Definitely sounds like a film worth missing.

I lived in Indonesia throughout the transition to democracy (1996-2004) and there was one foreign country over all others that played a pivotal role in assisting and supporting the Indonesian people in attaining that "worst of all possible forms of government" as Churchill once so eloquently once put it.

No, it wasn't Australia. It wasn't France. It wasn't the Philippines. It wasn't Russia. It wasn't even Canada. And it certainly wasn't Saudi Arabia.

I'll let you guess, Mr Pilger.

rogindon:

While I don't question the accuracy of your account, try and keep in mind that it is but one of many. The CIA has a long and *proven* history of toppling democratically elected leaders throughout South America and the Middle East. To back up an earlier post, I think 'conditional' is the best word to describe the USA's support of democracy over the last 60 years or so.

WHERE...was Pilger when the French News misreported the apparently staged "Killing of Mohammad" in Gaza ?

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1191257216490&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

"And yet France 2 refused to release Abu Rahmeh's full 27 minutes of raw footage. It did, however, agree to let three prominent French journalists view the footage. All three concluded that it comprised blatantly staged scenes of Palestinians being shot by Israeli forces, and that France 2's Jerusalem Bureau Chief Charles Enderlin had lied to conceal that fact."

Note... BLATANTLY STAGED SCENES... the only reference to material like this you would find in Pilger..would if he could somehow twist this into a CIA plot irrespective of how utterly remote such a thing might be.

If you doubt the credibility of the JPOST artcle.. seach it out on youtube.. for the French version.

PILGER.. = PROPOGANDA..and the cheap nasty kind at that

It's not only Americans that need to see this film. Many in the rich west, including Australia, have never been to a poor country, probably never will go, and would be agog if they did.

I agree with Gary Neat's comments.

Although we desperately need more John Pilgers and Noam Chomskys to publicise uncomfortable truths - in my view they both deserve a Nobel Peace Prize - I do feel they are sometimes on autopilot.

I've seen nearly all Pilger's films and read one of his books now, and his emotional monologues can be laborious and self important. This focus on himself can hinder rather than help his message. I prefer to experience his vision and interviews, and not have my opinion pre-digested.

With Mike Moore, Stephen Colbert, Jon Stewart and others, we know that what we are getting is primarily entertainment. With Pilger, I expect more credible journalism. More balance (although he would probably argue that the mainstream is so biased the other way that he is a balancing force), and some hard data to backup his anectodal style would have more impact.

For example, hard macroeconomic data on income and wealth distribution, literacy, AIDS rates, and their change over time under the various regimes he shows, (or at least an attempt to obtain this information, it can be difficult), if simply presented, would add credibility to his panning vistas of suffering.