Morally Flawed Character: Alger

If Chris Alger is unable to morally distinguish

between Palestinian terror resulting in the loss

of Israeli life and Israel defending herself like

any democracy would I am led to several conclusions. Algers himself must be a morally flawed individual because he is unable or incapable of differentiating between such an obvious moral difference. He is unable to differentiate between right and wrong and evil

versus good so I seriously question his character.

Perhaps in addition to being immoral he is an

anti-Semite. If points one and two don't apply

then he is an ignorant fool. Alger needs to look at himself in the mirror and do some deep soul

searching and try to establish the roots of his

evil and immoral behavior and pehaps one day he

may not be so morally flawed.


Bruce

so i guess you think it was good for the internment of the americans of japanase descent in wwII?


do you agree with US policy to train central american death squads?


do you agree with american intelligence drug running? (uh, remember vietnam, laos, cambodia, 'golden triangle', all that documented stuff? you think it ended abruptly?)


if nazis were running death camps again, do you think it would be moral for the US to supply them with arms and equipment? (if you think this is pie in the sky, read up on east timor)


if you do then you at least have an internally consistent argument.


bottom line: alger is just more well read and understands the futility of accsusing others of 3rd party crimes (in which we are not involved) when we ourselves, our government, is involved in atrocities itself (talking about nation states here) and is more articulate than his detractors, which is why all attacks against him are just general and ad hominem.


brad

dont get into too many posts but i think alger has a historical perspective that is worth noting. suicide bombing is horrible and to me unacceptable. in order for their to be peace in the middle east we have to understand the positions of both sides in the conflicts. i dont understand the personal attacks against him nor the assertation that he is a racist. the usa has a major commitment to israel. i think in light of the trouble that has developed there it is worthwhile to examine our commitment to see if our policy is the way to bring about peace.

He's made racially derogatory posts regarding Jewish customs.


He believes in suicide bombing. He is employed illegally. He believes the USA is a terrorist nation. He is a National Security threat that should be watched closely by the Homeland Security Office. I'm sure they do watch him.

and you believe that Jews rather your parents are responsible for your circumcision (which you have stated equates to molestation.)


Anyone reading your posts should consider the source.

to be fair i did postulate that jewish culture was a necessary but not sufficient cause.


in any case the scientific medicial community is of the opinion (based on the facts) that there is no valid medical reason for circumcision.


so what i was saying was that if you stripped away all the historical and cultural significance of circumcision then it probably wouldnt be practiced today in america as routine surgery.


also i stated that i wasnt sure if it was just culturally linked to jewish culture but that i was sure it was linked to jewish culture.


in any event ive got howard stern and dr. dean edell on my side so ive got both sides of the spectrum, so to speak.


brad

Right, there is no compelling medical reason. But what's wrong with making personal hygiene a tad more efficiently practiced? We don't need tails, we don't need appendixes, and we don't need the bit that gets circumcised. All of the above just get in the way, so why object to a custom which has slightly beneficial life-long effects (greater ease of hygiene and less chance of getting painfully caught in the zipper of your jeans;-))? Who wouldn't want those benefits for trhe rest of their life???