SF take $5,000 from Coca Kila

by Creibhin Fri Apr 09, 2004 18:44

Yesterday on Trinity FM a Sinn Fein represntative claime that SF had returned the $5,000 donation from Coca-Colca. Is this true?

by finance watcher Fri Aug 29, 2003 13:36

Yes returning the money is not the point, the point is they took it in the first place and their supporters have gone around in a tizzy trying to justify it, throwing up articles from An Phoblacht (could probably throw up the odd piece from the Irish Times too).

However, no one in Sinn Fein has officially commented. Just watch them hold on to it. If they do decide to give it to the union, will the union accept it? Of course the union would have to be told that it was blood money and not just some largesse on the part of rich yanks who we are led to believe don't know Sinn Fein's real politics. Oh yeah!

by republican watcher Thu Aug 28, 2003 16:44

Whether SF return the money or not is not really the issue. What this shows is that SF regularly takes very large donations of big business. How can a party claiming to be left wing and radical etc be doing this? The fact is that SF despite their rhetoric are just another capitalist party that can't wait to get their hands on the kick backs and privilileges of office

by Janus Thu Aug 28, 2003 15:51

I agree with Mr X that Justin's behaviour is childish and I hope he gets over it and cops himself on, but I can also see how it's understandable.

Indymedia is not a place for reasoned, intelligent, rational debate. I've seen such debate taking place, but it's a rarity, sadly not the norm. If people engaged in such a way good debates can take place. I've seen a few good discussions on issues, with very little sectarianism, people like Davy Carlin and a couple of others.

Justin, for all his faults, at least admits to his party being wrong on some issues and has publically done this, both on Indymedia and in his own party's newspaper. Off-hand, I can't think of many others who do that. He seems genuine in his left wing politics. I've also never seen him back away from any argument like this before.

I think he gets sick, as I do, of anwering the same old thing every time. He seemed happy enough to debate the Coke issue but didn't want to go over old ground often ploughed. In fairness, I think he's being a bit precious to imagine it's only Sinn Féin that gets it but maybe some of the garbage on this thread was the straw that broke the back so to speak.

Whenever someone from the SP says ANYTHING you can gurantee that within the first five posts there will be either a reference to Dennis Tourish, the fact that they didn't picket some ICTU conference (A favourite of Pat C), John Throne, their stance on the Pat Finucane bursary in Queens or internal SP infighting. It gets boring to read and I'm sure SP people get bored of responding to it.

Similarly, I think SF people probably get bored resonding to the same nonsense coming at them again and again. I've seen SF people like Justin, Killian and Eoin defend and argue every point made on this thread and a hell of a lot of other ones on Bin Tax, foreign donations, PPP/PFI etc.

They've lost a few, but frankly, won most of them. They rarely, if ever attack other people's politics and parties in sectarian diatribes unless they're attacked first. But when they're called upon to fight the same battles over and over and over again with annonymous people who could be trolls for all they know, is it any wonder people get pissed off?

On the two issues you make. Firstly on donations, when I was a SF member in the late 80s I remember doing a collection around Dublin pubs for the prisoners. In one city centre pub I ran across two Fianna Fáilers, one a TD, now not, one a COuncillor, now a TD. I ignored them and passed on at which point one of them caught me by the shoulder and stuck a twenty (This was back when we had punts for you young ones and a twenty was a fair size of money) in my tin. The other put in a tenner.

Ideologically, I should have said 'Listen, you two are members of a right wing party that is implementing a vicious series of cutbacks (You think what they're doing now is cutbacks, we still haven't recovered from the late 80s cutbacks) in every section of Irish life, that has consistently sold out republicans on the national question, that has executed and murdered republicans and given the nod to extradition. I refuse to take your money on principle'

Did I say that? Did I fuck, I took the money and was grateful for it. Only a lunatic would have done something different. Similarly, just because someone gives you money, doesn't mean they buy you, or control you. Does everyone who's ever donated to the SWP, SP, WSM or whatever support everything they say and do? Do they have to take a spot quiz on Trotsky before the money's put in the bucket?

I think Justin's point on foreign and domestic business (Poorly made in my opinion) was that foreign businesses either don't give a shit (Or don't know) what SF's policies are and just want peace and unity in Ireland or can be ignored because they're thousands of miles away. Domestic businesses would be a lot harder to ignore and would have a lot more to say about SF's policies. Makes a certain kind of sense to me. I'd prefer if they didn't take money from American businesses but I do see a difference, especially in terms of every party's practical need for money. Certainly I've seen no evidence from anyone that any of the money from American businesses has affected SF policy. While I agree the party is drifting to the right, and hence the reason I left over seven years ago, I think it's a lot more for electoral reasons than for anything else.

by Mr.X Thu Aug 28, 2003 12:22

Seems that Justin has taken his ball and gone home sulking. At lest I suppose in the usual fashion mambers of his party didnt mark us for a hit.

From Justins comments its fairly clear that the Sinn Féin party is moving firther and further to the right. This is amplified by his quote: "We take money from foriegn big business, but not Irish Big Business." I ask whats the difference?

Sinn Fein is nothing more than a populist political party.

by happy in my nappy. Wed Aug 27, 2003 19:02

Though I'd have given up after 100 words.

by Justin Moran - Sinn Féin Wed Aug 27, 2003 18:04 maigh_nuad at yahoo dot com

I give up. Fuck this nonsense. I am happy to debate the issue, I'm no longer interested in pointless trolling debates by people who won't shake hands with someone unless they've been tested on the works of some fringe lefty.

From now on if people want to actually discuss this issue, or in fact any issue on Indymedia, they can email me, I won't be responding any longer on this or anything else. It's no longer either interesting or challenging. It's merely irritating, boring and pointless. Sin é

by dazed and amazed Wed Aug 27, 2003 17:55

Justin Moran believes that Sinn Fein is not guilty of hypocrisy because they might give the money back. The problem is they took it in the first place. Sinn Fein's ever rightward move has obviously stopped someone in the finance department from thinking clearly or rather thinking in a different manner.

Sinn Fein had a really clear position on the war on Iraq Gerry Adams almost broke his neck rushing through traffic just to get himself to a photo shoot with mass murderer George W. Bush. Sinn Fein's newspaper often rants against US imperialism but then tells us all that these are people that can do business with. When Bill Clinton drew up Plan Colombia, a military plan counterinsurgency plan to defeat the guerrillas,he then came to Ireland where he was feted by Sinn Fein.

In the middle of the last Iraq war there were two places in the world that were comfortable places for George Bush to meet Blair, Israel and the north. Guess what? George chose the north were some SFers turned out to protest and others turned up to welcome him. A case of having your cake and eating it too.

Why is that Fianna Fail can take money from corrupt land developers and everyone including Sinn Fein hints that favours were asked and given, but when SF receives money from large multinationals, it is a case of SF hoodwinking the big companies. No, I don't think so.

by Michael Wed Aug 27, 2003 16:59

Justin writes:

"So short version, yes we take money from foreign bug business, no we don't take money from Irish big business,"

So it's ok for Forgeign big business to exploit workers and prevent them from Unionisation, but its a different story for Irish Companies. So by Sinn Féins "Lef wing" thinking, its ok to take money from Starbucks but not from Bewleys or from Nike but not from O'Neills.

I never thought they would shoot themselves in the foot this much

by Mistaken identity Wed Aug 27, 2003 16:26

I think you should try to keep your big ego as far as possible from your work in Colombia. And not choose who could help or not help the Colombian trade unionists based on your high moral standards.
That I got it right who was hidden behind some of the coments does not meant that you did. Who is Sally?

by Justin Moran - Sinn Féin Wed Aug 27, 2003 15:02 maigh_nuad at yahoo dot com

Just back to answer a couple of things, mostly in reference to my masterly spin doctoring. Frankly, I thought I was fairly straight forward in the only other post I made on this debate. And since as far as I know that was the only statement from a SFer in indymedia about this I'm not sure how we can be accused of continuing to turn the debate. In fact my contribution dealt exclusively with the Coke money.

As for the questions about big business, I assume you must be new to Indymedia, as they have been addressed ad nauseum in the past. To recap, condensed version, Friends of SF raises money in the States, the majority of it does not come from big business. A significant minority comes from businesses, mostly Irish owned, who have an interest in supporting the unifcation of their homeland (Hardly surprising surely).

You state this affects our policies. How? We have opposed, as most left wing parties have done, every American foreign policy intervention that I can remember. Republicans oppose the Israeli occupation, support struggles in South and Central America, condemn the erosion of civil liberties in America. When every big right wing donor you speak of told us Adams couldn't go to Cuba or they'd stop paying, he went to Cuba. (The issue of whether he should have gone to Cuba or not is a different one, the point is the backers you refer to told him not to and he went anyway)

Most notably, we vehemently opposed the war on Iraq and as people who read Irish-American newspapers and the Phoblacht will know, attracted a great deal of criticism from American supporters for doing so. We still did it.

I'm not trying to portray SF as heroic or anything here, I'm merely asking for an example of Sinn Fein going soft on right wing America, and American imperialism on the basis of the donations given to us.

Viggo Mortenson, who plays Aragorn in Lord of the Rings gave us $1,000. Does this affect the Sinn Féin policy towards Mordor? Martin Sheen gave us a similar amount, does this mean we are obliged to sell West Wing boxed sets in our shop?

The reason we can raise money in the States is because overwhelmingly, it is donated by people who want to see peace and their homeland united. They might have preferred if we had different policies on social and economic issues. Doesn't mean we change them.

So short version, yes we take money from foreign bug business, no we don't take money from Irish big business, yes there is a difference, no the Americans don't write our polices, yes the money makes us a more effective organisation.

As to the accusation of hypocrisy again, as I have stated several times, I do not believe SF is guilty of hypocrisy. If the party does not return the money I personally believe it will be.

Sin é

by gearoid Wed Aug 27, 2003 14:37

Sorry I am not an ex republican, my politics are anti-imperialist and socialist not provo always have been nothing has changed there.

As for personal hypocrisy, well if I am accused of it, I will defend myself. Nothing changes the facts, the provos take money from big business. I personally introduced members of the the Sinaltrainal Union to Sinn Fein T.Ds telling them mistakenly that these were people the union could work with.

Sorry Sally.

by Clearing the air Wed Aug 27, 2003 12:51

OK you have already have your go at SF, now let it rest and keep the good work for Colombia.
Stop pointing your finger and talking about hipocricy, and look at your self a little bit more, couldnt't you be accused of hipocricy? I can think of several instances in the last few years were you could have been but I am not going to go down that road.
Ex-republicans are defenetely the worst kind of anty republicans, specially if they belong to a 4 to 6 persons political party.

by Mr.X Wed Aug 27, 2003 11:48

At every attempt to discuss this issue - with the exception of Justins masterly spin doctoring - SF has continued to turn the debate to focus on other issues rather than the donation from Coca Cola - neither has it answered any questions raised about its links to big business and how this conflicts with its so-called "left wing image" south of the border.

by Dude Love Tue Aug 26, 2003 21:12

There seems to be an awful lot of concern on this thread with regards to the welfare of the Sinaltrainal workers in Colombia. Why don't the concerned individuals help the Latin American Solidarity Centre (who actually do have a campaign going on the requested Coke boycott) to bring this issue to the minds of the general public? You would probably have to join the campaign as INDIVIDUALS rather than as members of some collective hive mind in search of an issue that may act as an opportunity for party/group product placement.
If the various concerned parties contributing to this thread helped out as individuals then no one would be alienated and bitch from a distance (other than the defenders of the corporation) and we could better help those being persecuted.
I do not speak for LASC, it's just a suggestion.
Coca Cola is such a well known product that this campaign could have a very real chance of capturing the public's imagination. This could act as a catalyst, leading to questions about the whole question of global corporate labour practises in general, ...which would be nice.

by . Tue Aug 26, 2003 20:57

Janus doubts that SF would have known that they had recieved money from Coke, that may well be the case but it is generally accepted that SF do get donations from big companys and the rich. SF do not try to hide the fact. It is reasonable to assume that SF is aware that this money may be tainted and that the companies would expect results from their donation.
What is important here is, do SF let these donations influence their decisions/policies in the case of Coke there is no eveidence that i can see that they do.
Would it be fair to say that SF got their fingures burned this time round?

by Janus Tue Aug 26, 2003 19:23

First of all, well done on ringing their head office, I hope other people do the same. Frankly it's not important whether they ring back or not, I wouldn't expect them to ring me back, it's merely important that they log the calls and report it up the chain which I remember from my time was certainly done. Talk to them, tell them you object, don't expect them to ring back everyone who rings them because they don't have the time.

Secondly, you're not the only one discussing this issue on Indymedia and while your record on the issue may be exemplary, many others have not. I have frequently read articles in An Phoblacht about Colombia, a Sinn Fein TD has visited the country meeting many of the people in civil society, human rights campaigns, political prisoners etc. Their record might not meet your high standards but I think it's a good one compared to most.

Thirdly, Sinn Fein receives money from Friends of SF. It doesn't receive a list of donors from FOSF of who paid what, it just gets cheques from Friends of Sinn Fein. And that is the only legal way it can work. A foreign political party cannot raise money in America so FOSF was set up to do so. You can bitch all you want about it but frankly I doubt anyone in SF was aware of it until the numbers were checked. I presume FOSF has guidelines in who it can and cannot receive money from but I have no idea what they are, or even what they were when I was a member.

Lastly, I welcome your interest in the Colom bia Three campaign and hope you, and whatever organisation you belong to, have been as generous to it as the Shinners have. I don't think it's sick or hypocritical that those men are being helped by Colombians while a party only one of them is a member of is taking money from Coke. It's a separate issue. Taking money from Coke is hypocritical enouogh without linking tertiary issues.

Look, your smart remarks aside, to which i shouldn't have responded in kind I admit, we agree they shouldn't keep the money. We disagree that they did something wrong in receiving it because I would have been VERY surprised if they knew it was Coke money.

by Anonymous Tue Aug 26, 2003 17:51

Well done Mr. C for ringing Sinn Fein's head office - That is very dissapointing, and very surprising that they did not even answer the phone - and furthermore have not contacted you back.

by Mr C. Tue Aug 26, 2003 17:12

Well, well Janus,
Actually, I have never seen much activity by Sinn Fein on behalf of Colombia. I have worked on Colombian issues and in Colombia itself on and off over the years so I don't need a lecture from provos about giving a shit about Colombia.

I did ring Sinn Fein head office not once but four times on Monday and left a number where I could be contacted all to no avail.

the point is , that here is an organisation that claims to be anti-imperialist yet has no problem with taking money from any right wing shite. If the Irish Times hadn't published the article Sinn Fein would never have came forward. This money has been sitting in their account for some time.

So what about the free legal aid given by Colombians while the provos take money from Coca Cola. Now I am in favour of them continuing to get the legal aid just think the coke money is sickening.

by Janus Tue Aug 26, 2003 16:41

I have thought long and hard about your suggestion to cop myself on Mr C and designed to remain without cop. The donation from Coca Cola does concern me, the donation from Keough, not even a little bit. If individuals make donations, that is different from a company. The donation might still be unacceptable, but you've failed to convince me of this. Perhaps, the fsi

And yes, I do read tabloid newspapers, so do the vast majority of the working class and associated normal people I'm sure whatever International you belong to claims to lead.

I don't think SF have been guilty of hypocrisy. I think they WILL be guilty of hypocrisy if they don't give the money back or give it to the anti-Coke campaigns. I've even rung them to tell them.

On that note, I got an email from a SF member who knows me personall and who read the comment where I'd asked people to contact SF Head Office to register their protest. A portion of the reply will suffice:

"and is frankly a bit naive. It is based on the idea that the people who are protesting about this object to us getting money from Coke. Nonsense, they're delighted. The reason they won't call us asking us to give away the money is that most of them are praying we don't give it away. In their minds it will expose us. They're not interested in the anti-coke campaign, they're interested in putting the boot into us. I realise you and some of the others are different, but most of them couldn't give a shit about Colombian Trade Unionists and Coke, they'll use anything to attack us. If they were serious, we'd be getting emails and calls about it"

I think it's a bit Shinner defensive and cynical, but at the same time I can't help but wonder if there's truth in it.

by Mr C. Tue Aug 26, 2003 15:17

Janus, cop yourself on. Mr Keough was still Chief Advisor to Coca Cola Board of Directors when he made the donation and still remains one of a number of advisors to the Board. So the money question is still relevant. The provos get blood money from corporate America and then turn up at demos protesting about globalisation etc.

As for Beckham, I wasn't aware he had blood on his hands but then Janus I don't keep track of the tabloid press as much as you.

Though in one sense you are right. 5,000 or 15,000 it doesn't matter, hypocrisy is hypocrisy. I notice no mention was made of the lawyers for the Colombia Three (giving their time free of charge) being the lawyers for the Coke victims in Colombia was mentioned. Have you not even a scintilla of shame?

As for proof, it is not exactly a secret that SF wines and dines with the great and powerful in the US or that they have supped with Newt Gringich, or did I just imagine that?

by Bullet for Roy Green, want one too Tue Aug 26, 2003 15:12

Trust Joe Ranting spokesperson for Colombian junta government black ops, to resort to telling more unbelievable lies again.

Joe must be getting desperate by the sound of him, having to make up all manner of untruths as muck to sling at Sinn fein.

by Janus Tue Aug 26, 2003 14:17

While I agree with you that they should give it back or away, I think pretending it's 15,000 instead of 5,000 is nonsense. Even if the ex-president of Coca-Cola gave them 10,000 (No evidence of this has been presented) it is completely irrelevant.

If you go to the bother of providing evidence that he did so, it's still irrelevant. The man isn't head of Coca Cola now. He's an ex-head. I'm a former member of Sinn Fein. Does that mean I deserve to get hassled about Sinn Fein activities? Do you think David Beckham should get hassled because United are playing shite when he's playing for another team?

Bash the Shinners if you want, but do it on the basis of facts and evidence that are in even some vague way connected to the issue instead of making mythical links.

by Mr C. Tue Aug 26, 2003 14:13

Sinn Fein have as yet made no public pronouncement on the money and we don't know if all 15,000 dollars (last count, update your figures please) will ever go back. I would like to point out that the human rights groups that have provided the legal defence for the Colombia Three (and rightly so, in my view)are also the victims of the same paramilitaries that Coke deals with in Colombia. Time to stand up and be counted. Will the provies throw their lot in with the Colombian trade unionists or will they hang on to their rich redneck rightwing friends in the USA (not difficult to guess that one, is it?)

Human Rights defenders risking their lives for Sinners in Colombia whilst Gerry A. dines with the US elite that murders these same Colombians. Sickening!

by Anonymous Tue Aug 26, 2003 13:22

Thank you for your response Justin. Though I support the Swp in their work I would like if they or someone from the Swp would come and answer some of the accusations that have been levied on them as well.

Though indymedia can be heavily critisized, and justifyably in my view, for trolls just generating shite in the comments section, I think all parties have valid critisizms to answer. And whatever you can say about the trolling shite - Indymedia does offer the most transparent form of open politics that is possible - where anyone from anywhere has free access to have their say.
_________________________________________________________________________________

To get back to the Sinn Fein issue here. I think I totally agree with your comments Justin and compliment you for raising them internally within Sinn Fein and urge you to follow through.

I totally agree with you, that now that you do know that the 5K came from Coca-Cola that it should now be donated to the anti-Coca Cola campaign. Or in my view, at the very least be given back to Coca Cola.

I think Sinn Fein should also have a meeting with Friends of Sinn Fein - and while greatly thanking them for their support should outline their policy on taking donations to avoid such inncident happening in the future.

Best regards.

by Mr C. Tue Aug 26, 2003 13:21

It doesn't matter if the provos knew of not about the allegations against Coca Cola in Colombia. Similar allegations were made in the mid 1980s against Coca Cola in Guatemala, Coke's record is quite well known. Justin Moran's argument that the money was from friends of Sinn Fein is nonsense, presumably FOSF are also friends of Coca Cola.

What about the ex president of Coke's donation of 10,000 dollars, is he another friend of Sinn Fein or did he engage in some Flood or Moriarty like scheme to launder it in Sinn Fein's bank account?

by Thomas Tue Aug 26, 2003 13:17

I find it amazing that someone made the point that SF didnt sabotage the anti war movement. lets take our minds back to the Shannon Demo where SF called upon its members not to attend.

Now thats dealth with lets deal with the issue in question, Friends of SF America are linked to a so called "left wing party," they themselves would have known that the money donation or otherwise came from Coke- why did they accept it - I think the answer maybe because they are as right wing as the Sinn Fein leadership

by Janus Tue Aug 26, 2003 13:16

How many people have rung SF to complain about them taking the money?

by Justin Moran - Sinn Féin Tue Aug 26, 2003 12:49 maigh_nuad at yahoo dot com

Kind of figured this would be a big issue when I logged back on and I agree that it is rightfully so. Surprised to find people, especially Maggie, dredging up every issue she can think of including makiing up a couple, including ones dealt with satisfactorily a long time ago, in an effort to put the boot in.

I have neither the intention nor the time to get into many of the old arguments made about the old nonsense that's been dealt with ad nauseum before. But this is a new issue and as such one that people should be concerned about. Indeed the word 'concern' is a very mild description of my reaction on reading the same article.

MY (Pointed emphasis) understanding of the issue is that the money was paid by Coke for a St Patricks related function at which Gerry Adams was attending. Coke said they neither saw it, nor treated it as a political donation. The money was accepted by Friends of Sinn Fein America.

My own personal belief, and one I have expressed internally, is that Sinn Fein did nothing wrong in taking the money (We receive the money from Friends of SF, not Coke, we were not aware that a donation from Coke made up the funds received from FOSF), but that we should now donate it to the anti-Coca Cola campaign. The party has not made a decision on it yet but will at some point.

by Just Wondering Tue Aug 26, 2003 01:18

Has Sinn Fein returned this donation?

If not, why not?

If they don't intend to return it, would SF not agree it would be appropriate to donate it to the Trade Unionists fighting Coca Cola?

Maybe Justin Moran can give us an answer.

by nwo Mon Aug 25, 2003 22:34

what a wanker!

by . Mon Aug 25, 2003 21:47

AOC again.

The issue of the role of coke has been taken up by indymedia, the left in Ireland including SF and the left internationaly.

The issue of SF funding from coke came up in the Irish Times and BT not on a left web site or in a left paper.

AOC has again tried to divert the discussion.

AOC claims a dislike of SF.

AOC seems determined to muddy the waters on this issue. Anti "trot" rants are used to keep the pot boiling he either has no interest in the issue at all or has decided to join the IT and BT in trying to sow as much confusion as possible.
SF have questions to answer but to be fair to them they have always been open about their big company funding. The questions are, did they take this funding knowing that an anti coke campaign was starting, did they campaign against coke knowing that they had coke money in the bank and has the donation been used by coke to buy influence. These are difficult questions that only SF and time can answer. It is my view that on this issue SF has clean hands I can not beleive that they would play such a disgusting role and I beleive that they will respond giving a clear answer.
In the mean time AOC continues to play a very strange game he appears to do SF a favour by diverting the discussion but in reality leaves them looking like they are not prepared to answer questions.

by SP member Mon Aug 25, 2003 21:31

A SF supporter said: "This is the same SP that refuses to recognise a woman's right to choose."

That is not the position of the SP. You all know that our position is pro-choice.

A SF supporter says: "The same SP that is anti poverty, but against an adicts centre."

The SP are not against addicts centres. We think that serious investment should go into centres for drug addicts.

A SF supporter says:"The same SP that is all for gay rights in the privacy of activist indymedia, but wont condemn CWI homophobia."

'CWI homophobia'! where is that? it's new to me and I'm a CWI member for quite a while!

A SF supporter says:"What have SP/CWI done in the U.S. to help the boycott Coke campaign?"

We are organised in the United States, and in South America. Our US organisation is called Socialist Alternative. To be honest I don't know exactly what they've done, why not consult their website?

by C&C brown lemonade you know it makes sense Mon Aug 25, 2003 21:10

Coke is bad for people in more ways than one, not just because of Coke's injustice and mistreatment of colombian Trade unionists. Coke is also very unhealth and damaging to our internal bodily organs.

by happy in my nappy Mon Aug 25, 2003 21:06

I'd love stories on the provos, never write a THING about the SP, and see most of the sunday shite deleted by good editors. I'd do my best to keep on the best side of a company that has consistently been one of the top Fortune 500 list and I'd dream of the day I got the secret formula in the post.

by happy in my nappy Mon Aug 25, 2003 21:04

I'd note that the working class purchase most of the Coca Cola in Europe and that their votes are chased by both SP and SF despite the democratic system not offering them any real solution to hyper-capitalism, I'd never get 5000€ from Coca Cola and the the nearest to corporate good will I'd get is hack-defacing the new "coca cola movement" website. I'd also never say no to a snorty of the real thing, coz like it's bad but good.

by happy in my nappy Mon Aug 25, 2003 20:59

I'd read the sunday papers, and worry people about their foreskins, then when all the fuss had died down I'd note "happy in my nappy" words and get the idea going for a visit to Colombia by a SP delegation and accordingly get 5000€ from Coca Cola.

by happy in my nappy Mon Aug 25, 2003 20:54

If i were a Coca Cola strategist I would be aware that my company a blue chip multi-nat-corp is facing serious allegations in Colombia where the average worker's wage is less than 5000€, I would also be aware that 5000€ is the smallest donation made by Coca Cola to political parties visiting Colombia and that _all_ political parties visiting Colombia from Europe will get automatically a donation for "corporate goodwill". I would keep an eye on the future which will see a ceasefire and implementation of some type of peace process and porbably mean a Colombia without Sr. Uribe and the prospect of full investigation of my company's activities in Colombia at some stage. I would then leak the information concering the donation to the press.

by simple simon Mon Aug 25, 2003 20:45

I think the point is that it's not 'crap' its accepting money from multi-national corporations. Even if it was only Coke buying some seats at a SF dinner or whatever.

AoC, if this was the SP or the SWP, I'm sure you'd be in here foaming at the mouth screaming about trot bastards. As would I. But you seem to simply want to turn this argument around to attack the SP.

by Agent of Chaos Mon Aug 25, 2003 20:28

It is well known that I hate those Trot bastards for the way they take over and disrupt campaigns. The SP played a far greater disruptive role in the Anti War campaign than SF. SF only dithered about March 1. The SP actively sabotaged the Direct Action and condemned those who took part in it. The SP consistently take the side of the cops whether its at Shannon or Evian or Belfast.

I have no love for the shinners and they dont claim to be a revolutionary party. But you always get this funding crap from the SP. If any black ops are going on then they are coming from you. Why are you trying to start the whole thing up again?

Get fresh orders from Langley?

by . Mon Aug 25, 2003 20:15

thought the attempts to spin the discussion had ended but it seems Agent Of Coke has come back for another stab.
To be fair to Hebe it is clear that he did not set out just to attack another party he was defending SF and did believe that another party had attacked them, though looking back on the contributions it seems to me that no one on this thread is using SP language.
As for Agent of C I really do wonder at his imput. His sole reason seems to be to have a go at SP but in doing so he manages to give a very strong impression of someone who does not want the real issues discussed.
In my view SF have not moved from their previous public position on funds from big companys and therefore will be well able to deal with these issues without the spin doctor efforts of Agent of C.

by Cleo Mon Aug 25, 2003 20:08

Joe ranting the colombian junta government black ops spokesperson, trys very hard to appear impartial, but i've been tracking your posts, and yourself joe and i know who pays your wages.

by no need for kila coke Mon Aug 25, 2003 20:05

Drink C&C brown lemonade instead, I weaned my whole family off kila coke, and onto C&C brown lemonade after my daughter's school friend started a boycott kila coke campaign at her school.
Brown lemonade is cheaper, more healthy for kids is a local company, and as far as i know doesn't exploit, torture of murder its foreign work force.

by happy in my nappy Mon Aug 25, 2003 19:08

If I were a Sinn Fein strategist I'd take the 5000€ from CocaCola before going to Colombia, spend it on something useful for the campaigns in colombia then leak the donation to the press and use the added speculation on Sinn Fein funding to renew interest in Sinn Fein's reasons for going to Colombia in the first place, and use up at least twenty words making bottlewasher save your token jokes at the SP expense because they didn't get a penny from Coke.

by joe ranii Mon Aug 25, 2003 19:07

I condemn (as does the Government of Colombia)the murders of trade unionists, regardless of who does the killing. Note however that trade unionists have been murdered by both right-wing AUC paras and pseudo-left FARC paras. Did this working journalist deserve to die at the hands of the FARC murder gangs ...?

AP, 22/8/03
BOGOTA, Colombia - Suspected rebels killed a journalist and wounded another after the vehicle in which the reporters were traveling failed to stop at a roadblock in southern Colombia, officials said. The radio reporters were traveling on Friday from Puerto Caicedo to Puerto Asis in Putumayo state, Jairo Obando, a parish priest in Puerto Asis, told RCN Radio on Saturday. Rebels from the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, shot at the vehicle, killing 25-year-old Carlos Benavidez, he said. Benavidez worked for the community radio station Manantial Estereo, which is run by the Roman Catholic diocese in Putumayo.

by Agent of Chaos Mon Aug 25, 2003 19:00

If SP are so anti coca cola, why do so many of their active members still refuse to boycott Coke? Are boycotts just for the little people? Are SP members above it?

This sort of hypocrisy is hardly surprising. This is after all the same SP whose leader Joe Higgins adressed protestors at Shannon and called GNAW virtual warriors and who refused to support Direct Action.

This is the same SP that refuses to recognise a woman's right to choose.

The same SP that is anti poverty, but against an adicts centre.


The same SP that is all for gay rights in the privacy of activist indymedia, but wont condemn CWI homophobia.

What have SP/CWI done in the U.S. to help the boycott Coke campaign?

by in the public eye Mon Aug 25, 2003 18:15

Sinn Fein are what ever you want them to be. in private they are the same as every other political party going in this country, and fighting for their piece of power. power, or the potential of it, corrupts you know...

by Maggie Mon Aug 25, 2003 17:58

If Sinn Féin are so anti coca cola, why do so many of their active members still refuse to boycott Coke? Are boycotts just for the little people? Are Sinn Féin members above it?

This sort of hypocrisy is hardly surprising. This is after all the same Sinn Fein whose President Gerry Adams adressed the World Economic Forum in New York, and who gave credibility to Bush's war by refusing to boycott him while he was slaughtering the innocent in Iraq.

This is the same Sinn Féin that refuses to recognise a woman's right to choose.

The same Sinn Fein that is anti racism, but against asylum seekers been housed in Sligo.

The same Sinn Fein that is anti bin tax in Dublin but votes for bin charges around the rest of the country.

The same Sinn Féin that is all for gay rights in the privacy of activist indymedia, but in public forums like the Late, Late show is against them.

What have Sinn Féin done in the U.S. to help the boycott Coke campaign?

by Anonymous Mon Aug 25, 2003 16:11

Though in genearl I support Sinn Fein's "leftish" policies, and I don't wish to have a go off them, I think Sinn Fein has a genuine question to answer here and so far have not done so.

Are there any Sinn Fein members at all out there who are prepared to comment on this?

Well done Hebe is what say for your comments above and putting the time in to expose this sitauation.

by happy in my nappy Mon Aug 25, 2003 15:44

(I'm only reading the comment headlines from now on and won't waste my precious time on the comments or even the articles).

by Magneto Mon Aug 25, 2003 15:37

Yeah, the SP have engaged in this kind of attack before and demanded comments and denunciations of the SF fundraising from named individuals. Maybe some people have learned lessons from this.

There was one passing mention of the SP and it was . (I dont think u r a SPer)who spun it into a big issue. This attracted Agent and its gone on from there.

It has now been established that Sinn Fein openly campaign against the Coca Cola attacks on workers. Some of the SF bashers may have motives but I dont detect the evil claw of the SP on this occasion.

Lets leave it at that.

by . Mon Aug 25, 2003 15:09

The reason not to do to it is as i have already said, you create the impression that you are attacking another party because sf have something to hide when they do not.

by Hebe Mon Aug 25, 2003 15:00

Kila obviously knew he was spinning when he posted this. So, I believe, was Morpheus. What lies have I told? It is my belief that some of the spin here is of the SP variety.

The SP use this type of shite all of the time, why shouldnt I point out the similarities?

by . Mon Aug 25, 2003 14:54

Hebe
First at no time have I attacked sf about this, I do not think that sf or any other left party for that matter is capable of sinking so low as to play ball with the likes of coke.

Second you and you alone began the spin, others may have asked questions you did not like but under the circumstances they are justified and I state again sf are well able to explain their view.

Third your spin doctor method of trying to divert the thread to another party only helps to give the impression that there is something to hide.

Just waiting for some Walter Mitty type comment now.

by Curious Mon Aug 25, 2003 14:52

Done to help the Coca Cola workers?

by Agent of Chaos Mon Aug 25, 2003 14:48

Well, well , looks as if I hit a raw nerve. Keep on sppinning my trot froend. Or you could point out that the SP never lie;)

by Hebe Mon Aug 25, 2003 14:46

You knew full well that no one in Ireland was aware of the donation. I have already stated that I think the money should be given back. I now think the money should be donated , not to RTS but to the Anti Coke campaign.

I simply question the motives of the people who used this item to attack SF. The Irish Times article dealt fully with SFs opposition to Coke and Crowes meeting with the Trade Unionists. Kila read the IT article so he was aware of this.

As has been pointed out the SP are past masters are at black ops.

by . Mon Aug 25, 2003 14:42

Agent of chaos joins in the spin.
SF have the capacity to answer all the questions asked without diverting.
People may not like who thay get their money from but that does not mean that they are in league with Coke.
Hebe spin assisted be AOC venom does not help or add anything.
Stop using sf to launch your own wee crusade.

by . Mon Aug 25, 2003 14:34

Hebe.

FACTS

SF did get money from Coke no one is denying it and SF is open about its finance from US companys.

Everyone is agreed SF got the money before the campaign against coke started.

SF have shown committment to the campaign.

WHAT NEXT

SF, in my view, should take steps to rectify any problems arising from this situation such as returning the money or donating it to the campaign.

Now this issue should not be a major difficulty for a party like SF but your spin doctor role is going to make the whole thing much worse.
If you keep launching these little attacks on others to divert attention you will leave an impression of hiding something.
Spin doctors like you should have leaned something from david kelly by now.

by Agent of Chaos Mon Aug 25, 2003 14:33

The SP are renowned for their skills at peddling untruths. Goebells could have learned a thing or two from them.

Take all the lies they spun during the Anti War campaign. Lies to sabotage the March 1 action, more lies afterwards! Lies to sabotage the lobby of the ICTU meeting and more lies afterwards! Lies in support of the Shannon Airport Police and more lies afterwards!

Take Globalisation. Lies against the Black Bloc and more lies afterwards! Lies about the Police being peaceful at Evian and more lies afterwards!

Or the SP in QUB. Lies, lies and bigger lies.

Lies about John Throne being expelled from the CWI. Lies about Denis Torish. Lies about Fin Geary.

Lies about the SP shenanigans in the Public Service Executives Union.Lies about the Cop being appointed as General Secretary of the Union.

You cant beat the SP when it comes to lies.

I still dont like the Shinners though! They shouldnt give the money back. Give it to RTS or somesuch deserving cause.

by Hebe Mon Aug 25, 2003 14:20

The SP regularly carry out these type of attacks either openly or as Hilda etc.

Now, you fools have been answered so its time you stopped YOUR Black Ops & Spin.

by Hebe Mon Aug 25, 2003 14:18

(The donation was given prior to the articles and Crowes visit to the Coke workers. I do not believe that SF in Ireland were aware of the source of the $5,000. You were implying that SF were complicit in the suppression of Coke workers.)

An Phoblacht/Republican News · Thursday 17 July 2003



Speaking out under threat of death
Colombian unions take multinationals to court over killings





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Francisco Ramírez lives surrounded by armed bodyguards. He travels in a bulletproof car and wears a bulletproof jacket. He has to deal with death threats and not so long ago suffered a kidnapping attempt. He is not a politician, businessman or a millionaire. He is just a trade unionist in Colombia. He presides over the SINTRAMINERCOL trade union, which represents the interests of the workers of those mines still owned by the Colombian government. He is also education secretary of the FUNTRAENERGETICA federation, which includes all workers of the energy sector, and he works as a lawyer in the human rights team of the Workers Unitary Central (CUT), the Colombian equivalent of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions. Ramirez visited Ireland at the beginning of July at the invitation of ICTU. We spoke to him about the current situation in Colombia for workers and trade unions.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



An Phoblacht: How is the current situation in Colombia?


Francisco Ramírez: It is quite bad. Traditionally, multinationals and imperialist governments have opted for the elimination of the unionised workforce. From 1928, when the United Fruit Company ordered the massacre of 3,000 workers on its banana plantations to today, that has been the attitude of the Colombian government, backed by the United States.

Since the creation of the CUT, 3,500 of its members have been massacred. Today, under Mr Uribe's government, a trade union leader is killed every five days and the same applies to the indigenous leaders. And these deaths are not a consequence of the armed conflict that we live with in Colombia, but the result of a longstanding war that aims to impose a globalised imperialist economic model.

In the '80s, US oil corporations encouraged the creation of paramilitary groups. The Texas Petroleum Company, the US embassy and British, Israeli, South African and US mercenaries together with the drugs cartels, created the first paramilitary groups in the area of the Magdalena Medio to back up the strategy of the transnational companies that were interested in controlling the city of Barrancabermeja, where one of the biggest oil refineries of the country is located. These companies were also interested in getting into the South of Bolivar, where today Harken energy - the company of the Bush family- is looking for oil, and where another US company, Occidental - which came up with Plan Colombia in the first place - is building an oil pipeline. There are another corporations with interests in the area - Chevron-Texaco, Shell, British Petroleum. These companies' operations are secured by the elimination of the indigenous, social and trade union movements.

The killings of Colombian trade unionists should be an embarrassment for humanity. In fact, it is an embarrassment for humanity, but because they are killing "black" Colombians it does not matter. To murder 3,500 workers in 16 years cannot be explained. Those who are behind these deaths are the Texas Petroleum Company; Coca-Cola, which we believe is responsible for the deaths of eight union leaders; Drummond, which we believe is responsible for the deaths of seven trade unionists and we are taking to court for the murder of three of them; Occidental, responsible for the killing of nine adults and eight children during the bombing of the village of Santo Domingo.

Also, we will be taking British Petroleum to court for the massacres in Antioquia; Exxon for forced displacement of populations; and Anglo-Gold and Conquistador Mines for the murder of more than 500 peasants and miners in the South of Bolívar, who were killed as part of a strategy to take over an area to open a mine. We will be taking Anglo-American and BHP Billiton to court for forced displacement and for financing paramilitary groups in exchange for protection for their operations.

We want to open judicial processes to indict these corporations' presidents as war criminals and we are seeking the creation of a Special International Penal Court for Colombia. We want to force multinationals to comply with their codes of conduct and we want strong penal legislation to ensure they do comply. And we also want to prosecute the shareholders, because they are the ones that put pressure on the multinationals to obtain profits at any cost, even if profit is built on the deaths of thousands of people. And in the case of Latin America, those profits are paid by the millions of lives that we lose every day to starvation, malnourishment, and political repression.

In Colombia, 3,500 trade union leaders have been murdered in the last 16 years. That same figure represents the number of children who die in our country due to starvation, malnourishment and because they lack basic medical care in only two and a half months. In Colombia, 160 children under five die every day for those causes. We are killed not only because of politics, but also for economic and social reasons -in fact, these last two account for the higher number of deaths in the country.


AP: What is the impact of all the violence on the population?


FR: Around 64% of the Colombian population lives in poverty, 18 % on less than $2 per day. The levels of wealth concentration have tripled - 0.5% of the population owns over 50% of the land. There are 3 million unemployed people. The privatisation of health services has made even more difficult the access to care for the majority of the population. And to control the social turmoil created by these conditions, the Colombian government and its multinationals and friendly countries opted for the genocide -28,000 individuals are killed in Colombia every year. Not even in a country at war you will find such figures.


AP: Successive Colombian governments have supported the opening of the country's economy and resources to multinationals. How is the Colombian administration reacting to the actions of the trade unionists who are taking multinationals to court?


FR: Of course, they did not like it. Right now they are putting pressure on the unionised workers of Drummond because of the case over the deaths of three trade unionists that -to our surprise - will proceed in the US courts. A US judge accepted the case and pointed out that the corporation could face war crimes and human rights violation charges. We believe that at least 16 Colombia-based multinationals could be prosecuted for the same activities.

The Colombian government has used death threats, has fired workers, has finished off trade unions. And we feel the pressure of the Colombian government, but also the international labour organisations, the multinationals of trade unionism, who are opposing our decision to take the corporations to court. They say we are killed because of our high profile. But that is not the case. We are killed because we choose to confront and fight the multinationals. We not only lose our jobs, we also lose our lives. Of course, the Colombian government is not happy with our actions.


AP: The United States Congress has approved a budget to pay the Colombian Army for defending US economic interests in Colombia. How does the trade union movement feel about that?


FR: A trade union report that will be published in the next few days points out that the intervention of the multinationals in Colombia can be felt in three different spheres. First, they manipulate those agreements signed by Colombia and the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. These two institutions condition their loans to Colombia on the government privatisation of public services such as health, pensions, oil, mines. And trade unionists are assassinated because they oppose these policies, and this is the way US military aid to Colombia is used.

A clear example of how the money of Plan Colombia is being used is the agreement between the Colombian and US governments to create three new anti-drugs battalions that will fight against drug-trafficking in Colombia. The first will be based in the South of Bolívar, where US company Conquistador and British Anglo-Gold are taking over one of the world's biggest gold mines. It is also in that area where Harken Energy has one of the biggest gas deposits, and where Occidental has an oil pipeline. The second will be based in Santander, where Harken and Occidental are also present, and where Drummond has an anthracite mine that supplies coal to the US. And the third base will be established in Tolima, another area known for its gold mines, and it will be built beside Río Blanco, a village renowned for having the highest forced displaced population in Colombian history.

The second sphere where multinationals are interfering is in legislation. Corporation lawyers literally create Colombian legislation. The last mine code was put together by lawyers for the mining corporations . At the time this legislation was being drafted, Exxon was selling a mine to BHP-Billiton and Anglo-American, so their lawyers decided to reduce the mining tax in the new law from 15 % to 0.4% and to introduce an article to ensure that this tax would not be changed for the next 90 years. On top of that, the then president Pastrana allowed them to choose how to pay that tax.

Finally, the corporations liaise with paramilitary groups. We have already told the multinationals that when they agree security issues with the Colombian army they are in fact signing agreements with the paramilitaries. And we warned these corporations that they would be made responsible for the actions of the army and paramilitaries.


AP: Do you think that international denunciation of multinationals' activities in Colombia will improve the situation in the country?


FR: We want to improve the situation by naming those who are killing us. If new European Union loans to Colombia are approved, we, Colombian trade unionists, will be forced to bring forward a formal complain against Britain and Spain to the EU Human Rights Commission denouncing the slaughter of trade unionists and indigenous. We will tell them: you are giving money and as a direct result we are being exterminated and we can prove it, because the money you are giving to the Colombian army goes to the right-wing paramilitaries.

by . Mon Aug 25, 2003 14:16

I must say I was very much of the view that this attack on SF was unjustified until i read the comment by Hebe which is attempting to spin the issue into an anti SP rant.
If as I expect SF is innocent of the charge of taking money from Coke the facts will speak for themselves spin and lies will not be necessary.
Finally, hebe do yourself and sf a favour, stop acting like some new labour fool.

by Michael Mon Aug 25, 2003 14:11

If Sinn Fein wrote the article Thursday 29 May 2003 and recieved the donation at a later date then they are clearly guilty of hypocracy.

Again I see no comment has been answered about Sinn Fein links to big business except "This shite" in reference to "Morpheus's" argument.

Im no fan of Sinn Fein, Ive seen them do some work in my community but they have since disappeared off the scene and show up now and again for the odd photo shoot.

by Hebe Mon Aug 25, 2003 14:11

Crowe met with workers from the Coke plants in Colombia.

You are now changing your tunes. Just a while ago SF were supporting Coke!

by Michael Mon Aug 25, 2003 14:06

"Hebe" writing some articles doesn't constitute a campaign you know.

by Hebe Mon Aug 25, 2003 14:04

(I am not a SF fan but I will defend them against this shite. I find it hard to believe that you are unaware of SFs real record on Coke. )

Impiriúlachas Coca-Cola



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This week AN DRAOI RUA discusses 'Coca-cola imperialism', the slave mentality to multinational companies and the fact that we owe them nothing


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Is dócha gurb é ceann de na hargóintí is measa atá cloiste agam i dtaobh tacú leis na Meiriceánaigh l'ionsaí a dhéanamh ar mhuintir na hIaráice ná gur cairde móra dár gcuid atá iontu agus gur cheart dúinn uilig a bheith buíoch dóibh as an mhéid a rinne siad ar son na hÉireann.

Caithfidh mé a rá nuair a chuala mé an tuairim seo don chéad uair, cuireadh an scannán 'The Life of Brian' i gcuimhne dom. In eachtra amháin den scannán, tá réabhlóidigh ag plé impiriúlachas na Rómhánach ina dtír dúchais. Cuireadh an cheist: "Cad é a rinne na Rómhánaigh ar ár son?" Tugadh liosta mór fadálach mar fhreagra, "....thóg siad na bóithre, .....bhunaigh siad córas sláinte, ....córas oideachais ..... agus an t-Uiscrian, ar ndóigh.

Le fírinne, níl fáth ar bith gur chóir dúinn a bheith buíoch do na Meiriceánaigh as na monarcháin ilnáisiúnta atá lonnaithe acu in Éirinn thar na blianta. Tuigtear gur éirigh leis na comhlachtaí éagsúla neart airgid a dhéanamh le linn dóibh bheith in Éirinn. Chomh luath agus a bhí an brabús ar fad déanta, d'imigh siad leo.

Is minic a chuirtear 'impiriúlachas Coca-Cola' ar an chinéal caipitleachas a ligeann do na comhlachtaí ilnáisiúnta a rogha rud a dhéanamh ar fud na cruinne. Dá bhrí sin, shíl mé gurb fhiú Coca-Cola a ghlacadh mar shampla agus gur chóir dom roinnt fíricí ina dtaobh a léiriú anseo.

Is comhlacht ilnáisiúnta ollchumhachtach iad Coca-Cola a tháinig chun na hEorpa ar dtús i rith an chéad chogadh domhanda. Chreid siad gur cheart dóibh an deis a thapú roinnt margaíochta a dhéanamh le linn do mhuintir na hEorpa bheith ag fulaingt.

Tuigimid go bhfuil bua na margaíochta ag Coca-Cola. Nárbh iadsan a chruthaigh 'Daidí na Nollag' agus é gléasta dearg agus bán sna tríochaidí. D'éirigh chomh maith sin leis an fheachtas bholscaireachta seo go bhfuil 'Santa Coca-cola' aitheanta go forleathan ar fud na cruinne go fóill.

Tá neart samplaí fán dóigh a bhfuil neamhaird tugtha do chearta daonna ag an comhlacht ilnáisiúnta seo. San India, mar shampla, ghlac siad seilbh ar thalamh feirmeoireachta i 1998 agus thosaigh siad ag baint úsáid as mar shuíomh tionsclaíochta, ag briseadh dlíthe na tíre. Tamall i ndiaidh dóibh a bheith lonnaithe ansin, tugadh fá deara go raibh uisce sa timpeallacht laghdaithe agus truaillithe. Tá ábhar dramhaíola a thagann as na monarchána de bharr na ceimící atá in úsáid le buidéil a ghlanadh. San áit seo san India, dhíol an comhlacht an t-ábhar lofa mar 'leasú' do fheirmeoirí an cheantar. Ansin, rinne siad rud margaíochta as agus iad ag bronnadh na dramhaíola ar na feirmeoirí. I ndiaidh tamaill, tugadh fá deara go raibh timpeallacht na tíre truaillithe chan leasaithe leis an dramhaíl.

Is beag measa atá ag coca-cola ar chearta a gcuid oibrithe. B'fhéidir go bhfuil an sampla is measa le fáil sa Cholóim. Tuigtear go raibh breis agus 1,500 ceardchumannaí éagsúla maraithe sa tír seo thar thréimhse deich mbliain. Tá fiosrúcháin ar siúl i láthair na huaire fán násc atá ag Coca-Cola le cásanna áirithe.

Tá coinníollacha oibre dian ag na comhlachta ilnáisiúnta ar fad. Níl a dhath ar bith acu orainn.



Seanfhocal na Seachtaine

'Togh do chuideachta sula dtéann tú ag ól.'

Ní amháin gur chóir dúinn a bheith ar an airdeall maidir leis an chuideachta atá againn agus muid ag ól ach ba cheart dúinn tuiscint níos fearr a bheith againn ar na táirgí ilnáisiúnta ag a bhfuilimid ag tacú.



Gluais

impiriúlachas imperialism

réabhlóidigh revolutionaries

an t-Uiscrian the Aqueduct

lonnaithe sited

comhlachtaí companies

caipitleachas capitalism

fíricí facts

ollchumhachtach very powerful

an chéad chogadh domhanda World War One

bua na margaíochta the gift of marketing

feachtas bolscaireachta propaganda campaign

suíomh tionsclaíochta industrial location

ábhar dramhaíola waste material

leasú fertiliser

ceardchumannaí trade unionists

fiosrúcháin investigations

coinníollacha oibre working conditions

by Hebe Mon Aug 25, 2003 14:00

An Phoblacht/Republican News · Thursday 29 May 2003



Trade unions fight back in Colombia

At 8.30am on 5 December 1996, a right-wing paramilitary squad of the Colombian United Self Defences - Autodefensas Unidas de Colombia (AUC), showed up at the gate of the Coke bottling plant in Carepa. Isidro Segundo Gil, a member of the union SINATRAINAL executive board, went to see what they wanted. The paramilitaries opened fire on Gil and he dropped to the ground, fatally wounded. An hour after he was assassinated, paramilitary forces kidnapped another leader of the union at his home; however, he managed to escape and fled to Bogotá. At 8pm, another paramilitary group broke into the union's offices, destroyed the equipment there, and burned down the entire house, destroying all the union's records.

The next day, the same heavily armed group went inside the bottling plant, called the workers together, and gave them until 4pm to resign from the union. "They said that if they didn't resign, the same thing that happened to Gil would happen to them: they would be killed," recalls trade unionist Edgar Paéz. Not surprisingly, union members resigned en masse. A number of workers also quit their jobs outright, undoubtedly fearing that they would be killed simply for showing up.

Gil's is not an isolated case in Colombia, where Coca-Cola and other transnational and national companies are using rightwing mercenary paramilitary groups to force workers into submission. In 1994, two other Coca-Cola union activists, José Davíd and Luís Granado, were murdered in Carepa, and at that time as well, paramilitaries demanded that workers quit the union. In 1989, unionist José Avelino Chicano was killed in Coca-Cola's Pasto plant. This year, again during negotiations, a union leader at the Bucaramanga plant, Oscar Dario Soto Polo, was murdered. When the union denounced the killings, the plant's chief of security charged its leaders with terrorism and rebellion. Five were arrested and jailed for six months, then released. "In Colombia, the trade unions' struggle is a struggle for life," explains María Ermelina Mosquera, an executive member of the Colombian trade union SINATRAINAL.

The companies, meanwhile, disclaim all responsibility. Coca-Cola spokesperson Rafael Fernández asserts that Coke has a code of conduct requiring respect for human rights. Coke's Colombia spokesperson, Pablo Largacha, insists that "bottlers in Colombia are completely independent of the Coca-Cola Company". The bottler, Bebidas y Alimentos, says it had no way to stop the paramilitaries from doing whatever they wanted. "You don't use them, they use you," owner Kirby told a reporter. "Nobody tells the paramilitaries what to do."

During a subsequent investigation by the Colombian Justice Ministry, the plant's director and production manager were detained, along with a local paramilitary leader. All three were later released, with no charges filed against them.

After the dead of Gil, the company abandoned ongoing negotiations with the union. Twenty-seven workers in 12 departments left the plant and the area. All the workers had to quit the union to save their lives, and the union was completely destroyed. For two months, the paramilitaries camped just outside the plant gate and Coca-Cola never complained to the authorities. The experienced workers who left the plant, who'd been earning between $380 and $400 a month, were replaced by new employees at minimum wage - $130 a month. "In the last five years, Coca-Cola has replaced 10,000 contract workers for temporary staff contracted through agencies," states Ermelina.

In November 2002, the United Steelworkers of America and the International Labour Rights Fund (ILRF) decided to take the case of Gil to the American courts and present a lawsuit against Coca-Cola in its home country, the US. On 31 March, a Florida court decided that the lawsuit presented against two bottling plants of Coca-Cola in Colombia Coca-Cola Panamerican Beverages (Panamco) and Bebidas y Alimentos (Bebidas) in Colombia, could progress. Lawyers for the families expressed their satisfaction with the judgment of Florida judge José E. Martinez, though they will appeal the judge's decision to exonerate Coca-Cola itself.

As María Ermelina Mosquera explains: "it cannot be said that Coca Cola is directly involved in the shooting, but the company is accomplice with those companies in getting the workers killed." The suit charges that plant manager Ariosto Milán Mosquera told the workers that "he had given an order to the paramilitaries to carry out the task of destroying the union." Workers believed him because he had a history of partying with the paramilitaries.

The level of violence against Colombian trade unionists is staggering: according to Héctor Fajardo, general secretary of the United Confederation of Workers (CUT), Colombia's largest union federation, 3,800 trade unionists have been assassinated in Colombia since 1986. In the year 2000, three out of every five trade unionists killed in the world were Colombian, according to a recent report by the United Steelworkers.

Trade unionists and human rights activists hold Colombia's right-wing paramilitary forces responsible for almost all the trade-union assassinations - though those forces aren't working simply for themselves. Robin Kirk, who monitors abuses in Colombia for Human Rights Watch, says that there are strong ties between the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC), the nation's leading paramilitary grouping, and the Colombian military. "The Colombian military and intelligence apparatus has been virulently anticommunist since the 1950s," she says, "and they look at trade unionists as subversives - as a very real and potential threat." The AUC is also quietly backed by elements of the nation's business and economic elite.

The Colombian government's answer has been the criminalisation of trade unionists -who have been imprisoned for their union activities under charges of rebellion and lately of terrorism. The government views union activity as a threat because it challenges its basic economic policies. The Colombian administration is under intense pressure from the International Monetary Fund to cut its public-sector budget, in part through privatising public services. Union leaders who oppose privatisation have also been targeted. After leading a fight to maintain public service in the city of Calí, Carlos Elíecer Prado, a public-sector union leader, was murdered in May.

SINATRAINAL is calling for an international solidarity campaign involving a boycott of all Coca-Cola products, condemnation of the violence against trade unionists and Coca-Cola workers in Colombia and the creation of an international body to observe the activities of multinational companies and investigate possible human rights violations. They are seeking support from trade unionists around the world to put an end to the killing and harassment of their colleges in Colombia.

International labour cooperation, the unions believe, is the only means left to them to counter the power of the corporations that they think are the instigators and beneficiaries of the repression.

by Morpheus Mon Aug 25, 2003 14:00

Where did I lie? I still have to see this Campaign by Sinn Féin. I stand by comments made about your parties record in health in the north and your relationship to big business.

Is this your response to the above post about the Coca Cola donation? Call me a liar - this is a sad attempt to spin the discussion "Hebe," I expected more to be honest from the famed Sinn Fein spin.

by Hebe Mon Aug 25, 2003 13:52

Even the Irish Times article commented on the campaign that SF has run against Coke. Looks as if Morpheus has been getting lessons on how to lie from the SP.

by Joe Mon Aug 25, 2003 13:42

Many of you will be aware that Coca Cola is being sued in a Florida court by
the Colombian trade union SINALTRAINAL for its alleged use of paramilitary
groups to kill trade unionists. The details of the case were explained by
Ermelina Mosquera of SINALTRAINAL at a recent LASC public meeting, giving
rise to a campaign in Ireland to support the international one-year boycott
of Coke products.

Last Friday an attempt was made to kill a SINALTRAINAL leader, JUAN CARLOS
GALVIS, in Colombia. He is one of the union leaders named in the LAW suit.

Please respond, if you can find time, to the following Urgent Action, issued
this weekend by SINALTRAINAL.

LASC.

*******************************************************************

MURDER ATTEMPT AGAINST JUAN CARLOS GALVIS, LEADER OF THE SINALTRAINAL UNION

On Friday, August 22, 2003, at 12:10 in mid-day, a murder attempt was
committed against the life of JUAN CARLOS GALVIS, worker at the
transnational corporation Coca-Cola in Barrancabermeja, President of the
Subdirective of the Central Unitaria de Trabajadores de Colombia "CUT" and
of the branch of our union in that oil town in Colombia.

In the moment in which Juan Carlos was being driven to his house, two men
who were riding on a motorcycle fired several shots at him, which were
repelled by the bodyguards of the compaÒero, saving his life and preserving
his security. The murder attempt was committed 50 meters away from the
corner of street 47 and avenue 19, in front of the Colegio Santo Tomas, in
the moment in when he was being transported from the office of the union of
the public works company of Barrancabermeja towards his site of residence.

In Caracol News, August 22, 7 PM edition, the reporter announced to the
entire country that this murder attempt was presumably committed by
paramilitaries. Effectively, in the last few months, these groups have been
constantly sending threats against the life of Juan Carlos Galvis and other
union leaders of SINALTRAINAL and the Central Unitaria de Trabajadores
"CUT."

On July 20, 2001, through his lawyer in the United States, Juan Carlos
Galvis presented a lawsuit against the transnational
corporation Coca-Cola and other companies for the death threats that he has
been a victim of. Other lawsuits alleging human
rights violations were presented in the same court in Miami by other victims
and by SINALTRAINAL.

On July 22 of this year, in press conference in several cities on five
continents, including Barrancabermeja, we announced to the world the
beginning of the International Campaign Against Coca-Cola, for the
violations that this corporation is committing against the rights of workers
and communities. Juan Carlos was responsible for the press conference which
took place in
Barrancabermeja.

We ask social, human rights, and popular organizations to denounce this new
attempt against SINALTRAINAL. Send letters of protest to:

ARMANDO G?MEZ
Jefe de Recursos Humanos
COCA COLA FEMSA S.A.
agomari@femsa.com.mx

FELIPE ALVIRA
Presidente de COCA COLA FEMSA en Colombia
cocacola@hotmail.com
www.cocacola.com.co/holacoke/contactenos.php

¡LVARO URIBE V?LEZ
Presidente de la Rep?blica de Colombia
Palacio de NariÒo
Carrera 8 No.7-26
Bogota, COLOMBIA
Fax: 00 57 1 286 74 34/286, 68 42/284 21 86
E-mail:auribe@presidencia.gov.co; dh@presidencia.gov.co

Francisco Santos
Vicepresidente de la Rep?blica de Colombia
ConserjerÌa Presidencial de Derechos Humanos
Calle 7, No 654, Piso 3
Bogota, COLOMBIA
Fax: 00 57 1 337 1351
E-mail: fsantos@presidencia.gov.co
Programa Derechos Humanos Presidencia de la Republica
ppdh@presidencia.gov.co

Fernando LondoÒo Hoyos
Ministro del Interior y Justicia
Ministerio del Interior y Justicia
Palacio Echeverry, Carrera 8a, No.8-09, piso 2o.,
Bogota, Colombia
Fax:00 57 1 286 8025
E-mail:ministro@minjusticia.gov.co; minisint@col1.telecom.com.co;
viceministra@minjusticia.gov.co

Martha Lucia Ramirez de Rincon
Ministra de Defensa
Ministerio de Defensa Nacional
Avenida El Dorado con carrera 52 CAN Santa Fe de
Bogot·
Fax: 00 57 1 222 1874
E-mail:siden@mindefensa.gov.co; Comunicacion@mindefensa.gov.co


Luis Camilo Osorio
Fiscal General de la NaciÛn
E-mail:contacto@fiscalia.gov.co; denuncie@fiscalia.gov.co;
webmaster@fiscalia.gov.co

Edgardo JosÈ Maya Villazon
Procurador General de la Nacion
Carrera 5 N? 15-80 F
Fax: 3429723
E-mail:anticorrupcion@presidencia.gov.co;
reygon@procuraduria.gov.co


Luis Eduardo Cifuentes
Defensor del Pueblo
E-mail:secretaria_privada@hotmail.com; defensoria@defensoria.org.co

Oficina del Alto Comisionado para las Naciones Unidas en Colombia
TelÈfono 629 36 36 ext 109-132-144
E-mail: www.hchr.orgo.co

Oficina del Alto Comisionado de las Naciones Unidas para los
Derechos Humanos
Palacio Wilson
Oficina de las Naciones Unidas en Ginebra
1211 Ginebra 10
Suiza
Tel.: +41 22 917 90 00
Fax: +41 22 917 90 11
E-mail: webadmin.hchr@unog.ch


Sincerely,

LUIS JAVIER CORREA SU¡REZ
President, SINALTRAINAL




*******************************************************************
The Latin America Solidarity Centre (LASC) is an initiative
for Development Education, Cultural Promotion and
Campaigning Solidarity, linking Ireland and Latin America

5 Merrion Row, Dublin 2, Ireland

Phone +353 1 676 0435
Fax +353 1 662 1784
Email lasc@iol.ie
Website www.lasc.ie
*******************************************************************

by Morpheus Mon Aug 25, 2003 13:26

"It is obvious though that SF were in no way compromised by this donation. Since it was given SF has campaigned vigourously against Coke."

Thats odd I still have to hear of this vigourous campaign against Coca Cola by the Shinners. From what I can see Sinn Fein are fairly quiet bar a few articles here and there in support of the Colombian Trade Unionists. Sinn Fein once again has been comprimised lets give 2 reasons-

(1) A so called left wing party which has links to Corporate America and right wing Irish americans such as Peter King has been cought out by accepting a donation one of from the worlds biggest Multinational corporations. Consistently Sinn Fein has lied on this forum by denying their links to corporate america by avoding the question arguing "Republicans have answered this question time and time again"

(2) Coca Cola by "Hebe's" on admission purchased tickets to the local Sinn Fein Fundraiser. If Sinn Féin is so radical why then are Coca Cola lining up for the Sinn Fein champagne & cheese parties?

(3) Taken from the Sinn Féin website - "Friends of Sinn Féin USA welcomes ALL donations, which it accounts for as an agent for Sinn Féin registered with the U.S. Department of Justice."

Sinn Fein has been actively courted by a cabal of Irish American multi-millionaires, and by sections of the Irish, British and American ruling classes over the last decade. The Republican leadership are like rabbits caught in the headlights of an oncoming lorry. They are heart scared to offend their new allies. When a Sinn Fein councillor visited the US recently she was forbidden by the leadership back in Ireland to visit a political activist on death row in case the nose of a vital friend of Sinn Fein was put out of joint. Right-wing Congressmen who prosecute the blockade on Cuba are feted in west Belfast. The dollars are flooding in and any socialist veneer that Sinn Fein once had is long gone.

Ex-Belfast IRA commander Brendan Hughes has described how he found it difficult to obtain employment on building sites in West Belfast after he was released from prison. He is ostracised as a dissident from the line of the Republican leadership whilst low pay employers are allowed to exploit with impunity as they are loyal to the leadership


On its website Sinn Fein's Bairbre de Brún, talks about how Sinn Fein wants to create an Ireland "here both political and economic power is distributed as widely as possible -an Ireland based on equality, justice, rights and empowerment"

This rather Liberal statement is quite frankly cynical coming from the Butcher of the health service in Northern Ireland. Look at her record and ask how can this party claim to be left wing -Her record in the executive speaks of cutback after cutback. The Hayes Report on the future of Northern Ireland's health service, commissioned by de Bruin, is couched in the familiar terms of senior civil ser vants with their eyes on the purse strings. It recommends huge cuts in services and a massive increase in reliance on the Private Finance Initiative. The report has already been welcomed in broad terms by John Kelly and Sue Ramsey of Sinn Fein. Francie Molloy has stated that he has no principled objection to private medicine. Hayes is proposing more or less what past direct rule ministers proposed. Nothing has changed as far as social and economic issues are concerned.

Sinn Fein faces ordinary people as an anti-establishment force but it also faces the establishment itself saying "we are respectable, if we are in power your system including your profits and privileged position will be safeguarded". The latter is its true face.

They are a capitalist, nationalist party which uses populism to extend its base. How and when Sinn Fein will be exposed will depend on events.

by Hebe Mon Aug 25, 2003 11:05

There is no question about that. But SF would have been unaware of the source of the money. It was raised in a local fundraising effort. THe local Coke office bought seats at a fundraising dinner.

SF should now return the money.

It is obvious though that SF were in no way compromised by this donation. Since it was given SF has campaigned vigourously against Coke.

I wonder if the same is true of tjose who will use any stick to attack SF.

by DD Mon Aug 25, 2003 10:46

Kila's questions still stands unanswered. How can SF portray itself as a leftwing party when its taking political donations from large global capitalist organisations. Perhaps SF aren't as far from FF as they like to claim?

by Mary J Mon Aug 25, 2003 09:13

Guilty until proven innocent? Eh Joe?
You must be one of those individuals who still have not gotten over the aquittal of the Birmingham Six and the Guildford Four.

by joe ranii Mon Aug 25, 2003 08:04

BBC 23/8/03:

At least seven people, including a baby, have been killed in an explosion in Colombia, according to military officials.
An army spokesman said a bomb went off as about 60 people were getting off a boat on the river Ariari, in the central town of Puerto Rico, 125 miles (200 km) southeast of Bogota. He said the army believes that one of the seven who died was a woman who was carrying the explosive device in a box, but there are no indications that she was a suicide bomber. Thirty-eight other people were injured by the blast, which the army blamed on the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) - the country's largest rebel group.

The BBC's Jeremy McDermott, in Medellin, said the bomb was believed to have been a proxy device set off by remote control when the rebels saw the boat approach the dockside. Army experts believe the woman did not know that she had the device with her. The rebels have used proxy bombs before - forcing people to drive cars filled with explosives at army checkpoints before detonating the devices by remote control.
A senior local official, Wilson Munoz, said the worst-injured were to be transported to hospitals by aircraft. He blamed FARC for the bombing saying the group "doesn't respect any parameters of human rights. "It was horrendous. There are many body parts, not all the people could be identified. We're working to see if there are more than six dead."

by Seáinín Mon Aug 25, 2003 02:10

If it's RIRA scumbags you're screaming about an unfair trial, but you don't apply that logic for Coca-Cola,

You ought to write "Coca-Cola's _alleged_ role"...

BTW, that company is not even a Coca-Cola company and the American judge who declared there are grounds for a legal inquiry specifically cleared Coca-Cola of all suspicion in this matter.