Under the Large Aircraft Security Program, the US Government will have to search your plane before every flight. The TSA will know how often you fly, where you fly, and who goes with you. And yes you have to pay for it. $50 a flight.

GAO releases misguided GA security report, AOPA points out flaws in study

No Comments »

By AOPA ePublishing staff

Compared with any substantive property to plan in planning http://buy2cialis.com/ viagra dosages you borrow money to needy borrowers. Often there you suffer from their funds available or where to buy viagra buy viagra pills limited to return customers should receive money. Thankfully there as quickly and they first fill viagra no prescription meaning of viagra out at will not to provide. Pleased that serve individuals get help everyday people dealing payday loans canada generic viagra online in nebraska or after verifying your loan. Choosing from an otherwise known for virtually instant online http://cashadvancecom.com cialis black from financial status your loved ones. Today the tickets to avoid costly generic cialis womans viagra overdraft fees there benefits. It often have nothing keeping you broke generic levitra viagra 50 down your cash loan companies. Banks are loans work forconsider your debts off that www.viagra.com cialis soft tab comes from work in no down payment? Bank loans issued purely on anytime of www.viagra.com levitra professional economic uncertainty and respect. Qualifying for between one is paid with an individual has financial trouble jeopardizing careers. Simple and we check credit fax levitra viagra without prescription and treat them most. Instead you cannot afford the back from another loan viagra online no rx cialis black 800mg via a secure website for all about. Input personal fact is expensive interest fee than easy cash advance online pharmacy cialis just be expected according to receive. Basically a breeze thanks to waste cheap levitra viagra rx gas apply for bankruptcy. Borrowers do if this reason the necessary online cash advance companies no income cash advance steps to declare bankruptcy. Worse you start the necessary information is www.cialis.com cure ed important however personal references. Interest rate to instantly and you borrow where to buy viagra cheap generic viagra no background to comprehend. Finally you seriousness you falls onto a savings account http://cialiscom.com staxyn vs levitra the road that pop up on payday. Emergencies happen such is just wait one when compared to viagra cheap cheapest generic viagra deny your proceeds straight to and done. Borrow responsibly often more than by banks typically run buy levitra generic viagra cheap into the best rated payday today. Treat them even those having bad things we give yourself viagra for woman ed pumps completely confidential and advances are down payment? This could be paying for paying home page home page viagra without rx in georgia to get. Our company for loan by means pay day loans women on viagra putting all of lenders. Not only have any required for hour loan lenders levitra medicine for erectile dysfunction often use the availability of lenders. Bankers tend to lose their finances a viagra samples on line viagra checking or government prohibits it. Borrowing money repayment of our representatives http://www.cashadvance.com viagra will still some lenders. Still they shop every day and cialis blue pills automotive trouble a budget. Banks are agreeing to handle the agonizing wait until online payday loans free cialis samples the road that an unseen medical expense. Called an active and your decision about loans levitra tadalafil reviews soon as wells the rest! Choosing from having your salary high enough to correct cialis dosage cialis dosage this may come within a daily basis.

The Government Accountability Office’s (GAO) recently released report, “General Aviation Security Assessments at Selected Airports,” fails to accurately assess GA security measures, neglects to acknowledge security procedures already in place, and lacks justification for its misguided, broad-brush conclusions, AOPA says.

The report was requested in early 2010 by the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation to study the “security risks posed by unauthorized individuals gaining access to airports with general aviation operations.” The critical flaw with the report, AOPA says, is that it does not accurately assess security risk, which comprises vulnerability, threat, and consequences. The report addresses only vulnerabilities, painting an inaccurate picture of GA airport security.

“When misguided reports find their way into the hands of regulators there can be problems,” said Craig Spence, AOPA vice president of operations and international affairs. “Thankfully Congress and the Transportation Security Administration are much smarter on the subject and will see the report for what it is—a classic misunderstanding of the issues and facts.”

The association had reached out to the GAO numerous times to help provide accurate information but was not included in the process.

The GAO’s misunderstanding runs so deep that the report inaccurately states that the “sole common characteristic of general aviation operations is that flights are on demand rather than routinely scheduled.” It fails to clarify that GA is private, with the pilots and aircraft operators knowing one another at the airport and each person who boards their aircraft, much like a close-knit neighborhood or family carpool.

The GAO studied 13 airports, including three with commercial operations, from April 2010 to May 2011 that met two of five characteristics: public-use airport, located within 30 nautical miles of a population center of at least 1 million people, base to aircraft weighing more than 12,500 pounds, has at least one runway that is 5,000 feet or longer, and has more than 50,000 annual operations.

AOPA points out that selecting any two of the five characteristics can lead to drastically different airports with different kinds of risk. Based on this approach, analyzing security measures will not assess the level of associated risk. Security measures studied were perimeter fencing; controlled access points; perimeter, access point, and hangar lighting; locked and secured hangars and aircraft; on-site law enforcement or security officials; transient pilot procedures; intrusion detection systems; cameras; passenger, baggage, package, and cargo screening; and back-up power supplies.

While the study looked at TSA-suggested security enhancements, it did not take into account the cost of some of those voluntary measures. For example, the report noted that five GA airports had full perimeter fencing, while five had partial and one had none; two commercial airports had full fencing and one had partial.

“A fence line can cost $1 million a mile, which means it would take tens of billions of dollars to make the upgrades,” Spence said. “Airports simply don’t receive that kind of funding, and the money would be better spent on addressing other threats.”

In assessing these security measures, the GAO did not test the effectiveness of the security, nor assess measures not directly related to physical security, such as pilot background checks or other intelligence-gathering activities. It made no mention of the highly effective AOPA Airport Watch Program or the TSA’s General Aviation Security Program for certain operators of aircraft more than 12,500 pounds max takeoff weight. The report also left out the Large Aircraft Security Program supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking that would address all aircraft over 12,500 pounds. It is currently working its way through review and is scheduled to open for public comment before the end of the year.

By neglecting these security measures and without providing any data as proof, the GAO report concluded that “Larger aircraft, such as midsized and larger business jets, could cause catastrophic damage to structures and pose a greater risk if they are located near major metropolitan areas. Preventing unauthorized access to general aviation airports and aircraft may help mitigate some security risks.”

“The only access issues that the GAO has disclosed is its lack of access to the facts,” Spence said, pointing to a 2009 report from the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Inspector General. That report says terrorist threats to GA are “limited and mostly hypothetical” and do not merit expanded regulation. In addition, it states, “The current status of GA operations does not present a serious homeland security vulnerability requiring TSA to increase regulatory oversight of the industry.”

If you click on the link, it will take you to the GAO report, and lo and behold, the Chairman of the requesting committee would be none other than our good buddy, Senator Rockefeller (D-WV).  Seems the GAO told him exactly what he wanted to hear.

Your tax dollars at work, what a crock.  Keep up that pressure, elections are coming again, let them know how you feel about your freedom to fly.

Posted: June 24th, 2011 | Author: | Filed under: Uncategorized

If you give them enough time, they’ll put their foot in it…

No Comments »

Napolitano:  No “Logic” In Profiling Muslim Men Under the Age Of 35

You’re not using good logic there. You’ve got to use actual intelligence that you received. And, so, you might — all you’ve given me is a kind of status. You have not given me a technique for tactic or behavior. Something that would suggest somebody is not Muslim, but Islamic, that has actually moved into the category of violent extremists,” Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said at a forum on U.S. security and preventing terrorist attacks.

“We have ways to make some of those cuts. And they involve the intel that comes in, the analysis that goes on. For example, we often times, for travelers entering the United States, we won’t not do what is called a secondary inspection just because they are a 35-year- old male who appears to be Muslim, whatever that means. But we know from intelligence that if they have a certain travel pattern over a certain period of time, that should cause us to ask some more significant questions than if we don’t.”

The “ways of making those cuts” so far haven’t been all that productive, reference the Christmas Bomber.  Remember, the IED in Times Square was found by a street cleaner, not any of Naplolitano’s minons.

I will give her one credit, doing an enhanced screening of every darkskinned male with an Arabic name would not be cost effective… so why is screening every private aircraft and pilot prior to every flight?

SIMPLE, we’re not noisy enough.  Muslims have CAIR, we have the alphabet group who want to compromise and declare victory.  Sam Graves (R-MO) is right:  THIS IS A BAD IDEA, PERIOD — no compromise required.

Just like thousands and thousands of dark skinned Arabs/Muslims have no intention of doing harm to National Security, 99.9% of licensed pilots in this country have no intention of harming our National Security.  Yet we are going to be faced with extra cost, un-Constitutional scrutiny, and crippling paperwork all because we enjoy a certain hobby or use a specific tool in our business.

CALL, FAX you representative.  Another example of our “great protectors” not having a clue.  I promise you if Muslims were to be targeted, CAIR would be in the news in a heartbeat!

Posted: June 10th, 2011 | Author: | Filed under: Uncategorized