BP, its a nightmare!

[touchring]

Re: BP, its a nightmare!

When the next BP disaster happens and the new Chinese CEO and Chairman get called to testify in Washington, will they even bother expressing any concern for the "small people", and if so will they be any more believable than Tony Hayward and Carl-Henric Svanberg?

There's not an oil company out there that knows how to do effective public relations, but I must admit after watching the BP executive's recent performance they make Lloyd Blankfein look like a PR genius.

You maybe disappointed to know that there won't be a Chinese CEO - http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthr...ighlight=white

Anyway, I can tell you how the Chinese CEO of an SOE will respond even if there is one - "We are studying the situation", "We are trying all we can". As for questions from the press, it will be all "No comments". And it will not be said in person - the spokesperson will say on behalf.

[reggie]

Re: BP, its a nightmare!

What was your purpose for introducing that video to this thread? I am not trying to stifle you or your viewpoint. I really want to know honestly what is the purpose of introducing something tinged with conspiracy in this thread? What knowledge has it added to the the discussion about what is happening in the GOM?

Hopefully, it has made some question the validity of the images that they are trusting and basing their frame-of-reference on. Remember, all the images and the distribution channels that these images are being delivered through are controlled. Baudrillard shows us quite clearly how a System of Objects can be consumed by a target audience in order to create new realities.

Ok, ok. Doth protest too much. I had no idea you would take those words so personally. Those are just words in the english language that I thought most described your agenda and your purpose for posting that video and the 2 real estate brokers? tourist industry pr people? (sic) videos near the beginning of the thread. I could be wrong though. I have humility.. What was your motive for posting those videos and the video tinged with conspiracy?

"Conspiracy" is another loaded symbol meant to put me on the defensive before I even respond. The state of semantics America are such that the "conspiracy" object is one is viewed as something to be discounted and discredited. If you want me to take you seriously, just ask the questions without pointing loaded symbols at my head. There are psychological reasons why some "[just] words in the english language" are loaded, and not understanding these reasons means not understanding how the System of Objects works to control and manipulate. This goes to the heart of what is happening right now in the Gulf, and across America.

Was it questioning the status quo view point on what is going on in the GOM or was it to create an alternate narrative of the events in the GOM? I am really curious.. Please enlighten me..

The goal was to make one step back and think for a moment... to question ones own assumptions and the way they segment the assumptions and analysis of others. I'm trying to pull people out of their existing frames of references, and sometimes one has to come from outer space in order to do that. Perhaps an unexpected jolt now and again will get someone to take a new perspective, even for a moment. So, don't get caught up so much in your existing framework of assumptions and conclusions, because some incredibly obvious observations maybe incorrect.

I know that words are powerful symbols. Whatever the case is ... I think your introduction of Baudrillard and the use of loaded symbolic language used as psychological warfare by the Soviet Union into this debate is nothing but a straw man that you are creating to argue against, instead of addressing the reality of the the oil gusher in the GOM. I will definitely study loaded symbols and their use by the Soviets in psychological warfare, the history of "sensitivity training" and I will check out the Baudrillard book. Thanks for prompting me to go down that route of inquiry.

The truth of the matter is that neither you nor I no what the "reality" of the situation is. I fully admit that. Let's see if you can get to this point as well.

As far as my introduction of Baudrillard and PysWar, this is precisely what we are facing. I have discarded all the irrelevant discussion and driven straight to the heart of the matter. This is where ones focus should be, not on the imagery being blasted into your senses through controlled sources. See my comments here in another post on Goleman at Google, and you'll see him explain the Amygdala Hijack and get some further insights in to how this imagery is impacting the bio-physiology of your brain and how it processes inputs, and therefore impacts your decision processes.

FWIW- I am not trained nor educated in the use of symbolic objects for the manipulation of minds . But I am curious about that subject ... however off topic it is in this discussion of the events in the GOM and BP's standing as a going concern in the future. ( I have considered buying BP stock recently)

For someone who says he is trying to separate the wheat from the chaff, you are certainly quick to dismiss others.

I am just an average dude who is trying to find accurate information that is not filled with hyperbole and has more depth than the MSM offers about what it going on in the GOM. I saw your posts and thought they were unusual compared to what I usually read on Itulip. I trust most of the people on this site for good, factual information that is not tainted very much by confirmation bias. Your posts stood out from the usual fare that I read here.

That because I am not in-formed (the dual meaning is deliberate).

By the way, how does one qualify whether in-formation is "good" or "factual"? Obviously, you don't understand how reality is created, or you would have not made this statement. Google 'creation of social reality' and see if you can find a book by Berger and Luckman on the subject. I think this is where you need to go, because you won't be able to separate the wheat from the chaff until you understand the concepts of social reality creation.

Are they working in tandem with the environmentalists to paint a bad picture of what is going on in the GOM to further the agenda of the environmentalists and "sensitivity trainers" ?

Who funds the NGO's, big guy? Have you thought about how dialectics in society are deliberately contrived and maintained? What do you think these NGO's are, anyway? I mean, what are their real purpose? Let me give you a hint, it is NOT what you are told in the public domain.

Obviously, you have not worked in the foundation world, otherwise, you would not be laughing. Read Rene Wormser's book on Foundations and their Influence, perhaps that laugh will turn to a sick stomach as you continue down your path of separating wheat from chaff. But never forget that sometimes the entire stalk is developed, grown, maintained and controlled by the same source.

[reggie]

Re: BP, its a nightmare!

[ThePythonicCow]

Re: BP, its a nightmare!

Why are BOOMS *and* CATCH BASINS not being properly installed?

I think that lady flunked out of finishing school (or got someone to sign off on it for her, while she was at the bar ).

Good video - thanks.

[ThePythonicCow]

Re: BP, its a nightmare!

For someone who says he is trying to separate the wheat from the chaff, you are certainly quick to dismiss others.

Sometimes reggie, it seems to me you are more reluctant than need be to establish any rapport with your reader.

May I suggest that you not confuse dismissal of the messenger (of yourself, that is) with dismissal of the message (a good message, with which I agree in great part.) Sometimes it seems as if you encourage dismissing the messenger.

warren_c was not the first iTuliper to wonder who you are and what motivates some of your posts. I've done the same myself, as I recall.

As a small example, one need not rail against being labeled Conspiratorial. One can adapt the label, with a chuckle.

== TheParanoidCow, aka TheCynicalCow, aka The ConspiratorialCow, ...

(still wondering if reggie is a CIA plant to discredit Bovine Bloviators )

[reggie]

Re: BP, its a nightmare!

Sometimes reggie, it seems to me you are more reluctant than need be to establish any rapport with your reader.

Group reality is based upon shared frames and schemas across the group. But given that I don't share in these frames of reference, I am viewed as an outsider and a disruptor. Well, to that, I say "good"! Every group needs such an element to keep it from falling into the trap of group perception. Unfortunately, this is often viewed as being anti-social or not-going along, and hence is sometimes frowned upon.

May I suggest that you not confuse dismissal of the messenger (of yourself, that is) with dismissal of the message (a good message, with which I agree in great part.) Sometimes it seems as if you encourage dismissing the messenger.

Messages can be dismissed without the use of labels, which are tools used to unfairly disarm the messenger. I know where these tactics were developed, and why they were developed, and I'm not going to tolerate them, irrespective of how that style of retort is received by those in the group. I wish more would invest the time to understand the consequences of allowing sensitivity training techniques to infiltrate our society.

warren_c was not the first iTuliper to wonder who you are and what motivates some of your posts. I've done the same myself, as I recall.

Who cares who I am. My message is all that is important. If interested parties would simply research the breadcrumb trails that I leave, they would gain immense perspective. No one has to take my anonymous word for what I claim. There are plenty of "reputable" sources who articulate my points.

As a small example, one need not rail against being labeled Conspiratorial. One can adapt the label, with a chuckle.

== TheParanoidCow, aka TheCynicalCow, aka The ConspiratorialCow, ...

You deal with it your way and I'll do it my way. I've got no problem with that.

(still wondering if reggie is a CIA plant to discredit Bovine Bloviators )

Well, COINTEL assets are trained in managing perception through the control of objects and frames, grouping audiences into segments that can be targeted in the future with newly developed messaging. My message continues to be, and always will be, to break from the [controlled] System of Object that infiltrate our individual worlds and to develop an individual perspective that is based on 1st hand experience to the maximum extent possible. Further, ones own assumptions should always be challenged and no assumption ever taken for granted. Hence, alternative views are welcomed, not chided, labeled or mocked.

My messages are not the messages of someone seeking control, because controlling individual thinking-beings who don't follow prescribed patterns of belief or share similar reality frames is virtually impossible to achieve, while grouping people into aligned nodes within a systemic framework is totally controllable via feedback control mechanisms. By following centrally controlled object delivery systems one can easily fall into groups of thought, and thereby become victims of manipulation through perception management. I'm not promoting this, so I am not promoting control, and thereby I am an anathema to COINTEL goals.

[ThePythonicCow]

Re: BP, its a nightmare!

Who cares who I am. My message is all that is important.

I disagree. I strongly disagree.

Personal relationships and trust are essential to healthy communities and discussions.

Those who hide who they are find that their message is not received, no matter how vital or insightful the message.

[Chris Coles]

Re: BP, its a nightmare!

Sometimes reggie, it seems to me you are more reluctant than need be to establish any rapport with your reader.

May I suggest that you not confuse dismissal of the messenger (of yourself, that is) with dismissal of the message (a good message, with which I agree in great part.) Sometimes it seems as if you encourage dismissing the messenger.

warren_c was not the first iTuliper to wonder who you are and what motivates some of your posts. I've done the same myself, as I recall.

As a small example, one need not rail against being labeled Conspiratorial. One can adapt the label, with a chuckle.

== TheParanoidCow, aka TheCynicalCow, aka The ConspiratorialCow, ...

(still wondering if reggie is a CIA plant to discredit Bovine Bloviators )

Well said Wriggley.

[Chris Coles]

Re: BP, its a nightmare!

I disagree. I strongly disagree.

Personal relationships and trust are essential to healthy communities and discussions.

Those who hide who they are find that their message is not received, no matter how vital or insightful the message.

Absolutely correct Wriggley.

Also, for the record, this is the first time ever that I have seen the word COINTEL. I have thus to assume reggie that you are, or have recently been, a part of at least one organisation that uses, or teaches such things.

[warren_c]

Re: BP, its a nightmare!

Hopefully, it has made some question the validity of the images that they are trusting and basing their frame-of-reference on. Remember, all the images and the distribution channels that these images are being delivered through are controlled. Baudrillard shows us quite clearly how a System of Objects can be consumed by a target audience in order to create new realities.

Interesting.
I agree with your approach to some degree and like that you have introduced a new frame of reference into the discussion via planting doubt.

My whole approach to reality is--"de omnibus dubitandum est"...

That being said..

Is there or is there not a new reality in the GOM as the result of a large gushing well?

Or are the pictures, information and images that are coming from the GOM just the manipulation of our minds via a system of objects implemented by environmentalists?

Do you think there is a group of environmentalists working in concert with BP to damage the oil industry via images from ROV video streams of a gushing oil well from 5000 ft beneath the sea?

"Conspiracy" is another loaded symbol meant to put me on the defensive before I even respond. The state of semantics America are such that the "conspiracy" object is one is viewed as something to be discounted and discredited. If you want me to take you seriously, just ask the questions without pointing loaded symbols at my head. There are psychological reasons why some "[just] words in the english language" are loaded, and not understanding these reasons means not understanding how the System of Objects works to control and manipulate. This goes to the heart of what is happening right now in the Gulf, and across America.

I asked you a question on why you introduced a video that has a conspiratorial implication? I research all claims whether I think the person has a mindset that sees conspiracies or not. I was aware of this video because I visit sites where conspiracy theories are incubated and launched into the wild. That particular video was debunked on the sites I visit promptly.

Why do I visit sites like that you may ask? Well, I do not dismiss those who question the mainstream information stream out of hand and I get a different perspective on reality. So, you may think I am disrespecting you or dismissing you by asking you why you introduced a video that has a conspiratorial tinge. I am not. That was not my intention.. I was questioning the video and your motives to see where you are coming from. So I can relate to you as honestly as possible on this forum.

The goal was to make one step back and think for a moment... to question ones own assumptions and the way they segment the assumptions and analysis of others. I'm trying to pull people out of their existing frames of references, and sometimes one has to come from outer space in order to do that. Perhaps an unexpected jolt now and again will get someone to take a new perspective, even for a moment. So, don't get caught up so much in your existing framework of assumptions and conclusions, because some incredibly obvious observations maybe incorrect.

Laudable goal. I like it.

Please do not make assumptions about me and how much, or if I get caught up in any existing framework of assumptions and conclusions.

I agree. Often incredibly obvious observations may not be correct. They may also be correct.

The truth of the matter is that neither you nor I no what the "reality" of the situation is. I fully admit that. Let's see if you can get to this point as well.

I agree. The absolute truth of the matter is probably unobtainable but a reasonable approximation of it can be probably be ascertained.

Once again you are making assumptions about me and trying to guess what point I am at. Please refrain from that. Thank you.

As far as my introduction of Baudrillard and PysWar, this is precisely what we are facing. I have discarded all the irrelevant discussion and driven straight to the heart of the matter. This is where ones focus should be, not on the imagery being blasted into your senses through controlled sources. See my comments here in another post on Goleman at Google, and you'll see him explain the Amygdala Hijack and get some further insights in to how this imagery is impacting the bio-physiology of your brain and how it processes inputs, and therefore impacts your decision processes.

I am aware of that. We are in the proverbial "fog of war". I knew that from the beginning of this whole mess in the GOM . It is something I assume from the outset of any major world event where there are a lot of eyeballs on the event.

I will look up the other post of yours. Neuroscience is a topic I enjoy studying and I agree the images we see and the words we read probably do impact our bio- physiology. But to what end are you guessing this is being done?

Also, may I ask...
Are you assuming that I am subjecting myself to a massive amount of images via a TV or the internet?

I am not. I actually limit my consumption of images via both especially those with editorial content and I do not own a TV. So, I have no idea what other people are watching on TV concerning the events in the GOM. I also really do not know what the consensus is on the reality of the situation there. In fact most of the people I know don't really seem to care that much about it at all.

For someone who says he is trying to separate the wheat from the chaff, you are certainly quick to dismiss others.

I was dismissing the videos/ video and questioning your motives. I do not see how that is dismissing you. Sure, I got a bit jokey there! Sorry

But, I can see you are serious about this and I will give the information you provide consideration and the benefit of the doubt.

That because I am not in-formed (the dual meaning is deliberate).

Ok.

By the way, how does one qualify whether in-formation is "good" or "factual"? Obviously, you don't understand how reality is created, or you would have not made this statement. Google 'creation of social reality' and see if you can find a book by Berger and Luckman on the subject. I think this is where you need to go, because you won't be able to separate the wheat from the chaff until you understand the concepts of social reality creation.

So, now you are dismissing me and what you think I know or do not know?

I think perhaps a definition of terms by what you mean by the word reality is in order.

To me on the most basic level right now reality is something that is or isn't in the present moment, where I am at and what I am doing ( I even doubt that at times)... and my perception of my understanding of it evolves and is subject to constant revision. As far as virtual reality or the reality of the virtual and mediated imagery and information goes - I take it all with a grain of salt.

I doubt everything upon first examination.

Re - information:
I think that information or data can be considered factual or " good" if it is corroborated by multiple sources over time and it is subject to falsifiability ( Popper) .

I will google "creation of social reality"

Who funds the NGO's, big guy? Have you thought about how dialectics in society are deliberately contrived and maintained? What do you think these NGO's are, anyway? I mean, what are their real purpose? Let me give you a hint, it is NOT what you are told in the public domain.

Obviously, you have not worked in the foundation world, otherwise, you would not be laughing. Read Rene Wormser's book on Foundations and their Influence, perhaps that laugh will turn to a sick stomach as you continue down your path of separating wheat from chaff. But never forget that sometimes the entire stalk is developed, grown, maintained and controlled by the same source.

1. I don't know who funds all of the NGO's that would require a vast amount of research and time. I will research it though. I am sure each NGO has a different purpose and mission. Some are probably good and some not so good.

You have obviously come to a definite conclusion about NGO's though. Which you are not revealing. Perhaps some elaboration on what you think they represent may be helpful.

2. RE: Foundations. I am aware of them ( FORD, ROCKEFELLER, etc..). I don't have any direct dealings with them. I know they influence public policy for what I think are laudable goals and also for what I think are not so laudable goals.

I will look up the book and read it. I have already seen enough and experienced enough horrible events in real life that not much could turn my stomach via reading a book about Public Foundations..


I have a feeling this discussion may become very long though and I may not have a lot of time for it in the near future. So, please forgive me if I do not respond promptly to your posts...

Thank you for the thought provoking posts reggie

[warren_c]

Re: BP, its a nightmare!

So that video was taken after they cut the kinked pipe but before they attached the cap over it? But what's the purpose of showing an old video? Matt Simmons is short a couple hundred thousand or more BP shares.

Are we discussing the same video that reggie posted with the reflection of the door opening on a monitor? If so, the reason or purposed that video is being circulated is to propagate the idea that this whole thing is some how staged. I think the time frame is probably irrelevant for who ever is behind the propagation of this idea.

[warren_c]

Re: BP, its a nightmare!

The problem as I see it with a nuclear bomb is the effects upon the sea bed under 5,000 feet of water, rather than the possibility of success in sealing the leak.

I agree. It's a zany mad cap idea!!! I think to get people thinking that using nukes is a good idea to solve intractable problems. It pops up every where and it really makes reasonable conversation about what is going on in the GOM difficult.

[reggie]

Re: BP, its a nightmare!

Absolutely correct Wriggley.

Also, for the record, this is the first time ever that I have seen the word COINTEL. I have thus to assume reggie that you are, or have recently been, a part of at least one organisation that uses, or teaches such things.

Just read a few books from [former] CIA operatives, or a few public domain government documents, and the term is frequently used.

These posts that isolate me and attempt to identify me as a threat to the group are quite interesting.

Group management techniques, such as what we are witnessing in recent posts, were first developed by the Tavistock Institute in England and then further refined in to the DELPHI Method by academics at the University of Michigan and heavily used by the US Department of Education in order to manage change at local school boards and PTA groups.

Further, if there is a proposal on the table that posters must submit a minimum level of background information on themselves before posting, then I think the admins should consider that proposal and adopt their ruling universally, across all forum members.

[FRED]

Re: BP, its a nightmare!

Just read a few books from [former] CIA operatives, or a few public domain government documents, and the term is frequently used.

These posts that isolate me and attempt to identify me as a threat to the group are quite interesting.

Group management techniques, such as what we are witnessing in recent posts, were first developed by the Tavistock Institute in England and then further refined in to the DELPHI Method by academics at the University of Michigan and heavily used by the US Department of Education in order to manage change at local school boards and PTA groups.

Further, if there is a proposal on the table that posters must submit a minimum level of background information on themselves before posting, then I think the admins should consider that proposal and adopt their ruling universally, across all forum members.

Our policy is to allow members to reveal such information about themselves as they choose to share. Credibility is established here in our virtual iTulp world no differently than in the real world; through patterns of behavior over time a person reveals their true self.

[ThePythonicCow]

Re: BP, its a nightmare!

Our policy is to allow members to reveal such information about themselves as they choose to share.

As it should be, and thank-you for stating that directly.

I was at best only speaking for TheBlanketyBlankCow, and sometimes not so well even at that.