i just want to say something about the genocide/isis thing, though, because the conservatives used this tactic against him when he was running for prime minister (i can't remember what it was about...) and he responded the same way both times.

broadly speaking, an opposition member wouldn't ask that question unless it was meant as a sucker punch. and, it's obvious that it was meant as a sucker punch in context, too.

if somebody asks you this question: "is isis guilty of genocide?", you're going to run off some chain of mental logic that is along the lines of "isis....bad guys...genocide....bad...bad guys...bad things....yes.". so, you'd likely respond affirmatively pretty quickly.

but, in the mind of stephane dion - and in fact most academics - this is a legal accusation that requires evidence and due process. the question of whether isis is guilty of genocide or not is reduced to the question of whether they have been found guilty of genocide in a court of law, and after due process. the accusations may exist - wildly, i may add - but no process has ever occurred to determine the accuracy of them. so, in his mind, the most uncontroversial response is going to be the one with the least number of assumptions. and, surely, we can't have a canadian minister of foreign affairs libeling a foreign group before the process of establishing guilt has been carried out.

and, i ask you: what court of law has found isis guilty of genocide?

so, we run into this problem. where dion is technically correct, and is responding in the way that he would be expected to in the circles he exists within, the response is considered to be outrageous by the general public. how can he not know if isis is guilty of genocide? doesn't he watch tv? doesn't he understand the propaganda? why isn't he repeating it? what a fool!

but, what i wanted to draw attention to was the reality that he got suckered and may still not fully know it - because it happened (at least) twice.