Why is BP taking all the blame?

[Damocles]

Does this article state that there wasn't aid from other countries regarding ships?

Nope.

Does this article disprove what was presented in the information I sighted or the chart we both discussed?

Nope.

You don't like the delays...neither do I...but your automatic assumption that it's all the "fault" of the Obama administration is just that...an assumption. And in order to maintain that assumption, one would have to deny the information in the factcheck article...as you have done.

What it states is that the red tape that Obama should be cutting isn't being cut and that there have been zero Jones Act waivers issued, although there are at least six ships waiting for those waivers, according to the administration's "joint information center"...

We now know that Obama's administration has finally understood that there is some need for help and "accepted" (approved) help from 12 skimmers from foreign nations, and still has 30 requests waiting to be "accepted". Their urgency and capacity to understand the scope of the issue isn't just broken, it's non-existent.

It also shows that factcheck, at least in this instance, is working on old and inaccurate information.

But he's all thumbs up when it comes to eating food from the gulf! Thank Gawd he told us that the food was okay!

 

[Canceled.LTroll.16]

In the past an almost double-digit percentage increase in the BP share price would have signalled a spectacular oil strike.

It is a measure of the decline in the company's fortunes that such a surge was triggered by hopes of a takeover or break-up.

The company's stock soared 9% to 331p at one point as a growing list of companies from China to Russia were linked with potential mega-mergers that could see the end of independence for what was once Britain's biggest firm.

Investors piled into the troubled oil group amid a growing view that the brand has little future in the US – its biggest single market – and the company will need to reinvent itself through a change of brand, change of boss or change of ownership.

The takeover ball started to roll in earnest when a research note released by JP Morgan Cazenove in London boldly declared that "either ExxonMobil or Royal Dutch Shell could consider a bid for BP".

And it gathered pace when figures such as Peter Odell, professor emeritus of energy economics at Erasmus University in Rotterdam, said "everyone was contemplating" what it would be like for their company to buy BP.

"If the bad news continues to roll for BP then the feeling will grow that the company has had its day and will either be broken up into pieces or bought up completely," he argued.

The speculation was also given momentum by Maxim Barsky, deputy chief executive of BP's Russian joint venture, TNK-BP, saying his company could be interested in acquiring assets from BP outside Russia.

Other Russian groups such as Gazprom and Chinese companies such as PetroChina – now the largest quoted oil company in the world – were also being discussed as potential predators.

Analysts believed one of the main stumbling blocks to a merger approach to a company whose share price has more than halved since late April was the difficulty of assessing the scale of its future liabilities, which some think could reach $60bn.

But there would also be competition issues and concerns about job losses.

Fred Lucas, the JP Morgan energy analyst, argued that BP could be worth 473p a share to a potential buyer, such as Exxon – a hefty premium to BP's current share price. "The market has lost sight of the intrinsic value that is resident in an asset-rich company like BP," he argued.

Odell believed it inconceivable the White House would allow a Russian or Chinese company to buy BP's American assets, which provide the UK-based company with 40% of its profits, but said it might be quite possible for the US business to be bought by a local group and the international operations taken by someone else.

A furor over the planned sale of a strategic oil asset in 2005 prevented another large Chinese firm, China National Offshore Oil Company, buying up the locally owned Unocal Corporation.

Not everyone accepts that BP is doomed and some argue it could still rebuild its reputation and brand in the US by quickly capping the oil leak, bringing in a new chief executive and then reverting to the much heavier use of the Amoco name.

Many believe chief executive Tony Hayward will go before Christmas, with some of his lieutenants, such as the American head of the oil spill operation, Bob Dudley, or the British refining boss, Iain Conn, tipped as possible successors, while the names of outsiders such as Tony Blair have been linked with the post of chairman.

Meanwhile the rebranding of BP petrol stations would be easy.

BP took over Amoco in a $110bn mega-merger over a decade ago and gradually replaced the Amoco brand on petrol stations and refineries with its own.

Fadel Gheit, oil analyst with New York brokerage Oppenheimer & Co, argues the sale of BP is far from inevitable, not least because any big tie-up with another local company such as Exxon could cost tens of thousands of jobs.

"When Exxon took over Mobil, 50,000 employees left the combined company payroll within three years and this is the last thing that politicians would want to see in the current environment," said Gheit.

Gheit also holds the controversial view that a big political event away from the gulf would be enough to distract attention away from BP and allow the company to rebuild.

"The best thing that could happen to BP is an Israeli and US bombing of Iran, which would take the media spotlight off BP and send the oil price racing up to $100 per barrel. I personally believe there is a very high probability of this within three to six months," said Gheit.

BP has already said it will suspend dividends to shareholders, reduce its investment program and sell some of its assets, after agreeing with the US government to set aside $20bn to pay for the spill.

Several investment banks have teams reviewing BP's asset portfolio. The company has sizeable operations in Colombia, Algeria, Australia, and South America, none of which are central to the company's future strategy.

Barsky said that TNK-BP, responsible for a quarter of BP's output, would be particularly interested in the British oil major's downstream refining and marketing units in Europe and other assets related to unconventional gas and offshore drilling. But the Kremlin, which has already destabilized Hayward by predicting his departure, may have a bigger prize in mind.

 

[Canceled.LTroll.8]

The top Republican on the energy committee even had the nerve to apologize to BP for the fact that we made them set up this fund.

Apologize to BP!

He actually called the fund 'a tragedy.'

A tragedy?

A tragedy is what the people of the Gulf are going through right now.

That's the tragedy.

 

[Canceled.LTroll.17]

You lie!

 

[Canceled.LTroll.8]

There are some folks in the other party who are also against raising the limit on what companies like BP have to pay for the environmental disasters they cause.

 

[Canceled.LTroll.17]

You lie!

 

[Legion Troll's Troll]

You tell em Legion!

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Does this article state that there wasn't aid from other countries regarding ships?

Nope.

Does this article disprove what was presented in the information I sighted or the chart we both discussed?

Nope.

You don't like the delays...neither do I...but your automatic assumption that it's all the "fault" of the Obama administration is just that...an assumption. And in order to maintain that assumption, one would have to deny the information in the factcheck article...as you have done.

What it states is that the red tape that Obama should be cutting isn't being cut and that there have been zero Jones Act waivers issued, although there are at least six ships waiting for those waivers, according to the administration's "joint information center"...


We now know that Obama's administration has finally understood that there is some need for help and "accepted" (approved) help from 12 skimmers from foreign nations, and still has 30 requests waiting to be "accepted". Their urgency and capacity to understand the scope of the issue isn't just broken, it's non-existent.

It also shows that factcheck, at least in this instance, is working on old and inaccurate information.

But he's all thumbs up when it comes to eating food from the gulf! Thank Gawd he told us that the food was okay!

You're insipid stubborness is tiring.

The factcheck information is not "dated", as it EXPLAINS THE CHAIN OF EVENTS. The "chart" that you were so hyped about included information about material, ships and personnel that were already working in the Gulf prior to the last article you just linked (go back and CAREFEULLY read what I excerpted). So unless you're calling the Coast Guard admiral a liar, and are going to deny information in the chain of events, the oft repeated accusation heard via neocon radio and newspapers that Obama refused ALL foreign naval help has been debunked.

Also, the whining about the Jones Act was explained by FactCheck....you don't like it, but you can't deny it....so to satisfy your anti-Obama itch, you just ignore it and just keep repeating "Obama should waive the Jones Act".



The chronology of facts mean nothing to those who have an agenda of discrediting a man on all levels. Like I said before, I'm not happy with all the protocol BS either...but I won't use that dislike to endorse exaggerations and fabrications.

So unless you've got something else besides another version of what has previously transpired (and personal shots with condescending attitude won't count), I'd say we're done here.

 

[Damocles]

You're insipid stubborness is tiring.

The factcheck information is not "dated", as it EXPLAINS THE CHAIN OF EVENTS. The "chart" that you were so hyped about included information about material, ships and personnel that were already working in the Gulf prior to the last article you just linked (go back and CAREFEULLY read what I excerpted). So unless you're calling the Coast Guard admiral a liar, and are going to deny information in the chain of events, the oft repeated accusation heard via neocon radio and newspapers that Obama refused ALL foreign naval help has been debunked.

Also, the whining about the Jones Act was explained by FactCheck....you don't like it, but you can't deny it....so to satisfy your anti-Obama itch, you just ignore it and just keep repeating "Obama should waive the Jones Act".



The chronology of facts mean nothing to those who have an agenda of discrediting a man on all levels. Like I said before, I'm not happy with all the protocol BS either...but I won't use that dislike to endorse exaggerations and fabrications.

So unless you've got something else besides another version of what has previously transpired (and personal shots with condescending attitude won't count), I'd say we're done here.

Yet the actual information center set up by the government disagrees with you, and so does Bill Clinton...

http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2010/s2940251.htm


BILL CLINTON: One of the best things that they've done is to deploy massive naval and coastguard resources and finally start taking help from other countries.

And the factcheck.org's "report" flat out was wrong about Jones Act requests. Just wrong.

Your blind partisanship has never been more obvious than in this particular issue. Nothing the man does wrong will ever reach your radar. We get it. You want to cheer mediocrity and incompetence. I, for one, am done with it.

 

[Canceled1]

Yet the actual information center set up by the government disagrees with you, and so does Bill Clinton...

http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2010/s2940251.htm


BILL CLINTON: One of the best things that they've done is to deploy massive naval and coastguard resources and finally start taking help from other countries.

And the factcheck.org's "report" flat out was wrong about Jones Act requests. Just wrong.

Your blind partisanship has never been more obvious than in this particular issue. Nothing the man does wrong will ever reach your radar. We get it. You want to cheer mediocrity and incompetence. I, for one, am done with it.

May wonders never cease!

Now let's see how long before the rest say "OUCH!".

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
You're insipid stubborness is tiring.

The factcheck information is not "dated", as it EXPLAINS THE CHAIN OF EVENTS. The "chart" that you were so hyped about included information about material, ships and personnel that were already working in the Gulf prior to the last article you just linked (go back and CAREFEULLY read what I excerpted). So unless you're calling the Coast Guard admiral a liar, and are going to deny information in the chain of events, the oft repeated accusation heard via neocon radio and newspapers that Obama refused ALL foreign naval help has been debunked.

Also, the whining about the Jones Act was explained by FactCheck....you don't like it, but you can't deny it....so to satisfy your anti-Obama itch, you just ignore it and just keep repeating "Obama should waive the Jones Act".



The chronology of facts mean nothing to those who have an agenda of discrediting a man on all levels. Like I said before, I'm not happy with all the protocol BS either...but I won't use that dislike to endorse exaggerations and fabrications.

So unless you've got something else besides another version of what has previously transpired (and personal shots with condescending attitude won't count), I'd say we're done here.

Yet the actual information center set up by the government disagrees with you, and so does Bill Clinton...

http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2010/s2940251.htm


BILL CLINTON: One of the best things that they've done is to deploy massive naval and coastguard resources and finally start taking help from other countries.

And the factcheck.org's "report" flat out was wrong about Jones Act requests. Just wrong.

Your blind partisanship has never been more obvious than in this particular issue. Nothing the man does wrong will ever reach your radar. We get it. You want to cheer mediocrity and incompetence. I, for one, am done with it.

Nothing you presented disproved what Fact Check put forth......Slick Willy's "opinion" is NOT FACT...no "opinion" is fact. Unless you can show EXACTLY what your source disproves in the Fact Check article(with all it's sub-links), then all YOU are doing is just stubbornly repeating yourself, Damo....and sounding more and more like all the other neocon clowns that permeate this thread.


Grow up, Damo. The whole "Obama's denied all foreign ships/aide" has been proven WRONG....TFB if you don't like it.

Had you been paying attention, you'd note that I have stated repeatedly that I'm not entirely happy with Obama's performance throughout this mess...hell, I've started 2 critical posts on his administration in the recent past...I'm just exposing the neocon "get Obama out" hype for what it is. You can't be "partisan" if you're not lock step.....as the neocons showed us from 2000-2008.

Carry on.

 

[Canceled.LTroll.16]

British Polluters is taking the blame only because they've been caught.

British Greenpeace activists unfurled a mock BP logo at the oil major's corporate headquarters in London on Thursday following the recent oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

On a big flag the protesters covered the official logo - described by BP as "a sunburst of green, yellow and white" - with an oil spill and added the inscription "British Polluters."

"We reckon a company that invests in tar sands - the dirtiest oil there is - needs something other than a nice green flower as their brand identity," Greenpeace said on its website.

An explosion in April on the Deepwater Horizon oil drilling platform about 80 kilometers (50 miles) off the Louisiana coast caused a major oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. The blast claimed the lives of 11 people who were working on the rig and injured other 17. The rig sunk two days later, with oil continuing to spill into the sea.

The Gulf of Mexico, which hosts some 4,000 drilling platforms, is home to many endangered animal species and the accident is a major threat to the Gulf's flora and fauna.

http://en.rian.ru/world/20100520/159093386.html

http://imjustcreative.com/bp-logo-redesign-greenpeace-bp-logo-flickr-set/2010/05/31/

http://imjustcreative.com/bp-logo-redesign-greenpeace-bp-logo-flickr-set/2010/05/31/

 

[Damocles]

Nothing you presented disproved what Fact Check put forth......Slick Willy's "opinion" is NOT FACT...no "opinion" is fact. Unless you can show EXACTLY what your source disproves in the Fact Check article(with all it's sub-links), then all YOU are doing is just stubbornly repeating yourself, Damo....and sounding more and more like all the other neocon clowns that permeate this thread.


Grow up, Damo. The whole "Obama's denied all foreign ships/aide" has been proven WRONG....TFB if you don't like it.

Had you been paying attention, you'd note that I have stated repeatedly that I'm not entirely happy with Obama's performance throughout this mess...hell, I've started 2 critical posts on his administration in the recent past...I'm just exposing the neocon "get Obama out" hype for what it is. You can't be "partisan" if you're not lock step.....as the neocons showed us from 2000-2008.

Carry on.

Dude, what I presented showed factcheck to be incorrect. It was from the Administration's own joint informational center. Had you been paying attention, you would stop trying to be an apologist for them and try to get them to start making some freaking decisions.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Nothing you presented disproved what Fact Check put forth......Slick Willy's "opinion" is NOT FACT...no "opinion" is fact. Unless you can show EXACTLY what your source disproves in the Fact Check article(with all it's sub-links), then all YOU are doing is just stubbornly repeating yourself, Damo....and sounding more and more like all the other neocon clowns that permeate this thread.


Grow up, Damo. The whole "Obama's denied all foreign ships/aide" has been proven WRONG....TFB if you don't like it.

Had you been paying attention, you'd note that I have stated repeatedly that I'm not entirely happy with Obama's performance throughout this mess...hell, I've started 2 critical posts on his administration in the recent past...I'm just exposing the neocon "get Obama out" hype for what it is. You can't be "partisan" if you're not lock step.....as the neocons showed us from 2000-2008.

Carry on.

Dude, what I presented showed factcheck to be incorrect. It was from the Administration's own joint informational center. Had you been paying attention, you would stop trying to be an apologist for them and try to get them to start making some freaking decisions.

"Dude" YOU'RE FULL OF SHIT....PERIOD! All you presented was an article that gave Slick Willy's OPINION and then coverage of aspects of the ON-GOING situation.

I'M NOT ASKING FOR YOUR OPINION OR FOR YOU TO REPEAT YOUR OPINION OR ANOTHER ROUND OF NEOCON MANTRAS ABOUT OBAMA..... I WANT YOU TO GIVE ME SOME DIRECT QUOTES FROM YOUR SOURCE THAT FACTUALLY DISPROVE WHAT WAS IN THE FACT CHECK ARTICLE.

I read it, and it doesn't do what you say. Put up or shut up, Damo...stop stalling like the neocon hack you SWEAR you're not.

 

[Liberty]

"Dude" YOU'RE FULL OF SHIT....PERIOD! All you presented was an article that gave Slick Willy's OPINION and then coverage of aspects of the ON-GOING situation.

I'M NOT ASKING FOR YOUR OPINION OR FOR YOU TO REPEAT YOUR OPINION OR ANOTHER ROUND OF NEOCON MANTRAS ABOUT OBAMA..... I WANT YOU TO GIVE ME SOME DIRECT QUOTES FROM YOUR SOURCE THAT FACTUALLY DISPROVE WHAT WAS IN THE FACT CHECK ARTICLE.

I read it, and it doesn't do what you say. Put up or shut up, Damo...stop stalling like the neocon hack you SWEAR you're not.

WOW!!!

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

"Dude" YOU'RE FULL OF SHIT....PERIOD! All you presented was an article that gave Slick Willy's OPINION and then coverage of aspects of the ON-GOING situation.

I'M NOT ASKING FOR YOUR OPINION OR FOR YOU TO REPEAT YOUR OPINION OR ANOTHER ROUND OF NEOCON MANTRAS ABOUT OBAMA..... I WANT YOU TO GIVE ME SOME DIRECT QUOTES FROM YOUR SOURCE THAT FACTUALLY DISPROVE WHAT WAS IN THE FACT CHECK ARTICLE.

I read it, and it doesn't do what you say. Put up or shut up, Damo...stop stalling like the neocon hack you SWEAR you're not.

i see not much changed here over the holiday

:lol:

 

[Damocles]

"Dude" YOU'RE FULL OF SHIT....PERIOD! All you presented was an article that gave Slick Willy's OPINION and then coverage of aspects of the ON-GOING situation.

I'M NOT ASKING FOR YOUR OPINION OR FOR YOU TO REPEAT YOUR OPINION OR ANOTHER ROUND OF NEOCON MANTRAS ABOUT OBAMA..... I WANT YOU TO GIVE ME SOME DIRECT QUOTES FROM YOUR SOURCE THAT FACTUALLY DISPROVE WHAT WAS IN THE FACT CHECK ARTICLE.

I read it, and it doesn't do what you say. Put up or shut up, Damo...stop stalling like the neocon hack you SWEAR you're not.

It isn't an opinion, dude.

The fricking administration's own joint informational center flatly stated that there are still Jones Act waivers that have yet to be given. Factcheck needs a bit of factchecking.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

It isn't an opinion, dude.

The fricking administration's own joint informational center flatly stated that there are still Jones Act waivers that have yet to be given. Factcheck needs a bit of factchecking.

Let it go Damo; because sissie will never admit he was this much in error.

You'd have better luck, betting your head against a wall; because at least then you're in control of how much headache you want.

He's never changed one person's opinion or thought process, the entire time he was on AOL and now here.
Makes one wonder if we're not feeding into a really intense masochistic personality.

 

[DamnYankee]

LOL Damo you're part of the "Neocon" bogeyman conspiracy too.

 

[Damocles]

LOL Damo you're part of the "Neocon" bogeyman conspiracy too.

Everybody who ever disagrees with TCL is a "neocon", according to TCL. I'm sure his disappointment in Obama even makes HIM call HIMself a neocon when looking in the mirror. He washes that clean by coming on here and working hard as an apologist for Obama's shortcomings.