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.

 

Obama Approves Arctic Ocean Drilling

page: 1
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 10:19 PM
link   
I'm placing this here, and not Fragile Earth, because the point I really want to make is to demonstrate once again how Obama is NOT the man his supporters claim he is.







Arctic Ocean Drilling Approved

The Obama administration said Monday it was moving forward with oil-drilling leases off the coast of Alaska issued by the Bush administration in 2008, a victory for oil companies in the battle over Arctic Ocean drilling.



You Obama guys have been so had, and yet, most of you still seem not to know it!





edit on 4-10-2011 by loam because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 10:24 PM
link   
reply to post by loam
 


haha i fail to see what authority obama has when it comes to arctic drilling..and drilling in general
no one should have the right to say its ok

we just had a politican in australia call for the stopping of antarctic drilling

lets hope the world can come to its senses and stop destroying the ground
no one owns it
not the governments, nor the ceos who pay for 'rights' to take it

shame on this world



posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 10:26 PM
link   
Drill baby Drill!!!

oh wait its gonna take at least a decade til that gets to market sorry too little too late.

just like the keystone pipeline that environmentalists are arguing about.

we need it now not years from now and if he hadnt banned offshore drilling and penalized american companies who did nothing wrong.

gas prices would be a hell of alot lower and yeah op i do agree obama aint the man they make him out to be.

he aint that smart the only thing he cares about is looking good and twisting to whatever way the political winds blow.



posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 10:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
Drill baby Drill!!!

oh wait its gonna take at least a decade til that gets to market sorry too little too late.

just like the keystone pipeline that environmentalists are arguing about.

we need it now not years from now and if he hadnt banned offshore drilling and penalized american companies who did nothing wrong.

gas prices would be a hell of alot lower and yeah op i do agree obama aint the man they make him out to be.

he aint that smart the only thing he cares about is looking good and twisting to whatever way the political winds blow.





Damned if he does

Damned if he doesn't




posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 10:31 PM
link   
A blind squirrel finds a nut every once in a while.



posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 10:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
Drill baby Drill!!!

oh wait its gonna take at least a decade til that gets to market sorry too little too late.

just like the keystone pipeline that environmentalists are arguing about.

we need it now not years from now and if he hadnt banned offshore drilling and penalized american companies who did nothing wrong.

gas prices would be a hell of alot lower and yeah op i do agree obama aint the man they make him out to be.

he aint that smart the only thing he cares about is looking good and twisting to whatever way the political winds blow.


seriously man?
we dont need it now, fact is we wouldnt of needed it 50 years ago if renewable energy wasnt thrown in the rubbish bin by your american companies who 'did nothing wrong' just so they could control a monopoly.
gas prices have nothing to do with the rate they are drilled out..we could drill every last drop and stockpile it all and it would still be sold at an inflated price. and dont say it wouldnt because they hold a monopoly so its up to the fat cats..and if you really think the fat cats would let the price go down you would have to be blind

he definetley isnt smart, but hes only doing what the corporations tell him to do..he is a PR rep

no one has the right to take stuff from the ground
edit on 4-10-2011 by UniverSoul because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 10:40 PM
link   
Man, he must really be courting the conservatives for votes....I mean he's even invoking Reagan...albeit in a disingenuous way...



posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 10:47 PM
link   
reply to post by UniverSoul
 


tell that to those who are paying 4 dollars a gallon adjust that for geographic locations elsewhere in the country

oh say like new york and california where its well over 5 bucks a gallon.

yeah we need it now because that fuel costs translate in higher cost to bring products and goods to market.



posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 10:49 PM
link   
OMG he may actually be the Anti-Christ! Ok, maybe he is just ought and paid for.. Who would'a thought a Chicago politician would be corrupt as heck....................



posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 11:05 PM
link   
What I can't figure out is why all you neocons hate him...
oh wait, ya I can.



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 12:24 AM
link   
reply to post by loam
 


Wow, how about investing in some clean, cheap/free energy Obama? Wait, he tried that, and it didn't work out so Republicans are nailing him to the wall for that


We need to fund renewable energy a lot more and cut our reliance on oil. I can think of several alternatives off the top of my head right now. Putting a team of crack scientists together and giving them the resources to put things like that to work would be much better than sucking liquid from the earth's crust and fooling ourselves into thinking it's the best route to take when it comes to energy.

Seriously, why is clean/free energy not being funded and pursued much more than it currently is?
edit on 5-10-2011 by TupacShakur because: To edit my post



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 09:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by TupacShakur
reply to post by loam
 


Wow, how about investing in some clean, cheap/free energy Obama? Wait, he tried that, and it didn't work out so Republicans are nailing him to the wall for that




You don't understand.

Republicans are "nailing Obama to the wall" for his lies, flip-flopping, broken campaign promises, arrogance, and incompetence.

They are also "nailing Obama's supporters to the wall" for still believe in obama like he IS the (so-called progressive's) messiah even after all of the above.

A good - hypothetical - analogy for that would be the people that still believed the crucifixion story even if they later found Jesus living high off the hog in egypt.

There, that should be enough reasons ...
edit on 10/5/2011 by centurion1211 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 04:02 PM
link   



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 04:56 PM
link   
First off....did you read your own OP?


Originally posted by loam
The Obama administration said Monday it was moving forward with oil-drilling leases off the coast of Alaska issued by the Bush administration in 2008, a victory for oil companies in the battle over Arctic Ocean drilling.

edit on 4-10-2011 by loam because: (no reason given)


Secondly...maybe read up a little on the topic you post about?

This was a court decision to uphold leases sold by the Bush administration.



The validity of the government's sale of roughly $US3 billion ($3.16 billion) worth of drilling leases covering 1.1 million hectares of the Chukchi Sea was thrown into doubt in July last year, when a federal district court in Alaska concluded that the environmental analysis the Bush administration completed before the auction fell short of what was required by US law.

The court ordered the Interior Department to redo the assessment and decide whether to void, uphold or alter the leases. The department completed its new environmental analysis in August.



Read more: www.smh.com.au...


Now are you suggesting that the Interior Department should have falsified their investigation records to report back to the court that the environmental analysis said something it didn't?

Or that the Obama administation should have stepped in and somehow simply torn up the legal sales of these leases that the oil companies bought during the Bush administration?

The "Obama Administration" didn't sell these leases, they followed the law and honored them and if they hadn't there would have been a supreme court case lickity-split and they would have lost and appropriately so.
They did stall the leases to make sure that the Bush administration envirornmental study wasn't BS...but again, did you want the interrior department to fudge the results of the analysis?

Not getting it.
edit on 5-10-2011 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 05:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211

Republicans are "nailing Obama to the wall" for his lies, flip-flopping, broken campaign promises, arrogance, and incompetence.

They are also "nailing Obama's supporters to the wall" for still believe in obama like he IS the (so-called progressive's) messiah even after all of the above.



Wait a minute...so conservatives don't think Obama is a progressive AKA Socialist??

Geez ...what were you saying about lies and flip-flopping again?




posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 06:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 


This is the flip-flop on this issue:

source


WASHINGTON — The Obama administration announced on Wednesday that it had rescinded its decision to expand offshore oil exploration into the eastern Gulf of Mexico and along the Atlantic Coast because of weaknesses in federal regulation revealed by the BP oil spill.

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said that a moratorium on drilling would be in force in those areas for at least seven years, until stronger safety and environmental standards were in place. The move puts off limits millions of acres of the Outer Continental Shelf that hold potentially billions of barrels of oil and trillions of cubic feet of natural gas.


and



Other potential drilling sites in the Arctic will be studied before any leasing decisions are made for 2012-2017, Mr. Salazar said…

So the Arctic, that is Alaska, is also off limits.


Until it's not off limits ...



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 07:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 



Originally posted by Indigo5
Secondly...maybe read up a little on the topic you post about?


M'kay. How about you give that a try first.



Originally posted by Indigo5
This was a court decision to uphold leases sold by the Bush administration.


Wrong.

It was a court decision that "concluded that the environmental analysis the Bush administration completed before the auction fell short of what was required by US law."

Quite the opposite of your characterization.

Accordingly, "the court ordered the Interior Department to redo the assessment and decide whether to void, uphold or alter the leases. The department completed its new environmental analysis in August."

And the Obama administration said it was all just peachy.


So had he wanted to, they could have altered the leases or voided them by arriving at a conclusion the leases were not in the public's interests because of environmental concerns.


But the Obama apologists will have us believe this was somehow out of their hands and that they were just honoring the rule of law and the sanctity of contract...




But remember this is the president who just assassinated an American citizen without any due process, including no formal accusation of an actual crime... So spare me your protestations that Obama has concern for the rule of law and was somehow hobbled by it.



He's a fraud...and so are most of his supporters.




edit on 5-10-2011 by loam because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 07:57 PM
link   
If there was oil in your head, they would drill for it, and everyone would go along with it because they have us by the short hairs of survival
Occupy wall street. Nothing everyone is talking about is really what they mean. There are so many layers and so much has been erased....if no one ever knows how it really happened t begin with, how do we change it, really, or prevent the past from happening all over again?



posted on Oct, 6 2011 @ 10:54 AM
link   
The court asked the Department of the Interrior to confirm that the Bush administration had met the specific guidelines for envirornmental concerns that the Bush administration claimed they did. Those guidelines were part of the lease agreement that was sold by the Bush administration.


Originally posted by loam

So had he wanted to, they could have altered the leases or voided them by arriving at a conclusion the leases were not in the public's interests because of environmental concerns.




Arriving at conclusions? You mean they could have lied? The court gave specific requirements to be confirmed, requirements that were outlined first by the Bush administration.


edit on 6-10-2011 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-10-2011 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-10-2011 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2011 @ 10:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 



Originally posted by Indigo5
You mean they could have lied?


Why is it you so easily assume they aren't lying now to uphold the leases?




You can lead a horse to water....

*sigh*
edit on 6-10-2011 by loam because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join