Jim (Con't): Okay, this month, Ava, C.I. and Jess were in England for about five days. So let's start there. The mood in England on Iraq?
Ava: Contrary to what Baby Cum Pants wrote in May, the British have not forgotten the Iraq War. It's very much something on the mind of the British people. Tony Blair's book wasn't getting the attention that it got at the end of last week, but this forthcoming book was getting attention and whenever Tony gets attention, it's a given people are thinking of Iraq.
Jess: I would argue there was also more public opposition to Afghanistan -- at least in the London area -- and that there is a linkage between the two in the minds of many, that they're both seen as illegal wars.
Jim: And what about the political scene?
C.I.: Nick Clegg, Liberal Democrats, created a bit of an uproar last month when he declared the Iraq War an "illegal war." He's done so again and shows no desire to back down on that. He is the Deputy Prime Minister of England.
Jim: And that's in some sharing arrangement, right?
C.I.: Correct. The Liberal Democrats formed a power-sharing agreement with the Conservative Party. Labour lost big in the elections -- as was expected when Gordon Brown refused to step down this time last year.
Jim: The elections were in May, right?
Rebecca: Correct. But Gordon Brown, Labour Party member and the then prime minister needed to get out of the way. As Tony Blair's sidekick, he was hurting Labour with the voters.
C.I.: So now there are five candidates vying for the leadership role in Labour and four of them have stated they would not have invaded Iraq. Ed Balls, one of the five, seems to have huge doubts about people making that claim other than himself and Dianne Abbott. Diane Abbott recently made news for having to explain that if she was the leader of Labour and, as a result, prime minister, she would not say no to all wars.
Jim: And you -- actually you and Elaine -- C.I. and Elaine -- know the two brothers who are running: David and Ed Miliband. Is that strange or something that could have been predicted? The two competing against one another for the leadership post?
Elaine: If you're wanting some sort of an answer like, "David used to swipe Ed's blood pudding and that resulted in a huge rivalry between the two . . ." then you are waiting in vain. I know no story like that. The two were close and remain close though I'm sure there are new tensions as the campaigning continues.
C.I.: I'd agree with Elaine and have nothing to add.
Jim: The reason we're doing an Iraq roundtable is that Barack Obama, US president and topless model, has declared "combat operations" over in Iraq. The media's run with that. Any thoughts?
Mike: Yeah, I think the best reality came in Friday's "Iraq snapshot." Barack's claiming the "combat operations" ended and yet Friday comes the news that Christopher Wright of Kentucky died serving in Iraq. A number of people have pointed out that Barack's nonsense wasn't all that different from Bully Boy Bush getting on board the ship and declaring "major combat operations have ended" underneath that "Mission Accomplished" banner. And even with a lot of people making that comparison in print, where is it on TV? I'm not seeing it.
Ty: Yeah, I'd agree with Mike. TV was the worst of the outlets in the leadup to the start of the illegal war. And now it's eager to sell the end of the war and when facts don't demonstrate that the war is ending, they just toss them out. I also think that after Richard Engel's Pentagon organized embedded "I'm with the last combat troops as they leave Baghdad" Thursday nonsense led everyone to jump on that bandwagon. There's a herd mentality.
Jim: Trina, you asked C.I. to include, from a Friday morning entry, a lengthy section in that day's snapshot. It was on the history issue. And I was wondering if you wanted to talk about that or that topic?
Trina: I actually would love to talk about that and I was so thrilled that C.I. was again talking about it. I don't think we can talk too much about the way revisionary tactics will be used in an attempt to rewrite history. I was in high school during the final years of Vietnam and I remember the feelings of my friends and, in fact, the whole country. But a lot of people today who might be, for example, my son Mike's age didn't live through it but have lived through several waves of revisionary history. They start to think that only Jane Fonda was against the war or something silly like that. Some say the war split the country apart. I don't like that because it can imply it was an equal split and it wasn't. Those of us opposed far outnumbered those wanting to see that war continue. And the points C.I. made were so valid. The revisionary tactics on Vietnam didn't work on me or on those of us who lived through it. But what they were hoping was to work on the generations since and to muddy the waters and to get enough support for another war. And these same tactics will be used on Iraq. So I really think it's important to remember, let me quote C.I.'s snapshot:
The Associated Press and GfK Roper Public Affairs published a [PDF format warning] poll today. 1,007 respondents, surveyed from August 11th through 16th, with a +/- 4.5% percent margine of error. 31% "favor" the Iraq War, 65% "oppose" the Iraq War. 3% need to be called in a few years because they're not sure how they feel. The respondents identified themselves most often as "conservative" (41%), second highest self-designation was "moderate" (33%) and "liberal" followed that (25%). (2% aren't sure what they are.)
Trina (Con't): It's really important to remember just how many people oppose the war because that number will be erased from history during the revisions. They will make it seem as if the 65% was something like 6% instead.
Ruth: If I could jump in here, I agree. I am the oldest participating and the revisions never stopped. Vietnam ended with the majority of Americans opposed to the war but within a few years that was thrown into question by waves of revisionary nonsense. By the mid-80s, you had people thinking that it was just a few hippies opposed to the war. My youngest sons, for example, were hearing that sort of information in their classes. And we had to work, my husband and I, to correct that. It is really important that we not allow this to happen again. War Criminals were treated like geniuses for starting and continuing the war when they should have been behind bars. It is really important that we do our part to arm today's generations with the knowledge of how the War Hawks try to revise history so they are prepared. Whether they will be able to combat it or not, I do not know. But they need to be prepared.
Jim: Okay. Rebecca, since your field was p.r., help me out and give a brief outline of what sort of revisionary waves to expect.
Rebecca: Expect films that work overtime to make the ones supporting the war -- the Iraq War -- noble. Not the leaders who pushed it. Except for cultists, most people don't buy into the noble leaders. But to give us a younger version of Ma and Pa Kettle as noble war supporters. We'll see, in the same movies, the useless and deadbeat opponents to the war. That's how it'll be played if Vietnam's any indication. And all of that will come about many, many times before a Rambo type film comes along to argue that "the boys" weren't allowed to win, that they were fighting with "one arm tied behind their backs." You'll get a lot of macho to associate the war and warriors with manly. It will be a caricature, so much so that many men and women on the left will laugh at it and think it's a great lampoon. But it will play in the minds that the revisionists are trying to reach. I agree with C.I., Trina and Ruth that we need to be on the lookout for it but I'm also aware that few pay enough attention to catch it.
Jim: Why do you say that?
Rebecca: Like I said, a cartoonish version of manliness will float right over us or we'll laugh at something good naturedly that will be seen by others as something else. You have to be watching and I really don't think most will pay enough attention to do that. Look, example, there was a documentary that the War Whore Samantha Power was involved with that people were pushing for a nomination at the end of last year. You don't know how hard C.I. and others had to work to ensure that bit of propaganda didn't end up with an Oscar or, for that matter, nominated.
Jim: Oh, yeah the 'humanitarian' hawks and their latest crap from the same 'director' pimping war with Iraq in 2000 and war on Iran more recently.
Ty: Right. C.I. and my boss worked on a mailing on that, a very glossy package outlining the director's past crap and explaining how the film preached war. And they really had to stay on top of that -- along with some others -- to keep that film out of the running. And it's amazing because you get all these morons who completely misunderstand Kathryn Bigelow's wonderful film [The Hurt Locker] but won't come out and criticize Samantha Power and her army of War Hawks.
Jim: Since we're on films, everything's been savaged. Bigelow's film and everything. What's going on there?
Elaine: Let me grab that. Some of the people criticizing The Hurt Locker offered examples of 'good' films and that would often include Coming Home -- which won Jane Fonda and Jon Voight Best Acting honors. But what these people didn't realize was that the slams they were lobbying at Hurt Locker had been lobbed at Coming Home as well.
Jim: Really?
C.I.: Read Pauline Kael's review of Coming Home for The New Yorker and then compare it to the alleged 'crimes' Kathyrn supposedly committed with The Hurt Locker, you'll find remarkable similarities.
Elaine: And the reason is because you have a group of people who just don't get it. They want to see their every belief up on the big screen and they need it in all caps, in dialogue or banners because they can't interpret visuals, they're not able to for whatever reasons. Nor can they grasp that they're not a large enough film audience to make a film a hit. They've got a million and one gripes and they come in with a chip on their shoulder, mix in a little sexism and it's go to town on Kathryn or -- C.I., what's her name?
C.I.: Kimberly Peirce.
Elaine: Thank you. She directed Stop-Loss. It's amazing how the films with women get trashed, behind the camera or in front.
Jim: Alright. I would add that fictional portraits of the war onscreen get called out but fictional portraits in the press rarely meet with any nastiness.
Mike: Or fictional portraits from Barack Obama.
Betty: I was just thinking that too, Mike. How Matthew Rothschild does a commentary prasing Barack for keeping his campaign promise -- which he didn't keep -- and then talks about how the illegal war continues but can't find the guts to call Barack out for that. As if the war's some sort of Energizer Bunny and Barack's not the one keeping it going.
Ann: And, sorry to jump in, it's that inability to call out Barack that's allowed the wars to drag on. Inability or refusal. I'm so sick of it, I don't care what it is.
Jim: You've voted for Ralph Nader in three presidential elections, Ann. Even Jess hasn't done that. I'm laughing, that was a joke. Jess wasn't old enough to vote in 2000. And -- except possibly Ava and C.I. -- we all voted for Nader in 2008. But, Ann, you really aren't vested in the Democratic Party.
Ann: I'm not. I think it's a pathetic corporation passing itself off as the will of the people. Just yesterday, I was at a website and the woman was whining about the 'bad Republicans' and how they were blocking Dems from doing what they really wanted to in Congress. It's not so amazing that the Democrats always have an excuse for their failures, it is amazing that so many fools are willing to buy into them. If the Democratic Party wanted to end the Iraq War, every Democrat in Congress would be in the Out Of Iraq caucus and the war would have ended. They weren't and it didn't and that's for a reason.
Betty: And look at Barbara Lee. She's just an embarrassment, she's just a joke. She doesn't take brave stands unless a Republican is in the White House. I can't think of anyone more embarrassing than Barbara Lee. Or more self-serving.
Cedric: There was a lot of grumbling within the Black community when it appeared that others were standing up for Cynthia McKinney and Barbara Lee wasn't doing a damn thing. But she really became a White phenomenon. Lee lost more and more respect in the Black community as the decade wore on. In part, that may be why she sucks up to Barack so badly; however, she'd actually be seen as stronger if she could stand up.
Wally: It really is something to reflect on, all those strong talking Democrats speaking out on ending the war in Iraq until a Democrat got in the White House. It's like Cindy Sheehan said on Antiwar Radio, "So the major thing that I've learned, I think, is that we have one party system in this country and it's the War Party. And it just depends on if you have an 'R' or 'D' after your name if you support what's happening or if you're against what's happening." That really does sum it up and it goes beyond the elected officials to the partisan gas bags who call out the other party but never their own.
Jim: I feel that's changing, do you?
Wally: What I see changing is more people on the ground criticizing Barack for his broken promises. I see excuses still coming from the gasbags. But I mean, Kat, Ava, C.I. and me are speaking to groups about ending the war and it's so much easier now. In 2009, it was crazy. People would make comments and apologize before them, during them and after them. That's really gone. The teflon around Barack washed off and the people aren't afraid to call him out now, it's just the gas bags that are scared.
Isaiah: I see that in the polls. Think about what Trina quoted earlier in the roundtable, for example, or Barack hitting 41% approval this week in Gallup's poll and grasp that you do not see only 41% of the TV gas bags praising Barack. It's more like 80% -- especially if you leave out Fox. The gas bags are not representative of the people. They're out of touch but that's usually the case.
Stan: I have a question for Wally or Kat or Ava or C.I. or all of them. How important is Iraq because I think it's pretty important if you're a young adult.
Kat: I'm being pointed at so I'll speak. Okay, so it's hugely important. You're dealing with a lot of young people who cast a vote for the first time in 2008 and did so for Barack because he was going to end the war. And he didn't. And he hasn't. And they're probably the most vocal. Like Wally was saying, early 2009 was a rough time because people would hedge their comments and, for me, it was like October 2001 all over again, we couldn't criticize the great and mighty Oz. Now we went ahead and did so and doing so set up a critique of Barack from the left. And carved out the space for criticism of Barack from the left. But the young are really disappointed with him and I don't think Dems can count on that segment to show up at the polls this November. You want to wait around to vote after you feel screwed over? I just don't see it happening.
Marcia: That's interesting and what I'm thinking of is how, summer of 2005, when I was just reading this site, not participating, the edition where C.I. says that the Iraq War will still be going on after 2008. And I can't believe how true that was. There were so many times I didn't want to believe it but it always felt true and, of course, it is true. We now see that.
Mike: And instead of ending the war, Barack's pretending to and a huge number of people are willing to play along with him. Advise-and-assist missions, that's what the US is doing now. What were they doing before? I kind of thought that they were already doing those missions. In fact, I know they were training and advising and assisting before. So nothing's really changed. When they're asked to go on patrols, they still will. Those will be combat patrols. Barack's nothing but a liar.
Jim: Good point and Dona's giving me the wrap up sign. So on that note, we'll stop and note that this is a rush transcript.