Rating: 
Summary: A critical look at 9-11: U.S.A, the sole Super-Power.
Review: Chomsky, as usual, makes comments that the majority of American society hates to hear. If you like to think critically and hear many different arguements on a subject, have an open mind, and instead of blindly supporting a cause or in this case, A WAR, I strongly recommend you read this book. Some comments that Chomsky makes are supported by logical and historical facts; however, others are of course questionable and lack the context in which America acted upon. I only wish Chomsky had of waited until the "War on Terrorism" had played out instead of only waiting a number of months to react to the events of 911. The only reason why I don't recommend buying this book is because as you know, the war is an ongoing development and Chomsky's best work on the subject will not come out until deep into the war or after. I say this mainly because it would be interesting to hear what he has to say about the possibility of a war in Iraq. Chomsky is finally getting somewhere in his rants against America and anyone blind enough to not see Chomsky's warnings playing out in the world today, should really ask themselves a question. How would you feel if your country, already war-torn and impoverished, came under attack by a far superior power, killed innocent civilians and destroyed what little remained of the infrastructure because of one man(all concede supported by a political group) and some oil?(convenient how recently an oil line has now been discovered in Afghanistan). Notice how this can apply to both Iraq and Afghanistan. Read Chomsky with that question in mind and some of his "RADICAL" arguments don't seem to crazy anymore.
Rating: 
Summary: Deserves to be heard
Review: I don't agree with Chomsky's politics, but after reading this, I got angry. Angry at the media for all of the lies they said about Chomsky. They have completed misreported what he says. Is it too much to ask the media to tell the truth? Apparently so. But unlike the pundits, the Rush Limbaugh's, the Sean Hannity's, the Mort Kondrake's and other do-it-yourself knuckleheads on cable tv, Chomsky knows how to think. His views deserve to be considered, and if you disagree, then debate them with equally thought out ideas.
Rating: 
Summary: Is your head in the sand?
Review: At this point, anyone who still wonders about the reasons behind the WTC attacks either is hopelessly naive or wishing to live with their head in the sand. There is no justification or excuse for the horrible events of 9.11, and Chomsky offers none. However he does present some reasons behind the rage our nation causes around the world. It has nothing to do with "globalazation" or our standard of living- it has to do with supporting terrorist nations such as Israel, starving children in Iraq, and lying to Middle East nations in order to get our troops into Saudi Arabia...
Rating:
Summary: Good, thought-out analysis of 9-11
Review: I enjoyed these interviews of Noam Chomsky immensely. I found that they were sane, balanced, and well-researched. A lot of the people who gave this book poor reviews probably did not even read this book- Chomsky in no way condemns the attacks or makes them seem okay. Granted, he didn't go into how horrible the attacks were or stories of those who died, but that is not the purpose of the book. The purpose of the book was to go into the reasons for the attacks, our role, and how we can/could have prevented the attacks. He also compares our international terrorism to the attacks on 9-11. But by doing this he is not saying that bin Laden's attacks are acceptable; he is saying that bin Laden's and our terrorism are both unacceptable. Anyway, I find it hard to believe that one can ignore or argue out of Chomsky's main reasoning against the war- that more people dying and more violence and more starvation in the middle east will just mobilize more desperate people to bin Laden's cause. Just read the book yourself, and no matter what your political beliefs are, keep an open mind.
Rating:
Summary: Classic Chomsky, Pocket-Sized and On a Budget
Review: This is the perfect book both for the Noam Chomsky aficianado and the reader meeting Chomsky for the first time. For the former, some of the positions here will be familiar, but worth hearing again, and for the latter, "9-11" provides a perfectly engaging and accessible introduction to Chomsky's thought, as no one in the mainstream media speaks the way he does about politics, government and world affairs. The book compiles interviews given by Chomsky to various reporters following the events of 9-11. It's sad how few of the reporters are American and one wonders in the face of Bernard Goldberg's successful book, "Bias," why, if the media is so liberal, so few members of the American press interviewed Chomsky, (or Gore Vidal? or Ralph Nader?), following 9-11? I heard Chomsky speak about terrorism and other subjects on CSPAN's BookTV one weekend a few months ago, in a talk that touched on some of what is in this book in fuller form. If you managed to catch that forum, sponsored by FAIR, and liked it, then you will probably like this book also. The interviews here, some of which have been translated, are grouped by subject in a way that is helpful and not at all artificial. Chomsky gives detailed, well-formed answers to the questions asked, most of which, the editor's note informs us, were posed and answered via e-mail. There are few disappointments in this book, so I will dispense with these first to get them out of the way. In a couple of places, Chomsky alludes to comments he's made elsewhere that the editor might have been kind enough to footnote and direct us to. The first appears on page one, no less. Regarding the geopolitical fallout of the crumbling of the Berlin Wall, part of Chomsky's answer-and this is only a part-reads, " . . . I've tried to explain my reasons elsewhere and won't go into it now." Granted, there is a nice selected bibliography of Chomsky's works in the back from which likely these discussions can be found, but what are we expected to do-plow through all of these books to find them? This is what footnotes are for. Another problem results from the publication lag between press time and distribution (not to mention the fact that is has been very popular and has sold out in some places from time to time). Since some of these interviews took place only days after the attacks, there was not as much known about the players involved as there is now. These interviews pre-date, for example, the well-circulated videotape from what is supposed to be late October showing bin Laden discussing and laughing about the 9-11 attacks. As a result of this time lag, one comment in particular is quite jarring: "It's entirely possible that bin Laden's telling the truth when he says he didn't know about the operation." This comes from a September 21st interview. So, if readers maintain an historical perspective, these anomalies shouldn't bother anyone. In fact, Chomsky should be admired for being willing to write so candidly about all of this so soon, and let the book be published while facts were still accumulating. It's interesting to hear an intellectual think through something like this as it's happening. Now onto the book's strengths, which are far more substantial than these few faults. One of the greatest features of this book is that it is a small-scale historical retrospective of 20th century history in the areas of state-sponsored terrorism, US intervention in various conflicts, the CIA, the Gulf War and the Middle East generally. Like a good historian, Chomsky traces current events backward to their causes and fleshes out events in detail. Nicaragua's appeals to the World Court, the UN Security Council and the General Assembly in the 1980s are presented along with the US reactions to each. In greater depth, ten full pages are devoted to recounting and analyzing the story of the bombing of the Al-Shifa pharmaceutical plant in Sudan in August of 1998. A surprising revelation emerges at the end of the discussion, showing a direct link between the Sudan situation and 9-11; read it to find out. Chomsky is at his best when reminding readers throughout the book that "the literature on all this is voluminous." His book "9-11," then, gives just enough to set down the issues, before directing readers to resources where more can be had. In this way, besides covering a topic, "9-11" also serves as a Chomsky primer of sorts for the open-minded. The book also contains lots of tidbits such as on page 16 the text of the United States Code's official definition of terrorism; in appendix A, "the current list of Designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations (as of October 5, 2001)," as well as the legal criteria for designation of such groups, the effects of designation and in Appendix B, a recommended reading list containing Chomsky titles as well as those of others dealing with the terrorism topic. These alone are worth the price of the book; even though the information can be had elsewhere, it's handier here in this slim, attractive pocket-sized book. Obviously, Noam Chomsky isn't for everybody. But anyone who likes Chomsky already will most certainly enjoy "9-11." And, if you're not sure whether someone will like it or not, the book is inexpensive and unassuming enough to make it worth a try.
Rating:
Summary: ignorant "freedom" nuts need not apply
Review: No, this is not the best book to get people started on Noam Chomsky. It's short and overpriced (in my opinion), with a lot of repetition. However, it's refreshing to see someone NOT trying to capitialize on the raging racist nationalism of America by putting out another Anti-Osama Bin Laden diatribe. Chomsky instead questions what your nightly news will claim are 'facts,' and brings up valid points about the United States and its own heavy record of terrorism in Third-World countries. To those who brand him 'ignorant,' you couldn't be more wrong--the truly ignorant in society are those who watch (and believe) what they see on the news, buy into everything "America Inc." has to offer, and rely on their fists to solve problems. Then again, that's what our 'holier-than-thou' corporate government wants. Granted, many died in the 9-11 attacks, but how many more (civilians, not just terrorists, mind you) will die before this whole conflict is over? I'm betting it'll be an astronomical number that'll make most thumb-sucking patriots cheer. I'd recommend "9-11" more for Chomsky completists than the casual reader.
Rating:
Summary: Forgetting is democracy's enemy
Review: If you haven't read Chomsky before, this is a decent introduction to one of the most controversial public commentators of our time. You'll want to read more of his work when you're finished with this. The book is a collection of interviews with Mr. Chomsky conducted between September 11 and October 15. It will be a long time, if ever, before we are able to make sense out these attacks given the images the media floats before us. We instinctively look for answers that are both safe and comforting. However, too many people died on 9-11 and since for us to accept the easy answers. We must have the courage to look fearlessly at ourselves and the rest of the world. Despite, or because of the focus on 9-11, Chomsky delves into the past fifty years of world history, particularly regarding U.S foreign policy. As always, he allows the facts to speak for themselves. In this sense he is much like I.F. Stone. When the Kennedy administration was testing nuclear devices and claiming that a test ban was unenforceable because such tests were not detectable, Stone simply read the newspaper. The government argued that we would have no way of knowing whether the Soviet Union violated a test ban. Stone pointed out that in the same newspaper (I believe it was the New York Times) which carried the Kennedy administration's position on page one, the back pages carried short and unheralded reports from as far away as Australia that geologists reported their seismographs had clearly recorded the test. Chomsky works out of the same tradition. While other commentators attempt to put a spin of one sort or another on a story, Chomsky relentlessly places the facts before his readers and asks: what do these facts tell you? He also insists on applying the standards the U.S applies to other nations to the U.S. If another nation claimed that the deaths of tens of thousands of children are an acceptable byproduct of its foreign policy, we would, of course, deplore it. Madeline Albright defended U.S. policy toward Iraq in those words. When our friends in Indonesia, Angola and Central America use tactics we label terrorist when used by bin Laden, our presidents call them "freedom fighters". Chomsky does not blame the U.S. for the 9-11 attacks. Terrorists are responsible for their own acts. He does, however, demonstrate that the U.S. conducts itself in a manner that helps create a world in which terrorism is not only acceptable but flourishes. His insistence on focusing on the facts and applying standards universally maddens his critics. Nothing is left for them to do but call him names. This small book is a big boost for democracy.
Rating: 
Summary: Rush Job
Review: This book is a collection of interviews Chomsky has done related to 9-11 and in each of them it feels like he's in a hurry, tired of repeating himself, having said what he says in this book many many times before. I knew when I bought this that it probably won't be a good introduction to Chomsky, and I regret buying it. Chomsky frequently says things like, "...but this is common knowledge convered very well elsewhere..." and this book felt like an illustration of that, like a web page that just links to good bits elsewhere. It felt more than a little opportunistic. Buy something else by Chomsky!
Rating:
Summary: Chomksy is a pleasure for those that think.
Review: For those that have not been brainwashed by the constant america-bush-war is good barrage by the media with corporate greed pulling the strings, Chomksy serves us with a powerful reminder of why America is so unpopular with the rest of the world and even with our supposed allies in Europe. Chomsky reminds all of us about America's terrorist activity and if there is one crititism to be made of him, is that he is too naive into believing that Americans would actually put as much value into the deaths of third world, dark skinned people as equal to the deaths of New Yorkers. One can be ignored with the other must be avenged by awesome cruelty not even on the person that committed the act, not even on the organization that committed the act, not even the government that committed the act, but THE WHOLE COUNTRY THAT THE PERSON OR ORGANIZATION BELONGS even if that country was already in dire straits and that it would result in the deaths of thousands of innocent civilians. But that is America. America is a funny country as we so often attack the same people we gave weapons to when during the 80's. Why? To stop the Soviets, we didn't care about he actual fate of the Afghan people just as long as they didn't say they were Communist. Human rights? Can be ignored , what do Americans care about the conditions in third world countries unless we tell them to care of course if they become too left wing or go against American interests. Then we need to bomb them, illegally depose the government, commit terrorist acts on innocent people, or impose a inhuman and widely condemned embargo on that country to teach them a lesson, only then will the American people care, when we want them to. That is certainly American policy towards nations of the third world and the most important thing Chomsky uncovers, besides the obvious bias of the media in reporting terrorist events when the government wants us to know about them so they can have excuses for wars they always wanted, but the underlying bias Americans have in treating the deaths of Americans and the deaths of people in third world nations. And how about the Northern Alliance? The Drug Lords of the Middle East now wholeheartedly supported by so called Drug Warriors of America that spend billions of dollars on a so called Drug War, I guess Bush is not thinking about fighting the drug war internationally, I guess he wants to concentrate on the home front. Which is not surprising given his daughters habit to drink illegally and his own habit of drinking and past use of drugs when he was younger. Not surprisingly, Bush has now made it so that students applying for federal aid to go to college must answer if they were found guilty of using drugs and if they answer yes, they will receive no aid. The same thing Bush has done! Talk about major hypocrite! And this is a guy that sneaked into Yale with SAT scores and a GPA that was lower that other applicants that were rejected and a so-called veteran that loves the military yet mysteriously found a way to the Texas National Guard BUT not only that, took a ten month "leave" while serving!!! What a joke! Not that Gore was much better, but I truly feel sorry for a nation that would have voted for such a moron. Anyway, certainly read up on Chomsky's latest, as always highly recommended by one of our great thinkers of a time when so few of us actually seem to be thinking at all.
Rating:
Summary: Chomsky is like the boy who saw the Emperor had no clothes
Review: Noam Chomsky has been applying basic logic and a single moral standard to analyzing international relations and the official justifications for U.S. foreign policy since the Vietnam War. Rather than assume "my country right or wrong," Chomsky condemns the U.S. government when it does wrong, which unsurprisingly is all the time. Why unsurprising? As Lord Acton said, "power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." As the philosopher Karl Popper said, "[t]he history of power politics is nothing but the history of international crime and mass murder..." The U.S. emerged from WWII as the greatest Empire in history (which was no accident, but the result of cold realpolitik planning), and has used and abused that power ever since. This little book is a necessary antidote to the wave of blind patriotic propaganda following the 9/11 attack, but I doubt that it will persuade anyone not already in basic agreement with Chomsky. For those who want to read a more in-depth analysis by one of America's leading dissidents, I recommend "The Washington Connection and Third World Fascism" (1979) and "Deterring Democracy" (1991). On the Middle East, there is an updated edition of "The Fateful Triangle" about the U.S., Israel and Palestine (originally published in 1983). The key source on U.S. planning during WWII is "Imperial Brain Trust" by Shoup & Minter (1977), now out of print. An account by a mainstream historian that corroborates Chomsky on the main outline of the immediate post-WWII period is Leffler's "A Preponderance of Power." Chomsky continues the honorable tradition of the public intellectual in the spirit of Bertrand Russell.
|
