Paul, with respect, just because the UKDFDF refuses to expose itself to your
particualr brand of a witch hunt hardly makes it secretive.
I also still fail to see where is your reasoning (and I use the term
lightly) you justify your claim that PAS is showing acceptance of the
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Barford" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, February 27, 2006 12:35 PM
Subject: Re: [BRITARCH] PAS website advertises UKDFD?
>> Paul, as Dan has asked these questions of the UKDFD I would hardly
>> that this indicates that the PAS has come to terms with them...
> Dan Pett's questions have little to do with the matter under question, and
> he stressed that he was asking for his own interest (as their IT person)
> rather than it being an official request for information. Some of the
> questions he could anyway answer himself by looking more carefully at the
> UKDFD website, as some of us have already done.
>> rather it would appear to me that the PAS is showing the intelligence to
>> and ask before casting sentence....
> We have all of us (PAS included) had since last September "to examine and
> ask". Many of us who "asked" (then and now) more often than not have had
> questions ignored or otherwise dismissed by the UKDFD Representatives. We
> have all witnessed this on PASF and Britarch. As to whether ignoring the
> questions at the time was an "intelligent" way to behave in the
> circumstances, I leave that up to you to reflect over.
> You will therefore forgive many of us for having severe reservations about
> secretive and obviously flawed organization which cannot answer even
> straightforward and simple questions with straight answers. UKDFD had its
> chance in September to dispel our misgivings and blew it, we have all
> sufficient chance to see what UKDFD does and does not represent.
> Paul Barford