Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Banana giant Chiquita held liable by US court for funding paramilitaries

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 343 posts

Re: Banana giant Chiquita held liable by US court for funding paramilitaries

#221

Post by lstodd »

coldtea wrote: post #178
dmix wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes I'm aware of the details > But to be clear they had already pled guilty to doing that crime in 2007 (and they also prosecuted the AUC, many AUC leaders were extradited to the US in 2008). That's exactly what I mean for extremely selective enforcement Say some hypothetically medium/small US business with some operations in Mexico has their employees stalked/intimidated and their equipment gets burned down and peop…

> So they pay money to some local cartel to make them go away Traditionally it's more like "they pay money to some local armed group to get rid of union activists and unruly workers asking for more rights and better conditions and salaries".

Yes, where the "union activists and unruly workers" represent the rival armed group.

Re: Banana giant Chiquita held liable by US court for funding paramilitaries

#222

Post by lstodd »

phs318u wrote: post #120
caf wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anyone who has ever worked for a medium-large corporation will have done the inevitable employee training that, among many other things, tells you that "no, you cannot pay bribes or facilitation payments in another country even if it's normal and expected there, and yes you and us can still be prosecuted at home for that" .

Which can be code for: “We have specialists[0] for sensitive in-country negotiations.” [0]. Arms-length, third-party, paper-trail-negative contractors.

so very true

Re: Banana giant Chiquita held liable by US court for funding paramilitaries

#223

Post by mavili »

barbarr wrote: post #195
sensanaty wrote: post #194

The punishment being fines is criminal in and of itself. Everyone involved needs to be locked away for a long, long time, not have to pay pennies as "punishment"

Also if you take a step back, it's more like the US is getting a cut of the $, almost like profit sharing.

US is the same country that kills Iraqi civilians and requests money for the bullets from the Iraqi government that they control indirectly.

US is an evil empire.

Re: Banana giant Chiquita held liable by US court for funding paramilitaries

#224

Post by pjc50 »

Log_out_ wrote: post #159
advisedwang wrote: post #45

The 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 c…

what?

Re: Banana giant Chiquita held liable by US court for funding paramilitaries

#225

Post by pjc50 »

fuzztester wrote: post #123
digging wrote: post #60

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.

Also this, right in the USA: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Overpass Mentioned here too: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Ford

> In the aftermath, Ford Motor Company attempted to control the narrative by destroying news photographs onsite

America's own micro Tianamen. Private sector, of course.

Re: Banana giant Chiquita held liable by US court for funding paramilitaries

#226

Post by verisimi »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #219
verisimi wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Murder vs manslaugher vs self defence vs execution vs being stabbed by a soldier is a good lens into law. (Or, to be provocative, eating meat.) Very good! I think these are all interpretations of the same type of event. Do you know the Russell conjugation?

> these are all interpretations of the same type of event Sure. But legally--and culturally--very different. If someone doesn't see that, they probably shouldn't be commenting on the law. (Practically speaking, they probably aren't.)

Right. We are talking about social conventions, not right or wrong. This is plain when we see that the same action can be legal in one country, and a serious crime in another. It's simply the rules of the game, no different to Scrabble or poker. How the individual engages with the culture/game is their business. Similarly, if an individual is able to direct the creation of rules in their favour, why shouldn't they?

Re: Banana giant Chiquita held liable by US court for funding paramilitaries

#227

Post by pjc50 »

stavros wrote: post #180
ToucanLoucan wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you aware of the history of labor organizing in the states...? Not meant as an attack, I'm genuinely wondering. Strike breakers routinely killed people, destroyed property, cars would have sticks of dynamite chucked into them, and famously the coal miners blew up a fucking bridge. I think people tend to think that modern politics is how all politics was done and... nah. Before we had more robust judicial, communi…

> Are you aware of the history of labor organizing in the states...? No, I'm not. It sounds like a very interesting read, though. I don't think those things tended to happen over here, beyond mafia-style illegal dealings.

Americans get taught a weird fictionalized version of their own history where political violence ended at the Civil War, conveniently overlooking anything that might be awkward to explain in the present day. Little things like General MacArthur opening fire on veterans https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonus_Army ; MOVE bombings; Tulsa massacre https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/jun/12/tuls... ; the general high levels of violence in the civil rights era; lynching, and so on.

The Pinkerton detective agency has a long history of being the go-to contractors for corporate violence against labour organisers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinkerton_(detective_agency)

Re: Banana giant Chiquita held liable by US court for funding paramilitaries

#228

Post by wil421 »

mavili wrote: post #223
barbarr wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also if you take a step back, it's more like the US is getting a cut of the $, almost like profit sharing.

US is the same country that kills Iraqi civilians and requests money for the bullets from the Iraqi government that they control indirectly. US is an evil empire.

Article III of The Hague convention:

“ (III): Convention relative to the Opening of Hostilities[26][27] This convention sets out the accepted procedure for a state making a declaration of war. It provides the basis on which, in international law, war reparations may be demanded.”

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hague_Conventions_of_1899_an...

Re: Banana giant Chiquita held liable by US court for funding paramilitaries

#229

Post by JumpCrisscross »

verisimi wrote: post #226
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> these are all interpretations of the same type of event Sure. But legally--and culturally--very different. If someone doesn't see that, they probably shouldn't be commenting on the law. (Practically speaking, they probably aren't.)

Right. We are talking about social conventions, not right or wrong. This is plain when we see that the same action can be legal in one country, and a serious crime in another. It's simply the rules of the game, no different to Scrabble or poker. How the individual engages with the culture/game is their business. Similarly, if an individual is able to direct the creation of rules in their favour, why shouldn't they?

> the same action can be legal in one country, and a serious crime in another

Social constructs are socially constructed. Given social systems are heterogenous, this variation is far from profound. (It’s almost corollary.)

> no different to Scrabble or poker

In the way Duplos and dielectric physics are the same.

> if an individual is able to direct the creation of rules in their favour, why shouldn't they?

One usually can’t.

Re: Banana giant Chiquita held liable by US court for funding paramilitaries

#230

Post by wil421 »

hi-v-rocknroll wrote: post #212

Merely a sliver of the total suffering through coups, wars, and corporate exploitation imposed on Central and South American countries in the spirit of America's Monroe Doctrine colonialism project spanning 200 years.

[flagged]
Post reply on HN