On my last internet radio show I went over a piece I had written a week or so earlier regarding the BP oil leak resulting from the Deepwater Horizon accident, and made the observation that while the rig explosion was a tragic accident, along with the continuing leakage from the wellhead, but that in my opinion, BP was purposely dragging their feet on stopping the leak. Was I right? Or am I wrong in the matter?

Let’s look at some more of the facts and actions taken by those involved, as well as revisiting my original feelings over the accident.

On April 20th, the rig Deepwater Horizon sustained an explosion and resulting fire cause by a mixture of methane and oil being forced through the main riser to the rig, resulting in 15 injuries and leaving 11 people unaccounted for, and those 11 people were presumed killed in the accident. The rig continued to burn for two days, sinking into the Gulf of Mexico on the 23rd, with the riser still attached to the rig.

On that same day, April 23rd, the Netherlands, and other nations as well, offered the use of their expertise and assistance via skimmer ships, booms and a plan for the building of sand barriers to contain any spilled oil. Just like they started doing a few weeks ago, isn’t it?

However, the Obama administration refused to accept the assistance. While it is true that the Jones act prohibits ships of foreign registry from working within our territorial waters, that act can be waived by the president. When Katrina hit, George Bush, the liberal’s favorite demon du jour had absolutely no problem waiving the act and accepting assistance from other nations. Not so for the Obama administration. Why do you suppose that is?

A couple of things to note here is that this rig and leak are not necessarily unique in the world. There are over two hundred deepwater oil rigs around the world, and there have in fact been blowouts on others, which were successfully contained by swift action when they occurred.

Also, of the 126 crewmen on board the Deepwater Horizon only seven were BP employees. The rig is actually owned by Transocean, which obviously suffered a total loss of the rig, which was under lease to BP until 2013. My understanding is that the actual operations were directed by others than BP itself.

While the coast guard originally stated that they did not believe any oil was leaking, they changed course with that statement on the 24th of April and claimed there were approximately 42,000 gallons per day leaking from the broken riser.

Over the next few days attempts were made to close the valves on the blowout preventer, and controlled burning of the slicks on the surface of the gulf’s waters began. It seems kind of wasteful to simply burn all of that oil, but even more tragic is the fact that all of those pollutants contained in and created by the burn were allowed into the environment unabated.

A week later, BP began to mobilize its response to the spill, and NOAA made the claim that it was 210,000 gallons of oil spilling into the gulf, not 42,000. Underwater video shows that the riser was now leaking in three places.

In the weeks since then there have been many news stories and videos splattered across all reaches of the media world, most of them demonizing BP, its executives, Hussein Obama and others for failing to solve the issue immediately.

And the cries are correct in that an immediate solution should have been the course of action. But there was no immediate solution forthcoming. BP waited until a week after the accident before beginning to deploy its solution. Could they have started earlier? Maybe, maybe not, but the indication should have been made the day after the accident that the situation would be quickly remedied.

So one has to wonder why there was no immediate reaction to the accident beyond the rescue of the 126 crewmen. To take a very broad view of this incident we need to step way back from the incident and put aside the emotional reactions to the catastrophe. When we do that, what do we see through the telescope of the geopolitical and business telescope? And we have to ask a few questions.

Do you remember what happened to the price of oil and gas at the pump when Katrina paid a visit to the Gulf Coast? The reaction was immediate and oil prices, and subsequently gas prices went through the roof, sometimes climbing by a half dollar of more every few days. There was widespread panic because of the disaster. Disasters control the emotions of the public and when any trading is connected to those emotions, such as in the gas and oil futures market, the pricing becomes uncontrollable.

In this instance there was no kneejerk panic causing sharp increases in the price of crude, or its distillates such as gas and heating oil. In fact, the prices have actually leveled off and in some cases declined, up until this week that is. Today I see that the futures are starting to trade higher, with crude expecting to be in the $89.00 range, or higher, by Christmas.

If this was such a catastrophe, where was the panic by the investors?

Our emotional reaction has been directed towards the ecological damage this oil spill has, and will continue to cause to the gulf region. We react to video of distressed and dead birds and fish along the shore. We react to the tar balls washing up on the many pristine tourist beaches. We lament the coming problems caused by the pollution left behind by the oil spill.

And yet there has been no great outcry from the leaders of the environmental community. Why not, if this ecological disaster is as bad as the main stream media wants us to believe it is. Where has The Nature Conservancy, the Sierra Club and the Audubon Society been throughout this catastrophe? Why aren’t they plastered all over the headlines protesting BP and the oil industry?

And why hasn’t Obama been eager to waive the Jones act to allow foreign vessels to assist in the damage control of this disaster? Offers were made on the first day, and were rebuffed by both BP and the Obama administration. George Bush had no problem accepting assistance after Katrina struck, so why is this action not allowed in this case?

There are some interesting things that are loosely related to this incident that may well answer some of these questions.

For one, the price of oil has been fairly stable, and low due to the lessened demand of the last artificial pricing cycle of unrealistically high oil prices. The housing bust, the credit bust and now the employment bust are all causing a lower demand for gasoline and other energy products, thus keeping profits in the industry low. BP, of course, has been affected by this trend as have all of the other petroleum industry companies.

But an unexpected, by some, result has been that the demand for green energy and technology has been sharply curtailed and there are many companies facing a possible demise in that sector. BP is but one of many companies that stand to suffer great financial loss if that trend continues. BP has in fact been a leader in both the pushing for implementation of green energy as well as the farcical cap and trade dog and pony show so many want to see instituted.

BP is also heavily involved with organizations such as The Nature Conservancy and the UN in an advisory capacity, as well as through funding mechanisms. The net abounds with claims and counterclaims of conspiracy and corruption regarding these relationships.

So here we have several parties, all following in the same ideology of the UNs Millennium Goals. They all have the same spirit that drives the creation where everyone in the world is equal to everyone else, all under the leadership of one global governance program.

And the events caused and rolled out by the hesitation we saw in the beginning are coming to fruition.

We have a renewed drive to increase our research and reliance on green energy. We have a renewed drive to implement a global tax and trade program. We have a renewed effort to create new taxes as well as to resurrect old taxation schemes on the petroleum industry.

If the reaction to plug the well had been swift and decisive, would we be looking at these renewed initiatives? I think probably not. I think the leak could have been contained weeks ago, and that production would have been resumed as soon as a new rig could be placed at the scene. But there was a greater goal achieved by waiting.

The UN gets a boost in their drive to enact a global energy tax, and the current administration gets to impose even greater levels of control and taxation over this nation, driving us further into a socialist, communal economy and society, just as the progressives have been dreaming of since the early 1900s.

Every party involved in stretching out this catastrophe is a follower of the new world ideology, and every single party involved in stretching out the conclusion of this catastrophe has something to gain by making it take as long as possible to solve the problem. And in so doing they build what some would call a good structure in favor of their arguments that we should worship Gaia by embracing the dreams of the environmentalists and those who would see the new world order come to complete fulfillment.

I say by allowing this sham to continue we only further the goals of the antichrist, and spur his arrival to the seat of power he has been ordained to fill. But it is in fact too late for quick action and whatever damage this accident will create has already been done.


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s