NYC 747 (Air Force One) Fly-Over

[1OldGI]

Even more concerning is the fact that Janet Napalitano, the Director of Homeland Security was totally clueless about it. Perhaps all of her time is spent profiling returning war veterans.

Fox news viewer or no, you have to agree that whoever authorized this, it was a dumb **** move. And had George W Bush pulled a stunt like this it would have been a national scandal on the front page of every newspaper in the country for weeks.

 

[SRock]

Because, unlike most Fox News viewers, he doesn't keep his personal vehicle on cinder blocks in the front yard.

The VC-25 aircraft that fly as Airforce One are based at Andrews Airforce Base, some thirteen miles from the White House. The aircraft in question was technically the backup plane. And like the rest of the aircraft in the 89th Airlift Wing (including the transport planes used to fly helicopters and limousines in advance of Presidential trips) it is regularly flown on training and other missions where the President is not a passenger. In fact it would be extremely unusual for him to be briefed on such a flight.

What a sad generalization. I feel sorry for you.

Anyway, on another note. They've since released a memo that shows the White House staff was aware of this fly over and specifically ordered it not to be released to the general public. So, it's not the DoD, DoT, Air Force or any other organizations fault. Fact is the White House staff knew about it and ordered it hush hush.

 

[michael.scheller]

If the president is in a Cessna, it's now Air Force 1.

If the POTUS flies in an U.S. Air Force Cessna, it's Air Force 1.
If the POTUS flies in any U.S. Navy aircraft, it's Navy 1.
If the POTUS flies in any U.S. Army aircraft, it's Army 1.
When the POTUS flies in his U.S. Marine Corps helicopter, it's Marine 1.

 

[SRock]

If the POTUS flies in an U.S. Air Force Cessna, it's Air Force 1.
If the POTUS flies in any U.S. Navy aircraft, it's Navy 1.
If the POTUS flies in any U.S. Army aircraft, it's Army 1.
When the POTUS flies in his U.S. Marine Corps helicopter, it's Marine 1.

Indeed!

 

[michael.scheller]

Those CALLSIGNS are based upon VIP codes in the DoD Flight Information Publications (FLIP) General Planning pub.

1 is the highest VIP code -- President and Ambassadors in the country they're ambassadors to.
2 -- the VP, etc. Thus when VP is on it's Air Force 2.
They continue down to 7 -- Brigadier General and some equivalents.

I don't think the POTUS would EVER fly on a pure civilian aircraft, while in office, so the question of what a civil Cessna would be called is pointless.

 

[SRock]

Those CALLSIGNS are based upon VIP codes in the DoD Flight Information Publications (FLIP) General Planning pub.

1 is the highest VIP code -- President and Ambassadors in the country they're ambassadors to.
2 -- the VP, etc. Thus when VP is on it's Air Force 2.
They continue down to 7 -- Brigadier General and some equivalents.

I don't think the POTUS would EVER fly on a pure civilian aircraft, while in office, so the question of what a civil Cessna would be called is pointless.

Oh, I totally agree with you. I think all of those were hypothetical, for example only.

 

[philamac]

I heard on BBC Radio that this is part of a regular program. Aparently there is an office of the presidential staff which thinks of interesting places in which to photograph Airforce 1, then goes ahead and does it.

I am sure the photos are lovely but.......

Surely all those Americans struggling to get by on low wages, those who pay a lot of tax, those who have been made redundant and many others must be asking 'Why?'

Many New Yorkers must have had their nerves jangled.

 

[SRock]

I heard on BBC Radio that this is part of a regular program. Aparently there is an office of the presidential staff which thinks of interesting places in which to photograph Airforce 1, then goes ahead and does it.

I am sure the photos are lovely but.......

Surely all those Americans struggling to get by on low wages, those who pay a lot of tax, those who have been made redundant and many others must be asking 'Why?'

Many New Yorkers must have had their nerves jangled.

I don't think that is entirely true. This was to "possibly replace" a photo that has been used for years, several years.

On another note, I heard on the radio where the Air Force estimated the cost of the photo at $382,000.00!

Wow, just wow. How about $5K on professional photo shop and put AF1 anywhere you want. Plus save the tax payers $377,000.00!!

 

[texcattlerancher]

Because, unlike most Fox News viewers, he doesn't keep his personal vehicle on cinder blocks in the front yard.

Don't forgit about hound dogs asleepin on tha front porch and the laundry drying on a line in the front yard. Or people who wear nondesigner blue jeans like wranglers or levis. Let's throw those Americans in here too. I bet they might watch Fox news.

Some people are just a little quick to defend the current administration. It doesn't matter whether you are red or blue, or some other political color, flying a 747 close to ground zero was just plain stupid; an entire lack of judgment was exhibited. For Fox viewers to understand, stoopid.

 

[SmoovD]

I gave this person an accurate, factual answer.

If the people who imply in their question that the President is either stupid or lying can't take a facetious jibe as part of the response, then they really ought not to be playing with the big boys.

Conservatives can dish it out, but they sure as heck can't take it.

Again? Does this forum really need this sort of behavior?

Where is that "Ignore List" button?

 

[knlgskr]

I remember a quotation "You would be surprised my son with how little intelligence the world is run." As for politics, both parties and philosophies left me long ago; color me Independent and Individualist. No, I would not buy a used car from either/any.

Richard

 

[jazzman]

On Monday morning, I awoke above the 50th floor of the Millenium Hilton, directly across the street from the World Trade Center site, with a great view of the Statue of Liberty, Ellis Island, and the Hudson River. I checked out and went about my business before this fly over, but you can bet I would have been scared poop-less if I had seen a 747--chased by fighters--flying by my window.

As for all the political punidtry in this thread, I've heard reports on TV news that the White House official in charge of this stupid idea has apologized and the president has expressed displeasure. As a Democrat and a supporter of our president, I have no problem saying it was a dumb thing to do. But an even dumber thing to do would have been for the president to spend one second planning the photo op schedule for one of his planes when he should be (and is) spending all of his time dealing with the enormous challenges facing our country. I'd be very happy if all of the Republicans could maintain their focus on this problem while their senators slowly switch parties. Forty-nine states without a moderate Republican senator, one to go.

 

[blantyre]

I wonder what kind of "photo op" someone was looking for - thousands of frightened people evacuating buildings in the Manhattan? They could have done it on a Sunday at least. Doesn't seem as though anyone involved thought it through very carefully.

With even the kind of Photoshop software that comes free with a computer these days, it should have been pretty easy to take some pics of AF1 flanked by a couple of fighter jets and paste them into an image of a skyline - preferably a fake one, perhaps a composite of famous city icons, rather than NYC.

 

[pal]

I'd be very happy if all of the Republicans could maintain their focus on this problem while their senators slowly switch parties. Forty-nine states without a moderate Republican senator, one to go.

You were making a very good point until your last two sentences. Your statements show that you also are caught up in the "us against them" atmosphere that splits our country.

I think that no matter which party is in power, they are going to waste money. What is upsetting about this, is that it obviously was not thought out well. To fly any plane over the site of the worst attack in U.S. history is unthinkable, and yet someone thought it was a good idea.

 

[kwk285]

You were making a very good point until your last two sentences. Your statements show that you also are caught up in the "us against them" atmosphere that splits our country.

I think that no matter which party is in power, they are going to waste money. What is upsetting about this, is that it obviously was not thought out well. To fly any plane over the site of the worst attack in U.S. history is unthinkable, and yet someone thought it was a good idea.

The main way to slow down government waste is to have one party control the house, one the senate, and a third party the presidency. Then all three could argue and throw their little sound bite temper tantrums blaming each other and accomplish nothing. Government in gridlock is the only way I know to prevent the demoplicans/republicrats from wasting money at the current levels.

 

[pal]

The main way to slow down government waste is to have one party control the house, one the senate, and a third party the presidency. Then all three could argue and throw their little sound bite temper tantrums blaming each other and accomplish nothing. Government in gridlock is the only way I know to prevent the demoplicans/republicrats from wasting money at the current levels.

Good point Kyle, I am really thinking of voting for only the challengers in this next election. We have to find some way of getting rid of career politicians. Since they won't limit there own terms, it make sense that we vote them out and give someone else a chance. After all that is the way it was meant to be. Citizen legislators who serve a term, and then go home.

I know this is a pipe dream, but wouldn't it be great!

 

[jazzman]

You were making a very good point until your last two sentences. Your statements show that you also are caught up in the "us against them" atmosphere that splits our country.

That's an excellent point, coming from the gentleman who said:

"If this would have happened under George W's watch, some people would have been screaming bloody murder. It just goes to show you that a man standing on the ground watching his rival up on a ladder painting, and pointing out every little spot he misses, sings a different tune when he finds himself up the ladder."

 

[pal]

That's an excellent point, coming from the gentleman who said:

"If this would have happened under George W's watch, some people would have been screaming bloody murder. It just goes to show you that a man standing on the ground watching his rival up on a ladder painting, and pointing out every little spot he misses, sings a different tune when he finds himself up the ladder."

That is my point, I take no sides in this matter and it does not do any good to get caught up in the politics of it. No matter who is in power the other side will use a mistake like this to damage the one in power. It was an unfortunate mistake and we should leave it at that. I don't think we should be about trying to show up the President, just to make some political hay.

 

[bro-ham]

The main way to slow down government waste is to have one party control the house, one the senate, and a third party the presidency. Then all three could argue and throw their little sound bite temper tantrums blaming each other and accomplish nothing. Government in gridlock is the only way I know to prevent the demoplicans/republicrats from wasting money at the current levels.

Indeed. When the President GW Bush took office, I asked my Congressman Hastert if the "Pay as you go" system for new appropriations created by the Republicans under Clinton would stay in effect. I was told Rep Hastert that there was no need to have a limit on the spending as there would be lowered taxes and the the Republicans would keep spending in check.

I have been reading a lot on the Jefferson/Adams rivalry and while they had different views of the role of the US Government, they were able to get many things done. With rivalry brings lots of fights, but many times improves a problem over what one person or party could do alone.

 

[BillEllis]

I gave this person an accurate, factual answer.

If the people who imply in their question that the President is either stupid or lying can't take a facetious jibe as part of the response, then they really ought not to be playing with the big boys.

Conservatives can dish it out, but they sure as heck can't take it.

I'd really like to give you the opportunity to say something like this to my face. Yuh, I got your "big boy" ...