SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
september 11
Bush's Post-9/11 Policies Are Doing Further Damage in Trump's Hands
Because they were never decisively laid to rest by subsequent administrations, they formed the foundation for the excesses of the Trump administration’s foreign and domestic policies that we face today.
Sep 15, 2026
In response to the terrorist attacks of 9/11, the Bush administration rushed to implement domestic and foreign policies that had dramatic consequences for the US and the world.
They pushed through far-reaching legislation which, when combined with Executive Orders and “national security” memoranda, effectively gutted one-half of the rights guaranteed in the Bill of Rights and erased 50 years of work advancing civil rights and liberties here in the US. In addition, the steps they took to justify the invasions, occupations, and nation-building gambits in Afghanistan and Iraq contributed to degrading the roles of the United Nations and NATO and contributed to dismantling the architectures of diplomacy, rights, and law that had been created by the international community in the aftermath of World War II.
The assault on rights and freedoms had been brewing before 9/11. Beginning in the Reagan era and continuing through the Clinton administration, there’d been “secret” plans to round up, detain, or deport “aliens” without due process. Because of domestic opposition, earlier administrations had been hesitant to publicly implement them. But with the nation reeling in shock in the aftermath of the terror attacks, it became possible for the Bush administration to openly give law enforcement agencies a grab bag of repressive tools they had been seeking. They did so knowing that domestic or partisan opposition would be muted because 9/11 had taken such a traumatic toll. In the end, the Bush-endorsed legislation was easily passed in Congress, with only one senator voting against the bill. And there was only modest opposition to the administration’s measures to use racial and ethnic profiling, deny due process to immigrants, conduct warrantless searches and surveillance, make use of entrapment techniques against vulnerable individuals, and implement a range of costly and invasive measures at airports—all of which have been shown to be wholly ineffective in protecting national security.
If the shock of the attacks had made the public more willing to accept new laws and programs that sacrificed the rights of others, they also created a sense of dread about what might happen next. America had invaded, bombed, and fought wars in other countries around the world, but not since Pearl Harbor, more than a six decades earlier, had the American homeland been attacked. This resulted in feelings of vulnerability. People wanted to know: “Who are these people who committed these crimes?” “Why did they do this to us?” and “What should we do now to respond?”
As a result of the US unilaterally steamrolling its way into the war, insulting allies who refused to join them, and faring so poorly in its execution of both conflicts, respect for the US plummeted worldwide.
It was a short time after the attacks that I accepted an invitation from the Council on Foreign Relations to participate in a post-9/11 study group to discuss these troubling questions and offer recommendations to policymakers, specifically regarding what America’s message to the world should be in this moment. The group they assembled was mixed and bipartisan, including former lawmakers and diplomats, military and government officials, and Middle East “experts.” In the months that followed, we met several times, seated around a conference table in center city Washington DC.
While many of us had questions and concerns, it was striking that a core group of participants came with an obvious agenda. The dust hadn’t yet settled, nor had the embers cooled at the site of the burning towers, but a cohort of the “study group” already had answers. America, they argued, had been attacked because it was perceived as complacent and weak. The terrorists saw that weakness and took advantage of it. The solution, they posited, was for America to demonstrate strength by dealing with a devastating blow so that our enemies would know better than to strike at us again. They had already settled on their preferred target: Iraq. Saddam Hussein was a ruthless leader who’d committed crimes against his own people and his neighbors—and so he was deemed a worthy and non-controversial foe.
Interestingly, at this very early point, the “pro-war hawks” had not yet fabricated their later justifications for the war they so desperately sought. There was no case being made that Saddam sponsored al Qaeda, or that he had weapons of mass destruction. This was to come later. In the beginning, the only justification they advanced was that America needed a dramatic display of strength to put fear into the hearts of those who might be inclined to attack again.
The group who advanced these views in the study group was part of a much larger ideological movement of “neoconservatives” who were growing in influence in Republican circles. They were ideologues whose belief system had more in common with Christian fundamentalism than with traditional Republican thinking. They saw a worldwide cosmic struggle between good and evil. America, of course, was the force for good. The evil had been the Soviet Union but had now been replaced with Arab or Islamic extremism. It was imperative that the forces for good be relentless in its never-ending struggle against evil—to root it out and crush it. No compromise was possible.
While then-President George W. Bush did not initially share their world view, the shock of 9/11 catapulted the neoconservatives into a dominant force shaping his administration’s policies. In the months and years that followed, the Bush administration made decisions reflecting their influence. The repressive legislation and anti-Arab, anti-Muslim programs were part of this, as were the wars and occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq.
The costs and consequences of these two ill-conceived wars have been immense in lost lives, treasure, and respect. In addition to the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and Afghanis who perished, 7,000 US military personnel died. While the Bush Pentagon tried to sell the war to Congress by saying it would cost just a few billion dollars, it is now estimated to have cost between $6 and 7 trillion. And as a result of the US unilaterally steamrolling its way into the war, insulting allies who refused to join them, and faring so poorly in its execution of both conflicts, respect for the US plummeted worldwide.
These post-9/11 policies inflicted tremendous damage during the Bush years, but their consequences are still with us. Because they were never decisively laid to rest by subsequent administrations, they formed the foundation for the excesses of the Trump administration’s foreign and domestic policies that we face today.
Keep ReadingShow Less
25 Years After 9/11, the Deportation Machine Has Exploded
Rights that apply to some people are not rights. They are privileges with an expiration date, and that date moves every single time this country gets scared.
Sep 15, 2026
For my family, the story of September 11 didn’t end when we went to bed after a day of fear and confusion.
We were attacked during what was my first week of 9th grade. I was looking out my classroom window at the Twin Towers with a classmate as we inadvertently witnessed the first plane hit the building. We were in shock. More kids gathered at the windows as a particular silence fell over the group. We eventually moved to a bigger room with more students, but with blinds pulled down. The sound of the second plane hitting the building made the blinds pop.
I don't remember much else about that day except that the room went quiet in a way I'd never heard a room go quiet before. But I vividly remember what would happen in the days after.
The city's grief curdled into something else for people who looked like me. Harassment on the streets. Windows broken. Women with their hijabs pulled off on the street. Fathers, brothers, grandfathers were pulled out of homes and businesses across the city and questioned like suspects, not for anything they'd done, but for what mosque they prayed at or what their passport said.
Twenty-five years later, the machine that was built to watch a few of us is watching most of us.
By the following year, tens of thousands of other men were required to register in person at the immigration office because of where they were born. Between September 2002 and 2003, 83,519 men registered at intake windows across the country. Of those, 13,799 were placed in deportation proceedings. Yet, only 11 were found to have any connection to terrorism, by the government's own count at the time. A program that processed 83,000 people and tried to deport almost 14,000 of them.
Six months into that registration program, on March 1, 2003, the federal government opened the Department of Homeland Security, which folded 22 agencies into a single new department built to do that kind of work at scale. But this mandate’s impact on communities wasn't an abstraction to me. It was the agency that had just decided my brother didn't belong in our city, with a budget line and a headquarters and a mission that would live long past our nation’s trauma.
I started organizing more deeply because of what happened to my neighbors and family that year. Twenty-five years of doing this work has taught me one specific thing: The machine doesn't stay pointed where it started. It isn't only Arab and Muslim families anymore who get treated as a threat first and people second.
This year, Congress gave Immigration and Customs Enforcement $45 billion just for new detention spaces, a 265% jump that gives ICE a bigger detention budget than the entire federal prison system, plus another $30 billion for enforcement operations on top of that. No one has properly enumerated what threat justifies a budget that size. I don't think there is one. Rather, it's a machine that's been fed for 25 years and has simply gotten larger with more zeroes attached.
What happened to Muslim and Arab families after 9/11 is not identical to what's happening to immigrant families now. But what I recognize is narrower than that. It’s how a government decides that fear of a few individuals justifies suspicion of entire communities, and how fast the list of suspects grows once the infrastructure to monitor and process them is in place.
After 9/11, I learned the difference between charity and power. Charity helps people survive a system. Power changes what the system is permitted to do to those in society. I've spent my adult life on the side of building power, not because immigrants are just useful, exceptional, or because of their economic contributions, but because rights that apply to some people are not rights. They are privileges with an expiration date, and that date moves every single time this country gets scared.
Twenty-five years later, however, it's landing on more doors than it did in 2002. Others have said it countless times, but if some of us don't have rights, none of us do. It's the exact lesson this country refused to learn in 2002, when 11 real cases were enough to justify tracking 83,000 people, and the tracking was made permanent instead of undone. Twenty-five years later, the machine that was built to watch a few of us is watching most of us.
We must fight for every single one of us because we have all witnessed what happens when we do not. I watched it through a classroom window when I was 14. I have spent every year since making certain that the next community in the crosshairs does not face it the way mine did, alone and expected to be grateful for whatever protection somebody decided to spare us.
This anniversary is absolutely a time when we need to reflect on what we lost that day as New Yorkers and as Americans. It's also about whether we're finally willing to notice what we built right after it, and this time agree not to let it keep growing.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Never Forget Is Bad Spiritual Advice
There is wisdom in honoring one’s pain and setting it aside, to live. I still believe that. I no longer know if it’s possible when the country doing the wounding has stopped bothering to hide it.
Sep 12, 2026
"The well-prepared heart has hope during adversity and fear during prosperity.”—Erica McAlpine
Twenty-five years, and the day keeps getting bigger instead of smaller. Three thousand dead in a single morning, then some multiple of that across the wars launched in its wake, then a shifting count out of Gaza that outpaces anyone’s will to keep totaling it. I did not expect grief to go on collecting interest this long. I did not expect to still be bitter, on a date this rehearsed, in a country this practiced at looking away.
I have written some version of this before. On some earlier September, I posted this: “#NeverForget is bad spiritual advice. Especially, when one has exacted revenge that far exceeds initial loss. To spell it out, honor your dead but remember, too, the 100,000+ Iraqi civilian noncombatants murdered in a vengeful, unjust ‘war.’ It is unseemly to keep one’s wounds open, while downplaying those of others that we’ve inflicted. There is wisdom, humility, and self preservation in honoring one’s pain & setting it aside, to Live.” Under it, I’d put a line from Friedrich Nietzsche, “Without forgetting it is quite impossible to live at all"; another, unattributed, “If the other person injures you, you may forget the injury, but if you injure him you will always remember"; and closed with Kahlil Gibran: “Hate is a dead thing. Who of you would be a tomb?”
This is not the only year I have said some version of it. Social media keeps a ledger I never asked for: one friend calling it the voice of reason, another admitting he’d learned the hard way that making this case got him nowhere with people he knew, a third telling me the 9/11 Memorial & Museum has a final section on the wars that followed, built into the same ground as the names of the dead. “We can always do better,” I wrote back to that last one, which was as much comfort as I had that day.
Then there is the exchange that still says more than anything I could add to it. A commenter, spoiling for a fight, wrote that we were lucky the whole Middle East hadn’t been leveled. “You’re a funny guy,” I wrote back, “and I’m too fond of you to take seriously your outrageous comment,” and sent him “a great big, virtual hug, until I can give you one in person.” Another commenter played along just long enough to ask what exactly had been won. Afghans and Iraqis, he answered himself: more Americans dead in the war on terror than in the towers, “them” and “us” collapsing into the same casualty list. “Yes,” I wrote back, “it’s always civilian casualties,” which is the whole essay in four words, if I am honest, and everything since has only been me finding 400 more ways to say it.
I could republish that old post today, and only the arithmetic would need updating. Ammiel Alcalay, writing this same week, names the habit outright: Keep what happens abroad in one room and what happens at home in another, so neither has to answer to the other. Brown University’s Costs of War project puts the toll of these 25 years, direct and indirect combined, at 4.5 to 4.7 million and still counting. Alcalay draws the line forward, to what he calls, correctly, “the genocide in Gaza and seizure of land in Palestine.” The number I gave my friends, a decade or more ago, was 100,000. It never got revised. It got buried under the next one, and the next. There is no exchange rate for human suffering. The afterlife of September 11 was not measured abroad alone. At home, Muslims remained available for suspicion: The Council on American-Islamic Relations recorded 8,683 complaints in 2025, its highest annual total. This week, Rudy Giuliani went on television to say the city’s current mayor, its first Muslim one, shouldn’t attend Friday’s ceremony, then said Muslims are taught from childhood that they want to “dominate us.” Twenty-five years on, and grief still comes with a loyalty test.
What has changed since is the camouflage. Richard Nixon needed Henry Kissinger to bomb Cambodia in the dark. Barack Obama needed kill lists and a “disposition matrix,” a targeting database mapping how terrorism suspects would be captured or killed, dressed up in the calm language of due process. Donald Trump needs none of it. He says the part that used to need a translator, calls it winning, and the bombs land anyway, in the same places they always did. He is the pattern finally caught without its coat on, a confession the country has been rehearsing since before I wrote that old post, only now said out loud.
It was a friend, in that same 2018 thread, who was already flagging the collusion with Saudi Arabia over Yemen: American weapons, sold for profit, into a war just as unjust as the ones carrying our own name. I hadn’t known. I said so. Eight years on, Britain has announced plans, not yet law, to ban imports from illegal settlements and create powers to sanction companies that support, facilitate, or profit from them. It is a small thing. It is also an acknowledgment, however belated, that complicity can carry a price.
I wrote, once, that there is wisdom in honoring one’s pain and setting it aside, to live, that what is spiritually true for us as individuals is also true for us as nations. I still believe that. I no longer know if it’s possible when the country doing the wounding has stopped bothering to hide it, or if honoring the dead, now, requires that we stop setting anything aside at all.
Keep ReadingShow Less
25 Years After 9/11, Islamophobia Thrives
Islamophobia is at an all-time high 25 years after 9/11, largely due to intentional disinformation and government officials spreading hate in order to get elected.
Sep 12, 2026
A new study by Pew Research finds that more than 4 in 10—more than 40%!—of Americans believe that Muslims are having a “negative impact on the US” and are “less patriotic” than other Americans. These numbers show more negative feelings toward Muslims than immediately after 9/11. Islamophobia is also higher than immediately after 9/11.
And yet, no massive terrorist attack like 9/11 or other similar negative impact by Muslims has occurred in the last 25 years. 9/11 is an unremembered event in the lives of over 100 million young Americans. So what is happening to increase negative views of Muslims in America?
First, those with negative views about Muslims are less likely to have ever met a Muslim. Their views, then, stem from social media, the news, and the many Islamophobic statements by governmental officials.
Second, American attitudes about Islam are being intentionally manipulated by a loose network of individuals and organizations, called “The Islamophobia Industry,” which seeks to disseminate disinformation about Muslims and Islam. The anti-“Ground Zero Mosque” appellation and campaign was engineered by this network. The introduction of the word “shariah” (which essentially just means “Islam”) as a scare word and specter was deliberately introduced by David Yerushalmi, who made a lot of money peddling his xenophobic views to state legislatures, telling them to implement “anti-shariah laws,” which promote the falsehood that Muslim Americans are incapable of complying with American laws.
These attitudes affect Americans. Islam is an American religion. And yet, Muslims experience the most discrimination of any religious group in the United States.
Third, this characterization of shariah, as well as other canards about Muslims, are parroted by governmental officials aiming to scare Americans into voting for them, Vice President JD Vance going so far as to say—on no evidence whatsoever—that Democratic Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed is “very, very evil,” implying that Muslims are out to destroy other religious groups in America. Yet, the vast majority of Muslim Americans (the largest majority of any American group except for Jewish Americans) want to live in a country where no one is targeted for their religious beliefs.
These negative stereotypes and bogeyman threats belie reality. Polls have shown that Muslim Americans are more likely than other faith groups to reject attacks on civilians. Muslim American women are the second-most educated faith group in the US, ranking just below Jewish American women; Muslim American women have the most parity of income with Muslim American men, as well. Most Muslim Americans believe that homosexuality should be accepted by society (52% accepting to 33% opposed), more than Evangelical Christians (who number between 25% and 40% of all Americans) and Jehovah’s witnesses.
Professor Steven Fish at University of California Berkeley wondered whether the endlessly circulating stereotype that Muslims are more violent than others were true. If so, he thought, homicide rates in Muslim-majority countries should be higher. Right? So he conducted a massive empirical study and found that not only are homicide rates in Muslim-majority countries lower than in other countries, but the larger a Muslim community, the less homicide.
These attitudes affect Americans. Islam is an American religion. And yet, Muslims experience the most discrimination of any religious group in the United States.
Ironically, given all these scare tactics about Muslims taking over the United States, shariah itself requires Muslims to obey the law of the land in which they reside. This has been established in Islam for over 1,000 years. Muslims would violate shariah if they tried to impose shariah on Americans or in American governments. In fact, the Qur’an repeatedly prohibits conversion by force. How ridiculous, then, are our lawmakers for indulging in bigotry to say the opposite.
I grew up in California, answering questions on Islam and Muslims as far back as I can remember (the question of why I didn’t eat pepperoni pizza being the prevalent one when I was a child). I see absolutely no conflict between living as a practicing Muslim and being a patriotic American. After all, the basic tenets of Islam are belief in God, donation to charity, prayer, fasting, and pilgrimage. Broadly speaking, pretty much the same as other American religions. Muslim Americans are pretty much the same as other Americans, as well.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Son of 9/11 Victim Says 'Please Stop' Exploiting Tragedy to Spread Anti-Muslim Bigotry
"You do my dad's legacy and the legacy of all these victims no honor by using this tragedy to spread hate."
Sep 11, 2026
Twenty-five years after the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States that killed nearly 3,000 Americans and others and sparked a worldwide US-led war on terrorism that has left nearly one million people dead, some relatives of 9/11 victims pleaded that their grief must not be weaponized in the form of anti-Muslim bigotry.
Michael Massaroli Jr., whose father, Michael Massaroli, was killed in the attacks, made one such appeal during Friday’s 25th anniversary commemoration at the National September 11 Memorial at ground zero in Lower Manhattan.
"One parting thing I want to leave everyone with is that you do my dad's legacy and the legacy of all these victims no honor by using this tragedy to spread hate," Massaroli said. "We have seen a medley of people come up today of all races, all religions, all creeds, and this tragedy is just that—it's a tragedy."
"I've had to grow up and spend the past 25 years seeing people use it to hate on our Muslim brothers and sisters, to hate on people who don't look like them," he added. "And that's wrong. And that does no honor to the victims here. And I want to use the little platform I have to ask for that to please stop."
"My father Michael Massaroli...you do my dad's legacy and the legacy of all these victims no honor by using this tragedy to spread hate. We have seen a medley of people come up today, of all races, all religions, all creeds and this tragedy is just that, it's a tragedy. I've had… pic.twitter.com/xRtXgZZyYn
— CSPAN (@cspan) September 11, 2026
Massaroli wasn't the only one decrying Islamophobic exploitation of 9/11. Members of September 11th Families for Peaceful Tomorrows, including co-founder Colleen Kelly, have repeatedly denounced the violence and hatred perpetrated after the attacks.
On Friday, Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) national executive director Nihad Awad recalled how "the trauma we all felt after the attacks was exploited to erode civil liberties, justify torture, normalize illegal discrimination, empower hate groups, and launch forever wars across the Middle East that killed thousands of American soldiers and hundreds of thousands of men, women, and children in numerous countries."
Recently, Democratic New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani—the first Muslim elected to lead the city—has been subjected to a wave of Islamophobic vitriol. Critics have invoked his religion and 9/11 in questioning whether he should participate in the city’s September 11 commemoration. Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani and other Republicans have said that Mamdani should skip the ceremony, while broadly attacking Islam.
The Trump administration's immigration policies have also been called discriminatory against Muslims. CAIR said in a March report that it received a record 8,683 anti-Muslim and anti-Arab complaints in 2025, attributing part of the increase to the administration's immigration crackdown and its response to pro-Palestinian protests. The cases included immigration and travel discrimination, employment discrimination, and alleged targeting of Muslim and Arab communities.
“Today, bad actors are once again exploiting the 9/11 attacks to score political points, incite discrimination, and justify forever wars overseas," Awad said on Friday. "We cannot let these resurgent voices of division, hate, and violence succeed. We must instead embrace the spirit of unity that bonded all of us together 25 years ago and stand up for the universal value of human life, anywhere and everywhere."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Exploiting Tragedy to Promote War, Hegseth Falsely Claims That Iran 'Cheered on 9/11'
"What haunts me," said one anti-war activist, "is how little accountability there has been for those who lied us into war—and how those same lies are now recycled to justify the attack on Iran."
Sep 11, 2026
Twenty-five years later, Republican politicians are still using 9/11 to justify war in the Middle East. And they're still lying shamelessly.
During remarks outside the Pentagon on Friday commemorating the 25th anniversary of the terrorist attack, President Donald Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth portrayed their deeply unpopular war in Iran as part of the lineage of the global War on Terror, which was marked by a pair of lengthy military engagements in Iraq and Afghanistan that cost well over $2 trillion and millions of lives.
Trump declared that he was prosecuting his new war with Iran to fulfill the "sacred oath" sworn in the names of the nearly 3,000 people whose lives were lost that day, that "we will never, ever forget."
Hegseth seems to have forgotten quite a lot. Attempting to draw a link between the ideology of the al-Qaeda hijackers who committed the attack and the current Iranian government, the defense secretary said, "Our warriors have fought an Islamic theocracy that has wished us death for nearly half a century, that cheered on 9/11."
However, the claim that Iran "cheered on 9/11" is at odds with the historical record of how the nation's government and people reacted.
On September 19, 2001, The Washington Post reported that:
Despite two decades of official hostility, the people and government of Iran have offered vivid messages of sympathy and condemnations of terrorism in the aftermath of last week's attacks on New York and Washington...
Hard-line conservative Iranians and moderate reformers, top government and religious officials, Friday prayer leaders, and citizens on the street have uniformly denounced the plane hijackings and suicide crashes of September 11. Some, including President Mohammad Khatami, have offered to join an international campaign against terrorism under certain circumstances, including United Nations sponsorship.
On the day of the attacks in 2001, Khatami issued a swift condemnation over Iranian state TV of what he called "the terrorist operations of hijacking and attacking public places in American cities, which have resulted in the death of a large number of defenseless American people."
Khatami later decried the attacks as “the ugliest form of terrorism ever seen." According to later congressional testimony by a State Department official, he also asked to visit ground zero to light a candle out of respect for the victims, a request that was denied by the administration of then-US President George W. Bush.
Days after the attacks, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei—who was killed this past February during the opening salvo of the joint US-Israeli war against Iran—agreed at the time that “mass murder of human beings is condemned," though he also suggested that "expansionist" US foreign policy had played a role in provoking the attacks.
The US-funded Radio Free Europe reported that, far from celebrating in the streets, around 2,000 Iranians had gathered in Tehran for a candlelight vigil a week after the attacks, at which participants "chanted against terrorism and expressed their sympathy with America." Days earlier, the Post reported that about 50,000 spectators at a World Cup qualifying match in Tehran observed a minute of silence in recognition of the attacks.
Iran's support for the US following the attack also went beyond words. While still describing Iran as the world's leading "state sponsor of terrorism," a May 2002 State Department report emphasized Iran's cooperation with US operations against al-Qaeda and the Taliban.
This included offering search-and-rescue assistance for downed US air crews, diplomatic cooperation at the 2001 Bonn Conference to build Afghanistan's post-Taliban government, and promising border controls to prevent fleeing Taliban and al-Qaeda members from escaping.
Though Trump promised at the outset that it would last only a matter of weeks, his war with Iran has now lumbered into its sixth month with no sign of stopping. It has spilled out into a wider Middle Eastern conflict that has taken the lives of about 8,000 people, displaced millions, and wreaked financial chaos.
The war has included US attacks on civilians that have had a similar resonance with Iranians that 9/11 has for Americans, most infamously the bombing of an elementary school that killed at least 150 people, most of them children.
According to one economist's recent estimate, the war has conservatively cost the average American household about $1,200 over six months, combining the direct cost to taxpayers with the knock-on effects of spiking oil prices and broader inflation.
Though around two-thirds of Americans say they oppose the war and Congress has ordered Trump to bring it to an end, recent reports indicate that the administration is considering expanding it following this November's midterm elections.
Trump described the war as a grim necessity on Friday, in part to honor those who perished on September 11, 25 years earlier.
“That’s why we fight today," Trump said. "We don’t have a choice. There can only be victory. We fight hard. We fight to win.”
Medea Benjamin, the co-founder of the anti-war group CodePink, reflected earlier this week on how the tragedy is still being used to this day to justify endless wars overseas.
"What haunts me today is not only the devastation of the invasion, but how little accountability there has been for those who lied us into war—and how those same lies are now recycled to justify the attack on Iran," Benjamin said. "The War on Terror did not end."
"The same impunity that has shielded the architects of the global War on Terror," she added, "now emboldens the war criminals behind the genocide in Gaza and the Minab school massacre in Iran."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Mamdani Says NYC Can Honor 9/11 Victims by Building a City Where 'We Run Toward One Another'
"Let us remember the extraordinary compassion, resilience, and bravery that carried our city through its darkest day."
Sep 11, 2026
With Lower Manhattan and the site of the September 11 attacks in the background, New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani on Friday called on people to honor the memory of the nearly 3,000 victims—as well as those who have died of illnesses stemming from toxic air at the site of the attacks—by caring "for one another" as thousands of people "cared for strangers" as the tragedy was unfolding exactly 25 years ago.
Mamdani honored the 2,753 New Yorkers—"parents and children, husbands and wives, friends and colleagues, 2,753 universes gone in an instant"—and said the city and country remember September 11 as "the darkest day" when hijackers flew airplanes into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, and passengers aboard a fourth plane fought to stop another target from being struck.
The mayor urged viewers to remember the actions of thousands of New Yorkers in the immediate aftermath of the attack—those who donated blood and "opened their homes to those who could not get home."
"We remember the workers who carried their colleagues down hundreds of stairs, then turned around and went back up to find someone else who needed help," said Mamdani.
On social media, as the country marked the 25th anniversary of the attacks, many users spoke about specific acts of bravery, including those of Rick Rescorla, the head of security at Morgan Stanley, who was killed at the World Trade Center after he led roughly 2,700 of his colleagues to safety.
In a separate social media post on Instagram, Mamdani highlighted several lesser-known New Yorkers who "sprang into action to help however they could," including teachers, firefighters, sanitation workers, and healthcare providers.
His office interviewed Roseann Caruana of the city's Department of Transportation, who described a triage center that was set up for victims, and Rashel Dorleans—now a New York City public school teacher, and a high school student at the time of the attacks.
"I think it's a credit to the teachers that were there," said Dorleans. "They did not seem panicked. I'm sure they were panicked on the inside, but they were kind and calm with us."
Mamdani said that "we have a sacred obligation to those who were stolen from us to care for one another as they cared for strangers, to live lives worthy of the sacrifices they made, and to build a city worthy of their courage, a city where we run toward one another. That is how we remember."
Ahead of the anniversary this week, the mayor released long-hidden files regarding how New York residents were misled about the toxicity of the air at the World Trade Center attack site. He said the number of people who have died thus far from related cancers and other health issues has likely surpassed the number of victims on September 11.
Mamdani was also the target of attacks this week from Republicans including former Mayor Rudy Giuliani and City Council members Vickie Paladino and Joann Ariola, who explicitly cited Mamdani's Muslim faith as they said he did "not belong" at the September 11 memorial ceremony held on Friday.
“I’m proud to be the mayor of this city. I love this city. I love this country,” Mamdani said when asked about the racist remarks. “What I want this week to be a focus on is the families whose loved ones were stolen from them 25 years ago in the horrific act of terror of September 11, and a focus also on the first responders who did everything they could.”
The mayor was seen shaking Giuliani's hand and speaking to him at the ceremony.
"Let us remember the extraordinary compassion, resilience, and bravery that carried our city through its darkest day," said Mamdani. "Today, New York remembers."
Keep ReadingShow Less
On 25th Anniversary of 9/11 Attacks, Condemnation of Global 'War on Terror' That Has Killed Millions
"US officials who orchestrated post-9/11 abuses must also be held accountable, and their victims must receive meaningful remedy and reparation."
Sep 11, 2026
International human rights campaigners, United Nations experts, journalists, and anti-war activists marked the 25th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 attacks on the US by paying tributes to the thousands of lives lost on that day while condemning what followed: an unparalleled expansion of state surveillance, crackdowns on dissent, arbitrary detention, torture, and catastrophic wars that cost trillions of dollars and millions of lives.
Mourning the lasting impact of "those horrific acts of violence" perpetrated in the US a quarter-century ago, a group of more than 40 UN experts said in a joint statement on Friday that "we equally acknowledge the millions of other victims worldwide of terrorist attacks, excessive counter-terrorism responses, and conflicts in the name of countering terrorism."
"Too many governments have adopted unnecessary and disproportionate responses that have seriously undermined human rights, civil society, civic space, democracy, and the rule of law," the experts continued. "Wars of aggression. Unlawful occupations. Countless war crimes and crimes against humanity, and plausible allegations of genocide. Assassinations dressed up as 'targeted killings.' Torture disguised as 'interrogation.' Transboundary abductions, extraordinary renditions, and transnational repression. Secret detention and enforced disappearances. Unfair military trials and special courts, including at Guantanamo Bay. Toxic residues from conflicts have severely harmed human health."
The experts argued that global "wars on terror" launched by the US and other nations in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks have "have stretched foundational rules of international law beyond their breaking point," "counterproductively fueled terrorism," and "entrenched cycles of violence."
Many of those grave abuses continue in the present, the US-based Center for Constitutional Rights emphasized in a statement marking the anniversary of the 9/11 atrocities.
"In the 25 years since September 11, 2001, the sweeping political project the US government undertook in its aftermath has shaped, shattered, or ended millions of lives," the group said. "Exploiting fear and suffering, the Bush administration launched a limitless 'war on terror,' whose stated purpose was all pretext to impose its will on other countries, expand its power beyond constitutional bounds, and target vulnerable communities."
"Today, because of the lack of accountability for these gross abuses of human rights, Trump can use 'counterterrorism' to pursue his authoritarian program," said CCR.
Nick Turse, a senior reporter at The Intercept, argued the attacks coordinated by Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in 2001 created a "swirl of toxic policies and governmental overreach" that "opened the door to something beyond bin Laden’s wildest dreams, the rise of an even more effective terrorist who has crippled the US in countless ways and sought to strangle the best of the country: President Donald Trump."
"Bin Laden’s attacks turned the US government into an engine for the destruction of America, inducing it to implement policies that have devastated the country and immiserated its people," Turse wrote in a column published Friday. "That includes unrestrained spending while cutting taxes on the rich, closer ties with despotic regimes, the sneak-and-peek warrants and roving wiretaps of the Patriot Act and other domestic surveillance programs, and the ruinous failed forever wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere."
Those wars, according to Brown University's Costs of War project, have cost the US federal government upwards of $8 trillion.
"The opportunity costs are staggering," the project noted. "Many of these funds could have been spent on public health or in sectors that create far more jobs than the defense sector, like education or green energy."
As for the human toll, the Costs of War project noted in a brief published last week that as of 2023, "an estimated 905,000-940,000 people—including US soldiers, allied security forces, civilians, and militants—have died due to war violence in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria (in the fight against the Islamic State), Yemen, and elsewhere. At least 408,749—432,093 of those who have died were civilians."
"Many other people have died indirectly as a result of the wars," the brief observed. "An estimated 3.6-3.8 million indirect deaths have occurred in post-9/11 war zones."
Scott Roehm, Amnesty International USA's chief human rights strategy officer, said Friday that the US government could have responded to the 9/11 attacks "by upholding human rights and the rule of law while pursuing justice and accountability for victims’ families."
"Instead, it embarked on a campaign of widespread abuses against Muslim, Brown, and Black communities, including arbitrary detentions and mass surveillance in the US; unlawful lethal air strikes abroad; enforced disappearances and torture in Iraq, Afghanistan and at CIA black sites; and the opening of the notorious Guantanamo Bay detention center," said Roehm. "The choice to engage in torture, then build prosecutions against those alleged to be most responsible for 9/11 on the back of torture-derived evidence, is largely why, 25 years later, there has been neither justice nor finality for victims’ families."
"The US government must end the last 25 years of abuses," Roehm added. "US officials who orchestrated post-9/11 abuses must also be held accountable, and their victims must receive meaningful remedy and reparation.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
After 25 Years, 9/11 Continues to Shape How America Polices Immigration
For a quarter century, America has treated immigration enforcement as a form of counterterrorism. Yet, instead of making us safer, it has given rise to an increasingly militarized agency that, in the name of protecting ‘the homeland,’ uses its vast surveillance network and policing powers to target and kill innocent people.
Sep 11, 2026
Since the start of its second term, the Trump administration has repeatedly defended Immigration and Customs Enforcement shootings and killings, smeared their victims as “domestic terrorists,” racially profiled people with the Supreme Court’s consent, expanded their biometric and social media surveillance capabilities while also maintaining over a dozen “secret and obscure” watchlists. It is effectively dismantling the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, tried—and is trying again—to repeal birthright citizenship, paused all immigrant visa applications, and is aggressively pursuing politically motivated visa revocations and denaturalizations, among other extreme measures.
All of this is reflective of the rampant and unfettered xenophobia, Islamophobia, and white nationalism that define the Trump administration. Yet, at same time, we must also acknowledge that Immigration and Custom Enforcement’s (ICE) violence and Trump’s assault on the immigration system is an extension of the national security framework built following the 9/11 attacks.
ICE was established in March 2003 as part of “the single-largest government reorganization since the creation of the Department of Defense.” A key rationale for including ICE within the newly created Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was that the 9/11 hijackers entered the US legally via temporary visas. To keep “the homeland” safe, a more aggressive approach to immigration was thus deemed necessary. As Attorney General John Ashcroft remarked in 2002:
In this new war, our enemy's platoons infiltrate our borders, quietly blending in with visiting tourists, students, and workers. They move unnoticed through our cities, neighborhoods, and public spaces. They wear no uniforms. Their camouflage is not forest green, but rather it is the color of common street clothing. Their tactics rely on evading recognition at the border and escaping detection within the United States. Their terrorist mission is to defeat America, destroy our values, and kill innocent people.
Going forward, immigration enforcement and control agencies would police and surveil every immigrant as if they were potential terrorists. As the Department of Justice (DOJ) emphasized in 2004, “The primary mission of ICE is to prevent acts of terrorism by targeting the people, money, and materials that support terrorists and criminal activities.”
In the name of counterterrorism, the DOJ launched the National Security Entry-Exit Registration System (NSEERS) in 2002. Under this program, male foreign nationals aged 16 or older from 25 countries—24 of which were majority-Arab and Muslim (the other was North Korea)—were fingerprinted, interviewed, photographed, and required to check in with immigration officials at regular intervals. These regulations applied to both new arrivals and individuals who were already in the US on temporary visas. NSEERS was suspended in 2011 and finally terminated in 2016 by President Barack Obama—it led to no terrorism prosecutions.
Despite its failure, NSEERS, alongside other measures and decades of Republican fearmongering, functioned to normalize the link between immigration enforcement, border control, and counterterrorism. In doing so, it amplified the alleged danger posed by “radical Islamic terrorism,” thus setting the stage for the Trump administration’s relentless attacks on Muslims. This, in turn, served to distract from the far greater and actual domestic terrorism threat posed by white supremacist groups. As a report by the US Senate Committee on Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs noted, “In 2019, DHS publicly acknowledged white supremacist violence as a major threat to national security for the first time, despite being aware internally of the severity of the threat for 10 years.”
In our desperation to prevent another 9/11, we have spent billions building our own homegrown domestic terrorism threat.
The goal of combating terrorism also promoted a demand for more biometric technologies. As Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) noted in 2001, the reason why “a large group of coordinated terrorists [could] operate for more than a year in the United States without being detected” is because “we could not identify them. We did not know they were here. Only if we can identify terrorists planning attacks on the United States do we have a chance of stopping them. And the biometrics technology, the state-of-the-art technology of today, really offers us a very new way to identify potential terrorists.”
To that end, DHS established the US Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology (US-VISIT) program in 2003 to collect biometric identifiers from foreign nationals and build an electronic check in-check out system. As Undersecretary for Border and Transportation Security at DHS Asa Hutchinson remarked in 2003, “initially, fingerprints and photographs” will be used; however, “as the technology is perfected, additional forms such as facial recognition or iris scans may be used as well.”
Fast forward two decades and now, ICE agents are currently deploying facial recognition software such as Mobile Fortify. In May 2026, ICE awarded a $25.1 million contract to BI2 Technologies to acquire over 1,500 wireless, handheld iris-scanning devices. In its fiscal year 2027 budget request, DHS allocated $7.5 million to develop face-scanning “smart glasses” that would grant agents real-time access to biometric databases.
Now, importantly, none of this should be taken to mean that the pre-9/11 landscape was entirely welcoming to immigrants. The “browning of America” discourse depicted—and continues to depict—immigrants as an existential threat to the nation. Meanwhile immigration policies like the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigration Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) of 1996 expanded the number of deportable offenses while also introducing expedited removal processes that allowed immigration officers to deport people without a formal hearing.
And yet, there were a few rays of hope. There was broad support for the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act, with a Senate hearing scheduled for September 12, 2001. On September 6, 2001, the US and Mexico announced they had reached an agreement on a framework for border and immigration reform that included “respecting the human dignity of all migrants, regardless of their status; recognizing the contribution migrants make to enriching both societies.” At the time, both President George W. Bush and President Vincente Fox “agreed that US-Mexican relations have entered their most promising moment in history.” Then 9/11 happened, and everything changed.
For 25 years, America has treated immigration enforcement as a form of counterterrorism. Yet, instead of making us safer, it has given rise to an increasingly militarized agency that, in the name of protecting “the homeland,” uses its vast surveillance network and policing powers to target and kill innocent people. In our desperation to prevent another 9/11, we have spent billions building our own homegrown domestic terrorism threat.
After 25 years, we must finally recognize that DHS and ICE were never the solution. If we truly wish to make America safer and greater, we must choose to forge a new path—to work toward a world without war, resentment, and violence.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Victims of Our Post-9/11 Wars Deserve Remembrance, Too
Similarities between Reflecting Absence and an earlier German Holocaust “Counter-Monument” prompt reflections on accepting responsibility.
Sep 11, 2026
Few who pay their respects today in the hallowed plaza where the Twin Towers once stood will be aware that the September 11 memorial echoes a 1987 Holocaust “counter-memorial” in Kassel, Germany. Like our memorial, the German monument consists of a hollow in the shape of what had once been there, into which water flows.
But the scope of the remembrances evoked by the two memorials are revealingly different.
We Americans want only to recall our innocent dead and to honor them. Unlike the Germans, we spurn acknowledging the evils done in their name that came to be intertwined with our losses, the catastrophe we inflicted on an innocent nation, Iraq.
What We Can Learn From Kassel’s Holocaust Counter-Memorial
In 1939, the Nazis destroyed a 40-foot pyramidal fountain in Kassel, Germany because it had been built by a Jew, the entrepreneur Sigmund Aschrott. The elimination of “the Jews’ Fountain” was soon followed by the elimination of Kassel’s 3,000 Jews themselves.
The Aschrott Fountain (1908–1939) is shown.
Forty-five years later it was proposed to rebuild the fountain. But simply rebuilding the original fountain would have erased the memory of its destruction. So artist Horst Hoheisel designed a new fountain: “a mirror image of the old one, sunk beneath the old place in order to rescue the history of this place as a wound and an open question.”
The Memorial to the Aschrottbrunnen Fountain is shown. (Photo by Eistreter, CC BY-SA 4.0)
The September 11 memorial, which is called Reflecting Absence, evokes the missing Twin Towers by revealing their empty foundations. Hoheisel’s earlier Kassel counter-monument is, similarly, an emptiness in the shape of the missing original. “The pyramid will be turned into a funnel into whose darkness water runs down,” Hoheisel says.
“The sunken fountain is an invitation to passersby who stand upon it to search for the memorial in their own heads. For only there is the memorial to be found.”
The underground portion of the Aschrottbrunnen Fountain is shown. (Photo by Horst Hoheisel)
Kassel’s Holocaust memorial is one of many throughout Germany, part of the way the Germans have accepted responsibility for the crimes of the Nazi era. This small, local memorial compels us to think of those who were murdered, but also of those who murdered and those who stood by.
The installation of the Aschrottbrunnen Fountain is shown. (Photo by Horst Hoheisel)
We reflect on the small viciousness of destroying “the Jew’s fountain,” and the monstrous barbarity to which this was prelude. The small monument conjures the sadness of loss, and the responsibility of a people for acts that can never be made right.
Can America Accept Responsibility for the Mass Deaths Inflicted in the Name of Our “War on Terrorism”
The murder of thousands of Americans, the crime of September 11, 2001, spawned a larger tragedy for another people. Using the false suggestion of Iraq complicity as one of its pretexts, and treating the 9/11 “war on terrorism” as license for war on Baghdad as well as on Kabul, our government invaded Iraq, overthrew its government, and occupied the country.
In reality, as Bush White House anti-terrorism adviser Richard Clarke confirmed, Iraq was not responsible for 9/11 and our government knew it. “In the weeks immediately after 9/11,” Clarke explained, “the president… instruct[ed] the Pentagon to prepare for the invasion of Iraq... Even though they knew at the time from me, from the FBI, from the CIA, that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.”
Knowing that Iraq had nothing to do with the al Qaeda attack did not matter because President George W. Bush’s government had begun targeting Iraq for invasion long before September 11. The very first meeting of Bush’s national security team on January 20, 2001 included a discussion of “military options” for Iraq and overthrowing its government.
It would represent no insult to the memory of the innocents murdered in America, 25 Septembers ago, were we to acknowledge and memorialize the carnage and catastrophe we unleashed in Iraq.
As a delegation from our British allies secretly reported to their government before the invasion, “The intelligence and facts were being fixed around the [Bush] policy” of going to war. “The case [for war] was thin.”
The American invasion, and the resistance and chaotic civil war triggered by the US occupation, likely took between 500,000 and 1 million Iraqi lives. It made refugees of millions more, and inflicted malnutrition, birth defects, and other health disasters on a generation of Iraqi children.
It would represent no insult to the memory of the innocents murdered in America, 25 Septembers ago, were we to acknowledge and memorialize the carnage and catastrophe we unleashed in Iraq.
To America’s 9/11 memorial we should add a wall on which we engrave, in a necessarily small font, the names of however many can be identified of the million Iraqi men, women, and children slain in the wars and sectarian strife our invasion precipitated. And since President Donald Trump has ensnared our nation in another pointless war, another war of aggression based on the excuse of “terrorism,” a Middle East war he has no plan to end, we should inscribe as well the names of the Iranian civilians killed in Trump’s war. The 100 children slain at the beginning of the bombing campaign. The wedding guests bombed in a small Iran town last week. They deserve remembrance, too.
Of course, this is unthinkable and will never happen.
It would be “too political” to acknowledge any connection between the horrors we suffered and the horrors we inflicted. In fact, even the suggestion will be said to “disrespect” our honored dead—as though their memories could be further sullied than they already have been by the evil perpetrated in their names.
Nonetheless, the proposal may be useful. As Hoheisel says: “That’s how a counter-monument works. People get angry, they write letters, but you have a discussion. Out of this void, the history begins to come out.” In America, such a provocation may be the only kind of counter-monument that is permitted.
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy