Posted on 11/21/2008 8:16:50 PM PST by BuckeyeTexan
On October 1, 2008, the Ithaca, NY, Common Council declared Ithaca a "Community of Sanctuary" for protestors against the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, but denied sanctuary status to supporters of the wars. Proponents of the sanctuary resolution used a false narrative of "suppressed" anti-war protestors to justify having government protect only locally popular speech content. Similar tactics can be expected nationally, as Democrats use government power to protect only liberal speech under the guise of promoting "fairness."
{Snip}
Nonetheless, the sanctuary city proponents used this false narrative of "suppressed" protestors to support its petition drive. The resolution sought to protect the right of residents "to support lawfully and proactively military personnel and veterans who are organizing to stop the wars in and occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan and all future violations of the United Nations Nuremberg Charters." The resolution further provided that "all other City Officials and all City Employees, as is customary, shall, to the extent permitted by law, respect and not interfere with the lawful activities of military personnel, veterans, and all others who are opposed to the immoral wars in and occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan and all other violations of the United Nations and Nuremberg Charters."
{Snip}
This high-minded verbiage notwithstanding, there were no reported instances of any city employee interfering in anti-war protests. The sanctuary city proponents created a fictitious victim (the non-existent oppressed anti-war protestors) to drive a political agenda.
Recognizing the danger of government protecting only a single political viewpoint, Ithaca Alderman Eric Rosario proposed an amendment to protect all protesters, including those supporting the wars. Rosario openly acknowledged that his amendment would make him "unpopular" and "ridiculed":
RESOLVED, That this Resolution be a reaffirmation of our commitment to the First Amendment, which ensures the rights of the people to freedom of expression and to peaceably assemble; that we are especially cognizant of the importance of protecting this right for the minority opinion, which may or may not be in agreement with sentiments expressed in this Resolution.
A Peace-Now-Ithaca representative argued at the public hearing that the amendment to protect minority opinion "does not take into account the broader social and political reality.... It just waters down the spirit of the resolution because the spirit of it is to actually give an extra boost, an extra protection to people whose rights are being suppressed in practice...." This argument, of course, was completely fallacious. No one protesting against the war was being "suppressed" in Ithaca.
As to the concern that minority opinions needed protection, the Peace-Now-Ithaca representative was dismissive. "Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and so people can go out on the street and say what they think and if they're in the minority they might be mocked, but it's not in the purview of the city council to be concerned about who's being mocked or isn't being mocked...."
The Common Council rejected, in an 8-2 vote, Alderman Rosario's proposed amendment in favor of language dropping any reference to protecting minority opinions. So as it stands now in Ithaca, people wishing to protest against the Iraq and Afghanistan wars are protected against government or other interference, while those who support these policies have no such protection.
We can expect to see more of the Ithaca model of protecting only liberal speech. The Obama campaign's use of prosecutors to intimidate political opponents, e-mail action lists to shut down telephone lines at radio stations, and the use of the "race card in reverse" to silence opponents, does not bode well. Senator Chuck Schumer already has compared conservative talk radio to pornography. Unlike the largely futile, self-aggrandizing actions of the Ithaca Common Council, however, the federal government has the power to do substantial damage to conservative free speech.
ping
Just askin for a whoopin from the courts.
I wouldn’t hold my breath on that one.
My family was originally from Ithaca. I played on the lakefront as a kid. Our summer homes were on the lake. It’s a damn shame. Hopefully the Saudis will build a giant radical mosque there.
Does the Fairness Doctrine apply to NPR?
**Can’t wait for the ACLU to jump all over this!**
Wait all you want ... just .. Don’t HOLD YOUR BREATH!!
This high-minded verbiage notwithstanding, there were no reported instances of any city employee interfering in anti-war protests. The sanctuary city proponents created a fictitious victim (the non-existent oppressed anti-war protesters) to drive a political agenda.and there it is...
the Peoples DemocRATic Republic of Ithaca EVIL!!!
And I thought Berkeley was a lunatic asylum.
This is the problem with intellectuals - they think themselves into a stupor until reality no longer exists in their minds.
I’m so thankful we don’t reside there anymore; but since our son is buried there on 14 right at the edge of town we still get there occasionally to visit his grave site. I’ve seldom seen a place of such intense beauty. What a tragedy that practically all vestige of hope and light have been extinguished as the most insane elements have made Ithaca their meltdown headquarters.
Our son loved Ithaca, but I’m glad he isn’t around to see what it’s become.
Our liberal courts? You serious?
Straight out of 'Atlas Shrugged'.
Amazing.
Is the name of the Peace-Now fascist available?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
