The terrorists have won

Rhetorical phrase

"...the terrorists have won" or "...then the terrorists win" are rhetorical phrases which were widely used in the United States in the wake of the September 11 attacks. The phrase says "that if we pursue some particular course of action, why then, the terrorists have won" (as explained by Jeff Greenfield of CNN).[1]

## Etymology

[edit]

The expression had been used before 2001. In 1986, an article in the Journal of the American Bar Association (ABA) reported:

> ABA President William Falsgraf has wisely pointed out that we must not alter fundamental precepts of U.S. law in responding to terrorism. "If we do," Falsgraf said, "the terrorists have won."[2]

## History

[edit]

In 1995, an editorial about the response to the Oklahoma City bombing in the Ocala Star-Banner, of Ocala, Florida concluded: "Our response to terrorism should be carefully measured. If our First Amendment rights suffer as a result of the awful domestic terrorist attack in Oklahoma City the terrorists have indeed, won."[3] At the same time, an editorial in the Victoria Advocate of Victoria, Texas said: "If Americans begin to yield their own freedoms at home, the terrorists have won."[4]

In the months after the September 11 attacks, the expression was often used. One of the most famous instances was on November 4, 2001 by Ellen DeGeneres, who was hosting the Emmy Awards, which had been postponed twice that year for worries that a showy celebration would seem inappropriate in the wake of the attacks. To lighten the mood, she quipped: "We're told to go on living our lives as usual, because to do otherwise is to let the terrorists win, and really, what would upset the Taliban more than a gay woman wearing a suit in front of a room full of Jews?"[5]

## See also

[edit]

* Language portal
* Linguistics portal
* United States portal
* Politics portal

* Appeal to consequences
* Appeal to fear
* Appeal to pity
* Black and white thinking
* Cut and run
* False dilemma
* List of fallacies
* Stay the course
* Terrorism
* Think of the children
* War hawk
* You're either with us, or against us

## References

[edit]

1. ^ A Phrase That Turns Routine Acts Into Acts of War, Los Angeles Times, November 7, 2001
2. ^ Jeanne B. Clarizio, "Striking at the heart of liberty", in ABA Journal vol. 72 (issue of January 1, 1986). Chicago, IL: American Bar Association. 1986. p. 40.
3. ^ Hasty laws are not the answer, Ocala Star-Banner, April 27, 1995
4. ^ Don’t yield our freedoms, The Victoria Advocate, May 8, 1995
5. ^ Glaister, Dan (2007-02-23). "'People who see her on television think she's wonderful ... and then there are the people who have worked with her'". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 2025-05-10.

## External links

[edit]

Look up the terrorists will have won in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

* v
* t
* e

Common fallacies (list)

Formal|

| In propositional logic|

* Affirming a disjunct
* Affirming the consequent
* Denying the antecedent
* Argument from fallacy
* Masked man
* Mathematical fallacy

|

In quantificational logic|

* Existential
* Illicit conversion
* Proof by example
* Quantifier shift

Syllogistic fallacy|

* Affirmative conclusion from a negative premise
* Negative conclusion from affirmative premises
* Exclusive premises
* Existential
* Necessity
* Four terms
* Illicit major
* Illicit minor
* Undistributed middle

Informal|

| Equivocation|

* Equivocation
* False equivalence
* False attribution
* Moral equivalence
* Quoting out of context
* Loki's Wager
* No true Scotsman
* Reification
* Map–territory relation

|

Question-begging|

* Circular reasoning / Begging the question
* Loaded language
* Leading question
* Compound question / Loaded question / Complex question
* No true Scotsman

Correlative-based|

* False dilemma
* Perfect solution
* Denying the correlative
* Suppressed correlative

Illicit transference|

* Composition
* Division
* Ecological

Secundum quid|

* Accident
* Converse accident

Faulty generalization|

* Anecdotal evidence
* Sampling bias
* Cherry picking
* McNamara
* Base rate / Conjunction
* Double counting
* False analogy
* Slothful induction
* Overwhelming exception

Ambiguity|

* Accent
* False precision
* Moving the goalposts
* Quoting out of context
* Slippery slope
* Sorites paradox
* Syntactic ambiguity

Questionable cause|

* Animistic
* Furtive
* Correlation implies causation
* Cum hoc
* Post hoc
* Gambler's
* Inverse
* Regression
* Single cause
* Slippery slope
* Texas sharpshooter

Appeals|

* Law/Legality
* Stone / Proof by assertion

| Consequences|

* Argumentum ad baculum
* Wishful thinking

|

Emotion|

* Children
* Fear
* Flattery
* Novelty
* Pity
* Ridicule
* In-group favoritism
* Invented here / Not invented here
* Island mentality
* Loyalty
* Parade of horribles
* Spite
* Stirring symbols
* Wisdom of repugnance

Genetic fallacy|

| Ad hominem|

* Appeal to motive
* Association
* Reductio ad Hitlerum
* Reductio ad Stalinum
* Bulverism
* Poisoning the well
* Tone
* Tu quoque
* Whataboutism

|

* Authority
* Accomplishment
* Ipse dixit
* Poverty / Wealth
* Etymology
* Nature
* Tradition / Novelty
* Chronological snobbery

Other fallacies
of relevance|

| Arguments|

* Ad nauseam
* Sealioning
* Argument from anecdote
* Argument from silence
* Argument to moderation
* Argumentum ad populum

|

* Cliché
* The Four Great Errors
* I'm entitled to my opinion
* Ignoratio elenchi
* Invincible ignorance
* Moralistic / Naturalistic
* Motte-and-bailey fallacy
* Psychologist's fallacy
* Rationalization
* Red herring
* Two wrongs make a right
* Special pleading
* Straw man

* Category

*[v]: View this template
*[t]: Discuss this template
*[e]: Edit this template