Refutation of False Claims Circulated on the Internet in Regard to Dr. Marc Gafni

Where There is Smoke There is Fire vs. Where There is Smoke There is Smoke Bomb

We live at a time where our online information ecology is broken, for that reason we are providing you with a multiple of links to help clarify any issues that might arise if you’re searching online and run into controversial claims regarding Dr. Gafni.

It’s of course also worth exploring Dr. Gafni’s work and teachings directly:

In general, the woke position is that one side is right and the other wrong, or that truth is somewhere in the middle. Often the assumption is that there is a perpetrator and a victim, or more often a set of victims.  And that, where is smoke there is fire.

That is sometimes the case.

But it is also often not the case.

Indeed, there are often false complaints, made by men and women, false claims of patterns of behaviour, which are in fact what cognitive psychology calls false pattern recognition, and deliberate false flag attempts to falsify events, generally motivated by sets of hidden agendas.

In the Marc Gafni story for example, a careful investigation discloses that there were active hidden third parties orchestrating the events behind the scenes, encouraging the presentations of claims that were deliberately false. In other words, the issue is not hurt persons making confused or false claims, but bad actors deliberately falsifying events.

The history of what are called false flag events, encouraged by perpetrators disguised as rescuers or victims is well documented.

That is a major part of what happened in the false claims against Marc Gafni.

All forms of malice and violations of integrity, justice and love take place under the fig leaf of victim advocacy. Indeed, as a wise man once wrote, “Malice must never admit of itself so it always pleads other motives.”  

The advent of the internet and social media has generated new playbooks for the organizing of public attacks.

In 2015 the core persons involved in organizing and supporting the false claims against Gafni in 2006, encouraged and helped organized another round in their smear campaign.

At that time Gafni penned a short article, Eight Steps for Crowd Sourcing a Witch Hunt which is instructive in exposing the playbook behind these kind of internet campaigns.

Clarifying the facts is crucial. There is no love without that clarification. And often the greatest lie is that the truth is somewhere in the middle.

Part One: Introduction

  1. Gafni and his students and colleagues have taken the unusual and courageous step of organizing an entire website and publishing a full book sharing both how the smear campaign against Gafni replete with false claims was undertaken, who was behind it, and how to identify and stand against these dynamics in public culture, for the sake of integrity and love.

    https://www.whoismarcgafni.com/

    https://www.marcgafni.com/resp/

  1. This link includes a list of links to videos made by Dr. Gafni, that engage the fact pattern of the story, and then in playlist four ‘Truth, Abuse, and Malice in the Marc Gafni Story’ and playlist five ‘False Complaints about Marc Gafni’, the broader patterns of how these dynamics are organized in public culture.
  2. Before looking at these sources it is important to note, that after being falsely attacked, and experiencing what might be fairly described as unbearable suffering, Gafni in his first public reappearance in 2008, published a public letter, taking responsibility for any part that what his in the dynamics that allowed for the emergence of the false claims. That letter also appears below in number 14.In Gafni’s words, “There is almost always a contribution system in every situation. Even if we are truly victims, – we are 95 percent innocent, falsely attacked and hurt beyond measure, we still must always inquire, ‘what is my five percent in this dynamic?’. And then we should take a hundred percent responsibility for our five percent. Having said that, if we are fundamentally innocent of claims made against us, we must, for the sake of love and justice, first establish our innocence and not give in to the intense desire to take the much more ‘politically correct’ and often politically advantageous route, of falsely taking responsibility for the that which is not our responsibility. Earlier in my life I personally made the terrible mistake for taking responsibility for that which was a hundred percent not mine. The sin of taking too much responsibility, motivated by fear, the desire to not be ostracized, internal shock and confusion in response to betrayal, to be politically correct or expedient, is a great sin against love.  I committed that sin of taking responsibility that was not mine in 2006 which I deeply regret and for which I deeply apologize.”
  3. However once facts have been established—when that is possible which is often not—only then should we turn and see what, if anything, is our responsibility in the contribution system that created the dynamics that allowed false claims and attacks to take place. Again, in Gafni’s words, “And if we have even five percent in the contribution system then we should take one hundred percent responsibility for that five percent.”

    Part Two: Resources In Regard to Dr. Marc Gafni

  4. Here is a one-page letter by Ken Wilber, leading philosopher and ethicist affirming his partnership with Dr. Gafni after looking into these issues.
  5. Here is a joint one-page letter by Sally Kempton, leading teacher of feminine spirituality, and Ken Wilber together affirming the false nature of the claims.
  6. This is a podcast with Dr. Gafni, his partner Dr. Kristina Kincaid and Aubrey Marcus entitled Healing the Wounds of Culture.
  7. In 2011, leading feminist spiritual teacher Sally Kempton published an article entitled “Who Is Marc Gafni?,” which is also perhaps worth reading.The facts of this claim have been refuted by in multiple articles based on extensive research, for example a thorough refutation by Chahat Corten et al called Social Murder on the Internet,which appears on Medium.com.
  8. There are multiple essays on the web by leading figures which refute the false claims and provide a context for how they emerged. Here is one set of articles. Injustice via the Internet: Myths, Facts, & Smear Campaigns in the Marc Gafni Story.
  9. The claims made in 2006 have been refuted in multiple well researched articles. Each of them cites extensive primary source material. This is a link to one article “The Hidden Story of the Marc Gafni Smear Campaign and the People Who Want Him Dead”, by Clint Fuhs.This particular author was directly or through his close colleagues directly in touch or examined extensive written digital records from virtually all the parties involved. These written digital records were deliberated deleted by some of the parties and were recovered forensically at great expense and effort. The recovered records fully clear Gafni of the false claims.This is only one of multiple articles of this nature, they are all written by serious, highly credible authors. Many of the other articles can be found at WhoIsMarcGafni.com and here on Marcgafni.com.
  10. Personal Responsibility and Apology: Gafni has responded to and refuted the false claims that were made, and he took a polygraph test with the leading polygraph expert in the United States which validates his refutation of the false claims circulated on the internet in 2006.
  11. There were never any police complaints registered, that itself was part of the lie told at the time.See this legal letter by attorney-in-law Nitsa Cohen.
  12. Marc has explained clearly why he wrote the letter in 2006 (which Tomer cites) several days after the false claims exploded on the internet. It is worth reading that explanation in a piece called “Why I Signed That Letter”.
  13. Marc himself responded directly to the false complaints seventeen years ago, his response has been posted in the public space for that long. Included in Marc’s response is both a refutation of the false claims as well as an apology from Marc, written and posted by Marc in 2007, for any part he played in fostering the dynamics which created this situation.
  14. As the Dr. Fuhs article cited above points out, there were key political and personal shadow figures behind the scenes who were directly involved in organizing the false complaints, each with their own personal or political agenda. There is extensive documentation on this, some of this was made public, and is referred to in the article by Dr. Fuhs above, other pieces have not been made public.
  15. Marc has long offered to sit in directly mediated conversation in which evidence is gathered and evaluated in order to resolve this issue and create deep and appropriate healing and resolution for all injured parties, including Marc himself, his children, and many others. Marc has made that offer on countless occasions, both in private and public communications, the offer has always been ignored.
  16. The fact that we look to resolve these issues in social media posts, instead of face-to-face communication and conversation, clear research and investigation, is itself tragic. If we can’t sit and talk to each other directly, share information, evaluate information, create integrity, justice and healing on all sides, how can we ever expect for the resolution of larger and far more serious conflicts that threaten both Israel and the world.
  17. It is worth listening to playlist 4, which explores some of the core dynamics that underlie the arising of these kind of internet trials in public culture.
  18. In 2007-8 Marc published personal reflections, and although his thoughts and feelings have undoubtedly evolved significantly since then, it is nevertheless worth reading. The reflections are but a glimpse of his more personal intimate experience at the time when the false claims that which shattered his life were being actively circulated.