Military Recruiters Targeted

Access to Campuses Subject of Scrutiny

Thursday, March 20, 2014
Article Tools
Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
iPod friendly
Share Article

Limiting access by military personnel to high school campuses has become the mission of Veterans for Peace and the Santa Barbara Friends Meeting (Quakers) members. A few dozen people showed up to the Faulkner Gallery last Saturday to discuss the matter and hear a handful of panelists talk about alternative opportunities for service and stricter policies in San Diego. “It’s kind of become this very casual notion that everyone is used to the military in our lives,” said Santa Barbara High School parent Kate Connell, citing “chin-up challenges” with Marines on campus as one example.

Per No Child Left Behind (and tied to federal funding), public high schools must allow the same access to military recruiters as they do for college and career recruiters. School districts can place limits on recruiter campus visits, as long as the same policies apply across the board. Current Santa Barbara Unified School District protocol exists to limit all recruiter visits to twice a year, and it also states recruiters must sign in at the administration office, not have “unfettered” access to students on campus, and not offer awards or gifts in exchange for contact information. But Connell hopes to turn the guidelines into more comprehensive, permanent board policy. Such a policy could cap the number of recruiters at a single visit, detail how the policy would be enforced, and limit data from the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery Test that juniors and seniors take.

Also at issue is the access that military recruiters have to student directory information. Parents (or students 18 years or older) can sign an “opt out” form, but Connell hopes to spread awareness about the form because it comes buried in a hefty packet of papers at the start of each school year. The group will meet again on March 31.


Independent Discussion Guidelines

This David Swanson piece, regarding a 2010 Army War College report (linked from the source) just posted yesterday:

'Army Makes Case Against Enlisting'


"...This is the highest honor the Army could give these groups, including Quaker House, the Mennonite Central Committee, Iraq Veterans Against the War, Veterans For Peace, and Courage to Resist. Activists often disbelieve in the effectiveness of their own work until the government admits it explicitly. Well, here is that admission. And counter-recruitment activists really do seem to appreciate it.

"...But who really should be reading this excellent report is potential recruits..

"A Veterans For Peace video [ ] the report helpfully tells us, (in reality the video is the work of a number of organizations):…“begins with video from the United States Army Recruiting Command...

Before You Enlist!

JohnTieber (anonymous profile)
March 20, 2014 at 7:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Hey, if the Dems (per Taxin' Jackson) want to recruit voters before they are eligible to vote, why not the military?

JohnLocke (anonymous profile)
March 20, 2014 at 9:45 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Because our military is evil and destructive to both our country and innocent people abroad. The military is not a private enterprise, it is part of the government, it has no free speech rights. The people have the right to restrain government.

loonpt (anonymous profile)
March 20, 2014 at 9:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Orwell: "We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm"

Get with the program, loonpt. Freedom isn't free.

DonJosedelaGuerra (anonymous profile)
March 20, 2014 at 12:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Tomorrow's leaders would be better prepared attending UC and taking
Ms Miller-Youngs classes rather than joining our evil military where they would actually learn how to get things done!

garfish (anonymous profile)
March 20, 2014 at 1:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The military does some neat, cool things. However, with the leadership of the last half century, you'd be crazy to sign up and follow orders coming from liars, thieves and corporate interests. Wish it was as black and white as Don Jose painted. That program changed long ago.

spacey (anonymous profile)
March 20, 2014 at 4:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I accept the need for a strong military for defense in this violent world, but the whole "freedom isn't free" cant is just a bunch of b.s. The last war the citizens of the United States fought for freedom and sovereignty was the War of 1812, unless you count the Civil War, which was fought to free African Americans from slavery. Otherwise, the Mexican/American War, the Spanish/American War were wars of aggression to take over territory that did not belong to us. World War I and World War II were fought to protect the freedom of people in Europe and Asia from European and Asian despots. All the wars since then have been police actions to attempt to force other countries to accept our view of the world or to depose some regime that we didn't like. Since the War of 1812, we have been attacked on our shores by a foreign power only once, Pearl Harbor (to which we ultimately responded by unleashing nuclear annihilation on two Japanese cities). 911 was an attack but not one by a sovereign state. It was a thuggish act of terrorism by criminals to which we responded in a rather random and shotgun fashion in Iraq and Afghanistan and by systematically hunting down and assassinating the architect of that attack. Proving to terrorists that our drones and assassins can reach you wherever you are in the World is a good message, but it is a policing message rather than a freedom preserving one. We need a military and we should allow military recruiters to recruit from our high schools. But please spare me the "freedom isn't free" trope.

Eckermann (anonymous profile)
March 20, 2014 at 8:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)

In addition to what Eckermann wrote, regarding the vapid platitude "Freedom isn't free":

Anyone who's been paying attention for the past 60 years or so — or even just for the past 12 years and 6 months — is well aware that freedom within the USA is nearly gone...

'Americans Have Lost VIRTUALLY ALL of Our Constitutional Rights'

...stolen not by foreign enemies (of which the USA has had none since World War II except those its military-industrial complex deliberately created), but by domestic enemies, the same domestic enemies Dwight Eisenhower and J F Kennedy warned of, the latter perhaps paying for that warning with this life.

Former Top NSA Official: “We Are Now In A Police State”

INFOGRAPHIC: Is the U.S. Becoming a Police State?

Techniques Used in Prisons Are Now Applied To All Of US

10 Reasons the U.S. is No Longer The Land Of the Free

U.S. Government May – On a Whim – Label ANY American a Terrorist

32 Privacy Destroying Technologies That Are Systematically Transforming America Into A Giant Prison

The Criminalization of Everyday Life

Police State USA

'72 Types Of Americans That Are Considered “Potential Terrorists” In Official Government Documents'

Experts on the Left and the Right Agree: America Is Running the World’s Largest Terrorist Operation

JohnTieber (anonymous profile)
March 20, 2014 at 9:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The military saved my son from a life of hell. Yes, like many young Latino men in the Santa Barbara area the "gang lifestyle " called him and only by the grace of God he never got in trouble. Well, one day he decided to speak to a recruiter and his life has never been the same. Nearly 7 years now he has been on the "right track" and staying out of trouble and out of the judicial system! As a parent I know there is danger around every corner and for me personally I would rather my son be remembered for being a Sergeant in the USMC than a low life gang banger in Santa Barbara. Thank You to the United States Marine Corp for saving my son. OOO-RAH

37087pav (anonymous profile)
March 21, 2014 at 8:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)

If military recruiters can't come on campuses then neither can political indoctrinators or government representatives. Lets be "fair" across the board.

blahblahmoreblah (anonymous profile)
March 21, 2014 at 9:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I liked your commentary about your son 37087pav!

DonJosedelaGuerra (anonymous profile)
March 21, 2014 at 9:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)

what's this "evil military" nonsense? Refried 60's peaceniks? It's the politicians that send the military on its missions. Like CA's beloved Senator (only I get to carry concealed) Feinstein.

JohnLocke (anonymous profile)
March 21, 2014 at 9:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Over Post much JL?
Sorry if my subtle sarcasm flew over your head if you were commenting on my prior post.

garfish (anonymous profile)
March 21, 2014 at 9:49 a.m. (Suggest removal) a parent in the Latino community, do you have an opinion on the gang injunction.

and good job on your son.

lawdy (anonymous profile)
March 21, 2014 at 10:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)

37087pav's son quit the smallest gang in the world that rarely ever commits an act of violence to join the biggest and most violent gang in the world. I guess being in the biggest and most violent gang in the world has its benefits over being in the smallest gang in the world, at least for that particular individual and perhaps their family, but which would be better overall for humanity?

JL, if the people who send the military to war are evil and they send them on evil missions, the individuals in the military may be ignorant and may be good at heart but it would then be OUR RESPONSIBILITY to inform them that they are fighting for evil. To let people who are good at heart continue to fight for people that are evil without informing them of what they are doing seems pretty evil to me.

loonpt (anonymous profile)
March 21, 2014 at 11:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)

loonpt wrote:
"…the individuals in the military may be ignorant and may be good at heart…"

I agree.

And regardless, they are breaking the law, and (though there's little chance they'll be charged and convicted) they are subject to the same penalties as Nazi soldiers after World War II.

Any war initiated against a country that has neither attacked nor posed an imminent threat to the initiator (i.e. all 37 that the USA has initiated or become involved with since World War II, resulting in the deaths of 20-30 million individuals and many multiples more maimed and driven from their homes), is a violation of international law and a war crime.

And so, regarding any individuals who are involved:

Nuremberg principles


Principle VI:

"The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law:
(a) Crimes against peace:
(i) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;
(ii) Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i)."

Principle 1:

"Any person who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefore and liable to punishment."

Principle IV:

"The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him".

This principle could be paraphrased as follows: "It is not an acceptable excuse to say 'I was just following my superior's orders'".

JohnTieber (anonymous profile)
March 21, 2014 at 11:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)

So blahblah, what is a "political indoctrinator"? A teacher or student group with whom you disagree regarding politics? Pretty tall order, to scrape that landscape clean of disagreement. You know they teach that stuff on campus: communism, socialism, capitalism, fascism, monarchism, totalitarianism, compare and contrast, characteristics of, historical emergence of, various manifestations of, comparative revolutions, social and cultural factors affecting… Naturally, the kids have some thoughts, get some ideas. --Nitz's wife

Nitz (anonymous profile)
March 21, 2014 at 12:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I find this story and responses awesome. Having been a Marine on recruiting duty in Santa Barbara (95-98) and now currently in Afghanistan, I love the armchair quarterbacking by all. A little perspective...a good recruiter will get names and phone numbers of every single HS Senior and contact as many of them as humanly possible before and after they (hopefully) graduate. Contact...NOT perform magic/voodoo/Jedi Mind trick. Restricting access is silly (note to Marine in office on Upper State: Keep up the good work brother!)...pontificating about what the military is or is not doing in Afghanistan while sitting in a home in one of the most exclusive/expensive communities in the world is even sillier.

Marine0369 (anonymous profile)
March 21, 2014 at 1:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"pontificating about what the military is or is not doing in Afghanistan while sitting in a home in one of the most exclusive/expensive communities in the world is even sillier."


How does being in Afghanistan give a broad perspective about what is happening when everything you do is so compartmentalized?

"Contact...NOT perform magic/voodoo/Jedi Mind trick."

What about bribe?

loonpt (anonymous profile)
March 21, 2014 at 1:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)

loonpt excerpted:
"pontificating about what the military is or is not doing in Afghanistan..."

I haven't pontificated here regarding Afghanistan, so I'll do so now:

As Afghanistan is a brutal and unprovoked attack and occupation by the USA against a country that did not attack us and posed no threat to us, and thus a clear violation of international law, everyone involved in that brutal and unprovoked attack has also violated international law.

JohnTieber (anonymous profile)
March 21, 2014 at 3:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Not illegal to sit in the US and speak of a country you know nothing about...just silly. You're welcome by the way...
Bribe? Never once as a recruiter did I ever offer a bribe...not even a friggin bonus. How could this happen? I offered people the truth about a purposeful life where hard work is rewarded in a disciplined meritocracy. I can give you numerous contacts in the SB service community (Police, Fire Dept, etc) that chose to enlist during my watch and are better human beings as a result.
There is nothing compartmentalized about what I do. At the high end of the tactical spectrum, everything we do and everyday, has strategic implications. Another area you know nothing about

John Teiber: You have no idea how many Afghans are killed by their home grown Taliban in daily unprovoked attacks on thier own women and children in the name their bastardized beliefs. You have no idea how many young Afghan boys my men have seen after getting raped by thier village elders simply for sport. One constant remains: the ethical warrior who is the antithesis of what you describe who is there to pick up the pieces and strives daily to bring about security, peace and prosperity. Just came to me: Not once has a US Marine laid an IED in this country. Since you have the answers, go down the road to Wounded Warrior Battalion and see some of my brothers with missing limbs and tell them they violated international law in person.

Marine0369 (anonymous profile)
March 25, 2014 at 1:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Riighhtt.... It sounds like we are talking past each other.

So how much are they paying you to post here?

loonpt (anonymous profile)
March 25, 2014 at 2:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The Military is great for getting away from home, getting an education for near free, having a pay-check from Uncle Sam but remember that even after you have enlisted and performed your Basic Training, have your MOS (Military Occupational Specialty), and are going through College on your GI Bill, when the order to report for War is issued by what ever President is in Office, your Primary JOB is Warrior for the Country. That's right people, you are ordered to DIE for your Country (hopefully our Enemy Dies first). I remember many a radio announcer here in the DC Metro asked the listening audience to report in regarding the Declaration of War by then President George W. Bush, "what do you think", was the question and many a service person reported that they signed up cause they wanted all the free stuff and was told they would NEVER have to serve as a soldier in a War cause we were the greatest Country in the World and NO one would challenge us! Well the Terrorists of 9-1-1 did and many service people were shocked that they were going to Fight; many wanted OUT any way they could. A huge spike in "Don't ask and I will tell", came to light and at the time I was working at the NRO (National Reconnaissance Office), and watched many Service people bow-out under that declaration, they just couldn't believe that they would actually have to FIGHT!

dou4now (anonymous profile)
March 25, 2014 at 2:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)

well, marine, I do respect you, and I'm pretty sure you are indeed "an ethical warrior " -- however, you don't take on Tieber's comment that our Afghanistan military adventure is "a brutal and unprovoked attack and occupation by the USA against a country that did not attack us"... Yes, YOU are ethical, but our country's attack is not ethical or provoked. Putin brought this up in his (yes, crazy) rant vs. the USA -- where is our moral high ground about slamming his unprovoked seizure of the Crimea (where at least 70% are native Russian speakers) but enthusiastically supporting our aggression??
Try this, it's good when you comment that no "US Marine [has] laid an IED in" Afghanistan, but no Taliban has laid an IED in the USA, either. To do your job, you have to believe what you wrote. OK. But I am against recruiting H.S. students to join these bellicose attacks supposedly in the name of "freedom". Whose freedom??

DrDan (anonymous profile)
March 25, 2014 at 3:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)

People should have been more worried about this before and during the war, not when it is about to end, and they are cutting down the military.

AZ2SB (anonymous profile)
March 25, 2014 at 9:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)

event calendar sponsored by: