Wednesday, October 7, 2015
Saturday, September 26, 2015
Saturday, August 29, 2015
Friday, July 24, 2015
Allen Bernard West speech against Obama
What I
found most disturbing about Allen Bernard West speech against Obama and the deal with Iran is not the speech itself but the
fact that his warmongering is hailed as patriotic and common
sense. Allen says that Iran is the number one sponsor of terrorism. The validity
of the assertion depends on how he defines terrorism, but he makes references to
fundamentalistic militant Islam. Allen, a paratrooper officer and a congressman, knows that Islamic terrorist groups
like ISIS and Al Qaeda are sponsored by Saudi Arabia and that they are not only
not supported by Iran, but are actual mortal enemies of Iran itself. The deal,
if anything, is an intent by Iran to appease the US. Iran agrees to have foreign
bodies supervise his nuclear program and set limits in exchange for the promise
to have sanctions lifted in the future.
Moreover, in terms of mortal risks to people in the West, terrorism is less of a treat than diet. Climate change, antibiotic resistance, soil loss and nuclear proliferation by states (including Israel) are orders of magnitude more dangerous.
Sunday, May 10, 2015
Chiquita Banana
Chiquita Brands International Inc. is an American producer and distributor of bananas and other produce. The company operates under a number of subsidiary brand names, including the flagship Chiquita brand and Fresh Express salads. Chiquita is the leading distributor of bananas in the United States.
Chiquita is the successor to the United Fruit Company. It was formerly controlled by Cincinnati businessman Carl H. Lindner, Jr., whose majority ownership of the company ended when Chiquita Brands International exited a prepackaged Chapter 11 bankruptcy on March 19, 2002. In 2003, the company acquired the German produce distribution company, Atlanta AG. Fresh Express salads was purchased from Performance Food Group in 2005. Chiquita's current headquarters is located in Charlotte, North Carolina.[1]
On March 10, 2014, Chiquita Brands International Inc. and Fyffes plc announced that the Boards of Directors of both companies unanimously approved a definitive agreement under which Chiquita will combine with Fyffes, in a stock-for-stock transaction that is expected to result in Chiquita shareholders owning approximately 50.7% of ChiquitaFyffes and Fyffes shareholders owning approximately 49.3% of the proposed ChiquitaFyffes, on a fully diluted basis. The agreement would have created the largest banana producer in the world and would have been domiciled in Ireland.[2] Though an intervening offer by Cutrale and Safra groups of $611 million in August 2014 was rejected by Chiquita, with the company saying it would continue with its merger with Fyffes,[3] on October 24, Chiquita announced that the shareholders at a Company Special Meeting had rejected the merger with Fyffes. Instead the Cutrale-Safra acquisition offer was then accepted by the shareholders.
On May 3, 1998, The Cincinnati Enquirer published an eighteen-page section, "Chiquita Secrets Revealed" by investigative reporters Michael Gallagher and Cameron McWhirter. The section accused the company of mistreating workers on its Central American plantations, polluting the environment, allowing cocaine to be brought to Borneo on its ships, bribing foreign officials, evading foreign nations' laws on land ownership, forcibly preventing its workers from unionizing, and a host of other misdeeds.[10] Chiquita denied all the allegations, and sued after it was revealed that Gallagher had repeatedly hacked into Chiquita's voice-mail system. (No evidence ever indicated that McWhirter was aware of Gallagher's crime or a participant.) A special prosecutor was appointed to investigate, because the elected prosecutor at the time had ties to Carl Lindner, Jr.
On June 28, 1998, the Enquirer retracted the entire series of stories and published a front-page apology saying it had "become convinced that [the published] accusations and conclusions are untrue and created a false and misleading impression of Chiquita's business practices".[11] The Enquirer also agreed to pay a multi-million-dollar settlement. The exact amount was not disclosed, but Chiquita's annual report mentions "a cash settlement in excess of $10 million". Gallagher was fired and prosecuted and the paper's editor, Lawrence K. Beaupre, was transferred to the Gannett's headquarters amid allegations that he ignored the paper's usual procedures on fact-checking.
In an article examining the Chiquita series, Salon.com said the "Chiquita Secrets Revealed" series "presents a damning, carefully documented array of charges, most of them 'untainted' by those purloined executive voice mails."
On March 14, 2007, Chiquita Brands was fined $25 million as part of a settlement with the United States Justice Department for having ties to Colombian paramilitary groups. According to court documents, between 1997 and 2004, officers of a Chiquita subsidiary paid approximately $1.7 million to the right-wing United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC), in exchange for local employee protection in Colombia's volatile banana harvesting zone. Similar payments were also made to the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), as well as the National Liberation Army (ELN) from 1989 to 1997, both left-wing organizations.[14][15] All three of these groups are on the U.S. State Department's list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations. Chiquita sued to prevent the United States government from releasing files about their illegal payments to Colombian left-wing guerrillas and right-wing paramilitary groups.[16]
According to a Wall Street Journal report in 2004, outside attorneys for Chiquita notified the company that the payments violated U.S. anti-terrorism laws and should not continue. However, payments to the groups continued until Chiquita sold its subsidiary, Banadex, in June 2004.[17] On December 7, 2007, the 29th Specialized District Attorney's Office in Medellín, Colombia subpoenaed the Chiquita board to answer questions "concerning charges for conspiracy to commit an aggravated crime and financing illegal armed groups". Nine board members named in the subpoena allegedly personally knew of the illegal operations.[18] One executive for the company penned a note which proclaimed that the payments were the "cost of doing business in Colombia" and also noted the "need to keep this very confidential — people can get killed."[19]
In 2013 and 2014, Chiquita spent $780,000 lobbying against the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act.[20]
On July 24, 2014, a US appeals court threw out a lawsuit against Chiquita by 4,000 Colombians alleging that the corporation was aiding the right-wing paramilitary group responsible for the deaths of family members. The court ruled 2-1 that US federal courts have no jurisdiction over Colombian claims.
In May 2007, the French non-governmental organization (NGO) Peuples Solidaires publicly accused the Compañia Bananera Atlántica Limitada (COBAL), a Chiquita subsidiary, of knowingly violating "its workers' basic rights" and endangering their families' health and their own. According to the charge, the banana firm carelessly exposed laborers at the Coyol plantation in Costa Rica to highly toxic pesticides on multiple occasions. Additionally, COBAL was accused of using a private militia to intimidate workers. Finally, Peuples Solidaires claimed that Chiquita ignored some union complaints for more than a year
Chiquita is the successor to the United Fruit Company. It was formerly controlled by Cincinnati businessman Carl H. Lindner, Jr., whose majority ownership of the company ended when Chiquita Brands International exited a prepackaged Chapter 11 bankruptcy on March 19, 2002. In 2003, the company acquired the German produce distribution company, Atlanta AG. Fresh Express salads was purchased from Performance Food Group in 2005. Chiquita's current headquarters is located in Charlotte, North Carolina.[1]
On March 10, 2014, Chiquita Brands International Inc. and Fyffes plc announced that the Boards of Directors of both companies unanimously approved a definitive agreement under which Chiquita will combine with Fyffes, in a stock-for-stock transaction that is expected to result in Chiquita shareholders owning approximately 50.7% of ChiquitaFyffes and Fyffes shareholders owning approximately 49.3% of the proposed ChiquitaFyffes, on a fully diluted basis. The agreement would have created the largest banana producer in the world and would have been domiciled in Ireland.[2] Though an intervening offer by Cutrale and Safra groups of $611 million in August 2014 was rejected by Chiquita, with the company saying it would continue with its merger with Fyffes,[3] on October 24, Chiquita announced that the shareholders at a Company Special Meeting had rejected the merger with Fyffes. Instead the Cutrale-Safra acquisition offer was then accepted by the shareholders.
On May 3, 1998, The Cincinnati Enquirer published an eighteen-page section, "Chiquita Secrets Revealed" by investigative reporters Michael Gallagher and Cameron McWhirter. The section accused the company of mistreating workers on its Central American plantations, polluting the environment, allowing cocaine to be brought to Borneo on its ships, bribing foreign officials, evading foreign nations' laws on land ownership, forcibly preventing its workers from unionizing, and a host of other misdeeds.[10] Chiquita denied all the allegations, and sued after it was revealed that Gallagher had repeatedly hacked into Chiquita's voice-mail system. (No evidence ever indicated that McWhirter was aware of Gallagher's crime or a participant.) A special prosecutor was appointed to investigate, because the elected prosecutor at the time had ties to Carl Lindner, Jr.
On June 28, 1998, the Enquirer retracted the entire series of stories and published a front-page apology saying it had "become convinced that [the published] accusations and conclusions are untrue and created a false and misleading impression of Chiquita's business practices".[11] The Enquirer also agreed to pay a multi-million-dollar settlement. The exact amount was not disclosed, but Chiquita's annual report mentions "a cash settlement in excess of $10 million". Gallagher was fired and prosecuted and the paper's editor, Lawrence K. Beaupre, was transferred to the Gannett's headquarters amid allegations that he ignored the paper's usual procedures on fact-checking.
In an article examining the Chiquita series, Salon.com said the "Chiquita Secrets Revealed" series "presents a damning, carefully documented array of charges, most of them 'untainted' by those purloined executive voice mails."
On March 14, 2007, Chiquita Brands was fined $25 million as part of a settlement with the United States Justice Department for having ties to Colombian paramilitary groups. According to court documents, between 1997 and 2004, officers of a Chiquita subsidiary paid approximately $1.7 million to the right-wing United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC), in exchange for local employee protection in Colombia's volatile banana harvesting zone. Similar payments were also made to the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), as well as the National Liberation Army (ELN) from 1989 to 1997, both left-wing organizations.[14][15] All three of these groups are on the U.S. State Department's list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations. Chiquita sued to prevent the United States government from releasing files about their illegal payments to Colombian left-wing guerrillas and right-wing paramilitary groups.[16]
According to a Wall Street Journal report in 2004, outside attorneys for Chiquita notified the company that the payments violated U.S. anti-terrorism laws and should not continue. However, payments to the groups continued until Chiquita sold its subsidiary, Banadex, in June 2004.[17] On December 7, 2007, the 29th Specialized District Attorney's Office in Medellín, Colombia subpoenaed the Chiquita board to answer questions "concerning charges for conspiracy to commit an aggravated crime and financing illegal armed groups". Nine board members named in the subpoena allegedly personally knew of the illegal operations.[18] One executive for the company penned a note which proclaimed that the payments were the "cost of doing business in Colombia" and also noted the "need to keep this very confidential — people can get killed."[19]
In 2013 and 2014, Chiquita spent $780,000 lobbying against the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act.[20]
On July 24, 2014, a US appeals court threw out a lawsuit against Chiquita by 4,000 Colombians alleging that the corporation was aiding the right-wing paramilitary group responsible for the deaths of family members. The court ruled 2-1 that US federal courts have no jurisdiction over Colombian claims.
In May 2007, the French non-governmental organization (NGO) Peuples Solidaires publicly accused the Compañia Bananera Atlántica Limitada (COBAL), a Chiquita subsidiary, of knowingly violating "its workers' basic rights" and endangering their families' health and their own. According to the charge, the banana firm carelessly exposed laborers at the Coyol plantation in Costa Rica to highly toxic pesticides on multiple occasions. Additionally, COBAL was accused of using a private militia to intimidate workers. Finally, Peuples Solidaires claimed that Chiquita ignored some union complaints for more than a year
Chiquita's 'Banana Republic' History Is Why It's Lobbying Against a 9/11 Victims Bill
Eric Levenson The Chiquita company, worldwide purveyor of bananas, fruits, and paramilitary groups, has spent $780,000 over the past year and a half to lobby against a 9/11 Victims' Bill, according to a report from The Daily Beast. Chiquita could be found liable for its past terrorist-funding actions in Colombia. Back in 2007, Chiquita was found to have given $1.7 million in a series of payments from 1997 to 2004 to a paramilitary group in Colombia, one designated by the U.S. as a terrorist organization.History
Unpeeling the Controversial History of Bananas
In the wake of the latest military coup in Honduras, the original ‘Banana Republic,’ Leonie Nimmo investigates the shocking history of Chiquita Brands International.
The phrase ‘Banana Republic’ describes a country heavily dependent on one type of plantation agriculture, controlled by a servile dictatorship and corrupt elite, in thrall to shady foreign powers with an iron grip over its economy. It was originally applied to Honduras, a country which has for the last hundred years been dominated by Chiquita Brands International Inc, formerly the United Fruit Company. In the 1920s the company controlled almost a quarter of the country’s arable land.[1]
Sunday, May 3, 2015
Do not transfer America’s public lands to state or private control
Republicans didn’t campaign on getting rid of America’s public lands
and national monuments in the last election, but they sure are acting
like it.
First they attempted to pass a bill that would abolish the Antiquities Act, a hundred year old executive privilege that allows Presidents to protect threatened public lands and designate national monuments.
Now, they’re using Congress’s annual budget process to lay the groundwork for turning America’s public lands over to state control for sale to private mining, drilling and real estate companies.
Tell Congress: Do not transfer America’s public lands to state or private control. Click here to sign the petition.
This latest assault on America’s public lands is at the hands of Sen. Lisa Murkowski, the new Republican chair of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. Her amendment, which passed by two votes and is now a part of the Senate’s official budget, would fund state efforts to seize America’s public lands and then sell them off to the highest bidder.1
Under state control, these public lands would likely be sold off for real estate or fossil fuel extraction. Hundreds of millions of acres of pristine public lands in the American West that are the cradle of future national parks, monuments, and preserves would instead be sacrificed to dirty oil drilling and fracking companies.
According to New Mexico Sen. Martin Heinrich, who stands in opposition to these attacks, “selling off America’s treasured lands to the highest bidder would result in a proliferation of locked gates and no-trespassing signs in places that have been open to the public and used for generations.”
But here’s the good news: Because Congress’s budget is non-binding, these proposals need further legislation to actually take effect. That’s why it’s incredibly important to step in now to let Congress know exactly where Americans stand on this terrible idea.
Tell Congress: Do not transfer America’s public lands to state or private control. Click here to sign the petition.
This is a coordinated attack on government management of taxpayer owned public lands. Murkowski’s amendment mirrors a similar proposal by House Natural Resources Committee chairman Rob Bishop, that would spend $50 million of taxpayers’ money to transfer America’s public lands to states for private sale.
With these attacks, Republicans are marching in lockstep with the self-serving ideology made famous by Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, who refused to pay $1 million owed to American taxpayers for grazing his cattle on public lands on the grounds that states have “sovereignty” over public lands. Even Murkowski herself described President Obama’s decision to protect the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska as “a stunning attack on our sovereignty.”2
We need to make sure Congress knows Americans won’t stand by while Republicans wage war on America’s public lands. Tell Congress that America’s public lands are NOT for sale:
http://act.credoaction.com/
Thank you for your activism.
Josh Nelson, Campaign Manager
CREDO Action from Working Assets
First they attempted to pass a bill that would abolish the Antiquities Act, a hundred year old executive privilege that allows Presidents to protect threatened public lands and designate national monuments.
Now, they’re using Congress’s annual budget process to lay the groundwork for turning America’s public lands over to state control for sale to private mining, drilling and real estate companies.
Tell Congress: Do not transfer America’s public lands to state or private control. Click here to sign the petition.
This latest assault on America’s public lands is at the hands of Sen. Lisa Murkowski, the new Republican chair of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. Her amendment, which passed by two votes and is now a part of the Senate’s official budget, would fund state efforts to seize America’s public lands and then sell them off to the highest bidder.1
Under state control, these public lands would likely be sold off for real estate or fossil fuel extraction. Hundreds of millions of acres of pristine public lands in the American West that are the cradle of future national parks, monuments, and preserves would instead be sacrificed to dirty oil drilling and fracking companies.
According to New Mexico Sen. Martin Heinrich, who stands in opposition to these attacks, “selling off America’s treasured lands to the highest bidder would result in a proliferation of locked gates and no-trespassing signs in places that have been open to the public and used for generations.”
But here’s the good news: Because Congress’s budget is non-binding, these proposals need further legislation to actually take effect. That’s why it’s incredibly important to step in now to let Congress know exactly where Americans stand on this terrible idea.
Tell Congress: Do not transfer America’s public lands to state or private control. Click here to sign the petition.
This is a coordinated attack on government management of taxpayer owned public lands. Murkowski’s amendment mirrors a similar proposal by House Natural Resources Committee chairman Rob Bishop, that would spend $50 million of taxpayers’ money to transfer America’s public lands to states for private sale.
With these attacks, Republicans are marching in lockstep with the self-serving ideology made famous by Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, who refused to pay $1 million owed to American taxpayers for grazing his cattle on public lands on the grounds that states have “sovereignty” over public lands. Even Murkowski herself described President Obama’s decision to protect the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska as “a stunning attack on our sovereignty.”2
We need to make sure Congress knows Americans won’t stand by while Republicans wage war on America’s public lands. Tell Congress that America’s public lands are NOT for sale:
http://act.credoaction.com/
Thank you for your activism.
Josh Nelson, Campaign Manager
CREDO Action from Working Assets
Tuesday, March 31, 2015
OceanaGold
In 2009, three of my closest friends were murdered. The four of us—and other members of the National Roundtable on Mining—were fighting to stop international conglomerate OceanaGold from building a gold mine near our home in El Salvador that would absolutely devastate our community. Because of our activist work, my three friends were murdered. To this day, I don't know why I got to survive and they didn't, but I do know I'll never stop fighting to win our cause.
We secured a major victory when our democratically elected government did not grant the permit to build this giant mine. Our government was right to make this decision, because the corporation didn't come close to meeting the environmental or social safeguards our laws require.
But now, OceanaGold is suing my country in an obscure court of the World Bank. They say that the nation of El Salvador owes them $300 million because we wouldn't let them build a mine that would contaminate our limited clean water and devastate our lands.
El Salvador is in the midst of a serious water crisis — in fact, more than 90% of the surface water in my country is contaminated. One river in eastern El Salvador contains nine times the amount of cyanide that is safe for human consumption because of a gold mine just like the one OceanaGold wants to build in my community. My family shouldn't lose access to clean water just because an Australian company wants to make money!
My wife Zenayda and I—and many others—have kept fighting to stop this mine, and we have endured countless death threats, armed robberies of important case files, even unknown assailants breaking into our home and and drugged us while they stole the evidence that linked the mine with local elected officials.
But through all this, we refused to give up. We cannot let our friends’ deaths be in vain.
Now, three people on a World Bank panel in Washington, DC will decide whether my country will be forced to give $301 million in badly needed tax dollars to a corporation that has terrorized my family and my community for years. I know that with your help, we can convince this panel to do the right thing.
Thank you for standing with my country, my family, and the memory of my friends. I have been shouting about this issue for so long, it is good to have your voice added with mine.
Héctor Antonio Garcia Berrios
Cabañas, El Salvador |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)