UNCP Faculty Corner

CIA Recruiting

This page is for discussion of recruiting on campus by the Central Intelligence Agency.

Advertisements

7 Comments »

  1. http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/03/30/qt#195300

    New Student Assignment: Helping the CIA Recruit

    The Central Intelligence Agency has long recruited new college graduates as employees — and those efforts have sometimes been controversial. But the agency is having success in attracting interest on campus, the Los Angeles Times reported, by working with marketing courses at universities, which take on the project of designing materials to publicize the CIA’s recruiting efforts. Beyond the marketing skills of the students, the CIA has another edge today, the students in the course told the Times. With jobs for new graduates in short supply, the CIA is looking more attractive as an employer.

    Comment by George Guba — March 30, 2009 @ 8:40 am

  2. Above (in comment 4) my friend and colleague Ottis Murray assures me that the United States will outlast the C.I.A. and the B.o.A. True, but what will they each become?

    Among soldiers and police officers (who daily have to synchronize their activities with their “orders,” and their memory of their various oaths) many take their oaths very seriously, but can assure you on a day to day basis that the Consitution for the U.S. is an operational dead letter. The country survives, yes, and the flag has not changed.

    However, I’m willing to bet Dr. Murray three boxes of blackboard chalk: sometime in the next ten years sufficiently universal and clear violations of the Current Constitution of 1789 and its twenty-odd amendments will be enacted into black letter federal law to allow those with even the shortest of memories to see clear evidence that where we are now is NOT where they were then. I think that can happen without ever changing the flag. (Note: This bet does not even take into account the EXTERNAL threats to national sovereignty.)

    But back to the recruiters on campus. The difference of opinion expressed on FAC_ALL and moved here to our designated free speech zone isn’t going to affect recruiters on campus. That is beyond our control and so what? Free speech is a form of bulletless sniping. Facts help. We like to believe that we’ve got facts that other people need to know.

    John Hays writes in Comment 2 above: “I will just add that my respect for the faculty of UNCP has gone down now.”

    To which I really want to reply, “John, good grief, you are in touch with so many members of the faculty in your work. The faculty can’t even do their job in this age if you and your department fall down on theirs. And you’re going to tell me that the whole faculty has lost respect in your eyes just because not even a dozen of us took each other’s bait and expressed an opinion on issues which are based in ideology as much as they are based in fact, in any disciplined reality?

    Ideological snipers are REALLY bad. (All of us who have weighted into this sniping contest and gotten ourselves sidelined to the free speach zone, you, too, John) are REALLY bad. But that is the heart of free speech. It really isn’t free of consequences. Every member of the faculty who chimes in on this subject (except for Ross) would have really rather graded papers than hit the keyboards. But they didn’t.

    If we sound mealy mouthed (cottened keyboarded) its only because we get so many people upset if it begins to sound as if we were about to take an ideological stand. So we cloak our ideological opinions and bury them deep within any post, with the idea that the really nasty members of the faculty (who hate us anyway) won’t read this far and laugh at us.

    Okay, not us. Me. I don’t speak for anyone else, just me.

    Members of the CIA have been guilty as all get out of extra-legal activity in times past, and in current times have been upheld in violations of the Geneva Conventions that have been upheld and backed by their Chief Executive (read POTUS), with their activities legalized by executive findings.

    My point again, attack their leadership, not their recruiter.

    I’m only one member of the faculty. I’m recommending that no one go out and throw tomatos at any recruiter. I’ll snipe at my friends as I did when the whole unruly bunch of us was relegated to the blogs. But I’ll sure not go outside to throw tomatos. Neither will I tell the UNCP staff who have to manage all the recruiters who they should bring on campus, nor will I tell the group who bring speakers to campus how to pick and choose and still make the budget.

    But ideological sniping in the interest of free speech? Running my keyboard and putting my mouth on campus EXACTLY where my mouth is in my classroom, i.e., OPEN. You bet, ideological sniping is our bread and butter.

    As for all those “facts” we all believe deserve a fair hearing? I think that’s where we have a serious problem, and I think that’s why so many members of the faculty (six or eight vocal and sniping is a whole lot, actually, to drive to the keyboards to risk banishment for bad behavior on just one topic) rose to this topic: we actually disagree as to what the facts actually are.

    Well, I submit that all the facts aren’t in yet. But they are on the way, and they are not pretty.

    Fran Fuller (still sniping away.)

    Comment by Fran Fuller — February 8, 2009 @ 8:22 pm

  3. Memory is important regardless of ideology. Huffington was very recent, North was not. What I believe is fair is to put all the information on the table (good and bad), and let people decide for themselves. Unfortunately, I do not trust the media to do this anymore. For example, people dislike the war for whatever reasons. We heard daily how many soldiers lost their lives. We don’t hear about the very low death rate now, why? The death rate in American death rate in D.C. is higher per capita than in Iraq. Do we pull out of D.C.? Did we hear the media list the number of project completed, schools and hospitals built, how much of the infrastructure had been rebuilt, how many women are being educated, how many women have not been raped, how many people have not been tortured, murdered, and put into mass graves? The last two questions cannot be answered, but should be considered. How would the world view Hitler if he had been killed before his invasions and slaughter began? We can never know, but would the world have been better for it?
    I worry when any organization begins speaking in terms of censorship and deciding “appropriate” freedom of speech. Has the U.S. been hit again since 9-11? Should the credit go partly to the CIA? There is good and evil in the world. So the question may be, “Do we believe there are necessary evils?”

    Comment by Doug McBroom — February 6, 2009 @ 10:18 am

  4. Apparently, some memories are obviously short-term or perhaps myopic; Oliver North was on campus and recited his version of history; he justified his actions. If you recall, he was a freedom fighter. So, when the democratically elected government felt one way, North’s truth superceeded democracy. He did what was “right” in his own mind.

    Do we really want to compare North to Huffington’s contribution in terms of terror, torture and anti-democratic behavior? Probably not. Do we wish to at least suggest others should examine the historical record as it relates to organizations that might elect to recruit on our campus? Most certainly!

    Its self-serving to request others to “be fair” when that really means towing-the-line and following the corrupted ideology of t.v.’s “fair and balanced” moniker.

    I do not really believe many would wish to go down the road in terms of vetting the CIA’s morality or even justifying recently unclassified actions. However, I do agree … students can make whatever choice they elect, regardless of their awareness of the company for which they choose to work. I am becoming somewhat cynical in that many only care about the $$$ … the rest is fluf. So, welcome CIA and Bank of America … the United States will survive you both!

    Comment by Ottis Murray — February 6, 2009 @ 12:38 am

  5. I find it interesting that an academic institution cannot allow people to come and speak to adults (students) and allow them to make up their own minds. If we are looking for “balance,” why didn’t I see that “balance” when Mrs. Huffington came and spoke. Unfortunately, I have seen too many times, terms like fairness, justice, and balance really mean fairness, justice, and balance just for me and what I want. And if you feel it is acceptable to show “terrible” methods used by our agencies, be fair and show the terrorists cutting off the heads of helpless people as well. That is their method. The truth means ALL information, not just what supports your ideology.

    Comment by Doug McBroom — February 4, 2009 @ 10:36 am

  6. Greeting all.
    While I am only a staff employee, I have read with considerable interest the comments posted by Dr. Hicks, Dr. Haladay, and Dr. Ross about the pending visit by CIA employees. I do tend to agree with the original post by Dr. Hicks and think a more balanced presentation should be made. So, I suggest that in addition to the material Dr. Hicks recommends we include a reading of the names of those Americans that died on 9/11 and include the video made of the rather infamous beheading. That along with some accounts of the victims of human bomb attacks might help out students understand just how “terrible” the methods used by our military and intelligence agencies, such as the CIA, are in response to the attack on everything we hold dear – including the right of Dr. Hicks and Dr. Haladay to speak freely. I will just add that my respect for the faculty of UNCP has gone down now.

    John Hays
    Business & Technology Applications Analyst
    IT Applications Development and Support
    Department of Information Technology
    UNC Pembroke
    Phone: (910) 521-6500

    Comment by John Hays — January 27, 2009 @ 2:06 pm

  7. Okay, so I was reading from latest to earliest on the fac_all list and got my licks in before I saw the directions to carry the incindiary remarks over here.

    I do agree with the fac-all list responders who said we ought to be able to discuss hot button issues without rancor. I don’t know how much of the rancor is in misunderstanding and how much of it is in not liking what’s been posted.

    Still, I’ll stand up for what I implied on the other list. CIA recruiters are no more, and no less responsible, for the violations of law-breakers-in-charge — than are Bank of America reps responsible for the kleptomaniacs who have hijacked the economy.

    There, is that a scholarly enough provocative remark?

    Fran Fuller, soon to retire from the Dept Soc & CJ, UNCP

    Comment by Fran Fuller — January 26, 2009 @ 6:11 pm


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: