- This topic has 685 replies, 28 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 11 months ago by
afx114.
-
AuthorPosts
-
May 27, 2010 at 10:26 AM #555887May 27, 2010 at 10:30 AM #554933
Allan from Fallbrook
Participant[quote=Arraya]
But getting wind about problems on an oil rig:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andy-borowitz/goldman-sachs-reveals-it_b_558774.html
In what is looming as another public relations predicament for Goldman Sachs, the banking giant admitted today that it made “a substantial financial bet against the Gulf of Mexico” one day before the sinking of an oil rig in that body of water.
The new revelations came to light after government investigators turned up new emails from Goldman employee Fabrice “Fabulous Fab” Tourre in which he bragged to a girlfriend that the firm was taking a “big short” position on the Gulf.
“One oil rig goes down and we’re going to be rolling in dough,” Mr. Tourre wrote in one email. “Suck it, fishies and birdies!”
Well, that’s just fucking priceless.. And as WFB says, love it or leave it[/quote]
Arraya: I read that article, too, and was howling. Wow. Just wow.
Obama has been handed a gift from the gods. This is a tailor-made opportunity to drive hard on a comprehensive energy program (and one we’ve been promised since the Nixon Administration).
I thought he was going to come up with something good with FinReg, but that’s proving to be a friggin’ joke.
He needs to show his mettle on this Gulf mess, or risk the same sort of PR disaster Dubya had with Katrina (“Heckuva job, Brownie!”).
May 27, 2010 at 10:30 AM #555034Participant[quote=Arraya]
But getting wind about problems on an oil rig:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andy-borowitz/goldman-sachs-reveals-it_b_558774.html
In what is looming as another public relations predicament for Goldman Sachs, the banking giant admitted today that it made “a substantial financial bet against the Gulf of Mexico” one day before the sinking of an oil rig in that body of water.
The new revelations came to light after government investigators turned up new emails from Goldman employee Fabrice “Fabulous Fab” Tourre in which he bragged to a girlfriend that the firm was taking a “big short” position on the Gulf.
“One oil rig goes down and we’re going to be rolling in dough,” Mr. Tourre wrote in one email. “Suck it, fishies and birdies!”
Well, that’s just fucking priceless.. And as WFB says, love it or leave it[/quote]
Arraya: I read that article, too, and was howling. Wow. Just wow.
Obama has been handed a gift from the gods. This is a tailor-made opportunity to drive hard on a comprehensive energy program (and one we’ve been promised since the Nixon Administration).
I thought he was going to come up with something good with FinReg, but that’s proving to be a friggin’ joke.
He needs to show his mettle on this Gulf mess, or risk the same sort of PR disaster Dubya had with Katrina (“Heckuva job, Brownie!”).
May 27, 2010 at 10:30 AM #555518Participant[quote=Arraya]
But getting wind about problems on an oil rig:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andy-borowitz/goldman-sachs-reveals-it_b_558774.html
In what is looming as another public relations predicament for Goldman Sachs, the banking giant admitted today that it made “a substantial financial bet against the Gulf of Mexico” one day before the sinking of an oil rig in that body of water.
The new revelations came to light after government investigators turned up new emails from Goldman employee Fabrice “Fabulous Fab” Tourre in which he bragged to a girlfriend that the firm was taking a “big short” position on the Gulf.
“One oil rig goes down and we’re going to be rolling in dough,” Mr. Tourre wrote in one email. “Suck it, fishies and birdies!”
Well, that’s just fucking priceless.. And as WFB says, love it or leave it[/quote]
Arraya: I read that article, too, and was howling. Wow. Just wow.
Obama has been handed a gift from the gods. This is a tailor-made opportunity to drive hard on a comprehensive energy program (and one we’ve been promised since the Nixon Administration).
I thought he was going to come up with something good with FinReg, but that’s proving to be a friggin’ joke.
He needs to show his mettle on this Gulf mess, or risk the same sort of PR disaster Dubya had with Katrina (“Heckuva job, Brownie!”).
May 27, 2010 at 10:30 AM #555615Participant[quote=Arraya]
But getting wind about problems on an oil rig:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andy-borowitz/goldman-sachs-reveals-it_b_558774.html
In what is looming as another public relations predicament for Goldman Sachs, the banking giant admitted today that it made “a substantial financial bet against the Gulf of Mexico” one day before the sinking of an oil rig in that body of water.
The new revelations came to light after government investigators turned up new emails from Goldman employee Fabrice “Fabulous Fab” Tourre in which he bragged to a girlfriend that the firm was taking a “big short” position on the Gulf.
“One oil rig goes down and we’re going to be rolling in dough,” Mr. Tourre wrote in one email. “Suck it, fishies and birdies!”
Well, that’s just fucking priceless.. And as WFB says, love it or leave it[/quote]
Arraya: I read that article, too, and was howling. Wow. Just wow.
Obama has been handed a gift from the gods. This is a tailor-made opportunity to drive hard on a comprehensive energy program (and one we’ve been promised since the Nixon Administration).
I thought he was going to come up with something good with FinReg, but that’s proving to be a friggin’ joke.
He needs to show his mettle on this Gulf mess, or risk the same sort of PR disaster Dubya had with Katrina (“Heckuva job, Brownie!”).
May 27, 2010 at 10:30 AM #555891Participant[quote=Arraya]
But getting wind about problems on an oil rig:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andy-borowitz/goldman-sachs-reveals-it_b_558774.html
In what is looming as another public relations predicament for Goldman Sachs, the banking giant admitted today that it made “a substantial financial bet against the Gulf of Mexico” one day before the sinking of an oil rig in that body of water.
The new revelations came to light after government investigators turned up new emails from Goldman employee Fabrice “Fabulous Fab” Tourre in which he bragged to a girlfriend that the firm was taking a “big short” position on the Gulf.
“One oil rig goes down and we’re going to be rolling in dough,” Mr. Tourre wrote in one email. “Suck it, fishies and birdies!”
Well, that’s just fucking priceless.. And as WFB says, love it or leave it[/quote]
Arraya: I read that article, too, and was howling. Wow. Just wow.
Obama has been handed a gift from the gods. This is a tailor-made opportunity to drive hard on a comprehensive energy program (and one we’ve been promised since the Nixon Administration).
I thought he was going to come up with something good with FinReg, but that’s proving to be a friggin’ joke.
He needs to show his mettle on this Gulf mess, or risk the same sort of PR disaster Dubya had with Katrina (“Heckuva job, Brownie!”).
May 27, 2010 at 10:34 AM #554950briansd1
Guest[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
The fail-safe had NOTHING to do with the drilling, hence my suggestion to research “cementing”, which you obviously didn’t do prior to responding. Deep-drill technologies and methodologies have NOTHING to do with the process of cementing, which is why the cementing is done by an oil-services company, like Halliburton, versus the actual driller or rig owner.
Like so many of your other responses, this is just glib evasion and designed to support your view (incorrect, in this instance), without having any supporting facts.[/quote]
[quote=Allan from Fallbrook] suffice it to say I’m eminently more qualified to comment on this than Brian is. [/quote]
Allan your eminent qualification is best reserved for the court room where there will be blame pointing among BP, Halliburton and the other companies involved in the platform.
I guess that technically we should also separate the oil platform from the oil well also because they are not one and the same.
The fine technical details on what exactly failed will determine the proportional liability for this disaster.
As far as the public is concerned, the technology did not work. The promises of the oil industry that they can safely drill in sensitive eco-systems resulted in the largest oil spill in US history.
May 27, 2010 at 10:34 AM #555052Guest[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
The fail-safe had NOTHING to do with the drilling, hence my suggestion to research “cementing”, which you obviously didn’t do prior to responding. Deep-drill technologies and methodologies have NOTHING to do with the process of cementing, which is why the cementing is done by an oil-services company, like Halliburton, versus the actual driller or rig owner.
Like so many of your other responses, this is just glib evasion and designed to support your view (incorrect, in this instance), without having any supporting facts.[/quote]
[quote=Allan from Fallbrook] suffice it to say I’m eminently more qualified to comment on this than Brian is. [/quote]
Allan your eminent qualification is best reserved for the court room where there will be blame pointing among BP, Halliburton and the other companies involved in the platform.
I guess that technically we should also separate the oil platform from the oil well also because they are not one and the same.
The fine technical details on what exactly failed will determine the proportional liability for this disaster.
As far as the public is concerned, the technology did not work. The promises of the oil industry that they can safely drill in sensitive eco-systems resulted in the largest oil spill in US history.
May 27, 2010 at 10:34 AM #555537Guest[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
The fail-safe had NOTHING to do with the drilling, hence my suggestion to research “cementing”, which you obviously didn’t do prior to responding. Deep-drill technologies and methodologies have NOTHING to do with the process of cementing, which is why the cementing is done by an oil-services company, like Halliburton, versus the actual driller or rig owner.
Like so many of your other responses, this is just glib evasion and designed to support your view (incorrect, in this instance), without having any supporting facts.[/quote]
[quote=Allan from Fallbrook] suffice it to say I’m eminently more qualified to comment on this than Brian is. [/quote]
Allan your eminent qualification is best reserved for the court room where there will be blame pointing among BP, Halliburton and the other companies involved in the platform.
I guess that technically we should also separate the oil platform from the oil well also because they are not one and the same.
The fine technical details on what exactly failed will determine the proportional liability for this disaster.
As far as the public is concerned, the technology did not work. The promises of the oil industry that they can safely drill in sensitive eco-systems resulted in the largest oil spill in US history.
May 27, 2010 at 10:34 AM #555633Guest[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
The fail-safe had NOTHING to do with the drilling, hence my suggestion to research “cementing”, which you obviously didn’t do prior to responding. Deep-drill technologies and methodologies have NOTHING to do with the process of cementing, which is why the cementing is done by an oil-services company, like Halliburton, versus the actual driller or rig owner.
Like so many of your other responses, this is just glib evasion and designed to support your view (incorrect, in this instance), without having any supporting facts.[/quote]
[quote=Allan from Fallbrook] suffice it to say I’m eminently more qualified to comment on this than Brian is. [/quote]
Allan your eminent qualification is best reserved for the court room where there will be blame pointing among BP, Halliburton and the other companies involved in the platform.
I guess that technically we should also separate the oil platform from the oil well also because they are not one and the same.
The fine technical details on what exactly failed will determine the proportional liability for this disaster.
As far as the public is concerned, the technology did not work. The promises of the oil industry that they can safely drill in sensitive eco-systems resulted in the largest oil spill in US history.
May 27, 2010 at 10:34 AM #555908Guest[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
The fail-safe had NOTHING to do with the drilling, hence my suggestion to research “cementing”, which you obviously didn’t do prior to responding. Deep-drill technologies and methodologies have NOTHING to do with the process of cementing, which is why the cementing is done by an oil-services company, like Halliburton, versus the actual driller or rig owner.
Like so many of your other responses, this is just glib evasion and designed to support your view (incorrect, in this instance), without having any supporting facts.[/quote]
[quote=Allan from Fallbrook] suffice it to say I’m eminently more qualified to comment on this than Brian is. [/quote]
Allan your eminent qualification is best reserved for the court room where there will be blame pointing among BP, Halliburton and the other companies involved in the platform.
I guess that technically we should also separate the oil platform from the oil well also because they are not one and the same.
The fine technical details on what exactly failed will determine the proportional liability for this disaster.
As far as the public is concerned, the technology did not work. The promises of the oil industry that they can safely drill in sensitive eco-systems resulted in the largest oil spill in US history.
May 27, 2010 at 10:37 AM #554963Guest[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
Obama has been handed a gift from the gods. This is a tailor-made opportunity to drive hard on a comprehensive energy program (and one we’ve been promised since the Nixon Administration).[/quote]I agree Allan. Obama had been handed many such gifts. He is THE ONE. 😉
He’s not fully maximized his gifts. But maybe he’s counting on more.
May 27, 2010 at 10:37 AM #555064Guest[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
Obama has been handed a gift from the gods. This is a tailor-made opportunity to drive hard on a comprehensive energy program (and one we’ve been promised since the Nixon Administration).[/quote]I agree Allan. Obama had been handed many such gifts. He is THE ONE. 😉
He’s not fully maximized his gifts. But maybe he’s counting on more.
May 27, 2010 at 10:37 AM #555548Guest[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
Obama has been handed a gift from the gods. This is a tailor-made opportunity to drive hard on a comprehensive energy program (and one we’ve been promised since the Nixon Administration).[/quote]I agree Allan. Obama had been handed many such gifts. He is THE ONE. 😉
He’s not fully maximized his gifts. But maybe he’s counting on more.
May 27, 2010 at 10:37 AM #555646Guest[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
Obama has been handed a gift from the gods. This is a tailor-made opportunity to drive hard on a comprehensive energy program (and one we’ve been promised since the Nixon Administration).[/quote]I agree Allan. Obama had been handed many such gifts. He is THE ONE. 😉
He’s not fully maximized his gifts. But maybe he’s counting on more.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.