On April 9th, Columbia students will participate in “Lobby Day”, where they are used by the university to ask for more federal funding.
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/news/03/03/student_lobbyday.html It would be usefull if Freepers could write their congressman and ask them to tell the Columbia students that they will not be getting more funding.
The administration is complicit.
Before the administration could claim that they were distancing themselves from De Genova and the teach-in.
Here, they are covering up the remarks. Given this position and the fact that the university is going to make one of the participants of the "teach-in" responsible for faculty and curriculum decisions, the administration has taken the side of the radicals.
The good news is that alumni are beginning to respond to this issue. Many have threatened to withhold donations.
http://www.columbiaspectator.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2003/04/03/3e8c1bcf54f95 At some point, the Trustees will reign in the radicals.
They just need a push.
I've asked members of congress to withhold funding untill Columbia meets the following demands:
1. Columbia must have a semblance of ideological balance for it to be a true institution of higher learning, not indoctrination.
2. To promote national security, Columbia must start complying with regulations regarding the registration and processing of foreign students.
3. If the university wishes to disavow itself of Professor De Genova's comments, it must reinstate the ROTC program and stop harrassment of ROTC members by faculty and staff.
This reminds me of the fallout at the University of Oklaqhoma Law school after the Anita Hill debacle. The Dean used the facility for a press conference suppporting her. Economic support immediately dried up. He ultimately issued a long winded written apology to try to restart the dollars flowing. It did not work. He ultimately lost his job and Hill moved on. Since a new dean came in the law school is doing great.This kind of pressure works!
Amen! keep the pressure on the University and Congress. I will write my own here in Idaho as well.
Can someone please explain to me the difference between "academic free speech" and the kind mentioned in the Bill of Rights?