Author: Badalian Vardan

KIM KARDASHIAN DIVORCE: EIGHT THINGS YOU DON’T KNOW

International Business Times

Nov 1 2011

Kim Kardashian will once again be a single lady. Her relatively
unknown first marriage was at the age of 20, to music producer Damon
Thomas. That relationship lasted four years, ending in 2004, after
which Kim dated R&B singer Ray J, who starred in her infamous sex
tape which was leaked to the public in 2007.

Here are more little-known facts about this reality television
darling who has filed for a divorce from her husband and NBA player
Kris Humphries.

1. Middle Name – Kim Kardashian’s middle name is Noel and her first
name – Kimberly – was shortened to Kim.

2. Meaning of “Kardashian”- Her last name in Armenian means “son
of a stonemason.” Although only half-Armenian, she states that she
“was raised with a huge Armenian influence, always hearing stories
of Armenia, eating Armenian food and celebrating Armenian holidays.”

3. Relationship with Paris Hilton – Kim and Paris have seen several
highs and lows throughout their relationship. It was Paris who
introduced Kim to the socialite scene in Hollywood in 2007. However,
their relationship was strained after Kim shot to fame dramatically,
often overshadowing Paris.

Like us on Facebook

“Paris used to command $100,000 for club appearances, but now Kim is
the hottest girl — and they aren’t friends anymore,” a November 2009
report stated.

4. “Give a Damn” Campaign – Kim is an active member of the “Give a
Damn” campaign, an organization that supports the rights of the gay,
lesbian, bisexual and transgender community.

5. Kim’s Father was O.J. Simpson’s Attorney – Robert Kardashian, Kim’s
father and a third-generation Armenian American, was an attorney for
actor and football star O.J. Simpson in 1995, during his infamous
murder trial, where accused him of murdering his ex-wife and her
friend.

6. Six Public Relationships – After separating from her first husband,
Damon Thomas, Kim dated R&B singer Ray J, NFL star Reggie Bush and
Dallas Cowboys wide receiver Miles Austin. She was also seen with
model Gabriel Aubry. She married Kris Humphries, in a lavish affair,
in October.

7. PETA and Kim Have Always Been at Loggerheads – Kim stirred up
controversy, posting a photograph on Twitter of her holding a cat
by the scruff of its neck. Her excessive use of fur coats has also
always attracted criticism from PETA.

8. Supporter for Recognition of the Armenian Genocide – The Armenian
genocide refers to the killing of the Armenian population of the
Ottoman Empire during and just after World War I. Kardashian has
always been a supporter for recognizing the genocide as such and has
encouraged President Barack Obama and the U.S. government to consider
its acknowledgement.

WRITING IS A COURAGEOUS ENDEAVOR IN TURKEY
by ORHAN KEMAL CENGÄ°Z

Today’s Zaman
Nov 1 2011
Turkey

Writing and being an opponent in Turkey has always been hard. There
is no single serious writer or columnist who had not been jailed in
this country in the 1950s, ’60s or ’70s.

This has been the case since the time of the prominent names of
Turkish novel literature like Kemal Tahir and Orhan Kemal (whose
name I share), as well as Cetin Altan and Nazım Hikmet. In Turkey,
dissidents and opponents have been locked up in prison.

Of course, jailing was not the only way to silence writers; hundreds
of intellectuals have been abducted and assassinated in this country.

Even as late as the 1990s, pro-Kurdish papers were bombed in Turkey.

We no longer live in a Turkey where papers are bombed and journalists
are assassinated. But it is still a courageous endeavor to write or
say anything substantial in Turkey.

There is tremendous pressure upon writers in Turkey. This is a very
pro-communal country. Everyone lives within a certain community.

Raising an argument contrary to the priorities and agendas of
that community always requires courage in Turkey. This applies
to somebody who lives in a Kemalist community and those who live
in a socialist community or in a pro-Kurdish group or a religious
entity. In our culture, the individual is sacrificed to the group,
and for this reason, individuals are not allowed to say anything
that goes against the values of the group; otherwise, they’ll face
the danger of exclusion or expulsion from their respective communities.

In addition, Turkey is a country of taboos. We hold many kinds of
taboos. We have made a taboo out of religion; Ataturk is still a taboo;
we have been brainwashed by the arguments of the official version of
history; it is still impossible to talk about the Armenian question in
detail. When you attempt to talk about the great lies in our history,
this causes a frenzy and a reaction. For some, the foundation of
the republic is a taboo; and others do not want to see the Ottoman
heritage touched or criticized.

The obstacles to free thought are countless. Any column you write
may become a reason for you to be summoned to the office of the
prosecutor. There are 40 articles in the criminal code that can
restrict freedom of expression; you may step on one of these mines at
any time. Most recently, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR)
attracted attention to one of these mines. In a lawsuit filed by
Taner Akcam, the court ruled against Turkey over Article 301. There
are many other similar provisions in our penal code. Unexpectedly, you
may be prosecuted because of a column you write concerning obscenity
charges, an attempt to obstruct fair justice or an attempt to acquire
information and documents pertinent to national security. I think it
is not even necessary to talk about the Counterterrorism Law (TMK).

It becomes even more difficult to criticize the government and the
prime minister. A mechanism of auto-censorship is in place on this
matter. The prosecutors were replaced in the Deniz Feneri investigation
in which people known for their close relations with the government
were on trial; but with a few exceptions, no one said anything about
this in the Turkish press. Likewise, there are many rumors concerning
corruption in Justice and Development Party (AK Party) municipalities;
but you cannot read a single line in a paper on this subject.

Do not think that these are all of the troubles that writers have to
face. Now criticizing the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) requires
courage in Turkey. The PKK openly threatens whoever criticizes it,
and unfortunately, intellectuals who are threatened are left alone in
their cause. The PKK wants us to overlook a totalitarian organizational
structure, an approach that turns the individual into a tool, and
the terrorist methods it employs. It expects us to show the tolerance
that we do not show the state in Turkey to its actions.

Claiming that it is fighting in the name of people suffering from
brutality, it dictates that we should exempt it from our criticism.

In addition to all these troubles, we now have a Turkey suffering from
the repercussions of extensive polarization. All want to read columns
that confirm the truths of their camps and undermine the opposite.

They want to see everything within a stark contrast of black and
white. People are outraged; they only ask writers to speak on their
behalf and raise this outrage. I do not refer to Today’s Zaman
readers when I say this. I am talking about the expectations of an
average reader that reads papers in the Turkish language. You would
be surprised if you read these papers. Two separate and irrelevant
Turkeys are narrated in these papers; one group of papers argues that
everything is just fine, whereas another claims that everything is
simply terrible. I think one of the hardest things is to tell people
who expect these black-and-white versions anything.

For all these reasons it becomes even harder to write a column in
Turkey, as doing so really requires courage; courage to face yourself,
your community, your society and the state at all levels.

THE COST OF UNSCRUPULOUS JOURNALISM
by Amanda Paul

Today’s Zaman
Turkey
Nov 1 2011

A journalist’s code of basic principles has always been to seek
the truth and report it, minimize harm, act independently and be
accountable. These principles remain at the heart of good journalism
ethics.

Such a code also bears true for the academic world and in this
respect, as a policy analyst in a think tank, I always carry out
thorough research when working on a new paper. If there is a need
to quote experts, I am always scrupulously careful, as to misquote a
source demonstrates a real lack of professionalism, particularly on
important or sensitive issues. Moreover, as part of my job, I also
regularly give interviews to the media, including print media, radio,
TV and, as is more and more the case these days, the electronic media.

Over the years I have always been more than happy to do this, regularly
expressing my views on the whole range of different issues that I
cover. Of course one can expect that now and again a reporter may
slightly misquote you or bend what you say to some extent in order
to favor a particular argument or position they are trying to take.

However, on the whole I consider that I have been relatively fortunate
and have had the opportunity to work with excellent journalists from
all over the world, both from well-known media groups as well as
lesser-known regional agencies.

But of course there have been some exceptions, where reporters have
gone too far, crossed the line and twisted what they have been told.

One such case happened to me last week. Usually I would simply say
“that’s life” and shrug it off, but on this occasion it disturbed me
to such an extent that found I simply could not forget the incident
that easily.

This unpleasant experience has caused me a great deal of trouble,
risked damaging my reputation on the issue on which I was interviewed
and left me feeling extremely disappointed by the complete lack of
integrity of the journalist and the news agency for which he worked.

It happened during a conference I recently took part in during which
I was asked to give an interview to a group of media representatives.

The interview was focused on Azerbaijan’s recent success in achieving
a temporary seat on the UN Security Council as well as developments
in the South Caucasus, including related to the settlement of the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Having dealt many times with various
journalists and news agencies from this part of the world — although
usually via email questions and answers — I accepted to do the
interview with pleasure.

When I returned to my hotel room later in the day, I was somewhat
surprised to find a number of emails from colleagues and friends
asking me, “Amanda did you really say this?” Wondering what on earth
they were talking about, I quickly checked the links I had been sent.

To say the least I was horrified to discover myself as a headline
item in a number of Azerbaijani and Armenian news stories. One of the
news agencies had reported me as saying that I thought it was totally
acceptable for Azerbaijan to retake lands currently under Armenian
occupation by military force given the fact that peace talks had
produced no positive result for almost 20 years. Frankly speaking,
on this topic, there could not really be a more provocative statement
to make. Not surprisingly, I was immediately labeled as a scandalous
warmonger who thought it was acceptable to violate international law.

Of course I had never made such an outrageous statement, and I
immediately complained as well as responded to the article. However, by
that time the story had been picked up all over the electronic media.

I still have no idea whether it was purposely done, or if something
was lost or badly translated or manipulated through the interpreter.

Either way it was a gross error which I find totally unacceptable and
I will certainly never accept to be interviewed by the news agency
that ran the quote again.

Unfortunately, when journalists report lies and propaganda instead
of the truth, the consequences can be catastrophic. Individual
journalists, as well as the media as a whole, have a responsibility to
act in a responsible and scrupulous way. Unfortunately in some parts
of the world journalists remain corrupt and frequently uneducated in
the ways of professional journalism. The media has a responsibility
on its shoulders, which is to guide the people and report the truth.

People often have strong faith in the media and believe that what they
read or hear is the truth, particularly when stories or articles quote
experts. Professional journalists need to be honest and accountable
in their news gathering and reporting. They should certainly treat
their sources with respect and integrity, which was certainly not
the case in my case.

POLITICAL ANALYST: “AZERBAIJAN MAY PUT FORWARD AN INITIATIVE TO EXAMINE THE FULFILLMENT OF UN SECURITY COUNCIL’S FOUR RESOLUTIONS ON NAGORNO KARABAKH CONFLICT”

Milaz.info
Nov 1 2011
Azerbaijan

“Some countries will try to establish good relations with Azerbaijan
due to its representation at the UN Security Council”

APA’s interview with political analyst Farhad Mammadov

– Beginning from 2012, Azerbaijan will be directly involved in
adoption of important decisions at the UN Security Council in two
years. Azerbaijan is a country, which tries to strengthen its position
at the international arena. What do you think will membership at the
UN Security Council be effective for Azerbaijan?

– It will depend on the skills of our diplomacy. I think they will
do it. The question is that the mission at the Security Council has a
number of difficult tasks, including the solution of peace and security
problems in the world. Azerbaijan is neighboring with Russia in north
and with Iran in south. Of course, we have to take different regional
and global interests into consideration. For example, the problem
of Syria can be raised at the Security Council. There are forces
pressing for it, first of all, the West. But there are countries,
which don’t desire it, for example Russia, Iran and others….

– By the way, during the elections to the UN Security Council, a
Western diplomat told foreign newspapers that they fear that the new
members like Azerbaijan will not support the West in the questions
of Iran and Syria. What do you think is it possible to derive benefit
from such situation?

– Yes, it is possible. The question is that you become a player there.

The UN Security Council adopts decisions with majority of 9 votes of
15. But five permanent members have the right of veto. If, for example,
Russia uses the right of veto in the issue of sanctions against Iran,
the vote of Azerbaijan will not be significant. If Russia doesn’t
use the right of veto, in that case, Azerbaijan’s position will
be decisive. The important side of this issue for us is that some
countries will try to establish good relations with Azerbaijan due
to its representation at the UN Security Council.

– As Azerbaijan was elected to the UN Security Council, many in Baku
began to view this issue from the prism of its possible impact on the
solution to Nagorno Karabakh conflict because this issue is the most
important nationwide issue for Azerbaijan. Could the UN play any role
in moving the Nagorno Karabakh issue from deadlock?

– First of all I would like to note that during the 24 months of
Azerbaijan’s representation at the Security Council, the chairmanship
will be handed over to us for two times. Every chairmanship will
continue for one month. But the chairing country doesn’t determine the
agenda independently. It puts proposals and recommendations to vote
in order to include them in agenda, which is composed after the voting.

If Azerbaijan puts forward an initiative that “Armenia is an invader
and lets recognize it”, veto will be put by such countries like
Russia and France. Thus it will be impossible to include this issue
in agenda. These countries will not support including of Karabakh
issue in agenda and will say that it is under the mandate of the OSCE
Minsk Group. But what can Azerbaijan do? Azerbaijan can include the
examination of fulfillment of UN Security Council’s four resolutions
on Karabakh in agenda. Thus it is possible to put forward an initiative
to examine the fulfillment of these four resolutions. But be confident,
they will not recognize Armenia as an invader country.

Just remember Section 907 of the Freedom Support Act which is still
in force. It must be considered that Armenia is a second country
after Israel for per capita US financial aid. It reflects America’s
position. But anyway, Azerbaijan can raise a question on the reason
of non-fulfillment of 4 resolutions. The Armenians hope that this
issue will be dropped from the international agenda and consequently
the occupation will be legalized. Azerbaijan can prevent it in the
tribune of the Security Council.

– Are there countries which can be a partner and ally of Azerbaijan
during the discussion of issues related to Azerbaijan in the Security
Council?

– United Kingdom is one of the prestigious members of the Council.

Britain has wide relations with Azerbaijan and the British companies
invest many capitals to Azerbaijan. The United Kingdom has deep
interests in Azerbaijan and Caspian Sea region. Besides, Pakistan is
also a member of the Security Council and this country has allied
relations with our country. A potential partner and ally issues
will depend on the ability of our diplomacy. Azerbaijan’s image,
geographical positions, resources, successes in various spheres extends
our country’s “background” list and has direct impact on its political
position in the world.

TURKEY, AZERBAIJAN NEVER SAW ARMENIA AS OBSTACLE – AMERICA-AZERBAIJAN COUNCIL

news.az
Nov 1 2011
Azerbaijan

Turkey and Azerbaijan have never seen Armenia as ideological and
geographical obstacle for cooperation.

Armenia deprived itself of an opportunity to live in condition of
cooperation with its historical neighbors by occupying lands of
Azerbaijan.

According to America-Azerbaijan Council, the statement came from AAC
Director General Javid Huseynov in his response letter to the article
by Henry Srebrnik titled “Locked in ethnic and territorial disputes”
published in the 18 October issue of Canada-based Guardian newspaper.

In response to the author’s remarks about Armenia-Azerbaijan
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, Huseynov has noted that the war that took
place between Azerbaijan and Armenia in 1919-1920 did not produce any
decisive result. Azerbaijan defeated Armenia in 1919 thus preventing
occupation of its lands.

Huseynov stated that the conflict erupted not in 1991, but in 1987-1988
when ethnic Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia laid claims to
Azerbaijani territories. Two Azerbaijanis killed near Asgaran District
were the first victims of the conflict. The first Azerbaijani refugees
were those deported from Armenia in late 1987.

US STATE DEPARTMENT RECALLS ARMENIAN-TURKISH RELATIONS, YET AGAIN

news.am
Nov 1 2011
Armenia

Philip Gordon, the US Assistant Secretary of State for European and
Eurasian Affairs, addressed the American-Turkish Council platform,
during which he reflected on Turkish-American relations and regional
matters.

Noting that the United States continues to assist in the normalization
of Armenian-Turkish relations, Gordon stressed that the improvement
of relations between both countries would be beneficial for Turkey
and Armenia alike, and also for the entire region, the Turkish Haberx
news agency reported.

ARMENIA TO TAX LUXURIES

Vestnik Kavkaza
Nov 1 2011

Armenian government has prepared a package of laws designed to
overhaul the tax system, including introducing new taxes on luxury
cars, RIA Novosti reports.

Introducing the 2012 budget, Sarkisyan told parliament that tax would
rise 5% to 25% for individuals earning more than 2 million drams
(5.3 thousand dollars).

Tax on expensive alcohol, casino games and slot machines would rise
50%, netting a planned 4 million drams to the budget, although some
details were still to be worked out.

Administrative procedures would be simplified for small businesses
earning up to around $25,000, while rules for large businesses and
the banking sector would be toughened.

Sarkisyan noted that laws on free trade zones were in the budget,
including the CIS agreement signed in St Petersburg and economic
stimulation measures.

PROFESSOR AKCAM’S COURT VICTORY

Worcester Telegram

Nov 1 2011
MA

A ruling by the European Court of Human Rights in favor of a Clark
University professor is a small but welcome step forward in the
ongoing debate over the Armenian genocide. The court ruled that Turkey
violated Taner Akcam’s right to free expression when it filed criminal
complaints against him under Article 301 of Turkey’s criminal code,
which makes it illegal to characterize the killing of 1.5 million
Armenians during the twilight of the Ottoman Empire as a genocide.

Mr. Akcam has been a courageous and leading advocate for recognizing
the genocide as such, and brought his case in 2007, following
the murder of journalist Hrant Dink, who had been convicted under
Article 301.

This case alone will hardly resolve a longstanding and contentious
historical dispute, but the European court has added its weight on
the side of historical truth and good sense. The Armenian genocide
debate itself is likely to endure for years to come, but Turkey’s
official effort to squelch dissent and debate grows ever more tiresome
and untenable.

SPEAKER ABRAHAMYAN WILL RESIGN

Story from Lragir.am News:

Published: 21:58:21 – 01/11/2011

Today during the Republican board meeting President Serzh Sargsyan
nominated Speaker Hovik Abrahamyan as head of the election staff of
the Republican Party.

Hovik Abrahamyan accepted this offer and offered to hand in his
resignation from the post of speaker of the National Assembly to
focus on the pre-election processes in the upcoming elections.

NELSON SOGHOMONYAN RELEASED FROM POST OF DEPUTY COMMANDER

Aysor.am
Tuesday,November 01

On 1 November President Bako Sahakyan signed a decree releasing
major-general Nelson Soghomonyan from the post of deputy commander
of the Artsakh Republic Defense Army, head of the rear in connection
with his transferring to another job, the Press Service of Artsakh
President reports.