tv Consider This Al Jazeera September 20, 2014 9:00pm-10:01pm EDT
duty, tapping the first keg of gear. the first stin went to the governor. 6 million tourists take part in the festival. visitors drank 1.8 million gallons of beer at october fest. that'll do it for this hour. thank you for joining us, i'm thomas drayton in new york. thanks for watching. as congress votes to arm the moderate syrian rebels, can they make a difference in the fight against i.s.i.l. and congressman luis joins us to discuss broken promises on immigration. i'm antonio mora, welcome to "consider this". those stories and more straight ahead. .
>> i will not commit armed forces to fighting another ground war in iraq. >> we know the free syrian army cannot take on i.s.i.l. >> the moderate opposition in syria has, in fact, been fighting i.s.i.l. they require our support. >> americans could be fighting on the ground. >> used in specific operations. >> if we reached a point where we believed advisors should accompany troops, i'll recommend it to the president. >> men and women are sitting, waiting to die. >> we are sending 3,000 personnel. >> we are prepared to mobilize the world in ways that only america can do. >> delaying executive action on immigration date day. >> the president is willing to take on heat. >> the president has broken his promise to the latino community. >> it's hard to garner enthuse yam. >> the artificial zero calorie sweet nears. >> the house voted 273 to 156
wednesday to give the obama administration authority to spend as much as half a billion to train and arm moderate syrian rebels in the war in ilyour. the bipartisan vote massed doubts that the moderate opposition could see. doubts that surfaced in an exchange during an armed services committee hearing. >> we know the free syrian army cannot take on i.s.i.l., you know that. >> the moderate opposition in syria has, in fact, been fighting i.s.i.l. for the last two years. since last january, the free syrian army has been engaged with i.s.i.l. in idlib, aleppo and damascus. they require our support. >> for more on the moderate syrian opposition, i'm joined from washington d.c. by strategic communications advisor for the syria coalition.
uba, good to have you on the show. a west virginian diplomat said he'd oppose granting the president authority to train the opposition saying: does he have a point. despite what secretary of state john kerry says, is the free syrian army in any better shape than it was the last time you and i talked a few months ago. >> it is. secretary of state john kerry is correct. it's been the free syrian army that led the fight against i.s.i.s., and the free syrian army that successfully expelled i.s.i.s. from two major provinces in northern syria that is fighting i.s.i.s. in eastern syria and damascus. and it's been able to do so with little to no outside support. imagine if you add american enablers. train and equip programs to sicken the lines to empower the
free syrian army to expel i.s.i.s. from a safe haven in the north and east. before you have a chance. >> it won't participate in the coalition to fight i.s.i.l. defeating president santa barbara is its top priority, and the group's founder, told reporters: the syrian revolutionary front signed a nonaggression pact with i.s.i.l. to keep the focus on... >> that's not true. the civil revolutionary front has done no such thing. it was a false rumour perpetuated on the internet. it has issued a statement that has corrected that false notion. in fact, i've spoken with the commanders on the ground. if anything, the fight against
i.s.i.s. in the country side intensified. rumours that there has been an agreement by the free syrian army, and i.s.i.s. is not true. >> what about the free syrian army, focussing on bashar al-assad and not fighting i.s.i.l. >> it's viewed as a root cause for extremism in syria. many commanders are on the ground, and men - they've been two sides of the same coin. i.s.i.s. was allowed to operate in syria, and the bashar al-assad regime purchased oil from i.s.i.s., fuelling the conference and the operational capabilities of i.s.i.s. >> many think bashar al-assad benefits. if he's seen as a bull work against terrorism, he'll manage to stay in power. i have to challenge you about
the moderate syrian opposition. there are reports that steven sotloff, one of the two american journalists, was sold to the terrorists by moderates, and a congressman questioned whether the moderate free syrian army is moderate or an army. what do you say to that? >> steven sotloff was captured by i.s.i.s. there's suspicion that it was a fixer that he hired that beprayed him. i agree with the white house when they send out a statement that there's zero evidence that the vetted moderate free syrian army were the ones that kidnapped steven sotloff. when it comes to the free syrian army position on i.s.i.s. the free syrian army is committed to the fight against i.s.i.s. the head of the commission came out in favour.
that's a positive indication that the moderates have a proven partner on the ground that is willing to take the fight to where they operate. >> the military adviser met on tuesday. >> syria is our neighbour. we cannot afford to fight our neighbour. even if we disagree on many things. >> how can this work. if one of america's allies is consulting with bashar al-assad at the same time. >> it's interesting. in 2009 the iraqi government was singing a different tune when the prime minister maliki at the time brought forth a case that president bath christopher gibson himself, and his security
services underneath the command of bashar al-assad were responsible for facilitating the al qaeda and the iraq foreign fighters na were launching suicide bombs in baghdad, specifically attacking the ministry of interior and defense. we fully sympathise with the government in baghdad, that has been the government of bashar al-assad, that has been distributely responsible for the expansion of the extremist forces in iraq. >> they are important developments. i know you have been calling for aid to the syrianed moderate opposition, and we'll see how it proceeds in the senate, and what happens if the aid goes to the free syrian army. >> for more on fighting terrorism under u.s. and international law, we are joined by a harvard law professor emeritus and has written a 5-part op-ed, and the clear of
an e-book "terror tunnels, the case for israel's war on hamas." thank you for being with us. >> my pleasure. i can write a back and have it published at the time as writing an article for the paper. i finished my book thursday, published monday. >> you said there should be congressional authorisation for us to get into iraq. how important is it that president obama - this likely will be a long war, getting that authorisation with congress. >> it's a war that will take many years. >> it will not be solved. >> when we allow the president to engage in warfare, it's not turned out well. it's better if we have congress and the president agreeing. >> what about the president who
said he think the authorisation is sufficient for what he's doing. that was specific to those connected to the wars attack in u.s. history. >> i think when you have new events you need new legislation. after the elections, everyone may feel for comfortable. >> it's the best way. congress has the right to declare war. they haven't declared war since pearl harbour. this is something that should be done. >> an important point that you make is that traditional rules of the american and international law to deal with conventional warfare cannot apply to the new realities of fighting terrorism. we are constrained by laws. what should we do? >> we have to fight with one hand behind our back.
we have to maintain the upper hand. i think israel provided a model. never perfect, but a model on how to do this. hamas shed its fighters. you see them fighting, using human shields. they have to take recautions. give warns, and still 2,000 were killed. america will confront the same sayings. i.s.i.s. is getting smart. they are embedding fighters. we'll have to figure out how to get the leaders and civilians. >> we'll have no problem for legal justification for targetting. it doesn't matter whether they are americans or not. that's a red herring. as long as they are combatants. they always have been under international law.
the only question is can you kill them or get them without too many casualties. president clinton, i guess regrets not something gotten osama bin laden in the 1990s. >> he's concerned that if he had gone after osama bin laden, he would have killed a number of civilians. that is the challenge, if that's the best word that israel faces, having to dal with hamas putting the tunnels or the rocket launches near the civilian population. the u.s. has to deal with i.s.i.l. the issue comes up of proportionality. >> it has to be understood, doesn't mean the same numbers have to be killed. portionality is if there's a military target, you know you'll have to kill civilians to get the military target, and the
value has to be proportional to the number of civilians kill. it's a matter of degree, made in the fog of war. >> that's a difficult calculation. >> that's what you have to do. look what happened. >> new york times did a story about a big apartment building used as a hamas headquarters. but it was a residential building. israel warned every western in that building. every one got out. not a single person was hurt, but the building was destroyed. that's proportionality. if there's one hamas fighter, and they go after him and kill a bunch of kids. that's a war crime. if it was done purply. that balance has to be struck. >> a question that fits into the general conversation, you
naught president obama should not -- thought president obama should not have been as involved with the arab spring. >> no one could have predicted what would happen. i say here, no one nose what will turkey be like in 10 years. no one nose what the world will look like in that part of the country. the only country you can be sure, will remain a strong american ally is israel. that's the only country. it will help technology. and be supported in the united states. >> if you advised president obama as an advisor, what would you tell them to do. >> i would say go and get approval of congress. make sure you do it and make sure everything you do is on sound legal grounds and have advisor telling you when you can and can't attack targets. make sure you do everything with one hand behind your back, and
the other raised mightily to destroy an enemy, who was out to get western civilisation. >> a lot of thought provoking. the new book is terror tunnels. >> thank you. >> "consider this" will be right back. alex gibney, a hard hitting look at the real issues facing american teens. the incredible journey continues... on the edge of eighteen only on all jazeera america >> protestors are gathering... >> there's an air of tension right now... >> the crowd chanting for democracy...
of showing down. in atlanta, president obama call on the international community to act, to help the people of west africa. >> the reality is that this epidemic will get worse before it gets better. right now, the world still has an opportunity to save countless lives, right now. the world has the responsibility to act. according to the world health organisation, 5,000 people have fallen ill and 2400 have died. the president is hopeful. >> the world nose how to fight this disease. it's not a mystery, we know the science, we know how to prevent it from spreading. we know how to care for those that contract it. we know that if we take the proper steps, we can save lives. >> joining us from new orleans is robert gary, a virologist that worked in sierra for a decade studying viral fevers, working with local and
international workers to identify and contain. he returned last month. good to see you. the president announced that the u.s. will send 3,000 troops to west africa. the effort, the largest international response by the c.d.c. is called operation united assistance, and will be commanded by an army general. the president is asking for $88 million. the department of defense is looking to allocate half a billion. the world health organisation, as you know, says the number of cases is growing. do you think this major operation by the u.s. will be enough to stop the spread? >> the response from the international community has been too little too late. i'm glad that president obama and the u.s. government are taking a leadership role on this, and i'm hoping that responses like this will have an impact, but it will take more than this.
>> listen to a response that we heard from a resident in the area to the u.s. sending troops. >> what are they protecting us from. we need drugs, vaccines. >> there are no vaccines ready for widespread use and won't be for some time. is the best step what the u.s. is doing - dealing with the logistics of getting a mass medical response up and running. if that's the case, why to the people in the thick of it, we don't they understand that. why do they have a misunderstanding in what is going on. >> the u.s. can play a role in getting people, resources vehicles and food, basic needs
into the area. it's not the guns we are bringing, it's the logistics. talking about the money, the world health organisation said it would take about 600 million to contain the ebola threat. the money is coming in. maybe it's late in the game, but it's coming in from the e.u. u.s. a.i.d., the gates foundation. how quickly can the money and the logistical effort - how quickly can it make sa difference. >> it will take a while to get the troops into west africa. the money and resources need to be brought to the front lines. we need to identify the cases and the contacts. they need to be chased, quarantined and the evidence will take a while to get off the ground. >> the president said it's unlikely anyone will get to the u.s. with ebola, but they are taking more measures.
if it does, they said that they are ready. are you concerned that this strain seems to be transmitted more easily that others in the past? >> our group looked at the mutation. it's faster than it was, but it's about like any other virus. so far the changes that the virus has undergone don't seem to affect how it is transmitted, but we need to be vigilant and look at current strains than what the previous study did, and to remain on guard for a change in the virus. >> i know everyone says the likelihood of the virus is slim, airborp. we hear about children getting ebola. could it be transmitted by more casual contact? >> anything is possible with this fire us. it could be more pathogenic or
less. the more that we allow the virus to spread in humans, the more likely it will change in a way that will make it easier to spread. spread by a different route. more or less pathogenic. either one could be bad in terms of the number of cases. >> on the other hand, mild good news that it may be less deadly. if we look at the numbers from the w.h.o. there's almost 5,000 cases of ebola. 2,460 died. half the people confirmed with ebola died. more may die. many are sick. it seems the mortality is lower than in prior outbreaks, where we heard as many as 90% were dying. the fatality rate is closer to 70% much official numbers do not reflect cases that are not counted in those statistics.
they can be a bit misleading. 70% is about average, and that's a high case fatality rate. it may not be a good thing for it to go down if the virus is easier to spread, because you'd have more cases. >> it's frightening, 70% mortality is horrific. good to have you on the show. thank you. >> my pleasure. >> turning to the politics of immigration reform, a political topic we'll focus on as we head to the fall political season. immigration is a key issue that president obama pushed hard and put off, to the frustration of immigration advocates, according to a caucus that met on tuesday. despite promising to use powers to change immigration laws. the president said he will not do that until well after the
elections and politics had nothing to do with his decision. >> when i take executive action, i want to make sure it's sustainable. i want to act because it's the rite thing for the country. it is going to be more sustainable and effective. as long as they understand what the facts are, and why it's necessary. >> for more i'm joined from washington d.c. by a democrat, representing the fourth district in the chicago area. the author of "still dreaming", good to have you. you're a leader of the congressional hispanic caucus, and it's said to draft a resolution to demand that president obama take action on immigration between election day and thanksgiving. you laid out what you expect to see in the president's plan, you talked to the house, talking about those without visas, those
living and working here. >> it works like this. if they come forward, submit their fingerprints and pass a rigorous criminal background check and meet other requirements, we will issue them a biometric card saying they are not a priority. >> now there are reports that the hispanic caucus wants a commitment by the white house to go bigger. what does that mean? >> i think when we met with the white house official, with the chief of staff and others from the white house. they are asking for forbearance. if you or i ask for forbearance at the bank, we have to pay extra interest. if omat home, and -- if i'm at home and screw up with my children or wife, i think - do you know how i'll make it up to them - make it up by being broader, generous.
in terms of the executive authority you can use. i think the american public and the immigrant community expects something bigger and broader from the president obama administration, and i'm hopeful that that is what we'll see. >> so the screw up, to use your words that you are talking about, is that the president said he would act on immigration at the end of the summer. he delayed it, the "new york times" published an editorial called "another broken promise on immigration", criticizing the president for treating families and advocates like you as safely expendable. you wrote that action should have been taken before the election. you said whatever was done was more sustainable after the election. do you agree. >> here is what i have done. i have pivoted away from criticism. i went to the house floor, gave speeches and interviews, and
talked about how i was disillusioned when you walk away from your values and principals, it's the wrong think to do, and immigrants should be protected by the democratic party and the pet all the time. not just when it's politically wise or expedient. what many senators say to the president is wait until after the election, delay actions without taking into consideration the devastating effect that the broken immigration has each and every day on people that it supports, and 10 million that it hurts, by not allowing them to get right with the law. >> what i'm saying is you don't usually get farps and justice when you do things that are politically wise, and you don't get public policy that you are proceed of. let's not do the smart, let's do
what is fair and just. let's stand up for principles and values. immigrants on election night, you remember - you were part of those that looked and analysed how it was, president obama and the democratic party was so triumphant. one after the others centered on the immigrant, hispanic vote, asian, and see what it meant. they came out to vote. you should keep your promise, you shouldn't have political considerations. you should stand up for the immigrant community all the time. >> to your point. you mentioned that the senators pressured the president to put off a decision. a poll she is two-thirds of voters in the competitive house and senate disapproved, and many trust republicans, has
immigration turned into a liability for democrats. let me tell you one thing, there were 2 million voting to 2008 to 2004 and so on. you want to turn away from immigration, you turn around from 900,000 latinos that turn 18 every year, it's a growing community and cares about the fate of 11 million people in the country. asians care deeply, and those are core groups of the democratic party. let's stopped up for them. i know where the american people are at. they are on our side. whether it's the "new york times" or "the wall street journal." everywhere is fokked and reached a consensus that immigration reform is a way forward. >> an important issue going into
just as the united nations reached a deal with israel and the palestinians to begin reconstruction of gaza, a more tar was fired from gaza into southern israel on tuesday. it's the first since the august ceasefire. the attack under scored how there has been little progress towards reaching a lasting peace. a framework for negotiations on palestinian self governance was laid out in the camp david peace accords in 1978. 36 years later it is elusive. the unlikely peace between israel and egypt is ipp tact. how did president jimmy carter, anwar sadat, and the israeli
president baggan succeed where others filed. lawrence write, pulitzer prize winner joins us, his book was "the looming tower", and he has a now book. great to have you with us. this was as unlikely a piece as it's been. one of the obstacles was a parliamenty involved. you bring the three leaders and imperfections to us. at first, most important, you describe how sadat and bayingan could look at each other. they hated each other. it was surprising to carter. he thought if he could get the two men alone. they would like each other, trust each other and find their way to peace. he couldn't have been more
mistaken. they had to block the staff. that's despite that they had a common history. they had a lot in common. they didn't like to acknowledge that sadat was an assassin. and he had been a part of a thing called a murder club. they used to build officers, mostly guys that were drunk. he was very eager to kill the prime minister, and missed on a couple of occasions, but did succeed in directing an assassination with another government official. >> bayingan was a terrorist. the head of yag on, which had driven the british out of palestine with the terrorist acts. and turned his attention to the
palestinians. it was the beginning of the palestinian exodus. because of the destruction of the village, these were men with blood on their hands. >> they were. they had that in common. >> religion is something that you talk about as playing an important part. jimmy carter told you that he had come to believe that cod wanted him to bring peace to the holy land. bagan was secular. >> they were all three men of religion, carter was a born again christian, sadat was a pious muslim, calling him the first man of islam. and biggan was an orto dox jew, not as practicing as the other two, but scarred by the holocaust. they had come together to solve a problem that religion largely caused.
>> sadat comes across as the hero, but so does carter in a way, because as you said, he obstinately would not let sadat and bakan walk away. were they better suited to agreeing to a deal than binyamin netanyahu, mahmoud abbas and president obama. >> as i said. they were flawed characters. carter was a failing and unpopular president. i don't think you could assemble a less likely cast of characters. one thing they did have, they had a lot of political courage, and that may be the difference today. >> long-term consequences of what happened. there's no violation of the treaty. israelis and palestinians can't figure out a long-term peace, and you wrote that the camp
david accords severed egypt from the palestinians. in saying without a powerful arab champion, palestine was a mascot for islamists and radical factions. in a way, looking back, could that have hurt or delayed the possibilities of an israeli solution? >> "possible. camp david accords are divided into two parts. the peace between israel and equipment, which was accomplished. the second part of it was supposed to be a roadmap between israel and the palestinians. the palestinians were not represented at champ dived. every piece attempt since then has been an effort to finish the champ david accords, the second part that has not been achieve.
>> the irony is that these men will be remembered for this achievement. all three. they suffered great losses as individuals because of it. >> to start with, carter had a bump in popularity, but lost to ronald reagan, he was the first nominee not to have a jewish vote, which was on interesting punishment for a man that brought peace to israel in egypt. sadat was assassinated. when he signed the camp david award, it was signing a death warrant. after camp david in 1981, he invaded lebanon, a catastrophe for the lebanese people. and it went on for years and years. it was something that he taught
would be over in days. had he not signed the accords in egypt. it may be that israel had not felt enabled to go into lebanon. after the war he went no sebbing lugs for nine years. his death was marked, in a way, tragically, by their bringing piece to the holy land. >> the book is 13 days in september. a powerful description of one of the most important event in our lifetime. appreciate you joining us. good to see you. could artificial sweeteners be worse for you than the sugars they are replacing. a study found they may cause the opposite of the desired affect and could raise blood sugar levels, and new evidence in the debate over standing or sitting. turns out standing it not only better for your joins, it may add years to your life. an isn't professor of
epidemiology of columbia university jones us. let's start with the artificial sweeteners. they are having an effect on good bacteria and our digestive systems, and that is having negative affects. >> for a long time it's bad. >> over the last 10-15 years, we realised that bacteria is an important part of what makes us us. mostly, there are billions of bacteria that live in mine and your cut that helps to dimmest food. a new study plays on that, and shows us when you feed the bacteria the wrong thing, they exchange. you have different types, some overgrow others, and that can have implications. you are not eating sugar. it's raising the blood sugar level. >> over times it changes the
bacteria in your gut, and it changes the way it met abbo lieses sugar. >> it's doesn't raise it in a normal way. >> again, most of these sweeteners, since they came into play and became popular, obesity soared in this country. >> we. >> is there thought that maybe not only are they not helping, but they may be hurting. >> it is. and the study is a step in that direction. the researchers fed a couple of mice water sweetened with art fible sweeteners. it looked at the bacteria and found the mice that had a change had a prediabetic state. they did the same with humans, putting it in the mice. >> it is a limited study. it's mostly meself, a few
humans, what do we take. >> i wouldn't change my behaviour just yet much at the end of the day, moderation is the key, don't drink too many bev ridges. if you think putting the slendor in the cup will change the outcome. >> let's talk about the new studies on sitting and standing. one of them mound that people that stood a lot ended up living longer. a detailed study lookeds at in from a cellular level and found people that stand more and sit less, that their cells, they don't age as quickly. >> it's fascinating. the research took 68-year-old men, and randomized them to a trial which included exercise and efforts to get you to stand up. what they did is took blood tests before and after.
and what they found is in those people randomized to exercise and intervention, the length of the d.n.a. didn't decrease, some increased. we call it the end of the dna. cellular ageing happens where the tilomare shrinks. for some of these people, not those that exercise, those that weren't sitting. we found they increased in length, suggesting that it could be a big thing. >> sitting around too much might cause diseases, joint issues, diabetes, but now it's on a cellular level. one of the odd parts of the study was they found that people who exercised the most didn't do much better. moderation. >> it actually is helping to change the paradigm around what physical activity means. in the past we thought if you got the hour of exercise, you
are physically active, like you and i are doing now. >> what i do all day. >> me too. people should still exercise, but it's about how active you are intermittently through the day. if we can, we should get up and take a break, go walk around. there are standing desks that are increasingly popular and show that sitting on a stability ball, a big inflatable ball can have a benefit. in the work of standing or sitting on a ball, our body has to do a bit of work that our body doesn't pay attention to. >> always a pleasure to have you with us. thanks for clarifying some of this for us. >> thank you for having me. >> "consider this" will be right back.
>> start with one issue education... gun control... the gap between rich and poor... job creation... climate change... tax policy... the economy... iran... healthcare... ad guests on all sides of the debate. >> this is a right we should all have... >> it's just the way it is... >> there's something seriously wrong... >> there's been acrimony... >> the conservative ideal... >> it's an urgent need... and a host willing to ask the tough questions >> how do you explain it to yourself? and you'll get... the inside story ray suarez hosts inside story weekdays at 5 eastern only on al jazeera america today's data dive has an eye on millennials because things are rough for young adults. they find they can't do many of
things parents took for grantedment "the washington post" found more than a third of people aged 18-31 lived with their parents, the highest percentage in four decades. a total of 21.6 million. that may be a reason are three-quarters of millennials are not married. if you think it's because young people don't want to get tied down, think again. the vast majority want to get married, but the high costs made it tougher to afford. the first house or apartment is further off. home ownership is at record lows. in the first quarter of this year, a third of people under 35 owned their home, the lowest assistance the sensis kept track in 1982. two big reasons - houses are more expensive and banks more selective. higher costs come with shrinking economic opportunities.
in 1980 the average worker earned the national median salary by 26. part of the problem is that the economy is not creating enough jobs. from 1987 to 2000. 30 million net jobs were added in the u.s. since then 4 million. 4.6 million young people without a job. we'll be back with more of "consider this". this base >> what's happing on u.s. bases? >> the tax payer directly pays the human trafficker >> fault lines al jazeera america's hard hitting... >> they're blocking the doors... ground breaking... they killed evan dead... truth seeking... >> they don't wanna see what's really going on >> break though investigative documentary series america's war workers only on al jazeera america
we don't see after. the longer deployments, the greater the risk of divorce in military families, "port bliss" focuses on an army medic returning from a 15-month deployment, finding her child didn't want anything to do with her. >> movie reel: how are you doing? do you miss your kid? >> every day. >> iud. >> i'm going in. . >> i heard about what you did out there. if he pulls through, it's because of you. >> maggie, welcome back. >> where's paul? >> it's been 15 months since you were gone, that's a lifetime for a little kid. hey, it's mummy. >> you're not my mummy. >> michelle monahan stars in fort bliss, opening in select cities. great to have you here.
there has been so many movies about war. this is breaking new ground. a single mother coming home from a long deployment and finding that it's harder to come home than be out in crazy places like afghanistan and iraq. >> that's right. stories about female veterans are nearly absent from our culture, yet 200,000 are serving in active duty, 40% are mums. while the story is original, this is a common occurrence. it's happening to a lot of women, werparents, they are struggling with it. >> we see some stories, but there's something about watching a feature-length drama, and the intim assy of it bringing the issues home.
i assume that's what you were trying to d? >> absolutely. it's easy to watch and hear the news. if you can't emotionally connect, you don't necessarily pay attention to it. i initially connected to this emotionally when i read it. it was not something i considered before. this wasn't an aspect of war that i had encountered. it was something i felt compelled to share, and after spending time with a lot of female soldiers's mums i was more impassioned to shed light on the sacrifices that they and their families are making. >> it shows the disconnect between the military and civilian life. men go through a lot of issues when they come back. it does have the strong look at what this means to be a mother and the specific issues that are involved there, and the kind of... >> well, the judgment. >> judgment is the best word.
i was going to say prejudice, but judgment is the better word. >> if a woman leaves her family to go to work, she's a bad mother. if a man leaves his home to go to work, that's an honourable thing, and he's providing for his family, i appreciate that we are looking at a broader aspect of it. i met with these women, they are so proud to serve our country. they are passionate about their jobs, good at their jobs, yet are devoted parent. they don't have to choose one or the other, they can do both. the army supported the project. >> they did. >> it brings up serious issues they don't like to talk about, p.t.s.d. and sexual assault. >> absolutely, we have to tib our hats to them, without their support we wouldn't have been able to make the move j what it
is. >> have you gotten a rehabilitation. we have been so fortunate to show it to the core audience three times. two nights ago we showed it to 200 female veterans at the war memorial. it was powerful. soldiers, men and women alike are saying that this is the most honest depiction they have seen of the soldiers experience, that is so encouraging to us. it was our intention, and impassions me to share our story and shed light. >> are you thinking of staying involved. >> absolutely. i met with paul, the founder of if v.a. the iraqi afghanistan veterans or ni -- organisation. they promote advocacy, awaren s
awareness, and have an amazing outreach. i'd like to partner and continue the goal. >> it's an honest, brutally honest at times, and brutally captivating. i don't think it will turn people off. you have gotten positive reviews, showing that this is a career-capping performance - you are a little young for a career-capping performance. >> i'll take it anyway. i appreciate it. i put my heart and soul into this. i took the opportunity to represent a group of women that we don't often see. i wanted to do right by them, and say that - i'm getting that response is a high compliment. >> you've had all sorts of great roles in your career. to great television.
"bost on public", i loved that show. >> thank you. >> you have done serious roles - miners, truck drives and now this. are you specially drawn to those roles? >> i guess so. i guess so. it's not something i consciously thought of. i come from a working class background. i come from a town of 700. my dad worked in a factory, mum ran day care out of our home. >> foster family. >> and foster siblings, i come from strong, hard-working people and appreciate where i come from. i think they are representative of my roots. >> thank you are for your service to military members. if people see the movie, they'll say that with more genuineness, because it shows the sacrifices that military members and their
families go through. i enjoyed watching it, and it was a pleasure to have you with us. "fort bliss" opens in selected cinemas on friday. that is for now. we are on "consider this", facebook, twitter and you can tweet me. see you next time. >> it's christmas eve, and us soldiers are preparing for their last months in afghanistan. about forty thousand are still here - by the end of the year, there'll be just eight thousand.