Sorry to be so blunt, but someone has to say it. The bias of the following post will be heavy, and I apologize for that. Now, let me tell you a story:
19 years ago, in wonderful 1989, an oil tanker captain with an alcohol problem at the attention of his employers was allowed to continue his duties on a ship, the Exxon Valdez. Late in an Alaskan winter, this inebriated captain ordered his crewmen to steer the ship through the wrong lane of the port entrance to attempt to pass between ice flows and the Bligh Reef.
It didn't work out.
About an hour later, they had lost an estimated 115,000 barrels of oil into the sea. Another 5 hours later, they were up to around 215,000 barrels (about 11 million gallons).
This immense natural disaster destroyed the ecosystem along 1,200 miles of coastline ruining the livelihood of local economies which were heavily fishing based. There have been all sorts of legal battles since and Exxon has appealed it every step of the way fighting tooth and nail to never actually have to pay punitive damages to the people whose lives were destroyed.
Details of this case can be read in the Washington Post, but ultimately we all know what is happening. An oil company is powerful and influential in our country, and as such can hold things up in our efficiency deprived judicial system for a few decades until the surviving 80% of the original 32,000 plaintiffs are on their last legs and the endless appeals have reduced the damages to be paid to almost nothing.
Good thing our Supreme Court didn't have anything more important pressing down on them so that they could take the time to debate the last grasp at positive qualities of their good friends at the nature-raping plant.
I mean, fair facts about defendants from the oil companies.
The Point Blank Critic
0 Witnesses:
Post a Comment