Please, I ask you again, stop putting words in my mouth (or fingers on the keyboard, as the case may be.) I did not say he was "lying." I said that it would be foolish for an officer of a corporation to state that a Federal agency was in cahoots with pharmaceutical companies, without concrete proof thereof. Or, do you think that libel and slander are okay, and that it's better to express any opinion someone may or may not have with no proof, said opinion being one that would torpedo the company's chances of rebuilding a relationship that was torpedoed by a big-mouthed CEO already?

It is possible to point out that no reputable CEO (see, I just excluded Nader) would publicly bash the FDA, without making the assumption that this means that CEO is lying. He may believe it; he may be diplomatic as the representative of the company; or he may not have enough data to state an opinion on something, especially in his role as the PUBLIC FACE OF THE COMPANY.