Florida School Punishes Students For Saying No To Military Recruiters


From Mother Jones’ Mojo Blog:

    Thanks to Louisiana Senator David Vitter, the No Child Left Behind Act contains a clause which requires schools to give military recruiters the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of high school students. As most people have heard by now, parents may opt their adolescents out of this process. However, No Child Left Behind also provides that schools that do not hand over the information are subject to losing federal funding.

    In Florida’s Duval County, school officials have made a bargain with parents: It’s okay to opt your kids out of the military recruiter list, but if you do so, your teenager’s photo will not appear in the yearbook, and she will not be listed in sports activities or on the honor roll. Where I come from, this practice is known as extortion, but I’m sure the Pentagon sees it as negotiation. Duval County officials, though they believe they are operating within the confines of the law, have agreed to make some changes next year, which would give parents more options. However, these changes do not appear to effect the “negotiation” aspect of the process.


40 Responses to “Florida School Punishes Students For Saying No To Military Recruiters”

  1. Military Recruiter Says:

    “It’s okay to opt your kids out of the military recruiter list, but if you do so, your teenager’s photo will not appear in the yearbook, and she will not be listed in sports activities or on the honor roll.”

    Think about it, a simple Yahoo People search, Dex Online search or white pages search can turn up a person’s information. If not the student information than their parents information. If the student does not want their information released, it makes sense that NONE of their information is released. Also, concerning the “opt-out”, if a student ops out from the recruiter’s lists, they also opts out of the lists that get sent to colleges when they’re requested. The law says that the recuiters get the same information as colleges or perspective employers of students get. If they opt-out from one list, they opt-out of them all.

    Why is it that people blame the No Child Left Behind Act for “violating student’s privacy rights”? The TRUTH is that a law called the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 was the first law requiring schools to give Military Recruiters student information. That law was in effect up until the NCLBA took over in 2002. Schools have been required to give recruiters student information for over 40 YEARS! If you want to blame anybody for “violating student privacy rights” than blame LBJ since he signed that origonal law into effect. The NCLBA isn’t all that different from the ESEA, all it adds is more funding and standardized testing. I might add that LBJ was a democrat….. Just goes to prove what hypocrits the libs can be. It’s OK when THEY do something, but nobody else dare do it…….


  2. jl Says:

    Schools having to give out personal information is dumb. It most definatly is a violation to some people. I think a part of the freedom we have here in America is wheather or not people or kids want there personal information floating around where anybody can get it. And another thing, kids these day aren’t really taught about the Armed Forces. They just see ads on TV giving out free stuff if they order information on it. And the information makes the Armed Forces look like fun when really they just want you to go and risk your life fighting for something most teenagers don’t understand. If the military is going to target teenegers, they should at least explain why and what they would be doing.

    -consientious objector to war

  3. Recruiter Says:

    consientious objector to war,

    Why is it OK for a college to get student information but not a military recruiter?

    FACT: Average number of US soldier deaths, per year, from Operation Iraqi Freedom – 760
    FACT: Average number of college students to die from Alcohol related incidents and suicide PER YEAR – 2800!

    College kills over 3 times more people aged 18-25 than the war in Iraq has and college is the “safe” route?

    I’m not advocating that nobody should go to college. I’m just pointing out that there are risks in everything we do. There is a risk to joining the military, just as there is a risk to going to college. How about driving a car? 43,000 people DIE EVERY YEAR on U.S. highways (that’s not counting the average American street). Should we not allow 16 year old kids to drive cars because they don’t have the experience to drive safely?

    War is a dangerous thing, I’m not denying that. However you blow the risks out of proportion. It is because we are the best trained and best equiped Army in the world that we are safer in combat than we were 40, 50, 60 or more years ago.

    I find it funny that you basically call America’s teenagers dumb. That they “don’t understand.” Why does the State of California want to lower the voting age to 16? They’re not smart enough to figure out if the War in Iraq is right or wrong but they can vote for President? They’re not smart enough to know the realities of war but they can have an Abortion without their parent’s knowlege? They can get tattoos, piercings and even raise a child of their own, all without their parent’s permission, but they arn’t smart enough to know about the military? At the age of 16 you’re not smart enough to believe in defending one’s country, but you can go to college? You don’t give American teenagers enough credit at all.

    If they’re not smart enough to figure these things out for themselves than why do they have all these student organizations against the war and against the military? Are you saying that they’re all just puppets on a string? If that’s the fact you should be more appaled that these anti-war organizations are blatently using American children, when they don’t understand why or what for, just to push their own political interests. If YOU, sir, are against war, if YOU, sir, go and protest against the soldiers, against the President, agaist the War, against America; than I hope you do not let children protest along side you. They obviously don’t understand what they’re doing. They obviously don’t understand what they’re protesting against. So they SURELY have no opinion on what they’re doing. YOU should have the moral OBLIGATION to stop this blatent abuse of American teenagers without haste. You should also speak out against organizations like Students Against War (SAW) and other student anti-war/Military/Bush/government organizations because these are obviously mis-guided youth since they have NO IDEA what they’re talking about since they’re “dumb.”

    Before you go and accuse the Military for “preying” on America’s youth why don’t you and all of these anti-war/military organizations take a long look in the mirror. IF we’re “preying” on them than surely YOU are too.

    Loving one’s Country and dedicating your life to protect it isn’t misguided, that’s honorable. I do not know you, but I would assume that you would know nothing about that.

    Nobody joins the military to go to war. Nobody joins the military to die. Nobody joins the military to kill people. We all join to serve our Country. We take an oath to protect the Constitution and the citizens with our lives, if necessary. That is a sacrifice that nobody WANTS to make, but we are all willing to do so if it comes down to it. As a soldier, marine, airmen, or sailor we don’t pick and choose our time to serve in combat. We don’t get to say “Naw… I don’t think this war is the right one… I’m not going to go.” We follow our orders from the officers appointed above us and the President of the United states – it’s as plain and simple as that. We have to trust that the President, and Congress (since the President cannot send us to war without Congress’ approval) are sending us on the right mission. Myself, and millions of other soldiers, believe that this is the RIGHT war at the RIGHT time. This war serves the best interest for the American People and keeps us safer in this epic battle between good and evil.

    Some people (IRR Soldier or Kevin most likely) are probably going to come back and say things like “The United States did this to itself. THEY created these terrorists who hate us…..” Does that make the terrorists right? Does that mean that 3,000 innocent people had to die on that fateful day? Because an admistration 20 years ago did something “bad”? Fact is that these people hate us and want us all to die. What are you going to do to stop them? When somebody is so committed that they’re going to blow themselves up just to kill you what do you say to them? “I’m sorry”? “We won’t do it any more”? When they’re THAT committed there is nothing you can say or do to stop them, except kill them before they kill you. THAT is why we are at war. THAT is why we went to Iraq because Saddam has been supporting terrorists for years; Saddam even had a terrorist training camp in Iraq that we didn’t know about until AFTER we invaded. It’s called Salman Pak. He trained an estimated 800 terrorists there – funny how the left-wing… er… ah… main stream media never reported that. Saddam had WMDs, USED THEM TWICE, but could not prove that they were destroyed or explain where they went. Suddenly we’re supposed to believe that he doesn’t have them? We went to War in Iraq to prevent Saddam from giving those weapons to terrorists. Unfortunetly we were too late. That’s why we havn’t found any WMDs now. The question isn’t “DID Saddam have WMDs?” It’s “what did Saddam DO with his WMDs?” I pray that the answer is give them to an organization with the capabilities to bring them to U.S. soil.

    This post has gone on long enough and kind of gone off topic; however I greatly anticipate your, or anybody elses, response.


  4. gr Says:

    “Think about it, a simple Yahoo People search, Dex Online search or white pages search can turn up a person’s information. If not the student information than their parents information.”

    If its so easy than the recruiters can do it themselves.

    “Also, concerning the “opt-out”, if a student ops out from the recruiter’s lists, they also opts out of the lists that get sent to colleges when they’re requested.”

    Not necessarily. There can be two lists. A good school ought to not mix those up. But why would a recruiter lie?

  5. Military Recruiter Says:

    Why are you advocating making our jobs harder? Should I take away gas stoves at McDonalds since YOU could easily make a fire with 2 sticks and a piece of string?

    “Not necessarily. There can be two lists. A good school ought to not mix those up.”
    Under the law, there CAN NOT be two lists. The NCLBA (formerly the ESEA) does NOT give recruiters any special rights or privileges. Under the NCLBA – they only get EQUAL TREATMENT from the schools. Everything a college recruiter or prospective employer gets, the military recruiters get and vice-versa. Why do you people act like it’s a “voilation of student privacy” if a military recruiter gets your contact information, yet it’s OK for a college recruiter to get your information? If you want student information protected, protect it from EVERYBODY – don’t discriminate against recruiters. You people are against this provision of the NCLBA because it “violates student privacy rights.” It seems to me you’re not against that “violation” on just the principle alone (if at all). You’re against it because the information goes to one organization – the DoD. If you’re going to be accusing recruiters of lying, why don’t you start telling the truth yourself.

    “But why would a recruiter lie?”
    This whole story and resulting comments have nothing to do with recruiters lying…… what are you trying to bring up here? Please do not try and change the subject.


  6. Another Fellow Recruiter Says:

    Recruiter has obviously done his homework. Although, I do find it difficult to rebut the “conscientious objector’s” comment with all the mispelling. It makes it comical to think that this person has a problem with the military, when they should be ashamed of their own education.

    As to recruiters lying, how the web tangles. Can any recruiter say that another recruiter hasn’t lied somewhere on someday? No. We know there are less than perfect people. But we identify the liar, then generalize the whole spectrum of recruiters, including those that have NEVER lied and served their country with honor. Recruiters do not generalize that all the Counter-Recruiters are liars, although many have. Myself, I view the Counter-Recruitment movement as dissent, and subversion against the Department of Defense, and the United States Government. It is outlined in 18 United States Code, Section 2387. If we were indeed a Nation at war, it would violate Section 2388, and constitutes a crime once again. But then, the Counter-Recruitment movement does not seem to care that interfering with the DoD’s procurement policy puts billions of jobs in jeopardy. Defense Contractors, to include Lockheed-Martin, Boeing, General Dynamics, Northrup-Grumman, Litton Industries, etc.; are the major corporations that support this economy, providing millions of jobs to our fellow Americans. But then again, you seem to care more about destroying the military’s recruiting effort, unknowingly destroying the companies that exist to keep us safe, equipped, and alive.

  7. jude Says:

    Even though the (unconstitutional) law may require the students personal information should be turned over to the military machine (and colleges/universities), it’s still a violation of privacy, period. Being discriminated against by an American high school is correctly defined as “punishment,” and is unamerican. Anyone (especially a minor) who prefers to keep their personal address & phone number private have every right to do so. They also have the right to not be excluded from their community (i.e. banned from their HS yearbook). Individual rights are being violated by both federal law and the school in this case.

  8. Military Recruiter Says:

    Since none of us are on the Supreme Court here, lets just stick to what the law IS.

    Nobody has ever said that they don’t have the right to privacy. Hence, the “opt-out” rule.

    I’m going to defend the school here – on principle alone. The students want their information protected – their NAME is part of the information that they want protected. Putting their name in the year book would be releasing that information since HS year books are public domain and anybody can buy one. You may have wanted the recruiter to not contact you – so you oped-out and then he gets the year book, does a simple google search and gets your addy and phone number. The school should have done more to protect that person’s privacy – but they didn’t.

    But the school in Florida is doing it the right way. You want your infomation protected? We’ll protect it…. ALL of it.

    So which amendment to the Constitution gave everybody the “right” to be in their HS year book? I can’t quite remember which one it is…..

    Oh yeah, why is nobody pissin’ and moanin’ about telemarketers getting your information? When are you going to put that on Bush?


  9. Another Fellow Recruiter Says:

    Just for clarification, how is releasing names, addresses, and telephone numbers a violation of privacy? If the child opts-out, then they shouldn’t have the phone number and address in the phone book.
    But then again, the military recruiters are only allowed the same access as universities/colleges, trade schools, and employers, to the information. But I don’t hear your Counter Recruiter Movement up in arms over colleges calling students. Because it ISN’T the military. Thats the only reason you don’t complain. You are bigots; bigots that exploit children and use them as leverage in your anti-military, anti-government, political agenda. You are no better than anyone else. If you say you are not anti-military, would you let your children serve in a time of peace? If you answer yes, you are a fair weather supporter of the military, and we don’t need Americans to half-ass their way through life anyway. We have plenty of those in this country already. If you answer no, then you obviously don’t give a damn about the freedoms and “rights” you think you so richly deserve, and would rather us “all get along” because war never solved anything…except ending communism, slavery, liberating Europe, and stopping anarchy, war never solved anything.

  10. SGT. Dave M. Davis Says:

    I think what Another Fellow Recruiter says pretty much sums up what I have been hearing from more than one parent. “If it weren’t for war we would allow our son or daughter in the military.”

    The problem with many of you is that you think nothing is worth fighting for. “Just give the bullies of the world what they want,” some of you say, “and they’ll leave us alone.”

    History has shown that bribing the thugs of the world (Hitler, Saddam Hussein, Tojo, etc.) has never worked. AND IT NEVER WILL. I know from personal experience that backing down doesn’t work.

  11. Military Recruiter Says:

    Another Military Recruiter,
    Do you have my office bugged? Or are you some how stealing my thoughts? Because DAMN! We’re singing off the SAME sheet of music here bro’! It’s nice to know I’m not the only sane person in this world

    SGT Davis,
    I feel you, man. I feel you!

    I get so sick and tired of hearing: “I support the military. I support the war. I support the President….. But not my child.”

    Then you don’t really support it do you? If not your child, then who? Why is your child’s life more important than anybody else’s life? Than MY life? Than the 2 million people that are in the military? You either support the war and believe in fighting terrorism where ever it hides…. or you don’t. It’s that simple.

    I sometimes feel like I’m in a sports bar…
    “WO-HOO! ASTROS WIN! Man I LOVE the Astros – they’re my favorite team!!!” Then next week comes around and the Astros lose you hear the SAME PERSON saying “MAN! The Astros SUCK! I never liked them anyway….”


  12. LockStock Says:

    I honestly don’t belive jude could have stated it any more clearly:

    “Individual rights are being violated by both Federal law and the school in this case.”


  13. Military Recruiter Says:

    How are people’s rights being violated by the NCLBA when they have the option to not have their information released?

    What rights have the school violated? Not being put in the school year book? Where does it state in the constitution that you have that “right”? The schools actions are perfectly legal and make sense. The student does not want ANY of their information released. Part of that information is their NAME. School year books, sports programs, and honor role lists are all public information. They clearly stated that they don’t want ANY of their information released to recruiters from the military or colleges. In order to insure their information isn’t released (to include their name) the school must ensure that it is not in ANY publication of any kind. Where were the rights violated here? The school is just acting on the student’s request.


  14. jane Says:

    Hey military recruter, not all rights are in the us or state constitutions. Ever hear of human rights? Yeah, those things that the military don’t believe in, as evidenced by abu ghraib, gitmo, school of the americas (now going by whinsec), among many others. Human life and human rights obviously have no meaning to the military. The military is a tool of opression and power by the political elite. You do the dirty work so the wealthy don’t have to get their hands dirty. Your efforts make the rich richer, keep the poor poor, and result in much suffering and death in this world.

    Not much point in arguing though, you’ll never be right, and I’ll never convince you.

  15. Dave M. Davis Says:


    If the rich are getting richer because of the military, their doing a lousy job of it. There are better ways for the rich to get richer without violence. Free Trade with every tin horn dictator of the world for starters.

    Did the rich really need to get richer by fighting Hitler? No. It would have been a whole lot easier to trade with him.

  16. Military Recruiter Says:

    Human life and human rights mean everything to the military. The international red cross went to gitmo and it’s report said that there was some abuse of prisoners. You know what their chief complaint was? That the prisoners were being left outside in the cold at night…… THEY’RE IN CUBA! COLD?! CUBA?! GIVE ME A BREAK! Prisoners are NOT being abused in gitmo. Abu Ghraib was an isolated incident carried out by a FEW individuals. These acts, were they torcher? ABSOLUTELY NOT. Were they abuse? Yes. Were they wrong? Yes. Are the individuals involved being rightfully punished? YES. Their actions do not reflect the entire military. Why do you hate the organization that keeps you free?

    Human rights…… I suppose that we all have different views of human rights. But lets see what Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary has to say about it:
    Main Entry: human rights
    Function: noun plural
    : rights (as freedom from unlawful imprisonment, torture, and execution) regarded as belonging fundamentally to all persons.

    I’m failing to see how having your picture in the year book falls under HUMAN RIGHTS! So is the most of the continent of Africa violating people’s HUMAN RIGHTS since not every body has a high school year book?

    How is the military a “tool of opression and power for the political elite”? Lets list a few conflicts and see the opression…
    Revolutionary War: Liberate Amererican Colonies from a dictator thousands of miles away. Reason for war – freedom & liberation.
    Civil War: Keep the union whole & free the slaves.
    WWI: Free Europe from a brutal dictator. Reason for war – freedom & liberation.
    WWII: Free Europe again from an even more brutal dictator. Stop Hitler & Emperor Showa from ethnic cleansing. Reason for war – freedom & liberation.
    Korean War: Stop the spread of communisim and opression. Reason for war – freedom & liberation.
    Vietnam War: Stop the further spread of communisim and opression. Reason for war – freedom & liberation.
    Gulf War: Remove Saddam’s forces from Kuwait and stop a brutal dictator from ethnic cleansing. Reason for war – freedom & liberation.
    Operation Enduring Freedom: Stop a brutal regime from providing aid and comfort to terrorists and liberate an opressed population. Reason for war – freedom & liberation.
    Operation Iraqi Freedom: Stop a brutal dictator from providing aid & comfort to terrorists. Stop Saddam from developing and distributing weapons of mass distruction. Liberate an opressed population & stop Saddam from further ethnic cleansing. Reason for war – freedom & liberation.

    Where is the opression & power for the “elite”?

    I’m not sure how the poor get poorer from war because a post-war economy is usually much better than before the war.

    SGT Davis is right, there are much easier ways for the rich to get richer than to go to war.

    You’re right though… Not much point in arguing because YOU’LL never be right, and I’ll never convince YOU. You are so blinded by your hatred for your own country to ever see things in a different light; or even consider other people’s ideas.

    One thing that I find interesting, and that show’s your pure hatred for America, is your accusations of human rights violations. You’re quick to point out all these supposed human rights violations that America supposedly commits. Yet you say NOTHING about the REAL human rights violations done by our enemies. You say nothing when innocent civilians are killed in the streets of Iraq because they don’t believe in the same things as the terrorists, or because they support the United States and the new Iraqi government. You say nothing when soldiers and civilians are captured/kidnapped and beaten, TRUELY torchered, starved, and eventually beheaded. You said nothing when women were beaten with lead pipes by the Taliban because they showed too much skin (the skin on their wrists) in public. You said NOTHING when women were executed in public by the Taliban because they spoke back to their husbands. You said nothing as Saddam murdered millions of his own citizens. You said nothing when Saddam would have people’s toungs cut out because they spoke out against Saddam. You said nothing when Saddam would have his government rape squads rape women and female children to get information from their husbands or fathers. You said nothing when Saddam gassed 5000 people in one day because they weren’t the same religion. You said nothing when Saddam would torcher and mulitate his citizens because they weren’t the same religion or tried to rise up against his opression. You said nothing when Saddam would torcher people because they refused to work on his WMD programs, leaving many of them paralyzed. You said nothing when Saddam let 200,000 children starve to death while he lined his pockets and built palace after palace with gold toilets and marble floors. I could keep going on and on about Saddam’s and others human rights violations…. but my point is that you say NOTHING about those – but scream at the top of your lungs about the United States few, minor infractions. You’re lucky that you live in the United States because if this were another country you’d be tried and hung for treason…….


  17. Patriot Says:

    What’s with the “hate your country” argument? I’ve seen no hatred for their country by jane or her ilk. And do you hate free speech so much that you would kill those who disagree with you? If anyone is guilty of treason, it would be the folks who perpetuate the damage to our country’s image by participating in and/or supporting an unjust and illegal war. These are the same people who are destroying our country’s infrastructure for their own greed.

    BTW, the reason these wealthy would rather own a country than trade with it is that they get MUCH richer MUCH more quickly. They would never make nearly as much money in trade as they would through ownership. The greedy will never be satisfied, it’s true.

    And to keep this on topic, you will find that a majority of Americans find the law regarding student’s personal information to be unconstitutional, or at the very least, unacceptable. Look it up, the polls are out there. The only people who can’t seem to accept this are the people who truely do hate this country and it’s freedoms and protections.

  18. jane Says:

    MR (hehe, it fits!)- Treason?!?! Puh-leeze. You talk about “sticking to what the law is,” so why don’t you explain exactly what I said constitutes “treason.”

    Pat has a good point too, why do you hate our country and our constitutional right to free speech? Hang me for having an opinion different than yours? You gonna pull the lever?

    Sure glad to have people like you fighting for our rights…

  19. Military Recruiter Says:

    It is clear that they hate their country because they are so quick to condemn it yet REFUSE to recognize the atrocities of others. Especially the horrific violence displayed by the former Saddam regime, the former Taliban regime and the terrorists that we’re fighting to keep America safe and free. She blows the minor infractions by a few Americans WAY out of proportion and does not bring to light the actions of others (who commit human rights violations on a extremely grand scale). That shows her pure, unaltered HATRED for America. Plain and simple.

    I do not hate free speech. I never told anyone to shut-up at all. I might have used strong language to make them understand how wrong they are. But I never told them to shut up. What I said is: “You’re lucky that you live in the United States because if this were another country you’d be tried and hung for treason…….”

    Why did I say this? Because in other countries, more specifically Iraq under the control of Saddam or Afghanistan under control of the Taliban, she would have been killed as the first sentence of “anti-government” or “anti-war” came out of her mouth. Mind you “old” Iraq and “old” Afghanistan are just 2 examples. The former USSR was another good example. How about North Korea? Vietnam? China? That list could go on forever…..

    I never once accused her of treason. I was just demonstrating the realities of living under the rule of a different government. Now that the United States has toppled those governments, their citizens will never have to worry about that ever again.

    “If anyone is guilty of treason, it would be the folks who perpetuate the damage to our country’s image by participating in and/or supporting an unjust and illegal war.”

    Madam, please walk up to the first soldier you see and say the quote above (from your post remember) to their face. You just accused EVERY Soldier, Marine, Airman, and Sailor of being guilty of treason. HOW DARE YOU! We’re the only thing that stands between certain death and freedom. Without us, you would not even be able to say those words. Without us, life as you know it would cease to exist. Without us you would be forced to cover all your skin 24/7 and be treated as an object rather than a human being. Without us YOU, madam, would be treated worse than a dog. You would have NO rights what-so-ever, not even human rights as defined by M-W Dictionary. If you’re unaware of what the terrorists want, unaware of their ideologies, unaware of their ultimate goals….. then you need to educate yourself pretty quickly. That’s some scary shit.

    You say this war is “unjust”. Why? Because Saddam had WMDs, USED THEM TWICE, and could never prove that he destroyed them, and from 1998 to 2001 bragged that he had them? Because EVERYONE IN THE WORLD said he had them? We were supposed to believe that he didn’t have them? Now you’re thinking “ok smart guy, where are they now? Why can’t we find them?” Well, the answer to that is one of the very reasons we went to war. We went there to prevent Saddam from giving those WMDs to terrorists. I fear that we acted too late. There is significant evidence that he had them in the past. Nobody can deny that since he’s used them (on civilians in his own country I might add). Nobody has ever proven that he destroyed them. The question is: Where did he put them? Or worse yet, WHO did he give them to? I pray that we never find out the answer to the second question. If we find out the answer to the second question it’ll because the recipient of those WMDs has used them on innocent civilians.

    You say this war is illegal. Why? Chew on this for a while: In 1992 at the end of Operation Desert Storm there was only a declaration of a cease-fire. There was NEVER a declaration ending the war in Iraq. So technically we’ve been at war with Iraq since 1991. Why do you think we’ve had troops in Kuwait since then? Ever heard of Operation Desert Fox? What about the no-fly zones? All there because we’ve been at war. Technically the President didn’t need anybody’s permission to go to war. However he followed the right path and got Congress’ approval. If you want to blame anybody, blame Congress since the President couldn’t have done anything without their say-so. Oh, it’s illegal because we didn’t have U.N. approval? Hmm….. lets look at something for a second. During Operation Desert Storm we had a coalition of 34 nations. During Operation Iraqi Freedom we had a coalition of 31 nations…. Who’s missing? France, Germany and Russia. 3 countries, all part of the U.N., 2 with veto power, all three against the war in the security council. They never said that Saddam DIDN’T have WMDs, they just wanted to do something else about it other than war. Why were they against it? Could it be because of the Oil-for-Food Scandal? Do some research and get back to me on that one. For those of you who don’t care to research. Basically, France, Germany, and Russia have been illegaly buying oil from Saddam for years lining his pockets with over 10 BILLION dollars. There is also evidence that France and Russia have been dealing illegal weapons (not WMDs, but illegal non-the-less) to Saddam for years. Wonder why they didn’t want us to go in there? Because we’d find evidence of their crimes? You bet ‘cha.

    “BTW, the reason these wealthy would rather own a country than trade with it is that they get MUCH richer MUCH more quickly.”

    When has the United States ever gone to war and “owned” something in the 20th century and beyond? NEVER! What do we “own” in Iraq? Oil? WHERE IS THE OIL?! If we went to Iraq for oil, whether it was right or wrong, I’d like to see the benefit. The United States does not, and never will “own” Iraq.

    “…you will find that a majority of Americans find the law regarding student’s personal information to be unconstitutional, or at the very least, unacceptable. Look it up, the polls are out there.”

    FIRST OF ALL, what “law” regarding student’s personal information are you talking about? If you’re referring to the NCLBA, it is a section of a law. Secondly, I searched high and low and couldn’t find any polls indicating that people believed that the NCLBA is unconstitutional. I found a Gallop poll saying that 68% of Americans believed that the NCLBA was a step in the right direction, and a vast improvement over the ESEA that was in place before NCLBA. If you say it’s so easy to find the polls indicating the “unconstitutional opinion” please provide a link.

    I love America, and I love freedom. I have dedicated my life to protecting it. I have not indicated that nobody can say anything that I disagree with. As I said before, I was just demonstrating the greatness of living in America. I was demonstrating the fact that you CAN freely speak your mind without fear of persecution. Just be prepared to hear everybody else’s opinion right back at ‘ya.

    Please see everything above.


  20. poetpiet Says:

    Over de Schutting, 21 oktober 2005 will be in the archive on (REAL) call. Near trhe beginning of the 3rd hour: 2(nd song into it) We can’t make it here (James Mc.Murtry) / James Mc.Murtry / 7’04 / Compadre 6-16892-65842-9 / ‘Childish Things’ / 2005
    3 Stranded (J.Pepper) / Jefferson Pepper / 2’57 / American Fallout Records AF 001 / ‘Christmas in Fallujah’ / 2005

  21. . Says:

    vry amusng waching mr dig himslf into a hole

  22. Military Recruiter Says:

    Anonymous Poster,

    #1. Hole? What hole? I’ve based everything I’ve said with facts. I see no hole hat I’ve dug myself into. Jane and “Patriot” were quick to reply to my posts before – yet suddenly they’re silent…..

    Hole you say?

    #2. If you’re willing to say things about/to me. Why are you UNwilling to atleast post a name? What are you afraid of?

  23. . Says:

    we r all laughing at you, is y we r so quite.
    ur self-righteous sincerity is funny and depreesing at th same time

    nuthing u say follows ne logic xcept mayb as flame-bait

    u contradict ur self over and over and u r blind 2 ur own fallacies

    u just like 2 fite. overcompensation?

    u r an attention whore

    even i can see thu u

  24. . Says:

    we r all laughing at you, is y we r so quite.
    ur self-righteous sincerity is funny and depreesing at th same time

    nuthing u say follows ne logic xcept mayb as flame-bait

    u contradict ur self over and over and u r blind 2 ur own fallacies

    u just like 2 fite. overcompensation?

    u r an attention whore

    even i can see thu u

  25. Military Recruiter Says:

    Anonymous Poster,
    #1. Their silence continues for over 5 days now. Obviously they realized that they cannot beat my arguements. It’s easy to see why really… I use facts while they do not. I can guarentee that nobody is laughing at me – they’re actually laughing at YOU! They’re laughing at you for your complete lack of understanding of the English language. Go back to school QUICKLY! My 5-year-old nephew has a better grasp of the English language than you do. Please go back and finish the 4th grade before you post again. You may think it’s “cool” to use “u” instead of “you”, but it isn’t. All is shows is your complete lack of education, ignorance, and illiteracy. Judging by your writing I can tell you are severly uneducated. Frankly I’m surprised you were even able to post a comment on this website! I might make a few spelling mistakes here and there and what not. But WOW you’re dumb!

    #2. 99.9% of things on the internet are single-click only. When you double-click, that’s when your comments get posted twice. Moron.

    #3. Contradict myself? How? When? I have re-read my posts for any mistakes I made and have found NONE.

    #4. No logic? Facts don’t equal logic? You’re more stupid than I thought.

    #5. I don’t like to fight. I like to educate people on things I am passionate about. I might come off as confrontational only because I don’t understand why people can’t see the realities of the War on Terror. You can show your kind fact after fact and they still refuse to believe it. It frusterates me beyond belief. I’m sorry I am confrontational, it’s just that I have lost all patience.

    #6. Attention whore? What does that say about the rest of the people who post on this site? Is IRR Soldier an attention whore since he put this site up and comments on it constantly? My attempts to shed light on the War on Terror and the recruiting world are not for attention. I’m just trying to show people the real story – not the biased point of view, pack of lies your ilk puts out.

    #7. “even i can see thu u” I was right! YOU ARE A COMPLETE UNEDUCATED MORON! You just admitted to your own incompetence right there! The first step to solving a problem is admitting you have one. Now that you know you’re stupid do something about it!

    #8. I did not attack you, you attacked me. I do not attack people personally until they fire the first shot. That’s my own personal ROE. If you attack me expect it back 10 fold.

    To those of you who think that my comments were harsh and un-called-for. Sorry, they were called for. Anonymous started it and deserves every word I wrote. It just goes to show how wrong Anonymous and the rest of the left is. If they are losing a debate; rather than admitting they’re wrong or backing up their statements with facts….. they start in with the personal attacks. Anonymous realized that I was right and knew the only way to “win” was to discredit me personally. Anonymous failed miserably.

    If anybody else wants to post comments on this further, please feel free. I will not attack you unless you attack me. Contrary to popular belief, I actually do read other people’s posts and consider their points. If they’re right, I’ll admit it – if not I’ll argue my point. I look forward to any more comments.


  26. . Says:


    u r a joke

    tell me anuther

  27. W. Smith Says:

    Familiar with the term duckspeak?


    Antecedent conditions that encourage groupthink

    * Insulation of the group
    * High group cohesiveness
    * Directive leadership
    * Lack of norms requiring methodical procedures
    * Homogeneity of members’ social background and ideology
    * High stress from external threats with low hope of a better solution than the one offered by the leader(s)

    Eight symptoms that are indicative of groupthink:

    1. Illusion of invulnerability
    2. Unquestioned belief in the inherent morality of the group
    3. Collective rationalization of group’s decisions
    4. Shared stereotypes of outgroup, particularly opponents
    5. Self-censorship; members withhold criticisms
    6. Illusion of unanimity (see false consensus effect)
    7. Direct pressure on dissenters to conform
    8. Self-appointed “mindguards” protect the group from negative information

    Symptoms of decision affected by groupthink are:

    1. Incomplete survey of alternatives
    2. Incomplete survey of objectives
    3. Failure to examine risks of preferred choice
    4. Failure to re-appraise initially rejected alternatives
    5. Poor information search
    6. Selective bias in processing information at hand (see also confirmation bias)
    7. Failure to work out contingency plans

  28. Patriot Says:

    I don’t know why I feel the compulsion to respond. I must say my silence has not been due to amusement (although I must admit our illiterate friend has a legitimate point – or several). I’ve remained silent because, despite the fact that you claim to read what anyone says to you, it would appear that you don’t listen to what’s being said. (I may be wrong, this is just my perception of the situation – at the very least I don’t see you responding directly to what’s being said without aggressive derision of those you appear to perceive as opponents.) You raise points that were never part of the original discussion – that was about public schools required to provide personal information of students to the military, yes? You’ve led us off on a tangent, a tactic (in my experience) used by every MR I’ve tried to have a conversation with. Distraction works wonders, doesn’t it? Confuse your opponent/target/mark – it’s a technique utilized by used car salesmen and con-artists, too.

    Would you care to discuss the article, or do you prefer to rattle off the rhetoric you use to recruit TEENAGERS? Sorry, I get worked up over things like this. Teenagers don’t know what the world is like, and it seems to me that military recruiters, corporate recruiters and college/university recruiters prey upon the young and naive.

    I’d ask your thoughts, but to be honest, at this point I no longer care. This discussion has clearly outlived any usefulness it may have had, and (again I’m being honest here) because of your apparent indifference and egocentrism, I really can’t say I give half a damn about what you say or think anymore.

    I guess what I’m trying to say here is that I expected insightful comments, instead of the same old stale propaganda. I have noone to blame for my disappointment but myself.

    Peace be with you, and may your recruits return alive and whole.

  29. vernon oneil Says:

    I would like to make the following statement to all of you. You are all patriots in your own way. The freedom we enjoy to speak what we feel is priceless. We are all Americans and have the right to say what we believe in. Now that you have all stated your beliefs, let me state mine.

    First let me respond to the issue of recruiting teenagers.

    The fact is that everyone, business and military alike offer young men and women opportunities. Some of these opportunities have inherent risks. For example, the oil fields of northern New Mexico recruit young Native Americans to work the wells. These jobs have a high risk of injury or death involved. Firemen, Police Officers and even the electrician that works on the power lines that provide you the ability to turn on your lights are all dangerous jobs. The military is another job/career opportunity. Now before you start with the accusations of me being blinded by my chosen career, know this: I have done both civilian and military work, I have as much experience in one field as the other, I have been a recruiter and a recruitee. I am the father of three boys who will be of age soon to choose thier own destiny. With that said. Here is the real scoop. The military is an option. The belief that young men and women do not know what they are getting into is false. They have all seen “Saving Private Ryan”, they have all seen “Men of Honor”, they have all seen the anti-war movies as well. Further, they are watching the news, surfing the web, and are better aware of what goes on than we give them credit for. The military is an option, it gives them money for college, life training “Teenagers don’t know what the world is like”, the military brings them up to speed quicker than any other legal experience. It also gives them benefits, like VA loan garuntees and lastly it gives them a common bond with other veterans. If you all would take a look at one another’s postings (without being hostile) you might see that you each have a point. The original question was: Is it right for Military Recruiters to get the phone lists from High Schools and Colleges. The answer both legally and morally is: Yes. If we are a country of fair people, then we should give the information out and let individuals decide for themselves what they should do. That is what we as Americans believe (Individual rights and all). Yes, it is a difficult decision, but so is what college to go to and what career path should be taken or even marriage and sex. But, we gladly let our children take these risks. The recruiter is correct. College is a dangerous place, more kids get raped, killed, abused and in more trouble there than in the military. But, that is not saying the military is perfect. Instead, it is saying the military is an equal option. Please remember, the military is made up of Citizen Volunteers. It is not a group of brainwashed Gestapo type individuals. We do not serve past 30 years and are not allowed to (while in service) to run for political office.
    I tend to run on and on, but the fundamentals are this:
    The military is an option for young men and women. So is college and so is the business community. The right for these individuals to be approached by recruiters for any of the above is allowed by law. The individual has the option to opt-out of these lists. They even have the right to say NO. Before everyone gets into their own trench and fights to the finish, there should be some leeway given to both sides.

  30. ArmySoldier Says:

    Ok…so the fix is this.
    Do not release their name and address in a school list.
    I would take a yearbook over a school list anyday…it is more personal…and then I can DQ all of the Fat kids.
    Getting the address/phone number is not a problem…someone has it, whether it be in the yearbook directory…whitepages…or maybe I will buy it from the yearbook people, or class ring people, or (you get the point).
    Point is…my time can be better spent recruiting rather than looking up phone numbers. And it is cheaper for the govt.
    Remember that I get paid by the taxpayers.
    The same taxpayers that pay for the schools.
    Funny how that turns out isn’t it.

  31. standby Says:

    Not really all that funny. Seeing as I’m paying for it either way, I think the military/university/corporate recruiters should do their own work. If the military needs to spend $60 annually to get the local HS yearbook, I’m not going to cry about it. I’m sure it costs at least that much for the school to compile the students’ personal information to begin with. I’d rather see the schools’ money be spent on education.

    I’m not opposed to the military looking up students who they’d like to recruit (I’ve torn up plenty of recruitment mail, and sent it back with my name still clearly legible until they finally got the point and removed me from their lists – not to mention laughing at and hanging up on recruiters who had the balls to phone me), but I do believe it is wrong to require the public school system to assist the military in this endevor.

    You do bring up a valid question about how much of our taxes are spent on these recruitment tactics. Business-reply envelopes, full color glossy brocures, high-production commercials on MTV, not to mention the time the recruiter puts in already (hanging out at the mall seeking vulnerable teenagers), etc.

  32. ArmySoldier Says:

    I guess you are right…a draft would be cheaper. Its a shame that money motivates you that much…
    What are the alternatives? Recruit or Draft.

  33. IRR Soldier... Says:

    Yes a drfat would be much cheaper – that is only one reason why I support its return.

    – No mercenary bonuses for enlisting.

    – A draft would involve healthy, single young men. There would be no need to subsidize family housing for PV2s and PFCs or the medical costs for junior enlisted dependents.

    – A draft would probably be able to return about 1/2 of the NCOs in USAREC back to the mainstream Army. While some would still voluntarily enlist with a draft, it would be a sellers market – ie. no prospecting, no P1 etc. These NCOs could be the cadre new units of drafted junior enlisted are formed around.


  34. IRR Soldier... Says:

    Yes a draft would be much cheaper – that is, however only one reason why I support its return.

    – No mercenary bonuses for enlisting.

    – A draft would involve healthy, single young men. There would be no need to subsidize family housing for PV2s and PFCs or the medical costs for junior enlisted dependents.

    – A draft would probably be able to return about 1/2 of the NCOs in USAREC back to the mainstream Army. While some would still voluntarily enlist with a draft, it would be a sellers market – ie. no prospecting, no P1 etc. These NCOs could be the cadre new units of drafted junior enlisted are formed around.


  35. ArmySoldier Says:

    Though I should not support the draft for personal reasons…i.e. having to deal with unmotivated/unwilling soldiers…I see your point and would be willing to sacrifice my self interests for the good of the country.
    It would help the country by everyone having a part in service…thus everyone having a vested interest in world affairs. It would do wonders to bring up the quality of this generation as far as values/morals are concerned.

  36. IRR Soldier... Says:

    Army Soldier,

    Glad to see we agree. I wouldn’t be so down on the quality of soldier brought in if the draft was reenacted. Remember that we had a draft from ’47-’73 and that experience showed that draftees were chaptered at a rate 1/2 of that for volunteers. AWOLs among draftees were alos about 1/2 of the rate for volunteers.

    You can’t underestimate the motivation in a 2 year draftee – “cooperate and graduate” to survive and return to “the world” after 24 months. In the end, many guys who never would have considered the Army will make it a career or do 20 in the Reserves or Guard. SMA Tilley was a draftee.

    Also, draftees would have a better education than what we currently have in the volunteers. We would have enlisted soldiers from areas and colleges unrepresented in today’s forces. The more affluent, better educated and more physically fit are what we need in this assymetric war. When the USMC talks of a “strategic corporal”, I think many from better educations can fill that roll well.

    And you’re right – integration would increase, voting participation would increase and Americans will once again have a common, unifying experience.

    Check out the book “United We Serve” – a must read. It has a lot of great essays for and against the return of the draft.

    Today’s volunteers have a 40% attrition rate before ETS – this hardly constitutes evidence of the “greatest Army” we’ve ever had.

  37. ArmySoldier Says:

    I guess my question is this then…
    If the end state of your affiliation with this site is to reform recruiting…and eventually spur talk on bringing back the draft…why is there nothing on the site (other than your comments) regarding this?
    This site appears to me to be an anti military site. Is this “false advertising” to get the youth of America to join the anti-recruitment movement, thus forcing us to have even tougher recruiting times…thus creating the necessary environment for the draft?

  38. IRR Soldier... Says:

    Army Soldier,

    This is not my site – it is a project of NYC Indymedia. I have no idea who runs it. That being said, I like the dialogue here and the diversity of opinions. That is why I link to it.

    Just wanted to clarify.

  39. Military Recruiter Says:

    Mr. Smith,
    I had no idea what you were talking about with the team duckspeak. I did a little research and found out I should have read George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four. But here is what I found:
    “In the novel Nineteen Eighty-Four by George Orwell, duckspeak is a Newspeak term meaning literally to quack like a duck or to speak without thinking. Duckspeak can be either good or bad, depending on who is speaking, and if what they are saying is in following with the ideals of Big Brother. To be speaking rubbish and lies (bad), or to be speaking rubbish and lies for the good of “The Party” (good).”

    I am not speaking on behalf of “Big Brother,” nor speaking rubbish and lies for the good of “The Party.” I am only saying my personal beliefs. If my speech is good or bad is up to you. That said, I believe that I am speaking for the good of the American people.

    In my second post I strayed off topic – I admitted doing so at the end of that post. We continued on topic with “gr”‘s post following my second post.

    Another Fellow Recruiter, SGT Davis and I stayed a little off topic having a conversation about what parents say to us.

    Then Jane took us off topic with her accusation that the Military doesn’t care about human rights, and speaking how the military is a tool of opression.

    I responded to Jane’s accusations and it went on from there.

    I did not go off topic, your ilk did. Don’t blame me for shit I didn’t do to try and make me look bad/dumb.

    Thank you for not singleing(sp?) Military Recruiters for “preying on the young and naive”. While I don’t think we’re “preying” on anybody – I appreciate that you aknowledge the fact that Military Recruiters are not the only people who deal with young adults and their future.

    I am not sure what your experience is with 17-24 year old young adults is. But in my experience they’re much more aware of the situation than ANYBODY gives them credit for. A previous poster said it right – they’ve seen the movies, they’ve seen the news, hell they’ve probably talked about it in class! They’re very informed about this decision.

    Thank you for your comments on the safety of my recruits. Just because I’m a recruiter doesn’t mean that I do not care for their livelyhood. I just had a recruit of mine get back from Iraq actually (that’s where I was all weekend). He had a lot of good information and insight. He saw a lot of action, but due to his unit’s high quality training they never lost a single soldier.

    Thank you for your insightful comments. You brought up a lot of good points. I really liked your commments about how informed students are and how the Military is an equal option to college/workforce. You also said it best when you said: “The right for these individuals to be approached by recruiters for any of the above is allowed by law. The individual has the option to opt-out of these lists. They even have the right to say NO.”

    Just give me the damn list. I’ll probably buy the yearbook anyway. But the school already has the list made up for their own use anyway….. so just give it to me to make my life easier.

    It is not costing the schools any more money to create these lists. As I said before, the schools have to create these lists for their own use anyway. So the lists are already there. Do you have any idea how much it would cost the government if every recruiter had to spend $60 per list? MILLIONS. It’s far cheaper to give the recruiters the lists. Really, the only cost to the current way is the cost of the paper. Since many schools now give the lists in electronic format it’s not even that.

    ArmySoldier (again),
    Not a fan of the draft, but you and IRR Soldier bring up some very good points.

    IRR Soldier,
    First, see my post to Anonymous about double-clicking on the internet…. J/K.

    As I said to AS, I don’t like the idea of a draft, but you have a lot of valid points. I think it would cause a lot of problems initially, but in 10 years or so might prove to be a better system.

    YOU DON’T RUN THIS SITE?! I feel like a horse’s ass! I thought you did….. do you have your own blog? If so what is the address, I’d be interested in seeing it.

    I think that’s it for now…..


  40. IRR Soldier... Says:


    No worries. I’m the most frequent poster here so i understand how you thought I may have something to do with it. To be honest, I wouldn’t post a lot of the stuff here … but it’s their site.

    No blog of my own. I’m afraid I’ll spend even more time on the net then!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: