> Also, what exactly is wrong with what is
> said, below? This is what people in more mainstream groups say. For
> instance, today:
>
> >From: "Smi Ling" <smi_ling at hotmail.com>
> >
> >For whatever it is worth. Many friends in interfaith circles here in Toronto
> >have not been that supportive of ANSWER representatives. One thing that is
> >sure is the ANSWER folks in Toronto seem hostile to a free Tibet and
> >insensitive to the racism that Tibetans experience.
> >
> >I have left past protests over the last year when Toronto representatives of
> >ANSWER have demeaned the Jewish people. There is nothing wrong with
> >criticizing the government of Israel. There is something wrong with
> >denigrating the Jewish people.
Of course there is something wrong with denigrating the Jewish people. Who and what is this person talking about? This is the first I've heard that there were any ANSWER representatives in Toronto. To the best of my knowledge there are no WWP members in Toronto.
> ANSWER is red, so the hell what?! WHY are they whining about this? They ARE
> marxists. Why are they surprised that mainstream lefties reject
> their politics?
NO, Kelley, let's run through it again. WWP is marxist. IAC has non-marxists in it. ANSWER is a coalition of which IAC is a member, but it has other people on its board including, like, Pastors for Peace, the Nicaragua Solidarity Committee, and so on, and these are not marxist organizations, so far as I know most of their members aren't marxist, and ANSWER doesn't have a marxist line. It has an anti-war and anti-racist line.
Anyway, re-reading the NYT article which I didn't have in front of me 30 minutes ago, I see that my implication that Lerner "libelled" ANSWER as anti- semitic in the pages of NYT is not correct. He TRIED to do it. He was unhappy that they didn't print the 'anti-semitism' charges. He did in fact libel ANSWER as antisemitic in Tikkunmail.
LP