In 'Invitation to Terror' Frank Furedi forwards essentially a single thesis: that the War on Terror's politics of fear pushed by governments around the world does not result from a conscious deception in the service of power, state warmongering, and suchlike; but rather from the elite's own loss of self belief and a culture of uncertainty and anxiety. The loss of belief in question is the erosion in the belief in secularism, liberalism, and, more generally, 'Western values'. Thus, despite drawing different conclusions to the 'pro-war left' there is a certain similarity to it's analysis in Furedi's work. The self-hating elite is apparently under the same spell of decrepit belief in Western culture, and if adopting more stridency in standing up for Western values they would not need to peddle the politics of fear.
Whether you agree with his arguments' logic or assumptions, the problem is that the book never really develops it with any specificity. What is the 'political elite', and can all governments around the world be operating in the same fashion? What about non-Western governments who have adopted the same rhetoric? The War on Terror is never put into any form of geopolitical analysis. Furedi's analysis involves poring through official statements and British and American newspaper articles and drawing massively sweeping conclusions from this limited form of discourse analysis. The upshot is that the book is repetitive; when assertion is not substantiated, or at least theoretically deepened, it is simply repeated over and over again for effect.