Some wonderful, thoughtful posts. But the REALITY is that in Africa and much of the third world it is SOP AND politically correct. So American business finds itself at a disadvantage at the hands of the FBI at a time when we desparately need to export. That disgusts and offends me, regardless of who is in office. And the whole thing, as it has been laid out here, stinks to high heaven of entrapment. I would like to hear more about who in Africa the FBI was impersonating and what it has cost the taxpayer.

quote:

Originally posted by JohnHunt:
Wonder what the chinese equivalant to that law is?

probably a 7.62 x39 round in the head!

Why do people get so self-righteous? All governments have issues with corruption. It is ridiculous to claim that US does not have an inherent corrupt political & business systems. It is even more ridiculous to claim some how that one party is corrupt & the other is not. I googled & found this http://www.google.co.nz/search...uption&start=10&sa=N

Some of it is rubbish but a lot the info is eye popping & scary. Neither Fox nor CNN will report such details & facts. But Fox news does rant & rave about others being corrupt.

quote:

But Fox news does rant & rave about others being corrupt.

Specifics? Just a question.

quote:

Don, first of all, I was talking about Law Enforcement, not politics. YOU gave it the political flavor.

Is this a record? That's the first time I have ever seen Don post in the African Big Game Hunting Forum.

quote:

Originally posted by jetdrvr:

quote:

Don, first of all, I was talking about Law Enforcement, not politics. YOU gave it the political flavor.

Is this a record? That's the first time I have ever seen Don post in the African Big Game Hunting Forum.

Come to think of it, you're right. No wonder Donnie thought my comments were political.

In contrast to the vast majority of threads on AR, this one has a few of the most ill-considered - if not moronic - posts I've read in a while. Perhaps this is because of the political overtones that have somehow been injected into a seemingly innocuous news story. Whatever the reason, I finally had to post my thoughts.

"I will not lie, cheat, or steal, and I will not tolerate those that do." An honor code held dear by many Americans but apparently not understood or subscribed to by some on this thread.

First, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act is an essential tool to ensure that American businesses are competing on an equal footing. All too often large and frequently less capable firms use their financial wherewithal to bribe their way into winning overseas RFPs or tender offers. This adversely effects all Americans because corrupt, incompetent companies can put out of business those that are ethical and well-run. And with money going to bribes instead of services or products, American business gets a black eye whenever a corrupt company fails to deliver.

If that's not enough, turning a blind eye to bribery has shown that corruption increases and the bribes escalate in the future - to the point that in some countries over 50% of a contract was diverted as 'baksheesh' or bribe money. That drives down margins and leads to reduced competition. Were our country to countenance bribery and other corrupt practices in foreign trade, we would see a degradation of the prestige of the US 'brand' - perhaps our greatest asset when competing against foreign companies. For those who argue that the US should adopt the same moral approach to business as China, France, or New Zealand: Are you really that cynical about the American way of doing business that you feel we need to cheat in order to succeed?

Second, the people of the country affected by these bribes are themselves being cheated. Instead of receiving the service their government is paying for, they instead have large portions of a contracting fee going to line the pockets of their officials instead. Were the practice of bribery legal for American companies to engage in, citizens of these countries would rightfully blame the US government for sanctioning a practice that steals from them. And in the developing world, it is often foreign governments like the US that help protect the interests of people otherwise being poorly served by their respective governments.

The argument that other countries competing with the US turn a blind eye to corruption and therefore we should as well is both specious and morally bankrupt: "Everyone else lies/cheats/steals so we should, too." I wonder what kind of parenting some of you folks had who find cheating and stealing so inoffensive and easy to rationalize? One particularly adroit law-and-order type suggested that we should instead be arresting corrupt Democrats rather than corrupt 'industry types'. Hmmm, now there's an interesting approach to legal justice! Any other favored persons that can be exempted from - or targeted for - prosecution?

My guess is that most of those who argue that the FCPA is a 'stupid law' have either never competed overseas for a contract, or if they have, are themselves dishonest.

And this finally leads to those that have described FBI SAs as "Famous But Incompetent", "ass wipes", "out of control", "unsupervised", "unaccountable", "inexcusable", "bunch of revenuers", "another way for wyatt erp to get into the headlines", etc. When LEOs do their job, as they appear to have done in this case, it's to be expected that wannabes, would-have-beens, cop-haters, militia loonies, and other fringe-types are going to criticize them for their success. It's interesting to me how they are also among the first to voice their disgust when an arrest isn't made and an investigation fails. The fact is that most of those who so easily savage the FBI (or CIA or police) for doing their job have never sworn the oath, pinned on a badge, strapped on a weapon, and voluntarily faced the life-threatening uncertainty that is the lot of law enforcement every day.

It's pretty simple folks: 1) As Americans we should always strive to live up to the highest moral standards in both business and government, at home and abroad; 2) Lying, cheating, and stealing are never justified, even if others might; 3) Law enforcement should enforce all laws with neither prejudice nor preference. How radical is that?

KPete

As a person living and trying to survive in a country where these practices are devastating our economy, moral fibre and robbing us of good leadership I appreciate your stance.

These practices keep the poorest of the poor in abject poverty here in Africa and elsewhere, and in fact, this kind of situation becomes the breeding ground for the kind of stuff Americans are fearing the most in recent years.

quote:

The defendants allegedly agreed to pay a 20 percent commission to a sales agent

and this is bribery ?

that sounds to me like all of your retail outfitt's are in deep doo-doo then.

so if i sniff out a major custumor, make all the songs and dance, and secure the contract, i cant have my commision. this is good to know for all who deals with american company's.

best

peter

I would like to say a couple things. First I think perhaps it was my initial couple statements that got us headed down this path. Allthough some very good points have been made both pro and con I need to clarify my stance. First I have the utmost respesct for the leos in the field. These guys and gals are out there putting their lives on the line for us as a people every single day. They are easy targets for us to direct the anger and frusttration we feel to. This should never be the case in less of course they are doing someting that is corrupt.This frustration and agner stems from the frustration and anger we are feeling towards the poitical types that make and interpret how those laws will be applied. The problem I see is the law is not applied equally across everyone and it becomes self feeding. I dont like bribery but see it all the time outside the USA. At times it is a necessary evil. Somthing as simple to getting power turned on to a factory in a timely manner, Or getting all the permits needed to buy land,build a factory and start a buisness.The problem is our government uses this act against those they dont like. They tend to overlook these little and not so little faux pax in those who have political connections. It dosnt matter who is in power left or right, the game remains the same. The only thing that changes is whose ox gets gored this time.I still have to wonder what the motivation of those pulling the strings behind the scenes were? I would like to think it was something good. My true feeling was it probably wasnt. When you ignore the absolute buying of votes that has been going on in congress and clamp down on the bribery that was supposedly done here I have to question underlying motivation. All this said I despise bribery as such, but sometimes it is the only way to gain access to what is needed. To have this many companies and individuals caught up in a sting like this makes me question this whole thing. I guess it is ok if it is the various factions of the government doing the bribing.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Smith:
I would like to say a couple things. First I think perhaps it was my initial couple statements that got us headed down this path. Allthough some very good points have been made both pro and con I need to clarify my stance. First I have the utmost respesct for the leos in the field. These guys and gals are out there putting their lives on the line for us as a people every single day. They are easy targets for us to direct the anger and frusttration we feel to. This should never be the case in less of course they are doing someting that is corrupt.This frustration and agner stems from the frustration and anger we are feeling towards the poitical types that make and interpret how those laws will be applied. The problem I see is the law is not applied equally across everyone and it becomes self feeding. I dont like bribery but see it all the time outside the USA. At times it is a necessary evil. Somthing as simple to getting power turned on to a factory in a timely manner, Or getting all the permits needed to buy land,build a factory and start a buisness.The problem is our government uses this act against those they dont like. They tend to overlook these little and not so little faux pax in those who have political connections. It dosnt matter who is in power left or right, the game remains the same. The only thing that changes is whose ox gets gored this time.I still have to wonder what the motivation of those pulling the strings behind the scenes were? I would like to think it was something good. My true feeling was it probably wasnt. When you ignore the absolute buying of votes that has been going on in congress and clamp down on the bribery that was supposedly done here I have to question underlying motivation. All this said I despise bribery as such, but sometimes it is the only way to gain access to what is needed. To have this many companies and individuals caught up in a sting like this makes me question this whole thing. I guess it is ok if it is the various factions of the government doing the bribing.

So you pussed out with the politically correct talk?

Law enforcement, political types (vis a vis the hopeful dictators in the US), and the rest are not your friends, basically won't be happy, if ever, until everyone but themselves are in prison, will be the first ones there to kill their own family members for violating the rules of marshal law when that comes along, will do anything for their paychecks, and you respect that?

Does no one know about communism and dictators? Does that not ring a bell when Waco and Ruby Ridge and obamer are mentioned?

Or a Supreme Court that damn near ruled against free speech just last week?

Get a friggin' clue.

I agree with Will: hell, ATF still does not think they erred at Waco.

KP- How long is that extension ladder you are using to get up on your high horse? I'm thinking you must be an inside the beltway guy who knows little about a struggling business trying to make a deal where it is SOP to grease the skids. The arrogance of applying your puritanical American vision of morality to the third word is almost laughable, except I'm guessing you work for one of the agencies.

quote:

Originally posted by crane:
KP- How long is that extension ladder you are using to get up on your high horse? I'm thinking you must be an inside the beltway guy who knows little about a struggling business trying to make a deal where it is SOP to grease the skids. The arrogance of applying your puritanical American vision of morality to the third word is almost laughable, except I'm guessing you work for one of the agencies.

It's always amusing when miscreants, and those who side with them, get caught and called on their moral aberrations they invariably adopt the tactic of accusing their accusers. High horse? If that's the only vantage point where you can see right from wrong, I suggest you climb on one. Puritanical? If that's what you call someone who doesn't feel it's right to cheat or steal, I suggest you try it. Moral relativism has become increasingly in vogue because of views like yours, and the result is hero status for pimps, drug dealers, and gangsters.

As for me, while I was at one time a federal LEO, I've spent almost 15 years competing my firm against some of the largest US companies and multinationals in places like Africa, Latin America, and the Middle East. And I can tell you there is nothing more aggravating than to spend hundreds of manhours and tens of thousands of dollars competing on the straight and narrow only to lose to a less-qualified company that has applied your morally slippery approach to business and bribed an official. Corruption is a moral corrosive that does huge damage to both honest companies and the citizens that are cheated. Is being dishonest a requirement to succeed in your profession?

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Smith:
Somthing as simple to getting power turned on to a factory in a timely manner, Or getting all the permits needed to buy land,build a factory and start a buisness. The problem is our government uses this act against those they dont like. They tend to overlook these little and not so little faux pax in those who have political connections. It dosnt matter who is in power left or right, the game remains the same.

That's not the case, Mike. The FCPA does allow the payment of 'facilitation' fees that help to grease the skids for "routine governmental actions". The Act lists the following examples where fees are permissable: obtaining permits, licenses, or other official documents; processing governmental papers, such as visas and work orders; providing police protection, mail pick-up and delivery; providing phone service, power and water supply, loading and unloading cargo, or protecting perishable products; and scheduling inspections associated with contract performance or transit of goods across country.

Basically, what the Act does not allow is the payment of a fee or 'commission' (a common euphemism for a bribe) to the government officials that are responsible for selecting a vendor in a tender offer. Bear in mind that the person making (or authorizing) the payment must have a corrupt intent, and the payment must be intended to induce the recipient to misuse his official position to direct business wrongfully to the payer or to any other person.

Kidnapping ransoms are bribes, too. I suppose those who think that the FCPA, which prohibits paying bribes, is a bad policy would also agree that the policy of not paying ransom to kidnappers is a bad policy?

And as to the argument that the FCPA only disadvantages American companies, I suggest you reread the news article: "Charged are people at companies in eight U.S. states and executives at companies in the United Kingdom and Israel. Five defendants were identified in federal court in Las Vegas as British citizens. Two others were from Israel, and one was from Peru." Five Brits, two Israelies, and a Peruvian -- sounds like the long arm of American law is impacting more than just poor old American companies, isn't it?

What many people are overlooking is that quite a few Western nations have similar laws to the FCPA, and they enforce them pretty well. Remember former British PM Margaret Thatcher's son? Well, last I knew he was cooling his heels in prison for violations of similar British law.

Gato: Tell me that the bribe-payers aren't hurt by the practice of bribery the next time some foreign customs agent wants a hundred bucks to release your gun and bags at the airport. You gonna just add that to the cost of your "product"?

quote:

Gato: Tell me that the bribe-payers aren't hurt by the practice of bribery the next time some foreign customs agent wants a hundred bucks to release your gun and bags at the airport. You gonna just add that to the cost of your "product"?

Well, gee, and what do you suggest we do, turn him into the Feds for violating the FCPA? Give me a fucking break.......talk about comparing apples and oranges. And yes, if I'm going to one of those places where bribery is just ordinary business, then I factor that into whether I'll go or not, so that is included in my "costs". Don't like, don't go. Just like I personally don't go on hunting trips where thousands of extra dollars are required to hire private air to get you to the hunting locale. That's part of the "costs", and I choose not to pay them. Bribery gets bad enough, then the controlling factors will fix it if it hurts their pocketbook.

quote:

Kidnapping ransoms are bribes, too. I suppose those who think that the FCPA, which prohibits paying bribes, is a bad policy would also agree that the policy of not paying ransom to kidnappers is a bad policy?

You are badly mistaken if you think the FCPA covers ransoms, it does not and they are commonly paid by US, British, and other corporations all over the world.

I've used this example before as far as paying bribes go, but I'll repeat it briefly.

Let's assume you and a couple of other guys decide to drive down to Mexico for a few days of dove hunting.....you dot all the i's and cross all the t's, get across border, have gun permits, licenses, etc.........get stopped at a checkpoint by the Federales and they search the truck, finding a .308/.223 round that had slipped down behind the seat......after handcuffing you, the jefe in charge takes you aside and says something to the effect that, "Look, y'all seem like good guys, I know this was just a mistake, that you aren't really supplying ammo to the druggies, so you have a choice at this point, you can either pay me and my men something for our troubles and we'll just ignore the whole thing and let you go on to your hunting. A couple of hundred $US from each of you would be an appropriate amount."

Now, Mr. High Horse, do you pay the bribe and enjoy your hunt, albeit with a sour taste in your mouth, or do you say "Hell no, throw me in jail, confiscate my truck, etc. I'm an honest American citizen and I'm not paying a bribe. I'll take my legal medicine."

I'd like to see ANYONE in a sound mind take the second choice.

quote:

"I will not lie, cheat, or steal, and I will not tolerate those that do." An honor code held dear by many Americans but apparently not understood or subscribed to by some on this thread.

Yeah, right, let me know what you'd do. To repeat, give me a fucking break.

Yea for Gatogordo! Kpete, you make some long, intelligent looking posts, but I stopped reading them after the "honor code" line. Gee, what a bunch of Barbara Striesand!
And poor, old, liberal, Don. Adds nothing to the thread. Just kinda' slips a little Bush- bashin' under the door.........Grant.

quote:

Originally posted by Oldmodel70:
Just kinda' slips a little Bush- bashin' under the door.........Grant.

Surely the only thing ANY politician is good for is bashin'!

I don't think that there is any need to name call or make fun of someone's moral stance. I do, however, see the difference between gatogordo's scenario and a business bribing government officials for preferential treatment in obtaining contracts.

we have to give birthday gifts to minor government employees, in order, to expedite payments and change orders, which I freely admit is wrong; however, we do not bribe, in any way, anyone to obtain contracts. We have, in the past, had to complain to the VI Justice Department and the U.S. Attorneys office when we felt that we were being discriminated against, which usually corrected the issue.

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:
Kidnapping ransoms are bribes, too. I suppose those who think that the FCPA, which prohibits paying bribes, is a bad policy would also agree that the policy of not paying ransom to kidnappers is a bad policy?

And as to the argument that the FCPA only disadvantages American companies, I suggest you reread the news article: "Charged are people at companies in eight U.S. states and executives at companies in the United Kingdom and Israel. Five defendants were identified in federal court in Las Vegas as British citizens. Two others were from Israel, and one was from Peru." Five Brits, two Israelies, and a Peruvian -- sounds like the long arm of American law is impacting more than just poor old American companies, isn't it?

What many people are overlooking is that quite a few Western nations have similar laws to the FCPA, and they enforce them pretty well. Remember former British PM Margaret Thatcher's son? Well, last I knew he was cooling his heels in prison for violations of similar British law.

Gato: Tell me that the bribe-payers aren't hurt by the practice of bribery the next time some foreign customs agent wants a hundred bucks to release your gun and bags at the airport. You gonna just add that to the cost of your "product"?

So again... what about the Chinese?

Laws like this are great if everyone plays by the rules. But simply put one country at a disadvantage when they don't. Maybe this needs to be a WTO rule.

quote:

Originally posted by Gatogordo:
I've used this example before as far as paying bribes go, but I'll repeat it briefly.

Let's assume you and a couple of other guys decide to drive down to Mexico for a few days of dove hunting.....you dot all the i's and cross all the t's, get across border, have gun permits, licenses, etc.........get stopped at a checkpoint by the Federales and they search the truck, finding a .308/.223 round that had slipped down behind the seat......after handcuffing you, the jefe in charge takes you aside and says something to the effect that, "Look, y'all seem like good guys, I know this was just a mistake, that you aren't really supplying ammo to the druggies, so you have a choice at this point, you can either pay me and my men something for our troubles and we'll just ignore the whole thing and let you go on to your hunting. A couple of hundred $US from each of you would be an appropriate amount."

Now, Mr. High Horse, do you pay the bribe and enjoy your hunt, albeit with a sour taste in your mouth, or do you say "Hell no, throw me in jail, confiscate my truck, etc. I'm an honest American citizen and I'm not paying a bribe. I'll take my legal medicine."

Gato, you're describing an extortion or ransom not a bribe.

No Will I didnt puss out. I just saw this heading in a direction that I didnt intend. All the politcal types wether Leos or not are certainly not our friends. The rank and file leos are for the most part just like us. Hell they are us. They have no more use for the politicos than we do. I agree that there are those in this country who would sell their own family out to get what they want. Then there are the true believers. They are the ones to really fear. Great belief can bring great evil. When you think you are above everyone else you tend to hold everyone with disdain.
Kpete, This is where I dont agree with the law. A bribe is a bribe. Making a distinction between different types of bribes no matter what you call them makes no sense to me. I guess if the govt. wants to make a distinction that is up to them.

quote:

Originally posted by ForrestB:

quote:

Originally posted by Gatogordo:
I've used this example before as far as paying bribes go, but I'll repeat it briefly.

Let's assume you and a couple of other guys decide to drive down to Mexico for a few days of dove hunting.....you dot all the i's and cross all the t's, get across border, have gun permits, licenses, etc.........get stopped at a checkpoint by the Federales and they search the truck, finding a .308/.223 round that had slipped down behind the seat......after handcuffing you, the jefe in charge takes you aside and says something to the effect that, "Look, y'all seem like good guys, I know this was just a mistake, that you aren't really supplying ammo to the druggies, so you have a choice at this point, you can either pay me and my men something for our troubles and we'll just ignore the whole thing and let you go on to your hunting. A couple of hundred $US from each of you would be an appropriate amount."

Now, Mr. High Horse, do you pay the bribe and enjoy your hunt, albeit with a sour taste in your mouth, or do you say "Hell no, throw me in jail, confiscate my truck, etc. I'm an honest American citizen and I'm not paying a bribe. I'll take my legal medicine."

Gato, you're describing an extortion or ransom not a bribe.

Not in my opinion, if you pay it, it's a bribe.

Merriam-Webster:

bribe: 1. money or any other valuable consideration given or promised with a view to corrupting the behavior of a person, esp. in that person's performance as an athlete, public official, etc.: The motorist offered the arresting officer a bribe to let him go.

Gato: ForrestB said it well, that's extortion, not bribery. Just as if someone sticks a gun in your back and demands your wallet, surrendering your wallet upon threat of death shouldn't be confused with the practice of promoting and encouraging bribery by paying bribes.

The official who asks for a bribe, in return for a contract to build a bridge or for a boatload of wheat, is stealing from the people he is supposed to be representing. And the guy who pays the bribe to get the contract to build the bridge or sell the wheat is complicit in a crime against the people of the nation of the corrupt official.

Corruption starts at the top. If officials of an African country routinely demand and receive bribes for contracts for bridges or wheat, then you can bet that the guy with a badge at the airport will demand a bribe to stamp your passport or release your luggage.

Sure, there are corrupt business who may be outside of the reach of the FCPA and who may continue to pay bribes, but the FCPA has markedly reduced corruption in many countries, to the benefit of both their citizens and to Americans who travel there. If there's an African country you can travel to without being hit up for a bribe, you can in part thank the FCPA.

Johnhunt, In regards to your question about the Chinese, there are 2 versions. The official one is it is illegal and will be punished. The real version is it is an everyday occurence and often the only way to get things done. Since this is a "facilitation charge" according to our law supposedly it is ok. The Chinese have their fair share of this as well but nothing like what occurs in Africa.
Stonecreek, "If there's an African country you can travel to without being hit up for a bribe, you can in part thank the FCPA." To me there isnt one. Granted I am no expert on the subject but have been hit up for a bribe just about every place I have been in Africa.

Kpete- From your last post(miscreants) would I be correct in assuming you condone the business pratices of the large multinationals(Bectel for example)?

Does anyone have additional info as to just what the sting was soliciting? Are we talking about a few AR clips to Ghana or something more?

quote:

Stonecreek, "If there's an African country you can travel to without being hit up for a bribe, you can in part thank the FCPA." To me there isnt one. Granted I am no expert on the subject but have been hit up for a bribe just about every place I have been in Africa.

My only experience traveling in Africa has been in Namibia. No bribes were asked and none paid. Even our hunting guide seemed not to expect a tip (although one was bestowed) even after waiving the trophy fee on several animals as a gift to us. Maybe we were just lucky. Seemed like a friendly country to me.

Well, the local paper has news! Jacksonville was the home town of Armor Holdings, since bought by a British company (BAE systems). Armor holdings sells body armor among other items. The local paper (The Florida Times Union) reports today (Sunday) that 22 suppliers of body armor were arrested in an FBI sting. The paper specifically identifies Richard Bistrong, a former VP of International sales for Armor as being arrested and charged with one count of conspiring to induce officials of the UN to award contracts to his unidentified Jacksonville company.
It goes on to say that 22 executives and employees at arms and body armor suppliers to military and law enforcement agencies were arrested.
So there, it's just the UN, so you guys don't need to worry!
Peter.

quote:

Gato: ForrestB said it well, that's extortion, not bribery.

You're both dead wrong, that is not extortion (look it up), the hunters are guilty and could be convicted (and have been under similar cases not involving hunters). The payment would flat be a bribe to (see above def. of bribe) corrupt an official's behavior (that's a bribe) and that's that. Now, if they were not guilty, and the official threatened to plant some bullets on them unless they paid, THAT would be extortion.

Call it what you want, are you paying or losing your guns, truck, money, etc. and going to a Mexican jail?

quote:

It also allows companies from countries who are not so puritanical in their outlook to steal trillions of dollars in business that might have gone to US companies. China, India, Brazil, Japan, and France come to mind immediately.

Man, it's shocking.....but...... I gotta agree with El Gato here!

Gato, Spot on! To some of you others, let me introduce you to your new cell mate/girlfriend, El Puerco!

So the FBI was impersonating the UN? God help us all!

Has anyone noted my earlier post on US citizens paying to "adopt" children? This is nothing but trafficking in babies & the US has not signed the international agreement on this critical issue!! I am really surprised that the US does not have strict laws protecting children & preventing the payment of huge sums of money for them!

Naki, you've got to be kidding, right? These guys don't give a shit about trafficking in babies and children. They only care about African Hunting. As to signing an international agreement, man, that's giving up national sovereignty. That's akin to a world government! That's the UN running the world. That's worse than communism ! You don't need laws to take care of this problem. let the free market take care of it. When the price gets too high it will stop. No government intervention required!
Peter.

Curruption is sapping the progress of much of the Third World but I'm not sure entrapment and agents provocateurs is the answer. Such methods are thought of as poor form in many jurisdictions because they can make criminals out of previously innocent people.

We all have our price, the saying goes, and the modern corporate ethos seems to be to increase profits any way you can (thanks, banks!). Yes, the law is the law but I would want to see evidence that the people charged with these bribery offences had been involved in real instances of bribery as well before I'd feel comfortable with a conviction.

- Paul

quote:

Originally posted by Peter:
Armor Holdings, since bought by a British company (BAE systems).
Peter.

These companies NEVER learn. BAE has had major involvement in the arms procurment corruption allegations & charges occuring over some years here now, and still they carry on. Daimle Chrysler has also been involved.
Our president's good friend went to jail (albeit not for long) for what was termed "a generally corrupt relationship" with our president whisle he was still VP.

Google SA arms procurement corruption, with alternatively the names BAE, Daimler Chrysler, Shaik, Jacob Zuma etc.

I cannot begin to imagine how much South African money and skills have been wasted on this fiasco. We could have saved a few red data species with those resources !

Stephen, you may be right about BAE, but my understanding is that they are NOT involved in this series of arrests. I did not quote the entire article. Richard Bistrong was fired from his job at Armor Holdings before the BAE buyout. He then formed his own company and it is this company (and others) that are targets of the FBI investigation. Having said that, discussions of a plea deal suggest that perhaps after Mr. Bistrong was arrested, he assisted the FBI by implicating others to reduce his own sentence. I am afraid I don't understand your comment about "South African amoney and skills being wasted". Is there an RSA angle to this investigation?
Peter.