• Register
  • Help
Results 1 to 10 of 10

Topic: This should, in theory, bother you, or not?

Share/Bookmark
  1. #1

    This should, in theory, bother you, or not?

    sponsored links


    ***Advertisments***
    The Pentagon Unleashes a Holy Warrior
    By William M. Arkin
    The Los Angeles Times

    Thursday 16 October 2003

    Click Here for Video Report

    William M. Arkin is a military affairs analyst who writes regularly for The Times.

    A Christian extremist in a high Defense post can only set back the U.S. approach to the Muslim world.

    In June of 2002, Jerry Boykin stepped to the pulpit at the First Baptist Church of Broken Arrow, Okla., and described a set of photographs he had taken of Mogadishu, Somalia, from an Army helicopter in 1993.

    The photographs were taken shortly after the disastrous \"Blackhawk Down\" mission had resulted in the death of 18 Americans. When Boykin came home and had them developed, he said, he noticed a strange dark mark over the city. He had an imagery interpreter trained by the military look at the mark. \"This is not a blemish on your photograph,\" the interpreter told him, \"This is real.\"

    \"Ladies and gentleman, this is your enemy,\" Boykin said to the congregation as he flashed his pictures on a screen. \"It is the principalities of darkness It is a demonic presence in that city that God revealed to me as the enemy.\"

    That\'s an unusual message for a high-ranking U.S. military official to deliver. But Boykin does it frequently.

    This June, for instance, at the pulpit of the Good Shepherd Community Church in Sandy, Ore., he displayed slides of Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein and North Korea\'s Kim Jung Il. \"Why do they hate us?\" Boykin asked. \"The answer to that is because we\'re a Christian nation We are hated because we are a nation of believers.\"

    Our \"spiritual enemy,\" Boykin continued, \"will only be defeated if we come against them in the name of Jesus.\"

    Who is Jerry Boykin? He is Army Lt. General William G. \"Jerry\" Boykin. The day before Boykin appeared at the pulpit in Oregon, the Pentagon announced that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld had nominated the general for a third star and named him to a new position as deputy undersecretary of Defense for intelligence.

    In this newly created position, Boykin is not just another Pentagon apparatchik or bureaucratic warrior. He has been charged with reinvigorating Rumsfeld\'s \"High Value Target Plan\" to track down Bin Laden, Hussein, Mullah Omar and other leaders in the terrorism world.

    But Gen. Boykin\'s appointment to a high position in the administration is a frightening blunder at a time when there is widespread acknowledgment that the position of the United States in the Islamic world has never been worse.

    A monthlong journalistic investigation of Boykin reveals a 30-year veteran whose classified resumé reads like a history of special operations and counter-terrorism. From the failed Iranian hostage rescue attempt in 1980 to invasions in Grenada and Panama, to the hunt for drug lord Pablo Escobar in Colombia, to Somalia and various locales in the Middle East, Boykin has been there. He also was an advisor to Atty. Gen. Janet Reno during Waco.

    He has risen in the ranks, starting out as one of the first Delta Force commandos and going on to head the top-secret Joint Special Operations Command. He has served in the Central Intelligence Agency and, most recently, he commanded Army Special Forces before being brought into the Rumsfeld leadership team.

    But Boykin is also an intolerant extremist who has spoken openly about how his belief in Christianity has trumped Muslims and other non-Christians in battle.

    He has described himself as a warrior in the kingdom of God and invited others to join with him in fighting for the United States through repentance, prayer and the exercise of faith in God.

    He has praised the leadership of President Bush, whom he extolled as \"a man who prays in the Oval Office.\" \"George Bush was not elected by a majority of the voters in the United States,\" Boykin told an Oregon congregation. \"He was appointed by God.\"

    All Americans, including those in uniform, are entitled to their views. But when Boykin publicly spews this intolerant message while wearing the uniform of the U.S. Army, he strongly suggests that this is an official and sanctioned view — and that the U.S. Army is indeed a Christian army.

    But that\'s only part of the problem. Boykin is also in a senior Pentagon policymaking position, and it\'s a serious mistake to allow a man who believes in a Christian \"jihad\" to hold such a job.

    For one thing, Boykin has made it clear that he takes his orders not from his Army superiors but from God — which is a worrisome line of command. For another, it is both imprudent and dangerous to have a senior officer guiding the war on terrorism in Iraq and Afghanistan who believes that Islam is an idolatrous, sacrilegious religion against which we are waging a holy war.

    And judging by his words, that is what he believes.

    In a speech at a church in Daytona, Fla., in January, Boykin told the following story:

    \"There was a man in Mogadishu named Osman Atto,\" whom Boykin described as a top lieutenant of Mohammed Farah Aidid.

    When Boykin\'s Delta Force commandos went after Atto, they missed him by seconds, he said. \"He went on CNN and he laughed at us, and he said, \'They\'ll never get me because Allah will protect me. Allah will protect me.\'

    \"Well, you know what?\" Boykin continued. \"I knew that my God was bigger than his. I knew that my God was a real God and his was an idol.\" Atto later was captured.

    Other countries, Boykin said last year, \"have lost their morals, lost their values. But America is still a Christian nation.\"

    The general has said he has no doubt that our side is the side of the true God. He says he attends prayer services five times a week.

    In Iraq, he told the Oregon congregation, special operations forces were victorious precisely because of their faith in God. \"Ladies and gentlemen I want to impress upon you that the battle that we\'re in is a spiritual battle,\" he said . \"Satan wants to destroy this nation, he wants to destroy us as a nation, and he wants to destroy us as a Christian army.\"

    Since 9/11, the war against terrorism has become almost exclusively a special operations war, melding military and CIA paramilitary and covert activities with finer and finer grained integrated intelligence information. Hence, the creation of Boykin\'s new job as deputy undersecretary of Defense for intelligence.

    The task facing Boykin, Rumsfeld insiders say, is to break down the wall between different intelligence collectors and agencies and quickly get the best information and analysis for American forces in the field.

    But even as he begins his new duties, Boykin is still publicly preaching.

    As late as Sept. 27, he was in Vero Beach, Fla., speaking on behalf of Visitation House Ministries.

    In describing the war against terrorism, President Bush frequently says it \"is not a war against Islam.\" In his National Security Strategy, Bush declared that \"the war on terrorism is not a clash of civilizations.\" Yet many in the Islamic world see the U.S. as waging a cultural and religious war against them. In fact, the White House\'s own Advisory Group on Public Diplomacy for the Arab and Muslim World reported this month that since 9/11, \"hostility toward America has reached shocking levels.\"

    \"Arabs and Muslims respond in anger to what they perceive as U.S. denigration of their societies and cultures,\" the report stated.

    The task for the U.S., the report said, is to wage \"a major struggle to expand the zone of tolerance and marginalize extremists.\"

    Appointing Jerry Boykin, with his visions of holy war in the Islamic world, to a top position in the United States military is no way to marginalize extremism.

  2. #2

    Re: This should, in theory, bother you, or not?

    Is that really happening? What happened to politics being removed and seperated from religion.

    Whats going on down there?

  3. #3

    Re: This should, in theory, bother you, or not?

    Can it get any scarier?

  4. #4

    Re: This should, in theory, bother you, or not?

    I thought you might be interested in a view from a Christian:

    I don\'t believe that there is such a thing as a Christian nation. Jerry is deluding himself in thinking that the US is a \"Christian\" nation.

    I also don\'t believe Osama and Co. hate us because we\'re Christian but because of how \"un-Christian\" we are. For example, the immorality we accept in our society as a \"right.\" That and the bully tactics from the gov\'t to make them comply to what they believe to be wrong. \"A nation of believers?\" Get real!

    (This is most likely only part of it, but I am only going to address the claims directly.)

    He alluded to a Bible passage that goes something like this: \"We are not fighting against flesh and blood, but against the principalities, against the powers, against the world rulers of this present darkness, against the spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places.\"

    Seems he\'s forgetting that it\'s not against flesh & blood. Or the reporter misinterpreted what he meant.

    The separation of church and state, in my opinion, was meant to prevent the church \"institution\" from controlling the state.
    If you separate your religion from your politics, if you believe one thing, but do another, that is hypocrisy. EVERYONE lives according to what they believe.

    Lunch time, gotta go for now.

    Rob

  5. #5

    Re: This should, in theory, bother you, or not?

    Rob, I doubt anyone would disagree with you.

    I don\'t think the point is whether this guy is a christian or a hypocrite or deluded or not.

    I think the point is that the powers have put such a raving looney to work at such a high level. It shows their confidence. They rule virtually unchallenged.

    They are, quite literally, madmen.

  6. #6

    Re: This should, in theory, bother you, or not?

    Z6,

    What, in your opinion based on the above article, makes him a raving looney? (I\'m not necessarily defending the guy, I just want to see more clearly where your thinking is.)

    I (as usual) suspect a negative bias from the writer: After all he starts with \"A Christian extremist. . .\" What exactly IS that? Whatever it is, it comes off NEGATIVE, and it sets the stage in the readers mind for the rest of the article.

    \"Appointing Jerry Boykin, with his visions of holy war in the Islamic world, to a top position in the United States military is no way to marginalize extremism.\" - I can see from the article where he gets this conclusion from (the \"My God is bigger\" argument), but I think it\'s an invalid conclusion. Where the writer gets this conclusion is from a specific case (Atto). Not necessarily a pattern of \"Let\'s get those Islamic B*stards!\" (I hope Jerry doesn\'t have that attitude!) And as so often stated elswhere in this forum, It\'s not about Islam, it\'s about oil! [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img]

    Rob

  7. #7

    Re: This should, in theory, bother you, or not?

    There is definately a negative bias from the writer, but it doesn\'t change the basic fact that this person should not be in a high governmental position.

  8. #8

    Re: This should, in theory, bother you, or not?

    Originally posted by robh:
    Z6,

    What, in your opinion based on the above article, makes him a raving looney? (I\'m not necessarily defending the guy, I just want to see more clearly where your thinking is.)

    I (as usual) suspect a negative bias from the writer: After all he starts with \"A Christian extremist. . .\" What exactly IS that? Whatever it is, it comes off NEGATIVE, and it sets the stage in the readers mind for the rest of the article.

    \"Appointing Jerry Boykin, with his visions of holy war in the Islamic world, to a top position in the United States military is no way to marginalize extremism.\" - I can see from the article where he gets this conclusion from (the \"My God is bigger\" argument), but I think it\'s an invalid conclusion. Where the writer gets this conclusion is from a specific case (Atto). Not necessarily a pattern of \"Let\'s get those Islamic B*stards!\" (I hope Jerry doesn\'t have that attitude!) And as so often stated elswhere in this forum, It\'s not about Islam, it\'s about oil! [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img]

    Rob
    <font size=\"2\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">Okay, not because the article \'claims\' he\'s a \"Christian extremist\", but how about this (to be more specific - and I\'ve heard/read as much from other sources):

    \"In June of 2002, Jerry Boykin stepped to the pulpit at the First Baptist Church of Broken Arrow, Okla., and described a set of photographs he had taken of Mogadishu, Somalia, from an Army helicopter in 1993.

    The photographs were taken shortly after the disastrous \"Blackhawk Down\" mission had resulted in the death of 18 Americans. When Boykin came home and had them developed, he said, he noticed a strange dark mark over the city. He had an imagery interpreter trained by the military look at the mark. \"This is not a blemish on your photograph,\" the interpreter told him, \"This is real.\"

    \"Ladies and gentleman, this is your enemy,\" Boykin said to the congregation as he flashed his pictures on a screen. \"It is the principalities of darkness It is a demonic presence in that city that God revealed to me as the enemy.\"

    That\'s an unusual message for a high-ranking U.S. military official to deliver. But Boykin does it frequently.

    This June, for instance, at the pulpit of the Good Shepherd Community Church in Sandy, Ore., he displayed slides of Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein and North Korea\'s Kim Jung Il. \"Why do they hate us?\" Boykin asked. \"The answer to that is because we\'re a Christian nation We are hated because we are a nation of believers.\"

    Our \"spiritual enemy,\" Boykin continued, \"will only be defeated if we come against them in the name of Jesus.\"

    Who is Jerry Boykin? He is Army Lt. General William G. \"Jerry\" Boykin. The day before Boykin appeared at the pulpit in Oregon, the Pentagon announced that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld had nominated the general for a third star and named him to a new position as deputy undersecretary of Defense for intelligence.

    In this newly created position, Boykin is not just another Pentagon apparatchik or bureaucratic warrior. He has been charged with reinvigorating Rumsfeld\'s \"High Value Target Plan\" to track down Bin Laden, Hussein, Mullah Omar and other leaders in the terrorism world.

    But Gen. Boykin\'s appointment to a high position in the administration is a frightening blunder at a time when there is widespread acknowledgment that the position of the United States in the Islamic world has never been worse.

    A monthlong journalistic investigation of Boykin reveals a 30-year veteran whose classified resumé reads like a history of special operations and counter-terrorism. From the failed Iranian hostage rescue attempt in 1980 to invasions in Grenada and Panama, to the hunt for drug lord Pablo Escobar in Colombia, to Somalia and various locales in the Middle East, Boykin has been there. He also was an advisor to Atty. Gen. Janet Reno during Waco.

    He has risen in the ranks, starting out as one of the first Delta Force commandos and going on to head the top-secret Joint Special Operations Command. He has served in the Central Intelligence Agency and, most recently, he commanded Army Special Forces before being brought into the Rumsfeld leadership team.

    But Boykin is also an intolerant extremist who has spoken openly about how his belief in Christianity has trumped Muslims and other non-Christians in battle.

    He has described himself as a warrior in the kingdom of God and invited others to join with him in fighting for the United States through repentance, prayer and the exercise of faith in God.

    He has praised the leadership of President Bush, whom he extolled as \"a man who prays in the Oval Office.\" \"George Bush was not elected by a majority of the voters in the United States,\" Boykin told an Oregon congregation. \"He was appointed by God.\"

    All Americans, including those in uniform, are entitled to their views. But when Boykin publicly spews this intolerant message while wearing the uniform of the U.S. Army, he strongly suggests that this is an official and sanctioned view — and that the U.S. Army is indeed a Christian army.

    But that\'s only part of the problem. Boykin is also in a senior Pentagon policymaking position, and it\'s a serious mistake to allow a man who believes in a Christian \"jihad\" to hold such a job.

    For one thing, Boykin has made it clear that he takes his orders not from his Army superiors but from God — which is a worrisome line of command. For another, it is both imprudent and dangerous to have a senior officer guiding the war on terrorism in Iraq and Afghanistan who believes that Islam is an idolatrous, sacrilegious religion against which we are waging a holy war.

    And judging by his words, that is what he believes.

    In a speech at a church in Daytona, Fla., in January, Boykin told the following story:

    \"There was a man in Mogadishu named Osman Atto,\" whom Boykin described as a top lieutenant of Mohammed Farah Aidid.

    When Boykin\'s Delta Force commandos went after Atto, they missed him by seconds, he said. \"He went on CNN and he laughed at us, and he said, \'They\'ll never get me because Allah will protect me. Allah will protect me.\'

    \"Well, you know what?\" Boykin continued. \"I knew that my God was bigger than his. I knew that my God was a real God and his was an idol.\" Atto later was captured.

    Other countries, Boykin said last year, \"have lost their morals, lost their values. But America is still a Christian nation.\"

    The general has said he has no doubt that our side is the side of the true God. He says he attends prayer services five times a week.

    In Iraq, he told the Oregon congregation, special operations forces were victorious precisely because of their faith in God. \"Ladies and gentlemen I want to impress upon you that the battle that we\'re in is a spiritual battle,\" he said . \"Satan wants to destroy this nation, he wants to destroy us as a nation, and he wants to destroy us as a Christian army.\"

    Since 9/11, the war against terrorism has become almost exclusively a special operations war, melding military and CIA paramilitary and covert activities with finer and finer grained integrated intelligence information. Hence, the creation of Boykin\'s new job as deputy undersecretary of Defense for intelligence.\"

  9. #9

    Re: This should, in theory, bother you, or not?

    Ok, I was looking for something more specific. But coming from my perspective, I believe Boykin could be (and I emphasize \"could be\")misinterpreted. Let\'s start with the \"pictures\":
    Regardless of what you think of his interpretation of the pictures, what enemy was he referring to? Islam? I don\'t think so, at leaast not in the sense the writer is saying. If he was speaking in a church service (which is implied), he would be referring to the Bible passage I mentioned a few posts above. That would mean that although he is in the military, he does recognize and distinguish the spiritual war from \"physical\" war. How is a Christian army to fight according to the Bible (we are described as an army in there)? Turn the other cheek. Love your enemy. Feed the poor. Clothe the naked. Care for the widow and orphaned. Heal the sick. Go the extra mile.

    Shoot! I have to go. Maybe I\'ll pick this up later. Just a parting thought. I have seen far too many quotes and facts misinterpreted in the media which is why I offer a possible alternate interpretation. The skepticism thing again I guess.

    Rob

  10. #10

    Re: This should, in theory, bother you, or not?

    unfortunately there are no pics to look at ?

Go Back to forum

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •