The World's Largest Coalition of Nontheists and Nontheist Communities!

US troops using weapons marked with secret 'Jesus' Bible codes

ABC News is reporting that rifle scopes provided to the US military by the Michigan-based Trijicon Corporation are inscribed with coded references to New Testament Bible passages about Jesus Christ... and have been for years. They appear above the model number on the sight and just below the words, "MADE IN USA". Included are New Testament verses such as JN8:12 (John, Chapter 8, verse 12), "Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life"; 2COR4:6, "For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ" as well as verses from the books of Revelation and Matthew.

According to ABCNews, Trijicon confirmed that the insciptions on their ACOG (Advanced Combat and Optical Guide) scopes referred to Bible verses and their sales and marketing director, Tom Munson added that they "have always been there." The practice was begun by the company founder, Glyn Bindon, a devout Christian from South Africa who died in a 2003 plane crash. The company website makes reference to it's vision of goodness through Biblical values. Trijicon received a $660 million contract in 2005 to supply up to 800,000 gun sights to the US Marine Corps. Additional government weapons contracts totaling at least another $133 million were received in 2008 and 2009.

It gets worse. The US has been supplying these"Jesus weapons" to our allies in Afghanistan and Iraq... who haven't found out about the codes yet. (more here)

0 members like this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Freedom of Anonymity on January 20, 2010 at 10:44am

But doesn't a tiny bit of the Bible verse magically attach itself to the bullet and fly true into the non-Xtian enemy?

Humorous hyperbole duly noted, lol. Feel free to show evidence and I will willingly quell my protestations.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Freedom of Anonymity on January 20, 2010 at 12:35pm

That is expressly my point John, you caught it quite well.

We don't "know" if an article like this can/will have any effect upon those hyper-irrational fucktards of Islam ... but it isn't the lives of individuals at ABC non-News we're talking about here.

Is being cautious in provoking an enemy a bad idea? Is expecting the media to hold themselves to a standard of ethics and journalism out of bounds? Or does "free press" mean "free to report anything and free from responsibility of reported material causing injury" ...

I, in my opinionated perspective, feel that the press shows too much liberty with the latter part of that statement ... especially where their lives aren't the ones in likely jeopardy of grievous injury, dismemberment and death ...

P.S. Although the Village Idiot and Darth Cheney are certainly at the center of the sphere of responsibility, those mongoloids of Congress went right along with it; without reservation. Not trivial at all, goes to the point of exercising prudence when putting others into harms way.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Sonny Mobley on January 20, 2010 at 2:07pm

I needed to know this. And I can't help but say that I had every right to know, even if it endangers someones life. Blame the government for doing it, not the journalist's for bringing it to my attention. If the fact that it becomes common knowledge and does cause someone who wouldn't jihad before to begin jihad it is on the governments head.

I'm a man of practicality, but I can't help but think I and everyone else has a right to know this.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Freedom of Anonymity on January 20, 2010 at 2:18pm

There is no "right" to know; the only rights there are, are those that can be adequately defended from being taken.

I.e. anyone's "right" to life is only active until someone with greater power "takes" it away.

The government has not been shown to be to blame; therefore, onus of responsibility falls to ABC non-News.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Sonny Mobley on January 20, 2010 at 2:57pm

I disagree. If the government is using these scopes they would be well aware of this craziness. Or they should be. Those in charge are either ignorant or condone it. Neither is acceptable. And, once again, any resulting blood would be on the hands of those in charge. Damn, 'm glad the military wouldn't accept my ass when I tried to join years ago.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Freedom of Anonymity on January 20, 2010 at 5:13pm

If the government is using these scopes they would be well aware of this craziness. Or they should be.

Bare assertion fallacy.

By what manner of evidence, not known or given, to anyone else, do you know that "they should know". How much time have you had with/in the military procurement process?

Those in charge are either ignorant or condone it. Neither is acceptable.

False dichotomy fallacy.

Another possible condition is, they use their own catalog numbers for the ACOG, hence, the company's number is irrelevant. Or, the primary concern is usability, durability, mod-ability, price, supply, contracting restraints ... there are any of a number of possible alternative reasons.

I defer on the rest of that post, ceteris paribus.

Permalink Reply by Sonny Mobley on January 20, 2010 at 2:59pm

Word.