Wow, I never knew that the use of dispersants were voted down during the Exxon spill.
And they actually say that marine life was sacrificed so more oil didn't end up on beaches.
I think the Gov knew this from the start, as they were there with Exxon, but they also wanted less oil on the beaches so they made a weak attempt at
telling BP to stop and we all know how that turned out.
I think that attempt was made with both sides already knowing the use would continue.
Another thing is BP has to pay to clean up the beaches, but doesn't have to pay for ten million dead fish.
What's your ideas? Was it worth less oil on the beaches?
I dont think it was worth the death of marine life. Also has anyone considered what the effects of the dead carcuses floating/ sinking in the ocean
are causing, ARE THERE ANY SCAVANGERS FOR THIS as I do remember reading the beach scavangers are not touching the dead. Just a major thought, I meen
it got to be smelling bad for the fish not to mention the decay effects on the total eco system.... Imagine if humans had to walk around dead bodies
would that be a cause for disease to spread. Could their be infectious disease spread within ocean???????
corexit is being used all over the planet. nalco is a nest of vipers full of the usual
evil bastards. this is sabotage-it's chemical warfare- and it's them getting away with mass murder.. hand in hand with the other sociopathic
corporations like monsanto,
dupont,dow,union carbide,- on down the line. yes they really mean to kill us-
we are in the way.
This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.