I'm not sure where the lines are in these definitions, or how much the difference really matters but I'm hoping he will be remembered not just as an enabler but as a direct accomplice, which he is. He could have chosen to stop it at any point, instead he has goaded it on and knowingly, unhesitatingly provided the material means to perpetrate it.
in a court of law, if someone was repeatedly recorded on video saying they'd like to kill a murder victim, and provided the murderer with the gun used in the murder, they would be charged as an accomplice, even if they stated under oath that they told the murderer that they shouldn't murder.
I'm not sure where the lines are in these definitions, or how much the difference really matters but I'm hoping he will be remembered not just as an enabler but as a direct accomplice, which he is. He could have chosen to stop it at any point, instead he has goaded it on and knowingly, unhesitatingly provided the material means to perpetrate it.
in a court of law, if someone was repeatedly recorded on video saying they'd like to kill a murder victim, and provided the murderer with the gun used in the murder, they would be charged as an accomplice, even if they stated under oath that they told the murderer that they shouldn't murder.
Yeah, he's been an unrepentant zionist forever.