"That year, although I was still very young
My mother left me,
And I realized
That I was an orphan.
Everyone around me was crying.
I suffered in silence . . .
Allowing the tears to flow,
I felt my pain soften.
Evening enveloped Mother's tomb,
The pagoda bell rang sweetly.
I realized that to lose your mother
Is to lose the whole universe".*

My mother has passed away.

There will be no new posts on Not a Fish for a week or so.

___________________________
*Vietnamese poem quoted by Thich Nhat Hanh in A Rose For Your Pocket.

posted by Imshin 11:44

Big day in Israel today, too.
300,000 or so Likud members go to vote for their party chairman. Who will it be? Bibi Netanyahu or Arik Sharon? The answer to that is, of course, the answer to who will, most likely, be the next prime minister of Israel. Well, you all know who I prefer. He's winning in the polls, too. For weeks now, Israeli media have been gleefully asking what happened to Bibi's magic touch. We'll see.
posted by Imshin 06:26

Happy Thanksgiving to my American readers.
It is today, isn't it? Yesterday I say what looked like a mutant chicken in a delicatessen. The South African lady behind the counter said it was a Thanksgiving Turkey. I'd never seen one before. A turkey I mean, Thanksgiving or otherwise.

Update: I mean a whole turkey. Dead.
posted by Imshin 06:15

Fun game.
Many thanks to Andrea. I really needed that.
Of course, the beauty is I can play abominably and nobody knows.

Be warned, if you're busy, don't even think of clicking through.
People are complaining about this bitterly on Andrea's comments.
posted by Imshin 17:06

It's not the same
Nathan Guttman in Haaretz writes about former UK Guardian correspondent to Israel and the PA, Suzanne Goldenberg, who has moved to Washington DC. She says, among other things: "I think it is fair to say, if you look at most of the European coverage, it's probably less critical than Ha'aretz and not more critical, on occasion, than Yedioth Ahronoth or other commentators”.

Not fair at all. Israeli reporters never imply that Israelis are themselves to blame for a suicide bombing in the very same story that reports the details of the said suicide bombing (It sounds so tasteless put like that, doesn’t it? But the foreign media do just that regularly). Terrorists are never called militants in Israeli newspapers. Acts of terrorism are never condoned or "understood". Israeli newspapers often publish articles giving completely opposite points of view side by side, even Haaretz sometimes (well, occasionally). It must be understood that the Hawkish viewpoint is so widespread and understood in Israel that the press exposing Israelis to alternative viewpoints is acceptable, even positive, if not taken to extremes (Haaretz has definitely been going a bit overboard for the last year or so). In Europe, most people never get the other side of the picture. Many have no idea one exists. That's why Haaretz's English language edition gives foreign readers such a distorted view and is so harmful. In Israel, people who read Haaretz also listen to the news on the radio and watch the news on TV, at least a few times a day. Some even read other newspapers as well. Haaretz isn't anyone’s only source of information and readers can confront the ideas and views expressed in the newspaper with other ideas and views. Haaretz often reacts to things happening and being said in Israel that the foreign reader is completely unaware of. Criticism in the Israeli media is in a certain context.

People like Ms. Goldenberg are completely ignorant of this context, of course, but still have no problem being judgemental. Ms. Goldenberg says: "I think that the foreign press coverage of the conflict is presenting people with the facts they don't want to see. I think it's hitting too close to home - people just don't want to be confronted with what's going on.".

Actually, we do know what's going on.

But tell me this: Why should we be receptive to views expressed by people who tell us that it is understandable for Palestinians to be blowing up Israeli babies, given their dire circumstances? There's a limit to how many times we can hear what a terrible time the Palestinians are having, even if we know it’s true, while buses explode every other morning blowing Israeli schoolchildren into little pieces.

Ms. Goldenberg claims “Israelis are resistant to hearing or seeing anything that challenges their version of events”. This would be true had there not been any Oslo Accords and had there not been any generous offers at Camp David in the summer of 2000. As it is, it’s Ms. Goldenberg and her friends who are “resistant to hearing or seeing anything that challenges their version of events”, not us. We went out on a limb to try and not only hear and see another version, but actually live it. Our reward is suicide bombings.

There's a lot more to be said in reaction to her claims. Another time.

posted by Imshin 23:31

Light blogging lately.
Real life is making blogging difficult.
posted by Imshin 21:47

More of the same.
I was sent an e-mail, by someone, whose name I will not divulge, because I have not requested his permission to do so. He said, among other things:

"I'm an Islamicist, by the way, and a lifelong liberal, yet I find myself in
full agreement with almost everything said by yourself and your
correspondents. It never ceases to amaze me how many of my fellow liberals are taken in by the 'poor Palestinian victims' lobby. It doesn't surprise me from within Islam, where anti-Semitism is built into the system. But for Western liberals brought up with a more than passing knowledge of the Holocaust, and holding political views totally opposed to those found in the Arab and Muslim worlds, to round on a democratic and socially liberal Israel
and support repressive Islamic states is simply shocking."

This e-mail got me thinking about peace activists. Again.

Foreign peace activists who say they come to this area to promote peace offend me. Why do they offend me? Because if they were truly interested in promoting peace they would take the time to listen to the suffering of the Israelis. They would go to the hospitals, and hold the hands of the Israeli wounded, they would visit the families of the Israeli dead.

I am grateful that peace activists and humanitarian organizations are helping Palestinians. They are needed there. There is great misery and suffering on the Palestinian side.

It's true, we Israelis look after our own. The Jewish Diaspora and others who support us pitch in. We don't need food and we can manage with medical supplies and aid. We don't need help rebuilding our coffee shops, pizzerias and discotheques.

What we do need is a bit of compassion. We do need not to be told constantly that we deserve to be blown up and that we alone are to blame for our suffering. This is insulting and offensive. It fills our hearts with anger and hatred, even if they were not there before.

In cutting themselves off from the suffering of the Israelis, the peace activists are not helping promote peace. They are helping prolong war. They are going to the Palestinians and saying to them, with great love and compassion: "You poor dears. You do not deserve to be treated in such a fashion. The Israelis are wrong and are doing you a great injustice." Thus they encourage the Palestinians. They strengthen their determination while alienating Israelis, even those who yearn for peace and who are truly willing for painful compromise.

Why do they not say to them: "We help you because you are desperate, and because you need our help. In return you must do your utmost to stop suicide bombings and all other violent activities, in order that you may sit down and negotiate with the Israelis and reach a peaceful solution"?

Most Israelis left in the peace camp are those who, like their foreign counterparts, seem to see in Israel and the Israelis the only guilty party in this conflict. They also seem to fail to see the need for supporting the Israeli victims of this conflict and offering them their compassion.

They do nothing to earn the respect of their Israeli brethren and indirectly encourage the Palestinians' violence. Therefore their peace efforts are not only useless, they are actually detrimental to peace.

This need not be the case. Would it not be a powerful message for peace, if after every murderous suicide attack against innocent Israelis, peace activists would leave the Palestinian towns and refugee camps and go to spend some time with the wounded and visit the mourning families of those murdered? Afterwards, they could go back to the towns and refugee camps and continue giving humanitarian aid to Palestinians.

There may be some who do this, but I have not heard of this happening.

Could it be that they do not do this because the Palestinians might harm them if they are seen to be giving any support to Israelis? Could it be that they dare not visit the mourning house of Israelis, lest they be unwelcome?

If they are really committed to peace, these considerations shouldn't hinder them. They are willing to risk Israeli bullets, after all.

But they do not do these things. Nor do they do ride Israeli buses in a show of solidarity and compassion, as Stefan Sharkansky and others have suggested. They make no effort to show that they give a damn about the suffering even of Israeli babies, who could hardly be blamed for the situation any more than Palestinian babies.

But they are called peace activists, nevertheless.

posted by Imshin 21:45

OK, important message:
Diane said I should change my template and it would fix my archives. Seeing as I am fond of my rather infantile template I was reluctant to do this. I have however been messing about with it a bit, and lo and behold: Functioning archives!
posted by Imshin 16:26

home