Can anyone explain what TFR's are supposed to do?

On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 13:49:17 GMT,
(Corky Scott) wrote in
Message-Id: :

I haven't figured out why TFR's exist.

It's obvious presidential TFR's are an abomination of the original
intent of TFRs, that provide the post cold-war military (reduced
significantly by the Clinton administration) with a new found purpose
at the expense of a national asset (GA) they would like to see vanish
entirely, so that they could control ALL the nation's airspace, not
just 50% of it:

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Oct2...200310148.html
--

Irrational beliefs ultimately lead to irrational acts.
-- Larry Dighera,

The most interesting part of that article is the fact that there have been
two airliners since 9/11 that were hijacked to Cuba.

What the hell does THAT say about all of our newfound "Airport
Security"?!?!?


Larry Dighera wrote in
:

On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 13:49:17 GMT,
(Corky Scott) wrote in
Message-Id: :

I haven't figured out why TFR's exist.

It's obvious presidential TFR's are an abomination of the original
intent of TFRs, that provide the post cold-war military (reduced
significantly by the Clinton administration) with a new found purpose
at the expense of a national asset (GA) they would like to see vanish
entirely, so that they could control ALL the nation's airspace, not
just 50% of it:

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Oct2...200310148.html

"Judah" wrote in message
...

The most interesting part of that article is the fact that there have been
two airliners since 9/11 that were hijacked to Cuba.


Where did those flights originate?

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message ink.net...

"Judah" wrote in message
...

The most interesting part of that article is the fact that there have been
two airliners since 9/11 that were hijacked to Cuba.


Where did those flights originate?

Cuba. I'm not aware of any flights hijacked to Cuba since 9/11, but we've had
two hijackings FROM Cuba to the US in March of this year. One was an An24
and the other a DC-3.

In article ,
It was explained to me as follows: those responsible for security assess
all possible threats and create plans to mitigate each one. Regardless of
our opinions, small planes are indeed a threat and the easy thing to do was
to restrict their activity within a certain distance. They are considered a
greater threat than large commercial planes (to the mobile president) for
reasons I will not go into here. GA is an easy target for restrictions
because of GA's limited political and financial clout and the extreme ease
of clearing the area of GA aircraft.

There has been one act, a terrible act, of terrorism using planes.
They were not that small. Anything and everything is a risk. But having
small planes fly within a 30nm radius is far far far less of a risk than
having the president in a open crowd with several thousand people.
It's a political not a logically policy. I can understand (even accept
that). I think myself and others would just like some honesty on this
point.

Claiming that a truck bomb or suicide bomber can be a larger threat is
besides the point. Each separate threat has a plan to deal with it. GA is
dealt with by TFRs. Other threats are dealt with in other ways.

I understand the theory...

Ahh, I misread it then. I thought they said that two airliners were
hijacked TO Cuba originating in the US...


Nonetheless, it still demonstrates the point... No matter what the TSA
and FAA do, they will not be able to completely prevent terrorists from
trying another 9/11 type stunt if the terrorists are determined to do
it...

The TFRs, the bag X-Rays, the fancy TSA patches, it's all just a big
hoax...



"Ron Natalie" wrote in
m:


"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Judah" wrote in message
...

The most interesting part of that article is the fact that there
have been two airliners since 9/11 that were hijacked to Cuba.


Where did those flights originate?

Cuba. I'm not aware of any flights hijacked to Cuba since 9/11, but
we've had two hijackings FROM Cuba to the US in March of this year.
One was an An24 and the other a DC-3.

"Judah" wrote in message
...

The TFRs, the bag X-Rays, the fancy TSA patches, it's all just a big
hoax...



I don't think it's so much of a hoax as it is, unfortunately, the best they
have to offer.

Definitely not a comforting thought.

Judah wrote:

Nonetheless, it still demonstrates the point...

Not hardly! Last time I looked, neither the TSA nor the FAA had any say at all
in what goes on with Cuban aircraft.

George Patterson
To a pilot, altitude is like money - it is possible that having too much
could prove embarassing, but having too little is always fatal.

"Ron Natalie" wrote in message
m...

Cuba.


What's the point?

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message nk.net...

"Ron Natalie" wrote in message
m...

Cuba.


What's the point?

What's what point?