Should the identity of someone requesting a library book ban be protected? San Luis stands up for its water. And, because it's Friday, what do the "Purloined Letter" and The Greenbrier have in common?
What do you think: should the identity of someone that requests a book ban at a public library be private?
Right now, if you borrow from the library, what you borrow and your identity are protected from being disclosed by state law. To quote the CFOIC article below (with the hyperlink left in should you want to see the law):
"The library-user privacy law prohibits publicly supported libraries from disclosing 'any record or other information that identifies a person as having requested or obtained specific materials or service or as otherwise having used the library.'”
But (and I've posted about this in the past, this legal case has been going for a bit now), what is not decided law yet is whether or not someone who requests that a library ban or revisit a specific book or other material is considered a "library user" and thus has their identity protected by this law.
The original case went in favor of the person requesting the ban. The judge there ruled the requestor was protected (the editor of the Crested Butte newspaper sued to see who was requesting that a book in the local Gunnison library be removed), and thus their identity couldn't be shared.
The newspaper folks appealed and the hearing is detailed in the CFOIC article below.
This is a tough one to come to any strong feeling on.
Let me say this. If I asked that a book be banned or removed from my local library, I'd put my name to it. If I took such a step (and as a fan of the First Amendment this would be a noteworthy occurrence to be sure--I can't imagine asking that something be banned) I have no problem in standing by that.
I wonder why anyone would want to hide their identity if they request something be banned. It's suspect in my view.
That being said, however, I am equally suspect of the motives of the editor here. Why does he need or want the identity of the requestor? To what end? Public shaming?
In the end, I'm inclined to say that, were I a judge here, I would vote to protect the identity of the requestor. Not doing so opens doors and allows possibilities I'd rather not have happen. No camel's noses under tents here.
I guess we'll see what the judges decide.
In the meantime, what do you think? Do you have any more clarity on this than I do? I'd love to hear what you think in the comments below.
https://coloradofoic.org/colorado-court-of-appeals-considers-whether-the-statutory-definition-of-library-users-includes-those-who-want-books-banned-or-reclassified/
I'm glad to see that the group in San Luis is banding together to prevent their water being taken to slake the insatiable thirst of the Front Range.
It is high time in this state that the Front Range realizes that the rest of this state is not empty.
It's not empty and it doesn't exist simply to meet the needs of the people moving in to what will eventually be a solid city from Pueblo up to Ft. Collins and within 25 miles +/- of I-25.
If we continue the path we're on, that's what will happen. Take the water from Ag in the rural parts of this state, the land dries up and so do the families that live out here.
https://www.coloradopolitics.com/news/agreement-block-water-export-san-luis-valley-douglas-county/article_5642c8a0-2d77-11ee-a3ee-87a0d82bce26.html
What do the Poe story "Purloined letter"** and the Greenbrier Hotel (WV) have in common?
End of the week and you know what that means: something for fun and, with this post, not related to CURRENT politics.
So back to the question at the top: what do they have in common? Both involve hiding something very important in plain sight. In the "Letter" it was a scandal-generating letter that fell into the wrong hands and, in the case of the Greenbrier, it was a "bunker" (fallout shelter would be more apt, more to follow) intended for Congress.
During Eisenhower's presidency, as the Cold War deepened, he became increasingly interested in Continuity of Government (COG): the idea that, should an atomic attack happen, the United States could have its government come through mostly intact and thus recover faster.
This lead to a big investment in civil defense, planning, and COG bunkers/shelters scattered all around the US. These locations were to be used in the event of a nuclear attack with important officials being shuttled to them.
If your eyebrow is raising at the feasibility of this plan, you're wise to. These days, fuhgeddaboudit. Missiles coming off a sub parked off the East Coast give you maybe 5 minutes' warning. But at the time these shelters were planned, the method of delivery for nukes would be bombers and something like hours of warning time could be reasonably depended on.
Enough time (maybe) to get the President, Vice President and others to safety. Enough time for members of Congress to take a train, a car, a plane from DC down to the mountains of West Virginia and the Greenbrier.
Now, you'll hear it called a bunker, but I said up above that it would be more apt to call it a shelter. I say that (and I'm not the progenitor of this idea--I got it from the Tour Guide) because the structure itself is pretty flimsy. I mean there are feet of concrete and blast doors at the entrances (see pictures 1 and 2 attached), but take it from the mouth of someone who has seen structures that are hardened to blast, heat, shock, and radiation, this is barely hardened at all.
It mainly is just buried under earth to keep fallout from irradiating Congress. On the scale of atomic weapons, this thing is built of cardboard.
In fact, if you look at the simple drawing I've attached, you'll get an idea of what I mean. My first conception of this thing was that it was a bunker deep in the earth under the hotel. Nope. It is actually not that far off the level of the original hotel! It is under the new wing which is built up on a hill behind the original hotel (and whose construction was there to help hide the building of the bunker), but the bunker is just a concrete box sitting inside a hill. Not much protection there from blast!
So, if you were in Congress, this would be where you'd go until the fallout from the attack reached safe levels. There are two halls for the House and Senate to meet. There were dorms. There is a decontamination shower at the entrance, there would be rooms for caucus meetings, a cafeteria, and even rooms for what Congresspeople like most to do: get on the TV or radio to talk to Americans. Sadly, what's missing is room for your family. If you were called here, you'd be alone and wondering how they were doing. That's the price of duty and public service, I suppose.
The tour was very interesting and highly recommended. I put a link to the hotel's tour site below if you're interested in learning more.
Lastly, I want to touch on how this thing stayed secret for as long as it did. As the tour guide said (and as I find reasonable), it was hiding in plain site.
You see, this thing wasn't hidden behind walls with secret knocks to get inside. No. It was advertised as a new, modern, underground conference center and held a medical trade show within a year or two of its opening.
Yes, you read that right. They were holding trade shows in the secret Congressional COG bunker for years! It's just that all the things that would have tipped you off to it being a bunker were masterfully hidden.
--The blast door in pictures 1 and 2 was behind a screen and in a room with some of the worlds (intentionally chosen mind you) ugliest damn wallpaper to make you not want to linger.
--Other things that tipped you off about it being a shelter were hidden behind locked doors that had warning signs like "High Voltage" on them to keep prying eyes out.
--The Dept of Defense men who were there to keep the bunker in order and test its comms (and prep it should the need arise) were employees of the hotel and were sold to everyone as TV repairmen.
I wish I could have shared more pictures with you, but alas, cameras are not allowed past the blast door in the two pictures I could take. Why is that? Modern data storage companies have hired out the bunker (now that it's no longer a secret) for server and file storage and you're not supposed to be taking pictures of that.
Okay, that's about it for now. Have a good Friday!
p.s.
Couple bonus photos.
Picture #3 is of a chandelier in one of the lounges of the Greenbrier. If you're a fan of the movie "Gone With the Wind" you might recognize it. It's actually a prop from that film that the hotel bought and put here.
Picture #4 is also something you may recognize if you're a Civil War history buff. It's the house where Lee surrendered to Grant (they walked up and back down those very steps). Turns out Appomattox isn't far from the hotel and was on my way to the airport.
**An odd bit of trivia from a Poe fan (yours truly). Not many are aware, but Poe was one of the first authors to pioneer what we would call now the Detective Story. His Dupin character here was around long before Holmes. See the links below for some background and the story itself.
https://www.greenbrier.com/Activities-Events/Bunker-Tours-0130.aspx
https://poestories.com/read/purloined
https://www.nps.gov/articles/poe-detectivefiction.htm#:~:text=Edgar%20Allan%20Poe%20created%20a,the%20facts%20of%20the%20case.