Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Bechtel-ChevronTexaco execs at Int'l House Fundraiser
Bechtel and ChevronTexaco are listed at the top of the board of donors at the Int'l House dormitory in Berkeley. About ten students protested the presence of executives from this company at the annual fund raising dinner on May 7th.
Most of the donors to the Int'l House seem to be moderate or liberal-minded wealthy people from Berkeley and the Bay Area who also might donate to the art museum and the symphony. There are no other corporations evident among the top of the list of big donors on a chart in the hallway by the cafe.
About 10 students passed out leaflets and held signs as attendees of the fundraising dinner arrived and chaufeurs parked their cars.
A man who spoke as though he was a top-level manager or executive at Chevron Texaco, but whose name could not be determined, seemed quite bothered by the presence of the low-key protesters as he mounted the steps into the building. He started reacting to and questioning the student pictured who is either a chemistry grad student or undergraduate. My impression is that he was not at all used to debating political issues relating to criticism of his company. He seemed to be stuttering for good words to say, and made statements like "it's a free world" when he seemed to really mean to say something about how we might have free speech but he will ignore us, and we said "no, it sure isn't free!". She said she doesn't want to work at a place like ChevronTexaco, and he said that this is fine "we are all free", and she added that it isn't so simple because residents of Richmond suffer from pollution and dioxin when they don't choose this, and he said "it's not our fault!" and we snorted in laughter. We commented later that this is akin to the idea in Germany where after the third reich fell, most common people, and most soldiers and many members of the party said "we couldn't do anything. If we spoke out, we would have been sent to a camp", and this is entirely true in the case of most working class people. However, responsibility must rise as one starts to possess power - even just being the part of the 22% of adults with a bachelor's degree. I encountered this attitude among some upper-class residents of I-house - a ex-class president of Beverly Hills High who decided to become a progressive kept telling me that he had no power, because all his old neighbors and attorney colleagues are miles away from his viewpoint and won't be simply influenced by him. In any case, this executive was not able to start spouting rhetoric like you might hear on right-wing talk radio at any time of the day, nor was he able to coherently voice any sort of reaction or retort to the signs of the protesters. He just seemed confused and bothered by it as though he was seeing it for the first time. Maybe a lot of corporate heads only get the Wall Street Journal's cartoon version of what antiwar and other protesters are saying.
Bechtel has done harm in lots of countries around the world. Frequently they will move in and privatize an already built water system and raise priced by several times, and cause riots. They were given the contract to rebuild Iraq after the destruction in a predetermined, unopen process.:
http://bolivia.indymedia.org/es/2002/08/237.shtml
http://www.corpwatch.org/issues/PID.jsp?articleid=6532
ChevronTexaco had $99 in revenue and $2billion in profits last year. As many people have pointed out, wouldn't the world be a lot better if the system weren't structured around maximization of shareholder profit, and minimization of wages and shifting 'negative externalities' such as the uncleaned pollution and oilspills in Ecuador, the Nigerian Delta, Columbia etc. on poor local populations. Donations by corporations to NPR and other charities don't make up for this. Wouldn't it be easier to leave the money in the pockets of the poor Bolivians so that they don't need anybody's charity?
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/05/03/BU61801.DTL
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2003/05/06/state1704EDT0092.DTL
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/topco/chart/revenue
Around this point, Micki Weinberg, the 19 year old student who ran against councilmember Kriss Worthington for city office, walked by. http://www.dailycal.org/article.asp?id=9818 He said that all the corporations are screwed up but that we are guilty of selective bias of only opposing corporations associated with the looting of Iraq because that is popular right now. But we aren't protesting the Sultan Foundation giving money to the Dept. of Middle Eastern studies, where Saudi Arabia gives money to the Sultan Foundation. Saudi Arabia indeed is a monarchy that permits slavery, extreme repression of women, noncitizens, and religious minorities. That has to go. They are also a big ally of the U.S. and are looked at in favor by President Bush (or he has never has a word against them). We should be sure to tell this to Bush next time he comes to California. Here is a prominent group of neo-conservative Bush supporters who number a significant percentage of U.S. society - Christian millenialists or dispensationalists, such as his friends at Bob Jones university. My relatives from Germany can confirm that there are antisemitics all over the place in the U.S. who constantly come out to them, assuming that all germans will match their beliefs:
http://www.graceonlinelibrary.org/full.asp?ID=178
International House is a semi-private dormitory at UC Berkeley that has about 55% international students and 45% U.S. citizens. As an ex-resident, I strongly support the idea of this type of residence for other colleges. At many universities, the international students clearly end up associated mainly with other international students because there are no easy mechanisms for getting to know americans who already have their set of friends from high school etc. I-house has a great structure where people are encouraged to get to meet and interact with hundreds of other members of the 600+ student residence.
International House has an impressive history in Berkeley, where it was threatened and boycotted by its hills neighbors before the 1950s when the city was integrated. Before this, non-european americans were prohibited by and large from purchasing houses east of Sacramento (or maybe Shattuck) street. The traditional fraternity and sorority row culture felt threatened by the creation of ihouse. http://ias.berkeley.edu/ihouse/i/history.html The fact that Elmwood is one of the whitest census districts in the state is a remnant effect of this time, even though no legal infrastructure of this remains. Int'l House also sheltered a few japanese and japanese american students during WWII.
About 10 students passed out leaflets and held signs as attendees of the fundraising dinner arrived and chaufeurs parked their cars.
A man who spoke as though he was a top-level manager or executive at Chevron Texaco, but whose name could not be determined, seemed quite bothered by the presence of the low-key protesters as he mounted the steps into the building. He started reacting to and questioning the student pictured who is either a chemistry grad student or undergraduate. My impression is that he was not at all used to debating political issues relating to criticism of his company. He seemed to be stuttering for good words to say, and made statements like "it's a free world" when he seemed to really mean to say something about how we might have free speech but he will ignore us, and we said "no, it sure isn't free!". She said she doesn't want to work at a place like ChevronTexaco, and he said that this is fine "we are all free", and she added that it isn't so simple because residents of Richmond suffer from pollution and dioxin when they don't choose this, and he said "it's not our fault!" and we snorted in laughter. We commented later that this is akin to the idea in Germany where after the third reich fell, most common people, and most soldiers and many members of the party said "we couldn't do anything. If we spoke out, we would have been sent to a camp", and this is entirely true in the case of most working class people. However, responsibility must rise as one starts to possess power - even just being the part of the 22% of adults with a bachelor's degree. I encountered this attitude among some upper-class residents of I-house - a ex-class president of Beverly Hills High who decided to become a progressive kept telling me that he had no power, because all his old neighbors and attorney colleagues are miles away from his viewpoint and won't be simply influenced by him. In any case, this executive was not able to start spouting rhetoric like you might hear on right-wing talk radio at any time of the day, nor was he able to coherently voice any sort of reaction or retort to the signs of the protesters. He just seemed confused and bothered by it as though he was seeing it for the first time. Maybe a lot of corporate heads only get the Wall Street Journal's cartoon version of what antiwar and other protesters are saying.
Bechtel has done harm in lots of countries around the world. Frequently they will move in and privatize an already built water system and raise priced by several times, and cause riots. They were given the contract to rebuild Iraq after the destruction in a predetermined, unopen process.:
http://bolivia.indymedia.org/es/2002/08/237.shtml
http://www.corpwatch.org/issues/PID.jsp?articleid=6532
ChevronTexaco had $99 in revenue and $2billion in profits last year. As many people have pointed out, wouldn't the world be a lot better if the system weren't structured around maximization of shareholder profit, and minimization of wages and shifting 'negative externalities' such as the uncleaned pollution and oilspills in Ecuador, the Nigerian Delta, Columbia etc. on poor local populations. Donations by corporations to NPR and other charities don't make up for this. Wouldn't it be easier to leave the money in the pockets of the poor Bolivians so that they don't need anybody's charity?
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/05/03/BU61801.DTL
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2003/05/06/state1704EDT0092.DTL
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/topco/chart/revenue
Around this point, Micki Weinberg, the 19 year old student who ran against councilmember Kriss Worthington for city office, walked by. http://www.dailycal.org/article.asp?id=9818 He said that all the corporations are screwed up but that we are guilty of selective bias of only opposing corporations associated with the looting of Iraq because that is popular right now. But we aren't protesting the Sultan Foundation giving money to the Dept. of Middle Eastern studies, where Saudi Arabia gives money to the Sultan Foundation. Saudi Arabia indeed is a monarchy that permits slavery, extreme repression of women, noncitizens, and religious minorities. That has to go. They are also a big ally of the U.S. and are looked at in favor by President Bush (or he has never has a word against them). We should be sure to tell this to Bush next time he comes to California. Here is a prominent group of neo-conservative Bush supporters who number a significant percentage of U.S. society - Christian millenialists or dispensationalists, such as his friends at Bob Jones university. My relatives from Germany can confirm that there are antisemitics all over the place in the U.S. who constantly come out to them, assuming that all germans will match their beliefs:
http://www.graceonlinelibrary.org/full.asp?ID=178
International House is a semi-private dormitory at UC Berkeley that has about 55% international students and 45% U.S. citizens. As an ex-resident, I strongly support the idea of this type of residence for other colleges. At many universities, the international students clearly end up associated mainly with other international students because there are no easy mechanisms for getting to know americans who already have their set of friends from high school etc. I-house has a great structure where people are encouraged to get to meet and interact with hundreds of other members of the 600+ student residence.
International House has an impressive history in Berkeley, where it was threatened and boycotted by its hills neighbors before the 1950s when the city was integrated. Before this, non-european americans were prohibited by and large from purchasing houses east of Sacramento (or maybe Shattuck) street. The traditional fraternity and sorority row culture felt threatened by the creation of ihouse. http://ias.berkeley.edu/ihouse/i/history.html The fact that Elmwood is one of the whitest census districts in the state is a remnant effect of this time, even though no legal infrastructure of this remains. Int'l House also sheltered a few japanese and japanese american students during WWII.
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
So you were a resident of International House at some point. Guess it didn't bother you to live there subsidized by the very corporations you rail against. Typical spoiled child hypocracy.
How come you people don't understand that when the Richmond refinery was built, no one lived around it?
How come you people don't understand that when the Richmond refinery was built, no one lived around it?
Ha! I lived at I-House for a few years. It was run like an ultra-corrupt third-world bananna republic. It makes total sense to find that they're in cahoots with corporate terrorists like the Bechtel and Texaco guys.
But those companies weren't so bad when you were living on their dime, were they?
Often times, people do not realize that Bechtel and Chevron fund I-House and nor do many people even know what Bechtel does. It is important for people to realize that protesting is also about raising awareness. There are many people who currently live at I-House that are trying to get the I-House to divest from Chevron and Bechtel.
In order to change the society that we are living in, we must radically change the way that we view ourselves. We must have integrity and we musn't be defeatist about changing the society we live in. We, as a whole, have stopped caring about how we get our money, but rather as long as we get it. And we believe that we can't make a difference... that there will always be poverty and inequalities, so why change it? This is a problem- a feeling of powerlessness that results in action that results in a feeling of powerlessness and so on. It is a vicious cycle that must end.
This corporate executive/manager/whatever does not care about the people of Richmond. I mean, I have always known that, but I never thought that I would see such a smirk on his face while speaking of the poor suffering so that he could have his meal.
I hope he got digestive pains while eating his $250 steak.
In order to change the society that we are living in, we must radically change the way that we view ourselves. We must have integrity and we musn't be defeatist about changing the society we live in. We, as a whole, have stopped caring about how we get our money, but rather as long as we get it. And we believe that we can't make a difference... that there will always be poverty and inequalities, so why change it? This is a problem- a feeling of powerlessness that results in action that results in a feeling of powerlessness and so on. It is a vicious cycle that must end.
This corporate executive/manager/whatever does not care about the people of Richmond. I mean, I have always known that, but I never thought that I would see such a smirk on his face while speaking of the poor suffering so that he could have his meal.
I hope he got digestive pains while eating his $250 steak.
Sorry, I'm much too simpleminded to understand your post. I'm a conservative.
I-house was super-corrupt. I'm not sure that I 'was living on Blechtel and Toxico's dime' at all. Most likely the funds were diverted AWAY from the residents. Maybe to pay for I-House's team of lawyers that they need to shield them from all the lawsuits from disgruntled former residents, who knows?
Yes, the year I was there, people became disgruntled about the money too. I'm not sure where it all goes. Pres. Lurie makes an income. I won't give my name, but I ended up taking an illegal non-student roommate for the 2nd semester to defray the rent of $950. There was a older man who hangs out in the cafe and cafeteria who really freaked me out by trying to extort money out of me by claiming he had given me valuable legal advice when I got hit by a car and he told me to threaten to sue them, and he was about to sue me for a cut when I got the insurance settlement. Of course, dorms here are pretty expensive too, given that there apparently isn't a profit motive and they are stuffing them into triples and doubles for about $850? Is the donation money going to board for poor foreign students? The population was much more upper-class than I encountered at Cal in general, or the place I went to college in another state, but maybe on-par with the Piedmont greek community.
Joe,
How often did you see Mr. Lurie except during the first week when he makes a speech? he does make a lot of money like $200000, although he brings in a lot too. You wouldn't realize it, but Ihouse is like the #3 or #4 most dense zone of wingnuts in Berkeley, after #1, city council chambers and #2 - maybe the area outside of Cafe Mediteraneum. And it's not the foreign students who are eccentric - it's the americans, especially Boalt students, but also some members of the community who like to hang out there. They aren't weird in traditional ways, but in complex onion-like multilayered ways where it takes a while to learn how dramatically different their perspective on life is.
How often did you see Mr. Lurie except during the first week when he makes a speech? he does make a lot of money like $200000, although he brings in a lot too. You wouldn't realize it, but Ihouse is like the #3 or #4 most dense zone of wingnuts in Berkeley, after #1, city council chambers and #2 - maybe the area outside of Cafe Mediteraneum. And it's not the foreign students who are eccentric - it's the americans, especially Boalt students, but also some members of the community who like to hang out there. They aren't weird in traditional ways, but in complex onion-like multilayered ways where it takes a while to learn how dramatically different their perspective on life is.
Yeah I-house did have a lot of liberals in it, just like Berkeley as a whole. It is still disturbing to see them doing business with corporate terrorists though. It makes you wonder why Toxico and Blechtel are trying to buy influence there. Perhaps they want I-house to help propagandize the residents there to pro-US viewpoints.
Precisely. Remember that our media is owned by a handful of corporations, soon to be perhaps even ONE big corporation. The news doesn't get out unless we GET it out there, and, something simple and peaceful like holding a sign at an event is fantastic. Getting into an impromptu discussion with some corporate VP at the event is an AMAZINGLY good thing! How often do any "common" people cross his path? How easy is it to get access to those guys? They don't read letters or emails, and you can't get 'em on the phone.
Great job, demonstrators! And glad you were peaceful and reasonable too. Even bigger bonus: the executive was hearing and seeing something that apparently was totally new to him. Disregard the smirking arrogance. That goes away with time, after persistent effort. If you're still getting smirks in, 20 years, then sure, get angry. But that's how long it'll take for any serious social change to take root, and, if you keep it up, it WILL take root.
Great job, demonstrators! And glad you were peaceful and reasonable too. Even bigger bonus: the executive was hearing and seeing something that apparently was totally new to him. Disregard the smirking arrogance. That goes away with time, after persistent effort. If you're still getting smirks in, 20 years, then sure, get angry. But that's how long it'll take for any serious social change to take root, and, if you keep it up, it WILL take root.
How do conservatives live with themselves? I mean lets say you know the truth about the tightly controlled corporate media, and how the USA is not really a free country nor particularly democratic. Within this context, let's say you know your refinery is hurting people, but because of the tight control over the media few people will be aware of it. What would let you rationalize this to yourself? Have the CEOs of these companies no decency?
why did u covered what was on the banner????
what was write on it?
what was write on it?
For more information:
http://brasil.indymedia.org
The banner isn't covered. It actually was bleached out in the original photograph because of the white color so I used the photo editor to try to bring out the printing more by decreasing brightness and increasing contrast. She had sort of a straightforward message about Bechtel and ChevronTexaco profiting from intervention in Iraq.
"i" has a problem with students who live in dorms sponsored by corporations they don't like and calls it "[t][ypical spoiled child hypocracy." What a bunch of shit! In countries where the government is run by people who actually care about the people instead of profits for themselves and their ruling class masters, education is free. Most students, due to their studies, have no income, so they live wherever they can afford to do so. It's not their fault that in the not free, very expensive U.S., big corporations own the means of support -- in this case, housing -- that people need to survive.
This is an often used, false dichotomy that is used by the right and the rich. First, they take control of basic necessities, then they chastise those who object to their policies if those people make use of those necessities. What else are people to do, live on the street and starve? "i" should get a clue. If he or she already knows, he or she should stop this totally disingenuous argument.
This is an often used, false dichotomy that is used by the right and the rich. First, they take control of basic necessities, then they chastise those who object to their policies if those people make use of those necessities. What else are people to do, live on the street and starve? "i" should get a clue. If he or she already knows, he or she should stop this totally disingenuous argument.
Sorry, I'm much too simpleminded to understand your post. I am but a conservative.
No kidding, most conservatives are dumber than a bag of hammers. 'i' seems to be no exception.
it's always ugly chicks that do demonstrations?
Nothing else to do?
Nothing else to do?
Further proof that "i" is dumber than a bag of hammers:
He writes that the protesters pictured are guilty of "hypocracy" (misspelled) for having lived in the International House housing corporation that has received money from the Bechtel and Texaco scum they were protesting.
I know the people pictured, and in fact they do not live there. I believe they have never lived there.
So, aside from the fact that residents, employees, or customers of a company should protest it's fucked up policies without being accused of "hypocracy" for their preexisting affiliation, "i" can't even get his most basic facts straight to begin leveling his baseless, pointless attacks.
Pathetic. And now he'll probably respond, again, how he can't understand this post, being a simpleminded (stupid is more like it) "conservative," which, by the way, he is not.
General servility to the wealthy and hostility to their opponents does not make one a conservative. Conservatism is a tradition of thought that values independence from centralized control. People like "i" don't think, they knee-jerk in reaction to anyone struggling for freedom from corporate tyranny. Real conservatives resist tyranny, wherever it is. Edward Abbey was a real conservative. Tom Paine was a real conservative.
People like "i" would like to label themselves conservatives because it masks what they really are - slaves defending slavery and the slave holders. Truly pathetic.
He writes that the protesters pictured are guilty of "hypocracy" (misspelled) for having lived in the International House housing corporation that has received money from the Bechtel and Texaco scum they were protesting.
I know the people pictured, and in fact they do not live there. I believe they have never lived there.
So, aside from the fact that residents, employees, or customers of a company should protest it's fucked up policies without being accused of "hypocracy" for their preexisting affiliation, "i" can't even get his most basic facts straight to begin leveling his baseless, pointless attacks.
Pathetic. And now he'll probably respond, again, how he can't understand this post, being a simpleminded (stupid is more like it) "conservative," which, by the way, he is not.
General servility to the wealthy and hostility to their opponents does not make one a conservative. Conservatism is a tradition of thought that values independence from centralized control. People like "i" don't think, they knee-jerk in reaction to anyone struggling for freedom from corporate tyranny. Real conservatives resist tyranny, wherever it is. Edward Abbey was a real conservative. Tom Paine was a real conservative.
People like "i" would like to label themselves conservatives because it masks what they really are - slaves defending slavery and the slave holders. Truly pathetic.
For more information:
http://www.ainfos.ca/en/indiez.html
IHOUSE has ideological blinders soo narrow and tight he's losing his sight.
The two women pictured protesting are beautiful, by any standard. If he saw them in a fashion magazine with slinky clothes, wigs, and makeup on he'd be wanking all day in the bathroom, his mom banging on the door yellin', "Boy, WHAT are you doin' in there!?!?"
One of them has a shaved head, which no doubt means to IHOUSE that a woman is ugly, never mind women like model Eve Salvail and musician Sinead O'Connor, among many other beautiful women with shaved heads.
What IHOUSE really wants is not a beautiful woman, but a subservient woman. One who shuts up and will accept being told what to do, not make noise, speak her mind, and dress in a way that's comfortable to her. IHOUSE obviously thinks strength is ugly in a woman. How wrong he is.
I have seen more beautiful women protesting than anywhere else. They typically don't try to cover themselves in ridiculous makeup and absurd clothes like high heels. That makes them all the more attractive, because you can actually see them rather than a facade.
IHOUSE likes boobjobs, fake nails and hair, and facelifts, clearly - on a woman who will keep her mouth shut. With an outlook like that, good luck, loser. You'll be begging uninterested women for years to come while you pull your pud in your mom's basement.
The two women pictured protesting are beautiful, by any standard. If he saw them in a fashion magazine with slinky clothes, wigs, and makeup on he'd be wanking all day in the bathroom, his mom banging on the door yellin', "Boy, WHAT are you doin' in there!?!?"
One of them has a shaved head, which no doubt means to IHOUSE that a woman is ugly, never mind women like model Eve Salvail and musician Sinead O'Connor, among many other beautiful women with shaved heads.
What IHOUSE really wants is not a beautiful woman, but a subservient woman. One who shuts up and will accept being told what to do, not make noise, speak her mind, and dress in a way that's comfortable to her. IHOUSE obviously thinks strength is ugly in a woman. How wrong he is.
I have seen more beautiful women protesting than anywhere else. They typically don't try to cover themselves in ridiculous makeup and absurd clothes like high heels. That makes them all the more attractive, because you can actually see them rather than a facade.
IHOUSE likes boobjobs, fake nails and hair, and facelifts, clearly - on a woman who will keep her mouth shut. With an outlook like that, good luck, loser. You'll be begging uninterested women for years to come while you pull your pud in your mom's basement.
For more information:
http://infoshop.org
she's beautiful.
I guess, though, for some the standard set by protestant evangelical television hosts is the ticket to attractiveness and feminity. Ever notice an unusual similarity in hairstyle and makeup inspired by god among this crowd.
http://cbn.org/700club/behindthescenes/terrymeeuwsen.asp
http://www.backtothebible.org/gateway/today/18021
I guess, though, for some the standard set by protestant evangelical television hosts is the ticket to attractiveness and feminity. Ever notice an unusual similarity in hairstyle and makeup inspired by god among this crowd.
http://cbn.org/700club/behindthescenes/terrymeeuwsen.asp
http://www.backtothebible.org/gateway/today/18021
anarchist writes:
"He writes that the protesters pictured are guilty of "hypocracy" (misspelled) for having lived in the International House housing corporation that has received money from the Bechtel and Texaco scum they were protesting.
I know the people pictured, and in fact they do not live there. I believe they have never lived there.
So, aside from the fact that residents, employees, or customers of a company should protest it's fucked up policies without being accused of "hypocracy" for their preexisting affiliation, "i" can't even get his most basic facts straight to begin leveling his baseless, pointless attacks. "
I never said the protesters pictured lived there so it's you that can't the most basic facts straight before you launch into a baseless, pointless attack.
What's truly bothering you anarchist, no corporations will hire you?
"He writes that the protesters pictured are guilty of "hypocracy" (misspelled) for having lived in the International House housing corporation that has received money from the Bechtel and Texaco scum they were protesting.
I know the people pictured, and in fact they do not live there. I believe they have never lived there.
So, aside from the fact that residents, employees, or customers of a company should protest it's fucked up policies without being accused of "hypocracy" for their preexisting affiliation, "i" can't even get his most basic facts straight to begin leveling his baseless, pointless attacks. "
I never said the protesters pictured lived there so it's you that can't the most basic facts straight before you launch into a baseless, pointless attack.
What's truly bothering you anarchist, no corporations will hire you?
Wolverine writes:
"Most students, due to their studies, have no income, so they live wherever they can afford to do so. It's not their fault that in the not free, very expensive U.S., big corporations own the means of support -- in this case, housing -- that people need to survive. "
Have no income? Here's a little suggestion: GET A FREAKIN JOB!. Spare me the 'due to their studies' crap, most college students work AND go to school full time. Try cutting back on the cute little street theaters and prancing around as ANSWER's stooges - you'll have more time than you think.
"Most students, due to their studies, have no income, so they live wherever they can afford to do so. It's not their fault that in the not free, very expensive U.S., big corporations own the means of support -- in this case, housing -- that people need to survive. "
Have no income? Here's a little suggestion: GET A FREAKIN JOB!. Spare me the 'due to their studies' crap, most college students work AND go to school full time. Try cutting back on the cute little street theaters and prancing around as ANSWER's stooges - you'll have more time than you think.
Would somebody please help me take my head out of my ass?
Awwww, someone's pretending to be i, isn't that the cleverest thing you ever saw? What's next, "I know you are but what am I"?
I know I'm making someone squirm when they have to resort to such adolescent trivialities.
I know I'm making someone squirm when they have to resort to such adolescent trivialities.
"What's next, "I know you are but what am I"?"
Nobody wants to stoop to your level, i.
Nobody wants to stoop to your level, i.
Hi!
The sign said "If the Ihouse 'promotes peace and tolerance' why does it accept $$ from Bechtel and Chevron?"
For you who is too conservative to understand my previous posting... think about it and you might understand. In order to have a true social revolution in which we change the fundamental way we live (i.e. the commercialization, MTVation, superficialization, lack of compassion, ignorance and lack of education) we need to change some of our values and the way that we look at change.
We need to stand by values such as respect for human life, liberty and equality. That is not what the American flag is about, unfortunately. The american flag is a division of nations in which the lives of americans are more important than those of other countries and in which those of higher class are more important than those who are poor. It is division of people on the basis of material possessions.
And when I speak of empowerment, what I am saying is that if we do not act then we will never know the power that we have. It is complacency and apathy that breeds a sense of powerlessness. This must be changed.
And I am the girl with the shaved head, by the way. If you want to call me ugly, then just do it to my face. I'll be at the next action!
Lots of love and peace!
The sign said "If the Ihouse 'promotes peace and tolerance' why does it accept $$ from Bechtel and Chevron?"
For you who is too conservative to understand my previous posting... think about it and you might understand. In order to have a true social revolution in which we change the fundamental way we live (i.e. the commercialization, MTVation, superficialization, lack of compassion, ignorance and lack of education) we need to change some of our values and the way that we look at change.
We need to stand by values such as respect for human life, liberty and equality. That is not what the American flag is about, unfortunately. The american flag is a division of nations in which the lives of americans are more important than those of other countries and in which those of higher class are more important than those who are poor. It is division of people on the basis of material possessions.
And when I speak of empowerment, what I am saying is that if we do not act then we will never know the power that we have. It is complacency and apathy that breeds a sense of powerlessness. This must be changed.
And I am the girl with the shaved head, by the way. If you want to call me ugly, then just do it to my face. I'll be at the next action!
Lots of love and peace!
By the way, not only is Venus stunningly beautiful (both as a kind, considerate, loving, intelligent, funny person internally and a cute, sexy, sensual, gorgeously beautiful person outside) but she has a job, fucker! And not only does she have a job now; but she put herself through school without a dollar from her parents or anyone else- after by the way growing up in the ghetto (an experience that you probably wouldn't know shit about). The reason people like her are able to protest is because they sacrifice their social lives, work sometimes up to three-jobs and live with only the bare necessities so that they can devote the little free time and energy that they have to do something that's meaningful and real for themselves and for others.
On your comment, "Try cutting back on the cute little street theaters and prancing around as ANSWER's stooges - you'll have more time than you think." Having an informed conversation with those who are doing things that you don't like is hardly a "cute little street theater", nor was her honorable civic engagement and educational message "prancing around", as if it were as trivial as your free time probably is. Maybe you think that actually giving a fuck about people dying in Richmond from cancer and other diseases from the dioxins and other chemicals is something that we should shrug off for television-watching and bar-hopping. Maybe you think that there's no contradiction between supposedly "liberating" a people and then asserting authority to profit from their resources. May you think it's okay to allow US corporations to exploit the Iraqi's vulnerabilities and profit from their weaknesses - that US bombs and US-backed sanctions created- and the very resources which would have been their chance at actually getting some kind of decent living for themselves despite years of Western Colonialism and U.S. intervention fucking up the political systems of the whole region.
And ANSWER? She's not a part of ANSWER and has never been a part of ANSWER.... as if they were even involved in any of the planning for direct actions going on in the San Francisco Bay Area. But of course, I didn't expect you to know much about the anti-war movement. It figures that you'd lump it all together under the first acronym that the mainstream media or the conformist consumer culture tells you is running everything. Unlike your kind, we don't run things one way or have any authority figure or central group telling us what to do. We believe in freedom- the real kind: freedom from the grip of the wolfs bite around the sheep's neck, not freedom of the wolf to bite the sheep's neck. We believe in critical thought that allows us to lead meaningful lives away from the disneyland freakshow conformist societies that comprise this "
Brave New World" So next time that you start to criticize people on grounds that have no fucking basis, then realize that to have any kind of critical discussion you're going to have to get out of your naive, self-absorbed bubble and actually face reality.
On your comment, "Try cutting back on the cute little street theaters and prancing around as ANSWER's stooges - you'll have more time than you think." Having an informed conversation with those who are doing things that you don't like is hardly a "cute little street theater", nor was her honorable civic engagement and educational message "prancing around", as if it were as trivial as your free time probably is. Maybe you think that actually giving a fuck about people dying in Richmond from cancer and other diseases from the dioxins and other chemicals is something that we should shrug off for television-watching and bar-hopping. Maybe you think that there's no contradiction between supposedly "liberating" a people and then asserting authority to profit from their resources. May you think it's okay to allow US corporations to exploit the Iraqi's vulnerabilities and profit from their weaknesses - that US bombs and US-backed sanctions created- and the very resources which would have been their chance at actually getting some kind of decent living for themselves despite years of Western Colonialism and U.S. intervention fucking up the political systems of the whole region.
And ANSWER? She's not a part of ANSWER and has never been a part of ANSWER.... as if they were even involved in any of the planning for direct actions going on in the San Francisco Bay Area. But of course, I didn't expect you to know much about the anti-war movement. It figures that you'd lump it all together under the first acronym that the mainstream media or the conformist consumer culture tells you is running everything. Unlike your kind, we don't run things one way or have any authority figure or central group telling us what to do. We believe in freedom- the real kind: freedom from the grip of the wolfs bite around the sheep's neck, not freedom of the wolf to bite the sheep's neck. We believe in critical thought that allows us to lead meaningful lives away from the disneyland freakshow conformist societies that comprise this "
Brave New World" So next time that you start to criticize people on grounds that have no fucking basis, then realize that to have any kind of critical discussion you're going to have to get out of your naive, self-absorbed bubble and actually face reality.
Baker - try decaf fucker. I haven't said a word about 'Venus'. I'm assuming you're referring to the woman in the pictures above and you're obviously mistaking me for the author of a previous post that included caustic remarks about her appearance. Remarks I found very distasteful, btw.
You say Venus works several jobs and has put herself through school? She has my admiration for that (I worked 7 PM- 7AM and went to college during the day so I know how hard that is) and I support her right to voice her opinion, it's one of the reasons the US is a wonderful country to live in.
Say what you want about my remarks about 'colorful street theaters' but I've seen first hand that most of the people at these demonstrations are there for the social event.
You say Venus works several jobs and has put herself through school? She has my admiration for that (I worked 7 PM- 7AM and went to college during the day so I know how hard that is) and I support her right to voice her opinion, it's one of the reasons the US is a wonderful country to live in.
Say what you want about my remarks about 'colorful street theaters' but I've seen first hand that most of the people at these demonstrations are there for the social event.
To be perfectly honest, I could personally care less if someone calls me ugly or not. The only comments that mean anything to me are those that come from people that I trust and love anyway. (And I don't work three jobs... but I have before and since I have a degree now, I don't have to anymore- I just work one).
But, as for your comment about social events... Protests generally are not fun, at least not for me and not for many people that I know. Most of the time they are a great deal of work and stressful. Confrontation is very difficult and exhausting. I would definitely prefer to be relaxing in the park reading a good book, or riding a bike or... well, the list goes on. Protests are not the only solution, there are many other strategies to promote change. But protesting is useful to raise awareness about injustices.
Baker and I have been in jail a couple of times. And jail sucks. I hate it. The last time I was in it, I was broken down with exhaustion (since the police don't give water or food or phone calls like they should). But I did it because I believed in the cause (which at the time was to help a girl get out of jail who had false felony charges). And I don't regret it. I feel good about it.
And sure, at the Oakland docks we danced to the band music and that was fun. But it was something we needed very intensely after all the terror of previous protests. There's nothing like protesting to wake you up to the fact that we live in a police state in which there is no freedom of expression. It makes you get a small taste of what it would be like to be in Iraq right now, without food or water. Do you think the U.S. wants to feed Iraqis? No!! They want to break them down like they try to break us down in jail! To break us down to aquiesence and complacency. But fuck that! I know that what we are doing is letting the rest of the world know that we are not the same as our government (and that is national security!!) It is letting others out there that are surrounded by pro-war and pro-imperialists that they are not alone in their convictions and that they can also stand up for what they believe.
So, get it straight. We aren't out there, often waking at 3 in the morning or baking in the hot sun, in order to have fun! We are out there in order to stand up for something that we believe in.
But, as for your comment about social events... Protests generally are not fun, at least not for me and not for many people that I know. Most of the time they are a great deal of work and stressful. Confrontation is very difficult and exhausting. I would definitely prefer to be relaxing in the park reading a good book, or riding a bike or... well, the list goes on. Protests are not the only solution, there are many other strategies to promote change. But protesting is useful to raise awareness about injustices.
Baker and I have been in jail a couple of times. And jail sucks. I hate it. The last time I was in it, I was broken down with exhaustion (since the police don't give water or food or phone calls like they should). But I did it because I believed in the cause (which at the time was to help a girl get out of jail who had false felony charges). And I don't regret it. I feel good about it.
And sure, at the Oakland docks we danced to the band music and that was fun. But it was something we needed very intensely after all the terror of previous protests. There's nothing like protesting to wake you up to the fact that we live in a police state in which there is no freedom of expression. It makes you get a small taste of what it would be like to be in Iraq right now, without food or water. Do you think the U.S. wants to feed Iraqis? No!! They want to break them down like they try to break us down in jail! To break us down to aquiesence and complacency. But fuck that! I know that what we are doing is letting the rest of the world know that we are not the same as our government (and that is national security!!) It is letting others out there that are surrounded by pro-war and pro-imperialists that they are not alone in their convictions and that they can also stand up for what they believe.
So, get it straight. We aren't out there, often waking at 3 in the morning or baking in the hot sun, in order to have fun! We are out there in order to stand up for something that we believe in.
thank you so much for help-may the truth endure
“i” writes:
“I never said the protesters pictured lived there so it's you that can't the most basic facts straight before you launch into a baseless, pointless attack.”
Originally he wrote:
“So you were a resident of International House at some point. Guess it didn't bother you to live there subsidized by the very corporations you rail against. Typical spoiled child hypocracy (sic).”
One would naturally assume he meant the protesters, given that he was posting a comment to an article and photo essay about them. Perhaps he meant the journalist who posted the article. He didn’t make it clear who he was attacking, so there are no “facts” to get straight beyond the simple fact that he made a baseless, pointless, and unfocused attack against someone for “hypocracy.”
Regardless of who he was attacking, which he couldn’t be bothered to make clear, he also couldn’t be bothered to address my points:
“Residents, employees, or customers of a company should protest it's fucked up policies without being accused of "hypocracy" for their preexisting affiliation.”
“Pathetic. And now he'll probably respond, again, how he can't understand this post, being a simpleminded (stupid is more like it) "conservative," which, by the way, he is not.”
“General servility to the wealthy and hostility to their opponents does not make one a conservative. Conservatism is a tradition of thought that values independence from centralized control. People like "i" don't think, they knee-jerk in reaction to anyone struggling for freedom from corporate tyranny. Real conservatives resist tyranny, wherever it is. Edward Abbey was a real conservative. Tom Paine was a real conservative.”
“People like "i" would like to label themselves conservatives because it masks what they really are - slaves defending slavery and the slave holders. Truly pathetic.”
I’ll clarify my most important point, which “i” ignored. Workers, residents, citizens, consumers, really anyone in any dependent situation in regards to an institution, have not only a right but an obligation to criticize its faults. This is not hypocrisy, this is a basic part of being a human living within the constraints of flawed social systems like governments, corporations, and so forth. It is entirely appropriate to criticize the International House, especially if one has lived there or does live there. I say especially because those people who live there or have lived there have a special understanding of the institution in question, and therefore a special obligation to share their critical perspective.
This is just the same as if someone involved in International House thought there was merit to International House being involved with Bechtel and Chevron Texaco. They should state why they believe this. Of course, “i” hasn’t given any reason why International House should be involved with Bechtel and Chevron Texaco, regardless of his involvement with it or lack thereof. He just slings mud.
“i” writes:
“I haven't said a word about 'Venus'. … you're obviously mistaking me for the author of a previous post that included caustic remarks about her appearance.”
Baker didn’t indicate that you did, he just asserted that she was beautiful (against the ridiculous statement of “IHOUSE”). You did, however, clearly imply that the “cute little street theaters” protesters engage in are what they do instead of working, rather than in addition to working - which is most often the case. Baker mentioned Venus’ employment, which really has no bearing at all on the issue. Whether one attacks protesters by accusing them of “hypocracy,” writing “GET A FREAKIN JOB!” or calling them ugly, one avoids addressing the issues they brought up: the atrocities of Bechtel and Chevron Texaco.
You can’t take any moral high ground by pointing out that you haven’t stooped to the third of those three diversionary statements and found it “distasteful,” the fact remains that you are attacking people who are adding constructively to public debate by pointing out terrible things that are going on. You attack them for their public participation – the particular phrase you use is unimportant, and in fact totally interchangeable with “huh huh, Beavis, why are protester chicks so ugly?”
On work: work has no inherent value – it is the outcome of work that matters, which means that protests are valuable labor. Digging ditches then filling them is useless and stupid, regardless of whether you are being rewarded for it.
Your entire thrust of argument is not just distasteful, but concretely harmful in its effort to undermine those honestly engaged in public participation and activism. Not only that, but you have no constructive input of your own. It is also dishonest dialogue, in that you have yet to address any of the central points anyone has made, instead picking totally irrelevant nits about the supposed “hypocracy” or joblessness of those you disagree with. This sort of thing is sadly typical in American discourse, but nonetheless still reprehensible.
“i” writes:
“What's truly bothering you anarchist, no corporations will hire you?”
I’ve worked for plenty of corporations, and it has been unpleasant in every case. What’s truly bothering me is that you won’t tickle my ass with your puny cock.
Seriously, if you cared at all about what was truly bothering me, you would simply read and respond to my points, rather than attempting to brush them off with bullshit diversions like this.
“i” writes:
“Say what you want about my remarks about 'colorful street theaters' but I've seen first hand that most of the people at these demonstrations are there for the social event.”
OK, I’ll say that your comment here is, typically, bullshit. As Venus pointed out, this sort of activism is difficult, unpaid, sometimes physically painful or exhausting, emotionally taxing, and short on rewards. There is definitely a sense of camaraderie which is a social benefit, just as sometimes as a result of going to a protest you acquire a well written newspaper, engage in a good discussion, or hear good music. On rare occasion you might get to hear a good speaker. However, if I just wanted a social event I would plan a party, not a protest.
Further, there is absolutely no reason to make protests drab, dreary affairs that no one would attend for social reasons. If someone primarily goes to a protest because they want a social event, there is nothing wrong with that. It is a socially beneficial event. If protests were drab and dreary, you would criticize them for that, rather than for being social events. This criticism makes no more sense than accusing people of working at their jobs for social reasons. If someone enjoys making sandwiches and enjoys interacting with customers and co-workers, does that make their sandwich worthless? On the contrary, they probably make a better sandwich than someone who hates their fellow workers. Who are you to judge people’s motivations? You make your own motivation clear enough: you are a pathetically servile and bootlicking thought slave. You amuse me.
You have still said nothing compelling about the issues these protesters raise in regards to Chevron Texaco, Bechtel, or their ties to the International House. You have still failed to address any of my points regarding your pathetic excuse for discourse.
“I never said the protesters pictured lived there so it's you that can't the most basic facts straight before you launch into a baseless, pointless attack.”
Originally he wrote:
“So you were a resident of International House at some point. Guess it didn't bother you to live there subsidized by the very corporations you rail against. Typical spoiled child hypocracy (sic).”
One would naturally assume he meant the protesters, given that he was posting a comment to an article and photo essay about them. Perhaps he meant the journalist who posted the article. He didn’t make it clear who he was attacking, so there are no “facts” to get straight beyond the simple fact that he made a baseless, pointless, and unfocused attack against someone for “hypocracy.”
Regardless of who he was attacking, which he couldn’t be bothered to make clear, he also couldn’t be bothered to address my points:
“Residents, employees, or customers of a company should protest it's fucked up policies without being accused of "hypocracy" for their preexisting affiliation.”
“Pathetic. And now he'll probably respond, again, how he can't understand this post, being a simpleminded (stupid is more like it) "conservative," which, by the way, he is not.”
“General servility to the wealthy and hostility to their opponents does not make one a conservative. Conservatism is a tradition of thought that values independence from centralized control. People like "i" don't think, they knee-jerk in reaction to anyone struggling for freedom from corporate tyranny. Real conservatives resist tyranny, wherever it is. Edward Abbey was a real conservative. Tom Paine was a real conservative.”
“People like "i" would like to label themselves conservatives because it masks what they really are - slaves defending slavery and the slave holders. Truly pathetic.”
I’ll clarify my most important point, which “i” ignored. Workers, residents, citizens, consumers, really anyone in any dependent situation in regards to an institution, have not only a right but an obligation to criticize its faults. This is not hypocrisy, this is a basic part of being a human living within the constraints of flawed social systems like governments, corporations, and so forth. It is entirely appropriate to criticize the International House, especially if one has lived there or does live there. I say especially because those people who live there or have lived there have a special understanding of the institution in question, and therefore a special obligation to share their critical perspective.
This is just the same as if someone involved in International House thought there was merit to International House being involved with Bechtel and Chevron Texaco. They should state why they believe this. Of course, “i” hasn’t given any reason why International House should be involved with Bechtel and Chevron Texaco, regardless of his involvement with it or lack thereof. He just slings mud.
“i” writes:
“I haven't said a word about 'Venus'. … you're obviously mistaking me for the author of a previous post that included caustic remarks about her appearance.”
Baker didn’t indicate that you did, he just asserted that she was beautiful (against the ridiculous statement of “IHOUSE”). You did, however, clearly imply that the “cute little street theaters” protesters engage in are what they do instead of working, rather than in addition to working - which is most often the case. Baker mentioned Venus’ employment, which really has no bearing at all on the issue. Whether one attacks protesters by accusing them of “hypocracy,” writing “GET A FREAKIN JOB!” or calling them ugly, one avoids addressing the issues they brought up: the atrocities of Bechtel and Chevron Texaco.
You can’t take any moral high ground by pointing out that you haven’t stooped to the third of those three diversionary statements and found it “distasteful,” the fact remains that you are attacking people who are adding constructively to public debate by pointing out terrible things that are going on. You attack them for their public participation – the particular phrase you use is unimportant, and in fact totally interchangeable with “huh huh, Beavis, why are protester chicks so ugly?”
On work: work has no inherent value – it is the outcome of work that matters, which means that protests are valuable labor. Digging ditches then filling them is useless and stupid, regardless of whether you are being rewarded for it.
Your entire thrust of argument is not just distasteful, but concretely harmful in its effort to undermine those honestly engaged in public participation and activism. Not only that, but you have no constructive input of your own. It is also dishonest dialogue, in that you have yet to address any of the central points anyone has made, instead picking totally irrelevant nits about the supposed “hypocracy” or joblessness of those you disagree with. This sort of thing is sadly typical in American discourse, but nonetheless still reprehensible.
“i” writes:
“What's truly bothering you anarchist, no corporations will hire you?”
I’ve worked for plenty of corporations, and it has been unpleasant in every case. What’s truly bothering me is that you won’t tickle my ass with your puny cock.
Seriously, if you cared at all about what was truly bothering me, you would simply read and respond to my points, rather than attempting to brush them off with bullshit diversions like this.
“i” writes:
“Say what you want about my remarks about 'colorful street theaters' but I've seen first hand that most of the people at these demonstrations are there for the social event.”
OK, I’ll say that your comment here is, typically, bullshit. As Venus pointed out, this sort of activism is difficult, unpaid, sometimes physically painful or exhausting, emotionally taxing, and short on rewards. There is definitely a sense of camaraderie which is a social benefit, just as sometimes as a result of going to a protest you acquire a well written newspaper, engage in a good discussion, or hear good music. On rare occasion you might get to hear a good speaker. However, if I just wanted a social event I would plan a party, not a protest.
Further, there is absolutely no reason to make protests drab, dreary affairs that no one would attend for social reasons. If someone primarily goes to a protest because they want a social event, there is nothing wrong with that. It is a socially beneficial event. If protests were drab and dreary, you would criticize them for that, rather than for being social events. This criticism makes no more sense than accusing people of working at their jobs for social reasons. If someone enjoys making sandwiches and enjoys interacting with customers and co-workers, does that make their sandwich worthless? On the contrary, they probably make a better sandwich than someone who hates their fellow workers. Who are you to judge people’s motivations? You make your own motivation clear enough: you are a pathetically servile and bootlicking thought slave. You amuse me.
You have still said nothing compelling about the issues these protesters raise in regards to Chevron Texaco, Bechtel, or their ties to the International House. You have still failed to address any of my points regarding your pathetic excuse for discourse.
For more information:
http://crimethinc.com
I drove by the event, and was happy to see the signs... I love Berkeley.. i felt like such a poser, because I was burning petroleum.. I was embarrased to know that the people standing there would smell my tailpipe as I drove by.. .the next day I filled up on Biodiesel...
ahh... much better..
ahh... much better..
I drove by the event, and was happy to see the signs...
i will fill up the hummer and go down to take a look .
I have always wondered why these guy's go out to protest - then get back in the v w van and spew smog all the way home
i will fill up the hummer and go down to take a look .
I have always wondered why these guy's go out to protest - then get back in the v w van and spew smog all the way home
None of the people protesting that day even own cars.
We have bicycles thank you very much.
We have bicycles thank you very much.
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$330.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network