|
wonderful
Canuck57 wrote:
On 18/07/2010 7:42 PM, nom=de=plume wrote: Testing of BP well integrity "detected seep a distance from the well" in the Gulf of Mexico, Ret. Adm. Thad Allen says. If true, not good news. BP better get a pipe on that well and let it blow out oil to lower the top pressure some. If oil has fractured around the well head, they will be in a world of grief for years dealing with this as real disaster. Lets see how far BP stock drops tomorrow, if this is a real issue, $5 off the top easy. I hear BP is looking for cleanup workers. All you have to do is make sure they have a suit your size and you can get a job! It's Obama's fault. |
wonderful
"Jack" wrote in message ... On Jul 19, 6:10 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote: Oh, and one "expert" that the idiot Olbermann dug up who said the crap you stated does not come anywhere close to "everyone"... you do realize that's not news, it's entertainment for idiots, right? You should really stop watching that crap on TV... it's rotting your brain. Oops, too late. Never listened any expert on Olbermann... sorry. Feel free to google for this from the experts. Yeah, polly, right... you're repeated exactly what the KO "expert" Bob Cavnar, a left-wing blogger, said. No one else is saying that, unless they're repeating this KO garbage, like you. Whatever you say moron. Keep pimping for BP. Makes you look really hip. |
wonderful
"Jack" wrote in message ... On Jul 19, 7:12 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote: "Jack" wrote in message ... On Jul 19, 6:12 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote: "Jack" wrote in message ... On Jul 19, 3:16 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote: "Jack" wrote in message ... On Jul 19, 2:25 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 18:42:30 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: Testing of BP well integrity "detected seep a distance from the well" in the Gulf of Mexico, Ret. Adm. Thad Allen says. I am not sure why they don't open the valve now that they have a good cap and produce the oil to the surface. That will take off the pressure and still be safe/clean. After all that was the point in drilling the well in the first place. I think they are pressing their luck trying to top kill this with the cap. Something that would have been fine at the production pressures may rupture with it sealed and put us back 2 months. I agree... not an oil engineer, but it seems to make sense. I think they just don't want to have to record the flow rate, so the fine is lower. Too bad for them. I think Allen should force them to do that. Open pipe flow rate can be determined by calculation if the pressure, pipe diameter, and a few other factors are known, and they all are at this point. That does not tell us how much oil has escaped, since except for a few hours the leak has never been in a free flow mode. Any measured flow would be through the valves and hoses that would be connected from the cap to the surface ships, which once again tell us nothing about the escaped oil, or the fine to be levied. That only tells us how much flow those connections can accept. The only thing you are correct about is that you are no "oil engineer"... or any kind professional that requires critical, scientific thinking. In that case, mister moron, how come just about everyone who is an oil engineer who doesn't work for BP is saying that's the likely reason they don't want to do that?? Yes, you're a jerk as well as a moron. You wrote, " I think they just don't want to have to record the flow rate...", but that's not the issue at all. If they are to hook up the pipes to the surface, they have to open the well back up, letting oil again flow into the gulf for days. That's what BP doesn't want to do, it has nothing to do with recording any "flow rates". "The apparent disagreement began to sprout Saturday when Allen said the cap would eventually be hooked up to a mile-long pipe to pump the crude to ships on the surface. But early the next day, BP chief operating officer Doug Suttles said the cap should stay clamped shut to keep in the oil until relief wells are finished." "The government's plan would ease pressure on the fragile well, but would require up to three more days of oil spilling into the Gulf." "But the company very much wants to avoid a repeat of the live underwater video that showed millions of gallons of oil spewing from the blown well for weeks." Oh, and one "expert" that the idiot Olbermann dug up who said the crap you stated does not come anywhere close to "everyone"... you do realize that's not news, it's entertainment for idiots, right? You should really stop watching that crap on TV... it's rotting your brain. Oops, too late. Here you go your moronic brainiac. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/...6688083.shtml- Brilliant! That link does absolutely *nothing* to shore up your assertion. ~snerk~ You're a moron: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/88bde5ee-7...hinks-flow-rat... Sure... BP has no interest in obscuring how much oil is actually flowing. After all, big corporations are good for America: Congrats on doing your homework assignment. Unfortunately, you fail. All of your links are old news and irrelevant except for the "rawstory" one that features your olbermann "expert". None of them, except the moonbat, back up your assertion that they are leaving the cap on now to avoid measuring flow rates. They (BP and the gov) already have all the data they need to figure out approximately how much oil has come out. The monetary fines will be astronomical. Why would you want them to spill millions of gallons more now when this thing may be permanently capped next week? You hate our planet? As long as there is no sudden pressure drop, let it stay capped. Keep pimping and lying for BP moron. |
wonderful
"Jack" wrote in message ... On Jul 19, 2:26 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote: "Charles C." wrote in message ... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... Testing of BP well integrity "detected seep a distance from the well" in the Gulf of Mexico, Ret. Adm. Thad Allen says. -- Nom=de=Plume Seepage of oil through the bedrock is acknowledged to be a naturally occurring event according to the announcement. With the well currently closed off, the pressure within the oil reservoir should now be the same as it was before the well was drilled. The reported seepage is two miles away from the well. Not to defend BP, but how are they responsible for a naturally occurring leak? Seems to me that the seepage would occur well or no well. The part that is scary is that if true, permanently filling the well with mud and cement is not going to stop the seepage through the bedrock. Only thing to do is to allow the oil to be harvested, thereby reducing the backpressure. I agree that there's no absolute certainty it's from the BP site. In any case, the only reason I can see that they don't want to open up the cap and capture the oil at the surface is because they want to limit their liability. That will spill millions of gallons more oil into the Gulf. Why would you want to do that? Come on. If you believe BP, it's just a trickle. MORON alert! |
wonderful
|
wonderful
wrote in message ... On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 20:16:45 -0400, Harry ? wrote: It's important to keep in mind that BP's interests are opposite those of the citizens of hte United States. BP wants to protect its stock price and its stockholders. It has from the beginning and even now kept information from the government. Virtually nothing BP says should be accepted as "the truth." I really think BP USA will be bankrupt from this. It is the soundest business decision they could make. They are compartmentalized to the point that BP Mexico and BP Canada would be isolated from the damage and the other operations around the world would be totally immune. The only question will be how many assets they can spirit away before the walls come down. This might also be some kind of takeover where the incoming company negotiates a top limit on the liability they are taking on. I never underestimate the ability of corporate lawyers to get their clients off the hook and shed liabilities.. Thanks I think. :) |
wonderful
On Jul 19, 9:18*pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"Jack" wrote in message ... On Jul 19, 7:12 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote: "Jack" wrote in message .... On Jul 19, 6:12 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote: "Jack" wrote in message ... On Jul 19, 3:16 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote: "Jack" wrote in message ... On Jul 19, 2:25 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 18:42:30 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: Testing of BP well integrity "detected seep a distance from the well" in the Gulf of Mexico, Ret. Adm. Thad Allen says. I am not sure why they don't open the valve now that they have a good cap and produce the oil to the surface. That will take off the pressure and still be safe/clean. After all that was the point in drilling the well in the first place. I think they are pressing their luck trying to top kill this with the cap. Something that would have been fine at the production pressures may rupture with it sealed and put us back 2 months. I agree... not an oil engineer, but it seems to make sense. I think they just don't want to have to record the flow rate, so the fine is lower. Too bad for them. I think Allen should force them to do that. Open pipe flow rate can be determined by calculation if the pressure, pipe diameter, and a few other factors are known, and they all are at this point. *That does not tell us how much oil has escaped, since except for a few hours the leak has never been in a free flow mode. Any measured flow would be through the valves and hoses that would be connected from the cap to the surface ships, which once again tell us nothing about the escaped oil, or the fine to be levied. *That only tells us how much flow those connections can accept. The only thing you are correct about is that you are no "oil engineer"... or any kind professional that requires critical, scientific thinking. In that case, mister moron, how come just about everyone who is an oil engineer who doesn't work for BP is saying that's the likely reason they don't want to do that?? Yes, you're a jerk as well as a moron. You wrote, " I think they just don't want to have to record the flow rate...", but that's not the issue at all. *If they are to hook up the pipes to the surface, they have to open the well back up, letting oil again flow into the gulf for days. *That's what BP doesn't want to do, it has nothing to do with recording any "flow rates". "The apparent disagreement began to sprout Saturday when Allen said the cap would eventually be hooked up to a mile-long pipe to pump the crude to ships on the surface. But early the next day, BP chief operating officer Doug Suttles said the cap should stay clamped shut to keep in the oil until relief wells are finished." "The government's plan would ease pressure on the fragile well, but would require up to three more days of oil spilling into the Gulf.." "But the company very much wants to avoid a repeat of the live underwater video that showed millions of gallons of oil spewing from the blown well for weeks." Oh, and one "expert" that the idiot Olbermann dug up who said the crap you stated does not come anywhere close to "everyone"... you do realize that's not news, it's entertainment for idiots, right? *You should really stop watching that crap on TV... it's rotting your brain. *Oops, too late. Here you go your moronic brainiac. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/...6688083.shtml- Brilliant! *That link does absolutely *nothing* to shore up your assertion. ~snerk~ You're a *moron: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/88bde5ee-7...feabdc0.htmlht....... Sure... BP has no interest in obscuring how much oil is actually flowing. After all, big corporations are good for America: Congrats on doing your homework assignment. Unfortunately, you fail. All of your links are old news and irrelevant except for the "rawstory" one that features your olbermann "expert". *None of them, except the moonbat, back up your assertion that they are leaving the cap on now to avoid measuring flow rates. They (BP and the gov) already have all the data they need to figure out approximately how much oil has come out. *The monetary fines *will be astronomical. *Why would you want them to spill millions of gallons more now when this thing may be permanently capped next week? *You hate our planet? As long as there is no sudden pressure drop, let it stay capped. Keep pimping and lying for BP moron. Tell us why it would be preferrable to have millions of gallons spill into the Gulf instead of capping it safely and permanently. Do you think that BO and his czars would not have it under control? "BP continues to work cooperatively with the guidance and approval of the National Incident Commander and the leadership and direction of federal government including the Department of Energy, Department of the Interior, Federal Science Team, Bureau of Ocean Energy, Management, Regulation and Enforcement, U.S. Coast Guard and secretaries Ken Salazar and Steven Chu." Damn, sounds like the feds are up their butts, and have the data they need. If you have data showing otherwise, lay it out. Otherwise, STFU... skank. |
wonderful
"Jack" wrote in message ... On Jul 19, 9:18 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote: "Jack" wrote in message ... On Jul 19, 7:12 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote: "Jack" wrote in message ... On Jul 19, 6:12 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote: "Jack" wrote in message ... On Jul 19, 3:16 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote: "Jack" wrote in message ... On Jul 19, 2:25 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 18:42:30 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: Testing of BP well integrity "detected seep a distance from the well" in the Gulf of Mexico, Ret. Adm. Thad Allen says. I am not sure why they don't open the valve now that they have a good cap and produce the oil to the surface. That will take off the pressure and still be safe/clean. After all that was the point in drilling the well in the first place. I think they are pressing their luck trying to top kill this with the cap. Something that would have been fine at the production pressures may rupture with it sealed and put us back 2 months. I agree... not an oil engineer, but it seems to make sense. I think they just don't want to have to record the flow rate, so the fine is lower. Too bad for them. I think Allen should force them to do that. Open pipe flow rate can be determined by calculation if the pressure, pipe diameter, and a few other factors are known, and they all are at this point. That does not tell us how much oil has escaped, since except for a few hours the leak has never been in a free flow mode. Any measured flow would be through the valves and hoses that would be connected from the cap to the surface ships, which once again tell us nothing about the escaped oil, or the fine to be levied. That only tells us how much flow those connections can accept. The only thing you are correct about is that you are no "oil engineer"... or any kind professional that requires critical, scientific thinking. In that case, mister moron, how come just about everyone who is an oil engineer who doesn't work for BP is saying that's the likely reason they don't want to do that?? Yes, you're a jerk as well as a moron. You wrote, " I think they just don't want to have to record the flow rate...", but that's not the issue at all. If they are to hook up the pipes to the surface, they have to open the well back up, letting oil again flow into the gulf for days. That's what BP doesn't want to do, it has nothing to do with recording any "flow rates". "The apparent disagreement began to sprout Saturday when Allen said the cap would eventually be hooked up to a mile-long pipe to pump the crude to ships on the surface. But early the next day, BP chief operating officer Doug Suttles said the cap should stay clamped shut to keep in the oil until relief wells are finished." "The government's plan would ease pressure on the fragile well, but would require up to three more days of oil spilling into the Gulf." "But the company very much wants to avoid a repeat of the live underwater video that showed millions of gallons of oil spewing from the blown well for weeks." Oh, and one "expert" that the idiot Olbermann dug up who said the crap you stated does not come anywhere close to "everyone"... you do realize that's not news, it's entertainment for idiots, right? You should really stop watching that crap on TV... it's rotting your brain. Oops, too late. Here you go your moronic brainiac. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/...6688083.shtml- Brilliant! That link does absolutely *nothing* to shore up your assertion. ~snerk~ You're a moron: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/88bde5ee-7...feabdc0.htmlht...... Sure... BP has no interest in obscuring how much oil is actually flowing. After all, big corporations are good for America: Congrats on doing your homework assignment. Unfortunately, you fail. All of your links are old news and irrelevant except for the "rawstory" one that features your olbermann "expert". None of them, except the moonbat, back up your assertion that they are leaving the cap on now to avoid measuring flow rates. They (BP and the gov) already have all the data they need to figure out approximately how much oil has come out. The monetary fines will be astronomical. Why would you want them to spill millions of gallons more now when this thing may be permanently capped next week? You hate our planet? As long as there is no sudden pressure drop, let it stay capped. Keep pimping and lying for BP moron. Tell us why it would be preferrable to have millions of gallons spill into the Gulf instead of capping it safely and permanently. Do you think that BO and his czars would not have it under control? So perhaps there isn't a massive and uncontrollable leak elsewhere in the system. But, you knew that. You're just being an ass. "BP continues to work cooperatively with the guidance and approval of the National Incident Commander and the leadership and direction of federal government including the Department of Energy, Department of the Interior, Federal Science Team, Bureau of Ocean Energy, Management, Regulation and Enforcement, U.S. Coast Guard and secretaries Ken Salazar and Steven Chu." Damn, sounds like the feds are up their butts, and have the data they need. If you have data showing otherwise, lay it out. Otherwise, STFU... skank. You are a moron, but keep calling me names if it makes you feel more like a man. |
wonderful
On Jul 20, 2:10*am, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"Jack" wrote in message ... On Jul 19, 9:18 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote: "Jack" wrote in message .... On Jul 19, 7:12 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote: "Jack" wrote in message ... On Jul 19, 6:12 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote: "Jack" wrote in message ... On Jul 19, 3:16 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote: "Jack" wrote in message ... On Jul 19, 2:25 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 18:42:30 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: Testing of BP well integrity "detected seep a distance from the well" in the Gulf of Mexico, Ret. Adm. Thad Allen says. I am not sure why they don't open the valve now that they have a good cap and produce the oil to the surface. That will take off the pressure and still be safe/clean. After all that was the point in drilling the well in the first place. I think they are pressing their luck trying to top kill this with the cap. Something that would have been fine at the production pressures may rupture with it sealed and put us back 2 months. I agree... not an oil engineer, but it seems to make sense.. I think they just don't want to have to record the flow rate, so the fine is lower. Too bad for them. I think Allen should force them to do that. Open pipe flow rate can be determined by calculation if the pressure, pipe diameter, and a few other factors are known, and they all are at this point. *That does not tell us how much oil has escaped, since except for a few hours the leak has never been in a free flow mode. Any measured flow would be through the valves and hoses that would be connected from the cap to the surface ships, which once again tell us nothing about the escaped oil, or the fine to be levied. *That only tells us how much flow those connections can accept. The only thing you are correct about is that you are no "oil engineer"... or any kind professional that requires critical, scientific thinking. In that case, mister moron, how come just about everyone who is an oil engineer who doesn't work for BP is saying that's the likely reason they don't want to do that?? Yes, you're a jerk as well as a moron.. You wrote, " I think they just don't want to have to record the flow rate...", but that's not the issue at all. *If they are to hook up the pipes to the surface, they have to open the well back up, letting oil again flow into the gulf for days. *That's what BP doesn't want to do, it has nothing to do with recording any "flow rates". "The apparent disagreement began to sprout Saturday when Allen said the cap would eventually be hooked up to a mile-long pipe to pump the crude to ships on the surface. But early the next day, BP chief operating officer Doug Suttles said the cap should stay clamped shut to keep in the oil until relief wells are finished." "The government's plan would ease pressure on the fragile well, but would require up to three more days of oil spilling into the Gulf." "But the company very much wants to avoid a repeat of the live underwater video that showed millions of gallons of oil spewing from the blown well for weeks." Oh, and one "expert" that the idiot Olbermann dug up who said the crap you stated does not come anywhere close to "everyone"... you do realize that's not news, it's entertainment for idiots, right? You should really stop watching that crap on TV... it's rotting your brain. *Oops, too late. Here you go your moronic brainiac. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/...6688083.shtml- Brilliant! *That link does absolutely *nothing* to shore up your assertion. ~snerk~ You're a *moron: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/88bde5ee-7...feabdc0.htmlht...... Sure... BP has no interest in obscuring how much oil is actually flowing. After all, big corporations are good for America: Congrats on doing your homework assignment. Unfortunately, you fail. All of your links are old news and irrelevant except for the "rawstory" one that features your olbermann "expert". *None of them, except the moonbat, back up your assertion that they are leaving the cap on now to avoid measuring flow rates. They (BP and the gov) already have all the data they need to figure out approximately how much oil has come out. *The monetary fines *will be astronomical. *Why would you want them to spill millions of gallons more now when this thing may be permanently capped next week? *You hate our planet? As long as there is no sudden pressure drop, let it stay capped. Keep pimping and lying for BP moron. Tell us why it would be preferrable to have millions of gallons spill into the Gulf instead of capping it safely and permanently. *Do you think that BO and his czars would not have it under control? So perhaps there isn't a massive and uncontrollable leak elsewhere in the system. But, you knew that. You're just being an ass. And I've shown you to be an uneducated parrot. "BP continues to work cooperatively with the guidance and approval of the National Incident Commander and the leadership and direction of federal government including the Department of Energy, Department of the Interior, Federal Science Team, Bureau of Ocean Energy, Management, Regulation and Enforcement, U.S. Coast Guard and secretaries Ken Salazar and Steven Chu." Damn, sounds like the feds are up their butts, and have the data they need. *If you have data showing otherwise, lay it out. Otherwise, STFU... skank. You are a moron, but keep calling me names if it makes you feel more like a man. Does all the name-calling you do make you feel more manly? ~snerk~ |
wonderful
On 7/20/10 9:01 AM, Jack wrote:
On Jul 20, 2:10 am, wrote: wrote in message ... On Jul 19, 9:18 pm, wrote: wrote in message ... On Jul 19, 7:12 pm, wrote: wrote in message ... On Jul 19, 6:12 pm, wrote: wrote in message ... On Jul 19, 3:16 pm, wrote: wrote in message ... On Jul 19, 2:25 pm, wrote: wrote in message ... On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 18:42:30 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: Testing of BP well integrity "detected seep a distance from the well" in the Gulf of Mexico, Ret. Adm. Thad Allen says. I am not sure why they don't open the valve now that they have a good cap and produce the oil to the surface. That will take off the pressure and still be safe/clean. After all that was the point in drilling the well in the first place. I think they are pressing their luck trying to top kill this with the cap. Something that would have been fine at the production pressures may rupture with it sealed and put us back 2 months. I agree... not an oil engineer, but it seems to make sense. I think they just don't want to have to record the flow rate, so the fine is lower. Too bad for them. I think Allen should force them to do that. Open pipe flow rate can be determined by calculation if the pressure, pipe diameter, and a few other factors are known, and they all are at this point. That does not tell us how much oil has escaped, since except for a few hours the leak has never been in a free flow mode. Any measured flow would be through the valves and hoses that would be connected from the cap to the surface ships, which once again tell us nothing about the escaped oil, or the fine to be levied. That only tells us how much flow those connections can accept. The only thing you are correct about is that you are no "oil engineer"... or any kind professional that requires critical, scientific thinking. In that case, mister moron, how come just about everyone who is an oil engineer who doesn't work for BP is saying that's the likely reason they don't want to do that?? Yes, you're a jerk as well as a moron. You wrote, " I think they just don't want to have to record the flow rate...", but that's not the issue at all. If they are to hook up the pipes to the surface, they have to open the well back up, letting oil again flow into the gulf for days. That's what BP doesn't want to do, it has nothing to do with recording any "flow rates". "The apparent disagreement began to sprout Saturday when Allen said the cap would eventually be hooked up to a mile-long pipe to pump the crude to ships on the surface. But early the next day, BP chief operating officer Doug Suttles said the cap should stay clamped shut to keep in the oil until relief wells are finished." "The government's plan would ease pressure on the fragile well, but would require up to three more days of oil spilling into the Gulf." "But the company very much wants to avoid a repeat of the live underwater video that showed millions of gallons of oil spewing from the blown well for weeks." Oh, and one "expert" that the idiot Olbermann dug up who said the crap you stated does not come anywhere close to "everyone"... you do realize that's not news, it's entertainment for idiots, right? You should really stop watching that crap on TV... it's rotting your brain. Oops, too late. Here you go your moronic brainiac. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/...6688083.shtml- Brilliant! That link does absolutely *nothing* to shore up your assertion. ~snerk~ You're a moron: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/88bde5ee-7...feabdc0.htmlht...... Sure... BP has no interest in obscuring how much oil is actually flowing. After all, big corporations are good for America: Congrats on doing your homework assignment. Unfortunately, you fail. All of your links are old news and irrelevant except for the "rawstory" one that features your olbermann "expert". None of them, except the moonbat, back up your assertion that they are leaving the cap on now to avoid measuring flow rates. They (BP and the gov) already have all the data they need to figure out approximately how much oil has come out. The monetary fines will be astronomical. Why would you want them to spill millions of gallons more now when this thing may be permanently capped next week? You hate our planet? As long as there is no sudden pressure drop, let it stay capped. Keep pimping and lying for BP moron. Tell us why it would be preferrable to have millions of gallons spill into the Gulf instead of capping it safely and permanently. Do you think that BO and his czars would not have it under control? So perhaps there isn't a massive and uncontrollable leak elsewhere in the system. But, you knew that. You're just being an ass. And I've shown you to be an uneducated parrot. "BP continues to work cooperatively with the guidance and approval of the National Incident Commander and the leadership and direction of federal government including the Department of Energy, Department of the Interior, Federal Science Team, Bureau of Ocean Energy, Management, Regulation and Enforcement, U.S. Coast Guard and secretaries Ken Salazar and Steven Chu." Damn, sounds like the feds are up their butts, and have the data they need. If you have data showing otherwise, lay it out. Otherwise, STFU... skank. You are a moron, but keep calling me names if it makes you feel more like a man. Does all the name-calling you do make you feel more manly? ~snerk~ Gee, jackoff, if you bought a strap-on dildo and wore it, would you feel more like a man? |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:32 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com