Janet Lin

MRP 3: Full Annotated Bibliography

Question: To what extent did the war on terror affect and contribute to the sharp increase in the
incarceration rate in the U.S.?
Annotated Bibliography:
**include: authority assessment, summary of content, comparison/assessment, evaluation
***citations in APA style
1. Victoroff, J. (2005). The Mind of the Terrorist: A Review and Critique of Psychological
Approaches. Journal Of Conflict Resolution, 49(1), 3-42.

The author is Jeff Victoroff, a Professor of Clinical Neurology and Psychiatry at USC. He is also
the director of NATO Advanced Research Workshop on Social and Psychological Factors in the
Genesis of Terrorism and a member of U.N. Roster of Terrorism Experts. In this paper, he
investigates the social and psychological factors that cause and affect the mindset of a terrorist.
There is no peer-reviewed work that has as much authority and credibility as this paper. In
most of the other papers, it is mostly theoretical speculation based on anecdotes. This research
is important to me since I want to combine the topic of incarceration and terrorism; with this
information, I could further prove my point that the current incarceration policies and biases
really do not adequately deals with terrorism. Also, it is very interesting that it is possible to try
to understand the mindset of terrorists, and I am planning to base my section on proposed
solutions to the problems partially on this paper.
2. Levine, B. (2001). Terrorism in the Land of the Free. Humanist, 61(1), 11.

The author is Burton Levin, an assistant Professor of Economics at Trinity College. In this
paper, he discusses the repression and incarceration of immigrants in the United States. He
includes many statistics on immigrant deportation that was done in order to protect national
security and also discusses the relationship between anti-terrorism and the death penalty and
how they are against the U.S. legal tradition. This research was interesting to me not only
because it directly addresses the topic I wish to explore, but also because it sees it from the
perspective of immigrants and even provides a case study of Nasser Ahmed, an imprisoned
immigrant who was accused of being associated with a terrorist organization. I find the detail in
which this paper goes into the topics to be very helpful.
3. Gilroy, P. (2005). Multiculture, double consciousness and the war on terror. Patterns Of
Prejudice, 39(4), 431. doi:10.1080/00313220500347899

The author is Paul Gilroy, a professor at Kings College London. Gilroy is a scholar of Cultural
Studies and Black Atlantic diasporic culture. In this paper, Gilroy assesses the assertion that
multiculturalism has failed and substantiates his claims by looking at historical and political
examples from both the UK and the United States. He concludes with the rejection of the
notion that the US stands for the future of racial politics and that racially stratified and divided
societies are somehow en route to a destination defined by experience in the US politics. This
paper is unique in that it not only analyses the US, but also contrasts his claims in the largely
different yet sometimes similar culture of the UK. Gilroy also used the responses to US
incarceration from British returnees from Guantnamo Bay which is very rhetorically powerful.
4. Martinot, S. (2003). Patriotism and Its Double. Peace Review, 15(4), 405.

The author is Steven Martinot, an Instructor Emeritus at the Center for Interdisciplinary
Programs at San Francisco State University. He has been a human rights activist most of his
life and has organized labor unions in New York and Akron. He was a political prisoner in New
York State, but now lives in Berkeley. He has published 7 books on philosophy, history, and the

structures of racialization in the US. This paper evaluates the numerous political acts that the
author equate as governmental assaults on the U.S. political quality of life. This paper is
unique in the fact that it is so, so extremely negative in its criticisms of the U.S. government. I
might use the information from this paper to showcase one extreme viewpoint of this issue and
contrast it with the other papers that have given either a largely optimistic or more even
viewpoint.
5. Ttreault, M. A. (2006). The Sexual Politics of Abu Ghraib: Hegemony, Spectacle, and the
Global War on Terror. NWSA Journal, 18(3), 33-50.

The author is Dr. Mary Ann Tetreault, a Una Chapman Cox Distinguished Professor of
International Affairs Emerita at Trinity University. This paper goes into the horrid details of
torture, murder, and general maltreatment of prisoners at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq where
photographs of U.S. military personnel torturing Iraqi prisoners and forcing them to perform
sexualized acts were released. This paper presents numerous evidence of prisoner abuse
carried out by the U.S. and argues that the photos reflect complex reactions to 9-11, including
the need to assert U.S. global dominance by punishing those who are (in American eyes) an
inferior oriental enemy. This paper is unique in that it analyses the photos in the context of not
just whats currently happening, but links back to the past (with lynching) and modern events
(evaluating what the author calls events orchestrated by elites and imitated by popular-culture
entrepreneurs).
6. Gregory, H., & Clayton, M. (2005). Outrages Against Personal Dignity: Rationalizing Abuse and
Torture in the War on Terror. Social Forces, 83(4), 1627-1645.

The author Gregory Hooks (Ph.D., University of Wisconsin) is a Professor and the Chair of
Sociology at McMaster University. His research and publications focus on the study of spatial
inequality and the political dynamics associated with this inequality. The other author Clayton J.
Mosher (Ph.D., University of Toronto, 1992) is a Professor and Associate Chair in the
Department of Sociology at Washington State University Vancouver. He wrote several books
and articles on: inequality in criminal justice system processing, drugs and drug policies, and
the impact of prison construction on employment. This paper attempts to answer the resulting
confusion from the outrage that responded the Abu Ghraib prison. This paper is unique in that
instead of focusing on the injustices and being simply outraged by the government like some of
the other papers on this topic, this paper makes the case that the abuses are systemic. This is
very interesting for me especially because Ive written (for the first quarter) and evaluation of
whether systemic discrimination is prevalent in the US. It argues that the systemic abuses
result from dehumanization of the enemy and entrenched reliance on torture by the US national
security agencies.
7. Margulies, J. (2004). A Prison Beyond the Law. Virginia Quarterly Review, 80(4), 37.

The author is Joseph Margulies, a criminal defense and civil rights attorney with the MacArthur
Justice Center and a Professor of Law and Visiting Professor of Government at the Cornell
University Law School in Ithaca. On his own professional biography, he states, For many
years, I have defended people caught up in the excesses of the national security state and the
criminal justice system. This paper seeks to discuss the war on terror and incarceration in the
United States from a legal perspective, critiquing the events and governmental actions by
evaluating their impacts on the law and its implementation. This paper concludes with the
argument that it has been the governments intention, since the beginning of the War on Terror,
to place the prisoners and the lawfulness of executive conduct beyond the reach and power
of civil courts. I thought this article is quite unique and also useful because it provides a rare
legal perspective on the entire issue instead of the usual humanitarian or political evaluations
that most other papers focus on. This is valuable to me because this can add another layer to
my analysis and this perspective is hard to obtain.

8. Hrnqvist, M. (2004). Risk Assessments and Public Order Disturbances: New European
Guidelines for the Use of Force?. Journal Of Scandinavian Studies In Criminology & Crime
Prevention, 5(1), 4.

The author is Magnus Hrnqvist, an associate professor at the Department of Criminology at

Stockholm University. This paper goes over the prison system, border control, and antiterrorism measures in Europe. It goes on to argue that there exists a paradigmatic shift in the
manner in which state-sanctioned force is employed and uses peoples perception of
security, the rule of law, and social problems to support the argument. I found this paper
particularly useful and also unique because of the fact that it focuses on defining, before
anything else, what actually is criminal, and what should a country deem worthy to be dealt
with by the justice system. I think this is quite interesting because it evaluates the UK system,
where anti-terrorism and the multiculturalistic nature is pretty similar but their incarceration
statistics were quite different. I find the suggestions that the author has included in regards to
possible reformations to improve the system quite valuable as well and might include that in my
final project.