MRFF Legal Counsel Sends Demand to Air Force Base After Non-Response to Complaints of Gate Guards Wearing “In God We Trust” Tab on Uniform

Published On: January 6, 2023|Categories: Featured News|11 Comments|
Kirkland Air Force Base sign

“The practice of having uniform patches of an obvious religious nature, violates the rather direct prohibitions of AFI 1-1, § 2.12.

“They also violate AFI 36-2903, Dress and Personal Appearance of United States Air Force and United States Space Force Personnel (2022), and the Kirtland AFB, Supplement to AFI 36-2903, Dress and Personal Appearance of Air Force Personnel. (2020). Both note that ‘Compliance’ is ‘Mandatory,’ i.e., violations breach Article 92, UCMJ …”

— MRFF legal counsel Donald G. Rehkopf

Click to read

Share This Story

11 Comments

  1. Richard Westenkirchnet January 8, 2023 at 7:08 am

    Tell MRFF legal counsel to kiss our asses.This is what wrong with our country.

  2. Don goble January 8, 2023 at 9:46 am

    MRFF, KISS THE BIG ONE, and do not send anymore trash articles.
    I TRUST IN GOD!!

  3. Grey One Talks Sass January 8, 2023 at 3:31 pm

    The two commentators above speak as citizens which is their right.

    A Right, by the way, defended by each and every citizen who has served or serves now in the Military and Government Services.

    My father served in local and federal level government jobs, doing his best to meet the needs of his fellow citizens. He taught me that government is the agreement barbarians made with each other in order to live in close proximity without killing each other.

    The two fine fellows above believe their flavor of extremism will win in the end.

    I believe they are overly optimistic.

  4. Joe January 8, 2023 at 7:30 pm

    Didn’t the military make accommodations for Sikhs & Muslims? Seems they loosened the regs for turbans & beards. But someone wears a small Christian phrase & all of a sudden the powers to be start beating them over the head with the UCMJ. SMDH!

  5. Grey One Talks Sass January 9, 2023 at 1:43 am

    Where is it written in the Christian holy book that Christian’s must display their faith on their clothing? What verse? What chapter?

    In fact isn’t the wearing of a cross around one’s neck in violation of that book? Isn’t the display we are talking about now considered part of worshiping idols?

    So if I understand the rules correctly those soldiers are not only disobedient to military law but their own religious law too.

    And yet we get comments defending this heinous act.

    Seems to me those who claim religious preference don’t understand religion at all.

  6. Just_hooker January 9, 2023 at 7:22 am

    Show me on this doll where that pin hurt you?

  7. Tom O January 9, 2023 at 8:39 am

    Turbans and beards are REQUIRED by some religions, don’t have religious slogans written on them, and are not inherently religious symbols. I know of no religion that REQUIRES its followers to wear the words “in god we trust” on their clothing. If there is such a religion, what is it?

  8. MrffBabyJesus January 9, 2023 at 7:16 pm

    Boo hoo, the bad phwase huwt my wittle feel feels. Now i duno what to do

  9. Grey One Talks Sass January 10, 2023 at 6:54 am

    Wow. The ‘owning the libs’ scent is overwhelming in here!

    All this fuss and nonsense without one verifiable fact among them. Try harder Nationalist Christians. The only ones fussing about emotions are you lot.

    By the way – none of you have answered any of the relevant questions posed in other comments. It’s almost as if you’ve been making a big deal about nothing all along.

  10. Tom O January 10, 2023 at 12:03 pm

    Joe asked at 7:30 pm on 1/8/23 “Didn’t the military make accommodations for Sikhs & Muslims? Seems they loosened the regs for turbans & beards?”
    Short answer: NO
    Long answer: they did not “loosen the regs.” If any military member wants to be exempted from a military regulation for religious reasons, each such person has to individually request that exemption, and to document how their religion specifically requires them to do whatever they want to do that otherwise is not allowed.
    See the first entry on this website’s LEGAL page.

  11. MRFFAccountant January 10, 2023 at 3:14 pm

    The accountant for Michael “Mikey” Weinstein’s Military Religious Freedom Foundation seems to have finally found his stride, as Weinstein’s charity has filed its last two public disclosures in relatively record time.

    That said, the rest of the story is just about the same. Despite the fact the finances of Mikey Weinstein’s “charity” have been publicly criticized (and again, just recently), his ethically suspect practices continue.

    As in prior years, in 2019 the largest expense for Weinstein’s self-founded “charity” was his own compensation, totaling $364,241. That’s in line with what he paid himself in 2018. The MRFF’s total ‘take’, however, actually fell to $663,335. Though the “charity’s” income was down substantially, Weinstein’s pay remained essentially the same, meaning the direct compensation for his “work” at the MRFF was a solid 54.9% of its revenue, one of the highest percentages to date.

    (In defending his exorbitant salary — which the Military Times previously called “unheard of” — Mikey said

    My salary is perfectly in line with a ton of other folks that do what they do.

    However, Weinstein failed to cite a single “other folk” of that “ton” with whom his salary is “in line,” while it has been repeatedly shown that other charities pay their primary leaders substantially less as a percentage of total revenue.)

    In 2020, Weinstein’s largest expense was – you guessed it – his own compensation. This year it was down slightly, to a reported total of $314,160, while his revenue was up slightly, to $680,230 – making Weinstein’s direct compensation 46% of every dollar acquired by his charity. The $50,000 reduction in Weinstein’s salary appears to be the primary reason that the MRFF was in the black for 2020 – after operating in the red for the prior two years.

    Most of the MRFF’s major expenses appear to be for contracts or contractors. For example, Weinstein lists a single “research” expense of $38,924 in 2020 – a line that Chris Rodda has previously admitted was her pay (apparently as a 1099-contractor, which helps Mikey avoid payroll taxes and other employment expenses). Similarly, Weinstein has repeatedly listed an expense of about $42,000 for undefined “volunteer support” – the consistency of which from year to year makes it seem it may be another contract position.

    In 2020 Mikey Weinstein finally admitted that he was paying out about $134,000 for legal services. In what was surely just a coincidence, in prior years, a similar amount to that same cost had been obscured under “other/professional fees” – a line that suddenly became zero in 2020. Frankly, that’s the line that Weinstein should be most proud of. If, in fact, those legal fees are exclusively covering “program services” in support of the mission of his “charity,” that line is the most justifiable expense he has.

Leave A Comment