I havent read the book so cant comment on just how “nuanced” the review is. I note that opinions such as this

“McGeough told the Columbia Journalism Review last month the only term for such behaviour was terrorism and that Hamas was “a group that uses terror as a weapon”.

…..are accurate, but he may also have the view that Israel uses terror as a weapon…which in my opinion was made clear with its two most recent “wars” the nasty aspect of it all is that Israel attempts to legitimize its terror, and bizarrely now even insults our intelligence by attempting to claim some moral right to kill civilians, while its considerable propaganda machine demonises the resistance and its killing of ( far fewer ) civilians

And McGeough was much more nuanced about Mishal than this review would lead people to believe.

Hamas is not corrupt, most are educated people. To my mind the thugs in Israel are far more dangerous than this guy and my main feeling in the book was immense sadness for the doubly and triply betrayed man, a betrayal we safe idiots could never understand.

I just watched Yoni Goodman’s little video about the occupation.

That is more honest than this appraisal of Kill Khalid Antony so what has got into you?

Did you read it all or only pick out little bits to demonise Khalid?

This is not to applaud violence, but to question how our society judges it, and whether or not it is really the only path to change in situations such as these.