Tuesday, February 11, 2003

Warbloggerwatch-Watch, Part II

A few weeks back, "Warbloggerwatch" hammered Glenn Reynolds for repeating the claim that A.N.S.W.E.R., a truly hateful group involved in the "peace protests", prevented Michael Lerner from speaking at a San Francisco peace rally. WBW's main criticisms were that Reynolds linked to the story despite a "lack of substantiation" and that "A.N.S.W.E.R.'s claim on the anti-war movement amounts to little more than having secured permits and chartered buses."

Yesterday, thenation.com stated that (1) A.N.S.W.E.R. shut out the undeniably anti-war Lerner for the crime of trying to publicize the fact that there are anti-war Jews and Israelis and (2) the other peace rally organisers, Not in Our Name and United for Peace and Justice, didn't oppose A.N.S.W.E.R.'s decision to blackball Lerner.

How about it, Warbloggerwatch?

Is the story sufficiently "substantiated" for you now?

More importantly, care to explain why the peace movement is letting the "bus driver" pick who gets to speak, and why the rest of the movement is letting the "bus driver" suppress the message that there are anti-war Jews? (It sounds to me as if you're saying that A.N.S.W.E.R. may be shutting out anti-war Jews from the movement, but that's an acceptable price to pay if the alternative is getting the permits and buses yourselves).

I'll be watching Warbloggerwatch for the correction, together with anyone else who's still reading it.