- 27,219
- United Kingdom
Not least because it's not owned by the government so they don't have any say in what the company is called...
You and Famine are going to make Duke mad with your conspiracy talk.
You and Famine are going to make Duke mad with your conspiracy talk.
Just ask P Diddy.I mean, what kind of a name is 'P'?
You honestly don't see the difference between corner-cutting with a little collusion, and deliberately blowing up a rig to make a windfall insurance profit?
Not least because it's not owned by the government so they don't have any say in what the company is called...
You know if I never heard of the Gulf oil spill Id still be fit to be tied over the whole letting the terrorist go thing. Im way more POd with their actions over that, then the Gulf, its just that both stories happened virtually at the same time. I dont have any good will for anything or anyone that had anything to do with the denile of getting justice for those families.
I miss the pictures that you used to include in your comments. I think this one needs a picture.
How this?
I honestly think that LeftyWright69 needs to stop going onto all those conspiracy websites. >99% of them are pure bullcrap.
BP Admits It Lobbied British for Libyan Prisoner Transfer
Interesting URL/headline disparity there:
http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local-beat/Blood-For-Oil-BP-Denies-It-Wanted-Pan-Am-103-Bomber-Set-Free-98520589.html
It's worth a note too that "lobbied" hasn't got the same meaning or weight in the UK that it does in the US.
Interesting URL/headline disparity there:
http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local-beat/Blood-For-Oil-BP-Denies-It-Wanted-Pan-Am-103-Bomber-Set-Free-98520589.html
It's worth a note too that "lobbied" hasn't got the same meaning or weight in the UK that it does in the US.
But a year later Megrahi is free in Libya and the doctor who gave the diagnosis admits the bomber could live 10 or 20 more years -- and that he had been paid by the Libyan government.
As I said at the time of the release, the evidence was pretty vague and it all smelled more of needing to arrest someone for the bombing. I'm not entirely convinced that the Lockerbie case was fully solved at all and that this man is even to blame.
In any case, as has been said already, BP has little to do with it at all - it was the Scottish Government's decision. Why does the US and/or the media feel the need to turn the screw on BP? As far as I can see, BP had an accident - sure its their responsibility to avoid such accidents but is it really necessary to go to these lengths to condemn them? I mean, this has nothing to do with sorting out an oil rig in the Mexican Gulf....
I'm pretty worried about my future with pensions and all, this is certainly not helping one bit.
Not really "evidence" though is it? I could just as easily say that its an attempt to help promote a positive image of Libya, the evidence that was produced in the trials was pointing to Libya regradless of whether Al Megrahi was guilty or not. Even if its an admission of guilt, does it prove this particular man had anything to do with it?
As far as I'm concerned, they never proved he actually had anything to do with the bombing.
And I don't think I ever said it was Libya using him as a scapegoat.
Something tells me that there is never going to be any evidence that would sway you to believe that Libya has ever done anything terrorist related.
Its a rather large leap you are taking here to go from 'this one person may have been set-up as a fall guy' to 'Libya never did anything naughty at all'.
By all means debate a subject, its a cornerstone of GT Planet, but you will not get very far if you miss-represent what people have said to this kind of degree.
Scaff