9/11 Terrorism Research Paper

Our nation’s actions toward seeking justice and preventing any attacks of this scale from happening again came with quick notion, “Less than a week later (following the 9/11 attacks), Congress authorized the President to use military force ‘against those nations, organizations or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks,” (Yin). In essence, Congress gave the president the ability to use the military to seek out and detain terrorists responsible for 9/11, showing our country’s dedication to ending these attacks and those who initiated them for good. Overall, this tragic event revealed the need for stricter defense regulations against non-state actors (terrorists). For this reason, 9/11 was the catalyst for the beginning of the War on Terror and, consequently, the opening of Guantanamo Bay.

September 11, 2001 is one of the most infamous dates in American history. On this day, 19 radicalized Islamic militants hijacked four United States-based airplanes. Two of the planes were flown into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York City. Thousands of first responders, occupants of the Towers and bystanders were killed or injured. The third plane flew into the Pentagon in Washington D.C. and 125 people were killed. The passengers on the fourth plane revolted and forced the hijackers to crash into a field in Stony Creek, Pennsylvania. A total of 3,000 people were killed and over 6,000 were injured that day (“9/11 Attacks” 1). After the most detrimental terrorist attack in the history of the United States, action needed to

Developed “to deter and punish terrorist acts in the United States and around the world,

Today, I stand before the members of the court to request you support the opinion of on Hamdi v. Rumsfeld” (U.S. Supreme Court, June 28, 2004); who believes that Congress does not have the authority to detent person found to be an “enemy combatant” of the United States of American for an undetermined amount of time.

After the attacks, Arab Muslim men were arrested by the FBI, numbers in the thousands. Javaid Iqbal, who was one of these men and considered “high interest”, was imprisoned at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, New York. After being released, Javaid accused the Detention Center of mistreatment while in their custody. A few of these accusations included: confinement from the other prisoners, direct contact with blinding light for twenty-three hour spans, and the air conditioning in full blast, even during the winter months. Javaid brought a suit against the Department of Justice, Bureau of Prisons, and FBI alleging 21 violations of his statutory and constitutional right. The Us court of appeals for the second circuit stated that since these allegations were directly after the attacks of September 11th the court is going to hold them in to special regards. The court acknowledged all accounts by the district court except the right to due process. Due process is the act in which the government respects all of the legal rights of a person according to the law. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Due_process) The government was protected under immunity in regards to due process. Since the other accounts were considered "serious allegations of gross

This Act combined the efforts, authorities, and powers of more than twenty federal agencies into one entity (“How Has National Security Changed Since 9/11/2001?”). These changes have allowed for better possible security with the latest information on possible threats and have given much needed support to those who gave their service at a very dangerous

Recognizing the threat Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups posed provided homeland security with the basis which is now important to state and local law enforcement agencies (Sheehan, Michael, 2011). After nearly a decade after the September eleventh, more than twenty terrorist related plots were uncovered by the federal government. As the war against terrorism continues, it has cost America the lives of more than six thousand service members and nearly 1.5 trillion dollars (Ortmeier, P, 2009).

It proposed the president to have the ability to take up arms successfully, once an approved war was started. "In the cutting edge time, no nation - not even a parliamentary popular government has been so irresponsible as to put a war under the direction of an authoritative body, instead of a solitary, brought together summon." Yet, different specialists point to built up points of presidential power amid wartime, referring to the U.S. Incomparable Court's 1952 decision that struck down President Harry S. Truman's request to keep up operations of the nation's steel plants for national security reasons, which was observed to be against the will of Congress. Some point to the Supreme Court's 2006 Hamdan vs Rumsfeld administering which discovered uncommon military commissions built up by the Bush organization to be unlawful - to stretch the mutual wartime forces of the president and Congress. Susan Low Bloch, a sacred law master at the Georgetown University Law Center, says the composers of the Constitution purposely isolated the war controls between the two branches to instigate them to cooperate on such a fundamental issue.

The Supreme Court speaks not only through its rulings in cases argued before it, but also through its choice not to hear certain cases -- the ones denied certiorari, in legal lingo. By refusing to hear claims brought by victims of Bush-era torture and detention practices, and failing to decisively reject the government's array of bad excuses for denying them a modicum of justice, the Court in recent years has sent an appalling message of indifference and impunity. These missing cases constitute a profound stain on the court's record, and they are worth recalling on this week's tenth anniversary of John Roberts's swearing-in as Chief

After the attacks on the world trade center in September 11th, american society felt vulnerable as many citizens felt unsafe living in their own homes wondering whether there would be further terrorist attack. The fear of further terrorist attacks weren't only within ordinary citizens but also in politicians, as a result US government implemented laws which

Eleven days after the terrorist attacks the Government created the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The department oversees and coordinates the governments strategy to guard the country against terrorists and respond to any attacks in the future (Homeland). The Governor of Pennsylvania Tom Ridge was appointed the first Director of the Department of Homeland Security. Since the creation of the Department, America is much better equipped to handle the great deal of terrorist threats we face. Even with the creation of the DHS, it was clear that some sort of repercussions needed to be dealt to those responsible, which came when President George W. Bush declared a war on terror.

On September 11, 2001, the Unites States suffered massive destruction caused by terrorism. Four planes were hijacked by terrorist. Nearly, three thousand lives were lost when two planes crashed into the World Trade Towers, one crashed into the Pentagon, and the final plane crashed in Pennsylvania before it could reach its final destination. An immense fear spread across the country and out of this fear came the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct the Terrorism, also known as the USA Patriot Act.

“If, as m any expect, allowing the program to expire causes a sharp decline in the number of businesses with terrorism coverage, we find that the federal government could spend billions more in disaster assistance after an attack than it would with the program in place” (“Extending terrorism insurance,” 2014). Act creates an incentive for a functioning private terrorism insurance market through the promise of government support for losses that exceed a specified amount (“Extending terrorism insurance,” 2014). The analysis finds that in a terrorist attack with losses up to $50 billion, the federal government would spend more helping to cover losses than if it had continued to support a national terrorism risk insurance program (“Extending terrorism insurance,” 2014). Federal spending after future terrorist attacks on the United States may be higher if the nation’s terrorism risk insurance program is allowed to expire, according to a new RAND Corporation study (“Extending terrorism insurance,” 2014). Congress reacted by passing the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act, which provides an assurance of government support after a catastrophic attack (“Extending terrorism insurance,” 2014). Congress reacted by passing the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act, which provides an assurance of government support after a catastrophic attack (“Extending terrorism insurance,” 2014). Without the program, terrorism insurance would become less available and more attack losses would go uninsured,

The Department of Homeland Security in the U.S. is mandated to deal with terrorism problem that has a long history in the U.S. Terrorism has been a threat to U.S. security since the 1800. Terrorists continue to use powerful secret communication strategies and unexpected tools to achieve their intention in the U.S. soil. For example, the 9/11 terrorism attack that killed the highest number of American citizens in history succeeded because terrorist used hijacked passenger planes to perform the attack (Lutz and Lutz, 2013). Although the most notorious terrorism activity in the U.S. soil was performed by Islamic extremist, several other groups among them black militancy, anti-liberal, anti-government, Jewish extremist, fascist extremists, and Palestinian militancy among others have been reportedly caused a terrorist activity in the U.S. in the past and their continued existence still remain a major threat to the U.S. security (Lutz and Lutz, 2013). The counter-terrorism policy administered through the Bureau of Counterterrorism aims at partnering with local security agents, multilateral organizations, non-state actors and foreign governments to defeat local and global terrorism. The policy employs high level of coordinated strategies in securing international partnership to document and monitor and act appropriately to Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTO) and Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT) as emerging organizations that coordinate international terrorist

Thesis: The World Trade Center attacks were part of a strategic plan of a terrorist group al-Qaeda. And I will be mapping out the attacks as they unfolded.