Comments by a true partisan.
What were the "standards that were far higher " that supposedly applied to Tanbreez? That's not how governments are meant to work so maybe you would care to enlighten us as to the additional hurdles you had to jump.
I think even you should acknowledge (but you won't) that before GGG/ETM had the rug pulled from under it by a cabal of just 3-4 IA members, it had met all the legislative requirements asked of it.
You're not a total moron (credit where credit is due) and in some respects, I do agree with you about some GGG/ETM management decisions.
Before the IA election victory, the GGG/ETM management was on a roll and foolishly introduced the tetchy subject of uranium mining into the mix of elements that they wanted to exploit before they had secured their exploitation licence. They should have stayed mum bacuae this gave IA a handy agenda to take to the election which they were able to exploit and win. But. I still don't think they would have got there without the intervention of the U.S. who were keen to derail the mine because of China's interests.
I thought at the time that GGG/ETM were far too cocky and should have stuck to the mantra of rare earths mining, leaving the prospect Uranium mining to be negotiated at a later date after they had secured an exploitation licence.
They realised their mistake post-election and tried to backtrack, and I believe this is why John Mair walked the plank.
We are now were we are, and the court case or Donald Trump will determine the outcome. Which ever comes first.
Add to My Watchlist
What is My Watchlist?
