![]() |
|
Originally Posted by Check Essential
(Post 1746570)
expose myself to them.
|
Originally Posted by satchip
(Post 1746578)
The decision not to close the borders to Ebola infested nations is a political one related to the fight over amnesty and our failure to secure our borders generally IMHO.
|
Originally Posted by satchip
(Post 1746578)
Ebola transmission by aerosols confirmed: virus survives for days outside infected hosts - NaturalNews.com
Check, you don't have to shake hands to get it. Say an infected person uses the lab mid flight and gets some nasal discharge on the flush handle or sink or sneezes in the room. Ebola, according to the Canadian Public Health Service, "can live for days outside the host on surfaces". I've read it's only hours from other sources. But the bottom line is if an infected person uses the lave and touches the door knob leaving if you subsequently use that lav you are at risk. The decision not to close the borders to Ebola infested nations is a political one related to the fight over amnesty and our failure to secure our borders generally IMHO. |
Originally Posted by satchip
(Post 1746578)
Ebola transmission by aerosols confirmed: virus survives for days outside infected hosts - NaturalNews.com
Check, you don't have to shake hands to get it. Say an infected person uses the lab mid flight and gets some nasal discharge on the flush handle or sink or sneezes in the room. Ebola, according to the Canadian Public Health Service, "can live for days outside the host on surfaces". I've read it's only hours from other sources. But the bottom line is if an infected person uses the lave and touches the door knob leaving if you subsequently use that lav you are at risk. The decision not to close the borders to Ebola infested nations is a political one related to the fight over amnesty and our failure to secure our borders generally IMHO. |
Originally Posted by Purple Drank
(Post 1746581)
one of us is doing it wrong :D
|
Originally Posted by bohicagain
(Post 1746585)
Closing the border makes sense but it also would mean those countries in Africa that are getting help from the outside would have to fight it alone and it could spread in Africa.
|
Originally Posted by bohicagain
(Post 1746585)
Closing the border makes sense but it also would mean those countries in Africa that are getting help from the outside would have to fight it alone and it could spread in Africa.
You can still fly in with charters or military. |
Originally Posted by Herkflyr
(Post 1746537)
I remember reading a few years ago that USAir had made a specific decision never to hedge. I wonder if in the long run the hedging airlines (other than SWA and their famous hedge-at-$26/bbl decision from 10 years or so ago) have done any better? It certainly seems to have resulted in a lot of time spent on hedging that may or may not have done much for the aggregate bottom line.
Like someone said, on the other side of a fuel hedge is someone else who thinks they are going to make money off you. |
Originally Posted by buzzpat
(Post 1746270)
All I can say is "where they gonna park?"
|
Originally Posted by satchip
(Post 1746578)
Ebola transmission by aerosols confirmed: virus survives for days outside infected hosts - NaturalNews.com
Check, you don't have to shake hands to get it. Say an infected person uses the lab mid flight and gets some nasal discharge on the flush handle or sink or sneezes in the room. Ebola, according to the Canadian Public Health Service, "can live for days outside the host on surfaces". I've read it's only hours from other sources. But the bottom line is if an infected person uses the lave and touches the door knob leaving if you subsequently use that lav you are at risk. The decision not to close the borders to Ebola infested nations is a political one related to the fight over amnesty and our failure to secure our borders generally IMHO. How difficult would it be, and at what cost would the economy suffer to just deny entry to personnel who have countries that are experiencing massive Ebola outbreaks on their passports within the past month? IMO, not difficult to accomplish and not much cost, especially compared to the cost of treating U.S. citizens who become infected from those who get into the country with Ebola. But when this option is brought up the spin-answer is to say we need to be able to get personnel and supplies into west African; a non-answer which shows there is no rational excuse that would be accepted by the general public and the real reason is political. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:21 AM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands