Driving liberals, dhimmis and illegal alien apologists absolutely insane since 2005...

A Racial Supremicist Calls Manassas Racists, Again

By Greg L | 29 October 2009 | Illegal Aliens, Manassas City | 53 Comments

The historic district of Manassas got just a little bit more colorful today with the addition of yet another sign by Gaudencio Fernandez that spouts his “Mexica Movement” garbage.  While legitimate property owners in Manassas’ Old Town are required to get a permit from the Architectural Review Board for any sign they want to put up, no matter how big it is, City Manager Larry Huges apparently thinks whatever Fernandez does is OK and refuses to enforce any zoning ordinances against this civic vandal.

People of Manassas, how long are you supposed to put up with this?  Every time the city refuses to enforce zoning ordinances, all it does is encourage this radical to erect more signs calling you names.  The city acted like compliant little subservient cowards to this type of outrage only a few weeks ago, and as a result it only encouraged more bad behavior from Fernandez.  This has got to stop.  The law applies equally to everyone, doesn’t it?

I find it rather amusing that someone who ascribes to the policy of forcibly removing all white people from North America has the cojones to call others “white supremacists.”  It almost eclipses the ridiculousness of the call of this serial lawbreaker for “equality and justice,” which he has so far evaded by playing the race card every opportunity he gets.  Had anyone else engaged in such a persistent pattern of disrespect for the law, they’d have been pounded by the city long ago.  Fernandez instead gets to be the poster boy for the famous phrase “everyone is equal, but some are more equal than others.”

And you’re part of the side of this equation that gets to be a little less equal.  How wonderful.

I think Manassas City needs a new park.  I think this would be a great location for it.  I really think an eminent domain seizure for that purpose would significantly improve the quality if the City of Manassas.  It’s got to be easier than getting the city to actually enforce the rules when the violator happens to be a rabble-rousing racial supremacist like Gaudencio Fernandez, isn’t it? 

UPDATE: There’s been an interesting discussion in the comments thread between Councilman Andy Harrover and some readers about whether signs must be reviewed by the Architectural Review Board.  One smart reader bothered to look up the city code, and noted the following (emphasis added):

“Sec. 130-546. Certificate of appropriateness.
(a) Activity requiring review, unless exempted by this division:
(1) No building or structure, including signs, shall be erected,reconstructed, altered or restored within an HOD unless approved by the ARB or, on appeal, by the city council as being architecturally compatible with the historic structures within.”

then…

(b) Approval of certificate of appropriateness. Prior to approval of any certificate of appropriateness, the ARB shall determine if the following conditions have been adequately addressed:
(1) The activity is consistent with the secretary of the interior’s standards for:
a. Rehabilitation; and
b. Being architecturally compatible with the historical, cultural and/or architectural aspects of the HOD, structure and its surroundings.
(2) The visual impact of the proposed exterior architectural features, including all signs.
(3) The general design, scale and arrangement of new construction and additions.
(4) The texture, material and color of new construction, unless otherwise exempt from review.
(5) The relationship of features in subsections (b)(2), (3) and (4) of this section, to similar features of the buildings and structures immediately adjacent to or visible from the proposed activity.
(6) The extent to which the building or structure would be harmonious with, or incompatible with, the historic aspects of its surroundings.

And since a white sheet sign could be considered contempory, let’s look at that part -

(c) Contemporary construction. It is not the intent of the city or this division to discourage contemporary architectural expression, or to require the emulation of existing structures of historic or architectural interest in specific detail. Harmony, or incompatibility, shall be evaluated in terms of the appropriateness of architectural features, materials, scale, size, height and placement of a new structure in relationship to existing structures and to the setting.

I guess I’ll give up English speaking and switch to my German or Korean since I read the code as saying the ARB does have a say in Historic District Signs.

Now I’m not going to blame Andy for not knowing the code, since the City Attorney is who the council members depend on for guidance on legal matters.  Andy is an IT guy, not a lawyer, but at least he’s one of the few with the courage to engage the public on this issue and for that he is to be commended.  I’m going to lay this right in the lap of the City Attorney Robert Bendall who despite being in this position since 1975 is somehow giving legal advice to the City Council that is easily trumped by a layman effectively using google.  WHAT THE HELL IS BENDALL DOING THERE IF HE CAN’T EVEN TELL THE CITY WHAT THEIR OWN ORDINANCES SAY????



The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.

BVBL is not a charity and your support is not tax-deductible.

You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed. You can also pingback or trackback from your own site.

53 Comments

  1. Anonymous said on 30 Oct 2009 at 12:10 am:
    Flag comment

    By Greg L | 29 October 2009 | Illegal Aliens, Manassas City

    I think Manassas City needs a new park. I think this would be a great location for it. I really think an eminent domain seizure for that purpose would significantly improve the quality if the City of Manassas.

    Maybe that is what “Ferdie” is looking for. A buck to be be made for his worthless property.

  2. Anonymous said on 30 Oct 2009 at 12:31 am:
    Flag comment

    eat s**t and die a**hole

    [Ed note: comment edited]

  3. Angelena said on 30 Oct 2009 at 1:54 am:
    Flag comment

    Why is your blog using a symbol of Chinese Nationalism (Bruce Lee) and Black Velvet (a pretty girly drink) as a title? Just seems quite strange.

  4. ijustwantmywaffle said on 30 Oct 2009 at 5:25 am:
    Flag comment

    It’s

    “a-
    gainst”, BTW.

    That’s one reason for declaring a single national language.

    Who are the “Native Americans” to whom the sign refers? Navajo, Sioux, Cherokee, Seminole?

    The sign’s “natives” can go back to that part of “America” where they ARE native–Mexico and further south.

  5. Anonymous said on 30 Oct 2009 at 5:33 am:
    Flag comment

    It still amazes me that this continues. At what point does his comments cross the line from free speech to hate mongering? Aren’t certain messages directed at a single race considered hate crimes? Oh that’s right any message against whites is just free speech. I get it now.

    PS: Either the guy needs to plan better, or get a larger sheet.

  6. citizenofmanassas said on 30 Oct 2009 at 6:57 am:
    Flag comment

    I’m a Native American, I was born here. I’m not offended by the 287g program. I’ll say it again, the City Council and the attorney had a chance to put an end to this, but took a pass during the first court case.

  7. The Patriot (Got E-Verify???) said on 30 Oct 2009 at 7:45 am:
    Flag comment

    Here is the contradiction with all of this…the hispanics keep saying that you cannot tell who an illegal alien is based on skin color, language, etc. etc. etc.

    Okay…let us go with this argument…then why are the hispanics the most vocal on anything that has to do with illegal immigration (particularly when there is absolutely no mention of any specific race being looked at in the 287g program)? Could it be that the “REAL DATA” supports that most illegal aliens are from south of the border…and the hispanics know this (and even more likely…many of them have relatives that they are providing assistance to)? Let’s keep the obvious facts straight.

  8. The Patriot (Got E-Verify???) said on 30 Oct 2009 at 8:09 am:
    Flag comment

    The other big argument the pro-illegals use is 287g causes “fear in the immigrant community” or “the immigrant community will not report crimes”…blah blah blah!

    Fact 1: People engaged in illegal activities like illegal immigration (which involves many crimes…stealing benefits, stealing IDs, using forged documents to acquire employment illegally, evading taxes, etc. etc. etc.) should be fearful of law enforcement. If legal immigrants are “fearful” what are they afraid of? Perhaps they are “aiding and abetting” their illegal relatives???

    Fact 2: The recent study in our county on this very topic demonstrated that there was no real difference in reporting statistics before and after the resolution.

    Result…the “fear in the community” argument (just like the “racial profiling” argument) is nothing but a smokescreen tactic to keep law enforcement from looking into illegal alien activities.

  9. AndyH said on 30 Oct 2009 at 8:16 am:
    Flag comment

    The law City-wide is that you may have signs on your property that are no larger than 32 sq. ft. in aggregate size. This pertains to real-estate signs, campaign signs and all other signs on residential property. From a local governments perspective, the content of the sign matters not - only the size.

    Makes no difference where you are in the City. Commercial signs are governed by a different code section I believe. Violating the size limit is a zoning violation.

  10. Not SPLC said on 30 Oct 2009 at 9:10 am:
    Flag comment

    Andy- Isn’t the Historic District different? Don’t they have to have the sign’s approved by the ARB? It seems pretty fishy to me that you have to have the color paint approved in the Historic District but you wouldn’t have to have a sign approved? Don’t believe it!

    Also do you remember the almost three YEARS worth of zoning violations at this property? And nothing was done about it? It took the residents in Manassas to make to finally make the city do their job.

  11. Not SPLC said on 30 Oct 2009 at 9:11 am:
    Flag comment

    Sorry about the last sentence. ….to finally make….

  12. AndyH said on 30 Oct 2009 at 9:13 am:
    Flag comment

    I’ve gotta run but real quick: historic district is no different for signs on residential property…

  13. Not SPLC said on 30 Oct 2009 at 9:17 am:
    Flag comment

    Oh boy am I gonna have a field day in Old Town then!

  14. AndyH said on 30 Oct 2009 at 9:32 am:
    Flag comment

    As long as your field day is smaller than 32 sq ft…:)

  15. Truth to Power said on 30 Oct 2009 at 10:07 am:
    Flag comment

    287(g) enforcement = fewer gang members in my neighborhood

    Gangs flee N.Va. for havens in Md., D.C., report says

    By: Freeman Klopott
    Examiner Staff Writer
    October 27, 2009

    Crackdowns on illegal immigrants and other law enforcement efforts are driving gangs out of Northern Virginia and into Maryland and the District, a report released Monday concluded.

    “Many gang members from Northern Virginia are moving or driving to Prince George’s and other Maryland counties, into the District of Columbia or further south and west into Virginia to avoid dealing with police departments that are unrelenting in their efforts to keep gangs under control,” authorities wrote in the Northern Virginia Regional Gang Task Force report.

    The report said the task force’s success is the result of Virginia law enforcement’s use of anti-gang policing measures, including the referring of suspected illegal immigrants to federal authorities. Since the task force was created in 2003, it has arrested 952 gang members, more than 40 percent of whom were illegal immigrants, the report said.

    Experts say jurisdictions such as Montgomery County, where police are told to look away from immigration violations, have become safe havens for gangs.

    The law enforcement group hired independent reviewers to develop the “Comprehensive Gang Assessment,” which studied the effect of the task force’s efforts between 2003 and 2008 in Arlington, Fairfax, Prince William, Loudoun and Fauquier counties, as well as Alexandria. The task force has brought federal and local law enforcement agencies together, and the report credits it with helping drive down the region’s violent crime rate by 17 percent over the six years of the study.

    But officials on the other side of the Potomac said there is no evidence to back up the report’s claim — based on anecdotal evidence — that the gangs are fleeing into their jurisdictions.

    “We simply don’t have any evidence to support that assertion,” said Montgomery County Executive Ike Leggett’s spokesman, Patrick Lacefield. The county’s police department recently has made it more difficult for officers to report suspected illegal immigrants to federal authorities, even if they’re gang members.

    Prince George’s County State’s Attorney Glenn Ivey said violent crime has been dropping in the county, where homicides this year may reach lows not seen since the late 1990s. Violent activity by Hispanic gangs has dropped off since federal authorities successfully prosecuted MS-13 gang leaders on racketeering charges. However, Ivey said, traditionally black gangs like the Crips and the Bloods have been making inroads, but primarily through the jail system and not through migration from other areas.

    Jon Feere, a legal policy analyst for the Center for Immigration Studies, said the “enforcement-free zones” that define Maryland’s and the District’s approach to illegal immigrants “benefit only the lawbreaker and are a threat to public safety.”

    He added, “a jurisdiction which welcomes illegal immigration also welcomes gang activity.”

  16. Truth to Power said on 30 Oct 2009 at 10:10 am:
    Flag comment

    BTW - On this page is the link to the Comprehensive Gang Assessment 2003-2008 for Arlington, Fairfax, Prince William & Loudoun counties

    http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/police

  17. The Patriot (Got E-Verify???) said on 30 Oct 2009 at 11:02 am:
    Flag comment

    “A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government.”
    Thomas Jefferson

    How does this most excellent quote compare against our current government’s performance?

  18. The Patriot (Got E-Verify???) said on 30 Oct 2009 at 11:13 am:
    Flag comment

    “I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.”
    Thomas Jefferson

  19. The Patriot (Got E-Verify???) said on 30 Oct 2009 at 11:24 am:
    Flag comment

    “The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.”
    Thomas Jefferson

    Does this not address the “redistribution of wealth” concept?

  20. The Patriot (Got E-Verify???) said on 30 Oct 2009 at 11:32 am:
    Flag comment

    “Every immigrant who comes here should be required within five years to learn English or leave the country.”
    Theodore Roosevelt

  21. The Patriot (Got E-Verify???) said on 30 Oct 2009 at 11:37 am:
    Flag comment

    “There can be no fifty-fifty Americanism in this country. There is room here for only 100% Americanism, only for those who are Americans and nothing else.”
    Theodore Roosevelt

  22. Not SPLC said on 30 Oct 2009 at 12:18 pm:
    Flag comment

    The Patriot (Got E-Verify???)- Don’t get me started!
    Rasmussen survey
    Fifteen percent (15%) say that Congress is doing a good or an excellent job while 53% rate Congressional performance as poor. Sixty-two percent (62%) believe that Congress pays more attention to the media than to voters.

  23. The Patriot (Got E-Verify???) said on 30 Oct 2009 at 12:24 pm:
    Flag comment

    http://www.cis.org/Usurpation-Elites-People%27sWill
    This article is a must read…it coincides with the quotes I posted above.

  24. Dave Core said on 30 Oct 2009 at 1:33 pm:
    Flag comment

    2010 is an election year in the City. There are three city council slots to be filled either by incumbents or others. Keep an eye out in the papers or perhaps on this blog about how to apply to run for office. The filing deadlines might be as early as January 1 for the May 4 election. Sometimes, you need to make the necessary changes from within the powers of government.

  25. Austin said on 30 Oct 2009 at 1:56 pm:
    Flag comment

    7×10 is 70sf looks a little large to me.

  26. Dittyman8 said on 30 Oct 2009 at 2:31 pm:
    Flag comment

    Now these illegal immigrant “activists” are referring to themselves as Native Americans. Really? Where were they when my ancestor’s tribe, the Cherokees, was being forced march during the Trail of Tears from Georgia to Oklahoma (BTW, it happenned during Democrat Andrew Jackson’s watch)? Answer: Mexico, El Salavador, Costa Rica, and the rest of Latin America. I’ll bet if I was to move to Mexico or any country down there, I would not be accepted as a citizen with open arms. In fact, naturalized Mexican citizens aren’t even allowed to vote under the Mexican constitution. The double talk is laughable.

  27. citizenofmanassas said on 30 Oct 2009 at 3:11 pm:
    Flag comment

    Dave,

    Exactly. I hope you run again.

  28. Sue said on 30 Oct 2009 at 4:04 pm:
    Flag comment

    who don’t you like dave????

  29. anon said on 30 Oct 2009 at 5:07 pm:
    Flag comment

    Since when are hispanics native americans?!?

    A great example revisionist history!

  30. The Patriot (Got E-Verify???) said on 30 Oct 2009 at 5:15 pm:
    Flag comment

    When are people (legal U.S. citizens) going to drop the hyphenated American garbage? These ethno-centric groups (like La Raza - “the race”) are dividing our great nation into groups based on race (and yet…they scream racism…that does not compute). How about people just concentrate on being American.

  31. connoisseur said on 30 Oct 2009 at 6:20 pm:
    Flag comment

    It’s a shame most people don’t recognize fine art and great poetry when they see it. This will probably end up in the Smithsonian some day as an example of early 21st Century folk art.

  32. Ray B. said on 30 Oct 2009 at 8:57 pm:
    Flag comment

    A question was asked by NOT SPLC to Andy H. if the signs in the Historic District had to approved by the ARB….Andy said the historic district is no different for signs than any other residential property.

    Funny, I guess my computer injects words when I look at Manassas City Code to wit:

    “Sec. 130-546. Certificate of appropriateness.
    (a) Activity requiring review, unless exempted by this division:
    (1) No building or structure, including signs, shall be erected,reconstructed, altered or restored within an HOD unless approved by the ARB or, on appeal, by the city council as being architecturally compatible with the historic structures within.”

    then…

    (b) Approval of certificate of appropriateness. Prior to approval of any certificate of appropriateness, the ARB shall determine if the following conditions have been adequately addressed:
    (1) The activity is consistent with the secretary of the interior’s standards for:
    a. Rehabilitation; and
    b. Being architecturally compatible with the historical, cultural and/or architectural aspects of the HOD, structure and its surroundings.
    (2) The visual impact of the proposed exterior architectural features, including all signs.
    (3) The general design, scale and arrangement of new construction and additions.
    (4) The texture, material and color of new construction, unless otherwise exempt from review.
    (5) The relationship of features in subsections (b)(2), (3) and (4) of this section, to similar features of the buildings and structures immediately adjacent to or visible from the proposed activity.
    (6) The extent to which the building or structure would be harmonious with, or incompatible with, the historic aspects of its surroundings.

    And since a white sheet sign could be considered contempory, let’s look at that part -

    (c) Contemporary construction. It is not the intent of the city or this division to discourage contemporary architectural expression, or to require the emulation of existing structures of historic or architectural interest in specific detail. Harmony, or incompatibility, shall be evaluated in terms of the appropriateness of architectural features, materials, scale, size, height and placement of a new structure in relationship to existing structures and to the setting.

    I guess I’ll give up English speaking and switch to my German or Korean since I read the code as saying the ARB does have a say in Historic District Signs.

  33. red,whit and blue said on 30 Oct 2009 at 10:05 pm:
    Flag comment

    I have said it before and I’ll say again to those jerks who put up such signs. Where is your outrage for your murderer’s victims, your rapist’s victims, your molester’s victims? You SUPPORT crime and criminal activity and I am no fool but you are.

    I believe you want open revolution and you preach it with racist hatred. Bring it on. You have already declared war on America with your gangs, your killers and your disregard for laws, all laws. We know this because we watch the news of the lawlessness in your lands, your wanton murder, rape and mayhem; your killing of innocent, the police and the drug wars. You rape your own country and despise it by leaving it because it is the pits, a bad place to live and sorry excuse for a habitat yet you claim to love your land while saying we are all racist. We once were a land of laws but because of weakness, legislators and lawmen do not enforce them. Do not take this as a sign of weakness and don’t push us too far. I will fight for my land and my country. Your racist, anarchist views are clear. You will not take my land no matter how hard you try and make me feel like I owe you something. I owe you nothing. If Mexico or where ever you came from is so damn great, why the hell did you leave?

    Go home now! Go home now! Go home now! Go home now! Go home now!

  34. DPortM said on 31 Oct 2009 at 7:25 am:
    Flag comment

    God bless the CBP - they catch a man wanted for sexual assault in Manassas, VA:

    “Customs and Border Protection officers noted an outstanding warrant for arrest for Hassan Salieu Turay who arrived to Bush airport, October 26. Turay is wanted in Manassas, Va. for sexual assault involving a child. Turay was turned over the Houston Police Department for extradition. ”

    http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/newsroom/news_releases/10302009_3.xml

  35. AndyH said on 31 Oct 2009 at 7:54 am:
    Flag comment

    RayB:

    Thanks for that code section! That sign is political speech and is not regulated by the ARB. The problem, in the eyes of the law, is that it is too large, not how it looks.

    To put this question in different terms, would you imagine having to get approval from the ARB to put up a Miller or McDonnell sign if you lived in OTM? obviously not.

    I don’t like the sign or what it has to say either….

  36. ... said on 31 Oct 2009 at 8:44 am:
    Flag comment

    I think, when you start making determinations that a sign is or is not acceptable based on what is written on it, that is where the 1st amendment comes into play.

    I gather that the sign would not be considered acceptable if it had commercial speech on it?

  37. AndyH said on 31 Oct 2009 at 8:54 am:
    Flag comment

    That’s my understanding. If you want to put up a sign for your biz in OTM, you have to go see ARB.

  38. park'd said on 31 Oct 2009 at 9:21 am:
    Flag comment

    Just have a white guy hang his own sign and if the city tries to force him to remove it then sue the city for racism. Easy solution.

  39. Black Saint said on 31 Oct 2009 at 10:17 am:
    Flag comment

    There’s the “the U.S. stole the southwest” argument.
    Well, the land in dispute was “owned” by Spain for a couple of centuries. Then by Mexico for about 25 years. During these periods, there weren’t more than a few thousand Spaniards or Mexicans in the entire territory. It’s been owned by the U.S. for about 160 years now, much longer than Mexico’s reign. And the U.S. has actually done something with the land, made it habitable for tens of millions. The difference between American and Mexican “twin cities” straddling the border is like night and day, yet the land is obviously the same. It’s not the dirt that’s important, it’s the people. Put another way, if culture didn’t matter, Mexico and Central America would be paradise.

    Immigrant Argument!
    There’s the “everyone’s an immigrant except for the ‘Native Americans’” argument. Well, the American Indians didn’t sprout from the land, they came across the Bering land bridge from Asia. So if the criterion is “You’re an immigrant if you had an ancestor who immigrated here,” then American Indians are immigrants, too.

    In that case, “immigrant” is no longer a useful word, since Everyone’s an immigrant.

  40. legal2 said on 31 Oct 2009 at 11:21 am:
    Flag comment

    Sorry, I don’t consider the sign free speech or political speech. It’s hate speech and offensive to many people. If you’re going to be politically correct, then apply it with equality! If you’re going to defend some people from being offended, then defend ALL from the offensive, hate speech on Liberty St.

  41. RayB. said on 31 Oct 2009 at 9:00 pm:
    Flag comment

    Andy - thanks for the posting about it being a sign of political speech; I was sorta hoping if I stuck in the ARB code, the “rest of the story” (as Paul Harvey said) would come out.

    I find the sign offensive, as was the last sign, but alas….political speech is protected and he appears to be within the City’s sign ordinance. I served 23 years, and still serving now 35 years later, upholding & defending the Constitution even when I don’t like some idiot.

    Legal2 said “offensive to many people” and that raises the other issue about free/political/hate - until a majority steps forward and either addresses the City Council at available Citizens’ Time, or does a calling/writing campaign, the Council cannot take action. That is the caveat - the majority has to sound off.

    Unfortunately in my fair City, the majority goe about their lives, complain among self and neighbors, and just blow off City Hall saying it is just a bunch of political folks who take no action. Blogs don’t count as a majority unfortunately….and I am not sure even the City has determined what a majority would be when this yahoo’s “free speech” steps over the line to causing social unrest. Manassas Citizens have to step up to the plate, and the most vocal of us are the minority.

  42. Anonymous said on 1 Nov 2009 at 12:04 am:
    Flag comment

    RayB. said on 31 Oct 2009 at 9:00 pm:
    until a majority steps forward and either addresses the City Council at available Citizens’ Time, or does a calling/writing campaign, the Council cannot take action. That is the caveat - the majority has to sound off.

    How about Help Save Manassas of other enteties getting a LARGE group of people together and make a march on the Manassas City Council to show the people’s displeasure with the council and it’s handling of the Fernandez situation for the past 3 years. The illegals make no bones about marching in the city.

  43. AndyH said on 1 Nov 2009 at 8:07 am:
    Flag comment

    RayB:

    I don’t think he is within the sign ordinance. The size limit is 32 sq ft in aggregate size. The new sign appears to be too large but there is also some sign complaining about the police and when taken together, the signs are too big.

    IOW, you could have 32 1′x1′ signs or whatever combination of sizes as long as they don’t exceed 32 sq. ft.

    Now, this is a zoning violation and is dealt with no differently than peeling paint, vehicles parked on laws, etc. I have no idea what, if any, bearing our previous dealings with the owner of the lot have on this current episode.

    I’ll update either here or on my blog as I know anything else.

  44. Big Dog said on 1 Nov 2009 at 8:35 am:
    Flag comment

    Start a Million Anonymous Blogger’s March if you like, but the
    actions of the city must be based on what the law, as interpreted
    by the courts, permit it to take. This isn’t about lack of will
    on the council - they, to a person, want the signs removed ASAP-
    but an established legal process must be followed.
    Suggest you Google - Fernandez signs Manassas.
    For example, on 3-26-2009 the WaPo had an article
    headlined “Judge Refuses Manassas Permanent Injunction”.
    - “Manassas officials said they soiught the injuction because
    Fernandez has repeatedly violated the city’s building and
    zoning codes … They are not naive property owners and are
    deliberately breaking the law and thumbing their noses at
    the city, the law and the courts”.
    -A Prince William Circuit Court Judge denied the city’s
    request and noted “I recognize the frustration of city officials,
    but the law looks unfavorably on precluding future behavior.”

    Without a Permanent Injunction the city has to go back to square
    one each time around and restart the process and that, I’m told,
    was done on Friday.

  45. The Patriot (Got E-Verify???) said on 1 Nov 2009 at 9:28 am:
    Flag comment

    Why don’t we have our own sign…”PWC Residents Against Illegal Immigration…No Amnesty, No Pathway to Citizenship, No Dream Act! Enforce the Law!”

  46. The Patriot (Got E-Verify???) said on 1 Nov 2009 at 9:29 am:
    Flag comment

    http://www.thehopeforamerica.com/play.php?id=2256
    Sheriff Joe debates Rick Sanchez. Sheriff Joe owns the place!

  47. legal2 said on 1 Nov 2009 at 1:28 pm:
    Flag comment

    Just who determines that the Libertee sign is political speech or hate speech? It is inciteful, racist, offensive and devisive, imo.

  48. stick a fork in the usa said on 1 Nov 2009 at 2:01 pm:
    Flag comment

    It is way easier to harass pro-lifers outside the local abortion clinic than deal with the local pro illegal alien group, I mean what judge or politician (save a few we all know) will side with pro-lifers these days? Besides, the illegal lovers will sue your city and they will win!

  49. Tea for Two said on 1 Nov 2009 at 2:08 pm:
    Flag comment

    Quick Quiz:

    How fast would it take the city to remove a sign the size of the Liberty Street sign of an aborted baby?

  50. Big Dog said on 2 Nov 2009 at 9:46 am:
    Flag comment

    Drove by this morning and the smaller older sign is down, but
    the larger one, pictured at the top of this thread, is still up.
    It appears to be over 32 sq. ft and in violation of the city code
    I trust Manassas will soon be back in court to seek justice
    and hopefully the Judge will finally see the ongoing game
    Fernandez is playing as he flaunts the community, the court
    and the law.

    .

  51. zuzu said on 2 Nov 2009 at 12:00 pm:
    Flag comment

    Geez, in Leesburg (historic district) you can’t install anything but a “colonial style” garage door, let alone get away with a sign like this. Oh, by the way, I, too, am of native american descent and I’m damn sick and tired of them misleading people into believing that 287g is an offense and danger to native American INDIANS…(notice they never use THAT word, “indians”)and “people of color”. I don’t know of any African Americans that are under suspicion as illegal aliens! Just who are these “people of color”? They are simply trying to drum up hostility and anger between AMERICAN CITIZENS (legal ones) with the hope that the “an enemy of my enemy is my friend” mentality will benefit their cause. There are no bigger racists that the people who use race as an argument against a non-racial issue simply because they don’t HAVE an argument,period. If they’re here illegally, they have to go. It is THEY who are hurting “people of color”…ALL colors.

  52. Jay said on 2 Nov 2009 at 12:06 pm:
    Flag comment

    Most of this website is hilarious unintentional comedy for the intelligent- but accuracy should get rewarded. . .

    That sign is ugly. . .as well as an act of linguistic jihad on my precious language. Really - if you’re going to have a sign try to have solid grammar. . .and lose the differentiating font colors. . .it’s like a middle school product of a slow child.

  53. Dave Core said on 2 Nov 2009 at 3:49 pm:
    Flag comment

    To Sue: I wouldn’t mind seeing the two Republicans re-elected: Aveni and Harrover. I’d like to see the third slot taken by a conservative Republican. I don’t plan to run in 2010.

Comments are closed.


Views: 1766