Coke a killer in Colombia?

by UCDSU member Sun Nov 09, 2003 15:52

The ban does not just affect "UCD's Belfield campus". UCDSU's shop in Earlsfort Terrace is also affected, as is any shop that the SU opens anywhere else.

by harry Sun Nov 09, 2003 15:58

When I was a UCD student I was under the impression that only 'members of the University' were allowed on campus (ie students, staff, members of governing body, or those invited by a department, faculty etc.)

If this 'heavyhitter' comes on campus surely he would have to escorted off campus should it be requested that he leaves. If a society invites him on campus then they would be interfering in the SU, which is against Society rules. And I'm sure the College Authorites will not issue him an invite to interfere in the SU internal affairs.

Advice to the 'No' side: look into the legality of this guy coming on campus (or anyother outsiders) and get them kicked off campus.

by analyst Sun Nov 09, 2003 17:29

I think it is of utmost importance that Paul Dillon the SU president meets the SU shop staff straight away and makes a written guarentee that regardless of the referendum there will be no cut in hours, in wages or conditions for the staff. This is of utmost importance, we are only talking €200 a week at max. The SU staff need to be taken out of the referendum they are just being used as pawns in Waghornes games.

by Marcus - none Sun Nov 09, 2003 19:49

What other shops are there besides SU shops on campus? Does college have no control over these? Is it possible to pressure the academic senate to enact a campus-wide boycott?

by Seneschal Mon Nov 10, 2003 01:53

If Coca Cola pulled out of Colombia tomorrow the killings would go on apace. Coca Cola inc is operating in a guerilla war zone (Colombia).

To say that Coca Cola Inc can do anything to stop a conflict that has been raging for over 20 years is total naivety, a characteristic of UCD students. Most of the UCD crowd had necer seen a city before they got to Belfield.

by Seán Mon Nov 10, 2003 10:30

that Coke is responsible for all the deaths caused during the conflict in Colombia what we're saying is that Coca Cola is aware of, and quite possibly may have caused the death of 8 Trade Unionists since 1990, not to mention the harrassment, torture and disappearance of many more people wishing to be represented by a Trade Union.

by John Meehan Mon Nov 10, 2003 11:32

This is a great feature.

An additional question - have supporters of the "Colombia Three" - Niall Connolly, Martin McAuley and Jim Monaghan - considered the implications of Coke boycott opponents (the Coca Cola management, SIPTU in Ireland) questioning the company's role in the persecution and murder of trade unionists in that part of Latin America?

The main plank of the Colombia Three Campaign - which is indisputably true - is that the three Irish republicans cannot possibly get a fair trial in a state heavily implicated in death squad thuggery. Coca Cola management's role - at least indirect, as it says in the main story - in the murder and intimidation of trade union organisers in the Coca Cola plant is a very clear example of the claims made by the "Bring Them Home" Colombia Three Campaign.

Sinn Féin supports this campaign. Ógra Sinn Féin members are helping to spread the boycott campaign beyond UCD - and fair play to them.

Yet some leading Sinn Féin members (for example, the SIPTU Official Anne Speed) are working alongside Coke management "heavy hitters" against the boycott - if they succeed, they will obviously damage the campaign of the Colombia Three - plenty of food for thought there for Sinn Féin Assembly Election candidate in South Down, Catríona Ruane (also spokesperson for the "Bring Them Home" campaign).

by UCDSU member Mon Nov 10, 2003 11:39

"What other shops are there besides SU shops on campus? Does college have no control over these? Is it possible to pressure the academic senate to enact a campus-wide boycott?"

The SU runs 5 shops. 4 in Belfield and 1 in Earlsfort Terrace. There are no SU shops outside of any UCD campus. The SU don't run any shop in other UCD campuses, ie Ballsbridge, Blackrock, etc. The College does not have control over the SU shops, in UCD the SU is separate from the College authorities. It would be possible to put pressure on the College to boycott Coca Cola, but if you had the experience that I have had with the UCD Authorities you will know that their prime concern is with money and will do nothing whatsoever to 'rock the boat'.

by UCDSU member Mon Nov 10, 2003 11:45

The SU don't run most of the outlets in UCD. In Belfield there are 2 restaurants run by the College. There are also a number of canteens/cafes around Belfield run by UCD or a Franchise (Agriculture, Arts, Roebuck, Quinn School, Vet, Richview etc.). There are also a number of sandwich shop type outlets- these are franchised (ie O'Briens in Sports Centre, and the Grind in the Student Centre).

In Earlsfort Terrace there is a restaurant and a small cafe/canteen that are run by the College. In Blackrock and Ballsbridge the food outlets are run by the College.

The vast majority of Food outlets are run by the College and franchises.

by Mr DISCO - ucd SA ( Sinaltraninal {A}Obliteraters ) Mon Nov 10, 2003 16:49

This re-run will cost the union €5000.
thats the difference in a few jobs in the su.

all so a bunch of saggy chested right wing cunts will get their name printed in college papers/get to run for president .... etc.

Ask william binchy (any relation to the pro life lecturer in tcd?) would he collect signatures if the first ref went the other way. hell just laugh.

this isnt about democracy
this isnt about "freedom of choice"
this isnt about the union loosing money (as it will cost the union €5000

this is about a petty group of new right wingers (of the ross higgins/abe campbell/YFG variety) scrounging more money off the union to further their own bollox failed politics.

Dont let them away with it.
Dont vote.

//I've been walking in the rain just to get wet on purpose//

by money? Mon Nov 10, 2003 16:55

The Academic Council and Governing Authority are electing student members at the same time. My understanding was that the College pay the SU for the use of their services (ie the returning officer and his/her polling and counting staff). The AC and GA elections are taking place then anyway, so is it the case that the College are paying for the referendum?

BTW what's this I hear about a prisoner candidate running in the AC elections in Arts?

by Righteous Pragmatist Mon Nov 10, 2003 19:43

A pint glass of coke with a handful of ice cubes is refreshing on a hot summer day. one of life's few tender mercies.
Coke is sweet and fizzy and it tastes delicious!
I like drinking it! ALL my friends drink it!
Countless millions around the world drink it!
WHY?
It says on the bottles and cans.
ENJOY COKE!

by TheVoiceOfReason Mon Nov 10, 2003 23:25

I bet all the fizz goes out of you in public!

by Fergus Tue Nov 11, 2003 03:00

Fuck them, they're linked to FARC which is why the Right Wing paras are killing them, it's got nothing to do with Coca Cola.

by Daithí Tue Nov 11, 2003 11:32

Rafael Fernandez Quiros is indeed in Ireland, and on Radio 1 with Pat Kenny. Also Gearóid Ó (didn't catch surname) from LASC, Rory Hearne (Trinity Boycott Campaign), and head of Coca-Cola Bottlers Ireland.

by Non coke drinker Tue Nov 11, 2003 12:25

Apparently there are plans in the air to the franchising of soft drink vending machines in schools. The idea is that the schools would get some money for this. This is the thin end of the wedge of public-private partnerships and this campaign in UCD has come at a bad time.

Such franchises are widespread in the USA, where not only Coke, but some rather well known sports companies have franchises for providing equipement, sports clothing and trainers. It's an extremely profitable for all concerned.

by Richard Waghorne - Campaign to Re-Introduce Coca-Cola Tue Nov 11, 2003 14:24 richardwaghorne at hotmail dot com 087 6123021

Questions raised about nature and format of event
Monday's debate at UCD's L&H condemned.
PRESS RELEASE

On Monday November 10th at 1pm the Literary and Historical Society at UCD (L&H) hosted an event to debate the forthcoming Coca-Cola referendum. While this is a pressing issue for the students of UCD the nature and format of the event fell below the standard expected of such an august body. As Chair of the Campaign to Re-Introduce Coca-Cola I wish to express my great disappointment and to dissociate myself what was a sham debate. Yesterday's L&H event was no more than a corporate press conference masquerading as a student debate. The length of the speech by Coca-Cola Director of Communications in Latin America, Rafael Fernandez Quiros, far exceeded the seven minutes any guest speaker is expected to limit himself or herself to. Furthermore, Mr. Quiros refused to take any points of information, a decision explicitly sanctioned by the Auditor of the L&H Mr. Ciaran Lawlor. He took only four questions from students before leaving and was not present for any of the speeches by students and made no genuine effort to engage in debate with those present. This was not a debate but a press conference and was both a discredit to the Campaign and a scar on the reputation of the L&H.

Although the content of the address made a valuable contribution to students’ understanding of the issues, my own included, his refusal to participate in a debate with students is a source of major disappointment to me and it is a discredit to the campaign that this was tolerated. I am saddened that Campaign Agent Mr. Michael Binchy took an active role in organizing this event and I believe that his decision to do so was deeply regrettable. The nature and format of yesterday’s event were unknown to me and unauthorized by me and I would like to take this opportunity to condemn outright the excessive deference and partiality afforded to a guest speaker. Coca-Cola has no case to answer, but their policy of not debating these issues is unconstructive and unnecessary. The Campaign has no need to justify this policy and it is disappointing that Mr. Binchy chose to do so at yesterday’s event.

I now find myself in a very difficult position. However, I remain committed to pursuing this referendum and believe that the facts speak for themselves. I urge students at UCD to consider the arguments on each side and to vote. I personally urge students to vote Yes to this referendum and to bring Coca-Cola back to UCD.

END

Issued on behalf of Campaign Chair Richard Waghorne

by Free Dave Tue Nov 11, 2003 15:16

David Murphy, bin tax prisoner currently in D Wing of Mountjoy, will be standing in the undergraduate arts constituency for the Academic Council next wednesday.

If you really wanna piss off waghorne and the college authorities vote No. 1 David Murphy and Abstain on Coca Cola vote next Wednesday.

by Yossarian Tue Nov 11, 2003 15:48

Of course any human rights organisation, trade union or community group who opposes the policies of the Colombian government are "linked with FARC" and hence terrorists so we shouldn't cry when they are murdered by right wing paramilitaries intimately connected with the government.

by wag the dog Tue Nov 11, 2003 16:18

THe hypocrisy/naivety of this post is overwhelming!
This guy should not be representing any student apart from himself.
After reading reports of what is going on in Columbia on various websites I am in no doubt that Coca-Cola are responsible to large extent for what is going on there at the moment.
But if people are left to make their minds up around this debate from right-wing forums such as the L+H society or the Pat K show obviously many crucial aspects of the situation are distorted.
Although Gearoid O'Loinsigh was quite good on radio it is impossible to win a debate when Pat K continues to phrase and ask questions that are pre-conditioned for the neo-liberal thinker.
Ruairi Ahearne would need to spice up his debating skills to win the debate in Trinity.

But apart from all that I do think it is a cunning tactic of Mr.Waghorne to criticise the L+H society and the Coke rep--- leading us to believe he will not stand by silently and witness the misuse of a debating society for mere corporate advertising, that's touching....
I will not stand by and witness the murder of innocent people so that one of the worlds most powerful Multi-nationals can maintain their astronomical profits.
Boycott coke !

by william A Finnerty Tue Nov 11, 2003 16:19

Is this what goes in in UCD?? Debating about Coca Cola and putting up joke candidates in SU elections? Mabey somebody should debate why Indymedia is a slanted media organisation and why Indymedia pay money to a French multinational that has lots, if not more, to answer than Coca Cola (who incidentaly employ about 1,500 people in Ireland - in Mayo, Louth and Dublin). No doubt Chief Indymedia Censor Ray will delete this asap in case too many of you get wind of the real truth behind Indymedia.ie

by a happy person Tue Nov 11, 2003 16:29

The pro-coke lobby in DCU seems to be unhappy by the actitude of the Coke representative, may be he should be glad after his debate in RTE radio (Pat Kenny) this mornig. He was pittyful!! He could not convince even Mr Kenny.
By the way Mr Waghorne, was not you the one that said in Nearfm that you did not intend to stand for elections in UCD? that was totally untruth that you were going ahead with this campaing just for the good of humanity (all but the Colombian trade unionist)?
Lays, lays and more lays
Just to finish I will like to ask free Dave to get of the fence. Are you in favor or against the ban? to call for the vote for Dave and the abstention in the referendum is a very silly possition, either you are in or out, is your choice, but at least be honest.

by wowed Tue Nov 11, 2003 16:33

Q1 Why Indymedia is a slanted Media?
A I think perhaps you missed the main feature article here at the moment!

Q2 the French multinational company who have alot more to answer for than Coca-Cola who are they William? what have they done? answers please, you know you'll only be accused of being a shit-
stirer (rightly so) if you don't.

Now roll on the names, facts and figures Willie boy!

by Tell me more Tue Nov 11, 2003 16:36

Why don't you put up a some news, telling us all you know about the "dirty" deals of indymedia.ie? you seem to be well informed, good for you, I wish you would be as well informed about Colombia as you think you are about Indimedia. But if I have to judge by your message I hope that Ray (or whoever) deletes your messages before you have even think about them, it will be a service to humanity.

by is this the right button? Tue Nov 11, 2003 16:59

Not long now mr'fin till your comment will be removed you ran off mr'fin your not able to back up anything you said are you?

And as for Waghorne jesus dude hurry up and graduate and join the fuckin PD's they'd love you!

by John Meehan Tue Nov 11, 2003 18:06

The more you look into this story, the more astonishing it becomes :

See below extracts from an Irish Independent October 11 story on the Coca Cola Boycott - astonishing stuff :

Could SIPTU please explain how a UCD Student Union boycott of Coca Cola, affecting a few vending machines on the campus, could possibly threaten "up to 1000 jobs"? Especially when many other non Student Union outlets on the campus continue to sell the drink?

Perhaps the company and SIPTU are worried that these symbolic actions will spread to other colleges. Even if they do - and I hope they do - the actual effect on Coca Cola sales will be a tiny drop in the ocean.

Perhaps it is the example, and the bad publicity for the brand that people are worried about.

There is a very simple way to overcome that problem -

The company should stop being complicit in the murder and harassment of trade unionists in Colombia.

The Union SIPTU should stop downplaying the situation in Colombia.

All was "not right in Colombia in terms of trade union rights" say SIPTU blandly.

Just think about that phrase above - and substitute "Ireland" for "Colombia".

We could very easily say that all "was not right" about Trade Union rights in Ireland - but there is no comparison with the horrific situation facing labour activists in Colombia.

Let's face facts - a big company like Coca Cola will locate in any state where it believes it can make the biggest possible profit from its workforce - and if it cuts jobs in Ireland, or moves out, it will most likely be because it has found a cheaper labour market elsewhere, and maintains its access to existing markets serviced by the Irish plants.

It is scandalous to say that a boycott movement in Irish Colleges - motivated by support for trade unionists in Colombia - is a threat to 1000 Coca Cola jobs in Ireland. Shame on SIPTU.
----------------------

"COCA-Cola and the trade union SIPTU have warned of up to 1,000 Irish jobs being threatened if students at University College Dublin boycott its products over alleged links with violence in Colombia.

..........

Campaign organiser, archaeology student Finbar Dwyer, alleges that Coca-Cola or its bottlers have been complicit with paramilitaries in acts of violence against trade union members in Colombia.

Coca-Cola said a boycott of its products, at any level, including UCD, would have the potential to directly affect local businesses and local jobs.

The Coca-Cola Company and its local bottling partner, Coca-Cola Bottlers Ireland, employ over 1,000 people in Dublin, Belfast, Galway, Cork and Kilkenny.

''''''''''''

SIPTU represents about 400 Coca-Cola workers and Ann Speed, secretary of the Drink, Tobacco and Distribution branch, said there was "no doubt about" the seriousness of the company's warning.

She said SIPTU was not a "mouthpiece" for the company but that it felt the campaign was ill-thought out.

This could not be compared to the campaign against imports from South Africa in its apartheid days, she said.

Coca-Cola products on sale in Ireland were sourced here, not in Colombia, and bottled by an independent franchisee, with whom Siptu had enjoyed very positive relations.

She said concern about human rights was to be admired and Siptu would be aware that all was not right in Colombia in terms of trade union rights, but it was a "big step" to declare that Coca-Cola was supporting any paramilitary activity in relation to trade unionists."

by Informed Tue Nov 11, 2003 20:22

I'm amazed how John can proceed to comment without even reading the earlier contributions to the site. Evidently John has his own agenda here.

"Could SIPTU please explain how a UCD Student Union boycott of Coca Cola, affecting a few vending machines on the campus, could possibly threaten "up to 1000 jobs"? Especially when many other non Student Union outlets on the campus continue to sell the drink? "

This is not about 'a few vending machines' it's about the 5 UCDSU shops and secondly, the UCDSU have stated that they would like to pressure the non SU outlets into following suit - READ THE EARLIER ENTRY JOHN!

John also comments "Perhaps the company and SIPTU are worried that these symbolic actions will spread to other colleges. Even if they do - and I hope they do - the actual effect on Coca Cola sales will be a tiny drop in the ocean..... Let's face facts - a big company like Coca Cola will locate in any state where it believes it can make the biggest possible profit from its workforce - and if it cuts jobs in Ireland, or moves out, it will most likely be because it has found a cheaper labour market elsewhere, and maintains its access to existing markets serviced by the Irish plants".

Luckily I actually listened to the PK Show today and have done extensive research since which evidently makes me much more informed than John. The Coca-Cola Company products sold in Ireland are produced, bottled and distributed by Coca-Cola Bottlers Ireland. This company is a franchisee and is not owned by Coca-Cola. There is NO export arm to their business so a)a boycott like this must represent more than 'a tiny drop in the ocean' b) what the hell are 'markets serviced by the Irish plants' if the company doesnt export.

Think it's time to go back to the drawing board John and come up with some sort of REAL ARGUMENT/POINTS/CONTRIBUTIONS... ANYTHING!

by cabhog Tue Nov 11, 2003 21:04

if i remember correctly, SIPTU got thrown out of BElfield for distrubting pro-coke literature. The socialists in UCD were delighted that no outside influence was being brought to bear on the referendum first time out.

Why then is Rory Ahearne collecting signatures in Trinity? surely as he's nothing to do with trinity anymore, his SWSS friends should tell him to depart and not be interfering in TCD afairs?

by maybe more informed Tue Nov 11, 2003 21:08

Quote: John also comments "Perhaps the company and SIPTU are worried that these symbolic actions will spread to other colleges. Even if they do - and I hope they do - the actual effect on Coca Cola sales will be a tiny drop in the ocean..... Let's face facts - a big company like Coca Cola will locate in any state where it believes it can make the biggest possible profit from its workforce - and if it cuts jobs in Ireland, or moves out, it will most likely be because it has found a cheaper labour market elsewhere, and maintains its access to existing markets serviced by the Irish plants".


coke are a franchise company. Coca-Cola Ireland is an independent company from Coca Cola Colombia. If people stop drinking coke in Ireland, workers in Ireland will lose out first. Distrubtors, shop keepers, bottlers, etc

by confused Tue Nov 11, 2003 21:18

then the workers in the bottling franchise in Colombia will lose their lives!

and then the colombian unions will be smashed and then all the jobs will go to lower paid places and then there won't be anyone with enough money to drink coke in Ireland

ooohhhh it's all so confusing, what to do?:
let coke profit from murder or not?
hmmm.....

by Daithí Tue Nov 11, 2003 21:20

Rory Hearne is a TCD student. Get your facts straight before you bost.

by Informed Tue Nov 11, 2003 21:22

Damaging profits in Irish shops etc. will do what exactly for workers in Colombia?

Look at this rationally. Coca-Cola operates in over 200 countries. If they really believed that the management in the Colombian bottling plants was corrupt why would they not just end the franchise agreement and source new partners? Surely they would legally be within their rights to do so. This would seem much less hassle than risking the company's reputation and hard cash???
These guys aint stupid - give them some credit.

by confused - but not as much as some people Tue Nov 11, 2003 21:46

"Damaging profits in Irish shops etc. will do what exactly for workers in Colombia?"

Well, I could be wrong, but from reading the article above it would appear that this will put pressure on Coca-Cola to lean on the Colombian government who are probably not very far behind the attacks.

"Look at this rationally. Coca-Cola operates in over 200 countries. If they really believed that the management in the Colombian bottling plants was corrupt why would they not just end the franchise agreement and source new partners?"

Because the "corrupt" management are doing nice cheap bottling for them. The management (or so it would appear from the links in the story above) are part of the administrator class of the country who are fighting a civil war with the working class. Looking at it rationally it's in Coke's interests to maximise profits by selecting brutal working partners. Unless, that is, there's a strong backlash from people that don't agree with these murders in other parts of the world. Coke will "just end the franchise agreement and source new partners" when they end up losing more than they gain.

"Surely they would legally be within their rights to do so. This would seem much less hassle than risking the company's reputation and hard cash???
These guys aint stupid - give them some credit."

Well, with people like you arguing against the boycott there's no incentive for Coke to just do that. This boycott IS "the hassle".

by John Meehan Tue Nov 11, 2003 22:39

If the anonymous contributor (or contributors)attacking my signed article identifies her/himself, then it might be worthwhile answering the points - if the person continues to hide behind their computer screen - my advice to all is to boycott.

Put an end to this nonsense of "debating" with ghosts. If you believe you have a point of view that should be seen on indymedia, sign your name.

Clean up indymedia.

Boycott anonymous posters.

by John Meehan Tue Nov 11, 2003 22:59

I just noticed my main critic, the SIPTU fan signs her/himself, as "informd".

Apologies to whoever might be the contributor "confused" for mixing you up with "informed" - difficult to keep track of these ghosts.

by Righteous Pragmatist Wed Nov 12, 2003 18:58

Whether or not i want to drink Coca-Cola is my own fucking business!
Frankly i don't give a flying fuck WHAT Coca-Cola do in Colombia. They could kill a houndred thousands goddam Colombos,I want to drink Coca-cola and you bastards can't stop me!

by Phuq Hedd Thu Nov 13, 2003 01:10

No one is ordering you any here. They're asking you to be a big, warm-hearted cuddly teddy-bear and to deny yourself one little pleasure in order to help people being murdered. Now, be a good boy and just _try_, will you?

by righteous pragmatist Thu Nov 13, 2003 14:06

So why are you BANNING me from drinking coke in UCD? I don't think that's ASKING i think that's FORCING.
Left wingers are so blindly authoritarian they think that they see no distinction between forcing people to do something and asking.
Big Brother is watching you so you must love big brother.

by redjade Thu Nov 13, 2003 14:45

Published on Tuesday, November 11, 2003 by the New York Daily News
Bottling Coke and Spilling Blood
by Juan Gonzalez
http://www.commondreams.org/views03/1112-09.htm

''Colombia is the murder capital of the world. A 40-year-old civil war, a decades-long government campaign against drug traffickers and an infamously brutal military have led to near anarchy and more than 35,000 deaths.

But few people realize that Colombia is an especially notorious killing field for union leaders.

Some 213 trade union leaders were murdered worldwide in 2002, according to the London-based International Confederation of Free Trade Unions.

Of those, 184 died in Colombia.

Since 1986, nearly 4,000 Colombia union leaders have been assassinated - including 400 from the national teachers union alone. Virtually none of the killers have been brought to justice.

Juan Luis Londoño, Colombia's minister of social protection, admitted earlier this year that the murders of union leaders are an "international disaster." The government has resorted to paying for bodyguards for hundreds of labor leaders whose lives are threatened.''

by Righteous Pragmatist Thu Nov 13, 2003 15:44

I think that the Coke Wars are about the white powder that people snort up their noses and the profits from the drug which inspires armed thugs kill each other and innocent people to get their hands on!
Colombia's problems are from being the coke centre of the world.
Not because Coca-Cola run operations from there.
Comparing a harmless brown coloured fizzy drink with the cocaine trade is ludicrous in the extreme.

by Phuq Hedd Fri Nov 14, 2003 17:59

QUOTE: Comparing a harmless brown coloured fizzy drink with the cocaine trade is ludicrous in the extreme.

ANSWER: So why are you doing that then? You're the first one to make this comparison. In fact the article and discussion aren't anything about the health effects of the substance. They're about the fact that an employee of an employee of Coke is complicit in the murder of its employees and some of us want to pressure Coke to pressure its employees to not murder their employees.

It's quite simple. You're thinking too much and really you're not equipped for that. I can see why you're afraid of a socialist society in which you'd have freedom, you just wouldn't be able to cope with it. Now shut up and drink your Coke.

by SMASH FG/PD/FF CLIQUE! Sat Nov 15, 2003 01:06

I am more than sure that the left in UCD will smash Binchy and his pro Coke, pro death, anti Trade Union scum in this referendum.

This referendum is no longer about the boycott of Coke from the Su shops it is a fight between the Left wing and the capitalist class and their acolytes. If we beat them on Wednesday it will be the final nail in the coffin for the right wing in the UCD SU. Last February they were on the ropes now lets finish off the job and nail these bastards!!!


NO WAR BUT CLASS WAR!!!
KEEP THE BOYCOTT!!
SMASH BINCHY!!

by SMASH FG/PD/FF CLIQUE! Sat Nov 15, 2003 01:10

I havn't finished...

I think that if Binchy loses this referendum we should once and for all finish off his ambitions to become the new Aonghus Hourihane and for his FG blue shirted bastard wife beating knuckle scraping fucks of mates to become the new KBC.

I say if there is a NO vote we should recall this bastard from Union Council. In 3rd Law Binchy only won by a handful of votes agaisnt a left winger. And I know loads of people in his class HATE this BASTARD BINCHY with a fucking passion!!

by Coke Kills Sat Nov 15, 2003 21:54

Coke : Hazardous Even Without Pesticides
By Vandana Shiva


A pesticide residue found in the entire range of soft drinks has once again put focus on the Cola giants - Coca-Cola and Pepsi Cola. However, while government labs in Kerala and Rajasthan are giving the Cola companies a clean bill of health because no pesticides were found, soft drinks are hazardous even without pesticides. These hazards are intrinsic to the production processes of Coke or Pepsi.

Firstly, the Cola companies mine water for their bottling plants, robbing the poor of their very fundamental right to drinking water.

Secondly, the bottling plants are a source of toxic waste, which threatens the environment and public health.

Finally, the soft drinks themselves are a toxic brew known to be hazardous to health. For more than a year, tribal women in Plachimada in Palaghat district have been sitting in protest against Coca-Cola because the company has drained their aquifers dry. Wells and tanks have dried up with the water table dropping from 10 ft. to 100 ft. As Virender Kumar of Mathrubhumi has written, "People are bringing headloads of potable water from afar, while truck loads of soft drinks are leaving the Coke Plant."

The plant draws more than 1 million litres a day, forcing women to walk 5-6 kms to bring headloads of potable water. 8.5 truckloads leave the plant daily, loaded with soft drinks. Each litre of coke wastes 9 litres of potable water (Virendra Kumar, Open letter to Chief Minister 10.8.03)

Agriculture yields have dropped to 1/10th in this rich Kerala ecosystem that nature has endowed with abundant water, but Coke has mined and robbed.

To add insult to injury, Coke distributed the toxic waste from its plant as free fertiliser to the villagers. Tests done on the waste showed that it contains extremely high levels of Cadmium and lead, which leads to cancer, kidney and liver disorders.

The local panchayat has withdrawn the license, but the Kerala government is protecting Coke, and in fact giving it Rs. 2 million as aid as part of its industrial policy. Such subsidies have been provided by every government where a Coke or Pepsi Plant exists. For local communities, every bottling plant is a source of the double hazard of creating water scarcity and dumping toxic waste.

Rural India is clearly a victim of the environmental and health costs of the soft drinks industry. But middle class urban India is also a victim because what Coke puts into the bottle is as toxic as what it leaves behind. The only difference is that village women of Plachimada are aware of the threat posed to their health and survival, but affluent urban India is totally unaware of the harm soft drinks are causing them. The Rs. 6,247 crore spent annually by Indian consumers on soft drinks is spent on buying health hazards, not "fun" as the ads say.

Soft drinks have zero nutrition value compared to our indigenous drinks such as nimbu pani, lassi, panna, sattu. The soft drink giants have, through their aggressive advertising, succeeded in making the youth of India ashamed of our indigenous food culture in spite of its nutrition and safety. They have monopolized the market for thirst, buying up indigenous companies like Parle, and displacing indigenous cold drinks make at home or in the cottage industry. But what Coke and Pepsi sell is a toxic brew of colouring agents and chemicals with anti-nutritive values.

The nutrient-composition of soft drinks, per 12 ounce serving in comparison to orange juice and low fat milk.

Contents Coca Cola Pepsi OJ Low-fat milk %
Calories 154 160 168 153
Sugar, g 40 40 40 18
Vit. A, IU 0 0 291 750
Vit C, mg 0 0 146 3 Folic acid, mg 0 0 164 18
Calcium, mg 0 0 33 450
Potassium, mg 0 0 711 352
Magnesium, mg 0 0 36 51
Phosphate, mg 54 55 60 353

Ref: Marion Nestle, Food Politics

The sugar in soft drinks is not natural sugar (sucrose), but high fructose corn syrup. Plants for making corn syrup have started to be set up in India, and if strict regulations are not put in place, the Indian diet could go the way of the US diet, with high fructose corn syrup causing insulin resistance. Unlike sucrose, fructose does not go through some of the critical intermediary breakdown steps, but is shunted toward the liver, where it mimics insulin's ability to cause the liver to release fatty acids into the bloodstream. Studies have found that fructose diets have 31% more triglycerides than sucrose diets. Fructose also lowers the rate of fatty acid oxidation, P.A. Mayes, a University of London scientist has concluded that,

Long-term absorption of fructose causes enzyme adaptations that increase lipogenesis fat formation and VLDL (bad cholesterol) formation leading to triglyceridemea (too many triglycerides in the blood) decreased glucose tolerance, and hyper insulinemia (too much insulin in the blood).

Scientists at the University of California in Berkeley have also confirmed that overuse of fructose was skewing the American diet towards metabolic changes encouraging fat storage.

India cannot afford these high health costs of a fructose diet, which also has other nutritional costs as side effects. When corn is used for high fructose syrup, the poor are denied a food staple. Already 30% corn is going for raw material for making industrial cattle feed and fructose, and is diverted from human food. In addition, the displacement of healthier sweeteners derived from sugar cane such as gur and khandsari robs farmers of incomes and livelihoods. The impact of the Colas on the food chain and economy is thus very large and does not stop with the bottle.

But what is within the bottle in any case is not fit for a healthy diet. Consumption of soft drinks is well known to contribute to tooth decay. Adolescents who consume soft drinks display a risk of bone fractures 3 to 4 fold higher than those who do not. Soft drinks are becoming the greatest source of caffeine in children's diets, with each 12 ounce can of cola containing about 45 milligrams of caffeine.

And there are other ingredients in the toxic brew, an anti-freeze compound - ethylene glycol for lower freezing, phosphoric acid to give it a bite. People are consuming 4 kg of chemicals a year per person on the basis of 20.6 million tonnes of chemicals in the form of artificial colours, flavourings etc. (Prashant Bhushan "Soft drinks - A toxic - brew"). It is therefore not just pesticides we should be concerned about, but the toxic brew our children are being made addicted to by the Cola giants. And while the corporations push toxics in the form of soft drinks they have manipulated the government's Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs (CCEA) to deny Indian investors voting rights.

When Coca-Cola reentered India after being thrown out by George Fernandes in 1977, it could only have 51% voting rights under a clause that says, "Under any circumstances the voting rights of HCCHC (Coca Cola's Holding Company) shall not exceed 51% in HCCBL i.e., the Indian shareholders should get at least 49 per cent voting rights at all times." This clause was deleted recently giving Coca-Cola imperial powers, to destroy the health of Indians and rob Indians of their democratic rights

Even in political terms, Coke is a toxic brew.

by Anne Speed - SIPTU Thu Nov 20, 2003 02:20 Liberty Hall Dublin 1 01 8748346

Reply from Anne Speed
(I am the Branch Secretary of the SIPTU Drinks Branch that has Coca Cola bottling plant workers in membership. I have just come across comments in reference to me and to workers in the Coca Cola bottling plant in Dublin on this and on other pages. Most of the comments are simply untrue.

Workers were prevented from expressing their views, threatened with legal action, assaulted (in one case) and also insulted by some students in favour of the boycott tactic. The object of this censorship tactic appeared to be to prevent ordinary workers from being allowed to exress their view to ordinary students.)

SIPTU workers in Coca Cola bottling franchise attempted to distribute a leaflet to UCD students. This is the supposed “interference” from “officials” referred to by the article by the Editorial Board.

Without getting into the substance of the argument - this is not the place - the workers consider the boycott call to be divisive of the possibility and need for workers solidarity within the Coca Cola system.

The workers in Coca Cola Ireland are aware that Right wing paramilitaries did enter and shoot and kill a Coca Cola worker and a manager in a Coca Cola bottling franchise plant in Carepa in 1996. This happened as part of an assault on a guerrilla force in the locality. One group of franchise managers (who have since been removed) in the Carepa plant in Colombia engaged in extreme threatening behaviour later in the 1990s against SINAL Trainal members. Coca Cola workers in Ireland demanded and received information on these and other events in Colombia. Nothing new or substantially different has been added by contact with a SINAL Trainal member visiting Ireland recently.

Coca Cola workers are aware of the extreme violations of human rights in Columbia and the role of right wing death squads in assassinating trade unionists, political activists and others. It is possible that those in Ireland who are genuinely outraged by these events and want to do something concrete about them have latched on to the boycott call. Coca Cola workers in Ireland merely ask if that is the right thing to do – and also ask why they were not asked for their views.

Not one Irish campaigner sought the views of or communicated with the Irish Coca Cola workers in the bottling companies. They wished to democratically express their views. So-called advocates of socialism and democracy deliberately excluded them from the debates in UCD – and insulted them when they attempted to express their views. It is not as though workers were asked to express solidarity and refused. They were never asked. If union members in Coca Cola refused to support their Colombian brothers and sisters, there might be a case for the boycott tactic. Pursuing this tactic in the absence of making contact with other Coca Cola workers throughout the world only serves to isolate Columbian Coca Cola trade unionists from their worldwide trade union comrades. For those active on issues pertaining to multinationals to refuse to make contact with the workers is to potentially cut off the active involvement and support of organised labour (as well as being politically sectarian).

A couple of observations on some comments I have come accross:

Major Woody October 31
I did not speak on any radio programme on this issue, nor have I ever said that there are no problems at the bottling plants in Colombia. Let us debate honestly and tell the truth.

A couple of commentators have alleged that “Speed” was out in UCD. I was not. Only ordinary workers and shop stewards from Coca Cola were. If you don't believe me, ask them.

I strongly suggest that anyone using this website contact SIPU Drinks branch for details of the SIPTU workers’ position. Better still, for those of you who are serious about this issue, and not just wondering through the web, why not meet the Coca Cola SIPTU members and hear their views face to face.

Geroid O Loinsigh November 3
Your comments are gratuitously offensive. I never have and never would tell anyone that has suffered repression that they have nothing to worry about. The trade union delegation that met the Colombian member of SINAL Trainal expressed solidarity and offered to pursue various forms of solidarity action.

Finally, to all of you out there, the workers in Coca Cola bottlers in this state cannot understand and are clearly bewildered as to why nobody among all of you revolutionaries, activists and democrats ever bothered to ask them what they think or can do, not just as trade unionists but as human beings. The only interest those “left-wing” supporters of the boycott in UCD expressed in the workers, was to ensure that they would not and could not express their views to students. They were insulted, called “company hacks” and, in one case, assaulted.

But then again they are just ordinary workers. What would they know?

SPTU workers leaflet (ask SIPTU for a copy)

by UCD Lefty type Thu Nov 20, 2003 13:32

as we all know this story has gained a lot of exposure, both from the original referendum to the Nice-stlye re-referendum that took place yesterday. After many weeks of hard campaigning, including 15 hours of canvassing yesterday alone,we finally put the issue to rest.

the motion was rejected by nearly 600 votes out of a total poll of 4500. this means of course that the coca cola boycott remains in place and our campaign team can rest easy, for the moment at least.

I know similar referenda are being proposed in colleges all over Ireland, and also the world and I urge everyone to follow the lead set by UCD in standing up to major international corporations such as coca cola. Boycotts have proven time and again to be effective - from nestle to nike. It is great to see that students in Ireland do care about other people and don't just care about their own particular preferences (cue orange-faced wench: "but i like coca cola"...)

In the meantime I would like to thank any1 who has leant their support to this issue and c yas all at Shannon on the 6th!!!

by UCD hack Thu Nov 20, 2003 13:40

Refer to angry liberal's post on the change of no canpaign approach from abstain to vote no in response to anne speeds post.He fucking got you anne.