Brad Knickerbocker of the CSM: Can you trust his reporting?

Most definitely you can. Assuming that is, of course, that you want heavily biased yellow reportage such as that featured in "Across the country, many mobilize against illegal immigration" (link).

The bottom line of the report seems to be to portray those opposed to illegal immigration as various kinds of bad people. Some of the words and phrases used in the article include: "nativism", "anti-immigrant", "extremist movements", "extreme anti-immigrant sentiment", "conspiracy theories", "opposed to multiculturalism", "[historical] violent reactions to immigrants", and "extremist activities". And, those are words coming from the author; those from the people he quotes are even worse.

One of the "conspiracy theories" is "reconquista". Let's see now. The majority of Mexicans think the U.S. Southwest rightfully belongs to them. And, many U.S. politicians are former members of the racial separatist group MEChA. And, Mexico has come right out and said that sending us people gives them political power inside the U.S. And, their consuls repeatedly interfere in our internal politics. Given those facts and all the others available, should you trust anything Brad Knickerbocker writes?

The article reads less like a simply biased report and more like propaganda designed to smear those opposed to illegal immigration and support those who profit off illegal activity.

Some of those quoted include:

- Mark Pitcavage, "a historian of extremist movements with the Anti-Defamation League and an adviser to law-enforcement agencies." (Here's more on the ADL).

- Devin Burghart of the Center for New Community, "a faith-based human rights organization in Chicago"

- Jean Rosenfeld, of the UCLA Center for the Study of Religion.

- Mark Potok of Southern Poverty Law Center

Please write CSM senior editor Richard Bergenheim and let him know the CSM has lost several credibility points because of this article.

Immigration · Sun, 01/22/2006 - 20:20 · · Importance: 4