They should have been shoot on sight....on another note, security is lacking at th Airport if they got in, and climbed on a plane. Terrorist could have done far werst.
I disagree.
They should have been shoot on sight....on another note, security is lacking at th Airport if they got in, and climbed on a plane. Terrorist could have done far werst.
What about the tons and tons and tons of medical and food supplies that are distributed around the world in a timely and effective manner because of air transport? Should we go ahead and let those in need suffer, starve, and die?
Greenpeace's answer would be a resounding yes. They'd be quite happy if there were fewer people on this planet, and if takes pestulance and disease to make that happen they'd be happy to support it.
What about the tons and tons and tons of medical and food supplies that are distributed around the world in a timely and effective manner because of air transport? Should we go ahead and let those in need suffer, starve, and die?
Greenpeace's answer would be a resounding yes. They'd be quite happy if there were fewer people on this planet, and if takes pestulance and disease to make that happen they'd be happy to support it.
Ummm! I think they would just argue that boats were better. They can carry more too and it doesn't take so long to get around the world on a boat, especially if you are doing things in advance. I haven't heard anyone calling for the abolition of planes. I have heard them calling for a halt in the soaring demand for air travel. I disagree with them entirely, but let's not put them down to a level they aren't at.
It was admitted a couple of weeks ago that ships are responsible for far more emissions than aircraft. Ships are a major source of global warming pollutants
I disagree with them entirely, but let's not put them down to a level they aren't at.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 572 guests