Comments for U.S. Troops Proselytizing Muslims »
Posted By Spadecaller 7 months, 3 weeks ago in ReligionThe U.S. military denies that the video released on May 2, 2009 by Al Jazeera is evidence that our troops have been proselytizing Muslims in Afghanistan. They claim that the video depicted an isolated incident, and that the chaplains' statements were taken out of context.
In response to the military’s claim that the Al Jazeera video was taken out of context, Al Jazeera released the raw footage to prove that it wasn't. The soldiers are legally allowed to proselytize, but only as individuals and not as representatives of the US government. However, in Afghanistan and Iraq they are soldiers full-time, so what they are doing is clearly in violation of both US law and their oath as soldiers to uphold the US Constitution.
Read Full Story at talk2action.org »
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 99
-
78%
Spadecaller7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Evaluate this for yourself. Here is the raw footage videotaped by Brian Hughes, a US documentary maker and former member of the US military who spent several days in Bagram near Kabul.
Reply
The material, shows the Christian soldiers discussing the conversion of Afghans, and was obtained by Al Jazeera's Bays, who has covered Afghanistan extensively.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MbJ63Y4R0dA
In addition to the illegality of American troops proselytizing Muslims in Afghanistan, we are not a Christian nation fighting in foreign lands to convert the "heathens". By engaging in activities of this nature, we run the risk of creating animosity among a population that has its own beliefs worthy of respect.
My son is in the Special Forces, is trained to speak the language,and to respect other religious beliefs practiced in these foreign nations.
In addition, like other members of our military, he is not Christian; he is Jewish. Our troops have no business pushing Christianity. We are the foreigners and are there for one purpose: to fight the terrorists who bombed and killed Americans on 9-11.
If our troops engage in attempts to convert Muslims, it will only result in greater animosity and encourage further anti-American sentiment.
No religion has the right to use the U.S. military for the purposes of spreading its influence and teachings. The crusades should have ended a long time ago.-
capecoralMComment removed: Retracted by user6 Replies
-
capecoralMComment removed: Retracted by user4 Replies
-
capecoralMComment removed: Retracted by user2 Replies
-
capecoralMComment removed: Retracted by user1 Reply
-
100%
hyperbola7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
This proselytizing is just one more example of why Obama needs to totally renounce the bushie zioncon agenda and get out of Afghanistan.
Reply
Afghans to Obama: Get Out, Take Karzai With You
Some 45 per cent of Afghans in the south and east of the country, where most of the fighting is now taking place, say that violence against the US or Nato/Isaf can be justified, according to an opinion poll carried out for ABC News, BBC and ARD at the start of this year. The poll shows that the Afghan desire for retribution is significantly boosted by shelling or bombing of civilian targets. Ominously for President Obama’s surge, the increase in the number of US troops in Afghanistan is opposed by most Afghans. They say they are convinced that their presence will simply lead to more fighting....
http://www.propeller.com/story/2009/05/06/afghans-... -
100%
hyperbola7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Neither our religion or our social/political customs can be imposed in Afghanistan
Reply
‘Democracy at Gunpoint’Strategy Guarantees US Defeat
An account from the Taliban side of the Afghanistan war, which was published in the New York Times on May 5, provides devastating evidence of the failure that almost certainly will eventually overtake the United States and NATO. It is a long interview with a young Taliban "logistics tactician" who has been speaking with Jane Perlez and Pir Zubair Shah of the Times for many months about the Taliban view of the war, and about what he sees as their inevitable victory.
It amounts to an implicit challenge to the "democracy development" strategy adopted by the Pentagon and the Bush administration, and that now seems the policy of the Obama government as well. It is a strategy that assures a very "long war."
This strategy, overall, is described by one of its American critics as "to install democracy at gunpoint inside failed or backward societies, along with unrealistic security guarantees to states and people of marginal strategic interest to the U.S." (The critic is Douglas MacGregor, a retired army officer, in an article entitled "Refusing Battle," in the April Armed Forces Journal. It’s to be recommended.)
"Refusing battle" simply means not fighting battles and wars you know you will lose. This is what the Times article confirms that the United States has again done, in Afghanistan as it did in Vietnam. In Afghanistan it is fighting a guerilla war in which it has left to the enemy the choice, timing, and location of battle, as well as a permanent option of withdrawal and dispersion....
.... But it will ultimately rest – as in Iraq – upon an extremely doubtful long-term reliance on democracy development, of which we have heard much and seen little, since it assumes that a democratic society can be supplied by foreign military intervention. It is the recipe not for a long war, but for an unending one. The people of Afghanistan and Pakistan will in the end settle it, but only after the foreigners have gone home.
http://www.propeller.com/story/2009/05/06/lsquodem...
-
-
100%
mcgrievysr7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
As usual, our hard-core Christian right has the "truth" and feels that it is incumbent upon them to "spread the gospel". These "evangelists" are too obtuse to realize the implications and the ramifications of treading on other peoples' cultures and beliefs. Of course, any attempt to point out the problems of proselytizing will be met with charges of Christianity "bashing". For some reason, these proselytizers feel that their need to promote Christianity supersedes the illegality of it and they always fail to recognize the legitimacy of separating church from state.
Reply-
92%
Spadecaller7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Thanks mcgrievysr
Reply
"Of course, any attempt to point out the problems of proselytizing will be met with charges of Christianity "bashing". For some reason, these proselytizers feel that their need to promote Christianity supersedes the illegality of it and they always fail to recognize the legitimacy of separating church from state."
How very true.-
capecoralMComment removed: Retracted by user5 Replies
-
-
-
100%
jordan117 months, 3 weeks ago
-
100%
Spadecaller7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I do know that Obama is emphasizing the use of Special Forces trained to respect and live among the people in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the Philippines. I do think you are right in the context that Obama needs to express his disapproval of these practices. On the other hand, the President has been taking actions that circumvent conventional forces in favor of more strategic use of military personnel and has spoken about the fact the U.S. is not a Christian nation.
Reply-
-
100%
Spadecaller7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I agree.
Reply
WE better began to enforce and respect the oaths of office that the President and our soldiers take before becoming servants of our nation.
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God." (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962).
"I, _____ (SSAN), having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of _____ do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God." (DA Form 71, 1 August 1959, for officers.)
-
-
capecoralMComment removed: Retracted by user10 Replies
-
-
-
-
91%
Spadecaller7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Mutania,
Reply
Your overt and obsessive hatred of Muslims is pathetic and sad to witness. If there was a hell, it appears you would have already earned a place in it where you would have to live in close quarters with Muslims for eternity.-
100%
Dionys7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Spade -
Reply
Thank you for such an honest assessment of Mutainia. I can only imagine what kind of vile hatred bubbles within such a person that they feel compelled to spew it out at every opportunity possible. I blocked his spew a long time ago and now I just pray for him. Such spreading of hatred is the work of those in the thrall to Evil.-
0%
Mutainia7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If he's honest in his assessment of me, then he's not very bright. But, I've witnessed enough of Spade to know he's not stupid, so, I'm going to believe he just doesn't read what I write, only skim. YOU, O "I'm not a Muslim, yet, desperately defend Islam", hey, I detect lying (al taqqiya?) deCEIT coming from you.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The OBVIOUS insulting error of this should be apparent to all but the most obtuse. Any representative of the U.S. government would be in breach of the constitution thumping whatever brand of Holy Shiite they are brainwashed by at my (and your) expense.
Reply
Imagine for a moment these same people supporting this nonsense now continuing to defend say Chinese soldiers who decided to overthrow the US government (After all we had a leader who committed war crimes...and we really do have the worlds largest cache of WMDs) with a military invasion preaching Taoism, or Maoism at gunpoint to U.S. citizens...
Actually I guess they would, they'd be first in line to collaborate.
After all most of them have said they want the US to fail so Jebus will come out of the clouds and kill everyone not associated with their particular toupee wearing mega-preacher.
The founders were dead clear about the need for government to be kept away from religion...any possible intellectually honest understanding of the constitution would at minimum have to recognize that there is no official state religion and such a notion is clearly BANNED!
Though much wisdom can be gleaned from spaghetti westerns-
As Clint Eastwood says to Touco in The Good the Bad and The Ugly... (Paraphrased)"Blow up the bridge and these idiots will go somewhere else to fight".
Now that's music to my ears.-
92%
Spadecaller7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Thanks RFE for sharing that.
Reply
Faith tendered at the end of a gun is not the same as spirited discourse between equals. American soldiers are in a position of power - deadly power - over the men, women and children in whose countries they are operating in. When an armed man seeks to promote his beliefs with you, it is not about sharing enlightenment, but about domination and control. To go into a foreign country with a rifle in one hand and a Bible in the other, can only create terror, resentment and backlash - all of which comes back to hurt us even more.
-
-
43%
buckncindykill7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The website that wrote this story proclaims this from the editor/founder....
Reply
"............what the goal of leaders of the Christian right really are: an American Christian theocracy based on a legalistic, fundamentalist, bigoted, draconian, and punitive interpretation of Christianity that - at its most extreme - holds great hostility to the entire Enlightenment and seeks to roll back not decades but actually centuries of social change."
Wow. The description sounds like what I read in a newspaper in the Middle East about the west's increasing secularism/progressivism.-
89%
Dionys7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Do you have any evidence that this isn't their intent? Because to me the description sounds just like Palin's church and the assertions of evangelicals in the military talking about being God's army and fighting satan in the form of Muslims. Oh.. Haven't you heard that? Maybe if you got off your ass, stopped sucking down soda and popcorn in your bark-o-lounger and joined the military you'd hear it more often.
Reply-
100%
dailyblueberry7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I agree Dionys, to a point. I definitely cringe when I hear, "I am a part of God's army" or "God is on our side." I haven't heard this from Palin's church, specifically, but I'll leave that to you to post a link.
Reply
I think God weaps when He sees men fighting each other.-
100%
Dionys7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"I haven't heard this from Palin's church, specifically"
Reply
Palin's church didn't bring it into the military, but they talked about solid plans for senaking an army of God into public service to bring their vision of the Kingdom of God to fruition.
Fruit being the operative word.-
-
100%
vor7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I think the "Sarah Palin's Church" clips are still on YouTube (sorry cannot access). Palin herself calls for sending forth an army of Christian soldiers and refers to the fact that every citizen of her state needs to "get right" with God. She preaches values but to listen to her speak, what kind of "Christian" values is she promoting? Character assasination, slurs, questioning of one's patriotism based on political belief? These attributes (sic) are "Christian" values? She reminds me of tales of Cotton Mather. Dressed in all black including hose and pilgrim shoes she depicts herself as the embodiment of church teachings. H=ll, God is even going to help her with a new pipeline!
Reply
If this is the future of America we are in big trouble. Just because someone is raised under ignorant beliefs and lacking exposure to the real world does not give them common sense. Ignorance is not an attribute. Being a simpleton should not be a qualifier to seeking office.
-
-
-
0%
buckncindykill7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
What planet are you from?
Reply
I was in the military for 22 years (retired chief), and I NEVER heard anything close to what that video showed. Maybe that's what they do in the Army, but from where I stood in the Navy, it never happened.
BTW, I was off the bark-o-lounger protecting your fat ass and this country from people like you.
-
-
-
-
capecoralMComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
-
capecoralMComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
0%
dailyblueberry7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The soldiers are not "holding a gun on them" and its not "faith tendered at the end of a gun." Those kind of statements are only you're own perceptions and do not equal reality.
Reply
This group, as far as I could see, are like-minded military folks who are not being ordered themselves to pass out bibles. They have decided, under their own free will to give as gifts, bibles in the language of those folks. The piece mentioned that it is occurring, at least in the examples mentioned, under the context of the relationships these folks are engaging in with the Afghan folks. The Afghans, again in the examples given, are taking the bibles and saying "thanks."
To say that a member of the military or a group of members, cannot make free will decisions to pass out bibles, korans, torahs, baskets, cakes or whatever would be against their rights as individuals. Again, this group is not being ordered to pass these out. Are they to be stripped of their rights when they are on foreign soil?
The "separation of church and state" argument holds no water here. That argument was intended to keep the government from "forcing" a religion upon another. It was not intended to keep "we the people" from expressing our own ideas.-
100%
Dionys7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"The soldiers are not "holding a gun on them" and its not "faith tendered at the end of a gun.""
Reply
Really?
So you'd be okay with Afghanistan invading the US, starting a bombing campaign, killing some of your family and then rolling through town in their armored cars and armored troop carriers, then handing you a Qu'ran while people hold automatic rifles at the ready pointed near your family and others who live in your town?
I wouldn't.-
-
capecoralMComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Soldiers are representing the US Government, they are obliged to follow it's policies.
Reply
This is less appropriate and less jurisprudential than a teacher handing out religious books and trying to convert students to their particular brand of fantasy in a publicly funded classroom.
Or at least similar but with soldiers representing America and armed with powerful weapons.
C'mon you can't seriously condone this? How about some North Korean soldiers come to your house with a battalion or 2 mulling around outside....and teach you about their beliefs on their own of course,...not ordered to...I.m sure you would see that as equally wonderful. Just like waterboarding, it's a war crime if China does it...but it's friendly encouragement if Bushco does it. Hmmm. It's simply unjustifiable, hypocritical, and frankly quite unchristian as one of the major teachings is to treat others as you would wish to be treated yourself....a pearl of actual wisdom in the pigpen of ludicrous dogma invented over the years.
If you would like to be proselytized to by foreign soldiers at your house, well I can't fault you..(though I would have to question your ability to reason) but if you think it would be wrong for someone else to do it to you, your kids, family...then you must also reject Americans doing it elsewhere. Anything less is simply intellectually dishonest. -
100%
Spadecaller7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It is illegal. Soldiers cannot be engaged in proselytizing because they are considered working full time in combat zones such as Afghanistan and Iraq.
Reply
"The soldiers are legally allowed to proselytize, but only as individuals and not as representatives of the US government. In Afghanistan and Iraq they are soldiers full-time, so what they are doing is clearly in violation of both US law and their oath as soldiers to uphold the US Constitution."-
-
-
capecoralMComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
-
-
100%
reallypsst7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The mission of get osama and the 9-11 militants if over,we have failed ,and the Pakistanis have been playing us for the billions in aid,that also has backfired with the deal they made with militants,and now the Pakistani government is looking to use us no way,those a-holes need to remove their troops from the India border and engage these militants!
Reply -
SandmonsterComment removed: Hard Banned5 Replies
-
-
-
0%
armorfans7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Swagvault gives away Free DC World of Warcraft Action Figures.
Reply
Swagvault is launching a over $20 thousand campaign offering the chance to win a grand prize. Any registered user is eligible to win it.
? More than 100 sets of WOW action figures are ready for the customers with over 500$ purchase during the activity.
? Dozens of single WOW action figures will give to the consumers with over 200$ purchase within this period.
? Whatever the purchase, one WOW action figure is available for one consumer everyday by lot.
This launch will run one month from April 29, 2009 to May 29, 2009.
Read more detailed information HERE
http://www.swagvault.com/activity/2009-free-dc/ -
100%
truthiness7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
could not be more offensive.
Reply
brings up every scar on American history involving the natives.
brings up every scar on European history involving the crusades.
violates military and constitutional law.
and if my government thinks my military is for proselytising Christianity what does that mean for my Jewish family? -
-
loading ...
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.