WH bans all future flyovers

foxnews.com ^ | April 27, 2009 | major garrett

[Free ThinkerNY]

WH bans all future photo-shoot flyovers with AF1 backup plane

WH official tells Fox these flights have been banned but would not confirm a Wall Street Journal report that a planned flyover on May 5-6 in Washington, with the US Capitol as a backdrop, had been scrubbed.

[Red Steel]

Greta was REALLY steamed about this! Aside from scaring people to death, she was pushing the DC reporter to ask Obama how much this little stunt cost the taxpayers. I loved her comment that for $300 they could have bought Photoshop and faked up a pic of AF1 over the NY Skyline and avoided all this cost and hassle.

I haven't seen it pointed out yet on any of these AF1 threads that all active AF pilots fly x-amount of hours a month to keep their proficiency up and that includes the Air Force 1 pilots. The money for this flight was already in the defense budget so there was no extra expenses involved.

The problem is a political one. Obama's shortsightedness to see that a low flying 747 with trailing F-16s over NYC would invoke memories and terrorist concerns.

[bossmechanic]

He’s just so attuned to the public. He can respond in a moment’s notice to right wrongs and reduce threats to our
sensitivities.
Whata guy! /s

[Aria]

Our money is nothing to them. Lobster, carviar, $100/lb steak, .... etc. etc.

After all, compared to the national debt it's nothing.

Wonder how things are in Zimbabwe these days?

[Redbob]

Typical Obama barn-door approach:
“Let’s not do THAT again!”

No principles, no morality, just a fear of getting caught.
Although the fear of looking stupid apparently means nothing to them...

[Natural Law]

You mean to tell me that not a single dipstick on the WH publicity staff ever heard of Photo Shop?

[Mr_Moonlight]

Breaking News:
In light of today's panic, the 0bama administration has scrubbed plans for a photo shoot in Oklahoma City using Ryder rental trucks in front of federal buildings.

DING DING DING ... we have a winner!

[Mr Rogers]

You make an excellent point. I really don’t have much sympathy for all the whining...other than there should have been a news article done first.

[Toespi]

Wouldn’t we love to know who was on that plane. Maybe Obama was doing a dry run.

[GovernmentShrinker]

Hard to say. Here’s a photo of AF1 on the USAF site that looks like it was taken for publicity purposes:
http://www.usaf.com/1planes.htm And a very similar one (quite possibly from the same flight) labelled “Air Force One flies over Mount Rushmore” http://www.wingweb.co.uk/aircraft/Air_Force_One.html Could have been photoshopped though. Also could possibly date to Obama’s administration.

[fso301]

Someone needs to find out what variant F-16's flew today? Did a singleseater pilot really take pictures out of a tinted canopy while buzzing NYC in close proximity to other aircraft?

Someone should also find out the names of any civilians aboard AF1.

[JerseyHighlander]

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00002331----000-.html

Updates to this section of the United States Code

Title 18 > Part I > Chapter 113B > Section 2331

§ 2331. Definitions

Title 18 of the US Code as currently published by the US Government reflects the laws passed by Congress as of Jan. 3, 2007, and it is this version that is published here.


TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 113B > § 2331
Prev | Next
§ 2331. Definitions
How Current is This?
As used in this chapter—
(1) the term “international terrorism” means activities that—
(A) involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State, or that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or of any State;
(B) appear to be intended—
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
(C) occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States, or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to intimidate or coerce, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum;
(2) the term “national of the United States” has the meaning given such term in section 101(a)(22) of the Immigration and Nationality Act;
(3) the term “person” means any individual or entity capable of holding a legal or beneficial interest in property;
(4) the term “act of war” means any act occurring in the course of—
(A) declared war;
(B) armed conflict, whether or not war has been declared, between two or more nations; or
(C) armed conflict between military forces of any origin; and
(5) the term “domestic terrorism” means activities that—
(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;
(B) appear to be intended—
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.

So the question remains, will the US Supreme Court dare clarify if this event was international, or domestic, terrorism? In the Hudson River flight path and part of the East River flight path, EVERY single jurisdiction has the ability and preponderance of evidence to sit a grand jury and indict the director of the White House military office, Louis Caldera, and a good amount of the staff both civilian and military operating under his authority during the preparatino of this terrorist attack. Every single individual affected by this has civil class action suit standing against this administration. And let's not try to guess the number, but over 20 buildings were evacuated, including the large Goldman Sachs complex and the 55 story condo which is the tallest building in Jersey City, NJ. There are still thousands and thousands of people in that area still these several years later, under psychological counseling due the the fateful events on 9/11.

(On a personal note my heart just sunk today when it first crossed the newswire, out and out panic. Not again, not again, not again. Living in the NYC burbs I immediately started a run down list of every one I know who works in Manhattan and JC, I never want to have to do that again.)

The panic of Goldman Sachs complex highrise evacuees in Jersey City:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jn0tMMYEkQU

The panic in Brooklyn:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxE0iazfIBg

The minimum altitude and military escort:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMoy8JprKI0 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7H_8kQoVVFg

[thefactor]

maverick and goose are not going to be happy about this.

[dodger]

Fishy, fishy story ... who wanted a ‘fly-over photo op’ and why? That is just a weird explanation.

Was this some sort of security training session?

If not, who order the mission and to what purpose. Photo-op, I think not ....

[GovernmentShrinker]

Agreed that there was probably no extra expense for the planned flights. The extra expense on the ground in NYC and nearby NJ was substantial, however — lots of extra police time, lots of ambulance runs and hospital personnel to treat people injured, feeling faint, having chest pains, having PTSD flashbacks, etc. And the New York Mercantile Exchange was evacuated during trading hours, at an impossible to calculate cost.

[Danae]

Note to Obama White House: Horse already out of barn.

[DariusBane]

Hmmm,

a tyrant requires the approbation of his subjects. His decision, though unquestioned must appear, fair and just, and above all infallible. Hence Kim Jong Ill bowling a 300 the first time he bowled etc. So, Obama signs off on a flyover photo session, it goes bad so the tyrant must save face.

1. Blame somebody else for poor judgment (a firing might be in order)
2. In as heavy handed a fashion as possible end all possible opportunity for further transgressions (Kim Jong Ill might just blow up all the bowling alleys and hang the operators if he got a bad score.)

[Danae]

LOL

That is so not funny....

[El Gato]

But alas, even if the original concept of the photo shoots was justifiable, the notification screw-up solidly nailed its coffin shut.

It's said they did notify the NYPD, and other local police agencies. BUT, they asked them not to tell the public. NYPD didn't even tell DA Mayor. I hope the gun grabbing POS had to change his drawyers.

Still an ill advised idea. Not telling the public makes a narrow kind of sense, wouldn't want "someone" with a Stinger or SA-14 to take a shot at the backup VC-25 while it was low and slow. But I think I'd have risked it to avoid the panic that ensued.

Heck set the F-16s up as Wild Weasels, and you might bag a Jihadie, and the missile would probably miss anyway, especially if it wasn't a Stinger.

[GovernmentShrinker]

It could have been with an automated or remote-operated camera. Or from a nearby helicopter which wouldn’t have attracted any attention.

[Sequoyah101]

But Photoshop would be deceptive and the zero freaks must be transparent and truthful.

The zero freaks would never lie.