Answering the 'interference' accusation

Submitted by DL (Saudi Arabia), Feb 3, 2013 at 14:35

The moderator was clearly sympathetic to the antiwar representative which left little room for an actual debate or even dialogue. In other words, calling this a debate is a sham. I regret that Daniel Pipes didn't get to respond, and I can't leave without having my own say: the fact that 'little fires' are popping up all over Africa in no way supports the allegation that the US is instigating them. In fact, we are not. The antiwar representative was manipulating the logic of listeners. The presence of these 'fires' merely supports Pipes' position that we need a consistent policy, first rooted in promoting human dignity and secondly developing and supporting regional voices who are inclined to allow for nonviolent diversity.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".