Among most nations on this earth, UK and Sweden now recognize Palestine at least symbolically. Sweden in due process and the UK parliament as a recommendation:
”Lawmakers in Britain’s lower house of parliament voted by 274 to 12 to pass a non-binding motion stating: “That this House believes that the Government should recognise the state of Palestine alongside the state of Israel as a contribution to securing a negotiated two-state solution.”
Britain does not classify Palestine as a state, but says it could do so at any time if it believed it would help peace efforts between the Palestinians and Israel. Government ministers were told to abstain and the non-binding vote will not force Britain to recognise a Palestinian state.” huffingtonpost.com
Haaretz asks rather worried if “the Israeli government afford to ignore the signals coming from Westminster?” and also if “Monday’s Westminster vote on Palestine (was) another milestone in the increasingly precipitous demise of Israel’s political popularity in Europe?” haaretz.com
Jerusalem Post shows its contempt for British Member of Parliament when it reports from a “leading supporter of Israel Guto Bebb” who pointed out:
“that regardless of the vote, the British Government’s position would not change and international opinion would not be swayed by a few squabbling MPs on Britain’s opposition benches.” jpost.com
I Sverige hade Aftonbladet följande notis:
A staunch friend of Israel, i.e. a Zionist (“I was a friend of Israel long before I became a Tory.”), Mr. Sir Richard Ottaway is disappointed by the present government of Israel:
”Throughout all this, I have stood by Israel through thick and thin, through the good years and the bad. I have sat down with ministers and senior Israeli politicians and urged peaceful negotiations and a proportionate response to prevarication, and I thought that they were listening. But I realize now, in truth, looking back over the past twenty years, that Israel has been slowly drifting away from world public opinion. The annexation of the nine hundred and fifty acres of the West Bank just a few months ago has outraged me more than anything else in my political life, mainly because it makes me look a fool, and that is something that I resent.” newyorker.com
Such is the situation, that Zionism has come to road’s end and the political system of Israel is destroying itself from the inside together with many of those people living in its vicinity.
→A two-state solution would be a step toward a one-state federalistic structure with equal rights for all citizens.
Why Islam Is Not Anti-Feminin (Or Anti-Feminist)
edited by Omar K N
Shaykh Hamza Yusuf on women in Islam:1
Q: Is not Islam Anti-Feminist or even Anti-Female?
A: Men are anti-women in general [all around the world - in all cultures and regions] . We don't honour our women like we should. [The] Prophet (peace and blessings upon him) said:
Paradise lies at the feet of mothers.
and he also said:
No-one honours women except an honourable man, and no-one demeans women except a degraded human being.
And so there is a lot of misunderstanding about Islam [not the least in this respect], and [it is obvious] that in the pre-modern world [the situation was different and with the socio-economic changes of the last centuries], a lot of things [had to or] needed to go. [Such societal structures which] at the time were probably there for important reasons, agricultural societies needed a division of labour that no longer exists in the modern world, [but which now don't serve their purpose any more]. 2
Q: Is there equality with women, what about the segregation of women?
A: Segregation: a great deal [of it] is cultural, for example the segregation of women is different in Eastern Arabia compared with Western Arabia, where there was no segregation, but respect with certain courtesies and proprieties were expected, but no segregation.
Segregation in terms of Islam is much more cultural [than religious.]
- From BBC Interview – Hamza Yusuf interviewed By Mark Lawson ≈ 2003 @11:49 ↩
- Text in square brackets are interpolations by the editor. ↩
(Interview with Glenn Greenwald in Brazil*)
(Editor interpolations and summing-up by Omar K Neusser)
”Essentially what these documents show,… is that the United States government has created a system – in virtual complete secrecy – that has as its objective the elimination of privacy around the world. [This is something] which is not an exaggeration, it’s not being dramatic, that is its truly institutional objective. Their goal, that they wake up everyday to fulfill, is to ensure that all forms of human electronic communication … is collected by the NSA, and then stored, monitored and analysed. …
Ultimately that is the real revelation of these documents.
[Snowden is very reliable as a source -and has become the most wanted man on the planet…]
[This criticism of our reporting supposedly helping terrorists to evade prosecution] ”makes no sense, because terrorists have known for many years that the US and UK governments do everything they can possibly do to monitor their telephone calls and emails. What we revealed to the world, that they didn’t already know, is that the vast vogue of this surveillance system is devoted not toward terrorists, but toward ordinary, innocent people. And it is being done for economic espionage. And its being done for questions of political power, and not national security.
[Concerning the criticism that publishing these classified documents would damage national security and ultimately put lives at risk]:
[Then anyone should point to a single published document that it would any way jeopardize lives.] This is just a cliché that governments and their apologists start yelling, whenever you report things that they don’t want to be reported.
”The governments around the world will misuse their secrecy power to conceal information, not because publishing it would harm national security, but because publishing it would embarrassing to them.
We’ve been aggressive and will continue to be aggressive in making sure that people around the world know what their democraticly elected governments are doing in the dark.
The Inevitabe Abuse oF Power
”Journalism is about holding people in power accountable based on the widespread recognition that those who exercise political power in the dark, in secret, will not sometimes or usually but inevitably abuse that power. And the role of a journalist is to expose that which people in power are attempting to conceal that the citizens of that country should know, so that we can have an informed and healthy democracy.”
”Then once I did get the documents … I realized that … we really do live in a kind of a surveillance state and he was quite right to be that worried.”
”Once I saw the … full first set of the archive that he provided, the thousands and thousands of top-secret documents, that’s when I knew that this was the most significant leak in national security history,”
*Source: Uppdrag granskning, Swedish TV, dec 2013
US government Against First Amendment oF US Constitution
“Disclosure of this still-classified information regarding the scope and operational details of N.S.A. intelligence activities implicated by plaintiffs’ allegations could be expected to cause extremely grave damage to the national security of the United States,” wrote the director of national intelligence, James R. Clapper Jr.”
“So, he said, he was continuing to assert the state secrets privilege, which allows the government to seek to block information from being used in court even if that means the case must be dismissed. The Justice Department wants the judge to dismiss the matter without ruling on whether the programs violated the First or Fourth Amendment.”
[The rule of law is being rapidly eroded.
[There is nothing much transparent about an administration that claims it is the "most transparent" ever.]
From: townhall.com – http://bit.ly/19ITy6E quoting the New York Times.
See also TED.com talk:
Mikko Hypponen How the NSA betrayed the world’s trust
NYT: A Powerful Rebuke of Mass Surveillance
”Det är upp till medborgarna i varje enskilt land att fråga sig – om de vill leva i ett samhälle där regeringen samlar in information om dem och andra runtom i världen, där internet inte längre verkar för demokrati och frihet utan blir det starkaste verktyg för förtryck som någonsin funnits.”
Från Uppdrag granskning dec. 2013
Mera på engelska:
The Elimination oF Privacy Around The World
The outstanding characteristic of imagination is “its intermediacy, the fact that it combines the attributes of the two sides, such as spiritual and bodily, absent and witnessed, intelligible and sensory, subtle and dense.”
Shaykh Muhyiddin Ibn al-'Arabi says: ”Part of the reality of imagination is that it embodies and gives form to that which is not a body or form… Hence it is a sensation that is nonmanifest and bound [delimited] between the intelligible and the sensory.”1
What Is Made Possible Through Imagination
”Through imagination, spirits establish contact with bodies, or rather … No spirit can govern a body without the intermediary of imagination.”
Ibn al-'Arabi says: ”The spirit becomes corporealized to eyesight through imagination, so halt not with it, for the affair is a misguidance.”2
Concerning the cosmos, it ”is a barzakh between wujúd and nonexistence. In the same way, the cosmos that is manifest to us in the present moment is the barzakh between the past and the future. On the divine scale, the past is the infinite wujúd of God from which the cosmos is born at every moment, so it is known as “eternity without beginning” ( azal ). For the same reason, the future is the infinite wujúd of God that will never cease disclosing itself, so it is “eternity without end” ( abad ).”1
”God is manifest through self-disclosure when He is hidden, but He is hidden through the forms that appear when He is manifest,” and thus ”He is not recognized as He.” [SDG334b]
Title: There is still time to side with those committed to democracy in Egypt; by Maha Azzam
[2013-12-17: Time for this is gone, it was the author's wishful thinking!]
”Those calling for a return to the days that preceded the 25 January revolution in 2011, which brought about the fall of Hosni Mubarak, were not only the military high command, the interior ministry, the security services and the police, but critically the judiciary and the state media. These coteries of power actively worked together to block the smooth functioning of the state.
This went hand-in-hand with a vicious campaign to vilify and demonise the party in power, namely the Muslim Brotherhood. … the secular and liberal opposition, having failed to win enough votes themselves, played spoilers rather than engage in the political process, accept the results and campaign for the next elections.
And so the military and this opposition to Mohamed Morsi were to come together in an alliance of convenience with at least a nod from the US and UK to bring down the elected government through unconstitutional means.”
”Egypt’s state institutions, as in most dictatorships, are corrupt and fearful of change. The security apparatus is taking revenge for the last two years when it felt threatened by the possibility of any new order that would eventually hold it accountable.”
”There is still a window of opportunity to side with those committed to democracy in Egypt, and to put pressure on the military by cutting off aid from the United States and by ensuring that it has to be held accountable for any crimes against humanity.”