How is it that a “robust discussion” on a city council’s agenda of the artistic symbolism of how best to honor our precious liberty and freedom rises to a “statewide misrepresentation of our city?”
Aren’t all citizens free to question the mixed message of the Liberty Bell encased behind an impaling spiked fence — only open to someone with a key?
To me, it reminds me of the fences and armed guards down at our southern border — suggesting liberty only for those entitled to the key.
Why would such a discussion dishonor veterans?
I would think it might make more profound and meaningful what their sacrifices have wrought for us.
Ironically, it just may be that some of the homeless undesirables fenced out from liberty’s representation could be among the many homeless vets in Clallam County.
Are they being dishonored by being fenced out of the bell?
How does a discussion of the symbolism of peace renderings “take away” a community asset?
How does a thoughtful discourse about how to best represent liberty mean that we don’t support our veterans?
The vile, inflammatory and nearly slanderous response to Mayor Sissi Bruch’s attempt to discuss a more profound and patriotic rendering of what the Liberty Bell means dishonored veterans far more.
It denied citizens the freedom of expression for which veterans fought and died — and simply was divisive hysterical flag-waving.
Sylvia Meyer,
Port Angeles