• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Thanks for voting!

Top of page



Recent comments

  • Peter Lahay
    February 06, 2013 - 14:44

    I and my organization(International Transport Workers Federation) approached the Port of St Johns and the former charterers Cruise North to split the legal costs to get her sold while she still had some value -- while the engines still ran. But the Port Authority and Cruise North decided to sit tight wait for the starving crew to foot all of the legal bills. Mr Hanrahan can say what he wants about the profit the port was out, but this all happened under his watch. Peter Lahay ITF Coordinator

  • H Jefford
    February 05, 2013 - 11:22

    The largest bill that would be have to be paid? will be to the last vessel that had a line on the abandoned cruise ship and then left it in the shipping lanes to become a " Floating LAND Mine" ? IF A SHIP HITS THIS ABANDONED SHIP ON THE HIGH SEAS WHO WOULD BE HELD RESPONSIBLE , WOULD IT BE THE LAST VESSEL THAT TOWED IT THERE AND LEFT IT TO DRIFT IN SHIPPING LANES?

  • barry
    February 05, 2013 - 09:18

    The navy should use it as a target and sink it .

  • david
    February 05, 2013 - 09:00

    A marine lawyer "expert", eh? Here's all the facts anyone needs to know that that scow is no "prize": It sat here for OVER 2 YEARS......d'uh!! Now, where do I pick up my degree?

  • david
    February 05, 2013 - 08:53

    Wake up, folks...there's no great ananysis required here. No ultra-secret, hard-to-figure-out idea here. The boat was towed out to simply get rid of it, with our entire government of Keystone Kops asleep at the switch; the tugboat cut her free too early, it became a hazard to the oil platform; the oil companies told the governemnt they would get it out of their way, with the unspoken but completely understood intention of cutting her free again to find somewhere lese to sink, and here we are. And for crissakes, DON'T now hire a commission of unemployed political arseholes at taxpayer expense to "review" this joke...it's already bad enough.

  • Dee
    February 05, 2013 - 08:44

    My opinion only the city of St John's,s (Mayor O keefe) and the Port Auth. Wanted this ship out of St John,s harbor at who ever wanted to do it. They knew damm well that the boat was not going anywhere. it was all planned out just as long as it was out of St John,s harbor.My question is if this boat had to drift enough to damage either of these rigs out there or even had to cost someone their life would the city feel bad at all, that their plan did,nt work out the way they wanted it to.Shame on you O,keefe and Hanrahan it should have been handled better then this.

  • Joe
    February 05, 2013 - 08:16

    What a joke this whole story is....but a bigger joke is what the Charlene Hunt is being charged for being alongside..$14.10 a day. You wouldn't park on the waterfront meters for that price. My question is what are the bigger vessels being charged. If you do the math on the Orlova for 30 months which she was alonside at $225000 that works out to $247.57 a day. Time for the city to wake up, these vessels are making bloody fortunes offshore and you're charging nothing.....BUT the city wanted to charge homeowners $500 to plant two trees on their lawn. The oil companies are filling their pockets and O'Keefe is trying to empty ours. Time to change the guard at City Hall, they are not there for the people.....where is Andy when you need him..