It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

“It’s BP’s Oil”

page: 1
11
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 25 2010 @ 09:58 AM
link   
Heya folks, first time thread maker here, LONG time reader. Found this interesting article this morning while at work, thought I'd share it. Could not find anything similar in the search.

motherjones.com...



We tell her that deputies were just yelling at us, and she seems truly upset. For one, she's married to a Jefferson Parish sheriff's deputy. For another, "We don't need more of a black eye than we already have."

"But it wasn't BP that was yelling at us, it was the sheriff's office," we say. "Yeah, I know, but we have…a very strong relationship."

"What do you mean? You have a lot of sway over the sheriff's office?"

"Oh yeah."

"How much?"

"A lot."

When I tell Barbara I am a reporter, she stalks off and says she's not talking to me, then comes back and hugs me and says she was just playing. I tell her I don't understand why I can't see Elmer's Island unless I'm escorted by BP. She tells me BP's in charge because "it's BP's oil."

"But it's not BP's land."

"But BP's liable if anything happens."

"So you're saying it's a safety precaution."

"Yeah! You don't want that oil gettin' into your pores."

"But there are tourists and residents walking around in it across the street."

"The mayor decides which beaches are closed." So I call the Grand Isle police requesting a press liason, only to get routed to voicemail for "Melanie" with BP. I call the police back and ask why they gave me a number for BP; they blame the fire chief. I reach the fire chief.

"Why did the police give me a number for BP?" I ask.

"That's the number they gave us."

"Who?"

"BP."


[edit on 25-5-2010 by Kharron]




posted on May, 25 2010 @ 09:59 AM
link   
Are you really surprised?

We are screwed.



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 10:16 AM
link   
Nope, not surprised at all! I can't believe that I even found parts of it funny, when it's just corruption at its worst. I actually laughed when I read that she came back in and gave him a hug! What is this, kindergarten?

'Sorry I messed up, I wasn't suppose to say that, let's hug it out!'



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 10:21 AM
link   
Sure, BP's in charge... of the taxpayers' servants....

funny.

Corporate government, anyone?


Imagine that, during national crisis/ecologic disaster (pardon me 'matter of national interest') the only people you can talk to are the corporate representatives of those who should be under the scrutiny of the government.

Yeah... no conflicts of interest here.....



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 10:26 AM
link   
For anyone with atleast half a brain, this entire ordeal should make it obvious our goverment in buddy buddy with big oil. --- "But it wasn't BP that was yelling at us, it was the sheriff's office," we say. "Yeah, I know, but we have…a very strong relationship."


Hasnt our federal goverment just done such a great job cleaning this up so far??? (Sarcasm)



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 10:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 


Ah you know, cororations have deep pockets and politicians have an aversion to sunlight similar to that of vampires. It's win, win. BP takes responsibility, foots the bill for this poor excuse for a cleanup/containment operation and the administration can say some strong words and crawl right back into the money pit at the behest of their corporate masters.



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 10:39 AM
link   
God damn BP!!!
When the hell is this gonna stop? WHY have they not stopped it yet? They are a BILLIONAIRE CORP. and they can't even afford to figure out how to plug up a hole THEY CREATED?

Why aren't the people just flooding to the beaches? If everyone does it at the same time they can't put everyone in jail. And if they do put some in there, what are they going to be charged with? Trespassing on a public beach maintained by the resident tax money?



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 11:08 AM
link   
I'm glad it's BP's oil. They therefore have an extreme profit-driven incentive to stop this leak....



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 11:12 AM
link   
Oh Lord. This just adds on to everything. The average American won't give a damn until that new Gas Tax comes into effect. Once we pay, then we care. Until then, most view it as "not my problem".



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 11:39 AM
link   
I was just thinking about this and pondering the sheer magnitude of oil that is steadily billowing into the gulf at millions of barrels worth. No one knows if it will or when it will stop. This could end up putting the whole oil industry under a microscope. We may end up seeing that there is far more oil in one well than they claim and these so called shortages are concocted to drive prices up.
Many of us have claimed this for a long time but this could end up being the proof at a very,very,very heavy cost to the Earth in the process.



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 01:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
I'm glad it's BP's oil. They therefore have an extreme profit-driven incentive to stop this leak....


But in the end I believe it's inevitable a large chunk of the cleanup expenses will come from the government, and that means from our taxpayer money.

Does that mean we should all become shareholders in BP because our money will be used to do company work?


Would you even want to be a shareholder in a company that cares nothing about our livelihood?

Kharron



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 01:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kharron

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
I'm glad it's BP's oil. They therefore have an extreme profit-driven incentive to stop this leak....


But in the end I believe it's inevitable a large chunk of the cleanup expenses will come from the government, and that means from our taxpayer money.


I never brought up cleanup. You did. I was referring to stopping the leak, which is at the forefront of the problems.

BP will also have to assume some degree of financial liability for the cleanup else face other free-market based issues such as boycotts. Better too that they actually participate in cleanup efforts since government is hardly effective at dealing with disasters.



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 01:44 PM
link   
reply to post by traditionaldrummer
 


However, their liability is 'capped' (by our career politicians) at $27 million.

Funny that too!



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 01:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by Kharron

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
I'm glad it's BP's oil. They therefore have an extreme profit-driven incentive to stop this leak....


But in the end I believe it's inevitable a large chunk of the cleanup expenses will come from the government, and that means from our taxpayer money.


I never brought up cleanup. You did. I was referring to stopping the leak, which is at the forefront of the problems.

BP will also have to assume some degree of financial liability for the cleanup else face other free-market based issues such as boycotts. Better too that they actually participate in cleanup efforts since government is hardly effective at dealing with disasters.


Hehe I wasn't contradicting you. Easy there.


I was continuing off of your comment and included it to specify where my train of thought came from.



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 01:58 PM
link   
To quote Abert Einstein this one last time.

"There are two things I know that go to infinity. The universe and the
stupidity of man. I'm not real sure about the universe".



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 02:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 

No, I think it's more like $75 MILLION which is laughable given that the Valdez cleanup cost in the billions but this ceiling would be removed if significant safety violations occurred....this according to this article. It remains to be seen what kind of legal arguments BP will put up in paying "legitimate" claims. Imagine the legal maneuvers going on now. Part of the statute put in place after the Valdez spill.

The 1990 statute, which imposed liability as well as a cap, was passed because of the Exxon Valdez spill. It requires responsible parties to restore the land or “provide some equivalent resource to offset the loss,”

www.bloomberg.com...



[edit on 25-5-2010 by ChrisCrikey]



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 02:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maxmars
reply to post by traditionaldrummer
 


However, their liability is 'capped' (by our career politicians) at $27 million.

Funny that too!


This is yet another reason government shouldn't be meddling so much in business. BP could pay more if boycotts begin to cost them substantial profits. Ticking off an entire nation of 300 million+ consumers is not in your best business interests. We'll have to see how this pans out.



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 02:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kharron
Hehe I wasn't contradicting you. Easy there.


I was continuing off of your comment and included it to specify where my train of thought came from.


Ahhh. My apologies then. I saw that eye-rolling emoticon and thought there was the taint of smarminess in your comment. My mistake. Carry on.



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 02:08 PM
link   
I wouldn't wish for anyone but BP to claim ownership of the oil. The moment someone else claims ownership, guess what? It's yours to clean up.



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer


Ahhh. My apologies then. I saw that eye-rolling emoticon and thought there was the taint of smarminess in your comment. My mistake. Carry on.


I can see how that looked like it. My bad.

Wanna hug it out?




top topics



 
11
<<   2 >>

log in

join