Award winning journalist John Pilger examines the role of Washington in America's manipulation of Latin American politics during the last 50 years leading up to the struggle by ordinary ... See full summary »
Over the course of the last century, the US has silently encircled the world with a web of military bases unlike any other in history. No continent is spared.They have shaped the lives of millions, yet remain a mystery to most.
True story of the saga that was hoped to be the long-awaited justice brought to bear upon Augosto Pinochet, Chilean dictator from 1973 to 1990. In September 1998, Pinochet flew to London on... See full summary »
Taking place during the Chilean Coup d'état in 1973, this film opens with the attempted military coup of June 1973, which is put down by troops loyal to the government. The left is divided ... See full summary »
Divided into three segments, namely 1 Neocolonialism, 2 Act for liberation, 3 Violence and liberation, the documentary lasts more than 4 hours this deals with the defense of the revolution ... See full summary »
Fernando E. Solanas
María de la Paz,
Fernando E. Solanas,
This documentary details the case that the 1989 invasion of Panama by the US was motivated not by the need to protect American soldiers, restore democracy or even capture Noriega. It was to force Panama to submit the will of the United States after Noriega had exhausted his usefulness. Written by
Kenneth Chisholm <firstname.lastname@example.org>
This film is a leftist polemic in which the American forces involved in the 1989 Panama incursion are all liars and murderers and the leftists who are interviewed are all victims and heroes. That said, the film is well made and interesting, that is no doubt why it won the Academy Award for documentary films. Nevertheless, it is entirely unconvincing. The only person I saw interviewed in the film's entire 1 hour and 45 minute length who was credible was Pete Williams, now a network newsman, who was then the Defense Department's press spokesman. The bias of this film is demonstrated by its maker's position that the American press was itself biased because it focused on the tragedy caused by the deaths of Americans who died in the incursion. It's thesis that American soldiers willy-nilly murdered innocent civilians is supported only by biased interviews and urban legend. Despite the skill of its maker, this film is not recommended to anyone with an interest in knowing the facts.
13 of 28 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this