“My Trip to Al-Qaeda” (8 p.m., HBO) offers one journalist’s meditation on fundamentalist Islam, and its history and appeal. Lawrence Wright has won a Pulitzer Prize for his book “The Looming Tower: Al-Qaeda and the Road to 9/11,” and he has recently put on a one-man Broadway show about his experiences and his moral qualms about researching the book and interviewing men he knew were murderers and terrorists.
Wright’s link to Islamic culture goes back to the late 1960s, when he taught at an American school in Cairo. Some of the 9/11 hijackers graduated from that school long after Wright’s time there. But he understands the culture of the educated, westernized and disaffected Muslims who chafed against Egypt’s corrupt society and who were radicalized by time spent in jail cells and torture chambers.
Wright does a rather remarkable job describing the existential absurdity of Saudi Arabia. He describes a society where a handful of sheiks literally own everything and where a religious order controls everything else. The only outlet, he observes, is shopping. He cites statistics about the widespread depression of young Saudis who feel trapped and turn to the suicidal nihilism of the extremists as the only way to bring meaning to their empty lives.
Wright’s brush with terrorism predates 2001. Three years before 9/11, Wright wrote the screenplay to “The Siege,” a speculative Hollywood drama about a terror attack on New York starring Bruce Willis and Denzel Washington. Even before its release, fundamentalist groups called the film a slur on Islam and bombed a Hard Rock Cafe in South Africa, citing the restaurant chain’s connection to Bruce Willis. Several tourists were killed.
“The Siege” did not predict 9/11, but Wright found much of it sadly prescient. He sees the invasion of Iraq and the use of torture and rendition of suspects as playing right into Bin Laden’s playbook. While we talked about “liberating” Iraq, most in the Muslim world saw it as just one more humiliation at the hands of Western “crusaders.”
• The Disney Channel turns to an old friend and property with the music-filled “Mickey Mouse Clubhouse Road Rally” (6 p.m., Disney).
Tonight’s other highlights
• Starting tonight, “Friday Night Lights” (5 p.m., Family) airs nightly on ABC Family.
• The “30 for 30” documentary “One Night in Vegas” (7 p.m., ESPN) recalls the night of a 1996 Mike Tyson bout that ended with the shooting death of rapper Tupac Shakur.
• The top 10 perform on “America’s Got Talent” (8 p.m., NBC).
• “Primetime” (9 p.m., ABC) looks at food and the brain.
Comments
LJWorld.com doesn’t necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.
jaywalker (anonymous) says…
"Wright wrote the screenplay to “The Siege,” a speculative Hollywood drama about a terror attack on New York starring Bruce Willis and Denzel Washington. Even before its release, fundamentalist groups called the film a slur on Islam and bombed a Hard Rock Cafe in South Africa, citing the restaurant chain’s connection to Bruce Willis. Several tourists were killed."
"That's a slur! Come, let's bomb some innocents to prove it! "
Laughed out loud at the irony and idiocy.
vertigo (Jesse Crittenden) replies…
Ditto.
RonHolzwarth (Ron Holzwarth) says…
For a Westerner like me, it was bone chilling to hear about how thrilling it was to watch a woman get stoned to death in Saudi Arabia. First, the woman was buried in sand up to her neck. The rest of the details are to gruesome to describe.
We will simply never understand it.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) replies…
Yea, it's a whole lot more "civilized" to have snipers kill women and children from building tops, or from helicopter gunships, or with 2000-lbs "smart" bombs, or predator drones, or ....
jaywalker (anonymous) replies…
First of all, please support your standard hyperbole concerning snipers taking out women and children. Man, you're one sick puppy.
Second, who made such a comparison or said either was ok or more "civilized"?
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) replies…
"please support your standard hyperbole concerning snipers taking out women and children"
If it really happens then it's not hyperbole. And it really does happen, and not just by "terrorists," but by so-called armies wearing the uniforms of the US and Israel, among many others.
"Man, you're one sick puppy. "
What does that mean? Do you want to lap up my puke? (Now that's sick.)
"Second, who made such a comparison"
I believe that would be I who made the comparison, which I believe is perfectly acceptable under the user guidelines (although clearly not under yours, but who cares?)
"or said either was ok or more "civilized"?"
Don't know. My opinion is that it's neither OK nor civilized in either case. Do you agree?
jaywalker (anonymous) replies…
So you can't support it. Check. (Shocker)
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) replies…
It must be nice to have memory that resets itself every two minutes or so, jaywalker. It must make denial ever so easy. But it must be difficult having to relearn how to tie your shoelaces every morning.
jaywalker (anonymous) replies…
Not as nice as believing that throwing out any old piece of bs makes you credible in any sense.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) replies…
We aren't writing master's theses, here jaywalker.
I have no intentions of footnoting every post I make just because you want to play ignorant if I don't.
Then again, you probably aren't playing, are you?
jaywalker (anonymous) replies…
It's fairly amazing you keep posting what you do and think you've actually said anything.
I haven't asked for footnotes, I'm simply STILL waiting for you to support the claim I initially disputed. But that's not gonna happen, is it buddy? Like I said, shocker! Actually surprised? Naaaw, 'cuz this is how it works with you every time:
1) You post something absolutely ludicrous, assinine, hyperbolic, incredibly exaggerated....
2) I call you on it
3) You never support it AND/OR obfuscate.
Come on, now, post some more about foot notes or how it's not hyperbole if YOU say it isn't. That's all so much more persuasive than actual support or a real argument.
jafs (anonymous) replies…
Do you think we haven't killed any civilians??
vertigo (Jesse Crittenden) replies…
That wasn't the statement put out. The statement put out was that we use snipers to kill women and children.
jafs (anonymous) replies…
Or from helicopters.
Or with "smart" bombs.
Or drones.
The statement, although a bit provocative, was clearly a statement that we shouldn't be proud of our activities in war.
And that they result in the deaths of many civilians - in fact many more civilians than combatants.
vertigo (Jesse Crittenden) replies…
"...whole lot more "civilized" to have snipers kill women and children from building tops..."
This is the EXACT quote from Bozo. He is putting forth this position and jay asked him to back it up. Get it, Jafs?
jafs (anonymous) replies…
I understand.
But it just seems like a big waste of time to focus on one line.
I'd much rather see people discuss the point raised, which was that we have an unfortunate tendency to ignore our own bad actions, while focusing on the bad actions of other nations.
And, I think Bozo could and should have worded his comment differently, if he wanted to generate a worthwhile discussion, rather than just being provocative.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) replies…
Jaywalker isn't really "thinking" here. He's merely doing his contrarian schtick in order to pump himself up.
jaywalker (anonymous) replies…
Quite right. Has nothing to do with challenging heinous accusations, but merely a vanity exercise wherein I reflexively take a contrary position without actually thinking that bozo's self-loathing agenda must be factual 'cuz, after all, he says so.
Ya got me.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) replies…
"self-loathing agenda"
Can you support that? Footnotes, please.
jaywalker (anonymous) replies…
You're asking for support? That's amusingly ironic. I'd say the bulk of your comment history suffices, it's readily available for you at any time. Have at it.
jafs (anonymous) replies…
Again.
Do you think we don't kill massive amounts of civilians in wars?
If we do, we shouldn't be proud of it.
jaywalker (anonymous) replies…
I apologize for not responding to you already, jafs, but I didn't because I believed Vertigo had cleared this up for you. This futile exercise with bozo is in regards to his ludicrous claim which Vertigo already pointed out. Has nothing to do with whether civilians become casualties of war, that's certainly an unfortunate, horrible side effect of conflict. And I don't know anyone who's proud of it. But we don't have snipers taking out women and children, period. And that's what this has been about.
jafs (anonymous) replies…
He also included many other ways in which civilians may be getting killed.
You focus on one part, which may be debatable, and ignore the rest.
And, when people focus on the horrible things that the "other side" does, while ignoring the horrible things that "our side" does, they do it in order to maintain some sort of moral high ground, which in many cases is not warranted.
I think that's Bozo's main point.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) replies…
No, no, no. My main point, as jaywalker so insightfully points out, is to loathe myself.
Now, pardon me, I need to go self-flagellate. I'm already behind for the day (but I've got some nifty new spiked chains I got off the interweb.)
jaywalker (anonymous) replies…
Sure he did, jafs, 'cept that's not what I took issue with. I wasn't ignoring the rest, I simply wanted some sort of citation for the claim that our forces are using snipers on women and children. As you can see, none are forthcoming.
As for your equivocation, I don't wanna get bogged down in a discussion on our "sins" vs. others. While bozo may have wished his 'point' to be as salient as you attribute it to be, he chose instead to throw out an inflammatory lie right from the start. It's also amusing that while cheaply smearing our military in comparison with some people that would stone a woman to death, he chose to include 'smart bombs' as an example of our "uncivilized" murder of civilians. The whole point of the smart bomb technology is to minimize collateral damage.
In any case, I wasn't debating the effects of collateral damage or who commits more uncivilized acts. My argument was with the sniper claim. That's it.
jafs (anonymous) replies…
Ok.
Way to miss the point, though.
jafs (anonymous) replies…
And, I take issue with your characterization of "equivocation" - I am neither attempting to deceive nor refusing to commit myself.
I believe that it is a very bad idea for us to ignore our own many flaws and mistakes, while pointing out those of the other side.
I believe it is a form of projection of the shadow (see Jung).
I believe that we should look honestly at our nation and its' actions, and stop pretending we're perfect.
In fact, I believe, with Jung, that it is our moral duty to do so.
And, that it would be more in our own best interests to do so, since we cannot correct mistakes we are unable to acknowledge.
Hardly equivocal.
jaywalker (anonymous) replies…
First of all, you're taking my responses to you entirely the wrong way. I meant nothing by "equivocation" except as a sum-up of that one paragraph concerning bad acts vs. bad acts.
Second, I'm NOT missing ANY point. You came along and broadened the scope of what this particular dialogue was about. Vertigo alerted you to the subject, now I've done it twice. You're the one missing the point here. I agree with what you're saying in regards to recognizing our own flaws, but THAT is NOT what I've been hammering bozo on. Sweet cheese and rice, I'm simply focusing on the sniper comment.....
the sniper comment
the sniper comment
the sniper comment....
Got it?
jafs (anonymous) replies…
Sure.
Except it's a tiny part of his post.
And misses the point entirely.
I realize that's what passes for discussion these days, especially in political matters, but it's not very useful.
jaywalker (anonymous) replies…
A tiny part of his post? It's the longest segment of one open-ended sentence, and it's a flat-out delusioinal fabrication! You answered "Sure", as in you "Got it", but YOU are still missing the point. Once he opted to start his 'point' with that offensive and twisted piece of bozo-ness, whatever else he has to offer has lost all credibility, at least to me. I don't know how many other ways I can spell this out for you, but it was never a political discussion I was looking for from him, I simply wanted him to support that rot or call him on it. That's it.
And I stand corrected on 'equivocation', poor choice of words on my part. I'm embarassed. My bad.
jafs (anonymous) replies…
Thanks for the other part.
That is what "equivocal" means though, just so you know.
jaywalker (anonymous) replies…
"And that they result in the deaths of many civilians - in fact many more civilians than combatants."
Whoops. Missed the above response to Vertigo, jafs. I certainly hope you're not serious with that last sentence fragment, but if you are I sure would love to see some citation that support that assertion.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) replies…
You know, there's this new-fangled thing called the internet, and another one called google. You should check them out sometime.
jaywalker (anonymous) replies…
No kiddin'? Seems like those might be good tools for you to use when called out for being a liar. I've noticed you don't always have a problem posting links, curious why you'd post back here multiple times and not use those tools to prove me wrong? Head scratcher, that one.
And I've already done a search for jafs' claim, pal. Bupkiss.
jafs (anonymous) replies…
Well, I'd have to do some research.
But I'm pretty sure that more civilians are killed in wars than combatants, especially with the casual attitude we have towards "collateral damage".
And I know that we have killed about 30 times more Iraqi civilians than the American folks who died on 9/11.
Given a pretty conservative estimate of 100,000 Iraqi civilians.
jaywalker (anonymous) replies…
You really need to stop when you're talking rationally and factually, jafs. First: your initial claim wasn't a general "killed in wars", it was "we". 'Course, at the end of that you do use "we", and then you inexplicably add in the 'casual attitude'. That's not just tippin' your hand on this, it's flat out dumb. Read above: smart bombs....and then do some research. 'We' have invested billions into R&D in an attempt to make conflict as antiseptic as possible; we're the WORLD leaders in TRYING to minimize collateral damage. There is no 'casual attitude' amonngst those in the midst.
"we've killed 30 times more Iraqi civilians than American folks who died on 9/11"
Ok. Now THAT's equivocation. Is one somehow supposed to correlate with another???? Regardless, your belief that you have a firm grasp on the facts is downright disturbing. There MAY have been that many civilians killed in Iraq, but that would be a TOTAL with the overwheliming majority attributed to insurgents or tribal martyrs.
Wow. That's all so bad in so many ways.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) replies…
Please cite your sources.
jafs (anonymous) replies…
I retract my original claim - I don't have the time or energy to research it enough to support it.
I stand by my assertion that we as a nation are too willing to accept civilian casualties as "collateral damage". If they're civilians of other countries.
And, that with all of our advanced technology, and the billions of dollars we spend on our military, that we should be doing better.
For example. if we had gone after Bin Laden with a small, covert elite force and killed him, without killing any civilians, that would have been a military action I could support (although I wonder if it wouldn't have been better to put him on trial first).
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) replies…
Israeli military policy--During War There Are No Civilians
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/...
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) replies…
US soldiers 'killed Afghan civilians for sport and collected fingers as trophies'
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/...
snap_pop_no_crackle (anonymous) says…
Who wants a BLT?
vertigo (Jesse Crittenden) replies…
Hellz yeah! Homegrown tomatoes or store bought?
Oh, and toast my bread please? Thanks!
This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.
jonas_opines (anonymous) says…
Homeland Security doesn't look for ticking anymore because Modern Terrorists don't tick. But when a Modern Terrorist vibrates, Homeland Security has to move in.
postoakroad (anonymous) replies…
I like it.
Red_Forman (anonymous) says…
I thought they had all gone digital.
Take_a_letter_Maria (anonymous) says…
You mean besides the little clock attached to the bomb strapped to their chest?
booyalab (anonymous) replies…
argh, you beat me to it.
booyalab (anonymous) replies…
looks like lots of people beat me to it. Gotta work on my originality
missunderestimate (anonymous) says…
Timex. It takes a licking and keeps on ticking.
overplayedhistory (anonymous) says…
What makes them tick is the same thing that makes any religious fanatic tick, like the Hutaree or any other Christian extremist on the ATF's list. The difference between ours and theirs is poverty.
That is why larger the middle class the more civilized society.
Admittedly, Muhammad was a warrior God and Jesus was more like a Buddhist, but add enough poverty and hopelessness to Christianity and look out.
We have been fat on subsidized Big mac's and borrowed money from China for a while now, so I doubt the resolve of a newly impoverished Christian American population to behead someone with a dull blade, But I don't doubt they would kill.
The variety of religious fanatics of this discussion come from a people, that never Ideologically left the century they were in when our ancestors stole the Zero, and built western civilization. They have been stuck in a feudal system that eventually was reinforced by our need for their oil. So when you add this Historical systemic lack of mobility with young testosterone, God, and Poverty then you get a super scary fanatic capable of horrific acts that you can not fathom or what we call a terrorist.
LJW staff,
I have gotten rid of everything from this comment that I can think of that might got it pulled earlier. IF you pull it again I will be visiting the LJW personally to discus just exactly what was wrong with it.
overplayedhistory (anonymous) says…
What makes them tick is the same thing that makes any religious fanatic tick, like the Hutaree or any other Christian extremist on the ATF's list. The difference between ours and theirs is poverty.
That is why larger the middle class the more civilized society.
Admittedly, Muhammad was a warrior God and Jesus was more like a Buddhist, but add enough poverty and hopelessness to Christianity and look out.
We have been fat on subsidized Big mac's and borrowed money from China for a while now, so I doubt the resolve of a newly impoverished Christian American population to behead someone with a dull blade, But I don't doubt they would kill.
The variety of religious fanatics of this discussion come from a people, that never Ideologically left the century they were in when our ancestors stole the Zero, and built western civilization. They have been stuck in a feudal system that eventually was reinforced by our need for their oil. So when you add this Historical systemic lack of mobility with young testosterone, God, and Poverty then you get a super scary fanatic capable of horrific acts that you can not fathom or what we call a terrorist.
LJW staff,
I have gotten rid of everything from this comment that I can think of that might got it pulled earlier. IF you pull it again I will be visiting the LJW personally to discus just exactly what was wrong with it.
blue73harley (anonymous) says…
And you thought Lyme disease was bad!?
Terrorist ticks are much worse than regular ticks.
Armored_One (anonymous) says…
At first glance, I thought the word 'tick' in the title was the word 'sick', and I just had to pause and absorb that, which naturally led me to the conclusion I had to have read it wrong.
A fanatic is a fanatic. The woman that shot Selena was no less mentally unhinged than the ones on the planes on 9-11, the guys that blew up Pan Am 103, or that truly psychotic [expletive deleted] that carved 'Slayer' into his arm and ended up being the cover art for that same band's album.