Drill, baby, drill!! - Page 10 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 06-07-2010, 10:51 AM   #136
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,473
Local Time: 09:48 PM
this is an interesting twist:

Quote:
Gulf of Mexico oil spill: Foreign Office fears BP spill may hit US relations
The Foreign Office is becoming increasingly concerned that criticism towards BP over the Gulf of Mexico oil spill is threatening Anglo-US relations.

By Roland Gribben
Published: 6:17AM BST 07 Jun 2010


The scale and ferocity of the US attacks are said to have disturbed David Cameron, according to Whitehall sources.

Some American politicians have suggested that BP should be barred from future government contracts. The company is the biggest supplier of oil and gas to the US military with contracts worth $2 billion (£1.4billion) a year. Such a move would be likely to benefit US rivals such as ExxonMobil and Chevron.

With American midterm elections only five months away, Whitehall officials are understood to be concerned that the issue is becoming a political football in the States.

Tony Hayward, BP’s chief executive, was called “the most hated and clueless man in America” by the New York Daily News. Protesters, angered at BP’s failure to stem the flow of oil, have been photographed stamping on the Union Flag. Support for BP from rival oil groups is also weakening as the industry faces the prospect of a halt to the expansion of offshore drilling.

There are also fears that there are wider implications for British business interests in the US. One Whitehall insider remarked last night: “It’s not doing us any good.” Downing Street has declined to comment on whether the issue has been raised between Mr Cameron and President Barack Obama, but The Daily Telegraph understands that the disaster has come up in discussions between William Hague, the Foreign Secretary, and his US counterpart, Hillary Clinton.

Vince Cable, the Business Secretary, warned that the crisis was having “major indirect effects” on the British economy, hurting the value of pension funds because of the toll it has taken on FTSE shares.

Mr Obama has voiced his personal indignation at BP’s failure to stop the flow of oil more quickly.

Interviewed on the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show on Sunday morning, Mr Hayward said the company had made an “absolute commitment” to clean up the oil and restore the Gulf coast.

He insisted that he had no plans to step down and said that despite seeing billions wiped off its stock market value, BP remained resilient.

Referring to the attacks against him, Mr Hayward said: “I think it is understandable when something of this scale occurs... that people are frustrated and emotional.”
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2010, 01:41 PM   #137
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,974
Local Time: 09:48 PM
Poll: BP Oil Spill Response Rated Worse Than Hurricane Katrina; Most Americans Favor Pursuit of Criminal Charges According to ABC News and Washington Post Poll - ABC News

By more than a 2-to-1 margin, Americans support the pursuit of criminal charges in the nation's worst oil spill , with increasing numbers calling it a major environmental disaster. Eight in 10 criticize the way BP's handled it – and more people give the federal government's response a negative rating than did the response to Hurricane Katrina.

A month and a half after the spill began, 69 percent in a new ABC News/Washington Post poll rate the federal response negatively. That compares with a 62 negative rating for the response to Katrina two weeks after the August 2005 hurricane.
__________________

__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2010, 02:46 PM   #138
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,473
Local Time: 09:48 PM
wow. well, here's a new one from the American right: be nice to BP or else we're going to lose in Afghanistan.

Quote:
"Potential Casualty of Gulf Oil Rig Crisis: Our Most Critical Global Relationship"
Posted by: Hugh Hewitt at 9:21 AM

The Monday morning column from Clark Judge:

Potential Casualty of Gulf Oil Rig Crisis: Our Most Critical Global Relationship
By Clark S. Judge, managing director, White House Writers Group, Inc. (WHWG | White House Writers Group <http://www.whwg.com> ) and chairman, Pacific Research Institute (PRI&bull;Pacific Research Institute <http://www.pacificresearch.org> )

The biggest long-term casualty of the administration’s mishandling of the Gulf oil rig crisis may turn out to be our most critical global security relationship.

As Hugh has been on top of from the first hour, the administration has fumbled every aspect of the environmental disaster. The president took days to even seem to notice what had happened. Then he delayed and delayed on the one clearly constructive step he could take to stem the damage to shores and wetlands: a quick yes to Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal’s request for permission to build barrier dunes.

To compensate for their own ineptness, Mr. Obama and his colleagues have taken to bashing BP. There has been talk of prosecuting the company. Administration spokespeople have huffed and puffed with such pronouncements as, “We will keep our boot to their neck.” The president has vowed that he will make them pay every penny of the costs long after the company pledged to pay every penny of the costs.

In this fuming and fusing the mainstream media has been egging him on. As one network reporter asked White House press secretary Robert Gibbs last week (there are times you have to pity anyone who holds Gibbs’ job) if he had “really seen rage from the president.” Could he “describe it”?

In the years leading up to the disaster, the British Petroleum clearly made major mistakes, most damagingly, perhaps, allowing a fragmentation of the chain of command for operations such as Deepwater Horizon’s. No one was clearly in charge. Still, since the rig exploded and sank, it is hard to think what the oil giant could have done that it hasn’t done as quickly as it has done it. It has been days and weeks ahead of Team Obama at every turn.

But here is the problem. BP is not just any oil company. As reported in Sunday’s New York Post (Tiny URL - create a shorter link), “BP is Britain’s largest company and the biggest holding in most British pension funds.” It pays out one-seventh of the dividends paid in the FTSE 100, the UK’s equivalent of the Down Jones average. So large parts of the British population feel it personally when the administration listens to its left wing and major media friends and talks as if the company were a criminal conspirator.

Of the mood in London, The Post reports, that even The Independent, “a left-wing environmental newspaper,” has run nearly hysterical columns defending BP and worrying if it will survive. And at the conservative London Telegraph, another columnist has summed up that, “This crisis has injected an animus into transatlantic relations unseen since the days of George III.”

It has been clear for a long time that one thing Mr. Obama and those around him do not get is the centrality of the UK relationship to our nation’s effectiveness on the world stage. As British historian Andrew Roberts has written of the U.S. and U.K. in his magisterial A History of the English-Speaking Peoples Since 1900, it was not until that 1940s that:

“the realization finally dawned on both that they would be infinitely stronger together than the sum of their constituent parts…. [T]heir reverses – Dunkirk, Pearl Harbor, Suez, and Vietnam among them – have come when they were divided form one another. By contrast, their many victories –the 1918 summer offensive, North Africa 1942, Italy, the liberation of Europe 1944-5, the Berlin airlift, the Korean War, the Falklands, the collapse of Soviet communism, the Gulf War, the liberation of Kosovo and the overthrow of Saddam Hussein – all came when they were united.”

As it happens, at the moment we have major, joint global security operation going: Afghanistan. And at just this moment – as a new government is taking office in London – the British are wondering if that operation is worth its price.

This past week European Council on Foreign Relations senior fellow and journalist Daniel Korski wrote in the British journal The Spectator:

Having returned from Washington DC, where I spoke to a range of senior policy-makers about Afghanistan and Pakistan, I am struck by how much confusion there is about what President Obama meant when he said that he wanted US combat troops to return home in 2011.

“What is Plan B”? Korski asked.

Vice President Joe Biden has said famously and wrongly that Iraq may prove one of the Obama Administration’s great achievements. But he would have been right to say it about Afghanistan –- achievements or failures. For the UK to abandon us in that effort would be, to use Andrew Roberts understated term, a “reverse”.

Less finger pointing, more diplomacy, greater competence – all of this from the White House would go a long way, both to dealing with the Gulf of Mexico oil crisis and to keeping relations with our most critical ally from deteriorating further.

HughHewitt.com Blog : Hugh Hewitt : "Potential Casualty of Gulf Oil Rig Crisis: Our Most Critical Global Relationship"
__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2010, 07:28 PM   #139
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 03:48 AM
It's tough at the top. Would anyone seriously change places with Hayward right now, I certainly wouldn't.

And, honestly, I'm not English but to me, there is a trace of anti-English sentiment in some of the US media reportage. Not all of it, and certainly people have a right to be angry, but just a smidgeon of it.
__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2010, 09:36 PM   #140
Refugee
 
Bluer White's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Maine
Posts: 1,882
Local Time: 09:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
And, honestly, I'm not English but to me, there is a trace of anti-English sentiment in some of the US media reportage. Not all of it, and certainly people have a right to be angry, but just a smidgeon of it.
YouTube - Weiner says anyone from BP with a British accent is lying!
__________________
Bluer White is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2010, 10:24 PM   #141
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 19,256
Local Time: 08:48 PM
I don't care what their accent is. If an American oil company did this, I'd be mad at them, too.

Yeah, that really sucks that some people are sneaking anti-English bias into their reporting. That's not right. I personally can say that this whole debacle in no way diminishes my view of the British. I still like you guys over there . It's not your fault that BP screwed up.

Angela
__________________
Moonlit_Angel is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2010, 05:11 PM   #142
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,974
Local Time: 09:48 PM
I saw Kerry Kennedy on CNN last night, she's doing some work in the gulf region. She was talking about how toxic the dispersants are and she said that the average lifespan of cleanup workers at the Exxon Valdez site was 52. I don't know how accurate that is, but if it is that's shocking and this time will be even worse.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2010, 09:58 PM   #143
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,473
Local Time: 09:48 PM
the possibilities are so mind-numblingly awful, that i don't even know what to think.

Quote:
How bad could BP oil spill get for the Gulf and the nation?

So how bad could it get?

The numbers point to an unprecedented ecological disaster unfolding in the Gulf of Mexico and possibly along the Eastern Seaboard.

A cap placed over the leaking BP well in the Gulf of Mexico last Thursday began to capture about half the estimated 25,000 barrels a day flowing into the Gulf by June 6. But that still leaves 10,000 barrels, or 420,000 gallons, flowing into the open water each day.

That amount may be reduced as engineers work to siphon off more oil via the cap. But relief wells that could ease the flow from the leaking line won't be finished for at least two months, meaning that roughly another 25 million gallons could be added to the 24 million to 38 million gallons already fouling water and beaches across thousands of miles of the coast in Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama.

And relief wells won't be a sure thing: They are drilled through 2 miles of rock and sediment to find and tap into the Deepwater Horizon well bore, an oil pipeline measuring about 10 inches across. In the massive Ixtoc 1 spill in the Gulf of Mexico in 1979, it took several tries before the relief drill actually intercepted the original hole.

Today, drilling is more a science, but digging a relief well is still like finding needle in a haystack, even though "you have quite a good idea of where the needle is," says Arne Jernelöv, a U.N. expert on environmental catastrophe.

Now, 50 days after the BP rig in the gulf exploded, the range of scenarios for the toll of the environmental disaster are coming into focus:

The best case

Much of the oil that has floated to the surface now is caught in the Gulf of Mexico's Loop Current, which is pinched off into two large eddies, says Jeffrey Short, a former chemist with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) who is Pacific science director for the conservation group Oceana.

Because those loops are pinched off from the current, they just keep going around in a circle, not moving down the Florida Panhandle and around to the East Coast.

Oil that flows into the Loop Current eddies "is just going to float around in a big circle and not hit land," Short says. "That's a good thing. It will sit in the sun and be hit with wave action," which means the oil collects more water, increasing its viscosity and allowing it to congeal into larger masses, first as "real soft oil mousse and eventually as tar balls."

"The longer it spins around in the hot sun of the Gulf of Mexico, the closer it's going to get to tar balls," Short says.

The formation of tar balls may not sound like a best-case anything, but it would be.

"While they might be a hazard to things that eat them, they're pretty low impact" ecologically, Short says. They're relatively inert and not nearly as toxic as liquid crude, whose highly toxic volatile components will have evaporated.

"They're not biodegradable. They don't dissolve in water," Jernelöv says. "They're actually like asphalt." After the Ixtoc 1 spill, researchers found that by 1984, "the asphalt-like rocks had crabs crawling over them and oysters settling on them."

There is evidence that oil spill sites can recover, given time.

A study by Canadian researchers found that 24 years after the 1974 Metula oil spill in the Strait of Magellan in Chile, there was high degradation of oil hydrocarbons, leaving only asphalt-like pieces of weathered oil on the beaches and in the marshes. The spill does not appear to have had a significant effect on the coastal ecosystems, but it's difficult to say for sure because they were not studied significantly before the spill.

The fact that the Gulf oil spill is in a warm-water region is helpful because sun and higher temperatures help degrade the oil faster, Jernelöv says.

But one of the great unknowns of this spill is the amount of oil that's staying underwater and what it's doing there.

BP CEO Tony Hayward has tried to play down the underwater effect of the spill by saying that "oil floats." But it doesn't always.

In fact, NOAA administrator Jane Lubchenco said Tuesday that water tests have confirmed what scientist have reported — the existence of underwater oil plumes from the BP oil spill, though the concentrations are "very low."

Oil rising through extremely cold water, at high pressure, mixed with methane and at times with chemical dispersant, creates a "cloud" of millions of tiny oil droplets in the water, Jernelöv says.

For the subsurface plumes, the best-case scenario is that the oil droplets are eaten rapidly by oil-eating microbes without depressing the amount of oxygen in the water. How quickly this biological degradation takes place depends on the amount of oil, nutrients and microbes present.

"It gets chewed up pretty fast," Short says.

The worst case

The worst-case scenario is almost here for Florida beachgoers: The oil is fouling the Panhandle, the longest stretch of white-sand beach in the world, says Stephen Leatherman of Florida International University in University Park, Fla.

Known as "Dr. Beach" because of his expertise on America's beaches, Leatherman adds that if the oil gets caught up in the Gulf Stream and heads around the southern tip of Florida, the beaches of the East Coast — which have never had to endure such a nightmare scenario — could be next.

Computer models released last week by scientists at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) indicated that the oil could foul thousands of miles of the Atlantic Coast as early as this summer.

"Our best knowledge says the scope of this environmental disaster is likely to reach far beyond Florida," says NCAR scientist Synte Peacock, who worked on the study.

Peacock says that for those along portions of the Gulf Coast, including Texas, the worst-case scenario would be for the oil to not enter the Loop Current but to remain and foul the water and coasts of the Gulf of Mexico. For East Coasters, having the oil flow into the Loop Current and then the Gulf Stream would be disastrous.

NOAA officials have predicted an intense hurricane season for this year, saying that as many as 23 tropical storms and hurricanes could form in the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico.

The worst-case scenario for oil and the weather would be a large, Katrina-like hurricane tracking north in the Gulf of Mexico, with its eye passing just west of the oil spill, says Stu Ostro, senior meteorologist at the Weather Channel.

This would bring the "right-front quadrant" of the hurricane directly over the oil. (The right front is the most destructive part of a hurricane, because the wind blows in the same direction as the storm's forward motion.)

"That's the worst-case scenario," Ostro says, "with the wind pushing it all on shore."

Once it got there, the real nightmare would begin: Oil swamping the coastal grass marshes that are nurseries for a large percentage of coastal marine life and mammals. There it would remain a sticky mousse and a contact hazard to anything that gets near it. It would damage water fowl, turtle and marine mammals and possibly the embryos and larvae of invertebrates and fish.

"A deformed fish larvae is a dead fish larvae," says Chris Mann, who directs the Campaign for Healthy Oceans of the Pew Environment Group.

For wildlife, the worst-case scenario already has begun, says Doug Inkley, senior scientist with the National Wildlife Federation.

"This is breeding season in the Gulf," Inkley says. "The oil spill couldn't be at a worse time."

The Gulf's vulnerable young birds, fish and turtles are coming into a polluted environment. "There will be direct effects on these species," he adds.

For sea turtles, for example, the spill is a threat to their existence in the Gulf. There were 225 strandings of sea turtles in the Gulf in May, up from the typical May average of 35. Of those 225, the vast majority were dead, he reports.

"Humpty Dumpty has already fallen," Inkley says. "I believe there will be impacts in the Gulf for decades to come."

Felicia Coleman, who directs the Florida State University Coastal and Marine Laboratory in St. Teresa, notes that the "big bend" of Florida from Panama City to Tampa is one of the largest stands of sea grass in the United States. Those grasses contain probably the largest hatcheries and nursery ground for fisheries in the Gulf of Mexico, Coleman says.

"One of the last pristine, most biologically diverse coastal habitats in the country is about to get wiped out. And there's not much we can do about it," she says.

Once they're grown, fish and marine mammals, unlike plankton, have a highly developed sense of smell and the ability to swim away from oil in the water.

But they'll be fighting against their desire to go to long-established feeding and breeding grounds.

"To the animals that live there, the ocean is full of specific habitations," says Pew's Mann. Even dolphins and whales, which can swim long distances, could be affected. "They may not wash up dead on the beach, but they may fare very poorly when displaced from their habitats," he says.

The true extent of the deep-ocean oil plumes created by the spill is unknown. But they could be miles wide and dozens of feet deep. They would tend to stay in long, thin pancake spaces because they would be sandwiched between layers of water at different densities.

Far from being a homogenous column of water, the ocean exists in hundreds of different layers, at different temperatures, pressures and salinities. Each oil "cloud" could end up hanging between two layers of similar buoyancy, Short says.

In those depths, each of these clouds could become kill zones. The oil droplets, for example, could act like flypaper, trapping and killing plankton and other marine life, Jernelöv says.

"They've just got to be getting nuked by this," says Pew's Mann.

This "flypaper" layer can also attract fish, which come looking for the small crustaceans that are stuck in it. "The fish will eat them, and then they're breathing water, they get oil droplets stuck on their gill membranes, and if there's enough it can kill them," Jernelöv says.

Next, the creatures that feed on those plankton would be attracted to the mass of food all in one place, as well as some that could be attracted to the oil itself, which to some microbes is just another source of carbon, or food. But all those microbes in one place would deplete the oxygen in the area, creating an anoxic (no oxygen) space that would kill everything passing through.

This scenario is "very improbable, but that's the worst," Short says. "Nonetheless, the possibility of it demands that we at least find out how many of these plumes there are, how big and dense they are, and then keep an eye on them."

Long-term is really long

The full effects of the spill will hit long after the cleanup efforts are finished, the beaches no longer smell of petroleum and the hazy sheen of oil is gone from the water, experts say.

Fishermen are feeling it now with the fishing ground closures, but that won't be the worst of it, says Florida State's Coleman.

If you wipe out all the fish larvae in one year, "you're not going to know anything about that for three or four years before they're supposed to show up in fishermen's nets."

In the end, there's no way to know how bad this spill will be until about 10 years after the oil is shut off, and even that might be too soon, says Judy McDowell, biology department chair at the Woods Hole (Mass.) Oceanographic Institution. One of the best-documented spills of all time was a tiny 185,000-gallon spill off Massachusetts in 1969. Forty years later, "you can still find traces of hydrocarbons in the sediments," she says.

Oil, and the damage it can do, persists for a long time, she says: "It's still too early to make any kind of prediction as to how it will be."

How bad could BP oil spill get for the Gulf and the nation? - USATODAY.com


what was that i heard about warning us against overreaction, like Three Mile Island?
__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2010, 01:31 AM   #144
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 19,256
Local Time: 08:48 PM
Anyone else thinking Tony Hayward just shouldn't talk anymore?

Oy vey... What a depressing article. I'll certainly be hoping for the "best case" scenario to play out-it's not perfect by any means, but what else can we hope for? I really don't want to see the effects of the worst case scenarios. I'll also definitely be hoping for the hurricane season predictions to be wrong and for the season to be very quiet.

Poor animals. Poor humans. Poor beaches. Poor water.

So are we fully convinced about getting off drilling altogether now?

Angela
__________________
Moonlit_Angel is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2010, 05:38 PM   #145
has a
 
kramwest1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Not a toliet wall
Posts: 6,939
Local Time: 08:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonlit_Angel View Post
So are we fully convinced about getting off drilling altogether now?

Angela
I know. People are pissed. If we don't decrease our use, oil will just come from somewhere else without us drilling offshore. But, I still don't see many people waking up to the reality of what using less oil really is:

Smaller cars. Fewer trucks.

Driving fewer miles.

Living closer to where you work.

Etc.

To say nothing of making sure your car is in good working order, keeping your tires inflated and not sitting with your car idling.

One thing I'd love to see is cheaper, less luxury-laden pick-up trucks and vans. There are so many people I know who say they need a truck/van for work. That's fine, but how about some demand for a cheap work truck, so that they can own a regular car to drive as well. One $30-$40,000 Ford F250 could be a cheap but safe utilitarian truck ($15K) and a normal, small family sedan ($18K). It's great to make trucks more fuel-efficient, but if the owner had the choice of leaving the truck at home and using a more fuel-efficient car for other trips (family, groceries,etc.), that would save even more gas.

Also, the car-sharing programs seem to be going well, but how about some truck or minivan sharing programs. My brother makes use of the Home Depot rental truck 2-3 times per year instead of owning anything big.
__________________
Bread & Circuses
kramwest1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2010, 06:38 PM   #146
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,615
Local Time: 03:48 AM
^Such Socialist ideas, are you a secret European?




I'm starting to love these guys:
YouTube - Clarke & Dawe on the US Oil Spill.mp4
__________________
Vincent Vega is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2010, 10:17 PM   #147
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,882
Local Time: 09:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincent Vega View Post
^Such Socialist ideas, are you a secret European?




I'm starting to love these guys:
YouTube - Clarke & Dawe on the US Oil Spill.mp4
__________________
maycocksean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2010, 06:42 PM   #148
has a
 
kramwest1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Not a toliet wall
Posts: 6,939
Local Time: 08:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincent Vega View Post
^Such Socialist ideas, are you a secret European?


I like to think of myself as an closet Kiwi.


So, yes.
__________________
Bread & Circuses
kramwest1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2010, 11:11 PM   #149
Refugee
 
Bluer White's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Maine
Posts: 1,882
Local Time: 09:48 PM
Obama to POLITICO: Congress shares the blame for BP - Roger Simon - POLITICO.com

Politico's reader comments...scathing
__________________
Bluer White is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2010, 01:03 AM   #150
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,654
Local Time: 08:48 PM
Why not just show youtube comments?

BW you reach tooooooooo much.
__________________

__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:48 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com