Worldwide terrorist attacks down in 2003

[maddezmom]

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- 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.

The Patterns of Global Terrorism report said 190 acts of international terrorism occurred in 2003 -- a slight drop from 198 attacks the previous year and the lowest total since 1969.

The figure marked a 45 percent decrease in attacks since 2001, but it did not include most of the attacks in Iraq, because attacks against combatants did not fit the U.S. definition of international terrorism.

Cofer Black, the State Department's ambassador at large for counterterrorism, told a news conference that he attributed the decrease to "unprecedented collaboration between the United States and foreign partners to defeat terrorism."

The report counted 82 anti-U.S. attacks around the world in 2003, up from 77 in 2002. Thirty-five American citizens died in terrorist attacks last year.

~snip~
more: http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/04/29/terror.report/


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

How many terrorist attacks has the world seen in just the past 4 months? Are we supposed to feel safer now because in 2003 it was down. More propaganda from CNN, the State Dept and the US Gov't. :puke:

[DS1]

1. Fine, the number of attacks may be down, but what about deaths?

Bali was a pretty big one, wasn't it?

[demdave]

2. Yes, the Islamic extremists are pulling out all the stops.

I guess what they say about cornered animals that sense their impending death is true. They use everything they have.

[FlemingsGhost]

5. Now * that's * gotta be sarcasm, right?

Well done.

[demdave]

8. Nope

[Just Me]

11. Bush has managed to increase attacks against the US,...

,...and decrease the attacks against the rest of the world.

He is SOOOOO f*cking talented.

Let's all call the WH and congratulate them on their skill to create more enemies, disenfrachise all friends and f*ck the American people while making a profit,...in less than four years!!!

:grr:

[KissMyAsscroft]

3. Total propaganda....

You have to look at attempts, recruiting, public opinion,....

This is insane! They are trying to fight this linear war on a concept and trotting out this BS to say they are making progress.

When the world hates your guts and you are bombing people to death...you are creating new suicide bombers....you are NOT HELPING.

And this genius statement...

"The figure marked a 45 percent decrease in attacks since 2001, but it did not include most of the attacks in Iraq,"


I need a nap...

[MellowMarsh]

4. Will Bush and Blair get the credit?

Is there a whiff of a Nobel in the air?

[maddezmom]

6. they'll get credit for 2004 from me

and I'm sure the numbers will be record breaking, if the 1st 4 months are any indication

[Aidoneus]

13. What are you referring to?

[maddezmom]

15. the increase of terrorism since the US went to war w/ Iraq n/t

[54anickel]

7. We're winning the war on terrorism!

Come on, give me a break. #2 at the Pentagon can't correctly count the number of dead troops in Iraq. Shrub can't coun't anything except $100 bills.

This is complete BS, they count what they want, that's the great thing about fight an undefinable war against an indefinable enemy. They make up the rules as they go along.

A 7% increase in anti-US attacks 02 to 03.
45% drop since 01? Huh? How'd they come up with that?
Lowest since 1969? WTF?

This people make me sick. :puke:

[NewYorkerfromMass]

9. 3/11 TRUMPS ALL

Idiots. One big one like that fucks all logic.

[Just Me]

10. Cough, spit, snort,...

,..."82 anti-U.S. attacks around the world in 2003, up from 77 in 2002,..."

I note that terrorist acts have GONE UP, against us,...and down against the rest of the world.

I WONDER WHY?!?!?!?!

More manipulative spin.

Does anyone get as tired of this deception as I do?

[killbotfactory]

14. Not including attacks on our troops

Or the anything happening in Iraq.

What a joke.

[number6]

12. LOL

"The figure marked a 45 percent decrease in attacks since 2001, but it did not include most of the attacks in Iraq, because attacks against combatants did not fit the U.S. definition of international terrorism."

oh please, CNN is still a joke ...

[nonbelief]

16. What is terror?

That Iraqi human being with his head covered in a hood while standing on a box with wires attached to his hands would have been terrified....wouldn't he?

Since he was experiencing terror, and this was the aim of U.S soldiers, isn't it fair to say U.S soldiers committed an act of terrorism against him?

Shouldn't those U.S soldiers be in cells in Camp X-Ray?

[oblivious]

17. BBC TV had a piece on that this morning

They point out that a Japanese report showed terrorism attacks up 20%, But the US and Japanese studies have different definitions of terrorism. The US study apparently does not classify a terrorist act as such if it is carried out by a country's own people, citing a Bogata nightclub bombing or something, and it doesn't consider any of the Iraq terrorist incidents terror because it says they were all against military targets.

[leesa]

18. Oh, this is a crack-up. They are blaming bombs on "terrorists" daily

and yet they are somehow magically down??? This is truly bipolar schizophrenia in action.

[oblivious]

19. Yeah, that's the point, isn't it.

I can't find words to describe this...your 'bipolar schizo' is a start.