You could start by not misrepresenting what I said. On no occasion have I never said that Microsoft is going to get "slapped with libel for its part in licensing software from SCO." I have said that Microsoft could get slapped with a huge libel suit — 11-digit numbers — should a "snitch" come forward with credible evidence that Microsoft and/or Gates personally was the source of funds behind the BayStar/RBC PIPE deal, or is the source of funds for institutional buys that have had the effect of propping up the SCO stock price while SCO insiders unload for cash. SCO's officers and directors have so far collected $43 million selling shares of a worthless company into a market populated entirely by institutions who are fronting for "clients." Maybe Microsoft has nothing to do with shoveling money at SCO. Maybe they do. They certainly have motive, opportunity, and means. But we'll never know for sure unless someone spills beans that are not normally spilled. Should that happen however, Microsoft will have been caught funding a truly rancid trade libel effort directed at its competitors. I would assume that IBM, Red Hat, and many others would blacken the skies with lawyers if that happens. But I admit it's a big "if." None of the principals are going to talk. It'll be some secretary or bookkeeper or under-assistant deputy lawyer who squawks... if anyone does.
There is enough stuff on the record now to charge SCO with securities fraud. Whether they ever get charged or not is in the hands of the SEC. I don't run the SEC.
Nicky, I think you've got enough if's in there to cover your arse. You may have set a record for conditionals. Congrats... That was downright clintonian!
For reference, your original claim...
I don't know why you won't take up Bush2000 on that wager... Look at it this way: In the off-chance you win, you might actually have some credibility around here.