So, just how would the US defend against a small plane attack on

[wholetruth00]

a major city? God, this is some scary stuff.

[TheCowsCameHome]

1. Isn't it? Nothing's changed.

[Monkeyman]

2. Call Sac opps that right it gone

There is no why to prevent an attack with small aircraft. Bush has done nothing to make you safer

[MadMaddie]

3. It's scary and it's reality because absolutely nothing...I say

nothing has changed...our border security, our ports, our cities.....we are not safer.....

[Joe for Clark]

4. We'd send W to hide in a mountain in Wyoming, of course.

The rest of us are "on our own".

[napi21]

5. The most logical answer would be to STOP all aircraft from

flying belowa certain altitude over cities. Apparently the FAA wanted to do thatafter 9/11, but there was such a high outcry from the wealthy who own their own planes, and the scenic flight owners who flytours over NY, around the Statue of Liberty, and back, that the FAA caved in on that one. I wouldn't be at all surprised that Shrub's buddies called him and said "You can't let them do that to us!"

Maybe, after this awful accident today, the FAA will prevail!

[karlrschneider]

9. Yeah, that will work. Obviously it's impossible to drop a bomb or

a box of anthrax from high altitude. Maybe the Air Force should give you a job. :eyes:

[napi21]

12. You cannot stop planes from flying over all american cities.

THAT is purely impractical. What we're talking about here is planes, accidentally or intensionally,slamming into tall buildings. Other than beautiful scenery, there is NO REASON to have Gen. aviation aircraft flying below 1,500 to 2,000 ft. over cities.

've forgotten how many flight hours are required to fly solo, but perhapsethat should be relooked at as well.

Ihave no ideawhat could have happened to that plane today, especially since the flight instructor was there too! I do know,one of the very first things a potential pilot is taught is what to do in an emergency. They are told to look for a field, a wide road, ANYTHIng to stay away from buildings and population! I'm not sure we'll ever find out what really happened.

[karlrschneider]

15. What about the hundreds of inner-city airports? Every large city

has 1 or 2 smack in the middle of populated areas. I often fly into them to save a 10 to 20 mile road trip to get into town. One of the planes I fly cost seven million dollars (yes, it's owned by a Republican who pays me handsomely to deliver him safely to various destinations...that is what I do.)

There is no 'minimum' number of hours to fly 'solo'...that is up to the flight instructor, but there is a minimum of 40 hours to get a private license. Personally I think that's too little but I don't get to write the laws. However I do agree with your final point, it's very possible we might never know
precisely what transpired in this incident.

[karlrschneider]

6. The same way they would defend against a Ryder truck

carrying a bomb or anthrax. If you're scared, Bushco has accomplished the mission.

[The_Casual_Observer]

7. LIke Japanese Zeros?

Tora Tora Tora!!!!

[LTR]

8. By reading "My Pet Goat"

Hiding in bunkers and flying around the country.

Isn't that the way we did it before?

[Solly Mack]

10. King Kong?

[HysteryDiagnosis]

11. My best guess....

[greeneyedboy]

13. create a better, more peaceful world, and stop inciting terrorism?

[wholetruth00]

23. DING,DING, DING!! We have a winner!

[Poppyseedman]

14. Todays event should be keep in perspective.

The best defense to a small plane attack happens on the ground. You don't give any yahoo clearance to take off and fly a small plane.

Anybody who steps into a plane needs clearance. I'm sure (I least, I hope) every person who steps into a plane has been cleared first.

I'm sure this event will wake up a few sleeping souls to revisit their protocols and procedures on clearance to fly

[karlrschneider]

17. Indeed. And let's run a background check on everyone who rents

a Ryder truck. What kind of 'clearance' would be appropriate for ME if I want to get into my small
plane and run to St. Louis? Be specific.

[Poppyseedman]

18. As for doing a background check on renting trucks.

No need to as long as you aren't buying material for making bombs, you can't at least in large quantities. So it's an apples and oranges comparison.

As for what type of clearance you need to fly your plane to St Louis?

I have no idea, that's why in my post I stated I hope they are doing just that. I assume they just let any joe sho walk out onto the tarmac and fly away. Do they? I think not.

[karlrschneider]

19. Oh, I see. If I rent a truck, they will scour the country for fertilizer

dealers to see if I'm buying ammonium phosphate? Got it.

I don't need any 'clearance' at all unless I'm filing an IFR flight plan. When I do, it is invariably accepted and approved and I can change it at any time during the flight.

And any 'joe sho' can indeed walk onto the tarmac and fly away if he has the wherewithal to do so. If you think that's a problem, you might want to suggest a solution to what's basically a nonexistant problem.

[NNN0LHI]

16. Yea some people were really scared of bird flu a couple of years ago

I think some people just like being scared.

Don

[leftofthedial]

20. Not to worry!

There is a plan in place for exactly such a contingency.

Republicans would immediately call a press conference and blame Clinton.

[tinfoilinfor2005]

21. Kicked and recommended and I'm surprised that this isn't a bigger deal.

Not that we should stop all air traffic over big cities, but that the administration has been sending out the message that they, and only they, now have the ability to stop these things from occurring. On the one hand they want everyone to be scared silly, but on the other hand they want everyone to think that they have it all under control. Just pure bullshit on both counts, and I think an event like this shows how ridiculous their claims continue to be.

[leftchick]

22. a city? How about Indian Point Nuclear facility right down the road?

http://www.riverkeeper.org/campaign.php/indian_point/the_facts

Twenty million people live within the 50-mile "peak injury" zone of Indian Point, located 24 miles north of the Bronx on the banks of the Hudson River in Westchester County. A large radioactive release triggered by a terrorist attack on or accident at the facility could have devastating health and economic consequences, rendering much of the Hudson River Valley, including New York City, uninhabitable.

Due to the plant's vulnerability to a terrorist attack, a laundry list of safety problems, the storage of 1500 tons of radioactive waste onsite, and the lack of a workable evacuation plan, Riverkeeper is calling for the permanent closure of the Indian Point nuclear power plant. In addition, Riverkeeper is working with elected officials and the community to prevent a 20-year license extension for the Indian Point 2 & 3, currently licensed until 2013 and 2015, respectively. Entergy, the owner/operator, is expected to apply for 20-year license extensions as early as July 2006.

Riverkeeper's call for closure is supported by over 400 elected officials, including 11 members of Congress, and a broad-based alliance of environmental, health, public policy, and civic groups united under the Indian Point Safe Energy Coalition.

Read below to learn more about our campaign and what you can do to help us close this aging nuclear facility.