mudcat.org: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
Lyrics & Knowledge Personal Pages Record Shop Auction Links Radio & Media Kids Membership Help
The Mudcat Cafeawe

Post to this Thread - Sort Descending - Printer Friendly - Home


BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...

Related threads:
Songs about the Exxon Valdez disaster (1989) (41)
Lyr Req: One rock and one wing at a time (3)
BS: Exxon' electric car (4)
BS: Exxon Mobil Corp. Record profits (172)
BS: Exxon-Mobil to buy election??? (21)
happy? - Mar 24 ('Exxon Valdez, 1989') (2)


Bobert 28 Feb 08 - 11:24 AM
Amos 28 Feb 08 - 12:58 PM
irishenglish 28 Feb 08 - 01:06 PM
Peace 28 Feb 08 - 01:13 PM
irishenglish 28 Feb 08 - 01:24 PM
Peace 28 Feb 08 - 01:34 PM
Barry Finn 28 Feb 08 - 02:03 PM
Sandy Mc Lean 28 Feb 08 - 02:07 PM
bankley 28 Feb 08 - 02:18 PM
Bobert 28 Feb 08 - 02:31 PM
Charley Noble 28 Feb 08 - 10:33 PM
kendall 29 Feb 08 - 01:40 PM
Peace 29 Feb 08 - 02:01 PM
gnu 29 Feb 08 - 02:09 PM
GUEST,leeneia 29 Feb 08 - 06:18 PM
kendall 29 Feb 08 - 09:23 PM
heric 29 Feb 08 - 09:49 PM
Barry Finn 29 Feb 08 - 11:42 PM
kendall 01 Mar 08 - 08:35 AM
kendall 01 Mar 08 - 08:47 AM
Bobert 01 Mar 08 - 08:54 AM
Charley Noble 01 Mar 08 - 11:43 AM
Sandy Mc Lean 01 Mar 08 - 04:01 PM
GUEST,ALCAN1 01 Mar 08 - 04:46 PM
Q (Frank Staplin) 01 Mar 08 - 05:33 PM
heric 01 Mar 08 - 05:41 PM
heric 01 Mar 08 - 05:50 PM
Bobert 01 Mar 08 - 06:51 PM
kendall 01 Mar 08 - 07:31 PM
Bobert 01 Mar 08 - 08:26 PM
Q (Frank Staplin) 01 Mar 08 - 08:41 PM
Q (Frank Staplin) 01 Mar 08 - 11:04 PM
Sandy Mc Lean 02 Mar 08 - 12:16 AM
GUEST,Chicken Charlie 02 Mar 08 - 12:36 AM
Bobert 02 Mar 08 - 09:12 AM
kendall 02 Mar 08 - 03:15 PM
Q (Frank Staplin) 02 Mar 08 - 04:09 PM
kendall 02 Mar 08 - 04:50 PM
Q (Frank Staplin) 02 Mar 08 - 05:46 PM
Peace 02 Mar 08 - 05:50 PM
Q (Frank Staplin) 02 Mar 08 - 06:06 PM
Peace 02 Mar 08 - 06:15 PM
kendall 02 Mar 08 - 07:16 PM
Peace 02 Mar 08 - 07:17 PM
Q (Frank Staplin) 02 Mar 08 - 07:46 PM
Sandy Mc Lean 02 Mar 08 - 07:47 PM
Peace 02 Mar 08 - 07:48 PM
Bobert 02 Mar 08 - 08:13 PM
kendall 02 Mar 08 - 08:59 PM
Q (Frank Staplin) 02 Mar 08 - 09:16 PM
Q (Frank Staplin) 02 Mar 08 - 09:58 PM
Sandy Mc Lean 02 Mar 08 - 10:58 PM
Q (Frank Staplin) 03 Mar 08 - 12:11 AM
Sandy Mc Lean 03 Mar 08 - 07:13 AM
GUEST,Sandy (lost cookie) 03 Mar 08 - 07:38 AM
Q (Frank Staplin) 03 Mar 08 - 01:04 PM
Barry Finn 03 Mar 08 - 01:30 PM
Q (Frank Staplin) 03 Mar 08 - 01:51 PM
Barry Finn 03 Mar 08 - 02:05 PM
GUEST,chief chaos 03 Mar 08 - 02:56 PM
Q (Frank Staplin) 03 Mar 08 - 03:29 PM
Bobert 03 Mar 08 - 04:12 PM
Barry Finn 03 Mar 08 - 04:41 PM
Bobert 03 Mar 08 - 05:16 PM
kendall 03 Mar 08 - 06:37 PM
Sandy Mc Lean 03 Mar 08 - 08:00 PM
Bobert 03 Mar 08 - 08:31 PM
Q (Frank Staplin) 03 Mar 08 - 09:40 PM
Q (Frank Staplin) 03 Mar 08 - 10:09 PM
Bobert 04 Mar 08 - 07:50 AM
Q (Frank Staplin) 04 Mar 08 - 12:22 PM
Bobert 04 Mar 08 - 01:12 PM
kendall 04 Mar 08 - 01:48 PM
Peace 04 Mar 08 - 01:51 PM
*#1 PEASANT* 04 Mar 08 - 01:55 PM
Barry Finn 04 Mar 08 - 03:07 PM
GUEST,Chief Chaos 04 Mar 08 - 04:38 PM
Bobert 04 Mar 08 - 05:04 PM
Sandy Mc Lean 04 Mar 08 - 10:19 PM
kendall 05 Mar 08 - 06:47 PM
Lyrics & Knowledge Search [Advanced]
DT  Forum
Sort (Forum) by:relevance date
DT Lyrics:








Subject: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Bobert
Date: 28 Feb 08 - 11:24 AM

Let me see if I have this correct...

Exxon now is arguing that it should not have to pay punitive damages to the thousands of fishermen who lost their businesses because of the Valdez oil spill because...

... the captian of the ship was drunk???

That appears to be what they are arguing before the Supreme Court...

And, of course, the Supreme Kangaroo Corporatist Court will go along with Exxon because Exxon gives alot of $$$ to politicans, including the Bush's who have handpicked their fair share of the Supreme Crooks...

So this got me thinkin' that after Exxon prevails here that Exxon will just be sure to have drunhk captain's in all their super-tankers in case something bad happens that might cost them some $$$...

It is an absolutely brillient idea, I must say...

Maybe the airlines will follow... And bus companies... And taxi companies...

Beam me up... There is no intellegent life left here...

Bobert


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Amos
Date: 28 Feb 08 - 12:58 PM

Wait, wait Bobert!! I need a good FIrst Mate!!! My application is in the mail....



A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: irishenglish
Date: 28 Feb 08 - 01:06 PM

Just because that's Exxon's argument does not mean that the Supreme Court will support it. There are a few on the Court that I disagree with, but they have been known to go completely the opposite of the perceived wisdom more than a few times. It's bunk, and Exxon will still have to pay.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Peace
Date: 28 Feb 08 - 01:13 PM

Hell! Does this mean that the ship drunk has to stay sober?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: irishenglish
Date: 28 Feb 08 - 01:24 PM

I don't know. I also don't know what to do with the drunken sailor.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Peace
Date: 28 Feb 08 - 01:34 PM

I have to ask: "What WILL we do with a drunken sailor?"

I was gonna apply for that position, but it seems all those wot's s'posed to stay sober will now be drunk and that then means there won't be any place for a drunk already. What a connrundum/connumbdrum/cronumbdrum puzzle!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Barry Finn
Date: 28 Feb 08 - 02:03 PM

Exxon is arguing that because the disaster happend out at sea that the state can't rule on punitive damages & that it come under Maritime (Federal) Law, which Exxon clains doesn't have the legal right to hand out punitive damages. Historically this goes against all preceeding maritime law, claims the AG.
The courts have reduced the fine from 5 Billion down to 2 1/2 bil. It's also argued that punitive damages exceed 9x the amount of the actuall damage. In this case it's clain that it equals onlt 5x that amount.

If the courts see fit to reduce the fine any further of worst to let them off the hook, there should be a national boycott of all things Exxon until true damages are paid in full

They're also trying to claim that they can't be held responsible for the Captain's error in judgment as long as the company didn't interfere by redirecting the Captain or giving him orders to follow their instructions (that doesn't hold much water) They're also trying to claim that they didn't know the Captain had strayed from the strait & narrow (they're slick). This has been debunked though, they failed at that.

Barry

"What do you do with a drunken sailor (3x)
Put him in charge of an Exxon tanker"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Sandy Mc Lean
Date: 28 Feb 08 - 02:07 PM

I think that they made over 40 billion in profit last year. They pushed the price of crude above $100 per barrel and then drove up the price of gas because crude was so high. Then they sued Chavez and Venezuela because he wanted to keep some of the profit for the people who owned the resource. I think that they found some stupid damn court in Britain to agree with them on that so they will probably find another court of that ilk to help out with this. Welcome to the global economy where corporations are richer than some governments and are not slow to flex their muscle.
It has 19 years since this disaster and "JUSTICE" is not only blind but stupid as well!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: bankley
Date: 28 Feb 08 - 02:18 PM

well, I don't know if they'll qualify cuz the two crew on the bridge of B.C. Ferry's 'Queen of the North' were only smoking dope and making out when she struck a rock and sank in the Inside Passage.....

maybe they can get work with Exxon now... pump this, pilot that , avast ....    hic


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Bobert
Date: 28 Feb 08 - 02:31 PM

Exxon is making $2.5B every 3 weeks...

This is a case where rich people just think that seein' as they bought the governemnt that the government shoould always protect them against the peasants...

And Exxon isn't denying that it knew that the Captain had relapsed and was drinking... Heck, he had been drinking with Exxon execs prior to that assignment...

No, what this is ia a grossly arrogant corporation whcih feels that rules don't apply to it...

Remember Enron???

Same mindset... Same play book... Same theivery... Same anti-human, anti earth thinking... Same greed...

Waht we are seeing is more and more of Dcik Cheney's energy policy unfolding...

Okay, it might end up a 4-4 split since one of the Supreme Crooks has had to recluse himself because of his dirty little conmnections wuith Exxon but I'll guarentee the two Shrub Crooks will side with Exxon...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Charley Noble
Date: 28 Feb 08 - 10:33 PM

And Exxon's lawyers will need a supertanker to haul away all their ill-gotten gains.

Exxon did acknowledge that they had rules against drunk captains being in chrage of their supertankers. However, they claim that they had no reason to believe that the captain in question, a known alcoholic, was still a practicing drunk.

Well, I'll drink to that!

Cheerily,
Charley Noble


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: kendall
Date: 29 Feb 08 - 01:40 PM

Well, Hell! all those years I could have been drinking! (retired Captain)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Peace
Date: 29 Feb 08 - 02:01 PM

"pump this"

Well, Ron if they were smokin' dope and makin' out, I'd say they were already doing that!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: gnu
Date: 29 Feb 08 - 02:09 PM

I was on an oiler docked in Newfoundland. Three attempts at docking in poor weather. I could smell the booze as I went through the door of Cappy's office. The bottle of gin was on his desk beside the empty one. I have never seen eyes that red. And, Cappy's eyes were worse than the ship's cat that drinking out of Cappy's glass.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: GUEST,leeneia
Date: 29 Feb 08 - 06:18 PM

It was established in Congressional hearings that the crew of the Valdiz was suffering extreme sleep deprivation. It was that, not alcohol, that caused the accident.

It is hard to get good crew for ships. Most normal, healthy people want to spend their lives with family and friends. Result - crews are understaffed and overworked.

When I watched Connie Chung (news reporter) hammering the question of drunkenness over and over, even though the response was always 'No, the captain wasn't drunk,' I wanted to spit on her.

Then the result of the Congressional hearings got a few lines in the back pages of the paper, weeks later.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: kendall
Date: 29 Feb 08 - 09:23 PM

Drunk or sober he had no business going to bed with a green seaman on the helm in coastal waters.He was the Captain, so, it was his fault. Period.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: heric
Date: 29 Feb 08 - 09:49 PM

20% of the victimized class is already dead.

(Leenia's right he wasn't drunk.)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Barry Finn
Date: 29 Feb 08 - 11:42 PM

Part of the reason a ships company can't get a good crew is that for yrs they've been beating down the numbers of deck hands that they want to crew the ships. When they want to hire a skeleton to do the work of a full crew not only do they work longer hrs & extra watches, but they also become phycially exhusted as well as mentally fatigued. Don't go blaming the sailors & accusing them of being drunks & saying that that's the problem. The union's no longer have the power to enforce saftey for their members or the safety of the ships. That's now in the powers of the ship's owners & the government regs that allow ships at sea that should've been scrapped & sold off as rust. An example would be the recent sinking of the eco tour cruiser in the Antartic who's hull had over the yrs worn thin but pasted inspection. Or singled walled tankers & non water tight compartments. A drunk captain can sink a ship just as quick as
a rusted out propeller shaft.
He was the captain & in dangerous waters navigating a channel known to be a nasty waterway, that's his error, drunk or not. If he'd had the crew he would've been allowed to carry 25 yrs ago he could had a proper watch on deck instead of a greenhand, that's the fault of the powers that be for legaly allowing tankers to sail shorthanded. This doesn't come up because it now legal to sail with less crew than is actually needed so where's the fault there?

Yes, crews are understaffed and overworked but they're just as
normal & healthy as any construction crew you'd find on dry land, most are professional sailors with the exception of a few captains. These are not your sailors of yesteryear, they may be a rough lot but so are the ones that build the high rise offices buildings you work in & the towering bridges that you drive across. If there's a structural flaw don't blame the ones who built it blame the ones who designed it & instructed & recorded how it was built.

Next time you fly, think about the stewartess. Does the plane crash if they're drunk? If the captain's short handed & has to come out of the cockpit to serve you meals & drinks & the plane crashes but the law doesn't allow the captains more than 2 crew & one of them was at the controls at the time are you gonna look for a drunken passanger or stewart & blame?

Barrty


Barry


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: kendall
Date: 01 Mar 08 - 08:35 AM

Barry, as far as I'm concerned, you just spoke the last words on this subject.Republicans hate regulations. They cut into profits.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: kendall
Date: 01 Mar 08 - 08:47 AM

There is humor even in this situation:
The last I heard of Captain Hazelwood, he was teaching navigation in a college!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Bobert
Date: 01 Mar 08 - 08:54 AM

Well, now wait a minute here...

Exxon's argument is not that the ship was understaffed but that the captain, having fallen off the wagon and back to drinkin', acted improperly because of it and...

...therefore they (Exxon) should not be help accountable.

Facts of the case, as I understand them, is that Exxon execs knew the captain had fallen off the wagon after being treated for alcoholism... I heard on NPR that one of these execs actaully had been with the captain when both that exec amd the captain were drinking...

The under-regulated aspect, however, is very much part of the story, as well but it isn't part of Exxon's arguments to the Supreme Crooks...

What they seem to be arguing is that the captain, not them, had acted irresponsibly because of the drinking...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Charley Noble
Date: 01 Mar 08 - 11:43 AM

Here's a link to the current Wikipedia bio of Capt. Hazelwood: Click here!

It makes interesting reading.

Charley Noble


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Sandy Mc Lean
Date: 01 Mar 08 - 04:01 PM

Found this:
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/10/18/1034561314709.html


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: GUEST,ALCAN1
Date: 01 Mar 08 - 04:46 PM

I have mixed feelings on this one.

I was 17 years old when the Exxon Valdez spill happened. I live in the very town it took place...Valdez, Alaska. I was here when it occured and I personally know all the people who played a role in the response and clean up.

I also used to be a fisherman here as well and worked on a small fishing vessel called the ROALD. Within 2 months of the spill that vessel was drydocked and he owner of that vessel was paid over $1/2 million by Exxon as were all the other fishermen in the area. He retired, left his family and headed for Hawaii. This was the case for hundreds of fishermen. The fact is that Exxon paid these people multi times for the same claim. Then to top it all off Exxon paid them to help clean up the spill at a rate of $25 a hour working 84 hours a week. The money Exxon threw at this town was amazing.

Exxon brought in hundreds of millions of dollars worth of equipment that was tossed into the city dump. The city had to install fencing and gates so the locals wouldnt salvage what was being put in that landfill. Everything from generators, welders, inflatable boats, lumber etc was discarded. Prior to the gates being put up, I personally got 5 truck loads of stuff. We collected enough material to buil a friends house from the ground up. All that material was paid for by Exxon.

When Exxon pulled out, the large complex that was build for them to house their offices was given back to the company who built it. Exxon sold it and the land for ONE DOLLAR and the company who built it turned it into a hotel. Ive been working for that company since they opened the old Exxon HQ as a hotel.

Exxon paid alot. But they have gotten a raw deal in many ways. I would submitt that the Coast Guard, Alyeska, the union contractors, the State of Alaska itself as well Rikkie Ott (president of Cordova District Fishermen United) as the many enviormentalists that were protesting in the first 3 days of the spill are the ones to blame for it not being contained in time and it doing the dammage it did. They all stood point fingers at each other and nothing happened. As a result it led to the biggest economic boom this state has seen since the construction of the pipline in the 70s. Hell the local gas station was built with funds made on the oil spill and the owner named it "Captian Joes" after Joe Hazelwood himself as a tribute.

Come on people it was 19 years ago. They paid for it then and kept giving out money to people for years after. When is it going to end? Exxon wasnt the only one to blame. I hope the Supreme Court will finally put this to an end.

Now here is something that is reassuring. There wont be another spill like that on the water with another tanker here again due to the measures in place today. However the sad thing is the next major spill will be on the land because all efforts are on prevention on the water and Alyeska has cut back on maintaince on the pipeline and the terminal itself. The line is 30 years old and needs work. Trust me...its not if there is a proplem with the pipeline. Its only a matter of time. I just hope this whole town doesnt blow up as a result of the lack of maintaince.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 01 Mar 08 - 05:33 PM

Thanks for your post, Alcan1. A little sanity, soon to be eclipsed by more codswallop.
Some posters just like to mindlessly pile on unsupported suppositions and judgements, each trying to outshout the other.
The whole premise of this thread is nonsense.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: heric
Date: 01 Mar 08 - 05:41 PM

According to the LA Times, Bobert's version seems to be right. The punitives are apparently based on letting a drunk captain the shipL

"But Stanford law professor Jeffrey L. Fisher, representing the Alaskan workers, said Exxon deserved to be punished for 'putting a drunken master in charge of a supertanker.'"

It sems very strange, since a jury rejected that he was drunk at the time, and Leenia says Congress concluded the same.

He was a drunk but not drunk at the time?

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-na-scotus28feb28,1,2553954.story


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: heric
Date: 01 Mar 08 - 05:50 PM

Oh look at this: ``He was the person who decided on behalf of Exxon that it was safe to leave port the night of March 23, 1989,'' Fisher argued."

He probably was drunk when they left at 6:00 pm with a pilot, and probably was not drunk when the accident occurred at 11:00 pm.

THAT's probably the hook. Bloomberg

Seems a bit disconnected. He couldn't very well sit there for weeks? waiting for the icebergs to all float away.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Bobert
Date: 01 Mar 08 - 06:51 PM

Thanks, heric, for the additional links...

Yeah, this is the argument that Exxon has presented to the Supreme Crooks...

Sounds purdy rediculous to me but that is the argument... What is more rediculous is that the two flunkies that George Bush has appointed to the Supreme Crooks seem to love Exxon's arguments...

Beam me up... There is no intellegence left in the Supreme Court...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: kendall
Date: 01 Mar 08 - 07:31 PM

There are certain facts that no amount of money can wash away. EXXON knew ths Captain had lost his drivers license for drunk driving. They knew he was not on the bridge when the grounding happened.
And finally, we are told that the cleanup was at best a token effort, and the oil is still present in the soil of the shore.
I still say, screw EXXON, I will never buy any of their products again.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Bobert
Date: 01 Mar 08 - 08:26 PM

Right'o, Capt'n...

I haven't bought Exxon products since the oli spill and I'd highly suggest that Mudcatters don't either...

Exxon sucks!!!

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 01 Mar 08 - 08:41 PM

3.5 billion spent on cleanup and payments for damage. Token effort?

Maritime law lacks any serious precedent for the award of damages.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 01 Mar 08 - 11:04 PM

To correct another kneejerk comment far above about Exxon-Mobil, the prices of crude are set by demand and the Commodities Market. West Texas crude often is used as the indicator; it was $101.4 today. Middle East oil is a bit lower (not the cheapest to refine).

In Venezuela, Exxon-Mobil was just one operator. They objected to yielding a 60% stake to PDVSA (the Venezuelan company) and thought about suing, but now have sold their interests to Repsol (a Spanish-Argentine company) which agreed to Venezuelan terms.
Others who have agreed to terms are Royal Dutch Shell, Petrobras (Brazi), and China National Petroleum Co.
Total and Enl refused and are now nationalized.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Sandy Mc Lean
Date: 02 Mar 08 - 12:16 AM

"To correct another kneejerk comment far above about Exxon-Mobil, the prices of crude are set by demand and the Commodities Market."
The problem is that big global companies like Exxon are both the producer and the purchaser and the wholesaler and the seller of the product. In other words they are pumping the crude and then charging the refiner wharever they wish for it. The refiner then sells gas diesel etc. to the distributer/wholesaler who then sells to the retailer. This becomes a problem when they are all one and the same. The law of supply and demand fails and corporate greed rules supreme.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: GUEST,Chicken Charlie
Date: 02 Mar 08 - 12:36 AM

Hey man, this is Mudcat. Just because Alcan1 was there doesn't mean anybody except Q will listen to him. I'm with you two, but you're swimming upstream around here.

I remember the one-liner at the time: "How many men does it take to command an Exxon tanker?" One and a fifth.

Now there are equal parts of sanity & silliness. Take your pick. :)

CC


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Bobert
Date: 02 Mar 08 - 09:12 AM

$20B in annual profirs ougtta, at the very least, say something about just how stacked the deck is in protecting Exxon's ability to redistribute wealth away from the working class toward the obscenely rich...

What we are seein' unfold is Cheney's ***secret energy plan***... You know, the plan that Bush has used executive order after executive order to protect the crooks for the consumers...

"Government for the people, by the people" my butt... The only people that this corrupt government is for is for the super rich...

And in the words or Walter Cronkite, "That's the way it is..."

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: kendall
Date: 02 Mar 08 - 03:15 PM

I'm going to contact a friend who lives in Alaska and see what she thinks.
If I'm wrong I apologize, but there are two people here who sound like EXXON shills.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 02 Mar 08 - 04:09 PM

Sandy forgets that OPEC also has something to do with oil prices; adjusting production to keep prices within a range. Saudi Arabia and Iran, with the two largest production companies, Saudi Aramco and NIOC, along with the Emirates and Kuwait, are the OPEC members that control in that group (Venezuela has quit).

Exxon Mobil, with decreasing reserves, buys much of the oil that it refines. It does share ownership of some important refining companies, but shares this market with other biggies. It prefers to invest, and let others control, a change in policy that has taken place.
Many changes in rank and importance in the past five years.

World Petroleum Liquids Production- 2006
1. Saudi Aramco 11035 (thousands bbls/day)
2. NIOC (Iran)   4049
3. Pemex (Mexico) 3710
4. PDV (Venezuela) 2650
5. KPC (Kuwait) 2643
6. BP (British Petroleum) 2562
7. Exxon Mobil 2523
8. PetroChina 2270
9. Shell 2093
10. Sonotrach (Algeria) 1934 (Seldom mentioned, but widespread interests)
Seven of those ten are state-owned, and all have a share in refineries.
Source: "Energy Intelligence Research," 2007 ed.

The largest corporations, as economic entities: Wal-Mart, British Petroleum, Exxon Mobil, and Royal Dutch Shell in that order. All three oil companies make much of their profit in refining and manufacturing. PetroChina soon will surpass Exxon Mobil and British Petroleum.

A mistake in my previous post- ENI, the Italian company, has made peace with Venezuela, and plans to invest $4B in new fields.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: kendall
Date: 02 Mar 08 - 04:50 PM

There is no way to spin away the hard cold fact that EXXON pulls down profits in the billions every quarter.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 02 Mar 08 - 05:46 PM

Exxon Mobil is big, but Wal-mart is bigger than any of the private oil companies. There is nothing wrong with making a profit from their industries.

Exxon Mobil 2006 Financial Statement

Revenue- 49 billion
Return on capital- 33 percent
Capital expenditures- 756 million, with plans ongoing for a petrochemical plants in Qatar and Saudi Arabia, as well as a petrochemical complex in Singapore.

Total revenue- 377,365 million
Total costs- 310,000 million
Income taxes- 28 millions (Sales-based taxes included in costs)
Net Income- 39 millions.

Not too bad an annual report; should satisfy most of the many shareholders, large and small, including pension funds.
Ends up at $6.62 net income per common share.
(Share price about $87.00).


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Peace
Date: 02 Mar 08 - 05:50 PM

Q, that's true. Companies have a right to a profit.

Three days ago gas was $.99 a liter. Today it's $1.07. How many businesses can jack up their prices by 7% because they are 'moved by the spirit'?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 02 Mar 08 - 06:06 PM

The price increase follows the market. Exxon doesn't determine that.

Crude oil futures are the most heavily traded commodity on the market. Futures trade in units of 1000 US barrels (42000 gallons). If you feel like gambling on continuing price increase, buy a few.
The price should drop this summer, that will be the time to buy (don't follow this advice).


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Peace
Date: 02 Mar 08 - 06:15 PM

LOL


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: kendall
Date: 02 Mar 08 - 07:16 PM

When Bush TOOK office, the price of gasoline was $1.50. Seven years later, it's well over $3.00 a gallon. In northern California it's $4.00 a gallon.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Peace
Date: 02 Mar 08 - 07:17 PM

I wish it was $3 a gallon here.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 02 Mar 08 - 07:46 PM

In 1980, a gallon of gasoline cost $1.13.
In 2007, adjusted for inflation, the cost would be $3.19 (calculator 3), or $2.84 (calculator 1).
These calculators are at education-world.com.

Nothing out-of-line at $3.00 /gallon, kendall. What's the problem? Do you need a government subsidy?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Sandy Mc Lean
Date: 02 Mar 08 - 07:47 PM

Back when Trudeau was Canada's Prime Minister he had the balls to take on the big oil companies. He created Petro Canada as a crown corporation with the belief that one honest company in fair competition would force the others to follow.
Unfortunately there was such hell raised by Alberta that he had to back off and Petro Canada was eventually dumped back into the private sector.
If his plan had been allowed to stand I believe that our prices would have been much fairer today. Canadian prices should be determined and set here. We should not be slaves to the so called global economy because we produce and export far more than what we import. OPEC be damned!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Peace
Date: 02 Mar 08 - 07:48 PM

Good one, Sandy!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Bobert
Date: 02 Mar 08 - 08:13 PM

Ahhhhhh...

Bush, former oilman...

Cheney, former oilman...

Condi Rice, former oilwoman...

$1.50 a gallon in 2000 and pushin' $4.00 a gallon now???

Q,

Please send me some of the drugs you have...

Tnis is not explainable... I don't give a rat's ass about Exxon's story... Fine... If they wanta charge $4.00 a gallon then bring back thwe wind-fall-profits taxes and take that money and provide national health care with it...

We could all live with that...

But to have Cheney and his secret buddies profit from this is anti-American...

Yes, you all heard it here first... It is anti-American... On some level it's terrorism...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: kendall
Date: 02 Mar 08 - 08:59 PM

Right on, Bobert.
Q, the cost of living has shot up since 2000, but my income hasn't.How about yours?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 02 Mar 08 - 09:16 PM

Sandy, I was hired in Alberta when Petro-Canada was formed. Most of the industry opposition came from companies who had no interest in research, or exploration in virgin territory such as the East Coast and Arctic, and British Columbia.
Trudeau's actions not only formed PetroCanada, but provided tax relief for research, and exploration in new areas. Only the major companies, such as Imperial (Exxon affiliate), Texaco, Shell, Chevron, and some research companies took advantage of this break. All of these companies had labs which employed many people (Imperial perhaps 200 at their Calgary lab). Professionals published results in international journals. A large percentage of the research costs could be deducted from taxes.

Petro-Canada, because of its mandate, was interested in offshore and Arctic oil exploration, and set up exploration and drilling programs. Companies like Imperial also had their eyes on these possibilities, but company economists, etc., would shoot down proposals for wildcat drilling offshore as too expensive, or 'unlikely to show profit.' They did approve joint projects with PetroCanada, with shared costs.

Trudeau took on the oil industry- but his measures allowed for cooperation. Shared projects went forward that would have been too expensive for PetroCanada alone (Parliament would have rebelled) or considered uneconomic by the majors. Important discoveries were made, although their potential is still mostly in the future. Research on large scale models of ice islands, joint research with Imperial, made it possible to drill offshore in the Beaufort Sea. Experiments with oil sands have led to today's production.

The majority of the oil company work force in western Canada, however, worked for concerns that 'did not think outside the box,' hence were not aided in their production programs, and were not a part of the programs with PetroCanada, hence are still heard complaining and cussing Trudeau today. Many of today's employees of the majors know nothing of this history, and join those demonizing Trudeau.

The return to Conservative government, much of it orchestrated from Alberta as suggested by Sandy, spelled the end of this small golden age. Opposition was from all sectors of business, not just disgruntled small oil company employees.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 02 Mar 08 - 09:58 PM

Kendall, I don't know anyone who is seriously behind because of cost-of-living increases. Not ahead of it, but not really bothered. Business is booming. I was just offered $800,000 for a house I paid $29,000 to build. Several houses sold recently in my neighborhood, and they are being gutted and rebuilt with twice the footprint.

I remember paying $4.00 a gallon in Europe years ago- it didn't seem to bother them.

Everything hotsy doodle here. Of course this is Canada, not that old, rusted out place south of the border. Perhaps we should send you and Bobert a care package.

That Bobert is something, isn't he? A leftover from the Guthrie years, surely.

Got a provincial election tomorrow, but no one really interested in it except those running. Conservative, liberal- makes no nevermind here in Alberta.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Sandy Mc Lean
Date: 02 Mar 08 - 10:58 PM

Thanks Q for your explanation. My perspective was as a consumer hoping that the Petro Canada on the corner would be able to keep its price to an honest return and force the competition to do likewise. When the government put the 10 cent a gallon tax on gas to raise the exploration fund money I grumbled but saw it as short term pain for long term gain. This created exploration but it was never developed enough to see the payback at the pumps. Alberta made it plain that they did not see a national oil policy as being to their liking and in the end won the day. I guess we have drifted the thread quite a bit but I'm afraid that I will always hate oil companies. :-}
                      Sandy


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 03 Mar 08 - 12:11 AM

Sandy, you won't see a 'payback at the pumps' unless Canada goes socialist. Even then, it would remain relatively high because of refining costs. Keeping to the inflation curve isn't too bad.

Arctic Islands crude could be $150 a barrel, so it will be a while before that area is looked at seriously. Russia looks to claim the full extent of the Lomonosov Ridge, so offshore oil there will be developed by them. They are expanding their exploration rapidly off their west coast and north of Japan.

Canada should have kept their national oil company, but thinking here is on the U.S.-UK pattern- The Russian-Saudi-Venezuelan-Mexican-Chinese patterns of state control are something we will never see.

Canada has become a major supplier to the United States, more than from Saudi Arabia, etc.
Approx. Imports by U. S. (thousands bbl/day)
Canada- Total 2,300 (1,800 crude)
Saudi- 1,700 (1,600)
Venezuela- 1,400 (1,200)
Mexico- 1,400 (1,200)
Nigeria- 1,300 (1,200)

Canada exports 1.77 million bpd, but imports 850,000 bpd (cheaper to supply east coast from abroad)

The oil-gas industry paid Canada $27 billion in 2006- not a bad take, but I think Canada could squeeze a little more out of it without the U. S. invading.
The industry provides 80% of Canada's merchandise trade balance.
Figures from www.capp.ca. Can. Assn. Petroleum Producers)


(I have put a lot of figures in these posts, but having them together here saves me the trouble of looking them up whenever someone asks. Digression, sure, but will be handy for me.)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Sandy Mc Lean
Date: 03 Mar 08 - 07:13 AM

Getting back to the thread subject there was a terrible oil spill a few miles from my home in 1970. The Arrow, a rust bucket tanker owned by Aristotle Onassis under charter to Imperial Oil (Exxon/Esso) with an incompetent master was loaded with heavy bunker c oil. (much nastier, stickier, and dirtier than crude) A mile of coarse on approach to the Strait of Canso it struck a reef in Chedabucto Bay. There is an excellent video here that tells the story:
http://video.aol.com/video-detail/the-arrow-disaster/1871290739
The fishermen in the area never got a settlement anywhere close to what they did in Alaska.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: GUEST,Sandy (lost cookie)
Date: 03 Mar 08 - 07:38 AM

"of coarse " should have been "off course" of course.
Also you have to watch an advertisement at the start of that video but it is worth the wait.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 03 Mar 08 - 01:04 PM

Double-hull tankers are expected to be the standard by 2020. The Exxon Valdez was a major wake-up call.

Governments, by denying docking facilities, could eliminate much of the problem with 'rust bucket' ships, but forcing poorer countries to comply may be a problem. All major petroleum shipping concerns are demanding double hull tankers.
The tremendous increase in demand by China and India has put much pressure on tanker fleets. This may contributd to the use of old tankers, but I don't know Chinese or Indian regulations or if they are enforced.

At the time you cite, nearly 40 years ago, regulations were lax, but have changed for the better. Shipping firms try to avoid dangerous coastal waters and currents, but there is no way to guarantee accident-free shipping; keeping accidents to a minimum, through regulations, is the best that can be done.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Barry Finn
Date: 03 Mar 08 - 01:30 PM

"Double-hull tankers are expected to be the standard by 2020"

That's 40 yrs to late! That's just using up the fleet untill the rust out. Silly logic.

Barry


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 03 Mar 08 - 01:51 PM

So junk any automobile over 3 years old and buy that new 'green' whatchamacallit. Same silly logic?

Anachronistic thinking doesn't help.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Barry Finn
Date: 03 Mar 08 - 02:05 PM

Your car Q in not a potential hazard to the enviorment??? but we'd all be better off if you & 1o,ooo others would go out & buy Hybrids now
. All tankers built in the last 20 yrs should've been double hulled. Should we allow the fleet to rid themselves of 40 yr old rust buckets because it was to their advantage when they should never had been built to those standards in the 1st place? I don't think so.

Barry


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: GUEST,chief chaos
Date: 03 Mar 08 - 02:56 PM

Actually bunker c is a step up from crude oil (at least it's a "refined" product minus most of the impurities contained in crude. A few points need to be made here:
1. Hazelwood was found to not be drunk although he was observed by the Coast Guard to be behaving in an intoxicated manner. His innocence was more a matter of a technicality than a reality.
2. Clean up operations were not delayed by protesters. Personnel required to load equipment to respond to the disaster were not available until some 18 hours after the incident.
3. Manning and crew rest requirments are regulated and enforced strictly, however like any law, they can be violated until the violator is actually caught (you can speed until the cop stops you).

In this case what Hazelwood did or did not do is directly the responsibility of Exxon. They are responsible because they put him in charge!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 03 Mar 08 - 03:29 PM

The first double hull vessels were built between 1985-1990, small tankers of 75000dwt. They had crack problems between cargo hull and outer hull (explosion-prone if not repaired), first really brought up when a similar tanker built in 1992 was found to have cracks by the USCG.

MARPOL (Prevention of pollution measures) first became enforceable in 1983 (double hulls not specified). Nearly all nations became signators.

The National Academy of Sciences found safety benefits with double hulls in non-rocky areas, but with larger vessels and a speed factor, benefits were unclear.

The technology was not in place before 1985. There is no point in saying it should have been there 40 years ago.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Bobert
Date: 03 Mar 08 - 04:12 PM

Exactly, chief choas...

What we have here is yet another step towards the corporatists having absolutely no "risk", what so ever... This is their dream... The perfect storm where ***all*** risk lies at the feet of the working man...

And looks as if they have the perfect Suprme Crooks to pull it off... These Supreme Crooks have allready ruled against working class people in discrimination suits... These Supreme Crooks say it isn't up to the courts to decide discrimination matters...

(Well, geeeeee... What is their job, Boberdz, if they say they can't be bothered with a woman demanding to be paid the same $$$ for the same job as a fellow male employee???)

Good question...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Barry Finn
Date: 03 Mar 08 - 04:41 PM

2o yrs ago + the 20 Should've been 10 my mistake) yrs you're giving them to meet standards by 2020. So not 40 but 30 yrs.

Barry


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Bobert
Date: 03 Mar 08 - 05:16 PM

Why should Exxon even care, Barry... If they could move oil in ships with tin foil hulls they would... They don't a rat's ass about anything but linin' their pockets with our hard earned dollars... Nothin' else enters into their minds...

And as for things entering minds (or not), the current batch of Supremes is just like Bush... Stubborn to a fault in letting, ahhhh, anything but their pre-judgements enter into their corporatist little heads...

Alito, Scalia, Thomas and Roberts are the four most prejudiced Supremes Crooks the court, if you can call it a court, that this country has seen in one court going back maybe since the dinosaurs roamed the earth...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: kendall
Date: 03 Mar 08 - 06:37 PM

Today, on National public radio, one of the EXXON public relations people was interviewed. He left no doubt in my mind that Hazelwood WAS drunk. And it was obvious that they want to stop the suits to protect their asses in the future spills.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Sandy Mc Lean
Date: 03 Mar 08 - 08:00 PM

"Actually bunker c is a step up from crude oil (at least it's a "refined" product minus most of the impurities contained in crude."
That is totally incorrect. Bunker "c" is the dregs from the bottom of the refinery still after the lighter petroleum products have been drawn off. It is only a bit above tar, thick and sticky and has to be heated before it can be pumped.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Bobert
Date: 03 Mar 08 - 08:31 PM

Righto, Capt'n...

That is what this is all about...

Thousands of families ruined by the oil spill and Exxon, which makes in 3 weeks enough to make these families somewhat whole again, says, "Screw all of you peasants... Go after Hazzelwood... Not our problem..."

But guess what???

Remember me talkin' about the shifting of risk onto the taxpaying working class??? This is what has happened... Many of these families have had to accept governemnt help since they are destitude... Who pays for that??? We do...

This is yet another instance where the risk of doing business is passed on down to the working class and away from the wealthy....

Yeah, we might have passed "welfare reform" in 1996 but we left out the real Cadillac moms... You know, the Dick Cheney's and the George Bushs...

BTW, does anyone have a clue how George Bush got rich???

I do... Same game that E#xxon is playin' with the Supreme Crooks... Yeah, usin' power and a good 'ol American corruption to fleece the working class out of their tax dollars... And to the tune of $17M of working family tax dollars... But, all legal...

Just as Exxon will get off this hook...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 03 Mar 08 - 09:40 PM

A little about Exxon's cleanup in Prince William Sound here. Valdez became a boom town.
$3.5 billion paid. Not enough?

Clean-up


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 03 Mar 08 - 10:09 PM

Brief note on the 1964 earthquake that killed 31, mostly children, at Valdez. Valdez Sound was severely affected by slides. The town had to be moved.

The loss to wildlife was never determined.

Earthquake


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Bobert
Date: 04 Mar 08 - 07:50 AM

You are missing the point, Q...

There were thousands of mom and pop businesses that were ruined by the oil spill... Do you have a clue what a 50 foot fishing boat costs??? Or how much the monthly payments are on that boat??? Or the monthly payments on the diner where tyhe fishermen would take their families out to eat??? Or the movie house in town??? The mortgagaes on homes???

People's lives were ruined...

Of course, Exxon had to clean the up their environmental mess the best they could...

What about the mess the oil spill left in the families and businesses that were ruined???

That's the issue here... That is what Exxon says the Supreme Crooks should ignore...

That is the issue...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 04 Mar 08 - 12:22 PM

People got their boats paid for. Valdez was a village at the end of a pipeline. The clean-up brought in 10,000 people who were paid well and who spent freely. What "thousands of mom and pop businesses"? It is larger and wealthier now than it ever was.
Your willingness to shout your ignorance is appalling.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Bobert
Date: 04 Mar 08 - 01:12 PM

Earth to Q... Q???... You out there???... Earth to Q...

Ahhhhhh, apparently you haven't been keeping up, Q...

Where did all the herring go??? And salmon that eat herring???

Who is Mike Maxwell???

How many people's lives were devestated by the effects of the oil spill???

Google up "Cordova" for a reality check, pal...

Talk about "ignorance"...

But you'll love this one... My late daddy-in-law was a lobbiest for American Petrolium Institute... He testified before Conmgressional committees on oil spills and the crux of his sooothing arguments was "Don't worry, be happy" as he'd go on and on about how nature cleans itself up over time... "Don't worry, Hal"... lol...

4 years after his Valdez "Don't worry, be happy" testimony he was diagnosed with cancer... Too many carcitigens, the doc said was most likely the 'cause... Bad karma, if you ask me... I was sorry he got cancwer and later died from it but I've never forgotten his the first "Don't worry, be happy" sermon he delivered to me...

Yeah, Q... Do a little research before you come back and call me "ignorant", thank you...

B;~)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: kendall
Date: 04 Mar 08 - 01:48 PM

That PR man I mentioned said again that EXXON had taken responsibility for the damage, and had spent 3.5 billion dollars as a result. Fine, problem is, the damage is still there. There is oil under every rock in the sound, and nothing grows there.
Sure, they took responsibility, but it was limited to 6 weeks of their obscene profits. A pox on those money grubbing toads.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Peace
Date: 04 Mar 08 - 01:51 PM

Yes, Kendall, but it was a WHOLE six weeks.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 04 Mar 08 - 01:55 PM

My song on the topic....see the other thread
Subject: Lyr Add: THE BALLAD OF JOSEPH HAZELWOOD
From: *#1 PEASANT* - PM
Date: 07 Feb 02 - 09:39 PM

FOUND IT!
Looking for a tune:

THE BALLAD OF JOSEPH HAZELWOOD

I am courtly and I'm canny
But of wealth, I hadn't any
So to earn an honest penny
I've sailed the wide world round
No silver spoon was sent me
I must serve the sons of plenty
Lacking face and duty
They take the poor man's pound.

They say I'm a drunken rover,
A scoundrel and deceiver
But I can drink and still say sober
And stand steadfast to my ground
I am careful of my duties
Of mariners, I am the ablest
If they'd left me in the wheel-house
We'd have cleared Prince William Sound.

I have known and loved the cold seas
Better than wife or mistress
Hand and eye were the surest
And with success were crowned
But they forced me to my cabin
I was not at my proven station
And like a wounded dolphin
The Valdez ran aground.

And for now the silent sand lies
Memorial to dead seabirds
Awash with oil-blacked corpses
And fishes caught by crude
Were I sated and not drunken
Had overcome the censors
If not prisoner below decks
We'd never gone aground.

But now the courts have freed me
From the alcoholic's heavy mantle
The price of fine is steep though
The sentence I can keep
In its words comes real freedom
For this spirited canny captain
Now many rounds will order
While cleaning the sound's black border.

Derek Ward (Bolton, Lancs. England)
Conrad Jay Bladey (Linthicum, Md. USA)
4/1990.

The motto of this little lay
Some will anger others sway
The drinker may a thinker be
But when incompetent are sent
They always be disaster bent.
So learn you all that drink's no answer
But never take as guiding pastor
Those whose lessons fail to master.

Conrad Bladey


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Barry Finn
Date: 04 Mar 08 - 03:07 PM

Here's a privious thread on Wreck of the Exxon Valdez & here are the words to Geoff Bartley's song:

"The Wreck Of the Exxon Valdez"

In 89 I sailed on board, a tanker in Prince William's sound
I gave warning from the bridges wing, on the night we ran aground

CH. Oh I've been away it's a sorry tale I'll tell my (....?)
I'm a native of these stromy seas, who's (hit ?) hard ground by the wreck Valdez

The pipeline taps the north slope, 800 miles from Beaufort Bay
Through nickle steel poured in Japan, 2 million days every day

Our ship was fresh pumped full of crude, near a 1000 feet & laid in style
From 15 knots you could shut her down, she'd drift a good 10 miles

I don't know how we strayed off course when red lights to starboard I could see
And besides Sat/Nav & twin radars there's Cats 2 & Loran C (these are all electronic navagational system)

And as the monster struck Bligh Reef the mate had failed to swing her round
The gentle nudge that riped her clean sent that oil into the sound

And now yes the judge was not prepared with (disperson?) booms (ready cruise?)
And a slick the size of Rhode Island spread for every day that we did lose

I cannot help but love the land but we're treating her like our young whore
When the eagles & the fish lie heaped all along the blackened shore
And now we just pay more for fuel the cost has been pasted down we learn
And the helpless anger that I feel, it could make these waters burn

If anyone can fill in the missing or questionable words it would be appricated
It's not only about responsibility & compensation it also about the oil companies not having the right to plunder & rape the worlds' resources & then to add to that the enviormental damage they leave in their wake, that's what the really need to pay through the nose for. RUINNING our Earth.

Thanks

Barry


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: GUEST,Chief Chaos
Date: 04 Mar 08 - 04:38 PM

I'll beg to differ on Bunker C being worse.

As far as the technology not being there for double hulls, it's the same situation that we have with off shore oil platforms. They are required to use the best and latest technology to operate. Sounds good, but when there is no research being done because the oil companies won't finance it or if the technology is applicable to their operation it gets quashed before it sees the light of day, you won't see the technology develop. Unless it improves their bottom line you simply won't see it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Bobert
Date: 04 Mar 08 - 05:04 PM

Dick Cheney's "Energy Plan" at work!!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: Sandy Mc Lean
Date: 04 Mar 08 - 10:19 PM

Chief Chaos, I am a bit confused about what you differ with. Bunker "C" is not distillate, but the bottom dregs of the refinery still containing all of the residual toxins mixed with enough distillate oil, usually #2 (furnace oil) to make it soft enough to be pumped when heated. It is one hell of a sticky mess when spilled on cold water making it very difficult to clean up. I'm not saying that crude is nice stuff by any means but this is worse! I have seen it!
http://www.piersystem.com/go/doc/802/59981/


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Exxon: Drunk Ship Captains Wanted...
From: kendall
Date: 05 Mar 08 - 06:47 PM

Old Downeast proverb:

It's a dirty bird that beshits its own nest.

That's exactly what we have been doing for many years.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate
 


You must be a member to post in non-music threads. Join here.


You must be a member to post in non-music threads. Join here.



Mudcat time: 21 October 9:43 AM EDT

[ Home ]

All original material is copyright © 1998 by the Mudcat Café Music Foundation, Inc. All photos, music, images, etc. are copyright © by their rightful owners. Every effort is taken to attribute appropriate copyright to images, content, music, etc. We are not a copyright resource.