Tony Hayward cracks on cross examination

What we have here is a "failure to communicate":

www.youtube.com...

[edit on 17-6-2010 by manta78]

Forget BP footing the clean-up bill by taking shares out of Pensions and state Tax, forget him proudly saying "we've made thousands jobs" when this idiot has made millions unemployed.

I sincerely hope the US makes BP pay for this mess out of their OWN pockets, not one penny comes from the state or other sector.

I wouldn't put the blame on Tony Hayward. The blame should rest on BP and whoever was supposed to do inspections for the government. The only thing CEO's are supposed to do is increase efficiency in profits and profits.

Tony Hayward is just another face that knows how to deal with public affairs, better than many others. Believe me, what he is doing up there is not easy right now. Not many people can protect BP secrets and sit in the hot seat at the same time.

When they ask the questions the answers pop in his head. The thing that sucks is he has to filter anything that will make BP sound bad and make it sound good. NOT an easy job.

What a total farce that whole hearing was. The way we had to listen to every politician's "opening statement" for an hour and a half, all repeating the same stuff. It was really all about drumming up support for their elections, nothing else.

This is all smoke and mirrors for the gullible "smoole peephole"... They know the "smoole peephole" are too dumb and "smoole" like "da poor little birdies in da oil..." They know the "smoole peephole" will blame BP because they are so "smoole" that they think BP are "da big peephole" while the really "big peephole" (the royal families and Rothschilds) get away. Hehehehe… stupid “smoole peephole”

These "hearings" are nothing but a dog and pony show. Every single one of them. Has anything EVER come of them? I don't recall.

Everytime they get someone up there and ask him/her questions they ALL say,

"I don't recall"

"that is above my pay grade"

"I am not aware of the circumstances that led up to this"

"I can't answer that because I don't know anything about how anything works since I just sit in my big, giant corner office all day or play golf and collect oodles of money from the profits made by people who DO know about this stuff".

Bafoons...what is the point of a damn hearing anyway if no one ever answers any god dang questions?

reply to post by HunkaHunka
Hello,

Here's something to coincide with what you're saying?

Found on this page: www.bp.com...

Major and high-potential incidents


We monitor and report on major incidents, such as those covering fatal accidents, significant property damage, or significant environmental impact.
All fatalities, other major incidents and many that had the potential to become major incidents are discussed by the group operations risk committee, chaired by the group chief executive. We undertake incident investigations to ensure we learn as much as possible and take action to prevent recurrence.

Is not this Tony (what's his bucket) the same chief executive?

I started a thread where I was just presenting what all the company's I had thought had their hands in this mess; each company's safety standards, as an indicator of each company's integrity, and/or lack thereof. In that thread, it was found more company's are in the loop, and should share the burden of responsibility.

Here's a link if anybody's interested; www.abovetopsecret.com...

Edit to bold emphasis

[edit on (6/17/1010 by loveguy]

What proof do we have that Dick Cheney is still presently involved with Halliburton?
Everything that I research states that Dave Lesar currently holds the postion of President, Chairman and CEO of Halliburton and he was the push behind moving the Corporate HQ to Dubai, U.A.E.

Iam not trying tio debunk anyone. I only wish to hear/see the basis of this in order to keep me on the right track for my research.

Who was the BP supervisor on the rig who made all these fatal decisions and why isn't he sitting next to Tony Hayward? Who gave this supervisor the order to make those decisions? When I was in the Navy, and we had a plane crash, every one down to the person who performed the last maintenance is questioned. Do the words plausible deniability sound familiar?

Originally posted by sligtlyskeptical
"I wasn't involved in the decision making".

that was a truthful statement... Just like Obama's not involved in the decision making....

reply to post by darkelf


That's my question exactly.... The bp guy who forced the decision was in Houston at the time.... Another wsj article named him... I thin hie is Dave or Doug or something...



But HE is the one who should be right beside him answering questions as to why he went against the wishes of the transocean folks who were safety conscious....

I just don't get it....

But i bet someone will "get it" pretty soon...

reply to post by darkelf


They dont want some poor working class guy to get the boot or even a middle class engineer type. They want some millionaire figurehead who has nothing to do with anything get the boot.

Time for a little perspective people, as much as my I am furious with BP (I shake with anger at the thought of what's going on) - what you just observed was farcical to say the least, sickening and ridiculous.

Remember, this man's company has just paid $20 BILLION to pay for the clean up.

That is a lot of money.

And to see these slimy politicians all jumping on the band wagon...


Where were they when Haliburton raped the American people with cost plus in Iraq and Afghanistan?

Where were they when Coalition forces irradiated the region with uranium tipped weapons?

Have you ever seen a politician in the hot seat, avoiding question after question, probably dozens of times, the only difference here is that Hayward is crap at it!!

This guy will pay with his job, yes he messed up, I beleive he probably knew....but whose job is it to regulate the oil industry - the same fools grilling him....whose job is it to ensure that the laws are in place when something like this occurs...the politician's.

What you saw here was a classic case of guiding the public's anger away from the politicians...

Still the guy was a moron, he'll be picking up a gold plated retirement package before xmas, and will be dead long before the Gulf finally recovers.

Originally posted by SubPop79
I didn't catch the beginning of the hearing, but I have heard that Tony Hayward said that they were planning to capture 80,000 barrels per day? Capturing any amount of oil would obviously leave a certain amount that is not being captured, so did he just say that the blowout is now around 100,000 barrels per day?

Can anyone confirm this? I missed out on the beginning of the hearing also.

Very interesting if he did in fact say this, no?

reply to post by kiwifoot


Star for you! I totally agree. Hayward is the scape-goat that the Obama administration needs to deflect attention away from their own failings. All the while those slimy politicians are trying to win points through this event as we saw today. It was embarrassing.

Originally posted by kiwifoot....but whose job is it to regulate the oil industry - the same fools grilling him....whose job is it to ensure that the laws are in place when something like this occurs...the politician's.

I totally agree with your comments except to add that $20 Billion is a pittance compared to the ecosystem and the 40 million plus people who live the Gulf region.

To your point, until the DWH incident, the over-sight committee hadn't met for like a year.

[edit on 17/6/2010 by kosmicjack]

reply to post by HunkaHunka


Doug Suttles. Chief Operating Officer of BP Exploration and Production.

[edit on 17/6/2010 by kosmicjack]

reply to post by Navieko


We need to separate two things:

a) The need to get to the bottom of the situation. Get the truth of exactly what occurred and what decisions were made by whom. So it isn't repeated. Thats what really matters.

b) The need for the politicians to express anger thus demonstrating solidarity with the american people. The need for ritual sacrifice of a villain.

Whats going on now will satisfy point b. Point a will only be satisfied by an accident investigation. The accident investigation should be an independent one run by a judge with the power to impound all corporate documentation pertinent to the case.

The hearing going on now will achieve nothing. Expecting an individual to prejudice an investigation before its been conducted; or to have conducted one in the middle of the crisis is not realistic.

I'm not defending him personally, or the company. He has been unimpressive, he should fall on his sword and i'd wager the company will be found wanting when the investigation occurs.

However, watching politicians line up to throw rocks is distasteful. If its about finding truth why did they spend an hour making sure each politician gets a chance to make a witty criticism before the testimony started....pure theatre.

reply to post by texSflood
Hello,

So, my post earned me "foe" status huh? Thanks for the compliment.

I thought we were discussing Tony (what's his bucket) here?

If you want to discuss Dicky's involvement past, and/or present with Halliburton, I'm sure if you post a new thread discussing such will get plenty of attention. I'll hope for an invitation from you to join that topic.

Oh, sorry. Have you achieved your first 20 posts to unlock your ability to open a new thread? I'll be here...Welcome aboard.

Obama did he or did he not,


Receive more donations from PB then any other politician and then,

Give BP a pass on the environmental inspections after receiving the bribe, cough, I mean money.