It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Oil Spill Appears to be INTENTIONAL. Destroy the world for the allmighty DOLLAR

page: 13
<< 10  11  12    14 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 10 2010 @ 03:10 PM

Originally posted by billthename

The information in the linked article is of the sort that could cause one to be overwhelmed by fear. I do not want to cause that
and I feel like I need to apologize for even posting this, but it needs to be looked at in view of the Gulf Oil Spill: As you read, the
scope of this thing will slowly hit you. The water shortage also makes a person wonder.


Thanks for posting. Any information is greatly appreciated.

posted on Jun, 10 2010 @ 03:12 PM

Originally posted by DataWraith
There could be ANOTHER reason to have a constructed oil spill. To usher in the new era of energy production?
Using magnetic generators to power homes , solar powered vehicles and such like as the old fossil fuels are now either running out / or unstable to retrieve.
What better way for the energy companies to say " these fossil fuels are now becoming problematic for the world, so we'll invest time and money developing NEW ways to generating electricity" and lo and behold new fangled generators are wheeled out to the hopeful world at vastly over inflated prices , or yours to own for monthly charges of X amount.
I'll be expecting to see electric vehicles and home generators being advertised on a TV near you soon ATS'ers.

Anything is possible, and I'm sure that this reason that you posted could be one of many. Thanks for the alternate viewpoint.

posted on Jun, 10 2010 @ 06:09 PM
reply to post by chefc14

Yes you are correct, right in your face and under your nose.


Maybe a warning.

I have the movie Knowing and noticed the exact same thing.

posted on Jun, 10 2010 @ 06:24 PM
Sorry I can't quite buy into it. As much as it seems plausible that corrupt oligarchs would seek destruction to further line their own pockets, the facts suggest otherwise.

Nalco was already way overpriced prior to the oil disaster and since the disaster it has been dropping in price! They will get a boost from the dispersents, but it's a one time deal.

BP would have to have been in on it, but their stock value has dropped by $17 billion and getting worse. Halliburton's stock has also dropped precipitously.

If someone were profiting from this financially you'd want to look at suspicious exits from the market or odd short positions. Now it is true that the ceo of BP dumped a bunch of stock prior to the blowout, but I suspect he was planning to exercise his options anyway and it was just a matter of good timing.

In the end it's a negative for him since he's likely to lose his job, and this one is going to look ugly on his resume.

posted on Jun, 10 2010 @ 09:47 PM
reply to post by chefc14

I just watched the 'B' movie Supernova a couple days ago. Eerily familiar script. A meteor hit the sun and it started flaring and such, throwing off CMEs and massive solar winds. It was causing earthquakes, power outages, satellite killing, tidal waves, communication blackouts, meteor storms, all that stuff. Not meant to scare anyone, just a movie plot. Didn't want to divert the thread either.

[edit on 10-6-2010 by OuttaTime]
Edited out the info that was actually from the movie 10.5. My bad.

[edit on 10-6-2010 by OuttaTime]

posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 12:43 AM

When the Army Corps of Engineers first attempted to obtain NASA imagery of the Gulf oil slick, which is larger than is being reported by the media, it was reportedly denied the access. By chance, National Geographic managed to obtain satellite imagery shots of the extent of the disaster and posted them on their web site. Other satellite imagery reportedly being withheld by the Obama administration, shows that what lies under the gaping chasm spewing oil at an ever-alarming rate is a cavern estimated to be the size of Mount Everest. This information has been given an almost national security-level classification to keep it from the public, according to Madsen’s sources.

A cursory look at a map of the Gulf Stream shows that the oil is not just going to cover the beaches in the Gulf, it will spread to the Atlantic coasts up through North Carolina then on to the North Sea and Iceland. And beyond the damage to the beaches, sea life and water supplies, the Gulf stream has a very distinct chemistry, composition (marine organisms), density, temperature. What happens if the oil and the dispersants and all the toxic compounds they create actually change the nature of the Gulf Stream? No one can rule out potential changes including changes in the path of the Gulf Stream, and even small changes could have huge impacts. Europe, including England, is not an icy wasteland due to the warming from the Gulf Stream.

Yet there is a deafening silence from the very environmental organizations which ought to be at the barricades demanding that BP, the US Government and others act decisively.

That deafening silence of leading green or ecology organizations such as Greenpeace, Nature Conservancy, Sierra Club and others may well be tied to a money trail that leads right back to the oil industry, notably to BP. Leading environmental organizations have gotten significant financial payoffs in recent years from BP in order that the oil company could remake itself with an “environment-friendly face,” as in “beyond petroleum” the company’s new branding.

The Nature Conservancy, described as “the world’s most powerful environmental group,” has awarded BP a seat on its International Leadership Council after the oil company gave the organization more than $10 million in recent years.

Until recently, the Conservancy and other environmental groups worked with BP in a coalition that lobbied Congress on climate-change issues. An employee of BP Exploration serves as an unpaid Conservancy trustee in Alaska. In addition, according to a recent report published by the Washington Post, Conservation International, another environmental group, has accepted $2 million in donations from BP and worked with the company on a number of projects, including one examining oil-extraction methods. From 2000 to 2006, John Browne, then BP's chief executive, sat on the CI board.

Further, The Environmental Defense Fund, another influential ecologist organization, joined with BP, Shell and other major corporations to form a Partnership for Climate Action, to promote ‘market-based mechanisms’ (sic) to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Environmental non-profit groups that have accepted donations from or joined in projects with BP include Nature Conservancy, Conservation International, Environmental Defense Fund, Sierra Club and Audubon. That could explain why the political outcry to date for decisive action in the Gulf has been so muted.

[edit on 123030p://bFriday2010 by Stormdancer777]

posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 01:55 AM
reply to post by Stormdancer777

Very interesting information Stormdancer777. Thanks for posting and keeping this thread updated.

posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 04:51 AM
reply to post by EvolvedMinistry

What's the deal with ATSers telling fellow ATSers to "wake up!!!"

WE aren't the ones getting all of our news by MSM

We come here to get news from ATS NOT because we are sleeping sheep, so I don't think we deserve to be treated like we have our heads in the sand.

Treat your fellow ATSers with respect and not like ignorant fools just because you compiled some information on a post!

I don't see a reason to give S&F to anyone who treats me rudely as if I'm one of those people not trying to figure out what is really going on.

posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 10:34 AM

Originally posted by EvolvedMinistry
reply to post by Stormdancer777

Very interesting information Stormdancer777. Thanks for posting and keeping this thread updated.

YOu are welcome, EM.

posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 10:56 AM
It's the perfect, perfect distraction from the current crisis. They (the establishment) know how to skillfully divert and manipulate peoples' minds.

posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 11:04 AM
Actually, I do believe it was done intentionally, check out any info about hulliburton gas co. their sales were down 45% ( the stock plunged) , so they decided to purchase boots and coots company that deals with cleaning up or anything related to the oil industry. go to the and type WEL, that's the stock index for boots and coots, you clearly can see that the company got so many contracts for the future, it has hundreds of millions in contracts, apparently halliburton knew what it was doing in purchasing the company that would relate to the catastrophe 7 days prior to the explosion!!!

posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 04:12 PM

Originally posted by EvolvedMinistry
I have compiled some information studying this oil spill. On the surface it appears to be one of the worst "ACCIDENTS" in the history of the world. However, if one were to look deeper, they might see a pattern forming to which it was specifically designed.

Lets take a look:

Halliburton posts a 46% drop in profits due to lack of overseas drilling:

One of the best ways to increase profits is to make sure that you have work. So, if one were to create a disaster in which they were hired to clean, they immediately are able to replace lost profits by gaining contracts for clean-up.

Now, take a look at this link:

At the surface, this looks quite innocent until you start to get to some more serious issues.

That's right...the above link suggests that Halliburton was responsible for the cementing that created both oil spills.

Now you ask...What does that have to do with posting a 46% profit loss??? Well, if you can't get business through war and oil, which is Halliburton's bread and butter, what would be the next best way to ensure that you continue to work so that you can boost profits???

Then we have this little Gem: Halluburton Buys "Boots-N-Coots" Oil clean-up company 8 days before the spill: Who can put two and two together on this ONE???
Here's the conspiracy side:
Here's the mainstream

Gee...why would this occur do you think??? Why on earth did Halliburton need to purchase "Boots-N-Coots" 8 days BEFORE the spill???

Well now...let's look a little deeper into the profits that can be made by doing such things:
BP chief sells shares before the spill:
Goldman Sachs sells shares as well: Yep, these were the same psychopaths that helped the financial collapse.

And here are some reasons why BP keeps lying about the spill...That's right, it boils down to the almighty DOLLAR:

And look here: A faked clean-up response by BP and the government itself. WHY FAKE IT?

Does everyone here see a BIGGER picture forming??? If not, I could continue playing connect the dots all day, but, for those who critically think, this is a NO-BRAINER.

I have to go to work now, but, I will post more information shortly.

Star and flag, because if this is what I think it is, its the BIGGEST False Flag in the history of mankind...NEXT TO: 911???

Definition of false flag:

Wake up people!!!

And...MUCH LOVE TO ALL. Love, Peace, intellect, and understanding is our only hopes for survival here. Its amazing to see that so many people are waking up. Now we have to apply our knowledge to save our country and our people.

All of us are worth more than money. We're all worth more than what are politicians and businessmen sell us off daily for. Its a construct people, and the construct needs to die.

[edit on 8-6-2010 by EvolvedMinistry]

Ok I gotta argue some of this logic. Halliburton's profits are down yes. Vnezuela's plummeting currency value, the recession lowering fossil fuel demand, but still turned a 28 cent per share profit.

As far as buying boots n coots. They were competitors. Oilfield services. Halliburton bought a small cleanup company to increase it's marketshare. Boot's n Coots did about 195 million in business and their net income was 6 million dollars. Purchasing another company, elimination competition and consilidating services is a nice wat to enhance their market position.

The NPR article didn't suggest that Hallibburton was rresponsible for the defect. THey said their will be an investigation regarding the cementing. Cement has a very unique property, it turns from a liquid slurry to a solid. When a cement slurry is pumped into the hole it will have a high density. This density will hold the gas back in the formation in the same way that the drilling fluid does. However as the cement turns from a liquid to a solid (the exact point is called P70) the cement will essentially take on the density of water and for a few moments may allow gas to enter the wellbore.

As gas enters the wellbore it will displace fluid from the wellbore; the well will start to flow. On a land rig this is easily spotted but on a semi submersible (Transocean Horizon) the rig is contantly moving and fluid will tend to be displaced from the wellbore (riser at this point) as a normal course of events. Most likely the crews keeping an eye on this wellbore mistook it for normal displacement due to the motion of the rig.

Once gas has entered the riser (having passed the BOP stack) the crews didn't stand a chance.

Now Hayward sold his shares during a 2 month high spell right around the time a dip in prices of fossil fuel related stocks was projected to occur. Now he sold the shares before they maxed out before the spill. Goldman Sachs sold them in the 1st quarter again while the prices were floating high before a projected dip. Playing it safe.

As far as the faked cleanup response, they spruced it up for the prez. Nice PR work. Terrabonne and LaFourche parishes footed the bill for the workers. It's a shame they didn't stay and help. Out of all the things you listed this to me is the most offensive.

But all items are explainable. And I don't see an elaborate plot by Halliburton to bring down BP and give themselves more work with the cleanup effort.

posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 08:10 PM
reply to post by ThaLoccster


Hi all,

Perhap's Hal/Tans don't have the bucks to BP? But Hal and Dick should get swallowed-up re the bankruptcys forthcoming, re the gulf-disaster !!


posted on Jun, 12 2010 @ 01:47 AM
You guys really need to wake up and get you some lives! Conspiracy theories can be true to a certain extent, but saying that the oil spill was intentional is pure stupidity! I hear the craziest, dumbest, nuttiest crap of my life everyday. This beats almost all of them! No, I am not for the government in any way, shape, or form. But even if these conspiracies were true, about intentional oil spills and downsizing human population, it would be pure stupidity on the government's end. Because that would actually LOSE them money. If you people could actually think things through all of the way, then you might have a different perspective on things. Instead of piecing things together and calling it so. Even the editors of ATS can't even spell right (no offense). If you have any questions or comments about this post, write it down, fold it up, and [snip]. Yes, I used a line from The Shawshank Redemption, so what? And if ATS were to delete my profile for this specific post, would be completely personal in all ways!


Deleted uncivil comment.

[edit on 13/6/10 by masqua]

posted on Jun, 12 2010 @ 04:47 AM
reply to post by notAllofthemRtrue

You are assuming they are smart and know what they are doing. Good luck with that!

In truth, they are irresponsible like children. They cause damage and then run away. And they gather in crowds to defend themselves, throwing broken glass on people.

posted on Jun, 12 2010 @ 04:50 AM
Remember the worlds of the Cree: "Only after the last tree has been cut down / Only after the last river has been poisoned / Only after the last fish has been caught / Then will you find that money cannot be eaten."

Peace Cushy

posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 10:24 AM
Environmental destruction is a by-product of the relentless pursuit of profit.

Corners are cut to maximize profit,resulting in illegal dumping of industrial waste to save the cost of disposing of it properly,and the products from the raw materials eventually wear out,and are then disposed of,creating more pollution.

A massive lifestyle change,worldwide,is the only thing that will fix the problems we are facing.

It's our fault,you can't blame companies for going out to harvest raw materials, and manufacture the things you will pay them for.

posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 01:49 PM
See this thread:

posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 01:51 PM

Originally posted by Rockpuck

Originally posted by EvolvedMinistry

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by EvolvedMinistry

So how much money has Haliburton actually made off the oil spill... you left that out.

Well, that information has yet to be known. The same as the economic collapse. Untold amounts were made by the bankers at the expense of the tax payers, however, all WE know is that it caused our economy to tank.

No. If you accuse a corporation of profiting off the disaster... you'd better know how much, if any, they profited. Otherwise it's baseless lies. Don't get me wrong, I hate Hailburton .. and we can look at their connections to the War and see the billions they made from moving oil, feeding troops, etc, etc..

But if you cannot prove they made a profit at all during this crisis... it's baseless lies. So simply show where they made the profit.

Here's your exact figures.

Baseless lies???

Well, I'm glad that we got this out of the way...DON"T YOU??? And even better, I told you to be patient and you would get your answer.


[edit on 13-6-2010 by EvolvedMinistry]

posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 03:59 PM

Originally posted by area6
Unless BP got duped by Halliburton, profit doesn't make sense as the motivation. This is costing BP AND losing them revenue. BP would be blaming Halliburton big time.

But ....

Let's imagine a President who wants to end the wars in the Middle East and "bring the troops home". He hasn't yet because his security advisors keep pressuring him with the realities of peak oil and the need to secure oil reserves in the Middle East.

But he argues back "We have generous reserves in the Gulf of Mexico".

So what do TPTB do about this to convince this peacenic prez that a presence (and expansion) in the ME is necessary?

... now you've got a conspiracy.

Yep. Glad someone else sees this, as well.

This was done by Cheney (Halliburton) to make us more beholden to the middle-eastern oil contracts he benefits from. AND, it has the added bonus of being huge scar on the Obama Administration, which also benefits Cheney's beloved GOP.

new topics

top topics

<< 10  11  12    14 >>

log in