The answer you entered to the math problem is incorrect.

Yes, bullshit

I don't know about Switzerland or where-ever you are, but here in New York we call a spade a spade.

Did I say suicide bombings were "morally unique"? Is that in any way relevant to the discussion? No. (That said, it is—if you will—bullshit to say that they are "horrifying to the same degree that every other bomb is horrifying." Not all bombs are intended to kill the maximum number of civilians. There you go with that dualism again.)

Did I demand that "every discussion of Palestine include a condemnation of suicide bombs"? Do you bother to read this publication you have been invited to contribute to?

The abortion analogy is the reddest of herrings. I support abortion; I don't support suicide bombings.

Political realism—as well as moral consistency—demand that we are clear in our opposition to attacks on civilians as a matter of principle, not only when they are committed by one side or the other. You equivocated on that point. I said no more and no less.

And you have still failed to identify in what sense I am a "perpetrator." But maybe we should leave well enough alone.


Reply

Please solve the math problem above and type in the result. e.g. for 1+1, type 2
The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Images can be added to this post.
More information about formatting options