BP

The express coffee at a Wild Bean Cafe on the BP petrol stations in England in very good. Also you should try one of the crusty bread rolls filled with mature cheddar cheese and tomato. Another one of OTs' favorites is the chicken pie. You can also pick up a case of stella if need be.
BP do have the best petrol stations in the UK when it comes to having the munchies.
Oh, one other thing, you can but the newspaper as well which is handy.

OT........on topic and making the BP thread more interesting.......

old-timer wrote:you can but the newspaper as well.

Do you roll it into a tube first, or crumple it into balls?

Britons and their odd fetishes.

Texpat wrote:

old-timer wrote:you can but the newspaper as well.

Do you roll it into a tube first, or crumple it into balls?

Britons and their odd fetishes.

wooops, OTs' mince pies are getting worse, although what you are insinuating Texpat is not what an Brit would say anyway - he would say that he was going to stick the newspaper up his @rse. To "but" something in English speaking terms normally means headbutting it like this

OT......

arjay wrote:

“We are making this claim because we believe that BP has inflicted catastrophic harm on the state,” Attorney General Troy King told Reuters.

Cookie wrote:perhaps wishful thinking,

Cookie, it's re-assuring to note that you don't believe everything you post then! I was getting seriously concerned about your mental well-being.

it is quite incredible how " MODERATORS"
are allowed to spin and troll on this forum.

my full sentence was of course:

"perhaps wishful thinking,
but let's hope that every fisherman, hotelier, victim,... get every dime they lost over this disaster, plus interest."

but Arjay, the troll, likes to take sentences out of context so that he can troll and spin
I still wonder how this man can stay a moderator on this forum

troll is even a too nice expression,

by the way,
I hope that the moderators will notice what happened with this topic after Arjay, the troll posted.

he should be ashamed, a moderator that is clearly only posting to troll and stir things up,
and the persons that posted after him proved that he succeeded his "troll-spin"

no other words then SHAME OP HIM,
especially in the position of a moderator

Just for the record and in response to Cookie's comments above:

I haven't posted as a Moderator for a couple of weeks now. My posts are as a normal member.

I consider your remarks and perspective an insult (Cookie), considering that for the last couple of months you persistently "shat" your poisoned and vitriolic off topic abuse of BP all over a thread that I started about Obama's behaviour. Then when I protested enough about your posts being off topic, you started a new topic entitled BP (which of course you are entitled to do). Not then being satisfied with continuing your vitriolic attacks of BP on that thread, you proceed to throw in liberal sprinklings of sarcasm and mocking remarks clearly aimed at me.

In one of my posts, you refer to above, I was simply pointing out an inconsistency in your logic. In that one you quoted an article about oil spills all over the world, involving many different oil companies and that "Ecuador alone is seeking $30bn from Texaco". You then followed that up with comments about BP & Shell and a comment that "BP clearly is the villain here"!! Thus using that article to tar BP with, as well as mock a previous comment of mine from the Obama thread. As indeed you sought to challenge much of what I said on other threads.

The other (Note light-hearted) point made, applies whether the single sentence was quoted or the several sentences are quoted. (see below). I try and make MY points concise.

I do not control or influence what others post on the threads. Maybe they were trying to lighten up the situation, or convey to you that in their view enough is enough!

Have you thought of posting any material about Udon Thani?

For the record this is the full piece I quoted an extract from:

“We are making this claim because we believe that BP has inflicted catastrophic harm on the state,” Attorney General Troy King told Reuters.

perhaps wishful thinking,
but let's hope that every fisherman, hotelier, victim,... get every dime they lost over this disaster, plus interest.

To me the part after the comma was superfluous. It certainly doesn't change the meaning.

PS. Ironically this point I made was light-hearted suggesting that maybe you (yourself) didn't believe everything you wrote or quoted!!

arjay wrote:Just for the record and in response to Cookie's comments above:

I haven't posted as a Moderator for a couple of weeks now. My posts are as a normal member.

I consider your remarks and perspective an insult (Cookie), considering that for the last couple of months you persistently "shat" your poisoned and vitriolic off topic abuse of BP all over a thread that I started about Obama's behaviour. Then when I protested enough about your posts being off topic, you started a new topic entitled BP (which of course you are entitled to do). Not then being satisfied with continuing your vitriolic attacks of BP on that thread, you proceed to throw in liberal sprinklings of sarcasm and mocking remarks clearly aimed at me.

In one of my posts, you refer to above, I was simply pointing out an inconsistency in your logic. In that one you quoted an article about oil spills all over the world, involving many different oil companies and that "Ecuador alone is seeking $30bn from Texaco". You then followed that up with comments about BP & Shell and a comment that "BP clearly is the villain here"!! Thus using that article to tar BP with, as well as mock a previous comment of mine from the Obama thread. As indeed you sought to challenge much of what I said on other threads.

The other (Note light-hearted) point made, applies whether the single sentence was quoted or the several sentences are quoted. (see below). I try and make MY points concise.

I do not control or influence what others post on the threads. Maybe they were trying to lighten up the situation, or convey to you that in their view enough is enough!

Have you thought of posting any material about Udon Thani?

For the record this is the full piece I quoted an extract from:

“We are making this claim because we believe that BP has inflicted catastrophic harm on the state,” Attorney General Troy King told Reuters.

perhaps wishful thinking,
but let's hope that every fisherman, hotelier, victim,... get every dime they lost over this disaster, plus interest.

To me the part after the comma was superfluous. It certainly doesn't change the meaning.

PS. Ironically this point I made was light-hearted suggesting that maybe you (yourself) didn't believe everything you wrote or quoted!!

Arjay, you are litlle poor man,
poor, poor man,
as I said before, BP needs more than abuse,
but your problem is big...
if members don't agree with your opinion,
you start to get aggressive, .....fill in the words that you think suit you.
then you start with:
"I don't want to perpetuate this topic"
more lies, BS
BS, yes, BS
you just can't stop attacking members that don't agree with you

So a wise guy told me,
stop it and start a new topic
he will calm down

NO, forget it,
the troll is there again, trying to kill this topic also
giving a great example as a moderator.
Again,
you are a troll
and I hope that the moderators have the honesty to stop you!!!

I started this new topic in the hope that you would calm down
but wishful thinking indeed,
even this new topic that I started, you had to attack as a troll !!!!!

a new topic couldn't stop you, no of course not
your ego is tooooo big
you had to show your troll mentality again !!!!
a mderator would have kept his word

" I don't want to perpetuate this " ????? BS

Is that the value of your words????
acting like a troll??? giving the right example???


Again,
I started this new topic to avoid , but you have to perpetuate, you have to act as a troll...
you are a poor guy indeed,
nothing else to add....

cookie wrote:I started this new topic in the hope that you would calm down
but wishful thinking indeed,
even this new topic that I started, you had to attack as a troll !!!!!

Just out of interest, why was the opening sentence of the new topic phrased as follows?:

no childish spin allowed on this new topic.

Was it written with the intention of calming things down?

I reckon most impartial observers would regard the situation as haa sip/haa sip at the moment.

As much as I hate to admit it, one of two things is happening:

(No, not among the UM drama queens -- with British Petroleum)

Either the media has accepted massive incentives from the US administration to topkill stories of oil slicked beaches (perfectly believable)
or
Chemical dispersants are working and the oil is diminishing.

If BP continues to live up to its responsibility, and early claims, good. It's what they should do. It doesn't bring back 11 lost lives or correct their abysmal safety record, but it's a start.

We'll likely never know what the environmental effects of hundreds of Valdez-like spills had on the Gulf. It can't be good.

And those nationalistic, pride-bound posters that seek to minimize and divert blame and change the subject should still be ashamed of their dishonesty and denial.

The disaster continues.

Oh dear!

Just as someone tries to pour oil on troubled waters (excuse the pun), UM's direct descendant of the Three Billy Goats Gruff pops up.

I recall earlier this year ago when a tanker began leaking while transiting the GBR.

BBC wrote:There has already been one failed attempt to refloat the 230-metre (754-ft) vessel. Its fuel tank, carrying 150 tonnes, has been punctured.

All in a tizzy.
But an environmental disaster 1000x the magnitude -- those whining Americans. It's nothing, really.
Hey! Look the US president is expressing concern! Isn't he an alarmist idiot? Hahaha.
Yes, the ***** response was irresponsible, inexcusable and frankly, insulting.

Special relationship -- ummmm, no. Thanks for playing, though.

Let's hope the situation continues to improve. Or the media are exposed for the sycophantic babbling idiots they are.

jackspratt wrote:

cookie wrote:I started this new topic in the hope that you would calm down
but wishful thinking indeed,
even this new topic that I started, you had to attack as a troll !!!!!

Just out of interest, why was the opening sentence of the new topic phrased as follows?:

no childish spin allowed on this new topic.

Was it written with the intention of calming things down?

I reckon most impartial observers would regard the situation as haa sip/haa sip at the moment.

I asked him in the past not to answer because we knew his reaction already: BP has nothing to blame, BP will take it's responsibility,Bp is fine, the history of BP is irrelevant,......
but to no use; more insulting, more troll

so I started a new post and asked again not to react because of the spin,
but we know what happened,
the sick obsession is unstoppable.


even more , his arrogance has no limit:

his post:

"Have you thought of posting any material about Udon Thani?"

I just checked:

I posted over the years 316 posts about Thailand News.....

so what is he doing here with these arrogant remarks:

MORE TROLLLLLLLLL

I hope he crawls back under his rock where trolls belong,
by the way,
one of his interests: "Maintaining fair play on forums." Give me a brake....
Does this mean that one has to agree with his opinion in order to obtain fair play ?????

Admiral Thad Allen interview with Charlie Rose on Bloomberg.

Link: http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/11179

I saw this interview, which is 27 minutes long, on Bloomberg last night – it gave a refreshingly clear insight into some of the aftermath of the Deepwater Horizon disaster without the emotionally charged rhetoric and ill informed comment that has been such a prominent feature of most of the media reporting (that I have seen) to date.

the oil spill that was gone,
is suddenly back: 22 miles long !!!!!

It is obviously difficult to determine how much oil is left and
what its continuing effects are.
As I predicted the lawyers and
consultants will have a field day

[urlhttp://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/08/19/99410/scientists-say-gulf-oil-to-linger.html][/url]

The testimony came as a new independent study, published in the journal Science, reported that a vast fog of oil — 22 miles long and more than a mile wide — is floating far below the Gulf's surface, where low water temperatures are slowing its natural breakdown.

It was the most conclusive evidence yet of a subsea oil "plume" that could linger for years, said Richard Camilli of the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts, the lead author of the report.

"We understand that the government wants to turn a corner and wants to signal that the Gulf is on the road to recovery,"

"However, the facts simply do not bear that out. There is still a huge amount of oil in the environment."

Earlier this week, researchers from the University of Georgia reported that 70 to 79 percent of the spilled oil remained in the water, and that far less oil had evaporated than the government claimed.
Bill Lehr, a senior scientist with NOAA, acknowledged at Thursday's hearing that only 10 percent of the spill had been skimmed or burned off by recovery efforts. Anywhere from 60 to 90 percent of the discharged oil remains in the Gulf in some form, much of it broken up by chemicals, he said.

Ian MacDonald, a Florida State University oceanographer, also cast doubt on the government's claim that oil "is biodegrading quickly" in the ocean, arguing that scientists still don't know how fast hydrocarbon-eating bacteria are working. MacDonald, who's 58, said the spill would remain in the Gulf in some form for the rest of his life.

"That's a lot of oil," he said, "and it's not going away quickly."

JimboPSM wrote:Admiral Thad Allen interview with Charlie Rose on Bloomberg.

Link: http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/11179

I saw this interview, which is 27 minutes long, on Bloomberg last night – it gave a refreshingly clear insight into some of the aftermath of the Deepwater Horizon disaster without the emotionally charged rhetoric and ill informed comment that has been such a prominent feature of most of the media reporting (that I have seen) to date.

Watching Charlie Rose is such a pleasue!Objective,intellectual without emotional ignorant selfish selve serving outbursts!