Interesting Facts(?) about the Oil Spill (page 1)

[Phatscotty]

-only 1 month before the explosion in the Gulf, Obama came out in support of underwater oil drilling, stunning many

-The CEO of BP dumped 1/3 of his stock in BP 1-2 weeks before the explosion (remember the huge scary shorts on the airlines right before 9-11?)
-The CEO of Goldman Sachs sold 45%EDIT**(58%) (250 mil)of their BP holdings 2-3 weeks before the explosion (1 week after Obama SUPPORTED deep sea drilling) questionable at best.. The CEO of Goldman is also the former CEO of BP.....even less questionable

-BP donated more to Obama than anyone else. somewhat sourcy

-The Queen of England has a huge ownership of BP

-cap and trade was first concocted by Enron CEO Ken LAY and BP CEO Lord John Browne. Al gore says this is false. Hmm wonder where all his holdings are? Also, GS, BP and Enron, for obvious reasons, were huge in supporting the global climate summits.
-BP and goldman Sachs have been "nudging" other oil companies for the last few years to prepare to get online with the new carbon tax scheme,
-BP has the most to gain from a co2 tax system, as they have been preparing to be the frontrunner in the "new energy economy"
-Hailburton, 2 weeks before the explosion, acquires "Boots and Coots" for 240 mil, an oil spill prevention and clean up company in the Gulf. At the time, many called this a bunk deal and questioned it.



-Rahm Emanuel links Fall Election to "GOP support of of BP"


-there were early calls of "conscious gross negligence" and "outright sabotage" and were duly reflected in the "drafts" done by BP, as they identified "undocumented modifications" to the hydraulic cooling systems. the extent of those modifications is unknown at this time, but they did happen. Also, BP used the riskier casing of the methods, for financial reasons. Along with many arguments from local contractors and engineers and related occupation and other observers on site that this would be a very bad idea, and even warned of the possible explosion, but the orders came down from BP, but perhaps BP was given orders themselves?

post-Explosion

-on Obama's orders, all oil wells are to be shut down, except for BP's, because they "cant get it to stop though" Wonder if they are deep enough to reach ALL the oil in the gulf? just wondering there

-Over and over again, the federal gov't is blocking clean up attempt after clean up attempt, halted dredging attempts, reversed orders on barges, stopped governors efforts to clean up in their tracks, and many more examples I am certain most of you are by now familiar with.

-we turned down help from 13 other countries, and have our own skimmers sitting dormant on American soil. BP also had a hand in "discouraging" companies who were willing to help. (citation needed)

-now we are looking at higher gas taxes, higher taxes on oil companies, permit just to purchase an alloted amount of "energy" per month.

Ok CCF, I just wanted to throw these things out there, and if any of that is bullshit please call it out but provide something to help that. I am sorry as I cannot source every single thing, and can only hope most of you have heard this stuff as it happened or else in other oil spill threads.

[obliterationX]

Click image to enlarge.

[pimpdave]

Actually Scotty, you didn't provide sources for anything.

[Metsfanmax]

If this is a parody of all those 9/11 conspiracy articles, I love it

[King Doctor]

if any of that is bullshit please call it out but provide something to help that.

How can we be sure that any of it isn't bullshit?

[saxitoxin]

-BP was Obama largest single donor.

While the wrongness of this statement does not make the piggish Obama any less culpable for his gross derelictions or his bought-and-paid-for status as a corporate whore, it does merit note and the presumption that - lacking any sources for any other claims - all are suspect.

BP Employees to Obama 08: $89,151
BP PAC to Obama 08: $0
BP, Inc. to Democratic Campaign Committee: $100,000
Total BP Donations to Obama Campaign and Affiliate Entities: $189,151

UnitedHealth HMO* Employees to Obama 08: $109,577
UnitedHealth HMO PAC to Obama 08: $0
UnitedHealth HMO, Inc. to Democratic Campaign Committee: $1,000,000
Total UHC Donations to Obama Campaign and Affiliate Entities: $1,109,577
*The mega-corporation for whom Obama is having federal police round up new customers under force of law.

Sources:

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/searc ... t=a&sort=A
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/searc ... t=a&sort=A
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/conv_ ... cycle=2008
http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/expend. ... =C00060103
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/searc ... t=a&sort=A
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/searc ... t=a&sort=A
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/searc ... t=a&sort=A

[Phatscotty]

-BP was Obama largest single donor.

While the wrongness of this statement does not make the piggish Obama any less culpable for his gross derelictions or his bought-and-paid-for status as a corporate whore, it does merit note and the presumption that - lacking any sources for any other claims - all are suspect.

BP Employees to Obama 08: $89,151
BP PAC to Obama 08: $0
BP, Inc. to Democratic Campaign Committee: $100,000
Total BP Donations to Obama Campaign and Affiliate Entities: $189,151

UnitedHealth HMO* Employees to Obama 08: $109,577
UnitedHealth HMO PAC to Obama 08: $0
UnitedHealth HMO, Inc. to Democratic Campaign Committee: $1,000,000
Total UHC Donations to Obama Campaign and Affiliate Entities: $1,109,577
*The mega-corporation for whom Obama is having federal police round up new customers under force of law.

Sources:

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/searc ... t=a&sort=A
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/searc ... t=a&sort=A
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/conv_ ... cycle=2008
http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/expend. ... =C00060103
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/searc ... t=a&sort=A
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/searc ... t=a&sort=A
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/searc ... t=a&sort=A

okay, okay. right off the bat, yes, you are correct, and I misspoke. I should not have said single donor. But, under the "laws" 100k is the maximum allowed by a "single corporation" not including affiliates or pac or 1089's or whatever you call them. BP my number were about 97,000 (sorry I go off the cuff but I know you will agree that is about the right amount) and GS was just below it around 95k, and the process assumes there is a need to play price is right in order to get as closee to 100k as possible, without being the top donor. Im gonna check through those though and maybe we will have to do some editing. Thanks

P.S. Greekdog has tried to correct me before when he said I was incorrect about some other donor information regarding another politician. I do not remember the conclusion or if we ever reached one, simply because I was not willing to risk my avatar on it. I will look into it and perhaps start to challenges a few sources a bit more.

[saxitoxin]

Your newly added citations in the first two claims are good and, in the case of the first at least, is of high enough quality to be a prima facia affirmation of fact.

Still, it would be better if you removed all the subjective claims such as this one -

/// BP has the most to gain from a co2 tax system, as they have been preparing to be the frontrunner in the "new energy economy" ///

which is unprovable by the very way it's written - and kept only the objective ones.

[Phatscotty]

Your newly added citations in the first two claims are good and, in the case of the first at least, is of high enough quality to be a prima facia affirmation of fact.

Still, it would be better if you removed all the subjective claims such as this one -

/// BP has the most to gain from a co2 tax system, as they have been preparing to be the frontrunner in the "new energy economy" ///

which is unprovable by the very way it's written - and kept only the objective ones.

BP has been preparing for years, and are in position to gain greatly from a cap and trade system?

[jaimito101]

-The CEO of BP dumped 1/3 of his stock in BP 1-2 weeks before the explosion (remember the huge scary shorts on the airlines right before 9-11?)
-The CEO of Goldman Sachs sold 45%EDIT**(58%) (250 mil)of their BP holdings 2-3 weeks before the explosion (1 week after Obama SUPPORTED deep sea drilling) questionable at best.. The CEO of Goldman is also the former CEO of BP.....even less questionable


post-Explosion

-on Obama's orders, all oil wells are to be shut down, except for BP's, because they "cant get it to stop though" Wonder if they are deep enough to reach ALL the oil in the gulf? just wondering there

-Over and over again, the federal gov't is blocking clean up attempt after clean up attempt, halted dredging attempts, reversed orders on barges, stopped governors efforts to clean up in their tracks, and many more examples I am certain most of you are by now familiar with.

-we turned down help from 13 other countries, and have our own skimmers sitting dormant on American soil. BP also had a hand in "discouraging" companies who were willing to help. (citation needed)

-now we are looking at higher gas taxes, higher taxes on oil companies, permit just to purchase an alloted amount of "energy" per month.

Ok CCF, I just wanted to throw these things out there, and if any of that is bullshit please call it out but provide something to help that. I am sorry as I cannot source every single thing, and can only hope most of you have heard this stuff as it happened or else in other oil spill threads.

so what are you trying to say? that BP caused this knowigly for personal profit? thats the biggest bull i've heard in a long while. the company has taken a huge financial hit after this dissaster, and have had to open up a rescue fund of 20 billion. Do you think the CEO is enjoying his life at this point?! Do you think BP is at a better place now than it was before the accident?

-Hailburton, 2 weeks before the explosion, acquires "Boots and Coots" for 240 mil, an oil spill prevention and clean up company in the Gulf. At the time, many called this a bunk deal and questioned it.

now if your saying that haliburton sabotaged the rig, well that makes more sense, as they are profiting now, and indeed the US have not been accepting much help from elsewhere. but stating that the BP top has anything to do with this is just insane.

-The Queen of England has a huge ownership of BP

-there were early calls of "conscious gross negligence" and "outright sabotage" and were duly reflected in the "drafts" done by BP, as they identified "undocumented modifications" to the hydraulic cooling systems. the extent of those modifications is unknown at this time, but they did happen. Also, BP used the riskier casing of the methods, for financial reasons. Along with many arguments from local contractors and engineers and related occupation and other observers on site that this would be a very bad idea, and even warned of the possible explosion, but the orders came down from BP, but perhaps BP was given orders themselves?

Having BP being led by a higher hand?! that also seems unreasonable, this higher hand would have to have expected to make profits of above 50 billion to make this even worthwhile. Also how would you keep this quiet? and repay BP for its losses? very risky and unlikely as well.

[PLAYER57832]

I am just going to assume your figures are valid. But your attempt to somehow claim this might be intentional is really missing the point.

The problem is that so many people, and you have shown yourself to be in this group absolutely, entirely underestimate the impact of these things and entirely overestimate the economic benefits of all market enterprises.

The answer is to move toward sustainability and entirely away from our growth-centered economy that requires we exploit non-renewable resources and exploit people. In the past, this worked because we just went to other countries -- Africa, South American, Asia. Now that is no longer acceptable. Either we face that and start balancing our OWN books, fully or our great, great great grandchildren will suffer far more than is now projected.

[Phatscotty]

-The CEO of BP dumped 1/3 of his stock in BP 1-2 weeks before the explosion (remember the huge scary shorts on the airlines right before 9-11?)
-The CEO of Goldman Sachs sold 45%EDIT**(58%) (250 mil)of their BP holdings 2-3 weeks before the explosion (1 week after Obama SUPPORTED deep sea drilling) questionable at best.. The CEO of Goldman is also the former CEO of BP.....even less questionable


post-Explosion

-on Obama's orders, all oil wells are to be shut down, except for BP's, because they "cant get it to stop though" Wonder if they are deep enough to reach ALL the oil in the gulf? just wondering there

-Over and over again, the federal gov't is blocking clean up attempt after clean up attempt, halted dredging attempts, reversed orders on barges, stopped governors efforts to clean up in their tracks, and many more examples I am certain most of you are by now familiar with.

-we turned down help from 13 other countries, and have our own skimmers sitting dormant on American soil. BP also had a hand in "discouraging" companies who were willing to help. (citation needed)

-now we are looking at higher gas taxes, higher taxes on oil companies, permit just to purchase an alloted amount of "energy" per month.

Ok CCF, I just wanted to throw these things out there, and if any of that is bullshit please call it out but provide something to help that. I am sorry as I cannot source every single thing, and can only hope most of you have heard this stuff as it happened or else in other oil spill threads.

so what are you trying to say? that BP caused this knowigly for personal profit? thats the biggest bull i've heard in a long while. the company has taken a huge financial hit after this dissaster, and have had to open up a rescue fund of 20 billion. Do you think the CEO is enjoying his life at this point?! Do you think BP is at a better place now than it was before the accident?

-Hailburton, 2 weeks before the explosion, acquires "Boots and Coots" for 240 mil, an oil spill prevention and clean up company in the Gulf. At the time, many called this a bunk deal and questioned it.

now if your saying that haliburton sabotaged the rig, well that makes more sense, as they are profiting now, and indeed the US have not been accepting much help from elsewhere. but stating that the BP top has anything to do with this is just insane.

-The Queen of England has a huge ownership of BP

-there were early calls of "conscious gross negligence" and "outright sabotage" and were duly reflected in the "drafts" done by BP, as they identified "undocumented modifications" to the hydraulic cooling systems. the extent of those modifications is unknown at this time, but they did happen. Also, BP used the riskier casing of the methods, for financial reasons. Along with many arguments from local contractors and engineers and related occupation and other observers on site that this would be a very bad idea, and even warned of the possible explosion, but the orders came down from BP, but perhaps BP was given orders themselves?

Having BP being led by a higher hand?! that also seems unreasonable, this higher hand would have to have expected to make profits of above 50 billion to make this even worthwhile. Also how would you keep this quiet? and repay BP for its losses? very risky and unlikely as well.

I am quite sure we can easily prove that is not the case, can't we? What is the reason then, that these guys dumped HUGE positions of BP stock 2 weeks before the oil spill? Gotta be an easy one...

[Phatscotty]

I am just going to assume your figures are valid. But your attempt to somehow claim this might be intentional is really missing the point.

The problem is that so many people, and you have shown yourself to be in this group absolutely, entirely underestimate the impact of these things and entirely overestimate the economic benefits of all market enterprises.

The answer is to move toward sustainability and entirely away from our growth-centered economy that requires we exploit non-renewable resources and exploit people. In the past, this worked because we just went to other countries -- Africa, South American, Asia. Now that is no longer acceptable. Either we face that and start balancing our OWN books, fully or our great, great great grandchildren will suffer far more than is now projected.

#1how does any of that related to underestimating the impact or overestimating the economic benefits.
#2 Can power be overestimated?
Don't go after me, go after the facts.
Don't tell me where my errors are, tell me where if and how the facts are errors. (not opinions)

I dont even disagree with your long-term answer, as we do need to figure something out. But exploiting the oil crises is not the way to do it, and exploiting the oil crises is also standard operating procedure.

I guess I'm pulling a Ventura here. Just asking questions. We have facts, I am asking you guys to either plug in something that can lend further credence to any of this, or else, please and by all means, tear it apart! That's what we do, and we do it well.

#3 What is your answer to why the Fed's are putting up so much red tape on clean up attempts?

[pimpdave]

Decent citations Scotty, I'm impressed.

[Baron Von PWN]

-we turned down help from 13 other countries, and have our own skimmers sitting dormant on American soil. BP also had a hand in "discouraging" companies who were willing to help. (citation needed)
.

Fact check claims the Feds haven't really turned down offers of help, or if they have its because those offers of help sometimes come with price tags or don't meet with US standards.

Source:http://www.factcheck.org/2010/06/oil-spill-foreign-help-and-the-jones-act/

[Phatscotty]

-we turned down help from 13 other countries, and have our own skimmers sitting dormant on American soil. BP also had a hand in "discouraging" companies who were willing to help. (citation needed)
.

Fact check claims the Feds haven't really turned down offers of help, or if they have its because those offers of help sometimes come with price tags or don't meet with US standards.

Source:http://www.factcheck.org/2010/06/oil-spill-foreign-help-and-the-jones-act/

Well aware of the Jones act. Also aware we can temporarily suspend the act in the case of an emergency.......

NOPE!

Gov't regulations on oil skimmers is far more important than the oil spill itself

[Nobunaga]

With the stroke of a pen and an executive order, we'd have help.

Such gross incompetence in the office of President is truly frightening.

[PLAYER57832]

I am just going to assume your figures are valid. But your attempt to somehow claim this might be intentional is really missing the point.

The problem is that so many people, and you have shown yourself to be in this group absolutely, entirely underestimate the impact of these things and entirely overestimate the economic benefits of all market enterprises.

The answer is to move toward sustainability and entirely away from our growth-centered economy that requires we exploit non-renewable resources and exploit people. In the past, this worked because we just went to other countries -- Africa, South American, Asia. Now that is no longer acceptable. Either we face that and start balancing our OWN books, fully or our great, great great grandchildren will suffer far more than is now projected.

#1how does any of that related to underestimating the impact or overestimating the economic benefits.

Back up a bit. I don't believe that BP execs or the Bush administration (or Obama) were/are evil. Not to get esoteric, but if all we had to worry about were evil people, there would be no worry. Truly evil people are pretty rare.

So, how can people decide that its OK to put millions and millions of people at risk and threaten the entire Gulf economy, etc. ?(I won't get into the whole list... that's been touched on elsewhere) They can decide it by being utterly ignorant of the real impacts and utterly arrogant of the chances of the damage occuring.

When you choose to or simply are ignorant of impacts to the natural world, it becomes easy to create situations that lead to huge environmental disasters.

#2 Can power be overestimated?

Not sure what you are getting at here.

Don't go after me, go after the facts.

I believe it was facts I was going after. I have said over and over that the main reason you and I disagree so often is that you just plain dispute what I say to be true about the world around us. Specifically, about our dependence on natural systems, and the importance of paying attention to people working at lower economic levels.

Don't tell me where my errors are, tell me where if and how the facts are errors. (not opinions)

Well, except you consider most of what I have been taught about the world around to be "mere opinion". You dismiss years of education, work in various fields, etc. (not just in me)

I dont even disagree with your long-term answer, as we do need to figure something out. But exploiting the oil crises is not the way to do it, and exploiting the oil crises is also standard operating procedure.

People only move when they feel their house is burning. I might wish it were otherwise, but that is the truth.
I don't call moving people in the right direction to be "taking advantage", I call it finding what good we can from a terrible situation.

A father who decides to donate millions to a cancer research center after his child dies of cancer might, by your reconing, be said to have been "taken advantage of", except.. I doubt he sees it that way.

I guess I'm pulling a Ventura here. Just asking questions. We have facts, I am asking you guys to either plug in something that can lend further credence to any of this, or else, please and by all means, tear it apart! That's what we do, and we do it well.

Problem is, I cannot give you years of college education in just a few short paragraphs, and you don't trust scientist, in general, so simply referring you to various sites even won't do much good.

#3 What is your answer to why the Fed's are putting up so much red tape on clean up attempts?

Any time you have an operation this large, you have some idiots involved.

I will give you a similar example. I worked wildfires for a few years in CA. CA, Texas, etc all currently have a pretty tight structure and response system for dealing with fires. However, it took long years of problems, lost lives, etc for that system to evolve. Even so, there are still big goofs. People die in fires when someone goofs. So, there is a lot of emphasis on prevention, on control, on making things work "right". Still... people are not perfect.

If the danger from these spills were properly assessed, as I feel should have been done from the get-go, as needs to be done now, then all of these needs would have been identified in advance. This would include trained managers, field personnel adept at dealing with such a spill.

However, as I said earlier... all that, the study, the response preparation, etc... all of that requires more government. One problem in tracking this spill is that Bush significantly cut funding for research into ocean currents so that many of the tracking bouys that used to be all over the Gulf are no longer there. They stop working and cannot be replaced. BUT, on one point, I want to be clear. NONE of this should come directly from taxes. Every oil company in the Gulf should share in those expenses, but the administration must be independent of those companies, ergo the government, but not the arm responsible for collecting lease money. I fully realize these costs will then be passed on to we consumers, but that is how it should be. If something is expensive, then it is expensive. This false idea that oil is cheap is what got us into the heavy dependence to begin with. Had oil companies been forced to pay real costs from the beginning, then perhaps other alternatives would have been developed far, far sooner. We made some brief pushes in the 70's, but then it all petered out. Now China has more invested in alternative energy than we do... and it is yet one more reason they are and will pass us up.

[Baron Von PWN]

-we turned down help from 13 other countries, and have our own skimmers sitting dormant on American soil. BP also had a hand in "discouraging" companies who were willing to help. (citation needed)
.

Fact check claims the Feds haven't really turned down offers of help, or if they have its because those offers of help sometimes come with price tags or don't meet with US standards.

Source:http://www.factcheck.org/2010/06/oil-spill-foreign-help-and-the-jones-act/

Well aware of the Jones act. Also aware we can temporarily suspend the act in the case of an emergency.......

NOPE!

Gov't regulations on oil skimmers is far more important than the oil spill itself

What exactly is your source for this? as all I have seen are post in forums about him supposedly turning down help.

[Nola_Lifer]

I didn't see this anyways but Cheney owns shares in Hailburton and we all know what that guy is all about. Also, I am pretty sure a lot of British own BP who are in retirement or nearing retirement. Put those some where in your facts.

Also, I am from New Orleans, so if you know any thing about emergencies and the Federal Government you'll quickly find it in the dictionary under CLUSTER f*ck. I am mean look at all the Hurricanes that hit the Gulf Coast and how many Feds still have a thumb up their ass. Also, do you know how toxic this oil is and all those chemicals they have pored on top. You have to wear these crazy suites that are hot and it gets well over a 100 down there.

Yet, what is the point of this thread? If your outraged, why don't you go down and help the clean up. I mean starting some pointless thread about the oil spill is useless. O yeah, throw this in your facts. Nothing is spilling. No ship, no containers. It is coming out of the earth, so it seems like its an oil leak or and oil gouge.

[Nola_Lifer]

http://www.wwltv.com/news/gulf-oil-spill/A-Whale-Of-A-Skimmer-Ready-For-Action-In-BP-Spill-97625959.html

[PLAYER57832]

I didn't see this anyways but Cheney owns shares in Hailburton and we all know what that guy is all about. Also, I am pretty sure a lot of British own BP who are in retirement or nearing retirement. Put those some where in your facts.

Also, I am from New Orleans, so if you know any thing about emergencies and the Federal Government you'll quickly find it in the dictionary under CLUSTER f*ck. I am mean look at all the Hurricanes that hit the Gulf Coast and how many Feds still have a thumb up their ass. Also, do you know how toxic this oil is and all those chemicals they have pored on top. You have to wear these crazy suites that are hot and it gets well over a 100 down there.

Yet, what is the point of this thread? If your outraged, why don't you go down and help the clean up. I mean starting some pointless thread about the oil spill is useless. O yeah, throw this in your facts. Nothing is spilling. No ship, no containers. It is coming out of the earth, so it seems like its an oil leak or and oil gouge.

With respect, unless someone has a job in advance, just heading down there to work is NOT a good idea.

A GOOD idea, though is to go down and spend money -- eat at the restaurants, go to the shops, bars, etc. That will help keep people working.

... and look for ways to reduce your personal petroleum usage

[Phatscotty]

I didn't see this anyways but Cheney owns shares in Hailburton and we all know what that guy is all about. Also, I am pretty sure a lot of British own BP who are in retirement or nearing retirement. Put those some where in your facts.

Also, I am from New Orleans, so if you know any thing about emergencies and the Federal Government you'll quickly find it in the dictionary under CLUSTER f*ck. I am mean look at all the Hurricanes that hit the Gulf Coast and how many Feds still have a thumb up their ass. Also, do you know how toxic this oil is and all those chemicals they have pored on top. You have to wear these crazy suites that are hot and it gets well over a 100 down there.

Yet, what is the point of this thread? If your outraged, why don't you go down and help the clean up. I mean starting some pointless thread about the oil spill is useless. O yeah, throw this in your facts. Nothing is spilling. No ship, no containers. It is coming out of the earth, so it seems like its an oil leak or and oil gouge.

Just sharing interesting fatcs. Why do you think GS and BP sold a shit load of shares 2 weeks before the explosion?

[Nola_Lifer]

What would really be interesting is to see how many they have bought now. Seeing that their stock has decreased immensely that you know who ever buys it now will see it rise in the next 5 years, so if you can find something to link how many the sold to how many have been bought now would be interesting, but the reason for the blow up was because some retard was dicking around with the well even though many told them to stop the drilling or something was going to blow. Also, why would you dump your stock, blow up a rig, which makes you your money, then do nothing about it and not increase any more income for your company.

[PLAYER57832]

Just sharing interesting fatcs. Why do you think GS and BP sold a shit load of shares 2 weeks before the explosion?

Reasons not truly related.
Truth is, you can find "cooincidental connections" between just about any 2 things.

I agree there are issues, but an intentional conspiracy is just pretty far down the line. Among other reasons, there just is no real and true benefit to anyone, not really, in this. It was caused by folks arrogantly overlooking risk and impact.. much like in most major disasters on Earth.