Oil Companies are Evil fucking Asses

[Hugo Chavez]

Just listening to Greg Palast and as usual he's got documents in hand... In Ecuador, Chevron gained permission to drill from the native tribes in exchange for candy, sugar, diesel fuel and cheese and told them that they could rub the crude oil all over their skin to cure all sorts aches and pains.  They're now dying of all sorts of hideous ailments with something like 200 leaking wells polluting the water and land.

[gcb]

but hang on a sec - capitalism works so this can't be true 

[240 is Back]

Just listening to Greg Palast and as usual he's got documents in hand... In Ecuador, Chevron gained permission to drill from the native tribes in exchange for candy, sugar, diesel fuel and cheese and told them that they could rub the crude oil all over their skin to cure all sorts aches and pains.  They're now dying of all sorts of hideous ailments with something like 200 leaking wells polluting the water and land.

Is Chevron run by Hugo Chavez?  Or am I thinking of something else?

[Hugo Chavez]

Is Chevron run by Hugo Chavez?  Or am I thinking of something else?

LOL, no Hugo is helping Ecuador   Chevron doesn't own the companies anymore but it really just gets me.  It should be so extremely illegal to go into native lands with simple people and offer them candy and cheese and tell them crude oil will cure their ailments   On the funny side, they thought the cheese smelled like shit and they tossed it.  Hopefully they will follow Hugo and nationalize the oil.  If they're going to go in and be that freaking greedy, this is what they deserve.  Then maybe these people who have lost so much in exchange for candy can get some relief.

[trab]

Is Chevron run by Hugo Chavez?  Or am I thinking of something else?

Citgo is Vensuala.  They offer'd free fule last winter to the poor in the NE USA and the USA govt prevented it is my understanding.

CHeveron is a publicly traded company. Citgo is not traded in the USA markest at least.

[240 is Back]

ah gotcha.

why wolud we turn down free gas, with prices as they are?

[trab]

ah gotcha.

why wolud we turn down free gas, with prices as they are?

BUsh didnt want anything free from Hugo is my guess.Google the story up if you want...
I think they also turned down fule/help durning Katrina from Hugo.

Im not crazy about Chavez, but I think Bush admin pushed him right into the arms of Iran and worse.
He could of been handled much better.

[24KT]

BUsh didnt want anything free from Hugo is my guess.Google the story up if you want...
I think they also turned down fule/help durning Katrina from Hugo.

Im not crazy about Chavez, but I think Bush admin pushed him right into the arms of Iran and worse.
He could of been handled much better.

Yes Trab, you are correct. This offer came in right after Katrina, when it was obvious the US would suffer a severe oil shortage due to all the damaged refineries. Chavez offered to provide free home heating oil to the impoverished in the NE, as well as provide low cost fuel elsewhere in the USA. Bush turned it all down flat. In addition, Castro offered to send doctors. They had thousands of doctors at the ready waiting to be deployed. Bush turned it all down too, and the nations of the world watched in horror as the Katrina disaster became worse & worse, and even more Americans died from starvation, dehydration, and lack of fresh drinking water. There is no telling how many countless lives were lost because of how they dealt with Katrina.

If one didn't know better, one might even assume the lack of action and seeming incompetence was by design, with NO residents as human guinea pigs in the grand experiment of bringing order out of chaos.

[trab]

He's been a utter failure who's blunders we will all suffer from for decades at least for sure.
I don't know one person who supports him any longer, and that is mostly conservatives.

Unfortunately, there's not one political offering out there I'd even spend my time or gas to go vote for or against in the next election.
 Its THAT bad of a lot.

[Deicide]

He's been a utter failure who's blunders we will all suffer from for decades at least for sure.
I don't know one person who supports him any longer, and that is mostly conservatives.

Unfortunately, there's not one political offering out there I'd even spend my time or gas to go vote for or against in the next election.
 Its THAT bad of a lot.

Wrong. Ron Paul 2008!

[Dos Equis]

He's been a utter failure who's blunders we will all suffer from for decades at least for sure.
I don't know one person who supports him any longer, and that is mostly conservatives.

Unfortunately, there's not one political offering out there I'd even spend my time or gas to go vote for or against in the next election.
 Its THAT bad of a lot.

I don't think it's THAT bad.  I feel that way about Hillary and Obama, but Rudy was a successful mayor of NYC, Romney was a successful governor of Massachusetts, and Huck was a successful governor of Arkansas. 

[24KT]

I don't think it's THAT bad.  I feel that way about Hillary and Obama, but Rudy was a successful mayor of NYC, Romney was a successful governor of Massachusetts, and Huck was a successful governor of Arkansas. 

Well when you consider that GWB was supposedly "a successful Governor of Texas", ...it might be time to pass on the former governors. Sad prediction, ...but I think anyone who moved to 'restore the Republic' might end up with the same fate as JFK. Vote rigging is assured in 2008. The American public has sat on the sidelines for alot, but I think another Oswald with another magic bullet will be more than they will abide by. The powers that be will need to steal 2008, ...AGAIN!

[Hedgehog]

I don't think it's THAT bad.  I feel that way about Hillary and Obama, but Rudy was a successful mayor of NYC, Romney was a successful governor of Massachusetts, and Huck was a successful governor of Arkansas. 

Rudy is ok.

Edwards is also a good option IMO.

IMO, Edwards have shown signs of a strong comeback, now when the Democrats are starting to realize that he's their only shot.

On-topic: I think the whole deal with more or less plundering and stealing natural resources out of developing countries is wrong.

It sets them back permanently.

I cannot see one valid argument against the nationalizing of natural resources in these countries.

The worst example currently is Nigeria, where British Petroleum and Shell are heavily involved, as a consequence Nigeria, a land loaded with oil, is still very poor.

Look at Norway, where 100% of the oil industry is owned by two state corporations - Norway's the richest nation in the world.

[trab]

Rudy is ok.

Edwards is also a good option IMO.

IMO, Edwards have shown signs of a strong comeback, now when the Democrats are starting to realize that he's their only shot.

On-topic: I think the whole deal with more or less plundering and stealing natural resources out of developing countries is wrong.

It sets them back permanently.

I cannot see one valid argument against the nationalizing of natural resources in these countries.

The worst example currently is Nigeria, where British Petroleum and Shell are heavily involved, as a consequence Nigeria, a land loaded with oil, is still very poor.

Look at Norway, where 100% of the oil industry is owned by two state corporations - Norway's the richest nation in the world.

There is a Hell of a Lot of differance in the Human Capitol of Norway and Nigeria/Afica in general.
Left to their own, these assbackward slums will devolve even further.

Basicly, they are hopeless. You could give them all the money and aid you want and they would not change much for long.

[JBGRAY]

Capitalism CAN work in some of these situations, but only if it goes both ways.  Jamaica, while some of it is indeed poor, is not entirely destitute and poverty-ridden.  For a long time, US and British mining companies extracted bauxite, and gave but a very tiny percentage to the native population and government there.  However, after some time, several agreements finally took place where the companies agreed to a 50/50 split of the profits.  In addition, instead of brining in mostly US and British workers, the mining companies instead trained and educated Jamaicans to do the work.  Both sides greatly benefited.  If the natural resource is being extracted from the land at a profit, the natives rightfully should get a nice slice of the pie.  It seems that nations who refuse to do this, whether through prejudices, governmental corruption, or some othe reason, don't do very well in relation to others that have.

I wonder if Venezuela is actually better off now with the nationalization of everything.  If people's lives there are actually improving greatly and standards of living is rising, then I am all for it.  US media sources are pretty much skewed and inaccurate on what those conditions currently in Venezuela really are.