I am well impressed by about 98% of what Pilger says in those articles, Bobert. That's good enough for me.

The Democratic Party was in "danger" in '68 of being taken over by a genuinely antiwar coalition led by a genuinely antiwar candidate...simply because of the enormous opposition to the war that had been building in America.

The $ySStem cannot allow either of its major parties to adopt a genuinely antiwar position...and it won't allow them to...though it will certainly allow the Democratic party to pretend to be antiwar...until it has been elected.

You saw a great demonstration of this following the last Congressional elections. Remember? The Democrats campaigned as if they were going to end Bush's Iraq War...but they did nothing of the kind once they got the chance to. They continued to support Bush's war by continuing its funding.

Thus all you people who voted for them were betrayed, as usual.

Now I think that Pilger is probably quite right that Bobby Kennedy...although looking and sounding like the great liberal dream in '68...would have continued supporting the Vietnam War policy once in office. That's how the game works. The Republicans make a big show of being pro-war (which they are). The Democrats make a big show of being anti-war (which, as a ruling party power structure, they are NOT). The public votes in the Democrats, expecting the war to end. It doesn't end, in fact it often gets even worse!

And that's how it works. Ha! Ha! Fooled again.

The sad thing is, Bobert, no matter which one of those two corrupt parties you vote in you get a war policy. And that war policy ends only when a war becomes an absolutely unwinnable disaster that is totally beyond redemption (like Vietnam)....or when the $ySStem decides it's time to move the theatre of war to a new and better location for some reason.

So I think Pilger is probably quite right in what he says about Bobby Kennedy, though as I say, I still like Bobby Kennedy a whole lot. I bet he would have continued fighting that war pretty much the way Nixon did, and you know what? The "liberals" in America would have then been far more inclined to forgive Bobby for so doing, simply because they liked and trusted Kennedy, and he wasn't a Republican! So it "must be okay"!

This is analogous to the way the conservatives can easily forgive Nixon or any other Republican president for opening friendly relations with Communist China or negotiating a big arms limitation treaty with Russia. ;-) They'd NEVER allow a Democrat to do it, but if a Republican does it, then it "must be okay"!

That's how the political game is played by the great Oligarchy in Amerika. They use people's liberal or conservative habits of thinking to manipulate them at the ballot box, and the grand imperial agenda goes ahead regardless. Either the Democrats or the Republicans can be used in that fashion, and they are used in that fashion over and over again.