Lt. General Boykin is back in the news (1, 2). This time, the New York Times is calling him an embarrassment. Glad to hear that major papers are thinking this might not be right guy to be interrogating non-Christians, or to be involved in the War on Terror[ism] in any way. But for the record, what is an “Islamic American?”
Related Posts
Cairo Park Now Open (Really) [updated]
An article on private-public partnership. The official news material. The digital library on ArchNet; very nice images. Update: The official web-site.
“He broke from them and then he broke from himself”
All right, allow me one more indulgence and then I will keep quite for a while. I am a pacifist. I am also pragmatic and take responsibility for my actions. I subscribe to the Kurtzian view of war. If you are going to fight a war, fight it to win. War is an act of barbarism. Thus, to have rules such as the Geneva conventions govern the conduct of fighting and treatment of combatants, to me, seems ridiculous. Kurtz in Apocalypse Now argued for the right to drop the bomb on the Chinese and the Vietnamese. He understood the horror…
Eating Your Own
In the last month three articles have come out regarding the Muslim attack on Islamist ideologues. Chris Dickey came out in Newsweek with a few good examples in the Muslim majority world. My two (minor) gripes are that he didn’t mention the stuff happening here in the US, for example, that’s been going on much longer, and the gates of ijtihad never closed for the Shi’ah, so the debate is very different. Lawrence Wright has a wonderful piece in The New Yorker that highlights the nuances involved in the ideological dispute happening in AQ now. Most importantly what emerges is…
One thought on “Back to Boykin”
Comments are closed.
Couldn’t tell you what an Islamic American is, but I can hardly blame them for being offended by all this.
How about Person of Qur’ano-Hadithic Convictions?