Here, please post your commentary (max 300 words) on a series of "the Mind of Peace Experiment" seminar to be held at the Community Room of David Adamany Undergradaute Library from May 21 to 24, 2009.
"The Mind of Peace Experiment", Response By:Antoinette Golston
I thougt that the Mind of Peace Experiment was very interesting. It was fascinating hearing opinions directly stated by the Palestine and Israel people. The object of this Peace Conference was an attempt to bring the citizens a level for a common future. The question at hand was, Can the Israel and Palestine Citizens ever come to some type of bond and live together in the same civilization in peace and harmony? The Mind of Peace making experiment was first tried out in St. Louis first. The Experiment in Peace Making vision is to involve and establish public negotiating congress to discuss and debate. A scholar by the name of Sapir Handelman outlined all of this for the people in the debate as well as the audience in the conference room. This conference was set up for about four to five meetings. The first mission was for the two sides to come with an agreement confidence of measure, and of violence (attack, 5 sessions to reach a peace agreement secret diplomacy. The mediator, Sapir Handelman stated that it was important to keep in mind respect. Respect each other, that they all had the same blood, to be an active listener, be open minded, and try to understand the other side. He also reminded each side that they were trying to find a civilized process. That destiny allowed them to live together, and that there was no way to eliminate either sides. One of the participants in the debate said that most of their problems are because of medlers. There were outside people medeling within their negotiations. One of Isaac Barr's point of view was that the Holy Land will ultimately make the decisions, and their the one's who will have to face the consequences. The mediator posed the question, "How do we suspend the violence?" Isaac suggested that this was too long of a process, and that violence was apart of the process that cannot be ignored. "Although there are many forms of peace, poverty is the violence against the oppressed, placing restrains" (Basima Farahat). Most of the Palestine participants felt as if Occupation is violence. Israel not letting refugees come back is still violence. When will they be able to return to the Holy Land. Another concern of the Palestines' were the starting points. They felt as if the check points should be lifted. And because of these check points the Palestines were oppressed. The Palestines fill as if this is against their Human Rights. The Israel does not want to lift the check points because of the fear of violence and destruction. I thought that the two sides were off to a good start. You could fill the tension from both sides of the room. Both sides were laying out their hearts and desires. Some people were real emotional and let their personal battles get the best of them when either sides were negotiating. In society I believe that you cannot eliminate violence. Violence is a problem and it is increasingly rising as the day goes by. However, if people want to try to live together they need to start being active listeners and actually take the other sides position into consideration. There has to be some type of give and take with any thing in life. This was a very interesting conference and I only wished that I have witnessed the ending results. This to me was a close up experience of real- life politics.
"The Mind of Peace Experiment", Response
ReplyDeleteBy:Antoinette Golston
I thougt that the Mind of Peace Experiment was very interesting. It was fascinating hearing opinions directly stated by the Palestine and Israel people. The object of this Peace Conference was an attempt to bring the citizens a level for a common future. The question at hand was, Can the Israel and Palestine Citizens ever come to some type of bond and live together in the same civilization in peace and harmony? The Mind of Peace making experiment was first tried out in St. Louis first. The Experiment in Peace Making vision is to involve and establish public negotiating congress to discuss and debate. A scholar by the name of Sapir Handelman outlined all of this for the people in the debate as well as the audience in the conference room.
This conference was set up for about four to five meetings. The first mission was for the two sides to come with an agreement confidence of measure, and of violence (attack, 5 sessions to reach a peace agreement secret diplomacy. The mediator, Sapir Handelman stated that it was important to keep in mind respect. Respect each other, that they all had the same blood, to be an active listener, be open minded, and try to understand the other side. He also reminded each side that they were trying to find a civilized process. That destiny allowed them to live together, and that there was no way to eliminate either sides.
One of the participants in the debate said that most of their problems are because of medlers. There were outside people medeling within their negotiations. One of Isaac Barr's point of view was that the Holy Land will ultimately make the decisions, and their the one's who will have to face the consequences. The mediator posed the question, "How do we suspend the violence?" Isaac suggested that this was too long of a process, and that violence was apart of the process that cannot be ignored. "Although there are many forms of peace, poverty is the violence against the oppressed, placing restrains" (Basima Farahat).
Most of the Palestine participants felt as if Occupation is violence. Israel not letting refugees come back is still violence. When will they be able to return to the Holy Land. Another concern of the Palestines' were the starting points. They felt as if the check points should be lifted. And because of these check points the Palestines were oppressed. The Palestines fill as if this is against their Human Rights. The Israel does not want to lift the check points because of the fear of violence and destruction.
I thought that the two sides were off to a good start. You could fill the tension from both sides of the room. Both sides were laying out their hearts and desires. Some people were real emotional and let their personal battles get the best of them when either sides were negotiating. In society I believe that you cannot eliminate violence. Violence is a problem and it is increasingly rising as the day goes by. However, if people want to try to live together they need to start being active listeners and actually take the other sides position into consideration. There has to be some type of give and take with any thing in life. This was a very interesting conference and I only wished that I have witnessed the ending results. This to me was a close up experience of real- life politics.
Good. Thanks!
ReplyDelete