Any investigator worth his salt would have picked up the inconsistencies in this fishy tale. Never mind. At least we now know for certain the whole system had been rigged right from the start. The perpetrators of the crime will never be hauled up for prosecution. We live at the mercy of those in power. Of all the preposterous lies spewed to make this planned event appear accidental, this fishy eye-witness account of 4 guys on an all-night fishing trip to the Deepwater Horizon (DWH) takes the cake, from head to toe and from visual to sound. Not only is regulatory enforcement blind, so is the crime investigation. In fact the crime scene was surrendered wholesale to the criminals to do as they please. Law enforcement took a step backwards. It kept independent observers at bay. Something Nazi Germany or any present day Authoritarian regime would have done, but not America; land of the brave and free. It is indeed a far cry from the days America stands for the morally upright, Freedom and Democracy.
With so many holes in the fishy tale, why would BP even consider putting out the story in the first place, let alone sponsored the tall tale all over the internet and main stream media? We are all suckers for a good accidental Joe-Public turned hero/famous storyline. Hollywood had been honing their skills for the last 8 decades. But why hire outsiders to the front row seats of the crime scene? It wouldn't be a surprise at all if at least one of them was connected to the oil industry.
We can think of many but would like to keep BP guessing how much and how far we had penetrated into their pile of BS. The general public need to understand 2 things:
- When there is a total blackout of information, truth or speculations will fill up the void. BP had to fill up the cyberspace (before anyone else) with their version of twisted truth. To their advantage, of course. Propaganda can't get any better than this.
- Like all reality shows, public feed backs were important to monitor their deception. BP couldn't jolly well run a Gallup poll on CNN, can't they? Besides knowing how intoxicated the public was with the toxic lies, they also needed to adjust the evolving story. The more criticisms, the better, for them to adjust the legal loop holes and thus limit their future financial obligations. While loose pieces of the jigsaw puzzle were in play, the distorted “truth” could still be adjusted to escape prosecution. By the time the main street public wakes up to the corexit, FEMA camps will be well and ready to keep dissidents in check.
It is for reason no. 2, our articles on the eye-witnesses accounts were kept secret. The constant changing of the time-zone at Gcaptain.com after our articles were published and discussed on Facebook, not only confirms the ever shifting goal posts but also the “cyber-spying”. We have to have the last laugh on this. Even technological giants and bullies fell for it.
Joking aside, this is only a minor score point. Their battle is to escape culpability. Like a fish caught in a net, no amount of adjustment now can free them from the net of truth. As Gcaptain.com found out, it would look utterly ridiculous for Anchorman's posting “it's 0130 in the morning now” if the time of post was 1:30 pm in the afternoon. With tails between their hind legs, Gcaptain had to admit defeat and adjust back to their normal time zone.
The court of public justice (ridicule) can be suppressed temporarily but not forever.
No crime can be so perfect as to leave no trail. There is thus, a need for mass deception in such a high profile crime. Although somebody did notice the transcripts of item A, his/her lone voice of suspicion was quickly drowned out. Why wasn't this piece of evidence investigated deeper. After 2 years, nothing was ever heard of this “explosion three hours before the rig went up in flames in a second, larger explosion”. Either there was an explosion or the transcripts were part of a contrived plot. If it was the latter, it definitely explains the “scripted screen play” so typical of Hollywood movies.
NEW ORLEANS (AP) - The Coast Guard says a crew member from an oil platform that sank off Louisiana reported an initial explosion three hours before the rig went up in flames in a second, larger explosion. Coast Guard Senior Chief Petty Officer Mike O'Berry says the first blast was reported at 7 p.m. CDT Tuesday. Later, the rig sent an emergency signal. O'Berry says a nearby rig at the same time reported the Deepwater Horizon was in flames. He says the rig didn't ask for help during the initial call. The Coast Guard sent help after the emergency signal came. The Coast Guard is investigating what happened during that three hours. A spokesman for the rig owner says any logged events are part of the investigation. AP: Oil rig reported explosion 3 hours before fire Apr 22 08:29pm EST
The scripted plot was too damn accurate to be just a fictional message written by some bored personnel working on the rig. It could not be a minor explosion incident since the scripted plot detailed out a complete rig abandonment. You do not abandon a $300 million rig for a minor fire. If it was a safety or SAR drill, you do not plan for casualties or unavoidable collateral damages. You do that for a strategic military assault to achieve certain political or economic advantage.
In peace time, we can't think of anything else except that the oil spill disaster was planned for several sinister objectives. Watch out for more articles how this can be achieved through planned disasters. Their acceptable collateral damage? Up to 15 crewmen, excluding the gulf coast victims and marine wildlife (they are part of their sinister objectives). So 4 crewmen were extremely lucky. Wonder who? They should know themselves. Their personal safety can never be assured for long.
You play with the devil, you will be sent to hell as soon as your role is over. No one ever believes the aircraft tragedies of Jim Black (BP Spill Commander) and Ted Stevens (ex Senator who had BP's files) were accidental. Just because Joe Public doesn't talk about it, doesn't mean he believes in it. Similarly, there is a wide mistrust between industry workers and their employers. That sacred trust had been broken decades ago.
Why would outsiders be brought into the crime scene as eye-witnesses when there were hundreds of workers and first responders at site? It is because they couldn't trust any of the workers to talk. The number of first responders turned problem eye-witnesses in 911 taught them a lesson. Would you tell the truth if one of your buddies perished in a planned accident?
We have studied BK's claims of being set up by his employer. To have escape so many potentially fatal “accidents” is nothing short of miracle. Amen! There are certainly merits to his cases. Isn't it too much of a coincidence for an ROV captain who had worked at the Macondo site to be killed by a great white while his buddies escaped? Even if he wasn't going to spill the beans in his Christmas home coming, there would always be uneasy feelings of knowing too much. Any surprise many had gone underground?
More than a dozen accidental deaths cannot be coincidental. Keeping quiet can be hazardous to your health. Dead men tell no tales. This a fact. Dance with the devil and you dance in hell.
By itself, Anchorman's surprisingly accurate Gcaptain posts (despite being 10 miles away from the crime scene) could be dismissed as wild guesses despite the astronomical odds. But with AP's report of an explosion 3 hours before the “accident”, coincidences can become serious evidence. Couple these two with the transcripts labeled A to D, you start to have a very credible proof of an inside job. If the fishy tale of the fishing trip to DWH on the night of explosion stands up to scrutiny, you at least have a score of 3 to 1. But with a score of 4-0, well that is something else. With BK's pieces of incriminating evidence (physics of impossibilities), the score must be an astounding 50-0. You have to admit this is truly a tilted Justice Scale by any standard. We leave it to your sense of justice whether the following fishy tale is indeed fishy (0 points to BP).
Of all the lies, the fishy tale of a fishy trip of a lifetime to DWH on the night of explosion has to be the most preposterous. You simply cannot have 200 invited guests for a funeral and yet claim the death to be purely accidental. It can't get more ridiculous than that. Yet the world is blissfully asleep because it is not their turn at the funeral pyre yet.
Greece can't be their ultimate target. 911 which was allegedly planned and executed by Al Qaeda on 11 Sept 2001 was an Inside Job. The 2003 Bam-Iran, 2004 Tsunami-USS San Francisco, 2006 Taiwan quakes were not natural disasters. They had been planned for years only to be triggered on 26 December at precisely 26 minutes after the hour.
Well the 2004 quake missed or triggered early, resulting in a badly damaged USS San Francisco nuclear submarine. Isn't this proof that the time of detonation is of critical importance as Kollmann had highlighted in his research? Why do you think the 311 Fukushima quake hit exactly on the same minute after the hour as the first plane (or drone or missile or whatever) that hit Tower 1. If you are still asleep and have not not smelled the corexit yet, then your time will come soon enough. As Dr Rikki Ott (herself a victim of the Exxon Valdez oil spill) repeatedly said, “educate yourself”. There is absolutely no way you can survive what is going to come, by burying your head in the sand.
First they came for the Communists but I was not a Communist so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Socialists and the Trade Unionists but I was not one of them, so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Jews but I was not Jewish so I did not speak out. And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me.” ~Martin Niemoeller
With the corroborating evidence of the fishy tale of 4 students who went fishing at DWH on the night of the explosion, there can be no further doubt the 20 April 2010 explosion was a contrived plot at the highest level. And the scary part? There will be more coming when the first line of resistance is gone. Quit escaping from reality by “innocently” asking why.
False evidence is a doubt edge sword.
How could Anchorman be so accurate on events that were not yet made known in the first few hours of the disaster? And yet be so wrong on details which could have been verified or repeated broadcast over the news media? If he was completely accurate on all accounts, it would have aroused suspicions. Thus, he was deliberately fed wrong information where it did not matter. In all probability Anchorman might not have known head or tail of the contrived plot.
As a respected sea captain and a vivid blogger (top contributor at Gcaptain) he was narrowed down as the best avenue to disseminate BP's half-facts. It was better he did not know the whole story except only the key details. As we have seen in Kollmann's article “Natural Accidental Disasters Timed To Happen?”, to avoid real accidents on the ground and to allow sufficient time for their agents to get to a safe distance from ground zero, the vital triggered time had to be known. Now you know why Guilliani avoided WTC-7 in the 911 disaster, 15 minutes before it collapsed completely from “unknown causes”. Anchorman's mistake was similar to BBC and Fox News announcing the collapse of WTC-7 minutes before it collapsed. How could they have known beforehand unless it was preplanned?
So 126 personnel onboard (POB) became 144 or 160. Perhaps the extra 14 also included the Schlumberger crew who unexpectedly flew off on a “demand” chopper flight. What did they know to demand an instant flight out? Obviously, there was no explosion at 18:57 CDT. So how could there be transcripts of an explosion of unknown causes 3 hours before it happened? Item A clearly stated the crew had abandoned rig and “87 POB” had been picked up after the explosion event. This “planned explosion” was no small matter but a disastrous one that required all the crew to abandon rig. Is that why Anchorman posted on Gcaptain.com exactly 49 minutes after the actual blowout (which was invisible to him, 10 miles away) that “all have abandon ship”. As we tear through all these eye-witness accounts, it is obvious all of them were mere actors playing to the scripted plot.
A. 202357Z APR 10 (18:57 CDT 20 Apr 10)
INITIAL CIC BRIEF// D8 RECVD DSC FROM MOBILE DRILLING UNIT DEEPWATER HORIZON OF AN EXPLOSION ON BOARD. THERE WERE 144 POB. CAUSE OF EXPLOSION UNKNOWN. THERE IS A 285' WORKBOAT AND 2 LIFE RAFTS ON SCENE. 87 POB HAVE BEN RECVD AND ARE ON THE 285' WORKBOAT. 2 H-65'S FROM A/S NOLA, H-65, H-60 AND C-144 FROM ATC MOBILE LAUNCHED AS WELL AS CGC POMPANO AND CGC RAZORBLEL. SEVERAL GOOD SAM'S ALSO RESPONDING. THE RIG COMPANY IS TRANSOCEAN; D8 IS TRYING TO GET MORE INFORMATION FROM THEM. RIG WAS 72NM SE VENICE LA IN POS 28-44N 088-21W. // FOLLOW UP CIC WILL BE AT 0445Z.
No matter how good the actors, there will always be bloopers.
To understand the blunders highlighted here, please refer to the mudinmyblood.net/forum/showthread.php?t=6104 where the story first appeared and the CBS interview at cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=6490138n&tag=related;photovideo.
Firstly, what is the chance of an impromptu fishing trip coinciding with an accidental blowout down to the exact date and hour? Noticed that the four witnesses claimed the blowout happened at around 10 pm but there was no mention of him or his buddies looking at their time. Anyone who had experienced a gas blowout within 100 yards of the derrick in a small launch at sea would have panicked, cut and run. Yet they stayed on for 4 minutes to observe the “light went out and came on again seconds before the explosion”. How did they know the rig was about to blow up in flames when the lights went off?
Another major flaw in the fishy eye-witness account has been their claim that they were that close to the rig. Unless US offshore and BP safety regulations were way below third world lax regulation and enforcement, would the captains of MV D Bankston and DWH allow any Tom, Dick or Harry fishing boat to park so near them, especially with the work vessel connected with an umbilical to receive the drilling mud from DWH. The launch could have been a terrorists' boat loaded with explosives. Didn't the control bridges of both vessels care at all or at least logged in their “displeasure” warnings?
Just like the “explosion 3 hours before”, it must have been a “phantom boat”, good enough for a fiction or Hollywood movie but failed muster inspection. And the USCG let it pass? This is no longer a conspiracy theory but a factual conspiracy. Not by the terrorists but by the highest authority in the government in cahoot with the oil company.
Look for the hidden mega windfalls in connection with the trillions of fake US treasury bonds. Fake bonds with millions or billion in denomination values, are useless except for use as collateral for short term borrowed funds. And what use would these short term borrowed funds be if not to bet against certain high odds rigged in their favor. To make big gains you have to bet on the impossible. The term “impossible” means you will lose your pants even for the first time unless you know for certain the one-to-million chance event will happen within a certain period, months ahead. So for those who kept asking “why”, please continue to bury your heads in the sand. Odds are, you will lose them in the next mega planned disaster.
Sail out 50 miles for an impromptu fishing trip without radar, navigation aids and front flood lights?
Without radar and navigation aids, could some casual fishing buddies on an impromptu boat trip have reached DWH 50 miles out in the open sea. Could a 26 footer launch have sufficient fuel for the return trip? Another giveaway was the time they left the dock; “@3pm”. Isn't that a bit precise? A 4½ hour trip to reach DWH at 07:30pm well before the planned event. What did DWH have to offer? The “expected fireworks”? Even by American brand of adventurism and rashness, it just doesn't make sense. If it was really an impromptu fishing trip why didn't they choose a closer platform at shallower water? Why head for DWH when there were tens of other nearer rigs? Platforms with legs attract more fishes than semi-subs with no legs. No active offshore platforms (drilling or production) in the world would allow unauthorized approach without prior notification, let alone allow it to latched on to its pontoon. Isn't America serious on their War on Terror?
In all likelihood, the “uninvited” fishing boat would have been chased away. If they were indeed close range eye-witnesses, they were there by invitation to observe and to record the planned fireworks. Alternatively, they might not even be at the crime site. They were merely given the video clips/photos and paid to lie. Whatever the true story was or arrangements made, this fishy tale is one more proof the blowout was an orchestrated plot with Bollywood-grade reality.
Some other discrepancies in their testimony and video itself
Ryan Chaisson, Wes Bourg, Dustin King, and myself, Albert Andry were fishing this rig right before it exploded. We were fishing the leg of it when we noticed rushing water coming down the derek, Gas began BLOWING out the side of it and we ran from the rig. It exploded seconds later. We got to a safe distance and this is what we recorded. You can see more at WWW.KNIGHTRYDERZ.COM
You can't fake background noise short of muting it and completely voice over it.
Up to minute 0.15, the video was silent (muted). When the background noise was turned on, it is too noisy to be a motor launch with its outboard engine shut off. You should be able to hear the clear sound of water flapping against the sides of the boat rather than the generator or machinery noise found in bigger, 300 footer supply vessels. The video was obviously recorded at the upper decks to get a better view. This explains the absence of water sound and higher wind noise. If the video was taken at water level (as in Anchorman's shot) there would be no “reflection trails” in the water leading to the burning rig (something to do with the angle of reflection ~BK).
The wind sound in the background was fairly strong and yet the voice of the cameramen was so clear as if it was a voice-over recording in a studio. A sound spectra analysis would be able to confirm this. With the strong wind sound and the calm but rolling water (before zooming in) the camera viewport should be more jerky on a small 26 footer. With the zoom in, it would be impossible to get a steady view of the burning rig unless the video was recorded onboard a steady platform like the deck of a supply vessel in calm water.
At minute 1:40, there was the unmistakable captain's instruction on the loud speaker to his crew at the back deck. The video had to be recorded close to the loudspeaker on a vessel bigger than Andry's 26 footer (where no loudspeaker was required).
Extra: Capturing The Disaster May 16, 2010 4:16 Pm
Albert Andry, Dustin King, Ryan Chaisson & Westley Bourg describe the explosions on the oil rig Deepwater Horizon. Chaisson began videotaping the scene almost as soon as the disaster began.
“Began videotaping as soon as the disaster began” means at the time of the blowout at 21:45 CDT. They did not speed off until seconds before the explosion. A comparison of a snapshot taken from Chaisson's video recording with Anchorman's photo, suggests that “safe distance” to be between 6 to 8 miles.
The boat was stationary (from video shot) and amazingly steady for a small rocking boat which had just sped away from the exploding rig. It would have taken 30 minutes to travel 5 n.mi at 10 knots. Further a boat on water does not stop even after the engines are shut down. It glides for tens of minutes before coming to a standstill. Thus for the camera to start rolling at a stationary position (on a small boat) it would have to be at least 40 minutes. Chaisson's video would have started recording at the earliest 22:30 CDT (40 minutes after 21:50). Forty minutes after the blowout cannot be construed as “began videotaping as soon as the disaster began” in any sense of the phrase.
Forty minutes would be too long to capture the first explosion as Chaisson had claimed. If at all he was recording, we would be seeing a jerky, motion (speeding away) recording of the exploding rig. Without doubt the video was recorded from a stable stationary vessel watching the explosion from a safe distance (7-8 miles?). That vessel had to move out at least 20-30 minutes before the explosion started. No two ways about it. Alternatively if the MV D Bankston was that tiny dot next to the burning rig, then the video must have been taken on another vessel in the vicinity.
Now, the question is, how many vessels were out there within 10 miles of DWH just before the blowout? Kind of strange to have all the funeral guests arriving in black mourning suites when it was supposed to be a surprised celebration party turned funeral? Elementary, my dear Watson.
“Around 10pm the entire center of the rig started rushing water downwards over all the pipes....I looked at my friend who previously worked offshore, and he said that’s BOP something another and the rig took a ‘kick!”
If the four buddies were really within 100 yards of the blowing well, it would be inconceivable for any first timer not to mention the “torrential rain of drilling mud falling on them”. For the experienced one to have said “BOP and the rig took a kick” meant he had experienced a blowout before. So why did he not scream to speed off until 4 minutes later, just seconds before the first explosion? The experienced instant expert analysis did not jive with the 4 minutes of inaction.
I thought the rig was sinking and that was their way of bilging… But nope! Methane gas began BLOWING out of the West side of it and the noise of the thrust was louder than anything I’ve ever herd (except for a sonic boom I herd once, and what I’m about to tell you next)
“rig was sinking”...this must have been in the script from the very start because there could not be any visible sign of sinking or even any feeling of it. They were on a small boat divorced from the rig, remember.
“Methane gas”...Wait a minute, how did 4 youngsters know instantly it was Methane, a colorless and odorless gas. And in the dark? They should be hit with drilling mud, sea water and other more visible drilling fluid first. For most layman, the first exclamation would be like “it is raining MUD” not invisible gas. Again this was scripted to imply the “naturalness or expectation” of the explosion that followed. Most blowouts do not end up in flames thanks to various safety and fire hazards prevention measures. Without the dramatic effects, no one would want to see any Hollywood movies. Without the implied presence of explosive gas, there would be more piercing questions on the actual causes of the initial explosions. Oh yeah, the ever important buzz words; spark, hissing gas sound, turned off power, prevent electrical spark, generator kicked in, ignite the gas.......WOW, amazing how a 24-year old student (at that time) could have analyzed all that in his “own eye-witness” account, in his very first blowout experience?
And then this interesting response Aandryiii made to someone’s question within the follow-up thread:
When the gas started blowing out the side of the rig they turned off the power to prevent electrical spark which would ignite the gas, but when they shut power the generator kicked on and thats all she wrote!
“At approximately 100 yds from the rig it Exploded!”
They were 100 yards from the rig at 21:49 CDT when the first explosion occurred. They were under the rig a full 4 minutes before taking off after the blowout occurred. If they had taken off at the instant of the blowout (at 21:45) and at 10 knots, they would have been 0.65 nmi or 1,300 yards from the exploding DWH. Is it not surprising for an ex-offshore worker (friend) who could analyze on the spot ….a well kick and BOP, vaporizing methane hydrate etc, to stick around a full 4 minutes before screaming to take off? Yet at such a short distance they were not hit with any falling debris and drilling mud. There is no telling what damage they could have suffered at such near distance. On the other hand, would they willingly risk their lives if they were told the truth. We bet our bottom dollar, the four buddies were not under the rig at the time of the blowout or the explosion.
So why did BP need 4 outsiders to masquerade as eye-witnesses at the crime scene?
In the first place, there would have been 126 potential eye-witnesses already. Why invent more from the outside? This is again another CYA strategy. There is no telling what the “uncontrolled eye-witnesses” could tell in public, or even under controlled situation. The key to holding eye-witnesses to ransom is to hold them on their hidden crime. By lying to the public, these four youngsters were forever beholden to take their secrets to their grave (natural or prematurely). Besides, it is easier to impose a blanket ban not only on the surviving crew but all who wish to continue working in the oil industry. If they permit some and not others to talk, everyone in the industry would know who the planted moles were on the ground. Why kill their golden goose and spoil the chance for another “accidental disaster” when future opportunity presents itself again? Industry agents are difficult to come by as they are not born everyday. At the present rate, expect several blowouts (side shows) to build up to a mega strike annually. Chances are another mega spill is brewing somewhere.
Other discrepancies and contradictions
In the CBS interview (May 16, 2010 4:16 pm), the four eye-witnesses gave an account of their narrow escape. In Anchorman's photo, you can see the moon and another vessel but no trailing water surface reflections to the camera position. So either the photos were taken at vastly different location or many hours apart when the position of the moon in the sky had changed significantly. The CBS interview stated that Chaisson began videotaping the scene almost as soon as the disaster began. How could they be so near (100 yards) and more than 5 miles at the same time? Again this could only have happened on paper but not on reality.
The video cameraman mis-spoke when he said his video caught the first explosion, pointing to the hovering mushroom clouds above the rig. The CBS interviewer (at 0.27min) corrected that there was no flame in the first explosion (blowout). Andry quickly covered the mistake by describing the hissing sound of the gas in the blowout. Again there was no mention of “raining mud around them” which any eye-witness within 100 yards would have experienced. There were flames in between the float pontoon and as far as 500ft from the drill derrick side. The 4 youngsters could not have possibly escaped without burns if they were indeed at the pontoon leg of the rig. In their eye-witness accounts, never once did they mention burns although they did “confess” to feeling the intense heat when asked.
How could the boat be speeding away until a safe distance (30 minutes away) and yet still caught the mushrooming cloud from the first few explosions? By the time the small boat steady itself, the explosions would have been gone. This means the video that caught the explosions were already a few miles away at a safe distance in anticipation of the initial explosions at 21:49 CDT (not the blowout at 21:45. No video of that has surfaced yet). The video posted by Andry could not have been taken on a small 26 footer. Period!
The rig blew a few more explosions after that and began to burn down. Some of the rig began dripping into the water and the platform tilted in and turned RED HOT.
The “ platform tilted in” phrase seems to be another prepared script. The tilting happened much later. “began to burn down” and “turned RED HOT.” do not go together. If anything the burning intensified at least for the next few hours as the fuel on board started to burn.
The guy who predicted the explosion was terrified of what would happen next and would not allow for us to get any closer than a mile. He told me things about air rising from the pipes below, and how the pipes could be below us since they run at angles under water, and how the explosions would continue. I think he knew what he was talking about and made us all worry… We stayed a mile off the fire and searched/listened for missing ppl for 4 hours.
“predicted the explosion” seems such a certainty when most blowouts do not end up with an explosion or fire.
The photo comparison suggests 7-8 miles with respect to Anchorman's declared distance of 10 miles. A mile off the rig would be too close. These four guys were not survivors of a deadly blast or heroes but paid liars. Most rig survival lifeboats were designed to withstand heat up to 1000 degrees C and to escape beyond the first mile radius of a burning rig. In such unprotected close proximity from the derrick, these foursome would have been roasted alive if not blown apart. The rig survivors (crew on board) jumped into the water only after explosions. Item EG at 211313Z CGC Zepher reported finding 2 burnt life raft with no signs of life or having POB in them at position 38-45.3N 088-21.2 W or 1.5 n.miles from well A location. If the “phantom” fishing boat had been within 100 yards at the time of explosion, they would have been “dead eye-witnesses”. And they were there for 4 hours, searching and listening for missing people without a scratch in their faces? Give me a break!
- a joint effort article by the gulf truth movement. Special thanks to BK Lim, Trisha James, Red Horse, Jbao, Kollmann and other contributors who preferred not to be named.