A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Washington DC airspace closing for good?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old August 5th 05, 06:00 AM
John T
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Larry Dighera wrote:

I disagree. The DC ADIZ provides an opportunity for the military to
intercept flights that violate it before they might enter the FRZ
within which lethal force may be exercised. If the DC ADIZ (or
something similar) did not exist, there would be no opportunity to
determine how much of a threat those flights might be, and the
military would have no other option but to shoot them down. So while
the DC ADIZ does nothing, in my opinion, to make DC more secure, it
may provide some measure of mitigating erroneous shoot downs of fellow
airmen.


You give our enemies far too little credit if you really believe this.

Every single violation of the DC ADIZ to date has been erroneous - some
grossly so (see "Hayden Shaeffer") while most were not. The ADIZ does
nothing but separate those following the rules from those not following
them. Assuming for the moment that Al Qaeda (or some similar outfit) were
to use airplanes to cause mischief here in DC, I'd exect them to follow the
rules right up to the last minute.

Really, how hard do you think it would be to locate a vetted pilot, kidnap
them and extract the information needed to penetrate the FRZ?

You mean like the CIA did in Peru:


You keep bringing that up like the CIA shot down the plane. They didn't.
The Peruvians did after the CIA operatives told them *not* to shoot
(admittedly after providing tracking/guidance for the Peruvians).

Perhaps this incident made it obvious to our government, that it might
be prudent to attempt to ascertain if the aircraft in question is
'friend or foe' _before_ shooting it down, and inspired the DC ADIZ.


I think it's far more likely that various security agencies saw an
opportunity to justify their budget requests.

I agree; the DC ADIZ does nothing to make DC more secure.


If this is the case, why do you keep arguing *for* the ADIZ?

Don't get me wrong. I don't believe the FRZ is an effective measure
against all hypothetical attacks on DC.


I haven't seen any hypothetical attack where the FRZ is an effective
countermeasure.

Further, I feel that our
government putting it's citizens in the cross hairs is repugnant in a
free society.


Yet you argue for just that when you want fighters intercepting errant
aircraft in the ADIZ.

What would you propose in place of the DC ADIZ and FRZ?


Considering that *nobody* is claiming knowledge of any imminent attack,
nothing. I'm not opposed to *temporary* restrictions in times of heightened
threat, but most of the rest of the country now enjoys the same freedoms
they had prior to 9/11 and February 2003 while those of us under the DC veil
are still denied those freedoms - even in the absence of a heightened
threat.

By the way, where are those regular justifications for the ADIZ the FAA was
mandated to provide to Congress?

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_s...veloperid=4415
Reduce spam. Use Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com
____________________


Ads
  #42  
Old August 5th 05, 06:48 AM
Don Tuite
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 05 Aug 2005 03:59:58 GMT, Jose
wrote:

Actually, first somebody else wrote:

If those Muslims who are aware of terrorists
in their midst were to inform on them...


Then Jose said:
Didn't communist China do this some years back? This kind of thing can
be useful if it is appropriately contained, but it's hard to say where
it should stop.


Try England under the later Tudors. Denunciation and Star Chamber
trial. Then the headsman. Or France under the Reign of Terror. Or
Germany in the twentieth century. And France and Poland, and in fact,
damn near everywhere except (for the most part) Holland and Denmark.
Your next-door neighbor is often happy to denounce you if there's a
chance of picking up your land.

You know who resisted the temptation? Our parents and grandparents.
There is story after story about Euro-americans looking after the
property of Japanese internees during the war and returning their
homes and business to them after it was over. I'd like to hope that
the current generation has the same scruples, but I'd rather not have
to find out.

Don
  #43  
Old August 5th 05, 08:37 AM
Happy Dog
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Larry Dighera" wrote in

I disagree. The DC ADIZ provides an opportunity for the military to
intercept flights that violate it before they might enter the FRZ
within which lethal force may be exercised. If the DC ADIZ (or
something similar) did not exist, there would be no opportunity to
determine how much of a threat those flights might be, and the
military would have no other option but to shoot them down.


Bull****. Do you still live with your mother?

moo


  #44  
Old August 5th 05, 08:37 AM
Happy Dog
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 4 Aug 2005 16:48:10 -0400, "Happy Dog"
wrote in ::

Do you really believe that this is being considered to reduce
clutter?


I'm talking about radar screen clutter. Yes. I see no other rational
reason for the DC ADIZ.

Why do you think it was implemented?


Political pressure. Absolute irrelevant bull****. As for clutter, have you
visited a radar facility? It's a computer game. There is a huge amount of
filtering that goes on specifically to reduce clutter.

moo


  #45  
Old August 5th 05, 10:53 AM
PPT33R
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"It appears the government is protecting itself and could care less
about the
public."

SHACK!!! But even then, it is a farce. The extent of the existing ADIZ
/ NDA will provide no time for intercept if the TOI is a fast-mover, or
a commercial flight out of IAD...

This is purely an issue of the oligarchy trying to protect itself, and
the USSS and Capitol Police completely out of their domain trying to
figure it out with incremental elimination of freedom of movement. DoD
got what it wanted last month with direct 'shoot-down' authority.

Bear in mind as well that this Administration has an Iron Fist policy
over the Executive Branch. I would be EXTREMELY surprised if Karl Rove
and Fran Townsend did not personally approve. They know exactly what
FAA has been ordered to do, and they hold the leash, so put the blame
where it is deserved.

The ONLY way the "Land of the Free and the Brave" will once again
become Free and Brave is if this becomes an election issue in 2008.
Cast aside any sad devotions to "political parties", having lived in
the Beltway for many years I have concluded neither party represents
the national interest anymore. Study the issues, figure out who is
LIKELY to inact policies and laws commensurate with your beliefs, and
THEN pull the handle...

  #46  
Old August 5th 05, 02:00 PM
Jose
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

It appears the government is protecting itself and could care less about the
public.


If you mean bureaucratically, it's doing a find job.

If you mean physically, then it's inviting Darwin to the party.

Jose
--
Quantum Mechanics is like this: God =does= play dice with the universe,
except there's no God, and there's no dice. And maybe there's no universe.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.
  #47  
Old August 5th 05, 04:05 PM
Larry Dighera
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 5 Aug 2005 01:00:47 -0400, "John T" wrote in
::

Larry Dighera wrote:

I disagree. The DC ADIZ provides an opportunity for the military to
intercept flights that violate it before they might enter the FRZ
within which lethal force may be exercised. If the DC ADIZ (or
something similar) did not exist, there would be no opportunity to
determine how much of a threat those flights might be, and the
military would have no other option but to shoot them down. So while
the DC ADIZ does nothing, in my opinion, to make DC more secure, it
may provide some measure of mitigating erroneous shoot downs of fellow
airmen.


You give our enemies far too little credit if you really believe this.


I fail to understand you inferred that from what I wrote. You will
note that I made no mention whatsoever of enemies in that statement.
My point was that the DC ADIZ's purpose most probably is to protect
the innocent from lethal force.

[...]

I agree; the DC ADIZ does nothing to make DC more secure.


If this is the case, why do you keep arguing *for* the ADIZ?


I'm not in favor of the DC ADIZ. I'm just attempting to clarify its
intended purpose.

[...]

Further, I feel that our government putting it's citizens in the cross hairs

is repugnant in a free society.

Yet you argue for just that when you want fighters intercepting errant
aircraft in the ADIZ.


Surely you must agree, that the attempt to identify flights violating
the DC ADIZ as friend or foe preferable to downing all such flights.

What would you propose in place of the DC ADIZ and FRZ?


Considering that *nobody* is claiming knowledge of any imminent attack,
nothing. I'm not opposed to *temporary* restrictions in times of heightened
threat, but most of the rest of the country now enjoys the same freedoms
they had prior to 9/11 and February 2003 while those of us under the DC veil
are still denied those freedoms - even in the absence of a heightened
threat.


That seems a reasonable proposal.

By the way, where are those regular justifications for the ADIZ the FAA was
mandated to provide to Congress?


Ask baby Bush. He's an expert at justifying inane actions. :-)


  #48  
Old August 5th 05, 04:28 PM
Larry Dighera
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 05 Aug 2005 03:59:58 GMT, Jose
wrote in : :

There is another way to find Islamic terrorists.


Islamic terrorists aren't the problem.

Terrorists are the problem.


Bill Maher recently expressed the opinion, that crashing airliners
laden with hundreds of people was a faith based initiative. :-)

[...]

It is the evil ideas that must be stopped. But alas, there's something in
the constitution about that.


So if it's not possible to stop ideas, what action is appropriate?

If those Muslims who are aware of terrorists
in their midst were to inform on them...


Didn't communist China do this some years back? This kind of thing can
be useful if it is appropriately contained, but it's hard to say where
it should stop. Or rather, it's easy to say, but hard to agree, and I
don't trust this administration to agree with me.


I'm just talking about Muslims coming forward of their own volition
and exposing those in their ranks they believe to be terrorists. Such
active cooperation would be an additional source of information, and
paint the Muslim-American community as allies in the fight-for-right
not the harborers of evil as they are currently being viewed.

I fail to understand your fear of where "this kind of thing" should
stop.

Clearly we should encourage informants to out terrorists, drug kingpins,
religious extremists, welfare abusers, deadbeat dads, athiests,
jaywalkers, gays, and people who fly little airplanes "for fun". If
you're doing nothing wrong, you shouldn't be afraid.


Oh, you're concerned about informing in an Orwellian way. I
understand now: kids informing to the government on their parents, and
such.

When you lump "people who fly little airplanes" and terrorists in the
same group, it becomes difficult to take your words seriously.


  #49  
Old August 5th 05, 04:31 PM
Larry Dighera
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 05 Aug 2005 05:48:16 GMT, Don Tuite
wrote in
::

On Fri, 05 Aug 2005 03:59:58 GMT, Jose
wrote:

Actually, first somebody else wrote:

If those Muslims who are aware of terrorists
in their midst were to inform on them...


Then Jose said:
Didn't communist China do this some years back? This kind of thing can
be useful if it is appropriately contained, but it's hard to say where
it should stop.


Try England under the later Tudors. Denunciation and Star Chamber
trial. Then the headsman. Or France under the Reign of Terror. Or
Germany in the twentieth century. And France and Poland, and in fact,
damn near everywhere except (for the most part) Holland and Denmark.
Your next-door neighbor is often happy to denounce you if there's a
chance of picking up your land.

You know who resisted the temptation? Our parents and grandparents.
There is story after story about Euro-americans looking after the
property of Japanese internees during the war and returning their
homes and business to them after it was over. I'd like to hope that
the current generation has the same scruples, but I'd rather not have
to find out.

Don



Thanks for the information.

If exposing the evil in their midst is so fraught with possible abuse,
what do you propose to assist in quelling terrorist activities?


  #50  
Old August 5th 05, 04:33 PM
Larry Dighera
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 5 Aug 2005 03:37:31 -0400, "Happy Dog"
wrote in : :

"Larry Dighera" wrote in

I disagree. The DC ADIZ provides an opportunity for the military to
intercept flights that violate it before they might enter the FRZ
within which lethal force may be exercised. If the DC ADIZ (or
something similar) did not exist, there would be no opportunity to
determine how much of a threat those flights might be, and the
military would have no other option but to shoot them down.


Bull****. Do you still live with your mother?

moo


At the risk of having misinterpreted another of your outbursts, please
let me request that you compose a cognate rebuttal worthy of rational
discussion.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
NAS and associated computer system Newps Instrument Flight Rules 8 August 12th 04 05:12 AM
AOPA Sells-Out California Pilots in Military Airspace Grab? Larry Dighera Instrument Flight Rules 12 April 26th 04 06:12 PM
AOPA Sells-Out California Pilots in Military Airspace Grab? Larry Dighera Piloting 12 April 26th 04 06:12 PM
12 Dec 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News Otis Willie Naval Aviation 0 December 12th 03 11:01 PM
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools RT Military Aviation 104 September 25th 03 03:17 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:25 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2021 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.