Ok so after reading the reviews of others, and reading the book myself, I would like to offer my own thoughts and also correct some of the notions on both sides of the reviews (the 1 and 5 star people).
I enjoyed the book. It is a different way of looking at history, from a much more realistic point of view than the views that school history books give us (we ought to wonder who is feeding that history). It was definitely good to learn the connections between certain individuals, governments, foundations, etc, and their involvement in oil politics.
I also really liked to learn how propaganda was used to promote a certain viewpoint, and it was pretty wild to see how the effects usually were just as the propagandists planned. For example, and this is something I've known about for a long time, in America we are constantly being fed the Zero Population Growth propaganda, paid for by the elites who feed on America's consumerism. Do some real studying yourself and see that the "we are running out of space and food and the world is dying" message is a well-constructed lie, and yet, the overwhelming majority of the civilized world would probably agree. Propaganda works.
That said, my biggest complaint with the book is the lack of sourcing. Yes I realize that there are places throughout the book that he provides reliable sources, and there is the sources list in the back, but one cannot help but notice the amount of times he makes wild claims with absolutely no sources to back it up. He finds a source that takes him to 25% of his conclusion; then he fills in the rest himself, without mentioning that it is conjecture and not verifiable fact.
My other huge pet peeve is that he makes everything a conspiracy, and uses a conspiratorial tone in most of his writing. He will blatantly say things like "But Washington didn't care if the people went hungry" or "The British government was perfectly satisfied with the murder of millions." You just can't be an intellectually honest person and say things like that. "Washington" and "the British" are not persons you can analyze and then easily make blanket judgments about. Governments are made up of many people, with varying motives. History is not as black and white as the author seems to believe. And it should bring someone who jumped on his bandwagon pause to see that his other books are written in exactly the same tone. He is a conspiracy theorist to the bone.
That doesn't mean I agree with the 1 star reviewers who simply write him off saying that it's all nonsense. Those people are naïve in my opinion and I disagree. I think the book is worth reading, but do not so easily buy into his message wholeheartedly. Read the book slowly, understanding that he has a message to promote just like anyone else.