All the angry posts about BP attempting to cover up the extent of the damage

[hedgehog]

remind me of that line from Men in Black -

"Not much of a disguise."


Hey, we got a huge problem her folks, and yes it's BP's fault, but it doesn't make much sense trying to focus our efforts on ramping up outrage at BP. We're chewing out the lookout for not seeing the ice berg when we need to be manning the life rafts.

I would compare the situation to the war in VietNam and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan - ongoing disasters. Except for a few diehards who will never admit anything is wrong, people do know that yes indeed, we are in a swamp and yes, indeed we are up to our asses in alligators.

I think the biggest problem I have with all the outrage at BP is right outside my window - Global Climate Change. BP's oil leak makes for dramatic photos, but the entire planet is dying by inches around us every day. Let's focus on dealing with the real problem and maybe getting to the source - our dependence on fossil fuels.

[BrklynLiberal]

1. Life rafts being govt regulators and overseers?

[BeFree]

2. Manning the life rafts?

You mean the BP authorized life rafts? Where can I find one?

[burnsei sensei]

3. However deep they dig the poison down,

they'll never be able to hide the pollution.
The environment does not lie.
If there is residual damage, it will be revealed.

[blindpig]

4. It's just a big example of what's wrong with Capitalism.

Capitalism or Nature, ya can't have both.

[hedgehog]

6. BP makes a good scape goat, but,

[Edweird]

7. Yeah, we collectively twisted their arms (during a time of RECORD PROFITS) to cut corners

and cheap out. Poor little abused BP. And those regulators that should have been regulating were just so overworked (with meth and hookers) that they were unable to do ANYTHING to stop it. Yes, clearly, we are to blame....

[blindpig]

10. Not me...

I have no say in the macro-economic decisions which cause such harm.

They do.

[Angry Dragon]

5. What would you have us do??

People have complained to the government, I have written letters asking for answers, and I get none back.
If we go down to clean it up we face unknown health risks, media is not allowed to film what they want.

We are lost in a sea of mis-information, lies, cover-up. We have two choices, either we attack bp for there failure to protect us from their destruction or we attack the government for their failure to protect us.

[hedgehog]

11. You provide an example of what I am talking about -

"media is not allowed to film what they want". All I've seen is the statement that everyone has to stay 65 feet back unless they get prior permission. That's a reasonable requirement for people to stand back from where others are working to collect hazardous materials. I assure you, the same rules apply when a tanker car derails! I haven't seen any report of someone asking for and being refused permission. Nor have I seen a report that BP bought up all the telephoto lenses! Anyone who hasn't seen multiple images of the ongoing damage is just plain keeping their eyes closed!

What you didn't mention was the assorted groups of scientists claiming "BP won't allow us access". The stories I've tracked down are all "we have appointed ourselves the experts in this area, but BP won't give us the money and equipment to go collect data, even though major projects of this type generally go through a series of grant reviews to ensure the work is worthwhile." The proposed data collection may eventually prove useful, but it won't clean up the mess we're facing today! In fact, if equipment needed to stop the leak is diverted to someone's study, it may aggravate the situation! Again, the implication is that BP is attempting to hide something. Like I said, even if it were true, "not much of a disguise"!

It's frustrating as hell to see this disaster, but how are things improved if someone sends you a form letter reply? How does it help to have thousands of well meaning volunteers expose themselves to toxic chemicals? Say people go down and collect tar balls? What do they do with the tar balls?

I'm all for keeping BP's feet to the fire. I'm against random attacks on the Obama administration for "carrying BP's water" .


You offer two choices: attack BP or attack the government, i.e. Obama. I suggest a third choice - support Obama in building a green economy.

[Angry Dragon]

18. All I know is what I read an hear

Much of what I read and hear is conflicting. How is that helpful to the over 300 million people of this country?? I do not know who is really in charge. Who do I go to if I have a question??

You may get your wish of a green economy for the Gulf states because it may be the only thing that will be viable in that region for generations.

I think most, or perhaps it is just me, do not feel that anyone is really in charge, it is just a reaction to a new threat of oil here, oil there. At this time we need a leader on the oil gusher/Ecocide and my perspective that is not the case. I do not care who is in charge i just want to know and feel that they are in charge.

[hedgehog]

12. You provide an example of what I am talking about -

"media is not allowed to film what they want". All I've seen is the statement that everyone has to stay 65 feet back unless they get prior permission. That's a reasonable requirement for people to stand back from where others are working to collect hazardous materials. I assure you, the same rules apply when a tanker car derails! I haven't seen any report of someone asking for and being refused permission. Nor have I seen a report that BP bought up all the telephoto lenses! Anyone who hasn't seen multiple images of the ongoing damage is just plain keeping their eyes closed!

What you didn't mention was the assorted groups of scientists claiming "BP won't allow us access". The stories I've tracked down are all "we have appointed ourselves the experts in this area, but BP won't give us the money and equipment to go collect data, even though major projects of this type generally go through a series of grant reviews to ensure the work is worthwhile." The proposed data collection may eventually prove useful, but it won't clean up the mess we're facing today! In fact, if equipment needed to stop the leak is diverted to someone's study, it may aggravate the situation! Again, the implication is that BP is attempting to hide something. Like I said, even if it were true, "not much of a disguise"!

It's frustrating as hell to see this disaster, but how are things improved if someone sends you a form letter reply? How does it help to have thousands of well meaning volunteers expose themselves to toxic chemicals? Say people go down and collect tar balls? What do they do with the tar balls?

I'm all for keeping BP's feet to the fire. I'm against random attacks on the Obama administration for "carrying BP's water" .


You offer two choices: attack BP or attack the government, i.e. Obama. I suggest a third choice - support Obama in building a green economy.

[newtothegame]

8. Agreed. I almost get the impression from some that they want the oil to STAY.

They seem to be mad that the cleanup would prevent people from seeing what BP did. :shrug:

[librechik]

9. It's like that old joke about MIHOP 9/11. Nobody could keep such a big secret!

exactly. And they can't.

It's just that the people who could do anything about it have a different agenda than us.
They're just stalling and obfuscating. We want quick, direct action.

They have the muscle. We can't even get heard in the sold-out media.

[KharmaTrain]

13. People Want Cheap Gas...

Global warming is something they show on PBS specials or happens far far away...something that too many in this country still refute and for selfish reasons. This country is addicted to oil...to the ability to get in cars and drive anywhere at anytime and that it's the only energy source that matters. All this "alternative" stuff won't make their cars go (can't put a windmill on a car chassis), electric cars are too slow or don't hold enough of a charge or cost too much. Find a reason to push for greater development of alternative energy and you're sure to hear how cost prohibitive it is or not practical...a mindset that does have an effect in this disaster. People don't associate a "little spill" with their own driving habits...or that by "boycotting BP stations" will do some good here.

I've waited 30 years for people to get fed up with oil...be it the price or the damage it does to our world, but the need to drive supercedes all else. Taking away one's car is like taking away their freedom and the oil companies and their proxies in our government have made sure this addiction remains no matter what the consequences are...for some it's all about "freedom". Truth is its all about being addicts.

[gateley]

14. My outrage comes because they could be attempting steps to actually

lessen the damage, but instead they are worried about their corporate bottom line. I understand they are mandated by law to do so, but they don't think twice about dropping tons of money on hiring 'extras' when needed, a high-priced PR firm, renting expensive condos for their PR team, etc.

I couldn't agree more about getting to the source, but meantime, in this particular instance, we need to do all that can be done to make sure we've done all we can!

I just read (probably here) about someone who has turned parking lots into solar fields. You can still park there, but the "roof" over your car is a solar shield. This guy started the company in 2005, and there are some big-name companies who are utilizing his products. This is the first I've heard of it, but it's something that could have been implemented on a far wider scale over the past 6 years but hasn't been.

I'm hopeful that this nightmare will give us a sense of urgency that we have been thus far refusing to acknowledge.

[hedgehog]

15. BP is just doing what it is designed to do - get the biggest

profit possible for the least effort. Getting mad at BP is like getting mad at a hurricane. We need to focus on efforts on making change happen. It won't be one big thing but a million little things like the parking lot solar panels. But the ongoing drum beat that somehow the Obama administration is helping BP to cover up the disaster and avoid any remedial action isn't the way to bring about change!

[jberryhill]

16. Are you suggesting....

That this might not be a real mustache?



The other thing I don't get is that for any place where oil is reaching now, there are 80 days worth of oil behind it.

Take the "THEY ARE PUTTING SAND ON THE BEACHES!" thing. Please note, I don't know the first thing about cleaning a beach of an oozy liquid. However, if I'm on that beach on day 3 of the oil getting there, I suppose I could plow off a couple of feet of sand and get rid of that.

What happens on day 5 when the oil keeps coming?

Again, maybe I'm an idiot, but I don't think you can just keep digging off the top layer of a beach for 80+ days straight, and end up with a clean beach. IMHO, what you end up with is a less well-protected barrier island and no beach at all.

Laying down a sacrificial layer of sand now, and then taking that up three months later doesn't strike me as an inherently bad idea when you have a situation where the OIL IS GOING TO KEEP COMING FOR A WHILE.

But, hey, what do I know...

[LoZoccolo]

17. I think the outrage at BP lends credibility to climate change arguments if you use it that way.

If you can establish that the company shamelessly covers up one thing that makes them look bad, they have less credibility when they try to cover up another.

[ToddWorkman]

19. BP clean up effort. Oil burried under the sand VIDEO PROOF

From what I have heard. The BP clean up crews are only cleaning up the oil that can be seen. But this video proves that there are huge globs of oil burried under the sand. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GAQPr83SgKQ

[jberryhill]

20. Could you be so kind

Since there's something I obviously don't get...

...to educate me:

-----
The other thing I don't get is that for any place where oil is reaching now, there are 80 days worth of oil behind it.

Take the "THEY ARE PUTTING SAND ON THE BEACHES!" thing. Please note, I don't know the first thing about cleaning a beach of an oozy liquid. However, if I'm on that beach on day 3 of the oil getting there, I suppose I could plow off a couple of feet of sand and get rid of that.

What happens on day 5 when the oil keeps coming?

Again, maybe I'm an idiot, but I don't think you can just keep digging off the top layer of a beach for 80+ days straight, and end up with a clean beach. IMHO, what you end up with is a less well-protected barrier island and no beach at all.

Laying down a sacrificial layer of sand now, and then taking that up three months later doesn't strike me as an inherently bad idea when you have a situation where the OIL IS GOING TO KEEP COMING FOR A WHILE.

But, hey, what do I know...
-----

Are you suggesting, since oil is going to be washing up for months, that they can somehow just keep scraping the top layer of sand off of a beach for months?

How does that work, exactly?

[anarch]

21. somebody find me a life raft to get off this planet

although who's going to find me adrift, I sure don't know....