Re: UfPJ and Oct. 25

["Eli Stephens" <elishastephens@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

In response to my wild speculation, Adam wrote:

> Unlikely--ANSWER has always had  range of candidates, from radicals to
> Democrat politicians (Jesse Jackson, Cynthia McKinney, Al Sharpton come
> to mind). I don't see why they'd turn down a "dove Democrat" prez
> candidate.

Well, I would have thought so too, but the strength of Lou Paulsen's
response makes me think there *may* be more to my speculation than I really
thought. After all, before the invasion, people like Barbara Lee and the
three mentioned above were all (I think, I could be wrong) basically taking
the line that we should let the UN inspectors do their thing and let the UN
"process" run its course. There was an IMPLICIT statement that, if they UN
Security Council voted for war, then that would make war legitimate and they
would support it, but I don't believe any of those people (except maybe
Jackson?) ever said so EXPLICITLY.

But now the situation is different, there IS an occupation (and, depending
on semantics, an ongoing war as well, but it's really a distinction without
a difference). So calling for "supporting the UN" takes on a whole different
character. Nonetheless, that clearly is a major position among the people
(leaders and masses) who made up the pre-invasion antiwar movement, I
suspect it's larger, even MUCH larger, than the BTTHN position. So perhaps
it is not such wild speculation after all that people in UfPJ are pushing
for that kind of position to be represented on the platform, if not in the
public demands of the march, and that ANSWER doesn't agree with that. Still
speculation, since I know nothing whatsoever about any negotiations (or lack
thereof) between UfPJ and ANSWER, but maybe not quite so wild.

_________________________________________________________________
<b>Get MSN 8</b> and enjoy automatic e-mail virus protection.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus