Simon Wiesenthal's question “What would you have done” if we had had the opportunity to forgive a Nazi soldier forces humanity to understand and apply our moral repertoire. My moral repertoire, I mean the set of moral beliefs that inform our understanding of forgiveness and the criteria by which we evaluate it. Karl the Nazi soldier, who launches our investigation into forgiveness, represents multiple identities. He is at once a rational human being, a member and supporter of the Nazi army, a murderer, an actor, and a representative of the state. Because of the simultaneous occurrence and fluidity of these identities, confusion is an easy mistake when it comes to constructing exactly who we forgive. Forgiving Karl the individual is very different from forgiving the Nazis or the state represented by Karl. Even Lawrence Lager writes in the Symposium: “It seems to me that by refusing to grant forgiveness to the guilty, Wiesenthal unconsciously recognizes the indissoluble bond which unites the criminal to his crime” (Le Tournesol, 178). The confusion of what Karl represents is largely what makes Wiesenthal's question so thorny, because the rules of forgiveness vary depending on the actor. Karl, the individual, deserves some consideration simply because of his humanity, while the Nazis and the state represented by Karl are enmeshed in political considerations. To forever label Karl as a murderer is to renounce his ever-present humanity. This is not to say that forgiving Karl the individual is not political, or that we should not recognize the enormity of his crime. This is to emphasize that the limits and criteria of forgiveness change depending on whether it is from person to person or from person to political organizations. This separation of the individual from power...... middle of paper ...... the country and the victims to move forward and be "free", as one speaker puts it. To wallow in bitterness and despair is perhaps to acknowledge what happened, to mourn what was a loss, and to begin the process of rebuilding. Louise Mallinder in “Can amnesties and international justice be reconciled? " hypothesizes: "Amnesty for lower-level offenders could also mean that in their daily lives victims are frequently confronted with the individuals who caused their suffering, which could cause further harm to victims and even lead them to engage in self-defense actions” (210).Forgiveness is not physical and can only be manifested through words, actions, and shared understandings. These traits give forgiveness a spiritual quality that illustrates how it can transcend physical atrocities; make the unforgivable forgivable.