posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 10:02 AM
reply to post by woodwardjnr
So even the guardian places the onus on Britain for this fiasco ??
I find it remarkable how even columnists writing for a major newspaper fail to do even basic research before spouting off and sarcastically
congratulating the people of Britain.
As I have pointed out in another thread, both the Managing Director and Chief Financial Officer of BP are Americans. The chairmain is Swedish.
More telling, however, is that of the 40% British ownership, 33% is held by institutions (pension funds and the like), and 7% Individuals. Of the 39%
American ownership, 14% is held by individuals.
Now a pension fund is not likely to be very pushy when it comes to the running of the company, but an individual with a large stake is most probably
going to be extremely concerned about what might be conceived as his or her personal wealth, and it seems that Americans have twice as much personal
wealth tied up in the company as the British.
So it seems to me that if people are going to apportion their anger and/or point the finger at the native nations of those who control the company,
Sweden should be top of the list as it is a Swede who holds the top job at BP. The buck should stop with him, but I guess no-one is going to rush out
and burn their ABBA collection. Throw in the mix the American Managing Director and Chief Financial Officer, and the USA is right up there on the hit
list. And lets's face it, if it were a wholly owned British company, BP wouldn't be permitted to be 'running the show' down at the gulf in regards
to the cleanup, security efforts, and news feeds.
IMO what people should really be concerned about is who is really in control, and I feel that those who are, are global in nature and have no
allegiances to any one nation and care not for anything or anyone but their own agenda.