|"Jews rule the world" is "wrong and divisive" -GW BuSh||PdxMark|
Oct 21, 2003 8:45 AM
|but there is no comment at all on General Boykin, an administration official (deputy undersecretary of defense for intelligence) who persistently couches the war on terrorism as a religious war against Satanic forces and equates Allah with an idol... (Nevermind that Islam was founded, in part, as a reaction against idol worship and rigorously prohibits any graven images.)
Maybe it really IS a religious war... THAT's why no-one in the administration willing to even criticize the repeated remarks, much less firing the guy.
Onward Christian soldiers... in your Crusade against the Satanic forces that threaten our Christian Nation. Uhh ahh.
(Ok, it was BuSh who called this fight a Crusade, not Boykin.)
|Though more than likely it's just a guy with a different||No_sprint|
Oct 21, 2003 9:27 AM
|opinion than most. I've heard FAR more whacked out things from posters on this board. There are some out of bounds imaginations running wild here.|
|They only rule K street, advertising and publishing. Duh.||128|
Oct 21, 2003 9:36 AM
|Actually, the Jewish lobby and agenda is real, powerful and influential but people are intimidated to not speak of it.
I think you're right; for these boys, it is a religious flavored war on both sides, American and Arab.
|In the words of the PM, religious war indeed...||No_sprint|
Oct 21, 2003 9:39 AM
|Not exact words, however, close enough, *calling all the 1.8 billion Muslims against the 6 million Jews and supporters, let's get a final victory over them*.
Sounds religious, undeniably religious, at least on their part.
|More: Anti-semitism as ballast to Muslim anti-intellectualism||128|
Oct 21, 2003 11:36 AM
|From the linked ed:
It's worth reading the rest of last week's speech, beyond the offensive 28 words. Most of it is criticism directed at other Muslims, clerics in particular. Mr. Mahathir castigates "interpreters of Islam who taught that acquisition of knowledge by Muslims meant only the study of Islamic theology." Thanks to these interpreters, "the study of science, medicine, etc. was discouraged. Intellectually the Muslims began to regress." A lot of the speech sounds as if it had been written by Bernard Lewis, author of "What Went Wrong," the best-selling book about the Islamic decline.
|Hope your ready to back up the talk||jtolleson|
Oct 21, 2003 1:02 PM
|because that kind of flip remark really does lead to anti-Semitism, I believe. The "Jewish lobby" and "agenda?" Other than providing a very vocal pro-Israel voting block, exactly what is the Jewish Lobby?
There are plenty of well organized political groups in this country. Nothing wrong with that. Feminist, Evangelical Christian, Senior citizens, tree huggers, and more. But no one talks about them with such hints of clandestine power grabbing.
Fearmongering is dangerous.
Oct 21, 2003 1:55 PM
|>But no one talks about them with such hints of clandestine power grabbing.
Seems I've heard lots of people describing Christians or Evangelical Christians effectively as clandestine power grabbing - to wit: Ashcroft and people of like faith. [maybe it's not claimed to be so clandestine, though]
Appears to me that nearly every faith or group on the planet is defended, and their opponents lynched, except Christians -- they're pretty much fair game for any attacks.
While I essentially agree with what you say, I would prefer (certainly not accusing you, just happened to open an opportunty to vent here) that the sentiments be universally applied.
|I think you make my point: mention it and be labeled.||128|
Oct 22, 2003 5:12 AM
|I didn't say it was bad or clandestine, the lobby and agenda, I just said it exists and people will try to intimidate you from speaking of it. How does that lead to anti-Semitism? My subject line was farsicle regarding the very fearmongering you reference.
The Jewish lobby is just as you describe, and not everyone who disagrees even in part with that 'agenda' should be labeled anti-semitic. Anti-Isreal/US MidE and Neo-Con. actions do not mean anti-Jewish, but since Religion is so inextricably bound to this issue it's difficult to make the distinction sometimes. Religion and state should be separate issues in my political view.
Apply the sentiment universally. Fine with me. But I'm not sure there is "nothing wrong" with well organized political groups when their actions and influence may be fairly criticized.
|Gen'l Boykin's remarks to be investigated...||PdxMark|
Oct 21, 2003 3:05 PM
|Sounds like Karl Rove has finally had time to think about the geo-political effect of General Boykin's dopey remarks.
The BuSh administration's Defense Dept. has decided to look into the General's remarks about Islam, etc. It must have taken Rove awhile to decide to have it look like a bureaucratic process so no Administration official comes across as actually contradicting the good General (and those voters who agree with him). Rove is one smooth operator.
|re:Jews rule the world...||Matno|
Oct 21, 2003 3:41 PM
|I'm not going to argue that Jews don't have tremendously disproportional influence in the world. Disproportional to their numbers, that is. There is plenty of truth to the idea that they have a LOT of influence. (e.g. a significant percentage of international banking, Hollywood, etc).
HOWEVER, it's ridiculous to describe that power in terms of religion. Most of the Jews who are in such positions are completely secular - not religious at all. In fact, surprisingly, many of them are anti-Jewish, at least when it comes to religious Judaism. For example, the very same "Jews" who opposed the building of a Mormon temple in Westchester county have also opposed construction of new synagogues in the same area. Go figure... Living in a community of very religious Jews the last two years has been enlightening in many ways.
As for Islam, I think that by and large, it teaches many good things. I have known many wonderful Muslims in many countries, and they are great people. However, anyone who claims that Islam is a "religion of peace" doesn't know much about the doctrine of Islam...
|There's no such word as "disproportional"||baylor|
Oct 21, 2003 7:41 PM
|and as for your attack on Islam, why don't you ask that question of an actual Muslim rather than basing it on your own political leanings. Islamic extremist bastardizes the Koran as much as your own Christian extremism bastardizes the New Testament.
But thank god you could clear up who is a "real" Jew for us, Matno.
|Don't quit your day job to become an editor...||TJeanloz|
Oct 22, 2003 11:02 AM
|Disproportional most certainly is a word, in English, anyways:
Nov 3, 2003 4:40 AM
I must have hit a nerve there. My "own political leanings" are based on personal experience. I lived in the West Bank for 5 months, so I have had more close contact with "actual Muslims" than the average American. Many of them are still my good friends. That doesn't change the truth of what I said. Islamic Jihad is not peculiar to "Islamic extremists" - it's one of the main "pillars of Islam." Mohammed himself certainly was no pacifist.
Not sure where the "real Jew" comment came from. I just mentioned that there is more than one type of Jew. The ones who typically are considered "powerful" are rarely religious.
Not sure where your comment about my Christian extremism came from either. I don't believe I mentioned anything about the New Testament. Please explain.
Oct 22, 2003 12:38 PM
|No more complaining about the President? Or will we be critical that his statement wasn't enough? Or maybe he made a gaffe when he said it?:
General Was Wrong on Islam but Won't Be Reassigned, Bush Says
WASHINGTON, Oct. 22 President Bush said today that he disagreed with comments by a top Pentagon general who has cast the campaign against terrorism in religious terms, but the Defense Department said the officer would not be reassigned.
Mr. Bush, talking with reporters aboard Air Force One as he flew to Australia, did not say whether he thought the officer, Lt. Gen. William G. Boykin, should be disciplined for comments likening the battle against Islamic militants to a struggle against Satan. But the president did say that he had told Muslim clerics during meetings in Indonesia that the general's statement "didn't reflect my opinion" nor "reflect what the government thinks."
Mr. Bush's comments were the first he has made publicly about General Boykin's remarks, and they came as some Congressional Republicans began to suggest that General Boykin be moved aside temporarily or even resign.
"The political reality up here is that no one thinks Boykin will survive," said a senior Congressional Republican official, speaking on condition of anonymity.
Although Senator John Warner, who heads the Senate Armed Services Committee, has been among those voices calling for General Boykin's temporary reassignment, a Pentagon spokesman, Larry DiRita, said today that "nobody's thinking about asking him to step aside."
Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld told reporters on Tuesday that General Boykin had requested an internal investigation, a request that Mr. Rumsfeld said he endorsed. But Mr. Rumsfeld declined to criticize the general's comments.
The general, a highly decorated Army officer, who was confirmed by the Senate in June as deputy under secretary of defense for intelligence, came under criticism last week, when NBC News and The Los Angeles Times reported details of comments he had made in talks at Christian evangelical churches: that the enemy in the war on terrorism is Satan, that God put Mr. Bush in the White House, and that a prominent Muslim militia leader in Somalia is an idol-worshiper.
On Friday, the Pentagon issued a statement in which General Boykin said he wanted to apologize "to those who have been offended by my statements." But the general also made clear that he had no intention of resigning and that he believed that at least some of his remarks had been taken out of context.
The same day, Senator Warner, Republican of Virginia, and Senator Carl Levin of Michigan, the ranking Democrat on the Armed Services Committee, wrote a letter to Mr. Rumsfeld in which they asked that an internal investigation be conducted. On Tuesday, Senator Warner made his criticism public, saying on the Senate floor that General Boykin should step aside in order to focus on responding to the investigation.
"When you start trying to explain what you did say, you need time out to do a little study," Senator Warner said. Representative Jim Turner, a Texas Democrat, who met with Mr. Rumsfeld this morning, said he also favored reassigning General Boykin in order to send a message "that the war on terror is not a war on Islam."
Religious leaders from several denominations have spoken out against General Boykin's remarks, saying that they posed the danger of inflaming anti-American sentiment across the Islamic world.
Mr. Rumsfeld was to meet behind closed doors on Capitol Hill today with senators from both parties for a regular meeting on Iraq, but Congressional officials said they expected the issue of General Boykin to be raised.
A sense of Republican anger about Mr. Rumsfeld's handling of the matter was apparent on Capitol Hill this afternoon. Two Republican Congressional officials said that the
|I'd reply longer, but I'm busy ruling the world...||miposy|
Oct 22, 2003 1:53 PM
|... it's a full-time job, really. Ruling the media alone takes about 4 hours, then I have to work on our conspiracy against all Muslims for the next two hours, which leaves me two hours for everything else if I want to work anything even close to a normal day.
It's a bit@& being Jewish.
P.s. Don't even get me started on our control of the world's financial institutions. What a nightmare!
|HEY...TERRIFIC, now I'm not the only one!||sn69|
Oct 23, 2003 1:08 PM
|Welcome to the party. Tell you what, you do the media and the financial institutions, I'll work on the impending military dictatorship that our meager numbers are apparently working on.
It takes a global nation of billions to hold us back......
|HEY...TERRIFIC, now I'm not the only one!||Noam|
Dec 31, 2003 1:40 AM
|I have been bussy with Jewish control of the organised crime and the NYSE.|
|ruling the world?||DougSloan|
Dec 31, 2003 8:46 AM
|If Jews were ruling the world, seems to me like Isreal would not be having quite so many problems.