To look at the front page of the New York Times of Tuesday, September 11th, 2001 is to reach back into another era – an era, in many ways, which doesn’t look very different to that of today.
The president was under pressure over the economy, there was violence in the Middle East and the New York Giants had lost to the Denver Broncos.
But even before many New Yorkers would have opened their newspaper on that clear, sunny September morning, America and the world had been changed forever.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
What is the legacy of 9/11?
At 8.46am and 9.03am, two hijacked airliners were flown into the twin towers of the World Trade Center. Another jet was crashed into the Pentagon near Washington DC and a fourth was brought down in a field in Pennsylvania.
What had seemed unimaginable – an unprecedented terrorist attack on American soil, striking at the very heart of society and witnessed on television screens around the world – was a shock the country has still not absorbed.
Advertisement
The results of a recent USA Today/Gallup poll are astonishing. Some 60% of Americans say the attacks permanently changed the way the country lives, more than the number who felt that way on the tenth anniversary.
The youngest, and those who weren’t even born on September 11th, felt that impact the strongest of all.
More on 9/11 Attacks
Related Topics:
Twenty years on, the debate continues about how much America and the world was altered by the events of September 11th but in myriad ways, big and small, the scars of that day are still evident.
Image: It has been 20 years since the 9/11 attacks. Pic: AP
Endless War
Who would have thought that when the US launched airstrikes on Afghanistan within a month of September 11th that it would be almost 20 years before the last American troops would finally leave the country?
The initial aim of the invasion, ordered by US president George W Bush, was to crush al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden, the terrorist group and its leader blamed for planning and carrying out the attacks, and deny them the base from which they had operated. Prime Minister Tony Blair was a key ally of the US in offering military support.
But Mr Bush had already told the US Congress and the American people that the country was engaged in a new type of military action that went far beyond a few targeted strikes against a single enemy.
The “war on terror” was born and it would not end, he said, “until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated”.
The war in Afghanistan became the longest in US history. Some 800,000 served there and nearly 2,500 died. More than 20,000 are listed as wounded – the true cost of psychological wounds is far higher.
Image: George W Bush in 2003 at the end of major operations in Iraq
The more than 400 UK service personnel who died in Afghanistan add to thousands of Afghan civilians, police and military personnel, aid workers and contractors over the 20 years.
While the war in Afghanistan enjoyed public support initially, that waned over the years, especially after the killing of bin Laden in 2011.
That the “war on terror” encompassed the far more controversial invasion of Iraq – in the supposed hunt for stocks of weapons of mass destruction that were never found – would cost a further 4,500 American military lives, some 179 British and 100,000 Iraqi. A million Americans served in Iraq.
Everywhere you look are remnants of the war. The prison camp at Guantanamo Bay just one we almost forget these days.
The pursuit of the “war on terror” would define American foreign policy and arguments rage about whether it was won or lost.
It is undeniable that the spectre of a repeat of September 11th, the fear of an attack on the homeland, has driven American actions abroad for far longer than anyone expected.
Air travel
Anyone who has flown into, out of or around the US in recent years will be familiar with those blue-uniformed custodians of the body scanner, the TSA.
Before September 11th, not only did the Transportation Security Administration not exist but airport security was a pale shadow of the operation we see today. Fewer than 10% of checked bags were screened back then.
The TSA was built from scratch within months and in direct response to the September 11th attacks. It is now a behemoth with a budget of $8bn and has undoubtedly made air travel safer.
The law that created it also mandated that all bags be screened, cockpit doors be reinforced and air marshals be put on planes.
If you can remember flying pre-2001, or if you watch an old film with an airport scene, it was a time of no lines at security, no need for a boarding pass to get to the departure gate and far less stress.
But as previously-unseen threats manifest, so too have security measures. Things that could be used as a weapon, like blades, were banned. Shoes had to be removed, a move that followed the failed shoe bomb attack in 2001, and electronics received extra screening.
Image: The TSA has become an ever-present part of air travel in the United States
The limit on liquids which could be used to make a bomb have been accepted, sometimes grudgingly, by passengers along with those growing queues and the need to arrive earlier at the airport.
While some success is obvious – 3,200 guns seized at airports last year, almost all loaded – much of the security infrastructure is hidden from view with vetting and background checks and behavioural analysis part of the system. This has also led to suspicions and complaints of racial profiling.
And like the booming business in trusted-traveller programmes – where passengers pay fees and disclose background information to bypass the checks – it has come at the cost of another big aspect of change in our post-September 11th world: privacy.
Surveillance and privacy
Just 45 days after the September 11th attacks, the Patriot Act was signed into law with the stated aim of tightening US national security.
It expanded the surveillance reach of law enforcement including permitting the tapping of international and domestic telephone lines. In essence, it made it easier for the US government to monitor US citizens.
Opponents say it was the birth of a “mass surveillance regime”, expanding powers to carry out electronic searches without court orders and property searches without someone’s consent or even knowledge.
In the years that followed, those programmes were expanded and supported by the Bush and Obama administrations and Congress.
The revelations of whistle-blower Edward Snowden in 2013 reverberated around the world, his allegations of the broad extent of the US National Security Agency’s efforts to gather data on a massive scale revealed the expansion of the power granted to the intelligence services.
Image: The revelations of Edward Snowden showed the extent of the US surveillance state. Pic: AP
Civil liberties groups began a fight against the scope of the laws arguing they undermined privacy rights and are, in some cases, unconstitutional.
But, as Congress quietly renewed many of the powers, public opinion remained broadly supportive of the intelligence services right to snoop in the name of national security.
A quarter of Americans, though, did say they had changed the way they used technology in the wake of the Snowden revelations.
Congress has now acted to rein in some of those powers and the more controversial data collection techniques have been abandoned.
But in an era when data is exploding, and with a greater awareness of transparency and privacy, the tension between civil liberties and national security is alive and well.
Anti-Muslim sentiment
In 2000, 12 anti-Muslim assaults were reported to the FBI in the US. In 2001, the number had leapt to 93. It has never returned to pre-2001 levels.
A decade and a half after September 11th, half of Muslims in the US said they found it more difficult to live in the country as a result of the attacks.
But it initially appeared the backlash against the Muslim community that everyone had feared could be averted.
Six days after the attack, President Bush visited a mosque in Washington and condemned harassment of the Muslim community. “The face of terror is not the truth faith of Islam,” he said. “That’s not what Islam is all about. Islam is peace. These terrorists don’t represent peace. They represent evil and war.”
Image: Roughly half of the US believes Islam is not part of ‘mainstream American society’. Pic: AP
Polls taken two months after September 11th showed 59% of Americans had a favourable view of Muslim Americans, up from the number before September 11th.
But in the years that followed, polls showed a growing suspicion of people of Middle Eastern descent and a growing number of Americans who associated Islam with violence.
Even though the Muslim population has grown in the years since September 11th, researchers say many Americans know little about Islam and that views about the Muslim community have divided along political lines.
A survey by Pew Research in 2007 found that half of Americans believe that Islam is “not part of mainstream American society”, but that view was held by 68% of Republicans and just 37% of Democrats.
American psyche and patriotism
It is one very visible testament to the impact of September 11th on every street in America
The flags that fly on porches and front lawns, the protocol of never leaving them there unlit after dark, gained an added meaning for many. There is also a greater suspicion of those who don’t fly the flag, who don’t wear their patriotism proudly in post September 11th America.
Millions of words have been written about the surge in patriotism after September 11th. President Bush harnessed the spirit, with a bullhorn in one hand and his arm around a firefighter at Ground Zero, to rally Americans around the flag.
It has often been said that the US military saw a surge in enlistment after September 11th. In fact, despite a surge in calls to recruiting centres, the increase in the number who actually signed up was negligible. In 2005, the US fell short of its annual recruitment goal.
But there is no doubt many of those who did enlist in 2001 and 2002 were motivated by a desire to seek revenge. And, after all, the US had not been actively engaged in an official war until the invasion of Afghanistan.
Bush’s exhortation that “you are either with us or against us” struck a chord.
Image: Patriotism soared after the attacks and has stayed around – as seen here on September 11th 2011. Pic: AP
In the immediate aftermath of September 11th, there was a surge in the number of people looking to volunteer for charities and donate blood. A similar rise in attendance was seen at churches.
When researchers looked at all of those numbers again nine months after September 11th, only the levels of patriotism remained as high.
This took root in American culture as even Hollywood focused on patriotism rather than violence.
And the overt reverence for the military and first responders and their service is an undoubted legacy of what Americans witnessed on September 11th.
Changed the world
While the ways in which September 11th changed America are unmistakable, the impact of those attacks around the globe is a varied picture of the subtle and brutal.
For the people of Afghanistan and Iraq, years of war and its terrible costs are a living embodiment of America’s reaction to the attack on home soil. The repercussions have been felt throughout their neighbours and beyond.
The loss of life of British military personnel, and those of other allied nations in those wars, are scars with which hundreds of families still live.
If few people in the broader population paid attention to the names of al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden before September 11th, many countries have seen first-hand in the years since the devastation of the sort of attacks they inspire.
The world has also drawn lessons from the withdrawal from Afghanistan and whether the “war on terror” succeeded. Wherever we are in the world, even if it is something as minor as taking our belt off at airport security, the impacts of September 11th are with us.
Twenty years on
One third of all Americans alive today were children or hadn’t been born on September 11th 2001. Everyone else, as they always say, knows exactly where they were when it happened.
At the time many feared it was the beginning of a wave of such attacks but, for whatever combination of reasons, it hasn’t been. Americans have been protected, even if it has come at a cost.
But 9/11 shook the confidence of the world’s superpower and not even the passing of twenty years has fully restored that.
Images and video of Jeffrey Epstein’s private Caribbean island have been released by politicians in the US.
Democrats on the House Oversight Committee said on X that they were “a harrowing look behind Epstein’s closed doors”.
“We are releasing these photos and videos to ensure public transparency in our investigation and to help piece together the full picture of Epstein’s horrific crimes,” said representative Robert Garcia.
“We won’t stop fighting until we deliver justice for the survivors.”
The images show empty courtyards, bedrooms and other rooms from his villa.
Image: .
Mr Garcia said: “It’s time for President Trump to release all the files, now.”
President Trump recently approved their releaseafter US Congress voted overwhelmingly in favour.
More on Jeffrey Epstein
Related Topics:
The US Department of Justice now has until mid-December to release thousands of files linked to civil and criminal cases involving Epstein.
But much more is set to follow as the Epstein Files Transparency Act demands release of all files relating to Epstein, including investigations, prosecutions and custodial matters, as well as records connected to Ghislaine Maxwell.
Politicians have said the files’ release is critical to uncovering whether powerful figures have received special treatment or protection.
This breaking news story is being updated and more details will be published shortly.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:22
Trump’s envoys walk around Moscow
They finally got down to business in the Kremlin more than six hours after arriving in Russia. And by that point, it was already clear that the one thing they had come to Moscow for wasn’t on offer: Russia’s agreement to their latest peace plan.
According to Vladimir Putin, it’s all Europe’s fault. While his guests were having lunch, he was busy accusing Ukraine’s allies of blocking the peace process by imposing demands that are unacceptable to Russia.
The Europeans, of course, would say it’s the other way round.
But where there was hostility to Europe, only hospitality to the Americans – part of Russia’s strategy to distance the US from its NATO allies, and bring them back to Moscow’s side.
Image: Vladimir Putin and Steve Witkoff shaking hands in August. AP file pic
Putin thinks he’s winning…
Russia wants to return to the 28-point plan that caved in to its demands. And it believes it has the right to because of what’s happening on the battlefield.
It’s no coincidence that on the eve of the US delegation’s visit to Moscow, Russia announced the apparent capture of Pokrovsk, a key strategic target in the Donetsk region.
It was a message designed to assert Russian dominance, and by extension, reinforce its demands rather than dilute them.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:47
‘Everyone must be on this side of peace’
…and believes US-Russian interests are aligned
The other reason I think Vladimir Putin doesn’t feel the need to compromise is because he believes Moscow and Washington want the same thing: closer US-Russia relations, which can only come after the war is over.
It’s easy to see why. Time and again in this process, the US has defaulted to a position that favours Moscow. The way these negotiations are being conducted is merely the latest example.
With Kyiv, the Americans force the Ukrainians to come to them – first in Geneva, then Florida.
As for Moscow, it’s the other way around. Witkoff is happy to make the long overnight journey, and then endure the long wait ahead of any audience with Putin.
Captivate
This content is provided by Captivate, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Captivate cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Captivate cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Captivate cookies for this session only.
US defence secretary Pete Hegseth has cited the “fog of war” in defence of a follow-up strike earlier this year on a boat alleged to be carrying drugs in the Caribbean Sea.
His comments came on the day the Pope urged Donald Trump not to try to oust Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro using military force.
Speaking at a cabinet meeting on Tuesday alongside Mr Trump, Mr Hegseth said the US had paused strikes because it was hard to find drug boats.
But strikes against drug traffickers would continue, he said.
Image: Pope Leo XIV talks to reporters as he returns from visits to Turkey and Lebanon. Pic: AP
During the cabinet meeting at the White House, Mr Hegseth said that he did not see that there were survivors in the water when the second strike was ordered and launched in early September, saying that “the thing was on fire”.
Mr Hegseth also said he “didn’t stick around” for the rest of the mission following the first strike, adding that the admiral in charge had “made the right call” in ordering it, which he “had complete authority to do”.
The Washington Post first reported that Mr Hegseth issued a verbal order for the second strike that killed survivors on the boat.
On Monday, the White House said that Navy vice admiral Frank “Mitch” Bradley acted “within his authority and the law” when he ordered the second strike.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:07
Pope pleads to Trump not to oust Venezuelan president by force
Asked if he supported the second strike on a boat in the Caribbean Sea in September, President Trump said he “didn’t know anything” and “still haven’t gotten a lot of information because I rely on Pete”, referencing Mr Hegseth.
On Tuesday, Pope Leo, the first American pontiff, said it would be better to attempt dialogue or impose economic pressure on Venezuela if Washington wanted to pursue change there.
The Trump administration has been weighing options to combat what it has portrayed as Mr Maduro’s role in supplying illegal drugs that have killed Americans.
The socialist Venezuelan president has denied having any links to the illegal drug trade.
Asked during a news conference about President Trump’s threats to remove Mr Maduro by force, the Pope said: “It is better to search for ways of dialogue, or perhaps pressure, including economic pressure.”
He added that Washington should search for other ways to achieve change “if that is what they want to do in the United States”.
The Pope was speaking as he flew home from visiting Turkey and Lebanon – his first overseas trip in the role.
Image: Venezuela’s President Nicolas Maduro in Caracas. Pic: Reuters
Image: A map showing Venezuelan military facilities
The president held a rally in Caracas amid heightened tensions with Mr Trump’s administration, which has been targeting what it says are boats carrying drug smugglers.
Mr Trump met his national security team on Monday evening, having warned last week that land strikes would start “very soon”.
It has not been confirmed what was discussed at the meeting. But White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters: “There’s many options at the president’s disposal that are on the table – and I’ll let him speak on those.”
US forces have carried out at least 21 strikes on boats it claims were carrying narcotics to its shores over the last few months.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
20:08
Did Pete Hegseth commit a war crime?
Mr Maduro – considered a dictator by many in the West – said on Monday that Venezuelans were ready “to defend [the country] and lead it to the path of peace”.
“We have lived through 22 weeks of aggression that can only be described as psychological terrorism,” he said.
Venezuela has said the boat attacks, which have killed more than 80 people, amount to murder – and that Mr Trump’s true motivation is to oust Mr Maduro and access its oil.