|
rulemylife -> RE: Feds Knew NYC Flyover Would Cause Panic (4/30/2009 4:40:17 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY
I have no doubt that a lot of people are doing a bit of CYA in this entire scenario.
But lets talk a bit about your assumptions:
1. That it was solely the FAA "ordering around" the officials of NYC,
2. That the person who said that the FAA "ordered" the city to keep quiet about the event was both telling the truth, and accurate in his comments.
As for #1, they are not my assumptions, assuming you believe the report you posted is true. They were stated in your link:
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.
As for #2, my post stated the opposite. I believe most of these media reports regarding this are full of inaccuracies.
quote:
First, in a thread about this subject which was deleted, I gave what I thought the most likely reason that would be cited for lack of public announcement: secrecy on the "movements of the President".
I suspect that all the announcements had, by default, a statement about it being a violation of Federal law to disclose the information due to routine security surrounding the movement of the President or his aircraft.
In the bureaucratic world, that is the same as "threatening" - because that is what it is - a threat from the Feds in the event of disclosure.
The movements of Air Force One when the President is on board are rarely a secret within this country. Presidential visits are announced days or weeks in advance.
Even on last-minute trips the FAA and the airport authority are given as much notice as possible.
The FAA in turn, establishes temporary flight restrictions in the vicinity of the destination airport that are published in advance to alert the users of that airport and other nearby airports within the restricted area of special operating rules and the potential for delays.
quote:
The person that you are relying on in assumption 2 could therefore be partially correct, and also totally covering his ass.
This, of course, is also supposition on my part, since neither you nor I know the facts. So I'm waiting an investigation that will reveal the actual facts.
Me too, but again, I'm not relying on him (or them), your article is.
One fact I do know for sure is the very headline of the article is inaccurate.
The FAA has no jurisdiction over any of these agencies save the aircraft they operate and the airports and airspace they use.
Particularly ridiculous is the claim that the FAA threatened the Secret Service. The FAA issues temporary flight restrictions regarding the President and other high-level officials at the request of the Secret Service. Besides, what sanctions would they be able to threaten them with?
quote:
But ... the fact is ... this was an utterly pointless event, caused by an inherent lack of concern about the people of NYC, and caused by normal bureaucratic operations.
Yes it was, but not the first time one of the Presidential aircraft was used for photo ops.
As you mentioned earlier, secrecy related to security is my guess as well. Mainly because they were operating over a small area at a very low altitude for an extended period of time.
Regardless, there were obvious mistakes. Either the decision to do this should not have been made or there should have been better planning and communication with all involved.
quote:
As for your first asssumption ... since there were more federal agencies involved than just the FAA ... how do you know what else occurred, or what other federal agency might have some culpability?
I don't. Which was my point. Your article and the other news reports, including condemnation by some Senators, are blaming this largely on the FAA and they do not have the broad authority being attributed to them.
(By the way, interesting series of posts in a row. Someone complained to me recently about my shotgun posts. Sort of happens when you get behind on a thread, huh?)
|
|
|
|
