Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Brief Contents
- Contents
- Acknowledgments
- 1 Introduction
- 2 The United Nations Responds: Security Council Listing and Legislation
- 3 Countries That Did Not Immediately Respond
- 4 The United States Responds: Executive Power and Extra-Legalism
- 5 The United Kingdom Responds: A Legislative War on Terrorism
- 6 Australia Responds: Hyper-Legislation
- 7 Canada Responds: Border and Human Security
- 8 Conclusions
- Index
- References
1 - Introduction
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 June 2012
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Brief Contents
- Contents
- Acknowledgments
- 1 Introduction
- 2 The United Nations Responds: Security Council Listing and Legislation
- 3 Countries That Did Not Immediately Respond
- 4 The United States Responds: Executive Power and Extra-Legalism
- 5 The United Kingdom Responds: A Legislative War on Terrorism
- 6 Australia Responds: Hyper-Legislation
- 7 Canada Responds: Border and Human Security
- 8 Conclusions
- Index
- References
Summary
The Post-9/11 Fallout
Terrorism was not invented with the September 11, 2001 (9/11), terrorist attacks on the United States. Nevertheless, the coordinated attacks that killed almost 3,000 people were unprecedented as a single act of terrorism. So, too, was the global response to those events. Although individual countries had panicked and reacted to terrorism with repressive and ineffective laws and measures before, the response to 9/11 was an unprecedented global phenomenon. 9/11 produced a horrible natural experiment that allows us to compare how international institutions and different countries responded. Some reacted to 9/11 in novel and disturbing ways; others did very little to respond. All countries responded in a manner that reflected their own particular histories and legal, political, and social cultures.
Information
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The 9/11 EffectComparative Counter-Terrorism, pp. 1 - 20Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2011
References
2004
Terrorism and the Limitation of Rights: The ECHR and the US ConstitutionOxfordHart 2008Google Scholar
Human Rights and Non-Discrimination in the “War on Terror”OxfordOxford University Press 2008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary SocietyChicagoUniversity of Chicago Press 2001Google Scholar
The Struggle of Democracy against TerrorismCharlottesvilleUniversity of Virginia Press 2006Google Scholar
Legitimacy and Legality in Interactional Law: An Interactional AccountNew YorkCambridge University Press 2010Google Scholar
Anti-Terrorism Efforts in IndonesiaGlobal Anti-Terrorism Law and PolicyNew YorkCambridge University Press 2011Google Scholar
The Migration of Anti-Constitutional IdeasThe Migration of Constitutional IdeasNew YorkCambridge University Press 2006Google Scholar
Defining Terrorism: How and WhyThe Human Rights of Anti-TerrorismToronto, ON, CanadaIrwin Law 2008Google Scholar
The Legal Authority of the UN Security CouncilSecurity and Human RightsOxfordHart 2007Google Scholar
Accessibility standard: Unknown
Why this information is here
This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.Accessibility Information
Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this chapter is currently unknown
and may be updated in the future.