Why is Halliburton always involved?

[steve_a]

Hi Everyone,

I just heard that Halliburton was working on the oil rig shortly before it exploded.

Normally I wouldn't have thought anything more about it if it wasn't Halliburton, but it seems that the company has been involved in so much dubious circumstances that my eyebrows raised when I heard.

Could this be just another coincidence? After all, Halliburton is a very large company.

Best regards,

Steve

[Shairia]

Haliburton or it's subsidiaries are always involved because they have the inside tract on US Gov't contracts. They know the process, have the security requirements in place and employ people who already have held US Gov't clearances so this makes access to any sites expedient. They are familiar with the contracting process (which can be quite daunting for any new company) and know how the Gov't evaluates bids. They also know who to contact when they need questions answered.

Time is money to the Gov't and it doesn't hurt to know the people involved with awarding the contracts by being a repeat bidder. I'm not implying procedures are not followed for impropriety (although you never really know do you?).

[Luke]

Transocean chief executive Steven Newman is expected to say the spill was caused by the failure of a cement wall built by a BP contractor, Halliburton.
from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8674073.stm
They supposedly finished work on that 20 hrs before failure.
Again, Halliburton is second largest oilfield services corporation, so might be just bad luck .. might be.

[stardustaquarion]

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/DXSMs874uuQ&hl=en_GB&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/DXSMs874uuQ&hl=en_GB&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

They don't have a very good reputation for what I have seen around. Now I am not a builder but doesn't cement need time to cure properly? Is 20 hours under the ocean long enough?

[Swanny]

Wouldn't want to be on the end of karma payback for anyone involved in Halliburton

[Fredkc]

Sharia;
You neglected to mention that Halliburton also:
Knows where all the bodies are buried, both figuratively and literally,
Has paid out more "bribe money" than any other corporation in the last 10 yrs and damned well wants their money's worth,
Will hire ANY bi-pedal murdering psychopath who can kill without blinking, and keep their mouth shut,
AND has close ties to the inner workings of the oil business.

[Swami]

Where are the interviews with the Rednecks working the rigg.....??

[steve_a]

Hi Swami,

Perhaps this release from AP could have something to do with it: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2010/05/11/national/a104820D60.DTL&tsp=1
From what I can see from the article, there were six workers forced to sign 'silence orders'.

Best regards,

Steve

Where are the interviews with the Rednecks working the rigg.....??

[Shairia]

Sharia;
You neglected to mention that Halliburton also:
Knows where all the bodies are buried, both figuratively and literally,
Has paid out more "bribe money" than any other corporation in the last 10 yrs and damned well wants their money's worth,
Will hire ANY bi-pedal murdering psychopath who can kill without blinking, and keep their mouth shut,
AND has close ties to the inner workings of the oil business.


I was trying to be nice and open the topic slowly...:gossip: Yes sadly these are most likely true. Why do you think I got out of Gov't contracting.

[stardustaquarion]

Following on my previous post, in this video just at the end there is a comment that says that there were conversations about whether the cement on the plug had time to cure or not, profits before safety as usual:sad:

<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/1vJ9mlzQ5AA&hl=en_GB&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/1vJ9mlzQ5AA&hl=en_GB&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>

If I had the power I will sit the directors of BP in their yatches in the middle of the spill for at least a week without alcohol :mmph:

PS is in minute 08:06 more or less

[steve_a]

Hi Everybody,

After some time thinking about this Halliburton thing always seeming to be implicated in dodgy stuff: http://www.busrep.co.za/index.php?fArticleId=142210

I can't help thinking that this oil rig explosion in the gulf was not too much of an accident.

It is true to say that there may have been a 'problem' involving the cementing process and it was this that caused the blow out. That I could get to grips with. I couldn't wrap my head around the fact that only last year the very same thing happened, involving the same company only in Australia. If Halliburton had accidentally stepped on the ball in Australia, surely that would have taken steps to beef up their safety and process when taking on future jobs so that the same thing never happens again. That is how logic goes.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/30/halliburton-may-be-culpri_n_558481.html

So I need to ask myself why it happened again. Was it that the first blow out was a pre-run for this one? This way they could guarantee a disaster.
Why would it need to create a disaster? Well it's simple. The shadow government of the US doesn't want to drill for oil, depleting US natural resources. The shadow government thinks it better to swap pieces of paper (US$) for natural resources from other nations. When the resources run out, the only nation or at least one of the very few to have oil will be the US.

The fact that Goldman Sachs shorted oil in the gulf one day before the blowout surely put further fuel on the fire:

http://cromalternativemoney.org/index.php/en/media/news/goldman-sachs-shorted-gulf-of-mexico-one-day-before-oil-rig-accident.html

It always seems to be the same group of names involved in scandal.

Best regards,

Steve

[Hummingbird]

" Colonialism is sponsored by corporations, thats why halliburton gets payed to rebuild nations" Immortal Technique

¤=[Post Update]=¤

Good Investigative work steve Thank you

[Lily de Cuir]

Dick Cheney used to head Halliburton. Like others have said, they know how to work the government contracts system. I heard that BP got their 'fix-it' stuff , called 'Corexit' from a subsidiary company of theirs. Hey, pays to keep all the profit in the one company eh?

[Barron]

Maybe because Dick Cheney was involved?!! "Truth about Halliburton and Dick Cheney" - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UbDfYzq_HaQ

[steve_a]

Hi Everybody,

Just to keep the ball rolling, it appeared that notonly did Goldman Sachs short some of the (key) oil industry one day before the explosion, three weeks beforehand they sold 44% of their shares in BP. Things start to look a little more sinister.

One could argue that it was a coincidence as if they wanted to protect themselves they would have sold all their shares in BP. Firstly Goldman doesn't own shares, it's clients do. Gldman receives a percentage of the profits and charges for transactions, just like any other investment bank. So we need to ask, "Which shares exactly were sold?"

http://freepressinternational.com/2010/06/goldman-sold-44-of-its-bp-stock-3-wks-before-blowout/

Let's keep on looking for more.

Best regards,

Steve

[steve_a]

Hi Everybody,

The plot seems to be thickening, as is the oil. It now appears that the CEO of BP also sold shares some weeks before the 'accident': http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/oilandgas/7804922/BP-chief-Tony-Hayward-sold-shares-weeks-before-oil-spill.html

I would have posted this earlier but the forum seems to have been down more than a glum Sunday in Bognor.

I think it has been rightly batted around the internet recently that BP was never intent of stemming the 'leak' of oil as it would have been too expensive to tap into the oil field again. If we look at all the techniques they have tried it appears their goal has always been to capture the oil and not just stem the flow.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/01/us/01spill.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/15/gulf-oil-spill-bp-tries-t_n_577401.html

http://www.nctimes.com/lifestyles/health-med-fit/article_2ab7b452-9f05-5824-8424-78179f81b6dc.html

This must surely put into perspective big business's real agenda when faced with a crisis. Always do the most cost effective thing regardless of the consequences.

Best regards,

Steve

[steve_a]

Hi Everybody,

It seems that the noil well is damaged beneath the seabed. This opens up a whole new can of worms.

On the technical side of the leak, I found this interesting and most comprehensive page from the "Washingtons Blog" website which looks at the progress of the undoings of the crisis: http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2010/06/evidence-points-to-destruction-beneath.html

This could change all the theories regarding as to why the leak occurred. As always it brings out more questions. If the damage is underground did BP know that it had a massive problem before the media got hold of the story in the first place? Is that why the CEO of BP sold his stocks and is that why Halliburton bought the small company who did the 'cementing work'? Small company = fall guy.

Was the "explosion" deliberately caused to mask the real reason of the well leaking oil? Is that why Goldman Sachs shorted the oil companies a day and three weeks beforehand?

At the end of the day, if the well was already compromised well below underground, who pays damages? BP.

If there was a tragic 'accident', who pays the damages? The fall guy. Perhaps it was cheaper to buy out and sacrifice a company than to own up to an immense problem.

Just a thought.

Best regards,

Steve

[Luke]

If the data from PDF article Mr.Ryan posted, and this article in NYT (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/27/us/27rig.html), then they knew it - the damning data is sudden loss of drilling "mud". So called mud is one of the most expensive elements in the drilling process, due usage of rare elements, and is usually carefully recirculated. And this rig "lost" all of it in one place! If there are unfilled cavities on the way of the shaft, then any cementing op will fail, as concrete that should strengthen the well, would flow... somewhere. Unless filled. The invoices for amount of material pumped by Halliburton into casing would tell the story. :confused:
If my reasoning is right, then well might be structurally compromised before the explosion (though, I just extrapolate from known data, which surely are incomplete). Then there is a case of mud "hangup" and wrong readout in testing system that was designed to check IF the cementing works were made according to spec. (is the well holding the pressure).
Now, there are things I do not fully understand:
1. what was the stage of the drilling (did they actually reached the intended reservoir or they hit unexpected "pocket" between the stages) Stages outlined here: http://www.treesfullofmoney.com/?p=1610, link from PDF. Did they were preparing well for operation/tests, or were they still drilling to main reservoir?
2. What was design of the joints (in above pdf there is a gif that shows joint with ball valve, that would prevent influx from above? maybe this is the disk some experts talk about - ball would look like a disk in 2d diagram) why on earth they used such a design (basically- that makes any top-kill scheme unfeasible) -> diagram linked in PDF -> http://glossary.oilfield.slb.com/files/OGL00014.gif
3. Why such crucial system as pressure controll of well integrity failed?

Anyway- right now this data points to two things: there might be structural problem with the well, and that last cementing op might have been botched. Integrity tests performed after finishing of the construction work failed too.
And cementing was all Halliburton job.
Sudden "mud" loss should ring alarm bells all around, if i understand drilling principles right.

[steve_a]

Hi Everyone,

Well it seems that BP knew about frissures in the oil well around three weeks before the explosion. This would explain the sale of stocks in the company before hand. I don't always agree with Paul Watson of Prison Planet, as I think sometimes he goes too far, but I reckon he's about right in his reporting here setting it all out: http://www.prisonplanet.com/bp-aware-of-cracks-in-oil-well-two-months-before-explosion.html

Now we need to see exactly how much was known before hand and even find out if the well was sacrificed as it couldn't be saved or used without leaking or having the threat of leaking hanging over it. A bit like cutting your losses and running, only the spin off of the scrifice was too great as they could have destroyed more than they expected to and made the situation into a huge crisis. Something to think about.

Best regards,

Steve

[Jonathon]

From Rawstory.com:
Other asset management firms also sold huge blocks of BP stock in the first quarter -- but their sales were a fraction of Goldman's. Wachovia, which is owned by Wells Fargo, sold 2,667,419 shares; UBS, the Swiss bank, sold 2,125,566 shares.

Wachovia and UBS also sold much larger percentages of their BP stock, at 98 percently and 97 percent respectively.

From inspiredeconomist.com:
Why Did Halliburton Buy An Oil Cleanup Company 8 Days Before The Oil Spill?
There are innumerable of bits of information floating around in the battle over the narrative of this national disaster. This one is particularly disturbing. From AOL’s Daily Finance just over a week before the spill:

“…the days of independence have come to an end for Boots & Coots as the company has agreed to sell out to Halliburton (HAL) for $240.4 million.”

M&A in the industrial and oil services sectors is totally normal, but the timing in this case, is not. Boots & Coots sure seems like the perfect company to own if it would soon become necessary to get more involved with some oil disaster (emphasis mine):

Boots & Coots has two core businesses. First, there is Pressure Control, which involves prevention and risk-control services for oil- and gas-well fires and blowouts. A key to this area was the acquisition of John Wright, which developed sophisticated technologies to measure well integrity.

Next, Boots & Coots has a Well Intervention division, which helps enhance production for oil and gas operators. This business is likely to benefit nicely from the trend toward unconventional resource plays (such as extracting energy from shale). Boots & Coots greatly expanded this division with the acquisitions of Oil States International and StassCo.

Does this strike readers as a coincidence? If so, it’s a pretty lucky one for Halliburton.

[steve_a]

It appears that the Football World Cup is far more important (England finally qualified for the next round by the way!) in the mainstream media.

Two of the latest news articles I read on the internet were that BP had to remove the capture valve of the leak as it was hit by a mini submarine: http://www.dailypaul.com/node/138392

You can get an up to date quote from the BP website: http://www.bp.com/liveassets/bp_internet/globalbp/globalbp_uk_english/incident_response/STAGING/local_assets/html/Skandi_ROV2.html

Also Reuters just posted an article about the levels of methane gas down there which apparently are 1 million times higher than normal: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE65L6IA20100622

The news is out there, we just need to look for it and not wait for it to find us. The comercial news channels (CNN, Fox, BBC etc.) can only offer a limited service.

Best regards,

Steve

UPDATE: It seems that the oil collecting resumed this morning: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN1416392020100624

[steve_a]

Hi Everybody,

There was an article I read the other day suggesting that the oil rig problem was really a false flag operation and that there is no oil spewing out of the well top in the Gulf. I sat tight on this article as it was a point of view, but decided to lose it as I just saw aerial images from a police helicopter of Pensacola Beach, Florida which seems not to have such white sands as the holiday brochures brag these days: http://www.pnj.com/article/20100623/NEWS01/100623027/1006/RSS01

Note the oil slick in relation to bystanders on the beach to get an idea of how much oil is washing up.

Best regards,

Steve

[steve_a]

Hi Everybody,

We've probably all seen the video of Kindra Arnesen: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkYJDI8pK9Y complaining about the lack of work being done and the toxicity problems of the sea in the Gulf where the BP oil leak is at. Well there is that latest from the Steve Quayle blog which is extremely important to read and know, especially if you live near the affected area. Basically the advice is to get out now while you can! Read more at: http://www.stevequayle.com/index1.html

There is another reference to this at this link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/22/AR2010062205391.html?sub=AR

Be safe people.

Best regards,

Steve

[PHARAOH]

Haliburton involved with this????? Noooooo...... That would make it a CONSPIRACY. Oops did I say that? It's so blantantly obvious it disgusts me, steve a.