Cruise ship docks at private beach in Haiti for barbeque and water sports

[Dogbert]

http://www.boingboing.net/2010/01/18/cruise-ship-docks-at.html

The Royal Caribbean Cruise Lines' ship Independence of the Seas went ahead with its scheduled stop at a fenced-in private Haitian beach surrounded by armed guards, leaving its passengers to "cut loose" on the beach, just a few kilometers from one of the worst humanitarian disasters in the region's history. The ship's owners justified it as a humanitarian call, because the ship also delivered 40 palettes of relief supplies while its passengers frolicked on zip-lines and ate barbeque within the 12-foot-high fence's perimeter.

The Florida cruise company leases a picturesque wooded peninsula and its five pristine beaches from the government for passengers to "cut loose" with watersports, barbecues, and shopping for trinkets at a craft market before returning on board before dusk. Safety is guaranteed by armed guards at the gate.

The decision to go ahead with the visit has divided passengers. The ships carry some food aid, and the cruise line has pledged to donate all proceeds from the visit to help stricken Haitians. But many passengers will stay aboard when they dock; one said he was "sickened".

"I just can't see myself sunning on the beach, playing in the water, eating a barbecue, and enjoying a cocktail while [in Port-au-Prince] there are tens of thousands of dead people being piled up on the streets, with the survivors stunned and looking for food and water," one passenger wrote on the Cruise Critic internet forum.

"It was hard enough to sit and eat a picnic lunch at Labadee before the quake, knowing how many Haitians were starving," said another. "I can't imagine having to choke down a burger there now.''

 

[Interrobang]

tough one ... but if we go back some years and look at the tsunami in the indian ocean, one of the mayor problems after the dust mud had cleared and the dead people were mourned was that the tourist trade just didn?t get going again (even untill now AFAIK). In a region that lives on tourism, that?s like a follow-up catastrophe for the people who survived the tsunami but can?t feed their families without tourists.
Try to look at it this way ... If Haiti made it?s money by digging coal out of the ground and selling them, we?d say nothing when they resumed digging up coal again now to make some really needed income. But Haiti doesn?t mine for coal ... their natural resources are their beaches, and the people who come there to spend their cash. Do we really want to tell them "sry you can?t be making money right now when you would really need it, try again later"?

 

[Salanax]

Not really sure what the problem is here. They're on a cruise with a scheduled stop, they're taking the scheduled stop and doing everything they would have done. It's not like they caused the disaster, probably not much they can do to help either, governments and charities around the world are sending in the aid and manpower, what else is there? Should people just avoid the area? Wait until things have been cleaned up? A week, month, year, until the last person stops grieving? An area has had a disaster, but how long do you wait to do your normal activities? It doesn't really affect the passengers of the cruise, so why not be there? The only problem is the thought of people suffering so close and on a larger than normal scale, but there is nothing they can do.
Or am I just an emotionless ass?

 

[Dogbert]

An area has had a disaster, but how long do you wait to do your normal activities?

When the people stop dying in the streets from it.

I can certainly see the whole "it was a scheduled stop" and "they didn't cause it" thing, but it's just a totally tasteless move.

 

[VR6]

If I paid for a cruise I would damn well enjoy the activities, it's not my fault an earthquake hit.

 

[idk]

I admit, it's unfortunate on many levels.

I don't think it's overall inappropriate because.. well. you can't expect the people on the ship to get off and start helping digging bodies out.

They just should have changed the schedule to a destination in the Dominican Republic... But either way it doesn't make a difference.

 

[Polly]

If I paid for a cruise I would damn well enjoy the activities, it's not my fault an earthquake hit.

So.. I'd be allowed to sleep with your wife during your funeral if I'd pay for it?

 

[Dogbert]

^ Yes, they should have just changed the destination. I don't think anyone would have really complained; "aw, but I wanted to go to a disaster-stricken nation!"

 

[Salanax]

The thing is, they did also have "40 palettes of relief supplies" which I'm sure would be handy. Of course people on a cruise probably aren't too keen on spending their relaxing time in a country in such trouble when there are other options available, but that was where they were going, the cruise company has made the most of it by delivering aid, the passengers may as well make the most of their time there as well.
I think everyone agrees it's an unfortunate situation, but that is the nature of it. Not going there or not delivering supplies also helps no one (except maybe a passenger to down his burger).

 

[BlaRo]

Disgorge the passengers in a nearby country, fly them back home, give them a refund for the activities they've missed, bring the ship back to Haiti and use it as a hospital ship. Boom! Ugly PR problem solved.

 

[Twerp128]

I can't tell you how many fat ass Royal Caribbean passengers on Ski Doo's we almost ran over when I was sailing in Key West. I would have loved to see the Haitians go hunting for fat tourists Lord of the Flies style. Good to here a few of the tourists have a soul though.

 

[2Billion]

I'd almost suggest giving tourists the option to help out with the relief efforts. If they're going there to drop off food and other supplies, maybe some of those tourists might want to help. I won't say it's likely, or that they could even do much, but I imagine one or two might want to feel useful.

 

[Topgearfanatic]

I'd almost suggest giving tourists the option to help out with the relief efforts. If they're going there to drop off food and other supplies, maybe some of those tourists might want to help. I won't say it's likely, or that they could even do much, but I imagine one or two might want to feel useful.

This, I'd love to be given the option to help out and would take it.

 

[argatoga]

I'd almost suggest giving tourists the option to help out with the relief efforts. If they're going there to drop off food and other supplies, maybe some of those tourists might want to help. I won't say it's likely, or that they could even do much, but I imagine one or two might want to feel useful.

There would be huge liability issues for the cruise company, even if they sign contracts (America is great like that). This is also why BlaRo's suggestion wouldn't work as the cruise line would be sued for that as well.

The solution I believe would be to kill and skin American lawyers. Their meat could provide for food, while their skin could be repurposed for stretchers, bandages, or blankets. Their cold stone hearts could be used as building material.

 

[EyeMWing]

I don't see any problem whatsoever with this. The cruise line's infrastructure was apparently undamaged, so no risk was posed to the passengers, they delivered humanitarian supplies, and left. That's all they could do - and stowing bulk cargo on a cruise ship is not by any means a straightforward task in the first place - they should be commended for that effort, because the passengers and crew had to have given up SOMETHING for it.

Using a cruise liner as a "hospital ship" is the most pants-on-head retarded idea ever - it's utterly unsuited to the task with private rooms, no equipment and no staff, and would cost millions to refurbish afterwards - millions better spent on doing things properly. There are purpose-built, properly equipped ships (many of which are also MUCH larger than a cruise ship) with the appropriate manpower already in place and en route.

Let's look at the facts about Haiti:
1) It was a disasterous shithole to start with. There's no meaningful infrastructure, an unstable government and the average citizen can be described only as "dirt poor and lucky to be alive"
2) The only meaningful airport in the country is a single runway with an incredibly inefficient layout - there is VERY limited manuevering space on the ground, restricting large cargo aircraft to military models with short wheelbases and tight turning circles. Conventional civilian cargo aircraft are useless, because they're based on large airliners like the 767 and DC-10, which are too long to operate in the tight turning bays at the airport. You can probably manage 3 C-17's on the ground at a time, or a dozen C-130's and light aircraft (since you can use them on the other tarmacs)
3) There's one other airport, suitable for light general-aviation type aircraft ONLY. There are no turning bays and the taxiways are too narrow to support any form of small airliner flight, much less cargo. The runway surface is probably likewise weight-limited (It's a paved runway with a *dirt extension*). The only cargo aircraft in the world that could conceivably operate there is a C-130.
4) Port facilities in the capital are HILARIOUSLY limited. There's one container freight dock, which can park 3 ships but only unload one at a time. That crane, assuming it still stands and operates, will have to handle almost ALL the supplies coming into the country through the port. The only other actual port facility is a bulk freight dock with space for about 10 vessels - which is mostly useful for parking hospital ships.
5) There are a handful of bulk freight docks (roughly 2 ships each) scattered around the coasts, associated with single industries.

The logistical resources associated with this relief effort are EXTREMELY limited and should be left to those most qualified to use them properly. The fact that the most efficient way to get cargo into the country pre-earthquake was by taking it to the Dominican Republic and trucking it across the border should be particularly telling.

 

[BlaRo]

Using a cruise liner as a "hospital ship" is the most pants-on-head retarded idea ever - it's utterly unsuited to the task with private rooms, no equipment and no staff, and would cost millions to refurbish afterwards - millions better spent on doing things properly. There are purpose-built, properly equipped ships (many of which are also MUCH larger than a cruise ship) with the appropriate manpower already in place and en route.

Jesus Christ, it was a joke and wishful thinking on my behalf. I'm well aware that Royal Caribbean would waste too much time, money and effort hastily converting their luxury liners into a medical center. This isn't World War I.

 

[Susurrate]

If possible, a change of destination would have been wise from a PR standpoint; send a different ship with aid.

 

[brydie76]

If i was on that boat I think I would be one of the people refusing to go onto the beach. Pretty bad form IMO- send a different ship with aid like Susurrate said, don't use it as a veil for the fact that you are sending people into a current disaster zone to play beach volleyball whilst people are still trapped, ill/injured and dying mere kilometres (or less) away. Like BlaRo said, end the cruise early and refund the passengers, but also give them the option of donating the refund to the relief efforts. Then donate anything on the ship that can be logistically used in the relief effort (eg non-perishable goods, some first aid kits, spare rope, etc). Perfect world scenario unfortunately, but I can dream.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

They delivered 40 palettes worth of relief aide. That is equivalent to several 18 wheelers (lorries) worth of supplies. I see no problem. Would have been worse if they didn't show up at all...

 

[Twerp128]

Several, a normal 48' trailer fits 26 standard pallets.