October 2008
S M T W T F S
« Sep   Nov »
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  
Categories
Latest Postings
Links
Archives
Meta
« “That was freakin’ awesome!” | Contradictions »

ADIZ-zy about Sarah

You will not be surprised to learn that the Associated Press is trying to paint the McCain-Palin campaign in a negative light. It brings to mind Heinlein’s Razor: “Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity… but don’t rule out malice.”

In an article yesterday (”Campaign tries to explain Palin’s Putin comment“), AP reporter Martha Mendoza reports on her investigations into Sarah Palin’s comment about Russian penetrations of U.S. airspace. The article has some serious defects.

Palin made this comment in her interview with Katie Couric:

Couric: Have you ever been involved in any negotiations, for example, with the Russians?

Palin: We have trade missions back and forth, we do. It’s very important when you consider even national security issues with Russia. As Putin rears his head and comes into the air space of the United States of America, where do they go? It’s Alaska. It’s just right over the border. It is from Alaska that we send those out to make sure that an eye is being kept on this very powerful nation, Russia, because they are right there, they are right next to our state.

Mendoza decided to put on her investigatrix hat and sniff this out. Her article packs confusion and innuendo shoulder-to-shoulder like sardines in a… sorry, I went off into Chandler-land for a moment.

The article says “The air defense identification zone, almost completely over water, extends 12-mile [sic] past the perimeter of the United States. Most nations have similar areas.” This is wrong. The ADIZ (not the “outer ADIZ”) extends hundreds of miles over international waters, outside the 12-nautical-mile territorial waters. The ADIZ boundaries are documented in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 14, Part 99.

You may have to go to http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov and search manually.

The FAA provides a picture of the Alaska ADIZ, consistent with 14 CFR 99:

AK ADIZ

Look at this carefully and savor the stupidity (and malice?) of the AP.

FYI the FAA also describes procedures for flying through the ADIZ in

http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/ATpubs/AIM/Chap5/aim0506.html

If you scroll to the end of that page, you will see the CONUS ADIZ figure:

CONUS ADIZ

There are also ADIZ zones set up over land, e.g. the Washington, D.C. ADIZ, which may be the source of Mendoza’s confusion.

The point of all this is that Russian bombers flying over international waters within the Alaskan ADIZ will most certainly cause U.S. interceptor aircraft to be scrambled. The interception is generally limited to identification (the “I” in ADIZ). However, in times of crisis (”increased states of readiness”), if the Russian aircraft refuses to identify or to cooperate with instructions over posted frequencies, they are subject to interdiction before they reach U.S. territory. I will leave it to the lawyers to figure out if that means the U.S. claims the ADIZ is part of U.S. airspace. Chapter 3 of the FAA AIM makes clear that “airspace” is a diverse and complicated concept. I would say the ADIZ is certainly covered by FAA regulations, so I have no problem if someone wants to call it “our airspace”. OTOH if someone wants to dispute our control over the ADIZ, I have two words: “Fox One“.

So: when Palin spokeman Maria Comella stated “Russian incursions near Alaskan airspace and inside the air defense identification zone have occurred … U.S. Air Force fighters have been scrambled repeatedly”, she is certainly correct. When Major Herritage said that the 12-nm zone has not been penetrated, he is also correct.

And when the incompetent AP author, Martha Mendoza, disputed the truth of Comella’s statement, based on the incorrect assumption that the ADIZ was the 12-nm zone, she mangled the simple facts of what was being clarified by both Comella and Herritage. And, in her incompetence, cast doubt on the competence of the McCain-Palin campaign. What Palin and Comella were referring to is the ADIZ, not the “buffer zone…. sometimes called the outer air defense identification zone by the military”. (Note Mendoza used the phrase “might have been referring to“, as if Palin were talking in some obscure dialect that smart people like journalists have to struggle to interpret.) And again, “ADIZ” is not an invention of the military, it is dictated in the CFR.

Mendoza follows with a quote from Maj. Herritage: “To be very clear, there has not been any incursion in U.S. airspace in recent years,” as though this were a flat contradiction of Palin’s comment. But Herritage is referring to the 12-nm zone, not the ADIZ. Once one understands the difference, it becomes clear how the stupidity of a journalist gets turned into the innuendo of “conservative lie”.

Mendoza then quotes Palin’s foreign policy adviser, Steve Biegun: “‘Governor Palin told me that when Russian aircraft buzz American airspace and U.S. aircraft are mobilized at Elmendorf Air Force Base, she is informed by her National Guard commander,’ said Biegun, who did not offer any additional explanation for the contradiction.” That might be because he didn’t feel obligated to penetrate this particular journalist’s RDZ (reality distortion zone). There is no contradiction, only confusion in the mind of Martha Mendoza.

And one has to laugh at the wrap: “Major General Craig E. Campbell, the adjutant general of the Alaska National Guard, did not immediately return calls and e-mails,” as though this were an ominous sign. Gee, ya think the General might be… busy?

[h/t Powerline]

UPDATE:

Some idiot bloggers — I won’t dignify them with a link — have questioned whether there is even an Air National Guard unit at Elmendorf. Yes, there is. The 176th Wing of the ANG is one of the largest and most active in the Guard. It is based out of Kulis ANGB near Anchorage, with units assigned to Elmendorf AFB, Eielson AFB, and Fort Richardson. The 176th Air Control Squadron, part of the 176th Wing, controls the airspace in the Alaskan Air Defense Sector, which includes the Alaskan ADIZ. And yes, this is a unique responsibility for a Guard unit. From the wiki article:

The 176th Air Control Squadron is unique amongst the other American sectors in that it controls the only sector within its region, while both the Northeast Air Defense Sector and Western Air Defense Sector both comprise the Continental NORAD Region (CONR). In addition to this distinction, it is the only sector that has regular reported intercepts of foreign military aircraft, with multiple intercepts of Russian Tu-95 “Bear” aircraft through its lifetime.

UPDATE 2:

Visit the Paul’s Thing blog for an exciting account of an F-15 intercept with a Bear-H over the skies of the Alaska Air Defense Zone, ca. Reagan era.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, 1 October 2008 at 20:15 and is filed under Politics & Society. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site.

| Print

8 Responses to “ADIZ-zy about Sarah”

  1. pwoodford says:
    Thursday, 2 October 2008 at 01:29

    Well, bbbeard, I hope I’m not one of the “idiot bloggers” you refuse to link to! Having an ANG unit control an air defense sector is, I think, a fairly recent development, and given the information you provide, I happily retract my statement that the Alaska governor isn’t informed of intercepts within the Alaskan ADIZ as they happen. The governor, is not, however, part of the operational chain of command, and it was a deliberately misleading stretch for her to imply that she somehow directs the intercepts.

    Paul
    http://pwoodford.net/blog/

  2. dpkeogh says:
    Thursday, 2 October 2008 at 16:34

    excellently written bbb. Granted: I don’t give much credence to media. I’ll be listening to the VP debate tonight. But I can’t vote for someone because (a)she’s female (so was Maggie T); (b) she’s a state governor (so was Jimmy); or (c) the press are gunning for her.

    I think she’s naive and inexperienced and would be eaten alive in DC and scoffed at by the world in general.

    Perhaps tonight’s debate will change my thoughts on this.
    Dawn

  3. aurora_guy says:
    Friday, 3 October 2008 at 05:41

    Judge refuses to block Alaska Troopergate probe

    By MATT VOLZ – 2 hours ago

    ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP) — An Alaska judge on Thursday refused to block a state investigation into whether Gov. Sarah Palin abused her power when she fired her public safety commissioner this summer.

    Judge Peter Michalski threw out the lawsuit filed by five Republican state legislators who said the investigation had been tainted by partisan politics and was being manipulated to damage Palin shortly before the Nov. 4 presidential election.

    “It is legitimately within the scope of the legislature’s investigatory power to inquire into the circumstances surrounding the termination (of) a public officer the legislature had previously confirmed,” the judge wrote in his decision.

    The probe is looking into whether Palin, who is the Republican vice presidential candidate, and others pressured Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan to fire a state trooper who was involved in a contentious divorce from Palin’s sister, and then fired Monegan when he wouldn’t dismiss the trooper. Palin says Monegan was ousted over budget disagreements.

    The five Republican lawmakers had argued that the legislative body that ordered the investigation exceeded its authority. Their attorney, Kevin Clarkson, said the political bias was demonstrated by the plan of the Legislature’s independent investigator to issue a report by Oct. 10 although the full legislature won’t consider until reconvening in January.

    But Michalski said in his ruling that the mere appearance of impropriety does not mean any individual’s right to fairness was violated.

    The independent investigator, Steven Branchflower, still plans to conclude the probe and report his findings by Oct. 10, said Democratic state Sen. Hollis French, the investigation’s project manager. Branchflower’s report will not include the testimony of Palin’s husband, Todd, and several top aides who refused to appear under subpoena.

    In the ruling, released minutes before Palin and Sen. Joe Biden faced off in a debate in St. Louis, Michalski agreed with defense attorney Peter Maassen, who argued that the Legislature has the authority to investigate the governor as it sees fit.

    “He agreed with us on pretty much everything,” Maassen said of the judge’s ruling. “The separation of power principles that governed this case seemed pretty clear.”

    Maassen represents the Legislative Council, 10 Republicans and four Democrats who authorized the investigation, and others involved in the probe.

    Clarkson did not immediately return a message left at his office.

    At first, Palin agreed to cooperate with the probe, but since being picked Aug. 29 to be McCain’s running mate, she, her family and staff have instead said the legislative investigation has been compromised by politics and that they would only cooperate with a separate investigation run by the Alaska State Personnel Board, whose members Palin can fire.

    Michalski also threw out a lawsuit filed by Palin aides seeking to dismiss subpoenas compelling their testimony in the investigation. The aides had argued that the subpoenas should not have to be honored because they should not have been issued.

    Todd Palin also refused to testify under subpoena, but he was not a plaintiff in the lawsuit filed by the state. His attorney, Thomas Van Flein, did not immediately respond to a question sent by e-mail of whether Todd Palin will testify. A phone call to his office was not answered.

  4. aurora_guy says:
    Sunday, 5 October 2008 at 05:42

    “Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity… but don’t rule out malice.” Amen!

    According to CNN — darned leftist Ted Turner — and other news outlets, Governor Palin seems to think Senator Obama likes to hang with terrorists. (Must be a Muslim thing, eh Sarah?) She said so in at least two speeches today, one in Englewood, Colorado. “Our opponent though, is someone who sees America, it seems, as being so imperfect that he’s palling around with terrorists who would target their own country.” She cited her source as the NY Times. (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/04/us/politics/04ayers.html) Apparently, she’s too busy or was interrupted before reading the second half of the article, which concludes there never was a close association between Weatherman Ayers and Sen. Obama. Of course, she could also have gleaned this little tidbit from Washington Post, Time magazine, the Chicago Sun-Times, The New Yorker and The New Republic. So she’s not stupid? OK, must be malice.

    Please send her back to Alaska. We miss her in Juneau.

  5. bbbeard says:
    Sunday, 5 October 2008 at 06:30

    Well, I guess your opinion on this depends on who you read! I didn’t bother to read the NYT article, though I saw the headline, because I’ve been following the Ayers story for many months now, while the Times has been “absent with malice”. And yes, Obama and Ayers have had a close working relation for many years, though for obvious reasons Obama has been trying to hide this fact (”He’s a guy that lives in my neighborhood”). Ayers was an early supporter of Obama’s political career and held a key fundraiser — in his own house — that launched Obama’s political career. Obama was then chair of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, Bill Ayers’ slush fund which doled out millions of foundation dollars with the express purpose of indoctrinating the youth of Chicago in the “revolutionary” values of Ayers and his proudly bomb-throwing clique. I think you should read some of Stanley Kurtz’s research into the Obama-Ayers connection. You could start by googling Kurtz’s name, or “Annenberg Challenge”.

    And malice? Yeah, I sure hope so — Ayers is a founding member of the America-hating left, and a despicable character. “Guilty as hell, and free as a bird” is how I recall Ayers describing himself. Don’t you think their relationship calls Obama’s “judgment” into question? This last bit is admittedly “opinion” on my part — everyone is free to make what they will over the Obama-Ayers connection. But it is just a fact that they had a connection.

    Some of you will probably find the term “America-hating” off-putting. I ask you to revisit my “Patriot Games” post which discusses the meaning of patriotism for folks of different political stripe. And you might want to read Ron Radosh’s post-9/11 piece on Ayers and the adoring NYTimes. I don’t see how you can read that and come to any conclusion other than “America-hating” is a kind way of describing Ayers. And not the Ayers of 8-year-old Obama’s memory hole — the Ayers of today, or at least the post-Annenberg, Obama-boosting Ayers. Even if you don’t want to besmirch the image of Saint Barry, ask yourself: what did Ayers see in Obama that was worth promoting?

  6. bbbeard says:
    Sunday, 5 October 2008 at 20:51

    Here’s a good quick summary of Obama-Ayers in the WSJ:

    Obama and Ayers Pushed Radicalism On Schools.

  7. bbbeard says:
    Tuesday, 7 October 2008 at 17:35

    Well, the story is evolving somewhat. Now Obama’s campaign strategist claims Obama didn’t know Bill Ayers was a terrorist. See

    “Obama: No Knowledge of Ayers Terrorist Past”.

    In fairness, there was no Google in 1995. How’s a dude supposed to know?

    Any day now, we expect to hear, “This is not the Bill Ayers I knew”….

Leave a Reply