Yep, I know. I was just being sarcastic...

You gotta love the media.

I wonder if Rockwell sold the Congress on a civilian airliner version to cover the costs? Inquiring minds want to know.

The same kind of editing/fact checking that had a "brown" (aka Grizzly) bear in a western Massachusetts neighborhood a couple weeks ago. (For those who aren't well versed in all things natural, the only bear east of the Rockies is the black bear, )

Reporters haven't a clue on aircraft or ARV recognition.  I still remember the attack on the Russian parliament in '93; at first the BRDM's were called "tanks", then the BMP's  were "bigger tanks".

Why has the word "jet" become synonymous with fighter? I remember when they first began to call them fighter jets.  This is because at first they were rare- most were prop.  Then, when virtually all fighers were jets, the term held on, then "fighter" was dropped and they became just jets.  Then, the press began to call ALL planes jets, even when they used props!!

I have found that the Chinese do indeed like to kid around, but that does not entail putting pee pee in coke. After that discovery, I tend to do my own research

Yeah, guy at work had the radio on a month or so ago when they announced the crash of a US Army Apache helicopter and the ten or so personnel being unaccounted for. A couple of hours later they did change it to US Army Blackhawk helicopter... (sigh)...

The utter ignorance in mass media these days is just astounding.  I never thought there could be such a decline as we've seen over the last couple decades.  I recently saw a news story where they were showing a troop transport and calling it a tank.

Kids reporters/newscasters nowadays can't even tell the difference between a jet, bomber, tank or troop carrier in the news.