"Coke for the People" - Blatant disrespect for property righ

[Anonymous]

Soldiers haul off inventory; drinks to go to `the people'

Posted January 18, 2003 in The Miami Herald (http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/)

BY FRANCES ROBLES

CARACAS - Acting on orders from President Hugo Chávez, armed soldiers raided the Coca-Cola and local beer bottling plants Friday, seizing soft drinks and alcoholic beverages that the government said it would distribute ``to the people.''

In televised scenes broadcast nationwide, rifle-toting soldiers stormed the Coca-Cola bottling plant, roughing up employees and driving away in trucks filled with beverages.

In a similar raid at the Polar beer bottling plant, soldiers grabbed company managers by their shirt collars and tossed them off the company grounds.

At a second Coca-Cola plant, on Margarita Island, by contrast, a National Guard captain standing at a locked gate calmly said: ``Someone has to come here and open this, or should it be by force?''

A key was produced and the gate was opened.

''This is not a question of a court order. This is a question of orders from the president,'' said National Guard Gen. Luis Felipe Acosta, who led the search of the Coca-Cola plant in Venezuela's Carabobo state. ``Collective rights come before individual rights.'' (emphasis added)

He then took a swig from a malt beverage, looked at television cameras -- and delivered a loud belch.

More (http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/4975590.htm)

[Mazdak]

Heh! I saw that a few nights ago on channel 41(spanish TV).

Chavez is truly one great man. A true hero.

[RedCeltic]

For once I agree with Mazdak..... YEA... GO CHAVEZ!!!!!!!!

wha'.... you gotta problem with that dc?!? lol...

[synthesis]

Ha!

I don't like Chavez, but I gotta admit, it's a damn ballsy move to nationalize an industry such as Coca-Cola!

GO CHAVEZ!

[Anonymous]

Despicable....absolutely despicable.

"Collective rights come before individual rights"

Fuck Chavez and all that he stands for. We should send the marines in and demolish the motherfucker! Leftist prick.

[El Brujo]

Boo-fuckin-hoo. Im so fuckin sorry that your corporate asspals lost their right to leech of the workers and gain unnecessary profit from dirty corporate play. Chavez is doing what he should have done a long-ass time ago. If I were him the lackeys that are deliberately bringing the country down for their own benefit would be rotting in prison right now.

[peaccenicked]

DC. It is nothing to do with universal individual rights.
What you defend is the collective right of the rich to crush the individual rights of the poor.

[Anonymous]

Sometimes I think we need coporate mercenary armies that'll deal with shit like this. Coke has every right to defend their property, even if it means killing those who would threaten it.

[El Brujo]

Quote: from Dark Capitalist on 3:40 pm on Jan. 20, 2003
Sometimes I think we need coporate mercenary armies that'll deal with shit like this. Coke has every right to defend their property, even if it means killing those who would threaten it.

See. This is EXACTLY what Mazdak is talking about when he refers to "enemies of the people". Fascist shitheads that are willing to massacre millions in the name of greed (or "property rights", as they so softly put it).

How could anyone POSSIBLY think pacifism works with cronies like these againts us. This is proof that the right is inherently un-democratic and won't peacefully accept change unless we shove it down their fucking throats.

[Don Amodeo]

Ok, lets pretend that all of you make $50,000 a year, and I make $3,000. Does that justify me if I go to your houses, break in, beat up you and your family, threaten to kill you if you don't give me money, take everything from your house, and then announce in front of the media that I am a hero for my family, because I did this for them, and that it would be morally wrong for you to go after me in the court to try to take back your things. If you would disagree with someone who did this, then you are also disagreeing with the militaristic tactics used in Venezuela. If you would support somebody who did this to you, I will be happy to liberate your funds, so if you would please give me your credit card numbers, I will spread them throughout my school, for all to be equal.

[Capitalist Imperial]

Hey, its good to know that leftists here support utter theivery.

I mean, they did not initiate or control 1 input into the means to production at those plants, so it is hardly a marxist move they are making.

It is stealing in the strictist definition of the word.

However, for a stalinist holdout like Chavez, I am not surprised.

Perhaps after we are done with Iraq and North Korea we should just send a carrier battlegroup to shell his palace.

[Sol]

I never thought I'd say this, and I feel sick doing it, but the Cappie's are right. This is bullshit. This won't help the "people". It's a totally political move to intimidate opposition businesses, and not a very bright one at that. This kind of shit hurts his cause, 'cept maybe as far as that fuck Castro's concerned.

That isn't socialism. That is totalitarianism.

[Weatherman]

Let me start off by saying I dont know much about Chavez and his history. He claims to be on the left, wether that is true I do not know. But this was not thievery because the venzuelian (mispelled probably) people were the workers at that factory, and they were the ones given the goods. I dont understand how you can defend a greedy mega corporation like coca-cola, havent you guys read about coca-cola executives hiring hit men to kill union leaders in Columbia. When taking money from a billion dollar corporation and giving it to the people who earned that money, it can never be called thievery; did not Coca-cola steal it first?

And Sol, What you said about Fidel Castro is bullshit. You need to do some research. Your falling into the lies of the oppressor owned media. He is in power because his people want him to be. I have personally interviewed 4 people who live in Cuba. Only one disliked Fidel, and that was because pre-revolution his family was rich; so they went to the US in the in name on inequality. If you knew how much obstacles Fidel is having to manuever around you would understand Cubas current state. They would so financially well off if it was the our consistent Illegal Embargo, and us attacking them physically (Bay of Pigs) and with propaganda, which caused you to think bad of Fidel. Do you know how much Che looked up to Fidel, if you read the last chapter of Guerilla warfare you would know. Fidel was born rich and gave up his wealth to fight the oppresive system in his country controlled by U.S. puppet dicator Fulgencio Batista. Well anyways, you learn something everyday, but dont take my word for it, READ!!!

[TXsocialist]

I never thought I'd say this, and I feel sick doing it, but the Cappie's are right. This is bullshit. This won't help the "people". It's a totally political move to intimidate opposition businesses, and not a very bright one at that. This kind of shit hurts his cause, 'cept maybe as far as that fuck Castro's concerned.

That isn't socialism. That is totalitarianism.

WTF!?

How the hell do you think socialism will be brought about? Ya think the capitalists will decide one day to give their factories to the people? LOL!

I praise Chavez, although he's a big softie and does have some capitalist sympathies, for his work against Coke - Those bastards have freggin' DEATH SQUADS to oppress socialistic-unions(Meaning non-industrialist-controled)! I hope the rich mo'fo's tremble at the thought of Venezualan troops storming their factories!

ALL POWER TO THA PEOPLE! REVOLUTION!

[Don Amodeo]

Quote: from Weatherman on 10:55 am on Jan. 21, 2003
Let me start off by saying I dont know much about Chavez and his history. He claims to be on the left, wether that is true I do not know. But this was not thievery because the venzuelian (mispelled probably) people were the workers at that factory, and they were the ones given the goods. I dont understand how you can defend a greedy mega corporation like coca-cola, havent you guys read about coca-cola executives hiring hit men to kill union leaders in Columbia. When taking money from a billion dollar corporation and giving it to the people who earned that money, it can never be called thievery; did not Coca-cola steal it first?

And Sol, What you said about Fidel Castro is bullshit. You need to do some research. Your falling into the lies of the oppressor owned media. He is in power because his people want him to be. I have personally interviewed 4 people who live in Cuba. Only one disliked Fidel, and that was because pre-revolution his family was rich; so they went to the US in the in name on inequality. If you knew how much obstacles Fidel is having to manuever around you would understand Cubas current state. They would so financially well off if it was the our consistent Illegal Embargo, and us attacking them physically (Bay of Pigs) and with propaganda, which caused you to think bad of Fidel. Do you know how much Che looked up to Fidel, if you read the last chapter of Guerilla warfare you would know. Fidel was born rich and gave up his wealth to fight the oppresive system in his country controlled by U.S. puppet dicator Fulgencio Batista. Well anyways, you learn something everyday, but dont take my word for it, READ!!!


Give me a reliable source that states your accusations against Coca-Cola that they have hired assasins to kill union workers, and I will be glad to look into it.

[TXsocialist]

BBC

Coke sued over death squad claims



Right-wing paramilitaries under arrest in Colombia

Trade union leaders in the United States have said they are suing the soft-drinks company Coca-Cola for allegedly hiring right-wing death squads to terrorise workers at its Colombian bottling plant.
A spokesman for Coca-Cola in Atlanta said its Colombian bottling plants were run by business partners and denied any wrongdoing by the company.



We do not own or operate the plants

Rafael Fernandez Quiros
Coca-Cola
Lawyers for the United Steel workers union say they will file the lawsuit in Miami on Friday on behalf of the Colombian union Sinaltrainal.

The suit alleges that Coca-Cola and Panamerican Beverages, its principal bottler in Latin America, waged what union leaders describe as a campaign of terror, using paramilitaries to kill, torture and kidnap union leaders in Colombia.

Indirect responsbility

In a 66-page complaint presented at a news conference in Bogota, Sinaltrainal alleges that Coca-Cola bears indirect responsibility for the killing of Isidro Segundo Gil, a union leader shot dead on 5 December 1996.

The plaintiffs will cite the Alien Tort Claims Act, a centuries-old law which allows foreigners to sue US companies for damages caused abroad.

More than 50 union leaders have been killed in Colombia this year, 128 last year and more than 1,500 in the past 10 years, according to the complaint.

Sinaltrainal represents 2,300 food workers in Colombia including 500 employees at plants where Coca-Cola is bottled.

Allegations denied

"Coca-Cola denies any connection to any human-rights violation of this type," company spokesman Rafael Fernandez Quiros said from the company's headquarters in Atlanta, Georgia.

"We do not own or operate the plants," added Mr Quiros.

Colombia has been locked in a bloody, 37-year civil war between leftist rebels and right-wing paramilitaries and the armed forces in which hundreds of unionists have died.

Coke results

Coca-Cola reported a 22% rise in net income for the second quarter on Wednesday.



Daft: We are still not reaching our full potential in some key markets

The world's biggest soft drink maker earned $1.1bn, higher than analyst forecasts, compared with $926m in the same period of 2000.

"Despite our growth in a tough economic climate, we are still not satisfied that we are reaching our full potential in some key markets, and we are determined to do so," Coca-Cola chief executive Douglas Daft said.

colombia e-port


Coca-Cola Accused of Using Death Squads to Target Union Leaders

by Garry M. Leech

A lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Florida accuses the Coca-Cola Company, its Colombian subsidiary and business affiliates of using paramilitary death squads to murder, torture, kidnap and threaten union leaders at the multinational soft drink manufacturer's Colombian bottling plants. The suit was filed on July 20 by the United Steelworkers of America and the International Labor Rights Fund on behalf of SINALTRAINAL, the Colombian union that represents workers at Coca-Cola's Colombian bottling plants; the estate of a murdered union leader; and five other unionists who worked for Coca-Cola and were threatened, kidnapped or tortured by paramilitaries.

Colombia has long been the most dangerous country in the world for trade unionists with almost 4,000 murdered in the past 15 years. Last year saw 128 labor leaders assassinated. Most of the killings have been attributed to right-wing paramilitaries belonging to the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC), who view union organizers as subversives and, therefore, "legitimate" targets in their dirty war against Colombia's guerrilla insurgents. Three out of every five trade unionists killed in the world are Colombian. The most recent killing of a union leader at one of Coca-Cola's Colombian bottling plants was June 21 when Oscar Dario Soto Polo was gunned down.

Needless to say, companies in Colombia benefit from the reduced effectiveness of union organizing that results from the intimidation of workers by paramilitaries. But the complaint filed against Coca-Cola last week claims that the company does more than just benefit from paramilitary violence: it claims the company orchestrates it.

According to Terry Collingsworth of the Washington DC-based International Labor Rights Fund and co-counsel for the plaintiffs, "There is no question that Coke knew about, and benefits from, the systematic repression of trade union rights at its bottling plants in Colombia, and this case will make the company accountable." The plaintiffs are seeking compensation and an end to the human rights abuses committed against Coca-Cola's employees and union members.

The suit claims that Coca-Cola controls all aspects of business conducted by its Colombian subsidiary Coca-Cola Colombia, as well as the operations of Panamerican Beverages, its Colombian subsidiary Panamco, and Bebidas y Alimentos. According to the complaint, Panamco and Bebidas y Alimentos exist solely for the purpose of bottling and distributing Coca-Cola products in Colombia. Both are Florida-based companies with 'bottling agreements' requiring them to abide by Coca-Cola's code of conduct regarding their operations and labor relations.

The plaintiffs are claiming U.S. jurisdiction under the Alien Tort Claims Act, which allows non-U.S. citizens to file suit against Americans for violations of international law. Regarding the role of the United Steel Workers in the suit, union President Leo Gerard explains, "We are filing this case to show our solidarity with the embattled trade unions of Colombia." The position taken by the union stands in sharp contrast to AFL-CIO policies during the 1980's that openly supported President Reagan's military funding of Central American governments involved in the violent repression of union activities.

Among the suit's many claims is a 1996 incident in which Ariosto Milan Mosquera, plant manager at Bebidas y Alimentos' bottling facility in Carepa, Colombia, made public pronouncements that "he had given an order to the paramilitaries to carry out the task of destroying the union." Union members claim that Mosquera often socialized with paramilitary fighters and even provided them with Coca-Cola products for their fiestas. Shortly after Mosquera's pronouncement, local members of SINALTRAINAL began receiving threats from the paramilitaries.

On September 27, 1996, SINALTRAINAL sent a letter to the Colombian headquarters of both Bebidas y Alimentos and Coca-Cola Colombia informing them of Mosquera's threats against the union and requesting that they intervene to prevent further human rights abuses against employees and union leaders.

Two and a half months later, on the morning of December 5, 1996, Bebidas y Alimentos employee and local SINALTRAINAL executive board member Isidro Segundo Gil was killed by paramilitaries inside the Carepa bottling plant. The remaining union board members were also threatened with death if they did not leave town. And then, on December 7, the paramilitaries entered the plant and told employees they had three choices: resign from the union, leave Carepa, or be killed. The suit claims the workers were then led into the manager's office to sign union resignation forms prepared by the company. The union had been successfully busted.

When asked about his company's use of paramilitaries to kill and intimidate union members, Bebidas y Alimentos owner Richard Kirby, who is also a defendant in the case, said, "You don't use them, they use you. Nobody tells the paramilitaries what to do." He also claims that the facts regarding the murder of Isidro Segundo Gil have been distorted: "One day the paramilitaries showed up at the plant. They shut the plant down, put everyone against the wall, and started shooting. Now its been turned around so that it's our fault."

But the targeting of labor leaders was not limited to the Carepa plant. According to the complaint, union officials at several other Coca-Cola bottling plants were also being threatened and harassed. In 1996, at Panamco's Bucaramanga plant, local members of SINALTRAINAL went on a 120-hour strike to protest the company's elimination of employee medical insurance.

After the strike ended, the suit claims, "the chief of security for the Bucaramanga plant, Jose Alejo Aponte, told authorities that he found a bomb in the plant." He then accused five members of the local SINALTRAINAL executive board of planting the bomb. The five union leaders, three of whom are plaintiffs in this case, were then imprisoned for six months based on charges brought by, according to official documents, "COCA COLA EMBOTELLADORA SANTANDER."

The union leaders were released six months later when, according to the suit, the regional prosecutor "concluded not only that the Plaintiffs had nothing to do with placing a bomb in the plant as charged, but that there in fact was never a bomb in the plant as the company had claimed."

When asked about abuses committed against union leaders at its Colombian bottling plants, Rafael Fernandez, a spokesman at Coca-Cola's headquarters in Atlanta, denied any wrongdoing regarding human rights violations in Colombia or anywhere else. He also stated, "Coca-Cola has a strict code of conduct that all its subsidiaries and businesses that work with Coca-Cola products have to adhere to." But according to Collingsworth, "Their 'code of conduct' shows that they are legally responsible. These companies come up with these codes and then don't enforce them."

The suit also claims that local management at Panamco's Barrancabermeja plant "have openly sided with the paramilitaries in the civil war which is intensely manifested in Barrancabermeja." It goes on to claim that Panamco Colombia has publicly accused SINALTRAINAL members of being guerrillas. Given the volatile situation in Barrancabermeja, home to the most intense urban warfare in Colombia, such an accusation is tantamount to a death sentence.

The president of the local SINALTRAINAL union in Barrancabermeja, Juan Carlos Galvis, says he received phone calls from paramilitaries threatening him with death if he didn't stop his union work and quit his job at Coca-Cola. The suit claims that paramilitary threats also appeared on the walls inside the plant, including one in June 2000 that stated, "Get Out Galvis From Coca-Cola, Signed AUC."

According to Fernandez, "Coca-Cola Colombia has very special security measures for all its employees and the employees of its bottling plants in Colombia." But the company's failure to respond to the SINALTRAINAL letter, written more than two months before the murder of Isidro Segundo Gil, and the ongoing intimidation and harassment of labor leaders raises serious questions regarding Coca-Cola's commitment to protecting its workers, especially those involved in union activities.

NEED MORE CITATIONS, CAPTIAN FALLACY?

[TXsocialist]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/1448962.stm


Coke sued over death squad claims



Right-wing paramilitaries under arrest in Colombia

Trade union leaders in the United States have said they are suing the soft-drinks company Coca-Cola for allegedly hiring right-wing death squads to terrorise workers at its Colombian bottling plant.
A spokesman for Coca-Cola in Atlanta said its Colombian bottling plants were run by business partners and denied any wrongdoing by the company.



We do not own or operate the plants

Rafael Fernandez Quiros
Coca-Cola
Lawyers for the United Steel workers union say they will file the lawsuit in Miami on Friday on behalf of the Colombian union Sinaltrainal.

The suit alleges that Coca-Cola and Panamerican Beverages, its principal bottler in Latin America, waged what union leaders describe as a campaign of terror, using paramilitaries to kill, torture and kidnap union leaders in Colombia.

Indirect responsbility

In a 66-page complaint presented at a news conference in Bogota, Sinaltrainal alleges that Coca-Cola bears indirect responsibility for the killing of Isidro Segundo Gil, a union leader shot dead on 5 December 1996.

The plaintiffs will cite the Alien Tort Claims Act, a centuries-old law which allows foreigners to sue US companies for damages caused abroad.

More than 50 union leaders have been killed in Colombia this year, 128 last year and more than 1,500 in the past 10 years, according to the complaint.

Sinaltrainal represents 2,300 food workers in Colombia including 500 employees at plants where Coca-Cola is bottled.

Allegations denied

"Coca-Cola denies any connection to any human-rights violation of this type," company spokesman Rafael Fernandez Quiros said from the company's headquarters in Atlanta, Georgia.

"We do not own or operate the plants," added Mr Quiros.

Colombia has been locked in a bloody, 37-year civil war between leftist rebels and right-wing paramilitaries and the armed forces in which hundreds of unionists have died.

Coke results

Coca-Cola reported a 22% rise in net income for the second quarter on Wednesday.



Daft: We are still not reaching our full potential in some key markets

The world's biggest soft drink maker earned $1.1bn, higher than analyst forecasts, compared with $926m in the same period of 2000.

"Despite our growth in a tough economic climate, we are still not satisfied that we are reaching our full potential in some key markets, and we are determined to do so," Coca-Cola chief executive Douglas Daft said.

http://www.colombiareport.org/colombia73.htm


Coca-Cola Accused of Using Death Squads to Target Union Leaders

by Garry M. Leech

A lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Florida accuses the Coca-Cola Company, its Colombian subsidiary and business affiliates of using paramilitary death squads to murder, torture, kidnap and threaten union leaders at the multinational soft drink manufacturer's Colombian bottling plants. The suit was filed on July 20 by the United Steelworkers of America and the International Labor Rights Fund on behalf of SINALTRAINAL, the Colombian union that represents workers at Coca-Cola's Colombian bottling plants; the estate of a murdered union leader; and five other unionists who worked for Coca-Cola and were threatened, kidnapped or tortured by paramilitaries.

Colombia has long been the most dangerous country in the world for trade unionists with almost 4,000 murdered in the past 15 years. Last year saw 128 labor leaders assassinated. Most of the killings have been attributed to right-wing paramilitaries belonging to the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC), who view union organizers as subversives and, therefore, "legitimate" targets in their dirty war against Colombia's guerrilla insurgents. Three out of every five trade unionists killed in the world are Colombian. The most recent killing of a union leader at one of Coca-Cola's Colombian bottling plants was June 21 when Oscar Dario Soto Polo was gunned down.

Needless to say, companies in Colombia benefit from the reduced effectiveness of union organizing that results from the intimidation of workers by paramilitaries. But the complaint filed against Coca-Cola last week claims that the company does more than just benefit from paramilitary violence: it claims the company orchestrates it.

According to Terry Collingsworth of the Washington DC-based International Labor Rights Fund and co-counsel for the plaintiffs, "There is no question that Coke knew about, and benefits from, the systematic repression of trade union rights at its bottling plants in Colombia, and this case will make the company accountable." The plaintiffs are seeking compensation and an end to the human rights abuses committed against Coca-Cola's employees and union members.

The suit claims that Coca-Cola controls all aspects of business conducted by its Colombian subsidiary Coca-Cola Colombia, as well as the operations of Panamerican Beverages, its Colombian subsidiary Panamco, and Bebidas y Alimentos. According to the complaint, Panamco and Bebidas y Alimentos exist solely for the purpose of bottling and distributing Coca-Cola products in Colombia. Both are Florida-based companies with 'bottling agreements' requiring them to abide by Coca-Cola's code of conduct regarding their operations and labor relations.

The plaintiffs are claiming U.S. jurisdiction under the Alien Tort Claims Act, which allows non-U.S. citizens to file suit against Americans for violations of international law. Regarding the role of the United Steel Workers in the suit, union President Leo Gerard explains, "We are filing this case to show our solidarity with the embattled trade unions of Colombia." The position taken by the union stands in sharp contrast to AFL-CIO policies during the 1980's that openly supported President Reagan's military funding of Central American governments involved in the violent repression of union activities.

Among the suit's many claims is a 1996 incident in which Ariosto Milan Mosquera, plant manager at Bebidas y Alimentos' bottling facility in Carepa, Colombia, made public pronouncements that "he had given an order to the paramilitaries to carry out the task of destroying the union." Union members claim that Mosquera often socialized with paramilitary fighters and even provided them with Coca-Cola products for their fiestas. Shortly after Mosquera's pronouncement, local members of SINALTRAINAL began receiving threats from the paramilitaries.

On September 27, 1996, SINALTRAINAL sent a letter to the Colombian headquarters of both Bebidas y Alimentos and Coca-Cola Colombia informing them of Mosquera's threats against the union and requesting that they intervene to prevent further human rights abuses against employees and union leaders.

Two and a half months later, on the morning of December 5, 1996, Bebidas y Alimentos employee and local SINALTRAINAL executive board member Isidro Segundo Gil was killed by paramilitaries inside the Carepa bottling plant. The remaining union board members were also threatened with death if they did not leave town. And then, on December 7, the paramilitaries entered the plant and told employees they had three choices: resign from the union, leave Carepa, or be killed. The suit claims the workers were then led into the manager's office to sign union resignation forms prepared by the company. The union had been successfully busted.

When asked about his company's use of paramilitaries to kill and intimidate union members, Bebidas y Alimentos owner Richard Kirby, who is also a defendant in the case, said, "You don't use them, they use you. Nobody tells the paramilitaries what to do." He also claims that the facts regarding the murder of Isidro Segundo Gil have been distorted: "One day the paramilitaries showed up at the plant. They shut the plant down, put everyone against the wall, and started shooting. Now its been turned around so that it's our fault."

But the targeting of labor leaders was not limited to the Carepa plant. According to the complaint, union officials at several other Coca-Cola bottling plants were also being threatened and harassed. In 1996, at Panamco's Bucaramanga plant, local members of SINALTRAINAL went on a 120-hour strike to protest the company's elimination of employee medical insurance.

After the strike ended, the suit claims, "the chief of security for the Bucaramanga plant, Jose Alejo Aponte, told authorities that he found a bomb in the plant." He then accused five members of the local SINALTRAINAL executive board of planting the bomb. The five union leaders, three of whom are plaintiffs in this case, were then imprisoned for six months based on charges brought by, according to official documents, "COCA COLA EMBOTELLADORA SANTANDER."

The union leaders were released six months later when, according to the suit, the regional prosecutor "concluded not only that the Plaintiffs had nothing to do with placing a bomb in the plant as charged, but that there in fact was never a bomb in the plant as the company had claimed."

When asked about abuses committed against union leaders at its Colombian bottling plants, Rafael Fernandez, a spokesman at Coca-Cola's headquarters in Atlanta, denied any wrongdoing regarding human rights violations in Colombia or anywhere else. He also stated, "Coca-Cola has a strict code of conduct that all its subsidiaries and businesses that work with Coca-Cola products have to adhere to." But according to Collingsworth, "Their 'code of conduct' shows that they are legally responsible. These companies come up with these codes and then don't enforce them."

The suit also claims that local management at Panamco's Barrancabermeja plant "have openly sided with the paramilitaries in the civil war which is intensely manifested in Barrancabermeja." It goes on to claim that Panamco Colombia has publicly accused SINALTRAINAL members of being guerrillas. Given the volatile situation in Barrancabermeja, home to the most intense urban warfare in Colombia, such an accusation is tantamount to a death sentence.

The president of the local SINALTRAINAL union in Barrancabermeja, Juan Carlos Galvis, says he received phone calls from paramilitaries threatening him with death if he didn't stop his union work and quit his job at Coca-Cola. The suit claims that paramilitary threats also appeared on the walls inside the plant, including one in June 2000 that stated, "Get Out Galvis From Coca-Cola, Signed AUC."

According to Fernandez, "Coca-Cola Colombia has very special security measures for all its employees and the employees of its bottling plants in Colombia." But the company's failure to respond to the SINALTRAINAL letter, written more than two months before the murder of Isidro Segundo Gil, and the ongoing intimidation and harassment of labor leaders raises serious questions regarding Coca-Cola's commitment to protecting its workers, especially those involved in union activities.

NEED MORE CITATIONS, CAPTIAN FALLACY?

[Don Amodeo]

Ok, first of all I was asking for the source becaue I'd never heard of it, so lets remember that this is a debate and throw out the insults. They're not necessary, and this is the internet so it doesn't make you sound much tougher, especially when you mispell them. Also, I am not trying to defend coca cola, as they should have seen how things were operating in their name, and so I am on the side of the union workers this time. But what happened is not killings made on the orders of the coca cola ceos, but killing made on the orders of the factory's owners. So while coca cola should be charged with negligence, and fined for this inhumane way of operating business, you can't say they had people killed directly, even the union leaders aren't saying that. Its the coca cola subsidaries which have about the same relationship to coca cola as Lenin has to the stalinist regime in Russia. Lenin, like coca cola, set up something with opporunity for the poor, and stalin, like the factory bosses, ruined the beautiful thing created.


(Edited by Don Amodeo at 6:39 pm on Jan. 21, 2003)

[El Brujo]

Quote: from Don Amodeo on 3:00 pm on Jan. 20, 2003
Ok, lets pretend that all of you make $50,000 a year, and I make $3,000. Does that justify me if I go to your houses, break in, beat up you and your family, threaten to kill you if you don't give me money, take everything from your house, and then announce in front of the media that I am a hero for my family, because I did this for them, and that it would be morally wrong for you to go after me in the court to try to take back your things. If you would disagree with someone who did this, then you are also disagreeing with the militaristic tactics used in Venezuela. If you would support somebody who did this to you, I will be happy to liberate your funds, so if you would please give me your credit card numbers, I will spread them throughout my school, for all to be equal.


Typical bourgeoisie-apologist rhetoric: "People are payed more because they work harder", "giving private property to the people is robbery. They didn't work for it" yadda fuckin yadda.

Imagine this: You are gathering wood from a forest to build a log cabin when I come up to you and tell you that I own the forest and you must give me 90% of the wood you gather. You don't agree with this but you need a place to live so you do it anyhow. Instead of finnishing the log cabin in a month, you finnish it in 10, meanwhile Im profiting from your hard work while playing put put golf and riding around in my limo just because I happened to have inherited wealth and "own" the forest without having moved a finger. If you would disargee with this, you would disagree with your beloved capitalism and despotic yankee-imperialism.

[Man of the Cause]

Atlast Chavez puts up against those damn capitalists.
I mean, the U$ supported the undemocratic coup against his democratic leadership. Too bad the people of Venezuela have belivied the right-wing propaganda and are striking and demonstrating against him. We should hope that his leadership doesn't end like Salvador Allendes did.

[Larissa]

Quote: from Weatherman on 6:55 am on Jan. 21, 2003
Let me start off by saying I dont know much about Chavez and his history. He claims to be on the left, wether that is true I do not know. But this was not thievery because the venzuelian (mispelled probably) people were the workers at that factory, and they were the ones given the goods. I dont understand how you can defend a greedy mega corporation like coca-cola, havent you guys read about coca-cola executives hiring hit men to kill union leaders in Columbia. When taking money from a billion dollar corporation and giving it to the people who earned that money, it can never be called thievery; did not Coca-cola steal it first?

And Sol, What you said about Fidel Castro is bullshit. You need to do some research. Your falling into the lies of the oppressor owned media. He is in power because his people want him to be. I have personally interviewed 4 people who live in Cuba. Only one disliked Fidel, and that was because pre-revolution his family was rich; so they went to the US in the in name on inequality. If you knew how much obstacles Fidel is having to manuever around you would understand Cubas current state. They would so financially well off if it was the our consistent Illegal Embargo, and us attacking them physically (Bay of Pigs) and with propaganda, which caused you to think bad of Fidel. Do you know how much Che looked up to Fidel, if you read the last chapter of Guerilla warfare you would know. Fidel was born rich and gave up his wealth to fight the oppresive system in his country controlled by U.S. puppet dicator Fulgencio Batista. Well anyways, you learn something everyday, but dont take my word for it, READ!!!
Don't waste your time. If these people read they would be intelligent and thus, socialists.

[Stormin Norman]

Kill him.

[Weatherman]

Give me a reliable source that states your accusations against Coca-Cola that they have hired assasins to kill union workers, and I will be glad to look into it.

[/quote]

Well I could see that TXsocialist already handled this for me; very gracefully if i might add. But I would like to address your want for a "legitimate news source". Lets see, all the mass media in the US is owned and controled by about 25 rich capitalist's. And they will never tell the truth. At best they leave out pro-left articles. The media is a corporatation and all they care about is money, so they use the articles that make the most money. Of course these articles are the ones that usually promote hate and fear. e.j. Homicides went down in the US by 20%, Media coverage on Homicides when up by 800%; result is everyone is more scared, spending more money on security and less trusting of people which causes more problems. Anyways, the same rich who own the government, own the media so their not going to post much anti-government stances, they post a little to keep the illusion of a free-press. Another example is that NBC, a major mass media outlet, was given a letter by the government saying not to quote Madeline Albright when she admitted to the mass deaths caused by us on national television. NBC, gave in without a fuss. The letter was simply a notifacation, not a command; they dont need to order the media around, they own them. If you want to learn more about this subject read some Noam Chomsky, he has a wealth of evidence in his books about this subject. To sum up, what you call legitimate, I call lies; When I quote an article from some nobody newsgroup online you will say it is illegitamate, but the truth is there is less external factors effecting that news group, they arent owned by the people in power, their allowed to post the truth. Swap your definitions.

[Guardia Bolivariano]

UN SALUDO EMOCIONADO A ACOSTA CARLÉS
UN GENERAL
DEL PUEBLO.
LAS ARMAS DE LA REPÚBLICA AL SERVICIO DE LAS CONQUISTAS SOCIALES DEL PUEBLO.
ADELANTE GENERAL EL PUEBLO
ESTÁ Y ESTARÁ SIEMPRE CONTIGO.:cool:

[Smoking Frog II]

The most interesting thing I have ever seen... EXCEPT FOR THE LABEL ON MY PANTS

[Capitalist Imperial]

Utter eradication of the stalinist-dictator-theif Chaves and summary execution of the stalinist faction in Venezuela is the only option at this point.

One carrier battlegroup and a Marine expeditionary unit should more than do the trick.

[Guardia Bolivariano]

Quote: from Capitalist Imperial on 12:02 am on Jan. 22, 2003
Utter eradication of the stalinist-dictator-theif Chaves and summary execution of the stalinist faction in Venezuela is the only option at this point.

One carrier battlegroup and a Marine expeditionary unit should more than do the trick.

Good words only that your little goverment depends on our oil.You're shit without It.OH and about the carrier thing that's exactly what they were thinking for Vietnam.That's why they have a big wall with the names of like 30 000 dead soldiers.They sure did the job.

[Capitalist Imperial]

Quote: from Guardia Bolivariano on 12:07 am on Jan. 22, 2003
[quote]

Good words only that your little goverment depends on our oil.You're shit without It.OH and about the carrier thing that's exactly what they were thinking for Vietnam.That's why they have a big wall with the names of like 30 000 dead soldiers.They sure did the job.

LOL, you only look at vietnam, but forget every other U.S. war was a victory.

Every US operation in South and Central America has been successful.

Besides, our military was highly successful in vietnam, it was just poorly managed by congress. 30,000 deal soldiers? Vietnam has 6 million dead.

By the way, we will not destroy your oil, just thew Chavez regime. We will just put in an American-friendly government that will ensure our supplky remains safe. Besides, we don't need venezualen oil, you are not our biggest supplier.

[Guardia Bolivariano]

Quote: from Capitalist Imperial on 12:21 am on Jan. 22, 2003

Quote: from Guardia Bolivariano on 12:07 am on Jan. 22, 2003
[quote]

Good words only that your little goverment depends on our oil.You're shit without It.OH and about the carrier thing that's exactly what they were thinking for Vietnam.That's why they have a big wall with the names of like 30 000 dead soldiers.They sure did the job.

LOL, you only look at vietnam, but forget every other U.S. war was a victory.

Every US operation in South and Central America has been successful.

Besides, our military was highly successful in vietnam, it was just poorly managed by congress. 30,000 deal soldiers? Vietnam has 6 million dead.

By the way, we will not destroy your oil, just thew Chavez regime. We will just put in an American-friendly government that will ensure our supplky remains safe. Besides, we don't need venezualen oil, you are not our biggest supplier.

You should take up comedy you're good a It.:biggrin:
If you can't beat the Colombian guerrilla with your friendly goverment you'll grow the pair of balls you don't have before you beat the 4 millions Venezuelans ready to burn your poor ass.

(Edited by Guardia Bolivariano at 12:30 am on Jan. 22, 2003)

[Anonymous]

labels- BUAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHA


copyrights- BUAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHA

respect for either one of them- BUAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHA

[TXsocialist]

LOL, this makes me want to wear a shirt saying "I support utter thievery" with a big coca-cola symbol covered be a hammer-sickle on it :)

[Man of the Cause]

Quote from Capitalist Imperial:
"Every US operation in South and Central America has been successful."
Have you heard of Bay of the Pigs or the dozens of assasination attempts on Castro?

[Guardia Bolivariano]

Quote: from Man of the Cause on 2:09 pm on Jan. 22, 2003
Quote from Capitalist Imperial:
"Every US operation in South and Central America has been successful."
Have you heard of Bay of the Pigs or the dozens of assasination attempts on Castro?




We don't even have to go this far back into time just think about the forty year old Colombian guerrilla force It's only getting stronger.

[Capitalist Imperial]

Quote: from Man of the Cause on 2:09 pm on Jan. 22, 2003
Quote from Capitalist Imperial:
"Every US operation in South and Central America has been successful."
Have you heard of Bay of the Pigs or the dozens of assasination attempts on Castro?





US forces were not directly involved in the bay of pigs, get your facts straight.

[Capitalist Imperial]

Quote: from Guardia Bolivariano on 2:19 pm on Jan. 22, 2003

Quote: from Man of the Cause on 2:09 pm on Jan. 22, 2003
Quote from Capitalist Imperial:
"Every US operation in South and Central America has been successful."
Have you heard of Bay of the Pigs or the dozens of assasination attempts on Castro?




We don't even have to go this far back into time just think about the forty year old Colombian guerrilla force It's only getting stronger.


US counter-insurgency operations in columbia have been limited at best. If we fully committed, we would crush the guerillas.

[Guardia Bolivariano]

Quote: from Capitalist Imperial on 11:49 pm on Jan. 22, 2003

Quote: from Guardia Bolivariano on 2:19 pm on Jan. 22, 2003

Quote: from Man of the Cause on 2:09 pm on Jan. 22, 2003
Quote from Capitalist Imperial:
"Every US operation in South and Central America has been successful."
Have you heard of Bay of the Pigs or the dozens of assasination attempts on Castro?




We don't even have to go this far back into time just think about the forty year old Colombian guerrilla force It's only getting stronger.


US counter-insurgency operations in columbia have been limited at best. If we fully committed, we would crush the guerillas.

Wishfull thinking at best.;)

[Hampton]

I'm glad CI supports the assassination of elected officals. I hope someone takes this initiative with George Bush and the rest of his cabinet.

[Capitalist Imperial]

Wishfull thinking at best.;)



LOL, hardly. The US has been much too successful in south and central america for me to bother arguing about it, because we both know it is true!

[MEXCAN]

Another stupid comment by CI !!!!===US forces were not directly involved in the bay of pigs, get your facts straight.=====

You know,the US was never really involved in Nicaragua,the US was never really involved in Chile,the US was never really involved in Cuba,the US was never really involved in Columbia!!!!!!!!!Fucking rat-bastard hypocrites are involved everywhere.The US should stay in their own backyard,and maybe something like 9/11 won't come to america and SURPRISE the whole nation.YOU GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT

[MEXCAN]

Quote: from Capitalist Imperial on 12:05 am on Jan. 23, 2003



Wishfull thinking at best.;)



LOL, hardly. The US has been much too successful in south and central america for me to bother arguing about it, because we both know it is true!


successful in what CI,genocide ?????????

[Capitalist Imperial]

Quote: from MEXCAN on 12:10 am on Jan. 23, 2003
Another stupid comment by CI !!!!===US forces were not directly involved in the bay of pigs, get your facts straight.=====

You know,the US was never really involved in Nicaragua,the US was never really involved in Chile,the US was never really involved in Cuba,the US was never really involved in Columbia!!!!!!!!!Fucking rat-bastard hypocrites are involved everywhere.The US should stay in their own backyard,and maybe something like 9/11 won't come to america and SURPRISE the whole nation.YOU GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT


But mexcan, I am correct, us military forces were not present at the bay of pigs invasion.

We trained Cuban rebels, with promise of support upon the attack. However, when the rebels attacked, we balked on the support.

Not our most honorable move, but it does not take away from the fact that our FORCES were not DIRECTLY involved!!!

So, how was my comment ignorant?

[Anonymous]

correction: you armed conter revolutionary forces, and then got bored and attacked along with them...

[MEXCAN]

Ya,you're right about not being "DIRECTLY" involved.But the majority of US involment(those sneaky fucks),is indirect actions,and that is what makes them a "TERRORIST STATE".

[Capitalist Imperial]

Quote: from the anarchist on 12:20 am on Jan. 23, 2003
correction: you armed conter revolutionary forces, and then got bored and attacked along with them...


but that is just it, anarchist, we did not attack along with them

why do you think that?

[Anonymous]

when your arming a terrorist, you are killing as well....

[Capitalist Imperial]

Quote: from the anarchist on 12:30 am on Jan. 23, 2003
when your arming a terrorist, you are killing as well....

we were arming liberators from a communist regime

[antieverything]

...which is exactly what the US said when they were funding the Taliban. Remember when Reagan called Osama Bin Laden a "freedom fighter"?

[timbaly]

CI doesn't seem to understand the concept of a sovereign nation, unless it's the US. I've never seen him directly adress the situation with a straight answer.

[Capitalist Imperial]

Quote: from antieverything on 12:41 am on Jan. 23, 2003
...which is exactly what the US said when they were funding the Taliban. Remember when Reagan called Osama Bin Laden a "freedom fighter"?


That was the mujahadeen at the time, wholely different ideologically from the Taliban. Learn your history.

[MEXCAN]

Osama was part of the mujahadeen at the time !!!!Osama did not start the taliban,he started what is known as AL-Qaeda !!!!!Who attaked the states??Oh that's right Al-qaeda !!!!

[MEXCAN]

Not very original,but i thought i give CI the definition of bigot from the Net.

"
bigot
noun [C]
DISAPPROVING
a person who has strong, unreasonable beliefs and who thinks that anyone who does not have the same beliefs is wrong
a religious bigot
He was known to be a loud-mouthed, opinionated bigot.

bigoted
adjective
DISAPPROVING
She's so bigoted that she refuses to accept anyone who doesn't think like her.

bigotry
noun [U]
DISAPPROVING
religious/racial bigotry
The organization is dedicated to fighting bigotry and racism in America.
Commentators believe there is no other reason for the latest killings than a renewed wave of bigotry and hatred.

[synthesis]

Most of things you're going to see people mad about internationally are places where the U.S. was involved indirectly - for example, Indonesia, East Timor, Guatemala, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Honduras, Haiti, Guyana, Mexico, Cuba, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, Chile, Argentina, Paraguay, Uruguay, Brazil, China, the Philippines, the Congo/Zaire, Angola, Mozambique, Italy, Palestine, Israel, Afghanistan, Turkey, Greece, Cyprus, Iraq, Pakistan and Iran... just to name a few.

However, the largest death tolls originate from where the U.S. was directly involved, such as the Philippines, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Mexico, Cuba, Haiti, Dominican Republic, Nicaragua, Russia (invasion during the civil war of 1918-1920), Japan, France, Germany, Korea, Thailand, Panama, Grenada, Iran, Libya, Lebanon, Iraq , Sudan, Somalia, Bosnia, Yugoslavia and Afghanistan.

For example, 3,500,000 innocent civilians died in Vietnam, 2,000,000 innocent civilians died in Cambodia, 500,000 innocent civilians in Laos, 3,000,000 innocent civilians in Korea - the list goes on.

Fight back!

[Guardia Bolivariano]

First In all the wars the Us had too many advantages.

War of indepandence the US had suport of the french and spanish armys.
WAR OF 1812 the brittish had to moove the troops across the atlantic to do battle with the americans and fight France at the same time.
Spanish american war,the spanish navy was totaly obsolete they only had one modern ship the pelayo that stayed in Spain.Again the enemy was the one with the hardship of the journey and also had to fight the cuban rebels.
And in ww1 ww2 and the gulf war the US would have lost the war It It wasn't for the allies that were fighting the enemy long before, like the soviets and english did.They never had to fight for a base the english gave them to the americans, this was to easy.

But vietnam they had to go alone what hapened ?Korea backed by the UN but with american troops.
You see wen they go alone the US troops can't win.
And If the US is so good at dominating latin america.Why is Cuba still socialist ?,why did you give back the panama canal? and why can't you do anything about leftist presidents that are taking over the zone.?Simple whitout allies or a false excuse you can't do much.

In other words CI this is another case of your bullshit.But you do deserve something for trying to make us believe the things that come out of your poor confused mind.:)

(Edited by Guardia Bolivariano at 3:28 am on Jan. 23, 2003)

[Sol]

The storming of a factory isn't some great act of revolution you numb nuts. Coke still owns it, he just swiped some soda. The workers hate his guts now (how do you feel when guys in camo with guns storm your office?) and the opposition has a field day. Don't even mention what the cappie press is going to do with this here in the States.

He keeps the factory, turns it over to the workers, gives Coke the value of the factory, kicks them the hell out and takes it to NAFTA and the WTO when they come after him, then its worth something. Guy's a gorilla.

[Capitalist Imperial]

Quote: from MEXCAN on 2:13 am on Jan. 23, 2003
Osama was part of the mujahadeen at the time !!!!Osama did not start the taliban,he started what is known as AL-Qaeda !!!!!Who attaked the states??Oh that's right Al-qaeda !!!!


That does not mean that Al-queda or the taliban were the same as the mujahadeen.

[timbaly]

I wouldn't be surprised if the CIA knew that many people in the mujahadeen were radical fundamentalists.

[MEXCAN]

Quote: from Capitalist Imperial on 8:10 pm on Jan. 23, 2003

Quote: from MEXCAN on 2:13 am on Jan. 23, 2003
Osama was part of the mujahadeen at the time !!!!Osama did not start the taliban,he started what is known as AL-Qaeda !!!!!Who attaked the states??Oh that's right Al-qaeda !!!!


That does not mean that Al-queda or the taliban were the same as the mujahadeen.

mujahadeen "evolved" into Al-qaeda !!!Same people,different cause !!

[antieverything]

I don't think that the mujadeen and the taliban really need to be differentiated in this case...I understand what you are saying but what is now the Taliban came from the mujadeen.

[Som]

The mujahadeen were radical islamic fundamentalists.

The ideology never changed, the only thing that changed was who they were fighting.

the word Mujahadeen has a religious context.

They were brutal muderers when the CIA began funding them and they continued it, they even gave more funding to the more brutal groups, anything to get at the soviets, and before that the pro-soviet government.

[Capitalist Imperial]

Quote: from Guardia Bolivariano on 3:18 am on Jan. 23, 2003
First In all the wars the Us had too many advantages.

War of indepandence the US had suport of the french and spanish armys.
WAR OF 1812 the brittish had to moove the troops across the atlantic to do battle with the americans and fight France at the same time.
Spanish american war,the spanish navy was totaly obsolete they only had one modern ship the pelayo that stayed in Spain.Again the enemy was the one with the hardship of the journey and also had to fight the cuban rebels.
And in ww1 ww2 and the gulf war the US would have lost the war It It wasn't for the allies that were fighting the enemy long before, like the soviets and english did.They never had to fight for a base the english gave them to the americans, this was to easy.

But vietnam they had to go alone what hapened ?Korea backed by the UN but with american troops.
You see wen they go alone the US troops can't win.
And If the US is so good at dominating latin america.Why is Cuba still socialist ?,why did you give back the panama canal? and why can't you do anything about leftist presidents that are taking over the zone.?Simple whitout allies or a false excuse you can't do much.

In other words CI this is another case of your bullshit.But you do deserve something for trying to make us believe the things that come out of your poor confused mind.:)

(Edited by Guardia Bolivariano at 3:28 am on Jan. 23, 2003)


This is the most pathetic, ignorant, ill-informed post that I've read in the history of this board.