My Photo
Follow UselessTree on Twitter



  • eXTReMe Tracker
Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 07/2005

« Freedom of Speech in China (with a bit of Chuang Tzu thrown in for good measure) | Main | One Last Time with Gusto: Bush Lost the War! »

January 16, 2009


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


This to me, is an interesting discussion.

I think the idea of children first is one we might all agree with, but might should be followed with, whomever happens to be traveling with that child, and to take it a step further, whomever happens to be most likely to safeguard the child during the process. And then there's the issue of practicality, which should maybe take priority over all of the above. Wouldn't it be faster and safer, and thus more conducive to saving more lives, to escape in somewhat the order of seating in relation to exit?

I have no idea how my comment fits into the tenets of Confucianism, but would be curious to hear the answer.

Thanks for stopping by (and, by the way, the wine was great!).
What I mean to focus on here is the conscious effort to develop some understanding of preserving our closest loving relationships. That is what is Confucian about all this. Of course, the specifics of how that is best done can vary from time and place, and you suggest some practical variations. But to have some general ethical guideline beyond domination of the strongest and fastest is what I wanted to highlight here.


Thanks for the reply which I belatedly noticed. The story fascinates me, and I wonder at the details in that span of time between descent and final rescue, how each moment must have seemed possibly the last...and then not, and then again not, and then finally safety! And then, how all of it would be so amplified if safeguarding a child...

Anyway, what a glorious day today! Truly a new beginning.

Best to you.


Some quick news here: the very same jet that crashed into the Hudson River nearly crashed into Newark Airport, New Jersey, one week earlier. It looks like the jet was badly maintained.

Two days before US Airways Flight 1549 crashed into the Hudson River, passengers on the same route and same aircraft say they heard a series of loud bangs and the flight crew told them they could have to make an emergency landing, CNN has learned….

Expert Aviation Consulting, an Indianapolis, Indiana, private consulting firm that includes commercial airline pilots on its staff, said the plane that landed in the Hudson was the same one as Flight 1549 from LaGuardia two days earlier. Photo See images from the rescue in last week’s crash »

“EAC confirms that US Airways ship number N106US flew on January 13, 2009, and January 15, 2009, with the same flight number of AWE 1549 from New York’s LaGuardia Airport to Charlotte Douglas [International] Airport in North Carolina,” Expert Aviation said in a statement to CNN.
Well, this story has more sides to it. Evidently, birds probably were not the cause of the engines falling off. Even when birds hit engines, both engines don’t fall off. When I heard that the engines were missing when the jet was pulled out of the water, I found that fishy.

If the engines fell off and there was previous warnings, the loud snapping sounds, etc. may mean that the jet should have been grounded a week ago. This is one bad aspect of aviation: during hard times, the airlines lose funds and cut corners and we get a rash of crashes. I hope the entire fleet is grounded and carefully checked.


The comments to this entry are closed.

Aidan's Way

  • :

    Understanding disability from a Taoist point of view