Whats this about 2 on the list?
That must be me and one of the other guys who owns Hotel India then I
guess!!!
Who else here has (or will definitly) write to Graham Newby?
If we can get at least a dozen of us and tell him that we will raise this as
a serious question at the PFA AGM, it may set him into action.
I for one felt that the reply I got from him was a 'stock reply' - cut and
paste from a 'we're really not interested as you have to be a PFA member to
own a permit aircraft so you can't vote with your feet!' file.
----- Original Message -----
From: "R Holder" <rholder@avnet.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Europa-List: PFA Feedback
>
>> I have been just as pissed off that KW is getting
>> photo's ANYWHERE, not just in PF [ I would bet real
>> money he IS getting money from the PFA] , and there
>> are DOZENS of you out there , who I have spoken with
>> recently, who feel the same. HOW ABOUT ANOTHER FORM OF
>> ATTACK ? Whether he is getting money for the photo's,
>> it is a comercial venture he is operating, do we know
>> anyone in the C.A.A. who can look into the legality of
>> useing PFA Permit aircraft, and C.A.A. non public
>> transport cat' aircraft for aerial work ? I know of
>> many ''sorties'' carried out in the Europa
>> demonstrators, if he ever recieved ANY money for ANY of
>> those photo's, can we ''get the ba**ard'' ? You can
>> also be sure, he will be at Kemble this year, and the
>> PFA will take his photo's, unless we can get enough
>> members to make enough noise ? At the AGM, can someone
>> propose that KW's work is vetoed, and get enough
>> members there to force that through ? Let's pull
>> together on this ? Cheers, Nev.
>
> Hi Nev and the rest of those concerned about KW.
>
> I also had a swift reply from Newby also telling me that
> KW isn't paid for the photos. However that is "spin".
> [Spin is the art of making a statement which sounds true
> but which cannot be proven one way or the other]. There is
> no way we can be sure that KW isn't paid.
>
> Another example of spin was when he replied to someone
> implying that that respondent was the second person on the
> list complaining about it. Unless there is a way to
> promulgate who has written in, the powers that be can say
> things like that and no-one knows whether it is true or
> not. I hope he doesn't repeat the "2 now on the list"
> comment to anyone else - because we have got him if he
> does as there have been at least four on this list
> reporting that they have complained.
>
> I also see KW has the cover of the June PFA magazine also.
>
> Richard Holder
> G-OWWW - High Cross #51
>
>
>
|