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.


Bombshell expose'. The real reason the oil still flows into the Gulf of Mexico

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

+34 more 
posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 09:08 AM

As you know, the Deep Water Horizon has exploded in the Gulf of Mexico. It has been spewing oil from a ruptured wellpipe for over a month.

BP and the US Government has said they are trying everything possible to stop that multi million gallon oil from continuing to flow into the Gulf. I am about to dispute that claim and offer an expose' as to why that story about them doing everything possible is a lie and a profitable enterprise to those who would make money from this disaster.

The Top Kill method was started and suspended several times. It was being attempted only half heartedly. The reason is, there is no money to be made with a solution that simple. The real money is in the use of dispersants.

There is a company called NALCO. They make water purification systems and chemical dispersants. NALCO is based in Chicago with subsidiaries in Brazil, Russia, India, China and Indonesia.

NALCO is associated with UChicago Argonne program. UChicago Argonne received $164 million dollars in stimulus funds this past year. UChicago Argonne just added two new executives to their roster. One from NALCO. The other from the Ill. Dept of Educaution.

If you dig a little deeper you will find NALCO is also associated with Warren Buffett, Maurice Strong, Al Gore, Soros, Apollo, Blackstone, Goldman Sachs, Hathaway Berkshire. Warren Buffet /Hathaway Berkshire increased their holdings in NALCO just last November. (Timing is everything).

The dispersant chemical is known as Corexit. What it does is hold the oil below the water's surface. It is supposed to break up the spill into smaller pools. It is toxic and banned in Europe.

NALCO says they are using older and newer versions of Corexit in the Gulf.. (Why would you need a newer version, if the old one was fine?) There is big money and even bigger players in this scam. While they are letting the oil blow wide open into the Gulf, the stakes and profit rise.

The Dolphins, Whales, Manatees, Sea Turtles and fish suffocate and die. The coastal regions, salt marshes, tourist attractions and the shore front properties are being destroyed, possibly permanently.The air quality is diminished. The Gulf of Mexico fishing industry is decimated.

All to create a need for their expensive and extremely profitable poison. -

So what are the dangers of this?

Apart from the enormous sums of money now flowing into NALCO's corporate accounts, the real issue is the potential devastation that will be brought about by the toxic rainfall deposited throughout the South-Eastern United States in the coming months. As dispersants find their way into the precipitation and then penetrate the topsoil prior to entering the water table, the potential for the whole are becoming a waste land is a very real possibility. As the prevailing winds head west, it is not beyond the realms of possibility that see a marked increase in the toxicity of rainfall in Europe over the Winter months!

There is also a disturbing rumour doing the rounds that shed a different light on the events of that day...

The official version of events is that the two SLB Engineers were on the rig to run a CBL (Cement Bond Log), the test that ultimately determines the integrity of the cement holding the production casing to the formation. The Cementing operation having been completed by Haliburton. However, BP's Company Man decided not to run the test (why not?) and told the SLB guys that they could get the next scheduled helicopter off the rig. The Cementing operation completed by Haliburton.

However, there is an extremely disturbing rumour that suggests a rather different series of events!

The SLB Wireline personnel were called to the rig specifically to run the CBL test. However, they discovered that the well was still 'kicking; something that should definitely not be occurring at this stage of the proceedings and a pretty good indicator that there was a serious problem with the well-completion process. As a result of this, the SLB Wireline Engineer supposedly advised the Company Man that the well needed to be 'Shut in', either by pumping a heavier density mud (drilling fluid) or activating the BOP (Blow Out Preventer). The word on the vine is that the BP Company Man rejected this advice and the SLB Engineers immediately demanded to be evacuated from the rig. There being no scheduled helicopter, SLB management apparently responded to their Engineers request for immediate evacuation by flying out a charter 'copter. It is agreed by all parties that the SLB Engineers left the rig at 11.00am. The rig exploded six hours later. If there is any substance to these allegations, the BP Company Man has a lot to answer for ... including the lives of 11 oilfield hands. The truth is unlikely to be established outside a Court Room as the incestuous oil industry closes ranks.

The rumour part of this is provided by Ian R Crane (who some of you may have heard of); Prior to his retirement from the corporate arena, Ian enjoyed a career of 25 years in telecommunications and international oilfield services, a career that provided the opportunity to live & work in the U.K., Continental Europe, the Middle East & Houston, Texas.

So, Ian has vast knowledge of this particlar issue and one can only guess that he has many friends 'on the inside', as it were.

I haven't particularly been keeping up with all the developments regarding the oil spill so this information in new to me. I thought I would share it with you guys as it sounded rather important.

[edit on 15/6/10 by LiveForever8]

[edit on 15/6/10 by LiveForever8]

posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 10:01 AM
reply to post by LiveForever8

Maybe some digging should also be done concerning possible development of enterprises that will specialize in eco-systems reconstruction. I mean, they can

posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 10:10 AM
reply to post by Aresh Troxit

It gets even worse...

On May 19, 2010 the Environmental Protection Agency gave BP 24 hours to choose less toxic alternatives to Corexit, selected from the list of EPA-approved dispersants on the National Contingency Plan Product Schedule, and begin applying them within 72 hours of EPA approval of their choices but BP refused to change from Corexit, citing safety and availability concerns with alternatives.

They refused because of concerns of safety and availability? Hmm...

The proprietary composition is not public, but the manufacturer's own safety data sheet on Corexit EC9527A says the main components are 2-butoxyethanol and a proprietary organic sulfonic acid salt with a small concentration of propylene glycol.

So god only knows what else Corexit contains! Also...

2-Butoxyethanol is more hazardous, and has previously been identified as a causal agent in the health problems experienced by cleanup workers after the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill.

History repeats.

According to the Alaska Community Action on Toxics, the use of Corexit during the Exxon Valdez oil spill caused "respiratory, nervous system, liver, kidney and blood disorders" in people.

According to the EPA, Corexit is more toxic than dispersants made by several competitors and less effective in handling southern Louisiana crude. The UK's Marine Management Organisation has banned its use in the North Sea.

And yet BP refused to use other options because they were worried about safety? Unbelievable!

Reportedly Corexit is toxic to marine life and helps keep spilled oil submerged. The quantities used in the Gulf will create 'unprecedented underwater damage to organisms.'

9527A is also hazardous for humans: 'May cause injury to red blood cells (hemolysis), kidney or the liver'.

Talk about making a bad situation worse! BP have a lot to answer for.

[edit on 15/6/10 by LiveForever8]

+4 more 
posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 10:22 AM
reply to post by LiveForever8

S+F, LiveForever8.

If this holds true then couldn't we, in theory, plug that hole up with each and every *sshole who had something to do with this??


posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 10:24 AM
reply to post by LiveForever8

Yes, I remember that BP argued that Corexit would dissolve into a non-dangerous chemical after 28 days and that the alternatives could deteriorate into something that might be more dangerous than Corexit.

I think they had an overstock of Corexit since it is a banned substance in Europe.

It's like a few years ago; there was a chemical in white glue you could get stone on. Once discovered, the producer of white glue had to change its formula, but was left with tons of unusable white glue. They simply sold it to poor countries where there were no regulations preventing the use of the chemical, and kids got stone on it. That didn't prevent them from selling it...

[edit on 15-6-2010 by Aresh Troxit]

posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 10:48 AM
reply to post by Aresh Troxit

reply to post by Aresh Troxit

Exactly, it's not about whats economically friendly, it's about what is financially beneficial.

Rodney F. Chase, who sits on the board at NALCO, was also a BP board member - with a likelyhood that he still holds shares in both companies being very probable. It's painfully obvious that he at least has a personal interest in both companies.

Even more ominous is the fact that NALCO are owned by Blackstone Group.

Blackstone has had Japanese investors for many years, but recently doubled that investment; The Japanese now own 20% of Blackstone.

There are ties with them and the dolphin slaughters in Japan - do you really think they care for the wildlife in the Gulf with a track record like this?

posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 10:59 AM
The list of profiteers is amazingly big, if this isn't a conspiracy, magic bullets exist.

I said in this thread before, State Street Corporation owns the most stocks in all major oil companies and Halliburton (except Shell, that seems to be mainly from David Rothschild)

And I think State Street Corporation is an investment firm for the Rothschild Fortune, how convenient they stepped out of the goldmarket a few years back...

posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 11:29 AM
reply to post by Grey Magic

Wow! I thought that magic bullets did exist. Didn't Pres. Kennedy get shot with one of these magic bullets. I guess he didn't.

posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 11:31 AM
reply to post by Grey Magic

Cheers for that mate

With all the horrid images we are seeing from the Gulf it's nice to know someone is looking into the money paper trail that is behind it all.

Some more info on Corexit...

"Experts say Corexit 9500 is a solvent four times more toxic than oil. The agent, scientists believe, has a 2.61ppm toxicity level, and when mixed with the warm waters of the Gulf of Mexico, its molecules will be able to “phase transition.” This transition involves the change of the liquid into a gaseous state, which can be absorbed by clouds". Oil spill threatens 'total destruction' - Fri, 28 May 2010


"The chemical has arsenic in it and this will alone poison the water column for fish and mammals." BP Using Toxic Corexit 9500 - May 31, 2010 Politicol News (Product info: COREXIT® EC9500A -

posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 12:16 PM

So, Carl M. Casale, Director of NALCO, the manufacturer of COREXIT, is also the Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Operator of Monsanto, the company known for US agricultural biotech, Agent Orange, terminator seeds, Roundup herbicide (pesticide), saccharin, bovine growth hormone, genetically modified swine, corn, soybeans and other GMO? Monsanto is somehow always in the news these days. -

Surprise, srprise...Monsanto are somehow involved again

It's only speculation though I suppose but they always seem to have a finger in every pie.

J. Erik Fyrwald - Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer of NALCO and Director of Eli Lilly & Company (Drug Manufacturers)

Carl M. Casale - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of
Monsanto Company and Director of Nalco Holding Company.

Both men also have ties to DuPont (worlds second largest chemical company)

posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 01:05 PM
16 Flags and 3 Replies

Chemicals used to break up BP oil spill present new environmental concerns

Additional Info

BP spraying Corexit over populated area


Today, Kelso is the executive vice president of the Ocean Conservancy and has been dividing his time between his home in California and the Gulf of Mexico, and he's among many Exxon Valdez veterans who criticize the use of dispersants that break down the oil. It makes the oil less visible but at least as toxic, he said, and oil treated with dispersants is more likely to get past booms protecting critical shoreline because it's not floating as a mass on the surface.

Charles Wohlforth, now an author of books on the environment, was a reporter who covered the Exxon Valdez spill using a boat purchased for the story by the Anchorage Daily News. Wohlforth said the boat was an essential tool to get the story independently of Exxon's and the federal government's public relations apparatus, which tried to hide the extent of the damage.

"It's been really disturbing to watch BP's behavior be so similar to what Exxon's was in terms of downplaying stuff and creating their own reality, saying there is no subsurface oil, trying to hide how much is leaking. All this stuff is amazingly similar to the Exxon Valdez playbook, and the government is playing right into it," Wohlforth said. Even worse, said Wohlforth - like Senner, the former Exxon Valdez science coordinator - is the secrecy now being applied to research by federal scientists.

Wohlforth said that one of his best science sources from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration during the Exxon Valdez is now refusing to talk about BP out of concern about future litigation, he said.

"Here's the scary thing - who really learned the lesson? I think it was the oil industry, and what they learned was, take very aggressive measures to control the images," Ott said, referring to the difficulties that news media and environmental groups have had in getting to spill sites, including restrictions imposed by the Coast Guard and the FAA.

"No cameras, no evidence, no problem. They are like a house afire here, trying to capture one agency after another and use these agencies to shield themselves from liability, from the public, from the media. Exxon didn't have it down quite this good," Ott said.

posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 03:02 PM

posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 03:55 PM
reply to post by LiveForever8

Not sure if this is my first post here or not but have lurked for a long time.

I've worked offshore for around about 10 years although in Europe and not the States but I'd bet my house that if somebody wanted to get off a rig/platform badly there's no way the company would send out a chopper to pick a couple of guys up.

The only time I've seen a special chopper laid on is if there has been a death or bad accident in the family.

And I'm sure it's somewhere on ATS that the guys in question got off on a normal crew change flight.

Oh and although I dont work for them I'm currently on a BP platform, not much being said to be honest.

[edit on 15-6-2010 by Queeg]

posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 04:25 PM
Hurry, break out the FEMA COFFINS. Now BP is polluting the air we breath. I guess the population control has already started. BP is gassing us with this toxic spray. BYE, BYE TO STATES BY THE OCEANS.

posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 04:27 PM
This morning while driving home from work, I was listening to the news on the radio.
Obama was heard saying he would make sure the Gulf would be in better condition than before the oil spill.

I believe you are on to something very real and big.

posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 04:34 PM
reply to post by Queeg

Thanks for the reply.

I understand what you are saying but if this Schlumberg crew felt they were in real danger I see no reason why the company (Schlumberg, not BP) wouldn't charter a helicopter to get them out of there.

Indeed, a Schlumberg official did come out after the spill and state that the crew left on one of BP's regularly scheduled helicopter flights, but that desn't mean it was talks.

But hey, it's a rumour and should be treated as one. Still something to ponder

posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 04:53 PM
reply to post by nite owl

Well, the original sub-title of the email I received was 'BP and Depopulation' or something to that effect.

I chose not to use that title as I felt it was a tad over the top. However, there is no doubt that the effects of this are going to be devestating to the eco-system and is likely to last years.

Will it effect human health? It seems that many of the veterans from the Exxon Valdez oil spill are now suffering from numerous health problems related to the spill - so I would have to speculate that it will have a serious effect on us.

Time will tell.

posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 05:03 PM

Originally posted by sweetliberty
This morning while driving home from work, I was listening to the news on the radio.
Obama was heard saying he would make sure the Gulf would be in better condition than before the oil spill.

Well that's a good one! I know he's the President but I doubt even he is capable of miracles.

I'd love to believe him but from what I have seen I really can't see that being the case - at least not for a good while. And I think making such claims is a bit naive of him to be honest, he probably won't even be President by the time this situation starts to get better.

Let's all start hoping for a miracle

posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 05:10 PM
I wonder if this spraying is done not only above oil, but is in fact related to some of the threads on here about planes spraying unknown chemicals into the air. DEPOPULATION PROJECT. STOP GASSING US, THE CARTEL IS GASSING US.

posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 05:15 PM
reply to post by LiveForever8

Watch the OBAMA speach again, HE MESSED UP. CATCH WHAT HE SAYS. He said that, " when the oil reaches louisiana beaches." EXCUSE ME, THIS MUST BE AN OLD VIDEO. The oil has been on the beaches for some time. SOMEONE ON HERE, should make a story about that video. OBAMA SPEECH.

new topics

top topics

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in