Its is extremely naive to pretend that wars aren’t won and lost on the home front. The US military correctly devotes serious attention to explaining its view of events. Its enemies certainly understand the power of the media to sell their story. They rarely miss an opportunity to portray the US in the worst possible light. Its simply a fact of life in modern conflict. And it bears out the truth that war is politics by other means.

There is a world of difference between lying, and telling the truth as you see it. However, Pilger seems to consider the two things to be the same. Clearly Pilger is one of the few good guys who would never manipulate the facts to fit his story. Or Not.

His whole argument is devoid of any intellectual honesty. He puts his own spin on the quotes of his subjects rather than let their words speak for them. He uses Petraues voice to claim that this war of perception (petraeus words) is about “the way the adventure is sold in America”. Clearly not Petraeus words. The intent, of course, is to show that Petraeus is cavalier about the war, a cowboy. Something he is undoubtedly NOT.

He uses this dishonest technique to link the gushing statements of his Venezuelan general (code for a Fascist Warmonger) with the undertaking of the US and its dozens of NATO allies.

The next paragraph he doesn’t even attempt to stay on point. He ignores the fact that he not demonstrated that “gov’t is ensuring journalists collude with rapacious warmakers”. And goes on to claim, again on the flimsiest of flimsy pretexts, that the rapacious warmakers are planning never ending wars and their real enemy is the public.

Pilger claims Public Relations is Propoganda.. “ He seems to believe there is only one truth, and he dispenses it. Which is clearly as good an example of propaganda as you are likely to get. Pilger uses his background as a journalist, not to uncover truth, but to promote his own extremist worldview, where the good guys red hats.