Columbia U's Bigotry Toward the Military

[Tigermike 3,039]

COLUMBIA'S BIGOTRY

By CHARLES E.F. MILLARD

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

April 14, 2005 -- COLUMBIA University, only a few miles north of Ground Zero, treats young people who are training to defend this nation as second-class citizens.

You might think that, at a university where virtually every student and faculty member was directly affected by 9/11, there'd be respect and gratitude for ROTC. Reserve Officer Training Corps students, after all, seek to serve and protect their country and their community. Instead, President Lee Bollinger (who's also under fire over alleged anti-Semitism in his Mideast Studies Department) has said he allows ROTC recruiters at the Law School only "with regret," and ROTC itself is banned on the Columbia campus.

Fortunately, a few courageous Columbia students are willing to face not only the threats of our enemies around the world but also the venom of the Columbia administration.

Sean Wilkes, a neuroscience student at Columbia, does his ROTC duties at Fordham. Wilkes, a junior, wants to continue his family's military tradition — so every Friday morning he travels south to Fordham's Manhattan campus for ROTC classes, then turns around and travels north to Fordham's Bronx campus for ROTC "leadership labs" in the afternoon. Three times a week, he arrives for physical training at 6:30 a.m. in Central Park or at a Fordham campus.

"I have a strong desire to serve. I think the military is a noble profession," he told me. "Seeing your neighbor free and protecting the people around you" is why he joined.

Colleges should encourage this kind of idealism and the self-sacrificing ethic of service to others — but Columbia tries to keep it off campus.

At other schools, ROTC students receive regular course credit for their ROTC classes and conduct their other ROTC activities on campus. At Columbia, ROTC is barred; students who wish to add these activities to already demanding schedules may do so — but elsewhere, please.

Columbia banned ROTC in 1969, a few months after the height of the famous campus demonstrations against the Vietnam war and all things military. Yet that knee-jerk anti-military attitude doesn't apply to today's Columbia students: Two years ago, a student referendum to bring ROTC back to campus passed with 65 percent of the vote.

The faculty is another matter. It took a year after the referendum before the faculty-dominated University Senate would even form a task force to study the isssue. After a year of town halls, email exchanges and committee meetings, the committee is deadlocked, 5 to 5, over whether to change the existing policy. The full Senate is set to decide on May 6.

ROTC opponents claim that they're not anti-military — that their opposition is solely related to the military's "Don't ask, don't tell" policy. That's supposedly the one issue that has the committee deadlocked, because the policy doesn't match with Columbia's own non-discrimination policy.

One can only wonder: If (God forbid) terrorists launched an attack at Columbia, would these critics block the gates of 116th and Broadway to prevent the military from entering the campus because "Don't ask, don't tell" violates Columbia's anti-discrimination policy?

Keep in mind that ROTC students have their tuition partially paid by Uncle Sam; checks are sent directly to Columbia from the "Don't ask, don't tell" U.S. Army. Columbia has yet to send any of those checks back.

But the hypocrisy gets worse.

An official Columbia group, the Columbia Law School Center for the Study of Law and Culture, recently hosted a "teach-in" on this subject.

Professor Michael Adler, who supports the return of ROTC, hoped the center would allow for a debate on the issue. In an email (provided to me by an ROTC supporter) to Professor Kendall Thomas, the center's co-director, Adler noted: "The fact is that most of us who support the return of ROTC to Columbia would be willing to make common cause with the law students" on certain aspects of the "Don't ask, don't tell" issue.

Professor Thomas replied, "A teach-in is being planned, which I believe will be a more productive use of the law school's resources, and its members' time."

Thomas failed to explain how three hours of one-sided military-bashing would be "more productive" use of resources at a center of higher education. Debate is apparently inappropriate for the education of future lawyers.

Instead (as reported to me by an ROTC supporter who was present and took notes), students heard from the likes of Columbia anthropology Professor Rosalind Morris: "[W]e should not be inclusive or tolerant of an institution that structures violence as a war against homosexuality."

At the end of the one-sided event, a short statement from a group in support of ROTC was read out — along with an announcement that that this qualified as making sure all views had been heard.

In short, the official group refused to debate the pro-ROTC Columbians — then stooped to insulting the uniform that Sean Wilkes wears with optimistic pride. Sean's reaction? "The great thing is that people are free to express their opinions. We have freedom of speech and that is important to protect."

"The fact that they are able to [do that] is a vindication of my service."

Sounds like the kind of future leader Columbia should be proud of.

Charles E.F. Millard was a city councilman from 1991-'95 and president of the city Economic Development Corporation from 1995-'99.

http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/23189.htm

[Auburn85 432]

Wow, I'm surprised they even let any type of military on the campus. What has the ROTC done? Nothing. What did the ROTC do to deserve this? Nothing.

In short, the official group refused to debate the pro-ROTC Columbians — then stooped to insulting the uniform that Sean Wilkes wears with optimistic pride. Sean's reaction? "The great thing is that people are free to express their opinions. We have freedom of speech and that is important to protect."

If the goal is to protect free speech, then who's standing up for the ROTC?

[Tigermike 3,039]

Wow, I'm surprised they even let any type of military on the campus. What has the ROTC done? Nothing. What did the ROTC do to deserve this? Nothing.

In short, the official group refused to debate the pro-ROTC Columbians — then stooped to insulting the uniform that Sean Wilkes wears with optimistic pride. Sean's reaction? "The great thing is that people are free to express their opinions. We have freedom of speech and that is important to protect."

If the goal is to protect free speech, then who's standing up for the ROTC?

155849[/snapback]

John Kerry?

[Tiger Al 0]

If the goal is to protect free speech, then who's standing up for the ROTC?

It could be Dubya, but he's no where to be found.

[TexasTiger 12,956]

If the goal is to protect free speech, then who's standing up for the ROTC?

It could be Dubya, but he's no where to be found.

155868[/snapback]

Dubya's there. It's just that nobody remembers seeing him.

[Tigermike 3,039]

If the goal is to protect free speech, then who's standing up for the ROTC?

It could be Dubya, but he's no where to be found.

155868[/snapback]

Dubya's there. It's just that nobody remembers seeing him.

155871[/snapback]

John Kerry remembers seeing him. Johnny Boy may not remember if he was in Vietnam or Cambodia, but he remembers seeing W.

[Auburn85 432]

If the goal is to protect free speech, then who's standing up for the ROTC?

It could be Dubya, but he's no where to be found.

155868[/snapback]

Dubya's there. It's just that nobody remembers seeing him.

155871[/snapback]

John Kerry remembers seeing him. Johnny Boy may not remember if he was in Vietnam or Cambodia, but he remembers seeing W.

155928[/snapback]

Tigermike, you got it a little wrong. Kerry seen an L in November.

[Tigermike 3,039]

If the goal is to protect free speech, then who's standing up for the ROTC?

It could be Dubya, but he's no where to be found.

155868[/snapback]

Dubya's there. It's just that nobody remembers seeing him.

155871[/snapback]

John Kerry remembers seeing him. Johnny Boy may not remember if he was in Vietnam or Cambodia, but he remembers seeing W.

155928[/snapback]

Tigermike, you got it a little wrong. Kerry seen an L in November.

155934[/snapback]

Are you saying that what Kerry really remembers is W pasting an L on his forehead?

[Auburn85 432]

Yes, and he still feels he was cheated.

Sounds like an eight year old, if you don't win the other persons must have cheated