Maybe its the same technology as used for that shambolic anti missile test
that was fudged so nobody knew it was a failure!

Brian

--
Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email.
graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
Email:
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________


"Craig Fink" wrote in message
news

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/12319764/
quote
NASA keeps mum on space robot’s failure
DART report considered too sensitive for public release
...
The space agency distributed a new public information policy last month
specifying that information protected by ITAR is considered "sensitive but
unclassified" and that unauthorized release to news organizations could
result in prosecution or disciplinary action.
end quote

It appears there is more to the story than what is presented in Mr.
Oberg's story. A quick look at the NASA web site shows:

http://search.nasa.gov/nasasearch/se...de=dart+report

That many of the DART documents appear to have the date of "30 Mar 06",
when in fact the documents are from various dates prior to March 30, 2006.

Pure speculation, but it appears that these documents may have been pulled
off the NASA web site, then put back on the web site on March 30th of this
year. Hence the wrong date.

Did NASA post-facto edit these documents?

Did all the documents make it back on to the NASA web site?

Are previously released documents too sensitive for public release?

Inquiring minds would like to know.

--
Craig Fink
Courtesy E-Mail Welcome @