Boycotting BP/Arco and other British products

[patb]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=patb]
That would explain all those american multi-nationals in Iraq
signing oil contracts.[/quote]

Pat: Read this: http://www.upi.com/Energy_Resources/2009/08/24/Iraq-prepares-for-next-oil-contracts/UPI-28761251129466/

It’s a recent article regarding the letting of Iraqi oil contracts and it cites only BP (British Petroleum, which is, uh, British) and China National Petroleum (which is Chinese) as moving forward on this round of contracts.

Yes, I realize this is an on-going process, with multiple rounds of contracts, but it gives lie to your “American multi-nationals signing oil contracts” statement.

How’s about you throw some facts out there, instead of relying on tired old canards, huh? You have Dutch (Royal Dutch Shell), French (Total (fmrly Elf/Aquitaine)), Italian (Eni), Chinese, British and Russian oil companies all competing with ExxonMobil, Chevron, et al, for these oil contracts. NPR article on same: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106077283%5B/quote%5D

Halliburton. Who was managing the oil fields from 2003 to 2008.

http://professorsmartass.blogspot.com/2007/03/juhasz-whose-oil-is-it-anyway.html

In March 2001, the National Energy Policy Development Group (better known as Vice President Dick Cheney’s energy task force), which included executives of America’s largest energy companies, recommended that the United States government support initiatives by Middle Eastern countries “to open up areas of their energy sectors to foreign investment.” One invasion and a great deal of political engineering by the Bush administration later, this is exactly what the proposed Iraq oil law would achieve. It does so to the benefit of the companies, but to the great detriment of Iraq’s economy, democracy and sovereignty.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=patb]

Halliburton. Who was managing the oil fields from 2003 to 2008.

http://professorsmartass.blogspot.com/2007/03/juhasz-whose-oil-is-it-anyway.html

In March 2001, the National Energy Policy Development Group (better known as Vice President Dick Cheney’s energy task force), which included executives of America’s largest energy companies, recommended that the United States government support initiatives by Middle Eastern countries “to open up areas of their energy sectors to foreign investment.” One invasion and a great deal of political engineering by the Bush administration later, this is exactly what the proposed Iraq oil law would achieve. It does so to the benefit of the companies, but to the great detriment of Iraq’s economy, democracy and sovereignty.[/quote]

Pat: Okay, color me confused. I’m not sure what Halliburton has to do with this, given that they’re an oil and gas services company, which is separate and distinct from oil companies like BP, Chevron or ExxonMobil, but you seem to think that Halliburton’s presence indicates that the US has some special angle that companies like China Petro or BP don’t.

Also, the linked article you presented doesn’t seem to have anything to do with supporting your argument. It makes some far-reaching accusations, but, ultimately, offers no proof.

I’d ask that you come up with some sort of proof that US oil companies are not only enjoying a significant advantage over their foreign competitors, but show how much in terms of dollars and contracts.

I’d be willing to ascribe some of this to your obvious ignorance regarding the oil business, especially given your inability to differentiate what makes Halliburton (or Schlumberger, or TIC for instance) different from Elf or Valero or Unocal.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=patb]

Halliburton. Who was managing the oil fields from 2003 to 2008.

http://professorsmartass.blogspot.com/2007/03/juhasz-whose-oil-is-it-anyway.html

In March 2001, the National Energy Policy Development Group (better known as Vice President Dick Cheney’s energy task force), which included executives of America’s largest energy companies, recommended that the United States government support initiatives by Middle Eastern countries “to open up areas of their energy sectors to foreign investment.” One invasion and a great deal of political engineering by the Bush administration later, this is exactly what the proposed Iraq oil law would achieve. It does so to the benefit of the companies, but to the great detriment of Iraq’s economy, democracy and sovereignty.[/quote]

Pat: Okay, color me confused. I’m not sure what Halliburton has to do with this, given that they’re an oil and gas services company, which is separate and distinct from oil companies like BP, Chevron or ExxonMobil, but you seem to think that Halliburton’s presence indicates that the US has some special angle that companies like China Petro or BP don’t.

Also, the linked article you presented doesn’t seem to have anything to do with supporting your argument. It makes some far-reaching accusations, but, ultimately, offers no proof.

I’d ask that you come up with some sort of proof that US oil companies are not only enjoying a significant advantage over their foreign competitors, but show how much in terms of dollars and contracts.

I’d be willing to ascribe some of this to your obvious ignorance regarding the oil business, especially given your inability to differentiate what makes Halliburton (or Schlumberger, or TIC for instance) different from Elf or Valero or Unocal.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=patb]

Halliburton. Who was managing the oil fields from 2003 to 2008.

http://professorsmartass.blogspot.com/2007/03/juhasz-whose-oil-is-it-anyway.html

In March 2001, the National Energy Policy Development Group (better known as Vice President Dick Cheney’s energy task force), which included executives of America’s largest energy companies, recommended that the United States government support initiatives by Middle Eastern countries “to open up areas of their energy sectors to foreign investment.” One invasion and a great deal of political engineering by the Bush administration later, this is exactly what the proposed Iraq oil law would achieve. It does so to the benefit of the companies, but to the great detriment of Iraq’s economy, democracy and sovereignty.[/quote]

Pat: Okay, color me confused. I’m not sure what Halliburton has to do with this, given that they’re an oil and gas services company, which is separate and distinct from oil companies like BP, Chevron or ExxonMobil, but you seem to think that Halliburton’s presence indicates that the US has some special angle that companies like China Petro or BP don’t.

Also, the linked article you presented doesn’t seem to have anything to do with supporting your argument. It makes some far-reaching accusations, but, ultimately, offers no proof.

I’d ask that you come up with some sort of proof that US oil companies are not only enjoying a significant advantage over their foreign competitors, but show how much in terms of dollars and contracts.

I’d be willing to ascribe some of this to your obvious ignorance regarding the oil business, especially given your inability to differentiate what makes Halliburton (or Schlumberger, or TIC for instance) different from Elf or Valero or Unocal.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=patb]

Halliburton. Who was managing the oil fields from 2003 to 2008.

http://professorsmartass.blogspot.com/2007/03/juhasz-whose-oil-is-it-anyway.html

In March 2001, the National Energy Policy Development Group (better known as Vice President Dick Cheney’s energy task force), which included executives of America’s largest energy companies, recommended that the United States government support initiatives by Middle Eastern countries “to open up areas of their energy sectors to foreign investment.” One invasion and a great deal of political engineering by the Bush administration later, this is exactly what the proposed Iraq oil law would achieve. It does so to the benefit of the companies, but to the great detriment of Iraq’s economy, democracy and sovereignty.[/quote]

Pat: Okay, color me confused. I’m not sure what Halliburton has to do with this, given that they’re an oil and gas services company, which is separate and distinct from oil companies like BP, Chevron or ExxonMobil, but you seem to think that Halliburton’s presence indicates that the US has some special angle that companies like China Petro or BP don’t.

Also, the linked article you presented doesn’t seem to have anything to do with supporting your argument. It makes some far-reaching accusations, but, ultimately, offers no proof.

I’d ask that you come up with some sort of proof that US oil companies are not only enjoying a significant advantage over their foreign competitors, but show how much in terms of dollars and contracts.

I’d be willing to ascribe some of this to your obvious ignorance regarding the oil business, especially given your inability to differentiate what makes Halliburton (or Schlumberger, or TIC for instance) different from Elf or Valero or Unocal.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=patb]

Halliburton. Who was managing the oil fields from 2003 to 2008.

http://professorsmartass.blogspot.com/2007/03/juhasz-whose-oil-is-it-anyway.html

In March 2001, the National Energy Policy Development Group (better known as Vice President Dick Cheney’s energy task force), which included executives of America’s largest energy companies, recommended that the United States government support initiatives by Middle Eastern countries “to open up areas of their energy sectors to foreign investment.” One invasion and a great deal of political engineering by the Bush administration later, this is exactly what the proposed Iraq oil law would achieve. It does so to the benefit of the companies, but to the great detriment of Iraq’s economy, democracy and sovereignty.[/quote]

Pat: Okay, color me confused. I’m not sure what Halliburton has to do with this, given that they’re an oil and gas services company, which is separate and distinct from oil companies like BP, Chevron or ExxonMobil, but you seem to think that Halliburton’s presence indicates that the US has some special angle that companies like China Petro or BP don’t.

Also, the linked article you presented doesn’t seem to have anything to do with supporting your argument. It makes some far-reaching accusations, but, ultimately, offers no proof.

I’d ask that you come up with some sort of proof that US oil companies are not only enjoying a significant advantage over their foreign competitors, but show how much in terms of dollars and contracts.

I’d be willing to ascribe some of this to your obvious ignorance regarding the oil business, especially given your inability to differentiate what makes Halliburton (or Schlumberger, or TIC for instance) different from Elf or Valero or Unocal.

[Zeitgeist]

Hey Allan,

What do you think about medical marijuana? I think it explains a lot of mental confusion. What do you think?

[Zeitgeist]

Hey Allan,

What do you think about medical marijuana? I think it explains a lot of mental confusion. What do you think?

[Zeitgeist]

Hey Allan,

What do you think about medical marijuana? I think it explains a lot of mental confusion. What do you think?

[Zeitgeist]

Hey Allan,

What do you think about medical marijuana? I think it explains a lot of mental confusion. What do you think?

[Zeitgeist]

Hey Allan,

What do you think about medical marijuana? I think it explains a lot of mental confusion. What do you think?

[all]

I hate to insert myself into a debate, but did not Mr. Greenspan write something to the effect of war in Iraq being affected by oil under the sand?

I find the oil theory more believable than incompetence of US intelligence, family vendetta or freedom fighting.

[all]

I hate to insert myself into a debate, but did not Mr. Greenspan write something to the effect of war in Iraq being affected by oil under the sand?

I find the oil theory more believable than incompetence of US intelligence, family vendetta or freedom fighting.

[all]

I hate to insert myself into a debate, but did not Mr. Greenspan write something to the effect of war in Iraq being affected by oil under the sand?

I find the oil theory more believable than incompetence of US intelligence, family vendetta or freedom fighting.

[all]

I hate to insert myself into a debate, but did not Mr. Greenspan write something to the effect of war in Iraq being affected by oil under the sand?

I find the oil theory more believable than incompetence of US intelligence, family vendetta or freedom fighting.

[Author]

Posts