121–130 of 343 posts
Allegedly also Coca-Cola, Drummond and even some local companies like Postobón have been involved with paramilitary groups and sponsored crimes against civilians - and haven't faced any consequences. But this is a good precedent.
Everyone pays protection money in Colombia, every single commercial entity except in the most upscale places.
> During the 2007 trial, it was revealed that Chiquita had made payments amounting to more than $1.7m to the AUC in the six years from 1997 to 2004. > The banana giant said that it began making the payments after the leader of the AUC at the time, Carlos Castaño, implied that staff and property belonging to Chiquita's subsidiary in Colombia could be harmed if the money was not forthcoming Not saying this is the case…
If someone threatens to kill your employees and burn everything you own to the ground - and you know they will - you're gonna pay them.
The government of Columbia should be held to account for allowing this evil to run rampant, not the victims of these cartels.
Allegedly also Coca-Cola, Drummond and even some local companies like Postobón have been involved with paramilitary groups and sponsored crimes against civilians - and haven't faced any consequences. But this is a good precedent.
Certain there are others. Naomi Klein wrote about Ford paying to have its own Argentine employees murdered during the junta in the 70s, apparently to prevent unionization.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Overpass
Mentioned here too:
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> So basically every corporation operating in the US has to follow US law at all times, regardless of the economic/legal circumstances in other countries? It is wild to me how some people can throw something like this out as this like, unreasonable and clearly sarcastic question like, what you expect a corporation to follow the law everywhere? And I'm just over here like... yeah? Yeah. I... always did, really, I neve…
If we’re talking about crimes like “murder”, yes, it’s pretty clear. If we’re talking about crimes like “bribing a public official”, it’s less so. There are countries where that is simultaneously 1) technically illegal by that country’s own laws, 2) absolutely an expected and required part of doing business. So what do you do in that case?
whereas if you bribe public officials in other countries as normal business practice, that might give you an advantage over other companies that also operate in the US. if they have to also engage in bribery to compete with you, that seems like a much more direct harm to another US entity.
- Chiquita was forced to pay "protection money" to the AUC. Read: "pay us or we kill your employees and burn your plantations to the ground."
- Chiquita makes the payment and alerts the Department of Justice that they were forced to pay under duress.
- The AUC kills 8 people, as cartels tend to do.
- Chiquita is held accountable.
This does not seem reasonable: First you get extorted at threat to life/property, then you get punished for getting extorted. Furthermore, it's tenuous at best to say "8 people died because you paid the AUC." The AUC kills/maims/tortures children every day for fun. This is not an exaggeration, most people will never comprehend the sheer evil of these organizations.
Calling for the execution[1] of Chiquita execs as some HNers are doing is absurd. Should Chiquita just let their employees get tortured to death and watch their properties burn to the ground?
Perhaps the government of Columbia itself should be responsible for not exterminating its cartels, and instead allowing them to infiltrate the deepest ranks of its military and government.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Certain there are others. Naomi Klein wrote about Ford paying to have its own Argentine employees murdered during the junta in the 70s, apparently to prevent unionization.
What the hell kind of corporate exec goes "well, I guess I have to get them murdered, there's shareholder value to protect"?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So basically every corporation operating in the US has to follow US law at all times, regardless of the economic/legal circumstances in other countries? I can see why that is controversial and almost certainly will be extremely selectively enforced.
Uh, yes? There are dozens of specific US laws that govern this and tons of existing case law that committing a serious crime overseas is punishable in the US regardless of its legality elsewhere. The Travel Act for example makes it illegal to fly to another country to engage in sexual acts with a minor, even if it is legal in that country. Do you think that is some sort of government overreach?
Mind you, Id gladly have pedos and banana execs shot in public.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> So basically every corporation operating in the US has to follow US law at all times, regardless of the economic/legal circumstances in other countries? It is wild to me how some people can throw something like this out as this like, unreasonable and clearly sarcastic question like, what you expect a corporation to follow the law everywhere? And I'm just over here like... yeah? Yeah. I... always did, really, I neve…
If we’re talking about crimes like “murder”, yes, it’s pretty clear. If we’re talking about crimes like “bribing a public official”, it’s less so. There are countries where that is simultaneously 1) technically illegal by that country’s own laws, 2) absolutely an expected and required part of doing business. So what do you do in that case?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So basically every corporation operating in the US has to follow US law at all times, regardless of the economic/legal circumstances in other countries? I can see why that is controversial and almost certainly will be extremely selectively enforced.
It's kind of ironic, as the US wants every other country to follow their laws too sometimes (patents, copyright, probably more). For the extra cup of strange irony, part of the government in my country (Australia) just tried forcing X to delete posts for everyone globally instead of just not showing them to Australian users. Thankfully the court system told the Aust gov to bugger off due to overreach. ;)