BP

Different horses for different courses I guess. I found watching him (Rose) painful, to the extent of switching off the interview about 20 minutes in.

The slow delivery, punctuated by long pauses, the finger pointing for emphasis and the interruptions were all very annoying. At one point he asked a critical question about the perceptions of BP's responses to the incident, and the good Admiral (ret) was going to answer in two parts:

1. responses at the macro level (engineering etc) , in which he have BP glowing marks

2. responses at the micro level (eg the affected fishermen), which he never got to answer (at least not when I switched off) because of Rose's interruptions.

However, I found Ad. Allen most impressive.

jackspratt wrote:Different horses for different courses I guess. I found watching him (Rose) painful, to the extent of switching off the interview about 20 minutes in.

The slow delivery, punctuated by long pauses, the finger pointing for emphasis and the interruptions were all very annoying.....

Have to agree with you on the delivery - I watch his show for the high quality of guests (on topics that interest me) and a change from the confrontational points scoring nature that seems to be in vogue with most media prima donnas these days.

The Thad Allen interview was refreshing (to me) in its lack of histrionics and its cool, calm, collected, informative and thoughtful delivery.

Jimbo wrote:The Thad Allen interview was refreshing (to me) in its lack of histrionics and its cool, calm, collected, informative and thoughtful delivery.

Yes, having watched the clip twice, I thought the same.

I thought Thad Allen conducted himself in an exemplary manner, with a "statesmanlike" dignity, language & behaviour. I was also impressed by his giving (BP) credit where it was due, and not being drawn on matters that were not yet known or proven, and not to mention his lack of amateur dramatics/histrionics!

If you haven't watched it, please do.

just for the members that want to know the truth of BP and it's history.....

as I predicted in the past,
it is only a question of time, but the truth will come out.

after months of great journalistic work,
A ProPublica and PBS FRONTLINE investigation. “The Spill " came out.

REAL JOURNALISM: This report confirms what I wrote months ago:
it all boils back to the pattern of behavior of BP!!!!!!

Over the past decade, BP vaulted from an energy "also-ran" to one of the biggest companies in the world, gobbling up competitors in a series of mergers that delivered handsome profits for shareholders. But an investigation by FRONTLINE and the nonprofit newsroom ProPublica shows that BP's leadership failed to create a culture of safety in the massive new company. As BP took increasingly big risks to find oil and extract it, the company left behind a trail of mounting problems: deadly accidents, disastrous spills, countless safety violations. Each time, BP acknowledged the wider flaws in its culture and promised to do better. The FRONTLINE/ProPublica investigation shows that the rhetoric was empty. From the refineries to the oil fields to the Gulf of Mexico, BP workers understood that profits came first.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/the-spill/bp-questions-answers/

cookie wrote:as I predicted in the past,
it is only a question of time, but the truth will come out.

after months of great journalistic work,
A ProPublica and PBS FRONTLINE investigation. “The Spill " came out.

REAL JOURNALISM: This report confirms what I wrote months ago:
it all boils back to the pattern of behavior of BP!!!!!!

You are "having a laugh" now cookie....

Great journalistic investigation work??

Where?? This complete piece has nothing to do with the Gulf spill at all. Just a rehashing of stuff I reported on a few days after the spill, open to anyone on the internet & safety breaches that BP has already been to court for &, rightly, fined large sums of money for. There is zero in this piece to suggest that BP did anything illegal in its operations in the Gulf - now that would have been a scoop.
As far as I can tell BP are not facing any criminal charges for what happened in the Gulf Spill incident.
As I am becoming increasingly bored with telling you....
Crimes committed in the past cannot be forwarded as evidence of a crime currently being committed. They are taken into account by a judge when considering sentencing IF the party is found guilty of a new crime.
I am surprised that you have been unable to grasp this very simple concept....

Have just read this in the Daily Mail, is it about the same thing.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... fault.html

malc123

BobHelm wrote:I am surprised that you have been unable to grasp this very simple concept....

indeed incredible that mister Bob still can't read
high time to change the reading glasses????

the title of this topic is BP (in general) and not only about BP and it's operations in the Gulf.
but we all know that you use every occasion you can get to....
as I mentioned before,
this report gives us a clear and detailed view over the pattern of behavior of BP.

The full investigation over the gulf spill is still ongoing .....

And EVERYONE agrees that BPs past safety record is abysmal. So why the need to continually resurrect it. It is history.
On the current BP front in your delight at playing the history card (again) you miss the real news that Malc had to post.
That so far the major contributor to the spill would appear (by EVIDENCE rather than history or rhetoric) to be Halliburton and not BP.
Or does that not appeal to your anti-BP stance???

BobHelm wrote:That so far the major contributor to the spill would appear (by EVIDENCE rather than history or rhetoric) to be Halliburton and not BP.

this confirms indeed my point that you urgently need new reading glasses, or
there are perhaps some facts that you simply refuse to
read because they don't stroke with your opinion.....


according to Bob;
here you have more evidence together with history!!!!

[quote]BP had in hand at the time of the blowout the results of only one of the tests—a February analysis sent to BP by Halliburton in a March 8 e-mail that indicated the cement could fail.[/quote]

nevertheless BP continued, even when they had in their hands an analysis that indicated that the cement could fail.

but according to Bob,
these conclusions of the panel are not important;
according to Bob
Halliburton is the major contributor.
It seems that Bob doesn't need an investigation anymore,
his mind is made up; he judged already:
Halliburton is the major contributor.
As I mentioned before, the investigation is ongoing and I will wait,
( keeping in mind the history of BP )

The independent investigators do not address other decisions that could have contributed to the cement's failure and the eventual blowout, such as BP's decision to use fewer centralizers than recommended by Halliburton. Centralizers make sure the well's piping is centered inside the well so the cement bonds correctly.

BP has also been criticized for not performing a cement bond long, a test that checks after the cement is pumped down whether it is secure. There are also questions about whether BP pumped down enough cement to seal off the bottom of the well, which was located more than three miles below sea level.

again,
for the members that are interested to know more about BP:



http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5igahXC3SkTTf2b4nKNp9VZuv6Mew?docId=505ad7273f504a769b2da63b5fb43328

members that missed the program and want to watch it:
the program frontline: the spill can be downloaded here:

http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/5915006/Frontline.US.S29E02.The.Spill.HDTV.XviD-FQM

And still you make no reference to this...

The allegations were made in a letter by the panel’s lead investigator Fred Bartlit.

In his letter, Mr Bartlit says that if the cement used to secure the bottom of the well had worked properly there would never have been an accident

‘We have known for some time that the cement used to secure the production casing and isolate the hydrocarbon zone at the bottom of the well must have failed in some manner,’ he said in his letter to the seven members of the presidential commission.

Three tests showed the cement was flawed, but Halliburton went ahead with the job anyway, the presidential commission investigating the disaster revealed. It is the first official finding of responsibility.

Yet, according to YOU it is still undoubtedly ALL BPs at fault.
Those are not my words above they are Fred Bartlits' who, I suspect, knows a little more about the situation than you or most!!

BobHelm wrote:
Yet, according to YOU it is still undoubtedly ALL BPs at fault.

It is high time for you to stop putting words in the mouth of other people.

please quote me where I wrote that it was undoubtedly ALL BP's fault??????

you wrote :

That so far the major contributor to the spill would appear (by EVIDENCE rather than history or rhetoric) to be Halliburton and not BP.

I pointed out from the report that this was wrong,
judges will decide who's fault it is.
and now you try to turn it around by lying?????

Stop what you are doing !!!!!
I never said that !!!!!

You are a lying..... fill it in yourself
or show me where I said that it is undoubtedly ALL BP's fault.....

and I hope that you will use EVIDENCE rather than your rhetoric,
because we know what your rhetoric is worth as you have just proven.....

So you agree with the Investigator then cookie & that Halliburton are a major (if not THE major) contributor of the spill.
That is good then, we are agreed....on the evidence..

as predictable as ever
Bob has to come back with rhetoric so that he can avoid the answers to his lies
what a little man you are

You can wriggle & wriggle as much as you like & use Smilies & capital letters, but, at the end of the day I have only quoted what the Investigator appointed by the President to see what was the root cause of the disaster was said.
Say where he is wrong & where I have misquoted him & I will happily apologize.
He says

Halliburton are a major (if not THE major) contributor of the spill

Do you deny that???????????????????

quite incredible how members still blindly try to defend a company with a list of conviction and a proven pattern of negligence

The above is your 3rd. post on this thread....Do I now take it that it is a ringing endorsement of your belief that BP were not responsible for this disaster??? Otherwise, why did you post it????

Cookie, you brought this subject up, ... yet again,..... with your attacks on BP, and when Bob stopped you and pointed out your inconsistencies and the unsubstantiated aspects of your allegations, you resort to personal attacks and sarcastic or belittling comments.

Cookie wrote:indeed incredible that mister Bob still can't read
high time to change the reading glasses????

A rather childish if not rude remark, don't you think.

cookie wrote:as predictable as ever
Bob has to come back with rhetoric so that he can avoid the answers to his lies
what a little man you are

Yet another personal attack.
When I last met Bob, he was at least as big as me, and I wouldn't describe myself as small. Maybe you should be keeping up to date with Forum rules, rather than accusing others of being liars.

As you yourself said:

Cookie wrote:The full investigation over the gulf spill is still ongoing .....

Yes, so why not stop your constant regurgitation of historical events, assertions, allegations and snide remarks and wait until it all the enquiries, inquests and court cases have been fully completed, or are you afraid that BP will be found to be less at fault than you persist in asserting, and that US company Halliburton or others may be found significantly lacking!!

I note your friend Obama has perhaps wisely and prudently gone very quiet on the subject.