That's the opposite of a fact.FACT: you said that Oakeshott never asked a question
Just get on with the explanation.Oh, and now he did ask a question didn't he - so which is it?...did he or didn't he?Please explain why you consider his question to be a warning, bearing in mind that it isn't one.
So what? What was the response, and why do you regard the response as unsatisfactory?But he also asked other questions regarding the Icelandic situation
Is that "warning" recorded in Hansard?... and warned that "Alarm bells were ringing all over about the Icelandic banks and the Treasury must have been blind and deaf not to hear them."
And when you've finished imagining contradictions in my posts that don't exist, perhaps you'll find time to actually answer the questions I've asked you.