What happens when the Left abandons its concern for such things as accuracy, morality and fact-based writing? What does one call such reporting then? Does it then not become—for whatever reason—another form of propaganda? Jim DiEugenio once again blasts Counterpunch for its pig-headed blind spot concerning the Kennedys.
[photos courtesy of National Press Club (Silverstein) and Amazon.com (St.Clair)]
A thoroughly mediocre rendering of a tumultuous year. Mediocre in every way, including aesthetically, concludes Jim DiEugenio.
By Matt Schudel, at: The Washinton Post
By Thomas A. Bass, at Mekong Review
By Jefferson Morley, at Newsweek
The history of the Vietnam War is invariably delineated by historians as a continuum of escalating involvement from the administrations of Eisenhower through Nixon. This essay by Prof. Norwood challenges that notion by demonstrating how the vision of John F. Kennedy was consistently and vehemently opposed to conventional warfare there.
Was the hero of Jim Douglass' book murdered in 1968?
Jim DiEugenio carefully takes apart and corrects another misguided and misinformed attempt by Paul Street to characterize JFK as economically anti-progressive, complicit with southern racists, and a militarist abroad.
Once again, the factual basis of Chomsky's statements is allowed to go unchecked by his interviewers, as Jim DiEugenio demonstrates in yet another critique of his praxis of historical elision and distortion.