Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

SHAME ON ALL OF YOU!!
AERO-NEWS Network ^ | May 13, 2005 | Kevin R.C. "Hognose" O'Brien

Posted on 05/13/2005 2:03:47 AM PDT by LukeSW

Aero-Views: Shame On All Of You

Fri, 13 May '05

No Heroes In ADIZ Incursion

By ANN Senior Correspondent Kevin R.C. "Hognose" O'Brien

I wasn't flying Wednesday when the city of Washington went into a massive, hyperventilating panic over a light plane in the ADIZ; I was driving the highways, and I got to hear the blow-by-blow on the radio and in periodic phone calls with ANN's Pete Combs. Good grief, what a shameful episode. There's enough shame to go around. Indeed, there are no heroes in this tawdry tale of ADIZ incursion, but there's a whole gaggle of goats:

Shame On The Security Establishment

..in the first place, for being unable to distinguish between a real threat and a bogus one. The physics of the Cessna 150 make it an improbable terror weapon. Indeed, we have an incident to show us that a Cessna 150 is not much threat to the White House. In 1994, a suicidal nutball tried to kamikaze the steel-and-concrete-reinforced landmark, and left an unsightly black smear on the wall and a divot out of the lawn -- who are we looking out for with all this panic, the groundskeepers?

A Cessna 150 does not a warplane make. But steeped in the shibboleths of relativism and egalitarian ignorance, security managers prescribe the same frantic reaction, as if it were some kind of anti-Newtonian universe: "For every action, an identical and hyperbolic overreaction."

The mighty 150 has a gross weight of 1,500 to 1,600 lbs, or about half the weight of a compact car. Even a 172 is lighter gross than the empty weight of my 1965 mustang (~2,500), which is pretty light by new-car standards. I think a typical Camry or similar vehicle is about 3,800 lb. You just can't do a lot of damage with 2,000 lbs unless it's all explosives... I know a little about blowing things up, and served for 25 years alongside the guys with the equivalent of a PhD in blowing things up, the 12BS and 18C demo men of the Army Special Forces. If we can't figure out how to destroy a big, strong building with a Cessna 150, and we can't, it's a pretty safe bet that Osama or whoever can't do it either: he puts on his baggy pants one leg at a time.

Then, there's the whole question of, "what about the building?" The White House is no stranger to hard times, having been burnt to a shell by a British raiding party on August 25, 1814 (the only surviving fixture from before 1814 is a Gilbert Stuart portrait of George Washington which was secured by a fleeing Dolly Madison). The West Wing burned again in 1929. Yet the building endures. The walls are made of the original stone, reinforced during a 1948-52 renovation with concrete and structural steel, and light GA aircraft are not going to move them. QED. Most other public buildings in Washington are equally robust -- compare the damage and death toll at the Pentagon to that in New York. Or take a good look at the J. Edger Hoover building sometime.

Shame On Our National Leaders

...for not facing the risk (if any?) like grown men. A lot of the current security nonsense has come about because of the physical and even moral cowardice of our current crop of national leaders. If we are "a nation of laws, not of men," why are some men so demanding of special protection?

Our Government is predicated on the idea that no man is divine or irreplaceable. Our Constitution has been frequently amended to ensure that suitable procedures are in place to ensure an orderly succcession and continuity of government.

Apart from the troubling moral issues raised by special privileges for the Washington elite, there are practical issues involved in hasty and ill-advised evacuations like the one we've just seen. I've looked at several airline incidents that rose to the level of accident only when the crew made a judgment call to order an evacuation, and passengers were injured in the evacuation.

Why injure people unnecessarily, when few people are likely to be injured in the extremely unlikely event the worst-case scenario comes to pass, but some people are likely to be injured in a needless evacuation?

Shame On The News Media

I was able to hear the audio from the White House Press Room, and boy howdy, it was a pitiful display. Screaming, and yelling, and blubbering and carrying on. A most unseemly display, but then the most fitting 19th Century word for concept that's defined by the 21st Century word "metrosexual" is probably "poltroon."

The every-man-for-himself-and-devil-take-the-hindmost stampede for the exits was unseemly, unsurprising, and, as noted above, unsafe. You are much safer staying in the building during the attack than bolting for the exit, where you might be trodden under by Helen Thomas or somebody.

I always figured most news people would be no earthly use in a crisis (real, or as in this case, imagined) and now I have my proof.

Shame On The Men In The Plane

You didn't think I was going to let these two clowns off, did you? I mean, I fly in Boston and I know about the ADIZ. My friends in Florida and California know about the ADIZ. According to a family member, the unlucky pilots knew about the ADIZ, but they blundered into it anyway.

Research in the human behavioral subset of "being lost" has shown that humans, when confused about location, will seldom if ever backtrack to the last known location and try again -- even though that method, logically, offers a good chance of success. Instead they will press on forward -- pretty much in whatever direction they happen to be pointing -- for good or for ill. The only antidote to this deeply ingrained behavior, since one can't grab his hippocampus and shake some sense into it, is to have a plan and conscious procedures for safe recovery to a known point when mislocated.

Many people will focus on the instructor, and as the more experienced pilot and authority figure, he's definitely where the buck stops. The FAA will probably recognize this with a certificate suspension or even revocation (since the violation wasn't willful, revocation would be out of line. But the security organs will want their pound of flesh). I hope the instructor subscribed to AOPAs Legal Services Plan.

But the student also deserves a share of the blame. By the time you're doing ambitious cross-countries, you need to have a baseline level of situational awareness. A student can't just ride on the instructor's ticket (even if that is how the FAA sees it, in legal terms). He holds a ticket inscribed not pilot student but student pilot -- the first is the adjective, the second the noun. Students shouldn't be constantly in their instructors' faces, but they should be willing to speak up. Many an airliner has come to grief because a doubting FO held his tongue. If there was ever a place to indulge in bumper sticker behavior, the cockpit is where you "Speak truth to power" and "Question Authority."

These two men had a very unpleasant day, and they have more hard times ahead. But they were lucky; they very nearly died. If the fighter pilots had been what the Air Force calls "fangs out", this whole story would be ten times worse. The 150 pilots will live to fly again -- and one hopes, to enjoy flight again.

One Organization Reacted Credibly

After all this ranting, I ought to close on a positive note -- and there is one to be found. Despite all the things that COULD have gone wrong, the air defense organization reacted with as much restraint as alacrity. If the military and DHS intercept crews hadn't been at the top of their game, if the controllers hadn't been alert, God alone knows what might have happened. These disciplined men and women are trapped in a bad system that's not of their making, but they still performed like a symphony orchestra with Beethoven Himself conducting.


TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events; US: District of Columbia
KEYWORDS: adiz; airplane; attack; blahblahblah; cessna; homelandsecurity; ignorantcrank; ohjustshutup; restrictedarea; shameonmeself; wankerwithkeyboard; whinemoanwhinemoan; whitehouse
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-178 next last
As I have commented elsewhere, the sorry spectacle was pure, unadulterated PARANOIA. This author puts things in a bit of perspective and represents the views of many of us in the aerospace industry

By the way, one of the clearest lessons potential terrorists could take from the events in D.C. would be how easy it is to create a mass diversion to set the stage for a real attack: In other words, get everyone hyperventilating and running around like idiots over a small airplane, dashing into the subways and tunnels of D.C. and then ....

1 posted on 05/13/2005 2:03:48 AM PDT by LukeSW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: LukeSW

Bull! Even a C-150 could carry something really bad.

The instructor pilot should never be in command of an airplane again..


2 posted on 05/13/2005 2:12:27 AM PDT by leadpenny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LukeSW

***"For every action, an identical and hyperbolic overreaction."***

Now that's funny.


3 posted on 05/13/2005 2:12:54 AM PDT by PetroniusMaximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LukeSW

Freak out over a plane that can do minimal damage, including explosives, and ignore huge trucks that can carry literal tons of high explosives almost to the doorstep of any government building.


4 posted on 05/13/2005 2:13:48 AM PDT by Crazieman (If Con is the opposite of Pro, what is the opposite of Progress?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LukeSW
A Cessna 150 does not a warplane make.

A Boeing 767 does not a warplane make either Fool!!!

How much anthrax can a Cessna 150 carry?

5 posted on 05/13/2005 2:16:56 AM PDT by konaice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LukeSW
Re the FO comment... Many gung ho heros here were calling the pilots all kinds of names etc and were willing to have shot them down. These people need to know how often top of the line airline crews become "confused" and make horrible mistakes.

These mistakes include landing at the wrong airport. All one has to do is check past FAA records for such. Pilot heros that have never made mistakes are kidding themselves, it happens.

6 posted on 05/13/2005 2:20:14 AM PDT by cynicom (<p)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #7 Removed by Moderator

To: Crazieman; LukeSW
Where do we draw the line?

Cessna, Beechcrafts or Lear?
Turbo props or jets?
Gross weight or wingspans?

Granted most incursions are harmless, but if a scenario is outside parameters, then what?

8 posted on 05/13/2005 2:27:52 AM PDT by endthematrix (Declare 2005 as the year the battle for freedom from tax slavery!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Eat-Mo-Possum

And a boy terrorist flew a plane into a FL building.


9 posted on 05/13/2005 2:29:06 AM PDT by endthematrix (Declare 2005 as the year the battle for freedom from tax slavery!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: LukeSW
Stopped reading after this:

Shame On The Security Establishment ..in the first place, for being unable to distinguish between a real threat and a bogus one. The physics of the Cessna 150 make it an improbable terror weapon.

And I wonder what his reaction would have been if security personnel didn't "overreact" and we found out too late that the improbable terror weapon was filled with something like anthrax (which is a very real possibility). Some people are just never satisfied; you take precautions against a catastrophe and you are being silly, don't take precautions and a catastrophe happens and you are at incompetent.

The security personnel in this situation acted very reasonably and should be commended, not ridiculed.

10 posted on 05/13/2005 2:29:38 AM PDT by frankiep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #11 Removed by Moderator

To: LukeSW

Isn't the fact that it was a Cessna 150 a bit of hindsight here? My understanding is that nobody knew what it was until the F-16's got up there to take a look. IIRC, the plane had no transponder and the pilots were not responding to hails.


12 posted on 05/13/2005 2:38:38 AM PDT by Nick Danger (Honey, Intel wants to go outside)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: endthematrix
Trying to defend against all possibilities is impossible and fruitless. Becoming trigger happy is not a solution.

The possibilities of crashing into the Whitehouse are so great that one has to accept that there is a risk to life.

Minimize, yes. Hysterical reaction, no.

13 posted on 05/13/2005 2:40:56 AM PDT by cynicom (<p)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Eat-Mo-Possum

I think you have your incursions mixed up. A German kid landed his Cessna at the Kremlin after waltzing in from Germany.

14 posted on 05/13/2005 2:41:53 AM PDT by Nick Danger (Honey, Intel wants to go outside)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: LukeSW
A Cessna 150 does not a warplane make.
Oh, really? Not even with anthrax, or sarin, or ricin, or whatever?

And what about probes, testing our defenses?

I saw an interview with one of the F16 pilots yesterday and he was absolutely calm and rational and in the intervew he calmly and rationally related the calm and rational actions he took, under calm and rational orders. It was all by-the-book.

I would trust that pilot with my life. I wouldn't trust the writer of this anti-defence hysteria with my car. He'd probably leave the keys in the ignition in the parking lot.

15 posted on 05/13/2005 3:00:02 AM PDT by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cynicom; konaice; LukeSW

I was just notified that no one was in the FAA DC Command Center at the time of the incursion. MSM is reporting...CBS?


16 posted on 05/13/2005 3:01:01 AM PDT by endthematrix (Declare 2005 as the year the battle for freedom from tax slavery!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: endthematrix

D.C. in Dark While Plane Was Intercepted
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/12/AR2005051201614.html

I'm posting the thread now.


17 posted on 05/13/2005 3:03:12 AM PDT by endthematrix (Declare 2005 as the year the battle for freedom from tax slavery!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: endthematrix

Having had friends that worked in the Command Center in the past, I find this difficult to believe.


18 posted on 05/13/2005 3:04:43 AM PDT by cynicom (<p)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: cynicom

The finger pointing begins. Two SNAFU's:


1. "At police headquarters, someone had disconnected a phone line that would have provided emergency communications from the Federal Aviation Administration, the officials said."


2. "Sgt. Guy Poirier was stationed Wednesday at the Homeland Security Operations Center, along with members of other local, state and federal agencies. He was in a room with law enforcement officials who do not have high-security clearance. Federal authorities with such clearances, stationed in another room, reported monitoring the actions starting at 11:28 a.m. But Ramsey said that they did not share information with Poirier."


19 posted on 05/13/2005 3:14:16 AM PDT by endthematrix (Declare 2005 as the year the battle for freedom from tax slavery!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: LukeSW
The plane was capable of carrying biological weapons of immense destructive power. A single letter killed people and destroyed property not too long ago right here in my town and where I worked.

The rule is for planes to stay away from the White House, etc. a certain distance.

Except that the plane would likely have crashed and burned in my neighborhood, serious consideration should have been made to taking it out when it violated the airspace and refused to communicate.

There is a war on. Unfortunately we are not able to restrict the impacts of that war to the folks who deny it exists. If we could, we would.

20 posted on 05/13/2005 3:17:51 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
There is a war on.
45-50% of Americans either fail to grasp this fact or are in active denial about it.
21 posted on 05/13/2005 3:20:16 AM PDT by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: endthematrix
There will be many "snafus" uncovered, everyone will run in circles creating a dust cloud to obscure their shortcomings, then it will all settle back to business as usual.

Seen it many a time. Never fails.

As for DC police. I suspect the others see them as a "sieve" that is brought in at the last minute.

22 posted on 05/13/2005 3:21:42 AM PDT by cynicom (<p)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: cynicom

Re: DC police...I agree!


23 posted on 05/13/2005 3:27:18 AM PDT by endthematrix (Declare 2005 as the year the battle for freedom from tax slavery!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: LukeSW

I notice this is published with about 36 hours of hindsight to assess the situation. I'm sure if we had a day and a half to react to every security breach things would go differently.


24 posted on 05/13/2005 3:30:45 AM PDT by Flyer (I've seen your king come and go here)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LukeSW

It should have been shot down.
If you aren't going to bother to learn how to read the instruments, then shame on you.


25 posted on 05/13/2005 3:31:56 AM PDT by mabelkitty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: endthematrix
was just notified that no one was in the FAA DC Command Center at the time of the incursion. MSM is reporting...CBS?

End, that is not the impression I got from the article in your link. The impression I got is that the DC police were not monitoring the FAA. It seems as if the DC police dropped the ball.

From your link: the D.C. government was relying on a sergeant to keep track of any potential crisis. But it was not until the air scare was nearly over that he got word to police commanders.

--snip--

At police headquarters, someone had disconnected a phone line that would have provided emergency communications from the Federal Aviation Administration, the officials said.

It was not until he heard fighter jets screaming past his office that D.C. Police Chief Charles H. Ramsey had an inkling of the events that had been consuming federal officials for a half-hour. And several more minutes elapsed before Ramsey received official notice and then alerted Mayor Anthony A. Williams (D).

--snip--

Although police took responsibility for failing to monitor the FAA, D.C. and federal officials gave conflicting reports yesterday about what the sergeant knew at the homeland security center -- a place designed to speed communication among the many agencies that respond to terror threats. Ramsey insisted that the sergeant was not told by his federal counterparts what was happening, but federal officials took issue with that account.

26 posted on 05/13/2005 3:32:28 AM PDT by Unknown Freeper (Doing my part...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: LukeSW
The mighty 150 has a gross weight of 1,500 to 1,600 lbs, or about half the weight of a compact car. Even a 172 is lighter gross than the empty weight of my 1965 mustang (~2,500), which is pretty light by new-car standards. I think a typical Camry or similar vehicle is about 3,800 lb. You just can't do a lot of damage with 2,000 lbs unless it's all explosives... I know a little about blowing things up, and served for 25 years alongside the guys with the equivalent of a PhD in blowing things up, the 12BS and 18C demo men of the Army Special Forces. If we can't figure out how to destroy a big, strong building with a Cessna 150, and we can't, it's a pretty safe bet that Osama or whoever can't do it either: he puts on his baggy pants one leg at a time.

...and if the Cessna is carrying a fresh nuclear weapon from North Korea (or soon Iran)...

27 posted on 05/13/2005 3:33:18 AM PDT by Ichneumon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: leadpenny

So could any car or truck -- and do so more efficiently and surely. You and John Loftus! He was over the top hysterical on the WABC radio John Batchelor radio show on "The Day of the Cessna". Grow up you Beltway whiners! Grow some balls. And grey matter too! Common sense!


28 posted on 05/13/2005 3:33:42 AM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: samtheman

Repeat: A Cessna 150 does not a warplane make. Stop the hysterics, already. Please. Grow up!


29 posted on 05/13/2005 3:36:27 AM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Unknown Freeper

In many years of work I never placed a call into the Command Center that was not promptly answered.


30 posted on 05/13/2005 3:36:46 AM PDT by cynicom (<p)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

A semi-truck, or even an SUV both would be able to carry myuch more of that bad stuff, and to disperse it equally well -- or better. Get some common sense.


31 posted on 05/13/2005 3:38:00 AM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Unknown Freeper

I was notified personally (by an FAA source) then followed up on the lead. I found and posted what I found on the web.


32 posted on 05/13/2005 3:38:38 AM PDT by endthematrix (Declare 2005 as the year the battle for freedom from tax slavery!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Ichneumon

What a stupid way to deliver that nuke! Could not fit lead shielding in the Cessna nor air scrubbers. Can do so in an SUV -- ANS in an SUV you already have thens of thousands of them in the Beltway. Use some simple logic. Stop the panic, already.


33 posted on 05/13/2005 3:40:25 AM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: LukeSW
And you can be sure that our enemies are very aware of how much hysteria a puny little Cessna caused our capital.

Shameful indeed.
34 posted on 05/13/2005 3:41:22 AM PDT by Bullish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bvw

ANS = AND


35 posted on 05/13/2005 3:41:28 AM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: leadpenny
I'm in complete agreement, except that I would have ordered the plane shot down.

Either we have a no fly zone or we don't.

If we do, then it means exactly what it says.

NO FLY

36 posted on 05/13/2005 3:47:47 AM PDT by OldFriend (MAJOR TAMMY DUCKWORTH.....INSPIRATIONAL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: leadpenny
I'm in complete agreement, except that I would have ordered the plane shot down.

Either we have a no fly zone or we don't.

If we do, then it means exactly what it says.

NO FLY

37 posted on 05/13/2005 3:47:48 AM PDT by OldFriend (MAJOR TAMMY DUCKWORTH.....INSPIRATIONAL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: LukeSW

Could a Cessna 150 contain several hundred pounds of C-4? Yes.

Could a Cessna 150 contain a dirty bomb? Yes.

Could a Cessna 150 contain biological agents? Yes.

Could a Cessna 150 contain chemical agents? Yes.

Luke, my friend, you are as wrong as can be that a small aircraft is no threat.


38 posted on 05/13/2005 3:47:49 AM PDT by Beckwith (I knew Churchill, and Ward Churchill is no Churchill . . . he ain't no Indian either . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

All

There use to be a joke about the C-150. It takes off at 50 kts, cruises at 50, lands and or crashes at 50.

39 posted on 05/13/2005 3:48:48 AM PDT by cynicom (<p)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: LukeSW

Interesting post!


40 posted on 05/13/2005 3:49:50 AM PDT by The_Media_never_lie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: frankiep
Imagine the media rant if they noticed a plane flying inside the NO FLY ZONE with no reaction at all.

Am sick of all the second guessers.

I suppose we can say that since hundreds of thousands of planes have flown over NY, PA, and D.C. without incident, then there will be NO incident in the future.

Kind of like the Michael Jackson defense. Look at all the boys he didn't molest, therefore......

41 posted on 05/13/2005 3:50:56 AM PDT by OldFriend (MAJOR TAMMY DUCKWORTH.....INSPIRATIONAL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: OldFriend

Olde...Your usual thinking cap is missing today.


42 posted on 05/13/2005 3:52:26 AM PDT by cynicom (<p)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Ichneumon
and if the Cessna is carrying a fresh nuclear weapon from North Korea (or soon Iran)...

Actually one at the state of development of both nations would be too heavy for this aircraft.

43 posted on 05/13/2005 3:54:46 AM PDT by Strategerist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: LukeSW; Howlin; Timesink; Utah Girl; hosepipe; backhoe; FITZ; Happy2BMe; ...

This is a Cessna 150

A suitcase nuke or suitcase bomb is a very compact and portable nuclear weapon and could have the dimensions of 60 x 40 x 20 centimeters or 24 x 16 x 8 inches. The smallest possible bomb-like object would be a single critical mass of plutonium (or U-233) at maximum density under normal conditions.

The Pu-239 weighs 10.5 kg and is 10.1 cm across. It doesn't take much more than a single critical mass to cause significant explosions ranging from 10-20 tons. These types of weapons can also be as big as two footlockers.

The physics of the Cessna 150 make it an improbable terror weapon. Indeed, we have an incident to show us that a Cessna 150 is not much threat to the White House.

A Cessna 150 does not a warplane make.

A Cessna 150 waould make a dangerous warplane indeed .

Government Alert: Hospital Security Breach

Filed under: — admin @ 7:08 am

This really has federal authorities puzzled - intruders masquerading as doctors and inspectors probing hospital security. But there is no evidence the cases are connected, including two in New Jersey. Hospital officials and security experts say the similarities are disturbing.

It happened on Easter Sunday. Three men of middle-eastern descent entered a Sussex County hospital posing as physicians.

Read Article

Watch For Impostors, Homeland Security Warns City Hospitals

Filed under: — admin @ 6:00 am

New York City hospitals are on the lookout for impostors trying to scope out health-care facilities and locate radioactive materials following warnings late last month from the Department of Homeland Security and the city Police Department about an emerging pattern of “suspicious incidents” in some American cities.

Read Article

Stowaway on American nuke-powered aircraft carrier

Filed under: — admin @ 6:53 pm

A Newport man who boarded an American nuclear-powered aircraft carrier anchored in The Solent has been made subject to an anti-social behaviour order and banned from named sensitive areas.

Abdoul Masmoud Yessoufou, 37, whose address was given at Portsmouth Magistrates’ Court on Wednesday as East Street, Newport, admitted entering a prohibited area at Portsmouth Docks.
The court was told that Yessoufou was found on the USS Harry S. Truman at the weekend after he strolled past guards and hitched a ride out to the carrier on a boat used by sailors on runs ashore.

Yessoufou had previously appeared before Uxbridge Magistrates three times this year for entering restricted zones at Heathrow. He also reached the side of an aircraft at Southampton Airport in January.

Read Article

44 posted on 05/13/2005 3:55:09 AM PDT by ATOMIC_PUNK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ATOMIC_PUNK

As has been repeatedly pointed out by many posters your odds of getting a nuke closer to the center of DC are infinitely better with a car or truck than an aircraft.


45 posted on 05/13/2005 3:56:54 AM PDT by Strategerist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: LukeSW
Well, gee, okay. Some crack pot self-appointed security expert apparently knows more about defending the capitol in time of war against threats than the Pentagon.

Move over Rummy.

The idiots flying the Cessna refused to acknowledge and had no transponder. They continued to fly into the ADIZ - even though they KNEW of it's presence. Only a complete a**wipe would be unable to recognize BY SIGHT that they were flying into DC Airspace and NOT realize that, gee, maybe we should turn back!

The author (and to be fair, many others as well) simply ASSUMES that the WH was the target. Based on what evidence?? I can think of a great many targets within the DC Metro Area which would be quite lucrative around noon on a nice spring day - none of which is "hardened".

BUT - this JERK starts his diatribe by denouncing the very people charged with protecting US!

Review the history of terrorism sometime Mr Omniscient Pilot. Seldom if ever are "buildings" themselves the target. It is almost ALWAYS the people who are the target. If a symbolic building CAN be targeted at the same time, so much the better (for the terrorist) but the place is secondary to the people present there!!

I will agree that the reactions of some of the security forces was a bit extreme (in hindsight) - but consider - most likely the ONLY word these people received was "a plane is approaching", not "a single engine Cessna 150, an improbable terrorist weapon, weighing a mere 1,500 lbs is approaching".

It is attitudes like YOURS which does more to endanger the safety of US Citizens than an occasional "false alarm".

No one was harmed by the precautions taken, unless you count some soiled undies as harm. Many COULD have been harmed had the precautions not been taken and the incident had been "real".

No sir, SHAME ON YOU!
46 posted on 05/13/2005 3:59:30 AM PDT by An.American.Expatriate (Here's my strategy on the War against Terrorism: We win, they lose. - with apologies to R.R.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Strategerist
The point is even at 4 miles a nuke would still be a dangerous thing to go off in a Cessna to make out like it would not be dangerous as a weapon is ridiculous at best.
47 posted on 05/13/2005 4:01:44 AM PDT by ATOMIC_PUNK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: samtheman

Simply shooting the plane down would prevent the appearance of panic, if image is so darned important.


48 posted on 05/13/2005 4:03:17 AM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March (<<<< Profile page streamlined, solely devoted Schiavo research)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: LukeSW
Dear Mr. O'Brien:

You have no idea what kind of threat that plane might have posed, regardless of its size, weight and capacity. Would you rather have it crash onto a busy D.C. street killing a few innocent people, or treat it as a possible threat and save those peoples' lives? And, as others in this thread have pointed out, could it not have have been carrying biological agents of some kind, and could those agents have been fairly efficiently dispersed from the air? And lastly, would you rather we not treat such incursions as threats thus paving the way for some enterprising terrorist to use a light single-engine plane to kill innocent people in our nations capitol?

Thanks for listening...

Frikkin' idiot...
49 posted on 05/13/2005 4:07:47 AM PDT by LIConFem (Mein Luftkissenboot ist mit Aalen voll.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ATOMIC_PUNK
I think there's still a picture of the Davy Crockett miniature nuke here:

Tiny Nukes-- the backpack threat

The smallest US nukes ever made had yields on the order of 0.02 kilotons:


50 posted on 05/13/2005 4:16:20 AM PDT by backhoe (Just another TerriBot... for Life...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-178 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson