Agreed, but a hell of a lot of people didn't support it. I don't really know what that means, but I'd like to think it's a good sign. On the other hand, it might just mean that because the establishment were themselves divided on the issue of the war, the usually rock solid wall of media propaganda showed a few cracks here and there and the truth couldn't help leaking out.kali wrote:
The saddest thing was how badly America, Britian, and many of you Canadians, the freedom loving public, wanted this war.
Nothing learned from Vietnam or any of the others either.
But, even so, because the media is wholly controlled by the establishment I suspect that we are not being told just how many people there were - and are - out there who were sickened by the whole business.
Here in the UK the media supported the war - the BBC especially, of course - and they did everything they could to play down the extent of public opposition to it.
After all, the big anti-war protest in London was the biggest ever seen in this country - the biggest by a huge margin. On some accounts over two million people marched that day - that's 4% of the entire population. Foreigners I have spoken to, especially those in the U.S., often seem to suppose that because Blair supported the war that the British people supported it as well. That's way off mark. Blair is still very unpopular because of his decision to support Bush despite massive popular opposition. What price democracy!
K, I'll send you my address.
Cheers
