|
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 - 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: 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: 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 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: 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 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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 - 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: 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 - 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 - 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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 - 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 26 May 10 - 01:21 PM A NY Times report today supports some of Mike Williams charges. It will be some time before the investigative committee reports, but it looks like a sloppy, careless crew were on the drill floor and mud control procedures were overridden by BP supervisor. Day 37 and no progress.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: PoppaGator Date: 26 May 10 - 03:38 PM What's with Richard? He obviously harbors tremendous irrational anger, but I can't tell if it's based upon hatred of the US, blind loyalty to a multinational corporation, or extreme insecurity about being British. "...A corporation that looks more and more culpable every day." No foolin' ~ seems like every day's news reveals yet another coverup or outright lie. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Richard Bridge Date: 26 May 10 - 05:10 PM My anger is based on the fact that without any then evidence US pundits were queuing up to condemn the only company in the principal frame that was not wholly American - London based British Petroleum. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Ebbie Date: 26 May 10 - 05:13 PM What did they actually say, Richard? My guess is that if it was derogatory it had to do with BP's past record. And that, it seems to me, should be valid criticism. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: mousethief Date: 26 May 10 - 05:31 PM I'd say that WITH evidence they were queuing up to condemn the company that is in charge of the operation. If they were from the moon I think they'd still do so. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 26 May 10 - 05:54 PM Commentators on CNN and in the press are talking of a developing boycott of BP. This would hurt the little franchise owner more than BP. I have posted this in the other thread as well; think before you show your disapproval of BP operations in this particular way. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Ebbie Date: 26 May 10 - 07:31 PM Q - and everyone else - are you going to read Alice's link in the other thread where two oil men discuss what they believe is going on? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: GUEST,Songbob Date: 27 May 10 - 02:06 PM Richard, I will admit to being biased. Biased against incompetent, greedy motherfucking multi-national corporations who kill off the Goddamned Gulf of Mexico. Hell, you could say that BP is biased against Mexico, so they shat in their (Mexico's) Gulf. That statement is as factual and logical as any of the horse-shit you've been dropping here. Get a life! Congress blamed the guys at the top (you know, the ones making all the fucking money till their own incompetence and interference with their hired sub-contractors screwed up the well and stopped the flow of money into their pockets) and you bitched. Get over it. Bob |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 27 May 10 - 02:48 PM Ebbie, I discussed that in the other thread and added a link to John Hofmeister-Pozzi comments. Simmons is a banker. Pozzi has had engineering experience with Saudi Aramco and his company is active in service to several oil companies, hence is worth listening to. John Hofmeister is ex-president of Shell. Songbob, BP cut corners and expenses- it now looks like they used thinner pipe then called for. These decisions were made in the Houston office (all, or nearly all, Americans) and by the onboard supervisors (Again, salaried employees). Should the CEO and others in the head office have known about this? They probably did, but deferred to the managers on the spot. Tony Hayward, the BP CEO, is a 'boy wonder', who shot up the ladder like a rocket. His skills are in management, not in science or engineering. He is a delegator as far as local operations of BP are concerned. Perhaps he should have a better knowledge of exploration procedures, and exercise more control; I don't know. He is not coming across as a thinker in his comments on TV and to the press; he trys the minimize the effects of the disaster. Salary- $1 million pounds, bonus each year about $1 million pounds- I noted this in the thread with a less controversial title. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: mousethief Date: 27 May 10 - 05:12 PM My wife read that somebody is offering a t-shirt that says, "BP: Bringing Oil to America's Shores" (or something close to that). I think I may buy one. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Joe Offer Date: 27 May 10 - 06:00 PM Well, I'm going to blame Transocean, Ltd.. It's the company that owned the drilling rig. It's incorporated in Switzerland and previously in the Cayman Islands. I never did trust a cayman. They have those big, wicked-looking teeth. Then again, this article puts the blame on BP-America (formerly AMOCO, formerly Standard Oil of Indiana), and for good reason. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spil From: Charley Noble Date: 27 May 10 - 09:06 PM Richard- Here's more evidence of US bias toward BP, which I posted in a related thread: What I'm struck with is BP's track record for producing and refining oil (from ABC News this evening). They seem to have done quite well in terms of maximizing profit but by running risks in production, at least until the current ongoing disaster. Here's a sample of how they've operated compared with other major oil producers: "OSHA statistics show BP ran up 760 "egregious, willful" safety violations" This compares with less than 10 such incidents from any of the other major oil producers. This was an accident waiting to happen and unfortunately it did. "All the king's horses and all the king's men won't put the Gulf of Mexico together again." You may quote me. Feel free to crawl out from whatever rock you're hiding under to respond. Charley Noble |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spil From: Stringsinger Date: 27 May 10 - 09:33 PM MMS was controlled by the oil companies. It is a corrupt agency corrupted by those companies who wrote their regulatory rules. This has nothing to do with Britain. It has to do with a corrupt oil company as most of them are. Corporations own most countries, these days and control their governments. I don't care how much oil company technicians or executives are paid, they are still corrupt. The problem is that corporations have become the new fascism in most parts of the world. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: mousethief Date: 27 May 10 - 11:59 PM Um, Charley, if BP is egregiously out of regulation with hazardous conditions compared to other oil companies, in what way is it anti-British to point this out? Should we kid-glove the British because they're too delicate to play with the big boys? I think that's more anti-British than letting the chips fall where they may. Pull up your big-boy pants and admit with the rest of the world that BP fucked up royal. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spil From: Charley Noble Date: 28 May 10 - 01:15 PM Mousethief- I was being sarcastic but forgot to color the font the appropriate color. Sorry for the confusion. BP fucked up big-time. But it was no accident. It was the consequence of their on-going corporate strategy of maximizing profits at the expense of safety concerns. I hope that's a clearer statement. Charley Noble |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 28 May 10 - 01:37 PM The BP executives I have mentioned in this and the other thread mostly had experience in the Russian oil fields, with TNK-BP. I wonder if the Russian tendency toward corruption and shortcuts infect them? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: PoppaGator Date: 28 May 10 - 03:52 PM On the morning before the explosion, the Transamerica guys were reportedly arguing for observation of various safety measures but were overruled by their employers from BP. This report has been slow in emerging largely because the leaders among the Transamerica group didn't survive the explosion. So, Joe, don't be so quick to shift blame from the owner to the subcontractor. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 28 May 10 - 04:48 PM Transocean provides the rig and crew to operate it. They can do nothing in regard to the drilling except give advice. "The rig's regulations state that in the event of such an emergency, the two top managers- on April 20 they were BP's senior person on the rig, Donald Vidrine, and Transocean's installation manager, Mr. Harrell- were to go to the drilling floor and evaluate the situation jointly. But once the gas hit, neither was able to get to the area." These rigs have no fire pumps, so the fire couldn't be fought (impossible anyhow, with the rush of gas up the pipe). All of those killed were American, including the well-known driller, Dewey Revette. See other thread for more comments from the WSJ article, which includes pictures of the 11 killed. The BP executives on board, and senior transocean crew, escaped. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Don Firth Date: 28 May 10 - 05:13 PM Mike Williams, who was working on the drilling rig, was interviewed very recently on "60 Minutes" on CBS (CLICKY). He stated that an official from BP complained that the drilling procedure was taking too long and costing too much money. He ordered changes in the normal drilling practices and insisted that they "speed it up!" When experienced oil drillers protested, he—a paper-pushing, bean-counting desk jockey—ignored their cautionary advice and insisted that they do as he said. Pretty harrowing! He and a co-worker, a young woman, had their choice between staying on the drilling platform and blowing up with it, or jumping into the water some 90 feet below. It makes no difference whether it's BP, Exxon, Shell, or Charlie Farquarson and his backyard drilling rig, the kind of greed and carelessness that leads to disasters of this sort is to be condemned. Don Firth |
