Gov. lies about rise in Terror due to Bush Policy

What do you do when you want to maintain the illusion that invading Iraq made the world a "safer" place -- as you endlessly have your lackeys repeat to a timid and compliant media -- but the reality is that the incidence of terrorism has gone through the roof? Why, you simply do away with the government's annual Patterns of Global Terrorism report, of course! That way, you won't:

1. have to admit that you were dead wrong about everything, and

2. suffer the humiliation of getting caught publishing LIES, like you did last year.

It's like getting two birds stoned at once!

Bush Administration Eliminating 19-year-old International Terrorism Report
By Jonathan S. Landay
Knight Ridder Newspapers

Friday 15 April 2005

Washington - The State Department decided to stop publishing an annual report on international terrorism after the government's top terrorism center concluded that there were more terrorist attacks in 2004 than in any year since 1985, the first year the publication covered.

Several US officials defended the abrupt decision, saying the methodology the National Counterterrorism Center used to generate statistics for the report may have been faulty, such as the inclusion of incidents that may not have been terrorism.

Last year, the number of incidents in 2003 was undercounted, forcing a revision of the report, "Patterns of Global Terrorism."

But other current and former officials charged that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's office ordered "Patterns of Global Terrorism" eliminated several weeks ago because the 2004 statistics raised disturbing questions about the Bush's administration's frequent claims of progress in the war against terrorism.

"Instead of dealing with the facts and dealing with them in an intelligent fashion, they try to hide their facts from the American public," charged Larry C. Johnson, a former CIA analyst and State Department terrorism expert who first disclosed the decision to eliminate the report in The Counterterrorism Blog, an online journal.

Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., who was among the leading critics of last year's mix-up, reacted angrily to the decision.

"This is the definitive report on the incidence of terrorism around the world. It should be unthinkable that there would be an effort to withhold it - or any of the key data - from the public. The Bush administration should stop playing politics with this critical report."

A senior State Department official, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue, confirmed that the publication was being eliminated, but said the allegation that it was being done for political reasons was "categorically untrue."

According to Johnson and US intelligence officials familiar with the issue, statistics that the National Counterterrorism Center provided to the State Department reported 625 "significant" terrorist attacks in 2004.

That compared with 175 such incidents in 2003, the highest number in two decades.

The statistics didn't include attacks on American troops in Iraq, which President Bush as recently as Tuesday called "a central front in the war on terror."

The intelligence officials requested anonymity because the information is classified and because, they said, they feared White House retribution. Johnson declined to say how he obtained the figures.

Another US official, who also requested anonymity, said analysts from the counterterrorism center were especially careful in amassing and reviewing the data because of the political turmoil created by last year's errors.

Last June, the administration was forced to issue a revised version of the report for 2003 that showed a higher number of significant terrorist attacks and more than twice the number of fatalities than had been presented in the original report two months earlier.

Knight Ridder

Faulty Terror Report Card

By Alan B. Krueger and David Laitin

Monday, May 17, 2004; Page A21

Are we winning the war on terrorism?

Although keeping score is difficult, the State Department's annual report on international terrorism, released last month, provides the best government data to answer this question. The short answer is "No," but that's not the spin the administration is putting on it.

"You will find in these pages clear evidence that we are prevailing in the fight," said Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage. As evidence, the "Patterns of Global Terrorism" report says that worldwide terrorism dropped by 45 percent between 2001 and 2003. The report even boasts that the number of terrorist acts committed last year "represents the lowest annual total of international terrorist attacks since 1969."

Yet, a careful review of the report and underlying data supports the opposite conclusion: The number of significant terrorist acts increased from 124 in 2001 to 169 in 2003 -- 36 percent -- even using the State Department's official standards. The data that the report highlights are ill-defined and subject to manipulation -- and give disproportionate weight to the least important terrorist acts. The only verifiable information in the annual reports indicates that the number of terrorist events has risen each year since 2001, and in 2003 reached its highest level in more than 20 years.

Washington Post

"winning the War on Terrorism", "Fighting them There so We don't have to fight Them HERE", "We've got Them on the RUN", " I voted for Bush because he'll keep us SAFE"

Add your own catch phrase, it's FUN! In a perverse-yes-we-know-we-are-fooked-but-there-is-no-savior-in-sight kind of way.

Typical behaviour for the Right, if the facts don't support your arguments, just hide the facts or ignore them. This administration and it's supporters live in a world of make-believe, a Neverland that would be funny and cute if it's results weren't so brutal and grotesque.

You can't win a war on terror by using methods of terror such as "war" to change hearts and minds. The U.S. may have made some local progress but overall we cannot and will not win a war on ideology. It's simply impossible.

and this attempt by the current administration is totally expected and a just another method of their madness. Pretend it doesn't exist and hopefully no one will ask questions later.

[edit on 4-21-2005 by worldwatcher]

Terrorism is an odd thing. You have no nation to battle, only a handful of tribes and poor concepts.

I am by no means an expert on terrorism. But, I do have a thought on this. When does a snake or a dog attack? Normally when it is threatened/backed into a corner. Perhaps this is all a retaliation to our efforts. Perhaps we do have them by the throat and their flailing arms and legs are still able to cause some damage. Whenever you don't have much else to lose, what would you do? Try to do anything.

Besides, you cannot stop this war now. Why? Because it would only empower the terrorist. They will think they won and bring on more violence. Either way, we need to get it over with.

However, to the actual reports, I think it is wrong for them to hide it. They should be looking at ways to keep this from happening instead of burying it so people won't know the truth.

War against terrorism is akin to extinguishing an electrical fire with water.

[edit on 22-4-2005 by cargo]

Originally posted by OXmanK
Terrorism is an odd thing. You have no nation to battle, only a handful of tribes and poor concepts.

I am by no means an expert on terrorism. But, I do have a thought on this. When does a snake or a dog attack? Normally when it is threatened/backed into a corner. Perhaps this is all a retaliation to our efforts. Perhaps we do have them by the throat and their flailing arms and legs are still able to cause some damage. Whenever you don't have much else to lose, what would you do? Try to do anything.

Besides, you cannot stop this war now. Why? Because it would only empower the terrorist. They will think they won and bring on more violence. Either way, we need to get it over with.

However, to the actual reports, I think it is wrong for them to hide it. They should be looking at ways to keep this from happening instead of burying it so people won't know the truth.

You have voted OXmanK for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.

I don't believe that any thinking individual doesn't realize that the sheer number of terroristic attacks has risen in the past several years. But the real point is, is that necessarily a bad thing? Daylight is the best antiseptic irt fighting terrorists.

OXmanK's theory is right on target, IMO. And one good result of the increase of the number of attacks, and the shift of their focus from military to civilian, is the beginning of a shift of support away from these terrorists.

As far as the report goes, it was wrong to stop publishishng it, but the data will still be available from reputable research organizations and the news, whatever form it it takes.


[edit on 22-4-2005 by jsobecky]

The Governator..Arrnuald" obviously got the word too late, when he inadvertantly spoke the truth yesterday and said..."close the borders." But I digress!

Originally posted by OXmanK
Terrorism is an odd thing. You have no nation to battle, only a handful of tribes and poor concepts.

What about Christian terrorists like Eric Rudolph who bomb abortion clinics?
Or the IRA? White, God-fearing men and women just like you or I...

Besides, you cannot stop this war now. Why? Because it would only empower the terrorist. They will think they won and bring on more violence. Either way, we need to get it over with.

So when do we bomb Northern Ireland? North Carolina? They've both harbored terrorists.

Surely this war on terrorism won't stop with the Middle East, now will it?

However, to the actual reports, I think it is wrong for them to hide it. They should be looking at ways to keep this from happening instead of burying it so people won't know the truth.

I agree with you 100% on this point.

[edit on 22-4-2005 by negativenihil]

[edit on 22-4-2005 by negativenihil]

Originally posted by worldwatcher
You can't win a war on terror by using methods of terror such as "war" to change hearts and minds. The U.S. may have made some local progress but overall we cannot and will not win a war on ideology. It's simply impossible.

My problem is that I have a very hard time understanding what is in the hearts and minds of an ideology that makes them want to deliberately target innocent civilians. Killing schoolchildren with a car bomb is an act of valor that I should make an attempt to understand? I don't think so.