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.

 

Video of man taping in front of BP, Police ask questions

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 10:11 PM
link   
I found this video of a man who was trained to be a BP volunteer. He is taping a video across the street of LA's main BP headquarters on farmland. Yet the police come by to ask him questions.

He is then stopped by police on the highway, too. Not that it's news that the police seemed to be working for BP, just find it interesting.


YouTube Link

[edit on 19-6-2010 by mweiss]

[edit on 19-6-2010 by mweiss]




posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 10:17 PM
link   
embed fixed, post removed.

[edit on 6/19/2010 by Alaskan Man]



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 10:24 PM
link   
Great Video! I did not know that propylene glycol(antifreeze) droplets can kill a household cat? It really puts in perspective the poison that this one ingredient of several in Corexit is.
Also, if true, the fact that it is banned for use in United Kingdom, and the fact that our govt politely asked them not to use, and they decline the request is just another horrendous piece of the puzzle.



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 10:31 PM
link   
This guy is a moron, and needs to research a bit better instead of cam whoring.
It's not Propylene glycol that's dangerous.
It's Etheline glycol.
en.wikipedia.org...

en.wikipedia.org...

While there are certainly problems, and big ones at that, slip ups like that due to bad sources make the argument that some people have no idea what they are talking about seem all the more valid.

Yes, BP needs to stop using dispersant, and Yes the USA needs to do something to fix this, and CEO's need to get back to work instead of yacht racing.
Then again, no one really seems to give a crap anymore anyways.
Not until the oil hurricanes start hitting the Gulf and eastern seaboard.



[edit on 6/19/2010 by reticledc]



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 10:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by reticledc
This guy is a moron, and needs to research a bit better instead of cam whoring.
It's not Propylene glycol that's dangerous.
It's Etheline glycol.
en.wikipedia.org...

en.wikipedia.org...

While there are certainly problems, and big ones at that, slip ups like that due to bad sources make the argument that some people have no idea what they are talking about seem all the more valid.

Yes, BP needs to stop using dispersant, and Yes the USA needs to do something to fix this, and CEO's need to get back to work instead of yacht racing.
Then again, no one really seems to give a crap anymore anyways.
Not until the oil hurricanes start hitting the Gulf and eastern seaboard.



[edit on 6/19/2010 by reticledc]


actually, propylene glycol is used in a form of antifreeze. source



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 10:45 PM
link   


* As a non-toxic antifreeze for winterizing drinking water systems, and in applications where the used antifreeze eventually will be drained into the soil, water, or a septic system.[6]
* As a less-toxic antifreeze in solar water heating systems


[edit on 6/19/2010 by reticledc]



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 10:45 PM
link   
This guy just doesn't know what he is talking about. Propylene glycol : each of us probably put it in our mouths every day (toothpaste is just one example).

That is not to diminish my thought that bp should not be spraying corexit due to other dangerous components.

wikipedia


The acute oral toxicity of propylene glycol is very low, and large quantities are required to cause perceptible health damage in humans; propylene glycol is metabolized in the human body into pyruvic acid (a normal part of the glucose-metabolism process, readily converted to energy), acetic acid (handled by ethanol-metabolism), lactic acid (a normal acid generally abundant during digestion) [8] , and propionaldehyde [9] [10].

Serious toxicity generally occurs only at plasma concentrations over 1 g/L, which requires extremely high intake over a relatively short period of time.[11] It would be nearly impossible to reach toxic levels by consuming foods or supplements, which contain at most 1 g/kg of PG. Cases of propylene glycol poisoning are usually related to either inappropriate intravenous administration or accidental ingestion of large quantities by children.[12] The potential for long-term oral toxicity is also low. In one study, rats were provided with feed containing as much as 5% PG in feed over a period of 104 weeks and they showed no apparent ill effects.[13] Because of its low chronic oral toxicity, propylene glycol was classified by the U. S. Food and Drug Administration as "generally recognized as safe" (GRAS) for use as a direct food additive.



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 10:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Zeptepi
 


Thank you.



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 10:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by reticledc
This guy is a moron, and needs to research a bit better instead of cam whoring.
It's not Propylene glycol that's dangerous.
It's Etheline glycol.
en.wikipedia.org...

en.wikipedia.org...

While there are certainly problems, and big ones at that, slip ups like that due to bad sources make the argument that some people have no idea what they are talking about seem all the more valid.

Yes, BP needs to stop using dispersant, and Yes the USA needs to do something to fix this, and CEO's need to get back to work instead of yacht racing.
Then again, no one really seems to give a crap anymore anyways.
Not until the oil hurricanes start hitting the Gulf and eastern seaboard.



[edit on 6/19/2010 by reticledc]


Sorry but the corexit debate is irrelevant here and off topic as this thread is about the police, the guy was harassed then pulled over by state police. The police are doing BPs bidding, thats whats scary. I kinda understand(but do not approve of) how 911 truthers are harassed police, but this is WAY different and complete insanity. Government police are working for BP and aiding and a media cover up, thats what I see here and it is completely unacceptable.

[edit on 19-6-2010 by CREAM]



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 10:49 PM
link   
Alone.

In combination with other chemicals, it's quite a different story. He is not wrong. It is in antifreeze. The non-toxic and less toxic kinds.

Intravenously it can cause major metabolic changes (acidosis; severe propylene glycol toxicity) and it can induce invitro chromosomal damage in eukaryotic cells (possible cancer-like changes).

www.naturalnews.com... more about propylene glycol



[edit on 19-6-2010 by ~Lucidity]



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 11:27 PM
link   
I did not see direct proof of police interaction with this guy. I heard a voice asking him questions and telling him that bp would like him to not film.Could have been his film making buddy,for all we know.

Then he claims he was pulled over by the State Police. Did you see the trooper?? I didn't.
no direct proof was seen.

Further:
chemindustry.ru...

Applications
Propylene glycol is used:

As a solvent in many pharmaceuticals, including oral, injectable and topical formulations. Notably, diazepam, which is insoluble in water, uses propylene glycol as its solvent in its clinical, injectable form.[5]

As a humectant food additive, labeled as E number E1520

as a food grade antifreeze

in hand sanitizers, antibacterial lotions, and saline solutions

as a main ingredient in many cosmetic products, including baby wipes, bubble baths, and shampoos

as the primary ingredient in the "Paint" inside a Paintball;


It is not good for cats. That is well known!

It will use up a lot of oxygen in any water it is put into as the microbial populations decompose it.
----------------
bolding mine



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 11:38 PM
link   
Toxic non-toxic who gives a flying whooo.
Either way the stuff is not natural but hair is as well as hay.
They should stop using the dispersant and formulate a real plan of attack.
I cannot believe that the worlds best minds have been at this problem and the containment thereof. Actually maybe I can believe it.
Keep moving nothing here to see.
As for the guy in the video he did a good thing and got harassed for it, shame on the officer(s).



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 11:50 PM
link   
How many people are going to hook up a IV and pump propylene glycol into there veins.

Likely propylene glycol is just a inert dispersing or thinning agent for Corexit to allow them to spray it from aircraft is a fine smoke/mist.

I used propylene glycol in my fog machine to create fake smoke for firefighting training.
I also used it for pranks.



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 11:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by SunnyDee
Great Video! I did not know that propylene glycol(antifreeze) droplets can kill a household cat? It really puts in perspective the poison that this one ingredient of several in Corexit is.
Also, if true, the fact that it is banned for use in United Kingdom, and the fact that our govt politely asked them not to use, and they decline the request is just another horrendous piece of the puzzle.


It's not the * glycol that kills the cat. It's actually the cats own metabolism, which breaks down the * glycol into other chemicals that bind with chemicals already present in the cat.

The original * glycol is chemically altered, separated, rejoined, etc.. etc.. to other molecules inside the cat. This is what causes death in the cat.

By itself, the * glycol is basically harmless.



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 11:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by ANNED

I used propylene glycol in my fog machine to create fake smoke for firefighting training.
I also used it for pranks.


I use it in my KY liquid.



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 07:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Zeptepi
 


Absolutely right.
Which is why I didn't even address the topic.
So if the 5.0 were harassing him so bad, how was he allowed to film this garbage?

Lots of crappy editing in there.
Not even an accidental glimpse of anything to do with the authorities.
I smell propaganda.
Despite the fact that the topic might be true, no one would even consider this as any kind of evidence.
In fact, it lends more credibility to the fact that this is fake altogether.

As the old saying goes, (Pics or it didn't happen)



[edit on 6/20/2010 by reticledc]



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 08:13 AM
link   
Am I the only one that has to turn the volume all the way up and strain my ears to hear what he's saying throughout 95% of this?

I only have one speaker, so the volume might be one-sided, but it's still something that should get fixed if they're expecting a lot of people to sit through the whole video.



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 08:15 AM
link   
Finished watching the video, and I agree that it seems faked.

There's nothing showing anyone besides the guy speaking (all of which is next to inaudible, except for some stupid singing and sound effects) and usually the police don't take very lightly to people jumping right out of their vehicles once they're pulled over...

[edit on 20-6-2010 by alaskan]



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 08:35 AM
link   
reply to post by reticledc
 


IMHO I think its faked all so.
When "The Cop" asks for his ID its in the other truck and just takes his name on faith. Oh give me a break no cop is going to just take your name and believe you have no warrants on you. For all the LEO knows this guy could have been a Eco terrorist.
If he was real hard core he would have got a pic of the LEO and the unit he was operating.



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 09:02 AM
link   
well its hardly implied that the person asking him the questions is a leo.
maybe its a BP renta cop that would explane the lack of asking to see proof of ID as a renta cops only power is to keep you off what ever property he is hired to .He cant arrest you nore make you pull out id .
And if I would have been filming this I would ignore the renta cop as well there is no point to getting him in the video. HES NOT A COP he is nothing but a payed security guard .
most of them cant even carry a zapper let along a gun .



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join