Blindly following the Prime Directive

No - not the one from Star Trek - that one that drives the corporate world; and in the corporate world the Prime Directive is "maximise shareholder value". For an example one need go no further than Sherry Williams's testimony before a Senate hearing. Ms. Williams is a Vice President and Company Secretary of Halliburton. She was questioned as to the company's business deals with Iran despite laws preventing US companies from just such dealings. Ms. Williams mantra was "we have followed U.S. law...We will continue to follow U.S. law."

Ethical considerations? "We have followed U.S. law."

Aiding and abetting terrorists? "We have followed U.S. law."

Patriotism? "We have followed U.S. law."

Why, as US law gives corporations the status of persons, should Halliburton not be prosecuted, as a person, under anti-terror legislation of assisting terrorists. If that fails the company could simply be "extraordinarily rendered" to parts unknown where it could be "aggressively interrogated". Or does the recognition of corporations as persons under American (and British) law extend only as far as rights and not as far as responsibilities?

Perhaps it is time that I reread this.