Charles Kernaghan Talk Audio Online
Kernaghan Audio Sec. 1
Kernaghan Audio Sec. 2
Kernaghan Audio Sec. 3
Kernaghan Audio Sec. 4
Kernaghan Audio Sec. 5
Kernaghan Audio Sec. 6
Kernaghan Audio Sec. 7
Kernaghan Audio Sec. 8
Kernaghan Audio Sec. 9
Kernaghan Audio Sec. 10
Monday, November 26, 2007
Saturday, November 17, 2007
Recruit This!
How the US Military is Trying to Recruit Your Children, and What You Can Do About it.
Mark T. Rutkowski
The War on Terror (or as it is now being called, the Long War) is into its sixth year with no sign of an end in sight. While Democrats continue to stall on Capitol Hill, more and more Americans die each week. To date over 3,200 Americans have been killed in combat and more than 24, 000 have been wounded. Meanwhile the military has experienced its lowest levels of enlistment since the Vietnam War.
In response to this massive personnel loss the Bush administration has stepped up its effort in military recruitment. Waivers have been given to criminal offenders while the standards for the Arm Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) have been lowered. The enlistment age has been raised twice: from 35 to 40 in 2005 and from 40 to 42 just last year. However the most effective element of this enlistment campaign has been the No Child Left Behind Act.
Signed into law in January 2002, No Child Left Behind narrows testing standards, increases state accountability and cuts federal funding to schools that are considered to be failing. In addition, section 9528 of the act requires that high schools turn over information of all students or risk losing federal funding. The legislation was co-authored by Department of Education Secretary Margaret Spellings, Texas lawyer Sandy Kress, and Spelling's Chief of Staff David L. Dunn. The act reads “…each local educational agency receiving assistance under this Act shall provide, on a request made by military recruiters or an institution of higher education, access to secondary school students names, addresses, and telephone listings.”
Additionally the Army’s Junior Reserve Officer Training Corps (JROTC) is used to give students an early lesson in military indoctrination. The Army defines JROTC as “a course of instruction taught for academic credit in high schools by retired officers and non-commissioned officers. In public schools, students select Junior ROTC as an elective course. In some private schools, such as military schools, enrollment in JROTC may be a mandatory part of the curriculum.” JROTC programs can be found in many inner city schools where the chances or recruiting students are very high. Such programs can cost school districts tens of thousands of dollars each year. Most JROTC graduates actually go on to be privates in the Army, not officers.
There are things people can do to curtail the military’s recruitment efforts. Parents have the right to opt their children out of section 9528 (links to the forms and additional information can be found at the end of this article). Letters must be submitted to both your high school district superintendent and the Pentagon. The first letter keeps the student’s information private from military recruiters while the second (supposedly) keeps his or her name out of the Pentagon’s JARMS database (the Joint Advertising Market Research and Studies database claims to be “the largest repository of 16-25 year old youth data in the country, containing roughly 30 million records.” Information private is purchased from school emergency cards, motor vehicle departments, college recruiters and even companies that sell class rings.) Parents should aware that unfortunately opting their children out of section 9528 means they may not receive valuable information from college recruiters. The War Resisters League has a counter-JROTC campaign known as Revolution Out Of Truth and Struggle (ROOTS) that seeks to dismantle current JROTC programs and prevent others from forming. Remember, no matter what a military recruiter may tell you, the ASVAB is completely voluntary.
Mark T. Rutkowski
The War on Terror (or as it is now being called, the Long War) is into its sixth year with no sign of an end in sight. While Democrats continue to stall on Capitol Hill, more and more Americans die each week. To date over 3,200 Americans have been killed in combat and more than 24, 000 have been wounded. Meanwhile the military has experienced its lowest levels of enlistment since the Vietnam War.
In response to this massive personnel loss the Bush administration has stepped up its effort in military recruitment. Waivers have been given to criminal offenders while the standards for the Arm Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) have been lowered. The enlistment age has been raised twice: from 35 to 40 in 2005 and from 40 to 42 just last year. However the most effective element of this enlistment campaign has been the No Child Left Behind Act.
Signed into law in January 2002, No Child Left Behind narrows testing standards, increases state accountability and cuts federal funding to schools that are considered to be failing. In addition, section 9528 of the act requires that high schools turn over information of all students or risk losing federal funding. The legislation was co-authored by Department of Education Secretary Margaret Spellings, Texas lawyer Sandy Kress, and Spelling's Chief of Staff David L. Dunn. The act reads “…each local educational agency receiving assistance under this Act shall provide, on a request made by military recruiters or an institution of higher education, access to secondary school students names, addresses, and telephone listings.”
Additionally the Army’s Junior Reserve Officer Training Corps (JROTC) is used to give students an early lesson in military indoctrination. The Army defines JROTC as “a course of instruction taught for academic credit in high schools by retired officers and non-commissioned officers. In public schools, students select Junior ROTC as an elective course. In some private schools, such as military schools, enrollment in JROTC may be a mandatory part of the curriculum.” JROTC programs can be found in many inner city schools where the chances or recruiting students are very high. Such programs can cost school districts tens of thousands of dollars each year. Most JROTC graduates actually go on to be privates in the Army, not officers.
There are things people can do to curtail the military’s recruitment efforts. Parents have the right to opt their children out of section 9528 (links to the forms and additional information can be found at the end of this article). Letters must be submitted to both your high school district superintendent and the Pentagon. The first letter keeps the student’s information private from military recruiters while the second (supposedly) keeps his or her name out of the Pentagon’s JARMS database (the Joint Advertising Market Research and Studies database claims to be “the largest repository of 16-25 year old youth data in the country, containing roughly 30 million records.” Information private is purchased from school emergency cards, motor vehicle departments, college recruiters and even companies that sell class rings.) Parents should aware that unfortunately opting their children out of section 9528 means they may not receive valuable information from college recruiters. The War Resisters League has a counter-JROTC campaign known as Revolution Out Of Truth and Struggle (ROOTS) that seeks to dismantle current JROTC programs and prevent others from forming. Remember, no matter what a military recruiter may tell you, the ASVAB is completely voluntary.
The Legacy of U.S. Imperialism
Iraq, Afghanistan Wars Tied to Legacy of U.S. Imperialism
By Michael Hoffman
The people of Iraq and Afghanistan have suffered through repressive dictatorships and now wars that have killed many civilians as well as American troops. The real tragedy is this all may not have happened if it wasn’t for the United State’s imperialist aims.
The Iraqi people have gone through years and years of occupations. In 1258, the Mongols sacked Baghdad, murdering thousands. Later, the Iraqis became part of the Ottoman Empire.
After World War One, Ottoman rule ended but the Iraqi’s troubles were far from over. Great Britain, a country that never could keep its grubby paws off of other people’s possessions, was given a “mandate” over Iraq. In this case, the British wanted oil. They broke a promise to the Kurds to give them their own country because they would have had to give up Kurdish land with oil on it. They also set up puppet rulers and took away ownership of land from people whose ancestors had lived on it for centuries, giving it to landlords which effectively made the people serfs on their own land. Finally, a revolution in 1958 killed the puppet ruler and ended British rule.
Which takes us to the U.S.’s role. After a series of military rulers, the Baath party took over in 1963. A few years later, one of the Baath leaders, Saddam Hussein took total control and began a brutal dictatorship. The Bush administration justified the war in Iraq (after both Iraq’s harboring of weapons of mass destruction and Saddam’s support of Al-Qaeda were both exposed as lies) by saying that getting rid of Saddam would be beneficial to Iraqis. But that would go against the history of America’s dealings with Saddam. William Polk was responsible for planning American policy toward the Middle East during the Kennedy administration. In his book, Understanding Iraq Polk tells us that the CIA most likely helped with the coup that brought the Baath party into power and also helped to identify members of the former regime that were killed by the Baath. When Iraq went to war with Iran, the Reagan administration gave Saddam arms, money and food. Reagan also sent Donald Rumsfeld as a special envoy to visit Saddam and promise him that the U. S. would do whatever it took to ensure that Iraq did not lose the war. This was done by supplying or arranging for others to supply weapons, cluster bombs, components for nuclear weapons, and equipment to manufacture poison gas. U.S. and UN sanctions placed on Iraq after the Gulf War were also disastrous. Inflation destroyed the middle class. Malnutrition became widespread. Hospitals ran out of medicine and import mortality rates rose, all while Saddam was able to deflect these horrors onto the poor people of Iraq while he and his cronies continued to remain comfortably in power. Now the Iraqi people are in the middle of a new imperialist war which has led to a civil war which shows no sign of ending soon.
The people of Afghanistan are also no strangers to imperialism. In the 1980s they became the pawns of the cold war between the United States and the Soviet Union. While the Soviets invaded the country and supported a puppet government, the U.S. supported the rebel fighters known as the mujahidin or Muslim Holy Warriors. To do this the U.S. gave money to Pakistan whose ruler, General Zia, broke a promise to hold elections and was currently beginning a nuclear program. Zia gave money to the mujahidin and other Islamic radicals. After the Soviets left, the fundamentalist Muslims eventually took over, culminating in the repressive rule of Osama bin Laden’s patrons, the Taliban.
Without the role of imperialism, it is quite possible that the horrors of September 11th and the two destructive wars that followed could have been avoided and thousands upon thousands of lives could have been saved.
By Michael Hoffman
The people of Iraq and Afghanistan have suffered through repressive dictatorships and now wars that have killed many civilians as well as American troops. The real tragedy is this all may not have happened if it wasn’t for the United State’s imperialist aims.
The Iraqi people have gone through years and years of occupations. In 1258, the Mongols sacked Baghdad, murdering thousands. Later, the Iraqis became part of the Ottoman Empire.
After World War One, Ottoman rule ended but the Iraqi’s troubles were far from over. Great Britain, a country that never could keep its grubby paws off of other people’s possessions, was given a “mandate” over Iraq. In this case, the British wanted oil. They broke a promise to the Kurds to give them their own country because they would have had to give up Kurdish land with oil on it. They also set up puppet rulers and took away ownership of land from people whose ancestors had lived on it for centuries, giving it to landlords which effectively made the people serfs on their own land. Finally, a revolution in 1958 killed the puppet ruler and ended British rule.
Which takes us to the U.S.’s role. After a series of military rulers, the Baath party took over in 1963. A few years later, one of the Baath leaders, Saddam Hussein took total control and began a brutal dictatorship. The Bush administration justified the war in Iraq (after both Iraq’s harboring of weapons of mass destruction and Saddam’s support of Al-Qaeda were both exposed as lies) by saying that getting rid of Saddam would be beneficial to Iraqis. But that would go against the history of America’s dealings with Saddam. William Polk was responsible for planning American policy toward the Middle East during the Kennedy administration. In his book, Understanding Iraq Polk tells us that the CIA most likely helped with the coup that brought the Baath party into power and also helped to identify members of the former regime that were killed by the Baath. When Iraq went to war with Iran, the Reagan administration gave Saddam arms, money and food. Reagan also sent Donald Rumsfeld as a special envoy to visit Saddam and promise him that the U. S. would do whatever it took to ensure that Iraq did not lose the war. This was done by supplying or arranging for others to supply weapons, cluster bombs, components for nuclear weapons, and equipment to manufacture poison gas. U.S. and UN sanctions placed on Iraq after the Gulf War were also disastrous. Inflation destroyed the middle class. Malnutrition became widespread. Hospitals ran out of medicine and import mortality rates rose, all while Saddam was able to deflect these horrors onto the poor people of Iraq while he and his cronies continued to remain comfortably in power. Now the Iraqi people are in the middle of a new imperialist war which has led to a civil war which shows no sign of ending soon.
The people of Afghanistan are also no strangers to imperialism. In the 1980s they became the pawns of the cold war between the United States and the Soviet Union. While the Soviets invaded the country and supported a puppet government, the U.S. supported the rebel fighters known as the mujahidin or Muslim Holy Warriors. To do this the U.S. gave money to Pakistan whose ruler, General Zia, broke a promise to hold elections and was currently beginning a nuclear program. Zia gave money to the mujahidin and other Islamic radicals. After the Soviets left, the fundamentalist Muslims eventually took over, culminating in the repressive rule of Osama bin Laden’s patrons, the Taliban.
Without the role of imperialism, it is quite possible that the horrors of September 11th and the two destructive wars that followed could have been avoided and thousands upon thousands of lives could have been saved.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
