Waiting For Everyman
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-07-10 07:32 AM
Original message |
Imagine this - how would the public & federal reaction be different if the oil spill was caused by |
|
terrorists? Would we be waiting for BP to fix it? Would suction super-tankers have been down there right away, just for starters?
Leave aside the fact that we'd probably start another war over it, I'm asking just in terms of our response to the spill and its damage, as it is now.
I'm thinking more would've been done, quicker. And I don't see why the cause being an "accident" should make any difference to how big of an emergency it is.
|
izquierdista
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-07-10 07:41 AM
Response to Original message |
1. Why are you thinking that? |
|
There is still a big vacant lot in lower Manhattan.
|
Statistical
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-07-10 07:42 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
HillbillyBob
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-07-10 07:42 AM
Response to Original message |
2. Yea it would be pinned on who ever the enema of the day |
|
is to be then we would start a shock and awe bombing campaign, claim they had weapons of mass distraction.....
|
emulatorloo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-07-10 07:42 AM
Response to Original message |
4. Does the govt have the technology to fix it? |
lunatica
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-07-10 07:47 AM
Response to Original message |
5. Do you think people aren't mad enough? |
|
Edited on Mon Jun-07-10 07:49 AM by lunatica
Just because Bush and Company reacted to the 9/11 like they'd won the lottery and immediately started the war machine propaganda they'd been saving up to catapult for years doesn't mean the citizens of the US would have done the same. It's important to remember we went to war based on outright lies which were fed to the mighty Fourth Branch of the government, the propaganda arm, the media. And it's good to recall Judith Miller and her bully pulpit, the New York Times as she wrote lies she was fed with the sole purpose of taking us to a war with a country that didn't attack us, all at the behest of the Vice President's office.
|
Richardo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-07-10 07:50 AM
Response to Original message |
6. Many people 'think' more could have been done, quicker... |
|
...and then neglect to say how.
BP is its own clusterfuck in fixing this and remediating the damage, and I have no faith that they'll keep their 'commitments' to make everyone whole. And I'm not a big fan of how the Administration has positioned itself publicly in this matter, but that is a question of message and perception more than function.
|
Coyote_Bandit
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-07-10 09:01 AM
Response to Reply #6 |
|
perception is more important than reality.
I have to wonder why nearly 8 weeks into the gusher sand barriers are just now being constructed in many areas to protect the shore. Those kinds of protective measures are one thing the administration could have taken/directed/permitted weeks ago.
There's an incestous relationship between the industry and the regulators. No change there from previous administrations. That means there likely are at least a few regulatos who understand the issues and the science involved in closing down the Gulf Gusher. But so far as we can tell they are not actively involved in resolving issues. They are spectators. Responsibility for resolution has been left with BP.
The government doesn't have to have the equipment to proactively exercise their power to direct certain actions by BP.
Problem is that even when the EPA directed BP to quite using toxic dispersant it didn't make any fucking difference. That's the sign of an impotent government with less power than the corporation it is attempting to regulate. Worse yet, the President didn't appear to even care - suggesting that he was either willing to cede that power or was ignorant of the implications.
The administration has not been proactive in addressing the issues surrounding the Gulf Gusher. They've permitted challenges to their authority to regulate on environmental matters. They have delayed in taking/directing/permitting actions to protect the shoreline. They've abdicated the responsibility to shut down the Gulf Gusher and preserve the quality of national costal waters to a for-profit multi-national corporation whose first obligation is to their fucking shareholders.
Once again this administration is the administration of lost opportunities. Color me unimpressed.
|
Turbineguy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-07-10 08:05 AM
Response to Original message |
7. There are two completely seperate things going on. |
|
Dealing with the leak and dealing with the information about the leak. The people dealing with the leak are not the same people who caused it. The people dealing with the information about the leak are the same ones who promised this could never happen.
|
Toots
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-07-10 08:20 AM
Response to Original message |
8. And we would find pristine passports of people we don't like floating nearby |
Bitwit1234
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-07-10 09:07 AM
Response to Original message |
10. I think it has been repeated so many times on TV that TANKERS |
|
can not get into the Gulf to SUCK UP THE OIL. The experts say they need more maneuverable room. They can not, repeat suck up the oil in the Gulf. The reason they did near Russia is they had the whole OPEN SEA. I am only repeating what Experts have said. I don't really know. But the people who know what the super tankers can do, SAY IT CAN'T BE DONE IN THE GULF. And I guess if it could it would have been started by now. BP does not want to loose the oil and this greedy company would do anything to save every drop they can. That way they can sell it back to greedy countries.
|
Waiting For Everyman
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-07-10 11:18 AM
Response to Reply #10 |
11. Then why weren't Costner's smaller vacuum separators used instead? |
|
I've seen no coverage that any of his 20+ machines of various sizes were used at all. I saw coverage of him down there, offering them. So were they used? Or did the media just fail to show that they are being used?
Excuses won't clean up the mess. And it for sure would've been better to start sucking up as much of the spill as possible on DAY TWO, to minimize the amount floating around. The "industry" was offered Costner's machines even long prior to the spill, but didn't include them in any contingency plan... oh, I forgot, because this spill "couldn't happen". Gee, we never had a spill before, it's impossible. :sarcasm:
I'm not buying that nothing could've been done about sucking up the spill right away. And neither is most of the public.
If everything that could've been done had been done, then the mess we were left with would've been what was unavoidable. Except that I have to wonder if Salazer was sent to clean up MMS, then why were 19 Democratics who wrote to MMS 4 months ago about BP's more dangerous sister rig, the Atlantis, ignored? Those Democrats were sounding the correct alarms and doing their job. Why did they get no help from Salazar, is what I want to know?
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Mon May 13th 2024, 10:53 PM
Response to Original message |