You refer to the "misquoting of a QQ safety report". Would it be the one that states "Furthermore, due to the lack of any safety target, no statement can, or has been made made as to whether the hot air system risks identified in this report have been reduced to As Low As Reasonably Pracitcable (ALARP) in line with the requirements of JSP 553", or do you have another one in mind.
Many here, and also in the Times IIRC, did hold up this (or a similar) report as evidence that Nimrod was not ALARP, by selectively quoting another part of the report.
I think you're now proving the fact that the report was not trying to make any such assertion. Thank you.