It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Australia to cover costs of Abby Sunderland's rescue

page: 4
8
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 01:17 AM
link   
reply to post by theability
 

A yacht without an autopilot doesn't make it capsize, in fact anyone who's ever sailed a yacht will know that in heavy weather most people would switch off the autopilot and helm manually.

My point being that her Dad and any repairs in South Africa have zero to do with this current incident.




posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 01:17 AM
link   
reply to post by The Theorist
 



There's that 'rich' comment again. Is it just me or is the overall post-quality declining alongside the economy while the mere ignorance of people increase alongside the oil spill in the Gulf?


Did you miss the part where I said my parent (single) couldn't even buy me a pair of shoes? So we're talking about $20 max here. And you're comparing it to just having $25,000-$50,000+ just sitting around to use. That's rich.

The WHO Defines the poverty line as Median national income /2. The median income in Australia is $46.500 as of 2007.

So you want to take those figures, there are hundreds of thousands of people in this country living below the poverty line on less than $500 a week, trying to bring up kids and just afford to pay the bills and buy food. Meanwhile this dog is prancing around the world in a bloody yacht.

And even worse expecting the Australian tax payers to bail her out. When all the States, and the Federal government are all in deficit and selling of "assets".

It's a totally unjustified waste of taxpayers money, for a media spectacle about someone that should get the Darwin award, posthumously.



posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 01:18 AM
link   
reply to post by The Theorist
 

It's one thing to let your child grow and take risks, it's another story when you are willing to let them spend 9 months alone on dangerous seas. Pirates, rough weather and isolation are certainly not going to be aides in my childs development.



posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 01:20 AM
link   
reply to post by The Theorist
 



The MAST was torn from the boat. It was RIPPED OUT by 60+knot winds! Could have happened to a BRAND NEW yacht, for your information.


What are you talking about??? I know what happened. In fact I have been following this all since Jan 23rd when she left on the trip, not now because its on tv.

I know what happened I also know she had to stop in Capetown to have autopilots repaired, because both failed.

BTW she is ingenious enough to have swapped parts in the autopilots to make one work so she could finish the leg to Capetown.

Abbys blog
Offical Site

There is alot to this story than what is on the news today.



posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 01:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by who-me?
reply to post by belial259
 


You ignorant fool, the Indian Ocean isn't Australian waters FFS. With your view everyone who needs help should be ignored because of costs.


Only Australians should be helped with Australian money. And stop calling me names and using ad hominem attacks. It makes you look like you can't manage to debate without falling to the lowest common denominator.

And the Indian Ocean isn't ours you say? So why is this piece of trash our problem again? Why am I constantly being assaulted with her hideously stupid visage if she isn't our problem?

Fine we pick her up. She's gotta pay us back somehow. Nice blonde 16 year old girl like that. Yeah heres hoping one or more of our boys gets Australia's monies worth outta that before she gets shipped back home.




posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 01:22 AM
link   
reply to post by who-me?
 



ARE YOU AN IDIOT I NEVER SAID THE AUTOPILOT ISSUE HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE DEMASTING!!!!!!!!!!!

The autopilots failed WEEKS AGO!

Get with the program and WAKE UP



On April 24, 2010 Sunderland announced that she would stop at Cape Town for repairs to her autopilot system, ending her non-stop attempt. However, she planned to continue the circumnavigation.[23] Sunderland had two separate autopilot systems and both failed. She was able to swap parts between them to keep one going for a time, but a leak made the repair stop necessary. She arrived in Cape Town on May 5, 2010.[24]


Here is the Post I said this on to begin with

[edit on 13-6-2010 by theability]



posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 01:24 AM
link   
I will be sure to spell like correctly this time spellin gpolice.. geez

nit-pick much?

anyway.. I will highlight the key word here

Among the types of conduct that can lead to a Penal Code 273 a child endangerment charge are:

* Willfully causing or allowing a child to suffer unjustifiable physical pain or mental suffering (Willful harm to a child)
* Willfully allowing a child in one's custody to have his/her person or health injured (Willful injury to a child)
* Willfully allowing a child in one's custody to have his/her health or safety endangered (endangering person or health of a child).

not only were they allowing it.. they encouraged it and enabled it..
with at least 2 children..



[edit on 6/13/2010 by KATSUO]



posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 01:26 AM
link   
reply to post by belial259
 


Answer this-: Her parents offered to pay. The offer was declined.

Why are you still whining?

You say I'm name calling and complain whilst calling this girl a dog in your earlier post. Your words

Meanwhile this dog is prancing around the world in a bloody yacht.

I stand by what I said, not only do I think your and ignorant fool, your a bigoted hypocrite as well.

Riddle me that.



posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 01:28 AM
link   
reply to post by who-me?
 


People like you really drag down the whole conversation here.

I'm leaving this thread to satisfy your vanity. Have fun talking about an irrelevant fad.



posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 01:33 AM
link   
reply to post by belial259
 


Answer the question... its not that hard or is it?



posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 01:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by theability
There was just a brief snippet on the news:

That her father supposedly forced repairs to the vessel, making them hurry as to ensure her departure from cape town was quick so she would be in position to win the solo voyage navigation.

So after all the Dad might be a little more responsible than I had thought!

Sheesh if that is true what jerk!

And

Both auto-pilots failed before she could round the cape town horn and she had to stop in Capetown Africa for repairs making her non-stop journey a no go.

I disagree, those two posts imply your associating forced repairs and her dad being at least somewhat responsible for what happened.



[edit on 13/6/2010 by who-me?]



posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 01:35 AM
link   
reply to post by The Theorist
 



The Yacht she was in was higher quality one. Nobody is going to sit here and argue that.


The boat is of great quality and very very stable.

In fact it won't sink, has five sealed compartments.

You have to fracture the hull to break those areas and release the air before she'll sink.



posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 01:39 AM
link   
reply to post by who-me?
 


I am having a tough time folllowing your thoughts and logic.

Seriously, go read read my post from start to finish then ask questions again.



posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 02:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by who-me?
reply to post by DOADOA
 


250,000? that's a lot of money for people like me, and if you can afford that you'd have to be rich, thats like driving a ferrari.


Come on, everyone knows Ferrari's aren't 60ft long.


the price remain the same. my point is, if you can afford a boat that cost 250,000, you can afford a ferrari, we all know people who have yacht and ferrari's are rich. whats your point? just because a yacht that cost 250,000 is 60ft. long everyone can afford it now? what are you trying to say?

it would cost more to own a yacht than a ferrari. maintenace, docking, insurance etc... would add up to well above 300,000. show me an average joe who own a yacht..

[edit on 13-6-2010 by DOADOA]



posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 02:31 AM
link   
reply to post by DOADOA
 


That was mean't as a joke, it obviously when straight over your head.

And yes I can show you hundreds of average joes with yachts.

There called cruising yachties. They can be found all over the world in thousands of anchorages and marinas. Rarely are these people rich. Usually they have sold up everything in order to purchase and sail off round the world.



posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 02:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by who-me?
reply to post by DOADOA
 


That was mean't as a joke, it obviously when straight over your head.

And yes I can show you hundreds of average joes with yachts.

There called cruising yachties. They can be found all over the world in thousands of anchorages and marinas. Rarely are these people rich. Usually they have sold up everything in order to purchase and sail off round the world.









u2u me them. i would like to see for myself how they afford the food and fuel and such.

it's hard to tell you were joking, you were rolling your eyes like i'm an idiot. if you had a smile instead i would take it you were being sarcastic.



posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 03:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Theorist
I could buy a brand new 60" Jeanneau sailing yacht for about $250,000. A used one for FAR LESS (which, by the way, Abby was in an OLD YACHT that was RESTORED).
'Reserved For The Rich' ... Yeah, hardly. Get your facts straight, please.

$250,000 buys a three bedroom house on about 600 m^2 of land where I live.

Should we even begin to discuss what $250,000 would mean to probably half of the world's underclass population?

It's funny how skewed the definition of 'rich' can be. Most 16 year-olds in my area would think they were rich if they had $2,500 to buy a car.



posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 03:10 AM
link   
There's a lot of people in this thread arguing over semantics. A complete waste of time! Let's boil it down shall we.

Australia is footing the bill for this girls stuff up. Australia wont let the parents pay. OK... fine... that's the way it's going to be... this time.

However

These ventures should not be allowed if there isn't some type of contingency insurance to cover any type of mishap that may burden the resources and innocent tax payers of another country.


If someone wishes to take such risks, then every part of that risk and responsibility should fall upon their own shoulders. Not an innocent third party!

That's not too much to ask is it?

IRM



posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 03:14 AM
link   
This silly brat has now vowed to try to sail the world again.
So I guess the australians will have to pay millions again for this proud little rich girl when she fails the second time.

The millions of dollars payed to rescue her could have saved thousands of lives in a third world country. I hope she sinks.



posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 03:57 AM
link   
Okay sooo...next time theres lets say an eathquake and it kills thousands of people in some foreign country.

What you are saying is we should all go and help...but then make the people of that country pay for it...because it was their own 'fault' for living in an area eathquakes could occur.


She isn't the first teen to try something like this, there have already been successful trips and the same thing could have happened to an adult so her age doesn't really matter.


What happened to grouping together to help another human?



new topics




 
8
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join