BioHoward Zinn is an American historian, political scientist, social critic, activist and playwright. He is best known as author of the best-seller 'A People's History of the United States'. Zinn has been active in the Civil Rights and the anti-war movements in the United States.
Zinn was raised in a working-class family in Brooklyn, and flew bombing missions for the United States in World War II, an experience he now points to in shaping his opposition to war. In 1956, he became a professor at Spelman College in Atlanta, a school for black women, where he soon became involved in the Civil rights movement, which he participated in as an adviser to the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee SNCC and chronicled, in his book SNCC The New Abolitionists. Zinn collaborated with historian Staughton Lynd and mentored a young student named Alice Walker. When he was fired in 1963 for insubordination related to his protest work, he moved to Boston University, where he became a leading critic of the Vietnam War. Comments from Registered Members | (Register or log in to make your comment.) | jeff 2009-11-17
Howard Zinn has done nothing more than regurgitate what many in the main stream media have spewed since 911. It is clear that Mr. Zinn does not fully understand what happened and has no regaurd for the facts that surround the fall of the Twin Towers or the people murdered inside them. Sadly, Mr Zinn shares the same misled thought process that has diverted far too many Americans from ever looking for the truth.
There are far too many unanswered questions about 911. Having a "what's the use in asking?" attitude is a fearfull defeat that has poisoned the main stream media. We Must find these Answers. We Must Keep Asking the Questions. If we all turn into Zinns, this country will truly be lost. | jeff 2009-11-17
It is a diversion to try to find the truth? It is a diversion to try to find the guilty? Howard Zinn seems to be throwing up his hands and giving up. No one is going to give the answers so don't waste your time aksing the questions? Without finding out Who did it, how are we to ask the questions of Why? But, in the same thought process as Howard Zinn, we should not be asking Who wants to put their heads in the sand and avoid looking for the truth, but Why? Is it becasuse it's just easier to throw up your hands and say 'Why bother, it's a diversion. Is it fear of finding a truth that you don't really want to know? Finding the facts through asking questions is the only way to know what happened on 911. Looking for the truth has never been a diversion. | Michael Hey 2009-05-19
According to Howard Zinn, an investigation into 9/11 is not needed because it would divert energy from the "real" inquiry. In his own words:
"They have not investigated why 9/11 took place - this is something that should be asked. Why are there people that want to blow up our buildings?"
But this "real" inquiry presumes that the official myth is true - that 9/11 was perpetrated by foreign terrorists. The inquiry Zinn is proposing would likely be run by the very people who have emerged as the prime suspects in the crime.
According to Zinn, it is important to ask why somebody would want to blow up a building, but it is a "diversion" to try to figure out who blew up the building. It is necessary for us to understand why terrorism exists, but it is irrelevant for us to know whether the terrorists are muslim extremists or whether they are government insiders.
Does this analysis make any sense at all? | johnscriv 2009-05-14
sorry, that should be Principles of Conservation of Momentum, Conservation of Energy and basic Thermo-dynamics. Add to this an hour or two studying real world examples of building fires and building demolitions and I think anyone who considers themselves to be open minded and rational would conclude that the argument for controlled demolition is indeed compelling, and there is certainly no way a bunch of terrorist, holed up in Afghanistan, could pull *that* off, at least not without some inside help. | johnscriv 2009-05-14
I'm a great admirer of Howard Zinn, I've read his book War & Terrorism and I agree with his take on most issues. I agree we probably will never find out who was behind 9/11 and I agree we need to look at why there are terrorists in the world and what america represents to the world.
But on a fundamental level, I'm afraid Zinn has accepted as fact the official conspiracy theory that places the blame for 9/11 on foreign terrorists.
I suggest that there is a perfectly reasonable, scientifically sound and logically presuasive argument that can show, beyond any doubt, that the official conspiracy theory is fatally flawed and indisputably disprovable.
All it takes is a few hours of critical thought in front of solid, reliable, verifiable real-world evidence, with a modicum of understanding of some basic laws of physics, such as Newtons Laws of Motion, the Principals of Conservation of Momentum and basic Thermo-dynamics.
Add to this, an hour or two studying real world examples | neoconbuster 2009-05-05
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3776750618788792499&hl=en | JanT 2009-05-05
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_the_Iraq_War#September_2002 | punk-rawker 2009-05-03
Obviously intelligent people like Chomsky and Zinn are putting this message of 'move on' out there because they are too polite to say 'you tinfoil hats are nuts and you make all radicals look stupid' And because half of all radicals believe anything that is anti-government. Zinn and Chomsky are brilliant and read like madmen, with an open mind, already anti-government outlooks, and still come to the conclusion that the towers fell because they got hit by 767s. | neoconbuster 2009-05-02
Jan T: There will be no serious internal prosecution of any Local High official regarding War Crimes committed after 9-11 while the Myth (Hoax. Hollywood Production, Lie, Conspiracy Etc) of 9-11 is Still alive. The CIA is not dismantled and the Propaganda Machinery of the MSM is not revolutionized.
Folks like Zinn, Chomsky, Bill Maher’s etc. Have being fooled by Dick Cheney. They should ask the experts of Ae911truth dot org for knowledge.
More than 120 people have been killed trying to cover up the JFK assassination, The Zapruder Film was a Scandal in the late 70s. Do you have any idea, how many Films like the Zapruder regarding 9-11 exists? How many people have to die for covering up 9-11? Who cares how cruel the “Empire of Good” in its PEAK of wealth is, as long as his citizens are fooled by the “bad apples.” and minions?
| JanT 2009-05-02
neoconbuster : 1. 'The US Constitution says we CAN’T invade other countries unless “there is an imminent threat from them?"' Cursory examination alone shows that there was no imminent threat from Iraq (or Vietnam). It is interesting how there is talk of attempting to prosecute some of the previous US administration for torture, and yet no talk of prosecution for war crimes. 2. "Zinn and you pretend that Our Super Empire in its pick (sic) of wealth recognizes how cruel it is!" I can't speak for Zinn, I don't know him and there is no evidence that leads to your conclusion in what he says here, but it is strange that you presuppose knowledge of my opinion based on what little I have said. | Gaspacho 2009-05-02
I believe that Howard Zinn doesn't understand how crucial this event is because he's like 1000 years old; He's witnessed past U.S. led atrocities first hand, hence his statements. I believe that someone needs to explain to him that investigating 9/11 leads people(under the age of 1000) to research other events in U.S. history. It's the smoking gun that woke me up and sparked my interest in historical and current global events. It's the single most important catalyst for a massive awakening. | neoconbuster 2009-05-02
Jeant “Don't you think there would have been other justifications presented for war in the absence of 911?”
What Kind of incident can justify worldwide, eternal WARS and the lost of Local Civil Liberties?
The US Constitution says we CAN’T invade other countries unless “there is an imminent threat from them?
That’s why since 1898 (USSS Maine exploded in Cuba) we have been blowing up things and fabricating Incidents. Other Imperials powers like Germany have done the same thing.
The fact is that today the evidence (Including Scientific and forensic) is overwhelming convincing that Dick Cheney and Rumsfield were somehow behind 9-11.
Zinn and you pretend that Our Super Empire in its pick of wealth recognizes how cruel it is!
That’s a foolish thing!
Wouldn’t be easier to prove that Explosives were used in all three buildings and that no Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon?
| JanT 2009-05-02
neoconbuster: 1. Long before 911 - Vietnam, The Gulf of Tonkin; numerous South American countries; Haiti & the list goes on. There is plenty of evidence to support the case that these were atrocities committed as part of US foreign policy. Not to mention all the countries who have to bow to rich Western nations & their corporations through the WTO & trade agreements. Imagine if huge crowds of Vietnamese turned up in Washington demanding reparations for all the known & documented atrocities committed during that war & it's aftermath. 2. Don't you think there would have been other justifications presented for war in the absence of 911 - it's absence didn't prevent the commission of atrocity before it. | normajean 2009-05-02
This is very weak. Zinn clearly doesn't not believe 9/11 was an inside job which suggests to me he has not done proper research or given the matter real consideration. Why is it essential to expose 9/11 and bring the people responsible to justice? Because it sets a precedent so that governments in the future will not act with impunity to achieve their ends. It is the complacency of people like Zinn that brings us all closer to servitude. The RNN talks about smoke and mirrors of the cold war but gives little if any attention to the biggest crime in U.S. history. Interview Ray Griffin or countless other reliable and intelligent professors to address this issue and deliver the so called REAL NEWS. | Ben Dover 2009-05-01
Continuation of my previous comment (see below-guess i went over the word limit):
Our "policies" both foreign and domestic are symptomatic of a DEATH CULTURE that cares little for life, the natural world, or human rights.
The monsters of greed and corruption rule this world like a giant malignant tumor that won't stop growing until it devours the host (us).
Each of us is unwittingly complicit in murder, torture, and incalculable human suffering every time we pay our taxes. -I think we've finally proven that humans are not a viable species.
The real HOAX is the illusion of a future for our children and their children... | K.night 2009-05-01
I was very disappointed to hear Zinn comments. With him and Chomsky not really interested in any real investigation of 9/11, my only conclusion would be that they are afraid of any repercussions they or their families may suffer. I feel that real threat is what keeps all would be whistle blowers quiet. We can only hope that one brave insider will expose all. I have my doubts. | Ben Dover 2009-05-01
neoconbuster: "WHAT IF 9-11 WAS A HOAX?"
-The nightmare that was 9-11 (and its ongoing nightmarish repercussions) aside, what if U.S. DEMOCRACY is hoax? -"Our" foreign policy certainly seems to indicate as much. Do you really feel that this is a government "OF, BY, and FOR the people?" What if the U.S. Government is a hoax? Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? -What about the life/liberty/pursuit of happiness of everyone from the slaughtered indigenous people of this country to the slaughtered innocent Iraqis and everyone in between? Are they all victims of "Democracy?" Where were THEIR "inalienable rights?" What about the millions of poor and dispossessed children & adults starving to death right here in our own "great nation?" -Every war ever perpetrated or participated in by the US since the American Revolution has been a "hoax" designed to exploit the fears of the masses and make mountains of money for a small elite. Our "policies" both foreign and domest | brian 2009-05-01
I've read Howard's work and I am surprised that he is so superficial about this issue. Investigate our foreign policy? Terrorists are the REAL diversion. Did you notice that there was never any other terrorist act after 911, only alleged threats? On national television it was televised and admitted by Larry Silverstein that WTC #7 had to be "pulled"...it was prewired for demolition...isn't it a crime to populate a bldg in NYC that has been wired for demolition, and, considering the controversy, isn't a crime to totally destroy a crime scene and dispose of all the evidence? I do not know what Howard is rambling on about, but it seems like a diversion away from a standard criminal investigation of the worst crime against the American people since 12/7/1941. There is no statute of limitations on murder. | dart 2009-05-01
Labeling the search for 911 truth as a diversion is itself a diversion.HZ,NC,SH and others know full well that if they take that position then their media dependant careers are toast so they will always sidestep the issue.
Of course the US should examine its foreign polices but first it needs to examine and expose their corrupt policy makers.Without this step Mr Zinn`s destraction comment is a mere platitude.
Current Atlantic magazine describes Obama as having aided a coup for the financial oligarchy.Why not start looking there for these answers. | neoconbuster 2009-05-01
JanT: 9-11 is the "Justification" for More than three WARS and perhaps more to come. Our "Defense Buget" raised close to A Trillion a Year for fighting "The WAR ON TERROR" Alqaida and Osama Bin Laden. The US Congress aproved all this mess because "America was Attacked" and Obama is still searching for Osama with 20k troops.WHAT IF 9-11 WAS A HOAX? |
PAUL JAY, SENIOR EDITOR, TRNN: Welcome back to The Real News Network, coming to you from Boston. We're talking to Howard Zinn. Hi, Howard. HOWARD ZINN, HISTORIAN AND AUTHOR: Thank you.JAY: So the e-mail we get most often is: "Why aren't you guys doing the 9/11 story?" It can go anywhere from "9/11 was an inside job. Why aren't you doing that story?" I would say more often now the e-mails are saying, "Will you report on those people who support the idea of an independent inquiry around the events of 9/11, who caused it, and the whole issue of incompetence and negligence, or even criminal involvement?" What do you make of this whole issue of the need to investigate what really happened around 9/11?ZINN: There are some issues which are interesting but which are diversions from what we really have to do. This is one of them. I doubt that an independent commission—and I grant it, we don't know all the facts about 9/11, and we could probably learn a lot more. And maybe there was a conspiracy. Who knows? But I believe it's one of those issues that can never be fully answered, like the assassination of John F. Kennedy. It'll go on and on and on. People will write books and talk about it. It will be an enormous waste of good energy. So it's not that I doubt any of the doubters; it's not that I doubt that there are very troubling questions to be answered. I just don't think that it leads anywhere.JAY: Well, they would answer back that much of today's foreign policy, not just Bush but Obama as well, talks about, for example, the objective of the Afghan policy is to make sure 9/11 doesn't happen again. We've got to make sure it's not a base for terrorism. Like, a lot of the underlying rationale or mythology, however you want to describe it, still has its roots in 9/11 in terms of today's policy, and that if in fact it turned out—if you go, like, to this one end of the spectrum of what may have been, if it turns out that the leaders of the Republican administration, perhaps with some collaboration of some of the leading Democrats, which is possible, knew something was coming and decided not to do something about it—or you can go to other ends of the spectrum, which, you know, talk about bombs in the buildings and so on—the one fact we do know is that Condoleezza Rice did open up a document that said Osama plans to attack America, and seems not to have done anything about it, said at the 9/11 Commission that she was going to task all the FBI offices, and then later the 9/11 Commission found out she didn't really task all the FBI offices, and literally nothing was done in a summer where her own national security czar was saying, "Our hair was on fire." So on and so on and so on. If it turns out there actually was a decision that an attack ain't so bad, isn't that a rather important thing to know for American people?ZINN: You say "if it turns out."JAY: And one would never be able to know.ZINN: Nothing will never turn—it will never turn out. That was—it will never be clear. It's one of those situations where nobody will be able to prove anything, and it will lead us nowhere. That doesn't mean we shouldn't be concerned about 9/11. 9/11 is crucial. We should talk about 9/11, but not about who knew in advance what. We should talk about how 9/11 was used by the Bush administration however it started, whoever was behind it. The important thing about 9/11 is that 9/11 was used as an excuse by the Bush administration to go to war, and furthermore that they have not investigated why 9/11 took place. This is something that should be asked. What should be asked is: why are there people in the world who want to blow up our buildings, who want to scare the American people, who want to do terrorist—why are there such people? If you start to ask that question, then that would lead you into, well, is it possible that there are people in the world, all over the world, who are absolutely enraged by American foreign policy? There's a lot of evidence for that. That's a lot easier to prove, a lot easier to prove than who conspired to plant bombs and so on and so forth. That's what we should be concentrating on. We should be concentrating on in what way is American foreign policy responsible for the terrorism that exists in the minds and hearts of so many people in the world, and which in a small number of them results in violent acts.JAY: And a lot of that conversation has been had. There's been a lot of discussion about blowback. There's been a lot of—and maybe not enough in the mainstream media, but even in the mainstream media there's been some conversation. Even Bush, at some point before his term was over, talked a bit about how US foreign policy had been connected to these events, even though at the time they tried to close down that whole conversation completely. But if one looks at the connection between the Pakistani ISI, Saudi intelligence, some people suggest Mossad, we know there were messages coming, warning the United States that something was happening, from other intelligence agencies. If in fact there was a decision made—and you say, your point is, "Maybe it was. But how do you prove it?" But the fact that hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of Americans and people around the world still believe such things, doesn't that actually suggest an inquiry, as much as it could achieve, would be worthwhile?ZINN: Yeah, I think it would divert our energy from the real inquiry. The real inquiry is: in what way has American foreign policy inflamed and antagonized people all over the world to the point of creating terrorists? That's the question that should be investigated. And the other question about the conspiracy and who knew about it and who didn't do anything about it, that to me is a dead end. It's a diversion. And I think it leads us away from what we should be doing.JAY: Thanks very much for joining us. Thank you for joining us on The Real News Network.DISCLAIMER:Please note that TRNN transcripts are typed from a recording of the program; The Real News Network cannot guarantee their complete accuracy. |
Multipart or Related Episode
|
