Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for March, 2012

The study of terrorism received a massive boost following the 9/11 attacks. In the decade since then, tens of thousands of new books and articles on terrorism have been published. However, despite this massive growth in the field, there is still a great deal we do not know about the phenomenon and its effects, and there are many areas of controversy and dispute between terrorism scholars and experts. In response, me and my colleague, Samuel Justin Sinclair, recently published a book entitled, Contemporary Debates on Terrorism (Routledge, 2012).

A key purpose of this volume is to provide an accessible discussion of  what we believe are twelve key questions which in many ways define the core debates and controversies within the study of terrorism today. The questions we have identified touch upon all the important subjects of terrorism research – how it should be defined and understood as a concept, its main types or categories, the nature of the threat it poses, its origins and causes, and how it should be dealt with and managed over time. The chapters in our new book, written by leading scholars, represent the latest thinking about these core questions. As such, they provide a kind of snapshot or distillation of what we know about terrorism today, what we are still unsure of and where the key lines of debate – and thus where future research – lies.

The format and approach adopted in the book is unique and designed to provoke debate and discussion: in each case, a leading scholar takes a particular position on a given question, followed by an opposing or alternative viewpoint written by another leading scholar.  With a clear and forceful articulation of each side of the argument, the reader is then able to evaluate the relative merits of each set of arguments and make up their own mind. Supplementing the arguments on each side of the controversy, we have provided a follow-up set of discussion questions and recommended readings. This makes it an ideal book for teaching about terrorism, or readers who want to learn about terrorism.

The 12 central questions examined by our experts in the book are:

1. Is terrorism still a useful analytical term or should it be abandoned?

2. Is there a ‘new terrorism’ in existence today?

3. Can states be terrorists?

4. Is terrorism a serious threat to international and national security?

5. Is WMD terrorism a likely prospect in the future?

6. Does al Qaeda continue to pose a serious international threat?

7. Is terrorism the result of root causes such as poverty and exclusion?

8. Is religious extremism a major cause of terrorism?

9. Are counter-terrorism frameworks based on suppression and military force effective in responding to terrorism?

10. Is the use of coercive interrogation or torture permissible and effective as a counter-terrorism method?

11. Is the targeted assassination of terrorist suspects an effective response to terrorism?

12. Have global efforts to reduce terrorism and political violence been effective in the past decade?

 

The illustrious list of scholars contributing to the volume includes:

Jeffrey Addicott

Alejandra Bolanos

Robert Brecher

Dominic Bryan

Natividad Carpintero-Santamaría

Stephanie Carvin

Mark Cochrane

Jeffrey B. Cozzens

Isabelle Duyvesteyn

Boaz Ganor

Jeffrey Goodwin

Dipak K. Gupta

Graham R. Huesmann

L. Rowell Huesmann

Lee Jarvis

Ian S. Lustick

James and Brenda Lutz

Leena Malkki

Fathali M. Moghaddam

Rachel Monaghan

John Mueller

Amanda Munroe

Magnus Ranstorp

Paul Rogers

Andrew Silke

Michael Stohl

Paul Wilkinson

We believe the book is a useful introduction to the subject, and makes an important contribution to the study of terrorism. Some of the positive comments we’ve had about the book include:

Few topics have stimulated as much public debate as contemporary terrorism. What, if anything, does the word itself mean? Where did it come from? How serious a threat does it pose, and to whom? What are the best means for stopping it or at least mitigating its effects? Jackson and Sinclair have assembled an outstanding group of scholars who debate the answers to these and other questions  in a way that provides readers with clear understandings of both the complexity of the problems involved and alternative ways of solving them.’ — Leonard Weinberg, University of Nevada

‘This is a comprehensive, thought-provoking and fascinating volume. It provides the reader with conflicting views on terrorism and terrorism related phenomena. The authors are prominent scholars who offer fascinating arguments in a lucid style. This is the kind of scholarship that every individual who has an interest in terrorism should follow’ - Professor Ami Pedahzur, University of Texas at Austin, USA

‘This is an impressive collection of essays on a number of critically important debates on terrorism and political violence by an outstanding group of scholars. Incredibly rich, sober and mature in analysis Contemporary Debates on Terrorism is an excellent addition to the currently available literature and deserves to be read not only by academic specialists but also by security analysts, policy makers and general readers concerned about international security issues.’ — George Kassimeris, University of Wolverhampton, UK

Contemporary Debates on Terrorism presents a lively and informative selection of central debates which exemplify the modern terrorist environment. Jackson and Sinclair have assembled an exceptionally qualified panel of experts who articulately address critical issues defining the nature of present-day terrorism. Questions posed by the authors, and the robust positions taken by experts in this field, are guaranteed to stimulate critical thinking and quality discussions among readers.’ — Gus Martin, California State University, USA

Please check it out. We hope you enjoy it and find it helpful.

Read Full Post »

Imagine if the media did not uphold Western racism and bias. Imagine if the shoe was on the other foot in the treatment of minorities and current events. You might get stories such as the following:

The Aotearoa Times, 20 March 2018

A former company director of European-Paheka descent admits he ripped off West Cheviot Finance (WCF) to the tune of $23 million – spending more than $1m on “various female companions”. The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has revealed John Peter Carpenter’s spending habits after the former Gemfine Finance director pleaded guilty to six charges of dishonestly using documents, and two charges of false accounting.

The six charges against the well-known figure in the European community involved $23 million in fraud against SCF and related to 894 false transactions. WCF went into receivership in August, 2010 and triggered a $1.6 billion Government payout under the Crown’s retail deposit guarantee scheme.

In the Cheviot District Court today, Judge Mary Latimer said due to the “magnitude” of Carpenter’s offending the 54-year-old would be held in custody until his sentencing on May 3. “The loss to WCF as a consequence of the defendant’s offending is at least $23 million, which is a loss that will ultimately be borne by the New Zealand taxpayer,” said Judge Latimer.

She went on to say that, “His actions raise real questions about whether Europeans are ready to be put into positions of financial trust involving taxpayer’s money. It pains me to say it, but this case poses some serious and difficult questions for the European-Paheka community. The New Zealand public will not tolerate the profligate and dishonest waste of taxpayers’ money.”

………………………………………………………………………………………………..

The Kabul Telegraph, 21 March 2018

At least five Afghan military personnel could face a disciplinary review in connection with the recent burnings of American flags at a military base in Austin, Texas. An official familiar with the ongoing probe says a joint Afghan-U.S. team is convinced the burnings were not intentional.

But, two Kabul lawmakers are convinced extremists are intentionally using the incident to whip up anti-Afghan sentiment and increase violence against Afghan soldiers stationed in Texas to support to the fledgling democratic government.

“Just last month, we buried a corporal from Kandahar and it was an American soldier who turned on him, a trusted associate,” said Parliamentarian Shar Maliki. “This is getting outrageous. One thing, we should never apologize. This is just an excuse to inflict harm upon Afghans,” Maliki said. “Americans need to join the twenty-first century and realize that it’s just a piece of cloth. They may revere their flag, but killing in revenge for burning a flag is primitive behavior and cannot be tolerated.”

“This is being done by our enemies, by the so-called Sons of Texas, by the people who are using this flag-burning as an excuse to inflame the local population,” said MP Kaled Gulam Rasul. “It’s not being done by run-of-the-mill people, it’s being done by people who are looking for an excuse to say something bad and stir people up against the Afghans, who are only there to help,” Rasul said.

However, in a video-taped response from the Sons of Texas group posted on Youtube, their spokesman said, “After invading our land, killing our women and children every day in drone attacks, torturing people in their bases and urinating on the corpses of loyal Americans killed doing their patriotic duty, this was the final straw. We call on the American people to rise up and throw out the aggressors.” The spokesman went on to say that because the Afghan army had been in Texas for ten years, they ought to know by now how much the flag meant to Americans. “Nobody who desecrates our sacred flag can expect to escape the most severe retribution”, the spokesman said.

The official probe into the incident is expected to deliver its report by December.

……………………………………………………………………………………………….

The Palestine Daily, 22 March 2018

Livid American officials last night pointed the finger at Israel over a plot to kill Palestine’s ambassador on US soil.

As Britain lined up alongside the States to back any reprisals, President Michelle Lopez ordered a probe into Tel Aviv’s part in the plan. It came after an alleged plan to bomb a favourite Washington restaurant of ambassador Mohammad Ahmed was uncovered. Two Israeli nationals have now been charged with offences including conspiracy to murder a foreign official.

A spokesman for the White House said: “President Lopez underscored that the United States believes this plot to be a flagrant violation of US and international law. She reiterated our commitment to meet our responsibilities to ensure the security of diplomats serving in our country, or any other. She pointed out that Israel had a well-documented record of this sort of behavior. It must not be tolerated.”

Tel Aviv has dismissed the allegations but Britain said it would stand beside America in any action. A Downing Street spokesman said: “We congratulate the US authorities on the successful operation to disrupt a conspiracy to attack diplomats in the United States. The United Kingdom is in close touch with the US authorities on this case. We will support measures to hold Iran accountable for its actions.”

In a statement, Prime Minister Dipak Patel’s office said: “Indications that this plot was directed by elements of the Israeli regime are shocking. We will support measures to hold Israel accountable for its actions.”

US officials also said that the Iranian embassy in Washington was to have been attacked. One of the defendants appeared briefly at a New York City court yesterday. He did not enter a plea and was held without bail. He could face a life prison sentence if convicted on all charges, the Department of Justice said.

Israel’s official News Agency called the charges a “propaganda campaign” by the US government against Tel Aviv. The allegations were “a comedy show fabricated by America”, an Israeli foreign ministry spokesman told Reuters.

Read Full Post »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 966 other followers