There you go stamping your foot like the petulant child you are. Now here this, the question has been answered over and over again. Go back and reread the Fishes posts and try to comprehend them. Might be better if you got a grown up to help you.
OK; let's start by correcting the spelling:- Now hear
this . . . . go back and re-read TheFish's
posts . . . "
I read every word of the voluminous posts made by TheFish, and I understand everything he wrote. He wrote of a multiplicity of matters dealing with the return of 3801, and the relevant authorities, and governance thereof. He stoutly defended the appointment of Mr Lowry. At no stage did I question or criticise Mr Lowry's appointment. To again make the point of all my posts - I wanted ( and still do ) to know exactly what Mr Lowry will do to speed up the return of 3801. TheFish has said what he can on that question, but it took a very long time, and used a huge amount of words ( something on which Graham4405 agreed with me ). I have never found it necessary to question or remark upon TheFish's intellectual capacity - it may be better than mine; it may not, and the question is irrelevant.
I would be interested in your explanation of how TheFish blew me and "the other idiot" (whoever that may be) out of the water. The Fish comes across as a very courteous man in his writings, and I will admit that he outdid me on that score. I was a little "less than parliamentary" on a couple of occasions, and I will happily apologise if I offended him.
Your latest contribution to the debate has been a bit of high quality, badly-spelt sniping, and I am curious to know why you bothered.