I'm shocked, veritably shocked. Who would have guessed ? ? ?
 
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
 
 
In a message dated 6/10/2010 6:43:55 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,  
david.r.bl...@verizon.net writes:

Not that relationships with the British were all  that warm BEFORE the 
spill. 

I think that The One has tried to tick off  every friend and make nice with 
every enemy that he could. 

So how's  THAT change working out for us?? 

David

   
 
If  you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the 
newspaper  you are misinformed.--Mark  Twain  



On 6/10/2010 11:57 AM, _bil...@aol.com_ (mailto:bil...@aol.com)  wrote:  


 
Has US bloodlust for BP gone too far?
The oil spill  could be down to BP's failings, but bankruptcy would destroy 
livelihoods and  pensions on both sides of the Atlantic
Andrew Clark  /  June 10, 2010
 
As each day goes by, the disastrous _oil_ 
(http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/oil)  spill in the Gulf of Mexico becomes 
more  gruesome. Oil-drenched 
birds and turtles wash up along the shoreline,  pristine beaches are polluted 
by balls of tar and an oily slick laps at  Louisiana's ecologically fragile 
marshland. Understandably, Americans are  livid. But has the bloodlust 
directed at _BP_ (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/bp)  gone too far?
 
Egged on by catch-all protest coalitions, a "seize BP" campaign is  
organising demonstrations in major cities calling on the US government to  
snatch 
the British company's US assets. A "boycott BP" action group  advocates 
shunning BP service stations. Placards abound with slogans such as  "God bless 
America – go to hell BP" and "BP – billionaire polluters".  The wife and 
children of BP's chief executive, Tony Hayward, are under  police 
protection following threats. 
Urged by political strategists to act more  angrily, _Barack Obama shed his 
 uncharacteristic cool_ 
(http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/jun/10/bp-shares-plunge-gulf-mexico)  
this week and declared that if it was up to  
him, BP's boss would be fired. The White House now wants BP to pay not only  
for cleaning up the Gulf, but also for the cost of jobs lost on 33 other oil  
rigs because of a government-imposed six-month moratorium on offshore  
drilling. And the US department of justice is threatening legal action to  halt 
BP's dividend payouts to investors. 
_Anthony Weiner, a usually  sensible Democratic congressman, declared_ 
(http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/08/anthony-weiner-bp-defende_n_604445.html
) : "Whenever you hear  someone with a British accent talking about this on 
behalf of British  Petroleum, they are not telling you the truth." 
With something close to relish, financial  pundits are mooting a BP 
bankruptcy. A New York Times columnist, _Andrew Ross Sorkin_ 
(http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/08/business/08sorkin.html) ,  guessed that the 
cost of the gulf 
disaster could reach a staggering $40bn  (£27bn), making corporate collapse a 
real possibility (calmer industry  experts put the cost at $5bn to $15bn). 
A prominent, albeit retired, oil  analyst, _Matthew Simmons_ 
(http://www.neurosoftware.ro/finance/insurance/economy/matthew-simmons-bp-wont-last-the-summ
er-and-theres-another-big-hole-7-miles-away/) , has  been touring 
television studios to declare that the oil spill was "entirely  BP's fault" and 
that 
the company will be bust within months. Predictions of  doom are 
self-perpetuating in business and BP's stock price has duly  plummeted by 40%. 
The 
company's market value has fallen by nearly £50bn,  even though BP makes a 
profit of more than £11bn annually. 
Perhaps it's time, though, to pause for breath.  It isn't yet clear exactly 
what happened on the _Deepwater Horizon  platform_ 
(http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/deepwater-horizon-oil-spill)  in the 
hours leading up the 
catastrophic fire on April  20 that sent the rig under water, killed 11 people 
and left BP's Macondo  spewing oil. This accident may well be down to BP's 
failings – but  shouldn't we wait until we know for sure before we become 
not only judges  but executioners? 
Of the 126 people working on the Deepwater  Horizon, only eight were BP 
employees. BP had a 65% share in the well, while  a partner, _Anadarko_ 
(http://www.anadarko.com/Home/Pages/Home.aspx) , had 25%. The  rig was owned 
and 
operated by a US firm, _Transocean_ 
(http://www.deepwater.com/fw/main/Home-1.html) . A failed  blow-out preventer 
was made by another US firm, Cameron, 
while Halliburton,  the oil services firm once run by Dick Cheney, carried out 
cement work that  was supposed to seal the well. 
BP was calling the shots on the project – and  it is tempting to rush to 
judgement on the British firm, given its dismal US  record. Neglect and lax 
safety oversight caused an explosion at _BP's Texas City oil  refinery_ 
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_City_Refinery_explosion)  in 2005, killing 
15 workers. The following year, poor  maintenance prompted BP's pipelines in 
Alaska to spring a leak, sending oil  gushing into the Arctic wilderness. 
There have been allegations, as yet unproven, that BP was cutting corners  
on the Deepwater rig – perhaps by filling the well with unstable water,  
rather than drilling mud. Nevertheless, there are plenty of questions  
outstanding. Just this week, a US congressional committee asked Transocean  to 
explain apparent poor staffing on the rig on the night of the gulf  disaster. 
There were 18 employees on shift that evening, the lowest number  in a 
fortnight of records, and there were no engineers, electricians,  mechanics or 
subsea supervisors. BP isn't allowed to suggest that others  might share 
responsibility – that amounts to "finger pointing", which  prompts howls of 
political outrage. 
Irrespective of liability, it is worth pondering whose interests a BP  
bankruptcy would serve. Although based in London, the company has been  
effectively Anglo-American since its 1998 merger with Amoco – it employs  
80,300 
people, of whom 29,000 are in the US. Some 40% of its shares are held  in 
the UK, while 39% are held in the US. A collapse of BP would destroy  
livelihoods, damage pension funds and wipe out savings on both sides of the  
Atlantic. For critics of "big oil", that's hardly a cause for tears. But  BP's 
failure wouldn't dent America's reliance on fossil fuels even slightly.  
Ironically, the real beneficiaries would be other big oil companies. 
The US government isn't likely to let a Russian,  Chinese or Middle Eastern 
buyer pick up the assets of a crippled BP. The  richest, most likely buyer 
of valuable remnants would be _ExxonMobil_ 
(http://www.exxonmobil.com/corporate/) , which, lest we forget, is a company  
that defines hardline. Until 
very recently, Exxon spent millions funding  groups that deny global warming. 
Of all the major energy companies, it has  been the slowest to invest in 
renewable energy – in 2007, it made a profit  of $40bn but put just $100m 
into a research project on wind, solar and green  technology. And before the 
Gulf of Mexico disaster, Exxon was the worst  oil-spiller in US history. 
BP hasn't done itself many favours. Initially, the company woefully  
underestimated the scale of the spill. And BP's chief executive has produced  a 
string of cringeworthy remarks. The company was ill-prepared for such an  
unprecedented disaster but has finally made some progress in plugging the  
leak. 
Yet BP has consistently promised to foot the bill for cleaning up the  gulf 
and to meet all valid compensation claims. 
Many will argue that BP deserves to die, and anger is entirely  
understandable. But critics should be careful what they wish for. America is  a 
nation 
with a tradition of due process and everybody – even "big oil"  – is 
entitled to a fair trial.


_______________________________________________

Centroids mailing list: _centro...@radicalcentrism.com_ 
(mailto:Centroids@radicalcentrism.com) 

_http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com_ 
(http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com) 

Archives at 
_http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/_ 
(http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/) 

  



_______________________________________________
Centroids  mailing list:  Centroids@radicalcentrism.com
http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com
Archives  at  
http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/


_______________________________________________
Centroids mailing list: Centroids@radicalcentrism.com
http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com
Archives at http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/

Reply via email to