Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Novabonker]

Me: Of course there is a chain of command and responsibility, but you believe that it is some "political hack" giving orders and responding to calls from afar in the late hours of the night and I would like to know who it is.....seeing as though you are so convinced that this individual exists.

NB: Rephrase that to upper management doing damage control through talking head spokespersons

Conclusion: No direct answer there

You've read too much into the term hack - Do you think the sputum (and related ,um, untruths) released to joe 6 pack weren't controlled by somebody from Ottawa trying to make the cons look good?

Me: Do you think that every call or most of them are directed to some “political hack” in Ottawa(?) who has to time to review, investigate and direct (or micro-manage) employees across the county what to do?

NB: (Silence).  Conclusion is obvious.

Me: You keep referring to the photo, but do we know when it was taken and by whom?

NB:Since you purport to being such an astute detective - dig it up yourself

Conclusion: Hmmm…no direct answer there either.  More like deflection.  I actually asked you twice.  It appears as though it was taken by a Vancouver radio reporter, Chad Dey.  He posted it on Twitter on April 9th – one day after the incident.  I guess I should have just looked it up myself.

So Mr. Dey and the media had the smarts to do a fly over, but CG didn't?

Perhaps before you start accusing others of not answering questions you might want to do a better job yourself.  Why should I feel obligated to respond if you can’t do a better job?

As for your question, well we have already been discussing this.  It’s back on the 3rd page of this thread.  The only difference was that it was Moxey and not Toxopeus, but they both had the same opinion about what was at Kits.  Here was my response:

There are going to be opinions back and forth from current and past CCG.  Still doesn't take away from the fact that the source still needed to be found and most of the surface oil has been recovered.  If it wasn't for the CCG overturning the Port's assessment this could have been worse.  A debrief of all information is what is needed, not a trial by twitter.

And how much more do we know now and how much has been released or is this a matter of grave national security?

On page 2 of this thread in my reply to skaha:

Not really surprised that current and past CCG could have different opinions especially with the former Kitsilano base. However, in my non-expert opinion, you can have the all this equipment at your fingertips, but the fact still remains that one still has to find the source before you can start installing booms.  How can you be beside the boat that is causing the problem so fast if you are not sure which boat has the leak....or if it is in fact from a boat?

Perhaps Girouard was merely misinformed what was at Kits.  It’s not unusual for senior management to not know what each facility has.  However, in my opinion, the outcome of the response was kind of dependent on when the Bunker C started leaking from the ship which could have been long before the initial calls.  If that was the case, then what does it really matter if one guy was right and the other was wrong because there was already quite a bit of oil in the water (see Reply #57 on Page 4), so do we really know if a quicker response would have had a significant impact on the outcome.  In addition to that the source still needed to be confirmed.  It’s not right to hold a trial in the media because a debrief of the incident with all parties is the best place to critique what could have been done better.  The media doesn’t always report both sides fairly and when you look at the first reports that came out on this they were not entirely accurate (i.e. the notification of the City of Vancouver and the time it took).

And Girouard or his masters have done NOTHING to dispel any of this until they get slapped in the face with the facts from former employees and the sailing club next door, neither of which have anything to gain by sowing misdirection and tall tales.Call me cynical, but....

2 points we agree on- the feds shouldn't have closed the Kits base and the boat's owners have to pay for the clean-up.Other than that, this whole thing and subsequent news releases from the CG smell like  rotten red herrings.

[shuswapsteve]

You've read too much into the term hack - Do you think the sputum (and related ,um, untruths) released to joe 6 pack weren't controlled by somebody from Ottawa trying to make the cons look good?

I think I have read too much of you ducking and weaving with this one.  However, I have my answer now.  Thanks.

So Mr. Dey and the media had the smarts to do a fly over, but CG didn't?

Did you note the date of the photo?

And how much more do we know now and how much has been released or is this a matter of grave national security?

Well…if wish to believe that the media gets everything right and nothing is left out or misinterpreted then by all means gobble all this up.  I believe there are better venues to express concerns, provide constructive feedback and make recommendations than battling it out in the newspapers and on Twitter.

And Girouard or his masters have done NOTHING to dispel any of this until they get slapped in the face with the facts from former employees and the sailing club next door, neither of which have anything to gain by sowing misdirection and tall tales.Call me cynical, but....

I will refer once again to what I have repeatedly said already: If oil had already been leaking for sometime before the first calls came in then what does it really matter if one guy was right and the other was wrong because there was already quite a bit of oil in the water.  The first boater estimated that the slick was already half a kilometre in length.  That was an estimate from the water’s surface (not the air) – it could have been smaller, but it could have been much larger.  The source of the oil also needed to be confirmed.  I am sure if the CCG staff on the ground knew the source they would have installed a boom as they were there all night, but for some reason (likely to be part of a review) the source was not so obvious at the time.  I doubt the CCG and WCMRC staff were just cruising casually around English Bay that night.  For all we know (which hasn’t been reported in the media) there could have been conflicting information at the time.  In addition, the ship’s crew originally denied the source was coming from them.  What role did that play in the overall response?

So, are we to believe that a crew from Kits would have been out there in less than 10 minutes, confirmed the story and the source in a matter of minutes, installed the boom, and skimmed the water all in time to prevent no oil from coming to the beaches?  C’mon…who is Cotter really trying to kid?  Oil was already in the water.  Personally, I am not convinced that quicker response would have made a significant difference unless there was still obvious visible oil in English Bay and beaches were still closed.  The shellfish closure is precautionary which is not unusual in these circumstances.  Communications could have been better, but I feel that this issue is not limited to the CCG.  I think other agencies and jurisdictions contributed in some part.  Like I said before, I don’t think this response and clean-up went without a hitch, but I don’t think it deserved the massive condemnation either.

I am done now.