Here is an excellent example of how the Left operates to shut down free discourse and free inquiry.
It appears that a Canadian man, Brad Salzberg, sent around two of my articles, “Justine Damond: Killed by ‘Islamophobia,’” and “After Muslim cop kills unarmed woman, Minneapolis mayor reassures Muslims, warns against ‘Islamophobia,’” to a large number of Canadian officials and public figures. He did so without comment, although he did highlight several passages. I had no involvement in this and didn’t know he was doing it, not that I mind, but was copied on this reply email from Dr. Malinda S. Smith, Professor, Department of Political Science, University of Alberta, Edmonton:
Dear Edmonton Hate Bias Unit:
Note this common line of propaganda circulated in this unsolicited email, which promotes the view that ‘one Somali on a police force is too many and any Somali/Muslim must be unqualified’. Such stereotypes and implicit biases, and racism and xenophobia, are regularly circulated through this person/s alt-right listserv.
Note2: I did not solicit or voluntarily subscribe to this listserv administered by Brad Salzberg, and I do not wish to receive what has become weekly Hate emails against immigrants, Muslims and/or diverse visible minorities.
Brad unsubscribe me from all of your CAPs emails that you subscribed me to without my prior knowledge or consent.
Dr. Malinda S. Smith
Professor, Department of Political ScienceUniversity of Alberta, Edmonton
The University of Alberta acknowledges that we are situated on Treaty 6 territory, traditional lands of First Nations and Métis peoples.
Here is my reply to Dr. Smith:
Dear Dr. Smith:
I note with great interest that you have reported this email to the “Edmonton Hate Bias Unit.” Can you please specify where in this piece, of which I am the author, does the view that “one Somali on a police force is too many and any Somali/Muslim must be unqualified” appear?
In reality, I do not hold such views, and such views do not appear in the piece.
In light of that, I have several questions for you that I do most earnestly hope you will take a moment to answer.
1. In view of the manifest inaccuracy of your characterization of what I wrote, should the “Edmonton Hate Bias Unit” trust your judgment in considering taking action against Mr. Salzberg and/or me?
2. Who should be empowered, in general, with the authority to determine what is an incident of “hate bias” and what isn’t? What criteria should be used to determine what exactly constitutes “hate bias”? Is disagreement with the political perspective that is dominant today in itself a manifestation of “hate bias”?
3. What criteria do you use to distinguish between legitimate criticism of the “diversity” policies that led to Ms. Damond’s death, and “hate” directed against “immigrants, Muslims and/or diverse visible minorities”? Or do you have no such criteria, and consider any and all criticism of policies that led to the hiring and maintaining on the force of an incompetent police officer because of his ethnicity and religion to be “racism and xenophobia”?
4. You consider what I wrote, and Mr. Salzberg’s sending it to you, to be an offense worthy of being reported to the “Edmonton Hate Bias Unit.” Meanwhile, I consider your demonization of legitimate inquiry and honest questioning to be deeply offensive in its own right. If I were a citizen of Edmonton, would you support my reporting you to the “Edmonton Hate Bias Unit”? Or is some offense more offensive than others, such that some offense is worthy to be reported to the “Edmonton Hate Bias Unit,” and some isn’t? What are your criteria, if any, for distinguishing between speech that offends and is worthy of being reported, and speech that offends but is not worthy of being reported?
Thank you for your kind attention to these questions. I look forward to your answers.
Kindest regards
Robert Spencer
Director, Jihad Watch
www.jihadwatch.org
And Dr. Smith’s reply to that:
Dear Robert Spencer and Brad Salzberg
Please remove me from this and, to repeat, all CAP and Jihad Watch emails/Listservs to which I have been subscribed without my consent.
There are many very good books on stereotypes, implicit biases, racism and xenophobia. I’d add islamophobia. Undoubtedly your public librarian can assist you with a reading list. Do feel free, as well, to contact your nearest Human Rights Commission.
Now: remove me from your list.
Dr. Malinda S. Smith
Professor, Department of Political Science
University of Alberta, EdmontonThe University of Alberta acknowledges that we are situated on Treaty 6 territory, traditional lands of First Nations and Métis peoples.
It’s all there: the arrogance, the rudeness (as if those who dissent from her views have no rights Dr. Smith feels bound to respect), the refusal to engage in rational discussion with opponents, the demonization of those opponents and the threat of authoritarian power against them. These are the hallmarks of the modern academic Left — indeed, of the Left in general and Leftists’ Islamic supremacist allies, as I detail in my new book The Complete Infidel’s Guide to Free Speech (and Its Enemies).
(In reality, just for the record, Dr. Smith is not now and was never subscribed to any Jihad Watch email lists.)
somehistory says
Well, just like the moslums who hate you and call you liar, and complain that you said something you didn’t, she has also.
So arrogant to not even address or reference your questions, much less attempt to answer them.
Thank you, Mr. Spencer, for doing what you do best: exposing those who enable the lies and coverup of the goals of eliminating the freedom of speech and disagreement
Morton Doodslag says
The “professor” cannot even punctuate or compose simple sentences without multiple glaring errors…
How did she ever attain honorifics such as “professor” and “doctor”…?????
Krazy Kafir says
I think we both know.
JAR says
Maybe her local public librarian can assist her with a reading list of reliable manuals on basic grammar and writing skills.
I’m sure Robert will take her advice to contact the nearest Human Rights Commission!
DAI says
She(it) be SPECIAL!!!
mortimer says
Malinda S. Smith is an obvious case of DIVERSITY HIRING and DIVERSITY PROMOTION.
Mark Swan says
Yes mortimer, and it surely indicates why she was so offended by Mr. Spencer’s articles.
Krazy Kafir says
The left truly are the new fascists.
Minutes1234 says
Yes.
RichardL says
Professor Smith is a race and gender “researcher” and her academic output, measured in decent journal articles is pitiful. My doctoral students must produce more to be allowed to graduate.
Richard Finlayson says
but her “minority status” not her “work” keeps her employed!
RichardL says
You mean because she is astoundingly ugly?
It cannot be because she is a black woman. They are in the majority in gender and race professorships.
Minutes1234 says
Indeed.
pdxnag says
The charge of hate against Muslims is the rough equivalent to a charge of Blasphemy or Apostasy in a mature community dominated by Muslims. Where, if an imam makes the charge he can incite a mob of thousands of Muslims to go on a genocide rampage against an entire non-Muslim community of which their target is a member.
How is Dr. Smith any less complicit than any imam in any Islamic State?
(I do like your question number 3.)
theo says
Their use of “Islamophobia” is hate speech.
Keys says
Precisely.
And it does not depend upon whay the definition of “is” is.
Robert says
Sadly, the Left has been pushing their extreme anti-free speech agenda on college and university campuses in Canada for several decades now. Their extreme intolerance tolerates no opposition.
Back in 1988, I made the mistake of taking a Women’s Studies class — it was a pure, unsubstantiated, over-the-top hate fest. The female professor hated men (although her father had been one!), heterosexuals (although she owed her life to a straight couple!), whites (although she was one!), capitalists (although her institution depended on students who earned their tuition fees by working in a capitalistic economy!), Christianity (although the modern European-based universities stemmed from Christian culture!), etc.
In short, she was a massive hypocrite and a pure parasite — she was living off the life of her host society and culture, at the same time she was attacking its very existence.
There is a despicable quality to the Left that is almost beyond words.
Shmooviyet says
A miserable yet valuable learning experience, @Robert. Imagine living with that level of hatred bubbling beneath those ultra-tolerant masks.
Years ago, a leftist-in-law suggested I dig up my recently deceased father, in order to give him a Christmas gift. He makes fun of Christians in the family, holds bigoted views of Jews and blacks, and bashes capitalism though he loves his toys. (Just another example of ‘despicable’ Leftist hypocrisy.)
Note the lack of response in Smith’s reply to RS– only sarcasm and superior-toned snark.
ElderlyZionist says
It was mean of Brad Salzberg to troll Dr. Malinda S. Smith. He should not have done it, and he should stop. She doesn’t want to come out of her bubble, she doesn’t have to, and no one can make her.
Custos Custodum says
Malinda Smith gets a generous paycheck from a public institution, the University of Alberta. Through her job, she maintains a personal web page (http://ualberta.academia.edu/MalindaSSmith) and a Facebook page.
Presumably, Mr. Salzberg as an Alberta citizen chose to exercise his right to write to Mx. Smith, a staffer of an institution that he PAYS for. This is entirely justified, and if Malinda can’t take the heat, she should find a job more in keeping with her delicate sensibilities.
“Professor” Malinda’s “academic” output consists of turgid, post-modern Leftist propaganda screeds circling around the Leftist favorites of “race” “equity” (which Leftists love because it sounds like “equality” but really means “we want your money”), and of course the inevitable paeans to “queers.”
According to her taxpayer-financed vanity page, Malinda Smith was “raised in the Bahamas.” In the Alice-in-Wonderland world of Frankfurt School academia, this qualifies her to be the “editor of three books on Africa” which one hopes are not inflicted on anyone outside the Frankfurt School cult. (Some hope – in reality, race/feminist/queer etc. cultists throughout North American colleges ensure that EACH college buys every one of the useless “books” concocted by any of their colleagues. YOU BUY MY BOOK, I BUY YOUR BOOK.)
somehistory says
I think ElderlyZionist was poking fun at the one who *professes* to know enough to teach and instruct others.
\..
Custos Custodum says
Suspected as much given EZ’s solid posting history, but the basic point about an “academic’s'” shamelessness vis-a-vis a taxpayer maintaining her institution should be put before the public in full.
Ravening greed for more and more tax money (aka “resources”) paired with noisy shows of contempt for real taxpayers are common in the Leftoid cult.
blackcat mendoza says
Thanks mate. You said it much better, and more wisely, than I could have, given my propensity to go for the testicles when I’m angry at F/School manipulations and lies, and the useful idiots who form a protective shield around them.
gravenimage says
I would think that a university professor might expect to be sent all sorts of articles–both those they agree with and those that they do not. With respect, I don’t consider this trolling.
I don’t think college professors should be protected from other points of view any more than college students should.
Mark Swan says
That is true gravenimage—if she can not tolerate the on-line nonsense, just turn it off.
mgoldberg says
I hope Robert, that you will send the correspondence to her University and to the commission so that the glaring discrepancy’s in logic and the lack of discourse is duly noted. Not that they would care, or want to care, but it might be important for the public record
john spielman says
let me get this straight – the muslim cop shot and killed an innocent young woman because people in Minnesota are islamophobic ie afraid of islam? – that is a PSYCHOTIC world view!
Tom Davis says
Obviously gender studies have nothing to say about the shooting either. Wonder why.
gravenimage says
I guess she is fine with unarmed women being gunned down by men–as long as the identity politics are right…
Tom Davis says
That’s the way it looks to me. It’s likely she has some regrets deep down, but they can’t be allowed to rise to the surface in the same way that they would for people of the more correct identities.
CogitoErgoSum says
I too would really like to know what the guidelines are for determining a “hate bias” incident. Here are some of the things I’ve drawn up for my own use and which I’m sure any “Hate Bias Unit” would include it its list.
People are committing a hate bias incident when:
1. They won’t talk to me.
2, If they do talk to me, they always think my ideas are stupid.
3. They don’t invite me to their parties.
4. They spread rumors about me ….. like I have herpes or something.
5 They won’t sit beside me on the bus.
6. They won’t let me lick their lollipop.
7. They won’t share their toys with me.
8 They call me silly names and laugh at me.
9. They put a sticky note on my back that says “KICK ME.”
10.They stick their tongue out at me (or give me “the finger”).
Oh, and one other, They beat me up and/or try to kill me. (This one is a dead giveaway.)
I hope this helps.
Kay says
In some places, what is “hateful” is completely dependent on the “victim’s” perspective.
Scary stuff.
Good for you for responding Robert.
For many of us, even being accused of being “hateful” would mean the end of our careers.
Scary stuff.
Enoch was right says
Spencer’s reply was quite good for questioning the premise of “hate speech.” Rather than engaging with issues on their merit, the Left shuts down debate with allegations of “hate” and “Islamophobia” or sometimes “racism” and “fascism.” These demonizing designations build on fear and identity politics, not reason or truth.
Richard Finlayson says
I was just notified by Prof. Smith that the Alberta Hate Crimes/Edmonton Hate Crimes unit was sent a copy of my reply to her reply to Robert Spencer. Nice how a dissenting opinion is now a “hate crime” instead of freedom of speech! I’m glad I live in Texas so that maybe it will take a few more years for the PC crazies to migrate down here!
ItsReallyQuiteClear says
Richard,
Just like the Southern Poverty Law Center, it sounds like those Canadian hate crimes units have the best hatred money can buy.
t. says
Richard Finlayson, can you post here, your reply to her? It would be interesting to see what was in it that merited being sent to the hate unit.
gravenimage says
Good grief. Thanks, Richard.
demuslim says
Dr Smith , a professor in Department of political science University of Alberta, refused to have a rational discussion with those who have different point of view.
Leftis professors in Canada are doing academic inbreeding.
mortimer says
Critical thought is exterminated by POLITICAL CORRECTNESS.
Malinda S. Smith’s department should be called ‘POLITICAL CORRECTNESS & THOUGHT ENFORCEMENT’.
Custos Custodum says
Excellent observation.
Department of POLITICAL CORRECTNESS AND THOUGHT ENFORCEMENT have been metastasizing throughout public and private colleges for decades and have long acquired a feeder system of complicit high school and even middle school teachers.
mortimer says
Malinda S. Smith is a dhimmi without knowing what that is.
Custos Custodum says
In other words, a DHIMWIT.
Wellington says
Again Robert Spencer demonstrates his superior argumentative skills and his commitment to free speech.
Again yet another Leftist demonstrates their decided tendency to substitute demonization for argument and their antipathy to liberty by way of dismissing what they don’t agree with (and often can’t understand as well) as something hateful which needs to be treated in some Orwellian fashion.
Westman says
“Please remove me from this and, to repeat, all CAP and Jihad Watch emails/Listservs to which I have been subscribed without my consent.”
When anyone starts lying, all credibility is lost. Agenda-driven leftists have done more damage to their nations than any outward enemy by weakening and undermining patriotism with redefined history that places the nation as the enemy, destruction of founding icons, immoral living, and mindless SJW multiculturalism.
Mike says
We can play this game too…
Dearest Professor Smith:
Given that you have acknowledged that you are an occupier of native land, I would kindly ask you to remove yourself from it immediately.
You are a self-admitted colonialist!
Go away!
Mike
Tom says
Unfortunately the good professor has placed her elitist and privileged attitude to the fore in her response to Roberts email questions.
So much for an open mind and the discussion of topics that one would expect from an academic on a university campus.
Thoroughly disappointing, and one would hope that her students enter her classroom with open eyes to see the obvious bias displayed.
El Cid says
In point of fact, there is no dialogue here whatsoever.
The professor appears to think that she is a recipient of a newsletter and does not show any evidence of having knowledge of Mr. Spencer.
Her bias, however, is loud and clear. More Muslims, preferably black Africans, on the police force. You need to break some eggs to make an omelet. (sarcasm)
How dare we question her?
JawsV says
Why don’t Africans reside in Africa?
AzB says
Hate bias is a deeply problematic phrase.
What might be required in order to eliminate all of ones bias?
I suggest a few topics are needed:
1. history (that’ll be WORLD history, across multiple continents and millenia of the stuff)
2. comparative religion (textual, cultural, legal, symbolic, military) and including consideration of the many and various sects of each and their demographics and interactions with one another locally and globally.
3. politics (past, present, future, including complex patterns of alignments between economic and social priorities which may favour more or less “diversity” or “working class jobs” or other such priorities which emerge in the ordinary course of politics debate
4. A sound grasp of fee market economics and its interactions both with the media and politics in introducing global bias in the kinds of policy making which governments adn corporations lobby for.
5. Excellent grasp of statistics in order to carefully interpret with error bars on conclusions whether policies, including diversity policies, are benefiting one or other group too much
6. consideration of human psychology which expose a wide range of bias including “outgroup bias” (xenophoilia and xenophobia) which cut across many other identity variables in ways that probably haven’t been explored yet (due to academic bias)
7. The nature of modern social media and the web, including suck topics as “shock ” and “clickbait” which makes separating out all the prevailing informational inaccuracy very hard indeed, and exactly how to reduce the impact of “conspiracy theory” style spinning of media, to reduce your own exposure to propoganda, and who gets to decide the “facts of the matter” in that case.
8. the compostion of all the various prevailing MSM media agencies in detail, including their alignments, roughly or ambiguously, with different political and social and economic causes and movements and groups, withotu which it is impossible to separate out all the prevailing informational bias
9. sufficient science to understand the impact on continuing policies uncritically in terms of national standards of public services, and the quality and character of a society through time, and what is flexible, and what ought to be preserved , and who gets to decide
10. Analysis of all of our mechanisms of government control, via representational democracies and lobby groups of many kinds, and who gets to have a stake in that, and in what balance with all other citizens, and in what balance with people from other parts of the wrold
11. weather patterns and complex climate phenomena, involving modelling 50 or more years into the future (during the life of people’s children and grandchildren) and what kinds of impacts this is likely to have on suitable present day policies
12. So you probably need to udnerstand a lot about energy markets and development programs in the 3rd world too
13. careful examination of which social policies in what contexts are successful, and the interconnections between numerous identity traits and all of the above as indeed the modern left itself acknowledges as it has embarked upon “intersectionality” which is creating all kinds of new moral conundrums and contradictions which have yet to be properly addressed. What is the status of “minorities within minorities”? (LGBT muslims etc)> Can the human rights commission tell us how to deal with this, and stand up for both sets of diversity sensitivities simultaneously. Not really!
If you get that far, then you might have any chance of reasonably reigning in your own bias and concluding whether your retweet or share was indeed hateful, or merely concerned.
Anyone who claims academic rigour on all of these topics simultaneously is deluding themselves. I doubt very much either the nearest human rights commission or the hate bias unit is in a position to sift through it all and to declare with confidence on which side of the line a particular “retweet” or click of an article may lie, in terms of providing evidence for underlying hate.
Would suggest the hate bias unit should be converted into an academic research think tank that will attempt to create such media and other aids to navigating the modern internet as will allow people to make up their own minds with confidence .
This would be far more useful than prosecuting people for thoughts and retweets….
AzB says
Oh yeah 14. International terrorism and terrorist actors domesticaly and their impacts on civic life and safety both now and in the future.
Those in the diversity bubble need to rapidly remove heads from said bubble and get back to the business of talking on a level as adults about the issues facing countries.
I find the vast majority of adults in all groups are more than willing to talk and talk frankly about difficult topics and subjects and do not take offense.
Its only a certain type of leftist who can’t even abide the possibility of the conversations themselves.
its not my experience from actual conversations with “real people” on all sides of discussions. It becomes more insidious when it becomes efforts to turn assumptions into laws. The wrong people obtain too wide of a margin of protection from criticism.
People who aren’t interested in conversations. So yes these trends ought to be opposed. For sure.
Flavius Claudius Iulianus says
She is requesting to be removed from the lists because there are very steep fines in Canada for those who spam without permission. So she may be setting Salzberg up for such a penalty.
I agree with those that say that such individuals (Dr. Peepee-caca-no-substance-full-professor) to be left to their bubbles. They are self-absorbed ninnies who were clever enough to get themselves into a tenure position. Nobody with real intelligence takes their navel gazing seriously. Too bad the taxpayer has to foot the bill.
I know a little about the universities in this area of Canada. The University of Alberta is a big behemoth institution that is known for its indifference towards its students. It is a ‘professor’s’ university and only cares enough about it’s students in order to get the numbers to get government grants. It and its professors are, in general, a leftist island in a province that is very conservative. A few years ago the provincial government (which was conservative) pulled back on granting. So the U of A thought that it should start fundraising with its alumni. (Yes, that’s right, this institution had it so good, it didn’t need to fundraise with its alumni – one of the reasons it could get away with treating its students so poorly.) So they set up teams to call the alumni. It was an education for the U of A because most alumni told them to *F* off before hanging up!
In order to create some competition the provincial government gave other post-secondary institutions in the area, the right to grant degrees. Two examples are the Northern Alberta Institute of Technology and MacEwan University. Needless to say these two institutions do not have problems with their alumni. In fact, they both have very healthy alumni associations.
So again, this woman lives in a taxpayer funded bubble. I’ve known such people and I avoid them like the plague. They get up in the morning and the first thing they think about is ‘race.’ And it’s the last thing they think about before going to sleep. Everything is ‘race.’ You sit to have coffee with them and they connect everything to ‘race.’ Race, race, race. Victim, victim, victim! They are self-absorbed bores whose affluence has nothing to do with their competence.
gravenimage says
If Salzberg really were spamming her–or if any of the contact appeared threatening–it would be different. But sending a professor a couple of articles–even ones they do not agree with–seems perfectly reasonable; indeed, routine.
Mark Swan says
Yep, delete the e-mail, block the sender, get on with your day.
MasQueNada says
Hope you cc:ed the Edmonton Hate Bias Unit and as many Canuck crybully snitching hotlines as you can find, Robert. Keep ’em tied up in correspondence!
Lydia says
There is no such thing as ‘islamophobia,’ this is a false label for a rational reaction to the terror of the islamic religion.
Dr. Smith seems to be suffering from an acute case of TRUTHOPHOBIA and is not academically competent enough to respond to Robert’s challenging but normal and reasonable questions. She continues to suffer from the same delusion as previously, not seeing clearly that dissent is not ‘stereotypical bias,’ but is in fact healthy and in this case based on factual reality.
Rx: She needs to stop regurgitating the same propaganda that she is recommending, pull her head up out of the sand, and do some serious academic research on these issues and get a reality check in her life. Repeat several times daily. Dr. Smith: Call the psych doctor immediately if still suffering from this delusion.
Lydia says
That term ‘islamophobia’ is just one more cattle prod to herd everyone into their censored approved groupthink propaganda mentality.
gravenimage says
Canada: Prof reports to “Hate Bias Unit” criticism of policies that led to Muslim cop’s killing of unarmed woman
……………….
I suppose this idiot would be just fine with Canadian citizens being gunned down by Mohammedans. Better that than his being considered “Islamophobic”…
Joeyn says
What an ugly woman this Malinda is. Feel sorry for students who are forced to listen to her.
UNCLE VLADDI says
Re: “There are many very good books on stereotypes, implicit biases, racism and xenophobia. I’d add islamophobia.”
REALLY?
😉
Everyone who defends islam and muslims endorses crime.
Endorsing crime IS a crime, so those doing it are criminals.
Right in the Qur’an is: the permission to murder Jews and Christians (Surah 9:29), to terrorize all non-Muslims (8:12), to rape young girls (65:4), to enslave people for sex (4:3), to lie about one’s true goals (3:54), and the command to make war on all the infidels (9:123) and subjugate the entire world to Allah (9:33).
Are death-threats legal? NO.
Is extortion legal? NO.
Is slavery legal? NO.
Is murder legal? NO.
Is rape legal? NO.
THEN ISLAM IS ILLEGAL!
Rape, slavery, robbery, extortion and murder are never OK!
Everything muslims pretend to see as “holy” is already a crime!
So nobody has a legal right to practice islam anywhere on earth!
t. says
UNCLE VLADDI, I totally agree with you; What you’re saying is absolutely logical and rational!
Unfortunately there is no place for that, in the west, regarding Islam.
UNCLE VLADDI says
Right! Because to criminals (leftopaths, muslims) hurting criminals’ (ie “other victims'”) feelings by calling them “criminals” shalt be the only real crime!
Whee!
😉
Jack Holan says
Professor Smith must have been having an off day confusing what Robert Spenser wrote with some one elses writings. Compounding that grieguous error she believes. In an “alt-reality” that she is subscribed to something or on a list when in fact she is not.
Dr Smith for the sake of your students I hope your research digs deeper. And is more serious.
Carolyne says
Interesting .I didn’t know that Maxine Waters is a Professor in Canada as well as a US Congresswoman.
I think it might be advisable to write this woman letters consisting of words with one or two syllables only. She might better understand the content.
Mike says
I was a student in 2 different canadian universites in the 70 ies and 80 ies . The left was there in every service with his propaganda including social activiies . Friday night movies , concerts, lectures , everything was left biased . One evening I realised it and stayed home ever since after that .Poor left . Our best loosers around !
thomas says
this woman edited Securing Africa: Post-9/11 Discourses on Terrorism.
https://www.amazon.ca/Securing-Africa-Post-9-Discourses-Terrorism/dp/0754675459
Amazon says:
This meticulously researched, forcibly argued and accessibly written collection explores the many and complex ways in which Africa has been implicated in the discourses and politics of September 11, 2001. Written by key scholars based in leading institutions in Canada, the United States, the Middle East and Africa, the volume interrogates the impact of post-9/11 politics on Africa from many disciplinary perspectives, including political science, sociology, history, anthropology, religious studies and cultural studies. The essays analyze the impact of 9/11 and the ‘war on terror’ on political dissent and academic freedom; the contentious vocabulary of crusades, clash of civilizations, barbarism and ‘Islamofascism’; alternative genealogies of local and global terrorism; extraordinary renditions to black sites and torture; human rights and insecurities; collapsed states and the development-security merger; and anti-terrorism policies from George W. Bush to Barack Obama. This is a much-needed meditation on historical and contemporary discourses on terrorism.