This paper is intended to defend the Principle of Alternative Possibilities (pap) against two recent putative counterexamples to it, inspired by the one that Harry Frankfurt designed forty years ago. The first three sections provide a summary of the state of the art. In the remaining sections, the counterexamples to pap of Widerker�s (�Brain-Malfunction-W�) and Pereboom�s (�Tax Evasion�) are succes- sively presented and discussed. We hold that both examples breach at least one of two conditions that are required in order to refute pap, namely, (1) that the agent is morally responsible for his/her decision and (2) that s/he lacks any morally signifi- cant (�robust�) alternatives to it. Regarding (1), the examples face several problems conce...