|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: GUEST,Neil D Date: 26 May 10 - 01:05 PM I don't understand how someone I've always thought was pretty liberal can be so quick to jump to the defense of the world's fourth largest corporation. A corporation that looks more and more culpable every day. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: catspaw49 Date: 26 May 10 - 12:23 AM I don't give a rat's ass if BP is based on the fuckin' moon.....How can they not be at fault here and the company of primary responsibility? Gawdamn Mr. Bridge.......explain the bigot part. You're so stuffed shirt on this that your xenophobia is like a flare on a dark night. Come join the 21st Century. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 25 May 10 - 09:02 PM From Mike Williams statement- When first drilling down, a BP manager ordered a faster pace Due to the faster pace, the bottom of the well split open and the well had to be abandoned, costing BP millions. Pressure to get the job done was increased. A rig accident damaged the annular at the top of the blowout preventer. The crew sealed the pipe, but too much force was applied, and chunks of the rubber annular came up in the drilling fluid. The supervisor said it was no big deal. "There was apparently no way to know how much damage was done. When there was a meeting to discuss how they were going to seal the well. Williams said a manager from BP changed the process at the last minute and 'communication broke down'." So, in typical rash English fashion, "into the valley of death rode the 600." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: dick greenhaus Date: 25 May 10 - 08:57 PM Richard- For some years now, BP hasn't stood for British Petroleum (they prefer "beyond petroleum"). I'm not really sure that they qualify as a British Company. And it doesn't really matter. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Richard Bridge Date: 25 May 10 - 06:31 PM Ah. Prejudice admitted. Thank you. I would also point out that if "60 minutes" is right, and if it was the groundbreaking disclosure that some say, then until those disclosures (if right) there was in fact no evidence against British Petroleum (as distinct from its American subcontractors) so any adverse conclusions or inferences against BP were based on prejudice. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 25 May 10 - 04:22 PM Hayward, BP CEO- "We made a few little mistakes early on." "Very, very modest environmental impact". Statements quoted in the Guardian, My 13, 2010. Yes, we all would like to push BP aside. Anti-BP predjudice, but not anti-UK. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Richard Bridge Date: 25 May 10 - 03:16 PM hellelo Ollimah? Can you read a name, or are you too busy resenting the English? Now, what was the quote in the papers just yesterday? Something like "we will push BP aside if we have to"? No prejudice there of course. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: olddude Date: 25 May 10 - 08:57 AM it is a tactic all the big corporations try to use and I will say try for it doesn't wash for them. A few years ago the dog food companies poisoned a bunch of peoples dogs with sub standard foreign ingredients. their excuse was gee we just believed what the supplier told us .. we are not responsible, the Chinese supplier is. That didn't fly, they all got sued for millions. If you have your company name on it, if you make the profit, you are responsible. Like a Wal-mart. They don't make what they sell but they are sued if a product they sell harms someone. BP makes the money, they do the sales, It is their name on the rig. They are responsible, that is how it works. Now I believe this clean up will ultimately run into the billions , It always does, making the American taxpayer pay all but 27 million is absurd and isn't going to fly in congress or with the American people. A company any company is responsible for their product no matter who the sub contractor(s) are. Stay tuned it will get interesting. An a multi national company with assets in the US is not beyond the reach of fines or lawsuits. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Greg F. Date: 25 May 10 - 08:29 AM History repeats itself: BP had key role in Exxon Valdez disaster in Alaska By NOAKI SCHWARTZ, Associated Press Tuesday, May 25, 2010 Since a busted oil well began spewing crude into the Gulf of Mexico a month ago, the catastrophe has constantly been measured against the 1989 Exxon Valdez disaster. The Alaska spill leaked nearly 11 million gallons of crude, killed countless wildlife and tarnished the owner of the damaged tanker, Exxon. Yet the leader of botched containment efforts in the critical hours after the tanker ran aground wasn't Exxon Mobil Corp. It was BP PLC, the same firm now fighting to plug the Gulf leak. BP owned a controlling interest in the Alaska oil industry consortium that was required to write a cleanup plan and respond to the spill two decades ago. It also supplied the top executive of the consortium, Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. Lawsuits and investigations that followed the Valdez disaster blamed both Exxon and Alyeska for a response that was bungled on many levels. People who had a front row seat to the Alaska spill tell The Associated Press that BP's actions in the Gulf suggest it hasn't changed much at all. Read more: http://www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=934410#ixzz0owmiTByQ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Teribus Date: 20 May 10 - 12:52 AM Q, sorry to drag you back to what you said and the point I picked you up on: What AMOCO did makes no never-mind. It was up to BP to bring the operation up to snuff after their purchase of the refinery back in 19 and 98. I asked if in stating that you considered that in 1998 the refinery needed bring up to snuff - you have not answered that, no matter I will do it for you. Off course it was up to snuff in 1998 at least officially, whether it was in fact is an a completely different question. The OSHA inspection and its outcome depend on many things one of them is the relationship between those doing the inspecting and those being inspected. Look at the Ohio Refinery Inspection for an example picked up on x number of points the visit to check that the work had been done BP was initially was found to be in full compliance, the inspectors turned their follow-up visit to check that work had been done into a second inspection and made other findings. The same people ran the Texas City refinery for BP that ran it for AMOCO therefore their management style, approach and culture remained very much in place. Points I made earlier were that the corner cutting and the ignoring of advice by engineers on site that led to accident all pre-dated BP coming on the scene by up to seven years in some cases. Now unless somebody informed BP of those things there is no way that BP could have discovered those things. The same people having had their advice and suggestions ignored and discarded to the same management are not going to offer that up again irrespective of what sign is hanging over the door. BP's safety record in the US where it has taken over the existing assets of US Oil companies acquired you say is bad, globally where it works in over 160 countries it is very good. It is quite right that they should be fined and brought to book, it is quite right that BP should pay the costs of the spill, and as I have stated before BP have never said anything else. President barack Obama is not forcing them or making them pay for anything that they have not already agreed to and stated clearly that they will pay for. The largest and deepest discovery of oil in the Gulf of Mexico is BP's. BP produces more oil and gas than any other Operator. Watch the price of your oil produced products go up on the cost of this spill, because BP, or any other Company in the same situation will do its best to recover what it loses. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Ed T Date: 19 May 10 - 06:31 PM "You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into." —Anon "If you follow reason far enough it always leads to conclusions that are contrary to reason." —Samuel Butler |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 19 May 10 - 06:02 PM Buy a used car, and on the way home get stopped and inspected. The fuel lines are corroded, the flexible brake pipe connectors at the wheels are frayed, and the car is judged dangerously unroadworthy. Now, you may be able to sue the seller later, but sure as hell you will pay the fines for the current condition. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: mousethief Date: 19 May 10 - 05:07 PM How long after a purchase can we stop blaming the previous owner and blame the new one for any problems? Two years? Five? Ten? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 19 May 10 - 05:06 PM Link changed, but still found by googling 60 minutes oil spill. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 19 May 10 - 04:59 PM Supposedly BP had the engineering know how to determine if they were buying a pig in a poke. Caveat emptor and all that. Moreover, a top to bottom inspection is supposedly ongoing in a facility of the complexity of a refinery. If BP had kept the plant in good condition, felony fines would not have been imposed on them. As noted by Dick Greenhouse, BP has a terrible operating record. And no report more damning than the one on the Gulf blowout aired on "60 Minutes" and linked in another thread: - 60 Minutes |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Teribus Date: 19 May 10 - 02:29 PM So Q are you saying thet the Texas City Refinery was not up to snuff when it was sold? If it wasn't whose fault was that? Those selling or those buying? Could hardly be the latter could it? Now who was to tell them it wasn't up to snuff as you put it? What would tell the purchaser? Things like last OSHA audit/inspection? Review of maintenance records? Purchasers own audit/inspection? All would play a part. Now obviously the last OSHA inspection had thrown up nothing so no problem there. AMOCO's maintenance record would show that maintenance work was up to speed it would not necessarily tell BP that safety modifications suggested years before had not been implemented, the safety valve change out would detail just that it would not detail the modification or that the new type of valve recommended had not been fitted. Finally we come to BP's own inspection, now if OSHA had found nothing wrong why should BP have found something? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 19 May 10 - 02:13 PM What AMOCO did makes no never-mind. It was up to BP to bring the operation up to snuff after their purchase of the refinery back in 19 and 98. Some confusion about the tar balls on the Florida Keys. First announced that they came from the BP blowout but analysis showed otherwise. It is only a matter or time, however, until some of the oil gets into the Loop Current and into the passage between Florida and Cuba. Stray tar balls have been a frequent visitor to the Florida coast. I remember them from years ago (1950s). At the time they were blamed on ships releasing bilge, but I never saw this confirmed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Teribus Date: 19 May 10 - 11:06 AM Absolutely agree with you Dick and BP have never said anything else |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: dick greenhaus Date: 19 May 10 - 12:20 AM I hold no brief for AMOCO. I should point out, though, that the outfit (British, American, Swiss or Tonkinese)that makes the profit should be held responsible for the damage. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Teribus Date: 19 May 10 - 12:18 AM Q I fully agree with what you say, and the points you make, none of which alters the validity of the points I made regarding AMOCO's management and maintenance regime, unless of course you are trying to say that everything was perfect with that refinery up until the second BP took it over in 1998, I hope not as, as a contention, it is ridiculous. AMOCO engineers have advised modifications and had specified new types of safety valves on the section of the plant that failed, when maintenace was done AMOCO fitted a direct change out of the equipment modifying and changing nothing. Now BP cannot be held responsible for that, OSHA must have been aware of and must have reviewed plant maintenance and raised no objection. At the time BP took over had OSHA given the plant a clean bill of health? I would rather think that it did have an operating licence. During turn-over BP would have worked closely with AMOCO but as personnel changes were few, if any, then what was done before would continue to be done, existing "company culture" would prevail irrespective. Completely different thing if everyone had been sacked and new people brought in. I worked for BP for four years as a contractor, I have worked for a number of other Operator Companies and can state by experience that without any shadow of a doubt that BP was best of the lot, but that was in the days BP had its own Engineering Department and shadowed absolutely everything that any supplier of services or equipment did from start to finish. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 18 May 10 - 11:44 PM Operations to try to stop the flow are being directed from Houston, where engineers from BP, Halburton, Transocean and Exxon-Mobil are working together (NY Times, May 18). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 18 May 10 - 12:36 PM Terribus- After 1998 BP had seven years in which to carry out upgrading on the refinery. They paid in lives and a felony fine. Other short-comings after 2005 were not corrected by 2009 when another fine was levied. Personnel hired originally by Amoco probably continued working after the BP takeover, but they were now supervised by BP and procedures were BP revised and approved. Although job loss would have been significant, perhaps the government regulatory body should have required closure of the plant until corrections were made. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: ollaimh Date: 18 May 10 - 12:21 PM i really begin to wonder if richard bridges has any education or even has read a book? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Teribus Date: 18 May 10 - 11:38 AM Texas City Refinery Incident: Some of the things that Dick did not mention. The Texas City refinery was built and operated by AMOCO, BP acquiring it as a running concern in 1998. Now the proposed modifications that could have prevented the explosion all pre-date 1998 (i.e. The modifications were turned down not by BP but by AMOCO) In 1998 how many AMOCO employees were changed out, or did the work-force remain in place? If the work-force remained in place then so would the work practices and safety culture. What did the OSHA reports on the Texas City refinery state about the place when AMOCO ran it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: dick greenhaus Date: 18 May 10 - 12:18 AM BP was named by Mother Jones Magazine as one of the "ten worst corporations" in both 2001 and 2005 based on its environmental and human rights records.[61][62] In 1991 BP was cited as the most polluting company in the US based on EPA toxic release data. BP has been charged with burning polluted gases at its Ohio refinery (for which it was fined $1.7 million), and in July 2000 BP paid a $10 million fine to the EPA for its management of its US refineries.[63] According to PIRG research, between January 1997 and March 1998, BP was responsible for 104 oil spills.[64] BP patented the Dracone Barge to aid in oil spill clean-ups across the world. [65] One of BP's largest refineries in the US exploded in March 2005 causing 15 deaths, injuring 180 people and forcing thousands of nearby residents to remain sheltered in their homes.[41] A large column filled with hydrocarbon overflowed to form a vapour cloud, which ignited. The explosion caused all the casualties and substantial damage to the rest of the plant. The incident came as the culmination of a series of less serious accidents at the refinery, and the engineering problems were not addressed by the management. Maintenance and safety at the plant had been cut as a cost-saving measure, the responsibility ultimately resting with executives in London.[42] The fall-out from the accident continues to cloud BP's corporate image because of the mismanagement at the plant. There have been several investigations of the disaster, the most recent being that from the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board[43] which "offered a scathing assessment of the company." OSHA found "organizational and safety deficiencies at all levels of the BP Corporation" and said management failures could be traced from Texas to London.[41] The company pleaded guilty to a felony violation of the Clean Air Act, was fined $50 million, and sentenced to three years probation. On October 30, 2009, the US Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) fined BP an additional $87 million — the largest fine in OSHA history — for failing to correct safety hazards revealed in the 2005 explosion. Inspectors found 270 safety violations that had been previously cited but not fixed and 439 new violations. BP is appealing that fine.[41] [44] Seems to me that the US is being the one attacked. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Donuel Date: 17 May 10 - 09:40 PM BP is run by very greedy and extemely stupid short sighted men. This Sunday on CBS 60 minutes you will learn exactly why and how the oil diaster occured. BP argued to eliminate putting in the 3rd plug of drilling mud to seal the well with the weight of filling the pipe with mud. Halliburton argued that the well haed had broken due to an explosive gush of gas 2 months earlier so they did not know how much pressure was in the pipe since the valve had shattered and had come out the top of the pipe in pieces. With no way to know the pressure Halliburton argued that a total sealing of the pipe was necessary. BP said that filling the whole mile long pipe wioth mud would take too much time when they were ready to pump oil. BP won the arguement. This entire argument actually took place aboard the oil rig that blew up 3 hours later killing eleven people and set into motion a oil diaster that could spread across two oceans. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spil From: Charley Noble Date: 17 May 10 - 09:07 PM Hmmmmm? How does one do CAPS on CAPS? Charley Noble |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: GUEST,Kendall Date: 17 May 10 - 08:03 PM AND WHO DRAGGED THEM KICKING AND SCREAMING INTO THE 20TH CENTURY? Sorry about the caps. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Don Firth Date: 17 May 10 - 04:12 PM It was pretty obvious at the time that Japan was hell-bent on conquering the world, starting with China. They were allied with Germany and Italy and were regarded as (and consider themselves to be) one of the Axis Powers. New York Times, July 26, 1941. In view of the unlimited national emergency declared by the President, he has today issued an Executive Order freezing Japanese assets in the United States in the same manner in which assets of various European countries were frozen on June 14, 1941. This measure, in effect, brings all financial and import and export trade transactions in which Japanese interests are involved under the control of the government, and imposes criminal penalties for violation of the order.FYI. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 17 May 10 - 03:25 PM Gee, Kendall, would the British get to burn the White House again? The U. S. froze Japans assets July 25, 1941. Pearl Harbor attacked December 7. (Digression, but I had to refresh my memory) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: GUEST,kendall Date: 17 May 10 - 03:05 PM Remember when FDR froze Japans assets? They declared war on us. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 17 May 10 - 02:06 PM The U. S. would never do it to a British-registered corporation, but in another thread I suggested that BP assets in the US be frozen. Might help some in getting compensation. I was hoping CNN would pick up the Mike Williams story, but not a peep on their TV reports. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: GUEST,Songbob Date: 17 May 10 - 12:38 PM The speeches that I heard were attacks on BP ("British Petroleum"). They were by Americans. The faults were the faults of the subcontractors. The subcontractors were American, but not attacked in the speeches." Jesus Christ! You're basing all this too-sensitive BS on Congressional speeches? Would you react to the catcalls heard during "Question Time" the same way? As the kids say, "Get a life." And your examples of non-responsibility (or non-liability, whichever) were not germane. If that sweep had used the draft test because you told him to make sure the sweep was necessary, in order to save costs, then the metaphor would be closer. BP is not a disinterested, non-technical homeowner requiring work on his house, but a full-blown part of the team, and by telling the US subcontractors what to do, and largely how to do it, BP is responsible. And honestly, I wish they were British -- it'd be easier to extract compensation than from a multinational corporation. We could just trim the "fat" from any "aid" we send you. Bob |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Bobert Date: 17 May 10 - 08:56 AM Well, I ain't called anyone any names... Might of fact, I was kinda late to this thread and maybe missed some of the name callin' but, hey... ...seein' as I've had a lot of names hurled in my direction over the years I might be so desensitized that I don't realize it when folks are doin' it??? I donno??? What I do know is that if the "60 Minutes" report turns out to be true then BP is in some deep poo... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Backwoodsman Date: 17 May 10 - 08:11 AM "Bobert, this thread is certainly worth having but the name calling and other insults are not." Correct. Bobert - we in the UK have had many tragedies of this kind. The North Sea (the stretch of water between the UK and Belgium/Holland/Denmark/Scandianavia) is one of the most dangerous seas in the world and is full of oil- and gas-rigs. A number have been lost in deadful accidents. Google 'Piper Alpha' - just one of them, where 170 or so men perished. We've had a number of huge spills too, from tankers wrecked on the British coastline in some of the most beautiful and wild-life-rich areas. Google 'Sea Empress' or 'The Braer Disaster'. We know what a 'tragedy' is. The US has our sympathy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: GUEST,kendall Date: 17 May 10 - 07:49 AM Mike Williams, the Electronics chief had quite a story to tell. He's lucky to be alive. BP was also responsible for the fire at the Texas refinery a few years ago. They were fined a huge amount of money. Don't tell me they have a great safety record! Bobert, this thread is certainly worth having but the name calling and other insults are not. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 16 May 10 - 11:09 PM The 60 Minutes report (see Spill Baby Spill thread) seems to substantiate charges of almost criminal level against BP. The report appalled me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 16 May 10 - 09:35 PM Thanks, Ed T. The gist has been reported in NY Times, etc., but it is good to see the entire document. It answers some of the questions that came to my mind when I read the news items. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Ed T Date: 16 May 10 - 08:51 PM Maybe the information in the attached report is isolated or not related to this case. But, could it be part of reasons for the changes that Obama indicated were needed? http://www.doioig.gov/upload/Smith%20REDACTED%20FINAL_080708%20Final%20with%20transmittal%209_10%20date.pdf |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Bobert Date: 16 May 10 - 08:36 PM Joe, If people want to complain about threads that deal with the largest ecological disaster in our times then tell them stay above the line... This is one heck of a messed up situation and to pull the plug on any of it because someone thinks it ain'ty worth talkin' about is irresponsible... Tell 'um from me to "Bite me"... I mean, we let the threads go during the run-up to the Iraq War and on a different level this is, fir these times, perhaps as important... B~
-Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 16 May 10 - 08:30 PM Ed T, the mention of Maritime Canada came from a news item, so often incorrect. It does impact the Grand Banks, but at that distance, only some tar balls would be expected. Map of the flows predicted off the east coast of N. Am.: Oil spill and gulf stream currents The NOAA maps seem offline at the moment; they would be more accurate. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Ed T Date: 16 May 10 - 06:44 PM Q It is very unlikely that the Gulf of Mexico oil spill would impact Maritime Canada and the north eastern USA because the Gulf Stream moves east away from the coast as it moves northward (and, eastward towards Iceland and Europe. By the time the Gulf Stream is off Canada's east coast it is abour 400 nautical miles west of the coastline. Also, the prevailing currents along the Canadian Continental Shelf, off eastern Canada, flow south (part of the Labrador current). The southward flow, I suspect, would be prevailing throughout the Gulf of Maine to Cape Cod. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 16 May 10 - 06:02 PM Yes, Kendall, the oil could enter the Gulf Loop Current and from there into the Gulf Stream, discussed with links in the Oil spill thread which has disappeared from the current 'below the belt' list. That is always a problem when someone goes off at a tangent and starts their own peeve thread. Joe has linked the other two threads at the top of this one. So far, winds and currents have kept the spill (really a gusher, spewing out the oil under high pressure) in an area suoth of the Louisiana Mississippi Delta. Some progress has been made and part of the oil is being collected and piped to a tanker, but only part- and entry into the Gulf Stream is still a possibility. The damage, if that happens, will be to East Coast U. S. and maritime Canada, but of course some 'tar balls' would continue up the Gulf Stream to Europe. The main hope for stopping the flow is the relief well, which will not intercept the old well for some two months- and we must hope that will work. There are no guarantees that it will. Interesting sidelight- US law limits the damages to $75 million, but I am sure law suits will continue for some time. Somewhere along the line, suit will be brought against the US for the failure of their regulator, MMS to require full compliance by the operator. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Ed T Date: 16 May 10 - 05:09 PM An interesting pair of news stories: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/may/16/gulf-oil-spill-bp http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/may/13/bp-boss-admits-mistakes-gulf-oil-spill |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: kendall Date: 16 May 10 - 04:54 PM Guest from Sanity, what facts are you talking about? Sarah Palin's? Rush Limbaugh's? Your own? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: kendall Date: 16 May 10 - 04:51 PM There was an interesting article in yesterday's paper saying that this spill could make its way out of the gulf and into the Gulf Stream! Ok, when the tar balls start washing up on the shores of "Old Blighty" we will see if you folks over the5rte sing a different song! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Joe Offer Date: 16 May 10 - 04:06 PM I received a complaint about an oil spill thread, but the person didn't say which oil spill thread - two of the three have been quite nasty, and I see that woodsie's post here is a bit ripe. So, let me just say: If you kids don't stop it right now, I'll......'Nuff said. And now, back to our program. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Arthur_itus Date: 16 May 10 - 04:02 PM An update http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8685368.stm |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Ed T Date: 16 May 10 - 03:47 PM To me, this was a responsible part of Obama's statement, and it is one that he is responsible for, as USA President: "For too long, for a decade or more, there has been a cozy relationship between the oil companies and the federal agency that permits them to drill. It seems as if permits were too often issued based on little more than assurances of safety from the oil companies. That cannot and will not happen anymore. To borrow an old phrase, we will trust, but we will verify. Now, from the day he took office as Interior Secretary, Ken Salazar has recognized these problems and he's worked to solve them. Oftentimes he has been slammed by the industry, suggesting that somehow these necessary reforms would impede economic growth. Well, as I just told Ken, we are going to keep on, going to do what needs to be done. And so I've asked Secretary Salazar to conduct a top-to-bottom reform of the Minerals Management Service. This week, he announced that the part of the agency which permits oil and gas drilling and collects royalties will be separated from the part of the agency in charge of inspecting the safety of oil rigs and platforms and enforcing the law. That way, there's no conflict of interest, real or perceived. We've also ordered immediate inspections of all deepwater operations in the Gulf of Mexico. And we've announced that no permits for drilling new wells will go forward until the 30-day safety and environmental review that I requested is completed. We're also closing the loophole that has allowed some oil companies to bypass some critical environmental reviews, and today we're announcing a new examination of the environmental procedures for oil and gas exploration and development. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Arthur_itus Date: 16 May 10 - 03:38 PM Guest GFS said By the way, Arthur itus, great name there! Thanks but my knees don't like it :-) |
