ok read some more - in all submissions there seems to be key...

ok read some more - in all submissions there seems to be key threads, grammatical, objection statements (not scientific ) repeated over and over again. these public submissions need to be analysed, my gut says they were prepared at a central point and given to people to submit. This is organised, organised crime, just putting it out there. I also note an article dated 04-05-2017 from the Canberra Times titled Business lodge identical submissions of support, (four letters of support received) more to the point Knight Frank stated that they did not send in any letter of support. The word is that Greg Cummins from Knight Frank opened his mouth to quick as the word is someone from his office did send it in, yes I can get on the phone and dig, dig, dig. Now what Clark Kent (Andrew Brown) from the Canberra Times didn't do was read every single submission, talk about rigged. Now the doosey of all this is a group called CPR, just read what they have submitted and a kook called Chris Klootwijk - now if you are going to draw a connection between four (professional) entities which prob did get together over a red wine or two and wanted to show their support and not draw the dots between a good proportion of the negative submissions and ask some serious questions, well CLARK KENT you are about as effective as MICKEY MOUSE.
Unfortunately the actions of a few nuts appear to have frightened some pollies (only a couple) in the ACT and this was heightened by a visit or talk with Beaman and the NSW EPA now including them as participants in Beamans objective to insure FOY failed in the ACT.
Still cant find the NSW EPA statement that they had "Rejected FOY's Application".
Still reading.