To all the anti-ANSWER folks . . . a suggestion.

[ET Awful]

If you don't like their way of doing things, then DO SOMETHING YOURSELF. Sitting around whining like a spoiled child about the way someone else does something doesn't get a god damned thing changed.

NOBODY else is taking the steps necessary to organize large scale events.

If you don't want ANSWER involved, the logical step is to form a group that will jump through all the necessary hoops that ANSWER currently does insofar as organizing, gaining permits, gaining funding, etc.

If you don't like it, do something about it. Doing nothing accomplishes nothing, that's kind of the way it works.

Sure nobody wants to hear about Save Pakistani Land Whales from Extinction or whatever new pet cause is being spoken about at anti-war rallies, but until someone (namely those who object so vociferously to ANSWER) steps up and actually attempts to organize something, then ANSWER will always be the organizer.

Every rally, both local and national I've seen, I see the same old complaining and whining.

If you don't like the way someone else organizes it, then DO SOMETHING YOURSELF. Form another group if you like, publicize it nationally, get national donors and support, fight for the permits, arrange for the space necessary for rallies, etc. Just do something besides whine.

Who does more damage to the anti-war movement, those who organize the rallies and speak about other unrelated issues, or those who do nothing but whine about people who organize the rallies speaking about other unrelated issues.

If you aren't part of the solution, you're part of the problem. PERIOD.

[DS1]

1. I think there's been more complaining about the fringe-groups

of ANSWER here than there have been on the typical right-wing boards :eyes:

[ET Awful]

6. That's kind of my point.

If people spent more time doing something about it than they did complaining, they might actually accomplish something.

[Inland]

10. Why would the right wing boards complain?

A prominent place for commies at an antiwar rally is Christmas in September for them.

[sniffa]

13. you're a commie!!

i knew it.

[jonnyblitz]

20. nobody there paid much attention to them...the crowd was so

huge and so many other things were going on. I don't understand why the anti ANSWER people chose this particular march, one of the BIGGEST ones ,to completely go off their rocker over ANSWER when ANSWER has been at the helm for damn near every one in DC. Most of these asshats bitching don't go to demos anyway, I am sure.

[moddemny]

22. "Most of these asshats bitching don't go to demos anyway, I am sure"

Don't be so sure..... I've been complaining about ANSWER for some time. When I was at the RNC (waiting on a corner for the riot police to come in and arrest us all) I saw alot of passerbys who were joining the protests spontaneously. People who were not particularly active before but because it was anti-bush joined in. When they found out what ANSWER was about they became disgusted. United for Peace has the framework up, I dont see why they can't just break away from ANSWER.

[symbolman]

38. Are you calling me an asshat?

Because the think ANSWER sucks and always have?

So if I don't want a group being the media representation of the anti war movement who have Communists in their org then *I* am an asshat?

I guess I've been fighting the wrong fight.. I should have been fighting for the right to WRECK the Progressive causes by being a shrill fringe hodgepodge of unpalatable people that completely turns off middle america..

It was MIDDLE AMERICA that got NAM ENDED. I was THERE, I got DRAFTED and I MARCHED then..

YOU don't think I KNOW what the fuck a Movement is all about? I've been fighting these bastards on the right for FOUR years with all the money I had, been on Television, O'Reilly, Scarborough, Boycotted Limbaugh for millions, sued by Savage for half a million..

Created over 50 animations that pulled in 100 million hits our first year alone. Flew from Hawaii to film the DSM hearings when it was thought NO MEDIA was going to cover them..

and *I*m an ASSHAT?

Sorry, gotta call bullshit on this - would you mind very much if *I* or Takebackthemedia organized something cooler, without the baggage?

Or would I still be an ASSHAT?

[ET Awful]

43. Now see, that's what I'm talking about, someone who is willing to not

only criticize ANSWER, but get involved enough to actually organize something better.

KUDOS to you for actually doing exactly what I'm talking about in my initial post.

In fact, PM me if you know of any area where I can be of assistance in such an organizational effort.

[Ignoramus]

48. A public demonstration isn't a press-conference

It's a united front create by people with diverse views. Even if ANSWER gets the permit, it's the demonstrators demonstration.

If you will organize something different, then great.

How about also attempting to hijack ANSWER's demonstrations? That way you won't be diverting people from protesting.

You do slick flash stuff, and performance art. How about coming up with a clever way to promote a pro-demonstration anti-answer event at an ANSWER demonstration?

Also, what do you think about the idea that demonstrations are largely white? You say screw the arabs, middle-america doesn't know about them. Let's focus on middle-america white people's interests. Isn't that kind of sick?

Also, aren't you fighting reactionary politics? For example, the type of politics that label people "commies"?

[jonnyblitz]

81. if the shoe fits...

if you are crapping on all the coalitions for participating in the demo because you don't like some of the "commies" responsible for it YES YOU ARE AN ASSHAT. I don't give a fuck what your claim to fame is and I don't even know you except that you come on here every so often to toot your own horn and to remind us that you know Janeen Garafalo.:eyes: just my opinion..

[LittleClarkie]

66. Probably because those who saw the coverage in the media

saw mostly ANSWER. I didn't get a chance, but apparently you couldn't find coverage of the march itself for love or money. So perhaps folk's perceptions are skewed because ANSWER's all the media showed them.

Understandably, if you were IN the march, you didn't see the coverage in the media.

[Guaranteed]

57. Yeah, because we need to get our shit together.

The anti-Iraq-War movement is getting taken over by a bunch of crazies.

There is SO MUCH political territory between Joe Lieberman and ANSWER.

The question is, where are those strong, reasonable people in our party? They need to STAND UP.

[whatever4]

2. Question about the Answer

Without trying to remain ignorant, I haven't been able to follow very easily what the "problem" is with the "ANSWER" people, movement, statement, whatever it was. It seems to involve Cindy. As if she's a policy maker. As if she's running for public office. As if all her opinions must be sterling, else everything she says means nothing?

Yeah. Well, I can't think of a single person I agree with on everything, so that "what she said about..." is pretty pathetic. It's needless picking, unless I'm badly mistaken, and I can't see how it has a place here at all.

What is this recent divide in the camp? Are the difference/s in opinion worth arguing about?? It seems like now would not be the time to split up, especially over the trivial issue of Cindy's opinions on other issues. Which issues? Does it even matter? Do we really need to waste time on the details of it?

Seeing this argument, about Cindy, on it's surface it almost looks like a ruse. It feels like poison. What I don't understand is why any thinking individual is participating in it, elevating the level of discord, and pushing an agenda of issues which, right or wrong, are bound to weaken our "side".

Who is it that wants to weaken "our" side? Are the differences in opinion worth it? Or are they trumped up, spun up, and intended to disrupt us?

Is everyone sure this isn't a subtle form of attack from within?

Anyone think the Admin would not stoop to doing this???

Can anyone explain how or why some issue, apparently over the opinions of Cindy, merits the harmful and divisive arguments?

[ET Awful]

7. Cindy is not part of ANSWER

ANSWER is a coalition of very diverse groups with very diverse goals. Those groups range from organizations demanding Israels withdrawal from Palestinian territory to Save the Whales.

The complaint by many is that allowing these various groups to have their say at an anti-war rally dilutes the message.

The problem is that the funding, organization, beuraucratic rangling for permits, negotiations with city officials, etc. for these large scale events, have in the recent past been handled by ANSWER because nobody else has the funding nor the organization to pull it off.

After every event, a huge contingent of people spend a huge amount of time pissing and moaning about how ANSWER did this or that, but I have yet to see anyone actually DO anything except whine.

The ANSWER discussion is completely unrelated to the Sheehan discussion. Cindy is not ANSWER and ANSWER is not Cindy.

[RandiFan1290]

3. How do we get C-SPAN to cover anything other than

the kooks on stage for ANSWER?

I remember the NYC march and they actually covered the march. This year we got 3+ hours of ANSWER speeches. C-SPAN is also a part of this problem.

[ET Awful]

5. Once again, form another group, organize, get permits.

The key word, ORGANIZE.

If you have an event with enough people, in a visible way, you FORCE attention. If you sit at your keyboard and complain about events put on by others, you are ignored.

[RandiFan1290]

11. OK we get that part

We are sitting and complaining from our keyboards.

What was the difference between NYC 2004 and DC 2005? ANSWER was in NYC and we heard a lot of their speeches and we also saw the march. In DC we had an event with enough people, in a visible way. We were ignored for the ANSWER speeches.

I don't blame ANSWER for the coverage they received from C-SPAN.

[ET Awful]

12. In NYC, the cameras were already there for the convention.

That's the difference. There were two large newsworthy events going on.

In DC, this wasn't the case.

That's why I suggested the other day that if you want attention, get an equally large rally to brave winter weather and march on the Capitol during the SOTU address, you'll get the media coverage.

[RandiFan1290]

15. So as usual the problem is the media

I think most Americans are not ready to wrap their brains around the problems in Israel right now. They have a hard enough time understanding what is going on in our country. As soon as ANSWER mentions Israel they are labeled as anti-semitic and tossed to the side, like Jon Stewart did last night. Unfortunately the entire march was tossed to the side.

ANSWER has an advanced message that most people do not understand. I just wish they would do a lot more teaching and a lot less screaming.

[ET Awful]

16. ANSWER didn't mention Israel, one of their member groups did.

If you don't like it DO SOMETHING.

I don't equate being on the front page of every major newspaper to being "tossed to the side."

[RandiFan1290]

17. You have no idea what I have done

So please stop screaming that at me. Most Americans do not read news papers. If it wasn't on the tee-vee it didn't happen.

[ET Awful]

18. So tell me oh righteously indignant one . . . what have you done?

Have you made any attempt to change things that didn't involve posting on a message board?

Personally, I have no objections to ANSWER, I think they could do better, but they have the know how and the connections to get the permitting and organization done when necessary, more power to them.

I'm not the one complaining and whining. I'm simply making suggestions.

So enlighten me, apart from posting righteously indignant rants on web sites, what have you done?

[RandiFan1290]

19. I am not sure why you attack me

We have pretty much agreed so far. I happen to agree with ANSWER I just think they are putting their cart ahead of the horse.

Like I said they have an advanced message that most Americans are not ready to understand.

I have not organized any march or protest so I will just shut up about it from now on.

[ET Awful]

25. I'm not attacking you, at least that's not my intent.

You showed righteous indignation, so I commented on righteous indignation.

You appeared to be complaining about ANSWER so I said rather than complainin, you should do something, to which you responded I had no idea what you'd done . . So, I asked you to explain what you'd done.

Nobody is asking anybody to agree with ANSWER, I'm just suggesting that if they don't agree, sitting around pouting and whining isn't going to change things.

I apologize if it sounded like I was attacking you, that wasn't my intent.

[Walt Starr]

4. Tell it to Jon Stewart. n/t

[ET Awful]

8. Tell what to Jon Stewart? All he does is comedically comment on

the days news most often with a liberal slant.

He doesn't organize events, he doesn't fund events, he doesn't fight to obtain permits for events, etc.

If you want Jon Stewart to show clips of something else, then you must first provide something else.

[comsymp]

28. Maybe, with all the "mainstream" Dems carping about ANSWER we'll be

treated to a nice, million-strong DLC March On Washington sometime in the near future?

I, for one, can't wait :popcorn:

[bpilgrim]

9. they are single issue marchers and nothing will change their minds

they make lots of noise but only amount to a handful of folks so i wouldn't worry about them as ANSWER seems to be doing very well without them.

peace

[moddemny]

23. "they make lots of noise but only amount to a handful of folks "

That's where you have it backwards, it's not just a handful of folks who don't like ANSWER. Anti-ANSWER sentiment has been building for a long time. Many people had a problem with ANSWER but didn't want to say anything because of the people waiting to call them freepers. republites, red baiters, blah, blah, blah. Now they see many people share their anti-ANSWER views so they are speaking out more openly.

[ET Awful]

26. The problem is that none of them are willing to do anything to replace

ANSWER or take over where ANSWER leaves off.

For there to be change people must actually do something to effect change, not whine because nothing has changed.

[moddemny]

27. "The problem is that none of them are willing to do anything ......

......to replace ANSWER or take over where ANSWER leaves off."


Not true, I already had one Duer email me that he is a protest organizer in another city and he doesn't like ANSWER. There are many DUer's who don't like ANSWER who have helped organize many events in other ways, the threads are filled with their responses. United for peace has a framework in place....... they could easily pick up where ANSWER left off (I don't know their entire platform but so far it seems fine and it is light years ahead of ANSWER). Many people were motivated to go because of word of mouth and Cindy Sheehan. The reponse that anti-Answer people just whine is from people who don't want to have to deal with ANSWER's many ugly hypocrisies. If United for Peace does try to dump ANSWER, which they could probably do easily, all the pro-ANSWER apologists are probably going to attack them. That's why I think they don't want to make a clear, clean break from ANSWER.

[comsymp]

29. So, this "protest organizer in another city"...

he already has the plans, permits, logistics, etc., for a big upcoming DC march in place, nu?

/so much easier to criticize than to do

[ET Awful]

31. "A protest organizer" . . . a single "organizer" does not a massive rally

make. It takes many people many hours (if not weeks and months) of effort to organize anything on the scale of what was seen last weekend.

[comsymp]

79. Hey, I'm in agreement with you. The attitude I find so... interesting

in all these "OMG, ANSWER IS TEH SUXORZ" threads (which, btw, crop up after every ANSWER-led protest), is that the critics apparently have time to bitch about the events put together by ANSWER, but not to offer an alternative.

The post I was responding to referenced his / her acquaintance, an Organizer who doesn't like ANSWER -- my question is basically, so what is he doing about it?


EDITED FOR: CTFS

[moddemny]

34. You make protest organizing sound...

like you are looking for the cure for cancer or launching a mission to mars. It doesn't take NASA.


Marching for a day isn't the same as living through the siege of Sarajevo with constant shelling and someone sniping at you every time you go to get water. The people who lived through that aren't allowed to have their own principles? They have to join a march with a group that wants Milosevic, the person largely responsible, to go free? (and that's just one example of ANSWER idiocy).

A great deal of the motivated people who came from all over the country because of Cindy had a mockery made of their time and effort spent.

[ET Awful]

37. You really think it's simple?

Please enlighten us.

Have you ever tried getting permits from a city for anything?

It's not an automatic process no matter how much you might like to believe that it is.

If it was that simple, we'd be having rallies every month.

[moddemny]

52. I didn't say say it was simple.....

It's just not the Mars shot you make it out to be. Your trying to find a quick convenient way on how not to deal with ANSWER's hypocrises ignoring the experience of millions of people who actually lived under the horrors of the regimes ANSWER supports.

[ET Awful]

54. Show me where I said it was quick and convenient. Actually I said

exactly the opposite.

I also said if you don't like it, TRY TO CHANGE IT.

I'm happy to note that you ignored that in your rush to attack someone who suggested that might be more effective then complaining.

[moddemny]

58. What?????

"I'm happy to note that you ignored that in your rush to attack someone who suggested that might be more effective then complaining."

You didn't read or don't care about the underlying point in my response about the experiences people have lived through under communism (or people in the balkans under milosevic), which were much longer, much harder than organizing a march. A lot of you people who are attacking the anti-answer folks are really missing a lot of the varied points made in the last few days.

[ET Awful]

63. Once again, the key here is if people are willing to step up to the plate

and organize, then ANSWER will become irrelevant.

If you want to eliminate ANSWER and still have any kind of anti-war movement, you must first present alternatives.

While people have lived through atrocities under communism, etc. (they've also lived through atrocities under capitalism, but that's beside the point), that has little bearing on what we are discussing.

If you don't want ANSWER to be involved in rallies, the first step is to have rallies without ANSWER.

If you'd like that to happen, explain to me how it will happen if people aren't willing to organize.

[moddemny]

65. No one said they aren't willing to organize........

Those are your words..... it won't happen in a day. Right now a lot of people feel duped by ANSWER. They are realizing besides the fact ANSWER has some reprehensible positions it is a liability to the the anti- bush movement and are getting the word out. Getting the word out and building other organizations goes hand in hand.

[ET Awful]

67. The majority of the people I see complaining about ANSWER

have known for ages what ANSWER stood for. ANSWER has been around for many years, and they have been criticized many times, but so far, nobody has done anything to try to organize without them.

[moddemny]

71. I thought when I went to the March.....

United for Peace would have it under control, I complained before the march, people told me to calm down it would be United For Peace so I took it no further. ANSWER has been around and when some people complained they were accused of being redbaiters, freepers, etc. just like now. If there was more awareness before United For Peace may have more courage to dump ANSWER.

[ET Awful]

73. UFPJ is almost always associated with ANSWER when it comes

to these rallies though. You rarely see one without the other.

Have you actually gotten involved with UFPJ (I believe it's actually "United for Peace and Justice, not just United for Peace)? Perhaps that will give you the route I'm speaking of.

If enough people get involved with them, perhaps they CAN dump ANSWER, but unless they know for a fact they have the support base, they won't divest themselves of the connection.

[comsymp]

78. You're exactly right - it DOESN'T take NASA... which reinforces my point-

If so many others who seem to have such an aversion to ANSWER are capable of doing it, why aren't they stepping up?

[sniffa]

83. you may have a point

i was so proud of myseLf, and mrs. sniffa, and bi-baby, and everyone eLse who made the trek down to DC to be heard..

but now i reaLize our time and effort was just made a mockery of, instead. i wish we didn't go. i wish the march never happened. :cry:

[papau]

14. Is ANSWER Saudi money funding dump on Israel with a cover of "progressive"

thought - and communist thought?

Well - since they will not tell anyone about their funding we can only "guess", but the Saudi funding is said to be very real by folks close in to the organization.

And the fact that money buys organization and permits and advertising does indeed get folks out in numbers to a demonstration.

And I doubt that anyone is following ANSWER issues close enough for it to hurt progressives - except that is there is hurt in the media coverage (it is less) because of the commie/anti-Semitic angle - and in media coverage the US media already refuses to cover anything that might hurt Bush or the GOP.

So what is lost by Answer doing the hard work of getting a demonstration going?

:toast:

:-)

[goodhue]

21. Hear, hear!

[Czolgosz]

24. Agreed

[wildeyed]

30. I did do something.

I loaded up two kids under the age of five and drove over seven hours to participate in what I thought was a demonstration against the Iraq war. When I got there, it appeared that the war was only one of a large laundry list of issues that were being protested, many of which I either did not understand or out-and-out disagree with. In addition, the demo appeared to be poorly organized. As has been mentioned, the march started almost three hours late. In the future, I will not participate in a demo organized by ANSWER.

I don't think this constitutes whining. In any situation, there are leaders and followers. When it comes to demos, I am a follower. I choose not to follow these people.

[ET Awful]

32. So, by your own description, you aren't willing to help organize anything

but are just willing to criticize the organization of others.

As I said above, that's kind of like not voting then being outraged at the election results.

[H2O Man]

33. Actually, that is

not an accurate description of what the person said. It is twisting it to meet your purpose.

Until today, I have not participated in the discussions about ANSWER, because I do not think that it serves any progress purpose. However, it is unfair of you to say that those who do not like ANSWER are simply whining. You simply can't back that type of statement up.

[ET Awful]

35. Now you're twisting what I said.

What I said is that if they are unwilling to make an effort to effect change or to get involved in organizing the events, they have no place complaining about the way the events happen.

Nice try at twisting my words though.

[H2O Man]

40. I know that

is what you are saying. I also know it's wrong. And I know you twisted the other person's words.

Anyone who attended the rally has every right to complain. And they are under no obligation to meet any silly standard that you determine to earn that "right."

[ET Awful]

41. I see, so basically, your stance is that you don't want to help plan,

you don't think anyone else should have to help organize, you're not willing to get involved in making a change, but you have the right to attack those who are making the plans you don't like?

Basically what you're saying is that you prefer to wallow in ineffectual criticism of those who are willing to step up to the plate and do what you yourself are unwilling or unable to do.

If you don't like the way things are, then TRY TO CHANGE THEM.

After all, isn't that the entire purpose of such a rally anyway? You don't like the way things are, so you want them changed? Why should that apply only so long as someone else makes it easy for you?

[H2O Man]

47. Actually

you don't see anything. You are using a cheap tactic in debate, which is to say, "So, if you don't agree with me on issue A, you obviously think B." You would not pass a high school debating class with that.

I would be confident in comparing my history of activism with yours, or anyone else's; I would not be comfortable in thinking that my history gives me license to tell others what to think or do. That is one difference between us. I get the feeling that you are a little acorn that mistakes yourself for a mighty oak tree.

I know a few of the ANSWER folks, and worked with them a quarter of a century ago. I know their character quite well. You might note that I have not commented about them, however. I have made no comment, pro or negative, about them. But I respect everyone else's right to do that.

Hopefully, after finding out how badly you erred in telling the other person how poorly you value their opinion, because they don't meet your standards of "organizing," when in fact that person is well-organized, you will consider not making unsupported assumptions.

[ET Awful]

50. You are doing EXACTLY what you are accusing me of.

You are saying that since I don't agree with you, I must be wrong for suggesting someone actually get involved in changing things.

All that is accomplished by saying "I won't do anything with ANSWER" and leaving it at that, is insuring that any movement dies then and there. Seriously, that's what it comes down to.

[H2O Man]

51. Your being silly.

You accused people of whining. You are sure that if people are raising concerns with ANSWER, they are incapable of doing other things, at least without your direction. And you are writing silly things, such as, "You are saying that since I ....", which have no foundation in reality.

[ET Awful]

56. Then tell me, oh wise one, what are YOU willing to do? Are you in any

way involving yourself in organizing? Are you in any way making an effort to get events that exclude ANSWER into the public eye? Are you trying in any way whatsoever to organize anti-war events that don't involve them? If not, then you are doing nothing but complaining about them.

[wildeyed]

36. No, I organize plenty.

My area of experience runs more toward voter outreach. Events I organized registered hundreds of voters last election cycle. I am also my precinct chair, although admittedly, I am new to the position and haven't done much with it. Yet.

I don't hate ANSWER. I don't actually know that much about them, except what I have read here. I actually enjoyed the event. But I found it disconcerting to be lending my voice to a bunch of issues I don't understand. I won't do it again. I don't feel that is whining or being overly critical. Just stating my opinion. And I was there, so I think I am entitled to it.

I do think that someone else with a clarity of vision better step up to do the organizing for this movement or a lot of momentum will be lost.

[ET Awful]

39. But see, that's my point. If you were to take some of those same efforts

you invest in voter outreach and make an effort to either form a new group or get involved in an already existing group organizing rallies, don't you think that it would, in the long run, have a more positive insult than just sitting there and saying "I won't work with ANSWER?"

[wildeyed]

45. But what would happen to my voter outreach work?

It is very important. I live in a closely divided city. Good voter turnout is really key to success in my area. Besides, I feel called to the work. And I have experience doing it. Why start over with something new?

As I have stated before, I will not participate in an ANSWER event again. I do not agree with their message. I hope that someone else will step up to the plate. But just because it won't be me doesn't mean I am not entitled to my own opinion on the subject.

[ET Awful]

49. Okay, let's try putting it this way to see if it makes you think on it

more.

If someone started ranting and raving about the way that you did your voter outreach work, and refused to work with you because of the way you did it, but was also completely unwilling to put forth any effort of their own to work with you or to exercise their own initiative to perform outreach, would their critism have any effect whatsoever on how you did your outreach?

[wildeyed]

59. I am not ranting and raving.

And if no one willing to work with me anymore, then yes, it would effect my outreach work. I would no longer have volunteers to work with. And if there was enough criticism from sources I respected, then I might think that the criticism was deserved and make some changes in my approach.

You know who my outreach work really pisses off? The local repugs }( And no, I am not taking their criticism to heart.

[moddemny]

53. "are just willing to criticize the organization of others."

If a neo nazi group or the KKK turn anti-bush and have a large rally are you going to march with them? Are you going to just drop your jaw in awe of their logistics and say who cares about the message?

[ET Awful]

55. The KKK aren't going to organize an event that draws 300,000 people

to Washington DC.

That's the most idiotic comparison you could have come up with.

Actually, what I would do is EXACTLY what I am suggesting. FORM A NEW GROUP AND GET INVOLVED IN ORGANIZING.

I'm done. You people would rather sit and bitch than take action and effect change.

Bye bye.

[moddemny]

62. It's not an idiotic comparision.........

because that is exactly how people feel about ANSWER. A lot of people would have never dreamed they would run into a pro-stalinist group organizing a major protest in DC, it was as inconcievable as the KKK doing it. ANSWER is a front group........ Neo Nazis could easily form a front group. It sounds like lunacy but I never thought I would run into a lunatic group on such a large scale like ANSWER either.

[ET Awful]

64. Comparing ANSWER to the KKK is about as "luantic" as you can get.

They're bad, but they are NOT the KKK. They are not neo-nazis.

They are a coalition of diverse groups.

Once again, if you disapprove of their message, what are you willing to do about it? Would you rather sit around and type complaints about them onto a forum, or would you rather put your efforts into rendering them ineffectual and getting involved in organizing events that exclude them?

The choice is yours.

[moddemny]

69. The comparison is to......

illustrate that ANSWER is as reprehensible to some groups of people as neo-Nazis are to others. They are both extreme.


As far as what I am doing about it, I protested agaisnt Bush many times, I campaigned for Kerry and I dont want ANSWER showing up in a big way ruining other people's efforts. I myself happen to be partially diabled so I cannot form an organization by myself, there are others here who know the mechanics of obtaining permits and marches much better than I. When I find the right group, I will help in what way I can. ANSWER is still going to try to show up and ruin and the parade, when that happens people will know to ignore them.

[ET Awful]

74. Now you're trying to talk about ANSWER showing up at someone elses

event. That's exactly the opposite of what's going on here. Peopled came to ANSWER's event, not the other way around.

Once again, what are YOU willing to do to effect change?

[moddemny]

77. "Once again, what are YOU willing to do to effect change?"

By now I can tell you can't read enough to follow a point in a thread. The inaugural wasn't there event in 2001 or 2005, neither was the RNC. Hundreds of thousands show up....... ANSWER rides the wave. I wouldn't credit ANSWER with even a miniscule part of the Anti-bush movement in the USA.



By the way as I am surfing other groups....... I think I like Billionaires for Bush..... I think I'll call them to help.

[symbolman]

42. This thread is hilarious

reminds me of my ex wife..

"Well, are you going to BUILD a BARN OR NOT?"...

"I'm STILL WAITING.."

YOu got FIVE MINUTES to create a new ORG or ET AWEFUL is going to bust a vein or call your mommy.. or just insult you :)

[ET Awful]

44. Gee, attack me for suggesting someone do exactly what you are

talking about doing a few posts up . . . odd.

You get mad at someone suggesting that people complaining about ANSWER are asshats. You defend yourself and say that you are doing EXACTLY what I'm suggesting, then you attack me for suggesting it?

Wow . . .

[sniffa]

70. don't sweat

dicks are dicks.

[jonnyblitz]

82. and asshats are asshats. nt

[Individualist]

46. Kudos, symbolman

Well said!

[meow mix]

61. LoL! easy to see why EX'd

good one

[Just Me]

60. Tolerance creates space for unity.

There is plenty of room for differing opinions,...as long as they are respectful rather than intended to condemn/persecute/destroy.

I believe the most helpful action for those who view the participants of ANSWER as too abrasive or disconnected or off-point is to contact ANSWER with a constructive memo with respect to those concerns. Lambasting and persecution really should be set aside if we seek to unite our voices with fellow human beings who oppose oppression.

C'mon, folks. Take a breath. Be reasonable and rationale and tolerant. 'Kay? :hug:

[ET Awful]

68. Good suggestions, but I don't think ANSWER would take heed of any memo

like that. That's why I suggest that people actually make an effort to organize without ANSWER. It's really the only way that you can get an undiluted anti-war message out there. If ANSWER wants to get involved as a member or attendeed of said group/event, fine, but so long as ANSWER is in charge, there will always be complaints.

The key, as I said above, is to get people who are willing to get involved on a large scale to form coalitions that render ANSWER effectively irrelevant.

[moddemny]

72. I'm not going to be tolerant of people who pretend

they are for human rights and at the same time think the students in tiannem square are the ones who attacked the Chinese army or that Milosevic should go free.

[Just Me]

75. Name those people,...

,...because there are a LOT of members I know who would NEVER take the positions you asssert. Keep in mind that, ANSWER is a very, very broad coalition. If you seek to be intolerant, then consider being specifically intolerant of those whose position you reject rather than throwing away an entire organization with thousands of fabulous people.

[moddemny]

76. You want to know who they are........

email them. The material is on their website and of the organizations they front for. You don't have to be worried about me being overly intolerant, I'm not the guy who writes the anti Bill Maher threads when he diagrees slightly with people here or all the other threads bashing people who are clearly anti-bush when they deviate slightly from general consensus about what should be "progressive". There is a lot of talk about principle but the anti-answer folks aren't allowed to have theirs about a deranged group? ANSWER is a broad coalition and no Haitian I have met where I live who has a problem with Aristide being ousted wants to turn Haiti into another little Cuba. Answer is bad news for all the groups in their coalition as well.

[LynneSin]

80. Hey, we're all allowed a day of bitching, but you're absolutely right

:pals: