The head of the Garfield High School PTSA hassled an on-site military recruiter yesterday, who left after reporters who were alterted to the confrontation, arrived. The Seattle Post Intelligencer reports:
Do you understand that we don't want you here?" said PTSA co-Chairwoman Amy Hagopian, who came to the Garfield High School lunchroom carrying pictures of Iraq vets maimed in war. "Do you see these pictures of people who come home with prosthetics? Do you see them?" challenged Hagopian, a University of Washington assistant professor in health administration and the mother of a senior at Garfield. "My uncle was injured in Iraq in March," responded the young new recruiter. "And you know what? He feels it was worth it!"
(Mac Safari users click on time stamp to continue).
The media descended and the recruiter left. Free speech for me, but not for thee, again, in seditious, sorrowful Seattle. Thanks for helping chase off the recruiter, University of Washington Asst. Professor, Garfield parent and PTSA head Amy Hagopian - very American of you. (Where's the ACLU in all this, anyway? Their silence on harrassment of recuiters in Seattle is deafening).
The Garfield PTSA previously tried to get the Seattle school board to ban recruiters, but failed. Recruiters are under pressure to follow guidelines for proper conduct, as the P-I story details, and rightly so. A "Stand-Down" day tommorow for recruiters is meant to re-emphasize the rules of the game. That's the approach to take, as opposed to banning recruiters, which the Seattle School board says is illegal in its schools.
Apparently, at least one Garfield student interviewed by The P-I would be happy to go to Iraq.
Yesterday senior Timmel Bowens, who has signed up with the Army but is still trying to pass the aptitude tests, said having recruiters on campus is "cool" and that the PTSA resolution is "not right."Posted by Matt Rosenberg at May 19, 2005 04:20 PM | Email This"Why would you prohibit recruiters from coming to high schools if there are students trying to join up?" he asked...."To me, going overseas and killing people, I would feel happy about myself for that," he said.
I suppose.. it's better than staying here and killing people.
Posted by: bmvaughn on May 19, 2005 04:22 PMThis Amy H is so incredibly insulting to the students and totally disrespectful of the military. She obviously feels that the education given in the Seattle schools does not prepare the kids for anything serious, so they need to be protected. I'm sure many of these kids can make up their minds either way.
Any bets which way Amy H feels about these kids able to make a serious decision on their own when it comes to abortion?
Posted by: Fred on May 19, 2005 04:33 PMAmy is a certifiable nut case. There I said it, and I mean it.
Posted by: who'dathunk on May 19, 2005 04:40 PMMandatory 2 year military service for all!
Johnny and Jane will ship out idealistic dreamers and come back with a love of country for what we have.
Posted by: Elvis is the King County on May 19, 2005 04:47 PMThe first thing I did after 9/11 was check minimum age for military service, I discovered I am officially an old fart. Any one for an age discrimination suit?
I hope the feds follow through and yank Seattle Public Schools Federal funds.
Posted by: jcm on May 19, 2005 05:04 PM"Where can I sign up?"
AS they say, the military laughs all the way to the bank.
dB
Posted by: dB on May 19, 2005 05:47 PM
"If two or more persons in any State, Territory, Possession, or District conspire to prevent, by force, intimidation, or threat, any person from accepting or holding any office, trust, or place of confidence under the United States, or from discharging any duties thereof, or to induce by like means any officer of the United States to leave the place, where his duties as an officer are required to be performed, or to injure him in his person or property on account of his lawful discharge of the duties of his office, or while engaged in the lawful discharge thereof, or to injure his property so as to molest, interrupt, hinder, or impede him in the discharge of his official duties, each of such persons shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than six years, or both." (Emphasis added.)
The students at North Seattle Community College should have faced this felony as well.
A reminder to moonbats: Don't commit federal felonies in the course of protesting the government. You don't get to vote afterwards, and state governors can't give you a pardon or restoration of rights.
Uhhhhh.. This IS washington right? Haven't we just been discussing the felon vote? There seems to BE no penalty wrt voting in Washington, or at least in KC. So maybe that's why some people are willing to flout the law.
You think our freedom is a cakewalk? Visit Arlington Nat. Cemetery. Watch the guards at the Tomb of the Unknown. Ask WHY they volunteer. Feel the reverence there. Then come back and tell me you aren't grateful for all you have here.
Posted by: Jimmie-howya-doin on May 19, 2005 10:08 PM
James S.
Posted by: james S. on May 20, 2005 07:18 AMMilitary people can come on to campuses and speak the TRUTH, but they can't come on and lie to students about matters of life and death.
Posted by: headless lucy on May 20, 2005 07:43 AMWhat happened to Viet Nam?
And save your supposed pity and sympathy for those who've died in prior wars. You don't respect them any more than you respect yourself.
Posted by: jimg on May 20, 2005 08:41 AMThe war is not for oil. If we wanted the oil we would have lifted the blockade against Iraq years ago. It's about defending civility in the onslaught of islamoterrorists out to take the world by dastardly terrorist attacks on civilization and innocent people. If you think that Bush and the administration is lying to you, then please go to Baghdad and report the facts to us.
I've had the opportunity to live in Asia during the late 60's at a military establishment. My view of the world changed tremendously and I appreciated more upon return just how good we have it here in the US and it is worth defending. Headless--is this country worth defending in your opinion? If not please move out and let a grateful immigrant take your place.
People like you lead me to really believe that the only way to reverse the perverse is by mandatory 2 year service in the military.
Posted by: Elvis is the King County on May 20, 2005 09:38 AMI suppose you never have been attacked. I suppose you don't know about violence. Here is a little lesson--the only way to fight fire is with fire. The only way to stop violence is with the violence or the threat of violence. Why is there so many children and women beaten in this country and around the world? Because they don't know how to fight back. A person is more likely to be violent with someone if they in return will not get hurt. But who will save the women and children? Our country risks itself to help the less forturnate, to help those who ASK for our help. We protect those who cannot protect themselves. And even when we lose our own and seem to be fighting a losing battle, we still stand beside those who want the same as us--life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Posted by: Shannon on May 20, 2005 10:14 AMLike many "liberals", I deplore that this officer was treated this way. While many of us disagree on the necessity, and motives for our invasion of Iraq, we can all agree on the following:
1) The US military must follow orders, regardless of personal opinion or political considerations, except where those orders violate the law, or the UCMJ. Note that the military, if left alone is quite effective in disciplining its own.
2) The US military takes great care in minimizing civilian casualties and collateral damage...far more than other nations or conflicts historically. It would have been pretty easy to flatten Fallujah into rubble from the air, at zero risk. Instead we sent in troops, taking casualties, to root out the insurgents, minimzing civilian loss of life.
3) The military should always be respected. They are the guardians of our democracy, and have served both Republican, and Democratic administrations with equal professionalism.
Recruiters should have full access to our schools, provided they don't break the law, or make promises they can't deliver. The military is an honorable profession. I personally believe all 18 year olds should perform some kind of government service, be it the military, Americorps, or a similar program.
Finally, all "moonbats" aside, please note that many key Democrats have served in the military, in active duty roles. Take a look at and contrast the current GOP administration, and key party members, and you would be *quite* surprised. The majority of us are patriots, and believe in our country, just as you do.
Posted by: Proteus on May 20, 2005 10:56 AMThe first thing I did after 9/11 was check minimum age for military service, I discovered I am officially an old fart. Any one for an age discrimination suit?
Someone told me that they raised the age from 35 to 39. I haven't confirmed that yet... Wife would kill me if I joined a Reserve Group and was sent off to Iraq. She'd kill me for just going to a Boot Camp for weeks on end. Something to do with a 15 mo. old in the house.
PS. I feel shitty for not doing it already.
Posted by: Troll on May 20, 2005 12:21 PMWho is this hag UW professor to believe that she decides who the schools "don't want here"? I pay part of the taxes used by the schools, so do many, many people in the area. It's not up to her to decide whether or not recruiters can recruit in a highschool.
Classic totalitarian thinking from this woman. You're exactly right - free speech for me, but you better shut up.
Posted by: DeadManVoting (aka Iguana) on May 20, 2005 01:22 PMHowever, her type is the first to dust off the medeival rage & torture gizmos when HER family is attacked by an assailant or carjacked. Military hater. Police hater. Until HER family is attacked. Then, she it the first in line to scream for bloody vengance. We've all seen these types. Reality kicks them in the teeth.
The world can be a nasty place and we have a right--no--duty--to preserve ourselves. To do less is to deny our worth as a nation and to ingore untold sacrifices made on our behalf throughout our history. God bless our military!
Posted by: Jimmie-howya-doin on May 21, 2005 06:47 AMEditor:
Two of my sons proudly serve in the military. One is a U.S. Army staff sergeant in Baghdad, and one is a stateside United States Marine working to get himself deployed. My Marine son, especially, is grateful to the recruiters who came to his high school campus and talked with him about the honor of serving his country.
My sons' sacrificial service deepens my embarrassment at the inane and vacuous Garfield High PTA vote to "ban" military recruiters, an action it had no legal authority to take, from Garfield's campus. But what can you expect from this band of dilettantes? While service in our country's armed forces is, in the words of Friday's Times' editorial on this subject, "honorable and necessary," one can't say the same for Garfield's PTA.
My sons proudly serve to defend Garfield's PTA members' freedom to say and do stupid things. To them and to all the men and women of our military, especially from the Seattle area, I apologize for this insult since an apology is in order but not expected from Garfield's PTA.
Posted by: Scott St. Clair on May 21, 2005 06:59 AMRegarding my e-mail admonishing her for the PTAs position.
Dear Correspondent,
I'm sorry to have to resort to this canned
response.
It's unfortunate you have been led to believe
that if we send our American teenagers to go kill
Iraqi teenagers that somehow this protects our
freedoms. That's how they get people to enlist
and ship out--by preying on our values of
patriotism, love of country and freedom. I share
those values. But our freedoms come from our
Constitution and depend on our ability to
construct a government and political system that
adequately provides for freedom. Anytime our
political system fails to protect our freedoms,
freedom is lost and there's not a damn thing the
military can do to save it.
The PTSA's mission is to “to support and speak on
behalf of children and youth in the schools, in
the community and before governmental bodies and
other organizations that make decisions affecting
children;” and “to promote the welfare of the
children and youth.”
Our PTSA represents a diverse group of kids, many
of them low-income and ethnic minorities.
Low-income kids are the specific targets of
military recruiters--you don't see the Marines
with recruiting tables at America's elite prep
schools. Kids shouldn't be lured (often through
illegal and unethical recruiting practices) to
join the front lines in wars far from home--leave
that to the people who make the decisions to go
to war (or *their* kids). They might think twice
about it.
There is no need to reply.
Amy Hagopian
Garfield High School
PTSA co-chair
Our teenagers don't go over there to 'kill Iraqi teenagers.' They go over there to kill Iraqi insurgent and mercenary terrorists from any country (Syria, Saudi Arabia, Iran, et al) who try to kill our troops, blowup Iraqi innocents, and disrupt the peace process. If one of them happens to be a teenager, so be it.
We don't target civilians. My guess is you have the 'War IS Terrorism' bumper sticker on your VW Bus. That worldview is so Orwellian and wrong. War (use of troops) is our legitimate response to unprovoked terrorism (targeting of innocents and civilians.) That world view produces wrongheaded angsters like you.
America is great because we don't target civilians or the innocent. We could wipe out every citizen in any country we choose. But we don't. The terrorists would if they could. We're better than they are. And the world is better served and safer because of our strength and restraint.
Posted by: tumnus on May 23, 2005 03:41 PM