Libya

I wish I had more time, but I don't ... despite how critical this issue is.

First nomenclature -

Bob, Robert, Rob are all the same name.  Anyone who goes by Bob is still Robert and vice versa.  Same person, different name.

ISIS - Al Qaida = same ideology, intention, desire, and purpose, comprise of many of the same people who float from one cause to another and the names change.  Same people, same purpose and they are NOT JAYCEE.

An airbase fell in Syria to these barbarians, with our help (you will recall we supported the 'rebels' at the time, against the 'mean and cruel and evil' dictator Assad.  He was sooooo mean, Mr Obama would not stand for any more of his bad behavior.  So, he helped weaken him, to the point where the 'rebels' aka as ISIS or Al Qaida have slaughtered tens of thousands and created a new caliphate or rather, restored the first Umayya caliphate under ... how original ... Abu Bakr.

They took an airbase some time ago - out of which they could fly airplanes that would hurtle toward any European country, thus providing them with something much worse then 9/11.  Why worse?  Because Europeans tend to seek compromise before they are attacked, so imagine if they are attacked .... they would surrender.  In any case, a base taken by these ideologically driven barbarians from which to launch air attacks.  With, in part, the assistance of the US.

Something Obama can be proud of.

Then there is the case of Tripoli.

Over a dozen planes captured by their equivalent of ISIS - a group we armed and trained to topple Khadafi - because he was a "mean and cruel and evil" dictator, and Obama and Cameron had had enough!

In any case, he is gone and al qaida (or whatever name they go by in Libya) have taken control of the Tripoli International Airport along with over a dozen planes.

These planes, from what we have been told are of the Airbus variety, which means they are failure driven even at their best, but ... they have a range between them of 3700 to 6400 miles.  More than enough to fly into all the major European cities and make it to the Eastern coast of the US almost.  Doubtful they could make it to the US because of fuel use and the lack of knowledge concerning flight paths to reduce fuel use .... but they can all certainly make it to Europe ... where our 'allies' would be nearly apoplectic with fear.  I would not be surprised if, at this moment, the European nations have all sent 20+ fighters up to scour their skies, and all radar and air traffic control systems are monitoring any and all movement in the skies.  I am sure many of the leadership class in Europe will, until those 12+ planes are located and destroyed, sleep very uncomfortably.  From Parliament building in London to Buckingham Palace to the Versailles, and the Bundestag ... Europe is littered with targets and ISIS/Al Qaida/ al shabaab are planning.

And ... they have still never found that plane from Malaysia.   It does not look good for Europe.  They lack the will but I suspect when the evil doers finish with their warped plans, Europe will be ready for a new Crusade.


Update:  "Rough men ... visit(ed) violence on those (individuals) and in the dark of night destroyed many of those aircraft. 

Airlines to Charge for Reclining Seats?

Dumbest ideas

March 07, 2011

NewsCore

NEW YORK – Airlines may begin charging for new services including early boarding, fancier meal options and reclining seats, as they continue to dig around for ways to pile on more fees, The Wall Street Journal reported Monday.

In recent years, airlines from AMR Corp.'s American Airlines to Spirit Airlines Inc. found new ways to boost profits -- and annoy fliers -- by charging fees for checked bags, selecting a choice seat or other services once included in ticket prices. Airlines started charging for checked bags, snacks, pillows and other items in a big way in 2008. Last year, such fees brought in an estimated $22 billion, or five percent of global industry revenue.

But now they are mulling and testing various new fees for services that never were part of a ticket.

Want a seat that reclines more? A pre-ordered champagne brunch in coach? Insurance against a blizzard that waylays a trip? Access to speedy security lines and early boarding? Soon you might be able to get them all -- for a price.

Carriers could tap into "billions and billions of potential revenue" said Tom Douramakos, CEO of GuestLogix Inc., a Toronto technology supplier that helps airlines sell products and services.

"The airlines are only scratching the surface" with baggage and seat fees, he said. They could become virtual shopping malls, offering captive travelers a variety of buy-while-they-fly items such as theater tickets or a handbag, he says.

Two small, low-fare carriers, Spirit and Allegiant Travel Co., have led the way in the US by charging for almost everything but lavatory access and by marketing travel packages including hotels, rental cars and theme-park tickets along with air travel.

A rich new vein for airline fees is early boarding, which American and United Airlines already sell to their non-elite frequent fliers. As more passengers avoid paying checked luggage fees by hauling their bags on board, overhead bin space is at a premium. That means getting to board ahead of other travelers can be worth a few extra bucks.

Big carriers already have discovered passengers will pay for better seats in coach. Delta Air Lines Inc. recently said it will remove seats from its international planes by summer to create an "Economy Comfort" zone that offers up to four inches (10 centimeters) more legroom and 50 percent more recline than regular coach seats.

***************************************************************

Dear Mr and Mrs Airline Directors and Owners -

Take heed, you are falling into a hole from which you will have a very difficult time extricating yourself.

Making money is fine.  If it costs 50 cents to produce a widget, charge $1.  If gas costs $1.80 a gallon, charge $3.25.  If soda costs 30 cents for a can, charge 90 cents.  But Sirs and Madams, you are greedy selfish bastards who whine like little children and deserve to be spanked and sent to bed.

The next time the terrorists attack, and use planes, and your planes are all kept on the ground for several days, and you feign poverty and bankruptcy, I will argue as passionately as possible to allow you all to fail and to go into bankruptcy.  Not one cent.  Never again.

The audacity of your airlines to charge for reclining seats.  The audacity to charge for drinks or peanuts.   Your airline gets the coke at such a low cost, it would be financially feasible for people who make pennies a day, to have a few cans of soda a week and you charge for it - not a few pennies, but dollars. 

The audacity to charge me to sit like a sardine, in a germ infested tube in the sky that at any moment could hurtle down to earth killing everyone on board - including those passengers who paid for the reclining seats.

You should be paying us to fly your airlines.  And that hole I referenced earlier - the time is coming when you will be unable to charge what you do currently.  Perhaps that is why you are gouging us in more ways than one - you know the future and you are not part of it. 























airlines

Human Bombs

This is what they will do and it will succeed, the first couple times.  I don't know what we will do after that - x-ray machines in order to fly.  And when we move to profile, they will find a non-typical carrier and force them through some means, to carry out the evil act.  I tend to believe it will be done very nearly without the knowledge of the carrier.  They render them unconscious, implant them, do not permit the person to regain consciousness for a period of time until healing as begun, and then ... its done.   They could set up an elaborate story how the carrier ended up with a closure mark.  Or simply no answer.  They may use one of their own the first couple times and by the time we catch on, it will be too late.  Hundreds of millions spent on useless machines, untold aggravation and loathing, distrust toward our government by its citizens and nothing they can do will help.



US: Terrorists look to implant bombs in humans



New York Post
By EILEEN SULLIVAN
Associated Press
July 6, 2011





WASHINGTON (AP) -- The U.S. government has warned domestic and international airlines that some terrorists are considering surgically implanting explosives into humans to carry out attacks, The Associated Press has learned.

There is no intelligence pointing to a specific plot, but the U.S. shared its concerns last week with executives at domestic and international carriers.

People traveling to the U.S. from overseas may experience additional screening at airports because of the threat, according to the Transportation Security Administration.

"These measures are designed to be unpredictable, so passengers should not expect to see the same activity at every international airport," TSA spokesman Nick Kimball said. "Measures may include interaction with passengers, in addition to the use of other screening methods such as pat-downs and the use of enhanced tools and technologies."

Placing explosives and explosive components inside humans to hide bombs and evade security measures is not a new idea. But there is new intelligence pointing to a fresh interest in using this tactic, a U.S. security official told the AP. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive security information.

When the U.S. government receives information suggesting terror tactics that could threaten commercial aviation, the TSA alerts companies domestically and abroad. Last December, the U.S. received intelligence that al-Qaida's Yemen branch was considering hiding explosives inside insulated beverage containers to carry them on airplanes. That warning was shared with domestic and foreign airlines so that security could be on the lookout, even though there was no specific plot.

Airport security has increased markedly since the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks. But terrorists remain interested in attacking aviation and continue to adapt to the new security measures by trying to develop ways to circumvent them.



 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
terror

Sweden: Release a Hijack Suspect (not enough evidence)

He had the gun, on the plane, for ... self-defense reasons, nothing more.



Monday, 30 September, 2002
BBC


Sweden releases hijack suspect


The Swedish authorities have released from custody a man held on suspicion of trying to hijack a plane bound for Britain. Nothing in the investigation indicates that Chatty would have intended to crash the plane

Kerim Sadok Chatty, 29, was arrested a month ago at a Swedish airport after a gun was found in his hand luggage.  But the authorities say suspicions that he was planning a hijack have weakened since then.

Despite his release, prosecutors say investigations into the incident will continue. They have imposed a travel ban on Mr Chatty, and ordered him to report to police regularly.

Fears

Mr Chatty - a Swedish national of Tunisian origin - was trying to board a Ryanair flight to Stansted Airport, north of London. His arrest raised fears of further suicide attacks, as it came almost two weeks before the first anniversary of 11 September attacks on the United States.  The incident triggered a huge security operation.

But Chief prosecutor Thomas Haeggstroem said in a statement on Monday that the hijacking case had weakened in recent days.  "Nothing in the investigation indicates that Chatty would have intended to crash the plane against any target in Sweden or in any other country," the statement added.

Mr Chatty has said he has no connection with Islamic militants.  Suspicions against him increased after it was revealed that in 1996 he had briefly received training at a flying school in the United States - like some of the 11 September hijackers.

Following his arrest a court twice ordered that Mr Chatty should be detained for periods of two weeks, pending further investigations.  The second detention period ended on Monday.

Mr Chatty has admitted to having the gun, but denies having planned a hijack.




 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
sweden

TSA and their unproductive, violative, idiotic, unjust, dubious actions

This guys story is well worth the time.  Can I not fly - I really really want to go somewhere during Christmas break and in summer, but will make do, here.  They win - I won't fly.  The airlines will lose money, they will ask the federal government for bailout, the government will be hard pressed to explain why they paid for machines that resulted in the airlines losing money they had to give them to keep them from failing. 

All because of intransigent fools who are placed in charge of agencies they are wholly unqualified to head.

While we are at it, abolish the TSA.  Incompetents, many of whom arrived here from a small country far away or a big country just as far away, some are illegals, and others just not the brightest bunch - abolish the TSA, save us all money and do away with this insane screening process.  Use a method that is very nearly full-proof - and it isn't an x-ray machine.


The Story  <-- link and the body (minus the videos is below)



These events took place roughly between 5:30 and 6:30 AM, November 13th in Terminal 2 of the San Diego International Airport. I'm writing this approximately 2 1/2 hours after the events transpired, and they are correct to the best of my recollection. I will admit to being particularly fuzzy on the exact order of events when dealing with the agents after getting my ticket refunded; however, all of the events described did occur.



I had my phone recording audio and video of much of these events. It can be viewed below.


Please spread this story as far and wide as possible. I will make no claims to copyright or otherwise.]


This morning, I tried to fly out of San Diego International Airport but was refused by the TSA. I had been somewhat prepared for this eventuality. I have been reading about the millimeter wave and backscatter x-ray machines and the possible harm to health as well as the vivid pictures they create of people's naked bodies. Not wanting to go through them, I had done my research on the TSA's website prior to traveling to see if SAN had them. From all indications, they did not. When I arrived at the security line, I found that the TSA's website was out of date. SAN does in fact utilize backscatter x-ray machines.


I made my way through the line toward the first line of "defense": the TSA ID checker. This agent looked over my boarding pass, looked over my ID, looked at me and then back at my ID. After that, he waved me through. SAN is still operating metal detectors, so I walked over to one of the lines for them. After removing my shoes and making my way toward the metal detector, the person in front of me in line was pulled out to go through the backscatter machine. After asking what it was and being told, he opted out. This left the machine free, and before I could go through the metal detector, I was pulled out of line to go through the backscatter machine. When asked, I half-chuckled and said, "I don't think so." At this point, I was informed that I would be subject to a pat down, and I waited for another agent.


A male agent (it was a female who had directed me to the backscatter machine in the first place), came and waited for me to get my bags and then directed me over to the far corner of the area for screening. After setting my things on a table, he turned to me and began to explain that he was going to do a "standard" pat down. (I thought to myself, "great, not one of those gropings like I've been reading about".) After he described, the pat down, I realized that he intended to touch my groin. After he finished his description but before he started the pat down, I looked him straight in the eye and said, "if you touch my junk, I'll have you arrested." He, a bit taken aback, informed me that he would have to involve his supervisor because of my comment.


We both stood there for no more than probably two minutes before a female TSA agent (apparently, the supervisor) arrived. She described to me that because I had opted out of the backscatter screening, I would now be patted down, and that involved running hands up the inside of my legs until they felt my groin. I stated that I would not allow myself to be subject to a molestation as a condition of getting on my flight. The supervisor informed me that it was a standard administrative security check and that they were authorized to do it. I repeated that I felt what they were doing was a sexual assault, and that if they were anyone but the government, the act would be illegal. I believe that I was then informed that if I did not submit to the inspection, I would not be getting on my flight. I again stated that I thought the search was illegal. I told her that I would be willing to submit to a walk through the metal detector as over 80% of the rest of the people were doing, but I would not be groped. The supervisor, then offered to go get her supervisor.


I took a seat in a tiny metal chair next to the table with my belongings and waited. While waiting, I asked the original agent (who was supposed to do the pat down) if he had many people opt out to which he replied, none (or almost none, I don't remember exactly). He said that I gave up a lot of rights when I bought my ticket. I replied that the government took them away after September 11th. There was silence until the next supervisor arrived. A few minutes later, the female agent/supervisor arrived with a man in a suit (not a uniform). He gave me a business card identifying him as David Silva, Transportation Security Manager, San Diego International Airport. At this point, more TSA agents as well as what I assume was a local police officer arrived on the scene and surrounded the area where I was being detained. The female supervisor explained the situation to Mr. Silva. After some quick back and forth (that I didn't understand/hear), I could overhear Mr. Silva say something to the effect of, "then escort him from the airport." I again offered to submit to the metal detector, and my father-in-law, who was near by also tried to plead for some reasonableness on the TSA's part.


The female supervisor took my ID at this point and began taking some kind of report with which I cooperated. Once she had finished, I asked if I could put my shoes back on. I was allowed to put my shoes back on and gather my belongs. I asked, "are we done here" (it was clear at this point that I was going to be escorted out), and the local police officer said, "follow me". I followed him around the side of the screening area and back out to the ticketing area. I said apologized to him for the hassle, to which he replied that it was not a problem.


I made my way over to the American Airlines counter, explained the situation, and asked if my ticket could be refunded. The woman behind the counter furiously typed away for about 30 seconds before letting me know that she would need a supervisor. She went to the other end of the counter. When she returned, she informed me that the ticket was non-refundable, but that she was still trying to find a supervisor. After a few more minutes, she was able to refund my ticket. I told her that I had previously had a bad experience with American Airlines and had sworn never to fly with them again (I rationalized this trip since my father-in-law had paid for the ticket), but that after her helpfulness, I would once again be willing to use their carrier again.


At this point, I thought it was all over. I began to make my way to the stairs to exit the airport, when I was approached by another man in slacks and a sport coat. He was accompanied by the officer that had escorted me to the ticketing area and Mr. Silva. He informed me that I could not leave the airport. He said that once I start the screening in the secure area, I could not leave until it was completed. Having left the area, he stated, I would be subject to a civil suit and a $10,000 fine. I asked him if he was also going to fine the 6 TSA agents and the local police officer who escorted me from the secure area. After all, I did exactly what I was told. He said that they didn't know the rules, and that he would deal with them later. They would not be subject to civil penalties. I then pointed to Mr. Silva and asked if he would be subject to any penalties. He is the agents' supervisor, and he directed them to escort me out. The man informed me that Mr. Silva was new and he would not be subject to penalties, either. He again asserted the necessity that I return to the screening area. When I asked why, he explained that I may have an incendiary device and whether or not that was true needed to be determined. I told him that I would submit to a walk through the metal detector, but that was it; I would not be groped. He told me that their procedures are on their website, and therefore, I was fully informed before I entered the airport; I had implicitly agreed to whatever screening they deemed appropriate. I told him that San Diego was not listed on the TSA's website as an airport using Advanced Imaging Technology, and I believed that I would only be subject to the metal detector. He replied that he was not a webmaster, and I asked then why he was referring me to the TSA's website if he didn't know anything about it. I again refused to re-enter the screening area.


The man asked me to stay put while he walked off to confer with the officer and Mr. Silva. They went about 20 feet away and began talking amongst themselves while I waited. I couldn't over hear anything, but I got the impression that the police officer was recounting his version of the events that had transpired in the screening area (my initial refusal to be patted down). After a few minutes, I asked loudly across the distance if I was free to leave. The man dismissively held up a finger and said, "hold on". I waited. After another minute or so, he returned and asked for my name. I asked why he needed it, and reminded him that the female supervisor/agent had already taken a report. He said that he was trying to be friendly and help me out. I asked to what end. He reminded me that I could be sued civilly and face a $10,000 fine and that my cooperation could help mitigate the penalties I was facing. I replied that he already had my information in the report that was taken and I asked if I was free to leave. I reminded him that he was now illegally detaining me and that I would not be subject to screening as a condition of leaving the airport. He told me that he was only trying to help (I should note that his demeanor never suggested that he was trying to help. I was clearly being interrogated.), and that no one was forcing me to stay. I asked if tried to leave if he would have the officer arrest me. He again said that no one was forcing me to stay. I looked him in the eye, and said, "then I'm leaving". He replied, "then we'll bring a civil suit against you", to which I said, "you bring that suit" and walked out of the airport.






 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
TSA

Terrorism: AL Qaida on trhe Attack: We are under Attack Yet Again.

There are quite a few questions we may ask after reading the below article -
1) have they made it clear where the UPS plane was about to head off to?
2) the nationality, ethnicity, and religion of the perpetrators was?  or was most likely?
3) how many other such attempts have been made in the very recent past (the article indicates a possible number).  I have also posted part of a 2nd article by the Los Angeles Times.
4) England (and Europe less specifically) is at the highest state of readiness and alert.  The US is ...
5) All targets known have been against ?




Theresa May's statement on cargo plane bomb

Full text of the home secretary's speech on the explosive device found on a UPS plane at East Midlands airport



guardian.co.uk
Saturday 30 October 2010



"Earlier today, I chaired a meeting of Cobra to review the progress of our investigation following the discovery yesterday of a suspect package at East Midlands airport.

Our preliminary examination of the device is now complete. I can confirm the device was viable and could have exploded.

The target of the device may have been an aircraft and, had it detonated, the aircraft could have been brought down.

But we do not believe that the perpetrators of the attack would have known the location of the device when they planned for it to explode.

Our investigation remains sensitive. We will continue to work very closely with international colleagues to develop our understanding of what was planned and of course to bring to justice those responsible.

I will be speaking again to my US counterpart, secretary for homeland security Janet Napolitano.

At this stage, we have no information to indicate another attack is imminent.

The threat level is already at severe, meaning that a terrorist attack in this country is highly likely. We do not plan to change that threat level at this stage.

Now we must take further precautionary measures. I have agreed with the transport secretary to take immediate action to stop the movement of all unaccompanied air freight originating in Yemen and moving into or through the UK. We are in contact with the transport sector about this.

Direct cargo and passenger flights from Yemen were suspended for security reasons in January this year, following the earlier attempt to bomb an aircraft destined for Detroit.

The police and the security and intelligence agencies are working tirelessly to increase our understanding of the case. I would like to publicly thank them for their work.

We are also grateful for all the assistance provided by other countries, notably the US.

I have briefed the prime minister after our Cobra meeting. He has been following events closely. The government's primary aim is to keep the UK safe.

I shall be monitoring progress and further statements will be made as necessary."

 
 
**************************************************************
 
Q Just a quick follow, you said you’ve identified two. What about reports that there are up to 15 packages out there that you’re looking for? Is that possible?



MR. BRENNAN: What we are doing is making sure that we take a close look at other packages that might also have some type of materials in them of concern. Both of these packages that we’ve identified to date originated in Yemen, and so I think it is very prudent for us to make sure that other packages that might be coming in similar routes or from Yemen, as well, are looked at very carefully. And that's what we’re doing right now. But there are only two packages right now that have materials of concern.


Q The President described this is as a credible terrorist threat against the United States. Can you say whether this was actually an attempted terrorist attack, or some sort of practice run for something down the line?


MR. BRENNAN: I think, as the President noted, it is -- does appear that there were explosive materials in both of these packages, that they were in a form that was designed to try to carry out some type of attack. The forensic analysis is underway. We are relying heavily and working closely with our partners in this regard. But clearly, from the initial observations, the initial analyses that's done, that the materials that were found and the device that was uncovered was intended to do harm. Chip.


[...]

Q There’s been a lot of concern about threats against European targets. Is this at all related to any of that chatter that was picked up in recent weeks?



MR. BRENNAN: Well, as you well know, we issued the travel alert because of concerns about al Qaeda carrying out attacks in Europe; that one package was uncovered in East Midlands Airport in the UK. We are looking at all the parts of the puzzle that we have been piecing together over the past several weeks from al Qaeda. But we're not presuming that this is part of that plot. We're not presuming that we've disrupted that plot. We need to maintain our vigilance. And that's the message that we share with our European partners.


Q Considering what the targets were in Chicago, the Jewish places of worship, any extra precautions that you're putting out for synagogues?


MR. BRENNAN: The FBI, Department of Homeland Security and other domestic agencies are looking at that very carefully and have reached out to the appropriate private-sector entities as well as organizations to ensure that any other potential targets of such attacks are alerted. So we’re working very closely with state and local officials.

[...]

Q John, the other packages that are being looked at, were they also addressed to destinations in Chicago or also to Jewish organizations?



MR. BRENNAN: There were two packages, as I said, that we identified -- one in Dubai and one in East Midlands. Both of them were addressed to synagogues in Chicago.









 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
terror

Air Marshals Arrested for Arresting Woman Who Bit Them

Two U.S. air marshals flee Brazil after being charged with assault


By Mike M. Ahlers
CNN
October 22, 2010




Washington (CNN) -- Two U.S. air marshals who arrested the wife of a Brazilian judge on a flight to Rio de Janeiro -- and were themselves arrested and had their passports confiscated by Brazilian authorities -- fled the country using alternate travel documents rather than face what they believed to be trumped-up charges, sources said.


The incident has impacted air marshal operations on flights to Brazil, officials said, and air marshals contacted by CNN said the case raises questions about Brazil's willingness to support future law enforcement actions by U.S. officials on international flights.

The incident occurred on October 1 on Continental Flight 128 from Houston, Texas, to Rio de Janeiro. During the flight, a female passenger who appeared to be intoxicated tried to serve herself drinks by going to the plane's galley, one source said. The plane's crew asked air marshals to intervene, and two marshals approached the woman, who began struggling with them.

Two sources said the woman bit one of the air marshals, and she was handcuffed and placed under arrest.

At the Rio airport, the air marshals went to turn over the woman to local authorities but were themselves brought before a federal judge and charged with misdemeanor counts of assault, sources said. Brazilian authorities took the air marshals' passports, so they could not leave the country and set a court hearing for the following week, sources said.

"They (Brazilian officials) did not want them to leave. They were not free to go," one U.S. law enforcement source said.

But the air marshals used alternate travel documents and quietly departed the country on a commercial flight that same day without the knowledge of the Brazilian court officials who had sought their detention.

One source said the air marshals believed the charges against them were retaliatory because the passenger they arrested is the wife of a prominent Brazilian judge. The air marshals believed it was to their benefit to leave the country and let the U.S. and Brazilian governments resolve the dispute, the source said.

The air marshals had not recovered their passports when they left, the sources said.

A Transportation Security Administration official, contacted by CNN on the day of the incident, confirmed that air marshals had confronted a "disruptive passenger" on Flight 128, and said that U.S. officials were working with their Brazilian counterparts to resolve "an issue," which the official declined to discuss.

Shortly before midnight the day of the incident, the TSA official said the air marshal team had left Brazil, but the official did not elaborate on the circumstances.

U.S. officials on October 1 and again this week declined to discuss the circumstances in which the air marshals left Brazil. But, commenting about the incident on board the aircraft, an official said, "We believe our federal air marshals acted appropriately within the provisions of the Convention on Offenses and Certain Other Acts Committed on Board Aircraft (Tokyo Convention)."

Air marshals and union representatives contacted by CNN say it is important that Brazil and other nations recognize law enforcement actions taken by air marshals during international flights.

"In theory we're all working together to combat the threat of terrorism and we should not let egos or marital relations impact proper procedure and legal protocols," said Jon Adler, national president for the union that represents air marshals.

Numerous sources said the issue is still unresolved. According to court documents in Brazil, after the air marshals missed a scheduled court appointment on October 6, the court contacted the U.S. Embassy in an attempt to get the air marshals' addresses.

On Tuesday, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano met with Brazilian Minister of Defense Nelson Job to discuss strengthening the global aviation system. The United States and Brazil signed a "joint statement of intent on aviation security." A Department of Homeland Security official said the parties did not discuss the Continental Flight 128 incident or its aftermath.

Sources said they believe the two agents remain charged in Brazilian courts. They did not know if the agents' passports had been returned to them or the U.S. government.

State Department officials have declined to comment on the incident, but said it is not affecting relations with Brazil.

"We've got broad, deep relations with Brazil," State Department spokesman Mark Toner said. "We have many, many areas of cooperation with Brazil. And on those areas where we have had disagreements, or rather issues to address, and challenges, we've worked through them quite effectively."

A call to the Brazilian Embassy in Washington on Thursday was not immediately returned.





 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
brazil

Ryanair: Stand up on the plane to fly cheaper.

Fly standing up?  Imagine a crash landing, or for that matter, turbulence!  Forget the actual crash - you may as well bite down on the cyanide pill.



Ryanair to sell £5 tickets for standing-room only flights



By Laura Roberts
01 Jul 2010
The Telegraph


Ryanair is planning to run flights where passengers stand during the journey at a cost of just £5 per ticket.


Ryanair to make passengers standHe said that charging customers £1 to make use of facilities would encourage travellers on one hour flights to use lavatories at the airport instead of on the aircraft.

The Irishman said he intended to introduce coin-operated loos and added: "The other change we've been looking at is taking out the last 10 rows of seats so we will have 15 rows of seats and the equivalent of 10 rows of standing area."

A Ryanair spokesman said that Boeing had been consulted over refitting the fleet with "vertical seats" which would allow passengers to be strapped in while standing up, which would cost between £4 and £8 per person.

Safety testing will be carried out next year.

However, a spokesman for the Civil Aviation Authority said the plans would struggle to meet safety requirements.

He said: "It's aviation law that people have to have a seat-belt on from take-off and landing so they would have to be in a seat. I don't know how Mr O'Leary would get around that one. During turbulence passengers also have to have a seat-belt on."

Mr O'Leary was interviewed for ITV's How to Beat the Budget Airlines which airs on Thursday night at 7.30pm.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
euros

Scottish Deal: Free Terrorist for Compassion (he was about to die - now he is doing quite well)

It is amazing what positive thinking can do.  When  you are down to your last 3 months, just be happy and it will nearly extend your life by two years.  Think positively.  Amazing how it works.



Lockerbie bomber may beat cancer (but wasn't he sent back to Libya to die?)


By Sam Greenhill and Peter Allen
The Daily Mail
27th February 2010




Freed from his life sentence, the Lockerbie bomber was sent home by the Scots on compassionate grounds because he had 'just three months' to live.

But six months later, Abdelbaset Ali Mohamed al-Megrahi is still living - and doing it in the lap of luxury.

Yesterday, his elderly father even held out the prospect of him beating the prostate cancer that doctors said would kill him by last Christmas.

Mr Ali al-Megrahi believes that good genes, 'positive thinking' and alternative medicines could explain his son's remarkable survival.

Megrahi, 57, no longer receives hospital treatment after ending a course of chemotherapy.

Last night, the British cancer specialist who gave the three-month prognosis was forced to defend his prediction.

He insisted that Megrahi remained gravely ill and was not expected to live much longer.

He said the patient's survival may be due to his excitement over his reunion with family.

But Tory MP Daniel Kawczynski, chairman of the Commons all-party Libya group, yesterday tabled a Parliamentary question demanding Megrahi's medical records be published in full.

He said: 'He's still alive and we were told he had no more than three months to live. The Scottish Executive have a lot to answer for.'

Earlier this month it emerged that Libya was on the brink of agreeing £5billion in investment in Britain.

Critics believe Downing Street colluded with the Scots to pave the way by having Megrahi freed.

The news of Megrahi's survival has provoked consternation among those relatives of victims of the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 who suspect he was never as sick as he claimed to be.

They believe it was an unforgivable mistake for the Scottish Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill to release him last August.

The Libyan - who days earlier had dropped an appeal against his conviction for the 270 deaths caused when Flight 103 exploded over Lockerbie - flew home to a hero's welcome.

It later emerged he had a £2million fortune stashed in a Swiss bank account.

His father, who is in his early 80s and keeps a vigil at his son's side in the family's plush villa in the capital Tripoli, still believes a 'miracle' could happen.

He said: 'A close relative was diagnosed with a similar disease and he was treated and recovered completely. We hope that Abdelbaset recovers his health as well.

'I think that the sick are not just cured by medicine, but also by having a high morale and a sense of freedom, and these were not available to Abdelbaset in prison.'

Megrahi receives 24-hour nursing care and, though often heavily sedated, receives well-wishers.

The relaxed, peaceful atmosphere has enabled him to more than double his original survival prognosis, and he says he is 'inspired and feeling very positive' thanks to the support of family and friends.

Mr Megrahi said his son was working on his autobiography, and was determined to prove that he had nothing to do with the Lockerbie bombing.

The Tripoli Medical Center, where Megrahi was treated following his initial release, said it would be 'quite normal' for him to use 'alternative medicine and positive thinking' to prolong his life, and that a good family medical history would also act in his favour.

East Renfrewshire council, which is in weekly contact with Megrahi under the terms of his licence, speculated he could even 'last a year or two years'. A spokesman said: 'Nobody knows. It was never that he was supposed to be dead by now, it was never a certainty, it was just the opinion of the experts.'

Megrahi's life expectancy was crucial because under Scottish rules, prisoners can be freed on compassionate grounds if they are considered to have fewer than three months to live.

Last July, the Libyan government paid for Megrahi to be examined by three cancer specialists, among them British expert Professor Karol Sikora. It was their prognosis that won his freedom.

Professor Sikora told the Mail: 'I am very surprised that he is still alive. He is not receiving any active treatment. The latest information I have from Tripoli is that he is not a well man, and I suspect he will be dead within a month or so.'

Professor Sikora said he suspected Megrahi was hanging on because he had received a ' psychological' boost from being reunited with his family and countrymen.

Indeed the former Libyan secret service agent and his wife and five adult children are treated like royalty in Libya.

Frank Duggan, president of the Victims of Pan Am 103, which represents U.S. relatives, said: 'His people tried to have us believe he had one foot in the grave.

'Then to hear that he is doing quite well medically and is living in a luxury villa makes them all the more frustrated.'

Megrahi's lawyer in Scotland, Tony Kelly, declined to comment.










Lybia

Airline Security

This does make sense and will do more for security than naked imagery from a scanner.




TSA to swab airline passengers' hands in search for explosives




By Jeanne Meserve and Mike M. Ahlers, CNN
February 17, 2010





Washington (CNN) -- To the list of instructions you hear at airport checkpoints, add this: "Put your palms forward, please."

The Transportation Security Administration soon will begin randomly swabbing passengers' hands at checkpoints and airport gates to test them for traces of explosives.

Previously, screeners swabbed some carry-on luggage and other objects as they searched for the needle in the security haystack -- components of terrorist bombs in an endless stream of luggage.

But after the Christmas Day attempted bombing of Northwest Flight 253 over Detroit, Michigan, the TSA began a program of swabbing passengers' hands, which could be contaminated by explosive materials, experts say. The TSA will greatly expand the swabbing in the coming weeks, the agency said.

"The point is to make sure that the air environment is a safe environment," Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano told CNN. "We know that al Qaeda [and other] terrorists continue to think of aviation as a way to attack the United States. One way we keep it safe is by new technology [and] random use of different types of technology."

Security experts consulted by CNN said swabbing hands is a good move, and privacy advocates said they support the new swabbing protocols, provided the agency tests only for security-related objects and does not discriminate when it selects people to be tested.

It's a "very good idea," said security expert Tony Fainberg. TSA screeners currently swab luggage handles and parts of bags that are likely be contaminated by human hands, he said, and swabbing a person's hands increases the chances of finding explosive materials. "Looking at the hands means you will probably get a better dose," he said.

Under the new protocols, tests will be conducted at various locations -- including in checkpoint lines, during the screening process and at gates. Newer, more portable machines make it easier to conduct tests away from fixed locations such as the checkpoint.

The TSA has more than 7,000 explosive trace detection (ETD) machines and has purchased 400 additional units with $16 million in federal stimulus money. The president's fiscal 2011 budget calls for $60 million to purchase approximately 800 portable ETD machines.

Napolitano said the tests will not significantly increase wait times at airport checkpoints.

The American Civil Liberties Union has "always supported explosive detection as a good form of security that doesn't really invade privacy," said Jay Stanley, an attorney and privacy expert with the organization.

Stanley said the ACLU is chiefly concerned that the TSA does not discriminate when selecting people for enhanced screening -- something the agency said it does not do -- and that it treat people with dignity.

"We would not want to see it implemented in a discriminatory fashion, for example, in a disproportionate way against Muslims and Arabs or, for example, people with red hair or anything else. Security experts from across the spectrum will tell you that that's not just unfair and unjust and not the American way, it's also a terrible way to do security," Stanley said.

Swabbing also should not be used to test for nonsecurity-related contraband, such as drugs, he said. "Under the Constitution, searches in airports are only for the purpose of protecting the security of airline transportation; they are not general law enforcement stops. And so it wouldn't be permissible for the government to use these trace portal detectors to look for drugs," Stanley said.

The TSA said the machines test only for explosives. It declined to specify which explosives, citing security reasons.

Because some legal substances -- such as fertilizers and heart medicines -- can result in "false positives," Stanley said the ACLU also wants to ensure that people who test positive be treated respectfully.

"It's important that the government treat people who do show up as a positive -- fairly and with dignity -- and not parade them off in handcuffs and treat them as terrorists, but do rational things to investigate what the problem might be," he said.

But swabbing hands does not, by itself, raise civil liberty problems, Stanley said. "There's really not a big privacy interest at stake here," he said. "They are basically looking for particles of explosives, which is not something that people normally have."








airlines

Airlines: We Lost Our Passengers

Airlines suffered record drop in traffic in 2009: IATA

Jan 27 05:19 AM US/Eastern


International airlines suffered their biggest decline in traffic since 1945 last year as passenger demand fell 3.5 percent, the International Air Transport Association said Wednesday.


Freight also fell, by 10.1 percent, as "full-year 2009 demand statistics for international scheduled air traffic that showed the industry ending 2009 with the largest ever post-war decline," IATA said in a statement.

"In terms of demand, 2009 goes into the history books as the worst year the industry has ever seen," said Giovanni Bisignani, director general of the world's biggest airlines' association.


"We have permanently lost 2.5 years of growth in passenger markets and 3.5 years of growth in the freight business," he added.

 
 
Wait, I thought that 2001 was the worst year, all those losses, needing bailouts.
 
But no, a year in which no US aircraft were destroyed by terrorism, and they had their worst year.
 
Hmm.
 
A few suggestions then, and of course, just my opinion, but heed the warning or find yourself losing more passengers every day until 1-2 airlines go belly up, and the others begin cutting routes.
 
We are tired of waiting in lines to wait in a line to get on an aircraft that sits, in a seat that is uncomfortable, with flight attendants that sell us drinks and food.
 
I don't recall the exact specifics, but if a large aircraft, 777, filled its First Class with paying customers, the rest of the plane could sit empty, and the airline paid for the fuel and all costs associated with the flight, to their destination.  That is less than 16 people in First Class and the flight is paid for.  There are 16 seats, one of those seats is used by the crew.  15 paid seats and the flights is paid for.
 
So - how about you remove 16 seats from the aircraft. That is two rows.  One from the very back, allowing the final section of the plane to have a few more inches each, and one from the mid-section of the plane, providing more room to those overcrowded passengers.  Spread the seats out, give more room, leg space, elbow room ... in general, more space.   Provide everyone with the same movie options as they have in First Class, albeit you could charge for the additional films not regularly provided.
 
Provide a meal without cost, refill the drinks, and offer the peanuts or crackers without charging.
 
Do these things and you will make EVERYONE on the plane happier, you will secure a clientele that will not abandon you for another airline.
 
Expedite.  Expedite.  Expedite.
 
No waiting around.  You do not need to wait.  Stay on schedule.  If you are more than 5 minutes late taking off, you should refund 10% of the ticket cost, back to the passengers.  Yes, there are ways to accomodate this: planes will not land and take off every 15 minutes.  A plane may be scheduled to land at 10 am, but it is late.  That is fine because the next flight doesn't leave until 11:30 am.  Plenty of time to get the plane in, emptied, cleaned, and restocked.  That means you do not have 20 flights a day from the gate, only 15.  Those 15 will all be filled and you will be able to add additional flights that will also be filled.  There will always be a gate available.  Not all airlines run 24 hours a day.  Move the next flight to another gate.
 
More cost you say?  Not really.  What will happen is your profits will drop a bit, BUT you will fill every aircraft, even the additional planes added.  You will secure a clientele that will NOT abandon you, and in fact, your numbers will grow.
 
Expedite the process - your inane questions are just that, inane.  If a terrorist gave me a bag to carry, do you think a) I would tell you, or b) I am stupid enough to carry it.  If I am, I sure won't tell you.  If I have a bag, it is my bag, and whoever packed it, clearly must have my confidence.  Your questions are not going to suddenly alert me to a hitherto unstated suspicion - oh my god, my wife packed it, I always wondered if she worked for al qaida and wanted to get rid of me.  I never thought the hijab was anything important, nor was her interest in learning Arabic, but your question made me realize how .... bloody inane your questions really are.  Or what about while you were in the airport - could someone have gotten to your bag.  Sure, I left it alone for a few hours, I wanted to see what would happen, and yeah it is a little heavier, but I never thought anything of it.   I am just not sure the point of those moronic questions, except to waste time.

That is something we are tired of.  Provide the male or female who usually stands at the end of the line with a hand held machine that can do something - perhaps provide details on flights or times or gates.  This will assist some passengers who get to the counter and proceed to waste time by asking idiotic questions.  You want gate 21b ... up the escalator and watch for the signs.  About 4 gates in.  21b, 4 gates after the security checkpoint.   This may, MAY save some time.  Idiotic questions will still be asked by morons who should not be flying.  They ask questions even though they know the answers, fearful that the airline changed the rules to trick them.

  Boarding:  Allow First Class and Business Class on first.  Then STOP for 5 minutes.  At the end of the 5 minutes, allow old people, handicapped, families with small children to board, and then stop for 5 minutes.  Why?  Because these people clog up the arteries when passengers are attempting to board the aircraft and then we get in long lines and just stand waiting.  Add the 5 minute wait period between boarding, stop and actually end boarding for that time.  It helps clear the arteries and will expedite boarding for all those able bodied people without issues.  Then ask if anyone who has any physical or mental condition that requires tremendous effort to put their bags up in the racks, to board.  Send someone on with them to throw their bags into the rack.  Then board the rest expeditiously - starting with the BACK of the aircraft first.

On Board:  When the plane is in flight, the flight attendants do not need to disappear.  Be available.  We just paid hundeds of dollars to sit on YOUR aircraft, serve us.  Sure, don't wash our feet, that is a little overboard, but we deserve some degree of consideration.  You give them goat and feta cheese and champagne/juice if they choose, in First Class, the least you can offer the Coach passengers is a soda or juice, crackers maybe, and go ahead, we don't need glass drinking cups, we can use plastic.
 
Security:  On all flights, get a sky marshall on board.  If the government doesn't provide one, get your own, charge us all $2 more per flight, but get one on every flight.  At the gate, have a final security check point, as they do at Heathrow.  A dog, that can smell explosives, sits at the side while everyone is checked a final time.  Is this slowing the process?  Not really, remember, the plane isn't on the ground, we have time.
 
 
Provide me with the security I need to fly across 3000 miles of ocean and not be blown up, treat me well, provide me with reaosnable services and ample room, and I will fly, even more than I do now.
 
Otherwise, I will cut back, and continue cutting back - why bother, I can be harassed on the freeway, I don't need an airport.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
flights

  

Congress Flys while we Walk

Naturally some will say - but they have important business to attend to. Yes, like holding Townhall meetings where they call the police because of the well-dressed swastika wearing protestors who are trying to obstruct Obama's agenda. They should walk. And where they can't walk, they shouldn't go. Foreign policy is made by the Executive Branch. We don't need Congress going on vacation.







Congress Gets an Upgrade
$500 Million Slated for Purchase of Eight More Planes as Lawmakers' Travel Soars



By BRODY MULLINS
August 7, 2009
Wall Street Journal

WASHINGTON -- Congress plans to spend $550 million to buy eight jets, a substantial upgrade to the fleet used by federal officials at a time when lawmakers have criticized the use of corporate jets by companies receiving taxpayer funds.

The purchases will help accommodate growing travel demand by congressional officials. The planes augment a fleet of about two dozen passenger jets maintained by the Air Force for lawmakers, administration officials and military chiefs to fly on government trips in the U.S. and abroad.

The congressional shopping list goes beyond what the Air Force had initially requested as part of its annual appropriations. The Pentagon sought to buy one Gulfstream V and one business-class equivalent of a Boeing 737 to replace aging planes. The Defense Department also asked to buy two additional 737s that were being leased.

Lawmakers in the House last week added funds to buy those planes, and plus funds to buy an additional two 737s and two Gulfstream V planes. The purchases must still be approved by the Senate. The Air Force version of the Gulfstream V each costs $66 million, according to the Department of Defense, and the 737s cost about $70 million.

Geoff Morrell, the Pentagon press secretary, said the Department of Defense didn't request the additional planes and doesn't need them. "We ask for what we need and only what we need," he told reporters Wednesday. "We've always frowned upon earmarks and additives that are above and beyond what we ask for."

Congress turned harshly critical of companies that fly executives on private jets in the weeks following the government bailout of banks and auto makers last year. General Motors, Chrysler LLC and Citigroup Inc. were among those caught in the cross hairs of angry lawmakers.

The House Appropriations Committee says the new purchases are designed to replace seven aging and more expensive business jets. The net impact is one additional plane owned by the federal government and a substantial increase in its passenger capacity.

Ellis Brachman, a spokesman for the House Appropriations Committee, said the changes were part of "Congress's normal oversight responsibility" to make sure "the troops have everything they need."

The 737s, known as C-40s by the military, are designed to be an "office in the sky" for government leaders, according to Air Force documents describing the plane. The plane is configured with all first-class leather seats, worktables, two large galleys for cooking and a "distinguished visitor compartment with sleep accommodations."

Mr. Brachman said Air Force's passenger planes were mostly used by military officials, the White House and other members of the Executive Branch. Over the past five years, 44% of the use of the planes has been for the military, 42% for the administration and 14.5% for members of Congress, Mr. Brachman said.

A Wall Street Journal analysis of congressional records found that foreign travel by members of Congress and aides was increasing. Last year, House members spent about 3,000 days overseas on taxpayer-funded trips, up from about 550 in 1995, according to the Journal's analysis.

Lawmakers disclosed they spent about $13 million traveling the world last year, a tenfold increase since 1995, when travel records first were made available electronically. The travel costs are covered by an unlimited fund created by a three-decade-old law.

This month, for example, 11 separate congressional delegations will swing through Germany. House Minority Leader John Boehner of Ohio is leading five other lawmakers on a trip around the world. Sen. Richard Shelby (R., Ala.) is taking a group of senators and their spouses to Europe for three weeks.

A spokesman for Mr. Boehner said he couldn't comment on the trip for security reasons. A spokeswoman for Mr. Shelby said the same.

Most travel must be approved by congressional committees. Once approved, the lawmaker who is leading a delegation can decide whether to fly on a commercial airline or to request a business jet from the Department of Defense.

Lawmakers typically fly on military jets, where members of the Armed Services carry bags and take drink orders. When flying on military jets, lawmakers are permitted to bring along spouses at no cost.

When there are too many requests for military planes, the speaker of the House or the Senate majority leader decides who gets to go. Two House employees work full time to organize overseas trips.

There is often a shortage of military planes for use by lawmakers when Congress is in recess, according to emails from 2007 obtained by the conservative group Judicial Watch under a Freedom of Information Act Request.

In June 2007, the House's travel coordinator, Kay King, was told that all military planes were booked for the July 4 recess. She replied to the Air Force officer: "This is not good news, and we will have some very disappointed folks, as well as a very upset Speaker."

Drew Hammill, a spokesman for Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, said Thursday, "The speaker is extraordinarily appreciative of the Department of Defense's efforts to accommodate requests from Congress."

Most of the planes available for lawmaker's travel are based at Andrews Air Force Base, Md., a few miles from Capitol Hill.

The D.C. Air National Guard maintains three 737s and two Gulfstream V planes there. The 89th Airlift Wing operates 18 planes, including two military versions of the Boeing 747 that serve as Air Force One. The Air Force also keeps several more passenger planes at bases in Illinois, Germany and elsewhere.

Most of the planes are painted light blue and white, with "United States of America" painted on the fuselage. The C-40 costs about $5,700-an-hour to fly, according to the Department of Defense. The smaller Gulfstream V, called a C-37 by the military, seats as many as 12 passengers and costs about $3,000 an hour to operate.









aircraft

Air France: Terror Suspects ?

Two passengers on doomed Air France jet had names linked to Islamic terror groups

By Peter Allen
10th June 2009
Daily Mail Online


Two passengers with names linked to Islamic terrorism were on board the Air France flight which crashed with the loss of 228 lives, it emerged today.

French secret servicemen established the connection while working through the list of those who boarded the doomed Airbus in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, on May 31.

It has also emerged that the laptop and boarding pass of British oil executive Arthur Coakley have been found in the wreckage of the jet.

Flight AF447 crashed in mid-Atlantic en route to Paris during a violent storm.

While it is certain that there were computer malfunctions, terrorism has not been ruled out.
Soon after news of the fatal crash broke, agents working for the DGSE (Direction Générale de la Sécurité Extérieure), the French equivalent of MI6, were dispatched to Brazil.

It was there that they established that two names on the passenger list are also on highly-classified documents listing the names of radical Muslims considered a threat to the French Republic.

A source working for the French security services told highly-repected Paris weekly L’Express that the link was ‘highly significant’.

There is a possibility that the name similarities are simply a ‘macabre coincidence’, the source added, but the revelation is still being ‘taken very seriously’.

France has received numerous threats from Islamic terrorist groups in recent months, especially since French troops were sent to fight in Afghanistan.

Security chiefs have been particularly worried about airborne suicide attacks, similarly to the ones on the U.S. on September 11th 2001.

French investigators today confirmed that that terrorism has not been ruled out, with an Air France spokesman adding that ‘all the indications’ are that the Airbus suffered some kind of catastrophic equipment failure.

A total of 41 bodies have so far been recovered from the zone 700 miles off Brazil's north-east coast where the plane came down.

Brazilian and French officials are using DNA samples from relatives and dental records to identify the remains.

On Monday, a Brazilian crew recovered the tail fin from the plane - considered significant because it could narrow the area underwater where the black boxes are.

The cause of the disaster is not known, but initial suspicions are focusing on the plane's airspeed sensors which were giving faulty readings, according to automatic data alerts sent by the plane in its final minutes in the air.

A French nuclear submarine, the Emeraude, and a naval vessel containing robot submarines should reach the crash site within the next day or so.

But a large amount of material has already been recovered, including possessions belonging to Briton Mr Coakley.

His wife Patricia said a local police liaison officer called at the family home in Sandsend, near Whitby, North Yorks, to say her husband's laptop and boarding pass had been found.

'I just want to remember him smiling and laughing. He was a wonderful man,' she said.

'We are just in limbo and still waiting for the phone call we will get from the authorities, but don't want.

'We cannot plan anything at this time until we get more news. But I don't want to fly out to Brazil.'

Mrs Coakley had spoken to her husband by phone shortly before he boarded the plane.

He had planned to take an earlier flight, but it was fully booked. He should have been in Brazil for two weeks on business and home on May 19, but was delayed.

She has been married to her husband for 34 years and the couple have three children Dominic, 31, Patrick, 29 and Mise, 25.

Mr Coakley, 61, was a structural design engineer and partner in the PD&MS firm based at Aberdeen.

He had many working contacts on Teesside and was also a director at Wilton Engineering Services based in Middlesbrough.









airplane

FAA sets temporary LA-area flight restrictions

Hmmm. Let's see. Can we guess in three tries or less??





FAA sets temporary LA-area flight restrictions
The Associated Press
5/26/2009

LOS ANGELES—The Federal Aviation Administration announced temporary flight restrictions on private pilots will be in effect in the greater Los Angeles area between early Wednesday afternoon and Thursday morning.

An FAA statement Tuesday said only airlines, law enforcement aircraft and air ambulances will be allowed to fly within a 12-mile radius of Santa Monica Airport between 1:15 p.m. Wednesday and 7:40 a.m. Thursday.

"During this time, private pilots will not be able to fly into or out of Los Angeles International Airport, Santa Monica Airport, Hawthorne Municipal Airport, Van Nuys Airport and Burbank Airport," the statement said.

During those restrictions, private pilots may fly in and out of airports between 12 miles and 30 miles from Santa Monica Airport, the FAA said. Pilots may also fly through that airspace but must have filed flight plans, must talk to air traffic controllers and must use transponders broadcasting a code unique to each aircraft.

The FAA said that at times the center of the restricted area will be at Los Angeles International Airport. Only airlines, law enforcement aircraft and air ambulance aircraft will be allowed to fly within a 10-mile radius of LAX between 1:05 p.m. and 2:10 p.m. on Wednesday, and between 6:55 a.m. and 8 a.m. on Thursday.

The FAA urged private pilots to view details of the temporary flight restrictions on its Web site.








terror

Obama and the Plane: Feign anger, get the photo.

The security of a city, the health and safety of millions - all put aside so the White House could get a photo key chain. Of course it will never happen again - New York City would turn against any politician who did such a thing twice, regardless of party. It was irresponsible and reprehensible, yet the White House did it. The thing is - when you get caught doing something - don't blame the person who makes it public. It is YOUR fault, Mr. Obama, accept responsibility - grow up.

Worse - the COST!





Apr 28, 2009 7:20 pm US/Eastern


FAA Memo: Feds Knew NYC Flyover Would Cause Panic

Threatened Federal Sanctions Against NYPD, Secret Service, FBI & Mayor's Office If Secret Ever Got Out


Furious Obama Apologizes: "It Will Never Happen Again"



NEW YORK (CBS) ― A furious President Barack Obama ordered an internal review of Monday's low-flying photo op over the Statue of Liberty.

CBS 2 HD has discovered the feds will have plenty to question.

Federal officials knew that sending two fighter jets and Air Force One to buzz ground zero and Lady Liberty might set off nightmarish fears of a 9/11 replay, but they still ordered the photo-op kept secret from the public.

In a memo obtained by CBS 2 HD the Federal Aviation Administration's James Johnston said the agency was aware of "the possibility of public concern regarding DOD (Department of Defense) aircraft flying at low altitudes" in an around New York City. But they demanded total secrecy from the NYPD, the Secret Service, the FBI and even the mayor's office and threatened federal sanctions if the secret got out.

"To say that it should not be made public knowing that it might scare people it's just confounding," Sen. Charles Schumer said. "It's what gives Washington and government a bad name. It's sheer stupidity."

The flyover -- apparently ordered by the White House Office of Military Affairs so it would have souvenir photos of Air Force One with the Statue of Liberty in the background -- had President Obama seeing red. He ordered a probe and apologized.

"It was a mistake. It will never happen again," President Obama said.

The NYPD was so upset about the demand for secrecy that Police Commissioner Ray Kelly vowed never to follow such a directive again and he accused the feds of inciting fears of a 9/11 replay. "Did it show any insensitivity to the psychic wounds New York City has after 9/11? Absolutely. No questions about it. It was quite insensitive."

The cost of the frivolous flight was about $60,000 an hour and that was just for Air Force One. That doesn't include the cost of the two F-16s that came along. The mayoral aide who neglected to tell Mayor Michael Bloomberg about it was reprimanded.




Obama Orders Review of New York Flight as Cost Put at $328,835
By Roger Runningen and Tony Capaccio
Bloomberg

April 28 (Bloomberg) -- President Barack Obama ordered a review of a publicity-photo shoot with one of the planes that serves as Air Force One that cost taxpayers $328,835 and caused a furor in New York City.








Obama

All of these Things

What do these things have in common: All of these things are similar.


AAA reports Americans driving less than in the last 37 years
Federal Highway Administration - Americans drove less than in recorded history

USAir reports 2008 will be a much lower than expected year for profits, and they will cut flight routes and another story about capacity and flights

Airport official details cutbacks

Alcoa To Lay Off 15,200, Reduce Operations

Toyota closes factories



**********************

Answer:
WITHOUT ANYONE telling us we have cut use of oil/petroleum for air travel, less carbon/global warming

WITHOUT ANYONE telling us we have cut use of oil/petroleum for auto travel, less carbon/global warming

WITHOUT ANYONE telling us we have cut use of resources oil/petroleum and aluminum - less carbon/global warming

WITHOUT ANYONE telling us we have cut purchasing vehicles and are sticking with what we have - less tires used, less petroleum used, less carbon/global warming


ALL THAT without anyone telling us or taxing us!!

Congress is considering TAXING you based upon the miles you drive (WHY? They need money, but the less we drive, the less money is available, the higher the taxes to compensate for the decreased driving!!!





idiots

Qantas 747 Flight

From Times Online
July 25, 2008

Qantas 747 terror could have been caused by bomb, say aviation experts

The hole blown in the side of the Boeing 747 on flight from London to Melbourne, could have been caused by an explosive device or a damaged fuselage, according to aviation experts.
Passengers on the flight have described their terror after a panel on the side of the aircraft was ripped off in midair, blowing a hole in the fuselage.

Qantas flight QF30, with 300 passengers and crew on board, plunged 20,000ft after the missing panel caused an "explosive" depressurisation.

David Learmount, Safety Editor at Flight International Magazine, said: "It's possible there was some kind of explosive device in the suitcases. There's a hole where there shouldn't be."
But he stressed that other possible causes for the damage included physical damage or a corrosive that weakened the hull, making it give way.

He said the hole had exposed some bags in the hold which are usually contained in metal containers. "It's interesting to see them - how else could that be if not an explosion? Bags are moved about quite roughly in the hold and the plane was built in 1991 so it has seen a lot of action. If damage was done to the fuselage over a period of time a crack could have developed...weakening to the point where it was blown out."

The Boeing 747 had just taken off from a stopover in Hong Kong when the incident happened. As the plane dropped from 30,000ft to 10,000ft, oxygen masks fell from the ceiling.

Investigators should be able to quickly pinpoint the basic reason behind the Qantas plane’s emergency landing in the Philippines, aviation experts said today. But they warned that a full understanding of the terrifying incident may take much longer.

Although there has been no immediate evidence that terrorism played a part in the incident, investigators will want to look at anything that points towards a deliberately-planted explosive device. The probe will also concentrate on whether there was a non-criminal explosion of some kind or whether the incident was sparked by something breaking on the plane.

“It should become apparent fairly quickly if something exploded or something broke,” said Kieran Daly, editor of internet news service Air Transport Intelligence. “When things like this happens there is always the thought that it might be a criminal case.Investigators will also want to see if something like a gas cylinder exploded or that something broke for whatever reason.

“There may also have been some form of structural failure. Sometimes with accidents, the essential gist of the cause is very quickly known, but then it can take a much longer period of time to know exactly what happened.”


[To read the rest of the article, click on the title link]