College kids: About that e-mail on Mandatory Military Draft - 2005
First, IT'S A HOAX, GUYS, DO NOT WORRY!
I just got off the phone with Jeri at Weiner & Laurin, LLP - the office where the e-mail titled "Subject: FW: Mandatory Military Draft - 2005" was supposed to have originated - and she said "It's a hoax. We looked into it and none of it is true."
I asked her whether she knew how it happened to be sent out under the law office's name, and she said "We don't know exactly how that happened. We think it might have started out in good faith, but you can tell your daughter not to worry because it is definitely a hoax. We made this point clearly earlier in the year after we looked into it, and we thought we had put it to rest, but for some reason it just resurfaced."
For some reason, indeed.
You will find a variety of resources on this topic below. To summarize: Both of the pieces of legislation were introduced by senior Democrats, in the House and Senate respectively. The lie that it is the Bush administration proposing a return to the draft is being spread by the Democratic candidate for president.
UPDATE: As the New York Times reported on October 19, when pressed the Kerry campaign hastens to admit it's "not alleging that there's a secret plan or anything like that." The Times notes President Bush has steadfastly opposed a draft and "In any event, the chances are extremely remote that Congress would approve a general draft."
UPDATE: Guess who REALLY has the plan to require national service? Hint: It's not George Bush, and the bulletin has now been removed from the John Kerry Web site. But it's archived here, for your convenience. Thanks to Captain Ed for the link. Ed adds:
It seems that Kerry has once again been caught in a severe case of projection, and once again has deleted pages from his web site to cover his tracks. His party squeals about a draft which only they have proposed restarting while trying to back-door a plan for indentured servitude for the teenagers of America.
UPDATE AS OF Oct. 7, 2004: The bill was defeated resoundingly in the House. It was a Democratic-sponsored bill.
Presumably, this is the time when today's college-age kids will realize the Democratic Party is for the uninformed.
Maybe today's college-age kids will be a little bit ticked off to find out they're being lied to about who to vote for, by the Party whose senior members are on record supporting a return of the draft, while the Bush administration is on record opposing a return of the draft?
Anyway, let the debunking begin: There is some good background over at Urban Legends (and, kids, go ahead and bookmark that site because people are going to try and sell you cartloads of crap in the coming years and the folks at Snopes can definitely save you some painful learning-from-experience).
Actually, you will probably figure some of this out if you just follow the instructions in the e-mail. Go to thomas.loc.gov and type HR 163 into the search box. What do you see right there at the top?
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
January 7, 2003
Mr. RANGEL (for himself, Mr. MCDERMOTT, Mr. CONYERS, Mr. LEWIS of Georgia, Mr. STARK, and Mr. ABERCROMBIE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services...
Recognize any of those names? For one thing, they are Democrats. In fact, all 16 sponsors of the bill are Democrats. For another, they are among the most strident and vicious opponents of President Bush, so it is improbable that they would be in a position to work secretly with his administration to get their bill passed. Just like it is improbable that you will climb on the back of a pig and fly over the treetops later today.
Follow the instructions for the Senate version of the bill and you'll find the same result.
Likewise, if you follow the links for sss and hslda you'll see that the documents do not in any way support the contentions made in the e-mail.
Whoever created the hoax e-mail apparently believed that the college students who receive it will be A) Too lazy to follow the links, or B) Too uninformed to understand what they would be reading, or C) All of the above.
In case you have not seen it, here is a copy of the e-mail my daughter received, which is apparently being circulated at her college:
Subject: FW: Mandatory Military Draft - 2005
Guess what is QUIETLY being put through the House and Senate - a DRAFT starting 2005. If you are against this, you better pass this on IMMEDIATELY. If you are for it, you can rejoice. I was not aware of this until I received this today and yes, I just verified it.
Mandatory draft for boys and girls (ages 18-26) starting June 15, 2005, is something that everyone should know about.
This literally effects everyone since we all have or know children that will have to go if this bill passes.
There is pending legislation in the house and senate (companion bills: S89 and HR 163) which will time the program's initiation so the draft can begin as early as spring, 2005, just after the 2004 presidential election. The administration is quietly trying to get these bills passed now, while the public's attention is on the elections, so our action on this is needed immediately. Details and links follow.
This plan, among other things, eliminates higher education as a shelter and includes women in the draft. Also, crossing into Canada has already been made very difficult.
Actions
Please send this on to all the parents and teachers you know, and all the aunts and uncles, grandparents, godparents. . .
And let your children know - - it's their future, and they can be a powerful voice for change!
This legislation is called HR 163 and can be found in detail at this website
Just enter in "HR 163" and click search and will bring up the bill for you to read. It is less than two pages long.
If this bill passes, it will include all men and ALL WOMEN from ages 18 - 26 in a draft for military action. In addition, college will no longer be an option for avoiding the draft and they will be signing an agreement with the Canada which will no longer permit anyone attempting to dodge the draft to stay within it's borders.
This bill also includes the extension of military service for all those that are currently active.
If you go to the select service web site and read their 2004 FYI Goals you will see that the reasoning for this is to increase the size of the military in case of terrorism. This is a critical piece of legislation, this will effect our undergraduates, our children and our grandchildren.
Please take the time to write your congressman and let them know how you feel about this legislation.
Please also write to your representatives and ask them why they aren't telling their constituents about these bills and write to newspapers and other media outlets to ask them why they're not covering this important story.
The draft $28 million has been added to the 2004 selective service system budget to prepare for a military draft that could start as early as June 15, 2005. Selective service must report to Bush on March 31, 2005 that the system, which has lain dormant for decades, is ready for activation.
Please see www.sss.gov/perfplan_fy2004.html to view the Selective Service System annual performance plan, fiscal year 2004.
The pentagon has quietly begun a public campaign to fill all 10,350 draft board positions and 11,070 appeals board slots nationwide. Though this is an unpopular election year topic, military experts and influential members of congress are suggesting that if Rumsfeld's prediction of a "long, hard slog" in Iraq and Afghanistan (and permanent state of war on terrorism) proves accurate, the U.S. may have no choice but to draft.
www.hslda.org/legislation/national/2003/s89/default.asp entitled the Universal National service Act of 2003, "to provide for the common defense by requiring that all young persons (age 18-26) in the United States, including women, perform a period of military service or a period of civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, and for other purposes." These active bills currently sit in the committee on armed services.
Dodging the draft will be more difficult than those from the Vietnam era. College and Canada will not be options. In December, 2001, Canada and the U.S. signed a "smart border declaration," which could be used to keep would-be draft dodgers in.
Signed by Canada's minister of foreign affairs, John Manley, and U.S. Homeland Security director, Tom Ridge, the declaration involves a 30 point plan which implements, among other things, a "pre-clearance agreement" of people entering and departing each country.
Reforms aimed at making the draft more equitable along gender and class lines also eliminates higher education as a shelter. Underclassmen would only be able to postpone service until the end of their current semester. Seniors would have until the end of the academic year.
What to do: Tell your friends, Contact your legislators and ask them to oppose these bills
Just type "congress" into your search engine such as Google or Yahoo. Click on the link and input your zip code. A list of your reps will pop up with a way to email them directly. We can't just sit and pretend that by ignoring it, it will go away. We must voice our concerns and create the world we want to live in for our children and grandchildren.
Richard L. Weiner, Esq.
Weiner & Laurin, LLP
rweiner@wllaw.com
Tel: (818) 501-8898
Fax: (818) 501-8897
15760 Ventura Blvd., Suite 1727
Encino, California 91436
Again, this controversy was addressed earlier in the year, but desperate people do desperate things.
President Bush heads into the first presidential debate with a solid lead over John F. Kerry, boosted by the perception that he is a stronger leader with a clearer vision, despite deep concerns about Iraq and the pace of the economic recovery, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News Poll and interviews with voters in battleground states.
I hope this has cleared things up, and you are better informed for at least one of the decisions you will be able to make in the voting booth on November 2. It is not my intention to tell you who to vote for, but rather to simply provide information...
Well, check that, actually. On second thought, I'm telling you to vote Republican, ok? Just do it - you will thank me in ten years, I promise you. I'm not going to pummel you with a bunch of BS, but just think about the fact that the Democratic Party thinks you are stupid sheep who can be led in any direction through the use of lies, celebrity endorsements, hip slogans and edgy visuals.
The Republicans are not gods or angels by a long shot, but between the two parties the GOP respects your intelligence way more than the other guys.
Now, if you share the concern of so many of today's youth's that it cannot be in any way fun or fashionable to support Republicans, please do this: Visit Allah and read a bunch of his stuff, then visit Frank J., and read a bunch his stuff, and follow some of the links on our World O' Blogs list on the right side of this page. Kids - I'm going to let you in on a secret that the Democratic Party is working desperately to keep you from learning: Conservatives are having all the fun. And on top of that, they tend to be making more of the sense.
Welcome aboard.
Thanks to Sparrows Fall for some of the links in this post - there is a good deal more information on this topic over there so please go and check it out.
UPDATE: BTW, that 'good faith' remark from the attorneys office follows in a proud tradition of good faith efforts which went mysteriously askew.
UPDATE II: Also, on the topic of 'fun', visit Ace. He's usually good for a chuckle or two, when he's not scaring you to death.
UPDATE III: Wes Pruden weighs in on the subject, and you've got to love an old white guy who really knows how to skewer the old white guys.
UPDATE IV: And whatever your age, you should stay informed on the most significant issues of the day. This requires a daily visit to Blogs of War. This Web site is the premier Internet resource for news relating to international conflict. Visit regularly to stay apprised of the world you live in.
UPDATE V: FactCheck addressed this back in June.
UPDATE VI: Then, of course, there is the CBS Angle on this story. Y'know, I must be getting slow in my old age, because when I was typing the word 'hoax' the other day, Dan Rather never crossed my mind....guess that's why I'm still waiting for MY pajamas to arrive. Oh well. You can read more about this developing and rather humorous side-story by visiting a REAL pajama guy:
