Read other letters about this article

• Tuesday, January 13, 2009 09:59 AM

  @Ché

  The problem is that this pressure is not "heard." And it's not "heard", in large measure, because the people and organizations who are applying this pressure are not "inside the Palace," whereas AIPAC most definitely is

  Ché:

  This is exactly what Professor Cole was saying. He did let his frustrations with people who only are interested in street protest get the better of him in the original post, but if you look at his next one, you'll see where he speaks in a more balanced way about the positive outcomes of street protest.

  I don't think anyone really feels that there's not any role for marches as part of a balanced, holistic strategy for changing U.S. policy. The idea of a "Peace PAC," which is what Prof. Cole was advocating, really is a relatively novel approach, and I hope it's pursued without being prejudiced by Cole's perhaps-intemperate remarks about people in the streets carrying signs.

  By the way, Ché, you keep mentioning that "things may change" in the years you insist it would take to establish this PAC as an effective counterbalance to AIPAC and the other war lobbies. I submit to you that the likelihood is quite slim of the US really changing its support for wars around the globe... but I'd be well-please if that turned out to be the case, and I'm sure people would be glad to disband the "Peace PAC" in that happy eventuality.

  —Paul Daniel Ash Read Paul Daniel Ash's other letters
  Permalink
  Flag
  Click "Submit Flag" if you feel this post is inappropriate. Explain why below if you wish.

  Cancel