U.S. Fury at BP Stirs Backlash Among British

page: 5
15
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 12 2010 @ 10:42 AM
link   
I just don't understand this... what "bashing" is exactly taking place here? I think I've read enough of this thread to see that the U.S. and British citizenry see right through this load of b.s. with a few possible exceptions.

If you read these hatchet job pieces in the UK Daily Mail, at no point do they offer anything by way of evidence of anyone bashing the British people. They show the inept Obama's anger directed at the rather callous comments of the even more inept Tony Hayward, at the paper-rock-scissors approach BP has thus far used to try and plug the leak, but absolutely nothing directed at the people of Britain or her government.

America is angry at her government, and even more angry at the CEO of a multinational company who dared go on television in front of tens of thousands of Gulf residents who's livlihoods have been eviscerated, who's ecosystem has been raped to say "I want my life back."

That is where our anger lies, with BP and with Obama's complete lack of leadership on this... and believe me when I tell you that we see about as many parallels between BP and the actual British people or government as we do between MTV and actual music - ergo, there are none.

This is a MSM hatchet job with an agenda, plain and simple - and it doesn't even have an iota of proof to back it up. Methinks this is just a simple case of media lackeys obeying the orders of a few BP shareholders who happen to live in the UK that are whining because their stock portfolios are beginning to thin out a little. Their problem. Not mine, not the American peoples', and surely not the people of Britain.

[edit on 12-6-2010 by Legion2112]




posted on Jun, 12 2010 @ 10:49 AM
link   
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 


I've seen a few people confused on what it means when a corporation is "American" "German" "British" etc. BP is a British corporation because it's Charter is filed in Great Britain. Thus is "World Headquarters" being in Britain, Britain is the country that taxes it.

Any portion of BP outside of Britain is simply called an "Asset" .. it's US Operations (well technically North American since its rig was in international waters) is considered American Assets.

39% of private owners of shares are American. 40% are British.

% of private ownership has absolutely nothing to do with what country the corporation belongs to .. it could be 90% American and still be British because it's Charter is filed in Britain.

It's not a Multinational Corporation. It's a British corporation.



posted on Jun, 12 2010 @ 10:53 AM
link   
This situation is a nightmare no matter which of these countries you live in. Imagine British outrage if "American Petroleum" was flooding England with oil from a spill that cannot be stopped. Americans would come to the aid of our company if it was tied to so many pensions.

I like the Brits for the most part as an American and I understand that they are upset that BP is getting hammered here in America. If the roles were reversed I would be worried about my retirement just like they are.

The thing is this is a disaster and a no win situation for BP, America and England. There is no way anyone can win or be happy with what is going on, it is just not possible. Sad anyway you look at it.......



posted on Jun, 12 2010 @ 11:01 AM
link   
Deepwater Horizon was built by Hyundai Heavy Industries which is headquartered in Ulsan, South Korea. Port of registry was listed as Majuro, Marshall Islands which means they operate according to Marshall Islands laws. Operator of the rig was Transocean which is Headquartered in Vernier, Geneva, Switzerland. BP is Headquartered in the City of Westminster, London, United Kingdom. So where do people come to the conclusion about the US companies own operate and built this rig?



posted on Jun, 12 2010 @ 05:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 


I've seen a few people confused on what it means when a corporation is "American" "German" "British" etc. BP is a British corporation because it's Charter is filed in Great Britain. Thus is "World Headquarters" being in Britain, Britain is the country that taxes it.

Any portion of BP outside of Britain is simply called an "Asset" .. it's US Operations (well technically North American since its rig was in international waters) is considered American Assets.

39% of private owners of shares are American. 40% are British.

% of private ownership has absolutely nothing to do with what country the corporation belongs to .. it could be 90% American and still be British because it's Charter is filed in Britain.

It's not a Multinational Corporation. It's a British corporation.

You need to learn what Privatisation mean before you post.

What I perceive of the whole issue so far:
BP isn't British Petrolium and hasn't been for a long time. It was privatised in 1987 and now is split between Rich Pigs from Britian AND America.

Frankly I don't care if they lose all their money and their pensions.

Obama has made deflectionary statements but then lets face it he doesn't like the UK period, something to do with his father. It's like putting Hitler in charge of America after he lost WW2.
The media like a good story and a stupid comment like Obama made is MSM Gravy, what ever country you're in.

I would suggest you "hang'em high son" and if you're like me in Britain you "burn'em...they're a witch". While using all their illgotten gains to help our economies.
It seems these Criminals own our Governments and Laws so we will suffer as we have always done, with passive outrage.



[edit on 12-6-2010 by DreamerOracle]



posted on Jun, 12 2010 @ 05:51 PM
link   
look we gave you a point in the world cup as a good will gesture, we're trying our best



posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by woodwardjnr
 


It's much appreciated. In these rough times, it's nice to know you guys will throw us yanks a bone every now and then for appearances' sake


Though next time, could you go a little easier on our keeper? Listening to ESPN you'd think that rib shot ruptured Tim Howard's spleen or something...



posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 06:52 PM
link   
Actually what a lot of us are pissed off about is your lawmakers and your president who should know better calling the company 'British Petroleum' when it hasn't been called that for more than a decade.

The company merged with a US oil company and became BP Amoco then BP Plc. 39% American owenership with 40% British ownership. The issue is more that people who should know better are trying to deflect this issue onto people who had nothing to do with the disaster.

You have every sympathy of the British people. No-one deserves this and we would never wish this upon our american brethren yet your politicians trying to deflect this issue onto a British company rather than their lax regulation of the energy industry is what grates.

Acoustic switches are required in virtually every country except the US due to the inordinate influence the energy lobby has over US government policy.

Yes, BP are a bunch of money hungry bastards with no care for their actions as long as they turn a profit. The folks who were supposed to be looking out for the people ahead of those profit hungry instincts have no such excuse.



posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 06:57 PM
link   
There has been bashing going on? I consider myself an average Brit with an average lifestyle and I am in no way annoyed by any bashing, because I really haven't heard any.

I have heard pretty much the barebones of the situation on mainstream news. They barely tell us anything here, aside from the latest fix, or some article tucked into the pages of a newspaper. I get my information from the internet and pass it on.

I don't hold a grudge against Americans, and my American friends don't hold any grudges against Britain. We're more concerned with the environmental effects, and I have a lot of sympathy with people who are currently living with the fallout from this leak. It could be at my doorstep in the future, I bear that in mind, and it is the fault of fat cat profit farming. And possibly an over reliance on fossil fuels. And maybe even desperation to find more sources of a finite fuel.

Also, if the UK government are stupid enough to rely on one source for a large amount of pensions, then shame on them. It is foolish to depend on such a company when supplies will eventually run dry.

Like many have said, this isn't an issue about nationalities, but one of corporations who are multinational, and thus it is impossible to point fingers at any one country. Anyone who says otherwise is falling for the sensationalism of the MSM.



posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 07:16 PM
link   
I have no animosity against my British friends just because some multinational company like BP decides to accidently trash the entire gulf coast.

However I do have one request of our British friends. Please please could you take back Russel Brand. The profound lack of talent and general obnoxiousness are killing me.

What ever happened to Monty Python by the way? Those guys were awesome.



posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 07:48 PM
link   
If the British people link themselves to BP they are on a sinking ship. If I had money with them I would sell-sell-sell-sell.


You watch the rats will start jumping off this ship in droves. They are toast it is only a matter of time and the truth surfacing.


A trillion dollars will not even come close to touching how much this will cost. Investors need to see the hard truth on this one--sell-sell-sell before it is to late. I bet we will see them claim bankruptcy in the next month. Mark my words.

[edit on 13-6-2010 by Citizen-X]

[edit on 13-6-2010 by Citizen-X]



posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 09:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Citizen-X
 


If you think they will pay a trillion dollars , your having a laugh they will declare bankruptcy , sell to china ( like that US company Union CARBIDE ) and the victims will get nothing....



posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 08:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chris McGee
Actually what a lot of us are pissed off about is your lawmakers and your president who should know better calling the company 'British Petroleum' when it hasn't been called that for more than a decade.

The company merged with a US oil company and became BP Amoco then BP Plc. 39% American owenership with 40% British ownership. The issue is more that people who should know better are trying to deflect this issue onto people who had nothing to do with the disaster.

You have every sympathy of the British people. No-one deserves this and we would never wish this upon our american brethren yet your politicians trying to deflect this issue onto a British company rather than their lax regulation of the energy industry is what grates.

Acoustic switches are required in virtually every country except the US due to the inordinate influence the energy lobby has over US government policy.

Yes, BP are a bunch of money hungry bastards with no care for their actions as long as they turn a profit. The folks who were supposed to be looking out for the people ahead of those profit hungry instincts have no such excuse.



exactly.



posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 08:39 AM
link   
Here is quite a good article from Guardian columnist Charlie Brooker about British reactions to the oil spill


And to be honest, the Americans are thus far admirably restrained about the whole thing. If a company called Texan Gloop belched a carpet of black gunk over Norfolk, we'd be surrounding the US embassy and burning sarcastic effigies of Boss Hogg within minutes. And that's just Norfolk: flat earth and windmills. Having vandalised Louisiana and laminated thousands of pelicans, the BP spill now threatens to disfigure the Miami coastline, corrupting its relentlessly cheery blue-and-yellow colour scheme with a sea of rainbow black. Congratulations, people of Britain. Even though, strictly speaking, it isn't your fault.


www.guardian.co.uk...



posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 09:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Citizen-X
 


There is about as much chance of Exxon Mobil and Shell, (who are responaible for this, www.commondreams.org...), going bankrupt as there is of BP going bankrupt.

They will receive a token fine, which to us ordinary people may seem quite large but will be an insignificant amount to them, and will carry on as normal.


reply to post by woodwardjnr
 


Charlie Brooker can be very funny.
For those who have never seen him:









[edit on 14/6/10 by Freeborn]



posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 10:01 AM
link   
What BP and the oil mining / extraction industry has caused in the GoM is a disgrace, as EDIS puts it ' an ecological disaster'.

I can understand why people's temper's are running high and the need for a 'villian' is huge... I personally believe that this will severly damage BP as a compnay and therefore all associated ''business interests'', both British and American with it..... remember alot of overfed, fat American pensioners who have retired early from their corporate high lifes will have some of their 'pension pots' affected by BP going down !!

BUT something is starting to GRATE me HERE .... namely Transocean and Haliburton are ALSO GUILTY here too !!!!

I want everyone, wether British, American, Government Official or bar tender to start rtealising that it is not only BP's fault........ IT IS a CORPORATION and Government REGULATION FAILING here !!!!!

Come ON...



posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 10:02 AM
link   
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.



posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 12:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by DreamerOracle
Frankly I don't care if they lose all their money and their pensions.


You will when you start working and get a pension - unless you are one of those people who insist on sponging off the State because you make no provision.

To topic...

BP is a big company which has a problem with an accident. I suppose it is "luck of the draw" because it could well have been a US or even Dutch company. Either way, Obama needs to be careful he is not seen to meddle or bully industry as that may cast him as anti-business. In a previous post I accused him of bullying and I stand by that. His tactics are more about being seen as tough., although I suspect he would have taken a different tack of it was US Oil.

Regards





top topics
 
15
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join