Insurgentjg

A piece in the December 27, 2007 Cleveland Plain Dealer, “Vote on fate of Kirkuk postponed,” by Tina Susman and Asso Ahmed of the L.A. Times, reported referendum, to decide whether the oil rich city of Kirkuk will join semi-autonomous region of Kurdistan or will remain under Iraq central government, is being postponed for further six months. Other major decision for the delay is in the re-writing of a national constitution by the head of Iraqi parliament’s constitutional review committee, Humam Hamoudi. This is the fourth time that target date has not been met to articulate the new constitution. Such delays will hinder the progress of other related issues.While Iraqis are kicking the can down the road, Americans are also playing their part in a process. American funded Sunni militia is actively working in more than 300 communities in Iraq with it volunteer numbers growing day by day. They have been credited with reducing violence in some of Iraq’s most violent areas. But a wide belief about the militia is that it could further de-stabalise the country. Writer comments this is quiet a valid concern as the Sunnis who have adopted the friendly strategy may come up again against Shiites and in the case of Kirkuk, the Kurds.Iraq is somewhat on peace these days and it’s a high time that American pull back their men and leave the country announcing “Mission Accomplished”, as the riots wil rise again shortly. But it seems that Bush administration will not withdraw from the country no matter how favourable the situation is. They are planning to hand over the tactics of ugly war to their successors probably the Democrats.“But what of the Democrats who control both Houses of Congress? Why do they keep funding the war, as they just did again?” There are several reasons to continue with the war of aggression and none of them are pretty. Democrats are of view that they will cash the Bush’s war and get more votes. Running against the Bushs war is more fruitful then putting an end to the war. Most of the leading presidential candidates are ambiguous in their campaigns about putting an end to the war America has waged upon the world. According to Lind partially the reason behind this ambiguity is “because just as the neo-cons now dominate Republican circles, so the Democratic Establishment is in thrall to the neo-liberals. Both cabals of neos favor a world-dominating American empire, run of course by themselves. We are reminded once again that while there may be, at least on paper, two parties, there is one Establishment. It does not look favourably on ending the games off which it feeds.”Lind also makes reference to other mid eastern country who wish the war in Iraq to continue and looks forward for the attacks on Iran. Money has never spoke this loud in any election year. Napoleon once said that “I may loose a battle but I will never loos a minute.” American politicians are waiting for the time to run out which their country have so dearly bought in Iraq. Moral burden of command demands from military to step up and go public and announce their departure from the ruined land. Some of them will get fired for their morally ethical response yet General Petraeus probably will remain untouched once again.

But history reveals quiet a grim moral through out the Vietnam war, American generals are more likely to step up to the trough than to the plate.

______________________________

This essay is rephrased from William S. Lind’s article “why do democrats keep funding the war?” Lind is expressing his own personal opinion, is Director for the Center for Cultural Conservatism for the Free Congress Foundation.

In his article “Nothing Can Morally Justify the Invasion of Iraq” Jacob Hornberger writes that the neo-con supporters of the U.S. government’s war of aggression against Iraq are still holding their hopes high that some how they will be able to prove the war of aggression a right step of US against the Iraqi regime and the day will come for them to proudly announce “You see, this shows that we were right after all to invade and occupy Iraq and kill and maim hundreds of thousands of Iraqi people.”
On the other hand associated press is reporting that U.S. soldiers have come across mass graves and torture cells in North of Baghdad. Where chains were attached to blood stained walls while a metal bed attached to the electrical shock system. Here a point to ponder is whether all the things in torture cell really represented items to torture as definition of suffering and torture depends upon each person’s subjective determination of the term!
The article also wonders and questions whether there was torture in Iraq under Saddam Hussein. If the justifications for inducing torture were different from those employed today by current U.S. torturers. Hornberger made reference to the writings of Rosa Brooks from Los Angeles Times who states that Baghdad has now been divided into “cleansed”neighbourhoods, where Sunnis occupy some areas and Shiites occupy other. U.s strategy to keep the areas safe from violence is to segregate them with walls. A wonderfully interesting way of pentagon to keep peace in a society that is been destroyed with its invasion.
America’s stance on attacking Iraq is that “it is because of the love American government has for Iraqi nation”. Whereas hundreds of thousands of Iraqis are trying to flee to neighbouring countries where U.S. governments has refused to let them immigrate to the United States. What a good strategy to reduce the death toll than by reducing the country’s population?
Things were not crazy enough, we now learn that U.S. government is now in forefronts with Turkey to attack Iraqi Kurds in northern parts of the already ruined country. There is absolutely no logic behind connecting 9/11 attacks to Iraq, especially when none of the attackers were from Iraq. Yet Iraq is a doomed country now where million of innocent people are victimised, tortured and killed. Hornberger relates the Iraq chapter to the famous dictum of Tacitus: “They made a desert and called it peace.”
Nothing can ever be able to justify the war of aggression against a country which is totally innocent of the September 11 attacks. Not even the vague definition of terrorism can morally justify killing millions of Iraqis who were merely trying to get rid of the illegal invaders who were in their country justifying their presence with fake and false rationales.

_________________________________________________________ 

Jacob Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation.

Not having a written constitution allowed Blair and his advisers to go to war without reference to parliament or the public. George Monbiot comments on a rather confusing unbalanced discussion programme broadcasted on the BBC a Friday before the New Year. Programme discussed with Lord Guthrie, formerly chief of the defense staff, and Sir Kevin Tebbit, until recently the senior civil servant at the Ministry of Defense, if the parliament decides whether Britain should or not go for war. The discussion reveals some terrifying facts about the privileges of unfathomable power which lead Britain to become a party to a crime that killed million of people and changed the history of the world.
Guthrie argued that parliamentary approval would mean intelligence had to be shared with MPs; that the other side could not be taken by surprise which means that the enemies will know that an attack has been planned. Tebbit argued that the prime minister can not deploy forces until he or she has a command over majority of the parliament. This way the executive is already accountable to parliament. Once the prime minister has his majority, in other words, MPs become redundant.Wagging a war of aggression is considered to be a supreme international crime, according to International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg. It is actually at the top of the list of war crimes but mostly the nations or organisations supporting the point of view are scoffed off where in reality these are the few who stand between us and the greatest crimes in history.
If Britain’s top most officers do not understand the simple idea then what can be expected from the country’s policies. In September 2002, a speech in Lords he stated that Britain has to join US in operations against Iraq, the sooner we strike the less easier it will be to handle the threat. No one in the parliament pointed out that he is proposing the supreme international crime. Later on Guthrie also argued that it is unthinkable for British servicemen and women to be sent to international court, regardless of what ever crime they might have committed. He also proposed government that British forces should be allowed to opt out of the European convention on human rights. The grey heads murmured their agreement. The grey heads murmured their agreement. 
According to the British government both the Commons public administration committee and the Lords constitution committee is aware that decision making should provide  “provide sufficient flexibility for deployments which need to be made without prior parliamentary approval for reasons of urgency or necessary operational secrecy”. This means that any matter can’t be kept secret from the parliament unless it is kept from the UN.
Guardian got hold of some letters in 2003 showing how Tebbit prevented the fraud squad at the MoD from investigating the allegations against corrupt dealings by the arms manufacturers BAE. He tipped off the BAE chairman about the confidential letter that was sent by the Serious Fraud Office and he never informed his ministers about the warnings by SFO. In October 2003, during investigations for the death of government scientist David Kelly, he revealed that a decision to name Kelly was made in a “meeting chaired by the prime minister.” This could have been the end of the Blair’s tenure in 10 Downing Street but after a week Tebbit denounced his statement in a written form tto Lord Hutton. Neither parliament nor press was informed about the retraction and it was only after three months when Hutton’s report was published that every one came to know about the hidden realities. Tony Blair already knowing about the secret took crushing advantage.
This programme revealed that both Guthrie and Tallbot have not learnt much from their experiences of disaster in Iraq. They are not alone; Tony Blair wrote an article for the economist “What I have learned” in which he states that “his critics are both wrong and dangerous and that his decisions are based upon the freedom, democracy, responsibility, justice and fairness.” He added that his decisions were difficult to take but were invariably right.
Blair, brown, Straw, Hoon, Campball and their legal advisors still haven’t said a word of regret about Britain’s participation in the supreme international crime. The press and parliament seem to follow the petition of Blair and British government that we “move on” from disastrous land of Iraq. But the question is that does British government has ever learnt from its prior experiences?
British unwritten constitution is widely referred as the gentleman’s agreement, which allows prime minister to act without making any references. Britain went on supporting its ally forces in Iraq because the common people and the parliament were not informed at the time of decision.
George Monbiot going further on the subject says that “Had the truth not been suppressed, Britain could never have attacked Iraq. Real constitutional reform requires much more than the timid proposals in the green paper on the governance of Britain, which are likely to appear in a bill in a few weeks’ time. Yes, parliament should be allowed to vote on whether to go to war, yes the royal prerogative should be rolled back. But the prime minister, his diplomats, civil servants and generals would still decide which wars parliament needs to know about, which crimes could be secretly committed in our name. Real constitutional reform means not only handing power to parliament but also confronting the power of the hard, unaccountable people who act as if it is their birthright.”

___________________________________________________

1  George Monbiot, How Britain became party to a crime, The Guardian.
2  Ibid
3  Ibid
4  Ibid

Not having a written constitution allowed Blair and his advisers to go to war without reference to parliament or the public. George Monbiot comments on a rather confusing unbalanced discussion programme broadcasted on the BBC a Friday before the New Year. Programme discussed with Lord Guthrie, formerly chief of the defense staff, and Sir Kevin Tebbit, until recently the senior civil servant at the Ministry of Defense, if the parliament decides whether Britain should or not go for war. The discussion reveals some terrifying facts about the privileges of unfathomable power which lead Britain to become a party to a crime that killed million of people and changed the history of the world. Guthrie argued that parliamentary approval would mean intelligence had to be shared with MPs; that the other side could not be taken by surprise which means that the enemies will know that an attack has been planned. Tebbit argued that the prime minister can not deploy forces until he or she has a command over majority of the parliament. This way the executive is already accountable to parliament. Once the prime minister has his majority, in other words, MPs become redundant.[1] Wagging a war of aggression is considered to be a supreme international crime, according to International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg. It is actually at the top of the list of war crimes but mostly th e nations or organisation supporting the point of view are scoffed off where in reality these are the few who stand between us and the greatest crimes in history. Cont… 

[1] George Monbiot, How Britain became party to a crime, The Guardian.

 Earlier on this blog a report on water and sanitation is been published, discussing the damages lack of portable water availability has caused to the masses. Following essay is based upon the reports published by The Observer, fearing that 24.5 million people may go hungry because of limited facilities available to crops and poultry industry- catastrophe in making for Iraqis. Majority of the farmers in South do not have access to the seeds, fertilizers and pesticides. Government warehouses which use to provide Iraqi farmers have been looted particularly in centre and south of the country. Collapse of the pumpng stations furthers adds to a deterioration situation. Spokesman Barry Came comments that ‘Vegetables and poultry are particularly important because they are the main source of protein, vitamins, minerals and a host of micro-nutrients that are missing from the oil-for-food basket which is also why malnutrition is endemic in Iraq,’ Iraqi farmers have not been able to plant tomatoes and onions, potatoes, cucumbers, water melon, peppers, beans and squash due to lack of availability of seeds, this will further exacerbate the situation‘Vegetables and poultry are particularly important because they are the main source of protein, vitamins, minerals and a host of micro-nutrients that are missing from the oil-for-food basket which is also why malnutrition is endemic in Iraq,’[1] Majority of Iraqi population, almost sixty per cent of them, depended on the oil-for-food programme, started at the end of the 1991Gulf war. Oil-for-food programme was aimed at providing Iraq with supplies of wheat, pulses and flour in exchange for oil. Irrigation system urgently needs to be revived in southern and central Iraq. Unattended poultry industry thrives for attention too. Thousands of starving birds have died which is causing the spread of different epidemics. This traumatizing situation of once blooming country is prevailing for years and recent war has brought the nation at the brink of starvation. Iraq awaits the long lost peace and solitude!

William Blum in his article ”Oh! By the way Iraqis don’t really want us” explains the results of survey conducted by US military hired firm amongst the cross sections of Iraqi society. In nut shell, William’s report states the following facts:
* Until the March 2003 US occupation Sunnis and Shiites coexisted peacefully.
* Iraqis of all sectarian and ethnic groups believe that the US military invasion is the primary root of the violent differences among them.
* After the United States leaves Iraq, national reconciliation will happen “naturally.”
* A sense of “optimistic possibility permeated all focus groups … and far more commonalities than differences are found among these seemingly diverse groups of Iraqis.”
* Dividing Iraq into three states would hinder national reconciliation. (Only the Kurds did not reject this option.)
* Most would describe the negative elements of life in Iraq as beginning with the US occupation.
* Few mentioned Saddam Hussein as a cause of their problems, which the report described as an important finding, implying that “the current strife in Iraq seems to have totally eclipsed any agonies or grievances many Iraqis would have incurred from the past regime, which lasted for nearly four decades — as opposed to the current conflict, which has lasted for five years.”
Apart from the above mentioned facts article also refers to another companies which is been conducting widespread polls in Iraq’s 18 provinces and who came up with the results and findings not very different from above. Systems, a Virginia-based company that maintains offices in each of Iraqs provinces, recently released survey findings, which reveals similar findings. One os their report states that majority of the Iraqis believe that “we are suffering more now because of the invasion not when the local fanatics who ruled us before“
The Washington Post added this note on December 10th “In just ten minutes time US did the biggest air strike on the southern outskirts of Baghdad, which invading army considered to be the safe heavens for al-Qaeda. Other media report printed the statement of Cesar Pardo, representative of the governing Democratic Revolutionary Party, which holds a majority in the legislature, legislature of Panama declared December 20th the national day for mourning. 20th day of December in 1869 was the horrific day when the nation of panama was invaded by the most powerful army in the world. US officials downplayed the issue saying that they prefer to look at the future.
“As with their attack on Iraq on March 19, 2003, the United States, with no provocation or international legality (yet raged another war of aggression), first bombed Panama, then staged a ground invasion, killing as many as a few thousand, while offering no believable reason for their psychopathic behavior.”

Critiques of Iraq war are of view that there will be a day when Iraq will again be a free state and will also observe mourning on March 19th.

___________________________ 

This article is rephrased from the essay by William Blum, “Oh! By the way the Iraqi’s doesn’t really want us”

William Blum is the author of Killing Hope: U.S. Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II, Rogue State: a guide to the World’s Only Super Power. and West-Bloc Dissident: a Cold War Political Memoir.

The war brings along series of crimes in all walks of life! British drug companies GlaxoSmithKline and Astra Zeneca have been ordered by the Serious fraud Office to hand over all the confidential files and correspondence details related to dealings in Iraq under UN oil-for-food programme. Several other British companies most importantly infrastructure firms have been ordered the same disclosure. British firms have been investigated in alleged corruption in there dealings during the final years of Saddam Hussein.
 GlaxoSmithKline denies the allegation saying that  the company does not believes that its employees or their agents in Iraq knowingly engaged in any wrong doing regarding oil for food programme. “In fact, GSK went to considerable lengths to cooperate with UK government authorities responsible for the UK administration of the programme, and to impose anti-corruption measures when dealing with intermediaries in Iraq.”Other firms AstraZeneca and Eli Lilly also confirmed the SFO’s demand for the documents and stated that they will corporate with the British government and SFO’s enquiry.
In a report by Paul Vauker more than 2,200 firms around the world are been alleged for bribery payments beneficial to the Iraqi regime. Report also accuses UN official over the scheme of involvement in corruption. Commenting on US Securities and Exchange Commission’s criminal investigations, SFO said that it is only monitoring the allegations its small specialist investigations unit was expected to play a supportive role in a US-led inquiry. Independent criminal enquiry out of London is only being carried out after SFO’s controversial negligence of investigating involvement of a contract between contract between the British arms manufacturer BAE Systems and Saudi Arabia.
SFO has gained funds of £22m  to pursue oil-for-food allegations against British firms and ministers are hoping that this go some way to restoring Britain’s reputation for tackling UK-based companies involved in overseas corruption.

Nir Rosen views on the surge
In his interview to Mike Whitney, Nir Rosen said that to call operation Iraq a surge is misleading. He said that surge is fast; where this took months. Its more like an ooze in which U.S. barely increased the number of troops, they just forced already stressed American soldiers to stay longer. At the same time, U.S. has doubled their enemies; in addition to Shiite militias they are also encountering the Shiite Mahdi army. Commenting on the level of violence being brought down because of the surge, he said ”Objectively speaking, the violence is down in Baghdad, but that’s mainly due to the failure of the US to establish security. That’s not success…Sure, less people are being killed but that’s because there are less people to kill.”
It’s not the power of surge that has reduced the number of people being killed in Iraq everyday. If you look closely there are different attributes which is bringing the toll down. Firstly, Iraq is a country where violence and civil war has left thousand displaced, Shiite militias trying to get rid of Sunnis while Sunni militias are hunting down Shiites, Kurds and Christians. There are just less people to kill. Secondly U.S. never expected that Mehdi army will be ordered to halt action against Shiites and foreign forces or Sunnis to work with U.S. to prepare for the next battle. One important fact that most living in peace neglects is the truth of humans trying to find normalcy amongst the most abnormal situations. Cont…

________________________________________________
Nir Rosen is the author of In the Belly of the Green Bird: The Triumph of the Martyrs in Iraq. He has spent more than two years in Iraq reporting on the American occupation, his reporting and research is also focused on the origins and development of Islamist resistance, insurgency, and terrorist organizations. He has also reported from Somalia, where he investigated Islamist movements; Jordan, where he investigated the origins and future of the Zarqawi movement; and Pakistan, where he investigated the madrassas and pro-Taliban movements.

Northern Iraq is under constant attack by Turkish planes. In just ten days of the New Year, Turkish warplanes have attacked atleast three suspected Kurdish rebel hideouts in northern Iraq. According to Turkey’s military the planes struck in an “effective pinpoint operation”, targeting eight caves and other hideouts being used by rebels of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK). It is also reported that Turkish troops are already set to chase rebels in a province of Turkey nearing Iraqi borders. Everyday tens of rebels are reported dead and several injured with no or nearly no medical aid.
These attacks on Turkish / Kurdish rebels are backed up by the intelligence services provided by US to Turkish government, though none of the reports clearly states that the recent attacks are based upon the same reports. European Union, US and Turkey blames Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK).to wage the war in parts of Turkey for autonomous parts. PKK is considered to be terrorist organizations not quiet different from the status of al-Qaeda. Turkish raids on Iraq add’s further in already deteriorated situation of the country. A war in a country where everything is already in tatters because of the war led by no one else but Turkey’s closest ally United States.
 

United Nations, in its 60 years tenure has not been able to come up with the satisfactory definition of terrorism. International Criminal Court has excluded terrorism from its jurisdiction, although it deals with a wide range of crimes including genocide. Terrorism is still an abstract concept but has attracted lots of attention by media and academic circles. Authoritarian governments in many countries have been active in taking actions against terrorism, claiming to be the only savior of the country from the deadly virus. Most importantly after September 11 attacks, US has lead a war against terrorism followed by many other countries who want to get rid of terror by spreading more of it. The cooperation Washington gained for war on terror was even more than the cooperation against the international communism. The European Union and Russia collectively rallied to the US cause.

Opinion about the terrorism and terrorist activities is widely been condoned in US but analyising the political and social causes of terrorism has been avoided. Everyone was supposed to agree to the official line – that an irrational force inspired by a hatred of democracy threatened the planet. None of the books considered here justify terrorism; they analyze its causes and suggest remedies.

Violence with political aims

“Unknown Soldiers” a book by Matthew Carr, is about how terrorism is violence adhered to achieve the political aims. He quoted the example of attacks and assassinations in 19th century Russia by organizations claiming to be inspired the French revolution. In 20th century Balkans were under continuous war(1900-13) and in Ireland after 1916.All over the world colonies rebelled against their oppressors

Freedom fighter and rebel groups were demonized to justify repression by the colonial powers. They referred terrorists as bandits, criminals and vermin. In 1950’s Mau rebels in Kenya were accused of belonging to fiendish sect by the British officials and settlers. Even the New York Times explained Kenyan uprising as their frustration on being unable to embrace the development brought in by civilization. Seven years of revolt resulted in massive killing and displacement. Insurgents killed 32 settlers and 177 members of the security forces, about 100 of them African. Whereas the army and police killed more than 20,000 Mau Mau, with hundreds of thousands of Kenyans injured and driven from their homes. Carr points bring our attention to the fact that colonial conflicts often bring former terrorist leaders to power: Jomo Kenyatta in Kenya, Nelson Mandela in South Africa, Ahmed Ben Bella in Algeria, Menachem Begin in Israel and Anwar Sadat in Egypt.

Authorities never consider motives of terrorists to be legitimate and their social demands & sources of their discontent is never taken into account unless under extreme pressure. American eminent writers have put forward many theories, for instance Professor Huttington in 1993, forecasted the clash of civilizations between the West and Islam. In 1964 the historian Bernard Lewis explained the root cause of Arab Israel war to be the inability of the Muslim world to adapt to modernity.

“Violence to oppose that of their oppressors”

Phil Rees in his book “Dining with terrorists” states that violence is merely a way of raising international awareness of distress. Rees is an investigative journalist who has won several international awards for his work on demystifying the motives of terrorists. He has travelled around the world talking to the leaders of organizations in such a way that none re portrayed as terrorists yet convey their political message across. He brings out the human side of his stories by the photographs to back his description of terrorists’ convictions and give powerful arguments to find more peaceable ways to end the violence.

Rees is a remarkable storyteller, the way he puts forward his interviewees’ point of view, who claim that they resort violence only to oppose their oppressors and some want to force the enemy to negotiate a compromise. Rees also argues that Palestinian response in 1970’s especially the hijacking of the airplanes should be treated as propaganda. The Palestinians are resistance fighters just as the Zionists under British between 1922 to 1948 or as the French during German occupation.
1997 was the year when Rees got know a founder of Hamas Issmael Abu Shanab, who completed his education from US and was penned many books on technology or politics. Abu Shanab after serving eight years in Israeli jails remaed a militant. His point of view was that Palestinians only send their children to die in their fight for freedom as a response to tank shelling, bombs dropped by F16 jets and missiles launched by Apache assault helicopters. Violence, in his point of view is a way to get international attention to distress and oppression. Abu shanab’s car was hit by rocket launcher by an Issraeli helicopter. Abu Shanab was the 138th victim of Issrael’s targeted assassination policy which under international law is considered as war crime.

Stop the war on words

Rees during his visit to Columbia witnessed the Marxist Revolutionary Armed forces and counter revolutionary militia. Both the organizations involved in massive killings, kidnapping of the fellow citizens who were suspected to gain sympathies of rival organization. Rees in his accounts interestingly states that instead of naming these organizations terrorists, it will be a better option to try and getting the conflicting parties problems solved and stop the war on words for the sake of world’s peace. ”(1)Quoting former US ambassadors to Latin America, he points out that the US policy in its backyard has little to recommend it .

In his accounts he also states that blame for the crimes committed in Basque country can not only be blamed on Euskadi ta Askatasuna (ETA) independence movement but also on the Spanish government, and indirectly on US and Europe, fo condemning this terrorism without even initiating a peace dialogue. Stating on the situation in Northern Ireland he says that “a peaceful settlement has been found for a conflict that dragged on for decades and was presented as being religious in origin, therefore intractable: it required long negotiations with the Irish Republican Army.”
Whereas the case of Al- Qaeda is different as Bush and Al-Qaeda both considers the differences between the Judeo Christian West and Islam is the struggle between life and death. There is no question of negotiation or compromise so the hope for the peaceful situation is grim. “The jihad waged by Osama bin Laden is as inflexible as the crusade launched by Bush after 9/11.” Rees comments that to get hold of Al-Qaeda is is the most difficult task because of its varied and vast location between the mountains of Pakistan and Afghanistan and the networking is based just upon a call to its supporters. Now how the Western governments are thinking to deal with such autonomous units is a question to ponder!

___________________________________
 1- The most recent example is the release on bail on 11 April of Luis Posada Carriles in New Mexico. He is an anti-Castro Cuban exile, who took part in the failed Bay of Pigs invasion in April 1961, and a CIA informer. He masterminded the plan to blow up a Cubana de Aviacion airliner in 1976, killing 73 passengers. After entering the US illegally in 2005 he was charged with breaking immigration laws, invalidating the extradition applications filed by Cuba and Venezuela (from which the doomed flight took off).

This article is rephrased from the article published in Le Monde diplomatique, “Does `global war on terror’ mask a new imperialism?” by Eric Rouleau

MATTHEW CARR: Unknown Soldiers: How Terrorism Transformed the Modern World (Profile Books, London, 2006, 400pps, £20)

PHIL REES: Dining With Terrorists: Meetings With the World’s Most Wanted Militants (Macmillan, London, 2005, 432pps, £7.99)