CV640 From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 952 posts, RR: 5
Reply 3, posted (12 years 9 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 1148 times:
Yes, I saw the few of them with the signs, Protect the Neighborhood, blah, blah. I was catching SWA flight to Nashville and thought it was a small company on strike until I saw the signs. Come on people, ISP has been there for years and you have to know airports always grow, never shrink.
How about thinking about the jobs, revenue, and cheap air service that is a lot closer and more convient then LGA, JFK< and EWR.
I guess if the NIMBY's want to put their money where there mouth is, they could always drive into the City and use JFK, LGA, and EWR. I'm sure some of them do already. But I wonder how many of the protesters also fly out of ISP? It sounds like the NIMBY's want just enough service to support their needs and to hell with the rest of Long Island residents and visitors .
ChrisNH From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 4011 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (12 years 9 months 11 hours ago) and read 1072 times:
Up at the Boston-area secondary airport, Bedford's Hanscom Field, NIMBY's were out in force and celebrated a victory when USAirways turned tail and rescinded their decision to fly BED-PHL this fall. The BIG problem USAirways made, in my opinion, is that they basically 'credited' the protesters in their press release as the reason why they were changing their mind. I was LIVID at that!
As for NIMBY's, they are soooo hypocritical...they rant and rave about all the noise and 'environmental damage' that airports cause, yet lost (conveniently) in the shuffle is any rationalization about the 'environmental damage' that occured when their favorite mall was being constructed, or even the woods that were carved out to create their neighborhoods. I have no sympathy for one-way arguments like theirs...Southwest, go for it Full steam ahead
TWA717_200 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (12 years 9 months 10 hours ago) and read 1063 times:
If NIMBY's were serious about their cause, they'd all go get hysterectomies and vasectomies (and possibly lobotomies). That way the rest of us would be assured that they cannot possibly contribute to the unstoppable growth which they so tenaciously oppose.
Catflap From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2000, 73 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (12 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 1035 times:
Lots of abuse but very little sense coming from the Yanks. How cosy; hurling abuse at people within the limited confines of the incestuous aviation world, secure in the knowledge that protesters don't log on to your site. Presumably you'd like to keep it that way ?
Perhaps it didn't appear on the news in the US, but the rest of the world has accepted that burning fossil fuels contributes to global warming, and has signed up to reducing emissions. The Bush administration is left isolated. The spokesmen being wheeled out by the Whitehouse sound increasingly incredible, trying to claim that there is no scientific evidence for gobal warming.
There may well be 80 protesters today, but tomorrow there will be more. The protests against environmental damage to the planet are growing. If you continue to adopt an antagonistic "up-yours" attitude towards them, you will simply increase what is already a polar situation. Try to remember, it's just as much their planet as yours.
ISPPD From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (12 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1026 times:
Most of the 80 protesters at ISP Saturday were driving there SUV's and pushing there kids in stollers. They say there are concerned about the air and such, but they are pushing there kids along a highway with cars going by at 50-60 MPH putting there own children in danger of being hit by a car. They just want the airport to have a flight that will fly them to there city and the heck with everyone else.