Two weeks ago in Winterset, at our 4th District Candidate Forum, I hand delivered letters to my opponents Becky Greenwald, Kurt Meyer, and Kevin Miskell. The subject matter of these letters was regarding an upcoming candidate forum in Ames on the 28th of May, presented by Working Families Win.
I am going to stay away from dropping names as much as possible. The Iowa orgianizer of this particular organization presents a grave concern to me. His destructive attitude towards the United States Government, and especially the brave young men and women who have volunteered to serve this nation, worries me.
Just over a year ago, this organizer was quoted in the Iowa Press Citizen proudly stating and directing our youth to follow in his destructive footsteps.
He
(name removed) proposed several counter-recruitment tactics, including opt out forms, distracting recruiters, shadowing recruiters, shutting down recruiting tables, and confiscating military propaganda.
“'I told [the high school students] to go on a search and destroy mission and just take every piece of military recruitment material they could find in their town,' he (name removed) said.”
In my opinion, after serving this nation proudly as a United States Marine, this organizer belongs behind bars and not putting on candidate forums which are supposed to present winning solutions for working families. His actions are anti-govenment and undoubtedly anti-troop.
I asked Becky, Kurt, and Kevin to decline the invitation to this event and did in fact warn them in my letter that anyone attending this event will also be labeled as supporting the destruction of government property and anti-troop.
I appears as if this event will continue, it is my hope that fellow readers will stand with me and organize against this event in a peaceful manner. I have sent this same information to the AP, and individually to every media outlet across the state of Iowa. Tomorrow it will go out to 5,873 people on my official email list, which includes each and every State Representative and State Senator.
Best Regards,
William J. Meyers
A Veteran for Common Sense
MEYERSFORHOUSE.COM
29 Comments
you are entitled to your opinion
and I understand where you are coming from.
At the same time, I know parents of teenagers who have been upset by high-pressure tactics used by recruiters their children encounter in public high schools.
desmoinesdem Mon 12 May 1:57 AM
Where do you expect Central Iowans to go?
This primary season has been moving very quickly, and I haven’t seen too many forums or debates so far. I realize that there have been a few up North and there will be at least one more, but those areas aren’t exactly accessible for people in the Ames area. So, why would the people of the area refuse to learn more about them just because someone involved opposed military recruitment tactics?
As far as I can tell, Working Families Win is not an anti-government or anti-troop organization, and neither is the organizer. I see no direct attacks against anyone in the military or veterans. All I see are quotes from someone who opposed the tactics used to pull in recruits, but not the recruits themselves, the military, or veterans. Clearly, a person can oppose recruitment tactics without actually opposing military service or those who have been recruited. So why “throw the baby out with the bathwater,” especially when there doesn’t seem to be any bathwater to begin with?
I’m also very concerned that Meyers’ motivation may be based on personal bad blood between himself and the organizer which resulted from the comments posted on this blog entry: http://commoniowan.blogspot.co… . I hope that this is not the case.
dabbadoo Mon 12 May 5:48 AM
Bad Blood?
No, my motivation is nothing to do with any bad blood.
Des Moines Dem, I understand where you are coming from the school standpoint. These quotes are not regarding school based recruiting. I personally do not agree with school based recruiting that was implemented by this ill attempt at No Child Left Behind.
Dabbadoo (hiding behind name) A recruiter is an active duty soldier who has a full time job to do. In the Marines, you have a choice for promotion, either you serve Embassy duty or recruiting duty. Not everyone can be an Embassy Marine. Recruiters are soldiers and Veterans as well. If they are not allowed to serve out their orders then they cannot advance and that does not provide a winning solution for their families. Yes, that’s right, recruiters are humans as well and most have families as well. Hurting the entire family of an active duty military man/woman is an extremely shameful thing to do.
Shadowing recruiters or shutting down recruiting tables is not a peaceful way to ask for an end to this war, it is only hurting the soldier. If someone does not want to join they are not being forced to join, at least not yet.
Search and destroy missions are clearly destruction of government property and anti-troop. As said before, someone promoting this behavior deserves to be locked up.
A recruiter is simply doing his/her job, just the same a a machine-gunner who is on the ground in Iraq who signed up for college money and is now being forced to participate in a war that he/she and I know is clearly wrong. you cannot blame a recruiter for this war. Take your discontent out on your elected officials and not someone who volunteered to serve this nation to preserve and protect the blanket of freedom in which you sleep under every single night.
william-j-meyers Mon 12 May 8:02 AM
Good to hear
Mr. Meyers, I’m glad to hear that is not your motivation.
Still, I don’t think that the organizer actually did anything to oppose the recruiters themselves. Again, I think it’s quite clear that he opposed recruitment tactics, and not the troops.
It would seem to me that the purpose of shadowing a recruiter would be to keep tabs on where they’re recruiting so that timely protests could be launched. I’m fairly certain this was not intended to mean that the recruiter would be stalked after hours.
As far as distracting the recruiter or trying to shut down their table, again, I don’t see this as action against the troops, but as a means to disrupt their recruitment. The recruiter may simply be doing his job, and can’t be blamed for that, but neither can the person who believes that the job he is being told to do is wrong and tries to disrupt it.
In both cases, while the counter recruiter would be interfering with the soldier’s work, I see no way in which this causes any further harm to the soldier.
It would be a shame if the soldier’s commanding officer ignored the presence of counter recruiters and denied a promotion. However, if a person believes that the recruitment system fails to fully inform potential recruits, disproportionately targets the poor, and uses high pressure tactics, then I can’t imagine why you would fault that person for trying to stand up for those beliefs and disrupt the process. I’m not saying that all of those things are necessarily true, but I am saying that it’s not as simple as saying that the organizer is clearly “anti-troop” if they believe that they’re helping others. Yes, it would be best if they could just change the system through the normal channels, but the history of social movements shows that’s often easier said than done, and in the meantime, the process will continue.
There are those who appreciate the service of the men and women in our armed forces, but disagree with many of the recruitment tactics that are used to put them there. Condemning a tactic is not the same as condemning a person. I’ve never met a single person who blamed recruiters for any war, but I have met plenty who believed that our recruitment system is not what it should be and that it should be kept out of our schools. Considering recruitment commonly occurs either on school grounds or through school records, I would suspect that is exactly what the organizer was referring to.
As far as searching for and destroying materials, perhaps they are government property, but in the same way as a spring break ad on a bulletin board is the travel agency’s property. If a professor sees that in a classroom, doesn’t feel it’s appropriate, and tears it down, we don’t lock him up. Now, obviously a vacation ad is a much more trivial thing than a recruitment ad and I don’t mean to trivialize military service. The point is that what the organizer suggested is nothing like sabotaging military equipment or vandalizing recruitment offices. You may disagree with it and maybe it’s wrong, but it’s clearly not meant to harm the military or servicemen.
Honestly, I’m not hear speaking for or on behalf of the organizer. But I don’t want to see what could be a great chance for central Iowans to meet the candidates overshadowed. I also feel like you and the organizer have your hearts in the right place, so I hope you can understand that it is unlikely that he meant any disrespect to you, your profession, or to this country, and that this is a good opportunity for you both to get past your disagreements.
dabbadoo Mon 12 May 9:30 AM
BTW
You just missed a candidate forum on the 10th in Ames presented by STAR*PAC (Stop The Arms Race Political Action Committee) which covered peace and justice issues.
Start another forum presented by an organization which does not have an organizer such as this and I am all for it.
Perhaps The Ames Progressive would like to host a forum and have one of their writers moderate it.
william-j-meyers Mon 12 May 8:27 AM
I am sure they would love that
Gavin is pretty interested in this Primary and I’m sure if they could find a place to do and a forum to promote it, they would jump at the chance.
Here is a link to get in touch with them
http://amesprogressive.org/
As for the post, here is my take.
Everyone is entitled to there own opinion. I am in no position to tell another person what is wrong and right.
But I will say that taking out your frustrations with the war (and we all have them) on a recruiter, you are really wasting your time. While it may bring some sense of accomplishment it is more likely to demoralize the recruiter, who probably doesn’t want us in Iraq any more than you do.
I suggest to whoever this mystery guest is that he do anyone, or all of the suggestions in my next diary as a more productive way to fight against this immoral, unjust war.
As for William Meyers, I am glad that he is putting his neck out here on a blog post where he can be quoted by any candidate or even the Republican Machine if he gets past the nomination. While I may not always agree with him, he does do more to make sure that people know his stance than any other candidate.
bailey-campaigner Mon 12 May 4:38 PM
Again...
Again, I don’t think anyone, including that organizer, was attempting to take our their frustrations on recruiters or demoralize them. The purpose of counter-recruitment tactics is to prevent recruitment, plain and simple.
Some do this because they believe that it will starve the military of troops they need to fight, and either prevent or shorten war.
Others believe that the tactics used in recruitment are unethical, and they want to make sure that those who join the military are making an informed decision, of their own free will.
Whether or not these are appropriate actions or motivations, it should be quite clear that someone who behaves in the way the aforementioned organizer did is not necessarily, or even likely to be, targeting the troops.
I’m sorry, but I just find it frustrating to see anti-war activists and others who fight for their beliefs consistently accused of malevolence against their country and the troops.
dabbadoo Mon 12 May 5:59 PM
my two-cents
I recently was fortunate enough to meet (name removed). He clearly is not, and was not, destructive towards the US government. Counter-recruitment is just one of many strategies that has been tried by a tireless, and dedicated anti-war activist who has proven himself to be working for the cause of peace and social justice for over a decade. If that’s anti-American from the perspective of somebody who’s warped by marine-indoctrinization then so be it. But, as Thomas Jefferson said, “dissent is the highest form of patriotism.” I welcome the crowd of protesters at the forum, but their message to this point is very segmented and seems to be more about a personal vendetta than anything else. These kinds of attacks on people working for progressive groups that organize around issues like workers rights, universal health care, raising the minimum wage and trade reform are not what we expect from candidates running for the office of US congress, they are petty and immature. So, I ask you, is this political organizer anti-government, anti-American, anti-troop or anti-veteran? or all of the above? This argument is the primary stance of the pro-war military establishment that any action taken against the war or against the war-mongering president is anti-troops. Counter recruitment is now a standard strategy of pro-troop, anti-war groups such as IVAW and Gold Star Families for Peace.
iowatransplant Tue 13 May 11:16 AM
Wow, behind bars? Really?
I see nothing wrong with promoting anti-recruitment, and I think whoever thought of the current recruiting plan should be given more flack instead of the organizer mentioned above. Recruitment tactics disproportionately target minorities and low-income individuals; this to me is blatant racism and classism, two things this country should work toward getting rid of. I suppose this would be somewhat hard to do if the government is promoting this systematic targeting in efforts to get people to volunteer to fight for the Iraq occupation. I understand that people in the lower income brackets would find the wages and college payments the armed forces can provide. However I think these benefits would be less appealing if the Federal government actually cared about college education and broadened grants and loans to reach more people instead of tightening them.
As Americans we have the right to protest whatever we want to protest, especially if the issue rests within the scope of government. Obviously people haven’t agreed with the organizer’s tactics, but then again many people disagreed with Martin Luther King Jr.’s tactics as well.
b Tue 13 May 5:26 PM
Wow
To suggest that this person deserves to be “behind bars” for counter-recruitment is awfully disturbing.
Keep seeking that common sense…. you have a ways to go.
Yikes.
slightlyconcerned Tue 13 May 5:31 PM
Does the recruiter run for office on zero experience?
And pretend to have international experience because he once lived in a foreign country…
trueblue Tue 13 May 8:57 PM
off subject
are we now resulting to personal attacks about someone? This post is totally off base and out of line for this thread. This thread is NOT about personal attacks on posters no matter how much some would like to think so.
This thread, is about a 4th Distric Forum in Ames, and about the person in charge and his method/s of protesting the activities over seas.
For a recruiter, his “weapons” are his pen and paper, his telephone, his table and other such essentials that pertain to his “job”. Just as a foot soldiers “weapons” are his gun, his humvee, his grenades, etc..
As ‘dabbadoo’ said and I quote…
“As far as distracting the recruiter or trying to shut down their table, again, I don’t see this as action against the troops, but as a means to disrupt their recruitment. The recruiter may simply be doing his job, and can’t be blamed for that, but neither can the person who believes that the job he is being told to do is wrong and tries to disrupt it…”
Would we as a whole feel the same way, if those same protestors were over in Iraq, trying to distract our soldiers there, by taking away their guns, grenades and humvees? Probably not.
Just because our active soldiers are doing their duty in a differnt area, using differnt methods doesn’t make it any more right to “distract” them, by destroying the governments property and trying to make their job harder.
If such people really want peace, then why don’t they do it in a peaceful way. March out front where the recruiter is working. Send peaceful but powerful letters to the recruiters, congressman, and the officers in charge. Have a sit in where they are at. But destroying a soldiers “weapons” for success is NOT the way to go about doing it.
Also, have these “peaceful” protestors thought about what would happend if our country didn’t have any new recruits to uphold and maintain our defense system. If our troop numbers ever became so low because of the success of these protestors, then we just may have to resort back to the draft, and I don’t believe any of us want that to happend.
Hope and Pray for peace but don’t destroy gov’t property to try to accomplish that goal.
webster_co_dem Tue 13 May 10:49 PM
How easily you denigrate the names of those who work for peace....
I’m sorry, but I find your post infuriating.
A good friend of mine is a member of Christian Peacemaker Teams and went to Baghdad as part of a human shield program before the bombing raids began. This is a woman who some might consider elderly, who spent her own money and her time, when she could have just watched the whole thing on TV, and she put her life on the line for peace. Now maybe you think this is pointless or stupid in the face of a man like GWB, but I’m proud to call her my friend. She went there because she wanted to disrupt the misguided actions of our government, and I’m glad she did. And if you’re insulting the folks who disrupt the actions of the military for peace, you’re insulting my friend.
I know that tearing down military recruitment posters doesn’t make one Mohandas K. Gandhi, but that sort of action is in line with the actions of men of Gandhi’s ilk. Tearing down those posters IS peaceful action and distracting recruiters sure as hell is as well. People who engage in counter recruitment tactics believe that the current recruitment process is wrong and they are making a specific choice to stop them from doing something that they believe is wrong. And thankfully, they would keep doing so even if Mr. Meyers was the judge, jury, and jailer. I can’t possibly imagine how you could be so confused as to think that what they’re doing is wrong.
And by the way, I hope we’re all damn clear by now that what the organizer was referring to destroying was flyers, posters, brochures, and the little giveaway toys that the military hands out for free. No one is blowing up tanks or buildings and every peace activist in their right mind, including the organizer, I’m sure, immediately condemned the individual who attempted to bomb the recruitment office in NYC a short time ago.
I certainly don’t condemn the recruiters or the troops themselves, and I don’t think any of us here, nor the organizer who is not here to defend himself, believe that we should.
So, Webster_co_dem, and perhaps monroemaggie as well, would you like to tell us who we SHOULD condemn? Should we condemn those who tear down flyers, distract recruiters, tell young people the realities of war and stop-loss policies, and try to disrupt our government’s recruitment of the poor and minorities to fight the wars for the white and privileged? Or should we condemn those who are happy to watch it happen while insulting those who actually care?
And if it’s the latter, please tell me you don’t speak for Mr. Meyers.
dabbadoo Wed 14 May 1:17 AM
appalling
I find it rather appalling that you think I condemn peace activist. I have not said anywhere that I condemn peace activist. By far that is totally opposite. I was at peace rally in Ames, doing my part to peacefully protest against the war.
We have all agreed, Mr Meyers included that recruiting in highschools isn’t the proper way. So we take that line of tactics away from the military and what does that leave them? Putting up posters and business cards at the local casey’s, making phone calls, going to local civic events and mall offices.
Why are we protesting recruiting civilians into the military, when they are doing it the same way, IBM recruits employees to work for them? What would happend to IBM if they lost 50% of their recruits and then they had people quite and retire? They wouldn’t be around long, they would have to close their doors due to lack of personel.
Same holds true for our military. When the recruitment falls off by (for example) 50% and the returning men and women decide to not to re enlist. What will happend to our military? It will be weak and we will be vulnerable to attack. Also, if this fiasco goes on any longer, who will be there to replace these over worked, over stressed troops there?
You ask one question, who should we condemn. We don’t condemn the protestors, or those who watch idly. Me personally I condemn our government and more specifically the BUSH ADMINISTRATION for sending our troops in harms way without having a fully exicutible plan.
We all want to see our friends and family return home safely. Protesting the WAR is a better way to bring them home, not protesting a job that has been done for decades and that keeps our military at safe operating levels.
webster_co_dem Wed 14 May 8:42 AM
Can't we just all get along?
What is really achieved by protesting a forum that would let the people of the 4th congressional district learn about the candidates and their stances on issues that Working Families Win supports? I believe that all candidates should participate no matter what issues they have with one of the organizers. Participating in a forum that discusses issues faced by the working family does not make someone anti-troop. Can’t you put the people you want to represent ahead of your personal vendettas for one day?
iowatransplant Tue 13 May 11:42 PM
peace is patriotic
i don’t think there is anything more patriotic than standing up for something you are passionate about. wasn’t that one of the guiding forces of our country’s history? i think it’s clear one loves their country deeply when they will fight to make sure their fellow brothers and sisters do not fall in an unjust war no one should be fighting in. is it a crime to love your brothers and sisters so deeply? or have we returned to the age of mccarthy, and those who speak out against injustice peacefully are accused of criminal action?
edc Thu 15 May 2:23 PM
recruitement not war
these people are not fighting for brothers and sisters to fall into an unjust war (which I agree it is). They are undermining the recruitment process, which has been going on long before this fiasco and will continue a long time after. By undermining recruitment, all they are doing is weakening our Military for the future. Keeping numbes down is NOT a good thing…there is strength in numbers and our military and our saftey and our freedom depends on those numbers.
webster_co_dem Fri 16 May 7:01 AM