General (5)

Rate this item
(5 votes)
The best evidence for the triumph of neoconservatism, including over PBS, is to compare the 1983 series, Vietnam: A Television History, with the Burns/Novick version. The former is more honest, more hard-hitting, and more complete on the facts of the war. In a very real way, that comparison tells us how the Nixon/Kissinger view of Vietnam and the world eventually eclipsed JFK's, concludes Jim DiEugenio.
Rate this item
(3 votes)
As depicted in Athens or at the Globe Theater, with tragedy there is always an element of both rage and violence. Johnson assiduously worked to spring his own trap on himself. And that is what is missing from this film, writes Jim DiEugenio.
Thursday, 28 September 2017 21:24

Ken Burns & Lynn Novick, The Vietnam War: Part Two

Written by
Rate this item
(11 votes)
With their defense of the Dulles brothers as “decent people” in Part One, the disappearance of Kennedy’s withdrawal plan and the championing of Vann and Sheehan in Part Two, so far the net value of this documentary is something less than zero, writes Jim DiEugenio.
Rate this item
(19 votes)
How can one tell the story of American involvement in Vietnam without mentioning the Dulles brothers or General Edward Lansdale? With a full 18 hours at one’s disposal, I would have thought such a thing would be impossible. Yet with Burns and Novick, the impossible becomes the possible, writes Jim DiEugenio.
Friday, 14 January 2011 21:53

The Illusion of Michael Shermer

Written by
Rate this item
(1 Vote)
Frank Cassano on Michael Shermer's own sleight of hand:  why one must be skeptical of the skeptic.

Find Us On ...

Sitemap

Please publish modules in offcanvas position.