In addition to his other ills, apparently George W. Bush is causing massive delays at Heathrow Airport and, as Jim Manzi deftly points out, no doubt breeding massive anti-Americanism among U.K. air travelers.
« Requests Thread | Main | Vacation Spots to Avoid »
Worse Than I Thought
15 Jun 2008 03:57 pm
Comments (14)
I've actually never thought about presidents and airports. It's so...plebeian. I think I've always assumed that Air Force One always landed in a secret, heavily guarded, remote location.
This would be true without regard to who was President - which means this may well be one of your most inane posts (and that's a tough competition there).
Also, I fly through Heathrow a lot, and believe me - it doesn't take Presidential security to bring it to a halt. They manage to be less efficient and more stupid than TSA, and that's realy, really hard to do.
I had read that there were serious delays because of an unusual jet stream across the Atlantic. Lack of a tail wind was causing eastbound flights to arrive late. This might be confounding the problems.
There are enough RAF and 'RAF' bases in the UK (i.e. USAF bases maintained under vague leases) where AF1 could land. But little Baby Bush wanted to land at Heathrow, while dumping off the travelling entourage at RAF Northolt, because he's a spoilt little shit.
Though at least he's not wrecking HMQ's garden this time. And the fucker isn't going to be leaving the country once he loses his sovereign immunity, so that's nice.
Matt,
I don't think delays are a big source of anti Americanism at the mooment. Its kind of dwarfed by other issues.
A case in point. When Bush came to Sydney for APEC the US forced us to change our federal gun laws to allow snipers into the city, we had to change our air space laws to allow a SS helicopter to follow Bush's motorcade with a mobile phone jamming device (prevent bomb detonators apparently), we had the main streets of the city blocked off for an hour or so (well that didn't matter much since a third of the city was cordened for APEC anyway.
Still, if you Google "Chaser APEC" you'll see that Osama bin Laden rocked up to Bush's hotel in the Canadian motorcade. Pretty funny stuff.
This would be true without regard to who was President - which means this may well be one of your most inane posts (and that's a tough competition there).
I'm not sure that the president travels with four helicopters, two 747s, and one 757 out of strict necessity. It's certainly possible to imagine a smaller entourage being effective, and failing that, the president could just land at somewhere other than extraordinarily busy airports . . . military airfields for example (RAF Lakenheath comes to mind).
If W did this to Dulles on a regular basis, I imagine there would have been a mob of consultants outside the White House with torches and pitchforks by now.
Thank goodness Andrews AFB is used for this. I have had enough trips messed up by the VP's evening commute up Mass Ave with his huge security detail. I don't need my flights screwed with either—neither do the folks at Heathrow. Bush should have gone into an RAF field.
If pseudonymous in nc is right -- that Dubya WANTED to land at Heathrow -- he is even dumber than we thought. You're better off landing at Schiphol and taking a ferry.
As I recall, the last time Bush went to some African country, they bulldozed an entire village so they wouldn't look bad.
One time he went to England, they refused to allow the Secret Service to walk around with surface to air missiles - or maybe it was helicopter gunships. They didn't want some nut firing a .22 at this jerk, and then have the entire city of London destroyed.
The amusing thing is that any competent assassin could bypass all that security and still knock him off. And not even get caught. If he was willing to be a suicide assassin, it would be even easier.
I recall reading once that when Thomas Jefferson was working as President, he was at one point living in a boarding house - and they wouldn't hold dinner for him if he was late home from work.
That's how we should treat the President - as just another public servant - not a King.
I think having to go to Heathrow breeds massive anti-Britishism among UK travelers.
"If pseudonymous in nc is right -- that Dubya WANTED to land at Heathrow -- he is even dumber than we thought. You're better off landing at Schiphol and taking a ferry.
Posted by David B. | June 15, 2008 9:10 PM"
We've finally figured it out: Bush is a masochist. Cheney is the sadist with a shotgun. Rummy pays to watch. This explains so much about the Bush administration.
You're better off landing at Schiphol and taking a ferry.
When I go to Europe, I take pleasure at avoiding the London hubs, and choose Schiphol, ideally with a half-day layover.
Imposing the Sultan's Caravan on Heathrow is just dickish, though.
James, as part of a group who was bitching and whining promoting the falsehood that Bill Clinton shut down air traffic at LA airport for a haircut, you're in no position to criticize.
This sort of (true!) critique is a tiny, minor fraction compared to the republican campaign of smears, urban legends, and lies perpetuated against bill clinton. The Republicans are in no moral position to say anything about MattY's mild needling of Bush here. So you can go and shut your fat mouth.
Angry people and cancelled flights at Heathrow? That never happened until Bush came to town. It's well known as the best operated airport in Britain. No, in Europe. Hell, I think it's the best, most relaxing and most reliable airport in the world!
Comments closed June 29, 2008.
| 
Heads in the Sand
When I was on my way to Beijing from the airport during my trip to China in 2005, the Chinese shut down the entire expressway for about 15 minutes to let a VIP go through (I believe it was New Zealand's PM, Helen Clark). First a couple of police cars went flying by, sirens blazing, and then black sedan after black sedan. Sleep-deprived as I was, it was a pretty surreal experience.
So take that, Bush haters! He's not as bad--ah, who am I kidding.
Posted by mwg | June 15, 2008 4:13 PM