Strange Logic...Terrorism Info Leaked...

Regarding the recent alleged terrorist plot to damage the NYC subway, it is believed someone within the Homeland Security Department, via e-mail, warned a relative about the plot before the information was released to the public.

One of the E-mails warned: "As some of you know my father works for Homeland Security, at a very high position and receives security briefings on a daily basis...The only information that I can pass on is that everyone should at all costs not ride the subway for the next two weeks in major areas of NYC."

This, of course, isn't supposed to happen. Employees are duty bound to keep such information secret until they are given permission to release it. Evidently someone was worried the threats might be real and they didn't want their relatives to be killed or injured.
That's understandable.

Just as understandable is officials in charge being upset because someone leaked information that hadn't yet been evaluated as to it's authenticity.

What I don't understand is the statement quoted below made by someone inside the loop concerning the security leak. Read it carefully.

"I don't know what is more frightening, the possibility of a subway terror bombing or the idea that you'll get an early heads-up if you are lucky enough to be in the loop," said a financial director. "It shouldn't be the luck of the draw."

Come on, now! It's more frightening that someone might not be killed because someone else warned them about a possible terrorist threat than it is about the threat itself?

Where is the logic in that statement? Does he mean; "It would be better for everyone to be killed,"than for a couple of people to be saved from being blown up because they were warned by someone who loved them?
I think this financial director should have thought about this statement a bit more before he made it; and then not made it!

Later...