ABC: U.S. Military Weapons Inscribed With Secret 'Jesus' Bible Codes

[Predicto]

Why? Trijicon is a private company. They can do anything (legal) with their product they want. Would you ask the U.S government to give our troops inferior weapons or capabilities because you know that the vendor making the weapon puts bible verses on their products?

Trijicon is not completely private - they are selling a product to the Government. The government often sets rules for the products they purchase from contractors.

Are you genuinely concerned that Trijicon would stop making gunsights if the government declined to buy any more that had bible verses on them?

[MrSilverMaC]

Of course not. Given the past Administration's approach to both military issues and the separation of church and state, I would suspect that these inscriptions were a positive for Trijicon in their eyes, not a negative. You need a holy weapon when you go Crusading against the Muslim hordes.

That may be true, but Trijicon is one of the best at what they do.

[MrSilverMaC]

Trijicon is not completely private - they are selling a product to the Government. The government often sets rules for the products they purchase from contractors.

Are you genuinely concerned that Trijicon would stop making gunsights if the government declined to buy any more that had bible verses on them?

I don't know what Trijicon would do. But they could tell the gov to pound salt if they believe strongly in it. It sounds strange, but some companies do have principles. And yes, I am concerned that they could do that.

[Koolblue13]

You dont honestly think that this is a "revelation" for the DOD do you?

Of course I don't. Wouldn't surprise me if they built an empire selling the military these things. They just never should have bought them and if this is not a holy war, then the government should just say stop or we do. The almighty dollar still controls most things.

Why? Trijicon is a private company. They can do anything (legal) with their product they want. Would you ask the U.S government to give our troops inferior weapons or capabilities because you know that the vendor making the weapon puts bible verses on their products?

Sure they can. I don't care if they make machine guns that sound like gospel as opposed to machine gun sounds.

The bakery across the street can keep making ****ty danishes. I'll just walk down the block to get better ones.

But I bet they are making a bit more money selling military weapons, then the bakery and would hate to lose that.

[Predicto]

I don't know what Trijicon would do. But they could tell the gov to pound salt if they believe strongly in it. It sounds strange, but some companies do have principles. And yes, I am concerned that they could do that.

It may sound strange, but the government does not have to completely allow contractors to do whatever they want just because they are good at what they do. Lockheed follows lots of rules. So does Raytheon. There is no reason that Trijicon should be exempt.

[SnyderShrugged]

Of course I don't. Wouldn't surprise me if they built an empire selling the military these things. They just never should have bought them and if this is not a holy war, then the government should just say stop or we do. The almighty dollar still controls most things.

Sure they can. I don't care if they make machine guns that sound like gospel as opposed to machine gun sounds.

The bakery across the street can keep making ****ty danishes. I'll just walk down the block to get better ones.

But I bet they are making a bit more money selling military weapons, then the bakery and would hate to lose that.

but what you are overlooking is that the DOD doesnt have an issue with this molehill non-news story. They dont need to do anything about it because there isnt a need nor a problem from their perspective.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trijicon

"A spokesman for U.S. Central Command, which manages military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, said the inscribed sights don't violate the military's self-imposed ban on proselytizing because there's no effort to distribute the equipment beyond the U.S. troops who use them. "This situation is not unlike the situation with U.S. currency," said the spokesman, Air Force Maj. John Redfield. "Are we going to stop using money because the bills have 'In God We Trust' on them? As long as the sights meet the combat needs of troops, they'll continue to be used."[2]

[Koolblue13]

but what you are overlooking is that the DOD doesnt have an issue with this molehill non-news story. They dont need to do anything about it because there isnt a need nor a problem from their perspective.

Oh, I get that and that's one of the major problems I have with this.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Why don't you bring it up the next time you're in a foxhole or shooting back at the enemy who is screaming Allah is great. I'm sure that is a hot button issue over there for my troops.

Don't be dense! We have Muslim soldiers fighting over there too in those foxholes. You know of all the really dumb things I've read yours takes the cake.

[MrSilverMaC]

The bakery across the street can keep making ****ty danishes. I'll just walk down the block to get better ones.

But I bet they are making a bit more money selling military weapons, then the bakery and would hate to lose that.

I bet they do make a pretty penny making these for our military. And yeah, the gov most certainly can make the request that they change, and you are right about the dollar ruling.

But it's not as simple as saying they are going to walk down the street to a better baker. In most cases Trijicon IS the better baker. If I am not mistaken, the tactical sight that Trijicon makes is the gold standard for tac optics. Not only that, they are a U.S company.

Personally,I would rather have a Jewish serviceman or service woman using top notch equipment even if it has a bible reference on it than them using something inferior, even if only slightly, that sdoesn't have the reference.

[China]

A spokesman for U.S. Central Command, which manages military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, said the inscribed sights don't violate the military's self-imposed ban on proselytizing because there's no effort to distribute the equipment beyond the U.S. troops who use them. "

So we don't supply this equipment to any Iraqi or Afghan troops?

[JMS]

The government should just say stop doing that or we stop buying from you. Done.

I can't see a government contractor doing this on it's own. I'm thinking this is some high military officials agenda, imposing it on the government contractor who is willing to bend over backwards to please his customer.

That's my take on it. It's way to controversial for an industrialist to implement.

[JMS]

I don't know what Trijicon would do. But they could tell the gov to pound salt if they believe strongly in it. It sounds strange, but some companies do have principles. And yes, I am concerned that they could do that.

You think a government contractor with an 800 million dollar contract would walk way from it if asked to remove bible verses from the ocular?

You could be right, I don't see it.

[Predicto]

Personally,I would rather have a Jewish serviceman or service woman using top notch equipment even if it has a bible reference on it than them using something inferior, even if only slightly, that sdoesn't have the reference.

I agree. But I think that it is very unlikely that those are the only two possible outcomes here.

[Koolblue13]

I can't see a government contractor doing this on it's own. I'm thinking this is some high military officials agenda, imposing it on the government contractor who is willing to bend over backwards to please his customer.

That's my take on it. It's way to controversial for an industrialist to implement.

Maybe. May have just been a selling point.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Maybe. May have just been a selling point.

Anyone figure out when these contracts were awarded yet? I'm wondering if perhaps they coincided with the Pentagon reports from Donald Rumsfeld that had Bible verses on them.

[SnyderShrugged]

Anyone figure out when these contracts were awarded yet? I'm wondering if perhaps they coincided with the Pentagon reports from Donald Rumsfeld that had Bible verses on them.

most recent one was July of 2009.

[Koolblue13]

Anyone figure out when these contracts were awarded yet? I'm wondering if perhaps they coincided with the Pentagon reports from Donald Rumsfeld that had Bible verses on them.

Great question, but like I said before. I wouldn't be surprised if it started 100 years ago or yesterday.

[MrSilverMaC]

It may sound strange, but the government does not have to completely allow contractors to do whatever they want just because they are good at what they do. Lockheed follows lots of rules. So does Raytheon. There is no reason that Trijicon should be exempt.

I know. And yes the gov could say do this or lose your contract. But Trijicon could also say we are not going to stop this, you agreed to buy our product knowing this is how we made it.

Some companies who have a religious side to it are rather principled. Some. Not many, but some. Just for an example (and I am sure someone will laugh or make a comment that I bring it up) take In N Out. They also put bible references on their products (cups and wrappers.) They undoubtedly lose business because of this for people that have an issue with it, but they still do it.

Being good doesn't mean you get to do what you want and still get everything you want, but Trijicon has the option to continue making optics without a government contract if it is that important to them.

[MrSilverMaC]

You think a government contractor with an 800 million dollar contract would walk way from it if asked to remove bible verses from the ocular?

You could be right, I don't see it.

I don't either, but you never know.

[Predicto]

I know. And yes the gov could say do this or lose your contract. But Trijicon could also say we are not going to stop this, you agreed to buy our product knowing this is how we made it.

Some companies who have a religious side to it are rather principled. Some. Not many, but some. Just for an example (and I am sure someone will laugh or make a comment that I bring it up) take In N Out. They also put bible references on their products (cups and wrappers.) They undoubtedly lose business because of this for people that have an issue with it, but they still do it.

Being good doesn't mean you get to do what you want and still get everything you want, but Trijicon has the option to continue making optics without a government contract if it is that important to them.

That is true. It seems kind of silly to assume in advance that they would do that, and thus turn a blind eye to a Trijicon practice that is not in our countries' best interest (and may be legally questionable as well).

If the government decided to subcontract with In N Out for feeding our troops overseas, I would hope they would require In N Out to take out the Bible references as well.

[MrSilverMaC]

I agree. But I think that it is very unlikely that those are the only two possible outcomes here.

No, you are right, they aren't. The gov can ask Trijicon to put the reference somewhere less conspicuous. Trijicon could offer to stop the practice in order to save everyone the trouble. there are alot of other ways this could go.

My opinion though is simply that if they did it before they got the contract, and still got it, if they did it before and make one of the best tactical sights in the world the issue being raised isn't an issue.

There is no issue with the separation of church and state. And if the issue with the product is from an ideological standpoint and not a performance standpoint then performance has to be the deciding factor.

[Predicto]

And if the issue with the product is from an ideological standpoint and not a performance standpoint then performance has to be the deciding factor.

Again, however, you are presenting a false choice.

Unless the presence of the bibilical reference is necessary to somehow maintain the targeting capabilities of the sight, then it is not a straightforward question of performance vs. ideology.

Moreover, in this situation the "ideology" is not just an empty exercise. We are doing our best to demonstrate to the people of the Middle East that we are there because of terrorism, and are not there as Christian Crusaders against all of Islam. This kind of stuff undercuts that vital message.

[AsburySkinsFan]

There is no issue with the separation of church and state. And if the issue with the product is from an ideological standpoint and not a performance standpoint then performance has to be the deciding factor.

I'm sorry but this interferes with the mission over there, we are trying hard to not fall into the crusader label that many over there want to put on our efforts and this only substantiates that claim.

Besides that its just awful; I bet they don't use MATT5:44

[Vicious]

It doesn't help when psycho christians like the blackwater CEO are pushing an agenda other than securing resources for America.

It just doesn't look good.

[AsburySkinsFan]

It doesn't help when psycho christians like the blackwater CEO are pushing an agenda other than securing resources for America.

It just doesn't look good.

Ok, I had to read this about four times to make sure, and I think this may be a first, but Vicious I agree with you.