For The British Only - PB Poll

I would like to know;

How do the general population of British Peoples (UK) feel about Americans attitude toward the BP company and the Gulf Oil Leak.

If the truth is that: ( These are the things most Americans agree on according to the threads on ATS)

Most Americans strongly disagree that PB is Not telling the whole truth about the oil leak and has been hiding facts.

Americans feel that the oil capping efforts, the clean up efforts have been too little too late and PB has done this on purpose for a variety of reasons.

Most Americans are mad as Hell and want every dime from BP to fix this situation spent properly with proper oversight and possibly take this effort out of an incompetent PB's hands. A total possibly extending above 20 Billion dollars in EPA fines, cleanup efforts, stopping the oil flow efforts.

Most Americans want the PB executives in charge to be extradited to the United States for Trial and Sentencing.

Would you:

1) Strongly agree
2.) Agree
3.) Can see both views, agree and disagree
4.) Do not agree
5.) Strongly disagree

And for each answer, please give a short explanation.

I want to use this to gauge if the news Americans are getting from overseas are accurate reflections of the British peoples true feelings or if possibly the Americans are being manipulated by perhaps American or British news media.

3.) Can see both views, agree and disagree

I agree with most of what you stated but I do NOT agree with any extradition of British citizens to the US to stand trial. It always seems to me that extradition only ever works one way with the US and that is its way.

Most Americans want the PB executives in charge to be extradited to the United States for Trial and Sentencing.

Strongly agree

Whatever it takes to get these guys taken to justice. It's just another large multination corperation to me. I don't care that it has, or did have the word "British" in the name. I don't think simply waving a flag is going to impress the British public much.

Although I have strong doubts that the American courts would actually do anything if they did get their hands on the executives.

To be honest, I have no love for BP just because it has the name British in it. They should be treated as harshly as possible and made to do everything within their powers to bring this disaster to an end. If laws have been broken, then they should be punished with the full weight of the law.

Only one thing. Why isn't the American government doing anything about sorting this mess out? Surely the most powerfull nation in the world should be able to do more. Maybe not?

I would have no problems with BP Execs being extradited to the US. I cant imagine there being much sympathy for BP over here, biggest problem is the amount of peoples pensions tied to BP, but that pales in insignificance to the damage done to the Gulf imo

Answer number 3 for me.

Also agree with Wotan that extradition is only ever a one way passage.
BP is a multinational company that is run by many nationals including Americans. I would say one thing to Obama, those who live in glass houses should not throw stones.

Many Americans who are outraged should understand that many American companies like exxon have completely ruined area's of the world like the Nigerian delta but that seems to be silenced.

Also why we are on the topic of destroying marine life etc, what about the dumping of toxic waste of Somalia.

Rant over.

(2) I agree, No person with any love for the planet would disagree with the people responsible being brought to justice. If the shoe was on the other foot how would you feel? If the executives in charge were from the US would you want them extradited to the UK?

[edit on 11-6-2010 by Majestic RNA]

3) agree to disagree

As I feel something deeper is going on here, as the only explanation why both the American Gov & BP has done to little to late.


[edit on 11/6/10 by thoughtsfull]

The US authorities consistently refuse to comply with the requests of UK coroners for US military personnel to testify before the British coroners court on matters relating to the deaths of British servicemen in friendly fire incidents ... so I agree with the sentiment that extradition between the UK and USA is invariably a one way street.

I don't detect any sympathy for BP from the British people to whom I speak ; most feel desperately sorry for the oil spill and environmental consequences but there's no tribal loyalty to either the company or its executives. Most people would be quite content to have the company brought to account and punished in a US court on a corporate negligence charge, or similar, but not for the US Government to take the American assets of BP into public ownership as punishment because that goes against free trade.

Qualification ... I am not British but live in the United Kingdom.

Most Americans strongly disagree that PB is Not telling the whole truth about the oil leak and has been hiding facts.
[1/2. but it's nowhere near over yet - and we need far more facts to emerge...also, I don't think it's only PB that are holding back info, I suspect the government(s)/agencies are too?]

Americans feel that the oil capping efforts, the clean up efforts have been too little too late and PB has done this on purpose for a variety of reasons.
[3 - We just don't KNOW because as you suggested, I don't feel confident we have ALL the facts, maybe they did, maybe not, who knows? It certainly looks pretty P:@~ Poor though]

Most Americans are mad as Hell and want every dime from BP to fix this situation spent properly with proper oversight and possibly take this effort out of an incompetent PB's hands. A total possibly extending above 20 Billion dollars in EPA fines, cleanup efforts, stopping the oil flow efforts.
[2 - Mind you PB were allocated the task by the USA government - surely ultimately they ought to also acknowledge some responsibility? They also knew the specific site risks, that was one reason PB were given it, and one reason they didn't step in to take charge, because they lack the tech/resources to do it. Given the environment was so risky/challenging/vital for ecology etc. was it right to go against environmental warnings/protests and allow extraction there at all? Also, it would be interesting to know whether the UK gov/PB hold any abilities to 'embaress' or 'influence' the USA in other theatres/spheres, how far will the USA gov go? ]


Most Americans want the PB executives in charge to be extradited to the United States for Trial and Sentencing.

[I would say 3-5 if PB had handled the post-event situation well, however, the PB boss has really undermined himself so badly in terms of PR/empathy and establishing a sense of leading and joining people together in joint effort; it is not like he walked into this responsibility/job/rewards scheme blindly, and we can all see the real damage to real people and ecology, so perhaps 1-2, but then so too should other corporate mgt be held accountable in countries they have committed gross negligence in, USA mgt included...]

Hope that helps....?

Just one thing, I've been reflecting on this today, and what is strongly emerging for me is the realization that in some sense we ALL must take some responsibility for what we see here. If you are a consumer of oil, and products and services reliant on the oil/gas addiction (food/fertilizers/clothing/etc...) that has unfortunately coincided with a boom from 3 to 7 billion people on the earth in under 100 years, we all need to take a step back and look at where we stand.

It's not just Deepwater, it's Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran...the whole ME, ...Russia looking at high-risk-nuclear-powered-deepwater-polar extraction.....

At the end of the day, the USA allowed PB to go for it because they were desperate to feed our global addiction to the stuff/lifestyles, nations are desperate to secure new access, competition for access is getting nastier, but there are other deepwaters/Exxon Valdiz/wars around the corner unless we deal seriously with the more fundamental issues.

[I think what I meant to say is, take a step back, we're all in this together]

[edit on 11-6-2010 by curioustype]

most people that i talk to in the pub couldnt care less about bp.when bp are mentioned we dont feel protective just because british is a word used in the title.we think fat cats.i have not heard one coment in defence of bp.they live on another planet to us mate.

Three companies are involved and complicit in this oil disaster: BP 'Beyond Petroleum' (not British Petroleum) who majority own the oil field; Transocean (American) who owned the semi-submersible rig that exploded killing 11 people onboard and causing the oil spill, but it was BP personnel that ran the rig; and Haliburton (a very suspect American company) who made the defective casing for the rig. In actuality, BP is about as British as a hot dog.

From Wikipedia:

On April 20, 2010, the rig was in the final phases of drilling an exploratory oil well in which casing was being cemented in place as a reinforcement by Halliburton. The planned well was to be drilled to 18,000 feet (5,500 m) below sea level, and was then to be plugged and suspended for subsequent completion as a subsea producer. At 09:45 p.m. CDT, a geyser of seawater erupted from the marine riser onto the rig, shooting 240 ft (73 m) into the air. This was soon followed by the eruption of a slushy combination of mud, methane gas, and water. This eruption was caused by the fact that the company man (BP rep) ordered the heavy mud that held the pressure down, to be displaced with sea water. The toolpusher (Transoceans rig boss) argued against this, but was over ruled. The well was behind schedule, and BP's plan was to save time on the production end of the completion by using the drilling rig to displace the riser and have the well one more step closer to flowing when the completion team took over from the drilling team. The gas component of the slushy material quickly transitioned into a fully gaseous state and then ignited into a series of explosions and then a firestorm. Workers immediately attempted to activate the blowout preventer, but it failed.

Eleven workers were presumed killed in the initial explosion. The rig was evacuated, with numerous injured workers airlifted to medical facilities. Support ships sprayed the rig with water in an ultimately unsuccessful bid to cool it and prevent it from capsizing. This was an attempt to buy time while attempts were made to stop the oil and gas that were feeding the flames from coming up the riser pipe. If it had been successful, it would have reduced the flames and allowed special teams of firefighters to board the stricken rig and extinguish the remaining fire.

After burning for approximately 36 hours, the Deepwater Horizon sank on April 22, 2010, in water approximately 5,000 ft (1,500 m) deep, and has been located resting on the seafloor approximately 1,300 ft (400 m) (about a quarter of a mile) northwest of the well.

BP do not deserve sympathetic support from the British people. They operated outside British commonsense of listening to experience, and forsaking safety values for profit. America, do with them as you see fit, but do not relate them to being British...there are a multinational company operating under no distinct national identity.

reply to post by JohnPhoenix


Are you dyslexic? Why do you keep saying PB?

What is PB? Do you mean BP?

If you do mean BP please get it right, at least in the thread title.

I don't care about any of it really. We will never know the truth and there seems to be people on both side not being honest for some reason that we will not know. So I do not care. The oil is not in my backyard. This is pointless!

However, until I know the full truth and nothing but the truth then I will stand by a British Company. I am English and I am Pro British. I love the St Georges and The Union Jack. We can not stand by and let another British Company go down the pan. But then again I support Britain and its Interest home and abroad above all else. We just need the truth to be able to make an informed and correct judgment.


[edit on 11-6-2010 by C11H17N2NaO2S]

Originally posted by Majestic RNA
(2) I agree, No person with any love for the planet would disagree with the people responsible being brought to justice. If the shoe was on the other foot how would you feel? If the executives in charge were from the US would you want them extradited to the UK?

[edit on 11-6-2010 by Majestic RNA]

Absolutely!

I have not seen anyone actually putting any blame on the British government or people, and frankly I assumed that BP was still British petroleum until today, their name makes no difference in the grand scheme of things. We are smart enough to realize that the name doesn't mean anything.

This is being pushed as a distraction from the main issues, cause the citizens to bicker and get mad at each other so that some of it is deflected by the truly responsible.

3.
People are looking for that hate figure with-in BP to vent their anger on due to the tradegy.
As the American president said ''Im looking for a butt to kick.''

Obviously BP should fund the cost of clean up 100% as well as compensation for their employee's and third partys effected.

The thing thats slowly emerging in the British tabloids is how BP is a major contributer to tax and also the UK pension fund has bought a lot of shares from BP.
And due to the droping of their share prices, this is slowly wiping more of the investments by the UK pension funds.
And in these times of economic stress, any money thats lost will further the strain on any econamy.
This will add more doubt to the already unstable pension pot and may mean, further down the line, somebody who's worked their whole life and paid their taxes may not get anything, or only a little taste of what they should get.
And I guess a lot of replys to that would be why buy shares in Oil?... Because oil makes the most profit and is in demand.

Now the thought of extradition, thats news to me, but honestly, would it make anyone happy?

Getting a public whipping boy to be the fall guy who will get a couple of years in prison?
It'll probably add to the 'piece of mind' aspect, but wont really acomplish anything in the long term.
But, as Id like to point out, the company was working in American waters (I think, or are they international?) but nether the less, due to them working in that nations territory, they should be susceptible to that nations laws.
Only question is, what would be a suitable sentence?

But back to the Britain - American merry-go-round, I look at it like this, the American public would be just as bugged if it was an American or even Arabic company.

I dont think its the press sniping, their just picking up on the oppinions of the excentric buffoon Boris Jhonson, Mayor of London.
And the language used by Obama in refering to BP as British Petrolium, when the companys name is BP, which is also the name in which it trades under.
This ''repatition'' could instill thoughts of a diffrent nature into the lighter mind which are triggerd on the word 'British.'
-- The only way I can describe what I mean is by playing the word Association game...

When I say British, whats the first thing you think of..?

Easily strongly agree!! Having said that, the same should go for the execs of Exxon and other companies that have ruined vast stretches of land in Nigeria and Southern America.

Fact is, the oil companies don't give a # about the environment or the health/safety of human people as long as they're making a profit. I really hope this accident is the final drop that forces people to WAKE UP and demand that those execs get what they deserve.

Cheap oil? Sure!! But NOT at the expense of the environment or human safety/health!!

Either way, if you criticize the BP execs, you also have to criticize the people who allowed them to disregard environmental/human concerns...you know, the people who DEREGULATED the business. Do your research, and you'll find some VERY familiar names. I'll give you a hint: The name of the person instrumental in the deregulation of environmental/human safety measures starts with a "C", and ends with "HENEY".

[edit on 11-6-2010 by MrXYZ]

The OP uses PB instead of BP on several occasions, which is trifle frustrating.

This is a poll. So, my opinion would largely be 3. However, I neither care or even have remorse for the emotions what the American people or government view of BP (orchestrated cleverly through their media). Yes this company must accept responsibility to a degree, but my instinct from the start of this whole awful thing was that Halliburton were the clowns who had the control in thier hands.

Just my view. I'm not open to debate on it either. That's how I feel until I realise otherwise.





[edit on 11-6-2010 by BAZ752]

People have to realize that it isn't only the oil companies' fault. They are businesses, and will do whatever necessary to maximize profits. The people who allowed this to happen in the first place are the politicians DEREGULATING the business on our and the environment's expense!

Agree. As the responsible company, BP must bear the costs of the clean up and compensate everyone affected. Criminal proceedings are also appropriate given that negligence appears to have been a factor in the disaster. I would imagine that BP would wish to bring subcontractors, eg Haliburton, into any action against it.

My principal concern right now however is that the leak gets fixed as soon as possible. The disaster keeps getting worse and worse and the consequences of it continuing unchecked for months are global and catastrophic. The time for recriminations is after the problem has been fixed. Before then all parties should be working together rather than attacking each other.

BP isn't really a 'British' company anymore. It's a global multinational. In recognition of this the name doesn't even stand for 'British Petroleum' any more. It's just BP.

I've seen estimates of the eventual total cost of this disaster running into trillions of dollars. Even BP doesn't have this sort of money and nor does its insurers. No prizes for guessing who'll end up paying in the end.

reply to post by winston_jones


I understand Halliburton were nom. Contractor. Ultimately BP would (and hopefully will) bear the brunt of the accountability of the face of the events, but I sincerely do not buy into this nonsense that the effects will be ''global and catastophic''! Are you talking economic or naturally?


[edit on 11-6-2010 by BAZ752]