Haiti Cruise ships still find a Haitian berth

[panzerfaust]

Source: Guardian (UK)



Sixty miles from Haiti's devastated earthquake zone, luxury liners dock at private beaches where passengers enjoy jetski rides, parasailing and rum cocktails delivered to their hammocks.

The 4,370-berth Independence of the Seas, owned by Royal Caribbean International, disembarked at the heavily guarded resort of Labadee on the north coast on Friday; a second cruise ship, the 3,100-passenger Navigator of the Seas is due to dock.

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...

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jan/17/cruise-ships-haiti-earthquake

---

If the majority of the Haitians were not black, I wonder if Royal Caribbean would be doing this ... the ships all have food and water - why do they not share it and try to help?

Disgusting. Immoral. Heartless.

http://gulfnews.com/polopoly_fs/haiti-quake-1.567994!image/362401655.jpg_gen/derivatives/box_475/362401655.jpg
http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:Km_vyj9CbAKX9M%3A

[saigon68]

1. Hey, pass the Piper Heidsieck

</sarcasm>

[saigon68]

2. More--let them eat Cake

Champagne makers Piper Heidsieck have worked with master shoe maker Christian Louboutin in a box set. The set consists of a bottle of champagne and a glass shoe designed by Christian Louboutin. The box set was inspired by a ritual from the 1880’s and will be exclusively available through colette from October 26th.

Famed shoemaker Christian Louboutin has turned out heels in leather and silk, but he’s adding a new material to his portfolio: glass.

For a new collaboration with champagne-maker Piper-Heidsieck, Louboutin created a glass slipper that connotes both Cinderella fantasy and Parisian decadence. The shoe flute is packaged as part of the $500 Le Rituel gift set, which also includes a bottle of champagne. It will only be sold in select Neiman Marcus stores and online at www.le-rituel.com.

Drinking out of a lady’s shoe is a tradition that dates to the 1880s, when Russian counts celebrated ballerinas by drinking out of their toe shoes. Later, the tradition was picked in Belle Epoque Paris on the stages of the Folies Bergere and other cabarets.

“There is something a little bit corny of drinking out of a shoe,” Louboutin says. He wanted to suggest something sweeter. “I thought of Cinderella, so the shoe became a symbol of the lost person.”

[JCMach1]

3. Must of the cruise ship ports are on the north side of the island

and likely suffered little or no damage.

While I admit it's in poor taste, should people in those communities lose their jobs because the cruise ships no longer come?

[lapfog_1]

8. No, the cruise lines should continue to PAY the people

that they hire to "man the beaches" for their guests. However, out of respect for the dead, it is unseemly for the guests and the cruise ships to continue to party down. They shouldn't stop other than to land supplies for the local residents who likely can't get anything through normal channels right now. Relief aid to help Port-au-Prince is probably not useful (with the possible exception of medicine).

If I were running the cruise line I would:

a) Continue the employment of everyone on Haiti

b) pay them with cash instead of checks, as banking is likely down for a while.

c) have my ships drop anchor overnight, but no guests to the beaches.

d) send whatever medicine, food, water, cash, onto the beach for the local employees and whoever else can be helped.

e) Ask for donations from my passengers as well

f) coordinate with one or more of the NGO's currently attempting to get things done in Port-au-Prince.

[Kurska]

10. They are doing everything but C

I'd reckon because a huge part of the ships income comes from "Excursions" Snorkeling, jet skis, tours, all sorts of things that run around 100-200 dollars a pop and are the biggest money maker for the ships. These lines need those dollars to survive, especially in this economic environment. The only real option is to passengers go out or divert the ships.

You can say what you will about the "Dignity of it all", but for better or worse Royal Caribbean can't afford losing money at a time like this for dignity. They are however going out of their way to do whatever is practical and real for the people of the Island they dock at so much, but to expect them to lose money on principle seems beyond what they need to do.

[lapfog_1]

13. But there are alternative destinations, some very close

but not Haiti.

They could stop overnight in Haiti, drop anchor, send the crew with supplies to the beach, weigh anchor and be off to another destination before the passengers even wake up (the DR is only a few hours away and they have some fine beaches too).

The President of Haiti has said that everyone in the country has lost a relative. That makes complete sense. If there were 100,000 dead or more, out of a population of 10,000,000, that's at least 1 out of every 100 Haitians.

People should not be so insensitive as to party and drink while millions of people sixty miles away are near the breaking point because of a lack of water and food, and everyone has lost a friend or relative.

[Kurska]

15. But then that money goes to other places instead of Haiti.

Like I've already said the money doesn't just come from the cruise lines, the passengers pile out buy trinkets, go on tours, tip well everything that you expect and sometimes more. Alot of those local economies are absolutely dependent on that.

I don't really know what to say, It is a very hard position to be in and I don't envy these cruise lines one bit in that regard.

[lapfog_1]

24. Yes, which is why the cruise lines still need to stop

and drop off cash plus whatever supplies they can... even if horribly inefficient... AND hit the passengers up for donations the night before.

But to continue "business as usual" especially when the "business" is "party down and drink your self silly on the beach" is, to say the least, tacky. It would be just like going to a nightclub in lower Manhattan on 9/17/2001 and having a party while a few blocks away, rescue workers were still looking for bodies in the WTC.

[Robb]

25. The cruise lines have donated quite a bit

...Something they would not be able to do were they not also operating.

[lapfog_1]

29. Did anyone say they needed to stop operating?

I suggested that they stop in Haiti and drop off supplies and money for their local employees and beach vendors, plus whatever else they can spare, and then move on to the DR or another location to party down. No passenger even need be deprived of one day of drinking and sun worshipping, as the stop could be made in the middle of the night.

It's simply tacky and inconsiderate to do it in Haiti, less than a week after the worst disaster to hit that nation EVER (in a long list of bad things) and one of the worst earthquake disasters on record in terms of deaths.

[Robb]

32. The customers don't seem to think so.

The Haitians don't seem to think so, either. :shrug:

[lapfog_1]

36. Neither of the two groups you mention actually have a say in it.

This is the cruise lines decision. And they are being assholes.

If I was a passenger, I would certainly lodge an objection.

It's tacky and inconsiderate. Dispute THAT point.

[Robb]

37. They are delivering revenue to their ports of call

...As they always do. It's not tacky, certainly no more tacky than ever going to Haiti was.

Tourism in poor areas is always a rough proposition. But it brings in money. Ecotourism for example often brings insanely wealthy people into insanely poor areas, but benefits those areas. It's the height of arrogance to impose a morality question or any vision of "oh, that's just tacky" on a starving population.

The ships are delivering aid as well. You want them to go elsewhere after delivering aid? I would only suggest that the passengers paid for a trip to Haiti, and should get that if they still want it. Many of these ships boarded after the earthquake, and the passengers still arrived, which tells me they wanted the trip they were on.

Other ships go elsewhere, these go to Haiti.

[lapfog_1]

47. First off

This has nothing to do with Haiti being a "poor area". It has to do with 100,000+ Haitians (out of a population of 10 million) just dying 6 days ago in a huge earthquake. And the resulting disruption in the normal course of life there, such as it is. I wasn't suggesting that Cruise ships not visit these places, or for that matter, anyplace else. Most of the Caribbean is poor (though not nearly as poor as Haiti).

And it is tacky and disrespectful.

And I didn't say they should "fire" their employees there or not stop there. What I've said now, over and over, is that they should stop and deliver payroll (in cash) and supplies (what they can, given that it's not really a port but an anchorage). And they should then move on to another spot for their guests.

The guests are not "visiting Haiti", they are visiting a private beach which has armed guards to keep unauthorized locals out (if you bothered to read the article). It's as if they are visiting a deserted island (only with drinks and staff, and probably a few beach vendors selling knick-knacks and sun tan oil).

There are literally hundreds of such locations throughout the Antilles. I used to live their and teach the stupid walking wallets (that's what we called the tourists) how to scuba dive. And tried to keep them from killing themselves and from touching anything at the bottom of the ocean.

I have no problem with the cruise ships stopping in Haiti... in about a month or so. After the dead are buried, those still trapped are freed and treated, and some sense of "normalcy" (the new normal, it will take years, if not decades, to return to something like the old normal) returned.

This isn't about cruise ship tourists visiting poor countries. It's about death and destruction.

[jberryhill]

53. "the stupid walking wallets (that's what we called the tourists)"

That's really nice.

[lapfog_1]

56. Not my terminology, but that's what they were called.

When you are poor, and there isn't that much hope of not being poor, being dependent on tourism is a great way to engender that attitude. Something about rich tourists walking around complaining about everything and looking right past you as if you are invisible does something to people over time.

Try it for a while.

[jberryhill]

59. No thanks

I'll just walk my wallet elsewhere, then.

[lapfog_1]

67. Got news for you...

wherever you find collection of tourists, you find the poor who are there to cater to their whims, and you find that same attitude.

Don't want to see that attitude, stay home.

[jberryhill]

75. Actually, no

Since you dive, I assume you've been to Cayman. Much different political environment there, and it's not all rich folks, but does have a decent social system that isn't built on the back of grinding poverty.

[jberryhill]

40. There certainly were parties in NYC on 9/11

Weddings... Bar mitzvahs.... These things are planned, booked, and paid long in advance.

Nobody said "earthquake in Haiti, let's go party!"

The cruise lines employ Haitians and bring revenue to Haiti.

[lapfog_1]

52. I wonder if families of the 9/11 victims were serving drinks

at those weddings and Bar mitzvahs. And if you knew that the person waiting on you had a close relative or friend that just died, would you still eat, drink, and be merry right in front of them.

Because that is what these cruise ship passengers are doing.

1 in 100 Haitians are likely dead. 1 in 100.

If 1 in 100 New Yorkers died on 9/11, think those weddings would still have taken place? Seriously?

[jberryhill]

55. You know, I have no idea

...but I'm sure you signed up to be the morality police that day. Check your citation book.

I just never spent that much time going out of my way to find reasons to condemn other people.

[CreekDog]

61. i don't get this...it's unseemly to vacation only in Haiti

you don't seem to have any problem with people living in up in Dominican Republic (possibly closer to the quake than where these ships are) or with people vacationing right now all over the Caribbean.

:shrug:

Did you not have any parties Year's 2005? Were you "living it up" just 5 days after the Indonesian Tsunami (it's 7 days after the Haiti earthquake BTW).

[Peace Patriot]

20. I agree. Almost all devastation is in Port-au-Prince. Why should the rest of the economy shut down?

That would just ADD to the disaster. And, as others are pointing out here, the cruise ships are bringing in supplies, donating quite a lot of money, soliciting donations from passengers, helping their Haitian staff, and helping keep one aspect of Haiti's economy up and running.

For tourists, it should be, and of course is, a matter of individual conscience. If they know how big the disaster is, on the other side of the island, and they don't want to party, or they want to go help in some way, that's up to them. Maybe the cruise ships should make provision for this (and maybe they have--I don't know). But the passengers ARE helping just by being tourists--and there probably isn't a whole lot they could do, unless they have specialized skills (like doctors).

I know it's a gross contrast--the luxury food on board, the starving people in Port-au-Prince--but we could make that unjust criticism of anybody anywhere. What about you? What about me? We may not be on a cruise ship, but we are likely eating well and some of us are, oh, visiting nightclubs, having birthday parties, going to weddings, etc., in between blogging at DU and whatever else we do. I think this criticism of the cruise ships and tourists is really quite unfair. They are doing MORE good than most of us are--just contributing some jobs and money to the Haitian economy.

[Kurska]

4. I've been to Haiti on a cruise ship, on Royal Caribbean no less.

Many years ago granted, but the cruise ships are a absolutely massive part of the local economy, more so then even most of the other ports I've been to because of the pervasive level of poverty you could see there. Tourist pile out, throw money around , go on tours, visit private Islands, do excursions and a area that has little other economic output gets a weekly injection of American dollars.

This sounds like Royal Caribbean is JUST using the private island, which makes sense considering the main land is probably pretty devastated, but these cruise lines certainly aren't the bad guys here. I don't know what sense it would make diverting ships to another Island, which would mean diverting money AND supplies from Haiti.

[lynne]

5. You might want to read the entire article. Royal Carribean is bringing food and disaster relief -

- supplies to Haiti with each stop to Labadee. The Haitian men and women working at Labadee certainly don't need to lose their income, either. It is in the best interest of the Haitian people for the ships to continue to stop there.

From the article:

"Forty pallets of rice, beans, powdered milk, water, and canned foods were delivered on Friday, and a further 80 are due and 16 on two subsequent ships. When supplies arrive in Labadee, they are distributed by Food for the Poor, a longtime partner of Royal Caribbean in Haiti.

Royal Caribbean has also pledged $1m to the relief effort and will spend part of that helping 200 Haitian crew members."

[demo dutch]

11. Not only that pulling out would create more unemployment, in other words do more harm than good

[Kurska]

12. And these ships don't just go to Private islands.

The do go to the mainland, I've seen that first hand, I've also seen how thousands upon thousands ends up getting pumped into local communities that would otherwise rank among some of the poorest in the world. It is a very good thing for Haiti, even more so at a time when Haiti really needs it.

[lapfog_1]

14. You assume that not stopping means an end to employment.

And that doesn't have to be the case. Declare "hardship leave" for all Haitian employees, keep paying them, more importantly, supply them with food, water, medicine (the normal channels of supply for a secluded beach area are likely down right now).

But don't stop there... at least for a couple of weeks or possibly a month or so.

Given the wages paid to the average Haitian, what would this cost a cruise line?

[demo dutch]

16. I worked for a cruise line, and it simply doesn't work that way, it's not just salaries there's a

huge spin off that supports Haitians and local business through merchandise, tips, services etc. Not to be critical but, your idea is too simplistic

[lapfog_1]

21. Do you think that the beach vendors have much to vend these days?

Most of the stuff they sell comes from elsewhere, not local crafts. There isn't any supply chains for that stuff right now, if they are selling stuff today, it's from their local inventory.

I lived in the Caribbean for over a year. I knew many quite a number of "tourist workers" that lived there next to me (not at the tourist resorts). People that sold stuff on the beach, people that ran para-sail operations, scuba dive instructors (that was me), etc.

[Turborama]

71. What about the local farmers and fishermen who provide the fresh produce?

And the guy that sells them the fuel? The list goes on.

On second thoughts, the fresh produce could be redirected to the needy but it would be a drop in the ocean and might not even make it that far.

[Turborama]

70. AKA The multiplier effect

Which has a very positive impact on local economies, as long as there isn't too much leakage, that is.

As you say, when the tourists stop coming, it causes a ripple effect of economic hardship on everyone in the surrounding area and beyond. As was seen in Bali when the tourists evacuated and stopped coming after the terrorist attacks in 02 and 05.

[redwitch]

19. Sounds like Royal Caribbean is doing what they can and should.

Employment for Haitians, emergency food supplies, $1 million in aid. Pretty decent of them.

[Posteritatis]

66. My "WTF!" reaction's more aimed at the more indifferent among the passengers. (nt)

[melm00se]

79. shhhh!

those facts just get in the way of the moral outrage!

[lapfog_1]

6. The author used the term "dock"

which isn't very accurate. They "anchored" in the bay.

They take their guests to a beach using small dinghy.

If they were to use the same method to transport food or fresh water... let's just say it wouldn't make that much difference. In addition, once they get the supplies on the beach, how would they (or anyone else) transport it to where it's needed?

If pulling up and dropping anchor in a bay 60 miles from the earthquake zone was a useful method to get supplies to the people that need them, I'm guessing that many relief agencies that are currently jammed at the airport would lease a ship and do it. Unfortunately, it's not.

That said, for the cruise lines to continue using Haiti as a stop on their cruises shows a complete lack of humanity and respect for the many thousands who have lost their lives to the disaster.

[Scooter24]

57. No more anchoring off the coast...

Royal Caribbean just built a new pier on Labadee (their private island in Haiti) to handle their ships, especially their new ship which is about 225,000 tons. It just opened up last December so there will be no more tendering for this island.

Secondly, just yesterday I completed my 17th Royal Caribbean cruise. The line is doing all it can to make sure they are respecting the people of Haiti while making this vacation stop. Just a few days ago I got a letter in my room that asked for donations and many I talked to onboard were happy to give. The president of the company also met with the UN special rep. from Haiti and former President Clinton about this matter and both have urged the line to continue to stop at Labadee.

Lastly, every time a cruise ship stops at this island, the Haiti government gets a port fee (probably around $10-$15) for every person that is on the ship. Considering that the ship that last called on Labadee held about 3500 passengers, the government will bring in about $50,000 directly from this one ship, not including the monetary benefit to the locals that are employed on the island plus the money generated from the market.

[we can do it]

7. Reading For Comprehention Is A Valuable Skill

[Rebubula]

9. LOLZ

Considering that the world has mobilized and sent naval vessels, hospital ships, 10s of thousands of troops and medical\search and rescue people and BILLIONS OF DOLLARS are being sent to dozens of relief organizations - the continued drumbeat of "if they were white this would be different" becomes sad and pathological.

Seriously...do all of you race baiters and agitprops even READ THE FREAKING NEWS?

It is getting pathetic. Grow up.

[lapfog_1]

17. The response would be different in one HUGE respect...

Relief workers with food and water would be the FIRST ones in. Not armed troops.

I lived through Loma Prieta. I don't remember seeing even ONE national guard transport or even any police cars cruising the streets in the hours and days after the quake (except for a few that were "red tagging" the houses and buildings).

Florida Hurricane versus New Orleans Hurricane.

It's a startling difference, if you look beyond our media coverage.

[demo dutch]

18. Troops are barely armed, and if you have any experience with relief work under chaotic

circumstances, then you know that troops are a necesary support system to the distribution of aid.

[lapfog_1]

22. But it's a noticeable difference

as to the amount and visible presence, based on the economic conditions that existed BEFORE the disaster.

And the perception is that this is race based. UN convoys with armored vehicles and machine guns to accompany one relief truck, 4 or 5 days AFTER the disaster event.

The mindset going in is the problem. "These people are violent, we have to have security to deliver the aid, we'll wait for enough troops and supplies to arrive before attempting distribution". Time passes... days later, people are near rioting... "See, if we just sent out the supplies, they would have killed the aid workers and each other to loot it, we were RIGHT to wait for security forces!"

[Rebubula]

23. Loma Prieta vs. Haiti

Not even remotely comparable.

Have you seen the pictures from the ground? Men roaming the streets with guns, knives and machetes. The destruction in Haiti makes San Francisco's damage look like a broken wondow on an 86 Honda.

The difference is the level of destruction, the lack of infrastructure and the fact that this is an island with one damaged airport and few passable roads.

To compare the two is silly at best. To try to say that the difference is due to the racial makeup of Haiti is disingenuous at the very least.

[lapfog_1]

27. Were you there?

I was.

The reason there there weren't "armed men roaming the streets" was because we had supplies. Even in the hardest hit areas (like where I was), it was easy to get food and water and, although harder, fuel. Do you think it would have been any different if, 5 days after it happened, there wasn't anyplace to buy food or find drinking water. You can BET that there would have been near riots.

The big difference was that when I was helping some friends rescue their belongings from a house that was "red tagged" and off it's foundation and nearly split in two, there was a relief truck at the end of the street handing out cases of bottled water for anyone that came by. And if your house was damaged too much to enter, some one you knew was OK and let you stay with them (I had two people move in with me). And we had food for a week, but we could DRIVE to another location where grocery stores were open (my local Safeway was closed) and buy what you needed the next day after it happened. Of course, we had MONEY as well.

The difference is that nobody assumed that it would be dangerous to deliver supplies, so no troops were needed. In Haiti, the assumption was just the opposite. But *I* didn't start seeing the "armed gangs" roaming the streets on any TV report or internet video until just yesterday, though I did see some "wrestling over supplies" the day before. But that was the first relief delivered and it was 4 days after the event.

The difference in the reaction isn't solely race, but also economic conditions. Of course, I can present a very GOOD argument that the economic conditions are, in fact, based on race.

[Rebubula]

30. No...I was not there...

...but the comparison is tenuous.

68 or so dead compared to more than 50,000. The police\fire\National Guard were out in full force in SF as soon as the earthquake hit. Almost all building in Port-au-Prince are destroyed and 1000's remain buried.

I certainly do understand your point about troops on the ground and the soft bigotry of low expectations. However, regardless of preexisting ideals and biases - the Haiti situation is far worse than anything this country has seen due to the economic\infrastructure\political situation in Haiti. We can debate the origins of these problems well into the next year, but the fact remains (and the point of my rebuttal to the OP) that the world is reacting the best that it can with the situation as hand.

Stirring up shit when the water is already polluted does no good.

[lapfog_1]

39. Police and fire, not the national guard.

The national guard didn't show up for about two days.

The point is... I didn't hear of any reports of unrest or violence in the 2 to 3 days immediately after the earthquake. Had we started landing C-31's with trucks full of water, food, medicine within 24 hours of the quake happening (first landing an air traffic control plane), I think we could have forestalled a lot of the problems you now see on your TeeVee. Not all of them, because the scale of this is overwhelming (3 million people that need something like 7500 tons of supplies each and every day), but some.

But news stories like the one where the CNN guy is left at the makeshift hospital all by himself with his news crew and hundreds of victims because the UN told the relief worker staff that they needed to TAKE THE MEDICINE and get out because of security concerns... well, it doesn't look good.

[Rebubula]

42. OK...we'll call it a draw

There will always be moaning and such after a tragedy of this size. Sometimes things go wrong...for fark's sake 50,000 people are dead and a city is in ruins - such like we have not seen in many years.

San Fransisco is much different that Haiti and the destruction in Haiti is 100 fold the SF damage. You can continue to argue the troops vs help all you want.

My point remains...the world is reacting and Haiti will get the help that it needs. Yes...it sucks that people have to suffer, but that (according to one of the main tenets of Buddhism) is part of life. We just have to come together to help when we can.

[Gormy Cuss]

63. No the difference is that is IS dangerous to deliver supplies to Port-au-Prince

because as you correctly point out, there is no easy way for people to drive to the supply chain, never mind afford to buy supplies once they got there. Another difference is that even in Santa Cruz there weren't hundreds of thousands displaced by Loma Prieta nor hundreds of thousands dead and injured, never mind having the whole affected population confined to a much smaller geography. The scale of this event is very different. That said, I don't condone the media obsession with showing law and order stories rather than problems in infrastructure that are keeping aid away from people.

[XemaSab]

74. I was in Loma Prieta and there's no comparison

About 60 people died in Loma Prieta, and half of them died on the collapsed freeway. The other 20 people died all over the Bay Area and Santa Cruz.

Yeah, my house was a mess after the quake, but it was still standing, and within a few days life was back to normal. :shrug:

[Peace Patriot]

26. This is a cheap shot. Did the editors/writers of the Guardian eat well last night?

Did they attend any weddings, birthday parties, nightclubs or any other party circumstance in the last week, or will they in the next week? What about vacations?

And what about you and me? Eat well last night? Will be eating well tomorrow? This criticism could be leveled at ANYBODY right now--who dares to eat a good meal or attends a wedding or hangs at a nightclub.

The cruise ships are far from the devastation, are bringing in supplies, are donating a lot of money, are employing Haitians, and they and their passengers are keeping one aspect of Haiti's broken economy going.

And what can the passengers do anyway? Go home? Right. That helps a lot.

Maybe they could have the cruise ship drop them off somewhere and walk overland, across the country of Haiti, to Port-au-Prince and add themselves to the casualty list. Maybe they have skills (doctors, nurses) and want to help. How do they get to Port-au-Prince, and who is going to take care of them (food, water, shelter, supplies) when they get there, so that they can help? Maybe some highly motivated passenger will do this, but it is absurd to expect it of most passengers. They would likely be nuisance anyway. And what else can they do? Stop partying? Go home? What good is that?

The best thing they can do--just like the rest of us--is donate money. And they ARE doing that. And so are the cruise lines operating in Haiti.

If the Guardian or anyone else wants to make something of the injustice in this world, regarding this terrible disaster, they should start with themselves.

[Igel]

65. Precisely.

If they're not eating porridge for their one meal a day, with 16 oz of water for their daily ration, then they're spending money on themselves instead of sending it to help the needy. Moreover, they're showing a lot of racism (even if they're black) because they're not making themself suffer out of sympathy while others are suffering.

In fact, if they really want to show their sympathy they should hit themselves with a few rocks and then deny themselves medical care.

:rant:

[Psephos]

69. You said it perfectly. n/t

[jpak]

28. What horseshit - that's an anchorage and not a berth - i.e. a dock

big diff - and useless to cargo ships (although US amphibious craft/vehicles could land there).

That said - a holiday in Haiti is a sick fuck thing to do right now.

[Scooter24]

58. Royal Caribbean just invested $55 million into Labadee...

This was last August. The new pier opened this past December.

[Kurska]

68. Docking supplies on a isolated island doesn't do alot of good.

You'd still have to move them to the mainland, which means you might aswell skip that dock all together.

[Scooter24]

76. Labadee isn't an island...

It's an isolated piece of land on the northern coast that is leased until 2050 to the cruise line. It's about 60 miles from PAP.

The major logistical problem is the lack of adequate roads to transport the goods.

[ananda]

31. Or why don't they just get out of the fucking way..

.. and open the docks to aid ships and convoys?

Hmmmmmm??????

[Robb]

33. Read the article first, then post.

Just a suggestion. :hi:

[Merchant Marine]

77. Look at the damned pier

It's a tourist dock, not a commercial port. Too narrow to turn a truck around on even if you wanted to. 100% unsuited to high-throughput cargo movement, not to mention isolated.

[Politicub]

34. That's quite callous for RC to do. Shame on them.

A cruise ship would actually be a good way to get supplies in to Haiti. It could moor and use a tender to get supplies to the mainland.

And the passengers - how could they enjoy themselves with so much suffering less than 10 miles away?

[Robb]

35. ...from the very article

"Friday's call in Labadee went well," said Royal Caribbean. "Everything was open, as usual. The guests were very happy to hear that 100% of the proceeds from the call at Labadee would be donated to the relief effort."

Forty pallets of rice, beans, powdered milk, water, and canned foods were delivered on Friday, and a further 80 are due and 16 on two subsequent ships. When supplies arrive in Labadee, they are distributed by Food for the Poor, a longtime partner of Royal Caribbean in Haiti.

[lapfog_1]

41. I, personally, would still have a very hard time

enjoying a MaiTai and relaxing in a hammock knowing that 60 miles away there were dead bodies being scooped up by front loaders and dumped into mass graves... or simply being burned in makeshift funeral pyres in the middle of the street.

But I seem to be a minority on this thread, everyone else here thinks this is all just peachy.

[Rebubula]

43. 60 miles....600 miles....6000 miles...

...well...the suffering is the same regardless of distance. Did you smile yesterday?

These people on this cruise (and dozens others like it) reserved this trip months ago. Moreover, I am certain that the tragedy weighs on their minds...but what do you do? Abandon ship? Start fasting and mope about?

[lapfog_1]

45. There is a big difference between 60 miles and 6000 miles.

If *I* go to a bar and order a drink, it is highly unlikely that the person serving me that drink has either a family member or a friend in one of those mass graves. Guests on the cruise ship stopping over in Haiti... it's almost CERTAIN that the person serving you had either a family member or friend who just died in a horrible tragedy. It is dead certain that they are affected by it.

The cruise ship can move another 60 miles to the east and anchor at some other bay in the Dominican Republic... and the passengers (the vast majority) wouldn't even notice the difference (except for the expressions on the faces of their servers).

Nobody is suggesting that the cruise ships cease operation, or that the passengers give up their already paid for holiday, or that even ONE DAY of their scheduled stops for fun and relaxation be removed from their itinerary. Just change the location of one stop, shifted by a few miles to another bay and a different beach.

[Rebubula]

46. Good to know...

...the further away I am from a tragedy the less I need to care.

We are a world community. If you want to criticize someone who is 60 miles from Haiti for having fun, I can criticize you for having fun 3000 miles away.

Death and pain happen all the time, there is always someone within a few miles of you that is suffering.

[lapfog_1]

50. That's not what I said.

What I said was that the person having fun 60 miles from the epicenter of a magnitude 7.0 earthquake that has killed at least 50,000 people, and that it is presently unknown how many will have actually died in it, is likely interacting with people that have been directly affected. People who have friends or family members who died.

If the cruise ships want to dump their passengers off on a deserted island with NO ONE THERE, and that island was 60 miles away from Port-au-Prince, and the cruise ships did their best to offload supplies to Haiti, then by all means, have fun, laugh, drink yourself silly. You aren't doing it in the FACE OF the people affected.

But that's not what we are talking about. They are dropping anchor in Haiti, they have Haitian employees who are serving people that are having drinks and shit.

And, yeah, that's a big difference.

Sorry that you are such an insensitive sod that you can't see the difference.

[Dappleganger]

49. Changing the location means that working Haitiens don't get paid.

And is tantamount to boycotting a country because they have a natural disaster. Now THAT would be cold and callous!

[lapfog_1]

51. Again, what I have stated in this thread, now for the nth time.

Is that the cruise should stop and drop anchor (probably at night so they can make another destination for the daytime activities). They should offload what supplies are practical, given that they have to use small landing craft to bring the supplies to shore AND there probably isn't much transport for those supplies to get them the 60 miles to where they are most needed... however, they can supply their employees who likely live near the beach area (and who are also facing a lack of supplies from Port-au-Prince. They should also PAY their employees and collect extra from the passengers to distribute to the vendors and other workers at the beach area. Pay them in cash, as banks are likely not functioning. Pay them extra because right now, opportunists are hiking the price of everything.

And then leave for another bay, another beach, probably only another 60 miles away (if that) in the DR so their guests can go ashore and lay in hammocks or beach chairs and have a MaiTai (or, when I lived there, whatever fruit juice was handy and Rum in a blender with some crushed ice).

It would be the decent thing to do.

[Merchant Marine]

78. Ships cannot just change destinations like that, especially cruise liners

You want the Royal Caribbean line to turn its operations upside down because you feel it's "insensitive"? Why would they do that? It makes no sense morally or economically.

And where would they go if they did? RC has a big, developed facility in Haiti. Why should they burn tons of fuel (Long tons, 2240 lbs) to go to an unknown location with unknown facilities and attractions? Why does that make any damn sense to you? And you want this to last a month?

And really, 60 miles is the "sensitivity zone" for disasters? Stability is what Haiti needs right now, not a major economic contributor (Tourist $$$) being swept out from under their feet over some white guilt sensitivity concerns.

The lines are doing all they can. Cruise Liners are shitty cargo platforms by design; they cannot move mass relief supplies like a merchant marine cargo vessel can, nor can they move it all that quickly.

I guess I just don't understand your reaction. In the maritime industry we're taught to normalize as quickly as possible after an incident- stability is key to disaster recovery. If we lose a man overboard or have an engine casualty we can't sit around wondering if it would be appropriate to do this or that. The ship is still underway and we still need to get into port on time. So you do everything you can to solve the problem with what you've got on hand and cry about it later, once the last line is thrown and the cargo is moving ashore.

[Politicub]

60. I should have read the article - I often just rely on what's in the post

And sometimes those are edited to the point of concealing what's really going on.

Thanks for pointing that out!

[jberryhill]

38. Uh, yeah, let's have an economic boycott of Haiti...

Fail.

[DCBob]

44. Then we are all guilty of enjoying our lives while thousands are suffering..

The distance hardly matters.

[Gin]

48. remember after 911 we were told that New York needed folks

to come and spend....sad as it all is...parts of Haiti were not damaged and life goes on...sounds like the cruise ships are helping best they can. (IMO)

[Codeine]

54. Good. Haitians in non-devastated areas

need to make a living.

[PacerLJ35]

72. My thoughts too...counter-productive to chase a viable industry away from those people

Simply so we can sit in our chairs at home and have something to make hay about.

[Scooter24]

62. I would like to share a letter from Royal Caribbean that we received a few days ago...

We just completed a 14-night Caribbean cruise on RCCL's Voyager of the Seas. This was my 17th cruise with them and I'm also a shareholder. Many people on the ship were very sensitive to the situation and many were ready to open their wallets and donate.

This is the letter:

January 15, 2010

Dear Voyager of the Seas Guest:

We are writing to provide you with some important information about Haiti and our relief efforts.

As you know, on January 12, Haiti experienced a catastrophic earthquake located near the capital of Port-Au-Prince. The earthquake caused massive, widespread damage and mass casualties. Our thoughts and prayers go out to the people of Haiti and their family members.

Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd, our parent company, has nearly 30 years of commitment and contribution to the government, businesses and people of Haiti, and is committed to helping them through this disaster. Royal Caribbean is in the unique position of being able to provide humanitarian relief to Haiti by delivering much needed goods and supplies to Labadee, Haiti - the company's private destination - via our cruise ships. We are very sensitive to the idea of delivering a vacation experience so close to the epicenter of the earthquake, and we appreciate that many guests might feel the same way. However, given the terrible economic and social challenges Haiti now faces, they need the positive economic benefits now more than ever. Royal Caribbean not only impacts the local economy in Haiti with every port of call, but Labadee employs hundreds of Haitians from nearby villages. Therefore, as soon as Royal Caribbean received approval from Haiti that they would welcome our return as soon as possible, we wanted to ensure that our ships called on Labadee as scheduled.

Royal Caribbean is also partnering with charitable organizations -such as Food for the Poor, the Pan American Development Foundation, and the Solano Foundation - to provide additional assistance to the people of Haiti. Many of our guests have asked how they too can help the people of Haiti. Attached to this letter, and throughout the ship, you will notice donation cards for Food for the Poor's Haitian Relief Fund. For many years, Royal Caribbean has partnered with Food for the Poor to assist the people of Haiti. If you would like to make a donation, please fill out the card and give it to our staff at the Guest Relations Desk. You may donate any amount you choose, and Food for the Poor will receive 100% of your donation. The donation amount will be listed as an onboard charge in your guest folio as "Food for the Poor donation."

If you would like to learn more about Royal Caribbean's humanitarian relief efforts, you may visit our web page at www.royalcaribbean.com. If you would like to learn more about Food for the Poor, please visit www.foodforthepoor.org.

Royal Caribbean International and the people of Haiti thank you for your support.

Sincerely,

Royal Caribbean International

[Arkansas Granny]

64. Just out of curiosity, how many miles should be allowed or what

period of time should elapse before the rest of Haiti is allowed to pursue their regular life and means of income? Tourists $$$ mean big bucks, and may be a very large part of the income of the families that have not been immediately affected by the earthquake. Affecting their income could be a real hardship on their families.

[XemaSab]

73. I'm on the pro-tourist side

Every dollar that gets spent there now is helping keep Haiti float.