Whose terrorists?

Conclusion The government of Muammar Qaddafi has certainly engaged in state criminality in acts of terrorism sponsored by official agencies of the Libyan state. However, these acts are nothing like as frequent or as systematic as has been suggested by Western critics. It is Qaddafi's weakness which leads to his stigmatization, rather than the true seriousness of his nation's crimes.In the last decade, there has been a dramatic growth of scholarly and journalistic work on terrorism, much of which uses the concept of state terrorism. That such a thing exists is clear. However, each case must be examined very closely before the motives and rationale for such a policy can be understood; and only then can we begin to address questions such as etiology. There could be a criminology of states which would be a valuable addition both to criminology and political science. At present, though, our primary need is to understand that the facts in each case are often far different from the political rhetoric.     

Narcotics trafficking and the American mafia: The myth of internal prohibition

Numerous books assert that the Mafia long had a prohibition against engaging in narcotics trafficking, either for reasons of morality, or else because of the public stigma attached to drugs. In reality, there are many problems with the belief in voluntary abstention. The mythical nature of internal prohibition, and the far different reality, will be illustrated from the case of Philadelphia, supposedly the base for one of the most powerful and traditional-minded of all the American Mafia groups, the family headed from 1959 to 1980 by don Angelo Bruno. We will attempt to explain the roots of the prohibition myth, both for writers and for the wider public that appears so endlessly enthusiastic about sagas of organized crime. Finally, the paper examines the implications of this myth for policy makers in successive wars on crime.     

The C.T.A. case: A study in political corruption

Between 1984 and 1987, a wide-ranging corruption scandal in Pennsylvania resulted in the conviction and disgrace of a number of high-ranking elected officials, as well as the much publicized suicide of state Treasurer R. Budd Dwyer. This C.T.A. case initially appeared to be a straightforward and almost commonplace affair involving bribes and kickbacks to secure state contracts; but on further examination, this seemingly uncomplicated case can be shown to have involved elaborate conflicts at both state and federal level, and the direction and outcome of the prosecution were heavily influenced by political factors and bureaucratic self-interest.This paper will provide a narrative of the C.T.A. case and related incidents, and also describe the external factors which shaped the investigation. Particular emphasis will be placed on the complex relationship between state-level political interests and the activities of federal prosecutors. The C.T.A. affair offers an excellent illustration of the difficulty of gaining an accurate understanding of even an apparently simple case of political corruption, and the implication is that more elaborate incidents are even less amenable to any kind of academic or social scientific observation. The case can only be understood if full account is taken of the prosecutorial and investigative process which turned the original illegal transactions into a full-blown public scandal, factors which are often insufficiently emphasized in research on political corruption.     

Research note: Rand's research on terrorism

Repeatedly, during the last few years, small groups of extremists have demonstrated that by using terrorist tactics they can achieve disproportionate effects. They attract worldwide attention to themselves and their causes; they arouse worldwide alarm, and can create international incidents that national governments are compelled to deal with, often before a worldwide audience. To protect against their attacks or to respond to crisis situations they create, they force governments to expend resources—manpower, money, the attention of senior officials—vastly out of scale with the magnitude of the actual threat they pose.¹     

Stevie Smith's Myth-Kitty

Abstract

Although Stevie Smith's poetry is in many ways very close to the laconic and less-deceived tone characteristic of Philip Larkin, there is one aspect of her work in which she differs strikingly from him and from the general features of Movement poetry: that is, in her use of what Larkin, in his 1956 ‘statement on poetry’, contemptuously called a ‘common myth-kitty’. In this chapter, I attempt to examine the treasures of Stevie's myth-kitty, not merely with the aim of distancing Smith from the Movement, but of reassessing her relationship with modernism and other poets of the generation which came to prominence in the 1930s, in particular, W. H. Auden. Smith's closest connection with modernism has often been seen to be her use of a stream-of-consciousness technique, as deployed in Novel on Yellow Paper—a technique which is inevitably compared to and dismissed as inferior to that of Virginia Woolf. Instead, I will put forward the claim that Smith's relationship to modernism should also be seen in her use of intertextuality, in the classical and other mythic fragments which, despite considerable differences of tone, place her work in the same tradition as James Joyce, Ezra Pound and T. S Eliot. I attempt to demonstrate how she draws on this ‘myth-kitty’, especially ?n her poetry, focusing on her treatment of female mythical figures, and argue that the key figure in Smith's oeuvre—the counterpart and equivalent of Eliot's Tiresias—is the figure of Persephone on her journey to the underworld.     

Miscarriages of Justice and the Discourse of Innocence: Perspectives from Appellants,Campaigners, Journalists,and Legal Practitioners

This article problematizes the discourse of innocence in relation to victims of wrongful conviction operating within the criminal justice system. For appellants whose convictions have been quashed by the Court of Appeal, notions of innocence are often at odds with how others perceive and understand the purpose of criminal trials and appeals. This article will examine the views of legal practitioners, journalists, and victims of wrongful conviction and their supporters regarding factual innocence and how misunderstanding can sometimes lead to miscommunication by actors operating within the same system. The article will further examine the issue of compensation in light of the recent ruling by the Supreme Court and conclude that the current debate regarding what constitutes a miscarriage of justice continues to confuse legal practitioners and prolong the anxiety suffered by victims recovering from the trauma of wrongful imprisonment and subsequent losses.     

Learning from each other: causal inference and American political development

Public Choice - Within political science, a movement focused on increasing the credibility of causal inferences (CIs) has gained considerable traction in recent years. While CI has been...