PDA

View Full Version : My God's Bigger Than Your God


Chris Alger
10-17-2003, 11:42 PM
"In one speech, [senior Pentagon intelligence officer Lt. Gen. William Boykin] recalled a Muslim fighter in Somalia who said U.S. forces would never get him because Allah would give him protection. 'Well, you know what I knew, that my God was bigger than his. I knew that my God was a real God, and his was an idol,' Boykin told his audience. ... [Boykin has also] portrayed the U.S. battle with Islamic radicals as a clash with 'Satan,' saying they sought to destroy America 'because we're a Christian nation.'"

US General, Under Fire, Says He's Not "Anti-Islam" (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=578&ncid=578&e=9&u=/nm/20031017/ts_nm/iraq_usa_general_dc), Reuters, 10/17/3

The interesting question is not whether we'll survive these people, because we probably won't, but why we think we deserve to.

HDPM
10-17-2003, 11:45 PM
Yeah, I saw that article. Pretty scary. But the funny thing is that we probably will survive these people, although we may very well not deserve to. /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Utah
10-17-2003, 11:52 PM
I saw the video of the General speaking. That was just f'in freakish and scary.

I am by nature fairly pro military - but I don't want my team to be run by a guy who is dropping bombs on the enemy because he is a religious nut who thinks he is on a mission from god.

Even if he is on our team, his mentality is almost the same as the terrorists.

TAFKAn
10-18-2003, 01:04 AM
When you say "survive these people" do you mean Islamic extremists or guys like the General Boykin? Or both?

Rushmore
10-18-2003, 09:49 AM
I am not overly impressed by the stupidity of this man's beliefs--nearly every human being has some form of irrational belief in place to survive the tedium and/or terror of existence.

What DOES impress me, however, is that the U.S. can allow itself to be "led" by people with such poor judgement.

This man's job, by its very nature, is political. How can he be unaware of the fact that what he is saying is absolutely unacceptable from every political standpoint?

It is incredible to think that the secret society of higher-ups that run this country are not only vulnerable to stupidity, but are, apparently, stupid.

Cyrus
10-18-2003, 10:49 AM
survive those people, we are better persons than bin Laden or General Boing Boing.

(Which is irrelevant in the long term!)

The interesting question is not whether we deserve to "survive them" but how it has come that the American public at large has been rendered numb to witnessing such extraordinary displays of treason to the very core of American ideals by high ranking officials. (I know, I know. Lotsa things wrong with that sentence.)

Chris Alger
10-18-2003, 11:07 AM
I mean people like Gen. Boykin, his secular but equally nutty counterparts, and their facilitators in the government, media, schools, churches and other institutions. It's not that Boykin is a religious crank, but that he's apparently oblivious to the reality that he confronts daily. For years the people running this country have been trying to distill the ideology and slogans to justify Middle East adventurism, but they can't prevent their own clowns from kicking over the house of cards by saying the opposite. Even after Bush's "crusade" gaffe, after getting roasted by Senators, Boykin still doesn't see what the big deal is. It suggests that attempts to restrict the halls of power to the minimally sane might be failing.

Which in turn suggests that our system the system attracts lunatics and allows them to thrive at the top because the purposes it serves are so unaccountable and removed from rational, popular desires. There might be a point where any government can become so pointlessly powerful that the only crazy people want to run it. Think of the calculated self-destruction of WWI, when the most powerful states in the World, having evolved into craziness, nearly destroyed themselves, ending or ruining tens of millions of lives "by accident." There are a lot of other precedents.

But maybe HDPM's comment is better than mine. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

Cyrus
10-18-2003, 11:30 AM
Where is the graveyard of dead gods?

--by H. L. Mencken

What lingering mourner waters their mounds? There was a time when Jupiter was the king of the gods, and any man who doubted his puissance was ipso facto a barbarian and an ignoramus. But where in all the world is there a man who worships Jupiter today?

And what of Huitzilopochtli? In one year -- and it is no more than five hundred years ago -- 50,000 youths and maidens were slain in sacrifice to him.

Today, if he is remembered at all, it is only by some vagrant savage in the depths of the Mexican forest. Huitzilopochtli, like many other gods, had no human father; his mother was a virtuous widow; he was born of an apparently innocent flirtation that she carried on with the sun. When he frowned, his father, the sun, stood still. When he roared with rage, earthquakes engulfed whole cities. When he thirsted he was watered with 10,000 gallons of human blood. But today Huitzilopochtli is as magnificently forgotten as Allen G. Thurman.

Once the peer of Allah, Buddha and Wotan, he is now the peer of Richmond P. Hobson, Alton B. Parker, Adelina Patti, General Weyler and Tom Sharkey.

Speaking of Huitzilopochtli recalls his brother Tezcatlipoca.

Tezcatlilpoca was almost as powerful: he consumed 25,000 virgins a year. Lead me to his tomb: I would weep, and hang a couronne des perles. But who knows where it is?

Or where the grave of Quitzalcoatl is? Or Xiehtecutli? Or Centeotl, that sweet one? Or Tlazolteotl, the goddess of love? Or Mictlan? Or Xipe? Or all the host of Tzitzimitles?

Where are their bones? Where is the willow on which they hung their harps? In what forlorn and unheard-of Hell do they await the resurrection morn? Who enjoys their residuary estates?

Or that of Dis, whom Caesar found to be the chief god of the Celts? Or that of Tarves, the bull? Or that of Moccos, the pig? Or that of Epona, the mare? Or that of Mullo, the celestial jackass? There was a time when the Irish revered all these gods, but today even the drunkest Irishman laughs at them.

But they have company in oblivion: the Hell of dead gods is as crowded as the Presbyterian Hell for babies.

Damona is there, and Esus, and Drunemeton, and Silvana, and Dervones, and Adsalluta, and Deva, and Belisama, and Uxellimus, and Borvo, and Grannos, and Mogons.

All mighty gods in their day, worshipped by millions, full of demands and impositions, able to bind and loose -- all gods of the first class.

Men labored for generations to build vast temples to them -- temples with stones as large as hay-wagons. The business of interpreting their whims occupied thousands of priests, bishops, archbishops. To doubt them was to die, usually at the stake. Armies took to the field to defend them against infidels: villages were burned, women and children were butchered, cattle were driven off. Yet in the end they all withered and died, and today there is none so poor to do them reverence.

What has become of Sutekh, once the high god of the whole Nile Valley? What has become of Resheph, Baal, Anath, Astarte, Ashtoreth, Hadad, Nebo, Dagon, Melek, Yau, Ahijah, Amon-Re, Isis, Osiris, Ptah, Molech ?

All these were once gods of the highest eminence. Many of them are mentioned with fear and trembling in the Old Testament.

They ranked, five or six thousand years ago, with Yahweh Himself; the worst of them stood far higher than Thor. Yet they have all gone down the chute, and with them the following:

Arianrod , Nuada , Argetlam , Morrigu , Tagd , Govannon , Goibniu , Gunfled , Odin , Dagda , Ogma , Ogyrvan , Marzin , Dea , Dia , Mars , Iuno , Lucina , Diana of Ephesus , Saturn , Robigus , Furrina , Pluto , Cronos

And

Vesta , Engurra Zer-panitu , Belus , Merodach , Ubilulu , Elum, U-dimmer-an-kia Marduk , U-sab-sib Nin , U-Mersi , Persephone , Tammuz , Istar , Venus , Lagas , Beltis , Nirig , Nusku , Nebo , As En-Mersi , Sin Assur , Apsu Beltu , Elali , Kuski-banda , Mami Nin-azu , Zaraqu , Qarradu , Zagaga , Ueras.

Ask the rector to lend you any good book on comparative religion: you will find them all listed. They were gods of the highest dignity -- gods of civilized peoples -- worshipped and believed in by millions.

All were omnipotent, omniscient and immortal.

And all are dead.

Rushmore
10-18-2003, 02:32 PM

Phat Mack
10-18-2003, 05:19 PM
Is it possible that Boykin is, in fact, a Coen Brothers character who was simply placed in the wrong thread? There are plenty of movie threads on this board where he would make perfect sense. At the time Dr. Strangelove was released, many people thought it was satire. Heh.

adios
10-18-2003, 06:49 PM
Boykin is going to resign and run as Wesley Clark's running mate. I like the part in the article where Lieberman and Kerry criticize Bush for not criticizing Boykin. Talk about a political low blow. How do Kerry and Lieberman know Bush didn't criticize him? Boykin made an idiotic statement borne out of ignorance.

Chris Alger
10-18-2003, 09:46 PM
"How do Kerry and Lieberman know Bush didn't criticize him?"

Uh, because their staffs called the White House or took 5 seconds to do a Nexis search? After Boykin's comments hit the stands, Rumsfeld expressly defended his right to say it (it's a "free country"). Maybe Bush believes Boykin's comment that "God put" him in the White House.

Bush's slight rebound in recent polls might be due to a Christian right response to his antigay initiative, something with which Bush is likely to make a big issue during his early campaign. In any event, Bush can't afford to alienate one of his core constituencies: Christian bigots. The days might be over when Bush periodically criticized Christian crazies like Franklin Graham (Islam is a "very evil and wicked religion"); Jerry Falwell (Mohammad was a "terrorist"); Jimmy Swaggart (Mohammad was a "sex deviant" and "pervert") or Pat Robertson (what Muslim's want to do to Jews is "worse than the holocaust").

adios
10-19-2003, 09:29 AM
"Uh, because their staffs called the White House or took 5 seconds to do a Nexis search? After Boykin's comments hit the stands, Rumsfeld expressly defended his right to say it (it's a "free country"). Maybe Bush believes Boykin's comment that "God put" him in the White House."

You and I both know that this hardly constitutes proof that Bush didn't criticize the general.

Chris Alger
10-20-2003, 02:04 PM
Of course it does. If Bush had criticized him, it would have been reported. The Senators would known about it to prevent embarrassing themselves for saying false statements of verifiable fact, something that every right-wing organ would have pounced on. Note that the White House didn't deny the criticism that you speculate might be unfounded.

(Rice criticized Boykin today, and it was widely reported).

adios
10-21-2003, 01:55 AM
I think this headline is a little misleading. The general's right to say what he said was defended instead of what he actually said. Note the general has apologized to those offended by his remarks. Politicians never seem to miss an opportunity to exploit an issue for their own self interest.
Conservatives Back Gen. in Remarks Flap (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20031020/ap_on_re_us/general_religious_views_22)

Conservatives Back Gen. in Remarks Flap
Mon Oct 20, 6:58 PM ET

Add U.S. National - AP to My Yahoo!

By LIBBY QUAID, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - Religious conservatives in Congress are defending a Pentagon (news - web sites) general who referred to the war on terror as a Christian fight against Satan.



In remarks many consider demeaning to Islam, Army Lt. Gen. William G. Boykin has told church audiences his mission is "a battle with Satan." The struggle, Boykin said, is "because we're a Christian nation, because our foundation and our roots are Judeo-Christian ... and the enemy is a guy named Satan."

Rep. Todd Tiahrt, R-Kan., drafted a letter Monday asking Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld not to discipline Boykin, saying that elected officials and military leaders have talked about God and spiritual matters throughout U.S. history.

"As elected officials serving in the United States Congress, we recognize the vital importance our personal faiths play in helping us make decisions," Tiahrt wrote. "We ask that any actions taken in response to Lt. Gen. Boykin's remarks not, in any way, intimidate the free religious exercise of his faith."

Boykin, a three-star general, is deputy undersecretary of defense for intelligence. He's also told audiences that President Bush (news - web sites) is in the White House "because God put him there for a time such as this," and he once said after a 1993 battle with a Muslim warlord in Somalia, "I knew that my God was bigger than his. I knew that my God was a real God, and his was an idol."

The general apologized Friday to those offended by his comments.

Pentagon officials released Boykin's statement Friday after hours of weighing how to quell the criticism of the general's speeches, some of which he made while in uniform.

Bush's national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice (news - web sites), seemed to reproach the general Sunday on ABC's "This Week."

"The president's views on this are absolutely clear, and I think the president is very clear on what he means here," Rice said. "This is not a war between religions. No one should describe it as such."

Rumsfeld has declined to comment on Boykin's statements or say whether he would take action. A Pentagon spokesman declined to comment on the letter Monday.

The Kansas congressman circulated the letter among colleagues, including Missouri Republican Rep. Todd Akin, who signed it. Tiahrt serves on the defense spending subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee, while Akin serves on the House Armed Services Committee.

"The general is an outstanding leader and is widely respected in the military," said Akin spokesman Steve Taylor. "He has expressed he needs to be more guarded in his statements, and the congressman believes that is sufficient. And he agrees with Secretary Rumsfeld that he is an exemplary public servant."