Sulla wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2019 12:21 am
I have actually tried to tone down the anti-DFA rhetoric of late.
Good lad - I'll also keep my interjections to a minimum...
Regarding the lilo case: that one's a really interesting saga. The story first appeared in a local news media site - The Falmouth Packet - on Monday. On Tuesday, the national media repeated the story verbatim, except all of them missed out the following key sentence:
"He said he had been told the story by a former member of 771 search and rescue squadron on Sunday, which is believed to have taken place when the rescue helicopters were still based out of RNAS Culdrose in Helston."
By missing out this sentence, they were deliberately trying to make out that the incident happened recently and that it was based on real witness evidence rather than hearsay. If you google 'KentLive Porthleven lilo,' you'll find they've done a good job investigating the story and basically found zero evidence of it - even the helicopter which was supposedly involved has never existed.
The truth of the matter is that this story is a "fisherman's tale" which has been circulating for decades but is entirely untrue. It only resurfaced this week because an ex-lifeboatman recounted it over drinks to a Falmouth Packet journalist on Sunday and he made an article out of it. (NB - there was no lifeboat involvement in this alleged rescue - it was an RNAS helicopter, i.e. the military.) Prior to handing helicopter rescue services over to a Newquay-based contractor in 2016, there certainly have been many rescues involving RNAS helicopters out of Helston, but both the RNAS and the RNLI have been unable to provide the actual details of this incident, despite both keeping meticulous records when it comes to operational activity logs. The story doesn't sound like it was recounted by anyone involved in rescues either - the reason you might puncture an inflatable in a helicopter rescue is not "to save any further drifting" (you simply get the child off the lilo to achieve that!) but to reduce the serious risk of the lilo being sucked up into the rotor-blades in the doughnut-shaped ''up-draught' area which surrounds the 'down-draught' area directly underneath a helicopter.
The reason I'm so interested in this story is that it beautifully demonstrates how easily the media can make us believe the most ludicrous lies providing they play up to our prejudices. You've cited an anti-wealth prejudice, which I'm sure you're right about, and which I probably share. There's also a right-wing prejudice that sees all poor people as mean, work-shy, stupid, dishonest, compensation-obsessed sub-humans and this is reflected strongly in all the readers' comments under this dodgy lilo story in the websites of the Daily Express etc. It's incredible that anyone could actually believe that parents who'd just seen their child's life saved would demand compensation for a £7 lilo. If you think about it for a second, you'll realise it must be nonsense, but unfortunately, people are prepared to believe literally anything so long as it fits in with their prejudices.
There are countless other examples of this. Try Googling 'Winnebago cruise control crash' and look at all the media websites that have printed this completely unbelievable story. Then Google 'Snopes winnebago lawsuit' to find the truth about this and thousands of similar falsified 'news stories.'
