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.

 

BP says Halliburton destroyed Gulf spill evidence

page: 2
29
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 09:45 PM
link   
No, not Hallibutrton, they wouldn't do something like that. The company that was once lead by the great American VP Dick Cheney? The same one's that bribed the Nigerian government, but then got Dick Cheney and others off of criminal charges by paying a huge settlement so they wouldn't convict? The same Halliburton that has US government contracts, but has an office in Tehran Iran? Naaww, they would NEVER do something like THIS!




posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 09:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 

My fear, though, is that bp will take the hit, and the other companies will skirt under the radar, with a slap on the wrist if anything. All of the companies are liable, and all should be held to account.

Now that is a very interesting way of seeing it. I hadn't really understood where you were coming from on that, but giving a moment to look at this from that angle...you have a point. A serious bashing of BP could leave everyone tired and wishing the whole thing just goes away.....leaving others to skate.

Hmmmm....... A possible solution to that would be to see a citizens review board as a part ...and a MAJOR part...of any future investigation. Draw the people from the Louisiana coastal community and fishing industries. Now there is a crowd who won't tire in hunting down the last one to have been involved in what was done and still being done to their communities and livelihood.



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 09:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 

My fear, though, is that bp will take the hit, and the other companies will skirt under the radar, with a slap on the wrist if anything. All of the companies are liable, and all should be held to account.

Now that is a very interesting way of seeing it. I hadn't really understood where you were coming from on that, but giving a moment to look at this from that angle...you have a point. A serious bashing of BP could leave everyone tired and wishing the whole thing just goes away.....leaving others to skate.

Hmmmm....... A possible solution to that would be to see a citizens review board as a part ...and a MAJOR part...of any future investigation. Draw the people from the Louisiana coastal community and fishing industries. Now there is a crowd who won't tire in hunting down the last one to have been involved in what was done and still being done to their communities and livelihood.


Even if BP takes a huge hit, they just disolve and reform under a new name. There is a law already on the books with laughably low liabilities, so I doubt it will come to that.

§1004 The liability for tank vessels larger than 3,000 gross tons is increased to $1,200 per gross ton or $10 million, whichever is greater. Responsible parties at onshore facilities and deepwater ports are liable for up to $350 millon per spill; holders of leases or permits for offshore facilities, except deepwater ports, are liable for up to $75 million per spill, plus removal costs. The Federal government has the authority to adjust, by regulation, the $350 million liability limit established for onshore facilities.
edit on 5-12-2011 by AGWskeptic because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 10:10 PM
link   



Secondly, the Nat Geo crew, right after the disaster, published photos on the net, and one of the photos that was taken on board the rig as the employees were evacuating showed a guy dressed all in black, with "BLACKWATER" written on the back of his shirt. He was fully armed. I have since tried to find this photo and cannot locate it.

What is the reason to have a fully armed private security force on an oil rig? I can think of a few reasons, such as being the law in case the employees get crazy, or perhaps pirates (yeah, that's a stretch), but Blackwater (now Xe) and Halliburton have been in cahoots for lots of shady adventures.

Anybody have any thoughts or information on this?



digitaljournal.com...

i was reading on this site, that they had Blackwater on the rig to force blast survivors sign "legal statements"....however...NPR says the Coast Guard kept them on the water for hours..

www.npr.org...

so...it sounds like there are two different stories as to who was doing what, and for what reason....and where they were doing it...of course, we all know what they can go do to themselves....how they can do it..where they can do it...and what they can use to do it with!



posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 12:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by AGWskeptic
Even if BP takes a huge hit, they just disolve and reform under a new name. There is a law already on the books with laughably low liabilities, so I doubt it will come to that.

§1004 The liability for tank vessels larger than 3,000 gross tons is increased to $1,200 per gross ton or $10 million, whichever is greater. Responsible parties at onshore facilities and deepwater ports are liable for up to $350 millon per spill; holders of leases or permits for offshore facilities, except deepwater ports, are liable for up to $75 million per spill, plus removal costs. The Federal government has the authority to adjust, by regulation, the $350 million liability limit established for onshore facilities.
edit on 5-12-2011 by AGWskeptic because: (no reason given)

This is why I do have some serious hope someone like Ron Paul makes it. Whatever they want to say about him, and however much he goofs here and there, he's still in the top 3 and he's there very solidly. The establishment doesn't like him, but the people are keeping him near the top. Maybe........ That would be about the only chance of seeing meaningful reform with teeth for accountability when a corporations action have caused calamity to an area, IMHO. From all he's consistently said over the years, he would bring creativity to the process of seeing that those who destroyed a large % our coastal waters pay for it to the maximum extent of their corporate ability.


There is also a whole different aspect to this. The amount that came out of the hole is astronomically larger than any numbers on even the most cooked and fantasy projections for what was recovered. I don't think this whole thing is over by a long shot. It all went somewhere, and experts are suggesting it's blanketed much of the deep water floor. I really don't think the whole idea of getting another shot at BP is academic when this will likely rear it's head again.

There has to be more consequence in the natural world for such an event. Oh well... We'll see.



posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 12:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
 





BP says Halliburton destroyed Gulf spill evidence


Well this is Satan accusing Beelzebub isn't it? Yes, they are the same creature, different names.

I just got Greg Palast's new book Vulture's Picnic and that is one of the subjects of this book. I would give a fuller report but I am on page 75 at the moment so...

Another good one to read on this subject is The Secret War Against The Jews by Aarons and Loftus. In that book they reveal that the CIA in the Mid East is Big American Oil. And in both books it is revealed that MI6 in the Mid East and elsewhere is BP.

Oh and by the way, BP has a history of these spills, it just never made it to the Nightly News before.

S+F OP.



posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 12:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Vardoger
Nice...two oil giants going head to head in court....Who does the Judge side with! They're both his employer!


BP's pissed because they got stuck with the blame where Halliburton made a fortune on the cleanup (coincidence that Halliburton bought/invested in oil spill cleanup services/machines/chemicals some months before?)


It could well be to the people's advantage that these two giants are equally corrupt,
because the money in the kitty for each legal team may actually hurt each a little..
I can dream. Hey, mixed signals from an authority figure can CREATE schitzoid
tendencies-- maybe Joe average will notice both sides are nutballs. Now I'm really
dreaming.



posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 04:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


You do realise that that statement is akin to having family members on a board to decide a punishment for a crime commited against them. In law there can be no emotion that is the point, things are done on the circumstance and not as a retribution, which is what would happen.

Not that i'm disagreeing that someone needs to be held accountable, but with Obarmy constantly going on about British Petroleum, when it happened, they will never get a fair hearing. Always thought that was a bit rich seeing as Hallib and transocean were also involved. Also did the silly **** not realise they hadn't been called that for years



posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 05:43 AM
link   
If this is admitted why has no one been charged. This shows the level of corruption we are facing.



posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 07:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
 


Sounds like he said she said....How about they are ALL GUILTY! What can we do to keep it from ever happening again! Thats my concern! Those who are guilty need to be punished!

The gulf helps control weather systems, oceanic conveyers belts and food populations...Without this system working, its just another nail in the coffin if you ask me.



posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 07:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by FFS4000
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


You do realise that that statement is akin to having family members on a board to decide a punishment for a crime commited against them. In law there can be no emotion that is the point, things are done on the circumstance and not as a retribution, which is what would happen.

Not that i'm disagreeing that someone needs to be held accountable, but with Obarmy constantly going on about British Petroleum, when it happened, they will never get a fair hearing. Always thought that was a bit rich seeing as Hallib and transocean were also involved. Also did the silly **** not realise they hadn't been called that for years

Okay, you get me wrong... I wouldn't suggest or foresee a citizen based investigative body working alone, nor would I ever suggest it have any involvement in liability assignment or what sanctions or punishments are handed down. That could get totally out of hand by the emotion you rightly note would be driving it. A lynch mob in an office isn't any better than one in the street. lol..

I don't believe that is how the model works for the citizen review portion of the equation for the Police Departments which use this, for example. It does, however, insure that for strictly the investigative side of the effort, no cover-ups are tolerated and the effort doesn't stop short of running down the leads and pursuing all the issues. The pure conviction lay citizens would bring to it is what I think would make a real difference vs. a strictly political 'show' committee.

Who knows.. Maybe Bobby Jindal can pull it off when Washington isn't 100% against him on it.



posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 11:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by cconn487
Two big companies going at it? Glad to see it.


I agree. It's a good sign that companies formerly in cahoots are turning on one another in a public way. I'm going to go out on a limb and assume this is a symptom of the collapse of the oil-based economy. More evidence that this economic collapse could produce some pretty constructive effects.



posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 11:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Vardoger
 


My thoughts exactly. It's not like BP is totally innocent an it's all Halliburton's fault. There's plenty of blame to go around. Washington DC can have a helping of blame, too.



posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by captaintyinknots

Not only did haliburton get rich from the cleanup, they were getting rich from the setup of the rigs as well. So basically, you have a company setting up the rigs to drill, doing it poorly, and then getting paid to clean it up when it fails.


In my business thats what we call "double dipping"

Halliburton is above the law, and they employ their own army of privately contracted soldiers who will kidnap the judge's wife and kids, or simply kill them all to send a clear message to the next judge who will say "not enough evidence to convict"

Worst case scenario, the power players of halliburton, (mostly political figures and their cronies) will pull all their money out and file bankruptcy, only to re-open their doors the following day under a new name, and with a new CEO.

Blackwater was facing some heinous criminal charges, and now they're called Xe. Thats the benefit of being one of the nations biggest contracted companies...you're always one step ahead!
edit on 6-12-2011 by WhiteDevil013 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 11:44 AM
link   
wow if this isnt a case of the pot calling kettle black ok haliburton destroyed slurry tests evidence . bp sprayed a dispersant on oil spill causing oil to sink so they would have less oil to have to pay fines on while damaging the environment in process . i say hold both of them responsible and shut them both down . take control of their american oil fields and quite letting them export our oil overseas.



posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 12:12 PM
link   
As a Halliburton employee I'd have to remain impartial to the Halli blame.

This is not just halli's fault, you have BP, Transocean, and the US government. They had a vested interest in this incident. After all the energy head of BP is also the energy head of the US government. Then you have the company who supplied the poisonous dispersant Corexit. They are owned by BP and funded by the US government. Looks to me like a case of a 'Planned' disaster. Not just in BP and Halli's money making interests but in the US governments agendas too!!



posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 12:49 PM
link   
The whole court case is a pseudo-rouse.

They are both taking the heat off of each other !!!

Watch for a "verdict" years from now to be "neutral"....no proof either way,
and/or, a magically arrived at settlement.

In the meantime, this case locks up any other efforts by other companies.

The "out of court" settlements avoid public disclose of criminal details,
and allows legal "no admissions of guilt".



"These remedies are amply warranted in law and by principles of fair play, and they are essential to ensure this court's trial is not tainted by Halliburton's misconduct," BP said in the filing.



"We believe that the conclusion that BP is asking the court to draw is without merit and we look forward to contesting their motion in court," she said.



The public gets the feeling of satisfaction and hope.....but no case, no penalty.




edit on Dec-06-2011 by xuenchen because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 04:10 PM
link   
BP is Rothschilds.

What else ya need to know.



posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 08:33 PM
link   
This is going to be a legal battle....... BP Lawyers vs Haliburton lawyers....Holy hell this could get ugly, especially with these accusations....



posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 09:01 PM
link   
it's not gonna be ugly....it's gonna be downright nasty....both companies may very well be told to get out, and stay out of the gulf of mexico, for good
edit on 2011/12/6 by moonweed because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
29
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join