Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 
Here's yet more video evidence of Christian groups using soldiers to proselytize Muslims in a war zone, this time in Iraq. The video is of an Army chaplain and officer, Capt. Chris Rusack, talking about raising money to ship bibles in Swahili to soldiers in Iraq so they can use them to convert Ugandan aid workers. And he talks about how the shipment of those Bibles to Iraq was held up by "the enemy" - meaning the military, which knows it's a violation of regulations to do this - until a high-ranking Colonel made sure they got distributed.
Chris Rodda has this video on Talk2Action along with more information. And as she notes, the group that is doing this has been explicitly praised by the Army's Chief of Chaplains, Maj. Gen. Douglas Carver even while they are violating army regulations and putting other soldiers at risk by trying to convert Muslims to Christianity in a war zone.
The military's response to the Al Jazeera story the other day, more video showing soldiers in Afghanistan using bibles in Pashtun and Dari to proselytize Muslims in that country? They deny that there's any problem. But at this point they seem intent on denying the evidence no matter what.
They did say, however, that the Bibles were confiscated from those soldiers in Afghanistan and that the soldiers were reprimanded. The question is, when did this happen? And how long did it go on before it was stopped? And would it ever have stopped if it was not exposed by groups like the Military Religious Freedom Foundation?
Politics
Comments
I'm sure that Mr. JD will be along to inform us that this was all totally kosher and aboveboard.
Posted by: SLC | May 8, 2009 9:25 AM
Reading the title, my thought was: what, they don't realize Swahili isn't the local language in Iraq? Having read the context, I'm not sure whether to be relieved that, phew, at least they're not that stupid or worried that, gee, wouldn't it be better if they were that stupid?
Posted by: Morgan | May 8, 2009 9:34 AM
Re: the video. Nice brown shirt, Captain Skypilot, Sir! I wonder if the rules have changed since my days in the AF. Even on leave we were not supposed to sport facial hair beyond a regulated (and quite closely at that) moustache. But, since the good chaplains REAL boss is scoutmaster GOD, I guess he wouldn't worry about some measly army regs. What a fuckbag.
Posted by: democommie | May 8, 2009 9:40 AM
What makes you think the Ugandans are Muslims? It's not a terribly popular religion there. More like, they'll be converting Catholics to protestantism or get nominal Christians attending church.
Posted by: Ace of Sevens | May 8, 2009 9:43 AM
Don't people from sub-Saharan Africa tend to be quite overwhelmingly Christian already? I suspect that the proselytisers could quite quickly become the proselytees in this situation.
Posted by: Philbert | May 8, 2009 9:48 AM
Ace, Ed didn't say that the Ugandans were Muslims. He said the group this guy praised was trying to convert Muslims to Xtianity.
And what difference does it make that these people attempt to convert Catholics or the non-religious rather than Muslims, anyway? Is it somehow less of a transgression?
Posted by: Spidergrackle | May 8, 2009 10:07 AM
Yes. Apostasy is a big deal in Islam. They don't care abotu someone who isn't Muslim still not being a Muslim.
Posted by: Ace of Sevens | May 8, 2009 10:20 AM
So Catholics and the non-religious are not deserving of equal protection from this sort of mistreatment because they don't get as outwardly upset about it? How nice.
Posted by: Spidergrackle | May 8, 2009 10:23 AM
Awww, God put a Bible on his heart. And a beard on his face too. Awwwwwww...
Posted by: 386sx | May 8, 2009 10:32 AM
Ace of Sevens: You... seem to have completely missed the point. The local reaction is one reason why it's a bad idea to convert people, but it's also generally considered to be Bad to convert people at gunpoint - and before you miss this point, I don't just mean literal gunpoint.
Posted by: user@example.com | May 8, 2009 10:43 AM
The main thing is that the military exists to protect and further the interests of the Union, not preach evangelical Christianity to the masses. By putting their religion before their duty to the Union, these soldiers, and the chaplains pushing them to this, are violating their service-oaths and, more pragmatically, making their military and political objectives in Afghanistan more difficult to reach.
Posted by: Julian | May 8, 2009 10:57 AM
Shouldn't it be part of a Chaplain's training to be made to understand the consequences of proselytizing and passing out religious materials on foriegn soil? I can't imagine how much damage these people are causing in Iraq and Afghanistan. And in their minds, they think they are doing a good thing. Amazing.
Posted by: Democritus | May 8, 2009 11:02 AM
In answer to the question, "What makes you think the Ugandans are Muslims?", other information that we have from the Soldiers Bible Ministry indicates that some of the Ugandans are already Christians, but others are Muslims. What the ministry said is that these Ugandans came to Iraq to work, and then, completely out of the blue, were seeing a messiah (a.k.a. Jesus) appear to them in dreams, and suddenly started asking the chaplain about Jesus and wanted Bibles in Swahili.
Posted by: Chris Rodda | May 8, 2009 11:11 AM
I'm not saying this is a good thing. Active duty forces have to remember they are representing the U.S. and the U.S. is a secular nation, but the Ugandans are contractors, which is nothing like being part of an occupied state. This is the critical difference between them and Afghanis or Iraqis.
Posted by: Ace of Sevens | May 8, 2009 11:14 AM
General Order 1-A prohibits ALL proselytizing. It doesn't matter if its directed at the Afghan and Iraq locals, other U.S. troops, civilians employed by the U.S. military, or DoD contractors. There is also the matter of it being illegal to send any bulk quantities of religious materials contrary to Islam into Iraq or Afghanistan to begin with. That's why Chaplain Rusack's shipment of Swahili Bibles was flagged and almost sent back to the U.S. until, as he says in the video, that Christian colonel went and overrode the person who was doing their job by flagging the illegal shipment.
Posted by: Chris Rodda | May 8, 2009 11:33 AM
This is even older news than the first clip, and yes, its even more benign. Swahili speakers working under contract for the US government, who considered the US military Chaplain their "Pastor," asked him for Bibles. No conversion. No coercion. A military Chaplain fulfilling his role as a spiritual help to the US soldiers, our allies, and government employees.
Rodda said this:
The shipment...violated the postal and customs regulations prohibiting the bulk shipment into Iraq of religious materials contrary to Islam.
I'll give her and the MRFF more credence when they start villifying the Jewish groups and soldiers who are doing the same thing.
Posted by: JD | May 8, 2009 11:34 AM
JD...
Thank you for directing me to that article. I'll certainly be checking out the shipment of Jewish materials that you linked to. We do not single out Christians, and if there were any regulations violated by the group that sent these Jewish materials, they will be treated the same way by MRFF as the Christian groups.
But, just so you know, MRFF has never pursued any instances of shipments to the troops that were clearly to allow the celebration by the troops of important Christian holidays, such as Christmas, even if those shipments looked like they might have violated the Title 39 restrictions on the use of the military postal service. If this Jewish group was just trying to allow the Jewish troops to celebrate a specific holiday, which is what appears to be the case from a quick glance at the article you linked to, we would consider it the same kind of thing, but I will certainly check into it to make sure.
Posted by: Chris Rodda | May 8, 2009 11:53 AM
Gee, is Mr. JD claiming that the Jewish group shipped copies of the Hebrew bible written in Swahili? What to bet. As I predicted in the first comment, Mr. JD indeed comes along with the usual dominionist apologetics along with a preposterous claim.
Posted by: SLC | May 8, 2009 11:55 AM
And SLC gets the pay-off!
JD - Nothing in the article about Jewish religious articles being distributed to Swahili speaking Ugandan aid workers. Plenty about Jewish-Americans serving in the US Armed Forces getting supplies to celebrate a Jewish religious festival. But no third-party civilian aid workers, dubious requests for bibles or violations of the Military Code.
Guess it isn't the same thing at all then, is it JD?
- :) DJ
Posted by: DingoJack | May 8, 2009 11:55 AM
For what it's worth, the CIA World Factbook breakdown for Uganda:
Roman Catholic 41.9%, Protestant 42% (Anglican 35.9%, Pentecostal 4.6%, Seventh Day Adventist 1.5%), Muslim 12.1%, other 3.1%, none 0.9% (2002 census)
It also says English is the official language and taught in schools. It just makes me curious why they would need a Swahili translation. To be fair, there is no breakdown listed of the percentage of Swahili speakers listed.
Posted by: Ted H. | May 8, 2009 12:49 PM
While I would not consider it gospel (so to speak) this might help concerning the languages of Uganda. - DJ
Posted by: DingoJack | May 8, 2009 1:16 PM
Just a note: I'm not a Christian, I am an atheist, but I was raised in the church. While I don't approve of the actions of the "soldier missionaries", I think that some of the groups reporting on this issue are misinterpreting some parts of it to make the groups seem more sinister than they are.
When the pastor refers to "the enemy", he is NOT talking about the U.S. military. He is referring to Satan. He believes that things getting in the way of his Bibles being distributed are the work of the devil. Keep in mind, in their world everything around us is God's domain. The default mode to them is not moderation and tolerance and a fair playing field for all points of view or simply mandated neutrality. Anything not of "the word of God" is regarded as the deviation, and thus any laws that prevent them from say proselytizing anywhere they go are violations of that default mode and thus must be the work of Satan, aka: the enemy in their cosmic WWII scenario.
Posted by: Sam H | May 8, 2009 1:43 PM
This is really splitting hairs. It was the military that flagged the shipment and was going to send it back to the U.S., so what he's saying by saying that the "enemy" tried to block the shipment is that the military personnel who were following regulations were doing the work of Satan. We run into statements like this all the time, and what they are all clearly saying is that the "enemy" is Satan, so anyone interfering with their proselytizing efforts by following the laws and military regulations is an "enemy" because they are doing the work of Satan.
Posted by: Chris Rodda | May 8, 2009 2:05 PM
"We do not single out Christians..."
Post a link to a single press release in which Weinstein says something negative about any other religion's activities in the US military besides Christianity.
The "illegal activity" of "shipment of bulk religious materials contrary to Islam" is one of the MRFF's most frequently cited "violations." The "exception" for holidays seems to be a parsing of convenience, particularly since in the Christian faith there's no such thing as specific material "clearly [necessary] to allow the celebration...of important Christian holidays."
If you've never seen that article before, you should consider hiring a new research director. Transportation of religious materials in bulk contrary to Islam is conducted by every religion represented in the US military, and those deliveries are not restricted to "holy days."
Posted by: JD | May 8, 2009 2:07 PM
In a place and time of delicate foreign policy, these Christians see no problem with violating military regulations they find inconvenient.
I find the death penalty for Islamic apostasy abhorrent, but, is now the time and is Iraq the place for Christians in the U.S. military to pursue their idea of civil disobedience?
Do Christians really think adding their delusions to the boiling cauldron of the Mideast's religious sectarianism the best way to bring about peace?
Posted by: Gilgamesh | May 8, 2009 2:13 PM
Ed wrote:
So, Capt. Chris Rusack is referring to the U.S. military, and his own superior officers, as "the enemy"? Is that an exact quote? Because that sounds like falsely accusing high-ranking military officials of treason, which would be a violation of articles 88, 89, 90, 92, 94, 98, and 99 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, among probably several others. At least one of those is punishable by death.
Posted by: phantomreader42 | May 8, 2009 2:14 PM
So, JD, are you contending that there are non-christian groups engaged in widespread proselytization using military resources in violation of law and direct orders? Or are you just whining that only christians are being punished for a crime only christians have been observed committing?
If the former, provide evidence to support this claim. If the latter, pass on this message to your cult: STOP BREAKING THE LAW, ASSHOLES!
Posted by: phantomreader42 | May 8, 2009 2:22 PM
JD, we haven't received any reports or complaints about any other religions besides Christianity being forced on our troops or the people of Iraq and Afghanistan. If you can find instances of any other religion being forced upon anyone by the military, please report them to us and we will investigate.
Yes, we frequently cite the postal regulation regarding bulk shipments, but there are other military postal regulations that we also look at. For example, there are always quite a few violations of Title 39 around Christmas. There is no way that the shipping of Christmas trees to our bases in Iraq and Afghanistan could possibly comply with the restrictions on the size of packages allowed. And, while we could make an issue out of the fact that tax dollars, because of the free and reduced rate shipping to the military, are being used to support the celebration of Christmas, we never would. Allowing our troops, whether they're Christian or Jewish, to get whatever they need to celebrate their holidays in a manner that's as close as possible to how they would celebrate them at home is obviously good for morale, so as long as the items, books, symbols, etc., are not being used to proselytize, we don't even look at this stuff.
If a shipment of religious books to a chaplain, for example, is clearly sent with the intent that those books will only be distributed to individual troops who are members of the religion that uses those books, we pay no attention to it. Religious materials for personal use are allowed by the postal regulations, so if the purpose of a "bulk" shipment is simply for a chaplain to be able to distribute those books to individual soldiers for their personal use, whether they are Christian books or books for any other religion, we don't consider it to violate the intent of the law, so there's no problem. We only get involved when the intended use of the books being shipped is clearly to evangelize or proselytize.
Posted by: Chris Rodda | May 8, 2009 2:40 PM
"If a shipment of religious books to a chaplain...is clearly sent with the intent that those books will only be distributed to individual troops who are members of the religion that uses those books, we pay no attention to it...We only get involved when the intended use of the books being shipped is clearly to evangelize or proselytize."
You're contradicting your own statement. The Chaplain in this video said the Ugandans asked their "Pastor" for the Bibles. He was fulfilling their own request, and you certainly "paid attention to it".
Posted by: JD | May 8, 2009 2:54 PM
Chris Rodda:
JD, Liar For Jesus™:
There is no evidence the chaplain is telling the truth, and even if he were the Ugandans are not "troops". The bibles in question were clearly intended to be given to people who are not U.S. soldiers. There is a clear and documented pattern of behavior among christian chaplains proselytizing in violation of their direct orders, the UCMJ, and the US Constitution. And all your dodging won't change that fact.
JD, why do you side with criminals? Why do you support a man who is undermining the mission of our troops and endangering their lives?
Posted by: phantomreader42 | May 8, 2009 3:09 PM
First of all, JD, you haven't seen everything I have from Rusack's ministry, which clearly states elsewhere that they were, in fact, trying to convert the Muslims among these Ugandans. Second, the free and reduced rate postal privileges are only for the use of the U.S. troops for their personal mail and packages, and not to import anything for anyone else. These shipping perks cannot be used to receive anything from any private organization for the purpose of distributing it. There was actually a case at Bagram Airbase in Afghanistan just last year where a group of soldiers were misusing the mail system to receive shipments of gifts for the Afghans from a private charity. These packages didn't even contain prohibited religious materials and heads were rolling over the abuse of the military mail system by these soldiers.
Posted by: Chris Rodda | May 8, 2009 3:11 PM
The best place for information on what language is spoken where is the Ethnologue. According to the entry for Uganda, there are only about 2,000 speakers of Swahili in Uganda. compared to over 3 million for Ganda, for example. English is the official language and widely spoken. Unless the Ugandan aid workers happen to come from this small minority, the use of Swahili language Bibles probably reflects the ignorance of the proselytizers about African languages.
Posted by: Bill Poser | May 8, 2009 3:18 PM
Re JD
Mr. JD still hasn't indicated whether the Hebrew bibles he cited earlier on were written in Swahili. Of course, they weren't as no such bibles exist. They were designed to be distributed to Jewish troops stationed in Iraq, which, as Ms. Rodda has pointed out is perfectly legal, just as Christian bibles designed to be distributed to Christian troops is perfectly legal.
Furthermore, it should also be pointed out that it is against Jewish religious tradition to proselytize so any such activity would violate that tradition.
Re phantomreader42
Mr. JD is a liar for Joshua of Nazareth because he is a dominionist who believes that it is his duty to convert the heathens to his perverted version of Christianity. He couldn't care less how many American soldiers get killed as a result of his illegal activities.
Posted by: SLC | May 8, 2009 3:25 PM
A Bible in one hand and a machine gun in the other... it's almost too beautiful. Let's hope these military proselytizers keep up the good work. With a little luck, USA's hideous reputation in the world will rub off on Christianity.
Posted by: Flapper | May 8, 2009 3:39 PM
It may be splitting hairs to you, Chris. But to them and to anyone who wants to understand truly what he is saying, there is a definite distinction. You can say that the logical implication of him saying that the powers that be are working under the influence of the enemy is that they are infact also the enemy's agents. But he's not making a logical statement, so you have to suspend logic to understand his position.
He's not calling anyone in the military "the enemy". He is referring to Satan. Anyone intimately familiar with evangelical rhetoric will tell you that, you hear it all the time in a church. The "enemy" is everywhere.
Posted by: Sam H | May 8, 2009 3:54 PM
I know the "enemy" is technically Satan, but with the constant statements like this that I look at almost every day, some of which are more overtly referring to a specific person and some of which are referring to the broader "enemy" that's everywhere, I don't even attempt to make the distinction. Like you said, we're trying to logically explain completely illogical statements, which is impossible, so I just do the best I can and hope that logical people will understand what I mean.
Posted by: Chris Rodda | May 8, 2009 4:04 PM
Are you sure this video is for real? Because seriously, that beard is so far away from the Uniform Code that it's hard to believe this guy is actually currently in the military.
As far as I know, the only people in the US military allowed to have beards are Special Forces, if necessary to blend in while in the field, and people with medical conditions making it impossible for them to shave -- and they have to keep beards trimmed and neat. Check out Army Regulation 670-1. My link's from a rotc site, but it is the regular US Army regs, for cadets, use of, one each.
http://www.armyrotc.vt.edu/Cadets/r670_1.pdf
Posted by: DRK | May 8, 2009 4:46 PM
DRK:
I asked the same question earlier in the thread. He does say in the video that he's on R&R (I assume he's in ConUS) but, as I said earlier, unless the regs have changed (or if the Army was always different than the AF) then he's in violation of the dress code.
Actually, I find it interesting that so many preachers like their goatees (as I do mine). It tends to make them look a bit, oh, I don't know? SATANIC!!!!
Posted by: democommie | May 8, 2009 4:56 PM
DRK, there are a variety of people who can get waivers for facial hair growth, I don't think a preacher would be one of them. It could be the case however that he is a Reservist or a National Guardsman, in which case it may be acceptable since he is not actively at drill or deployed.
Posted by: Sam H | May 8, 2009 4:57 PM
F.Y.I.
One of MRFF's Advisory Board members, Reza Aslan, who has a new book out titled "How to Win a Cosmic War: God, Globalization, and the End of the War on Terror," is going to be on Bill Maher tonight, so if you have HBO, be sure to tune in.
Posted by: Chris Rodda | May 8, 2009 5:32 PM
JD, why do you hate America?
Posted by: Patriot | May 9, 2009 5:28 PM
JD: "Post a link to a single press release in which Weinstein says something negative about any other religion's activities in the US military besides Christianity."
Has JD pointed to any evidence that any non-christian group has committed any acts worthy of criticism?
Posted by: Barry | May 9, 2009 6:56 PM
Sam H: "Just a note: I'm not a Christian, I am an atheist, but I was raised in the church. While I don't approve of the actions of the "soldier missionaries", I think that some of the groups reporting on this issue are misinterpreting some parts of it to make the groups seem more sinister than they are.
When the pastor refers to "the enemy", he is NOT talking about the U.S. military. He is referring to Satan. "
He doesn't get to use his own definitions and language, just because he's an evangelical. When a member of the armed forces of the US uses language like 'enemy' about his/her superiors, it violates at least one article of the UCMJ (using disrespectful language about superiors). And it also violates any articles pertaining to obeying lawful orders, and not urging others to violate them.
Posted by: Barry | May 9, 2009 7:00 PM
JD, the Jewish prayer books are being provided by Chabad, a Hasidic (Orthodox Jewish) organization that ministers solely to other Jews. They have absolutely no interest in proselytizing people of other faiths - AND they are providing these materials at the soldiers' request.
Furthermore, it makes this clear in the article:
Aleph, a Chabad-Lubavitch initiative based in Florida that assists United States armed forces in providing for their Jewish personnel both on and off the battlefield, has already begun receiving requests for siddurs, kippahs, and lulavs and etrogs for Sukkot.
and
Aleph is also planning to send Lubavitch rabbis to bases that do not have a Jewish chaplain to conduct High Holiday services.
Either you didn't bother to read the (short) article, or you didn't understand the term "Chabad-Lubavitch", or you were just so eager to defend your fellow military Christbots that you didn't take the time to comprehend the bleeding obvious - or a combination of the above. In any case - FAIL.
Posted by: Jeffr Eyges | May 10, 2009 7:37 AM
One of MRFF's Advisory Board members, Reza Aslan, who has a new book out titled "How to Win a Cosmic War: God, Globalization, and the End of the War on Terror," is going to be on Bill Maher tonight, so if you have HBO, be sure to tune in.
He was also on the Daily Show recently: http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=224289&title=Reza-Aslan
He's articulate, insightful and responds well to Stewart's humor.
Posted by: Jeff Eyges | May 10, 2009 7:47 AM
Hi! I just want to invite you to hear the Good News...
By: sword44.blogspot.com
Posted by: Barakk | May 11, 2009 7:36 AM
sword44.blogspot.com:
And I want to invite you to go fuck yourself instead of blogwhoring what's probably dominionist garbage infested with malware.
Posted by: phantomreader42 | May 11, 2009 1:00 PM
Wow! Some of these comments reek of tolerance.... Let me see...
Honey bees dying off, Global Famine inbound, global financial collapse, 2012 doomsday rolling in, socialism, Pelosi lying, hate crimes legislation, war starting where last 2 World Wars began and so on and this is what you manage to complain about??? Must be a slow news cycle...
Btw: Commie boy posting above complaining about facial hair that is more than likely lying about ever serving in the armed forces. If you had two IQ points to rub together, you would see that this guy was obviously at his home (hence the missing olive drab, camo or khaki tent backdrop and cozy chair) which would indicate he was on leave. According to the UCMJ, facial hair rules do not apply while you are on what is aka a vacation half wit. Had you served, you would have known this before your ears dried from boot camp...
But I am sure you already knew that. That is what I love about you commie lovers... Your attention to detail. LMAO! What a piece of work...
Pretty cut an dry here. The Ugandans asked for bibles (God forbid as Uganda is a predominantly Christian nation. I am sure you already knew that too) and they were sent. No big deal unless perhaps you don't think that their request should have been honored because they are black or from Uganda. If not one of the priors, then I fail to see what the big deal is over this, or understand the hate filled comments being said about someone you don't even know and would probably like if you met in person
Just my .02 which combined with 4.48 will get you a mocha at starbucks...
Posted by: Does a name matter | May 17, 2009 7:14 PM
dear readers i have read the above with more intrest and i have to make this clear
1 am a ugandan and i worked at the base where the said bibles were brought .
asking for swahili bibles does not mean that we were being converted to christianity .
you all miss understood the whole idea swahili is one of the many languges in uganda mostily in the miltary services there for we asked the bibles to the language we liked most and we wanted to be close to home .
99 % of all the guards in iraq are chritians this includes protestants catholics and born again there is little or no guards who are musilems .
let the world understand that this is not as it is potrayed i recived the bible not becuase i was being converted but we wanted the word of GOD writen to one of the local language .
how ever much the official language is english the army uses swhahili in most of communication .
you guys get to know we speak many languages i my self i speak 16 languages and swahili is one of them and next to english in genral usage .
if you have anything more you would want to know do ask me
Posted by: MPEIRWE BARRY | May 23, 2009 4:30 PM
This is for all the hair stylists on the board that know so much about US Army dress code...
This is called Army Regulation SH 21-10 - [b]Standards of Appearance and Conduct[/b] Article 670-1 section 2 (Hair and Fingernail Standards and Grooming Policies)
For the obviously inattentive types that like to meet and take turns pretending they know what they are talking about, I have emboldened the section below that reveals just how uninformed, naive and in some cases, flat out dishonest you are, especially those who tried to pass yourself off as .mil...
A MAN IS ONLY as good as his WORD and you would do wise to remember that, as your character on here, however anonymous you think you are, will no doubt manifest itself through your character in your other reality. That also goes for those whom are slothful in their research and misrepresent those whom they speak about because it suits their own agenda and interests...
http://www.scribd.com/doc/2514083/Army-sh-2110-Standards-of-Appearance-and-Conduct
(AR 670-1)
a. Hair.
(1) Male haircuts will conform to the following standards: (a) The hair on top of the head must be neatly groomed. The length and bulk of the hair may not be excessive or present a ragged, unkempt, or extreme appearance. The hair must present a tapered appearance. A tapered appearance is one where the outline of the Soldier’s hair conforms to the shape of the head, curving inward to the natural termination point at the base of the neck. When the hair is combed, it will not fall over the ears or eyebrows, or touch the collar, except for the closely cut hair at the back of the neck. In all cases, the bulk or length of hair may not interfere with the normal wear of headgear or protective masks or equipment.
(b) [b]Males will keep their face clean-shaven [u]when in uniform[/u] or [u]in civilian clothes on duty.[/u][/b] If appropriate medical authority prescribes beard growth[aka a Shave chit~ added mine], the length required for medical treatment must be specified. For example, “The length of the beard will not exceed 1/4 inch.” Soldiers will keep the growth trimmed to the level specified by appropriate medical authority, but they are not authorized to shape the growth into goatees, or into “Fu Manchu” or handlebar mustaches.
{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{
Notice it says absolutely nothing about while they are on leave or off duty??? It details regs for "IN UNIFORM" or "ON DUTY-IN CIVVIES" but nothing about off duty...
I think that concludes the briefing for all the hair stylists here???
Boo-Yah!!!!
Posted by: Whoever | May 27, 2009 11:23 PM