Branding Terror, a design book by former UN counter-terrorism analyst Artur Beifuss and creative director Francesco Trivini Bellini, catalogs the logos of 65 terrorist organizations across the globe. Jez Owen is a fan:

To be able to study the real thing … is an unusual opportunity for designers and historians. What we discover is that it is a rhetoric of idealism combined with a heavy dose of pageantry that drives these logos, and in turn the organizations that they represent. … Whilst some of the marks are theatrically elaborate, others are incredibly simple; where some are expertly created, others are crudely drawn; many employ cliché upon cliché: however, all apparently have the capacity to convey powerful messages. A world emerges where aesthetic and graphic design skills take second place to connotation. The goal, first and foremost, is to persuade.

Owen’s objection:

Branding Terror is a tour de force of visual research with one fundamental flaw: its categorization as a design book. As one reads, one can’t help feeling that to talk about terrorism in pure graphic terms is to ignore the violence that has been and will be committed in its name, that a discussion of color references and font choices trivializes the subject.

In a July review, Dawn Perlmutter scorned the book: “The authors should stick to producing art books, as they have no training in the significant subtleties of the subliminal and covert imagery contained in terrorist propaganda”:

The book “Branding Terror” essentially sugarcoats the jihadist threat by applying a biased interpretation of the emblems, minimizing the iconography of martyrdom and sanitizing obvious violent indicators, such as the black flags of jihad and swords that are depicted in many of the Islamist logos. The sword is described throughout the book as a premodern weapon that represents the historical struggle in early Islam. Two crossed swords in the emblem of the Indonesian group Jemmah Anshorut Tauhid are described as indicating “JAT’s commitment to jihad. As a pre-modern weapon, the sword is linked to early Islamic jihad campaigns; it is also associated with the purity and nobility of early Islamic heroes. By using swords as a design element JAT confers legitimacy on its jihadi activities, and portrays them as a modern extension of historical jihadi campaigns” (p. 187). There is no reference at all to the swords’ significance in representing “the sword verses” in the Quran, which jihadists use to justify their violence or that they represents Jihad by the sword (jihad bis saif), which refers to armed fighting in holy war. … Merrell, the book’s publisher, claims on its website that “Branding Terror does not seek to make any political statements; rather, it offers insight into an understudied area of counter-intelligence, and provides an original and provocative source of inspiration for graphic designers.” The statement that this book’s aim is to be a source of inspiration for graphic designers is truly obscene and makes it clear that the authors have no concept of what these symbols represent. These groups are not selling cereal; they are selling fear and their “brand” is backed up by murder, suicide attacks, beheadings and bombings. They are not misunderstood freedom fighters, or peaceful protestors — they are mass murderers. Sugarcoating the violence minimizes the threat, and referring to their emblems as “brands” also diminishes the seriousness of their violent ideologies.

(Image of Jemmah Anshorut Tauhid emblem via TRAC)