I can only reiterate what the general feeling this side of the pond is;your BA pilot was too clever by far and should have got his skinny ass on the ground and damn well checked the condition of his aircraft.This was no precautionary IFSD due low oil half way across the pond.Stoic's attempt to draw parallels with a '77 case are puzzling;I see no similarities between the two whatsoever.
The FAA are naturally upset;firstly,by the Captain's cynical interpretation of the reg and secondly,by the reaction of the CAA who I suppose are hamstringed.I guess you have politics your side of the pond too.
I can understand BA pilots coming on this forum and defending their colleague;loyalty is a good attribute.However,an airline pilot's most solemn duty is the care of his passengers and crew.You never ever let commercial pressure come between you and that tenet.Just what were the passengers thinking when the Captain tried to explain that he was continuing to London after they had just seen no.2 engine disintegrate on takeoff?Their fear is very real and it must be part of the equation.