Communicating violence: a review of Michael Loadenthal’s The politics of attack

References

• Abrahms, M., 2006. Why terrorism does not work. International Security, 31 (2), 42–78. doi:10.1162/isec.2006.31.2.42
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cordes, B., et al., 1985. A conceptual framework for analysing terrorist groups. Santa Monica: RAND.
   Google Scholar
• Danner, M., 2004. Torture and truth: America, Abu Ghraib, and the war on terror. New York: New York review of Books.
   Google Scholar
• Dohrn, B., Ayers, B., and Jones, F., eds., 2006. Sing a song: the revolutionary poetry, statements and communiques of the weather underground 1970-1974. New York: Seven Stories Press.
   Google Scholar
• G-MAC and People within the ARA, 2002. A communique on tactics and organisation to the black bloc. In: X. David, ed. The black bloc papers. Baltimore: Black Clover Press, 198–225.
   Google Scholar
• Harris, L., 2004. Civilisation and its enemies: the next stage of history. New York: Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hoffman, B., 1997. Why terrorists don't take credit. Terrorism and Political Violence, 9 (1), 1–6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoffman, J., 1998. Inside terrorism. London: St Andrew’s University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jackson, R., 2015. The epistemological crisis of counterterrorism. Critical Studies on Terrorism, 8 (1), 33–54. doi:10.1080/17539153.2015.1009762
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kellner, D., 2004. 9/11, Spectacles of terror, and media manipulation. Critical Discourse Studies, 1 (1), 41–64. doi:10.1080/17405900410001674515
   Google Scholar
• LaFree, G. and Dugan, L., 2008. Global terrorism database II, 1998-2004: codebook and data documentation. ICPSR Codebook No. 22600.
   Google Scholar
• Laqueur, W., 2000. The new terrorism: fanaticism and the arms of mass destruction. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Laqueur, W., ed., 2004. Voices of terror: manifestos, writings and manuals of Al Qaeda, Hamas, and other terrorists from around the world and throughout the ages. New York: Sourcebooks.
   Google Scholar
• Lesser, I., et al., 1999. Countering the new terrorism. Santa Monica: RAND Corporation.
   Google Scholar
• MacDougall, D., 1998. Transcultural cinema. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Marlin, R., ed., 2004. What does Al Qaeda want? Unedited communiques. Berkeley: North Atlantic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Mishal, S. and Aharoni, R., 1994. Speaking stones: communiques from the intifada underground. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Moller, F., 2007. Photographic interventions in post-9/11 security policy. Security Dialogue, 38, 179–196. doi:10.1177/0967010607078549
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neumann, P., 2009. Old and new terrorism. Cambridge: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Oren, I. and Solomon, T., 2015. WMD, WMD, WMD: securitisation through ritualised incantation of ambiguous phrases. Review of International Studies, 41 (2), 313–336. doi:10.1017/S0260210514000205
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petersen, P., 2005. 9/11 and the ‘problem of imagination’: fight club and glamorama as terrorist praxis. Orbis Litterarum, 60, 133–144. doi:10.1111/j.0105-7510.2005.00830.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pickering, L., 2007. The earth liberation front 1997-2002. Portland: Arissa Media Group.
   Google Scholar
• Prensky, M., 2001. Digital natives, digital immigrants: part 1. On the Horizon, 9 (5), 1–6.
   Google Scholar
• Simpson, B., Willer, R., and Feinberg, M., 2018. Does violent protest backfire? testing a theory of public reactions to activist violence. Socius: Sociological Research for a Dynamic World, 4, 1–14.
   Google Scholar
• START, 2018. Global terrorism in 2017: background report. Study of terrorism and responses to terrorism. College Park: University of Maryland.
   Google Scholar
• Tuman, J., 2009. Communicating terror: the rhetorical dimensions of terrorism. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Zulaika, J., 2012. Drones, witches and other flying objects: the force of fantasy in US counterterrorism. Critical Studies on Terrorism, 5 (1), 51–68. doi:10.1080/17539153.2012.659909
   Google Scholar