“The Debate” of April 16, 2017 on Iran’s PressTV between Richard Millett and myself is important to me.
I think it will be for you too in the sense of clarifying two approaches and positions on Syria.
Its focus is on the difference in media coverage of the terrible events in Khan Seykhoun and al-Rashideen but there is much more to it.
I’ll keep on struggling for the conflict and peace perspective against the violence perspective that sees black-and-white only and continues the seemingly eternal blame game – and thus legitimates more, rather than less, warfare.
Happy if you care to share and continue the – meta – debate!
MIMAC, indeed, Jan. This mouthpiece-apologist for the West’s crimes against humanity, this so-called “journalist,” Millet, ought to be publicly pilloried for his complicity in helping to provide the US and UK cover for their ruthless brutality against innocents not only in Syria, but in Yemen as well. Yes, the motivational analysis says it all, as, no doubt, proper investigations and legal follow-up would also support. Anyone who is truly paying attention knows what’s going on here while we watch in total frustration the West’s attempt to initiate a world war that it can sell to the American public who, it seems, is gullible enough to buy into it if given the right sales pitch. I hope I’m wrong.
Thanks indeed. A refreshing update on the facts of the conflict and what those poor people in Syria are going through. Especially after the pain I put myself through upon watching the ‘debate’ in Danish state TV after Trumps bombing of Syria. The real debate was actually which one of the participating parties would praise the bombing the most. My vote for the the best lapdog of US and western policy went to the moderator though.
The ‘killing kids on the bus’ team has the best ‘perception management’ guys on its side.