Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by LaminatorX on Friday September 12 2014, @12:18PM   Printer-friendly
from the guilt-by-friend-of-a-friend dept.

Jeffrey Mervis reports at Science AAAS that in 1979 Valerie Barr handed out leaflets, stood behind tables at rallies, and baked cookies to support two left-wing groups, the Women’s Committee Against Genocide and the New Movement in Solidarity with Puerto Rican Independence. In August 2013 she took a leave from her position as tenured professor of computer science at Union College to join the National Science Foundation (NSF) as a program director in its Division of Undergraduate Education. And that’s when her 3-decade-old foray into political activism came back to haunt her. Federal investigators say that Barr lied during a routine background check about her affiliations with a domestic terrorist group that had ties to the two organizations to which she had belonged in the early 1980s. On 27 August, NSF said that her “dishonest conduct” compelled them to cancel her temporary assignment immediately, at the end of the first of what was expected to be a 2-year stint. Federal investigators say those groups were affiliated with a third, the May 19 Communist Organization (M19CO), that carried out a string of violent acts, including the killing of two police officers and a security guard during a failed 1981 robbery of a Brink’s truck near Nyack, New York.

Barr’s first background interview was held in November 2013, 3 months after she began working at NSF. During that session, Barr answered “no” when asked if she had ever been a member of an organization “dedicated to the use of violence” to overthrow the U.S. government or to prevent others from exercising their constitutional rights. In a second interview after again being asked if she had been a member of any organization that espoused violence, Barr was grilled for 4.5 hours about her knowledge of all three organizations and several individuals with ties to them, including the persons who tried to rob the Brink’s truck. Four people were found guilty of murder in that attack and sentenced to lengthy prison terms, including Kathy Boudin, who was released in 2003 and is now an adjunct assistant professor of social work at Columbia University. “I found out about the Brink’s robbery by hearing it on the news, and just like everybody else I was shocked,” she recalls.

Barr says she is thankful that Union College has welcomed her back with open arms and says she will soon resume her teaching and research activities. In addition, she regards her year at NSF as “a very rewarding experience in many ways.” Even so, she has written to her representatives in Congress and to NSF Director France Córdova asking them to examine what she labels an “Orwellian process” for vetting rotators like herself. “We volunteer to do this,” she wrote Córdova on 29 August. Until a better process is put in place, Barr says, “NSF runs the risk that many highly qualified scientists will not even consider serving as IPAs. That will be a tremendous loss.”

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by MrGuy on Friday September 12 2014, @05:00PM

    by MrGuy (1007) on Friday September 12 2014, @05:00PM (#92495)

    I wonder if she would have been hired in the first place if she had been truthful. I'm thinking she would have; those sound like peaceful, mild-mannered groups.

    I really think this is the point you have yet to grasp on this thread.

    She was NOT ASKED to name all the groups she'd belonged to. She was asked SPECIFICALLY whether she was affiliated with groups that specifically ADVOCATED violence. And was asked ONLY about those groups.

    If she'd have been asked to name EVERY group she'd been a member of, and she'd decided to omit some of them, then the point you keep wanting to make (she should have disclosed them) would make sense. But that wasn't the question.

    The question essentially asked her for three things:
    * Think about every group you've ever been a part of
    * Evaluate each group on the criteria we asked for ("do they advocate violence?")
    * Name the ones that DO advocate violence.

    It's not like she named The Society to Rescue Puppies and deliberately omitted The Society for an Independent Puerto Rico. She wasn't ASKED to disclose groups UNLESS they advocated violence.

    She thought the same thing you do (that they're peaceful groups), which is why she didn't disclose them. Because she wasn't asked to.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 1) by arashi no garou on Friday September 12 2014, @05:59PM

    by arashi no garou (2796) on Friday September 12 2014, @05:59PM (#92524)

    The reason for my confusion is that I've read conflicting articles on this matter. Two days before it broke on SN it was on HN with a different source article, and it's on G+ as well. Lots of different versions of what happened. Not excusing my apparent ignorance, just pointing that out.