Please do not attempt to cast BP as the hero now. The overriding issue is that the explosion could have been prevented had they embraced all safety regulations and followed industry best practices. They did neither. So taking the financial hit is the least they can do. They brought it upon themselves. They could have repaired the seal on the BOP when they were told it had been damaged. They could have made sure their blueprints and schematics were consistent with the equipment in play. They could have given in to TransOcean's argument to cap the well in a safer, albeit, more time-intensive manner.

No one here is providing cover for TransOcean or Haliburton, or even our own Federal bureau who gave BP a pass and never demanded verification of their false statements during the lease application process. They are all responsible in one way or the other. But in terms of overall management, this is BP's mess. They own it. Of course they should pay for it. But paying for it does not mitigate their dishonesty, negligence, and arrogance.

And this just featured on Countdown. BP has been given 72 hours to replace the chemical dispersant it's been using because it's so toxic that it's banned in Britain! And it's never been tested on a slick of this scope. Ah, but it's not their "garden", so no worries, mate.

Oh, and several top BP executives (Exxon, too) sit on the board of directors of the dispersant manufacturer.

Yeah, these guys are my heros.

Well, different countries have different regs so the idea is to comply with those pertaining in the territory where you're operating.

km

Well, here we go again. So why did BP not make this fact known to the U.S. gov't? Why did they not say outright that they were going to use a chemical so toxic that they can't use it in their "garden", and that they've had no experience using it in such large quantities? Why didn't BP share the specs of this dispersant with the U.S. and ask if it's in compliance with our guidelines?

Explain, please.

I think it's time to declare BP a terrorist organization.

Oh no. Now km's defense will grow even more fervent!

Not Pointed at anyone

Lets not forget certain facts along the way - Like Anderson Cooper who keeps pushing an issue that was already answered .

1 - 5,000 barrels was first reported via satellite imaging when the leak first happened - BP went with that figure , it is certainly not BP estimates .

2 - Flow estimates; example 70,000 barrels are velocity measurements <-- heres the big one , it could be 50% gases and 50% oil = 35,000 barrels not 70,000 .

3 - What oil BP already recovered said they have already burned off Thousands of cubic meters of methane gas <-- Sooooo the leak does contain a large volume of gas as well as oil

Now I can understand that BP wants to down play , to the media because bumb arse Alarmist would be jumping off bridges . Fox News , Rush , yada yada

Still BP should have every single expert scientist , government officials yada yada free access to any and all information

Well obviously the reason they don't use it in our garden is that they're not allowed to - doesn't mean they agree with the regulation. Instead of just criticising all the time it's about time you started showing some sense of appreciation for the enormous energy and skill that BP is investing into the response effort.

km

Ahh

Part of the problem is (km) BP has not even been close to providing a response to the effort .

Are you watching only Al-Gahzeera again ? or whatever that Bias site is called just wondering you seem to be really detached from the real world on this incident ?