BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 16 May 10 - 02:18 PM

kendall: "The latest poll disagrees. 69% like him, 51% think he is doing a good job."

...according to the 'Amos and liberal left' poll! You need to check your facts better!..I mean, if facts are relevant to the ideologues, any more!

Arthur itus: "I agree with Kendall.
It doesn't matter who's fault it is, it needs to get sorted first, then look at how the cost is dissipated."

..and I agree with you and kendall, on that one!

Personally, I think there must a way to utilize the oil coming up..but, I can't speak to that, as much, because that's up to the more knowledgeable, in that area.

By the way, Arthur itus, great name there!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: kendall
Date: 16 May 10 - 02:00 PM

To imply that because I have never worked for an oil company and don't know how they operate makes my opinion that of a gullible fool is silly.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Arthur_itus
Date: 16 May 10 - 01:24 PM

I agree with Kendall.

It doesn't matter who's fault it is, it needs to get sorted first, then look at how the cost is disipated.

It is a disaster and everybody that has the skill from wherever, should be employed to sort the problem out.

If there is a disaster, like an earthquake, people from all around the globe, donate funds to get things sorted.

Why can't that be the same with this. It might be the Americans problem, but in reality it is a world problem. We all need to pull together. Who knows where the next disaster occurs.

IMHO we should pull together instead of taking a stance.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 16 May 10 - 12:36 PM

The policy briefly noted by Teribus is general among established oil companies; bad practice and bad publicity hurt profits and cause stockholders to sell their stock.

Regulatory bodies (MMS in U. S. waters, regardless of registered company offices elsewhere) set the limits.
It seems that the requirements in this case were inadequate, but drilling to a deep target in deep water, especially a large target with high formation pressure (unpredictable, but always possible) is not a stroll through the park.

The operating company selects subcontractors who do work not performed by the operator; those selected must have a good record but the cost also is a consideration. As noted, Haliburton is one of the two foremost for the services offered.

I really can't comment on Haliburton's current status; when I was working with petroleum exploration, they were highly thought of. Since their link with KBR, now broken and Haliburton's return to its original role, their ability may have suffered- I don't know- but they are accepted as competent by BP and other petroleum exploration companies world-wide. They are considered one of the best for the procedures they are hired to do, especially in deep water.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: kendall
Date: 16 May 10 - 12:20 PM

...most Americans think he's full of shit ...
The latest poll disagrees. 69% like him, 51% think he is doing a good job.

Look, I don't give a rats ass who is to blame! What is being done about it, that's what's important to me.

woodsie, how is an oil spill going to cause you a reduction in your pension? And how is that Our fault? Are we paying your pension?

You are entitled to your opinion even if it makes no sense.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Teribus
Date: 16 May 10 - 06:50 AM

Compared to many others in the oil industry world wide Kendall its damn near spotless, but then knowing nothing of how they operate you couldn't have a fuckin' clue what you are talking about. Mind you you could be one of the many gullible fools how believe everything they read so long as it matches their own prejudices.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: GUEST,woodsie
Date: 16 May 10 - 06:23 AM

I don't see why I should have a reduced pension to clean up fucking Amarican's problem! Incompetent big mouthed American's caused this shit the same as they are fucking up the whole planet! Let them rot in their own polution.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: kendall
Date: 16 May 10 - 06:11 AM

No. I have never worked for Halliburton or BP. So what? I didn't sail with Columbus either but I know the world is round!
BP has a shitty record.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Teribus
Date: 16 May 10 - 05:02 AM

They (BP presumably) are still motivated by profit first and safety second.

Ever worked for them Kendall?

I did back in the 1990's. Before awarding major contracts the Bid evaluation teams were always briefed as follows:

Technical Evaluation - Assess each bid; evaluate technical compliance with the ITT and competence to perform the work; evaluate that proposed equipment and method statements are "fir for purpose".

Financial Evaluation - Keep it foremost in your minds when evaluating prces quoted The Contractor Must Make a Profit if he has trimmed his price too tight it may tempt him to cut corners and that acts against our best interests in significant ways:

Safety;
We have to increase our minitoring role;
Mistakes may be made which will cost us time, money and resources to rectify;
Any such delays may affect First Production.

BP is an Operating Company and as such THEY ARE responsible for whatever happens in their Licence Areas. Having said that, they issue to the Licencing Authorities (In the UK that would be the Department of Energy and the HSE) for review, comment and approval details of exactly what they intend doing. In this case US Authorities would have known and would have looked at the designs of the Temporary Guide Base; the casing depths and cementation; the drilling programme; the BOP and the Well the Production Manifold that would eventually be installed.

For many, many years now HAZID's; HAZOP's and Risk Assessments have been undertaken before any Operation is allowed to proceed. It will be a simple matter to establish it that was the case with this well.

They are still motivated by profit first and safety second.

Have you ever worked for Haliburton Kendall? I have experience of working for them directly and as a sub-contractor, I have also in turn had them working for me, and guess what Kendall as far as the driving force behind Haliburton goes you are spot on. Of the two BP were a "Flagship" Company that set standards; Haliburton (Or at least the parts of it I had to deal with) in comparison were "cowboys" who would cut every corner they could to maximise their profit.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 15 May 10 - 11:23 PM

Hey, Shit happens!.....Only idiots get their knickers in a twist with such stupid crap, like playing the 'blame game'!

Richard. you think that Americans are bigoted?..Then hang out with your own crowd of geeks! If you're saying Obumbler is pissed at the Brits, or Bp,..so what? Most Americans think he's full of shit anyway! Just a few loudmouths, on here, lick his boots!

Give it a rest!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: bobad
Date: 15 May 10 - 11:06 PM

Q, I made no such assumption, the only assumption I did make was that a contractor is liable for the work of his sub-contractors.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 15 May 10 - 10:41 PM

Assumption by Bobad- the work of the subcontractors was faulty.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: bobad
Date: 15 May 10 - 10:31 PM

Words like blame and responsibility strike me as being moral terms whereas liability sounds like a legal term to me. I would think that a contractor is liable for the work of his sub-contractors but then I am not a lawyer.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: mousethief
Date: 15 May 10 - 10:11 PM

They are not to blame, maybe, but they are ultimately both responsible and accountable.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: steve in ottawa
Date: 15 May 10 - 09:39 PM

Richard said: Evidently your academia, goosey, does not include reading or understanding. The idea that British Petroleum (based in London) are to blame for their subcontractors' failures cannot (as I have demonstrated above) rationally be supported. Therefore it is irrationally derived.

Wow.

Time to shut this thread down?

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 15 May 10 - 09:33 PM

Methinks the bigotry also roosts on the European side of the pond.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: mousethief
Date: 15 May 10 - 09:26 PM

Plainly the attack by US politicians on British Petroleum (of London) is because it is not a US company.

It's only plain to you. There's nothing in what Obama said that has anything to do with nationalism. As everybody else but you has said, if it has been Shell or Exxon or Texaco, the stink would still smell the same and Obama would have said the exact same thing. You've got a bee in your bonnet and it's making your brain misfire.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spil
From: GUEST,Goose Gander
Date: 15 May 10 - 06:48 PM

Richard, please read your own posts. Obama did not merely blame BP, he made it a point that he felt there was plenty of blame to go around, including but limited to BP. Anyway, BP is a multinational corporation. They're about as 'British' as Exxon is 'American'. You get the Humpty-Dumpty award for debasement of language with your whining about "bigotry".

I would still like to know what the physical location of BP's offices has to do with responsibility for the spill.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: catspaw49
Date: 15 May 10 - 06:37 PM

Oh horseshit.............As I recall the government went after Exxon and if this were a rig owned by Shell or someone else then they would go after them. No one here gives two runny shits where BP is based.

Christ Richard, give it a break1   Your xenophobia is showing..........

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 15 May 10 - 06:32 PM

Plainly the attack by US politicians on British Petroleum (of London) is because it is not a US company. BP is for the reasons I have set out above not liable for the spill. The attempt to cause it to pay for the faults of US companies is based on nationhood. It is bigotry.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spil
From: GUEST,Goose Gander
Date: 15 May 10 - 06:23 PM

Really, Richard, is that the best you can do? The degree to which BP may or may not share responsibility with other parties is something for the courts to work out, but "the substratum that is bigoted."?! Maybe you could define what you mean when you use the term 'bigot'.

And what does the physical location of BP's corporate offices have to do with responsibility for the spill?

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Donuel
Date: 15 May 10 - 06:05 PM

BP address for North America is
28100 Torch Pkwy
Ste 300
Warrenville, IL 60555

[phone]

yep it really is Torch Parkway.

For UK it is James St. London and there is a new THK BP headquaters in Moscow.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: catspaw49
Date: 15 May 10 - 05:42 PM

Is it BP rig? Does BP own the oil coming from the well? Did BP, through whatever means, build the platform? They did not have to accept the work done if it did not meet the criteria set forth.

While there are many involved, the ultimate responsibility is with BP......or as Greg points out, all of us for allowing this type of thing to take place.


Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 15 May 10 - 05:35 PM

"not appreciate what I considered to be the ridiculous spectacle" of executives from BP, Transocean, the rig owner, and Halliburton, supplier of a cement pipeline plug, "falling over each other to point the fingers of blame at somebody else" in testimony before Congress earlier this week. "I will not tolerate more fingerpointing or irresponsibility," he said sternly. "There is enough responsibility to go around, and all parties should be willing to accept it."

For a lawyer that is bollocks. Whose systems failed? Those of the US companies. Liability is a legal concept. The editor of the Harvard Law review cannot understand that?

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 15 May 10 - 05:29 PM

The substratum that is bigoted. Not the substratum of the drilling area, but of the commentary. Doh!

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spil
From: GUEST,Goose Gander
Date: 15 May 10 - 05:12 PM

Please, Richard, could you provide us with the remarks from Obama that constitute bigotry?

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 15 May 10 - 05:01 PM

Evidently your academia, goosey, does not include reading or understanding. The idea that British Petroleum (based in London) are to blame for their subcontractors' failures cannot (as I have demonstrated above) rationally be supported. Therefore it is irrationally derived.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: GUEST,kendall
Date: 15 May 10 - 03:32 PM

I am against greed and sloppiness no matter who is to blame. There are plenty of "Brown sandwiches" to go around.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spil
From: GUEST,Goose Gander
Date: 15 May 10 - 02:27 PM

My academic background is in history. When doing original research, I prefer to go to primary sources. Reading over President Obama's comments regarding the spill, I am at loss to find anything remotely close to bigotry, at least as I understand the word. Perhaps Mr. Bridge can cite an example from the speech in question.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 15 May 10 - 01:31 PM

Haliburton and Cameron were contracted for this well by BP (the former often used by them for over half a century.
The subcontractors follow specifications laid down by the operating company. It seems BP did not require the most advanced methods offered by Cameron.

I don't know about Cameron, but Haliburton has offered careful service by excellent technicians to many companies over their long history. The BP executive may live to regret his comments to the Congressional Committee; he cannot be sued, however, because comments to a legislative body by are not actionable. I am sure that he will not repeat the remark outside of a protected 'venue'.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: mousethief
Date: 15 May 10 - 11:38 AM

Both Transocean and Halliburton were subcontractors. BP (widely and correctly referred to in reports as "London-based BP") is quite correct to seek to place blame for their failures on them. Barack Obama as a lawyer should appreciate that, and his criticisms of "a "ridiculous spectacle" of publicly trading blame over the accident" are out of place and must I think be an attempt to play to the gallery of prejudice against "foreign corporations".

I was with you right up till the point you brought in "foreign coprorations" because it's a total and complete non sequitur. It could be he's playing to the gallery of people mad about the spill, and BP being the most prominent name (and one most people know). I think that's far more likely. At any rate nothing in your explanation has anything to do with foreignness until your conclusion. Which therefore does not follow.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 15 May 10 - 09:36 AM

I think the word 'bigot' is thrown around way too loosely..and very ignorantly. The U.S. is not bigoted towards the British, therefore the title of this thread is too stupid to even comment on.

Richard, wake up, and get a life!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Ed T
Date: 15 May 10 - 09:21 AM

BP now means 'Beyond Petroleum', as they are no longer British, and are as much US as any global multi-company. They likely absorbed as more US firms as their original British base....a very long time ago.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 15 May 10 - 07:43 AM

FFS! It happened because the two subcontractors screwed up. Many in the US are trying to outsource the blame presumably to make themselves more comfortable with being the world's number 1 polluter - and of course the inventor of "big oil" - and for permitting drilling and plenty of other energy extraction exploits in sensitive places - primarily to feed the world's number 1 energy (particularly petroleum product) user.   

US - this happened because of you. Don't even think of sending a gunboat.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: stallion
Date: 15 May 10 - 07:15 AM

All this piss and wind! I have read most of this thread (got tedious) but I do think the spill is an envioronmental disaster and the book is getting passed around like a red hot potato. Of course BP is a multinational tax dodging money grabbing company and, apart from who is going to pick up the tab, ultimately people will want to know how it was allowed to happen. It has happened on the US politicians patch/watch and people will want to know if they were regulating the operation. To claim it was a foriegn company and out of their regulatory authority would be a good way of externalising blame and stop the shit sticking to their coat and also keep Joe public devided vertically. A sort of fascism, blaming a group or another country for ones own ills to focus the attention away from the real problem that large multi national institutions are above natural law of any country, see money as the godhead and, apart from the chosen few, the rest of us are flotsam and jetsom with a vote that means bugger all in the real world. How else could a handful of banks bring the whole world economy to it's knees? A world problem requires a world government, in your dreams.........divide and rule is the mantra......drifting thread here, but it isn't bigotry it's self preservation! And forget about nation states and consider the state of it's peoples

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: steve in ottawa
Date: 15 May 10 - 07:06 AM

I think Richard Bridge has touched on a bit of truth.

I say this because when Continental Connection Flight 3407 went down near Buffalo, NY in Feb 2009 the U.S. media quickly jumped on the bandwagon of solely blaming the sub-contractor, Colgan Air, even though all the passengers had bought their tickets through Continental and most probably would not have known, even after boarding, that they were not flying on a Continental plane, or that the air crew was not Continental trained, certified, or even monitored, and that Continental would claim not to accept any liability for the crash of the plane. I remember hearing "commuter airline" over and over. Even here in Canada. Which is disturbing.

I think calling the disaster the BRITISH Petroleum Oil Spill rather than the Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill, or the Offshore Deep-Sea Drilling Disaster is re-assuring to most Americans. Mainstream news media seem to like to alarm and then reassure people to the point where they probably won't take any action.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: kendall
Date: 15 May 10 - 07:04 AM

They are still motivated by profit first and safety second.
So, in this case I am with the President.

Was it Shakespere who said in a perfect world the first thing to do is kill the lawyers? He never mentioned oil company CEOs.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Teribus
Date: 15 May 10 - 06:39 AM

I know it doesn't happen often but Richard Bridge on this is totally correct.

Another couple of things from the way Barack Obama has "grandstanded" this one he has been reported as saying he will keep his foot on the neck of BP; he has been extremely vocal in insisting and making sure that BP will pay.

Now from what I have seen, heard and read:

BP has always accepted responsibility as the Operator Company, it has never said anything else.

Now whether through contractual means or through insurances BP can in turn recoup some of those costs from Transocean and halliburton that is a completely separate matter. But Obama does not have to keep his foot on anybodys neck, as he first must remove it from his mouth.

BP has always stated very clearly that it will pay any legitimate claim for compensation and for the clean up, it has never said anything to the contrary

Oh Kendall as one of the oldest international oil companies in the world and the independent that produces more oil than any of the others, BP's safety record is pretty good considering the scale of its operations. Its other claim to fame is that no other oil company is better at finding oil than BP, in its history it has found more "Elephants" than any other oil company.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 15 May 10 - 05:11 AM

The relevant point about subcontractors is that you subcontract to them. Therefore in classic tort theory a hirer is not ipso facto liable for the negligence of his subcontractor, although he is liable in negligence if the choice of subcontractor was negligent. Vicarious liability only arises if the negligent worker is an employee acting in the course of his employment.

Example 1. You engage a chimney sweep to sweep your chimney in your semi-detached house. He ses the chimney is badly sooted and decides to do a draught test with lighted paper. The lighted paper goes up the chimney (showing good draught) but sets light to a deposit of soot which burns both your house and your neighbour's house down. Assuming that doing the draught test before sweeping was itself negligent, the sweep is liable to you and to your neighbour for his negligence, but you are not liable to your neighbour in negligence unless engaging that subcontractor was negligent.

Example 2. You employ an employee to deliver a lorryload of stuff. It is your lorry. He takes the lorryload of stuff home with him overnight to make the delivery the next day. At 11pm he decides he wants a kebab and drives the lorry to the kebab shop but runs over a nun on a zebra crossing. You are not liable to the nun for his negligent driving for he was not acting in the course of his employment.

Exapmple 3. You employ an employee as before. He collects your lorry and load at 11 am and while driving by the correct route tomake the delivery he runs over another nun on a zebra crossing. You are liable for his negligence in the course of his employment.

Both Transocean and Halliburton were subcontractors. BP (widely and correctly referred to in reports as "London-based BP") is quite correct to seek to place blame for their failures on them. Barack Obama as a lawyer should appreciate that, and his criticisms of "a "ridiculous spectacle" of publicly trading blame over the accident" are out of place and must I think be an attempt to play to the gallery of prejudice against "foreign corporations".

Try to keep up at the back (that means you Goosey - you seem pretty ignorant).

My original thread title still seems pretty accurate to me.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 15 May 10 - 04:31 AM

"No one is allowed to trash Brits in my house"

LOL! I should hope not!

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Joe Offer
Date: 15 May 10 - 02:50 AM

Q, the Alberta wages sound similar to the pay for oil well workers in Bakersfield. But the work is extremely hard, and it's rare for an oil worker to work steadily. It's a tough life - and it results in lots of alcohol and spousal abuse, and lots of financial problems.
-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spil
From: GUEST,Goose Gander
Date: 15 May 10 - 01:56 AM

So now it's bigotry to get mad at an oil company for a spill? Richard Bridge, you are beyond parody. My dog has more common sense than you.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: mousethief
Date: 15 May 10 - 12:40 AM

What do senators do besides accepting bribes from big business, and making a lot of noise?

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 14 May 10 - 10:18 PM

The word was unnecessary, RB got hot under the collar about some derogatory statements about BP in Congress, but the senators did nothing more than make a lot of noise. Par for the course.
But perhaps some legislation to strengthen the MMS and other regulators and place restrictions on drilling in sensitive areas will result, as least I hope so.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: kendall
Date: 14 May 10 - 09:43 PM

Seems to me that the word "Bigot" is out of place here.
No one is allowed to trash Brits in my house.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: mousethief
Date: 14 May 10 - 05:47 PM

BP had a responsibility to make sure their subcontractors were doing the work right. If they can't do that, they have no business hiring subcontractors. Holding their feet to the fire has to do with their corporate responsibility and nothing to do with what nation they represent or used to be owned by or whatever. Are you saying that if they were a wholly-American-owned company, they would not be coming in for criticism? What is your evidence for this? We held Exxon responsible for the Valdez spill, and they were majority American. You're taking offense where none exists. Playing the pond card.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Tootler
Date: 14 May 10 - 05:29 PM

By the mid-1990s, corporations no longer seemed to have any loyalty toward employees

Very true. I was a lecturer in a Chemical Engineering department at that time. In the late 1980s, the big chemical companies started putting graduates on six or twelve month rolling contracts rather than employing them on a permanent basis. A local senior manager of a major company complained bitterly that recent graduates showed no loyalty to the company and was most put out when a colleague of mine said he wasn't surprised when they, as employers, were showing no loyalty to their employees. Loyalty is a two way thing and if you are not loyal to your employees, why should they be loyal to you?

My daughter experienced the rolling contract business at first hand and eventually got fed up and left her employer, a major chemical company, and went to train as a teacher. She said that about a third of her intake were from industry and many had similar experiences to her.

While the examples I have first hand knowledge of are from the chemical industry, I have no reason to doubt that the oil industry behaved in a similar manner.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 14 May 10 - 01:10 PM

Joe, Alberta requirements-
Alberta requirements for drilling rig technicians-
(applies whether hired by oil company doing the drilling or registered contractor)

Rig technician 1- must be registered apprentice,certified journeyman (journeyperson in AB Occupational profiles), or holds a recognized trades certificate. Base pay $27.50/hr. plus living allowance.
Rig technician 3- the driller- 3 years experience minimum, trade school diploma or equivalent. Base pay $38.50/hr. plus living allowance.

A professional engineer is in charge of the field, and makes daily visits to a drilling well- often staying on site during critical intervals.
A geologist (analyzes samples, etc.) may be on site for critical wells, but usually receives samples sent to him daily.

Back-up- With major companies, professionals in Exploration Division and research personnel at a central laboratory.

Lowest rung on the well- Leasehands, floorhands, motorhands; usually highschool level. Do the 'joe-work' around the rig. Pay $27.50/hr. plus living allowance (may be bunk and mess hall food, while the driller gets a house or trailer home, a car, etc.).

On an offshore rig, the crews are professional technicians, a professional engineer, and rig crew of the rig owner, that takes care of everything not directly related to the well itself.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: kendall
Date: 14 May 10 - 11:30 AM

We are. Big oil no matter who they are or where they are trying to hide.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 14 May 10 - 09:02 AM

Be pissed off with the people at fault.