The Lies, Distortions and Fabrications of F.A.I.R.

The Federation for American Immigration Reform (“FAIR”) continues to be treated by the mainstream media as if it were a legitimate and reliable source of information. Eristic Ragemail has previously posted articles where the media will quote FAIR without elaborating on its extremist elements and more importantly on its web of lies, distortion and outright fabrications. If one has the stomach to peruse FAIR’s website, one will see a panoply of claims, all of which lack hard empirical proof or are outright fabrications of the nativist imagination.

Take for example the claim, prominently posted on all of FAIR’s web pages, that the “Census Bureau’s Projection of U.S. population in 2050 because of today’s mass immigration: 420 million.” (emphasis added) One is led to believe that the growth in U.S. population, currently at 300 million, is the result of “mass illegal immigration.” This canard is in no way supported by the Census Bureau. While it is true that the demographics of the country will continue to change, this is due in large measure to the graying of the baby boomer generation. According to the Census Bureau, the population of the U.S. will increase to 419.9 million in 2050. At that rate we would still not reach the current European Union population of 494 million (which is half our size geographically) and we would remain one of the least densely populated countries in the world.

Similarly, the FAIR website asserts, contrary to most scholarly estimates, that the current population of undocumented immigrants numbers 13 million. The well-respected Pew Research Center flatly controverts FAIR’s numbers.

As previously reported, the Center’s analysis of the March 2005 CPS shows that there were an estimated 11.1 million unauthorized migrants in the United States a year ago. Based on analysis of other data sources that offer indications of the pace of growth in the foreign-born population, the Center developed an estimate of 11.5 to 12 million for the unauthorized population as of March 2006. A full report on the estimates including a description of the methodology can be found in: Size and Characteristics of the Unauthorized Migrant Population in the U.S.: Estimates Based on the March 2005

Current Population Survey (http://pewhispanic.org/reports/report.php?ReportID=61 ). As well, they blame immigrants for overcrowding schools, clogging roads, swallowing up open space, taxing the environment, and raising the cost of living for all. Never mind that the United States consumes vastly more resources than any other country in the world and has been doing so long before the current wave of nativists started looking for scapegoats. In any event, blaming sprawl and congestion on immigrants is simply ludicrous.

A perennial canard of the nativists, and of FAIR, is the wholly untrue claim that immigrants overload the welfare system (such as it is). Undocumented immigrants are ineligible for welfare no matter how poor they may be. In fact, undocumented workers, contribute more in taxes and social security payments that they will ever see. Rather than being a burden, undocumented workers actually subsidize the Social Security fund and other social programs.

One can dissect almost every issue raised by FAIR and demonstrate its falsity or distortion. So why does FAIR continue to be trusted as a source of reliable information when so much of what they put out is patently untrue? The answer lies partly in the nativist network that FAIR and other nativist groups such as NumbersUSA have built.

The Washington D.C.-based Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) founded in 1979, claims to work to “improve border security, to stop illegal immigration, and to promote immigration levels consistent with the national interest.” Possibly due to its large size (it claims over 250,000 members and supporters), D.C. location, and exposure, elected officials look to the organization for input. To that end, FAIR boasts that it “has been called to testify on immigration bills before Congress more than any organization in America.” FAIR is more nuanced in its use of language than other anti-immigrant groups and it has been used as a resource by officials, the media and within anti-immigration policy circles. However, a close look reveals a pattern of extremist affiliations and a strategy of founding and empowering smaller groups that promote xenophobia.

Immigrants Targeted: Extremist Rhetoric Moves into the Mainstream: Groups: The Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), ADL Report

Prominent in all of FAIR’s postings are click and send faxes to the media and to elected representatives. Hyperbolic and alarmist language foments their readers to save our nation. Needless to say, the pro-migrant web has not employed such measures.

More critically, why do such alarmist messages resonate with a portion of the American public? I believe, as I have stated in previous posts, that the current nativist trend is actually thinly veiled animus animus against the Latino population.

ADL's new online report, Immigrants Targeted: Extremist Rhetoric Moves into the Mainstream documents the rhetoric employed by groups that routinely position themselves as legitimate, mainstream advocates against illegal immigration in America.

A closer look at the public record reveals that many ostensibly mainstream anti-illegal immigration organizations – including those who testified before Congress or frequently appeared on news programs – promote virulent anti-Hispanic and anti-immigrant rhetoric. Some groups have fostered links with extremist groups.

The real victims in this are Hispanic-Americans and other immigrants who are being unfairly targeted, demeaned and stereotyped."

The report cites several key tactics used by anti-immigrant groups, including:

• Describing immigrants as "third world invaders," who come to America to destroy our heritage, "colonize" the country and attack our "way of life." This charge is used against Hispanics, Asians and other people of color.
• Using terminology that describes immigrants as part of "hordes" that "swarm" over the border. This dehumanizing language has become common.
• Portraying immigrants as carriers of diseases like leprosy, tuberculosis, Chagas disease (a potentially fatal parasitic disease), dengue fever, polio, malaria.
• Depicting immigrants as criminals, murderers, rapists, terrorists, and a danger to children and families.
• Propagating conspiracy theories about an alleged secret "reconquista" plot by Mexican immigrants to create a "greater Mexico" by seizing seven states in the American Southwest that once belonged to Mexico.

What groups like FAIR are really concerned about is the growth of the Latino population in this country, no matter how legitimate that population may be. This is borne out by their history of of racism and extremist associations. For example, the current posting on the extremist website, VDare is an anti-immigrant posting by FAIR board member and extremist activist, Daniel A. Collins.

According Hatewatch Intelligence Report, of the Southern Poverty Law Center, Collins has a history of racism:

Donald Collins, a member of both FAIR's board of directors and its board of advisers, has his own ties to white supremacy. Collins posts frequently to a hate website called Vdare.com, which is named after Virginia Dare (said to be the first white child born in the New World) and publishes the work of white supremacists and anti-Semites. Collins also has been published in The Journal of Social, Political and Economic Studies, a periodical run by longtime academic racist Roger Pearson. (Pearson founded the Eugenics Society in 1963 and worked with at least one former SS officer in England. He is also the recipient of several Pioneer Fund grants.)

Collins is by no means the only bad apple of the FAIR enterprise. FAIR was founded by people who admired the eugenics practiced by the Nazis and who have well-cemented ties to white supremacist organizations.

At the center of the Tanton web is the nonprofit Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), the most important organization fueling the backlash against immigration. Founded by Tanton in 1979, FAIR has long been marked by anti-Latino and anti-Catholic attitudes. It has mixed this bigotry with a fondness for eugenics, the idea of breeding better humans discredited by its Nazi associations. It has accepted $1.2 million from an infamous, racist eugenics foundation. It has employed officials in key positions who are also members of white supremacist groups. Recently, it has promoted racist conspiracy theories about Mexico's secret designs on the American Southwest and an alternative theory alleging secret plans to merge the United States, Mexico and Canada. Just last February, a senior FAIR official sought "advice" from the leaders of a racist Belgian political party.

“The Teflon Nativists,” SPLC Hatewatch,

It's no surprise that Tanton employs people with similar views. His long-time deputy, for example, is Wayne Lutton, who works out of Tanton's Petoskey offices and edits the journal, The Social Contract, published by Tanton's press. Lutton is not just linked to white supremacist ideas, many of which he publishes in his journal — he has actually held leadership positions in four white nationalist hate groups: the Council of Conservative Citizens, the National Policy Institute, and The Occidental Quarterly and American Renaissance, both racist publications. Lutton has written for the Journal of Historical Review, which specializes in Holocaust denial. Early on, Lutton and Tanton collaborated on The Immigration Invasion, a nativist screed that has been seized by Canadian border officials as hateful contraband.

"The Teflon Nativists",

FAIR's current media director, Ira Mehlman, was an adviser in 2001 and 2002, and his essay, "Grand Delusions: Open Borders Will Destroy Society," was published in the journal's pages. Today, FAIR still advertises The Social Contract on its website, saying the journal "offers in-depth studies on immigration, population, language, assimilation, environment, national unity and balance of individual rights and civil responsibilities."

"The Teflon Nativists,"

[FAIR organizer, Joe] Turner made one of his more controversial remarks, amounting to a defense of white separatism. "I can make the argument that just because one believes in white separatism that that does not make them a racist," Turner wrote in 2005. "I can make the argument that someone who proclaims to be a white nationalist isn't necessarily a white supremacist. I don't think that standing up for your ‘kind' or ‘your race' makes you a bad person." The Southern Poverty Law Center has listed Save Our State as a hate group since it appeared in 2005.

Turner's predecessor in the FAIR organizing post, Rick Oltman, was cut from the same cloth. Oltman has been described as a member of the Council of Conservative Citizens (CCC) in the publications of that hate group, which is directly descended from the segregationist White Citizens Councils and has described blacks as "a retrograde species of humanity." He has spoken at at least one of the CCC's conferences and has taken part in one of its rallies. And he wasn't alone.

"The Teflon Nativists"

You can also watch this You Tube video put out by SPLC.

You Tube Video SPLC on FAIR

So the issue remains, with overwhelming evidence of racism, extremism and hate, why does the media continue to turn to FAIR as if it were a legitimate organization instead of a product of the David Duke mindset? This is a question that should be answered by the media and in the spirit of fair play I invite readers to fax, mail and phone these very media representatives with that question. Contact information is listed below.

Contact the Media

See that your opinion matters too!!!

CNN
Mr. Jim Walton
President CNN Worldwide
1 CNN Center
Atlanta, GA 30303
Fax 404-878-1727
Email: jim.walton@turner.com

Mr. Jonathan Klein
President CNN U.S.
1 Time Warner Center 5th Floor
New York, NY 10019
Email: jonathan.klein@cnn.com

Mr. Richard Davis
Executive Vice President of News Standards and Practices
1 CNN Center
Atlanta, GA 30303
Fax 404-827-5453

Viewer Response Line/Comments
Call 212-275-7800 ask for Viewer Response Line

FOX NEWS
Mr. Roger Ailes
Chairman and CEO
1211 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10036
Email roger.ailes@foxnews.com

Mr. Bill Shine
Senior Vice President Programming
1211 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10036
Email bill.shine@foxnews.com

Mr. Brian Lewis
Executive Vice President Corporate Communications
1211 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10036
Fax 212-819-0816
Email brian.lewis@foxnews.com

Public Feedback
Yourcomments@foxnews.com

MSNBC
Mr. Phil Griffin
Senior Vice President of News
30 Rockefeller Plaza 3rd Floor
New York, NY 10112
Fax 212-664-2264
Email phil.griffin@nbc.com

NOTES

In addition to founding FAIR, John Tanton has also opened up the following front organizations to give his extremist views a respectable veneer.

*American Immigration Control Foundation
AICF, 1983, funded

*American Patrol/Voice of Citizens Together
1992, funded

California Coalition for Immigration Reform
CCIR, 1994, funded

Californians for Population Stabilization
1996, funded (founded separately in 1986)

Center for Immigration Studies
CIS, 1985, founded and funded

Federation for American Immigration Reform
FAIR, 1979, founded and funded

NumbersUSA
1996, founded and funded

Population-Environment Balance
1973, joined board in 1980

Pro English
1994, founded and funded

ProjectUSA
1999, funded

*The Social Contract Press
1990, founded and funded

U.S. English
1983, founded and funded

U.S. Inc.
1982, founded and funded

Traffic Stop: Car Registration and National ID Card Please

Many anti-immigrant groups have embraced the use of a National ID card as another means to enforce immigration laws. The U.S. has long resisted such a measure as an unnecessary infringement on civil liberties and personal privacy. Congress has however passed legislation that would make such a national ID a reality. The U.S. Congress has passed the REAL ID Act of 2005, which mandates federal requirements for driver's licenses. Critics point out that it would make driver's licenses into de facto national IDs. The Department of Homeland Security has already signaled its intent to make wide use of the card for a wide variety of purposes.

Secretary Chertoff indicated that the REAL ID card would be used for a wide variety of purposes, unrelated to the law that authorized the system, including employment verification and immigration determination. He also indicated that the agency would not prevent the use of the card by private parties for non-government purposes. As part of the cost-saving effort, Homeland Security has decided not to encrypt the data that will be stored on the card.

In an opinion column written by Secretary Chertoff after the publication of the final rule, he said, "embracing REAL ID" would mean it would be used to "cash a check, hire a baby sitter, board a plane or engage in countless other activities." The technology already exists to encode such a card with vast amounts of information and to tie the card to a wide array of databases. Imagine, a traffic stop where your “driver’s license” card does not merely indicate whether you have a valid driver’s license and any outstanding warrants. The card would indicate your social security number, whether you are late on child support payments, all previous residences, books and videos that you checked out, rented or purchased, internet-browsing habits, amount of liquor purchased, credit report, associations to which you belong, your religion and places you have recently visited. Needless to say the card would be encoded with your fingerprint for quick identification.

Soon after the 2001 World Center attacks, Larry Ellison, head of California-based software company Oracle Corporation, called for the development of a national identification system and offered to donate the technology to make this possible. He proposed ID cards with embedded digitized thumbprints and photographs of all legal residents in the U.S.

Such a card could track your movements as easily as a turnpike pass. Should you wish to enter any Federal or State government building, the card would be required for entry and would immediately disclose all of the foregoing information. It is a given that any technology once unleashed will not be contained. Any and all foreseeable uses that such a card carries will be too tempting to both government and private agencies to forego. Just think of the multitude of uses made with your social security number.

As if the Real ID Act of 2005 were not enough, anti-immigrant advocates are now wanting to expand Federal power in the workplace in the form of the Save Act of 2007 which would require employers to verify 130 million workers against a Social Security database over the next four years. The Save Act and the the Real ID Act have been opposed by numerous civil rights groups. The Electronic Privacy Information Center has come out strongly against the Real ID Act:

EPIC explained that the Department of Homeland Security's REAL ID system includes few protections for individual privacy and security in its massive national identification database. It harms national security by creating yet another "trusted" credential for criminals to exploit. The Department of Homeland Security has faced so many obstacles with the REAL ID system that the agency now plans an implementation deadline of 2017 -- nine years later than the 2008 statutory deadline. It is an unfunded mandate that would cost billions, with the burden ultimately being placed on the individual taxpayer.

Technical experts familiar with the challenges of privacy protection and identification presented the Department of Homeland Security with a variety of recommendations that would have minimized the risks of the REAL ID system. The DHS made some modifications, but left the essential system in place. As REAL ID currently stands, the costs are many and the benefits are few. EPIC also detailed the State rebellion against REAL ID.

Civil rights and civil liberties groups have come out against the these two pieces of legislation including, The National Council of Jewish Women, the ACLU, The Church World Service, The American Immigration Lawyers Association, The Catholic Campaign for Immigration Reform, The American Jewish Committee, HIAS, as well as employer groups, The Society of American Florists, The Associated General Contractors of America and unions such as The Service Employees International Union. One need not be pro-immigrant to oppose such burdensome and overbearing legislation. Clearly, Congress and the Federal Government has overstepped its bounds and is threatening long-cheris hed civil rights and liberties.

eristic ragemail

Confirmation of Federal Abuse of Information

For those who think that I am engaging in a bit of paranoia, I invite you to check out Ryan Singel’s excellent article in the current issue of Wired magazine entitled, “Secret Court Repeatedly Questions FBI Wiretap Network.” From Singel’s article:

Does the FBI track cellphone users' physical movements without a warrant? Does the Bureau store recordings of innocent Americans caught up in wiretaps in a searchable database? Does the FBI's wiretap equipment store information like voicemail passwords and bank account numbers without legal authorization to do so?….

Separately, the secret court questioned if the FBI was using pen register orders to collect digits dialed after a call is made, potentially including voicemail passwords and account numbers entered into bank-by-phone applications.

Using a pen register order, the FBI can force a phone company to turn over records of who a person calls, or is called by, simply by asserting the information would be relevant to an investigation. But existing case law holds that those so-called "post-cut-through dialed digits" count as the content of a communication, and thus to collect that information, the FBI would need to get a full-blown wiretapping warrant based on probable cause.

On August 7 2006, Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly took the extraordinary step of ordering the FBI to report (.pdf) on how its sophisticated phone wiretapping system, known as Digital Collection System, handled those extra digits and whether it stored them in a centralized data-mining depository known as Telephone Application.

The documents (.pdf) show that the majority of FBI offices surveyed internally were collecting that information without full-blown wiretap orders, especially in classified investigations. The documents also indicate that the information was being uploaded to the FBI's central repository for wiretap recordings and phone records, where analysts can data-mine the records for decades.

Clearly, the FBI has been using the panoply of electronic surveillance techniques at its disposal. For example, your movements can now be tracked simply by obtaining your cell phone number. Wired Magazine has written of the abuses carried out by U.S. Intelligence agencies against U.S. citizens. You can check out other articles, here, here, here,here,here and here.

The Electronic Fronteir Foundation has done an excellent job of reporting on govenment abuses and collecting government documents via FOIA requests and litigation. It is time for concerned citizens to push back and rein in the unbridled powers ceded to Federal agencies by chicken hawks who treat this country like some third world autocracy.

Spain: Example of Enlightened Immigration Policy

Spain has a population of 40 million and is geographically 1/20th the size of the United States. Since 1985, Spain has welcomed and granted legal status to 600,000 immigrants. In 1987, after the United States enacted comprehensive immigration reform, 2.7 million immigrants were granted legal status. The United States has a population of 300,000,000 and is 20 times larger than Spain. Unlike the United States, Spain encounters no nativist or anti-immigrant outcries of any significance. To the contrary, the Spanish seem quite willing to accept the newly arrived immigrants, including those from Africa. A portion of these immigrants come from Latin America and share a common language and culture. Hence, it could be argued that such immigrants are more easily assimilated into Spanish society. Even taking account the cultural kinship, the Spanish seem extraordinarily tolerant in welcoming immigrants. This is in marked contrast to other European countries, and significantly to the United States, where nativists constantly harp that the country cannot absorb so “many” immigrants.

According to the New York Times,

No country has run more legalization programs than Spain, which has carried out six since 1985. As recently as a decade ago, immigrants made up less than 2 percent of the population. Now they are more than 10 percent. About 40 percent come from eastern and northern Europe; 38 percent come from Latin America; and 20 percent from Africa.

Despite the rapid change, until recently there was little political conflict, with legalizations occurring under both conservative and socialist governments. Spain even offers immigrants free health insurance, whether they are legal or not.

“The attitude toward unauthorized migrants is much more relaxed than in the United States,” said Joaquín Arango, a sociologist at Complutense University in Madrid.

The acceptance has been attributed to newfound prosperity, the need for workers, the progressive culture of post-Franco Spain and the shared language with Latin Americans, which spares Spain a major source of tension in the United States.

“Border Crossings: Spain, Like U.S., Grapples with Immigration,” by Jason DeParle, The New York Times, June 10, 2008. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/10/world/europe/10migrate.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&hp

Did you catch that: immigrants make up 10 percent of the Spanish population. A similar percentage of immigrants in the United States would amount to 30 million people. Keep in mind that the density of the Spain is considerably higher than that of the United States.

Historically, nativism in the United States has had a strongly anti-Catholic element. In fact, the central part of Harvard nativist, Samuel Huntington’s argument against Latin American immigration is the fact that they come from Roman Catholic countries. (Huntington, like many nativists ignores the fact that, well over a third to as much as half of Latin Americans, are now Evangelical Protestants.) Huntington argues that Catholic immigrants will change our Protestant work ethic and culture. Needless to say, this argument is lacking rock-hard empirical evidence.

What Spain demonstrates is that a society can absorb very large numbers of immigrants without social disruption. I would argue that the repressive Federal policies currently being carried out against immigrants in the United States are much more socially disruptive than legalization of undocumented workers. We, who have prided ourselves as a tolerant society, might well take a chapter from the Spanish on how to treat immigrants in our midst.

If you liked this post, don't forget to subscribe to my RSS feeds. Or you can
get my posts delivered to your inbox directly, by subscribing to my feeds by email.

And now for color commentary we turn to Nazi apologist, Pat Buchanan

By now, most informed people know that Patrick Buchanan holds some pretty extreme views. Volumes of material (much of it penned by Buchanan; see citations below) attest to the fact that Buchanan is an anti-Semitic, racist, xenophobe and Nazi apologist. His most recent work,“Churchill, Hitler, and "The Unnecessary War": How Britain Lost the Empire and the West Lost the World,” has as its central thesis that had, we accommodated Hitler, as he sought to regain the lands “rightfully belonging to Germany,” or let him take Poland, we could have avoided the Second World War. Most reviewers of Buchanan’s opus have indulged in the “Great Man” machinations of Churchill, Hitler, Roosevelt and other leaders of the time, which goes something like this: had Churchill not been such a drunk he might have seen reason and not proclaimed victory at all costs. Absent from most such commentary, is the degradation of the Weimar Republic into a monstrous set of codes and laws that would eventually lead to the horrors of the Holocaust. Whatever accommodation may have been accorded to Hitler in his nation-grabbing, it cannot be gainsaid that the Nazis would have exacted a horrific human toll on the nations that they controlled (as they, in fact, did). God have mercy on the Jews, Gypsies, leftists, mentally ill, homosexuals, dissidents and the rest of the human species that the Nazis considered disposable detritus in the countries that the West ceded to Hitler. No amount of appeasement would have salved this savagery.

So the question that comes to my mind, and I wonder why it doesn’t to others’ minds, is why is this racist, neo-Nazi given so much real estate in the mainstream media? (Buchanan already hangs with the retrograde racists and nativists that inhabit the VDare website: a gathering place for extremist nutwings.) I will grant that Buchanan is possessed of a considerably keener intellect than fellow travelers, Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, Lou Dobbs and the very mediocre, Glen Beck. (Although, these other nutwings are not pinch-hitting for Hitler.) But shouldn’t someone say, hey this Buchanan guy is way out of the mainstream, as in David Duke/Hal Turner territory, Holocaust denier terrain, and perhaps he should find an outlet that does not carry the imprimatur of Conventional Wisdom. He needs to crawl under the same rock that houses the KKK, the Order and the Aryan Brotherhood. We know that Fox News is merely a mouthpiece for Rupert Murdoch’s right wing views, so his appearances come as no surprise. But in spite of his well-documented history of extremist views, Buchanan is featured in such mainstream, even liberal outlets, as MSNBC and PBS’ the McLaughlin Report. No such accommodation is made for left-wing commentators such as Alexander Cockburn or Noam Chomsky. One can only conclude that left-wingers must use their own channels while extreme right-wingers are always welcome in the corporate media. Self-evident perhaps but frightful nonetheless.

Citations

Books by Buchanan

Churchill, Hitler, and "The Unnecessary War": How Britain Lost Its Empire and the West Lost the World by Patrick J. Buchanan (Hardcover - May 27, 2008).

Day of Reckoning: How Hubris, Ideology, and Greed Are Tearing America Apart by Patrick J. Buchanan (Hardcover - Nov 27, 2007).

The Great Betrayal: How American Sovereignty and Social Justice Are Being Sacrificed to.. by Patrick J. Buchanan (Hardcover - April 1, 1998).

State of Emergency: The Third World Invasion and Conquest of America by Patrick J. Buchanan (Hardcover - Aug 22, 2006).

Conservative votes, liberal victories: Why the right has failed by Patrick J Buchanan (Hardcover - 1975).

Where the Right Went Wrong: How Neoconservatives Subverted the Reagan Revolution and Hijacked the Bush Presidency by Patrick J. Buchanan (Paperback - April 21, 2005).

Citations:

Anti-Defamation League: Pat Buchanan: In His Own Words

As an author, media figure, and political commentator, Patrick Buchanan publicly espouses racist, anti-Semitic, anti-Israel and anti-immigrant views. At one time an influential staff member in the Nixon and Reagan Administrations, Buchanan has gone on to write a number of books and articles that focus on the decline of Western civilization due to what he refers to as the “invasion” of non-European immigrants in the United States and Europe. His books, along with his weekly appearances on NBC’s The McLaughlin Group, have given him substantial mainstream exposure. Buchanan has affiliated himself with extremists in the United States and abroad, including deceased racist Sam Francis and the leaders of the Vlaams Belang, a xenophobic, racist political party in Belgium.

http://www.adl.org/special_reports/buchanan_own_words/buchanan_intro.asp

Pat Buchanan: Nazi Sympathizer*? , Posted by GayPatriotWest at 2:41 pm - May 22, 2008 ; Gay Patriot: the Internet home for the American gay conservative. http://www.gaypatriot.net/2008/05/22/pat-buchanan-nazi-sympathizer/

Pat Buchanan Is A Nazi Sympathizer, by Doug Mataconis @ 3:04 pm on May 20, 2008; Below the Beltway Blog. http://belowthebeltway.com/2008/05/20/pat-buchanan-is-a-nazi-sympathizer/.

“Anger on the Right: Pat Buchanan’s Venomous Crusade,” An ADL Special Research Report, Anti-Defamation League, 1991. http://www.adl.org/special_reports/pb_archive/pb_1991rpt.pdf

“Just Who and What is Patrick J. Buchanan?” by SJ Reidhead on Thu 10 Aug 2006 10:42 PM MDT, The Subway Canaries (a conservative blog). (many citations contained therein). http://subwaycanaries.blogharbor.com/blog/_archives/2006/8/10/2190994.html.

“Pat Buchanan's Revisionist Fantasy,” Washington Post Review of “The Unnecessary War,” By Robert Dallek, Tuesday, October 19, 1999; Page A19. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPcap/1999-10/19/057r-101999-idx.html.

“Hawking Racism: Pat Buchanan's latest book is a white nationalist screed. But that hasn't stopped it from climbing the best-seller charts,” by Alexander Zaitchik, Southern Poverty Law Center HateWatch Intelligence Report, Winter 2006. http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=718

If you liked this post, don't forget to subscribe to my RSS feeds. Or you can
get my posts delivered to your inbox directly, by subscribing to my feeds by email.

The Chicago Tribune Gets it Wrong: Drawing moral equivalency between haters and humanists.

The Chicago Tribune recently published an article by Antonio Olivo, entitled “Immigration debate grows from Web roots: Blogs, forums rife with opinions from advocates, opponents.” The article did a moderately decent job of describing the push-back that the pro-migrant netroots community has given the nativists that have dominated the immigration debate on the web. Unfortunately, in an apparent feign at neutrality, Tribune reporter, Olivo drew a moral equivalency between the nativist screamers and the the pro-migrant blogs. Although, well-intentioned, this equivalency is a mirage of the journalistic imagination. A great many nativists have hate and racism as their primary agenda, whilst most of the pro-migrant sites are penned by human rights advocates, morally disturbed religious advocates and a sincere regard for the well-being of the mostly-helpless undocumented immigrant community. For greater insight into the debate I invite readers to check out Nazua’s posting, “ humanists vs. nativists” at the Sanctuary website. (http://thesanctuary.soapblox.net/showDiary.do;jsessionid=07764A6D53A9FFC072BC50B4B08C3576?diaryId=193)

The moral equivalency drawn by the article may make for good journalistic pugilism, “browns v. whites” but it in no way reflects the reality of a community bent on intolerance, the nativists and a community advocating for human and civil rights, the humanists. As more amply articulated by Nazua:

Oddly, the right-wing ALI-PAC is quoted by the Chicago Tribune and allowed to conclude and frame the dialogue online as "You've got [militant Latinos] posting 'Kill all whites' and you've got white nationals over there posting 'Kill all browns.' It's out of control. It's crazy."

Pretty impressive, eh? They really ARE the voice of moderation, aren't they? These sanity-minded "conservative" sites. We're so lucky ALI-PAC is so respected in the mainstream press. No wonder they are given so much weight in the Tribune's story. And now the mainstream press is positioning UMX and Citizen Orange as opposites. And so the battle lines are drawn.

Well, let's look into that.

What do sites like Citizen Orange and UMX (and icirr.org and The Sanctuary and Xicanopwr.com and zuky.net and Latino Politico) have in common?

Human rights for all! Humane consideration for ALL, despite document status. It's that simple.

We of the SanctuarySphere are for the end of exploitation of the weak and the poor and the unrecognized. We want to give them a fair and legal process; we respect their needs as well as our needs as well as those of the environment. We understand we owe many of them for our economy. Were they all to vanish, we'd plunge into a depression and be missing many services and foods we take for granted.

We of the SanctuarySphere are concerned about the hungry and mistreated and scared mothers and children and the poor who are caught in a trap, wedged in an abyss between labor's demands, their own needs and wants, racist and nativist hate, and the government's apathy.

We of the SanctuarySphere advocate a generous, humanist self-aware approach that understands the connection between living and eating and farming and economy and health and equality and positivity and all our paths, which must by necessity run toward the same destination.

Okay, so it's not exactly "Kill All Whites," but it is—to my mind—what girds and gives breath to the "Pro-Migrant" approach.

Even though ALI-PAC's William Gheen is allowed to position his site as some sort of centrist refuge of sanity, nobody after the Bush years believes that right wing sentiment is the center. And nobody who knows ALI-PAC falls for that, either.

What does a site like ALI-PAC espouse?

Well, today the posts bear titles like Lets push for a new flag law, Diversity is strength…and backwardness!, Indians from India: Suddenly they all over?, and Michelle Obama and Louis Farrakhan Take On Whitey.

Okay, so far so good. That is opposite my stance. I am more concerned with a child's health should there be a need to consider medical attention, than I am with their citizenship status.

Random quote from the masters of moderation and balance, alipac.us. —

Yes, something IS happening! Despite the malice and racism of the illegals and their supporters, MORE American flags are popping up EVERYWHERE in illegal-alien refuge city Dallas, TX! On cars, trucks, in stores, businesses, restaurants, churches, you NAME it! And, more PEOPLE are carrying American flags in their purses, bags, backpacks, wheelchairs, even BABY strollers! I ALWAYS have Old Glory with me when I protest for our persecuted fellow patriots Ramos and Compean! —

joazinha, I Saw A Sight That Warmed My Heart

Remember. These people see "Old Glory" sort of in the way that they see garlic to vampires. They think that "ALIENZ" Hate America, and "open borders" sites (as they call us) "the enemy," UMX and Citizen Orange are "anti-American." So in their minds, the presence of an American Flag = Anti-migrant sentiment. I know. It's cute!

(The Sanctuary. Citation below.)

I really do not know if The Tribune’s Olivo actually went to any of the nativist or pro-migrant websites. Had he done so he would not have so glibly drawn a moral equivalency between the haters the humanists. It is truly unfortunate, as more research would have disclosed stark differences.

Citations:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-webfights-04-jun04,0,2477785.story?

http://thesanctuary.soapblox.net/showDiary.do;jsessionid=07764A6D53A9FFC072BC50B4B08C3576?diaryId=193

If you liked this post, don't forget to subscribe to my RSS feeds. Or you can
get my posts delivered to your inbox directly, by subscribing to my feeds by email.