Category: News

Zaman, Turkey
May 8 2004
PMs Sow Seeds of Strategic Partnership
“Let’s not jeopardize our future with the petty calculations,” said
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan to his Greek counterpart
Kostas Karamanlis. Erdogan’s is currently paying an official visit to
Athens, the first such visit for a Turkish Prime Minister in 16
years.
Erdogan and Karamanlis talked about a ‘united will’ for the solution
of various issues. Their joint message was, ‘a secure future’. Many
feel that Erdogan’s visit marks the beginning of a new page in
Turkish-Greek relations.
The two leaders came together for an inter-delegation talk. “Let’s
not jeopardize our future with petty calculations,” Erdogan said,
implying about the contentious Aegean continental shelf issue.
“Our future gains will be more than what we have lost in the past,”
replied Karamanlis.
Karamanlis discussed Turkey’s E.U. membership with Erdogan. “We
regard Turkey’s accession to the E.U. as strategically important. We
praise the steps you have taken in that direction. Implementation is
crucially important; however, after knowing your personality, I
believe this issue will be overcome as well.”
The Turkish Prime Minister offered help to Greece for the 2004 Athens
Olympic games if it is requested. He emphasized that it was a pity
not to have direct flights between Athens and Ankara. Erdogan also
voiced his discomfort for a local Greek minister ‘s participation in
a meeting concerning claims of the so-called Armenian genocide.
“Let’s leave history to historians and not make this a tool for
politics,” said Erdogan.
After the talks, both leaders held a press briefing. Erdogan replied
to a question about the Heybeliada Seminary by saying that the
studies are in progress, as are studies about the continental shelf
issue.
Meanwhile, the Greek press covered the visit on the front pages of
the newspapers and emphasized the start of a ‘new era’. Erdogan is
expected to visit Western Thrace today and make statements to bring
ease to both the Turkish people living in the region and Athens.
05.08.2004
Edip Ali Yavuz
Athens

Baku Today, Azerbaijan
May 8 2004
Police Stops Marching To Karabakh. Akif Naghi: `We Are Adamant To
Reach Frontline.’
Baku Today 08/05/2004 14:15
BAKU- Police cardoned off Martyr’ Alley on Saturday and prevented
several hundred members of the Karabakh Liberation Organization (KLO)
to start their unauthorized march to Shusha, a main Azeri-populated
town in Nagorno-Karabakh that was captured by Armenian troops on May
8, 1992.
`This once again displays the attitude of the Azerbaijani authorities
to the Karabakh problem,’ the KLO leader Akif Naghi, surrounded by
police officers, told reporters, while the marchers were chanting
`Karabakh!’ `Karabakh or Death!’ `Those who made the decision [to
stop the marchers] will feel sorry for this in the future.’
The KLO leader said that the Azerbaijanis driven out from their homes
by Armenians have a desire to return and no one can prevent them from
doing this.
`We should at the very least reach the frontline,’ the KLO leader
said, explaining the `march is not our goal but just a means to reach
our goal of liberating Karabakh.’
Naghi said now that the authorities prevented them to start the
action from Baku, they are planning to leave the city in smaller
groups and join somewhere outside of the capital to continue walking
towards the frontline.
The KLO leader said the peace negotiations mediated by OSCE’s Minsk
group since 1992 are aimed at making the Azerbaijani people gradually
forget Nagorno-Karabakh.
`Shusha and Karabakh mean the fate of the Azerbaijani state,’ Naghi
stressed. `Without these, there can be no statehood in Azerbaijan.’

Baku Today, Azerbaijan
May 8 2004
Aliyev Urges Minsk Group Co-chairs to Mediate, Not To Observe Talks
Co-chairmen of the Minsk group of the Organization for Security and
Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) have to display that they are really
mediating the talks between Armenia and Azerbaijan, President Ilham
Aliyev told reporters on Friday.
Expressing dissatisfaction over the co-chairs’ activities, Aliyev
said `they have to stop just observing the talks.’
The Minsk group was set up in March 1992, and its co-chairmen
representing the United States, France and Russia have failed in
their activities to find a peaceful settlement to the 16-year-old
conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan.
President Aliyev reiterated his government’s position that the
chances for resolving the conflict by peaceful means have not been
exhausted yet.
In regard to the status of Nagorno-Karabakh – a mainly
ethnic-Armenian populated region within Azerbaijan – Aliyev said that
all the internally displaced persons (IDPs) from Azerbaijan’s
occupied territories should be returned to their homes first, and
then the status issue could be discussed.
Armenia occupied former autonomous Nagorno-Karabakh region and also
seven Azerbaijani districts in 1991-94 war, forcing over 700,000
Azerbaijanis to leave their homes. Despite an armistice signed in May
1994, no final solution has been achieved to the conflict between the
two countries.

Azer Tag, Azerbaijan
May 8 2004
PRESIDENT OF AZERBAIJAN REPUBLIC ILHAM ALIYEV AND PRESIDENT OF
RUSSIAN FEDERATION VLADIMIR PUTIN HAVE TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
[May 08, 2004, 19:19:06]
President of the Republic of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev telephoned to
President of Russian Federation Vladimir Putin on May 8, Azerbaijan
president’s press-service told AzerTAj.
President Ilham Aliyev offered his sincere congratulations to
Vladimir Putin on reassuming the office of President of the Russian
Federation. The head Azerbaijan state expressed satisfaction with
dynamically developing bilateral cooperation between Azerbaijan and
Russia, and stressed that deepening of mutual relations in all
spheres meet fundamental interests of the two peoples.
The two leaders exchanged views on urgent peaceful settlement of the
Armenia-Azerbaijan, Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, and pointed out the
importance of the problems’ resolution from the standpoint of
security and future development of the region.
During the conversation, the two Presidents also touched upon the
legal status of the Caspian and emphasized the necessity to continue
cooperation in this sphere.
Russian President Vladimir Putin thanked President Ilham Aliyev for
the sincere congratulations, expressed hope for further joint efforts
to bring relationship between the two countries to a higher level.

Baku Today, Azerbaijan
May 8 2004
BBC To Launch Karabakh Web Page On May 12
Russian service of the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) is
planning to launch a Karabakh web page on May 12 – the day of the
tenth anniversary of signing a ceasefire agreement between Azerbaijan
and Armenia.
According to a press release of BBC World Service, the Karabakh page
is done in partnership with the British NGO Conciliation Resources,
as part of the Consortium Initiative – a new British
Government-funded programme which aims to improve the prospects for a
settlement of the Karabakh conflict.
The press release reads that going live on bbcrussian.com on
Wednesday 12 May, the Karabakh Page will publish news and views from
Russian-speakers in Armenia ,Azerbaijan and across the world.
Visitors to bbcrussian.com who take interest in the Karabakh conflict
and whose lives have been affected by it will have the chance to take
part in weekly online discussions.
The Karabakh Page will publish photos and personal stories and there
also will be a special section for people seeking to re-establish
contacts with old friends and neighbours, the press release reads.

Washington Post
May 8-9 2004
A Sorry State
The Artlessness Of the Apology
By Tony Judt

We live in the age of the public apology. When a crisis occurs or a
scandal is exposed, the first instinct of many public figures today
is to erupt in a torrent of remorse. From Bill Clinton’s 1992 apology
to his wife for his sexual infidelities to the notorious 1998 Oprah
Winfrey show where guests apologized to people they had “hurt,”
saying sorry has become all the rage. On the Oprah show experts even
offered tips on how to apologize. “Don’t be afraid to apologize,” the
incomparable Ms. Winfrey advised on her Web site. “Apologizing to
your child doesn’t mean you lose.”

President Bush could have used a few such tips this month. Faced with
the evidence of serial abuse of Iraqi prisoners by U.S. soldiers,
Bush condemned, decried and regretted; but he didn’t apologize for a
week. In a world where victims — real or presumptive — demand not
merely justice but penitence, the president’s reluctance became a
political issue in its own right.
For the second time this spring the Bush administration was caught up
in the media’s passion for public contrition. In late March the
public commission investigating security lapses before 9/11 was
transformed into a daytime soap opera. Would Condoleezza Rice follow
Richard Clarke’s cue and offer a telegenic “sorry” for letting it all
happen? How would she “look” if she did offer an all-points apology?
And — of even greater media interest — how would she look if she
didn’t?
Rice is a mediocre national security adviser but a good tactician. By
refusing to express remorse (“I don’t think that there is anyone who
is not sorry for the terrible loss that these families endured,” she
told Ed Bradley on “60 Minutes,” but she added, “the best thing that
we can do for the future of this country is to focus on those who did
this to us.”), she paid a small price in the congeniality stakes
while keeping journalists’ attention firmly diverted from anything
that mattered. It was Rice’s present sentiments, rather than her past
actions, that held center stage. We used to pay attention to what
public figures did and what they thought. Now all we really want to
know is how they feel. And everyone, even the president,
enthusiastically obliges.
Public apologies used to be a very serious matter — that’s why they
were so uncommon. In the past, when faced with bad news, politicians
would do anything rather than confess. Typically, they dissimulated.
Rather than tell you how they felt about something unpleasant for
which they might be held accountable, they just issued denials: “It
never happened.” Later, when denial was no longer possible, they
downplayed the matter: “All right, it happened, but it wasn’t as bad
as you say.” And then, later still, when the scale of the crime or
scandal was clear to all, they would concede that, “Well, yes, it
happened and it was every bit as bad as you say. But it’s all so long
ago — why dredge up the past?”
That is still the response in cultures where the public confession of
failure or misbehavior carries heavy social penalties. In Japan, the
wartime mistreatment of Chinese and Koreans is still mired in
semi-denial and official mis-memory. Turkish authorities — and many
Turks — shift uncomfortably between exculpatory re-description and
outright denial when confronted with the massacre of the Armenians.
Australia’s leaders no longer deny the near-genocide of the
Aborigines, but it is such old news that they refuse to dwell on it.
Even where international pressure has made official “regrets” and
restitution unavoidable, as in the case of the Holocaust, heartfelt
official remorse is rare — the recent apology by President Alexander
Kwasniewski for his countrymen’s part in the destruction of their
Jewish neighbors was all the more effective for being unprecedented
in Poland.
The public apology, in short, is not a universal political response
to bad news. But in the United States, where virtually everyone
(except the 43rd president) apologizes at the first opportunity, it
has a very different resonance. This does seem to be a distinctively
American development. True, Tony Blair also indulges in it, but then
in his well-advertised religiosity and his propensity to wax
moralistic, Blair is the most “American” prime minister in modern
British history. He is also of an age with Bill Clinton, Al Gore,
George W. Bush and other baby boomers molded by the pedagogical
revolution of the ’60s and the narcissistic preoccupations of the
era.
For this generation of political leaders — and followers — it has
always been important to have the right sort of feelings and to
display them copiously. Thus (according to his spokesman) President
Bush — hitherto seemingly immune to the sensibilities of his
generation — feels sorry for the “pain caused” by the publication of
pictures and reports of American soldiers torturing Iraqis. In Bush’s
own words he feels “bad” about what happened, “sorry for the
humiliation” of Iraqi prisoners. He might not say that he exactly
“feels their pain” — that is a more distinctively Clintonian
sentiment — but it is the same general idea: Saying “sorry” makes it
better. The victim feels better and so does the perpetrator —
indeed, you score a triple: You are good, you do good and you feel
good.
The preferred use of sorry, however, is in the formulation “I’m sorry
that such and such happened,” distancing the speaker from any
connection to the events, thereby relieving the speaker of any need
for self-examination.
But in any case, in its transition from private relations to public
affairs, the apology encounters some intriguing paradoxes. In the
first place, it is self-undermining. As anyone knows who has ever
dealt with young children, saying “sorry” has a dual purpose: It
concedes guilt and exculpates the perpetrator. “I said I’m sorry —
why are you still upset?” Thus President Bush undoubtedly hopes that
by saying how sorry he feels that his army has disgraced itself he
can speedily put the affair behind him. But in this he is surely
mistaken.
In our age of instant remorse the currency of penitence has been
hyperinflated and has lost almost all its value. Most of those who
heard the president expressing his regrets, above all the Arab and
Muslim audience to which they were primarily directed, will have
echoed the celebrated response of Mandy Rice-Davies at the height of
the Christine Keeler affair in Swinging London, when Lord Astor
denied under oath that he had been involved with her: “Well, he would
say that, wouldn’t he?”
Moreover, while the president’s regrets are doubtless heartfelt, his
skeptical international audience is likely to reflect that he is no
less “sorry” that the news leaked out. He may also come to rue the
carefully qualified apologies offered by his subordinates: Maj. Gen.
Geoffrey Miller, in charge of Abu Ghraib prison, first offered his
apologies and then spent some time explaining that what he was
referring to were the “illegal or unauthorized acts” of “a small
number of soldiers.” Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt, the U.S. army spokesman
in Iraq, similarly qualified his expression of regrets — “a small
number of soldiers doing the wrong thing.” Such grudging, formulaic
repentance (alleged sodomy “with a chemical light and perhaps a
broomstick” is now “the wrong thing”?) merely calls attention to its
own inadequacy — and invites charges of bad faith.
So what is a democratic leader to do? If you apologize too soon it
rings false — particularly to foreign audiences unfamiliar with the
American cult of contrition. But if you stay silent it suggests
callous indifference or a coverup. The crimes in Abu Ghraib and
elsewhere are not comparable to My Lai in Vietnam or other atrocities
committed in the heat of battle by terrified GIs and inadequate
officers. They were born of that arrant indifference to laws,
regulations, rights and rules that has characterized this
administration from the outset, and that was bound, sooner or later,
to percolate down to the sergeants and mercenaries who do the dirty
work. Thus Bush had no option but to acknowledge immediately that
terrible things had been done in Iraq — and he would be wise to make
sure that he has been told and is telling the whole story. But a
public expression of his pain and sorrow will no longer suffice.
What is missing in the modern American cult of “sorry” is any sense
of responsibility. Whether it concerns the incompetence of the
security apparatus before 9/11, a misguided and failed imperial
adventure, the mismanagement and degradation of the army, or the
criminal behavior of Americans in Iraq, everyone feels “bad” and
everyone expresses “regret.” But until Defense Secretary Donald H.
Rumsfeld testified on Friday, no one even hinted at feeling
“responsible.” According to Bush (interviewed on the U.S.-funded Al
Hurra Arabic language television network), “We believe in
transparency, because we’re a free society. That’s what free
societies do. If there’s a problem, they address those problems in a
forthright, upfront manner.” Except, of course, we don’t.

For in the very next sentence, Bush assures his interlocutor that
“I’ve got confidence in the secretary of defense, and I’ve got
confidence in the commanders on the ground . . . because they and our
troops are doing great work on behalf of the Iraqi people.” So the
commanders are off the hook.
Meanwhile the New York Times (on May 6) carries a touching little
story about the confused and helpless GIs who actually did the
torturing, claiming that they were following orders/ had no orders/
misunderstood those orders/ were themselves misunderstood/ suffered
great stress at the time/ are suffering even greater stress now —
and so forth.
Everyone is sorry “it” happened. But unless its leaders can get
beyond that sanctimonious and self-serving response, the United
States is in deep trouble. If Rumsfeld (who on Friday offered his
“deepest apology”), Deputy Defense Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz or
Joint Chiefs Chairman Richard B. Myers were honorable men they would
resign in shame. But they are not.
If Bush were of presidential caliber he would have sacked them by now
— and taken full personal responsibility for their incompetence. But
wherever the buck stops these days, it surely is not on the
president’s desk. Yet nothing short of such an old-fashioned
assumption of duty can now retrieve America’s standing in the
community of nations.
To the rest of the world Bush’s apologies are mere exercises in
damage control. The same president who spoke of leading God’s crusade
against Evil and who basked in the self-congratulatory aura of his
invincible warriors will have difficulty convincing the rest of
humanity that he really cares about a few brutalized Arabs.
Given the president’s simultaneous and reiterated insistence that
neither he nor his staff have done anything wrong and that there is
nothing to change in his policies or goals, who will take seriously
such an apology, extracted in extremis? Like confessions obtained
under torture, it is worthless. As recent events have shown, America
under Bush can still debase and humiliate its enemies. But it has
lost the respect of its friends — and it is fast losing respect for
itself. Now that is something to feel sorry about.
Tony Judt is the Remarque professor of European studies at New York
University.

Baku Today, Azerbaijan
May 8 2004
Marchers Reach Frontline, Are Stopped By Azerbaijani Army
Nearly 220 marchers, 120 of the from the Karabakh Liberation
Organization (KLO) and 100 from local residents, have already reached
the frontline, a KLO official told the Baku Today in a telephone
interview from Susanli village of Aghdam District.
Kazim Salimi, deputy head of KLO, said after the police prevented
them from starting the march in Baku early the day, the KLO members
left the capital in cars and reached Barda District.
Then they marched to the frontline form Barda, but stopped there by
the Azerbaijani army and were not allowed to cross to the territories
occupied by Armenians, Salimi said.
`We are not going to resist our army,’ Salimi said, adding that the
marchers are going to dissemble after reading their statement.
Police cordoned off Martyrs’ Alley around 12 a.m. today and prevented
the KLO members to start the unauthorized march from Baku.
`This once again displays the attitude of the Azerbaijani authorities
to the Karabakh problem,’ the KLO leader Akif Naghi told reporters,
adding that those trying to prevent them from marching to their
occupied territories would feel sorry for their move in the future.
The KLO leader said the peace negotiations mediated by OSCE’s Minsk
group since 1992 are aimed at making the Azerbaijani people gradually
forget Nagorno-Karabakh.
He said Shusha and Karabakh mean `the fate’ of the Azerbaijani and
that without Karabakh no Azeri statehood could be imagined.

Beirut International Documentary Festival (6th)
Mohamad Hashem
Founder & Manager
113-7222 – Hamra
Beirut – LEBANON
Tel: +961 3 771880
Fax: +961 1 352256
AREVAG. Festival of Armenian Filmmakers
May, 5, 2004
Arevag Film festival, which kicked of on April 26th, 2004 in Beryte Hall
on the campus of Saint Joseph University in Beirut, Lebanon and closed
on April 30, was received by the audience and the local press by great
enthusiasm and success.
For the first time in the Middle East, a festival was solely dedicated
to Armenian filmmakers. Five filmmakers, who were attending the festival
presented the audience with many of their films, each filmmakers was
given a night and the selection of their films was done by the
filmmakers themselves.
The participating filmmakers were Serge Avedikian (France) Gariugin
Zakoyan (Armenia) Garine Torossian (Canada) Nigol Bezjian (Lebanon) and
Stephane Elmadjian (France).
The audience filled the cinema every night to full capacity and lively
debates and question/answer with the filmmakers followed at the end of
each screening night.
This successful event was organized as a joint venture between
Hamazkayin of Lebanon, Hamazkayin Centeral executive body and Docudays;
the only film festival in the Arab world dedicated to documentary films.
The admittance to the event was free and sponsored Societe General, Audi
and Credit Libanies banks, Libby’s, Haygazian University and AFHIL.
For more details of AREVAG festival, you may visit
From: Baghdasarian

Punchlines:Ligament damage forces Harrison to postpone
The Scotsman – United Kingdom
May 08, 2004
Stephen Halliday

SCOTT Harrison has been forced to postpone his defence of the WBO
featherweight title defence against William Abelyan after sustaining
an injury in training. The Scot was scheduled to face the US-based
Armenian at the Braehead Arena on 29 May but it is now likely to go
ahead three weeks later on 19 June. Promoter Sports Network hopes to
confirm the new date within the next few days.
“Scott damaged ligaments on his left arm while doing some pull-ups in
the gym,” explained Peter Harrison, the champion’s father and
trainer. “He was supposed to start sparring but can’t throw hooks or
uppercuts at the moment because of the injury.
“It’s not a major injury but after what happened in his first fight
against Manuel Medina when he lost his title last year, Scott isn’t
going to fight unless he is 100 per cent right.”
Harrison was originally due to face Abelyan, the No1 contender for his
title, in March, only for the US-based Armenian to pull out at short
notice because of injury.
By the early hours of tomorrow morning, meanwhile, Harrison will have
a clearly defined target in his quest to become the undisputed
featherweight champion of the world when Juan Manuel Marquez places
his WBA and IBF belts on the line against Manny Pacquaio at the MGM
Grand in Las Vegas.
It is without question world boxing’s most eagerly anticipated contest
of the year so far and has required little in the way of hype from
promoter Bob Arum. Marquez, the 30-year-old Mexican who has won 42 of
his 44 professional fights, is the man with the titles but finds
himself a slight underdog against boxing’s rising star Pacquaio, the
25-year-old from the Philippines who shot to global prominence with
his stunning 11th-round stoppage defeat of Marco Antonio Barrera last
November.
A former WBC flyweight and IBF super-bantamweight world champion,
Pacquaio’s ascent of the weight divisions has seen him lose none of
his explosive punching power. His last 17 wins, in fact, have been by
knockout and he has not been in a fight which went the distance for
almost six years.
If Pacquaio’s win over Barrera proved he could successfully compete at
featherweight and also earned him the division’s No1 rating from the
respected Independent World Boxing Rankings, he perhaps faces a more
searching examination from Marquez tonight.
A bona fide featherweight for the whole of his 11-year career so far,
the man from Mexico City lost a controversial points decision to
American Freddie Norwood in Las Vegas four years ago for the WBA
title. Avoided by Naseem Hamed, Marquez had to wait until February
last year for his second shot at a world title and left no room for
doubt with an outstanding seventh-round stoppage of compatriot Manuel
Medina for the IBF belt.
Last November, Marquez unified the IBF and WBA titles with a bizarre
seventh-round win over a petrified Derrick Gainer and is, with some
justification, miffed at receiving less recognition for his
achievements than Pacquaio.
“Last year was a great year for me, I worked hard to win two titles,”
said Marquez. “It is impossible for me to leave these titles
here. Pacquaio is a good fighter but he already talks about fighting
people like [Erik] Morales after me. Anything else I need to say about
this will be said on Saturday night with my two hands.”
British fans can catch the fight at 9am tomorrow morning on Sky Sports
2 and I believe they will see Marquez upset the odds and earn the
right to be called the best featherweight in the world.
AUDLEY Harrison is back in action tonight, making the first defence of
his WBF heavyweight title against former British champion Julius
Francis in Bristol.
While the giant Londoner should have few problems in racking up a 16th
straight win as a professional, Scottish interest in the BBC 2
televised bill centres on New Cumnock super-featherweight Andrew
Ferrans.
The 23-year-old will earn the biggest purse of his career when he
challenges WBF super-featherweight champion Carl Johanneson, son of
former Leeds United footballer Albert Johanneson, in the chief
supporting contest.

Associated Press
May 8 2004
Armenian Church offers to buy St. Francis in Nashua
The Associated Press
NASHUA, N.H. (AP) – The Catholic Diocese of Manchester hopes that a
$1 million offer from a representative of the Armenian Orthodox
Church to buy the century-old century-old St. Francis Xavier Church
will put residents’ minds at ease.
Architectural preservationists and former parishioners of the church
filed suit against Bishop John McCormack last month to stop their
closed church from being sold. They wanted the court to prevent any
sale and have the diocese maintain the building as a functioning
church.
Diocesan officials hope a probate court will recognize their intent
to transfer ownership to another church, thus following a provision
in a 119-year-old deed that lies at the center of the parishioners
lawsuit.
The deed states that if destroyed, the church building must be
replaced with another. It also requires that the land always hold a
place of religious observance and nothing else.
“We hope this proposal is consistent with the charitable condition”
of The Jackson Co., a textile manufacturer that donated the land on
which the building sits, said the Rev. Edward Arsenault, chancellor
of the Manchester diocese. “It’s our goal to resolve any civil legal
issue before transferring the title.”
The identity of the Armenian churchs representative is unknown. It is
also unclear if the individual would personally finance the purchase,
or if it would be funded by contributions from the Armenian
community. The buyer could donate the building outright to the
Armenian church, court documents suggest.
The diocese closed the church last year, citing a declining
parishioner base, dwindling donations and a clergy shortage.
“It was meant to be a church. Im very grateful the Armenian people
see its value as a house of worship, and a magnificent one at that,”
said Georgi Hippauf, a member of the St. Francis Xavier Church
Foundation.
The foundation – a group that wants St. Francis to remain a religious
institution – and several former parishioners of the church sued
McCormack, attempting to strip the diocese of its supervisory power
of the building.
The suit boils down to the question of who owns a church: the
parishioners or the bishop?
The diocese filed several court motions Friday, including petitions
to suspend and ultimately dismiss the suit in Hillsborough County
Superior Court. The diocese instead wants the Hillsborough County
Probate Court to issue a final ruling on the deed.
Gerald Prunier, a Nashua attorney representing the interested buyer,
would also not reveal the persons identity. He said the new church
would “be the parish of New Hampshire.”
“My client has strong interest in the church,” Prunier said. “Anyone
(who) takes the time to go around in the church realizes what a great
building it is.”