Sorry about my revert blanking the paragraph you added. It was inadvertent. My concern is a simple one of magnitude, which is even more clear now with the duplicate sections combined; there is an enormous amount of Pro-pollard rhetoric being added all the time, while the Directors of Naval Intelligence response, which has much more substance, keeps getting deleted (this response is already heavily truncated). I think some of the pro-pollard rhetoric needs to be trimmed, and the 'Directors response' states certain things that aren't reflected elsewhere in the article.