Top Leaderboard, Site wide
Left Masthead
September 27, 2016
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed





In Some Cases of Elder Abuse, Banks Facilitated Financial Exploitation
Writings on the Wall

Truthdig Bazaar
The China Collectors

The China Collectors

Karl E. Meyer (Author), Shareen Blair Brysac
$19.77

more items

 
Report
Print this item

Chevron’s Pipeline Is the Burmese Regime’s Lifeline

Posted on Oct 2, 2007

By Amy Goodman

The image was stunning: tens of thousands of saffron-robed Buddhist monks marching through the streets of Rangoon [also known as Yangon], protesting the military dictatorship of Burma. The monks marched in front of the home of Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi, who was seen weeping and praying quietly as they passed. She hadn’t been seen for years. The democratically elected leader of Burma, Suu Kyi has been under house arrest since 2003. She is considered the Nelson Mandela of Burma, the Southeast Asian nation renamed Myanmar by the regime.

  After almost two weeks of protest, the monks have disappeared. The monasteries have been emptied. One report says thousands of monks are imprisoned in the north of the country.

  No one believes that this is the end of the protests, dubbed “The Saffron Revolution.” Nor do they believe the official body count of 10 dead. The trickle of video, photos and oral accounts of the violence that leaked out on Burma’s cellular phone and Internet lines has been largely stifled by government censorship. Still, gruesome images of murdered monks and other activists and accounts of executions make it out to the global public. At the time of this writing, several unconfirmed accounts of prisoners being burned alive have been posted to Burma-solidarity Web sites.

  The Bush administration is making headlines with its strong language against the Burmese regime. President Bush declared increased sanctions in his U.N. General Assembly speech. First lady Laura Bush has come out with perhaps the strongest statements. Explaining that she has a cousin who is a Burma activist, Laura Bush said, “The deplorable acts of violence being perpetrated against Buddhist monks and peaceful Burmese demonstrators shame the military regime.”

  Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, at the meeting of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, said, “The United States is determined to keep an international focus on the travesty that is taking place.” Keeping an international focus is essential, but should not distract from one of the most powerful supporters of the junta, one that is much closer to home. Rice knows it well: Chevron.

Advertisement

Square, Site wide

  Fueling the military junta that has ruled for decades are Burma’s natural gas reserves, controlled by the Burmese regime in partnership with the U.S. multinational oil giant Chevron, the French oil company Total and a Thai oil firm. Offshore natural gas facilities deliver their extracted gas to Thailand through Burma’s Yadana pipeline. The pipeline was built with slave labor, forced into servitude by the Burmese military.

  The original pipeline partner, Unocal, was sued by EarthRights International for the use of slave labor. As soon as the suit was settled out of court, Chevron bought Unocal.

  Chevron’s role in propping up the brutal regime in Burma is clear. According to Marco Simons, U.S. legal director at EarthRights International: “Sanctions haven’t worked because gas is the lifeline of the regime. Before Yadana went online, Burma’s regime was facing severe shortages of currency. It’s really Yadana and gas projects that kept the military regime afloat to buy arms and ammunition and pay its soldiers.”

  The U.S. government has had sanctions in place against Burma since 1997. A loophole exists, though, for companies grandfathered in. Unocal’s exemption from the Burma sanctions has been passed on to its new owner, Chevron.

  Rice served on the Chevron board of directors for a decade. She even had a Chevron oil tanker named after her. While she served on the board, Chevron was sued for involvement in the killing of nonviolent protesters in the Niger Delta region of Nigeria. Like the Burmese, Nigerians suffer political repression and pollution where oil and gas are extracted and they live in dire poverty. The protests in Burma were actually triggered by a government-imposed increase in fuel prices.

  Human-rights groups around the world have called for a global day of action on Saturday, Oct. 6, in solidarity with the people of Burma. Like the brave activists and citizen journalists sending news and photos out of the country, the organizers of the Oct. 6 protest are using the Internet to pull together what will probably be the largest demonstration ever in support of Burma. Among the demands are calls for companies to stop doing business with Burma’s brutal regime.
 
  Amy Goodman is the host of “Democracy Now!,” a daily international TV/radio news hour airing on 500 stations in North America.

  © 2007 Amy Goodman

  Distributed by King Features Syndicate


New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

Join the conversation

Load Comments

By Douglas Chalmers, April 1, 2008 at 4:15 am Link to this comment

Uhh, ask Nancy Pelosi, plainspeaker, she’s willing do do anything for the Dalai Lama but NOTHING for the Buddhist monks in Burma!!!!

Something to do with further oil exploration in Cambodia???

Report this

By plainspeaker, March 31, 2008 at 7:59 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

thr was a tanker named CONDOLEEZZA RICE. name was changed to ALTAIR VOYAGER. this is still sailing on the seas bringing crude from basra to us east coast. so much for the dbl standards of us political honchos…can anbody do anything about it legally?... what a farce??

Report this

By Albert Dellgrottaglia, January 9, 2008 at 10:24 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Please go to ronpaul2008.com & check out the issues button. RP oposes & legislates against UN GATT NAFTA WTO CAFTA ICC, the war on drugs, patriot1&2;hr1955&57;as well as many other government waste programs. He opposes basically everything the Bush Adm. has done & will undo it. He wants to end the stronghold of the Federal Reserve as well amongst all other unconstitutional legislation. He & Dennis both opposed the war & all the funding as well. He wrote a book called a Foriegn Policy of Peace. He proposes to bring the US troops home from all over the world, mind our own business, be freinds trade and travel. Kucinich went public reaching out to RP as running mate. The constitution is what he is all about. He wants to end the IRS & have Social Securty optional. This alone is revolutionary. Personal liberty and personal resposability. I want the government off my back and out of my life as much as possible. I am not in kindergarden and i can take care of myself. He would completely end the HMO’s. He is a freemarket expert and thinks Health care should be between a doctor & patient. Free market on Medicinal drugs as well. Lobbyist will have to find another job. Please study & try & understand. This is not only a hope for america, but hope for the world. I sincerely believe that.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, October 22, 2007 at 4:52 pm Link to this comment

Albert Dellgrottaglia,

Even though the war is very high on my list, several other issues are important to me.  Since Ron Paul is a Libertarian I suspect he opposed federal medical or public medical care for all.  Which I also support.  In my opinion every citizen should have the right to medical care, not only those who can afford it. How about lobbiests having undue influance over congress?

Must admit, I am not up on Ron Paul, so enlighten me.

Right now I support Kucinich for the above reasons.

Report this

By cann4ing, October 22, 2007 at 4:28 pm Link to this comment

Albert:  Please explain to me why Ron Paul offers a better chance to get us out of Iraq than Dennis Kucinich, who voted against authorizing the war in the first instance, voted against every bill to fund it and who had a detailed plan for withdrawal within the time it takes for an orderly withdrawal in the form of H.R. 1234 in place since prior to the Nov. 2006 election?  So Paul placed first on a poll regarding a debate held with fascists (er Republicans).  ABC conducted to web polls on a recent Democratic debate.  Kucinich won them both, handily—so ABC did what all corporate media do when faced with a candidate who would represent the interests of the vast majority of the electorate—the middle and working classes—they pulled the polling data from their web site and declined to mention it on any of their programs.  Another, more intriguing “blind poll” that set forth where candidates stand on issues but did not mention them by name produced startling results.  One candidate received 58% of the Democratic votes—Dennis Kucinich.  Obama was a distant second.

I am pleased that Ron Paul opposes the war in Iraq, and that he is appalled by the Bush administration’s policies on torture, extraordinary rendition etc, but I have yet to see one word that suggests that Ron Paul would agree with Kucinich that we should repeal NAFTA & the WTO, replacing them with bilateral trade agreements that respect workers’ rights and protect the environment.  Mr. Paul has not said that he would support single-payer healthcare which would eliminate the unnecessary middle-man—for profit healthcare insurance and HMOs who account for 31% of the cost.

Report this

By Albert Dellgrottaglia, October 22, 2007 at 9:24 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Leefeller. Ron Paul is our best chance if getting out of Iraq immediately is your priority. Last night at the rebublican debate moderated by Fox News Network he spoke out against the war and US Imperialist foreign policies. Despite strong opposition from the other candidates, the audiance and even the host he still won in the poll held by fox at the end of the debate. Fox has no mention of that poll on their site this morning. Al

Report this

By cann4ing, October 6, 2007 at 9:03 pm Link to this comment

Doug, we are not talking about voting for a third-party candidate, as was the issue in 2000.  We are talking about nominating a Democrat who will restore power and control to the middle and working classes.  That candidate is Dennis Kucinich.  Hillary brings more of the same.

Underlying your posts is a basic premise.  You and many Americans have, like lemmings, followed the corporate media canard that tells you who the “viable” candidates are.  And always, the candidates whom you are told are “viable” are the ones whose policies would favor corporate profits at the expense of the middle and working class.

Don’t you see that these bogus “centrist” policies are not “centrist” at all—that they have served and will continue to serve to shift the balance of power away from American labor and into the hands of a wealthy elite—that the only difference between Bush and Hillary is their methodology for accomplishing the goals of the same wealthy elite?

We are in the midst of a global class war, and Hillary is on the wrong side.  See, Jeff Faux, “The Global Class War.”

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, October 6, 2007 at 4:39 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

105114 by Douglas Chalmers on 10/06 at 4:35 am

“but this IS the ONLY CHANCE and the LAST CHANCE to defeat the Bush crowd and the NEOCONS!!! “

Hillary IS the Bush crowd, and if this is all that the business shill has (that she alone can defeat a man who is not running) the Republicans will take yet another election.

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, October 6, 2007 at 1:13 pm Link to this comment

By the way, this topic IS about the tragedy in Burma/Myanmar and it isn’t over yet. This is a kind of mini TV memorial on air for the Japaneses journalist who was shot through the liver and hip and died on the street http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LymH0aPenBM

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, October 6, 2007 at 5:35 am Link to this comment

#104917 by Ernest Canning on 10/05 at 8:16 am: “...Sorry, Doug, but a candidate has to present more than gender to qualify for office.  Does gender mean that we have to overlook the fact that Hillary says we will still have combat troops in Iraq in 2013…?”

Oh, I agree, Ernest, but this IS the ONLY CHANCE and the LAST CHANCE to defeat the Bush crowd and the NEOCONS!!! Frankly, all of yours and Leefeller’s misgivings I quite agree with but the REALITY is far worse than procrastinating over whether you/we have such fine chioces when we are confronted with SLAVERY as ours and our childrens’ futures if we do not move towards supporting and encouraging some Light in both politics and our community.

If we miss it, the USA (and a few other countries) will slide into the ways which will quickly lead them to becoming the next Burma. Only there won’t be an international community of any consequence left to show support for an American Aung San Suu Kyi. The writing is on the wall, now….. and “neither you piety nor your wit can erase half a line of it…”!!!

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, October 5, 2007 at 10:03 am Link to this comment

Drugs are used to alter thinking and induce in the mind a kind of happy dance.  My drugs of choice would be coffee, beer and wine in order of priority.  Others have much more to choose from, or choose from much more.  Politicians have a drug called power, it induces them to need and thrive for more, a lust of driven emptiness in my eyes.  Hillary has tasted the
drug of living in the White House.  Her lust was apparent when she first ran for the Senate seat. 

There is not one bit of difference between Hillary and anyone else running for President, except for three candidates who do not seem to be in the pockets of big money.  Gravel, Kucinich and Ron Paul.  The snow ball theory is the order of the day,  the only three who even have one inkling of integrity, do not have a chance to win.

Our society has an inherent disregard for women, resulting from possible residue of those grand Christian teachings,  utilized to advantage by men who are not men.  Those who would oppose a women on the gender issue are sexist pigs. Unfortunately their are many more of them around than rats at a political convention.

Career Politicians, people who make their living in politics seem to me nothing more than elite socialists, lacking scruples.  Politicians utilize opportunism in a grand manner, under a guise of smoke and mirrors.  Manipulation of power at the hands of politicians, has proven to be deadly.  Hitler and others have shown us this.  Agendas of politicans seem to always be self serving, helping their friends or cronies, sleeping with special interests outright whoring, usually to wealthy friends, corporations, truth is absent from the life of politicians.

Crumbs for the poor, and this includes the middle class, we get the trickle down theory.  Fed an empty diet of lies, to only enhance the power of the powerful.  People, the masses are nothing but an inconvenience to be reckoned with. Dolts and children dolts to be used as consumers, cannon fodder for the wars so necessary to continue massing great wealth.  Seems the cycle is constant, as history seems to prove.

I would vote for Hillary only because she may be the best of the worse again, gender has nothing to do with it.

Report this

By cann4ing, October 5, 2007 at 9:16 am Link to this comment

Sorry, Doug, but a candidate has to present more than gender to qualify for office.  Does gender mean that we have to overlook the fact that Hillary says we will still have combat troops in Iraq in 2013?  Are we supposed to overlook the fact that Hillary voted for Kyl-Lieberman, a devise that opens the door for a Bush administration invasion of Iran?  What does Hillary’s gender have to do with the fact that she is the second largest recipient of health care insurance lobby money—second only to George W. Bush?  Is the election of a female president so important that I am supposed to ignore the fact that Hillary’s so-called “universal coverage” plan is a scam designed to provide subsidies for the healthcare insurance industry? 

I would be delighted to see the glass ceiling broken; to see a woman as president, an African-American, Hispanic, Muslim, Atheist, Jew, Hindu as president so long as they stand with the vast majority of the American people—the middle and working classes—so long as they are willing to take on rather than act as shills for the corporatocracy and the military industrial complex. 

The fact is that it was the Clintons who betrayed American labor by joining with Reagan/Bush in ramming NAFTA & the WTO through on the fast track—devises that permitted America’s economic elite to outsource our manufacturing base in an endless search of the $2/day laborer while what is left of American labor has been increasingly Wal-Martized.  Am I to ignore the fact that Hillary, who in her youth was a Republican, previously served on the Wal-Mart board of directors (as did Mrs. Obama)—a company which did not have a single store outside the U.S. before 1991 but is now, thanks to NAFTA & the WTO, the world’s largest corporation and the greatest threat to middle class aspirations for workers every where—simply because Hillary is a woman?

No, Doug, I am more interested in where candidates truly stand on “issues” that truly matter.  When measured against that standard, there is one candidate who, despite his being the shortest amongst them, stands head and shoulders above the rest.  His name is Dennis Kucinich.  It is too bad that so many, like yourself, would hold his gender against him and vote against your own interests just so we can break the glass ceiling.

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, October 5, 2007 at 8:44 am Link to this comment

#104883 by Ernest Canning on 10/05 at 6:56 am: “...Hillary Clinton is a part of the problem.  The only candidate running for President who truly represents the interests of the vast majority of Americans—the middle and working classes—is Dennis Kucinich…”

I think you guys are too afraid to vote for a woman to be president. But, that is the same problem Daw Aung San Suu Kyi faces, too. LeeFeller’s “conservative” rump (the ones with the “pain in the arse”) have the upper hand now but not enough males have stood up to be MEN!!!

Cory Aquino had a problem too when she came to power after the peoples’ revolution in the Philippines. As long as they fantasized that she would solve all their problems for them, everybody was happy. But no-one put any effort into helping and the inevitable results were - nothing.

Philippinos then voted for a macho, tough-guy, ex-movie actor strong man and found out what fools they really were. In the end, they voted for another woman but got G-l-o-r-i-a! She was almost as corrupt as the dude they had to dump. Better to get it right in the first place - or the powers behind the scenes will quickly take advantage to spoil things.

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, October 5, 2007 at 8:40 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

104881 by Douglas Chalmers on 10/05 at 6:48 am

“Its the covert Republican smear”

What’s “covert”?  I have identified myself as a conservative and a Republican.

What’s smear?

I have said I dislike her political positions;

Her membership on the India caucus (is this not so?)
Her advocacy for Microsoft     (is this not so?)
Her push for unlimited H-1b visas (is this not so?)
Her position as a Walmart Board member (is this not so?)
Her advocacy   for an FALN pardon. (is this not so?)

AND as to my support for neocons, I plan to support Ron Paul in Maine’s Republican Caucus. He’s not exactly where I wish to be, but he’s close.

My next choice would be Mike Bloomberg, followed by Representative Kucinich. 

But Thompson, Gulliani, Huckabee, are as old-school Republican as Clinton Obana, and Edwards are old-school Democrats. Both parties have been hijacked, and we should be about the business of taking them back.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, October 5, 2007 at 8:20 am Link to this comment

Folks, it has been proven that conservatives have different thought processes than liberals.  So arguments are fruitless and will always be.  According to what I read on the subject, the brain’s of children can determine the outcome. So conservatives are born that way and need some sort of guiding light utilizing ignorance as the template. Liberals turn out a pain the the arse, because they seem to use reason, common sense and thought. 

So you have no choice in how you and others think, nor can you change any of the handwriting on the wall.  Manipulation seems easier with one than the other, you pick which one.

Report this

By cann4ing, October 5, 2007 at 7:56 am Link to this comment

Doug, Hillary Clinton is a part of the problem.  The only candidate running for President who truly represents the interests of the vast majority of Americans—the middle and working classes—is Dennis Kucinich.

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, October 5, 2007 at 7:48 am Link to this comment

#104732 by Conservative Yankee on 10/04 at 2:37 pm: “...witness Hill-the-business-shill’s climb back to “grace”...”

#104807 by Ernest Canning on 10/04 at 8:15 pm: “...CY, until now I had simply found your posts irritating and naive.  Having read your latest, I can only feel pity….”

Its the covert Republican smear, EC. Its CY’s intention to merely whine about Hillar Clinton whist still voting for the main cause of the problems today - GWB’s Neocons!

Interesting though that today BP Oil has just announced:-
BP aims to double fuel oil storage in Singapore http://www.reuters.com/article/companyNewsAndPR/idUSSP144320071005?sp=true

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, October 5, 2007 at 4:55 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

EC

“You poor, deluded fool!”

Great way to win “hearts and minds”

We = 297 million

They = 3 Million

This using the 1% figure bandied about by you folks…

Cowards, sheep and Yammerers pretty much deserve what they receive.

There was a saying back in the sixties…perhaps you remember… Americans don’t always get a perfect government, but they always get what they ask for.”

Oh BTW were you not the poster complaining about “ad homonym attacks?”  Guess we now know where they are coming from.

Report this

By cann4ing, October 4, 2007 at 9:15 pm Link to this comment

CY, until now I had simply found your posts irritating and naive.  Having read your latest, I can only feel pity. 

You actually believe that in this day and age of Orwellian Bush World there is no ruling class; that the vast majority of Americans (what Tao refers to as “tamed two leggeds”) who have been kept in the dark by layers of executive secrecy thick enough to replace the Artic ice we are losing to global warming, an increasingly impoverished lot that has been indoctrinated by the propaganda network, aka corporate media, are the real rulers of this nation. 

You actually do not see the awesome and corrupting power that accompanies the accumulation of vast fortunes by a very small group of elites or how that accumulation of money and power produces a concomittent powerlessness in the growing number of impoverished souls who, as in the case of Katrina, were left to sink or swim in a toxic soup of oily, bacteria contaminated water.

You obviously do not appreciate the fact that a few wealthy ideologues like Ruppert Murdoch, by purchasing vast swaths of the media, can control what most people hear, see and read so as to thoroughly corrupt the media landscape.  More importantly, you obviously do not appreciate the symbol chosen by Admiral John Poindexter for his Total Information Awareness program—a pyramid topped by an all-seeing eye.  Beneath it are the words, Scieter Est Potentia—Latin for “Knowledge is Power.”  You obviously do not understand that in proposing Total Information Awareness, Adm. Poindexter did not have in mind informing the masses; that there is a ruling class which uses wealth to gain access to power; which engages in the twin practices of spying on its own people to maximize its power while erecting a veil of secrecy to prevent the rise of competing power; a ruling class that seeks to perpetuate itself by endless schemes for wealth accumulation amongst the powerful few at the expense of the increasingly impoverished many.

You poor, deluded fool!

Report this

By Geo, October 4, 2007 at 8:35 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I’ve posited the notion that Rice does these things because she hates racist America, and this is a way she can ruin it by making it reviled everywhere, as it ought to be, in her opine.  It’s the best explanation for why she always appears to have chunks of human flesh stuck between her teeth.

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, October 4, 2007 at 3:37 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

EC claims:

“By attempting to place the blame on the American public, CY, you are faulting the victims for the crimes of the ruling class.”

AND that is the huge unbrigable difference between our views.  There is no “ruling class” unless that is what we want.  Under our system it is you and I who stand as the rulers. They (The great left they here) rule at our pleasure…. and the status quo pleases most US citizens…witness Hill-the-business-shill’s climb back to “grace”

In a society worth more than shit… it would be “off with their heads!”

Report this

By cann4ing, October 4, 2007 at 2:19 pm Link to this comment

I don’t know about you, CY, but I drive a Prius.  I’d drive an all electric plug in if the powers that be hadn’t pulled them off the market.  In fact, as the technology is out there, there is no scientific reason why we couldn’t all be driving solar-aided, all-electrics. 

While there is no question but that in our brainwashed, consumer oriented society, there are many who, despite the choice, opt for the gas guzzlers, the fact is that “Big Oil” and their allies in the American automotive industry have worked tirelessly to “create” a captive market for the product—oil—by preventing rational choice, just as the likes of Exxon Mobil spend millions to deny the ecological devastation wrought by continued dependence on fossil fuels.

As to the cheap Chinese goods, it was your “conservative” friends, with a big assist from the Clintons, who brought us NAFTA and the WTO—tools by which America’s “conservative” economic elites were permitted to betray American labor by outsourcing our manufacturing base in an endless search for the $2/day laborer as what was left of American labor has been increasingly Wal-Mart-ized.  (See, Jeff Faux, “The Global Class War”).

These “cheap goods from China” are not something that American consumers actively sought.  They are the product of NAFTA & the WTO.  Wal-Mart, on whose board of directors both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama’s wife formerly served, did not have a single store outside the U.S. in 1991.  By 2003, with its 4,400 stores, it had become the world’s largest corporation.  It is also, in the words of Jim Hightower, “now the world’s most powerful private force for lowering labor standards and stifling the middle-class aspirations of workers everywhere.”  Its “always low prices” translate into “always huge profits”—$7 billion per year; profits that have placed the five members of the Walton family amongst the world’s top ten richest people, with a combined personal worth in excess of $100 billion.  This enormous wealth at the top is punctuated by poverty level wages of Wal-Mart’s own employees, the more fortunate of whom receive $15,000/year for full time work.  But for 70% of the Wal-Mart workforce, the company defines “full-time” as 28 hrs./wk.—$11,000/yr.

Not satisfied with paying minimum wages, the Scrooges at Wal-Mart have devised “off-the-clock” schemes in which employees are instructed to clock out, then assigned extra tasks for which they receive no compensation.  Abroad, Wal-Mart has aligned itself with sweatshop labor and has become the world’s largest purchaser of goods made in China.

By attempting to place the blame on the American public, CY, you are faulting the victims for the crimes of the ruling class.

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, October 4, 2007 at 5:24 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Oil Oil Oil.. You folks ought to get a new script writer…remember what happened to the 1940’s western movie.

People who have strong feelings against “big oil” seem to have this huge blind spot.  Big oil would be medium sized oil were it not for ....drum roll please… YOU!

You buy it, you use it, and since the price has risen you use even more than you did last year… and BTW thank you.

Funny though, the same American public so enraged by the goings on in Myanmar can’t break their addiction to cheap Chinese made goods flowing through Walmart, Target and K Mart.  without US dollars, China could not buy the oil flowing through Myanmar, and you also forgot to mention the millions of metric tons of natural gas.

I know, I know too hard to follow, and it doesn’t fit on a bumper sticker… Try this, Chevron’s oil is the raw product that makes all those neat little plastic utensils you buy for your kitchen, all those plastic toys you put under the xmas tree, and even the bags that contain your lawn seed, hold your groceries, and
keep your new undies from bunching up on the shelf!

Say Polymer

Say Oil

Polymer - oil

same stuff! 

The next step is yours. Why not try spending a bit more and buying US produced goods? Still polymer, but not supporting the government of Myanmar.

A-Yeah… that’s what I thought!

Report this

By Wim Roffel, October 4, 2007 at 5:04 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I disagree with Amy Goodman. This looks like the “bomb them to the stone age” ideology that the US militairy employs.

Look at Zimbabwe and you can see that impoverishing the population does nothing to topple a dictatorship. So your “strategy” will only harm the population.

It is better to have a long term strategy where we provide alternative news sources and develop more connections with people in Birma and that way we can undermine their ideological basis. Most dictatorships don’t fall because of a revolution, but because people stop to believe their justifications for monopolising the power.

Report this

By Jonas South, October 3, 2007 at 5:23 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The images of students and peaceful monks marching for their freedom are so inspiring. Less so are the empty words uttered from the White House. Based on what Amy Goodman reveals here, all Bush needs to do is sign an executive order, stopping Chevron from operating the pipeline and from doing business in Burma. Being so dependent on the income this pipeline generates, the generals can hardly ignore this pressure. Since we don’t benefit from the teeny amount of Burmese oil and gas, why not do the moral and easy thing?

Report this

By cann4ing, October 3, 2007 at 1:45 pm Link to this comment

Hmmm!  Rather interesting piece.  The corporate media stands so ready to castigate China, and properly so, for its support of the military dictatorship in China, yet it takes an Amy Goodman to inform us of support vital to the very survival of the regime that is much closer to home.

Once again we find the billions to be made from black gold trumping all else, whether it be human rights in Rangoon, or the right of all of us to survivability, which is directly threatened by global warming and environmental degredation.

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, October 3, 2007 at 7:22 am Link to this comment

#104146 by nefertiti on 10/02 at 3:01 pm: “...French TOTAL does lots of Business in Burma too . They know what s going on but they also sell him arms…”

The French were the colonial rulers and oppressors of Cambodia and they were - and are - keen to exploit everyone and everything for their own benefit.

As the USA in Iraq is also a virtual colonialist exploiter, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice should indeed “...keep an international focus on the travesty that is taking place….” and especialy since she was on Chevron’s board of directors back at the beginning.

Report this

By KISS, October 3, 2007 at 6:29 am Link to this comment

Good for you Amy, I well remember the first military take-over and Conoco delivering American made armaments being given to the military as part of the exploitation of Gas for Conoco, evidently now Chevron. Of course all of our dimmos and repugs were blind to this cou’ de gra to the peaceful little country of Burma. Again Big oil allows blood to be traded for oil, in this case Gas.
If you are waiting for the Texas Turd to stand up to this outrage you’ll be waiting a looong time.

Report this

By Thomas Billis, October 3, 2007 at 5:12 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Tie it together folks we are involved in the petrowars of the 21st century.If you think Iraq has anything to do with other than with stealing Iraqi oil you are deluding yourself.If you think we will act against oil and gas interests in Burma you are doubly delusional.Until we start discussing these issues as one entity oil and gas we are going to lose focus and discuss the silly.We want to bring Democracy to Iraq but when a real democracy movement breaks out like Burma we give lip service.It is all about oil and gas and it will always be about oil and gas.I hope more people realize what this is all about so we can start a rational dialogue here about energy and possibly become self sufficient so we can get back to having a modicum of principle and belief in our foreign policy.

Report this

By Verne Arnold, October 3, 2007 at 2:28 am Link to this comment

AMERICA, FRANCE, INDIA, CHINA, and THAILAND, are all involved in gemstones, gas, oil and probably opium with/from Burma.
Is it any wonder the hollow words of Bush fell on deaf ears?  Meanwhile, Ang Suu Kyi is rotting away, but the rhetoric flows like cheap wine.

Report this

By msgmi, October 2, 2007 at 9:30 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

It’s business as usual. When the junta begins to show signs of losing grip, a regime change will be implemented. The 2001 secret energy commission meeting/playbook presided over by the VP now needs a button to be pushed to start the coup d etats in order to preserve Chevron’s interests and the neo-CON plan for democratization of SE Asia. The preliminary round of soundbites about the Burmese junta have been seeded by GW at his UN address. The press echoed it and the American people are becoming outraged even though the majority of the ‘outraged’ have no clue where Burma is located on the world map.

Report this

By QuyTran, October 2, 2007 at 5:39 pm Link to this comment

Ha ! Ha ! Ha ! Now the devils meet with devils. There’s no way to overthrow the junta in Burma thanks to Chevron’s pipeline ! Bush, Cheney, Rice…
and their whole gangs are sleeping peacefully in this pipeline system. Stop playing hypocrisy.

Congrat !

Report this

By nefertiti, October 2, 2007 at 4:01 pm Link to this comment

French TOTAL does lots of Business in Burma too . They know what s going on but they also sell him arms .

Report this
 
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
Right Internal Skyscraper, Site wide
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 

Like Truthdig on Facebook