Bullock Texas State History Museum
Why Doesn't Wright Promote My Conspiracy Theories?
RECEIVED Tue., Aug. 15, 2006
Dear Editor,
After reading Taylor Holland’s interview with Lawrence Wright ["Eve of Destruction," Arts, August 1], author of the forthcoming book, The Looming Tower: Al-Qaeda and the Road to 9/11, I feel doubtful as to the author’s ability to give an accurate and unbiased history of the world’s foremost terrorist organization.
It’s not so much that I feel from his answers he’s any kind of overt ideologue for the right, but more a centrist liberal. And sometimes the positions taken by that breed are the most deceptive. At least with a right-winger you know where they’re coming from. For instance, when Wright says about bin Laden: "we would be better off with him gone. He’s an irreplaceable asset," that seems a bit naive to me. Of course the perpetrators of 9/11 should be brought to justice (and if I’m not mistaken, there still isn’t definitive proof Bin Laden was involved), but to think liquidating or capturing bin Laden would solve things is short-sighted. If someone assassinated the president of the United States does anyone believe that would slow our military down? It would do the opposite. The same is true for al Qaeda. And when Wright says there is no doubt in his mind that Bin Laden’s game is "a clash of civilizations," perhaps there’s some truth to that, but is U.S. foreign policy doing anything to mitigate that? The answer is a resounding no. If we weren’t bleeding the Middle East for oil by invading countries and FedEx-ing weapons to Israel to abolish Hezbollah so we might bomb Iran uninhibited, bin Laden’s call to arms would probably bring in quite a few less recruits.
Does Wright ever mention how the CIA helped create al Qaeda? I hope so. It just bugs me that so many journalists give credence to the idea of a war on terror.
After reading Taylor Holland’s interview with Lawrence Wright ["Eve of Destruction," Arts, August 1], author of the forthcoming book, The Looming Tower: Al-Qaeda and the Road to 9/11, I feel doubtful as to the author’s ability to give an accurate and unbiased history of the world’s foremost terrorist organization.
It’s not so much that I feel from his answers he’s any kind of overt ideologue for the right, but more a centrist liberal. And sometimes the positions taken by that breed are the most deceptive. At least with a right-winger you know where they’re coming from. For instance, when Wright says about bin Laden: "we would be better off with him gone. He’s an irreplaceable asset," that seems a bit naive to me. Of course the perpetrators of 9/11 should be brought to justice (and if I’m not mistaken, there still isn’t definitive proof Bin Laden was involved), but to think liquidating or capturing bin Laden would solve things is short-sighted. If someone assassinated the president of the United States does anyone believe that would slow our military down? It would do the opposite. The same is true for al Qaeda. And when Wright says there is no doubt in his mind that Bin Laden’s game is "a clash of civilizations," perhaps there’s some truth to that, but is U.S. foreign policy doing anything to mitigate that? The answer is a resounding no. If we weren’t bleeding the Middle East for oil by invading countries and FedEx-ing weapons to Israel to abolish Hezbollah so we might bomb Iran uninhibited, bin Laden’s call to arms would probably bring in quite a few less recruits.
Does Wright ever mention how the CIA helped create al Qaeda? I hope so. It just bugs me that so many journalists give credence to the idea of a war on terror.
Justin Finney
