In frustration Nungesser added, "Why are we fighting them when they are supposed to be helping us? I am sick to my stomach."
I searched high and low for photos of propeller-damaged boom on the net. It turns out that oil containment boom is pretty sturdy stuff and if a prop does encounter it, it "shreds" and does not leave a clean, sharp cut like the one pictured in the Coast Guard photo.
Such barriers, to be practical, must meet stringent operating conditions. The barrier should be made entirely of rubberlike material, and free from metal chains or cables extending therealong, so that when it is accidentally run over by a ship, rather than winding up around a propellor or shaft and so possibly causing considerable damage or delay necessary for its removal, it is simply chopped up into pieces. In such case, it is desirable that its sections be relatively short and easily replaceable, thus causing no particular problems, certainly fewer than those of a ship immobilized until its propellor can be freed of chain or cable wrappings. The barrier of said Patent has proved to be highly effective under actual operating conditions in permanent installations.
Then to add more confusion a "corrected" press release was issued late in the afternoon of July 4: "Correction: A photograph of boom suspected of being damaged by vandals was cut by workers as part of the normal removal process." The original photo is gone from the current online version, but we have the original email.
It is this sort of behavior that leads to suspicion and accusations that BP and the Coast Guard are being less than candid with the media and the American public. If the "vandalized boom" press release was an honest mistake, it stands to reason that there would be no need to scrub the previous release from the Internet, unless, perhaps, the photo was staged to begin with.
It is also curious that the new press releases came out on the Fourth of July (usually a dead media day) and after comments criticizing Petty Officer Polish ramped up on the Huffington Post.
Coincidence? It is certainly possible, but curious all the same.
Again, you be the judge. I don't know what was in their minds. I can only see the results.
By the same token, Petty Officer Polish has now been placed in a very compromising position by both the Coast Guard, which she truly loves, and by the public relations firm, Ogilvy, which employs her as a Vice-President and maintains BP as a client.
I am not an attorney, but I ran this entire mess past one.
There appears to be a conflict of interest under any rules, except perhaps those of the US Coast Guard. Normally when one has an interest in a company as Ms. Polish does given that in her civilian capacity she is employed performing PR work for BP, one would recuse themselves from any work concerning that company in another capacity, e.g., judging a case involving the company or considering the company for a contract award. In fact, the rules at many government agencies require one to do so when one is acting as a judge or engaged in procurement activities. Therefore, why Ms. Polish would be employed performing PR work involving one of her company's clients on whose account she works as a reservist is beyond me, especially when there are other Coast Guard PR tasks that she can perform which would not involve accounts that she handled as a civilian, e.g., perhaps the work that the Coast Guard is undertaking in the Middle East, or on drug interdiction, to suggest just two.
On the one hand, anyone with compassion, and I am such a person, would feel very sorry for Petty Officer Polish. She is probably kicking herself for participating in this grand social networking experiment and engaging Huffington Post readers to begin with. On the other hand, she should have known better than to allow herself to be placed in this position. Perhaps the whole situation was just too heady and we all know power intoxicates. I know I could feel very protected and insulated to have such close access to the Vice-President, the Homeland Security Director, and Thad Allen as well as the upper echelons of BP. Together, they are running the show on the Gulf Coast, but the lesson here is that social networking has made it possible for ordinary citizens to level the playing field by doing their own Internet research and loudly voicing their opinions.
Polish offered a response to Huffington Post readers late in the evening of July 4. They don't seem to be buying it.
As a Coast Guard reservist, I was activated on Title 14 orders - involuntary recall - for 60 days as part of the response effort and am proud to serve my country. I've always been incredibly transparent about my civilian job. My employer has thousands of clients, but I would never work on anything that would pose a conflict of interest. I am happy to answer any questions you may have.
The bottom line is this. Are BP and the Coast Guard knowingly operating on the American taxpayer's dime? Who has the best interests of the people, the wildlife and the ecosystem at heart? Nungesser is correct when he calls for someone, anyone, to take the reins and make some sense out of this mess.
I hope CNN's Anderson Cooper picks up on this and runs with it, although my Facebook friends say Rachel Maddow is the better bet. Rachel had best hurry home from Afghanistan.
Me, I will be down on the Gulf, talking to people, relating their stories, taking photos, and sharing their experiences during this horrible catastrophe--a catastrophe that is destroying their lives and livelihoods.
UPDATE: As I was completing this post, yet another press release came in with yet another explanation of the "boom rule."
Last week Coast Guard Captains of the Port in the region put in place limited, small waterside safety zones around protective boom and those vessels actively responding to this spill. This was required due to recent instances of protective boom being vandalized or broken by non-response vessels getting too close. These 20-meter zones are only slightly longer than the distance from a baseball pitcher's mound to home plate. This distance is insignificant when gathering images. In fact, these zones, which do not target the press, can and have been opened for reporters as required.
It is hardly a comfort to learn that the media will still be controlled by the Deepwater Horizon Response Team. The good news is that the voices of dissent are being heard, loud and clear.
UPDATE: Just received permission from Sarah Markworth (UK) and Editilla of The New Orleans Ladder to mention them in regards to tips.(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
2
1
1
