The horrific events of September 11, 2001 shook the foundations of many of the most basic assumptions of American life. These include our confidence in relative isolation from the trouble spots of the world; our belief, and need to believe, that our culture is recognized on some level worldwide as an advanced and superior one; and, perhaps most fundamental, the assumption that a common instinct for self-preservation motivates and constrains even aggressive behavior.
It was not that America had never experienced terrorism, even at home and on a fairly large scale, beforein the 1990s alone New York City and Oklahoma City had experienced massive bombings characterized as terrorist acts, two American embassies in Africa had been bombed, with enormous loss of life, and at least one plot to destroy major New York City landmarks had been foiled. Rather, we were shaken, as individuals and as a nation, by the realization that the September 11th attacks were part of a long-term, sophisticated plan whose chief architect had invoked religious teaching, obligation, and duty in his followers in aid of focusing sustained hostility and destruction on the United States, and that the plan included suicide attacks. That these hostile actors apparently are not under the authority of any recognized government, nor identified with the interests of any particular state, makes it difficult for our governmental agencies to investigate their plans, places current and future preventive and enforcement efforts at the awkward junction of criminal law, foreign affairs, and war, and makes us feel very insecure indeed. . . .
For more information about Judge Swain’s Donahue Lecture (which served as the basis for this article) please click here.