Piracy

When I see that the US government law capped the liability for environmental incident at 75M USD it makes certain that BP will NOT spend another cents on it even if they can be held responsible 100% and the costs become higher. That is being real pirates!!!

J+106 - Attente des derniers documents avant de signer le contrat

Je ne savais pas qu'une banque pouvait ne pas vouloir de mon argent... ce n'est pas narcissique, je veux dire que même quand l'analyse de la demande d'emprun (par la banque) est positive, la banque peux refuser. Ce qui c'est passé avec HSBC, et c'est pour ça que Santander va financer mon emprunt. En fait c'est amusant de se dire que je suis peut-être le victime d'un problème entre 2 multinationale. Je m'explique: HSBC avait fermé un contrat avec Schlumberger pour que tous les employés internationaux aient un compte en banque "premiere", ce qui est la version + du compte en banque de base. Ce qui s'est passé ne fut pas ce qui était dans le contrat puisse que HSBC est revenu sur ses actes. Schlumberger pas conteeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeent!!!! Schlumberger chercher solution!!!
Ceci c'est passé entre 2004 et 2005 je crois. Bref depuis lors Schlumberger cherchait une autre banque, c'est un peu le petit chien errant cherchant un maitre (mon dieu si un jour un de mes boss lit ça je vais me faire muter pour la Sibérie...). Je précise que je suis encore fan de ma boite même après l'Angola; genre ça va me servir d'excuse et tous vous allez vous foutre de moi parce que je me la joue couille molle et lèche cul... suspect non? Suspect...Suce pet, pire que lèche cul ça... (merci Coluche). Bref je ne sais pas trop quand mais récemment Schlumberger a enfin trouvé le mai-maitre pour tout ses petits com-comptes IM (=International Mobile). Santander a ouvert sa porte et tous les petits com-comptes sont rentrés bien au chaud. Quand c'est arrivé, forcément HSBC qui maltraitait tous ces comptes d'un coup se retrouve sans personne à maltraiter et c'est la frustration. Alors quand moi petit chaperon suis allé voir grand mère chez HSBC et me suis retrouvé face au grand méchant loup ça m'a fait drole. Donc HSBC regarde mon cas, me dis "mais y a paaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaas de problèèèèème voyons!!!! on vous finance 85% du prix rien que parce que vous êtes Schlumberger... et au dernier moment ils disent (quand je les appelle) "en fait on va pas vous financer à 85% mais à 50%... a ouais, et puis on s'en fout de savoir d'ou viennent les 50% restant...
Donc moi ce jour là c'était panique à bord, la course du poulet décapité, puis ma femme qui est un peu plus posée que moi prend la première masse qu'elle voit et fait un superbe demi cercle et ma tête devait se trouver dans le passage. Bref je traverse la pièce montrant mon meilleur profil (même en plein vol planné je sais garder mon style!!) et après avoir traversé le mur je reprends mes esprits et je me dis "pitêt qu'il y a d'autres banques" et la réponse est ouiiiii!! Donc je suis allé chez Santander (fast forward a bit sinon je vais y passer la nuit). Fait important, un de mes collègue m'a suggéré de parler à un avocat spécialisé dans l'immobilier. Il m'a révellé l'info sur Santander remplaçant HSBC. Et là c'est comme un puzzle qui se met en place... ou ma femme qui sort de derrière la porte avec sa masse. Donc après quelques murs traversés je me rend compte que HSBC n'a jamais voulu financer mon appart mais cherchait une excuse pour que je me casse vite vite. Cette sensation s'est confirmée quand le cabinet d'expertise de HSBC a audité l'appart et que ma banque préférée me dit que l'appart vaut 50000R$ de moins que normalement et que donc ils vont financer 50% de la valeur qu'ils pensent que l'appart vaux. Le plus amusant dans tout ça c'est que ces nouvelles je les ai apprise à chaque fois en les appelant. Donc ils ne voulaient pas de mon argent en gros.

Deepwater Horizon oil spill or the excellence of cinism

I just saw a couple of slideshows about reactions around the Louisianan oil spill, and others about  International Oil Company (IOC, opposed to NOC for National Oil Company) bad behaviour. It sort of filled me with sorrow because we cannot directly do anything to help. The best thing would be to provoke a sudden increase in reniewable energy demand, big enough to force IOCs-NOCs to switch energy sources (which I think is the ony way from my point of view). We do need to change the name to change the motives. There has been though a coule of reactions in the internet that got me angrier because it expose a great cinism of the persons that wrote it, hence in people's behaviour and it will affect in bad these IOCs-NOCs behaviour rather than in good. I did write an answer in their posts but I wish to share it here also, I think it is important, at least for me. I slightely modified in case you cannot read the original articles. I answered the second one under the cinism reference.


That is where people will understand majors consider US like Nigeria (article ref). I do not know how long it will take for people to understand that industries of that kind (IOCs/NOCs) are aggressive and has not a ounce of care, but neither does politics. IOCs/NOCs are placing the limit of safety as dictated by the government and NOT FURTHER. In countries with no safety rules means minimum safety rules (the ones created by the IOC-NOC usually meant to balance btw life-loss and economics, therefore it gives you an idea of the price of your life within that company). It is not Transocean's fault or BP's if they did not put that extra safety measure in the US cos the state never required it at all!!! Why spending on non-required-extra-and-possibly-useless safety measure? US is full of politics that are paid by the NOCc/IOCs and they are the ones enforcing the laws, now you blame brits for american laws lack of implementation?? I think the public is just not thinking at the right place. Company's greed is just as bad as the government's and its executives. Why is that the same company will flare in a country and not another?? Law and law enforcement only. Everybody was happy to get the oil at a fair price in the US, well it did cost a few african lives but who cares? they're not from the neighbourhood and will be forgotten after a good chill bud and a BBQ with the mates.
Understand me at the first place: I do hate a couple of things like threatens to the environment and people (especially locals). But worse of all is the cinism of the people raging because of the oil spill, that cinism is triggering the first 2, because now look what's next: No domestic expansion in the US, big yohoooo!! for the american citizen, but oil demand continues hence what will happen to all the countries that do not or CANNOT re-enforce their laws?? We had the pleasure to hear a comment on Nigeria by our journalist here, which I find profoundly revolting because IOCs are widely exploiting the greed of few country locals to extract their oil at a cheap price at the price of the local people and environment which we all know is a common practice for IOC, whether american or european don't get me wrong. Shell-TOTAL-BP-Exxon-Chevron-... are all on the same boat of exploitation and every time there is a trial they cry at court and use some misunderstanding from the jury, manipulation of information (or it's interpretation) due to culture difference mainly. Believe me culture difference has a much bigger impact than we can think and is a major trigger. We have very experienced IOC consultants that play mediating roles and can choose very well within a community who to speak to, regardless the culture. They all know cultural fact from foreign countries completely unknown from their domestic compatriots which helps in trials, but we are diverting. The nigerian reference is revolting because the only nigerian's fault here is to be unprepared to the oil philosophy. These people are fishermen, hunters and few farmers but oil is not treated like it is in the US, as a farming asset. Nigerian growth is pirated by IOC's greed and haste in oil recovery at whatever cost. These costs however will be subtlety traded for IOCs never to be directly engaged. A few environmental and educational programs will be executed to show their involvements" into country's growth but because of quarterly review must be always a rising slope if the said country's development goes against that slope there will be consequences. As IOCs have big resources and because they have powerful politic/military levers that allow them to answer with an absurd disproportion to threats. What stop them? law implementations and enforcements, otherwise it would be the same in their own country BELIEVE ME!!
 Unfortunately and sadly saying this will not change a lot. Whether ppl will believe me or not I don't really care for I witnessed these rude behaviours. Just remember that next time they vote the global consequences of it, major countries now have implications far beyond their own borders and that goes with an extra acquisition of conciousness. What I believe is that Transocean, BP and US government are all responsible for general lack of care and will use the people's ability to mentally cure from that environmental illness, spills will carry on, at a lower rate but still it will happen. Also foreign extortion to fulfil domestic demand will carry on. Just stay tune and listen, travel, don't take Fox or CNN (or whichever channel) for granted . Like Gandhi said, local revolution! talking about what matters to you around you and education of your close-by about what you think must change is the only way for things to change.

Damn I speak a lot!!!