WTF? "We hunt people for Jesus".?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cancel5
  • Start date Start date
He has claimed in an interview recently on MSNBC that it is more widespread than a few individuals.
I guess if the suit is successful we will find out the truth or some of it, anyway.

I don't know if you ever get the full scope when it comes to the military affairs.

With the obvious exception of gay individuals, I think the military is the most open institution in the country when it comes to being open and tolerant.

Yes, that is what he CLAIMS.... I think if he had the evidence of widespread situations like this he would have released it already.

That said, I do think this is a perfect story of intolerance and prejudice. The author is clearly bigoted against Christians and is looking to make a mountain out of a mole hill.

To me this is like saying .... well, this gay guy tried to hand me a brochure on gay rights and then equating it to 'gay people are all trying to force us to accept their views by pushing brochures down our throats'

Obviously this is all simply my opinion based on what we have discussed in this thread and the blurbs from your link. If we see evidence to the contrary I will of course recant.
 
What is currently going on in Afghanistan?

Is the Army really promoting a Crusade?

Are they passing out those ridiculous cartoon pamphlets and Bibles while in full uniform and on tanks?

Did the Secretary of the Army really make a speech at West Point in which he stated we are at battle with Islam?

What is going on in Pentagon where they are trying to make soldiers for Jesus?

We know that they were trying to use the Air Force Academy to create military missionaries?

A speech given by Army Lieutenant Colonel Greg Metzgar before the Officers Christian Fellowship – a group with 15,000 active members at 80 percent of military bases – in which he stressed: “Christian soldiers must always consider themselves behind enemy lines, even within the ranks, because every unsaved member of the military is a potential agent of ‘spiritual terrorism.’”

http://www.militaryreligiousfreedom.org/press-releases/harpers_newsstand.html

I plan to go and buy the Harper's magazine, this sounds like a very good article.

Bill Mahr also had a very good program this week which featured this topic.

It is incredible that this is going on within our military. It needs to be made public and stopped immediately!

This is not the New Crusades, people!

for some it is...especially those that declare this is a christian nation:(
 
With the obvious exception of gay individuals, I think the military is the most open institution in the country when it comes to being open and tolerant.

Yes, that is what he CLAIMS.... I think if he had the evidence of widespread situations like this he would have released it already.

That said, I do think this is a perfect story of intolerance and prejudice. The author is clearly bigoted against Christians and is looking to make a mountain out of a mole hill.

To me this is like saying .... well, this gay guy tried to hand me a brochure on gay rights and then equating it to 'gay people are all trying to force us to accept their views by pushing brochures down our throats'

Obviously this is all simply my opinion based on what we have discussed in this thread and the blurbs from your link. If we see evidence to the contrary I will of course recant.


http://men.style.com/gq/features/topsecret
 

Ok... I looked at the link... it had photos with scripture quotes on them. And?

Can you tell me who they were distributed to? Who distributed them?

Showing pictures with scripture and saying 'these are top secret' doesn't tell us anything other than someone took photos and put scripture quotes on them.

How about some details on distribution? and who they were distributed to?

Anything on that?
 
No problem, you gave some good insights, and somethings for me to think about.

The majority of the Afghan population is probably moderate, but the people who control them are not. I see our troops handing out Bibles as a way to inflame. I also do not think that the military should be in the business of conversion.

I guess it just goes along with my idea of the separation of church and state.

It is worrisome to me that there is any religious zealots in the Pentagon, like Boykins. One is too many in my opinion.

The military, the Pentagon should be neutral on religion.

I also don't think that they should sponsor Sporting events with tax payer dollars, but I seem to be in the minority on these things.

It concerns me some of the plans the religious right has for America. I am not a Christian and I don't want a Theocracy and there is a faction in America that would very much like this to be a Christian nation, huh, Ice Dancer...

It may seem insignificant, but they sneak up on you and an inch leads to a mile and I think they have gone too far in the last thirty years and I don't want them to have anymore power than they have been trying to steal!

Okay, I bought the magazine, read the article, and here's the scoop.

1. Some soldiers were desecrating Islamic sites in Samarra, which is a holy city to Muslims. They were spray-painting crosses on the buildings.

2. A lieutenant and a couple of sergeants commissioned their Special Forces interpreter, an Iraqi from Texas, to paint across their Bradley in giant red Arabic script: "Jesus killed Mohammed". Then this interpreter went on the roof with a bullhorn and shouted the phrase during evening call to prayer. When Iraqis came out to see what was going on, the SF guy fired a grenade launcher at them.

3. Maj. Genl. Johnny Weida made the Air Force Academy's National Day of Prayer services Christian only; he also created a code for evangelical cadets that when he said "Airpower" they were to respond "Rock Sir", a reference to Matthew 7:25.

4. Maj. Gen. Robert Caslen violated military ethics in 2007 by appearing in uniform, with six other Pentagon officers, in a video for the Christian Embassy, a fundamentalist ministry to Washington elites.

4. Lt. Gen. Robert Van Antwerp, Army chief of engineers, declared the baptism of 700 soldiers under his command evidence of the Lord's plan to "raise up a godly army".

5. Commanders conflate God with country by defining themselves as "spiritual warriors - ambassadors for Christ in uniform", and "government paid missionaries".

6. The Officers' Christian Fellowship has changed it's direction to a more militant one since 9/11, calling the global war on terror a "spiritual battle of the highest magnitude".

7. Three Christian evangelists speaking at the Air Force Academy proclaimed that the only solution to terrorism was to "kill Islam".


It's a long article with much more information than I've given here, and shows that what was once a fringe element is trying to move toward the mainstream. I think when you read it you'll agree that the article corroborates what you've written above, and also confirms some of those books about the religious right's plans for a theocracy.
 
Okay, I bought the magazine, read the article, and here's the scoop.

1. Some soldiers were desecrating Islamic sites in Samarra, which is a holy city to Muslims. They were spray-painting crosses on the buildings.

2. A lieutenant and a couple of sergeants commissioned their Special Forces interpreter, an Iraqi from Texas, to paint across their Bradley in giant red Arabic script: "Jesus killed Mohammed". Then this interpreter went on the roof with a bullhorn and shouted the phrase during evening call to prayer. When Iraqis came out to see what was going on, the SF guy fired a grenade launcher at them.

3. Maj. Genl. Johnny Weida made the Air Force Academy's National Day of Prayer services Christian only; he also created a code for evangelical cadets that when he said "Airpower" they were to respond "Rock Sir", a reference to Matthew 7:25.

4. Maj. Gen. Robert Caslen violated military ethics in 2007 by appearing in uniform, with six other Pentagon officers, in a video for the Christian Embassy, a fundamentalist ministry to Washington elites.

4. Lt. Gen. Robert Van Antwerp, Army chief of engineers, declared the baptism of 700 soldiers under his command evidence of the Lord's plan to "raise up a godly army".

5. Commanders conflate God with country by defining themselves as "spiritual warriors - ambassadors for Christ in uniform", and "government paid missionaries".

6. The Officers' Christian Fellowship has changed it's direction to a more militant one since 9/11, calling the global war on terror a "spiritual battle of the highest magnitude".

7. Three Christian evangelists speaking at the Air Force Academy proclaimed that the only solution to terrorism was to "kill Islam".


It's a long article with much more information than I've given here, and shows that what was once a fringe element is trying to move toward the mainstream. I think when you read it you'll agree that the article corroborates what you've written above, and also confirms some of those books about the religious right's plans for a theocracy.

http://www.reasonproject.org/newsfeed/item/jesus_killed_mohammed/
 
Ok... I looked at the link... it had photos with scripture quotes on them. And?

Can you tell me who they were distributed to? Who distributed them?

Showing pictures with scripture and saying 'these are top secret' doesn't tell us anything other than someone took photos and put scripture quotes on them.

How about some details on distribution? and who they were distributed to?

Anything on that?


The Secretary of Defense distributed them on a daily basis to the President, the Joint Chiefs of Staff and certain other high-ranking defense officials.
 
My point being that I'm just plain old not buying the "bad apples" bullshit. The Pentagon created an environment wherein torture of prisoners was an acceptable practice and created an environment wherein soldiers engaging in proselytizing both within and without the military was an acceptable practice.
 
The Secretary of Defense distributed them on a daily basis to the President, the Joint Chiefs of Staff and certain other high-ranking defense officials.

Ok... so your link stated...

" A series of cover sheets for intelligence reports written for Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld"

Hmmm... that says written FOR, not BY. They were not distributed BY him but TO him.

"The GQ article reports that the cover sheets were thought up by a general who worked on the Joint Staff, and that they replaced humorous covers that had been created in the prelude to the war. "

So even the GQ article says you are wrong.

"The magazine reported that some Pentagon officials were concerned that, if the cover sheets — which were marked “Top Secret” — were ever leaked, they could be interpreted as a suggestion that the war was religiously driven, a battle against Islam. But those officials were not named in the article, and a number of former Pentagon officials interviewed Sunday said they had no memory of seeing the illustrations or quotations."

So we know they were created by a general, yet no one remembers seeing them? Those that worked for Rumsfeld (obviously biased to a degree) said he would not have tolerated them.

Is it possible the General that created these cover sheets never actually distributed them?

I am not suggesting that there aren't cases where individuals within the military push religious views in inappropriate ways. I only have to look down the road at the academy to see examples of that. But this accusation that such events are widespread I beleive are blown way out of proportion.
 
Ok... so your link stated...

" A series of cover sheets for intelligence reports written for Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld"

Hmmm... that says written FOR, not BY. They were not distributed BY him but TO him.

"The GQ article reports that the cover sheets were thought up by a general who worked on the Joint Staff, and that they replaced humorous covers that had been created in the prelude to the war. "

So even the GQ article says you are wrong.

"The magazine reported that some Pentagon officials were concerned that, if the cover sheets — which were marked “Top Secret” — were ever leaked, they could be interpreted as a suggestion that the war was religiously driven, a battle against Islam. But those officials were not named in the article, and a number of former Pentagon officials interviewed Sunday said they had no memory of seeing the illustrations or quotations."

So we know they were created by a general, yet no one remembers seeing them? Those that worked for Rumsfeld (obviously biased to a degree) said he would not have tolerated them.

Is it possible the General that created these cover sheets never actually distributed them?

I am not suggesting that there aren't cases where individuals within the military push religious views in inappropriate ways. I only have to look down the road at the academy to see examples of that. But this accusation that such events are widespread I beleive are blown way out of proportion.


It was the first link I could find. I didn't read it. Apparently, it isn't a paragon of clarity.

The briefing are prepared for and distributed by the Secretary of Defense.

Here's another article that has more of the details:

WASHINGTON (AFP) — Former defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld routinely used militaristic passages from the Bible on the cover pages of White House intelligence documents, according to startling new revelations by GQ.

The magazine said he displayed the passages over photographs of US forces in Iraq to curry favor with then president George W. Bush, despite concerns about the incendiary impact on Islamic opinion if they were ever made public.

One of the images was from March 31, 2003, showing a US tank roaring through the desert about 10 days after the United States invaded Iraq to topple the regime of Saddam Hussein.

Over the image was printed a verse from Ephesians: "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."

The report by Robert Draper, who wrote a well-received book about Bush called "Dead Certain," also detailed the frustration and occasional fury of former officials who said Rumsfeld constantly undermined the president's goals.

Draper said: "Rumsfeld impaired administration performance on a host of matters extending well beyond Iraq to impact America's relations with other nations, the safety of our troops, and the response to Hurricane Katrina."

The bellicose passages of Scripture appeared on the front page of top-secret intelligence summaries prepared by the Pentagon for Bush, a born-again evangelical Christian, Draper reported.

The briefing documents were so sensitive that they were often hand-delivered by Rumsfeld to the White House, he said.


GQ published a slide-show of the images at http://men.style.com/gq/features/topsecret.

One showed US troops trudging through the desert under a passage from Isaiah: "Their arrows are sharp, all their bows are strung; their horses' hoofs seem like flint, their chariot wheels are like a whirlwind."

Another showed Saddam delivering a speech to camera with these words from the First Epistle of Peter: "It is God's will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish men."

Draper noted that unlike Bush, Rumsfeld did not wear his faith on his sleeve. And he said the use of the biblical passages was the brainchild of a director for intelligence working under the Pentagon chief.

"Still, the sheer cunning of pairing unsentimental intelligence with religious righteousness bore the signature of one man: Donald Rumsfeld," Draper's report said.

"At least one Muslim analyst in the (Pentagon) building had been greatly offended," it said.

"Others privately worried that if these covers were leaked during a war conducted in an Islamic nation, the fallout -- as one Pentagon staffer would later say -- 'would be as bad as Abu Ghraib'."

Bush himself discovered the perils of using Christian terminology when, five days after the September 11 attacks of 2001, he angered many in the Muslim world by describing his "war on terror" as a "crusade."

Some former officials cited by the New York Times played down the GQ report, expressing doubt that Bush regularly saw the Rumsfeld documents, which they said were less important than the president's daily intelligence briefing.

After months of criticism including an open revolt by several retired generals, Rumsfeld stepped down in November 2006, the day after the Republicans suffered a crushing defeat to the Democrats in congressional elections.

During one of his rare public appearances since then, Rumsfeld was denounced as a "war criminal" by two protestors at the White House Correspondents' Association dinner on May 9.
 
It was the first link I could find. I didn't read it. Apparently, it isn't a paragon of clarity.

The briefing are prepared for and distributed by the Secretary of Defense.

Here's another article that has more of the details:

ROFLMAO... WTF..... you aren't even reading the links you are providing?

What a complete douchebag.
 
Back
Top