Israelis Rush for Second Passports

“Perhaps as many as half of the Jews living in Israel will consider leaving Palestine in the next few years if political and social trends continue.”



Perhaps historians or cultural anthropologists surveying the course of human events can identify for us a land, in addition to Palestine, where such a large percentage of a recently arrived colonial population prepared to exercise their right to depart, while many more, with actual millennial roots but victims of ethnic cleansing, prepared to exercise their right of Return.

 One of the many ironies inherent in the 19th century Zionist colonial enterprise in Palestine is the fact that this increasingly fraying project was billed for most of the 20th century as a haven in the Middle East for “returning” persecuted European Jews.  But today, in the 21st century, it is Europe that is increasingly being viewed by a large number of the illegal occupiers of Palestinian land as the much desired haven for returning Middle Eastern Jews.

To paraphrase Jewish journalist Gideon Levy “If our forefathers dreamt of an Israeli passport to escape from Europe, there are many among us who are now dreaming of a second passport to escape to Europe.

Several studies in Israel and one conducted by AIPAC and another by the Jewish National  Fund in Germany show that perhaps as many as half of the Jews living in Israel will consider leaving Palestine in the next few years if current political and social trends continue.  A 2008 survey by the Jerusalem-based Menachem Begin Heritage Center found that 59% of Israelis had approached or intended to approach a foreign embassy to inquire about or apply for citizenship and a passport. Today it is estimated that the figure is approaching 70%.

The number of Israelis thinking of leaving Palestine is climbing rapidly according to researchers at Bar-Ilan University who conducted a study published recently in Eretz Acheret, (“A Different Place”)   an Israeli NGO that claims to promote cultural dialogue.  What the Bar-Ilan study found is that more than 100,000 Israelis already hold a German passport, and this figure increases by more than 7,000 every year along an accelerating trajectory. According to German officials, more than 70,000 such passports have been granted since 2000.

 In addition to Germany, there are more than one million Israelis with other foreign passports at the ready in case life in Israel deteriorates.  One of the most appealing countries for Israelis contemplating emigration, as well as perhaps the most welcoming, is the United States. Currently more than 500,000 Israelis hold US passports with close to a quarter million pending applications.

 During the recent meetings in Washington DC between Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s delegation and Israel’s US agents, assurances were reportedly given by AIPAC officials that if and when it becomes necessary, the US government will expeditiously issue American passports to any and all Israeli Jews seeking them.

 Israeli Arabs need not apply.

 AIPAC also represented to their Israeli interrogators that the US Congress could be trusted to approve funding for arriving Israeli Jews “to be allocated substantial cash resettlement grants to ease transition into their new country.”

Apart from the Israeli Jews who may be thinking of getting an “insurance passport” for a Diaspora land, there is a similar percentage of Jews worldwide who aren’t going to make aliyah. According to Jonathan Rynhold, a Bar Ilan professor specializing on U.S.-Israel relations, Jews may be safer in Teheran than Ashkelon these days—until Israel or the USA starts bombing Iran.

Interviews with some of those who either helped conduct the above noted studies or have knowledge of them, identify several factors that explain the Israeli rush for foreign passports, some rather surprising, given the ultra-nationalist Israeli culture.

 The common denominator is unease and anxiety, both personal and national, with the second passport considered a kind of insurance policy “for the rainy days visible on the horizon,” as one researcher from Eretz Acheret explained.

 Other factors include:

The fact that two or three generations in Israel has not proven enough to implant roots where few if any existed before. For this reason Israel has produced a significant percentage of “re-immigration” — a return of immigrants or their descendants to their country of origin which Zionist propaganda to the contrary notwithstanding, is not Palestine.

Fear that religious fanatics from among the more than 600,000 settlers in the West Bank will create civil war and essentially annex pre-1967 Israel and turn Israel more toward an ultra-fascist state.

Centripetal pressures within Israeli society, especially among Russian immigrants who overwhelmingly reject Zionism. Since the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, some one million Jews have come to Israel from the former Soviet Union, enlarging the country’s population by 25 percent and forming the largest concentration in the world of Russian Jews.But today, Russian Jews comprise the largest group emigrating from Israel and they have been returning in droves for reasons ranging from opposition to Zionism, discrimination, and broken promises regarding employment and “the good life” in Israel.

Approximately 200,000 or 22% of Russians coming to Israel since 1990 have so far returned to their country.  According to Rabbi Berel Larzar, who has been Russia’s chief Rabbi since 2000, “It’s absolutely extraordinary how many people are returning. When Jews left, there was no community, no Jewish life. People felt that being Jewish was an historical mistake that happened to their family. Now, they know they can live in Russia as part of a community and they don’t need Israel.”

No faith in or respect for Israeli leaders, most of whom are considered corrupt.

Feelings of anxiety and guilt that Zionism has hijacked Judaism and that traditional Jewish values are being corrupted.

The increasing difficulty of providing coherent answers to one’s children, as they become more educated and aware of their family history, and indeed honesty to oneself, on the question of why families from Europe and elsewhere are living on land and in homes stolen from others who obviously are local and did not come from some other place around the World.

The recent growing appreciation, for many Israelis, significantly abetted by the Internet and the continuing Palestinian resistance, of the compelling and challenging Palestinians’ narrative that totally undermines the Zionist clarion of the last century of “A Land without a People for a People without a Land.’

Fear mongering of the political leaders designed to keep citizens supporting the government’s policies ranging from the Iranian bomb, the countless ‘Terrorists” seemingly everywhere and planning another Holocaust, or various existential threats that keep families on edge and concluding that they don’t want to raise their children under such conditions.

Explaining that he was speaking as a private citizen and not as a member of Democrats Abroad Israel, New York native Hillel Schenker suggested that Jews who come to Israel “want to make sure that they have the possibility of an alternative to return whence they came.”  He added that the “insecurities involved in modern life, and an Israel not yet living at peace with any of its neighbors, have also produced a phenomenon of many Israelis seeking a European passport, based on their family roots, just in case.”

Gene Schulman, a Senior American-Jewish fellow at the Switzerland-based Overseas American Academy, put it even more drastically, emphasizing that all Jews are “scared to death of what is probably going to become of Israel even if the U.S. continues its support for it.”

Many observers of Israeli society agree that a major, if unexpected recent impetus for Jews to leave Palestine has been the past three months of the Arab Awakening that overturned Israel’s key pillars of regional support.

According to Layal,  a Palestinian student from Shatila Camp, who is preparing for the June 5th “Naksa” march to the Blueline in South Lebanon: “What the Zionist occupiers of Palestine saw from Tahir Square in Cairo to Maroun al Ras in South Lebanon has convinced many Israelis that the Arab and Palestinian resistance, while still in its nascence, will develop into a massive and largely peaceful ground swell, such that no amount of weapons or apartheid administration can insure a Zionist future in Palestine. They are right to seek alternative places to raise their families.”

( / 05.06.2011)

Israel kills 20 as Syrians march on Golan

Israeli forces opened fire on pro-Palestinian protesters on Golan Heights border on Sunday, June 5, 2011.
Israeli forces kill at least 20 people and injure nearly 325 others near Syria’s Golan Heights, attacking the protesters, who were marking the anniversary of occupation of Arab lands by Tel Aviv.

Israeli forces have opened fire on protesters inside Syria as they were approaching the occupied territories on Sunday. According to the Syrian TV, a child is among those killed by the Israeli gunfire.

The demonstrators have announced that they plan to stage a sit-in along the border in protest at the Israeli occupation and atrocities.

The state-run television also said three of the wounded where in critical condition from Sunday’s shooting.

The television showed footage of Israeli soldiers on top of a tank opening fire on the protesters. Israeli troops have been beefed up near Syria and Lebanon as well as in Jerusalem al-Quds.

The protesters flocked to Golan border on Naksa Day to mark the 44th anniversary of the beginning of Israel’s 1967 Six-Day War against Arabs. Israel declared northern Golan a closed military zone.

Thousands of Israeli security forces were also on high alert on ‘Naksa Day’, fearing possible unrest.

Palestinian protesters clashed with Israeli troops in the Qalandiya village near the city of Ramallah in central West Bank.Live footage broadcast on Syrian TV and Al-Jazeera also showed heavy gunfire along the Golan Heights border and protesters carrying wounded people away.

Israel captured the Golan from Syria in 1967, along with the Palestinian territories of West Bank, East al-Quds and Gaza Strip.

The events came exactly three weeks after tens of thousands of Palestinian refugees living in Lebanon and Syria, marked Nakba (catastrophe) Day on May 15.

In the Gaza Strip, the Israeli military killed two protesters, including one Palestinian teenager, and injuring at least 65 others on the Nakba Day.

Also on May 15, one person was also killed and at least 150 hurt in the Qalandiya on the same day.

( / 05.06.2011)

Nieuw bestand Jemen dankzij Saudi’s

President Saleh van Jemen President Saleh van Jemen
Koning Abdullah van Saudi-Arabië heeft bemiddeld bij de totstandkoming van een bestand in Jemen tussen de regering en het hoofd van een machtige stam. Vorige week bemiddelden de Saudi’s ook bij een bestand, maar dat hield niet langer dan een dag stand.

De koning kwam opnieuw in beeld toen het conflict vrijdag escaleerde. Bij een granaataanval op zijn paleis in Sanaa raakte president Saleh gewond.

Het bestand lijkt te worden gehandhaafd. Voor zover bekend is het al enkele uren rustig in de Jemenitische hoofdstad.


Ondertussen melden de Saudische regering en Arabische tv-zenders dat Saleh een medische behandeling krijgt in Saudi-Arabië. Hij zou granaatscherven in zijn borst hebben gekregen. Ook zou de president brandwonden in zijn gezicht hebben.

Vanwege het geweld in Jemen heeft het ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken besloten om de ambassade in het land tijdelijk te sluiten.

( / 04.06.2011)

Israel’s Operational Plan to Attack the Freedom Flotilla to Gaza

Israel is involved in advanced preparations to attack the Freedom Flotilla to Gaza. The commando attack is scheduled to take place in international waters. A detailed operational plan to be implemented by the Israeli navy has been set in motion. The use of force is explicitly contemplated:

“The Israel Navy has been asked by the government to prepare an operational response to prevent the flotilla from breaking the sea blockade that Israel has imposed over the Gaza Strip. Under the blockade, Gazan fisherman are allowed to sail three kilometers off the coast of Gaza but no further. Ships are not allowed to enter waters that are twenty kilometers from the Gaza Strip. (JP, May 31, 2011)

“….[S]oldiers were under order to use force to neutralize armed danger and neutralize attackers if necessary, but that in general, the objective and the goal would be to take over the ship non-violently and without casualties on either side.” (Ibid)

According to the Israeli navy spokesman, a number of “surprises” await those who dare approach Gazan territorial waters:

“The senior Navy officer said that Israel was preparing a number of “surprises” for the ships that are expected to participate in the flotilla.” (Ibid)

The same commando unit Shayetet 13 which attacked the Marvi Marmara in May 2010 killing nine human rights activists is “undergoing specialized training” involving “mock raids aboard a vessel that simulate events aboard the Mavi Marmara”. (See People’s Daily, May 31, 2011)

The commandos are also to undergo “extensive training in hand-to-hand combat taught by experts from Israel’s Shin Bet security service”.

The commandos, this time, will be heavily armed:

“Navy sources said that despite assessments that most of the activists will engage in passive resistance, the troops that will board the next flotilla are going to carry heavier weapons than the paintball guns and semi-automatic pistols used in the last flotilla.” (Ibid)

Israeli Intervention in International Waters is “Legal”

The report in the Jerusalem Post claims that under international law, Israel’s navy commandos have the right to intercept ships and engage in what is tantamount to acts of piracy:

According to international maritime laws, however, Israel Navy is allowed to intercept and take control of a ship that declares its intentions to sail to Gaza even before it enters the waters that are under the blockade.”

The Marvi Marmara

The articles then proceeds to describe the circumstances of the Marvi Marmara, where nine Turkish human rights activists were killed in May 2010 by an Israeli commando.

Realities are turned upside down. The lie becomes the truth. The Israelis commandos are portrayed as the victims, attacked by Turkish “mercenaries”.

“On May 31 2010, the Israel Navy stopped a Turkish flotilla and when commandos boarded the Mavi Marmara they were attacked by a group of mercenaries.

In ensuing violence, nine of the mercenaries were killed, and a number of Israeli commandos were seriously wounded.

In addition to military preparation, the Foreign Ministry is leading Israeli efforts to convince other countries to use necessary means to prevent the flotilla from departing to Gaza” (JP, May 31, 2011)

The JP report does not explain how these “nine mercenaries” were killed and no casualties were reported on the Israeli side.

( / 04.06.2011)

Announcing the Gaza to Ireland Youth Exchange

I am beyond excited to announce that we are formalising a partnership that will ensure one of my fondest goals shall be achieved, that of a youth exchange between the children of Gaza and those of Europe. I am even more excited because we are focusing on the youth of Gaza as well as Belfast and Free Derry in the North of Ireland. These kids, ages 15 to 18, all know what violent conflict is about, and all of them deserve a chance to play with and understand their brothers and sisters from distant but all too similar conflict zones.

Our success will be measured in smiles and laughter and the building of bonds akin to creating a cherished extended family… and we will succeed.


The measure of success.

I have wanted to do this for years, giving serious motivation to youth workers in an attempt to make it happen, trying through volunteers to get a program written up and funding to make it so. But with all that I was doing I simply had not managed to secure the right partners and funding, until now that is.

The Samouni Project, a non-profit company soon to become a charity, is to partner with Mr. Maamon Hashem Khozendar, a prominent businessman and philanthropist from Gaza. As a resident of Gaza, Mr. Khozender is also witness to the atrocities committed by Israel against the 800,000 plus children there. His people are providing logistical support in Gaza and the Samouni Project has partners in the North of Ireland who are doing the same. In Gaza and Ireland we are working to identify eight youth to be part of our first exchange.

First we plan to fly the kids from Ireland to Gaza (via Egypt), or possibly carry them on our convoy from London to Gaza in July of this year. After roughly two weeks of educational tours and fun based activities with four youth from Gaza, all will return to Ireland for similar activities there. Mr. Khozendar will be providing the facilities and funds in both Gaza and Ireland and we have high hopes that the program will soon be expanded; which indeed it will if support from people of goodwill is what I think it will be.

I would love to see 50 or 100 children at a time for each exchange, but we shall start with eight kids, and work our way up from there. Plans are flexible, but again we are looking at two weeks in Ireland, two weeks in Gaza, with ongoing support to facilitate continuing communications and hopefully, regular reunions.

If you live in the North of Ireland and wish to nominate a child for this exchange or support this project in meaningful ways, please contact us at, also cc me at Together we are going to do something truly special and everyone will get to see the initial results by July at the latest.


Ken O’Keefe

Managing Director – Samouni Project

Algerijnse FLN keurt buitenlandse inmenging in Libië af

Het Front de Libération Nationale (FLN), dat deel uitmaakt van de presidentiële alliantie in Algerije, heeft zaterdag de ‘buitenlandse inmenging in Libië’ gelaakt.

‘Wij weigeren de buitenlandse inmenging en vinden dat de tot dusver genomen maatregelen niet in de richting gaan van een oplossing die de wil van de Libiërs weerspiegelt’, zei secretaris-generaal Abdelaziz Belkhadem van het FNL, aangehaald door het agentschap APS.

Minister van Staat Belkhadem benadrukte dat het standpunt van zijn partij ook het officiële Argentijnse standpunt is.

‘Episode in een lange reeks’

Met de interventie van de Navo ‘vrezen we dat wat nu in Libië gebeurt een episode in een lange reeks (van interventies) is, en enkel de auteurs van dit vreselijke plan weten waar dit zal eindigen’, aldus Belkhadem. Wie die ‘auteurs’ zijn, zei de minister niet.

Algerije is de voornaamste leverancier van wapens aan het regime van kolonel Moammar Kadhafi. De bewapening van de rebellen gebeurt vooral via Egypte.

( / 04.06.2011)

Islam and feminism

OFTEN people object to the term ‘feminism’ as being a western one. One maulana when invited to speak in a workshop of this title refused to come as he considered feminism un-Islamic. Is the use of this term objectionable from an Islamic viewpoint? Not at all.

In fact, Islam is the first religion which systematically empowered women when women were considered totally subservient to men. There was no concept of a woman being an independent entity and enjoying equal rights with dignity. What is feminism? Nothing but women’s movement to empower women and to consider them full human beings. Thus we see in western countries until the early 20th century that women did not enjoy an independent status. It was only after the 1930s that women won equal status legally and various western countries passed laws to this effect. Yet patriarchy still looms large in many societies.

Though the Quran empowered women and gave them equal status with men, Muslims were far from ready to accept gender equality. The Arab culture was too patriarchal to accept such parity. Many hadiths were ‘readied’ to scale down the woman’s status, and she, in most Islamic societies, became a dependent entity; often Quranic formulations were interpreted so as to make her subordinate to men. One such hadith even said that if sajdah (prostration) were permitted before human beings, a woman would have been commanded to prostrate before her husband.

This is totally contradictory to the Quran, but no one cares. It is patriarchy which influences our laws, not the Quran. In fact, when it comes to patriarchy its jurists make it prevail over Quranic injunctions. Either Quranic formulations were disregarded or interpreted so as to have them conform to patriarchy. The time has come to understand the real spirit of the Quran. But the Islamic world still does not seem to be ready. What is worse, due to poverty and ignorance Muslim women themselves are not aware of their Quranic rights. A campaign has to be launched to make women aware of their rights.

Another important question is: what is the difference between Islamic and western feminism or is there any difference at all? If we go by the definition of feminism as an ideology to empower women, there is no difference. However, historically speaking, Muslim women lost the rights they had due mainly to the tribalisation of Islam, which was dominated by patriarchal values.

In the West, on the other hand, women had no rights but won them through a great deal of struggle known as ‘feminism’. But there are significant differences between Islamic and western feminism. Islamic feminism is based on certain non-negotiable values, i.e. equality with honour and dignity. Freedom has a certain Islamic responsibility whereas in the West freedom tends to degenerate into licentiousness, not in law but certainly in social and cultural practices. In western culture, sexual freedoms have become a matter of human right and sex has become a matter of enjoyment, losing its sanctity as an instrument of procreation.

Though the Quran does not prescribe hijab or niqab (covering the whole body with a loose garment, including the face), as generally thought, it lays down certain strict norms for sexual behaviour. Both men and women have right to gratification (a woman has as much right as a man) but within a marital framework. There is no concept of freedom for extramarital sex in any form. In a marital framework, it is an act of procreation and has much sanctity attached to it.

It is important to emphasise that in a patriarchal society men decided the norms of sexual behaviour. It was theorised that a
man has greater urge for sex and hence needed multiple wives and that a woman tended to be passive and hence had to be content with one husband at a time. The Quran’s approach is very different. It is not a greater or lesser degree of urge which necessitates multiple or monogamous marriages.

There is emphatic emphasis placed on a monogamous marriage in the Quranic verses 4:3 and 4:129. Multiple marriages were permitted only to take care of widows and orphans and not to satisfy man’s greater urge. Verse 4:129 gives the norm of monogamy and not to leave the first wife in suspense or negligence. Thus, as far as the Quran is concerned, sexual gratification is a non-negotiable right for both man and woman tied in wedlock. Hence a divorcee and a widow are also permitted to remarry and gratify their urge.

In western capitalist countries, woman’s dignity has been compromised and she has been reduced to a commodity to be exploited. Her semi-naked postures and her sexuality are exploited commercially and unabashedly. It is totally against the concept of woman’s honour and dignity. Unfortunately, many western feminists do not consider this objectionable but accept it as part of women’s freedom. Some (though not as many) even advocate prostitution as a woman’s right to earn a living.

This is against the concept of Islamic feminism, which while sanctioning sexual gratification to be as much of a woman’s basic right as a man’s prohibits extramarital sexual liaison. This, on one hand, upholds a woman’s honour and dignity, and on the other, exalts marital relations to the level of sanctity, restricting it for procreation. Islamic feminists have to observe certain norms which western feminists are not obliged to.

The writer is an Islamic scholar who also heads the Centre for Study of Society & Secularism, Mumbai.

( / 04.06.2011)

This Is What Democracy Looks Like

It was the Tahrir uprising that brought about an Egyptian government more accountable to public opinion.

There was a slogan on the streets of Seattle: “This is what democracy looks like.” You can’t love democracy and denigrate protest, because protest is part of democracy. It’s a package deal.

Likewise, you can’t claim solidarity with Egyptian protesters when they take down a dictator, but act horrified that the resulting government in Egypt, more accountable to Egyptian public opinion, is more engaged in supporting Palestinian rights. It’s a package deal.

On Saturday, at long last, the Egyptian government “permanently opened” the Egypt-Gaza passenger crossing at Rafah. A big part of the credit for this long-awaited development belongs to Tahrir. It was the Tahrir uprising that brought about an Egyptian government more accountable to public opinion and it was inevitable that an Egyptian government more accountable to public opinion would open Rafah, because public opinion in Egypt bitterly opposed Egyptian participation in the blockade on Gaza.

In addition, opening Rafah was a provision of the Fatah-Hamas reconciliation accord brokered by the Egyptian government – an achievement facilitated by the fact that the post-Tahrir Egyptian government was more flexible in the negotiations with Hamas that led to the accord.

Mubarak had a deal with the US government: I obey all your commands on the Israel-Palestine issue and in exchange, you shut your mouth about human rights and democracy. Tahrir destroyed this bargain, because it forced the US to open its mouth about human rights and democracy in Egypt, regardless of Egypt’s stance on Israel-Palestine. When it became clear to Egypt’s rulers that subservience to the US on Israel-Palestine would no longer purchase carte blanche on human rights and democracy, there was no reason to slavishly toe the US line on Israel-Palestine anymore.

The Mubarak regime also had a domestic motivation for enforcing the blockade: it saw Hamas as a sister organization of Egypt’s then semi-illegal opposition Muslim Brotherhood and it saw enforcing the blockade as a means of denying Hamas “legitimacy,” figuring that more “legitimacy” for Hamas would mean more “legitimacy” for Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood, thereby threatening Mubarak’s iron grip on Egypt’s politics.

But, of course, post-Tahrir developments in Egypt threw that calculation out the window: the post-Mubarak government in Egypt has reconciled with the Muslim Brotherhood, which is a de facto partner in the present interim government and is expected to do well in September’s parliamentary elections. It would be absurd for the Egyptian government to try to isolate the Muslim Brotherhood by trying to isolate its sister Hamas, when the Muslim Brotherhood is a de facto part of the Egyptian government and the role of the Brotherhood in running Egypt is likely to increase.

There are other considerations. Egypt’s government has seen how Turkey’s influence in the region has grown dramatically as a result of its “no problems with neighbors” policy. Now Egypt is saying: “I’ll have what she’s having,” and moving to normalize relationships in the region, just as Turkey has done.

The opening of the Rafah passenger crossing will mean that women, children and the elderly from Gaza will be able to travel freely to Egypt and, through Egypt, almost anywhere else in the Arab world. Adult men will have to get Egyptian visas, a process that currently can take months.

But – although it is virtually certain that some will try to claim otherwise – the opening of Rafah does not mean that the siege of Gaza is over.

Rafah is a passenger crossing, not a cargo crossing, as The Associated Press noted in reporting on the opening of Rafah. Gaza’s cargo crossings are still controlled by the Israeli government.

The Israeli human rights group Gisha reports that, since 2005, “goods have not been permitted to pass via Rafah, except for humanitarian assistance which Egypt occasionally permits through Rafah.”

In general, the Israeli government does not allow construction materials (cement, steel and gravel) into Gaza. Since January, about 7 percent of what entered monthly prior to June 2007 has been allowed in for specific projects.

The Israeli government prevents regular travel for Palestinians between Gaza and the West Bank, even though according to the two-state solution, which is the official policy of the US, Gaza and the West Bank are supposed to be one entity.

Exports from Gaza are generally prohibited by the Israeli authorities.

Palestinians in Gaza cannot farm their lands in Israel’s self-declared “buffer zone”along the northern and eastern borders with Israel, estimated to contain nearly a third of Gaza’s arable land.

The Israeli government does not allow Palestinian fishermen to fish beyond three nautical miles from Gaza, although under the Oslo Accord, they are supposed to be able to fish for 20 nautical miles from Gaza.

Thus, more pressure is needed on the Israeli government – and the US government, which enables Israeli policies in Gaza – to lift the blockade.

And that’s why it’s so important that another international flotilla is sailing to Gaza in the third week of June, to protest the blockade. It’s time to open all the crossings, not just Rafah

( / 04.06.2011)

De blijvende aard van het goede

“Wat het schuim betreft, het verdwijnt als iets nutteloos, en wat betreft hetgeen de mensen baat, dat blijft op de aarde. Zo geeft Allah de gelijkenissen.” (VBQ[1] 13:17)
Het bovenstaande vers onderstreept de werking van het universum. We leren van zowel de Edele Qoer’aan als van de geschiedenis, dat wat goed is van langdurige aard is. Dit verschilt compleet met de ´survival of the fittest-concept´ (overleving van het sterkste individu, ook wel het Darwinistische concept genoemd) dat in deze tijd veel populariteit heeft verworven.

De aard van schuim
Hetgeen niet goed, positief of nuttig is en wat niet aan het menselijk overleven en het comfort en de vooruitgang bijdraagt, wordt door de Edele Qoer’aan ´schuim´ genoemd. In een begrijpelijke, wijdverspreide term verwijst dit naar iets dat geen inhoud heeft.[2] Het heeft dus gebrek aan stabiliteit en bestendigheid. Het betekent vooral een plotselinge en krachtige beweging die niet van blijvende aard is. Schuim verschijnt aan de oppervlakte en bevat vuil en onzuiverheden. Het is van geen enkel nut voor de mensheid. Of het verdwijnt aan de oppervlakte wanneer het drijft of het wordt afgevoerd. In beide gevallen blijft het niet bestaan. Het beschikt niet over de mogelijkheid om te overleven. De erfenis van de wetten van Allah[3] (VVIH[4]) leiden ertoe dat het kwaad of schuim niet voor lange tijd kan voortbestaan. Als schuim in staat was om te overleven dan zou het een gevaar vormen voor het bestaan van alle schepselen in de wereld. Dit in tegenstelling tot hetgeen waarmee de mensheid zijn voordeel kan doen en wat op aarde overleeft.

Gerechtvaardigde aanwezigheid
Als moslims kunnen bewijzen dat hun aanwezigheid als een voordeel voor hun maatschappij is, dan zullen zij hun aanwezigheid kunnen rechtvaardigen. Op deze manier zullen zij als onmisbaar worden beschouwd. Hierdoor kunnen zij ook niet door middel van tirannie verdreven worden. Moslims zullen dan ongemoeid gelaten worden door hun omgeving. Door hun moed aan de rest te tonen, zullen zij gerespecteerd worden. Allah (VVIH) heeft de aanwezigheid en het bestaan van degenen die waardevol zijn voor het voortbestaan van het ware geloof gegarandeerd.

Auteur: Sayyid Aboel Hassan Ali Nadwi
Bron: Samengevat uit Guidance from the Holy Quran, blz. 221, 222.
Vertaling: Dar al-Tarjama (

( / 04.06.2011)

Private Israeli guard opens fire on protesters, protester hit by shrapnel

A private Israeli guard opened live fire on protesters marching on an illegal quarry near the West Bank village of Shuqba.

The march was organized by the Ni’lin and Budrus popular committees and commenced at noon. Dozens of Palestinian and Israeli activists marched toward the illegal quarry to stop the further confiscation of Palestinian lands from the nearby villages of Ni’lin, Qibya, Shuqba and Shebteen.

As demonstrators were marching towards the quarry, an Israeli security guard opened fire. Villagers had not even arrived to the designated spot of protest, the quarry, before live ammunition was shot. The injured protester from Budrus was evacuated to the hospital for necessary treatment.

After some time, 3 three Israeli military jeeps arrived and began firing tear gas canisters at the protest. Many suffered from gas inhalation and a few olive trees caught on a fire.

The quarry, owned by an Israeli commander, rests on lands confiscated from Palestinian villages. The demonstrators hope to deter further confiscation, since the quarry continues to be expanded illegally.

( / 04.06.2011)