*** YOU PAT KKKHOLI

On Nov 17, 12:31 am, "All Bad" <AllBad_notrea...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
"Sock-Puppet'ullah" <wahidaza...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:e5cede95-c8b1-4484-9e4c-e371f6b5ac46@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx



On Nov 12, 10:17 am, PaulHammond <pahamm...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Eric later changed his mind!

He hasn't said anything here about that specifically, and if he has,
Eric Smalley is a moral coward. Anything he says is predicated by 1)
fear and 2) his desire to rejoin the herd.

Star doesn't talk to you any more.

Thanks be the Godhead, the Lord of all the worlds! No, she's busily
engaged (one-sidedly at that) with "Andrew Carter" presently.

Cal
Rollins doesn't post here.

Where's your "consensus"? Where's your evidence?

Right here,
http://groups.google.com.au/groups/search?enc_author=AgTcCxcAAAC1t8Bu....

Good grief! Do I have to spell it out for you? The consensus of your
readers is that you are a whack job, a wing nut, and not even Governer of
Alaska. See the doctor and take your _prescription_ meds and stop taking
the illegal drugs.

- All Bad

*** you and the horse you rode on, cultist criminal hack! Your day
when you will finally be put before a firing squad are not that far
away. I'll make sure to be there personally to laugh in your face as
you make your one-way trip to your master in hell.

It’s this simple. On the surface your organization could profess the
most innocuous, most widely acceptable, morally unassailable position.
Makes it much harder to criticise, don’t you think? It’s what goes on
behind the scenes that matters. You cosy up with the likes of Chevron
Texaco, ExxonMobil and Estee Lauder, and you’re in bed with the wrong
crowd. Dirty, dirty money, and all the claims in the world to fighting
for ‘women’s rights’, human rights or the ‘earth’s rights’ aren’t
going to make a difference to the fact that if you deal with these
people, accept their money, let them have any sway in the direction or
interests of your organization, you’re cosying up to some of the most
corrupt corporate monsters, and great intellectual and moral cowards
of our time. Do you believe that Chevron is a bastian of moral
courage? If you don’t, then don’t waste your breath trying to paint
Wahid or anyone associated with him or criticism of the TJC as some
kind of misogynist. The same claims made about the TJC and about other
'charitable organizations' and NGO/lobby group can and have been made
in other contexts. However, this is the context to air the issues
regarding the corruption of one of the bodies associated with the
Bahai’s and their interests. CORRUPTION IS CORRUPTION, and POWER IS
POWER, NO MATTER WHAT AN ORGANISATION SAYS ITS UP TO. Anyone with an
ounce of moral courage, who really stood up for what they say they do,
would spit in the faces of these companies for they are the hands of
oppression.

So how about one of the TJC’s financial contributors?: Chevron
Texaco.

http://www.greenleft.org.au/2006/667/6673

“Pits the size of football fields filled with a choking sludge of oil
and dead animals. Children suffering from leukaemia at four times the
national average. Birth defects and miscarriages soaring. Drinking
water polluted by carcinogens for hundreds of square kilometres.

The unhindered oil pollution of Ecuador’s pristine rainforest began in
1970 and lasted for over two decades. When Texaco Oil walked out of
the country with US$30 billion in profits stashed in its pockets, it
left a toxic legacy for 30,000 rainforest dwellers that was 30 times
worse than the Exxon Valdez disaster in Alaska.

From 1970 until 1992, the US corporation dumped in excess of 18.5
billion gallons of acutely toxic “water of formation” into more than
650 open and unlined pits, as well as directly into the swamps,
streams and rivers that make up the Amazon rainforest of northern
Ecuador. “Water of formation” contains some of the most dangerous
known chemicals, including benzene, toluene, and Policyclic Aromatic
Hydrocarbons (PAHs). The result has been what experts believe to be
the worst case of oil pollution on the planet and, after Chernobyl,
possibly the second-worst environmental catastrophe in human history.

In 2002, Chevron took over Texaco and inherited its Ecuadorian
devastation, but the company failed to live up to CEO Dave O’Reilly’s
promise to “develop affordable, reliable energy supplies in a safe,
environmentally responsible way”, forcing five indigenous groups to
file a class-action lawsuit against the oil giant in 2003.”

(read the rest of the article on the link)

Now, show me how the criticisms of the TJC raised by Wahid and myself
and more ‘anti-women’s rights’ than taking money from and having your
name associated with people like Chevron Texaco? What is more morally
reprehensible than taking money from people like this?

And no, these organizations are not modern day Robin Hoods, taking
from the rich and giving it back to the ‘poor’ and needy. Donations
for big business are a tax write off, a way of publicly cleaning up
their image, and enmeshing the interest of monetary benefactors with
their beneficiaries.

http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=4133
Boycott Chevron-Texaco

OilWatch
September 26th, 2002

OilWatch and the member organizations of Ecuador and Nigeria are
calling a boycott against Chevron-Texaco Company, to punish this
company for the environmental damages and the human rights abuses
commited during its operations in Nigeria and Ecuador.

Chevron-Texaco will face trials for its impacts in Nigeria and
Ecuador.

These countries' organizations use boycott as an instrument of
pressure against the company, to make it remember that whatever is
polluted MUST be cleaned up.

At times when transnational companies frame up regimes of impunity for
themselves, we must join efforts to punish companies with our protest,
and our vow of censorship by not consumming these companies' products.

This campaign will provide a precedent to avoid other oil companies'
impunity, that in the same ways cause destruction and death.

Just so we’re clear on the issue, let’s put another face out there.
Maurice Strong. A perfect example of using a smokescreen of an
unassailable moral position (ie environmental protection) to engage in
some very suspect practices.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,250789,00.html

At the United Nations, the Curious Career of Maurice Strong

Thursday, February 08, 2007

By Claudia Rosett and George Russell

AP

Maurice Strong

NEW YORK — Before the United Nations can save the planet, it needs to
clean up its own house. And as scandal after scandal has unfolded over
the past decade, from Oil for Food to procurement fraud to peacekeeper
rape, the size of that job has become stunningly clear.

But any understanding of the real efforts that job entails should
begin with a look at the long and murky career of Maurice Strong, the
man who may have had the most to do with what the U.N. has become
today, and still sparks controversy even after he claims to have cut
his ties to the world organization.

From Oil for Food to the latest scandals involving U.N. funding in
North Korea, Maurice Strong appears as a shadowy and often critically
important figure.

Strong, now 77, is best known as the godfather of the environmental
movement, who served from 1973-1975 as the founding director of the
U.N. Environment Program (UNEP) in Nairobi. UNEP is now a globe-
girdling organization with a yearly budget of $136 million, which
claims to act as the world’s environmental conscience. Strong
consolidated his eco-credentials as the organizer of the U.N.’s 1992
environmental summit in Rio de Janeiro, which in turn paved the way
for the controversial 1997 Kyoto Treaty on controlling greenhouse gas
emissions.

But his green credentials scarcely begin to do justice to Strong’s
complicated back-room career. He has spent decades migrating through a
long list of high-level U.N. posts, standing behind the shoulder of
every U.N. secretary-general since U Thant . Without ever holding
elected office, he has had a hand in some of the world’s most
important bureaucratic appointments, both at the U.N. and at the World
Bank. A Canadian wheeler-dealer with an apple face and pencil
mustache, Strong has parlayed his personal enthusiasms and connections
into a variety of huge U.N. projects, while punctuating his public
service with private business deals.

(please refer to the rest of the article on the link provided as it is
very long and thorough).

Remember for future posts in response:

Raising questions about Maurice Strong and his associated business
practices DOES NOT EQUAL ANTI-ENVIRONMENT

Rasing questions about the abuse of children in the Catholic Church
DOES NOT EQUAL ANTI-CATHOLIC CHURCH

Raising questions about the associations and operation of the Tahirih
Justice Center- DOES NOT EQUAL ANTI-WOMEN

.