But if it is true, why hasn't this very story been put forward in the UFP/ANSWER explanation of the affair?
And why would UFP/ANSWER (ugh) choose lesser-knowns instead of Lerner, if not because Lerner had criticized ANSWER? Regardless of the process, choosing somebody other than Lerner is a blunder. No disrespect to the other rabbis, but compared to Lerner, they're just chopped liver.
I note that there are many names on the petition that are not Gitlin, Cooper, Berube, or Corn, though I have fewer problems with these three than many others here, evidently.
The real underlying problem is that ANSWER's sway as an anti-war focal point is grossly disproportionate to its appeal among active leftists. It needs to be taken down a peg.
mbs
-----Original Message----- From: owner-lbo-talk at lists.panix.com [mailto:owner-lbo-talk at lists.panix.com]On Behalf Of joanna bujes Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 5:36 PM To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com; bmayer at forte.com Subject: More on Learner
FYI/Joanna ___________________________________________________________ From: "Liat Weingart" <liat at jewishvoiceforpeace.org
Rabbi Lerner was not banned at all from speaking. A Jewish Voice for Peace is having a speaker at the same demonstration, and two other rabbis from San Francisco are also speaking. Marisa Handler, a representative from Tikkun, was present at the meeting of United for Peace where it was decided that Michael would not speak. She was asked three times if she was comfortable having someone else speak, and she said that she was, again and again. A week passed after this meeting, without incident, and then Michael decided to send a press release, stating that he was banned because of his views. This is patently false and has been tremendously destructive. We have been overloaded with trying to right this wrong, and it has distracted us from our work of organizing for this Sunday's demonstration. I urge you to please set the record straight.
Liat Weingart