SWJED - thanks
goesh - I agree anthropology and anthropologists have done some horrible things. However I disagree that this is relevant to the current issue under discussion.
Van-
The cynic in me has to ask: is there really a problem, or is there a bunch of Anthropology grad students who just realized that to do field work, they'd be separated from comprehensive medical care, the internet, flush toilets, health inspected restaurants, etc, and were looking for an excuse to stay at their nice comfy university? (I know I'm going to get flamed for saying this, but how many of y'all were thinking it?)
To become an Anthro. Prof. you would need to do some serious fieldwork. Where you do it is your choice (one of my fav. anthropologists did his fieldwork with the Vice Lords in 1960's Chicago, another did his with crack dealers in Harlem).

Steve Blair
Oh I have nothing against people getting anthropology degrees and going to work for the US government or getting funding from the government.
What I do have a problem with is how certain Anthropologists acted during Vietnam. My understanding of this is limited so I could be wrong but what I think happened is:
They worked for the US gov't but told no one (neither the uni's nor their informants). In their fieldwork they figured out specifically and generally who should be high priority anti-communist targets and then the US Military went in and killed those specific people and general people who fit the profile. If they want to do this fine, but they should do it as private citizens not by using their unis and the AAA as a shield.
I believe it is still a matter of controversy as to which anthrologists in S.E. Asia during Vietnam did what and many people still have clouds over their heads.

As for the program to send students through school, regardless of if I am for or against it I think the US Gov't did a horrible job on PR and selling it in an intelligent manner. They could also have made a statement about how the students would not spy on the profs.