Saturday, January 29, 2011

The Crusaders are here? Conspiracy theory anyone? (by Anon)

We are used to Alex Jones and Rense pushing the conspiratorial nature of the New World Order, but this is now coming from one of the most respected journalist in America.  If you recall, Hersch broke the stories on My Lai and torture in Iraq.  Has the US government being taken over by a group of Opus Dei and Knights of Malta wannabes?

The New Yorker's Seymour Hersh alleged in a speech in Qatar that key branches of the U.S. military are being led by Christian fundamentalist "crusaders" who are determined to "turn mosques into cathedrals."
Hersh was speaking at the Doha campus of Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service earlier this week. He made the comments while discussing a forthcoming book he is writing. A writer for Foreign Policy magazine attended the event and reported his remarks.

"What I'm really talking about is how eight or nine neoconservative, radicals if you will, overthrew the American government. Took it over," Hersh said.
He said that the attitude that "pervades" a large portion of the Joint Special Operations Command, which is part of the military's special forces branch and which has carried out secret missions to kill American targets, is one that supports "[changing] mosques into cathedrals."

Hersh also said that Stanley McChrystal, who headed JSOC before his tenure as the top general in Afghanistan, as well as his successor and many other JSOC members, "are all members of, or at least supporters of, Knights of Malta." Blake Hounsell, the reporter for Foreign Policy, speculated that Hersh may have been referring to the Sovereign Order of Malta, a Catholic organization.

"Many of them are members of Opus Dei," Hersh said. "They do see what they're's a crusade, literally. They see themselves as the protectors of the Christians. They're protecting them from the Muslims [as in] the 13th century. And this is their function."
He also criticized President Obama, saying, "Just when we needed an angry black man, we didn't get one."  - Huffington Post

Wow! Overthrew the American government! Took it over! Strong words! Hersch does not have a history of making "wild" statements without solid evidence. After all, he is a special reporter for the New Yorker.

By the way, a few years ago Hersch spoke at Whitewater and Madison on US torture in Iraq. He was one of the first reporters to confirm that US government had authorized extensive torture in Abu Grab.

Can't wait to see the evidence!


  1. If nothing else, Dan Brown will make millions off of it

  2. Am I missing something? The Republicans already run on a Christian platform, some more explicit than others. This is nothing new.

    For instance, the new Alabama governor Robert Bentley said at his tribute to MLK, "There may be some people here today who do not have living within them the Holy Spirit. But if you have been adopted in God's family like I have, and like you have if you're a Christian and if you're saved, and the Holy Spirit lives within you just like the Holy Spirit lives within me, then you know what that makes? It makes you and me brothers. And it makes you and me brother and sister."

    Bentley then continued, ''Now I will have to say that, if we don't have the same daddy, we're not brothers and sisters. So anybody here today who has not accepted Jesus Christ as their savior, I'm telling you, you're not my brother and you're not my sister, and I want to be your brother."

    That is a total "what the fuck!" How is this speech possibly tolerated in our elected offices? Total bullshit.

    There is a reason for the separation of church and state. I already feel like we, who are not Christians, are already fighting against a Crusade. Christianity is bad bad news in politics. Whether one is a part of some Christian secret group or a part of some mainstream evangelical church, they amount to the same thing: they want to do away with non-Christians by making everyone just like themselves. We should start our own anti-Crusade.

  3. skeptikus, Dan Brown has already made millions and the third film, the Lost Symbol, is in production. While there are fictions in Brown's work, there are also some truths.

  4. Xavier, slow down and be more discriminating in your argument.

    While I am not a republican, I think it would be stretching it to say that the official Republican Party runs on a Christian platform. Now there may, as you say, be members of the party from the bible belt who pimp conservative evangelicals to get elected but thats just politics.

    Next, Alabama is not a good example to use, as this is one of the most reactionary states in the Union.

    Third, the First Amendment reads "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ....", while Article VI specifies that "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."

    The purpose was to prevent the government from establishing a state religion, but it does not prevent members of Congress from being part of a religious movement or party. According to the Constitution, they are free to be members of any faith, as you are free to organize an anti Crusade.

  5. Anon 1:35, I'm aware of the distinction you are making. Of course the official Republican Party does not claim Christianity as its platform, and not all Republicans are even Christians.

    But let's be real here. A stronger and stronger link has been forming between Christianity and the Republican Party ever since Reagan. Reagan campaigned on values, and ever since then the Republican Party has appropriated itself as the bastion of Christian values. That is why being against abortion has become such a hot topic with Republicans. Anti-abortionists are just dripping with religious sentiment; there's no other way to understand them.

    But the link between Republicans and Christianity has gotten more overt and substantial than just abortion. Being Christian is a mark of credibility to many Republicans. If someone was running for office as a Republican and stated that he/she was not a Christian, that person would have a hell of time getting elected. Bentley ran on qualification that he was a deacon in his church, Palin is overtly Christian, Bachmann chastized Obama for not saying "God" and "Creator" enough to foreign diplomats, and Obama was compelled over and over again to say that he is Christian. Obama even felt the need to quote scripture more than once in his "Arizona shooting" speech. Obama does this because he wants the support of the hoards of Republicans who are Christians.

    You could still claim that all this does not mean a necessary relationship between Christianity and the Republican Party, and you would be right. But to deny the practical relationship is to be naive to the political landscape that has become our fucked up country with religion.

    And none of this touches on the relationship between Fox News and Christianity. They're in bed together too. Here's the new holy trinity: the Republican Party, Fox News, and Christianity.

  6. I agree with Xavier. but I have never understood why christians tend to be Republican. I would have thought that christians would be more democratic leaning because of the helping the poor and needy bit. if I pulled a WWJD wouldn't Jesus register as a Democrat?

  7. These comments are as stupid as saying that al Qaeda represents Islam. I do not have time and space to deconstruct your argument, but here are four excellent books on the subject.

    C Street: The Fundamentalist Threat to American Democracy, Jeff Scarlett
    The Family. Jeff Scarlett
    Fascist America, Chris Hedges
    The Theocons, Linker
    Republican Gomorrah, Blumenthal

    Each of these books (three are in paperback) will give you a historical breakdown on the Christian right and the Republican Party connection.

    By the way, 76 percent of Americans identify themselves as Christian. Using your logic, Xavier, they would be part of your holy trinity.

    Anon 7:08, are you serious that Jesus, if he even existed, would register as a democrat? I guess he would be delighted with the 500,000 deaths in Iraq and the drone attacks, more souls for his father!

  8. Anon 3:03, listing books is not an argument. That's just being lazy. I'll wait for a real argument from you.

    But you'll first have to fix your logic. If you think that I said that Republicans represent Christianity, please read what I said again. Or I'll restate it here as well: the Republican Party has increasingly been running on Christianity – there’s no talk of representation. Republicans (and Republican strategists like Karl Rove) have used Christian issues to advance their tenure. Rove was brilliant, to my utter dismay, to use gay rights issues to bring out Christians to vote for Republicans to elect Bush. Republicans frequently revive the abortion debate to rile up the Christians to make the Republicans stay in office so that the Republicans can contest abortion rights. Ironically, Republicans should never want the abortion rights or gay rights issues to be resolved because they need those issues to energize Christians.

    To ignore that having the mark of Christianity is something quite favorable to Republican constituencies is just being ignorant (note Bush, Obama, Palin, Bachmann, Huckabee…). I am not saying that Republicans somehow represent Christianity because there are other Christians who are not Republican. But if you take the ever-growing evangelical, fundamentalist movement of Christianity in the States, it is overwhelmingly Republican. The Republican Party knows this and exploits this.

    Another indication that this is true is to monitor particular blogs. The Huffington Post is a liberal/Democrat blog and if you read the posts and especially the comments, Christianity is never a focus of discussion unless the post is specifically on that topic (but that is rare). The blog, Red, however, is dripping with Christianity both in the posts and especially the comments. But for you Anon3:03, it would be utterly idiotic to make any connection there. You're just ignoring an obvious reality. Are you sure you are not a Republican or at least some kind of conservative?

    I said before that there is a link between Republicans, Christianity, and Fox News. Let me go one step further, and this delves more into the realm of stereotypes, but there are a string of descriptors that appear to go together for a particularly large demographic of the states. Here goes:

    Fox News watcher
    NASCAR lover
    Skeptical about what higher ed teaches youth
    Traditional views of men and women
    Rural and/or affluent community member
    Pro-war, guns, hunting

    I'm not saying that there is any necessary relationship here and many people can fit some of the descriptors without fitting the others, for instance, I am white but not Republican. Yet, something's going on. Coincidence? Just a particular effect of socialization?

  9. This seems appropriate to include from the Huffington Post today:

    During an appearance on HBO's "Real Time with Bill Mahr" on Friday night, Rep. Jack Kingston (R-Ga.) stated clearly that he does not believe in the process of evolution.

    "I believe I came from God, not from a monkey so the answer is no," he said, laughing, when asked if he subscribes to the theory. Later in the segment he added, "I don't believe that a creature crawled out of the sea and became a human being one day."

    According to a Gallup poll released last month, 40 percent of Americans believe God is responsible for creating human life in its current form roughly 10,000 years ago.

    The survey found that 52 percent of Republicans believe in creationism. 34 percent of Democrats and independents maintain the same view, the poll showed. An excerpt of analysis from Gallup:

    "The significantly higher percentage of Republicans who choose a creationist view of human origins reflects in part the strong relationship between religion and politics in contemporary America. Republicans are significantly more likely to attend church weekly than are others, and, as noted, Americans who attend church weekly are most likely to select the creationist alternative for the origin of humans."


  10. Xavier, your second post offers more clarification of your position.

    Your first post:

    "But let's be real here. A stronger and stronger link has been forming between Christianity and the Republican Party ever since Reagan"

    Your second post:

    " Republican Party has increasingly been running on Christianity – there’s no talk of representation. Republicans (and Republican strategists like Karl Rove) have used Christian issues to advance their tenure."

    The second part clarifies the first - Christian issues! With this simple clarification, I can agree with you.

    Usually when the words, "Christanity" or "Islam" are used in any discussion, unless I am told otherwise, I assume the reference is to an entire religion.

    Next, I do not have a fundamental problem with the use of Christian issues by the Republican Party. After all, the ultimate goal of politics at any level is to win, and using religion or any ideology is fair game.

    Do you and others feel that it is somehow morally wrong for the Republican Party to use Christian issues to further their agenda? Politics is war without bloodshed so anything goes!