September 11 attacks

The September 11 attacks appear in the book less as a narrated sequence of events than as a political and ethical reference point. Their significance lies in the contrast between the everyday character of the firefighters’ heroism and the extraordinary powers later defended in the name of security. The discussion traces how the attacks became a rationale for practices that, in the book’s analysis, threaten the legal and democratic principles they claim to protect.

Heroism and Ordinary Duty

The book recalls the much-celebrated heroism of New York firefighters on September 11, emphasizing that they did nothing exceptional in the sense of departing from their work: they did their job. This account locates heroism not in a dramatic claim to greatness but in the performance of ordinary duty under extraordinary circumstances. The distinction matters because such courage is itself exceptional, even when the action consists of carrying out the work entrusted to them.

Security and Outsourced Responsibility

The attacks also frame a discussion of torture and the effort to disclaim responsibility for it. The book compares outsourcing torture to corporations subcontracting material production: in both cases, powerful institutions can distance themselves from harmful practices by assigning them elsewhere. It recalls a proposal made immediately after September 11 to transfer suspects to allies less troubled by restrictions on torture, while stressing the hypocrisy of condemning torture as contrary to American values and then seeking a way to have it done beyond those values’ reach. The argument sharpens further in the observation that the United States had itself taught torture to military allies; the supposedly external practice could therefore be understood as a disavowed part of its own political history.

The War on Terror and Emergency Power

In the book’s account, the War on Terror turns an invisible enemy into a warrant for visible and continuing defensive measures. Because the threat is treated as potential and not yet fully actualized, waiting for it to materialize is represented as too late; preemptive action becomes the stated necessity. The result is an inversion: the danger invoked to defend democracy and human rights can authorize measures that pose a danger to them. September 11 thus functions in the argument not only as a reference to an attack but as the point of departure for a critique of permanent emergency, anticipatory force, and power presenting itself as perpetually under threat.

Meaning in the Book

The event’s two principal appearances—firefighters’ service and the political aftermath—are held in tension. Ordinary acts of responsibility receive the book’s respect, while claims of necessity are examined for the violence and evasion they may conceal. The attacks are not recounted in detail here; rather, their public meaning is examined through the uses made of them, and through the contrast between practical heroism and institutions that displace the consequences of their own decisions.