The Union Carbide subsidiary was majority owned by the parent company. The minority owner (about 49%) was the gov of India. It was run locally. When teh plant was built it was a long distance from habitation and the gov was supposed to keep it that way. Instead, bribery allowed squatters to live outside the fence. Also, the gov failed to enforce rules and regs for safety and so forth. The parent company in the USA turned blind-eye on the local management team (Indian) and didn't insist on following safety procedures.

At trial, the parent company was found to be responsible to a large degree and was forced to pay compensation to India and the gov of India was supposed to distribute the compensation.

Not that the gov of India was corrupt or anything.

One difference between UC and Al Queda that thoughtful folks may wish to consider is that UC wasn't malevolently intent on murdering innocents.

Just a thought.

Botnst