Advertisings War On Terrorism

When photographs documenting the torture and humiliation of prisoners at Abu Ghraib came to the attention of a horrified public, national and international voices were raised in shock, asking how this happened. At War with Metaphor offers an answer, arguing that the abuses of Abu Ghraib were part of a systemic continuum of dehumanization. This continuum has its roots in our public discussions of the war on terror and the metaphors through which they are repeatedly framed. Arguing earnestly and incisively that these metaphors, if left unexamined, bind us into a cycle of violence that will only be intensified by a responsive violence of metaphor, Steuter and Wills examine compelling examples of the images of animal, insect, and disease that inform, shape, and limit our understanding of the war on terror. Tying these images to historical and contemporary uses of propaganda through a readable, accessible analysis of media filters, At War with Metaphor vividly explores how news media, including political cartoons and talk radio, are enmeshed in these damaging, dehumanizing metaphors. Analyzing media through the lenses of race and Orientalism, it invites us to hold our media and ourselves accountable for the choices we make in talking war and making enemies.

Sylvia focuses on the impact of the OC If You See Something, Say SomethingOCO advertising campaign in the New York City subway system. She demonstrates how ideas regarding security and terrorism are socially constructed; it shows how the narrative of the war on terrorism as a political project was linked to the narrative of a local urban security campaign. Her thesis suggests that this advertising campaign perpetuates the politics of fear connected to the greater war on terrorism and that this advertising campaign is a mechanism of social control. SylviaOCOs research draws upon and supports Michel FoucaultOCOs understanding of governmentality."

From chants and pamphlets to the Internet, terrorist propaganda can be deadly effective Propaganda used by terrorists and armed groups might not always be the most sophisticated or nuanced form of rhetoric, but with the right mix of emotion and logic it can be extremely effective in motivating supporters and frightening opponents. This book examines how terrorist groups in recent history have used propaganda, and how they had adapted to new communications technologies while retaining useful techniques from the past. Harmon and Bowdish trace how armed groups and terrorists around the globe have honed their messages for maximum impact, both on the communities they hope to persuade to support them and on the official state organs they hope to overthrow. Sometimes both the messages and the techniques are crude; others are highly refined, carefully crafted appeals to intellect or emotion, embracing the latest forms of communications technology. Whatever the ideas or methodology, all are intended to use the power of ideas, along with force, to project an image and to communicate—not merely intimidate. The Terrorist Argument uses nine case studies of how armed groups have used communications techniques with varying degrees of success: radio, newspapers, song, television, books, e-magazines, advertising, the Internet, and social media. It is fascinating reading for anyone interested in civil conflict, terrorism, communications theory and practice, or world affairs in general.

In this new and expanded edition of Michel Chossudovsky's 2002 best-seller, the author blows away the smokescreen put up by the mainstream media, that 9/11 was an attack on America by "Islamic terrorists". This expanded edition, which includes twelve new chapters focuses on the use of 9/11 as a pretext for the invasion and illegal occupation of Iraq, the militarisation of justice and law enforcement and the repeal of democracy. According to Chossudovsky, the "war on terrorism" is a complete fabrication based on the illusion that one man, Osama bin Laden, outwitted the $40 billion-a-year American intelligence apparatus. The "war on terrorism" is a war of conquest. Globalisation is the final march to the "New World Order", dominated by Wall Street and the U.S. military-industrial complex. September 11, 2001 provides a justification for waging a war without borders. Washington's agenda consists in extending the frontiers of the American Empire to facilitate complete U.S. corporate control, while installing within America the institutions of the Homeland Security State. Chossudovsky peels back layers of rhetoric to reveal a complex web of deceit aimed at luring the American people and the rest of the world into accepting a military solution which threatens the future of humanity.

Looking back at the "War on Terror" and its policies, actions, and the violence that followed, this book analyzes the resulting changes in international power structures and the relationship between citizens and their representatives. It defines our shortcomings in opposing this type of violence by demonstrating how the notion of legitimate violence has been broadened. The impact of the "War on Terror" on the public view of Liberalism is explored, as well as its effects on the role of state authorities in our lives. Thus, this book names the lessons we ought to learn from the actions taken against terrorist organizations.

Many of the most pressing questions raised by terrorism are philosophical in nature. This book explores the crucial ethical and theoretical issues, such as: What is "terrorism" and how is it different from other types of violence? Do recent terrorist attacks constitute a fundamentally "new" type of terrorism? How can a nation conduct a "just war" against terrorists? Is torture of terrorists during interrogation ever justified? Philosophers and terrorism experts answer these pressing moral and political questions with clarity and wisdom.

On 20 September 2001, in an address to a Joint Session of Congress and the American people, President George W Bush declared a 'war on terror'. The concept of the 'war on terror' has proven to be both an attractive and a potent rhetorical device. It has been adopted and elaborated upon by political leaders around the world, particularly in the context of military action in Afghanistan and Iraq. But use of the rhetoric has not been confined to the military context. The 'war on terror' is a domestic one, also, and the phrase has been used to account for broad criminal legislation, sweeping agency powers and potential human rights abuses throughout much of the world. This collection seeks both to draw on and to engage critically with the metaphor of war in the context of terrorism. It brings together a group of experts from Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom, France and Germany who write about terrorism from a variety of disciplinary perspectives including international law and international relations, public and constitutional law, criminal law and criminology, legal theory, and psychology and law.

Richard Clarke has been one of America's foremost experts on counterterrorism measures for more than two decades. He has served under four presidents from both parties, beginning in Ronald Reagan's State Department becoming America's first Counter-terrorism Czar under Bill Clinton and remaining for the first two years of George W. Bush's administration. He has seen every piece of intelligence on Al-Qaeda from the beginning; he was in the Situation Room on September 11th and he knows exactly what has taken place under the United State's new Department of Homeland Security. Through gripping, thriller-like scenes, he tells the full story for the first time and explains what the Bush Administration are doing.