Mr Kobayashi
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 1 Oct 2020
- Messages
- 17,278
The way that interview has been completely mythologised and twisted is infuriating to me and I don’t even like Starmer.
Starmer says about 10 times in 30 seconds “Israel has the right to defend itself… Israel has that right… Israel has that right…” clearly he is talking about Israel’s right to defend itself. That point is abundantly clear.
Ferrari interrupts and talks about stopping water and Starmer continues “Israel has that right [stuck in a loop of repeating the same thing he’s already said repeatedly]. Obviously everything should be done within international law.”
How has the bit in bold been totally erased from history? How has this turned into Starmer advocating the deaths of children? Is starving children within the bounds of international law? No? Then that is quite obviously not what he’s suggesting. Is stopping water as a form of collective punishment within the bounds of international law? No? Then he clearly he was not suggesting that either. It’s not a matter for ambiguity.
There have been people complaining for years about the Tories taking things out of context and weaponising them against the likes of Corbyn, and now they’re quite happily doing it themselves without a second thought. Suggesting somebody believes war crimes are okay when they have actually quite clearly said the exact opposite. Unless somebody can come here and explain how war crimes can be committed within international law.
It wasn't clear though was it. He didn't answer the question directly. He could have just answered about the specific things Ferrari cited and said they are not allowed.
Why was he stuck in the loop? Because he was avoiding giving a direct answer.
Emily Thornberry then went further and said Israel has an absolute right.
Last edited: