Did Coke kill Isidro Gil?

February 27, 2006 10:20 AM

How credible are the claims of Coca-Cola bottling plants in Colombia having hired paramilitaries to kill union leader Isidro Gil?
posted by Count Ziggurat to society & culture (17 comments total)

Plant owners, staff, managment? The physical buildings themselves (ooh, spooky)?

A news.google.com search for "Isidro Gil" shows that at least some Universities in the US are asking Coke to look into this.
chicagotribune

But I can't actually find anyone making that claim, just referencing it and noting how it might have helped out corporate coke somehow.
posted by tiamat at 10:39 AM on February 27, 2006

A few articles for your perusal:

Coke workers protest boycott

All Bottled Up

Several years of anti-Coke campaigning on my campus (NYU) still haven't convinced me that they did, but far be it from me to write it off, either.
posted by anjamu at 10:45 AM on February 27, 2006

Oh, and the Straight Dope has a column about this.
posted by anjamu at 10:49 AM on February 27, 2006

some info on coke in latin america here
posted by the cuban at 11:32 AM on February 27, 2006

Colombia Solidarity Campaign. His wife was killed as well.
The killers were members of paramilitary forces.
posted by adamvasco at 11:51 AM on February 27, 2006

some info on coke in latin america here [killercoke.org]

Killercoke.org? That's sure to be an unbiased source! Glad we could straighten this whole thing out.
posted by grapefruit at 12:04 PM on February 27, 2006

anytime, bud :)
posted by the cuban at 12:24 PM on February 27, 2006

I've read the articles.. but nothing from a convincing source, and nothing which actually has hard evidence that pins Coke to it.

I ask, because I might be interested in publishing a little piece about it myself in a local magazine. But not if it's as shaky a claim as it seems to be.
posted by Count Ziggurat at 1:14 PM on February 27, 2006

i honestly don't understand why one would believe a multibillion dollar conglomerate accused of crimes elsewhere should get the benefit of the doubt. and this is not a troll, it's a serious question; when all evidence says that the anti-coke claims are credible, why would one dismiss them easily?
posted by yonation at 1:33 PM on February 27, 2006

about as credible as claims that the Contras were saving United Fruit Co(now United Brands) from the Sandinista/communists, remember it was a secret war
and who benefited is still secret.
posted by hortense at 1:41 PM on February 27, 2006

I'm at UMich, where we've recently cancelled our contract with Coke. I don't know the people in the Killer Coke campaign on campus personally, but if you like I can get you an email address or two to follow up with them. My address is in my profile.
posted by electric_counterpoint at 4:19 PM on February 27, 2006

If you're looking for hard evidence, I am under the impression that you won't find it. As far as I can tell, the Killer Coke campaign - at least here - is boycotting Coke because Coke won't submit to an independent investigation of the whole thing.

The best you can do, if you want to make it public, is write an article on the allegations and their refusal to let it be investigated.
posted by anjamu at 6:20 PM on February 27, 2006

I realize that I'm exposing my tin foil hat, but I found it interesting recently when I was Googling info on those old stories about Coke being an overseas cover for CIA operations, I came up with nothing. Nothing! As if Coke had quietly cleaned up the easily found materials on the web ahead of me. Sure, it might not have a shred of truth to it, but I couldn't find anything, not even halfwit ranting. [cue obvious reply about negative proofs]

So, yeah, good luck finding sources on the Colombian labor strife. Do you have any idea how powerful Coke is/was? They brought the Olympics to Atlanta, ferchrissakes. There is ultimately nothing compelling about Atlanta, and I say that having poured all of my adult energies into the place. Empty calories, indeed.

Hey, did you hear something? The phone line just clicked.
posted by intermod at 8:36 PM on February 27, 2006

Hey intermod, you mean this? It's around.

I find it kind of off-putting that the idea seems to be Drink Pepsi, Not Coke! considering that the whole pesticides-in-India thing seems to involve both of them; Pepsi's doing some hardcore environmental damage in South India (as has Coke). It doesn't seem like a change for the much better.
posted by anjamu at 9:17 PM on February 27, 2006

gotta agree with anjamu, intermod. Your google-fu ain't too hot.

"coca-cola cia cover" yields anjamu's link, as well as others.
posted by antifuse at 2:55 AM on February 28, 2006

Can't say if its true or not, and I was never a part of the movement, but Swarthmore College also recently succeeded in "kicking coke." Somewhat illogically, as anjamu has noted, the college will now serve scandal-free Pepsi.
posted by youarenothere at 6:27 AM on February 28, 2006

I think the jury's still out. Here's a recent Frontline/World video piece that looks at Coca-Cola in Colombia.
posted by donpedro at 8:38 AM on February 28, 2006