Journal of Turkish Weekly, Turkey
May 21 2006
Turkish MP Kocak Submits Bill on French Genocide of Algerian People
Print
Sunday , 21 May 2006
Source: Anatolian News Agency
ANKARA – Mahmut Kocak, a Justice and Development Party (AKP)
parliamentarian, has presented a draft law to Turkish parliamentary
Speaker’s office on Thursday [18 May] on genocide against Algerian
people.
The draft resolution proposes that the acts carried out by French
troops in Algeria shall be accepted as “genocide” and asks that 8 May
shall be declared as “commemoration day of Algerian genocide”.
The draft law also proposes that any denial of “this genocide” shall
be considered as a crime.
The draft law describes the inhumane acts which France did in several
Algerian cities on 8 May 1945 as “genocide”.
The draft resolution asks for punishment of individuals who reject
“genocide” in Algeria, with imprisonment terms and fine.
Kocak told a news conference that reciprocity principle was valid in
international relations, stating that the draft resolution was
prepared to “retaliate” [against] French proposal.
He said Algerian President Abdelaziz Bouteflika also had a request in
this direction.
Last week, Motherland Party (Anavatan) parliamentarian Ibrahim
Ozdogan prepared a draft law envisaging three years of imprisonment
for individuals who make claims of Armenian genocide.
The draft requests imprisonment terms up to three years for
individuals who allege (through article, picture or cartoon) that
Turks committed
genocide against Armenians.
French parliament ended Thursday’s session on a draft law which
proposes “any denial of Armenian genocide to be considered a crime”
without bringing it to voting.
French parliament sources said that a possible voting on the draft
law would not be held until new legislation term began in October.

American Thinker, AZ
May 21 2006
Badging Infidels in Iran
May 20th, 2006
The Iranian Majlis or Parliament has reportedly passed (now
disputed) a law requiring that, `Jews would have to sew a yellow
strip of cloth on the front of their clothes, while Christians would
wear red badges and Zoroastrians would be forced to wear blue cloth.’
An outraged Rabbi Marvin Hier of the Simon Weisenthal Institute
immediately responded to the provisions for Jews:
`This is reminiscent of the Holocaust…Iran is moving closer and
closer to the ideology of the Nazis.’
Such a comparison sprang to the minds of many.
But Rabbi Hier’s statement and this general view ignore the immediate
context – most glaringly, the simultaneous dress badge requirements for
Christians and Zoroastrians living in Iran – and more importantly, the
sad historical legacy of Shi’ite religious persecution of all
non-Muslims which dates back to the founding of the Shi’ite theocracy
in (then) Persia, under Shah Ismail at the very outset of the 16th
century.
A reflexive invocation of the Nazi era is ahistorical, and
symptomatic of a general failure to appreciate either Judenhass or
much broader anti-`infidel’ (i.e., in this case anti-Christian and
anti-Zoroastrian) motifs intrinsic to orthodox Islamic doctrine and
practice – both Sunni and Shi’ite. The Iranian Parliament’s legislation
reflects the profound influence of najis – a unique Shi’ite
institution – not Nazism.
Shi’ite Theocratic Rule in Iran: Najis and non-Muslims (especially
Jews)
Visceral, even annihilationist animus towards Jews is a deep-rooted
phenomenon in Shi’ite Iran, hardly unique to the contemporary
post-Khomeini Shi’ite theocracy, including the current regime of
Ayatollah Khameini and President Ahmadinejad. The Safavid rulers, at
the outset of the 16th century, formally established Shi’a Islam as
the Persian state religion, while permitting a clerical hierarchy
nearly unlimited control and influence over all aspects of public
life.
The profound influence of the Shi’ite clerical elite, continued for
almost four centuries (although interrupted, between 1722-1795 during
the period of Sunni Afghan invasion and rule), through the later
Qajar period, as characterized by the noted scholar E.G. Browne:
The Mujtahids and Mulla are a great force in Persia and concern
themselves with every department of human activity from the minutest
detail of personal purification to the largest issues of politics
These Shi’ite clerics emphasized the notion of the ritual
uncleanliness (najis) of Jews, in particular, but also Christians,
Zoroastrians, and others, as the cornerstone of inter-confessional
relationships toward non-Muslims.
The impact of this najis conception (based on a literal
interpretation of Koran 9:28) was already apparent to European
visitors to Persia during the reign of the first Safavid Shah, Ismail
I (1502-1524). The Portuguese traveler Tome Pires observed (between
1512-1515), `Sheikh Ismail…never spares the life of any Jew’, while
another European travelogue notes, `…the great hatred (Ismail I)
bears against the Jews…’. During the reign of Shah Tahmasp I (d.
1576), the British merchant and traveler Anthony Jenkinson (a
Christian), when finally granted an audience with the Shah,
…was required to wear `basmackes’ (a kind of over-shoes), because
being a giaour [infidel], it was thought he would contaminate the
imperial precincts…when he was dismissed from the Shah’s presence,
[Jenkinson stated] `after me followed a man with a basanet of sand,
sifting all the way that I had gone within the said palace’- as
though covering something unclean.
Mohammad Baqer Majlesi (d. 1699), the highest institutionalized
clerical officer under both Shah Sulayman (1666-1694) and Shah Husayn
(1694-1722), was perhaps the most influential cleric of the Safavid
Shi’ite theocracy in Persia. By design, he wrote many works in
Persian to disseminate key aspects of the Shi’a ethos among ordinary
persons. His treatise, `Lightning Bolts Against the Jews’ (pp.
216-220), was written in Persian, and despite its title, was actually
an overall guideline to anti-dhimmi regulations for all non-Muslims
within the Shi’ite theocracy.
Al-Majlisi, in this treatise, describes the standard humiliating
requisites for non-Muslims living under the Shari’a, first and
foremost, the blood ransom jizya, a poll-tax, based on Qur’an 9:29.
He then enumerates six other restrictions relating to worship,
housing, dress, transportation, and weapons (specifically, i.e., to
render the dhimmis defenseless), before outlining the unique Shi’ite
impurity or `najis’ regulations.
With regard to dress, Majlisi’s stipulations from the late 17th
century are consistent with the contemporary the Iranian Parliament’s
proposal (albeit the `color-coding’ differs):
it is appropriate that the ruler of the Muslims imposed upon them
clothing that would distinguish then from Muslims so that they would
not resemble Muslims. It is customary for Jews to wear yellow
clothes while Christians wear black and dark blue ones. Christians
[also] wear a girdle on their waists, and Jews sew a piece of silk of
a different color on the front part of their clothes.
But it is the latter najis prohibitions which lead Anthropology
Professor Laurence Loeb (who studied and lived within the Jewish
community of Southern Iran in the early 1970s) to observe, `Fear of
pollution by Jews led to great excesses and peculiar behavior by
Muslims.’ Again, according Al-Majlisi’s authoritative and influential
late 17th century text,
And, that they should not enter the pool while a Muslim is bathing at
the public baths…It is also incumbent upon Muslims that they should
not accept from them victuals with which they had come into contact,
such as distillates, which cannot be purified. In something can be
purified, such as clothes, if they are dry, they can be accepted,
they are clean. But if they [the dhimmis] had come into contact with
those cloths in moisture they should be rinsed with water after being
obtained. As for hide, or that which has been made of hide such as
shoes and boots, and meat, whose religious cleanliness and lawfulness
are conditional on the animal’s being slaughtered [according to the
Shari’a], these may not be taken from them. Similarly, liquids that
have been preserved in skins, such as oils, grape syrup, [fruit]
juices, myrobalan, and the like, if they have been put in skin
containers or water skins, these should [also] not be accepted from
them…It would also be better if the ruler of the Muslims would
establish that all infidels could not move out of their homes on days
when it rains or snows because they would make Muslims impure.
Professor Laurence Loeb’s seminal analysis of dhimmi Jews in Shi’ite
Persia/Iran (Outcaste- Jewish Life in Southern Iran 1977), documents
the social impact of najis regulations, beginning with the
implementation of a
badge of shame [as] an identifying symbol which marked someone as a
najis Jew and thus to be avoided. From the reign of Abbas I
[1587-1629] until the 1920s, all Jews were required to display the
badge
Loeb emphasizes, `Fear of pollution by Jews led to great excesses and
peculiar behavior by Muslims.’
Indoors/Outdoors and Wet/Dry
The enduring nature of the fanatical najis regulation prohibiting
dhimmis from being outdoors during rain and/or snow, is well
established. Examples include item 5 of Benjamin’s list (Eight Years
in Asia and Africa- From 1846-1855, Hanover, 1859, pp. 211-213) of
`oppressions’
(they [i.e., the Jews] are forbidden to go out when it rains; for it
is said the rain would wash dirt off them, which would sully the feet
of the Mussulmans),
and item 1 of Hamadan’s 1892 regulations for its Jews (From a letter
by S. Somekh, The Alliance Israelite Universale, October, 27, 1892,
translated and reproduced in Littman, D.G. `Jews Under Muslim Rule:
The Case of Persia’ The Weiner Library Bulletin, Vol. XXXII, Nos.
49/50, 1979, pp. 7-8.)
(The Jews are forbidden to leave their houses when it rains or snows
[to prevent the impurity of the Jews being transmitted to the Shiite
Muslims]),
as well as this account provided by the missionary Napier Malcolm
who lived in the Yezd area at the close of the 19th century:
They [the strict Shi’as] make a distinction between wet and dry; only
a few years ago it was dangerous for an Armenian Christian to leave
his suburb and go into the bazaars in Isfahan on a wet [rainy] day.
`A wet dog is worse than a dry dog.’ [Malcolm, Napier. Five Years in
a Persian Town, New York, 1905, p. 107.]
Moreover, the late Persian Jewish scholar Sarah (Sorour) Soroudi
related this family anecdote:
In his youth, early in the 20th century, my late father was
eyewitness to the implementation of this regulation. A group of elder
Jewish leaders in Kashan had to approach the head clergy of the town
(a Shi’i community from early Islamic times, long before the
Safavids, and known for its religious fervor) to discuss a matter of
great urgency to the community. It was a rainy day and they had to
send a Muslim messenger to ask for special permission to leave the
ghetto. Permission granted, they reached the house of the clergy but,
because of the rain, they were not allowed to stand even in the
hallway. They remained outside, drenched, and talked to the mullah
who stood inside next to the window.'[ from, `The Concept of Jewish
Impurity and its Reflection in Persian and Judeo-Persian Traditions’,
Irano-Judaica, Vol. 3, 1994, p. 156.]
Souroudi added this note, as well [p.156, footnote 36]:
As late as 1923, the Jews of Iran counted this regulation as one of
the anti-Jewish restrictions still practiced in the country.’
A more disconcerting 20th century anecdote from an informant living
in Shiraz, was recounted by Anthropologist Laurence Loeb [in
Outcaste, p.21]:
When I was a boy, I went with my father to the house of a non-Jew on
business. When we were on our way, it started to rain. We stopped
near a man who had apparently fallen and was bleeding. As we started
to help him, a Muslim akhond (theologian) stopped and asked me who I
was and what I was doing. Upon discovering that I was a Jew, he
reached for a stick to hit me for defiling him by being near him in
the rain. My father ran to him and begged the akhond to hit him
instead.
Finally, Janet Kestenberg Amighi. (in The Zoroastrians of Iran:
conversion, assimilation, or persistence. New York, NY: AMS Press,
1990, pp. 85) has argued that the Zoroastrians were perhaps the
lowest non-Muslim caste in Shi’ite Iran, and accordingly, subjected
to the most severe najis-related restrictions:
In Yezd and Kerman (through the early 20th century), Moslem pollution
prohibitions were strictly observed and extended to most aspects of
life. A Moslem would not eat out of a dish touched by a Zoroastrian
nor permit even his garment to be touched by a Zoroastrian.
Zoroastrians were forbidden the use of most community facilities such
as barber shops, bath houses, water fountains, and tea houses. Water
and wetness were considered to be particularly strong carriers of
pollution. Zoroastrians were not permitted to go to the market in the
rain. They could not touch fruit when shopping in the bazaar,
although the dry goods could be touched.
Far worse, the dehumanizing character of these popularized `impurity’
regulations appears to have fomented recurring Muslim anti-infidel
violence, including pogroms and forced conversions, throughout the
17th, 18th ,19th and into the early 20th centuries, as opposed to
merely unpleasant, `odd behaviors’ by individual Muslims towards
non-Muslims.
Respite and Recrudescence
Reza Pahlavi’s spectacular rise to power in 1925 was accompanied by
dramatic reforms, including secularization and westernization
efforts, as well as a revitalization of Iran’s pre-Islamic spiritual
and cultural heritage. This profound sociopolitical transformation
had very positive consequences for Iran’s non-Muslims. By virtue of ,
`…breaking the power of the Shia clergy, which for centuries had
stood in the way of progress’, Walter Fischel observed that Reza
Shah, `…shaped a modernized and secularized state, freed almost
entirely from the fetters of a once fanatical and powerful clergy’.
Regarding Jews specifically, Lawrence Loeb wrote in 1976 that,
The Pahlavi period…has been the most favorable era for Persian Jews
since Parthian rule [175 B.C. to 226 C.E.]…the `Law of Apostasy’ was
abrogated about 1930. While Reza Shah did prohibit political Zionism
and condoned the execution of the popular liberal Jewish reformer
Hayyim Effendi, his rule was on the whole, an era of new
opportunities for the Persian Jew. Hostile outbreaks against the Jews
have been prevented by the government. Jews are no longer legally
barred from any profession. They are required to serve in the army
and pay the same taxes as Muslims. The elimination of the face-veil
removed a source of insult to Jewish women, who had been previously
required have their faces uncovered; now all women are supposed to
appear unveiled in public…Secular educations were available to Jewish
girls as well as to boys, and, for the first time, Jews could become
government-licensed teachers…Since the ascendance of Mohammad Reza
Shah (Aryamehr) in 1941, the situation has further improved…Not only
has the number of poor been reduced, but a new bourgeoisie is
emerging…For the first time Jews are spending their money on cars,
carpets, houses, travel, and clothing. Teheran has attracted
provincial Jews in large numbers and has become the center of Iranian
Jewish life…The Pahlavi era has seen vastly improved communications
between Iranian Jewry and the rest of the world. Hundreds of boys and
girls attend college and boarding school in the United States and
Europe. Israeli emissaries come for periods of two years to teach in
the Jewish schools…A small Jewish publication industry has arisen
since 1925…Books on Jewish history, Zionism, the Hebrew language and
classroom texts have since been published…On March 15, 1950, Iran
extended de facto recognition to Israel. Relations with Israel are
good and trade is growing.
But Loeb concluded on this cautionary, sadly prescient note, in 1976,
emphasizing the Jews tenuous status:
`Despite the favorable attitude of the government and the relative
prosperity of the Jewish community, all Iranian Jews acknowledge the
precarious nature of the present situation. There are still sporadic
outbreaks against them because the Muslim clergy constantly berates
Jews, inciting the masses who make no effort to hide their animosity
towards the Jew. Most Jews express the belief that it is only the
personal strength and goodwill of the Shah that protects them: that
plus God’s intervention! If either should fail… [emphasis added].
The so-called `Khomeini revolution’, which deposed Mohammad Reza
Shah, was in reality a mere return to oppressive Shi’ite theocratic
rule, the predominant form of Persian/Iranian governance since 1502.
Conditions for all non-Muslim religious minorities, particularly
Bahais and Jews, rapidly deteriorated. Historian David Littman
recounts the Jews’ immediate plight:
In the months preceding the Shah’s departure on 16 January 1979, the
religious minorities…were already beginning to feel insecure…Twenty
thousand Jews left the country before the triumphant return of the
Ayatollah Khomeini on 1 February…On 16 March, the honorary president
of the Iranian Jewish community, Habib Elghanian, a wealthy
businessman, was arrested and charged by an Islamic revolutionary
tribunal with `corruption’ and `contacts with Israel and Zionism’; he
was shot on 8 May
The writings and speeches of the most influential religious
ideologues of this restored Shi’ite theocracy – including Khomeini
himself – make apparent their seamless connection to the oppressive
doctrines of their forbears in the Safavid and Qajar dynasties. For
example, Sultanhussein Tabandeh, the leader of a Shi’ite Sufi order,
wrote an `Islamic perspective’ on the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights. According to Professor Eliz Sanasarian’s important analysis
of religious minorities in the Islamic Republic, Tabandeh’s tract
became
`…the core ideological work upon which the Iranian government…based
its non-Muslim policy.’
Tabandeh begins his discussion by lauding Shah Ismail I (1502-1524),
the repressive and bigoted founder of the Safavid dynasty, as a
champion `…of the oppressed’. It is critical to understand that
Tabandeh’s key views on non-Muslims, summarized below, were
implemented `…almost verbatim in the Islamic Republic of Iran.’. In
essence, Tabandeh simply reaffirms the sacralized inequality of
non-Muslims relative to Muslims, under the Shari’a:
Thus if [a] Muslim commits adultery his punishment is 100 lashes, the
shaving of his head, and one year of banishment. But if the man is
not a Muslim and commits adultery with a Muslim woman his penalty is
execution…Similarly if a Muslim deliberately murders another Muslim
he falls under the law of retaliation and must by law be put to death
by the next of kin. But if a non-Muslim who dies at the hand of a
Muslim has by lifelong habit been a non-Muslim, the penalty of death
is not valid. Instead the Muslim murderer must pay a fine and be
punished with the lash
Since Islam regards non-Muslims as on a lower level of belief and
conviction, if a Muslim kills a non-Muslim…then his punishment must
not be the retaliatory death, since the faith and conviction he
possesses is loftier than that of the man slain…Again, the penalties
of a non-Muslim guilty of fornication with a Muslim woman are
augmented because, in addition to the crime against morality, social
duty and religion, he has committed sacrilege, in that he has
disgraced a Muslim and thereby cast scorn upon the Muslims in
general, and so must be executed
Islam and its peoples must be above the infidels, and never permit
non-Muslims to acquire lordship over them. Since the marriage of a
Muslim woman to an infidel husband (in accordance with the verse
quoted: `Men are guardians form women’) means her subordination to an
infidel, that fact makes the marriage void, because it does not obey
the conditions laid down to make a contract valid. As the Sura (`The
Woman to be Examined’, LX v. 10) says: `Turn them not back to
infidels: for they are not lawful unto infidels nor are infidels
lawful unto them (i.e., in wedlock).
And Sanasarian emphasizes the centrality of this notion of Islam’s
superiority to all other faiths:
…even the so-called moderate elements [in the Islamic Republic]
believed in its truth. Mehdi Barzagan, an engineer by training and
religiously devout by family line and personal practice, became the
prime minister of the Provisional Government in 1979. He believed
that man must have one of the monotheistic religions in order to
battle selfishness, materialism, and communism. Yet the choice was
not a difficult one. `Among monotheist religions, Zoroastrianism is
obsolete, Judaism has bred materialism, and Christianity is dictated
by its church. Islam is the only way out’. In this line of thinking,
there is no recognition of Hindusim, Buddhism, Bahaism, or other
religions
The conception of najis or ritual uncleanliness of the non-Muslim has
also been reaffirmed. Ayatollah Khomeini stated explicitly,
`Non-Muslims of any religion or creed are najis.’
The Iranian Ayatollah Hossein-Ali Montazeri further elaborated that a
non-Muslim (kafir’s) impurity was,
`a political order from Islam and must be adhered to by the followers
of Islam, and the goal [was] to promote general hatred toward those
who are outside Muslim circles.’
This `hatred’ was to assure that Muslims would not succumb to
corrupt, i.e., non-Islamic, thoughts. Sanasarian provides a striking
example of the practical impact of this renewed najis consciousness:
In the case of the Coca-Cola plant, for example, the owner (an
Armenian) fled the country, the factory was confiscated, and Armenian
workers were fired. Several years later, the family members were
allowed to oversee the daily operations of the plant, and Armenians
were allowed to work at the clerical level; however, the production
workers remained Muslim. Armenian workers were never rehired on the
grounds that non-Muslims should not touch the bottles or their
contents, which may be consumed by Muslims.
Khomeini’s views were the most influential in shaping the ideology of
the revitalized Shi’ite theocracy, and his attitudes towards Jews
(both before and after he assumed power) were particularly negative.
Khomeini’s speeches and writings invoked a panoply of Judenhass
motifs, including orthodox interpretations of sacralized Muslim texts
(for e.g., describing the destruction of the Banu Qurayza), and the
Shi’ite conception of najis. More ominously, Khomeini’s rhetoric
blurred the distinction between Jews and Israelis, reiterated
paranoid conspiracy theories about Jews (both within Persia/Iran, and
beyond), and endorsed the annihilation of the Jewish State.
Sanasarian highlights these disturbing predilections:
The Jews and Israelis were interchangeable entities who had
penetrated all facets of life. Iran was being `trampled upon under
Jewish boots’. The Jews had conspired to kill the Qajar king Naser
al-Din Shah and had a historically grand design to rule through a new
monarchy and a new government (the Pahlavi dynasty): `Gentlemen, be
frightened. They are such monsters’. In a vitriolic attack on
Mohammad Reza Shah’s celebration of 2500 years of Persian monarchy in
1971, Khomeini declared that Israeli technicians had planned the
celebrations and they were behind the exuberant expenses and
overspending. Objecting to the sale of oil to Israel, he said: `We
should not ignore that the Jews want to take over Islamic
countries’…In an address to the Syrian foreign minister after the
Revolution Khomeini lamented: `If Muslims got together and each
poured one bucket of water on Israel, a flood would wash away
Israel’…
Professor Reza Afshari’s seminal analysis of human rights in
contemporary Iran summarizes the predictable consequences for Jews
of the Khomeini `revolution’:
As anti-Semitism found official expression…and the anti-Israeli state
propaganda became shriller, Iranian Jews felt quite uncertain about
their future under the theocracy. Early in 1979, the execution of
Habib Elqaniyan, a wealthy, self-made businessman, a symbol of
success for many Iranian Jews, hastened emigration. The departure of
the chief rabbi for Europe in the summer of 1980 underlined the fact
that the hardships that awaited the remaining Jewish Iranians would
far surpass those of other protected minorities
Conclusions
An ethos of infidel-hatred, including paroxysms of annihilationist
fanaticism, has pervaded Persian/Iranian society, almost without
interruption (i.e., the two major exceptions being Sunni Afghan rule
from 1725-1794, and Pahlavi reign, with its Pre-Islamic revivalist
efforts, from 1925-1979), since the founding of the Shi’ite theocracy
in 1502 under Shah Ismail, through its present Khomeini-inspired
restoration, since 1979.
Having returned their small remnant Jewish community to a state of
obsequious dhimmitude – including now, perhaps the full restoration of
discriminatory badging – Iran’s current theocratic rulers focus most
of their obsessive anti-Jewish bigotry on the free-living Jews of
neighboring Israel.
Former Iranian President Rafsanjani’s December 2001 `Al Quds Day’
sermon threatened, explicitly, the nuclear annihilation of this
largest concentration of autonomous Jews in history. Current
President Ahmadinejad has reiterated these threats repeatedly as
Iran’s nuclear ambitions near fulfillment. But Ahmadinejad has also
reportedly vowed, `To stop Christianity in this country’ [i.e., Iran]
, and his recent `letter’ to President Bush emulates the jihad war
precept (originally formulated by the Muslim prophet Muhammad) of
calling infidel powers – often Christian powers – to accept Islam, prior
to initiating a jihad war against them.
The Iranian regime’s words and deeds are authentic manifestations of
the hatred of jihad. Whether directed against internal or external
`infidels’ this is a potentially genocidal animus which must be
understood in its Islamic context without meaningless and distracting
invocations to modern Western forms of totalitarianism, like Nazism.
Andrew G. Bostom is the author of The Legacy of Jihad.

Zaman, Turkey
May 21 2006
Is There a ‘Seldon Plan’ we do not Know About?
MEHMET KAMIS
05.20.2006 Saturday – ISTANBUL 00:31
Today, I would like to tell you about a novelist and his book. Isaac
Asimov who died on April 6, 1992 is known as one of the greatest
science fiction writers of our age.
Asimov, born as the child of a Jewish family in Russia, migrated to
USA when he was three. He grew up in New York and started writing
science fiction stories before he is 20. The Foundation series, among
his several works big and small, are considered among the most
important works in the field of science fiction.
In his Foundation series, Asimov talks about an imaginary and distant
future. Events taking place tens of thousands of years later are told
in these series called a kind of history of the Knights of the Temple
as they come to the agenda at times. Differently from the common
sci-fi works, there are no aliens or strange creatures around. The
human being went to space and gradually spread all over the galaxy. A
big empire is founded and the whole galaxy is under the sovereignty
of this empire. Asimov finds himself a hero at this point. A young
mathematician, Hari Seldon, puts forward an interesting thesis he
will later call `psychohistory.’
This thesis asserts that the future course of human events can be
calculated with a very complex mathematics formula and can be changed
through interventions if necessary. The formula does not work on
human beings one by one but gives perfect results on huge masses of
people. As Seldon applies the data of the era he lives in to the
formula, a very interesting result emerges. Bad times await humanity.
The empire will collapse and an era of barbarism to last for
thousands of years will replace it. Seldon realizes he will not be
able to stop the fall of this empire but the revival of humanity can
be possible in a much shorter time with proper interventions.
Seldon prepares a plan he believes will be for the benefit of
humanity. He deceives the administrators and sends a group of
scientists to a deserted planet at the border of the galaxy in order
to set up the Foundation with an apparent mission of preparing an
encyclopedia. He also convenes another group as the real protectors
of the plan under the title Second Foundation, in an unknown place he
calls Star’s End. The real mission the First Foundation is not aware
of is that of establishing the empire again in the future. As for the
Second Foundation, it is made up of leaders who know about the Plan
and will protect and make it operate after Seldon dies. Though the
First Foundation seems to rise, the Real Masters are the Second
Foundation members behind the scenes.
The Second Foundation we can also call social engineers constantly
controls the First Foundation and makes necessary adjustments for
them to live in accordance with the Seldon Plan. The plan is based on
the principle of leaving a single choice for human beings pressured
by crises inside and outside the country and their following this
single way compulsorily. The Second Foundation is always vigilant in
order for the plan to function. It produces proper crises when
necessary and never lets the First Foundation act on its own. It
continuously reduces the choices and makes sure others remain loyal
to the big plan. Those who have read the series may ask why I do not
mention the Mule or R. Daniel. If I mentioned them, then I would have
done wrong to those who have not read the series, however, I intended
to do so but this column does not have enough space for them, either.
While narrating the Seldon Plan, I said that the basic spirit is
leaving one single choice for humanity pressured by domestic and
foreign crises. Now, I have a look at the very recent history…
Foreign troubles on the one hand…The events taking place in
neighboring Iraq, developments within the framework of Iran, our
European Union membership process, France’s efforts to enact the
so-called Armenian Genocide law…It is possible to extend the list.
Domestic troubles on the other hand…The tension in Semdinli, the
Counter-Terrorism Act and the debates that ensued, pressure imposed
on the sanctities of different groups in the society, tension at
universities, the sudden economic fluctuation in the past week and
the treacherous attack on the Council of State yesterday…It is
possible to extend the links of this chain, too. I wonder if there is
a Second Foundation and are we forced to follow a certain way within
the framework of a pre-determined plan unawarely? No, it cannot be
possible!
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Zaman, Turkey
May 21 2006
Greek Cypriots Choose Their New Deputies
By Foreign News Desk
Published: Saturday, May 20, 2006
zaman.com
Critical parliamentary elections will be held tomorrow in Greek
Cyprus; 495 candidates including a Turk will compete for 56 seats in
the parliament.
Many female candidates are joining this year’s elections, in which
Turks residing in Southern Cyprus can cast votes. One of these is
Nese Yasin, a Turkish Cypriot. Yasin will try her chances to enter
the Greek Cypriot parliament as a candidate of the United Democrats
Movement (EDI). Yasin’s party; however, is not expected to win a
single seat according to polls. Religious groups and independent
candidates have also entered the competition, in which 11 political
parties and blocs are taking part. The deputies to be obtained by
Maronit, Armenian and Latin groups will not have the right to vote in
the parliament, but will mediate and communicate the problems of
religious groups to the parliament. Preliminary results from the
elections will be obtained towards midnight. 500,606 registered
voters including 266 Turks will cast their vote at 216 centers.

Zaman, Turkey
May 21 2006
Ankara: We Hope Bill will not be Brought up Again
By Zaman, Ankara
Published: Saturday, May 20, 2006
zaman.com
Turkish officials in Ankara welcomed with cautious optimism the news
that the French bill designed to criminalize denial of the s0-called
Armenian genocide was `for the time being’ dropped off the agenda.
A statement from the Foreign Ministry focused attention on the need
to not bring up the bill for discussion a second time in the
parliament. It also appealed for approval from the international
community of a proposal from the Turkish government to `form a joint
commission.’
In Friday’s parliamentary discussions, the French government and
French foreign minister had an oppositional stance to the bill, the
statement read, `Now we expect to see that the bill will not be
brought up for discussion a second time in the French National
Parliament, and that a joint commission of Turkish and Armenian
historians will be allowed to make use of all documents -archived or
not – when they are assigned for an exploration of the 1915 events,
and that the international community, including France, will grant
its approval of a proposal from the Turkish government to share the
results with the whole world.’
France was thrown into discussion over the bill that received
opposition from French historians and public leaders, the statement
said.

Today, Azerbaijan
May 20 2006
Azerbaijan made a protest against former OSCE MG Co-Chair’s statement

20 May 2006 [21:03] – Today.Az

Chief of the presidential administration’s international affairs
department, Novruz Mammadov held a press conference related to the
recent statements on Azerbaijan made by former Russian co-chair
(until 1996) of OSCE Minsk Group Vladimir Kazimirov.

Mammadov said that Kazimirov have Armenian relations and he has
financial relations with Armenians stressing that confidence in the
Russian diplomat was lost in 1992-93. Mammadov also noted that at
times Kazimirov made biased statements on Azerbaijan and sometimes he
even forged relevant international documents when he was sponsored by
Armenians.
“He even tells a lie by saying that the principle of nations
determining their fates is same with the principle of territorial
integrity of states according to the UN Convention of 1948.
Kazimirov’s statements are contrary to diplomatic ethic. I think he
has gone mad, he is too old to comprehend what he says,” the
presidential administration’s official said.
Mammadov also noted that Kazimirov’s such statements may hinder the
process of settlement of the Nagorno Karabakh problem. On the other
hand, stating that these statements are false, the department
director considers as the parties to the conflict do not take into
account these false statements, these factors will not have negative
impact on the settlement process.
“I don’t think these opinions coincide with Russia’s official foreign
policy. We have less belief that the old Kazimirov will have strong
logic,” he said.
Earlier Pan-Armenian Information Agency published Kazimirov’s
statement, according to which the late Azerbaijani President Heydar
Aliyev allegedly realized that it was impossible to liberate Nagorno
Karabakh, but only the surrounding areas. Stating that the Karabakh
problem had negative psychological impact on Azerbaijanis, Kazimirov
stressed that the problem cannot possibly be solved for the benefit
of Azerbaijan.
On Friday Russian Charge d’Affaires Pyotr Burdikin was invited to
Foreign Affairs Ministry and given an oral note with regard to the
above-mentioned statement.
Foreign Ministry press and information center head Tahir Taghizade
has informed APA that Khalaf Khalafov, Deputy Minister, has met with
Mr. Burdikin and made a protest against such a statement issued by
ex-official of Russia. The Russian diplomat, in his turn said he
would convey anxiety of Baku to official Russia.

URL:

Zaman, Turkey
May 20 2006
Armenian Genocide Bill Postponed; French Companies Relieved
By Economy News Desk
Published: Saturday, May 20, 2006
zaman.com
After French lawmakers dropped the bill that would criminalize denial
of the so-called Armenian Genocide, which nearly halted Paris-Ankara
relations, French companies in Turkey are relieved.
Representatives of the companies noted that agreements worth $14
billion escaped great danger, and expressed their pleasure at the
solution of the problem, even if only a temporary one. Les Echos, a
leading economy newspaper in France, wrote that postponement of the
bill provided a short respite, and added: `The French business
environment was taking the economic sanction threats of Turkey,
especially of Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, very
seriously. This decision may also affect new investments. Almstom is
among the companies vying for the tender of the Marmaray Project, a
subway project planned to cost 815 million.’ With their recognition
of the so-called Armenian Genocide, France attempted to pass another
bill criminalizing the denial of the genocide. After the harsh
reaction of Turkey, the bill was suspended despite pressure from the
Armenian lobby in France.
Les Echos, underlining the commercial intensity between the two
countries, cites a probable boycott of French products would result
in major damage, and stresses that even just the thought caused alert
among big French companies such as Alstom, Accor or Danone.
The newspaper commented `the Armenian problem poisoned Turkish-French
relationships previously, too’ and made reference to the so-called
Armenian genocide the French Parliament confirmed in 2001. Les Echos,
recalling the angered call for a boycott by Ankara, wrote `The
economic crisis Turkey went through at that time may have reduced the
effect of the boycott, but the effects are real.’ The newspaper wrote
the French company Thales was excluded from the 120-million-euro
tender regarding the maintenance of F16s in 2001, and that French
companies lost the 260 million euro agreement about the manufacturing
and launching of satellites.

Ottawa Citizen
May 20, 2006 Saturday
Final Edition
ESL: Edge-stitching a second language
by Margo Roston, Citizen Special
The women sit around sewing machines or at a table where they are
cutting fabric in the basement of the Caldwell Family Centre. Some
speak English without much hesitation; a couple barely speak English
at all. One or two wear the dress of their homeland; the others are
in western clothing.
What the women have in common is their interest in sewing and the
need to finish the outfits they will wear in an upcoming fashion
show.
They are members of an ESL sewing class run four days a week by the
Ottawa-Carleton Catholic School Board and its teacher Saada Hussain.
And while their lessons hone their skills with a needle and thread,
their classroom time is really all about learning a new language.
Nigar Islam, who carpools to the class from Kanata with her pal
Sayeeda Mirza, shows off the Pakistani national dress she’ll wear in
the show: a blue embroidered kameez with matching shalwar and a
doppatta — a dress, trousers and a scarf.
“I always did embroidery, but I had a fear of cutting,” admits Islam,
who has lived in Canada for 20 years. “Now I am a grandmother and
I’ve begun sewing for my granddaughter.” She has been making both
traditional and western-style clothing since she joined the sewing
group three years ago.
The centre occupies two townhouses in Bellevue Manor in the
Carlington community off Merivale Road. The complex houses a day
care, a food bank, a drop-in centre, a computer room and the sewing
room, which is filled with donated sewing machines, notions and
fabrics.
There is calm and quiet in here, the conversation all about seams and
button holes and zippers. It’s obvious the women are comfortable
together and having a wonderful time.
“We have to talk in English,” says Araclly Ossa, who immigrated to
Canada from Colombia more than 30 years ago. “The sewing is good for
us. You learn things to do, like making something for the bedroom.”
Suzanne Lamirande lives in the community and acts as a volunteer with
the group. A French speaker, she says her English has improved along
with her sewing skills. She has even produced a book of fashion
designs she’s keen to try out.
She also acts as a translator for Eulalie Nida, a recent arrival from
the Ivory Coast, who speaks only French. Tall and elegant, the mother
of three had never sewn before she joined the class, but has created
a colourful print dress to wear in the show.
Akur Mathaing is a newcomer from Sudan with a wide, cheerful smile.
She arrived a year ago to marry her Sudanese boyfriend, who had
already settled in Ottawa. In her short time with the group, Mathaing
has mastered the basics of both sewing and English.
The class, which when at full strength is 18-strong, pauses to admire
classmate Mirtan Aghazarian, an Armenian from Iran who came to Ottawa
in 2002. She’s modelling a tweed suit that she made and a sweater
with glitter around the neckline.
When she’s not working on a class project, Aghazarian makes little
gifts from scraps of material. “I’m learning a lot here. In the
summer I plan to do a lot of sewing.” She already owns a sewing
machine, a gift from her teacher.
Hussain is the creative pivot of the room, passing on advice in a
professional and quiet manner. She has taught in her native Pakistan,
Australia and Kuwait, and has worked for eight years at the centre,
where she’s determined to teach new skills along with English to new
and older immigrants.
“Many of the women take orders and make wedding dresses, some work in
dry cleaners and do alterations. And some of the women want to be
able to make their own national costumes since it’s expensive to buy
them here, but they can find beautiful fabric here.”
Some of the students have sewn before but need to learn English
sewing terms and new techniques in order to work. While the English
used in the class can be technical — words about stitching, hems and
patterns — there’s a strong sense of community support and
friendship in the room.
For many of the women, it’s also a place to have fun together. And
despite the mix of cultures, languages and dress, it’s where
differences are most likely to be expressed with a bit of fabric, a
needle and some coloured thread.
The Caldwell Family Centre Fashion Show takes place at 10 a.m.
Wednesday, 1520 Caldwell Ave.
Margo Roston is an Ottawa writer.

Agence France Presse — English
May 21, 2006 Sunday 1:11 AM GMT
Eurovision Song Contest final results
ATHENS, May 21 2006
Here are the full results from Saturday’s 51th annual Eurovision Song
Contest held in the Greek capital Athens. The scores were tallied on
a points system based on telephone and text voting in 35 countries,
with voters unable to vote for their home entrant.
The competition was won by Finnish heavy rockers Lordi
1 Finland – Lordi, group – 292 points
2 Russia – Dima Bilan, singer – 248
3 Bosnia-Hercegovina – Hari Mata Hari, singer – 229
4 Romania – Mihai Traistariu, singer – 172
5 Sweden – Carola, singer – 170
6 Lithuania – LT United, group – 162
7 Ukraine – Tina Karol, singer – 145
8 Armenia – Andre, singer – 129
9 Greece – Ana Vissi, singer – 128
10 Ireland – Brian Kennedy, singer – 93
11 Turkey – Sibel Tuzun, singer – 91
12 FYR of Macedonia – Elena Raniesteka, singer – 56
13 Croatia – Severina, singer – 56
14 Norway – Christine Guldbrandsen, singer – 36
15 Germany – Texas Lightning, group – 36
16 Latvia – Cosmos, group – 30
17 Switzerland – Six4one, group – 30
18 Denmark – Sidsel Ben Semmane, singer – 26
19 UK – Daz Sampson, singer – 25
20 Moldova – Arsenium, group – 22
21 Spain – Las Ketchup, group – 18
22 France – Virginie Pouchain, singer – 5
23 Israel – Eddie Butler, singer – 4
24 Malta – Fabrizio Fanielleo, singer – 1

The Sun (England)
May 20, 2006 Saturday
SUN GUIDE TO TONIGHT’S SONG CHEESEFEST; EUROVISION SONG CONTEST
ATHENS 2006
Wogan’s heroes
Nick Francis
THE most spectacular event of 2006 is upon us.
No, it’s not the World Cup or the Oscars. Tonight is Eurovision Song
Contest time.
It’s that magical moment in the year when nations from across the
Continent surrender the cream of their musical crop -and usually
their dignity -to do battle in front of millions of viewers…and
Terry Wogan.
It is a fantastic celebration of the naffest, cheesiest and most
downright atrocious music to ever be produced.
And we love it.
Tonight’s extravaganza stays true to form with a wonderful array of
flop pop set to blast out of our tellies and radios and then be
instantly forgotten.
The UK has not won since 1997, with Katrina & The Waves, and this
year our hopes are pinned on Daz Sampson’s Teenage Life.
Luckily we’re used to losing.
In preparation for the big event, we have had a listen to the 2006
line-up to give you a quick guide to the good (ahem), the bad and the
downright awful.
ARMENIA: Andre -Without Your Love: The bouncy and punchy beat is
typical Europop rubbish and does not make much of an impression. The
lyrics, however, leave a big impression -but of the wrong kind: “Fly
with me, take my wings and dream away.”
How we wish we could.
BOSNIA & HERZEGOVINA: Hari Mata Hari -Lejla: Any song that uses pan
pipes deserves to score low, yet somehow this offering has a certain
bizarre charm. It would make quite a nice love ballad, if you were
hearing-impaired.
CROATIA: Severina -Moja Stikla: This makes the Crazy Frog sound
musically gifted.
With a beat and melody lifted straight from a nursery rhyme, the
entry will surely bring a smile to the face of even the most dead-pan
Eurovision critic.
DENMARK: Sidsel Ben Semmane -Twist Of Love: It is a long time since
anyone has sung while doing The Twist, but perhaps Sidsel is a big
Beatles’ fan. A shame, then, that her music sounds nothing like the
Fab Four.
FINLAND: Lordi -Hard Rock Hallelujah: Ridiculous camped-up
gravel-voiced singers thrashing guitar riffs with make-up straight
out of a Lord Of The Rings movie.
What’s not to like? This novelty act is so bad it could win.
FRANCE:Virginie Pouchin -Il Etait Temps: Sad, forlorn, painful. And
that’s just the singing. This isn’t particularly awful music, but
it’s a touch sombre to be a winner.
F.Y.R MACEDONIA: Elena Risteska -Ninanajna: This tune would be more
at home playing in the background of a kebab shop. Sample lyric:
“Tell me what you want.”
Extra chilli sauce please.
GERMANY: Texas Lightning -No No Never: It pains us to praise
Britain’s traditional rivals, but this Country & Western effort is
far from terrible.
Granted, the singer sounds like Dolly Parton on an off-day, but it
deserves points for being an alternative to the mass of cheesy pop.
GREECE:Anna Vissi -Everything: Once again, true to form, Greece has
turned out an entry that sounds like the cabaret act at a Butlins
holiday camp. Close your eyes and you can smell the scampi in a
basket.
IRELAND: Brian Kennedy -Every Song Is A Cry For Love: There’s
probably not much point in giving this tat any kind of review, seeing
as Ireland seem to win every year -or at least they did in the
Nineties. Admittedly, Eurovision is supposed to be naff, but this
“ballad” takes it to new extremes. Cry for love? Cry for help, more
like.
ISRAEL: Eddie Butler -Together We Are One: This entry is crooned half
in English and half in Israeli. Presumably they couldn’t afford a
translator for the full three minutes. Naff is not the word.
LATVIA: Cosmos -I Hear Your Heart: A slow starter, with almost no
music for the first minute. And once it kicks in you will wish they
had kept it that way. A brave effort to harmonise, however, so good
luck to it.
LITHUANIA: LT United -We Are The Winners: If you do nothing else with
your life, listen to this song. It is so abysmal that it’s brilliant.
The lyrics, safe to say, are the funniest thing we have heard in a
long time, and they sound like they are sung by TV’s Avid Merrion:
“We are the winners of Eurovision, vote for us now.” Do it, do it, do
it!
MALTA: Fabrizio Faniello -I Do: We’re guessing Westlife are big in
Malta because this is exactly what the Irish band would sound like
with a backing track provided by a mouth organ. Tries to be an epic
love song but more a monumental mess.
MOLDOVA: Arsenium feat. Natalia Gordienko -Loca: “Every night I need
my Loca, give me your Boca, I’ll give you my choca.” This song is a
joke-a.
NORWAY: Christine Guldbrandsen -Alvedansen: A slow, mushy entry. We
think Norway have missed the point of Eurovision here. The aim is
surely to be as annoying and cheesy as possible, yet this sounds like
elevator music. You could easily drift off to this…
ROMANIA: Mihai Traistariu -Tornero: Tries to be a serious and even
spooky track but it fails to scare or impress. With an ultra-cheap
Europop beat it’s so bad it’s just bad. Nil points, not even for
naffness.
RUSSIA: Dima Bilan -Never Let You Go: Is it us or is the backing
track provided by a flock of gulls? If so, full marks for
originality. Only the Russians could train birds to belt out a
number.
SPAIN: Las Ketchup -Bloody Mary: If it’s possible, this track is even
worse than Las Ketchup’s chart effort back in 2002. At least that had
a beat that got every ten-year-old girl in the country bopping along.
This is devoid of any funky beat, cheesy chorus or catchy lyrics,
which are all vital ingredients of a Eurovision winner.
SWEDEN: Carola -Invincible: If their football is anything like their
music, Sweden pose no threat to us in the World Cup this summer. The
singer sounds like Celine Dion trying to sing Abba’s The Winner Takes
It All. In fact, does anyone know what happened to Celine Dion?
SWITZERLAND: Six4one -If We All Give A Little: A contender for the
worst, most tacky track in the entire line-up, and that’s saying
something. This “song with a message” won’t have Bono quaking in his
boots just yet. “If we all give a little” croons the male/female
duet. Give a little what exactly -time to singing lessons?
TURKEY: Sibel Tuzun -Super Star: A brilliant fun track. It sounds
like the theme tune from a Seventies cop show. You can just picture a
Turkish version of Shaft busting bad guys along to these lively riffs
and funky beat.
UKRAINE:Tina Karol -Show Me Your Love: This starts promisingly but,
like so many others, descends into complete pap. Typical Europop beat
makes this nothing special.
UNITED KINGDOM: Daz Sampson -Teenage Life: UK’s answer to Vanilla
Ice. We’d love to say that Britain have turned out a strong contender
this year. But we haven’t.
Even if the track didn’t sound like the Smurfs were making a
comeback, the very fact that Daz Sampson is clearly in his 40s yet
surrounds himself with schoolkids will preclude this from big points.
The Eurovision Song Contest 2006 is on BBC1 and Radio 2 tonight from
8pm.
LATEST BETTING
3/1………….Sweden
7/2………….G reece
11/2………..Bosnia
6/1………….Russ ia
6/1………….Romania
7/1………….Unite d Kingdom
10/1………..Finland
12/1………..Ge rmany
20/1………..Norway
33/1………..Maced onia
33/1………..Croatia
25/1………..Irela nd