PLANETIZATION and the Human Union

MUJCA-NET's
ENDORSERS

GROWING TRENDS  

Ramadan Reflections

Truth is our Trench

Kevin Barrett Responds to WKOW Book-Bashers, Knuckle-Dragging Politicians

WKOW’s article “Barrett Textbook Compares Bush to Hitler, Bashes Israel” is as yellow as journalism gets. If you took a parched 1898 newspaper clipping of William Randolph Hearst’s story about the “Spanish attack” on the USS Maine, inked it over five times with a fluorescent yellow hi-lighter, and then urinated on it, the result would be neither half as yellow, nor a tenth as putrid, as this fetid little pool of journalistic diarrhea.

Lest I seem ungrateful, let me hasten to add that I appreciate the publicity WKOW is giving the book. Not since Steve Nass last focused national attention on me—when was that, last week?—by yowling about how the BBC was coming to Madison to film my talk with Jim Fetzer, thereby filling what would otherwise have been an empty auditorium, has a rightwing nut offered me such terrific media play. Memo to Barrett Properties payroll department: Put WKOW down for a couple of juicy kickbacks, and give them free copies of the book for all their friends. 

But seriously folks: Let’s look at the assertions in this ridiculous article. Opening sentence: 

A textbook required of students in UW-Madison instructor Kevin Barrett's introductory class on Islam features Barrett's 9/11 conspiracy theory, comparisons of President Bush to Adolf Hitler, and harsh criticism of Israel. 

First, this is a book featuring assigned readings, but it is not a textbook, which my dictionary defines as “A book that treats a subject comprehensively and is used by students as a basis for study.” My course features two books that could be described as textbooks on Islam—they treat the subject comprehensively—but 9/11 and the American Empire v.2 is not one of them. It is a collection of essays whose theme is interfaith dialogue about the facts and meaning of 9/11, and my students will be assigned three of those essays, which balance viewpoints from other course readings. My own essay is not assigned reading. 

Since the government’s account of 9/11, and any other account, must be a “conspiracy theory,” given the legal definition of conspiracy, it is true that this book features mine as well as those of the fourteen other contributors. Any conceivable essay about 9/11 will feature a “conspiracy theory” of one kind or another, whether the government’s or someone else’s. (Interestingly, the government’s own conspiracy theory is unclear, now that the FBI has unequivocally stated that Bin Laden is “not wanted” for 9/11 because there is “no hard evidence” linking him to the attacks.) 

The WKOW article implies that my essay is representative of the book as a whole. It is not. Each of the fifteen contributors has a unique perspective. I fervently disagree with some of the ideas and assertions of my fellow contributors, and am offended by others. But despite those disagreements, I think that each contributor has offered something significant and valuable that needs to be heard even by people—especially by people--who have problems with it. In particular most Muslims will have issues with some of the content of the essays by Jews, and vice-versa. That is what interfaith dialogue requires. If you want “dialogue” with someone who agrees with you, talk to the mirror. 

The assertion that I compare Bush to Hitler is untrue; such a comparison would be an insult to Hitler, who was at least twenty or thirty IQ points up on Bush, and possessed infinitely more charisma. If the WKOW writers knew how to read, they would understand that I was comparing the Reichstag fire, which destroyed German democracy, to 9/11, which has badly damaged American democracy. In both cases, covert operators destroyed an architectural monument, blamed the act on designated enemies, whipped the population into a frenzy of fear and hatred, torched their countries’ Constitutions and installed dictatorships. 9/11 was well and truly the American Reichstag fire, designed to launch Nazi-style wars of aggression and install fascism at home. Indeed, WKOW’s journalistic style, which reads like warmed-over Goebbels, is typical of our post-9/11 goose-stepping press, while the statements of Rep. Suder sound like something Himmler or Goering would say about a critic of the Third Reich. I offer them as Exhibit A. 

Think about it: Before the 9/11 Reichstag fire, would anybody have dreamed of objecting to a university teacher assigning a collection of interfaith-dialogue essays by several of the leading religious intellectuals of our time? Give me a break! The bleeping Marquis de Sade is assigned in U.W. literature classes—and his stuff is even apparently being used as an instruction manual by US military interrogators dealing with detainees, and Republican congressmen dealing with teenage pages. If Neanderthal politicians like Steve Nass, Mark Green and Scott Suder know how to read, a dubious proposition at best, I challenge them to sit down and read Sade’s The 120 Days of Sodom alongside my 9/11 and the American Empire v.2 and decide which book is too offensive to be assigned in a university classroom. (My point, lest any slope-brow Republicans and other congenitally dimwitted readers who have gotten this far misunderstand me, is that most university assigned readings contain material offensive to somebody, and some is offensive to just about everybody—so if you don’t like it, shut down the  university...which seems to be the real goal of these purple-ass baboons disguised as politicians, who couldn’t think their way out of a piss-soaked paper bag, and resent anyone who can.) 

Most of the WKOW article consists of quotes pulled out of context for perceived shock value. Again, I must express my appreciation to WKOW for going to such absurd lengths to focus public attention on this critically important book. But why are all of the quotes from my essay, when it is not even assigned to my students? Why not address the whole collection of essays—or at least the three assigned ones?  And which is more newsworthy—that a Muslim thinks Israel is an apartheid state (yawn), or that America’s leading intellectual theologian (John Cobb), America’s leading feminist theologian (Rosemary Reuther), America’s leading progressive Jewish activist and intellectual (Rabbi Michael Lerner) and a host of other luminaries all lean towards thinking that 9/11 was an inside job? 

As for the Israel-Palestine issue: Everyone knows most Jews have a very different interpretation of the Israel-Palestine dispute from most Muslims. Most Jews celebrate the creation of Israel and tolerate the dispossession of the Palestinians, while most Muslims...well, think about how Catholics would feel if Muslim armies invaded and occupied Rome and the Vatican, massacred whole villages to terrorize most of the Christian population into fleeing Italy, and then permanently locked them out in order to create a demographically and constitutionally “Muslim state.” Let’s face reality, folks: Any mainstream Jew who speaks his or her mind on Israel-Palestine will offend most Muslim listeners, and vice versa. That’s old news. What is news about 9/11 and the American Empire v.2— what makes this book so astounding— that so many of America’s leading religious intellectuals from all three monotheistic faith traditions think 9/11 was an American Reichstag fire, and are willing to join together in thoughtful dialogue about it with those of other faith traditions. By concealing this, the core of this amazing book, WKOW has peddled a journalistic big lie. But by calling attention to the book, even through hysterical yellow journalism, WKOW has unknowingly performed an invaluable public service. 

Excellent 911blogger articles on the 9/11 and the American Empire v.2 controversy: 

http://911blogger.com/node/3601 

http://911blogger.com/node/3614 

U.W. Badger Herald: Embattled lecturer back in hot water

http://badgerherald.com/news/2006/10/11/embattled_lecturer_b.php 

A.P. story: UW instructor compares Bush to Hitler

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061011/ap_on_re_us/instructor_sept11 

9/11 Blogger stories 

Submitted by Reprehensor on Tue, 10/10/2006 - 5:26pm. 

With spin worthy of FOX News, Madison's WKOW has cherry picked some quotes from "9/11 and American Empire Vol. II" to make it seem like the book is some sort of anti-Israel screed. The book is far from that, and features a Jewish co-editor, Sandra Lubarsky, a writer who applies Process Thought to Jewish Theology in some of her writing. (Not unlike David Ray Griffin and John Cobb who apply Process Thought to Christianity.) 

Also featured in Vol. II are Jewish writers Professor Marc H. Ellis, Dr. Tamar Frankiel, Professor Roger S. Gottlieb and rabbi Michael Lerner. All of whom make very thoughtful contributions to the book. 

Barrett's contribution is neither anti-semitic or hateful. Controversial? Obviously. However, by posting pieces like this (with no byline, BTW) WKOW only draws more attention to Barrett's work, and by lopsidedly presenting specific snippets that will provoke mini-scandals here and there, WKOW hovers on the edge of flat out Yellow journalism that offers no real balance. 

(more after the jump..) 

For instance, WKOW could have posted snippets like this bit by Professor Ellis to balance things out some; 

    "At the same time an unexpected, and as yet unacknowledged, force has become part of the Jewish future. Within the Holocaust and Israel, the Palestinian people loom large, their presence as part of Jewish history assured. Seen for the most part as foreign and threatening, culturally and politically, by mainstream Jewish thought, that very definition fails to grasp the more subversive role that the Palestinians play. For Jews, Palestinians are the “other” that is within, challenging the very notions of Jewish identity found within the structures and institutions that interpret the Holocaust and Israel." 

Is that Israel bashing too? How about this piece by Dr. Frankiel; 

    "Any reader familiar with religious literature may at this point wonder: “There is nothing new here, and hasn’t 9-11 changed everything?” My answer, in two words, is simple: yes and no. On the one hand the existence of a world-wide terror network capable of such mad violence, and the U.S. government’s mobilization, deceptions, and threats to our civic liberties, constitute a new political terrain which require deep awareness of historically unprecedented threats, powers, and possibilities. 

    At the same time, however, this I don’t think we can really remember a time without moral struggle, resistance to evil, and the task of remaining faithful to a nearly impossible moral and spiritual vision. It is in that task that we find the basis of a meaningful, and even at times joyful life. And nothing that the terrorists of whatever religion or nation can do will ever take that away." 

Is that US bashing? How about the contribution from co-editor Lubarsky; 

    "It is possible that we may learn, at some point, that there was Israeli involvement in 9/11 though it is much more likely that the principal actors were U.S. citizens motivated either by an arrogant notion of what is “best” for the U.S. or for themselves. Still, that possibility raises in me the terrible desire that it never be true, for I fear the consequences it might have on American attitudes toward Judaism and Israel. The fragile tolerance that holds between secularists and those who maintain religious commitments, the bewilderment regarding Judaism and Jews that even now characterizes relations of many non-Jews to Jews, and the complicated resentments harbored by some toward Jews and their Holocaust memories--resentments interlaced with guilt--make me fearful were Jewish or Israeli involvement in 9/11 to move from possibility to fact. As a Jew, I understand the terrible fears and desires that now inform the desire of many Muslims to distance their religion from terrorism and to wish that others were culpable." 

Heresy! Professor Gotlieb (this is way out of context, but hey, at least I'm letting you know); 

    "There is a strain of self-righteous violence which runs through Judaism from the earliest texts to the present day, a celebration of our physical and cultural triumph over those who threaten us or who simply stand in our way. From Moses’ instructions at the end of Deuteronomy to kill the Canaanites and destroy their holy places to the grisly depictions of Israelite triumph in Joshua to the West Bank settlers who (with tacit or overt support from “religious” authorities) burn down olive groves and terrorize Palestinians, this strain darkens the moral radiance of my tradition." 

Rabbi Lerner (again, somewhat out of context); 

    "I would not be surprised to learn that some branch of our government conspired to either actively promote or passively allow the attack on 9/11. For those who watched the reactionary political uses made of this tragedy, it's easy to conjure up a variety of possible conspiratorial motives that would have led the president, the vice president, or some branch of the armed forces or CIA or FBI or other "security" forces to have passively or actively participated in a plot to recredit militarism and war. 

I must note, I'm quoting from the same proof (presumably) that WKOW is quoting from, and it may be edited or revised slightly before you see the printed copy. The point is, you can selectively quote from the book to make the case that the Jewish authors are just as critical of the United States and Israel as Barrett. In a couple cases even more so. Yet WKOW chose to single out Barrett for Piñata practice... and that is weak "journalism". 

--------------------------------------------------------------

The WKOW story; 

Barrett Textbook Compares Bush to Hitler, Bashes Israel 

Mon 10/09/2006 - 

A textbook required of students in UW-Madison instructor Kevin Barrett's introductory class on Islam features Barrett's 9/11 conspiracy theory, comparisons of President Bush to Adolf Hitler, and harsh criticism of Israel. 

A proof of the book, "9/11 and American Empire: Muslims, Jews, and Christians Speak Out," was obtained by 27 News. 

The 325 page textbook draws on essays from fifteen authors, including Barrett. Barrett's contribution is entitled, "Interpreting the Unspeakable: The Myth of 9/11." 

Barrett's writing makes a case for the mainstream account of what happened on 9/11 to be consistent with other myths throughout history. 

On the events of 9/11: 

* "The major television networks, largely owned by defense contractors that would be lapping up 9/11's trillion dollar windfall, made absolutely sure we couldn't forget it, by running the same footage over...and over...and over."

* "The obviously false 'let's roll' heroic mini-myth of Flight 93." 

On the Bush administration's alleged orchestration of the destruction: 

* "Like Bush and the neocons, Hitler and the Nazis inaugurated their new era by destroying an architectural monument and blaming its destruction on their designated enemies." 

* "It was intended to set the American empire in stone for at least a hundred years, perhaps even to found a new, imperial 1000-year Reich like the ones the Nazis dreamed of." 

On response to the Bush administration's alleged complicity: 

* "We have erected a wall of repression around 9/11 because deep down inside, we experienced a powerful wave of forbidden pleasure at the destructive spectacle." 

On Israel: 

* "The architects of the 9/11 myth were trying to preserve the very empire they so efficiently destroyed. The US empire, and especially its Iraeli outpost, were doomed in the medium-term anyway, with or without 9/11." 

* "The European Union was already bigger, both in population and GNP, than the United States, and Israel was losing its demographic race with the Palestinians it had always needed to expel as a precondition for an aparheid 'Jewish state.' " 

"I'm going to reserve judgement on whether it's anti-Semitic," Madison Jewish Community Council Executive Director Steve Morrison told 27 News. "I find it clearly to be anti-Israel." 

Morrison said while some other academics have also similarly characterized Israel's intentions, non-Jews can vote, hold office, and have unrestricted job mobility in Israel, unlike non-white residents of the former apartheid system in South Africa. 

In a gubernatorial debate Oct. 6, both Governor Jim Doyle and Republican challenger Congressman Mark Green stated UW-Madison officials should have fired Barrett for his lack of scholarship. Morrison defended Barrett's position as an instructor, but said his textbook contributions on Israel were red flags. 

"When loaded phrases are used, when buzz words of those engaged in hate mongering are used, that's something I'd like to look at much more seriously." 

"9/11 and American Empire" includes contributing essays from several Jewish authors. 

While the book dismisses mainstream accounts of Muslim hijackers costing lives and causing damage by piloting airplanes into buildings, Barrett has said other, required class reading will represent mainstream views on 9/11's destruction. 

The course syllabus indicates the book will be discussed by students next month. 

Barrett's class is offered through the Department of Languages and Cultures of Asia. UW-Madison spokesperson Brian Matmiller told 27 News Department Chair Ellen Rafferty declined comment on "9/11 and American Empire" because she was unfamiliar with the book and was not an expert on 9/11 and its implications. 

In response to criticism from Doyle, Green and several Republican lawmakers, UW-Madison Provost Patrick Farrell reviewed Barrett's syllabus and teaching plans before allowing Barrett to teach the course. 

A spokesperson for the textbook's Massachusetts based publisher, Interlink, told 27 News additional editing could take place before copies become publicly available.