• CmdrShepard42@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months 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
      ·
      2 months 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…”