Wrong feeling
response to Rudy Adler's post Keep Walking, Except For You In The Noose
I feel this posting is not up to the quality of the rest of the magazine:
- It is making fun of a dead man.
- It is pro death penalty in a self called "Good" magazine.
Did killing of Saddam stop bombings in Iraq? Did killing Saddam make any change in al Qaeda plans?
I don't know why you feel safer at night.
Maybe because you don't live in Iraq, Ethiopia, Israel, Palestine...
Something more on the line of this would be more like I would have expected
Like this article? Tell the world It's Good!
1 vote
Redefining GOOD
Saddam was not put to death in retribution for the 'bombings in Iraq" or the "plans of al Qaeda." While his trial and execution may have been terribly flawed, he was convicted by an Iraqi court for crimes against humanity that occured within a country that he was in power of.
Unfortunate as it may seem to some GOOD ? ULTRA LIBERAL. Just b/c the guys who started the publication happen to have attended Brown and other so-called left wing (ed. note: soft) schools, and their content may occasionally reflect this, it does not necessarily mean that the magazine needs to espouse all of the ideals that they picked up in first year American Civilization seminar. I can't speak for the magazine itself (mostly b/c this is a magazine and blog that contains different ideas conceived by different people), but I would imagine that any GOOD guy/gal would tend to agree.
As for making fun of dead people, this is almost always unacceptable except in certain well defined circumstances.
Posted on January 6, 2007 — by NYLawyer
1 comment
not yet rated
Re: Redefining GOOD
The "?" is actually supposed to be a "does not equal" sign. Sorry.
Posted on January 7, 2007 — by NYLawyer
0 comments