Lead,
Obviously the CASA CEO and the head of OAR haven't read you chaps forensic dissection of the legislation, and are still working under the misapprehension that the US NAS is the primary model.
Cute old fruit.
Given that you
could not answer my post on the
lack of direction in either the Act, Regulation or Statement (
post #427) regarding US NAS, and there is none, I find your approach most disappointing. I did not put you in the category of the Great Benefactor and regarded your contributions as a bit more positive; and honest. Argument 'won on merit' comes to mind.
However, the statement above is a shocker. In short, you are quite happy for the CEO of CASA and the head of the OAR to work under
the misapprehension that the US NAS is the primary model.
And before you jump in, you could not refute my assertions regarding Act, Regulation or Statement intent. However, to achieve your aims you seem to be willing to ignore
fact, accept 'misapprehension,' and use that
'misapprehension' to secure your aims.
Deductive reasoning
Lead: You cannot refute
post #427, otherwise you would have two-days ago; you are willing to perpetuate the myth that NAS is the end-state; and, furthermore, you are happy to have senior officials of CASA act in a state of 'misapprehension' to achieve your goals.
If you can defeat my argument at
post #427, my position is is
destroyed.
Do it Lead. If you can't, then your credibility, IMHO, ain't what I thought it was.