losing the "war on terror"

[a.k.a.]

Of

course it’s never been about making the world a safer place, but just for the record...

Bush administration

eliminating 19-year-old international terrorism report

By Jonathan S. Landay

Knight Ridder

Newspapers

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 U.S. 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

U.S. 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."



http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/11407689.htm

[a.k.a.]

OK. My mistake. The report WILL be

published by the state department, but annual statistics on terrorism activities will be included in some other

report. (???)

“WASHINGTON -- The United States state department said on Monday it will stop publishing annual

statistics on terrorism activities after discrepancies were found last year in figures for the number of attacks and

casualties.

Department spokesperson Richard Boucher said "the government has decided that the National

Counterterrorism Centre should compile and publish the statistical data on terrorism that has previously been

included by the state department in our report."

But he dismissed news reports that the department would do

away with its annual Patterns of Global Terrorism report, which is mandated by law.

"That report is due to

Congress by April 30, and we will do that this year," Boucher said, adding that the publication would contain, as it

had in the past, the country reports on terrorism.

"That's what the law asks of the state department,

that's what we'll be reporting to Congress," he said.

“

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0419-10.htm

Guess I'll have to wait and see what

all this really means.

[DrSmellThis]

So they're marginalizing the

report rather than eliminating it? Suppressing information and critical opinions regarding terrorism and war is the

MO of this administration, in any case.

625 in 2004 vs. a previous high of 175 in 2003, not counting

attacks against troops in Iraq? -- a truly remarkable failure!

[belgareth]

Are you really surprised? From

the terrorist's point of view, we are the enemy. Especially in Iraq. Can you blame them for calling us invaders?

What would you be doing if you felt your country was being invaded? Right or wrong in our eyes, you can't expect

them to not fight back. If I were in their shoes I would be doing much the sme thing.

[Mtnjim]

The "War on Terror" and the "War on

Drugs" are simply being used as tools of control and expediency by the past few administrations. If a few innocent

Blacks in the inner cities or Iraqis are injured, killed or have their lives destroyed, so what as long as the

administration gets the control it wants. Neither of these "wars" will ever be won; it would put people out of work

and take away funding and control.

[belgareth]

No argument here.

Your tax

dollars at work serving your best interests...right?

And people wonder why I don't trust ANY administration or

portion of our government..

[satyrboy]

Bel,
are you a libertarian?

[belgareth]

Not really. Most of their

candidates are better than any mainstream but there are parts of their philosophy I cannot accept. I have a strong

dislike for party politics in general. Most of my mistrust of our government has come from watching us get lied to

and cheated, time and again. I wonder at others who blithley continue to believe that minor changes will fix the

massive problems. It's kind of like trimming somebody's toenails while they are in cardiac arrest.