The leftist ideologues behind the International Freedom Center have been banished from Ground Zero.

Even Hillary Clinton bailed out on this ill-conceived elitist project.

But the editors of the New York Times are devastated: Leveling the Freedom Center.

Since late June, it has been clear that Mr. Pataki would no longer support the Freedom Center, except on terms that would render it meaningless. His argument is that the center’s plans are simply too controversial, a notion that was also endorsed by Senator Hillary Clinton earlier this week. It seems to have made no difference that this was an idea Mr. Pataki supported early on, or that the Freedom Center’s plans are almost precisely what the development corporation proposed in its outline for a cultural presence at ground zero. Nor does it seem to have mattered that the protest against the Freedom Center - or, more truthfully, against any cultural presence at the World Trade Center site - was based on false information and a profound fear of free speech.

At the root of that vitriolic protest was one question: “Why here?” Why imagine creating an institution that would celebrate freedom and foster discussion of its meaning, and the meaning of 9/11, within the memorial quadrant of ground zero? Wouldn’t that dishonor the dead? We have never thought so. We believe that the site is sacred to more than death. It is sacred to life and to the principles - as well as the people - attacked there on Sept. 11, 2001. We believe that this country can be made stronger only by free speech. We believe that the power of that site should be used to consider what happened that day and to see what lessons we can derive from it, not only to mourn the dead.