Replies

It's no "coverup" in notoriety, but behind it. Both sides cannot admit they screwed up, that they were incompetent in whole or in part. In turn, both sides claim rectitutde and that they were following proper procedures. I've seen some interviews on this topic, and eveyone acts like they acted perfectly. Of course, the motivation is to avoid liability and embarassment. This struck me as more likely explanation of the incident than the others. The denials of lack of competence fuel "conspiracy" theories, whereby the theorizers typically mention things like "this could not be a mistake because x denied such and such." It's like the denials of aerial bombing mistakes in war. Everyone says the "program" was followed.