Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (162603)	5/19/2005 6:31:15 PM
From: Sun Tzu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Ok my last word on this. Here are the problems with the bribe theory: (1) nobody has found the money (2) nobody has shown that the named corporation in oil ministry paper belongs to Galloway. (3) the authenticity and/or context of that document is questionable, especially given the forgeries that have been found so far. (4) Assuming you can prove items 1-3, then you can make an educated accusation. Here as well as in the court, the pattern of conduct means a lot. If I have a history of curing people for free and then one of my patients gives me a gift after treatment, that is a charitable contribution. But if I never lifted a finger to help anyone unless I got paid, then this "gift" is payment no matter what anyone says. In our case Galloway continued on the same path he had been for a long time, so even if you prove 1-3 he did not take bribe.