Originally Posted by
tucumseh
Whatever you think of politicians in general, Rifkind made a lot of enemies with this breach of parliamentary protocol. As did John Major and Jeremy Hanley. That a former Secy of State and prime minister can come out and publicly say the findings were wrong, and nothing be done, is a clue someone or something else is being protected. MoD later gave a clue, admitting UK/US relations were paramount.
Several of the postings on this thread ask about what it is we don't
yet know, about motivation for the utterly unjust and farcical position put forward by Day and Wratten. It is so 'off the planet' that I have never discounted involvement by the manufacturer of the Chinook, Boeing (and perhaps the engine manufacturer?), likely assisted by parts of the US government. It wouldn't be good for the US aviation manufacturing reputation to be sullied by the
abysmal performance of the Chinook HC2 uncovered, and documented, by Boscombe Down testing, would it? 🙄
tucumseh's last sentence, in the quote above, makes me think I was thinking along the correct lines!
Did Day and Wratten's coveting of Honours influence their willingness to pervert the course of justice, following 'orders' from elsewhere, even though so many could clearly see they had exceeded their remit? I am
not excusing Day and Wratten's behaviour with this theory, because they are both self-serving 🔔🔚's, I am merely musing about some of the motivations.