“While i have enjoyed the first season of this podcast, season 2 surprised me with an investigation of the murder of an MEK TERRORIST on Dutch soil. Mohammad-Reza Kolahi was responsible for an explosion that killed 70 persons in Iran. The narrator acknowledges the man was a TERRORIST, and then proceeds to minimize that very important fact by neglecting to mention this from that point on. I’m sure the writers prefer to avoid calling him a terrorist, as it would doubtless make the audience less interested in getting him justice, but it is an uncontested fact that the man earned the epithet.
The writers seem far more interested in smearing the Iranian GOVERNMENT (not “regime” as the narrator uses), than in telling a story in a balanced manner. Sure, Iran may have resorted to contacting the killing on organized crime, but was the alternative? Sending in a couple of Blackhawk helicopters full of special operations soldiers to kill him? Would that feel better to the writers? Only the most powerful nation in the world can act with such impunity.
While the story is certainly newsworthy and podcast-worthy, i feel the writers twisted it into a propaganda piece. The proper use of language is fundamental to relate a balanced story. And balanced is the only way a story should be related.
The fact that Mohammad-Reza Kolahi, aka Ali Motamed, was a cold-blooded terrorist is an extremely important element of the story. Do not minimize it.”
daffy688 via Apple Podcasts ·
United States of America ·
12/30/23