9/11, Six Years On
Some archival material about the 9/11 attacks as we mark the sixth anniversary of those despicable acts:
The destruction of the World Trade Center and the assault on the Pentagon may well represent an effort to overcome Western media speed and diffusion, and to do so by staging a startling cataclysm involving potent national symbols. But more than that: It would represent an adjustment of the scale of potential terror to the scope of available media. That is, it would not merely have overcome a diffused and quickly distracted media, it would have used the real-time abilities of the new media to stage an epic of murder and destruction, immersing a worldwide audience in horror and confusion as the events occurred. In the end, it would not merely have used media as a tool to disseminate an idea and demoralize an enemy, it would have used the media as one of its primary weapons, and made the audience participants in the apocalypse itself.–Charles Paul Freund, September 11, 2001
Yet, except for the devastating loss of life, these are all changes of degree, not kind. Even the psychological burden of feeling ever vulnerable to attack has a precedent in the Cold War, with omnipresent and credible threat of imminent nuclear annihilation lasting through the 1980s. The brute fact is that daily life in the United States will not change significantly in Tuesday's aftermath. Adults will get on with their work, students with their school, children with their play. Churches may be a little more crowded in coming weeks, and airplanes a little less. But we'll move on, even as we mourn.–Mike Lynch, September 13, 2001
With the destruction of the World Trade Center and much of its surroundings in lower Manhattan, there are serious questions about what to do next, with some suggesting that a memorial park be built on the site of the single greatest act of terror and destruction in U.S. history. Such thoughts are eminently understandable and certainly it will be a long time before the physical debris is removed, much less the psychic scars healed. But it would be a far greater tribute to the American character and to those who died on September 11 to rebuild on the site of the World Trade Center not a replica of what was, but a newer, larger, forward-looking complex–one that would hallow that bloody ground by providing the next generation with even greater possibilities for the future.–Nick Gillespie, September 13, 2001
In the gates, some of the traditional shops were closed. (With only ticketed passengers allowed through, many of these airport businesses could be in trouble.) McDonald's was closed, as was Bow Wow Meow, purveyors of assorted animal kitsch, and Brookstone, merchants of traveler's aids both useful and whimsical. Both airport bars were open, but each with less than a handful of customers. I had never seen an airport concourse more empty before midnight. My flight, a shuttle at the beginning of the weekend, had only around 40 passengers. Normally, it would have been packed. I watched one flight arrive, travelers trudging off forlornly with no eager spouses, kids, or friends to greet them; such familiar scenes of reunion may be a thing of the past. The canned message over the loudspeaker, one I was quite familiar with, reminded us all that solicitors are not sponsored by the airport, and that you needn't pay them. However, with the new ticketed-passengers-only policy, the kids selling candy and deaf people selling pencils had all disappeared.–Brian Doherty, September 17, 2001
I've long opposed American intervention abroad. Self-defense, however, is an entirely different matter. Obviously, the Kojak model is ideal, but I can live with Bronson or Bugs. The important point is to aim our fire at the murderers, not at civilians or at anyone who merely happens to be a usual suspect–and to limit ourselves to a well-defined mission, rather than a vague, all-encompassing "war on terrorism." The Caesar option would lead to further tragedy; the Strangelove path, to utter disaster.–Jesse Walker, September 21, 2001
"Several of the most worrisome provisions," observes the Electronic Frontier Foundation, "appear to be part of a general law enforcement 'wish list' rather than a specific response to terrorism." Remarking on the Justice Department's attempt to hurry the process, Rep. Bob Barr (R-Ga.), asked, "Does it have anything to do with the fact that the department has sought many of these authorities on numerous other occasions, has been unsuccessful in obtaining them, and now seeks to take advantage of what is obviously an emergency situation?" In circumstances such as these, skeptics of state power like to haul out a famous remark by Benjamin Franklin: "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." When it comes to deciding which measures will enhance safety and which aspects of liberty are "essential," of course, there is room for debate. At least, there ought to be.–Jacob Sullum, October 2, 2001
Here's a compilation, current through 2005, of articles related to the attacks, foreign policy, civil liberties, and more.
Our December 2001 issue, which was in production when the attacks occurred and includes a symposium on civil liberties, is online here.
On the first anniversary of the attacks, we published a special issue titled "What Price Safety?"
reason's ongoing coverage of terrorism is online here. Search the Topics page for related material.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
No quotes from Aaron Russo about 9/11 being an inside job? Geez, the man is hardly a week in his grave and his fans forget him.
Freedom isn’t Free, it costs a buck oh five.
Did anyone else do a little quick math in their heads when the second tower went down?
I came with about 20,000. Thank the Lord, and the 9-5 workday, for small mercies.
Welcome back, Edward.
“All I know is that it sucked.” –SPD, 11 September, 2007
I finished Finnegen’s Wake.
Here’s an Aaron Russo (RIP) quote:
“Why do you think 9-11 happened and nothing since then? Do you think our security is so great here . . . ? Nine-11 was done by people in our own government, in our own banking system to perpetuate the fear of the American people into subordinating themselves to anything the government wants them to do . . . that’s what it’s all about.” –Aaron Russo
Wow, you sure told that dead guy.
That doesn’t make any sense, Joe. I’m telling you what Aaron Russo–not just any dead guy, but a revered Libertarian activist–had to say about 9/11.
Edward, you’ve got stupid obsessions.
The four principles of conspiracism:
* Nothing happens by accident
* Nothing is as it seems
* Everything is connected
* If you this, you must be one of them
To a conspiracist, evidence is nothing more than an excuse to get people to listen to their conclusion. Just yesterday I ran across a guy who said “I know most of Loose Change is bullshit, but it gets people to see the ‘Truth'”.
Wait a minute, rho. You think it’s fine to praise Aaron Russo as a great libertarian defender of freedom and overlook his crackpot ideas about 9/11? If so, you’ve got some heavy-duty blinkers on. The great Libertarian presidential hope Ron Paul even delivered a eulogy at Russo’s funeral. Does Ron Paul believe the government pulled off 9/11? Do you?
Eddie,
Dr. Paul answered that question in the negative more than a couple of times.
Timon19,
Sure he did. But the notion that the U.S. government was behind the 9/11 attacks is such a vicious paranoid fantasy that you have to wonder what Ron Paul liked so much about a man who was so invested in it. An honest and intelligent candidate would want to distance himself from such a fruitcake, don’t you think?
Why won’t the 9/11 troofers get it? There’s no convincing them, is there? Our dear old government has expanded greatly since 9/11, but does that mean they were behind the attacks themselves?
Edward,
I don’t know anything about Aaron Russo but simply because a person has a crackpot idea in one area does not invalidate him completely. See Newton re: alchemy for one example. (no, I am not comparing Russo to Newton).
Most Truthers I know are wonderful people. Thoughtful, kind to kittens, etc. It is entirely possible to be grossly delusional in one area of your life, and be perfectly normal in the rest.
Russo was a friend of liberty, but I can’t help but wonder how much bigger of an impact he could have made if he hadn’t spent all his time denying the existance of income tax law, and had worked for getting rid of the actual existing income tax laws instead.
http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/jsiegel/Personal/taxes/IncomeTax.htm
http://www.publiceye.org/conspire/flaherty/Federal_Reserve.html
http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0703b.asp
JasonC,
In today’s political climate, maintaining that the 9/11 attacks were carried out by the U.S.government in colusion with greedy bankers is a pretty big crackpot idea. Maybe Russo was rational in other areas. Who knows? I’m glad you’re not comparing him to Newton.
Why Ron Paul delivered a eulogy at Russo’s funeral is puzzling. Of course, it’s not Ron Paul’s fault that crackpots support him. David Duke is another big Ron Paul supporter, but I’ll bet you won’t see Paul speaking at any David Duke rallies.
Brandybuck:
How was Russo a friend of liberty? How does making nonsensical arguments purporting to prove that the income tax law doesn’t exist or promoting wildly irrational conspiracy theories about the attacks of 9/11 serve the cause of liberty?
I said he was a friend of liberty, because it is still too soon for me to speak too much ill of the dead. He ran for office on the libertarian ticket in Nevada, so I can only assume that he promoted some non-conspiratorial libertarian ideology during his run. Such as the continuing legalization of prostitution, lowering state taxes and spending, etc.
Brandybuck:
I think Russo’s distorted worldview and commitment to irrational drivel on important matters overrides any laudable libertarian positions he might have taken. The Nazis were great on animal rights. In any case, having delusional conspiracists associated with the Libertarian movement only weakens the movement and blurs its message.
I fully agree. But I’m still not the type to go dancing on the graves of the dead.
Brandybuck:
Okay, wait a month or two, and then do a jig.
The Ds and Rs certainly have their share of nutjobs, hundreds of whom are elected officials.
Russo might have been a nutjob, but at least his nutjobbedness was well-directed. He was OUR nutjob.
R.I.P. Aaron.
Steve S.
Right. Denounce only others’ nutjobs. As a mindset, Stalinism is alive and well.