sort it out axiom, page-68

mboose, I appreciate what you are saying, especially your observations about Axiom's possible or alleged involvement in corrupt activities and the consequences that could follow. However, I believe you are getting distracted with all of the "smoke" blowing by generated by nothing more than suspicons.

These are the facts:

1. Axiom signed a 50 year lease over the Kolosori land on Isabel. The lease is with the LAWFUL land owners - end of story. No suspicions or allegations surrounding this.

2. There are no suspicions attached to the issuing of the Letter of Intent, which allowed Axiom to go off and find the lawful landowners and sign Surface Access Agreements with them.

3. Axiom comes back the following day with a signed Surface Access Agreement because all the ground work had already been done (locating the land owners, entering into discussions, etc). The Minister issued the prospecting licence that day, as he HAD to in accordance with the law. No ifs or buts. This is where the suspicions arise.

My point is, there is no opportunity for corruption to arise in the process of issuing the prospecting licence once the Surface Access Agreement was obtained. The Minister had to issue it.

Its a whole other story if the Minister had a choice or discretion to issue or not issue the prospecting licence or if he had to choose between Axiom and another company. In these circumstances, I agree there is an opportunity for corrupt activities to occur in order to procure the issuing of the prospecting licence.

I think its important to make your decisions based upon facts and circumstances that you can judge (i.e. legislation, OFFICIAL company response) not unsubstantiated rubbish you read on the internet.