US Military Chaplains & al Jazeera, Redux
The internet is awash with people calling for court-martial and other repercussions for the soldiers shown on al Jazeera (as discussed previously). Some have even said their actions are evidence of a larger conspiracy, and that they have endangered their fellow troops.
Problem is, they’re talking about fictional events.
Based on all the information that is now available, here’s a really, really simplified and slightly dramatized version for those that can’t comprehend what happened (names changed):
Sgt Smith is being filmed talking to a Chaplain. He says, “On my missions, I’m going to hand out Bibles.” The Chaplain says, “You need to be careful about that.” End of video.
The next day (and off camera), the Chaplain finds Sgt Smith and says, “I talked to Maj Doe and Chaplain John, and we’ve agreed that it would be inappropriate for you to do that. In fact, give me the Bibles you were going to hand out.” Sgt Smith does, the Chaplain discusses the propriety of the behavior, and the leadership is satisfied. The military considers the case closed.
But that’s not where it ends.
A year later, the videographer gives the film–which only contains the initial statement–to al Jazeera. Soon, the world sees Sgt Smith talk about handing out Bibles and accusations arise that the Chaplain is encouraging troops to begin a crusade.
With only the video to suggest what occurred, advocacy organizations start talking about how this is damaging America’s reputation in the Muslim world, being used as a recruiting tool for al Qaeda, and endangering our troops.
Americans United for the Separation of Church and State called the video proof of “the military’s proselytizing plan.” The Military Religious Freedom Foundation called it proof that “evangelical Christians…are putting their fellow soldiers at extreme risk by attempting to convert Afghans to Christianity.” To the contrary, while the video may suggest many things, it proves nothing.
These activist organizations have extrapolated from the video; the problem with extrapolation is that in the absence of facts, all they’ve done is create fiction. There is no evidence of an institutional “proselytizing plan;” in fact, the institution prevented “proselytizing.” Likewise, no soldiers attempted to convert Iraqis in re: this video because the military chain of command interceded, as it is intended to do. Is it possible the military is lying and covering up a scandal, or that the Sergeant did things on his own anyway? While unlikely, it may be possible, but evidence should be produced to support that assertion. Instead, unfounded speculation is not only being presented as fact, but is also being applied to the US military as a whole.
The AU and the MRFF have packaged fiction as fact in an inflammatory manner. They have accused soldiers of endangering their comrades. The video misrepresents actual events, and the AU and MRFF’s highly publicized accusations are not supported by evidence. Regardless of statements by military personnel to the contrary, they have continued to say that this video shows Christians in the US military on a crusade against Islam. That assertion is demonstrably false, and it is irresponsible and dishonest to repeat it as fact.
The videographer has defended the context of the “hunting” sermon (the second portion of the al Jazeera segment) by saying he filmed the entire thing. That’s not the “context” that’s relevant. The missing context is the scenario: First, the sermon was completely unrelated to the initial al Jazeera segment on the local language Bibles. Presenting the two together insinuated a connection that did not exist. Second, the Chaplain was speaking religious beliefs as a religious person in a religious service to willing religious adherents. He is explicitly allowed to do that very thing, just as any Jewish, Catholic, or Islamic Chaplain is (and even Wiccan or atheist leader); it is legal and even encouraged.
The soldiers were exercising their Constitutional right to free exercise, as affirmed by the Supreme Court. In the available video, the preaching Chaplain never said anything that was prejudicial to command guidance (including General Order number one).
The “liberties” taken in the creation of the video are evidenced by a cut to a holstered pistol in between two shots of the Chaplain, which appears to imply that the Chaplain was carrying a sidearm. This implication is false, as the Chaplain’s belt can be seen during the clip and he’s not carrying a weapon. Still, the creative editing has caused some people to believe that mistaken and misleading representation.
The AU and MRFF are right that this video may very well damage the reputation of America abroad, act as a recruiting tool for al Qaeda, or endanger our troops. But the video is a carefully edited piece that misrepresents the true nature of the US military. If the AU and MRFF had defended the military’s appropriate actions, rather than vilifying the military with false accusations, perhaps they could have mitigated those risks…rather than contributed to them.
Totally disingenuous post, JD. Like a fish out of water, you are floundering. You’d like to deny what was blatantly clear by the video clips.
The next day (and off camera), the Chaplain finds Sgt Smith and says, “I talked to Maj Doe and Chaplain John, and we’ve agreed that it would be inappropriate for you to do that. In fact, give me the Bibles you were going to hand out.” Sgt Smith does, the Chaplain discusses the propriety of the behavior, and the leadership is satisfied. The military considers the case closed.
Who is creating the fiction, JD? What evidence have you got that this is how it happened? Do you have other information that the rest of us don’t? I’d be happy to examine it, and perhaps could be persuaded that things happened the way your fanciful flight hopes.
And the Inquisition was a friendly little quiz game to help kids with their Catechisms, entirely taken out of context.
Likewise, the Salem Witch trials were only conducted to help the women see the value of admitting their faults and getting the warm forgiveness only Christians can give. The accounts of their torture and burning at the stake was greatly exaggerated.
How could having thousands of local language Bibles, printed and shipped to Afghanistan be so utterly miscontrued? They were meant only as individual gifts to the fiercely Islamic natives but of course had to be passed out at gunpoint.
Many of our Chaplains and their close associates are hunters and being in the military don’t have much of a chance to hunt deer, bear or other game. So they’ve taken up hunting converts for Jesus. You can get a lot of attention from potential converts when your mission is accompanied by a Bradley Fighting vehicle and a couple of .50 Cal machine guns.
The criticism of the Boston Presbyterians who ministered to our Hawaiian friends were totally misunderstood as well. They were right to have those wanton hula sluts whipped. And it was only God’s will that brought syphillis and other deadly STD’s on the mission ships to decimate the population, as many of the sailors who accompanied the missionaries forgot to have their blood tests.
I was a tad upset however, when advised of the 760 cartons of Kool Aid mix shipped to our Chaplains in Iraq and Afganistan. I don’t think they would pull a Jim Jones or anything but it created a shortage of Pomegranite flavor.
Yes there are many poor misunderstood enclaves of friendly, outgoing and God fearing Christians. Remember WACO? Poor David Koresh torn from the bosom of his 12 year-old lovers. The unfortunate Marshall Applewhite who apparently didn’t drink enough poisoned voka to reach the UFO with Jesus in it. And trhe many others.
Let us remember that what our eyes and ears perceive cannot always be counted on when dealing with our Christian friends. They have a way of being totally miscontrued and when a Chaplain says “These thousands of Bibles are to be individual gifts to the wonderfu;l Afghan people you know he really means it.
Excellent post, Richard Baker.
Is it possible the military is lying and covering up a scandal, or that the Sergeant did things on his own anyway? While unlikely,
JD, why is it unlikely? For God’s sake, you’ve got the Sergeant on tape, acknowledging that he gave out Bibles in Iraq!! The Chaplain should have shut him up right then and there for good, and without question, by saying we cannot evangelize these Muslim people by giving them these Bibles. That is not our mission.
You’d like us to assume that is what occurred…off camera. I doubt it! I have met too many fundamentalists to know better.
it may be possible, but evidence should be produced to support that assertion.
It is produced, JD. You’re just trying to shoot the messengers.
JD, I’m interested when did you attend the Air Force Academy? Or did you “mustang” into the Officer Corps? You must be aware of the Evangelicals confronting and intimidating Air Force recruits at the Academy?
Is this Evidence in your eyes?
What evidence have you got that this is how it happened?
The “evidence” that supports what I clearly described as a simplified and dramatized version of the story has been previously discussed; the military made official statements as to what occurred after the camera got turned off:
On the other hand, those that are asserting the opposite outcome are basing their stories on…nothing. If you don’t believe that’s what happened, provide evidence to the contrary. Otherwise, the accusations are unsubstanitated, inflammatory, irresponsible, and fiction.
How could having thousands of local language Bibles…? They…had to be passed out at gunpoint.
Rick, you’ve lost touch with reality again.
you’ve got the Sergeant on tape, acknowledging that he gave out Bibles in Iraq!!
No one has accused the Sergeant of any impropriety re: Iraq. They have only accused the group of soldiers for wanting to convert Afghans. If you’d like to accuse him, then do so. But that is not what the al Jazeera video is about.
Gene, you’ll have to explain to me how your referenced article is evidentiary of the actions of the soldiers on the video. The question is merely whether or not the soldiers on the tape were attempting to convert Afghans.
Now ain’t that just like JD? Always wanting the opposing dissenter to prove a negative.
It’s the same old ” I say God exists. Now you prove he doesn’t” routine.
Talk about evidentiary. Along with the thousands of examples of religious misdeeds throughout history, there are hundreds of cases of Christian misconduct. In a linear sense they provide evidence of every kind of crime against humanity known to man. And all in the name of religious supremacy and often coerced conversion. Today’s utter disregard for civil law and military regulation by certain Christian sects is a product of that heritage. That’s why it ios so easy to believe the Al Jazeera tapes.
The Great Commission, as practiced by today’s Dominion Christians, is in direct conflict with the discipline and good order of our military. Aided and abetted by senior officers and NCO’s, Dominion Christian organizations such as the Officers Christian Felllowship, Campus Crusade for Christ Military Mission, Christian Embassy, The Navigators, Focus on the Family, New Life Ministries and others have infiltrated military installations world wide with special emphasis on our service academies in an effort to Christianize the Armed Forces in preparation for world conquest. If this soiunds a bit huffy just google “Dominion Christianity” or “Christian Reconstructionism.”
My friends, when an operative of CCC, after taping a video at the AFA depicting cadets as asqueaky clean unified Christian Force, announces to them that they will, in fact, be PAID GOVERNMENT MISSIONARiES FOR CHRIST,” it’s hard to take that any other way than a gross violation of the Constitution.
Taken in aggregate, the number of incidents relating to overt and coercive proselytizing in the military are graphic proof of the Dominionist agenda.
One may parse the Al Jazeera video and look for commas and exclamation marks out of place but the real meaning is clear. Christian Supremacy, convert or kill and accomplish this with the force and power of the United States armed forces.
As has been pointed out, man cannot serve two masters. One must eventually be subordiated to the other. If you can serve the Constitution and your country and subordinate your religious beliefs, you can get along rather nicely. If you must serve your God and subordinate your service to the country and your oath to the constitution, then you must get a job at a Monastery where you can’t hurt anybody.
JD, Hmmm, my message was truncated. Apologies for the mistake. The remainder of the message was merely a query:
Do you think there is a proselytizing effort on going in the US military today?
There is a concerted effort directed at inculcating and indoctrinating young men while they are undergoing boot camp and acclimating to military life.
Your position seems to fall under the None so blind as those who will not see.
“Their code one is it didn’t happen. Code two is it’s an isolated incident. Code three, it was taken out of context.”
Apparently, the site I am citing is questionable – it places a post in moderation straight up.
So trying again:
Amy Goodman says, “Jeff Sharlet, first you. Talk about your reaction to these videotapes and the response by the military that it’s taken out of context.” (See code three above)
JEFF SHARLET: I think that’s anything but the truth. You know, what we see on that videotape is really just the tip of the iceberg. When Mikey Weinstein, the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, came to me and said, “You know, you should be writing about this subject,” I was a little skeptical that it could be as widespread as they said. But in more than a hundred interviews at every rank, I encountered that same kind of thinking. And the same kind of thing that you see there on display with Lieutenant-Colonel Hensley is replicated over and over and over, from private to general. But most frighteningly, it’s concentrated in the Officer Corps.
http://www.democracynow.org/2009/5/6/the_crusade_for_a_christian_military
But in more than a hundred interviews at every rank, I encountered that same kind of thinking.
Albatross says:
But in more than a hundred interviews at every rank, I encountered that same kind of thinking.
____________________________________________________________
Albatross,
This is because the Dominion Christian movement is epidemic. Having had the opportunity and the inventory to accomplish such wide spread infiltraton, they are well entrenched and able to deal with almost every opposing eventuality. They are smart and resourceful.
But there is a chink in their armor. Extremism. Once any philosphy, religious or political, is elevated to extremism, they have lost their direction, strategy and tactical advantage. They are now ABOVE the radar. The target is acquired and its vector and map co-ordinates is verified.
In short, we are on to them. We must exploit every opportunity to expose, oppose, and dispose of Dominionist influence in our military.
Just as all religious extremism must be disarmed, so must those who stand and wait in the wings, the authors of discord and terror, the puppet-masters, the behind the scenes perpetrators, irrespective of what grotesque caricature of religion they display. They must be reined in and intellectually neutralized.
Let us work together to bring the true American virtues of pluralism back to our troubled democracy.
If you agree that America is a secular nation in which all religions and non beliefs may flourish but none dominate, then contact the MRFF at militaryreligiousfreedom.com and help the over 12000 young service men and women who have sought assistance from MRFF in the face of coercive and debilitating Christian proselytizing. Most of these young men and women are self identified Christians.
It is vital that thinking Americans take action now.
Albatross, Richard Baker, et al…who is doing the “proselytizing”?
Since you have managed to divert the discussion from whether or not certain events happened over a year ago in Afghanistan and turned it into a blog about American religious freedom, let’s look at two important background elements to the argument of the place of religion in the USA.
Firstly words. The meaning of words is important. To wit:
pros·e·ly·tize
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): pros·e·ly·tized; pros·e·ly·tiz·ing
intransitive verb
1 : to induce someone to convert to one’s faith
2 : to recruit someone to join one’s party, institution, or cause
transitive verb
: to recruit or convert especially to a new faith, institution, or cause
Which of those meanings do you cling do in condemning the work of military Chaplains and of servicemembers of faith (that’s ANY faith)?
Second, let’s dust off that little document we swear to “support and defend” as officers/fighter pilots, specifically Amendment I to the Constitution:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”
There is much meat in that little amendment: no national religion, free exercise of any religion, freedom of speech, press, assembly, and petition. In short, your rights to disagree with Christians…BUT ALSO my right as a Christian to speak our respective minds and believe as we wish is enshrined.
I suggest that locking on and targeting fellow Americans for elimination (to “dispose” as you say), in any shape or fashion, is quite contrary to the Constitution. Perhaps that ought to be grounds for you to find another job, my friends. If you don’t think so, then let’s agree to disagree and move on to “expose, oppose, and dispose” of our nation’s REAL enemies in the world, together, providing each other mutual support.
May God bless you