I might be wrong but I'm guessing that Bruce Schneier is Jewish so if seems not entirely surprising that his understanding of terrorism is stunted or simplistic. He's been spoon-fed simplistic prejudice on terrorist motivation from the cradle.

Yes, you might be wrong.

Might be?

Returning to the subject for a moment, I am indebted to you for pointing out a definition of "perversely" I hadn't encountered before.

Another interesting thing is that it's taken as absolutely axiomatic that Bush is obliged to be completely accurate in his characterisations of these murderous bastards, and when he isn't, well, that just won't do, will it? How will we prevail if we don't, you know, define things correctly? And if we are prevailing, despite the fact that apparent misunderstandings are being given voice, well, that's just, dare I say it... perverse?

Reagan claimed that the Missile Defense System had performed successful tests when it in fact had not. It has since been discovered that his claims were believed in Moscow. Some people call that "lying to the American people"; I call it "a counterintelligence coup".