<p>I’m surprised no one else noticed this & started a thread about this. Three passengers brought the distressed vessel to the attention of a crew member who confirmed the sighting via a telescope but yet did nothing to aid the distressed vessel, NOR alert anyone else to aid it. Investigation appears to be continuing. </p>
<p>I was planning to go on a Princess Cruise in September–now I’m re-thinking. Pretty upset about this. Also, just saw the musical Titanic.</p>
<p>Yes, the have both a moral and legal obligation to come to the aid of a distressed boat, which it appears they failed to do. As of the NPR story, they had not decided whether they would do a formal investigation.</p>
<p>H says he’s OK if we opt not to go on this cruise lines because of this incident, even though his classmates have a cruise planned on it for September. I haven’t yet sent an email to anyone other than H with the above information. Two of the three fishermen died while awaiting rescue–one the day after they were sighted by the cruise ship, one three days afterwards.</p>
<p>OK, have sent an email to our friends who were planning to go on the cruise with us, as well as one of H’s classmates who encouraged H & me to sign up for it, as well as our kids who are thinking about joining us on the cruise. Don’t feel like patronizing a company that doesn’t seem to take this entire incident seriously–makes you wonder what else they don’t take seriously and how little they value human life.</p>
<p>good for you, HImom…
I am sure that more will come out about this story in the coming days. I am concerned about the way they seem to be covering up the whole thing. If what the passengers say is true, they falsified records to meet their own needs. But we do not know for sure at this time which story is correct.</p>
<p>Were they concerned about pirates and a fake distress call? </p>
<p>Are there guidelines to follow regarding the possibility that it is a pirate ship or terrorists faking a situation to get on board and take hostages??</p>
<p>(how many of us would have been very angry if a cruise ship did provide onboard access and then the “victims” ended up being terrorists who killed innocent passengers?)</p>
<p>If the cruise line’s latest statement is the truth, I don’t see why it would be a reason to refuse to patronize the business. It means that they have an employee who made the wrong decision. That guy will get fired, and everybody else will get more training, or at least a reminder. If they’re covering up for the captain, that’s a different story.</p>
<p>I thought the same thing too at first, M2CK, according to the article, the ships logs say that the people on the small boat were waving them to turn away from their fishing nets, and waving to tell them they were all clear. No mention of concern about illegal boarding or pirates. The survivor states that they were waving for help, and the passengers thought they were asking for help too.</p>
<p>The passengers who noticed the apparently distressed ship were very upset and surprised that the crew member wasn’t taking actions that they had thought would be taken. Are there pirates in the area that the distressed ship was in? That was never made clear to me in anything I’ve read to date.</p>
<p>I’ve been unwhelmed so far at the response by Princess Cruises–have not even decided if they are planning a formal investigation where on its face what is being alleged is a violation of international maritime law combined with a possible coverup by their office.</p>
<p>If they took this seriously and immediately said they would investigate & make their findings public, that would be more reassuring than foot-dragging.</p>
The issue isn’t so black and white and I’m not sure I’d cancel plans based on an initial article that likely doesn’t have all the facts. If nothing else, it looks like they might have an issue with a particular crew member who could be someone they hired a few weeks ago with no prior experience at sea. The fact that they’ve responded to an average of 3 rescues per year for 10 years implies that they don’t have some policy against rescues and shouldn’t be discounted.</p>
<p>We haven’t yet cancelled, but are waiting for more information and will see what is known and made public prior to the deadline for a full refund in June. Should have enough information to make a decision by then. The NPR story was pretty upsetting, that the passenger who saw the distressed ship was told when she asked after returning home about the incident was fishermen trying to keep the cruise ship away from their nets which didn’t jibe with what she & others saw on the cruise.</p>
<p>Key items I’ve noted so far is that it will be an INTERNAL investigation (meaning that onlyl what the company wants to have public will be publicized) and that it is a Bermuda flagged ship (which has very lax rules & enforcement). Also that it is British & American owned by Carnival. </p>
<p>Have read that the little shipping boat was far from where it should have been for a boat of its size, adding more creedence to the distress rather than some other reason for it being there.</p>
<p>Disappointed that there isn’t more “buzz” about this incident at Cruise Critic, the big cruise site. To me, this has pretty important implications.</p>
<p>I just noted that there are more threads about this on that website than I realized, one with over 19 pages of posts to date about the incident.</p>
<p>It is terrible if one of the ship’s sailing crew ignored the report. Perhaps even criminal.</p>
<p>But I am reminded yet again that the first person to take a report may have seriously garbled or misunderstood the situation – several years ago a family died in Colorado after a part of a bridge over a freeway fell on them – even though a structural engineer had called not long before to report seeing severe problems with the structure, but the highway person he spoke with assumed he was referring to something minor like a sign – not the entire span. And just a couple of weeks ago, people died in a wildfire after 911 operators kept telling worried callers not to worry, that it was simply a controlled burn when in reality it was a fire that was tremendously out-of-control. While I’m a fan of letting people do their jobs, when it comes to something that is potentially life or death, you have to follow your gut, and if the person with whom you speak does not seem to understand the severity of the situation, escalate it yourself.</p>