4 ms·
I'm not quite sure what your motivation in stating this is, so I'll ask plainly: What are you trying to imply with this statement? That it would have been of gr
by packetized 10y ago
I'm not quite sure what your motivation in stating this is, so I'll ask plainly: What are you trying to imply with this statement? That it would have been of greater value had he taken up this cause in the Thatcher years?
- peterwwillis 10y agoRe-read my reply.
- packetized 10y agoI have, several times. It still doesn't answer my sincere question, nor does it make your apparent criticism look any less venal.
- peterwwillis 10y ago> I have, several times. It still doesn't answer my sincere question, nor does it make your apparent criticism look any less venal. Your 'sincere question' is followed by saying I am criticizing his statement and that I am apparently doing it as part of a bribe or in exchange for some influence. If you can't understand my statement, or my clarification of my statement, based on the biased tone of your questioning, it is clear no further explanation I could give would satisfy you, unless it was admitting some form of deceit or untoward hidden agenda. But, instead of answering your question, I can at least correct your disingenuous accusation. I wasn't implying anything at all. I stated directly, twice, exactly what I meant. There was no hidden meaning or insinuation. And i'd appreciate it if in the future you could prevent yourself from attempting to derail someone's point of view with your own false assumptions.