Will the new government have any effect on GA?

On Nov 14, 5:29 pm, "Jim Macklin"
wrote:

But if they say riots in
Paris, cars burned, police station burned by "youths" we
know it was Muslim youthful terrorist wannabes.

That's exactly the kind of thinking that's going to lose this war.

Doesn't anybody realize anymore that it takes intelligence (as in
"smarts" not "information") and not just expensive machinery to win a
war?

The day patriotism and nuanced thinking are mutually exclusive is the
day we really will have lost.

Anyway, none of this has to do with flying. I'm outta this thread.....

Marc

Well, the way into the Washington ADIZ

The Washington ADIZ is not over our Capital. I have been in the ADIZ
many times. There's nothing under it but trees and suburbs.

We have lost the freedom to fly over our Capital. This is strictly
9-11. For a long time we lost the freedom to fly over NY and Boston. I
won't even talk about Chicago.

You don't think it's appropriate to have a no-fly zone around the
Kennedy Space Center? Tell me, Jose, where DO you think a no-fly zone
is appropriate?

The teeny ones that existed prior to 9-11 were appropriate.

The freedom to carry =my= wine in =my= carry-on is not a silly
freedom.
Yes, it is.

There are no silly freedoms. What if it were beer?

And if a terrorist smuggles four "bottles" of explosives on the plane,
killing everyone on board, well, that's just acceptable collateral
damage? After all, your merlot was an excellent year!

"If only one child is saved...". Yes, it's acceptable collateral
damage. Goddamnit, LIVING is risky. You think the terrorists can't
figure out another way? Gimme a break.

Ever played with powdered sugar around a heat source?
Not recently.

It's an explosive. Somebody will try it, and powders will be banned.
Pretty soon we'll all fly naked in handcuffs.

I'd fly on THAT airline.

Somebody might pick their nose.

No one rounded up the librarians when they said that, and no one will.

No. But they will ask a librarian for records, and she will comply or
not. If she refuses, she'll go to jail. If she breaks the secret,
she'll go to jail. It is not at all unenforcable. It is only needed
sometimes, and those times you can be sure it will be enforced.

We're going to win the war on terrorism just like we won the war on drugs.
You may be right, but I haven't heard any alternative responses that
make any more sense.

Accept the fact that life is risky. Accept the fact that freedom is
lost long before security is gained. Go from there. Somewhere in your
Holy Book there is a passage on that; something to do with cheeks.

Jose
--
"Never trust anything that can think for itself, if you can't see where
it keeps its brain." (chapter 10 of book 3 - Harry Potter).
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Jose writes:

No. But they will ask a librarian for records, and she will comply or
not. If she refuses, she'll go to jail. If she breaks the secret,
she'll go to jail. It is not at all unenforcable. It is only needed
sometimes, and those times you can be sure it will be enforced.

I've heard of libraries that regularly announce that they haven't been
told to provide records (which is legal). One day they stop
announcing that, and you know that the government demanded someone's
records.

Accept the fact that life is risky. Accept the fact that freedom is
lost long before security is gained.

The only thing we have to fear is fear itself. Fear is routinely used
to undermine freedom.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Jay Honeck writes:

You don't think it's appropriate to have a no-fly zone around the
Kennedy Space Center? Tell me, Jose, where DO you think a no-fly zone
is appropriate?

Wherever there are other things in the air that can cause conflicts,
such as balloons, projectiles (for military practice), and so on.

Just forbidding overflight out of concerns about "terrorists" isn't
justified, at least not as long as they can still drive into the area
in vehicles or navigate into it with boats.

No, the solution is to make all airline passengers fly naked. I'd fly
on THAT airline.

No, the solution is to profile and interrogate passengers, rather than
search their luggage. It's not what they are carrying that counts,
it's what they intend to do with it.

You may be right, but I haven't heard any alternative responses that
make any more sense.

There are many alternatives, such as the ones I've mentioned above.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.