My "extremely patronising" comment was explicitly in response to one specific statement from Boeing. Personally, I would not call Boeing's response "lies"; rath

My "extremely patronising" comment was explicitly in response to one specific statement from Boeing. Personally, I would not call Boeing's response "lies"; rather, it seems to me, it is probably being careful to not make any objectively false statements that could come back at them in an inquiry or court of law, while also attempting to imply that its actions always put safety first, and that training cost avoidance was never an overriding concern. My main point here is that, in doing so, Boeing appears to contradict itself in a way that weakens their position on the latter issue.