Following 9/11, a number of seasoned disaster researchers drew on these
past studies and argued that the response to the terrorist attacks essentially
affirmed what we already know about human reactions to catastrophe.27
Their argument, in effect, was that decades of research on earthquakes,
tornados, hurricanes, and floods has shown that regardless of the type of
event, human beings react fundamentally the same. During the emergency
period, survivors rush to rescue the injured from the rubble. Crime and other
acts of deviance decline as community members concentrate on promoting
public safety and restoring community life. neighbors come together to
help one another clean up the debris and to begin the process of rebuilding
damaged homes. individual differences and status distinctions are forgotten,
even if only temporarily, as the good of the collective becomes paramount.
From this perspective, disasters bring out the best in humanity, not the
worst.
The national and international media offered a similar frame in much
of their initial reporting on the events of 9/11. The day after the terrorist
attacks, the French daily newspaper Le Monde, which is frequently critical
of U.s. foreign policy, ran the headline “nous sommes tous Americaines”
(“We are all Americans”) on the front page of its morning edition. The motto
“United We stand” appeared on the cover of numerous U.s. newspapers
and magazines. radio and television commentators periodically uttered the
phrase “Today we are all new yorkers.” images of death and destruction were
juxtaposed with stories of ordinary heroes and remarkable acts of generosity.
new york was depicted as a city transformed. it was no longer an urban
metropolis filled with self-interested individuals; it had become a single
human community bound together by a horrible tragedy.
These academic and popular interpretations of the events speak to
one reality, a reality of social solidarity, of bravery, of good deeds, and of
22 / Chapter 2
kindness. But a second powerful reality also exists that the very notion of a
single, unified “altruistic community” serves to obscure.
After 9/11, the national mood swung quickly from shock to outrage.
Americans had watched in horror as men and women, faced with insufferable
heat and smoke, plunged to their deaths from the burning World Trade Center.
Then the two tallest buildings in new york City crumbled to the ground like
a house of cards. And just as quickly as those buildings disappeared from the
skyline, so too did the belief that an attack of this magnitude could be carried
out on American soil. Foreign extremists had infiltrated the United states,
and Americans feared that terrorist cells were hidden among the population,
waiting to strike again. The anger in the United states at that time was
palpable, and anger needs an outlet.
president Bush addressed the nation again on the evening of september
11, 2001. He solemnly assured the American people that the search was
already underway for those who perpetrated the acts of mass murder. The
pledge to find those who were responsible and to bring them to justice
was understandable, given the utter ruthlessness of the attacks and the
catastrophic losses they caused. However, the attribution of blame and the
subsequent scapegoating that followed 9/11 left those who shared a common
ethnic or religious identity with the hijackers—who, it would quickly be
discovered, were all Arab muslim men—feeling fearful and isolated. As a
consequence of the terrorist attacks, Arab and muslim Americans became
the targets of hate crimes, harassment, and government surveillance. Thus,
although the events of 9/11 brought together many Americans and led to
increased feelings of patriotism and national unity, the public and political
response that followed the attacks alienated and further marginalized
millions of others. in fact, we were really not “all Americans” on that day.
In his book A New Species of Trouble, Kai erikson argues that a profound
difference exists between those disasters that can be understood as the
work of nature and those that are recognized as the product of humankind.28
“technological” or “toxic” disasters, rather than terrorism, his central ideas
are still important in understanding the public response to 9/11. in natural
disasters, such as floods, tornadoes, and earthquakes, people usually blame
“mother nature” or an “act of God” rather than hold government officials,
building contractors, or other citizens accountable for individual and collec-
tive choices that may have placed victims in harm’s way. The ability to attri-
bute losses to some higher power, in many cases, allows survivors to move
forward and to mobilize necessary resources to begin the process of recovery.
At the other end of the spectrum are calamities that other human beings
Under Attack / 23
unmistakably bring about. Oil spills, chemical releases, nuclear meltdowns,
and other disasters of overtly human origin are, in principle, preventable, and
thus victims can always assign some blame. For this reason, emergencies that
result from human actions are more likely to provoke fear, anger, and outrage
rather than passive acceptance or resignation.
The events of 9/11 certainly share many characteristics with the toxic
calamities that erikson so carefully describes. yet what distinguishes the
terrorist attacks—and places them on a scale entirely their own—is that they
were deliberate acts of malice. Under no circumstance could the death and
destruction be attributed to human negligence, technological error, scientific
miscalculation, or even greed. These were carefully coordinated attacks,
designed to maximize the loss of life among civilians, to destroy symbols of
American prosperity and strength, and to terrify an entire nation.
Arab and muslim Americans quickly recognized the magnitude and
significance of the 9/11 attacks and anticipated the likelihood of serious
repercussions.29 This anticipation reflected their awareness of a history of
backlash violence and government-sanctioned discrimination against Arabs
and muslims in the United states following previous crises. Conflicts in
the middle east and acts of terrorism associated (rightly or wrongly) with
Arabs or muslims have triggered most of the hostile acts aimed at these
groups. For example, the 1973 Arab-israeli war and oil embargo heightened
negative stereotypes against Arab and muslim communities in the United
states, as did the 1979 iran hostage crisis.30 in 1985, the American-Arab Anti-
Discrimination Committee (ADC) documented a spate of violent crimes
against Arab Americans and their businesses following the hijacking of TWA
Flight 847 by shiite militants in lebanon.31 When the United states bombed
libya in 1986, Arab students were harassed and beaten, and Arab American
homes, community centers, and other ethnic and religious institutions were
vandalized.32
in the eight months prior to iraq’s invasion of K
uwait in August 1990,
ADC recorded just four anti-Arab incidents. However, as U.s. troops were
deployed to the persian Gulf, political rhetoric escalated, and levels of public
anxiety increased, so too did assaults against Arab Americans. in the last
three months of 1990 and throughout 1991, ADC logged more than 150
confirmed hate crimes perpetrated against Arab Americans.33 During this
same period, threats against Arab and muslim Americans grew so numerous
that the mayor of Detroit asked michigan’s governor to assign national
Guard troops to protect the city’s large Arab American community. As the
nationwide wave of hate crimes grew more severe, president George H. W.
Bush called for an end to religiously and ethnically motivated aggression,
insisting that “death threats, physical attacks, vandalism, religious violence,
and discrimination against Arab Americans must end.”34
24 / Chapter 2
The Council on American-islamic relations (CAir) recorded 296
occurrences of harassment and violence against muslim Americans in the
year following the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing.35 nearly three-quarters of
the attacks, which included shootings, mob violence, and the burning and
desecration of mosques, happened during the one-week period immediately
after the April 19 bombing. These incidents occurred across the United
states and were precipitated in large part by false media reports regarding the
involvement of “middle eastern–looking men” and “islamic fundamentalists”
in the destruction of the Alfred p. murrah Federal Building. The day after the
attack, the New York Times questioned whether the bombing could have been
the work of “islamic militants,” noting that “some middle eastern groups
have held meetings there, and the city is home to at least three mosques.”
This media speculation continued for months, despite the fact that Timothy
mcveigh, a white man who was affiliated with the radical Christian identity
movement, was apprehended an hour after the bombing took place and was
named by the Federal Bureau of investigation (FBi) as the prime suspect
within a matter of days of his arrest.36
The government response that followed the Oklahoma City bombing
was perhaps even more startling than the surge in anti-muslim hate crimes.
soon after the bombing, the U.s. Congress passed the Comprehensive Anti-
Terrorism Act of 1995. even though both of the Oklahoma City bombers
were American-born and American-raised, the bill established a special
measure for deporting “alien terrorists.” it also sanctioned, among other
security measures, airport profiling of potential terrorists. The profile was
not of a blond-haired, blue-eyed Timothy mcveigh but of a brown-skinned
Arab or muslim.37
Following the 1996 explosion of TWA Flight 800 over the Atlantic Ocean,
law enforcement agents quickly asserted, apparently without evidence,
that the plane was brought down by terrorists with ties to the middle east.
Consequently, significant numbers of Arab Americans, muslim Americans,
and others who simply appeared to be middle eastern were subjected to
harsh questioning, demeaning treatment, and intrusive searches of their
personal possessions and bodies. some were even told that they were being
interrogated more extensively than others because they “fit a profile.”38 in the
end, the crash was attributed to faulty wiring.
retaliatory attacks in the aftermath of crisis have become part of the
muslim American collective consciousness. Thus, it is no surprise that in
the wake of 9/11, almost like a startle reflex, muslims moved swiftly into
action as they attempted to avert antagonistic responses. Just hours after
the first airplane collided with the World Trade Center, muslim American
groups condemned the acts of terror. The joint statement, which every major
islamic organization in the United states endorsed, read in part, “American
Under Attack / 25
muslims utterly condemn what are vicious and cowardly acts of terrorism
against innocent civilians. We join with all Americans in calling for the swift
apprehension and punishment of the perpetrators. no political cause could
ever be assisted by such immoral acts.”39
Days later, CAir purchased and ran a full-page advertisement in
the Washington Post that stated, “Our thoughts and prayers are with the
families, friends, and loved ones of those who have been killed or injured.
may we all stand together through these difficult times to promote peace
and love over violence and hate.” similarly, the muslim public Affairs
Council issued the following statement: “We feel that our country, the
United states, is under attack. All Americans should stand together to
bring the perpetrators to justice. We warn against any generalizations
that will only serve to help the criminals and incriminate the innocent.
We offer our resources and resolve to help the victims of these intolerable
acts, and we pray to God to protect and bless America.” muslim students
Association (msA) national, which represents more than seven hundred
affiliated chapters on college and university campuses across the United
states, issued several press releases expressing grief and support for the
larger American community.40
muslim and Arab leaders abroad also condemned the attacks and offered
their condolences. For example, on the morning of september 11, palestinian
leader yasser Arafat spoke out against the terrorists and sent his sympathy
to the American people. One of sunni islam’s highest religious authorities,
sheikh mohammed sayed Tantawi of Al-Azhar mosque in Cairo, said that
the terrible acts would be punished on judgment day. president mohammad
Khatami of iran stated that attacking innocent people is not tolerated in
islam. And, in October 2001, representatives of fifty-seven nations at the
Organization of islamic Conferences declared that “such shameful terror
acts are opposed to the tolerant divine message of islam, which spurns
aggression, calls for peace, coexistence, tolerance, and respect among people,
highly prizes the dignity of human life, and prohibits the killing of the
innocent.”41
prominent islamic religious leaders in the United states, including imam
Hamza yusuf and imam siraj Wahhaj, offered dozens of interviews to print
media and appeared on national television to present the faith’s prohibition
of terrorism. On september 20, 2001, president George W. Bush invited
imam yusuf to the Oval Office, where the two men met privately and later
stood side by side and sang “God Bless America.”42 islamic scholars called
the attacks a distortion of islam and argued that no religious justification
exists for such violent actions. ingrid mattson, a professor of islamic studies
and Christian-muslim relations at Hartford seminary, said, “islamic law
is very clear: Terrorism is not permitted.” she added, “even in a legitimate
26 / Chapter 2
war—even if Osama bin laden were a legitimate head of state, which he’s
not—you’re not permitted to indiscriminately kill civilians, just to create
&nbs
p; terror in the general population.”43
major Arab and muslim American advocacy groups prepared resource
packets and posted information on their Web sites that answered common
questions about Arab Americans, islam, and the middle east. representatives
from these organizations also spoke at forums that professional associations
and federal and state agencies sponsored. members of msAs organized
educational forums, film screenings, and guest lectures on university
campuses across the nation. individual Arabs and muslims gave countless
talks to religious groups, schools, businesses, and local organizations about
the impact of 9/11 on their lives and communities. muslims began holding
“open mosque” events designed to offer the public an introduction to islam
and to connect people of different faiths. Christians, Jews, and other people
of faith were invited to join muslims in breaking the fast during the islamic
holy month of ramadan. CAir initiated a campaign to provide informational
books on islam to thousands of libraries nationwide.
As muslims attempted to convince the American people that those men
who hijacked the airplanes on september 11 also hijacked their faith, others
began to stand up in defense of the islamic community. During the fall of
2001, hundreds of non-muslim women across the United states volunteered
to wear the hijab for a day to support their muslim sisters. The campaign,
which was named “scarves for solidarity,” was largely organized via the
internet.44 volunteers offered to escort muslim families to the grocery store
and on other errands to ensure their safety. individuals sent cards, flowers,
and cash donations to mosques, and callers flooded their voicemails with
messages of support. in some cities, members of the public formed human
chains around mosques to discourage vandalism and to promote tolerance
and solidarity. The media ran numerous stories on the beliefs and practices of
muslim Americans and on their historical and contemporary contributions
to society. religious leaders from various faiths opened the doors to their
houses of worship and invited muslims to share an islamic perspective
on the events of 9/11. leading advocacy groups for latinos, sikhs, Asian
Americans, Arab Americans, and other minority communities formed civil-