Michael R. Blood / AP biased report on "National Day of Protest"

The AP reports on the "National Day of Protest" against illegal immigration in the Drudge-linked "Few Drawn to Illegal Immigration Protests" [1] by Michael R. Blood. The very first paragraph contains a highly misleading statement:

Illegal immigration protests organized across the country Saturday drew small numbers, and some were outnumbered and out-shouted by those who support immigrant rights.

Actually, since the protests were against illegal immigration, those on the other side were protesting for rights for illegal immigrants. Based on my coverage of similar protests, I also wonder whether that's a fair characterization of those on the other side. They seem to be a bit... extreme, such as carrying banners claiming that the U.S. is actually part of Mexico and the like. Then, there's this:

But [Joseph Turner of Save Our State ]'s group in Glendale was surrounded by more than 100 drum- beating supporters who chanted, "Racists go home." The two groups traded shouts and obscene gestures for more than an hour. One man was arrested for assault, police said.

The arrestee seems to have been from the other side. Not only that, Turner claims [2] that the Glendale PD did not try to separate the two groups, and that those on the other side agree that's a bad thing to do. He also says that a police officer made the following statement during the protest:

We cannot make it too easy for you guys. If we make it easy (i.e. allow us to peacefully assemble and exercise our first amendment rights), you guys will keep on coming back and we do not want to be out here doing this stuff. He then added, we would rather you guys went to Alhambra.

Unfortunately, SOS doesn't seem to "get it". The point is to make the other side - and their enablers and supporters - look bad. You do that by completely documenting the other side's activities and not falling for their provocations. Then, you get the word out, applying lawyers as necessary. I mean, he had the AP right there, perhaps he should have tried to get them to write a non-biased report, documenting exactly how they failed to get the real story. Where is that? Where are the concise press releases that have been vetted by a lawyer?

Back to the AP's non-coverage:

In Framingham, Mass., near Boston, a small group protesting illegal immigration was met by a much larger group of counter-demonstrators, some of whom surrounded them and temporarily disrupted the protest.

I'd like to know a bit more about what sounds like a far-left attempt to stifle free speech, wouldn't you? Unfortunately, that's not the kind of news reporting the AP has in mind. And:

In Danbury, Conn., about 50 people calling themselves the Connecticut Citizens for Immigration Control [3] spent about two hours chanting and holding signs that read "Arrest Illegal Employers." Several dozen people held a counterprotest across the street.

As the link shows, they have a website and everything, so "calling themselves" seems to diminish the fact that they seem to be a real organization.

Write feedback *at* ap.org and ask them to cover this issue in a bit more depth and with a bit less bias.

[1] breitbart . com/news/2006/01/07/D8F09FAG2.html
[2] saveourstate . org/forums/index.php?showtopic=6931
[3] ctcitizensforimmigrationcontrol . com


Big deal; so what if people don't show to protests like these in big numbers? Is that supposed to mean they don't view illegal immigration as anything important? I probably wouldn't go because I don't think it's the best way to make the case.

Anyway, constantly playing the race card has an effect, which is why it is done; people know that if they go to one of these events they'll be called names -- labeled as a racist etc. Not many have the guts to face that openly.

Anyway, the door to discussing this is now wide open, and a real debate about it is only beginning. Think secret ballot.

Our Oregonians for Immigration Reform protest in early December against the use of State of Oregon employees at the providing of matricula consular cards was attended in large part by old retired guys like me. This was pointed out by someone in a sneering letter to the Statesman-Journal of Salem, Oregon. Well, if it's wisdom your're looking for, where do you look, among the young or the old?