HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Re: McCain, the plot is a...

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 08:54 PM

Re: McCain, the plot is about to twist

http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/john-mccain-has-same-iranian-business-investments

Republicans aimed criticism at U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice Thursday for having modest stakes in companies that did business with Iran. And while the revelation has driven new questions and fodder for those opposing her nomination as secretary of state, one of Rice's most vocal critics, Senator John McCain, maintains investments in two of the same companies -- ENI and Royal Dutch Shell --through funds revealed in his financial disclosures.

More at the link above

29 replies, 4550 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 29 replies Author Time Post
Reply Re: McCain, the plot is about to twist (Original post)
loyalkydem Nov 2012 OP
ReformedGOPer Nov 2012 #1
mercuryblues Nov 2012 #2
applegrove Dec 2012 #29
loyalkydem Nov 2012 #3
Mnemosyne Nov 2012 #4
sheshe2 Nov 2012 #10
Mnemosyne Dec 2012 #24
SummerSnow Dec 2012 #26
mac56 Nov 2012 #13
Mnemosyne Dec 2012 #25
Honeycombe8 Nov 2012 #5
kelliekat44 Nov 2012 #6
BlueStreak Nov 2012 #11
Honeycombe8 Dec 2012 #22
BlueStreak Dec 2012 #27
Honeycombe8 Dec 2012 #28
UtahLib Nov 2012 #7
Honeycombe8 Dec 2012 #23
bluedigger Nov 2012 #8
freshwest Dec 2012 #15
bluedigger Dec 2012 #17
freshwest Dec 2012 #18
bluedigger Dec 2012 #19
freshwest Dec 2012 #20
Angry Dragon Nov 2012 #9
patrice Nov 2012 #12
sanatanadharma Dec 2012 #14
hrmjustin Dec 2012 #16
Hekate Dec 2012 #21

Response to loyalkydem (Original post)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 09:00 PM

1. Please proceed, Senator. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ReformedGOPer (Reply #1)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 09:02 PM

2. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ReformedGOPer (Reply #1)

Sat Dec 1, 2012, 07:42 PM

29. LOL!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to loyalkydem (Original post)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 09:03 PM

3. I am an aspiring writer

even I couldn't have forseen this kind of twist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to loyalkydem (Original post)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 09:11 PM

4. They take hypocrisy to new heights, constantly. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mnemosyne (Reply #4)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 11:27 PM

10. Oh yeah

Hypocrisy with a capital H.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sheshe2 (Reply #10)

Sat Dec 1, 2012, 09:43 AM

24. Is there a word for beyond Hypocrisy? It would be more suitable. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mnemosyne (Reply #24)

Sat Dec 1, 2012, 04:13 PM

26. I know a good word ...

Charlatan

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mnemosyne (Reply #4)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 11:57 PM

13. They are less troubled by hypocrisy than normal people are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mac56 (Reply #13)

Sat Dec 1, 2012, 09:44 AM

25. Sociopaths all. No conscience. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to loyalkydem (Original post)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 09:12 PM

5. Royal Dutch Shell does biz with Iran? Well, I'll be darned. I'm guessing...

it's not that big a deal that a big corp does business with various evil regimes. As we know, CORPORATIONS ARE NOT PEOPLE and ARE NOT CITIZENS. They exist soley for the purpose of making a profit, and hey, that's okay. But they don't necessarily put any one country above another. Their purpose has nothing to do with that.

Many people with 401ks that have mutual funds in them, probably own pieces of companies that do business with Iran and other undesirable countries. We 401k and mutual fund owners have no control over that. That's impossible.

So I guess it's no big deal.

But I think it's different if an individual intentionally buys into a company that is doing business with Iran, as opposed to buying a mutual fund that has a bunch of different companies' stock in it, some of which will no doubt do business with undesirables.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Honeycombe8 (Reply #5)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 09:24 PM

6. The Dutch are culprits in a lot of investments that affect the US. Food chains also.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Honeycombe8 (Reply #5)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 11:29 PM

11. Just about any who has shares in a broad-based mutual fund

will technically be an owner in Shell.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #11)

Sat Dec 1, 2012, 08:40 AM

22. Yes. That was my point. That is McCain's investment. Rice, OTOH, directly bought the company.....

if I understand that article.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Honeycombe8 (Reply #22)

Sat Dec 1, 2012, 05:00 PM

27. If a person doesn't have anything like a controlling interest, I don't see how

you can hold them accountable. If I buy 1000 shares in Shell, I can't be expected to hire my own auditor and my own team of investigators to determine if they are complying with all laws.

It is different when Romney owns a controlling interest in a company, for example. You must be accuontable then, rather than hide behind the corporate curtain.

Do you have any evidence of either of these things:

a) that Rice had a controlling interest

b) that Rice had knowledge of Shell's violation of laws with respect to trading with Iran

If Rice is culpable, then surely 40 million other Americans are equally culpable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #27)

Sat Dec 1, 2012, 05:08 PM

28. Fair enough. No, she didn't violate any laws. But since she's high up in the government,

I'm sure she has access to the list of companies doing business with Iran, a country that the U.S. has imposed sanctions on.

40 million people do not buy stocks directly in companies; they buy mutual funds. Like I do and probably you do. I have a few individual stocks, and it could be forgiven if I don't know that one of them does business with Iran. But then, have 15 shares of a company is almost the same as having no shares.

Rice is a multi-millionaire.

Face the facts. They've got her on this one. If the conflict of interest with the Keystone Pipeline wasn't enough, and it is to a lot of people. Remember, Rice is mega-wealthy. When she owns part of a company, we're not talkin' 15 shares.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to loyalkydem (Original post)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 09:47 PM

7. Once again McCain emerges covered in the slime of his hypocrisy. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UtahLib (Reply #7)

Sat Dec 1, 2012, 08:42 AM

23. You didn't read the article, did you?

He owns mutual funds, like millions of other people. Anyone who owns mutual funds, owns pieces of undesirable companies. It's unavoidable.

Rice, OTOH...that's not the situation with her.

Also, to be fair, McCain is not the one who criticized Rice for owing shares of that corp. So there's no hypocrisy on his part.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to loyalkydem (Original post)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 09:53 PM

8. McCain should be ashamed of himself.

The Vietnam War
Between 1972 and 1975, the last three years of the Vietnam War, Shell Vietnam (the local "operating company" of the Shell Group) controlled half of Vietnam’s oil supply. A book by Louis Wesseling, the President of Shell Vietnam during that period, revealed that Shell failed properly to control the oil shipments which flowed through indirect channels to the Viet Cong. According to his book “Fuelling the war: revealing an oil company’s role in Vietnam”, Shell knowingly employed as a manager a notorious former senior police official with a “fearsome and well-deserved reputation” who “had already shown his inclination to settle security matters by military action with little compunction about killing, innocents along with suspects”. Wesseling later served as CEO of Shell companies in South America and the Middle East and collaborated on drafting the "Shell Group Business Principles".

http://www.thefullwiki.org/Controversies_surrounding_Royal_Dutch_Shell#Jiffy_Lube_International

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluedigger (Reply #8)

Sat Dec 1, 2012, 12:36 AM

15. I remember when we were organizing against the Vietnam War and talked about the oil there.

That link is great. Thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to freshwest (Reply #15)

Sat Dec 1, 2012, 12:49 AM

17. Shell is one of my favorite examples of the amorality of multinationals.

Doing business in both North Vietnam and the USA while they were at war with one another.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluedigger (Reply #17)

Sat Dec 1, 2012, 01:45 AM

18. This thread reminds me of how Cheney was calling for bombing Iran when he or

Halliburtion - really the same animal - owned a mansion on an island where their rich people lived off the coast of Iran. It's disgusting they use the media to make people in the countries hate and fear each other for their profits. I feel we will come to know how when they post these stories, or declare wars and conflicts, they do it to make money on the commodities markets, etc. The impoverishment of the people of the world, the environmental destruction, human deaths and broken hearts, have no effect on their schemes. Those things should be first on the minds of those who lead societies. That's why businessmen should not be running things. It's rare to have someone who sees beyond that in the last century or so. Perhaps this has always been the case under one cover or another.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to freshwest (Reply #18)

Sat Dec 1, 2012, 01:56 AM

19. Great post.

All I can say is Queen Isabella didn't finance Columbus out of curiosity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluedigger (Reply #19)

Sat Dec 1, 2012, 02:25 AM

20. I pushed that further, when Bush did the wars on the Chinese and European credit cards.

Did they loan the USA money to go to war because they believed they were menaced, or for love for America?

Has that ever been the reason that governments and businesses lend huge sums of money to other entities, for sentiment and affection?

The Chinese have our manfacturing base, own big parcels of real estate in the Americas and exploiting the mineral wealth of Afghanistan and other regions where Americans have played the role of the occupiers. But we have not been colonizing these places for ourselves, if the USA is a corporation, we went bankrupt on the deal.

Do I fault them for this? For being shrewd, for pushing the debt to get concessions?

No, I don't see them as evil for doing it. Are they not entitled to be repaid? Seeing how the money was promissory notes and that the rich were refusing to pay for the wars they profited from, did they not have concerns about waiting?

I contend, they wisely took their pay in kind, that is, contracts, manufacturing plants, patents, and real assets instead of waiting for Americans to wake up and make the rich pay their share for their money making schemes.

That may sound cruel and I am not in finance, but I think it's logical. Some others may have facts to cause me to reject that assessment, but it seems to me to be a pattern.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to loyalkydem (Original post)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 11:09 PM

9. McCain should resign and sign himself into the nearest prison

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to loyalkydem (Original post)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 11:55 PM

12. Royal Dutch Shell, isn't that the one that the Kochs were using to play favorites in Iran with

on oil deals, thus pissing off, not only other Iranians, but also pissing off Shia who live in Iran and Iraq?

Seems like I also ran across a Koch grandson or nephew or cousin or something mixed into all of that when I was looking into it a little.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to loyalkydem (Original post)

Sat Dec 1, 2012, 12:02 AM

14. The boehner-head is also has his stick in the pipe

It has been reported that Boehner also has financial interests in companies that will benefit from the pipeline.

https://www.google.com/search?q=boehner+keystonepipeline+investment&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to loyalkydem (Original post)

Sat Dec 1, 2012, 12:39 AM

16. Can't wait to see him explain that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hrmjustin (Reply #16)

Sat Dec 1, 2012, 02:37 AM

21. IF anyone asks and follows up aggressively ...

... Which is pretty rare. But I would love to see it, I really would. That senile old man would pop a gusset.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread