Please forgive my ignorance, but just who in the hell

[Texasgal]

Is A.N.S.W.E.R?

[sui generis]

1. I.H.A.V.E.N.O.I.D.E.A.

:shrug:

[bryant69]

5. They are an anti war organization

The problem is that they have connections to Communist organizations, and as such take a harder line than some people are comfortable with, while excusing China it's depradations for example. They are good organizers and all, but people wonder if their baggage is worth the cost.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[undeterred]

2. Your avatar reminds me of

H.E.A.L.T.H. C.L.A.S.S.

:shrug:

[Burma Jones]

4. ROTFLMAO

either that, or that is one anorexic Longhorn.....

[flowomo]

3. just surf it up:

http://www.internationalanswer.org/

[Texasgal]

7. Thank you.

I am reading up on it now. :hi:

[TechBear_Seattle]

6. Essentially, a socialist front

http://www.internationalanswer.org/

You can't have any kind of political street action nowadays without them muscling in, taking over and refocusing the action to their own agenda damn whatever prompted the action in the first place. (Who me? Bitter? What do you mean?)

What I find tragi-comic about them is that the biggest name on the anti-war rallies is a group that advocates overthrowing capitalism by violent means.

[bos1]

9. yes, links about ANSWER Stalinists

http://www.laweekly.com/ink/02/50/news-corn.php

http://authoritarianopportunistswhocozyuptogenocidaldictators-forpeace.org/

http://www.zmag.org/sustainers/content/2002-11/11dominick.cfm
A critical response to Corn and other A.N.S.W.E.R. detractors

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20020513&s=featherstone
An example of A.N.S.W.E.R.'s relations with other groups

http://www.journalofaestheticsandprotest.org/1/BenShepard/index.html
Why the A.N.S.W.E.R. style of political mobilization is inherently disempowering

[LiberalEsto]

8. I posted this on another thread:

I strongly suspect there are elements in ANSWER that want to hijack the peace movement, dilute it, or derail it. I wouldn't be surprised if these elements came from some CIA-type people who have infiltrated ANSWER for the express purpose of derailing the anti-war movement.

Stuff like this went on during the Vietnam War protests as well. I remember attending many protests that were planned as peaceful and nonviolent, in which small groups of crazies and agitators tried to drive the crowds to commit violent or destructive acts. They would turn over cars and garbage cans and set fire to them. They ended up making all of us look bad, and giving an excuse to the war hawks to denounce us.

There were also various groups with their own agendas trying to take over the organization of the big marches. Again, looking back I suspect that some of these people were there with the intent of screwing up the peace marches.

Here's something from Wikipedia on ANSWER:
From Wikipedia:

ANSWER—is a protest organization established by the International Action Center, which was founded by former United States attorney general Ramsey Clark and has taken a leading role in the post-9/11 antiwar movement. The organization characterizes itself as anti-imperialist, and its steering committee consists of socialists, civil rights lawyers, and progressive organizations from the Muslim, Arab, Palestinian, Filipino, Haitian, and Latin American communities...

...Other prominent organizational endorsers include the Freedom Socialist Party, Green Party USA, and Vietnam Veterans Against The War Anti-Imperialist. Prominent individual endorsers include comedian Dick Gregory, Robert Meeropol of the Rosenberg Fund for Children, author Michael Parenti, and historian Howard Zinn.

[deutsey]

10. One of many anti-war groups in the American anti-war movement

They're one of the most effective and consistent organizers and also one of the most ideologically far-left among the various groups in the coalition.

They often lump a wide range of far-left causes (some obscure or unrelated to the anti-war movement) and have a reputation for being rather humorless and ideologically rigid (they were part of the Workers World Party, or something like that, which embraced Stalinist communism).

I align myself with United for Peace and Justice and CODE PINK, personally, but I have to say I appreciate ANSWER's efforts to at least resist and organize against Bush and his corporate fascism. In the dark days after 9/11, ANSWER was really the only group effectively rallying opposition against Bush on a national level. It wasn't until April 20, 2002 that another group (which became United for Peace and Justice, I believe) organized a strong anti-Bush demonstration in DC (although ANSWER, which had a demonstration on the same day, ended up getting all the TV coverage on CSPAN).

Anyway, what I think everyone needs to remember is that ANSWER is not THE anti-war movement. They are part of a large and diverse coalition of groups, large and small...unfortunately, they get the lion's share of attention as a result of their relentless self promotion and the easy target they make for corporate/rightwing media.

[deutsey]

11. PS: Here's something I wrote about the April 20 demonstration

http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/2002/04/23_Wage_Peace.html

I'm surprised it's still available online.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

12. Here is an excellent post from yesterday regarding ANSWER

from Minstrel Boy

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4878874

Is that your final A.N.S.W.E.R.?

Another march on Washington, and more grumbling about A.N.S.W.E.R.'s performance.

Much of the noise comes from embarrassed moderates, who are new to the demonstration game and are simply not that demonstrative. Others suggest A.N.S.W.E.R. engages in bait and switch: draw mass numbers with the cause of Iraq and then use the platform to catapult the propaganda, including wedge issues bound to alienate sizeable contingents of the crowd, and serves to categorize a generalized anti-war movement in the terms of Stalinist caricature.

Now I don't have a problem with radical politics. Those are my politics. And I do believe that mass events are good occasions to wisely shed light upon the interconnections of injustice. What I have a problem with is Ramsey Clark. I don't trust him. And so, I must have a problem with A.N.S.W.E.R. I don't trust it, either.

A.N.S.W.E.R., established by Clark's International Action Center, shows a national, organizational savvy in securing police permits and outclasses and outspends all popular opposition groups in America. (Though there's no transparency regarding the source of its funds.) While the Iraq War is its rallying cause, A.N.S.W.E.R. was founded, presciently, on September 14, 2001, even before the "War on Terror" was officially launched, even rhetorically.

Why don't I trust Clark? If LBJ's former Attorney General was ever going to win my trust, he would have repudiated his handpicked Clark Panel, its medical professionals linked to the intelligence community, and its findings a whitewash of John F Kennedy's incomplete and adulterated autopsy records. He would have apologized to history and America's thwarted justice for stating just days after the murder of Dr King, and even before a suspect was in custody, that "all of our evidence at this time indicates that it was a single person who committed this criminal act." Years later in The Nation, after his radical makeover, Clark said James Earl Ray should not be given a new trial, but rather his case ought to be studied by a government panel. As Lisa Pease asks in The Assassinations, "Did Clark really think the government, which produced the Warren Commission and the HSCA and failed to reveal the truth about either the Martin Luther King case or the Kennedy assassination, should have been given a chance to bamboozle us yet again?"

The American Left of Chomsky and Cockburn and The Nation will never touch these matters of conspiracy. So Clark is largely untouched by his legacy of abetting three of the most egregious miscarriages of modern justice - John, Martin and Bobby - which, uncorrected, have brought America to this point of low comedy and great horror.

If your intent is generational warfare, you had better give some forethought to the stage management of your opposition. As you turn up the pressure, you need to ensure people can vent some steam. It makes them feel better. Like they've done something.

[mcscajun]

13. Have a bit of a read here...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2111677&mesg_id=2111695

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=4878636&mesg_id=4878823