People block you because you're a right wing hack who cannot think for himself. It's only dumb***es like myself that continue to try and provide you with an alternative viewpoint even though I know you will never consider it simply because I'm not a right wing, corporate news source.
First, your claim that the oil is all gone is a lie even by BP and government claims. They have said that 25% of the oil still remains in the Gulf. So even before we get into the corporate media downplay of this disaster, we see that you are lying and already have lost any scrap of credibility on the subject.
Now, the article you provided is a great example of the corporate media at it's worst. Let's downplay the severity of the biggest oil spill in our history because the company responsible for it and some of the scientists that they are paying are saying that is wasn't that bad. Let's look at just some of how BP has acted during the course of this disaster and some of the lies they have told.
- They lied about the amount of oil leaked into the Gulf.
- They posted photoshopped images on their response website to make it appear as if vast technological resources were at use.
- They restricted reporter access from clean-up areas on public beaches
- They restricted access to the video feed of the oil leak
- They have retained scientists and academia under contracts which restrict them from straying from BP PR statements (Ivor van Heerden being an example) and do not allow them to publish any findings for a period of three years.
Basically, we have had to take BP's word on the severity of the spill and the progress of the cleanup. Is it any wonder that the reports coming in are so positive?
Now I do not fault the reporter in this article for publishing these statements and findings from BP, but you would think that there might be some quotes from the many scientists who claim that there is still tons of oil below the surface. You would think that when he quotes Paul Kemp (a quote that seems to be taken out of context from a larger explanation on how the oil industry has been ruining the gulf for decades), he would mention that the National Audubon Society that Kemp represents is demanding that BP provide a 5 billion dollar payment to rebuild the gulf wetlands. You would think that the reporter may be skeptical of using the BP oil spill response webpage as a source to back up BP's own claims of how much wildlife has been killed. You would think that he might do a little investigative reporting into the controversial chemicals that are being dumped into the Gulf to disperse the oil. You would think that he would dedicate more than a couple of sentences, which he then blows off, to the lessons we have learned from the Exxon Valdez spill and the discoveries about it's destruction that scientists were still making, twenty or so years after the spill. You would think that the reporter might point to
some of the evidence out there that
oil still exists under beaches that BP has claimed are clean of oil.
But hey, why do all that work? Rush says it wasn't a big deal so let's just move on.