FROM: Terry Lynch@aol.com; POB 241035; Montgomery, AL 36124-1035 
Phone: (334) 272-4217 voice  (334) 277-3582 fax via arrangement 

DATE:  July 7, 1998 

TO:  Letter to the Editor      

SUBJECT:  Is newspaper Bias, Unfair and Defamatory?

Why did the Montgomery Advertiser publish allegedly defamatory 
letters about Terry Lynch on July 2, 1998?  What does the Advertiser stand to 
gain by publishing untrue statements, innuendos, comments or 
false remarks about Lynch? Are these alleged libelous remarks 
considered fair comment just because they appear on the "Opinion" 
page?  Opinions which defame reputation by making false 
statements or which paint untrue pictures about a private person 
and their work or writings are not fair comment, but lies!

I suggest that what the Advertiser has to gain is money, profit 
from churches which are not taxed, which run socially segregated 
private schools and which spend advertising dollars with the 
newspaper.  Clearly the Advertiser is not unbiased in its 
opinion, but acting so as to increase its profits at the cost of 
Lynch's reputation.

Something very sinister and malicious seems to be at play with 
respect to this matter.  What could motivate the Advertiser to 
print false statements, innuendos, remarks and suggestions others 
have made about a private person?  Could it be the Advertiser 
wants to please the religious community and churches because both 
spend considerable sums in advertising?

Religious business persons and churches are the bread and butter 
of the Advertiser.  Suggesting that churches which operate 
private schools should be taxed may not be a popular notion, even 
though it is sound logic especially in an era and region where 
private, largely socially segregated church schools siphon money 
from public education systems, teach archaic principles and 
religious dogma which determine the conduct of our future 
political leaders and make second class citizens of women. 

However unpopular the idea of taxing churches which operate 
private, socially segregated schools, this does not give the 
Advertiser the right to publish defamatory statements or false 
remarks, suggestions or innuendos about a private person, no 
matter whose opinions those may be.  Such remarks are especially 
defamatory when they serve to:  insult Lynch's intelligence; imply that 
Lynch is impoverished and can not afford a Bible; imply Lynch is illiterate of 
the Bible and not worth consideration; make false associations or 
statements not attributed to Lynch; or infer or suggest that Lynch is a 
communist because some scenario Lynch did not state is like 
circumstances in the former Soviet Union.

The fact and truth is that Lynch is not a communist.  Lynch has never 
been a communist and Lynch don't advocate communism.  Nor is Lynch
unenlightened, asinine, illiterate, impoverished, immature, 
childish, immoral, wasteful, foolish or irreligious.  Lynch is a well 
educated American and believes in God as a righteous force of love 
and enlightenment.  Therefore published statements the Advertiser 
has printed or written images they have painted through 
publication of censored and/or edited letters are very 
defamatory!

Perhaps the best forum to settle these matter is not the 
biased "Opinion" page of the Advertiser but a court of law.  This 
is especially true given the fact that the Advertiser would 
probably go broke from lost advertising monies if it admitted its 
libel in this case and made just compensation without further 
adieu.

Sincerely, Terry Lynch
 Montgomery, AL