CHAIRPERSON
It may have been condoned but I'm not talking about whether it was rightly condoned or wrongly condoned, I'm looking at the acts that were committed and I'm trying to wrestle with whether those acts can be interpreted in terms of the Act as being related to a political objective.  The evidence that we've heard so far, at least on these two murders, leave me in grave doubt whether they can be described directly as being motivated by a political objective.   For example, the purchase of the diamonds was not political, is that correct?