See more from SWOPBlogger on military recruitment.

From IPS news:

WASHINGTON, May 13 (IPS) - Pressed by the demands of the "global war on terrorism", the United States is violating an international protocol that forbids the recruitment of children under the age of 18 for military service, according to a new report released Tuesday by a major civil rights group that charged that recruitment practices target children as young as 11 years old.

The 46-page report, "Soldiers of Misfortune", which was prepared by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) for submission to the U.N. Committee on the Rights of the Child, also found that the U.S. military disproportionately targets poor and minority public school students.

Military recruiters, according to the report, use "exaggerated promises of financial rewards for enlistment, [which] undermines the voluntariness of their enlistment." In some cases documented by the report, recruiters used coercion, deception, and even sexual abuse in order to gain recruits. Perpetrators of such practices are only very rarely punished, the report found.

"The United States military's procedures for recruiting students plainly violate internationally accepted standards and fail to protect youth from abusive and aggressive recruitment tactics," said Jennifer Turner of the ACLU Human Rights Project.

Keep Reading

Labels: APS, Equal Access, military recruitment, No Child Left Behind Act, youth

Good News for SWOP, NM Youth Organized and the many youth activists and organizations in ABQ

Organized Communities, Stronger Schools: A Preview of Research Findings

The Annenberg Institute this week released a preview of findings from a six-year study of the impact of community organizing on school improvement in seven urban communities.

The study found strong and consistent relationships between community organizing and school-level improvements, policy and resource decisions, and student academic outcomes and concluded that effective organizing helps expand the capacity of urban public schools to support student success.

> More information - http://www.annenberginstitute.org/Products/Mott.php
> Download Report at http://www.annenberginstitute.org/pdf/OrganizedCommunities.pdf

Labels: APS, Campaign for a Better New Mexico, Civic Engagement, community organizing, Criminalization of Young People, Highland High School, NM students least likely to succeed, youth

After news broke from the Journal this morning about a mandatory assembly held by military recruiters. Albuquerque High denied SWOP from entering campus to provide military recruitment alternatives. This does not look good APS, not good.

It's important to note that APS has an Equal Access Policy that is enacted when a controversial issue arises on campus. It means that organizations on both sides of the issue must be allowed to present to students. So that's obviously not working.

But APS also has to follow the No Child Left Behind Act, better known as the No Child Left Unrecruited. "...buried deep within the law's 670 pages, is a provision requiring public secondary schools to provide military recruiters not only with access to facilities, but also with contact information for every student -- or face a cutoff of all federal aid." Full article here.

Hurry up APS, you got 2 fights to fight. One, to get your schools to implement Equal Access appropriately and two, putting an end to NCLB. What are you waiting for...
*********************************

For Immediate Release: Press Advisory-December 6, 2007
Contact: Emma Sandoval-489-7332
Monica Cordova-385-6590
SWOP Office 247-8832

Albuquerque High Denies Alternatives to Military Recruitment Presentation

Albuquerque - Today at Albuquerque high the SouthWest Organizing Project (SWOP) was turned away from setting up a table during lunch today to provide students with information regarding alternatives to the military and how to prevent military recruiters from calling them at home. SWOP was clearly denied after Journal headlines broke of a mandatory assembly at which military recruiters were pushing their agenda of pro-war and military. Albuquerque High officials cited the Journal article published today as the reason for changing their decision at the last minute.

“On Tuesday of last week we set up an appointment to present alternatives during lunch. Being denied today after the pro-military mandatory assembly proves that APS is not enforcing equal access policy district wide,” stated Emma Sandoval, a SWOP youth intern.

After being denied access SWOP was told to come back next year.

SWOP received a letter from Rigo Chavez, Director of APS Communications, on August 30, 2007 with approval by the Superintendent stating we have permission from the Albuquerque Public Schools Communications Office, “to visit and distribute literature to schools in the APS school district.” The letter further stated, “Linda Sink and Eddie Soto have sent a memo on behalf of the superintendents to all high and middle schools reminding them that your group and similar organizations must be provided with equal time and opportunity provided to the military.”

“I feel like APS is pushing the military down students’ throats. Students deserve to hear about alternatives to the military so they can make informed decisions. APS must adhere to their policy and allow groups other than the military to talk to students,” stated Sandoval.

What is Albuquerque High afraid of? Parents and the public need to demand that APS provide alternatives to military recruitment of Albuquerque youth. We should have the same access to students as recruiters, especially given that we follow all APS rules and protocol.

A meeting is scheduled Tuesday, December 11, 2007 at 6pm at Albuquerque High School. Interested students and parents should attend.

###

Labels: APS, Equal Access, military recruitment, No Child Left Behind Act

By Zsombor Peter
Journal Staff Writer

Hardly a week goes by that Nathaniel Matthews-Trigg, a senior at Albuquerque High School, doesn't receive some bit of promotional mail from this or that branch of the U.S. military.

Bruce Trigg, Nathaniel's father, thought the form he signed barring Albuquerque High from sharing the family's contact information with recruiters would at least spare his son the school's involvement.

But when a cadre of uniformed Army officers showed up last week for a mandatory assembly on how to choose the right goals in life, he changed his mind.

The Army and school insist the assembly was not a recruitment drive. But some Albuquerque High parents say it was just that, only "thinly veiled" in the guise of a motivational talk to get around limits on student access.

They want the district to let students opt out of such assemblies and give groups that promote alternatives to military service an equal stage.

"I support the Army," said Jill Gatwood, whose son and daughter attend Albuquerque High. "The National Guard in particular can do some good things."

"The issue to me," she wrote on Duke City Fix, a Web site for public discourse on issues affecting Albuquerque, "is the dishonesty and the hidden agenda.

"If parents or students sign an opt-out form to keep the recruiters away, the public school should ... not sponsor mandatory assemblies to give recruiters access to students as a captive audience."

"It's manipulative and dishonest," Trigg agreed. "Who are they kidding?"

The Army actually did not run the assembly. That job fell to Planning for Life, which also visited three other high schools this semester: Highland, Manzano and Rio Grande.

On its Web site, the group says it is "a toolkit that helps students like you to better prepare— academically, physically, emotionally and financially— to further your education and plan for your life."

The only sign of any military tie is a small Army logo in the bottom left corner of the site's home page.

Planning for Life takes a holistic approach to student development, touching on everything from eating right to studying for standardized tests, said Emil Hill of the public relations firm Weber Shandwick. The New York firm represents Planning for Life.

"The Army does this to demonstrate community support," providing a free public service for cash-strapped schools, he said. "It is in no way a recruiting program."
The officers never ask the audience to enlist, Matthews-Trigg said.

"Absolutely no recruiting took place," Gabriel Gonzales, Albuquerque High's activities director, said in his reply to an e-mail from Trigg.

But the Army pays Planning for Life's bills— upward of $3 million a year— out of what Hill called its annual $250 million "advertising" budget.

The Web site for March 2 Success, meanwhile, the free test prep program that Planning for Life promotes and the Army pays for, has tailored four links of frequently asked questions for students, educators, parents— and recruiters.

The site repeatedly notes that students who sign up for the 45-day course have no obligations to the Army, but adds that students can use what they learn to improve their scores on military entrance exams.

It notes that the Army has no plans to release the results of individual students, but adds that results from the course will be used to "develop statistical profiles for the Army."

Gatwood, Trigg and others aren't asking schools to keep recruiters away entirely. Under the No Child Left Behind Act, schools have no choice, unless they want to forgo their federal funding.

But the law also lets parents request that their children's contact information not be given out if the military asks. Parents like Gatwood and Trigg believe that also should apply to school assemblies.

Hill said the group gives a presentation by invitation only.

In his e-mail to Trigg, Gonzales assured him that the visit was cleared by the district's communications office. Communications Director Rigo Chavez said that never happened.

Labels: APS, military recruitment, No Child Left Behind Act

Here is our 2nd video blog! We're still learning how to do this right. We welcome any suggestions and comments, Enjoy!

Labels: APS, Guns in Schools, SWOP News Rant, SWOP Podcasts

Labels: APS, Equal Access, miltary recruitment, SWOP, youth

On Wednesday, SWOP youth intern Emma Sandoval was a panelist on KNME’s program “New Mexico in Focus” which airs tonight at 7pm. The panel topic was the issue of whether or not it’s a good idea to have around the clock armed security officers in APS schools, and the larger question of whether or not it’s a good idea to create an actual APS police department. To follow is an interview I conducted with Emma about her experience and her thoughts at the conclusion of the panel.

So how did it feel to be a panelist on television? Have you done this before and who were your co-panelists?

Nerve-wracking. It was my first time doing something like this and it was kind of awkward being the only young person as well as the only female. All my co-panelists were much older men in positions of power in our community. They were Marty Esquivel, a school board member who voted in favor of an armed APS police force; Roberto Lucero, a school board member who voted against it; and Sergeant Robert Romero. It was moderated by David Alire Garcia.

This is a highly charged topic in Albuquerque. Did you feel it received a balanced approach on the panel?

Aside from the gender and age imbalance, I thought KNME did a great job addressing both sides of the issue. We each got an opportunity to give a little bit of our piece, but because the panel was large and there wasn’t much time I was disappointed that there were some issues I didn’t get the opportunity to address. And also, there was one moment when I felt I really needed to respond to something and I wasn’t given the opportunity to do so. But all in all, I appreciated that they included me. It was a real learning experience and I feel passionate about the issue.

What was it you didn’t have the opportunity to respond to?

Well, like I said, there were a lot of things I would have responded to given time. But most importantly was the comment made by Marty Esquivel in which he attempted to invalidate my use of the word “ludicrous” to describe his statistic that 80% of Albuquerque wants to arm APS security. He told me on the air that he was offended that I would call him ludicrous, and he said my use of the word was hyperbole and emotional. First let me say, he ran for office just 8 months ago on the stance that he was opposed to arming officers. Given the fact that he was elected after having said that, you could reasonably assume that more than 20% of his district is opposed to arming guards.

Hyperbole? That’s a big word. Isn’t that a synonym for exaggeration?

Yes, I believe so which I find funny because I find his 80% to be quite an exaggeration.

Tell me about that. Why do you think the number is much less?

For one his statistic was not based on fact. For myself, my sense of the numbers comes from my work in the week prior to the vote in which I and other students went to four high schools to circulate a letter asking the school board to vote no. These letters were individually signed by almost 300 students. Our approach was to get conversations going with students to ask them what they thought about the issue. We had many great discussions with students, and in almost all cases the students we spoke to wanted to sign a letter. I understand that this also, like Marty Esquivel’s numbers, is not a scientific poll, but it does demonstrate real voices and real proof that opposition to armed police officers does exist among the student body. And I would also like to note what Robert Lucero said, that a survey of high school student body leaders in all the high schools demonstrated a roughly 50/50 split on the subject.

What were the high schools you went to?

Albuquerque High, Highland High, West Mesa, and Rio Grande.

What were some of the other things you would have liked to respond to?

Well, a big part of the show was devoted to the “what if” argument, as in “Look at Virginia Tech. Look at Columbine and what if…yada yada yada.” We can not allow “what if’s” to be the basis of our argument. There is not a legitimate argument without facts and a “what if” statement is not a fact. So I think we should cease with the “what if” fear driven nonsense because it is not credible.

Also, the idea that officers need guns as a tool is not an argument I agree with. To often it is compared to not allowing a teacher to use chalk. This is a horrible argument because you can’t compare a piece of chalk to a gun. A piece of chalk doesn’t have the potential to kill somebody. I think it’s really sad that we are getting into this discussion of providing tools for officers in APS when we are failing our students in terms of education and providing them the tools they need to be successful in their education. New Mexico students were recently deemed least likely to succeed in the nation by Education Weekly Magazine. And yet we want to spend millions of dollars that’s coming out of funds for books and more teachers to create an armed police force, supposedly to keep students safe but without anything that shows we have an increased problem with violence. If we want to talk about keeping students safe, we need to be providing students with the tools to stop that violence from happening, which will also provide them much needed life skills. And, APS officers should be trained in how to de-escalate violent situations without having to use a gun on a school campus.

Tell me, what is the current state of the state on this issue? I thought it was a done deal but here we have KNME having a debate about it this week.

The vote by the school board happened, but they are unsure if it’s legal to create an armed police force for APS and they are waiting for a decision by the state attorney general. If the AG says no, it will have to be something that wins approval by the state legislature in 2009. Let’s be clear, beyond the guns in school issue, the idea that we should create a separate bona fide police department for APS is a really, really bad idea. It’s basically saying that our schools are so bad that they can’t function without their own police force. If that’s true, it means we are failing not only our students but our society as a whole. Anyhow, if the police department idea is shot down, the school board can still arm APS security guards around the clock through a simple policy change. So what if we do have guns in school? What then? Is it going to improve our educational standards? What purpose is it going to serve in terms of education? None. And then there will be armed people walking around, which in my opinion is crazy. Better yet, who does it really serve, our students or our security officers? The day after the vote happened, the headline in the Journal was “APS Cops get their Guns.” So what does this say about who we’re doing this for? Cops or students?

I want to deviate just a minute from the broader issue of guns in schools, and go back to the moment in the show when Marty Esquivel charged that you were full of hyperbole and emotion. At the School Board meeting when they voted on this issue, he also told those on the opposing side to not be emotional or full of rhetoric, and to demonstrate intellectual rigor. What are your thoughts on these words that he uses to describe those on the other side of the issue?

I think his use of words like this are an attempt to devalue not only myself but others in terms of class and gender. Especially in this case, being on the panel as the only woman, and a very young one at that, I took it as him trying to devalue me as a stereotypical “young, emotional woman” who because of who she is can’t make a valid and strong argument. He did not address the actual substance of what I said, instead he personally attacked me for using the word ludicrous to describe a statistic he used. He wasted that time on the panel, which could have been used to substantively discuss the guns in schools issue.

Yeah, I immediately noticed his use of the word “emotion” in both instances. As most women know, it’s a charge that is commonly used to dismiss us, not to mention disenfranchised peoples in general.

Yes, it insinuates that there is a lack of education and a lack of an ability to make a valid argument if you are someone who expresses yourself differently. It was to me a low blow because I know very well that I am very informed on this issue. Possibly even more so than Mr. Esquivel seeing as how easy it is to become disconnected to youth with age. As a young person myself I can relate and identify with students about their concerns. I just graduated from an APS high school in 2005, only 2 years ago. I think my age provides the perfect opportunity for me to gain some real insight into the opinions of students because when they speak with me about the issue they can open up to me and more closely relate to me as someone who just finished going through the same educational system that they are going through now.

Thanks Emma! I thought you did a great job on the panel. ~Marjorie

For those of you who haven't seen the show, you can see it here: KNME

Labels: APS, Guns in Schools, guns on campuses, Safe Schools

At last night’s APS School Board meeting, Paula Maes voted to create an independent and fully armed APS police force that would patrol all Albuquerque schools 24/7. Her vote tipped the scales in favor of the pro-gun advocates…namely Gordon Rowe, Mary Lee Martin and Marty Esquivel. Plus the police of course. Maes’ position can be summed up thusly: I’m not for guns. I’m just not. But, Ok, let’s arm them.

We'd like to recognize the three Board members who stayed firm in their positions that an armed police force for APS is bad for youth, and bad for the community at large. Thanks very much to Berna Facio, Dolores Griego, and Robert Lucero for their stewardship on the APS School Board. As for the others...

It was very, very depressing to see a shift, or more accurately a cave-in, toward an ever-increasing punitive approach to dealing with social issues. Marty Esquivel decried what he called rhetoric, and called for “intellectual and emotional rigor” instead of “ad hominem attacks” in one of his speeches in favor of arming police. Given his steely approach to negating his own campaign position on this topic when running for office just 8 months ago, we figured he must be talking about those of us on the opposing side. Well, let me tell you…the ad hominem approach, not to mention rhetoric, was definitely out in force but from my vantage point it was most prevalent on the pro-gun-throw-them-in-jail side. Now, how’s that for some rhetoric? :-)

Esquivel went on to give an indignant speech about how insulting it was to suggest that any police officer, all of whom are “highly trained professionals”, would shoot someone pulling a pen out of his pocket. As if we are all mindless, irrational idiots. (FYI: this is an “appeal to authority” argument and an “ad hominem” attack…at the same time…if there ever was one!) What’s insulting is that someone in his position would turn a blind eye to actual scenarios very similar to that. Amadou Diallo isn’t “rhetoric.” He’s a dead black man. The Diallo case represents the tip of the iceberg—think of the base of it as the prison system. Frankly, this school board member’s refusal to engage on this topic with intellectual honesty given his obvious ability to do so is confusing. That’s the most generous assessment I can make of it.

We saw very little “intellectual rigor” about the actual social reality of racial profiling at last night’s school board meeting. It seems that to them, the existence of a vast penal colony of brown men in this country…is a fiction residing in the irrational and deluded hearts of brown communities. Truly, we would have really liked to have heard just one of the pro-gun police types give just one thoughtful comment to this social issue, which is so clearly linked with policing (not to mention the legal and judicial system). Instead, we saw Paula Maes shaking her head “no” at a woman who bluntly suggested that racial profiling exists and would be amplified by the creation of a police force.

During public comment, a mother commented that the kind of safety she wants for her children is access to sports and to music. In other words, resources for young people to occupy their minds and develop their creativity. We fully endorse this idea of what safety entails. Speaking of, intellectual rigor on the part of the school board members, all of them, would have necessitated that they and the superintendent really address what “safety” means since they formed a commission explicitly charged with creating that. But instead, “safety” was just one of those words used to whitewash creating more police. Have a look at the recommendations from this commission. It’s all about police and guns. Not one thing about coordination between departments, about mental health, conflict resolution, or access to opportunity.

Despite what many pro-guns in schools folks believe, the word “safety” is not exclusively theirs. To us, safety begins by creating environments that foster personal and intellectual growth, that provide access to creative outlets, and that prioritize a public health approach rather than a punitive one to social problems. This is not an idealistic position, as one person suggested last night. It’s based in a reality that the so-called “safety commission” never addressed.

Safety is a primary concern of ours and the many, many people who agree that an armed APS Police Department is a bad idea. Thankfully, while the future’s of many lower-income youth are considered foregone conclusions by those who make these kinds of decisions, it should still not be a foregone conclusion that an APS Police Department will come into being. For this reason, we take heart that the victory, as ever, is in the struggle.

Labels: APS, Guns, racial profiling, Schools

At last night’s APS Policy Committee meeting, the School Board heard recommendations from a study commission that had been looking at whether or not the community would be better served by having an actual APS Police Department. Currently, the status quo is that APS has “security officers” who are commissioned by the Bernalillo County Sheriff.

SWOP along with numerous other community based groups have long argued that armed police officers mingling among our students during school hours is a bad idea. We firmly believe this and have maintained our clarity on what we consider a core youth rights issue without expanding our observations to the pros and cons of establishing an actual police department in general. But now it seems we are at that point. So let’s talk about police and criminal justice, racial profiling and guns.

Guns are lethal weapons. As we all surely know, guns riddle our society…they are literally everywhere. One of the officers who gave public comment at the APS meeting last night commented that they have a room full of confiscated weapons collected from APS campuses. We say GOOD FOR YOU. You obviously were able to confiscate, and maybe even de-escalate a bad situation, without using guns. When we consider the scenario he described, it begs an obvious question: had police officers been armed in those situations, would they have been more likely to use their weapons? And, given that racial profiling is a social reality would they have been more likely to use their weapons against youth of color?

Racial profiling is a social reality and to argue that it isn’t is to turn a blind eye to the incredible over-representation of men of color in the criminal justice system.

The fact that the United States, the “land of the free,” with our vaunted social prosperity, has the largest prison population in the world should be considered a crisis. While only making up 5% of the worlds’ population, we account for 25% of those behind bars worldwide. If we have a healthy and inherently good system, as so many of us believe, we should be viewing what we have collectively allowed to happen as a cancer.

It is most certainly a cancer for communities of color, let’s make no mistake. According to Glenn Loury's excellent article on this topic in this month's Boston Review, while three out of 200 young whites were incarcerated in 2000, the rate for young blacks was one in nine. There is no disputing the enormous amount of evidence we have that our criminal justice system stigmatizes by race. The criminalization of large sectors of minority populations in this country maintains racial hierarchies and perpetuates the life of poverty statistically so much more prevalent in brown and black communities.

And the entrance of people of color into the criminal justice system begins at a young age, sometimes as early as junior high.

When a police officer enters a person’s identification into their computer system, that person has entered the criminal justice system. That person has psychologically registered that they are suspected of being a criminal. This has profound impacts on the very young who are still developing their sense of themselves and what their life opportunities will be. And, this simple act also brands that young person in the eyes of the community as well as the broader police force, as someone that is “suspicious,” creating a shift in perception and in many people a forgone conclusion. This is just one example of how insidious policing can be to vulnerable communities.

We need to break the punitive chain that has spiraled out of control in this country. We certainly do not believe we should add to it by integrating a police department with our school system. Our campuses should be havens that young people can have an expectation of going to without being criminally targeted on the basis of subjective suspicion.

For us, the “guns in school” issue is essentially about this larger social issue. In the past, the issue was whether or not APS security officers should carry guns on their persons. This community worked hard to address this question a few years back, and the outcome was a compromise…security officers would have lethal weapons in their trunks and would be allowed to carry them on their persons after hours. We know that we are perceived as oppositional to the police force. But let’s be clear: while we know our society depends upon police and we want them to be able to do their jobs safely, we also think the police force itself needs to be controlled through rules, regulations, and oversight, just as we do our military. We do not think any institution is inherently able to police itself, including the police. And in this case, we believe that guns add fuel to the fire of what is already an environment fraught with danger for young people, coming at them from both their peer sets and from the very society that ought to have the best interests of all young people at heart, regardless of their cultural norms, ethnicity or class. Sadly, we can’t make the statement that all young people are treated equally in the United States.

After a motion was made by one of the Board members last night to keep the current system of security officers in place rather than create an APS police department, the Board heard public comment, during which they finally heard from community members that guns in school are a bad idea. To his credit, Board member Marty Esquivel quickly asked a very pertinent
question …was the motion to not create a Police Department really about not having guns in school? If so, he said, we should call it what it is and address that, but not trash the idea of a department because of that issue. We agree, actually. Since early summer we’ve been asking that question, but from the converse: is the effort to create a Police Department really about fully arming officers at all times without having to bring it up, essentially undermining the lengthy community debate and outcome which created the current APS policy concerning guns?

Marty Esquivel did not vote with us last night, in fact he said he thought that the efforts of a volunteer study commission should be validated by the wholesale adoption of their recommendations. I was confused by his position given the unrepresentative nature of the commission, not to mention how he comes across, which is as someone willing to ask detailed and pertinent, even if hard, questions. And I would also like to point out that in the run up to his election in March, he unequivocally stated that he would not support armed police in schools. Here is the exact Q&A printed in the Tribune during his campaign:

Q: Would you vote to arm school police 24/7?

“No. We need to proactively identify threats to our schools with better, smarter security.”

This is, of course, our position here at SWOP. And we were pleased when a candidate who shared our views won an election.

We understand that perspectives change, but we also hope politicians know that people really do seek to understand the positions of candidates in order to make informed choices about who they elect. In this particular case, we would like to see more clarity and we would also like to see the inclusion of a more diverse set of constituents when studying and making recommendations on these sorts of tough topics. APS does not have a good track record in this area and it needs to improve.

Labels: APS, Guns in Schools

Here is an open letter from 3 community organizations to the APS School Board urging them to diversify their commission and bring student interest into the discussion.

Safe Schools are Gun Free Schools.

Keep it that way and don't endanger our kids.

*******************
Dear APS School Board Member,

Many members of the community are concerned about the composition of the Safety Commission that has been established to make important decisions regarding school safety.

As community advocates, we find the lack of community input especially alarming. What’s worse is that after attending several Safety Commission meetings, we fear that only one perspective is being strongly represented. The obvious danger here is that it may be easy to overlook concerns that would be brought to the table if either a larger or more diverse group of people were included in the Commission.

As community organizers, we strongly urge all APS Board members to attend the last Safety Commission meeting, so that the general make-up of the commission may be thoroughly evaluated, and that all of these considerations are kept in mind when the recommendation is reviewed and final decisions are made.

Please attend the Safety Commission meeting on Thursday the 26th of July at the Albuquerque Public School Building.


Sincerely,

League of Young Voters Education Fund
Southwest Organizing Project
Sage Council

Labels: APS, Guns in Schools, Safe Schools

The Council of Great City Schools, a non-profit organization representing over 50 of the nations largest school districts; reported back to the Albuquerque Public Schools Board of Education's Community Safety Commission today that it was not in the best interest of the district to arm APS police on school campuses.

The council team also recommended overhauling the district's police department to create a new safety and security arm.

The team said the Albuquerque Board of Education and its administration don't seem to have the will or leadership to run an armed police force.

We've said it all along, adding guns to school campus will do nothing but perpetuate the culture of violence that is leading the problems with school violence.

It only makes young people the are going to school to learn and grow in SAFE, HEALTHY, GUN FREE environments feel like criminals.

Don't forget that this fight is not over, Saturday June 16th (This Saturday) at 10AM, Del Norte High School the school board is hosting its Open Community Forum around this issue

We will meet at the SWOP office at 8:30 AM to make posters and installation pieces to make sure that Board knows we are there and that we are serious about keeping our schools Gun Free!

Read the article from the Tribune below.

Police officers shouldn't carry guns, review team says

By Susie Gran (Contact)
Thursday, June 14, 2007

It's time to disarm the school police and let city and county cops carry the guns, the experts say.

Contracts with Albuquerque police and the Bernalillo County sheriff are the best law enforcement option for Albuquerque Public Schools, a review team from the Council of Great City Schools says.

The team's recommendation was reviewed on June 14 by the district's new Community Safety Commission, formed to help determine the fate of the embattled APS Police Department.

The council team also recommended overhauling the district's police department to create a new safety and security arm.

The team said the Albuquerque Board of Education and its administration don't seem to have the will or leadership to run an armed police force.

"Based on their past performance, it is not apparent that the Board of Education and the district's executive leadership team would provide the executive leadership, support and backing, and make the critical and difficult decisions that would be required to create a safety, security and professional, fully authorized law enforcement department," the report said.

The review team said the proposed safety and security department could concentrate on intervention and prevention in creating safe schools.

The commission will review the team's recommendation, then forward its own recommendation on to Superintendent Beth Everitt.

The goal is to have all changes in place by the time school starts in August, said district spokesman Joseph Escobedo.

The APS Police Department has a $3.1 million budget and 40 sworn officers, who are allowed to carry their weapons before and after school. Currently, there are 32 officers and eight openings.

Everitt called on the Council of Great City Schools to make recommendations on best practices for school police after the debate over arming officers heated up and audits verified problems in the department.

The chief for the last 16 years, Gil Lovato, has been on administrative leave since January amid allegations of misconduct and mismanagement of his department.

Everitt has said she will not renew his contract when it expires June 30.

Under Lovato, the district's school police operated as a police department with sworn officers. Many officers have urged the school board to allow them to carry guns around the clock.

The school board agreed to review its gun policy after the council review. Some board members also suggested the district consider disbanding its police force and asking the city or county to contract police services.

Bernalillo County Sheriff Darren White, who is a member of the safety commission, said on June 12 that APS must decide whether it needs its own police department, an unarmed security force or a little of both.

"It's kind of like an identity crisis," White said of school police.

"The district needs to do a needs assessment to determine if they need sworn officers. If they do, then they need to be armed."

White said it's not his recommendation for the sheriff or city police to take over school police.

"We should have close coordination, and the head of school police should report directly to the superintendent," he said.

Meanwhile, the district and Lovato are preparing for a court battle over his contract.

Lovato's attorney, Sam Bregman, said he intends to sue the district on the grounds of wrongful termination, defamation and retaliation.

The district refused Bregman's offer of a $500,000 settlement to end the dispute, district spokesman Rigo Chavez said.

An internal audit of Lovato's department identified 20 infractions including poor evidence-room inventory

Labels: APS, Guns in Schools

I encourage you to read the entire article, it's amusing to read the JROTC instructors response throughout the entire thing.

I can just imagine him talking out the side of his mouth. If anyone has had an experience with military recruiters you KNOW what they are like. You KNOW deceptive sweet talk is a part of their repertoire.

He also contradicts himself saying that recruitment isn't targeted to poor young people. But then at the end of the article he states, that of course young people who have college paid for wouldn't think of going into the military. What's that percentage? And how many of them go to Rio Grande!

The SWOP youth and Another Side have taken on an intense battle to fight the structural racism here in Albuquerque around military recruitment. They will soon be on campuses exposing young people to various opportunities available to them. It's time for change, and they're making it happen!

Viva los jovenes!

***************
News Feature

Military Brats
Waging a war against recruitment at Albuquerque’s public high schools

By Kate Trainor

In Albuquerque’s high schools, students are more likely to sign up for military service than join the student senate. The armed forces are as popular as any school sport and, on many campuses, military recruiters and the JROTC are a more prominent presence than college or career scouts.

Since the beginning of the Iraq war, a group of Albuquerque-based activists has rallied for “balanced” representation of post-secondary opportunities in New Mexico’s public schools. The military, they say, is selling students on the service with sugarcoated stories and deceptive sweet talk.

Statistics indicate the sales pitch has been a success. Since 2005, military recruitment in New Mexico is up by 23 percent, reports the National Priorities Project. Conversely, college enrollment has stagnated. According to the 2005-2006 Report on the Condition of Higher Education, published by the New Mexico Department of Higher Education, “Enrollment at New Mexico’s public institutions of higher education is relatively flat … [and] will remain flat.”

Still, Sgt. Stephen Standifird, public affairs representative for Recruiting Albuquerque, denies any dishonesty in communication with students. “I don’t think there are a lot of blatant lies told to kids,” he says, though he acknowledges that “a recruiter has to gear their spiel to a particular kid.” Standifird says there is competition among the various military academies and that, occasionally, one will slander another to win a recruit. Otherwise, he says, recruiters are straightforward.

A year ago, the Albuquerque Center for Peace and Justice partnered with the SouthWest Organizing Project (SWOP) to form Another Side, a campaign to lobby for the availability of “balanced” information about military service on APS campuses. Another Side contends that military recruiters are given preferential access to students over other groups, specifically those that advocate for peace. The group itself says it has had difficulty gaining access to the schools. By law, a school must allow military recruiters on its campus if it receives federal funds.

Casandra Stewart, now a youth intern with SWOP, graduated from West Mesa High School in 2003. Stewart recalls military recruiters calling her “at least once a week,” she says. “They would say that I needed to contact them. They were very manipulative, very knifing. I felt really targeted.” Stewart surmises that most students join the military for the promise of financial security. But, she says, “They need to know that alternatives exist.” While in school, Stewart says, she didn’t see any college or career recruiters, but felt the military was “always in [her] ear.”

To read the rest of the article click here: Weekly Alibi

Wanna Opt Out
The No Child Left Behind Act requires school districts to release student names and contact information to the military, though the law also stipulates that school districts notify students and their parents of their right to opt out of this information sharing. However, Another Side claims that students are seldom aware of this provision, as school districts fail to inform them of it. Rigo Chavez, director of communications for APS, says opt-out information is provided during student registration and through a variety of school communications, such as newsletters.

Students and parents who wish to withhold their information can download the opt-out form online at www.militaryfreezone.org/opt_out.

Labels: APS, Equal Access, military recruitment, youth

Actually, SWOP's been at the forefront of this issue for quite some time. Following the tragedy at Columbine, APS also felt the reactionary urge. It comes up every couple of years.

Below are links to a few stories about this round. Following those, I've included a few articles from previous rounds...

Albuquerque considers armed cops in school
Washington Times, DC - 1 hour ago
ALBUQUERQUE, May 4 (UPI) -- The school board in Albuquerque is discussing allowing school police officers to carry guns. Board members decided to revisit ...

Mayor would support arming campus cops - there's a poll here, go there and vote against any guns in the schools.
Albuquerque Tribune, NM - 12 hours ago

Mayor Martin Chavez is siding with school police in the gunfight at Albuquerque Public Schools. "Our kids will be better served if APS police are armed...

Tomas Garduno of the SouthWest Organizing Project also weighed in Thursday with an anti-gun message.

"Arming security guards only perpetuates fear and violence," he said in flyers distributed in the board room.

From 2003:

APS Police Guns Still Locked Up

BYLINE: Andrea Schoellkopf Journal Staff Writer

SECTION: FINAL; Pg. A1

LENGTH: 564 words

Superintendents Must OK Use

The Albuquerque Public Schools police department has had guns since January, but officers still can't carry them.

That's because the four-person superintendent team hasn't authorized use of the guns.

APS Superintendent for Education Elizabeth Everitt said the district has been busy with other matters.

"There were so many things that were going on," she said. "... It hasn't been forgotten."

The school board approved the policy in 2001, after months of heated debate, to allow school officers to carry firearms only before and after school. The guns will be locked in police vehicles during school hours.

The officers have been using the Glock Model 22 .40-caliber semiautomatic pistols for shooting practice and training. Everitt said they may finally be able to carry them on duty as soon as next month, depending on whether the school board wants to review revisions to the firearms manual.

Police would use them during the summer break to patrol APS campuses.

The superintendents also have agreed to review the manual with members of SouthWest Organizing Project, a group that had opposed arming the officers.

Last fall, the board's policy committee delayed arming officers until the district could come up with procedure during critical situations when officers would need guns during school hours.

The issue came up after APS police chief Gil Lovato told the board that officers would not "sit there and watch" if lives were in jeopardy.

The firearms manual was revised several months ago and now says that before officers can use their guns during school hours, they must contact Lovato, who must then notify Lead Superintendent Joseph Vigil.

"There has to be some oversight of that process," Everitt said.

But Lovato said Thursday that an officer would still "react to his training" in an emergency situation even if the gun is locked in his vehicle.

"If a student or a teacher is being shot at, that officer will take immediate action to stop the shooter," Lovato said.

Board president Mary Lee Martin said earlier Thursday that the issue didn't need to come back to the board.

"We settled that issue as far as the board's concerned," Martin said.

The president of the APS police union said officers are questioning the delay.

"If you're going to a dark building, it's a huge issue," said APS officer Kim Murray.

He said weapons training for the officers all of whom have retired from or served in other law enforcement departments is "beyond remedial." The state has required weapons training by APS for the last two years.

"I don't see why it wasn't done a year ago," Murray said. "We've met all those conditions. We've been pushing for this."

Even if the superintendents authorize the guns, police still don't have holsters. Lovato said he needs about $3,000 to pay for holsters, but the money won't be available until July 1, the beginning of the new fiscal year.

The school board approved $40,000 last fall to fund the policy. About $15,000 was spent for guns, clips and cleaning equipment, and the remainder was spent on training, Lovato said.

But he said the officers who have completed their training and are getting the gun safes installed in their vehicles during maintenance checks would gladly use their own holsters if administrators would authorize the guns.

GUN PRACTICE: Albuquerque Public Schools officer Dave Guzman practices shooting his Glock .40-caliber handgun Thursday at a shooting range near Double Eagle Airport.

PHOTO: b/wPHOTO BY: JESSICA MCGOWAN/JOURNAL

CITY: ALBUQUERQUE, NM, USA (88%);

LOAD-DATE: May 16, 2003

LANGUAGE: ENGLISH

GRAPHIC:

Crowd speaks on arming school cops

BYLINE: Jeff Commings, JCOMMINGS@ABQTRIB.COM / 823-3625

SECTION: Pg. A3

LENGTH: 554 words
The topic of arming school police was not on the agenda for a meeting of the Albuquerque Board of Education, but members of the community spoke out on the issue anyway.

That likely will give the board plenty to think about as it continues to consider whether to give itself or Superintendent Brad Allison the final say on how to implement a safety plan in schools.

In Wednesday's public forum, 17 people spoke passionately to the board.

Of the 17, nine supported arming school police. Of the nine supporters, six were retired or current officers from the Albuquerque Police Department, the Albuquerque Public Schools Police Department or the Bernalillo County Sheriff's Department.

Mark Shea, assistant director of school police, defended the force, saying that 27 "well-trained and very professional" officers were on the payroll and that they put the safety of children first. He also described guns as a "traditional tool of law enforcement."

Fernando Abeyta of the SouthWest Organizing Project, a grass-roots social reform group, came before the board again to stress that guns are not the answer to keeping children safe. He also said the discussion has missed a vital part of the community.

"The district has failed to bring young people to the table," Abeyta said. "The only tools (police) need are minds, words and a compassion for young people."

"Guns intimidate students more," said Rio Grande High School freshman Elena Garcia. "They raise the risk of shootings in our school."

Ken O'Keefe, an individual from the community, said he hoped the board would consider the public as an important voice in the discussion.

"We don't want to be cut out of this process," he said.

The board has not yet publicly attempted to connect arming school police with the recent information released about declining violence in Albuquerque schools in the 2000-01 school year. The report states some incidents of violence and vandalism continue to drop, and that fewer gangs are present in schools.

The number of guns reported to have been found in schools dropped from 14 to five in one year, the report says.

Despite the report's findings, board President Leonard DeLayo said he was troubled that some schools prominently, Rio Grande and Albuquerque high schools continued to have high numbers for violence and vandalism and that some are showing a rising trend in reported incidents rather than a decline.

APS Police Chief Gil Lovato said a plan is in the works to bring all of the numbers down and said the board would be presented with those plans soon.

The board will hold a special meeting at 5:30 p.m. Monday in the John Milne board room at the APS Central Office, 725 University Blvd. S.E., to make a final vote on how authority on keeping schools safe will be allocated in the future to the board or to the superintendent.

The board will vote to give Allison and his staff the final word on how to reduce violent incidents on school property or give itself the final word on how to implement such a plan. Allison has declared himself in favor of providing guns to school police and earlier this month told the board that his contract gives him the authority to implement any plan involving safety of students without necessarily having that plan approved by the board.

From 1999:

INTERVIEW WITH .....GILBERT LOVATO

BYLINE: Susie Gran sgran@abqtrib.com / 823-3682

SECTION: Pg. A6

LENGTH: 1234 words

Where's the safest place for kids? School, says top APSofficerGilbert Lovato has spent more than 30 years fighting crime first on the streets, now in the classroom.

The 54-year-old Lovato has been the chief of the Albuquerque Public Schools Police Department for 10 years. He supervises 25 sworn officers who respond to police calls on campuses throughout the city.

As another school year begins, Lovato said what he likes most about his job "is being able to help kids and being able to provide a safe learning environment for them."

However, he said he's convinced "school safety begins at home, and I encourage parents to spend more time with their children, find out what's going on at school and, if something is wrong, report it to the principal."

Tribune: Safety in schools is among the top concerns of parents. Are their concerns valid?

Lovato: Despite recent occurrences, schools should not be singled out as dangerous places in our communities. Our schools are safe. Just like the safest mode for traveling is still by aircraft, the safest place for our student population during the day is on school campuses. A student is much more likely to become a victim of a violent crime off campus.

While one homicide on campus is one too many, preliminary data from the U.S. Department of Education indicate that less than 1 percent of the 2,500 children nationwide who were murdered or committed suicide in the first half of the school year 1997-98 were on school property, at a school-sponsored event or on the way to or from school.

According to "Not Even One," a 1997 report on children, youth and firearms deaths in New Mexico, our school district is no different. That report shows 248 children and youth dying at the hands of firearms in New Mexico from 1996 to 1998. Forty-two percent of those occurred in Bernalillo County. Not one occurred on a school campus.

This is not to say that it will never happen, and we all need to continue to work to make our school district a safe learning environment.

Tribune: Do you have tips for parents on how they can help keep their children's schools safe?

Lovato: Without safe schools, teachers cannot teach and students cannot learn. The key here is parent involvement. Parents can get involved through their parent and teacher organizations or the school safety committees.

Every school in the APS system has a safe school plan. The community needs to be involved in the design and implementation of that plan. Safe school plans, of course, are only one component to creating a safe learning environment for our students. Parents should also work collaboratively with the school administration on issues such as dress codes, behavior standards, school rules and campus access control.

Parents should review with their children the APS Student Behavior Handbook, which contains a wealth of information for parents. This handbook sets the tone for what is expected of our students along with student rights.

Tribune: Bullying is a problem on some elementary school playgrounds. What advice can you give parents of children who are having problems with bullies?

Lovato: Bullying on campus should not be tolerated. Bullying, if not addressed, can lead to more serious consequences that can result in serious injury to a student. The victim needs to be protected, and the bully needs to take responsibility for his or her action. Parents, staff and students need to work together to make sure that this sort of behavior does not continue.

Tribune: What is the most common crime on the high school campuses, and how are schools dealing with it?

Lovato: Fights and assaults are the most common. However, this is not true at all high schools. APS is dealing with this in a number of ways. The school district has a zero-tolerance policy in place.

Our principals work very hard with their staffs to make sure that schools are safe. While I don't believe any student should be denied an education, suspending a student for violent behavior may be the only alternative. Again, students need to have the best of conditions, which include their safety in order for teachers to teach and students to learn.

The district also has campus security, APS police officers, APD and the Sheriff's Department to assist school staff in not only breaking up these fights but deterring them. We know that most of these fights are going to occur during lunch or at the end of the school day and we concentrate on this issue during those periods of time. I want to emphasize this type of disruption is caused by only a small portion of our students.

Tribune: For years, school police and school officials have been confiscating weapons from students. What is the weapon most frequently confiscated and under what circumstances? Do you feel metal detectors would be a deterrent?

Lovato: Knives, usually pocketknives, are the most frequently confiscated. These are not being used aggressively as weapons by students. Frequently, students have a knife at school because they used it over the weekend and forgot to leave it at home. These knives are reported by other students who observe the knife or while searching students for various infractions.

Most of the firearms confiscations were based on student tips because students want to be safe. I don't believe metal detectors would be a deterrent. Our school campuses have too many entrances. In addition to that, we have to remember that most of our schools are open late into the night for custodial cleaning, extra school activities, etc. I believe that if someone wanted to bring a weapon on campus, he or she could do so.

I think metal detectors would have a serious psychological impact on students and staff creating a feeling that their schools were unsafe. Metal detectors may have a place at events such as school dances, athletics events, etc. where you have received valid threats about weapons being brought to these events.

Tribune: Some school districts have removed lockers in their fight against drugs and weapons. Do you think this is a move APS should consider?

Lovato: I think there are valid reasons for doing this to minimize the transportation and storage of drugs and weapons. The decision should ultimately come from the school administrator and his or her staff who can better assess the need for this at their school. Some principals currently may be considering this move.

Tribune: Has the school police force grown over the years? Are more officers needed?

Lovato We have an allocation of 25 sworn officers. The number of full-time employees has remained the same for the last 10 years. Although we have APD officers and sheriff's deputies to assist us during the day, the school police is the primary responding law enforcement agency to calls on our campuses before and after the school day, on weekends and holidays, including full coverage of summer schools when the APD officers are off.

There are 35 APD officers, one assigned for each high school and middle school during the school year. In addition to responding to calls, the school police maintain the district's intrusion alarm system, provides for traffic control at athletic events, investigates employee misconduct cases and provides training to school personnel. A district this size could always use more officers.Interview With ... appears Mondays in The Tribune

Labels: Albuquerque, APS, Criminalization of Young People, guns on campuses, Police

This is just awful. APS is functioning on the assumption that our Albuquerque youth are criminals, that we are expecting them to get a hold of guns, and kill other people.

Why? If you don't have faith that this educational system is doing their job in teaching, change the system and invest in youth.

If you don't have faith that parent's aren't instilling "proper" values, ask yourself why many parents work 2 jobs, or get laid off, or struggle daily to provide the basic necessities because of unstable working conditions.

We have a bigger problem to address that doesn't get solved by 43 more APS officers carrying weapons.

The other problem with this is that officers have an unfortunate history of becoming trigger happy. I ask all parents, who are operating and buying into this particular fear tactic, do you really want to send your kid where their might be a slight chance that not only is it scary to go to school with other kids their age, but the cops might kill them too.

In 2001 the last time APS was considering arming their Police Officers, SWOP fought against the policy and the officers managed to get approval for only carrying guns at night. I guess it's scarier at night. But at night there aren't any kids!

What's the message we're sending to our children?

"Don't be afraid of going to school because the police officers on campus are more afraid of you, than you are of them, that's why they carry guns. Just in case."

Home school is sounding much better at the moment.

I can support thinking about a security plan and emergency response that doesn't include guns, rather appropriate training for officers. This should be revisited on a regular basis not when something tragic happens because then its just reactionary. Prevention is key!


Board Asks for Ideas To Improve Security

BY AMY MILLER
Journal Staff Writer

The Albuquerque school board will reconsider its policy that prohibits school police from carrying guns during school hours, board members said Thursday.

“I think we have a duty,” said Martin Esquivel. Mayor Martin Chávez will work with the district to provide additional security, said Paul Broome, the mayor’s education adviser.

Chávez supports arming school police, Broome said, but he’ll help the district whether the board changes the policy or not. Several options are on the table.

“He recognizes it’s a very agonizing decision,” Broome said during the board’s policy committee meeting.

The school board began discussing the issue again after the recent shootings at Virginia Tech. It has come before the board twice, the last time in 2001 after much public debate.

At that time, some APS officers were allowed to carry guns but not during school hours unless given permission by the superintendent.

Board members on Thursday also talked about contracting with Albuquerque police and the Bernalillo County Sheriff’s Department to provide school security.

There are 70 APS police officers, and 33 are certified to carry guns, school officials told the board. At least one city or county police officer is also assigned to all the city’s high schools.
That’s not enough to serve the entire district, said Robert Lucero. But he said he doesn’t think arming more APS officers is the solution.

“Should we not look at a better safety plan than we have today?” Lucero said. “We need to have a true study and look at all the options.”

Lucero said he’s waiting to see if a pending report from the Council of the Great City Schools, an advisory group for public schools, offers any recommendations about contracting with local law enforcement agencies.

Parents and community members on both sides of the issue will have a chance to tell the board what they think about arming school police officers, although no date was set.

Board members also want school officials to give them detailed recommendations for what they think should be done to improve school security as soon as possible.

“I think the community is expecting us to act quickly,” said Gordon Rowe. “They do want us to show leadership.”

Board member Dolores Griego said crime prevention shouldn’t be overlooked in the discussion.

“How can we reinstill values, reinstill respect?” Griego said. “We can’t keep going in the direction we’re going.”

Labels: APS, guns on campuses, youth

APS POLICY COMMITTEE MEETING TODAY 5PM
6400 UPTOWN Blvd. NE (Next To Coronado Mall) DeLayo Martin Community Room


Is the APS school system only capable of producing criminals and soldiers? This is a question that needs to be posed to the school board of the Albuqueruqe Public School system.

Of course the answer from board will be NO, but then why do we need military recruiters and armed police officers on our campuses? The criminalization of our young people here in Burque needs to stop!

The tragedy at Virgina Tech was avoidable, as was Columbine. If the students involved had been reached out to instead of marginalized and made to feel like social outcasts these tragedies could have been nipped in the bud.

The Virginia Tech Shooter was institutionalized by authorities, and instead of taking steps to insure that he was integrated back into campus life he was ridiculed by his fellow students and virtually ignored by administration.

Would armed guards have prevented him from doing what he did? Violent reactions to threats only escalate the violence. It's time that we start investing in our young people.

The military is a way out of dire situations for many young people, especially young people of color from lower economic stratas.

Enlisting in the military is an important decision that should not be gone into without a clear understanding of the sacrifices and reprucussions that go along with it.

The young folks of the Land of Enchantment deserve to go to schools where they don't have to feel like their only options when they leave high school are Prison or War. Our kids deserve to go to college not combat, and it's time that the United States started dropping knowledge not bombs.

Labels: APS, Criminalization of Young People, Gun Control, military recruitment, youth

For Immediate Release:
Contact: Rodrigo Rodriguez 505-620-1476
SWOP Office 505-247-8832

Press Advisory-May 2, 2007

Community challenges APS as a pipeline to the military

School Board scheduled to report on whether students have access to organizations that are providing alternatives to the military.

What: The Albuquerque School Board Policy Committee will be reporting the results of an equal access study that was done by the principals of our public high schools. The study was requested to investigate whether equal access is being provided to organizations that are working to provide alternatives to the military.

Where: 6400 Uptown Blvd NE DeLayo Martin Community Room

When: 5:00pm Thursday May 3rd, 2007

30 dead and counting, New Mexico is paying the price of war with our lives. Fewer New Mexican high school students are enrolling at the University of New Mexico, and after enticing war propaganda and in house military recruiters on high school campuses, military enlistment goals have been met. Organizations like the SouthWest Organizing Project and Another Side have been working to outreach to students to educate them about the harsh reality of the military and alternatives for career and higher education.

APS administrations have consistently denied students the opportunity to hear another side of military enlistment. We have pushed for a study to be done on whether students have access to organizations that are providing information about alternatives. Scheduled to be reported back in January, the study results have been delayed for four months. After SWOP and Another Side demanded the results be heard immediately, the School Board moved the meeting to Thursday, May 3rd.

What people are saying:

* “I feel bombarded with all the info the military pushes on me, even when I don’t put my information out there they still find me,” Says Lucia Martinez, incoming Freshman at Albuquerque High School.

* “The APS High School administrations give us the run around when trying to access students and teachers are scared to let us present alternative perspectives to the military. Now they are looking to arm APS school guards again. Our public schools are run by fear and the perpetuation of violence and that is no place for young people to develop.” Mónica Córdova, Youth Coordinator at the SouthWest Organizing Project.

* “Our students are being recruited and shipped off to fight in a war half a world away and the school board is sitting by idly doing nothing. Our students deserve to be able to make well informed decisions about their futures, especially when it comes to something as life altering as military enlistment.” Rodrigo Rodriguez, SouthWest Organizing Project member and CNM student.

Labels: APS, Iraq, military recruitment, war, youth

MAY 3 2007
5:00 pm
6400 Uptown Blvd NE
DeLayo–Martin Community Room

SHOW YOUR SUPPORT FOR
YOUTH WHO WANT THE TRUTH

For More 411 Contact The SouthWest Organizing Project or Another Side
(505) 247-8832/(505) 268-9557 www.myspace.com/swopyouth

Thus far in the War on Terror 3335 American soliders have died, 29 from the Land of Enchantment. It is also estimated that over 600,000 Iraqi civilians have also died.

The Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has declared the War in Iraq to already be 'lost'. Dubya's approval ratings are at all time lows, the people in the U.S. are taking to the streets VietNAM style.

We're in the middle of an Iraqi Civil War and we're gambling with the highest stakes imaginable, the lives of our brave young men and women.