Shvitz Search
Contribute
Featured Book
Featured Album
DAILY SHVITZ
| The Real Ahlam Tamimi You Didn't Read About In The Times | |
 by Noah Pollak, August 3, 2007
|
|
From reading the New York Times’ review of the Israeli documentary Hot House, an account of Palestinian terrorists held in Israeli jails, one would be left with the impression that Ahlam Tamimi, the smiling young woman featured in a large color portrait atop the story, is a kindhearted person, an anomalous presence behind bars. Her smooth, youthful skin perspires slightly beneath the hijab that frames her face; she is looking into the camera, head tilted slightly, straight white teeth shining, a look of contentment and pride in her eyes. What could someone like her be doing in prison?
You wouldn’t know the answer to that question from the photo caption, which reads: “Ahlam Tamimi in a scene from the documentary ‘Hot House.’ Ms. Tamimi is among about 10,000 Palestinians being held in Israeli jails.” The only reference to her in Neil Genzlinger’s review says, “A former Palestinian newscaster, Ahlam Tamimi, recalls the day she dropped a suicide bomber off at his target, then coolly went on television to report on the resulting bombing.”
But this, too, is troublingly incomplete: Tamimi was much more than a simple and perhaps unwitting means of transportation for a suicide bomber. And the suicide bombing in question, which is never mentioned in the review, was one of the most gruesome and deadly of the Intifada: it was the Sbarro pizzeria bombing in downtown Jerusalem that murdered 15 people (17, if one wishes to count the baby being carried by a pregnant woman and another victim who was left in a permanent coma). Eight of the slaughtered were children, a detail that could not have gone unnoticed by Tamimi’s accomplice as he made his way through the crowd of restaurant patrons with an explosives- and shrapnel-packed guitar case slung over his shoulder.
Tamimi, who at the time of the attack was a 20-year-old part-time university student from Ramallah, and the bomber, a 22-year-old son of affluent West Bank parents, were members of Hamas. The planning and reconnaissance for the attack were carried out also by Tamimi, and on the day of the attack Tamimi and her accomplice dressed as westerners and spoke English in order to pass through the checkpoints between Arab East Jerusalem and Jewish West Jerusalem. In 2006 Tamimi was given a rare opportunity to be interviewed in prison, and declared: “I'm not sorry for what I did. I will get out of prison and I refuse to recognize Israel's existence. Discussions will only take place after Israel recognizes that this is Islamic land.”
If the editors of the Times were familiar with the easily-obtainable details of her story but nonetheless chose to present her in the manner they did, they are moral cretins. And if they didn’t bother to investigate the reason for her incarceration, they are more than just poor journalists -- they are willfully obtuse ones, reluctant to dig too deeply into a story whose particularities would be troublesome to the aesthetic presentation demanded by the preferred narrative -- a narrative captured perfectly when Genzlinger avers that “by the end of ‘Hot House’ you may feel more than a little annoyance at the two sides in this endless conflict. These enemies know each other absurdly well. They learn from each other, and talk openly about doing so. Yet they can’t seem to break the cycle: a cat and mouse addicted to their own game.” Beliefs like this are both cowardly and convenient: They allow journalists to remain ensconced in their preferred moral universe, one in which there is equivalence between terrorist and victim and conflict only continues because of an intransigence, even a thirst for combat, that is shared equally by both sides.
I wonder whether the Times editors would portray an abortion clinic bomber or Ku Klux Klan member in the way they have presented Tamimi? Can one even imagine such a photograph of an Israeli settler? In selecting the glowing portrait of Tamimi to accompany the Hot House review, and in neglecting to provide essential context, the Times editors made a judgment about the moral characteristics of the attack: A judgment that if made differently would have demanded a photograph of a disfigured survivor, or a portrait of the shattered visage of parents who will be tortured forever by the unspeakable horror of knowing that their children’s bodies were torn to pieces by the nails and screws of a bomb that was delivered to its target by Ahlam Tamimi -- a woman who has been given the opportunity to grin at them satisfyingly by the Times editors.
Frimet and Arnold Roth, whose 15-year-old daughter was one of Tamimi’s victims, are courageously trying to influence the moral sentiments of people who see Hot House, or who even only read the Times’ coverage of it. Arnold Roth wrote in reaction to the Times’s review:
“Neither the New York Times nor HBO are likely to give even a moment's attention to the victims of the barbarians who destroyed the Sbarro restaurant in Jerusalem and the lives of so many victims. So we would be grateful if you would pass along this link to some pictures of our daughter whose name was Malki. She was unable to reach her twenties -- Hamas saw to that.
Though she was only fifteen years old when her life was stolen from her and from us, we think Malki was a beautiful young woman, living a beautiful life. We ask your help so that other people -- far fewer than the number who will see the New York Times, of course -- can know about her. Please ask your friends to look at the pictures -- some of the very few we have -- of our murdered daughter. They are at http://www.kerenmalki.org/photo.htm.
There are more photos of the Sbarro bombing and its victims available here and here. They are disturbing but necessary antidotes to the creeping moral dementia that has infected much of the media coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
 |
Noah Pollak is Assistant Editor of Azure magazine and blogs at Commentary's contentions and The More... |
If the Native American Church can trip, why can't I?
Chest pelt, furry legs, fuzzy arms, butt rug…I like it like that....
How a Korean-Irish secular Jew became a firefighter in Israel
A high-tech inventor and Holocaust survivor explains how paranoia...
Ranking the best and worst from the emerging virtual holy war
| Dev Blog | Privacy | Submissions | Contact | |  | | Comment Policy | About Us | FAQ | Masthead |
| Hosting provided by Tilted Planet | ||
Gregory C.
Moral Equivalence
The problem with Hot House and similar discussions of the conflict on film and television is the idea that all sides in this conflict are equally rational and share some kind of basic egalitarian "stuff" that journalists define variously as "common humanity," "brotherhood," and the like. I am frustrated and confused by so many secular journalists and academics who find so much sympathy (and at times, affinity) for Islamic terrorists, and try to rationalize their actions. Where journalists would never try to find something redemptive in say, IRA bombers, or as you pointed out, Israeli settlers, the Times review noted with implicit satisfaction that "prisoners talk about how they have used their time — decades, for some — to learn more about their own cause." So they're making themselves into better terrorists if they are released. And this is a good thing because???
richards1052
Much ado about nothing
This is nothing but typical hoch-Zionist Times-bashing. I read the same article you did. But I reacted differently. I saw the smiling face & read what she'd done. The smiling face chilled me to the bone because of the disconnect bet. what she'd done and how she presented herself to the camera. I got the message. Somehow you didn't. Somehow, you feel that unless the media spoonfeeds a script to the audience that is explicitly Israel-friendly, they won't get it. I prefer to think that good journalism, of which the Times is a paragon regarding the I-P conflict, presents the basic facts & allows the reader to put things together. You have to think when you read such coverge. You have to work at it. You think readers are too lazy to do so & need reporters to spell it all out to them. You need to shove those images of the bombing victims in people's faces in order for them to "get it."
Too bad you don't have more respect for people's intelligence.
Oh, and do tell me why you aren't willing to link to images that portray Israel's violence against Palestinians or Lebanese? Are they less worthy of yr sympathy? Or is their suffering only to be blamed on the Arab terrorists who provoke Israel to take such heinous actions that injure so many Palestinian civilians? Why no recognition that there are victims on both sides each equally worthy of sympathy?
Richard Silverstein
Tikun Olam (blog)
Benjamin Kerstein
I believe the point was that
I believe the point was that Ms. Tamimi (and God help us her name means "innocent" in Hebrew) is not worthy of sympathy. Or do you believe along with the paragon that is the NY Times that the people she killed simply do not exist?
Anonymous
Benjamin needs to brush up
Benjamin needs to brush up on his reading skills. Richard asked whether the victims of IOF aggression ought to be accorded the same sympathy as victims of suicide bombings. Here R was clearly referencing, e.g., Lebanese children shattered or evaporated by the cluster bombs whose whereabouts Israeli still refuses to completely disclose. I don't see how B could read his comment as exhorting sympathy for Ms. Tamimi. Unless, of course, we assume that B is a garden variety partisan of any abomination Israel may choose to perpetrate-to paraphrase Benjamin, that the people Israel slaughters simply do not exist (see G. Meir, J. Peters et al).
Noah
A reply to Richard Silverstein
Richard,
I'll get to your substantive critique in a moment, but first I'd like to say something about the aesthetics of your comment. I'll be blunt: Your condescension is unnecessary, and actually unwarranted, given your station in the intellectual world. You say to me, "You have to think when you read such coverge [sic]. You have to work at it." Thanks for the tip, Ace. I'll try to do better next time. Then you write: "Too bad you don't have more respect for people's intelligence." Actually, my respect for the average person’s intelligence is what prevents me from making the kinds of patronizing and arrogant comments you’ve made above. At this moment the only person whose intelligence I have very little respect for is yours, Richard.
Anyway, on to the fun stuff. You say to me: "Somehow, you feel that unless the media spoonfeeds a script to the audience that is explicitly Israel-friendly, they won't get it." This is a red herring. That's not at all what I feel, or what I wrote. My commentary was a narrowly-focused critique of the NYT's decision to publish a flattering picture of a mass-killer without indicating that she is such. Mentioning to readers that the woman beaming at them from the top of the story planned and helped execute a bombing that killed 15 people, 8 of them children, and wounded and maimed 130 more, is not "spoon-feeding readers an Israel-friendly script." It is practicing responsible journalism, and nothing more.
And as for your preposterous accusation that I am not willing "to link to images that portray Israel's violence against Palestinians or Lebanese," this too is a red herring. Critiquing Israeli violence had nothing to do with my commentary. Regardless, if you had done a quick Google search you would find that I wrote a lengthy article recently about a trip I did to Lebanon in which I wrote extensively about Lebanese suffering. It is available here: http://azure.org.il/magazine/magazine.asp?id=373
As you might advise, when it comes to making false accusations about people, "you have to work at it."
Anonymous
Not much point in dialoguing
Not much point in dialoguing with R. Silverstein -- he has a reputation for being a right prick.
Tamimi, indeed, means "innocent". But Ahlam means "dreams" (Arabic not Hebrew that is). Sort of a poignant juxtaposition in this context.
Benjamin Kerstein
My reading skills would
My reading skills would appear to be superior to my critic's, since I nowhere claim that Silverstein was, is, or ever will be a supporter of Tamimi. I simply noted the irrelevancy of his attack on Noah and its rather obvious implications.
AD
Silverstein
The only ones insulting our intelligence are those at Jewcy who thought it a good idea to give us a daily dose of Silverstein.
AD
Silverstein
And by the way, he is not a "right prick." He is way to the left.
Gordon Glock
Tamimi and Noah Feldman-a
Tamimi and Noah Feldman-a match made in heaven. Noah should ditch his current wife and go out with Tamimi- Feldman writes why Judaism is bad and Tamimi acts upon it
Anonymous
John Gangon
If there was a movie called "My name is Malki Roth" or "My name is Naama Appelbaum" would Richard Silverstein write such glowing reviews as he did for "My name is Rachel Corrie"? There is a lot more sympathy based upon volume of written blogs for Ashm Bishara or Norman Finkelstein. I guess not getting tenure at Depaul is worse than death, especially if the dead are losers, and my guess is that Silverstein considers Roth and Appelbaum losers who are unworthy of sympathy. I would like to know why Silverman has more sympathy for Bishara and Finkestein than he does for Roth and Appelbaum
BMOON
Silverstein
Noah correctly dissects Silverstein's mindset and the gross obtuseness that inherently accompanies such. The universal acid of moral equivalency, which to the left is synonymous with a religion (and as fundamentalist as anything Westboro Baptist has to offer,) not only produces the mind-boggling lack of objectivity and honesty in the NYT piece, but the kneejerk reaction of a true-believer such as Silverstein. Silverstein and ilk are so convinced by their devotion to their creed, that they naturally assume a messianic attitude of moral superiority and disdain at any who would dare point out the obvious. What would be hilarious if it wasn't so dangerous to our existence, is how the irony is totally lost on them.
It was funny however, seeing the pompous twit go off bleeding on his stumps.
Anonymous
Waving The Israeli Flag to Destroy It.
They've landed! The funny green men from planet Walt-Mearsheimer-Finklestein.
Dan
Truth Is Stranger Than (Science) Fiction
Scene: Alien spaceship lands on Silverstein's lawn
Alien to Silverstein: Take me to your leaders.
Silverstein: Can it wait? Lerner and Chomsky are out of town.
Arnold Roth
A 9th August comment
Richard Silverstein, the issue that drives my wife in what she has published about Hot House, and that drives both of us in our various activities to memorialize our daughter's life, is straightforward.
As unfashionable as the word "evil" is in many quarters, it's about deciding whether people who do terror are evil or not. Everyone needs to decide where he or she stands on this. We have learned how confused many people are about this.
Films that focus, as Hot House does, on the murderers who practice terror provide them with an invaluable, indispensable and very potent platform for their hatred and zealotry. There are many more such films (and articles and interviews) than there are films (and articles and interviews) about their victims. The dialogue they generate contributes to the confusion I mentioned.
Today is the sixth anniversary of the massacre at Sbarro. Our daughter would now be 21 if she had survived, about the age of the woman in the film, the murderer, when she planned the massacre and executed it. There have been grotesque Palestinian Arab commemorations about what happened that day, right down to splattered ketchup on the walls and mock body parts, glorifying the murder and the murderers, and explicitly encouraging its repetition.
We, by contrast, choose to honor our daughter's life by creating a fund in her name that provides Jews, Christians, Moslems and Druze - in other words, anyone living in Israel however you define the territory, and who has a child with serious special-needs, and we have already given this support to thousands of them in the past 4 years - with practical help. The details are on the Malki Foundation website (www.kerenmalki.org).
What reaction does this evoke among the confused? Some of them hate it. It enrages them. I can exemplify this by quoting verbatim an anonymous email we received tonight, typical of the genre: "a good jew is a dead jew f**k your child" with letters in place of asterisks.
You didn't send this sort of email to us, and you certainly are as repelled by the know-nothing hatred it embodies as we are by it, and by the dozens of similar anonymous messages we, as parents of a murdered child, get each week.
But when you (Richard Silverstein) ask: "Why no recognition that there are victims on both sides each equally worthy of sympathy?", you are contributing to confusion far more than to clarity or to a constructive outcome. Getting to a solution isn't about sympathy. It's about understanding that terror - engaged in enthusiastically and with the full support of one side's religious and political establishment, and only one side's - changes everything.
For those for whom it *doesn't* change everything -- know that nothing will ever change.
It *will* change, but only after the Palestinian Arabs stop teaching terror to their children and stop encountering deep wells of understanding and curiosity from people in less troubled regions who ought to know much better.
Arnold Roth
Jerusalem
Dan S.
Arnold, Thank your for the
Arnold,
Thank your for the nachas and inspiration generated by your comment -- and, much more so, your response to the tragedy your family has been asked to bear. I'm not surprised that your daughter would have "assur ledaber lashon harah" written on her phone -- clearly it is written on your heart.
May your efforts in her name have much success, and may her neshamah have an aliyah.
HaMakom yenachem eschem b'soch sh'ar aveilei Tzion v'Yerushalayim.
Dan Shmikler
Chicago
Post new comment