Islamic jihadists have always been intent upon characterizing their opponents as Crusaders (or Zionists, or both, as in the indelible honorific Al-Qaeda’s Adam Gadahn bestowed upon me: “Zionist Crusader”). Shortly before the beginning of the Iraq war, on November 8, 2002, Sheikh Bakr Abed Al-Razzaq Al-Samaraai preached in Baghdad’s Mother of All Battles mosque about “this difficult hour in which the Islamic nation [is] experiencing, an hour in which it faces the challenge of [forces] of disbelief of infidels, Jews, crusaders, Americans and Britons.”
Similarly, when Islamic jihadists bombed the U.S. Consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia in December 2004, they explained that the attack was part of larger plan to strike back at “Crusaders:” “This operation comes as part of several operations that are organized and planned by al Qaeda as part of the battle against the crusaders and the Jews, as well as part of the plan to force the unbelievers to leave the Arabian Peninsula.” They said that jihad warriors “managed to enter one of the crusaders” big castles in the Arabian Peninsula and managed to enter the American consulate in Jeddah, in which they control and run the country.”
And now comes the revelation that Pentagon briefings once carried Bible quotes. Barry Lynn huffs that U.S. soldiers “are not Christian crusaders, and they ought not be depicted as such.”
Indeed. But a few Bible verses doth not a Crusader make. Did American troops in Iraq or Afghanistan impose Christianity on the populace? They did not. (Neither did the real Crusaders, for that matter, but never mind that for now.) Did they even allow proselytizing? They did not. Did the Americans allow for the establishment of Sharia provisions in the Iraqi and Afghan Constitutions that relegated local non-Muslims to second-class status in both countries? Yes, they did.
The whole controversy over these Bible verses is a contrived exercise in moral equivalence, designed once again to distract attention away from the manifest reality that there is a worldwide religious group that is waging war against unbelievers in the name of religion. And the religion in question is not Christianity.
“Pentagon briefings no longer quote Bible: Under Bush, cover pages of daily intelligence report included verses,” from MSNBC, May 18 (thanks to all who sent this in):
WASHINGTON – The Pentagon said Monday it no longer includes a Bible quote on the cover page of daily intelligence briefings it sends to the White House as was practice during the Bush administration….
For a period in 2003, at least, the daily reports prepared for President George W. Bush carried quotes from the books of Psalms and Ephesians and the Gospel of Peter. At the time, the reports focused largely on the war in Iraq….
The “Gospel of Peter,” eh, MSNBC? So Bush was getting quotes from ancient Gnostic texts? That should be newsworthy in itself, no? But of course…it isn’t the Bible.
Anyway, wherever the quotes were from — and I am sure that they were Bible quotes but that the Bible-illiterate MSNBC reporter got mixed up as to the names of the books they were from — a Muslim was (stop the presses!) offended:
But they offended at least one Muslim analyst at the Pentagon and worried other employees that the passages were inappropriate.
On Thursday, April 10, 2003, for example, the report quoted the book of Psalms “” “Behold, the eye of the Lord is on those who fear Him. … To deliver their soul from death.” “” and featured pictures of the statue of Saddam Hussein being pulled down and celebrating crowds in Baghdad.
“Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand,” read the cover quote two weeks earlier, on March 31, above a picture of a U.S. tank driving through the desert, according to the magazine, which obtained copies of the documents.
The Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, on Monday said U.S. soldiers “are not Christian crusaders, and they ought not be depicted as such.”
“Depicting the Iraq conflict as some sort of holy war is completely outrageous,” Lynn said in a statement. “It’s contrary to the constitutional separation of religion and government, and it’s tremendously damaging to America’s reputation in the world.”
That last part is probably true. The jihadist propagandists will love this story.