25,000 non-Muslim casualties of terrorism last year
I already blogged the State Dept's report on terrorism which showed the number of terror incidents shot through the roof in 2005, but reading this mention in a USAToday article, something else struck me...
Okay, if I'm doing my math right, that means there were at least 25,000 non-Muslims killed or wounded in terror attacks last year. It's not that I value Muslim terror victims less, but as Iraq is included in the statistics, I'm not surprised by that number.
But, I'm about as news-junkie as news-junkie gets, and that 25,000 number is surprising to me, because it's a pretty big terror attack that kills or wounds a hundred and you'd be looking at a major attack outside Iraq more than one every two days. Or at least one major attack a week with many smaller events at several a day. Am I missing something, am I forgetting something?
Okay, if I'm doing my math right, that means there were at least 25,000 non-Muslims killed or wounded in terror attacks last year. It's not that I value Muslim terror victims less, but as Iraq is included in the statistics, I'm not surprised by that number.
But, I'm about as news-junkie as news-junkie gets, and that 25,000 number is surprising to me, because it's a pretty big terror attack that kills or wounds a hundred and you'd be looking at a major attack outside Iraq more than one every two days. Or at least one major attack a week with many smaller events at several a day. Am I missing something, am I forgetting something?
2 Comments:
I'm confused too. 14,600 deaths...approximately 40,000 people killed. Excuse me, but doesn't "deaths" refer to "people killed"? What accounts for the difference?
Am I experiencing a brain freeze?
By Motherlode, at 3:36 PM
I read it 14,600 deaths and then an inclusive 40,000 killed or wounded, so 35,400 wounded.
But, I will say this. It would not surprise me if it was intentionally complicated. After all, it's not good news for the administration and it was part of the Friday evening document dump, released at 6PM to even avoid the evening news.
If it was good news, it would've been the prime spot in one of those Bush lunchtime speeches.
Mike
By mikevotes, at 5:43 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home