A 'Progressive' Objective: Destroy Israel
"The protests here and elsewhere were largely sponsored by two groups, the Answer Coalition, which embodies a wide range of progressive political objectives, and United for Peace and Justice, which has a more narrow, antiwar focus," said the Times' Michael Janofsky.
Here is ANSWER's "progressive" agenda, as stated on its website: "From Iraq to New Orleans, Fund People's Needs - Not the War Machine; Stop the War in Iraq; End Colonial Occupation from Iraq to Palestine to Haiti; Support the Palestinian People’s Right of Return; Stop the Threats Against Venezuela, Cuba, Iran & North Korea," yadda yadda yadda.
Hamas, si! Castro, si! Kim Jong Il, si! U.S., no! On the "lucha en Palestine" point, a fave of these Moonbats, there is this: "it is the White House and Congress and both big business parties that wholeheartedly support the funding of the ongoing war against the people of Palestine."
"Progressive"? You bet.
Oh, and United for Peace and Justice has dismembering Israel squeezed into its "narrow" and "anti-war" agenda: "OCCUPATION: WRONG IN IRAQ, WRONG IN PALESTINE." Narrow enough for the Times, obviously.
This may seem, at first blush, to be lousy journalism. It isn't--not if you're the daily edition of Counterpunch.
UPDATE: Accuracy in Media has a special report on the particularly egregious character of the anti-American nutjobs at the demonstration, some of whom are old-style Stalinists standing shoulder-to-shoulder with the Iraqi "resistance."
Not a hint of this, naturally, in the Times coverage. "Our media pretend not to understand," says AIM's Cliff Kincaid. No, I think they understand perfectly well. They just are too biased to give a damn.