U.S. attorney general opens criminal probe of Gulf oil spill

[sangha]

Please cite your evidence that BP 'caused' the oil to spill... it has yet to be determined at all... because that type of investigation can only properly be conducted with access to everything including the site, failed equipment, systems controlling the equipment, persons involved with the equipment at the time of failure and during the fix action, etc

So your argument is bush should have waited until the WTC finished buring and was carted away before we started figuring out who did it.

If BP is found negligent or criminal in it's actions... go after 'em

More wingnut logic. The govt has to show BP negligent or criminal BEFORE the investigation.

.

... knock yourself out... should BP be involved in the cleanup and responsible for it?? Yep, and have already stated they will be doing so

Not true. BP's liability is capped and the conservatives oppose removing this bit of govt interference in the economy. Conservatives hate when the govt interferes the economy; except when they don't

There is no root cause or reason for the incident...

And without an investigation, you know this....how?

Once again, you have revealed yourself as someone who prefers to make stuff up to avoid having to defend your own ideas.

as all necessary evidence to determine that is not yet available....

And without an investigation, you know this....how?

Once again, you have revealed yourself as someone who prefers to make stuff up to avoid having to defend your own ideas.

The winger's contention of a BP 'perp' or definite cause of the incident is utterly laughable

And without an investigation, you know this....how?

Once again, you have revealed yourself as someone who prefers to make stuff up to avoid having to defend your own ideas.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

So I guess this giant hole in the Earth just magically started spewing oil all on its own, is that what you're saying?

Oil does in fact naturally seep out of the ocean floor, killing endangered species no doubt. How are you going to penalize the earth for such a crime?

Yeah, right, and because we can't charge gravity with a crime for an accidental fall, we shouldn't punish people who murder by causing someone to fall. You're a real intelligent moron.

 

[sangha]

They certainly don't stop fighting the fire to collect evidence, bub.

I never said they do. And once again, another rightwinger makes stuff up.

The only one suggesting that an investigation hinders solving the problem is one of your fellow wingnuts.

 

[DiamondDave]

There is nothing that has indicated ANY criminal activity by BP....

Except for the fact its a strict liability crime to kill a pelican - and we're finding all these dead pelicans with oil all over them. But hey, that's not evidence of a crime!

No... it is not.. a dead pelican by nature is not evidence of a crime... the evidence of the criminal activity of a person leading to that dead pelican is a crime.. and there is no direct and confirmed evidence of such criminal activity.... it is yet to be determined if this is negligence, HW failure, accident, human error, breaking of procedure, etc.. and that will not be determined until such time where there can be access to everything and everyone needed for that investigation.. and most of those people and systems, etc, are still integral to the finding and implementing of a solution

My god are you dense

 

[sangha]

So I guess this giant hole in the Earth just magically started spewing oil all on its own, is that what you're saying?

Oil does in fact naturally seep out of the ocean floor, killing endangered species no doubt. How are you going to penalize the earth for such a crime?

And another rightwinger who thinks this is a "natural disaster"

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Hey DiamondDave, you never answered this question:

You don't think the causes of a forest fire should be investigated while the fire is still burning - unless the investigation has already revealed evidence of arson? Is that what you're saying?

When the originating area is still burning, you can't.... when access to those with the data and those directly involved are still working on the fire.. you can't... you can look at video from a camera at the corner store on the access road... and you can ask neighbors.... and all sorts of things like that... but the pertinent information you need from ground 0.0 and the necessary information from the firefighters at the scene cannot be done UNTIL THE SOLUTION IS HAD..... UNTIL THE FIRE IS OUT....

What you are advocating is taking away cycles from the firefighters and their support staff to gather your information, while they are still fighting the fire.... and those directly involved are the ones that are going to give you the majority of your useful information...

So then - yes - if the fire is still going on - we should give the arsonist as much time as possible to escape before looking into the cause?

As stated.. interview the CEO.. interview a secretary.. interview some custodian.... knock yourself out... going to get you nowhere though, until you have access to the area, data, systems, personnel, etc, that are involved.. and right now they are dealing with something a little more important than the AG's questions... you have the fed take over the whole solution effort to relieve BP from doing it, go ahead... knock yourself out... doubt we'll see that happen though

You don't need to interview anyone to count dead pelicans. But since you're the expert at this, why don't you call up the AG and tell him?

 

[Lonestar_logic]

So I guess this giant hole in the Earth just magically started spewing oil all on its own, is that what you're saying?

Oil does in fact naturally seep out of the ocean floor, killing endangered species no doubt. How are you going to penalize the earth for such a crime?

Yeah, right, and because we can't charge gravity with a crime for an accidental fall, we shouldn't punish people who murder by causing someone to fall. You're a real intelligent moron.

Causing someone to fall is called murder you stupid fuck.

 

[DiamondDave]

They certainly don't stop fighting the fire to collect evidence, bub.

I never said they do. And once again, another rightwinger makes stuff up.

The only one suggesting that an investigation hinders solving the problem is one of your fellow wingnuts.

Investigation and interviewing of those persons, systems, data, etc that are still involved with solving the situation does inherently hinder the solution effort... go ask neighbors, secretaries, video cameras from the other oil companies, etc... knock yourself out...

or simply relieve BP and the persons/systems from the task at hand, and have the fed conduct the restoration effort while the lawyers then interview and examine equipment, systems, and data.... knock yourself out... don't think we are going to see that happen though... hence why this is huffing and puffing that will get everyone exactly NOWHERE... and that any proper investigation into the details and causes will not happen until the solution is completed

 

[SpidermanTuba]

There is nothing that has indicated ANY criminal activity by BP....

Except for the fact its a strict liability crime to kill a pelican - and we're finding all these dead pelicans with oil all over them. But hey, that's not evidence of a crime!

No... it is not.. a dead pelican by nature is not evidence of a crime...

It is when its soaked in crude oil.

the evidence of the criminal activity of a person leading to that dead pelican is a crime.. and there is no direct and confirmed evidence of such criminal activity....

Killing a pelican is a criminal act.

it is yet to be determined if this is negligence, HW failure, accident, human error, breaking of procedure, etc.. and that will not be determined until such time where there can be access to everything and everyone needed for that investigation.. and most of those people and systems, etc, are still integral to the finding and implementing of a solution

It doesn't matter if it was an accident, or human error, or anything that - killing a pelican is a strict liability crime. Do you know what a strict liability crime is?

 

[Lonestar_logic]

So I guess this giant hole in the Earth just magically started spewing oil all on its own, is that what you're saying?

Oil does in fact naturally seep out of the ocean floor, killing endangered species no doubt. How are you going to penalize the earth for such a crime?

And another rightwinger who thinks this is a "natural disaster"

When did I call this gulf oil leak a natural disaster? I was pointing out the fact that oil naturally seeps out of the ground.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Oil does in fact naturally seep out of the ocean floor, killing endangered species no doubt. How are you going to penalize the earth for such a crime?

Yeah, right, and because we can't charge gravity with a crime for an accidental fall, we shouldn't punish people who murder by causing someone to fall. You're a real intelligent moron.

Causing someone to fall is called murder you stupid fuck.

Killing a pelican is a crime as well.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Oil does in fact naturally seep out of the ocean floor, killing endangered species no doubt. How are you going to penalize the earth for such a crime?

And another rightwinger who thinks this is a "natural disaster"

When did I call this gulf oil leak a natural disaster? I was pointing out the fact that oil naturally seeps out of the ground.

Why?

 

[sangha]

Hey DiamondDave, you never answered this question:

You don't think the causes of a forest fire should be investigated while the fire is still burning - unless the investigation has already revealed evidence of arson? Is that what you're saying?

When the originating area is still burning, you can't.... when access to those with the data and those directly involved are still working on the fire.. you can't... you can look at video from a camera at the corner store on the access road... and you can ask neighbors.... and all sorts of things like that... but the pertinent information you need from ground 0.0 and the necessary information from the firefighters at the scene cannot be done UNTIL THE SOLUTION IS HAD..... UNTIL THE FIRE IS OUT....

And once again, DD has to make stuff up in order to defend himself.

DD wants people to believe that if a firefighter sees an emptied can of gasoline at the scene of a fire, the firefighter will just leave it there because, well, because "you can't"

DD even admits that the investigation CAN begin while the fire is still going on (quote "you can look at video...you can ask neighbors") but he dishonestly claims that the investigation CAN'T begin while the fire is still going on. He wants us to believe that looking at video and asking witnesses is NOT an "investigation"

What you are advocating is taking away cycles from the firefighters and their support staff to gather your information, while they are still fighting the fire.... and those directly involved are the ones that are going to give you the majority of your useful information...

Wrong. The people fixing the problem are NOT the ones who need to be questioned. This is just another of your invented lies designed to help you avoid explaining yourself.

As stated.. interview the CEO.. interview a secretary.. interview some custodian.... knock yourself out...

That's exactly what they're going to be doing. If you were honest, you'd acknowledge this.

going to get you nowhere though, until you have access to the area, data, systems, personnel, etc, that are involved..

And again, you're ability to predict the future is undermined by your inability to predict the past.

and right now they are dealing with something a little more important than the AG's questions... you have the fed take over the whole solution effort to relieve BP from doing it, go ahead... knock yourself out... doubt we'll see that happen though

And again, DD has to lie and claim the fed are going to "take of the whole solution effort"

I don't think DD has an honest bone is his body

 

[DiamondDave]

Hey DiamondDave, you never answered this question:

When the originating area is still burning, you can't.... when access to those with the data and those directly involved are still working on the fire.. you can't... you can look at video from a camera at the corner store on the access road... and you can ask neighbors.... and all sorts of things like that... but the pertinent information you need from ground 0.0 and the necessary information from the firefighters at the scene cannot be done UNTIL THE SOLUTION IS HAD..... UNTIL THE FIRE IS OUT....

What you are advocating is taking away cycles from the firefighters and their support staff to gather your information, while they are still fighting the fire.... and those directly involved are the ones that are going to give you the majority of your useful information...

So then - yes - if the fire is still going on - we should give the arsonist as much time as possible to escape before looking into the cause?

As stated.. interview the CEO.. interview a secretary.. interview some custodian.... knock yourself out... going to get you nowhere though, until you have access to the area, data, systems, personnel, etc, that are involved.. and right now they are dealing with something a little more important than the AG's questions... you have the fed take over the whole solution effort to relieve BP from doing it, go ahead... knock yourself out... doubt we'll see that happen though

You don't need to interview anyone to count dead pelicans. But since you're the expert at this, why don't you call up the AG and tell him?

You just hop right on in there to ground zero, while it is still burning, to find that Molotov cocktail.... or take away a firefighter from their duties to ask what he directly saw...

And again.. a dead pelican, even with oil on it, is not inherently evidence of criminal wrongdoing.. .do I think BP will be paying restitution whether or not there was criminality or negligence?? Yep... even if this is determined to be a complete unavoidable accident or something else with no personal negligence or criminality, they will indeed be paying for cleanup and dead pelicans.... but you don't need an intrusive investigation while the solution is still not had to get ready for that

 

[sangha]

And another rightwinger who thinks this is a "natural disaster"

When did I call this gulf oil leak a natural disaster? I was pointing out the fact that oil naturally seeps out of the ground.

Why?

Most rightwingers are too dishonest to admit their motives. If you get a response at all, it will pretend that it was "just saying" and it has nothing to do with *this* oil leak, even though the entire thread is about *this* oil leak

 

[sangha]

You just hop right on in there to ground zero, while it is still burning, to find that Molotov cocktail.... or take away a firefighter from their duties to ask what he directly saw...

As one of the first responders on 9/11, I can tell you that we were instructed that if we were to find anything from the plane, we were to immediately bring it to the police.

Once again, you made something up and got proven wrong.

And again.. a dead pelican, even with oil on it, is not inherently evidence of criminal wrongdoing..

And again, you're wrong. If the oil is tested and shown to have come from BP's leaking well, then that is not just evidence of wrongdoing, it PROOF BP committed a crime.

Since this has already been done, there is no doubt the BP has committed a crime.

So far, you have posted nothing but lies. Let's list a few

1) Fires are not investigated for possible arson until the fire is out
2) Doctors accused of malpractice are allowed to continue treating dying patients
3) Police do not investigate violent crimes until after the victim recovers
4) Bush did not investigate 9/11 until after the WTC towers stopped smoking
5) bush did not invade Iraq because of non-existent WMD's and 9/11 connections
6) And after action report is the same as an investigation.
7) BP has not committed any crimes
8) On 9/11, the first responders were prohibited from collecting evidence
9) DOJ investigators are going to fly out to the leaking oil platform and take the workers off the job of stopping the leak

Not bad for a rightwinger, but I'm sure you could tell more lies

 

[DiamondDave]

Hey DiamondDave, you never answered this question:

When the originating area is still burning, you can't.... when access to those with the data and those directly involved are still working on the fire.. you can't... you can look at video from a camera at the corner store on the access road... and you can ask neighbors.... and all sorts of things like that... but the pertinent information you need from ground 0.0 and the necessary information from the firefighters at the scene cannot be done UNTIL THE SOLUTION IS HAD..... UNTIL THE FIRE IS OUT....

And once again, DD has to make stuff up in order to defend himself.

DD wants people to believe that if a firefighter sees an emptied can of gasoline at the scene of a fire, the firefighter will just leave it there because, well, because "you can't"

DD even admits that the investigation CAN begin while the fire is still going on (quote "you can look at video...you can ask neighbors") but he dishonestly claims that the investigation CAN'T begin while the fire is still going on. He wants us to believe that looking at video and asking witnesses is NOT an "investigation"





Wrong. The people fixing the problem are NOT the ones who need to be questioned. This is just another of your invented lies designed to help you avoid explaining yourself.



That's exactly what they're going to be doing. If you were honest, you'd acknowledge this.

going to get you nowhere though, until you have access to the area, data, systems, personnel, etc, that are involved..

And again, you're ability to predict the future is undermined by your inability to predict the past.

and right now they are dealing with something a little more important than the AG's questions... you have the fed take over the whole solution effort to relieve BP from doing it, go ahead... knock yourself out... doubt we'll see that happen though

And again, DD has to lie and claim the fed are going to "take of the whole solution effort"

I don't think DD has an honest bone is his body

OK... so it is your contention that any info that people outside of the direct sphere of the problem will give you proper insight into the cause of the problem??

you are indeed ludicrous

Will the firefighter just leave it there while he is indeed still battling the fire around him?? You bet your sweet ass he will

You left wingers are just so taken by the obvious dog and pony show... you want a myth to be there in place of the truth that cannot yet be obtained.... so you can hold on to the myth even if the reality shows your myth to be wrong

I did not claim the fed 'was going to take over' the situation.... but in order to gain access to the necessary persons, systems, data, etc for a proper investigation BEFORE the solution, that would indeed have to happen.... unless you are willing to wait for those things/persons involved to be finished with the solution implementation.. you are indeed one disingenuous person... and pretty stupid, especially when you have my exact quote contradicting you right above your assertion

You can question my CIO all you want about details or reasons on the outage... or the secretary down the hall... but their insights are going to get you nowhere without the cold hard facts and data that they do not inherently have because they are not directly involved... and they will not be able to obtain such information to your satisfaction before the solution without interrupting those persons and things involved currently in the solution... which will, by nature, hinder the solution effort... if you cannot grasp this simple concept, you are indeed to far gone in your winger delusion

 

[SpidermanTuba]

And again.. a dead pelican, even with oil on it, is not inherently evidence of criminal wrongdoing.. .

When the oil comes from a man made oil spill it is.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

And another rightwinger who thinks this is a "natural disaster"

When did I call this gulf oil leak a natural disaster? I was pointing out the fact that oil naturally seeps out of the ground.

Why?

Because it's a valid point.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Yeah, right, and because we can't charge gravity with a crime for an accidental fall, we shouldn't punish people who murder by causing someone to fall. You're a real intelligent moron.

Causing someone to fall is called murder you stupid fuck.

Killing a pelican is a crime as well.

Only an idiot like you would compare a human life to that of a bird.