In this episode of Magnum JD: Baldwin v Costner kicks off today

And Slabbed has literally covered this whole sorry affair of a bunch of washed up Hollywood actors cashing in on the worst environmental disaster in this nation’s history with hocus pocus technology that did nothing beyond stuff money into the pockets of self serving politicians from day 1.

The suit itself has finally crossed into the traditional media and frankly the reporting I’ve seen to this point is as devoid of useful information as the original real time reporting on Costner and his machine, which BP never used to fight the spill.

That said and in case there are media members that want to catch up this recently filed court doc is a great place to start along with Slabbed’s prior coverage.

sop

7 thoughts on “In this episode of Magnum JD: Baldwin v Costner kicks off today”

  1. That entire document is nothing but a good novel on both sides. These centrifuges could not cut it in the industrial world so were pitched to the environmental. BP could have purchased top notch machines for half the cost.

  2. If I’m not mistaken, when this “controversy” broke, I did some research and posted a Comment to the effect that the United States Navy already had collaborated with some Scientists to develop an oil skimming centrifuge that had @ 4 times the capacity of the device which Costner, et al were marketing to BP. Also, to my knowlwdge the public has never been advised of how many barrels of oil the Costner, et al device recovered, if any. What made BP so ready and willing to throw money away? Was it the fact that someone else, like Transocean, Cameron, Halliburton or their insurers, would reimburse BP? Or did BP know that “Uncle Sugar” was going to give them money “back” through tax benefits or things that most people just don’t know about? And remember, ONE CRIMINAL CASE AGAINST A LOW LEVEL SACRIFICIAL LAMB since April 2010. Ashton O’Dwyer.

  3. SOP,
    Not so sure on the washed up actor part, but kudos to you once again on the exposure by Slabbed.org on the “truth behind it all” reporting that the mass media all to often fails to do . Certainly BP was just as overly exuberant to buy the face behind the troubled product for it’s PR misinformation campaign as it was to push it’s subcontractors in violating safety and commonsense. No wonder the TP has financial problems , eh?

  4. doug suttles should be charged with fraud for spending millions of BP’s dollars on a machine he knew would never be deployed. if suttles was on the up and up he would have told costner, magnum and america’s bubba to hit the bricks.

  5. costner is the epitome of a washed up actor. back to back flops with waterworld and the postman back in the mid 90’s knock him permanently off the A list. i enjoyed jfk, but costner was pretty dull compared to tommy lee jones and joe pecci.

  6. Here’s hoping that Richard Morrison is called as a witness to explain Exhibit AA. Could Exhibit AA possibly be the smoking gun of political bribery/political influence peddling?

    EXHIBIT AA( displayed previously on Slabbed) is an internal memo sent from BP Vice-Pres. Richard Morrrison to Doug Suttles, another BP officer in which Richard states:

    “POINTS TO MAKE:
    -the separator not the silver bullet, it’s about the package and people that surround it”

    How about it Richard, could you under oath please explicitly and in great detail describe “the package” and then name all the people “that surround it(package)” and then tell the Court why these people were important to resolving the damages incurred by the State of Louisiana, especially if in truth of fact the separators were purchased but never used.

    Then if you can please reveal to the Court if you had knowledge of similar “packages and people surrounding it” assembled in other States where oil spill damages occurred; and if your answer is yes please explain like you did for the “package and people surrounding it” for Louisiana.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpISqM2P4Ec

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *