http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/10/16/rumsfeld.boykin.ap/index.html
Defense Secretary Donald H . Rumsfeld and the chairman of the military Joint Chiefs of Staff publicly defended a new deputy undersecretary of defense of intelligence with a reported penchant for publicly casting the war on terrorism in religious terms.

Lt. Gen. William G. Boykin, whose promotion and appointment was confirmed by the Senate in June, has said publicly that he sees the war on terrorism as a clash between Judeo-Christian values and Satan, the Los Angeles Times reported Thursday.

Appearing in dress uniform before a religious group in Oregon in June, Boykin said Islamic extremists hate the United States "because we're a Christian nation, because our foundation and our roots are Judeo-Christians. ... And the enemy is a guy named Satan." :eek:

Oh.

My.

God.

I suppose a big neon sign that said "WE CAN'T WAIT TO ENCITE THE ENTIRE MUSLIM WORLD INTO A HOLY WAR" was just too politically incorrect, right?

:bang:

* Is very very very happy that he lives in northern Europe*

Here we lock madmen up.

What I can't comprehend is why there was no scandal about this.

Dude, try watching Pat Robertson's show every now and then. It is literally the play-by-play of Revelations with Jews/Christians vs. Muslims. The worst part is, this man and his ilk have far more political power than most non-crazies would assume.

I think as a general rule, whenever God is given a proper name...nothing but trouble ensues.

What I don't understand is why no one is shutting him up, rather than defending him. If he wants to beat his little boot-camp bible, fine. But how stupid do you have to be? As a career military man, he should know better than anyone that there are about a thousand Muslim clerics right now, some more fanatical than others, just ITCHING for an excuse to wage a holy war. "Jihad," as it's properly called, seems like more of a cliche than anything at this point. But it's a very realy thing.

People in America need to wake up to the fact that a good majority of the Arabic world is convinced that we are a greedy Christian tyrant of a nation, who's ultimate goal is to "destroy islam." As ridiculous as that sounds to us, how reasonable do you think that line of thinking is to an Iraqi? Or a Palestinian? They see president Bush as this gun-slinging, bible wielding powermonger. Is this such an unfounded impression? Not really, if you think about it. It seems like any time anyone in the Bush administration opens their mouth, they end up confirming these beliefs. And furthermore by defending those poorly-thought remarks by that idiot Boykin, rather than condemning them and shutting him up, I think it sends a very powerful message to the muslim world about where America's priorities lie.

I'd rather not invite another 9-11, thank you very much.

America needs to learn that we mankind did not come from a broken rib...

You know, plenty of Middle Eastern countries say this stuff about the U.S., although I find it funny that no one gets angry over that.

But anyways, Boykin is just being plain silly now.

[EDIT: Oh, jeez - I said "Rumsfeld", not "Boykin"? I'm such a clod. At least it has me a slight bit less worried that Rumsfeld didn't say that.]

[ October 20, 2003, 21:05: Message edited by: Oaz ]

People like this make me ashamed to be a Christian.

However, maybe a Holy War is exactly what this general [insert favorite synonym for madman] wants? It wouldn't surprise me one bit, with all of the Crusade Rhetoric that has been generated in this country since not just 9/11, but even further back! Remember Oklahoma City? The first words out of most people's mouths then was "jihad."

It is crazy (but somehow not very surprising) to me that we are saying the EXACT SAME THINGS as kings, bishops, popes, and others were saying in the eleventh century!

Ok.

Don't get me wrong, here. Christianity has gone through it's "Black Period" as well. With Pope's doing the whole "thou shalt not shed the blood of thy brother, so use a mace or club" thing.

But I'm more pragmatic than idealist.

Imam's are the "equivalent" of a priest. There is NO formal Imam school. It's a popularity contest, much like how a new Pope gets elected amongst the Cardinals. You have to know the Koran left and right, but that is IT.

Seminarys work a little different. Amazingly enough, since the 1500's, Catholic priests have been required to learn:

Chemisty
Physics
Botany
History (Asian, European, American)
English
Latin (only Christ knows why)

and amazingly enough, Judaism, Buddahism, and some others which I don't even remember the "ism" for. The general idea is when they roll into the confession booth, they can strike up a conversation with quite nearly anyone. And have at least enough information to know which questions to ask. Up until the Enlightenment, priests were highly educated individuals compared to 80% of the European population. Monks did an enormous amount of scientific work up until the Enlightenment. Some Limey even poked out gunpowder (China hadn't published their work yet).

Yet, it does not work this way for the Imams. And it has not worked that way for hundreds of years. Which has led to a breed that, like any good politician, is interested only in his power and maintaining that power. It's a wicked cycle, with the next generation being brainwashed and used.

Quite literally, Muslims are living in the 16th century. Which was a fairly brutal period of Christianity, if you just count heretics and witches. Which means, they've got at least another 400 years before Mecca II comes along and updates some stuff. Talking toward the parish and speaking in the local language.

I still think the Malay Prime Minister isn't some fundamentalist. He seems more like a realist to me. There's only so much change that people will accept, bolus. You might start with a loading dose, but it's a drip after that or you risk a civil war of unknown outcome.

Dictatorships and monarchies are just outdated. They might have been useful in the past, but times have changed.

Time to add 450 to the calendar.

"America needs to learn that we mankind did not come from a broken rib..."

It also needs to learn we didn't come from monkeys either, but that is neither here nor there. No offense, but when refering to the Bible please keep references in context and true to the best of your knowledge. According to the Bible, all mankind did not come from a broken rib, man was formed from dust by God, Eve from the rib of man, again by God. Note that this does not mean that man is better than women like some radicals have claimed, but again that is neither here nor there.

I don't think it's any secret to anyone regardless of religion, that the Middle East, religion, and war go hand in hand. The terrorists have attacked before this statement, showing that it does not take a statement like this to set them off. They've already been set off so to speak. Now does this fuel the fire? Probably, but the terrorists will continue to attack regardless of statements like this. Their minds are already made up, as shown by their actions.

You may be right that it does not set off more attacks but what it does do is to pull down atleast part of the American leadership to the same level as the crazy religious fundamentalistic fanatics in the Middle East. Isnt it enough that one part of the world is completely ruled by myths, superstition and religious fervor, do we want to have the control of the worlds biggest military machine and countless nukes into the hands of someone that at any minute can get the idea in his head that god wants him to exterminate all the unbelievers?

People like this make me ashamed to be a Christian.:rolleyes: people like this make me ashamed to be human.

originally posted by Oaz

You know, plenty of Middle Eastern countries say this stuff about the U.S., although I find it funny that no one gets angry over that.Exactly my thoughts. I hear and see Muslims preach all the time about the great white satan, and how decadent and rotten the western world is. I hear noone complain about that.

It's about time someone speaks out loud what a lot of people already think... that [offensive content removed].

[Poster has been sanctioned.] -Tal

[ October 17, 2003, 23:17: Message edited by: Taluntain ]

Well, the fact that the islamists yell against the great Satan is one thing.

A general who is preaching in public, declares his orders primarily come from god (maybe bypassing his superiors?) and believes to have spotted satan's shadow in Mogadishu (http://fairuse.1accesshost.com/news1/latimes12.html) is a different thing entirely. And his perception of monotheistic religions is a little flawed as well ... But anyway, when he's babbling stuff like that the US are a judeo-christian nation this isn't likely to help to improve the US image overseas - and that isn't in europe but in the middle east - and the trust in a rational political and military leadership in the US.

Sorry folks, but for me this dude is a zealous nutcase. Worse, he isn't alone in administrative functions in the US, there are others like him, including the president.

Dr. Strangelove galore. Thank god he doesn't commant the old SAC of the cold war ... like General Jack D. Ripper ...

Imam's are the "equivalent" of a priest. There is NO formal Imam school. It's a popularity contest, much like how a new Pope gets elected amongst the Cardinals. You have to know the Koran left and right, but that is IT. The similarities with the way many protestant branches put people in charge of the community are striking. But I think ideally, if possible, Imams have theological education training and training in other disciplines.

But I completly agree, big parts of islamic-territory are in a very sad state. And the islamic year now is 1400 and something. Wherease Europe started to recover from the dark-ages about 14th. century or so.

Seminarys work a little different. Amazingly enough, since the 1500's, Catholic priests have been required to learn:

Chemisty
Physics
Botany
History (Asian, European, American)
English
Latin (only Christ knows why)
And that's still part of the canon of the education in a lyceum. I wonder if this is a coincidence that the Arab discipline chemistry (Al-Chemy) is first in the list. The catholics in Spain and Italy observed the virtues of their Islamic neighbours and started to copy them. Obviously, a very wise move to getting on par with islamic education and introduce it to Europe. One should not forget, I think, that the Arabs conquered the hellenistic heartlands and absorbed the sciences they found there, developing it further and bringing it, coincidently, to Europe. Where people could get in contact with Aristotle and co., starting to translate it from Arab to Latin and greek.

Exactly my thoughts. I hear and see Muslims preach all the time about the great white satan, and how decadent and rotten the western world is. I hear noone complain about that.
Islam isn't a backwarded religion in my mind and I don't say that out of "political correctness". I just think it's not factually true. On the other hand, I see that people from rural areas stubbornly tend to clinch to there "old" customs and ways, however inadequate they are in modern-society. I think that integration problem, is where you're coming from.

As for people preaching in house of gods versus "satan" in different countries. Frightening mirror images.

[ October 18, 2003, 02:25: Message edited by: Yago ]

Boy, am I glad I never had to serve under that guy. He must be a foaming-at-the-mouth fanatic to belive something so stupid as that, and stark, raving insane to say so out loud. The Pentagon sure knows how to pick'em.

I'm going to... I can't believe...
@^#$%%$$%$#@%^(!!!($#$@ AAAAAAAGGGHH!! My government is ****ing stupid!

Hey europe, mind if I move in for a while?

Why can't my country shut up for a while. :cry:

It is crazy (but somehow not very surprising) to me that we are saying the EXACT SAME THINGS as kings, bishops, popes, and others were saying in the eleventh century! I find this very alarming though, does history repeats itself? If so then a fool is in charge of USA and i fear that this will cause larger problems than expected even by the pessimists.
Exactly my thoughts. I hear and see Muslims preach all the time about the great white satan, and how decadent and rotten the western world is. I hear noone complain about that.
Well sometimes i can't help thinking that we might as well look that way. Just look what is happening in many areas in Middle East and especially in Palaistine. If you were a Palaistinian wouldn't you have some similar thoughts?
As for the military man someone must do a great good to society and kill him or better yet humiliate him in a way he can never manage to put his image back in one piece. People like him are dangerous but he is more dangerous because he has authority too

History repeats itself over and over, but this isn't the point here. These dudes are resurrecting a menthality that has disappeared in central europe with the 30-year-war, the last religious war there, in the 17th century - that is the really alarming point.
People who were rightly considered raving loonies (and that is for both christian right and neocon warmongers) only a decade ago are at the wheel now.

Interesting enough Bush Sr. has subtly expressed his opinion on his sons foreign policy (http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2003/10/18/bush_srs_message_to_bush_jr/) by honouring Edward Kennedy, a very outspoken opponent of his sons policy, namely the war on Iraq, with the 2003 George Bush Award for Excellence in Public Service. Kennedy was praised as as a man who "consistently and courageously fought for his principles," and as an "inspiration to all Americans."
A very cool way to deal out a slap in the face.

[ October 20, 2003, 23:23: Message edited by: Ragusa ]

I can't recall the name of the guy who said it, but he's a nobel prize winner... he said that the only way world peace can be achieved, the only "isms" left should be atheism, humanism and Amnesty Internationalism.

Or was that just the Spoon guy's own version? Can't recall. But that should sum up my thoughts, I think.

*Pointing up*

What she said. And Amen to that.

I do not think atheism is the secret ingredient for world peace.

Populations of humans require leaders to make final decisions that effect them all individually.

If this leader is a man who believes he is the ultimate power in his life, a dictator of his own destiny, then he is apt to make all kinds of fear induced and ego-driven decisions.

If this leader believes there is a power greater than himself, then he is, at the end of his days, answerable to a higher authority. Even more importantly, his belief in a God that loves all men would make him equal in "value" to the man who is judged lowest by human standards.

Men of ego rule; men of God serve.

The hatred that religious people endorse has nothing to do with God, it is entirely under the domain of their individual egos.

Let's see, where are the world's dictatorial horrors today? North Korea, the Congo, Zimbabwe, Cuba, China...what do these all have in common, I wonder? Oh, wait...explicitly atheistic regimes opposed by their resident churches. What an eerie coincidence.

Ironic that atheism worships empiricism except as regards the actual application of political atheism.

If this leader is a man who believes he is the ultimate power in his life, a dictator of his own destiny, then he is apt to make all kinds of fear induced and ego-driven decisions.
Well, actually, it does not make no difference if a dictator believes in god or does not believe in god. The reasoning of the killing makes no difference. If you think you serve god by letting slave-workers errect a giantic cross or burn people on a stake or if you think you would bring humanity or your nation or your bank-account a step further by killing people. The dead are the same.

Religion or any kind of ideology, who's to say what is what ?

The up for atheism and religion would be, if there would be social control, that values like life, property and due process are upheld. And this, interestingly brings up the question, what is a dictatorship ?

Combine atheism and huimanism and you migyht actually have a functioning "ism"... To not to follow the doctrrines set in times past, and yet not screwing around wwith people.

Or words to that effect.

Arabwell you are forgeting one thing. You mix religion with church. These two are completely different entities. The first is the pure ideology and ideals of a cult, the latter is the organization that exploits the above mentioned ideology for their own interests sadly. Religions and ideologies generally are almost never responsible, people and the way they apply these ideologies on their world is what makes thing looks bad.
Too bad that people aren't perfect or at least all have a good/neutral alignment. Ideologies are just theories, people apply them in practice and people screw them up.

I do not support Boykin's comments. It stems from the very kind of religous fundamentalism that I find distasteful, whether Christian, Islamic or otherwise. He has since issued an apology for his remarks. At least we live in a society where overzealous idiots can be reigned in, it is not so for much of the Islamic world where the most extreme positions go unchecked. For example:

"The Europeans killed 6 million Jews out of 12 million. But today the Jews rule the world by proxy. They get others to fight and die for them"

Mahathir Mohamad, Prime Minister of Malaysia at a meeting of Islamic leaders

Not since Hitler's "Final Solution" have we seen this kind of blind hatred espoused to an eager audience. Makes Gen. Boykin seem like a harmless old fool.

He has since issued an apology for his remarks. At least we live in a society where overzealous idiots can be reigned in, Not hardly. Yes he apologized, but don't believe for one second he's sorry about what he said. That apology was for PR reasons, nothing more. Boykin has received no punishment, not so much as a slap on the wrist, and so far the administration who backs him has made no attempt to seperate their position from his. To me, that's the same as agreeing with him. In fact, he was defended. In this case, not disagreeing with him is condoning what he said and stands for, and sends a powerful message to the muslim world.

I understand that it was all a formality. Boykin's apology has effectively dismissed him as a credible source for US policy. The point I am drawing is that we do not have hordes of US military flocking to his standard and viewing him as a spiritual leader. This is not the case for an equal or greater statement of ignorance from an Islamic leader. Trust me, most Americans are not drawn in by his statements, let alone are willing to embark on a crusade to give up life and limb for religous zeal. Such is not the same in the Islamic world.

(I apologize in advance for painting the Islamic world with a very broad brush. I refer only to the radical segments who espouse Jihad and have lost all respect for fellow "People of the Book")