The First Casualty
Here is my take on the NCTC's (National Counter Terrorism Center's) recent findings. Tuesday the top story at Reuters was: World Terror Attacks Tripled in 2004 by U.S. Count (enjoy)WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. count of major world terrorist attacks more than tripled in 2004, a rise that may revive debate on whether the Bush administration is winning the war on terrorism, congressional aides said on Tuesday. The number of "significant" international terrorist attacks rose to about 650 last year from about 175 in 2003, according to congressional aides briefed on the numbers by State Department and intelligence officials on Monday.
I love that: "may revive." MAYBE the fact that our own State Department and Intelligence Community is announcing that terrorist attacks have TRIPLED will get people talking. Probably not. But maybe. Maybe they won't even see the news. Today at the CNN International homepage there is NO mention of the story. Well, there's a lot of other news to report you say?...Tom Cruise's new romance made the homepage!!! Am I in the F*ing Twighlight zone? I am pinching myself...but I'm not waking up.
The aides were told the surge partly reflected an increased tally of violence in India and Pakistan related to the Himalayan region of Kashmir, which both countries claim, and the devotion of moremanpower to the U.S. monitoring effort, which resulted in more attacks being counted overall. Fair enough. I can accept that. Maybe the count is thrown off by Kashmir. (Infact, I image in that even in a perfectly executed War on Terrorism things might need to get worse before they get better). I love the way they're spinning this though...Terrorists aren't attacking more, we're being more thorough. Classic! Anyhow, this is not the part that gets me...pay attention, here it comes... The State Department last year initially released erroneous figures that understated the attacks and casualties in 2003 and used the figures to argue that the Bush administration was prevailing in the war on terrorism. It later said the number of people killed and injured in 2003 was more than double its original count and said "significant" terrorist attacks -- those that kill or seriously injure someone, cause more than $10,000 in damage or attempt to do either of those things -- rose to a 20-year high of 175. COME AGAIN?!?...I LOVE IT...they report the White House lying like they report the weather. "In other news, remember when Bush & Co. threw out all those fun stats about the effectiveness of the War on Terror?..They were lying. In other news..." The State Department last week unleashed a new debate about the numbers by saying it would no longer release them in its annual terrorism report... Well, I don't know about you, but I feel safer.Then today the title at the CNN 'U.S.' page was:
manpower to the U.S. monitoring effort, which resulted in more attacks being counted overall. Fair enough. I can accept that. Maybe the count is thrown off by Kashmir. (Infact, I image in that even in a perfectly executed War on Terrorism things might need to get worse before they get better). I love the way they're spinning this though...Terrorists aren't attacking more, we're being more thorough. Classic! Anyhow, this is not the part that gets me...pay attention, here it comes... The State Department last year initially released erroneous figures that understated the attacks and casualties in 2003 and used the figures to argue that the Bush administration was prevailing in the war on terrorism. It later said the number of people killed and injured in 2003 was more than double its original count and said "significant" terrorist attacks -- those that kill or seriously injure someone, cause more than $10,000 in damage or attempt to do either of those things -- rose to a 20-year high of 175. COME AGAIN?!?...I LOVE IT...they report the White House lying like they report the weather. "In other news, remember when Bush & Co. threw out all those fun stats about the effectiveness of the War on Terror?..They were lying. In other news..." The State Department last week unleashed a new debate about the numbers by saying it would no longer release them in its annual terrorism report... Well, I don't know about you, but I feel safer.Then today the title at the CNN 'U.S.' page was:Terror threat to U.S. called 'significant'
You think?! I mean, all of you people out there who thought that the threat was totally 'insignificant' must be really embarrassed today. "Pay up Earl, I told you that that terror stuff was significant."
The article goes on to say... The State Department last week drew criticism from Democrats when Secretary Condoleezza Rice decided not to have her department release the statistics -- which had previously been part of the report -- and to allow intelligence officials to decide about their release. As late as Monday, Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte had not decided whether to release the data... Please don't get me wrong. The worst part of this is NOT the increase of reported terrorist attacks. I don't care if they quintupled, honestly...the Republicans already have 101 decent reasons why the stats aren't representative (and America only needs one to change the channel) predictably the Democrats are gonna drag the wrong bad news into the spotlight AGAIN.
If it is MY newspaper the headline isnt:
'Terror threat to U.S. called 'significant' or even:
'World Terror Attacks Tripled in 2004 by U.S. Count'
If it is MY newspaper the headline isnt:
'Terror threat to U.S. called 'significant' or even:
'World Terror Attacks Tripled in 2004 by U.S. Count'
It's: EXTRA! EXTRA! NCTC First Casualty in U.S.-led War on Information.
By Robert - 4/28/2005
2 Comments:
One word Bob......APATHY !!
We've become so cynical and apthetic with ALL of the constant barage of information that the important stuff either isn't even on our radar screens, or we simply are to numb to care.
Yes........you're right! The media
(both liberal and conservative) do
not focus on the crucial issues of the day......unless of course, thry're putting a spin on an issue for whatever agenda they're pushing.
Anybody wonder why Clear Channel and Fox Networks carry the load of
viership among all cable channels?
It surely isn't because they are reporting RESPONSIBLY about important issues of the day.
Sorry that this post was so damn long.
But it is important for liberals to pick their fights. When this news hits we have two choices:
1:"Told you so. Told you so. Told you so.
YOUR War on Terror is failing!!
[childish smile on face]
2:"We agree that it isn't exactly fair to compare these numbers to last year's. We agree that the Kashmir attacks make things seem worse than they are. We agree that probably some of the increase is due to more scrutiny on our part...BUT we WILL NOT stand for any administration purposefully releasing erroneous figures or burrying information like this from the American public.
Misleading or not, the people need to know.
[applause]
John, I agree about the apathy angle, but I think there is another even stronger factor in play: Denial.
There are things that are black and white:
1. Gravity exists.
2. Dragons don't.
3. Bob Marley was a cool cat.
Sadly, the other 95% seems to be a matter of CHOICE. People simply believe what they want to believe.
And unfortunately the Bush Doctrine is like a terminal illness. Once you've got it...you've got it to the bitter end.
Post a Comment
<< Home