Feds stop berms Wednesday midnight

thefoxnation.com/gulf-coast-oil-spill/2010/06/23/feds-halt-sand-berm-dredging-why

Apparently the oil contamination is preferred to moving the sand around.

This is beyond incompetence. The federal gov't could not give Gov. Jindal an answer or help w/ these berms and now, (how many weeks later?), they are giving directives that these new protective berms are too close to shore? This suggests intentional plans by this administration for a specific political outcome.

Just the other day Senator LeMieux, jr. Senator from Florida stated that there were only 20 skimmers off the coast for clean up. He said there are 2,000 skimmers available to the USA. When the clean up crews did not get additional skimmers he was told they were not sent because there maybe another oil spill somewhere. The good Senator compared this answer to the fire dept. refusing to send sufficient fire trucks to a house fire as there may soon be a fire somewhere else.

Unbelievable.

We are moving past the line of plain incompetence, to evil

Okay, maybe I'm just watching Glenn Beck too much (that's a gift to all you Beck haters to give you ammunition to hit me with), but something really seems to be going on here. The Feds stopped the berms, they stopped the skimmers, they refused all overseas help, they refused help from the other oil companies who have expertise in this situation, Obama sits on this whole thing for 2 months before even meeting with the CEO of BP. It seems to me that the Feds are doing everything they can to keep this thing going and to completely devastates the Gulf region. The administration outright lied when they say the "experts" all agreed on a 6-month moratorium. The experts have all said this is the worst thing they can do. Putting the moratorium on drilling will completely shut down all drilling in this area, and the Feds don't seem to care that it will devastate the economy not only in the Gulf region but around the country, and will drive energy prices sky high.

As Beck has been showing the last couple of nights, the Obama administration is giving a $2 billion loan to a Brazil drilling company.

This is from August of 2009, last year:

"The U.S. is going to lend billions of dollars to Brazil’s state-owned oil company, Petrobras, to finance exploration of the huge offshore discovery in Brazil’s Tupi oil field in the Santos Basin near Rio de Janeiro. Brazil’s planning minister confirmed that White House National Security Adviser James Jones met this month with Brazilian officials to talk about the loan.

Update: Who else besides Obama has taken an interest in Petrobras? Hmmmmmm:

His New York-based hedge-fund firm, Soros Fund Management LLC, sold 22 million U.S.-listed common shares of Petrobras, as the Brazilian oil company is known, according to a filing today with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Soros bought 5.8 million of the company’s U.S.-traded preferred shares.

This story is from last Friday. Is it a coincidence that Obama backer George Soros repositioned himself in Petrobras to get dividends just a few days before Obama committed $2 billion in loans and guarantees for Petrobras’ offshore operations? Hmmmmmmmmmm."

current.com/1dnko4c

Back in March, before the oil rig exploded, when Gibbs was asked about the Petrobras story, he claimed ignorance:

"But now Obama may start hearing cries of “foul” after the U.S. Export-Import Bank promised Petrobras, Brazil’s state-owned oil company, $2 billion in loan guarantees to help finance lucrative drilling off the shores of Rio De Janeiro.

Some see a contradiction in an executive branch agency, independent but with board members appointed by the president, facilitating abroad the very kind of energy exploration Obama opposes domestically.

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said Thursday he wasn’t prepared to address the issue.

“I have not seen the story,” he said. “I’d have to take a look.”

exportblueprint.com/blog/1748/u-s-loan-to-petrobras/

We still don't know what caused the oil rig to explode. Yet, it seems that this explosion is going to benefit George Soros tremendously. Obama won't back drilling here in the United States, but has no problem with financing drilling in other countries, and with corporations in which George Soros is invested.

I think this is much worse than incompetence. It all seems too deliberate to me. What in the heck is going on here???!!!!:hmmm:

Have the berms been really thought out? Where are the sea animals going to go? How much do you really gain with these berms? Won't the oil go elsewhere? How will they fix the oil spill? Aren't there better cost effective ways of absorbing the oil?

That said, states have rights to protect themselves but there may more at play here.

[quote="ProVobis, post:5, topic:202977"]
Have the berms been really thought out? Where are the sea animals going to go? How much do you really gain with these berms? Won't the oil go elsewhere? How will they fix the oil spill? Aren't there better cost effective ways of absorbing the oil?

That said, states have rights to protect themselves but there may more at play here.

[/quote]

And you don't think that millions and millions and millions of gallons of oil just might have a detrimental effect on the sea animals? When your house is on fire, do you worry about the damage that will be caused by the water used to put it out? Sheesh.

There is definitely more at play here.

[quote="ProVobis, post:5, topic:202977"]
Have the berms been really thought out? Where are the sea animals going to go? How much do you really gain with these berms? Won't the oil go elsewhere? How will they fix the oil spill? Aren't there better cost effective ways of absorbing the oil?

That said, states have rights to protect themselves but there may more at play here.

[/quote]

Yeah. It's better to let it just go wherever than containment.

Easier to clean up that way. Cheaper too.

Time's a wastin'.

God Bless.
+Jesus, I Trust In You.
Love, Dawn

[quote="Luigi_Daniele, post:3, topic:202977"]
Unbelievable.

We are moving past the line of plain incompetence, to evil

[/quote]

 NOTHING surprises me anymore. It's not incompetence; it's moral dementia and sickness. Were this Bush, he'd have been rousted from office already. I hope Gov. Jindal forces a showdown with the crackpot in Washington.  :gopray: Rob

[quote="ProVobis, post:5, topic:202977"]
Have the berms been really thought out? Where are the sea animals going to go? How much do you really gain with these berms? Won't the oil go elsewhere? How will they fix the oil spill? Aren't there better cost effective ways of absorbing the oil?

That said, states have rights to protect themselves but there may more at play here.

[/quote]

Yes there is! Obviously Obama is trying to maximize the devastation to the coastline, so he convince fellow Marxists in Congress that constiuents will see the need to destroy our economy to save it through "cap and tax". Rob

[quote="ProVobis, post:5, topic:202977"]
Have the berms been really thought out? Where are the sea animals going to go? How much do you really gain with these berms? Won't the oil go elsewhere? How will they fix the oil spill? Aren't there better cost effective ways of absorbing the oil?

That said, states have rights to protect themselves but there may more at play here.

[/quote]

I pretend to no expertise, but I have been in some of those estuary areas of Louisiana, and if I had to remove oil from somewhere, I would sure rather remove it from some sand berm than from some of those wetlands. I truly don't see how they will ever get oil out of some of those places, and I certainly don't blame Gov Jindal for wanting to do everything possible to keep it out of there.

Again, no expertise here. But it is my understanding (and to some degree my observation) that the tidal wetlands are the foundations of most of the sea life. There is a whole lot more life there than in the open Gulf. If those wetlands get seriously contaminated, there's no food for the sea creatures.

One might do well to remember, too, that vast portions of the beaches along the Gulf are, themselves, sand berms put there by man. A lot of them were just mud years ago. And, I might add that if a person looks at a map, a sand berm is pretty much what Padre Island is, and it's a mighty big one.

So, how's that hope and change working out for you, kids?

Still happy you voted for this take charge kind of a guy?

The continued stall tactics from this administration, in an effort to worsen the effects of the spill, are clearly obvious.

Someone mentioned a house fire as a very good analogy. Obama and his administration are purposely stepping on the fire hose in this case. Or perhaps pulling some favors down at the water plant, to disable the hydrants. All very legal I'm sure.

Can I prove any of this? Of course not. But folks, this is a time where common sense must prevail.

This has gone far beyond partisan bickering, the prankish immaturity of Obama et al, will have lasting effects on both people and the environment.

Clearly a teachable moment for the power of federal government; they cannot fix things, they can only screw things up worse.

This post is not about the berms, but rather about the Feds and how they think:

I was looking for something else and stumbled across this gem:

how can someone “deny” something that might (or might not) happen in the FUTURE?

This way of thinking makes EPAs recent decision explainable. After a few days since the oil spill started the US were offered Dutch skimmers that were tested and could have collected a total of 146000 barrels a day. They collect water-oil-mix from the surface, put it into the ship, let the heavier water sink and pump the water (with only particles of oil) back into the sea. EPA refused because of their rules that say that no contaminated liquid may be poured into the sea. It lasted more than 6 weeks until EPA rescinded their decision. In the meantime the oil reached coastal areas. Nonetheless the oil spill will be misused to push green agendas. In other words: no bad luck can be bad enough for those zealots.

Visit this Dutch site: tinyurl.com/2evwp7p

Hopefully the link will work.

Me talking: this is like stopping fire engines in the middle of fighting a fire because the engines didn't pass the Corporate Average Fleet Economy CAFE ] standards. Or because one of the crash tes dummies wasn't up to specs.

It’s all Bush’s fault.

[quote="DawnInTexas, post:7, topic:202977"]
Yeah. It's better to let it just go wherever than containment.

Easier to clean up that way. Cheaper too.

Time's a wastin'.

God Bless.
+Jesus, I Trust In You.
Love, Dawn

[/quote]

Yep, times a wastin' just like the administration likes it. Let's "pretend" we're doing something, and at the same time let time waste away to accomplish our own sinister plans. Even President Clinton has stated they need to blow it up if necessary to stop this thing. In the clip I saw, he of course in a round about way, inferred that Hillary would have been a better choice.;) He of course, praised the President for doing a better job than people gave him credit for........being loyal to his base, but said that the President's generation thinks differently and communicates differently than his.:rolleyes:

[quote="exoflare, post:14, topic:202977"]
It's all Bush's fault.

[/quote]

Yep, I think the left has already condemned Bush (yet again) for this tragedy. I wonder in time if they will look back and blame Obama for ANYTHING? Or if he can actually do no wrong no matter what he does or doesn't do.:confused:

[quote="Teelynn, post:16, topic:202977"]
Yep, I think the left has already condemned Bush (yet again) for this tragedy. I wonder in time if they will look back and blame Obama for ANYTHING? Or if he can actually do no wrong no matter what he does or doesn't do.:confused:

[/quote]

President Obama has a goal: dedevelop the United States to the same level as fourth-world countries. Convert the U.S. government to the same totalitarian one-person rule typical of countries in Africa such as Zaire. Reduce U.S. family income from $47,000 to $14,000 and raise fourth-world average income from $700 to $14,000. Create a completely level playing field. Redistribute U.S. assets to fourth world countries.

And the tactics he is employing in dealing with the oil spill are part of that strategy: creating massive unemployment; supporting his "middleman" change-agents such as George Soros who is actively developing oil and natural gas in Brazil and New Guinea; siphoning money from the U.S. and shipping it to fourth world countries; driving drill rigs away from the United States to other countries; cessation of drilling by denial of drilling permits; refusal to allow opposition party members to tour the area or to move ahead with remedial action.

All part of the plan.

[quote="Teelynn, post:16, topic:202977"]
Yep, I think the left has already condemned Bush (yet again) for this tragedy. I wonder in time if they will look back and blame Obama for ANYTHING? Or if he can actually do no wrong no matter what he does or doesn't do.:confused:

[/quote]

Most of the leftists won't blame Obama for anything, because he's a "notional" president. He stands for their notions of how things ought to be, and is a down-the-line leftist except when he's blocked and has to sound "centerist" until his next opportunity to go left arises. He really isn't a leader in his own right.

So, to criticize him would be to criticize their own notions of things, which most of them will never do. Well, let me modify that a little. Some few leftists will critique him as not being "left" enough. That strikes me, though, as an attempt to persuade the non-leftist majority that somehow Obama is less radical than he really is.

Between the Gulf oil spill and the POTUS' inability to protect AZ's borders, can't we start impeachment proceedings? If he was a CEO, he would be asked to step down by the stock holders. The man is inept and he and his administration is destroying this country.

Our neighbor is working in LA on the oil spill. According to him, BP is doing its job but not the government.

[quote="aicirt, post:19, topic:202977"]
Between the Gulf oil spill and the POTUS' inability to protect AZ's borders, can't we start impeachment proceedings?

.

[/quote]

How many votes do you need?

How many votes do you have?

For conviction? For removal?

Who would become president? Biden.

VP?

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.