Posted on 06/18/2010 9:31:10 AM PDT by lbryce
There is one question that I would really like an answer to. Who died and made BP king of the Gulf of Mexico? In recent weeks, BP has almost seemed more interested in keeping the American people away from the oil spill than in actually cleaning it up. Journalists are being pushed around and denied access, disaster workers are being intimidated and abused and now BP has even go so far as to hire an army of private mercenaries to enforce their will along the Gulf coast. Are we suddenly living in occupied Iraq? How in the world did a foreign oil company get the right to start pointing guns at the American people? The last time I checked, BP did not own the Gulf of Mexico and did not have the right to tell the American people where they can and cannot go. The truth is that BP could have avoided all of this by running an open, honest and transparent operation from the start. They could have welcomed help from all sources, they could have tried to be open with the media, and they could have tried to be fair with the volunteers and rescue workers. But instead BP has been conducting this whole thing as if we are living in a totalitarian dictatorship and they are the dictators.
Over the last several weeks, members of the mainstream media attempting to cover the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico have been yelled at, harassed, kicked off public beaches and threatened with arrest. The Obama administration keeps promising "to improve media access", but so far their promises haven't seemed to make much difference. In fact, a recent AP report detailed several recent highly disturbing incidents of journalist intimidation....
(Excerpt) Read more at theeconomiccollapseblog.com ...
I don't know if you're old enough to remember the John Birch Society of the early 60's, but this is EXACTLY the phenomenon that happened with that group. Thankfully, intellectual conservatives like William F Buckley fought against that insanity and the ludicrous conspiracy theories of the Birchers, and purged them from the movement.
For whatever reason, we've seen the same conspiracy theory phenomenon take root again.
Your post was ludicrous!!! As if the items you listed have warnings like Corexit does! Run and buy some more Nalco shares and keep on spewing Nalco’s talking points. You think shampoos, Dawn, face creams and cosmetics have these warnings? GET REAL! You are spreading propaganda and lies.
The list includes 1,2-Propanediol ; 2-butoxy-ethanol ; 2-sulfo-Butanedioic acid, 1,4-bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester, sodium salt (1:1); Sorbitan, mono-(9Z)-9-octadecenoate; Sorbitan, mono-(9Z)-9-octadecenoate, poly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl) derivss.; Sorbitan, tri-(9Z)-9-octadecenoate, poly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl) derivs; 2-Propanol, 1-(2-butoxy-1-methylethoxy)- ; and Distillates (petroleum), hydrotreated light.
Nalco, the company which manufactures COREXIT, responded by posting a list of “common day-to-day” uses of the chemicals in question. That list includes skin cream, body shampoo, emulsifier in juice, Baby bath, mouth wash, face lotion, emulsifier in food, Body/Face lotion, tanning lotions, Wetting agent in cosmetic products, gelatin, beverages, Household cleaning products, Air fresheners.
The independent watchdog group OMBWatch cites the New Jersey Department of Health to point out possible dangers of one of the the ingredients. The document indicates 2-butoxy-ethanol: “may be absorbed through the skin; should be handled as a CARCINOGEN—WITH EXTREME CAUTION; can irritate the skin and eyes with possible eye damage; can irritate the nose and throat; can cause nausea, vomiting, diarrhea and abdominal pain. can cause headache, dizziness, lightheadedness, and passing out and may damage the liver and kidneys.”
The dispersant is widely considered more dangerous to human health than the oil itself, and several clean-up workers exposed to the dispersant have been reported as coming down with health problems
http://www.examiner.com/x-46544-New-Orleans-Political-Buzz-Examiner~y2010m6d11-EPA-finally-relases-COREXIT-ingredient-list
http://www.epa.gov/bpspill/dispersants.html#chemicals
Are any human health effects expected as a result of using the dispersants?
People working with dispersants are strongly advised to use a half face filter mask or an air-supplied breathing apparatus to protect their noses, throats, and lungs, and they should wear nitrile or PVC gloves, coveralls, boots, and chemical splash goggles to keep dispersants off skin and out of their eyes.
How will we know the future and total effects on marine life of dispersant use?
It is too early in the process to know what the scope of the natural resource damage will be.
Apart from marine life, has the Unified Command been able to make an assessment on the effects of the dispersant on the environment?
The harm or toxicity of dispersed oil in the environment is generally associated with the oil rather than with the dispersant alone. However, use of dispersants breaks up a slick of oil on the surface into smaller droplets that can go beneath the surface. When applied on the surface before spills reach the coastline, dispersants will potentially decrease exposure for surface-dwelling organisms (such as sea birds) and intertidal species (such as mangroves and salt marshes), while increasing exposure to a smaller population of aquatic life found deeper in the water. It is unknown if dispersed oil has toxic implications to the human population because bioaccumulation through the food chain has not been evaluated.
Surface Use of Dispersants in the Response to the BP Spill:
The authorization given to BP to use the dispersant on oil present on the surface of the water included specific conditions to ensure the protection of the environment and the health of residents in affected areas. At this time, , EPA and the Coast Guard issued a directive requiring BP to decrease overall volume of dispersant by 75 percent and to cease use of dispersant on the surface of the water altogether unless provided prior written authorization from the Coast Guard. The Unified Command will continue to monitor for the effects of this dispersant on the environment and we reserve the right to discontinue its use.
Have dispersants ever been used this much before?
While dispersants have been used in previous oil spills, this is the largest application of dispersants at an oil spill response in the United States.
That is a lie!
Hey, you don't want to argue against an anti-Obama conspiracy theory, do you? With so many valid criticisms of the Obama Administration, it is baffling why its detractors would resort to highly dubious and inherently unprovable conspiracy theories. I am not a water treatment specialist, but about twenty years of experience in the hydrocarbon process industry informs me that Nalco is a world leader in water treatment chemicals. It has more expertise in the water treatment than the most-knowledgeable thousand bloggers combined.
I have an even better, second-level conspiracy theory. The whole Nalco theory is so preposterous and subject to ridicule by the Left that it must be a creation of the Left intended to discredit Obama's detractors.
Corexit was invented by Exxon, and then the patent sold to NALCO, Inc. NALCO is a publicly traded worldwide company specializing in water treatment, industrial and urban public sources, as well as providing chemicals approved by the EPA for use in ANY oil spill cleanup. The EPA has approved this agent for over 20 years as non-toxic. The dispersant breaks up crude into small components which are then attacked in open ocean by naturally occurring oliophilic bacteria which digest the oil. MSNBC first reported, incorrectly that this is toxic.
You are using liberal leftist talking points.
BS, YOU ARE USING NALCO talking points. I see you post no links to back yours up, I provided many links. You can’t because your link goes right to Nalco, what a shocker. AH
People are getting sick from the OIL not the dispersant. You try breathing OIL for a few weeks and see how you feel.
You may be misinformed. To date, 0BAMA has denied offers of assistance in the oil cleanup from 13 countries . . . . including those with the skimmers we need to suck that stuff up.
That’s not a BP call, it’s Obama following Rahm Emmanual’s advice and taking advantage of a crisis. The longer he can keep the heat on BP, the less attention is being paid to what he and his myrmidons are up to.
I have seen no evidence that reporters are being kept out of the area since they all seem to grab a boat out of Venice, LA, with ease and ride out near the oil spill. I think there is more at work here than BP - I think zero is up to even worse things to delay BP getting the well capped and the spill stopped.
Did you notice that MMS was absent from the hearings. Now these are the people that gave BP the permits, (which are many,a long process, and heavily regulated). Of course the government will not admit to any wrong doing. They inspected the well several times and gave them an award. So who is going to hold the government responsible?
LMAO. EPA is a liberal website? You are a real stooge. Post your link, prove your case and posting a link to what Nalco says doesn’t count.
If you don’t believe me then why don’t you read the posts above. They have a little more knowledge in the solvent industry than you obviously do.
You seem to think all solvent companies are evil and want to kill us all. They are in the business to CLEAN UP OIL and make a profit. DUH!
No conspiracy (unfortunately for you).
Thanks, joe. The last time I went swimming in the Gulf was in mid to early May, 2010. I am starting to wonder if that was the last time ever...
‘BP is under threat of criminal proceedings. Do you really think they are going to give the government or the main stream press any more ammo to prosecute them? ... the hearings were a joke....’
Agree! BP certainly deserves scrutiny but, it was amazing to hear the outrage from people who voted for the health care bill without reading it and then would not hold town hall meetings or answer constituent’s questions. Hypocrites!
And all of the banter between them is nothing but a "Dog and Pony Show."
You got that list right from NALCO. ADMIT IT and stop ignoring and lying!
on their website Nalco takes great pains to make the toxic shit stuff sound as innocuous as possible:
Corexit contains six primary ingredients. Examples of everyday products with specific ingredients in common with COREXIT 9500 include:
• One ingredient is used as a wetting agent in dry gelatin, beverage mixtures, and fruit juice drinks.
• A second ingredient is used in a brand-name dry skin cream and also in a body shampoo.
• A third ingredient is found in a popular brand of baby bath liquid.
• A fourth ingredient is found extensively in cosmetics and is also used as a surface-active agent and emulsifier for agents used in food contact.
• A fifth ingredient is used by a major supplier of brand name household cleaning products for “soap scum” removal.
• A sixth ingredient is used in hand creams and lotions, odorless paints and stain blockers.
And if you were King of Turd Island, you would do what? (try to be as specific as possible as BP and Gov't reps may be browsing for reasonable options)..
The EPA declared carbon dioxide a pollutant. They are all liberal nutcases.
By the way, 0bama thanks you for doing his anti-capitalist bidding for him.
Some very interesting comments on this article.
You nailed it. It was just face time. BP should have told them to shut up. I would have not given the adminestration 20 Bil. Fuck em.
EPA is filled with liberals for your information!
Carol Browner - Appointed by President Clinton in January 1993, Carol M. Browner is now the longest serving Administrator in the history of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from 1993-2000.
Carol M. Browner, President-elect Barack Obama’s global warming czar, was listed as one of 14 leaders of a socialist group’s Commission for a Sustainable World Society, which calls for “global governance” and says rich countries must shrink their economies to address climate change.
Carol Martha Browner (born December 16, 1955) is an American lawyer, environmentalist, and businesswoman, who serves as director of the White House Office of Energy and Climate Change Policy in the Obama administration. Browner previously served as administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency during the Clinton administration.
Her income in 2008 was between $1 million and $5 million from lobbying firm Downey McGrath Group, where her husband was a principal. She also reported $450,000 in “member distribution” income, plus retirement and other benefits from the (Madeline) Albright Group.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.