Presenting "CT Since 9/11: Evaluating the Efficacy of Controversial Tactics"

"Recommendation: The burden of proof for retaining a particular governmental power should be on the executive, to explain (a) that the power actually materially enhances security and (b) that there is adequate supervision of the executive's use of the powers to ensure protection of civil liberties. If the power is granted, there must be adequate guidelines and oversight to properly confine its use."

-- The Final Report of the 9/11 Commission



While several Inspectors General and Government Accountability Office analysts have evaluated whether CT tactics implemented after 9/11 were being overused or abused, (and found that they too often were), few in or out of the government have seriously endeavored to measure whether those tactics were even effective in the first place.

Instead, most authors have assumed (a) that the government powers expanded after 9/11 have "materially enhance[d] security" and gone on to argue about (b) the prudent implementation of those measures. Heymann and Kayyem's much lauded Protecting Liberty in an Age of Terror is an excellent case in point.

In "CT Since 9/11" we begin and end with evaluations of some of the most debated and litigated tactics used since 9/11. Reviewing hundreds of government documents, media reports, and works of social science, we get to the bottom of what works and what does not to counter terrorism. You can download the report here.