Buying Bp Shares Right Now!

[InterestedObserver]

<snip>

* The practical solution is a small diameter nuclear device to glass over the well bore. The nuclear device offers no risk.

<snip>

There are huge deposits of methane gas under the Deepwater Horizon well site. Any rupture of the earth's crest could unleash a doomsday event. Those who advocate nuking the well had better think twice before pushing the button.

[chiang mai]

Forget all that nonsense of nukes et al, if the BP/Libya link is pursued, BP is burnt toast crumbs.

[flying]

There are huge deposits of methane gas under the Deepwater Horizon well site. Any rupture of the earth's crest could unleash a doomsday event. Those who advocate nuking the well had better think twice before pushing the button.

My thinking exactly

[midas]

* BP continues to perjure itself and manipulate the press. They are distracting attention from the real problem which is a much bigger leak that cannot be controlled by this cap.

This is what they are trying to do now. Luckily some people have higher

moral standards than BP and have refused their " offer "

BP buys up Gulf scientists for legal defense, roiling academic community

" BP PLC attempted to hire the entire marine sciences department at one Alabama university, according to scientists involved in discussions with the company's lawyers. The university declined because of confidentiality restrictions that the company sought on any research.

The contract requires scientists to agree to withhold data even in the face of a court order if BP decides to fight such an order "

http://blog.al.com/live/2010/07/bp_buys_up_gulf_scientists_for.html

[sleepyjohn]

For a company that;s been called incompetent they look pretty damned competent to me. There got 3 huge waterstreams in place within hours of the fire starting and it's amazing to me what they are doing under the sea there.

Those 3 huge water streams eventually flooded and sank the Deepwater Horizon, thus snapping off the riser pipe causing the free flow of oil into the environment.

I don't know the details I must say. You think it would have been better to not try to put the fire out? No possibility anyone was alive? Maybe good thinking in retrospect?

makes me wonder if some of the posters here are indulging in a bit of

" pump and dump " ??

As I only knew I had the odds in my favour rather than knowing it would go up and not down I only took a position I could afford to lose but am sitting on a very decent gain already. It would have been more but I suspect Friday was profit taking day, meaning it's probably true any gains will be harder to come by in future. The action in the low 30s though means that some people really want to own this company and that pressure will likely come back. Personally given bank interest rates and the fact that BP after a delay will get probably back to paying me a very high divi on my buy price I may as well hold I'd say.

Of course I'm aware anything could happen!

I must say I'm interested in the universal damnation of BP I can't see their M.O. as coming anywhere in the same league as Big Tobacco or Big Pharma.

Businesses will always go to the limit of the law and a sometimes a bit beyond. It's largely the lawmakers' and overseers' failure they didn't do things better.

Edited July 18, 2010 by sleepyjohn

[coolhandjoe]

I believe it was American staff and equipment that was to blame for the disaster, the British company is a good scapegoat.

However, i still believe it's a good bet in the stock market ...maybe a 50% profit over two years!

[coolhandjoe]

BP Gulf of Mexico oil leak cap continues to hold

Jul 18 2010

THE latest attempt to halt the Gulf of Mexico oil catastrophe was yesterday still holding back the leak.

BP scientists were ready to work out whether a cap over the well has made it safe after three months.

A BP spokeswoman said yesterday: "The cap is still holding. Integrity tests are ongoing.

"These tests are due to be completed today but it may be some time before we know if they have been successful."

The leak began when the Deepwater Horizon rig exploded on April 20, killing 11 workers.

News that the leak had been stopped on Thursday boosted BP shares by eight per cent.

Prime Minister David Cameron is to discuss BP with President Barack Obama in Washington this week.

Cameron is expected to defend the firm in the face of pressure to prosecute the fuel giant in the US.

The disaster has been the worst of its kind in US history, leaking an estimated four million barrels of oil into the Gulf.

Obama said: "We won't be done until we know we have killed the well and we have a permanent structure in place."

Relief wells being drilled miles beneath the seabed will be the only means of stopping the leak permanently.

An oil pipeline at the Chinese port of Dalian exploded on Friday, causing a 15-hour inferno. Officials said no one was killed.

[midas]

BP Gulf of Mexico oil leak cap continues to hold

Jul 18 2010

THE latest attempt to halt the Gulf of Mexico oil catastrophe was yesterday still holding back the leak

I would rather believe this than any bull*hit BP executive or politician

" The announcement that the Deepwater Horizon Well Head has been capped is being blared all across ABCNNBBCBS with headlines "oil no longer gushing into gulf." Among the more naive, it may be understood if they have the impression the problem is over (except for the cleanup) because that is the impression being sold to the public.

But is it reality, or is it politics? There is no question that the Gulf Oil disaster is not going to help Democrats retain their hold on Congress come November. Senator David Vitter points out, correctly, that President Obama has a vested political interest in convincing the public that the problem is over, so that it will fade from public memory in the three months from now until the elections.

The well itself may be capped, and looks good for Obama's political purposes, the reality is that the oil leak is not fixed, only shifted away from the well head cameras and the light of the media, where it is hoped Americans will not notice it. "

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/gulfwellstillleaking.php

Edited July 18, 2010 by midas

[midas]

Seems pretty clear there is worrying CONFLICT regarding the handling of this matter :-

UPDATE: BP will keep the cap closed until it fears the well is at risk, Operations Chief Doug Suttles said in a conference call this morning.

This contradicts orders from Admiral Allen to open the well and begin siphoning oil -- to avoid a possible pressure-buildup.

So who's behind the wheel? And is BP about to take a huge risk?

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/government-orders-bp-to-open-the-well-later-today-2010-7#ixzz0u5FB3fQJ

And anyone with any doubts as to the extent of the “ cover up “ should read this :-

Check out this video of a local news crew that takes water samples from crowded beaches off the Gulf Coastto a chemist and find alarmingly high amounts of oil -- and one sample filled with toxic gas that causes a beaker to explode! (via monkeyfister)

http://www.businessinsider.com/watch-this-video-before-you-go-swimming-on-the-gulf-coast-2010-7

[flying]

However, i still believe it's a good bet in the stock market ...maybe a 50% profit over two years!

I have to admit at times I wonder if the market has 2 years left in it....

I guess the bond market would give the signal first.

Edited July 19, 2010 by flying

[Soutpeel]

The deaths on the rig were tragic and the oil is causing severe hardship on the coast, but BP will pay as they have plenty of cash reserves.

The US has gone overboard on this, but they they do on anything they can have a go at that is not American.

Google Bhopal, Union Carbide and see just what the yanks got away with in India, over 16,000 deaths and fines were minute.

Bloody double standards!

So very true......my little birdies tell me....BP US division will go down the toilet (bankrupt) and 2 of the largest US oil companies are already circling to buy up what ever assets are left

[midas]

Buy

Not until the relief wells are completed and the oil permanently stops flowing. BP is caught between a rock and a hard place, if the oil flow cannot be curtailed BP could end up bankrupt.

Got my last "divi"in March from BP in March @ £6.138p a share and although share price has sunk its still a good company to invest in although the Board will have to go back and re examine their "ethics"for future operations.

Yankee Gov has been blaming them for everything but where the inquest is over I would suggest that the guys who actually own the rig/blowout preventer will be brought to account...and yes they are US outfits.

Maybe Obama should put a sock in it ...for the time being at least.....wots the word...PARA-NOIA...... ......budgies and ducks...

So as a shareholder have you been " canvassed " yet ?

BP canvassing investors on possible break up - report

http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE66H0X820100718?feedType=RSS&feedName=businessNews&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=DTN+Financial:

[sleepyjohn]

I'm only an amateur but it seems to me BP makes enough money to have people queueing up to keep them going for the time it takes to do the payouts. Which would suggest if they're divesting of things they don't really want them much anyway.

[InterestedObserver]

I'm only an amateur but it seems to me BP makes enough money to have people queueing up to keep them going for the time it takes to do the payouts. Which would suggest if they're divesting of things they don't really want them much anyway.

The Prudhoe Bay oil field in Alaska is among BP's crown jewels and is reportedly on the chopping block. BP is desperate for cash to cover it's estimated $100 Billion in liabilities resulting from the ooops on the Deepwater Horizon..

[sleepyjohn]

The Prudhoe Bay oil field in Alaska is among BP's crown jewels and is reportedly on the chopping block. BP is desperate for cash to cover it's estimated $100 Billion in liabilities resulting from the ooops on the Deepwater Horizon..

I noticed about Prudhoe and was wondering why, because the most respected estimates for reparations have been very considerably below yours IO, and paying off shouldn't be too onerous at all. Could they have fancier fish to fry which would actually make them MORE attractive?

ps: Could be wishful thinking....and of course it's very unconfirmed.

[Rinrada]

Buy

Not until the relief wells are completed and the oil permanently stops flowing. BP is caught between a rock and a hard place, if the oil flow cannot be curtailed BP could end up bankrupt.

Got my last "divi"in March from BP in March @ £6.138p a share and although share price has sunk its still a good company to invest in although the Board will have to go back and re examine their "ethics"for future operations.

Yankee Gov has been blaming them for everything but where the inquest is over I would suggest that the guys who actually own the rig/blowout preventer will be brought to account...and yes they are US outfits.

Maybe Obama should put a sock in it ...for the time being at least.....wots the word...PARA-NOIA...... ......budgies and ducks...

So as a shareholder have you been " canvassed " yet ?

BP canvassing investors on possible break up - report

http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE66H0X820100718?feedType=RSS&feedName=businessNews&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=DTN+Financial:

No...its the Media with nothing better to do......Gloom and Doom...Luva duck...

[coolhandjoe]

NEW ORLEANS – Oil and gas are leaking from the cap on BP's ruptured oil well but the cork will stay in place for now, the federal government's point man on the spill said Monday.

The leaks aren't "consequential," retired Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen said, relieving concerns that they are a sign the cap is creating too much pressure underground. That could mean the cap that's stopped oil since Thursday would have to be opened.

Allen said BP could continue testing the cap, meaning keeping it shut, for at least another 24 hours. He said BP must keep rigorously monitoring for any signs that this test could worsen the overall situation.

If there was a quick rise in pressure, the well would be vented immediately to keep from creating leaks deep underground, Allen said.

Allen repeated Monday that the next step wasn't clear.

"I'm not prepared to say the well is shut in until the relief well is done. There are too many uncertainties," he said.

The concern all along — since pressure readings on the cap weren't as high as expected — was a leak elsewhere in the well bore, meaning the cap may have to be reopened to prevent the environmental disaster from becoming even worse and harder to fix.

With the newly installed cap keeping oil out of the Gulf, this weekend offered a chance for the oil company and government to gloat over their shared success — the first real victory in fighting the spill.

Instead, the two sides have spent the past two days disagreeing over what to do with the undersea machinery holding back the gusher.

"We had some concerns ... about commitments that BP had made that we did not feel that they were adequately living up to in terms of that monitoring," said White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said. "That was dealt with last night on a call that lasted late into the evening."

The apparent disagreement began to sprout Saturday when Allen said the cap would eventually be hooked up to a mile-long pipe to pump the crude to ships on the surface. But early the next day, BP chief operating officer Doug Suttles said the cap should stay clamped shut to keep in the oil until a permanent fix.

The company very much wants to avoid a repeat of millions of gallons of oil spewing from the blown well for weeks, watched live across the country on underwater video.

If the valves are kept closed, as BP wants, it's possible that no more oil will leak into the Gulf of Mexico. Work on a permanent plug is moving steadily, with crews drilling into the side of the ruptured well from deep underground. By next week, they could start blasting in mud and cement to block off the well for good.

But the government is worried that the cap on the well is causing oil and gas to leak out elsewhere, which could make the sea floor unstable and cause the well to collapse. That's why federal officials want to pump the crude to ships on the surface. That would require opening the well for a few days to relieve pressure before the pipes could be hooked up, letting millions more gallons of oil spill out in the interim.

[coolhandjoe]

Buy

Not until the relief wells are completed and the oil permanently stops flowing. BP is caught between a rock and a hard place, if the oil flow cannot be curtailed BP could end up bankrupt.

Got my last "divi"in March from BP in March @ £6.138p a share and although share price has sunk its still a good company to invest in although the Board will have to go back and re examine their "ethics"for future operations.

Yankee Gov has been blaming them for everything but where the inquest is over I would suggest that the guys who actually own the rig/blowout preventer will be brought to account...and yes they are US outfits.

Maybe Obama should put a sock in it ...for the time being at least.....wots the word...PARA-NOIA...... ......budgies and ducks...

So as a shareholder have you been " canvassed " yet ?

BP canvassing investors on possible break up - report

http://uk.reuters.co...=DTN+Financial:

I would like to know also if any shareholders have been canvassed yet.

[InterestedObserver]

The apparent disagreement began to sprout Saturday when Allen said the cap would eventually be hooked up to a mile-long pipe to pump the crude to ships on the surface. But early the next day, BP chief operating officer Doug Suttles said the cap should stay clamped shut to keep in the oil until a permanent fix.

The government needs an accurate reading of the flow rate of the oil into the Gulf for assessment of environmental and other regulatory fines/damages. Until now, only partial flow rates rates have been recorded since 100% capture of the oil has not been possible. It is in BP's interests to deprive the government of that data, billions of dollars are at stake in future litigation..

[sleepyjohn]

The government needs an accurate reading of the flow rate of the oil into the Gulf for assessment of environmental and other regulatory fines/damages. Until now, only partial flow rates rates have been recorded since 100% capture of the oil has not been possible. It is in BP's interests to deprive the government of that data, billions of dollars are at stake in future litigation..

Partial flow rates?

You mean the real flow rates are higher? Hmmm......are you really suggesting the government wants it turned on again so they can estimate their fines better?

BTW1 Cdr Thad was on telly this morning. There a a very few bubbles of methane at the valve assembly. It would be remarkable a gross rubber seal didn't allow that out. There is also some bubbling of methane 2 miles from the wellhead. He voiced that they had to take every conservative precaution but the metamessage was that things looked pretty fine. Sidenote: There are 40 million barrels of oil bubbling up from all around the seafloor into the gulf every year.

ps: Anderson Cooper continues his obsession with the Gulf. This morning we got an interview with three fishermen who arrived early at the scene. We heard about how one of them was "on tranquilisers". this was "his 9/11". No doubt he'll be billing BP for PTSD.

I must say the flames were enormous and apparently there was a very large explosion. I'd say it was amazing they got the fire so much lower with the fireboats.

Edited July 20, 2010 by sleepyjohn

[sleepyjohn]

My edit took too long:

According to the gov appointed scientist on Wolf Blitzer there are 40 million barrels of oil bubbling up from all around the seafloor into the gulf every year. Other estimates I see call it a substantial fraction of 660,000 tons pa. Another says of the less prolific Gulf of Mexico area "10,000 gallons of oil and 3.5 million cubic feet of natural gas a day"

If this well's leaking the upside estimate of 60kbpd that makes a small part of the natural seepage.

On a rather interesting historic note:

Natural oil seepage in the Santa Barbara Channel was first recorded by Spanish explorer Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo on Oct. 16, 1542. He even used the tar from the seepage, known as asphaltum, to waterproof two of his ships, just as the native Chumash Indians did with their canoes. English explorer, George Vancouver, in his exploration of the Pacific Coast in 1792 while looking for the Northwest Passage, noted in his log book that the Santa Barbara Channel was covered in all directions with an oily surface so thick that the entire sea took on an iridescent hue.

Edited July 20, 2010 by sleepyjohn

[midas]

The part i dont understand and simply doesnt make sense is why the US government

didnt take over this situation weeks ago ? Why on earth would you leave BP in charge when

they were already found out about lying regarding the amount of the leak weeks ago.

And this is a company that has over 400 safety infringments compared to American

companies who have in the region of 10-20 ?

The US government was thinking of taking over in May - after all this is Country

with the technolgy that could put a man on the moon and yet they came out with this

" Admiral Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said they had no more tactics left in their arsenal following BP’s latest failure to plug the leak.

Responding to calls for the armed forces to take control of the oil spill disaster, Mr Mullen said: “We’ve looked at that continuously since the leak started – whether or not we would have submersibles that could go do this.

“And the fact is the best technology in the world, with respect to that, exists in the oil industry.”

Ok maybe so - but this is a global emergency so why not use the technology and expertise of other oil companies ?

It doesnt make sense these people ( BP ) continue to have such a hold on this situation and are continually able to tamper with the evidence that may eventually be used against them ?

Surely no one can claim BP is the only organisation on the planet with the right equipment and expertise ?

I would never believe that

Leaving BP in this position has involved the most incredible conflict of interest like Dracula being

told to manage the bloodbank and none of it makes sense ?

Edited July 20, 2010 by midas

[consciousrobot]

The part i dont understand and simply doesnt make sense is why the US government

didnt take over this situation weeks ago ?

Apart from the fact it would make them blameworthy maybe because they have no legal rights to?

[midas]

The part i dont understand and simply doesnt make sense is why the US government

didnt take over this situation weeks ago ?

Apart from the fact it would make them blameworthy maybe because they have no legal rights to?

No......... that cannot be the answer because :-

( 1 ) Obama's administration has only just passed the new finance reform bill

which gives the government total power to decide if a corporation is 'too big to fail'

and thus should have its assets seized. So Obama doesnt care about issues such as

legal rights and particularly if there is a bigger issue at stake and here they could easily

have done on it the grounds of " national security ". Anyway when the armed forces considered taking over in

May they didnt even mention legal rights, they just said

they didnt have the expertise or equipment ?

and

( 2 ) What takes precedence ? The " legal rights " of BP that you are referring to

which are civil or mitigating the loss for the citizens of USA

and preventing the continuation of activities by the same company that more than likely

will eventually be accused of criminal negligence ?

Example........if the Department of Homeland Security found an explosive

device planted by someone and then they caught that person, the bomb squad

wouldn't then hand over the authority to the culprit to diffuse the bomb ?

Edited July 20, 2010 by midas

[midas]

Senior EPA Analyst: "Government [Agencies] Have Been Sock Puppets for BP In This Cover Up"

" Corexit is one of a number of dispersants, that are toxic, that are used to atomize the oil and force it down the water column so that its invisible to the eye. In this case, these dispersants were used in massive quantities, almost two million gallons so far, to hide the magnitude of the spill and save BP money. And the governmentboth EPA, NOAA, etc.have been sock puppets for BP in this cover-up. Now, by hiding the amount of spill, BP is saving hundreds of millions, if not billions, of dollars in fines, and so, from day one, there was tremendous economic incentive to use these dispersants to hide the magnitude of the gusher thats been going on for almost three months.

We have people, wildlifewe have dolphins that are hemorrhaging. People who work near it are hemorrhaging internally. And thats what dispersants are supposed to do. EPA now is taking the position that they really dont know how dangerous it is, even though if you read the label, it tells you how dangerous it is. And, for example, in the Exxon Valdez case, people who worked with dispersants, most of them are dead now. The average death age is around fifty. Its very dangerous, and its an economicits an economic protector of BP, not an environmental protector of the public."

FULL ARTICLE HERE : - http://georgewashington2.blogspot.com/

Edited July 21, 2010 by midas

[flying]

Corexit

It’s very dangerous, and it’s an economic protector of BP, not an environmental protector of the public

You remember I mentioned this to you some weeks ago.

The EPA may claim they did not know but the fact that they did know that they were rushing this approval is bad enough.

This mixture of corexit & crude is deadly & the extent of damage has yet to be completely seen IMO

To top it off it is in fact as they said....

it’s an economic protector of BP, not an environmental protector of the public

Because what did it really accomplish? It really only sank the problem under the surface so as to not be seen.

To try to present a lesser public view of the crisis.

In the meantime it has poisoned the sea life below & the humans who come in contact with it.

The sea life that survives by possibly ingesting smaller doses...What of them & the humans who eventually eat them as a protein source?

Edited July 21, 2010 by flying

[midas]

Corexit

It’s very dangerous, and it’s an economic protector of BP, not an environmental protector of the public

You remember I mentioned this to you some weeks ago.

The EPA may claim they did not know but the fact that they did know that they were rushing this approval is bad enough.

This mixture of corexit & crude is deadly & the extent of damage has yet to be completely seen IMO

To top it off it is in fact as they said....

it’s an economic protector of BP, not an environmental protector of the public

Because what did it really accomplish? It really only sank the problem under the surface so as to not be seen.

To try to present a lesser public view of the crisis.

In the meantime it has poisoned the sea life below & the humans who come in contact with it.

The sea life that survives by possibly ingesting smaller doses...What of them & the humans who eventually eat them as a protein source?

Yes indeed Flying........and what amazes me is the MSM once again

say nothing ?

[flying]

Yes indeed Flying........and what amazes me is the MSM once again

say nothing ?

Yes....well I guess freedom of the press these days relates to who owns the press

Edited July 21, 2010 by flying

[midas]

Yes indeed Flying........and what amazes me is the MSM once again

say nothing ?

Yes....well I guess freedom of the press these days relates to who owns the press

So thank goodness for the internet eh flying ?

And I would rather believe Matt Simmons than these other talking heads anyday.

For the OP the prediction is :-

1. BP stock is going down to $1

2. the ultimate clean up cost will likely be well over $1 trillion

" "What we don’t know anything about is the open hole which is caused by the drill bit when it tossed the blow-out preventer way out of the hole…and 120,000/day minimum of toxic poison has now covered the floor of the Gulf of Mexico. So what they’re talking about is the biggest environmental cover-up ever. And they knew that that well, that riser, would finally deplete. And then they could say it’s over." On blaming the catastrophe on Transocean: "For two days they kept saying it’s a rig fire. When the rig sank they could no longer call it a rig fire. It’s a riser leak…Because if they said the truth they would all go to jail." The conclusion: "Unfortunately, we now have killed the Gulf of Mexico."

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/matt-simmons-says-gulf-clean-will-cost-over-1-trillion-sees-bp-1-says-we-have-now-killed-gom

[flying]

So thank goodness for the internet eh flying ?

And I would rather believe Matt Simmons than these other talking heads anyday.

For the OP the prediction is :-

1. BP stock is going down to $1

2. the ultimate clean up cost will likely be well over $1 trillion

" "What we don’t know anything about is the open hole which is caused by the drill bit when it tossed the blow-out preventer way out of the hole…and 120,000/day minimum of toxic poison has now covered the floor of the Gulf of Mexico. So what they’re talking about is the biggest environmental cover-up ever. And they knew that that well, that riser, would finally deplete. And then they could say it’s over." On blaming the catastrophe on Transocean: "For two days they kept saying it’s a rig fire. When the rig sank they could no longer call it a rig fire. It’s a riser leak…Because if they said the truth they would all go to jail." The conclusion: "Unfortunately, we now have killed the Gulf of Mexico."

Yeah & one has to wonder how long before the internet gets more regulated.

As to the clean up agreed that

1) How much is an unknown quantity when this subject is brought up

2) How clean ultimately will be far from sufficient as it is impossible to clean what lies below the surface.

I would not be surprised by anything from here on in.