The Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF), has launched a new website called "Truth in Immigration" (truthinimmigration.org). Per this:
John Trasvina, president of Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, said Thursday the airwaves are dominated by anti-immigrant sentiment. His group launched the Web site to provide facts and contrary arguments to statements in media and on the Internet, Trasvina said... "Our idea in this Truth in Immigration Web site goes back to Thomas Jefferson's point of let us hear both sides," Trasvina said.
Gosh, it's so difficult for MALDEF to find their point of view presented. Except, of course, when the Associated Press interviews him for a promotion of his website, and it's then printed in the Houston Chronicle. And, of course, except for all the countless other AP, NYT, LAT, etc. etc. articles lying, misleading, or offering incomplete information about this issue.
1. MALDEF has at least an indirect link to the Mexican government.
2. The page truthinimmigration.org/CompleteStory.aspx?sid=13 implies they want to accuse those who oppose illegal immigration of encouraging illegal acts. I wouldn't put trying that past them.
3. The page truthinimmigration.org/Myths.aspx falsely implies that being here illegally is always just a civil matter, when in fact reentering (and, AFAIK, remaining here) illegally can be a felony.
4. That page also confuses some types of assimilation with full assimilation to our laws and culture. Many Hispanics do not want to culturally assimilate, and many - including MALDEF - seem to think some of our laws don't apply to those who are Hispanic. And, a small group - but one with political power - believes to some degree in Aztlan/reconquista.
UPDATE: Another MSM source promotes the new site, this time with Gary Martin of the San Antonio Express-News offering the almost completely pro-MALDEF "Immigration group looks to clear myths" (oddly enough, located in their Mexico section). Martin says the site is in "response to anti-immigrant sentiment", without quotes and without noting that most of the sentiment is opposition to illegal immigration and not so much against illegal aliens themselves and with very little sentiment being against immigrants, i.e., the legal variety. Martin then discusses a recent SPLC smear against FAIR in which they were named a "hate group". He fails to put that term in quotes, despite it simply being the SPLC's (incorrect) opinion. The term "anti-immigrant rhetoric" is used, without quotes and without any sort of analysis of how accurate that term is. Out of 13 paragraphs, two form as a sort of rebuttal by FAIR, but Martin prejudices the reader against them by first noting the SPLC's smear.
Immigration2008a · Fri, 03/21/2008 - 11:39 · Importance: 1