BIRDS OF A FEATHER FLOCK TO TEMORA
Sydney Morning Herald, Australia
September 18, 2006
This town’s the perfect spot for plane speaking, Kate Askew discovers.
THE Riverina town of Temora had never seen a gathering like it.
Standing in the sunshine at the Temora aerodrome on Saturday were
the country’s richest fellows, Frank Lowy and James Packer, talking
intently to Fairfax chairman Ron Walker. Lowy got a hug from his
close pal, the PM, who was also having a day out.
Thankfully Lowy’s eldest son, David, has thrown enough cash at Temora’s
World War II training aerodrome to ensure there was enough space for
all the private planes to park.
Recently departed Nine head honcho Sam Chisholm was out enjoying his
retirement and the opening of the new runway, which is capable of
landing a Boeing 747.
And Temora’s mayor, Nigel Judd, put in his two bobs’ worth, encouraging
the wealthy throng to buy up some land in town, or better still,
build a shopping mall.
Close call
It makes absolute sense. As the dynamic duo, they have been through
airports around the world, looked at a few ports and muddled over
telecoms.
The next piece of infrastructure on the list of two of Macquarie
Bank’s most loftily remunerated executives would obviously be an
industry mouthpiece of their own making, CBD figured.
Moss-in-waiting Nicholas Moore and his sidekick, Michael Carapiet,
are directors of the disconcertingly named Australian Financial
Publications.
CBD was relieved to hear the Mordialloc-born Moore and the
Calcutta-born Carapiet set up the company to own a slice of Peter
Charlton’s event management business cum magazine publisher, First
Charlton Communications.
Closer call
Even more disconcerting is Michael Carapiet’s other vehicle.
It’s called SMH Investments.
In a fit of paranoia CBD thought that having cast an eye over Telstra,
the voracious Macquarie bankers were casting an eye over the mastheads
of John Fairfax.
There’s a more prosaic explanation. SMH stands for Shahen, Michael
and Henry, the company’s three directors: Shahen Mekertichian, who at
one point had some involvement with Macquarie rival Babcock & Brown,
Australian-Armenian businessman Henry Hacobian, who has sponsored
the Armenian Sydney Dance Company, and Michael Carapiet himself.
Life begins at 55
So much networking, so little time. Being closer to 40 than 30,
your diarist was pleased to learn – as were many others in town –
that the secretive Young Presidents Organisation had come to a radical
juncture in its evolution.
Gentlemen approaching a certain age – 50, that is (though always
known as 49-ers because they were eternally afraid of turning five-o)
– will no longer have to graduate to the WPO, Well-Padded Oldies,
oops, World Presidents Organisation.
Now there will be a bunch of YPO-ers who, for another five years,
can avoid getting the dreaded farewell present – a rocking chair.
Sadly, such youthful and prominent entrepreneurs as Jack Cowin and
Marcus Blackmore won’t make the cut.
They’ll be WPO-ers for life.
Enjoying the nags
Stockmarket warriors turned horse flesh fanciers were out in droves
at the weekend.
Kingsgate Consolidated’s Ross Smyth-Kirk was on hand down at Kembla
on Saturday to see his five-year-old gelding Flavoursome have its
first start and come up trumps.
Later in the day Smyth-Kirk migrated to Rosehill, where another
corporate type indulging in the nags was stockbroker John Bowie-Wilson,
whose Rocking On couldn’t manage a place.
Smyth-Kirk will be hoping his luck holds for the election of the
Australian Jockey Club committee he’s standing for.
Last-minute letdown
Tim King walked up hill and down dale to be fit for this year’s
annual walkathon.
But when it came time for the Deutsche Bank head of research to don
his runners the flu had taken hold and he had to drop out of the team
of Doug Farrell, Matthew Prior and Jamess Forrest, which had raised
over $60,000, more than any of its competitors.
The Oxfam Trailwalker fundraiser, by the way, is the mad hike through
the night which usually results in bloodied toes, hallucinations and
vows from participants never to do it again – but which helps feed
people who simply can’t afford to eat.
And with competition for the flashest auto a driving feature of
Planet Investment Bank, it’s a wonder competition of other forms
doesn’t take hold in the same fashion.
The cheque from Switzerland must be in the post for the Slightly Warm
Turkey team from UBS which pledged $25,000 plus but has yet to crack
the $2000 mark.
Knowing how generous UBS usually is, CBD notes it is yet to match
the raisings from other finance outfits like Allco and one of its big
clients, Telstra, whose Holgate’s Heroes raised a whopping $34,000-odd.
State Street also deserves a mention for sponsoring the Trailwalker
year in, year out and giving sporty types the chance to stub their
toes on their midnight ramble – not to forget giving other people
the opportunity to eat.
Oh, that loss
Your diarist was terribly remiss in not finding Quickflix’s full-year
loss of a whopping $2.6 million buried in a bunch of dot points in
a press release.
Quickflix, if anyone missed it, is the latest stockmarket interest
of Lachlan Murdoch.
Just so you can get a feel for Quickflix’s exceedingly happy
perspective on its loss-making result, here’s an excerpt from its
press release:
“Quickflix today announced that it had increased revenue by 134.5
per cent and stabilised costs for the 2005-06 financial year while
establishing a platform for continued growth and enhanced services
over the coming years.
“The leading independent provider of online movie rental services
also announced that its total paying subscribers will this month
exceed the 10,000 milestone.”
“Quickflix chief executive officer Stephen Langsford said that over
the past year the company had consolidated its position as the second
largest online movie rental subscription service in Australia.”
Again, in case anyone missed it, the leading independent provider of
online movie rental services reported a full-year loss of $2.6 million.
Two new babies
And before handing the reins back to your regular diarist, Michael
Evans, let’s finish a tale begun last week …
After racing off from the Silliac dinner at Sydney University where
he was keeping company with legendary academic Harry Messell, Lee
Ming Tee, aka Gleaming Teeth, welcomed a granddaughter to the Lee
dynasty on Wednesday.
We can only assume that his driver that night, Albert Wong, was racing
home to put the finishing touches on what we hear is the prospectus
for his latest stockmarket plaything, Pluton, which joins a stable
of past and present companies including resources stock Zelos.
Kate Askew has a tiny stake in John Fairfax Holdings.
This town’s the perfect spot for plane speaking, Kate Askew discovers.
THE Riverina town of Temora had never seen a gathering like it.
Standing in the sunshine at the Temora aerodrome on Saturday were
the country’s richest fellows, Frank Lowy and James Packer, talking
intently to Fairfax chairman Ron Walker. Lowy got a hug from his
close pal, the PM, who was also having a day out.
Thankfully Lowy’s eldest son, David, has thrown enough cash at Temora’s
World War II training aerodrome to ensure there was enough space for
all the private planes to park.
Recently departed Nine head honcho Sam Chisholm was out enjoying his
retirement and the opening of the new runway, which is capable of
landing a Boeing 747.
And Temora’s mayor, Nigel Judd, put in his two bobs’ worth, encouraging
the wealthy throng to buy up some land in town, or better still,
build a shopping mall.
Close call
It makes absolute sense. As the dynamic duo, they have been through
airports around the world, looked at a few ports and muddled over
telecoms.
The next piece of infrastructure on the list of two of Macquarie
Bank’s most loftily remunerated executives would obviously be an
industry mouthpiece of their own making, CBD figured.
Moss-in-waiting Nicholas Moore and his sidekick, Michael Carapiet,
are directors of the disconcertingly named Australian Financial
Publications.
CBD was relieved to hear the Mordialloc-born Moore and the
Calcutta-born Carapiet set up the company to own a slice of Peter
Charlton’s event management business cum magazine publisher, First
Charlton Communications.
Closer call
Even more disconcerting is Michael Carapiet’s other vehicle.
It’s called SMH Investments.
In a fit of paranoia CBD thought that having cast an eye over Telstra,
the voracious Macquarie bankers were casting an eye over the mastheads
of John Fairfax.
There’s a more prosaic explanation. SMH stands for Shahen, Michael
and Henry, the company’s three directors: Shahen Mekertichian, who at
one point had some involvement with Macquarie rival Babcock & Brown,
Australian-Armenian businessman Henry Hacobian, who has sponsored
the Armenian Sydney Dance Company, and Michael Carapiet himself.
Life begins at 55
So much networking, so little time. Being closer to 40 than 30,
your diarist was pleased to learn – as were many others in town –
that the secretive Young Presidents Organisation had come to a radical
juncture in its evolution.
Gentlemen approaching a certain age – 50, that is (though always
known as 49-ers because they were eternally afraid of turning five-o)
– will no longer have to graduate to the WPO, Well-Padded Oldies,
oops, World Presidents Organisation.
Now there will be a bunch of YPO-ers who, for another five years,
can avoid getting the dreaded farewell present – a rocking chair.
Sadly, such youthful and prominent entrepreneurs as Jack Cowin and
Marcus Blackmore won’t make the cut.
They’ll be WPO-ers for life.
Enjoying the nags
Stockmarket warriors turned horse flesh fanciers were out in droves
at the weekend.
Kingsgate Consolidated’s Ross Smyth-Kirk was on hand down at Kembla
on Saturday to see his five-year-old gelding Flavoursome have its
first start and come up trumps.
Later in the day Smyth-Kirk migrated to Rosehill, where another
corporate type indulging in the nags was stockbroker John Bowie-Wilson,
whose Rocking On couldn’t manage a place.
Smyth-Kirk will be hoping his luck holds for the election of the
Australian Jockey Club committee he’s standing for.
Last-minute letdown
Tim King walked up hill and down dale to be fit for this year’s
annual walkathon.
But when it came time for the Deutsche Bank head of research to don
his runners the flu had taken hold and he had to drop out of the team
of Doug Farrell, Matthew Prior and Jamess Forrest, which had raised
over $60,000, more than any of its competitors.
The Oxfam Trailwalker fundraiser, by the way, is the mad hike through
the night which usually results in bloodied toes, hallucinations and
vows from participants never to do it again – but which helps feed
people who simply can’t afford to eat.
And with competition for the flashest auto a driving feature of
Planet Investment Bank, it’s a wonder competition of other forms
doesn’t take hold in the same fashion.
The cheque from Switzerland must be in the post for the Slightly Warm
Turkey team from UBS which pledged $25,000 plus but has yet to crack
the $2000 mark.
Knowing how generous UBS usually is, CBD notes it is yet to match
the raisings from other finance outfits like Allco and one of its big
clients, Telstra, whose Holgate’s Heroes raised a whopping $34,000-odd.
State Street also deserves a mention for sponsoring the Trailwalker
year in, year out and giving sporty types the chance to stub their
toes on their midnight ramble – not to forget giving other people
the opportunity to eat.
Oh, that loss
Your diarist was terribly remiss in not finding Quickflix’s full-year
loss of a whopping $2.6 million buried in a bunch of dot points in
a press release.
Quickflix, if anyone missed it, is the latest stockmarket interest
of Lachlan Murdoch.
Just so you can get a feel for Quickflix’s exceedingly happy
perspective on its loss-making result, here’s an excerpt from its
press release:
“Quickflix today announced that it had increased revenue by 134.5
per cent and stabilised costs for the 2005-06 financial year while
establishing a platform for continued growth and enhanced services
over the coming years.
“The leading independent provider of online movie rental services
also announced that its total paying subscribers will this month
exceed the 10,000 milestone.”
“Quickflix chief executive officer Stephen Langsford said that over
the past year the company had consolidated its position as the second
largest online movie rental subscription service in Australia.”
Again, in case anyone missed it, the leading independent provider of
online movie rental services reported a full-year loss of $2.6 million.
Two new babies
And before handing the reins back to your regular diarist, Michael
Evans, let’s finish a tale begun last week …
After racing off from the Silliac dinner at Sydney University where
he was keeping company with legendary academic Harry Messell, Lee
Ming Tee, aka Gleaming Teeth, welcomed a granddaughter to the Lee
dynasty on Wednesday.
We can only assume that his driver that night, Albert Wong, was racing
home to put the finishing touches on what we hear is the prospectus
for his latest stockmarket plaything, Pluton, which joins a stable
of past and present companies including resources stock Zelos.
Kate Askew has a tiny stake in John Fairfax Holdings.

IRAN PRO LEAGUE PREVIEW: PEYKAN
Iran Sports Press, MD
Mon, 18 Sep 2006 11:14:00
TEHRAN- (IranSportsPress.com): With the start of the new season in
Iran, IranSportsPress.com will be having a short preview of each team,
analyzing each team’s additions and departures. Here is the preview
of Peykan.
Nima B and Niloufar M., edited by Mahdi Rahimi
Founded: 1967
Based: Tehran
Sponsored by: Iran Khodro
Stadium: Iran Khodro
Capacity: 10,000
The team is known to have one of the better organizations in terms
of facilities and management.
With the 3 big signings Peykan should stay clear from
relegation. Players such as Milad Nouri, Bayatinia and Gholamin will
make sure Peykan will manage to get the necessary points to have a
good season.
Players OUT: Ali Latifi, Miguel Alberto Barto, Hossein Babaie,
Mehdi Vaezi, Morteza kashani, Amir Abbas Ghafoorihaye Asl, Shahrooz
Ghavi Mazhab,Mehdi Khakpour, Reza Shahmoradi, Rashid Hoveyzeh,Amin
Bagheri,Shahin bani Ahmad, Reza Hadad, Mansour Ahmadzadeh.
Players IN: Hossein Ashna(Fajr), Hossein Memar(Saipa), Mehdi
Mohamadi(Shahab Zanjan), Meisam Khosravi(free), Milad Nouri(Foolad),
Mohamd Gholamin(Malavan), Mohsen Bayatinia(Pas), Reza Azizi(Iran Khodri
Rey),Iman Heidari(Iran Javan Booshehr), Amir Hossein Aslanian(free),
Mokhled Ali Naser(Iraq).
Headcoach:Samoel Darabinian
Coach:Naser Poormehdi, Asghar Modirroosta.
Goalkeepers coach: Saeed Azizian.
Key players this season
Peykan’s best transfer was the promising Foolad player, Milad Nouri.
Mohammad Gholamin, Malavan’s top scorer and Mohsen bayatinia from
Pas were other good additions to Peykan team.
Prospects this season
Unlike Mes Kerman, Peykan was rest assured of advancing to IPL near the
end of the season. After finishing 2nd in Group 2 of First Division
games, they were to face Group 1 winner, Pegah Gilan. Peykan, with
former coach Farhad Kazemi in charge, managed to defeat Pegah Gilan
1-0 at home and a valuable draw in Rasht, to be the first team to
promote to IPL.
However, Farhad Kazemi switched to Saba for the new season and Peykan
hired Armenian Darabinian for the 6th IPL season.
For their preprations, they head to Turkey for 12 days for couple of
Friendly games and ongoing team training.

ANALYSIS – BOTH SIDES FEEL THREATS IN POPE-ISLAM ROW
By Tom Heneghan, Religion Editor
Reuters
The Star Online
Malaysia Star, Malaysia
September 17, 2006
ISTANBUL (Reuters) – One of the most basic human instincts is to defend
oneself when threatened. It’s a gut feeling that triggers vigorous
reactions, often far stronger than those seen when calm prevails.
The crisis over Pope Benedict’s remarks about Islam seems to play
this pattern out on a global scale, Muslim and Christian analysts
say. Only a few words suffice to turn a comment into an insult and
conjure up an “Islam versus the West” conflict.
The uproar comes just months before the visit of the world’s most
prominent Christian leader to Muslim Turkey. It is not yet sure if
his expressed regrets can save it from being scrapped.
The crisis — like recent controversies over the Danish cartoons of
the Prophet Mohammad or the death sentence for an Afghan convert to
Christianity — reveals a deeper gulf between two world views that
only a sustained dialogue can overcome, the analysts say.
“Both sides feel threatened and insulted,” said Mustafa Akyol, an
Istanbul commentator on Muslim affairs.
“Muslims see this as part of a whole campaign, in the same line as
the Afghan and Iraq wars and Abu Ghraib,” he said.
“In the West, they think they’re under attack by ‘jihad’ and an
intolerant Muslim religion.”
The term “jihad”, which is broader than the “holy war” interpretation
given it in the West, is at the heart of this crisis. Benedict said
in a lecture last week that a “holy war” was unreasonable and he
implied Islam was inherently violent.
Leaders throughout the Muslim world denounced this as a bid to paint
all Islamic believers as terrorists.
Palestinian gunmen firebombed churches in the West Bank in protest.
PAPAL WAR ON RELATIVISM
While the West feels threatened by the deadly Islamist attacks in
New York, London, Madrid and other cities in recent years, Benedict
has a particular reason to feel besieged.
The German-born Pope sees the once-Christian West being undermined
by a relativism that is “deaf to God” and morality.
The most dynamic faith in Europe now is Islam, a trend that troubles
him. The Vatican often asks why Muslim states restrict the rights
of their Christian minorities while Muslims in the West can build
mosques and openly spread their faith.
This is a minefield because Christianity and Islam, the world’s two
largest religions, both profoundly believe they are right and the
other is wrong about God and the world.
John Wilkins, former editor of the London Catholic weekly The Tablet,
said a sensitive dialogue was the only way for both sides to live
with each other without giving up their beliefs.
But Benedict has confused this necessary pluralism with the relativism
he opposes and makes statements that look provocative because they
do not seem to invite a dialogue.
“This Pope hasn’t really accepted pluralism,” said Wilkins. “He
confuses it with relativism.
“A real pluralist approach would not make statements but ask
questions. He could say ‘Yes, we were violent in the past and we have
repented for this. Can you do the same?’
“Or he could ask if the Muslims saw anything positive in what the
Church was doing,” Wilkins said.
CHRISTIAN VIEWS IN MUSLIM LAND
Christian leaders in Turkey, the only secular state in the Muslim world
and one that straddles Europe and the Middle East, saw misunderstanding
prevailing on both sides.
“Deep down, Muslims here see the Pope’s visit as a symbol of an effort
to re-Christianise Turkey,” said Father Francois Yakan in Istanbul,
the former Byzantine Christian capital conquered by the Muslim Ottoman
Turks in 1453.
“This controversy has started out just like the cartoon crisis,” said
the patriarchal vicar of the Chaldean Catholic Church, who was born
in eastern Turkey and speaks Aramaic, the language of Jesus Christ.
The Armenian Patriarch of Istanbul Mesrob II, head of another church
linked to the Vatican, told visiting Paris-based religion journalists
that Benedict spoke like the professor he once was rather than as a
Pope who must weigh his words carefully.
“The Pope doesn’t have to present his excuses, but I think he should
explain his thinking,” he said.
Akyol said only small minorities on either side actually wanted a
clash, but the reasonable dialogue needed to understand each other
requires a calm he cannot now see.
“People here tell me I’m wasting my time,” said Akyol, who describes
himself as a moderate Muslim. “They say the Westerners have made up
their mind. We’re the new enemy after communism and they only want
to take Muslim oil.”
“Unless we calm down, it will only get worse,” he said.

THE POPE, JIHAD, AND “DIALOGUE”
American Thinker, AZ
September 17th, 2006
The most important address commemorating 9/11/01 was delivered on
9/12/06, a day after the fifth anniversary of this cataclysmic act
of jihad terrorism. It was not delivered by President Bush, and was
not even pronounced in the United States. On September 12, 2006 at
the University of Regensburg, Pope Benedict XVI delivered a lecture
(“adding some allusions of the moment”) entitled, “Faith, Reason and
the University”.
Despite his critique of modern reason, Benedict argued that he did
not intend to promote a retrogression,
…back to the time before the Enlightenment and reject[ing] the
insights of the modern age. The positive aspects of modernity are to
be acknowledged unreservedly: We are all grateful for the marvelous
possibilities that it has opened up for mankind and for the progress in
humanity that has been granted to us. The scientific ethos, moreover,
is the will to be obedient to the truth, and, as such, it embodies
an attitude which reflects one of the basic tenets of Christianity.
Christianity, the Pope maintained, was indelibly linked to reason
and he contrasted this view with those who believe in spreading their
faith by the sword. Benedict developed this argument by recounting the
late 14th century “Dialogue Held With A Certain Persian, the Worthy
Mouterizes, in Anakara of Galatia” between the Byzantine ruler Manuel
II Paleologus, and a well-educated Muslim interlocutor. The crux of
this part of his presentation, was the following:
Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the
soul. ‘God’, he [the Byzantine ruler] says, ‘is not pleased by blood –
and not acting reasonably is contrary to God’s nature. Faith is born
of the soul, not the body. Whoever would lead someone to faith needs
the ability to speak well and to reason properly, without violence
and threats… To convince a reasonable soul, one does not need a
strong arm, or weapons of any kind, or any other means of threatening
a person with death’….
However, it is Benedict’s discussion of the Byzantine ruler’s allusions
to “…the theme of the jihad (holy war)”-Koran 2:256, “There is no
compulsion in religion”, notwithstanding-that has unleashed a firestorm
of condemnation and violence from Muslims across the world. Here are
the words deemed so incendiary by both Muslim leaders, and the masses:
Without descending to details, such as the difference in treatment
accorded to those who have the ‘Book’ and the ‘infidels’, he [Manuel
II Paleologus] turns to his interlocutor somewhat brusquely with the
central question on the relationship between religion and violence
in general, in these words: ‘Show me just what Mohammed brought that
was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such
as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.’
The historical context for these words-which were likely written by
Manuel II Paleologus between 1391 and 1394-turns out be much more
banal, albeit unknown to fulminating Muslims (here; here),and Islamic
apologists of all ilks, especially the disingenuous Muslim (here;
here) and hand-wringing non-Muslim promoters of empty “civilizational
dialogue”.
When Manuel II composed the Dialogue (which Pope Benedict excerpted),
the Byzantine ruler was little more than a glorified dhimmi vassal
of the Ottoman Sultan Bayezid, forced to accompany the latter on
a campaign through Anatolia. Earlier, Bayezid had compelled the
Byzantines under Manuel II to submit to additional humiliations and
impositions-heavier tribute, which was already onerous-as well as
the establishment of a special quarter in Constantinople devoted to
Turkish merchants, and the admission of an Ottoman kadi to arbitrate
the affairs of these Muslims.
During the campaign he was conscripted to join, Manuel II witnessed
with understandable melancholy the great metamorphosis-ethnic and
toponymic-of formerly Byzantine Asia Minor. The devastation, and
depopulation of these once flourishing regions was so extensive that
often, Manuel could no longer tell where he was. The still recognizable
Greek cities whose very names had been changed into something foreign
became a source of particular grief. It was during this unhappy sojourn
that Manuel II’s putative encounter with a Muslim theologian occurred,
ostensibly in Ankara.
Manuel II’s Dialogue was one of the later outpourings of a vigorous
Muslim-Christian polemic regarding Islam’s success, at (especially
Byzantine) Christianity’s expense, which persisted during the
11th through 15th centuries, and even beyond. The Muslim advocates’
(particularly the Turks) most prominent argument was the indisputable
evidence of Islam’s military triumphs over the Christians of Asia
Minor (especially Anatolia, in modern Turkey). These jihad conquests
were repeatedly advanced in the polemics of the Turks. The Christian
rebuttal, in contrast, hinged upon the ethical precepts of Muhammad and
the Koran. Christian interlocutors charged the Muslims with abiding
a religion which both condoned the life of a “lascivious murderer”,
and claimed to give such a life divine sanction.
Manuel, and generations of Christian interlocutors, argued that the
“Christ-hating” barbarians could never overcome the “fortress of
belief,” despite seizing lands and cities, extorting tribute and even
conscripting rulers to perform humiliating services.
Manuel II’s discussions with his Muslim counterpart simply conformed
to this pattern of polemical exchanges, repeated often, over at least
four centuries.
Returning to Pope Benedict’s now controversial lecture, even if one
accepts an apologetic interpretation of Koran 2:256 as prohibiting
forced conversion to Islam (see below), this verse was abrogated by
the verses of jihad, for example 9:5, and many others in sura 9, as
well as sura 8. Indeed Koran 9:5 alone is held to have abrogated (here,
pp. 67-75 ) as many as 100 pacific (or seemingly pacific verses).
Koranic sources, in particular the timeless war proclamation (the
Koran being the “uncreated word of Allah” for Muslims) on generic
pagans (not simply Arabian pagans), Koran 9:5, offers pagans the stark
“choice” of conversion or death:
Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever
ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare
for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and
pay the poor-due, then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is Forgiving,
Merciful.
The idolatrous Hindus (and the same applies to enormous populations
of pagans/animists wherever Muslim jihadist armies encountered them
in history, including, sadly, contemporary Sudan), for example,
were enslaved in vast numbers during the waves of jihad conquests
that ravaged the Indian subcontinent for well over a half millennium
(beginning at the outset of the 8th century C.E.). And the guiding
principles of Islamic law regarding their fate -derived from Koran
9:5-were unequivocally coercive.
Jihad slavery also contributed substantively to the growth of the
Muslim population in India. K.S. Lal elucidates both of these points:
The Hindus who naturally resisted Muslim occupation were considered
to be rebels. Besides they were idolaters (mushrik) and could not be
accorded the status of Kafirs, of the People of the Book – Christians
and Jews… Muslim scriptures and treatises advocated jihad against
idolaters for whom the law advocated only Islam or death… The fact
was that the Muslim regime was giving [them] a choice between Islam
and death only. Those who were killed in battle were dead and gone;
but their dependents were made slaves.
They ceased to be Hindus; they were made Musalmans in course of time
if not immediately after captivity…slave taking in India was the most
flourishing and successful [Muslim] missionary activity…Every Sultan,
as [a] champion of Islam, considered it a political necessity to plant
or raise [the] Muslim population all over India for the Islamization
of the country and countering native resistance.
The late Rudi Paret was a seminal 20th century scholar of the Koran,
and its exegesis. Paret’s considered analysis of Koran 2:256, puts
this verse in the overall context of Koranic injunctions regarding
pagans, specifically, and further concludes that 2:256 is a statement
of resignation, not a prohibition on forced conversion.
After the community which the Prophet had established had extended
its power over the whole of Arabia, the pagan Arabs were forcefully
compelled to accept Islam stated more accurately, they had to choose
either to accept Islam or death in battle against the superior power
of the Muslims (cf. surahs 8:12; 47:4). This regulation was later
sanctioned in Islamic law. All this stands in open contradiction to
the alleged meaning of the Quranic statement, noted above: la ikraha
fi d-dini. The idolaters (mushrikun) were clearly compelled to accept
Islam – unless they preferred to let themselves be killed. [Note-Koran
9:5];
In view of these circumstances it makes sense to consider another
meaning. Perhaps originally the statement la ikraha fi d-dini did
not mean that in matters of religion one ought not to use compulsion
against another but that one could not use compulsion against another
(through the simple proclamation of religious truth).
Such coercion applies not only to “pagans”. Princeton scholar Patricia
Crone makes the cogent argument that those of any faith may be forcibly
converted during acts of jihad resulting in captivity (including,
for example, the jihad kidnapping of the two Fox reporters, Centanni
and Wiig). In her recent analysis of the origins and development
of Islamic political thought, Dr. Crone makes an important nexus
between the mass captivity and enslavement of non-Muslims during
jihad campaigns, and the prominent role of coercion in these major
modalities of Islamization.
Following a successful jihad, she notes:
Male captives might be killed or enslaved, whatever their religious
affiliation. People of the Book were not protected by Islamic law
until they had accepted dhimma (Koran 9:29). Captives might also be
given the choice between Islam and death, or they might pronounce
the confession of faith of their own accord to avoid execution:
jurists ruled that their change of status was to be accepted even
though they had only converted out of fear.
An unapologetic view of Islamic history reveals that forced conversions
to Islam are not exceptional-they have been the norm, across three
continents-Asia, Africa, and Europe-for over 13 centuries.
Moreover, during jihad-even the jihad campaigns of the 20th century
[i.e., the jihad genocide of the Armenians during World War I,
the Moplah jihad in Southern India [1921], the jihad against the
Assyrians of Iraq [early 1930s], the jihads against the Chinese of
Indonesia and the Christian Ibo of southern Nigeria in the 1960s,
and the jihad against the Christians and Animists of the southern
Sudan from 1983 to 2001], the dubious concept (see Paret, above) of
“no compulsion” (Koran 2:256; which was cited with tragic irony during
the Fox reporters “confessional”! ) , has always been meaningless.
A consistent practice was to enslave populations taken from outside
the boundaries of the “Dar al Islam”, where Islamic rule (and Law)
prevailed. Inevitably fresh non-Muslim slaves, including children (for
example, the infamous devshirme system in Ottoman Turkey, which spanned
three centuries and enslaved 500,000 to one million Balkan Christian
adolescent males, forcibly converting them to Islam), were Islamized
within a generation, their ethnic and linguistic origins erased.
Two enduring and important mechanisms for this conversion were
concubinage and the slave militias-practices still evident in the
contemporary jihad waged by the Arab Muslim Khartoum government
against the southern Sudanese Christians and Animists . And Julia Duin
reported in early 2002 that murderous jihad terror campaigns-including,
prominently, forced conversions to Islam -continued to be waged
against the Christians of Indonesia’s Moluccan Islands.
Recently, at the close of a compelling, thoroughly documented address
(delivered April 2, 2006, at The Legatus Summit, Naples, Florida)
entitled, “Islam and Western Democracies,” Cardinal George Pell,
the Archbishop of Sydney, posed four salient questions for his
erstwhile Muslim interlocutors wishing to engage in meaningful
interfaith dialogue:
1) Do they believe that the peaceful suras of the Koran are abrogated
by the verses of the sword? (see here, pp. 67-75 )
2) Is the program of military expansion (100 years after Muhammad’s
death Muslim armies reached Spain and India ) to be resumed when
possible?
3) Do they believe that democratic majorities of Muslims in Europe
would impose Shari’a (Islamic religious) law? (see here)
4) Can we discuss Islamic history (here and here)-even the
hermeneutical problems around the origins of the Koran (see here,
here, here, and here)-without threats of violence?
Dr. Habib Malik, in an eloquent address delivered February 3,
2003 at the at the 27th annual Council for Christian Colleges and
Universities Presidents Conference decried the platitudinous “least
common denominators” paradigm which dominates what he aptly termed
the contemporary “dialogue industry”:
We’re all three Abrahamic religions, we’re the three Middle Eastern
monotheisms, the Isa of the Koran is really the same as the Jesus of
the New Testament….
This is politicized dialogue. This is dialogue for the sake
of dialogue. Philosophically speaking, this is what Kierkegaard
called idle talk, snakke in Danish; what Heidegger called Gerede;
what Sartre called bavardage. In other words, if this is dialogue,
it’s pathetic… it needs to be transcended, and specifically
to concentrate, to focus on the common ethical foundation for
most religions can also be very misleading. Because when you get
into the nitty-gritty, you find that even in what you supposed
were common ethical foundations, there are vast differences,
incompatibilities. Suicide bombers is one recent example. Condoned
by major authoritative Muslim voices; completely unacceptable by
Christianity.
Cardinal Pell’s unanswered questions highlight the predictable
failure of the feckless “We’re all three Abrahamic religions”,
“dialogue for the sake of dialogue” approach to both Muslim-Christian,
and Muslim-Jewish dialogue.
Eschewing the comforting banalities of his predecessor, Benedict
XVI has acknowledged that real dialogue, as opposed to bavardage,
begins not by kissing the Koran, but reading it. Most importantly,
he is impatient with an interfaith dialogue between Muslims and
Christians limited to platitudes about “Abrahamic faiths”, which
scrupulously avoids serious discussions of the living, sacralized
Islamic institution of jihad war.
Until Muslims evidence a willingness to engage in such forthright
discussions, Benedict appears to share Dr.
Malik’s sobering conclusions from his February 2003 speech: “One
certainly needs to be open at all times to learn from the Other,
including to learn at times that the Other right now has nothing to
teach me on a particular issue.”
Andrew G. Bostom is the author of The Legacy of Jihad.

NOT JUST AUSTRALIANS’ VALUES
By Ghassan Hage
On Line opinion, Australia
Australia’s e-journal of social and political debate
Monday, 18 September 2006
I came to Australia from Lebanon in 1976. I was 19.
Yet, I had no problems adjusting to Australian culture or to Australian
values.
First of all, the sacrosanct trio: democracy, tolerance, freedom
of speech. Despite some people’s ignorance of it, Lebanese society
had, and still has, a very vibrant “democracy-tolerance-freedom of
speech” sort of atmosphere. So, I never, ever, had a problem with this
wonderful side of Australian life. When it came time to vote, I never
asked: “How do you do this?” I just did it. Unbelievable, but true.
I never had a problem having civilised arguments with people –
respecting their views even when I disagreed with them (OK, maybe
not always, but most of the time). That’s because I did this kind of
“respect the other” thing in my youth. And when I didn’t, the adults
told me that I should.
Likewise, I had no problem with another apparently Australian value:
easy going-ness. I’ve always been pretty easy going – Mah te’tal himm
mah fee Mashkal, as the Lebs say, which translates as “no worries, no
problem”. Furthermore, when I came to Australia I immediately mixed
with people who were not from “my cultural background”. It was Mah
te’tal himm mah fee Mashkal here, too. I didn’t need an induction in
“Australian values” to do it – because, in Lebanon, I was already
quite used to mixing with a variety of people. My school friends back
there were not only Lebanese, they were European, Iranian, Armenian,
American, Syrian and so on.
Many of my friends from my early days in Oz were quintessential
Aussies (with what then appeared to be frightening accents), and yet we
remain friends to this day. This shows that I had no problems building
deep on-going friendships (or mateships as they are known here). None
whatsoever. It just came naturally to me because … I was doing it all
my life. And, yes, I know that mateship is more than “just friendship”.
True I had to sit in front of the mirror and practise saying, “G’day
mate!” until I kind of got used to it.
Nonetheless, I easily got the essence. Some might say: “But not
all Lebanese migrants are like this.” Fair enough. But not all
“Australians” are like this either. There are lots of differences
among Lebanese and among non-Lebanese – according to a variety of
sociological variables.
In Lebanon. I was a fan of the guitarists Frank Zappa and John
McLaughlin and of the violinist Jean-Luc Ponty. At the age of 19
I thought musical taste defined the person and I wouldn’t have
been caught dead with people who didn’t understand “what Zappa was
about”. So naturally enough, once in Australia, I became friends
with people who liked Zappa, McLaughlin and Ponty. They were pretty
much the same as my Lebanese friends – same dark sense of humour,
same disdain towards society.
So here again: I didn’t need to learn anything to take on board these
seemingly very Australian values (conveyed, appropriately enough,
by American jazz rock).
In much the same way – and I know some people will find this incredibly
hard to believe – the truth is I had no problem treating Australian
women the way they more or less expected to be treated. Indeed,
I think I did quite well.
My partner for the last 20 years is from Tasmania. I don’t think I’ve
had a problem relating to her in an Australian kind of way. (I had
more problem adjusting to her “Tasmanian” kind of way.) Actually,
relating to her was no different from the way I used to relate to
women in Beirut. That was even the case with my first wife who was
an Australian from Irish stock – and from Wagga Wagga, to boot.
I never had to stop and ask: “Well, I wonder how I should treat this
woman in a respectful Australian kind of way.” Of course, I’ve been
called sexist on a number of occasions, in Lebanon and here. But
no more and no less than any of my quintessential Aussie mates get
called sexist by their girlfriends, partners or wives.
My ex-wife and I are as open-minded as the next cosmopolitan
couple. We’re still friends. Again, I didn’t have to take on board any
specific “Australian” values to do this. My teenage years in Lebanon –
moving between girlfriends, getting upset with one girl, she getting
upset with me, moving on, becoming friends again – prepared me well
for my Australian experience.
So, throughout my years in Australia – and please let me brag:
that’s 30 years now – I really have had no serious problems with any
Australian values or aspects of Australian culture. None whatsoever
… well, except one.
Let me state it clearly: my problem with Australian culture is those
painful people who insist that, regardless of what I think, I do have
a problem with Australian culture.
They are the prejudiced and very ugly Australian assimilationists.
Even though, on the whole, they are not the best specimen of what our
nation has to offer, the ugly Australian assimilationists like to think
that, unlike others, they have a unique access to what being Australian
means, and that it is up to them to provide anyone they think is
different with instructions on how to become better Australians.
I met them the very first year I came here and I’ve been meeting them
regularly ever since. I’ve even made an academic career studying them.
I used to think the ugly Australian assimilationists have this
simplistic, psychologically naïve belief that if you harass people into
becoming something for long enough, then, people just become it. Like,
if you see someone who doesn’t know how to play cricket or doesn’t
like it, you just shout at them: “Go ahead, play cricket! Come on,
love cricket! Adopt cricketing values, now!” and, if you persist,
before you know it they’re aspiring to become Bradmans.
Likewise, if someone is sitting around our nation – not looking or
acting Australian – it is enough to just keep telling them: “Become
Australian … go on …
adopt Australian values!” This is supposed to work and make people
want to become Australian.
I used to think that these great national assimilationists actually
believed this. But they are not so naïve. They know very well that
harassing people into becoming Australian doesn’t work. They also
knew that if you tell someone: “Go ahead! Become Australian!” you
achieve two things simultaneously.
You make yourself feel as if you are supremely, obviously and
wonderfully Australian. And you make those you are harassing feel
that they are much less Australian than they really are.
This is the underlying, dirty secret of all those who like to scream
at the top of their voices about the need to adopt Australian values
and assimilate. The last thing they want is for the people they are
screaming at to actually assimilate. What assimilationists revel in
is that very moment when they are nagging people to assimilate.
In fact, they hate it when someone points out that people assimilate
quite naturally according to how long they’ve been in a place,
according to their socio-economic background, according to their
level of education. And the assimilationists certainly don’t want to
hear about the very obvious fact that if there’s one thing that is
guaranteed not to have any influence on people assimilating it is being
screamed at about their need to assimilate and adopt Australian values.
Assimilationists are the real exclusionists of Australian history. They
actually stop people from assimilating.
And this is, paradoxically, what they desire – deep down. They scare
people off. They drive them away.
They make them hide. They force them to live outside mainstream
society. And having done that, they then start telling the very people
whom they’ve excluded that they are living in ghettos and that their
problem is that they are not assimilated enough.
These assimilationists are ugly. They are nasty and malicious towards
the people they are addressing. I have never heard an assimilationist
showing love or respect for the people they are haranguing to
assimilate. They always do it either aggressively or with contempt.
Assimilationists are very caring towards their own mob – wanting
nothing but their relaxation and comfort.
But, at the same time, they are mean spirited, cruel and uncaring
towards those who don’t fit their cultural norms. They do not wish
them well. They want to hurt them. They openly call on such people to
integrate, while they secretly work to see them disintegrate. That’s
the most important feature that makes assimilationists ugly.
And for the last 10 years we’ve had a Prime Minister who is one.
First published in New Matilda on September 6, 2006.
–Boundary_(ID_w1eoq7TSYepDUeV2qW867A)–

THE STORY ON IRAN
Honolulu Star-Bulletin, HI
Vol. 11, Issue 260 – Sunday, September 17, 2006
Webster Nolan visited the tomb of the 14th-century mystic poet Hafiz in
Shiraz, a city in southwestern Iran, seen in this photo illustration.
Suspecting the American media aren’t portraying an accurate picture
of life inside Iran, a retired Honolulu journalist set out to get a
first-hand look at life in the so-called “Axis of Evil” nation By
Webster Nolan Special to the Star-Bulletin TWO WEEKS of traveling
around Iran earlier this year left me with the impression that at
least some Iranians might be just as worried about their leaders
as some Americans are about theirs. Admittedly, my impression was
thoroughly unscientific and intuitive, based more on the unusual
silences that occurred when President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s name
came up in conversation. Nobody seemed eager to defend him, much less
espouse his frequently inflammatory public statements.
My purpose in visiting Iran evolved during the past year or two, mainly
because much of mainstream media in the United States and much of the
American public seemed to be buying into the idea that Tehran posed a
major threat to world peace. It was starting to look like Judith Miller
time again, when the star reporter for the New York Times (and her
editors) bought into the WMD threat supposedly posed by Saddam Hussein.
Only with Iran, it was not just one journalist but many who seem to
accept the “axis of evil” rhetoric as fact.
To be sure, there are exceptions (nationally syndicated columnist
Trudy Rubin and Washington Post writer David Ignatius come immediately
to mind). And plenty of information is available on the Internet and
from bookstores and libraries, if one has the time and curiosity to
pursue it. Generally speaking, though, the daily coverage about Iran
is negative.
Of course, a relatively brief visit to Iran could not prove anything
one way or the other. Still, it seemed useful to go talk with some
Iranians in their own environment, and also to get a first-hand look
at one of the world’s oldest cultures. A brief BusinessWeek article
last year reported on the growth of middle-class consumerism in Iran,
which piqued my curiosity. Also, a well-traveled friend had enjoyed a
visit to the country last year and encouraged me to go. So I signed
up with a British travel agency, got a visa in London and flew off
in late April with 20 other people, mostly Brits, for Tehran. We
traveled nearly 2,000 miles, mostly by bus, and the only certain
conclusion I came to was that Iran is a terrific place to visit.
For starters, everyone we met was friendly, sometimes going to
unexpected lengths to be helpful. (One man actually “walked the extra
mile” when, seeing I was lost on a street in Esfahan, he took me to
my destination, shook hands and went on his way. Others in my group
reported similar experiences.) Another man said he had heard that
Hawaii needed more singers to entertain tourists and asked if he
could get a job in Waikiki, at which point (this conversation took
place in a large crowded hotel lobby) he started singing a Puccini
aria to demonstrate his skill. On another occasion, an engineering
professor I met recited some lines from the 10th-century epic writer
Ferdowsi, a reminder that poetry plays a strong role in the education
and culture of Iran.
As a tourist destination, Iran offers hundreds of opportunities to
explore and ponder, including some of mankind’s most majestic and
serene achievements in architecture. On the other hand, much of the
terrain we covered was hot, arid desert or rugged mountains without
much greenery, which probably explains why Iranians love their public
gardens so much. Every town and city we visited had at least one
large public park with lots of flowing and fountaining water and
beautiful flowers.
PHOTO COURTESY NAINESH PATEL Webster Nolan poses outside the immense,
elaborately tiled gate of the 16th-century Imam Mosque in Esfahan
in central Iran, one of the world’s most majestic architectural
achievements.
ALL ALONG our route, on the streets, in restaurants, at museums
and galleries, mosques and parks, people would start conversations,
sometimes to practice their English (taught in nearly all elementary
schools), sometimes to sell souvenirs, but mostly just to engage in
ordinary conversation, about television programs and movies, cars,
sports, our impressions of their country. It was pretty clear that
most of them were up to date on global matters, presumably through
the Internet.
One of Iran’s attractions as a tourist destination is that you
can devise an itinerary that generally parallels the chronological
narrative of the country’s history. That is what our group leaders
did. After a visit to several Tehran museums (including the famed
jewelry exhibit and the National Museum) on the day of our arrival in
the country, we flew south to Shariz and the next day went by bus to
the ruins of Pasargardae and Persepolis, the ceremonial palaces of
Cyrus and Darius, the sixth-century B.C. “great” emperors who made
Persia the world superpower of their era.
Next we traveled through the Zagros Mountains in the southwest, at
one point viewing a narrow valley through which Alexander the Great
and his army reputedly traveled in their conquest of Iran in 334-330
B.C. Then we visited palace of Shapur I, the shah who defeated the
mighty Romans in several major battles and in A.D. 260 captured the
Emperor Valerian, believed to have died in his cell at the site.
The Arab conquest of Iran began in A.D. 660, and much of our remaining
itinerary focused on that era, which also brought Islam to Iran,
and the subsequent centuries of Mongol and Turk invasions, as well
the happier years of the Savafid dynasty (A.D. 1491-1722).
We visited ancient citadels and caravanserais, old battlegrounds,
Zoroastrian fire temples and Muslim mosques, two Armenian churches,
mausoleums and madrassas, minarets and medieval bridges, museums and
art galleries, bazaars and public gardens.
We stayed in the desert-bordering cities of Kerman and Yazd,
and the central Iran metropolis of Esfahan with its extraordinary
architecture, before returning to Tehran. Along our route we stopped
at smaller towns, Sarvestan and Nairiz, Mahan and Rayin, Natanz and
Kashan, each with something special to offer: a delicious lamb stew,
a carpet-weaving shop, a centuries-old ice house, a hidden garden, a
group of wind towers, an ancient qanat (a remarkable system of wells
for irrigating crops and supplying water to towns), and, invariably,
some enjoyable conversations with Iranians.
AS OUR JOURNEY progressed and we learned more about the country, we
began to fully appreciate that we were visiting a highly energetic,
entrepreneurial country.
International trade, going back to the Silk Road days and even further,
is a major part of their culture, a point made recently in editorial
commentaries by former Secretary of State Warren Christopher, who
had considerable experience negotiating with the Iranians.
In urging resumption of U.S.-Iran dialog, he advises American
negotiators to remember that the Iranians are born bargainers, as
our own visits to the bazaars amply testified.
Other Iranian assets are its high literacy rate (80 percent,
according to a CIA estimate), a growing middle class, citizen
experience in election campaigns and voting at the local and national
level. A recent study by professors Ali Gheissari and Vali Nasr titled
“Democracy in Iran” documents a continuing effort by various political
and intellectual leaders during the 20th century to establish rule
of law, free press and a more free-wheeling political system than
currently imposed. (My own personal experiences also suggest that
many Iranians love a good argument, a trait that can play an important
part in democracy-building.)
Certainly Iran has some serious problems at this stage in its
history. Despite huge revenues from oil and vast untapped natural gas
resources, the country’s economy is faltering, with high unemployment
and inflation afflicting the population, estimated at 70 million. There
is a large gap between the few rich and many poor. There are strong
restraints on women, the news media and the market economy. The
government apparently has a good many inexperienced people in
decision-making positions. Students and the jobless occasionally take
to the streets to vent their anger.
The Iranian president, like the U.S. president, needs to acquire some
skills in public diplomacy.
AS WE NEARED the end of our trip, I wondered whether it might be better
for our government to work with Iran as a trading partner rather than
treat it as a political enemy, as a market rather than a military
target, much in the way that we’ve worked with China during the
past 30 years. Both countries would benefit, and a vigorous business
relationship likely would help defuse the incendiary rhetoric that
emanates from Tehran and Washington.
Getting to that stage would require compromises from both sides,
acknowledging past grievances, such as Iran’s holding 52 American
hostages for 444 days in 1979-80 and the continuing malignant
denunciations of Israel. The United States, for its part in re-opening
the dialog, would need to acknowledge its role in overthrowing Prime
Minister Mohammed Mossadegh in 1953, its stubborn backing of the
hated Shah Reza Mohammed, its covert support of Iraq in its 1980s
war on Iran, its shooting down of an Iranian airliner in July 1988
with 290 fatalities and its continuing economic sanctions, which in
the long run can only hurt and anger the Iranian people. These are
difficult and emotional issues, but that is why diplomacy exists — to
recognize such problems and move on toward building better relations.
CURRENT U.S. government concerns about Iran focus on two issues:
the suspicion that Tehran is developing nuclear weaponry and that
it supports international terrorism. The first step toward resolving
these disputes is for both sides to cool down, stop trying to scare
everybody with irresponsible public statements. The next step is to
find a way to start direct negotiations. That would not solve every
problem but could lessen many dangers.
The Internet and a wide range of books and reports offer useful
background on these two issues.
On the nuclear controversy, Iran’s membership in the nonproliferation
treaty (NPT) entitles it to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes. The
Web site of the International Atomic Energy Agency affirms that Iran is
abiding by the Safeguards Agreement of the treaty, but also complains
that Iran fails to cooperate in “confidence building” by refusing to
provide certain documents and information about dual-use equipment
and certain individuals.
(I suspect that Iran is not the only NPT country withholding
information, since no nation would or should disclose data that might
help its perceived enemies.)
Still, the U.S. believes Tehran is hiding a nuclear weapons program,
though neither Washington nor Israel has provided convincing evidence
of this.
Even assuming that Tehran is trying to build a nuclear arsenal, which
it denies, the fact that Israel already has such weapons and refuses
to join the NPT bolsters Iran’s claim to self-defense. But surely
there must be a sufficient number of intelligent policy makers and
skilled negotiators in this world to come to grips with this problem.
As for Iran’s role in world terrorism, it’s probably accurate to say
that in the early years of the current regime, there was an effort
to export the Islamic revolution. But today, when President Bush and
his senior advisers accuse Iran of sponsoring international terrorism,
they generally give only two examples: supporting Hezbollah’s attacks
on Israel from Lebanon and Shia militants in Iraq. That’s hardly
worldwide terrorism. So, again, the first step is to cool the rhetoric
and stop frightening people unnecessarily.
Then it might be helpful to look at why Iran helps Hezbollah. In a
way, it’s similar to the reason why America helps Israel, although the
American effort operates on a much larger and more deadly scale. Iran,
like most of the Muslim world, works from the premise that Israel
is an illegitimate occupier of Palestine that for 60 years has
been terrorizing the Palestinians in the name of self-defense. On
the other hand, the U.S. government, Democrats and Republicans,
has long held that Israel is a legally constituted state that has
a right to defend itself from attack, even if, as most recently, it
means killing hundreds of innocent people or destroying the economy
of a nearby democracy.
This issue is much harder to resolve than the nuclear controversy. My
own belief is that the answer probably lies with those 30 or so groups
of Israelis and Arabs who work together, mostly in Israel, in village
government, in health and cultural projects, and sometimes even at the
political level, as in the Geneva Proposal for peace a few years ago.
MEANWHILE, a sincere effort to develop mutually beneficial relations
between Iran and the United States seems a far better course than
the current saber-rattling. A good place to start might be tourism,
especially if Tehran would encourage more Americans to visit by making
it easier to get visas.
(The visitor destination industry in Iran needs some upgrading,
so there might even be a role for Hawaii.) Another step, already
suggested by Rubin the columnist, might be to restart cultural exchange
programs, with initial emphasis on mutual visits by members of Congress
and the Iranian parliament. I might add, as someone who has seen the
value of such exchanges, that giving journalists priority might be
a big help, sending ours off to Iran and inviting theirs to America.
Webster Nolan is a retired journalist and former director of the
East-West Center journalist exchange programs.

EVERYONE’S A WINNER AT MONK COMPETITION
By Matt Schudel
Washington Post Staff Writer
Washington Post
Monday, September 18, 2006; Page C01
But Pianist Hamasyan Takes Top Prize
For a music that usually flies beneath the radar of public notice,
jazz has had some rare visibility in Washington this past week,
and even a touch of glamour.
In honor of the 20th anniversary of the Thelonious Monk Institute
of Jazz, festivities began Thursday with a White House celebration
of America’s indigenous musical art that included an East Room
performance taped for PBS. It even had President Bush bobbing his
head to spirited versions of “Kansas City” and “It Don’t Mean a Thing
(If It Ain’t Got That Swing).”
Tell Your Story Tell us, in 400 words or less, about a time of crisis
that tested your faith, the person who most influenced your beliefs
or a life-changing event that shaped your spiritual identity. E-mail
your comments to [email protected] and include a daytime phone number.
In Depth
Open House A monthly visit to a house of worship in the Washington
area.
My Faith How has spirituality shaped your life? Readers share their
personal stories.
Religion Features We explore matters of faith and religion on the
first Sunday of each month.
Multimedia Photos, videos and panaromas of religious events and trends
around the world.
Save & Share Tag This Article
Saving options 1. Save to description: Headline (required) Subheadline
Byline
2. Save to notes (255 character max): Subheadline Blurb None 3. Tag
This Article
On Saturday, 12 pianists faced off in the semifinals of the annual
Monk competition at the National Museum of American History’s Baird
Auditorium. And last night at a sold-out Eisenhower Theater at the
Kennedy Center, three finalists competed for $35,000 in scholarships
and the exposure that goes with winning what has become, without
question, the most prestigious jazz competition in the world.
The annual contest, which rotates from one instrument to another each
year, has launched the careers of such young jazz stars as Joshua
Redman, Jane Monheit, Jacky Terrasson, Lisa Henry and Gretchen Parlato,
all of whom performed before and after last night’s competition.
There was other star power on hand as well, from presenters Quincy
Jones, Phylicia Rashad and Billy Dee Williams. But amid the celebratory
back-patting, there was a larger lesson to be learned than just
having a jazzy good time. The Monk Institute has a genuinely global
educational mission, which was embodied in this year’s 12 piano
semifinalists — who hailed from different countries. The annual
composition prize went to a Hungarian, Kalman Olah.
“The philosophy of jazz represents tolerance, teamwork and inclusion,”
said Thelonious Monk Jr., who helped found the Washington-based
institute in 1986 and is its board chairman. “That’s what America is
about. The music reflects that.”
For Monk, the institute is a way of “taking care of my father’s
legacy.”
His father, of course, was one of the guiding spirits of modern jazz,
a fiercely original composer and pianist who didn’t have megawatt jazz
competitions or college jazz programs to advance his career. Instead,
he came of age when jazz knowledge was passed from hand to hand and,
sometimes, from father to son.
“That music was part of my DNA,” said Thelonious Jr., 56, in a
pre-competition interview. After playing drums with his father in
the 1970s, the younger Monk had a career in R&B and rock music before
putting down his sticks in the mid-1980s.
Somewhat to his surprise, after founding the institute, he began to
reconnect with his jazz past, became absorbed in his father’s music
and formed a sizzling sextet that is one of the premier hard-bop
groups in jazz today.
He also settled into a role as the loquacious frontman for the Monk
Institute.
“I realized I could talk about this music,” he said, “because my
father had taken me everywhere and because he was like the oracle of
Delphi. I said, man, that’s a little gift. And gift is only a gift
if you use it.”
In 20 years, the Monk Institute has grown into a $5 million entity
that, against all odds, has put jazz into elementary and high school
curricula across the country. It sponsors a two-year fellowship
program for young musicians at the University of Southern California.
And, with his powers of persuasion, the younger Monk has helped bring
such distinguished musicians as Herbie Hancock, Ron Carter and Wayne
Shorter — all of whom performed at the White House and at last night’s
post-competition Kennedy Center jam — to schools from Miami to Alaska,
and overseas from Egypt to Vietnam.
“We’ve been very instrumental in changing the paradigm in jazz
education,” Monk says. “The Monk Institute is about re-creating that
interface between the older musician and the younger musician.”
Which brings us back to last night’s slickly produced finale,
underwritten by General Motors and Northrop Grumman. With Hancock,
Andrew Hill, Danilo Perez, Renee Rosnes, Billy Taylor and Randy Weston
judging the piano competition, the three young finalists added their
voices to a century-old jazz tradition.
The clear audience favorite was a Dutch-born Californian, Gerald
Clayton, who deftly combined the second movement of Beethoven’s
“Pathetique” Sonata with John Lewis’s “Django.”
But the judges were more impressed with Armenian-born Tigran Hamasyan,
who offered rhythmically dynamic readings of Ray Noble’s “Cherokee”
and Miles Davis’s “Solar” to take the top prize of $20,000. Clayton
won second place, and American Aaron Parks came in third.
Whether any of these pianists develops into a star remains to be
seen. But after 20 years of career-making competitions, the Monk
Institute can rightfully lay claim to being biggest buzzmaker in the
jazz world.

THE WORLD TAKES NOTE AT LAST
Messenger.ge, Georgia
Monday, September 18, 2006, #176 (1196)
After a “contentious procedural debate” GUAM member states (Georgia,
Ukraine, Azerbaijan and Moldova) have succeeded in having the
protracted conflicts on their territories discussed at the 61st
session of the UN general assembly.
The significance of this event is underlined by the hostility with
which it was greeted by Russia, who’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs
released a pre-emptive strike of a statement, and vowed to keep its
peacekeepers in Georgia’s breakaway regions regardless of any demand to
remove them. Russia was one of the fifteen countries that voted against
discussing the issue, which passed by just one vote on September 13.
The previous day Russia had successfully managed to stop the issued
from being included among those recommended for discussion to the
General Assembly at a sitting of the General Committee, which is
the steering body that sets the agenda for the GA sessions. In
a complacently victorious statement Russian MFA spokesman Mikhail
Kamynin said “We have from the outset been against politicizing this
issue and involving the General Assembly”, though, as the Georgian
MFA pointed out, these conflicts are by their very nature political.
President Saakashvili is expected to address the assembly later this
week, and will probably demand that Russian peacekeepers are replaced
with an international police force in South Ossetia. Russia is furious,
as even though there is little chance of any international organisation
offering to step in and police the conflict zone in the near future,
the very fact that the issue is being discussed at the UN at all
indicates that Russia’s ‘monopoly’ on the conflicts is slipping away.
This is a significant victory for both GUAM, which has now certified
itself as a proper international organisation, and not a petty anti-CIS
with no clout, as many in Russia had hoped, and also for the Georgian
government’s policy of pushing for the internationalisation of the
conflicts-even if they are only internationalised at the discussion
level.
This is not the only indication that the tide of opinion may
be changing with regard to the conflicts, however. In May US
Vice-President Dick Cheney gave a damning speech, lambasting Russian
“bullying” of its neigbours and use of energy as a political weapon,
the opening of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline have underscored
the importance of the region globally.
All year the Minsk group on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict have
intensified their efforts to kick start the peace process, and the
appointment of the young and energetic Matt Bryza, deputy assistant
secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs, as the US
co-chair has at least injected some new blood in the system, even if
no concrete achievements have been observed.
Moldova and Ukraine, with the explicit support of the EU, have adopted
a much more robust policy towards Transnistria also. Moscow calls it
a blockade, but it seems that, with the likely accession of Romania to
the EU in January, the EU are keen to clear up this ‘frozen conflict’
which will sit uncomfortably close to its eastern border.
But it is in Georgia where wind is changing most perceptibly
perhaps. The very public support for Georgia’s territorial integrity
and its government that has been forthcoming from the Whitehouse has
been accompanied by an increased assertiveness in Tbilisi.
Parliament’s resolution to ask the government to withdraw Russian
peacekeepers has been backed by two of the most senior lawmakers
in the US, Senator Richard Lugar and, as Saakashvili remarked,
possible-future-president Senator John McCain. These two both
unequivocally stated that Russian peacekeepers should be replaced in
the conflict zones.
Perhaps as significant, but less headline grabbing, is the recent
statements from Europe regarding the conflicts, where it seems patience
may finally be running out. Since the September 3 ‘helicopter incident’
in which South Ossetian paramilitaries fired on a helicopter carrying
Defence Minister Irakli Okruashvili reminded everybody how delicate
the situation is, and underlined the lawlessness of the South Ossetian
regime. The incident was strongly condemned by OSCE chair Karel De
Gucht, who described it as “criminal”.
Plans by the South Ossetian leadership to hold an ‘independence’
referendum have led to strong criticism from Europe also, with Council
of Europe Secretary General Terry Davis calling it “a waste of time”.
Even if we shouldn’t expect the blue helmets in the conflict zones
to suddenly have NATO or EU logos, these developments do indicate
an increasing engagement of the international community in Georgia’s
conflicts, and the UN decision is just the latest indication of the
trend towards ‘internationalisation’, which is exactly what Georgia
needs.
From: Baghdasarian

KAMANCHEH BY PEYMAN NASEHPOUR
Persian Mirror
The Persian Bowed Musical Instrument
Kamancheh is the chief Persian bowed instrument and is played both
in Persian art and folk music. The aim of this article is to offer
a historical introduction to this important Persian spike fiddle.
Kamancheh before Ghajar Period
Kamancheh is an ancient instrument. According to different books that
the author has considered, Ebn-e-Faghih is the first who mentions
to this instrument in 10th century. Also some Persian poets such as
Masoud-e-Sa’d, mentions to the name kamancheh in his poems.
Allameh-Ghotb-al-Din Mohammad Shirazi, in his famous encyclopedia,
Dorrat-al-Taj, mentions to this instrument by the name komajeh
that should be a dialect of kamancheh. The very famous Azerbaijani
musician/theorist/poet, Abd-al-Ghader Maraghi, describes this
instrument in his famous book, Jame’-al-Alhan and says that the
sound of kamancheh is more beautiful than ghezhak that is another
Persian bowed instrument and today ghezhak (with the name gheychak)
is played in Sistan-Baluchistan of Iran and is related to Indian
bowed instrument called sarangi.
In the book Kanz-al-Tohaf by Hassan Kashani that is maybe the only
historical book on making Iranian instruments, it has been written
about kamancheh of that time and describes how to make a kamancheh and
its accessories. It is very interesting to notice that the author of
the book mentions to this instrument with the name gheshak (another
dialect of ghezhak).
Maybe some object us what he describes is not the kamancheh but
fortunately he has painted the shape of kamancheh in his book and it is
wonderful that he mentions that bow (he calls it mezrab. It should be
mentioned that mezrab today is used for plectrum of Persian plucked
instruments) of gheshak is called kamancheh. The author believes
that etymologically Hasan Kashani was right and it is better to say
that kamancheh is more suitable to mention to the bow of this bowed
instrument than the instrument itself. The reason is that the word
kamancheh is the combination of the two words, ‘kaman’ that means
bow and ‘cheh’ that is diminutive suffix in Persian language. Anyway,
to apply kamancheh for this Persian bowed instrument is error allowed
by usage and it seems there is no better choice to offer.
Another book the Behjat-al-Ruh, mentions to kamancheh as a perfect
instrument.
Fortunately there are some historical Persian paintings (called in
the West as Persian miniatures) that show the kamancheh.
Some famous kamancheh masters of Iran before the Ghajar Period are:
Mirza Mohammad Kamancheh’i, Ostad Ma’sum Kamancheh’i, Molana Ahmad
Kamancheh’i entitled to Amir Ghazi, Ostad Zeytun, Malek Mahmud,
the brother of the author of the famous book, Tarikh-e-Sistan.
Kamancheh in and after Ghajar Period
According to different books in Persian language, it seems kamancheh
had only two strings. Though we don’t know when the third string had
been added to this instrument, but we know that in Ghajar period,
kamancheh had three strings.
Different books mention to the completion of this instrument. For
example, one of the famous kamancheh players of Ghajar Period, Agha
Jan, the father of Mirza Habib Sama’ Hozur (very famous santoor and
tonbak player) had invented a kind of kamancheh that had strange
strings and keys and it had a long neck and he was used to play that
while was standing up and he had named that kamancheh, Majles-Ara!
Some famous kamancheh players in and after Ghajar Period are:
Khoshnavaz Khan, Agha Motalleb, Esmail Khan, Hossein Khan Esmail-zadeh,
Gholi Khan, Musa Kashi, Mirza Rahim, Javad Khan Ghazvini, Bagher
Khan Rameshgar, Alireza Changi, Mirza Gholamhossein, Safdar Khan,
Hossein entitled to Karim-Kur and his daughter, Vajiheh, Farmanfarma
the Uncle of Naser-al-Din Shah, Jamileh (the female student of Esmail
Khan), Ali Khan, Reza Khan Nikfar, Hossein Yahaghghi and his sister
Keshvar Khnum entitled to Farah-Lagha, Haig (Armenian kamancheh player)
and at last, Asghar Bahari.
According to some books that we brought some parts of them here,
we see that kamancheh was very popular and important in Persian
art and folk music. After the introduction of Western violin to
Iran, unfortunately everything changed! Though the forth string
was added to kamancheh after the introduction of violin to Iran,
but many instrumentalists put the kamancheh down and started playing
violin. It is interesting to mention that even most of the students of
Hossein Khan Esmail-zadeh such as Reza Mahjubi, Rokn-al-Din Mokhtari,
Abu-al-Hasan Saba, Ebrahim Mansuri and so on were violin player.
The reader may consider what Ruh-al-Allah Khaleghi, the famous
historian/composer/theorist says about kamancheh in his famous
historical book, Sargozasht-e-Musighi-ye-Iran:
‘The sound of kamancheh is nasal, while the sound of violin is closer
to nature! When the violin was brought to Iran, since it had four
strings, another string was added to kamancheh for imitating the violin
and since it was very similar to kamancheh, many kamancheh players
became violin instructors. Since violin was similar to kamancheh,
portable and its shape was more beautiful, therefore gradually replaced
by kamancheh and today nobody plays kamancheh. It is always natural
that the more complete instruments will be replaced by non-complete
ones. Similarly flute was replaced by ney and oboe by sorna.’
Anyway, there were some compassionate artists such as Aref Ghazvini
that was not happy for what was happening to Persian art music and
warned about the danger of abolishing the Persian art music and its
important instruments like kamancheh, santoor and tar.
One day Hasan Mashhun, Persian art music researcher, asked from one of
the most famous kamancheh players of his time: ‘Why did you put down
the kamancheh? We have lots of violin players, but kamancheh players,
one after another, are becoming old and disabled.’ That the master
replied: ‘There is no student of kamancheh.
People have become modern and play violin!’
It is obvious that using western instruments instead of Iranian
instruments is not necessarily a smart idea. As some ethno-musicologist
believe that there should be a difference between modernization and
westernization. Violin is violin and kamancheh is kamancheh. It is
clear that every instrument has its own value and there is no need
to discuss about that more.
As historians mention, the late Asghar Bahari, gave a new life to
kamancheh by playing this instrument in many concerts, gatherings,
radio and TV.
It is fortunate that today we have many kamancheh players in such a
way that today there is no need to be anxious about the abolishment
of the art of kamancheh playing.
The picture of Asghar Bahari, appeared in Jean During’s The Art of
Persian Music, pg. 114.
Woman playing the kamancheh in a painting from the Hasht-Behesht
Palace in Isfahan, Iran, 1669 (from Wikipedia).
Write a Letter to the Editor or Send an email to this author
More Persian Instruments Articles
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Peyman Nasehpour was born in Teran, in 1974. He is a musician and plays
the Persian hand drums, including the tonbak, the ghaval and the daf.
He lives in Germany.
For more on Peyman, visit his website Rhythmweb.
This article was contributed by PEYMAN NASEHPOUR, Guest Contributor
for PersianMirror.

WB: 2 TRILLION USD COST OF BIRD FLU THREAT TO WORLD ECONOMY
Xinhua, China
2006-09-18 09:03:37
BEIJING, Sept. 18 (Xinhuanet) — The outbreak of a severe avian
influenza pandemic could cost the world economy up to 2 trillion
U.S. dollars, the World Bank warned Sunday.
“We estimate this could cost, in fact, certainly over 1 trillion
dollars and perhaps as high as 2 trillion dollars, in the worst case
scenario, so I think the threat, the economic threat, remains real
and remains substantial,” said Jim Adams, vice president for East
Asia and the Pacific and head of the bank’s avian flu task force.
Earlier estimates last year of about 800 billion dollars in economic
costs were basically written on the back of an envelope, he said at
a press conference during the International Monetary Fund and World
Bank annual meetings in Singapore.
“But more recent financial modelling had revealed a sharper threat
should the virus mutate and pass easily among people,” he also said,
adding a severe pandemic could cost more than 3 percent of the global
economy’s gross national product.
The World Bank has provided advice and financing totaling 150 million
dollars to projects to tackle bird flu in Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan,
Georgia, the Kyrgyz Republic, Laos, Moldavia, Nigeria, Tajikistan,
Turkey and Vietnam.
The international community has pledged to donate 2 billion dollars
to developing countries, and of this, 1.2 billion dollars has been
committed so far.
Asia has been hardest hit, with 127 out the 144 human deaths arising
from bird flu since 2003 occurring in East Asian countries, other
officials of the bank said.