Western democracy prioritizes individual freedom above religious and social constraints.

It includes various forms such as political, personal, and social freedoms, rooted in secular principles.

Covers freedom of belief, thought, preferences, and association without harming others.

Absolute freedom can lead to misuse of power and is often influenced by interests and powerful groups.

Unrestricted expression of opinions and ideologies can lead to societal conflicts and challenges.

The concept of freedom in Western democracy transcends everything; there are no religious texts or social norms that stand in the way of personal freedom. For them, freedom means that a person can do whatever they desire without restriction or condition, and that they can work to achieve their own interest, or what they believe is their interest, seeking benefit for themselves.

Sources of Freedom in Western Democracy

The democratic system defines freedom in all its forms, such as political freedom, which means that the people govern themselves or choose their rulers freely; personal freedom; freedom of opinion; freedom of assembly and association; freedom of religious belief; freedom of education; and other personal and social freedoms.

Western democratic system's vision

The Western democratic system's vision of freedom is based on the principles established by secular thought regarding the concept of freedom and its purpose. British philosopher John Stuart Mill asserts that an individual enjoys absolute freedom and can do as they please, without anyone intervening in their affairs or life. The individual alone is responsible for themselves and is the most entitled person to be the guardian of their own conditions—be they physical, mental, material, or moral. It is not permissible to force an individual to perform any task or refrain from any task, claiming that such performance or abstention is in their interest or leads to their benefit or brings them good and happiness, especially when, in the view of others, it is deemed to be the exact truth.

 The Aspects of Freedom Include:

**First**: The sanctities of consciences and the depths of inner thoughts, which necessitates freedom of belief in its broadest sense, freedom of thought, feeling, and the freedom of opinions and inclinations in all matters and discussions—whether practical or scientific, material or moral, religious or worldly.

 Second : Freedom of tastes and preferences; meaning that we are granted freedom to take the paths in life that align with our natures, and do as we wish, provided we bear the consequences that follow. No one should object to this from among our peers, nor should there be any obstacles from them as long as our actions do not inflict any harm upon them, even if in their view, it is evidence of folly or foolishness.

 Third: From that freedom restricted to the individual, there arises the freedom for individuals to unite and cooperate on any matter that does not harm others, as long as those gathering are adults and mature, and have not been coerced or deceived into the assembly. Any community that does not generally respect these freedoms cannot be justifiably described as free, regardless of its governmental form. Furthermore, any society lacking these freedoms in a full, unblemished, and pure manner is not entirely free. This is what the foundational theories of freedom in the Western democratic system dictate.

 A Critical Perspective on Freedom in Western Democracy

Western theories establish the concept of absolute freedom, which is unencumbered by religious texts or social norms. However, this freedom leads to chaos, wherein every individual believes they are free to do whatever they wish and legislate as they please to achieve two objectives: one being power and control, and the second being interest and benefit.

For example, the wealthy may legislate for usury and monopoly, the powerful for tyranny, and those driven by desire may legislate for vice. Furthermore, Western freedom does not adhere to fixed values; rather, it is subject to interests and whims. Consequently, this freedom does not align with truth but instead stands alongside capitalists and influential pressure groups, particularly Zionist groups with their vast political and media influence.

The Satanic Verses

In 1988, after the publication of the book "The Satanic Verses," Muslims in Britain attempted to use the law banning blasphemy against the author Salman Rushdie, but they failed; because the law only punishes blasphemy against Christian sanctities; thus, Salman Rushdie was not violating any British laws when he insulted Islamic sanctities.

In contrast, we see a tremendous success for the political and media influence of Jewish lobbying groups and Zionist organizations. In France, in January 1998, Roger Garaudy was tried for his book "The Foundational Myths of Israeli Politics," and he was fined $20,000. The situation did not end there; Garaudy received several death threats over the phone, libraries that sold his books were attacked until they ceased to do so, and the publisher of the book was physically assaulted, and his library was looted. What value does freedom of thought hold if it exposes its bearer to pressure and terror?!

Additionally, freedom in Western democracy allows for the expression of any opinion, the publication of any ideology, and the promotion of any thought, even if it involves disavowing the homeland, denying God and His messengers, attacking the laws, ethics, and customs of the nation, and ridiculing the principles upon which family and social life is built, without regard for those nations' rights to respect their laws and sanctities. There are many examples of this, such as the criminalization of minarets in Switzerland, and the violation of the sacredness of others through words, images, and offensive films, as happened in Denmark in 2005 and in America in 2012.

The Values of beliefs

This indicates that Western thought is based on elevating its own value while belittling and diminishing the values and beliefs of others under the guise of freedom. Absolute capitalist freedom is merely a ready weapon in their hands that paves the way for them and clears a path to glory and wealth at the expense of others.

Wishes without Restrictions

As for personal freedom, for them it means that a person can pursue their desires and whims, eat what they wish, and do as they please without restrictions or order; this is not freedom, but pure chaos that leads all individuals to ruin. Furthermore, a person who is controlled by their desires and succumbs to their instincts is actually devoid of freedom; they have become a slave to their desires, a captive of their instincts, unable to free themselves from them, to the point of losing their mind and depriving themselves of dignity, yet they claim afterwards that they are free.

Dr. Muhammad Imara states: “And if it is said that freedom consists of not interfering with anyone in their private matters; we say: this is a regression to animalism, and an exit from the limits of humanity. However, true freedom is the demand for rights while respecting limits.”

---------------

(1) Liberty: John Stuart Mill, Translation: Taha Al-Seba'i, pp. 17-21.

(2) Religion and Politics: Dr. Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, p. 60.

(3) Freedom of Expression in the West: From Salman Rushdie to Roger Garaudy: Sharif Abdel Azim, p. 9.

(4) Our Economy: Dr. Muhammad Baqir Al-Sadr, p. 375.

(5) Islam in the Face of Challenges: Dr. Muhammad Imara, p. 23.

Read the article in Arabic

The Zionist political arena is full of divisions and sharp conflicts as a result of the ongoing war on Gaza, in light of the continued fall of Zionist officers and soldiers in the Gaza Strip, between dead and wounded. The entity has incurred huge economic losses, recording a major failure in achieving any of the goals of that war, whether by eliminating "Hamas" or by recovering the Zionist detainees held by the movement.

The successive resignations of some leaders of the branches and arms of the Zionist army reflect the extent of the growing differences within the military establishment and the struggle over appointments to leadership positions. As well as related matters such as the failure to prevent Operation "Noah's Flood" and achieve the goals of the war on Gaza, as stated by the resigning officers and leaders themselves.

Yahya Sinwar's assumption of leadership of the political bureau of the Hamas movement on August 6, following the assassination of his predecessor, Ismail Haniyeh, in the Iranian capital, Tehran, is a step that means a lot to the Palestinian resistance movements. It is a dedication to a unique concept that is instilled among its ranks and in future generations, especially since the war is still raging with the Zionist entity.

In turn, General Israel Ziv, the former head of the Operations Division of the Zionist army, confirmed in an article on the Hebrew Channel 12 that his country is stuck in Gaza and bleeding, and the continuation of the war in the Strip without replacing the Hamas movement regime does not lead to any real results and costs the entity the lives of its soldiers and officers.

Influential Generals Resign

Just two days before General Israel Ziv's article, General Herzi Halevi, the Chief of Staff of the Zionist army, set the end of next December as a possible date for submitting his resignation from his position. This was indicated by the Hebrew Channel 12, as he is waiting for the completion of the investigations into the failure of the "Al-Aqsa Flood" operation, considering that the end of this year is the appropriate time to announce his resignation from his military position.

The Hebrew Channel 14 considered Halevi's resignation as an "escape" from responsibility, despite the channel's confirmation that by the end of next December, the occupation army will have completed its preparations for a comprehensive war in Lebanon, and its indication that General Halevi's setting of a date for his resignation from his position coincided with the announcement of General Yossi Shariel, commander of Unit 8200, his resignation against the backdrop of the failure of October 7. This further complicated matters within the Zionist military establishment.

8200 Intelligence Unit Commander:   I wasn’t up to the task

"I was not up to the task despite expectations. On October 7, I did not accomplish the mission as expected of me, as my orders stipulated, and as the citizens of the country I love so much expected of me." With these words, General Yossi Shariel, commander of the 8200 Unit of the Zionist Intelligence, sent a letter to the Chief of Staff, in which he submitted his resignation from his position, on September 12, 2024. He thus joins a long series of resignations within the Zionist army, although these resignations are the last, so far.

Yossi Shariel announced his responsibility for what happened on October 7, despite the importance of his military unit, especially since it represents the main link in the entity's external security system, and its control over military centers and bases in the north and south of the country. All of this is in addition to being the unit responsible for decoding and analyzing the information obtained by the intelligence apparatus.

This means that the resignation is conclusive evidence of the continued Zionist intelligence failure, up until now, despite the passage of nearly a year since the “Al-Aqsa Flood” operation and confirms the strength of Sinwar’s continuity in his political and military position.

Internal conflict and dispute

Shariel is the second in charge after the head of the Intelligence Division, General Aharon Haliva, the first in charge of Military Intelligence (Aman), submitted his resignation on April 22, 2024. This reflects the extent of the intelligence failure in preventing the October 7, 2023 attack. The newspaper "Maariv" explained that despite the delay in the resignation, the "Aman" apparatus is in real need of comprehensive rehabilitation and re-establishment, considering it as a "snowball" rolling inside the occupation army, and the beginning of an expected wave of resignations by senior leaders of the Zionist security services.

This wave, Amos Harel, the political analyst for the Hebrew "Haaretz", considered the real beginning of identifying the extent of the internal conflicts and disputes between senior officers and generals in the Zionist army; which reflects the failure of the army's readiness for a multi-front war that puts the future of the entity at stake.

"A Warrior's Cry" in a Public Speech

The newspaper "Israel Hayom" quoted General Dan Goldfus, commander of the Zionist "98th Division", on March 13, that he appeared in a public speech, to demand that Netanyahu and his government be worthy of the sacrifices shown by the occupation soldiers. This seems like a warrior's cry and the beginning of a military rebellion within the army, at the same time.

The Hebrew newspaper "Haaretz" published an explanation for the suicide of 10 officers and soldiers in the Zionist army since the "Al-Aqsa Flood", explaining that what the suicides saw in the combat sites destroyed their souls; while it quoted psychological experts that as a general rule, most soldiers who commit suicide are very young, in basic training or in the first year of service.

A soldier's call to revolt and rebel against the army leaders

The call of a Zionist soldier to revolt and rebel against the Zionist Minister of Defense and the Chief of Staff, and to use weapons against any decision related to the day after the war in Gaza, unless Netanyahu issued this decision; The army opened an urgent investigation into the incident on May 25, 2024. The soldier had posted a video of himself "masked", to lift the curtain on the state of fear and confusion that prevailed inside "Israel"; politically and militarily, which was confirmed by the Hebrew "Channel 12".

Certainly, the Zionist entity has always tried to distance the army from any internal political disputes, while emphasizing that the Chief of Staff is the true commander-in-chief of the occupation army and considering that the position of Minister of Defense in "Tel Aviv" is a political position that any politician can assume.

Zionist General Confirms Failure in His Military Mission

On June 9, 2024, General Avi Rosenfeld, commander of the Gaza Division in the Zionist army, confirmed his failure in his mission as a military commander. He therefore submitted his resignation from his position, referring to his failure to protect the Gaza Envelope settlements from the attack of the "Qassam Brigades" elements on October 7. Under the title "I Failed in the Mission of My Life", Rosenfeld announced his resignation in an official letter addressed to the Zionist Chief of Staff, explaining that all army commanders bear responsibility for the failure to confront the "Al-Aqsa Flood" attack, stressing his participation in the investigations into this attack to draw lessons.

The Hebrew Channel 12, in its comment (on June 10) on General Rosenfeld's resignation, blamed him for his direct responsibility for the Gaza Division's lack of preparation for Hamas' offensive operation. It pointed out that the same division lost its "eyes" on the morning of October 7, so the elements of his division took 4 full days to assemble a picture of what happened in the Gaza Envelope settlements.

The strange thing is that the day General Rosenfeld announced his resignation from his military position coincided with the resignation of both Benny Gantz and Gadi Eisenkot from their positions as members of the security cabinet for managing the war on Gaza (the Gaza Cabinet), after which Netanyahu came out and called on the three of them that what is happening in the Strip requires unity, not division and resignation.

Earthquake in the General Staff

On September 3, 2024, the newspaper "Israel Hayom" reported that the commander of the ground forces in the occupation army, General Tamir Yadai, had announced his resignation from his position for personal reasons, which the website "Walla" described as "an earthquake in the Israeli General Staff", especially since Yadai was one of the military leaders who called for a ground invasion of the Gaza Strip; which means that he bears responsibility for the heavy losses of dead among the ranks of the Zionist army.

Amir Bohbot, the military commentator for the website, did not stop there but explained that General Yadai's resignation came due to hidden internal disagreements within the General Staff regarding promotions and appointments in the leadership of the Zionist army.

What was taken by force cannot be restored except by force

Zionist pens continue to emphasize the loss of their country's army in Gaza and its falling into a quagmire and mire and the exhaustion of the resistance movements and "Hezbollah" of the Zionist entity. While Sinwar's assumption of leadership of "Hamas" means a lot to the resistance factions and movements between continuing the approach of resistance and not abandoning weapons, and defining that weapons are the only solution to the Palestinian issue; because what was taken by force cannot be restored except by force.

Sinwar learned during his time in Zionist prisons that the entity does not know the meaning of peace, but he understands the concept of force and what it represents for future generations, as many Zionist writers believe that Sinwar's leadership of "Hamas" confirms the true approach of the resistance movements and emphasizes the importance of returning the occupied lands to their owners, which is what Sinwar learned from his officers and guards in Zionist prisons; while the occupying state continues to bleed inside Gaza.

--------------

Read the article in Arabic

Since 1967, the West Bank and Jerusalem have witnessed a series of settlement waves that constituted radical transformations in the geographical and political situation of the region. Despite the heavy defeat suffered by the Arab countries during that period, it did not lead to the comprehensive displacement of Palestinians as happened in the Nakba of 1948.

After occupying these lands, the Zionist occupation began implementing expansionist strategies aimed at reducing the Palestinian population density and consolidating its control by building new settlements and expanding existing ones.

These waves range between attempts to expand the settlement area by building new settlements and strengthening control over the lands through policies aimed at changing the demographic and geographical reality.

The settlement has gone through several stages, each of which reflects different government policies and specific strategic goals, the most prominent of which are:

• The first wave (1967-1976):

It began immediately after the occupation, as the occupation government aimed to consolidate control over the Palestinian territories and avoid managing the affairs of Palestinian citizens. This stage was characterized by caution in building settlements and attention to basic infrastructure.

The number of settlements established during this period amounted to about 34 settlements. The occupation also demolished the Palestinian Moroccan neighborhood, which was adjacent to the Buraq Wall, and turned it into a Jewish settlement neighborhood in the Old City. These steps were aimed at consolidating the occupation's control over the eastern part of the Holy City.

• The second wave (1977-1987):

With the rise of the right to power in the Zionist entity in 1977, extremist forces rushed to build settlements on the ground for ideological, security, political and economic motives. This period witnessed the establishment of dozens of new settlements and the raising of slogans calling for the deportation of the Palestinians.

98 new settlements were built in the West Bank during that period, most of which was established at the initiative of the ruling right-wing Likud Party and the extremist religious Zionist movement "Gush Emunim", which was active in settlement activities.

• The third wave (1996-2022 AD):

It came in light of the political settlement process that began in the nineties, as the Zionist right sought to obstruct reaching final solutions for fear of handing over Palestinian lands and establishing an independent Palestinian state. This period was characterized by the acceleration of settlement construction to confront any progress in the negotiations.

It aimed to comprehensively Judaize Area (C), which is the area subject to security and administrative occupation according to the Oslo Accords, which constitutes 60% of the area of ​​the West Bank. It also sought to achieve geographical continuity between some distant settlements or between settlement blocs and to expand control over strategic peaks and heights in the West Bank. This wave worked to bring about radical changes in geography and demographics, supporting the settlement project in the West Bank.

The Zionists called them "illegal settlement outposts", a misleading name that aims to downplay the importance and size of this settlement attack, which may be the largest among the waves of settlement in the West Bank.

• The Fourth Wave (2002):

It emerged after the failure of the settlement process and the outbreak of the Second Palestinian Intifada in 2000, as the Zionist leadership believed that the time was right to impose control over as much of the West Bank as possible, so the settlement was greatly expanded and the Palestinian lands were divided into isolated cantons.

This wave was launched under the right's control of the seats of government in the occupying state, as it was initiated by the Prime Minister of the occupation, Ariel Sharon, who assumed leadership between 2001 and 2006, then he was succeeded by Ehud Olmert (2006-2009), and after him Benjamin Netanyahu (2009-2021), all of whom were symbols of the extremist Zionist right that sought to Judaize the West Bank.

These successive waves embody how the occupation sought to change the geographical and political reality in the West Bank and Jerusalem, which greatly affected the lives of Palestinians and complicated the Arab Israeli conflict.