Many of the issues that have now been raised publicly have been festering quietly and privately since February. I began communicating privately with Col Zimon in mid February, at which time he promised to respond to my concerns via email. As the issues became more pointed and direct, Col. Zimon emailed me on May 5 that the Kosovo war, "the most stressful operation in which I have been involved in my more than 29 years of service," so occupied him that it precluded him from speaking to me directly on my concerns. I accepted and accept at face value the pressures on his time and emailed him five specific questions, which form the core of the charges relating to his army service, including the checks issue, the authoring of the military education plan, etc.

His response: "You are generally on target with most of your assumptions. However, most if not all are complex issues which are not conducive to brief answers without some risk of misunderstanding, misinterpretation, or someone possibly taking parts out of context and using them for other purposes which might misrepresent the truth and/or create potential personal or legal liabilities. However, they are on the other hand topics which I will very much enjoy discussing with faculty and others who have an interest shortly after my arrival."

I immediately protested his decision not to address my concerns until after July 1 and asked him five very specific one sentence questions, including whether he had signed any check, written any section of any treaty, etc. I framed them so he could respond with a simple yes or no answer. He did not reply. I emailed him several more times requesting an answer, but did not get one. I finally gave him until May 17 to respond, failing which I would request a formal investigation as my research had discovered several incongruities in the public record and his resume.

When I did not hear from him, I sent a letter to then President Ellen Hurwitz on May 19 asking her to investigate the issues I was raising and attaching with it my communications with Praeger; freedom of information requests I had filed with the army; and my email communications with Col Zimon. Ellen advised me by letter on June 10, "I have taken up the matter with the chairman and the first vice chairman of the Board of Trustees, and they see no reason to pursue this issue any further."

I then wrote to Board Chairman John Horrigan on June 15 requesting him to investigate the allegations. One month later, on July 21, he wrote to me, "You have raised a number of significant issues, and I feel obligated to ensure that they are addressed. I believe we now have a reasonable plan to address your concerns, and I hope to provide a more detailed response as soon as possible."

I immediately wrote to Mr. Horrigan requesting an opportunity to provide all the information in my possession to whatever investigative mechanism the board set up. I did not hear from him on that request. Meanwhile, around Aug 11, three other faculty members and I met with Col Zimon as part of his group meetings. When I began seeking answers to some of my questions, Dave Martin objected to my line of questions protesting that I was wasting his time. I volunteered to let all the other faculty members ask their questions first, which included, as it turned out, Dave's concerns that the Albright faculty wields too much power and his hope that Col Zimon would restore the balance of power back to the president and the administration. After everyone had exhausted their questions -- a full two hours, during which I did not raise a single question -- Col Zimon graciously consented to give me some time to ask my questions.

--..Continued..

--