How many reports and/or verifications do you need? Let's look at the chronology. Guido's report was a verification of the Trites Report which was a verification of the Viscarra Report which was a verification of the U.N. Report which was a verification of the report done for Cambiol when Guido was their primary geologist. I ask you again, rjbac, how many f---ing reports do you want? What is the magic number? (I wonder, how many times a day you pinch an arm, verifying your own existence?).
RE. Terry Turner "hyping" and/or "commiting fraud": How can you classify the lone act of releasing the results of a commissioned report under the heading of hype? Terry Turner simply announced the results of a study conducted by an independent geologist. Do you hear me? ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS !! In terms elementary enough for you to comprehend, Terry Turner stated (and I'm paraphrasing), "Guido says there is X amount of gold in the area surveyed". The study reported indications of unusually high gold content in Cangalli!! And that is ALL Mr. Turner said! As you obviously consider yourself something of an authority on torts, please cite for me law or laws denying or making criminal the action of a US citizen or the officer of a US company releasing the results of a report they have no reason to doubt or suspect to be fraudulent.
Re. principals, past and/or present, of GE going to prison in the wake of the current SEC action: The current complaint is a CIVIL SUIT and not, I repeat, NOT a criminal action. Familiarize yourself, "counselor", with the differences and attending penalties. While you're at it, you may also want to research the SEC's guidelines and sampling requirements for mineral reserves to be categorized, "Proven".
I must ask you, rjbac, have you read Guido's report (or ANY of the geological reports)? Have you done your own study, taken your own samples or been on site in Cangalli? Have you spoken with Terry Turner, Guido Paravaccini, Ron Knittle or Mary Erickson? If not, you're no more credible in your assessment of these people and this situation than the critic who publishes reviews of motion pictures he's never seen or books he's never read.
I'll give you one thing, rjbac, you are wonderfully adept at throwing mud at and weaving threads of false enuendo into situations whose realities are readily self evident to those who care to observe objectively and look past their own self interests. You missed your calling. You could be frying bigger fish in DC working for Clinton as a member of his cast of slimeball attorneys and assorted spinmeisters. Your unique talents are being wasted here! |
