LETTERS TO THE EDITOR, Feb. 8
Rights abridged at lawful protest
To the editor:
I want to thank Jim Knipper, father of a student demonstrator, for his letter (The Packet, Jan. 25) supporting the students who provided our community with a public and peaceful demonstration of their social and political concerns on Jan. 20, Inauguration Day. "Students for Peace," a group of high school and college students, arrived at Palmer Square in Princeton at 4 p.m., with the intention to demonstrate peaceably and in silence.
A group of about 15 chose to lie on the ground to represent the loss of life and civil liberties. Signs on their jackets indicated what they were representing: HIV/AIDS victims, victims of torture, victims of the war and the loss of civil and voting rights. The Coalition for Peace Action had a table set up at the site, with literature and petitions for any interested.
Contrary to comments made by the borough’s police captain in local news articles reporting on the event, there was no blockage of the sidewalk, or interference of any kind with traffic, pedestrian or otherwise, in the area. The captain never came to the site. When questioned later by a reporter, he responded, "The three borough police officers on patrol broke up the protest because it was blocking the sidewalk. Also, the group did not have a parade permit that would allow them to stage such an event."
I was present when the police required the group to leave immediately, and at no time did those officers mention that the sidewalk was blocked. That would have been difficult, given that it was not. And, as Mr. Knipper observed, it is rather challenging to parade when one is lying quietly on the ground representing the dead.
The students, adult members of the Coalition for Peace Action and passers-by questioned the officers regarding our basic right to demonstrate peaceably, but Princeton Borough officers clearly stated that those rights are not available on borough property without a permit.
A phone call by the executive director of the Coalition for Peace Action to Professor Frank Askin, an expert on constitutional law at Rutgers Law School,confirmed that the actions of the officers deprived the students of their constitutional rights, and that they are legally allowed to hold posters and distribute literature without a permit. The ACLU has also confirmed these findings. Based on documents from the ACLU, Princeton Borough has been cited repeatedly since 1996 regarding violations to the constitutional rights of individuals within its borders.
A request has been made for an investigation of this incident, and I believe the students deserve to know the outcome of that investigation. We owe much more to these students and all who wish to demonstrate their convictions in a peaceful and compelling way. This was an unfortunate lesson in democracy.
"Dissent is the highest form of patriotism," observed Thomas Jefferson. I want to thank the students for the time and effort they made to remind all of us that actions taken by those who represent us result in deaths, through war or through neglect. Their demonstration obviously was unwelcome by some individuals, but those individuals should question why they were compelled to request the students’ removal, and the police department should provide legal justification.
Anne Blenman
Associate Director
Coalition for Peace Action
Witherspoon Street
Princeton
‘Shop Smart’ enjoys successful debut
To the editor:
The Princeton Education Foundation would like to thank all the shoppers, performers and merchants for their participation in the first annual "Project Shop Smart, Shop Princeton."
Everyone’s effort and generosity were much appreciated, and the community spirit added to the success of the event. We think that this collaboration between the PEF, the Princeton Parent-Teacher Organization Council and the Borough Merchants Association, which began the day after Thanksgiving and ended on Christmas Eve, was a wonderful success, and we look forward to joining the merchants in making this a yearly Princeton event.
We would additionally like to thank Kathie Morolda of Cranbury Station Gallery and Anita Fresolone of Palmer Square Management for all their hard work and enthusiasm.
Our special thanks to the participating enterprises: Go For Baroque, Steppin’ Birkenstock Shoes, Bowhe and Peare, CG Gallery, Craft Cleaners, Cranbury Station Gallery, Giselle Dancewear, Nick Hilton Studio, Hulit’s Shoes, Jazams, Kitchen Kapers, J. McLaughlin, Mehek Restaurant, Micawber Books, The Papery, Pryde Brown Photographs, Subway, Thomas Sweet, Triangle Repro, White Lotus, Wilson House Books and Learning Exrpess.
Alison Fox
Princeton Education Foundation
Jane Murphy
Princeton Education Foundation and Princeton Parent-Teacher Organization Council
Princeton
This year, send a Valentine of Food
To the editor:
We are school volunteers for the Princeton Parent Teachers Association conducting a Valentine’s food drive for the Crisis Ministry of Trenton and Princeton from Feb. 7 through 14. The Crisis Ministry provides canned goods, dry foods and other staples to those truly in crisis in Mercer County.
Most folks send many Valentines to folks they care for. Each of theseValentines could easily cost $3.99. A $3.99 Valentine of Food can feed a Crisis Ministry recipient household for a full day, or even two.
All community members are invited to join our students, families and staff to donate Valentines of Food from Feb. 7 to 14. How?
1) Take cans, boxes or plastic bottles of food staples to any of the following Princeton schools: Community Park, Johnson Park, Littlebrook, Riverside, John Witherspoon, Princeton High School and St. Paul’s School.
2) Donate directly to the Crisis Ministry food drive by sending or taking a check to any of the above schools made out to Crisis Ministry-Food.
3) Purchase one or more $3.99 Valentine Bags of Food at McCaffrey’s Princeton Market. McCaffrey’s will double that price and provide $7.99 worth of food to the Crisis Ministry.
Food can also be brought to the following local supporting churches: NassauPresbyterian, Trinity Episcopal and the Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Princeton.
For more information contact any of us through our schools, or Don Dickason,Crisis Ministry volunteer for the food drive, at (609) 683-4006.
Thank you for helping.
Tina LaPlaca
Community Park Elementary School
Tracy Morgan
John Witherspoon Middle School
Shari Black
Johnson Park Elementary School
Diane Landis Hackett
Littlebrook Elementary School
Gretchen Shankweiler and Neil Lundberg
Princeton High School
Eve Niedergang and Riva Levy
Riverside Elementary School
Princeton
Social Security is denial of freedom
To the editor:
It is time to sort through all the misinformation and scare tactics being applied to Social Security reform these days. Let’s look at the woods, not just individual trees, and apply some common sense to the problem.
We have a system in place at present that is clearly unsustainable in the long run. We have an ever-increasing number of recipients whose longevity is growing rapidly thanks to recent medical advances and new miracle drugs.
We have a shrinking base of people paying into the system per recipients.
Due to the post-war baby boom, we are about to be overwhelmed by a wave of retirees in excess of the normal expectation.
We have a trust fund that is supposed to help pay the retirement checks for this system, but it does not exist. The money in the fund has been spent and replaced with government bonds IOUs. To use these for payment of benefits requires that the taxpayers first redeem them.
Instead of burying our heads in the sand and pretending there is no problem, as the AARP and other liberals proclaim, we should be looking for a long-term solution that is fair to all.
Those already retired or nearing retirement are forced to rely on the system as it is. Part of the solution is to guarantee the benefits for those over age 55, as the president has proposed. For those with more time to adjust, the option to invest part of their tax is vital. It would offer a better return and it would return control of their own money to those who earned it. Most importantly, they could include any remainder in their estates.
I remember my outrage about 60 years ago when I first joined the workforce and started paying the Social Security tax. At that time it was small, just a couple of hundred dollars a year, but it was my money and I did not believe that in a free country the government could impound it without my permission and with no assurance that it would all eventually be returned. My employer was required to match this donation instead of increasing my wages, so that portion is also rightfully mine. Many years later, my sister-in-law reached retirement age, received one Social Security check and then died. A lifetime of enforced savings was taken away when that happened.
I am not incompetent and have always resented being treated as such by my government. If they had asked me whether or not I wished to join this Ponzi plan, I would have no grounds for complaint had I accepted, but the absence of the question has rankled me all my working life.
So why are the liberals so outraged when the president tries to repair the system before it collapses? It would increase our freedom.
For decades, the left has tried to force us to be increasingly dependent on Washington. Consider the power and control that gives them over individuals. By encouraging self-sufficiency, this control is in danger of being loosened and all the years of stealthy effort is in jeopardy. Of course they have to use scare tactics, lies and half-truths to preserve what they have achieved. Does this really surprise anyone?
The fair thing to do is to guarantee continuation of benefits to those already trapped in the system, and to offer a better alternative to those who have time to make better arrangements. Giving people a chance to build a retirement fund of their own in exchange for a somewhat reduced guarantee at an incredibly low rate of return hardly seems harmful to me. Unless you think all your fellow citizens are too stupid to manage their own affairs, it is hard not to favor allowing them the choice.
That is exactly what President Bush is proposing.
T. Burnet Fisher
Snowden Lane
Princeton

