or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Gulf Coast oil spill could eclipse Exxon Valdez
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Gulf Coast oil spill could eclipse Exxon Valdez - Page 15

post #561 of 700
We need an "Obama hates white people" moment.
post #562 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

We need an "Obama hates white people" moment.

Why do we need this in this thread?

To say just because this involves Obama is beyond a real stretch.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #563 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Apparently you are. You (and others) are the ones making the claim (or at least the implication) that the decision has no legal merit whatsoever. What is your basis for this claim?

That's an inaccurate statement. What we're claiming is there's an obvious conflict of interest here. You don't need to be an lawyer to see that.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #564 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

So, I'm in denial even though I'm not denying anything? The links you posted show one thing: The judge has had investments in oil. No one is denying that. What I'm taking issue with is the characterization and conclusions you draw. The judge having had oil investments does not mean his decision is invalid or based on faulty legal reasoning. Now, I agree that these stories add to an APPEARANCE of biased decision making being more POSSIBLE. But that doesn't mean the judge is "in the back pocket" of Big Oil. It doesn't mean he is doing Big Oil's bidding.

Your reasoning is along the same lines as your "common knowledge" statements. What you really mean is "commonly held belief or perception." That label fits this situation perfectly.

Quote:
So, I'm in denial even though I'm not denying anything? The links you posted show one thing: The judge has had investments in oil.

And he made a judgement that clearly benifited big oil, which if you were prudent you'd try to find out anything you could as to why this disaster happened ( you know to keep something like it from happening again ) before going ahead with any more drilling. The truth is we really still don't know exactly what happened besides the methane bubble. End of story.

Also you keep using " Your " when clearly I've shown that I'm not the only one saying this.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #565 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

That's an inaccurate statement. What we're claiming is there's an obvious conflict of interest here. You don't need to be an lawyer to see that.

OK. I'll play along. What is the point of bringing up the "obvious conflict of interest?"

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #566 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

We need an "Obama hates white people" moment.

I think that comes in 2012...

post #567 of 700
Sorry to derail the thread by posting something on topic ... but right now theres a tropical storm (Alex) in the Bay of Campeche, just below hurricane strength (65mph max winds) and is expected to strengthen into perhaps a Category 2 hurricane before making landfall *perhaps* somewhere near the TX/MX border. This projected storm track puts the (future) eye not over the spill area, but Alex is already a very large storm and will probably expand in the next couple of days and will generate some large surf throughout the entire GoM coastlines. As it will move to the west of the spill area, the winds over the spill area and the adjacent coastline wll be out of a southerly quadrant, driving the oil onshore. If Alex doesnt play by the forecast and keeps heading northwards towards the Gulf coast, it has enough time and water (!) to become a major hurricane (Cat3+), and could push an oily storm surge well inland if it makes landfall on the north gulf coast.

My question.. as this has never happened (on such a scale) before... will the storm tend to disperse the oil and (give the impression of) cleaning things up some... or will it make things even worse than they already are? Obviously BP will have to suspend operations if the storm heads on a more northerly track. Thoughts?
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #568 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post

My question.. as this has never happened (on such a scale) before... will the storm tend to disperse the oil and (give the impression of) cleaning things up some... or will it make things even worse than they already are? Obviously BP will have to suspend operations if the storm heads on a more northerly track. Thoughts?

I've been wondering the same.

I think the short answer is that no one really knows. You have somewhat random events colliding with one another. Though it's rather doubtful it could help by actually dispersing the oil. This seems unlikely. Most likely would be for some (or a lot) of the oil to get picked up by Alex and dropped over a wider area as part of the hurricane rain.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #569 of 700
I know next to nothing about weather systems, but I'm guessing that can't be a good thing.

All the more reason to get as much oil out of the water as possible.
Obama needs to drop all the union-protection crap and get every capable ship cleaning the water NOW.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #570 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

OK. I'll play along. What is the point of bringing up the "obvious conflict of interest?"

It can and probably has influenced his decision. Why the baby games? What do hope to accomplish?
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #571 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

I know next to nothing about weather systems, but I'm guessing that can't be a good thing.

All the more reason to get as much oil out of the water as possible.
Obama needs to drop all the union-protection crap and get every capable ship cleaning the water NOW.

The "union-protection crap" is, indeed, crap.

http://www.factcheck.org/2010/06/oil...the-jones-act/
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
post #572 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

All the more reason to get as much oil out of the water as possible.Obama needs to drop all the union-protection crap and get every capable ship cleaning the water NOW.

But you assume Obama is interested in helping the Gulf and cleaning up this oil disaster... you shouldn't assume! This is Day 71 of oil leak and Obama is doing everything he can not to address issue and not to clean up the oil! High volume foreign oil skimmers have not yet been deployed because they have not yet been requested... Even our largest domestic oil skimmer, the SS A. Whale, was delayed and is only now, two months late, en route to the Gulf... Local requests for berms, derrick, and barge placements to prevent oil from arriving on shore have been denied by federal authorities for, of all things, not conforming to environmental regulations. As you mentioned, Unions have thrown up roadblocks to cleanup and Obama has supported the Union cause... In short, Obama has done everything he can do to prolong this crisis and damage the Gulf...

Day 71 people...
post #573 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Why the baby games?

I'm not the one playing "baby games" here.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

What do hope to accomplish?

I hope to get to the root of what your (and other's) point is in bringing this up.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

It can and probably has influenced his decision.

OK. So, setting aside the "obvious conflict of interest" (as you put it) and regarding only the legal decision he made, are you claiming that it:

1. Has no legal merit whatsoever.
2. Has some legal merit.
3. Is completely merited, by the law.

These appear to be the main three options in regard to the legal decision, but feel free to explain what other options there might be regarding the legal decision.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #574 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

I'm not the one playing "baby games" here.




I hope to get to the root of what your (and other's) point is in bringing this up.




OK. So, setting aside the "obvious conflict of interest" (as you put it) and regarding only the legal decision he made, are you claiming that it:

1. Has no legal merit whatsoever.
2. Has some legal merit.
3. Is completely merited, by the law.

These appear to be the main three options in regard to the legal decision, but feel free to explain what other options there might be regarding the legal decision.


As to it's legal merits I wouldn't be making a comment as I'm not an attorney ( you aren't either ). Common sense wise however it's bad all over the board. And before you start I wasn't the one that started talking specifically about the legal end of it. I was talking about the obvoius conflict of interest here which you don't need to be a lawyer to see. Also the legal merits as discussed by you I wouldn't believe either as once again unless I was helped by an attorney. And since we are all anonymous here that wouldn't help either ( you would have to identify the lawyer in question to verify his credentials ).

However let me be clear it was you who brought up the legal ramifications. Also once again it's not just me who thinks this. Just clarifying.

Perhaps we'll read in the news what real lawyers think of this.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #575 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

As to it's legal merits I wouldn't be making a comment as I'm not an attorney ( you aren't either ).

Then there really isn't more to say about this, because the question of its legal merit is the only relevant one.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Common sense wise however it's bad all over the board.

Well "common sense" is sometimes wrong. This is one case. Unless there is some question about the legal merits of the decision, then all that's going on here is some well poisoning and circumstantial ad hominem attacks.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

I was talking about the obvoius conflict of interest here which you don't need to be a lawyer to see.

But it's irrelevant unless you can point to some problem with the legal decision.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

However let me be clear it was you who brought up the legal ramifications.

Yes I did, because I thought it would be a good idea to get around the vague innuendo, implications and smearing to find out whether anyone had any concerns about the legal decision or were merely trying to smear and discredit the judge and the decision by implication based on what is "obvious" and "common sense."

You (and the others who've brought up this "obvious conflict of interest") have nothing here unless you can come up with some reasons why the legal decision is questionable.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #576 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Then there really isn't more to say about this, because the question of its legal merit is the only relevant one.




Well "common sense" is sometimes wrong. This is one case. Unless there is some question about the legal merits of the decision, then all that's going on here is some well poisoning and circumstantial ad hominem attacks.




But it's irrelevant unless you can point to some problem with the legal decision.




Yes I did, because I thought it would be a good idea to get around the vague innuendo, implications and smearing to find out whether anyone had any concerns about the legal decision or were merely trying to smear and discredit the judge and the decision by implication based on what is "obvious" and "common sense."

You (and the others who've brought up this "obvious conflict of interest") have nothing here unless you can come up with some reasons why the legal decision is questionable.

Quote:
Then there really isn't more to say about this, because the question of its legal merit is the only relevant one.

To you.

Sorry it's not that easy.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #577 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

To you.

Sorry it's not that easy.

Then explain to me how I'm wrong.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #578 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Then explain to me how I'm wrong.

We can talk about anything we want here concerning this.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #579 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

We can talk about anything we want here concerning this.

I agree. But unless you're going to discuss the merits of the legal decision, then you're merely engaging in vague negative innuendo, implications of bias and well poisoning. I get that this is favorite tactic of the left and, in particular, the environmentalists. I get it.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #580 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

I agree. But unless you're going to discuss the merits of the legal decision, then you're merely engaging in vague negative innuendo, implications of bias and well poisoning. I get that this is favorite tactic of the left and, in particular, the environmentalists. I get it.

That would be true if I were the only one ( not on this board ) saying this.

Sorry but I just don't see this that way.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #581 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

That would be true if I were the only one ( not on this board ) saying this.

Actually it's true no matter how many people are saying it. You don't seem to get that the quantity of people saying something c=doesn't change its veracity.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Sorry but I just don't see this that way.

Of course you don't.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #582 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Actually it's true no matter how many people are saying it. You don't seem to get that the quantity of people saying something c=doesn't change its veracity.




Of course you don't.

Quote:
Actually it's true no matter how many people are saying it. You don't seem to get that the quantity of people saying something c=doesn't change its veracity

Neither does you trying to asses the legal ramifications. It's totally useless.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #583 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Neither does you trying to asses the legal ramifications.

I know that. You don't seem to however.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #584 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

I know that. You don't seem to however.

The legal aspect is the only one important to you. That's fine. I don't see it that way and that's my right the same as it's your right to ignore everything else but that. Just because you see it that way doesn't mean everyone will. If it was really that way we wouldn't be discussing anything here.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #585 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

The legal aspect is the only one important to you.

What I'm saying is that it is really all that is relevant. Everything else is merely vague innuendo intended to suggest impropriety without any real proof of it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Just because you see it that way doesn't mean everyone will.

I'm aware of that. But it's my goal to get people to think more clearly, factually and to avoid resting on mere innuendo and implication and instead seek truth and fact. It's okay if you don't wish to do that, but it's my hope that others will wish to.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #586 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

What I'm saying is that it is really all that is relevant. Everything else is merely vague innuendo intended to suggest impropriety without any real proof of it.



I'm aware of that. But it's my goal to get people to think more clearly, factually and to avoid resting on mere innuendo and implication and instead seek truth and fact. It's okay if you don't wish to do that, but it's my hope that others will wish to.

Quote:
What I'm saying

Yes we know that.

Quote:
truth and fact

Isn't true and factual that he was connected by money to the oil companies?
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #587 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Isn't true and factual that he was connected by money to the oil companies?

Yes it is. Many people have investments in oil companies. But his is only relevant if it affected his legal decision. The only way we can really begin to know that is if there are actual problems with the legal decision. If there are no problems with the legal decision, then the fact of his investments is just a lonely fact that has no relevance to all of this other than to continue to provide vague innuendo among those who's "common sense" tells them it's "obvious" that he's "in the back pocket of 'Big Oil'." Get it?

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #588 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Yes it is. Many people have investments in oil companies. But his is only relevant if it affected his legal decision. The only way we can really begin to know that is if there are actual problems with the legal decision. If there are no problems with the legal decision, then the fact of his investments is just a lonely fact that has no relevance to all of this other than to continue to provide vague innuendo among those who's "common sense" tells them it's "obvious" that he's "in the back pocket of 'Big Oil'." Get it?

Quote:
The only way we can really begin to know that is if there are actual problems with the legal decision.

Sorry but I just don't see it that way. And as you've seen I'm not the only one here. Other than reading this in the news how owuld you do that here?

Yes I did raise the concern that he would probably influenced by his investments. Perhaps " Back pocket " was a wrong term to use. It doesn't remove the concern however. Get it?
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #589 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Sorry but I just don't see it that way.

Yes, you've made this quite clear. I cannot cure blindness, especially willful blindness.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

And as you've seen I'm not the only one.

You like to hang with all the "cool kids" don't you.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #590 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Yes, you've made this quite clear. I cannot cure blindness, especially willful blindness.




You like to hang with all the "cool kids" don't you.

That's not an answer it's a quip.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #591 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

That's not an answer it's a quip.

Yes it is. But you don't want answers, so what's the problem?

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #592 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Yes it is. But you don't want answers, so what's the problem?

I do want answers. You just aren't qualified to supply them.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #593 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Yes it is. Many people have investments in oil companies...

Excellent point... while the Administration advocates rail against U.S. federal judge Martin Feldman, who struck down the Obama administration's six-month moratorium on deepwater drilling, few if any administration advocates care to acknowledge that millions paid by BP to the Obama campaign and the cushy relationship BP held with administration staff. Moreover, Obama's Minerals Management Service agency last year heralded BP's Deepwater Horizon rig as an industry model for safety and gave it awards. So naturally, liberals ignore all this, ignore the legal point being made by U.S. federal judge Martin Feldman, and concentrate on his alleged petroleum ties...

post #594 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

I do want answers.

To what? To the fact that you've dug your heels in and simply repeat the mantra "that's just not how I see it" and a bunch of other people agree with you? What is there to "answer" to that?


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

You just aren't qualified to supply them.

How do you know? After all we're all just anonymous posters here. I could be eminently qualified.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #595 of 700
There is a media blackout and BP and the government are censoring what you see and what you know about the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.

Learn more: http://site.pollyandcrackers.com/blo...pill-disaster/
post #596 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

To what? To the fact that you've dug your heels in and simply repeat the mantra "that's just not how I see it" and a bunch of other people agree with you? What is there to "answer" to that?




How do you know? After all we're all just anonymous posters here. I could be eminently qualified.

And what you've done is dug your heals in and stated that the only thing important to you is the legal end. So what? It's still what's important only to people who want to take a certain political stance.

Quote:
How do you know?

Exactly! You wouldn't know either. How are you going to verify that it's correct information ( to show it to all ) unless someone uses a 3rd source not connected to this forum? That's why in a forum like this unless you get a link to the info elsewhere it's really useless. You could say anything and expect people to accept it at face value. And they won't.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #597 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

And what you've done is dug your heals in and stated that the only thing important to you is the legal end. So what? It's still what's important only to people who want to take a certain political stance.

I have no doubt you see it that way. You still haven't really explained the whole reason for bringing up the "obvious conflict of interest" of this judge. You have tried to avoid being pinned down to any hard position on the legal decision (which is the only reason we're talking about this particular judge and this particular legal decision and this particular oil company investor.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

How are you going to verify that it's correct information ( to show it to all ) unless someone uses a 3rd source not connected to this forum?

Verify what information is correct? That you only see things a certain way (and that a bunch of people happen to see it the same way)?

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #598 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

I have no doubt you see it that way. You still haven't really explained the whole reason for bringing up the "obvious conflict of interest" of this judge. You have tried to avoid being pinned down to any hard position on the legal decision (which is the only reason we're talking about this particular judge and this particular legal decision and this particular oil company investor.




Verify what information is correct? That you only see things a certain way (and that a bunch of people happen to see it the same way)?

Verify that the legal information is correct. That 's if you want this assesed in a professional fashion. Not just hearsay from some person on an internet forum.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #599 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Verify that the legal information is correct. That 's if you want this assesed in a professional fashion. Not just hearsay from some person on an internet forum.

I'm going on the assumption that a U.S. District Court Judge of 27 years, a person who has been practicing law for 53 years, is correct in their legal judgement and that those who claim that his decision lacks merit have the burden of proof on their side. And, further, that people who want to hang their hat on the "obvious conflict of interest" are taking a short cut through the burden of proof, logic and legal rationale because its just easier to make innuendo and implications of impropriety. Now if the those who disagree with the decision do find that there are legal problems with the decision, then I will look at that and give it its due consideration.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #600 of 700
I just read Obama is now accepting offers of foreign help on this matter. I guess it only took 70 days of so of our "improved trust and understanding" with the world for him to desire such help.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Gulf Coast oil spill could eclipse Exxon Valdez