I think that governments and especially 'intelligence' groups have a very fine line to tread, in that if they start announcing to the whole world that there is a credible threat of X, then the possibility of that specific incident occurring is minimised, but it does not necessarily help them to catch the perpetrators of that future event and actually leaves them free to plot threat Y. It also has the possibility of causing
a) panic
b) cry wolf syndrome (i.e. people start ignoring the warnings).
Having said all that, I agree with whoever above said governments by and large will hide facts that paint them in a bad light, even going so far as lying to deflect criticism. This is (unfortunately) a failing of democracy, in that elected officials are working to get themselves re-elected. They will also take advantage of any situation to push their own agendas.
I suspect that there is a bit of both items above and I'd bet (especially in the first instance), that the intelligence agencies have a lot of tough decisions to make and generally try to do what they think best. Maybe this is me being naive, but I'd like to think that by and large people are not all 'me me me' focused. I also think that Intelligence agencies have to work without too much interference.
__________________
who hid my keyboard's PANIC button?
|