Please note that you can leave a comment on any of our posts at our Facebook page.  Subscribers can also comment at length at our Angel's Corner Forum.

OUR DAILY SNIPPETS ARE HERE.

SATURDAY,  MAY 1,  2010

DEALING THOUGHTFULLY WITH THE GREEK FINANCIAL CRISIS - AT 9:07 P.M. ET:  Greece is near financial collapse, and, this being May Day, the downtrodden citizenry has engaged in reflective activity to solve their nation's problem.  From The Times of London: 

MAY DAY protests in Greece turned violent yesterday as youths in gas masks and hoods set fire to vehicles, smashed shop fronts and threw molotov cocktails and rocks at police in an explosion of fury over austerity measures they claim will hurt only the poor.

Tourists were cut off from their hotels as thousands of communists, civil servants and private-sector workers converged on a main square in Athens to vent their rage at the European Union and the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

“No to the IMF’s junta,” they chanted as a youth in a black hood produced a hammer to try to smash windows of the luxury Grande Bretagne hotel.

Another painted anti-capitalist slogans on the facade, and demonstrators intervened to prevent him from spraying an Australian woman with paint as she tried to get back into the hotel. Japanese tourists stood taking photographs of the mayhem with mobile phones before being forced to retreat, coughing and sneezing, under a cloud of tear gas

COMMENT:  You know, next time the Europeans start lecturing us, please remember scenes like this.  I, for one, am getting damned tired of constantly being patronized by people who can't solve their problems, won't solve their problems, depend on America for their defense, have no respect for their own cultures, and simply sit around, waiting to be taken care of.

And it can happen here.

May 1, 2010    Permalink

KATRINA II? – AT 7:22 P.M. ET:  Shock.  Some news outlets covering the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico have been caught committing journalism.  This is a felony punishable by being banned from the best parties in the finer sections of town, where people mount their degrees on their living-room walls. 

It turns out that the federal government knew almost immediately of the catastrophic potential of the oil rig collapse.  But very little was done.

A National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration video, shot as officials coordinated response to the Deepwater Horizon disaster, shows that federal officials almost immediately worried that the oil well could leak up to 110,000 barrels per day, or 4.6 million gallons.

The video appears on a federal Web site.

It was filmed in Seattle, at NOAA's Western Regional Center, as scientists and federal officials in Seattle, Houston and New Orleans engaged in telephone conferences, according to a companion document on the Web site.

And...

"I think we need to be prepared for it to be the spill of the decade," Debbie Payton of NOAA, the meeting's coordinator, says during the NOAA video.

COMMENT:  The story appeared in the Mobile Press-Register.  Shall we take it seriously?  I mean, these aren't real journalists.  How many of them ever participated in an anti-war rally?  How many did their best for Obama during the 2008 campaign?  And I'll bet not one spent his junior year abroad.  Be careful of this scribbling rabble.

But, alas, the story may be true.  In that case, how will the Dems, who bashed Bush aplenty after Katrina, defend the sluggish response of their Action Comics president, Barack Obama?

We know, don't we?  They'll blame the whole thing on Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, a Republican and potential candidate for the national ticket.  Why not solve multiple problems at the same time. 

This is only the beginning of this story.  Let's see if the Republicans, who acted like zombie punching bags in the Katrina episode, can come up with a creative response.

May 1, 2010    Permalink 

OH HOW WONDERFUL.  AREN'T WE JUST THE NICEST? – AT 12:14 P.M. ET:  Another act of "engagement" by the Obama administration, intent on showing the world just how gosh darned civilized we've become since The One took office:

The Obama administration is likely to reveal a closely guarded secret -- the size of the U.S. nuclear stockpile -- during a critical meeting starting Monday at which Washington will try to strengthen the global treaty that curbs the spread of nuclear weapons, several officials said.

Various factions in the administration have debated for months whether to declassify the numbers, and they were left out of President Obama's recent Nuclear Posture Review because of objections from intelligence officials. Now, the administration is seeking a dramatic announcement that will further enhance its nuclear credentials as it tries to shore up the fraying nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

COMMENT:  How would you rate the maturity level of this administration?  High school?  Junior high?  Pre-adolescent? 

Apparently, the Obamans don't feel our credentials are strong enough in the nuclear nonproliferation field.  As compared with whom? 

We have a right to have our military secrets.  And the size of our arsenal is one of them.  The ambiguity makes it even more difficult for potential adversaries to plan.  Our secrecy probably helps the cause of peace, rather than hurting it. 

And, by the way, once we do reveal this secret, how do we respond when some hostile nation challenges us to "prove it."  The only way is by opening our arsenal to inspection, while rogue nations cheat.  You can be sure that's coming next.

Douglas MacArthur once said that all disasters begin with two words:  Too late.  We're finding out who it is that we elected.  Too late, too late.

May 1, 2010     Permalink

WAIT!  I'VE SEEN THIS MOVIE – AT 11:25 P.M. ET:  What was it's name?  "Katrina"?  Yeah, that was it.  Or maybe it was, "The President Fights a Storm."  It starred George W. Bush as the guy and Brownie as his best friend.

Now Obama wants to make the sequel:  "Saint Barack and the Oil Slick."  The Politico has the first exclusive, from Hollywood:

President Obama will head to the Gulf Coast Sunday morning for a trip an administration official describes as having "a very small footprint."

The trip, announced Saturday morning, comes after Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said Friday “[c]ertainly not this weekend,” when asked if the president would visit the area in the wake of the oil spill there.

So, we begin with a lie.  Apparently, the White House finally realized that the oil slick could become its Katrina, and Obama doesn't have a Brownie to blame. 

The press already is in high protection mode, making sure Obama comes out of this in good shape.  From The New York Times:

As President Obama, who will visit the Gulf region on Sunday morning, has stepped up his administration’s response to the oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico, ordering a moratorium on new offshore drilling leases and dispatching cabinet secretaries and cargo planes to the region, the White House is also trying to avert the kind of political damage inflicted on former President George W. Bush by his administration’s slow response to Hurricane Katrina.

Right.  Let's continue the myth.  After all, when The Times can sell the public the line that the United States "lost" the Vietnam War, it can sell an oil slick.  The Bush response to Katrina was not slow.  It was fast.  The Coast Guard rescue operation was one of the best rescue operations in history.  An expected death toll of 10,000 was reduced to 1,100.  The same FEMA, led by the same ridiculed "Brownie," had handled five hurricanes in Florida a year earlier, and handled them well.

Katrina was a press assault on a president.  It was a conscious distortion of facts to protect an African-American mayor of New Orleans – a monumental incompetent – and a female governor of Louisiana, equally clueless. 

Some of the "reporting" was wildly inaccurate.  CNN was the worst offender, spinning myths of racism and indifference to suffering.  Bush was made the villain. 

Now it's Obama's turn to tackle the Louisiana coast.  See the brave president fly over.  See his concern for afflicted, oppressed populations.  See his super-competent agencies.  Hear his eloquent words.  See the contrast with Bush, who'd only been governor of Texas and naturally had no knowledge of the region.

Get out the seasickness pills.  It's going to be a bumpy night. 

May 1, 2010    Permalink

FOOL ME ONCE, SHAME ON YOU, FOOL ME TWICE, SHAME ON ME – AT 11:01 A.M. ET:  Is there no end to the dishonesty and arrogance of this administration?

In the last few weeks the Obamans have been on a charm offensive, similar to the Soviet charm offensives of old, to convince the great majority of Americans who are pro-Israel that there really are no serious problems in our relationship with that nation, our only real ally in the Mideast.  Now comes this:

Washington and Cairo are negotiating an agreement which would see the Middle East become a nuclear-free zone, the Wall Street Journal reported on Saturday.

According to the report, which comes two days ahead of a UN-hosted conference to prevent nuclear proliferation, the agreement is aimed at making the treatment of nuclear weapons in the Middle East more balanced.

The US has been criticized in the past for expressing concern over the suspected nuclear ambitions of countries such as Syria and Iran with nary a mention of Israel's reported nuclear arsenal.

The Wall Street Journal quoted senior Obama administration officials as saying that the US officials would meet with their Egyptian counterparts in New York in efforts to promote the idea of a nuke-free Middle East which would encompass Arab countries as well as Israel, Iran and Turkey.

"We've made a proposal to them that goes beyond what the US has been willing to do before," one official reportedly said. Others added that progress would have to be made on the Israeli-Palestinian track before such an agreement could be made.

COMMENT:  Fascinating, isn't it?  We're negotiating with Egypt, and leaving Israel out of it.  What a friend we are!  How loyal!  Even in the midst of a charm offensive, the Obama leftists can't control their hostility to democratic allies.

The whole idea of a nuclear-free zone is a joke, but it will have surface appeal to the chattering classes.  Can you imagine Israel, or any other rational state, trusting Iran or Syria to live up to an agreement to ban nuclear weapons?

The only countries that can be helped by this will be those two, Iran and Syria.  They'll sign some vague non-proliferation agreement – after all, Iran has already pledged that its nuke program is only about powering hair dryers – and then go about developing nuclear weapons.  Meanwhile, Israel will be expected to open itself to full inspection.  If Israel refuses, as it must, it will be sanctioned, and a second Obama administration, with nothing to lose politically, will go along.

We never thought Obama would get so bad so fast.  But we underestimated him.

May 1, 2010    Permalink

WHAT IS WRONG WITH THESE PEOPLE? – AT 10:14 A.M. ET:  It sometimes appears that a Democratic candidate in Illinois could commit mass murder, and he'd still have a good chance at winning. 

Scandal surrounds the Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate heat once held by Barack Obama.  No scandal surrounds the Republican candidate, the outstanding Mark Kirk.  And yet, Kirk's lead over the Dem is modest, and Kirk can't break 50 percent.  Scott Rasmussen has the numbers:

Republican Congressman Mark Kirk has earned a modest pick-up in support, while his Democratic opponent, Alexi Giannoulias, appears stalled in the first Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Likely Voters in the state following the government's seizure of the failed Broadway Bank, the institution owned by Giannoulias' family.

Kirk now attracts 46% support in Illinois' race for the U.S. Senate, up from 41% in early April. Support for Giannoulias is at 38%, virtually unchanged from the previous survey but down from March, when he earned 44% of the vote. Five percent (5%) currently support some other candidate, and 12% are undecided.

Kirk picked up 46% to Giannoulias' 40% in the first survey after the two won their party primaries in February. But the race was a virtual toss-up by March. Still, despite the Broadway Bank controversy, Kirk has been unable to push past his previous high.

COMMENT:  Illinois is quirky.  Obama's approval ratings in his home state are higher than they are nationally.  Besides, corruption is almost taken in stride.

And Giannoulias has an appropriately ethnic name.  Kirk is a Republican congressman from a white-bread suburb.  He has been an excellent critic of Obama's foreign policy, but this is a bread-and-butter state, and that may not mean much. 

The odds favor a Kirk victory, but they're not strong odds.  If there's a Dem bounceback, Kirk could be in trouble.  Illinois is, for our side, still a problem.

May 1, 2010    Permalink

FRIDAY,  APRIL 30,  2010

HMM, INTERESTING, NOT A LIBERAL IDEOLOGUE – AT 8:08 A.M. ET:  The president is mulling candidates for the Supreme Court:

WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Obama has accelerated his search for his next Supreme Court nominee, meeting in the Oval Office with one of the candidates, federal Judge Sidney Thomas of Montana, a person familiar with the conversation says.

Mr. Obama's meeting with Judge Thomas on Thursday was his first known formal interview for the upcoming vacancy on the court. He is holding conversations with other candidates, and it is not clear whether he has already had other personal meetings with contenders...

...the personal time Mr. Obama devoted to Judge Thomas suggests that the federal judge, well respected within legal circles but hardly a familiar name in Washington, is under a higher level of consideration by the president.

And...

The court is dominated by justices with ties to the Northeast and the Ivy League; Judge Thomas' career is rooted in the West -- he lives in Billings, Mont., and earned his bachelor's degree from Montana State University and his law degree from the University of Montana.

And...

The 56-year-old judge serves on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the largest of the nation's appellate courts. He was nominated to that job in July 1995 by President Bill Clinton and confirmed by the Senate with no controversy.

The San Francisco-based appeals court on which he serves has a liberal reputation, but attorneys who know Judge Thomas describe him as independent and a straight-shooter.

COMMENT:  We'll wait for a more complete analysis of how straight a shooter he is.  But, on balance, he'd probably be as good as it gets for an Obama appointee.

April 30, 2010     Permalink

PART OF BRITAIN IS NUTS – AT 7:48 P.M. ET:  Since we're on the subject of Britain – see post just below – the screwball thinking that goes on there never ceases to amaze, especially in the one-gloried realm of British justice.  From the Daily Mail:

A Muslim protester who daubed a war memorial with graffiti glorifying Osama Bin Laden and proclaiming 'Islam will dominate the world' walked free from court after prosecutors ruled his actions were not motivated by religion.

Tohseef Shah, 21, could have faced a tougher sentence if the court had accepted that the insults - which included a threat to kill the Prime Minister - were inspired by religious hatred.

Wait, now wait.  I went to school.  You went to school.  We all studied English.  Would someone explain to me how the line, "Islam will dominate the world" is not inspired by religious hatred, when jointed with a threat to murder the prime minister?  Was this an oblique way of saying, "We love the Christians"?

Conservative MP Patrick Mercer, chairman of the Parliamentary Counter Terrorism sub-committee, said: 'This is an outrage against our war dead.'

Shah sprayed the words 'Islam will dominate the world - Osama
is on his way' and 'Kill Gordon Brown' on the plinth of the memorial in December.

He was arrested after his DNA was found on the discarded spray-can but refused to give an explanation for his actions or show any remorse, a court heard.

Shyness.  That's what it was, shyness.

The Crown Prosecution Service said Shah's offence could not be charged as a hate crime because the law requires that damage must target a particular religious or racial group.

It said: 'While it was appreciated that what was sprayed on the memorial may have been perceived by some to be part of a racial or religious incident, no racial or religious group can be shown to have been targeted.'

Seems to me you could list every other religious group in Britain other than Muslims, and it could be convincingly argued that they were the targets.  Obvious to we mere mortals.

Churchill must be spinning.

April 30, 2010     Permalink

BRITAIN VOTES THURSDAY – AT 7:27 P.M. ET:  Britain votes Thursday.  Conservatives have taken the lead in the polls, but are short, so far, of a majority in Parliament.  That would mean a "hung Parliament," and negotiations with another party to form a government.  A mess.

LONDON, April 30 (Reuters) - British Prime Minister Gordon Brown's faltering election campaign suffered fresh blows on Friday as support for his Labour Party slid in one new poll and leading newspapers came out in support of his rivals.

Opposition Conservative leader David Cameron's campaign was boosted by viewer polls finding him the winner of a televised debate among party leaders on Thursday night, the last before next Thursday's election.

But the increased support for the Liberal Democrats, traditionally Britain's third party, showed no sign of abating, appearing to leave Britain on course for its first parliament with no overall majority since 1974...

...A YouGov poll for the Sun newspaper showed the Conservatives leading on 34 percent with Labour and the Lib Dems tied on 28 percent.

But a Harris poll for Saturday's Daily Mail found support for Labour, which has ruled Britain since 1997, falling to just 24 percent. If repeated next Thursday, it would be Labour's worst election showing since 1918, it said.

The poll put the Conservatives on 33 percent and the Lib Dems on 32 percent. Under Britain's electoral system, which is based solely on the vote in individual constituencies, not proportional representation, the Conservatives would be the largest party but short of a majority in parliament.

COMMENT:  I'm particularly curious as to how President Obama will congratulate the new prime minister, considering his pretty obvious distaste for the Brits.  I'd imagine his message will be:  "I congratulate you on becoming prime minister of your colonialist, imperialist, dying nation, which did so much to oppress my father.  Feel free to visit the White House anytime, and talk to one of the ushers."

I'm serious.

April 30, 2010      Permalink

OH, THIS IS JUST TOO RICH – AT 10:10 A.M. ET:  Stories about Illinois politics are always good for a laugh, especially on a Friday.  This one, from the Wall Street Journal, is juicy:

We're hearing that Team Obama is increasingly eager to throw the Democratic Senate candidate from Illinois, Alexi Giannoulias, under the bus and replace him with someone who can win. The news gets worse and worse for the former wonderboy of Illinois politics. Mr. Giannoulias's family bank, Broadway Bank, collapsed and was seized by federal regulators. Now there are allegations of bank fraud.

Aw, come on.  Bank fraud?  In Illinois that's a misdemeanor.  Ten-dollar fine.

One intriguing idea being considered: Force Mr. Giannoulias out of the race and replace him with . . . Rahm Emanuel. Mr. Emanuel is still popular in Illinois and there was a big push to get him handpicked as the Obama successor back in late 2008. Democrats have used the shaft-and-shift strategy before, as in New Jersey in 2002 when they dumped a walking wounded Bob Torricelli as their Senate candidate a few weeks before Election Day.

Ah yes, we remember Bob very well.  Don't know where he is today.

What seems increasingly certain is that if Mr. Giannoulias stays on the ticket, he will hand the Senate seat to Republicans. Democrats need a replacement and muscling Rahm Emanuel onto the ticket as the Democratic candidate has obvious appeal. This is the Chicago way of politics, and no one does it better than Rahm.

COMMENT:  Rahm wants to be mayor of Chicago, and the United State Senate would be a good starter position.  In Illinois, any Chicago mayor outranks any U.S. senator.  In fact, the Chicago parking commissioner outranks a senator. 

We hope the Dems stick with their current loser because his Republican opponent, Mark Kirk, would be an outstanding senator.  This is the seat once held, and not used very much, by Barack Obama.  If the current Dem candidate is deep-sixed, the replacement would probably be a better vote getter.

April 30, 2010     Permalink

YOU THINK WE'VE GOT PROBLEMS? – AT 9:37 A.M. ET:  Spain is tottering, and Greece has already tottered:

MADRID (AFP) – Spain's jobless rate topped 20 percent in the first quarter, national statistics institute INE said Friday, fueling fears over the country's public finances which have rattled global financial markets.

The number of unemployed jumped by 280,200 to 4.61 million, more than in Germany which has nearly twice Spain's population, for a jobless rate of 20.05 percent. The unemployment rate rose from 18.83 percent in the fourth quarter.

The last time the unemployment rate topped 20 percent in Spain was in the fourth quarter of 1997 when it hit 20.11 percent.

Spain's jobless rate has soared since the global credit crisis hastened the collapse of its labour-intensive construction industry at the end of 2008.

COMMENT:  Spain is run by one José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, a strikingly immature socialist (they call him "Bambi") who derives great satisfaction from lecturing the United States.  He has led Spain to ruin.

We've been following the European economic crisis.  Some countries are literally going bust.  This inevitably will affect the United States as our exports to Europe shrink because Europeans won't be able to pay the bills.

Welcome to the recovery.

April 30, 2010     Permalink

THIS STORY WILL GROW – AT 9:07 A.M. ET:  Congress is working on the Iran Sanctions Bill, and, in an act of extreme ineptness, the administration has maneuvered to weaken it.  Another swift foreign-policy move by an administration already seen as weak-kneed and a bit pathetic. 

There has been some major blowback from Congress against these White House efforts, and some of it is led by Democrats, who apparently are listening to the folks back home.  From the Jerusalem Post:

The Obama administration has expressed concern that the legislation could hurt multilateral efforts to get countries such as China and Russia on board with its long sought UN Security Council resolution slapping further sanctions on Iran.

Do we laugh, or just cry?   The administration is seeking exemptions for Russia and China.  But if they have exemptions, what good would the bill do?

A conference committee meeting to reconcile House and Senate versions will decide whether to capitulate to administration pressure.

“The security of our nation and our allies cannot afford for this conference to produce a bill that is so full of holes, carve-outs, exemptions or waivers that no one takes it seriously. We’ve been down that road before,” warned Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Florida), ranking member on the House Foreign Affairs Committee during the conference meeting. “It is time for Congress to fill the vacuum created by executive branch inaction and enact crippling, mandatory sanctions that address the rapidly growing threat posed by Iran.”

“The idea of country-by-country waivers is absurd,” agreed Rep. Brad Sherman (D-California), chairman of the House Foreign Affairs subcommittee on terrorism, nonproliferation and trade. “They will waive virtually every country unless they decide to simply ignore the law.”

And...

Other members at the conference committee Wednesday suggested that tough legislation could strengthen the administration’s hand rather than weaken it.

“I want the toughest possible sanctions on Iran. I want unilateral sanctions. I want multilateral sanctions. I want UN Security Council-mandated sanctions. And I want these sanctions now,” declared Rep. Gary Ackerman (D-New York), chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Middle East subcommittee. “Today, we are going to move forward on a sanctions bill that I believe will strengthen the Obama administration’s diplomatic hand. The world, and I mean both our allies and others, needs to know that the United States is done waiting.”

COMMENT:  It's impossible to predict the outcome.  Will we have a tough bill or a joke?  The administration wants the joke so it can give Russia and China a gift and get them "on board."  On board for what? 

Obama's Iran policy has already collapsed.  Congress can save the president with a tough bill allowing no exemptions for "cooperative" states. 

But remember, the president can use his veto power, and he just might, unless Congress weakens the bill to conform to the appeasement policies that have gotten us so far since January 20, 2009.

April 30, 2010     Permalink

SOME QUESTIONS ARE IN ORDER – AT 8:42 A.M. ET:  As anyone reading Urgent Agenda knows, I'm not great fan of some elements on Wall Street.  There are some great people down there, and I know some.  There are also Wall Street types I wouldn't have in my home. 

But there's something awfully suspicious about a new criminal investigation into Goldman Sachs. From The New York Times:

Federal prosecutors have opened an investigation into trading at Goldman Sachs, raising the possibility of criminal charges against the Wall Street giant, according to people familiar with the matter.

While the investigation is still in a preliminary stage, the move could escalate the legal troubles swirling around Goldman.

The Securities and Exchange Commission, which two weeks ago filed a civil fraud suit against Goldman, referred its investigation to prosecutors for the Southern District of New York, which has now opened its own inquiry.

COMMENT:  It's quite possible, of course, that the inquiry is entirely justified.  But the timing makes us uneasy – right before a major election.  Let's not forget that Barack Obama was propelled into power in some measure by the Wall Street collapse that occurred in mid-September, 2008.  Anger at Wall Street helps Democrats...even though the Dems get most of the Street's political contributions these days.

So what could be more beneficial for the party in power than a crackdown on those deservedly unpopular zillionaires in lower Manhattan?  I make no charges.  But, as we always hear, timing is everything, and the timing of this probe is a bit too convenient for comfort.

We'll watch this carefully.  Don't be surprised if the Democrats do a modern version of the old leftist "warmongers of Wall Street" cry as the election approaches.  What else do they have?

April 30, 2010    Permalink

ONLY A MATTER OF TIME – AT 8:25 A.M. ET:  When President Obama recently approved some limited exploration for offshore oil, skeptics wondered if we'd actually see any drilling, or whether environmental fundamentalists would make it impossible to proceed.  There were suggestions that some excuse would be found for preventing the actual extraction of petroleum.

Well, the excuse has been found.  The destruction of that oil rig off the Louisiana coast, and the resulting oil slick, has given the anti-drilling forces all the ammo they need, and they are reloading:

WASHINGTON (AP) -- A top adviser to President Barack Obama says no new oil drilling will be authorized until authorities learn what caused the explosion of the rig Deepwater Horizon.

David Axelrod also defended the administration's response to the April 20 accident, saying ''we had the Coast Guard in almost immediately.''

He deflected comparisons with the government's slow response to Hurricane Katrina in 2005, telling ABC's ''Good Morning America'' that such speculation ''is always the case in Washington whenever something like this happens.''

Bush had the Coast Guard in almost immediately as well, and many lives were saved in Katrina as a result.  Bush got only blame, no credit.

Obama recently lifted a drilling moratorium for many offshore areas, including the Atlantic and Gulf areas. But Axelrod said Friday ''no additional drilling has been authorized and none will until we find out what has happened here.''

None will.  Look, this is a disaster.  It shouldn't have happened.  There must be a thorough accounting, with severe penalties, if called for.  But we don't stop flying because a plane goes down.  We don't stop traveling the seas because a ship sinks. 

Drilling should proceed, obviously observing all cautions.  We need that petroleum.  But I'm afraid this incident has set back the cause, and possibly damaged it fatally.  The oil is seeping onto the beaches.  The photographs will be devastating.  Public opinion will be affected. 

There are conspiracy theories floating around the internet that this was sabotage, designed to cripple offshore drilling.  I have seen no evidence to back up the claim.  But clearly it is an idea that will have to be addressed by any investigating body.

The whole mess is just sad because it can affect the future of the country and its economy.  But this round will go to the environmentalists

April 30, 2010    Permalink