September 4, 2002

The Global Tyranny of the Transnational Corporations & Efforts to Prevent a War Against Iraq

Hello everyone

The theme of this compilation deals chiefly with the main culprits for much of what is wrong on this planet right now.

Its subtitle could be "The Power of Greed Over Corrupted Souls"...

Jean Hudon
Earth Rainbow Network Coordinator

P.S. Don't miss my latest Media Compilation #85: Setting The Record Straight - Posted at


1. Greenhouse Gangsters vs. Climate Justice
2. Oil Lobby Urges Bush to Derail Earth Summit
3. Ramsey Clark to UN Security Council re: Iraq
4. Don’t be fooled by the argument about Iraq invasion plans - They’re debating how and when
6. These men don’t care how many more Iraqis die - No war on Iraq!

See also:

Earth Summit Settles Pact but Rows Still Bubble (Sept 4)
The world's governments forged a last-minute plan at the Earth Summit to ease poverty and safeguard the environment but political rows were brewing for Wednesday's final session. (...) The clause on promoting corporate responsibility through "international initiatives" is seen as a minor victory by anti-globalization activists who believe it may lead to the creation of a global system to police big business.

Earth Summit Agrees on Energy, Angers Greens (Sept 2)
The Earth Summit gave a muted push to "green" energy on Monday as part of a plan to curb poverty and
protect the planet, angering environmentalists who branded it a weak-minded sell-out to the U.S. oil industry.

USA: Government Secrecy and Corporate Crime

When Corporations Rule the World
In this updated edition of an international bestseller, Korten outlines the rampant development of a global economy over the last thirty years, the alarming concentration of power wielded by the corporations that fuel it, and its terrible cost. Noting that the quest for short-term profits is the main driver behind a market tyranny that is "extending its reach across the planet like a cancer, colonizing ever more of the planet's living spaces, destroying livelihoods, displacing people, rendering democracies impotent, and feeding on life itself," he argues that if we are to save ourselves and our planet from wholesale financial collapse, environmental destruction, and social chaos, we must eradicate the myth that consumerism is the path to happiness, and work instead for the creation of a society that nurtures cultural and biological diversity.

What to Do When Corporations Rule the World
An interview with David C. Korten

Group blasts 'colonial' Turkey pipeline deal
A planned 1,760 kilometre oil pipeline across Turkey involves an "extraordinary and outrageous" deal freeing oil companies from all regulation, a leading environmental group said today. (...) Other provisions in the HGA include unfettered access to water, regardless of the needs of local communities, and exemption from liability in the event of an oil spill or any other harm caused by the pipeline consortium. (...) The NGOs have slammed the agreement as "colonialist" and reminiscent of the discredited OECD proposal for a Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) which was rejected in 1998.

Can't Change the Science? ExxonMobil Tries to Change the Scientists

November Surprise?, Vacationing Bush Plots End of Iraq

What War Looks Like

American Support for War Against Iraq Declining, Poll Finds

U.S. cool to allies' call for UN effort on Iraq (August 31)

Germany threatens a Kuwait pullout (August 31)

Top Ten Reasons Why the US Should Not Invade Iraq
The White House is planning to launch a war against Iraq. Yet there has been no real public or congressional debate about why an invasion is justified, no convincing explanation of why a war is needed. The international community is virtually unanimous in its opposition to an attack on Iraq, leaving the United States without allies. A full-scale war against Iraq would isolate the US from the rest of the world, undermine the effort against terrorism, and senselessly kill tens of thousands of civilians. The Bush Administration is determined to initiate an illegal and ill-considered invasion. We the people must be just as determined to stop a war that threatens to tear the world apart.
PDF version at

Bush, Pentagon plot criminal war on Iraq
A world crisis is rapidly developing. The form it takes right now is preparation for an all-out war against Iraq by the Bush administration and the Pentagon. The Pentagon is reportedly shipping huge amounts of military equipment from its bases in Europe to the Middle East, and the number of U.S. troops in the area is ballooning. CLIP




Greenhouse Gangsters vs. Climate Justice


As we hurtle into the twenty-first century, oil is still King. But it does not rule benevolently. Rather, the reign of those who control the politics of petroleum continues to undermine democracy while fostering human rights violations and environmental disasters across the Earth.

Now, by making a major contribution to a global problem that looms larger than perhaps any before it, big oil may well have met its match. Indeed, climate change (often referred to as global warming or the greenhouse effect) has the potential to radically damage entire ecosystems, agriculture, and the inhabitability of whole countries. Changing the climate affects everyone and everything.

Despite the efforts of a few transnational oil corporations (as well as their cohorts in the coal, chemical and car businesses) to dupe the public into thinking that global warming is not a real threat, the vast majority of the world's climate scientists and a growing body of evidence say it is. No longer does the scientific debate focus on if global warming will happen, but rather on how soon it will occur and on how bad it will be. And if the extraordinary number of extreme weather events the world has recently been experiencing -- killer hurricanes, floods and heat waves in places as far flung as Central America, Bangladesh and the East Coast of the United States -- are a harbinger of what is to come, the greenhouse world will be harsh indeed.

The common wisdom is that the modern consumer is at fault; excessive driving, homes packed with appliances, central heating and cooling, and failure to turn off the lights when leaving the house are what's ailing us. This is partly true. But the ability of individual consumers to radically change their lifestyle while participating in mainstream society is severely limited. U.S. residents cannot easily buy a solar-powered house or low emission car, many cannot take public transport to work, and economic incentives for conservation and efficiency are practically non-existent.

The ability of the individual consumer to influence climate is dwarfed by the impact of giant corporations which explore for, extract, transport, refine and distribute oil which is the primary source of carbon dioxide emissions - by far the major greenhouse gas. Just 122 corporations account for 80% of all carbon dioxide emissions. And just five private global oil corporations -- Exxon Mobil,1 BP Amoco,2 Shell, Chevron and Texaco -- produce oil that contributes some ten percent of the world's carbon emissions.


Part 3: Climate Justice

The petroleum industry is going through the biggest restructuring since the oil embargo of 1973. At the start of the 21st century, a few super-giant oil companies will be moving toward re-establishing their dominance over one of the world's most strategic industries.

As we have seen, fossil fuel production by just five corporations accounts for 10% of all carbon emissions. If we include their role in refining and marketing, their contribution to climate change is higher. Their power in Washington and other capitals is difficult to resist, and that power is magnified by a collective political strategy. The globalization dynamic they have forged further expands their reach and impact. This collection of power dwarfs the influence of the individual to affect change through lifestyle choices.


(...) Thus, the following is an attempt to set forth a platform for Climate Justice.

1. Remove the Causes of Global Warming -- Build Democratic Control Over Corporations
2. Oppose the Destructive Impacts of Oil Locally and Globally
3. Forge Just Solutions to the Challenge of Climate Change
4. Reverse the dynamics of corporate-led, fossil fuel based globalization

Final Words

The clash between the hydrocarbon economy and environmental protection seems to present an intractable contradiction. But it also presents an opportunity to society. Once we accept that climate change forces us to severely limit fossil fuel use, we can begin to free ourselves of the tyranny of the oil industry over our lives. We can reduce destruction of Indigenous cultures and reduce pollution of local communities. We can begin to build less centralized energy systems, cleaner cities, less sprawl, more cooperation between North and South, more independence from the super-giant corporations which now control such fundamental aspects of our daily lives. The prevention of climate change goes hand in hand with the opposition to corporate rule.

Of course, Climate Justice will not be achieved without the emergence of a powerful movement for grassroots globalization -- one which links efforts for social and environmental justice across the globe. The good news is that such a movement is emerging.


Greenhouse Gangsters is also available in PDF File Size: 2.32MB/30 pages at

You can also order the report at and distribute it to your community, activist networks, friends and co-workers.

Check also:

Greenwash + 10 (January 24, 2002)
The UN's Global Compact, Corporate Accountability and the Johannesburg Earth Summit



USA: Oil Lobby Urges Bush to Derail Earth Summit (August 16)

By Anthony Browne - Times of London

Conservative lobbyists in the US funded by Esso have urged President Bush to derail the Earth summit in Johannesburg because it is anti-freedom, anti-people, anti-globalization and anti-Western. The lobbyists, funded by the oil company that was also a big donor to the Presidents election campaign, urged Mr Bush to make sure that global warming was kept off the agenda at the summit, which starts later this month. In a letter leaked to Friends of Earth in the US, the lobbyists tell Mr Bush: We applaud your decision not to attend in person . . . the summit will provide a global media stage for many of the most irresponsible and destructive elements in critical economic and environmental issues. Your presence would only help publicize various anti-freedom, anti-people, anti-globalization and anti-Western agendas, it said.

Among others, the letter was signed by representatives of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, the American Enterprise Institute, and the National Center for Policy Analysis, all of which received funding from ExxonMobil, Essos parent company. The letter, dated August 2, adds: The least important global environmental issue is potential global warming and we hope that your negotiators can keep it off the table and out of the spotlight.

The World Summit on Sustainable Development will be attended by 100 world leaders. However, the US Government has already made clear that it will not sign any internationally binding agreements.


From: "SUSAN ZIPP" <>
Subject: Ramsey Clark to UN Security Council re: Iraq
Date: 21 Aug 2002


*The following letter by former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark has been sent to all members of the UN Security Council, with copies to the UN General Assembly and Senator Biden of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations.

International Action Center
Founded by Ramsey Clark

July 29, 2002

Dear Ambassador,

Any remaining hope the peoples of the United Nations have to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war through the United Nations would be crushed by another United States attack on Iraq. Threats to attack, invade and overthrow the government of Iraq by President George Bush, Vice President Cheney, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, various cabinet officers and Pentagon officials have been routine for a year. The psychological warfare is itself a crime against peace and violates the U.N. Charter. Today's front-page headline story in the New York Times, "U.S. Exploring Baghdad Strike As Iraq Option," is typical of the in terrorem intention of the threats. The danger to civilian life in Baghdad from such a strike would be enormous.


If the United Nations is unable to restrain the United States, a permanent member of the Security Council, from committing crimes against peace and humanity as well as war crimes against a nation that has already been violated by the U.S. beyond endurance, then what is the United Nations worth? At the very least, opposition to any attack or attempt to overthrow the government of Iraq by force must be publicly expressed by the United Nations.


The U.S. led and glorified the massive assault on Iraq in January and February 1991. The Pentagon announced it conducted 110,000 aerial sorties against the defenseless "cradle of civilization," dropping 88,500 tons of bombs. The widespread bombing destroyed the economic viability of the civilian society throughout the nation. It killed tens of thousands of Iraqi citizens and others. A major part of the bombing was directed at civilians and civilian facilities. It was less accurate than the recent indiscriminate attacks in Afghanistan. U.S. bombs destroyed Iraqi water systems, electric power transmission, communications, transportation, manufacturing, commerce, agriculture, poultry and livestock, food storage facilities, markets, fertilizer and insecticide production, business centers, archeological and historical treasures, apartment houses, residential areas, schools, hospitals, mosques, churches and synagogues.

The Pentagon stated its casualties were 156. One third were from "friendly fire"; the rest were accidental. The U.S. had no combat casualties.


The U.S. crafted economic sanctions against Iraq which the Security Council approved on August 6, 1990, the 45th anniversary of the U.S. atomic bomb attack on Hiroshima. Those sanctions are the direct cause of the very cruel deaths of more than a million people. This is the greatest crime against humanity, in the last decade of the most violent century in history. Each painful death of an individual wasting away?from malnutrition; Kwashiorkor; the rush of dehydration from contaminated water and from diseases was preventable. The sanctions continue to this time to cause hundreds of deaths each day. Every United Nations agency dealing with food, health and children--including FAO, WFP, WHO, UNICEF--has proclaimed the horror, magnitude and responsibility for this human catastrophe.

The great majority of the deaths caused by the sanctions are infants, children, the elderly, the chronically ill and emergency medical cases. These are the people most vulnerable to polluted water, malnutrition, and the lack of medicines and medical equipment and supplies.

U.S. claims that it is the Iraqi government that is responsible for deaths from shortages of food and medicine are false. The U.S. blocked oil sales by Iraq for six years before appearing to yield to humanitarian pleas to permit oil sales to purchase food and medicine. Since 1997, when sales began, it has effectively frustrated and delayed the Oil for Food program, which does not provide sufficient income at the levels approved to stop the daily deterioration of health and growing death rates in Iraq.

Before sanctions there was virtually no malnutrition in Iraq and free hospital, health services and medicines were a model for the region. Its present system of government distribution of available food staples is a model of fairness and efficiency, lacking only in quantity and variety of food.


The U.S. has engaged in air strikes against Iraq at will since March 1991, when the massive attacks averaging one aerial sortie every 30 seconds ended. Without losing a single plane, U.S. attacks have killed: cleaning personnel at the Al Rashid Hotel in Baghdad in a failed attempt to assassinate Saddam Hussein; scores of people each year in attacks on radar stations in or near the U.S.-imposed no-fly zones; all the persons aboard a U.N. helicopter shot down by U.S. aircraft; and civilians from all walks of life, including the internationally famous artist and Director of Iraqis' National Center for Arts, Leila al Attar.


The U.S. has falsely claimed that Iraq is working to develop weapons of mass destruction to attack the U.S., Israel, its neighbors and others. The U.S. claimed its 1991 attacks destroyed 80% of Iraq's military capacity. The U.N. inspection efforts claimed to discover and dismantle 90% of Iraq's post-1991 capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction. Iraq, its peoples and resources are exhausted. It has a "stunted" generation of children under age 10 and a debilitated population at all ages. It is the victim of the worst crime against humanity in recent decades.


Two of the highest U.N. officials responsible for U.N. weapons inspection within Iraq and a principle U.S. citizen participating in the inspections have resigned, denounced the sanctions and denied that there is a threat that Iraq will develop weapons of mass destruction.

The U.S. has more nuclear weapons than all other nations combined as well as the most sophisticated and numerous systems for the delivery of nuclear weapons, including the Trident II submarine fleet. It possesses the greatest stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons and the most advanced and extensive research in mass destruction weaponry in the world. Military spending by the U.S. exceeds that of the nine next largest budgets for war combined. President Bush has repeatedly declared the right to strike first. The U.S. attacked Hiroshima and Nagasaki with atomic bombs and continues to justify those acts.

The U.S. has renounced treaties controlling nuclear weapons and their proliferation; voted against the protocol enabling enforcement of the Biological Weapons Conventions; and rejected the treaty banning land mines, the International Criminal Court and virtually every other international effort to control and limit war. The U.S. War Against Terrorism is a declaration of right by the U.S. to attack first?anyone, anywhere, on mere suspicion, or without excuse, unilaterally.

The U.S. wants to overthrow the government of Iraq and many others in violation of law. Unless restrained the chance for peace and global equality of economic, social, cultural and political opportunity among nations will be lost. Which government presents the greater threat to peace globally or for Mesopotania and its neighbors?the U.S. or Iraq?


If, as promised so many times, the U.S. does attack Iraq to overthrow its government, it will be the most notorious, arrogant and contemptuous violation of the Charter of the United Nations, the Nuremberg Charter and international law yet experienced, or likely hereafter. Only absolute power unrestrained by any rule of law or standard of human decency openly taunts an intended victim as President Bush has taunted Iraq. Because the U.S. has committed historic injustices against Iraq, most during his father's presidency, and still seeks dominion in the region, President Bush, his Vice President and others in his administration hate Iraq and want finally to destroy it.

I am writing this letter to you; to each U.N. Representative of a Security Council Member; the President of the General Assembly; and President Bush. This is one of a series of letters describing and protesting U.S. and UN wrongs against Iraq. The threatened wrong addressed here is the worst. If twelve years after its devastating aerial assault and after twelve years of genocidal sanctions, the omnipresent risk and frequent fact of random attack with the ever present stalking by U.S. aircraft and endless threats against its helpless victim, the U.S. commits its coup d'grace on the people of Iraq to the silence of the U.N. and wealthy nations of the world, human shame and impotence will doom us to ever greater violence.


I urge you to immediately activate the United Nations, the General Assembly, the Security Council and all its agencies to denounce the continuing threats by the United States against Iraq, to demand immediate cessation of the threats and to warn the United States that an attack by it on Iraq will violate the Charter of the United Nations, international law and the friendship of all who seek peace and respect the dignity of humanity.


An attack on Iraq by the United States would also violate the Constitution and laws of the United States and expose President Bush to impeachment by the House of Representatives under the Constitution of the United States for the highest of crimes, those against peace and humanity, to judgment by the United States Senate and trial in federal court for crimes charged.

Unfortunately in recent years our Constitution has been more honored in the breach than in faithful observance of the rights it is intended to protect for all. But the effort to hold accountable any U.S. authority who participates in an assault against Iraq will be made here by those who love their country and for that reason insist that its acts be just.


Ramsey Clark

International Action Center
39 W. 14th St., Suite 206
New York, NY 10011
212-633-6646 fax: 212-633-2889

Read also:

Ramsey Clark: 'Act against coming war in Iraq'



Don’t be fooled by the argument about Iraq invasion plans

They’re debating how and when

August 30, 2002

YET ANOTHER leading voice of the U.S. political establishment has told the Bush administration to slow down its race to war. James Baker III--the former secretary of state under Papa Bush and head of Dubya’s smash-and-grab operation for stealing the 2000 election in Florida--wrote a featured op-ed article in the New York Times last weekend advising the White House against "going it alone" in an assault to topple Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.

The growing questioning of the Bush administration--most loudly from Republicans, not the Democratic "opposition" in Congress--is a sign of a real disagreement in Washington. But no one should think that this is a debate about war or peace. It’s a question of how and when. Baker himself made this clear. "[R]egime change in Iraq is the policy of the current administration, just as it was the policy of its predecessor," he wrote. "That being the case, the issue for policymakers to resolve is not whether to use military force to achieve this, but how to go about it."

Make no mistake. James Baker and the Bush gang are old buddies, and they’ll eventually agree on "how to go about it." During the months before the first Gulf War against Iraq in 1991, there were plenty of "voices of caution" in Washington. But after Papa Bush put together a propaganda campaign and got the United Nations (UN) to endorse Operation Desert Storm, the establishment "opposition" fell in line.

Those in the antiwar movement who had conceded ground to the "cautious" opponents of war--to "consult" with the UN or to "let sanctions work" before bombing, for example--ended up disoriented and weakened when their fair-weather friends jumped on the pro-war bandwagon.

Likewise, we shouldn’t concede to establishment "doubters" today--as, for example, the editors of the liberal Nation magazine do when they ask in an editorial: "Why engage in a risky and potentially calamitous invasion of Iraq when the existing strategy of ‘containment’…has clearly succeeded in deterring Iraqi adventurism for the past 10 years…?"

"Containment" is an awfully generous description of what the U.S. has done to Iraq for the last decade--alternating new bombing campaigns with an iron regime of sanctions that has killed many times more Iraqis by starving the country of food and the most basic goods.

The question that we should be asking is this: By what right does the U.S. government claim to decide who will govern Iraq? This is democracy? The politicians may hyperventilate about Saddam Hussein and weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, but the U.S. government is guilty of violence and oppression on a vastly greater scale.

Antiwar activists will have a growing audience of people with doubts about Bush’s war drive in the weeks to come. We have to start now to educate this audience about the history of Washington’s imperialist adventures and its real aims in the Middle East. That’s the way to turn the doubts into an active opposition that can stand up to the U.S. war machine.


From: "Voice4Change" <>
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2002


A Statement by the US Fellowship of Reconciliation

August 16, 2002

The imminent possibility of a new war threatens the people of Iraq and the world. It is a war planned by the United States that would continue more than twelve years of economic and military violence that has decimated the Iraqi economy and physical infrastructure.

Despite the opposition of the international community, including many of Americaís European political allies, and ambivalent voices within the Bush administration itself, it is clear that militaristic, pro-war advocates in the administration are planning a massive, unilateral attack against Iraq. Such attacks would involve American air, naval, and ground forces and would certainly result in massive civilian and military casualties, including US military casualties that would far exceed the death toll of the last Gulf War.

To view the rest of the story:


On-going Campaigns Get Involved!!

Take The Pledge to Oppose War with Iraq

"A time has come when silence is betrayal. That time is now." Martin Luther King Jr.

To take the pledge:

Note to Southern California Residents: The coalition For World Peace will be demonstrating every Friday from 5pm to 7pm at the Westwood Federal Building. For more information call 323-852-9808


Peace and healing will be themes of events to commemorate the first anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks


As you know since September 11 the world has irreversibly changed. We at the "World's Biggest Hug for Peace" feel that the lessons of this tragedy have not yet been learned. The same problems we face every day on our streets are translating to the unresolved fear and hatred that currently divides nations.

We would like to transform September 11, 2002 into an anniversary of peace. A day when every person advances the process of reconciliation and peace within themselves. It is a simple concept that "Peace begins with Me": no matter what we do, the first steps to lasting world peace begin in our homes, our schools and then finally, our governments.

'We must be the change we wish to see' - M.K. Gandhi

Can you help?

Pledge-A-Hug now!

To subscribe to this new 2 month-old networking service go at



These men don’t care how many more Iraqis die - No war on Iraq!

August 30, 2002

THEY MAY not be able to prove their claims about Iraq possessing "weapons of mass destruction." But the war party in Washington is getting ready anyway for a new campaign of terror against the people of Iraq.

George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld are beating the war drums to drown out any critics. They’ll cynically use the anniversary of the September 11 attacks to justify plans to kill countless more innocent Iraqis. "If the United States could have preempted 9/11, we would have, no question," Cheney said at a convention of the Veterans of Foreign Wars this week. "Should we be able to prevent another, much more devastating attack, we will, no question."

There are questions about the Bush gang’s invasion plans within the Washington establishment itself--and top congressional leaders are angry at the White House’s arrogant claim that it doesn’t need a vote in Congress to go to war, though the U.S. Constitution says just the opposite.

But that isn’t stopping the Bush gang. "Regime change in Iraq would bring about a number of benefits to the region," Cheney declared. "When the gravest of threats are eliminated, the freedom-loving peoples of the region will have a chance to promote the values that can bring lasting peace."

Translation: the U.S. aims to terrorize the Middle East into submission.

But on what grounds does the U.S. claim the right to carry out a "regime change"? If lack of democracy is a good enough reason, then other countries could claim the right to wage war on the U.S. to remove its unelected president.

Weapons of mass destruction? Refusal to submit to weapons inspections? Washington has by far the world’s biggest arsenal of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons. And the Bush gang only recently finished wrecking another international treaty in order to prevent inspectors from gaining access to U.S. facilities.

This is a country where one of the president’s closest advisers is willing--even eager--to think the unthinkable. "No strategist would reject, in principle, using nuclear weapons against Iraq," said Richard Perle.

This is madness. But in Bush’s world, the sole superpower calls the shots--at any cost. If any country truly deserves the title of "mortal threat," it’s the United States. We have to organize an opposition that can stand up and say, "No war on Iraq!"