And since "mission" is "accomplished" -
Terrorist attacks worldwide shot up more than 25 percent last year, killing 40 percent more people than in 2005, particularly in Iraq where extremists used chemical weapons and suicide bombers to target crowds, the State Department said Monday.
(source)
By who's accounting and who's interpretation? Was all relevant data considered, or only that data favorable to a particular interpretation? How was the data gathered? How was the study premise formulated? How did they know the footprints were fake? (Think about that last one. :) )
Always check the work behind a conclusion.