>The question is
>whether it makes sense to have two separate rallies, when the two
>coalitions have practically the same demands. One of the coalitions
>had better give in and fold its rally into the other, in my opinion.
>Since <http://www.a20stopthewar.org/> is not likely to change its
>agenda, it has to be <http://www.internationalanswer.org/> to make
>the necessary change.
Who cares if there are two rallies if both are irrelevant? That's my point.
As for ANSWER folding into the larger coalition, of course they won't-- the IAC/WWP never does that. There whole purpose is to dominate whatever group they create-- if ANSWER announced that they were joining A20 and thereby promoting unity, everyone would be happy with that, but they will never do that.
They want their own press releases and their own marshalls fundraising and their own speakers on the podium with lots of allies and front groups making pretend that it's a "coalition" effort.
Won't happen so why even discuss it?
-- Nathan Newman