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.

 

Why is BP getting nearly all the blame?

page: 1
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 02:12 AM
link   
Why is it that BP is getting what appears to be 99% of the blame?

The Minerals Management Service is supposed to oversee safety and conduct regular inspections. They are operated by the US yes that's the United States Department Of The Interior.

Secondly Transocean owned and operated the rig under contract from BP. Yes there were six BP execs there at the time, the rest were Transocean employees and contractors (126 persons) on the Deepwater Horizon owned built and opperated by Transocean.

Now have read of this article then remember that BP has already spent in excess of 1 billion since the accident trying to deal with it. Are Transocean conspicuous in their absence from the MSM? I think so.

Lastly take a look at this here. pay special attention to the last paragraph of page one -

However, Henning pointed out in a recent New York Times column that Transocean has an indemnification provision that may leave BP responsible for paying the cost of cleanup and recovery no matter what. Halliburton said in a recent call to investors that like Transocean they are legally indemnified from responsibility through their contract with BP.
Some serious buck passing and covering of asses going on here.

Hypothetically if Company "X" chartered or contracted an aircraft and crew operated and owned by company "Y", who would be blamed if it crashed? Owner operator company "Y" or the passengers from company "X"?

These seems to be brewing an utter hatred and anger toward BP whereas the likes of Halliburton, Transocean and the US-MMS sit relatively quietly behind the scenes watching BP get a flogging.

I'd like to see others thoughts and comments on this slightly different angle to the general consensus.







[edit on 11/6/2010 by who-me?]




posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 02:15 AM
link   
YES MMS should get a huge amount of blame but it's a crooked branch of the govt. Halliburton also but BP execs interfere with cement process, transocean not so much.



posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 02:25 AM
link   
I've got over 760 reasons for you. 760 "egregious" safety violations and 60+ "willful" safety violations. Yes, all those others mentioned are also to blame but, BP is the operator of the rig that went under, their serial negligence has us in this situation. Oh and the second highest number of violations from one of BPs competitors in the industry, is 8 "willful" safety violations.



posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 02:27 AM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

Here is one reason why:

Rig survivors: BP ordered shortcut on day of blast
(CNN) -- The morning the Deepwater Horizon oil rig exploded, a BP executive and a Transocean official argued over how to proceed with the drilling, rig survivors told CNN's Anderson Cooper in an exclusive interview.

The survivors' account paints perhaps the most detailed picture yet of what happened on the deepwater rig -- and the possible causes of the April 20 explosion.

The BP official wanted workers to replace heavy mud, used to keep the well's pressure down, with lighter seawater to help speed a process that was costing an estimated $750,000 a day and was already running five weeks late, rig survivors told CNN.

BP won the argument, said Doug Brown, the rig's chief mechanic. "He basically said, 'Well, this is how it's gonna be.' "


As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.


[edit on 6/11/2010 by defcon5]



posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 02:38 AM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 

Your reply highlights my point, one BP exec makes a poor decision yet the operational crew (Transocean) 126 went with the BP guys six.....

Yet its still almost all BPs fault entirely?

Also FearfulButInterested not disputing what you have said but would very much like to read your source for these violations.


[edit on 11/6/2010 by who-me?]



posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 02:48 AM
link   
reply to post by who-me?
 


Yes, sir!
CNN video
Print Source if you prefer to read
Another source quoting the same OSHAA report

EDIT: the source for all of these are the same, it's is from the OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) report.

[edit on 11-6-2010 by FearfulButInterested]



posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 02:49 AM
link   
reply to post by who-me?
 


When the BP guy told them they had to do it, it overrode the transocean guys ability to refuse, and thus it removes their liability for what happened. Maybe you have never worked for a large multi-million dollar contract company, but the client calls the shots as they are paying the bills. Any little foot soldiers who voice an opposing opinion are quickly and quietly eliminated from the staff.



posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 03:12 AM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 


Ok fair enough, but knowing two friends in the off shore industry, they have both independently told me that the rule of thumb on every operation they have been involved with has been - "If someone, that means anyone that has any safety concern, everyone stops and concern is addressed" that is the culture they are accustomed too. Maybe this isn't the case in the Gulf though.

[edit on 11/6/2010 by who-me?]



posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 03:20 AM
link   
reply to post by who-me?
 


BP was technically operating in international waters, and in the case of corporations operating in international waters they must abide to the laws and regulations concerning the nations they are based in. In the case of BP, they were operating within international waters and they were based in the Marshall Islands, now Ill leave the guess to you as to why of all countries BP decided to base itself in the Marshall islands (virtually no regulation may be a clue).

The case of BP been held accountable, neither US or Mexican authorities held the power to obligate BP to inspection as explained above, they were in international waters, they are only held to the regulations of the Marshall islands. This is why they take the bulk of the blame. They were virtually unregulated and unaccountable thanks to where they were based and operating. They knew there was little Mexican and US authorities could do in regulate or inspect them, they were all their own.

The president has part of the blame because he didnt react fast enough to the situation... no no wait, the president is to blame because he wasnt vocal enough in holding BP accountable.... no wait..... the president should not be vocal and should not criticize BP because it hurts the British people and the investors. Obama's partly to blame because he didnt do... something? Nothing? He didnt leave the market to sort out itself? His interfering too much? Im sorry im just so confused. So many people have so many angles in which to complain.

As for other blame, I have already argued that our addiction and attatchment to oil is in part to blame. The american people are in such demand that these companies are drilling to full capacity without regards to safety. We need to cut down on this fuel as a nation to cut down on offshore drilling.


[edit on 11-6-2010 by Southern Guardian]



posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 03:21 AM
link   
How many executives are American? and where were they when the rig blew?
When the Exxon Valdez had its bump, just how much hysteria happened after the event? did share holders get their dividends?
Seems to me, poor old BP is being used as a whipping boy for all of Americas ills.



posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 03:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by pikestaff
How many executives are American? and where were they when the rig blew?
When the Exxon Valdez had its bump, just how much hysteria happened after the event? did share holders get their dividends?
Seems to me, poor old BP is being used as a whipping boy for all of Americas ills.

Whilst I wouldn't go quite so far as to say 'poor old BP' you have hit the nail on the head as far as the point I'm trying to make.

Most of the people aboard that rig were Americans as like you said are many of the BP execs. Yet the other two American based companies directly involved appear to be getting away with it relatively scott free when compared to BP.



posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 03:40 AM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

reply to post by who-me?
 


You might want to go to that link to watch the video and read the article, what you are talking about is addressed in both to a point, but mainly in the video:

In the CNN interviews, the workers described a corporate culture of cutting staff and ignoring warning signs ahead of the blast. They said BP routinely cut corners and pushed ahead despite concerns about safety.
The rig survivors also said it was always understood that you could get fired if you raised safety concerns that might delay drilling. Some co-workers had been fired for speaking out, they said.
It can cost up to $1 million a day to operate a deepwater rig, according to industry experts.
Safety was "almost used as a crutch by the company," Barron said. He said he was once scolded for standing on a bucket on the rig, yet the next day, Transocean ordered a crane to continue operating amid high winds, against its own policies. "It's like they used it against us -- the safety policies -- you know, to their advantage.

Yes, you could speak out and stop the drilling operation, but they would find a reason to fire you and remove you for doing it.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.


[edit on 6/11/2010 by defcon5]



posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 03:45 AM
link   
Scapegoat. Thats it. People want some entity to blame and BP is such a big name its easy. Then you get the bandwagon as seen here on ATS with the hordes of moronic people who pretend to care without thinking it through themselves.



posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 03:47 AM
link   
For a minute there I thought this thread was going to be interesting. As usual, it's the same old blame game.

How hypocritical is it to blame anyone but ourselves for all this. We wanted the gas for the cars and the air conditioning for our homes. We not only fight for this – we die for those luxuries. What a bunch of whining! You, I, and everyone – we all need oil for our stupid little worlds to keep spinning – how dare anyone here pretend that they aren’t a part of this problem.

Shame on all of you! BP only did what it did to make a profit off of your needs. It’s comical to read everyone’s reaction here while they sit and type and communicate only because of the energy these companies provide. Sort of like the house cat complaining that the only place to # in this house is that box in the corner!



posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 03:55 AM
link   
I still don't see how BP can be held fully accountable for the actions of Transocean employees. There were only six BP execs aboard.

That's right Halliburton & Transocean had nowt to do with any of it. Simply not true however the MSM is presenting it almost as such.

I bet half of CNN and FOX viewers haven't even heard of Halliburton or Transocean.
It'd be interesting to conduct a poll on a completely unrelated website to find out.


[edit on 11/6/2010 by who-me?]



posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 04:00 AM
link   
reply to post by cannibalrockets
 

Awesome post, finally someone who shares my viewpoint. Yes I admit it as well, my keyboard is made of plastic too and I drive a 4x4 gas guzzler (actually its a TDI but still)

Society has a need to blame "others" never them self. I was trying to highlight that with my thread.
"cannibalrockets" summed it up extremely well.

Edit-:
Since posting I have learned that it was six BP employees aboard not just one as I previously stated. Still a very small percentage out of the total crew of 126 on the vessel.
source

[edit on 11/6/2010 by who-me?]



posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 04:22 AM
link   
None of this explains why the blowout preventer failed to operate in auto or the subs from BP being able to manually close it

Or why the safeguards failed allowing the gas from the well to cause the generator to overrun and ignite the rig.

It also does not explain why the government had not required a system on the riser for removing the old riser and plugging in a new one to control the well.

Things like the rig being flagged in a foreign country or technically operating in international waters means nothing as when the lease was signed for the oil field work there falls under US safety laws.

Also this was not international waters nor did the Mexican authorities
have anything to do with this operation.

This well was 100% in US waters (US Exclusive Economic Zone)as soon as they signed the oil lease and any operations fall under US laws.
The only laws they do not come under is the state they are operating off.

there is a lot of blame and BP is not the only one.
the government is trying to CTA as they have more blame then they want to admint



posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 04:43 AM
link   
Another thing while I'm at it.

Please Americans and humanity in general stop these stupid suggestions that we can move away from oil, don't need it etc etc etc.

Look how much humanity uses in a day.
Consume This



posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 05:35 AM
link   
Why?? Because - whether you like it or not - they ARE to blame!

That's why...



posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 05:39 AM
link   
reply to post by jimbo999
 

Thank you for your intelligent and informative post.

Now please step back out side and re-join the "It is because it is baaa baaa I'm a sheep brigade." there's no need for you to post in this thread again.





top topics



 
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join