Skip to comments.
Battle Over Oil Drilling Turns to 2nd Alaska Site
Los Angeles Times ^
| 4/21/02
| Kim Murphy
Posted on 04/21/2002 7:17:17 PM PDT by Wphile
Edited on 09/03/2002 4:50:21 AM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40 last
To: Wphile
Thanks very much for the news! I sure hope there's more oil there then they think.
To: Big Steve;deport;blackie;PhiKapMom;Wait4Truth;Deb;GUIDO;Howlin
Some very good news,for a change!
Comment #23 Removed by Moderator
To: Wphile
To: bookworm89
HAHAHAHAHA! Now that you've mentioned it,I have to agree with you!
To: bookworm89
good. go ahead and drill for oil in this area. i don't care what the left says. they just don't want anyone to have land, they want it instead. The environmental wackos don't want the land instead. They are happy in their Chelsea and SoHo condos. There are three offices of these commie freaks within blocks of me.
To: bookworm89
i wonder if this was a trick by george bush to make democrats look like idiotsMe to!
Ok, they have their pristine preserve. They still don't want us drilling for oil so what is their next move? If they complain about this move, they will show that the real reason for the ANWR blockage is to prevent the U.S. from being more independent of Mideast oil. If they complain about the environment and the harm to the animals, we say "Ok, just how many states do the animals get?" The environs then reveal their real strategy of controlling Americas lands and how we, the people, use them - not the concern about the environment at all?
Very slick move by the Bush Administration.
27
posted on
04/21/2002 9:07:37 PM PDT
by
ClancyJ
To: Miss Marple
the enviros are funded by the OPEC people After Alaska was purchased as a territory, coal was found. Eastern coal interests had the Alaska coal fields put off-limits. This was before 1900. A freeze on development, still in force.
To: Wphile
hey Wphile,
put this
<,A, H,R,E,F,=,"
in front of this
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-042102npra.story
followed by this
",>
then create a title and place it right behind these (use the ones you've already typed)",>
followed by this
<,/,A,>
one other thing, remove ALL of the "comma" symbols, I had to put those in the html so as not to create a hot link
is this clear as mud ?
To: Wphile
thanks for the tip off, on this story
To: Wphile
Wphile, forgot to mention...look under the box where a post is created...under HTML Help...the third line down has the code arranged the way it is supposed to be placed, in order to create a hot link
To: freepersup
yeah, yeah, yeah....I know that now. Gosh, don't knock a girl for trying will ya? LOL!
32
posted on
04/21/2002 9:22:27 PM PDT
by
Wphile
To: Dog Gone
"[The NPRA] has not galvanized opponents the way the proposal to open up 2,000 acres in ANWR has because it is not a designated wildlife refuge and because its wide sweep of tundra can potentially accommodate wildlife and oil wells more easily than the narrow ribbon of coast in the Arctic refuge." A sentence that could have been written only by a.) a willing propagandist or b.) an ignorant dupe.
Given that it's the LATimes, the odds are 50:50.
33
posted on
04/21/2002 9:29:23 PM PDT
by
okie01
To: Wphile
lol, glad to see that you have retained a wonderful sense of humor, I am about as html illiterate as the next freeper, speaking of freeper...during the presidential campaign there were some outrageous and hilarious pictures/graphics that were constantly appearing on this great website, I mean it, they were tremendously uplifting
To: Wphile
Another aspect of this new area-is it's title-it isn't condensed like ANWAR,it's more of a mouthful and has the word Petroleum in it, which gives an idea of what it's purpose is. The WH has been behind the ball, in the area of audio visual presentations of what these areas look like. They have got to do a better job of getting their pictures of the sites on tv ,as opposed to the enviros showing us Mama caribous and their calves frolicking amongst the flowers,by the babbling brooks!!
To: Wild Irish Rogue
No kidding. The Dept of Interior produced a video of the actual ANWR site but they were only allowed to show it once because someone balked. Claimed it was propaganda on the part of the administration to further legislation. Naw...we can't have THAT! What a joke. And just what is all that Sierra Club garbage about ANWR if not but propaganda? Errrrr.
There was a young girl - probably 16 - outside our grocery store today collecting money for the Sierra Club to "save our wilderness." I was glad to see only one person signing up. It's quite telling when they can't have adults do their work but have to rely on school children!
36
posted on
04/21/2002 10:03:35 PM PDT
by
Wphile
Comment #37 Removed by Moderator
To: Lady In Blue
"Some very good news,for a change!"Yes it is, get those drill rigs going, now !!
38
posted on
04/22/2002 10:08:53 AM PDT
by
blackie
To: blackie;ALL
I wonder how many jobs this will create? Would it be the same as in ANWR or maybe more,since this area is larger? Anybody know? thanks.
To: Lady In Blue
More jobs...Bump!!
40
posted on
04/22/2002 4:49:32 PM PDT
by
blackie
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson