The book tries to expose the impotency of the mainstream media in asking tough questions of people in power by citing the story of abused Iraqi prisoners.While the book is well-referenced and comprehensive in its treatment of the subject, it is not devoid of flaws. Nevertheless, what flaws there are is peripheral to the essence of the book. For the most part, Richard Jackson comes up with a much-needed work on this neglected aspect of the ongoing war on terrorism. This elaborate study looks at the role of language and discourse in the construction of the war on terrorism. According to the author, language, in this context is used to normalize the practice of war on terrorism (Jackson, 69). The narrative is very elaborate in terms of attention to detail and employment of complex logic in support of arguments. The book is also an exposition on how the political elite of the United States uses language as a medium of public deception. The power wielded by the political elites of the country, the author argues, is so ubiquitous that even legislations are subject to manipulations. An interesting case in point is the Patriots’ Act (a euphemism). By delving into the labyrinth of official rhetoric over the last few years, the author comes up with impressive essays on the nature of American hegemony and its quest for global dominance. In Richard Jackson’s own words, the language of anti-terrorists actually prevents rather than facilitates the search for solutions to political violence. that it actually encourages terrorism (Jackson, 120).The book tries to weave together three diverse subjects in the form of language, writing and present-day terrorism. While the book is predominantly factual, one, however, gets the feeling that the author is biased against the American government. Given that the Bush Administration is one of the most unpopular American politics had ever seen, the book still does not present asingle appreciation or recognition of courageous and earnest journalism that did find publication.