Why are there so many BP defenders in here?

  • Thread starter Thread starter |3illy the |&lt
  • Start date Start date
well..they did.

they purposefully went against the advice of their crew figuring IF there was a problem they could handle it. Hence the statement: "Well, I guess that's what we have those pinchers for"

The testimony corroborated other witness statements obtained by The Associated Press that show Transocean managers complained BP was "taking shortcuts" the day of the explosion by replacing heavy drilling fluid with saltwater in the well that blew out. The accounts could give Transocean more ammunition in its verbal battle with BP to assign blame for the disaster, which caused what is likely the biggest oil spill in U.S. history.

In BP's internal investigation, made public by the committee, BP said it might have been a "fundamental mistake" to continue with the procedure because there was an "indication of a very large abnormality."
 
I would definitely oppose a take over of BP.


Why shouldn't the president have an opinion on a disaster? He's not unfairly attacking a company to give them a bad reputation or slandering them.
He should be allowed like any other citizen to express public outrage.
 
He's not expressing outrage. He's expressing that he's going to find out who is responsible and kick their ass - something he actually has the power to do. It's pathetic.
 
And it's not illegal to have babies.

Passing legislation saying you have to drill x far away from the coast.
=
Passing legislation saying if you have a baby you'll be slaughtered.
 
Congress didn't force them to become a company and drill though.
They simply told them where they were allowed to if they wanted to.

And since we hate government intervention we trusted that they would as a company work in the best interest of their business after they've decided to drill there (not forcibly). They had an accident which (thought not definitely) at least seems to be mostly their fault through bad practices.
 
It's common sense that drilling 50 miles offshore one mile below the surface of the ocean is going to be more dangerous than drilling in 200 ft. of water 20 miles offshore.

It was also part of the debates when some of the safest places to drill for oil were put off limits over the past decades.
 
since when does common sense have to do with anything? its common sense that you would do the opposite of what BP did to cause the rig explosion..
 
I guess you don't do well with analogies. That's your own shortcoming, not mine.
 
BP has had 760 safety violations and the next runner up has 8

Jesus christ.
 
?? We are holding them FISCALLY responsible.


But you can't argue it was criminal if they followed the law, the government watchdogs approved everything, etc...
 
What's absolutely hypocritical is that the conservatives jump all over a falsely edited video of ACORN employees and want to tear them limb from limb. But 760 safety violations and documented reports of BP cutting corners on the day of the incident still isn't enough for them to feel the need to vilify BP.
 
How many "conservatives" are defending BP?

Far fewer than the Liberals still defending Obama.

So shove the generalizations up your ass, bro.
 
Like the people doing meth in the break room at the MMS? Of course it was criminal and their shortcuts have been well documented.
 
Back
Top