Talking to Terrorists: Face to Face with the Enemy

by Peter Taylor

During his 40-year career, award-winning Peter Taylor has come face-to-face with some of the world's most fanatical terrorists. In 1972 he was sent to Northern Ireland to report on 'Bloody Sunday' and in the aftermath of 9/11, he focused on Al Qaeda, breaking stories in the period up to the July bombings and the plot to blow up passenger planes mid-Atlantic.

In "Talking to Terrorists" Taylor wrestles with a range of complex questions: What are terrorists like? What motivates them? Should governments talk to them? When does interrogation become torture? In this journey from Northern Ireland's Bogside to the notorious Guantanamo Bay, he uncovers this lethal phenomenon, unavoidably at the centre of our lives.

PRAISE FOR PETER TAYLOR:

'A disturbingly insightful book' SCOTSMAN

'His longevity and willingness to take risks places him in the pantheon of investigative reporters' INDEPENDENT

'Peter Taylor [has] delivered some of the most outstanding television journalism from Northern Ireland ... with courage and boundless curiosity' SCOTSMAN

'A fearless critic of authority ready to expose the abuse of human rights in the face of official denial and attempts at censorship. Taylor's reputation is reinforced' BELFAST TELEGRAPH

Genres: Politics, Nonfiction, Terrorism, History

358 pages, Paperback

First published March 1, 2011

About the author

There is more than one author with this name

Reviews

[Marichka Blindiuk · Rating 4 out of 5]

мені спершу заходило дуже туго. я мало чого знала про ІРА (так, я теж постійно читала, як пиво), важкувато було звикнути до структури та стилю. але потім втягуєшся — про Аль-Каїду мене історія відверто захопила, постійно крутила в голові думки навколо цього (докрутила аж до непоганого треду у тві) . Тейлор показує, що навіть така, здавалося б, «очевидно погана» тема, як тероризм, потребує критичного аналізу. так, готуйтеся, що ви будете симпатизувати терористам і ненавидіти американський уряд 🙃

[Dr. Phoenix · Rating 3 out of 5]

Well once again I will make a controversial review on the title at hand.

- Disclaimer: I make no excuses for being a conservative and traditionalist. I have a right to my position and opinions, much as you do yours. What I do try to do is give a balanced first hand review from my driver's seat.




Peter Taylor is a man who is rightly proud of his work, his major fault lies in being proud of himself rather than his work and projecting and announcing this fact to the general readership. I don't know about you but when reading a supposedly balanced scholarly work which is studded with loads of I, my, me me mysisms, the hair on the back of my neck stands up and I get a fierce migraine...Regardless:

THE GOOD

The book is full of interesting information and is well written. He details the historical facts and events as they occurred and offers much enlightenment on the topic.

THE BAD

On the downside one is obliged to question the authors motivations. Like so many supposedly critical thinkers and unbiased journalists, Taylor seems to be more on the side of the bad guys than the good. He flatters these butchers of humanity and coddles their image. Am I being too hard? No, I do not believe so. When people resort to strapping on bombs and beheading I do not wish to hear see or imagine their humanity., they are simply depraved animals and their actions define them accordingly.

-Despite these drawback and for all its warts I would still recommend the book for the information it contains.

Up until chapter 5 there are relatively few real insights to be gleaned. Much of this is recounting history through the eyes of the author on p.58 the author points out that his colleague Patricia de Mesuita, finds the terrorist Hutheifa "good-looking." The author rambles on about this urbane and charming yet homicidal fanatic. This is not the first time I have encountered such a phenomenon, it appeared also in an earlier text "Terror in the Name of God," I reviewed by Jessica Stern. As though the experience physical appearance somehow exonerates their ugly barbarity.

THE UGLY

A few other annoying points:

P. 84 "And so I got a world scoop,and talked to my first 'terrorist' in prison.

- Note the author's avoidance of the title "terrorist." Also world scoop? la-dee -da

Is this a contradiction? PP 100 & 107 to wit: pp 100: Speaking of the (failed) Strasbourg Christmases market bomber: "He was softly spoke, clearly highly intelligent,articulate and completely self contained."

On page 107 this charming erudite gentleman is described in couched yet less flattering terms however: "On the video you hear a nasheed [italicized in original], a jihad song, being played in the car as they drove into the city. Over the sots of the cathedral you can hear Boukhari saying 'This is the house of the infidel.' He denies adding 'And may the pigs rot in Hell.'

Of course why would such a genteel soul make such an offensive declaration? If it was on the tape, then it must have been put there by others.

P.131 The author's apologist approach shine forth quite clearly here. He dares o compare the teenage terrorists of the Lackawanna Six, with hardened professional killers in support of his arguments advancing total conflict resolution through dialogue.

-There are numerous instances of total oblivious naivety of the part of school officials in regards to their former institutions of learning such as that of the Hazelwick Comprehensive School, in Crawley. "He was polite, always respectful and well behaved.A nice lad. A decent lad.' (for a terrorist that is...).

- It is self evident that dues Britain's loose flying liberal policies they reap much of what they sow...poor intelligence combined with overt political correctness=terrorist success.

The author's preconceived anti-establishment preferences shine clearly through several glaring and inadvertent admissions: "An anonymous senior officer for the ISI's counter Terrorism Unit whom I interviewed in Pakistan flatly denied that torture was used. I suspected he was never going to say anything else.'

- How is that for unbiased and subjective journalism?

P. 231 the author insults the intelligence of the reader: "The *only* outward clue to his radicalization was his association with the Iqra bookshop in Beeston, which was also a study center with a reputation for radical Salafist teaching.'

- Come on now...nothing to report here move along.

p.214 "They had a young daughter who Khan adored. When the police searched his home after the attacks they found a video in which he is saying goodbye to the little girl. Although it is moving it is also deeply disturbing , and leaves no doubt as to his commitment to what he was about to do.'

- Moving? Huh????? We happen to be speaking of one of the London 7/7 bombers for clarification...this moving soul was responsible for the deaths of
6 innocent souls at Edgeware Road Station. Do not make me vomit with your maudlin pro fanatic sentimentalism Taylor.

p. 216: "The nineteen-year-old Germain Lindsay was described to me by one of his fellow converts as 'very friendly, pleasant, smiling and calm.'" (your typical happy-go-lucky butchering terrorist for example).

p.217 The author completely discredits any sense of critical thinking he may of been accused of when he related Jesuit training and that of fundamental terrorism.

- and on and on ad nauseum, other sticky points can be found on pps. 223, 247, 250, p. 275 "I knew it would be a coup to secure an interview with him." More self aggrandizement...


While I have spent time sniping various annoying segments I would like to emphasize that the author does have his moments of political lucidness:

p. 157: '...Whenever you have intelligence indicating specific targets, you disseminate that information as quickly as you can' (citing Pat D'Amuro of the FBI Lebanon barracks investigative team).

- The bases of all good actionable intelligence.

pp. 164-165: "The fact that the country's reconstruction proceeded at a snail's pace made some Iraqis yearn for the stability of the Saddam era, which though oppressive and bloody at least provided security, water and electricity."

- In this I wholeheartedly concur with the author that it is best at times to leave the dictator you know in power for the anarchy you do not know as its replacement. Modern day Iraq is a standing testament of the failed intervention and its consequences. In many respects the current scenario may foreshadow the future of Afghanistan as well.


All in all informative is a displeasing read due to the authors overarching arrogance and naive left wing approach to analysis. His bias is evident on nearly every page. Despite the numerous drawbacks, here is still much information worth knowing and contained within these pages.

My advice: grin and bear it. Take the good and toss the bad. And if it helps do like I do and vent your frustration by commenting in the margins.

Wishing you a good read.

[Jules · Rating 4 out of 5]

As one can imagine, it cannot be an easy task to sit down and write a compact book about terrorism as the topic is sadly too vast. Taylor though makes an excellent attempt here and picks a starting point by briefly discussing the political standpoints of the IRA. For most of the book thereafter however, he chooses to discuss the more recent threat of Al Qaeda and manages to give a detailed account of their extremist policies, ideals and ideologies and explains traits of their modus operandi.

Taylor quotes examples of terrorism from around the world and explains his subject matter thoroughly and with researched and well-referenced knowledge. As the book notes clearly state, Taylor ‘wrestles with a range of complex questions’ as related to terrorism. He discusses the psychological profiling of terrorism and makes no apologies for documenting how these profiles more often than not contradict what it true and pure in Muslim beliefs. He is sensitive and balanced whilst writing and reflecting on the motivations of terrorists and terrorist associations and manages to counter-balance the hypocrisy of some terrorist thought whilst acknowledging that many terrorist activities manifest themselves as ‘some kind of response’ to Western foreign policy. Other balanced commentary can be found in accounts of government response to terrorists such as the treatment of suspects at Guantánamo Bay.

I learned a lot from picking up this book and feel I did so by recognising a lack of author and political bias and a wealth of balanced commentary. Taylor narrates and explains but cleverly leaves judgement in the reader’s corner throughout. Whilst I didn’t treat the book as a leisurely or ‘weekend’ read, I found this book clear and easy to understand as well as ultra-informative and insightful as it deals with complex issues that seem so sadly unavoidable in modern times.

Recommended.

[Peter · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is part-memoir, part reportage relating to the author's experiences of talking with the enemy in the Northern Ireland conflict in the past, and the current war situation with Al Qaeda. Before reading this book, I didn't know that the basic kernel of what would eventually become the Good Friday agreement was formed and basically accepted back in 1975, and what follows is a remarkable account of how a seemingly intractable conflict eventually settled down.

The book describes the nature of jihad briefly, and reports on the radicalization of people, such as Syed Haris Ahmed, who, before being introduced to extremist teachings, at times disseminated across the internet, would come across as being good and diligent members of society. It concludes with a description of the emergence and development negotiating processes that can bring a conclusion to terrorist insurgencies and lay the foundations for the preparation and implementation of comprehensive settlements. It's highly recommended.

[Charlotte Cake · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very informative book offering an insight as a journalist on gaining knowledge on key interests of mine with radicalisation and religion. Something I haven’t read about since university. I still have such an interest and found I learnt a lot about key historical events that are still impacting society now

[Beorn · Rating 1 out of 5]

I have to admit to being rather disappointed by this book. It touts itself as going beyond the barricade to speak to the 'terrorists', which in a number of instances it does, but it does virtually nothing to find out their motivations or what events drove them to do what they did. There is no attempt to explore their human side, seemingly deliberately avoiding making them too personable a figure in case someone identifies with them. It is also a book that is very much obsessed with Islamist terrorists and makes no attempt to investigate non-Muslim terrorism.

Far too rigidly adherent to the tried & tested establishment line, this barely scratches the surface of the propaganda western governments have spewed forth to excuse their wars. About as deep and incisive as a puddle.

Very disappointing but somewhat to be expected from a BBC journalist. Trite, superficial and unchallenging and far from insightful.