Clare Shell to Sea Picket - 14th Sept '07.

by MacE Tue Sep 18, 2007 10:27

Intransigence on vital issues is to be commended, Henry. Dónall, scores of opponents of Shell's plans for Erris have taken beatings because of that stance. Some have been hospitalised. This doesn't happen to Shell loyalists, which might explain why some people are inclined to use pseudonyms and others are blasé.

by Dónall Garvin - Shell Mon Sep 17, 2007 16:37 donall.garvin at shell dot com

Thanks for your comments Henry.
I should probably take more care when typing.

It seems that this board is a closed-shop for anyone who doesn't completely share your points of view.

As far as hanging my head in shame - at least I am prepared to put my name to my words and hiding behind a pseudonym.

If you feel that you views are not being listened to and your objections being taken seriously it may be because of your intransigent stance.

by Henry Mon Sep 17, 2007 13:58

Well-paid Shell stooge shows ignorance of company's human rights record,

-claims that since all petrol is imported, therefore not buying Shell petrol will make no difference to competitors and franchise holders-

-shaky grasp of economics as well as spelling-

-how much is the fool getting paid to post this tripe?

(speculation: he may be doing it on his lunchbreak from cleaning executive toilets in Corrib House)

by icy Mon Sep 17, 2007 13:18

For Ramon

"Saro-Wiwa had been fighting against environmental degradation of his native Ogoniland by the Shell oil company"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/crossing_continen...3.stm

This article was written by John Egan, Shell spokesman in Erris.
As the old joke goes - 'we know what you are now we're just discussing price'

by HD Mon Sep 17, 2007 13:00

Ramon,
you obviously came in on the last train.
Please try to inform yourself before writing such nonsense again.
Maybe you would like to google shell's international record. If you do then you certainly won't repeat your last comment.

by Ramon Mon Sep 17, 2007 12:52

Some of the comments posted here are not very sensible. We can't be commenting on rape and pillage of the Irish natural resources on the one hand and on the other hold out our hand for gas resources from elsewhere, all the while complaining that it is so expensive.

Overall Shell has a very good record of dealing with the communities in which it operates in a sensitive manner; much more so than many other companies in the energy sector. Based on what I have been able to read about this case, it has been the same for Corrib. Some of the comments posted here are rather one-sided views. I think one could do much worse than having Shell as the operator of a project such as this. It has listened, at least to some degree, to the input of the community and has made concessions in the project to address concerns. The gas pipelines people are worried about exist all over the world without any problems and to think that because they are in Ireland they somehow will be very unsafe does not make any sense.

by Gan ainm Mon Sep 17, 2007 10:26

Donal you are working for a firm involved in the rape of Irish resources and the oppression of a vulnerable rural community, hang your smug head.

by Dónall Garvin - Shell Mon Sep 17, 2007 08:56 donall.garvin at shell dot com

All of the petrol that is used by all the cars in Ireland is imported - and it is all pretty much the same stuff that is used in all the petrol stations.

If you buoycott Shell stations and go elsewhere you are in effect making no difference - Shell sold the petrol station sites a year or two ago, another company runs the franchise and the (the crude the) petrol is (probably) imported from is from Russia or the Middle East.

By all means use less petrol; walk, take the bus or train but don't think that by buoycotting a petrol station does anything other than annoy people who have nothing to do with shell.

Also your reporting on Shell is a bit partisan.

by Gan ainm Sun Sep 16, 2007 13:52

Seriously wise up, you have tried splitting hairs on this already, trying to claim a shell station doesnt represent shell. These firms are related and hurting one hurts them all, unless you are saying that Topaz is in competition with shell, which they clearly not as they are sporting big shell signs outside their stations.

by DSF - Sinn Féin Sun Sep 16, 2007 13:51

All the petrol sold in Shell stations is still supplied by Shell, so all profits go to Shell. The deal with Topaz precludes the franchise holder buying petrol or diesel from anyone else. Picketing a Shell station, therefore, hurts Shell.

All the petrol and diesel sold in Statoil stations is supplied by Statoil. The deal between Topaz and Statoil stops the operator of the station from getting supplies from anyone else. So if you picket a Statoil station, and you should, you are having an effect on Statoil's profits.

by Shell petrol stations Sun Sep 16, 2007 13:14

Shell doens't own the Shell petrol stations. A company called Topaz does. They also own the Statoil ones.

by gan ainm Sun Sep 16, 2007 10:23

These shell stations will feel the impact of protests financially and immediatley. More importantly they are everywhere, as not everybody can get to rossport, people should be targetting the stations more and more. Make shopping at shell as popular as buying south african goods in the 80s.

by Mayo Local Sat Sep 15, 2007 14:25

Well done and thank you to everyone in Clare Shell To Sea