What The Fucks Going On Blog

9-11 flag-waving Party denies Health compensation for exposure victims

Following up on an item from yesterday, it appears Republican reverence for all things related to the 9/11 attacks is officially over.

Congress turned thumbs down on the Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act on Thursday night, raising doubts it will ever pass.

Most Republicans refused to back the measure, calling it a “slush fund,” and saying it was another example of Democratic overreach and an “insatiable” appetite for taxpayers’ money.

The bill would spend $3.2 billion on health care over the next 10 years for people sickened from their exposure to the toxic smoke and debris of the shattered World Trade Center. It would spend another $4.2 billion to compensate victims over that span, and make another $4.2 billion in compensation available for the next 11 years.

So, as Republicans see it, we can afford tax breaks for billionaires. But care for 9/11 victims, not so much.

Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas), perhaps best known for his apology to BP after the company’s oil spill, “said the rest of the country should not bear the brunt of helping New Yorkers cope with the aftermath of the terror attacks.” [Update: To clarify, this is a paraphrase from the New York Daily News, not a direct quote of Barton.]

How could House Republicans kill the bill in a majority-rule chamber? As it turns out, Dems brought the measure to the floor as a “suspension bill,” because they didn’t want the GOP to try to gut the legislation with poison-pill amendments. But this strategy meant the bill needed a two-thirds majority to pass. The final vote was 255 to 159 — far short of the two-thirds threshold — with 155 Republicans in opposition, many of them saying they would consider supporting the bill, but only if the GOP were allowed to push unrelated amendments intended to embarrass the majority.

Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y), whose constituents include many directly affected by this legislation, wasn’t especially impressed with the Republican argument:

http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy/2010/07/30/party-of-no-says-no-to-victims-of-911/

 

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_07/024967.php

Obama hides war spending using Bush-Cheney devious method - "Hey, where's my change?"

EARL  NASH

>>>>>  “ It’s news to YOU  <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Dear President Obama,

The people who supported you, who believed in the change that you promised, have stuck by you patiently and cut you a lot of slack.  They vowed to remain loyal, unless you flat out lied to them, and now you have crossed the line from Obama to Obusha and, now, it's just Obullshit.

In an entrancing speech to Congress in 2009 you said:

"For seven years, we have been a nation at war.

  No longer will we hide its price."

You were referring to the sneaky way that the Cheney-Bush regime funded the war--off the books.  Instead of asking the Congress for more money for war, those pig fuckers went around the budget process and asked for "supplemental" amounts to keep the war machine churning out bones and guts.

They were using the "devious practice of using supplemental spending bills - emergency cash transfusions that are separated from the annual federal budget - to funnel off money for war. This parliamentary trick masks the yearly cost of war, which would otherwise appear as one massive lump sum, by breaking it up into bite-size, deceptively digestible chunks.

Supplementals are intended for emergencies in which large amounts of money are suddenly needed: a huge-scale natural disaster, an unexpected war of defense, a Mars attack." [article below] 

Guess who wrote this in a letter to Congress?

"We must break that recent tradition and include future military costs in the regular budget so that we have an honest, more accurate and fiscally responsible estimate of federal spending..."

Well, that same guy, just 16 months later, has sent a supplemental spending request, which would sign away $33 billion more for Afghanistan and Iraq, those funds are heaped on top of the $159.3 billion that Congress approved (with little fuss) for the wars in May.

There is an old expression that goes like this:  'If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and acts like a duck--it must be a duck.'

Ergo, if a President funds his wars like a pig fucker...

We paid a lot to get you elected and we have been patiently waiting, but with this Big Lie, we can now stop asking: "Hey, where's my change?"

You counted on the saying that "Hope dies last." 

Well, now it's been strangled in its crib.

"What happens to a dream deferred... does it dry up like a raisin in the sun? Or does it explode?" 

[Langston Hughes]

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Tuesday 27 July 2010

by: Maya Schenwar, Executive Director, t r u t h o u t | Op-Ed

In a moving statement before Congress in February 2009, President Obama made a promise. "For seven years, we have been a nation at war," he said. "No longer will we hide its price."

Obama was referring to the Bush administration's devious practice of using supplemental spending bills - emergency cash transfusions that are separated from the annual federal budget - to funnel off money for war. This parliamentary trick masks the yearly cost of war, which would otherwise appear as one massive lump sum, by breaking it up into bite-size, deceptively digestible chunks.

(Image: Jared Rodriguez / t r u t h o u t; Adapted: Sgt. Mark Fayloga / U.S. Marine Corps, steve.grosbois)

Supplementals are intended for emergencies in which large amounts of money are suddenly needed: a huge-scale natural disaster, an unexpected war of defense, a Mars attack. The Bush administration used a supplemental to fund the early stages of the war in Afghanistan, then kept doing it ... and doing it and doing it. Throughout his tenure, Bush sent 17 war supplementals to Congress, and they all passed with flying (bipartisan) colors.

As someone who'd spent the previous four years chronicling Bush's slimy war funding ways, I was particularly relieved by Obama's words in 2009. Maybe, I thought, when Congress and the American people are confronted with that giant, ugly price tag for war hanging from the frail skeleton of our federal budget at the start of the year, reality will hit and plans to bring the troops home - for real - will become more than just a progressive talking point floating in the legislative ether.

However, less than two months after his bold pronouncement, the president slipped in a request for $76 billion in off-the-books war funds. He helped ease the sting of this hypocrisy slightly by promising that the ol' supplemental shortcut would never happen again.

"We must break that recent tradition and include future military costs in the regular budget so that we have an honest, more accurate and fiscally responsible estimate of federal spending," he wrote in a letter to Congress.

But 16 months later, the tradition hasn't been broken. It's been broken in.

Obama's latest supplemental spending request, which would sign away $33 billion more for Afghanistan and Iraq, is hovering on the brink of passage. Those billions would be heaped on top of the $159.3 billion that Congress approved (with little fuss) for the wars in May.

Now, if ever, Congress should be fussing - and so should the rest of us. The "Afghan War Diary" released by WikiLeaks Sunday night confirms what we've known for years: we're mired in a war that is failing more and more by the day, a war of hopeless destruction and pointless death. Alliances are ever-muddling, corruption is status quo. It's clear that, despite our gracious imperial assistance, democracy won't be flowering out from the graveyard of empires anytime soon.

Going into this week's vote on the supplemental, the House has particular reason to fuss. Last week, the Senate stripped the war funding bill of most of its cheerier components: domestic economy boosters like funds for teacher jobs, assistance for youth summer job programs and aid for needy families. In the interest of passing a "clean bill," Republicans and Republican-minded "Democrats" have turned the supplemental into a pure, untainted bad idea.

Do you like this? Click here to get Truthout stories sent to your inbox every day - free.

This round of supplemental decision making is a rough scene. Obama has settled into his predecessor's war funding routine. Congress members haven't kicked the nasty habit of smashing piggy banks every time war funding is running low. And activist groups - the same ones that rallied around this issue with fervor just two years ago - haven't been shouting nearly as loud.

So, what now?

Just because Obama has gotten comfy with the idea of endless funds for war doesn't mean that Congress and the rest of us need to mirror that inertia.

Sometimes it's a time to compromise, sometimes, a time to ask nicely. Now it is the Time to Fuss.

This week's House debate on the supplemental could be an exercise in depressive apathy, with the blessed Dennis Kuciniches of the chamber calling passionately (but practically solitarily) for withdrawal from the War of Error. But, in the wake of the WikiLeaks release and the Senate job-funding massacre, not to mention the wars' diminishing public approval ratings, this debate could take a creative turn.

This supplemental vote could mark a turning point. It could present a real opportunity to consider and discuss the on-the-ground implications of these $33 billion dollars, piled atop the $159 billion, weighing down on the more than a trillion dollars already exhausted by almost ten years of hubris and senseless violence.

A true dialog in Congress about where this money is going is long overdue. For the past 18 war supplementals, much of Congress has bent over backwards to justify the "emergency" nature of the spending, the standard line being a refusal to "abandon the troops." However, as numerous Congressional Research Service reports and Truthout analyses have shown, the troops will get their paychecks - and their body armor - even if a supplemental never passes again. The president can invoke the Feed and Forage Act and draw funds from the Treasury if the mess hall cupboards (or the payroll bank) ever go bare.

If Congress members would look past that "emergency" logic, they'd see the supplemental for what it is: simply another round of fuel for the engine of ongoing war. They'd also recognize their own power to cut the tank short.

Congress's "power of the purse" is its No. 1 check on executive blunders, especially on enormous, deadly, long-lasting blunders like the Vietnam War, which Congress ended by halting military funding for South Vietnam.

The war in Afghanistan has already surpassed Vietnam in length. It's time for Congress to take a hint from history, to stop loosening the purse strings and start fussing - starting with this week's supplemental debate.

This work by Truthout is licensed

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

LISTEN: Earthquake Warning for this week - Seattle to mid CAL - [Clif High]

When the Wizard of Washington speaks, I listen.  Clif High's predictions are based on his brilliant software scanning system that trolls the intutitive collective unconscious (aka internet) to listen for "echoes from the future."  His system is linguistically- based and has be accurate many time before.

 

For more information and his forecast reports (@ $10 for download) are the best bargain anywhere!

 

http://halfpasthuman.com/

An Earthquake Warning

In case you missed Clif, chief time monk, High's appearances on CoastToCoast last night during the show's first hour, the most important thing he had to say (very near term) was a heads up for the West Coast over the possibility based on predictive linguistics of a major quake toward the end of this week or maybe into the weekend...

"Within the immediacy data sets there are clear indications of a major [damaging] earthquake on west coast of america (MOST likely north america due to angular momentum issues of planetary alignment) and more probably than not, in the PNW perhaps down to mid CA. This quake shows as being completed with problems, *such as yet more [wedding interruptions] by August 3, however the data accretion patterns point to the last two days of July as the point of impact and largest number of after shocks. Damages are indicated to include [roadways] and [bridges] such that [transportation/movement] is [restricted (in some places)] for months afterward. Water flows are also to be affected and even altered for long time (months/years) which is how i found it. By noting the odd number of longer term indicators for [water pathways change] in the data accretion patterns for November and onward in 2010. A significant majority of these traced back to something in the immediacy data that turned out to be this pending earthquake in very late July. "

This just fell out' from the processing of the long term data set values which should result in a longer view of the data...out to beyond the end of this year.  The expectation is that there will be a new report available sometime around the August 10-period.  But, the reason for mentioning this now is that there is still plenty of time to get the stored water checked, food, first aid kits, and such on the West Coast. 

More doctored BP photos found - credibility rating now BELOW ZERO

By Steven Mufson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, July 21, 2010; 8:54 PM

The search for doctored BP photos is on. And it's a bit like finding Waldo in the famous game.

On Wednesday, for the second time this week, a blog has identified an altered photograph about BP's oil spill response on the company's Web site.

(Article and Photos: The first BP photo scandal)

The Gawker Web site said it received a tip about a BP photo taken from inside a helicopter, that shows a panorama of vessels working on the sea surface near the damaged well. The view through the windows makes it appear as though the helicopter is in the air.

But the astute tipster noticed a small glimpse of a control tower in a corner of the photograph. A poor Photoshop job left some white space around the shoulder of one of the pilots next to a patch of sea that was a brighter shade of blue than other parts of the gulf. In addition, zooming in on the helicopter's gauges reveals that the helicopter is not in the air at all; the dashboard indicates that the door and ramp are open and the parking brake engaged, Gawker noted. The pilot appears to be holding a pre-flight checklist.

(See the photos in question)

BP spokesman Scott Dean sent The Post the original photograph. The Waldos don't jump out at you. The helicopter was actually on the deck of a vessel at the spill site so the panorama of ships in the distance was there in the original photo. But the photographer, who is working on contract to BP, pasted in blue sea where the edge of the landing pad was showing. He also adjusted colors and contrast so that the interior of the helicopter was brighter, Dean said.

While the changes were minor, the embarrassment was major, coming at a time when the oil giant is trying to convince the American public that it is being open and transparent about the oil spill.

(More photos: The spill's animal victims and the cleanup effort)

The helicopter photo is the third doctored BP image outed by bloggers this week. Earlier, Americablog.com noticed that BP had altered an image of its crisis response center in Houston. The company's photographer had clumsily filled in blank spaces on a wall of subsea video feeds with images taken by some of the remotely operated vehicles. It is normal for some of those ROVs to be idle and to have some blank feeds.

Americablog also exposed an altered image from the Houston office, showing a technical team in front of a large projection screen. The image on the projection screen had been enhanced using Photoshop.

BP's Dean also provided the original of that photo to The Post. In the original, the screen appears to be entirely white because of the light contrast with the rest of the room. Dean said that the photographer used "the color saturation tool" to show "a clearer version of the same image on the projection screen."

Dean said that the altered helicopter and headquarters photographs, like the doctored one of the Houston control room, would be promptly taken down from the BP Web site. The original and altered versions would be placed on BP's Flickr site so people can compare them, Dean said.

More oil-related news:

EPA analyst: Corexit used to cover-up volume of oil spilled into Gulf - oil buried deep

"The sole purpose in the Gulf for dispersants is to keep a cover-up going for BP to try to hide the volume of oil that has been released and save them hundreds of millions, if not billions, of dollars of fines. That’s the purpose of using the dispersants, not to protect the public health or environment. Quite the opposite." [ Hugh Kaufman, a senior policy analyst at the EPA’s Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response. He’s been a leading critic of the decision to use Corexit.] 

"Corexit is one of a number of dispersants, that are toxic, that are used to atomize the oil and force it down the water column so that it’s invisible to the eye. In this case, these dispersants were used in massive quantities, almost two million gallons so far, to hide the magnitude of the spill and save BP money. And the government—both EPA, NOAA, etc.—have been sock puppets for BP in this cover-up. Now, by hiding the amount of spill, BP is saving hundreds of millions, if not billions, of dollars in fines, and so, from day one, there was tremendous economic incentive to use these dispersants to hide the magnitude of the gusher that’s been going on for almost three months.

Congressman Markey and Nadler, as well as Senator Mikulski, have been heroes in this respect. Congressman Markey made the BP and government put a camera down there to show the public the gusher. And when they did that, experts saw that the amount of material, oil being released, is orders of magnitudes greater than what BP and NOAA and EPA were saying. And the cover-up started to evaporate.

But the use of dispersants has not. Consequently, we have people, wildlife—we have dolphins that are hemorrhaging. People who work near it are hemorrhaging internally. And that’s what dispersants are supposed to do. EPA now is taking the position that they really don’t know how dangerous it is, even though if you read the label, it tells you how dangerous it is.

And, for example, in the Exxon Valdez case, people who worked with dispersants, most of them are dead now. The average death age is around fifty. It’s very dangerous, and it’s an economic—it’s an economic protector of BP, not an environmental protector of the public.

Now, the one thing that I did want to mention to you, Amy, that’s occurred in most investigations, back even in the Watergate days, people said, "follow the money." And that’s correct. In this case, you’ve got to follow the money.

Who saves money by using these toxic dispersants? Well, it’s BP. But then the next question—I’ve only seen one article that describes it—who owns BP? And I think when you look and see who owns BP, you find that it’s the majority ownership, a billion shares, is a company called BlackRock that was created, owned and run by a gentleman named Larry Fink.

And Vanity Fair just did recently an article about Mr. Fink and his connections with Mr. Geithner, Mr. Summers and others in the administration. So I think what’s needed, we now know that there’s a cover-up. Dispersants are being used. Congress, at least three Congress folks—Congressman Markey, Congressman Nadler and Senator Mikulski—are on the case. And I think the media now has to follow the money, just as they did in Watergate, and tell the American people who’s getting money for poisoning the millions of people in the Gulf.

1.8 million pounds of it have been dumped into the Gulf. What’s in Corexit? Do we know? What is EPA allowed to know, and what is the company allowed to keep private?

HUGH KAUFMAN: EPA has all the information on what’s in—the ingredients are. The largest ingredient in Corexit is oil. But there are other materials. And when the ingredients are mixed with oil, the combination of Corexit or any dispersant and oil is more toxic than the oil itself. But EPA has all that information. That’s a red herring issue being raised, that we have to somehow know more information. When you look at the label and you look at the toxicity sheets that come with it, the public knows enough to know that it’s very dangerous. The National Academy of Science has done work on it. Toxicologists from Exxon that developed it have published on it. So, we know enough to know that it’s very dangerous, and to say that we just have to know more about it is a red herring issue. We know plenty. It’s very dangerous. And in fact, Congressman Nadler and Senator Lautenberg are working on legislation to ban it.

HUGH KAUFMAN: Well, not only do you have airplanes flying and dropping them on the Gulf region, like Agent Orange in Vietnam, but a large amount of it is being shot into the water column at 5,000 feet to disperse the oil as it gushers out. And so, you have spread, according to the Associated Press, over perhaps over 44,000 square miles, an oil and dispersant mix. And what’s happened is, that makes it impossible to skim the oil out of the water. One of the things that happened is they brought this big boat, Whale, in from Japan to get rid of the oil, and it didn’t work because the majority of the oil is spread throughout the water column over thousands of square miles in the Gulf. And so—and there’s been a lot of work to show the dispersants, which is true, make it more difficult to clean up the mess than if you didn’t use them. The sole purpose in the Gulf for dispersants is to keep a cover-up going for BP to try to hide the volume of oil that has been released and save them hundreds of millions, if not billions, of dollars of fines. That’s the purpose of using the dispersants, not to protect the public health or environment. Quite the opposite. "

from Amy Goodman radio interview on DEMOCRACY NOW

"Four More Years" for US troops in Afghanistan - No quick exit says NATO Sec. Gen.

There will be no quick exit for international forces from Afghanistan, the secretary general of Nato warned this morning at a high-level conference in Kabul.

Anders Fogh Rasmussen told the meeting of foreign ministers that coalition troops would stay in the country even after Afghan troops had taken complete control of security.

He said that when the full transition finally happened, "international forces won't leave, they will simply move into a supportive role".

Opening the conference, held in a government building in central Kabul, the Afghan president, Hamid Karzai, said he "remained determined" that Afghan security forces should take full responsibility of all military and police operations by 2014.

The scale of the problem facing the Nato forces as they move to hand over control of security in the country was underlined today when an Afghan soldier killed two US civilians and another Afghan soldier at a weapons training area in Mazar-e-Sharif, in the north.

The Afghan soldier appears to have turned on his colleagues, shooting the two Americans and the Afghan before himself being killed.

The incident comes just days after another renegade Afghan soldier killed three British soldiers in their base near Lashkar Gah, the capital of Helmand province.

For most European countries, any transition to Afghan control that would allow them to take their troops home cannot happen swiftly enough.

The United Nations secretary general, Ban Ki-moon, said the conference, the first of nine international meetings to be held in Afghanistan since 2001, marked the "beginning of a very fundamental transition" to Afghan control.

But Rasmussen said the shift would happen slowly, and on the basis of "conditions, not calendars".

"Transition will be done gradually – on the basis of a sober assessment of the political and security situation, so that it is irreversible," he said.

Highlighting the difficulty of locking down the Afghan capital with so many big-name politicians attending the conference, rocket fire on the outskirts of the city earlier forced a plane carrying Ban and Sweden's foreign minister, Carl Bildt, to be diverted as it tried to land. They touched down instead at the US airbase in Bagram, outside Kabul, from where they travelled by helicopter to the conference.

"A few unguided rockets landed on the outskirts of Kabul city last night and in the early hours of the morning," said Lieutenant Commander Katie Kendrick, a spokeswoman for the international military coalition.

Addressing the meeting of some 68 delegates from different countries and international organisations, the US secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, defended her country's decision to start withdrawing some of its troops in July 2011.

The deadline, set last year in a speech by Barack Obama, has been widely criticised for fuelling concerns that the US will not stay the course.

Clinton said the date showed both the country's "sense of urgency and our strength of resolve".

"The transition process is too important to push off indefinitely," she said.

"But this date is the start of a new phase, not the end of our involvement. We have no intention of abandoning our long-term mission of achieving a stable, secure, peaceful Afghanistan. Too many nations – especially Afghanistan – have suffered too many losses to see this country slide backward."

Amiri Told CIA: Iran Has No Nuclear Bomb Program

By Gareth Porter

July 20, 2010 -- WASHINGTON, 19 Jul (IPS) -

Contrary to a news media narrative that Iranian scientist Shahram Amiri has provided intelligence on covert Iranian nuclear weapons work, CIA sources familiar with the Amiri case say he told his CIA handlers that there is no such Iranian nuclear weapons programme, according to a former CIA officer.

Philip Giraldi, a former CIA counterterrorism official, told IPS that his sources are CIA officials with direct knowledge of the entire Amiri operation.

The CIA contacts say that Amiri had been reporting to the CIA for some time before being brought to the U.S. during Hajj last year, Giraldi told IPS, initially using satellite-based communication. But the contacts also say Amiri was a radiation safety specialist who was "absolutely peripheral" to Iran's nuclear programme, according to Giraldi.

Amiri provided "almost no information" about Iran's nuclear programme, said Giraldi, but had picked up "scuttlebutt" from other nuclear scientists with whom he was acquainted that the Iranians have no active nuclear weapon programme.

Giraldi said information from Amiri's debriefings was only a minor contribution to the intelligence community's reaffirmation in the latest assessment of Iran's nuclear programme of the 2007 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE)'s finding that work on a nuclear weapon has not been resumed after being halted in 2003.

Amiri's confirmation is cited in one or more footnotes to the new intelligence assessment of Iran's nuclear programme, called a "Memorandum to Holders", according to Giraldi, but it is now being reviewed, in light of Amiri's "re- defection" to Iran.

An intelligence source who has read the "Memorandum to Holders" in draft form confirmed to IPS that it presents no clear-cut departure from the 2007 NIE on the question of weaponisation. The developments in the Iranian nuclear programme since the 2007 judgment are portrayed as "subtle and complex", said the source.

CIA officials are doing their best to "burn" Amiri by characterising him as a valuable long-term intelligence asset, according to Giraldi, in part in order to sow as much distrust of him among Iranian intelligence officials as possible.

But Giraldi said it is "largely a defence mechanism" to ward off criticism of the agency for its handling of the Amiri case.

"The fact is he wasn't well vetted," said Giraldi, adding that Amiri was a "walk- in" about whom virtually nothing was known except his job.

Although an investigation has begun within the CIA of the procedures used in the case, Giraldi said, Amiri's erstwhile CIA handlers still do not believe he was a double agent or "dangle".

What convinced CIA officers of Amiri's sincerity, according to Giraldi, was Amiri's admission that he had no direct knowledge of the Iranian nuclear programme.

A "dangle" would normally be prepared with some important intelligence that the U.S. is known to value.

Amiri's extremely marginal status in relation to the Iranian nuclear programme was acknowledged by an unnamed U.S. official who told The New York Times and Associated Press Friday that Amiri was indeed a "low-level scientist", but that the CIA had hoped to use him to get to more highly placed Iranian officials.

Giraldi's revelations about Amiri's reporting debunks a media narrative in which Amiri provided some of the key evidence for a reversal by the intelligence community of its 2007 conclusion that Iran had not resumed work on nuclear weapons.

An Apr. 25 story by Washington Post reporters Joby Warrick and Greg Miller said the long-awaited reassessment of the Iranian nuclear programme had been delayed in order to incorporate a "new flow of intelligence" coming from "informants, including scientists with access to Iran's military programs&."

They quote Director of National Intelligence Dennis C. Blair as explaining in an interview that the delay was because of "information coming in and the pace of developments".

Warrick and Miller reported that Amiri had "provided spy agencies with details about sensitive programs including a long-hidden uranium-enrichment plant near the city of Qom." Their sources were said to be "current and former officials in the United States and Europe".

Warrick and Miller could not get CIA officials to discuss Amiri. Instead they quoted the National Council of Resistance in Iran (NCRI) as saying that Amiri "has been associated with sensitive nuclear programs for at least a decade".

NCRI is the political arm of Mujahideen-e-Khalq (MEK), the anti-regime Iranian terrorist organization which has been a conduit for Israeli intelligence on the Iranian nuclear programme.

On Jun. 8, David E. Sanger of the New York Times cited "foreign diplomats and some American officials" as sources in reporting that a series of intelligence briefings for members of the U.N. Security Council last spring amounted to "a tacit admission by the United States that it is gradually backing away" from the 2007 NIE. Sanger referred to "new evidence" that allegedly led analysts to "revise and in some cases reverse" that estimate's conclusion that Iran was no longer working on a nuclear weapon.

Sanger cited "Western officials" as confirming that Amiri was providing some of the new information.

Three days later, the Washington Post ran another story quoting David Albright, director of the Institute for Science and International Security, as saying that the intelligence briefings for Security Council members had included "information about nuclear weaponisation" obtained from Amiri.

Albright said he had been briefed on the intelligence earlier that week, and the Post reported a "U.S. official" had confirmed Albright's account.

Subsequently, ABC News reported that Amiri's evidence had "helped to contradict" the 2007 NIE, and McClatchy Newspapers repeated Albright's allegation and the conclusion that the new assessment had reversed the intelligence conclusion that Iran had ceased work related to weaponisation.

In creating that false narrative, journalists have evidently been guided by personal convictions on the issue that are aligned with certain U.S., European and Israeli officials who have been pressuring the Barack Obama administration to reject the 2007 estimate.

For the Israelis and for some U.S. officials, reversing the conclusion that Iran is not actively pursuing weaponisation is considered a precondition for manoeuvring U.S. policy into a military confrontation with Iran.

Gareth Porter is an investigative historian and journalist specialising in U.S. national security policy. The paperback edition of his latest book, "Perils of Dominance: Imbalance of Power and the Road to War in Vietnam", was published in 2006.

Oil Industry friendly, Disney, ABC-News owner: Methane Disaster? "Nothing like that is going to happen."

EARL  NASH

>>>>>  “ It’s news to YOU  <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

 

ABC News has taken a stand against the methane bubble rumors;  the network has found a credible source to say very politely that the methane theory is a crazy crackpot fear. According to Gary Byerly, a geologist at Louisiana State University:

"The idea that there could be a catastrophic cave in, or a methane gas explosion, that's not a reasonable worry. [...] The rock formations on top of this oil deposit have enough strength that nothing like that is going to happen." [Read more: http://newsfeed.time.com/2010/07/12/doomsday-could-bp-spill-kill-all-life-on-earth/#ixzz0uFjDS000]

"On-going research is primarily directed at early Earth evolution, including magmatic, surficial, and biological systems.  This work, mostly in South Africa and Australia, has been supported much of the time by grants from NSF and NASA.  NSF has just renewed support for my work in the Archean of South Africa." [http://zoe.geol.lsu.edu/Byerly/Byerly.html] 

But, before we declare: "Mission Accomplished," let's see who is pulling the strings of the MSM Marionettes on this channel of the corporate-controlled Main Stream Media.

Q: "Who's the leader of the club?"

 DISNEY owns ABC

Oil industry connections?

* Major shareholders include Sid R. Bass, oil and gas baron.

*  Disney donated $640,000  to George W Bush's 2000 political campaign.

Penetration? 24% of US households.

Hmm...Something doesn't smell right here...cheezy business... or

an oil leak?

"Disney's environmental and social record: The company has been accused of human rights violations regarding the working conditions in factories that produce their merchandise. 

Numerous environmental groups in Florida and California have criticized development procedures used in building theme parks including damage to wetlands.

An environmental management plan for a zone of Great Guana Cay, in the Abaco Islands, criticized Disney for poor management of a 90-acre (36.4 ha) tract of the island. Disney partially developed but then abandoned the place, which was to have been a cruise ship resort called Treasure Island. The report, by the University of Miami and the College of the Bahamas, blames Disney for leaving hazardous materials, electrical transformers, and fuel tanks, and for introducing invasive alien plants and insects that threaten the natural flora and fauna of the island. [Source wikipedia.org]

                                         MEMO

TO: DIANE SAWYER

FROM: EARL NASH

SUBJECT: GULF COAST DISASTER - NEVER MIND

You can come back from the Gulf coast, your corporate bosses have determined that the official "story line" about the growing methane disaster will be: "nothing like that is going to happen."

 

 

White House-BP admit Gulf Sea Bed is compromised - BP triggered methane catasrophe

EARL  NASH

>>>>>  “ It’s news to YOU  <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

 

The White House and BP have kept a dirty little secret from you for many weeks:  after the well explosion, a major breach in the seabed was discovered, several miles from the well head.  The PTB (Powers That Be) have employed the first principal of deception in a magic trick: they have you focused on the "mouse" (the leak at the well head) to keep you from noticing the "elephant" behind it (the rupture of the sea bed.)  Thus have the PTB, including the White House and BP, kept the media away from the scene of the crime.

If you think capping a well pipe is difficult, try capping gaping holes (some more than 10 miles long) on the sea bed of the Gulf of Mexico.

It gets worse:  there are independent reports from citizen sailors that there are several, perhaps several dozen, huge gashes in the sea floor that are leaking both oil and methane.

As was reported here last week:

"The urgency was created by NOAA's report to Obama stating that the growing numbers of oil spouts (plumes) rising from the ocean floor from new cracks indicate growing pressure."

We told you that scientists stated that this could create several explosions, or, at worst,  a huge single event that would send a giant wave (50-200 feet high) at 50-70 MPH into the coastline of the Gulf states.

Reports still indicate that methane is flooding the Gulf waters at a rate one million times more than normal, and the NOAA research vessel, Thomas Jefferson has reported spotting new fissures.

Two weeks ago the science ship stunned some reporters with the revelation that the oceanographic team had discovered and measured a rift in the ocean floor miles from the BP wellhead. The rift was reported to be more than 100 feet long and widening. Oil and methane continues to plume from that rift. BP has also admitted damage beneath the sea floor.

Scientists had warned BP about the enormous bubble of methane that was trapped in the drill zone and specifically pointed out that drilling too deep could puncture the bubble and set off the release of the methane, which would endanger the plants and animals in the Gulf and the humans on its shores.  A worst case scenario would be a repeat of a methane release that ended all life on the planet in the age of the dinosaurs.

Sources inside the investigation of BP say that the company breached its permit, which limited it to a drilling depth of 14,500 feet, by drilling further than 30,000 feet; despite warnings that drilling that deep could cause create pressure well over safe levels, which would cause the spewing oil to reach a temperature of 500 degrees Fahrenheit, which would cause the frozen methane gas bubbles to melt and send catastrophic amounts of the gas into the ocean and into the atmosphere.

BP, by drilling deeper than approved and atop an enormous bubble of methane likely pricked the high-pressure balloon and has triggered the release of the methane.  The escaping methane is now flowing under the sea bed and popping out all over the Gulf of Mexico.

A similar methane release, caused by a natural cycle, ended all life on the planet in the age of the dinosaurs.

Will this release, caused by illegal oil drilling, fulfill many "End Days" prophecies and end all life on Earth?

???????????????????????????????????????????????????

Gulf Coast Disaster has only just begun: Methane leaks and COREXIT remain

EARL  NASH

>>>>>  “ It’s news to YOU  <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Before some other fool declares "Mission Accomplished" with the capping of the BP oil well, realize that the disaster may have just begun with the release of methane across the seabed and the spread of the toxic effects of the dispersant COREXIT and, consider the anomaly of the pressure now being too LOW.

"With the pressure now virtually level at 6,700 [psi], it's at the lower end of the ambiguity range, so it seems there is a good chance there is leak-off. That makes a lot of sense to me since there [are] 1,200 feet of open hole from the bottom of the 9 /7/8" liner to TD at about 18,300 feet. That's not to mention possible casing damage up hole. Think of it like a garden hose with a nozzle on the end. As long as the nozzle is open, the hose looks fine. As soon as you close the nozzle, the hose will leak through any pinholes or around the faucet as pressure builds inside." [the Daily Hurricane]

Worse still is the possibility that the oil and methane are leaking through fissures all over the Gulf of Mexico; NOAA has identified several and the rise in the methane levels in the seawater are another indication that the pressure from the punctured Oil-Cano, 20 miles in diameter under the BP well, is being released elsewhere.

The urgency was created by NOAA's report to Obama stating that the growing numbers of oil spouts (plumes) rising from the ocean floor from new cracks indicate growing pressure, which could create several explosions, or a huge single event that would send a giant wave (50-200 feet high) at 50-70 MPH into the coastline of the Gulf states.

Today, with concerns that the spider web network of Gulf seabed fissures is growing, and recent confirmation of at least one other confirmed oil plume NOAA is searching for two more suspected ones, and will report the results to the President.

Sea floor compromised

Reports still indicate that methane is flooding the Gulf waters at a rate one million times more than normal, and the NOAA research vessel, Thomas Jefferson has reported spotting new fissures. [1]

Last week the science ship stunned some reporters with the revelation that the oceanographic team had discovered and measured a rift in the ocean floor miles from the BP wellhead. The rift was reported to be more than 100 feet long and widening. Oil and methane continues to plume from that rift. BP has also admitted damage beneath the sea floor. [2]

 

Scientists had warned BP about the enormous bubble of methane that was trapped in the drill zone and specifically pointed out that drilling too deep could puncture the bubble and set off the release of the methane, which would endanger the plants and animals in the Gulf and the humans on its shores.  A worst case scenario would be a repeat of a methane release that ended all life on the planet in the age of the dinosaurs.

Sources inside the investigation of BP say that the company breached its permit, which limited it to a drilling depth of 14,500 feet, by drilling further than 30,000 feet; despite warnings that drilling that deep could cause create pressure well over safe levels, which would cause the spewing oil to reach a temperature of 500 degrees Fahrenheit and, which would cause the frozen methane gas bubbles to melt and send catastrophic amounts of the gas into the ocean and into the atmosphere.

Thus. the oil leak may be just the trigger for the greater problems created by the release of methane.

In the first half of Sunday night's Coast to Coast show, George Noory was joined by  Richard C. Hoagland for a discussion on the potential catastrophic dangers that could result from the accumulation of methane in the Gulf. He pointed to evidence which suggests that a massive bulge of methane is forming beneath the ocean floor. Should it suddenly burst, Hoagland warned, the methane would reduce the buoyancy of the water, causing large ships in the area to "sink like a rock," killing thousands of people instantly. Subsequently, the collapse of the bulge would cause water to fill the hole and create a tsunami that would hit anyone within a mile or two of the Gulf within minutes. In light of this theory, he posited that the lack of action coming from Washington is because they know of this potential danger and are trying to protect people by not filling the Gulf with boats as part of a clean-up effort.

Unfortunately, Hoagland lamented, since BP's mud log data is proprietary and unavailable to independent scientists, there is no way of predicting when such an event may occur. Therefore, he urged C2C listeners to contact Louisiana resident and prominent TV pundit James Carville, in the hopes of creating momentum in the mainstream media for this information to be made public. Beyond that, Hoagland's advice for people in the area was simply "get out of the Gulf region of Mexico because the Feds are not telling you the real danger." For those residents unable or unwilling to leave the region, he advised that the methane in the air carries a "huge cocktail of bizarre gases" that could prove deadly, immediately or over time, if inhaled. As such, he suggested that people in the area acquire gas masks to breathe and an ozone generator to purify the air, "otherwise, you gotta move, you gotta leave, you can't keep breathing this air."

 

Another major source of methane gas comes from frozen hydrate crystals which exist on the sea floor in vast quantities. Due to very cold temperatures and high pressure, they stay locked in place until they are awakened from their slumber by the very conditions that now predominate in the region around the wellhead. The gushing oil may be as hot as 300 to 400 F, which greatly affects the undersea dynamics, and especially the state of these hydrates. Also, it is quite noteworthy that we have no experience with the introduction of massive volumes of dispersants at the wellhead under those extraordinary conditions. What will be the ultimate effects on methane conversion and release throughout the region in terms of ramping up an already very dynamic and volatile situation on the seafloor?

There are other sources of methane, which occur under the seafloor in various types of “repositories,” that are being affected by movements of the earth, as well as by dramatic temperature fluctuations. These reservoirs are undoubtedly releasing methane gas, as are the seafloor surface beds of trapped frozen methane crystals. Almost all of the released methane gas from these sources will eventually rise to the surface of the Gulf, some of it accumulating as hovering gas bubbles which will then dissipate over time. They concentrate and disperse, come and go according to the scientific properties of methane gas behavior.

Then, there is the third threat from the "accident:" the unprecedented use of massive amounts of the dispersant COREXIT (as in: corrects it!).

 

Consider that the lab tests were conducted indoors under artificial light; a scientist familiar with the testing says that the levels of toxicity, when measured OUTDOORS in SUNLIGHT, could "easily be thousands of times more toxic" than the lab results stated.

 

What will do to the intakes of de-salinization and nuclear power plants?

 

What happens when, carried by storms, it enters watersheds?

 

The Pentagon is concerned about COREXIT degrading jet fuel in above ground storage tanks.

 

Since COREXIT dissolves oil and petro-chemicals and plastics,

what will it do to car parts and systems when it is drawn in through the air intake?

 

Will it storms carry benzene, hydrogen sulphide in the air and damage crops and poison the land?

 

What if the farmland has been sprayed with fertilizer and pesticides (both perto-chemically based) and COREXIT mixes with them to create a yet unknown compound?

 

Engines, even the NASA space vehicles, have O-ring seals and may be chemically compromised by COREXIT.

 

Anything that contains petrochemicals (oil) WILL be affected by COREXIT and in danger of some type of melting or leaking.

 

Toxicologists are saying that Corexit is much more harmful to human health and marine life than we've been told.

Specifically Gulf toxicologist Dr. Susan Shaw - Founder and Director of the Marine Environmental Research Institute - dove into the oil spill to examine the chemicals present.

Dr. Shaw told CNN:

If I can tell you what happens — because I was in the oil — to people…

Shrimpers throwing their nets into water… [then] water from the nets splashed on his skin. …

[He experienced a] headache that lasted 3 weeks… heart palpitations… muscle spasms… bleeding from the rectum…

And that’s what that Corexit does; it ruptures red blood cells, causes internal bleeding, and liver and kidney damage. …

This stuff is so toxic combined… not the oil or dispersants alone. …

Very, very toxic and goes right through skin.

The reason this is so toxic is because of these solvents [from dispersant] that penetrate the skin of anything that’s going through the dispersed oil takes the oil into the cells — takes the oil into the organs… and this stuff is toxic to every organ system in the body. …

Similarly, marine biologist and toxicologist Dr. Chris Pincetich - who has an extensive background in testing the affects of chemicals on fish - says that Corexit disrupts cell membranes.

He also explains that EPA toxicity testing for Corexit is woefully inadequate, since EPA testing for mortality usually only requires a 96-hour time frame. His doctoral research found that fish that were alive at 96 hours after exposure to pesticide were dead at two weeks, so the chemicals were considered non-lethal for the purposes of the test.

Drs. Shaw and Pincetich are wildlife conservationists. But even industry scientists working for Exxon and the manufacturer of Corexit itself admit that the stuff is toxic.

 

BP’s Deepwater Horizon rig has punctured a mega pocket of highly pressurized methane gas - putting millions of lives at risk in the Gulf. Oil and methane continue to surge into the Gulf from the destroyed well, with little hope of abatement. Evidence is growing for a devastating eruption of methane gas from deep beneath the sea floor. The resulting methane gas explosion and series of tsunamis could absolutely decimate the entire region.

If the methane bubble—a bubble that could be as big as 20 miles wide—erupts with titanic force from the seabed into the Gulf, reports Helium.com, "every ship, drilling rig and structure within the region of the bubble will immediately sink. All the workers, engineers, Coast Guard personnel and marine biologists participating in the salvage operation will die instantly. An ocean bottom collapse would follow, instantaneously displacing up to a trillion cubic feet of water or more and creating a towering supersonic tsunami annihilating everything along the coast and well inland. Like a thermonuclear blast, a high pressure atmospheric wave could precede the tidal wave flattening everything in its path before the water arrives."

 

High Risk Area for Methane and Blowouts

The extreme methane risk was well known before drilling commenced. Geologists warned oil companies working in the area that massive pockets of methane gas exist deep beneath the sea floor. The risk for a blowout and methane explosion was considered to be extremely high.

BP chose to drill an ultra deep well directly above such a pocket - this one as large as 20 miles in diameter.

Discoveries of natural gas are, of course, an important part of exploration. But the pressures of these methane pockets was predicted to be far higher than current technology can deal with. Typical well head pressures are in the 1,500 pounds per square inch range. Geologists warned that gas pressures in this area could range between 30,000 and 70,000 psi. Some reports indicate the actual pressure at the well head is 100,000 psi.

No drilling equipment can handle this amount of pressure. Given the extreme risks involved with drilling in this location, BP is keeping a tight lid on all data regarding pressures and drilling depth. There is speculation that the drilling went to at least 30,000 feet - far deeper than the 18,500 foot drilling permit allowed. Even more speculation exists that BP was following Russia's lead in searching for highly controversial "abiotic oil", since biogenic oil and gas should not exist below the 15,000 foot level.

Evidence for a Serious Methane Gas Threat

The threat of a methane gas explosion in the Gulf has been attributed to fear mongering. Is there any evidence to these claims? Robotic submarines are returning some very alarming video footage of methane gas hazards. Cracks and fissures are opening up on the sea floor over an area of several miles. A number of "pock marks" have appeared on the sea floor as far as 20 miles away from the original Macondo blow out. Oil and methane gas is escaping from areas that have never even been drilled.

Frighteningly, these fissures appear to be growing and connecting with each other. The methane pock marks are growing in size. Even worse, the weakened

 sea floor is being heaved up into a massive, fracturing, mound. A geological time bomb, previously locked away under miles of rock, has been disturbed. Evidence is pointing to the very grim possibility that a methane gas bubble, 15 to 20 miles in diameter, could indeed rupture the sea floor and escape with unimaginable violence.

John Kessler of Texas A & M University, said "This is the most vigorous methane eruption in modern history". The oil contains 40% methane - much higher than the usual 5%. The USGS claims that 2,900 cubic feet of gas is accompanying each barrel of oil from the well - also much higher than usual.

The EPA has found extremely high levels of other toxic gasses, such as benzene and hydrogen sulphide. It appears that BP did drill an ultra deep well, piercing an absolutely immense bubble of high pressure methane. Could they have unleashed a disaster that is unfolding with no possibility of reversal?

How Could the Ultimate BP Disaster Kill Millions?

The worst case scenarios are truly horrific. If this methane gas bubble ruptures the sea floor and unleashes itself, the devastation and loss of life would be unprecedented in human history. The loss of life would not be limited to oil field and spill clean up personnel - millions of lives all across the Gulf States are at terrible risk.

The smallest problem: methane gas is not buoyant enough to float ships or oil rigs. Any vessels in the area would immediately sink. Similarly, aircraft cannot fly in methane - any aircraft would lose lift and simply fall out of the sky.

The amount of water displaced by such a methane gas bubble would generate a tsunami - likely of a magnitude that humanity has never seen before. A gigantic cavity would be left where the methane existed - which would immediately flood with sea water. Because of the extreme depths of the methane gas bubble (possibly six miles), the temperatures are far above the boiling point of water. The icy sea water would explosively convert to steam, increase in volume dramatically, and erupt upwards to cause a second and possibly even larger tsunami.

Looking at an elevation map of the Gulf and eastern seaboard of the United States, it's clear to see what kind of devastation a tsunami would cause. The loss of life could very well be in the millions, making the Sumatra tsunami look trivial.

Transocean's drilling rig was destroyed by a methane gas explosion seconds after the blowout. This explosion and fire claimed 11 lives. But what would happen

 be spared the greatest explosion ever witnessed. Instead, a runaway acceleration of our global warming crisis could easily result.

55 million years ago, uplifting tectonic plates created the Himalayas. Changes to the sea floor allowed mega pockets of methane gas to be released. The result was an increase in global temperature of 7 degrees Celsius. A temperature rise of this magnitude could potentially submerge our cities and our best agricultural land. Hundreds of millions of people, at the very least, could perish world wide through starvation and economic collapse.

The troubled Macondo well, far behind schedule, was turning into a financial horror show for BP. The crew, supervisors, and even Halliburton were gravely concerned about a major blowout. Blatant disregard for safety was shown right from the initial application through to the final explosion and sinking of the rig. Their efforts to save a few million dollars may dramatically change the course of history.

What if BP did punch an ultra deep well directly into a gargantuan pocket of methane - a pocket so deep that we have no experience with the pressures involved? What if the sea floor is beginning to unzip? Could this methane bubble tear through several miles of solid rock? Sedimentary rock, probably sandstone, isn’t very solid really. It is already riddled with natural faults and has now been severely tampered with.

Will this liberated methane detonate in a "biblical fireball"? Will the Gulf States be inundated with a furious series of tsunamis? Will global warming accelerate at a pace we could not have imagined?

These are a lot of very grim questions that no one can answer. The situation is almost too frightening to believe. But ignoring the evidence won’t make it go away. We’ve never experienced methane discharges or well pressures anywhere near these levels, and something very terrible is happening deep in the Gulf.

Terrible enough that detonating a nuclear blast to kill the well has been considered. As risky and radical as it sounds, the heat could cause a durable layer of glass to form over the entire problem. Or, it could make the problem worse - much worse...

Sources:

http://www.mi2g.com/cgi/mi2g/f rameset.php?pageid=http%3A//ww w.mi2g.com/cgi/mi2g/press/2106 10.php

The pros and cons of planned communities

• Why cities are better for green living than suburbs
• The habitat of collared lemurs
• Why BP is readying a ‘super weapon’ to avert escalating Gulf nightmare
• How to use the summer heat to your advantage
• The real meaning of E=MC2
• Examples of locomotion in vertebrates
• Identifying and dealing with negative people
• Desertification in Brazil
• What blood does in the body
• Doomsday: How BP Gulf disaster may have triggered a ‘world-killing’ event
• Kalpana Chawla: A biography
• The history of strip malls in America
• The rise of suburbia in America
• Tips for dealing with traffic in the suburbs
• The top 10 most affordable suburbs in the United States
• What does an anthropologist do?
• How weather has changed human history
• The principles of aerodynamics
• Why are suburban schools usually better than city schools?
• Differences in urban and suburban schools
• The hidden cost of living in the suburbs: Transportation
• Common types of inclusions found in gems
• What is new urbanism?
• The drawbacks of automobile dependent communities
• The history of nylon
• How to design a walkable neighborhood
• The legacy of Marie Curie for women in science
• Comparing the health effects of living in a suburb vs. living in a city
• Marie Curie and her work with radioactivity
• Compostion of crude oil: Gases
• The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA): The General NOAA Operational Modeling Environment
• The many dangers of mining
• Climategate scientists cleared of dishonesty
• How does a body fall through space?
• Social statistics: What is gambler’s fallacy?
• What is gerentology?
• Aquatic ape hypothesis: Did early human evolution include an aquatic phase?
• Why some men cross-dress
• Why the human race is doomed to extinction
• Why elephants have trunks
• How an elephant uses its trunk
• How to decide when to move out of the city
• Things to consider when moving to the suburbs
• Mechanisms of heat transfer in thermodynamics: Radiation
• Factors that influence personality
• Change and how people deal with it
• The relationship between physical, cognitive and social-emotional development in humans
• Mechanisms of heat transfer in thermodynamics: Convection
• Louisiana State University (LSU) Earth Scan Lab: MODIS infrared imaging
• How to make alkaline water
• How December 21, 2012 could change the earth
• Coming sun storms could slam USA into ‘Greatest Depression’
• Yellowstone: A silent threat?
• What is Edwards syndrome?
• Nanotechnology: The science of the small
• UFO sightings…
• Ocean dead zones explained
• Which is the widest waterfall and where can you find it?
• When could humans first set foot on Mars?
• How social scientists view the Gulf of Mexico oil spill
• What is a Malthusian catastrophe?
• Is euthanasia ethical or unethical?
• Cellphone radiation may be killing bees
• What are solar neutrinos
• Psychology: How to identify an impulsive personality
• What can be done to clean up the 2010 oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico?
• How BP is going to stop the Deepwater Horizon oil well from gushing
• Environmental consequences of the recent oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico
• Archeology finds: Ancient town found underground in Kyparissia, Greece
• Facts about asteroids
• Jupiter: Basic facts
• A history of the petroleum industry and the origins of crude oil
• How stem cell therapy can restore sight
• Camille and the danger of hurricane parties
• What is the theory of dark fluid?
• Amazing medical breakthroughs: Cures for millions with blindness
• What is the Overconfidence Effect in Psychology?
• Scientist that eradicated smallpox declares Mankind extinct in 100 years
• How the BP Gulf oil spill may create killer hurricanes
• What is the God Particle and why is it controversial?
• The risks associated with organ transplantation
• Kadanuumuu, distant relative of Fossil Lucy, discovered in Ethiopia
• Worst hurricanes in history
• Knowing the signs of heat exhaustion
• How the ultimate BP Gulf disaster could kill millions
• Introduction to Sigmund Freud’s id, ego, and super-ego concepts
• Structure and function of the heart
• What is the monolith on Mars’ moon, Phobos?
• What is a blowout preventer?
• Structure and function of the lungs
• How scientists have achieved teleportation
• Top ten greatest inventions of all time
• How a nuclear blast could stop the Gulf oil spill
• A psychological look into serial killers
• How the oil spill may affect hurricane season 2010
• Healthy ways to express anger
• Understanding suicide
• Psychological perspectives on free will vs. determinism and nature v. nurture
• Introduction to operant conditioning
• How planet Earth was formed
• Utilizing the scientific method to solve a problem
• Anton van Leeuwenhoek’s contributions to microbiology
• The real meaning of E=MC2
• Scientists warn Eyjafjallajokull could trigger the Katla volcano to erupt
• Causes of volcanic eruptions
• Do humans use only 10 percent of their brain?
• Endangered sea creatures
• A scientific look at the 2012 Mayan doomsday prophecy
• Why do some people complain about everything
• What does an endocrinologist do?
• How to suppress bad thoughts
• The uses of helium
• Carl G. Jung: Archetypes of the collective unconscious
• How math is used in the real world, despite what students say
• Why people use drugs and alcohol as a means of escaping reality
• Structure and function of the stomach
• Things that make you cry easily
• Biography: Martin Cooper
• Parental neglect causes behavior problems in children
• How can you identify a chronic liar?
• Ethical issues in social work
• Definitions of the behavior that indicates sociopathic tendencies
• An overview of elements found in the human body
• The ‘Broken Window’ crime theory
• Alternating current (AC) and direct current (DC): A simple explanation
• People who belittle others are only belittling themselves
• What is cell differentiation?
• The structure and function of muscle cells
• Louis Pasteur’s contributions to medical microbiology
• Basic sociological concepts: Society, culture and social structure
• Labeling theory in juvenile delinquency: An evaluation
• Global warming and its effect on society
• What is biological psychology?
• Symbols used in the laboratory and their meaning
• What causes a volcano to erupt?
• Niels Bohr’s contribution to chemistry
• Famous Asian chemists and their contributions to chemistry
• Structure and function of the small intestine
• Why are gymnosperms different than angiosperms?
• Why some men cross-dress
• What are mosquitoes good for?
• Social structure theory and crime
• The chemical properties of copper
• Sociological perspectives: Functionalism
• The difference between exothermic and endothermic chemical reactions
• Examining the psychology of hoarding
• How to interpret the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale
• Natural disasters and their root cause
• Similarities between sociology and anthropology
• Functional and Conflict Theory: A point of view
• How blood flows through the heart
• How understanding chemistry can help you in daily life
• Identifying and dealing with negative people
• How to write a nursing teaching plan
• The difference between sociology and psychology
• The impact of religion on human behavior
• The Founding Fathers of Sociology
• Tips for analyzing people’s handwriting
• How long is a fortnight?
• James Marcia and the four identity statuses theory
• A brief history of chemistry
• The importance of zero in mathematics
• How a DC motor works
• Structure and function of the cell membrane
• How to calculate probability with multiple dice
• The role of bacteria in making cheese
• How James Chadwick discovered the neutron
• What are weather balloons and how do they work?
• Why is sea water salty?
• Carl Friedrich Gauss’s influence on modern mathematics
• The largest and smallest cells in the human body
• Safety precautions for chemistry experiments
• Types of scientists and what they do
• The structure of the ear
• Guide to the branches of zoology
• Soil pollution: Causes, effects and preventive measures
• Why it’s important to stop living in the past
• The importance of first impressions
• Overview: The sociological perspective
• Structure and function of the ovaries
• Groundbreaking inventions of the 20th century
• Is time real or relative?
• The impacts of Stephen Hawking’s contributions to science
• Marine pollution: Causes, effects and preventive measures
• The difference between the moment magnitude scale and the Richter scale
• What are the rarest eye colors in humans?
• The contributions of women to astronomy and space exploration
• How does the brain store information?
• Anthropology: Introduction to the four subfields
• Should animals be used for experimentation
• What to do if you get stung by a sting ray
• Nuclear Pollution: Causes, effects and preventive measures
• Function of white blood cells
• Structure and function of the pharynx
• How big is a mole?
• Aaron Beck’s cognitive therapy approach to the treatment of depression
• Crime according to Marxism and functionalism
• Structure and function of the reproductive system
• How to let go of someone you love
• Investigating recent changes in weather patterns
• Causes of the December 2004 Tsunami
• Fun facts about bacteria
• Lunar eclipse superstitions from around the world
• The facts about the Nile river
• What are irrational beliefs?
• The chemical properties of gold
• What is the difference between metaplasia, heteroplasia, dysplasia, neoplasia, hyperplasia, and anaplasia?
• Blood specimens: The differences between serum and plasma
• The difference between bacteria and viruses
• How to read and interpret a box plot
• The blue bottle experiment explained
• How to dissect a cockroach
• why the leaves on trees turn upside down before a storm
• Structure and function of the duodenum
• The chemistry of gunpowder
• The different types of psychology theories
• Our bodies at rest: What happens when we sleep
• Basic functions of the human eye
• How a narcissist uses introjection and projection
• Life span of a dragonfly
• How to make invisible ink
• What are the four phases of bacterial growth?
• Humanistic therapy: Examining person-centered therapy
• The chemical properties of neon
• Uses of an Anemometer
• Causes and effects of humidity
• Different types of blood vessels
• When science and technology does more harm than good
• Examples of Boyle’s law
• Why throat infections may cause pain in the ear
• Braking distance and reaction time
• How you know if you need to see a psychiatrist
• Rainiest places in the world
• Acid and base experiments for kids
• How to make glow in the dark paint
• Advantages and disadvantages of genetic engineering
• Explanations of bacterial shape, cell arrangement and colony morphology
• The reason why only female mosquitoes suck blood
• Megalodon: ancient shark – contemporary sightings
• Why we study microbiology
• Why plants and trees have sap
• The different types of metals
• Weighing the pros and cons of gene therapy
• The strangest recent scientific discoveries
• The order of the planets in the solar system
• Arguments for and against stem cell research
• Organizational Behavior and Motivation: Psychological and sociological insights
• How to choose an anthropology graduate program
• Elderberries: Identification and uses
• Difference between static stability and dynamic stability
• Where to obtain the best anthropology degrees
• The functions of red blood cells
• Branches of microbiology
• Storm & tsunami prevention theories
• The contents of a cigarette
• Physics science projects for middle school students
• Understanding the Bombay blood group
• Using practical and statistical significance in testing the null hypothesis
• Would you feel pain in the electric chair?
• Bowel movement frequency
• The discovery of neon
• The origin of the word hurricane
• Non cardiac causes of chest pain
• The difference between hemp and marijuana
• Characteristics of left vs. right brain dominance
• Structure and function of the esophagus
• Negative effects of modern medicine
• How to tell if somebody is lying
• Why there is still no cure for AIDS
• Why do our bowel movements come out in different colours ?
• Useful bacteria for humans
• The relationship between volume and temperature in the Ideal Gas Law
• Chemistry in daily life
• What is sodium and what is it used for
• How the dinosaurs became extinct
• Why X-rays can be dangerous for pregnant women
• Why are some people smarter than others?
• The history of the wheel
• Biography: Srinivasa Ramanujan
• The anatomy of a frog’s tongue
• A guide to famous zoologists
• The chemical properties of acids and bases
• The density of helium
• The differences between fungi and algae
• The difference between type I and type II errors
• Which tree has the largest girth?
• Different types of body thermometers and how to use them
• How the ocean’s currents affect weather
• Species other than humans that have sex for pleasure
• Why cows have four stomachs
• Understanding the case study in psychology
• James Chadwick and his discovery of the neutron
• Niels Bohr and his discovery of the atomic structure
• How J.J. Thompson discovered the electron
• Crime scene investigations: Latent fingerprint processing from crime scenes
• Who invented electric bulb?
• ‘Artificial Life’ explained in historical perspective
• Defining monoatomic gold and its effects on the body
• The difference between a cow’s heart and a human heart

Featured Partner

Society of Professional Journalists

Helium is proud to announce its partnership with the Society of Professional Journalists. Its members (almost 10,000 ...more

 (CHICAGO) - In a desperate attempt to stop a huge area of the Gulf ocean floor from possibly rupturing due to subterranean methane gas (leading to a calamity no human has ever seen) BP has ripped a page from science fiction books.

The giant oil company is now quietly preparing to test a small nuclear device in a frenzied rush against time to quell a cascading catastrophe. If successful they will have the capability to detonate a controlled fusion generated pulse.

While the world watches BP's attempt to contain the oil gusher at the former Deepwater Horizon site, company officials have given the green light on an astounding plan to use what is known as a nuclear EPFCG charge if all else fails.

The Omega plan

Most enterprises—whether business, government, or exploration—have a Plan B to fall back on. To date, BP has attempted Plans B through N. Yet it is the last ditch plan-the Omega plan-that hold the greatest risk. Yet that plan may be the final hope to stop what some insiders now consider a catastrophe that could culminate with a world-killing mass extinction event that modern civilization could not survive.

At a super-secret security base-CFB Suffield-located in southern Alberta, Canada, area reports indicate that high level engineers, physicists and military scientists are feverishly working to complete an ‘explosively pumped flux compression generator’ (EPFCG).

According to published scientific papers [see sources below] an EPFCG generator can be powered by a very small, controlled fusion explosion-in other words, a tiny nuclear bomb.

Why the UK based BP has set up operations at CFB-Suffield is obvious: The company already runs three oil rigs on the base, have worked with Canada’s chemical and biological efforts on and off for almost 40 years, and have strong ties to the Commonwealth’s infrastructure.

The CFB Base, which incorporates DRDC Suffield, is one of research six Canadian military facilities and critical to the security of the country. DRDC Suffield is the lead facility for all of Canada’s engineering and weapons systems R&D.

The EPFCG—a Star Wars super weapon

A device that can only be used once, the EPFCG generates a high power electromagnetic pulse. It achieves this by using a powerful explosive, preferably nuclear. Advanced, nuclear driven EPFCGs can instantaneously create up to billions of amperes and hundreds of terawatts. Such raw power exceeds lighting bolts by huge orders of magnitude.

The pulse can be shaped and directed and used to knock out electronics-or more importantly in this case—to fuse virtually any material—including crumbling rock strata deep under the sea. The fantastically energized pulse can also compress objects to very high pressures and densities. [3]

According to engineers familiar with the technology, the devices can generate plasma arcs hotter than the surface of the sun that will melt and fuse materials in nanoseconds.

A special security force manned by members of AEGIS, a UK based paramilitary security corporation similar to the old US Blackwater Security company, is reported to have cordoned off the base. The security lid has clamped down hard while the engineers and scientists work with the nuclear materials.

BP’s secret Omega Plan kicked off in earnest on July 7th, 2010. According to sources on the base the British Geological Survey (BGS), the United States Geological Survey (USGS), BP and Halliburton have set up a test site at one of the drill rigs.

While the plan would admittedly only be executed if a worst case scenario seemed imminent, some geo-chemists have expressed concerns that detonating an EPFCG in the Gulf might ignite the methane.

Meanwhile the preparations for the test continue in Canada.

[1] Methane in Gulf 'astonishingly high'-US scientist”

[2] BP Official Admits to Damage Beneath the Sea Floor

[3] Explosively pumped flux compression generator (EPFCG)

Sources: Scientific papers on a ‘super weapon’

• Scientific Collaborations Between Los Alamos and Arzamas-16 Using Explosive-Driven Flux Compression Generators - PDF
• An Introduction to Explosive Magnetic Flux Compression Generators - PDF [‘Stamped; DO NOT CIRCULATE’]
• Magnetized Target Fusion - An Ultra High Energy Approach in an Unexplored Parameter Space

Special thanks to: Helium.com

 

June 22 (Reuters) - As much as 1 million times the normal level of methane gas has been found in some regions near the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, enough to potentially deplete oxygen and create a dead zone, U.S. scientists said on Tuesday.

Texas A&M University oceanography professor John Kessler, just back from a 10-day research expedition near the BP Plc (BP.L) oil spill in the gulf, says methane gas levels in some areas are "astonishingly high."

Kessler's crew took measurements of both surface and deep water within a 5-mile (8 kilometer) radius of BP's broken wellhead.

"There is an incredible amount of methane in there," Kessler told reporters in a telephone briefing.

In some areas, the crew of 12 scientists found concentrations that were 100,000 times higher than normal.

"We saw them approach a million times above background concentrations" in some areas, Kessler said.

The scientists were looking for signs that the methane gas had depleted levels of oxygen dissolved in the water needed to sustain marine life.

"At some locations, we saw depletions of up to 30 percent of oxygen based on its natural concentration in the waters. At other places, we saw no depletion of oxygen in the waters. We need to determine why that is," he told the briefing.

Methane occurs naturally in sea water, but high concentrations can encourage the growth of microbes that gobble up oxygen needed by marine life.

Kessler said oxygen depletions have not reached a critical level yet, but the oil is still spilling into the Gulf, now at a rate of as much as 60,000 barrels a day, according to U.S. government estimates.

"What is it going to look like two months down the road, six months down the road, two years down the road?" he asked.

251 million years ago a mammoth undersea methane bubble caused massive explosions, poisoned the atmosphere and destroyed more than 96 percent of all life on Earth. [1] Experts agree that what is known as the Permian extinction event was the greatest mass extinction event in the history of the world. [2]

55 million years later another methane bubble ruptured causing more mass extinctions during the Late Paleocene Thermal Maximum (LPTM).

The LPTM lasted 100,000 years. [3]

Those subterranean seas of methane virtually reshaped the planet when they explosively blew from deep beneath the waters of what is today called the Gulf of Mexico.

Now, worried scientists are increasingly concerned the same series of catastrophic events that led to worldwide death back then may be happening again-and no known technology can stop it.

The bottom line: BP’s Deepwater Horizon drilling operation may have triggered an irreversible, cascading geological Apocalypse that will culminate with the first mass extinction of life on Earth in many millions of years.

The oil giant drilled down miles into a geologically unstable region and may have set the stage for the eventual premature release of a methane mega-bubble.

Ryskin’s methane extinction theory

Northwestern University's Gregory Ryskin, a bio-chemical engineer, has a theory: The oceans periodically produce massive eruptions of explosive methane gas. He has documented the scientific evidence that such an event was directly responsible for the mass extinctions that occurred 55 million years ago. [4]

Many geologists concur: "The consequences of a methane-driven oceanic eruption for marine and terrestrial life are likely to be catastrophic. Figuratively speaking, the erupting region "boils over," ejecting a large amount of methane and other gases (e.g., CO2, H2S) into the atmosphere, and flooding large areas of land. Whereas pure methane is lighter than air, methane loaded with water droplets is much heavier, and thus spreads over the land, mixing with air in the process (and losing water as rain). The air-methane mixture is explosive at methane concentrations between 5% and 15%; as such mixtures form in different locations near the ground and are ignited by lightning, explosions and conflagrations destroy most of the terrestrial life, and also produce great amounts of smoke and of carbon dioxide..." [5]

The warning signs of an impending planetary catastrophe—of such great magnitude that the human mind has difficulty grasping it-would be the appearance of large fissures or rifts splitting open the ocean floor, a rise in the elevation of the seabed, and the massive venting of methane and other gases into the surrounding water.

Such occurrences can lead to the rupture of the methane bubble containment—it can then permit the methane to breach the subterranean depths and undergo an explosive decompression as it catapults into the Gulf waters.  [6]

All three warning signs are documented to be occurring in the Gulf.

Ground zero: The Gulf Coast

The people and property located on the greater expanse of the Gulf Coast are sitting at Ground Zero. They will be the first exposed to poisonous, cancer causing chemical gases. They will be the ones that initially experience the full fury of a methane bubble exploding from the ruptured seabed.

The media has been kept away from the emergency salvage measures being taken to forestall the biggest catastrophe in human history. The federal government has warned them away from the epicenter of operations with the threat of a $40,000 fine for each infraction and the possibility of felony arrests.

Why is the press being kept away? Word is that the disaster is escalating.

Cracks and bulges

Methane is now streaming through the porous, rocky seabed at an accelerated rate and gushing from the borehole of the first relief well. The EPA is on record that Rig #1 is releasing methane, benzene, hydrogen sulfide and other toxic gases. Workers there now wear advanced protection including state-of-the-art, military-issued gas masks.

Reports, filtering through from oceanologists and salvage workers in the region, state that the upper level strata of the ocean floor is succumbing to greater and greater pressure. That pressure is causing a huge expanse of the seabed-estimated by some as spreading over thousands of square miles surrounding the BP wellhead-to bulge. Some claim the seabed in the region has risen an astounding 30 feet.

The fractured BP wellhead, site of the former Deepwater Horizon, has become the epicenter of frenetic attempts to quell the monstrous flow of methane.

The subterranean methane is pressurized at 100,000 pounds psi. According to Matt Simmons, an oil industry expert, the methane pressure at the wellhead has now skyrocketed to a terrifying 40,000 pounds psi.

Another well-respected expert, Dr. John Kessler of Texas A&M University has calculated that the ruptured well is spewing 60 percent oil and 40 percent methane. The normal methane amount that escapes from a compromised well is about 5 percent.

More evidence? A huge gash on the ocean floor—like a ragged wound hundreds of feet long—has been reported by the NOAA research ship, Thomas Jefferson. Before the curtain of the government enforced news blackout again descended abruptly, scientists aboard the ship voiced their concerns that the widening rift may go down miles into the earth.

That gash too is hemorrhaging oil and methane. It’s 10 miles away from the BP epicenter. Other, new fissures, have been spotted as far as 30 miles distant.

Measurements of the multiple oil plumes now appearing miles from the wellhead indicate that as much as a total  of 124,000 barrels of oil are erupting into the Gulf waters daily-that’s about 5,208,000 gallons of oil per day.

Most disturbing of all: Methane levels in the water are now calculated as being almost one million times higher than normal.

Mass death on the water

If the methane bubble—a bubble that could be as big as 20 miles wide—erupts with titanic force from the seabed into the Gulf, every ship, drilling rig and structure within the region of the bubble will immediately sink. All the workers, engineers, Coast Guard personnel and marine biologists participating in the salvage operation will die instantly.

Next, the ocean bottom will collapse, instantaneously displacing up to a trillion cubic feet of water or more and creating a towering supersonic tsunami annihilating everything along the coast and well inland. Like a thermonuclear blast, a high pressure atmospheric wave could precede the tidal wave flattening everything in its path before the water arrives.

When the roaring tsunami does arrive it will scrub away all that is left.

A chemical cocktail of poisons

Some environmentalist experts are calling what’s pouring into the land, sea and air from the seabed breach ’a chemical cocktail of poisons.’

Areas of dead zones devoid of oxygen are driving species of fish into foreign waters, killing plankton and other tiny sea life that are the foundation for the entire food chain, and polluting the air with cancer-causing chemicals and poisonous rainfalls.

A report from one observer in South Carolina documents oily residue left behind after a recent thunderstorm. And before the news blackout fully descended the EPA released data that benzene levels in New Orleans had rocketed to 3,000 parts per billion.

Benzene is extremely toxic and even short term exposure can cause agonizing death from cancerous lesions years later.

The people of Louisiana have been exposed for more than two months—and the benzene levels may be much higher now. The EPA measurement was taken in early May. [8]

Doomsday

While some say it can’t happen because the bulk of the methane is frozen into crystalline form, others point out that the underground methane sea is gradually melting from the nearby surging oil that’s estimated to be as hot as 500 degrees Fahrenheit.

Most experts in the know, however, agree that if the world-changing event does occur it will happen suddenly and within the next 6 months.

So, if events go against  Mankind and the bubble bursts in the coming months, Gregory Ryskin may become one of the most famous people in the world. Of course, he won't have long to enjoy his new found fame because very shortly after the methane eruption civilization will collapse.

Methane does have a very deleterious effect on all aerobic marine life in that it depletes oxygen very rapidly in water. This is the biggest concern, and can have greater impact on life than the toxicity of both the oil and the dispersants combined, dangerous interactions and all. We state the obvious when we say that all aerobic organisms needs oxygen, and that such life will die very quickly when oxygen concentrations drops below critical thresholds. As the methane rises through the higher layers of the Gulf of Mexico aquatic strata where the water is warmer, this problem becomes worse due to the fact that warmer water simply holds less oxygen than cold water.

The coming tropical storms and depressions, as well as the hurricanes, will provide vectors of dissemination for the aforementioned chemicals and contaminants to rain down on the many coastal communities, and beyond.

Even   a best case scenario, where the oil and methane leaks are over. here is the damage that has already resulted:

Sources

[1] The Permian extinction event, when 96% of all marine species became extinct 251 million years ago.

[2] “The Day The Earth Nearly Died,” BBC Horizon, 2002

[3] Report about the Late Paleocene Thermal Maximum (LPTM), which occurred around 55 million years ago and lasted about 100,000 years. Large undersea methane caused explosions and mass extinctions.

[4] Ryskin Theory
Huge combustible clouds produced by methane gas trapped under the seas and explosively released could have killed off the majority of marine life, land animals, and plants at the end of the Permian era—long before the dinosaurs arrived.

[5] James P. Kennett, Kevin G. Cannariato, Ingrid L. Hendy, Richard J. Behl (2000), "Carbon Isotopic Evidence for Methane Hydrate Instability During Quaternary Interstadials," Science 288.

[6] “An awesome mix of fire and water may lie behind mass extinctions”

[7] “Methane in Gulf 'astonishingly high'-US scientist”

[8] Report: “Air Quality - Oil Spill” TV 4WWL video

////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////