Former BP CEO Tony Hayward Arrested by Louisiana Police this Morning

We at BP are sorry to see him detained. Better him than me.

BP Chairman Carl-Henrich Svanberg

June 17, 2010, 10:45am

written by Asit Schuldbe

In a closed-door press conference this morning, BP Chairman Carl-Henrich Svanberg confirmed that a specially appointed Louisiana Police Task Force arrested BP CEO Tony Hayward during an early morning raid of his Delaware waterfront hotel penthouse. While it remains unclear if known big-business advocate, former New Orleans Mayor C. Ray Nagin participated in the coordination of this interstate effort, sources tell us that the former Mayor declined a recent dinner invitation to Hayward’s penthouse, citing “a previous engagement”.

Bail has not been set, however some legal experts expect that the prosecution will hinge most of their case on the present and ongoing damage to protected sea-turtle nesting grounds. Given the multi-terrain and aquatic, migratory habits of the sea turtle, damage to any of part of their range of habitats, experts are predicting swift decisive punishment grounded in the Endangered Species Act of 1973 and the Clean Water Act of 1972.

Statements issued by White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs and National Incident Commander Admiral Thad Allen assert that Mr. Hayward is personally liable for the BP Oil Spill, under the landmark 1972 Clean Water Act : Clause 32A, subsection B,  exhibits ii-iv states that: “The CEO of any corporation, whether domestic or foreign which sells, harvests or distributes any water-borne natural resource from or within those waters adjacent to the shores of the United States,  shall be considered “unnatural predators” and held directly and individually responsible for any ecological or species degradation or environmental destruction.  It is hereby acknowledged that the CEO is the figurehead of a corporation is the leader, voice and conscience and is thereby liable for any corporate misdeeds. The Clean Water Act hereby permits the arrest and prosecution of the responsible CEO.

Said CEO will be subject to arrest upon final collection of physical proof of culpability, assigned a public lawyer and granted a fair trial within the affected municipality before a jury of his peers. Fair sentencing shall be limited to any combination of the following: fines, seizure of assets, public service and / or imprisonment within the aforementioned locale(s)”.

If convicted, his or her assets will be immediately be seized and liquidated prior to distribution among affected families and communities. Corporate profits, operating budgets and off-shore accounts will be prioritized and allocated (without delay or excess machinations] to long-term environmental and wildlife rehabilitation, no-fee small business grants and social reparations programming.

Recent updates from Reuters News Wire and Associated Press have just confirmed that UK Prime Minister David Cameron will not seek to repatriate Mr. Hayward stating that the financial losses of one man [ Mr. Hayward] and one corporation does not compare to the economic, emotional and physical suffering of marine life and the millions of working people affected directly by Mr. Hayward and BP’s continued oil spill into the Gulf Coast. Prime Minister Cameron also made a personal phone call to President Obama ensuring his full cooperation with the case.

Guilty as chargedAlthough Mr. Hayward was again slated to appear before congress this morning, sources confirm that this morning’s arrest prevented his ongoing testimony. The congressional caucus proceeded gainfully nonetheless, and crude oil continues to pump into the Gulf.


No this did not happen in our reality, but shouldn’t it? If no one is held responsible, how then will things change?

Conceived of and written by: Shawndel N. Fraser. This work is a piece of fiction. I have used the names of real public figures, however the events and legislation described are purely works of my idealistic, fanciful imagination, which is prone to musings of alternate realities wherein wrongdoers, regardless of socioeconomic status pay for their transgressions by appearing before the commoner and judged in a court of law.


The coal industry gives their two cents…

Hello Thinkers!

(Watch the latest Anti-Clean Coal ad campaign. Its short and funny!)

I know, long time no hear from! But here I am, today was a news day and I must react to the madness in my inbox! I came across a blog posting on about the coal industry’s reticence to fund and develop clean coal technology that would make possible the capture and storage of coal pollution. The thrust of the article is essentially that coal companies have admitted to incredibly low spending on clean coal research and technology. The article cites various sources that provide this information, including a statement from “the CEO of Duke Energy, a major producer of coal power:

Asked how much Duke Energy has invested in carbon sequestration technology so far,” Rogers said, “We have not invested any dollars in the technology, per say. We have spent a lot of time and money reviewing and analyzing the various technologies.” “

Well, to this, I say “REALLY?” Of course the coal companies are not going to invest in clean coal technology. It isn’t realistic or ‘good business’ for them to do so! We live in a capitalist regime which is based on models of surplus and scarcity. Usually we HAVE a surplus, but corporations and manufacturers make it seem scarce for as long as possible so as to keep prices high. For example, think about how the hottest technologies, iphones, wii’s etc begin with a short supply and premium prices. Over time, there are more of them and the price drops. From the debut date, the producers have the stock ready that they don’t make available. The pretense is usually one of scarcity or ‘rareness’ so that people will spend early and much for elite, early access to the product.

So is the same with coal production and distribution, we have been mining and burning coal SINCE THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION…at least in massive climate changing quantities, for sure. In over one century of mining, isn’t it reasonable to expect that the coal industry would have amassed a gargantuan surplus? For them to truly fund clean coal technology now, they will have lost all the potentiated surplus that is the coal that has already been mined and not sold. It will only be  when all possible coal stores are exploited that business will fully and deliberately look toward alternate forms of energy on which to capitalize. I posit, that until that day, coal companies will continue to set aside only 2-cents of every profit dollar toward clean coal technology. It is not a profitable research venture to fund right now, and this clearly shows that coal companies are not concerned with climate change as much as they are enthralled by the prospect of continued profits using their antiquated energy product.

What do you think?