A long time ago in Munich I met a former member of the Waffen SS. How do I know he was the real thing? How do I know he wasn't spinning me a line?

Obviously I cannot be sure. But the memorabilia he had carefully preserved led me to believe he really had been in the SS.

At the time I met him he was an alcoholic beggar. He must have been about 40 but he looked 70. He stank. I ended up giving him a few Marks to buy some food. He probably spent it on cheap schnapps.

What brought this 40 year old incident to mind was watching Downfall on SBS. Downfall is a movie that tells the story of the last days of Hitler as soon through the eyes of the clerical staff in the Fuhrerbunker.

Seeing the movie raised a question I often ask myself. Suppose I had been born to parents who were avid Nazis. Suppose I had been through the Hitler Youth. Suppose I had grown up in a society that considered unquestioning obedience to the Fuhrer as the highest good. Would I have joined the Waffen SS? Would I have proudly bellowed out HEIL HITLER!

Could I have been that stinking alcoholic beggar?

Or is there something inside me that would have prevented me following the same path.

Perhaps there is something that would have stopped me following the same path as the erstwhile member of the SS. But when I look inside myself I can't find it.

Suppose I had been brought up in a society that considered blowing oneself up in a crowded pizza parlour to be the greatest service one could perform for some god. Could I have become a suicide bomber who yells ALLAHU AKHBAR and massacres himself and those around him?

What is there that would have stopped me being a suicide bomber?

Who is evil?

stevenlmeyer,
I agree that most of us are victims of circumstance and fate and that these are a result of when and where we are born.

How many of the same right-wing zealots who spend their spare hours typing away at their laptops would be busy making home-made bombs instead if they had been born in some oppressed society with no hope for the future?

How many left-wing miltary leaders would be successful corporate psychopaths if they had been born elsewhere?

It's been said that patriotism is a love of one's country that actually masks a secret hatred for other countries and religion is no different.

Both are usually determined by circumstance and the likelihood and opportunity to voluntarily change between them is not as common as some would believe. Refugees may be an exception but are still looked at with suspicion.

Who is evil ? Suppose you get a hard time from some ignorant moron who is too stupid to realise what he is doing to you. You would eventually have a gut full & retalliate. So, who would be the evil one there ? The moron who doesn't know that he is giving you a hard time or you who runs out of patience ? Neither of you deliberately went out to do "evil" but the consequenses are. In my opinion evil is when someone "deiberately" harms or cons someone else. Is it evil to expect cradle to grave support ? No !. That's ignorant. Is it good to give support from cradle to grave ? No ! That's ignorant. Is it evil to buy land, do nothing with it & then sell for 3 times as much ? No ! That's greedy & opportunistic. is it good to help drug abusers ? No ! That's stupidity which fosters evil. Is hypocicy evil ? Yes! Is turning a blind eye evil ? Yes ! Is reporting misuse of public funding evil ? No ! That's a good trait wich guarantees you some evil outcome. Leniency in sentencing is evil. Do-gooders are not evil, they're just plain ignorant & foster evil.

individual, that post came across less as a query as to what fosters evil behaviour than it did as a bitter diatribe against the issues you find personally offensive.

I know people who think there may be a 'fundamentalist' gene, which makes us unable to see reason, and latch on to whatever belief set is presented.

It's one possibility I guess... though I tend to be of the view it's more to do with the intensity of impression. If during the formative years, a child is repeatedly subjected to a particular ideology, of course it will take shape.

I've sometimes wondered what life would be like if children up to the age of about 17, weren't taught anything about any ideology, then when they were able to think for themselves, were offered the facts about evolution and the central religions, with the lessons being prefaced as 'these people believe....'
I can't help but wonder if religion would still have such a hold on so many if it wasn't impressed on children from such a young age.

I dare say most suicide bombers have been brought up in an environment where fundamentalist Islam is everything and it's tenets aren't questioned.
At the end of the day, I think anyone who doesn't reflect upon the basis for their beliefs and doesn't question is at risk of fundamentalism.

this thread was started many years ago. not only before the web, but before printing, quite possibly before writing. i could tell you the answer, but as i don't enjoy writing on stone tablets, you wouldn't listen. and then there's the lively possibilty that i'm wrong...

but the rough guide is this: humans are evil. it's in our genes. but until we take ourselves off the world stage with war, resource depletion, or simple pandemic, we can modify our behavior with negotiation and law. this will file off the sharp edge of evil so we are left with mere greed, flatulence, and rowdy behavior when drunk. let's aim for this.

Without absolutes 'who is evil' is only a matter of opinion. We all have the potential in us to do evil. Actually we all commit evil acts to a certain degree. A harder question to answer is who is good. There is only One I know of who walked the earth and was perfectly good by nature and action.

runner: "Without absolutes 'who is evil' is only a matter of opinion. We all have the potential in us to do evil. Actually we all commit evil acts to a certain degree. A harder question to answer is who is good. There is only One I know of who walked the earth and was perfectly good by nature and action."

Yes. Steve Irwin was indeed a great man.

I've sometimes wondered what life would be like if children up to the age of about 17, weren't taught anything about any ideology, then when they were able to think for themselves, were offered the facts about ...............
TRTL, because this won't happen I'll not even reply to academic hypothesis. I am concerned about reality & finding a method to get reality recognised in the education system as quickly as possible. Far too many "educated" people are in actual fact very ignorant. Because their just as ignorant teachers are perpetuating the myth that only education makes you smart they stop thinking after graduation. Education is only of use when you have a student who thinks rather than just believes. Age doesn't bring wisdom, experience & thinking are the basis of wisdom. Why is it so easy for young people being sucked into Hitler youth, suicide bombing etc. ? They're being "taught" to be mindless by just as mindless authorities, business people, political & religous fanatics. The poor concerned parent can't compete because of so much outside interference. A loving parent or a concerned teacher who disciplines a child gets cruzified so the child then sees discipline as wrong & acts accordingly. surprised ? when all this childrens' rights bizo started a lot of evil got it's foot in the door.

THANKYOU Stephen....for a frank admission (speaking for us all by the way).. and a good account of:

"original sin"

I cannot resist quoting Paul here "All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" (Romans 3:23)

If we look at that verse in isolation, it won't mean much, but for those interested I recommend a read of Pauls letter to the Romans from chapter 1 to 3 (at least)

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=52&chapter=1&version=31

Paul develops this concept very carefully and systematically.

His next statement after the 'bad news' of 3:23 is this, in 24 :

"and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus."

It might be 'free' in that we cannot 'earn' it... it is offered, but let there be no confusion...it will cost us our lives. "If any man will follow me.....let him deny himself, take up his cross, and come after me" said Jesus.

The solution to "would i be an SS member" (a question with the answer 'quite possibly') is for the righteousness of God to be proclaimed regularly in a community.

When we HAVE a standard... we can reflect and compare our own behavior and take corrective action.

"Amen" :)

Individual - no offence but the comment "do-gooders are not evil, they're just plain ignorant and foster evil" has to be about the dumbest generalisation I've heard in quite some time.

Do gooders are evil? People who do good... are evil?

Crikey. I don't think I'd like to encounter your concept of good...

I don't think things are quite as bad as you make out, and I think parents still have plenty of avenues for discipline.

I guess the issue I have there in your posts, is that you're grouping matters opposed to your own lone opinion as 'evil.' Believe it or not, that's an aspect of fundamentalism.

Here's a more up-to-date comment for you: out of touch old cynics sitting behind a keyboard, railing at a society that isn't as bad as they seem to think aren't evil, just ignorant and hostile.

Boaz

How does your call for individual spiritual change differ from demos' call for secular controls which limit the individual's ability to commit evil acts? Do they have a common aim?

TRTL,
You simply don't understand. But don't feel targeted too much. That's a very common trait among those with no vision or any kind of foresight.
I didn't imply that do-gooders ARE evil. They FOSTER evil via the same ignorance that you so unashamedly portray. For example, look how hysterically Whitlam's social reform was trumpeted thoughout the land. Look at the outcome of those "reforms" now. We have a whole generation that is so listless that they totally rely on our tax money funded hand-outs. TRTL, you have to understand that whatever momentary politically convenient policy or fad is introduced now will not be apparent until it's too late. Just look at big Goaf's legacy. I am getting told by Indigenous people every day how frustrated they are because good, bright kids get sent to boarding school & return devious & useless. Have a yarn with Huffnpuff about his experiences.

individual
Your post's make sense but do not join the mob in the character assassination's as they detract from the good points you have made.
Most educated people could bring much more simple devastation to any country with even a smaller effort than bombs and guns than any country can think of. But the thinking mind we have been shown to use show us we also loose to much. No examples will be given here as I'm not going to the camp delta concentration camp of America for stating basic knowledge taught at school. It ,only my limited opinion,comes down to desperate people will do desperate things. If we want an evil foe we ,to our demise ,maybe just get it.

stevenlmeyer - Forget the memorabilia!

If you could have stood the stench, then you could have looked under his armpit to see if his Waffen SS number was there in the form of a tattoo.

It it was, then instead of a few Marks you could have taken him to a bar and bought him whatever he wanted to drink and help him to keep right on drinking into oblivion. You could have assisted him under a tram. You could have . . . Well you could have done a lot of things!

We always have choices - regardless of the circumstances and if we make a choice we have to be prepared to face the consequences arising from those choices.

Not everyone chose to be part of the Waffen SS! Not everyone chose to commit atrocities.

The only thing I got from the film the "Downfall" was that some people were at least capable of taking responsibility for their decisions.

They were the ones who blew their brains out or took poison.

They KNEW that they had done the wrong thing and were petrified of facing the consequences.

I am more worried about the choices we make NOW about how we live and how we treat each other and how we think about and treat other people.

Hi Fester.. rather good question... I can best illustrate this with the interaction I once saw on a TV show between a child and the father.
Kid sits up at the table..
(DAD) "sitttttt DOWN!"

(KID) "I don't wannnnnt to !"

(DAD) "Sit down or I'll whack ur butt"

(KID) (Sits down, but has a big smile on his face)

(DAD) "What are you smiling so much about hmmmmm?"

(KID) "I'm sitting down on the 'out'side, but on the inside I'm still standing up" :)

So...the difference is... I'm speaking of "inner" transformation, and DEMOS is speaking about 'Outward' restriction.

Paul, after developing the idea of universal sinfulness of humanity in Romans 1-11 then..in chapter twelve declares:

[1Therefore, I urge you, brothers, in view of God's mercy, to offer your bodies as living sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God—this is your spiritual[a] act of worship. 2Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God's will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will.]

Quite profound really. "Inner" transformation. It's a matter of not only 'not' doing things we previously happily did (which were wrong) but it's also not even wanting to.

When I was in the RAAF..I and others stole petrol. (Prior to my embracing of Christ).. we drove the Section Combi wagon to a remote area on the base, and then took out the jerry cans.. and siphoned out a few gallons, then drove back. When I was discharged (having come to Christ and desiring to attend Bible College), I repaid an estimate of how much I took. They were quite stunned. (and impressed) The difference for me was not even 'wanting' to do that any more. "Inner" :)

individual, you're still making the point that people who do good are causing evil.

Aside from the strong rhetoric, it's so broad it's plain ignorant. You can't make those kinds of claims without looking exceedingly stupid.

By that logic, nobody should do anything. Good things are evil, bad things are evil... I guess everything should just stay the same, though if you listen to the cynic brigade, everything's screwed up anyway, so you can't really do that either.

Honestly. What guff.

TRTL,
you're obviously totally ignorant about the term D-Gooder. A Do-Gooder is usually of academic background although ignorant people come from all walks life. A Do-Gooder is not someone who does good. On the contrary. A Do-Gooder only THINKS he does good. A person who does actual good is a Philanthropist. Do-Gooders more often than not cause a lot of disruption by given people in need silly & outrageous advise & ideas. They're not evil or bad by any means deliberately, they just stick their noses into other people's business & disrupt common sense.

I'm aware of the term individual and I'm aware that some like to apply it in an insulting sense. I just think that's bollocks.

It's generally just a catchall phrase used as an excuse for people to legitimise their dislike of those who actually stand up for their ideals. They'll only accept philathropy if it doesn't rock the boat.
Part of it's the tall poppy syndrome, part of it's just because some people are so cynical, criticism is all that they can do.

Garpet

I certainly was NOT going to ask this guy to strip so I could see his tattoo!

Those that committed suicide did not look to me as if they were accepting responsibility for anything. All they seemed to be doing was bailing out of an unpleasant situation.

Individual, TRTL,

A "do-gooder" is someone who has forgotten that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

BOAZ,

I'm sure that David Hicks also has a "conversion experience" – one that led him to support the Taleban!

Again this arguement is shown to be fruitless if their are no absolutes. Just one persons opinion contradicting the next. Quite amusing really.

STEPHEN.. exactly.. (Hicks) so... why not ask this "What is different about being converted to Christ and converted to Mohammad/Islam" ?

I've not contemplated joining some militia and shooting my way into glory.... but Hicks did.

Is there any connection between what Hicks was converted 'to'...and what I was converted to ? Values.. human/divine relationship.. truth vs falsehood..etc...

All food for thought.

It is not an ideal for me nor is ist my opinion when I write posts which are not accepted or more sadly, not comprehended. I am writing from experience & my experience showed me that most of the problems in society are a result of this nonsensical individual rights ideal. How on earth can one expect harmony when everyone thinks they should be entitled to go through life by their ideals & everyone else should pull into line. Well, my boy, that don't work. It's been proven so let's not start that argument again. It is of no practical use whatsoever to rave on about ideals. ideals don't provide a living, practical effort does. What the core of it all is, is that we don't have rules & follow them. The whole idea of rules is that everyone gives & takes. simple. You can't run a train if the rails are not parallel. individual rights is the evil which constantly widens or narrows those rails & causes the disruption. The idealists who can't see that don't give it a single thought about the people who constantly repair the rails because, in the end, they still get their goods.

No, individual. You're being far too simplistic.

It's about a balance of rights.

You can't just call 'individual rights' nonsensical.

Honestly, what garbage. It's the kind of thing a stalinist dictator would love to spout.

In fact, that entire last post could be used as a justification for a dictator state, and once translated, wouldn't be out of place for a fundamentalist imam preaching the necessity of conforming to the fold.

'individual rights' are what guarantee you the ability to believe what you want.
Though when you say "everyone thinks they should be entitled to go through life by their ideals" I can't help but feel you don't get that.

Of course rules are a necessity, though I don't think it's as bad as you make out, and yes, I think you're totally out of touch. See, I can quite happily go outside, meet with friends and do what I wish without harming anyone.

It's actually a pretty nice country to live in out there. It's often sunny, and we enjoy quite a number of freedoms. You should actually try experiencing it sometime.

Of course, our rights are limited if we decide to harm someone. That's when the law kicks in, and that's how it should be, because I'm now affecting somebody elses 'individual rights.'

The anarchic cesspool you seem to think the country has become, is a myth. I'm quite happy in this country, though you seem to think it's a crappy system, which quite frankly, just goes to prove you're not grateful for what we have.

The anarchic cesspool you seem to think the country has become, is a myth.
TRTL,
go, work & live in the communities in the north, watch the southern bureaucrats' exploiting the system, wrecking whole communities by pressing individual right then tell me I'm wrong.

Read Jonathon Glover's "Humanity - a moral history of the twentieth century. How WWI was really the outbreak of four wars, Hilter ans the NAZI moral identity, Mao, the penchant towards Obedience and Conformity, Rwanda, Viet-nam and My Lai.... it goes on and on. The book analyses the psyche and the breaking down of moral identity too, as usually orchastrated by Governments and Treaties.

On the smaler scale: Is Tony about evil? There is 1 PET scanner for every 1,312,500 Australians. He promised to address the need for more affordable and more available scanners by July, 2007. These scanners can detect cancers at a cellular level. He has provided no information and doctors have to fight in Court for access to public records ubder the FOI Act. Presumably, the money is needed for por-barreling? Is that evil?

Oliver,
We should be asking What is Evil or evil, rather than who. Not to have facilities wherever someone would like them is not evil 't's a matter of economic priority. I believe many good people do very things bad things purely out of ignorance. I would not describe that as evil but it can lead to evil eventually. Surely you've heard the phrase "bad things happen when good people do nothing". Well, I have experienced good people thinking they're doing good things but the opposite resulted. that is not evil but it fosters evil because eventually the short-changed have to retaliate. this is how neighborhood disputes start & wars on the greater scale. When you have someone who is too ignorant to see that their action is offensive to someone else & that someone else is too ignorant to realise that the other did not mean to be offensive & becomes aggressive then who is the guilty one if a conflict occurs. I work in an environment where we provide facilities to remote communities & in general make for healthier living conditions & we get flak. why, because we're seen as a necessary evil. so, are we really evil by trying to help people who incessantly bleat discrimmination or are they evil by just taking & not making any effort to help themselves.
the outcome is that we have a dysfunctional society with a lot of ill-will & ill-feeling.

individual,

Have you read Lawrence Kolhberg:

http://faculty.plts.edu/gpence/html/kohlberg.htm

He would set-up scenarios like, is it right/wrong to steal to save a life. What was measured was not the right or wrong bit, but how the subject arrived at a decision. Germany was blockaded before WWI and forced to pay unpayable reparations before WWII. It was crippled economically and insulted to core of its society:

Hilter is regarded evil, but what of the West creating the situation via concourse of cascading treaties and acts of repribution?

Oliver,
the west wrong ? surely not ! left-wing academics undermining everything that's good for society ? never !
That Kohlberg article should be brought up in schools. thanks for that link.

The pseudo-science of Eugenics was popular in lots of nations 100 odd years ago, and found its political voice in Hitler's Germany. Racial hygeine and sterilisation of the 'feeble minded' etc were serious subjects for discussion, considered as science and popular with the Psychiatry profession. Why they won out in Germany and not the US or Australia does say something about the German psyche of the time.

Oliver, maybe the harsh terms imposed on Germany explains some of their bitterness, but this doesn't even touch the question at hand here.

If it was simply a question of righting those wrongs Hitler could of stopped after say, Poland & northern France and achieved a 'fair' outcome through diplomacy.

Gypsys, Jews, homosexuals et al, were the subjects of German evil, and irrelevant to your economics argument. Hitler had one product in mind- death and destruction. The results on Germans were no less destructive than the results on his targets

palimpsest,

I was addressing individual's what vs why. Distinctions are not always clear. In WWII after the Germans started [accidently] bombing Coventry [civilians], England started bombing Dresden [civilians]. Does tit for tat made it less evil. Suspect, evil as a force is buries in our genes. Conrad Lorenze [sp?] researched the cross-over of animal to human behaviour, especially aggression.

Germany and Hilter are different constructs. The conditions in Germany, let NAZISM become impeded. Elsewise, I suspect, Hilter would have neen thought of as some sort of nut, best ignored.

actually individual, I've lived in far north communities. I don't anymore, though I still live in regional Australia.

Individual rights aren't the problem, it's a simple issue of voter concentration amplified by pork barrelling in marginal seats.
If it's the aboriginal intervention you're referring to, I hardly see how you can chalk the problem up to people having too many rights, when it appears the rest of Australia is often quite happy to sit back and pretend it's not happening.

I still don't see anything that warrants your attitude, which, when you strip it to its core, is basically calling for a dictatorship.

is basically calling for a dictatorship.
TRTL,
well, isn't that what we've got now ? being dictated to by leftist minority groups who, if left to their own competence couldn't run a chook raffle. the taxpayer funded "keeping" of these interfering parasites is in my opinion evil. the Beatty outfit funded an artist to the tune of $90,000.- for his art which was regurgitating food onto a cement slab. that's just one example from the TV news. if you really care than take more notice of where public funding is distributed. the disadvantaged are always looking for support but hardly any is offered. evil bureaucrats rather spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on an assistance query when a few hundred dollars would have helped a person to get back on their feet. victims get no restitution whereas offenders get protection & better conditions at great expense. That TRTL falls into the EVIL category & I for one can not find a single excuse for the system which offers nothing to decent people.

No individual. Incompetent bureaucracy yes, dictatorship, no.

I see you're loaded with criticisms for the system. Fair enough, though I see you're a little light on the constructive side of things.

There's millions of people out there, loaded down with bile and cynicism, willing to take potshots at whatever system we have. There's far fewer who can come up with genuinely constructive solutions that actually improve the situation.

I find it interesting that you've simultaneously criticised do gooders and leftists who push for change as unrealistic, yet criticise the system and say it needs change.

I also find it most amusing that it's generally the leftists that favour a welfare state, yet you make the comment: "when a few hundred dollars would have helped a person to get back on their feet" I can't help but wonder how you decide who is worthy.
In practicality, a program like this could just as easily lead to corruption and pork barrelling.

Practically speaking, you're saying the government should do more to help people but they can't be trusted to help people. Nice.

In fact, looking over your posts I see nothing but a seething mass of criticism and contradictions.

Talk is cheap. Human nature is complex, especially when it comes to working together.

Can I ask, if this system of ours is so decadent and useless because of all the evil leftists, where is a better system?

Would you like the right wing US model, which couldn't even help the victims of Katrina yet squanders billions on Iraq contracts for companies run by associates of the administration?
They're probably about the most right wing out there...

Would you like the Scandinavian models of government? Regrettably, they're the products of the leftists you so despise.

Like I said, talk and criticism is cheap, but that's all I'm seeing from you.

Constant negativity without respite... now that's evil.

TRTL,
you just don't get it do you. well, never mind I almost felt sorry for you but, no, I'll wait till you leave school & hopefully you'll discover that critisism is there to make people think of what they're doing to others. what about the scandinavian system ? they're scandinavian & their system would never work with the australian mentality. same as they'll always be perplexed how people can actually compete with each other in ruining one of the best places on the planet. I'm about bringing peoples' attention to the things that need changing & yes of course it's all negative. I don't rave on about the good side of things because there's no need to.

individual, it's you who I feel sorry for.

And making false assumptions in an effort to devalue an opponents position is a very poor debating tactic.
My days of schooling are long behind me. You can try to paint me into the corner as naive or youthful all you want, but it's wrong, plain and simple.

I just don't subscribe to your "everything's screwed, nothing works, it needs to be fixed but you can't trust anyone so don't do anything" mentality. I also think your attempts to pin it all on leftists are the refuge of an embittered right winger. This isn't as much an assumption of your character as it is an interpretation of your posts.

I understand criticism very well, after all, I'm directing a fair bit of it at your constant pessimism. I just believe that it's far more effective when coupled with constructive suggestions.

At the end of the day, it boils down to one very simple concept: anyone can harp on about the problems of the world and how difficult it is to change. Far fewer can either do something about it, or have the courage to make suggestions.

Largely because with change there is always a downside - but if you're going to say that things are terrible here and need to be changed, there is an implicit assumption that there should therefore be change.
With change comes an inevitable downside, but you're just as keen to attack that as well.

Cont'd

So in an effort to actually be constructive, I'll suggest that changes that would actually improve our government should start with increased transparency - there's little downside to that.
I suppose you can attack the media for irresponsibility or poor coverage, but the fact is they're hamstrung in their efforts to obtain information from government.
In recent days we've seen reports regarding the state of FOI in Australia and how difficult it is to access.
I guess the first tasks would be to make the issue a prominent one - government transparency has entered the election campaign as a fringe issue that Rudd's made a few comments about, but given his disposition toward media management I'm sceptical. I tend to think that a more concrete step by step process geared at actually returning responsibility to government officials is needed.
Journalists can start by refusing to use "a department spokesman" instead using the actual names of representatives, so there's somewhere where the buck stops.

The ultimate aim of this is to actually give more insight into how this government which you seem to loathe so much actually operates. That's the first step in fixing these issues.

Well individual, I guess that's my suggestion for actually DOING something. What's yours? Or is it all hopeless anyway?

poor TRTL,
I am not a vindictive character, I just want people to WAKE UP. I have been a victim of crime & bureaucracy & it's set me back considerably. What hurts the most is that the very organisation (ALP) which constantly trumpets it's committment to the working class is the most corrupt and incompetent outfit and what's more, it is the preferred choice of the left.
A cademics
L eeches
P reposterous

Poor TRTL?

Thank you for the concern, however misplaced it may be, though I'm still not clear on what it's for.
I could however, do without the posts that use a patronising attitude in lieu of an argument.

I can't say whether you're vindictive or not, but the pessimism is clear.
Poor individual. It must be horrible carrying around all that doom and gloom, coupled with a constant hatred of the Left. I guess I can only hope you learn to let go of it for your own sake.

After I wipe away the tears, Steven.
I met another man in Richmond,I asked if he was Jewish,having befiended many Jewish people.
He strongly said "No,I hate them.
My curiosity aroused,I asked why.
He then told me a tear jerker.
He was born in the Ukraine and in the 1930's the Communists arrived in his village.
They then asked the local Jewish villager to identify all land owners. Behind his house curtains the Jew exposed who would die, who would be sent to prison in Siberia, and who would be left alone.
The man in Richmond could not believe that their were such evil people as this Jew who betrayed his fellow villagers .He became the Village leader until Hitlers SS entered his village where all the young men volunteered to join the SS.
Evil fights on both sides in all conficts.
The Middle East is a place for the flowering of evil.
Having your house bulldozed down and your father thrown into jail hardly makes you feel like loving your enemy.