In The Terror(s) of Our Time(s), Brett Bowden defines terrorism as a violent means to bring about a political end (government policy change). Whereas, in Origins of the New Terrorism, Matthew Morgan claims that a “new” terrorism has emerged, which does not seek political change as an end, but instead sees the violence itself as its desired end. Compare and contrast these two definitions of terrorism. Is a political aim an essential part of any “good” definition of terrorism? Which definition do you support and why? What policy implications can you predict from supporting one definition or the other?