Searching the heart

Today I spent a lot of time talking with three friends about the unspeakable tragedy that happened yesterday in Gaza. A 7 year-old girl named Hadeel Ghalia lost her entire family – mother, father and siblings – when an “errant” Israeli shell hit the beach where they were having a picnic.

I don't have any words, I told Noorster, Jill and Stephanie, who were all equally horrified. As is Sarah and Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's daughter, Dana. I feel as though I should write something, I said, but I am blocked.

I would like to say to the people who are using Hadeel's tragedy to score political points, to call for violent revenge and to condemn an entire nation: please stop it.

And I would like to say to the people who attempt to mitigate the horror with relativism, by drawing up a list of violent tragedies that have been visited upon Israelis in this conflict: please stop it.

A 7 year-old girl just saw her parents and siblings killed. She is an orphan. She is traumatized for life. Can't we just respect her grief with compassion and dignity? Must we watch the horrible video footage of her weeping near the body of her father over and over, making her grief into pornography?

Amongst the Arab bloggers who wrote about what happened yesterday, the only one I could relate to was this one, from Ahmed. The rest were
predictably disheartening. Just like so many of the posts written by Israeli and Jewish bloggers after a suicide bombing – the ones that demonize the entire Palestinian people for the actions of a few.

Today I received this email from Ramzi Sfeir, a Palestinian from Bethlehem:

Dear All ,

After the horrible attack that took place yesterday in Gaza, and after all the violence that has been stealing the lives
of thousands of innocent civilians in Palestine and Israel for the last
few years, I felt that I had a national, moral and human obligation of
doing something and speaking out. Therefore , i am sending you this
Frank Scott poem that , according to me, holds a good message for all
of us! Enough VIOLENCE, BLOOD and TEARS! Another way is possible!

Ramzi Sfeir

From Bitter Searching of the Heart
by Frank Scott

From bitter searching of the heart,

Quickened with passion and with pain

We rise to play a greater part.

This is the faith from which we start:

Men shall know commonwealth again

From bitter searching of the heart.

We loved the easy and the smart,

But now, with keener hand and brain,

We rise to play a greater part.

The lesser loyalties depart,

And neither race nor creed remain

From bitter searching of the heart.

Not steering by the venal chart
That tricked the mass for private gain,
We rise to play a greater part.
Reshaping narrow law and art
Whose symbols are the millions slain,
From bitter searching of the heart

We rise to play a greater part.

If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds

Post meta

This entry was written by Lisa Goldman and posted on June 10, 2006 at 11:58 pm and filed under Main Page. Bookmark the permalink. Follow any comments here with the RSS feed for this post. Post a comment(Latest is displayed first) or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

Share with others

30 Comments so far (Add 1 more)

We need more Ahmeds. I wonder which Telemicus shall stumble into the arena of bloodsoaked hate and make us all remorseful enough to turn away from death as sport and revenge. Enough is enough already. Thanks for posting this poem. It is beautiful.

1. Anonymous
on December 31st, 1969 at 6:59 pm
Dear Lisa,
First of all, I would like to express my affection to your great blog. I learned so much from you and from the other bloggers (especially the ones from your blogroll). I hope you don't mind that I have mentioned your blog and work in my latest post. Thank you so much and bravo on the hard work.

2. Anonymous
on December 31st, 1969 at 6:59 pm
Lisa, I am reading that this might have been a Palestinian “work related accident”. I can't comment too broadly on it, but your sentiments about this are still the gold standard.

3. Anonymous
on December 31st, 1969 at 6:59 pm
Sorry, but that second sentence, the one about the “errant Israeli shell,” were you there to see it? In fact, in light of today's remarks that support the notion that the deaths were caused not by Israeli but by Arab firepower, won't you at least update your blog and await further story development?
Oh – and perhaps some equal treatment for the poor injured soul from Sderot who was doing nothing when hit by a Kassam – that might reflect some fair and balanced commentary by you as well.

4. Anonymous
on December 31st, 1969 at 6:59 pm
Anonymous, you won't win any points with rhetorical questions: you know I was not there.
According to all my information, some of it obtained directly from people who were there, an Israeli army officer was criminally negligent when he gave the order to shell a beach used by civilians. If an investigation proves that the deaths were not caused by the IDF, then I will write an update/correction. I did not write this post to condemn the IDF as a whole, and certainly not Israeli society as a whole, but rather to express my frustration with people on both sides of this conflict who are trying to score political points with a human tragedy.
Whatever happens, Hadeel's family will still be dead when the investigation is complete. I don't think it's asking a lot to acknowledge a human being's grief.

5. Anonymous
on December 31st, 1969 at 6:59 pm
Had you not put quotes around the word “errant” perhaps you can make your case. But you deliberately did so to draw attention to your underlying assumption that this was no “accident.” That is shameless writing, as the facts are not yet clear that it was caused by Israelis and because the takeaway from your quote-usage is that is wasn't really so errant anyway. You might have a nice audience who are either sympathetic to your cause or who find some need to pretend they are centrist by using you as a balance, but you lose major points for using tricks like that in any honest forum.

6. Anonymous
on December 31st, 1969 at 6:59 pm
You are extrapolating rather a lot from what I wrote. I did not use the quotation marks as a device to imply that the shelling was intentional; I used them because I was, in fact, quoting the word used in the Israeli media.
You do not specify what my “cause” is, by the way. But before you leave another aggressively worded anonymous comment, let me pre-empt you: I have no cause. This is not a political post; it is a post that is meant to express opposition to the politicization of human tragedy – by both sides.
You have completely misinterpreted what I have written. You are welcome to respond, but if you do please include your email address and name. I won't post any more anonymous comments on this thread.

7. Anonymous
on December 31st, 1969 at 6:59 pm
Please have the decency to admit that you jumped the gun and proclaimed as fact that the deaths were caused by an Israeli shell, errant or not. Yes, so did many others, but they wait like cats to pounce on every opportunity to make the Israeli military seem overly aggressive, despite the truth to the contrary. Your readers are entitled to a headlined retraction, and a promise that before removing words like “alleged” you will be sure.
And you should be embarrassed trying to wiggle out of the quotated use of the word “errant.” If you were quoting a news outlet, then provide the reference. If not, then your readers will assume you were being sarcastic. The sentence was fine without the quotation around the word. In fact, removing the quotation changes the sentence to more fairly describe the shell as truly errant, without suspicion. Your use of the highlight was uncalled for and puts you in a class not unlike the National Enquirer.
Finally, everyone is entitled to their opinion. Civilian death to you seems to matter most when it can make Israel look bad. I searched your archives and could not find the name Wultz anywhere.

8. Anonymous
on December 31st, 1969 at 6:59 pm
Thanks for the good post, and for linking to me. It's been a tough couple of days, thinking about what happened.
But . . . I never thought I'd see my name in the same line as Dana Olmert. Not sure I want to!

9. Anonymous
on December 31st, 1969 at 6:59 pm
Aw, Sarah – you know I wasn't comparing between you and Dana. I mean, if I were comparing I'd only do so to emphasize that you are much, much smarter.

10. Anonymous
on December 31st, 1969 at 6:59 pm
What I have missed in all the media and blog reporting and discussion of this tragedy is any mention at all, much less condemnation, of the tactic used by Gaza-based terrorists of operating (including missile launches against Israeli civilian populations) from within dense civilian populations. They do this with the intention that Palestinian civilians will die in Israeli reprisals. Whether Israel should be expected to take NO action when they cannot do so without ANY risk to civilian life, I don't want to discuss here. But the fact that I have seen not a single mention, anywhere, of the terrorists' own guilt in the deaths of Palestinian civilians is, to me, frightening.
And that is not all: here we have a horrible, horrible tragedy that was, however criminally negligent, probably not intentional. Rightly, the world cries out in protest. Yet where is the equivalent protest against those in Gaza who almost every day try to fire missiles INTENTIONALLY targeted at civilian centers in Israel?
There is (probably) no excusing what happened on that beach in Gaza. And no wrong makes any other wrong right. But, people, where is all this moral indignation when it comes to the daily attempts to murder Israeli civilians, and the daily calculated efforts to provoke the IDF into taking actions that will risk Palestinian civilian lives?

11. Anonymous
on December 31st, 1969 at 6:59 pm
It is so hard not to become cynical, isn't it? Think about this: The typical reaction to seeing a little girl who just lost her entire family is to ache for this poor child.
Now, think not about the reaction to seeing this child, but think about the fact that there is a news cameraman on the beach at the very time a shell blasts through the family of picnickers. Anger. Unbelievable anger. It was, for me, sorrow, just a few days ago, but now, thanks to history always repeating itself in Israel, anger. It didn't take as long as the al Dura affair for the truth to start coming out about this. While I still ache for this little girl, now, knowing that she will go through her whole life believing that Israelis did this (on purpose, of course) makes me cry out for justice on the part of the always-oft-accused: The Torah enjoins us to preserve and defend justice and righteousness. “Tzedek, tzedek tirdof”. Justice, justice shalt thou pursue. Render, O Lord Justice on behalf of these children, who are but expendable tools in the hands of your enemies, and Render, O Lord, Justice on those wrongfully accused and accursed.

12. Anonymous
on December 31st, 1969 at 6:59 pm
Thanks for saying what I feel.

13. Anonymous
on December 31st, 1969 at 6:59 pm
What a tragic loss.
And, like Micah, thank you again for articulating what I feel.
I have said this before to you (or prob in the comments), but I get so upset at the fierce reaction to acknowledging the suffering of “the other side”. Is it as though their suffering/humanity somehow invalidates our own? Or that one side must have a monopoly on tragedy?

14. Anonymous
on December 31st, 1969 at 6:59 pm
After an excellent post decrying the politicizing, finger pointing, defensive posturing, justifications and moral grandstanding that inevitably follows the tragic loss of innocent civilians – about half of the comments do just that.
Well, maybe somebody read this and reconsidered for a second.

15. Anonymous
on December 31st, 1969 at 6:59 pm
The reason the response to this tragedy is political and politicised is that the causes of the tragedy are political.
While Lisa Goldman's heart is in the right place and the spirit of her post humane and generous, it also attempts to achieve something that is unachievable: de-politicising something whose very essence is political.
Lisa's post would have worked for the children who lost their entire families (but somehow survived themselves) in the 2004 tsunami, for example, but a non-political response to a political crime/accident is just not possible. It was either an Israeli shell or a Palestinian bomb/mine that killed the family on the beach. That's political. It cannot be ignored.
P.S. Writing this has jogged my memory that, horrifyingly enough, there were people who tried to politicise even the tsunami tragedy. Now THAT is truly disgusting.

16. Anonymous
on December 31st, 1969 at 6:59 pm
I disagree.
The fact that Kassams are being fired from Gaza is political.
The fact that Hamas hasn't controlled it is political.
The fact that Israel chooses to retaliate with artillary fire is political.
The fact that a little girl lost her family in a tragic accident, a casualty of war, is BEING politicized by both sides. Many Palestinians are using it to “prove” Israels “evil” motives and use it to justify further civilian deaths. Many Jews are talking as if it is justified as “payback” for the loss of innocent Jewish life.

17. Anonymous
on December 31st, 1969 at 6:59 pm
“Many Palestinians are using it to “prove” Israels “evil” motives and use it to justify further civilian deaths. Many Jews are talking as if it is justified as “payback” for the loss of innocent Jewish life. ”
It may be that some Jews do that, but still there is an assimetry. If the IDF was responsible (it wasn't), then Palestinians can choose to think that the IDF did it on purpose (it is “evil”) or was an accident (it is “careless” or “negligent”). And they can even reach the conclusion that their constant launching of Qassams over the fence is ultimately responsible for this. They have this three possible options.
But it the IDF was not responsible, Palestinians cannot prove that Israelis are evil, nor careless. And that is the truth. And many Jews want to know the truth because the truth comes before the political positions of the Palestinians and of the Jews.
So you are wrong in this Lishoosh. People can write a complete philosophy based on a false fact. And when this fact becomes known, it doesn't matter which philosophy people built, it will fall appart.
Best,
Fabian

18. Anonymous
on December 31st, 1969 at 6:59 pm
Fabian – I've seen you write comprehensive comments on other blogs – but in this one I don't think you have a sense of what I am trying to impart, you've tied yourself in knots for no reason.

19. Anonymous
on December 31st, 1969 at 6:59 pm
lioosh — (I am the “anonymous” you were replying to; I decided to have an identity for further discussion), I think I hear what you are saying. And I could say, yes, okay, you are right, it would be SO much nicer if people would leave politics out of their reactions to such a tragedy. But if people could do that, they wouldn't be people as we know people to be; they would be a whole new upgraded version of the Human species with some major improvements implemented in the source code, and they probably wouldn't make war in the first place. In other words, you and Lisa are asking the impossible.

20. Anonymous
on December 31st, 1969 at 6:59 pm
Thanks. You may be right about hoping for some evolution in humanity. On the other hand, maybe politicizing tragedy is a way for us to really avoid the true implications, a way to cut ourselves off from our emotional reactions. Maybe an evolution isn't required, just a step back to basics. Once wars were faught with knives and swords, up close and personal, it was very real. Now we have artillary and aerial bombing and TV and we are generally so divorced from what is happening we don't really connect with what goes on day to day and we've lost that ability to relate.

21. Anonymous
on December 31st, 1969 at 6:59 pm
“According to all my information, some of it obtained directly from people who were there, an Israeli army officer was criminally negligent when he gave the order to shell a beach used by civilians.”
Really? Because according to Ha’aretz, there is serious doubt that the shell was an Israeli one, given the makeup of the shrapnel.
“I did not write this post to condemn the IDF as a whole, and certainly not Israeli society as a whole, but rather to express my frustration with people on both sides of this conflict who are trying to score political points with a human tragedy.”
I sincerely fail to see how Israelis are trying to score political points, here. What does Israel have to gain from this? Nothing.
I have been reading pro-Israel blogs noting the dubiousness of the video – particularly the obvious editing and re-editing, how the girl is running without being consoled, and how teenagers are hanging around on a pearly-white beach where six human beings were supposedly blown to bits by a single artillery shell moments before.
It's OK to feel bad about the deaths yet have a passion to know the truth. It's OK to defend your people from constantly being villified by their enemies.
We're only human.

22. Anonymous
on December 31st, 1969 at 6:59 pm
Lisa:
I understand how you feel. But you don't work in a vaccum. Even now that we know that it wasn't an Israeli shell that killed the family but a Hamas mine (in an accident, of course, I am not saying they did it on purpose nor asserting that the video is phony), if you don't push the truth through the media, others will push a lie. It is simple as that.
Your friend from the Sabbah's blog to which you link has his mouth full accusing the Israeli “terrorist” army, and calling us (I don't know what is this us…Zionists? Jews? Israelis?) of being “blood suckers”. Even if we were involuntarily responsible for the massacre, would you call someone a “blood sucker”? I know where that comes from, and so do you.
I am not here to tell you what you do. I always read you with pleasure, almost never post comments, you don't know me, although I do link to you. You have taught me that you can debate and link with people of the Arab world. I am grateful for that.
But maybe think a little bit about what you can expect from these kind of friends like Sabbah. I know that you felt kind of like that because you asked from both sides to “stop it”. It is simply not possible to “stop it”. What is possible and necessary is to look for the truth, and talk about the truth. If we were responsible then I will want the army to apologize sincerely. If we were not, then I think that I will fight all that propaganda machine of lies that is thrown in the international media because nobody else is going to do it for me. And if you think that it has not effect what people think, I think you are wrong. I have to tell you that it was shit going to the university in Argentina and watch people ask for “arms for the Palestinians”.
My best,
Fabian

23. Anonymous
on December 31st, 1969 at 6:59 pm
hello everyone, hello lisa!
Lately, i have been surfing around from blog to blog , from news site to another , in order to see how people talk about the horrible incidents in Gaza and it's surroudings. After this long journey traveling from blog to blog, all i can say is that i am VERY TIRED and exhausted and…disgusted and and and…. Why ? Because most of the people ,and i mean it, MOST OF THE PEOPLE are talking about these horrible attacks just for the sake of Public relations! this doesnt only apply to Israelis but to Palestinians and to Arabs! I find it horrible that the little girl of the now Famous gaza beach story is used as a propaganda tool in order to show that the other side is horrible ! Well WE ALL ARE HORRIBLE! hello ? this is war! IT IS HORRIBLE! whether this attack was the result of an israeli shell or of a Palestinian shell, it is a massacre! Who did it will never change it's nature! I just hoped that for one second, someone would talk about the human side of this conflict! About the fact that innocent civilians are DYING daily! Little children are growing up in really disgusting atmospheres! This applies to the children of gaza, The WestBank, Sderot! It is horrible! If just for one second we can put our nationalities and religions aside and think for a second like rational human beings about all the horrors that some people are living everyday ! WHY ? just for the sake of Public Relations!!!I SAY STOP!!!! we have a moral obligation of looking towards the future! No matter what happened 2000 Years ago or what happened 60 years ago or what happened 30 Years ago, now we are in 2006 , and we have a reality and we have to face it and work with it! Being stubborn will only make everything harder! At the end of the day, we will all have to live together, Israel will not disappear and palestine will not disappear! Gaza will stay where it is and sderot will stay where it is!
While all the world is advancing towards erasing borders and frontiers and barriers, we are building them to last! One day, we will have to join the rest of the planet and enjoy a regional union! The day i will have my breakfast in Bethlehem, my lunch in Tel aviv , a little snack in Beirut and a dinner in Amman , I will be the happiest person on this planet….. And the sooner i become the happiest person, the better for everyone…because when Ramzi is not happy….BAD THINGS HAPPEN! ( ok…i got carried away at the end ….i admit it…)

24. Anonymous
on December 31st, 1969 at 6:59 pm
OK Ramzi, I agree with everything you've said. I can forget the past and live in the present. I can forget about spinning and public relations and who is evil and who is not. I agree that the children of Gaza and the west bank and Sderot are all growing up in a terrible environment. I would do anything to change all that and put an end to the 'cycle of violence'.
Just one request: Israel has always been asked to be the one to step up and make the concessions in the name of peace. Let it be the other side that puts out its hand first just this once.

25. Anonymous
on December 31st, 1969 at 6:59 pm
Treppenwitz ,
First of all, i'm glad that we agree….But there is always a But…you ended your comment with ” Israel has always been asked to be the one to step up and make the concessions in the name of peace. Let it be the other side that puts out its hand first just this once. ” My perception of things is different, it's normal since i'm on the other side of the conflict. I think that this excuse is irrelevant! The conflict is much more complicated than that! Israel is an occupying power in the Palestinian territories and it's normal that israel starts dealing with this main cause of the conflict. What do you want us to start with ? To stop terrorists ? With what? we don't have legitimate arms, our security services got destroyed, we don't have a proper police, we don't have an operating judicial system, we lost most of our infrastructure and now, it's getting so serious that any little strategical mistake could lead to a bloody civil war, and there is another reason , some people ask themselves ” Why should we help israel? they are building a wall , limiting our movements between our own cities, shooting at us, building settelments and seizing our lands….”, it's clear that when you live under such a situation, you don't feel like helping the other side…this is not an attack, i'm just telling you about what's happening inside the normal palestinian citizen's head an i'm sure that there is an equivalent spirit on the israeli side….but I agree on something : When arafat was there and at the end of his life, he didn't do much , it was a kind of a War between him and Sharon , they both forgot about the population! they just wanted to destroy each other!Sharon destroyed arafat and his security services ( who at some point did a great Security job for israel because the calm was maintained for a long time…(between 1996 and october 2000)) , in response , Arafat decided to sit there and watch the deteriorating situation, that's what usually happens when a conflict becomes Personal and stops being national! I will not do like others might do and start giving you a timeline of who did what and of who is to blame because its irrelevant and it will lead us to a dead end. I just want you to be sure of one thing : No side is to blame more than the other, both sides have responsibilities to hold and currently both sides are throwing responsibilities at each other in everything and this should stop as soon as possible in order to negotiate! I happen to harshly reject bush's pride theory , the ” We don't negotiate with terrorists” thing! you know why ? because it's very easy to call everyone a terrorist and not to negotiate! it's the easy way out! What nobody seems to understand is that One day you can be a terrorist ( Arafat, Begin( and the Irgun), Jean Jaures ….) and the second day you become a peace maker! i think that we must start negotiating As soon as possible and we have to face the VERY HEART of the conflict and talk about it, as long as our political leaderships don't engage in Bilateral diplomatic negotiations ( as they promised in their campains…) , you can be sure that we will not advance at all and more people will get massacred! we have to stop this ” you start first” habbit…..why don't we start together ? ..maybe it's because we don't trust each other….and why don't we start trusting each other ?

26. Anonymous
on December 31st, 1969 at 6:59 pm
Ramzi said:
“we don't have legitimate arms.”
Qassams and Katyushas are falling on Israel daily, and Fatah and Hamas are having firefights with AK-47 rifles in the streets.
You must be talking about somewhere else. Sudan, maybe?

27. Anonymous
on December 31st, 1969 at 6:59 pm
Brooklynsax…
The arms you are talking about are not legitimate and they are not in the hands of any official police! they are in the hands of militias! Which in my eyes makes them out of law! I said clearly ” Legitimate”

28. Anonymous
on December 31st, 1969 at 6:59 pm
Here is relevant quote from the play Henty V, from the negotiations on the end of the play. Burgundy is the negotiator:
“BURGUNDY
My duty to you both, on equal love,
Great Kings of France and England! That I have labour'd,
With all my wits, my pains and strong endeavours,
To bring your most imperial majesties
Unto this bar and royal interview,
Your mightiness on both parts best can witness.
Since then my office hath so far prevail'd
That, face to face and royal eye to eye,
You have congreeted, let it not disgrace me,
If I demand, before this royal view,
What rub or what impediment there is,
Why that the naked, poor and mangled Peace,
Dear nurse of arts and joyful births,
Should not in this best garden of the world
Our fertile France, put up her lovely visage?
Alas, she hath from France too long been chased,
And all her husbandry doth lie on heaps,
Corrupting in its own fertility.
Her vine, the merry cheerer of the heart,
Unpruned dies; her hedges even-pleach'd,
Like prisoners wildly overgrown with hair,
Put forth disorder'd twigs; her fallow leas
The darnel, hemlock and rank fumitory
Doth root upon, while that the coulter rusts
That should deracinate such savagery;
The even mead, that erst brought sweetly forth
The freckled cowslip, burnet and green clover,
Wanting the scythe, all uncorrected, rank,
Conceives by idleness and nothing teems
But hateful docks, rough thistles, kecksies, burs,
Losing both beauty and utility.
And as our vineyards, fallows, meads and hedges,
Defective in their natures, grow to wildness,
Even so our houses and ourselves and children
Have lost, or do not learn for want of time,
The sciences that should become our country;
But grow like savages,–as soldiers will
That nothing do but meditate on blood,–
To swearing and stern looks, diffused attire
And every thing that seems unnatural.
Which to reduce into our former favour
You are assembled: and my speech entreats
That I may know the let, why gentle Peace
Should not expel these inconveniences
And bless us with her former qualities.
KING HENRY V
If, Duke of Burgundy, you would the peace,
Whose want gives growth to the imperfections
Which you have cited, you must buy that peace
With full accord to all our just demands;
Whose tenors and particular effects
You have enscheduled briefly in your hands.”
Act 5, Scene 2

29. Anonymous
on December 31st, 1969 at 6:59 pm
This is a horrible thing. Simple as that. However, I'm not sure whether news should be censored and if it should be how? It's bad taste to exploit this little girls pain but this is the problem with setting up the opportunity for “objective” news. Reporters are planted. They wait for action, then they pounce. It may not be very noble but it's the way things go. People blame violent television for why people turn violent. I blame violent people for why we have violent television. I know it's the chicken versus the egg thing -art imitates life and vice versa -even when “art” is not very artistic. I guess that's why we have Dadaism.
Another way must certainly be possible otherwise we as humans wouldn't need hearts, hands and voices. Let us try to spread peace in every interaction with another human being.

30. Anonymous
on December 31st, 1969 at 6:59 pm