Oil Used as a Pretext for Corexit?
July 28, 2010by Ken Price
The story from Mathew Simmons (that the oil well was never capped and was still raging at full speed) has been deemed to be a misleading fraud. [Price & Makow.com fell for it. Apologies] It looks like the purpose of his "disclosure" was to get us to believe that the major cause of death in the gulf region is from methane gas and abiotic oil, WHEN IN FACT, the cause of death is corexit.
It now looks like we do not have an oil leak at all but a tar leak. I will be following up on this, but as you continue reading you will find good reason to believe that what has actually been leaking is from an asphalt volcano, and this could have been a normal seepage of such material. Asphalt is consumed by microbes and does not pose a threat to the oceans nor sea life. In fact, it provides billions of lower food-chain building blocks.
So this is what we have left to go on at the moment:
1. Corexit is lethal. It has been tested in the Valdez disaster and it is known to dramatically reduce the lives of all humans who work around it and breathe it. It should never have been used again.
2. Continue to stay away from areas along the shoreline. Do not swim in the waters.
3. There is a massive media illusion being fed to the public. This has been brought to light by the following:
-Faked pictures of the well supposedly being capped.
-Faked pictures of the BP supposed "command center".
-Zero callbacks have been made from the supposed BP "help center"
-Ground cleanup crews leaving the scene within an hour of the president's departure of the area he visited.
-Up to two feet of hauled-in sand being dumped on beaches in front of resorts during the night for photo ops the next day looking ok.
-Public access denied at most beaches along with speaking with any cleanup workers, flying over the gulf region, photographing BP or workers, access to records (how much dispersants, what's in it, etc.).
-Few people know anything about thousands of workers who have become ill working along the shores and off shore in boats.
What a fact finding mess!
4. Very little oil has hit the Gulf coast beaches and this is after days of prevailing winds from the south. So if the oil was ever there in the first place, dispersant or not, it would be reaching the shores now. What has reached the shore has been mostly tar, and overall, after all this time, the amounts have been minuscule. Some of the pictures have shown the "oil" to be reddish, others have shown it to be white.
The latest hypothesis is this: The Deep Horizon's rig drilled through a clay deposit and an asphalt deposit. This means the event was way over-hyped, that there has never been a threat from a deep well that tapped into 100,000 psi pressure within the largest oil reserve ever found. It would also mean that we DO NOT have a massive flow of toxic abiotic oil killing our oceans. This could mean that this was a scare tactic fed to the public to cover (as a reason) for the use of the deadly corexit.
There is absolutely no reason that this area should be so shut off to visitors other than to hide from us what is really going on. There was no reason to allow BP to control this situation from the beginning, and over 80 days before the well was supposedly "capped", without every major world leader screaming for the United States to take immediate action to stop the poisoning of the world's seas. Unless there never really was such a threat. I repeat, we can not trust any information received via MSM. Photos and movies are easily faked.
I do not know what is really happening or what the plan is. From the looks of things currently it does resemble a hurricane Katrina scenario resulting in permanent evacuation/relocation of lower income people and a possible redevelopment of the region. It all depends on the extent of the damage, long term and short term, of the generously applied corexit. What we may have is a massive dumping of accumulated toxic waste directly into the workplace of hundreds of thousands unsuspecting residents of the gulf.
Other possible reasons include:
-To cause a moratorium on offshore drilling so they can cry about a shortage later (and raise the price) .
-To cause a cataclysmic event for use as a reason the US economy collapsed (Chernobyl proceeded the USSR collapse by about five years).
-To spread a bio disease (depopulation).
-To collapse the economy of the middle east which has loans of such magnitude that some of the countries need crude oil at over 100 dollars per barrel just to survive the interest. This "black eye" the oil industry must now bare could lead to reduced demand and reliance on petroleum (not one of my hypothesis).
-To force the world into changing energy sources. This way they could make us rebuild out transportation system all over again, and capitalize and tax us at every stage of the way. (I'd like to see the day!)
-To change the climate of the East Coast of the US and/or England, Holland, Netherlands, etc.
-To change the gulf stream currents.
-To give reason for "emergency intervention", coming in the form of military takeover (aka Haiti), this time on a larger scale including Cuba and all the islands of the gulf region.
As part of a larger world plan; there are now confirmed oil leaks in China, the North Sea, the Red Sea and now a pipeline rupture sending 840,000 gallons into the Kalamazoo River in Michigan.
"Why are oil spills suddenly occurring constantly, all over the world? Just this year, the environment has taken an unprecedented beating, from the oil industry alone." Meta Ocean Research
In my last update I mentioned that a second well has been leaking in the gulf near the Deepwater Horizon, and the size of the leak was only mentioned as "smaller than the Deepwater Horizon's leak". I am seeing a mass of confusion coming together in the coming days, and years from now they may be still denying that BP's nightmarish accident was the major cause of the disasters of the seas as seen from a world-wide perspective.
Are these latest incidents for the creation of "plausible deniability" or a much larger plan?
The search for the truth never stops. I hope this helps you in your search for it.
Latest on Corexit Damage
Is Matt Simmonds Credible?
Comments for "Oil Used as a Pretext for Corexit? "
Henry Makow received his Ph.D. in English Literature from the University of Toronto in 1982. He welcomes your comments at