Hundreds protest at Caterpillar headquarters

http://week.com/morenews/morenews-read.asp?id=4189

Hundreds Protest at Caterpillar Headquarters
Posted April 23, 2004 6:03pm
Demonstrators in downtown Peoria delivered their message on the doorstep of Caterpillar headquarters.

They want Caterpillar to stop selling bulldozers to Israel.

Associates of the 'Stop Cat Coalition' say the Israeli government uses Caterpillar bulldozers to demolish Palestinian homes.

American Rachel Corrie was killed last year as she tried to prevent the bulldozing of a Palestinian home.

Today organizers carried pictures of Rachel Corrie as they rallied and marched to Caterpillar's front door.
<more>

Interesting...

New York - US stocks surged yesterday as investors cheered strong earnings reports, led by construction equipment maker Caterpillar and online marketplace eBay.

Caterpillar's earnings and a positive forecast from aerospace company Boeing helped prop up the blue-chip indices while technology stocks got a boost from eBay and the quadrupling of profit at wireless technology company Qualcomm.

"The market's been stuck in a rut and I think we're seeing a strong bounce due to optimism surrounding earnings," said Keith Keenan, a vice-president at brokerage Wall Street Access.

The Dow Jones industrial average, Standard & Poor's 500 and Nasdaq composite all rose by more than 1 percent in early trade.

Caterpillar, a component of the Dow, said quarterly earnings had more than tripled, sending its shares up 4.7 percent.

<snip>

http://www.businessreport.co.za/index.php?fArticleId=412354&fSectionId=552&fSetId=304

- Reuters.

http://www.forbes.com/markets/newswire/2004/04/14/rtr1332452.html

CHICAGO, April 14 (Reuters) - Caterpillar Inc. (nyse: CAT - news - people) shareholders on Wednesday defeated a proposal that would have asked the company to re-evaluate selling bulldozers to the Israeli army.

About half a dozen people spoke at the company's normally subdued annual meeting in support of the resolution, which was prompted by the use of Caterpillar machinery to raze Palestinian homes.

The company's board had opposed the measure, which received only 4 percent of the preliminary vote count.

"We have tremendous compassion for the families involved," said Jim Owens, who recently took over as Caterpillar's chairman and chief executive. "But with more than 2 million machines and engines out there, we don't have the practical ability or the legal right to determine how our products are used after they are sold."

more...

I missed it in the news.

To police its products around the world.

It is the responsibility of all of us! And Caterpillar, too. If I sold you a gun that I knew you were going to kill someone with, then I would share in the responsibility for that death.

Got it? Real simple.

We shouldn't export anything but confetti, and then only package it in bags of 5 pounds or less so it wouldn't fall on someone and hurt them. Should GM stop selling vehicles to the Israelis because they might be used to run someone over? I bet you complained when the State Dept brought up dual-use technology to use as evidence of Saddam's WMD production capabilities. Well, a bulldozer is dual-use. Because one person got run over with a bulldozer (maybe accidentally, maybe not) we should not sell anymore bulldozers to Israel? All I need to hear you say now is "If it saves just one person from dying it will all be worthwhile!"

It was never said that a company should stop selling a product because it might be used to harm other people. What was said was that the company should stop selling a product to Israel for a specific use (which has been human rights abuses - eg destroying Palestinian homes and killing peace activists). Now, if Israel hadn't committed these abuses, then it would be a case of might, but in this case it's a lot like someone who's already driven their car into a crowd of bystanders and killed a bunch of them going 'hey, that worked and no-one's doing much but making a few weak noises of protest! Time to put in an order with the manufacturer for another twenty cars!'


btw, for the How Dare Anyone Suggest That Companies Police What They Sell crowd, time for you to rush off and buy shares in an Australian company that did just that. Let's turn this appalling concern for people over profit around! How dare a company be concerned at what one of its products is being used for, and in this case withdraw it from sale to everyone! ;)

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/04/05/1081017102174.html?from=storyrhs

Violet...

(After that, the dog is a known biter: a danger to humans.)

Do you not agree that bulldozers are used for construction of homes, schools, hospitals, barracks, etc.? There is a Naval Construction Battalion base in my area and they have lots of heavy equipment: bulldozers, road graders, back hoes, dumptrucks. Should Caterpillar refuse to sell any of its products to any military entity? Yes, Israelis destroy the homes of family members of suicide bombers, but I can't say as I blame them. Maybe would-be suicide bombers will think twice about doing so if they think it would cause hardship for their family members rather than getting them a check from a "charity".

In cases where there's proof that equipment is being used to commit human rights violations (and in the case of Israel there is abundant proof), the company should refuse to sell its products when they're being bought for that purpose. Nothing too difficult to understand about that, I would have thought....

Even if Israel was only demolishing the homes of family members of suicide bombers (which it isn't, as it demolishes homes around settlements, and innocent Palestinians are killed either in their homes or because walls collapse onto structures next to the one being demolished), that's collective punishment, something any progressive should be strongly opposed to. Does it deter suicide-bombers? Of course it hasn't. Does it punish the innocent? Definately. In fact, demolishing homes is much more likely to create more suicide-bombers....

Violet...

Fortunately, companies also have freedoms to continue to sell legal products to legitimate buyers.

Even though I'm a socialist myself. Anyone who cares more about people than profit would agree that companies should show some concern when their equipment is being purchased to commit human rights violations. And if they won't do it, we as progressives should pressure them to do so...

Committing human rights violations isn't a legitimate purpose, btw...

Violet...

It is not THEIR job to monitor use of their products. Companies that make numerous products would spend all their time tracking down reports of their use and make no money.

And it is humorous to say nothing "socialist" about it and then you admit you are a socialist. You just don't see it.

I certainly didn't. No-one has even suggested that the company must monitor the use of their products. What's been said is that in a case like this where there is proof that human rights abuses are being committed using the equipment, then the company should show some concern for other humans over profit and stop selling their product to that user until they can show good cause that they're using it for legitimate purposes. As for being a socialist, that's got nothing to do with anything. Do you really think only socialists believe that companies shouldn't sell their products to those who are using them to kill others and violate human rights?


Violet....

"Proof" of many things exists in the world. Then there is counter "proof." Then there is debate, investigations, argument, challenges, court cases, appeals, etc.

All of them distract from the core functions of a business which include making a product and making a profit.

If governments wish to investigate such things, then they should do so and let CAT and others know about the findings. Then, so informed, CAT and others can choose to act or not.

Clearly, in this case, they chose not to act by an overwhelming majority.

Y'know, that'd be proof that the equipment isn't being used to demolish Palestinian homes, sometimes with Palestinians still inside them...

Are you trying to say that no matter what the use of the equipment is or how much misery it causes people, we should all ignore it because after all profit is just so much more important than human rights? Sorry, but at some point companies do have to be held responsible for the use of their equipment, especially when they're very well aware of the abuses being carried out with it...

Violet...

I am not on the CAT board and, besides, CAT has appropriately decided to NOT add this burden onto its already complex business.

You said there was counterproof, so I asked you to supply it. I think it's very safe to assume that there actually isn't any counterproof at all...

Violet...

We have debated the Rachel Corrie issue so many times there is no point in re-delving. Anyone who chooses to stay in the way of heavy construction equipment places themselves at risk just like they do if they run out on a busy highway.

in "Socially Responsible" Mutual Funds. Personally, I think they are great, their returns have been competitive with other funds in the past couple of years (since the popping of the Tech boom)

Corps loved the idea of 401Ks, it helped them to eliminate pensions and 401Ks and Mutual Funds brought lots of new, "dumb" money into the markets (no offense - most mutual fund owners aren't quite that savy and simple buy and hold - that was good advice in the old days).

Now corps are being pushed more and more to give these shareholders a say and vote in how the company operates. It may take a long time for this type of activism to make a difference, but it certainly is a wonderful sight to behold.

from its Buna Rubber Plant!

http://www.mazal.org/Auschwitz%20Aerial/Buna-01-14-45.htm

you know who is purchasing the equipment. You have purchase orders from the Israeli army and can simply stop selling to the Israeli army no matter what the ultimate aim of the equipment is whether it is by use by the National Guard for flood control or to bulldoze families' homes.

this incident , in my observation, is the most egregious.

I simply cannot parse or accept this incident at all. It is simply barbaric and is unforgiveable.

It turns me against Sharon's policies more that anything else/ the 23 year old woman peace activist, was simply run over by an Israeli bulldozer!!!

Dear heavens, what on earth is there in this that the Israeli's can be proud of?

Other than the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians and the building of a wall in repetition or imitiation of the walled ghettos we are familiar with in history.

She , Rachel Corrie, was NOT a threat to Israel!

or was she?

. She had NOT any explosives attached to her. She was simply standing there, protesting the bulldozing of a Palestinian homesite in her idealistic, youthful bravery.

What on earth is there about this that can be said to be a "defending of Israel" against the ones who would destroy Israel and it's claims to biblical boundaries?

This is NOT justified as a defense of Israel at all.


, although the building of a wall is surely the most ironic of all ironies re this situation there. I find that incredible and incredibly ironic.

was taken hours before Corrie was fatally injured. Sites posting them as consecutive to try and show intent have been proven misleading. Corrie, who was interfering with an IDF attempt to uncover smuggling tunnels for terrorists, was actually killed when she scrambled up a pile of dirt to wave the driver off and was spilled by the shifting pile of dirt. The driver didn't see her, as was proven in an investigation by the Israeli gov't.

Oh, and you should read a little more about the organization she represented, the ISM. Especially how they hid a terrorist in their office and helped other terrorists bypass security checkpoints.

have any links we can check out?

Or was a victim who deserved to be a victim

I don't get it.

Why was she killed , fatally injured, or run over at all?

She was "interfering'? In what?

Oh fine--a woman standing on a pile of dirt, a peace activist, who was standing on a pile of dirt, was deserving of being run over by a bulldozer because she was "protecting" someone,-- the enemy and their smuggling tunnels?

That is really stretching it. It is really cheap , that excuse for murdering this woman.

Corrie was not an indentified enemy.

It is simply another murder based on "suspcion" of a 23 year old woman seeking peace and this defense of her murder by a bulldozer is simply cheap and not believable at all.

Corrie was NOT a threat to Israel. PERIOD

Another murder, that can be termed pre-emptive that has become the accepted "norm" under Sharon.

After all, Corrie may have , at one point in time actually have been an enemy rather than a peace activist, Right?

Yeah, right. This young woman was so armed that she could have killed the operator of the bulldozer who was bulldozing 'tunnels. Right.

That assertion is simply not believable and is disgusting to me.

There is no excuse for this barbarism


Those who would insist that this type of murder is "justified" in order to "defend itself" when they have a lair of nukes hidden somewhere, is actually cause a horrific backlash


The woman had NO weapons pointed at anyone. Was NOT a threat to the bulldozing idiot. She did NOT threaten anyone.

To insist that her murder is justified is simply another examply of attempting to justify "defense" as an excuse for barbarism, and total inhuman knee jerk murder by one faction who is the best equipped over another who is the lesser equipped and the most vulnerable

This is NOT acceptable to me at all.

And to those who do insist that is was justified--all I can say is that you have lost your sense of justice and have lost your soul

is your characterization of Ms. Corrie's death as a murder. It's not like the 'dozer operator chased her down in order to run over her. She was engaging in extremely dangerous behavior (at one point even attempting to climb up on the spoil being pushed up by the 'dozer's blade!). Her death was tragic, and no more justified than any other accidental death. Heavy equipment is nothing to futz around with.

Edit: mispelling.

She was in a very dangerous area of the world. She knew the risks going in and chose to accept them. While it is tragic that she is dead, it's not like it was an outcome that could not have been forseen in that area of the world. Isn't that what everyone said about the Christian missionaries who were killed in Iraq a couple of months ago? Why more pity for Corrie than for them? Oh, that's right....they were Christian, not Muslim. My bad.

When did she convert?

They were Christian, not supporters of Muslims. Hope that clarifies it.

And the Christian team in Hebron is all over the U.S. press.

Not.

Run along.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

(You know that, don't do.)

Even the IDF withdrew the shit about "hiding a terrorist".

Get out of the LGF loop and into the real world.

Of noted peace activist Rachel Corrie.



And here's a tribute to Rachel published at http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull%26cid=1078113575924

A 'tribute' to Rachel Corrie
By RUHAMA SHATTAN

March 16 is the first anniversary of Rachel Corrie's death. I want to thank Corrie for the explosives that flow freely from Egypt to Gaza, via the smuggling tunnels under the Gaza homes that she died defending.

Perhaps it was these explosives that in the year since her martyrdom – oops, death – have been strapped around suicide bombers to blow up city buses and restaurants in Israeli cities, particularly in Jerusalem, killing men, women, and schoolchildren (two of them classmates of my daughter and her friend in the February 22, 2004 bombing), and leaving hundreds more widows, orphans, and bereaved parents.

On the first anniversary of her death, I want to thank Rachel Corrie for showing Palestinian children how to despise America as she snarled, burned an American flag, and led them in chanting slogans, and as she gave "evidence" at a Young Palestinian Parliament mock trial finding President Bush guilty of crimes against humanity.

Perhaps her help in fanning the flames of violent anti-American sentiment led to the October 2003 bombing of the Fulbright delegation to Gaza to interview scholarship candidates, killing three. There will be no new crop of Palestinian Fulbright scholars this fall.

ON THE first anniversary of her death, I wanted to thank Rachel Corrie for providing her organization, the Palestinian-sponsored International Solidarity Movement, with the opportunity to release a manipulated photo sequence "showing" an Israeli military bulldozer deliberately crushing her. (I would also like to thank AP and The Christian Science Monitor for taking up the baton and immortalizing this cynical ISM stunt.)

On the first anniversary of her death, I want to thank Rachel Corrie for showing the way to all those who seek peace in the Middle East. Unfortunately, Corrie's peace, as anyone familiar with the PLO, Fatah, Hamas, and Hizbullah organizations that she defended with her life knows – or as anyone familiar with the weekly rants of the Friday preachers in the Palestinian mosques is aware – means not peaceful coexistence but the elimination of the State of Israel, and death to those they call "the usurping Jews, the sons of apes and pigs."

Thank you, Rachel Corrie, of Evergreen State University, where the profs wear khakis and keffiyehs at graduation ceremonies, for showing us what peace really means.

The writer is a translator, editor, and writer who has lived in Israel since 1976.

You think burning an effigy of a US flag is terrible? I don't...

You think posting hatefilled diatribes full of debunked lies from conservative media sources is in some way a persuasive argument for anything at all? I don't....

Violet...

So burning the American flag is less of an issue for you than for other folk.

I'm more than aware of the bizarre conservative belief that burning a flag is much worse than say, bulldozing innocent civilians and their homes. See, those sort of people exist here too. Instead of focusing on the nationality of DU members, how about addressing the issues they make in their posts?

Violet...

While I oppose any amendment against it (because that would defy exactly what it stands for) I still don't like it. For you in Australia, it is not something that could ever strike the same chord.

THAT is the issue of course.

I'd hazard a guess that many* Democrats aren't progressives and are more comfortable with conservative views. The issue is that someone posted a picture of Rachel Corrie burning an effigy of a flag in order to make out that she wasn't a peace activist....

Stop telling me what things are like in Australia. Yr not here, you've never been here, and there's no need at all to continually bring my nationality into this discussion...

*using the formula of Muddles in the I/P forum to define what the word many means, in this case it means five people or upwards ;)

Violet...

With burning our flag, it is germane to the conversation.

This is a forum for progressives, and the vast majority of them are US citizens who, being progressives, don't think burning an effigy of the US flag is a terrible thing. I also don't think burning the Australian flag is a terrible thing, Muddles. Let it not be said that I'm not even-handed when it comes to being disgusted by blind patriotism displaying itself in reverence to a piece of cloth, and attacks on those who believe burning a flag is a legitimate form of protest...

Violet...

And there are folks here on both sides of it as there are on most cultural issues that are discussed.

As I said, while I don't like it, I defend the right to do it. But I still don't like it. But I find it beyond ridiculous for foreign nationals to say it is OK if folks here burn our flag.

You might actually have some minor point if I hadn't already pointed out that I don't find flag-burning terrible, regardless of what state's flag it is. And the issue isn't really whether flag-burning is okay or not. The issue was that someone tried to equate Rachel Corrie burning a flag with her being a traitor. Complete crap, wouldn't you agree?


Violet...

Whether folks burn flags in Austria or Australia is up to them. Whether we burn OUR flag in the U.S. is up to us.

And no, flag burning is just offensive, not traitorous.

Rachel Corrie wasn't even burning a US flag in the US. It was an effigy of a US flag and the location was in the Occupied Territories. The intent of burning a flag is the same, no matter where it is, and I don't need permission of any American to have the same opinion on the burning of the US flag as I do for any other flag...

I don't really care what *yr* opinion of flag-burning is. I was talking about the intent of the post where bunnythief posted that pic...

Violet...

There is no real difference between burning a flag and burning an effigy. The difference is marketing, not substance.

Yes, the intent is the same, to offend. It typically does so.

And you are welcome to your opinion, but again, we are talking about an American flag. And it is unsurprising that foreign nationals would be comfortable with burning another nation's flag.

You've got that right!

Here's what the U.S. Embassy in Tel Aviv had to say about this charming 'tribute' Bunnythief has decided to share with us...

http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/WO0403/S00092.htm

(excerpt is from a letter to the JPost)

Mar. 3, 2004 Letters to the Editor

Disgusting 'tribute'

Sir, – I want to pass on the US Embassy's reaction to the article "A 'tribute' to Rachel Corrie" (March 2). This article is nothing less than hateful incitement. The author's disgusting abuse of the anniversary of the death of this American citizen is inexcusable. The article reflects a level of discourse unbefitting any serious newspaper.

We're disappointed that you chose to publish this article.

PAUL PATIN US Embassy Tel Aviv

Ever since her unfortunate death, Rachel Corrie has practically been beatified as an "innocent peace activist" who was martyred for her beliefs. That's just WRONG.

In the above photo, the "peace activist" is teaching CHILDREN to burn the US flag. Nice, peaceful intentions there.

As far as the letter goes -- the ISM (International Solidarity Movement, to give it it's full name) is NOT a "Peace Activist" movement. They are unabashedly on the side of the Palestinian terrorists, and have NO business calling themselves "for peace."

Fact: they have harbored known, armed terrorists in their offices, and sought to protect them from arrest. One of the last stops of the two British men who committed the Mike's Place bombing was the offices of ISM, where they had tea with the activists.

And on March 27, 2003, IDF forces pursuing Islamic Jihad leader Shadi Sukia followed him to ISM's Jenin office. ISM's coordinator, Susan Barcley, refused IDF entry. They went in anyway, and arrested Sukia and Barcley. A search of the premises found a pistol and several Kalashnikov assault rifles.

(I'm sure that's standard office equipment for peace activists, though. I can see it in their fund-raising letters: "We need your support now more than ever. Our Jenin office is woefully unequipped. We only have two phone lines, one fax machine, three computers, seven assault rifles, two RPGs, four desks, and three chairs -- one of them falling apart.")

If the ISM were actual "Peace Activists," they'd be working to head off the worst of both sides. They'd be riding buses in Jerusalem to put their bodies between suicide bombers and innocent people. They'd go to the Temple Mount and protect worshipers at the Western Wall from the regular bombardment of rocks they face from the Al Aqsa Mosque above.

But ISM has their own agenda. It's summed up in their web site -- www.palsolidarity.org. They feel "solidarity" with the Palestinians, especially those killing Israelis.

Actually, I appreciate the ISM. They clearly demonstrate the moral superiority of the Israeli side. The main reason they don't take the actions I suggested above is simple: THEY WOULDN'T WORK.

Stand between an Israeli soldier and his goal, you'll get arrested. Stand between a suicide bomber and his goal, you'll become another casualty statistic.

Rachel Corrie was, at best, a naive tool of terrorists and murderers. At worst, she was a willing enabler of them. She died because she knew she was standing up against people with a conscience and trusted that conscience to keep her from harm. That trust wasn't misplaced; it didn't take into account her apparent clumsiness or poor judgment, and she fell out of sight of the person whose conscience she was trusting to keep her safe.

It's a harsh reality of this world: sometimes stupidity is a capital offense, and fate has no court of appeals.

J.

Ah, glorious. I hope you continue posting here for some time to come, as these posts are very entertaining.

"is teaching CHILDREN to burn the US flag. Nice, peaceful intentions there."

Those poor, simple brown-skinned people. They need White Goddess to teach them mystery of firemaker.

Who are you who is so wise in the ways of Bic? Teach us, for we know not of this thing you call burning. We are a simple, humble people - somehow unable to discover by ourselves how to burn oily rags or makeshift flags.

"Fact: they have harbored known, armed terrorists in their offices"

FACT: they have toilets which were once used by terrorists with weird diseases. Employees are advised to wash hands before AND after coddling imaginary Hamas types.

"I'm sure that's standard office equipment for peace activists, though."

So you're saying you wouldn't want a gun in a hellhole like that? What kind of red-blooded freedom-lover are you? What, guns are EVIIIIIL all the sudden? I'll have you know that guns kept my family alive during in the war, we were nourished on gunpowder.

"They'd go to the Temple Mount and protect worshipers at the Western Wall from the regular bombardment of rocks they face from the Al Aqsa Mosque above."

Better yet! They could carry Sharon's bloated body in on a rickshaw or something, and he could spread goodwill and his infectious laughter throughout the area!

After all, what's a Peace Movement without Mr. Bush's "Man of Peace" himself, ol' Arik?

"Stand between an Israeli soldier and his goal, you'll get arrested."

Or shot in the head, eh?

"She died because she knew she was standing up against people with a conscience and trusted that conscience to keep her from harm."

You should send that charming epitaph to her family, maybe offer to put it on a tombstone or something. Its really classy, they'd love it.

people had worked there for ever. A new company just built a huge place to paint their stuff. Now there's nothing to paint.

I sure hope they condemned the Palestinians that blow up innocent Israeli citizens too.

bus bombings are not an official governmental policy

razing homes is..

I'd bomb busses too, if they pulled that shit on mine or my family's house

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

get real. I guess some people love their families more than others, I wouldn't stand by and watch my family killed... if you had READ my post, I said I would react if they did that shit to MY HOME, MY FAMILY.

more of that All Palestinians are Born Terrorists bullshit, I'm not fooled. Regular people like you and me live in those homes, too. Do you not know that?

or they did, until they were destroyed and killed

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

i should be OK then right?

If the Iraqis warned you that they would demolish your house tomorrow and move Iraqis into it, and you have to live in a refugee camp, I guess that would be ok with you?

I'm sorry you think killing people and driving them from their homes is ok. I feel sorry for your loved ones

Killing innocent women and children on a hunt for "dead-enders"

If they were bulldozing my house on my family's land, I would sure contemplate a bomb or two.

It's the targeted bombing of innocent kids on busses etc that chap my butt.

or is it only kids on busses that bother you? Are Palestinian kids in their homes not innocent as well?

there are 2 sides to this, not 1. They don't call them "occupied territories" for nothing


:eyes:

although I don't really take a stand on the Israel-Palestine thing, I can see why the Palestinians may feel they are "bombing those who harmed them" to quote your line.


edit to add a impending :nuke: TS

http://www.stopcat.org/

Caterpillar FAQ



What’s Caterpillar got to do with Palestine?

The Israeli Occupation Forces frequently destroy the homes of already impoverished Palestinian civilians. According to the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions (www.icahd.org/eng)*: since the beginning of Israel’s occupation of Gaza and the West Bank in 1967, Israel has destroyed over 10,000 buildings, leaving 50,000 men, women and children homeless. What is the IOF’s choice weapon in its home demolition campaign? Specially armored D9, D10 and D11 Caterpillar bulldozers. On March 16, 2003, Rachel Corrie, an American student volunteer with the International Solidarity Movement, was murdered by an IOF soldier driving a Caterpillar bulldozer as she attempted to stop an illegal home demolition in the Rafah district of Gaza. For more information on Rachel, visit: www.palsolidarity.org
*Many believe that the total number of Palestinian homes destroyed is far higher that the estimate of the ICAHD.

Are home demolitions necessary to protect Israel from terrorists?

The vast majority of home demolitions are directed against civilians who have not been charged with terrorism or any other crimes. Demolitions are used as collective punishment to clear the way for illegal Israeli settlements on Palestinian lands, construction of the “Apartheid Wall”, or simply to assert Israeli dominance over Palestinian lives. Home demolitions do not prevent terrorism – they deepen the poverty, anger and despair that fuel violence. If Israel is serious about protecting civilian lives, it must address the root causes of terrorism by respecting democracy, self-determination and human rights in Palestine.

What does all this have to do with me?

The Caterpillar bulldozers that destroy Palestinian homes are partially financed by your tax dollars. Israel is the world’s largest beneficiary of U.S. military and economic aid. It receives over five billion dollars a year and 75% of this is spent on arms and equipment from U.S. corporations. As U.S. taxpayers, we need to take personal responsibility for ensuring that our money is not used to support brutality, oppression and military occupation. In the wake of September 11, it is vital that we promote peace, democracy and social justice in the Middle East and around the world. We unequivocally support our UAW brothers and sisters in their struggle for a fair contract. We do not, however, support the executives of Caterpillar in their decision to sell D9, D10 and D11 bulldozers to the Israeli military with the full knowledge that they are used as a weapon in illegal home demolitions.



What is this campaign asking of Caterpillar?

We demand that Caterpillar cease all sales to the Israeli military and government!
We demand that James Owens, CAT CEO, meet with a small delegation (including the parents of Rachel Corrie) at 3:00 PM on Friday April 23 in Peoria during the “International Day of Action Against Caterpillar”!
We demand a fair contract for CAT workers represented by the UAW!

Is the campaign winnable?

Yes! Unlike arms manufacturers, Caterpillar sells mostly to civilians, and it has many customers in the Arab world. Sales to the IOF represent a small part of Caterpillar’s total business. So the company may well be willing to give up its IOF contracts in order to maintain its standing with Arab and Western civilian customers.

They stood up to the silly boycott attempt.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

he keeps those rocks in his head. he he ha ha hoho ;)

http://www.socialistworker.org/2004-1/492/492_11_Caterpillar.shtml

snip>
However, a source close to union negotiators reported several weeks ago that Caterpillar initially sought concessions on 69 issues. The most important of these are the length of a contract--a six-year deal--and health care. Cat wanted caps on health care costs that are retroactive to 1991, different health plans for new hires, retirees and other groups of workers, and co-pays that could reach $4,000 to $5,000 per year by the end of the proposed contract in 2010.

Management also wanted to increase the temporary layoff period from 10 to 15 weeks, and eliminate time-and-a-half pay for overtime and its replacement by a supplemental pay of 25 percent. Caterpillar signaled its intention to play hardball in December, when it filed a lawsuit against a new state law banning the use of workers from temporary agencies from being used as permanent striker replacements.

snip>
Under federal law, Caterpillar couldn’t hire permanent replacements during a ULP strike. The strike had the potential to help turn the labor movement around. But the UAW leaders, unwilling to mount a physical challenge to the scabs, forced an end to the strike after 17 months by declaring that the union would cut off strike pay and benefits to the workers if they didn’t make an unconditional return to work--still without a new contract.

Meanwhile, Caterpillar had filed a lawsuit against the UAW that threatened to abolish the labor-management "jointness" funds used by the union to support a large part of its staff in the auto industry. As the dispute reached the U.S. Supreme Court in 1998, the UAW officials agreed to drop 440 outstanding ULP charges against Caterpillar --including the termination 50 workers out of 160 fired for union activity--if the company dropped the suit and agreed to a contract.

more...

Not suprised by those here defending Cat. :puke:

One of these days, it's going to be more worth it than not to just go ahead and get banned during the course of telling some of these hate-mongers where they can get off.

Do you recall the "Rachel Corrie is a bitch" thread from a year or so back? I'd swear some of the people who post here are filled with bile and hatred and nothing else.

And in 5 minutes, right on cue, someone will ask me if I support the bombing of innocents on buses. Let me go ahead and take care of that in advance:

NO!!! I Don't!!!!

to hold executive compensation at current levels as they cut benefits and pay for their employees and retirees."

Okay, I made that part up.

War Rocks ....:smoke: :hippie:

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Sadly,it's not.

We should have bought their stock, right? After all, Zyklon was "only" a pesticide.
http://www2.ca.nizkor.org/faqs/auschwitz/auschwitz-faq-06.html

Of course, because everybody you disagree with ultimately would have supported the Nazis?

These businessmen were executed because their product, Zyklon B, an exterminator's chemical was used to murder millions of Jews.

So clearly the answer from history is: businesses are responsible when their products are used for genocide.

So if you disagree with that, perhaps you are saying we made a mistake executing these businessmen?

There isn't.

Was to show you that companies have indeed been held responsible for the use of their products. Or are you now saying that profit should go out the window ONLY in cases of genocide?

Violet...

And it is up to government to get involved -- or not.

Or did we make a mistake with those Zyklon fellows?

There is no genocide going on here. So there should be no involvement.

Would you have the U.S. government investigate every death that occurs by cars made in the U.S. but happens somewhere around the globe?

http://www.spectacle.org/0302/refuse.html

Pay particular attention to this line:
We shall not continue to fight beyond the 1967 borders in order to dominate, expel, starve and humiliate an entire people.

Now please accuse these Israeli soldiers of being anti-Semitic or uninformed.

It doesn't make them anti-Semitic. I don't always agree with the actions of Israel myself.

nt

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

It's tragic that this young woman was killed.

However, I personally do not believe for a second that the driver of the machine saw her and purposely ran her over.

He has to live with what happened and I can't even imagine how I would feel if I was him.

He was probably just doing the job he's paid to do to feed his family. (speculation)

She was in a dangerous place she should not have been in, and tragically lost her life. I used to operate equipment that size, and a human body is no match for it. Trying to block a bulldozer with your body is an almost certain way to get yourself killed.

As for the razing of the homes of suicide bombers homes. What else can you do to deter them? As far as I am concerned, they have Hamas and their ilk to thank for the destruction of their homes.

I have no sympathy whatsover for anyone who would blow up a bus full of children and old ladies intentionally, nor do I for anyone who supports that.

Here's the kicker for me, and it's why I tend to side with the Israelis. (to the extent I do take sides at all) I believe that if the suicide bombings would stop, the destruction of homes would stop, but if the destruction of homes stopped, the suicide bombings would not stop.

I hear alot of rhetoric coming out of the Palstinian side about "the streets of Jerusalem red with Jewish blood" and "driving the Jews into the sea."

Most of the rhetoric I hear on the Israeli side is "Quit maiming, crippling and killing our innocent civilians"

Not too much to ask IMHO.

If you want the 1967 borders, why kill a 12 year old, what do they have to do with what happened in 1967?

Heyo

The first Palestinian suicide bombing inside Israel took place on April 6, 1994 following the massacre of 29 Palestinians in Hebron's Ibrahimi Mosque by Baruch Goldstein.

The Israeli destruction of Palestinian homes began long before the onset of suicide bombings. To contend that Israel would stop razing homes if suicide bombings were to stop is ludicrous (no offense).

On the Israelis razing homes way back then?

Also, I respectfully disagree that the razing would continue if the suicide bombings stopped, even if your previous point is true. I believe that they do it as a deterrent in recent times, and don't think they have any reason to go in there and raze homes for no reason at all... seems very counterproductive.

I'd be interested to read a link, though, if you have it.

Also, thank you for helping me remeber something. I for the life of me in recent months could NOT remember the guys name who shot up that mosque, I was trying to explain it to somebody and just could not remember. Baruch Goldstein, *ding* ...light comes on.

regards,
-Heyo

http://www.miftah.org/Display.cfm?DocId=1796&CategoryId=4

http://www.icahd.org/eng/

http://www.endtheoccupation.org/article.php?id=40

http://www.rebuildinghomes.org/why.php

<snip>

Year(s) 1967 Number of Palestinian Homes Demolished by Israel approx. 2000 Description of demolition policy At least 2000 houses were demolished following the war in 1967, including four entire villages in the Latrun area (now known as "Canada Park") and the Mughrabi Quarter in front of the Western Wall.

http://www.mideastfacts.com/joost_kollek.html

<snip>

"On Saturday night, June 10, 1967, Israeli authorities informed more than 100 families living in the Mughrabi quarter of Jerusalem's Old City that they had three hours to evacuate their homes, where some had lived for generations. As Teddy Kollek, mayor of the western half of the city since 1965, recalled in his 1978 autobiography,

Something had to be done about the small slum houses that crowded close to the Western Wall--the Moghrabi quarter. The one area that should have been spacious and bright was cramped and dark...When we decided to allow the first pilgrimage in 19 years...we expected hundreds of thousands of people to take part...But how would these hundreds of thousands of people reach the Wall through the dangerous, narrow alleyways? The only answer was to do away with the slim hovels of the Moghrabi quarter...My overpowering feeling was: do it now; it may be impossible to do it later and it must be done...Then the archaeologists and other experts went to the Wall and drew a map of exactly what should be torn down...<1>

Bulldozers operated by floodlight throughout that night and the next, and by the morning of June 12 a plaza before the Western Wall comprising one acre had been cleared.<2> In addition to religious occasions, this plaza has become a site for Israeli patriotic ceremonies, such as torchlit graduations for elite army unit recruits."

http://student.cs.ucc.ie/cs1064/jabowen/IPSC/articles/article0002602.txt

REPORT ON THE RAZING OF EMMAUS, BElT NUBA AND YALOU IN 1967

<snip>

"Beit Nuba village near Latrun. The commander of my platoon said that it had been
decided to blow up the three villages in the sector -Yalou, Beit Nuba and Amwas.
For reasons of strategy, tactics, security. In the first place, to straighten out
the Latrun "finger". Secondly, in order to punish these murderers' dens. And thirdly,
to deprive infiltrators of a base in future. One may argue with this idiotic approach,
which advocates collective punishment and is based on the belief that if the
infiltrator loses one house, he will not find another from which to wait in ambush.
One may argue with the effectiveness of increasing the number of our enemies - but
why argue?

We were told it was our job to search the village houses; that if we found any armed
men there, they were to be taken prisoner. Any unarmed persons should be given time to
pack their belongings and then told to get moving --- get moving to Beit Sira, a
village not far away. We were also told to take up positions around the approaches
to the villages, in order to prevent those villagers who had heard the Israeli assurances
over the radio that they could return to their homes in peace -from returning to their
homes. The order was -shoot over their heads and tell them there is no access to the village.
The homes in Beit Nuba are beautiful stone houses, some of them luxurious
mansions. Each house stands in an orchard of olives, apricots and grapevines; there are
also cypresses and other trees grown for their beauty and the shade they give. Each tree
stands in its carefully watered bed. Between the trees, lie neatly hoed and weeded rows
of vegetables. In the houses we found a wounded Egyptian commando officer and some old
men and women. At noon the first bulldozer arrived, and ploughed under the house closest
to the village edge.

With one sweep of the bulldozer, the cypresses and the olive-trees were
uprooted. Ten more minutes pass and the house, with its meagre furnishings
and belongings, has become a mass of rubble. After three houses had been
rowed down, the first convoy of refugees arrives, from the direction of
Ramallah."

<snip>

"The soldiers grumbled. The villagers clenched their teeth as they watched
the bulldozer mow down trees. At night we stayed on to guard the
bulldozers, but the entire battalion were seething with anger; most of them
did not want to do the job. In the morning we were transferred to another
spot, No one could understand how Jews could do such a thing. Even those
who justified the action said that it should have been possible to provide
shelter for the population; that a final decision should have been taken as
to their fate, as to where they were to go. The refugees should have been
taken to their new home, together with their property. No one could
understand why the fellah should be barred from taking his oil-stove, his
blanket and some provisions.

The chickens and the pigeons were buried under the rubble. The fields were
turned to desolation before our eyes, and the children who dragged
themselves along the road that day, weeping bitterly, will be the fedayeen
of 19 years hence. That is how that day, we lost the victory."

Was not the home of a suicide bomber, nor are the vast majority of homes razed by Israel.

The usual excuse for razing a home is expanding a military zone of control - usually around a settlement or on a border area (the latter in this case, admitted by Sharon and the IDF).

As for the "driving the Jews into the sea", sure there is some of that, but virtually none at the leadership level or within the mainstream of the Palestinian movement.

On the Israeli side, prominent figures close to the leadership call for "driving the Arabs into the desert", or policies to that effect (transfer to Jordan). That's Uzi Cohen, former mayor a major Israeli city, important within the governing Likud, who publically presented such a plan at a Likud Central Committee conference.

Moreover, Israel has the power to carry out those threats, being the "most powerful in the Middle East" and "stronger than ever". The Palestinians don't.

Therefore, anybody moral will be concerned with the Israeli threats, not the empty rhetoric of the Palestinians. Especially so since you're probably an American, and can therefore infulence Israel to a large extent.

participation in company voting and policy. This is very encouraging and I hope people will become even more involved.
I just hope that they pick their battles carefully.

So,... it's all about the money.

:hi:

OF COURSE it's all about the money.

:hippie:

Whatever it is most corporations appear to have contempt for unions and the welfare of the workers, while graciously rewarding the CEO.

No.

You do realize that, right? Anyway, thinking that a corporation has a divine right to make profits in any way that is not actually illegal and that any attempt by actual human beings to get in the way of the "rights" of corporations (to, say, sell bulldozers to the Israeli army) is a horrible subversion of the free market pretty much disqualifies any one as a progressive, more or less by definition.

Simply not their job to police the use of their product. And selling bulldozers to the Israeli army (the army defending a democratic ally of the U.S., btw) is a perfectly legitimate business operation.

"you drive a bulldozer, ergo you are a redneck." That's on par with "You play basketball, you must be black".

We had a demonstration against CAT for their sales to Israel here in Peoria, IL. (Our town's largest demonstration was a 20 people anti-war protest before this.) We had people from as far away as Philadelphia come join us. We had over 350 people there. We had cleared this all with Peoria Police.

Outside CAT HQ were 10+ cops, full riot gear, rubber bullet guns/nightsticks in hand, Kevlar vests, face guards, riot shields, etc.

I'm now told there were snipers at the ready on top of various buidlings. State police also followed the Chicago guys down to Peoria.

Is there normally this big of a police involvement in these things? :x

Pics will be up soon!