Letiecq fights back

Greg Letiecq
Published: March 18, 2008

On March 13 this paper published an editorial that attacked me as a “nativist,” a conclusion based entirely on a report by the Southern Poverty Law Center which is littered with obvious outright lies. In endorsing this outrageous effort to shut down the debate, this newspaper reaches a new low of journalistic malfeasance which can only accelerate its steady decline into irrelevance and financial ruin.

The Manassas Journal Messenger is well aware that I did not establish Help Save Herndon or Help Save Virginia, just two of more than a dozen outright lies presented by the SPLC as fact. Normally, when one intends to commit “journalism,”the appearance of obvious falsehoods in a public statement would prompt one to question the validity of the report’s conclusions. Not so for the Journal Messenger, which apparently saw confirmation of their obvious editorial bias, prompting the quick endorsement of a faulty conclusion based on nothing but a pile of deliberate falsehoods.

Smearing anyone who is ‘battling the influx of illegal immigrants into our country’ as a ‘nativist’ is the irresponsible behavior of which the editorial board accuses me. While the editorial board expresses its concern that the reputation of the county suffers as a result of inflammatory debate, it actually endorses statements such as “A dangerous mix of nativist intolerance, armed and untrained civilians, and wild-eyed conspiracy theories could easily explode into violence.” Readers, the editorial board apparently views you as crazed gun-toting rednecks who are but one step removed from engaging in a race war. Such utter hypocrisy marks a new and thoroughly disturbing low.

A claim that the SPLC’s irresponsible hit piece “serves only to cement the image of Prince William County and the surrounding jurisdictions as a haven for intolerance” can only hold true when media outlets take such reckless disregard for the truth seriously and intentionally promote clear falsehoods. It is ridiculous that Fauquier County would be viewed as a “haven for intolerance” simply because we have had our fill of those who violate the law and wish to restore lawful behavior in our community. Yet if the Manassas Journal Messenger can pigeonhole a well-justified intolerance of unlawful behavior as being irredeemably racist, it may well succeed in trashing the reputation of this community, which overwhelmingly supports efforts to reduce illegal immigration in a responsible manner that is consistent with the preservation of our civil liberties.

While the behavior of some illegal aliens is a matter of record and can be proven or disproven, as can the impacts they impose on our community, those whom the editorial board and ideological fellow travellers smear as “intolerant” or “nativist” for decrying the unlawful presence of illegal aliens have no means to prove their innocence.  Once smeared as a racist or “nativist,” there is no means of proving that you are not. 

The message that the Manassas Journal Messenger sends with this is clear: If you disagree with us and manage to win the debate, we will attempt to trash your reputation.While this paper devotes it’s minimalist local coverage to an outrageous effort to smear me as a “nativist,” it steadfastly ignores that many of our public facilities and schools suffer less overcrowding, that our healthcare system is less endangered, that dangerous criminal aliens are now being systematically removed from our community and that residential overcrowding has dramatically abated as a result of the policies I have advocated.

It also ignores that another organization in the debate promotes amnesty for illegal aliens alongside their public pronouncements of financial and material support for a foreign guerilla movement which regularly spouts communist and anarchist rhetoric. The uneven coverage of this debate and the biased treatment this paper inflicts upon those who engage in it are thoroughly appalling.

Were I not likely considered a “public figure” under the Supreme Court Case New York Times v. Sullivan, and thus forced to demonstrate “actual malice” in a defamation action against this paper, this outrageous and irresponsible behavior by this paper’s editorial board would have rapidly become the subject of a lawsuit. Instead, it will probably be up to the readers to judge whether spreading obvious falsehoods in an attempt to wrongly defame a local citizen is justifiable behavior for this newspaper and whether such exhibitions of clear bias can possibly constitute responsible journalism.

Greg Letiecq is the president of Help Save Manassas and blogs on http://www.bvbl.net.