Rich Forer

On 1/2/2010 9:13 PM, Rich Forer wrote:

Hi All,
Please read the brief press release attached and in the body of this email. I will be speaking about the Israel-Palestine issue at Congregation Nahalat Shalom on January 22 at 7PM. The event is free and open to the public. Whether you can come or not please tell your friends about it. Whether we realize it or not this is a global issue we all play a part in. To relieve the suffering of millions we need to learn what we can do individually within ourselves to foster peace in the world. Regardless of where you stand on the issue please come. Rich

1/3/10 Henry asks

Rich,
Good luck on your talk, wish I could be there.
Will you be supporting the Palestinian call for Boycotts in your presentation?
Best,
Henry Herskovitz

1/3

On 1/3/2010 11:13 AM, Rich Forer wrote:

Henry,
The talk is Thursday, January 21 in case you know anyone in my area. Yes, I support BDS. However, I am only being given 30 minutes and there is a lot I want to discuss; in particular I want to disabuse people of their mythical thinking. To that end I will discuss many of the misconceptions people have about the conflict. In the Q & A I will probably be asked about BDS. Also, although I support BDS, i see it as secondary to dialogue groups. I would like to see dialogue groups sprout up all over the US and Israel. The Gaza invasion and Goldstone report have opened people's minds a little bit. it would be good to take advantage of that with dialogue groups. Thanks for the interest. Rich

Jan 4

Rich,
I've had more than a little experience with "dialogue groups" and at best they're energy sink-holes. At worst they give the illusion of dialogue when in fact they serve to severely limit true dialogue. Case in point: our local Zeitouna group which purports "dialogue" between Jewish and Arab women. It's a show that diverts the missing dialogue of Jewish appropriation of Arab land...
I've also witnessed a "dialogue" between a former IDF soldier and a Palestinian man inside a synagogue, making presentations. The Jewish man repeated his mantra "Israel is an irreversible entity", thereby tossing "Israel"'s legitimacy off the table. Dialogue?
I hear what you say re: your support for dialogue, but feel that you've relegated the chosen tool of Palestinian liberation - their call for BDS - to "secondary" status, and if I weren't on your side, would consider that an act of arrogance - thinking that we know the way better than the Palestinians who suffer at the hands of the Jewish state.
Just as the end of Apartheid in South Africa did not come willingly from the hands of the white supremacists, neither do I think that the end of Israeli Apartheid in Palestine will come at the hands of Jewish supremacists. Both racist regimes required external pressure and shunning, to be eliminated.
As Jews, we need to lead in the dismantling of this Apartheid structure by *following* the Palestinians in their quest for liberation, and I hope that you will reconsider your strategy. But in the absence, I await your success and the names of those members of CNS whom you've converted.
As before, good luck
Henry

Henry,
I agree with what you consider the common result of dialogue groups. however, without dialogue I don;t think there will ever be peace. These groups need to consider actual historical documents and use books by reputable historians whose research is based on primary sources. As to your statement that we need to "follow" the Palestinians I do not necessarily agree with that. Yes, the Palestinians are the aggrieved party but the Israel-Palestine issue affects everyone. This is a spiritual problem; the dispute over land, religion and culture all arise from the attachment to a limited identity and the beliefs and images that emanate from and reinforce that identity. Until individuals become more conscious of how they contribute to conflict and suffering in the world they will always be obstructions to peace regardless of which side of the issue they are on. If, for example, Palestinians demand a full right of return I would say they were establishing conditions designed to prevent peace. ideally I would like to see a full right of return but practically I know it is not going to happen. Ideally I would like to see one state where people can live wherever they want (which implies a full right of return) but practically it is unworkable. Aware of the hatred and lack of self-understanding on both sides of the conflict, I advocate a two-state resolution that would include a Truth and Reconciliation Commission in which Israelis and Palestinians would be expected to confess to their crimes or face indictment, the Israeli archives would be openly acknowledged and publicly presented and discussed by historians in all the newspapers,TV, radio. This would provide some degree of justice for Palestinian refugees while also removing the unfair Western characterization of Arabs as pathological killers and haters. I include the U.S. and British archives also, since those countries were complicit in the dispossession of Palestinians. I also support extremely generous compensation to all Palestinians who were dispossessed and a full right of return to a Palestinian State. Further requirements in my opinion would be that both states would require all schools, public or private, to teach courses in non-violence in all grades; Palestinians must learn Hebrew, Israelis must learn Arabic. There would be required cultural and religious exchanges between schools from the two states and monetary awards to private schools that showed they had made great strides in eliminating prejudice and hate. Eventually, i would hope the two countries would see the wisdom of one-state which would then allow a full right of return to Israel on the basis that anyone can live anywhere because there would be no segregated neighborhoods. In short, I do not believe the world shuold suffer becasue of the stubbornness of leaders on either side of the conflict. I do not advocate punishing Israel or getting revenge against Israel, as so many activists actually want (in their emotional attitude). That is a recipe for conflict. Take care, Rich

Jan. 5

Aw, Rich ... Say it isn't so!
You're a Zionist??! In the Peace Movement ??!
Peace is the enemy of Zionism... a Jewish state (one half of the "two state resolution" you advocate) and peace in the Middle East are incompatible ...
Maybe I spoke too soon when I wrote: "and if I weren't on your side". Do you really support Israel's claimed "right" to exist as a Jewish state in Palestine?
Still, good luck ... the billboard was a good idea
Henry

Henry,
I support israel's right to exist because I know that far too much blood would be shed if the Palestinians hold out for a full right of return, not to mention the demise of Israel. My ideal situation would be for Israel to voluntarily turn their country over to the Palestinians and for Israelis to receive compensation to emigrate to democratic countries. Most Palestinians I have spoken with, however, actually want Israel to remain. We have to be practical. Both people need to learn to live peacefully with each other. That could set a model for the rest of the world. Regardless of one's ethnicity or religion favoring one's own group at the expense of the other's causes the whole world to suffer. People should be able to live wherever they want. Rich

Jan. 9

You dodged the core of the question: Israel exists as a Jewish state, and of course has no right whatsoever to commit atrocities in our name and claim is has a fictitious "right" to do so. The question was whether you supported such a "right" ... and I doubt the Palestinians you've spoken with who want Israel to "remain", really want it to remain as a State that, by definition, excludes them.
Too much blood? Only if you count Jewish blood as the standard ... wasn't 1400 dead Palestinians and a 100:1 "kill ratio" good enough for you? How many pictures of Palestinian babies burnt by white phosphorus do we need to conclude that bloodshed is already too much?
And why assume additional bloodshed? Why not look to the dismantlement of Apartheid South Africa as the working model for a similar dismantlement of Jewish supremacism in Palestine?
We have to be practical? First, Noah Cohen responding to the Zionist Noam Chomsky' claim that we need to be "realistic":

Chomsky's concept of "realism" has a striking resemblance to the colonial discourse of "manifest destiny": Good or bad, right or wrong--so the argument goes--these are the facts on the ground; this is the way of history. In the name of this "realism," activists and intellectuals in the international community have simultaneously asserted themselves as pro-Palestinian, and yet taken it upon themselves to concede every fundamental right to which the Palestinian people lay

claim.

And perhaps a better understanding from Oscar Wilde:
"Thin-lipped Wisdom spoke at her from the worn chair, hinted at prudence, quoted from that book of cowardice whose author apes the name of common sense."
I certainly agree that people should be able to live wherever they want, but your caution that Palestinians should not demand what is theirs puts the lie to your own good sentiment. The demise of a Jewish supremacist state is a good thing, the only thing that will ensure secure lives for Jews, ironically. Democracies should have no tolerance for ethnic supremacism. Wrong in South Africa, wrong in "Israel".
Best,
Henry

Harry,
You've distorted my POV, created another and attributed it to me. You said: "Israel exists as a Jewish state, and of course has no right whatsoever to commit atrocities in our name and claim is has a fictitious "right" to do so. The question was whether you supported such a "right" If you think I support a right of israel to commit atrocities you have not heard a word I've said. Not only does Israel have no right to commit atrocities in "our name" it has no right to commit atrocities in any name. You also said: "Why not look to the dismantlement of Apartheid South Africa as the working model for a similar dismantlement of Jewish supremacism in Palestine?" You simply decided I haven't looked at S. Africa, which is false. I write about this kind of thinking in my book, how people on either side of the issue distort reality so it matches their unconscious attachment to and lack of understanding of their identity, be it as Jew or as someone who identifies himself as having the truth that nobody else is smart enough or wise enough to have. When this attachment is not inquired into it will always create conflict and suffering for oneself and others, regardless of how they perceive themselves. Rich

Jan. 10

I don't think I've distorted anything. But for clarity, then, please answer the question as asked: Do you support Israel's claimed right to exist as a Jewish state in Palestine?
ps
It's "Henry"

Henry,
i prefer Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state to continued conflict. I am not willing to sacrifice the lives of thousands of people, including the unborn for ideological stubborness and egoic demands. The only way for there to be any peace is for the U.S. president to get personally engaged and speak the truth about the occupation, to withdraw all aid to israel if israel will not pull out of the occ ter's and E. Jerusalem. But that will never happen in this society. Obama will not even admit to the fact that there is legitimate anger at US policy (esp regarding israel) on the part of Muslim terrorists, regardless of the way they express their anger. Thus, while Obama and the US Congress claim to be fighting a "war on terror" they are continually creating the conditions that inspire terror in the first place. It will take hundreds of years before the U.S. is intelligent enough to see what a destructive force it is in the world. Evolution is very slow and without a courageous and insightful leader who is willing to speak the truth there will be minuscule changes in consciousness and hundreds if not thousands of years will be necessary for real change The only thing that can get people to wake up is a catastrophic event. 9/11 had the potential but we had an emotionally disturbed spoiled brat in the White House. So, the only way for there to be a real peace is for the consciousness of people to change. As I claim, the issue is a spiritual one more than anything else. It is about people waking up and seeing the self and other destructiveness of their attachment to indoctrinated and divisive beliefs. My plan would be for a two state solution (because a one-state solution would lead to too much bloodshed) with a 5 to 10 yr period during which all schoolchildren in both countries must learn Hebrew and Arabic respectively, where all schools and society at large would engage in continual religious and cultural exchanges, where all grades in all schools would teach nonviolent communication and/or other courses that teach about the self-destructiveness of enemy images; where dialog groups between Israelis and Palestinians are common and where an accurate history of both peoples is taught in all schools. At the end of 5 to 10 yrs, hopefully, both people would see the wisdom of a single state.
I have noticed, esp here in Albq, that in general the most veteran of "human rights activists, of "pro-palestinian" workers, be they Jewish or not, are the most ideological. They are more interested in being right than in creating peace. Their egos demand they punish Israel by forcing a one-state solution. They are willing to hold out for one-state because that is the way "things should be," regardless of the human cost. If someone comes along with some wisdom on the issue, they are incapable of understanding it because they have self-images of themselves as leaders and they don't want their potential glory taken from them. They insist on a world of us against them; thus, along with the right wing and other Jews they co-create a world based on this primitive paradigm of conflict. Until they look within and examine their beliefs and images they will always only contribute to conflict, not peace. Rich

Jan. 11

Rich, you're amazing.
Three times through, and you've YET to answer my question. Try this one...
If we were around in 1941, would you have preferred Nazi Germany's claimed "right" to exist as a white, Aryan nation in Germany, Poland, etc.as opposed to continued conflict?
Best,
Henry
ps I agree with you about Obama, and can't wait to cast my next vote for Sarah Palin. Let's get the wolf in WOLF's clothing back in the White House ... Social change will not happen through the legislative process, you've identified that...

Henry,
I am not interested in catering to your obsession with casting the world as the enemy. Your need to prove to yourself that since other people do not agree with your great wisdom they are the enemy is not my problem. I also am not responsible for your inability to understand what i have to say. If you were really interested in peace rather than your own egoic demands you would find a way to understand where other people are coming from. Most importantly you would develop an interest in acquiring some degree of insight and self-understanding. RF

Rich,
re: "i prefer Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state to continued conflict."...
It should occur to you that the continued conflict you fear is caused EXACTLY by the existence (including the violent creation and violent maintenance) of a Jewish state imposed against the will of the indigenous population. Cure the disease, and the symptoms will likely vanish.
Jewish Zionists in the peace movement are my enemy, not the world, but thanks for the free psychological profile ... worth every penny.
Best,
Henry