you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (7 children)

In this case, I can believe that Chiquita didn't set out to finance the AUC, but was unfortunate in that their banana plantations fell into AUC-controlled territory, and therefore were extorted for protection money.

It's like if I owned an Italian restaurant, the mafia comes in and extorts me for protection money, then the feds come and arrest me for financing the mafia. What was I supposed to do?

edit: I didn't know about Chiquita. Thanks for the replies and info!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 2 years ago

    No, it's like if you owned a massive chain of Italian restaurants that notoriously exploited people, and you were actively paying the mafia to intimidate your workers and to bust unions.

    The judge saw through Chiquita's ridiculous fabrication, I'm disappointed to see you parroting it here.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)