NBC recently updated the controversy of Bible references being inscribed on the side of Trijicon’s ACOG weapon sites sold to the US military (as well as other nations).

Nearly three years later — despite the military’s assertion that is making “good progress” — the code remains on many rifles deploying to Afghanistan…

For those unfamiliar with the original story, Trijicon makes industry-leading sights for weapons and has sold them by the hundreds of thousands to the military.  (They’ve reportedly increased marksmanship in the Army.)  On the side of the scope, the identification number is followed by an abbreviation that refers to a Bible verse.

As is Trijicon tradition, every verse makes some reference to “light,” as their sights use a form of ‘light enhancing’ technology.

Michael Weinstein complained in 2010 that the world was going to end because these abbreviated Bible references were on the sides of weapon scopes.  His quote was classic:

“It allows the Mujahedeen, the Taliban, al Qaeda and the insurrectionists and jihadists to claim they’re being shot by Jesus rifles…”

Somehow they’re probably more concerned about being shot by 5.56mm pieces of lead, rather than the letters on the sides of the scope to which the weapon firing the shot is attached, particularly since they can’t even own a Bible under strict Islamic law to which the extremists adhere.  Trijicon ultimately offered a kit to remove the inscriptions.

But, nearly three years on, Weinstein may have something to add to the original accusation he made in 2010:

Coded biblical inscriptions play into the hands of “those who are calling this a Crusade…”   “We’re emboldening an enemy.”

So, three years later, there must be evidence of Weinstein’s assertion, right?

Turns out, no.

It is virtually certain that no member of any Islamic extremist group waging war on the United States of America knew the Bible references were on the sights prior to 2009.  Now, thanks to Michael Weinstein, some may know, assuming they can read and have access to the internet.  Even then, after nearly three years, Weinstein fails to provide a single piece of evidence that his original accusations were correct.

Instead, he repeats the same tired mantra:

It’s an embarrassment and makes us look exactly like the tenth incarnation of the crusades which launches 8 million new jihadist recruiting videos.

Something so “dangerous” to our troops that it required national media attention and claims of illegal activity — and yet nothing has come of it in all that time?  Perhaps it was more benign that Weinstein let on.

Surely Weinstein wouldn’t manufacture a controversy, would he?

For its part, the NBC story seems to have passed quietly.