Just saunter in Sagey - the door don't even lock.

Here is the problem Merv. When we invaded Afghanistan and then Iraq the term "terrorism" became meaningless.

Do you think the innocent men, women and children of Afghanistan who had nothing to do with anything said thank you Mr US when the US dropped cluster bombs and food parcels together and they were both yellow? The US and we bomb in the night from 35,000 feet while people are sleeping, we use the worst of the worst weapons on them ranging from cluster bombs, napalm mark 77, daisy cutters which vaporise everything for miles around, depleted uranium. At least 20,000 civilians have been murdered with these weapons yet we never speak about them.

In Iraq the number is probably in the 100's of thousands - it was certainly 1.3 million from 1991-2003 during the sanctions. Even worse weapons were used here yet we only speak of the "horror" of the car bomb.

Not one car bomb was ever used in Iraq until 22 March 2003 when an Australian journalist, Paul Moran from Adelaide, was blown into a puddle.

In the US three buildings in 2 cities, 3,000 dead. In Madrid a train 192 dead, Bali 2 pubs 202 dead, Beslan 1 school 356 dead (most killed by the Russian army), the theatre where Russian army killed everyone, - hardly a massive crime wave that has affected the whole world or the whole countries which had these bombs.

In Iraq and Afghanistan there is hardly a town or city still standing whole and we did it.

Perhaps that is why so many academics in Australia refuse to maunder on about "terr'ism" - we are the terrorists in the 21 st century and I am sick to death of boys telling themselves ghost stories to claim otherwise.

Onya Marylin, well said

I don't disagree with the need for terrorism research but can understand some academic reluctance to doing it. For starters, there's the media 'problem' if word gets around you're a terrorism expert, then you'll find yourself front and centre doing sound bites for your institution, unless you're hopelessly tongue-tied. Then you'll have to deal with other terrorism institutions and I can think of nothing worse than wading through the spin of the AFP (re- the Bali nine) ASIO, the Defence Forces..you really would be setting yourself up for a heap of Howard Government/Canberra bureaucracy white anting. Marilyn lists all the big numbers argument, my cameo response would be how an academic terrorism expert would respond to the media call for a reaction to the ADF's complete exoneration of their Iraqi troopers who killed the Iraqi Government's Agriculture Minister bodyguard recently. Just as an example. Step up to the plate Mervyn, history (wars) awaits you.

Terrorism Research is not my field but what Mervyn says about the need for more research seems sound.

I do have issue though with his accusing other academics who take a dissenting view of somehow being in the thrall of “Stockholm Syndrome”. Other academics are likely to be as intelligent and well read as himself, they have just come to a different conclusion on the matter and have a different approach. It's usually regarded as healthy in academic circles to have different streams of thought out there.

In my former department we had two world authorities on human evolution who filled public forums for years for just the reason that they totally disagreed with each other. Not violently at all or things could have been very exciting, they were very affable about it, but they looked at the same evidence and came to different conclusions. Not once did one accuse the other of suffering from Homo Erectus cringe or Homo floresiensis rejection as reasons for their rejecting the others arguments....

But maybe I also are in the thrall of "Stockholm Syndrome". Dear me, therapy's expensive.

Also like Flezzy, onya Marylin. Back in 2001 just after 9/ll a group of us oldies in a Third Age class just happend to be talking on International Relations.

After the horror of 9/11 it seemed the time not to give lectures but to ask for opinions.

Certainly the first remark from a popular member of the group, was - "This should a be a wake-up call for America!"

It was so interesting that there was not so much shock among the group but more a murmer of agreement

We can well look back and think right now how unpopular the US had become, especially more so since the end of the Soviet Union and the Cold War.

Here had been most of us, even at end of the controversial Vietnam War, still enjoying scads of US TV feature films, especially ones on war featuring American as winners, or with winning smiles in ticklish occasions. But nowadays many of us oldies have gone off American humour, especially.

This is what we really have to look for, Mr Bendle, further we must say that you could not blame a looney-left wing fruity cake academia for all this, surely.