This was a beautiful mural telling the story of our states history until a street “artist” decided to blazon his, or her, tag across the painting.

You’ve got to wonder if moments after wrecking this unique work of art this anonymous tagger stood back and proclaimed his pride at a job well done-

A job well done!
Why in the world would anyone take the time to deface another’s property with his or her signature?
What glory do fellow taggers bestow when they see this mark of the revolutionary across a community centers roof?
Do taggers get to walk at the head of the parade of street urchins, waving spray paint cans aloft, while eager spectators cheer wildly over their artistic accomplishments, as they pass by clutching their falling down baggy pants?
Is there a blog site where they show your work?
Do they Tweet their victories to fellow artists?
Is there a magazine we can buy showing their portfolios?
Is the Frye Art Museum highlighting their work?
Is their work on Facebook, You Tube or My Space?

Can we shower them with hugs and kisses, accepting that anything they act out on, or dream up in that cocked little brain of theirs, is fine with all the rest of us?

Perhaps, on further reflection, it is time to bring back the stocks so we can pass by them, stopping only to hurl an aged Boston cream pie in their artistic face.

That would be okay, wouldn’t it, fellow artist?

• by BK Lim (1 May 2011)

The Deepwater Horizon (DWH) blowout on the 20 April 2010, overshadowed earlier evidence that the Macondo well was destined to trigger a major disastrous event. On 15 July 2010, I was barred from a drilling website for innocently exchanging information on the mysterious BP massive shares sell-off by Tony Hayward. That further triggered my interest in the ensuing Gulf Disaster. I was told to follow the money. And if the money trail was right then, this was a disaster made to happen on purpose for economic windfalls. So far all the evidence that surfaced thereafter have substantiated instead of diminishing this theory. Is that why deep water exploration is so attractive because of the high cost and high risk?

In geohazards survey circles (despite the purpose of preventing hazards), there has always been suspicions that old vessels were deliberately operated until they sank for insurance compensation and other sinister purposes. See figure 156-1. These are small frauds involving a few millions dollars here and there. Where there are easy millions to be made, you can be sure of the frauds behind the schemes.

So could the Deepwater Horizon disaster a multi-billion setup? Was the Transocean Marianas intended to go down at Macondo Well A in Nov 2009 instead of the DWH in 20 April 2010? Was the sinking of DWH a backup plan when Hurricane Ida rescued Transocean Marianas from its watery grave?

Tony Hayward sold off 1/4 of his BP shares holding prior to Marianas damage by Hurrican Ida

Tony Hayward sold off 220,000 shares at 587.5 p 10 days before the Transocean Marianas abandoned Well A on 9 Nov 2009 due to damages sustained by Hurricane Ida. One day after the pullout, Tony Hayward bought back the BP shares (56 lots) at a higher price of 595.2 p.

This is the similar pattern of massive sell-off (> 220,000 shares) only to buy back days later at smaller lots of 10- 90 shares; as if to cover their tracks of insider trading. That at least 4 BP directors sold and buy back in unison weeks before the 20 April 2010 blowout incident cannot be mere coincidence.

Now, recent researches by fellow gulf activists have confirmed what we have always feared. Are disasters being purposely perpetuated for monetary gains?

As oil prices shoot up (above $75/barrel) the costs of exploration, production and maintenance also increase. Unlike land-based Middle East low-cost production (less than $10/barrel), offshore production costs can range from $20 to $75/ barrel depending on the water depth and size of the fields. Deep water production costs are definitely higher; probably much higher than $80/barrel.

With a long gestation period of at least 2 years, hundreds of millions sank in for exploration costs, less than 60% chance of success and more hundreds of millions in engineering production costs, why would deep water oil exploration be economically attractive at all?

So let's take the case of Macondo prospect. The budgeted cost of drilling the first exploration well alone was 90 million USD. And it went over the budget; more than $100,000 million. Even if we assume the total cost of exploration to production to be just $500 million, at 200,000 bpd production rate and the price of oil at $100/barrel, it would have taken 25 years to payback just the high capital expenditure alone. This does not make sense for any investor.

Therefore we see oil field concessions being traded like commodity futures. It is a known fact that oil reserves can be manipulated for economic advantage. But is there an easier, faster and surer way of making a windfall, if not for oil company itself, at least for the elite insiders. All high cost offshore projects are heavily insured against Force Majeure. Thus, instead of gambling with 60% success rate and more than 3 years of production installation to reaping in the profit, disasters can be a good insurance pay off besides the windfalls to be reaped from the stock price fluctuation and the recovery operations as we have seen in the BP Mega Oil spew in the Gulf of Mexico.

It was recently brought to my attention that ENI rehired the Transocean Marianas to BP for drilling the Macondo well (Well A) in October – November 2009 at $446,000/day. ENI hired the Transocean Marianas at $565,000/day for a 2 year contract. Typical of offshore rig contracts reporting, the periods of hire and drilling were intentionally shifted by a couple months to protect market information.

But why would ENI rehire at a loss of $120,000/day to BP unless they too knew that the aging Marianas would not live out her 2 year contract period? Why hire the aging Marianas (1978) at $565,000/day when the state-of-the-art Deepwater Horizon rig (2000, $560 million) only cost $500,000/day? ENI's Saipem 10000 (1985, $400 million) which was capable of drilling in waters over 7,000 ft cost only $356,000/day.

Was ENI expecting a Force Majeure to profit from a quick insurance compensation? Was the Transocean Marianas saved from a disastrous blowout by Hurricane Ida? Now, that would be a coincidence would it?

Upcoming Rig Contract Commencements – 13 November 2009.

Two contracts are due to start before the end of the year. Eni will start drilling in the GOM with Transocean's Marianas semisubmersible Dec. 2, 2009. The NOC has contracted the rig for two years at $565,000/day. The Marianas is currently working at the Macondo Field at Mississippi Canyon Block 252 No. 1 for BP at $446,000/day.

The contract will terminate in Q3 2012. However, the Deepwater Pathfinder, an ultra-deepwater drillship, was contracted by ENI in 2008 for a start date in February 2010. The rig is contracted through 2015 at a dayrate of $650,000. This contract carries the highest dayrate on record that Eni has agreed to pay.

Just two weeks later, Eni will start the $650,000/day contract for Transocean's Deepwater Pathfinder. The drillship will drill for Eni in the GOM until Feb. 3, 2015. Currently the Deepwater Pathfinder is working for KNOC and Addax for $600,000/day off Sao Tome and Principe at Lemba 1X. The drillship then will work for Lukoil from Dec. 1, 2009 to Feb. 15, 2010 for $630,000 off Cote d'Ivoire before Eni starts its contract.

deep-water-oil+drilling/619 – 14 Feb 2008

Unfortunately, deep water drilling comes with a price...

In 2007, Brazil reported the discovery of a massive offshore oil field. The Tupi discovery boosted Brazil's proven oil reserves more than 50%. But don't let this ultra-deep field's huge numbers fool you-it's going to take a lot of time and money to bring Tupi into production. In order to extract the oil, producers have to go through 7,000 feet of water, over 10,000 feet of sand and rocks as well as another 6,000 feet of salt. Nevertheless, Brazil's state-run oil company, Petrobras, is confident that Tupi could be producing one million barrels a day within 15 years. By that time, it might be a case of, "too little, too late."

Investing in Deep Water Drilling

The Tupi field is a perfect example of the kind of difficulties offshore producers face. The fact is that deep water projects can get extremely expensive. The day rate alone for renting a drilling rig during 2007 upwards of $500,000 or more! For investors, deep water oil drilling has opened the door wide open for oil service companies. Rig companies like Transocean (NYSE: RIG) have been making a killing off the rising demand for offshore drilling equipment.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/07/28/oil-cost-factbox-idUSLS12407420090728 – 2 July2009

The International Energy Agency (IEA) -- in its latest November 2008 world energy outlook -- gave the followingestimates for the all-in costs of producing oil from various types of hydrocarbons in different parts of the world:

 Oilfields                   Estimated Production /source                        Costs ($ 2008) Mideast/N.Africa oilfields         6 -  28 Other conventional oilfields       6 -  39 CO2 enhanced oil recovery         30 -  80 Deep/ultra-deep-water oilfields   32 -  65 Enhanced oil recovery             32 -  82 Arctic oilfields                  32 - 100 Heavy oil/bitumen                 32 -  68 Oil shales                        52 - 113 Gas to liquids                    38 - 113 Coal to liquids                   60 - 113

 Source: International Energy Agency World Energy Outlook 2008 (Compiled by Martina Fuchs, Christopher Johnson, Karen Norton,Joe Brock and Barbara Lewis, Editing by James Jukwey)

http://www.forbes.com/2010/01/21/biggest-oil-fields-business-energy-oil-fields.html – 21 Jan 2010

The world gets its daily ration of 85 million barrels of oil from more than 4,000 fields. Most of these are small, less than 20,000 barrels per day. Giants, producing more than 100,000 bpd, account for just 3%. Then there's the megafields that gush out 1 million bpd. These are the most important sources of energy in the world--fields worth fighting over. In figuring the top 10 fields of the future, we're not interested in most of the giants of yesteryear, and not necessarily even the giants of today. Just the giants of tomorrow--those fields that might not even be producing yet, but will likely be doing better than 1 million bpd a decade from now.

The once and future king of the world's oil fields, Ghawar, in Saudi Arabia, ranks first on our list. It is thought to have had more than 100 billion barrels of recoverable oil in place. At 160 miles long and 16 miles wide it confounds even the most experienced geologists. With something on the order of 60 billion produced over the past 60 years, you'd be excused for thinking that Ghawar was sliding into its twilight years. Yet the Saudis insist that Ghawar is still going strong, producing 4.5 million bpd from six main producing areas with the ability to do 5 million bpd if called upon.

• by BK Lim (17 April 2011)

One year after the Macondo Blowout on 20 April 2010, lingering questions remain on the quantity of the oil spilled. Naturally BP would want to keep the quantity as small as possible to the point of ludicrousness. Even the term used is an understatement. It was in reality a mega oil spew. The term “Spill” had been hotly contested but since BP controlled the airwaves and media, the grossly understated term “spill” stuck. We use the term Spill to mean Spew interchangeably in keeping with the wide miss-use.

Most experts suspected MMS and BP grossly under-estimated the amount of oil spilled. Recent emails exposé suggested BP officials tried to take control of a $500m fund pledged by BP for independent research into the consequences of the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster, according to a report by Guardian, UK. Actions speak louder than words.

15 April 2011 – BP control science gulf-oil-spill

Those concerns go far beyond academic interest into the impact of the spill. BP faces billions in fines and penalties, and possible criminal charges arising from the disaster. Its total liability will depend in part on a final account produced by scientists on how much oil entered the gulf from its blown-out well, and the damage done to marine life and coastal areas in Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama. The oil company disputes the government estimate that 4.1m barrels of oil entered the gulf.

Central to the issue has been the thickness of the oil slick. The area of the oil slick can be estimated from satellite images and aerial photographs, but the thickness remains an unresolved quantity. Although BP had both the capability and technology to measure or sample the thicknesses of the slick at that time, many suspected it was not in the interest of BP to do so; preferring to use the MMS table Notice the number of qualifications made in using the guide. The “greater than” (>) symbol suggests the values given are the minimum.

Remote Sensing & Surveillance of Oil Spills (adapted from CONCAWE: A Field Guide To The Application Of Dispersant To Oil Spills.

An estimate of the quantity of oil observed at sea is crucial. Observers are generally able to distinguish between sheen and thicker patches of oil. However gauging the oil thickness and coverage is rarely easy and is made more difficult if the sea is rough. All such estimates should be viewed with considerable caution. The table below gives some guidance. Most difficult to assess are water-in-oil emulsions and viscous oils like heavy crude and fuel oil, which can vary in thickness from millimeters to several centimeters.

Although much of the observed slick seen in the Macondo Mega Oil spill are orange to black, most estimates used 1 to 2 microns as the average thickness of the sheen. According to the table, the minimum thickness for Brown to Black is 100 microns or 0.1 mm. It seemed quite obvious for BP to use the minimum end of the spectrum rather than the realistic value. Assuming 100 microns, the amount spilled would have been 24.4 million barrels (1.026 billion gallons) on day 34 with 50% void factor in the slick. By comparison at 2 microns, the oil spilled would amount to only 488,744 barrels or 20.5 million gallons on day 34. Even using the minimum 100 microns thickness for “Crude and Fuel Oil” we already see a 50-fold increase in the total estimate. Most independent observers agree it is more than 100 microns.

Assuming the rate of discharge had stablised, a 2-micron thickness would amount to only 1.95 million barrels (82.1 million gallons) of oil by 20th August (approx 4 months). That is why BP is disputing even the modest estimate of 4.1 million barrels (172 million gallons). Assuming 100 microns as the minimum thickness, it would mean more than 370,000 barrels were spewed daily. But not only through one well. In fact more oil were spewed through the numerous fault fractures and vents at the edges of the salt domes as the late Matt Simmons had asserted before his untimely death. BP reluctantly increased the spew rate from 1,000 barrels per day to 5,000 barrels per day, under intense public pressure. Honestly, could a technologically advanced giant like BP make such an innocent blunder as under-estimating the spew rate by as much as 74 times (at 100 microns thickness)? Certainly, it was not an accidental blunder.

Did Matt Simmons have the critical inside information to substantiate a much larger rate of oil spew? Nine months after his death, Matt Simmons could be proven right after all. This article examines some of the critical factors that refute the ridiculous “microns thickness” of the Macondo oil slick.

According to Dr Ian MacDonald (Gulf-oil-spill-rate-must-be-much-higher). The CONCAWE guidelines used by MMS date back to the eighties. The idea that a layer of oil on water will spread until it is only one or two molecules thick dates to Lord Rayleigh in the 1890s. He performed an experiment where he allowed a small drop of oil to spread in a tank. When it reached its maximum extent, he correctly surmised that the layer was ~1 molecule thick. However, he could not SEE the oil; instead he inferred the extent of the layer by floating camphor power on the water. And he got a number of 0.01 micron.

This is NOT what is happening offshore Louisiana. The open ocean is obviously not a laboratory tank. Visible oil layers have to be at LEAST 1 micron thick--even then you are not seeing the oil, just the reflection of light off the layer. An oil layer with a rainbow sheen is ~10 micron thick. Oil with red or brown color is several times thicker than that. Unfortunately this is exactly what we are seeing across much of the Deep Horizon spill. Misstating the thickness of the main sheen by a factor of 1000 has a direct effect of reducing the estimates of spill magnitude. The point is, even at 10 micron these are still not thick layers. They are 1/10th the thickness of a human hair, but they cover enormous areas. The areas add up to a very large volume of drifting oil.

Brian Grote (BP director) made a misleading statement that has been repeated. He said that the "wider sheen, has a thickness of one or two hydrocarbon molecules" (as quoted in Upstream Online http://www.upstreamonline.com/live/article213244.ece?WT.mc_id=rechargenews_rss).

APRIL 28, 2010 10:48 AM

CONCAWE was established in 1963 by a small group of leading oil companies to carry out research on environmental issues relevant to the oil industry. Our membership has broadened to include most oil companies operating in Europe. The scope of CONCAWE’s activities has gradually expanded in line with the development of societal concerns over environmental, health and safety issues. Our research now covers areas such as fuels quality and emissions, air quality, water quality, soil contamination, waste, occupational health and safety, petroleum product stewardship and cross-country pipeline performance.

The CONCAWE guidelines were set up by the oil companies for the oil companies since they would be the only ones causing the spills. This itself raises the question of objectivity. Oil companies are not non-profit organization and they are staffed with top-of-the-food-chain predators in the dog-eat-dog business world. This is evident from the compensation scheme to the gulf victims and businesses suffered as a result of the oil spill. They give an inch for a foot. Don't wish for them to be Santa Clauses. They are not. Can you trust them to use the table objectively? The answer is NO.

As commented by Dr Ian and most independent observers, the slick is more black and brown than light Iridescent (rainbow). Most would agree that at least 100 microns or 0.1mm should be the starting point of any estimation; not 1 micron or 0.0001mm. By common logic, if you cannot see a single strand of hair (and a micron is 1/20 to 1/180 the thickness of a single strand of hair) from a distance of 1 m, you are not going to see a 1 micron thick sheen (a couple of molecules thick) covering even 1 sq mile in the open sea, assuming you can stretch the oil film that thin without the oil molecules breaking up into smaller “dollar coin” size patches.

So for a director of the world's largest oil company to say that a few molecules thick of oil film can cover up to 30,000 sq miles in open choppy seas with winds causing ripples, is it not stretching the “dollar” a bit too far and wide? Figure 14 of the Real-time Detection of Oil Slick Thickness Patterns with a Portable Multispectral Sensor shows how 7 – 10 microns sheen looks like in a controlled lab pool. Hardly perceptible if the writers had not marked it with red arrows. This report was published by MMS in July 2006.

By logic and experience at sea, the majority of the oil slick area shown in the satellite images are more than 100 microns (minimum thickness on the table used by MMS and BP) but nobody dared to venture beyond that for many reasons. The fear of assassination where billions of dollars are at stake is real. More than 9 deaths linked to the BP gulf causes cannot be accidental.

Most laboratory experiments use scaled down models and none had been field-tested in an open sea. Having minimum values is fine but where is the upper limit? There is a good vested-interest reason for not giving an upper limit. In any legal tussle, the average of the maximum and minimum would be deemed fair but disastrous to the oil spill offender. Say if the upper limit is capped at 1 inch or 25.4 mm. The mean value of 100 and 25,400 microns is 12,750 microns. This will practically bankrupt BP or any company causing the spill.

Satellite imaging like all visual techniques suffer from the effect of illusion and scaling factor. In my earlier articles,I had commented that if common logic and scientific reasoning had taken precedent over visual illusion, Europe and the air travel industry would have saved more than 2 billion Euros of losses. Millions around the world not have been greatly inconvenienced by the Total Airspace Ban and the economic costs affected by the ban during the Iceland volcanic eruption episode. This illustrates that geohazards geophysics is not all about disaster prevention but can be an effective decision-making tool that makes economic sense on a larger scale. The Macondo wells would have shifted to a safe drilling location if professional (not subservient) geohazards geophysical principles had been applied. Similarly, if the early recovery efforts had followed the proper guiding principles based on predictive analysis we would not be caught in a congested highway heading to “a beyond patch-up” destination (Why-is-BP's blowout-so-disastrous-beyond-patch-up).

All maps and images have a “focus range” like in camera images. If the scale or colour range is adjusted to see all, then you cannot see the minute details. Say on a 0 to 100 scale, your major contour lines would typically be a multiple of ten with intervals of 1 unit. Forget about seeing details or variations as small as 1 or 2 decimal places. This is putting perspective in numbers.

So if we want to see molecular size thickness of the slick we have to zoom in million of times since the slick area is more than 30,000 sq miles. We don't have to be rocket scientists to see if the BP director is talking through his ….... ! Even if we can by some super-duper technology, cramp all the information into the satellite images, our eyes or any visualization programmes will be over-saturated by the high intensity values. I am not saying molecular thickness sheen (1 micron) do not exist. They do but are “not visible” to us in the presence of inch-thick oil layers. In all probability the dark core of the oil slick in the satellite images are the thicker oil layers while the “invisible” 1 micron sheen extend several miles beyond the visible limits of the slick.

Equating hundreds of microns to just 2 microns over 30,000 sq miles of the visible, thicker slick is like saying; “where is the oil?” That explained the urgency to aerially spray the dispersant to sink the oil. But images of the oil slick had already been captured and published. Applying the principles of geohazards geophysics and geophysical interpretation, we can re-examine these images to eliminate the improbabilities which of late seem to be the norm rather than the exception. Before we do that in subsequent articles, let us reexamine some fundamental physics and facts.

Average thickness of only a few microns? Even 100 microns thickness is an understatement.

In one model study Oil Spill Drift & Fate model the rate of decreasing oil thickness was computed to be 0.0056 mm per hour. Ecoceane recorded a rate of 0.051 mm per hour from 5000 tons (approx 35,000 barrels) of oil spreading over 545 hectares in 96 hours. This was 10 times faster than the model study. This is not surprising given the number of factors that could affect the spreading rate. Bear in mind most oil spill studies are based on fixed quantity leaking source at water level. In contrast, a conservative estimate of the Macondo Oil Spew is already 4.1 million barrels (172 million gallons). The Macondo Oil Spew is quite different from any previous oil spills. Some factors that invariably increase the thickness of the oil slick are:

• the enormous quantity of oil and gas spewed and the rate of spew. If the spreading rate cannot accommodate the spew rate, thickness builds up at the source area.
• the enormous water depth (5000ft) of the multiple leaks. In the long ascent to the surface, the effect of gas aeration and turbulence of spew with drastic decrease in pressure will hasten the emulsification (sea water droplets suspended in oil) process and increases the viscosity and volume. The lighter hydrocarbon will separate from the heavier stew. The deeper the source the larger the area of the slick, prior to spreading.
• evidences suggest not a single well spew but several spewing sources over a 7 sq miles area. It is like having simultaneous multiple spews. The net effect would be an increase in slick thickness. The Exxon Valdez is a single source leak, not a spew.
• the enormous surface area of the oil slick (30,000 sq miles on day 34). Like a traffic jam in a mass exodus, resistance builds in the spreading as the area gets larger. Without the supply of new oil, the slick would have broken up into numerous smaller slicks. The fact that the slick area seemed contiguous suggest thicker not thinner (as in the thinnest possible). Without stopping the spewing sources, the surface area of slick is proportionally related to the thickness of the slick, minus the thinning-spreading factor.
• the length of spew (at least 85 days). The peak spew will coincide with peak rate of spreading area.

In the Ecoceane example, the spreading rate was estimated to be only 5 hectares per hour while the average recorded growth rate at the Macondo Oil Spill was almost 12,000 hectares per hour. Unlike fixed quantity source spill, the spreading area rate is also affected by the supply rate and new sources of leaks. If the spreading rate is slower than the supply rate of new oil, the oil slick thickness may actually increase.

Clearly we are seeing an oil slick of a totally different dimension and nature. Thus, can the simple experiment performed by Lord Rayleigh in the 1890s where a small drop of oil was allowed to spread in a tank, be truly applicable in the Macondo Mega oil spill? If not, why then did BP and MMS still use his experimental data as the basis of estimating the volume of the spew? If the Macondo Mega oil spew is at least a million times bigger than Lord Rayleigh's “small drop of oil” does it make sense to use the lowest minimum of a few molecular thickness as the basis for estimating the average thickness of the oil slick and thus the total volume of oil spewed? The evidences given here make a mockery out of the perceived microns slick thickness. The minimum value for the brown – black oil slick is 100 microns. Some quantitative direct estimation of oil slick thicknesses are possible using photo images either from sea level, aerial reconnaissance or satellites.

An increase in viscosity will invariably contribute (positively) to the thickness of the floating fluid layer due to surface tension. In calm sea state, we can see convex advancing front of the slick. The radius of the curvature of the advancing front bears a certain relationship to the thickness of the floating layer. If this can be observed from the airplane, the thickness of the slick can never be a few microns. It is only after the surface tension has broken down, the oil starts to diffuse into elongated linear pattern. See the similarities in the slick pattern of both the model study (figure 14) and the satellite image (figure 15, ENVISAT satellite SAR) acquired on 17 Nov 2002 showing the slick from the leaking tanker Prestige off Spain.

For any given oil spew, an increase in the water depth will diminish the power to force the oil slick away from the source point. Imagine a high pressure hose injecting oil from beneath the water surface. If the nozzle is close to the water surface, the oil may even form a vertical column of fountain and the converted lateral force is clearly evident from the ripples radiating from the source. Lowering the nozzle will reduced the amplitude of the radiating ripples with a wider spread. Lower the nozzle even deeper, there will be a point where the ripples may not be even perceptible but replaced with more gentle bubbling over an even wider circle. If the Macondo oil Spew had occurred in much shallower water, the converted lateral force would have pushed the slick into a faster spreading rate. At 5000 ft, this force in area-spreading is negligible. Thus the thicknesses of the oil slick had to be much larger than the lab models with the minimum oil thicknesses.

When the spew rate is higher than the spreading rate (with respect to volume) the slick thickness can never be uniform. The thickness generally decreases from the source point (a few inches?) to the visual limit (100 micron?, seen from aerial photos and satellite images) and from there onwards a wider margin of a couple of micron thick sheen. This applies to an unbroken area of slick. Once a patch of slick breaks off from the main slick, the thickness is governed by other factors. Needless to say, when a broken patch of oil drifts to the shore, the thickness and area size would have decreased considerably. It is thus a fallacy that the oil slick is thicker close to shore than far offshore in the open sea where the oil slick originated. The reverse is true. The thickness of the oil slick near shore is like the clinical thermometer; it is at the very least, as thick as the outer peripheral of the main slick it broke off from. Likewise the thickness of the oil covering the birds and other marine animals, is in the same order of thickness of the oil slick that overwhelmed them. The birds (especially) did not swim around “corralling” or accumulating layers of micron-thick oil on their feathers. If the slick had been only a few microns thick, would the large birds like cranes be stuck to the gluey slick. In some pictures, the birds could not even break free the thick strands of gluey oil even a couple of feet above the slick. Honestly, it does not take a rocket scientist to figure the oil slick to be much thicker than a few mm. So 1 inch thick slick is not so far fetch at the source of the oil spew.

In conclusion, the CONCAWE guidelines were largely designed for limited oil spills from tankers and shallow water wells; not for an unprecedented mega oil spill, spewing uncontrollably from a deep water well (>5000ft) and multiple fractures and vents within a 7 mile radius. Obviously the deep water depth had a great effect on the thickness of the slick. By the time the oil reached the sea surface, it had spread over a much larger area and had lost the “jetting power of a geyser” to force the slick away from the source. Being more gentle and widespread, the floating oil accumulated in thickness with little force to radiate outwards. The relatively calm weather in the first few weeks was also an accumulating factor.

Don't take my word for it. Look at the photo evidence and interpretation in the following postings and see if logic and the truth prevails. Even the government's estimate of 4.1 million barrels (172 million gallons) is a gross misjudgment of the facts and publicly available information. Should BP be allowed to discount further on this grossly under-estimated volume of oil spewed?

See this MSNBC interview with the late Matt Simmons:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sG0CqD5MHOo&feature=player_embedded

Important points to note:

1. all the oil coming out that killed th Gulf of Mexico ... as opposed to the open holes several miles away .... that is still spilling 120,000 barrels of oil per day ..

2. enough is eough... time for the Govt ....to stop BP's advertisment ...stop deceiving the people...

3. ..send a submarine down there to find the open hole....

4. ... sonar images of the BOP finally located and the pieces of the casing that appear to .. 5 stories ...

5. ... I am not sure why they have not made that public .....may be they were just confused ...and alarm people

6. ...BP is so certain it all is coming from the drilling riser...

7... oil coming out of this 6 or 7 inch annular could not cover the gulf of mexico with 400-500 ft of this toxic oil at the top...

8... re the open hole several miles away .....if they acknowledge it they go to jail..and their fortune will be over, so they can't, so they lie..

9...are you suggesting the government is complicit in facilitating a lie ......not intentionally, I think they were basically confused

How close was Dr Tom Termotto with BK Lim?

We have not met physically and had telephone conversation from time to time. Like many others, Dr Tom first took notice of me after my 6^th article, Why Is Bps Macondo Blowout So Disastrous Beyond Patch Up published on 30 July 2010. From then on, he had faithfully posted every article I have ever written on all his websites, until recently in March 2011. Basically I wrote and he posted. We exchanged notes and clips of interests. He proof-read what I drafted occasionally. In fact all had been published without any technical alteration save for some grammatical errors. We basically worked independently of each other. I have no administrative control of any of the websites operated by ConcernedCitizens of Florida. The only blog under my control is http://bklim.newsvine.com.

It puzzles me to no end why Deborah had not bothered to investigate Dr Tom earlier, prior to collaborating with him. Is it another coincidence? Deborah first posted Dr Tom's article, The Gulf Of Mexico Is Dying, in early December 2010 about the time Thomson Reuters bought the Examiner.com. Reuters Corporate Headquarters is across the street from BP Corporate Headquarters in the City of London (Examiner-Com-Teams-Up-With-Thomson-Reuters) info by Dr Tom.

From there on, they established weekly chats to share information. I remember Dr Tom telling us, the Examiner was expressing great interest in our work. She had Dr Tom tied up in more conversations in one month than we had in the whole 7 months period Dr Tom and I had corresponded. She is after all the Human Rights Investigative reporter for the last 30 years. Me? I am just a lowly geohazards specialist from a third world country who spent more time at sea than at home. I am no trained journalist but a novice who just started blogging 8 months ago after noticing the technical discrepancies in the official story of the Gulf Disaster. If I do not point out these stark technical inconsistencies, who would?

It is only logical that I do not have any blogs or articles published on the internet before July 2010. Despite the details only an experienced geohazards specialist could have analysed, there was still speculation I was a fictitious person or Dr Tom's alternative identity on the net. The fact that I continue writing articles after Dupre's article on 7 Feb 2011 and Dr Tom disappeared completely, confirms that we are two separate persons.

Geohazards especially in the oil industry is a highly specialised niche. Even an experienced geologist like Art Berman had troubles understanding shallow geohazards; differentiating a mid-point of an escarpment and the bottom of a valley, and resolution limitation of acoustic sound sources. My detractors are mentally challenged, not me.

What about Ian Crane?

I first came across his video (Ian-Crane-Speaks-On-Gulf-Oil-Gush-Truth) on 17 Feb 2011. I was frankly quite impressed and held some respect for a co-industry truth advocate even though I did not fully agree with some of the points he presented. I do respect differences in opinion as we approach the problems from different perspectives. I had not realised who Ian Crane was before this. After watching his video I promptly seeded it to my column. I extracted some key phrases to highlight his presentation. It was never meant to be a comprehensive review asserted by Ian Crane. How could a short paragraph justify as a review? Now who gave him this absurd idea?

Under Newsvine's code of honour (COH) we are permitted only a few lines of summary to avoid accusation of plagiarism. His video links were seeded with my recommendation “You need to see these videos”. There were dozens of other websites with his you-tube links and short summaries. Was he just picking any lame excuse to attack me? It would be even more suspicious for him to attack me out of the blues without any lame excuse or anyone of the conspirator to introduce him to me. No, the road to Rome is laden with many traps. It would be one or the other. That Ian Crane chose to publicly post his first and only comment and links to his video on our website discussion blog on 9 Jan 2011, has some significance with regard to some of the confidential email correspondences in that period. Connecting the dots, it is now obvious Ian Crane was recruited to be part of the brewing plan to engage and distract me in a frontal cyber-attack; to conceal the physical attack from the rear. A classic military maneuver.

They were truly disappointed when I failed to respond. That was why Merita and Thad Daly had to come in on 18 Jan and 25 Jan respectively. No wonder Ian Crane's comments sounded so pathetic, frustrated and disappointed. How could a lowly geohazards specialist from a 3^rd world country have ignored Ian Crane's overtures for almost 2 months. It must have been totally pathetic not to have heard of the high and mighty dragon slayer from UK. After almost 4 months, Ian Crane has to resort to legally challenging BK to a fight in the courtroom. Do I trust the legal system of 1^st world countries? Nah. I have seen enough fake justices in my lifetime. Only the court of Public Opinion matters to me now.

Truth be spoken, I had actually wanted to contact Ian Crane earlier to commend him on his work but my computer was under constant cyber attacks at that time. I am glad I did not after noticing his “pathetic” comments at Deborah's column and later his website only on 2 March 2011. My respect for him went down the drain not because he thought so lowly of me (I can take that) but his instant jump to conclusion that I am in cahoot with Dr Tom to mislead or “controlled the opposition” as he termed it, without even investigating my background and past articles.

Putting it bluntly, he is accusing me of being paid to write all these articles and to control the “opposition” (gulf victims) into a mental corral so that his good work can be ignored by the public.

Wow! This must be a real compliment for my articles to have such controlling power. You can argue it both ways. The key word here is “Control”. To control implies power, force, pressure or mass media to influence others while my preferred term has always been “Believe” a softer term whereby the readers are convinced by the simple truths and logic not by mental coercion of any means. Undeniably, telling the truth is simple and easy with no worries of tripping over previous facts. On the other hand you need more lies to cover the initial lies and eventually the suppressed inconsistencies can no longer be kept close in the overcrowded closet. Ian Crane is now tripping over his own lies and deception he was paid to carry out.

As an experienced orator, why would Ian Crane choose to use “control” over “believe”? It is so inconsistent with my fugitive status, my constant theme of exposing the criminality behind the deception and my numerous whistle-blower reports. On the Gulf Disaster alone, I had written over 45 articles in 8 months. Many of them are over 5 pages long and with numerous illustrations and images. I must have been a damn good liar to have lasted so long with so many cyber mercenaries after my a$$. Even a small mistake would have been exploited to the hilt.

If I was not telling the truth, the lies would have multiplied exponentially that even a department of 10 staff would not have been able to cope. As an experienced analyst, surely he would have realised this untenable situation. So why would he choose to rely solely on Deborah's article, instead of doing his own research or investigation as claimed.

Again for an experienced oilfield executive, he must know that one does not go on the offensive without covering his behind (CYA) and doing his groundwork. Is there more to this? His sharply targeted comments showed rashness not objectivity. He seemed to be taking an opportunistic strike at a “down opponent (Dr Tom)” so uncharacteristic of an independent crusader of truth. Notice his choice of word “opposition” or opponent as if speaking from a position of authority. Is that a Freudian Slip?

Instead of viewing me as a co-industry worker and somebody supporting his cause of speaking the truth, is it possible he was viewing me as his Competitor? Readers can judge for themselves by reading my articles. I thought we were fighting on the same side? Nobody has any exclusivity on the truth. By staking a monopolistic claim to truth, one exposes one's selfish greed of owning and peddling “truth” for a price. BP would have seen the opportunity to create a split “opposition”. When it is hard to beat the truth, it is time to create a competition for it by funding one against another.

Spreading truth is like free flow water; there is never any need for pressure to force it in. On the contrary, to force feed even small amounts of twisted truth, you need constant bombardment to hammer it into the masses. No doubt many governments and global corporations like BP are well funded to follow Joseph Goebbels' propaganda principle of repetitive lying.

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” ~ Joseph Goebbels

Surely any truth advocate would have touched the raw nerves of the establishments, governments and big oil corporations as I have. Publicly you became an unemployable “pariah” within the oil industry. No one wants to be associated with you even though many expressed their concerns and support privately.

Permalink Reply by Ian R Crane on February 22, 2011 at 1:55am

If this is the best that Gulf Coast activists c...an offer after I have spent the past 7mths sharing this information via a DVD released in August 2010, 40+ public presentations throughout the UK, Ireland & Sweden, more than a dozen radio interviews with US & European stations; I strongly suspect that there are ‘elements’ with the Gulf Coast ‘activist’ community who are deliberately trying to prevent this information reaching a wider audience.

Reaching a wider audience to spread the truth far and wide is my main objective; not profit.

How many of the stricken gulf victims could afford Ian Crane's DVD or costly travels to attend his public presentation? Clearly his target masses are not the common “small people” most affected by the breakout any mega disaster. His high profile operations need funds to operate. Do you see that in my operation? My self funded crusade is hosted free of charge and the information shared freely. We live frugally to keep costs down. Cost-wise my messages reached out to more people at a tiny fraction of Crane's cost and with more potency. Who do you think BP would approach to buy out one against the other? Even Adsense turned down our requests for paid advertisement. Their sole reason; “Unsuitable/offensive contents”.

On the whole, it is so uncharacteristic of a “highly respected analyst” to jump to conclusion without using his grey matter. The same goes to Deborah as well. In one of my comments in August, I had commended her on a well written article. But now I am not so sure. Assuming she did not read my article to understand what I stood for before quoting or incorporating them into her investigative journalistic work, the very least she could do was to call or email me for clarification. I wanted to do that before I wrote this article but was advised against it as too much water had already flowed under the bridge. The implication of me being complicit in the “controlled opposition campaign” is totally untrue if only she had read and understood my articles, see http://bklim.newsvine.com. So where are her journalistic principles?

Deborah Dupre wrote on 7 Feb 2011.

Disinformation is designed to include elements of truth with untruths in the mix to confuse, agitate or pacify, and ultimately lead the public against its best interest. Termotto's reported claims about the murder of "Gulf Hero" Dr. Tom Manton and Gulf related assassination attempts on BKLim are in question, as everything else he reported.

The U.S. counter-intelligence program's 3-D aim is to disrupt, discredit and dissolve progressive groups. Its professionally executed divide and conquer tactic is highly effective, even among peerless colleagues.

Who would be more likely to be employed as US COINTELPRO? Deborah or me? As for Ian Crane, I had repeatedly said and wrote that I am just a plain BK Lim. No PhD. Why would he want to quote me as “Dr BK Lim”? Is it to embarrass or to ridicule, given Deborah's obsession with DR Tom?

Ian Crane was highly disappointed that I wrote such a pathetically short synopsis of his “priceless work” which he sweated for 7 whole months. Excuse me. I was not born into this world to serve Ian Crane. I am not a journalist but an independent geohazards specialist who is contributing his expertise and spare time for the sake of humanity and averting another preplanned disaster. I seeded his you-tube videos (which he encouraged to spread far and wide) for the benefit of my readers. There was no condition that one must sing a few pages of praises to bolster his ego prior to seeding. I cannot control anyone from “copying that pathetic short sypnosis of his work” and pasting them all over the internet. If he was so egoistic why did he not write one himself?

Oh I forgot. He wanted a lowly geohazards specialist to endorse his work. I did, but the short paragraph was too short for his liking. For that he blames the poor response to his post at his website on my “pathetic synopsis”. I did all my articles strictly on pro-bono basis and did not expect anyone to praise me. I was so thankful the general public would be interested enough to read my articles. I wrote that as long as there is one person who wants to read my articles I will continue to write without fear or favour, until my last breath.

But I learned to accept the ungratefulness that goes with my hard work in my line of work. When we did a good job of selecting a safe location out of a risky prospect, there were no thanks. His accusation that I was running a “controlled opposition campaign” is completely baseless and malicious. Get Real! I am apolitical. Who are the “opposition” Ian Crane was referring to? We are trying to get the truth out there and not even selling any DVD's to support our own out-of-pocket expenses. All the earnings from my newsvine column went to charities.

I did not chastise my readers for not heaping praises on me. I thank most of them for showing interest in what I wrote. I believe in educating not teaching, as we are all equals. People can judge for themselves whether there is logic and truth in my articles. Least of all, I do not need to convince Ian Crane that I am not part of ANYBODY's “Controlled Opposition” campaign. What I did is out of my heart; Sacrifice without Expectation.

The Gulf Victims are being lied to and it is within my geohazards expertise to analyse the situation and to tell the truth. I did not do it expecting anything in return. Instead I get repeated nasty comments from people like Thad Daly who harped on the point that I needed to join the list of dead scientists and whistleblowers to show my sincerity in advocating the truth. Why is Thad Daly not insisting Ian Crane to be dead in order to be a credible analyst? Both are obviously working on the same side.

Sorry to disappoint you, Thad Daly and Ian Crane. If I had haboured any intention of quitting, your comments have only strengthened my resolve to continue writing. I am thankful for so many people praying for my safety.

Ian Crane Wrote:

“The claim that their lives are at risk is a pathetic attempt to gain credibility amongst other activists …. Fool me once,eh?”

If Ian Crane could be fooled by me and reawaken by Deborah (who was proven to have written without investigating or reading) then I think Crane has been fooled twice already, don't you think?

Ian Crane Wrote:

Lim & Termotto are playing the 'Limited Hangout' game here. They know that ignoring my research and insights would be highly suspicious, so attempted to deflect this suspicion by posting a pathetic single paragraph 'synopsis' of m...y revelations. Termotto has also been central to the manufactured division amongst Gulf Coast activists ... it is essential that these infiltrators are exposed for what they are; primarily because their primary task is to keep the activism local and internally focused. Therby minimising the the risk to the perpetrators.

I can only say Ian Crane has “limited” openings to pick a fight with me, to pick out such an incoherent lame excuse. Ignoring his research and insights would be highly suspicious? Deflect this suspicions by posting a pathetic single paragraph synopsis? Notice how inconsistent his argument is? If I had wanted to ignore him, I would simply not post anything on him. With him on the fore-front of truth-advocacy, no wonder we are losing the battle to the evil-doers.

I just cannot believe he could open his mouth without checking his facts. I can only conclude he has been bought. As an ex-Schlumberger and a supposedly independent ex-industry worker, Ian Crane should have noticed the technical discrepancies in BP's fabrication on the blowout itself.

BP drilled at 3 separate well locations. We have rov video proof of 2 well heads and one blown crater with sub-horizontal casing retrieved on 29 July 2010. In his video, only 2 well locations (A and B, at 300ft apart) were mentioned based on BP's pathetic bathymetric chart and exploration plan. There are at least 5 fundamental arguments (facts) that they could not have drilled only at only 2 well locations. Sadly he has not picked up the discrepancies. With oil executives who are so incompetent, no wonder we keep getting wells blown up. So who is being fooled? Three times fooled?

Ian Crane also believed BP's story that the initial hydrocarbon influx that blew the well came from the bottom of the well (18,000ft bml). No he was dead wrong again to trust BP's fabrication. The initial gas influx came from leaks at the top 5000 ft section on 20 April 2010. The hydrocarbon influx from the base (with all the hydraulic power) happened only on 22 April 2010. There was a large gas bubble at the coastguard base some 40 miles away, to prove that this was a much much larger underground explosion than the first which caught fire on 20 April 2010. The BOP was intact until the 2^nd explosion which caused the DWH rig to sink.

These are just a few of our independent findings presented here to show our sincere efforts in determining the truth rather than harping on the superficial discrepancies purposely let out as distractions. I am truly disappointed. A truth advocate of Ian's experience and caliber could have done more than just sucking up to BP. Who is the “controlled opposition” now? What have you learn from his video? More of the same old stuffs churned out by BP presented in a more comical presentation and avoiding the real puppet masters behind the Gulf Tragedy. Fooled four times already!

His insights and revelations? My foot. Tell us something which we don't already know.

There are only two mistakes one can make along the road to truth; not going all the way and not starting ~ Buddha.

Crocodile Journalism

Any journalist can be enticed to crocodile journalism with the right price and enticement. In the oil industry, you are paid highly to be subservient to higher commands, not to carry out your duties to your highest professional standard. Since I could not be bribed to keep my silence, the other alternative is to seek out other credible advocates of truth who could. It is even better, if they are also ex-industry worker. Is it a coincidence, after more than 7 months Ian Crane suddenly started to attack me with the battle cry of “controlled opposition campaign by BK et al”? Why the sudden realisation based solely on Dupre's one article? Surely, a truth advocate would have a greater conviction than that? If Ian had carried out his independent investigations, he would have known what he is saying now is very far from the truth and cannot be substantiated. I suppose all moral values can be discarded if the bounty is high enough. Why Ian Crane? With his credential as a truth advocate and an ex-industry worker, they had hoped his false accusations could be rammed into the public's throats without too much trouble. For Ian Crane this is probably his biggest payoff of his lifetime.

Why are we being hunted down?

After 7 long months, the truth is being bored out. Lies cannot be covered forever and eventually truth prevails. The Gulf Disaster like any disaster, is a rich hunting ground for exploitation. Ian himself admitted BP spent record millions in advertisement and PR campaigns. Cyber warfare expenditure took precedent over genuine assistance to the gulf victims. Public perception is more important than the reality of the suffering gulf victims. It is the main stream media that is controlling the flow of such adverse information to the public, not us. Ian Crane is deliberately shooting at the wrong target and his own goal post. As you cannot change one's personal history (without being exposed as an imposter), recruiting a prominent member of the opposition achieve the objective; the same reason The Oil Drum and Coastal Warriors were hijacked.

Why would Ian Crane hold us solely responsible for the “controlled opposition campaign”? Surely he knows we do not have the financial means and mainstream media control. Surely, a few radio interviews by Rense.dom Radio with Dr Tom cannot constitute a controlled opposition campaign over 9 months. Every article and forum discussion were aimed at disseminating the truth freely without censorship. We publish every critical comment even those meant to destroy our credibility.

Below is one typical reply to Fintan's constant harping on inconsequential issues, instead of the geological model explaining the gravity of the disaster at hand. You can read more at BK fires back at BP's schills

Fintane Dune: to BK Lim ,

1) My first question was about BK's statement: "It is therefore intriguing that Well A should be more than 520ft SSE of DWH's surface location." -BK Lim

"The well that blew up on 20 April was... S20BC, is approximately... 720 ft NNW of Well A and just 120ft NW of DWHs surface location. " - BK Lim

Fintane Dune: Taking 120ft from 720 feet I get 600ft - not 520ft Even worse, in another graphic the 720ft appears as 750ft. This 500-700 ft stuff is based on "forensic analysis" of the sea floor wreckage. When relying on someone's 'forensics' I like to see the ability to make figures add up.

BK Lim: Fintan, either you are really confused and do not understand the forensic analyses OR deliberately (should I say desperately) grabbing all numbers and mixing them up to confuse the casual readers. I really did not expect you to scoop so low. But on the other hand, this looks very similar to BP's goons twisted logic and modus operandi. The estimated distance (720ft NNW) from well A to S20BC (blowout crater) is independent of all other measurements. My analysis was based on the debris chart (emailed to me) supposedly compiled by you until I was informed later by another source that it was compiled by Tuttlet. It beats me why you needed to add or subtract these numbers. The centre of the circle connecting the debris is the sea surface location of DWH whose radius works out to be approx 520 ft. (+/- 25 ft). In the ballistic-analysis-of-dwh-riser-wreck, I had argued that it was impossible for Well A to be drilled from the centre of the debris circle (sea level location of DWH) is more than 520 ft SSE away from Well A at seabed. All the distances for this scenario were given to prove the improbability of Well A being the well drilled and blew up on 20 Apr 2010. I think this is plain enough for everyone to understand. See extract below or read the full article again.

Quote from BK's previous article:

It is therefore intriguing that Well A should be more than 520ft SSE of DWH’s surface location. If this was true, then DWH was drilling with the riser string at an angle of almost 6º. Given the dynamic positioning capability of DWH, there should be no reason for DWH’s surface location to be so far away from well A; Since Well A was outside the circle, the distance from the surface location of DWH to Well A has to be greater than 520 ft. There is no need for any calculation - since it is a straight estimation and has nothing to do with 720ft or 750 ft. Period.
Fintan the intention to mislead is very clear with your "devious calculation plucking the numbers at random". Why did you not quote where the 750 ft come from? This came from the recent diagram Fig1C in the-diagrammatic-illustration-that-says-it-all. You had misleadingly imply my forensic analysis was wrong because at 520ft NNW of Well A, the blowout location (S20BC) would be over the flank and on top of the dome. This therefore contradicted the diagrammatic illustration and thus the inconsistencies in my geological model.

That posting was meant to answer your wrong assertion. Since you did not get it (purposely to confuse other readers) I will explain again. I intentionally left out the "A" from the "Well Location" label because it was supposed to represent any well drilled near the flank of the dome. You and those BP's Goons at TOD, having to scrap the bottom of the barrel for want of argument, twisted the "Well Location" to mean Well A. See how the twisted or preconceived minds work?

Quote from BK's previous article:

The label “Well Location” intentionally left out the alphabet “A” as it was intended to be the well that was actually drilled which forensic analyses of the seabed debris determined to be 720 ft NNW of Well A. Knowing full well that my "qualitative model" would be twisted, I had the foresight to include a scale indication by plotting theTexaco Rigel Well and inserting the distance 2 km from Well Location. That is why when you forwarded those questions, I told you via email I had the perfect answer (really no joke as I had anticipated). After working for 30 years I have seen all these dirty tricks. So you and BP's Goons thought you had me on a tight noose. If you proportionately scale out 2km, you will see that 520 ft is very very small horizontally in that diagram. So even assuming the well S20BC had to move towards the dome (which we don't need to but for argument sake), it would still be on the flank of the Dome, is it not?

I know you quoted 520 ft but I intentionally used 750ft to show that even on a larger distance, it would not make any difference as it would still be on the flank. This also demonstrates the pettiness in your argument. So far the validity of the geological model is unshakable. An inaccurate model would have fallen apart by now.

Fintane Dune: You show the BP well on a steep slope of a salt dome. Yet in this article you show the rig 520 feet from well A and thus nowhere near a steep salt dome flank: reference to: bklim.newsvine.com/_news/2010/08/14/4884549-dwh-blowout-csi-why-it-could-not-have-happened-as-reported-by-bp-

BK Lim: Why did I use 750ft? Whether it is 720 ft or 520 ft or 750 ft, it really does not matter. But I wanted to round it up to show that distance is inconsequential. Just like in the bathy problem, you and BP's goons at TOD had to choose the least important points and make a mountain out of a mole hill. Your dirty tricks are all documented and exposed. Why subject yourself to further embarrassment? Sorry I have to be so crude but remember, you ask for it. And you thought you had me checkmate!
So if the numbers do not add up as imagined by you, it is because it was not suppose to add up. Now which part do you still not understand?

• 12 votes #8.8 - Sat Sep 4, 2010 1:18 PM EDT

~~~~~end of quote~~~~~~~~~

When Fintan started to dish out the “dirts” he thought he had; he dirtied himself instead. A quote from Sayer Ji on his FB posting (Gulf-Oil-Spill-Truth/107630479281181): “..anyone who has anything bad to say about BK should be required to ACTUALLY READ what he has written. The Ad hominens need to stop. You can't character assassinate the messengers without it blowing back.” Fintan's story was repeated using Deborah and Dr Tom.

Geohazards Geophysics is a strange hybrid of science combining the art of oceanography, engineering, hydrography, geology and geophysics. Unlike exploration geophysics where the deep oil reservoirs are the main objectives, we spend our lives literally looking for potential troubles (in the form of geohazards) from the seafloor down to approximately 2 km. For years we learned how to differentiate man-made accidents from natural disasters due to natural causes.

The first 2 km is normally the blind and unproductive zone, oil wise. Hence it is understandable that oil companies do not really care too much on this section of the sub-seabed. Having worked exclusively on this zone for 30 years, it would be ridiculous for anyone especially Ian Crane & Deborah (if they had bothered to investigate) to accuse Dr Tom (a natural medicine doctor) to influence me at all. I had independently out-argued all the deep explorationists at TOD. So why would I be unduly influenced by Dr Tom just as I would not touch on biological, medicinal, genetics or biochemical aspects of the gulf disaster. Dr Tom's past has got no bearing at all on what I wrote. There was little need for me to explain what I had written for his radio interviews. Listening to some (no all) and reading what he had written himself, I saw no compromises.

Much earlier on, I had informed Dr Tom, Dr Deagle, Rense and several others in my Trust Circle, of life threats from the oil mafia since the day I started to expose the frauds from within. I had to make them understand my past and the reasons I would not do live interviews, post pictures of my activities or any public talks. A dead geohazards specialist is not much good to the general public. The threats to my life or anyone who could disrupt the oil mafia's agenda, are as real as the deaths of Matt Simmons, Ted Stevens, Jim Black, John P Wheeler, Dr Thomas B Manton, Gregory Stone and many others yet unannounced. For every American killed by the oil mafia in the US, there are at least 5 worldwide murders due to “accidents”. Nobody has earnestly investigated their deaths either within or outside their workplace.

The MAFIA in the oil industry is more widespread than the public can fathom. They have the resources to hire killers, thugs and cyber-mercenaries using their global network and exploration operation. How do you think they could track my last minute change of travel plans across 7 seven countries?

As an illustration of their accuracy in tracking my movement, picture my last minute change of travel plans across 3 countries. The authorised logistic agent pickup at the airport was mysteriously cancelled while I was still mid-air enroute to my destination and substituted with an “unauthorised” agent pickup. Luckily I met a friend at the airport and chose to share the transport out of the airport with him. Otherwise, I would have disappeared without reaching my destination. Up till now, the ones responsible for the sudden cancellation of the arranged logistic pickup had remained silent. They also could not explain their contradicting emails sent to various parties. One email (cc officially) announced my arrival as scheduled. Several covert emails at the same time (discovered later) showed contradicting instructions to the ground staff. Preparations on the ground showed that I would not to be expected. Even with documented evidences of a murder plot, Authorities in at least 2 first world countries (forget the corrupt 3^rd world countries) would not want to initiate any investigation? Similarly, the homicide investigation on John P Wheeler's mysterious death will lead nowhere.

Why do you think the ex-EPA attorney spent more than 6 years trying to debar BP from government contracts without success? BP boasted they had direct access to the White House. Could her nasty trip walking into the elevator at the EPA’s downtown Seattle offices be a mere coincidence or a “manufactured accident” to stop her almost secured debarment of BP? With only papers up the flagpole for a final signature from the EPA’s suspension and debarment official, why was the process not followed through to the final debarment after her accident? Fishy is it not?

http://www.propublica.org/article/bp-accidents-past-and-present Pascal and her struggle to debar BP.

Pascal, a career Environmental Protection Agency attorney only seven weeks into her retirement, knew as much as anyone in the federal government about BP, the company that owned the well. She understood in an instant what it would take others months to grasp: In BP's 15-year quest to compete with the world's biggest oil companies, its managers had become deaf to risk and systematically gambled with safety at hundreds of facilities and with thousands of employees' lives.

For 12 years, Pascal had wrestled with whether BP’s pattern of misconduct should disqualify it from receiving billions of dollars in government contracts and other benefits. Federal law empowers government officials to “debar”—ban from government business—companies that commit fraud or break the law too many times.

Many companies have been debarred, but never has one as large as BP, or as important to the U.S. economy and security. Debarment would have severed BP’s contracts with the American military and jeopardized the company’s long-term access to reserves that generated nearly $16 billion in revenue for the company last year. BP’s stock price would likely have gone into a tailspin.

By the end of the decade Pascal again began to think that the only way to make the company improve was to debar the entire corporation. “There comes a point where the events conspire to basically show federal regulators that a particular company, for whatever reason, has no intent of complying with U.S. law and regulations,” she said.

The company now had three criminal convictions—in Endicott Bay, Texas City and Prudhoe Bay—and a deferred criminal conviction in a price-fixing scandal. It also had a record of ongoing problems and employee harassment.

Pascal, at this point, was on the verge of retirement—she had promised herself she would leave at the age of 60. But she postponed her departure several times in order to see the BP case through. She said company executives acted confident—“arrogant”—as if they believed BP was so important that the U.S. government would never dare to debar it. “BP told me multiple times that they had direct access to the White House and they would go there.”

“You could do anything you wanted to BP and we could deal with it,” the official, Normand Lussier, wrote, adding that he didn’t think defense concerns should play into Pascal’s judgment.

The message was clear. The government was united in its concern about BP. Now the company needed to act. Pascal thought she had reached a turning point with BP. Lynch was new to his job, and she said he seemed genuinely intent on a reaching a resolution. But months passed, and still the agreement wasn’t signed. Pascal began to suspect that BP was waiting her out.

Her concern grew when she learned that Marty Anderson, the inspection supervisor who had raised the alarm about BP’s pipeline inspection program in Alaska, was accusing the company of blacklisting him. Here she was, working out a final agreement that pivoted around open safety communication between workers and their managers, and the company appeared to be punishing the man who had raised a flag about one of its worst spills in a decade.

“It appears that BP, regardless of its code of conduct and statements to the government, will do whatever is necessary to cover up the improper actions of its senior managers,” she and Hodges, her junior co-counsel, wrote in an e-mail to Lynch and BP Alaska’s new president, John Minge, on January 19, 2010. “This promotes intimidation, retaliation, blackballing and unethical behavior in the management ranks, and a culture of fear and lack of ethics in the employee ranks.”

“Nothing has been done in TWO YEARS,” the letter continued. “This is a current graphic example of why EPA does not trust BP.”

When she wrote that letter, Pascal had all but made up her mind. If BP didn’t sign the settlement agreement soon, she would double back on her case, make sure the documents behind her claims were rock solid and send the debarment papers up the flagpole for a final signature from the EPA’s suspension and debarment official.

Two days later, Pascal was walking into the elevator at the EPA’s downtown Seattle offices when her foot caught on an uneven lip at the door. She fell, hard, and was taken to a hospital, her face bruised, her rotator cuff so badly torn that her doctor said it was one of the worst shoulder injuries he’d seen. For a few weeks, she tried to work from home. But she needed surgery and faced a six-month recovery period before she would be able to resume her full workload. She couldn’t type. She couldn’t drive. She couldn’t even raise her arm to put a dish in the microwave. On March 1, Jeanne Pascal submitted her retirement papers, leaving the BP case she had worked on for nearly 12 years unresolved.

How did the “uneven lip” at the door occur just minutes before she went into the elevator? Was it really a coincidence the accident happened just before the official debarment was to be signed? Why do you think so few oil industry whistle-blowers had come forward? Thad Daly on Facebook tried another twist to get rid of me. Since I am not yet dead, I must be lying or a bad scientist. See the timing. Dupre's viral article was meant to shut me up, literally and physically.

Why were all these top scientists and whistle-blowers dead or taken out of active service? They were not street smart to recognise the danger signs or they trusted the system to be fair. It must have been inconceivable to them that the evil forces had penetrated so deep into their respective organisations with the capability killing innocent professionals (accidentally) perceived to be a threat to their schemes. I have stacks of evidences of such insiders' operatives at work. It is not good enough for one to stay neutral (keep their silence or sit on the fence). It is either you are with them or against them.

By now you should know those who are truly trying to expose the truths and those covering or distorting them. Willful ignorance and willful blindness would only feed the fires of Mass Deception and the profitable Crimes Of Mass Destruction. Why do you think our independent voices of truth are being “hammered” so mercilessly to stem out the last flames of resistance? Imagine if there had been no “pockets of freedom fighters” in Nazis-occupied Europe. Would the Allied Forces still be able to overcome the formidable military might of Hilter's armies? We are that few sparks of truth left that could perhaps prevent them from planning another mega-disaster of another kind. This Project Gulf Disaster is no accident but a planned disaster with a wide-ranging sinister agenda.

I have documented evidence of corruption, data fraud, fraudulent installation certification, etc and have submitted reports after reports. It does not take a genius to figure out how high and how wide the oil corruption had greased the wheels of the industry. Without this oil corruption, the industry will grind to a halt! I am not dead yet because I had to give up my regular consultancy work and roam the seven seas. Some had asked why waste time on Thad Daly? It is obvious from the two articles based on exchanges with him. Cyber-sabotage is real nuisance in getting the truth out to the concerned public. Who would have thought telling the truth would be so hazardous to one's life?

(continue part 4).

Part 4 - In Reply To Deborah's Insinuations & Ian Crane's False Accusations (updated 12 April 11)

http://bklim.newsvine.com/_news/2010/11/09/5438040-has-the-post-disaster-recovery-program-become-a-profitable-scam-part-iiic-of-root-causes

As we have seen in many cases, disasters can be highly profitable for those who know in advance or "privileged few in the know" (PFitK). This is very clear from the pattern of massive selling by BP's directors and Goldman Sachs before the advent of an impending disaster. See A pattern of massive shares sell-off by BP directors prior to expected disasters.

Though hard to believe, there are many who would profit without hesitation upon the miseries of others. A mega-disaster like the BP's Oil Spill is one of those. Sometimes it is hard to say if a prescribed cure is supposed to make you feel better or improve the bottom line of the one prescribing it. Time will always tell, as it is revealing in the case of the BP Gulf Oil disaster.

• (first drafted in Nov2010, revised and updated 29 April 2011)

First of all the relief wells were unable to "bottom kill" or seal the real gusher (3^rd well) at 18000ft below mudline. They could stop it momentarily but like applying band-aid to a high-pressured leaking hose, it comes off easily after a short while.

Much of the damage was done during the drilling itself. Shell had a blowout in the North Sea four months earlier (also on a Transocean rig) but could contain it even with all the accidental and random failures found at DWH. So what is difference in the Montara Oil Spill in the Timor Sea, off Australia and the DWH blowout at Macondo. For detailed explanation see

The root causes of bps oil spill the imminent threat of more oil related disasters part 1

The high risk of capping bps gushing well from the top

There is a special geohazards condition which I termed it – Gas-saturated Weak SubFormation (GWSF) zone. Even if the blow-out does not occur during drilling, the potent mix of gas and brine causes havoc in the vicinity of the well bore and will prevent the well-bore annulus from being cemented and sealed fast to the formation walls. Thus a blow-out is imminent even after the well is completed, sometimes years later as in Shell Barton BT5 in 1990, Sabah offshore Malaysia. For the cement to hold and prevent hydraulic connections, the cement needs to set and bind completely with the formation walls. But with a gas-saturated weak formation especially in the sub-formation zone, the overlying sediment are not rock solid and prone to sub-seabed erosion and slow transport of sediment out into the water column above. The emphasis is on this top sub-formation zone because of the possible gas escape routes to the water column. It would be fine if the original gas accumulation depletes itself. But large and significant accumulation of gases generally mean inexhaustible supply via permeable deep-seated faults. In Macondo's case, the permeable adjacent of the salt intrusion, an Allochthonous Salt structure (see figures 150-1) added to the wells' nightmares.

If this top hole section cannot be secured, leaking problems can still develop years later, even after the well is long abandoned; depending on the rate of sub-seabed erosion. Most of the leaks in the old abandoned wells would have been rejuvenated by the abnormal quake swarms after months of gas and oil spewing out of the 3^rd Macondo well until about mid-Sept 2010. As erosion progressively removes disintegrated sediment particles, porosity increases with mass depletion.

The fearsome scenario of a giant oil batholith swelling up the whole sea floor and exploding like an undersea magma volcano generating tsunami has no sound geological basis (figures 150-2a & 150-3). It was conjured up and propagated by pro-BP advocates to scare the public into surrendering their demands for justification and transparency, in return for BP to save them from such a nightmarish scenario. One of NOAA video on an undersea volcanic eruption was widely displayed in June 2010 to demonstrate the possibility of such a destructive scenario. Anyone watching the submarine volcanic eruption would assume it occurred in the Gulf of Mexico. It was not.

That volcanic eruption was close to an active plate margin within the Pacific Ring of Fire, in the South Pacific 140 miles SW of Samoa. Its tectonic setting is nowhere similar to the Gulf of Mexico, a more stable intra-plate tectonic zone. The mechanism of a Mud Volcano is a world of a difference from the Magma Volcano. Whose idea was it to show a volcanic eruption to illustrate what was happening with the Macondo mud volcano in the Gulf? NOAA label was flashed in the brief video of the eruption with no explanation. Apparently the video which also appeared under Discovery news was released from high level sources. It is unbelievable that the high level sources could not differentiate between a magma and a mud volcano. Was this technical deception planned as early as 2009?

Was a scarier eruptive scenario deliberately fed to the public, so that when the worst such as massive eruptions, seafloor collapse and giant tsunami did not come to pass, any notion of population reduction conspiracy or planned disasters for profit could be shot down readily by BP's cyber mercenaries?

Granted the industry's professionals are contractually obligated to keep their silence. But why are gulf truth advocates with claims to insiders' information keeping their silence on this clear deception since June 2010? Surely an ex-oilfield executive with a 25-year successful career, who claims to be a self-funded independent researcher and having spent more than 7 months researching on Project Gulf Disaster could not have overlooked this and other blatant fallacies of the Gulf Disaster?

Yet the one exposing at least 20 such distorted truths on the gulf disaster be accused of being on BP's payroll, misleading the public, controlling the opposition (gulf activism) and preventing his brand of truth from reaching a wider audience? What good would an ex-oilfield executive truth advocate be, if he is so willfully ignorant of all the facts and only regurgitating what is already publicly known and promulgated by the main stream media?

Instead of endless supply of oil, gas and mud with expanding and swelling seabed due to increasing pressure, the reverse is true. Like popping a champagne bottle, the initial burst is at the highest pressure. What or where is the source of increasing pressure? It is such simple fundamental question that guides us through a minefield of geophysical impossibilities on the path of Truth Reporting. If companies are not required by law to have their accounts audited by registered accountants, would major corporations be responsible enough to declare their profits truthfully?

Thus a mass depletion model, whereby the eroded sediment are continuously transported by the escaping corrosive fluid (gas-brine mix) through the fractured or faulted pathways, is more plausible than the “oil batholith-volcanic eruption model” initiated by BP. Who else could and would spend millions of dollars promulgating such horse-@!$%#?

The presence of extensive methane hydrate within the Quaternary sediment of the Gulf increases the rate of mass depletion. The escaping gas and brine create new pathways to the seabed. Hot oil from the reservoir follows and get trapped at the sub-formation zones, beneath the Quaternary deposits with the stable hydrates. Warmed-up hydrates vaporise into gaseous methane which in turn provide endless supply of gas, and together with brine, further erode and increase the permeability of these new pathways to the seabed. Shale and mudstone beds which are normally impermeable to either gas or oil, easily disintegrated on contact with fluid consisting of gas and brine (technical publication in prep).

Eventually, with higher permeability and porosity the oil seeps higher and closer into the seabed. The proliferation does not spread uniformly in radial pattern. For obvious reasons, the erosion process proliferates preferentially along the major fault lines and at the edges of the salt structures and the continental shelf edges.

Follow the faults and canyons radiating from the Macondo prospect and you will find the gas seepage and oil accumulation beneath the Quaternary beds. So Matt Simmons' assertion that there were major gas and oil leaks 7 miles from the Macondo wells was not far-fetched after all. Our observations showed that all the 3 drilling rigs ( DD2, DD3 and DE) had spent considerable period of time at the shelf-edges of the Salt domes / Continental slopes. Why?

With no ROV videos we can only speculate but then there were not too many options for BP. Either they were drilling shallow wells to grout the growing fractures in the faults and precarious edges of the salt domes or were fanatically pumping in even more dispersant so that the leaking oil would stay submerged. A sea of floating oil in the vicinity of the Macondo wells would definitely not look good. No matter how much PR cosmetics were applied, a massive oil slick would be highly unconvincing of a permanently sealed well.

BP had hoped that by grouting the fissures, vents and faults around the Macondo wells, the still escaping oil and gas would disperse far and wide beneath the seafloor, far enough to absolve further blame of future oil spills such as the one observed on 18 March 2011.

Though fully aware of the sub-seabed erosion process, BP reckoned it would take more than a few years before sufficient oil could accumulate at shallow depths to pose a problem. By then the Macondo Blowout would be a distant memory. It would be too absurd in the minds of the innocent Public, to connect any new oil spills to the disastrous Macondo blowout. But BP probably underestimated the abnormal rapid rate of sub-seabed erosion aided by the endless supply of methane gas from the extensive occurrence of hydrates and the effect of the mass depletion (vaporisation, disintegration of the clayey beds containing the hydrates sediment structure and erosion/transportion of the disintegrated clay sediment).

Worse. Many of the major deep-seated faults cut through other oil reservoirs which might have been indiscriminately damaged from the thousands of wells drilled in the last decade. Many of these faults were already leaking or on the verge of leaking. The recent quake swarms, though small in magnitude are shallow and quite effective in hastening the sub-seafloor erosion process. Once leakage to the many marginal uneconomic reservoirs are established more light crude migrate to the shallower sub-seabed zones. The new shallow oil accumulation need not necessarily originate from the Macondo prospect.

An example of this effect is demonstrated by the observed large gas bubble near at the coastguard base in Louisiana on 22 April 2010, the day of the second underwater explosion which brought down the Deepwater Horizon. The huge gas release occurred due to the vibration of the second explosion which fractured the overburden sediment capping an existing shallow gas accumulation 40 miles away. The NW-SE fault zones passing through the Macondo prospect to the coastguard base, facilitated the transmission of pressure pulses, just like any hydraulic system used in our machines.

The Stage Is Set and Nature refuses to play ball.

As more oil from the reservoir seeps to the sub-formation, more hydrates in the stable zone vaporised and caused even more erosion over a wider area. Unlike gas, oil can only migrate through the more permeable pathways and accumulate at the more porous and sandy beds. Any oil seepage by its natural pressure would mean near-saturation in oil bearing capacity of the shallow emplacement (high porosity sand, turbidites and deltaic formation intercepted by the highly fractured eroded faulted pathways). Continual or periodic oil seeps start the accumulated differential pressure is sufficiently high to overcome the combine weight (pressure) of the overburden and water column. Alternatively, the buried oil accumulation can be released through a major tectonic event since Quaternary sediment are quite fragile and easily fractured once the corrosive gas and brine erosion processes had taken their toll.

If the 9.0 mag quake in Japan had occurred months earlier, the new shallow oil emplacement would have been insufficient to cause such a large area of oil slick. To refute arguments that these shallow oil emplacement existed before the 20 April 2010 blowout, there was no report of widespread oil slick following the 24 Dec 2004 Sumatra (9.0), 12 Jan 2010 Haiti (7.0) and 27 Feb 2010 Chile (8.8) quakes.

By the time of the 4 Sept Canterbury (7.1) NZ, 29 Sept Papua Indonesia (7.2), 21 Dec Bonin Islands Japan (7.4) and 25Dec Vanuatu, S Pacific (7.3) quakes occurred, the gulf waters were again sufficiently clear of surface oil (oil dispersed and submerged) for any new oil slick to be noticed. Again none was reported. The recent 18 Feb 2011 quake off Fort Morgan Alabama (3.5 mag) was probably too weak and too far NE from the main erosion and migration oil pathways (the fault zones striking through Louisiana) to trigger any substantial release of oil into the water column.

By the beginning of this year, tar balls (nickel to palm size) and dollar-sized sandy patches of oil were reportedly washing up in Grand Isle and Louisiana coast to Alabama beaches at Fort Morgon. Towards the end of March 2011, there had been increasing reports of new oil related sightings at the beaches of Louisiana. These are significant evidences of periodic or regular oil seeps coming out of the seabed, not from a single point oil spill (some fundamental reasons in part 2 of this article). It also means the oil migration pathways were filled to the brim and ripe for major simultaneous releases on a tectonic trigger with a much lowered threshold.

5 Jan 2011 Oil Washes Ashore Again At Grand Isle

The mayor's office said tar balls are coming ashore on Elmer's Island and sand dollar-sized patches of oil are washing up in Grand Isle. The environmental group Louisiana Bucket Brigade said it was the worst instance of oil contamination since the BP oil spill.

4 Jan 2011 Gulf Oil Spill Tarballs Continue To Wash Ashore On Fort Morgan, Alabama Beach

BP cleanup crews returned to work Monday after a 10 day break, WKRG reports, and they seem to have their work more than cut out for them. Tarballs have been washing up all along the shores of Alabama's Fort Morgan beach.

According to the Press-Register, they range in size from as small as a nickel to as large as a person's palm. The tarballs are so plentiful on the beach that they are seldom more than an inch apart from each other on shore.

22 March 2011 Oil, tar balls wash ashore on Louisiana coast

Emulsified oil, oil mousse and tar balls from an unknown source have been washing up on beaches from Grand Isle to West Timbalier Island along the Gulf of Mexico, a stretch of about 30 miles, a Louisiana official said. It was still heading west Monday afternoon.

Intra-Plate Tectonic Setting.

You will notice that the Macondo prospect lies almost 150 miles SE from the southern tip of the New Madrid fault zone. Check out my previous articles to understand the Quaternary intra-plate tectonic setting and movement.

23 Feb 2011 shallow-earthquakes-associated-with-the-new-madrid-fault-bps-mega-oil-spill

10 Nov 2010 update-on-bp-rigs-location-fault-connection-10-nov-2010

The Macondo prospect is located approximately at the pivoting point of the intra-plate movement. The red and black dotted lines represent discernible faults obscured by the Quaternary sediment cover. Fundamental geotechnical principles dictate that there should be stress-induced faults and the step-like breaks at the shelf edge are give-away indications. Competent geologists from the oil companies would have noticed the fragility of the Salt-geology tectonic system. Exploration objectives however overrode geohazards concerns and environmental implications in the event of a disaster. It still is today.

The events unfolding from this mega-disaster confirm what geohazards experts had known and feared all along. Environmental and Safety concerns by oil companies are horse-@!$%# for public consumptions only. What goes behind boardroom meetings is just the exact opposite.

Like a loaded spring, shallow quakes occurred in response to tensional releases following the prolonged erosion processes of uncontrolled oil and gas flows. Shallow quakes occur due to differential tensional forces caused by higher resistance at the generally younger Miocene formation and above. The shallow quakes also rejuvenated old fault lines and spread the sub-erosion process even wider. As the cycle repeats itself, leaks from abandoned wells and uneconomical-spent out reservoirs rejuvenated and accelerated along the weakened fault zones and precarious edges of the salt domes.

Yes BP underestimated the connected relationship between hydrates, faults, Quaternary Sediment and shallow earthquakes. The erosion rates were several factors faster than they had anticipated. Even before the 9.0 mag earthquake in Japan on 11 March 2011, scientists and research workers were already finding oily sediment buried beneath the seabed. We will come to this in part 2. Just 34 minutes after the giant quake, groundwater levels in South Florida fluctuate up to 3 inches for 2 hours (JapaneseQuake stirred Florida). P waves travelled through the earth at a much faster speed.

New 10 x 100 miles oil spill spotted after Japanese 9.0 mag Earthquake.

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/possible-new-oil-spill-100-10-miles-reported-gulf-mexico

Independent pilots, including John Wathen of the Waterkeeper Alliance, and Bonnie Schumaker with Wings of Care, are currently flying out to investigate the spill. Schumaker reports having seen the sheen on Friday, March 18, and confirms that it is rapidly expanding. A Louisiana fisherman, who has chosen to remain anonymous at this time, also reports fresh oil coming ashore near South Pass, LA, and that cleanup crews are laying new boom near the beach.

Initially the new oil spill was suspected to have come from the Matterhorn field operated by W&T Technology using the production rig, Matterhorn Seastar. The oil was suspected to have come from a leak in the producing well. The Matterhorn field is located approximately 20 miles north of the Deepwater Horizon rig.

A couple of days later, a Houston-based oil company came forward to accept responsibility for the mysterious spill near Grand Isle, although it says it remains "surprised" that what it thought was a minor discharge from a long dormant well could have produced miles-long slicks. The company said it had reconnected the wellhead structure Tuesday (22 March 2011) morning and fully shut it in by 8:30 p.m. The amount spilled was estimated to be less than 5 gallons.

This is probably the case of a convenient scapegoat who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Even if the company had underestimated the amount spilled, the accidental spill which was reportedly noted over the weekend (19 / 20 March) could not account for the 10x100 miles sheen reported on 18 March. The Matterhorn Seastar did not report any spill. As a fully operational production rig, any spill would be an immediate concern. So unless the crews were sleeping on their job, they would have alerted the coast guards as soon as the oil sheen reached visible size like 1 to 2 miles diameters. I do not think American oil workers could be that slack, not to notice until it was over 100 miles long. Elementary, Watson!

Anglo-Suisse Offshore Partners was caught in the act of an accidental spill but the timing and the amount spilled from a dead well could not account for the instantaneous sighting and extent of the observed spill; certainly not the tar-balls. Probably guilty of not reporting previous accidental spills, the guilty-conscious party jumped to admit responsibility. But are we truly happy with napping any culprit without ever knowing the true cause. Is justice truly served when the wrong corporation ends up taking the tab? Could Justice in America have sunk to the level of dictatorial 3^rd world countries where an innocent can be sent to the gallow for justice to be seen to have been done? Surely not.

Assuming 1 barrel of oil (US) to 42 US gallons conversion; 1000 sq miles with 50% void and 100 microns thick slick, it would mean a leak of 814,574 barrels of oil in 3 days or 271,000 barrels per day. Even if we employ the ridiculous 2 microns thick slick, the total amount of oil leaked was still an enormous 16,291 barrels of oil. Could a “dead well” have leaked that much oil?

So even if the oil sightings had been exaggerated, say only 1x10 mile sheen, that would still mean the dead well had leaked a total of 8,146 barrels (at 100 microns thick slick). With such a fantastic production rate from a “dead well”, why was it dead in the first place and why would America need to import oil at all? For comparison, the Macondo well was initially reported to be gushing at only 5,000 barrels/day. Later it was revised to between 50,000 to 100,000 barrels/day. How many days did it take to reach the shores of Louisiana? Another clear example of Physics Of Impossibilities?

Even with a surface current of 3 knots (calm sea state is max 1 knot), it would have taken the oil 10 hours to reach the coast of Louisiana, 30 miles away. The company reported their crews have been monitoring the site since September and did not report any oil discharge until the end of last week. Even if the leak started on 18 March (Friday) the oil could not have been sighted simultaneously at the coast, 30 miles away. It would certainly take more than 30 hours for the oil leaking out from a single point to stretch 100 miles even assuming the volume and rate of leak can be justified. So either everyone is lying, exaggerating or the observed facts does not fit any one single source of leak. Simple logic dictates that there must have been simultaneous releases of oil spread over 100 miles rather than a single source. The long trauma of BP's mega oil spill had obviously taken a toll on rationality. Widely perceived to be inapt in handling the BP mega-oil spill, officials are quick to act and will grasp any illogical explanation, as if to compensate for past mistakes. Poor Anglo-Suisse!

But how could multiple oil releases be coordinated across 100 miles of ocean? Obviously the NW-SE fault zones played an important role in accumulating the shallow oil emplacement waiting to be triggered by an abnormal tectonic event. It is no coincidence the new oil spill was noticed just days after the 11 March11 Japan Earthquake.

What I have shown are simple basic quantitative estimates? Even if we reduced the 10x100 miles oil slick to just 1 sq mile, the leak from a single has to be staggering. Still physically impossible. Just because most of the oil exploration activities are offshore away from public scrutiny, many who were in charge of documentation thought they could easily fudge the data, dates, quantities etc mostly to cheat on time or to cover data which they had overlooked or had not acquired. There are plenty of examples. Just as the accumulated shallow oil will again be released by another quake, these data frauds and cheating will one day come back to bite us.

My purpose is not to ridicule but to illustrate a sleeping giant oil industry heavily intoxicated with high oil prices and greed. The bottom-line matters and corporate America is too high brow and too blind to see simple solutions and preventive measures at hand. Why would I risk my professional reputation in coming out with a qualitative geological model in late July 2010? Reading geohazardous conditions is not so difficult. It is the oil companies that are bullheaded in sidelining sound geohazards' advice and assessment. Even without detailed seismic data, a relatively accurate and reliable model can be estimated. The qualitative model turns out to be the most accurate todate – see figure 150-1.

Drilling risks can be assessed and minimised. Risk assessment is basically elimination of possibilities using quantitative estimates whenever possible. Geohazards prediction is not hoco-pocus, black magic art or voodoo science. The recent Japan Nuclear disaster could have easily been averted by locating all their nuclear plants on the north-western coasts, and not at the south-eastern coastline facing the greatest Tsunami threats. A quick look at the volcanic arc would show that locating a nuclear plant near to Sendai would be committing HaraKiri (excuse the term) if a mega quake were to occur.

Grossly expensive and grandiose schemes always proceed at bullet-train speed in their haste to beat the dateline and budget. Simple, logical and fundamental considerations get lost in the express-train schedule. With this Just-In-Time Business model, sadly the whole world is rushing towards another disaster......sigh!

The saga of Gulf 's Facts and Fictions ...continues

Part 2 - Mystery of the recent fish kills, mass bird deaths and other consequences of BP's Macondo BLOWOUT

Who is Merita Debbie Blanchet and what was her role?

The following was my immediate response to Merita Debbie Blanchet when I first logged on to my facebook account on 8 Feb. I reproduced the exact conversation with Merita on her facebook wall which were mysteriously deleted a few days later. I had also been blocked from commenting on her facebook page ever since. All these had to be more than just a coincidence. Dupre's article was posted on 7 Feb 4:41am ET.

February 7, 2011 at 10:34 pm ET Merita Debbie Marble Blanchet shared a link on your Wall.

BK did you know any of this?

Gulf 'doctor' criminal record and infiltration - National Human Rights

February 7, 2011 at 11:47 pm ET Merita Debbie Marble Blanchet wrote again 1 hour 13 mins later.

Hi Bk,

Merita Debbie Marble Blanchet commented on her link.

Merita wrote: "You told me he taught you at some point???"

February 8, 2011 at 08:52 am ET Merita Debbie Marble Blanchet wrote again 9 hrs 5 mins later.

Hi Bk,

Merita Debbie Marble Blanchet commented on her link.

Merita wrote: "seems he is not qualified to teach anyone.."

February 8, 2011 at 01:18 pm ET BK Lim replied 1^st time when he first logged on FB after an absence of 3 days.

Merita, What are you implying? I just learned about this after reading Dupre's article. When did I tell you "he taught me at some point"? There is a lot of difference between "learning a lot about Abiotic Oil from reading his postings and linked references" from being "taught (like in college for academic qualification)". I cannot comment on his background until I have seen the evidence. Please do not jump to conclusion.

February 8, 2011 at 07:29 pm ET Merita Debbie Marble Blanchet apologised 6 hrs 11 mins later.

Hi Bk,

Merita Debbie Marble Blanchet commented on her link.

Merita wrote: "My apologies..I stand corrected.. "It is to Dr Tom's credit what I understand about Abiotic Oil came through his articles and links. It goes to show we are not always masters in our own house." Clearly you were also referring to Dr Thomas B Manton and not Termotto ...Termotto is who I was referring to who appears not capable of teaching anyone.. I have done some research on him and have found records to back up some of what was said.. No need to get my "Doctors" confused because Termotto was NO doctor. This is proof enough BK why we will continue to ask questions of those that are professing serious matters about the Oil Disaster. All I can say is if one is legit then they have no reason to be concerned and should not mind the questions."

February 10, 2011 at 03:14 am ET Delia Labarre commented 1^st and last time on any BK's comments.

Hi Bk,

Delia Labarre commented on Merita Debbie Marble Blanchet's link.

Delia wrote: "I would like to know why Trisha Springstead, who gave a loving call-out to Tom Termotto and BK Lim during theJeff Rense show last week, told me that Tom Termotto has a doctorate in integrative medicine, which qualifies him to teach in medical schools, and has also said that she and her friends in California have known him for many years. How could she not know the truth, and why has she also apparently been misrepresenting him? Thank you, Merita, for asking more about this. There are still many questions unanswered."

Actually, after a long absence from home I had no time to log on the internet to check. Unknown to me at that time, Merita, Thad Daly and Delia Labarre who had so coincidentally invited me as their friend on 18 Jan (3:25am), 25 Jan (4:00am) and 25 Jan (6:06am) respectively, had been posting much earlier on the subject. Was Merita trying to wake up the “sleeper cells” staked out at the dozens of locations where I call home? It certainly looked that way with a “Tombstone, sleeping, wake and a couple of other key coded words”. Why would anyone post a tombstone of oneself? Since her first FB posting on 13 May 2009 till now this was the only instance she had posted such a sombre note of death. Incidentally, 13 May 1969 was an infamous day in Malaysia where thousands were killed in nation-wide racial riots orchestrated by the losing ruling party which still clings to power, 54 years after independence.

Another pure coincidence? Was the publication of Dupre's article supposed to be a signal to spring the “sleeper cells” to actions? One would also wonder about the urgency and coded messages in her postings on 7 Feb 2011.

February 7, 2011 at 04:33 pm ET Merita Debbie Marble Blanchet posted a tombstone on her wall.

February 7, 2011 at 05:25 pm ET Merita Debbie Marble Blanchet posted Dupre's article on her wall.

Would she post this if it is not true?

Gulf 'doctor' criminal record and infiltration - National Human Rights | Examiner.com www.examiner.com

February 7, 2011 at 06:05 pm ET Merita Debbie Marble Blanchet reposted Dupre's article on her wall.

Urgent

Gulf 'doctor' criminal record and infiltration - National Human Rights | Examiner.com www.examiner.com

February 7, 2011 at 06:18 pm ET Merita Debbie Marble Blanchet reposted Dupre's article 3^rd time on her wall.

Gulf 'doctor' criminal record and infiltration - National Human Rights | Examiner.com www.examiner.com

February 7, 2011 at 09:54 pm ET Thad Daly commented on Dupre's article on Merita's wall.

Are suprised? Old Psyop trick "poison the well" , throw enough mis-information and mis-direction in to the well of knowledge and it all is discredited.

February 8, 2011 at 01:51 am ET Merita Debbie Marble Blanchet posted reply her tombstone post.

LOL no Girl I'm still kickin it! And SIS I don't want no WAKE!! You know how much I like my sleep!!

hummm ponder time....why do they call it a WAKE if you are ASLEEP??? hummm

My analysis of the above conversations

Even without the privilege of reading Dr Tom's and Merita's emails prior to 7 Feb 2010, you would notice the “urgency” and “repeated” postings as if to make sure certain parties got the message. Once Thad Daly answered at 09:54pm ET, only did she post on the shared-link to my wall. You would also notice the impatience in Merita's first 3 comments to me. They were designed to insinuate ….... (I will leave this out for the moment, until my next article) and to prompt me to answer. They needed to know if I was still alive (for obvious reasons I will not elaborate) and to track where I was... that was the real objective of her facebook posting. Readers of my newsvine column would have noted my apologies for not replying to their comments online as they were actively tracking my IP. At that time it struck me as strange that Merita would be so obsessed with death, hunting down, killing, sleep, wake etc.... See one of her incoherent FB comments in fig 149-1.

Is Merita just an ordinary grandmother blogging her past time away? Was she really who she said she was? Merita certainly did not know my switch in travelling plans at the last minute, in late January. It was strange to see her lengthy emails on offshore operations involving BP and Haliburton without any coherent messages. She did not seem to understand what she was talking about and gave a “false impression” of following the gulf disaster since the beginning. Her inconsistent stands showed. She did not seem to have understood Termotto's or my articles. Yet she was demanding urgent answers to illogical questions for no apparent reasons. Dr Tom advised to ignore her.

I did until her series of accusing questions on the evening of 7 Feb 2011. As a veteran survivor of many attempts on my life, her postings were reminiscent of strange incoherent emails I received just prior or after the attempts on my life. For instance, out of the blues my employer wrote to check if I had arrived safely. Having made countless trips before, why should my safety be in question unless …....? I hope you get the picture.

I was unusually quiet (on the internet) from the 27 January onwards and was out of total communication (from the net) from 1 till 8 February 2011.Those who knew understood that I was travelling back home for the Chinese New Year holidays. As usual, there were lots of accidents, armed robberies and other nasty incidences during this busy holiday period. It would be absurd for anyone involved in Project Gulf Disaster to know personal details of my residences, homes, travel preferences and other very private information. The fact that they knew only meant that the puppet masters behind Project Gulf Disaster had contacted my previous employer and contractors in a joint assassination attempt. There are other evidences which will only be released upon my death. There is no sense in releasing them now since no one is interested in prosecuting the oil mafia criminals in court. Documented details of such incoherent emails following my unexpected last minute change of plans do not interest “greased authorities”. They could all rest better without one pesky whistle-blower exposing frauds in the oil industry.

Merita's communication with me stopped as suddenly as she had started. Why? She de-friended and blocked my access to her facebook page soon after Delia's reply. My emails to her had not been answered. Her “online duties” were done. Her interest on Dr Tom was also very short-lived despite her claims of having “researched on him to back up Deborah's articles” all in one day(?). If Dr Tom's past was so transparent how come I have not been able to google anything on him prior to June 2010. Deborah wrote Dr Tom was a man with no past.

My alarm bells are ringing loudly not because of Dr Tom's past (I have been getting conflicting reports) but because of the extremely strange circumstances in which Dr Tom's exposure came about. In BP's magic show of capping the wells, the world was mesmerized with the gushing well A (drilled to only 5000ft, 13,000 ft short of the reservoir depth) while the real gusher that reached the reservoir at 18,000ft below mudline, was spewing uncontrollably 720 ft away. Was Deborah's exposure meant to be multipurpose diversion as well?

Who would gain the most with the convenient disappearance of the “biggest prick sticking in their Ar$e$ right now”? They knew that documented information toxic to THEM had already been disseminated to four corners of the world. So the disappearance has to be accompanied with a scandalous exposure. The timing and questions on my private past was just too coincidental. Since there wasn't any, they had to pin on Tom Termotto's past mistakes and blew it up. See the many comments where they tried to insinuate our relationship was much closer than it really was. If I was a regular contributor to Rense.com website, does that really make me very close to Jeff Rense. Heck I do not even have his personal direct email until recently. But Jeff Rense has no dark secrets they could exploit. See the picture?

Thus, their main objective is to kill us off physically (if not literally on cyberspace) with Dupre's vicious article on 7 Feb 2011 when they learned of my last minute plan to return home for Chinese New Year. It would be the same as Christmas Home coming for the Americans. Since much of what I had written could not be erased (like a blackboard) on the internet, the character assassination has to accompany the physical assassination. I had to be discredited beyond redemption for the public to be convinced what I had written were all trash.

But blowing hot air can sometimes blow up right on your face. Logically why would they spend so much time, effort and money trying to kill a fictitious and mysterious character that appeared out of nowhere? If what I had written were all untrue, they would have sued my a$$ off.

Illogical isn't it? Fintan Dunne and BP's Schills at TOD tried for 7 months to discredit me through technical condemnation without success. The only way to discredit me is to falsely frame me as as fictitious and mysterious character with a scandalous past or association. I had to be silently and physically disposed off so that I could never answer back the false accusations that are now being propagated so vigorously by Ian Crane and Deborah Dupre. They had no choice but to recruit some credible “truth advocates” outside the TOD's circle. If the price is right, anyone can be bought. Only those who had miraculously survived from the brink of death, truly believe and committed in doing GOD's work and helping Mother Nature cannot be bribed.

Thus, Deborah's article had to be carefully crafted and timed to be released just before my physical assassination. That I live to tell, means their scheme of multiple murders and muddling the truth had not achieved 100% success. There is more but the complete plot will not be published until after my death. They have nothing to gain but everything to lose by killing me. I issued that warning to my former employers once in one of my whistle-blower reports. Apparently, they did not take it seriously. If you think all these are crazy, wait till the bizarre truth is out. It is more shocking than you can ever imagine. But it will explain why America is in such deep @!$%# today.

Why was my immediate first response published but the second response deleted from GOSRC website?

http://gosrc.wordpress.com/2011/02/10/a-necessary-response-to-a-recent-internet-article

BK Lim says:

February 11, 2011 at 12:04 am

Dear Dr Tom and all of those concerned with the Gulf situation;

I am in the midst of preparing an article (rushed forward in view of the present circumstances) to show this “under the belt” cheap blow did not matter one single bit on the grave situation we are facing on the gulf.

Coming so close to the continued threats to my life (my computer had been down from very specific consecutive attacks), Dr Tom B Manton’s unfortunate murder and now the character assassination on Dr Tom, it only shows they are desperately grabbing at whatever “straws” to contain the growing awareness of the true magnitude of the disaster.

Many of you had read my articles and see the logic and clarity in my explanations of the evidences at hand. You all believed in what I wrote and not who I was.

My CV was only published recently at the advice of Dr Tom. We all came together on a common cause believing we could all contribute collectively to help Mother Nature. Like everyone else we all do it on our own initiatives at our own costs. I have been doing that for more than 30 years. Contribution without expectation – that is what I always say. We do not need to check on each other background. I judge from what I read and what Dr Tom had written so far makes sense to me. If I had thought otherwise, I would not have even corresponded with him let alone befriend him.

I had been independent all my life, had written reports, papers and presented papers long before this disaster happened. To insinuate that Dr Tom and I are the same person under different pen-names is absolute absurdity. Throughout my life, I have always answered to the highest Authority of the Universe, not to the corrupt.

Even if no one wants to read my articles, I will still continue to write them until I am no more on this physical earth. If I had been interested in material wealth, you would not have seen me here. I would still be working in a comfy office and living with my family.

~~~~~~end~~~~

Immediately after her shocked exposure on 7 Feb 2011, I was asked to refrain from writing an article in direct defense and confrontation. We were after all, fighting the same cause on the same side. At least I thought we were. The following comments made simultaneously on FB and GOSRC websites, was strangely deleted from the latter. Why?

Clarification made via email,forums and facebook 13 – 15 Feb 2011.

To put the record straight, I am not Tom Termotto or Sayer Ji. Anyone who says this has not actually read our articles. I am an independent geohazards specialist with 30 years experience in the industry.

The articles were clearly written by different people with different styles and technical background. Dr. Tom started writing on the gulf disaster a couple of months before my first article in early July. For those who still doubt whether I am a real person check out this link where I wrote the abstract for the paper. The key words were the Shell’s Barton Platform blowout in 1991 in Sabah, Malaysia. http://www.aogexpo.com.au/files/editor_upload/File/pdf/Geohazards%20Program%20for%20web.pdf

I can also confirm that all my articles had been written independently and was never influenced by anyone nor did I obtain all my information and facts from Tom as insinuated by some comments.

With regard to attempts on my life, police reports had been made and many letters had been sent to various government departments in at least 7 countries, my former employers, offending contractors and oil companies. They are all international leading companies. They have all kept their silence. The fact that none had filed any defamation suits against me confirms their guilt. The fact that no criminal proceedings had been initiated against the offending companies (just as in the Gulf Disaster) just shows how far and wide corruption and vested business interests had infiltrated into our modern global society. And I am not talking about 3rd world countries either.

Hopefully this will put to rest the “speculations” churned up by the recent defamatory article. What were her ulterior motives in rushing out such a baseless article without confirming her facts? She should have written to me first before trying to taint my reputation.

~~~~end~~~~

Anyone reading my articles and those of Dr Tom Termotto, from July 2010 till 7 Feb 2011 will see that there has been no compromise whatsoever with regard to spreading the truth on the disaster. Our analyses have all turned out to be true. In what way had our articles “controlled the opposition (gulf victims)” or gagged the truth as these detractors kept harping on?

Typical of BP's schills attack, they have not been able to quote any part of our work to substantiate their wild claims. Many BP's schills from The Oil Drum (TOD) and Fintan Dunne had tried to discredit my interpretation and analyses of the disaster. They had all lost and bowed out. It is not because they were less capable or less experienced. Arguing on the side of truth has the plus factor especially when your opponents have a lot to hide.

It is no coincidence that Jim Black and Ted Stevens died in plane crashes, Matt Simmons in a hot tub, Dr TB Manton in jail, John P Wheeler in a dumpster, Gregory Stone by a mysterious ailment etc. The timing and the manner of their assassination were designed to arouse the least suspicion; with the sole aim of distancing the real puppet masters from these murders. As the last pieces of the giant jigsaw puzzle are being fitted in, the race is on to silence our voices; failing which the truth needs to be muddled to make it less palatable or confusing to the public at large.

I had warned of character assassination and muddling the truth months ago. The mass deception techniques so blatantly employed in the early months of the disaster, can no longer be used effectively. With our websites reaching tens of thousands of regular readers (and increasing) they had to resort to more drastic measures before the world becomes truly aware of the MIHOP disaster (Made It Happen On Purpose, an acronym credited to Dr Tom himself). Those who could not be eliminated physically, had to be silenced through other means; character assassination, suppression, internal bickering and competition.

If we were awakening the public to this critical fact, how can we be construed as “controlling the opposition”? Can any paragraph in our articles be quoted to prove that we had compromised on our principles? Like all their previous wild accusations, decrying that we have been running a “controlled opposition campaign” is totally absurd. Is this another desperate attempt to stop more revelations of frauds and profiting schemes in the oil industry? Can anybody explain why four drilling rigs/vessels (Discovery Enterprise, Virginia Responder, Development Driller 3 and C fighter) are still needed till this day at the Macondo well location and at the up-dip edges of the Whiting Dome? With no independent observation, hydrocarbons could be leaking even more profusely than before.

http://wilynetwork.com/2010/08/02/bp-macondo-well-what-went-wrong-continued

Has The Post Disaster Recovery Program Become A Profitable Scam 9 Nov 2010.

There was not much news on DD2 at Relief Well D. Industry’s experts were surprised when BP spared no efforts to drill 2 relief wells when one should be sufficient. Anyone questioning the need for two relief wells in May would have been scorned, if not “executed”in the press. This is the unconstrained purchasing power of any disaster; 911, Afghan War, Iraqi War or any disaster-relief efforts. You question, you die either by character assassination or … !

Anyway it was thought to be a good PR move, to show the world that BP would spare no effort to contain the spill. Those with the “evil thoughts” that BP could be fielding the additional drilling rig to pad up the MPDRP expenses had to hold their tongues and wait to be vindicated. But when the Discovery Enterprise (DE) was added on and all the 3 rigs (DE, DD2 and DD3) did not demobilize from site after the completion of the relief wells, the suspicion firmed up. When the West Sirius moved in, all doubts were erased.

~~~~end of quote ~~~~~

In between major offensives, cyber mercenaries are employed to eavesdrop, snoop, disrupt, engage and to frustrate our truth-seeking mission. To minimise suspicion of their ever presence on the social network, they normally disguised themselves as retirees. Their job is also to gather information and they do that by engaging you with universal questions like When, How, Who and Motives because they could not bother to read and understand the articles posted. Once their true agenda exposed, these cyber mercenaries are no longer useful. They will disappear temporarily to return with another identity. That is the reality of the cyberspace espionage and sabotage.

Established investigative reporters like Deborah Dupre or crocodile reporters like Fintan Dunne can however be more damaging to your charitable cause and credibility. They first infiltrate your trust circle by writing an article or two, in support your theories or works. Then they used whatever preliminary data or information discussed privately, to discredit.

In Fintan's case, he first wrote to me in early August, a crucial time in the deceptive killing of the Zombie wells. A similar pattern is emerging by putting these events in correct perspective.

Instead of killing the “Zombie Wells”, the late Matt Simmons, Ted Stevens and Dr Thomas B Manton who would have been most effective in exposing BP's scam, ended up dead or silenced within days of each other. Coincidences could not have happened with such precise timing. The late Dr Thomas B Manton was effectively silenced by giving him a 15-year jail sentence with no rights of appeal. One would wonder why he signed his rights away in the plea bargain on 21 May 2010. Even without any plea bargain, a repeat child molester could easily get away with less than 3 years jail sentence.

How do you explain the frame up in Oct 2007, the anomalous bond of $700,000 when others were routinely bonded at less than $15,000, the plea bargain on 21May 2010 (1 month after the blowout) of no-jail sentence and the surprised turn-around 15-year sentence immediately after the failure to kill the spewing well on 6 Aug 2010. It is Willful Blindness not to see the connection between them. Connect the dots to the mysterious death of John P Wheeler a month after Jim Black's death on 24 Nov 2010, Dr Thomas B Manton's death on 19 Jan 2011 and Gregory Stone who passed away on 25 Feb 2011, after suffering from an “unknown disease”. Could the assassination of all these whistle-blowers including mine, have been planned soon after the “permanent well sealing fiasco” on 19 Sept 2010? Their cyber infiltrators were just waiting for a break and that break came on 15 Nov. 2010, just 9 days before Jim Black's plane crash on 24 Nov 2010.

On 15 Nov 10 8:26 PM, ?????? wrote:

Dear BK,

First, let me say that all of our correspondence has been strictly confidential and will always be, unless you direct otherwise.

I have wondered - with each subsequent expose - how they would take it, and now I know for you. Not well, so we must all prepare for any contingencies. And remain faithful and positive, as you have been.

For myself, I have received 2 death threats which I shook off quickly and have never looked back. My future response to these will be to publicize them as much as possible. Exposure before a crime is committed is truly the best way to avert it altogether. If Matt Simmons had done so, I firmly believe he'd still be with us. But his destiny was otherwise, as he was meant to be a hero of the cause - a modern day martyr.

Think about that deeply, BK, since these threats are so many and real. The age of inquisitions has long since passed, as the internet has opened up a new era of openness and freedom of expression (revelation) worldwide. You are no exception, as we are not.

Could it be so fortuitous that Dr Tom's exposure (effectively silencing him) was published on 7 Feb, to coincide with my travel plans home for the Chinese New Year holidays? If I had not been alerted by some disturbing signs, I would have probably disappeared SILENTLY too. Again such perfect timing could not be purely accidental as in the Macondo Blowout. My disappearance and silence after 7 Feb would have been taken as proof that I was a “fictitious person” involved in the COINTELPRO as exposed by Deborah Dupre. Ian Crane 's comments were meant to substantiate Deborah Dupre's story. The fishy circumstances surrounding the death of Matt Simmons, Ted Stevens, Manton and his false conviction, JP Wheeler, Jim Black and Gregory Stone would all lay buried together with the secrets of the Dying Gulf of Mexico.

No wonder there were deliberate efforts to prevent me from publishing Silencing The Independent Voices Of Truth On The Bps Mega Oil Spill and Implication Of Dr TB Mantons False Conviction And Murder. The two articles were prepared on 14 and 22 Feb but published only on 20 Feb and 1 March 2011. The latter article (Implication Of Dr TB Mantons False Conviction & Murder) has also been deleted from the Pheonix-Rising-From-the-Gulf website.

(continue part 3).

• (first written on 3 March, publication withheld on request, revised & updated 3 April 2011)

If You Cannot Beat The Truth, Then Muddle The Pool. This is part of an ongoing COINTELPRO effort to muddle the truth so that the innocent public will not know what to believe, who to believe and finally give up on believing altogether. Distorted truths are most dangerous when they appear to be the whole truth.

The internet is a double edge sword. It swings both ways. Our current investigation is still ongoing but the timing of seemingly unconnected events and people across the world, give us shocking proofs that Deborah Dupre's exposure of Dr Tom's criminal past was not an isolated independent initiative. It is part of a well-orchestrated covert operation

• to distract public attention from the Gulf Disaster issues to Dr Tom's past,
• to effectively silence the independent voices of truth and
• to bury forever the truth on the BP's Macondo Blowout and the real puppet masters behind Project Gulf Disaster.

The cover-up in this disaster was dubbed Gulfgate by Dr Tom, for the scandalous undertones. Gulfgate is much bigger and more scandalous than Watergate according to inside sources.

We were all taken by surprise when Deborah Dupre published the “Gulf Doctor Criminal Record And Infiltration” on 7^th Feb 2011; less than a week after her full endorsement of Jeff Rense's three hour radio special, Voices From The Shattered Gulf broadcast live on 1 Feb 2011, 7-10pm Pacific Time. Dr Tom was among the high-profile leaders to be interviewed.

On 27 Jan 2011 2:35pm ET Deborah wrote:

Slated to be heard are both high-profile leaders such as Cindy Sheehan, Chief Phil Lane, Dr. Tom Termotto and President of The Earth Organization, Barbara Wiseman, to name only a few Rense is hosting during this show being referred to as a historic event.

On 7 Feb 2011 4:41 am ET, Deborah wrote:

Human rights advocates responding to the Gulf of Mexico catastrophe are being stifled not only by covertly applied chemical poisons, but also by poisonous operative infiltration. A major Gulf of Mexico "oil spill" "truth advocate" "doctor," Tom Termotto is not who he claims according to the investigation conclusion finalized Sunday. Questions raised by unexpected and last-minute prominence he was given on the Rense Radio Network special, Voices from the Shattered Gulf led to research by Dupré’s intelligence and criminal investigative team that reveals Termotto is a convicted criminal using bogus credentials.

Dupre's “intelligence and criminal investigative” team apparently started to dig into Dr Tom's criminal past after their “purported big disappointment” that Dr Tom was given so much last-minute prominence during the historic radio show. Give me a break. The lamest excuse I have heard yet.

Then on 2 April 2011, Ian Crane himself admitted that

“In the last week of January 2011, I had a 1hr 45min telephone conversation (recorded!) with self-appointed Gulf Coast National Coordinator Gulf Oil Spill Remediation Conference (International Citizens' Initiative). This grandiose title conceals a dark reality. 'Dr' Tom Termotto is NOT what he seems! I had called Tom Termotto as I had been advised that he was producing a 3 hour Gulf Coast Special to be broadcast by Jeff Rense.”

This implies that Ian Crane knew about Dr Tom's past before the Jeff Rense radio show. Yet his earlier comments on 22 Feb implied he discovered Dr Tom's past based on Dupre's exposure on 7 Feb 2011. Does this Freudian Slip mean that Dupre shared the information with Ian Crane before the Jeff Rense show on 1 Feb 2011? If so, then Dupre's article was misleading with the impression that her investigation on Dr Tom's past started after Questions were raised by unexpected and last-minute prominence given to Dr Tom on the Rense Radio Network special. Why “cry-baby” now, 2 months later? Was it because Dupre's exposure setup on 7 Feb 2011 failed to achieve all of its primary objectives? Because I was still alive?

A lot of innocent people are being used and led by their noses in the mass hijack of a noble charitable cause. Their main objective is to block any official investigation and revelation of the real puppet masters behind Gulfgate. BP was not just the global giant whose shares were inflated and deflated for quick profits but also the vehicle to deliver the Death Blowout to initiate the Gulf Disaster with more long term sinister objectives. Remember the phrase “why let a good disaster go to waste”. Knowing the WHO, HOW and Profit Motives are important to prevent the next planned disaster from happening. It is everybody's duty to demand the truth on Gulfgate.

“The most dangerous of all falsehoods is a slightly distorted truth” - Georg Christoph Lichtenberg and Dupre is not telling the whole truth.

An established investigative reporter like Dupre would have checked the credentials of Dr Tom before endorsing him as a “Gulf Hero”. If there was any intention to check his background, it would have been done prior to praising Dr Tom to “high heaven” just before a historic radio-broadcast special. Without an inkling of his personal past, could Deborah's investigation team have dug out more than 30 years of personal history in less than 5 days (2 of which are weekends)? How many Tom Termotto are listed on public records? If Dr Tom is not who he is, how did Deborah know Dr Tom's middle name was Anthony?

Why was there a sudden urge to check on his past after faithfully quoting every one of his articles since 2 December 2010. Why was there a need to rush out this viral article at 4:41am ET in the morning. Do you smell a rat yet?

Deborah normally published her works during working hours with occasional urgent articles posted in the evenings. Rarely did she post past midnight. One of her rare late hours posting was to break the news of “Lisa Nelson First Gulf Victim death” at 1am ET 8 March 2011. Why was there a necessity to urgently publish Dr Tom's criminal past by 7 February 2011? Could it not wait a few more days? This exposure had to be more than just an independent shocking piece. It was part of an elaborate plan to silence the independent voices of truth on Project Gulf Disaster.

The shocking, unimaginable murder plan behind the “Masquerade of Investigative Journalism”.

Would Deborah's exposure on Dr Tom be just as “explosive” or believable if news headlines around the world read “Geohazards Specialist who deciphered the deception behind the planned BP's Macondo Blowout and Oil Spill disaster in the Gulf of Mexico” was hacked to death by robbers after returning home for the Chinese New Year holidays?

I would not think so. But if Dr Tom's criminal past had been exposed first with serious doubts cast on Dr Tom's credentials and his announced assassination attempts just weeks ago, a “murdered BK” would be viewed as another cooked-up excuse to bury the “fictitious and mysterious” geohazards specialist from a third world country. All of BK's articles on the truth of Project Gulf Disaster could then be swept away as being incredulous. The secrets of Dr TB Manton's false conviction and murder, the death of JP Wheeler, Matt Simmons, Ted Stevens, Jim Black, Gregory Stones and others who had stumbled on the truth of Project Gulf Disaster will all be buried under one scoop. A brilliant and devious plot. The only problem was, Man proposes but GOD disposes. I escaped death yet again and lived to tell.

Of course, the plan was to whisk me away silently without any incident like the last few attempts on my life. But murders do not always go according to plan. The last time I was accosted by 4 armed personnel with machetes, I put up such a fight and commotion, it attracted the attention of 40 witnesses (neighbors). Even attempts to burglarize my home, a sneak attack by 2 gunmen or to storm it with at least a dozen men ended up with failures and unwanted fanfare. I am thankful for the miraculous divine intervention each time and numerous prayers for my safety all around the world. This is yet another proof that God protects the righteous but only if danger signs are recognised in time. God can't help if we choose to ignore his warning signs.

My interests and analyses of past premeditated murders of prominent figures and the attempts on my life, served me well in recognising subtle signs one would not normally look out for. All planned murders and disasters require certain known or “predicted” circumstances to trigger the actual murder or disaster. Alibis and backup plans are messy giveaways given their inconsistencies beneath their superficial cover. Was Thad Daly publicly expressing his frustration on FB (facebook) when he posted on the hijacked Coastal Warrior FB on 3 March:

….OK one or the other, take ytour pick, is false. The assissination of scientists

envolved with the BP diaster or BKL's theories. He is still alive

so either he is wrong and just a distraction or the assissination theories are false.

Was it any coincidence Ian Crane has to publicly lure me out with his illogical comments after 20 Feb 2011 following the failure of their primary plan to assassinate me over the Chinese New Year holidays. See the pattern of coordinated attacks?

The only perfect crime is no crime and the more backup plans used, the longer is the trail of incriminating evidence. We see that in Project Gulf Disaster and the murder attempts on my life. These criminals are not brought to justice because the governments of the world had all been greased by the mafia of the Oil Industry. The elites of society is well protected by oil power. Any wonder Dr Tom coined the term “Oil Mafia”?

For the murder ruse to work, Dupre's article had to be published well ahead of my secret travel plan home. Only 3 persons in this world knew of my secret travel plan and Deborah Dupre was not one of them. Is it not strange for Deborah and her investigation team to have the sudden urge to investigate Dr Tom? Deborah had been quoting Dr Tom and BK Lim in almost all her articles on the Gulf Disaster since 2Dec 2010 when she first endorsed Dr Tom's article (The Gulf Of Mexico Is Dying) in full. Does a rational established investigative report like Dupre make sudden 180 degree turns after a mere disappointment with a radio show? Come on Deborah, you have to do better than that, to convince me.

Quote from: The Gulf Of Mexico Is Dying 2 Dec 2010 3:23pm ET, Deborah wrote:

Termotto's Special Report was made possible by BK Lim, Geohazards Specialist, whose research and analysis of BP's Gulf Oil Spill proved invaluable for truth of this unprecedented environmental catastrophe to be exposed.

Loyal subscribers and readers of Dupré's articles know it is unusual for her to publish another author's work in full. It takes an extraordinary circumstance for her to do so. The Gulf crime against humanity and the planet meets such criteria.

This unprecedented dangerous ongoing criminal Gulf of Mexico activity and Termotto's groundbreaking report below represent not only such an extraordinary circumstance. It is by his request that the report is published in full on the Examiner.

Examiner.com/human-rights-in-national/explosive-gulf-oil-special-report-psyop-global-impact-slide

~~~~end of quote~~~~~

See Deborah's comments and part of her article on Dr Tom.

Deborah Dupre 3 months ago

Thanks Howard. I cannot ever remember obliging by including an entire article written by someone else as requested - but this one warrants an exception. Dr. Termotto and the hundreds of people he represents need a groundswell of moral support and their findings need to be exposed in ever block of this nation. I am grateful to Examiner for having this here. We DO NOT NEED off-shore drilling - anymore than body scans and gropings.

Voices From The Shattered Gulf: Rense Radio Network Special to rock denial and cover-up.

Examiner 25 Jan 2011 7:22 pm ET Deborah wrote:

Before starting his own news and information talk program, Jeff Rense was a network affiliate television on-air news Anchor and News Director for a decade and witnessed what he called "the disintegration real 'news' in the face of big money and corporate agendas." Rense stated today to this writer that he decided he "would not be used a vector for such tainted 'product' as dictated by the money and power organizations controlling the television news industry."

The Jeff Rense Program may well be the world's most listened-to and quoted radio news and information program on the internet, and the Program Archives are considered unmatched in true broadcast journalism. Through Voices From The Shattered Gulf, Rense is gathering people mainstream media have suppressed as part of its Gulf news coverup operation. The Voices From The Shattered Gulf event is for the American public, and Rense Radio Network listeners internationally, to stand in solidarity with those suffering and living in a heightening reign of fear along the Gulf Coast and elsewhere on the planet revealing the truth about the Gulf.

Dr. Tom Termotto, in a telephone conversation with this writer on Sunday said Voices From The Shattered Gulf is the best insurance for those being persecuted due to revealing truth about this ongoing mega disaster. During the broadcast, Mr.Rense will unveil an unprecedented collective effort, making available, absolutely free, life-enhancing health information to the many millions being impacted as a result of the BP disaster in the Gulf. More important than the music, Voices From The Shattered Gulf will provide listeners with testimonies by Gulf victims, the true Gulf Heroes and colleagues of Mr. Rense. Slated guests include poisoned "clean-up" crew workers and Gulf Coast residents who will give testimonies.

Who is more dangerous to the puppet masters? Deborah or Dr Tom? Ian Crane or BK Lim?

Ian Crane posted the following comments on the same article posted at the phoenix rising from the gulf website.

Ian R Crane says:

January 9, 2011 at 5:24 pm

If you are interested in knowing how this event was perpetrated and learning the name of the individual who was put on the BP Deepwater Horizon to ‘Make It Happen’ watch the following YouTube presentation recorded in Stockholm, Sweden:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQc19IB6YA4

This was a population reduction event!

Ian R Crane

Was this Ian's first and only comment on Dr Tom's article (The Gulf Of Mexico Is Dying)? I included Ian Crane's comment to show that Ian Crane himself had at least come across Dr Tom's or my article before the 7 Feb 2011. (This was before the recent article on 2 April 2011, where he admitted illegally recording 1½ hrs of telephone conversation with Dr Tom).

Ian Crane did not seem to have any serious disagreement with what Dr Tom and I was advocating at least until the last week of January 2011. It was made known to me recently that Dr Tom and Ian Crane had indeed communicated verbally. Dr Tom's article attracted over 200 comments with participants from all over the world. If there was a sign of “controlled opposition” or “censorship”, all of us including Ian and Deborah, did not notice. The majority of the comments were strongly critical of the way BP and the government had handled the Gulf Disaster. Dr Tom wrote that our messages of truth were beginning to be spread not only nationwide but around the world. Does all these conjure a picture of “controlling the opposition”? You tell me.

Anyone reading all of the above or Deborah's articles prior to 7 Feb 2011 (Gulf-Doctor-Criminal-Record-And-Infiltration) would not have believed she was referring to the same Dr Tom. As if on cue, I received several emails and comments asking whether I had any prior knowledge of Dr Tom's criminal past, the morning Deborah's vicious article appeared. How could I? I have not physically met anyone from US whom I had corresponded with regarding the gulf issues.

(continue part 2)

• by BK Lim (22 Feb 2011, updated 1 March 2011)

A man is innocent unless proven guilty beyond doubt. A Plea Bargain is only an arrangement between prosecutor and defendant whereby the defendant pleads guilty to a lesser charge in the expectation of leniency. It does not prove guilt beyond doubt. By accepting a plea bargain on 21 May 2010, Dr Thomas B Manton sacrificed proving his innocence in a lengthy trial in exchange for a speedy settlement so that he could get down to the business of helping the Gulf Victims and containing the mega oil spill. No one understood the impact of an oil spill more than him or was more prepared to deal with a mega oil spill he had anticipated for years given the reckless pursuit of oil wealth the industry had whilly-dallied in.

See In Honor of Dr. Thomas B. Manton, a True Modern American Hero

He was the President and CEO of International Oil Spill Control Corporation; one of the very first oil spill control companies in the world formed outside of the rubric of the Oil & Gas Industry. In this capacity he helped create many of the protocols and establish many of the standards that are still in use today throughout the realm of oil spill control.

Such selfless sacrifice is the hallmark of a great man; not a criminal. I am no supporter of any proven criminal. My articles had always carried the theme of exposing the criminality behind the deception. The suspicious circumstances surrounding his 15-year jail conviction and his subsequent murder while serving jail time, should arouse the “sense of justice” in every righteous human being. It is more than just proving one man's innocence. The powers behind Project 911 and Project Gulf Disaster know this and will do their utmost to keep the truth of Manton's false conviction from ever seeing the light of day.

The truth on Manton's false conviction is more critical now that the conspiracy behind the Deepwater Horizon blowout is beginning to unfold. The needless consequences of a disaster that could have been averted; are just beginning to be felt around the world. There are enough natural catastrophe, without the additional burden of manmade disasters to tilt world civilisation into the brink.

With all our modern sophistication, such blatant injustices should have been history. Instead they seem to be proliferating worldwide. Planting incriminating evidence be it drugs, semen (DNA) or children pornographic files, is the standard Modus Operandi for public assassination or elimination of political opponents and prominent personalities. Even now a live comical example is being played out in the Malaysian courts; the Anwar_Ibrahim_sodomy_trials (wikipedia).

Frauds are like imitation products. They all fail under scrutiny. It is the process by which a product is produced that distinguishes the genuine product from the imitation, not the label, not the attestation and certainly not the planted DNA or child-porn files. A planned disaster like Project Gulf Disaster could not duplicate the accidental nature of events leading to an accidental disaster. Many illogical events, infractions, safety lapses, improprieties, wrong decisions and other idiocies etc, were ignored and falsely reported. Even those that were reported smack of discrepancies and could not have possibly happened according to the official version unless we are all living in “Disneyland” and applying the laws of impossibility. See The Physics Of Impossibility -A Critical Review Of BP's & Oil Commission's Reports.

Just as logical reasoning first suggested that the BP's Mega Oil Spill disaster was a disaster made to happen, Manton's possession of child-porn files charge has all the evidences of a set up. His conviction will be proven to be false if the case is re-investigated fairly and professionally. Before arguing Manton's case further, look at some of the recent child-porn arrests that did not concern the gulf disaster.

25Feb 2011 Lee John Leonard Ocean-Springs-Ex-Officer-Arrested-Again

OCEAN SPRINGS, Miss. (AP) - A former Ocean Springs police officer who was arrested in November on a child pornography offense has been arrested again, this time on a cyber stalking charge. Jackson County Sheriff Mike Byrd says 45-year-old Lee John Leonard was arrested late Thursday. A complaint was filed Feb. 19 by a woman who said Leonard was harassing her on a social networking website. Byrd says Leonard was not supposed to be using a computer, under the conditions of his bond on the child pornography charge. In that case, Leonard is accused of downloading child pornography to his police-issued laptop computer.

25 Feb 2011 Raymond "Robin" Watts' Cherokee-Teacher-Busted-For Child Porn

Watts, 55, was arrested soon after sharing more than 1,000 explicit images of underage boys with the ICE agent. Authorities uncovered additional illegal images on his personal computer after executing a search warrant of his Kingston home. The veteran teacher came to law enforcement's attention during an investigation of the "Boylover" pedophile community, the affidavit states. A cooperating source told investigators the science instructor had swapped child porn with two longtime members of the online community.

After communicating via e-mail, the undercover agent met with Watts on Jan. 29 at a Cartersville restaurant, according to the affidavit. They then drove to the teacher's residence, where "the conversation centered on kids sports and their interest in children." According to the sworn statement, Watts stated he was predominantly attracted to boys ages 9 to 12. During subsequent telephone conversations Watts talked about working at a Mill Creek boys basketball game, the agent testified. The two met again Feb. 12 at Watts' home where the suspect transferred 1,027 images to the agent's thumb drive.

24 Feb 2011 Albert Turnell Jr.Retired-Pastor-Faces-Child-Porn

If you attended a Methodist church in north Georgia anytime over the last 40 years, odds are you came across Albert Turnell, Jr. a retired Cobb minister. "I don't know of any man in the United Methodist North Georgia district more admired, more respected," said Dr. Joe Peabody, pastor of Mt. Zion United Methodist Church in east Cobb.

FBI Special Agent Stephen Emmett tells WSB 71-year-old Albert Turnell, Jr. was arrested Thursday morning on charges of possession and distribution of child porn. Emmett says Turnell "came to law enforcement's attention over the Internet" and was taken into custody at his Smyrna home. The case was investigated by the FBI's Innocent Images Task Force and the GBI's Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force.

21 Feb 2011 Pastor Jerry CannonPastor-Jerry-Cannon-Arrested-On-Child Porn

The investigation began, according to court documents, after a citizen in Fairhope, Ala., complained to the police department in January about pornography posted on a Facebook account of a Fairhope resident. An FBI agent based in Mobile interviewed the person who complained and was told about child pornography being posted on other Facebook accounts.The agent was given permission to take over the complainant’s Facebook account to view the contents of a page the citizen had reported. The agent reported that the user of the account who identified himself as “Terry Lewis” offered to swap pictures of girls between 9 and 21 years of age, but “I like them to be 10-16 myself,” according to the affidavit.

Lewis – later identified as Cannon, according to the agent – gave permission to view the contents of his Facebook page. On Jan.25, 2011, the complaint said, the “Terry Lewis” Facebook account was being used to post more than 600 images of child pornography including prepubescent girls with their genitalia exposed and multiple videos including adults performing sexual acts on prepubescent females.

17 Feb 2011 John Wilson, 23Man-Arrested-On-Child-Porn-Chargeosting-Images-On-Facebook

Maine State Police arrested a Greenbush man Thursday afternoon after reportedly finding child pornography on his computers. John Wilson, 23, was arrested Thursday afternoon on a charge of possessing sexually explicit material, a Class C felony, after state police raided his Middle River Road home and seized his computers and cell phones, Maine Department of Public Safety spokesman Stephen McCausland said Friday.

“They found [sexually explicit] images immediately and then seized the equipment,” he said. He said Wilson’s hard drives now are being analyzed by the Maine State Police Computer Crimes Unit in Vassalboro. According to McCausland, investigators believe that Wilson posted child pornography on as many as 15 Facebook accounts he created over the past year. Wilson’s alleged criminal activity was reported to authorities by personnel from the social networking site as well as members of the public over the past month. “Facebook has been dealing with him on and off,” McCausland said. “Facebook would find a site and take the site down, and he would go ahead and set up a new one.”

5 Feb 2011 Dale Chisena Sr. http://www.wftv.com/news/26758523/detail.html

A former Orange County elementary school teacher is facing new charges for crimes involving children. Florida Department of Law Enforcement investigators arrested Dale Chisena Sr. Friday at a Lexington, Kentucky airport. Officials say Chisena Sr. was traveling to Kentucky to meet what he thought was a juvenile for sex. Cybercrime investigators began tracking Chisena Sr. after he went online to solicit sex with minors. Agents searched his mother's Apopka home Friday night looking for evidence. Eyewitness News reported about Chisena Sr.'s previous arrest on child pornography charges in March of 2010. http://www.wesh.com/news/26754321/detail.html WESH 2 News obtained exclusive video of Dale Chisena Sr. buying gifts for young girls minutes before taking off from the Orlando Sanford International Airport. FDLE agents served a search warrant on his Apopka home Friday night. Agents said they hope to find the computer that Chisena used to set up a sexual encounter with the woman and her two daughters, ages 9 and 10.

28 Jan 2011 Marine Corey McAdoo. Marine-Arrested-Child-Pornography-Portland

Marine Corey McAdoo, age 31, made an initial appearance before Federal Magistrate Nita Stormes in the Southern District of California on Friday, January 28th. A criminal complaint, filed by the FBI in Portland charges McAdoo with two counts of receiving child pornography. At the time, he was stationed at a U.S. Marine Camp in Leatherneck, Afghanistan. The complaint alleges that a girlfriend living in Portland, Inez Lambert, sent McAdoo numerous child pornography videos that she produced between October and November of 2010. Lambert faces several charges from the State of Oregon. In the course of this investigation, NCIS agents interviewed McAdoo in Afghanistan, and, at the direction of the camp commander, the military subsequently returned him to Camp Pendleton, California. He arrived in California earlier this week. On Thursday, January 27th, the FBI arrested McAdoo on the federal charges, and, with the assistance of NCIS, transported him to the Metropolitan Correctional Center in San Diego.

27 Jan 2011 Anthony Tremonte Ms Marine_Resources_Child_Porn

Another Mississippi law enforcement officer has been arrested for allegedly keeping child porn on his state issued laptop. Anthony Nicholas Tremonte, 31, was arrested Wednesday and charged with one count of Possession of Child Pornography. On Friday, the Jackson County Sheriff’s Department’s Tri County Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force searched Tremonte’s home on Moreton Place in Ocean Springs and seized the laptop. What officers found on that computer led to Tremonte’s arrest five days later.

Jackson County Sheriff's investigators had Tremonte under surveillance with the county's Internet Crimes Against Children system for 3 weeks, Sheriff Mike Byrd said. Tremonte's computer hard drive was seized by investigators on Friday and child pornography images were discovered Tuesday afternoon, Byrd said.

7 Jan 2011 Rob P. Mocarsky Jackman-Kindergarten-Teacher-Arrested-On-Child-Porn-Charges

An award-winning kindergarten teacher who was arrested Thursday and accused of possessing child pornography remained at Somerset County Jail on Friday after his first court appearance. Rob P. Mocarsky, 41, who has been a teacher at Forest Hills Consolidated School in Jackman since 2002, is charged with Class A sexual exploitation of a minor under 12 years old and Class C possession of sexually explicit materials of a minor under 12 years old. Police said they found dozens of sexually explicit photographs of children on Mocarsky’s computer.

According to documents in Somerset County Superior Court, Mocarsky’s alleged exploitation of a minor occurred between Sept. 1, 2007, and June 30, 2008. His alleged possession of child pornography was discovered Thursday when a team of detectives from the Maine State Police executed a search warrant at his home, which was followed by Mocarsky’s arrest.

Plante said the issue came to light after she received complaints and questions from a parent on Dec. 8, 2010. Mocarsky, who has a wife and two children, was put on administrative leave that day. Before that, he had been seen as an exemplary teacher, said Plante. In 2004, he was one of 100 teachers in the United States to win a Miliken Family Foundation Educator Award, which came with a $25,000 prize. Plante said he also has been nominated in recent years for the Maine Teacher of the Year award.

4 Jan 2011Amado Nicholas Hernandez Celebrity-Cruises-Crew-Arrested-On-Child-Porn

Hernandez was arrested after he apparently abandoned his computer which was subsequently purchased at an estate sale. The computer reportedly contained 450 photographs and about 250 video files of child pornography portraying a total of 44 different victims. The computer contained information which permitted the FBI to trace the pornography back to the crew member. Amado Nicholas Hernandez, age 31,was employed by Celebrity Cruises as an audiovisual manager and provided onboard guest-entertainment services.

Dr Thomas B Manton's Case Is The Odd One Out.

Notice the stark difference between Manton's case and the above cases that had nothing to do with the Gulf disaster? Dr Thomas B Manton's case stands out like a sore thumb. Not only did he not fit in the profile of a child molester or one who indulges habitually in child-porn activities, the circumstances leading to the discovery of the child-porn files in his computer were very different. If Manton was not your average child-molester or child-porn addict, why was he targeted exactly 2 years before the Macondo Wells were destined to blow in Oct 2009?

“Manton was arrested Oct 16 2007 by Detective Lieutenant Brad Stark of the Okeechobee County Sheriff’s Office (OCSO) after he had taken his computer to a local business for repair. The computer technician found the child photos and immediately contacted the Sheriff’s office. Lt. Stark arrested Man when he showed up to get his computer.”

Unlike the genuine child-porn cases, no suspicious past activities (cyber or otherwise) triggered any investigation or were there any surveillance on Manton's suspected child-porn activities before the arrest. Like any sexual activities conducted in the privacy of the home or computer, law enforcement officers do not normally zoom to arrest the suspected offender based on a third party report. In the 10 cases quoted above, the reported child-porn activities were confirmed by a period of surveillance, investigation and/or previous conviction as the chances of false reporting (with malicious intent) can be very high. Understandably, the investigating officers would not want to rush into any arrest without being doubly sure.

The child-porn files were supposedly “an accidental discovery” by a computer technician who was repairing Manton's computer. The fact that the DNA sample obtained from the lower rectum of Saiful's @!$%# was confirmed to be Anwar's, still does not prove Saiful (a healthy, strong young man in his mid twenties) was forcefully sodomised (raped) by Anwar, a smaller older man approaching 65 in age with a well-known back problem. At the very least, consensual sex by willing partners maybe but certainly not sodomy by force as claimed. The Anwar Sodomy II case is just as ridiculous as Manton's child-porn charge.

The fact that the child-porn files were found in Manton's computer during a period when Manton's computer was no longer in his possession or under his control, does not prove anything. Why would the detectives take the computer technician's word against an elderly prominent man who was not computer savvy? It would have been a stronger case against Manton if the child-porn pictures were found in Manton's computer immediately after confiscation in his presence. Not in his absence!

Manton's computer had malfunctioned after a bout of virus/worm/spyware attacks. The concerted computer attacks on the independent voices of truth on the Gulf Disaster reported in our previous articles, do ring a bell. In one Adware scan, there were 17 suspected spyware files. The interesting fact was none of the detected malicious “spyware” had been listed before.

If there were reasonable doubts that the child-porn pictures described by the sentencing judge as “horrific and evil behaviour” why had the the detectives not place Manton under tight surveillance or carried out a sting operation. If they had been so confident (maybe based on previous convictions or complaints) why did they not raid Manton's house for further substantiating evidence. Zilch! Even the second computer taken from his home after Manton's arrest had to be sent to Detective David Broughton of the Martin County Sheriff's office as they needed a computer expert to find “the additional photos and video of children”.

Even the most lenient judge should find this fact disturbing. Why do they need a “computer expert” detective to “find more photos and videos of children”? The fact that the average “computer technician” who was supposed to be repairing the computer (and /or harddisk) and not meticulously searching for the “child-porn pictures” suggests that the offensive files could be easily seen or found. Even a 100GB harddisk carries an average of 60,000 files (of all sizes) or 200 million high resolution mpg images (500k). Even if Manton had instructed the computer technician to recover his files from the “problematic harddisk”, all the files would have been transferred en masse by a recovery programme. There would not be a chance to look at individual picture or video files, unless the technician was specifically instructed to search for them. Most antivirus programmes do not scan data files (and photos are data files). Again if an anti-virus programme was used to scan the harddisk, there would not be a chance of an accidental discovery of 200 odd child-porn pictures unless there was a “premeditated effort to discover them” or easier still plant them.

So if a “computer expert” detective was necessary to “find” the “more child-porn pictures” in the second computer, 70-year old Manton must have been a computer nerd to hide them so well with encryption or other digital tactics. By all reckoning, the child-porn pictures should have been easier to find in the second computer, since the detectives knew what to look for. So either the detectives had much lower intelligence than the “computer technician” who could find the pictures accidentally outside his scope of work or the “shoes” just do not fit.

If there were going to be more questions than answers, why did the investigating officers not look for more incriminating evidence. All computer files carry with them attributes that include date-time stamps when the files were created, modified, originated, transferred, no of pixels etc. Details would reveal whether all these files were transferred at the same time, by the same mode or from the same sources etc. Such information would have erased all doubts on Manton's suspicious possession of child-porn charges to secure a firm conviction. With such detailed evidence, there would be no need to trump up on the numbers of images or the obscenity of the child-porn images as reported in the Okeechobee News on 6 Aug 2010. The only reason why there was no need to gather further incriminating evidence, was because Manton like any computer illiterate of his generation (lost in the computer age), was wrongly advised (legally) and was overwhelmed by the seemingly incriminating evidence of 500 pictures. It must have sounded a lot to someone who had probably not seen a child-porn picture before.

More curious was the fact that the Okeechobee County Sheriff did not see fit to apply for a search warrant immediately after being notified by the computer technician who discovered the files. If this was indeed a surprised accidental discovery, an immediate search of Manton's other computers should have been warranted before the evidences were destroyed. Why wait to arrest Manton only after he showed up to collect his computer? Where was the urgency if indeed this was the “child-porn bust” of the year involving a high profile personality? In fact if you google for Manton's arrest in 2007, you would not find any news on it. Compare it with the genuine cases above. Strange is it not when exposure and publicity were supposed to be the main deterrent to such despicable crime? Why? What happened to the “videos of children” stated in the news report?

The Secrecy Surrounding Manton's Child-Porn Arrest.

Manton's arrest and child-porn charge were kept secret instead of being publicized for it to be an effective “noose around Manton's neck”; to keep him in check and to ensure his silence. Nobody, not even Manton or the detectives who arrested him knew the real motives behind the arrest. Any publicity would have been detrimental to the objective of the “frame-up” operation. If Manton had decided to publicly prove his innocence, maybe the disastrous blowout could have been averted.

But child-porn charges bring shame and stigma to those even if their guilt had not been proven yet. If that had happened then the plot for Project Gulf Disaster might have been exposed and possibly derailed it. Watergate was initially reported as burglary. President Kennedy's assassination was also full of discrepancies. The official story on 911 is also beginning to fall apart, after 10 years. The “Gulf of Tonkin Incident” which propelled the US into a stalemate War was a farce. So were many historical incidences which changed the course of world history.

Dead men tell no tales but coincidences are no accidents either.

Were the recent deaths of personalities associated with Gulf Disaster all coincidental? Just like Manton's false conviction, if the surface is scratched, the truth will definitely show. Only those who had escaped death from such murderous plots, could tell their harrowing tales and the secrets behind these murders plots.

Since dead men tell no tales, my near-death experiences will do to illustrate the mafia and evil scheming in the oil industry; just because I chose to speak the truth without fear and favor, carry out my work diligently and refusing to bend under pressure from my employer to turn a blind eye on the safety violations, data and medical frauds, corruptions and unscrupulous business practices I encountered as the Client Representative for oil companies. I entered the Oil Industry as an enthusiastic young geologist full of expectation and respect for an awesome industry. I left the industry, totally deluded and disappointed with the industry 30 years later. Any lingering doubts the oil industry will regulate itself and reverse the oily slope of deterioration, was snuffed out with the Deepwater Horizon blowout on 20 April 2010.

The industry-wide safety farce and oily corruption power is aptly demonstrated by the world's largest geohazards survey company which is tasked with seeking out safety hazards in the oil industry. Instead of chartering decent safe vessel, an Indonesian Government vessel (BJ1) which was mothballing in port serving as a floating accommodation for resting crew was chartered on the cheap (illegally) to a middleman who inflated it by 5 times to USD5,000/day. The geohazards contractor repackaged it (just like the toxic subprime loans) to charge unsuspecting Oil Companies at 1000% (USD50,000/day). Besides the corruption to get vessel certified as a seaworthy vessel fully compliant with international standards (which of course was a big farce by itself), there were numerous breakdowns, fires, safety violations and frauds etc. The vessel was grounded at port when the halon fire smothering system blew up. Even for a hardcore quality control professional, the deceptive maneuvering and “cat & mouse play” to get the vessel sailing left no doubt it was the tail which wagged the dog. To resume the survey, the contractor had to reinstall the halon fire smothering system. But international regulations prohibit the installation of any new halon system. Halon is a banned ozone depleting, environmentally hazardous gas. There are alternatives such as CO₂ but they would cost more and required time. The Philippines Marine Authorities not only turned a blind eye. A few high ranking officials even turned out for a “mock” inspection which was later admitted as a “social visit” after my exposure. The Australian oil company I represented did not bother to respond.

Disappointed that I refused to turn a blind to the blatant HSE abuses, cheating and frauds (as other Client Reps had subserviently obliged), my employer plotted with the errant contractor, to set me up for several “accidents”. Initially I found it hard to believe but the falsified contracts, work instructions even to the extent of violating Australian Immigration laws, fraudulent medical certification and long email trails of outright lies cannot be wrong. If so many segments of the industry in so many parts of the world are in collusion with government regulators to willfully ignore so many whistle-blower reports, is it any wonder, disasters like Australia's greatest oil spill (Montara in Timor Sea) and US's most disastrous mega oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico happened on such a regular basis?

Coercion into Plea Bargaining.

It would be more of a surprise if any autopsy on Manton's false conviction showed no deception and underhand tactics?

500 images were originally quoted to scare Manton into submission as with any coercion-tactic. Otherwise, why would only 120 photos be later defined as pornographic? How did 120 become 115 child-porn images and amounted to only 33 counts? Was it any surprise the 33 counts were finally reduced to only 1 count on 21 May 2010, 1 month after the blowout? 35 Surety Bonds (no 2501421451 - 2501421485) totalling USD700,000 (USD20,000 x 35) were posted on 14 Jan 2009 and released on 6 Aug2010 the day of sentencing. These are no wacky numbers but facts from the court filings.

Compare this to bonds of USD5,000 to USD50,000 normally imposed for “possession of child-pornography” charges. Has the law changed so much since 2007? It could not be since even a convicted habitual under-aged sex offender and under-aged prostitution operator was sentenced to only 13 months jail.

A British Prince, an American Paedophile & the Australian Teen Sex Slave

The FBI case revealed sexual allegations by at least 20 girls, however, Epstein struck a deal with prosecutors and served 13 months' jail for soliciting child prostitution.

Why were only 115 pornographic photos sent to the National Centre for Missing and Exploited Children? Should not 500 images be sent for identification? On what basis did they select the 115 photos? How many of the photos sent matched with the children who had been identified to have come from Georgia, North Carolina and Texas (within the US) and other countries? What was the percentage hit? With thousands (if not millions) of child-porn pictures in the Internet, what are the chances of 10% hit? A 10% hit rate would suggest the detectives knew which photos to send for identification and a strong likelihood that the child-porn images were planted from police record files of missing and exploited children.

Why were there no follow-up in rescuing the children identified within the US? Why was Manton not investigated further on how he acquired those child-porn images? If these were downloaded from the internet, why was it not reported like the other child-porn cases? If not, did the detectives derelict on their duties to follow up (as in other genuine child-porn cases) for more serious offenses of child molestation, production of child-porn or even exploitation of children.

It seems the prosecutors were quite contented in charging Manton for only possession of child-pornography. Isn't a 15-year jail sentence for a first time offender a little too harsh? Considering that child molesters routinely had much lighter sentencing, is this not too heavy handed? What did Manton do to deserve this harsh sentence, other than his independent voice on the Gulf Disaster? How can Americans stand tall with such double standard justice? Or is justice served to please the British Colonial master, considering Prince Andrew and Tony Hayward are both British?

Why was confirmed Billionaire Child-Sex offender given a lighter jail sentence of 13 months?

~~~start of quote~~~~

It should not be forgotten that Epstein is a registered sex offender after recently completing his sentence for offences relating to child prostitution. However, he avoided trial on more serious charges that carried a potential life sentence. And no one reading The Mail on Sunday’s interview with the woman who was prepared to testify against him can be in any doubt of the seriousness of the charges.

Epstein, a Wall Street money manager who once counted Bill Clinton and Donald Trump among his friends, became the subject of an undercover investigation in 2005 after the stepmother of a 14-year old girl claimed she was paid $200 (£125) to give him an ‘erotic massage’. The subsequent FBI probe uncovered at least 20 girls levelling sexual allegations against him. Eventually, Epstein struck a ‘plea bargain’ with prosecutors – a practice not permitted under British law – under which he was allowed to plead guilty to two relatively minor charges.

Police claim that his donations to politicians and his ‘dream team’ of influential lawyers deterred prosecutors from bringing more serious charges of sex-trafficking. The deal certainly kept the names of a lot of Epstein’s famous friends out of an embarrassing court case. However, an unusual part of the agreement was that Epstein’s alleged victims were allowed to bring civil proceedings against him.

He has so far made 17 out-of-court settlements, and some cases are ongoing. One of these girls was to have been a key witness for the prosecution had the case gone to trial. She was just 15 years old when she was drawn into Epstein’s exploitative world in 1998. In her civil writ against him, under the pseudonym Jane Doe 102’ she alleged that her duties included being ‘sexually exploited by Epstein’s adult male peers including royalty’.

Read more: Prince-Andrew-Girl-17-Sex-Offender-Friend-Flew-Britain-Meet-Him

~~~~ end of quote ~~~~

Actions speak louder than words, it shows in Manton's framed-up conviction & unfair sentence.

Dr Thomas B Manton's framed-up conviction and subsequent murder in jail while serving time, are significant in more ways than many had realised. They add to the growing list of evidences that point to the fact that BP's Mega Oil spill was a planned disaster; possibly first hatched after the successful implementation of Project 911 and planned in earnest in 2007 when the new BP CEO, Tony Hayward was specifically sent to America to take charge of this important Gulf Disaster project.

Dr Thomas B Manton (a descendant of former President Thomas Jefferson) is a high profile personality with powerful political foreign friends, an outspoken human rights figure and the CEO (also President) of the International Oil Spill Control Corporation. If a mega oil spill disaster was indeed being planned in 2007, Dr Thomas B Manton would definitely be number one on the “assassination target” list. But eliminating a high profile personality would risk exposing the covert scheme. The frame-up charge and arrest was only an instrument to keep Manton from “spilling the beans” on the after-disaster Recovery or more accurately; Cover-Up Efforts.

The late Matt Simmons was not an open critic of the oil industry before the disaster or in 2009. This explains why he was not targeted until after the unsuccessful “killing of the well” in early Aug 2010. The late Ted Stevens was also a surprised whistle-blower that needed to be silenced after his announced donation of all his senate and personal papers on BP's operation in Alaska. There were more to this. The attempts to silence the independent voices of truth on the Gulf Disaster started from Nov 2010 onwards after the predicted failure of BP's recovery efforts and revelations on the conspiracy behind the Gulf Disaster were starting to make sense. See Silencing The Independent Voices posted 20 Feb2011.

~~~start of quote ~~~

Dr TB Manton needed to be reined with a noose around his neck, in order to secure his cooperation. He was tricked into a plea bargain in late May, about a month after the 20 April 2010 blowout. He accepted the plea bargain (with a promise of no jail sentence) so that he could concentrate his effort on the oil spill remediation effort.

There was never any need to jail or kill Dr TB Manton even as late as July 2010 since BP was still confident of killing the spewing 3^rd well covertly before the first week of August. The relief wells were drilled towards this S20BC well at 18,000ft BML and not Well A. To ensure the “Dog and Pony” show at Well A was convincing enough, the relief wells had to intercept and bottom-kill the runaway well first. Nothing was left to chance; certainly not in full view of billions around the globe.

On 6 Aug 2010, Dr TB Manton was sentenced to an unduly harsh 15 years jail time; effectively silencing a shocked innocent man who changed his “not guilty” plea in late May in exchange for a fine and no jail time. Two days later Matt Simmons was dead in a hot bath tub. Ex-senator Ted Stevens died in a plane crash 2 days later on 10 Aug 2010?

~~~~~end of quote~~~~~~

Dr Thomas B Manton, Matt Simmons and Ted Stevens were all silenced in the week following the failure to kill Well A convincingly on 2 Aug 2010. Their connections to the Gulf Disaster and timing of their deaths were no coincidences.

If Dr Thomas B Manton had been falsely convicted and subsequently murdered to secure his silence, he should be included in the growing list of Project Gulf Disaster's victims. He should be honored instead of being wrongfully disgraced. His false conviction is one more proof that the power behind Project Gulf Disaster spans across national borders and beyond global oil corporations. In the reckless hot pursuit of oil wealth, greasing the wheels of the industry is the norm, not the exception. Unfortunately there are no safety brakes. Rising crude oil price will increase the pressure to dislodge a few more safety catches along the way. The speeding train is on a collision course and that collision could be near if oil companies are allowed to continue in their freewheeling without accepting their responsibilities in protecting Mother Nature.

Dear Friends and Colleagues,

Above is a letter which I have written to two US Congressmen/Chairmen regarding some geohazard/seafloor developments at the Macondo Prospect in the Gulf of Mexico, the location of last year's BP Oil Spill.

I have posted many articles on the internet on the geohazardous conditions at the Macondo site (see http://bklim.newsvine.com and http://phoenixrisingfromthegulf.wordpress.com). Those of us working in the Oil and Gas Industry know how dangerous oil exploration can be and the disastrous consequences of any blowout, especially those that had reached their targeted reservoirs. The number of near disasters and oil spill disasters in recent years is not, and can never be, good for our industry. The safety of our working colleagues and the future of the oil industry are dependent on improving, not deteriorating safety standards and compromising preventive pre-drill planning, management and geohazards assessment.

We must also prove to the world our sincerity, our responsibility and our accountability towards preserving the global environment and leaving the world in a better place for our children. To those who know me or have worked with me in the past, I would deeply appreciate your support in emailing some words of verification that I (BK Lim) am a real person (not virtual) and a professional geohazards specialist working in the offshore Oil and Gas Industry. If appropriate, you might want to address any similar issues or incidents that would validate a pattern of conduct which led to the Macondo Blowout, as well as many similar situations that have occurred throughout the history of offshore oil and gas drilling.

To those who have not met me in person, but have come across my past work and contribution to the industry, please spare some time to write to:

Dr. Tom Termotto, National Coordinator

Gulf Oil Spill Remediation Conference

Tallahassee, FL

"Oil Spill Solution"

We greatly need the world's support in the remediation of the BP Oil Spill disaster in the Gulf of Mexico. Who would be better to lend support to this international community endeavor than those whose livelihoods depend on the Gulf's future, and those who understand the true state of affairs wherever oil and gas drilling are conducted in the oceans of the world.

Kind regards,

BK Lim

Links to video mentioned in the letter:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7aDI2X5hMOo.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SF5pWTvu5L4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_DgHYF8rKg&feature=related

World leaders sought to come up with the hundreds of millions of dollars needed to save the tiger from extinction and double the big cat's numbers by the next Year of the Tiger in 2022.

Krishna And The Elephant Trees

Some stories to take our focus off of what is in the news right now.

Great idea. The ultimate recycling -- of urine.

California? Who would have thought this showbiz state would be number one in anything besides the bulging population of "wanna be's"?

Destruction of any living thing on our planet must stop.

The truth is that conservation and environmental stewardship are core conservative values.

It is hard to imagine how someone can be considered a Conservative if they don't want to conserve the most important thing we have, the environment. They claim that they actually do, but not just now, not in that way, or not if it might cost a little. They also try to perpetuate the myth that conservation and environmental protection are liberal causes to justify their opposition. The truth is that conservation and environmental stewardship are core conservative values. (1)

It is even harder to imagine why the Republican Party would embrace the ideals and arguments of those non-conservationists. Our past Republican leaders have been strong advocates for environmental stewardship and they were responsible for enacting some of our most significant environmental legislation. (2)

Theodore Roosevelt believed that conservation was essential for keeping America strong and he was responsible for the permanent preservation of many of the unique natural resources of the United States. As he said, "To waste, to destroy, our natural resources … will result in undermining in the days of our children the very prosperity which we ought by right to hand down to them."

Richard Nixon enacted many of the nation's landmark environmental laws, which he saw as a means of unifying the nation. The EPA was created under Nixon's leadership. "Clean air, clean water, open spaces -- these should once again be the birthright of every American." "...we must strike a balance so that the protection of our irreplaceable heritage becomes as important as its use. The price of economic growth need not and will not be deterioration in the quality of our lives and our surroundings."

Barry Goldwater, dubbed "Mr. Conservative", was a gifted photographer who produced beautiful pictures illustrating his beloved Arizona landscape. He put his finger on it when he said : "While I am a great believer in the free enterprise system and all that it entails, I am an even stronger believer in the right of our people to live in a clean and pollution-free environment."

Ronald Reagan signed 43 bills preserving a total of 10.6 million acres of wilderness. He was instrumental in U.S. ratification of the Montreal Protocol -- which dramatically reduced depletion of the upper atmosphere's protective ozone layer. He developed a cap-and–trade system that prevented our acid rain form blowing into Canada that cost much less than even the government estimated. As he communicated: "If we've learned any lessons during the past few decades, perhaps the most important is that preservation of our environment is not a partisan challenge; it's common sense. Our physical health, our social happiness, and our economic well-being will be sustained only by all of us working in partnership as thoughtful, effective stewards of our natural resources." "I'm proud of having been one of the first to recognize that states and the federal government have a duty to protect our natural resources from the damaging effects of pollution that can accompany industrial development."

John McCain during his 2008 presidential campaign, proposed a pragmatic national energy policy based upon good stewardship, good science, and reasonableness. He cosponsored cap-and-trade bills in the Senate in 2003, 2005, and 2007 and, as he said then, "A cap-and-trade policy will send a signal that will be heard and welcomed all across the American economy. And the highest rewards will go to those who make the smartest, safest, most responsible choices." And he was right. Having to pay the true cost of fossil fuel use is fair and would create incentives for renewable energy and energy efficiency.

Cap-and-trade was once considered to be the market solution to reducing carbon emissions. When popular, a number of key Republicans, such as Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Sen. Richard Lugar (R-IN), Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) went on record as endorsing the policy. Even Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA), only two years ago, while supporting a version of a cap-and-trade bill in the Massachusetts legislature said:"Reducing carbon dioxide emission in Massachusetts has long been a priority of mine. Passing this legislation is an important step … towards improving our environment." (3)

But somewhere amid lobbying, big donations from power companies, and criticisms from so called conservatives who don't really want to conserve much, the Republicans have backed off the cap-and-trade concept. They are now claiming it would cost each U.S. household $3,100 a year, a cost that has great sticker shock but is totally inaccurate. Dr. John Reilly, the MIT economist whose work was used to get that number, has criticized Republicans for distorting his work. (4) The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the cost of the cap-and-trade program in 2020 would average about $175 per household (5) and estimates are that associated savings would reduce the federal deficit by about $19 billion over the next decade. (6). A recent report by the National Academy of Sciences details the high economic costs of inadequate environmental legislation, such as reduced streamflow, rainfall, and crop yields (7). Estimates by the World's top economists such as Britain's Nicholas Stern (8) are that right now it would cost about 2% of the worlds GDP to mitigate environmental damage – but if delayed, that amount could rise to 20% or more of the world's GDP by 2050 and put us at risk of an environmental catastrophe.

The misinformation, the damage to the environment, and waste that would be caused by not acting should alarm traditional Republicans. However, according to the Republicans for Environmental Protection, the GOP establishment has lost sight of its "core conservative values, largely due to the influence of corporate lobbies and political leaders beholden to them for campaign support, and in opposition of the willingness of populist Democrats to embrace environmental protection. The result has been a polarizing battle that is not at all about the advance of conservative principles, but rather the advance of special interest political agendas." (1)

(1) http://www.rep.org/index.html Republicans concerned about the environment may wish to check out this Republicans for Environmental Protection website.
(2) The quotes below came from http://www.conservamerica.org/quotes.html
(3) http://www.grist.org/article/2010-06-29-remember-when-republicans-liked-cap-and-trade/
(4) http://flavcountry.blogspot.com/2009/05/mit-economist-john-reilly-calls.html
(5) http://cboblog.cbo.gov/?p=300
(6) http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38130006/ns/politics-capitol_hill/
(7) http://www.denverpost.com/headlines/ci_15536630
(8) http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTINDONESIA/Resources/226271-1170911056314/3428109-1174614780539/SternReviewEng.pdf

About we paid attention before it destroys everything in its path.

Calling themselves CoAL of Africa, an Australian mining company is opening the huge Vele open cast colliery less than 6km from the Mapungubwe World Heritage site on the banks of the Limpopo River. This has the potential to seriously damage the culturally and biologically important Mapungubwe National Park, the Greater Mapungubwe Transfrontier Conservation Area and areas downstream along the Limpopo. Open cast coal mining is a very dirty process, and will result in coal dust blowing from the colliery into sensitive areas, as well as entering the Limpopo river to be transported to areas below the mine.

Mapungubwe is the culturally important area where the famous golden rhino was discovered showing the sophistication of tribes living in the area. The Apartheid government suppressed the find because it clashed with their claim that no black tribes were ever in the area under their rule. Now a World Heritage Site, the park is a wonderful area overlooking the Limpopo River towards the Tuli Block conservation area in Botswana, and over the Shashe River towards Zimbabwe.

The Greater Mapungubwe Transfrontier Conservation Area (TFCA) is an international effort to bring land in South Africa, Botswana and Zimbabwe into a common conservation area. It straddles the three countries, incorporating land straddling both the Limpopo and Shashe rivers. Despite some problems (particularly with Zimbabwe) there does seem to be genuine political will to get the TFCA off the ground and operating. The mine would seriously jeopardise this area's claim to be a world-class conservancy.

"WASHINGTON — BP's Deepwater Horizon well, which for 87 days spewed millions of barrels of crude oil into the Gulf of Mexico in the worst accidental oil spill the world has ever seen, has been successfully killed by thousands of tons of heavy drilling mud.

BP announced early Wednesday that a so-called "static kill" had succeeded in forcing the Macondo well's oil back into rock formations 18,000 feet below the sea's surface.

"The MC252 well appears to have reached a static condition," BP said in a news release, calling the well by the Mississippi Canyon lease number it was assigned when BP bought the rights to drill from the federal government in 2008."

Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/08/04/98597/bp-well-in-gulf-killed-with-heavy.html#ixzz0vdkcX0Pp

" (AP) — Standing water on Chicago-area expressways turned what should have been an easy Saturday morning drive into a soggy, snarled mess after heavy rains across the Midwest closed roads, stranded residents and punched a hole through an Iowa dam.
In Chicago, officials say more than 7 inches of rain fell early Saturday, inundating the sewer system and overwhelming waterways. Water covered portions of several Chicago interstates and the commuter train tracks that run along them, leading crews to divert traffic and call in bus shuttles."

"Scientists, researchers and other experts warn that the United States is entering an era of water scarcity. Back in 2003, the US General Accounting Office (now known as the US Government Accountability Office or GAO) projected that 36 states, under normal conditions, could face water shortages by 2013. However, those shortages were realized in 2008 – five years sooner than predicted. Current forecasts suggest that climate change will only exacerbate the challenges of managing and protecting water resources.

Water scarcity has widespread implications for our nation. As a recent New York Times (Global Edition) article notes, water scarcity is increasingly a major constraint for the production of electricity. But what, in particular, does this mean for the nation's current fleet of nuclear power plants?"

Pensacola Beach, FL -- When Ryan Heffernan, a volunteer with Emerald Coastkeeper, noticed a bag of oily debris floating off in Santa Rosa Sound, she ran up to BP's HazMat-trained workers to ask if they would retrieve it.
"No, ma'am," one replied politely. "We can't go in the ocean. It's contaminated."
Ryan waded in and retrieved the bag. That was Wednesday, June 23, the first day visible oil hit Pensacola Beach. Ryan had been swimming off the beach the day before, as she said, "to get in my last swim before the oil hit." The trouble is that not all of the oil coming ashore is visible. Dispersed oil - tiny bubbles of oil encased in chemical dispersants - are in the water column. On Thursday Ryan was treated at a local doctor's office for skin rash on her legs.
Three days later on Pensacola Beach, I watched BP's HazMat-trained workers shovel surface oiled sand and oily debris into bags early in the morning. "

In an interview, Bob Dudley, CEO of BP's New Gulf Coast Restoration Organization (whatever that is) finally admitted yesterday that their first relief well could be completed far in advance of the mid-August date that they have been insisting on since May, enabled by the Coast Guard and other government officials. We've heard the mantra now for months; even as the relief well, spud on Sunday, May 2, has stayed ahead of schedule, BP has steadfastly stuck to the mid-August completion date. In the interview, Dudley said that the well could be ready for the kill attempt by July 20th to 27th, but hedged, though, that storms and seas could delay that date. BP tried walking back his statement this morning, saying,

6.23.2010 12:07 PM
"15 Gulf Oil Spill Myths
A judge has lifted the moratorium on Gulf oil drilling, but few realize that the moratorium affected fewer than 1% of Gulf of Mexico oil wells. Here's a look at that, and 14 other BP oil spill myths."

Read more: http://www.thedailygreen.com/environmental-news/latest/bp-gulf-oil-spill-myths-0622#ixzz0sLMUdkqh

Sitting on my niece's deck overlooking the bay as we watched small patches of flat still water topped with an oily sheen, I was once again struck by the enormity of the task before us. Having grown up on the gulf I have helped clean up after storms that had destroyed homes, businesses and beaches. Nothing about those disasters was "easy" but compared to the impact of the oil spill I believe that we will at some point begin to remember them as much less than they seemed at the time. And it is not just the spill it is also the clean up because what we are looking at is not from the spill but rather from cleaning up the boats that are out daily laying booms or being "spotter" boats.

I am waiting for a call that will put me to work cleaning up one of my favorite beaches but while I waited I had been volunteering where I was needed. When I left for Louisiana a couple of weeks ago the beaches where I live in Alabama had yet to see any extreme damage but that is changing daily. I came home last weekend after being accepted into the classes that would qualify me to work for a sub contractor. After taking the OSHA class I am amazed that more people have not been injured or gotten ill from working the clean up. My class was a joke. I have taken this course before in Colorado and I know what the requirements should be. But down here required hours had been cut to almost nothing and some tests were only ten questions out of almost fifty that should be on a Hazwoper test. I am not even sure if I want to work with people who barely know the safety rules and health hazards. I do realize that we need bodies... on the beach and on the boats... but I am afraid that bodies is just what we will have. Just like on the rigs safety seems to be way down on the list of things to do the correct way. I have been a safety first responder and a second class fire control team member in two different companies and this is the most ridicoulous thing I have ever seen. One company doing it this way and one doing it another and none of them doing it properly.

A few minutes ago I heard that a federal judge has ruled against the moratorium on drilling. Now I realize that oil is a big employer in the gulf and I have friends and relations whose jobs depend upon drilling but even they do not believe that we should continue to do so until it is determined exactly how and why this happened. I know that they definitly want the oil companies to spend more money and effort on learning how to avoid this kind of disaster as well as developing better ways to control such spills. Safety should be more of a concern than getting a new rig up and running in as short as time as possible but I fear that such a hope is a ( excuse the pun) pipe dream. Money is and always has been the driving force. there are those who seem to believe that we should just keep letting the oil companies do as they damn well please as long as the jobs are there. What good is a paycheck if it gets you killed ? In the meantime we are going to lose more and more jobs as our beaches get oil soaked and our seafood industries go down in a sea of black crude. Tourism is on the downhill slide and that will affect many other businesses as well. As people lose their jobs because of these things others will lose theirs because there will be no money to shop at the local stores or eat out once in a while or go to the movies and the list goes on. How many disasters like this will it take before we realize as a country that we must find other ways to get at least some of our energy needs? How many other people will die before the oil companies realize that they can not cut corners when it comes to safety and the technology needed to avert such disasters? How much of our wetlands can we afford to lose before the rest of the country and even too many that live here realize that it can and will affect our lives as well as our enviorment?

Our lives may never be the same at least in my lifetime. I wonder how many people who just see this on tv really get how bad it really is or how long it will actually take to clean up or the fact that we will never get back much of what we losing daily to this spill. They do not know how bad it smells or how sad it it is to see the wild life covered in and dying from oil. How seafood prices will soar because it will be years before so many of the shrimp and oyster beds recover if ever. How many lives will affected because of these facts. They do not know how hot and dangerous it is to work this clean up or how many are forced to in order to put food on the table or how many will move because they can no longer afford to stay where they have lived and fished for generations. My family has been here since long before the civil war. We have fished, shrimped, played, and swam in the waters as some of the first settlers in this region. I have a deep and abiding love and respect for the water. I have long been an avid supporter of conservation and enviromental issues but I am also a realist. I know that we needed the influx of jobs and money the rigs have brought over the years but I have also protested the abuses. And these have only gotten worse as this spill proves. Whenever money becomes more important than human lives then we are truly lost. When we do not care enough about species other than human that affects our ecological makeup or the land and water that supports our life on this planet we have forgotten every lesson that every man made disaster should have taught us. The whole world should stop and take some time to reevaluate just what "progress" can and has cost us. I am all for progress but we need to be so much smarter how we go about obtaining our goals. We have done so much damage to our planet it is a wonder we still survive as well as we do.

So I sit and wait for a job I hoped to never have and that could last longer than I would have ever wanted it to. And I look at pictures that show the beauty of Gulf Coast and remember the times when the beaches were open to all. A time when casinos and condos did not obsure the views from the roads, when small motels and wayside eateries were all you needed to have a great vacation at the beach. But I would rather have another thousand condos littering up the landscape and privatizing the beaches than the view I now see as I ride down the coast or the view from my niece's deck.

A week of opportunistic urban prospecting pays... kind of.

Here is a quick look at one of my current revenue streams. Every time I harness-up and take my dogs (The Pack) on their daily walks I carry a couple of plastic shopping bags with me. One for Dog poop, one for aluminum cans, plastic/glass. Those street finds combined with the cans generated by my Coca-Cola habit form a small but significant addition to my monthly budget ledger.

The photos represent about a half-n-hour's worth of sorting, bagging, and transporting of the recyclable commodities to the local Recycling Center.

Total time expended in the week related to recycling activities - around 4hrs or so.

Payout for this week - $21.50

So I earned about $5.00/hr

This week is about average for me lately... I could increase my finds by walking the dogs through the parks in my neighborhood (there are four small and two large parks within our walking radius)and hitting those trash cans, but that would lead to little dog confrontations with The Pack - That is No Good.

I used to raid the city recycling containers on the night before trash-day, but I have stopped the practice. The economy is so bad that there are folks raiding the city recycling containers during the daytime, and by nightfall all the sellable commodities are gone. That is to the detriment of my cash holdings, oh well just have to be careful in spending is all.

Please note the eco-friendly transport system (who says Libertarians don't care about the environment?)... Got to love them Siberian Huskies!

Type Your Article Here ...

The millions of gallons of crude oil leaked from BP's wellhead in the Gulf of Mexico is known as a light, sweet crude. The term "light" refers to the many volatile compounds within the oil, while the term "sweet" refers to low levels of sulfur.

What does this mean, to the average person who isn't a chemistry major? Although the chemical composition of crude oil varies by source, crude oils and petroleum products share certain toxic characteristics. The oil in the Gulf is a light, non-sticky oil-- an oil that is waxy and toxic to humans and animal life. Petroleum distillate products that fall within this category include diesel fuels.

Crude oil is a mixture of thousands of chemicals. Analysis of the specific chemicals in each crude oil can be used to identify the particular crude oil spilled, based on the different percentages of the chemicals in the mix.

Compared to other crude oils, the oil currently leaking from the wellhead is relatively high in Alkanes. Alkanes are made of singly bonded carbon chains that micro-organisms can readily use as a food source, and liquefied petroleum gases. Alkanes include propane, butane, methane, hexane, and other "--anes"; that are also known as paraffins. This family of chemicals is mostly released to the air, but may also dissolve in the water, where bio-degradation can occur from the actions of microbes and oxygen. The amount volatized, (released to the air), depends on the temperature of the water, its turbulence, and the depth of the water. (Alkanes)

The effects of Alkanes on sea life have not been documented, or are not available. However, preliminary studies indicate that fish and other sea creatures are unlikely to store Alkanes in their tissues, to be passed along the food chain. Toxic levels of Alkanes for children, animals, and plants are unknown at this time. The effects of exposure to any hazardous substance depend on the dose, the duration, the method of exposure, degree of sensitivity to the chemical, and whether other chemicals are present.

Other chemicals found within this particular type of crude oil, include polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, (PAH’s), although in lesser amount than other heavy crude oils. The polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons are less volatile and water soluble than some of the other components of the crude oil. However, they are more fat soluble and may be stored within the oils and fats of an organism, entering the food chain for long periods of time. Many of these substances are carcinogenic, (cancer-causing), mutagenic, (causing mutations), and teragenic, (causing birth defects).

PAH's that are within the crude oil may be found attached to dust particles. Some can readily evaporate into the air from the surface of the Gulf, and they can break down by reacting by sunlight and other chemicals in the air over a period of days to weeks, into longer-lasting toxic substances. Breakdown in water generally takes weeks and months and is caused primarily by the actions of microorganisms. Most of them do not dissolve easily in water, and they have a tendency to stick to solid particles and settle to the bottom of the sea, where degradation is slowed due to lack of sunlight.. PAHs can travel long distances before they return to earth in rainfall or particle settling. The plants and animals that come into contact with these chemicals may have a much higher concentration than the soil or water in which they live. (See ASTDR's ToxFacts)

While the effects of PAHs on sea life are not available at this time, mice that were fed relatively high levels of PAH during pregnancy had difficulty reproducing and so did their offspring. These offspring had higher rates of birth defects. Animal studies have shown that PAHs can cause harmful effects after both short-term and long-term exposures, but these effects have not been seen in people.

For humans, who are more robust than many sea creatures, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has set a limit of 0.2 milligrams of PAHs per cubic meter of air (0.2 mg/m3). The OSHA Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) for mineral oil mist that contains PAHs is 5 mg/m3 averaged over an 8-hour exposure period. The EPA has set minimal contamination limits for several of the chemicals that are classified as PAHs. Ingestion of amounts below these limits are likely not to cause health problems in humans:

Anthracene - 0.3 mg/kg of human body weight, (1 kg = 2.2 lbs)
Acenaphthene - 0.06 mg/kg of human body weight
Fluoranthene - 0.04 mg/kg of human body weight
Fluorene - 0.04 mg/kg of human body weight
Pyrene - 0.03 mg/kg of human body weight

Even more chemicals include volatile organic chemicals such as Benzene, Toluene, and Xylene. These chemicals are acutely toxic, and evaporate readily. Unfortunately, they are also water soluble.

Benzene is a colorless liquid that has a sweet odor. It evaporates into the air very quickly and dissolves slightly in water. Benzene can pass into the air from water and soil, and then reattach to rain or snow and be carried back to the ground, where it can enter the soils and groundwater. It breaks down more slowly in water and soil, but it does not build up in plants and animals.

In humans, breathing very high levels of Benzene can result in death, while breathing high levels can cause drowsiness, dizziness, rapid heart beat, headaches, tremors, confusion, and unconsciousness. Eating or drinking foods containing high levels of Benzene can cause vomiting, irritation of the stomach, dizziness, sleepiness, convulsions, rapid heart rate, and death. Long term exposures can cause harmful effects on the bone marrow, leading to anemia, excessive bleeding, and lower immunity to diseases. No information is available as to the effects of Benzene on sea life.

Benzene is a known carcinogenic, and is directly linked to leukemia, especially AML, in humans. The US EPA has set a maximum contaminant level of 0.005 mg/l for Benzene. Ingesting amounts in excess of this level can lead to health effects in humans.

Toluene is also a clear, colorless liquid with a distinctive smell. While Toluene does not stay in the environment for long periods of time when exposed to the air, it can stay in water for longer periods of time, and enter soils or groundwater from rain and/or snow. It does not concentrate or build up to high levels in animals. Low to moderate levels of Toluene can cause tiredness, confusion, weakness, disorientation, memory loss, nausea, loss of appetite, and hearing and color vision loss in humans. These symptoms usually disappear when the exposure is stopped. Inhaling high levels of fumes in a short time can make a human light-headed, dizzy, or sleepy, and can also lead to unconsciousness and death. Long term exposure can cause kidney damage. The effects in children mimic those of adults.

Toluene is not a known carcinogenic in humans, but the effects are not known on sea life. Some studies in animals suggest that babies may be more sensitive than adults. In humans, breathing very high levels of toluene during pregnancy can result in children with birth defects and retard mental abilities, and growth. The US EPA has set a maximum contaminant level of 1 mg/l of Toluene in drinking water.

Xylene is a colorless, sweet-smelling liquid that catches on fire easily. Xylene evaporates quickly from the soil and surface water into the air. In the air, it is broken down by sunlight into other less harmful chemicals in a couple of days. It is broken down by microorganisms in soil and water. Only a small amount of it builds up in fish, shellfish, plants, and other animals living in Xylene-contaminated water.

Exposure to high levels of Xylene for short or long periods can cause headaches, lack of muscle coordination, dizziness, confusion, and changes in a human's sense of balance. Exposure of people to high levels of Xylene for short periods can also cause irritation of the skin, eyes, nose, and throat; difficulty in breathing; problems with the lungs; delayed reaction time; memory difficulties; stomach discomfort; and possibly changes in the liver and kidneys. It can cause unconsciousness and even death at very high levels. Not a known carcinogenic, children may be more sensitive to acute inhalation exposure than adults because their narrower airways would be more sensitive to swelling effects.

Studies of unborn animals indicate that high concentrations of Xylene may cause increased numbers of deaths, and delayed growth and development. In many instances, these same concentrations also cause damage to the mothers. We do not know if Xylene harms the unborn child if the mother is exposed to low levels of Xylene during pregnancy. The US EPA has set a maximum contaminant level for Xylene of 10 mg/l in drinking water.

An average sized Bottle-nosed dolphin weighs about 220 pounds. A shrimp weighs on average, (48 shrimp per pound), 0.33 lbs. Many of the sea life affected weigh much less and will ingest more of the contaminants, due to their methods of feeding and breathing. How much of these substances can they ingest with no ill effects, assuming they have no extreme sensitivity to these chemicals?

More to come!

------------------------------------

References

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
ATSDR

Deepwater Horizon Oil: Characteristics and Concerns
NOAA

Tox Town -- Environmental Health Concerns and Toxic Chemicals -- Crude Oil
Tox Town

Gulf Oil Spill Health Hazards
Crude Oil Toxicity

--------------------------------------

Thank you for stopping by!

My husband rarely complains. So, when he does it tends to get my attention. A couple of weeks ago "Roundup" was airing a commercial for its new battery-operated spray pump weed killer. I have never seen my husband so incensed. "Look how God#$% lazy people have gotten! They can't even spray a $&*#ing pump now! Christ!" After he calmed down, his major objection to this seemed to be the battery in the pump. After all, batteries are everywhere. They are in your children's toys, your cell phone, your laptop, watches, greeting cards, and now household items.

Our fascination with batteries goes hand in hand with our fascination with gadgets. However, when my husband brought the subject up, I became concerned as well. What happens to all these batteries? According to the EPA, 3 billion dry cell batteries are purchased every year. That's a lot of hazardous waste, my friends. What do you do with your cute greeting cards after you are done with them, or your watches after the battery has died?

This morning I engaged in a mission to find out. First of all, I wanted to research what kinds of batteries are out there. Holy schmoly, was I surprised! There are cylindrical batteries, which are the A, AA, AAA, C, and D batteries that are most common. Then you have your prismatic batteries, which are the 9-volt and Lantern batteries. Next you have your cylindrical, single cell batteries consisting of AAAA, 1/2 AA, A, F, N, and No. 6. After that, there are camera batteries, lithium batteries, etc. The entire list can be viewed here, courtesy of Wikipedia. With that list of battery types spinning in my head, I tried to find out what happens to them after they are spent.

Manufacturers of battery-powered objects must comply with the following rules: