Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In another report I heard the son went down because the trip was scheduled on Father’s Day.

And because people had dropped out so there was a seat available. Have those people been interviewed?

Yes, one of the men who dropped out over safety concerns:

https://www.insider.com/man-pulled-out-of-titan-sub-trip-didnt-seem-professional-2023-6?amp

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“These men were true explorers who shared a distinct spirit of adventure, and a deep passion for exploring and protecting the world’s oceans." -- Statement from Oceangate

They use the word explorers repeatedly. They were not all explorers - three of them were CUSTOMERS.

I'd like to know exactly what the "true explorers" did to protect the world's oceans - especially a 19 year old.

Does Oceangate really think we are all so gullible as to believe this??

Please! Respect the 48 hour rule if nothing else.

Agree.

These men are heroes.

WHAT?
NP

PP obviously only said that to make a point.

What point?

I think the pp meant what they said. I've seen the word tossed around a few times over the last few days. I think it's some type of denial coping mechanism.

Anonymous wrote:The 19-year-old passenger "wasn't very up for it" and felt "terrified" about the trip to explore the Titanic wreckage, his aunt said.

He ended up going because he was eager to please his dad, who was passionate about the lore of the ship, she said.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/titanic-submersible-shahwood-suleman-family-tragedy-rcna90678

The aunt making these comments is estranged from her family including the brother who was on board the Titan, according to Daily Mail, so she might not be an unimpeachable source.

Anonymous wrote:In another report I heard the son went down because the trip was scheduled on Father’s Day.

And because people had dropped out so there was a seat available. Have those people been interviewed?

Cheap submersible
And shady safety standards
Is a bad combo

Anonymous wrote:For anyone who wants a recap, the Daily podcast today is a good summary of the structural issues with this submersible. They used cheaper materials to make the craft and many others had refused to ride in it.

Why would anyone choose to ride in this if better options were available? Were the better options $1mil/ticket?

For anyone who wants a recap, the Daily podcast today is a good summary of the structural issues with this submersible. They used cheaper materials to make the craft and many others had refused to ride in it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

I am genuinely sad for the 19yr old.

sad because he’s younger than the rest? It is sad, sad that all the men died. He wasn’t a baby. God, some people have kids at 19, they have jobs, responsibilities. Why are we acting like he was 9? If his father was abusive and forced him into the crap device, then that’s concerning, but that’s not the case here. Do we feel this bad if a 19 year old has a motorcycle accident while riding with his dad? Or if a 19 year old dies while sky diving with Dad? I feel equal sorrow for everyone. The dad was only 48, he was very young also.

Yeah I mean it struck me that the dad's own dad is in his late 70s/early 80s. That man lost a son and a grandson.

I feel for the families. But yeah, a 48 year old has potentially another 50 years of life, even the oldest man was 77 years young. Sadly, you can die at any age. These men were robbed of life, they made one bad decision, like many people do, and that’s it, show’s over.

They weren't robbed; they made a choice (minus the kid). Robbed is being murdered, killed by a drunk driver, plane crash etc. Signing a waiver that notes "death" in it four times is a choice.

I get it. This didn't happen TO THEM. They did it - they chose to go down there in a carbon fiber mini van after signing waivers noting death. So yeah terrible decision. But just because someone makes terrible decisions doesn't mean they deserve to die.

I wasn't challenging if they deserved to die. I was challenging the word "robbed." They gambled with their lives and lost the bet. That's not how I define robbed. Rob is when something is taken from you without consent. They literally signed their lives away.

But you can say that about motor cycle riders, bike riders even, rock climbers, etc. Robbed, gambled with their lives, it’s semantics, either way many have succeeded at what they were trying to accomplish. It’s a shame, I feel they were robbed. They trusted that they would survive like the others before them.

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if OceanGate Expeditions will be held liable for what must have been an enormous search and rescue cost on the part of our Coast Guard.

Likely yes. IDK how the US does it, but with Canada it is standard to bill for these kinds of rescues - either the people or the corporate entity. Canada has had planes in the air since Sunday, as well as their Coast Guard and Navy. Oceangate will be filing for bankruptcy pretty soon here.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

I am genuinely sad for the 19yr old.

sad because he’s younger than the rest? It is sad, sad that all the men died. He wasn’t a baby. God, some people have kids at 19, they have jobs, responsibilities. Why are we acting like he was 9? If his father was abusive and forced him into the crap device, then that’s concerning, but that’s not the case here. Do we feel this bad if a 19 year old has a motorcycle accident while riding with his dad? Or if a 19 year old dies while sky diving with Dad? I feel equal sorrow for everyone. The dad was only 48, he was very young also.

Yeah I mean it struck me that the dad's own dad is in his late 70s/early 80s. That man lost a son and a grandson.

I feel for the families. But yeah, a 48 year old has potentially another 50 years of life, even the oldest man was 77 years young. Sadly, you can die at any age. These men were robbed of life, they made one bad decision, like many people do, and that’s it, show’s over.

They weren't robbed; they made a choice (minus the kid). Robbed is being murdered, killed by a drunk driver, plane crash etc. Signing a waiver that notes "death" in it four times is a choice.

But it has been done before and people survived, they didn’t believe they would be the ones to implode.

This vehicle had never been cycled to failure. It’s right there in the lawsuit. Nobody had any rational basis for thinking it would go one cycle, five cycles, or any number of cycles plus one and still be OK, because none of that had been tested.

They had hubris and hopefulness and they were being bullshit. That’s all.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

I am genuinely sad for the 19yr old.

sad because he’s younger than the rest? It is sad, sad that all the men died. He wasn’t a baby. God, some people have kids at 19, they have jobs, responsibilities. Why are we acting like he was 9? If his father was abusive and forced him into the crap device, then that’s concerning, but that’s not the case here. Do we feel this bad if a 19 year old has a motorcycle accident while riding with his dad? Or if a 19 year old dies while sky diving with Dad? I feel equal sorrow for everyone. The dad was only 48, he was very young also.

Yeah I mean it struck me that the dad's own dad is in his late 70s/early 80s. That man lost a son and a grandson.

I feel for the families. But yeah, a 48 year old has potentially another 50 years of life, even the oldest man was 77 years young. Sadly, you can die at any age. These men were robbed of life, they made one bad decision, like many people do, and that’s it, show’s over.

They weren't robbed; they made a choice (minus the kid). Robbed is being murdered, killed by a drunk driver, plane crash etc. Signing a waiver that notes "death" in it four times is a choice.

I get it. This didn't happen TO THEM. They did it - they chose to go down there in a carbon fiber mini van after signing waivers noting death. So yeah terrible decision. But just because someone makes terrible decisions doesn't mean they deserve to die.

Agree, they weren’t submersible pioneers. It’s been successfully done many times.

I wonder if OceanGate Expeditions will be held liable for what must have been an enormous search and rescue cost on the part of our Coast Guard.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

I am genuinely sad for the 19yr old.

sad because he’s younger than the rest? It is sad, sad that all the men died. He wasn’t a baby. God, some people have kids at 19, they have jobs, responsibilities. Why are we acting like he was 9? If his father was abusive and forced him into the crap device, then that’s concerning, but that’s not the case here. Do we feel this bad if a 19 year old has a motorcycle accident while riding with his dad? Or if a 19 year old dies while sky diving with Dad? I feel equal sorrow for everyone. The dad was only 48, he was very young also.

Yeah I mean it struck me that the dad's own dad is in his late 70s/early 80s. That man lost a son and a grandson.

I feel for the families. But yeah, a 48 year old has potentially another 50 years of life, even the oldest man was 77 years young. Sadly, you can die at any age. These men were robbed of life, they made one bad decision, like many people do, and that’s it, show’s over.

They weren't robbed; they made a choice (minus the kid). Robbed is being murdered, killed by a drunk driver, plane crash etc. Signing a waiver that notes "death" in it four times is a choice.

I get it. This didn't happen TO THEM. They did it - they chose to go down there in a carbon fiber mini van after signing waivers noting death. So yeah terrible decision. But just because someone makes terrible decisions doesn't mean they deserve to die.

I wasn't challenging if they deserved to die. I was challenging the word "robbed." They gambled with their lives and lost the bet. That's not how I define robbed. Rob is when something is taken from you without consent. They literally signed their lives away.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So per the kid's older sister, he didn't want to go on the sub and only did it bc it was Fathers Day/his father was Titanic obsessed (others had dropped out so seats opened up). Per his aunt - he was terrified of going and had expressed to other family members that he was terrified.

Wow. Learn to say no - even to mommy and daddy - folks. Or as I said before why on earth could mom not step in here and tell DH he was free to do what he wanted but her DS wasn't going esp since he was terrified!?

What makes you think the mother had any say in this matter? Different culture.

The mother is white/British. She's not a subservient Pakistani woman - and btw if you think Pakistani women are subservient with respect to their baby boys lol you don't know our culture. Mama always wins re her kids and esp her son at this age.

The culture issue may not be Pakistani vs European culture as much as billionaire culture. We don't know how this guy was - he actually wasn't a billionaire, "only" worth hundreds of millions. We don't know if this was a family where daddy was like you live this life because of MY money, MY empire, we'll do things MY way - and everyone went with it because of course they liked their rich lifestyle.

The guy was 19 yrs old, not 9. I mean really. I know kids are taking longer to grow up these days but man, he was 19. He could’ve said no, my kids refuse to go everywhere with me. Not blaming him but let’s not act like he was a child.

I agree with you but LOTS of 19 year old MEN these days may as well be 9. Hell lots of 25 year old men these days aren't their own man yet. All I'm saying is it isn't hard for a rich daddy to influence a 19 year old in this day and age.

They may as well be 9, but they aren’t 9. Huge difference. 25 year olds may as well be 12. It’s sad he had a rich dad. A shame he had no autonomy.

Look, no one twisted the 19 year old man’s arm to ride that crap device.

How do you know what kind of pressure his dad put on him? People on DCUM regularly talk about withholding college tuition payment or cutting off the cell phone if their college age kids don't do whatever it is their parents want or stop doing something, it's extremely common for parents to use their money and power to control college age kids even if the kids are technically adults.

Withholding tuition or a cell phone is different than coercing your son to ride in a submersible. I don’t believe the dad forced him to do it. I think the son had some reservations, as we all would, most people anyway. It’s like riding a scary rollercoaster with your dad, this is how I see it. His dad wanted to ride this particular ride and wanted someone to come along.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So per the kid's older sister, he didn't want to go on the sub and only did it bc it was Fathers Day/his father was Titanic obsessed (others had dropped out so seats opened up). Per his aunt - he was terrified of going and had expressed to other family members that he was terrified.

Wow. Learn to say no - even to mommy and daddy - folks. Or as I said before why on earth could mom not step in here and tell DH he was free to do what he wanted but her DS wasn't going esp since he was terrified!?

What makes you think the mother had any say in this matter? Different culture.

The mother is white/British. She's not a subservient Pakistani woman - and btw if you think Pakistani women are subservient with respect to their baby boys lol you don't know our culture. Mama always wins re her kids and esp her son at this age.

The culture issue may not be Pakistani vs European culture as much as billionaire culture. We don't know how this guy was - he actually wasn't a billionaire, "only" worth hundreds of millions. We don't know if this was a family where daddy was like you live this life because of MY money, MY empire, we'll do things MY way - and everyone went with it because of course they liked their rich lifestyle.

The guy was 19 yrs old, not 9. I mean really. I know kids are taking longer to grow up these days but man, he was 19. He could’ve said no, my kids refuse to go everywhere with me. Not blaming him but let’s not act like he was a child.

I agree with you but LOTS of 19 year old MEN these days may as well be 9. Hell lots of 25 year old men these days aren't their own man yet. All I'm saying is it isn't hard for a rich daddy to influence a 19 year old in this day and age.

They may as well be 9, but they aren’t 9. Huge difference. 25 year olds may as well be 12. It’s sad he had a rich dad. A shame he had no autonomy.

Look, no one twisted the 19 year old man’s arm to ride that crap device.

How do you know what kind of pressure his dad put on him? People on DCUM regularly talk about withholding college tuition payment or cutting off the cell phone if their college age kids don't do whatever it is their parents want or stop doing something, it's extremely common for parents to use their money and power to control college age kids even if the kids are technically adults.

Ha right. I love how DCUM - the most helicoptering of helicopter parents - who don't allow their precious babies to grow up even at age 25 are sitting here being like noooooo a 19 yr old is grown man who could've done what he wanted. Newsflash - daddy probably controlled him with money just like you control your kids with money, and unlike your kids this kid had an empire he was going to inherit so he wasn't trying to piss off his father lest he lost his lifestyle. And add the element of southeast Asian parent in there, I'm one of them - yeah we keep our kids dependent on us for FAR too long, at 19 we treat them like they're about 14.

But in the end money, empire, not pissing off daddy etc. all just did not matter.