Your biased hagiography of Mr. Stockton Rush was as fully predictable, one-sided, and disappointing as I expected it to be. Shame on the PAW for being more concerned with image than an unbiased accounting of a preventable tragedy brought about by hubris. One of the people you quoted stated: “Tock lived to conquer those risks. He — and his fellow passengers — died doing what they loved.” I’m curious, does that vapid assertion apply to the 19-year-old who forfeited his entire future because of Mr. Rush’s belief that he knew better than everyone else in the deep-sea submersible field? Would the folks lining up to defend their friend be so blasé if it had been their children or grandchildren had been pulverized in an instant two miles below the surface of the ocean?
Your biased hagiography of Mr. Stockton Rush was as fully predictable, one-sided, and disappointing as I expected it to be. Shame on the PAW for being more concerned with image than an unbiased accounting of a preventable tragedy brought about by hubris. One of the people you quoted stated: “Tock lived to conquer those risks. He — and his fellow passengers — died doing what they loved.” I’m curious, does that vapid assertion apply to the 19-year-old who forfeited his entire future because of Mr. Rush’s belief that he knew better than everyone else in the deep-sea submersible field? Would the folks lining up to defend their friend be so blasé if it had been their children or grandchildren had been pulverized in an instant two miles below the surface of the ocean?