![]() ![]() It can't, in other words, be 'leap, leap, leap' for four generations and more. And he must base his case on the singularity and uniqueness of the original leap. The man leaping from the burning building must still make such restitution as he can to the man who broke his fall, and must not pretend that he never even landed on him. ![]() Is this a historical injustice? Has the man below been made a victim, with infinite cause of complaint and indefinite justification for violent retaliation? My own reply would be a provisional 'no,' but only on these conditions. Now, make the burning building be Europe, and the luckless man underneath be the Palestinian Arabs. “Suppose that a man leaps out of a burning building-as my dear friend and colleague Jeff Goldberg sat and said to my face over a table at La Tomate in Washington not two years ago-and lands on a bystander in the street below.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |