To: Carl who wrote (6656 ) 3/10/1998 1:58:00 AM From: flightlessbird Read Replies (1) | Respond to
Carl: There are many forms of confidence. Passive confidence has never been a part of my lifestyle. I am a curious (to me anyway) blend of emotion. When I feel something I express it. I respect those that maintain a passive confidence. KRY's executives do and it is for the great benefit of KRY and its shareholders. I would probably make a poor KRY executive. LOL If I were attacked personally by Assensio, no telling what blankety-blank words I would have used. As for your misinterpretation of my expression as a sign insecurity and weakness, I suppose you are entitled to your opinion. I can only respond that you are wrong. Flat wrong. My "insecurity" would not lead to the decision I made this morning to clear out funds elsewhere in my portfolio to pick up additional shares of KRY throughout the week during dips. Again, you are entitled to read what you will into my personality. You are simply one person. I feel comfortable that the clear majority of people do not share your views on my feelings. As for your commentary regarding the Solvex litigation piece I attached, I'm beginning to feel like if I handed you the CSJ 4th ruling itself, you would say "how do I know that is Judge Gomez's real signature". And if I handed you a picture of her signing the document, you would say "how do I know this photograph isn't computer enhanced". And if I flew you out to Venezuela and set up a meeting with Judge Gomez to confirm the ruling, you would ask me "how much did you pay her to say that?" C'mon Carl, this isn't a court of law. We use our best judgment and do the best we can. I don't think anyone can prove anything "beyond a reasonable doubt" here but the circumstantial evidence against Assensio sure is stacked. In my opinion of course. And isn't this a forum for sharing opinions? I am not offering proof. I am offering opinions based on what CAN be acquired. The agnostic is always the worst opponent in a debate because he always responds with "but nobody can really KNOW that". Carl, I could turn around and refute EVERY SINGLE STATEMENT MADE BY ANYBODY ON THIS THREAD ON THE GROUNDS THAT THEY HAVEN'T RESEARCHED THEIR POINT OUT EXHAUSTIVELY. I don't. Rarely in a court of law do you even find such certainty. You will likely be shot by your fellow jurors if you ever serve on a 12 man panel jury. LOL As any jury does, you must weigh the credibility of the witnesses though you can't know for sure. You must weigh the intent behind the documents though you can't know for sure. You must piece together what facts are presented though there certainly could be others. It's imperfect, but it's 10x better and more productive than doing nothing. As you have done.
