I suppose what concerns many of us is the fact that this story was on its way to being deep-sixed, if it had not been the subject of so much interest on this forum, and maybe a couple of others.
Deep-sixed as so many incidents have been in the past.
We don't need more cover-ups.
No, most of us don't have to be told that large gatherings are perfect venues for those who want to cause mayhem. That's been a given for so long that we know it instinctively.
I have no problem with an investigation unfolding in due course, but it's wrong for those of us, taxpayers footing the bills for all of it, not to be allowed to know the results. It's more than tiresome at this point.
And insulting to be told ridiculous lies about things we can all see for ourselves.
texasbluebell wrote:
"...I have no problem with an investigation unfolding in due course, but it's wrong for those of us, taxpayers footing the bills for all of it, not to be allowed to know the results. It's more than tiresome at this point.
And insulting to be told ridiculous lies about things we can all see for ourselves."
"Ridiculous lies" like "large stockpiles of WMD in Iraq", when we know that Saddam never achieved an operational binary capacity, had chemical weapons with a shelf life of weeks or even days, and always used a just in time delivery mechanism when employing such weapons on the battlefield?
I feel bad for you, sincerely. What you want simply isn't going to happen under this administration, and if another administration takes over and changes that, then I fully intend to employ every tactic I can against them, because placing the public's right to know at a higher priority than operational security means giving away tactical and strategic advantage, which in turn costs our guys' lives.
Further, I'm going to say that in my opinion, labeling this incident a "cover-up", is either naive or maliciously ignorant.
Take your pick.