[Overpaid Slacker]

I don't think this is a "lie" "biting any dust" but it's food for thought. My first questions are -- who determines whether a death is related to a terrorist incident? Second, who determines whether it's a "terrorist incident"? Are roadside bombings in a war zone in Iraq "terrorist" attacks? It'd be convenient if they were if you really wanted to try to do was dis Bush and not inform. FTR, the link isn't working for me, so I don't know if they deal with it.

Also, as has been alluded to, many of the attacks are those which we haven't been directly trying to (even if we were able) to prevent. Many of the losses cited above have to do with Chechen rebels attacking Russia -- this is not a front we're engaged on, frankly -- and it's impossible for us to be so. It is unreasonable to so broadly construe terrorist attacks and global safety to include what Russia deems to be an internal conflict it will not allow the world to intervene upon.

It's intellectually sloppy (or really conveeeeeeenient) to lump attacks predicated on an "internal" civil war that the US has no ability to influence with islamofascist terrorism around the world. Tech, you split hairs and find "distinctions without a difference" all over the place; you can't honestly tell me you don't see the difference here. Just put down the knee-jerk Bush hatred crap for one day; you may wind up a happier person.

JP