This is For All The Mothers

Got this in email from a friend and felt it was worth sharing:

This is for the mothers who have sat up all night with sick toddlers in their arms, saying, "It's all right honey, Mommy's here." Who have sat in rocking chairs for hours on end soothing crying babies who can't be comforted.

This is for the mothers who gave birth to babies they'll never see. And the mothers who took those babies and gave them homes.

This is for all the mothers who go hungry, so their children can eat.

For all the mothers who read "Goodnight, Moon" twice a night for a year. And then read it again. "Just one more time."

This is for every mother whose head turns automatically when a little voice calls "Mom?" in a crowd, even though they know their own offspring are at home -- or even away at college.

This is for mothers whose children have gone astray, who can't find the words to reach them.

For all the mothers of the victims of recent school shootings, and the mothers of those who did the shooting. For the mothers of the survivors, and the mothers who sat in front of their TVs in horror, hugging their child who just came home from school, safely.

This is for all the mothers who taught their children to be peaceful, and now pray they come home safely from a war.

What makes a good Mother anyway? Is it patience? Compassion? Broad hips? The ability to nurse a baby, cook dinner, and sew a button on a shirt, all at the same time? Or is it in her heart? Is it the ache you feel when you watch your son or daughter disappear down the street, walking to school alone for the very first time?

The jolt that takes you from sleep to dread, from bed to crib at 2 A.M. To put your hand on the back of a sleeping baby? The panic, years later, that comes again at 2 A.M. When you just want to hear their key in the door and know they are safe again in your home?

Or the need to flee from wherever you are and hug your child when you hear news of a fire, a car accident, a child dying?

The emotions of motherhood are universal and so our thoughts are for young mothers stumbling through diaper changes and sleep deprivation... And mature mothers learning to let go.

For working mothers and stay-at-home mothers. Single mothers, divorced mothers, widowed mothers and married mothers. Mothers with money, mothers without.

This is for you all.

For all of us.

Going Public

Going public about any abuse you have endured can be a very healing and empowering experience. But it takes caution, thought and courage.

Before I went public about some of the abuse I experienced in my life I agonized a lot. My main reason for doing it was to help others. To validate them so they'd know weren't alone. I did this remembering how alone I felt for many, many years with what went on my life. How isolated I felt and how it had destroyed most of my self-esteem.

I realized I would be laughed at, those who exploited me would deny it or call me names, I might look weak, stupid, vulnerable or all three. And my family would be affected.

I made very careful choices about what information I wanted to put out and what I didn't. I didn't want my family or anyone else's family hurt. I am admantly against the concept of revenge. It's immature and silly. And that's not a good reason to do it because its just wrong.

As far as my family was concerned I didn't feel comfortable until my parents, of blessed memory, had both passed on and my sibling was o.k. with it. I am very protective of my children and my friends as well.

I've been accused of all sorts of things since coming forward. Lying, Loshan Hara, imagining it, being crazy, being jealous, being vindictive, being a whore, being called fat or old or insane... and so on. I've been threatened with harm and/or death and my children have been threatened. People I know have either been contacted to join in the public stoning of my character or asked not to speak to me. I've also received close to 100 letters of thanks, support and relief from fellow victims who are grateful I spoke out and provided them with information; which has made it all worth it.

All of these things are things victims have to think carefully about. Its very easy to have a knee jerk reaction and want some 'instant karma' but please think about the ripple effect. I believe telling is empowering and healing and can help others who think they are the only ones.

That said, I read this on THE AWARENESS CENTER's site and am reposting it here. The Awareness Center has a great site for Jewish Sexual Abuse Survivors and abuse survivors in general. I have a lot of admiration for Vicki Polin and Rabbi Dratch at JSafe.org for continuing their tireless work for victims like me:

Questions to Ask Yourself Before Disclosing, Confronting or Going Public About Surviving Sexual Violence

by Vicki Polin

WARNING

Survivors of various forms of sexual violence childhood sexual abuse, sexual assault, clergy abuse, professional sexual misconduct and sexual harassment) often want to disclose their experiences, confront their perpetrators, and/or speak-out about their victimization. This is done in an attempt to try to help educate the public.

Often the urge to share personal information about one self occurs during various stages of healing.

If you are considering speaking out PLEASE review the many questions listed in this pamphlet. You may also want to refer to "The Courage to Heal" (by Laura Davis and Ellen Bass) and "The Courage to Heal Workbook" (by Laura Davis).

It is also highly suggested that you consult with your family, friends and or therapist prior to speaking engagements.

Unfortunately, the reality is that our society has NOT been very accepting and/or understanding to the various issues faced by many adult survivors of sexual violence. The majority of the survivors who have confronted individuals, and/or have gone public -- shared that they had negative experiences after sharing their abuse histories with others. These survivors have all been met with disbelief -- been considered to be crazy, hysterical and/or delusional.

Too often survivors state that after the disclosures, they felt that they have lost a level of credibility. We, as survivors can not be responsible for the reactions of others. What we can do is take control of our actions and be prepared for the outcome if we decide to share our histories with others. It is vital for each individual decide for him/her self, and be sure that they are not being pressured to going public.

This is a reminder that once you share information about yourself -- you can NOT take it back!

If you thinking about going public, it is important to consider how you are going to do it.

1. Are you going to use your real name or a pseudonym?

2. Will you wear a disguise of some sort?

3. Will you be paid? How much?

4. If you are going on television will the producer of the show agree in writing to use a computer and distort both your voice and face (this is strongly suggested for the beginner)?

5. Will you have to sign a contract or an agreement? What will it say? It is strongly suggested you read the agreement BEFORE the day you are supposed to speak-out (and if possible have an attorney review it too)!

6. Will your attempt to educate the public cause harm to your credibility? Are you allowing yourself to be exploited?

7. Will it hurt you in your present or future career, social life, family life (including your partner/spouse and children)?

The Following are some questions you can ask yourself to help you make up your mind if disclosing, confronting and/or going public is right for you.

Directions: Answer the following questions on a separate piece of paper. Think about the following questions and your answers. Share your responses with at least one trusted support person. Ask for Feedback! BEFORE you disclose and/or confront someone.

1. Whom do I want to tell? Why?

2. Is someone or something internally/externally pressuring me to disclose my abuse history or confront my perpetrator(s)? Who and/or What is pressuring me?

3. If my plans includes going public, what are my motives? (It's suggested you consider all of the following questions before speaking in any public forum).

4. What do I hope to gain from this disclosure and/or confrontation? What could I loose by this disclosure and/or confrontation? Are my expectations realistic?

5. Have I thought about safety issues? What are they for me?

6. What are my motives for confronting my perpetrators? Do I have to be concerned about my safety?

7. Am I confronting my perpetrator(s) to gain information? Can anyone else supply me with the information I desire?

8. Would I be risking something I still want from my family (i.e. financial and/or emotional support, inheritance, employment in family business, other)?

9. Could I live with the possibility of being excluded from family gatherings (i.e. Holidays, Weddings, Deaths in my family. . .)? What would that mean to me? How would I deal with the loss?

10. Am I willing to take the risk of losing contact with other family members with whom I want to stay connected? What would that mean? Would I deal with the loss?

11. Am I grounded and stable enough to risk being called crazy?

12. Could I maintain my own reality in the face of denial?

13. Can I withstand the anger that I am likely to face from others?

14. Could I handle my own anger and/or other feelings? How would I do that?

15. Could I handle no reaction at all?

16. Do I have a solid enough support system to back me up before, during and after the confrontation?

17. Which support people agreed to be available before, during, and after?

18. Can I realistically imagine both the worst and best outcomes that might result? Could I live with either one?

19. How have I prepared myself for the Confrontation and/or disclosure?

20. Other issues I've considered regarding going public?

Remember!: It is important that you focus on yourself and your own personal needs before deciding to go disclose, confront and/or go public. This is also true before, during and after any confrontation.

Try to remember what you want or need to say (for your own personal needs and not anyone else's), how you want to handle the situation, rather than on any response you may hope to get.

Plan to process the confrontation and/or disclosure with your therapist and/or trusted support person(s).

Remember, this can be an ongoing task (and that's ok).

CLICK HERE FOR A PRINTABLE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT

Unsung Gifts of Motherhood

Mother's Day, for me, is filled with a conflicting thoughts & feelings. I struggled over 12 years with almost intractable infertility issues (after having terminated 2 pregnancies in my naive youth).

My own mother had a psychological disorder whose negative aspects were focused on me. I never told her I was an infertility patient. I couldn't, it would have brought with it a lot more verbal abuse than I was already taking for simply being alive. Once I finally did have children I realized I would never feel "normal" - I would always be infertile because I could not do easily what most other women do.

One thing she said to me a great deal was "you owe me." Over and over I was reminded that I owed her for paying my college tuition, working to provide a home for myself & my sibling, raising me and most of all: for having me in the first place. Especially since I was a "freak, a loser, ugly" and "no man would ever want" me.

So it was to her tremendous shock when she had this conversation with me when my children were just a few months old:

Her: "Don't ever forget to remind your children what you are going through raising them. Make sure they know they owe you!"

Me: "No, I owe them. I owe them everything."

Her: "That's absurd."

Me: "I am sorry you feel that way. But I owe them everything. I had them. I brought them here. And its my job as a parent to raise loving, god-fearing, responsible human beings who contribute to society. They owe me zip."

Her: (Look of shock... walked away sulking)

When I read this article it reminded me of that conversation. I have become a maker of agreements (not always a good one), a debater, a neutral arbitor, a peace negotiator and someone who tries to see everyone's side and see everyone's point of view, whether I agree or not, in addition to fielding some insensitive or inane comments from the world at large. Most of all - I strive to be a good example. Something anyone who is a political animal and a parent needs to be.

Today one of my children gave me some gifts that showed me in their short time so far on this planet, they knows me and understands me better than my ex ever did in over 23 years of marriage.

I felt so good about my relationship with my kids. My children have made me more myself than ever (despite all that disability has taken away). Validation I desperately needed after years of relationship abuses. And for that, I owe them.

The Political Crucible of Motherhood
The longer I’m more actively involved in politics, the more certain I am that the best preparation I ever had for participation was not the political science major I undertook in college, nor the journalism experience I had as a young professional, nor even the advisory role I filled in a (failed) Congressional primary campaign back in the 1980’s.

No, the most practical experience was provided by parenting.

From the moment a child is born, you are forced to put your own needs (primarily sleep, in the beginning) on hold. You immediately begin the task of balancing long-term and short-term goals, weighing, for example, the need to bring income in for the growing family against the commitment to spend time with your child, or your own requirement down the road a bit for rehabilitative solitude against the constant chatter of a toddler just discovering language.

You learn to gauge your limits of self-sacrifice, the places where diminishing returns set in, where you’re being a plain old mean person because you’ve embraced the role of persecuted-by-sippy-cup-wielding-beings martyr. You learn to give more of yourself than you ever imagined yourself capable of giving, but if you want to bring your child to adulthood without you doing a stint or two in an asylum, you also learn to say, "No." Quite often, in fact.

More than anything, you learn to explain yourself, especially about those "No’s." Over and over, in a dozen different ways, using scores of different metaphors to get your point across, you begin to blend your child into a family culture, and later that of society, by articulating and examining your own deep beliefs about how we all hang together as a unit.

You are forced to explain very, very consciously for the first time responsibilities to self and others, about the common good of the family, about why it’s important that your 10-year-old forego a slumber party in order to visit a boring grandparent.

Add another child to the mix and you’ve truly set up a parallel with the single-issue political groups on a painful personal level, when you find yourself explaining to your daughter that the family’s financial commitment to providing piano lessons for her brother precludes at this time the ability to pay for an expensive summer camp she wants to attend. Oy.

Such conflicts are constant and recurring, and they make the shouldering and shoving at the Democratic interest table look like a friendly game of contract bridge. You learn to barter, broker power or die.

In my own case, I went more whole hog on the parent thing than most here, I suspect. I have four children–two boys and two girls–with a 14-year age spread between the oldest and the youngest. I made the decision to stop working altogether for a decade-and-a-half to stay at home, which pushed us into living under the poverty level for a family of four ... when we were a family of six (a decision, I realize, not for everyone but one I am forever grateful now that I made).

The financially possible was extremely limited, and this forced us as a family unit to find creative ways to entertain ourselves (God bless you, public libraries) and to provide for necessities. Again, an invaluable, practical political lesson when transposed to the political sphere.

I also found myself relying on the older kids to help out with the younger, and while I admit there was a bit of grumbling during those years, they were surprisingly willing to take something of a leadership role in the family, testing their own capabilities and sharing their interests, enjoying being looked up to by their younger siblings–much like people-powered peer politics today. (Today, all four of them are each others’ biggest fans and admirers despite quite different lifestyles and choices. Although the piano lesson issue, I confess, will not die.)

And of course, there’s the constant reminder as a parent that you’re ideally modeling sterling character in action.

Children are heat-seeking missiles for hypocrisy; try lying on the phone to get out of a dreaded social engagement while an 8-year-old is looking you in the eye. These little people, they keep you as honest as you are capable of being, not a bad reminder for the rough-and-tumble of high stakes political commentary and action.

But the biggest boon to surviving parenthood are the habits fostered, of thinking communally, taking responsibility for shared space, for communicating values, for advising practical action. Here’s a truism from a parent who is in the process of launching at long last her youngest into the world:

You continue the pattern of caring for something bigger than yourself long after your day-to-day involvement with your specific children is over.

I suspect this is a large gift to the progressive movement overlooked and unrecognized, and you see it played out as more and more women who’ve raised a family either enter electoral politics or take to political activism (think Cindy Sheehan).

There is more to this than just biological imperative about making the world a better place for your own genetic progeny. The pattern of thinking, cooperating and sacrificing becomes part of your identity, as does the fulfillment and satisfaction one receives from living it out.

Mothers (and some fathers, of course, but mostly mothers as our society functions now) have found that the qualities they exercised for years in the context of family dynamics—struggles for fairness, equitable distribution of such limited resources as time and money, shifting of broad attention from long-term goals to immediate crises (a child’s serious health problem), the need to get the whole "coalition" that makes up a family on the same cooperative page—these are invaluable skills in a human being. Transferring them for use in a larger public sphere feels not only natural, but at some level imperative.

In light of all this, I’m going to do a reverse on Mother’s Day, and honor my children instead of expecting cards and calls and carnations from them. For all my failings (too numerous to recount), they have made me a vastly superior human being than I would have been otherwise, pulling strengths out of me I never knew I had and giving me a ride on one of life’s greatest and most wondrous adventures.

And if Markos can put pictures of his adorable infant and toddler on the site, I’m hoping I can get away with calling out my beloved kids by name—Matthew, Faith, Jackson and Micaela—and saying:

You four have made my entire life so much more than it would have been without you. You have made me alive and aware, reflective and political, less selfish, more patient and a far more responsible citizen of the world than I would have been without the examples of your unique lives unfolding in front of me day by day and hour by hour.

As always, you four, thank you for being born. And damn it, don’t you ever, ever forget to vote.

susang@dailykos.com

CLICK HERE FOR ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Responsible Un-Forgiveness

by Jeanne Safer, PhD.

From the political to the personal, Americans are caught in an orgy of forgiveness. Failure to pardon, we're constantly admonished, will blight our lives. Now a psychotherapist counters that popular claim. You can refuse to absolve your lover, spouse, parent, sibling or friend, she declares, and still be emotionally healthy.

Flip to any television station these days and chances are we'll be witness to some dramatic episode of forgiveness. We see a mother and daughter estranged for years kiss and make up, a long-feuding couple holding hands and renewing vows, scandal-plagued politicians asking for absolution and granting it to their accusers. Tears flow, hugs proliferate, and the inevitable psychological experts solemnly intone that traditional psychotherapy has neglected this essential element of cure and that studies show that forgiving alleviates depression and enhances self-esteem.

What's wrong with this picture? The capacity to forgive is an essential part of an examined life. However, enshrining universal forgiveness as a panacea, a requirement or the only moral choice, is rigid, simplistic and even pernicious. Yet that is exactly what we have done. Today we demonize not forgiving as much as we idealize forgiving. Failure to forgive, therapists caution, is to "doom yourself to be a victim for the rest of your life," while clergy warn that it inexorably leads to a "recycling of evil."

Yet some of the most admirable, sane and emotionally healthy people that I know have not forgiven on occasion. Not forgiving needs to be reconceived. It is not an avoidance of forgiveness or a retreat into paranoia, but a legitimate action in itself, with its own progression, motivation and justification. There are many circumstances in which it is the proper and most emotionally authentic course of action.

I have found that there are three types of healthy unforgivers. For moral unforgivers, refusing means telling the truth, asserting fundamental rights and opposing injustice. Psychologically detached unforgivers accept the painful reality that they cannot experience the positive internal connection with a betrayer--usually a parent--which forgiving would require. Reformed forgivers have faced conflicts between feelings, religious principles, ethics or social responsibilities, and reject the conventional attitudes they once accepted. None of these three types is vindictive or against forgiveness in principle; they share the capacity to forgive but do not exercise it indiscriminately.

MORAL UNFORGIVERS

"In my family, the very act of unforgiveness is an extortion of my soul," declares Sandy Katz, a psychotherapist. "It endorses what they did, which was to deny the truth and pressure me to sacrifice myself. For me not to forgive my brother at my parents' behest is my self-affirmation."

Sandy's parents had looked the other way when her violent bully of an older brother thrust a screwdriver up her rectum--even when he set her on fire. "Afterward they didn't leave tools or matches lying around, but they never acknowledged what he did to me. He continued to behave this way and they continued to insist that I submit; my mother would say, 'He's just trying to get close to you because he doesn't know how to be friends.' She'd confuse me by saying it was all out of love, and I had no recourse."

Parents define a child's world; there is no escape. Unsure of their own reality, children who have no validation and no protection become prisoners mentally as well as physically. Not forgiving is a recourse they can create only as independent adults, a way to free themselves from years of being coerced to agree that hate is really love.

Under the pressure of promoting family harmony, parents who need to deny one child's viciousness and their own negligence often try to force the victimized child to be "mature" and "rise above it." These more intact, "good" siblings continue to make the same demands of themselves. Their willingness to accept bad treatment, to feel they deserve it, or to define it out of existence then extends beyond their families and damages their later lives. Even those in less extreme circumstances tend to absorb parental values as an unexamined template for their own responses, making it difficult for them to distinguish what they truly feel from what has been imposed upon them.

Ten years ago, at age 35, Sandy finally defied her parents by refusing her brother's phone calls. "I started getting guilt-inducing messages from them saying that I was abandoning him and destroying the family. They became increasingly angry and accusatory, haranguing me to forgive and forget without admitting there was anything to forgive and forget. I wrote him a note detailing what he had done and said I wouldn't speak to him until he was willing to acknowledge it. He sent me back a letter taking the moral high ground: that he was just as hurt as I, that all children fight--as if these were normal childhood squabbles--and that he was willing to let bygones be bygones. Why couldn't I?"

Sandy hasn't attended a family function with her brother since she received that letter. "I've taken a strong position that he's out of my life, even though my parents still try to bully me into capitulating. I know it's difficult for them to have two separate sets of holidays, but I forbid them to talk to me about it because their Pollyanna attitude enrages me."

The moral unforgiver makes a distinction between the extreme circumstances where a relationship must be severed and other, more commonplace, injuries. "It's not so much what my brother did as a child, but what he continues to be as a man that I find unacceptable," Sandy explained. "He never changed, never grew, and just found new ways to feel entitled. It would only be right to forgive what he did as a child--it would be legitimate and healthy for everybody. But it would be wrong not to hold him responsible for being an undeveloped person now; I would be colluding in creating a false reality, which was what allowed me to be violated in the first place."

Contrary to the conventional wisdom, refusing to forgive or have further contact with an unrepentant, abusive relative is therapeutic. "My lack of forgiveness has not impeded my development or my relationships at all; in fact, it's cured me," she said. "Before I took a stand I was always depressed and acceding to others' needs, always confused about my rights and about what was real." It is commonly believed that forgiving promotes mental health and alleviates depression. But doing the opposite can express a person's very right to live.

Responsible unforgivers are never antiforgiveness; Sandy regularly forgives outside her family, even when the offender fails to apologize. "In a good relationship--not a perfect relationship--it's different; how bad are the screwups? If the person is still loving enough it comes naturally." By recognizing the distinction between actions worthy and unworthy of tolerance, and upholding her own moral point of view, a child triumphs over the masochistic role her family assigned her. Her insistence on truth and justice, which lead her to refuse to forgive, is the foundation of her sense of self. Says Sandy of her decision: "I've never had a moment's regret."

Proponents of universal forgiveness refuse to recognize that moral unforgivers exist. They find it inconceivable that unforgiving victims of injustice could be outraged but not obsessed by their injuries, that they could even sympathize or retain conditional connections with those they refuse to pardon.

What about Sandy's relationship to her parents, who at very least share responsibility for her childhood torment? She has not entirely severed her tie to them, though she holds them culpable. "I need some sense of family, as long as they accept my terms," she explains. "And with this huge exception, they have made genuine efforts in my behalf in recent years." Her attitude toward her parents is one of conditional unforgiveness.

So too with Paul Thompson. Paul managed to maintain an uneasy truce with his born-again Christian parents until they announced at a recent press conference, "Our son's homosexuality is worse than a death in the family."

The Thompsons are founding members of Return, Incorporated, an international evangelical organization dedicated to converting gay people to heterosexuality. They insist that they "hate the sin and love the sinner," and claim that they are proud of Paul, even though he is gay, and welcome him as a member of the family.

Yet they want him to gainsay his identity and accept their condemnation. Fear of the destructive power of his own rage, coupled with an unconscious belief that they might be right, prevented Paul from having a confrontation with his parents. His implicit acceptance of their terms perpetuated mutual false forgiveness.

"But now," he told me, "they've raised the stakes too high. They actually said that my being gay was a fate worse than death--in essence, that they would rather I had died. When my boyfriend and I broke up and I was devastated, my mother said it was 'an answered prayer.' They deny that what they're doing is personal and that it's damaging to me; this is hatred masked as love. I won't go any further; it's more a process of mourning than of forgiving them."

Paul's parents entrenched, sanctimonious refusal to admit their hostility is a nonnegotiable obstacle to full reconciliation. For them to disapprove of his sexual orientation is one thing; to wage a conversion campaign while insisting that they are acting out of compassion alone is another.

Without asking his son's permission, Mr. Thompson wrote and self-published Psalms for Sorrowing Parents, a book that included intimate letters his son had written to him. "I sobbed when he gave me a copy," Paul said. He refused his father's subsequent request to be pardoned for invading his privacy, the only offense Mr. Thompson would ever admit. "I won't do it because it's just a ritual for him, not blood and guts. Real forgiveness has to be based on working to change; he wants me to forgive him for what he's going to keep doing."

In the complex relations between parents and child, affection and hostility and pride and disappointment always coexist. To label an ongoing transgression unforgivable does not necessarily obliterate all positive ties. "Despite their fanaticism, fundamentally they love me very deeply," Paul acknowledged--and he knows he loves them, too.

Therefore, although he will not underwrite his parents' behavior by forgiving it, neither will he abandon them in retaliation; mature separation is not amputation. He has decided to maintain occasional contact with them, provided Return, Incorporated, is not mentioned. "Complete detachment isn't any more healthy than fusion--but I won't be careful or quiet any longer."

Partial nonforgiveness requires a person to bear alone the burden of intense ambivalence and continuing grief. The illusion of family harmony is lost forever, but it is replaced with something limited, painful and real.

DETACHED UNFORGIVERS

Anybody who struggles with intimate betrayal must reengage with the experience, actively choosing to think and to feel what was once unbearable. But understanding need not lead to forgiveness. Indeed, it is a major accomplishment for some men and women to temper their hatred and tolerate their indifference. For the sake of their own emotional survival, they can do no more.

Disengaging from a fatally flawed parent or intimate, sometimes seems to come naturally, without anguish. Biochemist Annie Travers remembers never feeling anything but contempt for her father. "He was a selfish brute who considered his children his property. Once when I was a teenager, he said, 'I can do anything I want with you'--and he would have if my uncle hadn't threatened to call the police." Annie's uncle, a blind biologist who lived with the family, was her protector, mentor and soulmate. "He taught me how to think," she said.

Annie discussed what must have been a miserable situation with scientific detachment, and not a hint of recrimination. Throughout our interview, she referred to her father as "this guy," and seemed surprised when I asked what qualities she had inherited from him. "I'm my uncle's daughter," she said. Many children who had a poisonous parent identify someone else as their "real" parent.

Under the right circumstances, a traumatic past can be left behind without being consciously mourned. Living with a beloved, admirable uncle who shared and validated her feelings--"I always knew we would be better off without my father and my uncle agreed with me," Annie said--made her solution possible.

Still, no daughter is born despising her father; what became of her original love? "You have deep feelings, but they get lost," Annie admitted. "What love there was initially got strangled." As Annie matured, her fear and hatred evolved into indifference, and though she still speaks of her father with distaste, she is not bitter. "People are much too willing to blame others. Since I moved out 30 years ago, my life has been what I make of it--I'm responsible." A self-reliant attitude, the opposite of vengefulness, circumscribes the influence of a bad father.

Annie was away on a fellowship when her father died, and she had no qualms about not coming back for the funeral; in their last conversation he had berated her for not going to medical school. Annie is the first to acknowledge that her father had a negative impact on her life--"It took me a long time to feel men could be trusted," she said but she claims never to have been disturbed by her unwillingness to reconcile with her father. "I never felt the slightest need to do it."

Though friends and therapists have repeatedly warned her that her unforgiving attitude would eventually be her downfall, she isn't afraid they're right. "People try to convince me that because I didn't make peace with him I'd suffer for it down the line; they feel that there hasn't been closure. I think it's more about them and their own fathers. I'm fine. It hasn't been a trauma for me." For others to find Annie wanting because of what she has not done is an imposition of alien values. Annie is a woman at peace, at a price that does not seem excessive.

For many others, however, achieving that sort of detached peace does not come as easily. Jessica Kramer was devastated when a close friend died, but not when her mother expired. "She died of cancer when I was 38 and I was mostly glad to be rid of her," she says.

Jessica's distancing from her mother started at an early age. "She was cold, uninvolved, and rejecting and never interested in me," says Jessica. "By age five, I had given up on her. I was never sure whether she hated me or was just indifferent. I was a burden and a competitor." Her mother was so detached from Jessica that she was surprised to notice that her 28-year old daughter was left-handed, and so mean-spirited that she used the money earmarked for Jessica's education to speculate in real estate.

Jessica initially blamed herself for her mother's inability to respond and condemned herself for despising her mother. And her lack of grief at her mother's death made her question her own character; what kind of a daughter--what kind of a human being--was she? We are, after all, commanded by scripture to honor our mothers and fathers, even to love them, no matter the transgressions. Not to do so is unnatural, we are led to believe.

"To mourn my friend and not my mother seemed like what a monster feels," recalls Jessica. "It was a shining moment when my analyst said, 'It's okay to love your friend more than your mother.' What had been disturbing me was not so much that she didn't love me but that I didn't love her. Not loving her meant I was like her, a person incapable of love. When I realized that I didn't love her because she didn't love me, I understood that I could still love. I haven't forgiven her, but I'm not angry anymore. She had some nice qualities, like liveliness. But in the most important way, she was never really my mother."

In the conventional view, the decision to forgive must not be based on whether the perpetrator deserves it; only then can the independent will of the victim be guaranteed. In fact, refusing to forgive a heartless mother or other betrayer expresses a person's right to his or her own feelings. Recognizing that you are under no obligation to profess love you do not feel is a hard-won freedom.

REFORMED FORGIVERS

We tend to think of forgiveness as the best, healthiest way to resolve an intimate injury, and of learning to forgive as one of life's greatest lessons. Sometimes the opposite is true. Learning not to forgive, after a life in which forgiveness has been compulsive, imposed or unconsidered, is an impressive achievement.

Daily life provides many circumstances where offensive and unchangeable behavior should not be excused and where forgiving is confused with submerging normal reactions to mistreatment. Yet even when the culprit is a peer and not a parent, and the injury is mundane, it can take years for a person to stop extending second chances.

Rita Bergman reversed her lifelong tendency to do what she was told when she turned 75. "As I've grown older I've begun to think more about what I need. Screw it, I don't have to forgive anymore," she exclaimed. The object of Rita's newfound insight was an old friend who had become so obnoxious and critical that she was offending everyone she knew. "I felt terribly sorry for her. She hasn't been the same person since she lost her husband and son a few years ago, and she's all alone."

Repeated infuriating lunches, in which every aspect of her appearance was scrutinized and found wanting, made Rita vow to sever the tie, but she always ended up reconsidering for old times' sake. Only after Rita's closest friend refused to see her if this woman accompanied them did Rita realize enough was enough, stopped making the dates she had come to dread, and ended the relationship.

As with more serious injustices, understanding the source of someone's inexcusable behavior--even feeling sympathy for her plight--does not justify endless exposure to it; there is a fine line between compassion and compliance. "I don't believe in carrying grudges at this point in my life," Rita said, "but how long could I continue to ignore my own feelings? I was always very timid and never opened my mouth, but now that has changed." Rita's refusal to overlook her unfortunate friend's hostility any longer is an act of self-respect that took a lifetime to attain.

Forgiving without reconciling is acceptable; why not reconciling without forgiving? People often wound one another in the name of truth; a person has a right to employ judicial dishonesty to protect him- or herself against being wounded by others.

Sarah Goodman recently reversed her pattern of placating her older sister Wendy. Stricken with a rare cancer in childhood, married to a repugnant layabout, Wendy has lived a life of bad luck and bad judgment. Sarah's duties as the "good" daughter included overlooking Wendy's rages and insults in childhood, and not objecting when as an adult Wendy refused to help care for their dying father.

"I was the one who was always pressured to do the right thing," Sarah said. "That was my script. I'd give in to keep the peace, but I can't and won't do it anymore; her problems are not my fault, and the way she vanished when our father got sick was inexcusable. I used to cry and curse her; now I'm civil. I'm no longer capable of forgiving her, whether she deserves it or not."

Sarah's cordiality toward her sister, which she maintains for her mother's sake, is a conscious pretense on her part and her best defense; she has decided that confrontation is too costly. "It never worked in the past, and now if I tell her how I feel I'll be punished. I don't wish her harm, but I want nothing to do with her on an emotional level."

Sarah frankly admits she derives secret pleasure in the privacy of her own heart from no longer turning the other cheek. Her customized solution involves a measure of hypocrisy, without self-delusion.

Unforgiving reconciliation is an ethical form of retribution. Like other responsible types of unforgiveness, it provides relief, closure and insight. "At my father's funeral I saw what a miserable person she was, a tormented soul who hasn't connected to anybody," Sarah recalled with more sadness than satisfaction. "I feel that really wonderful sense of indifference you have when you break up with somebody and you think you'll never get over the pain, and then one day you bump into each other on the street and wonder how you ever felt that way." Refusing to be what a priest might call "the bigger person" freed Sarah to be her own person.

Forgiveness and unforgiveness are not polar opposites but points on a continuum. The same internal processes can lead to emotionally authentic resolutions in either direction. Anyone who has gone through the profound and punishing process of conscious forgiving or not forgiving emerges more self-aware, more related to others, and less burdened by the past.

When it is genuine, forgiveness is a capacity not a compulsion; this is why the same person can grant it or withhold it, depending on the circumstances. The ability to discriminate signifies maturity and freedom.

Madame de Stael was wrong. Understanding need not lead to forgiveness -- but it can lead to wisdom.

Adapted from Forgiving & Not Forgiving: A New Approach to Resolving Intimate Betrayal by Jeanne Safer, Ph.D. (Avon Books, August 1999).

SOURCE

Hashem, I Beg a Favor... About Ehud Olmert...

Merciful Creator - Hear my Prayer For the love of all that's good and holy for Israel and its people... PLEASE HELP INDICT OLMERT. I Trust That You, Almighty Lord, Have a Hand in the Current Situation and Will Continue to do What is Necessary to Protect Israel. Amen. (and thanks in advance!)


By YAAKOV LAPPIN

The man at the center of a criminal investigation that could bring down Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Morris (Moshe) Talansky, is a 75-year-old millionaire financier from Long Island, New York.

Talansky is an Orthodox Jew who has engaged in extensive philanthropy in Israel, and owns an apartment in Jerusalem.

Both he and Olmert jointly founded the New Jerusalem Fund, a charity aimed at raising money for projects in the capital. The charity has offices both in Jerusalem and New York.

The New Jerusalem Fund's Web site has mysteriously gone off-line in recent days.

In the US, Talansky has contributed funds to high-profile politicians from both the Democratic and Republican parties, including former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani and former US president Bill Clinton.

Talansky is CEO of the Globes Resources Group investment firm. The company's address is registered to his Long Island home.

Talansky is listed as one of a number of investors who launched a July 2007 lawsuit in the New York Federal District Court in Manhattan against the Israeli satellite company ImageSat, which sells images from space to countries around the world.

ImageSat reportedly turned down a lucrative sale of satellite imagery to a number of countries, including Venezuela, allegedly due to that country's close ties with Iran, resulting in a decision by its investors - including Talansky - to sue the company.

A number of Israeli investors in ImageSat have also taken part in the lawsuit.

SOURCE

CALLS FOR OLMERT'S RESIGNATION

MORE

Self-Reinforcing Ignorance

How long before some pathetic ultra right-winger picks this up as proof that they are "better than" others? And that being conservative makes them "better" people?

While I don't consider myself a full-blown liberal, I will take reality & truth over "justification" any day. I don't find it o.k. to justify the death of our soldiers in an illegal war any more than visiting prostitutes paid for by lobbyists while preaching family values to be justifiable.

The stopwatch won't tick long for the happy kool-aid drinkers. (To my conservative friends, I know most of you are smart enough to 'get' the science here compared with your willfully ignorant bethren.)

Conservatives Happier Than Liberals
By Jeanna Bryner

Individuals with conservative ideologies are happier than liberal-leaners, and new research pinpoints the reason:

Conservatives rationalize social and economic inequalities.

Regardless of marital status, income or church attendance, right-wing individuals reported greater life satisfaction and well-being than left-wingers, the new study found.

Conservatives also scored highest on measures of rationalization, which gauge a person's tendency to justify, or explain away, inequalities.

The rationalization measure included statements such as: "It is not really that big a problem if some people have more of a chance in life than others," and "This country would be better off if we worried less about how equal people are."

To justify economic inequalities, a person could support the idea of meritocracy, in which people supposedly move up their economic status in society based on hard work and good performance. In that way, one's social class attainment, whether upper, middle or lower, would be perceived as totally fair and justified.

If your beliefs don't justify gaps in status, you could be left frustrated and disheartened, according to the researchers, Jaime Napier and John Jost of New York University. They conducted a U.S.-centric survey and a more internationally focused one to arrive at the findings.

"Our research suggests that inequality takes a greater psychological toll on liberals than on conservatives," the researchers write in the June issue of the journal Psychological Science, "apparently because liberals lack ideological rationalizations that would help them frame inequality in a positive (or at least neutral) light."

The results support and further explain a Pew Research Center survey from 2006, in which 47 percent of conservative Republicans in the U.S. described themselves as "very happy," while only 28 percent of liberal Democrats indicated such cheer.

The same rationalizing phenomena could apply to personal situations as well.

"There is no reason to think that the effects we have identified here are unique to economic forms of inequality," the researchers write. "Research suggests that highly egalitarian women are less happy in their marriages compared with their more traditional counterparts, apparently because they are more troubled by disparities in domestic labor."

The current study was funded by the National Science Foundation.

SOURCE

Brains Changed by Abuse

Abuse changes the brain. Thank you modern science for proving correct what I have been saying for years. And the more I work with other abuse victims, the more I see proof that this is so.

Abuse victims are not stupid, nutjobs, obsessive, crazy, scorned or naive. Suicide victims or contemplaters are not insane, cowardly or crying for attention.

As someone who contemplated suicide a few times for a variety of reasons (none of which had to do with attention-getting or cowardice) and who attempted it once (to get away from the 2 sociopaths in my life who had pushed me to the edge) I am grateful to my late therapist and those who made me see my life still had value. I was stuck in cognitive loops from which I couldn't escape through shear strength of will.

At the bottom of this article is a link to my friend Iddybud's recent post on the PTSD related suicides of Iraq War soldiers/ survivors. Please read and pass on.

Don't pass judgment on those of us whose lives have been forever altered by some type or trauma & abuse.


Abuse changes brains of suicide victims
By Maggie Fox

Suicide victims who were abused as children have clear genetic changes in their brains, Canadian researchers reported on Tuesday in a finding they said shows neglect can cause biological effects.

The findings offer potential ways to find people at high risk of suicide, and perhaps to treat them and prevent future suicides.

And, the researchers said, they also offer insights into how neglect and abuse can perpetuate unhealthy behavior through the generations.

Moshe Szyf of McGill University in Montreal and colleagues studied the brains of 18 men who committed suicide and who were also abused or neglected as children, and compared them to 12 men who also died suddenly but from other causes, and who were not abused, although some had various psychiatric problems such as anxiety disorders.

They found changes in the genetic material of all 18 suicide victims. The changes were not in the genes themselves, but in the ribosomal RNA, which is the genetic material that makes proteins that in turn make cells function.

These changes involved a chemical process called methylation, a so-called epigenetic change involving the processes of turning genes on and off, they reported in the Public Library of Science journal PLoS ONE, available HERE

"The big remaining questions are whether scientists could detect similar changes in blood DNA -- which could lead to diagnostic tests -- and whether we could design interventions to erase these differences in epigenetic markings," Szyf said in a statement.

Dr. Eric Nestler of the University of Texas Southwestern Medical School in Dallas said both drugs and psychotherapy may act to reverse some of these changes.

CHANGING THE BRAIN

"Ultimately we believe that a person who gets better from psychotherapy is inducing changes in the brain," Nestler Told reporters at a meeting of the American Psychiatric Association in Washington where similar research was discussed.

Szyf's colleague, Michael Meaney, has shown in animals that parental abuse and neglect can affect the brains and behavior of offspring.

He has studied the brains of rats, for whom parental care can be demonstrated in how much the mother grooms her pups.

"You can put two rats on a table and tell which one is raised by a low-licking mother. The one reared by a low-licking mother is more nervous, and fatter," Meaney said in an interview at the Psychiatric Association meeting.

Images of the brain cells of the rats show the brain cells of low-licking mothers have fewer dendrites. These are the strands that help one neuron communicate with another.

Meaney, who also worked on the suicide study, said the research, taken together, demonstrates how early experiences can cause physical changes in the brain.

He said female rats reared by low-licking mothers reached puberty earlier, meaning they had more offspring.

Similar findings are true of humans, who often have children at younger ages when times are stressful. The best way to pass along genes in uncertain times is to have more children, he said.

SOURCE

SUICIDE HOTLINE FOR VETERANS IN CRISIS

Deception = Awareness of The Truth

My friend Anna had a disordered parent like I did. Often when we discuss it, it's almost like we had the same parent. There is an understanding between us and other ACONS (Adult Children of Narcissists) that is only possible between people who have been through a war - and know the terror, rage and empty feeling that comes from knowing you meant nothing to that parent other than a prop to be used and abused. The very person who is supposed to UNCONDITIONALLY love & nuture you twists you into an abuse-ignoring, bad-treatment accepting blind person who has to take back their lives, inch by excruciating inch.

And then -- somehow come to terms with what love really is and with what was missing in their lives that can never, ever be replaced or reparented.

Anna's blog is a must-read for me and anyone who's been through this sort of growing up.

Reminder - that anyone who has/ had and abusive partner, friend, coworker, boss, parent or watched politicians for a few years will be able to relate to what Anna says here.

Ways That Narcissists Show They Are Aware of the Crimes
by Anna Valerious

As I have reflected on history with my narcissistic mother I have been able to see clear indications of her awareness of her crimes against me. I suspect you've seen the same indications with your own narcissist.

I'll name a couple of them:

1) All my life she has hated my friends.

I know now it is because they have always been a threat to her control of my mind. She made it clear to me, starting when I was very young, that I was not allowed to speak of the things that went on in our house. It was none of anyone's business, she would say. It was repeated often that talking about her or our family life was wrong, disloyal, bad.

(Even though she freely gossips to whoever about immediate family members when it suits her.)

Despite the ongoing propaganda she was never sure whether or not I was sharing things with my friends; she always imagined signs that they didn't like her and how that was directly my fault.

It is likely you've also seen this paranoia and active campaign against any and all of your friendships.

Proof one: Her need to hide facts is a sign of someone who knows on some level that their behavior is wrong. On some level narcissists know that they are abusing, using and hurting you.

2) Another thing is that she lies, covers up and minimizes her bad actions of past and present.

When someone lies then you have direct proof that they know the truth.

If she didn't know that her behaviors were bad then she'd have no need to lie about them. The rages, the martyr act, the helpless act, the many and varied manipulations are all ways that the N are trying to control your perceptions of them. They are trying to control your mind so you will reflect back to them how they want to see themselves. It is all deception. Varied forms of it.

The use of deception in any and all its forms is proof of an awareness of truth.

SOURCE

Dealing With Control Freaks

by Thomas J. Schumacher, Psy.D., R-CSW

Most all of you have had to contend with control freaks. These are those people who insist on having their way in all interactions with you. They wish to set the agenda and decide what it is you will do and when you will do it. You know who they are – they have a driving need to run the show and call the shots. Lurking within the fabric of the conversation is the clear threat that if you do not accede to their needs and demands, they will be unhappy.

Certainly, it’s natural to want to be in control of your life. But when you have to be in control of the people around you as well, when you literally can’t rest until you get your way … you have a personality disorder. While it’s not a diagnostic category found in the DSM IV (the therapist’s bible for diagnostic purposes) an exaggerated emphasis on control is part of a cluster of behaviors that can be labeled as compulsive generally characterized by perfectionism, orderliness, workaholic tendencies, an inability to make commitments or to trust others and a fear of having their flaws exposed. Deep down, these people are terrified of being vulnerable. They believe they can protect themselves by staying in control of every aspect of their lives, including their relationships.

Control freaks take the need and urge to control to new heights, causing others stress so they can maintain a sense of order. These people are riddled with anxiety, fear, insecurity, and anger. They’re very critical of themselves their lover and their friends, but underneath that perfect outfit and great body is a mountain of unhappiness. Let’s look at what makes control freaks tick, what makes you want to explode, and some ways to deal with them.

The Psychological Dynamics That Fuel a Control Freak
The need to control is almost always fueled by anxiety – though control freaks seldom recognize their fears. At work, they may worry about failure. In relationships, they may worry about not having their needs met. To keep this anxiety from overwhelming them, they try to control the people or things around them. They have a hard time with negotiation and compromise and they can’t stand imperfection. Needless to say, they are difficult to live with, work with and/or socialize with.

Bottom Line: In the process of being controlling, their actions say, “You’re incompetent” and “I can’t trust you.” (this is why you hate them). Remember, the essential need of a control freak is to defend against anxiety. Although it may not be apparent to you when they are making their demands, these individuals are attempting to cope with fairly substantial levels of their own anxiety. The control freak is usually fighting off a deep-seated sense of their own helplessness and impotence. By becoming proficient at trying to control other people, they are warding off their own fear of being out of control and helpless. Controlling is an anxiety management tool.

Unfortunately for you, the control freak has a lot at stake in prevailing. While trying to hold a conversation and engage them in some way, their emotional stakes involve their own identity and sense of well-being. Being in control gives them the temporary illusion and sense of calmness. When they feel they are prevailing, you can just about sense the tension oozing out of them. The control freak is very frightened. Part of their strategy is to induce that fear in you with the subtle or not so subtle threat of loss. Since the emotional stakes are so high for them, they need to assert themselves with you to not feel so helpless. To relinquish control is tantamount to being victimized and overwhelmed. When a control freak cannot control, they go through a series of rapid phases. First they become angry and agitated, then they become panicky and apprehensive, then they become agitated and threatening, and then they lapse into depression and despair.

Repetition Compulsion
Control freaks are also caught in the grip of a repetition compulsion. They repeat the same pattern again and again in their attempt to master their anxiety and cope with the trauma they feel. Characteristically, the repetition compulsion takes on a life of its own. Rather than feel calmer and therefore have a diminished need to be controlling, their behavior locks them into the same pattern in an insatiable way. Successes at controlling do not register on their internal scoreboard. They have to fight off the same threat again and again with increasing rigidity and intransigence.

Two Types of Control Freaks
Type 1 Control Freaks: The Type 1 control freak is strictly attempting to cope with their anxiety in a self absorbed way. They just want to feel better and are not even very aware of you. You will notice and hear their agitation and tentativeness. They usually do not make much eye contact when they are talking to you.

Type 2 Control Freaks: The Type 2 control freak is also trying to manage their anxiety but they are very aware of you as opposed to the Type 1 control freak. The Type 2 needs to diminish you to feel better. Their mood rises as they push you down. They do not just want to prevail; they also need to believe that they have defeated you. They need you to feel helpless so they will not feel helpless. Their belief is that someone must feel helpless in any interchange and they desperately do not want it to be them. The Type 1 needs control. The Type 2 needs to control you.

Some Coping Strategies
1) Stay as calm as you can. Control freaks tend to generate a lot of tension in those around them. Try to maintain a comfortable distance so that you can remain centered while you speak with them. Try to focus on your breathing. As they get more agitated and demanding, just breath slowly and deeply. If you stay calm and focused, this often has the effect of relaxing them as well. If you get agitated you have joined the battle on their terms.

2) Speak very slowly. Again the normal tendency is to gear up and speak rapidly when dealing with a control freak. This will only draw you into the emotional turmoil and you will quickly be personalizing what is occurring.

3) Be very patient. Control freaks need to feel heard. In fact, they do not have that much to say. They have a lot to say if you engage them in a power struggle. If you just listen carefully and ask good questions that indicate that you have heard them, then they will quickly resolve whatever the issue is and calmly move on.

4) Pay attention to your induced reactions. What is this person trying to emotionally induce in you? Notice how you feel when speaking with them. It will give you important clues as to how to deal with them more effectively and appropriately.

5) Initially, let them control the agenda. But you control the pacing. If you stay calm and speak slowly, you will be in command of the pacing of the conversation.

6) Treat them with kindness. Within most control freaks is a good measure of paranoia. They are ready to get angry and defend against what they perceive is a controlling hostile world. If you treat them with respect and kindness, their paranoia cannot take root. You will jam them up.

7) Make demands on them-- especially when dealing with the type 2 control freak. Ask them to send you something or do something for you. By asking something of them, you will be indicating that you are not intimidated or diminished by their behavior patterns.

8) Remember an old but poignant Maxim: “Those who demand the most often give the least.”

Keep in mind that control freaks are not trying to hurt you – they’re trying to protect themselves. Remind yourself that their behavior toward you isn’t personal; the compulsion was there before they met you, and it will be their forever unless they get help. Understand that they are skilled manipulators, artful and intimidating, rehearsed debaters and excellent at distorting reality.

In order to not feel degraded, humiliated and have your sense of self and self worth assaulted, you need to avoid being bulldozed by a controlling lover, boss or friend. When you are caught up in a truly destructive/controlling attachment, the best response may be to walk out. You have to understand that whatever you do will have a limited effect. These people are angry and afraid to let go of you. Hence, it is your job to let go of them, protect yourself in the process… and grow.

SOURCE

Israel Provides the Best Hope...

by Alan M. Dershowitz

As Israel celebrates its 60th birthday, the world should recognize the enormous gifts the Jewish state has given the world. Israel has exported more lifesaving medical technology to the far-flung corners of the earth than any nation of comparable size. It has done more to protect the environment, to promote literature, music, the arts and sciences, to spread agricultural advances and to fight terrorism within the rule of law.

Israel has created a legal system that is the envy of the world, with a Supreme Court that is open to all with few, if any, restrictions on its jurisdiction. As America's most liberal Supreme Court Justice William Brennan observed when he visited Israel in 1988:

"It may well be Israel, not the United States, that provides the best hope for building a jurisprudence that can protect civil liberties against the demands of national security. For it is Israel that has been facing real and serious threats to its security for the last 40 years and seems destined to continue facing such threats in the foreseeable future. The struggle to establish civil liberties against the backdrop of these security threats, while difficult, promises to build bulwarks of liberty that can endure the fears and frenzy of sudden danger - bulwarks to help guarantee that a nation fighting for its survival does not sacrifice those national values that make the fight worthwhile."

Yet despite these disproportionate contributions to the world, Israel has proportionally more enemies than any nation on earth. Moreover, the intensity of the enmity directed against the Mideast's only democracy is unexplainable on any rational basis.

It is remarkable indeed that a democratic nation born in response to a decision of the United Nations should still not be accepted by so many nations, groups and individuals. No other United Nations member is threatened with physical annihilation by other member states so openly and without rebuke from the general assembly or security counsel.

No other nation has been subjected to so many threats of boycott, divestiture, and delegitimation than the Jewish state. No other nation with such high standards of morality has ever been regarded as so immoral by so many members of the media, academia, and the intellectual elite.

Israel's enemies have learned how to take advantage of its high standards of morality. They understand what Golda Meir meant when she said to the terrorists: "We can perhaps forgive you for killing our children but we cannot forgive you for making us kill your children." Islamic extremist leaders who preach the culture of death are indeed trying to make you kill their children, because they know that every time you accidentally do, they win as big a victory as when they deliberately kill one of your children. That is why they fire their rockets from densely-populated areas knowing that you have no choice but to try to destroy their launching pads and knowing that in the process you may kill some innocent people. It is a win-win situation for them and a lose-lose situation for you.

I agree with the late Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin when he said that Israel should try to make peace as if there were no terrorism and fight terrorism as if there were no peace process.

No nation can be expected to endure repeated and systematic attacks against its civilian population, even when those attacks come from civilian areas. No nation can make peace with terrorists who seek not compromise, but total defeat of their enemy.
Israel's continuing efforts to fight terrorists within the rule of law and within the reasonable constraints of human rights and civil liberties may be among Israel's most enduring contributions to the civilized world. Israel's fight is our fight. Israel's struggles are