Poetry Day for Ukraine

April is National Poetry Month established by the Academy of American Poets in 1996 to remind the public that poets and poetry play an integral role in our national culture, and in others as well, and they have an important place in our lives, both in the USA and beyond, to give fresh recognition and impetus to regional, national, and international poetry movements.   

The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) adopted March 21 as World Poetry Day during its 30th General Conference in Paris in 1999.  It was established to celebrate this unique cultural and linguistic expression.  “Every form of poetry is unique, but each reflects the universal nature of the human experience,” writes UNESCO Director-General Audrey Azoulay; “Our aspirations of creativity that crosses boundaries and borders.”  This is the power of poetry!  This dialogue “enriches that catalyzes all human progress and is more necessary than ever in turbulent times.  She concludes: “Oral traditions and expressions are used to pass on knowledge, cultural and social values and collective memory. They play a crucial part in keeping cultures alive . . . [and] allowed people to escape temporarily from their fears and to find comfort at home with their loved ones.”

We continue to celebrate World Poetry Day "with the aim of supporting linguistic diversity through poetic expression and increasing the opportunity for endangered languages to be heard."  This year UNESCO marks the advent of the International Decade of Indigenous Languages, to affirm its commitment to indigenous peoples worldwide.  

This year World Poetry Day takes on a special significance and poets around the world have gathered to express their solidarity with the brave and heroic Ukrainian people as they defend their country from the savage and criminal war Russian president Vladimir Putin has unleashed on them for no other reason than to create a fascist state as the true and legal successor state of the brutal Russian empire and the former Soviet Union.

In celebration of World Poetry Day and standing in solidarity with sister Cities of Literature in Lviv and Odessa in Ukraine, several of UNESCO’s 42 Cities of Literature have joined together to present the poem, “So I’ll talk about it” by Serhiy Zhadan and translated by John Hennessy and Ostap Kin.  He is one of Ukraine’s best-known poets and novelists, who gathers crowds of thousands of people at his book launches and events. https://www.calvertjournal.com/articles/show/12137/contemporary-ukrainian-poems 

Men that dance the way they quench

steppe-fire with their boots.

Women that hold onto their men in dance

like they don’t want to let them go to war.

As I celebrated my 71st birthday on Match 21 I joined poets and writers from around the world in support of the Ukrainian people in their brave stand against Putin's criminal war.  Who can forget the words of Yevgeni Yevtushenko’s poem “Babyn Yar”? 

O, Russia of my heart, I know that you

Are international, by inner nature.

But often those whose hands are steeped in filth

Abused your purest name, in name of hatred.

We recall these words as Russian missiles land close to the memorial to that past massacre just outside Kyiv, the besieged Ukrainian capital. 

Let these words and others ring again in our ears as we watch with heavy hearts the death and destruction visited on the brave Ukrainian people who only want to live in peace.

Слава Україні ! Героям слава !

Missing That Special Third Place

March 9 marked the second anniversary of the coronavirus pandemic lockdown, when the human species worldwide was forced to seek shelter in place, and in doing so alienating itself from the broader social constructs it has for so long taken for granted.  Inter-personal relationships have suffered the most of all as we have gone so long without regular contact with family and friends. 

Having written my doctoral dissertation on the German interpretation of “proxemics” – the study of human space and the various non-verbal modalities through which they can be expressed – I have naturally been drawn to Ray Oldenburg, an American urban sociologist, who has written about the importance of public gathering places for a greater engagement within a civil society.  In The Great Good Place: Cafes, Coffee Shops, Community Centers, Beauty Parlors, General Stores, Bars, Hangouts, and How They Get You Through the Day (1989), and later in Celebrating the Third Place: Inspiring Stories about the "Great Good Places" at the Heart of Our Communities (2000), Oldenburg emphasizes the importance of these informal third places as “the heart of a community's social vitality and the foundation of a functioning democracy;” promoting social equality and community verve through a discussion of “grassroots politics” and thereby creating public association supporting individuals and their communities.   These books have been called eloquent and visionary in that they lend the “third place” a necessary and vital balance to the other two “places” – the privatization of home life, which has been the main focus for most of us over the past two years, and our work places which also adhere to certain formal rules yet which many of us have been isolated from in favor of working from home.

These so-called “third places,” on the other hand, are nothing more than informal public gathering places which allow individuals to set aside their daily concerns and obligations with home and work and to enjoy the company and conversation around them.  In contrast, third places offer a neutral public space for a community to connect and establish bonds. Third places "host the regular, voluntary, informal, and happily anticipated gatherings of individuals beyond the realms of home and work . . . but sadly, they constitute a diminishing aspect of the American social landscape."

Informal public life is essential for the health both of our communities and ourselves.  The anthropologist Edward Hall coined “proxemics” in the early 1960s and classified four major proxemic zones: intimate space, personal space, social space, and public space, aspects of the physical environment that affect behavior.  Within these spatial modalities he also defined audio, visual, tactile and olfactory responses.  Hall’s research, along with my own study of proxemic spatial behavioral patterns among the Germans, suggest that different cultures have different expectations of what is socially acceptable in the four proxemic zones.  

North Americans and Europeans in general prefer more social space while Latin Americans prefer more intimate contact when interacting with others.  Still, North Americans and Europeans tend to draw a strict boundary between private, or intimate space, and public/social space.  Population density also defines the noticeable difference between how rural and urban populations erect boundaries between private, which tends to be more formal, and public space.  "In the absence of informal public life, living becomes more expensive,” Oldenburg writes.  “Where the means and facilities for relaxation and leisure are not publicly shared, they become the objects of private ownership and consumption."

In this particular instance, I am focusing on American social space, the third proxemic zone as defined by Hall.  Without the chance for some degree of communal, public contact, we are relegated to our homes and work places where we tend to spend most of our time and which provide very limited social interaction.  “Social well-being and psychological health,” Oldenburg tells us, “depend upon community.  ”We are able to function better at home and at work as the “third place” provides casual interaction with those with whom we do not work and to whom we are not related.  "What suburbia cries for are the means for people to gather easily, inexpensively, regularly, and pleasurably -- a 'place on the corner,' real life alternatives to television, easy escapes from the cabin fever of marriage and family life that do not necessitate getting into an automobile."     

This social third space has sadly been a rare commodity over the past two years of the coronavirus pandemic . . . made even more so by the recent up ticks caused by the spread to the Delta and Omicron variants and people returning to the safety of hearth and home.  Outdoor gatherings were a premium during the cold and wet winter months.  This deprivation of casual interaction is a tragedy for us all and we try to make the best of it whenever and wherever we can. 

Recently to COVID numbers have been going down and with the return of warmer spring weather there is once again an opportunity to return to our favorite haunts to renew and reset our social links with friends and family.  I have also long counted on these third places as an alternative work place; an opportunity to seek out a social venue where I can be among people as I write while enjoying social contact, something to eat, and perhaps an adult beverage or two.  

Coronavirus cases plummeted around the United States over this past year, and states and localities are dropping their mask-wearing requirements.  That said, it is still incumbent upon on us to use a little common sense.  Just as the COVID number are on the wane, they could easily spike again.  This pandemic is not over and it is going to take all of us to do what is necessary to keep the numbers low.  If not, we may once again be forced to seek shelter in our homes.  Nobody wants that!

So eat, drink, and be merry, but do so with an ounce of protection.  It benefits all of us.

 

Some People Told Me - Why Do People Believe the Big Lie?

An immediate alarm bell, a warning flare goes up, whenever a pundit or talking head begins a report with “some people told me.”   Which people?   When?   What exactly was said and in what context?  But more importantly, do these people even exist?  In almost every instance I suspect not.  If you can’t cite a specific source, if the information is second hand and only attributed to “some people,” this tells me whatever is to follow is more than likely a crock of unadulterated bullshit.  I’m sorry, but let’s call it what it is.  This is nothing more than an example of “fire-hosing,” a propaganda technique in which a large number of messages are broadcast rapidly, repetitively, and continuously without regard for truth or consistency.  And people are eating it up whether it be true or not.

During the four long years of the former White House interregnum, and throughout the past year, the so-called “Big Lie” has largely been attributed to the words of, the evidence provided by “some people.”  But no one seems to know who they are.  And yet the media keeps reporting these false narratives, perhaps because they cannot conceive of anyone who might have the impudence to distort the truth so egregiously.  Yet it happens all the time.  The American landscape seems to be full of people who believe these “some people” who exist only in the minds of those who wish to lie and distort.  And what if such a claim is proven to be untrue?  Normally this would be considered embarrassing and a sign of weakness.  This is no longer the case.  These “some people” and their spokespersons double-down on untrue claims to save face and personal credibility.

It is our own fault that we are not more discriminating about what we choose to believe.  Many prefer to think they are correct rather than admit they are wrong or have been duped by the unscrupulous.  It has been shown time and again that repeating or amplifying false claims, even to refute them, makes people more likely to believe it.  We would be far better off to value uncertainty and intellectual humility and curiosity. Those values help us ask questions without the expectation of hard/fast answers.

Why haven’t we learned our lesson and demonstrated the fortitude to ignore these claims and call them what they are?  Perpetuating them comes with costs.  Case in point . . . the January 6th Capitol insurrection and attempted coup.  A year has passed, and the Big Lie is just as prevalent today as it was then.  Why?  Because the media is playing right into the hands of the perpetrators.  Dr. Matt Blanchard, a clinical psychologist at New York University, has studied how we deal with what is purported to be true . . . what “some people” have claimed is the truth.   People won’t so much believe something, yet they do seem willing to accept certain information or facts provisionally because it fits their frame of mind and helps them identify with others.  Or it might help one vent some rage.  What is believed “is always predicated on usefulness."  After a time, the presumed truth is accepted as fact.   

The Nazis were adept at perpetuating its Big Lie – claiming Germany’s ills were attributed to the Jews and their “stab-in-the-back” treachery – in order to exploit and manipulate people solely to appeal to ingrained historical anti-Semitism to gain their support.  Joseph Goebbels, the Nazi propaganda minister, freely admitted that the perpetuation of the lie is not dependent on the intelligence of those who created it, but rather on the “thick-headedness” and stupidity of those to ignorant to recognize it for what it really is.  There is no reason to fear appearing impudent or ridiculous.   Just stick to the story and folks will believe it to be the truth.  Timothy Snyder, a historian who specializes in the study of fascism, wrote in The New York Times last year that one of the major components of the Big Lie is that it is immediately attributed to the side it is directed against.  This is exactly what Adolf Hitler did in his Mein Kampf, and it is what we are seeing today in this country.

Frequent and tautological repetition is also key as its success is dependent on indoctrination from all angles.  It becomes its own primary evidence.  Repeat something enough it becomes truth.  Who is responsible for this truth?   More often than not it is “some people.”   No one seems to need any more proof than that.  It’s time to insist on those advancing the claims of “some people” to put up – show us the evidence – or shut up!

A Tale of Two Seafood Stews, Part 2: Cioppino -- Eating Vicariously

I apologize for the delayed posting of Part 2, but I have been distracted by the tragic and criminal Russian invasion of Ukraine commencing on February 24.  Part 1 was posted on February 14.  Bon Appetit!

As I stated in Part I, the differences between bouillabaisse and cioppino are few; broth is the main distinguishing component.   And whereas bouillabaisse is a genuine French stew, cioppino is an Italian-style seafood stew – purely tomato-based and coupled with a fish stock broth – first created and served in San Francisco.  Cioppino also includes wine – red or white – while bouillabaisse, at least historically, does not although plenty of modern versions do call for it, and it works beautifully.  OK, that is the general rule, but it can get more involved than that.  Olive oil, fennel and fennel seeds, yellow onion, garlic, fresh parsley, and red pepper flakes are frequently added as aromatics, and cioppino is often served with garlic bread while served with a local red Zinfandel or Vermentino from Sonoma or Napa.    

Some diners will suggest that there is not that much of a difference between a cioppino and a traditional bouillabaisse – that cioppino is simply and Americanized version of the latter – but I beg to differ.  These two stews share similar herbs and spice and are equally fragrant yet with a decidedly different flavor profile.  It is also more traditional to serve bouillabaisse as separate dishes – the seafood removed to a platter and the rich broth served separately.  Of course, one may mix the seafood and broth together when serving, if one wishes, but there is something a bit more elegant about serving it separately in the traditional way.  Cioppino, on the other hand, is always served from one big pot with a little bit of everything dished into individual bowls.  Although there are certainly similarities, cioppino is delicious in its own right.  Each has continued to evolve standing on their own merits.  

The name “cioppino” comes from ciuppin (also spelled ciupin . . . the literal translation meaning “chopped” or “torn to pieces”), a seafood soup from the Liguria coast of Italy bordering France.  The dish also shares its origin with cacciucco from Tuscany.  In fact, the dish actually traces its roots to San Francisco where Italian immigrants from Liguria fished along the waterfront wharfs in the North Beach neighborhood.  The earliest printed description of cioppino – called "chespini” – dates to circa 1900, and "Cioppino" first appears in a 1906 cookbook published to raise funds in the wake of the devastating fire that year.  Cioppino would soon become a staple in many San Francisco area restaurants.

In preparing the broth, it should be allowed to simmer for an hour or so before the seafood is added.  Onions, fennel, and garlic are sauteed in butter before adding white wine and a bouquet garni of selected herbs.  Some chefs will also add vinegar, hot sauce, and clam juice to enhance the flavors of the broth.  Once the wine has burned off it is time to add the chopped and crushed tomatoes and a seafood stock prepared by boiling fish heads and bones.  It is time to add the selected seafood after the broth has properly simmered to draw out the flavors,

The main ingredients of the original cioppino recipe are sourced from the Pacific, including whole quartered Dungeness crab in the shell, clams, shrimp, bay scallops, shucked oysters, mussels, and calamari.  Portions of white fish are often added, depending on the day’s catch or one’s personal choice.  Garlic sourdough bread is ideal for soaking up the flavorful broth.  And unlike bouillabaisse, cioppino requires more than a simple spoon and fork; don’t forget the shell cracker and seafood fork for the crab.  Serving a proper cioppino can get a let messy at times, but it is worth the extra effort.  

During the late 1970s and early 1980s I frequently traveled to San Francisco on business, and it was there that I first encountered cioppino.  I had many restaurants to choose from, but why not try the place that is named after the dish?  Cioppino’s is located at 400 Jefferson Street, at the corner of Levenworth Street at Fisherman’s Wharf (formerly Meigg’s Pier) / Hyde Street Pier.  This pier served as the ferry terminal to Marin County and the East Bay before the big bridges were built in the 1930s.  Although there is a rich assortment of seafood dishes to choose from, its signature dish is, of course, a hearty cioppino.  The crab can be removed from the shell for a few dollars more.  I enjoyed my meal, but I found everything a bit overpriced due to the simple fact that the city is expensive and the area is a main draw for tourists.  

On my next trip I looked for a place along the Embarcadero far from the Fishermen’s Wharf  tourist traffic and found it at the Pier Market at Pier 39.  The house cioppino was brimming with fresh fish, mussels, clams, shrimp and crab served over pasta which I found to be a pleasant addition.  There is no specific rules as to what constitutes a traditional cioppino.  Every local chef has a particular manner in which the dish is prepared and served.

Perhaps my favorite place to enjoy cioppino is found across the Bay in Sausalito.   Salito’s Crabhouse, at 1200 Bridgeway, offers different sizes of its house “Cioppinolito,” which is described as having mussel, crab, shrimp, calamari, fish fillet, potatoes, yams, onions, corn, garlic and black olives, and spicy “Cioppino sauce.”  My favorite dish at Salito’s is the tasty sand dabs, but a small bowl of Cioppinolito is always a nice starter to fire up the tastebuds for what will follow.

[https://lookingtowardportugal.blogspot.com/2021/03/sand-dabs-in-sausalito.html]

 

I have occasionally ordered what is billed as cioppino in several restaurants on the East Coast – Boston, New York, and here in Washington, DC – but I have never found it to be as attractive or as flavorful as those served on the Left Coast.  Don’t get me wrong.  Some have been very fine fish stews, but billing them as “traditional” cioppino is perhaps going a bit too far.  There is one notable exception, however, and again it was found in Maine . . . in the dining room of the Island Inn, on Monhegan Island situated in Muscongus Bay a dozen miles of Midcoast Maine.  It was not billed as the  traditional offering and it included lobster for a local flare, but it was the best I have had outside of the Bay area.  Unfortunately it is not a regular menu offering so I always make sure to order it when it does show up.  

No matter whether it is bouillabaisse or cioppino, a well-prepared offering of the freshest seafood and vegetables matched with a proper fish stock and selected spices and aromatics will please any diner’s palate.

There is Nothing Sinister About Poutine

                                         Photo: Canadian Broadcasting Company

Those of you who follow this blogspot regularly are familiar with my addiction to poutine [poo-TEEN], that wondrous concoction of French fries smothered in melted cheese curds and gravy; a comfort food and a meal in itself.  It’s origins can be traced back to 1950s Québec, and since then it has spread far and wide and in many specialty guises. . . even to Mother France.  Of course, there are those who find this combination revolting . . . a heart attack waiting to happen . . . and so there is no accounting for tastes.  The debate lives on.

Yet now, to my wonderment, there is a new reason to reject poutine . . . the belief that the dish is named in honor of the authoritarian Russian president Vladimir Putin [POO-tin].  A couple days ago I ran across a number of media stories reporting that a Parisian restaurant, La Maison de la Poutine, has been receiving insults and threats as a result.  According to some reports, the confusion is attributed to a recent tweet by French President Emmanuel Macron which described his conversation with “Président Poutine.”

According to one of the reports, “calling Mr. Putin ‘Poutine’ in French may be a matter of diplomacy to avoid the pejorative connotation, though there are disagreements in some linguistic quarters over the origin of the pronunciation.”  There is the claim that the English spelling “Putin” is pronounced in French the same way as “putain” [poo-TAIN = whore].  Perhaps this is why the French use the spelling “poutine” to closer approximate the correct pronunciation of the president’s name in Russian.  This report also indicates that several French linguistic scholars have discounted the insult theory, suggesting that the president’s name is written and pronounced “poutine” since the transliteration of the Russian from Cyrillic into French is different from its transliteration into English.  All of this may be true, but why the confusion?  I just don’t get it.

Frankly, this is something I might expect in this country, but in France?  As a result, the restaurant, which has three location in Paris and one in Toulouse, sent a tweet to its customers explaining the origins of poutine created by passionate chefs to bring “joy and comfort,” and reassuring them that its signature dish is in no way associated with the Russian leader.  Furthermore, the restaurant’s ownership, who was introduced to poutine while working at the venerable restaurant Leméac in the Outremont neighborhood in Montréal, expressed its desire to perpetuate these values, and its “most sincere respect to the Ukrainian people who are courageously fighting for their freedom against a tyrannical Russian regime.”   They did not rename their offering.

A related story reports that a Canadian eatery, Le Roy Jucep, located in Drummondville, Québec, has also been a similar target of those who can’t seem to differentiate between “Putin” and “poutine.”   This restaurant has long claimed to have invented poutine.  It’s founder,  Jean-Paul Roy, returned home to Drummondville, after having worked as a cook for several years at the Hotel Mont-Royal in Montréal. 

[See for more on this: http://lookingtowardportugal.blogspot.com/2009/06/une-maudite-poutine.html]

One of the owners, a veteran of the war in Afghanistan, announced on social media on  February 24, the day Russia invaded Ukraine, that it was temporarily renaming its most famous offering “la frite fromage sauce” [French fries cheese gravy] to demonstrate its “dismay” at the invasion of Ukraine.  “I wanted to make this little gesture to show Ukrainians we are thinking of them.”  This story goes on to say that a research fellow at the Modern Art Research Institute in Kyiv, told Radio Canada, that she applauded the restaurant and its decision to “DePoutineize poutine.”  I don’t understand this since the two were never associated in the first place.  The restaurant’s announcement has since been rescinded after this owner claims to have been berated by “pro-Russian activists.”   So much for one’s belief in one’s principles.

I am reminded of the 2003 US-led war against Iraq when so-called US “patriots” renamed French fries “Freedom Fries” when France chose not to join the coalition forces during the invasion.  Such efforts prove and accomplish nothing.  I applaud La Maison de la Poutine for sticking to its guns and refusing to surrender to the insults and threats from the ignorant.  There.  I said it.

Babyn Yar: Putin is Abusing and Distorting the Memory of the Holocaust

I read with horror and profound sadness the reports that the criminal Russian missile and aerial attacks on the Ukrainian capital Kyiv and the damage inflicted on the Babyn Yar memorial to victims of the Holocaust.  It was in a large ravine located there that over the course of two days in early September 1941 members of a Nazi German Einsatzgruppe murdered almost 34,000 Ukrainian Jewish men, women, and children.  The Nazi authorities continued to perpetrate horrendous crimes at Babyn Yar, using it as a mass grave to dispose of up to 100,000 bodies of Jews, Roma, Ukrainian civilians and Soviet prisoners of war, until Kyiv was liberated by the Soviets Red Army in 1943, but not before the retreating Germans bulldozed the ravine and burned the bodies to erase the evidence of their horrific crimes.  Since the war Babyn Yar has become one of the most important memorial sites of the Holocaust and holds a special place in the hearts of Ukraine, a country with a large Jewish population (perhaps as many as 360,000), and a Jewish president.  President Volodymyr Zelensky has long pledged to preserve his country’s Holocaust sites, to remember the victims, and to secure the historical truth of what happened during that dark chapter of the country’s history.

The entire civilized world condemns these horrible and senseless attacks ordered by Russian president Vladimir Putin on the pretext that he would rid Ukraine of its “neo-Nazi” leaders with the expressed goal, the "denazification" of the country.  Critics of Putin have condemned Putin’s delusional distortion and manipulation of the Holocaust to justify his criminal invasion of a sovereign and democratic country.  Strange then he would attack and damage one of the most important memorials to Nazi crimes in Ukraine.  Thankfully we now know that the iconic memorials in memorial park – a large menorah, a newly built synagogue, and a monument honoring Soviet citizens and prisoners of war who were murdered at the site, have not been damaged although a museum build was partially burned, and other damage occurred across the 140-acre memorial.  President Zelensky perhaps summed up best the attack that was “beyond humanity.”  "What is the point of saying 'never again' for 80 years, if the world stays silent when a bomb drops on the same site of Babyn Yar? At least 5 killed. History repeating . . . they have an order to erase our history.  Erase our country.  Erase us all."

The Russian attacks at the memorial site are significant in that they have been carried out by a country who suffered grievously when Nazi Germany invaded the former Soviet Union in June 1941.  Before the German invaders were vanquished, nearly 27 million Soviet citizens had died, including 8.7 million military deaths, including members of President Zelensky’s own family who fought with the Red Army against the Nazis.

Only his grandfather survived.  Numerous thousands were murdered by the Nazis at Babyn Yar.  President Zelensky is correct.   This unprovoked attack, in fact the entire war, goes “beyond humanity.”  And to justify the invasion of a free and democratic country on the grounds that it is necessary for its “denazification” is an abuse and a distortion of the memory of the Holocaust. 

Putin is following in the footsteps of his Soviet predecessors in trying to erase what history recalls of the murders at Babyn Yar.  Just as the Nazis had done before their retreat, Soviet authorities tried to suppress evidence of crimes committed against Jews on what was then Soviet territory even though its own soldiers and citizens were slaughtered by the thousands there.  Thankfully they failed, and with Ukraine gaining its independence following the collapse of the Soviet Union, Babyn Yar has taken its rightful place as one of the most important Holocaust remembrance sites.  

I first became aware of what happened at Babyn Yar in the mid-1960s when I read Yevgeny Yevtushenko’s 1961 poem “Babi Yar” [the Russian spelling] which he wrote in Kyiv in 1961 after visiting the site.  Recalling the Nazi atrocities committed there, Yevtushenko admitted later that he was surprised that it was published for it is a condemnation of all anti-Semitism, including that found in the Soviet Union.  It came at a time when the Soviet authorities were using Babi Yar as a garbage pit; there was no memorial to the dead.  Shame drove Yevtushenko to return to his hotel and write the poem, a poem about human suffering that overshadows any politics.  “It is very difficult to find words which are expressive enough.  It was too much for words.  Words are too weak.”  Nevertheless, he persisted.    

                O, Russia of my heart, I know that you

Are international, by inner nature.

But often those whose hands are steeped in filth

Abused your purest name, in name of hatred.

I know the kindness of my native land.

How vile, that without the slightest quiver

The anti-Semite have proclaimed themselves

The “Union of the Russian People!”

[ . . . . ]

Wild grasses rustle over Babi Yar,

The trees look sternly, as if passing judgement.

Here, silently, all screams, and, hat in hand,

I feel my hair changing shade to gray.

And I myself, like one long soundless scream

Above the thousands of thousands interred,

I’m every old man executed here,

As I am every child murdered here.

No fiber of my body will forget this.

May “Internationale” thunder and ring *3*

When, for all time, is buried and forgotten

The last of anti-Semites on this earth.

There is no Jewish blood that’s blood of mine,

But, hated with a passion that’s corrosive

Am I by anti-Semites like a Jew.

And that is why I call myself a Russian!

Now, once again, Putin aggression against Ukraine is an attempt to abuse and distort history.  And perhaps once again words are too weak to express what is felt deep in the heart.  But we must try.   All of us!!  It is time to say “Never Again” and mean it!

Losar Tashi Delek

Namo Buddhaya. Losar Tashi Delek!

Today marks the first day of the Tibetan royal calendar.  This Losar Festival celebrate 2149 - the Year of the Water Tiger - and is celebrated across different countries.

May this Tibetan New Year bring along happiness and smiles for you and fill your heart with beautiful memories. Warm wishes on Losar Festival 2149!