New York City Policy Department Commissioner Raymond Kelly offered a written apology for his appearance in a film deemed by critics, including the Center For American Progress in its “Fear, Inc.” report, to promote Islamophobia. Kelly appeared in the film, called the Third Jihad, which was shown in the registration area of a counter-terror training session for police.

Today, Kelly himself offered an apology for his appearance in the film, according to the Associated Press:

I offer my apologies to members of the Muslim community, in particular, who would find the film inflammatory and its airing on Department property, though unauthorized, to be inappropriate.

A Kelly aide denied to the New York Times, in an article published Tuesday, that Kelly had cooperated with the filmmakers of the Third Jihad. The film’s producers, the Clarion Fund, complained that the statement was inaccurate. “In fact, Kelly gave our filmmakers an hour and a half interview for use in the film,” the group wrote in a blog post where they linked to the just-published full interview. Kelly’s aide then retreated from his statements in a subsequent interview with the Times.

Human Rights Watch (HRW) issued a statement earlier today calling on New York City officials to order a full investigation into the repeated showing of the the film. HRW took particular issue with the false information provided by the NYPD, as reported in the Village Voice, that the film had only been shown “a couple of times” when newly released police documents show it was screened on a “continuous loop.”

“The New York City police not only showed an offensive anti-Muslim film during training, but its leadership grossly misrepresented the scope of the problem,” said Alison Parker, U.S. program director at Human Rights Watch. “A real investigation is promptly needed, with real results.”

Yesterday, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg criticized the police department for airing the film. “Somebody exercised some terrible judgment,” the mayor said. “As soon as they found out about it, they stopped it.” As to where the bad judgment came in, Bloomberg wasn’t sure and hinted at a possible investigation: “I don’t know who [was responsible]. We’ll find out.”

Last June, during hearings to confirm his nomination as defense secretary, Leon Panetta, then CIA director, said the military’s budget plays no role in the federal budget deficit:

SEN. JOHN CORNYN (R-TX): Do you agree with [Defense] Secretary [Robert] Gates when he said that the defense budget no matter how large it may be is not the cause of the fiscal woes?

PANETTA: I agree with that. It is by no means the cause of the huge deficits we are incurring today.

At a press conference today announcing the Pentagon’s new budget, it seems Panetta finally came around to the reality that military spending and defense budgets impact the deficit. The new budget “does something about reducing the deficit and achieving savings,” he said:

PANETTA: So the reason you’re seeing the tough decisions that are being presented to you in the implementation of the strategy is because we had to achieve savings that would meet the requirement that Congress gave us. And that is tough. It’s real and it’s something that obviously will cause some pain, but at the same time we recognize that defense has to play a role in dealing with the national deficit.

Watch clips from the press conference:

Today’s Panetta is right. While the Pentagon’s budget alone is not the only deficit driver, military spending makes up 50 percent of the discretionary portion of the federal budget. And defense spending has accounted for 65 percent of the discretionary spending increase since 2001. Total defense spending in real dollars is now higher than at any time since World War II, and DOD’s baseline budget nearly doubled in the last 10 years.

While Panetta’s new budget does reduce military spending over the next 10 years by nearly $500 billion, the defense budget, as the defense secretary acknowledged today, will still grow. The reductions he laid out today are cuts in projected increases in DOD spending.

Earlier today, ThinkProgress reported that ret. Lt. Gen. William “Jerry” Boykin — an individual who steadfastly believes that Islam is “a totalitarian way of life” and deserves no Constitutional protection — will be the invited guest speaker at West Point’s National Prayer Breakfast.

VoteVets, a coalition of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans, called on West Point to rescind Boykin’s invitation. “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,” Jon Soltz and Richard Allen Smith wrote in a letter to West Point’s superintendent.

In a statement issued to ThinkProgress, West Point’s Director of Public Affairs, Lt. Col. Sherri Reed, said the military academy stands by its decision to host Boykin and that the invitation is “in keeping with the broad range of ideas normally considered by our cadets”:

The U.S. Military Academy at West Point prepares cadets to be leaders of character with honor and consideration of others. 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.

The National Prayer Breakfast Service will be pluralistic with Christians, Jewish, and Muslim cadets participating. We are comfortable and confident that what retired Lt. Gen. Boykin will share about prayer, soldier care and selfless service, will be in keeping with the broad range of ideas normally considered by our cadets.

Sadly, the man who West Point has chosen as its representative of the Christian faith dangerously views our military conflicts as a holy war against Islam.

If those who have a degree of influence over Boykin do not speak up in protest, he will never understand that his views are wrong and hurtful. He could be better informed about Muslims and Islam if powerful organizations, institutions, and individuals help educate him, rather than giving sanction to his views.

The top officer in the U.S. military, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey, told the National Journal that the time has not come to decide on whether to use military force against Iran to curb its alleged push toward nuclear weapons. Speaking to the National Journal, Dempsey said:

I do think the path we’re on — the economic sanctions and the diplomatic pressure — does seem to me to be having an effect. I just think that it’s premature to be deciding that the economic and diplomatic approach is inadequate.

Neither the latest report from the International Atomic Energy Agency nor the most recent reported estimate of the U.S. intelligence community concluded that Iran has made a decision to build a nuclear bomb. And Haaretz reported last week that Israeli intelligence concurs with this view.

The Obama administration has pursued a dual-track approach so far of pressure and engagement, including a leveraging global diplomacy against Iran’s nuclear program — a record the President spoke about in his State of the Union address on Tuesday, expressing a continuing preference to resolving the crisis diplomatically. Facing the toughest sanctions yet from the U.S. and the European Union, Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Thursday signaled Iran was ready for nuclear talks.

In his interview, Dempsey “made clear he believed an approach involving military force wasn’t warranted at this point and could carry unforeseen risks,” National Journal reported, adding that Dempsey’s comments “represented the first time senior Pentagon officials weighed in” on the issue.

On Feb. 8, 2012, the United States Military Academy at West Point is planning to host a National Prayer Breakfast featuring ret. Lt. Gen. William “Jerry” Boykin, an individual who has a long record of issuing hate-filled rhetoric about Muslims.

Here’s what Boykin has said about Muslims in the past: there should be “no mosques in America“; Muslims worship an “idol“; “Islam is a totalitarian way of life, it’s not just a religion”; “it should not be protected under the First Amendment”; Muslims operate “under an obligation to destroy our Constitution.”

In the early days of the Iraq war, Boykin served in the Defense Department as a senior intelligence officer. Around that time, he appeared in full military dress at various churches, spouting bigoted rhetoric that casted the military conflicts as part of a religious crusade between Christians and the devil. In a 2004 report, the Pentagon Inspector General admonished Boykin for violating numerous internal regulations. “We recommend that the Acting Secretary of the Army take appropriate corrective action with respect to Lt. Gen. Boykin,” the report said.

VoteVets, a coalition of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans, released a letter today, asking West Point President to rescind the invitation to Boykin. Jon Soltz, Iraq War Veteran and Richard Allen Smith, an Afghanistan War Veteran, write:

As has been articulated by GEN Petraeus, [statements similar to Boykin’s] 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 whose views are inconsistent with the values of the Army as an institution. [...]

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.

Read the full letter here.

Just today, Boykin was scheduled to speak at the Mayor’s Prayer Breakfast in Ocean City, Maryland. People for the American Way and the Council on American-Islamic Relations had waged a vigorous campaign against his appearance.

The Baltimore Sun endorsed that effort this week, writing, “Make no mistake: This is not an issue of freedom of speech or of any of the constitution’s protections for religious expression that Mr. Boykin seems so eager to deny to those who don’t share his own Christian faith.” Boykin has every right to speak, but organizations that invite him “need to make clear whether they agree with Mr. Boykin’s views.” If not, they should not sponsor his hate speech.

We have contacted West Point to seek a reply, and we will post an update if we hear back.