In reply to this comment by Trancecoach:
Of course, Haliburton is in the top three of the most heinous corporations in the world and they are behind this nightmare.

Same themes, same players, over and over and over again. Reminds me of a documentary I saw last month called Gasland.

http://videosift.com/video/Gasland-An-Expos-of-US-Natural-Gas-Drilling-Practices

edit: whoops - meant to post that on the vid, not your profile.

Gawker has posted a list of The Bad Guys responsible for this oil leak disaster. Here it is. Most of who you suspect. All together. With referenced accusations.

Of course, Haliburton is in the top three of the most heinous corporations in the world and they are behind this nightmare.

[redacted]

I'd rather take a toaster bath than be governed by Apple. That's terrifying. I can't think of any corporation that is more 1984, more cult-of-personality, more we-know-what's-best-for-you, and more style-over-substance. I'd rather be governed by Haliburton (again).

proof?
ok..lets use the same anecdotal evidence you used from the very SAME interview.
http://videosift.com/video/60-Minutes-Deepwater-Horizon-s-Blowout-Part-1
part 2.
http://videosift.com/video/60-Minutes-Deepwater-Horizon-s-Blowout-Part-2
notice anything that may ADD to what you posted?
would you like me to post the senate hearings from c-span while those companies involved all try to pass the buck?
would you like me to also post the comparisons of regulations comparing the countries in the north atlantic with the USA?
or the fines over the past ten years levied against haliburton for similar malfeasance?
would you like me to spoon feed this to you?


listen man.
you want to believe this was all just a small random quirky accident that nothing or nobody could have stopped..well,that is your choice.
but dont come to the table with that flimsy flaccid thing you call an argument,because it is small,wimpy and weak.
the next time you want to spout off do a bit of leg work so you dont get tagged in the nose.
you have a right to your opinion but not to your own facts.
and the fact is:BP used political influence to avoid having to keep safety standards by having regulations thrown out the window.the result of this was 11 dead and whole communities and eco-systems wasted.
so you call this a random freak accident.
well..sure.you are correct..
BUT if BP had been forced to be inspected every month and haliburton had to keep strict production values.
FOUR failsafes would have never failed.
at least not all of them at the same time.
and then...using your anecdotal premise...look at how the BP manager dealt with the destroyed rubber.
so you are right about the freakishness of the events but EACH one was due to malfeasance on BP's part.
why?
greed and profit.

[redacted]

Actually, I can't imagine they make enough volume of this component to do any statistically significant testing.

And BP is absolutely responsible for this disaster, good intentions or no. The final manufacturer or project owner has to take responsibility to ensure the quality of the components, parts, and modules that he buys. Especially since the risks are so high. The fact that they didn't put this fail safe on their rig looks very much like a financially driven decision.

But even if they did everything they could, it's still their fault. BP, and other oil companies, choose to gamble not only with their investors, but with our planet. And that is not hyperbole, as we now see. All of BP's money will not fix this disaster. They owe humanity a huge debt.

Also, I am sure that this has happened before with BP or others in the same business; I hope some journo is digging for other occurrences so we know the full score.

>> ^Mcboinkens:

>> ^enoch:
it was not a small random chance.
thats what BP would LOVE for you to view this disaster but in reality it was negligence and greed.
40 billion in profits last year and BP tried to save 500k.fuck BP in the ass with a razor blade dildo.
the reason why you have not seen this type of disaster in other developed countries is due to the fact they impose incredibly strict safety measures with hefty fines attached if not adhered to.
thanks to haliburton and its influence in american legislature no such requirements here in the states.
exxons valdez was tragic but that was an tanker and with that comes risk.THIS could have been avoided from the beginning all the way to a few days prior.
so while i would tend to agree with your assertion "accidents happen" not in this case..NOT ONE BIT..this could have and SHOULD have been avoided but..profit above all else right??
now you watch as BP will use its political might to squirm out of this disaster which will be felt for the next twenty years.
whole communities wiped out.eco-systems destroyed to a point they may never recover.
accidents happen right? what would you say if you understood this could have been avoided?
would you still be so flip?
because i know if i run into a BP executive i am kicking him in the balls.

You seem pretty confident. Prove it wasn't a small chance. Prove they don't go through an abundance of safety regulations. It's easy to hop on the hate boat when something bad happens, but do you really think that these companies are that stupid? Yes, they'll get a slightly larger profit if they cut some corners, but they weigh that against something like this happening and just reinforce standards. Crews go through extensive safety training. The equipment used out there is tested before deployment. To think otherwise is ignorant. It pisses me off even more than you seem to place all of the blame on BP. I'll say it once and I'll say it again: BP didn't manufacture that blow-out preventor. We don't know all of the details yet, but do you really think they would purposely put a faulty preventor out in a deep-ocean well?

Also, my rebuttal for it NOT being small, random chance. Basic statistics. The company that produced the BOP in question probably ran simple random samples on their final products. A sample taken from a large batch of BOP probably tested fine, even though this one, and possible many others, was able to get through their testing, due to small, and random chance.

[redacted]

it was not a small random chance.
thats what BP would LOVE for you to view this disaster but in reality it was negligence and greed.
40 billion in profits last year and BP tried to save 500k.fuck BP in the ass with a razor blade dildo.
the reason why you have not seen this type of disaster in other developed countries is due to the fact they impose incredibly strict safety measures with hefty fines attached if not adhered to.
thanks to haliburton and its influence in american legislature no such requirements here in the states.

exxons valdez was tragic but that was an tanker and with that comes risk.THIS could have been avoided from the beginning all the way to a few days prior.
so while i would tend to agree with your assertion "accidents happen" not in this case..NOT ONE BIT..this could have and SHOULD have been avoided but..profit above all else right??
now you watch as BP will use its political might to squirm out of this disaster which will be felt for the next twenty years.
whole communities wiped out.eco-systems destroyed to a point they may never recover.
accidents happen right? what would you say if you understood this could have been avoided?
would you still be so flip?
because i know if i run into a BP executive i am kicking him in the balls.

how is this different from Haliburton/KBR?
to think that this is somehow a new and novel or an isolated incident just means you havent been paying attention.
stossel is and always has been a sensationalist.i am not suggesting that his report here means nothing but i am saying that it is nothing new and as per his style he cherry picks and then inflates the drama.
the only thing i like from stossel is when he got bitch slapped by that wrestler when stossel suggested wrestling was fake.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'jon stewart, al franken, haliburton, rape, contract, arbitration' to 'daily show, jon stewart, al franken, haliburton, rape, contract, arbitration' - edited by calvados

I realize some people will hate these weather bulletins in all caps, this however is standard for broadcast. So you'll just have to live with it. 2 new confirmed Tornado's.

AWCN11 CWTO 260120 -- SUMMARY OF THE TORNADO OUTBREAK OVER ONTARIO ON AUGUST 20.

TORNADO LOCATION/PATH DAMAGE OVERVIEW
TORNADO 1 5 KM SW OF DURHAM TO MARKDALE F2 TORNADO DAMAGE
(CONFIRMED) (ROUGHLY 20 KM) (SIGNIFICANT HOUSE + TRAILER DAMAGE, TREES DOWN)

TORNADO 2 FROM SOUTH OF THORNBURY TO THE F2 TORNADO DAMAGE
(CONFIRMED) SOUTHEAST OF THORNBURY (PATH (MANY TREES SNAPPED,
LENGTH UNKNOWN) GEORGIAN PEAKS SUSTAINED DAMAGE, ROOFS REMOVED, HOMES DAMAGED)

TORNADO 3 WOODBRIDGE/VAUGHAN F2 TORNADO DAMAGE
(CONFIRMED) (SEVERAL KM LONG (HUNDREDS OF HOMES + 50 METRES WIDE) DAMAGED, TREES DOWN, CARS FLIPPED)

TORNADO 4 NEWMARKET AREA F1 TORNADO DAMAGE
(CONFIRMED) (HOCKEY ARENA ALMOST DEMOLISHED, ROYAL CANADIAN RIDING ACADEMY SUSTAINED DAMAGE)

TORNADO 5 GRAVENHURST AREA F0 TORNADO DAMAGE
(CONFIRMED) (PATH ABOUT 10 KM LONG (SHALLOW ROOTED AND UP TO 1 KM WIDE) TREES DOWN)

TORNADO 6 MILTON F1 TORNADO DAMAGE
(CONFIRMED) (LIGHT STANDARDS DOWN, ROOF DAMAGE OF MEDICAL CENTRE AND NEARBY HOTEL, TREES AND FENCES DOWN, MINOR HOME DAMAGE)

TORNADO 7 HALIBURTON FOREST AND WILDLIFE F1 TORNADO DAMAGE (VERY (CONFIRMED) CENTRE(NORTHWEST OF HALIBURTON) LARGE SWATH OF TREES DAMAGED)

TORNADO 8 REDSTONE LAKE F0 TORNADO DAMAGE
(CONFIRMED) (MINOR ROOF DAMAGE)

TORNADO 9 ARNSTEIN TO RESTOULE TO NORTH WATERSPOUT/TORNADO
(PROBABLE) BAY (PATH LENGTH UNKNOWN AT SIGHTINGS (DAMAGE DETAILS THIS TIME) UNCERTAIN AT THIS TIME)

TORNADO 10 CARLOW MAYO AREA (EAST OF FUNNEL CLOUD SIGHTING (POSSIBLE) BANCROFT) (LARGE AREA OF TREE
DAMAGE)

TORNADO 11 TURNIFF (SE OF BANCROFT) LARGE SWATH OF TREE (POSSIBLE) DAMAGE, AND HUNTING CABIN DAMAGE.

>> ^dag:
^You're the one talking semantics. What's a "natural" death - when one group of people gets to live to 130 and the other has to die at 60 because they did not inherit their daddy's Haliburton stock?


Dick Cheney is going to live to be 130? Fuck.

You're correct that obviously modern medicine has enabled us to live longer. Most of which is experienced without an exorbitant, impractical price nearly all should be capable of affording. Antibiotics and vaccines are quite inexpensive, and these or the sorts of medicines that have allowed us to extend our lives.

We all have as much access to them as does the Haliburton exec, so I'm not sure what your issue can be.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

^You're the one talking semantics. What's a "natural" death - when one group of people gets to live to 130 and the other has to die at 60 because they did not inherit their daddy's Haliburton stock?

Hey, get on some Haliburton bandwidth and self-sift some vids while you're there.


Oh, and keep your head down!


Both of them.