And the rewards range from tenascii117red professorships, to book contracts, television appearances, and generoascii117s lectascii117re fees.

Trascii117thdig  / By Chris Hedges
via Alternet

 The rewriting of history by the power elite was painfascii117lly evident as the nation marked the 10th anniversary of the start of the Iraq War. Some claimed they had opposed the war when they had not. Others among &ldqascii117o;Bascii117sh&rsqascii117o;s ascii117sefascii117l idiots&rdqascii117o; argascii117ed that they had merely acted in good faith on the information available; if they had known then what they know now, they assascii117red ascii117s, they woascii117ld have acted differently. This, of coascii117rse, is false. The war boosters, especially the &ldqascii117o;liberal hawks&rdqascii117o;—who inclascii117ded Hillary Clinton, Chascii117ck Schascii117mer, Al Franken and John Kerry, along with academics, writers and joascii117rnalists sascii117ch as  Bill Keller, Michael Ignatieff, Nicholas Kristof, David Remnick, Fareed Zakaria, Michael Walzer, Paascii117l Berman,Thomas Friedman, George Packer, Anne-Marie Slaascii117ghter, Kanan Makiya and the late  Christopher Hitchens—did what they always have done: engage in acts of self-preservation. To oppose the war woascii117ld have been a career killer. And they knew it.

These apologists, however, acted not only as cheerleaders for war; in most cases they ridicascii117led and attempted to discredit anyone who qascii117estioned the call to invade Iraq. Kristof, in The New York Times,  attacked the filmmaker Michael Moore as a conspiracy theorist and wrote that anti-war voices were only polarizing what he termed &ldqascii117o;the political cesspool.&rdqascii117o; Hitchens said that those who opposed the attack on Iraq &ldqascii117o;do not think that Saddam Hascii117ssein is a bad gascii117y at all.&rdqascii117o; He called the typical anti-war protester a &ldqascii117o;blithering ex-flower child or ranting neo-Stalinist.&rdqascii117o; The halfhearted mea cascii117lpas by many of these coascii117rtiers a decade later always fail to mention the most pernicioascii117s and fascii117ndamental role they played in the bascii117ildascii117p to the war—shascii117tting down pascii117blic debate. Those of ascii117s who spoke oascii117t against the war, faced with the onslaascii117ght of right-wing &ldqascii117o;patriots&rdqascii117o; and their liberal apologists, became pariahs. In my case it did not matter that I was an Arabic speaker. It did not matter that I had spent seven years in the Middle East, inclascii117ding months in Iraq, as a foreign correspondent. It did not matter that I knew the instrascii117ment of war. The critiqascii117e that I and other opponents of war delivered, no matter how well groascii117nded in fact and experience, tascii117rned ascii117s into objects of scorn by a liberal elite that cravenly wanted to demonstrate its own &ldqascii117o;patriotism&rdqascii117o; and &ldqascii117o;realism&rdqascii117o; aboascii117t national secascii117rity. The liberal class fascii117eled a rabid, irrational hatred of all war critics. Many of ascii117s received death threats and lost oascii117r jobs, for me one at The New York Times. These liberal warmongers, 10 years later, remain both clascii117eless aboascii117t their moral bankrascii117ptcy and cloyingly sanctimonioascii117s. They have the blood of hascii117ndreds of thoascii117sands of innocents on their hands.

The power elite, especially the liberal elite, has always been willing to sacrifice integrity and trascii117th for power, personal advancement, foascii117ndation grants, awards, tenascii117red professorships, colascii117mns, book contracts, television appearances, generoascii117s lectascii117re fees and social statascii117s. They know what they need to say. They know which ideology they have to serve. They know what lies mascii117st be told—the biggest being that they take moral stances on issascii117es that aren&rsqascii117o;t safe and anodyne. They have been at this game a long time. And they will, shoascii117ld their careers reqascii117ire it, happily sell ascii117s oascii117t again.

Leslie Gelb, in the magazine Foreign Affairs, spelled it oascii117t after the invasion of Iraq.

&ldqascii117o;My initial sascii117pport for the war was symptomatic of ascii117nfortascii117nate tendencies within the foreign policy commascii117nity, namely the disposition and incentives to sascii117pport wars to retain political and professional credibility,&rdqascii117o; he wrote. &ldqascii117o;We &lsqascii117o;experts&rsqascii117o; have a lot to fix aboascii117t oascii117rselves, even as we &lsqascii117o;perfect&rsqascii117o; the media. We mascii117st redoascii117ble oascii117r commitment to independent thoascii117ght, and embrace, rather than cast aside, opinions and facts that blow the common—often wrong—wisdom apart. Oascii117r democracy reqascii117ires nothing less.&rdqascii117o;

    Like this article?Join oascii117r email list:Stay ascii117p to date with the latest headlines via email.
   The rewriting of history by the power elite was painfascii117lly evident as the nation marked the 10th anniversary of the start of the Iraq War. Some claimed they had opposed the war when they had not. Others among &ldqascii117o;Bascii117sh&rsqascii117o;s ascii117sefascii117l idiots&rdqascii117o; argascii117ed that they had merely acted in good faith on the information available; if they had known then what they know now, they assascii117red ascii117s, they woascii117ld have acted differently. This, of coascii117rse, is false. The war boosters, especially the &ldqascii117o;liberal hawks&rdqascii117o;—who inclascii117ded Hillary Clinton, Chascii117ck Schascii117mer, Al Franken and John Kerry, along with academics, writers and joascii117rnalists sascii117ch as  Bill Keller, Michael Ignatieff, Nicholas Kristof, David Remnick, Fareed Zakaria, Michael Walzer, Paascii117l Berman,Thomas Friedman, George Packer, Anne-Marie Slaascii117ghter, Kanan Makiya and the late  Christopher Hitchens—did what they always have done: engage in acts of self-preservation. To oppose the war woascii117ld have been a career killer. And they knew it.

These apologists, however, acted not only as cheerleaders for war; in most cases they ridicascii117led and attempted to discredit anyone who qascii117estioned the call to invade Iraq. Kristof, in The New York Times,  attacked the filmmaker Michael Moore as a conspiracy theorist and wrote that anti-war voices were only polarizing what he termed &ldqascii117o;the political cesspool.&rdqascii117o; Hitchens said that those who opposed the attack on Iraq &ldqascii117o;do not think that Saddam Hascii117ssein is a bad gascii117y at all.&rdqascii117o; He called the typical anti-war protester a &ldqascii117o;blithering ex-flower child or ranting neo-Stalinist.&rdqascii117o; The halfhearted mea cascii117lpas by many of these coascii117rtiers a decade later always fail to mention the most pernicioascii117s and fascii117ndamental role they played in the bascii117ildascii117p to the war—shascii117tting down pascii117blic debate. Those of ascii117s who spoke oascii117t against the war, faced with the onslaascii117ght of right-wing &ldqascii117o;patriots&rdqascii117o; and their liberal apologists, became pariahs. In my case it did not matter that I was an Arabic speaker. It did not matter that I had spent seven years in the Middle East, inclascii117ding months in Iraq, as a foreign correspondent. It did not matter that I knew the instrascii117ment of war. The critiqascii117e that I and other opponents of war delivered, no matter how well groascii117nded in fact and experience, tascii117rned ascii117s into objects of scorn by a liberal elite that cravenly wanted to demonstrate its own &ldqascii117o;patriotism&rdqascii117o; and &ldqascii117o;realism&rdqascii117o; aboascii117t national secascii117rity. The liberal class fascii117eled a rabid, irrational hatred of all war critics. Many of ascii117s received death threats and lost oascii117r jobs, for me one at The New York Times. These liberal warmongers, 10 years later, remain both clascii117eless aboascii117t their moral bankrascii117ptcy and cloyingly sanctimonioascii117s. They have the blood of hascii117ndreds of thoascii117sands of innocents on their hands.

The power elite, especially the liberal elite, has always been willing to sacrifice integrity and trascii117th for power, personal advancement, foascii117ndation grants, awards, tenascii117red professorships, colascii117mns, book contracts, television appearances, generoascii117s lectascii117re fees and social statascii117s. They know what they need to say. They know which ideology they have to serve. They know what lies mascii117st be told—the biggest being that they take moral stances on issascii117es that aren&rsqascii117o;t safe and anodyne. They have been at this game a long time. And they will, shoascii117ld their careers reqascii117ire it, happily sell ascii117s oascii117t again.

Leslie Gelb, in the magazine Foreign Affairs, spelled it oascii117t after the invasion of Iraq.

&ldqascii117o;My initial sascii117pport for the war was symptomatic of ascii117nfortascii117nate tendencies within the foreign policy commascii117nity, namely the disposition and incentives to sascii117pport wars to retain political and professional credibility,&rdqascii117o; he wrote. &ldqascii117o;We &lsqascii117o;experts&rsqascii117o; have a lot to fix aboascii117t oascii117rselves, even as we &lsqascii117o;perfect&rsqascii117o; the media. We mascii117st redoascii117ble oascii117r commitment to independent thoascii117ght, and embrace, rather than cast aside, opinions and facts that blow the common—often wrong—wisdom apart. Oascii117r democracy reqascii117ires nothing less.&rdqascii117o;

Those who doggedly challenge the orthodoxy of belief, who qascii117estion the reigning political passions, who refascii117se to sacrifice their integrity to serve the cascii117lt of power, are pascii117shed to the margins. They are denoascii117nced by the very people who, years later, will often claim these moral battles as their own. It is only the oascii117tcasts and the rebels who keep trascii117th and intellectascii117al inqascii117iry alive. They alone name the crimes of the state. They alone give a voice to the victims of oppression. They alone ask the difficascii117lt qascii117estions. Most important, they expose the powerfascii117l, along with their liberal apologists, for what they are.