Sharing an e-mail from Eric Byler —
Dear Friends,
Annabel Park and I have a documentary coming out this fall. 9500 Liberty explores the social, political, and economic fallout from one of America’s fiercest battles over immigration policy at the local level. We feel that our film will help illuminate what is really at stake in the upcoming national debate over immigration policy.
Watch our trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rlZkL_0lZ1Q
Please share our new website: http://9500liberty.com/
Please join our Facebook group at: http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/group.php?gid=13491935091&ref=ts
And/or please follow us on Twitter: http://twitter.com/9500Liberty
Thanks,
Eric Byler & Annabel Park
Ugh. For someone who lived through it this is frightening to watch. I am so proud of those who beat these nutjobs back with some good old fashioned democratic participation. I wish this video showed how the real Price William County rose up to defeat these fanatics and get rid of the racial profiling law. That was the best part of the story from my perspective. The frightening part I’d rather forget. But it did wake us up. A wake up call to action.
This video shows only the two polarized degrees. There should be shots that show the people in the middle taking charge and snipping the Resolution down to the point of legal castration. That is what the rest of the world needs to see. Not the immigrants angry or the anti-immigrants angry.
ShellyB, Eric mentioned on another blog that he addresses the rest of the story.
Right but Censored, the movie isn’t available yet and more people see trailers than whole movies in today’s short attention span America. So it would have been nice to show that there was a good or even semi-happy outcome to all of that mess in the trailer. So people don’t have to wait for the film to come out to know what happened. Most people already know there were a lot of anti-immigrant octogenarians popping veins at Citizens Time. And many immigrants protesting at McCoart. Fewer know what happened after the New Year. That’s all.
I’m surprised no one in the film industry or the media or at film schools has picked up on the METHOD of how this documentary was produced — beyond the content and subject. I have never heard of another film that was posted as short You Tube videos and produced in real time, as it was happening, out in front of everyone, rather than protected in a back room somewhere. Normally you would see the finished product at a premiere and then later on, get it on DVD with the director’s commentary and the outtakes and all that, without any interaction.
Here, it was like anyone could be in on the process the whole way through, with thousands of viewer comments or discussions with the filmmakers at the dinners that Anti hosted at different restaurants. That has to be a first.
It has been an interesting project, for sure. As to having a happy ending, I think the film is still a work in progress, Shelly. You should email Eric and Annabel and ask about that.
Is it just me or is this trailer favorable to Greg Letiecq? Letiecq makes a good point, supports that point by showing his effectiveness, and then is not given enough rope to hang himself on the Gospel Greg blasphemy.
As rumored, Chief Deane is clearly the hero, as it should be.
Cindy, if a trailer in 2009 had been the first the world saw of this film, I suspect things would have turned out differently. Corey Stewart might be our Congressman, or our nominee for Governor.
I think the film, as the trailer does, will put a mirror up to what each of us did or didn’t do then, and should or shouldn’t be doing now. The filmmakers just captured footage, favorable or unfavorable.
Everything I’ve seen of theirs was slanted and biased. I’ll keep an open mind. But if it’s what I expect, I’ll devote as much energy as I can to traversing the web and pointing out shortcomings.
Good bad or indifferent, hre’s hoping it gains traction and calls more national attention to the success we’ve had in Manassas through HSM. If more people knew that they could affect politics this way, they will do so.
@Last Best Hope
Seemed balanced to me.
I suppose an accurate depiction would have to give Letiecq proper credit for innovation and determination. If the “change you can believe in” is Greg Letiecq style, this movie might be the right vehicle. Obama said “one voice can change the world.” Letiecq was one voice that changed a county of 400,000 for decades to come.
Rick, what is it that you think you all have accomplished?
Greg L. likes to disparage the film but he’s responsible for shooting himself in the foot. I doubt he’ll ever acknowledge that.
He was fine with the shooting as long as he thought he was controlling the message. In my opinion he made two whopper-size errors. One was the Gospel Greg blathering and the other was his bragging about being able to generate a huge volumn of email to the BOCS.
What we accomplished frankly was to discourage illegal aliens from settling here. This is the land of “El Diablo”.
Obviously things are far from perfect but they got better for most residents – when it looked inevitable that they would get worse, much worse.
Our government is corrupt at every level, and impervious to the needs of their so-called constituents. What Greg L and HSM succeeded at first and foremost was proving that it is possible to systematically mobilize and force action on this issue. It is difficult and it requires leadership but it is possible.
Yes, Rick, we know it is possible. But can it be done without inciting hatred, false hysteria, and the lowest instincts of humanity? I imagine so, but it remains to be seen.
Great trailer! I cannot even wait to see the final cut. Any word on local premiere dates/viewings?
@Censored bybvbl
Yes, a huge volume of emails were sent to our elected officials from people who did not live in our county and had no business weighing in on how or whether we cope with demographic shifts. It wasn’t their tax dollars that they insisted on wasting. It wasn’t their public safety they insisted on endangering. It wasn’t their local economy and housing market they insisted on collapsing. It wasn’t their interest to even look into some of these unintended consequences. They just got a “Numbers USA” email saying “write something hateful about immigrants to the Board of Supervisors in Prince William County.” And they did. And our leaders were fooled. And they drove us off a cliff.
Was it a mistake to brag about it? Maybe. But the damage was still done. Our democracy was still corrupted. Our futures were still damaged. Mission accomplished.
I think Eric and company also did a fine job of inflaming law-abiding citizens who were outraged at the Liberty Street wall and at the blatant lawbreaking it represented. If anything “incited hatred,” I think those slanted videos did the job. It’s the law of unintended consequences. I don’t doubt that that anger will flare up again when this stuff is rehashed. But, hey, what’s a little anger when it might put Eric back in the spotlight again? Contention is good for his business.
I’m also sure there was an equal volume of people sending e-mails from out of the county against any possible resolution. I tend to think that’s been ignored, and I find it impossible to believe the volume of e-mails from out of county was so tilted as some people would have you believe .
Also, in viewing all the clips way back when they were on their website – if anyone thinks there wasn’t editing done to slant things to their point of view – that’s the same as saying the nightly news isn’t slanted on any particular network, one way or the other.
I’m going to have to say – I’d like to keep an open mind about the film – but from what I saw their edited snippets of stuff, and the pieces they chose to present on their website – definitely showed a biased point of view and distorted certain things – including making anyone who was in any way in favor of the resolution to look like they were raving mad and angry. I’m not saying what they showed of Greg wasn’t accurate, but I believe they edited a lot of other stuff and purposely didn’t show anyone with any moderate point of view – at least of what I saw on their website. Now, the finished film may be different, but I remain skeptical, obviously.
All the moderates were ignored, Gainesville. It was either HSM or MWB and there was no where to hide in between. Most of us couldn’t side with either so we stayed quiet. That is why this blog needed to come about.
There wasn’t an equal amount of emails coming from civil rights org’s from out of the county, by the way. The whole thing was organized as an ambush, with only one side knowing that a war was about to start. The civil rights folks were not organized to do anything about it. They did squat. That’s why the people had to step up and get the law repealed.
GR, I wouldn’t be so sure that an equal number of emails from the “other side” were sent. FAIR has its mitts firmly on PWC’s throat before anyone knew what was happening. Sure, that’s a kudo to Greg and his right-wing cohorts for their organizational skills but its an affront to the idea of the local populace having a voice in their government. Hats off to MWB for organizing as well as they did for the big BOCS meeting.
Witness is correct. Moderates were silenced if they attempted to speak out for more middle ground. When I say silenced, I mean silenced. That is how Anti was born.
GR, listen to Censored. She has been around since the beginning of all this. I doubt very seriously if an equal number of emails were sent from the other side, assuming that means those against the resolution. I would be willing to bet my next paycheck against it in fact. INformation was doled out very piece-meal. Information was filtered through HSM. I don’t think regular citizens were in much of a position to do anything. I also don’t think MWB who did organize some opposition, especially within the Hispanic community, had much opportunity to organize an email campaign. Several supervisors have also confirmed what Concerned is saying.
Censored is right about the 2 big mistakes. That is when we got to see the man behind the curtain.
Yes, people were shown by 9500 Liberty who favored the Resolution. Everyone knows Chris. She was filmed. I am sure there were others who appear sane shown.
Emma, I oppose (read HATE HATE HATE) the wall, oppose the original Immigration Resolution, support 287(g) and respect 9500 Liberty for shedding light on a community in crisis.
I feel 9500 Liberty exposed some of the lies and deceptions surrounding the Resolution. Additionally, It has become obvious that much of the Resolution was an election ploy to gather Republican votes. As an independent, I find that contemptible.
Censored, there was a third mistake: going after Chief Deane and calling him a traitor.
Everyone who responded to what I wrote makes some very good points, and I wouldn’t argue them, as they are probably in a better position to know than I am. And, I haven’t seen the finished product, all I saw were lots of different clips on their website, and have no idea what order the assembled them in.
There’s no question about Greg’s 2 mistakes (or 3 if you include going after Chief Deane), obviously.
However, i will say the depiction of that I saw in clips of those who in any way supported the resolution, seemed to universally portray them as angry and not very sane. I obviously did not see all the clips, I don’t believe I saw any clips with Chris in them.
At the same time, I tend to think the more radical elements of MWB were not portrayed – those that believe there should be no border, and thus no real immigration law, etc.
So, I’m still not convinced that everything is fairly portrayed, but again, it is hard to judge from a bunch of separate clips, and not seeing the assembled product. A trailer tells me nothing – I can’t count the number of movies I’ve seen that are not at all like what the trailer suggests. So I can’t really infer all that much from the trailer – it is even harder to infer anything from that than from the collection of various clips (all of which probably weren’t used) on their website. And, I have not looked at their website in a very long time, so I probably have not seen all that is there.
Finally, as to the issue of the e-mails from out of county – I just find it a little hard to believe that people would not realize many of them came from out of county. I’m willing to concede that there are those who are in better position to know than me – who say the number of out of county e-mails for the resolution far exceeded those against. However, at the same time, what percentage of the MWB folks that attended that meeting (it looked to me that there were a large number of them) were from PWC? I don’t know, and I doubt anyone knows. All I would say is that both sides numbers were distorted. It may very well be the “pro-resolution” side’s numbers were more distorted than the “anti-resolution” side, but until now I’ve never seen anyone suggest that there were probably attempts by BOTH sides to distort their numbers. And, again it is somewhat hard for me to believe that the entire board of supervisors could not between the 8 of them, reach a conclusion that a lot of e-mails they were getting were from out-of-county. If so, then it tells me everyone thinks all 8 supervisors are not too smart!
Well, that’s my opinion on all of this, for what it’s worth. Again, I don’t disagree with much of what was said in the responses to my above post, and those people are more in a position to know than me. For one thing, I didn’t become interested in this debate until roughly a little over a year ago – so did not pay it any attention at the time the original resolution got passed. It is hard to explain, but at that time it wasn’t really something that I was concerned about – for whatever reason.
GR, just so you know. “Mexicans Without Borders” is a take-off on “Doctors Without Borders.” The idea is that you would help anyone as you would help your own. This unfortunate name was skillfully exploited by Greg Leteicq. But there wasn’t anyone standing up to say “open the Virginia border.” Actually, the only border we could open would be to Fairfax, Stafford, or Fauquier. So what I’m saying is questions about borders were not the issue. The most aggressive member of MWB (that I saw) was a woman who cursed out the BOCS at Citizens’ Time. Other than that the most radical thing they said was “don’t separate my family.”
I will be the first to admit that their tactics were all wrong for modern times. Help Save Manasass’ tactics were all right for modern times. Most of what we saw on 9500 Liberty was simply Citizens’ Time.
Oh, take it back. The most aggressive message was probably when that one wall sign accused European settlers of genocide.
I hate being fair to the BOCS, but here it goes…most of them don’t have the staff to research where people live. I could pound Mike May every day with email. I don’t live in his district. One of me would be pretty easy to detect. However, think if 500 of my closest friends decided to also hammer him. How long would it take that office to sort out who was a legitmate constituent and who was not? On the other hand, I do live in Prince William County and therefore am represented by Mike May. (sorry, I pulled his name out of a hat) If one of my friends just happened to live in Delaware, they really don’t have any say on what happens in our county.
As for the Hispanic supporters who showed up on October 16, 2007, I am not sure how many were out of area. Someone, might have been Lucky Duck, said there were no large groups of buses that showed up.
I expect almost (not all) everyone who spoke at the 13 hour marathon that night was local. Some people might have lived in City of Manassas, on both ‘sides.’
GR, one more thing. You are certainly correct that people came from all corners to be in that giant rally you see above. You can see the Maryland flag for instance. But you never heard a member of the BOCS say they were voting yeay or nay based on the number of people who showed up at a rally.
They did, however, say very explicitly that they voted yeay on the Resolution based on the number of emails they received in favor of it. They had never been the target of a national email campaign before and just didn’t know what to expect.
I agree, Witness. Mexicans Without Borders was a very regretable name choice and it was exploited. Their leaders are both nice people who, unfortunately, used the technique of protest from another era.
HSM, on the other hand, used high tech to advance their message. The MWB concept was extremely exploited and misrepresented by HSM. Most people are unaware of how the same exploitation was tried with this blog. Didn’t work.
What continues to bother me are not those who found conditions in their neighborhood unacceptable. These people had and in some cases still have legitimate concerns. The deception and the political manipulation are what bother me. The politics of personal destruction that have been directed at those seeking office, those holding office, those employeed by the county and those who moderate blogs is unacceptable, unforgiveable and certainly not” part of God’s plan.” Some of the techniques used are down right evil.
I think this says it all and while I don’t approve of this technique, I respect Rick for being just about the only HSM member who has the nads to tell the truth.
M-H, if Letiecq had gone to court with the real life neighborhood issues that his followers were concerned about, there is no way he could have advocated for something so drastic. They would have said, okay, we’ll appropriate one million for Neighborhood Services; instead of $14 million for a massive overhaul of our police department.
This is why I doubt that the neighborhood issues was really the motivation. If you are seeking to solve a problem, why do you have to exaggerate and make up lies to support your cause?
Is it really true that only truly terrorized people will go out and vote in local elections? If so, that answers that one.
Witness, are you saying that the people who had some real issues were used?
Again, we have to go back and look at who was elected. Who ran?
That’s not what I was saying. I was saying Letiecq and Stewart (plus Stirrup) went about it in a way that served politics first and politics only. It was not about solving any problems that people were facing. The policy did not fit with the problem, certainly not in the United States what with our Constitution and Civil Rights laws and such.
The tactics revealed the purpose of using that issue. 100% politics. The exaggerations, distortions, bullying, slander, and lies seemed to work well for the election. They did not solve anyone’s problems.
Rick and others say they are more comfortable in their neighborhoods now. But think about why? Letiecq, Stewart, and Stirrup created a climate of racial intolerance and hostility that sent a message to certain people “you are not welcome” based on how you look. I know it is not kind to say it was based on how they looked, but how did we really know by looking at someone what sort of shape their immigration paperwork was in?
Of course, adding the police who carry guns to a situation where people on blogs are threatening to use guns made matters even worse. Of course people were going to leave.
But as for the ordinary members of HSM, I cannot speak for whether they were used. I know two people who are former members (by email only, never attended a meeting). They asked to be taken off the list for a few reasons. One of them was they were not happy with the way it was made into a partisan political issue.
MH, yes, I was there at McCoart in October 16th,2007 and yes, there was a very large crowd of anti-resolution folks both inside and outside. A number of them were bussed in, in fact, special bus parking was allotted at the McCoart complex. The crowd was estimated (for the anti resolution crowd) to be 3000 or so.
By the way Witness, Mexicans Without Borders is NOT akin to Doctors Without Borders…I have personally spoken to the leadership of MWB, to include Mr. Steinbeck, Both Juarez brothers as well as Ms. Nancy Lyall. Their organization DOES advocate the dissolution of borders between nations, particulary between the USA and poorer nations to our south. Doctors without Borders support no such philosophy.
Lucky Duck, if you say you have talked to the MWB leaders, I will take your word for it. I have spoken to members who told me the DWB inspiration for the name. They (the members) thought of border more as a barrier between people, as opposed to a demarcation between nations. I think there may even be a translation issue. I tried to explain why the word border was so infuriating and they didn’t readily understand.
In any case, the 3000 people were not there to protest the existence of a border between our nation and Mexico. They were there to protest a law that they believed would lead to racial profiling. I believed that too, but was reluctant to say so at the time because anyone who did faced retaliation, and I did not want to be pigeon-holed with the socialists and terrorists who were possibly bringing leprosy and machine guns to our county. You see, I didn’t know it was all a hoax then.
Thanks for clarifying Lucky Duck. I think I had misunderstood. I did not realize that there were many buses. Do you happen to know if they were buses bringing in local folks or out of town buses?
I can’t support any group who advocates dissolution of borders anywhere involving the USA. I do feel that many of the rank and file people involved in protest did not have that in mind, although, I suppose if I were in their shoes, that would be the best.
Being in my own shoes, I don’t like that. However, I still think their position at the time, was not to overthrow the government but to instead simply organize against what they saw as oppression. Their tactics were so 60’s.
In speaking several times with Mr. Steinbeck, he stated that his organization’s view was there should be the abolishment of any borders between nations. They, according to him, feel that people should be able to come and go between nations as they wish, regardless of immigration status. I had similar discussions with the others.
I believe there was a variety of reasons for 3000 anti resolution people being there. Some, yes, feared potential profiling but most, in my opinion from speaking to the crowds, were there because of fear.
That fear consisted of a casual encounter with either a police officer or even a county employee that could lead to the questioning of immigration status or detention. Most of the anti people stated that they were here to work and wished to be able to continue to do so without looking over their shoulders. They feared being separated from children and spouses by being taken into custody by the police.
The sad part was that the vote was a given before the protesters even set up. But Ms. Lyall told me that a lot of their folks didn’t realize that and felt it was important that they demonstrated their views. I think the leadership of Mexicans Without Borders failed those protesters in the most terrible fashion, they didn’t tell them the truth.
Those buses that came were from the metro area, none from out of the area. They were from Arlington, DC and Maryland.
Sorry to interrupt but here is a rather alarming article from today’s WaPost regarding national id cards as a means to counter illegal immigration.
Immigration Experts Urge Congress to Be Cautious on Schumer Work ID Plan
By Spencer S. Hsu
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, July 21, 2009; 8:05 PM
Immigration analysts urged Congress on Tuesday to carefully weigh a leading Democratic senator’s plan to require all U.S. workers to verify their identity using fingerprints or digital photos, saying such an effort faces technological and political obstacles.
The warnings came as Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee’s subcommittee on immigration, used a panel hearing to reveal new details of his proposal, which he said must be part of any broader immigration overhaul.
Schumer said a new national work identification system “must have the strictest privacy and civil liberties protections, and must only be used for employment,” not other federal ID purposes. He was silent on whether the government would maintain a database of fingerprint or other biometric information on all workers, or if data could be locked into a portable card or other microchip-bearing device held by an individual.
Avove is from
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/21/AR2009072102412.html?hpid=topnews
People breaking our laws, and entering the country illegally should live in fear of deportation. What other purpose are laws created for other than preventing certain actions by using the fear of prosecution as a deterrent. Makes sense to me, how come many here just don’t get it. If the vast numbers of people breaking a law makes that law null and void, then why not pull up all the speed limit signs as well? Is this or is this not a sovereign country that is allowed to enforce its borders? If not, then I say lets all join MWB, if so, then I say no entry without authorization!
“I respect Rick for being just about the only HSM member who has the nads to tell the truth”
That was my OWN opinion though and not in keeping with HSM’s goals or objectives. In fact it’s somewhat inconsistent with the HSM objectives.
I should elaborate because what I mean to say isn’t clear from what’s written in this thread.
I don’t want engage in racially biased behavior. However, if someone else thinks I am racist or biased because of policies like Rule of Law, I don’t care. If the Latino community thinks PWC are biased rednecks, and/or the liberal elites in this or other counties feel that way, I don’t care. And I will gladly trade that for a few less illegal flophouses in my community, less non-tracked child molesters, and less non-identified people wandering around my neighborhood. I will actively make that tradeoff. So, when someone rants and raves that my neighbors and I are anti-Latino bigots, I just smile. It’s A-OK with me.
There’s an arguement that that will deflate property values, but I believe that the values would go down more drastically if PWC devolved into a Spanish ghetto as was happening a few years ago.
I’m not saying that I smile at the thought of actually victimizing anyone. But at the thought of some nitwit speaking the language of racial identity politics, screaming “racist” if I don’t want to give special rights to illegal immigrants, I just smile. I don’t care. I care about my family’s quality of life. I care about not actually victimizing people based on skin color. But I don’t care about what some idiot chooses to believe about me and my motivations. call me El Diablo, super racist, I don’t care.
But this is not much to do with HSM. This is my personal statement.
Rick, you always speak your mind. Anyone that has really read what you’ve wrote over the past two years would know that. You don’t seem to have a political agenda. You just want a decent place to live and our laws to be enforce. I hardly think that reason to villify someone, but as we all know it will happen. I’m thinking I could have a nice chunk of change if I had a dime for every time I’d been called a racist.
Call you El Diablo-lol..I think that name’s been taken. I guess they could call you “El Demonio” instead. 🙂
Good post above.
Actually, to compare Doctors Without Borders, which is an organization that seeks to provide medical care in many countries where people can’t afford it, to Mexicans Without Borders, which much less altruistic, just seems to be to be an apples to oranges comparison. And, their website, while in Spanish – can be run through a Spanish to English translation – (by taking pieces of it and running through any online tool) – and it does seem to say that they do not recognize national borders, and think there should really not be any immigration laws – people should flow freely back and forth. I don’t see that as making any sense. Countries exist and have borders, and have the right to defend their borders, AND to limit the number of immigrants each year. I don’t think any country wuold want to open up its borders and have a free for all. For one thing, that would allow terrorists to enter. Thers’a lot of other reasons the “no borders” thing makes no sense.
Anyway, even IF they got their name from “Doctors Without Borders” – their goals are not as altruistic as that organization, and I just don’t see it being much of a comparison, if any. I also still say, the last time I looked at their website and ran pieces of it through an online translation tool, it made no secret of the fact they advocated “no borders” and that people should be able to freely come and go as they wanted, or just move to the region (as in country) of their choice.
Gainesville, here’s some pictures from a rally in Richmond that MWB hosted in Monroe Park. They had tables set up with propganda. When they saw me taking pictures of the table, as usual they sent someone over to harrass me and get in my face. I might even have a picture in there of one angry “man” running me off. HAHA they were in a public park. Also, I had one lady try to rip my camera out of my hand. MWB is a radical bunch. I’ve been at many “events” that they were in attendance too.
http://good-times.webshots.com/album/561176743SOvyOU
Actually, I posted the above before I read Lucky Duck’s post, and he seems to confirm what I was trying to say – but said it better, and as he got it right from the people who head up MWB, it sounds very credible to me.
I understand that the group at the protest were protesting the proposed resoultion, and NOT there to protest our border with Mexico. However, they were led by a group who’s aim is not to recognize tht border. Also, by not recognizing that border, that would lead to an even greater influx of people than our economy could sustain.
I actually think Lucky Duck made a good point when he said the protesters were poorly served by MWB – they were obviously led to believe their voices would be heard and the resolution would be voted down, etc. In a way, I kind of see it as MWB using them to gain credibility and to in the end futher its own political agenda, which is this no borders idea. So, those protesters, may have unwittingly lent credibility to MWB – and who knows if they were even aware of MWB’s greater purpose. MWB does seem to be clever at perhaps not always letting everyone know about its true agenda – as it knows that would infuriate a lot of Americans. And, it’s hard to gauge how the average Hispanic person feels about it. We know of a few examples such as the infamous sign in Manassas – that also appeared to me at least to advocate “no borders” – in at least one of its many incarnations. However, who knows what percentage of Hispanics in the USA here (both legal and illegal immigrants) would be for the “no borders” approach.