For those of you that don’t know in the days before the well blew up, Halliburton were involved with setting a cement plug which would have temporarily sealed BP’s Moncondo exploration well. According to another article as early as February Halliburton knew there were problems with their recipe for the cement. They then kept this information from BP notifying them by email about only one of the tests, leaving out the tests with “unstable” results.

And get this:

Chevron recently carried out independent lab tests of a cement slurry that Halliburton said was the same as that used in the Macondo well. The commission staff said Chevron reported that “its lab personnel were unable to generate stable foam cement in the laboratory using the materials provided by Halliburton.

-Article.

Not only that it seems like Halliburton lied about the unstable tests. Apparently to an inquiry on the explosion, Tomas Roth, Halliburton’s Vice President for Cementing said their results showed the cement mixture was stable, which of course seems to question the unstable results but apparently they didn’t make this issue known to BP, although they claim they shared the data in an email to BP, but apparently they never used the words “unstable” in that email.

Now that is has come out that they have destroyed evidence, I would bet money the lost documents also include these unstable test results in the days preceding the explosion. Which would be tough if they gave them to BP through email.

Now Halliburton is blaming BP because they only used 6 of the 21 centralizers, a device that ensures the drill pipe is properly centered.

And then this:

Robert Bea, a professor and oil industry expert at the University of California at Berkeley, said that drillers will often run one test on a cement mixture, then a second test as a backup. He called four tests “unusual.”
“Given that they are running four, that’s telling me they were having trouble getting to a stable design,” Bea said. “And so they continued to work with this witches’ brew until they got on to something they thought was workable.”

-Article

But I came across another article where Halliburton admits it never performed a test of the mixture, but that BP ordered them to change the mixture last minute meaning it could not perform the needed tests. Either way, sounds like negligence to me.

I have to say from the onset of this disaster Halliburton’s roll didn’t really pass the smell test for me. Due mostly to their close involvement with the CIA and Pentagon during the Iraq war and all the no bid contracts they’ve received because Dick Chaney was on the board of directors, sounds like a CIA front company to me. 

These weren’t a bunch of idiots, they may need to learn a bit about hubris but I don’t think they were incapable of the job they were doing. So it begs the question on whether they knew what they were doing may endanger the well. The US Government always seems eager to embrace disasters it can avoid being seen as the cause of (like Hurricanes, floods and earthquakes), although one could argue the approval process for off shore oil rigs may be in their hands, and it is probably a sure bet that many congresmen and women have made millions off the off shore oil rig deals in one way or another.

Everyone down here knows whats going on and the media black out is like calling the oil spill an oil spill when it is a flood. This media blackout is so deep, it’s like the Gestapo, its seriously feels like we are in some sort of Nazi State with the media. The media control is horrifying. It is so horrifying because it is getting WORSE”

The upside, flow has been reduced from a maximum some experts are estimating at around 100,000 bbl/day. The problem is that even if BP are reporting a small flow currently, an accurate estimate of the flow may never be truly determined as I don’t think the flow through the seabed can be accurately determined. For now, a video, showing the slow seepage of oil through the ocean floor. 

So new facts have come to light that both BP CEO and Goldma Sachs dumped BP stock in the days leading up to the ‘disaster.’ If that isn’t enough, the Cairman of Goldman Sachs was, until recently, also chairman of BP. 

According to his September 2009 bio: 

Peter Sutherland is chairman of BP plc (1997 – current). He is also chairman of Goldman Sachs International (1995 – current). He was appointed chairman of the London School of Economics in 2008…. Before these appointments, he was the founding director-general of the World Trade Organisation. He had previously served as director general of GATT since July 1993 [and was] chairman of the Board of Governors of the European Institute of Public Administration (Maastricht) 1991-1996. 

Sounds like quite the globalist. It now seems that BP let the people at GS know about the ‘disaster’ with enough time to sell almost half of their holdings. So either this event happened DAYs before it was reported in the media, which is possible, or the decision was made to blow up the rig. This is likely because the data supporting the man-made global warming hypothesis, which is being used to impose carbon taxes everywhere, something the elite bankers have their heart set on, looks to have been falsified so as to exaggerate the predicted effects. Another clue to premeditation is the length of time this has remained the big news item, mainstream media will always find sexy stories to distract from things that aren’t profitable to big business. They want the world to both know what is going on and to be enraged by it, so enraged they are willing to pay governments to protect our environment, which is what I thought they were supposed to be doing anyway. I mean how was big oil given permission to build a rig such as this with no contingency plan to stop a leak if one occurred? It’s because they had more than enough money to pay lobbyists and to contribute handsomely to politicians re-election funds, which is not considered a bribe in the US because if it was, no one would be making any extra cash in addition to the salary paid for by the American taxpayers. 

I have also come across an interesting article that does a good job of showing that its possible that CO2 levels have increased as a result of the warming, not the other way around. Looks to me like BP took one for the globalists, although in the end it will be you and me that truly pay for this disaster, some with our livelihoods, others through the soon to be created carbon tax.

Approximately 20 hours prior to the catastrophic loss of well control, Halliburton had completed the cementing of the ninth and final production casing string in accordance with the well program.
- http://www.onenewspage.com/news/Politics/20100510/10873842/Halliburton-Deepwater-Horizon-Oil-Rig-Explosion-Testimony-At.htm

Considering all the dirty dealings we’ve seen from Halliburton, it would not surprise me if they planted an explosive, bought a company to clean up oil, and watched as the region is decimated by the seepage of heaving crude into the gulf of Mexico.

The question that remains is why? Was it for the money they could make cleaning up the spill? Was it a distraction? (I doubt it’s a distraction considering how little the mainstream media is discussing it) Could it be, that as the man-made global warming myth begins to unravel, they purposely blew up the rig so as to create a new Environmental disaster to further boost the pressure for a carbon tax, or some new tax that will be introduced to ‘pay for cleanup’.