Author
|
Topic: RE: virus: General Casts War in Religious Terms (Read 702 times) |
|
Blunderov
Archon
Gender: 
Posts: 3160
Reputation: 8.63
Rate Blunderov
"We think in generalities, we live in details"
  
|
 |
RE: virus: General Casts War in Religious Terms
« on: 2003-10-16 15:44:10 » |
 |
[Blunderov]
Crusade? What crusade?
Best Regards
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-general16oct16.stor
y
By Richard T. Cooper, Times Staff Writer
WASHINGTON - The Pentagon has assigned the task of tracking down and
eliminating Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein and other high-profile
targets to an Army general who sees the war on terrorism as a clash
between Judeo-Christian values and Satan.
Lt. Gen. William G. "Jerry" Boykin, the new deputy undersecretary of
Defense for intelligence, is a much-decorated and twice-wounded veteran
of covert military operations. From the bloody 1993 clash with Muslim
warlords in Somalia chronicled in "Black Hawk Down" and the hunt for
Colombian drug czar Pablo Escobar to the ill-fated attempt to rescue
American hostages in Iran in 1980, Boykin was in the thick of things.
Yet the former commander and 13-year veteran of the Army's top-secret
Delta Force is also an outspoken evangelical Christian who appeared in
dress uniform and polished jump boots before a religious group in Oregon
in June to declare that radical Islamists hated the United States
"because we're a Christian nation, because our foundation and our roots
are Judeo-Christian ... and the enemy is a guy named Satan."
Discussing the battle against a Muslim warlord in Somalia, Boykin told
another audience, "I knew my God was bigger than his. I knew that my God
was a real God and his was an idol."
"We in the army of God, in the house of God, kingdom of God have been
raised for such a time as this," Boykin said last year.
On at least one occasion, in Sandy, Ore., in June, Boykin said of
President Bush: "He's in the White House because God put him there."
Boykin's penchant for casting the war on terrorism in religious terms
appears to be at odds with Bush and an administration that have labored
to insist that the war on terrorism is not a religious conflict.
Although the Army has seldom if ever taken official action against
officers for outspoken expressions of religious opinion, outside experts
see remarks such as Boykin's as sending exactly the wrong message to the
Arab and Islamic world.
In his public remarks, Boykin has also said that radical Muslims who
resort to terrorism are not representative of the Islamic faith.
He has compared Islamic extremists to "hooded Christians" who terrorized
blacks, Catholics, Jews and others from beneath the robes of the Ku Klux
Klan.
Boykin was not available for comment and did not respond to written
questions from the Los Angeles Times submitted to him Wednesday.
"The first lesson is to recognize that whatever we say here is heard
there, particularly anything perceived to be hostile to their basic
religion, and they don't forget it," said Stephen P. Cohen, a member of
the special panel named to study policy in the Arab and Muslim world for
the U.S. Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy.
"The phrase 'Judeo-Christian' is a big mistake. It's basically the
language of Bin Laden and his supporters," said Cohen, president of the
Institute for Middle East Peace and Development in New York.
"They are constantly trying to create the impression that the Jews and
Christians are getting together to beat up on Islam.... We have to be
very careful that this doesn't become a clash between religions, a clash
of civilizations."
Boykin's religious activities were first documented in detail by William
N. Arkin, a former military intelligence analyst who writes on defense
issues for The Times Opinion section.
Audio and videotapes of Boykin's appearances before religious groups
over the last two years were obtained exclusively by NBC News, which
reported on them Wednesday night on the "Nightly News with Tom Brokaw."
Arkin writes in an article on the op-ed page of today's Times that
Boykin's appointment "is a frightening blunder at a time that there is
widespread acknowledgment that America's position in the Islamic world
has never been worse."
Boykin's promotion to lieutenant general and his appointment as deputy
undersecretary of Defense for intelligence were confirmed by the Senate
by voice vote in June.
An aide to the Senate Armed Services Committee said the appointment was
not examined in detail.
Yet Boykin's explicitly Christian-evangelical language in public forums
may become an issue now that he holds a high-level policy position in
the Pentagon.
Officials at his level are often called upon to testify before Congress
and appear in public forums.
Boykin's new job makes his role especially sensitive: He is charged with
speeding up the flow of intelligence on terrorist leaders to combat
teams in the field so that they can attack top-ranking terrorist
leaders.
Since virtually all these leaders are Muslim, Boykin's words and actions
are likely to draw special scrutiny in the Arab and Islamic world.
Bush, a born-again Christian, often uses religious language in his
speeches, but he keeps references to God nonsectarian.
At one point, immediately after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks,
the president said he wanted to lead a "crusade" against terrorism.
But he quickly retracted the word when told that, to Muslim ears, it
recalled the medieval Christian crusaders' brutal invasions of Islamic
nations.
In that context, Boykin's reference to the God of Islam as "an idol" may
be perceived as particularly inflammatory.
The president has made a point of praising Islam as "a religion of
peace." He has invited Muslim clerics to the White House for Ramadan
dinners and has criticized evangelicals who called Islam a dangerous
faith.
The issue is still a sore spot in the Muslim world.
Pollster John Zogby says that public opinion surveys throughout the Arab
and Islamic world show strong negative reactions to any statement by a
U.S. official that suggests a conflict between religions or cultures.
"To frame things in terms of good and evil, with the United States as
good, is a nonstarter," Zogby said.
"It is exactly the wrong thing to do."
For the Army, the issue of officers expressing religious opinions
publicly has been a sensitive problem for many years, according to a
former head of the Army Judge Advocate General's office who is now
retired but continues to serve in government as a civilian.
"The Army has struggled with this issue over the years. It gets really,
really touchy because what you're talking about is freedom of
expression," he said, speaking on condition of anonymity.
"What usually happens is that somebody has a quiet chat with the
person," the retired general said.
---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
|
|
|
|
|
simul
Adept
Gender:
Posts: 614
Reputation: 7.53
Rate simul
I am a lama.
 
|
|
Re: virus: General Casts War in Religious Terms
« Reply #1 on: 2003-10-16 18:05:46 » |
|
http://documentroot.com/moore-questions.html
-----Original Message-----
From: "Blunderov" <squooker@mweb.co.za>
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 21:44:10
To:<virus@lucifer.com>
Subject: RE: virus: General Casts War in Religious Terms
[Blunderov]
Crusade? What crusade?
Best Regards
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-general16oct16.stor
y
By Richard T. Cooper, Times Staff Writer
WASHINGTON - The Pentagon has assigned the task of tracking down and
eliminating Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein and other high-profile
targets to an Army general who sees the war on terrorism as a clash
between Judeo-Christian values and Satan.
Lt. Gen. William G. "Jerry" Boykin, the new deputy undersecretary of
Defense for intelligence, is a much-decorated and twice-wounded veteran
of covert military operations. From the bloody 1993 clash with Muslim
warlords in Somalia chronicled in "Black Hawk Down" and the hunt for
Colombian drug czar Pablo Escobar to the ill-fated attempt to rescue
American hostages in Iran in 1980, Boykin was in the thick of things.
Yet the former commander and 13-year veteran of the Army's top-secret
Delta Force is also an outspoken evangelical Christian who appeared in
dress uniform and polished jump boots before a religious group in Oregon
in June to declare that radical Islamists hated the United States
"because we're a Christian nation, because our foundation and our roots
are Judeo-Christian ... and the enemy is a guy named Satan."
Discussing the battle against a Muslim warlord in Somalia, Boykin told
another audience, "I knew my God was bigger than his. I knew that my God
was a real God and his was an idol."
"We in the army of God, in the house of God, kingdom of God have been
raised for such a time as this," Boykin said last year.
On at least one occasion, in Sandy, Ore., in June, Boykin said of
President Bush: "He's in the White House because God put him there."
Boykin's penchant for casting the war on terrorism in religious terms
appears to be at odds with Bush and an administration that have labored
to insist that the war on terrorism is not a religious conflict.
Although the Army has seldom if ever taken official action against
officers for outspoken expressions of religious opinion, outside experts
see remarks such as Boykin's as sending exactly the wrong message to the
Arab and Islamic world.
In his public remarks, Boykin has also said that radical Muslims who
resort to terrorism are not representative of the Islamic faith.
He has compared Islamic extremists to "hooded Christians" who terrorized
blacks, Catholics, Jews and others from beneath the robes of the Ku Klux
Klan.
Boykin was not available for comment and did not respond to written
questions from the Los Angeles Times submitted to him Wednesday.
"The first lesson is to recognize that whatever we say here is heard
there, particularly anything perceived to be hostile to their basic
religion, and they don't forget it," said Stephen P. Cohen, a member of
the special panel named to study policy in the Arab and Muslim world for
the U.S. Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy.
"The phrase 'Judeo-Christian' is a big mistake. It's basically the
language of Bin Laden and his supporters," said Cohen, president of the
Institute for Middle East Peace and Development in New York.
"They are constantly trying to create the impression that the Jews and
Christians are getting together to beat up on Islam.... We have to be
very careful that this doesn't become a clash between religions, a clash
of civilizations."
Boykin's religious activities were first documented in detail by William
N. Arkin, a former military intelligence analyst who writes on defense
issues for The Times Opinion section.
Audio and videotapes of Boykin's appearances before religious groups
over the last two years were obtained exclusively by NBC News, which
reported on them Wednesday night on the "Nightly News with Tom Brokaw."
Arkin writes in an article on the op-ed page of today's Times that
Boykin's appointment "is a frightening blunder at a time that there is
widespread acknowledgment that America's position in the Islamic world
has never been worse."
Boykin's promotion to lieutenant general and his appointment as deputy
undersecretary of Defense for intelligence were confirmed by the Senate
by voice vote in June.
An aide to the Senate Armed Services Committee said the appointment was
not examined in detail.
Yet Boykin's explicitly Christian-evangelical language in public forums
may become an issue now that he holds a high-level policy position in
the Pentagon.
Officials at his level are often called upon to testify before Congress
and appear in public forums.
Boykin's new job makes his role especially sensitive: He is charged with
speeding up the flow of intelligence on terrorist leaders to combat
teams in the field so that they can attack top-ranking terrorist
leaders.
Since virtually all these leaders are Muslim, Boykin's words and actions
are likely to draw special scrutiny in the Arab and Islamic world.
Bush, a born-again Christian, often uses religious language in his
speeches, but he keeps references to God nonsectarian.
At one point, immediately after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks,
the president said he wanted to lead a "crusade" against terrorism.
But he quickly retracted the word when told that, to Muslim ears, it
recalled the medieval Christian crusaders' brutal invasions of Islamic
nations.
In that context, Boykin's reference to the God of Islam as "an idol" may
be perceived as particularly inflammatory.
The president has made a point of praising Islam as "a religion of
peace." He has invited Muslim clerics to the White House for Ramadan
dinners and has criticized evangelicals who called Islam a dangerous
faith.
The issue is still a sore spot in the Muslim world.
Pollster John Zogby says that public opinion surveys throughout the Arab
and Islamic world show strong negative reactions to any statement by a
U.S. official that suggests a conflict between religions or cultures.
"To frame things in terms of good and evil, with the United States as
good, is a nonstarter," Zogby said.
"It is exactly the wrong thing to do."
For the Army, the issue of officers expressing religious opinions
publicly has been a sensitive problem for many years, according to a
former head of the Army Judge Advocate General's office who is now
retired but continues to serve in government as a civilian.
"The Army has struggled with this issue over the years. It gets really,
really touchy because what you're talking about is freedom of
expression," he said, speaking on condition of anonymity.
"What usually happens is that somebody has a quiet chat with the
person," the retired general said.
---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
|
First, read Bruce Sterling's "Distraction", and then read http://electionmethods.org.
|
|
|
Blunderov
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 3160
Reputation: 8.63
Rate Blunderov
"We think in generalities, we live in details"
|
|
RE: virus: General Casts War in Religious Terms
« Reply #2 on: 2003-10-17 04:14:08 » |
|
Erik Aronesty
> Sent: 17 October 2003 0006
> http://documentroot.com/moore-questions.html
[Blunderov]
Thanks for an interesting link. (I hope Michael Moore's tax records are
squeaky clean.) A distinctly fishy smell seems to be emanating from
Denmark.
Best Regards
---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
|
|
|
|
|
JD
Adept
Gender:
Posts: 542
Reputation: 7.01
Rate JD
|
|
RE: virus: General Casts War in Religious Terms
« Reply #3 on: 2003-10-17 07:43:07 » |
|
This is an interesting article, but I think the "Crusade" reference
undermines some good points in it (and some facts):
The general is clearly a religious nut who in private meetings spoke of how
he saw various engagements.
[He said radical Islamists hated the United States] "because we're a
Christian nation, because our foundation and our roots are Judeo-Christian
... and the enemy is a guy named Satan."
It is likely that these ARE some of the reasons radical Islamists hate the
USA and perhaps he was referring to the Islamist label for America "The
Great Satan"?
Boykin told another audience, "I knew my God was bigger than his. I knew
that my God was a real God and his was an idol."
Whilst this is cringe worthy, it is simply a private conviction, expressed
to a private meeting. His other opinion, that ""[Bush is] in the White House
because God put him there" is also nothing more than a statement of belief
typical of true believers, but fairly harmless. Unless his private beliefs
interfere with his war fighting abilities, I think they are irrelevant.
Notice that the article says the general is "at odds with Bush and an
administration that have laboured to insist that the war on terrorism is not
a religious conflict" and that in his public remarks "Boykin has also said
that radical Muslims who resort to terrorism are not representative of the
Islamic faith...[comparing] Islamic extremists to "hooded Christians" who
terrorized blacks, Catholics, Jews and others from beneath the robes of the
Ku Klux Klan".
Is this praise for Bush and his tolerant, Muslim courting administration?
The article dredges up the unfortunate "crusade" reference by Bush shortly
after 9/11. It is odd that liberal commentators will go to great lengths to
point out Jihad means "struggle" as well as "Holy War" but are reluctant to
concede that crusade means "a remedial enterprise undertaken with zeal and
enthusiasm" (which we all know he meant).
Whilst Bush "quickly retracted the word when told that, to Muslim ears, it
recalled the medieval Christian crusaders' brutal invasions of Islamic
nations" nearly one thousand years ago, yesterday a Muslim head of state -
Mahathir Mohamad of Malaysia - demanded that Muslims unify against Jews who
control the world.
I think we are focusing on the wrong targets if it is hate mongering and
religious corruption of secular affairs we are fighting. That a US general
mention the fact that the West arises from a Judeo-Christian tradition is
utterly harmless compared to Mohamad's hate mongering.
There is an odd double standard which I notice in several political areas.
One group (the designated "oppressor group") to extraordinary lengths to
avoid insulting another group (the "victim group") whilst the aggrieved
group takes every opportunity to complain about putative motives and intent
after insults, disrespectful attitudes, insensitivity are extracted from
even the most innocent of statements. The fuss about Bush's use of the word
"crusade" was an example of this. The double standard worsens the
niggardliness of goodwill on the part of the self-appointed victim and
provokes the designated oppressor.
A simple and stern "Don't be silly, you know what he meant" was all that was
required instead of the obsequious appeasement that we witnessed instead.
Appeasement of bogus complaints and hypersensitivity lends legitimacy to
those claims and reinforces the overly sensitive behaviour. Eventually we
have a situation where all trust and good faith are gone so every word is
analysed for negative intent, every ambiguity mined for slight and injury,
every gaff exploited for gain and every interpretation coloured by the
search for offensiveness or disrespect.
Bush has "made a point of praising Islam as "a religion of peace."...has
invited Muslim clerics to the White House for Ramadan dinners and has
criticized evangelicals who called Islam a dangerous faith" yet he is
considered anti-Muslim and widely hated by Muslims. His words count for
naught. A prejudice exists that defeats claims and words. That prejudice is
fed by bigotry on both sides.
Here we have a senior general in trouble because he spoke of his private
religious beliefs. The allegation is that this will inflame anti-US
sentiments who will take exception to his beliefs. I suppose one might ask
the LA times why it is publishing this generals private comments if curbing
Muslim hatred was the mission? I see little point in fussing about the
Muslim street anyway. Statements and efforts by US officials will have
little effect on ordinary Muslims whilst Muslim leaders, heads of state,
teachers and media drive home a relentless anti-
Western/Jewish/Christian/American message.
It is, as they say in South Africa, farting against the wind.
Boykin should be ordered to keep his views to himself. There is no thought
crime (yet) in the USA. It would be a pity to see him persecuted for his
beliefs, a reversal of a 300 year old trend towards greater tolerance.
Simply make his silence on religious matters a condition of his new job and
request that in the interests of community relations Boykin's private
beliefs not be over reported. End of story.
Lastly, I had to laugh at this:
"Pollster John Zogby says that public opinion surveys throughout the Arab
and Islamic world show strong negative reactions to any statement by a U.S.
official that suggests a conflict between religions or cultures."
Mr Zogby (is that a ZOG - Zionist Occupation Government- reference? I feel
offended!), you might find that public opinion surveys throughout the Arab
and Islamic world show strong negative reactions to any statement by a U.S.
official FULL STOP
Regards
Jonathan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-virus@lucifer.com [mailto:owner-virus@lucifer.com] On Behalf Of
Blunderov
Sent: 16 October 2003 20:44
To: virus@lucifer.com
Subject: RE: virus: General Casts War in Religious Terms
[Blunderov]
Crusade? What crusade?
Best Regards
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-general16oct16.story
By Richard T. Cooper, Times Staff Writer
For the Army, the issue of officers expressing religious opinions publicly
has been a sensitive problem for many years, according to a former head of
the Army Judge Advocate General's office who is now retired but continues to
serve in government as a civilian.
"The Army has struggled with this issue over the years. It gets really,
really touchy because what you're talking about is freedom of expression,"
he said, speaking on condition of anonymity.
"What usually happens is that somebody has a quiet chat with the person,"
the retired general said.
---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
