An investigation at Fort Gordon disproved Michael “Mikey” Weinstein’s claims that unsuspecting and unwilling Soldiers were force-marched to a Christian event, noting

The findings [of the investigation] determined the intent and guidance of the Senior Leaders and Chaplains was to make this a voluntary event.

However, Fort Gordon officials concluded that “miscommunication” may have led some Soldiers to think it was a mandatory event. Thus, they’ll clear this up in the future — by putting “THIS IS VOLUNTARY!!!” on future announcements: 

Overall general training to AIT leaders [will emphasize] that communication for these events must always be voluntary. Also, all written products of instruction from brigade to platoon level will make clear and emphasize the voluntary intent of the event.

That’s…interesting. One of the reasons Fort Gordon officials have committed to this course of action is Col Samuel Anderson’s belief that

We understand why some students concluded the event was mandatory.

Weinstein notes that Col Anderson went out of his way to make sure MRFF “clients” were interviewed — which means offended Soldiers with an axe to grind were the source of that conclusion.  (Even Fort Gordon’s pagans disputed the accusations.) One wonders if they’ll also have to include the definition of the word “voluntary” on those announcements, just to be clear.

Mikey Weinstein has, in the past, insinuated that US Marines were cowards and morons — also because of a voluntary event that an MRFF “client” felt “threatened” over.  One wonders if Weinstein is now trying to convince the Army the same of young Soldiers — and using his own “clients” as proof.

Still, what’s obviously missing is the smoking gun Weinstein claimed: According to Col Anderson, there’s no indication the investigation concluded anyone was ordered or otherwise commanded to attend the event. Fort Gordon only said they didn’t use the word “voluntary” enough times or in bold enough font.

Yet Weinstein is claiming “victory.”

There are two other important points: First, Weinstein has emphasized to the press that the offended Soldiers had to go to him — because they needed his protection and anonymity from…someone.  Yet Weinstein proudly noted those same Soldiers were interviewed to sway the investigation. There’s a contradiction of convenience.

Also, Mikey Weinstein was effusive in saccharine praise for Col Anderson, whom Weinstein credits with personally shepherding the “investigation,” keeping Mikey up to the minute with its status (by phone and email, he wants you to know), and going out of his way to make sure Weinstein’s personally designated “clients” were able to be “interviewed.”

Col Anderson ultimately sent an official email directly to Mikey Weinstein explaining the outcome to him in full detail — a message not only not required, but at times discouraged. In that message, Col Anderson thanked Weinstein and even invited him to make further inquiries.

The next day, Col Anderson sent another email with a much more personal tone, again thanking Weinstein, expressing his appreciation, validating Weinstein’s claim of a “problem,” and saying it was a “pleasure” to work with Weinstein.

It seems Weinstein has a new battle buddy — and that’s a subject for another time.

Subsequently covered at MilitaryTimes.com.

ADVERTISEMENT

---

---