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.

"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.

"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.

"Jack" wrote in message
...
On Jul 19, 2:26 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"Charles C." wrote in message

news




"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!

On 7/19/10 9:30 PM, wrote:
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..


It's part of what makes America great...we bend over, and the corporate
interests do us in the ass, and the republicans convince us that we need
their "free market economy."

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.

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.

"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.

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~

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?