Task: Legacy of Ashes

Here’s another one where my procrastination is embarrassing. In this case, I cannot actually complete the task. At all. (One the plus side, for yesterday’s task, I have already heard back from Roberto!)

The procrastination did not go on quite as long on this one. I finished reading Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA, by Tim Weiner, in December of 2009. It is a lengthy book on its own, but I also felt compelled to read the notes, because they were so fascinating. There were all these little stories tucked in there that enriched the material, and yet which would have completely dragged down the main text if included there. (The book is also fairly dense, as well as long.)

There were two places in the notes where there were web links for more information. One was an audio archive from President Kennedy, and the other was some writings of General Petraeus. I intended to look both of these up. Now the links have changed. I suspect the material is still up, but I cannot find it now. This is my own fault.

The incident happened at a time of transition. I had been in a book club for a while, which had ended up being really good for me. It got me reading fiction again, where there were definitely some books that I would not have read on my own, but I was glad to have read. It gave me some monthly socialization, and conversation about books. That was all pretty good. Then people started getting married and moving, and it disbanded.

This happened around the time I got onto Facebook (late 2008), so one thing I started doing on Facebook is posting a note with a review after I finished a book. Remember Notes? Anyway, it wasn’t quite the same as a discussion, but I was putting my thoughts on my reading together, and it was something.

Somewhere around this time period I also got onto Goodreads, and then I started reviewing my books there. This made a lot more sense than doing the Notes. Reviewing books was exactly how you were supposed to use the site. I got on it for convenience in tracking books that I wanted to read eventually. (I’m afraid I still can’t escape the 3:1 ratio on books that I wish to read versus books that I’ve read, even adding the graphic novels, so easy tracking is very important.)

Legacy of Ashes was transitional. It was right around the time period where I was shifting, but also in the review I could mention things that conspiracy theorists would find interesting, going on the assumption that probably at least a few of my Facebook friends fit that category.

Ah, but I was waiting to cover those two last bits of content before posting that last note, and now I never shall. But hey, the regular review was posted ages ago, and for those who are interested, here goes:

Truthers, sorry, but there is no reason to believe that there was any US conspiracy to bring down the Twin Towers. There is no evidence of it, there is evidence against it, and frankly, there is no need for a conspiracy, because there was so much arrogance and incompetence and lack of cooperation among the different agencies that it was all enough to allow the plot to succeed. Look, once Charlie Sheen started saying it, that should have been your first clue that the story was not sound.

However, while it appears most likely that Oswald was a single shooter, it does appear that he was hired by the Cuban government in retaliation for CIA led attempts on the life of Fidel Castro. So that’s kind of interesting, right? Kennedy just keeps looking worse incidentally. I’m kind of a Johnson fan though, so I’m good.

(And please appreciate that I referred to the Kennedy assassination without making any Umbrella Academy references, but the opportunities were totally there.)

On the book itself, yes, it is a difficult read—you can’t just breeze through it at the beach—but there were two things that it did for me that I really liked. One is that it filled in a lot of blanks for things that I kind of remembered but did not understand at the time, like Grenada and Lebanon.

The other question that had persisted, even when I was older and understood current events better (Gulf War, Noriega, Iran-Contra) is why the US kept betting on the wrong horse. We would get people into power and then have to remove them, over and over again. A lot of that was simply the narrow-minded anti-Communism focus, because even as it kicks into high gear after World War II, we do not seem to understand that fascists and nationalists are not inherently better. That being said, of the previously mentioned incompetence and arrogance, it does seem like at any given point, there is always at least one of those in play.

Sometimes knowledge can be discouraging, but I can’t give up on it. So hey, if you like books, get on Goodreads, and if you are on Goodreads, friend me! The Goodreads Bookshelf on the right will take you right to me.