Rare chance to enjoy scenic earthquake disaster area while jetskiing and parasailing! Go to http://www.royalcaribbean.com/ for bookings. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/20100119/ts_ynews/ynews_ts1063 Royal Caribbean's decision to dock ships at Haitian resort creates controversy Tue Jan 19, 2:21 pm ET By now, most of us have seen and heard about the profound devastation and suffering wrought upon Haiti last week after a massive earthquake. So you'd probably think there's no way that cruising tourists could have returned to frolicking on Haiti's beaches mere miles from where people are trapped beneath the rubble of a decimated city. Unfortunately, you'd be wrong. On Sunday, the Guardian reported that Florida-based Royal Caribbean Cruise Lines is docking ships at the "picturesque wooded peninsula" known as Labadee, which it leases on Haiti's northern coast. At Labadee, passengers "enjoy jetski rides, parasailing, and rum cocktails delivered to their hammocks." The British paper also reported that passengers can spend their time "shopping for trinkets at a craft market" while armed guards stand at the entry to the complex to guarantee their safety. Despite the fact that the ships have delivered relief supplies to the island, some passengers on the ships are reportedly "sickened" over the decision to dock there. One passenger took to an Internet message board to protest the idea of vacationing where "tens of thousands of dead people are being piled up on the streets, with the survivors stunned and looking for food and water." When Royal Caribbean announced its decision to resume stops at Labadee last week, a company executive cited the economic importance of the resort to the local citizens as well as the opportunity to deliver much-needed supplies. "We also have tremendous opportunities to use our ships as transport vessels for relief supplies and personnel to Haiti," said associate vice president John Weis[brod?]. "Simply put, we cannot abandon Haiti now that they need us most." Still, Royal Caribbean, which recently raised eyebrows when it announced that it's organizing a "cougar cruise" for older single women, has been catching heat from all corners on their decision, prompting company CEO Adam Goldstein to post a defense of the company on their website. Saying that he is "proud of what our people and our ships are doing," Goldstein writes: The ships going back to Labadee, including Navigator of the Seas today, are obviously making a very valuable contribution to the relief effort by offloading supplies at Labadee. The media understand this and generally have written and spoken about the relief effort in positive terms. But in the last 24 hours, sparked by an article in the Guardian in the UK, a different and more critical view has emerged that questions how our guests can justify having a good time in Labadee when there is such misery less than 100 miles away. My view is this - it isn't better to replace a visit to Labadee (or for that matter, to stay on the ship while it's docked in Labadee) with a visit to another destination for a vacation. Why? Because being on the island and generating economic activity for the straw market vendors, the hair-braiders and our 230 employees helps with relief while being somewhere else does not help. These 500 people are going to need to support a much larger network of family and friends, including many who are in (or are missing in) the earthquake zone. Also, the north is going to bear a good part of the burden of the agony of the south, and the more economic support there is to the north, the better able the north will be to bear this burden. People enjoying themselves is what we do. People enjoying themselves in Labadee helps with relief. We support our guests who choose to help in this way which is consistent with our nearly 30 year history in Haiti.
A cougar cruise sounds like an interesting idea. Sex can help soothe the pain of the Haitian men who have lost wives.
Interesting. Massive earthquakes seem to pierce that comfort zone. But I doubt many tourists would've expressed any reservations at all had they been vacationing in Haiti last year, what with all the starvation and all that. There are things a lot worse to worry about. If you feel guilty sitting on your ass in a disaster zone (which you should), then man the f*** up and find ways to help while you're there.
Wooo. I thought those tourists signed up for a vacation in a scenic spot. I didn't realize they signed up for humanitarian relief.
You feel something is wrong in life, you go and try to fix it. pure and simple A docking in one place is just part of the whole trip. If you can't spare your convenience and luxury for a couple of hours to help people whose entire lives were interrupted or cut short by this event, then that's on you. Don't b*** at the cruise company about it. And you don't even need to actually do anything, which is hilarious. Do the lazy thing and just throw cash at the locals for services rendered or oh, if you're feeling particularly generous, for nothing! If there was a legit complaint about how this docking somehow overburdened aid transfers, then this might be valid. But there's not...the ship is actually helping a lot with aid transfers. To base all the criticism on whether or not people are "enjoying" this stop? That's just cold. I have nearly no sympathy for people who can afford luxurious pampering complaining about how an earthquake suddenly made the area too tacky for them. As an extension, if you have a problem with vacationing in an area where there is suffering, oh boy, do I have news for you concerning Dubai, Cuba etc.
What are you trying to say? No offense or anything, when I go on a trip, I'm going there to make a political statement. And quite frankly, if I were booking vacations on a cruise, I probably booked it a year to six month in advance, along with arranging all my plans. Had I had the future predicting ability to know that x weeks into there is going to be an earthquake in Haiti (or wherever my vacation takes) me, I wouldn't be going there. How about laying the blame where it is deserved hmmmmm? How about blaming the cruise line instead? If they want to provide humanitarian efforts, great. How about saying something like we would like to help in the relief efforts, postpone the trip then offer some vouchers? Don't put the passengers, who's only fault as far as I can tell is booking a trip on an ill-fated trip, on the spot.
Honestly, even if you act like a normal tourist (or even a douchebag one), you are doing more for Haiti then a lot of people, what with the money you give for services. The passengers put themselves on the spot by complaining of all things, that an earthquake was too guilt-racking for them. It doesn't even make sense because it's not like Haiti was a particularly pleasant place for its' citizens beforehand; just because there is an earthquake now and that's all come to the forefront doesn't mean massive amounts of starvation, economic obstacles and suffering weren't already present in the country. Obviously the earthquake escalated that, but I come back to what I said in the beginning. If you're "sickened" or "guilty" roll out and help people or just shut up. I have no respect for people who say they feel saddened by what has happened and complain about it rather then do something about it...namely either shut up and enjoy your stay and benefit Haiti that way or go that extra inch and actually help people out.
This is an interesting conundrum. It feels morally wrong, but after the tsunami a few years back, one of the things those countries were asking for early on was as many tourists as possible to keep coming simply because it brings money into the country which is vital. I would guess if you asked Haiti, they'd want the tourists as well.
I think he's saying that it would be weird that the people were perfectly OK booking a cruise 6 months ago to a horribly poor country with starvation and death on the streets and all sorts of other ills, but that they wouldn't be OK with going to an earthquake-hit horribly poor country with starvation and death on the streets. It's sort of like people were OK with it as long as it was kept behind the curtains.
