Review by Choice Review
As always, Dershowitz is provocative and controversial. His examination of terrorism begins with a simple premise: the world's response to the modern era of terrorist attacks has encouraged rather than deterred or punished terrorists. The result is that terrorism has been a successful political strategy for nations and organizations. Dershowitz bases this argument mostly on the way in which Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) terrorism led the international community to accept the legitimacy of the PLO's cause and confer statesman status on its leader, Yasser Arafat. The author argues forcefully that the current war against terrorism will never be won until terrorists are condemned unconditionally by all world leaders. The use of torture as a method to prevent terrorist acts is the second theme of the book. In an attempt to generate a debate on the subject, Dershowitz makes the case for and against torture as a legitimate tool of counterterrorism. Given how emphatic he is about other issues, his unwillingness to state a firm position is disappointing. As a popular examination of the issues, the book is a welcome and useful addition to a growing body of literature. ^BSumming Up: Recommended. General readers and lower- and upper-division undergraduates. W. W. Newmann Virginia Commonwealth University
Copyright American Library Association, used with permission.
Review by Publisher's Weekly Review
Against the backdrop of the U.S.-led war on terrorism, the renowned criminal defense and civil liberties attorney argues forcefully that the attacks of September 11 were largely of our own doing the international community, Dershowitz says, repeatedly rewards terrorists with appeasement and legitimization, refusing to take the necessary steps to curtail attacks. While the broad scope of this argument is inadequately supported, as it draws evidence almost exclusively from the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Dershowitz, like many others, views September 11 as a turning point and aptly advocates such measures as national identification cards, increased border security, improved coordination among federal agencies and refusal to give an ear to terrorists' demands. More controversially, he devotes a full chapter to the use of torture against terrorists to obtain information about imminent attacks. While eloquently arguing in its favor under very controlled circumstances, this frightening suggestion from a civil libertarian will be seen by many as a great leap backward for democracy and a dangerous precedent for the international community. Even with his proposed "torture warrant," there would inevitably be room for abuse, with lasting detrimental effects on both the victim as well as the U.S. justice system. Despite the "never again" hand-wringing, these penetrating arguments force readers to consider how we got to September 11, how far we are willing to pursue terrorists and how much freedom we are willing to give up for our security. (Sept. 4) Forecast: As with last year's Supreme Injustice, Dershowitz's media ubiquity and outspoken views should result in handsome sales. (c) Copyright PWxyz, LLC. All rights reserved
(c) Copyright PWxyz, LLC. All rights reserved
Review by Library Journal Review
You can love him or hate him, but Dershowitz (Harvard Law Sch.) is always worth reading. In this bracing work, he gently upbraids those who chalked up the September 11 attacks on New York and Washington to the supposed "root causes" of terrorism-namely, repression and desperation arising from poverty-while also chiding those he thinks are insufficiently committed to civil liberties. Dershowitz points out that the dispossessed in general "do not resort to the willful targeting of vulnerable civilians." Rather, militants resort to such tactics because the international community, and sometimes even the U.S. government, have rewarded them; terrorism will persist as long as it works. Dershowitz points out the scorched-earth tactics that could be used by authoritarian governments to defeat terrorism: torture, massive retaliation, complete control of citizens' movements. He concludes that nations bound by moral concerns can still respond effectively, reconciling forceful strategy with a regard for civil liberties that would include legal checks on the government use of military trials, wire tapping, and other antiterrorist tactics. Strongly recommended.-James R. Holmes, Ph.D. candidate, Fletcher Sch. of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts Univ., Medford, MA (c) Copyright 2010. Library Journals LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Media Source, Inc. No redistribution permitted.
(c) Copyright Library Journals LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Media Source, Inc. No redistribution permitted.
Review by Kirkus Book Review
The ubiquitous and prolific Harvard law professor (Shouting Fire, 2002, etc.) weighs in on civil liberties and international justice in a time of terror. Some of Dershowitz's theses will be familiar to anyone who watches Larry King or Meet the Press: Terrorism is a natural outcome of the Western powers' conduct around the world; terrorism exists because the West has not found effective ways of stamping it out; terrorism exists because "it is successful-terrorists have constantly benefited from their terrorist acts." Never mind the questionable wisdom (or logic) of blaming the victim: Dershowitz drops all that to argue how the war against terrorism should be waged, for a time of war it is, and one that may never end. Going after the terrorists with brutal force will just create more martyrs, true, but martyrs are far less dangerous in the long run than "charismatic leaders capable of persuading followers to risk or forfeit their lives"-leaders who are abundant on the present world scene. Dershowitz urges that battling these leaders be done without sacrificing civil liberties at home, for "if we gradually compromise the tools of freedom one at a time, we will not have them available when we truly need them to combat tyranny." Perhaps surprisingly, though, he recommends that stronger domestic security measures be put into place; the ID card itself is less a problem, he writes, than are "the content of government databases and the circumstances under which government authorities should be entitled to ask anyone to identify him or herself," and the specter of Big Brotherism is less troublesome than the fact that those entrusted to be vigilant are "simply not smart enough, not knowledgeable enough, and not experienced enough to do the job." Sensible overall, with little of the grandstanding or self-aggrandizement of Dershowitz's recent outings. Still, of interest to policymakers more than to general readers.
Copyright (c) Kirkus Reviews, used with permission.
Review by Choice Review
Review by Publisher's Weekly Review
Review by Library Journal Review
Review by Kirkus Book Review
