Article asked on this date

You have found the article

Dagelijks archief 11 maart 2017

Netherlands branded ‘Nazi remnants’ by Erdogan, as Turkey FM barred from entry

President of Turkey Recep Tayyip Erdogan speaks in a press conference in Manisa province of Turkey on 24th February [Kayhan Özer/Anadolu Agency]

President of Turkey Recep Tayyip Erdogan speaks in a press conference in Manisa province of Turkey on 24th February

The Netherlands barred Turkey’s Foreign Minister from flying to Rotterdam today and President Recep Tayyip Erdogan responded by calling his NATO partner a “Nazi remnant” as a row over Ankara campaigning among emigre Turkish voters intensified.

Rotterdam had banned Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu from attending a Turkish rally in support of Erdogan’s drive for reforming Turkey’s democracy into an executive presidency, to be put to a referendum next month.

The Dutch are due to vote in a national election on Wednesday, in which anti-immigration sentiment has played a prominent role with nationalist candidate Geert Wilders calling Erdogan a dictator.

Cavusoglu had said this morning he would fly to Rotterdam anyway and accused the Dutch of treating Turkish citizens in the country like “hostages”.

“I sent them so they could contribute to your economy…They’re not your captives,” he told CNN Turk television.

“If my going will increase tensions, let it be. What damage will my going have on them? I am a foreign minister and I can go wherever I want,” he said before the Dutch barred his flight.

Cavusoglu had threatened harsh economic and political sanctions if the Dutch refused him entry, a threat that proved decisive for the Netherlands government.

It cited public order and security concerns in withdrawing landing rights for Cavusoglu’s flight. But it said the sanctions threat made the search for a reasonable solution impossible.

Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte said that while the Netherlands and Turkey could search for “an acceptable solution”, Turkey was not respecting the rules relating to public gatherings.

“Many Dutch people with a Turkish background are authorised to vote in the referendum over the Turkish constitution. The Dutch government does not have any protest against gatherings in our country to inform them about it,” he said on Facebook.

“But these gatherings may not contribute to tensions in our society and everyone who wants to hold a gathering is obliged to follow instructions of those in authority so that public order and safety can be guaranteed,” Rutte added.

Spillover fear

Four planned Turkish rallies in Austria and one in Switzerland have also been cancelled in the dispute.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel, whose country Erdogan compared last week with Nazi Germany, has said she will do everything possible to prevent any spillover of Turkish political tensions onto German soil.

Cavusoglu said Turks in Germany were under systematic pressure from police and intelligence services.

Erdogan is looking to the large number of emigre Turks living in Europe, especially Germany and the Netherlands, to help clinch victory in next month’s referendum which will shape the future of a country whose position on the edge of the Middle East makes it of crucial strategic importance to NATO.

He has cited domestic threats from Kurdish and Islamist militants and a July coup bid as cause to vote “yes” to his new powers. But he has also drawn on the emotionally charged row with Europe to portray Turkey as betrayed by allies, facing wars on its southern borders and in need of strong leadership.

“Listen Netherlands, you’ll jump once, you’ll jump twice, but my people will thwart your game,” Erdogan said. “You can cancel our foreign minister’s flight as much as you want, but let’s see how your flights come to Turkey now.”

“They don’t know diplomacy or politics. They are Nazi remnants. They are fascists.”

Erdogan chafes at Western criticism of his mass arrests and dismissals of people authorities believe were linked to a failed July attempt by the military to topple him.

Cavusoglu made a veiled threat of possible realignment of Turkey in the world in a reference to Russia.

“The Netherlands should stop this faulty understanding and approach…If they think Turkey will take whatever they do, that Turkey is gone. I told them this, stop this boss-like attitude. If Europe keeps this up, they will lose many places, including Russia and us.”

(Source / 11.03.2017)

Palestinian injured prisoner suffers serious health deterioration

Jihad Hamad

The Palestinian injured prisoner Jihad Hamad, 19, suffers from a very difficult health condition, rights sources revealed on Saturday.

Following his visit to Israel’s Hadassah Ein Karem Hospital, lawyer of the Palestinian Prisoners Society (PPS) said that Hamad is still suffering from head injuries.

The lawyer pointed out that he remained unconscious after he underwent a medical surgery.

However, he is now in stable condition, he said.

Hamad was arrested earlier yesterday after being injured in the head with a live bullet when clashes broke out with Israeli forces in the village of Silwad in the central occupied West Bank district of Ramallah.

(Source / 11.03.2017)

Gazans march in protest of Israel’s approval of Adhan ban bill

Gaza protest Adhan ban wet

Hamas Movement organized Friday evening in Rafah city to the south of Gaza Strip a popular march in protest against Israeli Knesset’s initial approval of Adhan ban bill.

The protesters held placards condemning the recent approval by the Israeli Knesset to ban the Muslim call to prayer from playing over loudspeakers within the Green Line and in occupied Jerusalem.

The leader in Hamas Movement Mansour Breik strongly condemned the Israeli new escalation and considered it provocative and a violation against the freedom of Muslims.

Banning the Muslim call to prayer (Adhan) is a denial of Islam and Muslims’ doctrine, he said.

“We will stand by all possible means against this bill”, he warned, calling on the Palestinian people to confront such escalation.

Banning the Muslim call to prayer is a red line for all Muslims around the world, he concluded.

(Source / 11.03.2017)

Saudi airstrike kills 22 civilians in Yemen

People attend the funeral ceremony for the Yemeni Army's deputy chief of staff Major General Ahmad Saif Al Yafii, under tight security measures in Aden, Yemen on February 24, 2017. Ahmad Saif Al Yafii, was killed by a heat-seeking missile on the outskirts of the coastal town of Mokha during clashes with Houthi militias [Wail Qubati / Anadolu Agency]

People attend the funeral ceremony for the Yemeni Army’s deputy chief of staff Major General Ahmad Saif Al Yafii, under tight security measures in Aden, Yemen on February 24, 2017

At least 22 civilians were killed yesterday and dozens wounded when a Saudi-led coalition airstrike hit a market in western Yemen causing a fire to break out, a local official said.

Missiles launched by fighter jets of the Arab alliance hit a market selling the narcotic leaf qat, which is popular among Yemenis, near the Red Sea fishing town of Khoukha.

Rescue workers on Friday night were battling a blaze in the market caused by the attack and pulling bodies out of the rubble some of which were burnt beyond recognition, according to Hashim Azazi, deputy governor of Hodeidah province.

“All of those killed were civilians, none were holding weapons,” said Azazi.

A coalition spokesperson was not immediately available to comment.

Khoukha and the nearby city of Hodeidah are controlled by Iran-allied Houthi fighters who in 2014 overran Yemen’s capital Sana’a and forced the Saudi-backed government of President Abd Rabbuh Mansour Hadi to flee into exile.

Yemeni government forces backed by Gulf Arab troops recaptured control of the southern Red Sea city of Al-Mokha last month in a push that paved the way for an advance on Hodeidah, the country’s main port city.

The fighting on Yemen’s west coast has displaced nearly 50,000 people in the last six weeks among them children suffering from malnutrition forced to live in schools and in tents on streets, a United Nations refugee agency spokesman told a news briefing in Geneva on Friday.

The blocking of main roads by warring parties is hampering humanitarian access to those in need.

“The incident at Khawkhah resulted in a number of civilian deaths and injuries. We’re deeply saddened by this tragic loss of life,” UNHCR spokeswoman for Yemen Shabia Mantoo told Reuters.

The Saudi-led coalition was formed in 2015 to fight the Houthis and troops loyal to former President Ali Abdullah Saleh who have fired missiles into neighbouring Saudi Arabia.

Friday’s attacks were the latest in a series of coalition-led strikes that have hit schools, hospitals, markets and private homes. The Houthis themselves have fired missiles at extensive civilian targets throughout not only Yemen, but also Saudi Arabia, killing many.

In December, the coalition acknowledged that it had made “limited use” of British-made cluster bombs, but said it had stopped using them.

Nearly half of Yemen’s 22 provinces are on the verge of famine, according to the UN World Food Programme, as a result of the war that has drawn in regional rivals Iran and Saudi Arabia.

(Source / 11.03.2017)

Hamas set to recognize Palestine on 1967 borders, but not Israel

PALESTINOW.COM — Hamas is formulating a new outline of its policies, which will reportedly include an acceptance in principle of Palestine within the 1967 borders but not a recognition of Israel. According to reports, the document will also state that the organization was not a part of the Muslim Brotherhood.

According to the London-based Asharq al-Awsat newspaper, sources in Hamas say that officials from the organization’s political bureau, Chairman Khaled Meshal and his deputy Ismail Haniyeh, as well as other officials from the military and political leadership, were involved in formulating and amending the document, which is still being worked on. Final approval is expected at the end of this month or early next month, when the Hamas internal elections for the political bureau and Shura Council conclude.

The report says the document will make clear that Hamas is an independent organization not tied to the Muslim Brotherhood, and this will help it in its contacts with the Egyptian authorities who are demanding that Hamas be fully disconnected from the Muslim Brotherhood, which is banned in Egypt.

Hamas officials believe acceptance of the principle of a Palestinian state with the 1967 borders will help it break the boycott from foreign countries and international organizations.

Sources in Hamas say that the document will define the fight against Israel as a fight against the occupation and not against Jews, whereas the organization’s platform that was passed 29 years ago defined Hamas as an extension of the Muslim Brotherhood in Palestine, defined the Palestinian issue as a religious issue and said that the struggle was against the Jews.

An official with the political wing of Hamas in Gaza told Haaretz that the document that will be approved in the coming weeks will not present new positions, but will summarize positions and principles that came up over the last few years, in the talks for reconciliation and understandings with the other various Palestinian factions, and in the talks with Egypt and other Arab countries.

(Source / 11.03.2017)

Injured young man arrested by IOF during clashes east of Ramallah

Clashes Silwad

The Israeli occupation forces (IOF) on Friday evening arrested a wounded young man during violent clashes with local youths in Silwad town, east of Ramallah in the West Bank.

Eyewitnesses said a young man was arrested by soldiers after he suffered a bullet injury in his head during skirmishes in Silwad.

They added that another young man also suffered a bullet injury during the events.

The identities of the two young men are still unknown.

Two other young men identified as Majdi Abu Rahma and Issa Abu Rahma were arrested during the clashes that broke out with soldiers after the latter attacked the weekly anti-wall march of Bil’in west of Ramallah.

In a separate incident, anonymous persons detonated homemade explosive devices and firecrackers at Israeli soldiers and their vehicles in at-Tur town, east of Occupied Jerusalem.

There is still no information if the attack caused injuries among the soldiers.

(Source / 11.03.2017)

IOF kidnaps brother of female martyr west of Bethlehem

Broer Amani Sabatin opgepakt

The Israeli occupation forces (IOF) on Saturday morning kidnapped the brother of martyr Amani Sabatin from his home in Husan village, west of Bethlehem in the West Bank.

Local sources told the Palestinian Information Center (PIC) that Israeli soldiers broke into and ransacked the house of 41-year-old Adnan Sabatin, and confiscated cellphones and one laptop.

Adnan is the brother of Amani, a courageous woman who was killed by Israeli soldiers about one year ago after she allegedly carried out a car-ramming attack at Etzion junction, south of Bethlehem.

(Source / 11.03.2017)

Israeli police arrest Palestinian novelist

Khalida Ghusha opgepakt

Israeli police forces arrested Saturday morning the Palestinian novelist Khalida Ghusha from her house in occupied Jerusalem.

Local sources affirmed that Khalida was detained for issuing a novel attacking collaborators with the Israeli occupation.

Palestinian academics have been targeted by Israeli forces under flimsy pretexts including incitement.

(Source / 11.03.2017)

There are no safe spaces for Palestinians in Israel

An experience of a Palestinian at an Israeli university who is automatically looked at as a suspect in the eyes of the occupation authorities.

I certainly learned something from this incident: that law enforcement authorities are indeed frightened of the camera

By Yaser abu-Areesha

An experience of a Palestinian at an Israeli university who is automatically looked at as a suspect in the eyes of the occupation authorities.

I never thought I would find myself, one sunny afternoon, pressed against a police car on the grounds of Tel-Aviv University, where I study and work, with a police officer clutching my hands tightly behind my back. I was not in that situation because I had taken part in a demonstration, but because I had refused a demand from the university’s security staff to produce my ID while on campus.

On Tuesday, a few minutes before starting work at the university, I noticed a police car parked on the school grounds. An officer got out, accompanied by four university security staff, approached a man sitting on a bench nearby, and tried to arrest him. This is a rare, almost surreal sight at the university, given that it is supposed to have a level of autonomy that keeps the campus free of police involvement. As such, when I saw the police, I instinctively started filming them on my phone.

Almost immediately, a university security guard came and asked me why I was filming. I replied that it was my right to do so. Presumably feeling that his ego had been hurt, he asked me to identify myself. I refused. I also refused to identify myself to his supervisor and to the police officer, both of whom he had brought over. (The university’s official guidelines, by the way, only require people to produce ID on entering the campus.)

I explained that I am an employee and a student at the university, and that they cannot treat me like this when I have done nothing wrong. The police officer claimed in response that I have to accede to his request, simply because he made it, and added that if I continued to refuse, I would be detained. I still did not identify myself, and was violently dragged over to the police car.

After that things developed quickly: students and staff arrived, one of the deans got involved, and I mentally prepared myself to get arrested for the first time in my life. A smart man once told me that if you have not experienced a false arrest, you cannot know what freedom is.

The police officer, who was waiting for backup, announced over his radio that he had arrested “a member of a minority who refused to identify himself.” The negotiations between the dean, the security staff and the police officer continued briefly; I started to feel uneasy and so produced my identity card, solely out of respect for the academic faculty and my lecturers. And that was the end of the affair — at least on the face of things.

Violence triggered by racial biases

I am still thinking about something the police officer said to me — that if the dean had not got involved, I would be rotting in jail and he (the officer) could have already finished work. On this note, it is important for me to address a few things.

I know that some will say I should have produced my ID card at the start and got it over with, and that some will ask, “Why the provocation?” But the issue is not one of ego, or my wanting to “pester” the security guards, whose work I respect and whose working conditions I am appalled at.

The issue is what must be suffered by members of Israel’s weaker populations — a Palestinian or an Ethiopian, for example — every time they encounter security forces. The racial biases going through someone’s head, especially that of a member of the authorities, when they see someone different — black, brown, bearded (or not) — trigger violent behaviour against that same person, even more so if they are holding a camera.

What were the university’s security guards and the police officer afraid of? Is a smartphone camera such a threat to their power? I certainly learned something from this incident: that law enforcement authorities are indeed frightened of the camera.

Another important factor is the centuries-old international tradition according to which universities are autonomous, in particular when it comes to self-policing. This tradition is supposed to prevent police officers from entering the campus, and it is a principle that is respected by all academic institutions in Israel.

It saddens me that the university’s security staff, the police officer and even the university itself did not display even a minimum level of respect to this principle, and that it was so easy for them to accept the fact that I could have my freedom denied in the middle of the campus, for no reason at all.

In response to the incident, Tel-Aviv University said that “the police were summoned to the campus following a theft. During the incident, Yaser abu-Areesha was asked to identify himself because he was present, and was feared to be collaborating with the suspect in the theft.

“Despite the request from the security supervisor and the police officer to identify himself, Abu-Areesha refused to do so. Nonetheless, once faculty management representatives arrived on the scene and spoke with him, Abu-Areesha agreed to identify himself as an employee of the university, following which the police officer decided to release him without submitting a complaint.”

(Source / 11.03.2017)

‘Ik mag alles zeggen en jij krijgt geen kans’

In Nederland is  – volgens velen – een verharding in de politiek en in de maatschappij te ontdekken. Maar wat opvallend – zeker nu in tijd van de verkiezingen – en irritant is, dat men alles mag zeggen, maar degenen die aangevallen worden, zeker niet de mogelijkheid krijgen om zich te verdedigen.

De aanvallen op de (radicale) islam nemen alleen maar toe en elke keer is er geen moslim die in die debatten een eerlijke kans krijgt om zich te verdedigen. En dat is nu juist hoe het gaat in dit debatten-land: “Ik mag alle zeggen en jij krijgt geen kans”.
En dan zijn de debatten zo makkelijk en zo voorspelbaar: de Islam – en iedereen heeft het over de radicale Islam – is een gevaar voor de christelijk-joodse cultuur en moet geweerd worden. In dat geval zijn de aanvallen zo makkelijk maar tevens zo laag bij de grond.

Maar in alle debatten en verkiezing speeches wordt voor het gemak maar voorbij gegaan aan het punt dat al jaren, eeuwen zelfs, moslims in ons land wonen en die zich aangepast hebben aan de Nederlandse cultuur. Dus om te spreken over een christelijk-joodse cultuur is pure bull-shit. De Nederlandse cultuur bestaat uit veel meer componenten en daar mag en moet ook over gesproken worden. In tijden van de grote Nederlandse zeelieden werden al Arabische en Islamitische landen aangedaan en werden delen van de cultuur overgenomen en werden moslims meegenomen. Tevens kwamen er moslims naar het kleine land aan de Noordzee om daar een tijd te gaan wonen (ik heb hier al eerder over gesproken).

Maar daarna kwamen er ook moslims van de Indonesische eilanden naar ons land om hier te komen wonen, later Turken, Marokkanen en ander gastarbeiders die Nederland nodig had, omdat we onze handen niet vuil wilden maken. Dat was een van de redenen dat er mensen naar ons land werden gehaald, en de andere reden was dat ze zo goedkoop waren. Hadden we die mensen reeds in hun eigen land uitgebuit, het uitbuiten ging door nadat de gastarbeiders naar ons land kwamen.

Afbeeldingsresultaat voor eerste moslims in nederland

Maar het gevoel veranderde richting de gastarbeiders, want Nederland had gedacht dat ze terug gingen, maar dat gebeurde niet. Op die manier verspreidde de Islam – volgens bepaalde Nederlanders – over ons land en zou dus nu een gevaar vormen voor de Nederlandse cultuur, terwijl het in de jaren hiervoor nooit een gevaar is geweest.

Hoe kan het zo zijn dat het gevoel voor ‘onze gastarbeiders’ is veranderd en dat Nederland nu de Islam als gevaar ziet? Waarin zit hem nu het gevaar? In de Islam? In de moslims? Of in de gedachten van Nederland jegens de Islam? Of zit er meer achter achter?

Mijn gevoel zegt dat er meer achter zit, want het kan de Islam niet zijn. Zoals ik laatst hoorde, is maar 6% van de inwoners van Nederland moslim. Dit aantal kan dus nooit een bedreiging zijn voor Nederland. Maar waar ligt het dan wel aan? Dat er jongens (soms ook meisjes) zijn die betrokken bij bepaalde misdadige handelingen in Nederland? Hoe zit het dan met misdadigers / terroristen met een andere of zelfs een christelijke-joodse cultuur? Zijn die dan ook geen gevaar en worden die op dezelfde manier behandeld? Ik heb niet het gevoel dat alle misdadigers / terroristen op dezelfde manier worden behandeld.

Afbeeldingsresultaat voor debat verkiezingen 2017 islam

Maar nu terug naar de verkiezingsdebatten. Niet een keer heb ik gezien dat er bij de aanvallen op de (radicale) Islam, moslims de mogelijkheid hebben gekregen om zichzelf, maar vooral de Islam te verdedigen of minimaal uit te leggen of toe te lichten. Nee, want het is makkelijker te debatteren als je alles mag zeggen, zonder dat er iemand is om zich te verdedigen. Het is gewoon de manier om bepaalde mensen tegen andere mensen op te zetten. Dat heeft geen debat, dat heet – volgens mij – gewoon haatzaaien.   

Geen enkele moslim is aan de debattafel uitgenodigd die kan ingaan op de woorden van met name de rechtse politieke partijen, hoewel de geluiden momenteel ook bij linkse partijen te horen zijn.  

Zijn er leiders bij de politieke partijen die weten waar ze over praten, die ooit met moslims hebben gesproken of de Qur’an hebben gelezen? Hebben partijleiders wel eens een moskee bezocht om te spreken met een imam of andere Islamitische leiders in onze maatschappij? Ik heb niet het gevoel dat het ooit is gebeurd. Als het al eens is gebeurd, dan is het alleen maar gebeurd om zieltjes te winnen, niet om te praten over de Islam en moslims in Nederland.  

En dan elke weer dat gezeur over de radicale Islam. Al eerder heb ik gesproken over het feit dat de radicale Islam niet bestaat, er is maar een Islam en dat is de Islam die beschreven is in de Qur’an. Natuurlijk zijn er mensen met een moslimachtergrond die op het verkeerde pad zijn geraakt, zelfs terrorist zijn geworden, maar dat is niet gebeurd uit naam van de Islam. De Islam predikt geen geweld; de Islam predikt geloof, hoop, liefde en broederschap.

Mijn advies – en zeker te laat voor deze verkiezingen – aan de partijleiders en met name ook aan de debatleiders is,  nodig ook eens een moslim of meerderen uit. Laat ook eens een moslim zijn verhaal doen, elke keer als Buma, Van der Staaij, Rutte of Wilders met gestrekt been de aanval inzetten.

Een moslim is ook een mens die hier in Nederland een plaats heeft verworven en wil ook meepraten, zeker als het debat steeds de kant uitgaat van aanvallen op zijn geloof door mensen die bepaalde zaken uit hun rechtse populistische duim hebben gezogen.