Where is GeeenPeace when you need them?

[TAC]

ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP) -- A small cruise ship catering to eco-tourists was seriously damaged after running aground in the Aleutian Islands.

Coast Guard Chief Warrant Officer Roddy Corr said about 5,000 gallons of diesel fuel spilled from the ruptured tank, as was some waste water. He said swift currents dispersed the spilled fluid before it could be cleaned up.

The accident Saturday night punctured the 340-foot Clipper Odyssey's forward fuel tank and forced 153 people to abandon ship, Corr said Sunday. There were no reports of injuries.

Fishing boats and a freighter in the area carried the Clipper Odyssey's 122 passengers and 31 crew members to safety at Unalaska, about 800 air miles west of Anchorage, according to Lt. Asheley Bodkin.

The small cruise ship was refloated with the tide early Sunday.

The Clipper Odyssey was headed west along the Aleutian chain when the accident occurred. The ship takes passengers on cruises lasting a week or more for tours of seal and bird rookeries in the islands, Corr said.

A preliminary investigation indicated that the ship was going about 5 knots when it hit uncharted rocks between two islands, said Doug Bolnick, a spokesman for Clipper Cruise Line, the St. Louis company that operates the tour.

It was on the 7th day of a 12-day tour, Bolnick said.

 

[lebernadin]

Greenpeace's mission isn't to follow around thousands of large passenger vessels throughout the world waiting for one to run aground and leak hazardous fuel/waste.

 

[The Mom]

Ah, but I think the OP's point was that this was a ship full of environmentalists, who might have been tsk-tsking about people ruining the environment, especially damage caused by oil spills in the region. It just goes to show that any ship, even a small, environment-friendly one, can cause damage, so perhaps Greenpeace should work to keep ecotourists out, also.:animwink:

 

[lebernadin]

The original poster is trying to blur the differences between people who jump on a cruiseship to take pictures and the mission of Greenpeace.

Perhaps its a naivete because many people who are looking to make $$$ off of the large umbrella called "eco-tourism." But nevertheless, Greenpeace isn't an organization that's mission is to put vacationers on ships/safaris etc to look at the environment.

So to attempt to draw irony from it is just admitting you either don't have a grasp on the subject at hand, or have simply concluded that all things involving nature from Greenpeace activism to you name it are to be looked upon with the same frown.

Greenpeace, although i have yet to see a press release from them, would naturally frown upon this accident.

The only way you could draw irony out of what you're attempting to do would be if one of Greenpeace's large ships ran aground etc. But an independent FOR PROFIT cruise line based in St Louis has nothing to do with Greenpeace.

But for someone to agree with the points you two are trying to draw, would first have to already have negative preconceived notions about environmental activists.

 

[Wilt Dasney]

Well, sidestepping the convoluted putdown already registered here, I can see the irony pretty easily in a ship full of environmentally-conscious people running aground and leaking fuel. Forget drawing any conclusions about the character of the people involved or what involvement Greenpeace should or shouldn't have. It's just one of those funny coincidences, period. Perhaps if you wouldn't be so quick to assume that people are trying to insult environmentalists or push an agenda by pointing out something like this, you could see it, too. There's no need to be so defensive. I would find it just as humorous if a bunch of people from the opposite side of the political spectrum accidentally were involved in a similar situation (i.e., a pack of conservatives publicly endorsing a young person as a model citizen before finding out he's spent all his free time as a war protestor).

 

[The Mom]

The original poster is trying to blur the differences between people who jump on a cruiseship to take pictures and the mission of Greenpeace.

Perhaps its a naivete because many people who are looking to make $$$ off of the large umbrella called "eco-tourism." But nevertheless, Greenpeace isn't an organization that's mission is to put vacationers on ships/safaris etc to look at the environment.

So to attempt to draw irony from it is just admitting you either don't have a grasp on the subject at hand, or have simply concluded that all things involving nature from Greenpeace activism to you name it are to be looked upon with the same frown.

Greenpeace, although i have yet to see a press release from them, would naturally frown upon this accident.

The only way you could draw irony out of what you're attempting to do would be if one of Greenpeace's large ships ran aground etc. But an independent FOR PROFIT cruise line based in St Louis has nothing to do with Greenpeace.

But for someone to agree with the points you two are trying to draw, would first have to already have negative preconceived notions about environmental activists.

I think the "point" we're trying to make is that it was ironic that a cruise that targeted people who care about nature was involved in an incident that caused harm to the very environment they care about. I don't believe I said anything that was derogatory to environmentalists as a group, nor did said environmentalists do anything wrong. I just agreed with the OP who found the situation ironic. NO ONE stated that Greenpeace had anything to do with the incident; the title was meant to be HUMOROUS. Geesh, lighten up.

 

[EpcoTim]

The original poster is trying to blur the differences between people who jump on a cruiseship to take pictures and the mission of Greenpeace.

Perhaps its a naivete because many people who are looking to make $$$ off of the large umbrella called "eco-tourism." But nevertheless, Greenpeace isn't an organization that's mission is to put vacationers on ships/safaris etc to look at the environment.

So to attempt to draw irony from it is just admitting you either don't have a grasp on the subject at hand, or have simply concluded that all things involving nature from Greenpeace activism to you name it are to be looked upon with the same frown.

Greenpeace, although i have yet to see a press release from them, would naturally frown upon this accident.

The only way you could draw irony out of what you're attempting to do would be if one of Greenpeace's large ships ran aground etc. But an independent FOR PROFIT cruise line based in St Louis has nothing to do with Greenpeace.

But for someone to agree with the points you two are trying to draw, would first have to already have negative preconceived notions about environmental activists.

Itd be a lot easier to hug that tree if you pulled it out of your as* first.

 

[lebernadin]

I don't believe I said anything that was derogatory to environmentalists as a group,

No?

Then explain this:

Ah, but I think the OP's point was that this was a ship full of environmentalists, who might have been tsk-tsking about people ruining the environment

It just goes to show that any ship, even a small, environment-friendly one, can cause damage,

Where did the original article place a spin like that on the people on the cruise? Where in the article did it state the people on the cruise were environmentalists? Where in the article did it state they were "tsk-tsking" people who ruin the environment? Where in the article does it state the ship is environment-friendly?

Nowhere. The difference here is that i read the article for what it is. It doesn't state anything about Greenpeace. It doesn't state these people are environmental activists. It states these people are on a cruise that takes them past seal and bird rookeries in the Aleutians and primarily caters to eco-tourists.

To equate eco-tourists with environmentalists is like saying kids who play paintball or airsoft are members of the military.

These are people who pay thousands of dollars to take a cruise alongside nature and then go back to their lives. They aren't helping the environment by taking pictures of it for their albums. These type of cruises have been going on for decades, its just the term eco-tourists, obviously to some, connotates that they are somehow gung-ho savers of the environment on par with Greenpeace and other organizations.

This is all besides the fact that these tourists didn't run the ship aground, those on the bridge at the time did.

the title was meant to be HUMOROUS. Geesh, lighten up.

I know it was meant to be humorous, and that's the point. Its stereotyping eco-tourists as environmental activists when the eco-tourists themselves aren't even at fault in this story, the operators of the ship at the time are.

So if people just read the poster's title and the story, what would they conclude? "Yeah, all these greenpeace types are so busy trying to save the environment that they managed to destroy it in the process."

Well i didn't conclude that, and we're all entitled to our opinions. Its funny how people always tell others to lighten up when they don't like what they hear.

 

[lebernadin]

Perhaps if you wouldn't be so quick to assume that people are trying to insult environmentalists or push an agenda by pointing out something like this, you could see it, too. There's no need to be so defensive.

I didn't realize i had to pass my opinions by you prior to posting.


Its negative stereotyping that i'm pointing out is being pushed here.

You have just as much right to find it humorous as i do to not. You call it defensive, i call it opinion.

 

[celticdog]

Fishing boats and a freighter in the area carried the Clipper Odyssey's 122 passengers and 31 crew members to safety at Unalaska, about 800 air miles west of Anchorage, according to Lt. Asheley Bodkin.

Did this happen in Alaska or Unalaska, is that not Alaska? This makes my skull hurt. :hammer: :hammer: :hammer: :lol:

 

[Erika]

:lol: Oh, the irony!

 

[EpcoTim]

Unalaska is a small, 3 mile section of Alaskan beachfront where it is always 72-80 degrees. Once a popular tourist attraction, it was purchased by Bill gates in late 1996.

 

[Wilt Dasney]

I didn't realize i had to pass my opinions by you prior to posting.

Never said you did....was just commenting on your comments. You have the right to think and post whatever you like, and the rest of us do, too. I think it's a pretty cool arrangement. :wave:

 

[The Mom]

I'm sorry, I must be wrong, wrong, wrong to ever think that anyone who books an eco-tourist cruise gives a damn about the environment. Pardon me for seeing any humor in the situation.

 

[Number_6]

CAN'T WE ALL JUST GET ALONG?!?! :kiss: