The US just plain doesn't get it why it is so hated all over the planet. Stop stealing, start minding your own business and most importantly, start cleaning up your own backyard. Plenty of shit in it.

Point of clarification: It was not a group of US trial lawyers nor the Ecuadorian government that brought this class-action suit against Chevron. Rather, a citizen-activist, Luis Yanza, founded the Amazon Defense Front on behalf of 30,000 inhabitants of the Ecuadorian Amazon that have been affected by the toxic waste that Texaco left over 30 years ago. Pablo Fajardo, who is from one of the affected communities is the lead lawyer in the case. His story is told in "Jungle Law", the cover article of the May, 2007 issue of Vanity Fair. And these two men received the prestigious Goldman Award for their work. Check it out at http://www.goldmanprize.org/2008/centralsouthamerica

As I recall, Chevron (and formerly Texaco) claims that they did fund the cleanup and previously paid the Ecuadorian government but basically nothing was done. A subsequent company took over these operations and the pollution has continued. The Ecuadoran government is now seeking compensation to cleanup the pollution. Of course, the Ecuadoran court will decide which side prevails and where truth and justice lay. I hate to ruin Mr Isikoff's perfectly good Big Oil rape-the-earth and F*%K-the-little-people story with these minor details, but I admit I am naive to think that the reporter was trying to report a story in any sort of balanced way.

"The ultimate issue here is Ecuador has mistreated a U.S. company," said one Chevron lobbyist. Ah, reminds me of our mistreatment by the Vietnamese. How could those ingrates expect us to NOT impose trade sanctions against them after we sacrificed almost 60,000 of our finest. Our carpet bombing of 3.5 million was for their benefit. This view that we can do no wrong has been around since the beginning of this beacon of democracy. It shone brightly as we committed genocide against the Indians and bought and sold blacks. Why should it be any different today? Chevron need not worry. It is likely that Correa's fate will be similar to Ecuador's former president, Roldos. Now, you would think that the CIA would try to be a little more creative than rigging another plane crash. OK. So they did exercise a little more creativity in the recent attempt to take out Chavez with a helicopter crash. Whatever happened to hemlock? Perhaps our troops in Colombia will accidentally kill him while "pursuing drug runners"; i.e. while running the drugs themselves. As for Obama? You don't get as far as he is now by saying the things Kucinich says. Remember, the definition of politics is to speak and behave in a manner that will get you elected. One can only hope that if Obama does get elected, he will THEN proceed to behave like Kucinich. And folks, that is a big IF. As Hillary noted: RFK was killed prior to his Fall elections. Now, wouldn't it be droll of Obama also died in a plane crash? On the other hand, if he happened to be flying with Correa, the CIA might just accept such lack of creativity.

Great! Maybe Obama feels comfortable standing up for what's right in this case since noboby in America knows or cares about it!

Greenisgood July 30th, 2008 11:55 am wrote:

"If Washington crushes Ecuador on this, I suggest they solicit help from other South American countries. A group of them can fight back causing the Bush administration to back off. This is power politics and can only be resolved with power. Ecuador needs reinforcements."

----

Hugo Chavez is in the process of organizing a South American defense force, with the aid of Russia. Certainly Ecuador and Bolivia will go along with this. It is questionable how many of the remaining SA countries will, but it's possible that all except Columbia and Peru will. It appears the days of big stick diplomacy from the north have about five minutes remaining on the station clock.

Hugo is also organizing a development bank which will provide SA countries with services which the WB and IMF purport to provide but don't.

when you buy a company, you buy their debts just as much as you buy their assets.

If they didn't do the proper Due Diligence and bought Texaco "sight unseen", well too damn bad. Of course I believe they knew exactly what they were buying they just never figured on an honest court in a third-world country.

Early in this discussion some wanted to know who the criminal Chevron officers were who caused this catastrophe. This was caused by Texaco, and their officials are the ones to hold in deepest contempt. However, since Chevron bought Texaco, they now must assume responsibility for Texaco's actions. We know that only average people are supposed to take responsiblity for their actions, and while it's wildly radical, I believe that the rich and powerful should be held accountable also.

these lobbyists and lawyers are best for crab bait

they server no purpose for for themselves
and their masters
all need to be hung as traitors
HEMP now is the only solution
for quick results hemp seed oil
see FINOLA and hemp car and VOTE HEMP
of course Sen. Patrick Leahy is from the state that just also legalized hemp production
Texas will be the last one

Why do any of you feel happy about Obama's money people basically doing the same thing Chevron's money people did?

GET MONEY OUT OF POLITICS. Most of the time the buyer is on the wrong side of the issue.

If Washington crushes Ecuador on this, I suggest they solicit help from other South American countries. A group of them can fight back causing the Bush administration to back off. This is power politics and can only be resolved with power. Ecuador needs reinforcements.

JamesHall July 30th, 2008 9:47 am -- "... people are inherently EVIL; even if it is only a tiny evil."

I suppose that would depend on one's definition of evil. The human animal is hardly unique in seeking to avoid discomfort and to maximize pleasure.

While recognizing that some measure of self-interest is essential for survival, philosophers are generally inclined toward such concepts as "the greatest good for the greatest number" or some variant thereof. Religious concepts of evil can get rather more complicated (and even quite perversely convoluted in some cases) but might possibly be summed up in the notion that evil arises from levels of self-interest that override due consideration for the impacts on others -- greed, covetousness, etc.

In either context, there would seem to be some element of "relativity". So, perhaps, it's not entirely invalid to contemplate lesser or greater evil as judgemental criteria. The tricky part is deciding how far along that path one is willing to proceed before the distinctions become meaningless for all practical purposes.

Why the outrage when it has been known for nearly a century, voiced by a Presdent that the Business of America is Business . No one messes around with American Corporations particularly furriners its like messin with God. This is normal behaviour and has been for generations it is what has kept you all "fat and happy". You let Chevron get this big, you nutured it what do you expect, its arrogance has been learned right here in the good ol US of A. Talk about Booboise. Me I think those secessionists in Vermont have the right idea.

One of the most constant claims expressed on this site, and in fact throughout humanity, is our choice between the lesser of 2 evils [well it would be surprising, just shy of a miracle really if we were only limited to 2] in any one event/decision.

Well here's a clue to all of you - the choice of a lesser [if not least] evil still leaves the final choice as EVIL.

Ahhh finally we have come to recognize, without necessarily understanding, that we truly live in an EVIL environment and that, on the whole, people are inherently EVIL; even if it is only a tiny evil.

Fuckin' moronic, non ?

And you do know what invariably transpires in the lives of most morons, right ?

Oh well one could get real fortunate and end up like your moronic weenie of a pressie.

About the fate of your grandchildren ! Hahahaha

'"The ultimate issue here is Ecuador has mistreated a U.S. company," said one Chevron lobbyist

Shades of United Fruit!!

Anyone taking bets on how soon Bush Junior delares Ecuador a "terrorist state" and invades?

$10 Billion? Thats not even a years bloodsoaked profits...spread out over the 20 years of the cleanup, the shareholders would not even notice it.

Some top execs may have to forgo their annual new Rolls Royce, only only use their private jets every OTHER day....

BugsBBunny III July 30th, 2008 12:28 am -- "Will it become a world where corporations are not only declared citizens but are in effect are quasi-nations themselves?"

The power of major corporations passed that "quasi-national" stage some time ago and their combined efforts are now well on the way toward all-encompassing world governance.

Globalization and the "New World Order" are not merely semantic contrivances. In fact, the U.S. and its co-conspirators are quite sincere when they speak of bringing "freedom and democracy" to other nations. It's just that the only constituents with a voice in their "democracies" are corporate persons, not mere mortal individuals like you and me. And the "freedom" they strive to achieve relates to markets for unfettered capitalist exploitation, not human rights and individual liberty.

Billions of ignorant peasant consumers simply cannot be allowed to decide what is in their own collective best interests within discrete geographic boundaries. That absurdly "quaint and obsolete" concept of popular self-governance and national sovereignty is long dead and rotting in its grave.

I would venture to suggest, moreover, that many (most?) self-described progessives don't disagree. They just want their own (somewhat incoherent) governance values and perspectives globally to supplant those of the monied classes and their corporate instuments.

Yes, I'm certain that the Messiah, I mean Obama, will attend to this.

Incidentally, I was watching him on TV the other day and found myself cured, quite suddenly, of everything that was wrong with me. And everything that will ever be wrong with me. Ever. Forever.

He gets my vote.

grrrr. fuck you chevron. unapologetically shitting on indigenous people and the land. "little countries...big companies", i'm gonna puke.
see you in richmond, chevron.

NO CHEVRON EXPANSION IN RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA!
Equador, Burma, Nigeria, Richmond: Clean your messes Chevron.

'"The ultimate issue here is Ecuador has mistreated a U.S. company," said one Chevron lobbyist who asked not to be identified'

Newsweak doesn't want to identify the lobbyist who tries to reinforce the fascist dominance of capital over people. What are they afraid of?

"We can't let little countries screw around with big companies like this-companies that have made big investments around the world."

Latin America is turning on the evil US empire - even the imperial toehold in Columbia is shaky at this point. Latin America has run the WB and IMF out too. Soon enough there will be no more Yankees to go home.

"Chevron is pushing the Bush administration to take the extraordinary step of yanking special trade preferences for Ecuador"

It's very important for progressives to recognize the USA's "special trade preferences" for what they are - a lever of coercion, akin to blackmail. Progressives may support the people of Ecuador against the capitalists simply by continuing the systematic construction of our alternate eco/economic system in the USA - the local economy - which resonates with all the people worldwide and helps strengthen our united front in this grand-daddy of all wars - the class war. It's very important as we all know the capitalists are relentless in their quest to destroy the economic independence of all people and make them into consumption slaves, after stealing their natural resources and wrecking their ecosystems.

Commentor Doom n Gloom has a good point. While the legal battles are one way to fight, we as humanity (the local indigenous) should come up with other (non violent) means to effect change.

Some cultures use shaming to punish. Even corporate execs are subject to embarrassment. Part of their power is in their anonymity. Even if the corporation is in a legal suit, few executives are personally held accountable. This built in shield enables them to do actions which they know are wrong but profitable.

Silence is golden... to corporations.

The last thing the people who make the decisions in a corporation want is to be held to account as PEOPLE themselves in any way. They expect anonymity - unaccountability.

We have the net.

As yet anyway.

Hey Doom n Gloom... shame them. Do a little net research on Chevron and keep us all posted. Shame them...shed some light in anonymous places.

A single person armed with the net can do what you said Doom n Gloom.

Silence is golden to corporate officers. No wonder the assault becomes concentrated on the net.

We have the net... as yet.

Snag them with it. It's legal.

Shed a little light... and join the fight.

While corporations may feel it is little countries screwing with big companies, I notice that it is big companies screwing with little governments and ...US! People.

The Chevrons (mega corporations) do not want any interference by little countries, little governments and ...yeah...the little people... US.

Will it become a world where corporations are not only declared citizens but are in effect are quasi-nations themselves? Quasi national entities that will function outside of the 'local laws - the national laws of a country they operate in, like Ecuador's? Globalization seeks corporate 'independence' from 'local' restrictions.

Say Chevron gets it's way, what does that mean for those people? Well what it means for them ...is exactly what it means for us.

We ... humanity... are the locals. Can we locals hold a megacorp responsible for poisoning ...the locals? Bhopal?

I suppose this is rushing things but in a globalization world of corporate entities (whether considered 'persons' or effectively quasi nations), who already see themselves as big companies vs little countries, a globalized fascism is evolving.

Those indigenous peasants... are us... whether in Ecuador, Bhopal, France (nuclear leaks contaminating well water) or near some Superfund site etc.!

Little countries ...little people... little LAWS... it becomes corporations vs people... because whether or not a corporation claims to be a person... only a person gets cancer or birth defects.

I presume that in the corporate mind that cancer and birth defects ... are merely technicalities.

Now picture your kids living in a globalized world where corporations are unaccountable... um... okay... picture them in a world where corporations are EVEN MORE unaccountable.

First round in the battle to declare corporate persons... corporate nations.

What rights will you have under a corporate nation?

The same rights as the locals anywhere...whether Ecuador, Bhopal et al.

We literally are... the indigenous locals... everywhere!

"Chevron argues that it has been victimized by a 'corrupt' Ecuadoran court system while the plaintiffs received active support from Ecuador's leftist president, Rafael Correa-an ally of Venezuela's Hugo Chávez. The company says a loss could set a dangerous precedent for other U.S. multinationals."

Poor Chevron, subject to a justice system not controlled by right-wing Americans - how could it ever get *true* justice ? It would be as bad as, say, five Cubans trying to uncover terrorist acts against Cuba being planned in the anti-Castro Miami right-wing community, being tried by an American right-wing Circut Court. Clearly you can't expect Justice from Courts of the wrong Ideology.

http://www.nlg.org/news/index.php?entry=entry080605-080621

If Ecuador is allowed to hold a U.S. multinational corporation liable for its actions, this is a very dangerous precedent. What's next, Indonesia labor activists going after Nike ? We can't allow *that*.

http://www.albionmonitor.com/9606a/nikelabor.html

Po Grandma, 5:19 p.m.
I am pretty sure that no Constitutional amendment is needed to reverse the doctrine that a corporation is legally a person. Unless the PBS program on the Supreme Court was wrong, it came about as the result of a mistake of the clerk of the court in recording a case, back around 1880.
Of course, that doesn't mean that it will ever be undone by the governments we are likely to have in the next decades.

If, the Saudi Arabians felt the must pay Bill Clinton $10,000,000 for no reason, why can't
Chevron hire Bill Clinton and betray us.

Juliana

"So now the prospect of an Obama presidency has given additional urgency to Chevron's plea for help in Washington. Waiting until next year could leave the oil giant at the mercy of a judge in the Amazon jungle."

Doesn't anyone find it really outrageous that big corporations revile any government intervention into their affairs unless they need the government to come to their rescue? Here's to those 'horrid' Ecuadoran "savages" and may they wring every penny out of Chevron (boycott if you can still afford gas).

Please contact

Please e-mail the office for the US Trade Representative:

the address is contactustr@ustr.eop.gov

anyone want to take a bet where Nader stands on this? you already know the answer... hahahha

wild

Po Grandma,
re: "..We spend a lot of time attacking the repubs - with good reason - but they are just the enablers..."
It's not just the 'repubs'. When it comes to screwing over poor brown people around the globe, the 'dems' won't take second place to anybody.

So the plaintiffs are described having painted faces and being half naked. Sounds like the attire recommended by our MSM for us American women. I'll bet those plaintiffs looked a lot more dignified than MSM models in most magazines.

Meg @ 12:48
You are soooo right. Everyone deserves their day in court:
Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rove, McCain and all the rest of those warmongering ryhoules.

If I remember correctly, the major oil companies were the reason for the forming of OPEC in 1973. It was the heavy handedness before that that did cause all the problems at that time. If my time line is incorrect, I stand corrected. Remember that 2 oil people for 8 years equals the cost of gasoline at $4.00 per gallon.

It's TOO early for this independent to make a decision. My STRATEGY will be on election day. If there's any chance mccain might win I'll vote obama. Otherwise I'll send a message with my vote.

Naomi Klein's THE SHOCK DOCTRINE is a good primer on South America. We've been screwing them since forever, but really destroyed them financially with the help of the kind folks at the World Bank, et al. After 30 years of abject poverty for 90% of the people, they are finally getting out from under our thumb - and pushing back against the multinationals that have enslaved, tortured, and ruined them. So of course that can't be allowed. The Empire must prevail.

We spend a lot of time attacking the repubs - with good reason - but they are just the enablers. The threat always has been and always will be corporations. Thomas Jefferson saw it over 200 years ago. Dwight Eisenhower warned us as recently as 50 years ago. When a progessive mood is prevalent we pass laws or use anti-trust statutes to curb their excesses. But we always end up back at this point - they are in control and the people suffer. Why can't we pass a Constitutional Amendment that states corporations are not persons and do not qualify for any rights and liberties that are granted to persons? I can think of nothing else that would give us a chance of being free of them.

"Chevron argues that it has been victimized by a "corrupt" Ecuadoran court system while the plaintiffs received active support from Ecuador's leftist president, Rafael Correa-an ally of Venezuela's Hugo Chávez. The company says a loss could set a dangerous precedent for other U.S. multinationals."

"corrupt?" isn't that the pot calling BLEACH black? awwe. chevron is victimizing itself. nobody else is. and Correa SHOULD stand up to multinationals. they say it like it's a bad thing, ha.

Typical... mega corp Chevron wants to get all the benefits of drilling in the forest... non of the efforts to clean it up... and no responsibility for the damage they left. I think I will adopt the roll model they offer, and make sure I leave Chevron stations more damaged then way I found them. Can't let big companies screw around with small vandals.

Maybe Hugo Chavez will get involved. He could start a South American "superfund" program. The money would naturally come from a new tax on crude exports to the US (and any other home nations of oil companies that have left a mess). He's pretty good at thumbing his nose at Big Oil and Cheney. He may even enjoy it.

Shouldn't take long to raise $8-16b.

Well said, elmysterio! This sorry state of affairs in Ecuador is Exxon-Valdez deja vue. Exxon Lobbyists said to the fisherman, who refused their paltry offer to settle, "You take us to court, your heirs will take our original pennies on the dollar offer after we keep you tied up years in court. You'll be dead by the time this is settled."
The lobbyist was prophetic. That's exactly what happened. Greg Pallast covered it from the point of view of his friend, who had died by the time the Supreme Court slapped Exxon's (now Exxon-Mobil) hand as punishment.
That's what happens when Big Business owns our government and the world.

"Chevron is pushing the Bush administration to take the extraordinary step of yanking special trade preferences for Ecuador if the country's leftist government doesn't quash the case. A spokesman for U.S. Trade Representative Susan Schwab confirmed that her office is considering the request"

Can't help wondering what price Ecuador had to pay for those "special trade privileges" and whether, in the long run, they might be better off without them. If those deals were severed, Ecuador might be free to nationalize the whole kit and kaboodle, maybe? It would be interesting to know what "considerations" Ms Schwab is taking into account. Wouldn't it be just fine if this threat backfired and Chevron lost the whole ball of wax, or tar, as the case may be? This may turn out to be a fine dilemma indeed.

I know that many out there say that the US would never allow that to happen. I think, however, that is a product of the old way of thinking - that the US is such an overpowering goliath that no one can stand before it. But the winds of change have been blowing in SA, multiple SA Davids have arisen, and their slings (and arrows) are finding their marks more and more.

It is wonderful to see those "half-naked" folks have the gumption we used to have in the old days. OUR emperor is completely naked and all we can do is shush the ones who tell us so.

It will indeed be interesting to see whose court our emperor in waiting really has in mind. Stay tuned.

This is the main reason why people (mostly poor people) throughout the world hate the U.S. It's not us, it's the damn government (run by the corporations) plundering their nations and their goverment leaders getting rich and spitting on them, with our help.

How come everything has to turn into a "Why we have to elect Obama" discussion? The issue here isn't about Obama... it's about a major US multinational corporation polluting the environment and refusing to clean it up. This quote: "The ultimate issue here is Ecuador has mistreated a U.S. company" disgusts me. It's humanoid thinking... They 'declare' it to be true, therefore it is. The facts on the ground have no meaning. It's pretty hard to hide such ecological devastation.

plantman13, your choice to vote for McCain is made in jest. Now let me put something out there.

Since Obama's defenders are saying that he is the world's greatest liar and will reveal his true self just as soon as he gets his imperial presidency, why can't the same be said for McCain? Maybe McCain is equally good at fooling you and is just as much a tree hugger.

Or is it that Obama's supporters will vote for him, not because he is secretly a progressive, but because, secretly, they are not?

I've been following this issue for years. Although I was unaware of Obama's previous leanings, I assume that he will now "refine his position"... as he comes out of the Republican closet.

Obama's integrity is all tapped out.

This issue strikes at the heart of multinationals usurping the sovereignty of small nations under the neoliberal hegemony. It is crucial that citizens of the US and other nations that harbor terroristic multinationals clearly state that their current practices are intolerable. I know I'm dreaming, but an appropriate stick would be the threat of nationalizing these greddy predators within the United States.

Follow curmudgeon99's advice, and also mail a copy of this article to your congresspeople and Obama. Can Olberman discuss this? Contact him and ask.

AdjunctS,
your analysis on this article is very accurate, and Newsweek is considered a "liberal" magazine, ha!

The dynamics of this interesting piece of environmental public interest litigation look like part of a growing pattern: if you are a rich and powerful defendant at risk of suffering significant defeat in a lawsuit somewhere, augment your defense team with some K Street lobbyists to change the law in mid-course, or divest the tribunal of its jurisdiction.

Shades of the retroactive FISA immunity legislation and the Military Commissions Act.

Bill from Saginaw

Subtle Main Stream Media distortion in this article

As always, the larger context is missing/selectively left out.

Michael Isikoff writes
"Chevron argues that it has been victimized by a "corrupt" Ecuadoran court system while the plaintiffs received active support from Ecuador's leftist president, Rafael Correa-an ally of Venezuela's Hugo Chávez."

Five years ago, when the court case began, Correa was not president.
Isikoff implies that this case is part of a left-wing assault on Chevron, rather than standing on its own merits or even simply being inspired by nationalist sympathies.

Two years ago, when Obama wrote his letter, Correa was not president.
Again, Isikoff implies that Obama and the democrats are somehow sympathetic with the Correa government.

From the progressive perspective, Isikoff is overselling Obama's progressive potential. Within Main Stream Media politics, linking Obama to "an ally of Venezuela's Hugo Chávez" is red baiting. If anything the article will put pressure on Obama to change his position.

Isikoff's patronizing attitude toward Ecuador -- Amazon judges, people in face paint -- comes from and reinforces American ignorance.

Quito, the article's byline and where the case is being heard, is the capital, a modern mountain city nowhere near the Amazon.

Indigenous people may be represented, but the lawyers and judges will be part of the dominant latin elite.

Bush and company may threaten Ecuador over this case, but they are already looking for ways to threaten Ecaudor.

plantman13 -- I can see the point of view that voting for Obama is the thing to do to keep McCain out of the Whitehouse. (I don't subscribe to it under the current circumstances and will not be voting for Obama myself, but I can see it and make a point of not saying, "You shouldn't vote for...")

But you going off like a loose pinball here and there and everywhere seems like an overreaction to legitimate criticism and a legitimate point of view. Why the overreaction?

What is it about Obama that is above criticism? Why is he untouchable? It is not the "flip flops" but the really disturbing positions he has taken - sometimes inconsistently - that are troubling. Not supposed to talk about them? Faith is the thing? (Maybe he will even be a bit socialist??? That's reaching into the absurd.)

Good for Obama for the position on Chevron and the inhabitants of Ecuador. Hope he retains that position. Now that he is ready and likely to assume one of the key positions in overseeing U.S. "interests" (i.e. corporate interests), we'll see what develops. To be skeptical about it seems perfectly reasonable to me and the "don't touch Obama" quite unreasonable.

It seems to me that our biggest foreign policy problem is that the line between corporate interests and what's in our national interest has been blurred to the point that the over-lap obscures the distinction. But that's what we get for allowing corporate money to pervert and tamper with our national interests using bribery through campaign contributions. Even our military has become little more than the violent arm of corporate power that's being used to ursurp and seize natural resourses throughout the world in the name of "U.S. Policy."

Terrorists attacks throughout the world are, and have been, primarily a reaction to the "corporate policy" of bullying and strong-arming local governments into submitting to Corporate Will. The average citizen of the U.S. has more in common with the so called terrorists in the world than with the Wall Street Capitalists who manipulate our economy and other economies throughout the world in order to enrich themselves.

Chevron will not have to pay one greasy cent. If the peasants win their court case, Bush/O-bomb-a/McSame will bomb Ecuador back into the stone...er...dirt age. And it won't even make the news.

You rock Plantman!!

Please e-mail the office for the US Trade Representative:

the address is contactustr@ustr.eop.gov

please be as articulate as you all here can be in expressing your fear that Chevron, a US corporation, will be allowed to default in its duties as the new owner of the polluted rainforest. As a former Chevron employee I am pretty sure it knew about the polluted landscape and was to clean it up as part of the deal. It would be outrageous for the US gov't to apply pressure on Ecuador to enable Chevron to abrogate its responsibility to clean up the mess.

Amen to you plantman!!

Zamboni, you are probably right, and I think very little
pressure will be needed for the criminals in the white
house to side with the oil company criminals. I may get
used to it, but I will never accept it as right.

OK, Samson...you're right...I conceed...so I guess I'll vote for McCain because the right-controlled media said Obama has flip-flopped. Never mind that intelligent people change their minds all the time based on new information...while the blithering idiots and the fanatic idealogues NEVER change theirs. So let's all vote for McCain because we know exactly where he stands on serious issues like Czechoslovakia (which doesn't exist). This proves how stable a thinker he is...he doesn't change HIS mind even if the issue doesn't exist. Not to mention that, as a scion of the wealthy and privileged, McCain will always have the common man's best interests at heart...just like Bush.The better off the rich are, the more serving jobs there will be for the rest of us. How could we ever trust someone who came up in poverty and had to actually WORK for what he has accomplished instead of having it ALL handed to him on a platter by his rich, well-connected daddy? You're right...what we need is four to eight more years of the rich and powerful raping this country's treasury of all they can carry away to off shore tax shelters. We just can't trust that damn Obama, there's no telling what he might do...why, he might even turn this place into a socialist state where ALL citizens share in the country's largess...how obscene! CEO's forced to live on what real people have to get by on...its criminal! Who does that guy think he is? By the way, Samson, are you a Republican or just a whining yankee?
If we wait around for a candidate tailor-made to a perfect fit...we'll wait forever and the fascists will remain in charge...forever!

"Get used to it"?? Don't think so.

I beg to differ with most of the posters here: I think Chevron will pressure Bush and his administration to severely threaten sanctions, and revoke other import/export privileges--and rest assured Ecuador will fold, and Chevron will get it's way. Regardless of ideals, the Chevron lobbyist is right: multinationals now own and rule the world, and governments merely serve their needs. Get used to it, it's not going to change any time soon. Chevron 1: Ecuador 0. Game over.

Doom n Gloom

I would take a gander that one name might be Glenn Tilton, current CEO of United Airlines. Tilton was CEO of Chevron in the 1990s and early 2000s.

This is another example of one of the hundreds or thousands of off-the-media-radar reasons to be electing Obama. You either get one "mindset" or the other (favor Chevron and cohorts, or,....not so much.)

Names! I want to know the names of the executives who made these adverse decisions. They are the enemies of peoples and the Earth. Their pictures and names need to be sent around the world and their behavior condemned. Public condemnation should follow them the rest of their lives.

Seems like a pretty safe stance to me ... shouldn't everyone have their day in court?!?

It would not be surprising if the scum bags who run Chevron wished they go back in time and have the US Marine Corps practice a little gun boat diplomacy on their behalf. Instead, its' modern form is with the cast of lobbyist douche bags they have hired, and they are being opposed by an equally formidable legion of lawyers. It is at this point that the best line out of Richard III becomes apt, "First thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers."

Juliania July 29th, 2008 11:27 am:
"That really tips the balance for me on Obama. As I speed read I was AFRAID he was going to be on the other side. He went to Leahy. Better than any political commercial, that."

Juliania, let's hope he holds to his current position. The pressure is likely mounting just because of whom Obama has around him as "advisors."

If Obama pretzels on this one, our voting choice will definitely become the too familiar lesser of two evils rather than the audacity of hope OR choosing throw-away write-ins or ballot votes for McKinney, Nader, Paul or Kucinich.

"The company [Chevron] says a loss could set a dangerous precedent for other U.S. multinationals. 'The ultimate issue here is Ecuador has mistreated a U.S. company,' said one Chevron lobbyist who asked not to be identified talking about the firm's arguments to U.S. officials. 'We can't let little countries screw around with big companies like this--companies that have made big investments around the world.'"

... and I'll bet that Chevron lobbyist wears an American flag pin in his lapel.

The plaintiffs "showed up in court in native garb, with painted faces and half naked."

Were any of them gay or smoking something they shouldn't have been smoking? I mean we have to know this stuff, right?

"Waiting until next year could leave the oil giant at the mercy of a judge in the Amazon jungle." Wow, civilization at the mercy of savages. Soon, the slaves will be burning down the mansion. (Oh, the delicious thrill!)

Do you know the story of the USS ChevronLizza Maru vs. the lighthouse?

This will be a test for Obama and should be followed. This could also be a example for indigenous people around the world.

What Obama agreed to 2 years ago and what he'll do as President seem to have very little relation to each other. Heck, he's disavowing everything he said two MONTHS ago, so two YEARS ago is truly ancient history.

If I had to place a wager, it would be that Chevron gives much more than the measly $40k these lawyers came up with and amazingly enough Obama changes yet another position.

The way both Obama and the Democrats in general act, sometimes you get the feeling they temporarily take these positions just to shake down the corporations for more contributions. That was certainly what the telecom bill smelled like.

Bookmark this article, and come back to it a year from now. Maybe I'm wrong. I'd actually like to be wrong. But my guess is that activists will be wringing their hands at yet another time the Democrats did the opposite of what people wanted, and amazingly enough Chevron will get what they want (for the price of a few hundred thousand in contributions and soft money).

I bet that if I went and dumped 100 gallons of used motor oil on the Chevron CEO's front lawn that an equivelently "corrupt" US judge would make me pay for the clean-up and repair of the property.

Chevron made the mess. It and its shareholders should pay to clean it up. The managers who oversaw this should be looking at 10yrs in an Ecuadorian prison.

"Humans" aren't corporate-Entities...therefore they have few "Rights' or Representation in 'Law' (or Interests, enforced by 'governments', now evolved into the Tools/sock-puppets of Corporate-Interests). And, these-Humans aren't even 'valued-Consumers', so only 'Morality' can save them [good-luck with that, when confronting Chevron!].
The 'bottom-line' will always lead profit-driven Corporate-Interests into harming any 'public-interest', wherever and whenever 'possible'. I imagine that's exactly 'why' corporate-entities were so Controlled by the original Constitution/Founders...?
Only Governments could ever effectively 'control' Corporate-Interests -- but sadly, all current/Major-Governments have become the "hostile-takeovers" of 'successful'-Corporations. 'Laws' are generated/re-written in Boardrooms today, not from within Parliaments or Congresses.

That really tips the balance for me on Obama. As I speed read I was AFRAID he was going to be on the other side. He went to Leahy. Better than any political commercial, that.