People blame BP because they run the operation... but Haliburton actually cased the rupture.
Why no anger towards Haliburton? Gee... I wonder if it has anything to do with all the Haliburton Employees who move in and out of Government Positions?
Does a company that both builds oil rigs and cleans up oil spills have any motivation to prevent oil rig disasters?
That's the question some people in business and politics are asking themselves after Halliburton's purchase of an oil clean-up company 10 days before the Deepwater Horizon explosion that killed 11 workers and launched the worst oil spill in US history.
Some observers see a conspiracy in the actions of the company once headed by Dick Cheney. Halliburton, which built the cement casing for the Deepwater Horizon's drill, announced its purchase of Houston-based oilfield services company Boots and Coots for $240 million on April 9, just 11 days before the Deepwater Horizon explosion.
According to a report at the Christian Science Monitor Friday, Boots and Coots is now under contract with BP to help with the oil spill. The company "focuses on oil spill prevention and blowout response," CSM reports. Halliburton's purchase is not yet a done deal -- it's still awaiting regulatory approval, though few observers think the purchase won't pass muster.
"[Mergers and acquisitions] in the industrial and oil services sectors is totally normal," writes David Anderson at The Inspired Economist, "but the timing in this case, is not. Boots & Coots sure seems like the perfect company to own if it would soon become necessary to get more involved with some oil disaster.
MikeNV - You would have to search Hubpages pretty hard to find anyone with a LOWER opinion of Halliburton than me. But this dog won't hunt.
The deal has not gone through - and under the circumstances might not clear Congress if it turns out that Haliburton contributed to the disaster. If there was a conspiracy, it makes a lot more sense to wait until AFTER you have closed the deal to cause the spill.
At the moment, I don't care WHERE cleanup equipment comes from - or who BP pays for that gear. There will be a full investigation - and if Halliburton's gizmo failed - they may not be able to sell Bic lighters to the Oil giants.
There is no question that it IS Halliburton's gizmo that failed, the one that they installed, for the US Company who did the drilling and all the other work.
I don't dispute that Halliburton made the 'blowout preventer' that ummmmm - didn't prevent the blowout. When all is said and done, I hope they cut that piece of tin out of the sea bed and do an autopsy. If it turns out that the device failed by bad design or construction, I hope Halliburton have to repay BP for the portion of the total cost they are responsible for. We just don't know yet. I dislike Halliburton but we have only begun to gather the facts.
A general contractor is liable for the work of subcontractors. BP selected Halliburton so BP is the 'general' contractor and they can sue Halliburton for their failure - but BP will have to prove their case. It's going to be an interesting trial. If BP can hang part of this on a defective 'gizmo', where does that leave Halliburton (in terms of liability) for the OTHER gizmos that they sold to other oil companies? It may take a year, but the price of Halliburton stock may be in for a serious adjustment - down.
And the original allegation of a conspiracy to cause the spill to make money cleaning it up - makes even less sense.
Very well reasoned Doug.
I feel it is likely Halliburton did shoddy work. That would be in keeping with their track record.
Yes, very well reasoned. If you ignore the fact that you are inherently anti-Halliburton given your clear political leanings, and would add that if Halliburton were even 30% clearly suspected as at fault, we'd have listened to our Congressional boobs questioning Halliburton Exec's the past couple days, rather than BP's.
That said, it is very well-reasoned. I am most concerned at your quick disavoyance of this being a spill caused by conspiracy - shame on me, I'd have thought you, and other rabid libs, would have jumped on that to spin for your benefit -- but, of course, it does not fit with your goals, stupid really.....but, the quick disavoyance of some deliberate action, from you and others...raises eyebrows just a bit.
You cannot ignore the fact that Halliburton DID install their own design of Blow-out failsafe to this rig - and it failed. This is what happened and you can lean any way you like don't change it.
And your gov would be questioning a US Company about it - don't make me laugh, Halliburton has the US government in its pocket.
Halliburton has investments in the Caspian Sea. The Taliban went to Texas in 1997 and you can google it, in order to do a deal with Unocal to build a pipeline to the Caspian Sea.
Halliburton is evil and really the fact that the Taliban changed their minds is what caused US motivation to allow 911. I believe that the US government allowed 911.
However, Cheney has been quiet, and I do believe that the courts will judge whether Halliburton is culpable. So really, there is nothing Halliburton can do about it. But BP has final responsibility.
......" the US government allowed 911." Okay.
So, if you think that our federal government 'allowed 911', why would you not think that we actually instigated this oil spill, that we did in fact have gov't employees signing off......... on a fiasco...of untold, unknown consequences.
Could be, except I know how BP operates. My wife used to work for them. They have no clue what they are doing in so many issues of safety and employee relations. They have a buffoon of a CEO.
But if evidence came forth that this was some sort of conspiracy I would study it. As of now I don't think it is.
You seem to be implying that I said the "US government allowed 911" -- your speculative words -- NOT mine. That is an implied lie and farce of monumental proportions, the epitomy of a buffoon.
No doubt you don't think the oil spill was a consipiracy -- to think that, you'd have to think it was a liberal conspiracy, as that is the only cause it would serve.
I don't care what you think about 911. But after you read this about Warren Buffet and his netjet on 911 you may want to change your mind: http://killtown.911review.org/buffett.html
Here is a guy (Buffet) who had a party at strategic command on 911. One of his invited guests was a ceo who saw her entire company demolished on 911. And her director became chairman of the 911 investigation.
Buffet owns Net Jets. It tracked flight 93 instead of the military tracking flight 93. Berkshire Hathaway mentioned this one time and there has been silence ever since.
What do you think the odds of both those things happening if he wasn't involved in 911 Flippin?
Yes BP has final responsibility and when the current political noise dies down the law will take its course and I guess the real causes of this will come out.
If anyone can find any logic here, please translate to English. Thank you.
No surprise at your comments. Just because you are a rabid hater of liberals it doesn't mean we must jump to ridiculous conclusions a la KFC! Meaning using far fetched ideas to attack any chance one gets.
I despise Haliburton but like the others here who have tried to put it into words even you would understand, this is not a logical scenario. Look up logical!
I agree Cheney is evil, and if Halliburton is in his pervue, then I don't put anything past them.
But of course, they've got their legal "out"...they can just blame BP!
But all this anger laid strictly on BP doesn't pass the smell test.
Who knows, the BP employee who gave the ok to Haliburton may have been working for them/paid off by them.
Once again, the age old question....who benefits? Doesn't seem to be BP.
Mike, you have the best forum post titles, so interesting and current events like... but every one of your posts is really a hub. I always want to participate, but I don't come to the forums to read hubs. I come to the forums to read, well, comments. A pararaph. Maybe two. Three if the writing is really awesome. Every time I open a forum thread you started, it's an 800 word article minimum. I bet you'd be making double or triple whatever you get from HP adsense if you wrote this stuff as a hub. Even if you didn't get any comments.
by SparklingJewel 8 years ago
World Affairs Brief, June 18, 2010 Commentary and Insights on a Troubled World.Copyright Joel Skousen. Partial quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Joel Skousen's World Affairs Brief ( http://www.worldaffairsbrief.com ) BP GULF DISASTER--EXTINCTION EVENT OR MEGA-SPILL?Getting to...
by James L 8 years ago
Is anyone else seriously worried about the BP oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico?I've been staying on top of all the news reports and findings as well as researching the effects of previous oil spills and it seem the more I learn the more unsettling this whole situation becomes.
by KFlippin 8 years ago
"Red tape keeps prized oil-fighting skimmers from Gulf, coastline"Published: Monday, June 28, 2010, 10:29 PM Chris Kirkham, The Times-Picayune Excerpts from the Article (Link to full article below):"As oil oozes inland, tainting marshes and fouling beaches, local...
by Don W 8 years ago
Would a free market have prevented this from happening?I'm guessing the libertarian argument would be that the failings of state regulation was a contributing factor. Those failings stemming from the fact that the regulators were in bed (figuratively and literally) with those regulated. Whereas...
by tobey100 8 years ago
The Gulf oil spill is bad. For that matter any oil spill is bad. I am not a rabid environmentalist but I do believe we need to protect the wildlife we have left as well as our beaches and wetlands. To a point. Let's not get carried away. Chris Matthews actually called...
by woolman60 8 years ago
So now we are known as the little people, BP chairman calls us little people and guess what UK we are not blaming you, so get over it, our shores are being destoyed, this is not about the UK this is about the world.
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|