The AP reported today that Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-Kansas) drafted a letter Monday in which he asked Defense Secretary Rumsfeld not to reprimand Boykin, citing that elected leaders and military officials "have talked about God and spiritual matters throughout U.S. history."
Tiahrt pleaded in the letter that "As elected officials serving in the United States Congress, we recognize the vital importance our personal faiths play in helping us make decisions. 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."
Interestingly enough, the report states that the letter was circulated amongst colleagues but that only listed Rep. Todd Akin of Missouri as signing it.
This letter comes after the Pentagon on Friday released a statement by the General apologizing to those who were offended by his remarks. Of course, he is not sorry for saying what he did, only sorry that some took offense at it. Don’t you love how these people apologize?
By the end of the day, however, Rumsfield announced that there would be an inquiry into the General’s statements. One senator, I do believe he is a Republican, suggested that Boykin be put on leave till further notice. No word yet on that suggestion.
While viewing each of my favorite blogs I have listed to the left of this article, I came across some great commentary regarding Boykin’s beliefs by Kriselda, the author of Different Strings. In her post titled "Of photographing evil and mysterious, unheard-of planes," Kriselda cites an article from The Washington Post that reveals a few more of Boykin’s statements that "not only make him sound a bit unhinged but which lead the editors to question if he's actually fit for the position he's been given."
Here are a few highlights from her post.
1) She debunks his apology, especially for his comment about idol worship. Kriselda writes:
Gen. Boykin now argues that his "idol" reference was to the worship of money and power, not Allah. But a review of the full text of his remarks cannot support this reading. In fact, the full text only adds to the questions about his suitability. At the Good Shepherd Community Church in Sandy, Ore., last June, just after he received his third star and was named to his Pentagon post, Gen. Boykin said, "Don't you worry about what these courts say. Our God reigns supreme."
2) She cites two examples of how Boykin might be unfit, mentally, to fulfill the duties of his current position at the Pentagon. From her words:
He describes taking photographs during a helicopter tour before leaving Mogadishu, Somalia, and then finding an unexplained black mark on the developed pictures, which he explains as a manifestation of evil. "Ladies and gentlemen, this is your enemy," he tells the Good Shepherd audience. "It is not Osama bin Laden, it is the principalities of darkness. It is a spiritual enemy that will only be defeated if we come against them in the name of Jesus and pray for this nation and for our leaders."
Do you see where she is going with this? Do we trust someone with military intelligence to regard every "unexplained black mark" on a photograph as evidence of satan’s forces?
Kriselda continues:
He also offers this take on Sept. 11: "Whether you realize it or not, I believe there were at least two more airplanes that were headed for major installations in this country. I believe that there was one headed for the Capitol, but they were thwarted by the hand of God."
Other than the fact that his interpretation of intelligence is overtly religious and also too simpleton, Kriselda asks an interestingly valid question about what Boykin is revealing.
I am not the least bit comfortable trusting a man who think[s] that he can photograph evil to deal and believes God stopped two additional planes on 9/11. I'm sure some will claim that at least one of the planes he's referring to is the flight that went down in Pennsylvania, even though the way he's phrased his statement ("I believe that there were at least two more airplanes...") makes it pretty clear he means that he thinks there were six planes total - but even if we accept that one of them was the Pennsylvania plane, he's still claiming that there was yet another plane - a 5th plane.
Here's the thing, though. There were no reports of other crashes that day, and no reports from any pilots of other attempts at hijacking. So, my first question would be what makes Gen. Boykin think one existed? Is he privy to information none of the rest of us have? If so, why is he talking about it at all? I think that a publicly-unreported crash or hijacking attempt would have to be under perhaps the highest level of secret classification in order for us to have not even a hint of its existence to have escaped into the greater wilderness of public knowledge - and you know that if any conspiracy theorists caught so much as a whiff of something that explosive, we'd be seeing reports of it sailing around the internet. So, either there is no evidence of a 5th plane, or the General is talking about something he really shouldn't be talking about - making him either whacked-out or careless. I'm not quite sure which worries me more (especially for someone in an intelligence position.)
Kriselda continues talking about how God could possibly be relevant, or maybe related, to the events of 9/11. To read more, click here.
