Kathleen Moccio (a trustee of the American Immigration Law Foundation, associated with the American Immigration Lawyers Association) and Prof. Katherine Fennelly of the University of Minnesota's Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs have a screed supporting immigration "reform" in the Minneapolis Star Tribune entitled "Facts, not fear, should guide U.S. immigration":

We were appalled to learn that U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo of Colorado was invited to make a keynote speech at a Republican fundraising breakfast in Minnesota's Third Congressional District this weekend.

His brand of fear-mongering about illegal immigration and his active encouragement of vigilantes should have no place in Minnesota politics. Immigration reform is sorely needed in the United States, but responsible proposals must be based upon facts and not incendiary rhetoric...

You know, the last group discussed here that attacked Tancredo in the same manner was ProgressNow ("Tying up the loose ends on Colorado's guide for the illegal alien"). I showed that they were lying and I believe anyone who believes anything ProgressNow says should lay off the KoolAid. I'd like to do the same thing in this specific case, but Moccio and Fennelly have given me nothing specific to rebut. All we have is their word that Tancredo engages in fear-mongering, and I don't think I'm willing to accept their word for much of anything.

Note, of course, the use of the loaded term "vigilantes."

Tancredo rails against "illegal immigrants," but he doesn't address why so many undocumented workers come to the United States...

I'm not going to bother to do the research because I'm pretty sure that's simply a lie. Note, of course, the use of scare quotes around illegal immigrants. Both Moccio and Fennelly should know that that's the correct, legal term and that "undocumented" is a Carter-era PC euphemism.

President Bush has called the militia "vigilantes," but Tancredo calls them "heroes" and has invited their leaders to address members of Congress in his Immigration Reform Caucus.

Seriously, who cares what President Bush calls them? Everyone knows he's beholden to those companies that profit off illegal immigration. What did you expect him to say, something that most American citizens would agree with? (Here's an article on their meeting with the Caucus.)

Amongst all the lies and the logical leaps, the article's greatest attempt to lie to the reader stands out:

Among these so-called heroes are white supremacists from the neo-Nazi National Alliance. Members of the Alliance were at the project's kickoff, and some carried assault weapons in their trucks and boasted that they were scouting "sniper positions."

Let's examine that in more depth. The word "among" implies membership in a set, and that set is those that are "so-called heroes." Therefore, Moccio and Fennelly are saying that those members of the NA were among the "so-called heroes." Who is the agent behind the "so-called"? Why, none other than Tancredo.

Therefore, we see that Moccio and Fennelly are saying that U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo called members of the NA "heroes," with the implication that he did so knowing that they were members of the NA. Which, of course, is a bald-faced lie.

It is also misleading to state that these aforementioned NA members were also members of the MMP. That is clearly stated above. There were members of the NA who attempted to attach themselves to the MMP but were rebuffed. There may well have been members of the NA who hid their affiliation and were able to join MMP, but if so that's because they made it past the MMP's screening process. Not even the screening process by the CIA or other government agencies is foolproof, and one would hardly expect the same level of scrutiny from private parties.

Some members of the media went undercover among the MMP as well and attempted to provoke the others. I note that Moccio and Fennelly didn't mention that.

Note that the major funders of Moccio's group include the American Immigration Lawyers Association, the Ford Foundation and George Soros' Open Society Institute, so you would probably expect the above from anyone associated with such fine organizations.

However, Fennelly is an academic and presumably has some standards of logical reasoning, and if she wrote the above she should be ashamed of herself.