(04-01-2011, 11:47 PM)username Wrote: Honestly Katrina (and maybe the BP oil spill) were the closest we've had to a Japan earthquake/tsunami.

That said, I was once put in charge of creating a disaster preparedness plan for the company I worked for. What a joke. If you kept extrapolating out the possibilities, it became impossible! Okay, 1), the building collapses (what do you do?), 2), people can't get to the office because roads/bridges are impassable (what do you do?), 3), all communication is down so you rely on off-site back-up computers but unfortunately they're down too so 5)...

At some point we always got to "we're fucked".

The Gulf Coast is not ruined. The ocean cleaned itself in a few months (bacteria consumed the methane). The oil company cleaned the tar balls (which are really only hazardous if you eat them or get those little black spots on you bikini, which I remember from California beaches back in the 80s). The hype after the spill made it seem like it was a huge environmental disaster. It really wasn't. Residents of the coast got huge checks to make up for the lost revenue, so they go to kick back and still get paid.

There are still areas of oxygen-depleted water in the ocean, but that will take care of itself when the bacteria die off that consumed the oil/hydrocarbons.

Did you know there is such a thing as "heavy water"? Instead of regular Hydrogen atoms in the H20, they are isotopes of Hydrogen (extra neutron). That is the water they use in nuclear reactors and is why you just can't pump ocean water to replace it when an earthquake cracks your retention walls.

If the local and state officials in Louisiana had been prepared, which they should have had all kinds of plans ready after 9/11, there wouldn't have been such a problem. When they did notify the people, they didn't leave. Everybody thinks stupidity is funny until some bad shit happens, then they want to blame someone else. Then we take away freedoms and make stricter rules because of stupid people and we all suffer. Stupidity is dangerous.

I agree that the Gulf Coast doesn't appear to be ruined and that the BP spill might have been overblown (although there are still scientists saying that the oil is down there, not dissipated). But at the time there was almost unanimous agreement among scientists that it was a BIG fucking disaster. So clearly we don't have the capability or consensus or scientific certainty to predict the outcome of these types of events. That's a problem. Hindsight is ²⁰⁄₂₀ but at the time, the overwhelming consensus was the situation was doomsday for the region. I'm happy to see those predictions were seemingly wrong but it doesn't make me feel like we really have a handle (excuse the pun) on off-shore oil drilling.

I don't really blame the government. My point was, I had a bitch of a time drawing up a disaster preparedness plan for our company. If you keep moving to the next worst case scenario (and on and on), it's almost impossible to have a plan in place for every freaking thing that can go wrong. I think that's probably true at the corporate, state and federal level too. There's no way you can prepare for every possibility without radically changing the way we live our lives.

(04-02-2011, 10:24 PM)rothschild Wrote: The Bush team was competent when it came to running successful electoral campaigns. How do you go from that to doing absolutely nothing to defend against kamikaze hijackings?

Technically ONE successful electoral campaign. Winning electoral campaigns relies on the public being stupid enough to vote in a retard like Bush twice (well technically once).

It is not related to how an administration deals with intelligence reports (in the case of the Bush administration relating to 9/11, badly).

Are you suggesting the Bush administration deliberately let ⁹⁄₁₁ take place?, because that is pure insanity.

(04-03-2011, 08:52 AM)Ordinary Peephole Wrote:

(04-02-2011, 10:24 PM)rothschild Wrote: The Bush team was competent when it came to running successful electoral campaigns. How do you go from that to doing absolutely nothing to defend against kamikaze hijackings?

Technically ONE successful electoral campaign. Winning electoral campaigns relies on the public being stupid enough to vote in a retard like Bush twice (well technically once).

It is not related to how an administration deals with intelligence reports (in the case of the Bush administration relating to 9/11, badly).

It appears that you haven't got a clue as to what a successful electoral campaign entails. Bit more to it than a stupid electorate, sport.

(04-03-2011, 08:52 AM)Ordinary Peephole Wrote: Are you suggesting the Bush administration deliberately let ⁹⁄₁₁ take place?, because that is pure insanity.

Insanity?

Do you have any familiarity with the history and dynamics relating to power?

No, of course you don't, because that would be the end of the make-believe world you live in.

But if you think otherwise, feel free to take up the challenge I posed to Duchess in this thread. Should be a piece of cake for a sharp-witted pom like you.

(04-03-2011, 04:19 PM)rothschild Wrote: It appears that you haven't got a clue as to what a successful electoral campaign entails. Bit more to it than a stupid electorate, sport.


Insanity?

Do you have any familiarity with the history and dynamics relating to power?

No, of course you don't, because that would be the end of the make-believe world you live in.

But if you think otherwise, feel free to take up the challenge I posed to Duchess in this thread. Should be a piece of cake for a sharp-witted pom like you.

Oooooo.....this space cowboy means business!, I mean look how big his writing is now!!!! oooooooooo!

Do you have any familiarity with the history and dynamics of conspiracy theories?, no of course you don't because that would end the retarded conspiracy theme park YOU live in.

Please re-issue your challenge and I will address it, you could even issue it in normal sized writing like a grown up would do.

Sorry I haven't gotten to your challenge, Rothschild, I've been wrapped up in technical bullshit for days.

(04-03-2011, 05:13 PM)Duchess Wrote:

Sorry I haven't gotten to your challenge, Rothschild, I've been wrapped up in technical bullshit for days.

What was the challenge? something to do with ⁹⁄₁₁ conspiracy balls?

(03-31-2011, 08:44 PM)rothschild Wrote:

(03-31-2011, 03:05 PM)Duchess Wrote:

I never realized how many people actually believe there is/was some deception going on in regards to this until I started looking around online & asking the question of a few people I know. I was astounded.

I tell you what: watch this interview and if you can show three of the claims that Dr. Sutton makes to be false I'll send you $50 via paypal. It shouldn't be hard as he makes quite a number of them and he's obviously a conspiracy nutter. Should be like taking candy from a baby.

Good luck.


http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=...9954264539#

(04-03-2011, 05:36 PM)Ordinary Peephole Wrote:

(04-03-2011, 05:13 PM)Duchess Wrote:

Sorry I haven't gotten to your challenge, Rothschild, I've been wrapped up in technical bullshit for days.

What was the challenge? something to do with ⁹⁄₁₁ conspiracy balls?

This ^^^^^ was the challenge.

(04-03-2011, 04:29 PM)Ordinary Peephole Wrote: Oooooo.....this space cowboy means business!, I mean look how big his writing is now!!!! oooooooooo!

Do you have any familiarity with the history and dynamics of conspiracy theories?, no of course you don't because that would end the retarded conspiracy theme park YOU live in.

Please re-issue your challenge and I will address it, you could even issue it in normal sized writing like a grown up would do.

HOW'S THIS?

(04-03-2011, 05:13 PM)Duchess Wrote:

Sorry I haven't gotten to your challenge, Rothschild, I've been wrapped up in technical bullshit for days.

You mean to say that real life takes precedence over the interwebz?

I was busy on Wall St.