Abrams: Gingrich Insulted Reagan »« Marriage Equality in Washington?

Boykin to Speak at West Point

Retired Lt. General and current lunatic Jerry Boykin has been asked to speak at a prayer breakfast at West Point by the chaplain’s office there and a group of veterans is asking the military academy to rescind the invitation because of Boykin’s history of bizarre behavior. Here’s the full text of their letter:

January 26, 2012

Lieutenant General David H. Huntoon
Superintendent
United States Military Academy
West Point, New York 10996

Dear Lieutenant General Huntoon,

General David Petraeus (Ret.) has been a vocal advocate of the need for our society, and especially our armed forces, to build and maintain bridges of trust into the Muslim community in America and abroad. When an extremist in Florida sought to burn a Koran in a media stunt, General Petraeus accurately stated that the act “would undoubtedly be used by extremists in Afghanistan- and around the world- to inflame public opinion and incite violence” and that “Such images could, in fact… put our troopers and civilians in jeopardy and undermine our efforts.” The same could be said regarding Lieutenant General William Boykin (Ret.).

It has come to the attention of our organization that LTG Boykin has been invited to speak at the USMA prayer breakfast on February 8, 2012. You may not be aware of Lieutenant General Boykin’s history of extremist and hateful comments towards Islam. LTG Boykin has repeatedly characterized our war against al-Qaeda and other extremist groups, a war that we are both Veterans of, as a religious war pitting Christianity against Islam. Boykin claims to have captured terrorists in Somalia solely because the god of Muslims is “an idol.” The Pentagon Office of the Inspector General later found that LTG Boykin’s remarks were improper for a military officer. LTG Boykin, since his retirement, has also stated that “there is no greater threat to America than Islam.” LTG Boykin also co-authored a study from the Center for Security Policy that claimed that “most mosques in the United States already have been radicalized, that most Muslim social organizations are fronts for violent jihadists.”

These remarks are incompatible with the Army values, and a person who is incompatible with Army values should not address the cadets of the United States Military Academy. As has been articulated by GEN Petraeus, these remarks threaten our relationships with Muslims around the world, and thereby, our troops serving in harm’s way. LTG Boykin’s values are inconsistent even with current Army doctrine that is taught at the Joint Readiness Training Center, National Training Center and the Combined Arms Center which instructs Army leaders to respect the Muslim culture as a part of counterinsurgency operations. It is counterproductive for our future Army leaders to hear the views of LTG Boykin, a man who’s views are inconsistent with the values of the Army as an institution.

Not to mention, many Muslim Americans have fought and died in the uniform of the American Soldier in post-9/11 combat, as well as in previous eras. To allow LTG Boykin to address the corps of cadets would be disrespectful to the Muslim cadets currently enrolled at West Point. It would be a slap to the face to Muslim Americans who have served their country, not to mention those who gave the fullest sacrifice for their nation and their comrades.

Sir, as Veterans, we have the utmost faith in your leadership. As Veterans of these wars and men who have served in combat alongside Muslim Americans, we respectfully request that you retract LTG Boykin’s invite to the USMA Prayer Breakfast. The presence of LTG Boykin at West Point would violate Army Values, as well as potentially be used as propaganda by the enemy and endanger our troops in combat.

Sincerely,

Jon Soltz
Iraq War Veteran
Chairman, VoteVets.org

Richard Allen Smith
Afghanistan War Veteran
Vice Chairman, VoteVets.org

The Pentagon needs to put its foot down here. Given Boykin’s history of incredibly inflammatory statements about Islam and about Obama, he simply cannot be allowed to address the cadets. He has a First Amendment right to say crazy things, but if an active duty soldier said the things he’s said about Obama, they could well find themselves court-martialed. Unfortunately, the academy seems to be digging in its heels. If they don’t change their minds, the Secretary of Defense should intervene.

Comments

  1. peterh says

    A number of West Point faculty & cadets have already publicly announced their opposition to Boykin’s proposed appearance.

  2. Michael Heath says

    While I’m happy these two officers’ object to Mr. Boykin speaking at West Point, they defectively rely totally on how his views harm our interests. I’d far prefer these two officers instead argue Boykin shouldn’t speak at West Point precisely because his core premises are lies. Lies which also harm our interests.

    We shouldn’t necessarily oppose points of view which we denigrate; the real harm is that Boykin lies which harms our interests. Dishonesty alone is more than enough weight to deny Boykin this bully pulpit, especially given formal obligations by those in uniform regarding honesty and honor.

    I get that these two officers present evidence which shows Boykin’s dishonesty is self-evident if one is a well-informed. But their argument relies on their disgust with his views and their results when the far superior argument is that he lies. With a secondary concern being how those lies harm our interests.

  3. MikeMa says

    Boykin hasn’t exactly been subtle with his pronouncements. He’s got quite a google listing including:

    Kingdom Warriors – evangelizing for christ everywhere
    Abu Ghraib – His link is discussed
    George Bush – Not elected – appointed by god
    God’s size – his is bigger than yours

    He’s been on Faux news and hailed on the Nut. He strews divisiveness wherever he goes. I do hope is uninvited.

  4. says

    Since Boykin is an extreme exemplar of the kind of Christian crusading mindset that has poisoned the U.S. military, it would be more apropos to invite a speaker with the opposite point of view, if you really want to expose students to a variety of opinions. How about someone who will expose the interconnections of the military-industrial complex?

  5. Michael Heath says

    Several months was doing some research on home-schooling to rebut a claim that Christian home-school parents weren’t predominately trying to indoctrinate their kids. I found one of the biggest national home-schooling organizations was planning a convention where Jerry Boykin was the key-note speaker. Heh. [That finding of course didn't negate the other person's rebuttal, instead it's the curriculum predominately used by Christian home-schooling parents which does the trick.]

    I forget who was making the ‘no true Scotsman’ argument.

  6. exdrone says

    West Point’s Director of Public Affairs writes:

    In order to produce effective 21st Century leaders for our Army, and our Nation, cadets are purposefully exposed to different perspectives and cultures over the course of their 47-month experience at West Point.

    Then, I take it the Academy invites human traffickers to speak to their ehtics classes and creationists to brief their sciences classes. What a bankrupt excuse and complete waste of the cadets’ time!

  7. says

    Ed said:

    Given Boykin’s history of incredibly inflammatory statements about Islam and about Obama, he simply cannot be allowed to address the cadets.

    Ah yes, protect the cadets from Boykin’s opinion on Islam, which he “probably won’t even express” at the Prayer Breakfast.

    But then, Aiden and Dawkins aren’t going to express their “incredibly inflammatory statements” about religion at Fort Bragg, are they?

    I’m interested to see how you explain your participation in an event that invites speakers and bands who have done essentially the same thing of which you accuse Boykin, but from the opposite ideology.

    The only unique thing you mention is Obama, but a member of the military could probably be punished for saying “F— your God”, too, as the participants of Rock Beyond Belief have. Where’s the distinction?

  8. Michael Heath says

    The always clueless JD:

    Where’s the distinction?

    Boykin lies and people die. What’s ironic is that in spite of the military code of honor, JD the traitor needs to ask why Boykin is different from the others he mentions. He demonstrates once again he has no idea what honor actually entails. He should be instructing us on the difference and yet continues to stand in firm opposition to the U.S. Constitution, in spite of taking an oath to defend it.

    I guess we shouldn’t expect someone who repeatedly breaks their oath and advocates others do so as well wouldn’t be able to discern why we should ostracize liars whose lies kill people and directly harms the national interest from others who are not liars.

  9. kris says

    Hey look, I actually agree with JD on something! Regarding speakers “who have done essentially the same thing of which you accuse Boykin, but from the opposite ideology”: seeing as how Heath and others have pointed out that the objection to Boykin is that he lies, I certainly HOPE we’re invested in the opposite ideology!

    Thanks for pointing out the obvious, JD! Good luck not tripping over your own feet on the way out.

  10. MikeMa says

    JD, as a lying sack of shit, how do you keep your commission? Is the airforce so degraded that they value you and the dishonor you represent? Your attitude does reflect the reason Boykin might me given the chance to speak.

Trackbacks

  1. [...] There’s more. He has claimed that the war was against Muslim radicals in a Christian struggle against Satan. He also opined that there should be “no mosques in America,” that “Islam is a totalitarian way of life, it’s not just a religion, ” that Islam “should not be protected under the first amendment.” He has said that “there is no greater threat to America than Islam,” and in a study he co-authored, “most mosques in the United States already have been radicalized, that most Muslim social organizatio… [...]

  2. [...] There’s more. He has claimed that the war was against Muslim radicals in a Christian struggle against Satan. He also opined that there should be “no mosques in America,” that “Islam is a totalitarian way of life, it’s not just a religion, ” that Islam “should not be protected under the first amendment.” He has said that “there is no greater threat to America than Islam,” and in a study he co-authored, “most mosques in the United States already have been radicalized, that most Muslim social organizatio… [...]

Leave a Reply