Uh- how about the main organizer of many of the anti-war rallies, the Workers World cum IAC cum ANSWER folks? Read the frigging Workers World paper which over the years has hailed Iraq's bravery in defying US power.
I did a one minute search of their web site and came up with this gem from the last round of inspections disputes. http://www.workers.org/archives/1997/eye_iraq.html
"Clark supports Iraqi demand
Ramsey Clark responded, "It was never right that any Americans should be on the inspection team. Not only are they not neutral but their nation, their government has the direct policy and commitment to continue the sanctions."
Iraq's stance of calling for the removal of the U.S. inspectors, and of demanding an end to the sanctions, is a courageous act, given the overwhelming power and military presence of the U.S. Pentagon in the region...
Unity among the Iraqi people is evident, and programs such as the country's national food rationing and distribution system, which guarantees a minimum diet, have created a sense of unified struggle."
>From the headline identifying with Iraq's demands to phrases like "unity
among the Iraqi people" to "unified struggle", the WWP/IAC folks have framed
Hussein as leader of his people against US oppression. Whatever the merits
of the specific procedural issues involved, the description of meetings with
Iraqi officials and tone of the article definitely involved "cosying up to
Hussein" and identifying with him, just as the IAC has identified with
Milosevic.
It remains incomprehensible to me that the US left continues to associate with an organization that promotes and valorizes the thuggery of dictators from Beijing to Bagdad. This is close to home for me since large elements of the National Lawyers Guild support the IAC/ANSWER coalition, although the New York City chapter has denounced the endorsements by the national organiz ation of ANSWER's rallies when there are alternative coalitions without its repugnant politics.
-- Nathan Newman