The question posed by Henwood is this -- how do we outline the actual history of the U.S. relationship with the Middle East without sounding as if we are making excuses for the atrocities of September 11th?
I would like to suggest that the motivation of "incomprehensible hatred" being continually ascribed to the hijackers is not an unreasonable one. There has been much scoffing here at the portrayal of the U.S. as this innocent child who was suddenly attacked by the Afghan bully. Many of the participants on this list also scoff at the notion of evil as something beyond ideology. Unless I'm mistaken, I understand the argument as being that we have to understand the hijackers as being products of a culture which has suffered the corrupting influence of the U.S. government.
This argument has its limitations. Isn't it as simplistic as saying that Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris were merely products of the high school social structure? Millions of students felt the same kind of humiliation Klebold and Harris experienced, yet none went to such extemes. In the same manner, a wide section of the Middle Eastern community regards the US as a dangerous influence, but these people are not driven to such mad acts. If they do regard a U.S.-led military coalition with unease, it's because history has taught them that such coalitions can be harmful to the innocent. However, there is a danger that their suspicion and the hijackers' madness will be confused by the US as being the same thing. If we explain the WTC attack as just a by-product of U.S. foreign policy, we add to the same confusion.
We should focus on the motivation of the sane, not the insane. We should emphasize the feelings of the everyday Muslim, not the small group of psychotics who make up the Taliban. There has been a lot of talk about "blowback." Cause-and-effect should not be ignored, but irrationality fights against such mechanical explanations. I believe we should accept the WTC attack as an act of insanity and leave it at that. We should not argue that if the US government had been more critical of Israel, then the Trade Center would still be standing. We should argue that such acts of madness become the dominant driving force behind history as long as we do not admit to our own errors.
-- David.
P.S. I suppose that I am representing the "right wing" now, so forgive my usage of the word "we."