OMG - Just in from Pensacola - TRAGIC!

[susano]

Pics and video (can't copy to here)

http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1110380/pg1

[Working Poor]

bump

[paulitics]

It is tragic, and there you have the douchebag governor with his phot ops, bent down on the shore while you have 3 or four people with shovels.

We all know, so much more could have been done to prevent this crap from hitting the beaches. There was no response for weeks, and the damn federal government is disallowing the states and private companies from around the world to clean up the mess while it is still in the gulf and not the shores.

And this will all be used to push through the climate bills, since global warming, I mean climate change has has fallen on its face.

They have a few more months left, and this is the environmental 911 they needed.

What pisses me off is you know damn good and well some anti-american psycopaths are celebrating this right now. Some of them are there right now filming it, so that it can grace the front cover of time magazine.

[JeNNiF00F00]

..

[Uriel999]

I have surfed many many many times right at that pier. I've taken dates there, I've seen one of the most beautiful sunrises I have ever seen there, and now...FU BP! :mad:

[Kylie]

And they just uncapped it again.

Everyone down on the gulf is screwed. I'm not an oceanographer but I can see that this is going to decimate the gulf coast.

[Dr.3D]

So should they be constantly cleaning the beaches, or wait till all of the oil has come ashore and then clean up the mess? Seems to me it would be much like shoveling snow. Just wait till all of the snow has fallen and then shovel it up.

[erowe1]

I have surfed many many many times right at that pier. I've taken dates there, I've seen one of the most beautiful sunrises I have ever seen there, and now...

And now what?

Do you think you won't be able to do all those things again? Are we supposed to pretend this is some kind of permanent destruction of that beach like the people in that forum linked in the OP saying melodramatic things like, "Good bye, Ocean."?

[Dr.3D]

And now what?

Do you think you won't be able to do all those things again? Are we supposed to pretend this is some kind of permanent destruction of that beach like the people in that forum linked in the OP saying melodramatic things like, "Good bye, Ocean."?

Exactly! Once all of the oil has collected on the beach, they can clean it up and everything will be just peachy.

[libertybrewcity]

they should just burn it, wouldn't that work?

[free1]

So should they be constantly cleaning the beaches, or wait till all of the oil has come ashore and then clean up the mess? Seems to me it would be much like shoveling snow. Just wait till all of the snow has fallen and then shovel it up.
You are right, current limited hand cleanup efforts are only for show.

It just takes funding.

They scoop it up with bulldozers and take it to a processing plant, remove all the oil in mass and return it. We've moved more material for big construction projects around the country.

Not that I like the idea, but it's not that it's ruined forever. Just hope the funding keeps flowing.

[dannno]

Oh man I'd be pissed if my beaches looked like that.

[Meatwasp]

Pics and video (can't copy to here)

http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1110380/pg1

susano you are a dramatist. Dr 3d is right. It will be cleaned up eventually

[GunnyFreedom]

I do NOT expect BP or anybody else to live up to the task here, so I am in no way trying to defend their pathetic looking effort...however I WILL say that were I in charge of the cleanup here I would want to see a larger proportion come ashore first BEFORE I started lifting topsoil. There's only going to be so much of the sandy topsoil to lift up and truck out...

If I were in charge of the cleanup, I'd try and hold until 1/3 of the expected nasty washed ashore, and then dredge it up with an excavator. One of those giant 2-story ones. We already know how to put heavy equipment on a beach (See Normandy) A few iron plates and you are golden. Then I'd clear off the beach and let the next 1/3 wash in and dig it up and truck it out, and the final 1/3.

I think that would clean it up eventually while losing as little of the sandy topsoil as possible.

So that MIGHT explain the current pathetic-looking response...

but as I said before, I have zero expectations that these people will accomplish this. All I'm saying is if I were in charge my current effort there would look pretty pathetic too....

[Number19]

Not so bad; easy cleanup.


...FU BP! The American economy is government controlled and regulated. Offshore drilling particularly so. The responsibility lies with the government, not BP.

[noxagol]

Um, just have underwater skimmers. High tide brings it in, skimmer keeps it from going out during low tide, collect daily.

[Promontorium]

I lived in Pensacola for 1 1/2 years. I swam those waters, with the rays, the fish, the sharks, and the dolphins. I swam across the bay, I swam through estruarys into creeks. I ran that beach many times. One of the most beautiful and diverse places I've seen. This is a terrible raping of our country. Obama tied our arms and BP raped us.

[OhioMichael]

BP should be sued to death.

No company deserves to survive after messing up this badly.

[Meatwasp]

Oh man I'd be pissed if my beaches looked like that.

Dannno, Many many years ago the Santa Barbara beaches had oil seeping through naturally until they put oil wells there . You are too young to know this but I aint. Ha!

[puppetmaster]

OMG OMG OMG.....lol

[Number19]

BP performed no worse than our government does; and the morals exhibited by BP officers are the morals of our society. They did nothing that the vast majority of private citizens don't do in their daily lives. If BP as a corporation deserves to "die" for this accident, then perhaps we also need a mandatory death sentence if you text while driving and have an accident that kills someone. As a society, we reap what we sow.

[sailingaway]

Why was it again Obama wouldn't waive the environmental reviews so the governors could build artificial reefs to catch this?

[CountryboyRonPaul]

Some videos of my usual fishing grounds.

YouTube - LDWF - Oill Spill and Coastal Habitat Loss (Pass a Loutre WMA) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cuZH3Z6uGE0&feature=player_embedded#)!

YouTube - Oil spill tour 6-17-10-redo.wmv (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfWTkToaVRU&feature=player_embedded)

[Matt Collins]

One of the images from that op link:

http://www.godlikeproductions.com/sm/custom/c4958b8424.png

[dannno]

Dannno, Many many years ago the Santa Barbara beaches had oil seeping through naturally until they put oil wells there . You are too young to know this but I aint. Ha!

They still have oil seapage pretty bad in some spots..but they are tar balls, not like that.. From what I've heard it's about the same as it has always been, though some like to claim there is less.

[Matt Collins]

Governor Charlie Crist checking out the beaches...















http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/.a/6a00d8341c630a53ef0134846deee5970c-600wi

[Anti Federalist]

June 23, 2010
Eco-Theatre

Posted by Lew Rockwell on June 23, 2010 11:55 AM

A wildlife biologist visiting my town is “saving birds” in the oil spill, as he did after the Exxon Valdez leak. When the media is around, he and his colleagues are seen carefully cleaning birds, though this is virtually always futile. When the media are absent, they simply twist the poor animals necks, since they are dying. The whole business costs about $5,000 per bird.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/60128.html

[Dr.3D]

Governor Charlie Crist checking out the beaches...


http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/.a/6a00d8341c630a53ef0134846deee5970c-600wi

He was probably just checking to see if she had tar balls on the bottoms of her feet.

[Matt Collins]

He was probably just checking to see if she had tar balls on the bottoms of her feet.
The public safety requiring it.....

[susano]

susano you are a dramatist. Dr 3d is right. It will be cleaned up eventually

You need to change your name to Meathead

[jmdrake]

Governor Charlie Crist checking out the beaches...















http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/.a/6a00d8341c630a53ef0134846deee5970c-600wi

So much for the CC gay rumors.

[Dr.3D]

You need to change your name to Meathead

And yours to alarmist.

[susano]

June 23, 2010
Eco-Theatre

Posted by Lew Rockwell on June 23, 2010 11:55 AM

A wildlife biologist visiting my town is “saving birds” in the oil spill, as he did after the Exxon Valdez leak. When the media is around, he and his colleagues are seen carefully cleaning birds, though this is virtually always futile. When the media are absent, they simply twist the poor animals necks, since they are dying. The whole business costs about $5,000 per bird.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/60128.html

Video or that's bullshit

[Anti Federalist]

Video or that's bullshit

Posted without comment.

Take it up with Rockwell.

[Anti Federalist]

Video or that's bullshit

Maybe more to your liking:

Boat captain, despondent over spill, commits suicide

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/greenspace/2010/06/gulf-oil-spill-boat-captain-despondent-over-spill-commits-suicide.html

June 23, 2010 | 11:51 am
William Allen Kruse, 55, a charter boat captain recently hired by BP as a vessel of opportunity out of Gulf Shores, Ala., died Wednesday morning before 7:30 a.m. of a gunshot to the head, likely self-inflicted, authorities said.

"He had been quite despondent about the oil crisis," said Stan Vinson, coroner for Baldwin County, which includes Gulf Shores.

Kruse, who lived with his family in nearby Foley, Ala., reported to work Wednesday morning as usual at the Gulf Shores Marina on Fort Morgan Road in Gulf Shores, Vinson said. He met up with his two deckhands at his boat, The Rookie. One of the deckhands later told Vinson that Kruse seemed his usual self, sending them to fetch ice while he pulled the boat around to the gas pumps.

As the deckhands walked off to get ice, they heard what sounded like a firecracker, Vinson said. They turned around but didn't see anything out of the ordinary. So they proceeded to gather the ice and wait for Kruse at the pumps. "He never showed," Vinson said.

After waiting a while, the deckhands returned to the boat, which was moored where they had left it, Vinson said. They went aboard and found Kruse at the captain's bridge above the wheelhouse, Vinson said. He had been shot in the head. A Glock handgun was later recovered from the scene, and investigators do not suspect foul play, Vinson said.

Vinson said Kruse was in good health, did not suffer from any mental illness and was not taking psychotropic medications.

But he said it's not surprising the oil spill had weighed heavily on his mind, as it has on many local fishermen no longer able to support themselves with deep-sea sport fishing trips for marlin and the like, Vinson said.

"All the waters are closed. There's no charter business anymore. You go out on some of the beaches now, with the oil, you can't even get in the water," Vinson said. "It's really crippled the tourism and fishing industry here."

Vinson's office was to perform an autopsy Wednesday, and the Gulf Shores Police Department is still investigating. Det. Justin Clopton did not return calls.

Kruse's family was notified by Wednesday afternoon, Vinson said, and his deckhands were sent home for the day.

-- Molly Hennessy-Fiske

[susano]

And yours to alarmist.

At what point do you consider being alarmed appropriate? Maybe if you lived there you would be alarmed, like people who bother to make these videos.

That oil can't just be shoveled up like snow, and nobody knows when it will stop coming, either. It's deep in the sand. I've posted other video of that in Destin. The hairbrained comments about how easy this is to clean up are just stupid beyond belief. The time to contain the oil is BEFORE it gets in the marshes and on shore, and that could have been and could be done. That doesn't meet the corporate-gov't objective, though. That won't help get cap & trade (which BP helped write and supports) passed. This is an environmental 9/11 and there are agendas behind the destruction.

Also, you unfeeling, sociopathic fuckers need your faces shoved in that oil. Maybe then you might get some empathy for the marine life. Then again, prolly not.

[susano]

Maybe more to your liking:

Boat captain, despondent over spill, commits suicide

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/greenspace/2010/06/gulf-oil-spill-boat-captain-despondent-over-spill-commits-suicide.html

June 23, 2010 | 11:51 am
William Allen Kruse, 55, a charter boat captain recently hired by BP as a vessel of opportunity out of Gulf Shores, Ala., died Wednesday morning before 7:30 a.m. of a gunshot to the head, likely self-inflicted, authorities said.

"He had been quite despondent about the oil crisis," said Stan Vinson, coroner for Baldwin County, which includes Gulf Shores.

Kruse, who lived with his family in nearby Foley, Ala., reported to work Wednesday morning as usual at the Gulf Shores Marina on Fort Morgan Road in Gulf Shores, Vinson said. He met up with his two deckhands at his boat, The Rookie. One of the deckhands later told Vinson that Kruse seemed his usual self, sending them to fetch ice while he pulled the boat around to the gas pumps.

As the deckhands walked off to get ice, they heard what sounded like a firecracker, Vinson said. They turned around but didn't see anything out of the ordinary. So they proceeded to gather the ice and wait for Kruse at the pumps. "He never showed," Vinson said.

After waiting a while, the deckhands returned to the boat, which was moored where they had left it, Vinson said. They went aboard and found Kruse at the captain's bridge above the wheelhouse, Vinson said. He had been shot in the head. A Glock handgun was later recovered from the scene, and investigators do not suspect foul play, Vinson said.

Vinson said Kruse was in good health, did not suffer from any mental illness and was not taking psychotropic medications.

But he said it's not surprising the oil spill had weighed heavily on his mind, as it has on many local fishermen no longer able to support themselves with deep-sea sport fishing trips for marlin and the like, Vinson said.

"All the waters are closed. There's no charter business anymore. You go out on some of the beaches now, with the oil, you can't even get in the water," Vinson said. "It's really crippled the tourism and fishing industry here."

Vinson's office was to perform an autopsy Wednesday, and the Gulf Shores Police Department is still investigating. Det. Justin Clopton did not return calls.

Kruse's family was notified by Wednesday afternoon, Vinson said, and his deckhands were sent home for the day.

-- Molly Hennessy-Fiske

Why would another tragic death, due to this horror show, be to my liking? I posted that news at GLP.

[jmdrake]

Video or that's bullshit

I don't have a video, but NPR did an story the other day of a wildlife biologist who claimed research showed cleaning birds was a waste of time and money since most died anyway.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=127749940

Something else to consider. Worse spills have happened. (What makes this one so bad is we don't know what the end game will be.) And each time the ocean bounces back and all the whales and dolphins don't die. That doesn't mean would shouldn't demand accountability. We should. But some of the concern is starting to stretch into hysteria.

Here's an excerpt from an article about earlier spills.

http://www.niemanwatchdog.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=ask_this.view&askthisid=462

Almost all oil spills are harmful. But the three largest in history – the Kuwait disaster in the first Gulf War, Mexico’s 1979 Ixtoc I well blowout in the Gulf of Mexico, and the 1979 Agean Captain-Atlantic Empress supertanker collision off Trinidad – all spilled far more oil than BP has so far, yet they left far less long-term damage behind than forecasts at the time predicted. And unlike the oft-cited Exxon Valdez spill in the much colder and less forgiving Alaskan waters, these three occurred in warm water environments similar to that of the BP spill. How much have the apocalyptic forecasts of the current spill’s long-term effects been based on worries and fears and how much on fact? Why has so little attention been paid to reports like the 1993 study by UNESCO, the United States, and Arab countries which found that the vast 1991 Kuwait spill – the spill extended more than 4,000 square miles – did “little long-term damage”? Weren’t seabirds nesting safely in the spill area the following year? What factors make the BP spill different? (Later reports, emerging after the BP spill, said the 1993 study understated effects. One said there has been heavy impact along coastal marshes. Another focused on the lack of clean-up efforts, which is unlikely to be a problem this time.)

Seen Trinidad's beeches lately?

http://gallery.hd.org/_tn/std/places-and-sights/_more2002/_more01/Cuba-Trinidad-Caribbean-Sea-Playa-Ancon-woman-floating-on-clear-water-shadow-1-MY.jpg

http://www.trinidad-travel.info/images/Trinidad-travel-trinidad-coast.jpg

[susano]

One ton of crude oil equals 7.3 barrels

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_barrels_of_crude_oil_EQUALS_one_ton_of_ga s_oil


On this day in 1979, two gigantic supertankers collide off the island of Little Tobago in the Caribbean Sea, killing 26 crew members and spilling 280,000 tons of crude oil into the sea.

http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/7/19?catId=5

280,000 divided by 7.3 = 38,356.16 barrels

Did I do that right? If so, this isn't even close to one DAY of the Macondo well spew.

[Brian4Liberty]

We all know, so much more could have been done to prevent this crap from hitting the beaches. There was no response for weeks, and the damn federal government is disallowing the states and private companies from around the world to clean up the mess while it is still in the gulf and not the shores.

There was immediate action taken to keep this from hitting the beaches. It was the use of dispersants to make the oil break up and sink. It didn't work completely, and they didn't really consider any other options.

[specsaregood]

And now what?

Do you think you won't be able to do all those things again? Are we supposed to pretend this is some kind of permanent destruction of that beach like the people in that forum linked in the OP saying melodramatic things like, "Good bye, Ocean."?

It should be noted that particular forum is a tavistock psyop project. It is pretty much common knowledge at this point. I'd recommend considering anything said there or found there with healthy dose of skepticism.

[susano]

Ixtoc/Campeche

An average of approximately ten thousand to thirty thousand barrels per day were discharged into the Gulf until it was finally capped on 23 March 1980, nearly 10 months later

How much is spewing at Macondo is unclear. BP first said 1000 bpd. Then it was 5000 bpd. Then maybe 50-70,000 bpd. Then their internal memo said possibly 100,000 bpd. Lets take 50,000 pbd. We're around day 60. That's 3,000,000 barrels so far. That's about half of Ixtoc, in two months.

[susano]

Here's a somewhat encouraging article about Itox, but with the big difference being there were hardly any wetlands involved:

http://news.discovery.com/earth/gulf-oil-spill-ixtoc.html


Coastal Louisiana wetlands are termed “America’s Wetlands” because of their great environmental and societal value. They make up the seventh largest delta on Earth and are the heart of an intricate ecosystem some scientists say is on the verge of collapse. They contain over 40 percent of the U.S. tidal marshes and support the largest commercial fishery in the lower 48 states.

http://www.nwrc.usgs.gov/releases/pr03_004.htm

That's just Louisiana! These wetlands have already been severely impacted by industry and pollution and Louisiana has been involved in coastal restoration:

http://www.wavcis.lsu.edu/news/wetland.htm

When oil kills the grasses in the marshes and barrier islands, they wash away. Now, I realize that some of you assholes might not care if that happens, but some of us do. It's a huge loss and not some easy fix as some would like to imagine it.

[jmdrake]

:rolleyes: Again, some of us "assholes" have been pointing out repeatedly that this wouldn't have even happened if government regulations and inducements had not pushed the oil companies into the deepwater over the shallow. But I guess you're too busy on your soapbox to listen to that.


Here's a somewhat encouraging article about Itox, but with the big difference being there were hardly any wetlands involved:

http://news.discovery.com/earth/gulf-oil-spill-ixtoc.html


Coastal Louisiana wetlands are termed “America’s Wetlands” because of their great environmental and societal value. They make up the seventh largest delta on Earth and are the heart of an intricate ecosystem some scientists say is on the verge of collapse. They contain over 40 percent of the U.S. tidal marshes and support the largest commercial fishery in the lower 48 states.

http://www.nwrc.usgs.gov/releases/pr03_004.htm

That's just Louisiana! These wetlands have already been severely impacted by industry and pollution and Louisiana has been involved in coastal restoration:

http://www.wavcis.lsu.edu/news/wetland.htm

When oil kills the grasses in the marshes and barrier islands, they wash away. Now, I realize that some of you assholes might not care if that happens, but some of us do. It's a huge loss and not some easy fix as some would like to imagine it.

[susano]

It should be noted that particular forum is a tavistock psyop project. It is pretty much common knowledge at this point. I'd recommend considering anything said there or found there with healthy dose of skepticism.

That's a rumor that's been around for a long time (which I have never seen substantiated). I also post at sites with the orginal GLP members. The guy who strated the site, Kent Steadman, continued to post at GLP untiel he died, a year or two ago. It's the best site for breaking news and in depth threads on the same. The threads on the Gulf have been outstanding, as many of the members live down there and have been reporting with pics and video.

[susano]

:rolleyes: Again, some of us "assholes" have been pointing out repeatedly that this wouldn't have even happened if government regulations and inducements had not pushed the oil companies into the deepwater over the shallow. But I guess you're too busy on your soapbox to listen to that.

I'm fully aware of the collusion between government and corporations but I guess you've been too busy defending corporations (gov'ts partner) to read my threads on it.

[jmdrake]

I'm fully aware of the collusion between government and corporations but I guess you've been too busy defending corporations (gov'ts partner) to read my threads on it.

I'm not the one running around calling other people "assholes" sweetheart. You really need to take a chill pill. And this isn't just "collusion between government and corporations". It's collusion between government, corporations and ENVIRONMENTALISTS! Yes the same well meaning tree hugging save the whales folks have actually been an active part of the problem. I call all of them out. (Government, corporations and environazis). You (by your own admission) have only gone after 2 of the 3.

[susano]

I'm not the one running around calling other people "assholes" sweetheart. You really need to take a chill pill. And this isn't just "collusion between government and corporations". It's collusion between government, corporations and ENVIRONMENTALISTS! Yes the same well meaning tree hugging save the whales folks have actually been an active part of the problem. I call all of them out. (Government, corporations and environazis). You (by your own admission) have only gone after 2 of the 3.

I've addressed the hijacked envorironmental movement, in more than one thread, along with the cap & trade agenda and the fact that BP helped to author C & T legislation. So, I admitted no such thing and you're full of shit.

[not.your.average.joe]

Have you guys seen this video?
Does anyone know if this is enough to kill off vegetation?

YouTube - Oil rain: BP's black gold lands on Louisiana (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hY-tIEqzcmU&feature=player_embedded)

[Danke]

So, I admitted no such thing and you're full of shit.

jmdrake full of shit? lol. He is one of the most thoughtful posters here.





The assholes on this board who have defended this bullshit as though this has something to do with these goons "freedom of speech" also need their asses kicked.


Go away.

[susano]

jmdrake full of shit? lol. He is one of the most thoughtful posters here.





Go away.

He told a lie. He said I admitted that I have not posted about the fake environmental movement. I didn't admit anything of the sort because I have posted EXTENSIVELY about that very subject, as well as cap and trade fraud. I called him on a lie.

So, YOU go away.

[susano]

Have you guys seen this video?
Does anyone know if this is enough to kill off vegetation?

YouTube - Oil rain: BP's black gold lands on Louisiana (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hY-tIEqzcmU&feature=player_embedded)

I've seen that and I think it's BS. It looks like an oily steet at the beginning of a rain. There is no rain shown hitting a car or something else. I doubt it's possible to rain oil.

[Danke]

So, YOU go away.

Didn't address the quote. Not surprising.

[tropicangela]

I've seen that and I think it's BS. It looks like an oily steet at the beginning of a rain. There is no rain shown hitting a car or something else. I doubt it's possible to rain oil.

confirmed by friends of a friend in Louisiana

[susano]

Didn't address the quote. Not surprising.

Yes, I did address it. He may be thoughtful but he told a lie. It was probably due the fact the fact that he hasn't read my posts, so he threw out something based upon an assumption, and it was not true. That's still a lie. I called him on it. It's as simple as that.

[susano]

confirmed by friends of a friend in Louisiana

What was confirmed?

[tropicangela]

What was confirmed?

that it's raining oil

[susano]

that it's raining oil

I don't believe it. I believe you, just not that friend with a friend ;)

[susano]

Oil does evaporate/dissapte into the air, somewhat, but I don't think it evaporates into clouds! If it did, it would probably have been raining oil in Houston for decades.

[TNforPaul45]

At what point do you consider being alarmed appropriate? Maybe if you lived there you would be alarmed, like people who bother to make these videos.

That oil can't just be shoveled up like snow, and nobody knows when it will stop coming, either. It's deep in the sand. I've posted other video of that in Destin. The hairbrained comments about how easy this is to clean up are just stupid beyond belief. The time to contain the oil is BEFORE it gets in the marshes and on shore, and that could have been and could be done. That doesn't meet the corporate-gov't objective, though. That won't help get cap & trade (which BP helped write and supports) passed. This is an environmental 9/11 and there are agendas behind the destruction.

Also, you unfeeling, sociopathic fuckers need your faces shoved in that oil. Maybe then you might get some empathy for the marine life. Then again, prolly not.

You are correct about one thing. This can indeed by analogied to an Environmental 9/11. Just like with 9/11, either elements of the government were sympathetic and allowed the lapse in the quality of the operations on the rig which led to the initial accident (Unlikely). Or more likely there was a specific effort to thwart quality efforts and direct action by actions of our government to blow the well (More Likely). There were gov. inspectors on the rig hours before it blew, the rig won an award for saftey by Obama's admins, and employees on the rig heard their managers yelling, over the phone, back at BP Execs saying "we cant do that, that's crazy."

Either way, just like with 9/11, there was criminality here, executed by a few, directed by a few more powerful, in order to carry out an agenda.

I say this to also say, this again means that the direction of our anger should not be focused on corporations or the existence of business, but at those criminal elements in our goverment/corporate alliance that actively caused this. Yes accidents happen in the course of business, because business is run by humans. But this was criminality that needs to be investigated.

Too bad the investigators are also the instigators.

It is to they you should direct your comments of "sociopathic fuckers" and it is they who should have their faces in the oil. Unfortunately this will not happen, but they will get their come-uppance one day, either in this life or the next, or both.

The liberty minded individuals in this forum are not your enemies. And the lack of emotion yet demonstration of stern attention and calm contemplation does not denote the lack of care or concern over the situation.

Becoming either panicked or frantically impassioned about any issue helps in neither case.

[tropicangela]

I don't believe it. I believe you, just not that friend with a friend ;)

Understandable. I was also skeptical in response to the video which was on facebook and said so. I believe this person, but more accounts would help.

[susano]

You are correct about one thing. This can indeed by analogied to an Environmental 9/11. Just like with 9/11, either elements of the government were sympathetic and allowed the lapse in the quality of the operations on the rig which led to the initial accident (Unlikely). Or more likely there was a specific effort to thwart quality efforts and direct action by actions of our government to blow the well (More Likely). There were gov. inspectors on the rig hours before it blew, the rig won an award for saftey by Obama's admins, and employees on the rig heard their managers yelling, over the phone, back at BP Execs saying "we cant do that, that's crazy."

Either way, just like with 9/11, there was criminality here, executed by a few, directed by a few more powerful, in order to carry out an agenda.

I say this to also say, this again means that the direction of our anger should not be focused on corporations or the existence of business, but at those criminal elements in our goverment/corporate alliance that actively caused this. Yes accidents happen in the course of business, because business is run by humans. But this was criminality that needs to be investigated.

Too bad the investigators are also the instigators.

It is to they you should direct your comments of "sociopathic fuckers" and it is they who should have their faces in the oil. Unfortunately this will not happen, but they will get their come-uppance one day, either in this life or the next, or both.

The liberty minded individuals in this forum are not your enemies. And the lack of emotion yet demonstration of stern attention and calm contemplation does not denote the lack of care or concern over the situation.

Becoming either panicked or frantically impassioned about any issue helps in neither case.

The sociopathic fuckers have appeared on several other threads, in the ongoing debate over whether global corporatism equals a "free market". They have made mny outrageous comments, some as insane as claiming a "right to pollute" as well a complete disregard for animal life and nature. That has nothing to do with liberty, any more than setting a canyon on fire does.

I agree about the perps being the real enemy. However, the anti life elites are the main shareholders of these global monstrosities that pass for "business". I wouldn't have called the British East India Company "business", either, though they enaged in commerse.

[susano]

BTW, TNforPaul45, I don't feel panicked. I am sickened and angry. If all of BP's assets went to the Gulf, and Cheney and Obama were hanged from the lamposts, it couldn't compensate for what's been done. Some things are priceless, like life and the ecosystem. Depending on if this is stopped (or not - don't want to think about that!), the Gulf should recover, but the damage is done. It may not be same for many of our lifetimes.

[Travlyr]

... some as insane as claiming a "right to pollute".

Susano... again that was me. And I'm not insane. I had hoped that you were actually intelligent enough to understand that we do have a natural right to pollute... just like we have a natural right to eat. If you aren't smart enough to understand our natural right to pollute, then what do you call excrement?

[susano]

Susano... again that was me. And I'm not insane. I had hoped that you were actually intelligent enough to understand that we do have a natural right to pollute... just like we have a natural right to eat. If you aren't smart enough to understand our natural right to pollute, then what do you call excrement?

Grow up. Go start another poo thread.

[Travlyr]

Grow up. Go start another poo thread.

What are you talking about? Can you not understand the fundamentals?

[susano]

What are you talking about? Can you not understand the fundamentals?

Look, you seem to have a certain obsession with excrement. Bears shit in the woods. That's not pollution, you moron.

[Travlyr]

Look, you seem to have a certain obsession with excrement. Bears shit in the woods. That's not pollution, you moron.

You seem to be the only one not smart enough to understand.

A pollutant is a waste material that pollutes air, water or soil.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pollution

[TNforPaul45]

You seem to be the only one not smart enough to understand.

A pollutant is a waste material that pollutes air, water or soil.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pollution

Ok, Ok, lets stop S*tting with each other........literally.

From a Libertarian standpoint, I would say that no, we do not have a natural right to pollute. The basis of libertarian thought, if I am not mistaken, says that we can undertake any action, as long as that action does not harm another person, or prevent them from the freedom of action. Harming another person can be seen as either harming them directly, or harming the profits of their labors (preventing them access to their person or property).

So no, polluting is not a right, because pollution affects either land or animal (food) resources, where the land is owned or the food is harvested by people who own the rights to either, and thus the pollution would deny them access to either, and would violate the basic Libertarian principle.

So excrement, while a bodily function cannot be done just anywhere. Please don't make me get into the details on this (haha!).

But pollution does happen. And that is where our Legal system kicks in, and forces a restitution to the owner by the polluter, and restoring of the value lost and the potential future value denied, as well as a restoring to the state pre-damage.

Rothbard can explain this much better.

[Travlyr]

We need to learn how to manage all of our pollution. I claim a natural right to pollute.

[susano]

More video from Pensacola

http://video.godlikeproductions.com/video/Surf_On_Pensacola_Beach_Boiling_Like_Acid?id=f2d5a c95ab60e4f14e9


http://video.godlikeproductions.com/video/Oil_Hits_Pensacola_Beach_The_Darkest_Day_for_Pensa cola_Beach_Ever?id=20daecf7723d2235624


http://video.godlikeproductions.com/video/Pensacola_Beach_Covered_In_Oil?id=5a233086e26b72b9 a06

[Razmear]

An even worse video, WTF is happening here?

YouTube - Surf On Pensacola Beach Boiling Like Acid (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qO193f8xAls&feature=autofb)

[Matt Collins]

An even worse video, WTF is happening here?
I sure hope that guy was wearing boots :(

[jmdrake]

He told a lie. He said I admitted that I have not posted about the fake environmental movement. I didn't admit anything of the sort because I have posted EXTENSIVELY about that very subject, as well as cap and trade fraud. I called him on a lie.

So, YOU go away.

If that is your definition of a "lie" then using your own measuring stick you are "full of sh*t". You claimed I as defending the corporations. I have not. Have you gone threw and read every thread of mine to see everything I've ever said about corporations? Then by your own standards YOU need to "go away". Now in this thread you, by your own admission, have only attacked the government and corporations. If you expect people to go through every other thread you wrote to see where you said this or that then you are just as unrealistic as you are hysterical. Like I said. You need to take a chill pill. Step back from the discussion for a second and quit assuming everyone who doesn't immediately agree with you 100% is "the enemy".

As for being against cap and trade, good for you. But you don't seem to understand the role the phony environmentalists have played in THIS disaster. For that matter, based on your discussion in another thread, you don't understand the government role other than "the government didn't regulate enough". So no. I haven't lied in the least.

[moostraks]

Susano... again that was me. And I'm not insane. I had hoped that you were actually intelligent enough to understand that we do have a natural right to pollute... just like we have a natural right to eat. If you aren't smart enough to understand our natural right to pollute, then what do you call excrement?

Excrement is not toxic and can be composted.

http://www.amazon.com/Humanure-Handbook-Guide-Composting-Manure/dp/0964425831

You might not want to eat your veggies from it but you can certainly grow ornamentals and trees with it.

[moostraks]

I sure hope that guy was wearing boots :(

I was thinking the same thing...:(

[Dr.3D]

Not all pollution is toxic. Pollution is just an over abundance of something that doesn't belong in nature in such proportions. Pollution upsets the balance of nature.

If I dumped a ton of sugar in a river, I would have polluted it with sugar.

[Bruno]

An even worse video, WTF is happening here?

YouTube - Surf On Pensacola Beach Boiling Like Acid (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qO193f8xAls&feature=autofb)

I wonder if that is the dispersants. And I wonder if the dispersants are really causing more damage than good. We don't know what the long-term effects are on the ocean and animal life.

BP seems to be using them to keep the oil below the surface where it can't be seen as easily, but where it can actually do more harm. It is also an issue because it is slipping underneath the booms, and it doesn't allow them to burn it off like would be possible if they allowed it to rise to the surface without using dispersants.

[Meatwasp]

You need to change your name to Meathead

Hey Drami, we all have meatheads but not too many have shit heads like you.

[jmdrake]

Excrement is not toxic and can be composted.

http://www.amazon.com/Humanure-Handbook-Guide-Composting-Manure/dp/0964425831

You might not want to eat your veggies from it but you can certainly grow ornamentals and trees with it.

Oil can be composted too.

http://www.reflector.com/news/pitt-county-crop-may-help-oil-spill-37229

A crop grown and processed in Pitt County could soon be helping to soak up oil from the spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

Kenaf, a fibrous plant native to Africa and brought to North Carolina in the past decade, is already being used by Greenville-based company RF Wastewater to absorb and and break down sludge in local municipal wastewater treatment plants.

Kenaf could similarly be applied to the oil smearing the shores of Louisiana and other Gulf states since the spill began when a BP oil rig exploded in late April.

“Kenaf is mother nature’s most absorbent plant; it’s like a sponge on steroids,” said Eric Pierce, a Farmville native who is farming kenaf for RF Wastewater on his family farm between Fountain and Falkland.

The company makes its product, called Activated Kenaf (patent pending) by taking the finely ground core of the kenaf plant and adding naturally occurring microbes that break down oil soaked up by the plant materials, RF Wastewater Principal Walt Brown explained.

[moostraks]

Oil can be composted too.

http://www.reflector.com/news/pitt-county-crop-may-help-oil-spill-37229

A crop grown and processed in Pitt County could soon be helping to soak up oil from the spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

Kenaf, a fibrous plant native to Africa and brought to North Carolina in the past decade, is already being used by Greenville-based company RF Wastewater to absorb and and break down sludge in local municipal wastewater treatment plants.

Kenaf could similarly be applied to the oil smearing the shores of Louisiana and other Gulf states since the spill began when a BP oil rig exploded in late April.

“Kenaf is mother nature’s most absorbent plant; it’s like a sponge on steroids,” said Eric Pierce, a Farmville native who is farming kenaf for RF Wastewater on his family farm between Fountain and Falkland.

The company makes its product, called Activated Kenaf (patent pending) by taking the finely ground core of the kenaf plant and adding naturally occurring microbes that break down oil soaked up by the plant materials, RF Wastewater Principal Walt Brown explained.

Did I say it couldn't?

[moostraks]

Not all pollution is toxic. Pollution is just an over abundance of something that doesn't belong in nature in such proportions. Pollution upsets the balance of nature.

If I dumped a ton of sugar in a river, I would have polluted it with sugar.

pollution:undesirable state of the natural environment being contaminated with harmful substances as a consequence of human activities
befoulment: the state of being polluted
contamination: the act of contaminating or polluting; including (either intentionally or accidentally) unwanted substances or factors
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

An individual who properly compostes his excrement is not polluting.

[live liberty]

pollution:undesirable state of the natural environment being contaminated with harmful substances as a consequence of human activities
befoulment: the state of being polluted
contamination: the act of contaminating or polluting; including (either intentionally or accidentally) unwanted substances or factors
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

An individual who properly compostes his excrement is not polluting.

You're just like everybody else. You're not responsible for polluting; it's the other guy.

[moostraks]

You're just like everybody else. You're not responsible for polluting; it's the other guy.

:rolleyes:Wth? I responded to someone who stated that excrement is pollution and I get this response? Troll elsewhere...

The system for disposing of human waste is the problem for excrement polluting the waterways. Henceforth why some folks think that people are polluters. Individuals are not the problem, the system of waste management is the problem.

Why do humans think crapping in their drinking water is a wise choice??? There are better ways...

[constituent]

I'm not the one running around calling other people "assholes" sweetheart. You really need to take a chill pill. And this isn't just "collusion between government and corporations". It's collusion between government, corporations and ENVIRONMENTALISTS! Yes the same well meaning tree hugging save the whales folks have actually been an active part of the problem. I call all of them out. (Government, corporations and environazis). You (by your own admission) have only gone after 2 of the 3.


So then to be clear, you do admit to posting falsehoods to bolster your argument when you earlier referenced the story claiming this oil spill is smaller than even the Exxon Valdez?

I just want to make sure that everyone is clear that such a claim--and by extension the argument built on it--is a blatant falsehood, the result of researching for the answer one wants rather than the answer as it reveals itself. :)

[klamath]

Ok, Ok, lets stop S*tting with each other........literally.

From a Libertarian standpoint, I would say that no, we do not have a natural right to pollute. The basis of libertarian thought, if I am not mistaken, says that we can undertake any action, as long as that action does not harm another person, or prevent them from the freedom of action. Harming another person can be seen as either harming them directly, or harming the profits of their labors (preventing them access to their person or property).

So no, polluting is not a right, because pollution affects either land or animal (food) resources, where the land is owned or the food is harvested by people who own the rights to either, and thus the pollution would deny them access to either, and would violate the basic Libertarian principle.

So excrement, while a bodily function cannot be done just anywhere. Please don't make me get into the details on this (haha!).

But pollution does happen. And that is where our Legal system kicks in, and forces a restitution to the owner by the polluter, and restoring of the value lost and the potential future value denied, as well as a restoring to the state pre-damage.

Rothbard can explain this much better.

The only problem is what is aceptable polution? I do not care who you are, your existence causes pollution as defined today. As detection devices get more and more accurate pollution is defined in ever smaller parts per billion. If you do not believe this ask an environmental consulting firm to hover around your life and test all your activities. Without a doubt something you are doing is causing pollution by todays environmental standards. If all Americans were held to the standards that are currently on the books we would all be in jail. We get by with it because there isn't enough government environmental police to enforce it. The enforcement will come though. It will make DHS seem like nothing.

[pacelli]

http://video.godlikeproductions.com/video/Kindra_Arnesan_-_Quoted_on_PBS_Newshour_6232010

[Anti Federalist]

Absolutely correct.

Clam cops with MP5s, a horrendous nightmare.


The only problem is what is aceptable polution? I do not care who you are, your existence causes pollution as defined today. As detection devices get more and more accurate pollution is defined in ever smaller parts per billion. If you do not believe this ask an environmental consulting firm to hover around your life and test all your activities. Without a doubt something you are doing is causing pollution by todays environmental standards. If all Americans were held to the standards that are currently on the books we would all be in jail. We get by with it because there isn't enough government environmental police to enforce it. The enforcement will come though. It will make DHS seem like nothing.

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

http://attachments.techguy.org/attachments/107086d1180458061/end_is_near.png

[Anti Federalist]

http://anhonestclimatedebate.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/environazis.jpeg

[Dr.3D]

http://anhonestclimatedebate.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/environazis.jpeg

Just one step away from removing "Environ" from that sign on the door.

[susano]

An even worse video, WTF is happening here?

YouTube - Surf On Pensacola Beach Boiling Like Acid (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qO193f8xAls&feature=autofb)

In the GLP thread where I got that, many posters suggested it might be methane, which makes sense. I was just reading that there are some areas, near the well, where the methane concentrations are 100,000 times normal. Methane is crystalized (frozen) at depth, buy becomes a gas as it is released and warms up. This is also very bad for marine life because it robs the water of oxygen.

[susano]

Oil can be composted too.

http://www.reflector.com/news/pitt-county-crop-may-help-oil-spill-37229

A crop grown and processed in Pitt County could soon be helping to soak up oil from the spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

Kenaf, a fibrous plant native to Africa and brought to North Carolina in the past decade, is already being used by Greenville-based company RF Wastewater to absorb and and break down sludge in local municipal wastewater treatment plants.

Kenaf could similarly be applied to the oil smearing the shores of Louisiana and other Gulf states since the spill began when a BP oil rig exploded in late April.

“Kenaf is mother nature’s most absorbent plant; it’s like a sponge on steroids,” said Eric Pierce, a Farmville native who is farming kenaf for RF Wastewater on his family farm between Fountain and Falkland.

The company makes its product, called Activated Kenaf (patent pending) by taking the finely ground core of the kenaf plant and adding naturally occurring microbes that break down oil soaked up by the plant materials, RF Wastewater Principal Walt Brown explained.

You see, that's wonderful and an example of human ingenuity at work. There are other non toxic methods of dealing with oil, in marshes, on land, and in the water, that are not being used because BP doesn't want to use them. Sugar cane fiber and dried pete moss are two of them. The sugar cane fiber is also infused with microbes and they eat the oil, making it no longer toxic, and it turns to harmless compost in about ten days. The pete moss absorbs oil, leaving clear water, and can be easily skimmed up. Along with capturing the oil with tankers, these things should have been immediately.

Having said all that, this discussion about pollution arose because of a poster who compares millions of barrels of oil gusing into the Gulf, a man made disaster atht is killing marine life and marshes, with feces. He claims a "right to pollute". It's really such a juvenille and and absurd contention, it's almost embarrassing to see it posted on this board. It is also an extreme pervertion of "liberty".

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

Just one step away from removing "Environ" from that sign on the door.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2589/3840558113_589e19813c.jpg

[Travlyr]

You see, that's wonderful and an example of human ingenuity at work. There are other non toxic methods of dealing with oil, in marshes, on land, and in the water, that are not being used because BP doesn't want to use them. Sugar cane fiber and dried pete moss are two of them. The sugar cane fiber is also infused with microbes and they eat the oil, making it no longer toxic, and it turns to harmless compost in about ten days. The pete moss absorbs oil, leaving clear water, and can be easily skimmed up. Along with capturing the oil with tankers, these things should have been immediately.

Having said all that, this discussion about pollution arose because of a poster who compares millions owithf barrels of oil gusing into the Gulf, a man made disaster atht is killing marine life and marshes, feces. He claims a "right to pollute". It's really such a juvenille and and absurd contention, it's almost embarrassing to see it posted on this board. It is also an extreme pervertion of "liberty".

What is embarrassing is your inability to be honest and forthright in your posts. That comparison was never made.

I simply understand that I pollute the planet with my CO2 and my daily habits... and that is my natural right whether you like it or not. That's all.

[Dr.3D]

What is embarrassing is your inability to be honest and forthright in your posts. That comparison was never made.

I simply understand that I pollute the planet with my CO2 and my daily habits... and that is my natural right whether you like it or not. That's all.

You are correct.

I like to look at the Earth as if it is a petri dish and all of the plants, animals and humans living on it as if they were a bacterial culture in that dish.

When the bacterial culture first starts out in the center of the dish, it begins to expand and cover the entire surface of the medium in the dish. Those who watch this happen will often notice how the center of the dish begins to have a die off of bacteria as their waste products poison them out of existence. This die off again spreads across the dish and soon there is nothing growing in the dish as the waste products released killed it off.

There is a little difference between the Earth and a petri dish though. The Earth has a much more complex mechanism for cleansing waste products and degrading them into something that is non toxic to it's inhabitants. The problem is, we don't know how far the Earth can extend it's ability to do so and thus must take care that we don't upset the balance so far that it can not recover.

[noxagol]

Pollution is any unwanted matter on in ones property, plain and simple. Fecal matter to a person composting it is not pollution, but to one who is not, they probably do not want it around, hence it is pollution.

[susano]

The only problem is what is aceptable polution? I do not care who you are, your existence causes pollution as defined today. As detection devices get more and more accurate pollution is defined in ever smaller parts per billion. If you do not believe this ask an environmental consulting firm to hover around your life and test all your activities. Without a doubt something you are doing is causing pollution by todays environmental standards. If all Americans were held to the standards that are currently on the books we would all be in jail. We get by with it because there isn't enough government environmental police to enforce it. The enforcement will come though. It will make DHS seem like nothing.

Can we agree to define pollution as it really is, rather than how those with nefarious agendas do so? My GOD, we have the global warming tards, along with gov't and the corporations like BP, defining CO2 as pollution. Equally ridiculous is comparing shit to the oil spewing from the Macondo well. Maybe we should have a proper "poo thread" where we can discuss natural biological processes v., say, factory farms that dump millions of gallons of shit into water ways, or things like PCB's and other man made compounds polluting our environment and bodies.

At this point, I think this is way off topic, but it obviously is a topic some are very interested in.

[constituent]

don't forget noise pollution.

[Travlyr]

At this point, I think this is way off topic, but it obviously is a topic some are very interested in.


You, susano are the one bringing it up time and time again. :( I simply defend my position when you attack me. Please try to be genuine and honest.

And again - susano, "Equally ridiculous is comparing shit to the oil spewing from the Macondo well." that comparison was never made. You are proving to be the most disingenuous person in these threads.

[susano]

What is embarrassing is your inability to be honest and forthright in your posts. That comparison was never made.

I simply understand that I pollute the planet with my CO2 and my daily habits... and that is my natural right whether you like it or not. That's all.

Nope. This discussion with you has gone on on more than one thread. It arose with your defending corporate practices that destroy the environment and claiming that pollution is a right.

Breathing out CO2 and shitting are natural biological processes and have fuck all to do with industrial pollution. It was you who introduced this absurd comparison with your "right to pollute" argument in a thread about industrial pollution.

[klamath]

Can we agree to define pollution as it really is, rather than how those with nefarious agendas do so? My GOD, we have the global warming tards, along with gov't and the corporations like BP, defining CO2 as pollution. Equally ridiculous is comparing shit to the oil spewing from the Macondo well. Maybe we should have a proper "poo thread" where we can discuss natural biological processes v., say, factory farms that dump millions of gallons of shit into water ways, or things like PCB's and other man made compounds polluting our environment and bodies.

At this point, I think this is way off topic, but it obviously is a topic some are very interested in.
The point of my post is determining what the line should be. What is the line where your pollution is really effecting your neighbor? I suggest you read the United states code followed by the federal register of all regulations covering the country. Follow that up with your state laws and regulations and then county ordinances. And yes you will find how you are to specifically dispose of one bowel movement covered in detail.
Yes the oil spill is an extreme environmental disaster but what has many of us taking a step back is the fact that the event will be used to impliment a huge environmental agenda that you yourself will be horrified at.

[Travlyr]

Nope. This discussion with you has gone on on more than one thread. It arose with your defending corporate practices that destroy the environment and claiming that pollution is a right.

Breathing out CO2 and shitting are natural biological processes and have fuck all to do with industrial pollution. It was you who introduced this absurd comparison with your "right to pollute" argument in a thread about industrial pollution.

I defended the corporate structure in another thread, but I am not in favor of destroying our environment. I simply recognize that we do pollute, we should pollute as little as possible and manage the pollution as best we can.

[charrob]

The only problem is what is aceptable polution?

http://photos-c.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc3/hs201.snc3/20845_138634642816828_100000108791083_407464_82296 06_s.jpg

one thing is for sure,


.

This has nothing to do with private property and everything to do with tragedy of the commons. We all share the oceans, and only governments can collaborate and regulate the 'commons' to stop the destruction of those oceans and its marine life that inhabits it.

[susano]

You are correct.

I like to look at the Earth as if it is a petri dish and all of the plants, animals and humans living on it as if they were a bacterial culture in that dish.

When the bacterial culture first starts out in the center of the dish, it begins to expand and cover the entire surface of the medium in the dish. Those who watch this happen will often notice how the center of the dish begins to have a die off of bacteria as their waste products poison them out of existence. This die off again spreads across the dish and soon there is nothing growing in the dish as the waste products released killed it off.

There is a little difference between the Earth and a petri dish though. The Earth has a much more complex mechanism for cleansing waste products and degrading them into something that is non toxic to it's inhabitants. The problem is, we don't know how far the Earth can extend it's ability to do so and thus must take care that we don't upset the balance so far that it can not recover.

Creation is amazing and so far beyond our understanding. I'm pretty sure the earth will go on, even if we manage to kill off ourselves and many other species.

An incredible thing happened years after Chernobyl. Radiation eating mushrooms have sprouted up all over the site. Nature looks to be taking care of what man fucked up.

What's disturbing about some of the posters, here, is that they have defended the worst assaults on life and Nature, as some kind of natural right. The contention has been that freedom and liberty equate to the right to right to trash and destroy the environment, animal life and habitat. Along with that, they have argued that corporations, left to their own devices, would rarely do anything wrong, and if they did, we could just sue them. My contention is that corporations, being chartered by government, are government creations, and they are ONE beast. They are not business in the sense of a free and responsible INDIVIDUAL who is 100% accountable foir their actions.

Governments are out of control and so are their corporate creations. As long as they exist, we cannot control this monster. If the oil volcano is stopped, and we have no idea if and when it will be, the damage to the Gulf, it's species, the land, and Gulf state economies and lives, could continue for years. Some people who are so cavalier, brush that off by claiming that lawsuits will fix it. They won't. No amount of money can fix the loss of something of priceless. For me, this is a very key point. While I want the right earn money and create without government stealing from me and sticking their slimey hands in my affairs, I know that what the global corporatocracy is is not comprable to that.

Government and corporations are the NWO. Anyone who defends corporations is defending government and the NWO. Everyone should look for Omaba's and Mededved's (sp) press conference, today, to get a taste of what I'm talking about. It is plain as day that Obama is president of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, the corporation, not the country.

[susano]

don't forget noise pollution.

How interesting that you bring that up! In the 70s, I was searching for an ordinance that would address some extremely loud machinery that was driving me crazy, when I ran across the subject of ELF waves and what was then, Project Seafarer, the precursor of HAARP. That's another thread, altogether, and an interesting one that looks at the intersection of gov't and corporations in the military industrial complex.

[moostraks]

Pollution is any unwanted matter on in ones property, plain and simple. Fecal matter to a person composting it is not pollution, but to one who is not, they probably do not want it around, hence it is pollution.

Pollution involves the element of hazard. Lawn clippings thrown out in your yard may be aggravating but they would not qualify as pollution.

[susano]

The point of my post is determining what the line should be. What is the line where your pollution is really effecting your neighbor? I suggest you read the United states code followed by the federal register of all regulations covering the country. Follow that up with your state laws and regulations and then county ordinances. And yes you will find how you are to specifically dispose of one bowel movement covered in detail.
Yes the oil spill is an extreme environmental disaster but what has many of us taking a step back is the fact that the event will be used to impliment a huge environmental agenda that you yourself will be horrified at.

Klamath, I am in complete agreement with you. I think you may been on some threads with me where I have expressed my belief that the non containment of the oil is deliberate, in order to use it to pass cap & trade. I'm of the opinion that this is a conspiracy of the maginitue of 9/11.

[susano]

Pollution involves the element of hazard. Lawn clippings thrown out in your yard may be aggravating but they would not qualify as pollution.


Exactly. Common sense should prevail. If GOD created it (or for the atheists, nature did), it's natural. Naturallly occuring and going though natural processes, is not pollution. Enter man, who can even take something natural and make it pollution, such as dumping waste from the abominations known as factory farms, where thousands of animals are kept in un-natural conditions. Same with oil. I've seen posts, here and elsewhere, about the natural oil that seeps from the Gulf floor, as though that can compared to man drilling holes miles into the earth and things like blowouts.

There's a fair amount of dog shit, right now, in my backyard. I deal with it on a regular basis, lol. So far, it hasn't killed any birds, racoons, possums, or given our family cancer.

[susano]

http://video.godlikeproductions.com/video/Kindra_Arnesan_-_Quoted_on_PBS_Newshour_6232010

She's amazing, eh? Reminded me of a Karen Silkwood or Erin Brokovitch.

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

Creation is amazing and so far beyond our understanding. I'm pretty sure the earth will go on, even if we manage to kill off ourselves and many other species.

An incredible thing happened years after Chernobyl. Radiation eating mushrooms have sprouted up all over the site. Nature looks to be taking care of what man fucked up.

What's disturbing about some of the posters, here, is that they have defended the worst assaults on life and Nature, as some kind of natural right. The contention has been that freedom and liberty equate to the right to right to trash and destroy the environment, animal life and habitat. Along with that, they have argued that corporations, left to their own devices, would rarely do anything wrong, and if they did, we could just sue them. My contention is that corporations, being chartered by government, are government creations, and they are ONE beast. They are not business in the sense of a free and responsible INDIVIDUAL who is 100% accountable foir their actions.

Governments are out of control and so are their corporate creations. As long as they exist, we cannot control this monster. If the oil volcano is stopped, and we have no idea if and when it will be, the damage to the Gulf, it's species, the land, and Gulf state economies and lives, could continue for years. Some people who are so cavalier, brush that off by claiming that lawsuits will fix it. They won't. No amount of money can fix the loss of something of priceless. For me, this is a very key point. While I want the right earn money and create without government stealing from me and sticking their slimey hands in my affairs, I know that what the global corporatocracy is is not comprable to that.

Government and corporations are the NWO. Anyone who defends corporations is defending government and the NWO. Everyone should look for Omaba's and Mededved's (sp) press conference, today, to get a taste of what I'm talking about. It is plain as day that Obama is president of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, the corporation, not the country.

By stating corporations are the problem are you implying people who pay taxes are the problem?

Government created the privileges and immunities corporations enjoy. Government has a monopoly on the justice system. Government has a monopoly on the rules of property damage.

I say people who pay taxes are the problem because government amounts to nothing more than a group of people. I am only slightly sympathetic to people who say they are afraid of government and only in a strategic context because fear is not a justifiable excuse.

All I read is you attacking are people who do not value the environment above everything else. If the problem is people who pay taxes the problem is also people who believe in a monopoly of force, people who believe in a monopoly of justice, people who invest in corporations, and people who trade using federal reserve notes. Not abstract concepts like government, corporations, or the NWO.

[jmdrake]

So then to be clear, you do admit to posting falsehoods to bolster your argument when you earlier referenced the story claiming this oil spill is smaller than even the Exxon Valdez?

I just want to make sure that everyone is clear that such a claim--and by extension the argument built on it--is a blatant falsehood, the result of researching for the answer one wants rather than the answer as it reveals itself. :)

I never said this spill was smaller than the Exxon Valdez dufus. I've never referenced the Exxon Valdez in this entire thread. Now perhaps the spill I did reference wasn't as big I thought. Susano did the math and I don't feel like checking up on her. But I'm not going to make a blatant lie like you just did. Also I didn't build my argument concerning how environmentalists have contributed to this current problem on the size of previous oil spills. So once you pull your foot out of your mouth we can have an intelligent conversation.

[jmdrake]

You see, that's wonderful and an example of human ingenuity at work. There are other non toxic methods of dealing with oil, in marshes, on land, and in the water, that are not being used because BP doesn't want to use them. Sugar cane fiber and dried pete moss are two of them. The sugar cane fiber is also infused with microbes and they eat the oil, making it no longer toxic, and it turns to harmless compost in about ten days. The pete moss absorbs oil, leaving clear water, and can be easily skimmed up. Along with capturing the oil with tankers, these things should have been immediately.

Having said all that, this discussion about pollution arose because of a poster who compares millions of barrels of oil gusing into the Gulf, a man made disaster atht is killing marine life and marshes, with feces. He claims a "right to pollute". It's really such a juvenille and and absurd contention, it's almost embarrassing to see it posted on this board. It is also an extreme pervertion of "liberty".

Ok. You were doing well at first. But please explain how BP is preventing the EPA from giving environmental approval to natural methods of cleaning up the spill? What could BP possibly gain from that? And do you have any source to back up that claim, or is this just another example about how it must all be BPs fault? BP definitely shares much of the blame and the certainly manipulated one federal agency (the MMS), but you have to come up with some better documentation if you want to claim BP is stopping the EPA from approving using natural methods to soak up the oil.

As far as comparing oil to feces, one of the main concerns of pollution for rivers, lakes and streams is agricultural runoff. In other words feces. Both feces and oil are biodegradable. Both feces and oil are pollution when they are in the wrong place. I'm not sure what the effect of millions of gallons of feces would be on the Gulf but I assume it wouldn't be pretty. And as far as "rights" are concerned, you don't have a right to empty your septic tank in someone else's stream either.

[jmdrake]

Exactly. Common sense should prevail. If GOD created it (or for the atheists, nature did), it's natural. Naturallly occuring and going though natural processes, is not pollution. Enter man, who can even take something natural and make it pollution, such as dumping waste from the abominations known as factory farms, where thousands of animals are kept in un-natural conditions. Same with oil. I've seen posts, here and elsewhere, about the natural oil that seeps from the Gulf floor, as though that can compared to man drilling holes miles into the earth and things like blowouts.

There's a fair amount of dog shit, right now, in my backyard. I deal with it on a regular basis, lol. So far, it hasn't killed any birds, racoons, possums, or given our family cancer.

Are you sure about that?

http://www.doodycalls.com/resources_toxic_dog_waste.asp

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) deemed pet waste a “nonpoint source of pollution” in 1991, which put poop in the same category as oil and toxic chemicals!
Far from Fertilizer

Woof-woof waste does not a good fertilizer make. It is actually toxic to your lawn, causing burns and unsightly discoloring.

Beyond your grass, it has been estimated that a single gram of dog waste can contain 23 million fecal coliform bacteria, which are known to cause cramps, diarrhea, intestinal illness, and serious kidney disorders in humans. EPA even estimates that two or three days’ worth of droppings from a population of about 100 dogs would contribute enough bacteria to temporarily close a bay, and all watershed areas within 20 miles of it, to swimming and shell fishing.

Protect your family from the hazards of pet waste with DoodyCalls

Dog feces are one of the most common carriers of the following diseases:

* Heartworms
* Whipworms
* Hookworms
* Roundworms
* Tapeworms
* Parvo
* Corona
* Giardiasis
* Salmonellosis
* Cryptosporidiosis
* Campylobacteriosis


Oil is no less natural than dog feces or grass clippings for that matter. Of course grass clippings are non toxic. Dog feces and oil are toxic.

[jmdrake]

Did I say it couldn't?

You responded to someone that said excrement was a pollutant by pointing out that excrement can be composted. I assumed you meant that as a reason excrement was different from oil. If that's not what you meant then I have no idea what your point was. Care to explain?

[susano]

By stating corporations are the problem are you implying people who pay taxes are the problem?

No, I wasn't adressing that but it's pretty undeniable, eh? If we didn't play, they wouldn't have any power. Having said that, it's easier said than done. They have the guns and the goons and the means to kill us, imprison us, and torture - which I'm sure is being done to the Browns. IMO, the system and the establishment are not fixable and should be smashed to smithereens. How to do that, I don't know.



Government created the privileges and immunities corporations enjoy. Government has a monopoly on the justice system. Government has a monopoly on the rules of property damage.

Agreed. This is why I keep at this subject of corporations. They are artificial constructs in law and they are part of the gov't beast.



I say people who pay taxes are the problem because government amounts to nothing more than a group of people. I am only slightly sympathetic to people who say they are afraid of government and only in a strategic context because fear is not a justifiable excuse.

Again, I agree that taxes feed the beast. Again, it is easier said than done to never pay them. One can earn cash and avoid income tax, but how one would avoid sales tax I don't know. A bunch of us tried that, in Michigan, in the 70s. It wasn't successful, though it's something that needs to be done, again. That's another thread, though.



All I read is you attacking are people who do not value the environment above everything else. If the problem is people who pay taxes the problem is also people who believe in a monopoly of force, people who believe in a monopoly of justice, people who invest in corporations, and people who trade using federal reserve notes. Not abstract concepts like government, corporations, or the NWO.

I have pointed out that some things fall outside of the realm of money and the market. The universe, the earth, life, cannot be catalogued, have a price put on them, and itemized like products. The law may try to do that, but the law also calls CO2 toxic and it put the Brown's in prison. In many respects, the law is just a tool of the enemy. I hold the higher laws of Creation in higher regard than anything man has cooked up. The evironment is within GOD's law (or Nature's, for the atheists). You can have buildings full of law books trying to usurp GOD and Nature, but it will not work. Nature bats last and man ignores this fact at his peril. When he does ignore it and dire consequences result, he scrambles around to "fix" his stupidity, just like now. Sometimes it works, sometimes not.

When man made disasters happen, they are usually the result of few who have taken it upon themselves to violate GOD's laws and Nature's laws. The rest of the human population cannot possibly monitor all of the activities of the greedy and insane. That leaves us with a couple of options. Either we elect other people to monitor this stuff for us, which hasn't worked out, or we stop these things before they happen. Only govenment and it's partner, corporations, have the wherewithall to pretty much destroy or seriously harm the rest of us, robbing us of our rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That means one thing: Abolish these enterprises.

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

That means one thing: Abolish these enterprises.

You can't abolish something a majority of people believe in. You can only challenge it and that takes courage.

[moostraks]

You responded to someone that said excrement was a pollutant by pointing out that excrement can be composted. I assumed you meant that as a reason excrement was different from oil. If that's not what you meant then I have no idea what your point was. Care to explain?

I made the point that regulation is what rendered human excrement a controlled substance and effectively caused more destruction than it solved. We crap in our drinking water and then gripe about water shortages. Go figure...

Try to compost your poop in most areas and you will be run out of town with people hysterical about the pollution it causes :rolleyes:.

Ironically people want to take a 'tude with me each with their own assumption of my stance on matters. Folks here need to relax and lighten up a bit.

[susano]

Ok. You were doing well at first. But please explain how BP is preventing the EPA from giving environmental approval to natural methods of cleaning up the spill? What could BP possibly gain from that? And do you have any source to back up that claim, or is this just another example about how it must all be BPs fault? BP definitely shares much of the blame and the certainly manipulated one federal agency (the MMS), but you have to come up with some better documentation if you want to claim BP is stopping the EPA from approving using natural methods to soak up the oil.

When BP starting using the dispersant, Corexit, the EPA told them to stop. BP said no and the EPA backed off. Are you one of the people who wants the government to back off from business? If so, that's what they did. BP alos wanted safety exemptions on the Deepwater Horizon project, and they got them. Government backed off and left it to BP who assured that a blowout was a near impossiblity and that they had it all covered should any emergency occur. because I know that government and corporations are one beast, you won't see me arguing for more power for either faction. They are both colossal fuck ups and totally corrupt. I will post a couple of articles, at the end of this post, about how the administration had deferred to BP.

On the non toxic fixes, there have been many news reports and interviews, with entrpreneurs who have contated both BP and the feds, to no avail. It's not the EPA took a position one way or the other. These remedies and the people offering them are simply ignored. I read an article that contained an interview with one of the operators at a BP call center where people are supposed to contact the company about such products. Turns out the call centers are all for show. The phone calls are not recorded or passed on and the faxes go straight to the trash. In the video posted a couple of pages back, with the lady from Louisiana, she said BP calls this "ponies and balloons". That's what the BP call center is.




As far as comparing oil to feces, one of the main concerns of pollution for rivers, lakes and streams is agricultural runoff. In other words feces. Both feces and oil are biodegradable. Both feces and oil are pollution when they are in the wrong place. I'm not sure what the effect of millions of gallons of feces would be on the Gulf but I assume it wouldn't be pretty. And as far as "rights" are concerned, you don't have a right to empty your septic tank in someone else's stream either.

I don't claim the right to pollute a stream. That would be some other posters. The topic of what is pollution (a bear shitting in the woods is not, the waste from a factory farm is) is an interesting one, but needs it's own thread.

[susano]

Sorry, I forgot the articles about who has the control.





At yesterday's State Department briefing, spokesman P.J. Crowley updated reporters on the offers of international assistance the Department has received to help with the oil spill in the Gulf.

He said the U.S. has received offers to assist from 17 countries and four international organizations. The countries are : Canada, Mexico, Korea, Croatia, France, Germany, Ireland, Japan, Netherlands, Norway, Romania, Russia, Spain, Sweden, the United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom and Vietnam. The organizations are : the European Union, including the European Maritime Safety Agency, the environmental unit of the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, and the United Nations Environment Program and the International Maritime Organization.

Though the State Department receives the offers, it is BP and the Unified Area Command, led by the Coast Guard, that are the entities that decide which offers to accept. So far, the UAC has accepted skimmers and booms offered by Mexico and Norway. He deferred questions as to why only those offers had been accepted so far to the UAC in Louisiana.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/05/gulf-oil-spill-bp-countries-offer-assistance.html





PolitiFact Confirms NewsBusters Claim Donna Brazile Misrepresented Oil Pollution Act

The Oil Pollution Act of 1990 was passed in the aftermath of the Exxon Valdez spill in Prince William Sound in 1989. The law was designed to better coordinate the government response to a major oil event, and to set penalties for companies responsible. It was approved by Congress and signed into law on Aug. 18, 1990.

In general, it gives the president more authority in an oil event, not less.

"When responding to a spill, many considered the lines of responsibility under the pre-OPA regime to be unclear, with too much reliance on spillers to perform proper cleanup," according to a Congressional Research Service report. "OPA strengthened and clarified the federal government's role in oil spill response and cleanup."

The Oil Pollution Act included amendments to the Clean Water Act to provide the president three options in the wake of an oil event, the Congressional Research Service concluded. The president could:

Perform cleanup immediately ("federalize" the spill);
Monitor the response efforts of the spiller;
Or, direct the spiller's cleanup activities.
The Environmental Protection Agency describes the OPA this way:

"The OPA improved the nation's ability to prevent and respond to oil spills by establishing provisions that expand the federal government's ability, and provide the money and resources necessary, to respond to oil spills."


Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2010/06/15/politifact-confirms-newsbusters-claim-donna-brazile-misrepresented-oil-pollution-act#ixzz0rjUSQCTr"]http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard...t#ixzz0rjUSQCTr





Here we have BP and the Coast Guard threatening to arrest a CBS news crew. The Coast Guard says that BP in charge, not them:

YouTube - Oil Spill - CBS Threatened With Arrest For Filming The Oil Spill (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2VuaGXOlJ0)



And this is an article on the back and forth between the EPA and BP over the use of Corexit. I see this as merely a squabble between players inside the same beast. The EPA "requested" and BP said no, and they're still using Corexit:

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/05/22/gulf.oil.spill/index.html?hpt=T1




Anyway, it takes a long to go digging up these articles and videos. Anyone can search Google and Youtube for the facts of what has and is going on. The US gov't has hardly tied BP's hands. In fact, they have enabled them by letting them do whatever they want to, including threaten Americans on American soil and waters. The reason for that is because THEY ARE ONE BEAST.

[susano]

You can't abolish something a majority of people believe in. You can only challenge it and that takes courage.


I'm doing my individual best :D

[ClayTrainor]

This has nothing to do with private property and everything to do with tragedy of the commons.

This has everything to do with lack of respect for private property rights. Common ownership ensures that no one is motivated to care for the property/land correctly.

Industries and individuals with a vested economic interest in the Gulf resources (fishing industries, Coastal Dwellers, Beach owners, etc) should own and regulate the gulf, not the government. They could calculate the risks of oil drilling, based on everyone who has a stake in that property, instead of expecting some massive unaccountable bureacracy (the state) to micromanage all of it, on everyones behalf. More private property rights in the Gulf would have encouraged supervision, caution, proper bargaining, and full assessment of risks before moving forward.




We all share the oceans, and only governments can collaborate and regulate the 'commons' to stop the destruction of those oceans and its marine life that inhabits it.

We all share the land, and only governments can collaborate and regulate the 'commons' to stop the destruction of that land and the wild life that inhabits it. How is your logic any different, or do you share the same views on land and water ownership?

Also, Do you recognize the role that the government played in causing this BP oil spill? They forced BP to drill in a high risk area, when there were plenty of lower risk places to drill...

It's interesting to me that you think this organization that has proven its incompetence on multiple occasions, is the "only" solution. Why is this?

[Captain Shays]

If somebody could figure out a way to make it into usable fuel huge markets would open up for people to come down and get enough cheap fuel to heat their homes next winter. There would be a mad rush down to the beach to clean it up solving two problems at once. Either that entity could make money by selling their invention or they could do the conversion and sell the usable end product. Either way, there is so much "energy" washing up on those beaches its a shame to let it go to waste. "Waste" meaning some landfill or a huge pile where it just sits til BP heats hell a little hotter when their sorry asses die. Why not burn it to heat homes or produce electricity? That way it will be a huge motivator for people to clean it up faster and more effectively.

In the meantime we should all do a reverse boycott of BP and everyone buy their gas. We need to keep them in business so they don't go belly up and so they'll have enough money to continue to clean up their mess.

[klamath]

If somebody could figure out a way to make it into usable fuel huge markets would open up for people to come down and get enough cheap fuel to heat their homes next winter. There would be a mad rush down to the beach to clean it up solving two problems at once. Either that entity could make money by selling their invention or they could do the conversion and sell the usable end product. Either way, there is so much "energy" washing up on those beaches its a shame to let it go to waste. "Waste" meaning some landfill or a huge pile where it just sits til BP heats hell a little hotter when their sorry asses die. Why not burn it to heat homes or produce electricity? That way it will be a huge motivator for people to clean it up faster and more effectively.

In the meantime we should all do a reverse boycott of BP and everyone buy their gas. We need to keep them in business so they don't go belly up and so they'll have enough money to continue to clean up their mess.
If I lived on the gulf I would be gathering that stuff up in all the 55 gallon drums I could find. I bet I could crack at least a certain percentage of diesel and gas from it with a crude refinery. If the stuff is free and floating on the bayou it would pay to do it small scale.
I bet if someone started making and selling small cheap refineries to people down there the government would shut them down because the refineries didn't meet EPA regulations.

[Number19]

As someone living in the Houston area ( BP's Texas City's Refinary explosion ), I'm well aware of BP's history. But their practices are not all that much out of the norm for the industry. The government regulates, controls and has oversight responsibility. Corporations, just like people, do no more than is necessary to comply with the law. To do otherwise is not profitable, or practical.

Deep water drilling is pushing the limits of technology. An accident happened - BP is not "evil". In today's business climate, American industry does have a short sightedness toward immediate profitability and this is what often drives decision making. But this is not "evil". It's simply the way American culture has shaped corporate policy. As pointed out, it's an industrial/governmental complex.

I get it. It's an environmental disaster. But starting at day +1, everyone in the business has been doing everything possible to bring this under control. So what's the point of continually attacking BP?

Most. if not all, of the regulars at RPF are working to change government. But we desire smaller, less intrusive government. BP should not be the target, what's the point, but rather the government should be.

[Number19]

...As far as comparing oil to feces, one of the main concerns of pollution for rivers, lakes and streams is agricultural runoff. In other words feces. Both feces and oil are biodegradable. Both feces and oil are pollution when they are in the wrong place. I'm not sure what the effect of millions of gallons of feces would be on the Gulf but I assume it wouldn't be pretty. And as far as "rights" are concerned, you don't have a right to empty your septic tank in someone else's stream either.An interesting side note - the worst pollution affecting health in 1900 New York City was "horse shit". The new fangled technology of the "horseless carriage" was a major advance in the improvement of living in metropolitan cities.

[jmdrake]

When BP starting using the dispersant, Corexit, the EPA told them to stop. BP said no and the EPA backed off. Are you one of the people who wants the government to back off from business? If so, that's what they did. BP alos wanted safety exemptions on the Deepwater Horizon project, and they got them. Government backed off and left it to BP who assured that a blowout was a near impossiblity and that they had it all covered should any emergency occur. because I know that government and corporations are one beast, you won't see me arguing for more power for either faction. They are both colossal fuck ups and totally corrupt. I will post a couple of articles, at the end of this post, about how the administration had deferred to BP.


Ummmm...that's got absolutely nothing to do with whether or not BP wants to use Kenaf. While the dispersant BP is using might not be on the top of the EPA's list, it is an approved dispersant. Kenaf hasn't been approved AT ALL. And you have given zero evidence that BP was against Kenaf's approval. Besides BP isn't the only group out there trying to clean up the spill. Local governments and state governments could be using Kenaf right now if not for the federal government being in the way.



On the non toxic fixes, there have been many news reports and interviews, with entrpreneurs who have contated both BP and the feds, to no avail. It's not the EPA took a position one way or the other. These remedies and the people offering them are simply ignored. I read an article that contained an interview with one of the operators at a BP call center where people are supposed to contact the company about such products. Turns out the call centers are all for show. The phone calls are not recorded or passed on and the faxes go straight to the trash. In the video posted a couple of pages back, with the lady from Louisiana, she said BP calls this "ponies and balloons". That's what the BP call center is.


Are these people contacting Bobby Jindal? Obama set up a website. Last I heard they'd received over 38,000 "suggestions". Good luck wading through all of that and separating the wheat from the chaff. And anything that gets proposed has to go through an "environmental impact study". When Bobby Jindal wanted to build sand berms to keep the oil out of the marshes he was hampered by the EPA that insisted on doing an "environmental impact study".

http://www.nola.com/news/gulf-oil-spill/index.ssf/2010/05/state_officials_say_they_wont.html

So let's say BP got as many suggestions as Obama (38,000). Let's assume 10% were actually good ideas. That's still potentially 3,800 environmental impact studies that have to be done before anybody can do anything.

Now maybe it would be nice if BP actually read the faxes before sending of to the EPA who would then sit on them for two years to do their stupid study. But again this simply shows how the federal government doing nothing but getting in the way and it's getting in the way in the name of "protecting the environment". A governor simply should not way for some stupid bean counter to give him approval for what he should do to protect his state from oil. Jindal should have said "Screw you EPA! If you don't like it arrest me." and gone ahead and built the berms. Same for using Kenaf.



I don't claim the right to pollute a stream. That would be some other posters. The topic of what is pollution (a bear shitting in the woods is not, the waste from a factory farm is) is an interesting one, but needs it's own thread.

Fair enough.

[jmdrake]

Sorry, I forgot the articles about who has the control.

At yesterday's State Department briefing, spokesman P.J. Crowley updated reporters on the offers of international assistance the Department has received to help with the oil spill in the Gulf.

He said the U.S. has received offers to assist from 17 countries and four international organizations. The countries are : Canada, Mexico, Korea, Croatia, France, Germany, Ireland, Japan, Netherlands, Norway, Romania, Russia, Spain, Sweden, the United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom and Vietnam. The organizations are : the European Union, including the European Maritime Safety Agency, the environmental unit of the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, and the United Nations Environment Program and the International Maritime Organization.

Though the State Department receives the offers, it is BP and the Unified Area Command, led by the Coast Guard, that are the entities that decide which offers to accept. So far, the UAC has accepted skimmers and booms offered by Mexico and Norway. He deferred questions as to why only those offers had been accepted so far to the UAC in Louisiana.


Ummmmm....the State Department and the Coast Guard both fall under the same commander in chief. And if you don't know who that is ask General McKrystal.

It's in the administration's best interest not to let other countries in to help because that makes us look like a third world banana republic that can't handle their business. Not sure how that helps BP.




PolitiFact Confirms NewsBusters Claim Donna Brazile Misrepresented Oil Pollution Act

The Oil Pollution Act of 1990 was passed in the aftermath of the Exxon Valdez spill in Prince William Sound in 1989. The law was designed to better coordinate the government response to a major oil event, and to set penalties for companies responsible. It was approved by Congress and signed into law on Aug. 18, 1990.

In general, it gives the president more authority in an oil event, not less.

"When responding to a spill, many considered the lines of responsibility under the pre-OPA regime to be unclear, with too much reliance on spillers to perform proper cleanup," according to a Congressional Research Service report. "OPA strengthened and clarified the federal government's role in oil spill response and cleanup."


Yeah. Well I wish he'd use that presidential authority to fastrack approval of Kenaf. I wish he'd use it to tell the tree huggers at the EPA to go jump in a oil filled lake when they drug their feet on approving Bobby Jindal's request to build sand berms to keep out the oil. And last, I don't think a "bigger more powerful federal government" is in the long term best interest of this country. I didn't think that was the case for fighting terrorism. I think the federal government got in the way in the Katrina aftermath. I think they're getting in the way now.



The Oil Pollution Act included amendments to the Clean Water Act to provide the president three options in the wake of an oil event, the Congressional Research Service concluded. The president could:

Perform cleanup immediately ("federalize" the spill);
Monitor the response efforts of the spiller;
Or, direct the spiller's cleanup activities.
The Environmental Protection Agency describes the OPA this way:

"The OPA improved the nation's ability to prevent and respond to oil spills by establishing provisions that expand the federal government's ability, and provide the money and resources necessary, to respond to oil spills."


Yeah. This is the same EPA that's dragging it's feet on Kenaf and drug its feet on oil berms. The EPA should be drug by its feet through the streets.




Here we have BP and the Coast Guard threatening to arrest a CBS news crew. The Coast Guard says that BP in charge, not them:

YouTube - Oil Spill - CBS Threatened With Arrest For Filming The Oil Spill (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2VuaGXOlJ0)


And the answer to this problem is to give the federal government more power?



And this is an article on the back and forth between the EPA and BP over the use of Corexit. I see this as merely a squabble between players inside the same beast. The EPA "requested" and BP said no, and they're still using Corexit:

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/05/22/gulf.oil.spill/index.html?hpt=T1




Anyway, it takes a long to go digging up these articles and videos. Anyone can search Google and Youtube for the facts of what has and is going on. The US gov't has hardly tied BP's hands. In fact, they have enabled them by letting them do whatever they want to, including threaten Americans on American soil and waters. The reason for that is because THEY ARE ONE BEAST.

Correction. They are CONTROLLED by one beast! And that beast wants more power. And that beast is successfully manipulating well meaning people into giving them more power by conning them into believe that BP is in control when it really isn't. Neither is Obama for that matter. The federal government represents a single point of failure. Or rather a single point of control. If the beast had to pay off Louisiana, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, etc it would have a hard time maintaining control. Now it just has to pay off key people inside the fed.

[jmdrake]

I made the point that regulation is what rendered human excrement a controlled substance and effectively caused more destruction than it solved. We crap in our drinking water and then gripe about water shortages. Go figure...

Try to compost your poop in most areas and you will be run out of town with people hysterical about the pollution it causes :rolleyes:.

Ironically people want to take a 'tude with me each with their own assumption of my stance on matters. Folks here need to relax and lighten up a bit.

Ok. I see your point. As for 'tude, this thread is full of it. I thought I was being nice in my response to you. Guess not. :confused:

[susano]

And the answer to this problem is to give the federal government more power?


Not sure why you're asking me that, jmdrake, as I have made it clear that both the federal gov't and corporations should be abolished.

I posted the information about the adminstration giving authority to BP just to show this is a government-corporate collusion, not just government. I know full who the Commander in Chief is and he is the one who had to give the orders for the Coast Guard to act as BP's goons.

There is a tendency, on this board, to lean toward government - bad, business - good. I don't see it that way. I say gov't and corporations are one animal and both are the enemy.

If you want to get into who controls the puppets in gov't and corporations, we'd have to have a good conspiracy thread. While I think that, ultimately, it is a non human entity or entities at the top of the pyramid, I try to stick to the more wordly when I post here. On that level, it's banksters, corporations and NGOs who control the politicians, because it is they who have the money and nearly all politicians are whores to the highest bidder.

You will not find anyone who hates government more than I do. I just also happen to hate the corporations who own government, as well. That's where I part company with some of the members here, who practically get a hard on at the idea of corporations running free. To think that corporations are somehow separate from gov't is as absurd as buying into the two party illusion.

[charrob]

This has everything to do with lack of respect for private property rights. Common ownership ensures that no one is motivated to care for the property/land correctly.

ahhh, but you deceive yourself. All it takes is to look at what the "owner" allowed to happen to mile after mile of ancient redwood forest in northern Ca., or to the "owner" who allowed the last tree on Easter Island to be cut down. If $ is involved, an owner can be just as environmentally uncaring (and in many cases more uncaring) than a government...because quick $ is a strong motivation that many people cannot turn their backs on despite whether the consequences to the environment are harmful. in fact, i'd venture to say an owner can be more uncaring because unless the government is in bed with the corporation for $ or votes, the government would at the very least be impartial, and at the very most environmentally responsible. The problem was not that we had government regulation, the problem was that government regulation was ignored by an agency that was corrupted by Bush (and now Obama) corporate cronies.

re: all those that have a "stake" in the property include everyone who goes to the beach every summer....all those who love to swim....all those who love to see and learn about marine life... in other words, "all" of us minus the $ whores who only see the environment as something to make money out of.


More private property rights in the Gulf would have encouraged supervision, caution, proper bargaining, and full assessment of risks before moving forward.

that depends on the owners, and owners can, and have been, bought and bribed with quick $ despite the longterm consequences and detriment for the rest of us who love and value the oceans for esoteric reasons unrelated to money. The answer is not to get rid of government but to make government better and destroy cronyism.



Also, Do you recognize the role that the government played in causing this BP oil spill? They forced BP to drill in a high risk area, when there were plenty of lower risk places to drill...





Shallow Water Drilling Is Dangerous Too

Last Thursday, the President announced that he was imposing a moratorium on deepwater drilling activities for 6 months, until his Presidential Commission has issued its final report examining the root causes that led to the Gulf oil spill disaster, and recommendations to address those problems.

This is an important first step, and NRDC applauds this decision. However, the President has limited the moratorium to deepwater drilling activities, meaning that new shallow-water drilling activities are allowed to proceed (with the exception of the suspended leases in the Arctic). Carol Browner appeared on Meet the Press Sunday morning, and defended this approach by inferring that it would somehow be easier to address a spill if it occurred in shallow waters: “I think on the shallow waters, the distinction is you can get to the wellhead if something goes wrong in shallow water, and you can--there's mechanisms to shut that down.”

But this is flawed logic. The President has acknowledged that the system regulating offshore drilling operations is broken. A broken system could lead to additional failures, regardless of the depth of water in which drilling occurs. Second, shallow-water drilling is not low-risk, and Australia’s offshore oil disaster last summer is proof of that. Finally, the oil industry has proven it cannot contain a spill, which could prove even more problematic to our coasts in shallow water.

The Administration just today approved a new oil well in shallow-water in the Gulf of Mexico, even as BP continues to fumble their attempts to control the gusher that is poisoning Gulf waters, destroying marine life and livelihoods. This move only adds insult to injury. The President must expand his moratorium on all new offshore drilling activities for these reasons:

#1) We do not know what it takes to drill safely

First, the industry and the government do not know what led to the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon rig. The President has appointed a Commission to investigate and make recommendations that address the technical, regulatory and ethical failures that led to this tragic accident. The President and members of his Administration continually point to the Commission as the key to providing the answers of what it takes to drill safely. While failure of the blow-out preventer and “cozy relationships” between the industry and its federal regulators are undoubtedly a part of the problem, the Commission is likely to unearth further deficiencies. Until we know what all of these deficiencies are, it is dangerous to assume they only apply to deepwater drilling.

#2) Shallow-water drilling is not low-risk

Shallow-water drilling is characterized as drilling in 500 feet of water or less. While it is true that it is much easier to operate at 500 feet as compared to, say, 5,000 feet, this difference doesn’t necessarily make responding to a blow-out event any easier. Just last summer, a blow-out occurred on the ********Montara rig, which was situated in 240 feet of water, off Australia’s coast. The well gushed oil for over 10 weeks, depositing millions of gallons of oil that eventually covered nearly 25,000 square miles of seas. The Thai-based company tried four different attempts to cap the well. In the end, the only thing that stopped the leak was drilling a relief well.

#3) The industry clearly does not have adequate containment and clean-up capabilities

As anyone watching the news recently can tell you, the oil industry does not have the ability to contain a major spill. Despite having two weeks of lead time to prepare for oil from the Deepwater Horizon well to hit shore, the industry failed to protect the country’s most fragile marshlands and valuable beaches. Boom is ineffective. It needs constant maintenance to ensure it doesn’t wash ashore, lose air or break apart. And that’s in ideal weather conditions. Add some wind and waves, and the booms lose all ability to stop or contain oil. Furthermore, how are booms sitting on top of the water supposed to stop oil that has been dispersed into the water column? They can’t.

Burning and skimming are equally problematic in that these techniques only clean-up a tiny fraction of the oil, and that’s just the oil on the surface of the water. They do nothing for the giant oil plumes found underwater. And we’ve all watched in dismay as top-kill, junk-shot, top-hat and other shoot-from-the-hip techniques fail to plug the oil gusher. The worst part of it is these shoddy efforts are considered “proven techniques” that multiple oil companies have cited when they gained approval to drill. As Greenwire reports today:

“BP Exploration and Production told federal regulators it had "proven equipment and technology" to deal with deepwater spills like the one billowing crude oil into the Gulf of Mexico. It didn't. Still, the Minerals Management Service took the company's word for it. But BP isn't the only company to offer such blithe, and some say false, assurances. Most of the three dozen or so companies that kept drilling in deep water in the Gulf after the Deepwater Horizon rig sank got their regulatory approvals based on documents stating they could easily mop up spills, even gushers many times the stated size of the BP spill. But there's no indication they have any better method than BP.”

Additionally, shallow-water drilling usually occurs much closer to shore than deepwater wells. Imagine if the Deepwater Horizon rig was 5 miles off shore, rather than 50 miles. The impact to Gulf states would be even worse than it is now, and the failures of the industry’s containment and clean-up efforts would be even more obvious.

The President should not make the mistake that shallow-water drilling is somehow less of a risk to our oceans and coasts. Until we have a better handle on what it takes to drill safely, the President’s moratorium should cover all new drilling activities, no matter the water depth.

http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/rnelson/shallow-water_drilling_is_dang.html

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

ahhh, but you deceive yourself. All it takes is to look at what the "owner" allowed to happen to mile after mile of ancient redwood forest in northern Ca., or to the "owner" who allowed the last tree on Easter Island to be cut down. If $ is involved, an owner can be just as environmentally uncaring (and in many cases more uncaring) than a government...because quick $ is a strong motivation that many people cannot turn their backs on despite whether the consequences to the environment are harmful. in fact, i'd venture to say an owner can be more uncaring because unless the government is in bed with the corporation for $ or votes, the government would at the very least be impartial, and at the very most environmentally responsible. The problem was not that we had government regulation, the problem was that government regulation was ignored by an agency that was corrupted by Bush (and now Obama) corporate cronies.

re: all those that have a "stake" in the property include everyone who goes to the beach every summer....all those who love to swim....all those who love to see and learn about marine life... in other words, "all" of us minus the $ whores who only see the environment as something to make money out of.



that depends on the owners, and owners can, and have been, bought and bribed with quick $ despite the longterm consequences and detriment for the rest of us who love and value the oceans for esoteric reasons unrelated to money. The answer is not to get rid of government but to make government better and destroy cronyism.

Put your money and energy where your mouth is.

Become the owner by partnering up with people who want to preserve the environment. Start a boycott with other people who share your values. Be an entrepreneur of consumer reporting on companies who do not uphold your values.

However I do not need to subsidize your values nor am I going to tolerate a threat of force to subsidize your values.

Religious analogy: Standing before God

I noticed you spent most of your money and time on yourself.

How do you plea?

[Pauls' Revere]

Jobs!, jobs!, jobs!

[tangent4ronpaul]

June 23, 2010
Eco-Theatre

Posted by Lew Rockwell on June 23, 2010 11:55 AM

A wildlife biologist visiting my town is “saving birds” in the oil spill, as he did after the Exxon Valdez leak. When the media is around, he and his colleagues are seen carefully cleaning birds, though this is virtually always futile. When the media are absent, they simply twist the poor animals necks, since they are dying. The whole business costs about $5,000 per bird.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/60128.html

Total BULLSHIT!

-t

[jmdrake]

And the answer to this problem is to give the federal government more power?


Not sure why you're asking me that, jmdrake, as I have made it clear that both the federal gov't and corporations should be abolished.

I posted the information about the adminstration giving authority to BP just to show this is a government-corporate collusion, not just government. I know full who the Commander in Chief is and he is the one who had to give the orders for the Coast Guard to act as BP's goons.

There is a tendency, on this board, to lean toward government - bad, business - good. I don't see it that way. I say gov't and corporations are one animal and both are the enemy.

If you want to get into who controls the puppets in gov't and corporations, we'd have to have a good conspiracy thread. While I think that, ultimately, it is a non human entity or entities at the top of the pyramid, I try to stick to the more wordly when I post here. On that level, it's banksters, corporations and NGOs who control the politicians, because it is they who have the money and nearly all politicians are whores to the highest bidder.

You will not find anyone who hates government more than I do. I just also happen to hate the corporations who own government, as well. That's where I part company with some of the members here, who practically get a hard on at the idea of corporations running free. To think that corporations are somehow separate from gov't is as absurd as buying into the two party illusion.

Fine. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were just misunderstood. That said, do you think it's possible that you misunderstood others you attacked as "assholes" or "defenders of corporations"?

As for who's really pulling the strings, I agree that both the government and BP are puppets in the grand scheme of things. But ask yourself this. 1) Who do you think is controlling the media? 2) Do you think the media has been "defending" BP or attacking? I think the answers to both of those questions are quite obvious.

[moostraks]

Ok. I see your point. As for 'tude, this thread is full of it. I thought I was being nice in my response to you. Guess not. :confused:

The previous response came off like I was some pointless schmuck. I think people are paranoid, and with good right since this is going to be used against us all the while being exploited to cause as much harm to people and the environment until we agree with the environmental proposals of the administration.:mad:

[moostraks]

Fine. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were just misunderstood. That said, do you think it's possible that you misunderstood others you attacked as "assholes" or "defenders of corporations"?

As for who's really pulling the strings, I agree that both the government and BP are puppets in the grand scheme of things. But ask yourself this. 1) Who do you think is controlling the media? 2) Do you think the media has been "defending" BP or attacking? I think the answers to both of those questions are quite obvious.

What's your take on the media coverage? From what I hear it seems to be handwringing over what BP has been forced to do due to America's ferocious appetite for oil. If they mention the cut corners at all it seems that it coincides with terms of necessity.

Now granted I hear it from NPR (I listen to classical music and this is the station left on in the kitchen so I hear it in passing as I am doing chores in/through there). I get the rest of my news from online sources which I pick and choose so I am not seeing the msm full spectrum assault. I am aghast that NPR has yet, to my knowledge, to cover the administration turning away help. So I do see them painting the administration in a favorable light.

So in short, my take is the media is protecting the corporate and the political interests.( Which appears par for the course...)

[DjLoTi]

I'm doing my individual best :D

Susano, thank you so much for going out there and taking pictures. I posted them on my profile so that other people could see. It's important that we have raw footage. Thank you again, what you're doing is very important. I don't live in Pensacola anymore but I'm very interested in the health of our beaches! I'm a beach kind of guy lol! =P



I'm well aware of BP's history. But their practices are not all that much out of the norm for the industry.

BP should not be the target, what's the point, but rather the government should be.
I agree that BP should not be the 'target', but I think instead of the government being blamed, I think we should blame corporatism (the industry). See what I'm sayin? =)

[Anti Federalist]

Total BULLSHIT!

-t

Is it?

I could say just the opposite.

[puppetmaster]

I vow never to read another thread where the title begins with, or contains the letters....OMG

[Number19]

...I agree that BP should not be the 'target', but I think instead of the government being blamed, I think we should blame corporatism (the industry). See what I'm sayin? =)Corporatism,IMO, at least the negative aspects which people rile against, exists only by the approval and assistance of government power.

Checking Wikipedia real quickly, it appears that our American blend of corporatism began with the progressive movement and gained momentum under Roosevelt's New Deal administration.

So, change has to start with the reduction of government and a reform of the legal system.

Attacking BP, or corporate America, leads to "solutions" like the 3,000 page financial reform legislation passed this morning. Again, no one has read it and it's freely admitted that we don't know what outcome will evolve until bureaucrats start implementation. Addressing the current crisis in the Gulf, Obama's commission will come up with a similar solution to fix the oil industry.

From Wikipedia, I get this:

...One of the most prominent forms of corporatism is economic tripartism involving negotiations between business, labour, and state interest groups to set economic policy.[4] In contemporary usage, "corporatism" is often used as a pejorative term against the domination of politics by the interests of business corporations based on the inaccurate interpretation of "corporat" in corporatism as referring to business corporations.

Corporatism is related to the sociological concept of structural functionalism...

Remove government from the equation and "the problem" goes away.

[charrob]

Put your money and energy where your mouth is.

Become the owner by partnering up with people who want to preserve the environment.


Be careful what you wish for: if i could own the oceans surrounding the U.S. i'd stop all offshore drilling. :D

[Rancher]

Be careful what you wish for: if i could own the oceans surrounding the U.S. i'd stop all offshore drilling. :D

And what is your solution when people start freezing in the dark?

[constituent]

And what is your solution when people start freezing in the dark?

whale blubber.

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

But why not have the millions of people living in the area volunteer to pick it up rather than pay people twenty-four dollars an hour to do so? Figure if each person filled a 55 gallon barrel and bought a bottle of dawn to clean a few birds, that the beach would be cleaned quicker than anyone has time to complain about it. But, no, this has to become something lucrative for the government to contract out.
Shoot, a lot of hot liberal babes running around in string bikinis would probably increase sales of local businesses. Blame this on the Federal government sticking its nose where it has no business.

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

Be careful what you wish for: if i could own the oceans surrounding the U.S. i'd stop all offshore drilling. :D

All states have their natural disasters, Florida and the deep south getting struck by hurricanes, the bread basket getting hit by huge tornadoes, and the west coast getting shaken by earthquakes. But none of these natural disasters come near to comparing with the artificial disaster caused by the socialism that destroyed the Northeast.
In other words, please don't confuse your desire to manipulate with that of any real concern.

[ClayTrainor]

And what is your solution when people start freezing in the dark?

She has made it clear that she gives marine life priority over human life...

I've asked her a couple of times how she would justify the starvation of millions of humans, if she got her wish to ban all water drilling. I have yet to get a response that shows any hesitation or regret for the millions to billions of humans that would starve and suffer, from her preferred policy.

[catdd]

I think everyone pretty much agrees that there would have been some inexpensive and completely workable alternative sources by now if we had Free Market without government and corporate intervention.
The government is just as guilty as BP in more ways then one.

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

I think everyone pretty much agrees that there would have been some inexpensive and completely workable alternative sources by now if we had Free Market without government and corporate intervention.

In the game of musical chairs, the song happened to quit on BP leaving the company without a chair to sit upon. The real culprits though are the greedy stock holders who never concerned themselves enough to protect their livelihoods by creating a fund to tackle such future mishaps. As we are all imperfect and use energy, we should all share in the blame.

[susano]

Fine. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were just misunderstood. That said, do you think it's possible that you misunderstood others you attacked as "assholes" or "defenders of corporations"?

As for who's really pulling the strings, I agree that both the government and BP are puppets in the grand scheme of things. But ask yourself this. 1) Who do you think is controlling the media? 2) Do you think the media has been "defending" BP or attacking? I think the answers to both of those questions are quite obvious.

Well, yes, please do give me the benefit of the doubt because what I say is exactly what I mean.

The assholes are the ones who, through several threads, have equated corporations doing whatever they feel like (blowing off mountain tops, for instance) with personal liberty, and defending the actions of those who pollute and destroy the planet that sustains all of our lives. My view of what liberty means is consistant with that video, The Philosophy of Liberty, and it includes being 100% responsible for ones actions. You may not have seen them, but I've had exchanges here where people have defended limited liablity (granted by big gov't to their corporate puppet masters) and these posters have said things like, "Why should "I" have to be liable for a company that I invest in?". In no way is that consistant with the meaning of liberty. Then there are those who argue they have a right to pollute, and the original conversations have NOT been about personal defecation (sheesh, I can't believe I'm even writing that, lol). So, it's been a running theme and conversation, and yes, I stand by the asshole label, and, more accurate, sociopath.

When talking about gov't and corporations being puppets, and another force controlling them, we can move on up the pyramid to the banksters, who are primarliy the "Synagogue of Satan", the most prominant of which is the House of Rothschild, straight up to the Illuminati Luciferians who go back to Babylon and Egypt. Then we can get into the non human entities who control them. On this forum, I try to stick to the human actors who, of their own free will, serve that beast. The federal gov't (and many at state and local levels) and corporations are all part of that Luciferian pyramid.

As for the press, I see that as a total dog and pony show. MSNBC will lean toward blaming BP, and Fox will blame Democrats and Obama. Every bit of that is for public consumption. Just as when we get treated to Bernanke getting grilled (though I am not saying that Ron Paul isn't sincere - he is), demonizing any Illuminati faction is supposed to pacify the useless eaters, while the the anti life demons go right on about their business. Until we see them lined up and shot, you know it isn't real.

Who do I think controls the propaganda machine? Why that same Illuminati, of course.

I would not doubt, one bit, that the blowout was intentional. A CONSPIRACY. Just like 9/11. These kinds of conspiracies serve their purposes on many levels - 9/11 passed the PATRIOT Act and took us to war; they'll use this to pass cap & trade and for economic warfare, etc. That's the more mundane level, as is the stuff like insurance fraud. At the higher levels of the pyramid, these events are blood scarifices and occult rituals. Now, I realize that on a board like this, many people have no idea of what I'm talking about and they'll think that's crazy talk. Unless someone is familiar with who these demons REALLY are, they cannot possibly conceive of what I'm talking about.

This is as much a metaphysical/spiritual battle, as it is one against gov't and/or corporations. They are the physical manifestation of the consciousness that turned away from the Creator and belived it was "god". They and all who get pulled into their web, represent complete, moral ROT. What happens on earth is not separate from the spiritual. Just as freedom is birthright of all of GOD's Creation, the antithesis orginates in the non physical. Our limited perception only allows us to see part of the big picture, but if we try to stay as close to the Creator as we can, we can see beyond the puppet show. Evil hates GOD's Creation and we are all it's enemy.

[susano]

Susano, thank you so much for going out there and taking pictures. I posted them on my profile so that other people could see. It's important that we have raw footage. Thank you again, what you're doing is very important. I don't live in Pensacola anymore but I'm very interested in the health of our beaches! I'm a beach kind of guy lol! =P



You are more than welcome for pics and videos. I live in Michigan and I got those at http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/06/25/10/pg1 where many of the posters live along the Gulf coast. I can't take credit. It all goes to them. I'm just passing the info on.

[susano]

Is it?

I could say just the opposite.

Yeah, you and LR can say anything. No names, no pics, no video, no proof. As one who has rescued many animals, and knowing that there are people who devote their lives to helping animals, there is zero reason to believe it.

[susano]

And what is your solution when people start freezing in the dark?

You don't really think that no drilling in water would result in people freezing in the dark, do?

There's a lot of evidence that the gov-corp industrial complex has suppressed every effort to develop alt energies. Human beings are very clever creatures. We can find new sources of energy and it doesn't have to be expensive during the change from one paradigm to another. We could start with having ZERO taxes on all forms of energy.

[susano]

She has made it clear that she gives marine life priority over human life...

I've asked her a couple of times how she would justify the starvation of millions of humans, if she got her wish to ban all water drilling. I have yet to get a response that shows any hesitation or regret for the millions to billions of humans that would starve and suffer, from her preferred policy.

No she hasn't.

The rest of your post is pure melodrama.

[susano]

I think everyone pretty much agrees that there would have been some inexpensive and completely workable alternative sources by now if we had Free Market without government and corporate intervention.
The government is just as guilty as BP in more ways then one.

Yep. Alt energy is suppressed by the gov-corp industrial complex.

[ClayTrainor]

The rest of your post is pure melodrama.

Interesting accusation coming from you. How many threads have you started with hyperbole like OMG, or URGENT, or RISE UP in the title this week??

[susano]

Interesting accusation coming from you. How many threads have you started with hyperbole like OMG, or URGENT, or RISE UP in the title this week??

A couple about the Gulf and burning sea turtles alive. Also, a really old one, back during the campaign, where I found Hillary Clinton had a flag at one of her events upon which the stars were upside, like Satanic pentagrams. In that case, I used "OMFG!"

:p

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

This thread needs more drama whoring to further explain how the entire history of the human species changing or manipulating the planet to accommodate more humans is bad.

[Captain Shays]

It looks like we're eating each other in this thread.

Could people be so unkind as to twist the necks of birds? Sure they can. I see turtles smashed on the shoulder of the road from time to time indicating that some creep actually swerved to deliberately run it over.
Could other people lie about that sort of thing to say it happened when it didn't or visa versa? Sure. I doubt of Lew Rockwell would lie about it though.

I also know lots of people who devote themselves to saving animals.

It's not one or the other. Its both.

I want to interject another possibility here that has been on my mind lately. For the past 36 years I have pretty much devoted my life to seeing my country finally ween itself off foreign sources of energy so it's been my life study. Back when it all started I knew nothing about my Constitution or basic economics. Since then, I have made a lot of changes.

Now, I consider oil a vital part of our economy and our way of life. Where I used to hate oil companies and blame them for influencing my government, I now blame those in my government who have used tax payer dollars and the lives of our sons and daughters to protect the profits of oil companies and Royal families and ruthless dictators in the middle East. I blame our dependence on tax breaks, subsidies, and grants taken from the working people and transferred to the corporate elites.

See, if we had politicians who upheld the Constitution then they wouldn't be able to send troops all over the world especially in oil producing regions of the world, without a declaration of war as per Article I section 8 clause 11.
They wouldn't be allowed to take money from one taxpayer to give to another or from one group and transfer it to another.

Where I used to blame the corporations for bribing my elected officials and ignore the elected official for accepting that bribe, I now give more of a pass to the corporation and blame the politician more. Why? Because if the politician had nothing to sell in the way of grants, tax breaks, subsidies, no bid contracts, "incentives" or "investments" (ALL corporate welfare-ALL Unconstitutional-ALL anti-free market capitalist) then the corporations would have nothing to buy. Our elected officials have a responsibility to do the work of the people, while the corporations have a responsibility to make money.

Our military involvement in those parts of the world actually have kept us artificially dependent upon oil longer than what would have been in a true free market environment. See, unless we can factor in the stranded costs of the military expenses into the price of gas at the pump then we will never know what we're really paying because its being hidden behind our income tax. We pay once for that gas at the pump and again through our taxes.

So, for the past 8 years I have been installing solar panels for a company called Ecological Systems here in NJ. Every day, we install panels made my companies like Shell and BP. In fact, BP is the largest producer of solar panels in the world and the largest supplier of energy from solar farms in the world.

Being that this administration doesn't like to see a good crisis go to waste I could see this leading to a new solar paradigm with BP leading the way with their panels to help pay off their debt and to help give the impression that we're changing and making progress. I am working on this theory because in an intuitive way it sort of makes perfect sense.
O wonder why I never hear about BP's huge investment and dedication to renewable resource technologies.
Even as a young man of 13 right after the oil embargo which had a profound effect on my life I instinctively knew that we would never make the change until the people who control the oil companies can control the solar panels and dominate them as well.

I'll be back on this.

[Anti Federalist]

Even as a young man of 13 right after the oil embargo which had a profound effect on my life I instinctively knew that we would never make the change until the people who control the oil companies can control the solar panels and dominate them as well.

We have a winner.

There is a reason the major oil companies fund eco groups, support things like tax and trade and have so much invested in "alternative energies".

While not convinced of the false flag aspect of this disaster (yet) it will certainly be used to push the system's agenda, which the major oil companies are certainly poised to benefit from.

[Pizzo]

That's a rumor that's been around for a long time (which I have never seen substantiated). I also post at sites with the orginal GLP members. The guy who strated the site, Kent Steadman, continued to post at GLP untiel he died, a year or two ago. It's the best site for breaking news and in depth threads on the same. The threads on the Gulf have been outstanding, as many of the members live down there and have been reporting with pics and video.

Not a rumor. If you want to test it out, start a thread there with the word Tavistock in it, see how long you are still a member there. There are also other instant ban words for that site, including peoples names.

[Captain Shays]

We have a winner.

There is a reason the major oil companies fund eco groups, support things like tax and trade and have so much invested in "alternative energies".

While not convinced of the false flag aspect of this disaster (yet) it will certainly be used to push the system's agenda, which the major oil companies are certainly poised to benefit from.

Well I said I would be back on this but you summed it up in less words than I ever could. That last sentence is EXACTLY my sentiment.