BAN CONVENIENT STORES OWNED BY Exxon and Chevron

BAN UNITED ON Exxon and Chevron

MEDIA PRESS RELEASE FROM BAN UNITED

IT'S TIME TO STAND UP TO THE OIL COMPANIES AND CONVENIENT STORE'S OWNED BY

(Exxon and Chevron) IN THIS COUNTRY. THEY ARE TAKING FOOD OUT OF KIDS MOUTHS AND HURTING OUR WAY OF LIFE. MANY ARE LOSING EVERYTHING THAT THEY OWN BECAUSE OF THESE STORES. WE ARE ASKING ALL AMERICAN'S TO STAND WITH US. TO PLACE A BAN ON ALL CONVENIENT STORE'S OWNED BY (Exxon and Chevron) NATION WIDE! DON'T BUY ANYTHING IN THESES STORE'S INCLUDING GAS. . Stop buying gas from companies affiliated with Exxon and Chevron, Buy from anyone BUT them - because Exxon and Chevron are the guys who are fucking us over. MANY OIL COMPANY'S OWN THESE STORES. IT'S TIME TO SEND A MESSAGE THAT WE WILL NO LONGER TAKE THIS IN THE ASS!! WE ARE GOOD PEOPLE, AND WE HAVE HELPED THE WORLD OUT IN THEIR TIME OF NEED. WE ASK THAT YOU PASS THIS ON TO EVERYONE YOU KNOW.

TOGETHER WE CAN CHANGE THE WAY GAS COMPANY'S CHARGE FOR GAS!!!! THE BAN ON IS ON!

PASS THIS ON TO ALL MEDIA OUTLETS AND EMAIL ACCOUNTS!!! EMAIL US AT
banunited@yahoo.com or visit our website banunited. bravehost.

com

A PLANNED PROTEST IS IN THE WORKS.

PLZS WATCH POSTINGS FOR TIME AND PLACE

" ALL my Venezuelan friends, both lefties and righties, tell me that they just LOVE the low price of gas."

Not surprising.

Hey, Tootin'newton, me parece que sabes un poquito acerca de la producion de petroleo, pero, desafortunadamente, sabes NADA de la situacion de la gente de Venezuela! Yo soy un Americano con MUCHISMOS amigos de Venezuela, y ellos seimpre me dicen que todo la gente alli LES GUSTA MUCHISMO el precio reducido de gasolina en su pais! La gente no son estupidos. Hey, tootin' boy, ALL my Venezuelan friends, both lefties and righties, tell me that they just LOVE the low price of gas. You don't know what the hell you're farting about. Sorry. I have one friend who is from the rightwing upper clase, and he absolutely hates Chavez, but he loves the low gas prices. Find a diffferent argument. I don't think you've ever been, have you? Me neither, but I have lots of friends from there.

"Actually I am not sure whether Chavez is using the profits from selling oil internationally at $80.00 a barrel to subsidizes domestic oil products or whether he sets aside part of their crude production for domestic use. "

It makes no difference. One way or the other, cash proceeds from sales of crude or manufactured product on world markets where normal supply and demand laws prevail are lost.

"It would make sense to divert some of their crude rather than diverting dollars as international reserve currency. "

While it is true that this is a common practice in many countries with oil production surplus, whether it is wise or not is debatable. I merely raised the point, without stating outright that it was unwise, and I was accused of smearing Chavez for it.

"There is no "lost cash" in the Chavez situation, "

On the contrary, the cash is lost. It is demonstrably, relentlessly true. Brush up on Opportunity Cost. The only issue is whether the loss is more than balanced by a gain, and that is open to debate.

" The Venezuelans who save on energy costs use the savings for other aspects of life. Farmers can afford to run their tractors and grow food. "

True enough, in fact oil consumption levels are often a proxy for GDP rates within a country and over some limited time frame. But you have to ask if abundant cheap energy encourages or discourages efficient use of that energy. How much GDP does Venezuela produce per barrel of oil they consume? More or less than the US or other nations? Wikipedia shows the US at almost three times the efficiency of Venezuela:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross_domestic_product_per_barrel

Many European nations quite a bit more still.

"Their democratic government is arguably the most generous and creative oil-funded government on earth"

I am loath to accept that any government can be generous, believing the trait to be the province of individuals. But I would be very interested in knowing how popular the various programs of internal and external "generosity" are with the Venezuelans.

The Burma crimes are yet another chapter in how American multinational corporations are the driving force behind endless injustice and cruelty.

However, every now and then there is victory for the people such as UNOCAL in Burma:

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/12/16/1444238

And this pattern is global. UNOCAL was also the primary corporate player in the early plans to run a natural gas/oil pipeline from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan to sell energy to Pakistan, India and other world markets via a potential port on the Arabian Sea . Good luck getting such a pipeline through the Afghan war zone. The wore down the colonial British and the Russians in the "Great Game."

"Afghanistan's significance from an energy standpoint stems from its geographical position as a potential transit route for oil and natural gas exports from Central Asia to the Arabian Sea."

Old news, but still true: http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/51/118.html

And another 2002 analysis: http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHI203A.html

Because the Taliban did not roll over, they were bombed out of power and now we have the occupation.

And what a surprise, occupied Afghanistan is now the global center of heroin production.

http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~pdscott/q7.html

The above url links to this discussion of the drug trade as related to corporate imperialism:

http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~pdscott/qov.html

And then we have the oil war the problems in Iraq which is another fine mess:

http://www.commondreams.org/scriptfiles/views03/1213-05.htm

http://www.counterpunch.org/tariq08162004.html

And back to Chavez with a few choice quotes:

" Capitalism is savagery.

Before, education was privatized. That's the neo-liberal, imperialist plan, health systems were privatized, that cannot be, it's a fundamental human right. Health, education, water, energy, public services, that cannot be given to the voracity of private capital, that denies those rights to the people, that's the road to savagery, capitalism is savagery.

But the Venezuelan people demonstrated to the oligarchy that they will never surrender.

We resisted, we defended ourselves, and then went on the counteroffensive. As a result in 2003, for the first time, Venezuela recuperated its oil company, which had always been in the hands of the Venezuelan oligarchy and the North American Empire.

Empires have always been brutal, there are no good or bad Empires, they are all aberrant, brutal, perverse, no matter what they wear or how they speak.

Empires sometimes do not get surrounded, they rot from inside, and then they tumble down and get destroyed as the Roman Empire and every Empire from Europe in the past centuries. Some day the rottenness that it carries inside will end up destroying the US Empire."

Question: Why not just share the wealth with developing nations ?

Answer: The wealthy elite would find it much more difficult to become multi-millionaires and billionaires.

BOYCOTT !!DEMAND BUSH BE IMPEACHED AND THE TROOPS BROUGHT HOME,OR WE WILL NOT VOTE IN THEIR PRIMARY OR ELECTION !!

In case anybody is still following this one, the following is a bit more on how creative Chavez is in helping the people of Venezuela and other developing nations. He is a hawk for high prices via OPEC and sells their oil on the international market at top dollar according to their OPEC quota and then gives resource revenue back to the people of Venezuela directly via health care, education, affordable energy, affordable food, and other aspects of their society and government.

I first heard about these policies from my nephew's wife who is from Venezuela and could afford a college education when her father was only an oilfield laborer. You can't put a kid through college on a roughneck's salary here in the good old USA.

And it was stated : "But there is opportunity cost, because they are withholding that material from the global market and thus lose the potential proceeds."

Actually I am not sure whether Chavez is using the profits from selling oil internationally at $80.00 a barrel to subsidizes domestic oil products or whether he sets aside part of their crude production for domestic use. It would make sense to divert some of their crude rather than diverting dollars as international reserve currency.

However this is a moot point.

Chavez sells as much as he can at high international prices and then, and one way or another, makes energy products affordable to the people of Venezuela. If he sold more than his international OPEC quota the global price would drop and it would be a loss to Venezuela. The " withholding " or limiting production is a key to their economic success.

The old colonial model Chavez replaced would be for Venezuela to open their country to the oil multinationals, like we are trying to do in Iraq with force. The people of Venezuela would then purchase gas at $3.00 a gallon from ExxonMobil and watch their money leave Venezuela.

There is no "lost cash" in the Chavez situation, but a chance for the average person to SAVE money by keep their money within Venezuela. The Venezuelans who save on energy costs use the savings for other aspects of life. Farmers can afford to run their tractors and grow food. Win win for the common man.

And it was state: " And that works out because the government deprives it's people of the proceeds that that commodity would otherwise get in the world market."

It is neither true nor fair to claim that this process "deprives" the people of Venezuela of the value of that resource and that their government is lacking in "generosity".

Their democratic government is arguably the most generous and creative oil-funded government on earth. He is a admired everywhere in Central and South America for his progressive policies. Obviously he is not popular with corporate America or either political party as he has foiled neo-liberal and neocon global exploitation in many ways.

Chavez is working internationally as well as domestically in very innovative ways so that Venezuela's oil resources benefit as many people as possible and is helping nations less fortunate than Venezuela. Check out the complete Zmag article on Chavez's economic methods as well as the posted excerpt.

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=11562

The following is also a relevant read as Chavez also engages in barter with oil since the dollar is not doing well these days. By doing commodity trades he cuts out the corporate middlemen and make the oil more available to nations with limited reserve currency.

Example: "Meanwhile Hugo Chavez has been taking Venezuelan oil out of the petrodollar economy by bartering oil directly for commodities from thirteen other third world countries."

http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~pdscott/iraq.html

Oil is more or less money these days and there are more ways than one to share the wealth.

Note also that JConrad's post completely ignores the issue of highly subsidized gasoline in Venezuela altogether. Try again? Anyone else?

"There is some twisted Chavez bashing going on here "

Venezuela provides the raw material, it's own crude oil, seemingly at "no cost" as input to the refinery. But there is opportunity cost, because they are withholding that material from the global market and thus lose the potential proceeds. The lost cash could be used for anything, but the cheap gasoline they give away to the people can only be used as fuel, benefiting only those who drive cars, encourages waste, and wrecks the environment.

Please Note: There is some twisted Chavez bashing going on here that has also been repeated in comments on another article.

jakenewton October 8th, 2007 4:23 pm

"I am begining to doubt that everything Chavez does is for the good of Venezualan people."

Isn't gasoline there subsidized, so that the cost to consumers is pennies a gallon? They do that by depriving the people of the price they could get for the oil on the world market. Is that "generosity"?

And the same "person" Jakenewton on another article:

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/10/07/4379/

jakenewton October 9th, 2007 3:43 pm

" And that works out because the government deprives it's people of the proceeds that that commodity would otherwise get in the world market. I guess that's good if you drive a car, especially if you drive a lot. Is that subsidy supported by the people I wonder? $80 a barrel they could have instead."

The following article goes into Venezuela's oil policy and success at:

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=11562

" In 2004, Venezuela invested $3.7-billion of its $6.5-billion net oil profits in social missions. In 2005 this figure increased to nearly $5-billion, providing medical services to over 17 million Venezuelans, teaching one million people to read, and granting 46 per cent of Venezuelans access to basic foodstuffs at significant discounts. Last year, Energy Minister Rafael Ramírez announced the industry's plans for the period from 2005-2012 based on projected revenues, calling for a total social investment of $56-billion (nearly $10-billion per year).

The social programs are not just creating educational and health programs while the oil money lasts: they are mobilizing the populace. Education and health programs, subsidized basic foods, job training, co-operatives, land reform committees, participatory budgeting initiatives—all are possible because of high oil prices, but their legacy will outlast Venezuela's oil reserves. This investment is building a society fundamentally inclusive of the 37 per cent of Venezuelans who live in poverty, and the much larger number who live within its shadow—the very people who have historically been the victims of a society designed to perpetuate the rights and privileges of a tiny minority. Those who previously would never have obtained university degrees or even learned to read are now both educated and invested in their own futures. The legacy of democratization will be hard to reverse, no matter what turns are taken by future oil policy or future governments.

In the same way, Venezuela's solidaristic foreign policy—dubbed "oil diplomacy" by some—is building regional and international capacities. In an immediate sense, it is proving to the world the that there is an alternative to the neo-liberal model, which has billed itself as the only option for the past 25 years. Recently, Venezuela has created regional oil initiatives—including investment, assistance with development, and preferential pricing—for the Caribbean (PetroCaribe), the Andean region (PetroAndino), South America (PetroSur), and Latin America (PetroAmerica), along with a spectacularly successful oil-for-doctors agreement with Cuba, and oil-for-food-and-goods deals with Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay."

Just for the record. Venezuela is part of OPEC and sells it's quota of oil internationally at whatever the global price may be. The proceeds are then used for the benefit of the people of Venezuela for such things a national health care and higher education which are increasingly out of reach for many people here in "developed" America. They also make domestic energy products affordable, since they have a huge surplus, to improve the Venezuelan standard of living.

Our oil corporations pay as little royalty as possible and taxes as possible when they exploit public oil sources, such as BLM lands, USFS lands, and offshore deposits. But then Exxon pays CEO's $400 million while engaging in global warming disinformation projects. And they are subsidized with counterproductive wars of aggression.

buy CITGO

Conservation in an attempt to punish the oil companies by lowering their profits is a vain strategy that will only result in prolonging the oil companies hold on society and an increase in frustration for those participating in the attempt.

I lived in Tennessee during one of the previous oil embargoes and the Governor at the time urged everyone to conserve gasoline by driving less. Not long after that the Governor came back on television and informed everyone that they were doing too good a job at conserving by driving less. He said that as a result road taxes were down because less gasoline was being purchased and the tax would have to be raised to compensate.

In the case of the oil companies the same thing will happen. As the quantity goes down the price will go up to compensate.

The only real solution would be to convert to another fuel such as hydrogen, which the oil companies will fight, and would require that we have real statesmen in government rather than politicians, which we don't.

Lobo Gris

To those who boycott Chevron and those who let them and Congress know why they are doing so, you make the sacrifice of the monks have meaning. They did not risk life and imprisionment just to have armchair naysayers say it was useless against the generals and all for naught. The monks broke the silence hanging over Burma so that the world would help them. Pressuring Chevron will cause them to pressure the generals. That is the way it works. Speak there language... money talks and the only thing that talks louder than money is losing it. The generals want things to go back the way they were. In comparative silence and mostly ignored by the world. Chevron at all costs does not want to do anything which interrupts profits. Remember that this regime is not wealthy and a regional power. Supported by Chevron's pipeline profits,otherwise a poor country, these generals succeed only because in effect everyone ignored them. That has changed and you can see how vulnerable the regime will be if Chevron sees that it's profits are being affected. What else props up the regime? Let Thailand know it too. Blood makes for lousy tourism. Silence will kill again if it falls over Burma anew. So to all who protest Chevron's role in propping up the regime in any way... that is the one thing that the generals actually fear. Somebody noticing that that is the only thing they have. Chevron.

Naming an oil tanker after Rice is appropriate. Rice is a big container of toxic material leaking out here and there polluting the environment.

Boycotting Chevron is not going to be effective. All the oil products are fungible a drop used anywhere sends money to Chevron. That is why drilling for oil in the USA doesn't help our energy situation.

Carpool to work or take public transportation and conserve energy everywhere else. That deprives Chevron, Exxon, and all the others of some cash. It also reduces a portion of the campaign contributions to politicians and reduces money going to many bad regimes including the Saudis', and Bu$h the inferior's.

We all have to move closer to work. Many times that means living in burned-out lawless zones so nobody is going to do that. But giving up a fancy house has its up side: No target for the government to tax.

In my life,

Commuting has always been the enemy. Lost time. Lost money. Frustration. Traffic Danger. Dangerous fumes in my lungs from the highway....

Life became good when I moved ten minutes from work. If the car broke down, no sweat, lots of options. Life sucked when I returned to a two hour comute in the city. God, the headaches.

A rual slow life is better for your mind and your body, if you can do it.

But all the conservation in the world is not going to stop the poles from melting. It's too late for that; short of banning all internal combution engines and rainforest clearcutting. Even if that happened (which is fantasy) enforcing the ban would be inpossible.

My neocon friends that I've known for years, that are involved in the defense industry (and profiting handsomely: buying new houses and airplanes and boats for rec) told me that they believe getting nuked is inevitable. This nightmare fits in perfectly with their "born again christian" end-of-the-world beliefs.

How the hell am I supposed to reach somebody like this?

Confirms my belief that all Religion is a mental disorder.

Another attrocity gets linked to another major corporation, that's linked to another major political player.

We are still hooked on standard reactions to the same outrageous behavior of the same people.

The system sucks. It is sucking the life out of the world faster every day.

If we do a coordinated withdrawal of money from the system it's going to make an awesome statement. Imagine a million or more citizens withdrawing a thousand dollars or more from their bank accounts at the same time. Could even be world wide. Amy, are you listening?

Agreed, jakenewton. I actually do ride my bike to work as much as possible. But as I live in NH, and work is 15 miles away, inclement weather often forces me to drive. So, as long as I do, I won't be purchasing any more Chevron gas. I have also contacted Chevron from their corporate web site and informed them of this. Luckily, I have Citgo stations near me, and though Chavez has begun to stink a little of late, the choice is still a clear one.

"Mr. Chavez knows sulfur when he smells it."

It's in his crude actually, the lowest quality produced by any country.

Oil and the products derived from oil are fungible commodities. Boycotts therefore won't do much. Only cutting back permanently will make any difference.

It seems we have our dirty little fingers in 'small potatoes' conflicts all over the globe. We can not send aid anywhere...we are part of most of the problems, scrape away a few layers and oh-my-gosh, there we are. Surprize, surprize!! Laura has been kept so sheltered she would be surprized by just about anything. One tends to forget that we even have a first lady, let alone how she reacts to any up-to-date-news.

The rest of the world is organizing at grassroots with the World Social Forum. It might be worth keeping it in the blogs.
http://wsf2007.org/

The boycott idea is great, but as ruscle points out, some of us don't have much of an option until we can bicycle to work or afford an electric car run off power generated by solar. What amazes me is how everything and everyone in this corporate cabal are so interconnected. And these relationships (greed) go back 40 or more years. And the beast has become so huge with so many tenicles, I don't even know where to start anymore. I mean, all I had to do was boycott grapes to make a difference in years past. Now? It doesn't matter which tenicle I focus on, the beast doesn't even feel my pin prick. This is SOOOOO frustrating!!!

But I'm already Boycotting Exxon/Mobil and Shell... what's left in my area? Uh just a thought... maybe it's time for the Government to step in.

Is there any irony in Laura Bush being outraged by a repressive and murderous regime?

You mean the Chevron Oil Company has been propping up Burma's brutal military dictatorship. Shocked I tell you, I'm shocked.

Karzai in fact represented Unocal. He was instrumental in setting up a visit of Taliban officials to the US in summer 2001. The Taliban eventually said NO to the pipeline that Unocal and others wanted to build (before 9/11.)

Mr. Chavez knows sulfur when he smells it.

So he's got that going for him.................witch is nice.

"I am begining to doubt that everything Chavez does is for the good of Venezualan people."

Isn't gasoline there subsidized, so that the cost to consumers is pennies a gallon? They do that by depriving the people of the price they could get for the oil on the world market. Is that "generosity"?

So much for the U.S. taking the moral high ground.

Didn't Hamid Karzai work for Unocal before he took on the role as President and pipeline promoter of Afganistan?

Let's not forget who built the pipeline. Why, none other than Dick Cheney's Halliburton. What a surprise!

I am begining to doubt that everything Chavez does is for the good of Venezualan people.
And there is not one Citgo gas station in the rural town I am in.

If we did not have a junta ruling this country, we might have had a more effective response to Burma's atrocities.

boycotting chevron is good, but what about all the other oil companies?
there is only one oil producing nation that is not a dictatorship: venesuela. all gas from citgo is from venesuela. buy CITGO gas.

Thank you Amy.

sadly, and we all know it, bush has no moral authority to bring to bear against any killers in the world, as we - the united sates are the most prolific of them all.

compared to iraq, burma is small potatoes.

to bring freedom and democracy to iraq we have killed over a million of them. if we happen to steal their oil and build a few "enduring" bases over there at the same time, well, so much the better.

but its all about democracy, right.

the fascists in burma are the proud - and i do mean proud - children of the fascists in america.

the united states pretty much concluded the mass killings of our own saffron revolution last century - they were called the first nations. remember them?

the burmese are acting right out of the american play book.

and they are - sadly - supported by the corporations who never saw a gas field they didn't like.

I have emailed Chevron at their corporate headquarters informing them because of their continued support of their Burma operations, that I will boycott personally all their products. I hope others do the same at their chevron.com website.