Comments on: lies, damned lies

lies, damned lies

amberglow — Wed, 09 Jun 2004 18:37:43 -0800

Terrorist incidents actually ROSE in 2003, but the State Department's "Patterns of Global Terrorism" report, issued April 29 (see Appendix G for an easy chart), said the exact opposite. Senior Bush administration officials immediately hailed it as objective proof that they were winning the war on terrorism. The report is considered the authoritative yardstick of the prevalence of terrorist activity around the world. Reports like this one were all over the news in April--will the fact that it was a lie be reported as widely? And can we trust anything this administration says anymore?

By: amberglow

amberglow — Wed, 09 Jun 2004 18:39:40 -0800

shit--i used the 2003 cnn article instead of 2004--sorry--here's the right one: International acts of terror in 2003 were the fewest in more than 30 years, according to the U.S. State Department's annual terrorism report released Thursday.

By: JollyWanker

JollyWanker — Wed, 09 Jun 2004 18:44:39 -0800

And can we trust anything this administration says anymore? There hasn't been an administration so completely lacking in any sense of the "truth" since the Imperial Presidency of Richard Nixon. You can trust nothing this Adminstration says, not at face value anyway - they've turned disingenuousness, media manipulation and outright lying-until-confronted-and-even-then-denying-it... Bush may have his supporters and I respect their right to disagree with me regarding his capabilities and his philosophies, but even the most ardent of this Adminstration supporters can't claim that this Administration hasn't raised lying to a new high without appearing to be braindead idiots.

By: quonsar

quonsar — Wed, 09 Jun 2004 18:45:13 -0800

will the fact that it was a lie be reported as widely? And can we trust anything this administration says anymore? you communist america-hating pig. show Our President some respect, you filthy hippie.

By: graventy

graventy — Wed, 09 Jun 2004 18:52:31 -0800

Whew. It's a good thing for them that Reagan died this week so that this didn't make it on the news.

By: Dipsomaniac

Dipsomaniac — Wed, 09 Jun 2004 19:07:54 -0800

'Several State Department officials vehemently denied their report was swayed by politics. "That's not the way we do things here," said one senior official.' Oh, that's the funniest thing I've seen in days.

By: y6y6y6

y6y6y6 — Wed, 09 Jun 2004 19:14:45 -0800

Before - The number of terrorist attacks had dropped to its lowest level in 34 years. After - The number of significant terrorist incidents increased to its highest level in 20 years. The State Department's explaination - Clerical errors. We have a government of asshats. It's an assocracy.

By: stbalbach

stbalbach — Wed, 09 Jun 2004 19:16:40 -0800

"senior official characterized the errors as clerical" .. no doubt it can and will be explained that way, and the fact they are re-releasing it says a lot theres no cover up. Plus responsibility for the report recently shifted from the CIA to the TTIC which screws things up and the report is on "auto-pilot" meaning the definitions are not up to world standards. Overall looks like a case of bureaucracy in action. The real damage is further erosion of American credibility in the International community. Bunch of amateurs we are.

By: Wulfgar!

Wulfgar! — Wed, 09 Jun 2004 19:22:54 -0800

Bunch of amateurs we are. No. just our current leaders. Wait until November to make that claim, please.

By: CunningLinguist

CunningLinguist — Wed, 09 Jun 2004 19:38:32 -0800

Here's Waxman's letter to State last month demanding to know what the fuck. (PDF)

By: amberglow

amberglow — Wed, 09 Jun 2004 19:42:37 -0800

Waxman has been excellent lately, with Halliburton, Condi, this...everything.

By: Joey Michaels

Joey Michaels — Wed, 09 Jun 2004 19:47:12 -0800

Waxman in '08!

By: Ynoxas

Ynoxas — Wed, 09 Jun 2004 19:48:30 -0800

And can we trust anything this administration says anymore? No.

By: dejah420

dejah420 — Wed, 09 Jun 2004 19:57:58 -0800

Ok...because someone has to do the obligatory Star Wars reference...what with them doing the Lenin - Reagan thing at the capitol: *waves hands in arcane, yet impressive motion* These are not the terrorists you're looking for

By: troutfishing

troutfishing — Wed, 09 Jun 2004 20:25:41 -0800

"There hasn't been an administration so completely lacking in any sense of the "truth" since the Imperial Presidency of Richard Nixon. You can trust nothing this Adminstration says, not at face value anyway" - JollyWanker - you Reaganite, you.

By: spilon

spilon — Wed, 09 Jun 2004 20:32:46 -0800

Hmm.... perhaps if someone was running against Bush, they could make an issue out of this. Nah, probably not.

By: BlueTrain

BlueTrain — Wed, 09 Jun 2004 21:12:16 -0800

You can trust nothing this Adminstration says, not at face value anyway I recently received two letters from both the Democratic National Committee and their Republican counterpart, both charging that the other party was being run by radical fanatics. It's our own fault, really. Our nation is in a state of complete denial and defensiveness, where everyone feels that they're right. Something wrong? Blame the other guy! ::sigh:: (completely off-topic) I just saw a chart in the WSJ today showing that Japan is #1 in the world for steel exporting. That tiny little island nation is out-producing the world's richest and most powerful country in the world because we decided that it'd be better to outsource it than to maintain dominance in the steel industry. This country needs a wake-up call, and it wasn't 9-11. At some point, either the EU or China will create a manufacturing base so strong that we will be forced to concede power. I wish I could continue my rant, but I just came back from a concert and I need some sleep. Maybe I'll come back tomorrow.

By: xmutex

xmutex — Wed, 09 Jun 2004 21:17:42 -0800

This world makes my brain hurt.

By: amberglow

amberglow — Wed, 09 Jun 2004 21:19:42 -0800

me too xmutex. Voting makes me feel better tho : >

By: y2karl

y2karl — Wed, 09 Jun 2004 21:26:56 -0800

We have a government of asshats. It's an assocracy. Kakakracy is the word which the Viennese satirist Karl Kraus once coined, with kaka meaning the same in German as English. It's the shit, not the ass.

By: homunculus

homunculus — Wed, 09 Jun 2004 21:54:59 -0800

Lying By Reflex

By: mr_crash_davis

mr_crash_davis — Wed, 09 Jun 2004 22:00:40 -0800

*sigh* Bush...admin...lied...pissed

By: four panels

four panels — Wed, 09 Jun 2004 22:05:55 -0800

This world makes my brain hurt. posted by xmutex at 11:17 PM CST on June 9 Yes. What to do but try?

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Wed, 09 Jun 2004 22:30:11 -0800

(completely off-topic) [...] That tiny little island nation is out-producing the world's richest and most powerful country in the world because we decided that it'd be better to outsource it than to maintain dominance in the steel industry. Top 5 steel producers : China, Russia, Japan, America, Korea. Forget 'tiny little island nation' - it's the second biggest economy on the planet, with nearly 130,000,000 people. The really good story (and the one that should tweak America, if that's what you're looking for) is that Korea, which really is tiny, and has a population well under 50,000,000, is only very slightly behind America in steel production. [/also offtopic]

By: five fresh fish

five fresh fish — Wed, 09 Jun 2004 23:11:56 -0800

Japan isn't the second-biggest economy: China is. CIA World Factbook: In 2003, with its 1.3 billion people but a GDP of just $5,000 per capita, China stood as the second-largest economy in the world after the US (measured on a purchasing power parity basis). And we can all expect China to become the largest economy within the next five to ten years. It has a GDP of over $6 trillion, a debt of only $150 billion, and is currently experiencing deflation at a time wages are overall increasing. Unless the USA can pull a rabbit out of its hat, it best prepare to be in permanent second position.

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Wed, 09 Jun 2004 23:57:18 -0800

Japan isn't the second-biggest economy: China is. Ah, yes. Correct. Japan would now be Number 3. That is, of course, a relatively recent development, and does not in any way detract from my argument. But point taken, nonetheless.

By: Space Coyote

Space Coyote — Thu, 10 Jun 2004 04:12:56 -0800

If China would float their currency they would shoot past the US in a second. Of course that would kill their artificial manufacturing advantage... Hmm.. better say something on-topic. The state dept. said that they needed to stop measuring by nov. 11th in order to get it printed? Anyone else remember how quickly the Patriot act came together?

By: quonsar

quonsar — Thu, 10 Jun 2004 06:07:47 -0800

This world makes my brain hurt. dubyuh's "brain" makes the world hurt.

By: BlueTrain

BlueTrain — Thu, 10 Jun 2004 06:10:42 -0800

Top 5 steel producers Whoops. The graph I saw was referring to the biggest exporters of steel, not producers. I'm annoyed either way, but I'm more sober now, so it's okay.

By: ook

ook — Thu, 10 Jun 2004 07:40:26 -0800

Back on topic -- one thing about this report bothers me; they seem to want to stretch the definition of terrorist attack to get an even bigger, better, "most attacks ever!" number: For instance, the many deadly attacks on coalition forces in Iraq were not included in the "Patterns" report because they did not meet the State Department's long-standing criteria of targeting civilians or soldiers not on duty. Attacks against an occupying military force -- even guerrilla attacks against an occupying military force that has declared itself to be at war against terrorism -- don't sound at all comparable to suicide bombings or airplanes into buildings. While it's clear that the original report was deliberately skewed downwards for political reasons, and while that's incredibly foolish and shortsighted -- it doesn't make sense to now skew it the other direction. This administration could get just as much political play out of that: "Look! Attacks are up! We need the War On Terrah more than ever!" I'm skeptical anyway of the whole notion of trying to boil this all down to a single worldwide number; it's not a useful indicator of anything, even if you manage to somehow clearly define what a terrorist attack is. Most have purely local causes and local effects -- a drug-business skirmish in Columbia has nothing to do with a Palestinian bombing is unrelated to ethnic tension in Africa has zip squat to do with bin Laden's jihad. In what way is a bar graph that combines all those unrelated elements useful? More than that, though, the fact that we've come to the point where we can't trust our own evidence -- on terrorism, on our Lysenkoist climate change studies, on the which-report-do-you-trust state of the economy, on the obviously-biased media bringing it all to the voters -- is immensely troubling. It means that as a nation we've effectively got our head up our own collective ass. When businesses start skewing their numbers to tell management or the shareholders what they want to hear, instead of what's actually happening, they fail. Sooner or later, that disconnect from reality causes them to make bad decisions. Governments are no different.

By: JollyWanker

JollyWanker — Thu, 10 Jun 2004 07:48:27 -0800

troutfishing: JollyWanker - you Reaganite, you. Ah, but then being the Oldest Living MeFite (or something approaching that, quonsar not included, YMMV...), I was taught from the day of JFK's assassination to Trust No Establishment Whatsoever, just as a matter of course. That the Bush administration is the worst I've seen in the thirty-or-so years since Emperor Dick, including Ronnie the Benevolent and his Queen-Concort, Nancy of the Zodiac, speaks volumes and hardly recommends me for being marked with a Description so Foul as "Reagnite"...

By: aacheson

aacheson — Thu, 10 Jun 2004 07:48:41 -0800

I love the end of Waxman's letter, "I hope you will give this matter your prompt and thorough attention." BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Yeah, right. Like Powell's driving this bus anymore. Like Bush cares what a ranking MINORITY member thinks. Like the Republicans CARE about the truth anymore.

By: dash_slot-

dash_slot- — Thu, 10 Jun 2004 09:06:02 -0800

Next President of the USA: Dennis Hastert to become President in the event Bush and Cheney both go. Well... we can but hope!

By: jonmc

jonmc — Thu, 10 Jun 2004 09:10:18 -0800

Jesus, Hastert. The guy who lectured John McCain on the need to sacrifice during wartime. What a waste of skin.

By: dash_slot-

dash_slot- — Thu, 10 Jun 2004 09:23:45 -0800

Jeez, did he? Well, all I can say is that I hope the period of time the White House feels chastened is longer than the 30 years from Nixon's exit to today (hoping desperately that this denouement occurs soon).

By: troutfishing

troutfishing — Thu, 10 Jun 2004 12:48:20 -0800

JollyWanker - I was joking, really. Here, have a laugh : "Like rats in a trap, they are" - Bush, Cheney indictments in Plame case looming in CIA engineered counter-coup !

By: fullerine

fullerine — Fri, 11 Jun 2004 00:03:54 -0800

Seems like the State Department has done admitted they were wrong.

By: fullerine

fullerine — Fri, 11 Jun 2004 00:05:59 -0800

"has done admitted", now that is classy. should be has done a u-turn and admitted they were wrong

By: boredomjockey

boredomjockey — Fri, 11 Jun 2004 01:15:02 -0800

"has done admitted", now that is classy. That would go over just fine here in Texas.

By: shoos

shoos — Tue, 22 Jun 2004 17:10:50 -0800

Terrorist incidents actually ROSE in 2003, by 1.46%.

By: amberglow

amberglow — Tue, 22 Jun 2004 17:47:30 -0800

State Dept. Doubles Its Calculation on '03 Terrorism Casualties In revising its annual "Patterns of Global Terrorism" report, the department listed 625 deaths last year from terror-related causes, down from the 725 in 2002, but well above the 307 originally declared in April. It also reported an increase in total terror attacks, to 208, up from the 190 listed in the original report and the 205 in 2002. The revised report said that 3,646 people were wounded in terror attacks last year, more than double the 1,593 cited in April, and a substantial increase from the 2,013 in 2002.

By: shoos

shoos — Tue, 22 Jun 2004 21:33:01 -0800

Terrorist incidents actually ROSE in 2003, but deaths dropped by 13.8%.

By: shoos

shoos — Tue, 22 Jun 2004 22:37:52 -0800

Over the past 30 years, the largest increase in terrorist incidents occurred from 98-99 (+44%) the largest drop in terrorist incidents occurred from 01-02 (-42%) A good collection of the annual reports (in pdf) Do you think Clinton's book is selling so well now because people are eager to learn more about his wily antiterror methods?

By: five fresh fish

five fresh fish — Tue, 22 Jun 2004 23:13:58 -0800

Maybe terrorism is kind of like orgasm: there's a bit of a refractory period before you can get it up again...

By: shoos

shoos — Tue, 22 Jun 2004 23:53:00 -0800

FFF: the data is all right there. See how the orgasm model stands up.