5. Colonel Zimon claims in his resume to have authored, even been the principal author, of several U.S. treaties. In his resume he states that he "Participated in the development, writing, and intragency coordination of five of the eight President's U.S. National Security Strategies. Wrote and helped negotitate major sections of two U.S. Treaties and related documents…." In addition, in his resume, he lists the following documents as publications: Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe; National Security Strategy of the United States; Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate Range Missiles; National Security Strategy of the United States. But in response to my FOI request, the army informed me that, "No official documents were authored or co-authored by Colonel Zimon" relating to any treaties, U.S. security plans, or the National Security Strategy of Engagement and Enlargement, of which Colonel Zimon claims to be principal author. Once again, in his meeting with me, Colonel Zimon was unable to provide any explanation for this discrepancy, again explaining that the documents exist but that they have not been provided to me pursuant to my FOI request. Colonel Zimon's in essence is arguing that the army is violating FOI law by not providing the documents that he says will show that he played a significant role in these national publications. Indeed, my understanding is that Colonel Zimon was not even a member of most of the task forces that authored these documents and of which he claims to be principal author.

6. Two search committee members have advised me that they had the understanding that Colonel Zimon was a candidate for president at Seton Hall. Indeed, it was the concern of losing Colonel Zimon to a competing institution that was advanced as the motivating consideration for speedy action on his candidacy, well ahead of the scheduled time table. This hasty action may have precluded the kind of investigation that might have exposed some of these discrepancies. In fact, Colonel Zimon was candidate only for dean of the International School at Seton Hall, which scarcely raised concerns of losing him. He was also a candidate for dean of the school of arts and sciences at Creighton University. He had not even interviewed for these positions at the time. How these two and perhaps other committee members came to the false understanding that he was candidate for president at Seton Hall needs to be examined. Perhaps this miscommunication was passed along by the consulting firm hired by the college for this search. Colonel Zimon has told me that the firm had vetted his vita. The nature of his relationship with the consulting firm for possible conflicts of interest needs to be explored.

There are a host of other questionable claims that Colonel Zimon had made about his professional and publishing background, but all the above involve documentary evidence that can be examined. Academic dishonesty is the most egregious misconduct in academia. The Albright College catalog notes: "Academic honesty is part of the foundation of an academic community. Any violation of the highest standards of academic honesty threatens the trust upon which an academic community is built." The point is further underscored in the faculty handbook, which provides on the subject of faculty searches: "Faculty are expected to be honest and fully responsive to the questions they are asked…. This interest requires an open, honest search procedure and is PARAMOUNT in the College's consideration." (Emphasis added).

In his interview with The Albright Reporter (Summer 1999), Colonel Zimon himself stresses honesty and integrity as the core values both in life and education: "However, in answer to your question to me personally, at the top of my list are core values such as integrity - and I should point out that integrity to me is a much broader value than simple honesty, although it certainly includes being honest…."

As one works through these and other issues and looks at the totality of the documentary evidence, one cannot but arrive at the conclusion that there is potentially, at least, a willful and calculated pattern of deception on Colonel Zimon's part to deliberately mislead and deceive the faculty, the search committee and the trustees. I do not ask anybody to take my word; I do ask for a legitimate inquiry that gets to the facts. I have not even asked that Colonel Zimon produce the evidence to me; I have asked only for a serious investigation.

A prima facie case exists that Colonel Zimon has falsified his publication record and that he has grossly exaggerated and misrepresented his army background. Even though the facts in this case may cause us discomfort, we all have a professional responsibility to pursue truth wherever it might lead us. If we chose to ignore such a blatant case of dishonesty by the college's lead officer, the faculty will have no moral authority to challenge similar misconduct by students and by other faculty.

Questions relating to Colonel Zimon's background were raised at the faculty meeting of February 17. Several of the votes that followed were very narrow. A motion to table a resolution congratulating Colonel Zimon was voted down by just two votes (and just one not counting the chair). Remarks were made by supporters of Colonel Zimon at that meeting, to quote the minutes, "[I]f Dr. Zimon's vita were inaccurate then this in itself would be grounds for his removal…." There are sufficient grounds to suggest that that might be so. No doubt, students are investigated on far flimsier evidence than is the case here.

It is imperative that the college establish a committee to investigate Colonel Zimon professional and academic background and let the chips fall where they may.

Achal Mehra
Associate Professor
Communications Program

--..Continued..

--