Reply #184: I'm glad you're not one to pass judgement

[mobuto]

As for Harken, Harken bought a small Soros concern with Harken stock. Soros then sold the Harken stock he received as payment. We're talking about a very small amount of money, by Soros standards. And as for BCCI, you're trying to make a case of third-hand guilt by association:

Not that Soros had anything to do with any BCCI misdeeds; not that anybody Soros was associated with had anything to do with BCCI; but people you associate with people you associate with Soros were criminals.

And in my book that's just plum silly.

But insider trading is insider trading.

No it isn't. You have to look at the circumstances if you want to maintain intellectual honeasty. The fact is that the circumstances surrounding Soros' conviction are murky, to say the least. People familiar with the case tell me that they believe the prosecution was politically motivated. That doesn't mean Soros is innocent, but it puts his conviction in a different light.

There's one other distinction - Soros was convicted in France, where securities laws are very different than they are here. I'm not going to pretend I'm an expert on comparative securities law, but I would not be surprised if his goings-on would have been legal if committed in the good old US of A.