When the polls reported that Obama wasn’t taking the oil spill seriously enough, his next TV appearance depicted him as “outraged.” Yet his continuing lack of action doesn’t match his new, stronger emotions; nor does his inaction match the dire seriousness of the situation.

Indeed, Obama continues to allow BP to lie about the seriousness of the spill, even when numerous independent scientists disputed BP’s estimates of the spillage. Of course Obama knew that BP had a profit incentive to lie, while Obama has his own incentive to allow the lie — and continued lies — of BP.

One reason Obama doesn’t challenge BP is because he’s on their payroll. The news agency Reuters explains: “During his time in the Senate and while running for president, Obama received a total of ,051 from the oil giant and is the top recipient of BP PAC and individual money over the past 20 years, according to financial disclosure records.” (May 5, 2010).

In July, BP is set to give its shareholders multi-billion dollar dividends — prompting more toothless anger from Obama — while BP continues to maintain a healthy distance from taking complete accountability for the oil spill.

The results are sadly predictable: many of the effects of the spill will be permanent, while the cleanup and recovery will go on for years and decades, possibly costing the extinction of some species and the United States billions and maybe trillions of dollars in the long term.

BP will throw itself at the mercy of the courts, an elite entity much friendlier to the mega-corporations than to the millions of U.S.workers demanding justice. Add to the equation BP’s elite attorneys and you have an eventual settlement — after years — that will equal the tiniest fraction of the caused devastation. This prediction was all but confirmed by the mainstream media, when Curt Anderson of the Associated Press reported:

“More than half of the federal judges in districts where the bulk of Gulf oil spill-related lawsuits are pending have financial connections to the oil and gas industry, complicating the task of finding judges without conflicts to hear the cases...” (June 6, 2010).

Aside from the above financial blocks to holding BP accountable, there lays a deeper code of ethics that prohibit government interference into the matters of private corporations, no matter how great the damage done to the general public.

At the top of this corporate code of ethics is the sacredness of property rights, meaning that large corporations have complete control — outside the grasp of any government — to do what they want with their giant wealth and facilities, wherever and whenever they want.

To the U.S. government, this right pre-empts human rights, environmental rights, etc. Property rights are enshrined in every free-trade agreement the U.S. government signs, so that overseas corporate investments are strictly protected, prohibiting foreign nations from using U.S. corporate facilities for the social needs of their native populations. Although BP is a British corporation, the rules of this code are mutual and global.

Nowadays, the tiniest crack in the foundation of corporate property rights constitutes “communism” — a right wing accusation hurled at Obama after he partially nationalized General Motors and other institutions in response to the economic crisis. And although Obama intruded into the sanctity of property rights when the financial crisis exploded, it was with the general consent of the corporate establishment — who viewed those actions as necessary, short-term evils — meant to save the investments of the rich, while using taxpayer money to rehabilitate the companies before they were eventually handed back to shareholders.

The emergency in the Gulf of Mexico, on the other hand, is viewed by the corporate elite as a lesser crisis, demanding the government not set another precedent that would point to the necessity of public ownership.

Obama’s unwillingness to push aside BP and take government charge of the operation makes him an accomplice to the environmental disaster. For example, in order that BP be allowed to remain at the helm, Obama has given them professional credibility where none should exist — “they have the expertise and technology,” etc. BP’s actions prior to the spill constitute criminal negligence. The comments of BP’s CEO since the spill undoubtedly prove that the company views the disaster as more of an inconvenience, to be handled at their leisure.

Furthermore, every public appearance of a BP executive or spokesperson serves to minimize the crisis, implying that a less immediate reaction is required. Indeed, as a for-profit company, BP’s actions remain motivated by concern for their shareholders, whose only motivation is profit. In practice, this means fewer resources are dedicated to the spill than would be otherwise, since higher cleanup costs equal lower profits. One glaring example of this was cited in The New York Times, which quoted a scientist working for the Flow Rate Technical Group, a team of scientists trying to accurately gauge the flow of oil into the Gulf:

“It’s apparent that BP is playing games with us, presumably under the advice of their legal team,” Dr. Leifer said. “It’s six weeks that it’s been dumping into the gulf, and still no measurements.” (June 7, 2010).

Local government officials in Florida are also disgusted with BP’s lack of action in preventing the oil from landing on their beaches, while doing next to nothing in cleaning up the beached oil. The attorney general of Florida complained:

“I’m outraged…why are we waiting so long to do this? Why is the Coast Guard, Obama, BP waiting? They’ve seen it coming, so why are we waiting?” (Bloomberg, June 7, 2010).

Obama’s religious faith in BP to properly handle the spill — after it had no emergency plan to deal with such a spill in the first place — borders on lunacy. But the logic is sensible from the corporate prospective, which preaches that all is rational which protects profits.

In a sane world, BP’s executives would be facing severe criminal charges, and the billions of profits they’ve earned in the last year would be confiscated to pay for the cleanup. BP’s infrastructure would be taken under the control of the U.S. government, which could ensure that the job was done correctly, timely, and publicly, as opposed to the shield of corporate secrecy currently protecting BP.

The ultimate lesson of this environmental/economic catastrophe is that Obama is not at all serious about confronting corporate interests. Rather, he allows them to stampede over the public interests, ensuring that such disasters will happen again.

To pay the costs of this disaster, the US needs to seize the assets of BP. Arco stations all the way to refineries, office buildings, cash, real estate etc. All these things need to be frozen so they cannot be sold off, divided into spin-off companies, or other accounting tricks used to hide their assets.

As the total damage is assessed, the government can then get the money from BP by selling assets back to BP.

Here's a response to a debate related to boycotts, my position is for a focused boycott against BP, NOT for a general boycott against oil, even though i agree that oil is the greater problem.



“Don’t boycott BP/ARCO. Boycott oil. Otherwise we’re just perpetuating the problem."

Agree and disagree. Yes, oil addiction is the greater overall problem. However, the current disaster in the Gulf is the direct result of negligence on the part on ONE corporation, namely British Petroleum. Just as the Valdez spill was the fault of Exxon. We need to send a strong message to BP that they cannot get away with this behavior and expect to remain in business.

Following such severe incidents of negligence on the part of BP, sending the message that BP is unwelcome in the U.S. is of the upmost importance. Let us not go easy on them (like Obama will) because they are a foreign corporation. Check into the WTO free trade agreements to understand why foreign corporations operating in the U.S. have more legal rights than U.S. residents and ecosystems! Nothing against the British (Hey, i still love London dry gin and fish and chips!!), but BP really needs to pull out of the U.S.

BP's filling stations, warehouses, rigs and other material assets should be turned over to the ownership of the coastal Parish governments of Louisiana (and other Gulf states) who can document they were most severely effected on their coastline by the BP spill. The locals in the Parishes can profit from the remaining wells as they see fit, or shut the deep sea wells down altogether if they so desire. Of course corruption and bribery as in the MMS can happen in local governments, though in this case the community has more recourse as the local governments can be easier reached than the federal (non) regulators of the MMS who would rather snort coke together with BP execs than bother to regulate them!!

The jobs on the BP rigs have now negatively effected the coastal fishing jobs, so now we can trade off a few deep sea oil rig jobs for a cleaner and safer ecosystem, then maybe the fishing industry will be restored over time. Remind ourselves that the oil rig jobs now came at the expense of the fishing jobs, NOT the other way around!!

Please do NOT make the mistake of feeling sorry for BP, or getting worried that they will file for Chapter 11 Bankruptcy due to lack of clean-up funds and the loss of stock value, the BP workers will find other jobs (as the unemployed fishing workers will need to!).

As far as BP CEO Mr. Tony "Want My Life Back" Hayward goes, he should be criminally prosecuted locally and federally for negligence. Maybe take him out to the bayous and ask the gators when his life should be returned to him??

The BP spill is a direct result of cutting corners for safety to increase short term profit. So BP shareholders can be included as responsible, and if their stock tumbles down below the basement, that is another form of justice. They are just a non-living corporation! Since when do people feel more compassion for non-living corporate entities than the birds, fish and people effected by their greed induced negligence!!

As occurred in other incidents of corporate bankruptcy (see Maxxam Pacific Lumber bankruptcy), the people most effected often don't get their money in time and become creditors. So the 20 billion escrow account as proposed by Obama is more smoke and mirrors from a government unable to bite the corporate hand that feeds their campaign chest.

Therefore any biting back against BP is going to need to come from people (and a few hungry gators!!), and the most effective way to bite back against BP's criminal acts is a long term boycott, and maybe a few improvised "BP station shutdowns" throughout the U.S. The boycott needs to be focused against BP specifically, not spread out as a general boycott against oil. People can brainstorm and work for other options outside of oil, though the immediate message needs to be strongest against BP until we can see some results!!

BTW - As expected by my spirit guides, a "spirit fatwa" will be issued against BP CEO Mr. Tony "Want My Life Back" Hayward. Oh, you'll get your life back in due time Mr. Tony Hayward, though you may discover that your life isn't the same as before, nor will it ever be. You are a disgrace to the British people, Mr. Tony Hayward!!

Mr. Tony Hayward, my prayer to the spirits is that they send you endless nightmares of oil soaked birds, the angels of the Gulf whose wings you so carelessly soiled for your short term profit from cutting corners. The flapping of soiled wings of the Gulf's angels will be inside of your head for all eternity, at least until you leave the physical realm. There is the beginnings of justice!!

Mr. Tony Hayward, once the spirits get into your dreams, you will be reconsidering your earlier statement of wanting your life back. You will only be looking forward to the ending of the ceaseless nightmares!!

Sweet dreams, Mr. Tony Hayward!!