Algol, at what point in either of my posts did I question the facts that we know so far? Allow me to reiterate: my original post was questioning koi's implication that the
reason for the event unfolding as it did was due to the pilot having an axe to grind with his employer. You take it one step further by stating:
The only aim I can possibly ascribe to that is the intent to punish his employer
Once again, if you have knowledge that allows you to make this assertion then I bow to that superior knowledge and will accept the assertion as fact. If you don't have that knowledge it's merely speculation as to why you think it happened and, frankly, it baffles me as to how you can jump to this conclusion. This is the only statement of
fact that I was questioning in your post.
I am not defending (or even debating) the deliberate nature of this act and have never done so, by statement or implication. The fact that you chose to interpret my posts as doing so is unfortunate. You are right, this is a court of public opinion and I have no desire to stop speculation as to the motives of this individual nor do I have any power to do so. It's human nature to want to find out why things happen the way they do, particularly events that are so appalling in their nature. So far, and this is to the best of my knowledge, we know
what happened but we don't know
why it happened.
STP