Speaking of "one-issue" people, anti-war group is far worse than women.

[madfloridian]

You guys are ready to never vote Democratic again, you are ready to condemn everyone in the party. Yet some of the posts here are by people ready to jump all over a woman who thinks she should not have to have her rights regulated by government.

I came to DU in 2002, and from Day One I learned that if you have a protest march with ANSWER, you will get every issue under the sun. We ranted about it in 2002, worse in 2003. ANSWER did the same thing then, and the groups who put on the rally should have known.

This is not a new topic yet it has dominated DU with all the condemnation of our Democrats. Governor Dean just got back from the Middle East, visiting Israel, Palestine, Jordan. I can just see him appearing at a rally that is almost anti-semitic. I am sorry but I don't think he should.

I am against this war as much as anyone, but I had to turn off the rally early on yesterday. It was just too much. My husband and I stand with anti-war protests every week here in our city, we have for years. But I don't have to listen to the stuff they put on the air yesterday. They knew it was coming, they should have had their own rally.

Now I am going to watch for the next one who calls me a "one-issue" person and a threat to the party. I will remind them of this.

[nadinbrzezinski]

1. One issue, there I had to

;-)

that said, I posted this earlier

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=4881553&mesg_id=4881553

The thread was locked, I suspect because it asks a question nobody wants to ask... who is truly behind ANSWER and what is their true agenda vis a vis the Peace movement

[asthmaticeog]

2. .

:popcorn:

[CBGLuthier]

3. I consider myself a one issue person

My one issue is human rights. Which includes women's rights, civil rights, gay rights, and the right to not be blown to hell and back by a barbarous invading nation.

And I will not support politicians who do not agree with me on ALL of these issues.

Why should I?

[jonnyblitz]

4. one more try here.

:eyes:

criticizing how Israel treats Palestinians is NOT anti-semitic, criticizng how the US govt or Bush treats the rest of the world is NOT anti-american.

I have NEVER agreed with Dean's stance on the whole Middle East situation. sorry. I know supporters of "which ever" candidate are thin skinned when it comes to criticism. oh well. :shrug:

[madfloridian]

5. Hogwash. Quit rolling your eyes at me.

This is not about a candidate, it is about the party leaders appearing at such a rally. If I have to turn off the TV because it bothers me, then why should I expect them to attend.

People here have said that they will not vote Democratic because our leaders did not show up en masse. That is simply stupid.

[Nikki Stone 1]

10. Exactly. ANSWER abused the march and Dem leadership would have

had egg on their faces and been tied by the neocon media (and the MSM) to those unorganized, diffuse, and unfocused speakers from ANSWER.

AS you know, Madfloridian, I stand with you on women's issues 100%. I stand with you on this one as well.

[madfloridian]

6. Oh, and please tell me his stance on the mideast.

Lay it out, please. I mean all the statements, not just the AIPAC one. He made a lot of very sensible moves on this issue, and he was blasted down by Pelosi and others in the House.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

19. Criticizing how Israel "treats" Palestinians?

Criticizing how Israel "treats" Palestinians.

^That is a statement which conveniently makes Palestinians seem like the victims. A statement like that conveniently ignores every bit of history from 1948 onward (and before) wherein the land belonged to the Brits, and the Brits wanted it partitioned between the Israeli Jews and Palestinians living there. A statement like that conveniently ignores the fact that in 1948 the Palestinians said they didn't want the land divided, that the land was all theirs, and that they planned to kill every Jew in Israel. A statement like that conveniently ignores the fact that Palestinians promptly gathered together the armies of 5? 7? Arab nations to attack and kill all Israeli Jews and take over all the land the Brits had left. It ignores the fact that the Arab armies attacked the then-unarmed Israeli Jews. It also conveniently ignores the fact that to this very day, Palestinians still refuse to partition the land. Instead, Palestinians terrorize common citizens of Israel, and spend their life training and using children as suicide bombers, and suicide rock throwers. It angers me when people choose to be apologists for Arabs based only on blatant misinformation, rather than historical fact.

I was against the invasion on Iraq. I am completely against Bush and his merry band of criminals. Nobody is as much a lib as I am. However, I'm the first to tell you that what's going on in Israel is "an invasion of Palestinian land" ONLY to those who either have no clue whatsoever of Israel's history, or are choosing to ignore every bit of its history.

Criticizing how Israel "treats" Palestinians may or may not be an anti-semitic way to look at what's been going on in Israel since 1948, but it SURE as hell is a way to play a sick revisionistic game with Israel's history.

Please refer to history and historical events when discussing Israel if you're going to bash Israeli Jews.

Sarah

[Colorado Blue]

24. I couldn't agree more. I too am against Iraq, the criminals,

and 100% FOR civil rights, health care, environment, human rights, gay rights, feminism, religious freedom and all the other traditional Democratic values.

But historical revisionism is threatening not only Israeli Jews, but indeed is fueling a surge of antisemitic attacks all over the world. Europe is once again becoming dangerous for Jews. And I truly hate to see Israel-bashing and antisemitic conspiracy theories becoming common on the Left. It's frightening, and reminiscent of the not-so distant past.

Thank you, Sarah, and welcome to DU:)

[Chi-Town Exile]

26. Great Post

[Chi-Town Exile]

25. Fantastic Post

I am so sick of the revisionist history employed by the Palestinian apologists.

They are as bad as the Freepers and use exactly the same tactics as Freepers use when defending Bush.

We have people on here that defend the televised celebrations by Palestinians on 9/11 and the recent destruction of the synagogues that were left in vacated settlements. They also say that if we want to see suicide bombings stopped all Israel has to do is give up Gaza and the West Bank. I wish to God it were that simple!

Worst of all, they reserve their "outrage" for Israel and Israelis and never feel compelled to decry the shedding of Jewish blood.

I believe that many of these individuals are Anti-Semites that hide behind the Palestinian issue by the mere virtue of stating, "I can't criticize Israel without being called an Anti-Semite."

What these people fail to understand is just how tied Jews are Israel, especially since it was only 60/70 years ago that Jews were being systematically hunted down and slaughtered. I fear these individuals would love to see that happen again ... right now.

Do not misunderstand, I do not believe that Israel should never be criticized or that I am enthralled with Sharon and his policies. However, the shrill rhetoric that gets bandied around here with respect to Israel is just a few steps below garden mill Anti-Semitic tripe.

[Violet_Crumble]

31. Yeah, it blamed those pesky Palestinians for everything!!

There was no use of revisionist history in the many corrections I made to that particularly woeful attempt to blame the Palestinians for everything. What I used was FACT, and I can easily give you some references if I thought you were interested in facts...

A hint: you'd be best off not labelling anyone who dares show their support for Palestinian self-determination as anti-Semitic or Freepers. Apart from the fact that yr very wrong, it's only done to inflame people and pretty much gives a solid clue that the flinger of accusations isn't interested in any serious discussion on the issue...

I've seen you say a few times now in yr short time here that you don't believe that Israel should never be criticised, but the strange thing is that any time anyone utters the slightest criticism of Israel, yr in there boots and all arguing with them. So, could you maybe clarify yr position on the conflict by giving a few examples of things yr critical of Israel for?

Violet...

[Violet_Crumble]

30. Wow. Talk about blaming Palestinians for everything...

I think you need to study up on the history of the conflict. A few corrections and ommissions on yr part:

1. It was the United Nations that came up with the Partition Plan, not the British...

2. Something you forgot to mention: In 1948, around 750,000 Palestinians were forced to flee or forcibly expelled from their homes in what's now Israel and weren't allowed to return. What happened then was ethnic-cleansing...

3. The Palestinians did NOT gather together the armies of surrounding Arab states. Sheez, they were so unorganised they couldn't have organised a piss-up in a brewery, yet yr trying to say they were so organised they could gather together a bunch of armies??

4. The Haganah were most definately NOT unarmed...

5. The PLO recognised Israel's right to exist back during the early days of Oslo. The current Palestinian leadership also recognises Israel's right to exist...

6. What is going on in the Occupied Territories IS an occupation of Palestinian land that doesn't belong to Israel.

Please refer to history and historical events when discussing Israel if you're going to bash Palestinians.

Violet...

[OldLeftieLawyer]

7. I couldn't stand it

I have no idea why this march was linked to anyone, and I don't even know who "ANSWER" is. But, watching the endless list of self-indulgent, sloppy, uninteresting, unevolved speakers with causes that are painfully marginal at a time when the big issue - the biggest issue - is our occupation of Iraq, well, it just reminded me that people on the right side (my side) of the issues don't have a whole lot of skill at organizing or getting the message across.

Yesterday called for focus and simplicity, and I watched in horror as everyone who owns a pencil and paper read their "poetry," and shouted to an empty plot of grass, while the C-Span cameras made fools of us all.

I don't know about "one-issue" or anything like that, but I do know that those speeches yesterday - Ralph Nader? - were hopelessly off the topic.

Ramsey Clark, though, an old teacher of mine, was great.

[symbolman]

14. I love it

you nailed it.

I want to start a new org and give the people ENTERTAINMENT, but the truth is you are right, this protest really didn't NEED ANSWER - it was so simple and sincere that what they did was nothing more than damage and interfere..

People need inpired speakers and I didn't see many, very few and even trying to watch it was painful..

and there's really no such thing as a single issue, we all have wish lists, but for the good of the many we put them aside to accomplish ONE task, but ANSWER didn't..

thanks, appreciate your posts

[welshTerrier2]

8. "condemn everyone in the party" ???

really ??? i've never seen even a single post that "condemns everyone in the Party" ...

who is this "you guys" your first sentence is referring to??

as an anti-war Democrat, i would never say that i will never vote Democratic again ... and i certainly would not condemn everyone in the Party ... i will, however, refuse to support those who are supporting more occupation in Iraq ... i will not support those i see as enablers of bush's big oil agenda ...

my program is to vote first for progressive Democrats and then for progressives of other parties if no progressive Democrat is running ... i think many anti-war DU'ers hold similar views ... i think somewhere between no one and very, very few DU'ers hold the views you described ...

[lcordero2]

9. here is my one issue...ACCOUNTABILITY

The (D) next to a name does not give a "get out of jail free" card.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MrModerate]

12. Then we need to organize without ANSWER

We faced the same thing in SF in the run-up to Bush's war. They diluted (some say tainted) the message with their heaping helpings of old-leftie bushwah.

And yet they Organized, they did the hard work of getting the demo on the street, and while many other organization contributed a lot, they were the most effective and most visible in outreach to the community, working with city officials, etc., etc.

If you don't want to hear Troskyite crapola at your next "Dump Bush" rally, be as organized as ANSWER is.

No one said this was going to be easy.

[Violet_Crumble]

13. How were yesterday's rallies 'almost anti-semitic'?

n/t

[G_j]

18. is that like 'almost pregnant'? n/t

[Chi-Town Exile]

27. The Messages Were Anti-Semitic

No "almost" about it.

[Violet_Crumble]

28. Can you be more specific?

Exactly what were these messages? And could you supply them in the exact words of the speaker, rather than yr own interpretation of someone's words?


Violet...

[TahitiNut]

15. Yeah. That diversity of liberal and leftist viewpoints sure is a pain.

:sarcasm:

I never enjoyed myself more in a crowd of 50,000 people than I did back in 2002 during an A.N.S.W.E.R. protest march. I didn't see a single person there whose freedoms I wasn't celebrating, in agreement that the Bushoilini war policies are evil and corrpt.

[Mandate My Ass]

20. We need to be exclusive and a very small tent! Yesiree, that's the ticket.

;-)

[cry baby]

16. I thought this rally was to be a "one issue" thing...

end the Iraq war. I couldn't go, but I was shocked to hear the satellite issues being prominantly spoken of at this "Bring the Troops Home NOW" rally on C-SPAN.

Even though I believe the vast majority of people were there to protest the war in Iraq, there were a fringe few that got the microphone and the nation's attention with their issues that are not directly relavent to ending the war.

Isn't there any other group that could organize the next rally and march that will keep the people there focused on the main issue?

[mcscajun]

21. United for Peace and Justice is far more focused

They were at this rally/march, but they should totally run the next ones and keep A.N.S.W.E.R. out of it.

[bluestateguy]

17. I find ANSWER to be dour, pessimistic and whiny.

Their attitude is that every issue is interrelated, which gets us off message and into an overly complex mess.

[Geek_Girl]

22. When I hear a democratic Leader

actually stand up and say, "This is war is wrong, bring home the troops now!", then you may have a point. But so far I have not heard one politician say that including Dean.

The democratic line is "we are there so we have to finish the job." I don't think you'll be seeing any strong dems other than Sharpton and Jackson at a anti-war rally any time soon, regardless of ANSWER's presence.

I'm seriously thinking of tearing up my DNC card and supporting the Green Party.

[madfloridian]

23. Go ahead.

I intend to keep trying with the DNC. You can do as you wish.

[fujiyama]

29. Howard Dean is an intelligent

and PRAGMATIC person.

He realizes that the middle east situation requires a balanced American position, not screaming about Israel commiting genocide against the Palestinians. He knows that such rhetoric will not move the region toward peace.

ANSWER and it's ilk is made of apologists for dictators and extremism. I'm not interested in that kind of shit. I am not looking for demagogues on the far left (though I really doubt many are that 'left' in any sense...just authoritarian nutjobs). God knows there are enough demogogues on the right.

[Moderator]

32. Locking...

This is flamebait.