$38 million fine for funding paramilitaries for a company that commands a little under $2 billion in revenue a year is a total joke of course. Then again if these US courts were actually worth their salt and not total kangaroo courts, they'd hold the US liable for funding paramilitaries in Latin America as well.
Banana giant Chiquita held liable by US court for funding paramilitaries
151–160 of 343 posts
Re: Banana giant Chiquita held liable by US court for funding paramilitaries
#152Earlier 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…
The issue has nothing to do with conservatism versus liberalism, but sovereignty. Why should the US get to make law for the whole world, and then enforce that law in US courts? The funny thing about the leftist children of Reaganites is that they maintain their parents’ universalism and lack of respect for foreign sovereignty. “Maybe America should fuck off and mind its own business” is never part of the political co…
[deleted]
Re: Banana giant Chiquita held liable by US court for funding paramilitaries
#153The Alien Tort Statue [1], the reason this case [2] is in the US at all has sometimes been used for significant environmental and social justice global legal activism. Because of this, it is in the sights of the conservative legal movement. Sadly I suspect this case may end up at the supreme court and end up another victim of the removal of redress for the evil of the powerful. [1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/ali…
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.
There are certain crimes that might take place outside the US that the US enforces on US citizens/entities. E.g. war crimes.
Re: Banana giant Chiquita held liable by US court for funding paramilitaries
#154Earlier quoted context omitted.
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?
Yes because it is a breach to the principle of jurisdiction and it's ultimately based on American imperialism. Mind you, Id gladly have pedos and banana execs shot in public.
What might you say about war crimes? When was the last time we had a large scale war within the borders of the U.S.? Should the wars that have taken place since been free of such prosecution since they were overseas?
Re: Banana giant Chiquita held liable by US court for funding paramilitaries
#155Earlier 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…
The issue has nothing to do with conservatism versus liberalism, but sovereignty. Why should the US get to make law for the whole world, and then enforce that law in US courts? The funny thing about the leftist children of Reaganites is that they maintain their parents’ universalism and lack of respect for foreign sovereignty. “Maybe America should fuck off and mind its own business” is never part of the political co…
Other countries are free to levy such fines for offenses they deem worthy and have done so in the past certainly. The US does not have exclusive right to this.
Re: Banana giant Chiquita held liable by US court for funding paramilitaries
#156When I saw the headline I assumed this was going to be about practices from the "banana republic" era in the 60s.. almost unbelievable that they were still doing this in the 21st century.
Why would they stop when the punishment is a paltry fine, and all their bananas remain in every grocery store in the country?
Re: Banana giant Chiquita held liable by US court for funding paramilitaries
#157Earlier 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. ;)
That's still good.
Austrian courts forced Meta to delete certain posts globally. That's some crazy overreach.
https://globalfreedomofexpression.columbia.edu/cases/die-gru....
Re: Banana giant Chiquita held liable by US court for funding paramilitaries
#158Just more hypocracy from the US. US have been funding and training paramilitaries in just about every continent for decades now. Don't your government have anything better to do then throw their weight around the global arena?
Re: Banana giant Chiquita held liable by US court for funding paramilitaries
#159The Alien Tort Statue [1], the reason this case [2] is in the US at all has sometimes been used for significant environmental and social justice global legal activism. Because of this, it is in the sights of the conservative legal movement. Sadly I suspect this case may end up at the supreme court and end up another victim of the removal of redress for the evil of the powerful. [1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/ali…
>" Sadly I suspect this case may end up at the supreme court and end up another victim of the removal of redress for the evil of the powerful."
I find it deeply ironic that such morally guided policy unravells a power projection machine only to then be replaced by another powers power projection machine void of values. A power that engages in values mimicry on the surface level and copies the colonial strategies it condemns. And in the end, the morally just but powerless are just written out of history. All the good intentions and they will have never existed.
Some kissinger minion will remove us from the internet archives to have a more correct history for the great leader. And lets not forget the physical, real disasters of antirealpolitics in Europe. Everyone scrambles to get nukes that idealists declared redundant.
In this game the moral and decent loose totally if they allow one player to gain enough power to flip the gameboard. Worser still the moral rightous ones become defacto usefool gamepieces rambling about "red lines & rules" of the opponents, while the littlefingers and kissingers play this game with one arm tied back. The blood in Ukraine is on your hands too, oh moral ones.
Re: Banana giant Chiquita held liable by US court for funding paramilitaries
#160Earlier 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…
The issue has nothing to do with conservatism versus liberalism, but sovereignty. Why should the US get to make law for the whole world, and then enforce that law in US courts? The funny thing about the leftist children of Reaganites is that they maintain their parents’ universalism and lack of respect for foreign sovereignty. “Maybe America should fuck off and mind its own business” is never part of the political co…
America is not enforcing its laws on some random people outside its borders, its regulating the behavior of people who are very much subject to our legal system. I am quite surprised to see there's a contingent of folks who think that leaving our borders means you can do whatever you want and expect to be welcomed back