Just so I understand...
I sign a purchace agreement to buy a house, and then the sale falls through for whatever reasons.
Would you argue that I didn't 'seek' to buy this house??
Just curious...
Posted by CH Truth at May 9, 2006 07:28 AMCH,
>> "I sign a purchace agreement to buy a house, and then the sale falls through for whatever reasons. Would you argue that I didn't 'seek' to buy this house??"
No I wouldn't. Unfortunately, the uranium allegation didn't follow the fairy tale that you have described. The IC did not publish evidence saying that the alleged uranium sale "fell through". For a signed purchase agreement to "fall through", that agreement should have been signed and completed in the first place. How does something that never happened, "fall through"? It doesn't.
Posted by eriposte at May 9, 2006 07:41 AMI'd say that your argument is one of semantics... but that might be giving it too much credit.
Posted by CH Truth at May 9, 2006 09:16 AMUh - what part of This is the next part of a series (see Introduction, Part 1, Part 2, Part 2-1) examining the origins of the "bought" v. "sought" semantics of the uranium from Africa allegation. did you not understand, Cornholio? It was the first line of the frikkin' post!
You're out of your league here, and your ignorance should be embarrassing to you. But then, you're backing a 31% failure, so obviously you have no personal pride.
Posted by iamcoyote at May 9, 2006 09:34 AM