Does the military have a Christian missionary agenda in Afghanistan | Mutate

Christopher Hitchens:

More alarming still is a book called Under Orders: A Spiritual Handbook for Military Personnel, by an air-force lieutenant colonel named William McCoy, publicity for which describes the separation of church and state as a “twisted idea.” Nor is this the book’s only publicity: it comes—with its direct call for a religion-based military—with an endorsement from General David Petraeus.

More:

I found I had been sent a near-incredible video clip from the Al Jazeera network. It had been shot at Bagram Air Force Base last year, and it showed a borderline-hysterical address by one Lieutenant Colonel Gary Hensley, chief of the United States’ military chaplains in Afghanistan. He was telling his evangelical audience, all of them wearing uniforms supplied by the taxpayer, that as followers of Jesus Christ they had a collective responsibility “to be witnesses for him.” Heating up this theme, Lieutenant Colonel Hensley went on: “The Special Forces guys, they hunt men, basically. We do the same things, as Christians. We hunt people for Jesus. We do, we hunt them down. Get the hound of heaven after them, so we get them in the kingdom. Right? That’s what we do, that’s our business.”

The comparison to the Special Forces would seem to suggest that the objects of this hunting and hounding are Afghans rather than Americans. But it’s difficult to be certain, and indeed I am invited to Colorado Springs partly because chaplains there have been known to employ taxpayer dollars to turn the hounds of heaven loose on their own students and fellow citizens. As the Bagram tape goes on, however, it becomes obvious that Afghans are the targets in this case. Stacks of Bibles are on display, in the Dari and Pashto tongues that are the main languages in Afghanistan. A certain Sergeant James Watt, a candidate for a military chaplaincy, is shown giving thanks for the work of his back-home church, which subscribed the dough. “I also want to praise God because my church collected some money to get Bibles for Afghanistan. They came and sent the money out,” he beamingly tells his Bible-study class. In another segment, those present show quite clearly that they understand they are in danger of violating General Order Number One of the U.S. Central Command, which explicitly prohibits “proselytizing of any religion, faith, or practice.” A gathering of chaplains, all of them fed from the public trough, is addressed by Captain Emmit Furner, a military cleric who seems half in love with his own light-footed moral dexterity. “Do we know what it means to proselytize?” he asks his audience. A voice from the audience is heard to say, “It is General Order Number One.” To this Sergeant Watt replies: “You can’t proselytize but you can give gifts.… I bought a carpet and then I gave the guy a Bible after I conducted my business.” So where’s the harm in a man who is paid by the United States government to be a Christian chaplain strolling condescendingly through the souk and handing out religious propaganda as if it were a handful of small change or backsheesh? Probably not much more damaging to the war effort, or insulting to Afghan sensibilities, than the activities of the anonymous torturers who have been found operating elsewhere on the Bagram base. But it is taking the axe to the root of the United States Constitution, never mind General Order Number One. (Neither of these seems to be in force locally: no action against the uniformed missionaries has been taken.)

Vanity Fair: In Defense of Foxhole Atheists

See also Jeff Sharlet’s coverage of evangelicals in the military

 

BBC persecution of one-eyed man over handwriting descends into quackery

The mother of a dead British soldier has called Gordon Brown's letter of condolence to her "disrespectful", partly because of his handwriting. But does his script, and those of other prime ministers, say anything about them?

The spelling mistakes in Gordon Brown's solemn letter to Jacqui Janes were not the only shortcoming, according to the bereaved mother.

In expressing his condolences for the death of Jamie Janes, who died in Afghanistan on 5 October, Mr Brown appeared to correct the soldier's first name, as well as rushing the communique.

"I saw he had scribbled out a mistake in Jamie's name," Ms Janes told the Sun newspaper. "The letter was scrawled so quickly I could hardly even read it and some of the words were half-finished. It's just disrespectful."

But what does Mr Brown's handwriting style, and those of other prime ministers, betray about their state of mind?

Some believe graphology - the study of handwriting - can help in the analysis of a person's character. Adam Brand, writing in Tuesday's Guardian, says Brown's script shows signs of "a compulsion and anxiety to get things right" while other elements reveal him to be someone who "likes to operate on his own".

WHAT IS GRAPHOLOGY?
Study of size, layout, slant, connectedness, speed, regularity, letter forms, angularity, and shading of handwriting
Popular as a recruitment selection tool in Germany and other continental European countries
Forensic graphology has some scientific and legal base
But relationships with objective measures of personality generally produce only weak and unstable correlations
Sources: Penguin Dictionary of Psychology; Oxford Dictionary of Psychology

But others dismiss graphology as a pseudoscience.

"There is no credible scientific evidence with it at all," says Richard Wiseman, a professor of public understanding of psychology. "Every controlled test has showed that no evidence has emerged."

While a person's handwriting might reflect they are in a hurry, he says, "there's nothing which compares it to their mood."

Graphologist Elaine Quigley, former head of the British Institute of Graphologists, disagrees. Here she gives her view of Mr Brown's style as well as those of Tony Blair and Margaret Thatcher.

 

GORDON BROWN, LETTER TO JACQUI JANES, NOV 2009

 

Brown's letter to Janes

"His writing has changed from the usual way it's laid out - it's more spaced out, both between the words and between the lines. This suggests he is tense, given the difficulty of the subject.

The way the left margin moves towards the right shows how urgently he wants to get it finished
Elaine Quigley

"It is very jerky. The separate lines don't flow together and the ends of the words are abrupt, as if he's cut them off. Look at the Es, for instance.

"This absence of flow suggests he doesn't communicate naturally. He's living on his nerves when he goes beyond his own environment and his own space.

"The right-hand-side of the letters signify one's connections with other people and the future. The way they are cut off suggests he can't empathise because it's not part of his make-up.

"The lower section of the letters show how you feel. The As and Gs and Ys are all abrupt, so he's focusing on getting this task done. And the way the left margin moves towards the right shows how urgently he wants to get it finished.

"Dropping the Es on some words, like "condolences" and "colleagues" suggests he is expedient and he is sub-consciously abbreviating."

 

TONY BLAIR, 'TO-DO LIST', MAY 1997

 

Tony Blair's 'to-do' list in 1997

"His words have an easy flow to them and this suggests he has a lot of charm and is very articulate. One word is even flowing into the next - "to court". He doesn't like routine or boredom, but style, fluidity and flexibility.

"The T-bar pointing down suggests he is stubborn.

"All the writing has a right slant which means that he gravitates towards people and he can charm them.

"It's also very mobile, which means that he will come up with the right thing at the right time.

"Look at the word "strong". A lot of people in jobs serving the public open their Gs to the right, as if they are opening their energy to the public sphere. Edward Heath had the same characteristic."

 

MARGARET THATCHER, LETTER, 1979

 

Margaret Thatcher's letter

"It's a masculine script, not prissy or emotional, but it is still elegant. Unlike Mr Brown's, her writing has charm and elegance.

"Underlining it is that she likes control. The vertical spacing means she is independent and doesn't like to be crowded by others. There is a general sense of confidence from the writing.

"She has a calmness about her and an assuredness about her. She can use charm and make people feel that she cares about them but it's implicit that they also know she won't let them manipulate her.

"The way the T-bar misses the T shows she chooses when to transmit information, it gives her flexibility. She will choose her moments. It's empowering."

 

Serving soldier leads London protest against war in Afghanistan | guardian.co.uk

Lance Corporal Joe Glenton says continued military action is abuse of trust by government

A serving soldier today accused the government of abusing the trust of the army and serving soldiers by continuing military action in Afghanistan.

Lance Corporal Joe Glenton, who is facing a court martial for refusing to return to Afghanistan, made his comments before an anti-war demonstration in central London.

Glenton, 27, led former colleagues, military families and anti-war protesters in the march, calling for British troops to be brought home.

He told protesters at Speakers Corner in Hyde Park that he found it distressing to disobey orders but felt that he had been left with no choice.

The centre of London was brought to a temporary standstill as thousands of protesters made their way to Trafalgar Square.

Some of the crowds chanted "Gordon Brown, terrorist" while others sang "What do we want, troops out".

His statement, released before the rally, read: "It is distressing to disobey orders but when Britain follows America in continuing to wage war against one of the world's poorest countries I feel I have no choice.

"The Geneva Convention was launched after the Second World War and the Nazi extermination of six million Jews. It means no soldier can say I was just obeying orders.

"Politicians have abused the trust of the army and the soldiers who serve. That is why I am compelled and proud to march for Stop The War Coalition today."

Peter Brierley, whose son Lance Corporal Shaun Brierley was killed in Iraq in 2003, also attended the march.

Brierley, a 59-year-old CCTV supervisor from Batley, West Yorkshire, recently hit the headlines after refusing to shake hands with the former prime minister, Tony Blair, accusing him of having blood on his hands because of the Iraq war.

Brierley said British troops needed to be withdrawn from Afghanistan as soon as possible.

"They are not doing any good while they are over there," he said. "They need to leave the country to sort itself out. While the British troops are there they are actually bringing in insurgents who are coming in to fight."

The protest came as a poll found that almost half of the UK public believe that military victory in Afghanistan is impossible and many believe that British troops should be brought home either immediately or within the next year.

The YouGov survey for Channel 4 News found just 6% of the 2,042 people polled on October 22 and 23 believed British troops were winning t he war, 36% said eventual victory was possible and 48% who said victory was not possible.

A quarter said British troops should be withdrawn "immediately" and 37% said most should be withdrawn soon, with the remainder pulling out within a year or so.

 

Afghan girl killed by Royal Air Force leaflet drop | Danger Room | Wired.com

After Leaflet Drop Kills Afghan Girl, a Search for Safer Psyop Tech. Missiles, Anyone?

041101-A-9531S-040

The Royal Air Force has accidentally killed a young girl in Afghanistan — by dropping a box of leaflets on her. The British Ministry of Defence is carrying out a full investigation. Meanwhile, the seemingly antiquated practice of leaflet bombing continues. In the 21st century, it remains one of the primary tools of psychological warfare; U.S. Special Operations Command is even looking to build leaflet-carrying missiles. And while top American commander Gen. Stanley McChrystal has virtually banned “kinetic” air strikes, paper bombs are in regular use.

According to the BBC, the leaflet box was supposed to open in mid-air, spreading pro-coalition propaganda over rural Helmand province. But the container failed to break apart, landing on top of the girl, who died later in the hospital.

Leaflets have been used by militaries since at least the Napoleonic wars, when the British navy dropped them over France using kites. And they continue to be employed, because leaflets have some advantages over other media. Radio and TV are fine if the audience happen to be tuned in at the time, but printed matter is durable. As the U.S. Army’s Psychological Operations Field Manual explains, a printed leaflet has the advantage that it can be passed from person to person without the message being altered. It can convey a complex message which can be reinforced with pictures if the recipient is illiterate. And a leaflet can be hidden and read in private, and shared around with others.

Delivery methods have ranged from artillery and mortar shells to loose airdrop by hand to “leaflet landmines.” The M129E1/E2 Psychological Operations Leaflet Bomb weighs 200 pounds and can disperse some 60,000 to 80,000 leaflets which are scattered by a length of detonator cord.

However, U.S. Special Operations Command is looking for a wider range of options, and their current R&D budget calls for a “Next Generation Leaflet Delivery System,” which will:

…provide forces a family of systems consisting of unmanned air vehicles, drones,
missiles, and leaflet boxes that safely and accurately disseminate variable size and weight paper and electronic leaflets to large area targets, at short (10-750 miles) and long (>750 miles) ranges. These systems can be utilized in peacetime and all threat environments across the spectrum of conflict, and are compatible with current and future U.S. aircraft.

The fact that the commandos are seriously developing missiles to deliver leaflets shows the importance given to this mission. Hopefully, improved safety measures will mean less chance of tragic accidents.But the technology does not stop there. In addition to digital broadcast capability and advanced loudspeakers, new psychological operations tech also includes development of appropriate emerging technologies including “remote controlled electronic paper.”

This sounds a lot like the video advertising inserts being pioneered by Entertainment Weekly, which includes a wafer-thin screen which plays up to 40 minutes of video. (See “video in print” in action here, featuring Tony Stark, appropriately enough.) It’s like an evolution of the musical greeting cards, with added video. But the difference with the Special Operations version is that it is remote-controlled, so presumably new messages or video can be sent as required. The applications for such a device would be endless, and as a shiny gadget it would have a much greater chance of being picked up, retained and shown around — if it can be made cheap enough to distribute in significant quantities.

Photo: DoD

 

Animal House in Afghanistan | Mother Jones

— By Daniel Schulman | Tue September 1, 2009 10:19 AM PST

 

Drunken brawls, prostitutes, hazing and humiliation, taking vodka shots out of buttcracks— no, the perpetrators of these Animal House-like antics aren't some depraved frat brothers. They are the private security contractors guarding Camp Sullivan, otherwise known as the US Embassy in Kabul.

These allegations, and many more, are contained in a letter sent to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Tuesday by the Project on Government Oversight, which has been investigating the embassy security contract held by ArmorGroup North America (a subsidiary of Wackenhut, which is in turn owned by the security behemoth G4S). The contractor was the subject of a congressional probe earlier this summer that found serious lapses in the company's handling of the embassy security contract, which internal State Department documents said left the embassy compound "in jeopardy." Nevertheless, the government opted to extend the company's 5-year, $189 million contract for another year. 

Underscoring the scope of the problems within ArmorGroup's Afghanistan operation, POGO says that nearly a tenth of the company's 450-man embassy security force contacted the watchdog group to "express concerns about and provide evidence of a pattern of blatant, longstanding violations of the security contract, and of a pervasive breakdown in the chain of command and guard force discipline and morale."

In the letter to Clinton, POGO executive director Danielle Brian writes:

This environment has resulted in chronic turnover by U.S./ex-pat guards. According to the State Department, "nearly 90% of the incumbent US/Expats left within the first six months of contract performance." According to POGO sources, the U.S./ex-pat guard turnover may be as high as 100 percent annually. This untenable turnover prevents the guard force from developing team cohesion, and requires constant training for new replacement recruits. The guards have come to POGO because they say they believe strongly in the mission, but are concerned that many good guards are quitting out of frustration or being fired for refusing to participate in the misconduct, and that those responsible for the misconduct are not being held accountable.

 

Brian's letter suggests that Wackenhut Vice President Sam Brinkley, who testified before a Senate panel in June about ArmorGroup's performance of the embassy contract, may have misled Congress.

Despite Wackenhut Vice President Sam Brinkley's sworn Senate testimony that "…the Kabul contract has been fully-staffed since January 2009…" the truth is that chronic understaffing of the guard force continues to be a major problem. And evidence suggests Mr. Brinkley knew that. Around March, according to numerous participants, he was confronted by some 50 guards at Camp Sullivan who complained to him directly about a severe, ongoing guard shortage. Then, in an April 2009 memo to a State Department official, U.S. Embassy Kabul guard force Commander Werner Ilic reported that guard shortages had caused chronic sleep deprivation among his men. He described a situation in which guards habitually face 14-hour-day work cycles extending for as many as eight weeks in a row, frequently alternating between day and night shifts. He concluded that "this ultimately diminishes the LGF's [Local Guard Force's] ability to provide security." The contract with the State Department specifies that guards may not be on duty for longer than 12 consecutive hours. Interviewees and documents reveal that short-staffing frequently results in the denial of contractually guaranteed leave and vacation, and that those who do not comply are threatened with termination or actually fired.

 

But criticisms of failing to meet manpower obligations are nothing compared to the bacchanalian activities ArmorGroup's personnel were allegedly engaged in.

Guards have come to POGO with allegations and photographic evidence that some supervisors and guards are engaging in near-weekly deviant hazing and humiliation of subordinates. Witnesses report that the highest levels of AGNA management in Kabul are aware of and have personally observed—or even engaged in—these activities, but have done nothing to stop them. Indeed, management has condoned this misconduct, declining to take disciplinary action against those responsible and allowing two of the worst offending supervisors to resign and allegedly move on to work on other U.S. contracts. The lewd and deviant behavior of approximately 30 supervisors and guards has resulted in complete distrust of leadership and a breakdown of the chain of command, compromising security.

Numerous emails, photographs, and videos portray a Lord of the Flies environment. One email from a current guard describes scenes in which guards and supervisors are "peeing on people, eating potato chips out of [buttock] cracks, vodka shots out of [buttock] cracks (there is video of that one), broken doors after drnken [sic] brawls, threats and intimidation from those leaders participating in this activity…." Photograph after photograph shows guards—including supervisors—at parties in various stages of nudity, sometimes fondling each other. These parties take place just a few yards from the housing of other supervisors.

 

Multiple guards say this deviant hazing has created a climate of fear and coercion, with those who declined to participate often ridiculed, humiliated, demoted, or even fired. The result is an environment that is dangerous and volatile. Some guards have reported barricading themselves in their rooms for fear that those carrying out the hazing will harm them physically. Others have reported that AGNA management has begun to conduct a witch hunt to identify employees who have provided information about this atmosphere to POGO.

 

These allegations raise serious questions about why ArmorGroup has been allowed to retain this important contract, which gives the company the responsibility for protecting the lives of the hundreds of diplomats, officials, and others who work within the embassy compound. Also in question is the State Department's ability to provide adequate oversight of contractors under its jurisdiction. It should at least be able to ensure that its embassy doesn't provide the backdrop for a Contractors Gone Wild video. 

POGO is calling on the State Department to launch an independent investigation of the Kabul embassy contract and to "consider initiating suspension and debarment proceedings against the companies ArmorGroup North America." As for the State Department officials who were supposed to be providing oversight, the watchdog says they, too, should be held accountable. Perhaps as punishment they ought to be forced to watch the buttcrack vodka shot video.

Follow Daniel Schulman on Twitter.