We (muslims) are like a football.These big guys kick us.ball goes where
the kick takes him.The condition of muslims today is so bad that we feel
we have no value .our leaders are having a good sleep.
But i hope soon our leaders will wake up(Mahatir Mohammed) and
things will change in future INSHALLA.blue green
More about the Racist US General, who has recently become a Deputy Defense Undersecretary within the Bush Adminstration..
General’s remarks haunt Bush, President’s inaction angers Arab world](http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/journalgazette/7332861.htm) Fortwayne Journal Gazette, 23 Nov 03
By Johanna Neuman Los Angeles Times
WASHINGTON - More than a month has passed since the disclosure that a fundamentalist Christian policy-maker at the Pentagon had disparaged Muslims by saying they worship idols. To U.S. diplomats charged with selling America to the Arab world, the remarks by Lt. Gen. William G. “Jerry” Boykin are an albatross they cannot seem to shake.
“I get calls from officials in Arab countries every day about Boykin,” said James Zogby, president of the Arab American Institute. “They are stunned nothing has happened.” While the Pentagon investigates Boykin’s remarks, the passage of time is turning the episode into a no-win dilemma for the Bush administration by pitting its need to reach out to the Arab world against the sentiments of fundamentalist Christians, who form a core constituency heading into an election year. Both camps are livid about the White House response to Boykin’s remarks - President Bush has distanced himself but has not taken any steps to remove him - and profess amazement that the matter has not been resolved in their favor.
The battle over Boykin shows a Bush administration torn between its policy imperatives and its political interests - a White House hoping the controversy will fade away, or maybe that Boykin will. In an administration where the president himself is a born-again Christian, punishing believers does not come naturally. In speeches to Christian groups around the country, Boykin - often in uniform - has said that radical Muslims hate the United States “because we’re a Christian nation . . . and the enemy is a guy named Satan.” He also said that in dealing with a warlord during the U.S. operation in Somalia in 1993, “I knew that my God was a real God and his was an idol.”
The Pentagon, at Boykin’s request, is looking into whether the general, who recently was named deputy defense undersecretary for intelligence, violated any regulations with his remarks. Arab leaders are furious at the lack of action, and believe it is evidence of a double standard in which Bush rebuked the president of Malaysia for anti-Semitic remarks but said little about Boykin’s. Fundamentalist Christians, who form one of the president’s staunchest core constituencies, are angry that Boykin is not being applauded. Many military officers who served with the oft-decorated Boykin in Bosnia and other hot spots are also rallying to his defense.
“Anything that looks like punishment or reprimand will turn off, disappoint and demoralize a certain percentage of the president’s base that he is going to desperately need a year from now,” said Gary Bauer, chairman of the Campaign for Working Families, a conservative political action committee. “I’ve heard nothing but outrage that Gen. Boykin has been treated this way. The Islamicists say we are to be killed because we are infidels. We can’t win a war unless we understand what it’s about,” said Bauer, who briefly ran against Bush in the 2000 Republican presidential primaries.
When Bush welcomed Arab leaders to the White House last month for the annual “iftar” dinner that breaks the day’s fast during Ramadan, he did not mention the Boykin case in his public remarks. But when he sat down for dinner, he heard a mouthful. “I sat across the table from him and he looked me in the eyes, and I told (the president) that statements by public officials like this general do not serve amity between the Muslim world and the West,” said Dr. Ziad J. Asali, president of the Washington-based American Task Force on Palestine.
Bush replied as he has in public, telling Asali that Boykin’s views are neither his nor those of his administration. “You can spend all the money you want on public diplomacy but at the end of the day, it’s what we do, not the image we try to project,” Zogby said. “What he said is absolutely awful, and Arabs I talk to are having trouble understanding why we just don’t get how hurtful this is.”
“Everybody in the Middle East pays attention to the news now, they’re all hooked up to satellite television and car radios,” said Harold Pachios, a Portland, Ore., attorney who serves on the State Department’s Advisory Commission for Public Diplomacy. “If you took a poll in the United States, you might get 1 percent who know who Gen. Boykin is and what he said. If you took a poll anywhere in the Islamic world, a majority would know. And they would believe that he was speaking for the U.S. government.”
[quote]
**In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful
Believers, do not take for your intimate friends men other than your own folk. They will spare no effort to corrupt you. They love to see you in distress. Their hatred has already become apparent by (what they say with) their mouths, but what their hearts conceal is even much worse. We have made revelations plain to you, if you will only use your reason. See for yourselves how it is you who love them and they do not love you. You believe in all the scriptures. When they meet you they say: “We, too, are believers.” But when they find themselves alone, they bite their fingertips with rage against you. Say: Perish in your rage. Allah is fully aware of what is in the hearts (of people). When good fortune comes your way, it grieves them; and if evil befalls, you, they rejoice. If you persevere and fear Allah, their machinations cannot harm you in any way. Allah encompasses all that they do. (The House of Imran, “Aal Imran”: 3;118-120) **
[/quote]
I think the Generals opinions depict a very chilling aspect to the Bush Administrations foreign policies which analysts state are very much in tune with the views of Extremist Christian fundamentalists. Pres. Bush risks the alienation of not just Arabs but all Muslims by his silence on this matter.
This guys thoughts clearly show he is a racist and a bigot. They also demonstrate the general mindset of the people in power in Washington these days. Inshallah after the next election that may change, but till then we are stuck in the current situation.
I mean the hypocrisy of it is amazing, if a muslim leader said what this guys did, the media would be all over him.
Well here it is, yet again. The Bush regime still does not get it - how it is viewed in the Muslim world. Or maybe it knows all too well but doesn’t give two hoots. With elections coming up maybe it is the latter.Take your pick.
"Patrick Seale: Has the Bush administration declared war on Islam?
…
The question must be posed: Are the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and the world-wide terrorist manhunts, no more than the early skirmishes of a prolonged war between the world’s only superpower and the world’s fastest-growing religion? Bush has hinted the war could last a generation, like the religious wars of past centuries and that victory might take “one day, one month, one year, or one decade.” Echoing his messianic rhetoric, Britain’s Prime Minister Tony Blair has vowed to “finish the job”, however long it takes. Between the two of them, we seem to be promised war without end.
…
Living in the shadow of this colossus, it is only fair to ask how the US intends to use its unequalled military power. For people worried about the spreading violence and disorder in the world, it is today’s most important question. The short answer is that the US intends to impose its will by force, by coercion, rather than by persuasion or mutual accommodation.
Over recent years, a few things have become clear about American objectives which can be summarised by saying that in the ongoing Washington power struggle, the Pentagon has triumphed over both the State Department and the Treasury. America’s militaristic and unilateralist foreign policy has been set by Pentagon hawks, aided by their friends in the Vice-President’s office and in the National Security Council, and cheered on by Washington’s myriad right-wing, pro-Israeli think-tanks. Moderate voices have been silenced, swept aside or been forced to toe the line.
What then are the main aims of Bush’s foreign and security policy? It is evident the US wants to use its power to achieve global dominance, and to retain it for the future. It has declared it intends to prevent the emergence of any rival. It wants a “unipolar” world order dominated by itself, rather than the “multipolar” world countries such as France, Germany, Russia and China prefer, where compromise and accommodation is necessary.
From this perspective, America’s “war on terror” seems little more than a cover for its avowed intention of global dominance. It is a conclusion drawn from the fact that countries targeted for American hostility are chosen not because they sponsor terror but because they refuse to acquiesce.
The members of Bush’s “axis of evil” – Iraq, Iran and North Korea – have no connection with the September 11 attacks or Al Qaida.
The message from Washington, therefore, is that states that fail to acknowledge American hegemony risk pressure, destruction or “regime change”. Their equality with other states, their sovereignty, are no longer recognised.
…
Moreover, as the US dispenses with consent from the international community, international law is repudiated.
It is a law of history, however, that any attempt by a state to impose its hegemony inevitably breeds resistance, whether from other states, from non-state actors or private citizens. Resistance to America’s global dominance has emerged and takes different forms. There is, for example, the grassroots worldwide anti-war movement which, during Bush’s visit to London, brought thousands of people onto the streets. There is diplomatic resistance from countries like France, Germany and Russia, usually manifested in international fora like the UN Security Council. But perhaps the most striking resistance of all lies in the widespread anger at American policies in the Arab and Muslim world, of which the terrorism of Al Qaida and other Islamic groups is the most violent expression. The battle against these militants is now engaged and is becoming increasingly bloody, plunging countries into cycles of violence.
…"
http://www.gulf-news.com/Articles/Opinion.asp?ArticleID=104000