It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

US Should Seize BP's US Assets ?

page: 2
6
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 1 2010 @ 06:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Rockpuck
 


Puck I know that, but like I posted earlier I think that Riech was referring to BP's US assets.

On a side not I've heard a rumor that BP is in the process of creating a recievership just in case the damages are more than BP can handle since it self insures.




posted on Jun, 1 2010 @ 08:38 PM
link   
removed by author**

[edit on 1-6-2010 by djvexd]



posted on Jun, 5 2010 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by jefwane
 


.....BP isn't an American company.. it's a British corporation...

Something tells me Britain would have some minor objections if we just up and stole one of their oil companies?

Shows the intelligence of CNBC. Really. It does.


Nope not from me and i live in the UK where we have nearly the highest pump prices in the world and if the Queen owns part of the company then america can have it.

Silly thing is americans think the money will go to them, it won't and cents on the $ will be spent in cleaning up the mess and they also need to ask themselves why they were not allowed to clean up the oil before it hit shore.

Bp is not british it's controlled and will contunue to be controlled by the zionists who run america and the UK and the only real lossers will be people living on the coast and your average shareholder.

The games is rigged people, get use to it and ask golden sacks why they sold shares in Bp a few weeks before the rig blew up and ask hailburton what were they doing in the hours before it blew.



posted on Jun, 5 2010 @ 01:28 PM
link   
oh, yes, let's seize their assets, the us taxpayers can be on the hook for the whole mess, which will be then destined to keep getting bigger till the end of time, because our gov't has less knowledge, experience, and willpower in the field than bp does!!
it would take them forever to do anything but bicker between themselves about it!!!




posted on Jun, 5 2010 @ 01:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by jefwane
 


.....BP isn't an American company.. it's a British corporation...


It's not a British corporation though. Right from the start it's never been a wholly British corporation. Also, what the American media don't really appear to be mentioning - judging by the posts I've come across - is that BP merged with an American company, Amoco, more than a decade ago. Not an acquisition where a British firm bought out an American company, but a merger.

So, as I've stated in another thread, BP (part British, part American) have Transocean (an American firm based in Switzerland for tax reasons) doing the contracting work and running the rig but some how the Britishnessof British Petroleum is emphasised, even though the name itself hasn't been used in years.



posted on Jun, 5 2010 @ 01:59 PM
link   
Well there is this:


"Washington, DC - BP CEO Tony Hayward woke up to the news Monday morning that President Obama had taken the drastic step of freezing every last penny of BP's assets, including bank accounts the world over, stock portfolios, and even the cash Hayward himself had in his wallet, until every last drop of oil is cleaned up and the leak is fixed.

"That should cook their goose," he heard the President say as he listened to the news report on the clock radio beside his bed. "Unless and until this tiny little man wakes up and smells the oil, there will be no more free lunch from the United States, and I mean that literally. That little lunch counter he and his oil buddies frequent down by the water every day as they sit there and soak up the sun is now officially off-limits. Besides, he's gonna be as poor as a church mouse come about noon today, so that's a moot point."

Hayward reached for a cigarette with trembling hands and lit one up as he sat there contemplating his next move. "Ah-ha," he said under his breath although no one was in the room with him, "the President doesn't know about the stash of hundred dollar bills I keep in my socks." But just as he got the words out of his mouth, the President continued, "oh and Tony, if you're listening, we already know about the roll of hundreds you keep in your sock for emergencies. We're gonna get that too, every last cent of it."

"And to make sure you understand the severity of this situation, Mr. Hayward," continued the President, "we are sending someone up there immediately to your fancy hotel room to help you get packed. We've found a sweet little shrimp shack on the edge of the water in Blurgwenchtth Bayou, where you'll spend the rest of the time in Louisiana until that oil mess is taken care of." "Blurgwenchtth, what the fu*k kinda name is Blurgwenchtth," whispered Hayward.

Just as Hayward was getting ready to put all his belongings in his suitcase
and make a run for it, he heard a knock on the door and froze in panic. He didn't make a peep as the knocking got louder and louder. Finally, a key was inserted and the door opened a crack, "Mr. Hayward, Mr. Hayward? This is your 7 o'clock wake up call."

Which sounds good until you go to the source: www.thespoof.com...


But there actually is a real website located here which is dedicated to
the seizure of BP:

seizebp.com...


Actually I think the correct term is freeze vs. seize if any efforts are successful, and yes the U S government does it all the time.


And yes B P does own assets in the United States; here's just one of them in
Arkansas:

online.wsj.com...

and another here:


"BP Plc may have to sell some of its most-valued assets, including a stake in the biggest US oil field, to pay cleanup costs, fines and legal damages from the largest offshore spill in American history.

The 26 percent stake in Prudhoe Bay on Alaska's North Slope and other BP assets could attract suitors such as China National Petroleum Corp (CNPC), Occidental Petroleum Corp and Hess Corp, said Douglas Ober, chief executive officer at Petroleum &Resources Corp in Baltimore, the oldest US oil fund. "

Source: english.people.com.cn...

[edit on 5-6-2010 by manta78]



posted on Jun, 5 2010 @ 03:14 PM
link   
I certainly think BP should foot the cleaning bill etc... and I hope the US does take the root of seizing BP... As it'll be interesting to see how it pans out.. and indeed, the repercussions on US corporates abroad...



posted on Jun, 5 2010 @ 03:22 PM
link   
I think we should ceize all assets,whats BP going to do otherwise? declare bankrupcy,what are repreccusions? like GB would want to go to war with the US,I say get busy



posted on Jun, 5 2010 @ 03:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Oldtimer2
I think we should ceize all assets,whats BP going to do otherwise? declare bankrupcy,what are repreccusions? like GB would want to go to war with the US,I say get busy


I prob read that wrong, but why would the GB go to war with the US over BP?

It's what, 100,000 American Jobs if BP goes down the toilet while the American people are left paying for the clean up...

Tho I am sure if Obama goes down that route he'll find some nice Chinese corp to buy it off the American Gov



posted on Jun, 5 2010 @ 05:21 PM
link   
reply to post by jefwane
 


Well,why anyone would listen to anything he said is beyond me.

This one individual did more to cause companies to move out of the U.S. than any other individual.

He has not worked one productive day in his life.

He has always been on the dole to the government in some fashion.

Why don't we seize the assets of Walmart?

They sell cheap Chinese crap that is killing thousands and put untold millions into unemployment.

Reich sounds like a shill for Chavez,now.

I suppose walking around through life smelling peoples farts will effect your brain.



posted on Jun, 5 2010 @ 08:39 PM
link   
reply to post by jefwane
 


Right, I get it......... but it's still a British company.. regardless if we only seized the American assets, Britain would be having a cow .. it would be an international relations nightmare.

It would never stand.

And they'd have to use terrorist laws in order to claim the assets were a danger to national security. Of course..... Britain used the same terrorist laws against Iceland to seize Icelandic assets after their economy crashed. Even calling them terrorist in their parliament.



posted on Jun, 5 2010 @ 08:57 PM
link   
Why not blame the US government , fancy having such weak regulation , and inspectors in bed with the oil producers, Oh well greed is a funny thing.....



posted on Jun, 5 2010 @ 09:37 PM
link   
Great more talk of nationalization and seizure of a private companies wealth and assets. Outstanding, the United States is slowly evolving into what it fought and spent trillion dollars to prevent. Do you folks even no what you are talking about? The US government gobbling up the free-market one company at a time. Where does it stop? This recent phenomenon is quite disturbing, and government meddling in the markets, outright seizures, and nationalization is the road taken by Communist leaders.

I am sure BP is spending a heck of a lot of money on this disaster in Gulf. They may not even survive when this thing is over? Plus, their liability exposure is going to cost them dearly, when they have to payout compensation to the government in fines, legal defenses, and to industries affected by the spill along the Gulf Coast.

As evil as Big Oil is, they are still private industries, and they should remain that way. I am staunchly opposed to all this talk of nationalizing industry. However, BP ought to be held to account for their negligence on this matter. Furthermore, the US government has a lot to answer for on this catastrophic disaster as well. Where were the regulators? Why are the taxpayers funding this government agency and the next if they are not doing their jobs? The inefficiency of government on this issue is a major problem.



Fudging paperwork, shoddy inspections, cozy and unethical relationships with companies they are tasked with regulating, and other corrupt practices led to what the country is experiencing in the Gulf. Why should we allow the government to shrug their responsibility and profit off of it by this nationalization scheme? So, thumbs down on this alternative. Lets first get serious about cleaning this mess up instead of playing the blame game, saving face politically, and other slithery activities by all involved in this national emergency.



posted on Jun, 5 2010 @ 09:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Jakes51
 


much more eloquent than my post , but the same sentiment , starred



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 06:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by jefwane
 


Right, I get it......... but it's still a British company..


It's not a British company though. How many times does it need to be said? Also, why are Transocean getting such an easy ride in all this?



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 08:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Merriman Weir

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by jefwane
 


Right, I get it......... but it's still a British company..


It's not a British company though. How many times does it need to be said? Also, why are Transocean getting such an easy ride in all this?


I have to admit I am pretty close to breaking all contact with my American relatives over this issue... As I'm pretty sick of the constant barrage of "British" this, that and the other about the Gulf incident, as if is our fault.

They seem to have all brought into the Obama Administration's line of "American Boot on the neck of this British company" the wording may be slightly different, but that is the gist they take from the comments being made by the media and American administration.

So all my relatives seem to hear is the word "British", then see the consequences of the oil gushing on to the American coast and so their anger is aimed at us and all things British..

The use of the words "British" in the media/from the Administration seems to be at the heart of the issue and I personally feel plays on the "British are coming" line that is engrained in the American psyche.

And to be honest no matter what I say to my relatives I can not convince them that Britain is not at fault for the dreadful scenes in the Gulf. So have given up flogging that dead horse.



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 08:26 AM
link   
My gut says yes. But I don't know what this would really accomplish other than get around any liability caps that BP might have on it's insurance policies and via regulatory loopholes.

Well since profits seemed more important to them than safety to the point of the idiot CEO ignoring repeated failed safety tests and overriding them to start production, it seems clear to me that BP is so hellbent on profit that they are trying to preserve the fiscal viability of the well.

Maybe the American subsidiary can be taken over and run better. But I believe a chunk of BP is owned by Kuwait.

Also? I'm totally SICK everyone blaming Obama when they industry was so deregulated by a free market logic already in existence.

[edit on 6-6-2010 by ~Lucidity]



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 09:02 AM
link   
I am from the UK and BP has the "Royal Warrant" which is plastered on all there trucks here in the UK. The Royal Warrant is an important symbol and highly sought after.

Given what has happened in the Gulf of Mexico i think that they should lose that Royal Warrant and be stripped of it, i know that it is not much on the grand scale of things but the Queen should recognise that many people in this country and accross the Commonwealth are furious with BP and she should reflect this by stripping them of their royal warrant and any MBE, OBE or any other titles that may have been bestowed upon senior BP executives.



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 10:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by SpecialAgent25
I am from the UK and BP has the "Royal Warrant" which is plastered on all there trucks here in the UK. The Royal Warrant is an important symbol and highly sought after.

Given what has happened in the Gulf of Mexico i think that they should lose that Royal Warrant and be stripped of it, i know that it is not much on the grand scale of things but the Queen should recognise that many people in this country and accross the Commonwealth are furious with BP and she should reflect this by stripping them of their royal warrant and any MBE, OBE or any other titles that may have been bestowed upon senior BP executives.


I'd much rather Liz and Charlie strip the Royal Warrant from BP and put it on some kind of alternative energy programme and just tell Big Oil to go and # themselves generally.

It's weird, all this blame and anger but none of it directed at ourselves, the oil consumer. We've known about Peak Oil for #ing years and yet here we are gobbling up as much as the black stuff as possible and then crying like #ing babies at the mess we're making. We're as complicit as Transocean and BP in this in my opinion.



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 10:18 AM
link   
From a legal point of view, US courts are going to need a way to enforce any judgments they may render against BP. It would be wise for potential plaintiffs to attach any BP assets within the US if they plan on suing BP in an American court. Otherwise, there is nothing a US court could do to enforce a judgment against a foreign entity.




top topics



 
6
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join