Posted on 06/10/2010 6:22:32 AM PDT by txlurker
As each day goes by, the disastrous 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 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 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: "Whenever you hear someone with a British accent talking about this on behalf of British Petroleum, they are not telling you the truth."
(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...
I can see that you feel very passionately about this. And please know that I do not feel sorry for BP ...they brought this on themselves. However, I do not wish them or anyone to be taken advantage of and clearly bambi and his crew are more than willing to do that.
NOAA Administrator Jane Lubchenco said that the tests conducted at three sites by a University of South Florida research vessel confirmed oil as far as 3,300 feet below the surface 42 miles northeast of the well site. Oil also was found in a sub-surface sample 142 miles southeast of the spill, but further tests showed that oil is "not consistent" with oil from the spill.
Lubchenco said the water analysis "indicate there is definitely oil sub surface. It's in very low concentrations" of less than 0.5 parts per million. Additional samples from another research vessel are being tested, she said.
The media will tell you it has to be from another well, oh wait, another spill no one knows about yet, but how about the reality that it is from normal seeps in the Gulf that have been there for a long time?
How many fish and shrimp do you catch from a sunken boat or one driven five miles inland from the storm surge of a hurricane? How many tourist come to the beach during a storm? (Yeah, I know, the weather channel idiots take up a lot of that slack.)
My point is there is nothing guaranteed in this life, especially on the Gulf coast during hurricane season. I know, I live on the coast and amazingly survived Ixtoc. My information comes from many sources, none of it from the TV though. A lot from the net, having lived through "end of the world oil spills" (Ixtoc), family in the business, oil and fishing, and friends actually on the rigs.
Do you know how much Pemex paid the State of Texas, or anyone here for that matter? Nothing.
No duh. Your equating of the greed behind Chavez and his thieves to the motivations of our Founders is beyond the pale. It's DU moonbat territory.
As long as they keep their monkey business within their soveriegn borders, it's none of our business what they do.
Hey, genius, their monkey business extends to a U.S. Company called Citgo. In case you missed it, they used their ownership of Citgo to try and influence politics in the U.S.
Who are you trying to fool? You've been all over this thread with your kook Royal Family posts while inventing reasons to let despots like Chavez off the hook. Get a grip.
Well, let's take a look at the numbers:
BPs net tangible assets are approx $140B. There are approx 3.1B shares. A simple division shows that at book, a share of BP should be approx $45. But it's sitting at $32. Why? - because BP may have to spend somewhere in the range of $40B to clean up and for damages, etc. So investors have mentally deducted $40B off the net value and so $140B less $40B = $100B divided by 3.1B shares equals approx $32.5 per share value - which is exactly where BP stock is today.
So there is some rationality behind stock prices.
Sometimes, but definitely not always. The tech bubble of the 90s comes to mind.
And in essence, you made my point for me. People buy stock in a company because they believe it has a good future. In BP's case, people are selling because they don't.
It was a holding of the British government. It's been a while since the royal family was the British government.
[despots like Chavez]
He’s Venezuela’s despot, let them deal with him. Citgo shouldn’t be allowed to influence U.S. Politics - and neither should BP.
Still haven’t answered that border question, have you?
>>It was a holding of the British government.
A Nationalized Oil Company? I thought only folks like Hugo Chavez and Mexico did that?
Not a Royal Oil Company? LOL!
Whom you liken to the Founding Fathers.
Still haven’t answered that border question, have you?
You come up with a coherent question, maybe you get an answer. Ranting about Royal Pirates swooping in and taking whatever they want...that's simply your fantasy at work again.
You were OK when Pemex claimed sovereign immunity after the Ixtac spill, huh? Were they pirates?
What will LB do when he finds out that Royal Dutch Shell is operating in the US? It’ll probably involve a kilt.
>>Whom you liken to the Founding Fathers.
Whom I liken to all revolutionaries with “Fire in the Minds of Men”.
The results are not always the same.
So it’s ok to Nationalize oil companies... as long as they’re nationalized by British Royal Subjects.
But it’s not ok for the colonists... whose natural resources the Nationalized oil company is exploiting...
Ok.
No. Not even once.
as long as they’re nationalized by British Royal Subjects.
IIRC, the British government actually paid for their ownership shares. And they never owned 100%.
That's a little different than your hero Chavez, who stole from the owners of the companies.
whose natural resources the Nationalized oil company is exploiting...
What are you whining about now? I thought you were talking about BP, which is a public company?
>>when Pemex claimed sovereign immunity after
>>the Ixtac spill, huh? Were they pirates?
Are you suggesting Nationalized Oil companies should be held accountable by the international community when the damage those Nationalized Oil companies cause extends beyond their sovereign borders?
So as long as I have a public company, I can come into your house and take anything I want.... as long as I sell shares of the loot?
Who do you imagine came into your house and took something?
That's the point, LB. You liken thugs to revolutionaries. You are welcome to point out any part of Chavez's "career" where you feel he acted as a revolutionary that is even remotely similar to American Patriots during our Revolution. Go ahead.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.