October 13th, 2007 Posted in Press Releases, ISM Media Alerts, Jericho Region, Boycott & sanctions
October 13, 2007
For Immediate Release
ONEVOICE CONCERT CANCELLED DUE TO GRASSROOTS MOBILIZATION
Another Voice to hold alternate concert on October 18…
Another Voice is proud to have contributed towards the grassroots mobilization that has resulted in the cancellation of OneVoice’s event in Jericho on October 18th. We acknowledge the efforts of all the organizations and individuals that have played a role in generating awareness about the major problems with OneVoice’s campaign and how it undermines Palestinian rights, as well as OneVoice’s fraudulent listing of endorsers and unethical means of collecting signatures.
The problems with OneVoice’s campaign include, but are not limited to, failure to distinguish between occupier and occupied, implicit support of Israel’s retention of settlement blocks, apparent disregard for the refugees right of return, failure to mention of Israel’s illegal separation wall, and the absence of any reference to international law or human rights.
Most of the Arab artists have withdrawn their participation from the concert, including DAM Rap, Reem Talhami, Jamil Al Sayeh, and Al Asayel Group. In addition, many individuals and organizations that have been listed as endorsers, including Bishop Atallah Hanna, have pulled out upon closer examination of what OneVoice is all about. Furthermore, we have learned that several alleged endorsers, including President Mahmoud Abbas, were listed without their prior knowledge or consent. As for collecting signatures, the concert in effect serves as a bribe to the public, as concertgoers would be required to sign OneVoice’s mandate prior to entry.
Another Voice spokesperson Natasha Aruri stated, “A concert for peace is one thing, and asking people to sign away their basic human rights is another. The OneVoice campaign is deceptive, and the reaction of the Palestinian public was a natural result.”
OneVoice claims that the cancellation of their event was due to security issues. However, a source at the President’s Office affirmed that there were no problems regarding security arrangements. OneVoice founder Daniel Lubetzky also claims “threats of violence” by “extremists,” and that he did not want to “endanger people’s lives.” We are disturbed by this slander and challenge OneVoice to provide any evidence or information supporting these outrageous lies.
Another Voice is organizing a concert in Ramallah on October 18th, to sing and chant for freedom, justice, and true peace.
For more information, contact:
Natasha Aruri: +970-599-794-761
Huwaida Arraf: +972-547-473-308 / +970-599-130-426
Just what was the opposition to the One Voice movement? Their opposition was legitimate due to the "Ten Pillars of the One Voice Movement" which have magically disappeared from their site Note what Flo states HERE
HOWEVER, there is a PROBLEM, the link to the One Voice Ten Pillars which WAS there on October 11th (I linked to it and read it myself) is now GONE, POOF, vanished in the night off the One Voice website! Below Flo's statement ARE the Ten Pillars, courtesy of Shual
" After writing the One Voice media officer, here is an important document I got. I quote her:
“You can find the 10 pillars on our website at http://www.onevoicemovement.org/wps/wcm/resources/file/eb06e2420922ece/pillars.pdf (this is our original website, and we are still in the process of migrating all the information on it to the OneMillionVoices site which was only completed at the end of August 2007).”
Now check point 3: “Do you agree that any peace agreement will be based on the principle of evacuating the settlements, excluding settlement blocks? ”
So when you say “At the end of the day One Voice is on the right team and is working toward a noble goal”, I’m sorry but I beg to differ.
Check out their ‘10 pillars’, see how International Law is never mentioned, think through them and see if you still have the same opinion after that.One Voice Ten Pillars:
OneVoice Negotiations Referendum Proposals
1. Two states: Do you agree that there will be two viable states: Israel will be the state of the Jewish people and Palestine the state of the Palestinian people, each recognizing the other as such, both democratic and respecting human rights, including minority rights?
2. Borders: Do you agree that the 1967 borders are the basis for an Israeli-Palestinian agreement, modifications will accommodate territorial and security needs of both sides, while exchange of territories will be mutually agreed?
3. Settlements: Do you agree that any peace agreement will be based on the principle of evacuating the settlements, excluding settlement blocks?
4. End of occupation and terror: Do you agree that Israel shall completely end the occupation, within the context of a comprehensive peace agreement and a cessation of all terror and violence on both sides, at which time all political prisoners will also be released?
5. Security: Do you agree that the Palestinian state shall be demilitarized for an agreed upon period, but will posses a strong security force, and each state shall ensure that its territory is not used to threaten the security of the other?
6. Jerusalem: Do you agree that Arab East Jerusalem will be under Palestinian sovereignty while Jewish area will be under Israeli sovereignty, and that each State shall have the right to establish its capital within its sovereign territory, recognized by the other and internationally?
7. Holy Sites: Do you agree that both States will guarantee security, access and freedom of worship to all significant religious sites giving due regard to the established customs of each religion?
8. Refugees: Do you agree that no peaceful solution will be achieved without a solution to the Palestinian Refugees problem?
9. Education and reconciliation: Do you agree that, in order to build reciprocal understanding, education against incitement, terror, hatred, fear and racism should be an integral and enforceable element of the permanent agreement; that Palestine and Israel shall foster economic, social and cultural cooperation in order to improve the lives of their citizens; and that physical barriers should not serve as an obstacle for this?
10. End of Conflict: Do you agree that a permanent peace agreement shall constitute the end of the conflict, and mutual claims and must be implemented and democratically approved?
Lies and Threats Savaging Truth, Palestinian Cause and Opportunity for Change
12 days ago a slanderous press release was launched by a fringe group that sparked rumors that OneVoice Palestine exists to negotiate away the rights of refugees and international law. OneVoice’s teams here come together to categorically deny this and expose the fact that some Palestinians have been misled by a sinister campaign of hate, coupled with vicious threats of violence from extremists that have spiraled out of control.
The call to boycott the One Voice movement concert can be found HERE
Press Release, PACBI, Oct 4, 2007
On 18 October, One Million Voices, an organization led by Israelis and international figures with the support of some Palestinians, is organizing a public event in Jericho and Tel Aviv, simultaneously. The event will include performances by renowned artists Bryan Adams and Ilham Madfa'i. As stated on the organization's English webpage, the objective of the event is to "mark the first time that massive numbers of Israelis and Palestinians gather simultaneously to unite against violent extremism."
According to the widely accepted boycott criteria advocated by the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI), the event falls under the category of normalization projects and violates the call for boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS), endorsed by over 170 Palestinian civil society organizations, trade unions, political parties, and grassroots movements, for the following reasons:
1. Participants are required to join the One Voice Movement and sign a mandate -- ostensibly based on a "two-state solution," but without any commitment to international parameters -- which assumes equal responsibility of "both sides" for the "conflict," and suspiciously fails to call for Israel's full compliance with its obligations under international law through ending its illegal military occupation, its denial of Palestinian refugee rights (particularly the right of return), and its system of racial discrimination against its own Palestinian citizens.We believe this event is being organized to promote a "peace" agreement that is devoid of the minimal requirements of justice, and that will leave the Palestinian people as disenfranchised as previous agreements have. The unfortunate and harmful support of Palestinian businessmen, religious and political figures, among others, for this event indicates either ignorance of the hidden agenda inherent in the whole initiative, deceptively camouflaged as a collective call for peace, or willingness to forfeit the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people in return for advancing selfish interests.
2. The event is sponsored by Israeli institutions (mostly from the private sector) and endorsed by mainstream Israeli political figures from parties including the Likud, Labour and Shas. These Israeli "partners" are unquestionably complicit in maintaining Israel 's occupation and other forms of oppression.
We call on the Palestinian public and international supporters of a just peace in Palestine not to take part in this public relations charade that conceals a misleading political program that falls significantly short of international law tenets and the Palestinian national program.
We call on Arab and Palestinian artists, in particular, not to participate in this or any similar event whose real objectives have nothing to do with genuine peace.
We call on Palestinian board members of the One Million Voices to withdraw their support for this movement that only serves to blind the Palestinian public and sidetrack it from struggling, with the solidarity of its international supporters, for its UN-sanctioned rights, for justice, equality and freedom.
This call has been endorsed by tens of cultural and other civil society organizations in Palestine and the Arab World.
At the end of the day, I must say I agree 100% with Flo and the call to boycott the One Voice concert. I truly have to ask what the purpose of this campaign was because what it offered was empty rhetoric in the mandate which was offered to sign in endorsement with down right AWFUL offerings in the Ten Pillars which were NOT listed on the page where you signed the mandate, which is MISLEADING to say the least. Keeping settlement blocks complete with the apparatus to support them? I DON"T THINK SO. How can you keep settlement blocks complete with the apparatus to sustain them and have ANY semblance of a contiguous state? The answer is that you cannot. It is a noble gesture to get people together, but this One Voice movement in my eyes was destined to ruination from the beginning by choosing to decieve.
UPDATE: While continuing to have a conversation HERE, I was given some important information concerning the One Voice process. When I attempted to respond to that information, the owner and moderator of Conflict Blotter, Charles Levinson "moderated" my comment out of existance. Funny how things go POOF in the night concerning even discussion of this subject. Below is the information provided to me HERE as well as my comment back:
Montag, 15. Oktober 2007
RESULTS FROM THE 3rd ROUND of CITIZEN NEGOTIATIONS September 2004
From the throes of chaos and despair, a clear message from the Israeli and Palestinian people is emerging: deep thirst for a working compromise. Below is a summary of results from the third round of citizen negotiations that culminated this summer with over 113,000 participants, the largest-ever aggregation of
ordinary citizens to jointly and actively forge a mandate on how to resolve the conflict.
Consensus Emerges During Third Round of Citizen Negotiations
Citizens' Feedback Yields Broader Support for Key Proposals
Breakthrough Agreement on Settlements
More Pragmatism in Palestinian Villages and Refugee camps than in cities
Consensus Emerges During Third Round of OneVoice Palestinian-Israeli Citizen Negotiations. Escalating tensions and violence provoked by a minority of extremists have thus far obfuscated the will of the silent majority. And yet, amidst unbearable pain, voices from the ground are clearly demanding a resolution to the conflict. In the latest round of public negotiations, citizen negotiators achieved consensus on all ten issues before them. Over 40,000 Israelis and Palestinians participated in this third round, for an aggregate total of 113,000 (58,000 Palestinian, 55,000 Israeli). Overall a trend towards increased consensus was noticeable among this round of citizen negotiations, though on some proposals the consensus slightly decreased.
73% of Israelis and Palestinians affirmed the proposal on „Two States for two peoples" in this round, compared to 75.6% in the second round. Proposals on „Holy Sites‟, "End to Terror and Occupation, and „Education and Reconciliation all continued to receive high supportabove 70%. Proposals on Security, and „End of Conflict" received support above 63%. But sharp increases in overall consensus were noticeable on some of the thorniest issues, including on Jerusalem (59% support vs. 50% in the prior round), Borders (68% support vs. 63% in the prior round), and
most remarkably on Settlements, (65% support vs. 40% average support in the prior round). Detailed breakdowns below.
Citizens' Feedback Yields Broader Support for Key Proposals. The content of most proposals remained unchanged, though some changes were made to the Settlements and
Borders proposals at negotiations among Israeli and Palestinian experts last summer where the feedback from the prior round was analyzed.
The OneVoice methodology allows citizens not just to register their votes but actually to influence and mold the language of the proposals in question. In other words, the interactive and iterative nature of the popular negotiations provides the people a chance to influence the content on which they are voting. This is one of the greatest strengths of the process: that the content of the proposals gathers unassailable moral authority as it is forged through a participatory democratic process that broadens consensus as popular feedback is integrated.
Breakthrough Agreement on Settlement Language: Specifically on the Settlement proposal, the prior formulation had gained little traction with the Palestinian population, and citizens on both sides had complained it was not clear or specific enough. The language was firmed up to clarify that “settlements will be evacuated and that land exchanges along the borders will permit inclusion of a limited number of settlement blocks.” Whereas only 23% of Palestinians supported the Settlements proposal in the second round, 67.8% of Palestinians supported it in the third round (and 32.2% disapproved). Israeli numbers were not significantly affected (support in the second round was 65%, and decreased slightly to 62% in the third round). In addition to clearer language that the people suggested, training was enhanced so field workers could better explain the OneVoice methodology and clarify the content: that all settlements would be evacuated, with the exception that a small number of settlement blocks along the border could be incorporated by Israel in exchange for agreed-on land swaps, close to the Clinton Camp David parameters, which ultimately met majority approval from both sides.
More Pragmatism in Palestinian Villages and Refugee camps than in big cities: Almost across the board, Palestinian voters living in refugee camps and small villages were more conciliatory than those living in larger cities. For example, the settlement proposal was affirmed by only 58% of Palestinians living in cities, compared to 70.4% living in villages, and 72.9% living in refugee camps. The proposal to „End Occupation and Terror‟(Do you agree that Israels hould completely end the occupation, within the context of a comprehensive peace agreement and a cessation of all terror and violence on both sides, at which time all political prisoners will also be released?)" received 75.9% support in cities, 79.8% support in villages and 88% affirmation in refugee camps. Dr.Fathi Darwish, OneVoice Palestinian Executive Director stated that „This highlights the importance of involving the people in the camps and the villages, who have been neglected and ignored in the past. They want a better future with dignity for everyone. They are part of the solution.” Voters in Qalqilya, Tulkarem ,and Jenin were consistently more pragmatic than average. On „Two States", 75.3% of Jenin residents, 94.5% in Tulkarem, and 84.8% of Qalqilyians affirmed, compared to the Palestinian average of 72%. Palestinians in Bethlehem and Jericho proved more recalcitrant (59.7% and 53.3% respectively affirming it). On the critical Settlements Proposal, an average 67.8% of Palestinians supported it, compared to 78.9% in Tulkarem, 76.2% in Qalqilya, 61% in Bethlehem, 62% in Hebron, 64.7% in Salfeet, 68.1% in Ramallah, and 63.5% in Jenin.
Palestinian residents of East Jerusalem were most pragmatic on some issues but more intransigent on others. They approved proposals on Two States (85.4%), Borders (81.9%), and End to Occupation and Terror (85%) overwhelmingly, but only 54.3% approved the Settlements proposal and 55% the Jerusalem Proposal, below the Palestinian average of 64.9%. While OneVoice does its utmost to provide a balanced voting process among all voters, it is possible and likely that District leaders and field outreach supervisors influence where their volunteers do their canvassing so the above cannot be considered authoritative samples. While the above data is useful, the fundamental goal of OneVoice is not to provide survey data, but to engage citizens on the ground in thinking through these issues and vesting them with the power and responsibility to negotiate with themselves and learn the art of
More resuls at C21.
MY COMMENT WHICH WAS NOT PUBLISHED:
Robin // Oct 15, 2007 at 5:15 pm
Thank you Shual, I really appreciate you giving that information to clear up my misunderstandings of the One Voice process. Here’s my sincere concern ESPECIALLY in light of the last paragraph of the link you provided:
Palestinian residents of East Jerusalem were most pragmatic on some issues but more intransigent on others. They approved proposals on Two States (85.4%), Borders (81.9%), and End to Occupation and Terror (85%) overwhelmingly, but only 54.3% approved the Settlements proposal and 55% the Jerusalem Proposal, below the Palestinian average of 64.9%. While OneVoice does its utmost to provide a balanced voting process among all voters, it is possible and LIKELY that District leaders and field outreach supervisors influence where their volunteers do their canvassing so the above
CANNOT be considered authoritative samples. While the above data is useful, the fundamental goal of OneVoice is not to provide survey data, but to engage citizens on the ground in thinking through these issues and vesting them with the power and responsibility to negotiate with themselves and learn the art of
So that statement is saying in fact, that manipulation of the balloting process is LIKELY.
That is VERY telling don’t you think? The thing that concerns me is that this concert was being promoted as the CLIMAX of this process, a sort of “see, all these peaceful Palestinians signed on to this agreement” and as clear, it is LIKELY it was manipulated, then at the concert they whip out the “Pillars” and say “See, PEACEFUL Palestinians agree to settlement blocks being left, they said NOTHING about the ROR and here you go, this is what they want” when it is a SHAM to begin with. Some updates, the folks at OV are claiming threats made the concert close down, giving NO PROOF http://www.onemillionvoices.org/news/#ovStatement1
and the folks at ISM are saying this
Now keep in mind, it was PACBI which called for the boycott, and I sincerely believe it was legitimate given the hidden agenda of OV and the manner in which support was garnered.
It’s just a REAL shame in my mind, because if the whole process would have been above board, then it would have had a much better chance of success, because those on both sides who seek PEACE, their voice must be heard, but JUSTICE simply CANNOT be tossed to the side and using VICTIMS of this injustice in the manner it seems to be apparent is just WRONG.
Please Shual, I invite you sincerely to correct me if you think I still misunderstand.
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
UPDATE: Conflict Blotter after 24 hours and two other comments being posted while mine was "awaiting moderation" HAS published my comment. THANK YOU because I am TRULY trying to understand this issue