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

[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.

 

[BobG]

Er, I'm not from the Middle East by any stretch, but rather American from generations of the same. I wasn't rightly ranting either though, just listing off some previously referenced facts drakin seems intent on ignoring.

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 finally dawned on me how Ivan was reading your name. Ky-leb, kyle-b, eb kyl, ebeneezer kylandermander, meh, what's the difference?

And don't feel bad. Personally, I have to go through life with half the people I meet saying my name backwards.

 

[dotman]

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.

It is a big deal, but not the way you're looking at it. The problem is not the Iraqis. The problem is the terrorist organizations. They are looking at America in the middle east as a holy war, and they are recruiting on this basis. This just gives them another piece of ammunition to win over one more mind and turn one more young person into a suicide bomber. When they are meeting with these youths, and they show them a captured American firearm with an inscription on it, and tell them what it means, well, that right there is solid evidence that a holy war is already underway, and the only thing they can do is fight back for their faith. They are able to show concrete evidence.

By putting these inscriptions on the rifles you are giving them another way to help recruit people to their cause, and for what? We gain nothing for the risk. It's ridiculously stupid, and has certainly put American lives in jeopardy.

And don't feel bad. Personally, I have to go through life with half the people I meet saying my name backwards.

How do you say 'G' backwards?

 

[zomgwtf]

It is a big deal, but not the way you're looking at it. The problem is not the Iraqis. The problem is the terrorist organizations. They are looking at America in the middle east as a holy war, and they are recruiting on this basis. This just gives them another piece of ammunition to win over one more mind and turn one more young person into a suicide bomber. When they are meeting with these youths, and they show them a captured American firearm with an inscription on it, and tell them what it means, well, that right there is solid evidence that a holy war is already underway, and the only thing they can do is fight back for their faith. They are able to show concrete evidence.

By putting these inscriptions on the rifles you are giving them another way to help recruit people to their cause, and for what? We gain nothing for the risk. It's ridiculously stupid, and has certainly put American lives in jeopardy.
How do you say 'G' backwards?

No. Iraq wasn't a major sponsor of terrorism and was definitely not a major sponsor of terrorism against U.S.A., if at all. Hussein had sponsored terrorist that were fighting against the governments of neighboring states i.e. Iran, Palestine... turkey. These groups were busy mostly fighting against their own government to be too bothered with launching attacks against America or any other developed nation for that matter.

A way I think that terrorism HAS made America look bad however is the Palestine-Israel fighting going on, which Hussein had a hand in as far as I know.

Also as far as I know the only other times that terrorism has been used against America from Iraq was during Bush Sr..

In short, the 'terrorist'(they are probably best called rebel) groups in Iraq probably don't care at all that the guns being used against them have inscriptions on them. They care that AMERICANS have invaded their country.
------------------

The youth are just from the general population. Do you think that the terrorist organization have breeding factories and indoctrinate these poor children from birth? Obviously not, maybe they do indoctrinate hate into them at a young age and bring them up with that but so what? An inscription on a gun will not change this, and the terrorist organizations do NOT need these inscriptions to show that America is a very christian state. IDC what people say about America's constituition or founding principals, it means NOTHING when you look at the reality of the situation in America.

So to conclude, it does NOT matter if there are inscriptions on the American sights, it will not increase or decrease recruitment to 'terrorist' organizations within any country. If these countries DO want to use religion they will use what their OWN religion says first, and foremost, and they can just use the well known fact that America is a christian state. So this means that the inscriptions on the guns are a rather small problem. Saying that they will cause more recruitment or feed the fire is just being pessimistic, it's not the inscriptions fault.

However I will agree that they should be removed it just seems rediculous that a weapon will have religious inscriptions on them.

 

[Phrak]

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?

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

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.

I have no idea how you come up with this rhetoric. Try supporting with some grounds in early American legal history. The Constitution is a short document. Read it and you won't find what you seem to believe it contains, that is only vaporware of modern oral tradition.

 

[Evo]

I have no idea how you come up with this rhetoric. Try supporting with some grounds in early American legal history. The Constitution is a short document. Read it and you won't find what you seem to believe it contains, that is only vaporware of modern oral tradition.

Honestly Phrak, what people thought over 200 years ago is neither here nor there.

We have to deal with the here and now. And religious references do not belong on military equipment, that goes for any references that push any agenda or belief. They should not be there.

 

[Nebula815]

Honestly Phrak, what people thought over 200 years ago is neither here nor there.

Just playing some devil's advocate here, but in Roe v Wade history played an important role in the decision (if I remember right).

We have to deal with the here and now. And religious references do not belong on military equipment, that goes for any references that push any agenda or belief. They should not be there.

I agree.

 

[kyleb]

I have no idea how you come up with this rhetoric. Try supporting with some grounds in early American legal history. The Constitution is a short document. Read it and you won't find what you seem to believe it contains, that is only vaporware of modern oral tradition.

I've read our Constitution numerous times, along with our Bill of Rights, which I know contains the statement "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion". I also know that Establishment Clause has been cited as the basis for disallowing the promotion of of establishments of religion on government property, such as in http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&navby=case&vol=000&invol=03-1693". That's not rhetoric, it's facts. If you know of some early American legal history or other facts to support your claim then I'd be interested in seeing them, but at this point I get the impression that all you've got is handwaving.

 

[zomgwtf]

Honestly Phrak, what people thought over 200 years ago is neither here nor there.

We have to deal with the here and now. And religious references do not belong on military equipment, that goes for any references that push any agenda or belief. They should not be there.

I agree. I think that the 'pushed agenda or belief' however is more-so on the personel of the American military than on the enemy.

I disagree however with anyone claiming it's dangerous for Americans and makes it look like a holy war etc.

 

[Cyrus]

I've read our Constitution numerous times, along with our Bill of Rights, which I know contains the statement "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion". I also know that Establishment Clause has been cited as the basis for disallowing the promotion of of establishments of religion on government property, such as in http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&navby=case&vol=000&invol=03-1693". That's not rhetoric, it's facts. If you know of some early American legal history or other facts to support your claim then I'd be interested in seeing them, but at this point I get the impression that all you've got is handwaving.

Wax on, wax off. Cyrus 01:20:10

 

[OmCheeto]

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.

Finally...

2nd Peter 3:16 says that if you disagree with me, then you are an idiot.

Quranic verse 33:7 references Jesus. ie, he is a prophet of Islam. Hence, claiming that putting Quranic verses on the scopes would make a difference to Muslims makes no sense.

John 11:35. Well, it's the only one I can quote without screwing it up: ἐδάκρυσεν ὁ ἰησοῦς

 

[OmCheeto]

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/jesus-rifles/story?id=9618791"
After ABC News Report, Trijicon Announces Plan to Remove Bible Codes from Gun Sights Provided to U.S. Military

Perhaps we can codify phrases by our founders, and send them into Trijicon.

BF:26 could be Benjamin Franklin's: Beer is proof that god loves us.

TJ:39 could be Thomas Jefferson's: Conquest is not in our principles. It is inconsistent with our government.

I do so love secret messages.

 

[OmCheeto]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/21/AR2010012102637.html?hpid=sec-nation"
The statement does not provide an estimate on the removal costs. A company spokesman did not return a telephone call.

I'd say, along with the $5 twitter for Haiti, we all send a $1 twitter to our kids overseas.

They can use it to buy some bubblegum, and put an abc glob over the demon inspired secret codes.

Cuz you know that J$&%# smoochin' company is going to J@* us out of a whole M#$#(&#^! inspired load of bucks to dremmel those micro sized stainless steel 5 characters * 600,000 = about 12 million bucks!

Ok... I'm done proselytizing. Whatever that means.