Chevron Tries to Silence Critics of Its Ecuador Environmental Disaster

Cross-posted from The Chevron Pit blog:

Chevron is exhibiting some awfully thin skin lately over its Ecuador environmental disaster.

A clear pattern is emerging where the company, its lawyers, and its public relations firms try to intimidate critics of its Ecuador problem into silence. Award-winning filmmaker Joe Berlinger, who recent made a movie documenting the company's abuses in Ecuador, is the latest victim. That has gotten Chevron on the bad side of prominent journalists and filmmakers such as Bill Moyers, Trudie Styler and Michael Moore.

Chevron has admitted to dumping billions of gallons of toxic waste into Ecuador's Amazon to cut costs, decimating indigenous groups and creating an outbreak of cancer that affects thousands of people. For years, the company has engaged in abusive litigation to evade accountability for a clean-up.

Unlike the BP disaster in the Gulf, Chevron (via its predecessor company Texaco) discharged this waste on purpose. And unlike BP, Chevron's executives have buried their heads in the sand and refused to accept responsibility for the clean-up.

The increased pressure on Chevron – 60 Minutes did a highly unflattering segment on the company recently – seems be taking a toll.

Take look at Chevron's attacks on Free Speech just in the past year:

Filing frivolous lawsuits to "punish" critics: Chevron, via its new law firm Gibson Dunn, initiated a "malicious prosecution" lawsuit in a California federal court to punish a 75-year-old lawyer, Cristobal Bonifaz. Bonifaz had brought a separate lawsuit against Chevron on behalf of a handful of individuals for health claims related to the company's Ecuador disaster in San Francisco federal court. A federal judge turned the tables on Chevron, finding the Chevron action violated a California law that bars nuisance lawsuits designed to suppress Free Speech. The judge dismissed virtually all of Chevron's claims against Bonifaz. The California law (called Anti-SLAPP) used by the court against Chevron was created to prevent legal attacks brought to censor, intimidate and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of defending a frivolous lawsuit. The decision was a tremendous setback for Gibson Dunn, which has a reputation for being paid millions to protect companies like Chevron from being held accountable for their human rights abuses.

Attempting to intimidate journalists and gain access to their files: Chevron recently launched an unprecedented legal attack on award-winning documentarian Joe Berlinger to force him to allow the company to rummage through 600 hours of video footage Berlinger shot for the documentary, CRUDE. The movie – which has won 22 awards from film festivals -- chronicles the struggle of the 30,000 residents of the Ecuadorian rainforest to hold Chevron accountable for systematically polluting their lands. Chevron's lawsuit prompted a group of filmmakers that includes 20 Academy Award winners and many more nominees to write an open letter in support of Berlinger stating that Chevron's effort "will have a crippling effect on the work of investigative journalists everywhere." Filmmaker Michael Moore has stated, "The chilling effect of this is, someone like me, if something like this is upheld, the next whistleblower at the next corporation is going to think twice about showing me some documents if that information has to be turned over to the corporation that they're working for."

Barring critics from public events: At the Chevron-sponsored Houston Marathon, a team of runners was barred from participating in the event, and threatened with arrest, for attempting to distribute materials critical of Chevron's human rights record in Ecuador. The race manager told the runners that "higher ups at Chevron were freaking out." At the time, runner Maria Ramos stated: "It is sad that the Chevron Houston Marathon – which raises awareness and money for many important causes – would deny the rights of participants to appease a corporate sponsor that is clearly ashamed of its human rights record."

Attempting to pressure news outlets to silence critics: Chevron has used pressure tactics to force major media outlets to prevent advertisements critical of the company from being published. Chevron responded to an ad campaign from the Rainforest Action Network by directing its lawyers and public relations firms to leverage the company's influence and demand that the New York Times and Washington Post pull the ads. Despite Chevron's complaints, the New York Times ran the advertisements. However, the Washington Post initially succumbed to Chevron's pressure and pulled the ads temporarily. Of course, the fact Chevron was contemporaneously paying for the publication of advertisements attacking its critics was of no small irony.

Taking out advertisements attacking critics: Chevron has taken out multiple paid advertisements in Ecuador, in the United States, and across the internet accusing the Amazon community leaders suing Chevron of being liars, frauds, and con men. Chevron has also taken out ads attacking the independent court-appointed expert in Ecuador, the judge, and other participants in the lawsuit. The use of paid public advertisements to attack and intimidate court officials is unethical and would result in sanctions against the company's lawyers if it were done in the United States.

Chevron's "scorched earth" approach to its critics is pathetic, to say the least. But that's what happens when some of Big Oil's corporate leaders don't want to be reminded that they are responsible for the discharge of more than 18 billion gallons of toxic waste into the Amazon Rainforest.

But the facts are the facts. While we can understand Chevron's desire to forget about the mess it made in Ecuador, and to wish that its critics would go away, it's time for the company to stop trying to silence the opposition.  

For more information, visit www.chevrontoxico.com.

Prominent Filmmakers Rally To Fight Chevron's 'CRUDE' Attack on the First Amendment

By now, the threat posed by Big Oil's stranglehold on our political leadership should be as obvious as the oil slick spreading on the Gulf. With oil companies ranking as seven of the top ten largest corporations on the planet, and the fossil fuels industry spending colossal amounts of money to disrupt meaningful efforts to combat climate change, people are waking up to the peril represented by what oil analyst and author Antonia Juhasz calls 'The Tyranny of Oil."

Last week I wrote about the latest threat posed by Big Oil– this time, an attack by oil giant Chevron against the First Amendment.

Chevron is going after acclaimed filmmaker Joe Berlinger, the director of 'CRUDE', which tells the story of the company's toxic legacy in the Amazon rainforest of Ecuador. Journalists, filmmakers, and civil libertarians – along with supporters of the campaign to hold Chevron accountable for its devastation of the Amazon – were appalled when Chevron went to court to demand that Berlinger turn over all of the 600+ hours of footage he shot during the making of CRUDE.

Chevron is hoping to mine the footage for any material that might help its relentless public relations schemes to try to discredit the plaintiffs, their attorneys and the courts in Ecuador.

Late last week, U.S. District Court Judge Lewis Kaplan sided with Chevron, sending shock waves through the documentary film community.

But now, filmmakers – including the most prominent documentary filmmakers in the world – are rallying behind Joe as he appeals the misguided judgment.

On Wednesday, Dave Itzkoff wrote on The New York Times' Arts Beat blog:

The International Documentary Association and a group of filmmakers that includes 20 Academy Award winners and many more nominees have issued an open letter in support of Joe Berlinger, the director of “Crude,” and objecting to a judge’s ruling that Chevron could subpoena Mr. Berlinger’s footage from that film.

The letter is signed by some twenty Oscar-winning filmmakers, as well as the Board of Directors of the International Documentary Association. Signatories include Michael Moore, who had already railed against the potential "chilling effect" on investigative journalism that the ruling could have, as well as Louie Psihoyos, director of this year's Academy Award-winning documentary film The Cove, about dolphin slaughter in Japan.

Entitled 'An open letter in support of Joe Berlinger and the documentary filmmaking team of "Crude"', the letter reads in part:

While we commend Judge Kaplan for stating "that the qualified journalists' privilege applies to Berlinger's raw footage", we are nonetheless dismayed both by Chevron's attempts to go on a "fishing expedition" into the edit rooms and production offices of a fellow documentary filmmaker without any particular cause or agenda, and the judge's allowance of said intentions. What's next, phone records and e-mails?

At the heart of journalism lies the trust between the interviewer and his or her subject. Individuals who agree to be interviewed by the news media are often putting themselves at great risk, especially in the case of television news and documentary film where the subject's identity and voice are presented in the final report. If witnesses sense that their entire interviews will be scrutinized by attorneys and examined in courtrooms they will undoubtedly speak less freely. This ruling surely will have a crippling effect on the work of investigative journalists everywhere, should it stand.

In addition to those mentioned above, the signatories read like a veritable who's who of documentary filmmaking (and a few non-doc-makers too) in the late 20th and 21st centuries– Morgan Spurlock, Alex Gibney ('Taxi to the Dark Side', Oscar Winner), Davis Guggenheim ('An Inconvenient Truth, Oscar Winner), Ken Burns, Joel Cohen, Barbara Kopple, Nick Broomfield, D.A. Pennebaker, James Longley, Jehane Noujaim, and many, many more.

The letter concludes:

This case offers a clear and compelling argument for more vigorous federal shield laws to protect journalists and their work, better federal laws to protect confidential sources, and stronger standards to prevent entities from piercing the journalists' privilege. We urge the higher courts to overturn this ruling to help ensure the safety and protection of journalists and their subjects, and to promote a free and vital press in our nation and around the world.

Today, another of the signatories, respected journalist and commentator Bill Moyers, raised his voice even louder in defense of Joe. Moyers and co-author Michael Winship – president of the Writers Guild of America, East – have an article on Huffington Post today, which is sure to make waves. In 'Chevron's "Crude" Attempt to Suppress Free Speech', Moyers and Winship write:

This is a serious matter for reporters, filmmakers and frankly, everyone else. Tough, investigative reporting without fear or favor -- already under siege by severe cutbacks and the shutdown of newspapers and other media outlets -- is vital to the public awareness and understanding essential to a democracy. As Michael Moore put it, "The chilling effect of this is, [to] someone like me, if something like this is upheld, the next whistleblower at the next corporation is going to think twice about showing me some documents if that information has to be turned over to the corporation that they're working for."

The film community is rallying to support Joe and the team behind his powerful documentary CRUDE. They have appealed the ruling granting access to his raw footage, and have filed a motion to stay the District Court's ruling while they file an appeal with the Circuit Court of Appeals.

Supporters of the communities working to hold Chevron accountable are also rallying to support Joe and highlight this attack as part and parcel of the oil company's abusive legal and PR strategy to evade responsibility for its toxic legacy in the Amazon.

In the meantime, one simple thing you can do is to watch CRUDE (buy the DVD) if you haven't already, and if you have, spread the word about this critically-acclaimed, award-winning film. Email your friends, post about it on Facebook, hold a screening party at your home with friends and stream it on Netflix.

And stay tuned for more ways to help Joe, and the communities in Ecuador who continue to suffer as Chevron finds ever more creative ways to change the subject.

– Han

Han Shan is Coordinator of Amazon Watch's Clean Up Ecuador Campaign

BP's Accidental Disaster in the Gulf & Chevron's Deliberate Disaster in the Amazon

Environmentalists and clean energy advocates are hoping that BP's disaster in the Gulf of Mexico will serve as a wake up call – or, as activists who marched on the White House on Tuesday called it, a 'Crude Awakening' – for the oil industry and our political leaders.

But while people across the U.S. are pointing out the need for serious international action on climate change and the urgency of ending our addiction to fossil fuels, much of the media has framed the debate arising from the Gulf spill narrowly: How much offshore drilling? How deep? What kinds of safety measures? Who should regulate it?

Thankfully, activists continue to make noise for real energy solutions.

A handful of people have drawn a direct link between BP's accidental spill in the Gulf, and Chevron's deliberate dumping of billions of gallons of toxic wastewater and oil into Ecuador's Amazon rainforest.

Here are a few articles doing just that. Read & share:

Today, the Chevron Pit blog has a new post up entitled, 'Obama, Ecuador, and Chevron: Big Oil’s Hypocrisy'

Twelve days after the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, President Obama, visited Venice, Louisiana, to meet with local fishermen, industry representatives and local leaders. President Obama made it clear BP was to blame for the spill:

"BP is responsible for this leak — BP will be paying the bill," he said.

President Obama’s press secretary said the White House would "keep a boot to the throat of BP" to ensure that it fulfilled its responsibilities.

In 2007, six months after his election as President of Ecuador, Rafael Correa visited the former concession area of Texaco, now owned by Chevron, to see firsthand the contamination and destruction left behind by the oil company after almost three decades of oil exploration. President Correa expressed support and concern for the residents who suffer from cancer, respiratory illness and other diseases as a result of living near toxic materials. He lifted soil from the ground and stated the obvious, “Soil with oil, friends.”

He was the first President of Ecuador to visit the contaminated sites since Texaco left Ecuador in 1992.

Chevron’s new attack-dog law firm, Gibson Dunn, points to this moment as evidence that Ecuador is a corrupt and backwards country and that Chevron cannot get a fair trial there -- even though Chevron pleaded with a U.S. court to move the lawsuit to Ecuador in the first place.

When President Correa visited several of over 900 unlined oil pits where Texaco left its toxic sludge, Chevron said it was "sorry" the President had gotten involved by expressing concern for the people living in the contaminated area.

Is Chevron sorry the President of the United States did the same thing on the Gulf Coast? Does Chevron think the United States is a corrupt and backwards country?

Chevron is drowning not only in a multi-billion liability in Ecuador, but also in its own hypocrisy.

Read the rest >>

You can also check out a previous post from the Chevron Pit, whose title says it all: 'BP: 200,000 gallons per day by accident. Chevron: 4 million gallons per day on purpose.'

Environmental journalist Starre Vartan has an article on Huffington Post entitled 'Chevron's Terrestrial Oil Spill: Less Media, More Insidious Than Gulf Slick'.

Vartan, editor of Eco-Chick writes an account of her friend Beth's recent tour of the Amazon rainforest region devastated by Chevron's oil operations.

At length, she quotes Beth Doane, founder of t-shirt company Rain Tees whose proceeds benefit Amazonian communities:

"I visited with the Cofan tribe outside Lago [Agrio] who have been hurt dramatically by the contamination and oil pits left on their land. I saw children in their village swimming in water so polluted with oil that it gleamed iridescent purples and greens as it floated around them. I wanted to scream at them to get out of the water but was told not to say anything as they have no other places to bathe."

Read the rest >>

Also on Huffington Post, Becky Tarbotton, Executive Director of Rainforest Action Network, wrote on Tuesday about the Senate Hearings happening on Capitol Hill in an article called 'BP Oil Disaster: A Crude Awakening for Washington'

Senator Cardin, who is co-chairing one of today's hearings, put it perfectly in the Baltimore Sun:

"The catastrophic oil spill ravaging the Gulf of Mexico and bearing down on coastal states is another reminder: America's current energy policy is a disaster. We need to break our dangerous addiction to oil and promote safe and clean sources of power and fuel -- and we need to begin today."

He took the words right out of my mouth -- America's current energy policy is a disaster. Big Oil and King Coal assert tremendous power in Washington, operating unchecked and unregulated, and wreaking havoc on our environment, public health and our climate. The oil spill in the Gulf is a tragedy, but it is not the only horrifying dirty oil disaster local communities are facing. From the devastating tar sands projects in Alberta to the oily mess Chevron left in Ecuador, across the globe the price of oil is too high.

Read the rest >>

I'm not sure I can add anything to Becky's last paragraph above so I'll leave it there. Tomorrow, news about the film community rallying to support CRUDE filmmaker Joe Berlinger in his fight against Chevron's legal attacks.

– Han

Han Shan is the Coordinator of Amazon Watch's Clean Up Ecuador Campaign.

Chevron's Court Win to Get Filmmaker's Ecuador Footage: Another Victory for Lies & Swiftboat Tactics

For decades, the indigenous and campesino communities living in Ecuador's Amazon rainforest region have suffered an epidemic of cancer, miscarriages, and premature deaths caused by oil giant Chevron's horrific contamination of their once-pristine lands.

Now, in its belligerent and well-resourced quest to evade responsibility for its toxic legacy in Ecuador, Chevron's actions pose a grave threat to a new victim that all Americans hold dear; the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.

Yesterday, Judge Lewis Kaplan of the U.S. District Court in New York granted a motion by Chevron to issue a subpoena to acclaimed filmmaker Joe Berlinger, demanding more than 600 hours of footage shot during the making of the award-winning documentary 'CRUDE.' The film, as many readers here know, chronicles the David vs. Goliath battle by some 30,000 Ecuadorean plaintiffs to hold Chevron accountable for widespread devastation caused by the company's deliberately substandard operations while drilling for oil over nearly four decades.

In response to the ruling, Joe Berlinger said:

"We will appeal today's unfortunate decision. The filming and production of Crude – which presents both sides of this compelling and important story – is precisely the type of investigative journalism that the First Amendment was designed to protect."

And Maura Wogan, attorney for Berlinger and his production company had this to say:

"Today's extremely broad decision will cause grave harm to journalists, investigative reporters and documentary filmmakers. The court has shown an unprecedented lack of sensitivity to the journalist's privilege and the First Amendment."

Director Michael Moore has spoken out as well. He told The New York Times 'Arts Beat' blog:

“The chilling effect of this is, someone like me, if something like this is upheld, the next whistleblower at the next corporation is going to think twice about showing me some documents if that information has to be turned over to the corporation that they’re working for.

“I’ve never had to deal with any corporation suing me to find out how I gather this information. Obviously the ramifications of this go far beyond documentary films, if corporations are allowed to pry into a reporter’s notebook or into a television station’s newsroom.”

The post continues:

Mr. Moore said he hoped the judge’s ruling would be overturned on appeal, and said that if it is not Mr. Berlinger should resist the subpoena “if he can.”

“I think that he’ll find that he’ll have the support of hundreds of filmmakers who will back him in this,” Mr. Moore said.

Chevron claims that a scene in one version of the film shows inappropriate collaboration between the plaintiffs' counsel and an independent court expert. Chevron lawyers used this scene as justification for wanting to sift through the rest of the footage, and see if there was "additional" misconduct captured by Berlinger.

But in a statement from Ilann Maazel, an attorney for the plaintiffs, he explains:

“Chevron’s lawyers refer to a scene where they believe a court-appointed expert attended a 'focus' group with the plaintiffs. The individual in question had not even been appointed as an expert when the scene was shot. The scene depicted a meeting — not a focus group — with Ecuadorians who live in the contaminated area, many of whom suffer from cancer, respiratory disease and other illnesses as a result of the toxins left behind by Chevron in the soil and water."

As I explained in a previous post, Chevron and its high-powered lawyers at international corporate law behemoth Gibson Dunn are hoping to mine the footage for any material that they might find useful for their relentless public relations schemes to try to malign the plaintiffs, smear their attorneys and discredit the courts in Ecuador. All the while, of course, Chevron has engaged in its own dirty tricks campaign to corrupt the trial.

In addition to a cadre of high-powered DC lobbyists and some of the largest, most expensive law firms in the world representing them, Chevron has at least six corporate public relations firms working for them, including Hill & Knowlton, which represented the tobacco industry and – as it attempted to do with tobacco and cancer – has tried to deny a link between oil contamination and cancer in Ecuador.

Of course, witnessing Chevron's increasingly hostile and dishonest tactics in its fight to avoid responsibility, it's not surprising that the oil company also works with CRC Public Relations, the DC-based firm that spearheaded the 'swiftboating' of presidential candidate John Kerry, and more recently, misleading attacks on health care reform.

Speaking about the firm, Kellyanne Conway, a Republican pollster "who has worked with CRC for years" according to the Washington Post, told the paper:

“They are among the most powerful and consequential people you’ve never heard of, and they like it that way."

Lovely.

So now, much like the right wing (with CRC Public Relations' expertise) smeared John Kerry with lies and introduced blatant falsehoods into the health care reform 'debate,' Chevron has amassed an ugly cabal of law firms, lobbyists, and PR spin-masters to corrupt the legal process in Ecuador, punish anyone who dares stand up against the oil giant, and spread disinformation about the company's toxic legacy in the Amazon.

I wish it was just some sort of political chess game but it never is. These things have real consequences, for people like Maria Garofalo, whose heartbreaking story is told in CRUDE. She and her husband Luiz and her daughter Silvia have all been diagnosed with cancer, after living downstream from Chevron's toxic waste pits.

Maria Garofalo, who lives in San Carlos, suffers from uterine cancer. Photo by Lou Dematteis

After nearly 17 years in the courts, there is a mountain of incontrovertible evidence that Chevron (in the form of its wholly-owned subsidiary Texaco) poisoned the water and forests depended upon by tens of thousands of people in Ecuador. And so without a fact-based argument to make, Chevron has resorted to shifting the blame, sowing confusion, attacking advocates for the affected people, and crying "corruption!"

Going back to Ilann Maazel, an attorney for the Amazon communities:

“The corruption is not in some 600 hours of videotape. It’s in the ground and water of the rainforest for anyone to see and smell. Chevron's quest for the footage is just another last-minute sideshow to divert attention from the intentional dumping of billions of gallons of toxic sludge in the Amazon. Notwithstanding Chevron's smoke and mirrors campaign, at the end of the day, we believe Chevron will ultimately be held accountable for its indefensible and unconscionable conduct in the Amazon.”

In concluding his decision to allow Chevron to subpoena Berlinger's footage, Judge Kaplan wrote:

The Court expresses no view as to whether the concerns of either side are supported by proof of improper political influence, corruption, or other misconduct affecting the Ecuadorian proceedings. As [Supreme Court] Justice [Louis] Brandeis once wrote, however, “sunshine is said to the best of disinfectants.” Review of Berlinger’s outtakes will contribute to the goal of seeing not only that justice is done, but that it appears to be done.

In many cases, I am all for 'sunlight' – Brandeis was presciently referring to transparency and openness in government and regulation of the financial system. But in this context, the judge is DANGEROUSLY wrong.

If the judge's ruling – which went against abundant legal precedent in the United States – is allowed to stand, it could indeed endanger the critical work of people like filmmaker Joe Berlinger, who explore under-reported issues of profound social and ecological importance. In that way, it would have the exact opposite effect from what Brandeis was suggesting.

And while the Judge is wrong, Brandeis' principle is right. While Chevron tries to muddy the waters and deceive the world as to its responsibilities for massive suffering in Ecuador, we need the efforts of journalists like Berlinger – and social justice activists, human rights lawyers, environmentalists, and supporters like you – to expose Chevron and its Chernobyl in the Amazon to the cleansing power of sunlight.

Only then will justice be done. Spread the word.

– Han

Han Shan is the coordinator of Amazon Watch's Clean Up Ecuador Campaign.

BP: 200,000 gallons per day by accident. Chevron: 4 million gallons per day on purpose.

*Cross-posted from 'The Chevron Pit,' a blog maintained by the legal team representing the plaintiffs suing Chevron for environmental clean-up in Ecuador:

Try comparing the environmental disaster that Chevron created in Ecuador's Amazon to the oil slick that now threatens the Gulf Coast states.

The disaster at "Deepwater Horizon" is causing an oil well to bleed some 200,000 gallons of oil a day into the ecosystem. And this was a horrible accident.

If you can believe it, this is only a fraction of what Texaco (now Chevron) deliberately dumped in Ecuador's rainforest when it operated hundreds of oil wells there from 1964 to 1990.

Chevron has admitted that Texaco dumped toxic "produced water" into the Ecuadorian rainforest and into the streams and rivers that 30,000 people used for their bathing and drinking water. "Produced water" can contain a toxic mixture of chemicals, including benzene and other components of crude oil. Some believe that approximately 2% of produced water is pure crude oil.

Over the course of 26 years, Chevron has acknowledged that it dumped more than 18.5 billion gallons of the industrial waste into the waterways of the populated and sensitive ecosystem, or 4 million gallons per day at the height of its operation. Put another way, Chevron's dumping of 18.5 billion gallons of produced water is the equivalent of discharging 332 million gallons of crude directly into the rainforest.

Without taking anything away from the tragedy in the Gulf of Mexico, at the rate that the Deepwater Horizon spill is going, it will have to discharge 200,000 gallons per day for 1,660 days to dump as much oil as Chevron deliberately dumped into the Ecuadorian rainforest. That is a little over 4.5 years.

And that only accounts for the pure crude oil Chevron dumped – not the oil it spilled from shoddy operation practices, or the 98% of the "produced water" that isn't pure crude, but encompasses a toxic "cocktail" of industrial runoff, salty water, and other chemicals. If you want to start comparing the Gulf of Mexico oil spill to the entirety of Chevron's dumping in Ecuador (all the produced water it has admitted to dumping, not just the crude oil), consider this: at a rate of 200,000 gallons a day, the Deepwater Horizon spill would have to go on for 92,500 days to spill 18.5 billion gallons into the environment. 92,500 days. 253 years. And no, that isn't a typo.

The worst part? Deepwater Horizon was an accident. But Chevron's actions in Ecuador, through its predecessor company Texaco, were the product of a system designed to dump toxic waste directly into the environment to keep production costs to a bare minimum.

Since the Deepwater Horizon incident happened, BP has taken full responsibility for the spill. More than 2,500 people have been mobilized to respond to the disaster, and the company has insisted that it will pay for a full clean up. Of course, we will see what ultimately happens – but at least it's a good start.

Chevron's response to their disaster in Ecuador? The opposite. Chevron has launched a full-scale litigation war to cover up the disaster and the company's own fraud in a purported remediation in the mid-1990s. It has committed fraud on the court by engaging in deceptive sampling practices and by controlling a laboratory that it represented as independent, according to audio recordings of one of Chevron's longtime contractors involved in the fraud, Diego Borja.

If the Ecuador disaster happened within the U.S., Chevron would be pressured and shamed into cleaning it up. In Ecuador, where the company disregarded the rights of the local indigenous groups on its way to ever higher profits, we see nothing of the sort.