Questions about the cruise port need answers

| 01/11/2019 | 52 Comments

Anna Peccarino writes: So last night I couldn’t sleep and did a Google search for pros and cons of cruiseships. I tried my best to keep as much of an open mind as possible because I didn’t want anyone to accuse me of not doing my homework and opposing the port without good reason.

Within minutes of clicking “search”, I discovered that:

1. Each day at sea an average cruise ship emits more sulfur dioxide than 13 million cars, and produces about 21,000 gallons of sewage, which is dumped just outside the territorial waters of the destinations they visit.

2. Over the last two and a half years, Carnival Corporation has been on criminal probation in the US for illegally dumping oily waste into the ocean and obstruction of justice for hiding it from regulators. Despite being on probation, each of the company’s cruise lines continued to commit hundreds of environmental crimes, including dumping wastewater and plastic into the ocean and polluting our air in excess of federal and state rules. One of the worst violations was the illegal discharge of 26,000 gallons of polluted graywater into Glacier Bay National Park in Alaska.

3. Under the current Caribbean regulations, ships can begin dumping garbage, including metal, glass and paper, three miles from shore as long as it is ground to less than an inch. Almost anything but plastic can be dumped beyond 25 miles. Miles from shore in the open Caribbean Sea, cruise ships are dumping ground-up glass, rags and cardboard packaging. Tons of the stuff. Every. Single. Day.

4. The bigger cruise ships that CIG claims to be building the port to attract, like The Harmony, owned by Royal Caribbean, have two 4-storey high 16-cylinder Wärtsilä engines, which at full power each burn 1,377 US gallons of fuel an hour, or about 66,000 gallons a day of some of the most polluting diesel fuel in the world.

According to leading independent German pollution analyst, Axel Friedrich, a single large cruise ship will emit over five tonnes of NOX emissions, and 450kg of ultra fine particles a day.

Bill Hemmings, marine expert at Brussels-based Transport and Environment group said, “These ships burn as much fuel as whole towns. They use a lot more power than container ships and even when they burn low sulphur fuel, it’s 100 times worse than road diesel.”

5. Air pollution from international shipping accounts for around 50,000 premature deaths per year in Europe alone, at an annual cost to society of more than €58bn ($65bn).

6. In Southampton, UK, “up to five large liners a day can be berthed in the docks at the same time, all running engines 24/7,” said Chris Hinds, vice chair of the Southampton docks watchdog group WDCF. “Pollution from the port is leading to asthma and chest diseases.”

7. Cruise ships effectively coming into land can bring diseases to the island, like norovirus which is known as “the cruise ship virus”

“Norovirus is a very contagious virus. You can get norovirus from an infected person, from contaminated food or water, or by touching contaminated surfaces. The virus causes your stomach or intestines or both to get inflamed (acute gastroenteritis). This leads you to have stomach pain, nausea, and diarrhea and to throw up.

“Individuals who have gastroenteritis can spread illness to others by touching handrails, elevator buttons, shared utensils, and other people while they are ill. Infections that cause gastroenteritis can also be spread through contaminated food or water.”

All of the above information is directly extracted from and contained in the news articles (all from reputable sources) that I posted on my FB page last night. On 31 October. Oh the irony! There’s much scarier stuff in those articles than any horror you could imagine on Halloween! And there’s a lot more additional information in those articles too. With pictures, so you can see with your own eyes what we’re dealing with here.

It’s all out there in the public domain for all to see if they know where to look. I have made it easier for you to find it on FB with the hashtag #rascalsofcaymanunite. Go and read the articles for yourselves, do your own research, too — don’t take my word for it — and then decide for yourselves if that is what you want for our islands and your children’s future.

You have a choice and you have a voice. On December 19, you can chose to vote either yes or no to the port. Whichever way you choose to vote, the most important thing is that you make a fully informed decision based on all of the relevant information available to you, and that must include the information listed above and contained in the articles I referred to that has not been disclosed to you by the pro-port groups.

But even with this information you still don’t have everything you need about the specifics of the project. Ask CIG for it. Never stop asking until you’re satisfied you have everything you need to decide whether or not to support the port.

And if you’re still not sure you have everything you need, or about which way to vote, please err on the side of caution and vote no.

The port is irreversible. Once they build it, there’s no going back.

If we say no now and in a few years’ time it turns out we were wrong, we can change that. We can build it later. But what if we’re right and they’re wrong? What then? There’s no going back from that.

Let’s not do anything irreversible that could ruin us.

I was recently criticised by Cayman’s Port. Cayman’s Future. for not giving the pro-port side a chance to persuade me that the port is a good thing for our economy. They said I opposed it unreasonably, without asking enough questions about it. So, I set about doing my research and I am now ready to rectify that. Here are some of the questions that I am putting out there for anyone who may wish to answer them fully and truthfully:

1. Our government spent five years and $5m working on the port project proposal but it didn’t take five minutes in those five years to do the proper due diligence about the full environmental impact of having up to four mega cruise ships docked in our harbour emitting harmful fumes that in Europe alone have so far been causing 50,000 premature deaths per year and costing some $65bm in healthcare bills. Seriously?

2. CIG didn’t think it necessary to do proper due diligence and to investigate the record of some of the Verdant Isle partners that were put on criminal probation in the US for environmental offences? Really?

3. And if they did do all proper due diligence on the health and safety and environmental implications of the project, and on their main “partner” that they’re allowing to come on island and attempt to mislead all of us about mythical jobs they’re supposed to create, even before CIG has the proper mandate and authority to sign any contracts with them, what on earth were they thinking? And why wouldn’t they tell us about it so we could make a fully informed decision about whether or not to support the project in light of ALL the relevant information? Surely not to mislead us?!

4. How can CIG, with a clear conscience, recommend the port project to us so forcibly in light of all of the above? And with the island so divided over the port too? And to invite Verdant Isle here to try to persuade us with bribery? To allow them to hold a job fair, albeit one at which allegedly only 20 people registered any interest for jobs, just before the referendum? Unbelievable!

5. No one in their right mind, with an ounce of sense, and the best interests of their people in mind would do such a thing! And to attempt to mislead us and to criticise anyone who tries to give people the full picture about what they’re proposing, too? That’s got to be the cherry on top!

6. How do they sleep at night and look their kids and grandkids in the eye?

The CIG work for us. We “hired” them to represent us and look after our (not their) best interests. That what they were elected for. To represent us and look after us. Now… if I hired lawyers or professional advisers or industry experts, or anyone else for that matter, to advise me about whether or not to embark on a particular project and they failed to bring the type of information that I have listed above to my attention before I signed off on it, not only would I sack them on the spot, but I would sue them, both their firms collectively and each and every one of them in their individual capacity, for gross negligence!

And yet here we are with CIG unapologetically and arrogantly trying to shove this environmentally harmful (as well as commercially unviable) project down our throats, putting our children’s health at risk, and engaging every possible trick in the book to make it as difficult as possible for us to succeed in the port referendum.

I know I sound like “Irate from Milton Keynes” writing this, but I am beyond saddened by what is happening in Cayman at the moment and utterly disappointed in our government for taking the stance it has taken in relation to both the project and the referendum.

Something must be done to protect our island before it is too late and that is why I’m speaking out. We must all speak out, if not for ourselves, let’s do it for our children. Please do the right thing. The stakes are far too high for us not to.

Whichever way you vote on 19 December is between you and your conscience. My conscience and I are voting NO.


Share your vote!

How do you feel after reading this?
  • Fascinated
  • Happy
  • Sad
  • Angry
  • Bored
  • Afraid
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Tags: , ,

Category: development, Local News, Viewpoint

Comments (52)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Anonymous says:

    I still am waiting to hear what the plans are for infrastructure and traffic during and after the construction.

  2. Anonymous says:

    The Deputy Governor had issued a memo to ALL Civil and Public Servants that they must remain neutral during this time regarding the Port Referendum.

    Yet, the Ministry of Tourism Civil Servants are assisting the Preferred Bidder Verdant Isle with the job fair and now a lunch and learn meeting for Civil and Public Servants to attend IN THE GOVT Admin bldg.

    What is neutral about these Civil Servants assisting the preferred bidder with its job fair and assisting them with this lunch and learn in the GAB?

    • Anonymous says:

      Whatever it costs and whatever the environmental damage , I just don’t want 2,000,000 more people to crowd our limited space and infrastructure.
      For me it is as simple as that and does not need science, research or Google.

  3. Anonymous says:

    The people for the port do you really wants thousands more people walking up and down your beach, there not even buying anything even if there were who wants them I rented a condo on the beach more than once I hated it when the ships let off those people , we just went in for lunch, tired of being asked to use r washroom , I don’t even want to get into the congestion in town , oh well there are many other islands for the stay over tourists but I degress I just really loved Cayman circa 1995

  4. Anonymous says:

    I your first sentence says you looked for pros and cons. Apparently you did not find any pros. A bit one sided me thinks.

    • Anonymous says:

      There are very few pros for the average Cayman citizens, but there are about five million dollars worth of negatives!

    • Anonymous says:

      There are none

    • Anonymous says:

      Yeah, I’d like to know as well. Was looking forward to seeing what could possibly be on the ‘pro’ side of having these mega trash producers on the high seas.


      Also, Anna, why do you not provide any of your sources here?

      I’d like details on this “2. …. the record of some of the Verdant Isle partners that were put on criminal probation in the US for environmental offences” ? You shouldn’t throw around accusations without a source.

      Give us the sauce!!

      CNS: Anna’s second question clearly correlates with Point 2 at the beginning. Here’s just one of many sources for those who can’t google:
      As she clearly says in her opening sentence, she found all of this with simple google searches, which anyone can do.

      • JahDread says:

        See wa me tell ona Duda a go round and round and we it stop nobody knows. Hmm

      • Anna Peccarino says:

        All the sources are articles posted on the Rascals of Cayman Unite Facebook page, as well as on my own Facebook page. There are also some other really interesting sites on Facebook, eg. Cruise Law News which have lots of information about the cruise lines and their impact on locations they visit. See also the Book by Ross A. Klein, “Cruise Ship Squeeze: The New Pirates of the Seven Seas” and Nadia Hardie’s affidavit on The National Trust website. And if all of that is not enough information for you, come to court on 22-24 January and hear the submissions on the environmental impacts of the proposed project in the judicial review trial.

      • Anna Peccarino says:

        Check out the sauce at – lots of articles on that FB page about Carnival’s criminal probation and environmental offences – and also read the affidavit of Nadia Hardie on the National Trust website. Even better, come and hear all about it in Court on 22-24 January 2020.

  5. eyeihavenoideer says:

    There has been alot of likes for comments ” for the port” i wonder if CIG paying people of to go online and like to influence voters ?????? Hmmmmm i smell Russia

    • Anonymous says:

      Uhm… hello!? Clearly they are paying people!

      Paying people to upvote and down vote. Paying Kelly Holdings to be their PR. Paying people to leave comments! Have you not seen how much money they have spent!? It is incredible.

      Just in case, they also pay people for the other issues that the rest of the world disagrees with them about, for example Gay Marriage.

  6. Anonymous says:

    Anna, you have obviously gone to a lot of trouble researching and writing this long article, however like some many people today you believe everything that you read on the web. Even Wikipedia can be full of false and misleading information. People read your article and believe all these many totally false, misleading and incorrect facts you have listed.

    Item #1 is totally incorrect. The shipping industry moves 90% of the worlds trade and has been the incinerator for the oil refining industry for over 100 years however over recent years they have been gearing up to totally clean up high surphur emissions with IMO regulations that all shipping must now burn low sulphur fuel which will double the cost of fuel for all shipping so shipping and trade cost will increase considerably The cruise industry can no longer burn high sulphur fuels and are now burning low sulphur and ultra low sulphur fuels similar to what CUC burns and the same diesel fuels that are now used on the road. You are misleading the public, and statements about the shipping industry being responsible for 50,000 deaths in Europe is absolutely laughable, ships do not travel over land they move across oceans far from land and when they are in port engines are shut down and only a small generator is on line supply power burning ultra low sulphur diesel in port which has a sulphur content of less than 10ppm. What about the enormous emission of the airline industry having multi thousands of flights over Europe every single day, what about all the power stations across Europe pumping out emissions and lastly what about all the multi hundreds of millions of cars and trucks in Europe pumping out emissions and you are singling out the shipping industry to be the root cause of all these deaths. Come on now! you cannot be serious and by you claiming this you lose all credibility whatsoever.

    Item #2 This is mostly correct.

    Items #3 to #6 is your misguided opinion not based on truthful fact at all for there is not way the environmental lobby can possibly win this referendum when it has taken 2 years for them to gather 25% of the registered voters so please explain to us all how are they planning to capture 50% + 1 voters on referendum day all in a single day. This whole obstructive effort was doomed from the beginning and has been a total waste of everyone’s time based on totally false and incorrect and exaggerated facts propagated by so many.

    You published a huge article on social media on Facebook with over 8 subject topics all of which every point was so negative based on misleading and false information. To recap your Facebook comments;
    #1 Item same as above,
    #2 Item almost the same as above except you go on about all the raw sewage pumped in the ocean by cruise ships. this is totally so wrong and so misleading and so false because every ship in the world is highly regulated for any and all pollutants and all ships have sewage treatment plants to ensure that no sewage pollutants are released into the environment. The exact same applies to emissions and oily water. All oily water is processed through separating equipment onboard every ship in the world and is recorded with the oil recovered and held and only water being discharged.
    #3 Item I think you need to take a cruise and ask for a personalized and escorted tour of the cruise ship to inspect the effort and lengths the cruise industry go to ensure that none of the garbage and waste that you claim is thrown into the ocean, simply does not occur at all. This is more of your false claims.
    #4 Item your have just taken this information from Wikipedia and modern cruise ships today do not have two gi-enormous main engines 4 stories high. They have multiple diesel engines being 6 diesel generators similar to a power station like CUC and these ships are now all diesel electric like a power station for a large floating town. When in port most of these engines are shut down because they only need power for mostly hotel services. So they are definitely not burning fossil fuels and creating the emissions you refer to when berthed at a port cruise pier, so Cayman is far better off with this positive compared to your fabricated negatives misleading the public.

    You claim that the CIG did not do any due diligence, that is like calling the kettle black because it is you who have not done any due diligence. Ask a cruise line executive for a guided tour of one of their ships to learn the realities of operating a cruise ship and visit MACI and talk to shipping professionals who regulate and survey the shipping and super yachting industries. Visit the MCA in Southhampton and let them show you and guide you through the regulations covering all shipping. Your opinions and the so called facts you are writing are all negatives with not one positive at all for a balanced truthful article and it is this type of misleading and totally false information and exaggeration that have been at the root basis of the environmental lobby. There is so much false information being spread by the environmental lobby it is a joke and alarming that so many intelligent people believe the garbage.

    Anna, Please think carefully about what you write and do not be just negative all the time, because this port development project is also about 4500 jobs currently servicing the cruise industry directly or indirectly and it is also about our countries life line to our existence being the cargo port. Obstructing the development of important infrastructure is holding the most affluent country in the Caribbean in the dark ages as we already have almost the worst port facilities in the Caribbean next to Turks and Caicos and Monserrat, shame and sadness that we will be left behind and we will have high unemployment and increased crime if we are obstructed from developing infrastructure.

    • Anonymous says:

      Before refuting, I’d suggest you do your own fact checking:
      This is a 2019 report

      • Anonymous says:

        If you did read the article response you would have seen that Item point #2 had a response of correct as the comment.

    • Anonymous says:

      10:30am – (I’ll call you Mansplainer) you are completely full of BS. Barely much of what you write is true. In fact pretty much all of it is fabrication.
      You sound like you work for a cruise line…
      However, if she had included her sources you could have tried to refute each individually and while there is much on the interwebs that is false, there is much more that is in fact FACT.

      • Anonymous says:

        Just think for a moment, if cruise ships discharged all their waste in the ocean there would be more waste in the Caribbean than Sargasso Seaweed. why don’t you educate yourself and visit the IMO, MCA, USCG and Cayman’s MACI on shipping regulations for all discharges and the handling of wastes.

    • Anonymous says:

      10:30 The thing with cruise ships is that they’ll pollute the environment all their working lives and even after retirement they’ll still be polluting when they’re dragged up a beach somewhere like Pakistan to be cut up for scrap.

      If cruise ships were cars they’d be banned in most of the First World.

      As for your comment about, ‘the worst port facilities in the Caribbean next to Turks and Caicos.’ I’d say from that you’ve never been to Grand Turk. I was out there when the cruise dock was built. It’s not ideal but does the job with very little impact. We lost two shallow dive sites and the fall out from the construction was minimal. That’s not what’s proposed here.

      The other thing about Grand Turk is that the original plan for a dock in Cockburn Town was rejected by the electorate, who kicked the government out before it could go ahead. There’s a warning there.

      • Anonymous says:

        We are not talking about cruise ship piers because we do not have them, we are talking about general cargo port facilities and infrastructure.

    • Anna Peccarino says:

      Dear Anonymous,

      Unlike yours, all my claims and comments are made in my own name. And I stand by them. They are all substantiated by quoted sources on my FB page, on Rascals of Cayman Unite, on Cruise Law News and on a number of other websites such as, eg. Friends of the Earth (, and if you just do a simple Google search you will easily find references to them and many other related ones too.

      There are also recent Florida court decisions on the subject, some from just over a week ago severely criticizing and reprimanding Carnival for even more environmental offences despite its criminal probation. Check out

      There is additional evidence about Carnival’s environmental criminal offences in the affidavit of Nadia Hardie published on the National Trust website which is very interesting reading. That affidavit, incidentally, also points out how CIG and VIPP have been misleading the public about the project. I suggest you read it and I also invite you and anyone else interested in finding out the truth about the project to come along to Court on 22-24 January so you can hear for yourself about the negative environmental impact the proposed project would have on our islands and how the true position has been misrepresented to us.

      Unlike CIG, I do not owe anyone any duty of care to do any due diligence on a such a massive and costly project that is going to change the Cayman Islands beyond recognition and from which there is no going back. If anyone should have gone to talk to shipping professionals about cruiseship pollution it should have been our very own CIG. Their due diligence should have included investigating the criminal status of their project partners. And yet they didn’t do any of that. In answer to questions about Carnival’s criminal record we were told that our question was “ridiculous!” and in answer to what they planned to do about air pollution we were told that our prevailing offshore winds would take care of that by blowing cruiseship fumes away from the island. Beggars belief…

      Indeed it would appear that I have done considerably more due diligence on the project and on the VIPP partners than they have and because of that I have no problem whatsoever standing by any of my comments whether in this article or anywhere else. Will you do the same for your own comments and stop hiding behind anonymity to criticize me and others who speak out against the port? And if and when you are ready to sign your own name to your comments, do remember to also tell us what your own personal interest in the port project is and why you really support it.

    • Anna Peccarino says:

      Check out for articles and information relevant to cruise lines, the port project and related issues.

  7. Anonymous says:

    So well expressed and valid points addressed. It sad how people attack and clearly haven’t done their own research, I wanted to see what all the fuss was about the Oasis ships so I went on one this year March 2019. We had a really nice time but it was overwhelming how big it was and how many people were on it.This size ship is a floating city and there is no need to get off the ship. we have a few sites that people wold enjoy but Cayman prices and selection are nothing compared to what they sell on the ship. They literally have a shopping mall in the center of the ship. We got off at each port and I must say all of them except Labadee, were over congested and confusing as hell. In one port over 20 people ran into the local pharmacy store to use the restroom, as the public ones were disgusting and had even more waiting to us them. Cayman has some very special sites to be seen but if you treat tourism the same way you treat development, we are all screwed. Why is there not a DOE unit at stingray city every day to control volume and close it when at capacity. GREED will be the end of Cayman, we attracted a certain type of person here, who is looking for a developed, safe, peaceful and tranquil island getaway. We are on the edge of destroying what made us great just for more money for a limit few. I would love to see every MLA try to go and access public right of way in there District to the sea and let us know how easy they found it upon the sea. good luck getting there in this traffic!

    • HQ Mueller says:

      Hmm I don’t know how accurate all of that post is. She does not provide any credit to the supposedly publications she has extracted data from, isn’t that wrong?

      You call for information that is not forthcoming from government . you read don’t you well the Premier has announced that a series of meetings to further inform and inquire .( I know your possible retort oh doing it now why not before). Ask yourself isn’t it possible that this was all planned already but antsy antsy antsy activists were chomping at the bit to get one up on the government.

      Lastly remember this do not judge too quickly the people who you ridicule . They live here too and have a very serious vested interest and They and others before them have allowed people like you and me to have freedom of expression with which comes a serious responsibility to critique but not defame. I expect that you and others opposing the Port will take the time to attend and participate in a respectful and inquisitive way it is your right . I implore you to respect or else you cannot expect it from others.

      Bona será

    • Anonymous says:

      Being from Cayman Brac we see a fair amount of foreigners, usually American, who build unobtrusive homes here and add in various ways to the community. Most of them had visited Cayman many times, some owned homes there, but settled on the Brac because of what Cayman has become. Uncontrolled chaos. Please stop. It is becoming a very unappealing “paradise”.

      • Anonymous says:

        3.48pm Please… Cayman Brac is a part of ‘Cayman’ , so is Grand Cayman. I believe what you meant to say is many foreigners settled in Cayman Brac because Grand Cayman is becoming unappealing due to ‘uncontrolled chaos’ Ok. The big island is GRAND Cayman .Cayman or the Caymans should only be used when referring to the three islands as a group.

  8. Anonymous says:

    Anna Peccarino – what an amazing, intelligent synopsis you’ve put together for people. Well done, and while I’m not Caymanian so can’t vote, if I could, you’ve made an assailable argument. I just hope people who can vote, do so intelligently and for the right reasons.

  9. Tony Ward says:

    Far and away the best commentary I have seen on this whole subject. Some members of the CIG have an obvious interest in the project and will benefit when the costs blow out to double the estimate and ultimately the retail trading in GT at the end. Dirty doings in CIG are plain to see.

    • Chris Johnson says:

      I agree. Anna wrote a very well constructed article when she could not sleep. I cannot imagine the next article when she is at full force. Well done Anna and let us hear more from you.

  10. Jonas says:

    The Lady’s heart is the right place I hope that all of her wishes and dreams will come true. XXXX If cruise ships Are stopped from coming here and everywhere else there will be massive unemployment.

    Ms. Pecarino what we all worldwide should be advocating for is better standards of emissions control, invention of and usage of alternative means of fuel for these ships. Standards of controlling and recycling waste on these ships thus negating the dumping of waste in the ocean etc.

    To extract articles of material which is largely known to all ( we read we are not dum) and to think that portraying such heartfelt emotional verbiage is going to dissuade the government or the people whose living comes from the cruise industry. It is possible that the referendum results will not favor the government and it is possible that it will theAyes will have it. XXXX

  11. J|) says:

    Thing is, we could turn away every cruise ship and everything you listed above would still happen, just elsewhere and we’d still feel the effects. The washed up garbage on our beaches floats from hundreds of miles away and the air we breathe isn’t 100% local.

    Might as well get our cut of the cake.

    • Anonymous says:

      ‘Might as well get our cut of the cake.’ That comment sums the Cayman Islands rather nicely. The only bit missing is, ‘while it lasts.’ The thing with a cake is that once everyone’s had their share all you get left with is the crumbs.

      This, ‘What’s in it for me?’ mentality is ultimately what’s going to kill these islands.

  12. Anonymous says:

    Thank you for your article. Maybe some of the undecideds will understand better what is at risk here. Maybe we should ban 6:51 also. With an attitude like that, he or she, is a detriment to the Cayman Islands.

  13. alaw says:

    Caymanians are SEAFARERS!

    • Anonymous says:

      Another problem with the docks rather than tendering is that it increases the smuggling of drugs. Much easier if you can just walk off a ship.

      • Say Wa says:

        Outright nonsense @6:10, in case you didn’t know there is a screening process on disembarkation of passengers as well as on boarding.

        • anon says:

          not a very good one though. You could very easily have a bag of weed or coke in your pocket going through the metal detector. As long as it isn’t in your bag which is the only thing which gets x-rayed.

      • Anonymous says:

        Get off the ship, get onto a tender, get out of the tender simple as that. Nobody checks what people have in their bags getting OFF the ship so what’s the difference

  14. Anonymous says:

    As if you don’t have enough pollution from the Dump you now want to bring toxic emissions from the ships closer to your shores.
    And if anyone believes that he lives too far from either The Dump or proposed dock, just for fun have Comprehensive Urine Element Profile and Comprehensive Blood Elements tests done. Test your children.

  15. Anonymous says:

    say NO NOW and leave it for or Grand Children to BUILD !

  16. Kurt Christian says:

    Vote No

  17. Anonymous says:

    Do you not think the cruise ships motors are on even when anchored…..Yes lets ban all the cruise ships. very ideal plan.

  18. Anonymous says:

    This is exactly the type of extreme view that makes port opponents so dangerous at times. Trying to make out that cruise ships are the most dangerous thing on the planet… so you don’t think anything else causes harm to the environment? If we strike the right balance this port can be great for our country.

    • Anonymous says:

      Classic whataboutism. Yes, we know that other things cause harm to the environment. What does that have to do with cruise ships?

  19. Anonymous says:

    Thank you Anna, great article.
    What you write about is a cause of global concern but it is of no concern whatsoever to those who own Watches & Jewelry businesses in downtown Cayman and take 50-60% of cruise passenger spend.

  20. Anonymous says:

    It sounds like you don’t want any cruise ships coming to the Cayman Islands. Maybe ban cargo ships and airplanes also?

  21. Anonymous says:

    We should throw a big party to celebrate the cruise piers. Maybe bring the kids.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.