Yank rag demands treason trials for war dissenters
Unbelievable | 09.02.2003 01:40
"In an editorial yesterday, the editors of the New York Sun, a conservative newspaper founded last year, call on New York City to obstruct a protest against a potential war in Iraq for as long as possible and to monitor the protestors for "an eventual treason prosecution." This breathtaking article is a direct attack on the free speech rights of every American."
New York Sun suggests treason prosecution for free speech (2/7)
By Brendan Nyhan
Since Sept. 11, 2001, we have documented many instances in which pundits and politicians have tried to demonize dissent, suggesting that it is unpatriotic and even that it aids the enemy. But none has gone so far as to suggest an actual prosecution for treason simply for voicing one's political views - until now.
In an editorial yesterday, the editors of the New York Sun, a conservative newspaper founded last year, call on New York City to obstruct a protest against a potential war in Iraq for as long as possible and to monitor the protestors for "an eventual treason prosecution." This breathtaking article is a direct attack on the free speech rights of every American.
The Sun begins with this paean to obstruction of the constitutional right to political protest:
Mayor Bloomberg and Police Commissioner Kelly are doing the people of New York and the people of Iraq a great service by delaying and obstructing the anti-war protest planned for February 15. The longer they delay in granting the protesters a permit, the less time the organizers have to get their turnout organized, and the smaller the crowd is likely to be. And we wouldn't want to overstate the matter, but, at some level, the smaller the crowd, the more likely that President Bush will proceed with his plans to liberate Iraq. And the more likely, in that case, that the Iraqi people will be freed and the citizens of New York will be rescued from the threat of an Iraqi-aided terrorist attack.
As the Sun goes on to say, the city objects not to the demonstration itself, but to the demonstrators' plan to "march down First Avenue near the United Nations," which would obstruct traffic and require police protection. But the editors' logic is clear -- irrespective of these factors, it is desirable to obstruct free speech rights in order to advance a particular political cause. No matter that public officials are obligated not to discriminate between groups in this way. This shows a willful disregard for the legal principles of free speech, though the editors grudgingly concede later in the piece that the demonstrators "probably" have a right to hold their protest.............
More here...
http://www.spinsanity.org/post.html?2003_02_02_archive.html#90291559
By Brendan Nyhan
Since Sept. 11, 2001, we have documented many instances in which pundits and politicians have tried to demonize dissent, suggesting that it is unpatriotic and even that it aids the enemy. But none has gone so far as to suggest an actual prosecution for treason simply for voicing one's political views - until now.
In an editorial yesterday, the editors of the New York Sun, a conservative newspaper founded last year, call on New York City to obstruct a protest against a potential war in Iraq for as long as possible and to monitor the protestors for "an eventual treason prosecution." This breathtaking article is a direct attack on the free speech rights of every American.
The Sun begins with this paean to obstruction of the constitutional right to political protest:
Mayor Bloomberg and Police Commissioner Kelly are doing the people of New York and the people of Iraq a great service by delaying and obstructing the anti-war protest planned for February 15. The longer they delay in granting the protesters a permit, the less time the organizers have to get their turnout organized, and the smaller the crowd is likely to be. And we wouldn't want to overstate the matter, but, at some level, the smaller the crowd, the more likely that President Bush will proceed with his plans to liberate Iraq. And the more likely, in that case, that the Iraqi people will be freed and the citizens of New York will be rescued from the threat of an Iraqi-aided terrorist attack.
As the Sun goes on to say, the city objects not to the demonstration itself, but to the demonstrators' plan to "march down First Avenue near the United Nations," which would obstruct traffic and require police protection. But the editors' logic is clear -- irrespective of these factors, it is desirable to obstruct free speech rights in order to advance a particular political cause. No matter that public officials are obligated not to discriminate between groups in this way. This shows a willful disregard for the legal principles of free speech, though the editors grudgingly concede later in the piece that the demonstrators "probably" have a right to hold their protest.............
More here...
http://www.spinsanity.org/post.html?2003_02_02_archive.html#90291559
Unbelievable
Homepage:
http://www.spinsanity.org/post.html?2003_02_02_archive.html#90291559
Comments
Display the following 2 comments