City of London banksters pissed off at BP being dissed - demand action from UK gov't:: SAY IT LOUD, BP ARE GLOBAL CRIMINALS!

David Cameron has refused to bow to City demands to intervene in the increasingly bitter transatlantic row over the BP oil spill, as fears grow for the company’s future.

[...]

Despite calls for the Prime Minister to support BP and warnings about the threat to the national economic interest, he made no public attempt to defend the firm’s position.

[...]

Boris Johnson, the London mayor, became the most high-profile figure to demand a halt to the “beating up” of one of Britain’s biggest firms following a “catastrophic accident”.

He said that “anti-British rhetoric” levelled at the company was a matter of “national concern” and that the oil firm was paying “a very, very heavy price” for what had been an accident. “I would like to see a bit of cool heads rather than endlessly buck-passing and name-calling,” he said.

“When you consider the huge exposure of British pension funds to BP, it starts to become a matter of national concern if a great British company is being continually beaten up on the airwaves.”

Sir Christopher Meyer, the former British ambassador to Washington, called for Downing Street to intervene with the White House.

“The Government must put down a marker with the US administration that the survival and long term prosperity of BP is a vital British interest,” he said.

JP Morgan, the American investment bank, issued a report calling on Britain to raise a “diplomatic red flag” on BP’s behalf.

The Institute of Directors said that aggressive US political rhetoric was “inappropriate” and John Napier, the head of the insurers RSA, wrote an open letter to Mr Obama saying he appeared “prejudicial and personal” in his approach.

In Parliament, senior Labour MPs also intervened. Tom Watson, the former Cabinet Office minister, said: “This is now a serious crisis facing millions of pensioners in the UK and we need to say to our US allies that yes, it was a British company that made this mistake but if they were subject to a regulatory regime, they wouldn’t have been able to do that.

[link to www.telegraph.co.uk]