Activists on a plane

February 25, 2008

Here’s the link, in case you think I’m making all this up.


Apparently, four activists associated with Greenpeace have climbed onto the top of a Boeing 777 at London’s Heathrow airport to protest the planned construction of a third runway. Now, I know what you’re thinking. You’re thinking, “Greenpeace? Isn’t that the well-known environmental group famous for promoting logical, responsible and calm discussion about environmental issues by pulling stunts like piloting their ship, named the Rainbow Warrior, dangerously close to huge Japanese whaling vessels?” Yes. That’s them. France bombed and sunk the original Rainbow Warrior just to keep Greenpeace from driving their ship around the ocean like a drunken grandma on I95, which they have continued to do in the New Rainbow Warrior. Oh, and let’s not forget that Greenpeace also spent a lot of time and money to officially name one humpback whale “Mister Splashy Pants”. Yes, I expect you’ll be needing a link for that one too. Here it is.

So it only makes sense that four people from Greenpeace would climb up to the top of a 777 to criticize the British air travel industry. Let’s quote now from, “We may have exposed a hole in security at Heathrow, but it’s not as big as the hole in (Prime Minister) Gordon Brown’s climate change policy,” said Sarah Shoraka, 30, another of the protesters, who questioned why flights between Manchester and London are necessary when the train is a viable alternative. She went on to say, “The push for a third runway is being fueled by totally unnecessary flights like this one.”

OK, so where do we start? Climbing on top of an airplane? A BIG one? No. Protesting a THIRD runway at one of the busiest airports in the world, which you would think should already have about 63 runways so airplanes didn’t have to circle around endlessly waiting to land? No, too easy. Hmmm … I’ve got it.

Aren’t airplanes kind of like public transportation? I mean, the activists want everyone to ride the train instead of flying, but what about the other alternative? That 777 probably holds 300 to 400 passengers, depending on how the interior is configured. What if all of those people decided that, instead of flying from London to Manchester, they would all drive their own cars? How would the M1 (the main road north from London) look with an extra three or four hundred cars for every cancelled flight? There are multiple flights from LHR to MAN daily. That’s a lot of congestion and a lot of vehicle exhaust pollution. In fact, I think it would make more sense for Greenpeace activists to take their protest to the highways and try to convince people to fly INSTEAD of drive. Their signs should say something like, “Why are you driving when there is a perfectly good airplane waiting for you at Heathrow?” and “Boeing 777, great public transportation!”

But I guess it’s not about making sense now, is it Mister Splashy Pants?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: