9/11 & American Empire: Christians, Jews, and Muslims Speak Out (Paperback)

~ (Editor), John Cobb (Editor), Sandra Lubarsky (Editor)

Editorial Reviews

Review

"For too long, the very reasonable questions raised by 9/11 have been ignored and even ridiculed by America's press and politicians... We, the people, therefore owe the editors of this important new collection our warm thanks for their intelligent and unrelenting work." -Mark Crispin Miller, Professor of Culture & Communications, New York University"

Product Description

Inspired by David Ray Griffin's internationally acclaimed book The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions about the Bush Administration and 9/11, this anthology presents a variety of perspectives on 9/11 and empire from authors who identify with one of the major Abrahamic traditions. Co-edited by a major Christian theologian (John Cobb), a Jewish scholar (Sandra Lubarsky), and a Muslim scholar (Kevin Barrett), the book features essays by 9/11 revisionists and activists alongside those of noted writers and scholars, including several of the leading religious intellectuals of our time. The writers offer reflections on 9/11 and empire informed by the moral principles of their religious traditions as well as by the obligation to engage in thoughtful dialogue with those of other traditions. While the question of of the Bush administration's and Us military and intelligence leaders' possible complicity in 9/11- and the moral implications of facing that possibility-is at the forefront of the book's agenda, it also addresses the way 9/11 has been used to expand the US empire's "global domination project"-raising profound moral questions that confront all of us, whatever our views on 9/11 complicity and whatever our faith, worldview, or national/ethnic identification.

Contributors include Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed, Kevin Barrett, Faiz Khan, Enver Masud, Yasmin Ahmed, Tamar Frankiel, Roger Gottlieb, Marc Ellis, Sandra Lubarsky, Rabbi Michael Lerner, John Cobb, David Ray Griffin, Carter Heyward, Catherine Keller, and Rosemary Radford Ruether.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Paperback: 336 pages
• Publisher: Olive Branch Press (October 15, 2006)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 1566566606
• ISBN-13: 978-1566566605
• Product Dimensions: 8.9 x 6 x 1.2 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.1 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.7 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (3 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #491,134 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

20 of 22 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Common Ground for People of Faith, October 28, 2006

By	reprehensor (Planet Earth.) - See all my reviews

Following hot on the heels of 9/11 and American Empire Vol. I: Intellectuals Speak Out comes Vol. II: Christians, Jews and Muslims Speak Out.

Co-edited by Kevin Barrett, John B. Cobb Jr., and Sandra Lubarsky, Vol. II succeeds on several levels.

First, the quality of writing and serious contemplative nature of each essay builds on what has been an amazing year for written output about 9/11. Second, apart from Griffin's volume, Christian Faith and the Truth Behind 9/11, Vol. II sets a standard for frank discussion of morality in the shadow of the US hegemon (in the wake of 9/11). Third, for someone who is devoutly or moderately religious, but has not examined the events of 9/11 in a critical light, Vol. II packs a powerful punch. Informed by Griffin's informative rundown of False Flag terrorism, and Nafeez Ahmed's thoroughly documented reinterpretation of "international terrorism", one cannot walk away from this book without being a little bit wiser about the Machiavellian nature of the War on Terror and the historical roots of state-sponsored terrorism.

With Barrett's name on the lips of Wisconsin politicians and attack dogs on FOX News, his notoriety is assured. Cobb is known and respected as a pioneer in the fusion of Process Thought and Christianity. Lubarsky seems to have come on board with the other two editors via her association with David Ray Griffin; she co-edited a volume with him called Jewish Theology and Process Thought. Griffin is also a Process Theologian, so we can say that Alfred North Whitehead is well represented here.

Other notable authors also contribute to Vol. II, not least the rabbi Michael Lerner, whose short piece reveals his willingness to contemplate the worst about 9/11, and also reveals his prior experience with infiltration of a political organization by agents of the state. Sage advice for the naive.

Vol. II makes for an interesting primer to all three religions, with discussion inspired by the notion that 9/11 was a catalyst for geopolitical maneuvering that most Americans would not support without such a catalyst. It turns out that there is a lot of common ground for people of faith to stand on, to examine their priorities and formulate a response to 9/11 that is not afraid to stand apart from the Imperial ambitions of a "New Rome".

Much of the value of the book can only be transmitted by a first-hand reading. The subjective nature of the 9/11 experience informed by each author's religious worldview is a welcome addition to the growing library of 9/11 skepticism.

7 of 11 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars A matter of life and death, March 10, 2007

By	Luc REYNAERT (Beernem, Belgium) - See all my reviews (TOP 500 REVIEWER)    (REAL NAME)

This is in any case a very courageous book, even though the contributions vary in the extreme. Some authors accept the official 9/11 version. Most, however, see 9/11 as an inside job, a mantra for permitting preemptive war, disregarding human rights and personal freedom (S. Lubarsky).

One big chasm between the contributors is the fact that some see religion as an end, not as a means.
Religion is the institutionalization of people's irrational beliefs by the rulers to consolidate, enhance or justify their power and policies (J. Diamond). Fundamentalist followers are their best foot folk.
In the 9/11 case, R. Ruether speaks of `misuse of religious language'.
C. Heyward defines it more perfectly: `the problem with 9/11 is how religion was used to exploit the violence. The leaders of the US are justifying their behavior by faith in a god who is a concoction of their own lust of power.'

Nearly all the authors stress that Muslim fundamentalist terrorism with its symbol Al Qaeda and `its legend Osama Bin Laden' (R. Griffin), together with `the axis of evil' is the focal point. By creating terrorism as the main global enemy a screenplay of endless war (R. Ruether) should justify endless defense budgets.
But, there is not only Muslim fundamentalism. C. Keller exposes bitterly the Christian Right. She quotes one version of it: `war-making is precisely the work of killing people, and there is nothing wrong with enjoying one's work.' As Dante did already in the Renaissance, she pleads for a strong distinction between Religion and State.
More, N.M. Ahmed in `Interrogating Terrorism' explains clearly that the link between Muslim fundamentalism and Western intelligence is in no way cut. Muslim fundamentalism is still used in `the strategy of terror' and in covert destabilization of important oil countries to counter Russian and Chinese influence.

The most radical proposition comes from Rabbi M. Lerner `to use 5 % of the GDP to eliminate poverty, homelessness, hunger, inadequate education and healthcare and repair damage to the environment'. In view of R. McNamara's statement that `the US military spending could safely be cut in half' (quoted in E. Masud), the 5 % should be absolutely no problem.
Rabbi M. Lerner has other very important propositions in his sleeve, thereby criticizing heavily the actual government: `eliminate the electoral college, instant run-off voting, fully publicly financial elections, firm public control of electronic voting.'
In his critic he is not alone. For J. Cobb Jr. the US `is moving away from authentic rule by the people. Today we are more a plutocracy than a democracy.'
And C. Heyward sees `our political system as inextricable from capitalist powerbrokers and that what we hear from government is bound up in greed, corruption, lies, and violence.'

This book is a must read for all those interested in the future of mankind.
The terror myth should not become a self-fulfilling prophesy (E. Masud) and the sovereignty of the people should be taken seriously (J. Cobb Jr.).

0 of 10 people found the following review helpful:

1.0 out of 5 stars The Pagans will rule the world, August 18, 2007

By	Jill Malter ([e-mail]) - See all my reviews (TOP 500 REVIEWER)

Many years ago, someone said that if there were some smart aliens out there in space, their first knowledge of our civilization might come from capturing a few "I Love Lucy" shows, as they were some of the earlier television shows to be broadcast. And while that would confirm the presence of life on Earth, it might leave the aliens wondering about the possible presence of intelligent life here.

Well, I think they were wrong about Lucy. Sure, that was a mindless show. But I think our aliens would quickly guess that the characters might just be actors and actresses, rather than Important Leaders of Society. And they might even guess that the show was some sort of comedy or satire. I doubt that we'd have much to fear in this regard.

I wish I could say the same for this book.

I favor human rights for all. I value truth. I'm a Pagan and a Polytheist, and in my opinion, this book makes the monotheists look worse than any other book I have ever seen. It makes even "I Love Lucy" look honest, scholarly and sophisticated by comparison, and I'm not a fan of that show at all. If the monotheists do eventually become an insignificant minority and the Pagans become the majority, maybe some day, people will look at this book and say "Golly, no wonder the monotheists lost so badly." The contempt for facts and logic shown by the contributors to this book is incredible.

I was sorry to see that a book such as "Debunking 9/11 Myths" by Popular Mechanics was needed. But I guess some of you folks out there ought to read it.

By the way, I'm a liberal, and I do not like the present administration at all, and I think the war in Iraq has been a mistake. But books such as this one sure do not help those of us who say so. They tar us as immoral idiots and bullies.

John Cobb talks about "the evil that results from erroneous beliefs" and wishes that the Christian churches would adopt a "commitment to truth." Very funny. David Griffin says that "as long as the church does not explicitly oppose this empire, it is, by its silence, a de facto supporter of it." That does seem a little arbitrary, given how many ochlocracies the church really could justifiably oppose.

Next there are articles by Carter Heyward, Catherine Keller, and Rosemary Reuther.

Well, so much for the "Christians." What about the "Jews?" Sandra Lubarsky tells of John Kennedy, who indicated that refusal to abide human rights for the Blacks would make us "forfeit the right to worship God." She thinks we might be similarly accused if we fail to promote and protect life. Well, she might be right about that, and I think she needs to work much harder at promoting and protecting life!

Marc Ellis, Tamar Frankiel, Roger Gottlieb, and Michael Lerner also have some words for us. It's a pity that they did not use their talents to say something of value. Ellis may be the most outrageous of this bunch.

I found the sections by the Muslim contributors to be the most amazing. Kevin Barrett makes no sense at all. Nafeez Ahmed appears to wonder why there was a Jerusalem Conference on International Terrorism. It sure looks suspicious to him! I'm not making this up, by the way. Faiz Khan has a fine title which refers to "the paralysis of discourse, the incompetence of academia, and the need for an accurate diagnosis." He should have stopped right there. We do indeed have a problem in academia, and we do indeed need the help of those who not only can but will provide us with an accurate diagnosis. And he's not helping! Enver Masud writes about "a clash between justice and greed." It makes me wonder if all the contributors are simply projecting. Yasmin Ahmed puts forth some fine questions. Are we indeed asking Muslims not to be "too Muslim?" If so, that would be arbitrary and immoral of us. But if we merely ask Muslims to agree to be law-abiding members of society, that would be reasonable. Which is it? And I think she does a poor job of answering this.

I'm not a monotheist, but I'm still embarrassed that anyone would come up with the stuff in this book.