It's real, in the news in Hungary we can often read about action for damages lawsuits by American Jewish interest groups suing the Hungarian state, the owner of the successor companies of the Hungarian State Ralways with allegations that they actively contributed in the holocaust, by assisting deportations of Jews. In total their demands sum up to multi-billion dollars. It is real. We can also read about that they are at many points, armed with pretty much distorted historical data, and if you bring it down to employees of the railway company, Hungary can prove that there's no data on railway workers providing any kind of violent assistance... The Jewish are claiming away a sum close to Hungary's yearly budget, it sounds crazy but it's true.

Maybe the decision on the tender was split between multiple independent leaders, just like business processes relevant to the same purchase order/investments are nowadays purposely isolated (like according to the methodologies that the Sarbanes-Oxley act implies), to decrease corruption and increase transparency, so Cisco might argue that the deciders one by one were deciding about this without seeing the full picture... So when they get to know about it, it's done already and they can easily ignore the distributed guilt, saying "I have just talked to that officer about setting up the software on our equipment", "I've just installed the front-end software and set up the IP ranges they've told me" etc..., or they might even argue that they were totally misinformed about what kind of group they really have to surveil on, and the stuff was ready and handed over by the time they realized that it's against a peaceful group (which I think can even turn out to be possible). I wouldn't blame the whole Cisco company, instead I would carefully find the particular employee (if there is any) who was well informed about the plan, and only prosecute him/her. Because every business communication at companies like Cisco should be transparent, especially international ones, they surely can find something that points to a certain few people. If they can't, they should look for black holes in this transparency and raise concerns against those, and go for signs of white collar corporate crime. Would you feel guilty say as an IT pro of a company like say Union Carbide, if you would have been helped (say) a HR executive employee as a part of a bigger shake-up project, to set up the new stuff on her PC, who - imagine - a day later had fired 10 maintenance workers according data in the new system, that had led to training issues of the new employees failing to do their jobs well at the Bhopal plant, leading to the industrial disaster?

And what about the knife manufacture who regularly creates this same knife with the same description, without specifying the certain target, or they just specify a technically identical vertebrate as the target - and the shopkeeper is an expert on his products, as we expect him to be... ?? Is this considered as an active contribution to a criminal act?