• UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Jill Stein: So what we said about Putin was that his invasion of Ukraine is a criminal and murderous war.

    Mehdi Hasan: And he’s a war criminal who should be on trial?

    Jill Stein: Well, by implication.

    Mehdi Hasan: You’re struggling here to say something very simple. This is why people have their doubts about you with Russia. Why is Benjamin Netanyahu a war criminal but not Vladimir Putin?

    ???

    What does “by implication” mean to Hasan?

    Jill Stein: Yeah. Well, let me say this. We are sponsoring that war. We are sponsoring Netanyahu. He is our dog in this fight. That is why we have a responsibility to pull him back.

    Mehdi Hasan: No disagreement from me at all. It still doesn’t answer my question. Whether we sponsor them or not is irrelevant.

    Jill Stein: With Russia it’s far more complicated.

    Mehdi Hasan: Either you’re a war criminal or you’re not. Is Vladimir Putin a war criminal?

    Jill Stein: In so many words, yes he is.

    So they’re in agreement. Right?

    Mehdi Hasan: I don’t know “what so many words” — Butch [Ware, Stein’s running mate], is Vladimir Putin a war criminal?

    Jill Stein: Let me say that whatever you think he is —

    Mehdi Hasan: It’s not about what I think. I’m asking you. You’re running for President.

    Jill Stein: If you want to pull him back, if you are a world leader, you don’t begin your conversation by calling someone a war criminal unless you have a…

    Mehdi Hasan: So why have you called Biden and Netanyahu war criminals?

    Jill Stein: Because we have a clear strategy and we have very strong support across the world.

    Is Hasan trying to defend Biden and Netanyahu?

    Because Jill Stein repeatedly agreed with Hasan on Putin being a war criminal. But Hasan keeps doubling back and trying to defend the American President and his Israeli ally from the accusation.

    • Rekhyt@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      The problem is this: regarding Netanyahu she says “Well he is very clearly a war criminal.” Regarding Putin she says “With Russia it’s far more complicated” and “In so many words, yes.” She’s hedging out of calling Putin a war criminal directly so she can plausibly deny it. She will agree with general statements saying he could be a war criminal under those circumstances but she won’t say it directly so she can go “Oh no, Hasan called him a war criminal, I didn’t, I just agreed that if all of those things were true then he could be considered a war criminal!”

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        She’s hedging out of calling Putin a war criminal

        “In so many words, yes.”

        Hasan won’t take “yes” for an answer. Which is a weird thing to do, given that he keeps looping back around to attack her for her condemnation of Biden and Netanyahu.

        She will agree with general statements saying he could be a war criminal under those circumstances

        Under what circumstances is Hasan conceding that Netanyahu is a war criminal? All he does is deflect blame for war crimes away from Netanyahu, which is a really weird thing to do across multiple interview questions.

        she won’t say it directly

        She will and she did. Of course, Hasan keeps cutting her responses off to interject with new defenses of Netanyahu. Which is, again, a very weird way to establish Jill as a Putin-defender. It seems more like Hasan is hedging on Netanyahu and trying to back Jill into recanting her views on Israel.

        • njm1314@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          1 month ago

          I think it’d be easier to take yes for an answer if she said the word yes. And frankly I question why someone can’t use the word yes if it’s such a clear yes

            • TheFonz@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 month ago

              How come she can give a clear yes for Biden but Putis it has to be surrounded by a million qualifiers? Multiple times.

              We all watched the interview. What are you trying to prove.

        • Cadeillac@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 month ago

          Say weird some more. We aren’t going to be desensitized to it. The right will still be fucking weird

      • Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        I think her point is moreso that we’re actively funding and giving arms to Isreal to carry out these crimes, therefore we have more power to state things in that way from a geopolitical standpoint.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      1 month ago

      Is Hasan trying to defend Biden and Netanyahu?

      Almost the very beginning of the interview:

      Mehdi Hasan: So you called Netanyahu one, which I think he is.

      Unlike Jill Stein, he has no problem calling a war criminal a war criminal. But I am sure that, unlike Putin, Jill Stein would have no problem calling Joe Biden a war criminal immediately.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Unlike Jill Stein, he has no problem calling a war criminal a war criminal.

        Who does he call a war criminal in the interview?

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          17
          ·
          1 month ago

          You asked if he was trying to defend Netanyahu.

          I literally quoted him calling Netanyahu a war criminal. At the beginning of the interview you apparently didn’t read.

          And now you’re doubling down on it? Really?

          • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 month ago

            You asked if he was trying to defend Netanyahu.

            Mehdi Hasan: So why have you called Biden and Netanyahu war criminals?

            Why keep raising this question? Why not focus on Putin alone? Why does Hasan need to inject Biden into this conversation?

            And now you’re doubling down on it?

            I’m asking questions. You don’t seem comfortable thinking about the answers?

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              17
              ·
              1 month ago

              Irrelevant. You asked if he was trying to defend Netanyahu and he literally called him a war criminal at the top.

              If you had read the interview, you would have known that. So either you didn’t read it or you were being dishonest.

              • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 month ago

                Irrelevant.

                That’s what Mehdi Hasan is asserting, which is weird when you consider how Netanyahu and Putin are allies.

                Why keep putting up this defense of Netanyahu if you’re so focused on getting Jill to denounce Putin? Why does Israel become this backdoor by which you can tacitly trade weapons and fossil fuels internationally?

                If you had read the interview, you would have known that.

                Have you read the interview? You don’t seem to want to acknowledge anything Hasan has actually said.

                • The Quuuuuill@slrpnk.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  its not weird at all? he’s saying their both war criminals because they are. youre whose saying he’s defending netenyahu when theres nothing here to support that, which is what everyone else is saying

          • CmdrShepard42@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            To get pedantic, which seems fair considering the context of the exchange, he never said “Netanyahu is a war criminal” he simply said “I think he is” which doesn’t seem all too different from her saying “Yes … by implication.” The interviewer didn’t seem to think her answer was satisfactory, but his response was pretty much equivalent to her own.

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 month ago

              Sure, but add the other things he said.

              There was also this exchange:

              Mehdi Hasan: Oh, so Putin clearly isn’t a war criminal?

              Jill Stein: Well, we don’t have a decision, put it this way, by the International Criminal Court.

              Mehdi Hasan: Yes, we do. Yes, actually, actually, you’re wrong. There’s an arrest warrant for Putin and there isn’t an arrest warrant for Netanyahu, so why is Putin not a war criminal, but Netanyahu is?

              Jill Stein: Yeah. Well, let me say this. We are sponsoring that war. We are sponsoring Netanyahu. He is our dog in this fight. That is why we have a responsibility to pull him back.

              Mehdi Hasan: No disagreement from me at all. It still doesn’t answer my question. Whether we sponsor them or not is irrelevant.

              The real difference here is that Mehdi Hassan was saying “yes” and Jill Stein was saying “yes, but…”

    • Empricorn@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Mehdi Hasan: So you called Netanyahu one [a war criminal], which I think he is.

      Yeah, he’s really trying to defend them. Sure…

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        He’s telling Jill what she said about Netanyahu, but he doesn’t seem to agree. He keeps doubling back and insisting she needs to condemn Putin (which she then does) and using that as a shield for Netanyahu in follow-up.