Monitoring Policy Making at the United Nations |
| ||||||||||||
9/11: Causes, Repercussions and Consequences
The terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on September 11, 2001 evoked worldwide indignation. This page posts a selection of articles, interpretations and comments on 9/11, its background and its consequences at the world level and in the US. Commentators place the crisis in the context of globalization, US foreign policy, the Middle East crisis and other factors.
More Information on:
"War on Terrorism"
Links | Articles Links
9-11 Commission
This website links to the official site of the "National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States." Here, you can find witness and staff statements from the public hearings of the Commission.Articles
Archived Articles | 2005 |2004
Bin Laden – The Wrong Target? (September 20, 2001)
Paddy Ashdown, former leader of the UK Liberal Democrats, warns against the danger of simplifying the current crisis. In this article he fully explains the historical complexities and political intricacies of Afghanistan. (Times)
Le Monde Diplomatique gives a in depth background on Afghanistan, and analyses the US relationship with the Taliban.2007
Six Years of 9/11 as a License to Kill (September 10, 2007)
This article considers how the Bush administration has used a national tragedy for political purposes, especially by making a connection between 9/11 and Iraq. As families grieve for the victims, Washington carefully stages hearings and reports on Iraq. By including Iraq and the “war on terror” in the 9/11 discourse, the Bush administration has succeeded in making these events seem closely connected. (AlterNet)2005
The Tip of the Iceberg? (July 27, 2005)
As US and European governments and media warn of inevitable future terrorist action and encourage us to be afraid of the “terrorist iceberg” below the surface, TomPaine asks whether the “climate of intense fear that has been created since 9/11 helps the terrorists more than it hinders them.” Such alarmism is inaccurate, and portrays the limited attacks seen in the West as evidence of a greater unseen threat rather than the maximum capacity of the perpetrators.The Rise of Islamophobia (May 23, 2005)
The “most disturbing legal trend” after 9/11 involves the treatment of Muslims under US law, says this TomPaine article. Documenting substantial increases in civil rights cases, hate crimes and detentions since 2003, the author warns that the US government needs to win “hearts and minds” at home by “treating all people equally under the law.”What We Don’t Know About 9/11 Hurts US (February 15, 2005)
Recently declassified sections of the 9/11 Commission report demonstrate that the Bush administration placed political and economic interests before the protection of civilians, says this AlterNet article. The author contends that the public cannot make informed decisions when Washington ignores the “blinking red” system, resists spending money on security improvements, starts expensive wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and covers up the evidence by citing “national security” interests.2004
Guantanamo Has 'Failed to Prevent Terror Attacks' (October 3, 2004)
Retired top military intelligence officer Anthony Christino goes public with his opinions of the interrogation methods used in US military detention facilities since 9/11. Although government officials resolutely defend detentions and interrogations made in the name of the US “war on terror” as vital to national security, Christino claims that the “system seems almost calculated to produce entirely bogus confessions.” (Observer)We Could Have Stopped Him (August 20, 2004)
A senior CIA officer claims that the US government rather than the CIA bears responsibility for the lack of effective actions against Al Qaida. The White House put its economic interests, particularly oil interests in the Middle East, over security issues. This Guardian interview took place before the CIA gave its employee strict interview guidelines.Questions Persist Despite 9/11 Investigations (July 26, 2004)
The 9/11 commission’s final report left many unanswered questions. Some are as fundamental as the question of who financed the attacks, and some “fall more in the category of perplexing curiosities.” This article provides an overview of these remaining questions and what little is known about their answers.(Los Angeles Times)Failures of the Sept. 11 Commission (July 26, 2004)
Ray McGovern, former CIA analyst and member of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, argues that the 9/11 commission offers a “childlike” explanation of the attacks on the United States. The commission’s report was intended to absolve anyone in a position of authority, says McGovern, and its findings are “facile, mischievous and disingenuous.” (Washington Post)9/11: The Iran Factor (July 26, 2004)
According to this article from Newsweek, the 9/11 Commission’s final report provides the strongest evidence yet of links between Iran and al-Qaeda. The authors claim that the report raises new questions about the decision to invade Iraq, and warn that “what the new 9/11 report makes clear is that nearly three years into the war on terror, America is still not close to understanding the enemy.”Honorable Commission, Toothless Report (July 25, 2004)
Richard Clarke, former head of counterterrorism at the National Security Council, praises the 9/11 commission for its extensive presentation of facts. However, Clarke also charges that the commission “failed to admit the obvious: we are less capable of defeating the jihadists because of the Iraq war.” (New York Times)It's Not Always About You (July 6, 2004)
Columnist Gwynne Dyer provocatively argues that Middle Eastern Islamists are using the US as a pawn in their own domestic strategies. The Islamists’ goal, he suggests, is to take power in Muslim countries. The 9/11 attacks were not an assault on “Western” values such as freedom and democracy, but were an attempt to lure the US into invading Muslim countries, boosting the popularity of Islamist politics. (Toronto Star)9/11 Probe Clears Saudi Arabia (June 17, 2004)
The commission investigating the 9-11 attacks found “no evidence” that the Saudi government was bankrolling al-Qaeda. However, the recent report does identify Saudi Arabian donors “as the primary source of al-Qaeda funding.” (BBC)Response to Sept. 11 Attacks Was Confused, Panel Finds (June 17, 2004)
The 9/11 commission found that US government agencies failed to respond effectively to the attacks due to “inadequate emergency procedures.” The commission’s report revealed that the resulting confusion even led Vice President Cheney to mistakenly believe that US warplanes had shot down two of the hijacked jets. (Associated Press)The Roots of Torture (May 24, 2004)
After 9/11, legal advisors to the US government argued that international treaties do not apply when fighting the “War on Terror.” The Bush administration reinterpreted the Geneva Conventions “to allow tougher methods of interrogation” at Guantanamo Bay. Looking to Guantanamo as a model, the Pentagon later adopted similar techniques of abuse and humiliation in Iraq’s Abu Ghraib prison. (Newsweek)Pre-9/11 Files: Warnings More Dire and Persistent (April 18, 2004)
After three weeks of public hearings by the independent commission investigating the September 11 attacks, 6 of its 10 members suggest that the attacks could have been prevented. (New York Times)Panel Says Bush Saw Repeated Warnings (April 14, 2004)
The August 6, 2001 memo which contains the intelligence briefing for President Bush and other intelligence reports between April and May, 2001 show that there were consistent reminders of an imminent attack from Bin Laden. (Washington Post)September 11 Should Have Been Stopped (March 25, 2004)
The excuse for the catastrophe of 9/11: “No one could have anticipated this” has exposed the Bush administration’s disregard of intelligence that warned of potential terrorist attacks. (Truthout)
Archived Articles
More information on Empire?
