Teribus:

Can you tell us the source of the statements you are making?
I have by now read four long and seemingly painstaking accounts of the Machado explosion, three in the WSJ and one in the New York Times. All step-by step, detailed, with diagrams and referring to events on a time line with explicit quotations from testimony. None of them leaves any doubt that BP was in control of the rig--aside from the fact that key BP people were missing from the bridge on the day of the explosion because they were busy ushering BP executives around the rig. All four point to a long sequence of events in which BP repeatedly made the quick and dirty choice. And on or near the final day, it made a bizarre decision to draw out drilling fluid and pump in seawater, overruling the strong objections of Transocean people on the spot.

I also understand that Shell, also a British Company, has run a formal presentation describing precautions Shell normally takes and pointing out that BP did not follow what it considers best practices. I have not read or seen that presentation, so I may be wrong on that.

So the question is this. Your version of the story squarely contradicts every factual source I am aware of. Is there any evidence to support it? If so, what is it?

I think I am only hearing patriotic slogans from you--no facts.
Where do you get this stuff from?