Thanks again to those of you who are answering my questions. I'm seriously learning alot about my government--however functional, or not, it may be.
Theoretically, there is a balence of why a government organization, like the CIA, would destroy evidence that would be self incriminating. Theoretically. Theoretically, it would be to protect itself, or someone like Valarie (sp?) Plame, or to prevent a copy cat of 9/11. (Right? Or did I miss something?)
So when I read through the news today, I'm wondering why the DOJ is telling "us", the civilians, to "back off" the "tapes interregation." My question is, Do the governmental systems seem to feel as if they can rebuild credibility quickly by "reassuring" us that the tapes were destroyed for a "good reason" and that "we are better off?" I mean, that's not the pattern here, so why this 11th hour move by the PR machine to protect its own?
It also seems like a no win situation for the organization; if they open their moulths, they admit something WAS on the tapes. If they say nothing, they admit that the tapes WERE destroyed for "unsavory" reasons. So why say "stop being such mean bullies," effectively?
Enclosed, Yahoo! News link
http://news.yahoo.com/...