some disturbing info on the BP oil spill.

[toxic.zen]

of course many have a knee jerk reaction of ridiculing such ideas as presented in this 45 minute film. But there is enough info in it that can be verified that if looked at honestly can really be disturbing...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X33DIj9WZsU&feature=player_embedded#!

[Stalins Organ]

Perhaps you can sumarise the theory for us?

Is this the one that BP pumped the oil reservoir full of GM bacteria to generate CO2 so as to pressurise it and get more oil out of it?

and then they were not spraying Corexit (or watever it is/was) but something else to make oil-eating bacteria multiply and that's why there's all sorts of metals in the water now (or something like that)? And the proof is that the warehouses have armed guards so no-one would actually analyse the stuff to show how evil they were (never mind that you could jsut go out to the gulf and get a sample....)

Or is it some other list of more-or-less unconnected factoids thrown together to scare us all silly and show how BP and the NWO are killing and/or brainwashing us all?

[JonS]

oh jebus, make it stop

[toxic.zen]

Perhaps you can sumarise the theory for us?

well, no... there are a few theories put forth in the film, and lots of information. It covers things like The chief executive of BP selling £1.4 million of his shares in the fuel giant weeks before the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.

Haliburton purchasing a company that made a LOT of money in the cleanup called "Boots N' Coots" right before the disaster, and many other things... if one has an interest and a curiosity about these things, watch it and research. If one is convinced it is stupid, don't pay it any mind...

[JonS]

things like The chief executive of BP selling £1.4 million of his shares in the fuel giant weeks before the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.

Indeed. And how many shares did he buy and sell in a normal, non pre-disaster, week? Did he do the buying and selling, or did his broker do it on his behalf?

Haliburton purchasing a company that made a LOT of money in the cleanup called "Boots N' Coots" right before the disaster

Indeed. And how many companies does Haliburton buy and sell in a normal, non-pre-disaster, week?

if one has an interest and a curiosity about these things

Rolleyes indeed. I think your only interest in in being spoonfed mindless video gruel, and your only curiosity revolves around when the next meal is.

You see, the ridicule and mocking you've just set yourself up for is the entirely predicatable result of being a shill for those who seek to profit from the credulous. Ask Kettler - he knows all about this stuff, and can probably give you a few tips. Not good tips, or useful tips, you understand. But tips nonetheless.

[Stalins Organ]

And Goldman Sachs sold off 44% of their shares in BP a month or 3 weeks before IIRC too.....

You have to wonder why they only sold 44% of their shares, and why the CEO only sold off 1.4 million (about 1/3rd of his shares at the time) worth if they knew something was going to happen.

Or you could look at the trading activity in BP and see that there's regular major sell offs - a few million shares - as someone or other of it's numerous major share holders seeks to take a profit or alter their portfolio or change their risk profile or whatever.

Other asset management firms also sold huge blocks of BP stock in the first quarter — but their sales were a fraction of Goldman’s. Wachovia, which is owned by Wells Fargo, sold 2,667,419 shares; UBS, the Swiss bank, sold 2,125,566 shares.

Wachovia and UBS also sold much larger percentages of their BP stock, at 98 percently and 97 percent respectively.

Wachova parent Wells Fargo, however, bought 2.3 million shares in the quarter, largely discounting Wachovia’s sales.

Yawn......the stock market is apparently heavily dominated by institutional investors - retail ones make a lot of trades, but have low volume.

[toxic.zen]

"Indeed. And how many shares did he buy and sell in a normal, non pre-disaster, week? Did he do the buying and selling, or did his broker do it on his behalf?"

i dont know, i do know he profited nicely and just in time though...

"Indeed. And how many companies does Haliburton buy and sell in a normal, non-pre-disaster, week?"

i don't know but the specific one that made a lot of profit off of the cleanup?

"Rolleyes indeed. I think your only interest in in being spoonfed mindless video gruel, and your only curiosity revolves around when the next meal is."

you know all that from one post i made huh? that's pretty amazing! you may be psychic! (psychics tend to be off after all)

"You see, the ridicule and mocking you've just set yourself up for is the entirely predicatable result of being a shill for those who seek to profit from the credulous. Ask Kettler - he knows all about this stuff, and can probably give you a few tips. Not good tips, or useful tips, you understand. But tips nonetheless."

i was aware some would ridicule this post, (or in this case just one person) but to me that's pretty irrelevant... i mean the biting back and forth can even be entertaining to a degree... my true motivation was always just sharing info i looked into and found compelling.

"You have to wonder why they only sold 44% of their shares, and why the CEO only sold off 1.4 million (about 1/3rd of his shares at the time) worth if they knew something was going to happen."

yea true enough, if he didnt have a heads up that something was going to happen then it would seem to be just business as usual... and if he did have some prior info it seems it would behoove him to sell and make a profit with out being so obvious as selling it all. i don't know that he was aware of anything leading up to the disaster, I'm not sure what to think about that.

[JonS]

i dont know

s'ok. I knew you didn't.

i don't know

s'ok, I knew that too.

you know all that from one post i made huh?

The combat indicators are especially strong.

my true motivation was always just sharing info i looked into and found compelling.

You're just a regular altruistic hero, then, aren't you? Must be my turn for an eye roll.

i don't know... I'm not sure what to think.

That much is astonishingly clear.

[Other Means]

You're looking for correlation when you have no idea what noise looks like; therefore any results you get are invalid.

You may as well find patterns in telephone boxe...I've given too much away.

<<

>>

Nothing to see here...

[toxic.zen]

the overall thing i get from jon's response is the thinly veiled negativity...

like: "You're just a regular altruistic hero, then, aren't you? Must be my turn for an eye roll."

of course i don't think there is anything very heroic in exploring idea's... but i explore them none the less.

there were many things about the spill that were covered in the film that seem pretty hard to dismiss. i only touched on two of them, there are more, the dispersant "corexit" which used when advised not too and all that is involved with that. and the testimony of employees on Deepwater Horizon having there warnings of the present dangers being ignored. etc...

i don't do any justice to it repeating tidbits from the film, and those that have already convinced themselves they know the answers have no interest in exploring them, so a discussion based on exploring aspects of the film AFTER one views it disappears. replaced by self satisfied attempts at ridiculing the presenter. which i find amusing but increasingly boring... :/

[JonS]

but i explore them none the less.

No, you don't.

You noisily slurp them down like that annoying kid with his drink at the cinema.

If you explored them you'd know what kind of trades were normal, what kind of activity was normal. Or - as OM points out - you'd know what noise looks like. But you don't, because you're lazy. Just like the other conspiracy loonies. You just waltz up and vomit your filth, and then expect the rest of us to giddily lap it up. Then you have the gall to act all hurt when instead you get called on your foolishness and laziness.

[Stalins Organ]

I don't think there's any secret about the mistakes, incompetence and stupidity in the well drilling process - the public reports & investigations so far are pretty informative on that front.

And while the EPA told BP not use Corexit - the wiki page on the substance says BP was able to argue the case that there were no useful alternatives.

Here's a Scientific American article on Corexit.

Does the film add anything to this freely available information?

[toxic.zen]

of course i would have to be hurt to really act hurt... pointing out the readily apparent negativity of your posts doesnt translate to acting hurt. obviously to you it does, but that would be the old psychic in you again...

and as for knowing what is normal, you are quite wrong again. i wouldn't know what normal trading was, because i didnt explore those aspects until after watching and posting... of course it is easy to call a complete stranger lazy based on a scant amount of dialogue, and seems perfectly within the realm of the judgmental negativity you have been steadily attached to since you first contributed. it has similarities too angry kids calling each other poopyface to me. the accusation that i wanted any reading to giddily lap it up is on your part insulting to all the others who post here, i knew quite well that this would NOT be readily accepted, and met with scrutiny and doubt. that is actually the REAL reason i posted, i know you believe you are correct in your judgment, but that's just more of the unreasonable self assuredness that seems to be a strong part of most of your dialogue thus far.

"I don't think there's any secret about the mistakes, incompetence and stupidity in the well drilling process - the public reports & investigations so far are pretty informative on that front."

it was new to me! i wasn't aware of the level of incompetency uncovered in this film until viewing it.

"And while the EPA told BP not use Corexit - the wiki page on the substance says BP was able to argue the case that there were no useful alternatives.

Here's a Scientific American article on Corexit.

Does the film add anything to this freely available information? "

what new info i gained from it was how harmful corexit can be and how apparently it may have been ultimately safer to have scooped up and burned what they could have and let the rest be processed by nature, as the fallout of the toxic dispersant's may have longer term effects than the oil alone. I'm still reading about some of the long term effects dispersants had on the exxon valdez cleanup workers and the environment there. i don't know that the film adds anything to the info, as it is more or less available so much as it focuses the info to the more relevant points. it offers a lot to explore!

[Stalins Organ]

it was new to me! i wasn't aware of the level of incompetency uncovered in this film until viewing it.

Then you are/were remarkably ill-informed - glad to have helped rectify that for you!

[dieseltaylor]

http://www.physorg.com/news/2010-12-cornstarch-gulf-agony-sooner.html

Opportunity missed?

Incidentally Tony Heyward would be more aware than most punters on the risks attached to oil drilling - subsequent reports have shown that there have been a couple of near misses in the last year or so.

And I daresay they have a risk arm who can roughly calculate the "what-if" costs. BP is a disaster magnet because it has low safety concerns and high profit wishes.

[Stalins Organ]

Like Enron's risk management?

[Pak_43]

No, you don't.

You noisily slurp them down like that annoying kid with his drink at the cinema.

If you explored them you'd know what kind of trades were normal, what kind of activity was normal. Or - as OM points out - you'd know what noise looks like. But you don't, because you're lazy. Just like the other conspiracy loonies. You just waltz up and vomit your filth, and then expect the rest of us to giddily lap it up. Then you have the gall to act all hurt when instead you get called on your foolishness and laziness.

In slightly less vitriolic terms...

/signed for truth...

[CharlieMike24]

Ah...the season of Good Will.....

[toxic.zen]

"of course i would have to be hurt to really act hurt... pointing out the readily apparent negativity of your posts doesnt translate to acting hurt. obviously to you it does, but that would be the old psychic in you again...

and as for knowing what is normal, you are quite wrong again. i wouldn't know what normal trading was, because i didnt explore those aspects until after watching and posting... of course it is easy to call a complete stranger lazy based on a scant amount of dialogue, and seems perfectly within the realm of the judgmental negativity you have been steadily attached to since you first contributed. it has similarities too angry kids calling each other poopyface to me. the accusation that i wanted any reading to giddily lap it up is on your part insulting to all the others who post here, i knew quite well that this would NOT be readily accepted, and met with scrutiny and doubt. that is actually the REAL reason i posted, i know you believe you are correct in your judgment, but that's just more of the unreasonable self assuredness that seems to be a strong part of most of your dialogue thus far."

in more or less the same terms...

--------------------------------------------------

nothing quite says "happy holidays" like the lapping up of vomit!

except perhaps watching "2 girls and a cup" to the music of silent night. or or inviting santa's elves to go down water slides with fishhooks embedded in them...

[ZPB II]

I'm not going to comment on the rest, but I found it funny that someone actually considers it a plausible way for things to unfold that a CEO sells his soul and opens the portal for the Space Lobster invasion for *dramatic pause* 1.4 million!!!

I had a good snicker about it. You gotta be pretty disconnected from reality to consider that kind of a sum as something a CEO of a major oil company would bother with. If you were actually interested in the conspiracy theory instead of vying for attention and puffing your own view of the world you'd like, hey, dig around and find out for example that he earns 1,4 million in 8 hours. Hey, I'll totally gamble my life and the company's on this crazy scheme for a day's worth, I'm in! It's the only way I can think of the get an adrenaline rush instead of buying my own train to ride down the Alps with, man.

Nothing personal, no hard feelings, happy holidays.

[dieseltaylor]

BP was paying Hayward an annual salary of £1,045,000; his 2008 bonus was £1,496,000 and in 2009 his bonus was £2,090,000.[15]

Arse. Eight hours huh!

[ZPB II]

You know damn well what I meant and you saw that damn tongue coming out from my mouth.

[toxic.zen]

I'm not going to comment on the rest, but I found it funny that someone actually considers it a plausible way for things to unfold that a CEO sells his soul and opens the portal for the Space Lobster invasion for *dramatic pause* 1.4 million!!!

I had a good snicker about it. You gotta be pretty disconnected from reality to consider that kind of a sum as something a CEO of a major oil company would bother with. If you were actually interested in the conspiracy theory instead of vying for attention and puffing your own view of the world you'd like, hey, dig around and find out for example that he earns 1,4 million in 8 hours. Hey, I'll totally gamble my life and the company's on this crazy scheme for a day's worth, I'm in! It's the only way I can think of the get an adrenaline rush instead of buying my own train to ride down the Alps with, man.

Nothing personal, no hard feelings, happy holidays.

thankyou happy holidays to you! i hope you get to be near family and or friends...

the cut he got wasn't the crux of my draw to the whole conspiracy presented though... it was nothing more then something that was mentioned in the film i saw and shared, apparently after reading into it more, it seems true, that after all there is nothing unusual and it is just business as usual in the CEO realm of things...

for me the parts that grabbed me the most, that made me want to share it were the parts about the "corexit" and all they elaborated on with that. and the parts they touched on with a possible government agenda to get folks out of the area via environmental degradation, in order for the area to be used for big business and refining. sounds wacky for sure, but still compelling enough to me to want to look into. the truth is i wasn't and truly don't "want attention" or have a desire to puff my view. that can be believed or not but either way I'm honestly not compelled as was implied. my original intent was for folks to view it and pick it apart so the points or lack of points can be scrutinized... a knee jerk accusatory reaction doesn't really go far in accomplishing this. :confused: but c'est la vie.