BP not allowing local media access to public beach

www.wdsu.com...

For 2 days, BP-hired security tried to prevent local media from talking to workers while on their breaks. When the real police allowed the news crew access, this rent-a-cop goon still saw fit to hound the news crew.

reply to post by rocketman70433


Again we see that Big INC controls the world and we can't even go to a public place anymore without having a rent a thug tell us to go away.

Sick and completely wrong.

Wow, now that's revealing! Thanks for the post!

"Who do you work for?" "Well that's none of your business."
"We already heard that one," like the reporter is just making stuff up.
This only adds suspicion to the situation. Great find!
There is clearly a contradiction between what has been said is acceptable and what is really happening.


Another similar report.


Peace


[edit on 12-6-2010 by speculativeoptimist]

I heard a story about this on NPR a couple of days ago. They were being turned away by BP contractors and the Coast Guard. The Coast Guard had to clarify the access rules to BP at which more access became available but it is stll very restricted. Here is another article on the subject.

www.huffingtonpost.com...

I say it's high time we get about 100 reporters and 300 camera people to storm the beach! That security guy would have a stroke. LOL

It would be so easy to distract that guy with a fake reporter while a real one sneaks on to the beach behind him in the distance.

This security guy is the lowest form of life on earth, next to CEOs.

The problem is, even if we had the reporters storm the beach, it is quite obvious with the security guard standing there over the workers on break that they are not being allowed to interview anyway.

I was about to post this exact video, kudos to getting it out there fast Rocketman.

That security guard was an idiot.

Get one of those small pocket cams that take video. Hang it around your neck and make it record video. Also having a big ass dslr for primary photography is good. They tend to take away the attention from the small pocket cam. Go to beach, if anyone tries to prevent you from accessing it then sue them to high heavens. Best if you get footage of them physically removing you or assaulting you.

Call me the guy with a different opinion, or I just might work for BP.

But...

Is it even remotely plausible, that safety plays a part in denying people to the beach. With every other post here saying how if you breathe the benzene you'll die, the oil fumes are going to kill you, and the corexit is going to kill you...

But then as soon as you can't go on a beach (I'm assuming an oil covered one) its a vast conspiracy to keep you from seeing the real dangers.

I just find it odd that most of the posts are about forced evacuations due to the health affects, telling people to run for the hills because we are all doomed from the affects of the oil/dispersant/other chemicals. But then everyone wants to run and swim in the oil, and when they aren't allowed to BP is hiding something.

I don't understand the line of thought that makes you say the oil is dangerous to be around, but when people can't be around it it's not because its dangerous.

reply to post by ThaLoccster


Different opinions are appreciated and after making my post this morning, I was considering the same thing, a safety issue.

Honestly though, I am still undecided as to whether their restrictions are for safety or for image and damage control.

Your comment reminded me about perspective and objectivity, so thanks.
As to the truth of the matter, I guess time will tell, but I would like to see everyone on the same page instead of conflicting reports and restrictions.

The local officials down there are saying to the reporters,"come on down and our Sheriffs will take you out and about in a boat to report on the situation."

If it is a safety issue, then let everyone know. Of course that brings up the notion of "how bad is it then, if you won't let us down there?"
Obviously....it's real bad!

Peace