Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Impact of 9/11 attacks
The political impact of 9/11
The political impact of 9/11
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Impact of 9/11 attacks
The Language of Terrorism
On September 11, 2001, two airplanes flew into the World Trade Center and another into the Pentagon, while yet another suspiciously crashed. Blasted on T.V. screens across America, were images of fire, destruction, chaos and death. Framed in colors of red, white and blue, were such headlines that read: ³America Under-Attack,² ³The War Against Terror² and ³The Attack on America²; all the while, urgent ticket taped messages flowed across our television screens and news anchors reported on the utmost of news. To sum-up the days events, President Bush addressed the nation.
It was in the President¹s initial speech to the nation following the attack on the World Trade Center that the adjective ³evil² was first introduced. Quoting from the bible, and making reference to a ³power greater than any of us,² the President reassured the American people of their safety and well-being. Within a couple of minutes, the stage was set for all that was to follow.
Since adopted by the media, the Bush administration and the American people, the religious reference of ³evil² by the President has become an integral part of the public discourse. Framing the way we talk and think about the day¹s events, and all subsequent events, including talk of Bin Laden, the Taliban and terrorism, the use of binary language in religious and metaphoric expression have become an important element in the ³war against terrorism.² And despite the President¹s and congress¹ denouncement of any reference to ³the attack on terrorism² as a holy war, it seems as if the American ideal of ³separation of state and religion,² has become suspended and/or forgotten all together.
The intent of this paper is to analysis the language used by the President to describe the September 11th events, and consequentially, its binary effects. Given the President¹s religious and metaphoric references a dichotomous framework is thought to exit. For instance, in using the term ³evil,² images of the devil and hell have been conjured up --and conversely-- images of God and heaven. Helping to demonize those responsible, the initial language used by the President and later incorporated by the press, has since served as a political weapon from which to fight ³the war against terrorism.² In that the President¹s speech evoked from his audience (most notably the American people) feelings of fear, terror, anger, and hatred, the appeal has been to the public¹s emotions and senses rather than their ration and intellect.
Religion is a part of society that is so closely bound to the rest of one’s life it becomes hard to distinguish what part of religion is actually being portrayed through themselves, or what is being portrayed through their culture and the rest of their society. In Holy Terrors, Bruce Lincoln states that religion is used as a justifiable mean of supporting violence and war throughout time (Lincoln 2). This becomes truly visible in times such as the practice of Jihad, the Reformation, and 9/11. The purpose of this essay is to show that as long as religion is bound to a political and cultural aspect of a community, religious war and destruction will always occur throughout the world. A historical methodology will be deployed in order to gain
In his essay, Rodriguez believes that the diplomatic affairs we see on the evening news are merely being disguised as a religious war. The fight over oil or land when in reality it is the fight between whose side God is on, the attacks under the control of Al Qaeda when perhaps it’s the greed for power or world domination. According to Richard, these religious wars are allowing terrorism to become prevalent; often times within the same culture (147).
Since the 9/11 attacks, the Bush administration has been calling every citizens and every nations to support his Middle East policy. Nonetheless, the U.S. has been involved in the middle-east struggle for more than half of the century, wars were waged and citizens were killed. Yet, political struggles and ideological conflicts are now worse than they were under Clinton’s presidency. As “President’s Address to the Nation” is a speech asking everybody to support the troops to keep fighting in Iraq, I, as an audience, am not persuaded at all because of his illogical fallacy in the arguments. In this essay, I will analyze how and what are the illogical fallacies he uses in the speech.
Bush opens his speech by acknowledging the events of September 11, and those that lost the lives of loved ones and to those that gave their life trying to save others in the buildings. He appeals to those that remain strong by saying that, “These acts of mass murder were intended to frighten our nation into chaos and retreat. But they have failed. Our country is strong.” His use of pathos helps Bush to calm and control the public in order to keep the country together. This
President Bush and Prime Minister Blair delivered speeches shortly after the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Centers in New York and the Pentagon in Virginia, which occurred on September 11, 2001. Former President George W Bush utilized pathos, anaphora, and personification in his speech to convey an optimistic tone. Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, addressing the same topic, utilized mild invective and parallel structure to express an affirmative tone. Throughout the speech, the former President George W. Bush strives to empower Americans by instructing them to remain resolute, but to “go back to [their] lives and routines”. He uses the personal pronoun we and the common pronoun us repeatedly to indicate that the people of the United States, who either saw the event on television or experienced this event firsthand, were and still are involved in this national tragedy.
On September 11, 2001, America was forever changed. On this day, America faced the biggest terrorist attack that had ever been carried out; thousands of people lost their lives that day. Throughout the sadness and mourning of this terrible event, George Bush addressed the nation with one of the most memorable speeches. When President Bush addressed the nation, he stated that America is strong and they could try to bring us down, but we will not be broken.This speech gave hope to many Americans and helped them remember to stay strong. This day will be forever remembered for all the souls that lost their lives and the brave people who threatened their own life to save others.
Host: On September the 11th 2001, the notorious terror organisation known as Al-Qaeda struck at the very heart of the United States. The death count was approximately 3,000; a nation was left in panic. To this day, counterterrorism experts and historians alike regard the event surrounding 9/11 as a turning point in US foreign relations. Outraged and fearful of radical terrorism from the middle-east, President Bush declared that in 2001 that it was a matter of freedoms; that “our very freedom has come under attack”. In his eyes, America was simply targeted because of its democratic and western values (CNN News, 2001). In the 14 years following this pivotal declaration, an aggressive, pre-emptive approach to terrorism replaced the traditional
President George W. Bush use of symbolic strategies is admirable, regardless of one’s beliefs with politics. With his crucial tone combined with anaphoras and pathos, Bush created a speech that was inspiring and provoking. Looking back at everything, it is apparent that Bush used his successful speech as a stepping stone to go into Afghanistan, and then later Iraq. Bush’s 9/11 speech will go down in history and nobody will ever forget about this tragic, horrendous event that shocked our country worldwide.
In May 2003, President George W. Bush addressed the nation and announced an end to major combat operations in Iraq which resulted in the death of Saddam Hussein. His message touched on many issues in the ongoing war on terrorism but most importantly, it conveyed the fact that the United States would not tolerate the killing of innocent people. The President began by expressing gratitude to the men and women who have sacrificed for their country. He then proceeded to inform the American people of the work that had been accomplished in Iraq, Afghanistan, and neighboring countries since the declaration of war, all while substantiating the need for ongoing military presence in the Middle East. In addition to informing the nation, he attempted to ensure the safety of the American people and warn those with intentions to harm Americans or their allies.
For a second, the U.S. stood still. Looking up at the towers, one can only imagine the calm before the storm in the moment when thousands of pounds of steel went hurdling into its once smooth, glassy frame. People ran around screaming and rubble fell as the massive metal structure folded in on itself like an accordion. Wounded and limping from the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center, America carried on, not without anger and fear against a group of innocent Americans, Muslim Americans. Nietzsche’s error of imaginary cause is present in the treatment of Muslim Americans since 9/11 through prejudice in the media, disregard of Muslim civil liberties, racial profiling, violence, disrespect, and the lack of truthful public information about Islam. In this case, the imaginary cause against Muslims is terrorism. The wound has healed in the heart of the U.S. but the aching throb of terrorism continues to distress citizens every day.
On the brink of two different wars, two United States’ Presidents rose up to the challenge of calming the American people and fighting for the belief of justice. A day after devastation on December 7, 1941, Franklin D. Roosevelt gives his “Pearl Harbor Address to the Nation”. At the beginning of a terrorist crisis in 2001, George W. Bush announces a “‘War on Terror’ Declaration”. Both Presidents have many similarities in common, yet their differences set them apart with uniqueness. These two speeches, separate by nearly sixty years, weave an outright and assertive tone into their diction and detail.
The transformation of America is often discussed in both popular media and academic dialogue. Each generation has a name, new technologies define new eras, and events seem only notable when they are “historic”. While major events catch the interest of a broad spectrum of the public consciousness, subtle interactions between actors and slight shifts in beliefs are constantly changing the realities of the world. When the twin towers fell in 2001, the United States seemed to be thrust into a new world of Weapons of Mass Destruction, Jihadists, and a global fight against terrorism; bombs were dropped, ground forces were deployed in foreign states, and anyone who publicly questioned the urgency of war was at risk to be labeled a traitor. This one event was indelibly branded on the consciousness of the world and if often seen as a moment of sudden transformation. Most Americans believe that the troop presence in Iraq and Afghanistan are due to the terrorist attacks on the United States and while it is hard to deny that the 9-11 attacks was the impetus for putting boots on the ground, it is imperative that the chain of events following the horror of September 11 are seen to reflect the willingness and wants of actors in control before the towers fell.
September 11, 2001 was a day that Americans and the world for that matter will not soon forget. When two planes went into the twin towers of the World Trade Center and two others went into the Pentagon and a small town in Pennsylvania, the world was rocked. Everyone in the United States felt very vulnerable and unsafe from attacks that might follow. As a result, confidence in the CIA, FBI, and the airlines were shaken. People were scared to fly after what had happened.
On september 11, 2001 there was an attack on America. Four airplanes were hijacked, two were crashed into the World Trade Center in New York City, the third crashed into the Pentagon in D.C. and the fourth got stopped by a passenger. It was the first terrorist attack on the U.S. soil. Thousands of lives were lost that day. This attach was the most devastating act of belligerence on U.S territory since the Civil War (Terrorism, 2011). This even had an enormous influence on America and its history. It led to numerous short and long term effects. On September 20, 2001, former president George W. Bush announced publicly that he declares “War on Terror”. After this announcement, our country has altered. To determine if an effect was positive or negative, determines on the view point of the person. Some of those effects include; USA Patriot Act, creation of TSA, the War, and issues soldiers have after combat and health problems of Ground Zero. However, if the effects were positive or negative, it still made a massive mark in our country.
President George W. Bush is notorious for horrible public speaking, tripping over his words and making silly mistakes are not uncommon in President Bush’s speeches. When 9/11 struck the heart of America we turned to President Bush to guide us back to the path of calm and reason. The American population tends to lean on our President in time of tragedy to serve as a system of support. Instantly after the World Trade Center buildings were attacked President Bush addressed the nation on live television. Bush used neo-Aristotelian tactics: ethos, pathos, and logos to instate a sense of patriotism, argue that America will recover from this tragedy and bring justice to our nation.