I'm rolling my eyes at the "Do you have NO empathy" bit. Is it empathy that drives one to lie by omission to obfuscate the death of others? Is that the word f

I'm rolling my eyes at the "Do you have NO empathy" bit. Is it empathy that drives one to lie by omission to obfuscate the death of others? Is that the word for it? You don't have to tell the family you're certain they are dead, if you aren't, but you should tell the family "We heard a sound consistent with implosion at the same time we simultaneously lost communications and telemetry from the sub. The most rational explanation is that they are all dead." Once you've told the family, you should tell the public. What people are engaging in here, you included, is some kind of baffling Just World bias. That is, this unusual circumstance has happened - the sub imploded, the government knew, the government waited days to tell the public, and now you and others are defending the government's actions - as if, because it happened this way it must be justified in happening this way. In reality, of course, it's completely irrational - that's why you don't even bother to defend the course of events rather than imply I lack empathy (which, again, backwards because you are defending lying to the bereaved for no gain, in order to deceive them into believing their loved ones are huddled in the cold and dark and slowly suffocating when you know they are not). There is absolutely no reason to temporarily conceal the deaths. The government should have notified the families with their information, and then the public.