What's the Cost of Removing Secret Jesus Bible Codes from US Military Weapons?

[Proton Soup]

Not necessarily, and you are still ignoring the context regardless.

look, we see things a little differently, but if you want to talk context, let's widen that up a bit:

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+5:38-42&version=NIV

what i see from the whole verse is a very active, non-passive sort of interaction with people. a person that acts that way isn't going to be ignored easily, because the person is constantly in your face. some people might even consider it annoying.

 

[Proton Soup]

What you quoted there speaks of after the scopes had been put into use, not when the contract was signed.

it's not clear when they knew it. which is all i pointed out: it's not clear.

 

[kyleb]

What also bothered me was your lack of understanding of Kyleb's position. Your response to what is clearly a fear-based reacton, is to accuse him/her of ranting?

It seems you missed my post shortly before yours where I mentioned that I'm an American. I'm not reacting out of fear either, I'm just not hip to the clash of civilizations mentality some are so fond of. Also, for the sake of possibly saving you a bit of typing in the future, I'm a man.

it's not clear when they knew it. which is all i pointed out: it's not clear.

Well, surely the people mentioned in what you quoted wouldn't have known about it until after the scopes had been delivered. Regardless, I highly doubt the relevance of the markings was known by whoever contracted the manufacture. If it was, I contend they don't deserve the responsibility they have been vested with.

 

[drankin]

Commanders referring to guns using the sights as "spiritually transformed firearm of Jesus Christ" shatters the false dichotomy you constructed there.

Are you familiar with military humor?

 

[mgb_phys]

Are you familiar with military humor?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOrgLj9lOwk

 

[kyleb]

look, we see things a little differently, but if you want to talk context, let's widen that up a bit:

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+5:38-42&version=NIV

what i see from the whole verse is a very active, non-passive sort of interaction with people. a person that acts that way isn't going to be ignored easily, because the person is constantly in your face. some people might even consider it annoying.

I over looked this comment previously, but I agree with your interpretation here. However, it seems you have blurred the distinction between passive and pacific.

Are you familiar with military humor?

As an Army brat, quite so. I'm also familiar with commanders engaging in theological derived call and response drills, solders doing things like scrawling "Jesus killed Mohammad" on an APC. Am I to take it you don't see anything wrong with any of that?

 

[OmCheeto]

I can't believe no one acknowledged my secret bible/quranic scripts in my post.

Jesus & Mo' are going to shoot me...

 

[PhillisDillar]

Marine Corps Concerned About 'Jesus Guns,' Will Meet With Trijicon


Following ABC News Report of Secret Bible Verses on Weapons
Used in Muslim Lands, Marines Will Meet With Maker of Equipment

JOSEPH RHEE and MARK SCHONE
ABC News
Jan. 19, 2010


Following an ABC News report that thousands of gun sights used by the U.S. military in Iraq and Afghanistan are inscribed with secret Bible references, a spokesperson for the Marine Corps said the Corps is 'concerned' and will discuss the matter with the weapons manufacturer.

"We are aware of the issue and are concerned with how this may be perceived," Capt. Geraldine Carey, a spokesperson for the Marine Corps, said in a statement to ABC News. "We will meet with the vendor to discuss future sight procurements." Carey said that when the initial deal was made in 2005 it was the only product that met the Corps needs.

However, a spokesperson for CentCom, the U.S. military's overall command in Iraq and Aghanistan, said he did not understand why the issue was any different from U.S. money with religious inscriptions on it.

"The perfect parallel that I see," said Maj. John Redfield, spokesperson for CentCom, told ABC News, "is between the statement that's on the back of our dollar bills, which is 'In God We Trust,' and we haven't moved away from that."

Said Redfield, "Unless the equipment that's being used that has these inscriptions proved to be less than effective for soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines and military folks using it, I wouldn't see why we would stop using that."

A spokesperson for the Army told ABC News that the Army was looking into the procurement "to see if anything is amiss here. We are still checking."

As ABC News reported Monday, the sights are used by U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and in the training of Iraqi and Afghan soldiers. The maker of the sights, Trijicon, has a $660 million multi-year contract to provide up to 800,000 sights to the Marine Corps, and additional contracts to provide sights to the U.S. Army.

U.S. military rules specifically prohibit the proselytizing of any religion in Iraq or Afghanistan and were drawn up in order to prevent criticism that the U.S. was embarked on a religious "Crusade" in its war against al Qaeda and Iraqi insurgents.

'This Does Not Constitute Proselytizing'

One of the citations on the gun sights, 2COR4:6, is an apparent reference to Second Corinthians 4:6 of the New Testament, which reads: "For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ."

Other references include citations from the books of Revelation, Matthew and John dealing with Jesus as "the light of the world." John 8:12, referred to on the gun sights as JN8:12, reads, "Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life."

Trijicon confirmed to ABCNews.com that it adds the biblical codes to the sights sold to the U.S. military. Tom Munson, director of sales and marketing for Trijicon, which is based in Wixom, Michigan, said the inscriptions "have always been there" and said there was nothing wrong or illegal with adding them.

Munson said the issue was being raised by a group that is "not Christian." The company has said the practice began under its founder, Glyn Bindon, a devout Christian from South Africa who was killed in a 2003 plane crash.

On Monday, spokespeople for the U.S. Army and the Marine Corps both told ABC News their services were unaware of the biblical markings. On Tuesday, Redfield of CentCom told ABC News that the inscriptions did not violate the directive against proselytizing. "This does not constitute proselytizing because this equipment is not issued beyond the U.S. Defense Department personnel. It's not something we're giving away to the local folks."

But ABC News was able to find repeated references to the Biblical citations in on-line discussions of the gun sights. In August 2009, a poster named "Latex Ducky" tells other posters on a forum for firearm enthusiasts called "The Firing Line" about the inscriptions. "Here's something interesting: There should be a reference to a Bible verse on the base of the scope."

Back in 2006, on a self-described "Armageddon Forum," a number of users discuss the Bible references. "Seems there's a different verse on each model," writes Mr45auto. "They chose some whoppers too!"

After the Blotter's report Monday morning, the TPM Muckraker news Web site listed numerous references to the Trijicon Bible codes on-line dating back several years, including a January 2006 thread on a gaming forum that said "DoD contractor puts bible verses on it's (sic) products."

In May of 2006, a poster on Militaryphotos.net began a comment thread by asking, "Has anyone ever noticed the Bible verse on their ACOG sight?" Another user responds, "Yeah I read about that recently, but I didn't know there were than many different verses on all the different optics."

A video on YouTube that discusses the Bible verses had close to 20,000 views. "One of the really cool things that I like about this sight," says the maker of the video, is the Bible verse. "It says JN8:12. What that is is John 8:12."

"I love it. I love it. Yes, Trijicon, those guys are Christians. On all of their different sights they have verses on there."

"For those of you who aren't Christians, well, you know, get over it."

In another video, the same YouTube user notes the reference to Second Corinthians on a Trijicon scope.

'They Should Fix Them All'

"It's wrong, it violates the Constitution, it violates a number of federal laws," said Michael "Mikey" Weinstein of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, an advocacy group that seeks to preserve the separation of church and state in the military.

Weinstein, an attorney and former Air Force officer, said many members of his group who currently serve in the military have complained about the markings on the sights. He also claims they've told him that commanders have referred to weapons with the sights as "spiritually transformed firearm of Jesus Christ."

Weinstein said coded biblical inscriptions play into the hands of those who call the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan "a Crusade."

Retired Army Major General William Nash, now an ABC News consultant, said he had "no problem" with organizations providing Bibles and other religious tracts to U.S. troops. "But I do have a problem," said Nash, "with military equipment being labeled in a way where it seems like it's our god against their god."

Nash, who commanded the first brigade of the third armored division during Desert Storm in Iraq, said the Pentagon should make Trijicon remove the Bible codes from their sights.

Said Nash, "They should fix them all, they should do a modification on those sights and take off those inscriptions. And if they fail to do that they should be penalized."

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/secret-bible-verses-guns-marines-concerned/story?id=9602030


It is not the soldiers, who use the ACOG every day who are complaining about it. I have talked to many of them personally and they think that it is either neat that it is on there, or they do not really care. You know who else uses the ACOG? The IDF. That is Israeli Defense Forces if you did not know. There are many IDF members on militaryphotos.net, and one of them can be quoted saying "it could say mein kampf for all I care and I would still use the ACOG"

Trijicon has been putting these bible verses on their ACOGs since they started making them, most people don't even know they are there. This has been blown way out of proportion, as is everything that has to do with Christianity and seriously needs to stop.

 

[dotman]

My favorite quote of the whole post:

"For those of you who aren't Christians, well, you know, get over it."

That right there is exactly why these things can't be allowed.

 

[PhillisDillar]

My favorite quote of the whole post:



That right there is exactly why these things can't be allowed.

Mind you that is quoted from a youtube video. We all know how educated youtube commentators are. . .

 

[mgb_phys]

What a backlash - I'm beginning to have second doubts about the launch of my new line of condoms:
"Altar boy's choice"

 

[Proton Soup]

What a backlash - I'm beginning to have second doubts about the launch of my new line of condoms:
"Altar boy's choice"

would the package codes be a reference to Onan or to Sodom ?

 

[Phrak]

"It's wrong, it violates the Constitution, it violates a number of federal laws," said Michael "Mikey" Weinstein of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, an advocacy group that seeks to preserve the separation of church and state in the military."

If this is a correct quote, athiest "Michael "Mikey" Weinstein" is an idiot who does not know the meaning of "The separation of church and state" which should be part of his bivwack as an atheist advocate, nor knows its historical appearance and why, nor probably realizes that the phrase has no legal merit, appearing nonwhere in the Delclaration of Independence nor the Constitution.

Constitution:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . ."

The inverted core of this well memmed modern mythology, within the US, begins with a letter by Thomas Jefferson delived to the congregation of the minority Danbury Baptists Church of Connecticut fearful of the establishment of a state religion. I quote Jefferson as presented by Wikipedia:

"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his god, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their "legislature" should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between church and State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties."

The philosophy of the separation of Church and State was a desire protect organized religion from government interference. Not the inverted idea of protecting government from church as it is so commonly misinterpreted today.

 

[kyleb]

It is not the soldiers, who use the ACOG every day who are complaining about it. I have talked to many of them personally and they think that it is either neat that it is on there, or they do not really care.

Of course the Dominionist Christian types like it, and I'm sure many others don't care either way, but the solders represented by the Military Religious Freedom Foundation are complaining, as noted in the article you pasted above.

You know who else uses the ACOG? The IDF. That is Israeli Defense Forces if you did not know. There are many IDF members on militaryphotos.net, and one of them can be quoted saying "it could say mein kampf for all I care and I would still use the ACOG"

Well they are very well made scopes, but I dislike my tax dollars going towards promoting any institution of religion regardless, both in regard to those we buy for our troops and as part of the billions in weaponry we give Israel every year.

Trijicon has been putting these bible verses on their ACOGs since they started making them, most people don't even know they are there. This has been blown way out of proportion, as is everything that has to do with Christianity and seriously needs to stop.

Am I to take it you are hoping to see the line between church and state erased without those who respect it noticing?

If this is a correct quote, athiest "Michael "Mikey" Weinstein" is an idiot who does not know the meaning of "The separation of church and state"...

I'm pretty sure he knows what he is talking about, the markings on the sights being unconstitutional for the same reason posting the Ten Commandments on a courthouse is. Also, how did you come to the conclusion that he is an atheist?

...protect organized religion from government interference.

That's the bit about "prohibiting the free exercise" of relgion.

...protecting government from church...

And that's part about not "respecting an establishment of religion".

It goes both ways, "building a wall of separation between church and State" as Jefferson put it.

 

[OmCheeto]

I am not paying taxes in order to provide free advertising for religious fanatics.

Yes you are.

 

[mgb_phys]

Yes you are.

Doesn't say which God - I have no problem with the US treasury putting it's faith in Cthulu

 

[OmCheeto]

Doesn't say which God - I have no problem with the US treasury putting it's faith in Cthulu

Well, if it's just Christianity that people have a problem with, perhaps these guys have the cure:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/gPKH_XjY5aI&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/gPKH_XjY5aI&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Oh my. I just had a thought. Do you think Trijicon is putting those inscriptions on the sights in some kind of subliminal Christian recruiting scheme? My god! What if all our boys(and girls) turned Christian?! I think I'm starting to see the problem now.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Yes you are.

That is an internal document, not advertising.

There is a big difference between tradition, and projection.

 

[Evo]

I wonder how people would react if the company was inscribing the sights with anti-christian quotes?

Can you imagine the the uproar if the quotes were from the Qur'an?

No military equipment should have any inscriptions of anything.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I wonder how people would react if the company was inscribing the sights with anti-christian quotes?

Can you imagine the the uproar if the quotes were from the Qur'an?

That was my point as well. By now, Rush and Fox would be claiming that Obama did it.

 

[zomgwtf]

I wonder how people would react if the company was inscribing the sights with anti-christian quotes?

Can you imagine the the uproar if the quotes were from the Qur'an?

That was my thoughts exactly when I was reading through this thread just now. I think the difference though is that America IS a predominantly christian country. Last I heard it was some where around 80% christians, 15% atheist/agnostic etc. and the rest were other religions.

So to switch the context of what you prepose, would it be ok if an islamic state were doing the same thing? I do not think the American people would have THAT big of a problem with it. (I'm pretty sure the extremist we're already fighting yell religious things and follow religious pracitces before fighting etc.)

EDIT: Of course it's not part of theses islamic states constitution saying they won't do these sorts of things while it is in the American. Personally however I don't see why the problem is SO big. Who cares if some company had decided to inscript a few passages onto the scopes they sell? I certainly don't, and I highly doubt it makes a difference to the enemy after they've been shot by one.

 

[BobG]

Well...on one hand I think it would be quite a waste of the government's money to replace all the scopes with non-inscribed ones. On the other, I find the integration of religion into any part of the government to be unacceptable and should be punished as to avoid making a similar error again. The military rules clearly state that religious propaganda was unwanted for the war which the scopes were required for. After all, this was a 660 million contract, I am sure the government does not just blindly hand over the money to these people, without giving them a full list of military rules and regulations they have to follow. The owner may have been a christian before his "good lord' made him die in a crash, but that does NOT give the right to future people who run this company to break the laws and instructions they are given. And they clearly know it was wrong to do, otherwise they wouldn't have tried to hide it by masking it as some kind of serial number. To me, the company responsible needs to be punished with legal action for breach of important rules specified in their contracts (I got to say, even without seeing the contract, i am 99.9% sure one of the requirements is that there should be no personalization of the weapon parts done by the company, least of all with christian verses), the government should sue for their money back and use the money to replace all the scopes and stop Jeebus from targeting people abroad.

I think you'd need to provide some idea of what "important rules specified in their contracts" that they violated. This isn't the sort of the thing the average contracting officer would be thinking about when drawing up the requirements, nor when evaluating whether the contractor's product met the requirements.

And one could say that if contracting officers do have a list of politically correct requirements that have to be met before even considering performance requirements, then [uh-oh] help our troops. Well, at least one could say that if there weren't special consideration given to small businesses, minority owned businesses, woman owned businesses, etc. Actually, it would practically be business as usual.

There used to be a saying in the military about how anyone thinking about becoming a paratrooper should keep in mind that his parachute would be made by the lowest bidder. Nowadays, perhaps there's a few more things a paratrooper should keep in mind before jumping out of the plane.

Yes, now that it's known, the military should tell the company they'd appreciate it if the verses were left off future purchases, but I think it's a minor issue - far less important than whether or not the sights actually work.

Who cares if some company had decided to inscript a few passages onto the scopes they sell? I certainly don't, and I highly doubt it makes a difference to the enemy after they've been shot by one.

Mona Lisa Vito (of "My Cousin Vinny") would agree:

Imagine you're a deer. You're prancing along. You get thirsty. You spot a little brook. You put your little deer lips down to the cool, clear water - BAM. A xxxxx bullet rips off part of your head. Your brains are lying on the ground in little bloody pieces. Now I ask ya, would you give a xxxx what kind of pants the son-of-a-xxxx who shot you was wearing?

 

[BobG]

That is an internal document, not advertising.

There is a big difference between tradition, and projection.

I'm not quite sure what you mean. Which would the Land of Lakes butter girl be?

 

[zomgwtf]

I think you'd need to provide some idea of what "important rules specified in their contracts" that they violated. This isn't the sort of the thing the average contracting officer would be thinking about when drawing up the requirements, nor when evaluating whether the contractor's product met the requirements.

And one could say that if contracting officers do have a list of politically correct requirements that have to be met before even considering performance requirements, then [uh-oh] help our troops. Well, at least one could say that if there weren't special consideration given to small businesses, minority owned businesses, woman owned businesses, etc. Actually, it would practically be business as usual.

There used to be a saying in the military about how anyone thinking about becoming a paratrooper should keep in mind that his parachute would be made by the lowest bidder. Nowadays, perhaps there's a few more things a paratrooper should keep in mind before jumping out of the plane.

Yes, now that it's known, the military should tell the company they'd appreciate it if the verses were left off future purchases, but I think it's a minor issue - far less important than whether or not the sights actually work.



Mona Lisa Vito (of "My Cousin Vinny") would agree:

Agreed completely, imagine this situation though: the contracting officer tells the company that due to the fact they put these inscriptions on their sights that they will not be used. I think many more Americans would have a problem with that. Instead they just took it as what it was, a functioning product.

Does anyone here shop at Forever XXI? Look on the bottom of your bag next time

 

[Ivan Seeking]

What makes this important is the message it sends in a critically sensative situation. To not understand this is to be oblivious to the world arsound us. This is not a matter of opinion. It is a matter of grasping reality.

Remember that we did invade a Muslim country for no reason. Also recall that what turned the tide of the war in Iraq was the Sunni awakening. In order for that to happen, the Sunnis had to recognize that the insurgents were more dangerous than us. Giving the radical Islamic groups a new recruiting tool is not in our best interest.

 

[zomgwtf]

What makes this important is the message it sends in a critically sensative situation. To not understand this is to be oblivious to the world arsound us. This is not a matter of opinion. It is a matter of grasping reality.

Remember that we did invade a Muslim country for no reason.

So what if America is currently at war? Some christians want to make noise back at the muslims during a war, why's that such a big deal. Obviously their are going to be drawbacks and reasons why they shouldn't have the inscriptions on any part of their rifles, but is it really that big of a deal?

As well I do not think it's fair for you to post 'we did invade a Muslim country for no reason'.

EDIT: for your edit, I was unaware that killing a muslim with a rifle having christian inscriptions on it was giving them a 'new tool' to use. You can hardly try and claim that the muslims in these areas do NOT know that America is predominantly christian and probably the most religious first world nation in the world. That's bogus and all of this just seems pessimistic.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

So what if America is currently at war? Some christians want to make noise back at the muslims during a war, why's that such a big deal.

You just made the problem about as clear as it can be: This is NOT a war between Christians and Muslims. If we convey the message that it is, we have a whole new ball game. Even Bush went out of his way to avoid the crusade language [after his first idiotic mistake]. Even the Bush admin muzzled Bush when he started down that path.

As well I do not think it's fair for you to post 'we did invade a Muslim country for no reason'.

We responded to 911 by attacking the wrong country. I don't know how much more clear it can be be. No wmds, no link to 911, no reason for the invasion. The only justification was that Saddam posed an imminent threat to our national security, but he did not represent an imminent threat, therefore the war was not justified.

 

[kyleb]

Well, if it's just Christianity that people have a problem with...

No, it's the promotion of any particular institution of religion which is the problem, Christianity just happens to be the one promoted on the scopes. It's the same problem http://books.google.com/books?id=5C... religion, an amendment was proposed&f=false":

Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting the words “Jesus Christ,” so that it should read, “A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;” the insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination.

You can hardly try and claim that the muslims in these areas do NOT know that America is predominantly christian and probably the most religious first world nation in the world.

And the vast majorty of our population was Christian back when we were founded too. However, as noted in our http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/bar1796t.asp" :

...the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion...

 

[BobG]

If this is a correct quote, athiest "Michael "Mikey" Weinstein" is an idiot who does not know the meaning of "The separation of church and state" which should be part of his bivwack as an atheist advocate, nor knows its historical appearance and why, nor probably realizes that the phrase has no legal merit, appearing nonwhere in the Delclaration of Independence nor the Constitution.

I'm pretty sure he knows what he is talking about, the markings on the sights being unconstitutional for the same reason posting the Ten Commandments on a courthouse is. Also, how did you come to the conclusion that he is an atheist?

He's Jewish, not atheist - and he's anti-Evangelical, not anti-religion.

His obsessiveness is also beyond rational and he seems overly impressed with his past accomplishments. While there's nothing in particular you can put your finger own, he just gives me the impression of a person searching for personal attention in the public arena and his cause is just a vehicle to get him there. Weinstein may be the person who elevated the sights to public attention, but I think Weinstein, himself, is just a distracting sideshow to what's a minor issue in its own right.

The sights are definitely not on a level with posting the 10 Commandments. The 10 Commandments were something even the average person would clearly understand. OmCheeto's references provide the perfect example - what does 2P3:16 mean, anyway? Does the P stand for Paul, Peter, or something else, such as Phillistines (seems a lot of the books were written by Paul with the title relating where Paul was when he wrote it). It takes some specialized knowledge or research to figure out where to go to get the "secret" revealed by the code. I think it's too obscure to be any kind of issue.

 

[mgb_phys]

EDIT: for your edit, I was unaware that killing a muslim with a rifle having christian inscriptions on it was giving them a 'new tool' to use.

Suppose you are trying to persuade normal reasonable middle class iraqis that this isn't a holy war against Islam but an attempt to bring peace and democracy to the middle east. This isn't exactly helping your case.
It's rather like re-painting all police cars in Alabama with confederate flags in order to improve relations with the black community.

You would have thought that putting the wordsof the lamb of God on weapons would upset christians - but it seems that most christians have an image of Jesus as a cross between Chuck Norris and John Wayne.

Finally if these have always been there it shows an odd lack of oversight by the army. Normally dealing with general military contracts is a pain due to the ridiculous amount of oversight involved - ie. here are the 100s of pages justifying why we have used a foreign sourced glass in this lens and what proportion of the paintjob was done by native-american veteran owned businesses.,
So somebody (actually given military - a chain of somebodies) either didn't notice or approved this.

 

[drankin]

Suppose you are trying to persuade normal reasonable middle class iraqis that this isn't a holy war against Islam but an attempt to bring peace and democracy to the middle east.

The fact is, we are a predominately Christian nation. Whether we have teeny coded inscriptions on our rifles or not is does not make a damn bit of difference to an Iraqi. They ALREADY KNOW that we are mostly Christian people. It doesn't take a gunsight on a "soldiers" rifle to prove this.

 

[Proton Soup]

He's Jewish, not atheist - and he's anti-Evangelical, not anti-religion.

His obsessiveness is also beyond rational and he seems overly impressed with his past accomplishments. While there's nothing in particular you can put your finger own, he just gives me the impression of a person searching for personal attention in the public arena and his cause is just a vehicle to get him there. Weinstein may be the person who elevated the sights to public attention, but I think Weinstein, himself, is just a distracting sideshow to what's a minor issue in its own right.

i have noticed this, as well

The sights are definitely not on a level with posting the 10 Commandments. The 10 Commandments were something even the average person would clearly understand. OmCheeto's references provide the perfect example - what does 2P3:16 mean, anyway? Does the P stand for Paul, Peter, or something else, such as Phillistines (seems a lot of the books were written by Paul with the title relating where Paul was when he wrote it). It takes some specialized knowledge or research to figure out where to go to get the "secret" revealed by the code. I think it's too obscure to be any kind of issue.

i do wonder at what level of obscurity this would become a non-issue. suppose the inscription were coded in ROT13? or if it were located somewhere inside the scope so that no one could see it? would it be a non-issue then, or am i to think these atheists really DO believe it becomes a spiritually-transformed weapon of the Lord?

 

[BobG]

Suppose you are trying to persuade normal reasonable middle class iraqis that this isn't a holy war against Islam but an attempt to bring peace and democracy to the middle east. This isn't exactly helping your case.

Is there a significant percentage of Iraqis that believe the US is fighting a holy war against Islam? Or are more Iraqis concerned about what happens to their oil and what role the US might play in that? Or is the number of Iraqis concerned about a Christian-Islamic holy war irrelevant - it's just a good preventative measure to do anything possible to avoid that impression? Because so far the Iraqis haven't caught on to our secret plan?


Iraq poll 2007

While that doesn't address the US, per se, how many Iraqis remember why the US helped put the Shah back in power in Iran? Oil and who controls it is a lot more realistic issue than holy wars. And last month's auction should reduce those fears, as well: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1948787,00.html?iid=sphere-inline-bottom. In fact, one would expect US forces to withdraw fairly soon and let the countries with companies doing business in Iraq worry about security.



This poll might lend some indirect support to your point, but it still really only addresses who Iraqis have more confidence in - Iraqis or Americans? It doesn't really address why Iraqis might trust Iraqis more than they trust Americans. I don't think that would happen in the US. I'm pretty sure Americans would do just the opposite - and trust Americans more than Iraqis. But, it is kind of bothersome that Iraqis trust local militias more than they trust the US military.
Iraq poll 2008 - question 14, 19, 20 & 21

Unfortunately, there just don't seem to be any polls asking Iraqis if they think the US is conducting a holy war.

 

[zomgwtf]

Is there a significant percentage of Iraqis that believe the US is fighting a holy war against Islam? Or are more Iraqis concerned about what happens to their oil and what role the US might play in that? Or is the number of Iraqis concerned about a Christian-Islamic holy war irrelevant - it's just a good preventitive measure to do anything possible to avoid that impression? Because so far the Iraqis haven't caught on to our secret plan?

This was what I was attempting to get on to however people went off tangent saying that 'we're not fighting a holy war' etc. This has nothing to do with it... I'm sure that many American soldiers are practicing christians, even over seas. If their allowed they probably have crosses on chains around their necks or other religious symbols etc. are THEY too fighting a personal holy war against the muslims just because they are christian and decide to show it? I do not think so at all, they are just christians fighting in a war with the rest of their country.

Just because a predominantly christian country, with christians who are NOT afraid to show that they are christian, is fighting a country which is predominantly another religion does NOT make it a holy war. I highly doubt the Iraqi people think that Americans are 'neutral' in regard to religion (as a whole country). To think that is an insult to their intelligence.

It DOES make sense to be pessimistic about the situation and have the inscriptions removed as a 'preventive measure' but my whole point was that it's not that big of a deal. I feel like I can almost gurantee that Iraqi's are not afraid of Americans because they are christian on a crusade, let alone even think that is what America is doing.

If I were Iraqi I would rather be afraid of imperialism and monopolies being set up on my countries natural resources.

 

[zomgwtf]

This poll might lend some indirect support to your point, but it still really only addresses who Iraqis have more confidence in - Iraqis or Americans? It doesn't really address why Iraqis might trust Iraqis more than they trust Americans. I don't think that would happen in the US. I'm pretty sure Americans would do just the opposite - and trust Americans more than Iraqis. But, it is kind of bothersome that Iraqis trust local militias more than they trust the US military.
Iraq poll 2008 - question 14, 19, 20 & 21

I know the situation in Iraq is fairly different than Afghanistan but I think that same sense of fear goes through the general population when it comess to accepting foreign help and being friendly with them.

It's not necessary the views of the force that is there it's just what will happen when America leaves? It's not like the Americans are going to shoot the population in the head if they don't trust them, they just keep on going. If they betray the trust of Iraqi forces however it's completely different, and they better pray Americans stay and keep the Iraqi forces out.