bushies file illegal flight plan

I would reason it wasn't the first time and won't be the last time a head of
state (president/prime minister/king) is traveling into/over
hostile territory that secrecy would be maintained.

I have no problem with that. What I find bothersome is that the white house
issued a statement saying that the president ordered that the flight could only
take place if secrecy was absolutely maintained - if they were discovered, the
trip would be canceled. Then, they WERE seen, and didnt turn back, which flies
in the face of the official statement. At that point, the story gets quite
convoluted but still doesn't clear the initial comments about secrecy and
motivation for turning AF1 around. I dont understand why such a statement was
made in the first place, if it was already known to be false.

Gordon

Jim H wrote:

In case you have never heard this before "Loose lips sink ships" or
in this case aircraft.

Yeah, but how hard would it have been to declare the flight as an Evergreen
747F or some such? Still covert but properly identified as a heavy.

--
Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
"If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing
special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed)

Yeah, but how hard would it have been to declare the flight as an Evergreen
747F or some such?

Then they would have assumed that Jimmie Carter was still president and
hostages would be taken in Iran or France

From the official white house.gov website:

Roberts: “What are the legalities of filing a fraudulent flight plan?�
McClellan: “John, I think that the American people understand the
security arrangements that are made in a circumstance like this. The American
people understand the importance of not compromising security, not only for the
President of the United States, but for those on board the plane, and those on
the ground, as well. These are unusual circumstances. The President was pleased
to go into Baghdad and pay tribute to our troops for their service and
sacrifice, and show them that the American people stand fully behind them and
support them in their efforts.�

Ed Chen of the Los Angeles Times soon got into the act: “So the White
House has no compunctions about having misled the American people on this
trip?�
McClellan: “Well, first of all, one, I was not there, but I've gone and
gathered the facts. And I'm not sure that -- again, Colonel Tillman and the
pilots on board the Air Force One are people that relayed this information to
White House staff. And for very good reason, they believed it was a British
Airways flight, for the reason I stated. But now that we know more information,
we made an attempt to get you all that information as quickly as possible. And
that's what we always do.�
Chen: “I'm talking about having misled the public in thinking the
President was at the ranch. In other words, you know, that there's a level of
trust that has been eroded.�
McClellan: “Look, I understand, and I appreciate the question you're
asking. But I think that the American people fully understand the security
arrangements that were made so that the President of the United States could go
and thank our troops in person, on Thanksgiving, during a very special moment
for them, while they were celebrating Thanksgiving Day.�

A male in the front row, so with a top outlet, asked: “So did the
President then -- I mean, he made a decision that it was worth telling a white
lie to accomplish this policy goal -- or a political goal.�
McClellan: “I don't know exactly what you're referring -- I don't think
we viewed it that way."

========================
Luckily, it was only a little white lie.

Jarg wrote:

Nope, still have no idea what you are talking about. Perhaps you haven't
carefully examined this thread.

I think JT got his threads crossed.


SMH

"Stephen Harding" wrote in message
...
Jarg wrote:

Nope, still have no idea what you are talking about. Perhaps you
haven't
carefully examined this thread.

I think JT got his threads crossed.

Sorry.

For Christ's sake - do you think filing as
a G-V has any real material difference on a flight of this type?


Actually, yeah, yeah I do. Ever hear of wake turbulence? If I am flying two
minutes behind a GV, I am not going to have to consider it - but if I am behind
a frickin jumbo jet, I'd like to know about it. For those that think I am just
Bush bashing, this is a serious concern and there have been plenty of accidents
caused by aircraft flying into the wake of large aircraft without knowing it.
Its dangerous and in this case, definitely unnecessary. Why not identify AF1
as an aircraft type that at least was similar in size? I don't care what
President is involved - this was stupid and the 'evolving' story provided by
the admin. staff doesn't help.

Gordon

"Gordon" wrote in message
...

Actually, yeah, yeah I do. Ever hear of wake turbulence? If I am flying
two
minutes behind a GV, I am not going to have to consider it - but if I am
behind
a frickin jumbo jet, I'd like to know about it. For those that think I am
just
Bush bashing, this is a serious concern and there have been plenty of
accidents
caused by aircraft flying into the wake of large aircraft without knowing
it.
Its dangerous and in this case, definitely unnecessary. Why not identify
AF1
as an aircraft type that at least was similar in size? I don't care what
President is involved - this was stupid and the 'evolving' story provided
by
the admin. staff doesn't help.


Relax. You're assuming it happened as it's been reported. I think that
unlikely.

Relax.

I'm fairly relaxed, Steven. Some folks act like "no harm, no foul" and that
can be a damn slippery slope.

You're assuming it happened as it's been reported. I think that
unlikely.

However it happened, the flight plan should not have included deception
concerning the size of the aircraft involved.

Gordon

"Gordon" wrote in message
...

However it happened, the flight plan should not have included deception
concerning the size of the aircraft involved.


Agreed, but we don't know that it did. What would be the point of
misidentifying the type aircraft but still using the Air Force One callsign?