DARCHINYAN READY TO KNOCKOUT MALDONADO ON CASTILLO-CORRALES III CARD
Paul Upham Contributing Editor
SecondsOut
May 2 2006
By Paul Upham: Reigning IBF/IBO flyweight world boxing champion Vic
“Raging Bull” Darchinyan and Team Fenech were the special guests of
Wests Tigers – the reigning NRL rugby league football champions – at
their Concord Oval training facility on Tuesday morning in Sydney,
Australia. During the visit, Darchinyan sparred some rounds with
Tigers great Benny Elias.
“Last year the Wests Tigers were relatively unknown, but showed skill
and determination to win the NRL Championship,” said Darchinyan.
“Players such as Benji Marshall and Scott Prince proved how hungry
they were to win. I see a lot of similarities with my career. I have
won two world titles so far, but with every fight I want to show how
hungry I am to become the undisputed boxing champion of the world.”
Considered by many to be one of the hottest new stars in world boxing,
Vic “Raging Bull” Darchinyan – Australia’s only current male boxing
world champion – will next defend his world titles against undefeated
28 year-old Mexican Luis Maldonado 33-0-1 (25) on a card that will
see them as the main support bout to one of the world’s ‘Fights of
the Year’ in Jose Luis Castillo vs. Diego Corrales III on June 3 at
the Thomas & Mack Centre in Las Vegas, USA.
Darchinyan, who is promoted by prominent American Gary Shaw and
trained by three-time world champion Jeff Fenech, first won the IBF
flyweight world title in December 2004 against long reigning world
champion Irene Pacheco.
“The most knowledgeable people in American boxing can see how talented
Vic Darchinyan is,” said Fenech. “In this next fight in front of the
world, he will once again show that he is one of the most exciting
boxers competing today.”
30 year-old Darchinyan, the Armenia born Australian citizen, has
an undefeated record of 25 wins, 0 losses and 20 knockouts. In his
last fight on March 3 at the Chumash Casino Resort in Santa Ynez,
California in the USA, the hard-hitting southpaw knocked out IBF
mandatory challenger Diosdado Gabi from the Philippines spectacularly
with one punch in round 8.
The impressive knockout win over Gabi was televised by American
network SHOWTIME across the USA as the main event of their “SHOBOX:
The New Generation” series to an audience in the millions and has
led to his next fight on SHOWTIME “Championship Boxing” on one of
the most highly anticipated fight cards of the year.
“Maldonado is a good fighter,” said Darchinyan. “But on June 3,
I will knock him out.”

JOURNALIST FACES RETRIAL FOR INSULTING TURKISHNESS
Tatyana Margolin
JURIST , Univ. of Pittsburgh Law School
May 2 2006
[JURIST Europe] A Turkish appeals court has rejected a prosecutor’s
recommendation and has ruled that charges still stand against Hrant
Dink, a high-profile Turkish-Armenian journalist and editor of the
newspaper Agos [media website] who has written about the killings
of an estimated million Ottoman Armenians [ANI backgrounder] in the
early 20th century. Accused of publicly denigrating or insulting
Turkishness under controversial Article 301 [Amnesty International
backgrounder] of the Turkish Penal Code, Dink was given a six-months
suspended sentence [JURIST report] last October, but in February the
chief prosecutor of the Appeals Court ruled that his remarks were in
no way offensive. The new court determination sends the case back to
the local court where it may be reheard.
Article 301 reads: 1. Public denigration of Turkishness, the Republic
or the Grand National Assembly of Turkey shall be punishable by
imprisonment of between six months and three years.
2. Public denigration of the Government of the Republic of Turkey,
the judicial institutions of the State, the military or security
structures shall be punishable by imprisonment of between six months
and two years.
3. In cases where denigration of Turkishness is committed by a
Turkish citizen in another country the punishment shall be increased
by one third.
4. Expressions of thought intended to criticize shall not constitute
a crime.
Dink’s case, along with several others [JURIST news archive; JURIST
report] that deal with freedom of speech in Turkey, is being closely
monitored by the EU. Turkey is eager to join the EU and has committed
to a series of reforms, yet speech that can be interpreted as an
insult to the Turkish identity, the military and the judiciary is still
illegal. BBC News has more. From Istanbul, Hurriyet has local coverage.
Tatyana Margolin is an Associate Editor for JURIST Europe, reporting
European legal news from a European perspective. She is based in
the UK.
/journalist-faces-retrial-for-insulting.php
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

SYSTEM OF A DOWN RAISE AWARENESS OF SUDANESE GENOCIDE
Blabbermouth.net, NY
May 2 2006
SYSTEM OF A DOWN is committed to raising awareness of all human
rights issues, including the current genocide crisis going on
the Darfur region of Western Sudan. mtvU has launched a online
campaign at to help spread information about the
genocide. Through a partnership with the Reebok Human Rights Foundation
and the International Crisis Group, mtvU awarded a development deal
to group of student digital activists to create an online viral video
game which will put players in the shoes of the 2.5 million refugees
who are fighting for survival every day in Darfur.
Commented SYSTEM OF A DOWN frontman Serj Tankian: “MTV has been one
of the early screamers on the Darfur Genocide at a time when no one
was really paying any attention to it in the press. By calling it a
genocide and not doing anything about it, our government is setting a
standard for intervention only in cases of economic gain. I just met
with a number of Democratic and Republican Congressmen and a Senator
to talk about the need to have the U.S. Congress formally recognize
the Armenian Genocide by Turkey in 1915. Part of the conversation was
spent in explaining that genocide denial will lead to other genocide
as in Darfur and the need for our government to use its leverage
financially and otherwise in Africa to make sure that Khartoum gets the
message that this will no longer be tolerated, along with encouraging
the United Nations to immediately place an active, effective peace
keeping contingent of troops in the Darfur region of Sudan.”

PRESIDENT ROBERT KOCHARYAN IS NOT RETIRING – ARMENIAN PUBLIC
Author: A. Memmadov
TREND Information, Azerbaijan
May 2 2006
Armenia’s current president Robert Kocharyan is not going to retire,
reportedly said independent MP Manuk Gasparyan.
Trend reports quoting Gasparyan, almost two years prior to the
presidential elections Kocharyan did not choose his successor from
the country’s politicians. “In case he manages to become Armenia’s
prime-minister after the elections, he will do his best to hand the
power to the weaker politician and control him”, – Gasparyan claims.
Armenian MP said also in such case Kocharyan would not attempt to
hand the power to Armenia’s defense minister Serzh Sarkisyan.
Alongside, MP opines, the country’s prime-minister Andranik Markaryan
won’t stay ten days on his post after the elections. “This man is just
a political puppet”, – Gasparyan said, adding that the best for the
head of the government will be post of parliamentary fraction leader
or a president of parliament.
MP also predicts that following parliamentary elections in Armenia
leadership will remain with Republican Party, followed by Flourishing
Armenia and National Unity of Artashes Gegamyan.
Armenia is waiting for parliamentary and presidential elections in
2007 and 2008, respectively, ARKA reports.

OKRUASHVILI SPEAKS OF RUSSIA, WINE, CONFLICTS
Civil Georgia, Georgia
May 2 2006
Georgian Defense Minister Irakli Okruashvili has further stepped up
harsh-worded rhetoric against Russia and vowed to resign if Georgia
fails to restore control over breakaway South Ossetia by January
1, 2007.
At a political talk show aired by Imedi television on May 1 Okruashvili
spoke about relations with Russia and said while answering question
why Georgia remains in the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS)
against the background of deteriorating ties with Russia that he will
respond to this question “in exactly one week.” He declined to make
more comments on the issue.
Dubbed as hawkish Defense Minister by the opponents and media,
33-year-old Irakli Okruashvili has increased his political weight after
the President charged him to promote Georgian wine on new markets,
observers say.
This new task has also triggered rumors that Okruashvili may be
promoted at the Prime Minister’s position. But Okruashvili has strongly
denied these speculations.
“My major goal, my purpose of being the Defense Minister, is
restoration of Georgia’s territorial integrity. I have no other goal
more valuable than this and as soon as these two problems [the Abkhaz
and South Ossetian conflicts] are solved, I will no longer stay in
politics,” Okruashvili said while speaking on the political talk show
‘Pirvelebi’ (Leaders).
Okruashvili reiterated his late December statement and said that
Georgia will gain control over breakaway South Ossetia by January
1, 2007.
“If we fail to celebrate New Year in Tskhinvali on January, 2007 I
will no longer be the Defense Minister of Georgia,” Okruashvili said.
He said that the conflict in South Ossetia will be resolved through
peaceful means with the support of Georgia’s western partners.
“In a course of this year several very important events are scheduled;
these are: G8 summit, NATO summit in November and we will spare no
efforts to solve this problem through peaceful means with the help
of our friends, our partners and especially with the support of the
United States,” Okruashvili said.
After Okruashvili’s highly-controversial and harsh statements
towards Russia – like “even feces can be sold on Russian market” –
his opponents dubbed Okruashvili as “provoker.”
This statement has also triggered discontent among some Georgian
wine-producers, who are desperately trying to re-enter Russian market,
which was closed on March 27 after the Russian chief sanitary inspector
said Georgian wines contained pesticides.
But Okruashvili, who has just recently visited Ukraine in a capacity
of the Georgian wine promoter, says that the Georgian wine-makers
should forget about the Russian market and diversify foreign trade
to the western markets.
He said once again that the Russia is “low level consumer market” and
many Georgian wine companies should increase quality of their products.
Okruashvili admitted that his statements towards Russia are very
harsh-worded, “but this is the only language which is understood
by Russia.”
“Of course we should not talk like this not only with Russia, but
with anyone. But, unfortunately, this is the only language which is
understood by Russia, this is the only effective language on which we
can talk with Russia. I have learnt this from my two, or three years
of experience of having relations with them,” the Georgian Defense
Minister stated.
Okruashvili also admitted that one of the purposes of his controversial
statements was to trigger more international interest towards the
Georgia’s wine row with Russia.
“My statements about Russia and stir-up about this issue was caused
by an attempt to achieve a certain international effect. Now the
international community knows that this is a confrontation between
Georgia and Russia because someone among the Russian authorities
does not like the fact that Georgia has a significant increase in
economic growth rate… and they do not like that they have failed
to decrease this figure [growing economy] through imposing energy
blockade [referring to explosions of gas pipelines this January]
and through increase of gas price,” Okruashvili said.
He also accused Russian special services of masterminding provocations
in Georgia’s predominantly ethnic Armenian populated town of
Akhalkalaki in order to hinder Russian military base withdrawal
from there.
“A large rally is planned in Akhalkalaki on May 3 in an attempt to
hinder first stage of Russian military base withdrawal from there
and organizers of this [rally] are employees of the FSB [Russia’s
Federal Security Service],” Okruashvili said.
A small rally was held in the predominantly ethnic Armenian populated
town of Akhalkalaki on April 25 to protest against withdrawal of
Russian military base. The Russian Foreign Ministry said on April 26
that pullout of military hardware from the base was hindered because
of this protest rally.

A NUCLEAR TURKEY: AN ISSUE ON PAPER OF VISION
By Huseyin Bagci
The New Anatolian , Turkey
May 2 2006
View: Huseyin Bagci – The Turkish Army’s “spring cleaning”
in southeastern Anatolia was last week’s main issue besides the
visit by U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. The visit didn’t
produce anything except for talks about a “vision paper” on bilateral
relations, though the Turkish government now needs much more U.S.
support in order to realize “operation crescent,” hunting down
Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) terrorists. The Turkish government
indeed made great use of this visit, and when Rice’s plane had started
its route to Baghdad, it was clear that she was going to tell the
Iraqi Kurds that they should remain silent about these operations.
Iraqi Kurdish region leader Massoud Barzani’s threatening words
directed at Turkey fell upon deaf ears in Ankara, and the Turkish
military went ahead with another operation just like they did in the
’90s. “The more accusations Turkey gets from Barzani and [Jalal]
Talabani, the more Turkey is headed in the right direction,” is the
new formula in Ankara.
The U.S. guarantee to Turkey to undertake operations was confirmed
with the visit, and Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan as well as
Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul stated that relations between Turkey
and the U.S. are so good that “some will envy” their relationship. It
was not a message for domestic consumption, but rather for the Kurds
and neighboring countries. A new honeymoon period between Turkey and
the U.S. has begun.
Under this framework, Turkey also promised something to the U.S., as
was reflected in public debate about the “visionary talks.” Turkey is
keeping one eye closed to the U.S. policy towards Iran. The Iranian
nuclear debate makes it clear that Turkey still remains neutral and
is unwilling to open any airspace or military bases to the U.S. in
case of a U.S. attack on Iran. It seems that a possible U.S.
intervention would cause more damage in the region, and the Iranian
government is aware that it would turn the Middle East into a hell.
The U.S. administration is still looking for international and United
Nations support, but they have yet to receive it. On the other hand,
Iran is getting some other countries, like Azerbaijan, to take a
neutral stance.
Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev stated that his country would not
allow the U.S. administration to use any of their military bases or
allow U.S. troops to pass through their territory in order to intervene
in Iran. The reason president Aliyev takes such a clear position is
understandable. Iran is “closer to Azerbaijan,” and Moscow doesn’t
want a U.S. intervention in Iranian territory. Iran has a natural
shield of neighboring countries who will not risk going against Iran,
which could hit any of its neighboring countries with its military
capabilities. At the moment, both Iran and Azerbaijan are making huge
profits in the oil business. Moreover, both countries have specific
national interests in the Caspian Sea and they would both stand to
lose if Azerbaijan were to take sides.
Yet Azeris do make up a substantial portion of Iranian society, and
the U.S. failed in its attempts over the last two decades to generate
“divide et impera” (divide and rule) ethnic policies in the region.
The U.S. decision makers should know that as historian Professor
Halil Inalcik mentioned in one of his articles, even at the heyday
of the Ottoman Empire the Azeris supported the Iranian shah rather
than the Ottomans, and this is despite the fact that Azeris are also
Turks. This is the “realpolitik” of the history of Azerbaijan.
President Aliyev, like his father who had a similar policy in the
’90s and who even developed a neighborhood policy with Iran, is just
following the historical continuation of Azeri politics. Azerbaijan
is squeezed like a sandwich between Russia and Iran and doesn’t have
much room to maneuver. Russia and Iran seem to be on the same side,
and the U.S. policymakers should understand that this region is still
the hinterland of the Russian as well as Iranian empire.
What can the U.S. do in this respect? The U.S. is economically and
militarily present in the Caucasus and Central Asia, but Iran is a
tough nut for any external actor to crack. How long can Iran count
on this reality? It’s an open question. Just because the neighboring
countries remain silent, it doesn’t mean that they accept Iranian
policies. Certainly that is not the case. The reality is that they
don’t like to get involved in this “bilateral hatred” and would rather
remain nonaligned. In other words, they are choosing a third way.
Iran, Turkey and Azerbaijan are doomed to stick together for the
economic and political stability of the region. The Turkish government
still remembers the ’90s, when Iran had treaties with Armenia,
Syria and Greece that Turkey saw as a great danger to its national
security. It had to fight PKK terrorism while all of those countries
were supporting the PKK, at least according to official statements
made by Turkey. But now, the old enemies have become new friends,
and Turkish-Iranian relations have enjoyed a golden age ever since
former President Mohammad Khatami came to power eight years ago.
Now, Turkey’s choice is still the U.S. and Turkey wouldn’t support
Iran if there was an intervention. The Iranian government knows this.
But at the same time, Turkey would prefer non-intervention and a
diplomatic solution while being aware that Iran won’t give up its
nuclear program. What to do then? If the U.S. is trying to create a
balance of power towards Iran, they should start a nuclear program
in Turkey. The Turkish government wouldn’t reject it. On the contrary
even, the military would welcome it. The fact is that Iran is already
a nuclear power, and after Israel, Turkey is the only alternative to
keep the balance. The Iranians tell the Turks that there has not been
any imbalance since the 1639 Kasr-i Sirin treaty, when Turkey and Iran
negotiated their borders. This is no longer valid. Today, Iran has
changed the balance of power to its own advantage through its policies.
This is why Turkey is also starting to think about how to regain the
balance. U.S. policy should think about other options. When both sides
talk about a “vision paper,” then it should probably also contain a
vision of Turkey becoming a nuclear power. This is also the reality
of the day. If Iran goes nuclear, Turkey should not be allowed to
remain a conventional power. A new source of conflict?
Maybe. But Iran should somehow counterbalance for the sake of Turkey’s
national security, not necessarily for the sake of the U.S.

OKTAY EKSI: LAST WORD ON THE HEYBELIADA SEMINARY FROM GUL?
Hurriyet, Turkey
May 2 2006
There seems to be something different about Foreign Minister Abdullah
Gul these days. He appears to be backing away from his former “well,
if that’s how it is, that’s ok, oh, and that’s alright too” diplomatic
style. It was precisely this style which used to give the impression
that he was indecisive.
But just yesterday, we read in the news what he said to French Foreign
Minister, Philippe Douste-Blazy about the claims of Armenian genocide,
and the French plans to prosecute those denying them: “Let’s say either
I or the President of Turkey came to France. And let’s say that,
while there, reporters asked one of us about the Armenian claims,
and we denied them. What would you do? Throw us in jail?” Douste-Blazy
did not respond.
And in the same way, at the same Sofia, Bulgaria unofficial meeting of
NATO ministers, Gul went outside his usual relaxed style of diplomacy
in responding to Greek Foreign Minister Dora Bakoyanni’s pressing on
the question of whether Ankara would allow the Heybeliada Seminary to
open. As you know, the Halki Seminary on Heybeliada Island has been
closed since 1971. This decision was made neither by the Turkish
government nor by YOK (the Turkish Board of Higher Education) but
instead by the Orthodox Fener Patriarchate itself. It derived from the
emergence at that time of a law requiring all private institutions of
higher learning to be connected to universities in Turkey. Following
the emergence of this law, the Ministry of Education informed the Fener
Patriarchate that the Halki Seminary too would have to link itself
to a university in Turkey. It was after this that the Patriarchate
decided instead to close down the seminary.
According to reports, Gul told Greek FM Bakoyannis in Sofia that
“the offering of a religious education at the seminary is anathema
to our Turkish Constitution,” and then went on to stress that
religiously based education in Turkey was only authorized under
certain guidlines. Following this, he reportedly repeated the Turkish
government’s suggestion that the Halki Seminary open up in a capacity
linked to Istanbul University.
If these words by Gul put the final note on the question over whether
or not the Heybeliada Seminary will re-open, we will all breath a
sigh of relief. That being said, the pressure to re-open the seminary
is not only coming from the US or EU countries. As you might know,
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan is very soft on this matter,
and has even made statements to Patriarch Bartholomeus which could
be interpreted as promises. Even Education Minister Huseyin Celik
has said things like “If it were up to me, I would open that school
in 24 hours.” In any case, it looks like prudence in Turkey does,
from time to time, do its duty.

TURKEY, FRANCE AND REVISIONISM
Nazlan Ertan
The New Anatolian, Turkey
May 2 2006
Turkey and France have had a long history of intense and turbulent
relations for the last six centuries. This has, not surprisingly,
included times of cooperation, strategic balancing, intense trade and
cultural exchange and war. There have been moments, such as on the eve
and in the wake of the 1997 Luxembourg summit of the European Council,
that Turkey regarded France as one of its key partners in its drive
towards the European Union. There have been others, as we’ve heard
lately, before Sept 3, 2005, when France appeared to be an obstacle
to Turkey’s EU ambitions, both in terms of accession and Cyprus.
For a few months, Turkey has been living through a French spring in
the field of culture, but alas not in politics.
While art lovers are enjoying performances in Ankara, Istanbul and
around Turkey by French masters of their art, diplomatic and political
circles are deeply pensive about the possible damage that would be
inflicted on relations if France passes a new bill on the Armenian
“genocide” this month.
The French socialists will almost certainly bring a new bill proposing
penalties to those who question the so-called Armenian genocide
to the floor of the French National Assembly this month during a
“window session.”
Armenians in France have already welcomed the law, which will come
to the floor for debate on May 18, one of the limited times when the
opposition is allowed to propose laws.
If accepted then it would be a crime — punishable for up to five
years in prison — to “deny that the Armenian genocide” took place.
This will be the second time that a debate in the French Parliament
on the Armenian “genocide” has poisoned Turco-French ties. The French
Parliament adopted a controversial law in 2001, which says, in a single
line, that “France publicly recognizes the Armenian genocide of 1915.”
When this law, penned by the Socialist Party (PS), was first discussed
in 1997, there were various proposals: Some groups suggested that
a clause on revisionism be added to the law, while others wanted
to change the date to 1915-1921, when the modern Turkish state was
also established.
Then, after three years of being buried in the Senate, the law was
finally passed and signed by President Jacques Chirac. Both French
diplomatic and political circles quickly verified the law didn’t
contain “revisionism.”
The text, said Parisian policy-makers, diplomats and academics, was
greatly different from that of the Loi Gayssot, which made denial of
the Holocaust punishable under the law.
The Turks were unpersuaded. Ankara was certain that once this first
law was passed, a negationism clause would follow sooner or later.
Time, it seems, has proved Ankara right.
In the wake of the conflict around monuments that aimed to “honor”
victims of the Armenian genocide claims dedicated in the French
cities of Lyon and Marseille, the fertile atmosphere for that new
law was created.
Many French politicians have judged the graffiti scribbled on the
monument to be a mere act of vandalism, which fed pressure from the
strong and well-organized Armenian lobby on French politicians to
“do something.”
I’m reluctant to get into a debate on how and under which conditions
historical revisionism (or “negationism”) can be reconciled with
freedom of expression, if at all. To me, any negationism reminds me
of its most famous example in literature, George Orwell’s “1984.”
Nor will I discuss the differences between what constitutes a
“genocide” and what constitutes a “massacre” or wonder out loud
whether the international tendency to shout “genocide” is a factor
that, in fact, diminishes the gravity of other crimes against humanity.
Looking at the situation between Turkey and France, it seems highly
probable that the law will be passed. Take the existing sympathies in
the country toward the Armenian diaspora, the well-organized Armenian
lobby and its power, and all the negative factors against Turkey. Add
to this the dialogue of the deaf between Ankara and Paris on this
issue. No Turkish diplomat can be sufficiently convincing for the
French audience on the Armenian question, no matter what they say, and,
vice versa, no French diplomat can explain and make Turks “understand”
the French dilemma on the Armenian question. The civil societies of
both countries don’t have a sufficiently developed relationship with
each other to be a serious element in the equation.
One hopes, however, that credible and nonpartisan groups on both
sides will come together and discuss the issue in the coming days.
What makes one uneasy is think that French lawmakers will vote for
the new law without fully realizing what it means. They will know,
of course, that opposing it may border on political suicide. Most
will surely think of the Armenian question itself and conclude,
easily and without much of a dilemma of the conscience, that since
France passed a law recognizing genocide five years ago, why not add
another one on revisionism? After all, they might ask, do we want
graffiti on monuments?
Will any of them see the inconsistency when their country’s foreign
minister asked Algerian President Abdelaziz Bouteflika not to
“overuse” the term genocide in regards to France’s former role as a
colonial power in his country? Will he remember remarks uttered by
ex-Prime Minister Lionel Jospin, who in 2001 rejected a proposal to
investigate French “massacres” in Algeria, saying they should leave
judgements on the issue to historians?
Will the same deputies also think that by passing this law, France
— which was considered an intellectual and academic capital — can
no longer play a meaningful role on any Turkish-Armenian platform to
build a relationship? Would the same country be better off supporting
joint academic studies or a “Truth” commission on the same question?
A senior diplomat maintained that Turco-French ties, which have been
intense for centuries, will withstand it, but he added, “I’d be sorry
to see them deteriorate in my time.”
Hopefully, he won’t be the only one to think that, neither in Ankara
nor in Paris, and particularly not in the National Assembly.

THANK YOU, MR. URPER
Recep Guvelioglu
The New Anatolian, Turkey
May 2 2006
I was going to write another article about the Armenian genocide
claims. But after I read a news item in the newspaper Sabah, I changed
my mind.
According to the report, a cultural and political crisis occurred
in Bergama, a town whose biblical name is Pergamum. Greek Fener
Patriarch Bartholemeos wanted to organize a special religious ceremony
for St. John’s Day. All the local leaders of political parties —
with the exception of the ruling Justice and Development (AK) Party
– submitted a petition to the local authority, demanding that no
permission be given to this ritual: They claimed that Bartholemeos
wants to create a positive atmosphere for his claims to have an
ecumenical status. But the mayor of Bergama, who is a member of the
AK Party, Rasit Urper, rejected that idea and gave the permission for
this special ceremony. Urper said: “What age are we living in? We
started this event to boost faith tourism three years ago. They’re
trying to mix politics up with this event.”
Personally I congratulate the mayor of Bergama, Mr. Urper.
What really bothers me is the “mentality of the other side.”
Let me give you an example. Let’s say that as a devoted Muslim you
would like to organize “Mevlud” in one of the European cities, but
the municipal authority doesn’t give you permission. What would you do?
What would your reaction be?
The claim that the patriarch wants to create a positive atmosphere
for his ecumenical status by organizing St. John’s Day in Bergama is
also funny. As a patriarch it is part of his duty to do this. This
event will not add any power to him. What it would add is tourism to
the region.
This kind of event enriches faith tourism. It creates an extra spending
opportunity for regular tourists.
There is another point I should add.
Bergama (Pergamum) has an importance in Christian history. It is the
site of one of the seven churches mentioned in the New Testament.
So if Christians organize a religious ceremony there, why should this
bother us? Would it not be their right to do so?
If you say “no,” then why are you trying to get Turkey into the
European Union?
Why are you trying to be included in the civilized world?
St. John and other apostles are also mentioned in our Koran as “Ensar”
(supporter of Jesus Christ). To a certain extent we Muslims recognize
them.
Then why are we getting bothered about their religious ceremony?
St. John described Pergamum as “Satan’s throne,” mostly because of
the Temple of Zeus which existed there. Now that great monumental
temple can’t be seen there. It’s in Berlin. Because of the negligence
of our people. The negligence of narrow-minded people.
Bigotry and negligence have destroyed many historical artifacts in
this beautiful land.
That’s why I would like thank Mr. Urper again and again .At least he
saved us from a great shame.
From: Baghdasarian

ARMENIAN MEMORIAL SPURS GREENWAY WORRY
By Thomas C. Palmer Jr., Globe Staff
Boston Globe, MA
May 2 2006
Allowing the proposal could open the door to a rush of competing
political groups and causes.
A proposal to build a park memorializing Armenian genocide victims
on the Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy Greenway is rattling neighbors and
conservancy board members, who fear that it would open the door to
an overwhelming number of groups and causes.
The proposal is to put a large sculpture, reflecting pool, and
fountain, and 60-foot-diameter paved labyrinth on the southern end
of the block near Faneuil Hall. It would be the sole feature of the
new Greenway that would honor an ethnic group.
Edwin Schlossberg of New York, a conservancy board member and the
husband of Caroline Kennedy Schloss-berg, granddaughter of Rose
Kennedy, said he is concerned that placing one ethnic memorial on
the Greenway could “pit one group against another.”
“It’s so difficult when you open up the door to consideration about
people wanting to exhibit discrete things on their mind,” Schlossberg
said. “This area was one to be developed without that.”
So far the Greenway has been designed without monuments or memorials.
There is not even a plan for a bust or statue of Rose Kennedy,
namesake of the new corridor of parks along the former Central Artery
highway. She was the mother of President John F. Kennedy and Senator
Edward M. Kennedy, the senior US senator from Massachusetts.
“The Greenway, if possible, should stay true to how it’s been,”
Schlossberg said.
The Greenway conservancy board is scheduled today to see for the first
time the proposed Armenian park, which is being funded by the Armenian
Heritage Tribute and Genocide Memorial Foundation, a group of about
45 Armenian-American churches and cultural groups. The foundation
would also create a $500,000 endowment for maintenance and establish
a separate $500,000 endowment for an annual lecture series to be held
at Faneuil Hall.
Donald J. Tellalian of Tellalian Associates Architects & Planners LLC
of Boston said the memorial would not be dedicated solely to the 1.5
million Armenians who died in conflict with the Turks early in the
last century.
“It will be as universal in its message as possible,” said Tellalian
who led a design committee of 12 from the Armenian-American
community. “This is meant to be celebratory,” Tellalian added
yesterday, recognizing the “immigrant experience for all — not
just Armenians.”
Objections to the memorial concern not only whether a single monument
to an ethnic or national group should find a place on the Greenway,
they also have to do with the unusual process by which the memorial
was proposed and developed.
In 2000, the Legislature passed a brief provision into law directing
the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority to study the feasibility of
constructing “a monument to the Armenian Genocide of 1915-1922.”
It did not specify a location, but the Turnpike is now formally
proposing the foundation’s design for a parcel of a little less than
one-half acre between Cross Street and Surface Road, near Christopher
Columbus Park.
Other groups that sought Greenway space, including the Boston Museum
Project, went through competitive processes before being designated
and were designed within a public process approved by the Federal
Highway Administration. That included review by the Turnpike Authority,
City of Boston officials, and the community.
The Armenian group’s proposal has bypassed that route and is just
being made public. It was presented Thursday to a meeting of North
End and Wharf District residents.
“The memorial is a wonderful and important idea for our community,”
said Peter Meade, chairman of the conservancy board. “But there
are questions about whether it is consistent with the goals of the
Greenway conservancy, and we have to have a discussion about that
with the proponents.”
State Representative Peter J. Koutoujian, a Waltham Democrat and
proponent of the memorial, said at the meeting that details of the
plan had been purposely kept under wraps until all public officials
were briefed on it.
Fred Yalouris, director of architecture for the Big Dig, called the
land “a public park” and said, “We have proceeded with a very public
process that has been going on five to six years.”
But Rob Tuchmann, cochairman of the Mayor’s Central Artery Completion
Task Force, and others noted that the group, which oversees Greenway
design, has never seen the proposal.
“It is certainly not consistent with the spirit of the requirement
that they include the three parties — including the community —
in the design process,” said Anne Fanton, former executive director
of the Central Artery Environmental Oversight Committee.
Chris Fincham, a resident of Harbor Towers and a close observer of the
years-long design of the Greenway parks, said, “All the other parcels,
the community was involved in the designs from the beginning. This
is an ethnic memorial, and it creates a problem.”
Mayor Thomas M. Menino declined comment on the Armenian group’s
proposal or questions raised about it.
The park would almost certainly be the most distinctive feature of the
Greenway, which is under construction and is expected to be completed
in 2007.
The sculpture in the proposed park would be a 15-foot-high
steel dodecahedron, or 12-sided structure, in the form of a large
interlocking puzzle. It would symbolize the 12 provinces of historic
Armenia and the Armenians who died in the conflict early last century.
Tellalian said the structure would be pulled apart as it is installed,
recalling what happened to the Armenian homeland. Each year, with the
assistance of a crane, it would be taken apart again, and reconfigured.
“The immigrants came to this country and began to put themselves back
together again,” he said.
Some in the North End who attended last week’s meeting praised the
proposed park.
“I don’t think there’s anything wrong with the design,” said Nancy
Caruso, a North End community leader. “The problem is with the
process. I think what everyone’s objecting to is having it pushed
down our throats.”
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress