Terrorism reaches highest level since 1985

And what does this administration do to address the issue?

That's right. They immediately stop publishing the report that gives you that information. I mean, after all, if we don't publish the report stating that terrorism is at an all time high then it isn't. Right?

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

I bet you're disappointed. You must have been anxiously awaiting this years report.

I am disappointed in both the increase in terrorism and the act of this administration to not provide this information.

Increase in terrorism ?

Why are you concerned with such meaningless jargon? Do you not understand that "terrorism" is undefined. All anyone has to do is to adjust the meaning and scope slightly, and the "level of terrorism" can be made almost anything they like.

Particularly since the sort of definition we might once have used, like

"found guilty of a terrorist act in a properly and fairly conducted legal trial in front of a jury of their peers"

no longer has any meaning, and any faint suspicion can incarcerate you for years with no proper legal redress.

How very like Saddam Hussein's Iraq, the dispassionate observer might think.

So remind me. Who is winning exactly? Did he make our country more like his ? Or was it the other way round ?

I like this line:

"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.'"



I think the reasoning is, if there aren't any reports of terrorism, than no terrorism happened! *floats away on her fluffy cloud of dreams and sunshine drops*

It was defined in the report which will no longer be published.

Humoring the term "terrorism" as a usable term for a moment, let me refer to Webster for the definition:

Main Entry: ter·ror·ism
Pronunciation: 'ter-&r-"i-z&m
Function: noun
: the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion

Considering the above definition, it shouldn't be surprising that incidents of terrorism were at their highest level when the world's largest military force executed an operation with the name "Shock and Awe."

...

"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."

Gotta love those propa--I mean objective studies. Yes, bring them back. How will we know who the bad guys are without them?

I would buy this except this administration has a history of killing reports that don't reflect favorably on them.

Last month, the nation's governors came to Washington complaining about inadequate federal funding for the states. But states are about to find it much harder to make this complaint -- because the Bush administration has decided to stop publishing the budget report that states use to see what money they are, or aren't, getting from Washington.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A7789-2003Mar10&notFound=true

Damn yall! That's harsh. Maybe that spending report was just more government propaganda used to make the MAN look bad.

Incidentally, Neehai, in what sense are you Messenger of God ?
Does he talk to you direct, or do you get his wishes from old books ?

Which God is this ?
(yes yes, I know, yours is the only one ...blah....blah.....blah....
But which of the only ones ? )

"Linden."

Erm. That was my point with the "shock and awe" statement (that and pointing out that we fulfill the definition of "terrorist" Terrorism is subjective, so the terrorism reports probably didn't mean much in the first place so good riddance.

Money is a whole different ball of wax.

Most of the time he talks to me. Sometimes he just rolls his eyes like he did when I read your question to him. I don't think he was necessarily taking it out on you, but if you only knew how many times he's heard that question.

I thought "Linden"... Now I'm starting to think "Bob Dobbs."

My question, Neehai ?
Oh, I see, you mean "Who is winning exactly?"

Ah - now it all makes sense - God is George Bush !
By all accounts he DOES need things read to him.

But, to be fair to you, Neehai, the phrase
"if you only knew how many times"
rings a faint bell which suggests that just possibly you may have encountered a genuine spiritual experience.

The problem is, like most people, you may not realise that god has an infinite number of aspects and countenances, dependant on the direction you approach him from. Normally people are so overwhelmed by the experience of glimpsing/meeting him that they get fixated on the chance direction from which they happened to first approach, and never get the slightest idea of his true nature. It can be very misleading.

They often go ranting off into some cult or other, or support the Zionists in persecuting and stealing from Palestinians because an old book says its ok.

See - I'm a nutter too, lol.

Honey, I know! I am his personal messenger.

Do you have any idea how many messages I must deliver to extreme nutjobs that completely lose touch with reality after meeting "the G to the O to the D"? (That is what his holiness wishes to be called today. I am so cancelling cable television.)

Infinite number of aspects? If you mean "the G to the O to the D" is moody then you are right on that one. MOODY MOODY MOODY!

His true nature is to drive me insane. This is by far the worst job I've ever had in my life.

"The G to the O to the D" would also like it known today (Why today? Who fucking knows?) that he wants Santa Claus should be fatter. Department store Santas have become alarmingly thin.

How stupid is it to create a "War on Terrorism" knowing that terrorism is like pot. It can never be stopped. I think President Bush, the UN and all other parties Involved should call it more like "Policing Terrorism" Because a war is on definition to eliminate which is impossible showing how mindless the United States Government and all other Governments involved really are. No offense to anyone in any of the countries invovled. Just stating Fact.

You are missing the point. "War on Terrorism" is just a slogan to appease the masses. It was never the intention of the administration. Their real, and only, intention is to get rich, and get their buddies rich, and to make their campaign contributors rich.

They are not mindless at all. They are apparently smart enough to fool 50% of the United States population, and rake in billions in the process. They have also put into place policies that will make it much harder to fight against such greed and corruption in the future. They have very deliberately directed our country toward Facism, as it allows almost unlimited power and wealth for those corporations and individuals in the "club".

Uh... smart enough to fool 25% of the population, you mean. Only half of the country votes, if that.

I don't think they are directing our country toward Fascism, just away from bipartisanship. Demonizations aside, fascism is the idea of many shafts wrapped around one axe (or hammer). It is a single person's guiding will supported by everyone else. George Bush is not clever, inspiring, or eloquent enough to be a fascist. Greedy, arrogant, and Big Business lapdog- yes - but not fascist.