The BP Oil Spill Conspiracy Continues in the Gulf of Mexico

by Luis R. Miranda
The Real Agenda
July 10, 2011

There is not a big scandal that lasts more than a few weeks on the main stream media’s scope of attention. In the case of the BP oil catastrophe, it is incredible that after the size of the deadly disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, neither the main stream media nor the alternative news media followed up on what has been going on there. What has been going on there is inaction, and the BP oil conspiracy continues to develop.(1)

As we now know, the BP explosion that cost the lives of several workers was not an accident, but negligence at best and a conspiracy at worst. The direct result of the Deepwater Horizon’s explosion was the massive destruction of life through miles of coastline. The less than adequate cleanup, which helped worsened the disaster, condemned the area to living with tons of toxic chemical dispersants that simply destroyed the eco systems and negatively affected the health of the thousands of people who lived nearby and millions of others who directly and indirectly depended on the fishing, tourism and natural beauty of the marine life, wildlife and environment.

The greatest impact was felt immediately on the health, environmental and economic side of things. Regardless of what Obama and the U.S. government says, the Gulf Coast has not been the same ever since the BP explosion occurred.

This oil sheen can only be coming from fresh oil, newly coming out of the seabed.

Perhaps the most surprising fact is that the spill continues to exist, despite government and main stream media reports that the worst is over. As recently taken pictures show, there are still large amounts of oil floating around the Gulf of Mexico. This is not oil that remains from the original explosion, but fresh oil. Airplanes continue to spray toxic chemicals on the Gulf, which continue to sicken people and animal life there. Recent spraying was done as early as March 15th, 2011, even though the EPA said that no more dispersants had been applied since July 23, 2010. According to the Gulf Rescue Alliance, aerial photos taken between March 19, 2011 and April 21, 2011, reveal new “massive amounts” of oil floating on Gulf’s waters. (2)

Analysis conducted to test the consequences of using Corexit show that the chemical helps the oil dissolve into the water. These chemicals (volatile contaminants) would otherwise evaporated if the oil had been left
sitting on the surface. Laboratory tests conducted with Corexit 9500, saltwater and oil show the same foam found on Gulf waters after the application of the toxic chemical. For the most recent images of the newest oil leaks as well as military airplanes spraying chemicals in the Gulf with detailed dates and places see the PDF report titled Fresh Oil in the Gulf (Pages 4-21)

“Photos taken by Denise Rednour, John Wathen and Bonnie Schumacher prove that the Macondo well and / or the fractured seabed around the well was never fully plugged”. One of the most recent reports titled Fresh Oil in the Gulf includes a press release from NOAA that details its findings about the detection of limits of toxic chemicals, which the organization establishes at 100 parts per million for finfish and 500 parts per million for shrimp. However, chemist Bob Naman who works at the Analytical Chemical Testing lab in Mobile, Alabama tested samples from several places in the Gulf and his results do not match those of NOAA. According to Naman’s calculations, toxic chemical levels are around 5 parts per billion.

EPA Not Coming Clean

In another report titled Questioning EPA Fraud, a group of Gulf residents compiled what they say amounts to clear proof that the Environmental Protection Agency lied and continues to lie about the health impact on Gulf residents, contaminated beaches, water and seafood. According to the report there is an alarming difference between the levels of exposure to toxic chemicals considered as “safe” back in 1999 and those emitted more recently by the EPA, which are “thousands of times higher”. Part of the report relates how much easier would it be for governmental organizations to claim that no chemicals were detected while the health and lives of the residents are gravely put in danger. (3)

Government agencies have been caught giving false statements about the state of affairs in the Gulf of Mexico. In one occasion, government official said they were “not sure of the effect of utilizing dispersants, sub sea,” and on the surface in this volume, but that the use of such chemicals were a necessary risk. Unfortunately, those very same official failed to detailed the very same risks  they knew existed once the spraying of Corexit began on Gulf waters. They also admitted that more studies on the actual effects need to be performed.

According to the document titled Questioning EPA Fraud, sub sea test performed in the North Sea near Norway by major oil companies showed that the oil was split into fractions and left the most toxic parts (PAH’s) suspended throughout the water. These parts cause grave adverse effects to the marine species. “Over 60% of marine species normally thrive in those sub sea strata of ocean waters”, cites the study.

Still a Public Health Crisis

The Gulf Rescue Alliance, a coalition composed by Scientists, Doctors, Attorneys, Seafood and Tourism Industry Professionals, Civic and Government Leaders, Non-profits, and Citizens, documents the current health crisis that began back on the day of the BP oil disaster and that continues to get worse on a daily basis.  The Alliance’s claims are supported by, among other documents, a report from the American Medical Association entitled Health Effects of the Gulf Oil Spill that explains how the toxic chemicals used in the supposed cleanup of the Gulf caused innumerable cases of disease in local residents.

“The main components of crude oil are aliphatic and aromatic hydrocarbons.1 Lower-molecular weight aromatics—such as benzene, toluene, and xylene—are volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and evaporate within hours after the oil reaches the surface. Volatile organic compounds can cause respiratory irritation and central nervous system (CNS) depression. Benzene is known to cause leukemia in humans, and toluene is a recognized teratogen at high doses.” (4)

Although the EPA and the CDC have downplayed the consequences of continuous exposure to the toxic chemicals in the Gulf, citing only minor health problems such as temporary eye, nose, or throat irritation, nausea, or headaches, and “are not thought to be high enough to cause long-term harm” BP’s own website warns that current conditions are dangerous for both offshore workers and local residents. According to the JAMA report,  temperatures pose a risk of heat-related illness exacerbated by wearing coveralls and respirators.

The report continues to point out that when in contact with dispersants and other chemicals now present in the Gulf, people can suffer adverse health effects that may end in dermatitis and secondary skin infections. “Some people may develop a dermal hypersensitivity reaction, erythema, edema, burning sensations, or a follicular rash.”  But the health conditions now being experienced by residents and wildlife are not the only problems that remain in the heads of the citizens in the coast. There are a number of long-term health risks that not highlighted now, but that will appear later.

Although visible effects such as contamination, floating oil and dispersants as well as the death of the eco systems are some of the problems we see now, more pressing consequences are still to come. One of those consequences is the accumulation of chemicals that will remain with Gulf residents for years. The exposure to these chemicals will continue to endanger people generation after generation unless they are properly cleaned up. Because the Gulf of Mexico is one of the most important sources of seafood for the United States, the chemicals found on that seafood will potentially contaminate consumers with toxins such as cadmium, mercury, and lead that can accumulate over time in fish and shellfish. (5)

Fishing through oil and dispersant. Photo taken March 19th, 2011.

It is undoubtedly the damage to human health what worries most residents of the Gulf coast, though. Some of the most serious effects on humans are reflected on red blood cells. Exposure to the toxic chemicals people and marine life are now swimming in causes hemolysis. This happens because the fat of the cells’ membrane is dissolved and as a result the membrane breaks down. Another health problem is hematuria, or the appearance of blood in the urine and the feces. This happens as a result of kidney damage. If untreated, this damage can progress and lead to kidney failure.

“The chemicals extend their damage to other body parts such as the spleen, the bones in the spinal column, and bone marrow (where new blood cells are formed) and the liver, where chemicals are detoxified (broken down for easy excretion from the body). Chronic exposure can cause anemia, and lead to insufficient blood supply, cold extremities, and necrosis (a condition basically akin to flesh rot.) Females may exhibit more sensitivity to fore-stomach necrosis, ulceration, and inflammation occurring at half the dose required to cause the same problems in males. (6)

In women, fertility could also be reduced due to embryo mortality. Women are considered to be more likely to suffer from ocular damage. Some bodily injuries of that kind include severe damage to the eye such as retinal detachment, photoreceptor degeneration and occlusion resulting from multiple thrombosis of the blood vessels in the eye.

Reaching out to the Government

Marine Toxicologist, Riki Ott

In a letter to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Marine toxicologist and Exxon Valdez survivor, Riki Ott, details how the organization was ignorant about the effects of using dispersants in an area that went from Louisiana to Florida. The agency and other government organization were unaware of the existence of “subsurface oil-dispersant plumes and sunken oil on ocean and estuary water bottoms”, said Ott. He also asked for proof that it was a violation of existent law to spray sinking agents such as the ones BP had been using.(7)

Although under EPA rules BP had been banned from using Corexit on Gulf waters due to its toxicity and the reactions it caused when in contact with the oil, the company continued spraying the chemical after the March 19, 2010 warning to stop using the product. “By July 30, the congressional Subcommittee on Energy and the Environment reported the USCG on-scene commander (OSC) had approved 74 exemption requests to spray dispersants between May 28 and July 14”, cites the document.

The Sane Available Solution

On section four of the The Gulf of Mexico A Crisis That Must Be Resolved document, a proposal is presented to end the tragedy known as the BP Gulf Oil Spill. Under the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR 40), it is stated that in the event of environmental disasters such as the one in the Gulf of Mexico, the agencies in charge could use non-toxic products called “bio remediation” products. Bio remediation is the use living micro organisms to  enhance the rates of biodegradation of oil. The the use of bio remediation results in the appearance of organic substances such as carbon dioxide, water, biomass, and benign substances. This process, transforms oil into non-toxic products and the environmental impact is almost zero. It is basically the same process mother nature uses to clean itself, but performed at an accelerated pace. It speeds up the process.

Under the bio remediation category, there seems to be only one product left, from a total of 11 that existed in the near past. It is called OSE II. This product, as requested by government regulators, does not introduce foreign microbes into any body of water. OSE II can be used on refined or unrefined hydrocarbons or hydrocarbon-based compounds. This product was shown to EPA and other government representatives at least 14 times in laboratory experiments and on-location. Every single time, OSE II proved its capacity to detoxify the oil and dispersant in a matter of hours. “After getting in contact with the oil, it turns it into water and CO2 within 2 to 4 weeks, which is its defined end result.”

OSE II is used in 35 countries where the use of dispersants is prohibited or simply a non starter. In the United States, the EPA prevented the use of this product even though its manufacturer has provided it  to the U.S. military for 21 years.

References:

(1) The BP Oil Spill Conspiracy You Didn’t Hear About

(2) Fresh Oil in the Gulf Of Mexico and Fresh Chemical Dispersant Being Sprayed

(3) Summary of EPA/NOAA Fraud Regarding the Testing for Safety of Gulf Seafood, Water, and Sediment

(4) Public Health Crisis in the Gulf of Mexico as a Direct Result of the Inadequate Response to the Deepwater Horizon Oil Blowout Disaster

(5) University scientist’s seafood sample results were “hundreds of times higher than the levels the government tests found”

(6) General Overview of Symptoms Related to Exposure to Dispersed Oil and Toxic Chemical Dispersants

(7) The Gulf of Mexico A Crisis That Must Be Resolved

El Derrame de Petróleo de BP: La Conspiración que Usted no Conoce

Por Luis R. Miranda
The Real Agenda
Diciembre 16, 2010

Las grandes corporaciones son responsables de la destrucción del medio ambiente, eso es simplemente un hecho. Si no lo creen y no creen en teorías de la conspiración, sujetense los pantalones y el sombrero, porque este artículo se los va a volar lejos, muy lejos. Todo el mundo todavía recuerda el derrame de petróleo en el Golfo de México. Aún está fresco en mi cabeza y en la cabeza de mucha gente que lo vio de primera mano, que fueron desplazados por este, o que están enfermos hoy a causa del mismo. Al igual que el desastre causado por el huracán Katrina y los ataques que Estados Unidos sufrió el 11 de septiembre de 2001. Todo el mundo los recuerda …

Los rumores iban y venían sobre los motivos o causas del derrame de petróleo, el mayor desastre ambiental en la historia, sin duda. Pero el tiempo, sólo el tiempo puede proporcionar las respuestas que todo el mundo parece estar buscando después de la tragedia. Sólo el tiempo e investigación muy profunda revelan lo que estaba y sigue estando detrás de un derrame de petróleo que se llamó un “desastre”, pero que es mucho más que eso. Esta vez, las respuestas y la realidad que se presentan parecen ir más allá de lo que cualquier ser humano decente se pueda imaginar. Sólo una mente maligna podría entenderlo. La realidad es más extraña que la ficción, se dice. Con el derrame de petróleo, no es la excepción. Y no es extraño, sino también más diabólico de lo que cualquier productor o director de ficción podría imaginar, porque tiene que ver con la existencia humana.

Desplazados después de Katrina. Los diques no detuvieron las aguas.

En un documental investigativo de 43 minutos, con el apoyo de documentos, testimonios, pruebas visuales y mentiras de primera mano por parte de BP, el programa Conspiracy Theory presentado por el ex gobernador de Minnesota Jesse Ventura tiró la tapa y reveló que el derrame de petróleo no fue sólo un accidente, un desastre, una tragedia, pero fue en realidad un evento cuidadosamente elaborado para facilitar la despoblación de la costa, causar enfermedad, muerte, y el control de los recursos, todo en nombre de las corporaciones. El documental no sólo revela una de las mayores conspiraciones de las que me he enterado, pero también señala cómo el derrame de petróleo es parte de una serie de eventos de prueba para causar la destrucción de la zona del Golfo de México con el fin de provocar la migración obligatoria de por lo menos 17.000 familias, muchas de las cuales han vivido allí por más de 100 años. Los planes de despoblación no se limitan a las zonas costeras o el Golfo de México. Se extiende hasta tierra adentro, hasta Luisiana.

Pero los problemas son más graves que una simple migración masiva. ¿Cómo estaría el derrame de petróleo relacionado con el enfriamiento global o una edad de hielo que afectaría la mayor parte del hemisferio norte, causaría escasez de alimentos y potencialmente la muerte de millones, estimularía la mayor demanda de petróleo en la historia de la humanidad, mientras que este está en las manos de las corporaciones? Por favor permanezca sentado. Si no puede esperar a leer el artículo completo para saber de que se trata la conspiración, déjeme darle una idea directa. El gobierno de los Estados Unidos tiene un programa para despoblar la región de la costa del Golfo de México respaldado por 40 mil millones de dólares para convertir la costa en una zona desierta a fin de entregársela a las grandes corporaciones petroleras. Si usted no puede creerlo, siga leyendo.

Antes de entrar en detalles, sin embargo, vamos a poner algunos elementos de hecho que cualquiera puede confirmar. BP fue fundada en 1909 como la Compañía Anglo-Persa. Esta corporación participó en la destrucción de Irán mientras el país estaba en camino de convertirse en una nación del Primer Mundo. Los iraníes simplemente no querían renunciar a sus recursos naturales y dárselos a BP, por lo que la compañía utilizó sus conexiones para convertir a Irán en lo que es hoy. Como se sabe, BP es propiedad en parte de JP Morgan Chase Bank que tiene casi el 29% de sus acciones. Tanto Halliburton y Transocean operaban en la plataforma petrolera que explotó y causó el desastre. BP sabía, muy por delante de tiempo que la plataforma petrolera estaba en peligro y podría explotar como lo hizo. Esa es la conclusión alcanzada por la periodista investigativa Sherri Kane, quien ha escrito varios artículos sobre el derrame de petróleo, pero ninguno ha llegado a los medios de comunicación corporativos. Su investigación ofrece explicaciones sobre lo que ocurrió meses antes de la explosión. Para empezar, millones de dólares fueron obtenidos de la venta de acciones de BP, semanas antes del desastre. Entre los que la vendieron sus acciones se encontraba el CEO de BP, Tony Hayward, que vendió un tercio de sus acciones el 17 de marzo, y con esto ganó millones de dólares. Ese es sólo su soborno por permitir que el desastre sucediera.

Empresas involucradas en el derrame de petróleo.

La investigación se inició en la zona cero, para usar un término familiar. Como se señala en el documental, BP no podría haberlo hecho solo. Tuvieron la ayuda de Transocean, la mayor contratista de off-shore en el mundo. Aunque BP era el dueño de los 194 millones de galones derramados en las aguas del Golfo de México, Transocean era el propietario de la plataforma. Poco antes de la explosión, las acciones de Transocean fueron puestas en el mercado con una “opción de venta” especial para quienes fueron informados de antemano que el desastre sucedería. Una “opción de venta” es algo así como comprar un seguro de “algo” en caso que lo peor suceda. Eso permitió que cualquier persona con conocimientos previo de la explosión se asegurara antes de que ocurriera. Digamos por ejemplo, los propietarios de Transocean que ganaron miles de millones después de la catástrofe en dinero de seguros. Pero espere, más ayuda estaba en camino, de Halliburton. Esta empresa fue contratada para reforzar los pozos de petróleo de Transocean e indirectamente para BP antes de que estallara la plataforma. Además, Halliburton decidió comprar Boots & Coots, sólo 11 días de que ocurriera el derrame de petróleo. Boots & Coots era un subcontratista anterior de Halliburton y su especialidad es, como habrá adivinado, la limpieza de derrames de petróleo.

De acuerdo con Sherri Kane, la catástrofe del Golfo es un ejemplo de algo que ella llama el capitalismo de crisis, pero que me gustaría llamar problema, reacción, solución, porque no tiene nada que ver con el capitalismo real, aunque tiene mucho que ver con la forma en la que las corporaciones actúan; con codicia Bajo esta circunstancia, la Sra. Kane aseguró al gobernador Ventura que BP había planeado en realidad todo el asunto porque hay más dinero para hacer de la limpieza que hay en la extracción del petróleo. Prueba de ello es que las ganancias de Halliburton aumentaron en un 83 por ciento durante el desastre del derrame de petróleo. “Su dios es el dinero y el poder”, concluyó Kane. Es importante recordar que Halliburton trasladó su sede de Houston, Texas a Dubai, lejos de cualquier posible investigación penal, extradición o la supervisión del gobierno. En otras palabras, han cometido asesinato, literalmente, y se han salido con la suya.

El abogado y activista ambiental, Mike Papantonio, un residente de Pensacola, Florida, confirmó lo dicho por Sherri Kane; que BP sabía que el desastre iba a suceder. “Ellos sabían semanas antes del derrame de petróleo que el mecanismo de prevención de escape no estaba funcionando correctamente”, dice Papantonio. El desastre, dijo, podría haber sido evitado si la empresa hubiese tenido un interruptor acústico, que es un dispositivo que enciende el mecanismo de prevención antes de que una explosión suceda. “Si todo va mal en una plataforma petrolera, cualquier persona desde una distancia segura puede pulsar un botón para impedir la explosión.” De acuerdo con Papantonio, se trata de un equipo básico que todas las corporaciones deberían tener, pero no es así en los Estados Unidos . El ex ejecutivo de Halliburton y vice presidente de EE.UU., Dick Cheney, facilitó mucho la vida de las grandes petroleras pues redujo el número de reglas y leyes que estas debían seguir con el fin de extraer petróleo del fondo del océano. Una de las cosas que Cheney evitó fue la instalación de un interruptor acústico. “Desafortunadamente, en los Estados Unidos tratamos a los criminales de manera diferente. Si visten un traje entero, ellos pueden matar gente y salirse con la suya “, agregó Papantonio.

En Houma, Luisiana, el gobernador Ventura se reunió con Adam Dillon, un ex oficial de policía contratado por BP para mantener un ojo en todas partes, mientras que el derrame de petróleo sucedía. Dillon supervisó cada detalle relacionado con el derrame del Golfo de México. Mientras trabajó para BP, se enteró de los detalles que BP no quería que nadie supiera. “No me di cuenta de la magnitud del derrame hasta que llegué ahí”, dijo Dillon. “Por cada gota de petróleo en la superficie del Golfo, habían miles más bajo la superficie.” Dillon se dio cuenta que los números dados por parte de BP y el gobierno simplemente no cuadraban. Después de que él tomó fotografías de un avión que mostraban la verdadera magnitud del desastre, fue intimidado y despedido. La limpieza era todo una mentira. “Como ex soldado en Iraq y ex agente de policía sé lo que es un interrogatorio, y eso es lo que fue lo que pasé”, dice Dillon.

Después de estacionar sus vehículos frente a la sede de BP en Houma, Luisiana, el gobernador Ventura y Adam Dillon confirmaron que la policía local estaba allí para proteger a BP, no a la gente de la región. “He estado en instalaciones militares que no tienen tanta seguridad como este lugar”, agregó Dillon. El ex residente de Houma, George Harrison, se mudó de la zona cuando BP se instaló allí, pero antes de eso, tomó fotos y videos de la operación. En su video, aparecen policías locales y militares de EE.UU. no trabajando con BP, sino para BP. Su tarea principal era proporcionar seguridad a la zona de control establecida por BP.

Después de ser levemente intimidados por la policía local, que una vez más estaban trabajando para BP, el gobernador Ventura fue invitado por un trabajador de BP para hacer un viaje a lo largo del Golfo, para que pudiera ver por sí mismo el gran trabajo que la empresa estaba haciendo. Fue precisamente esa entrevista lo que dio a Jesse Ventura la oportunidad de enfrentarse al equipo de relaciones públicas de BP y exponer sus mentiras. El principal atractivo de este viaje era mostrar como Corexit, un producto químico tóxico prohibido en casi todo el mundo estaba ayudando a BP en el esfuerzo de limpieza. El único problema es que Corexit no limpia el petróleo, sino que separa el petróleo en partes más pequeñas que caen al fondo del océano. El petróleo sigue ahí, pero ahora es invisible para el ojo humano. Gene Dominique, un portavoz de BP, se apresuró a señalar que el personal de limpieza había estado trabajando en la eliminación de las partículas más pequeñas de petróleo, después de aplicar el Corexit al agua del Golfo de México. Negó que la limpieza llevaría años y agregó que la madre naturaleza, con el tiempo, haría su parte para devolver el Golfo a la normalidad.

Cuando se le preguntó acerca de la naturaleza tóxica de Corexit, Dominique dijo que no podía decir si era tan malo

Corexit fue pulverizado sobre el Golfo de México a pesar de su toxicidad.

como todos sabemos que es. Por lo tanto, para aquellos de ustedes que no saben lo que es Corexit, vamos a revisarlo. Corexit es una mezcla de arsénico, cadmio, cromo, cobre, plomo, mercurio, níquel, zinc y cianuro. Cuando se le preguntó acerca de la toxicidad de los ingredientes, un portavoz de BP se limitó a decir: “Ellos son aprobados por la Agencia de Protección Ambiental (EPA)”. Cuando el gobernador Ventura le preguntó si BP continuaba usando Corexit, después que la misma EPA solicitó a la compañía detener el uso, él respondió: “Hasta donde yo sé, no”. Por supuesto, todos sabemos lo que eso significa. Esto significa negación plausible. De hecho, BP ha seguido usando Corexit aerosol sobre el Golfo, pero ahora lo hacen con la ayuda de la oscuridad. Sus aviones despegan por la noche y rocían la sustancia química, mientras que los pobladores están dormidos.

David Arnesen, un pescador quien trabajó en la limpieza, fue testigo de primera mano sobre lo que Corexit puede hacer. “He estado por aquí desde que comenzó y he estado enfermo todo el tiempo”, dice Arnesen. “He tenido problemas de sinusitis y dolores de oído sin parar. Durante la mayor parte de los últimos tres meses, he tenido cosas de color marrón que sale de mis oídos. ” En lo que respecta a las personas enfermas a causa de Corexit, Gene Dominique dijo que BP no había tenido ningún informe sobre los trabajadores enfermos. “Si nuestra industria no regresa pronto, vamos a tener que trasladarnos a otro lugar para encontrar trabajo”, concluyó Arnesen.

Aunque se le pidió a BP que dejara de usar Corexit debido a su alta toxicidad, la empresa decidió continuar rociando el producto sobre las aguas del Golfo de México, con la consecuencia adicional de que Corexit es llevado por el viento a las zonas costeras y más allá. Pero ¿por qué BP decidió seguir utilizando el producto tóxico, a pesar de que el gobierno le solicitó parar? Bueno, porque BP tiene una conexión muy fuerte con Corexit y la compañía que lo produce. BP tiene fuertes lazos con NALCO, el productor de Corexit, mediante el intercambio de ejecutivos entre las dos compañías. Miembros de la Junta de NALCO ocupan altos cargos en BP, es por eso que la empresa petrolera insiste en el uso de la sustancia química en lugar de otros productos aprobados por la EPA que son menos dañinos.

Pero volvamos a los efectos sobre la salud de Corexit. Mientras los aviones de BP sigan pulverizando Corexit, este continuará propagandose por el aire sobre los residentes de Louisiana. “Es como si estamos siendo atacados por terroristas”, dice Kindra Arnesen. Están ahí afuera atacándolos … Ellos están ahí para proteger a las corporaciones.” Los vecinos tienen razón en estar preocupados. Casi todos los que participaron en la limpieza de la catástrofe de petrolero de Exxon Valdez en 1989, han muerto o sufren de enfermedades terribles en la actualidad. Su esperanza de vida, después de ser evaluados se estableció a cerca de 51 años de edad.

Pero ¿por qué un gobierno haría lo que las empresas quieren, y no lo que es mejor para el pueblo por el cual fue elegido? Creo que es fácil saber la respuesta a eso. El dinero, la avaricia, y un insaciable deseo de deshacerse de las personas que se atraviesen en el camino. Lo que hay detrás del derrame de petróleo de BP es un intento de despoblar la región del Golfo con el fin de convertirla en la mayor refinería de petróleo en América del Norte. Para eso, es necesario que sacar a todos los residentes de allí, voluntariamente o en ataúdes de plástico, si es necesario. Esta zona de refinería de petróleo daría todo el petróleo a las grandes corporaciones sin que estas tengan que preocuparse con regulaciones para explorar y extraer cada gota de petróleo en el Golfo de México. Este escenario fue confirmado por el abogado y ambientalista Alfred Webre en Nueva Orleans. El desastre del Katrina, el derrame de petróleo en el Golfo y todo lo que conlleva son sólo piezas de un gigantesco plan maestro.

George W. Bush y Dick Cheney son dos de principales peones de la Elite.

“Katrina fue una prueba o un entrenamiento… El objetivo final es convertir esta zona en un área de servicio de petróleo”. Luego agregó: “La gente como Dick Cheney y George W. Bush sirven una mafia internacional que está a favor de tener una población totalmente sometida a sus deseos.”Cuando el gobernador Ventura le preguntó si el actual presidente, Barack Obama era parte de eso también, él respondió: “Desde el 1980 Barack Obama ha trabajado para la Agencia Central de Inteligencia. “Pero era un agente? “Era lo que llaman un agente de la CIA. Fue inscrito por Zbiniew Brzesinski, el jefe de la Comisión Trilateral “.  (Ver nuestro artículo titulado: Fuertes vínculos de Obama a la CIA revelados).  Él continuó diciendo que tanto Barack Obama como George W. Bush seguían las mismas políticas y que su única diferencia es que a uno se le enseñó a gobernar desde la Izquierda mientras que al otro se le enseño cómo hacerlo desde la Derecha. Pero si esto es cierto, ¿dónde está la prueba que BP tiene el gobierno en su bolsillo? Webre fue aún más a fondo. “BP dio una donación de 500 millones de dólares al doctor Steven Chu, mientras trabajaba en el Laboratorio Nacional. Luego, Chu fue nombrado Secretario de Energía de Obama y con él vino Steve Koonin, un alto ejecutivo de BP, quien se conviertió en le subsecretario de energía. “BP está en completo control del Departamento de Energía de los Estados Unidos “, dijo Webre.

Cómo es que la llegada de una Edad de Hielo está relacionada con el derrame de petróleo de BP? Resulta que el derrame de crudo ha casi paralizado la corriente oceánica conocida como The North Atlantic Current. Si esta corriente se detiene, el resultado sería una mini Edad de Hielo. De acuerdo al documental, los datos de satélite muestran que el derrame de petróleo ha detenido la corriente conocida como el Motor de la Corriente del Golfo, la corriente oceánica cálida que fluye hacia el norte a través del Atlántico. La Corriente del Golfo ayuda a calentar el clima del norte de Europa. “Si el derrame de BP tiene éxito en frenar la circulación normal de la corriente del golfo y con esto la Corriente del Atlántico Norte, puede provocar una mini Edad de Hielo como la que teníamos en los años de 1700”, informa Alfred Webre. Una mini Edad de Hielo, como el documental explica, sería enormemente favorable para las grandes petroleras, ya que estas tendrían más crudo en sus manos cuando la mini Edad de Hielo se produzca. “Están jugando con el clima, nuestro suministro de alimentos y su intención es matarnos de hambre.”

¿Dónde está la prueba de todo esto, usted puede estar pensando. Aquí viene el papel que habla. Un documento oficial

La desaparición de la Corriente del Atlántico Norte, puede traer una nueva Edad de Hielo.

del Cuerpo de Ingenieros de Estados Unidos revela un plan respaldado por 1,200 millones de dólares para despoblar efectivamente la región del Golfo. Este plan forma parte de un plan más amplio de 40 mil millones de dólares para ampliar la despoblación hasta el estado de Luisiana. Para confirmar los detalles de este plan, el gobernador Ventura se reunió con la Dra. Susan. I. Rees, una miembro del Cuerpo de Ingenieros, quien está a cargo de ejecutar el plan de despoblación. Rees fue directa y ni siquiera escondió los detalles del plan. “Tenemos un programa integral donde vamos a reubicar a las personas.” Cuando se le preguntó acerca de si las compañías petroleras saldrían de la zona, la Dra. Rees dijo que los planes eran estrictamente para la gente, no las empresas. Patrick Robbins, otro miembro del Cuerpo de Ingenieros trató de lavarse las manos diciendo que junto con la despoblación había una gran cantidad de proyectos ambientales para mejorar la región. Sin embargo, recordemos que este es el mismo Cuerpo de Ingenieros culpado por el mal manejo de la catástrofe causada por el huracán Katrina. Es la misma organización que construyó los diques que se derrumbaron cuando se suponía que debían proteger a las ciudades de las aguas entrantes.

El Cuerpo de Ingenieros de Estados Unidos primero negó que existían planes para despoblar la región del Golfo, pero poco después lo admitió. Alegaron que el financiamiento del plan ascendía a sólo 1,200 millones dólares y no 40 mil millones, pero más tarde admitieron que el número verdadero era de 40 mil millones de dólares. Así que ahí lo tienen. Los planes existen para despoblar la región del Golfo de México, el financiamiento para su ejecución también existen y las consecuencias del derrame de petróleo ya se manifiestan. El hambre, la muerte, la despoblación, la corrupción y SI tal vez una nueva Edad de Hielo. Así que si usted no cree en conspiraciones del gobierno espero que este artículo le ayude a cambiar de opinión. En realidad no importa si usted las cree o no, porque igual estas existen.

The BP Oil Spill Conspiracy You Didn’t Hear About

POR LUIS MIRANDA | THE REAL AGENDA | DECEMBER 16, 2010

Big corporations are responsible for the destruction of the environment, that is just a fact. If you don’t believe it and don’t believe in conspiracy theories, hold on to your pants and hat because this article is going to blow them far, far away. Everyone still remembers the British Petroleum (BP) oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. It is still fresh in my head and in the heads of many people who saw it first hand, who were displaced by it, or who are sick today because of it. Just like the disaster caused by hurricane Katrina and the attacks the United States suffered on september 11th, 2001. Everyone remembers…

Rumors went and came about the motives or causes behind the oil spill, the largest disaster in environmental history, no doubt. But time, only time can provide the answers that everyone seems to be looking for after tragedy strikes. Only time and very deep researching reveal what was and is still behind an oil spill that was called a “disaster”, but that is much more than that. This time, the answers and the reality they present seem to go beyond what any decent human being can think of. Only an evil mind could figure it out. Reality is stranger than fiction, people say. With the oil spill, it is not the exception. And it is not only stranger, but also more diabolical than what any fiction producer or director could imagine, because it has to do with human existence.

Displaced after Hurricane Katrina. The levees did not stop the water.

In a 43 minute television documentary investigation supported by documents, testimonies, visual proof and first hand straight forward lies from BP, the program Conspiracy Theory hosted by former Minnesota governor Jesse Ventura pulled the curtain off the cover up and revealed that the oil spill was not only an accident, a disaster, a tragedy, but it was in fact a carefully crafted event to bring about coastal mass depopulation, death, sickness and control of resources; all on behalf of corporations. The documentary not only reveals one of the largest conspiracies I have ever learned about, but also points out how the oil spill is part of a series of test events to cause the depletion of the gulf area in order to cause the mandated migration of at least 17000 families, many of which have lived there for over 100 years. The depopulation plans are not limited to the coastal areas or the Gulf of Mexico. It extends to as far inland as Louisiana.

But the issues are more serious than mass migration. How would the oil disaster be related to global cooling or an ice age that impaired most of the northern hemisphere, cause food shortages, potentially the death of millions, spurring the highest demand of oil in the history of humankind while it is all in the hands of corporations? Please remain seated. If you can’t wait to read the whole article to know what the conspiracy is all about, let me give it to you straightforward. The government of the United States has a program to depopulate the Gulf coast region backed up with US40 billion to turn the coast into a deserted area so that they can simply handed it to big oil. If you cannot believe that, keep on reading.

Before entering into details, though, let’s put out some factual information that anyone can confirm. BP was founded in 1909 as the Anglo-Persian Company. It was involved in the destruction of Iran as the country was on its way to becoming a First World Nation. The Iranians simply did not want to surrender their natural resources to BP, so the company used its connections to turn Iran into what it is today. As it is known today, BP is owned in part by JP Morgan Chase Bank that holds almost 29% of its shares. Both Halliburton and Transocean operated on the oil rig that exploded and caused the disaster. BP knew, way ahead of time that the oil rig was in danger and could explode as it did. That is the conclusion reached by investigative journalist Sherri Kane who has written multiple articles about the oil spill, but none has reached the main stream media. Her investigation provides explanations as to what happened months before the conspiracy took place. For starters, millions of dollars in BP stock were dumped by their holders, weeks before the oil spill. Among those who dumped the stock was BP CEO Tony Hayward, who sold a third of his shares on March 17, and made millions in the process. It is just his tip, for standing by and letting it happen.

The investigation began right on ground zero, to use a familiar term. As it is pointed out on the documentary, BP could not have done it alone. They had help from Transocean, the largest off-shore contractor in the world. Although BP was the owner of the 194 million gallons spilled into the waters of the Gulf of Mexico, Transocean was the owner of the rig. Transocean’s stocks opened with a special “put option” for insiders to basically bet against the company. A “put option” is something like buying insurance in case ‘something’ happens. That would allow anyone with foretold knowledge about the explosion to buy insurance before it happened. Say for example, the owners of Transocean who made billions after the disaster took place. But wait, more help was on the way; from Halliburton. This company was contracted to reinforce the oil well for Transocean and indirectly for BP before it blew up. Additionally, Halliburton decided to buy Boots & Coots, just 11 days before the oil spill happened. Boots & Coots was a former subcontractor for Halliburton and it’s specialty is, you guessed it, oil disaster clean-ups.

According to Sherri Kane, the Gulf’s oil disaster is an example of something she called Crisis Capitalism, but that I would like to call Problem, Reaction Solution, because it has nothing to do with real Capitalism, although it has a lot to do with corporate greed and mass depopulation. Under this circumstance, Ms. Kane assured governor Ventura that BP had indeed planned the whole thing because there is more money to make on the clean-up that there is in the extraction of oil. Proof of this is that Halliburton’s profits exploded to 83 percent during the oil spill disaster. “Their god is money and power,” concluded Kane. It is important to remember that Halliburton moved his headquarters from Houston Texas to Dubai, away from any possible criminal investigation, extradition or government oversight. In other words, they committed murder; literally, and got away with it.

Environmental Attorney Mike Papantonio, a resident of Pensacola, Florida concurs with Sherri Kane’s investigation that BP knew the disaster would happen. “They knew weeks before the oil spill that the blow-up preventer was malfunctioning,” says Papantonio. The disaster, says the environmental attorney, could have prevented by having an acoustic switch, which is a device that ignites the blow-up preventer from a distance. “If everything goes wrong on an oil rig, anyone from a distance can hit a button to cause the blow-up preventer to engage.” According to Papantonio, this is a standard device that all rigs must have, but not in the United States. Former Halliburton executive and U.S. vice president, Dick Cheney, made sure big oil was given many passes on what they had to comply with in order to extract oil from the ocean floor. One of those things they avoided doing was to install an acoustic switch. “Unfortunately, in America we treat criminals differently. If they are in a three-piece suit, they kill people and get away with it,” added Papantonio.

In Houma, Louisiana, governor Ventura met with Adam Dillon, a former police officer hired by BP to keep an eye everywhere, while the oil disaster unfolded. Mr. Dillon oversaw every single detail that related to the Gulf’s spill. While on the job, he learned details BP did not want him to tell. “I didn’t realize the magnitude of the spill until I got out there,” said Dillon. “For every drop of oil on the surface of the Gulf, there were thousands more under the surface.” Mr. Dillon learned that the numbers being put out by BP and the government simply did not add up. After he took pictures from a plane that showed the real magnitude of the disaster, he was intimidated and then fired. The clean-up was all a lie. “As a former soldier in Iraq and former police officer I know what an interrogation looks like, and that is what I was put through”, says Dillon. After stationing their vehicles in front of BP’s headquarters in Houma, Louisiana, governor Ventura and Adam Dillon confirmed that local law enforcement was there to protect BP, not the people of the region. “I have been in military installations that do not have as much security as this place has,” added Dillon. Former Houma resident, George Harrison, moved out of the area as BP moved in. But before that, he took photos and videos of the operation. In his video, there appears to be local police and U.S. military working not with BP, but for BP. Their main task was to provide security to the complete BP staging area.

After being sort of confronted by local law enforcement who once again were working for BP, governor Ventura was invited by a BP worker to take a trip along the Gulf, so he could see for himself what a great job the company was doing. It was precisely that interview what gave Jesse Ventura the opportunity to face BP’s public relations team and to expose them and their lies. The main attraction of this trip was to show Ventura how Corexit, a toxic chemical banned almost everywhere in the world was aiding BP in the clean-up effort. The only problem is that Corexit does not clean the oil, it only breaks it apart in smaller parts which then fall to the ocean floor. The oil is still there, but it is now invisible to the human eye. Gene Dominique, a BP spokesman, was quick to point out the cleaning crews had been working on removing those smaller particles of oil, left behind after applying the toxic Corexit to the Gulf’s water. He denied the clean-up would take years and added that mother nature would eventually do its part to return the Gulf back to normal.

Corexit was sprayed over the Gulf regardless of its high toxicity.

When questioned about the toxic nature of Corexit, Dominique said he could not tell whether it was as bad as we all know it is. So, for those of you who don’t know what Corexit is, let’s review. Corexit is a mixture of Arsenic, Cadmium, Chromium, Copper, Lead, Mercury, Nickel, Zinc and Cyanide. When questioned about the toxicity of the ingredients, a BP spokesman simply said: “They are approved by the EPA”. When governor Ventura asked the spokesman if BP had continued to use Corexit, after the very same EPA asked the company to stop, he responded: “To be best of my knowledge, no.” Of course, we all know what that means. It means plausible deniability. In fact, BP has continued to spray Corexit over the Gulf, but now they do it with the aid of darkness. Their planes take off at night and spray the toxic chemical while most in the area are asleep.

David Arnesen, a fisherman and clean-up worker was a first hand witness to what Corexit can do. “I’ve been out there since the efforts began and I’ve been sick the whole time,” says Arnesen. “I’ve had sinus problems and just non-stop earaches. For the best part of the last three months, I’ve had brown stuff coming out of my ears.” In regards to people getting sick because of Corexit, Gene Dominique said BP had not had any reports on ill workers. “If our industry does not come back soon enough, we’ll have to move elsewhere to find work,” concluded Arnesen.

Although BP was asked to stop using Corexit due to its high toxicity, the company decided to continue spraying the product over the waters of the Gulf of Mexico, with the added consequence that Corexit was carried by the wind into the coastal areas and beyond. But why did BP decided to continue using the toxic product, even though the government requested to stop? Well, because BP has a very strong connection to Corexit and the company that produces it. BP has strong ties to NALCO, the producer of Corexit through the exchange of top executives between the two companies. Board members of NALCO occupied high positions in BP, that is why the oil company insists on using the toxic chemical instead of other EPA approved products that are less harmful.

But let’s get back to the health effects of Corexit. For as long as BP airplanes continue spraying Corexit, it will continue spread through the air over the residents of Louisiana. “It is like we’re being attacked by terrorists,” says Kindra Arnesen. I think they are out there to destroy us… They are set to protect the corporations.” The neighbors are right to be concerned. Almost everyone who participated in the clean-up of the Exxon Valdez oil disaster in 1989 has either died or suffers from horrible diseases today. Their life expectancy, after evaluated was set to about 51 years of age.

But why would a government do what the corporations want, and not what is best for the people it was elected by? I think by now it is easy to figure the answer to that. Money, Greed, and an insatiable desire to get rid off the average individual who gets on the way of their plans. What is behind the BP oil spill is an attempt to depopulate the Gulf region in order to turn it into the largest oil refinery in North America. And for that, they need to get everyone out of there; voluntarily or otherwise in plastic coffins. This oil refinery area would give big oil plenty of freedom, and zero regulation to explore and extract any and every drop of oil in the Gulf of Mexico. This scenario was confirmed by lawyer and environmentalist Alfred Webre down in New Orleans. The Katrina disaster, the oil spill in the Gulf and everything it entailed are just pieces of a gigantic master plan.

George W. Bush and Dick Cheney were two of the main pawns of the Elite.

Katrina was a test or a run through… The ultimate goal is to turn this area into a petroleum servicing area”. He then added: “People like Dick Cheney and George W. Bush serve an international racketeering organization that are in favor of subservient people.” When governor Ventura asked him if current president Barack Obama was part of that too, he responded: “Since the 1980’s Barack Obama has worked for the Central Intelligence Agency.” But was he an agent? “He was what they call a CIA asset. He was enrolled by Zbiniew Brzesinski, the head of the Trilateral Comission.” (See our article titled: Obama’s Deep Connections to the CIA Revealed). He went on to say that both Barack Obama and George W. Bush had the same policies in mind and that their only difference is that one was taught to govern from the Left while the other was shown how to do it from the Right. But if this is true, where is the proof BP has the government in its pocket? Webre was even more thorough this time. “BP gave a US$500 million grant to doctor Steven Chu, while he worked at the National Laboratory. He then was named Obama’s Secretary of Energy and with him came a BP insider as his undersecretary; a guy known as Steve Koonin. BP is running the Department of Energy of the United States,” Webre said.

Where would an ice age come from in anything related to the BP oil spill disaster? It turns out that the leakage of crude has slowed down the north atlantic current. If this current stops, the result would be a mini Ice Age. According to governor Ventura’s documentary, satellite data shows that the oil spill has halted the current known as the engine of the Gulf Stream, the warm ocean current that flows north through the atlantic. The Gulf Stream helps warm up the climate of Northern Europe. “If the BP dump is successful in braking the normal circulation of the gulf stream to the North Atlantic current, that may cause a mini Ice Age as we had it in the 1700’s,” reports Alfred Webre. A mini Ice Age as the documentary explains would play enormously well for big oil, as more of the crude will be in their oily hands when it occurs. “They are messing with out climate, our food supply and their intent is to starve us to death.”

Where is the proof for all this, you may be thinking. Here comes the paper that talks. An official document from the United States Corps of Engineers reveals a US$1.2 billion plan to effectively depopulate the Gulf region. This plan is part of a larger US$40 billion plan to extend the work into Louisiana. For this, governor Ventura met with Dr. Susan. I. Rees, a member of the Corps, who the investigation labels as the architect of the depopulation plans. She was straightforward and did not even lie about the existence of the plan. “We have a comprehensive program where we will relocate people.” When questioned about whether the oil companies would leave the area as well, Dr. Rees said the plans were strictly for the people, not the companies. Patrick Robbins, another member of the Corps of Engineers tried to wash his hands by saying that along with the depopulation there were a lot of environmental projects to improve the region. However, let’s remember that this is the same Corps of Engineers blamed for the poor management of the Katrina disaster. It is the same organization that built the levees that collapsed when they were supposed to protect the cities from the incoming waters.

The United States Corps of Engineers first denied that plans existed to depopulate the Gulf region, then admitted it. They claimed the plan amounted to only US$1.2 billion and not US$40 billion, but later admitted to the second number. So there you have it. The plans exist to depopulate the Gulf of Mexico region, the financing for it exists and the consequences of the oil spill are already manifesting themselves. Starvation, death, depopulation, corruption and YES maybe a new Ice Age. So if you did not believe in government conspiracies I hope this article helped change your mind. Because it does not matter whether you believe them or not; they do exist.

OPERATION GULF GREASE: Problem, Reaction, Solution to implement Agenda 21?

newswithviews.com

In the days prior to the Gulf drilling operation and ensuing environmental catastrophe, I remember thinking just how odd and out of

What is the United Nations' Law of the Sea Treaty? Click image and read the details.

character it was that Barack Obama had announced his approval for more offshore drilling. On April 1st, The Washington Post quoted Interior Secretary Ken Salazar as saying the administration had broached “a new direction” in energy policy. [1]

Had Obama lost his mind? Had he had some sort of religious experience? This was a president who campaigned against traditional energy sources in favor of so-called “sustainable” alternatives such as wind, solar, etc. This was a president who banned offshore drilling as one of his first acts in executive office.[2] This was a president who admitted in a meeting with the San Francisco Chronicle in January of 2008 that it was his plan to use a Cap and Trade system to cause energy prices to “necessarily skyrocket” in order to force people to transition to “green” technologies. “Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket,” Obama stated as documented in a YouTube video. [3]

Hence, the shock at the sudden “turnabout” in energy policy. True, the vast majority of Americans do support drilling for oil as a counterweight against increasing dependence upon the perpetually troubled Middle East and its OPEC cartel. But since when has any president in recent history paid attention to the opines of their electorate?

Now, as the days turn into weeks, and weeks into months — and the oil continues to gush in the Gulf with no sign of ever letting up — Obama has used the crisis as an excuse to not only ban offshore drilling,[4] but also to clamor for passage of his “cap and trade” energy bill.[5] Politico has cited opinion polls that suggest public support for drilling may be eroding.[6]

Was this the Hegelian plan all along? To foment a crisis in the Gulf to condition the masses that the world must adopt Agenda 21 “sustainable development” as its model for energy or pay the environmental consequences? Before you dismiss this notion as insanity, there are many troubling questions that demand answers. Questions that imply foreknowledge and planning. Questions of “coincidence.”

For example, is it “coincidental” the numerous incredible financial and business transactions that took place in the days, weeks, and months prior to the rig explosion?

We know the ties between British Petroleum and Goldman Sachs run deep. Peter Sutherland, the chairman of Goldman Sachs International also served as chairman of BP right up until last year, according to a 2009 bio on the site of the Trilateral Commission. It says,

“Peter Sutherland is chairman of BP plc (1997 – current). He is also chairman of Goldman Sachs International (1995 – current). He was appointed chairman of the London School of Economics in 2008. He is currently UN special representative for migration and development. Before these appointments, he was the founding director-general of the World Trade Organization. He had previously served as director general of GATT since July 1993 and was instrumental in concluding the Uruguay GATT Round Negotiations.”[7]

On April 30th, The Huffington Post published a satire piece about Goldman Sachs, who was embroiled in a Congressional probe over the present and pending financial meltdown just days before the Gulf disaster stole the headlines. The spoof article titled, Goldman Sachs Reveals It Shorted Gulf of Mexico, was actually mistaken by some as a legitimate news story. Written by a comedian, the satirical article said,

“In what is looming as another public relations predicament for Goldman Sachs, the banking giant admitted today that it made ‘a substantial financial bet against the Gulf of Mexico’ one day before the sinking of an oil rig in that body of water.”[8]

After this gag piece was published, various independent researchers began checking into the financial transactions of Goldman. What they found turned out to be a case of art imitating life.

Sterling Allan reported in The Examiner on May 5th,

“It turns out that Goldman Sachs really did place shorts on TransOcean stock days before the explosions rocked the rig in the Gulf of Mexico sending stocks plunging while GS profits soared — benefitting [sic] once again from a huge disaster, having done the same with airline stocks prior to 911 then again with the housing bubble.”[9]

It’s important to note the cozy relationship between Goldman Sachs and the Obama administration. According to McClatchy, while Goldman Sachs was under fire from the Securities and Exchange Commission, and their lawyers were in negotiations with the regulatory agency, Goldman CEO Lloyd Blankfein was a repeated visitor to the White House. He attended events with Obama and met with Larry Summers, Obama’s top economic advisor. Obama’s 2008 campaign benefited from $994,795 worth of campaign donations from Goldman employees and their relatives.[10] The Gulf disaster, coming on the heels of the Congressional hearing and SEC “investigation,” served to distract attention from the ongoing financial fraud and economic meltdown caused by Goldman and others.

We now know from John Byrne at Raw Story that prior to the Gulf oil mess, not only did Goldman Sachs short shares of TransOcean, the owner of the failed Deepwater Horizon rig, they also ditched 4,680,822 shares of BP stock, worth $250 million and representing 44% of their holdings. “Goldman’s sales were the largest of any firm during that time,” writes Byrne. “Goldman would have pocketed slightly more than $266 million if their holdings were sold at the average price of BP’s stock during the quarter.”[11]

Byrne also noted other financial institutions that also dumped BP holdings.

“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.”[12]

If that weren’t enough of a “coincidence,” we also had The Telegraph out of London reporting that the chief executive of BP, Tony Hayward, also sold 223,288 shares, worth £1.4 million of stock in his own company (over $2 million) on March 17th — only weeks before the BP Gulf mess. The paper noted that by doing so he “avoided losing more than £423,000 ($614,449) when BP’s share price plunged after the oil spill began six weeks ago.”[13] He took the money and paid off the mortgage on his family mansion in Kent.

At this point, a question should be coming to mind: What did these people know that the rest of us didn’t? How is it that stock in BP and Transocean suddenly seemed so unattractive to those closest to the disaster? Ah, the coincidences! But it gets even better.

On April 10th, The Houston Chronicle reported that Halliburton — the company of which former Vice-President Dick Cheney was CEO — was in the process of acquiring Boots & Coots. Reuters reported that the deal was announced on Friday, April 9th — just eleven days prior to the explosion.[14] The Chronicle noted that “Boots & Coots has become well known for putting out some of the world’s largest oil and gas fires.”[15] The company’s website lists services they provide, including “deepwater application and well inspections, as well as blowout prevention and control counsel or assistance…”[16] According to the Orlando Sentinel, their expertise is already being put to use in the Gulf, as they are “one of two primary companies designing relief-well strategies for the BP blowout.”[17]

So when the acquisition deal is formerly approved by the government, Halliburton — the company famous for profiting from no-bid government contracts in war zones — will have collected for themselves yet another “slick” profit.

This is especially intriguing in light of the fact that, according to NPR, Halliburton’s cementing work — completed only hours prior to the explosion — has become a “central focus” of the Congressional investigation.[18] The Wall Street Journal quotes unnamed “experts” as saying the timing of the cementing in relation to the blast “points to it as a possible culprit.”[19]

But Halliburton isn’t the only company that stands to make a killing off the crisis. The Times Online out of the UK reported that TransOcean itself took out a $560 million insurance policy on the Deepwater Horizon rig. The dollar amount was well above the rig’s value. According to the paper, insurance payouts amounted to a $270 million profit from the disaster.

“The windfall, revealed in a conference call with analysts, will more than cover the $200m that Transocean expects to pay to survivors and their families and for higher insurance costs.”[20]

A number of people have questioned why Corexit — a chemical banned in the UK[21] and is much more toxic than the oil itself — was used as a dispersant in the Gulf. Assuming for the moment that chemical dispersants had to be used, the New York Times reported on May 13th:

“Of 18 dispersants whose use EPA has approved, 12 were found to be more effective on southern Louisiana crude than Corexit, EPA data show. Two of the 12 were found to be 100 percent effective on Gulf of Mexico crude, while the two Corexit products rated 56 percent and 63 percent effective, respectively. The toxicity of the 12 was shown to be either comparable to the Corexit line or, in some cases, 10 or 20 times less, according to EPA.”[22]

Yet, despite the EPA data ranking it “far above dispersants made by competitors” for toxicity, BP chose to dump more than 400,000 gallons of Corexit into the Gulf, order 805,000 more gallons with plans of hundreds of thousands of additional gallons should the spewing continue. Why?

The answer may lie in the fact that not only has Corexit production benefited BP and Exxon Chemical Company, it also has ties to the very same banking company that somehow knew to sell nearly half its holdings in BP stock just prior to the disaster — Goldman Sachs. Cassandra Anderson of Morph City connects the dots to the economic ties between the oil industry and the bankers.

“Corexit is produced by NALCO, originally named the National Aluminate Corporation, which formed a limited partnership with Exxon Chemical Company in 1994. Ondeo Nalco was purchased by Goldman Sachs, Apollo and Blackstone in 2003 and is currently a publicly traded company. Given NALCO’s business ties, it seems that safe and natural cleanup methods were avoided in the Gulf to pursue an economic agenda. The use of Corexit in Alaska, after the Exxon Valdez disaster, resulted in toxicity to humans that included respiratory, nervous system, liver, kidney and blood disorders.”[23]

They say that history repeats itself. We know from wire reports that all 125 fishing boats had to be recalled from Gulf cleanup efforts after workers aboard began “experiencing nausea, dizziness, headaches and chest pains.”[24]

What’s going on here? Is the Gulf being poisoned on purpose to enhance corporate profits? Or has this crisis been orchestrated by the illuminists in order to force the United States to ratify the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) which would cede control of the oceans — over 70 percent of the planet’s surface — to the United Nations?

One must always keep in mind that Agenda 21 is the game plan for all that happens in the world today. The Hegelian dialectic is the means by which that game plan is implemented — creation of a crisis to condition the minds of the people that an undesired change is necessary, creation of their own controlled opposition to the crisis, finally the introduction of their pre-determined solution.

Chapter 17 of Agenda 21 deals with “Protection of the Oceans, all Kinds of Seas, Including Enclosed & Semi-enclosed Seas, & Coastal Areas & the Protection, Rational Use & Development of their Living Resources.” Who will determine what constitutes “rational use” of the oceans and their resources? If the LOST is ratified, it will be the United Nations.

In July 2009, State Department official Margaret Hayes told the New York Times that the Obama administration was in the process of working to “craft a plan to ratify the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea.”

“President Obama is strongly in favor of the United States becoming a party to the Law of the Sea Convention,” Hayes was quoted as saying. “There is discussion going on as to the exact timing of when they might have a hearing and when they might proceed to have the full Senate consider accession.”[25]

The Times goes on to report that the administration is continuing a multi-year mapping of the sea floor in the Arctic in preparation to stake a claim under the LOST.[26]

Furthermore, the World Ocean Council, an alliance of multi-national businesses that are dedicated to ocean “sustainability,” is having its “Corporate Ocean Responsibility” meeting this month — conveniently on the heels of a major maritime disaster. The Sustainable Ocean Summit is described as “the first international, cross-sectoral ocean sustainability conference for the private sector – [that] will catalyze the growing interest among ocean businesses for more effective leadership and collaboration in addressing ocean environmental challenges.”[27] It just so happens that two of the founding members of the World Ocean Council are ExxonMobil and TransOcean.[28]

That the crisis in the Gulf may have been planned and executed with the intention of profiting from it while pushing an environmental control agenda, might explain the pathetic federal response after the disaster. [NWV POLL: Was the Gulf oil spill deliberately created?]

Three days after learning of the Gulf gusher, the Interior Department Chief of Staff Tom Strickland left for the Grand Canyon with his wife and went white water rafting.[29] The Department of the Interior is charged with the task of coordinating federal response to a major oil spill. Yet, Strickland’s priorities were elsewhere.

The “In-Situ Burn” plan was developed by the federal government in 1994 to deal with oil spill disasters in the Gulf, and calls for the immediate use of fire booms. Had the plan been followed, it might have prevented oil from reaching the shoreline. A single fire boom can burn up to 1,800 barrels or 75,000 gallons an hour. Yet, despite the plan, not one fire boom was available anywhere in the Gulf at the time of the incident.[30] [31]

On May 11th, ABC News reported that the U.S. Coast Guard conducted operations in the Gulf, simulating a major oil spill and practicing federal response to it a mere three weeks prior to the real disaster.[32] What was the purpose of the simulation? Obviously, it wasn’t to improve federal response.

In 2002, there was a similar practice operation which ABC describes as “eerily similar” to the current disaster. Lack of experience, poor communications, conflicting roles, and a need for new technology were cited. None of the recommendations were ever put into place.[33]

Wire reports from the Associated Press have said that workers aboard the rig were forced to sign statements that they hadn’t witnessed the explosion. They were told they couldn’t go home, nor could they make phone calls and talk to their friends and family until they signed the statements indicating they had no “first hand or personal knowledge” of the incident.[34]

We now have private military contractors deployed from Wackenhut — the military contractor infamous for its employees’ drunken brawls and vodka shots taken out of each other’s backside — guarding the perimeter of the Deepwater Horizon Unified Command.

Respected attorney Ellen Brown has written about empty Wackenhut buses with prison bars on the windows being driven around for no apparent reason in Arizona. Your writer has personally talked to other people who have seen these buses. Ellen wrote last year:

“The new Wackenhut operation is shrouded in mystery. It has been running its fleet of empty prison buses night and day, apparently logging miles on a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) contract. Multiple buses can be seen driving all over town and even on remote desert back roads. Oddly, except for the driver and one escort guard seated in front, these buses appear to be empty.”[35]

Network news media have been complaining of being harassed and threatened by the security contractors for shooting video of the coast,[36] [37] which we’re told may soon become uninhabitable. Will Wackenhut buses be utilized to relocate mass numbers of people out of the coastal states?

It’s shaping up to be an interesting summer.

BP to blame in explosion, internal documents show

AP

The secret we all knew: BP cut corners days before platform explosion.

BP made a series of money-saving shortcuts and blunders that dramatically increased the danger of a destructive oil spill in a well that an engineer ominously described as a “nightmare” just six days before the blowout, according to documents released Monday that provide new insight into the causes of the disaster.

The House Energy and Commerce Committee released dozens of internal documents that outline several problems on the deep-sea rig in the days and weeks before the April 20 explosion that set in motion the largest environmental disaster in U.S. history. Investigators found that BP was badly behind schedule on the project and losing hundreds of thousands of dollars with each passing day, and responded by cutting corners in the well design, cementing and drilling mud efforts and the installation of key safety devices.

“Time after time, it appears that BP made decisions that increased the risk of a blowout to save the company time or expense. If this is what happened, BP’s carelessness and complacency have inflicted a heavy toll on the Gulf, its inhabitants, and the workers on the rig,” said Democratic Reps. Henry A. Waxman and Bart Stupak.

The missteps emerged on the same day that President Barack Obama made his fourth visit to the Gulf, where he sought to assure beleaguered residents that the government will “leave the Gulf Coast in better shape than it was before.”

Obama’s two-day trip to Mississippi, Alabama and Florida represents his latest attempt to persevere through a crisis that has served as an important early test of his presidency. The visit coincides with a national address from the Oval Office on Tuesday night in which he will announce new steps to restore the Gulf Coast ecosystem, according to a senior administration official who spoke on condition of anonymity so as not to upstage the president’s announcements.

“I can’t promise folks … that the oil will be cleaned up overnight. It will not be,” Obama said after encouraging workers in hard hats as they hosed off and repaired oil-blocking boom. “It’s going to be painful for a lot of folks.”

But, he said, “things are going to return to normal.”

The breached well has dumped as much as 114 million gallons of oil into the Gulf under the worst-case scenario described by scientists — a rate of more than 2 million a day. BP has collected 5.6 million gallons of oil through its latest containment cap on top of the well, or about 630,000 gallons per day.

But BP believes it will see considerable improvements in the next two weeks. The company said Monday that it could trap a maximum of roughly 2.2 million gallons of oil each day by the end of June as it deploys additional containment efforts, including a system that could start burning off vast quantities as early as Tuesday. That would more than triple the amount of oil it is currently capturing — and be a huge relief for those trying to keep it from hitting the shore.

“It would be a game changer,” said Coast Guard Chief Petty Officer Mark Boivin, deputy director for near-shore operations at a command center in Mobile. He works with a team that coordinates the efforts of roughly 80 skimming boats gathering oil off the coast.

Still, BP warned its containment efforts could face problems if hoses or pipes clog and engineers struggle to run the complicated collection system. Early efforts at the bottom of the Gulf failed to capture oil.

Meanwhile, congressional investigators have identified several mistakes by BP in the weeks leading up to the disaster as it fell way behind on drilling the well.

BP started drilling in October, only to have the rig damaged by Hurricane Ida in early November. The company switched to a new rig, the Deepwater Horizon, and resumed drilling on Feb. 6. The rig was 43 days late for its next drilling location by the time it exploded April 20, costing BP at least $500,000 each day it was overdue, congressional documents show.

As BP found itself in a frantic race against time to get the job done, engineers took several time-saving measures, according to congressional investigators.

In the design of the well, the company apparently chose a riskier option among two possibilities to provide a barrier to the flow of gas in space surrounding steel tubes in the well, documents and internal e-mails show. The decision saved BP $7 million to $10 million; the original cost estimate for the well was about $96 million.

In an e-mail, BP engineer Brian Morel told a fellow employee that the company is likely to make last-minute changes in the well.

“We could be running it in 2-3 days, so need a relative quick response. Sorry for the late notice, this has been nightmare well which has everyone all over the place,” Morel wrote.

The e-mail chain culminated with the following message by another worker: “This has been a crazy well for sure.”

BP also apparently rejected advice of a subcontractor, Halliburton Inc., in preparing for a cementing job to close up the well. BP rejected Halliburton’s recommendation to use 21 “centralizers” to make sure the casing ran down the center of the well bore. Instead, BP used six centralizers.

In an e-mail on April 16, a BP official involved in the decision explained: “It will take 10 hours to install them. I do not like this.” Later that day, another official recognized the risks of proceeding with insufficient centralizers but commented: “Who cares, it’s done, end of story, will probably be fine.”

The lawmakers also said BP also decided against a nine- to 12-hour procedure known as a “cement bond log” that would have tested the integrity of the cement. A team from Schlumberger, an oil services firm, was on board the rig, but BP sent the team home on a regularly scheduled helicopter flight the morning of April 20.

Less than 12 hours later, the rig exploded.

BP also failed to fully circulate drilling mud, a 12-hour procedure that could have helped detect gas pockets that later shot up the well and exploded on the drilling rig.

Asked about the details disclosed from the investigation, BP spokesman Mark Proegler said the company’s main focus right now is on the response and stopping the flow of oil. “It would be inappropriate for us to comment while an investigation is ongoing,” Proegler told AP. BP executives including CEO Tony Hayward will be questioned by Congress on Thursday.

The letter from Waxman and Stupak noted at least five questionable decisions BP made before the explosion, and was supplemented by 61 footnotes and dozens of documents.

“The common feature of these five decisions is that they posed a trade-off between cost and well safety,” said Waxman and Stupak. Waxman, D-Calif., chairs the energy panel while Stupak, D-Mich., heads a subcommittee on oversight and investigations.