The Red and Black

One more reason to protest coke; the price of a 20 oz bottle of has gone from 99 cents to $1.39 in a couple of years. It costs them almost nothing to actually make the drink.

Wow, unplugging vending machines... way to vandalize someone else's property! I don't drink Coke very often, but I'm definitely going to buy one today. Morons.

"Wow, unplugging vending machines... way to vandalize someone else's property! I don't drink Coke very often, but I'm definitely going to buy one today."

Coca-Cola is a serious violator of international law. A quick search on Multinational Monitor will show that they "vandalized" entire sections of countries with illegal polluting, torture of union members, and the use of slave labor. What these students are doing are pranks compared to what these Coke thugs are capable of.

Keep up the good work!

Wow Zaid......are you still talking?

You all are just a bunch of ignorant activists with nothing else to do. why don't you actually do some research before you vandalize machinery at http://www.thecoca-colacompany.com/citizenship/index.html?WT.mc_id=dok_local

I'm a member of the group that is doing the project. The point is not to vandalize, and as a group last night, we decided not to do any unplugging of machines across campus because it is illegal.

Zaid makes a great point, please visit www.killercoke.org and just look at some of the research, and especially other institutions that are on board with this movement. If you want to drink coke every day and support a company that has a worldwide monopoly on the soft-drink market, go ahead. But before you open that next delicious cola, think about the fathers and mothers in Columbia, the brothers and sisters, the sons and daughters, and the wives. These are people that have lost a loved one because they tried to unionize.

This is not happening in America, and if it was, you would be just as against it as we are.

And for whoever posted the coca-cola website, seriously? You think coke does not have hundreds of legal workers covering this all up...they are being killed due to profits, and they will cover it all up to save profits as well...

Give me a break a company as large as Coke there are bound to be some rumors of misconduct at some part of the world. If you take some left wing site at face value and do not investigate the facts yourself you are an idiot. Way to arbitrarial pick out a company to harrass. The fact that the group considered ILLEGAL ACTION to convey a suspect cause at best shows their true character.

It's a vast left wing conspiracy founded by Pepsi. Lemmings! You are all LEMMINGS!

Frank J here.

The ignorance of University students never fails to amaze me. I should be numb by now but the idiotic hijinks of retarded protesting students still causes me to shake my head and wonder why such trash is allowed to pollute my beloved Athens by them living here.

I love how these students are required to protest as part of a class requirement and yet have the audacity to act as if they are doing this out of the goodness of their hearts or because it's the right thing to do.

I wish I still lived a life of such ignorance.

Your stupid protests won't have any effect. In fact, it will probably have a positive effect for Coke. One poster has already stated he will support Coke and I'm joining him. I rarely drink soda but I will defintely purchase several tomorrow from vending machines spread throughout the campus. I prefer Diet Coke when I do give in and have a soda.

Why don't you actually do something "socially conscious" that is worthwhile and will have impact? Feed the poor and homeless, clean up the trash downtown or on campus, or better yet, volunteer at the VA in Atlanta. That way you can thank a true American for allowing you the right to live such a shitty worthless existence.

My god... I'm continually disappointed in some of the student body at UGA. I can't believe we walk amongst such tools.

Since you're all so brilliant, why don't you take the time to look up the preposterous claims that you are basing your protests on? You would find most all of them utterly false.

Here's an idea for you... why don't you protest the senseless waste of water? Or maybe you could raise awareness to the civil rights violations in Pakistan. Why, you could even protest the ridiculous fees that are tacked on to tuition every year. Protest the shortening of Fall break next year. Do something worthwhile!

...but no. You've chosen to protest Coca-Cola. Based on falsehoods.

It sounds like the protesters are being paid off by Pepsi to do this sortof scam...Coca-Cola has not only given a lot to the state of Georgia, but to the University as well, it is a shame people are so ignorant and blind. Coke Rules!

I would probably choose to protest laughably left-wing professors that encouraged me to stand up for my hippy-rights to protest any large corporation making money, and even offering the BRIBE of a higher grade for doing so.

Because we all know making money is EVIL, therefore so is Coke, right? I say what's really evil is any organization or individual lying and bribing to promote an agenda - and I'm not talking about Coca-Cola here... especially those partially funded with tax dollars from the aforementioned enterprise.

The liberal agenda found at most universities is obviously no great surprise. Where else can you find that kind of job security while being utterly ignorant and purposeless to the rest of the world than at a tenured professorship at a liberal arts college? Sorry. Corporations demand that you are intelligent, skilled, and hard-working. They turn that hard work into wealth for the shareholders, for the employees, and for the federal, state, and local governments. That, of course, includes the university. "Liberally" (as the term is used nowadays) minded folks are the free-riders of society, and in the long run they never matter. Nor will this ridiculous protest.

Judge Joe Martinez, the judge who dropped the case against Coke in Miami, appointed by George W. Bush, clearly has conflicts of interest through the University of Miami, his previous law firm and his professional defense of corporations:

Judge Martinez: Conflicts of Interest?

In October 2006, after lawyers for SINALTRAINAL appealed Judge Jose E. Martinez's dismissal of the 2001 Colombian human rights abuse lawsuits, it was discovered that the judge may have had serious conflicts of interest. The Campaign to Stop Killer Coke believes Judge Martinez should be recused in light of his strong ties to the University of Miami and its athletics, which are intertwined with Coca-Cola. There are also questions regarding his work defending corporations in product liability matters. In addition, his former law firm has a relationship with a Colombian law firm in which a name partner was a vice president of Coca-Cola Colombia.

Martinez, the University of Miami and UM Sports

Martinez is very closely connected to the University of Miami and its athletics, which are in large part sponsored by Coca-Cola.

He's a graduate of the University and its law school. Back in 2002, the Miami Herald reported that "he is best known for his sideline: color commentator on Spanish radio for Los Huracanes [The Hurricanes]" and that "the judge's passion often returns to University of Miami athletics." The Herald specified that he is "active in UM law school and athletic department functions...(and) serves as color commentator for Hurricanes football and baseball broadcasts on Spanish radio." The Herald quoted UM athletic director Paul Dee at the reception for Martinez when he became a judge, saying the "crowd might be impressed that the Hurricanes have won 32 straight games...'but that's nothing compared to the fact that we've never lost a game on Spanish radio.'"

Judge Martinez's role as a sports analyst for broadcasts of UM football games as early as 2003 is also described on the University of Miami Athletic Dept. website, sponsored by Coca-Cola . The University has had an exclusive beverage contract with Coca-Cola for years.

Judge Martinez has also "been active in UM matters, serving as...a member of the Governing Board of the UM Hurricane Club," according to the biographical note supplied for an Oct. 30, 2006 luncheon at which he was the keynote speaker. UM identifies the Hurricane Club as "the primary fundraising arm of the athletic department," which is heavily subsidized by Coke. Judge Martinez continues his active participation with UM sports.

In March 2003, Judge Martinez dismissed The Coca-Cola Company from the lawsuit brought in 2001, but allowed the lawsuit to continue against its bottlers. When he inappropriately dismissed Coke's Atlanta headquarters from the lawsuit, it had nothing to do with the merits of the case. Lawyers for the Colombian union say the judge found prematurely, and in error, that The Coca-Cola Company didn't have sufficient ownership or control of its bottlers to be liable.

He ruled prior to any discovery and the opportunity for plaintiffs to show that The Coca-Cola Company does have ownership and control. Martinez's decision was also based on a single document -- a sample bottlers' agreement that Coca-Cola admitted wasn't the actual agreement with the Colombian bottlers cited in the lawsuit.

A Forbes magazine article in December 2003, "Coke's Sinful World," pointed out:

"The biggest bottlers aren't subsidiaries of Coke, nor are they completely independent. Coke effectively controls them by maintaining big equity stakes and a heavy presence on their boards, and by providing their main source of business. Yet it keeps its stakes in the bottlers below 50% thereby avoiding getting hit with their piles of debt and any unpleasant liabilities."

Coca-Cola FEMSA is Coke's largest Latin American bottler and a defendant in the litigation. FEMSA's website lists The Coca-Cola Company as owning either 31.6% or 39.6% of its capital stock (both figures are used) and 46.4% of its capital voting stock. Many of Coca-Cola's top executives serve as directors and alternate directors on Coca-Cola FEMSA's board.

When he gave The Coca-Cola Co. a pass in 2003, Martinez chose to ignore documents admittedly created by Coca-Cola, such as letters to consumers and a statement to shareholders that frankly acknowledged the company's control over workplace practices and its right to inspect the plants to ensure that local managers abide by human rights conventions and domestic law.

Martinez's Predisposition for Corporations

In 2002, President George W. Bush nominated Martinez to the Federal bench. At his confirmation hearing, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (Dem.-Calif.) drew attention to his having "specialized in product liability litigation...advising and defending large corporations in product liability suits." Predictably, Martinez promised to be an objective judge, stating: "I think that I will do the right thing and the fair thing." (Senate Hearing 107-584, Pt. 4; Serial No. J-107-23)

Another ethics question came up last year when Martinez overturned a unanimous jury conviction against the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Miami. The judge neglected to mention that he is a Eucharistic minister, playing a role in Catholic services at St. Augustine Catholic Church in Coral Gables. Fla.

Judge Martinez was a name partner at the Martinez & Gutierrez law firm from 1991 until the time of his nomination, September 2002. Upon his appointment to the bench, the firm was renamed Gutierrez & Associates, but retained as its web address, http://www.MartLaw.com, apparently referencing Martinez. The home page of Gutierrez & Associates highlights Jose Martinez's work as a partner, reflecting his importance to the firm. The Gutierrez & Associates list of representative clients includes such major corporations and governmental agencies as American Airlines; Borden, Inc.; California Insurance Commissioner; United States Tobacco International; Ford Motor Company; The Philip Morris Companies; Florida Department of Insurance; Emerson Electric Co.; BAC Florida Bank; US Education Finance Corporation; Terrabank, N.A.; E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Company, and the government of Nicaragua.

Martinez himself, while at Martinez and Gutierrez, represented the Tobacco Institute in a case before the Supreme Court.

Gutierrez & Associates lists among its associated law firms a Bogota, Colombia firm, Gamboa, Chelela, Gamboa & Useche. That firm's website, in turn, identifies as a name partner Carlos Alberto Useche-Ponce de Leon, a former vice president of Coca-Cola de Colombia, S.A., who also serves as an "Advisor" to the Council of American Companies.

"Everything we have learned about Judge Martinez's connections to the interests of Coca-Cola, the University of Miami, its Coke-subsidized athletic department and his former law firm suggests at least the appearance of impropriety, if not actual bias," said Ray Rogers, director of the Campaign to Stop Killer Coke. "To preserve the integrity of the judicial process, we believe he must be recused from the Coca-Cola cases."

Return to top

4. Bogus 'Investigations' by Cal Safety and White & Case

Coke keeps claiming that it was exonerated of human rights abuse allegations by two judicial inquiries in Colombia and two "independent investigations" in the U.S. But no court in Colombia has ever ruled on the human rights claims against Coca-Cola. U.S. State Department human rights reports point out that only a handful of the thousands of murders of Colombian trade unionists in recent years have ever resulted in successful prosecutions. "Cases where the instigators and perpetrators of the murders of trade union leaders are identified are practically nonexistent, as is the handing down of guilty verdicts," said the State Department. So it's not surprising that the plaintiffs cannot secure justice through Colombian courts. That's why they're seeking redress through U.S. courts in the first place.

Coke states: "...(A) respected, independent third party found no instances of anti-union violence or intimidation at bottling plants." This refers to a bogus report issued in 2005 by Cal Safety Compliance Corporation, a Los Angeles-based company whose work was commissioned and paid for by The Coca-Cola Company. Cal Safety's monitoring record has been discredited in publications like the Los Angeles Times and Business Week. It is "not regarded as a credible monitoring organization within the mainstream worker rights advocate community as a result of its track record of missing egregious violations in high-profile cases and its flawed monitoring methodology," according to United Students Against Sweatshops, an international student movement fighting for sweatshop-free labor conditions and workers' rights.

USAS cites Cal Safety's poor monitoring track record as measured by Dr. Jill Esbenshade in her book, "Monitoring Sweatshops." Esbenshade conducted extensive interviews with Cal Safety auditors and directly observed the company's labor auditing in practice. She didn't find Cal Safety's poor track record surprising because she said they failed to adhere to minimum accepted standards for competent factory investigations.

Prior to the Cal Safety report, Coca-Cola repeatedly claimed that another group had investigated allegations of human rights abuses by Coke's bottlers in Colombia and exonerated both Coca-Cola and its bottlers. When students at Carleton College in Minnesota asked for a copy, they were told by a Coca-Cola representative that the report was done by White & Case, but was unavailable to the public. It so happens that White & Case is a large international corporate law firm that has represented Coca-Cola in lawsuits dealing with human rights abuses at its Colombian bottling plants. Alexis Rovzar, an executive partner at White & Case, serves as a director of Coca-Cola FEMSA, Colombia's largest Coca-Cola bottler and a defendant in the lawsuits.

uh...coke doesn't own those vending machines...a "vendor" owns them. Maybe that vendor should be reimbursed for lost sales by taking money from those activist students scholarships and student loans and see how that feels?

What time is the debate?