`, 26 January 2012 (UTC) :::Thanks. I'm leaving for several hours, so will ask my next question before responding to your long and detailed answer. Forthwith: Why do you use one technical report to rebut what dozens of thoroughly reliable sourcesall the broadcasters and newspapers and several bookshave published since 1970 to the present? The Cortright Report is the odd one out, and even it admits, ``The relatively sudden, and possibly violent, event associated with loss of integrity of the oxygen tank no. 2 system could have ruptured a lineto oxygen tank no. l, or have caused a valve to leak because of mechanical shock.``   18:29`