Originally Posted by
Organfreak
Regardless, if you are "the messenger," you're delivering fact. But in this case, it was opinion, not fact.
The opinion was sandwiched in between facts - namely that the restrictions on CVR publication are outside the control of the BEA, and thus the notion that the BEA are themselves responsible for the redactions for their own motives is incorrect.
And, thanks for the lecture; I'm well aware that BEA is not technically a private entity, but its processes and machinations are, by definition, private, and that's what I meant.
No more so than any other accident investigation agency.
As for the subsequent reprinting of Chris Scott's diatribe, I didn't like it the first time and I like it even less this time. It's full of uncharitable characterizations and motives-not-in-evidence as to those of us who feel that something may be withheld. Just for one example: "The truth is that no degree of revelation would silence their accusations of tampering of the data..." Nonsense.
Actually, some of the people and organisations he's referring to are indeed that partisan - though I'm pretty certain you yourself are not. For example, the French pilots' union SNPL are well known to have an agenda to harm Airbus at any opportunity - an agenda that dates back to the stink their FE contingent kicked up when Airbus announced the A300 would be available with a two-person flight deck back in the early '70s. You can trace almost every Airbus-related "controversy" in France to the actions of that union and their lawyers - including the notion (for which there is no evidence) that the BEA are somehow involved in deflecting criticism.
The crux of the matter for me is that no person or organisation would stand to benefit from withholding information in that manner. The fact that the BEA report mentions non-optimal aspects of the aircraft design as well as the way it was operated by the airline and the crew means it's likely that both Airbus and Air France will end up paying damages. The A330 is a successful type - its continued existence, operation and sales will not be harmed no matter what was in the BEA report. Is my reasoning in this flawed?