|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 11 Jun 10 - 11:16 PM Greg F, that was an interesting quote- makes no sense at all. I don't think many Americans throw all the blame on BP, although it must be made responsible for its mistakes. BP, as operator, took shortcuts that they might not have taken if the MMS had been hard-headed and insisted on certain checks and procedures, especially since BP had been so lax as to collect fine after fine. Congresses past are largely responsible for the MMS failures; it looks like MMS will be much different in the future (closing the barn door after... and all that). BP (Too little information to comment on Transocean's responsibilities) may find it is a takeover target because of its losses because resulting from the drilling shortcuts and the massive settlements sure to come. One NY paper suggested that the Chinese might bid for BP, but I don't think they would buy into trouble. They have bought into Canadian and other companies and Sinopec is a major petroleum corporation on the world scene. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Ebbie Date: 11 Jun 10 - 11:51 PM "Greg F, that was an interesting quote- makes no sense at all." Q June 11, 11:16 "I am blaming America for letting BP get itself into this situation." Arthur_itis June 11 1:34 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Arthur_itus Date: 12 Jun 10 - 01:24 AM What is this article on about. Is it suggesting mis-information from the Government? http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/06/11/eveningnews/main6573318.shtml?tag=stack Also this article, seems to suggest that the rig was not inspected regularly and that the last person to do an inspection was an apprentice Quote The last government inspection of the rig was on April 1 by Eric Neal, a government inspector who had only recently started his drilling inspection training, yet he was sent to the rig by himself to do the inspection. End of quote http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-31727_162-20007514-10391695.html?tag=stack |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Richard Bridge Date: 12 Jun 10 - 03:23 AM AoL news, APril 30. "Yet while both BP and Transocean have issued public apologies following the explosion and subsequent leak, the company that actually manufactured the BOP in place on Deepwater Horizon has remained curiously reticent about its role. Cameron International, formerly known as Cooper Cameron, is the worldwide leader in providing BOPs to offshore rigs, according to industry website RigZone. The Houston oil and gas systems company has been recognized by the American Society of Mechanical Engineers for creating the first blowout preventer of its kind, all the way back in 1922" Alice asserts above that US voices now attack Transocean as well as London based British Petroleum. There appears to be some argument whether Cooper Cameron or Halliburton produced the blowout preventer that BP just leased. While some US voices criticise Halliburton or Cameron Cooper, the vast preponderance (and, so far as I have heard to date, all US politicians) attack the two non-US-based corporations - and have done so from times well before any indications of maladroit operational decisions by BP. It still looks like xenophobia to me. By the way I am very critical of the ethos of multinational companies - but I stop short of blaming them for what they have not done. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: mousethief Date: 12 Jun 10 - 03:30 AM BP has been operating maladroitly for 10 years. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Joe Offer Date: 12 Jun 10 - 04:20 AM But it's not a matter of one nation against another - it's the people against the corporations. Corporate ethics seems to be at an all-time low, and the moderate-income and poor of the world are the victims. Americans have known since the days of Dick Cheney that Halliburton is corrupt, and Americans assume that almost all oil companies are corrupt. We didn't know about that Swiss drilling company - but it seems that they're corrupt, too. But we actually like the UK, and we often wish we had a President like that Tony Blair fellow.... I'll get me coat.... -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Howard Jones Date: 12 Jun 10 - 05:11 AM Joe, it shouldn't be a question of one nation against the other, but that is what the politicians and some of the media seem to trying to stoke up. In today's Times newspaper there's a letter from someone just returned from New York describing how one TV station there linked the spill with a visit to the White House by Paul McCartney by asking why the President was "inviting the citizen of a country which has destroyed the planet". US politicians want to appear to be acting tough in a situation which they don't actually have any control over. I'm not saying they shouldn't be criticising BP (although at the moment the priority should be fixing the leak and cleaning up the mess - there will be plenty of time later to argue over who is to blame), it is the way they are specifically identifying it as a British company (when it is 44% American-owned and employs twice as many Americans as Brits) which is not going down well over here. It seems from the story I quoted above that some of the US media have already fallen for this line, so it's only a matter of time before ordinary Americans start to believe it too. As for Tony Blair, you're welcome to him. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Ed T Date: 12 Jun 10 - 07:59 AM "it's not a matter of one nation against another - it's the people against the corporations" Yes...and the power and trust that nations put in these global companies, in a misguided belief that the corporate best interests are the same as the citizens best interests. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Greg F. Date: 12 Jun 10 - 10:13 AM Corporate ethics seems to be at an all-time low, and the moderate-income and poor of the world are the victims. And yet the moderate-income and poor of the U.S. of A. (read Tea-Baggers, Republicans et. al.) want to throw out of office the people who are attempting to do something to help them and put back in power the same assholes that created the mess in the first place. and the power and trust that nations put in these global companies "nations" can't put trust or anything else in corporations- its people- like the idiots above- that do. Are Piaget's stages of development taught in schoolsany longer, I wonder?? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Alice Date: 12 Jun 10 - 11:32 AM Americans work for BP, and Americans have investment in BP for their retirement, just as millions of people around the world. BP is not being "attacked". BP is RESPONSIBLE for a disaster and is being held responsible for what they have done. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 12 Jun 10 - 12:46 PM "People against corporations"- the old nonsense appears in yet another thread. Most of us depend on corporations for our employment, our savings funds, our products, our homes- in fact for our material possessions and the income to possess them. Whether the corporations are large, like Apple, Exxon, MacDonalds- corporate value in the billions- or small like that of the immigrant who employs 10 salesmen and a few others in the business end of his furniture shop, or the successful musician, his agent, driver, etc.or the plumber shop or whatever- corporate value a few million- is immaterial, our life is corporate life. And every decade through the last 150 years more and more people are able to live a comfortable life. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Ebbie Date: 12 Jun 10 - 12:57 PM "In today's Times newspaper there's a letter from someone just returned from New York describing how one TV station there linked the spill with a visit to the White House by Paul McCartney by asking why the President was "inviting the citizen of a country which has destroyed the planet". arrrrgghhhhhh! Do you actually believe that? Unless this letter writer came up with a TV station or show where this allegedly happened, I don't believe it for one gd moment. People are insane. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: mousethief Date: 12 Jun 10 - 01:07 PM "Our life is corporate life" This doesn't mean corporations are an unmitigated good, or that whatever they want to do is good for all of us. Multinationals are not the all-seeing, all-knowing benefactors of mankind you make out. They do a lot of terrible things in the name of profit, and the governments that they buy with their campaign donations sit idly by while they ruin people's lives and the environment. Most Americans work either for the government, or small businesses, not corporations. Real wages have declined quite a bit since 1980 in the United States, due in no small part to the practices of large corporations such as offshoring jobs, restructuring to get rid of well-paid employees, etc. Your bleary-eyed worship of corporations is ill-founded. Unless you're among the megarich. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spil From: Stringsinger Date: 12 Jun 10 - 02:46 PM Of course there are bigots in the U.S. congress as there are in the House of Commons or House of Lords. They're everywhere. B.P. is a criminal. This implicates Tony Hayward. They've destroyed America's coastline by cutting corners and hiring incompetents. I don't think all Brits want to be associated with B.P. just as most sane American's don't. This thread is bogus. It assumes that because Americans are down on BP, they are down on Brits. Not true and insulting. Goldman Sachs or AIG are American companies and many Americans are down on them, and justifiably so. The Multinationals are the new "countries" who are calling the shots (literally and figuratively) throughout the world. They need to be "trust-busted". They have taken over both the U.S. and the U.K. and it's time for citizens to reclaim their respective countries (but please, not like Rand Paul). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 12 Jun 10 - 03:35 PM Small businesses here are incorporated (Canada), and the same in the States. When I retired, I wanted to work as a consultant, and the first thing I did was incorporate my company. Legally in business I became "Joe Blow" Professional Corporation under the laws of the province. All professionals working independently or employing assistants or in partnership incorporate their business. It puts the incorporated business separate from the personal effects- home and possessions, etc.- of the individual and/or associates, and is necessary for legal and tax purposes. Corporations, large or small, may or may not be good corporate citizens; many of us look on BP as a bad one but that should not be a blanket condemnation of all corporations. To incorporate in the province of Alberta, this government website gives the essentials- Government Alberta Corporations |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Joe Offer Date: 12 Jun 10 - 06:45 PM Of course, there are ethical corporations, Q. Most of us are smart enough to know that, and we shouldn't have to explain that every time we say something. There are good corporations and there are corrupt corporations, and that has always been the case. Still, there seems to have been a downturn in corporate ethics in the last thirty years, at the same time that politicians have tended to deify corporations. I think it started with the Reagan-Thatcher economics of the 1980s, when the Conventional Wisdom dictated that business could do no wrong and government could do nothing right. As a result, those nasty government controls were relaxed, and business was allowed to do what it does best - become corrupt (I suppose the same is true for government: without control, it becomes corrupt). So, we have had one huge corporate scandal after another since the 1980s. Barack Obama is a ray of hope for many of us, but it has yet to be seen whether he can do anything to stem the corporate corruption of the last thirty years. Then again, many of us once thought that Tony Blair was a ray of hope.... -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 12 Jun 10 - 11:08 PM I hope it's not too long...... Common delusions notwithstanding, the United States, I submit, is not a democracy – by which is meant a system in which the will of the people prevails. Rather it is a curious mechanism artfully designed to circumvent the will of the people while appearing to be democratic. Several mechanisms accomplish this. First, we have two identical parties which, when elected, do very much the same things. Thus the election determines not policy but only the division of spoils. Nothing really changes. The Democrats will never seriously reduce military spending, nor the Republicans, entitlements. Second, the two parties determine on which questions we are allowed to vote. They simply refuse to engage the questions that matter most to many people. If you are against affirmative action, for whom do you vote? If you regard the schools as abominations? If you want to end the president's hobbyist wars? Third, there is the effect of large jurisdictions. Suppose that you lived in a very small (and independent) school district and didn't like the curriculum. You could buttonhole the head of the school board, whom you would probably know, and say, "Look, Jack, I really think…." He would listen. But suppose that you live in a suburban jurisdiction of 300,000. You as an individual mean nothing. To affect policy, you would have to form an organization, canvass for votes, solicit contributions, and place ads in newspapers. This is a fulltime job, prohibitively burdensome. The larger the jurisdiction, the harder it is to exert influence. Much policy today is set at the state level. Now you need a statewide campaign to change the curriculum. Practically speaking, it isn't practical. Fourth are impenetrable bureaucracies. A lot of policy is set by making regulations at some department or other, often federal. How do you call the Department of Education to protest a rule which is in fact a policy? The Department has thousands of telephones, few of them listed, all of which will brush you off. There is nothing the public can do to influence these goiterous, armored, unaccountable centers of power. Yes, you can write your senator, and get a letter written by computer, "I thank you for your valuable insights, and assure you that I am doing all…." Fifth is the invisible bureaucracy (which is also impenetrable). A few federal departments get at least a bit of attention from the press, chiefly State and Defense (sic). Most of the government gets no attention at all – HUD, for example. Nobody knows who the Secretary of HUD is, or what the department is doing. Similarly, the textbook publishers have some committee whose name I don't remember (See? It works) that decides what words can be used in texts, how women and Indians must be portrayed, what can be said about them, and so on. Such a group amounts to an unelected ministry of propaganda and, almost certainly, you have never heard of it. Sixth, there is the illusion of journalism. The newspapers and networks encourage us to think of them as a vast web of hard-hitting, no-holds-barred, chips-where-they-may inquisitors of government: You can run, but you can't hide. In fact federal malefactors don't have to run or hide. The press isn't really looking. Most of press coverage is only apparent. Television isn't journalism, but a service that translates into video stories found in the Washington Post and New York Times (really). Few newspapers have bureaus in Washington; the rest follow the lead of a small number of major outlets. These don't really cover things either. When I was reporting on the military, there were (if memory serves) many hundreds of reporters accredited to the Pentagon, or at least writing about the armed services. It sounds impressive: All those gimlet eyes. What invariably happened though was that some story would break – a toilet seat alleged to cost too much, or the failure of this or that. All the reporters would chase the toilet seat, fearful that their competitors might get some detail they didn't. Thus you had one story covered six hundred times. In any event the stories were often dishonest and almost always ignorant because reporters, apparently bound by some natural law, are obligate technical illiterates. This includes the reporters for the Post and the Times. Seventh, and a bit more subtle, is the lack of centers of demographic power in competition with the official government. The Catholic Church, for example, once influentially represented a large part of the population. It has been brought to heel. We are left with government by lobby – the weapons industry, big pharma, AIPAC, the teachers unions – whose representatives pay Congress to do things against the public interest. Eighth, we are ruled not by a government but by a class. Here the media are crucial. Unless you spend time outside of America, you may not realize to what extent the press is controlled. The press is largely free, yes, but it is also largely owned by a small number of corporations which, in turn, are run by people from the same pool from which are drawn high-level pols and their advisers. They are rich people who know each other and have the same interests. It is very nearly correct to say that these people are the government of the United States, and that the federal apparatus merely a useful theatrical manifestation. Finally, though it may not be deliberate, the schools produce a pitiably ignorant population that can't vote wisely. Just as trial lawyers don't want intelligent jurors, as they are harder to manipulate, so political parties don't want educated voters. The existence of a puzzled mass gawping at Oprah reduces elections to popularity contests modulated by the state of the economy. One party may win, yes, or the other. But a TV-besotted electorate doesn't meddle in matters important to its rulers. It has never heard of them. To disguise all of this, elections provide the excitement and intellectual content of a football game, without the importance. They allow a sense of Participation. In bars across the land, in high-school gyms become forums, people become heated about what they imagine to be decisions of great import: This candidate or that? It keeps them from feeling left out while denying them power. It is fraud. In a sense, the candidates do not even exist. A presidential candidate consists of two speechwriters, a makeup man, a gestures coach, ad agency, two pollsters and an interpreter of focus groups. Depending on his numbers, the handlers may suggest a more fixed stare to crank up his decisiveness quotient for male or Republican voters, or dial in a bit of compassion for a Democratic or female audience. The newspapers will report this calculated transformation. Yet it works. You can fool enough of the people enough of the time. When people sense this and decline to vote, we cluck like disturbed hens and speak of apathy. Nope. Just common sense. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Don Firth Date: 13 Jun 10 - 01:30 AM Credit where credit is due, GfS. That above article Copyright © 2008 Fred Reed. From http://www.lewrockwell.com/reed/reed139.html. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 13 Jun 10 - 01:32 AM I didn't sign it, did I?? But it is right on! >>>>>GFS<<<<<<< |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Ebbie Date: 13 Jun 10 - 03:24 AM sheesh And here I was thinking that Sanity Guest had finally taken the time to be coherent. Thanks, Don. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company From: Richard Bridge Date: 13 Jun 10 - 03:41 AM Thanks again Don - I was getting worried that I was going to agree with some parts of something Fugitive from Sanity said. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Arthur_itus Date: 13 Jun 10 - 03:58 AM Anybody on the in concerning Cameron Obama phone call? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 13 Jun 10 - 05:26 AM Coherent?..Here, let's be very plain about it. Thinking between the lines doesn't seem to be one of your leading traits! The two polarizations, that are oppressing this nation of people, happen to be, the product of propaganda, opposed by myself, and eloquently written by Fred Reed. He gets it, I get it...and so do you! At what point do you stop running into the arms of those feeding you that line of crap, that, because of some self imposed trap, you can't let go of??...and running away from the truth....WHICH YOU JUST RECOGNIZED!!!! You would, and have said, and done anything, to discredit either myself, or ANYONE, and diverting everyone's attention away. Away from someone who is, and has been calling you on your bullshit! ALL this to avoid you accepting, that the polarization, and anger in this country, on both sides, which you have chosen one, has you pitting the very VICTIMS of this fraud, against each other! How far does it have to get before your jaw drops open, as you gasp, "Oh, my God, their shooting at each other, in the streets?"..or, are you going to 'intellectualize' about it, even when you windows are rattling?? Maybe that's your goal, but I, for one oppose ANYTHING of this sort, and am doing, and will do everything I can, to disarm it, and the stupidity that brings it!...on here, in music, and in my daily life's dealings! STOP FEEDING IT!! As I've said before, and I'm sorry..I just can't remember where I first heard it, "SNAP NOW, AND AVOID THE RUSH!!" Clear and coherent enough??? ....Got too much personal and bull shit clogging your filters? Rethink....your political mantras ..and who fed you that crap!..and why! Most Sincerely, Guest from Sanity |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Howard Jones Date: 13 Jun 10 - 07:23 AM Ebbie, why shouldn't I believe it? It sounds like just the sort of dumb question a TV journalist would ask. The person who wrote the letter was on holiday with his wife - I doubt he noticed or cared what channel or what programme it was on, but he noticed the comment, and a growing anti-British sentiment in the media. No one is accusing the American people of being anti-British. The criticism is of a number of politicians who appear to have been deliberately and repeatedly making the point by referring to BP as "British Petroleum" that it is a British company. Although they deny being anti-British as well, the sub-text is there. If they keep repeating it, that subliminal message will start to get across to ordinary Americans. In fairness, some of our own politicians have been making an issue of this too, which is equally unhelpful. But the issue is causing some concern here - not because we defend BP, which has handled both the event and the aftermath badly, but because of the possible damage to US-UK relations. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Arthur_itus Date: 13 Jun 10 - 07:50 AM Ok here is a link to 'BP oil spill: Obama comments 'not anti-British' for what it's worth. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/politics/10303619.stm |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 13 Jun 10 - 10:00 AM ""Well, they agreed to pay for all legitimate claims, "legitimate" being a weasel word which one can fully expect to be used to dodge out of claims that any number of observers might think are "legitimate"."" So what do you want them to do then Mousethief? Pay out for some Kansas farmer who claims the spill hs ruined his fields? Of course they'll only pay claims for damage that actually happened i.e. "legitimate claims" It's a no brainer, and it's more than US insurance companies do. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 13 Jun 10 - 10:06 AM ""Actually BP is not a British Company. The B does not stand for British any more, it stands for B - the name was changed from British Petroleum a few years ago. There are probably as many American investors in the company as there are British."" Actually it is 40 percent British, 39 percent American, and 21 percent unspecified others, according to info from the BBC yesterday. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 13 Jun 10 - 10:19 AM ""Furthermore, the drilling is a lot deeper, than just 5000 feet below the surface of the water. It penetrates up to 30,000 feet below the ocean floor! They believe they have penetrated the earth's mantel."" Wow! GfS rewrites geology. 30,000 feet is 10 Kilometres, which could possibly penetrate the very edge of the upper mantle. However this depth would be insufficient except in a tiny percentage of the worlds surface area, and in any case would be many kilometres short of the mantle proper. I think GfS, that you would know if the mantle had been penetrated, as they would have been fighting a vocanic eruption, not a bloody oil spill. How do you propose that oil would exist in molten rock? Just gets dafter and dafter. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 13 Jun 10 - 10:27 AM ""and to answer Ebbster's questions, which is related, in a way, the EPA data was leaked, you might find more about it online, however I'd rather not divulge that, at this time."" I'll just bet you would rather not, or more accurately, rather cannot. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 13 Jun 10 - 10:36 AM ""we often wish we had a President like that Tony Blair fellow...."" You should have said Joe. By 2005 we would have happily given him to you, and thrown in Gordon Brown free of charge, WITH GREEN STAMPS! Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 13 Jun 10 - 10:50 AM ""Americans work for BP, and Americans have investment in BP for their retirement, just as millions of people around the world. BP is not being "attacked". BP is RESPONSIBLE for a disaster and is being held responsible for what they have done."" Yes Alice, BP is responsible, and accepted that responsibility long before American politicians started talking about "kicking ass". Can you explain what you find useful in the idea of whipping a horse that is already going in the direction you want, at the best pace of which it is capable. When RB started this thread I thought he was being paranoid, but there is one thing about which he is indubitably correct. Your politicians and your news media are accentuating the "British" Petroleum increasingly, and it simply cannot be passed off as accidental. Remember how the Shrub emphasised Iraq in connection with 9/11, until many Americans thought that the USA was invading Iraq because Saddam was responsible for 9/11? Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 13 Jun 10 - 01:01 PM Don T "30,000 feet is 10 Kilometres, which could possibly penetrate the very edge of the upper mantle. However this depth would be insufficient except in a tiny percentage of the worlds surface area, and in any case would be many kilometres short of the mantle proper." That's ri-i-i-ght! In other words, this thing is worse than being reported! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 13 Jun 10 - 02:10 PM BP, in their own website, states "We are the largest non-US company on the New York Stock Exchange." Their head office, and legal operations, are handled from there. Stock ownership does not determine the ownership of a company, unless it has control of the Board and legal operations. All this posted above. Stock Ownership 44% UK, 39% US; Institutional ownership 33% UK, 25% US, rest individuals. Also posted above. Stock ownership may be changing rapidly as many are divesting their portfolios of BP stock and reflected by the current low stock value. ------------------------ The well has drilled into sediments below thick salt layers and rock which formed an effective seal, trapping the oil and gas, and leading to high gas pressure, leading to the danger of blowouts. The mantle is not involved; at this location it is much deeper. Temperatures are high, however, also leading to high gas pressures. Several companies have drilled test wells into these sediments below the salt layers; it is risky because if something goes wrong or there is carelessness, blowout like BP's may occur and corrective measures are experimental or poorly tested. -------------------------------------- BP used to be called British Petroleum; as they increasingly operated all over the world, the Board decided the name should be simply BP. Of course many people still call the company 'British Petroleum'. So what? Not important. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 13 Jun 10 - 02:12 PM Handled from there should read- handled from the London headquarters. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 13 Jun 10 - 03:25 PM ""The mantle is not involved; at this location it is much deeper. Temperatures are high, however, also leading to high gas pressures."" Did you get that GfS. Given the averages involved, it was a racing certainty that such would be the case, since the thinnest parts of the crust would be concentrated at the edges of the emerging tectonic plates, none of which are anywhere near the drilling sites, being concentrated in the Pacific "Ring of Fire", and the Atlantic "Mid Ocean Ridge". The Carribean and the Gulf of Mexico would presumably be closer to the subduction zone at the other edge of the plate, where the crust would be thicker. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spil From: Stringsinger Date: 13 Jun 10 - 03:38 PM "Common delusions notwithstanding, the United States, I submit, is not a democracy" There is no pure democracy anywhere but there are tendencies that are apparent in some countries, more than others. "First, we have two identical parties which, when elected, do very much the same things." Not historically. The Party of FDR was considerably different than that of G.W. Bush. "But suppose that you live in a suburban jurisdiction of 300,000. You as an individual mean nothing. To affect policy, you would have to form an organization, canvass for votes, solicit contributions, and place ads in newspapers. This is a fulltime job, prohibitively burdensome." Burdensome, perhaps but well worth the effort. This is how grass-roots issues become national policy. This is true democracy albeit not "pure". "Fourth are impenetrable bureaucracies." Not totally. They are porous when world situations change such as the policies of the Pentagon during the Vietnam War. "Fifth is the invisible bureaucracy" Again, not totally. It is incumbent as a citizen to know who is who in these bureaucracies and to advertise their misdeeds. This has and can be done. "Sixth, there is the illusion of journalism." Most mainstream media are corporate controlled. But there are other wonderful voices to be relied upon such as Amy Goodman on Democracy, Now. There are also certain blogs and magazines that tell the truth. Again, it's up to an informed citizenry to find them. "Seventh, and a bit more subtle, is the lack of centers of demographic power in competition with the official government." This may be a good thing. Centralized power can sometimes be dictatorial whereas a displacement of various power sources can get things done particularly on a local level. Sometimes coalitions of power groups can be successful in instituting public policy. "Eighth, we are ruled not by a government but by a class." People are not ruled by any institution if they choose not to be. We are seeing that today in the grass-roots although some of that is misguided such as the so-called "Tea Party" which is corporate sponsored. On an individual level, a person doesn't have to buy in to the prevailing views of any administration of government. There can be still in this country countervailing group influences. We are not totally a fascist country yet. "Finally, though it may not be deliberate, the schools produce a pitiably ignorant population that can't vote wisely." This depends on the school. Education has suffered a set-back in its ability to get students to think, but young people can sometimes overcome this and can find support for their dissent in certain schools. We see this on Berkeley campuses and other institutions where the students question the prevailing authorities. "When people sense this and decline to vote, we cluck like disturbed hens and speak of apathy. Nope. Just common sense." There is nothing commonsensical about not voting. The idea of democracy is predicated on the importance of the process. Obama's election, regardless of his betrayal in his administration, represented a willingness of the electorate to want to improve the government from what it had under Bush. This can happen again. When the government is not working especially well, there is always a tendency to say that it will never work well. This is not historically true. Often world events will dictate that repairs must be made as in the case of say FDR during the Depression. One can criticize FDR on many levels but overall, there was an improvement in the way government worked under his administration. Even the war-mongering Johnson got us a Civil Rights Act with Thurgood Marshall. It's fashionable today to take a Libertarian view that government never works. There is no substantial proof of this, however, historically. The evidence points in the opposite direction. When Wall Street becomes unregulated, economic chaos ensues. That's what caused the Great Depression. Today's "critics" look to a under-achiever policy, if it isn't perfect than why bother? It's easy to take that view but not responsible. As citizens we have the responsibility to know what's going on and attempt to change it if we think it's wrong. The arm-chair cop-out is to sit back and throw darts. I, for one, am not totally disillusioned about our government and the problems of power and policy. Sometimes it's important to read about the stuff that isn't in the accepted history books such as the role of labor. It has been counted down and out only by those who don't have the information or have other agendas to know what's really going on. In short, there are alternative methods for getting newsworthy information without succumbing to corporate mainstream media. Hey, Mudcat is one. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Alice Date: 13 Jun 10 - 03:59 PM I am a news "junkie". I wake up to NPR news. I listen to the non-commercial radio news on National Public Radio, which includes BBC news at night. I usually have tv news on in the background while I work, which is CNN, MSNBC, non-commercial Public Broadcasting System, which includes BBC, CSPAN, and I check numerous news web sites during the day, BBC, Pravda, and Reporters Without Borders, covering world news, at http://en.rsf.org/ Reporters Sans Frontieres Most Americans I think are just trying to get through the day. They may not be very well informed about what is going on in the world, as putting food on the table and keeping the rent or mortgage paid is their main focus. Most Americans don't vote, unfortunately. Most do not have work schedules that allow them to keep up on daily news from sources around the world. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 13 Jun 10 - 04:47 PM If one is uninformed, one either doesn't care, or doesn't look. BBC, of course, is on many cable systems, we get it 24 hours a day. The internet has too many news sources to list. A few I look at semi-regularly- South China Morning Post- one in today's news- "Britain is cracking down on corruption among British companies worldwide..." May have far-reaching impact on Hong Kong and mainland firms- Al Jazeera- A report that Pakistan's Intelligence Service (ISI) backs Taliban- analysis of a paper from London School of Economics. Causing worry to US forces. Arizona Republic- various articles about Bill 1070 and its effects on legal immigrants and citizens. Many are worried, some are angered about being harrassed because they are darker-skinned. The Tucson police chief is worried that Sheriff Arapaio, etc., are causing conditions that may lead to riots. Some Hispanics are considering moving to another state. London Times- BP is considering putting several billions into a ring-fenced cleanup fund to appease Americans Where is the PB chairman, Carl-Henric Svenberg? He has been silent. He should be active in the disaster. BP was worth only $73 billion on Friday. It is vulnerable to takeover by Exxon-Mobil, Chevron, etc. Unlikely until after things quiet down and the gusher controlled. and so on- anything and everything is available |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 13 Jun 10 - 05:00 PM Carl-Henric Svanberg, the new BP chairman, has been summoned to a meeting with Pres. Obama. He has been chief executive of Ericsson Telecommunications. He is on the board of "9 different organizations across 12 different industries" -Bloomberg Business Week. Annual Compensation from Ericsson was 17 million Kroner. Degree from Uppsala (and a couple of honorary doctorates. Not versed in the oil business. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 13 Jun 10 - 05:09 PM PB has put forth this image of Svanberg- Svanberg Those eyes- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 13 Jun 10 - 05:39 PM Sorry- didn't work. Probably can be found through www.bp.com Andy Inglis, Board member (Pembroke College, Cambridge, engineering) is Chief Executive, Exploration and Production. Earlier, had led BP's deepwater Gulf of Mexico exploration, 1997-1999, before moving to US natural gas business. Tony Heyward was his predecessor as CE, Exp.&Prod. Haven't heard anything from him, either. There are 13 Board members, plus the Chairman. Two Board Members are American, or former Americans. Robert Dudley, BP Managing Director, is American. Amoco beginning. Dr. Byron Grote, Chief Financial Officer, has a PhD in chemistry, Cornell Univ. Standard Oil of Ohio and Kennicott Mining positions in his early history, BP since 1988 (Alaskan area originally). Cynthia Caroll (Canadian, now British?) started with Amoco; currently a director also with DeBeers sa and Anglo Platinum Ltd; former chief executive of Anglo American plc. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Alice Date: 13 Jun 10 - 05:47 PM Svanberg photo at BP.com |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Ebbie Date: 13 Jun 10 - 06:10 PM Whew. Wouldn't want to get in *his* way. :) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 13 Jun 10 - 06:14 PM Thanks, Alice. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Greg F. Date: 13 Jun 10 - 06:23 PM the teachers unions – whose representatives pay Congress to do things against the public interest. When did teachers and other union members stop being members of the public? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Ed T Date: 13 Jun 10 - 08:07 PM Oil spill casts doubts on deep water exploration http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international-business/Oil-spill-casts-doubts-on-deep-water-exploration/articleshow/604 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: GUEST,Uncle Rumpo Date: 13 Jun 10 - 08:37 PM blame who they like, claim as much $$$$$$$$$$ compensation off BP as they like, but some disgustingly ruthless greedy power crazed yanks long time ago decided drilling in a world valued eco environment beauty spot would be a splendidly profitable good idea.... live by the oil die by the oil... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 16 Jun 10 - 12:40 AM A few posts ago, I posted that the amount of oil leaking was MUCH higher than being reported. I also said, that this is not going to go away soon, and as time goes on, more of the story will come out. Since then the reports have been modified TWICE, within a couple of days, like I said. Now, they're saying it is up to 400,000 barrels a day...though the figure is still higher..much higher. Just thought I'd point that out...to all my naysayer critics! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: CarolC Date: 16 Jun 10 - 12:53 AM BP hires mercenaries to hide the evidence More about the coverup |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 16 Jun 10 - 01:13 AM 300! Thank you CarolC! As to the toxins, I also posted that, too. More will come out....watch! GfS |
