"Sabotage!" Right-wing media respond to oil spill by dreaming up conspiracy theories
In the wake of the catastrophic oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, right-wing media figures have suggested that the oil rig explosion which predicated the spill was an act of "sabotage" in order to halt offshore drilling.
Right-wing media sees "sabotage" in oil spill
Limbaugh: "Environmental whackos" may have blown up oil rig to "head off more oil drilling." On his April 29 radio show, Rush Limbaugh questioned "the timing" of the explosion and said: "Lest we forget ... the cap and trade bill was strongly criticized by hardcore environmentalist whackos because it supposedly allowed more offshore drilling and nuclear plants." Limbaugh added: "[W]hat better way to head off more oil drilling and nuclear plants then by blowing up a rig? I'm just, I'm just noting the timing here."
Perino: "[W]as this deliberate?" On the May 3 broadcast of Fox News' Fox & Friends, Fox News contributor Dana Perino said of the spill: "I'm not trying to introduce a conspiracy theory, but was this deliberate? You have to wonder...if there was sabotage involved."
Bolling falsely claimed it was "nine days before" the leak "was even addressed" and asked, "Did they let this thing leak? ... if they're going to try and pull drilling, that may be the way they do it." On the same broadcast of Fox & Friends, Fox Business Network host Eric Bolling said: "The question is ... why the delay in the response? You guys were pointing out, nine days before it was even addressed, 12 days before he made a formal comment. The question is, did they let this thing leak? I mean, BP said maybe a thousand barrels a day, it went to five thousand. Did they let it leak a little bit and say, boy I don't know. The conspiracy theorists would say, 'maybe they'd let it leak for a while, and then they addressed the issue.'" Bolling added: "That would be a humongous accusation and probably the net result would be no different, but if they're going to try and pull drilling, that may be the way they do it."
White House immediately dispatched officials, Coast Guard to work on response
April 20 (10 p.m.): Oil rig explosion. An April 21 ABCNews.com article reported, "An overnight explosion in the Gulf of Mexico rocked the Deepwater Horizon oil rig off the Louisiana coast, sending spectacular bursts of flame into the sky. The fires were still raging today." The U.S. Coast Guard's National Oil and Hazardous Substances Response System assigns primary responsibility for cleaning up oil spills to the spiller as the responsible party.
April 21: Deputy Secretary of Interior, Coast Guard dispatched to region. An April 22 White House statement noted that following a briefing with President Obama, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, Coast Guard Commandant Adm. Thad Allen, Department of Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, EPA Deputy Administrator Bob Perciasepe, and FEMA Administrator Craig Fugate, "Deputy Secretary of the Interior David Hayes was dispatched to the region yesterday to assist with coordination and response." The Coast Guard announced that four units were responding to the fire, with additional units en route.
- Search and rescue efforts begin for 11 missing. An initial focus of the response was the search for 11 missing crewmembers. The search was called off April 23.
- BP confirms U.S. Coast Guard was "leading the emergency response" In an April 21 press release, British Petroleum stated that it was "working closely with Transocean and the U.S. Coast Guard, which is leading the emergency response, and had been offering its help - including logistical support."
- CNN.com: "The U.S. Coast Guard launched a major search effort." An April 22 CNN.com article reported:
The U.S. Coast Guard launched a major search effort Wednesday for 11 people missing after a "catastrophic" explosion aboard an oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico engulfed the drilling platform in flames.
Another 17 people were injured -- three critically -- in the blast aboard the Deepwater Horizon, which occurred about 10 p.m. Tuesday. The rig was about 52 miles southeast of Venice, Louisiana, said Coast Guard Senior Chief Petty Officer Mike O'Berry. As of late afternoon Wednesday as many as six firefighting vessels were working to contain the massive fire caused by the explosion.
"It obviously was a catastrophic event," O'Berry said.
April 23: Coast Guard "focused on mitigating the impact of the product currently in the water." On April 23, the Coast Guard stated:
The Department of the Interior, MMS [the U.S. Minerals Management Service], and the Coast Guard continue to support the efforts of the responsible parties to secure all potential sources of pollution. Both federal agencies have technical teams in place overseeing the proposals by BP and Transocean to completely secure the well. Until that has occurred and all parties are confident the risk of additional spill is removed, a high readiness posture to respond will remain in place.
Although the oil appears to have stopped flowing from the well head, Coast Guard, BP, Transocean, and MMS remain focused on mitigating the impact of the product currently in the water and preparing for a worst-case scenario in the event the seal does not hold. Visual feed from deployed remotely operated vehicles with sonar capability is continually monitored in an effort to look for any crude oil which still has the potential to emanate from the subsurface well.
"From what we have observed yesterday and through the night, we are not seeing any signs of release of crude in the subsurface area. However we remain in a 'ready to respond' mode and are working in a collaborative effort with BP, the responsible party, to prepare for a worst-case scenario," Landry stated early Friday morning.
April 25: Response team implements plan to contain oil spilling from source, weather delays cleanup.
- Storms delay response efforts. An April 25 Associated Press article reported, "Stormy weather delayed weekend efforts to mop up leaking oil from a damaged well after the explosion and sinking of a massive rig off Louisiana's Gulf Coast that left 11 workers missing and presumed dead." AP further reported:
The bad weather began rolling in Friday as strong winds, clouds and rain interrupted efforts to contain the spill. Coast Guard Petty Officer John Edwards said he was uncertain when weather conditions would improve enough for cleanup to resume. So far, he said, crews have retrieved about 1,052 barrels of oily water.
- Oil recovery and cleanup were to resume after adverse weather passed. On April 25, the unified command team responding to the spill stated:
The unified command is implementing intervention efforts in an attempt to contain the source of oil emanating from the wellhead at the Deepwater Horizon incident site Sunday.
The unified command has approved a plan that utilizes submersible remote operated vehicles in an effort to activate the blowout preventer on the sea floor and to stop the flow of oil that has been estimated at leaking up to 1,000 barrels/42,000 gallons a day.
Also, BP is mobilizing the DD3, a drilling rig that is expected to arrive Monday to prepare for relief well-drilling operations.
Additionally, the oil recovery and clean-up operations are expected to resume once adverse weather has passed. These efforts are part of the federally approved oil spill contingency plan that is in place to respond to environmental incidents.
April 26: Response crews "to resume skimming operations." On April 26, the response team stated, "Sunday, an aircrew from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service sighted five small whales during an over flight in the vicinity of the oil spill, which currently measures 48 miles by 39 miles at its widest points with varying levels of sheening, and is located 30 miles off the coast of Venice, La." The command team further stated, "Following adverse weather that went through the area, response crews are anticipated to resume skimming operations today," including 1,000 personnel, 10 offshore vessels, 7 skimming boats and more than 14,000 gallons of dispersant. At that point 48,384 gallons of oily water had been collected.
April 28: Federal officials realize spill was far more severe than BP led them to believe. An April 28 New York Times article reported, "Government officials said late Wednesday night that oil might be leaking from a well in the Gulf of Mexico at a rate five times that suggested by initial estimates." The Times further reported:
In a hastily called news conference, Rear Adm. Mary E. Landry of the Coast Guard said a scientist from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration had concluded that oil is leaking at the rate of 5,000 barrels a day, not 1,000 as had been estimated. While emphasizing that the estimates are rough given that the leak is at 5,000 feet below the surface, Admiral Landry said the new estimate came from observations made in flights over the slick, studying the trajectory of the spill and other variables.
An April 30 Associated Press article reported, "For days, as an oil spill spread in the Gulf of Mexico, BP assured the government the plume was manageable, not catastrophic. Federal authorities were content to let the company handle the mess while keeping an eye on the operation." The article continued:
But then government scientists realized the leak was five times larger than they had been led to believe, and days of lulling statistics and reassuring words gave way Thursday to an all-hands-on-deck emergency response. Now questions are sure to be raised about a self-policing system that trusted a commercial operator to take care of its own mishap even as it grew into a menace imperiling Gulf Coast nature and livelihoods from Florida to Texas.
April 29: Napolitano declares spill "of national significance"; BP insists its "plan can handle this spill." On April 29, BP official Doug Suttles appeared on ABC's Good Morning America and stated, "At this point, I believe our plan can handle this spill, and that's what we're doing." That day, Napolitano declared the spill "of national significance," explaining that "we can now draw down assets from across the country, other coastal areas, by way of example; that we will have a centralized communications because the spill is now crossing different regions."
- EPA preparing for oil to hit shore. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson commented at an April 29 press briefing: "[A]s the oil does hit the shoreline, EPA will provide support to assess the impacts on the coastal shoreline and play a key role in implementing the cleanup. As a daughter of the Gulf Coast, I know that it is our job to ensure people that we will be eyes and ears working with the states who have valuable and vital resources to monitor air, water and land quality." Jackson also stated that the EPA has deployed air-monitoring aircraft "that is gathering information on the impact of the controlled burn on air quality, both in the area of the burn, and, of course, further away."
- AP: "Air Force sends planes to help with Gulf oil spill." An April 30 Associated Press article reported: "Two Air Force planes have been sent to Mississippi and were awaiting orders to start dumping chemicals on the oil spill threatening the coast, as the government worked Friday to determine how large a role the military should play in the cleanup."
WSJ: Navy joins Obama's "robust response." An April 30 Wall Street Journal article reported that "The U.S. Navy said it will send more than 12 additional miles of inflatable oil booms to the Gulf, as well as seven towable skimming systems and 50 contractors with experience operating the equipment." The article continued: "The Navy is making two large facilities available to the Coast Guard personnel and BP-employed contractors who are currently taking the lead in fighting the spill. Military officials said the booms and skimmers were being sent to a Naval construction base in Gulfport, Miss. The Navy also opened its air base in Pensacola, Fla., to the effort."

















The question here is not some philosophical debate about whether or not such people exist. The question here is that, yet again, the right-wing talking heads are slandering and insinuating bizarre and outlandish things without one scrap of proof or evidence. They continue their 'proud' tradition of taking something awful and playing political games with it, to try and scare the American people into complying with their world view. Into listening to them and believing the crap spewing out of their collective pie-holes.
It's getting more than a bit absurd. There needs to be a very active legal response to these yahoos, because money and threats with money is about the only thing that they understand. If that's what it takes to make people like Blimpy stop spouting out and out lies veiled in "What if" statements, then so be it.
I'd say they also want to get in front with their baseless mudslinging, because it's the party of "Drill, Baby, Drill!", deregulation, and Cheney's sekrit energy task force that has most of the oil on their hands in this disaster.
~
Tell what else Dark Cheney is responsible for?
Keep your eye on the ball...
I'm not surprised.
~
Sorry... I mean...
Haliburton, baby, Haliburton!
In fact, if can channel Mike Stivik for a moment...
HALIBURTON HALIBURTON HALIBURTON HALIBURTON HALIBURTON HALIBURTON HALIBURTON HALIBURTON HALIBURTON HALIBURTON HALIBURTON HALIBURTON!
------------------------------------------
You're a meathead! Dead from the neck up! ;)
i could go on
The oil well spewing crude into the Gulf of Mexico didn't have a remote-control shut-off switch used in two other major oil-producing nations as last-resort protection against underwater spills.
The lack of the device, called an acoustic switch, could amplify concerns over the environmental impact of offshore drilling after the explosion and sinking of the Deepwater Horizon rig last week.
When wells do surge out of control, the primary shut-off systems almost always work. Remote control systems such as the acoustic switch, which have been tested in simulations, are intended as a last resort.
Nevertheless, regulators in two major oil-producing countries, Norway and Brazil, in effect require them. Norway has had acoustic triggers on almost every offshore rig since 1993.
The U.S. considered requiring a remote-controlled shut-off mechanism several years ago, but drilling companies questioned its cost and effectiveness, according to the agency overseeing offshore drilling. The agency, the Interior Department's Minerals Management Service, says it decided the remote device wasn't needed because rigs had other back-up plans to cut off a well.
An acoustic trigger costs about $500,000, industry officials said. The Deepwater Horizon had a replacement cost of about $560 million, and BP says it is spending $6 million a day to battle the oil spill.
Hmmm, would it be better to spend $500,000 once, or damage the environment and spend millions of dollars for days on end? What do you bet that the Obama Administration requires them in the future?
And why didn't they require them? Because they had the mistaken attitude that drilling was safe. Yes, it's been pretty safe. But it's not "safe", which would mean free from any chance of harm.
I saw as ad recently about ethanol. It made a lot of points but the one that stuck with me was that we've never had to station troops anywhere to protect our ethanol reserves.
----------------------------------------------------
That's not to say that I endorse ethanol, but the anti-oil sentiment is certainly relevant.
And if insane people behave this way, they aren't "on the left", they're insane.
Please show me where "they exist". Or did you lie again Sue?
From that previous thread, there's [url=http://mediamatters.org/research/201004300039#838840]this post where you repeat Rush's charge. I never SAID you agreed with it, and in the sentence you copied, neither did the poster called "anamerican". You did repeat it.
You copied ONE sentence from their post. I then did a search, and found where you had said what they said you had repeated. That's why I said you could find where you had said it by looking just like I did.
But I don't believe that the poster, although replying to YOU, was directing all of their comments to YOU. Their first paragraph indicated that they were addressing all those on the right side of the aisle, and their behavior in general.
I asked him where? He never replied.
You said this "Find them yourself. They exist"
They don't exist and you know it. You lied Sue.
This isn't rocket science.
There is no other explanation, and considering the animosity between the two of you, you jumped on a dishonest attempt to link him to an opinion he did not have, and to make him look worse that he should. Which is something you frown upon. So your hypocrisy and dishonesty is plain, documented, and pretty shameful on your part.
Of course you will just attack me and call me a "sockpuppet" or try and discredit me with some baseless insult. But that doesn't change what you did, what you tried to do, and what you tried to cover up with some lame excuse above.
I suggest you start doing what you tell others to do, a substantive fair debate. Instead of letting your hatred of Right On prompt you to openly lie and deceive.
It doesn't help you or your credibility.
On this thread, I objected to a FAILURE to discuss the topic being covered by the MMFA article - how did you MISS that? How do you possibly not see the hypocrisy in your accusation towards me?
And it's undeniable that you're undeniably linked to RightON.
Here are more than 10 links documenting that connection.
RightON, I completely agree with you.
I have made it quite clear my opinion of Fox News. {Except YOU haven't. Now, RightON has.}
I would also be interested in knowing how your reply to Right On has anything to do with what he wrote?
Come on, Victor, in defense of RightON...
westla, Please, don't waste your time with Victor.
{Defending RightOn's bogus charge that by replying to my own post, it proved that I was posting as two people. Of course it didn't. I refuted the rightwing spin, and then added my take on the REAL meaning of the comment.}
Why don't you read what westla posted above?
DellDolly, I have no intention of wallowing in the mud with you, (but I will put myself in the mud to defend RightON from accurate charges that make him look bad!)
Victor, you are wrong on this.
Thanks again for pointing out that you're a lurker troll, westla.
You've hitched your wagon to the RightON horse.
So Dolly do you have a file on everyone here?
Get a job, or a hobby. Better yet, get a life.
Now you're on her "list"...
Pretty darn creepy isn't she?
I agree, you do have too much time on your hands. In any event, all you have done is shown where I have agreed with Right On regarding your dishonesty. If that makes our wagons "hitched", then you have established a link.
What you don't see to understand however, and never will, is that I am in far more agreement with your political views than I am with Right On. He generalizes about liberals unfairly all the time, distrusts government ad nauseum and is far too narrow and conservative in his views. You offer thoughtful and intelligent opinions on a variety of issues, often times I am impressed.
It is when you display sheer dishonesty and either outright lie or further a baseless falsehood as in the one above, which you didn't even address in your response so I assume you admit to lying, is when I feel it is beneath you. You are free to lash out at me, but you know I am telling the truth.
Sorry to have upset you so, but I call it as I see it.
But a cute distraction nonetheless.
Now come along westla, my horse is leaving any minute and you need to hitch up! Yippee.
He should call them out by name, not just vague "cable news" descriptors...
Next time, study up just for a millisecond and you might look less the fool, although that might be impossible, give your case of inoperable bulls**t artist.
Randy
T-BONE!
Dana overcompensates for her lack of lack of critical thinking skills by being completely transparent in her motives.
Instead of admit the regulation is poor and assign blame to those responsible, these wingnuts must divert blame onto somebody they can't politically align with.
Instead of blaming the self-regulated oil corporations, they've got to convince themselves "liberal activists" traveled a mile+ below the surface to plant bombs, as well as bombing the rig, to protest no cap and trade.....and they STILL call themselves "news?"
All evidence points to a blowout....of course, evidence isn't important to Fox.
Thanks Fox, for contributing to the declining civil discourse of modern politics and debate.
Terrorist ARE Responsible!!!!!
In a way they are correct. Only because, ... Greedy Corporations ARE Terrorist to the average US Citizens.
That's how the Right operates these days. When the truth doesn't fill the needs of your campaign of slandering Democrats, make something up, such as having the unmitigated gall to compare this, a man-made disaster that happened without warning, to Katrina, a natural disaster that SLOWLY moved toward NOLA as Bush jumped into action and presented John McCain with a birthday cake.
Randy
BP is already hiring the unemployed fisherman and others to aid in the cleanup when the slick hits the coast.
when you follow the money.....and run square into dick cheney's a$$ give it a big kiss eh
Why aren't they instead exploring the issue of safety equipment that Bush/Cheny admin vetoed that would have prevented this? Too costly..at 500K...their usual myopic view on helping the oil companies (in particular) with breaks from the Government!
Yes, we see that you will say ANYTHING, no matter how dumb or false.
Barry has a lot to gain. He easily could have cooked up a deal with BP to sabotage this.
to carry this insanity further why hasn't anyone offered a Cheney-Obama conspiracy link?
Inhabitants of the U.S. are particularly susceptible to these "black operations".
as for conspiracies, the bp explosion may have been caused a by a swisgaar guitar solo...
speculation on conspiracies are quite fair and reasonable... not unlike leftists speculating that tea partier rhetoric will cause public mayhem, murder and anarchy... both are far-fetched, but if the former bears out to be true, bp will be off the hook and us taxpayers will have to bailout the gulf coast tourism and fishing industries...
reporting from murderland ranch,
i'm mookie von zipper
massmurdermedia