PEA POD POLITICS FOR PEABRAINS: As many read last week Goofy Mufi Hannemann had his usual blinders on in ignoring an Associated Press article the week before that confirmed what we all knew- that Hawaii Superferry (HSf) Inc.’s claim that they were victims of the courts and those crazy environmentalists was a bogus piece of PR from a company that was actually drowning in red ink created by their own lack of a realistic business plan- although the article missed a chance to dig deeper and find out the ferry was created to fail as part of a military demonstration project for the littoral design.
Mufi’s pledge to bring back the same vessels- even though their size was half the reason for the bankruptcy- demonstrates just how much more damage there is to be done if a Hannemann administration gets it’s hands on the already damaged machinery of the state under the equally mentally and morally challenged Linda Lingle.
And as if to underline some of that damage, in an article about the delays in obtaining an environmental impact statement (EIS) for a UH coral reef research project it was reported that:
Part of the delay is that the state body that could grant UH an exemption to the EIS requirement has not met since Aug. 17 of last year...
The council tried to hold a meeting in late June, but was unable to book adequate state videoconference facilities, Steiner said.
"It seemed like we were moving forward, then it just stalled," she said. "I think that it is not a priority to our state or to our administration to have an active Environmental Council."
Steiner said council members have expressed concern that the group is being penalized possibly for ruling in 2007 that the state Department of Transportation erred when it exempted Superferry harbor improvements from an environmental review. That decision was later supported by a Hawaii Supreme Court ruling that eventually led to the demise of the interisland ferry.
Though the administration pooh-poohed the connection it’s just another symptom of how the state apparatus- especially for environmental protection- is still addled by Lingle’s denial of what even proponents view as the boneheaded way she handed the Superferry EIS and how it continues to hamstring the state EIS process, having created a pissed off Environmental Council and an administration bent on revenge.
Hannemann and Lingle apparently share one thing- a pig-headed battering ram style that scares the heck out of those who have been looking forward to a change of approach in November.
Showing posts with label Superferry-Militry. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Superferry-Militry. Show all posts
Monday, August 2, 2010
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
THAT DOG NEVER DID HUNT
THAT DOG NEVER DID HUNT: The Superferry is making headlines again today but as Joan Conrow pointed out this morning, the Honolulu Advertiser’s story missed the mark in reporting that “Hawaii Superferry wants to abandon both its catamarans when the real story, as reported in the Mobile (AL) Press Register (P-R), is that it was anything but about what Hawai`i Superferry (HSf) Inc. wanted to do but rather about the fact that the “Government (is) to repossess Hawaii Superferry”
One things that stands out is a discrepancy between how much of their “investment” in the project HSf maker Austal is eating on the deal, with the Advertiser reporting the figure at $29.9 million and the P-R saying it is only 11 of that 29 million that they will “write off”.
As Joan points out a key passage in the P-R article- at least for those of us who have seen through all the gorilla dust and spin and seen how the project was always about demonstrating the aluminum catamaran design of Austal’s so that they could get the huge military contract they have now signed- says:
Browning said that Austal approved lending $23 million to the ferry venture in part because the deal would help raise the profile of Austal's U.S. shipyard, which at the time had been operating in Mobile for only a few years. Although it succeeded in doing that — the Mobile shipyard in November won a potential $1.6 billion contract to build up to 10 high-speed fast ferries for the military — Browning said the company's lending days are over.
But another couple of passages in the P-R article were, well, pretty outrageous, the first saying
Talks among MARAD, Austal and Hawaii Superferry broke down last week, Austal officials said....
Austal Ltd. President Bob Browning said he was disappointed that MARAD decided to seize the ferries without involving Austal in a project to prepare them for military use.
Maybe Austal is “disappointed” but that is certainly good news for HSf- it seems that the “taxpayer guarantee” is now being “activated” which lets the owners off the hook for trying to find work for the apparently unwanted ferry, as evidenced by the lack of interest thus far in leasing the vessels even to the military.
But the bombshell in this, if true, might just be this sentence:
MARAD made the ferry loans under its Title XI program, which is supposed to support U.S. shipyards by reducing their reliance on military work.
With what we know now about how the whole deal went down in order to have Austal positioned to do military work, the fact that MARAD- the U.S. Maritime Administration- made the loan to “support U.S. shipyards by reducing their reliance on military work” points to one conclusion- the whole deal was a fraud.
Austal has admitted as much by saying publicly and repeatedly that their “investment” was in order to prove the ferry’s seaworthiness so it could eventually rely on military work, while knowing full well of the thus-far-unreported “strings attached” to the MARAD loan.
And by fraud we don’t mean just some petty theft- we’re talking about defrauding the taxpayer out of $136.8 million.
If nothing else it goes a long way in explaining the constant, adamant denial of military involvement in the venture- for no good reason- in the face the mounting evidence, as first reported by Conrow.
It also raises the question of what the liability of former Naval Secretary John Lehman may be now that MARAD has stepped in. Funny how he personally seems to be getting away scot-free, at least financially, when it was his machinations that cost everyone big bucks, including the Hawai`i taxpayers who will probably never see the $40 million Harbor improvements Governor Linda Lingle’s “Unified command” was duped out of .
As a matter of fact, he may turn a profit since, as the Advertiser article reports:
The company has no current source of revenue yet has to cover the cost of insurance, maintenance, security, storage and a skeleton crew for the catamarans at an Alabama shipyard owned by J.F. Lehman & Co., the project's main private investor.
So Lehman gets off from any financial responsibility for the fiasco he created and is most likely collecting “maintenance storage, security, and (salaries for) a skeleton crew” now that MARAD has taken “possession” of the boats.
We’ll see what happens in bankruptcy court where proceedings are now taking place in Delaware although the state is trying to move them to Hawai`i. But due to the insane bankruptcy laws that allow fat cats to form “limited liability” companies and duck out of obligations through bankruptcy yet stick working class credit card and home debtors with paying back every penny, don’t expect Lehman to be crying all the way to the bank.
---------
Correction:
Yesterday we said that Councilman Darryl Kaneshiro served in the Eduardo Malapit administration as Mala’s “Administrative Assistant”, a second-in-command “assistant mayor” position as defined in the county charter.
Rather, Kaneshiro’s service was in the administration of Tony Kunimura where he served as economic development director and, apparently, as a generic administrative aide. We regret the error.
One things that stands out is a discrepancy between how much of their “investment” in the project HSf maker Austal is eating on the deal, with the Advertiser reporting the figure at $29.9 million and the P-R saying it is only 11 of that 29 million that they will “write off”.
As Joan points out a key passage in the P-R article- at least for those of us who have seen through all the gorilla dust and spin and seen how the project was always about demonstrating the aluminum catamaran design of Austal’s so that they could get the huge military contract they have now signed- says:
Browning said that Austal approved lending $23 million to the ferry venture in part because the deal would help raise the profile of Austal's U.S. shipyard, which at the time had been operating in Mobile for only a few years. Although it succeeded in doing that — the Mobile shipyard in November won a potential $1.6 billion contract to build up to 10 high-speed fast ferries for the military — Browning said the company's lending days are over.
But another couple of passages in the P-R article were, well, pretty outrageous, the first saying
Talks among MARAD, Austal and Hawaii Superferry broke down last week, Austal officials said....
Austal Ltd. President Bob Browning said he was disappointed that MARAD decided to seize the ferries without involving Austal in a project to prepare them for military use.
Maybe Austal is “disappointed” but that is certainly good news for HSf- it seems that the “taxpayer guarantee” is now being “activated” which lets the owners off the hook for trying to find work for the apparently unwanted ferry, as evidenced by the lack of interest thus far in leasing the vessels even to the military.
But the bombshell in this, if true, might just be this sentence:
MARAD made the ferry loans under its Title XI program, which is supposed to support U.S. shipyards by reducing their reliance on military work.
With what we know now about how the whole deal went down in order to have Austal positioned to do military work, the fact that MARAD- the U.S. Maritime Administration- made the loan to “support U.S. shipyards by reducing their reliance on military work” points to one conclusion- the whole deal was a fraud.
Austal has admitted as much by saying publicly and repeatedly that their “investment” was in order to prove the ferry’s seaworthiness so it could eventually rely on military work, while knowing full well of the thus-far-unreported “strings attached” to the MARAD loan.
And by fraud we don’t mean just some petty theft- we’re talking about defrauding the taxpayer out of $136.8 million.
If nothing else it goes a long way in explaining the constant, adamant denial of military involvement in the venture- for no good reason- in the face the mounting evidence, as first reported by Conrow.
It also raises the question of what the liability of former Naval Secretary John Lehman may be now that MARAD has stepped in. Funny how he personally seems to be getting away scot-free, at least financially, when it was his machinations that cost everyone big bucks, including the Hawai`i taxpayers who will probably never see the $40 million Harbor improvements Governor Linda Lingle’s “Unified command” was duped out of .
As a matter of fact, he may turn a profit since, as the Advertiser article reports:
The company has no current source of revenue yet has to cover the cost of insurance, maintenance, security, storage and a skeleton crew for the catamarans at an Alabama shipyard owned by J.F. Lehman & Co., the project's main private investor.
So Lehman gets off from any financial responsibility for the fiasco he created and is most likely collecting “maintenance storage, security, and (salaries for) a skeleton crew” now that MARAD has taken “possession” of the boats.
We’ll see what happens in bankruptcy court where proceedings are now taking place in Delaware although the state is trying to move them to Hawai`i. But due to the insane bankruptcy laws that allow fat cats to form “limited liability” companies and duck out of obligations through bankruptcy yet stick working class credit card and home debtors with paying back every penny, don’t expect Lehman to be crying all the way to the bank.
---------
Correction:
Yesterday we said that Councilman Darryl Kaneshiro served in the Eduardo Malapit administration as Mala’s “Administrative Assistant”, a second-in-command “assistant mayor” position as defined in the county charter.
Rather, Kaneshiro’s service was in the administration of Tony Kunimura where he served as economic development director and, apparently, as a generic administrative aide. We regret the error.
Thursday, April 16, 2009
LET HIM LIE
LET HIM LIE: We’re had birthday fun at the doctors today so we’re presenting a spectacular open letter by researcher Hope Kallai of Moloa`a to Admiral Fargo, Superferry chief honcho.
Aloha e Admiral Fargo:
Being a second-generation, 30-year Navy man, it would probably be safe to assume you to be a man with a deep understanding of protocol and procedure and appreciation for honor and accountability.
I am aware that you have been CEO of the Hawai`i Superferry, Inc. (HSF) for only about a year and that as Commander In Chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet from Oct 99 - May 2002, then as Commander of U.S. Pacific Command (PACOM) from May 2002-Feb 2005, you oversaw the preparation of many Federal Environmental Impact Statements for Hawai`i and the waters of the Pacific Ocean including:
Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) 2000 EA, May 2000
Mountaintop Surveillance Sensor Test Integration Center (MSSTIC) Facility Kauai, Hawaii EA, May 2000
North Pacific Targets Program EA, April 2001
2002 RIMPAC PEA
Theater High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) Pacific Test Flights Environmental Assessment, December 2002
Development and Demonstration of the Long Range Air Launch Target System EA, October 2002
USWEX EA/OEA FONSI
USWEX EA/OEA Vol. 1
USWEX EA/OEA Vol. 2
Hickam Air Force Base C-17 Globemaster III Beddown EAt, September 2003
Ground-Based Midcourse Defense (GMD) Extended Test Range (ETR) EIS, July 2003
2004 Supplement to the RIMPAC 2002 PEA
Final Environmental Assessment: For Construction and Operation of a C-17 Short Austere Airfield (SAAF) Within the State of Hawaii, November 2004
Mobile Sensors EA, October 2004 Ballistic Missile Defense System Programmatic Draft EIS, September 2004 Mobile Launch Platform EA, June 2004
Final EIS Transformation of the 2nd Brigade, 25th Infantry Division (L) to a Stryker Brigade Combat Team in Hawaii, May 2004
Over a dozen federal EIS have been prepared by the Navy in Hawai`i since your retirement and since the initiation of the Superferry:
RIMPAC 2006 FONSI
2006 Supplement to the RIMPAC 2002 PEA
Flexible Target Family EA, December 2007
Permanent Stationing of the 2/25th Stryker Brigade Combat Team Draft EIS, June 2007
EA for MK-48 Mod 6 Torpedo Exercises in Hawaiian Waters, June 2007
Supplemental OEIS and EIS for Surveillance Towed Array Sensor System Low Frequency Active (SURTASS LFA) Sonar, April 2007
Composite Training Unit Exercises and Joint Task Force Training Exercises EA/OEA, February 2007
Ballistic Missile Defense System Programmatic Final EIS, February, 2007
Final Environmental Assessment: For Construction and Operation of a C-17 Short Austere Airfield (SAAF)
RIMPAC 08 Biological Opinion (NMFS)
Barking Sands Underwater Range Expansion (BSURE) Refurbishment Overseas EA, March 2008
It would seem you have great experience with EIS preparation. Perhaps you were not given a copy
of the last EIS performed by the State of Hawai`i for the last proposed ferry service, a fast PAX-only ferry servicing the southern shore of Oahu - the 1989 Oahu Intraisland Ferry System
available in the OEQC library
http://oeqc.doh.hawaii.gov/Shared%20Documents/EA_and_EIS_Online_Library/Oahu/ 1980s/1989-01-OA-FEIS-OAHU-INTERISLAND-FERRY-SYSTEM.pdf.
Potential ship strikes to wintering humpback whales and green sea turtles outside of the harbor areas were a prime concern even though there were only about 2,000 wintering humpback whales in Hawai`i at that time. Discussions were held with National Marine Fisheries Service about routes and timings and abut open ocean impacts, not just harbor impact. The State of Hawai`i , during Gov. Waihe`e's term, knew that any major Federal action triggers NEPA. As you are well aware, any dredging of ocean waters to deepen or widen the channel or turning basin or the constructing of a pier for the ferry vessel triggers permitting review of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, including NEPA, Rivers and Harbors Act and the Clean Water Act. The state knew that 20 years ago. Any federal study of harbor hydrology and bathymetry triggers the environmental review process. The EIS procedures were followed during Gov. Waihe`e's tenure and for this intraisland ferry proposal with minimal potential impacts.
The process of the Hawai`i Superferry has been severely flawed. With your expertise in overseeing EIS preparation, hopefully we can correct these procedures. The Superferry is not above the law; the Superferry must follow the same procedures that the Navy follows and the same procedures that previous ferry EIS followed 20 years ago.
As a submariner, you may be interested in the 1987 Final Impact Statement prepared by Atlantis Submarines for the Operation of Submersibles as a Public Attraction in the waters off Waikiki, Oahu , Hawai`i , now doing business as Atlantis Adventures (http://atlantisadventures.com/index.cfm). The tours would be at two dive sites in waters of -85' to -250' deep, 4,500 feet off Waikiki shore, between the Natatorium and Diamond Head.
This project included "habitat enhancement": sinking ships as artificial reefs for viewing because Atlantis thought the benthic environment somewhat boring.
Significant consideration was given to the exclusivity of the usage, impacts to cultural and recreational boating, surfing and fishing - with plans to cease tour operations during races. The area was a high vessel traffic area and the project was not projected to have significant impacts to whales because they usually do not frequent the project area, but impacts to humpback whales were considered. Recommendations were made to curb nighttime operations until after a trial period and to not do anything to "disturb the peace and safety of the whales." NOAA required a Section 7 consultation under the Endangered Species Act. The Atlantis operation was required to consider impacts to whales by both the submarine and escort boat operations. The EIS process did not prohibit Atlantis Adventures from operation.
Tim Dick, one of the co-founders of the HSF, said last week that the ship design was selected after consulting 20 year wave studies by UH School of Ocean Science .
From this, we developed a design specifically for Hawai'i including electric power plugs for refrigerator trucks, higher car decks to accommodate canoe racks for paddlers, comfortable leather sofas and coffee tables for families, and a design that would squeeze into Hawai'i 's dry docks. Many environmental "firsts" were designed into the ferry, including zero wastewater discharge, nontoxic bottom paint and next-generation ultra-clean and efficient diesel engines.
In November 2007, the School of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology, University of Hawai'i at Mānoa, using 25 years of buoy data, found the average annual significant wave height in Hawai`i to be 7 meters. The ship design Mr. Dick chose, the Alakai, is only certified to carry passengers in 6 meter seas. Perhaps with your expertise, HSF would have focused more on engineering and less on power plugs and paint. I understand that the paint job and branding is important, but community safety and the suitability of this ship design to the waters of Hawai`i are more important than paint.
Millions was spent on embedded technology but the Alakai has no life boats or marine evacuation systems. How can we, as a community, be asked to bring our kūpuna in wheelchairs on a ship with no way for them to exit in an emergency? Life jackets are just not sufficient to survive in our ocean conditions during emergency situations. Safety concerns, as you well know, would have been addressed during a proper EIS process. Maybe this community would rather have an evacuation slide rather than a ship than can carry 50 ton vehicles.
The Alakai that cannot have a scuppers because of the vehicle loading. With such a large exposed vehicle deck, given the intensity of Hawai`i precipitation events and waves breaking over the bow, how can the bilge design only accommodate 500 liters? These questions would have been addressed during a proper EIS process.
The Atlantis EIS included consideration of weather conditions and wave - knew they would not be able run when "Waves or sea swells which make the transfer of passengers from the barge to the vessel hazardous." HSF operational plans only considered downtime for annual maintenance. There was no consideration of downtime for ocean and weather conditions, with significant financial impacts. As an experienced mariner, please adjust operational ability to weather conditions in financial projections.
Before your tenure with the Superferry, decisions were made which have cost the state greatly. The State of Hawai`i spent $40 Million on barges to be built exclusively for Hawai`i Superferry vessels and caused them to be built in China , sending concrete and steel jobs overseas, in an economic time when our residents could certainly have used the jobs. This is a serious Jones Act violation - in the state with the second highest union membership in the US ! How many jobs did this decision cost our local construction and union workers? Again, a proper EIS could have avoided this.
Now, since HSF has installed stern-quarter mounted, folding ramps, the loading barges will not be necessary. Due to the artificial time restraints imposed by HSF, the decisions the state made have severely under-estimated the waves and surges of the harbors. The Manaiakalani loading barge in Kahului Harbor is only certified for a 1.43 meter (17 inch) wave! Average wave heights are 3-8 feet in Kahului. This error has cost over $5 million in continuing repair costs. If proper EIS procedure had been followed, this problem would have been avoided and saved almost $50 million. Hopefully with your expertise, these mistakes will not be made again. Please notify the people of Hawai`i about your company's plans for using the Huaka`i and re-fitting the Alakai with stern mount ramps. Please notify the HAR/DOT that dredging the harbor at Kahului to accommodate the setting of the mooring of the loading barge Manaiakalani will not be necessary.
Many times it has been mistakenly repeated that no other ship has had to comply with or perform an EIS. As you can see, many EIS have been compiled by the military and by private enterprises, including ferries. The previous ferry design was selected through the state bidding process. The sooner these studies are honored, the more expeditious the current process will be. In 2006, the U.S. Coast Guard prepared a Draft Environmental Assessment for Patrol Boat Support Facilities
USCG Station Maui to add a new boat to their fleet (which required dredging of 140 cubic yards of ocean floor). Because the high-speed ferry is a new mode of interisland transport, the EIS procedure, the ESA, NEPA and HEPA must be honored to the full intent and spirit of the law, as you well know and have spent so much of your career supporting. Mahalo for your expertise in fixing this flawed EIS process and honoring and learning from the EIS of the past and near present and holding the HSF accountable to the same standards as the Navy, the Coast Guard and private enterprise. I apologize for having to appeal to you in such a public forum, but since the Alakai has left the state and the HSF website was reduced to ticket refund status, there's no other contact listed. Thank you sincerely for addressing my concerns quickly and taking command of the EIS process.
Hope Kallai
Aloha e Admiral Fargo:
Being a second-generation, 30-year Navy man, it would probably be safe to assume you to be a man with a deep understanding of protocol and procedure and appreciation for honor and accountability.
I am aware that you have been CEO of the Hawai`i Superferry, Inc. (HSF) for only about a year and that as Commander In Chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet from Oct 99 - May 2002, then as Commander of U.S. Pacific Command (PACOM) from May 2002-Feb 2005, you oversaw the preparation of many Federal Environmental Impact Statements for Hawai`i and the waters of the Pacific Ocean including:
Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) 2000 EA, May 2000
Mountaintop Surveillance Sensor Test Integration Center (MSSTIC) Facility Kauai, Hawaii EA, May 2000
North Pacific Targets Program EA, April 2001
2002 RIMPAC PEA
Theater High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) Pacific Test Flights Environmental Assessment, December 2002
Development and Demonstration of the Long Range Air Launch Target System EA, October 2002
USWEX EA/OEA FONSI
USWEX EA/OEA Vol. 1
USWEX EA/OEA Vol. 2
Hickam Air Force Base C-17 Globemaster III Beddown EAt, September 2003
Ground-Based Midcourse Defense (GMD) Extended Test Range (ETR) EIS, July 2003
2004 Supplement to the RIMPAC 2002 PEA
Final Environmental Assessment: For Construction and Operation of a C-17 Short Austere Airfield (SAAF) Within the State of Hawaii, November 2004
Mobile Sensors EA, October 2004 Ballistic Missile Defense System Programmatic Draft EIS, September 2004 Mobile Launch Platform EA, June 2004
Final EIS Transformation of the 2nd Brigade, 25th Infantry Division (L) to a Stryker Brigade Combat Team in Hawaii, May 2004
Over a dozen federal EIS have been prepared by the Navy in Hawai`i since your retirement and since the initiation of the Superferry:
RIMPAC 2006 FONSI
2006 Supplement to the RIMPAC 2002 PEA
Flexible Target Family EA, December 2007
Permanent Stationing of the 2/25th Stryker Brigade Combat Team Draft EIS, June 2007
EA for MK-48 Mod 6 Torpedo Exercises in Hawaiian Waters, June 2007
Supplemental OEIS and EIS for Surveillance Towed Array Sensor System Low Frequency Active (SURTASS LFA) Sonar, April 2007
Composite Training Unit Exercises and Joint Task Force Training Exercises EA/OEA, February 2007
Ballistic Missile Defense System Programmatic Final EIS, February, 2007
Final Environmental Assessment: For Construction and Operation of a C-17 Short Austere Airfield (SAAF)
RIMPAC 08 Biological Opinion (NMFS)
Barking Sands Underwater Range Expansion (BSURE) Refurbishment Overseas EA, March 2008
It would seem you have great experience with EIS preparation. Perhaps you were not given a copy
of the last EIS performed by the State of Hawai`i for the last proposed ferry service, a fast PAX-only ferry servicing the southern shore of Oahu - the 1989 Oahu Intraisland Ferry System
available in the OEQC library
http://oeqc.doh.hawaii.gov/Shared%20Documents/EA_and_EIS_Online_Library/Oahu/ 1980s/1989-01-OA-FEIS-OAHU-INTERISLAND-FERRY-SYSTEM.pdf.
Potential ship strikes to wintering humpback whales and green sea turtles outside of the harbor areas were a prime concern even though there were only about 2,000 wintering humpback whales in Hawai`i at that time. Discussions were held with National Marine Fisheries Service about routes and timings and abut open ocean impacts, not just harbor impact. The State of Hawai`i , during Gov. Waihe`e's term, knew that any major Federal action triggers NEPA. As you are well aware, any dredging of ocean waters to deepen or widen the channel or turning basin or the constructing of a pier for the ferry vessel triggers permitting review of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, including NEPA, Rivers and Harbors Act and the Clean Water Act. The state knew that 20 years ago. Any federal study of harbor hydrology and bathymetry triggers the environmental review process. The EIS procedures were followed during Gov. Waihe`e's tenure and for this intraisland ferry proposal with minimal potential impacts.
The process of the Hawai`i Superferry has been severely flawed. With your expertise in overseeing EIS preparation, hopefully we can correct these procedures. The Superferry is not above the law; the Superferry must follow the same procedures that the Navy follows and the same procedures that previous ferry EIS followed 20 years ago.
As a submariner, you may be interested in the 1987 Final Impact Statement prepared by Atlantis Submarines for the Operation of Submersibles as a Public Attraction in the waters off Waikiki, Oahu , Hawai`i , now doing business as Atlantis Adventures (http://atlantisadventures.com/index.cfm). The tours would be at two dive sites in waters of -85' to -250' deep, 4,500 feet off Waikiki shore, between the Natatorium and Diamond Head.
This project included "habitat enhancement": sinking ships as artificial reefs for viewing because Atlantis thought the benthic environment somewhat boring.
Significant consideration was given to the exclusivity of the usage, impacts to cultural and recreational boating, surfing and fishing - with plans to cease tour operations during races. The area was a high vessel traffic area and the project was not projected to have significant impacts to whales because they usually do not frequent the project area, but impacts to humpback whales were considered. Recommendations were made to curb nighttime operations until after a trial period and to not do anything to "disturb the peace and safety of the whales." NOAA required a Section 7 consultation under the Endangered Species Act. The Atlantis operation was required to consider impacts to whales by both the submarine and escort boat operations. The EIS process did not prohibit Atlantis Adventures from operation.
Tim Dick, one of the co-founders of the HSF, said last week that the ship design was selected after consulting 20 year wave studies by UH School of Ocean Science .
From this, we developed a design specifically for Hawai'i including electric power plugs for refrigerator trucks, higher car decks to accommodate canoe racks for paddlers, comfortable leather sofas and coffee tables for families, and a design that would squeeze into Hawai'i 's dry docks. Many environmental "firsts" were designed into the ferry, including zero wastewater discharge, nontoxic bottom paint and next-generation ultra-clean and efficient diesel engines.
In November 2007, the School of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology, University of Hawai'i at Mānoa, using 25 years of buoy data, found the average annual significant wave height in Hawai`i to be 7 meters. The ship design Mr. Dick chose, the Alakai, is only certified to carry passengers in 6 meter seas. Perhaps with your expertise, HSF would have focused more on engineering and less on power plugs and paint. I understand that the paint job and branding is important, but community safety and the suitability of this ship design to the waters of Hawai`i are more important than paint.
Millions was spent on embedded technology but the Alakai has no life boats or marine evacuation systems. How can we, as a community, be asked to bring our kūpuna in wheelchairs on a ship with no way for them to exit in an emergency? Life jackets are just not sufficient to survive in our ocean conditions during emergency situations. Safety concerns, as you well know, would have been addressed during a proper EIS process. Maybe this community would rather have an evacuation slide rather than a ship than can carry 50 ton vehicles.
The Alakai that cannot have a scuppers because of the vehicle loading. With such a large exposed vehicle deck, given the intensity of Hawai`i precipitation events and waves breaking over the bow, how can the bilge design only accommodate 500 liters? These questions would have been addressed during a proper EIS process.
The Atlantis EIS included consideration of weather conditions and wave - knew they would not be able run when "Waves or sea swells which make the transfer of passengers from the barge to the vessel hazardous." HSF operational plans only considered downtime for annual maintenance. There was no consideration of downtime for ocean and weather conditions, with significant financial impacts. As an experienced mariner, please adjust operational ability to weather conditions in financial projections.
Before your tenure with the Superferry, decisions were made which have cost the state greatly. The State of Hawai`i spent $40 Million on barges to be built exclusively for Hawai`i Superferry vessels and caused them to be built in China , sending concrete and steel jobs overseas, in an economic time when our residents could certainly have used the jobs. This is a serious Jones Act violation - in the state with the second highest union membership in the US ! How many jobs did this decision cost our local construction and union workers? Again, a proper EIS could have avoided this.
Now, since HSF has installed stern-quarter mounted, folding ramps, the loading barges will not be necessary. Due to the artificial time restraints imposed by HSF, the decisions the state made have severely under-estimated the waves and surges of the harbors. The Manaiakalani loading barge in Kahului Harbor is only certified for a 1.43 meter (17 inch) wave! Average wave heights are 3-8 feet in Kahului. This error has cost over $5 million in continuing repair costs. If proper EIS procedure had been followed, this problem would have been avoided and saved almost $50 million. Hopefully with your expertise, these mistakes will not be made again. Please notify the people of Hawai`i about your company's plans for using the Huaka`i and re-fitting the Alakai with stern mount ramps. Please notify the HAR/DOT that dredging the harbor at Kahului to accommodate the setting of the mooring of the loading barge Manaiakalani will not be necessary.
Many times it has been mistakenly repeated that no other ship has had to comply with or perform an EIS. As you can see, many EIS have been compiled by the military and by private enterprises, including ferries. The previous ferry design was selected through the state bidding process. The sooner these studies are honored, the more expeditious the current process will be. In 2006, the U.S. Coast Guard prepared a Draft Environmental Assessment for Patrol Boat Support Facilities
USCG Station Maui to add a new boat to their fleet (which required dredging of 140 cubic yards of ocean floor). Because the high-speed ferry is a new mode of interisland transport, the EIS procedure, the ESA, NEPA and HEPA must be honored to the full intent and spirit of the law, as you well know and have spent so much of your career supporting. Mahalo for your expertise in fixing this flawed EIS process and honoring and learning from the EIS of the past and near present and holding the HSF accountable to the same standards as the Navy, the Coast Guard and private enterprise. I apologize for having to appeal to you in such a public forum, but since the Alakai has left the state and the HSF website was reduced to ticket refund status, there's no other contact listed. Thank you sincerely for addressing my concerns quickly and taking command of the EIS process.
Hope Kallai
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
SNIFF IT OUT SHERLOCK
SNIFF IT OUT SHERLOCK: The new book “The Superferry Chronicles” received quite the prominent although not-so-complementary review today courtesy of Honolulu Advertiser reporter and blogger Derrick DePledge who, after reading the book called it “a romantic and idealized view of the protests at Nawiliwili Harbor that stopped the ferry in August 2007”
The book by Koohan Paik- who in her bio lists “journalist” first among her credentials- and anti economic globalism author and activist Jerry Mander.(links courtesy of DePledge)- has caused some on Kaua`i to question whether Paik is exploiting or even “cashing in” on the actions and even legal miseries of others as PNN detailed last week
But DePledge questions the use of falsehoods based on apparently shoddy research that resulted in what he called:
factual errors that would be easy to chalk up as mistakes — we all make them — if they were not used by the authors to make critical points.
He listed some.
*The authors suggest Lingle and state lawmakers were sending a message with the name of the law that allowed Superferry to resume operations while an environmental impact statement is prepared. “In a direct slap at the court, they brazenly call it `Act 2.’” (Page 12) “In Special Session, the governor flippantly dubs the draft bill `Act 2,’ as if overturning a Supreme Court ruling were a mere trifle.” (Page 178)
The law was named Act 2 because it was the second bill passed during special session that was signed by the governor. The first bill, signed into law as Act 1, was a response to a state Supreme Court ruling on extended criminal sentencing.
*The authors claim Lingle did not give much notice for her meeting with Kaua`i residents and did not announce that the purpose of the meeting was to warn of the penalties for violating a new security zone at Nawiliwili. (Page 56)
Lingle gave a week’s notice that she would be coming to Kaua`i and described the penalties at a news conference at the state Capitol that was given front page and top-of-the-news treatment by daily newspapers and local television and radio.
*The authors describe “illegal Superferry donations to Lingle.” (Page 175) The donations from Superferry executives to Lingle’s campaign were not illegal. However, the donations were contrary to the Lingle campaign’s voluntary policy of not accepting contributions from companies negotiating with the state.
But the lack of acumen was not his only problem with the book. He writes
The authors do not break any new factual ground about Superferry and accept most of the critical theories about the project without skepticism. The central theory — so far unproven and denied by Superferry executives — is that Superferry is a military prototype designed to help shipbuilder Austal USA win lucrative defense contracts.
The book, which describes Superferry as an “uninvited menace,” is a celebration of direct action that is unlikely to persuade many neutrals.
While DePledge might be right about the slapdash journalism when it comes to researching facts, his contention that the “Superferry is a military prototype” theory is “so far unproven and denied by Superferry executives” is indicative of a the narrow view of what journalism is in today’s corporate news room.
Today’s journalism seems to take the concept of objectivity far beyond neutrality and instead of using investigative techniques that are universally accepted, boils down it’s coverage to a series of “he said, she said” competing quotes from anyone with a title and a tongue- the waggier the better.
Today’s reporter’s shun the utilization of the technique of comparing competing theories based on the factual material until, either the investigation peters out for lack of sufficient information to select from those competing theories or until one theory becomes the only plausible explanation for a series of events.
Though this system isn’t infallible- as the stream of release of innocents from jails proves- it’s the one that investigators- police, journalistic and detectives both real and fictional- have used for a century or more.
They all know that 99.9% of the time, when you eliminate the impossible and can’t even find an improbable that passes the laugh and smell tests, the theory turns out to be correct.
This is at the root of using inductive logic to solve a “case” where the deductive proof of a “confession” is not forthcoming. But many journalists from the post-modern school of “objectivity”- one only fully developed in the post WWII era- refuse to accept the validity of the technique.
Instead they ask those who would accept the indisputable validity of a certain “theory” to prove a negative. Nothing but an admission of guilt to suffice.
In plain English, it’s an “are you going to believe me or your lyin’ eyes” school of journalism and causes costly, time-consuming, investigative journalism to fall conveniently by the wayside in the “el cheapo” libel-phobic news “business” of the 21st century newsroom.
Two summers ago- before top Kaua`i journalist and blogger Joan Conrow’s brilliant series at her KauaiEclectic blog, her “U.S.S. Superferry?” investigative piece in Honolulu Weekly and her recap in a chapter of the Superferry Chronicles; before the Supreme Court ruling mandating an environmental assessment; before the name “Austal” (the builder of the Superferry which just last week landed a big contract for 10 Superferry-clone Navy warships) became a well known commodity among anti Superferry activists- PNN wondered in a column what the connection might be between the new aluminum catamaran ferry, similar naval vessels being considered by congress at the time and the financier of the project, former Secretary of the Navy under Reagan, John Lehman.
It didn’t take a genius to ask the question even way back then: was Hawai`i a guinea pig to show congress this thing is a viable Naval war ship?
But though formulation of the theory at that time was a stab in the dark nothing has been presented- except denials from some ferry executive- to refute the near certainty that the Superferry was a “demonstration project”. to show congress that the vehicle could ply shallow near-shore waters effectively.
As a matter of fact other officials- state and Superferry- have been quoted admitting the connection if not the actual intention to use our state apparatus to perpetuate a prototype without concern for the islands, its people and its economy
A frequent insightful commenter in various on-line publications- one who has identified himself only as an attorney and a Democrat and goes by the handle “Kolea”- addressed the state of denial by some of the Superferry-as-Navy-prototype “theory”.
He summed up the impossibles, the improbables and the all-but-certains this way in a comment on DePledge’s review.
As for SuperFerry serving as R&D for a proto-type for use by the military, that is the only sensible explanation. Otherwise, Lehman would have been an idiot to believe the SF made any business sense.
When local anti-militarist activists were insisting the SF was REALLY designed to carry Strykers inter-island, I had to tell them that theory did not make sense. But a review of naval national security debates convinced me Lehman was still promoting an idea from his days as Secretary of the Navy, the idea of a “600 ship fleet,: though he had updated in a few key ways. First, he had upped the number to “1000 ship Navy,” Secondly, he had looked with envy at the success Halliburton and Carlyle were having through the outsourcing of military functions to private companies owned by well-connected Bush cronies. Lehman proposed the “1000 ship navy” consist in large part of privately owned ships leased by the Navy for different lengths of time depending upon the shifting missions.
I see the SF as the development of a prototype ship, subsidized by Hawaii taxpayers and tested in our waters. As a private interisland ferry, IT never made sense. It is not viable and never was. The market did not exist prior to the current recession–simply check the passenger loads, both cars and people. People dreamed about a gentle cruise to another island for camping and holoholo, but the seas were too rough, voyages were cancelled with short notice and passengers were throwing up all over the boat. Ulpp! A bad idea.
The Navy has recently expressed a strong interest in the SF and ships of its type. Lehman headed up McCain’s “transition team” and would have been well=positioned to cash in as a “Naval Halliburton” had McCain won. Had “his ship come in.”
Lehman is either an extremely incompetent or conniving businessman. Or both.
To attack Paik and Mander for basing contentions on sloppy journalism is one thing. But to attack that which is apparent to all but the village idiot because it is “just a theory” that “you can’t prove beyond a shadow of a doubt” makes lies of theories like that of gravity and evolution or any prospective statement based on observations of frequent occurrences without variation from time immemorial.
There are, in logic, strong inductive arguments and weak ones. And sometimes people just can’t see the fleet because they’re too busy examining an individual boat.
The book by Koohan Paik- who in her bio lists “journalist” first among her credentials- and anti economic globalism author and activist Jerry Mander.(links courtesy of DePledge)- has caused some on Kaua`i to question whether Paik is exploiting or even “cashing in” on the actions and even legal miseries of others as PNN detailed last week
But DePledge questions the use of falsehoods based on apparently shoddy research that resulted in what he called:
factual errors that would be easy to chalk up as mistakes — we all make them — if they were not used by the authors to make critical points.
He listed some.
*The authors suggest Lingle and state lawmakers were sending a message with the name of the law that allowed Superferry to resume operations while an environmental impact statement is prepared. “In a direct slap at the court, they brazenly call it `Act 2.’” (Page 12) “In Special Session, the governor flippantly dubs the draft bill `Act 2,’ as if overturning a Supreme Court ruling were a mere trifle.” (Page 178)
The law was named Act 2 because it was the second bill passed during special session that was signed by the governor. The first bill, signed into law as Act 1, was a response to a state Supreme Court ruling on extended criminal sentencing.
*The authors claim Lingle did not give much notice for her meeting with Kaua`i residents and did not announce that the purpose of the meeting was to warn of the penalties for violating a new security zone at Nawiliwili. (Page 56)
Lingle gave a week’s notice that she would be coming to Kaua`i and described the penalties at a news conference at the state Capitol that was given front page and top-of-the-news treatment by daily newspapers and local television and radio.
*The authors describe “illegal Superferry donations to Lingle.” (Page 175) The donations from Superferry executives to Lingle’s campaign were not illegal. However, the donations were contrary to the Lingle campaign’s voluntary policy of not accepting contributions from companies negotiating with the state.
But the lack of acumen was not his only problem with the book. He writes
The authors do not break any new factual ground about Superferry and accept most of the critical theories about the project without skepticism. The central theory — so far unproven and denied by Superferry executives — is that Superferry is a military prototype designed to help shipbuilder Austal USA win lucrative defense contracts.
The book, which describes Superferry as an “uninvited menace,” is a celebration of direct action that is unlikely to persuade many neutrals.
While DePledge might be right about the slapdash journalism when it comes to researching facts, his contention that the “Superferry is a military prototype” theory is “so far unproven and denied by Superferry executives” is indicative of a the narrow view of what journalism is in today’s corporate news room.
Today’s journalism seems to take the concept of objectivity far beyond neutrality and instead of using investigative techniques that are universally accepted, boils down it’s coverage to a series of “he said, she said” competing quotes from anyone with a title and a tongue- the waggier the better.
Today’s reporter’s shun the utilization of the technique of comparing competing theories based on the factual material until, either the investigation peters out for lack of sufficient information to select from those competing theories or until one theory becomes the only plausible explanation for a series of events.
Though this system isn’t infallible- as the stream of release of innocents from jails proves- it’s the one that investigators- police, journalistic and detectives both real and fictional- have used for a century or more.
They all know that 99.9% of the time, when you eliminate the impossible and can’t even find an improbable that passes the laugh and smell tests, the theory turns out to be correct.
This is at the root of using inductive logic to solve a “case” where the deductive proof of a “confession” is not forthcoming. But many journalists from the post-modern school of “objectivity”- one only fully developed in the post WWII era- refuse to accept the validity of the technique.
Instead they ask those who would accept the indisputable validity of a certain “theory” to prove a negative. Nothing but an admission of guilt to suffice.
In plain English, it’s an “are you going to believe me or your lyin’ eyes” school of journalism and causes costly, time-consuming, investigative journalism to fall conveniently by the wayside in the “el cheapo” libel-phobic news “business” of the 21st century newsroom.
Two summers ago- before top Kaua`i journalist and blogger Joan Conrow’s brilliant series at her KauaiEclectic blog, her “U.S.S. Superferry?” investigative piece in Honolulu Weekly and her recap in a chapter of the Superferry Chronicles; before the Supreme Court ruling mandating an environmental assessment; before the name “Austal” (the builder of the Superferry which just last week landed a big contract for 10 Superferry-clone Navy warships) became a well known commodity among anti Superferry activists- PNN wondered in a column what the connection might be between the new aluminum catamaran ferry, similar naval vessels being considered by congress at the time and the financier of the project, former Secretary of the Navy under Reagan, John Lehman.
It didn’t take a genius to ask the question even way back then: was Hawai`i a guinea pig to show congress this thing is a viable Naval war ship?
But though formulation of the theory at that time was a stab in the dark nothing has been presented- except denials from some ferry executive- to refute the near certainty that the Superferry was a “demonstration project”. to show congress that the vehicle could ply shallow near-shore waters effectively.
As a matter of fact other officials- state and Superferry- have been quoted admitting the connection if not the actual intention to use our state apparatus to perpetuate a prototype without concern for the islands, its people and its economy
A frequent insightful commenter in various on-line publications- one who has identified himself only as an attorney and a Democrat and goes by the handle “Kolea”- addressed the state of denial by some of the Superferry-as-Navy-prototype “theory”.
He summed up the impossibles, the improbables and the all-but-certains this way in a comment on DePledge’s review.
As for SuperFerry serving as R&D for a proto-type for use by the military, that is the only sensible explanation. Otherwise, Lehman would have been an idiot to believe the SF made any business sense.
When local anti-militarist activists were insisting the SF was REALLY designed to carry Strykers inter-island, I had to tell them that theory did not make sense. But a review of naval national security debates convinced me Lehman was still promoting an idea from his days as Secretary of the Navy, the idea of a “600 ship fleet,: though he had updated in a few key ways. First, he had upped the number to “1000 ship Navy,” Secondly, he had looked with envy at the success Halliburton and Carlyle were having through the outsourcing of military functions to private companies owned by well-connected Bush cronies. Lehman proposed the “1000 ship navy” consist in large part of privately owned ships leased by the Navy for different lengths of time depending upon the shifting missions.
I see the SF as the development of a prototype ship, subsidized by Hawaii taxpayers and tested in our waters. As a private interisland ferry, IT never made sense. It is not viable and never was. The market did not exist prior to the current recession–simply check the passenger loads, both cars and people. People dreamed about a gentle cruise to another island for camping and holoholo, but the seas were too rough, voyages were cancelled with short notice and passengers were throwing up all over the boat. Ulpp! A bad idea.
The Navy has recently expressed a strong interest in the SF and ships of its type. Lehman headed up McCain’s “transition team” and would have been well=positioned to cash in as a “Naval Halliburton” had McCain won. Had “his ship come in.”
Lehman is either an extremely incompetent or conniving businessman. Or both.
To attack Paik and Mander for basing contentions on sloppy journalism is one thing. But to attack that which is apparent to all but the village idiot because it is “just a theory” that “you can’t prove beyond a shadow of a doubt” makes lies of theories like that of gravity and evolution or any prospective statement based on observations of frequent occurrences without variation from time immemorial.
There are, in logic, strong inductive arguments and weak ones. And sometimes people just can’t see the fleet because they’re too busy examining an individual boat.
Thursday, July 31, 2008
NO, NO- IT’S A JUST WHISKERLESS BARKING CAT
NO, NO- IT’S A JUST WHISKERLESS BARKING CAT: When Larry Geller posted a story about an article from the BYM Marine & Maritime News Wednesday on Hawai`i Superferry (HSf) maker Austal’s final Joint High Speed Vessel proposal to the US Navy he sure didn’t think he’d wind up on the obituary page of the Honolulu Advertiser today
The profoundly exaggerated news of Larry’s demise notwithstanding, his original post pressed others in the local alternative press into action with a lot more details coming from the “owner” of the USS Superferry story Joan Conrow to come up with some expanded coverage, quite obviously spurring a story in this morning’s Advertiser.
They are all a must read. And they all detail how military use of the Superferry is indeed- despite HSf’s past attempts to hide and deny it- moving along quite nicely thank you with a new ramp designed for military use being included in the new “under contraction” HSf and the possible retrofitting of one on the ferry currently in use.
But the real news came from Maui Professor Dick Mayer who did a little digging and provided this from an article today in the Mobile (Alabama) Press-Register. about hometown’s Austal’s prospects for landing the Navy contract to build 10 and maybe more of the military vessels based on the same design as the HSf vessels
The article states:
"We have the trained workforce ready today, we have the facilities available today to support construction, and we have already built a vessel of very similar design right here in Mobile," he said, referring the Hawaii Superferry.
Austal was one of three bidders awarded a design contract in January, and company officials said that they anticipate a contract award before year's end.
But that’s followed by what may be the punch line to the whole HSf joke.
The Mobile shipbuilder also said Wednesday that it had won new work to provide "additional features and equipment on the second Hawaii Superferry to facilitate its use by the military."
Part of a $190-million, two-ship contract, the vessel is being built for Hawaii Superferry Inc. The first superferry is in service in Hawaii, but the company's plan to run an inter-island ferry service has been plagued by environmental protests, and company officials could be positioning the vessel for sale to a third party. (emphasis added)
Browning said he met recently with Thomas Fargo, a retired U.S. Navy admiral who is Hawaii Superferry's chief executive, and there was "no mention" of plans to sell the second vessel.
"However, the national defense features we are adding to HSF 2 would enable the vessel to be chartered to the military if they so desired," Browning said.
Well this drove Conrow up a wall. In today’s post she says:
Now I don’t mind if HSF 2, or even the Alakai, for that matter, is made into a military ship, although it bothers me that the HSF spent so much money lobbying in an effort to get us taxpayers to pick up the tab. But I’m a fan of full disclosure, and when Hawaii Superferry came to town, asking for all sorts of state help and public acceptance for what is proving to be a rather dubious commercial enterprise, I think they should have been totally up front about their military aspirations.
Then we all could have weighed the issue more carefully, and asked such probing questions as whether HSF really is committed to the state for the long haul, or if we’ll be left holding the bag for those expensive harbor improvements, tugboat operations and litigation — and have no alternative form of transportation to show for it.
And then there’s still the unanswered question of why Gov. Lingle went out on such a limb to ensure the Superferry sailed. Surely it wasn’t just the replica of the Alakai she received from top Superferry investor John Lehman, who bequeathed a similar gift on that other key ferry skid-greaser, House Speaker Calvin Say, within months of the special legislative session being convened. (Sen. President Colleen Hamabusa, on the other hand, got only a framed photograph.)
But slow by slow, it seems the truth is being revealed, and perhaps one day the full tale will be told. Somehow, though, I don't think it will be The Advertiser that breaks the story.
In the grifter and carnie world they say the best “mark” is a fellow con artist. Think. the movie, The Sting”.
And it’s now become apparent that we’ve been the perfect suckers.
Lingle, Say, Hamabusa and most of the gullible public took it all at face value when we heard we were going to be magnanimously gifted with an interisland ferry. Thoughts were of a “free lunch” that wouldn’t cost the state taxpayers a nickel in the long run.
But it’s beginning to become painfully obvious that “we was tooken” and former Navy Secretary and 9/11 Commission member Lehman and his military-contractor breakfast club at Lockheed never really planned to help Hawai`i with a new form of inter-island transportation but rather just to demonstrate the prototype ship for his and Austal’s military boondoggle.
So if you were going to pull off this scam to get the Hawai`i pols and taxpayers to support this demonstration project but not lose your shirt in your cockamamie money-losing business plan, you’d have to not only wind up selling the boat to the military once it served it’s purpose but make sure people wouldn’t lynch you when it’s all over.
How? Maybe by intentionally going forward with a bad business, making bad business decisions and purposefully getting people to oppose it to insure the boat would eventually have be sold (to the military) without people even knowing they were conned because they blame themselves- and protesters or environmentalists- for the demise of their “free lunch”.... the best kind of scam of all.
The most superlatively run cons have a partnerships where one of the scammers is also scamming the others because they’re too busy conning others to realize they’re being taken.
Ever wonder why an obvious idiot like Garibaldi was put in charge? Garibaldi thought he was going to con everyone else into actually accepting the ferry, be a hero and make a lot of money. Lingle thought she was going to con everyone to put a higher-office feather in her admiral's cap
Everyone involved was out to con someone into something for their personal enrichment, whether monetary or otherwise including many of the “regular people” who thought they were getting insanely cheap transportation or a way to steal and smuggle back neighbor island resources or at least exploit them on the cheap.
That explains why they tried to deny any military use at first when no one- as Joan said to light our bulb- would have really cared if it was indeed a ferry project for Hawai`i and also a demonstration of the catamaran design for military purposes.
Normally you’d think they’d promote it. Why would they hide it?
Well maybe, if their plan all along was really to leave us high and dry so to speak, they were afraid people would look back and see the real purpose once they were “forced” to sell HSf’s boats to the military.
We in the islands - even those who support HSf- keep asking ourselves how these guys could be so stupid as to their business plan, their machinations with the state, the EIS debacle, the “in-your-face, Supreme Court” attitude that caused the Kaua`i protests to swell, all the PR blunders, starting service in the winter-swell season and other idiocies?
The most rabid Superferry proponent even asks “how could these people be so stupid.”
The answer is they weren’t and aren’t.. Nobody is that stupid. They always had this as their real plan.
How do we know- The same way the bunko squad does- when you use that as a premise, everything else falls into place and makes perfect sense.
You don’t even have to connect any dots but rather think about what makes all this “make sense”. Then you see the real reason they tried to deny, cover-up and hush up the military connection until the uproar in the alternative press got so loud the newspapers had to cover it..
But let us know if you still don’t believe this- we may have a bridge to the neighbor islands to sell you. Maybe you can sail your ferry under it.
The profoundly exaggerated news of Larry’s demise notwithstanding, his original post pressed others in the local alternative press into action with a lot more details coming from the “owner” of the USS Superferry story Joan Conrow to come up with some expanded coverage, quite obviously spurring a story in this morning’s Advertiser.
They are all a must read. And they all detail how military use of the Superferry is indeed- despite HSf’s past attempts to hide and deny it- moving along quite nicely thank you with a new ramp designed for military use being included in the new “under contraction” HSf and the possible retrofitting of one on the ferry currently in use.
But the real news came from Maui Professor Dick Mayer who did a little digging and provided this from an article today in the Mobile (Alabama) Press-Register. about hometown’s Austal’s prospects for landing the Navy contract to build 10 and maybe more of the military vessels based on the same design as the HSf vessels
The article states:
"We have the trained workforce ready today, we have the facilities available today to support construction, and we have already built a vessel of very similar design right here in Mobile," he said, referring the Hawaii Superferry.
Austal was one of three bidders awarded a design contract in January, and company officials said that they anticipate a contract award before year's end.
But that’s followed by what may be the punch line to the whole HSf joke.
The Mobile shipbuilder also said Wednesday that it had won new work to provide "additional features and equipment on the second Hawaii Superferry to facilitate its use by the military."
Part of a $190-million, two-ship contract, the vessel is being built for Hawaii Superferry Inc. The first superferry is in service in Hawaii, but the company's plan to run an inter-island ferry service has been plagued by environmental protests, and company officials could be positioning the vessel for sale to a third party. (emphasis added)
Browning said he met recently with Thomas Fargo, a retired U.S. Navy admiral who is Hawaii Superferry's chief executive, and there was "no mention" of plans to sell the second vessel.
"However, the national defense features we are adding to HSF 2 would enable the vessel to be chartered to the military if they so desired," Browning said.
Well this drove Conrow up a wall. In today’s post she says:
Now I don’t mind if HSF 2, or even the Alakai, for that matter, is made into a military ship, although it bothers me that the HSF spent so much money lobbying in an effort to get us taxpayers to pick up the tab. But I’m a fan of full disclosure, and when Hawaii Superferry came to town, asking for all sorts of state help and public acceptance for what is proving to be a rather dubious commercial enterprise, I think they should have been totally up front about their military aspirations.
Then we all could have weighed the issue more carefully, and asked such probing questions as whether HSF really is committed to the state for the long haul, or if we’ll be left holding the bag for those expensive harbor improvements, tugboat operations and litigation — and have no alternative form of transportation to show for it.
And then there’s still the unanswered question of why Gov. Lingle went out on such a limb to ensure the Superferry sailed. Surely it wasn’t just the replica of the Alakai she received from top Superferry investor John Lehman, who bequeathed a similar gift on that other key ferry skid-greaser, House Speaker Calvin Say, within months of the special legislative session being convened. (Sen. President Colleen Hamabusa, on the other hand, got only a framed photograph.)
But slow by slow, it seems the truth is being revealed, and perhaps one day the full tale will be told. Somehow, though, I don't think it will be The Advertiser that breaks the story.
In the grifter and carnie world they say the best “mark” is a fellow con artist. Think. the movie, The Sting”.
And it’s now become apparent that we’ve been the perfect suckers.
Lingle, Say, Hamabusa and most of the gullible public took it all at face value when we heard we were going to be magnanimously gifted with an interisland ferry. Thoughts were of a “free lunch” that wouldn’t cost the state taxpayers a nickel in the long run.
But it’s beginning to become painfully obvious that “we was tooken” and former Navy Secretary and 9/11 Commission member Lehman and his military-contractor breakfast club at Lockheed never really planned to help Hawai`i with a new form of inter-island transportation but rather just to demonstrate the prototype ship for his and Austal’s military boondoggle.
So if you were going to pull off this scam to get the Hawai`i pols and taxpayers to support this demonstration project but not lose your shirt in your cockamamie money-losing business plan, you’d have to not only wind up selling the boat to the military once it served it’s purpose but make sure people wouldn’t lynch you when it’s all over.
How? Maybe by intentionally going forward with a bad business, making bad business decisions and purposefully getting people to oppose it to insure the boat would eventually have be sold (to the military) without people even knowing they were conned because they blame themselves- and protesters or environmentalists- for the demise of their “free lunch”.... the best kind of scam of all.
The most superlatively run cons have a partnerships where one of the scammers is also scamming the others because they’re too busy conning others to realize they’re being taken.
Ever wonder why an obvious idiot like Garibaldi was put in charge? Garibaldi thought he was going to con everyone else into actually accepting the ferry, be a hero and make a lot of money. Lingle thought she was going to con everyone to put a higher-office feather in her admiral's cap
Everyone involved was out to con someone into something for their personal enrichment, whether monetary or otherwise including many of the “regular people” who thought they were getting insanely cheap transportation or a way to steal and smuggle back neighbor island resources or at least exploit them on the cheap.
That explains why they tried to deny any military use at first when no one- as Joan said to light our bulb- would have really cared if it was indeed a ferry project for Hawai`i and also a demonstration of the catamaran design for military purposes.
Normally you’d think they’d promote it. Why would they hide it?
Well maybe, if their plan all along was really to leave us high and dry so to speak, they were afraid people would look back and see the real purpose once they were “forced” to sell HSf’s boats to the military.
We in the islands - even those who support HSf- keep asking ourselves how these guys could be so stupid as to their business plan, their machinations with the state, the EIS debacle, the “in-your-face, Supreme Court” attitude that caused the Kaua`i protests to swell, all the PR blunders, starting service in the winter-swell season and other idiocies?
The most rabid Superferry proponent even asks “how could these people be so stupid.”
The answer is they weren’t and aren’t.. Nobody is that stupid. They always had this as their real plan.
How do we know- The same way the bunko squad does- when you use that as a premise, everything else falls into place and makes perfect sense.
You don’t even have to connect any dots but rather think about what makes all this “make sense”. Then you see the real reason they tried to deny, cover-up and hush up the military connection until the uproar in the alternative press got so loud the newspapers had to cover it..
But let us know if you still don’t believe this- we may have a bridge to the neighbor islands to sell you. Maybe you can sail your ferry under it.
Thursday, June 19, 2008
WE’RE BARKIN’ WITH ALL OUR MIGHT
Yesterday’s piece from top Honolulu Advertiser investigative reporter Derrick DePledege's was a definitive wrap on the work of so many brilliant and persistent people in breaking this story of the military boondoggle aspects of the Hawai`i Superferry (HSf).
Those “several activists who oppose the project have been fixated on Superferry's military connections”, as Derrick said, are some of the most brilliant and persistent story-chasers around.
If it weren’t for them he might never have written or even recognized the story of the years of lies from HSf executives, denying any and all connections with the military.
The same people continue as Derrick said, be “fixate on... rais(ing) suspicions about whether it can be commercially profitable” too.
Heroic diggers and documenters like Brad Parsons, Dick Meyer, Larry Geller, Joan Conrow and Doug White have continued to dig out documents and document the digs. And they’ll be there to dig up the next absurdity through their obsessional penchant for uncovering the obvious.
Maybe the Advertiser will cover that financial story after it happens. They’re too busy right now collecting HSf’s ad revenue to point out the obvious... although DePledge’s mentioning Dick Meyer’s “preparing to leave” theory is on the right track. It’s surprising Derrick’s editor let him get that one in.
Yes. As fellow-fiaxators we are fastidiously yet felicitously focused on our fellows’ compulsively-consumed, fanatical infatuation with fact-finding and document digging- sometimes in the face of total lack of recognition of the story by anyone in the Hawaii Corporate press...
Except for poor Derrick.... I’d like to give him credit for a sense of humor on this one.
Oh, and in case you think the cat still isn’t out of the bag, HSf mouthpiece Lori Abe has a press release about her new “sales team” including “Passenger Sales Manager Ward...Yamashiro (who) is responsible for contracting and servicing of all leisure travel and government accounts. This includes overseeing the company’s wholesalers (U.S. inbound, Hawai‘i, and Japanese), travel agencies, corporate, government, and military accounts.”
“Hi this is Admiral Bullschiester. I’ll tell ya how much we’ve got if you tell me how much is mine Yamashiro”
“Well we here at the Superferry Military sales division salute you Admiral- or should I say Mister Bullschiester as of your retirement next Thursday. I’ll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today, Popeye..
Those “several activists who oppose the project have been fixated on Superferry's military connections”, as Derrick said, are some of the most brilliant and persistent story-chasers around.
If it weren’t for them he might never have written or even recognized the story of the years of lies from HSf executives, denying any and all connections with the military.
The same people continue as Derrick said, be “fixate on... rais(ing) suspicions about whether it can be commercially profitable” too.
Heroic diggers and documenters like Brad Parsons, Dick Meyer, Larry Geller, Joan Conrow and Doug White have continued to dig out documents and document the digs. And they’ll be there to dig up the next absurdity through their obsessional penchant for uncovering the obvious.
Maybe the Advertiser will cover that financial story after it happens. They’re too busy right now collecting HSf’s ad revenue to point out the obvious... although DePledge’s mentioning Dick Meyer’s “preparing to leave” theory is on the right track. It’s surprising Derrick’s editor let him get that one in.
Yes. As fellow-fiaxators we are fastidiously yet felicitously focused on our fellows’ compulsively-consumed, fanatical infatuation with fact-finding and document digging- sometimes in the face of total lack of recognition of the story by anyone in the Hawaii Corporate press...
Except for poor Derrick.... I’d like to give him credit for a sense of humor on this one.
Oh, and in case you think the cat still isn’t out of the bag, HSf mouthpiece Lori Abe has a press release about her new “sales team” including “Passenger Sales Manager Ward...Yamashiro (who) is responsible for contracting and servicing of all leisure travel and government accounts. This includes overseeing the company’s wholesalers (U.S. inbound, Hawai‘i, and Japanese), travel agencies, corporate, government, and military accounts.”
“Hi this is Admiral Bullschiester. I’ll tell ya how much we’ve got if you tell me how much is mine Yamashiro”
“Well we here at the Superferry Military sales division salute you Admiral- or should I say Mister Bullschiester as of your retirement next Thursday. I’ll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today, Popeye..
Saturday, May 3, 2008
I DON’T THINK WE’RE IN KANSAS ANYMORE
I DON’T THINK WE’RE IN KANSAS ANYMORE: We once had a dog that the kids named Toto and he was so dumb he would run around in circles and pee on himself every time we came home. And even when we went outside to take in the clothes off the line or get something out of the car he would do it when we came back in as if he couldn’t remember we had been sitting there 30 seconds before.
It reminds us of these people who tried to get so excited over the possibility that Aloha Air Cargo’s demise was going to somehow make the Superferry a viable business and indeed an excuse for plunging back into Nawiliwili that they practically wet themselves in anticipation. And now, even though their off-island donuts will still be coming via air cargo, (with Love), they apparently keep forgetting that news and are still pissing their pants at the prospect of taking their jalopies on an O`ahu shopping expedition or a delivery of Ala Moana cream puffs.
But those Toto’s are no match for those who- and I’m not making this up- see absolutely no connection between the Superferry and the military.
Now that cabal is usually just made up of the clueless anonymous trolls in blog comment sections and the wing nuts and assorted wackos in the letters to the editor’s column.
But when our pal Pete Antonson, who apparently tries to put some thought into his writings, made the claim we had to take up the debate.
Rather than rehash it here we thought we’d re-publish it in the form of a conversation from our comments section since it appeared the day after we dissed Pete’s own letter to the editor. It’s about not only the connection but about how people do research and their homework and, in fact, how they figure out what’s really going on in the world.
We pick it up with Pete’s comments on our post the day before.
(Please excuse the lack of our usual crackerjack copy editing team on these comment section posts- now you’ll see how truly illiterate we are.)
Pete:
I realize my TGI letter was less than admired in some places; but, the writer I was defending also happens to be my fiancé; so the gloves were off.
My letter and Joan's post, in my opinion, speak of the soft underbelly of a movement with the best intentions.
When I was a young idealist, I believed everything I read in the L.A. Free Press (late 60's) and was ready to burn something down. Now, my peers are Doctors and Lawyers who have 40 years of adult experience and are not going to accept a bunch of poorly researched crap especially when it includes the pretense that they need to be educated.
Don't belittle us. We have to use research based treatments
, sort out the crap for a differential diagnosis or a legal brief on a daily basis. A lot can be at stake.
We then go home and try to be as green as we can because its the righteous way to live. A valid environmental movement needs folks like us too and we're not easily convinced.Regards, Pete Antonson
Andy:
That’s why I said I thought it was disingenuous Pete. You have every right to defend your fiancée but don’t do it without reading the document and then claim it’s others who haven’t done their homework, which is what I took from your letter.
I don’t need to list for you all the factual material on-line regarding the Superferry- or perhaps now I do. Did you even read the audit? Did you read the recent Times article? Just yesterday documents showed HSf lying about their lobbying expenditures and more revelations the day before about military ties in the lawsuit filing.
If you choose to attack the messenger - those who publish and comment on these documents- for being ill-informed at least read the documents.
We’re not making this stuff up. And most of us verify the validity of the source of the documents before we present them. I can’t think of an instance of someone providing faked documents in the on-line reporting on the HSf.
If you had read everything presented since last August you couldn’t say what you did about lack of documentation- and if you didn’t how can you say it’s those who have who are ill-informed. At least go back and read the documents and then attack the veracity of the source material, not the messenger. I expect that idiocy from the anonymous trolls and get a chuckle out of it. But expect better from you because I’ve seen it.
Pete
Dear Andy,
I don't see where Krisztina referred to any particular "document" that needed to be read like you did. She did refer to legal and environmental issues which I referred to as well and will now in more detail:
I was referring to the "concerns" first articulated by Judy Dalton at the Superferry PUC meeting, and the "after the fact research" that followed over the next two years. I agreed with the word: "concerns;" but, the "concerns" became "reasons" to stop the Superferry. I went over every study and presentation about whales in danger. None were peer reviewed. Some were discussions or reviews, not studys. Most were about different types of whales in different places and conditions. Every single one was sponsered or completed by advocates for whales and 12 mile an hour speed limits on the West and East Coasts and elsewhere.
I looked for substance, facts, or anything solid enough to stop somebody's business in regards to a homeless invasion, harbor traffic, increases in crime. There was anecdotes from other places with different conditions and a lot of concern and speculation. Invasive species is real. It's happening here and now and needs more attention. Stopping one boat does virtually nothing about it though. Ironically, more can probably be done quicker with Superferry. It would then be a model for what's imposed on all the rest.Again, all this was good reason for concern; but, less than a reason for a crusade, in my opinion.
As far as "We were enforcing the law" rationale. The fact was that until overuled by a higher authority, the Dept. of Transportation's ruling was the law and it was followed not broken. The fact was that the Supreme Court ruling was specific to Maui and their ruling was followed not broken.
The revelations since August are just reasons to dislike the management, especially if you already do, or call for enforcement of any violations of the law. I doubt if those penalties include terminating services. The military conspiracy is a joke. I've followed up on each and every part of it since Juan revealed breathlessly that SF looked just like the one the Navy leased...duh. It is nothing more than association piled onto association. If it turns out that Austal has an antiunion or rascist streak or, to no one's surprise, their Deep South portion does, I don't see how that has anything with a Superferry they don't own or operate, or the next one once they release it. If you feel morally obligated to boycott; then do so.
There's a ton of quantity here and almost no quality. Enough to be concerned; enough to work cooperatively for remedy, not enough for what has developed.Regards, Pete Antonson
Andy:
I was referring to your letter Pete. And for the most part I was referring not to someone’s oral testimony ages ago. Did you read Harold Bronstien's filing with the PUC? did you read the source documentation it contained? I can’t understand how you can disregard the information from government and university studies on speed and whales. The speeds were from the MMA.
As far as military connections I hope you’re read all of Joan’s work and checked the documentation behind it. And if the Times article isn’t another smoking gun what is? Did you read the agreement with the loan consultants? It lists the military as one body to be consulted with along with the money people. Even the military sees and readily the connection. there are statements and articles from HSf and active military leaders as far back as 2003 trying to “sell” it to Hawai`i by pointing out how it could be used to carry troops and materials.
It was sold as a potential transport for the Stryker brigade.If you want to turn away and say it’s all BS be my guest. People say that about evolution. But don’t say the documentation for all this isn’t out there because all you read or heard were characterizations of it instead of reading the source material.
The DOT’s actions in exempting the project were found to be illegal. That is a fact. And your “only for Maui” is also the same lie that the same people who, like you, continued to say there was nothing illegal liked to say even though the SC didn’t say it. Whether the 120 day limit on filing is or isn’t found to be valid (it’s before the Int. court right now) doesn’t effect that legality or its jurisdiction. If it wasn’t illegal how come the legislature had to go back and make it legal?
Which all comes back to the point that the information you’re seeking is what an EIS is designed to identify (not that anyone expects an honest EIS from Belt Collins who have already shown their hand in banning emailed testimony and limiting testimony at the scoping meeting which they tried to play down as “informational meetings”). If you lacked information why weren’t you screaming for an EIS before the action, as is detailed in NEPA, which Act 2 directly violates.
Like I said, if you have actually read all the source material and think it’s not enough-especially for the military connection- then your powers of reason are a lot less acute than I thought.
By the way – the big military Superferry that was put in the water Saturday leaked according to sources at Austal. You may miss it since apparently you don’t read all the source material... if it gets reported outside the non-corporate alternative press maybe you’ll notice.
Pete:
Dear Andy,If you begin with the premise that the military is our enemy and also have the premise that the Superferry is our enemy, all this information falls into a nicely prepared slot. I don't have either premise so this "mountain of information" is viewed by me in a different manner. The Times article tells us what we already know about Austal trying to obtain military contracts with their design. Austal built Superferry. That's an association. Associations are all I ever see waved around. Like Lehman and the Navy or the fact that the new CEO was in the military. This is guilt by association; not deeds. If either one does business with the military (deeds) in another arena, it simply does not mean that everything they do is militaristic. It's just another association.
Let me also point out that 50 pages about military clowns not doing the right thing and one page with loose associations about Superferry and former military personnel do not add up to 51 pages damning the Superferry. Ten paragraphs about Austal's Southern shipyard management doing bad things plus one sentence about Austal having built Superferry does not add up to 10 paragraphs damning Superferry; and so on and so on.
Here's another way the info is handled: John Lehman told the Pacific Business News that Superferry would ferry Strykers to the Big Island for training. Much was made of this and much should have been made of it. However, a year later, the statement was officially retracted and replaced with one that said the PUC would not permit it and Superferry had no plans to contract for military training. For the first statement, John Lehman was the "Minister of Truth." For the second statement, John Lehman was an exReagan admin. militaristic scumbag liar. Same guy making both statements. Whatever fits the foregone conclusion.Regards, Pete Antonson
Andy:
Pete if you can’t critically read because your pro-military or pro-Superferry bias is so strong don’t assume others are “jumping to conclusions”. The military, in and of itself is neutral, although the need for a standing army can be debated. But that’s irrelevant.
If you don’t want to see any connection you’re not going to. The Lehman quote was “retracted” as a PR move. You can’t just “retract” something and make believe it never happened. Was there an explanation for why it was wrong and how they discovered their error? As a matter of fact if you had been following the daily comedy bit that is the HSf you’d have known that at first they denied he ever said it until someone went back and found the PND piece.
If you want to act the fool, be my guest- most people do.
The Times article and Austal itself not just admits but touts the fact that the LCS is based on the HSf design. And the evidence for the “rush job” due to the pressure of the military contract are voluminous and Austal acknowledges it but denies it cause poor craftsmanship (and yet another Austal worker- this time an inspector- verified this again in today’s BI weekly article). Everywhere you go where the information has not been put back through the spin cycle after the facts were reported show the connection.
There are none so blind- you’d make a piss poor cop or investigative reporter Pete- don’t quit your day job.
You can attack my or others’ characterizations- I could care less what- or more accurately whether- you think. But if you can’t put the facts together it’s not because every single one doesn’t fit.
Good inductive reasoning is a skill- perhaps you don’t have it. As I said, any prospective statement is a “theory”- including gravity, the sunrise or evolution. But lack of intellectual certainty can’t get in the way of functional or operational certainty. Though gravity is the least scientifically understood natural phenomenon it seems to exist whether we believe in it or not. Sure we could fall up tomorrow but I wouldn’t rely on that to conduct my affairs and as a matter of fact I’m going to rely on the opposite.
Theories change with facts that don’t fit. What doesn’t fit here? Where even the one fact that indicates there may not be “a connection”.
I refuse to be a frickin’ idiot because some insists on peeing on my foot and telling me it’s raining.
People who employ critical thinking and aren’t mentally hung up on their “beliefs” are the ones who can see the inductions that approach certainty as opposed to those who either force the square facts in a round hole or employ a base of belief and a “you can’t ‘prove’ anything” model of the world.
It reminds us of these people who tried to get so excited over the possibility that Aloha Air Cargo’s demise was going to somehow make the Superferry a viable business and indeed an excuse for plunging back into Nawiliwili that they practically wet themselves in anticipation. And now, even though their off-island donuts will still be coming via air cargo, (with Love), they apparently keep forgetting that news and are still pissing their pants at the prospect of taking their jalopies on an O`ahu shopping expedition or a delivery of Ala Moana cream puffs.
But those Toto’s are no match for those who- and I’m not making this up- see absolutely no connection between the Superferry and the military.
Now that cabal is usually just made up of the clueless anonymous trolls in blog comment sections and the wing nuts and assorted wackos in the letters to the editor’s column.
But when our pal Pete Antonson, who apparently tries to put some thought into his writings, made the claim we had to take up the debate.
Rather than rehash it here we thought we’d re-publish it in the form of a conversation from our comments section since it appeared the day after we dissed Pete’s own letter to the editor. It’s about not only the connection but about how people do research and their homework and, in fact, how they figure out what’s really going on in the world.
We pick it up with Pete’s comments on our post the day before.
(Please excuse the lack of our usual crackerjack copy editing team on these comment section posts- now you’ll see how truly illiterate we are.)
Pete:
I realize my TGI letter was less than admired in some places; but, the writer I was defending also happens to be my fiancé; so the gloves were off.
My letter and Joan's post, in my opinion, speak of the soft underbelly of a movement with the best intentions.
When I was a young idealist, I believed everything I read in the L.A. Free Press (late 60's) and was ready to burn something down. Now, my peers are Doctors and Lawyers who have 40 years of adult experience and are not going to accept a bunch of poorly researched crap especially when it includes the pretense that they need to be educated.
Don't belittle us. We have to use research based treatments
, sort out the crap for a differential diagnosis or a legal brief on a daily basis. A lot can be at stake.
We then go home and try to be as green as we can because its the righteous way to live. A valid environmental movement needs folks like us too and we're not easily convinced.Regards, Pete Antonson
Andy:
That’s why I said I thought it was disingenuous Pete. You have every right to defend your fiancée but don’t do it without reading the document and then claim it’s others who haven’t done their homework, which is what I took from your letter.
I don’t need to list for you all the factual material on-line regarding the Superferry- or perhaps now I do. Did you even read the audit? Did you read the recent Times article? Just yesterday documents showed HSf lying about their lobbying expenditures and more revelations the day before about military ties in the lawsuit filing.
If you choose to attack the messenger - those who publish and comment on these documents- for being ill-informed at least read the documents.
We’re not making this stuff up. And most of us verify the validity of the source of the documents before we present them. I can’t think of an instance of someone providing faked documents in the on-line reporting on the HSf.
If you had read everything presented since last August you couldn’t say what you did about lack of documentation- and if you didn’t how can you say it’s those who have who are ill-informed. At least go back and read the documents and then attack the veracity of the source material, not the messenger. I expect that idiocy from the anonymous trolls and get a chuckle out of it. But expect better from you because I’ve seen it.
Pete
Dear Andy,
I don't see where Krisztina referred to any particular "document" that needed to be read like you did. She did refer to legal and environmental issues which I referred to as well and will now in more detail:
I was referring to the "concerns" first articulated by Judy Dalton at the Superferry PUC meeting, and the "after the fact research" that followed over the next two years. I agreed with the word: "concerns;" but, the "concerns" became "reasons" to stop the Superferry. I went over every study and presentation about whales in danger. None were peer reviewed. Some were discussions or reviews, not studys. Most were about different types of whales in different places and conditions. Every single one was sponsered or completed by advocates for whales and 12 mile an hour speed limits on the West and East Coasts and elsewhere.
I looked for substance, facts, or anything solid enough to stop somebody's business in regards to a homeless invasion, harbor traffic, increases in crime. There was anecdotes from other places with different conditions and a lot of concern and speculation. Invasive species is real. It's happening here and now and needs more attention. Stopping one boat does virtually nothing about it though. Ironically, more can probably be done quicker with Superferry. It would then be a model for what's imposed on all the rest.Again, all this was good reason for concern; but, less than a reason for a crusade, in my opinion.
As far as "We were enforcing the law" rationale. The fact was that until overuled by a higher authority, the Dept. of Transportation's ruling was the law and it was followed not broken. The fact was that the Supreme Court ruling was specific to Maui and their ruling was followed not broken.
The revelations since August are just reasons to dislike the management, especially if you already do, or call for enforcement of any violations of the law. I doubt if those penalties include terminating services. The military conspiracy is a joke. I've followed up on each and every part of it since Juan revealed breathlessly that SF looked just like the one the Navy leased...duh. It is nothing more than association piled onto association. If it turns out that Austal has an antiunion or rascist streak or, to no one's surprise, their Deep South portion does, I don't see how that has anything with a Superferry they don't own or operate, or the next one once they release it. If you feel morally obligated to boycott; then do so.
There's a ton of quantity here and almost no quality. Enough to be concerned; enough to work cooperatively for remedy, not enough for what has developed.Regards, Pete Antonson
Andy:
I was referring to your letter Pete. And for the most part I was referring not to someone’s oral testimony ages ago. Did you read Harold Bronstien's filing with the PUC? did you read the source documentation it contained? I can’t understand how you can disregard the information from government and university studies on speed and whales. The speeds were from the MMA.
As far as military connections I hope you’re read all of Joan’s work and checked the documentation behind it. And if the Times article isn’t another smoking gun what is? Did you read the agreement with the loan consultants? It lists the military as one body to be consulted with along with the money people. Even the military sees and readily the connection. there are statements and articles from HSf and active military leaders as far back as 2003 trying to “sell” it to Hawai`i by pointing out how it could be used to carry troops and materials.
It was sold as a potential transport for the Stryker brigade.If you want to turn away and say it’s all BS be my guest. People say that about evolution. But don’t say the documentation for all this isn’t out there because all you read or heard were characterizations of it instead of reading the source material.
The DOT’s actions in exempting the project were found to be illegal. That is a fact. And your “only for Maui” is also the same lie that the same people who, like you, continued to say there was nothing illegal liked to say even though the SC didn’t say it. Whether the 120 day limit on filing is or isn’t found to be valid (it’s before the Int. court right now) doesn’t effect that legality or its jurisdiction. If it wasn’t illegal how come the legislature had to go back and make it legal?
Which all comes back to the point that the information you’re seeking is what an EIS is designed to identify (not that anyone expects an honest EIS from Belt Collins who have already shown their hand in banning emailed testimony and limiting testimony at the scoping meeting which they tried to play down as “informational meetings”). If you lacked information why weren’t you screaming for an EIS before the action, as is detailed in NEPA, which Act 2 directly violates.
Like I said, if you have actually read all the source material and think it’s not enough-especially for the military connection- then your powers of reason are a lot less acute than I thought.
By the way – the big military Superferry that was put in the water Saturday leaked according to sources at Austal. You may miss it since apparently you don’t read all the source material... if it gets reported outside the non-corporate alternative press maybe you’ll notice.
Pete:
Dear Andy,If you begin with the premise that the military is our enemy and also have the premise that the Superferry is our enemy, all this information falls into a nicely prepared slot. I don't have either premise so this "mountain of information" is viewed by me in a different manner. The Times article tells us what we already know about Austal trying to obtain military contracts with their design. Austal built Superferry. That's an association. Associations are all I ever see waved around. Like Lehman and the Navy or the fact that the new CEO was in the military. This is guilt by association; not deeds. If either one does business with the military (deeds) in another arena, it simply does not mean that everything they do is militaristic. It's just another association.
Let me also point out that 50 pages about military clowns not doing the right thing and one page with loose associations about Superferry and former military personnel do not add up to 51 pages damning the Superferry. Ten paragraphs about Austal's Southern shipyard management doing bad things plus one sentence about Austal having built Superferry does not add up to 10 paragraphs damning Superferry; and so on and so on.
Here's another way the info is handled: John Lehman told the Pacific Business News that Superferry would ferry Strykers to the Big Island for training. Much was made of this and much should have been made of it. However, a year later, the statement was officially retracted and replaced with one that said the PUC would not permit it and Superferry had no plans to contract for military training. For the first statement, John Lehman was the "Minister of Truth." For the second statement, John Lehman was an exReagan admin. militaristic scumbag liar. Same guy making both statements. Whatever fits the foregone conclusion.Regards, Pete Antonson
Andy:
Pete if you can’t critically read because your pro-military or pro-Superferry bias is so strong don’t assume others are “jumping to conclusions”. The military, in and of itself is neutral, although the need for a standing army can be debated. But that’s irrelevant.
If you don’t want to see any connection you’re not going to. The Lehman quote was “retracted” as a PR move. You can’t just “retract” something and make believe it never happened. Was there an explanation for why it was wrong and how they discovered their error? As a matter of fact if you had been following the daily comedy bit that is the HSf you’d have known that at first they denied he ever said it until someone went back and found the PND piece.
If you want to act the fool, be my guest- most people do.
The Times article and Austal itself not just admits but touts the fact that the LCS is based on the HSf design. And the evidence for the “rush job” due to the pressure of the military contract are voluminous and Austal acknowledges it but denies it cause poor craftsmanship (and yet another Austal worker- this time an inspector- verified this again in today’s BI weekly article). Everywhere you go where the information has not been put back through the spin cycle after the facts were reported show the connection.
There are none so blind- you’d make a piss poor cop or investigative reporter Pete- don’t quit your day job.
You can attack my or others’ characterizations- I could care less what- or more accurately whether- you think. But if you can’t put the facts together it’s not because every single one doesn’t fit.
Good inductive reasoning is a skill- perhaps you don’t have it. As I said, any prospective statement is a “theory”- including gravity, the sunrise or evolution. But lack of intellectual certainty can’t get in the way of functional or operational certainty. Though gravity is the least scientifically understood natural phenomenon it seems to exist whether we believe in it or not. Sure we could fall up tomorrow but I wouldn’t rely on that to conduct my affairs and as a matter of fact I’m going to rely on the opposite.
Theories change with facts that don’t fit. What doesn’t fit here? Where even the one fact that indicates there may not be “a connection”.
I refuse to be a frickin’ idiot because some insists on peeing on my foot and telling me it’s raining.
People who employ critical thinking and aren’t mentally hung up on their “beliefs” are the ones who can see the inductions that approach certainty as opposed to those who either force the square facts in a round hole or employ a base of belief and a “you can’t ‘prove’ anything” model of the world.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
