COOPERATION IN THE ASPECT OF THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
National Assembly of RA, Armenia
Oct 18 2005
On October 17 RA NA President Artur Baghdasaryan received Allar
Jõks , the Chancellor of Justice of the Republic of Estonia. Larisa
Alaverdyan, the Ombudsperson of Armenia attended the meeting.
During the meeting Mr. Allar Jõks presented the Estonian model of the
Ombudsman, saying that being a parliamentary structure it includes
the parliamentary control and the protection of human rights. It was
noted that the Estonian model of Ombudsman enables all the citizens of
Estonia to apply the Justice Chancellor for their problems, proposal
of legislative amendments. The Estonian Justice Chancellor expressed
his readiness with the legislative experience, as well as in the
aspect of the study of that experience and the specialists’ training,
to cooperate with the National Assembly of Armenia and Ombudsperson.
NA President Artur Baghdasaryan highlighted the positive result of
the referendum of the constitutional amendments, which will become
a new impetus both for the activeness of the parliamentary works
(in the aspect of the increase of the powers) and the development of
the new law on Ombudsman. They also discussed the issue of holding
a forum of Ombudsmen of the European countries in Armenia in 2006.
–Boundary_(ID_HqC6VdzqNNZNoBtvzRlVpA)–

TREASON CHARGE DAMAGING, SAYS TURKISH MINISTER
By Vincent Boland in Ankara
Financial Times, UK
Oct 18 2005
Published: October 18 2005 03:00 | Last updated: October 18 2005 03:00
A charge of treason against Orhan Pamuk, the Turkish novelist, was
almost certain to be dismissed by the courts when his trial begins
in December but was damaging to Turkey’s image abroad regardless of
the outcome, the country’s foreign minister said.
Abdullah Gul said the publicity given to Mr Pamuk’s forthcoming trial
for “public denigration of Turkish identity” had overshadowed what he
insisted were notable efforts to modernise Turkey’s judicial system
and to enhance freedom of expression and civil rights.
“I have confidence that the judge will dismiss this case,” Mr Gul
said in an interview last week with the Financial Times.
Mr Gul said the government could not intervene because the judiciary
and the criminal justice system in Turkey were independent of
political control.
“I am not a judge, but I don’t think he will go to jail,” Mr Gul
said. If convicted, Mr Gul said, Mr Pamuk could appeal.
Two recent incidents raise doubts about Mr Gul’s optimism, however.
Recent sentencings of a newspaper editor on a similar charge, and of a
Kurdish politician for speaking in Kurdish, have added to discomfort
among Turkish reformers that penal and civil code reforms are being
wilfully ignored by some prosecutors and judges.
Mr Gul said the Turkish judiciary was “conservative” and that
“prosecutors were even more conservative, but there are higher courts
where the correct decisions are made”.
He insisted that the cases of Mr Pamuk and the others were “individual
cases” that should not deflect from the reforms the government has
passed to boost civil and human rights protection.
“We believe in freedom of expression and religion, and we are very
proud of the changes this government has introduced,” Mr Gul said. “I
know [Mr Pamuk’s case] is damaging and does not help us, but there
are many things happening that are more important.”
Mr Pamuk, who is better known and more widely read abroad than in
Turkey, has been charged with “public denigration of Turkish identity”
for remarks he made to a magazine about Turkey’s stance on the mass
killing of Armenians during the first world war.
Mr Pamuk is due to go on trial on December 16.
Turkey began accession negotiations with the European Union two weeks
ago but already Mr Pamuk’s plight is being cited as a reason why it
should not be allowed to join the Union.
The man who brought the charges against Mr Pamuk is the prosecutor
for the Istanbul district of Sisli. He also pursued Recep Tayyip
Erdogan, the Turkish prime minister and former mayor of Istanbul,
in the late 1990s.

DAVID BARSAMIAN INTERVIEWED
By Kasim Tirmizey
ZMag.org
Oct 18 2005
David Barsamian is the founder of Alternative Radio, a weekly
un-embedded public affairs radio program that can be heard on community
radio stations across North America. Some of his books include Imperial
Ambitions with Noam Chomsky, Eqbal Ahmad: Confronting Empire, and
The Checkbook and the Cruise Missile: Conversations with Arundhati
Roy. This interview was taken on a sunny morning in October of 2005
in Montreal.
KT: I read that you said “When the US marches to war, the media
march with it”. Could explain broadly how media is often in service
of empire?
DB: Well particularly in the United States where five corporations
basically control what most Americans see, hear, and read, these
corporations have very close economic, political, and I dare say
emotional ties with power. They identify with the state, and they
subordinate their cameras and their microphones to the interest of
the state. Particularly in time of war where there is much jingoistic
hysteria, flag waving, and nationalist fervour; the media, much
of the media, not all, much of the media see themselves as being
instruments of American destiny, whatever that might mean, or American
power. We saw that very clearly with Iraq and Afghanistan, but also
historically, the Vietnam War, the attacks on Laos and Cambodia,
these went unchallenged for years. The media internalized the basic
assumptions that are generated by the state, that such and such
country is a threat to the United States, that becomes the basis of
discussion, and then the dialogue, it is more of a monologue then
a dialogue, then occurs between the pundits, between the experts,
from these golden rolodexes of intellectuals and favoured thinkers,
such as Michael Ignatieff of Canada, David Frum, and others. [The
discussion is about] How to implement the policy, so should the US
attack Iraq with 200,000 troops or 150,000 troops? Should it invade
from Turkey and Kuwait, or just from Kuwait? Should there be a bombing
campaign initially, or a land campaign? This is the discourse, so
you see how corrupt the situation is in the United States, the media
do not challenge the basic assumptions, no one says “what right does
the United States have in invading any country under international
law, its illegal”. I will give you an example, the New York Times is
considered to be a liberal newspaper, it is all the news that is fit
to print, it is kind of the US Global and Mail, the national serious
newspaper, it not for common people, it is for the managers and the
owners, and the political and cultural elite. From September 11,
2001 until the attack on Iraq in March 2003, the New York Times had
70 editorials on Iraq, in not one of those editorials did they mention
the United Nations Charter, or the Nuremberg Tribunals, or the Geneva
Conventions. All of which, particularly the United Nations Charter,
specifically state that the planning and waging of aggressive war,
that is a first strike on a country that is not threatening you, is
the supreme international war crime. Now, why didn’t they write that,
why didn’t they inform their readers, maybe they didn’t know? That’s
not plausible, of course they knew, it was deliberately left out so
that information would not become part of the political discourse.
KT: Do you see this as something [that happened] in previous empires,
that media would also be marching with [empire]?
DB: Well, the history of media as we know it is not that old, we
can go back to the birth of propaganda which actually occurs in
the World War I period, where the British and Americans launched a
sophisticated campaign to demonize the Germans. In the case of the
United States, an actual propaganda agency was created by the Woodrow
Wilson administration, someone who is considered a liberal in US
history. This was the birth of, literally, modern propaganda. Such
luminaries as Walter Lippman and Edward Bernays were members of
this what was called the Creel Commission, it was designed to whip
up support for US entry into World War I. After World War I, in
the mid-1920’s when Hitler wrote his book Mein Kampf (My Struggle),
he pointed out to the fact that Germany actually lost the propaganda
war, they held their own militarily, but on the level of propaganda,
they were completely overwhelmed and outsmarted by the British and
the Americans. And he promised in the next war, that Germany would do
things differently, and of course they did do things differently, they
setup a Ministry of Propaganda, they had a very clever propagandist
as it’s director Joseph Gerbils. Propaganda comes into its maturity
in the 20th Century. Now in the 21st Century with the expansion of
television and electronic media. Prior to this era propaganda was
limited to posters and perhaps some hand-outs and a few newspapers. The
electronic umbilical cord had not yet developed to the extent that
it exists now, particularly with the massive use of television.
KT: I know that you were recently in Turkey attending the World
Tribunal on the War in Iraq, it was something that received absolutely
no coverage in the west. Maybe you can talk about that and the
Tribunal itself.
DB: There was a virtual media white-out or black-out, depending on
which color you favour, when I say media I mean the corporate media.
There was some coverage in the independent alternative media in
the United States. This was an extraordinary event that occurred in
Istanbul in the last week of June of 2005. It was the 20th and final
session of a series of tribunals that have been held all over the
world, New York, London, Rome, and other cities. Meeting on Iraq,
and featuring testimonies and presentations, there was a jury in
Istanbul featuring Arundhati Roy of India, the brilliant Chandra
Muzaffar from Malaysia, Eve Ensler of the United States who is known
as the writer of Vagina Monologues, and other people of that calibre,
quite impressive. They heard, we heard testimony from a wide range
of people, including Samir Amin of Egypt, Denis Halliday of Ireland
a former Deputy Security General of the United Nations and one of
the administrators of the infamous Food-for-Oil program, he resigned
because he said that the sanctions were killing innocent Iraqis. His
successor also was there in Istanbul giving testimony Hans Van Sponeck,
he too resigned in protest, he said this program is not helping the
average Iraqi, it’s killing them, he was there testifying. There
were many Iraqis who came from Iraq, overland through Turkey. Dahr
Jamail was there, a wonderful independent journalist, un-embedded,
third-generation Lebanese on his father’s side, who decided when the
Iraq war began in March of 2003 he was so disgusted and appalled by
the coverage, or lack of coverage, in the media in the United States,
he decided to go to Iraq. He is not a journalist.
KT: What was his background before that?
DB: He was doing odd-jobs, in fact he had even been in Colorado as
a ski instructor, then he went to Alaska to climb mountains, he had
been doing odd things. He is a late bloomer, he is in his late 30’s,
he decide to become a journalist, which I thought was brilliant,
it kind of in a way resonated with my own experience, I am kind
of a late bloomer, I didn’t get started in doing this kind of work
until I was into my mid or late 30’s, I had been doing other things,
playing sitar, teaching English as a second language in the World Trade
Center, jobs like that. I found it very admirable that Dahr just got
up and went to Iraq and reported on what was going on there. So these
were some of the people giving testimony. Haifa Zangana was there,
from Iraq. A number of Iraqi women testified as to what was going on,
how the war was affecting particularly women. And so the Tribunal met
in Istanbul, it was organized by people in Turkey, very well done. I
must tell you that the locale of the Tribunal was of significance,
it was in the former imperial mint of the Ottoman Sultans in their
great palace known as Topkapi. In the Topkapi Palace, which is now
a big tourist destination, the imperial mint is falling apart, it
hasn’t been renovated. Here we were meeting in a building where the
paint was peeling and the bricks were crumbling, it was very symbolic
because here were the ruins of a former empire, and we are talking
now about the depredations of another empire, another empire which
will collapse, the US Empire. People could not miss the symbolism
of that. The tribunal gave it’s final declaration, it found not just
the United States guilty of war crimes, but the United Kingdom, the
regime of Tony Blair, Berlusconi and Italy, John Howard of Australia,
all of the countries that participated in this criminal attack on
Iraq, that was kind of to be expected. There were a couple of other
judgements that the jury delivered that were quite extraordinary. As
far as I know for the first time in history, the media was singled
out for culpability, corporate media was held responsible for being
an accessory to the war. In what way? They acted as a conveyer belt
for the lies that the Howard, Bush, Blair, and Berlusconi governments
were generating, and they simply replicated them. They didn’t challenge
them, they didn’t cross-examine them, they didn’t interrogate them. And
in some cases even journalists were named, like Judith Miller of The
New York Times, someone who became a mouth-piece for Ahmed Chalabi,
a very wealthy Iraqi, who left Iraq after the 1958 overthrow of the
Hashemite kingdom. He was from a very wealthy Shia family, he has
lived in exile, and he has had a very corrupt and criminal background,
he was sentenced to over 20 years in prison in Jordan, for criminal
actions for defrauding and embezzling a bank there in Amman. This is
the person that was giving information to Judith Miller about weapons
of mass destruction, he hadn’t been in Iraq in 50 years, he was
literally making stories up. And Miller, to her great discredit and
shame, never challenged the information, never asked for subsistent
evidence to support these wild allegations. So the media were held
culpable, and also corporations such as Halliburton and Bechtel which
have profited enormously from the attack on Iraq and the on-going
occupation. But also some popular international companies like Pepsi,
Nestle, KFC, who have profited from the war. So that was an interesting
development, and I think a very important aspect of the World Tribunal
on Iraq. People can read about the deliberations and final verdict,
there are websites I’m sure, if you google World Tribunal on Iraq
you can find that information. It was a very depressing event, on one
hand, but also very inspiring. People from around the world gathered in
Istanbul to deliver justice, as it were, to say that imperialist wars
of aggression are not right and we the people of the world oppose it.
KT: I wanted to read something from Hakim Bey from his book Temporary
Autonomous Zone, he writes:
“In the East poets are sometimes thrown in prison–a sort of
compliment, since it suggests the author has done something at least as
real as theft or rape or revolution. Here poets are allowed to publish
anything at all–a sort of punishment in effect, prison without walls,
without echoes, without palpable existence–shadow-realm of print,
or of abstract thought–world without risk or eros.
“So poetry is dead again–& even if the mumia from its corpse retains
some healing properties, auto-resurrection isn’t one of them.”
Poets in the East could shake up people, but over here what would it
take to shake up people?
DB: In the United States, it is going to take a kind of rise in
consciousness, people there don’t have information, they don’t know
what the government is doing in many cases. It happens over a period of
time, I view the possibilities of change, I compare it to a marathon
and a sprint. A marathon is a very long race. And a sprint is a very
short race that is difficult to win and requires tremendous athletic
conditioning and training, and is just 100m let’s say.
Whereas a marathon is many many kilometres. So we need to develop
independent media, we need to develop our own documentary films,
which I am happy to say is happening, we do have poets in opposition
but they don’t have big audiences in the US. I want to give you an
example of a very courageous act in the United States, Sharon Olds
was recently honoured, she is a New York University professor and
poet, she was honoured with the National Book Critics Award, she was
invited to Washington DC by Laura Bush to attend a dinner and some
ceremonies. She wrote a very eloquent letter saying that ‘I would be
honoured, I wished I could attend, but the idea of breaking bread
with you and sitting at a table with linens and candles and being
served by waiters was just too disgusting and appalling, because of
what shame you have brought to the United States with the blood on
your hands and your husbands hands because of the criminal actions
of the regime.’ Poets and artists have always been the first line of
resistance, that has historically been more true in the East where
the oral tradition is very strong, in Arab Middle Eastern countries,
in Turkey, in Iran, in Afghanistan, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh,
there has been a tradition of poets who speak out against power, who
speak truth to power, who interrogate the popular wisdom, conventional
thinking, and hegemonic ideas. To develop a culture of resistance
requires quite a bit of internal development and societal maturation,
which you don’t see a lot of unfortunately in the United States,
not across the board, there are pockets of resistance in the US,
in Berkley, in Madison, where I live in Boulder, in Albuquerque, in
different cities around the US. But because of the role of propaganda,
the influence of television and mass media, and an educational system
that does not really educate, that inculcates rather than educates,
that doesn’t train students to deconstruct, doesn’t train students
to develop critical thinking; we have a lot of work to do inside the
US in developing a consciousness where we can change the situation
there otherwise this is just going to keep repeating itself.
KT: Can you talk more about media as a tool of intifada or media as
a tool of resistance.
DB: Well, media is a critical tool of resistance, because without
information, and without solidarity that that information provides,
then populations are completely vulnerable to exploitation, to
domination and to conquest. We need to, we – people in opposition,
people in resistance to empire – need to fortify those electronic
connections, those wires, we need to build those wires, we need
to make those connections between our computers, our minidisks,
and our cameras, and our e-mail lists and our websites, to build
up an electronic intifada as it were, to fight back the corporate
control of media which is trying to establish the legitimacy of empire
and domination. We see in different parts of the world, filmmakers
operating under the most difficult conditions, radio broadcasters
creating community radio, low-power FM radio (that is a very important
development), cable access TV, all of these media, newsletters, on-line
and off-line zines. The Internet itself has become a great tool, but we
need to know how to use it properly, otherwise we could just be buried
under e-mails and endless encyclopaedia torrents of information, we
need information that can lead to action, that can ignite a resistance
in concrete ways. These developments are very very exciting, I am
very optimistic, I am very happy to see, I am thrilled to see young
people who have mastered the new media and intend to use it in creative
ways. For example, the young Egyptian US-citizen Jehane Noujaim, she
did a brilliant documentary on Al-Jazeera called Control Room. There
are other young [filmmakers], not just in the United States, but let’s
say Ireland, two young Irish filmmakers made a brilliant documentary
on the attempted overthrow of the Hugo Chavez government in Venezuela
supported by the US, democratically elected I must say. It is called
The Revolution will not be Televised. These are all relatively new
developments, there are lots of websites on the Internet that are
critically important, where I get a lot of information from. You
can learn about what is going on in India in terms of resisting the
big dams that the World Banks is trying to impose on that country,
the Narmada Bachao Andolan – the NBA – is a very good example of a
grassroots organization that is located in central India that has now
achieved global visibility because of documentary films, because of the
activities of Arundhati Roy and many others, activists from around the
world, who are supporting people’s resistance against globalization.
KT: Can you talk about how your own political consciousness came about?
DB: Well I can’t pinpoint it to any one thing, it wasn’t one book,
or one demonstration that I went to. I think that my political
consciousness is informed by my family background and that is we
are Armenians. Historically, we have lived on our land, in what is
now south-eastern Turkey for millennia. In 1915 there was a massive
genocide carried out by the Turkish government, we lost everything,
we were uprooted, our homes were left, our farms, our seminaries, our
libraries, our churches, our cultural traditions, we were completely
severed from that, and just thrown. In the case of my family, my
mother lost many members of her family, we lost everything, and they
found themselves in New York as immigrants, my father was a grocer,
my mother raised me, I had three other siblings, there were four of
us, relatively lower-middle class. I always wanted to know why did
that happen, and my family were peasants, they were from a village,
they weren’t sophisticated, they weren’t educated, they didn’t
know what happened to them. One day a cyclone occurred, there was
a tornado, and they found themselves out of their home. That didn’t
satisfy me as a kid. I always asking questions: why did the Turks do
this? What possessed them? What were the reasons? I wanted to know,
and I couldn’t get any explanations. And so I started studying,
I started reading everything I could get my hands on. I am largely
self-educated, I barely graduated from high-school in New York,
I hated school, I played hooky most of the time, I would go to the
movies instead of going to school, I would play games with my friends,
we would never go to school. I did manage to go to college for one
year, the same kind of thing, I was bored, I didn’t go to classes,
and then I dropped out. So I am largely self-educated, which I
think in this instance was useful, because I didn’t go through the
propaganda networks, I didn’t go through official training, I didn’t
get a proper education, I got a very improper education. For the kind
of work I am doing, media and creating independent alternative media,
I think that is a very plausible and useful way to develop your mind,
because I wasn’t trying to be, for example, a biochemist or dentist,
where I needed very specific technical training. I am doing work in
ideology, and this work simply requires common sense, an analytical
mind, and a willingness to be fearless, to challenge, to ask questions,
and to be sceptical, so when people in power say something you take
everything with a grain of salt. Why are they saying that?
Whose interests are being served? Whose interests are not being
served? Who benefits from this policy? I think my background as a
child of refugees, who came to the United States with nothing, who
didn’t know literally what happened to them, and interrogating that
history, finding out what happened, and then my travels really opened
up my eyes and awakened me. I had the great good fortune to live in
Asia for almost five years, that was kind of like my education. I
lived of those five years most of the time in India, in Delhi,
where I had the opportunity to study with great master musicians,
sitar players. I was exposed to one of the most sophisticated music
systems in the world. This helped me politically also, because it
trained my mind, it disciplined me, to think in a methodological way,
in a chronological way. To be exposed to masters also inspired me to
excel. I always tell this, there is a saying in Hindi: if you try
and do many things at once you won’t do anything well, but if you
do one thing well then you can do many things later. There is a lot
wisdom in this adage. And I was also exposed to poetry, Urdu poetry,
very beautiful, one of the great literary traditions in the world. I
was in a culture where people would recite couplets or even entire
ghuzals – love poems – by Ghalib, Mir Taqi Mir, Momin, Iqbal, Faiz
Ahmed Faiz, Shamim Jaipuri, and others. This elevated me, in a very
positive way. When you are around excellence you internalize some
of those things. That’s a very inspiring thing. Even if you were
a carpenter, and you learned carpentry from an ustad – a master –
you have developed a certain power, a certain level of excellence
that you can then transfer that to do other things. You can even be
around master cooks, people who know how to make the most excellent
cuisine, this helps you develop in other ways. I was very very lucky,
that experience for me was I would say the most enriching and mind
expanding of my life.
KT: It was a pleasure talking to you Ustad David Barsamian.
DB: (David laughs) Thank you, Kasim. Bhot bhot shukria apka.
This interview was recorded for CKUT Radio, a community radio
station in Montreal, Canada. To listen to the interview, go to:

ionID=4&ItemID=8945

WHEN BILINGUAL IS SILVER, TRILINGUAL IS GOLD
By Domenico Maceri
The Seoul Times, South Korea
Oct 18 2005
Special Contribution
Asian students in the US “English gets boring sometimes” stated
Donna Nguyen, a senior at James Lick High School in San Jose,
California. Donna does not get bored very often. She can speak
English, Spanish, and Vietnamese. She can also read and write these
languages. So when she graduated from high school, she received
a recognition for her fluency in the form of a newly-instituted
bilingual certificate.
Her accomplishments are marked on her diploma as well as her
transcripts. The bilingual certificate is a new program available
only in a small number of American schools. It should be expanded to
recognize and encourage multilingualism, which is essential to make
it in today’s world.
To qualify for the bilingual certificate, students need to demonstrate
linguistic fluency and literacy in at least two languages. Students
need to show their language skills by passing an Advanced
Placement test in a foreign language if their native language is
English. Students whose home language is not English must pass an
Advanced Placement test in their home language and also pass the
state’s English standardized test.
Although the most likely combination is English-Spanish, the 82
students who met the criteria at Eastside Union School District in
San Jose also included French and German.
Glendale Unified School District, northwest of Los Angeles, also
recognizes bilingualism. On graduation day, students who can speak
two languages wear a silver medallion and trilingual students wear
a gold one. In 2004, one student qualified in Armenian, Russian,
German, and English.
Montreal in Canada Although the U.S. is a country of immigrants,
the native languages brought in tended to disappear quickly. Indeed,
being an American often meant speaking English and only English. Those
sentiments are still alive and well but more and more people are
beginning to see the value of bilingualism. It’s not just the marketing
value of two or more languages. International relations pretty much
dictate that monolingualism is not just a disadvantage but a danger
as well.
Serious shortages of bilingual personnel, for example, have been
reported in many areas of government. Soon after 9/11, it was revealed
that a vast amount of data had not been analyzed because of limited
linguistic resources.
In both Afghanistan and Iraq, US government officials have had to rely
a lot on local interpreters and translators and the results have been
far from positive.
The situation is so bad that the American government is considering
a targeted military draft for people with special skills such as
computer knowledge or foreign languages.
Unfortunately, bilingualism still conjures negative images in the
minds of some Americans. Some fear a Balkanization of the country
upon hearing the word bilingual. Images of Canada come to mind right
away. Also, fear that bilingualism may not lead to integration of
new arrivals pushes people to lobby for English-only laws.
Twenty-seven states have passed laws declaring English the official
language, but nothing has changed with regards to reducing immigration
nor the number of languages people speak.
Quebec City in Canada Fear that immigrant kids were not learning
English fast enough pushed California, Arizona, and Massachusetts
voters to virtually do away with bilingual education. The laws
eliminating bilingual education have been passed through the referendum
process in which voters were asked to choose along simplistic lines
of English-yes and Spanish-no.
Yet, most states are continuing bilingual education programs, which
in spite of their name, are not designed to develop skills in two
languages. Bilingual education programs in the U.S. aim to use the
students’ native languages as a springboard to eventual English-only
instruction by ensuring that immigrant students don’t fall behind
academically those born in the U.S.
Developing bilingual skills is really the focus of dual-language
schools which teach subjects in two languages. The numbers of these
type of schools in the U.S. are very small but they are expanding
rapidly as parents increasingly realize the value of bilingualism
for their kids.
Unfortunately, dual-language schools do not go beyond junior high
school. In the vast majority of American highs schools the focus is
on English. So when some high schools begin to recognize and foster
bilingualism, it’s an event worth celebrating.
As English increases its dominance in the world as the language to
know, it’s too easy to rest on our laurels and let the others learn our
language. It’s also dangerous. The smart thing is to go for the gold.
d.php?idx=770

ROMAN RULER’S HEAD FOUND IN SEWER
The Seoul Times, South Korea
Oct 18 2005
Life of “Saint Constantine” Who Cristianized Rome
Head statue of The Holy Emperor Constantine
A 1,700-year-old carved marble head of Emperor Constantine has been
found in a sewer in central Rome.
Archaeologists found the 60cm (2ft) head while clearing an ancient
drainage system in the ruins of the Roman Forum.
Eugenio La Rocca, superintendent of Rome’s artefacts, described the
head as a rare find and said it was possible it had been used to
clear a blocked sewer.
Constantine, who reigned from 306 to 337, is known for ending
persecution of Christians and founding Constantinople.
Although most of his subjects remained pagans, he is credited with
helping to establish Europe’s Christian roots by proclaiming religious
freedom.
The white marble head was confirmed as a portrait of Constantine by
experts who compared it with coins and two other giant heads kept in
Rome’s Capitoline Museums.
Probably carved between 312 and 325 AD, when Constantine was at the
height of his power, it may have belonged to a statue of the emperor
in full armour.
“Recovering a portrait of this size and in this state of conservation
in the very heart of the city is really extraordinary,” said Mr
La Rocca.
“We have concluded that the head did not fall by accident into the
passage, but was put there on purpose.
“It could have been used as a big piece of stone to divert water from
the drain, or it could have been put there to symbolise the resentment
of a pagan people for their Christian emperor.”
The head’s unceremonious insertion in the drain may have saved it
from the plundering of the Forum after the fall of the Roman empire
in the 5th Century.
It is expected to go on display in Rome’s museums after a brief period
of restoration.
Life of Contantine the Great
‘Constantine the Great’ ‘Saint Constantine’ Flavius Valerius
Constantinus (AD ca. 285 – AD 337)
Statue of The Holy Emperor Constantine
Constantine was born in Naissus, Upper Moesia, on 27 February in
roughly AD 285. Another account places the year at about AD 272 or 273.
He was the son of Helena, an inn keeper’s daughter, and Constantius
Chlorus. It is unclear if the two were married and so Constantine
may well have been an illegitimate child.
When in Constantius Chlorus in AD 293 was elevated to the rank of
Caesar, Constantine became a member of the court of Diocletian.
Constantine proved an officer of much promise when serving under
Diocletian’s Caesar Galerius against the Persians.
He was still with Galerius when Diocletian and Maximian abdicated
in AD 305, finding himself in the precarious situation of a virtual
hostage to Galerius.
In AD 306 though Galerius, now sure of his position as dominant
Augustus (despite Constantius being senior by rank) let Constantine
return to his father to accompany him on a campaign to Britain.
Constantine however was that suspicious of this sudden change of
heart by Galerius, that he took extensive precautions on his journey
to Britain.
When Constantius Chlorus in AD 306 died of illness at Ebucarum (York),
the troops hailed Constantine as the new Augustus.
Galerius refused to accept this proclamation but, faced with
strong support for Constantius’ son, he saw himself forced to grant
Constantine the rank of Caesar.
Though when Constantine married Fausta, her father Maximian, now
returned to power in Rome, acknowledged him as Augustus. Hence, when
Maximian and Maxentius later became enemies, Maximian was granted
shelter at Constantine’s court.
At the Conference of Carnuntum in AD 308, where all the Caesars and
Augusti met, it was demanded that Constantine give up his title of
Augustus and return to being a Caesar. However, he refused.
“Constantine the Great,” The Holy Emperor Constantine
Not long after the famous conference, Constantine was successfully
campaigning against marauding Germans when news reached him that
Maximian, still residing at his court, had turned against him. Had
Maximian been forced abdicate at the Conference of Carnuntum,
then he now was making yet another bid for power, seeking to usurp
Constantine’s throne.
Denying Maximian any time to organise his defence, Constantine
immediately marched his legions into Gaul. All Maximian could do
was flee to Massilia. Constantine did not relent and laid siege to
the city. The garrison of Massilia surrendered and Maximian either
committed suicide or was executed (AD 310).
With Galerius dead in AD 311 the main authority amongst the emperors
had been removed, leaving them to struggle for dominance.
In the east Licinius and Maximinus Daia fought for supremacy and in
the west Constantine began a war with Maxentius. In AD 312 Constantine
invaded Italy. Maxentius is believed to have had up to four times as
many troops, though they were inexperinced and undisciplined.
Brushing aside the opposition in battles at Augusta Taurinorum (Turin)
and Verona, Constantine marched on Rome.
Constantine later claimed to have had a vision on the way to Rome,
during the night before battle. In this dream he supposedly saw the
‘Chi-Ro’, the symbol of Christ, shining above the sun. Seeing this
as a divine sign, it is said that Constantine had his soldiers paint
the symbol on their shields. Following this Constantine went on to
defeat the numerically stronger army of Maxentius at the Battle at
the Milvian Bridge (Oct AD 312).
Constantine’s opponent Maxentius, together with thousands of his
soldiers, drowned as the bridge of boats his force was retreating
over collapsed.
Constantine saw this victory as directly related to the vision he
had had the night before.
Henceforth Constantine saw himself as an ’emperor of the Christian
people.’ If this made him a Christian is the subject of some debate.
But Constantine, who only had himself baptized on his deathbed, is
generally understood as the first Christian emperor of the Roman world.
With his victory over Maxentius at the Milvian Bridge, Constantine
became the dominant figure in the empire. The senate warmly welcomed
him to Rome and the two remaining emperors, Licinius and Maximinus II
Daia could do little else but agree to his demand that he henceforth
should be the senior Augustus. It was in this senior position that
Constantine ordered Maximinus II Daia to cease his repression of
the Christians.
Though despite this turn toward Christianity, Constantine remained
for some years still very tolerant of the old pagan religions.
Particularly the worship of the sun god was still closely related with
him for some time to come. A fact which can be seen on the carvings
of his triumphal Arch in Rome and on coins minted during his reign.
Then in AD 313 Licinius defeated Maximinus II Daia. This left only
two emperors.
At first both tried to live peacefully aside each other, Constantine
in the west, Licinius in the east. In AD 313 they met at Mediolanum
(Milan), where Licinius even married Constantine’s sister Constantia
and restated that Constantine was the senior Augustus. Yet it was made
clear that Licinius would make his own laws in the east, without the
need to consult Constantine. Further it was agreed that Licinius would
return property to the Christian church which had been confiscated
in the eastern provinces.
As time went on Constantine should become ever more involved with the
Christian church. He appeared at first to have very little grasp of
the basic beliefs governing Christian faith. But gradually he must
have become more acquainted with them. So much so that he sought to
resolve theological disputes among the church itself.
In this role he summoned the bishops of the western provinces to
Arelate (Arles) in AD 314, after the so-called Donatist schism had
split the church in Africa. If this willingness to resolve matters
through peaceful debate showed one side of Constantine, then his brutal
enforcement of the decisions reached at such meetings showed the
other. Following the decision of the council of bishops at Arelate,
donatist churches were confiscated and the followers of this branch
of Christianity were brutally repressed. Evidently Constantine was
also capable of persecuting Christians, if they were deemed to be the
‘wrong type of Christians.’
Problems with Licinius arose when Constantine appointed his
brother-in-law Bassianus as Caesar for Italy and the Danubian
provinces. If the principle of the tetrarchy, established by
Diocletian, still in theory defined government, then Constantine
as senior Augustus had the right to do this. And yet, Diocletian’s
principle’s would have demanded that he appointed an independent man
on merit.
But Licinius saw in Bassianus little else than a puppet of
Constantine. If the Italian territories were Constantine’s, then
the important Danubian military provinces were under the control of
Licinius. If Bassianus was indeed Constantine’s puppet it would have
ment a serious gain of power by Constantine. And so, to prevent his
opponent from yet further increasing his power, Licinius managed to
persuade Bassianus to revolt against Constantine in AD 314 or AD 315.
The rebellion was easily put down, but the involvement of Licinius,
too, was discovered. And this discovery made war inevitable. But
considering the situation responsibility for the war, must lie with
Constantine. It appears that he was simply unwilling to share power
and hence sought to find means by which to bring about a fight.
For a while neither side acted, instead both camps preferred to
prepare for the contest ahead. Then in AD 316 Constantine attacked
with his forces. In July or August at Cibalae in Pannonia he defeated
Licinius larger army, forcing his opponent to retreat.
The next step was taken by Licinius, when he announced Aurelius
Valerius Valens, to be the new emperor of the west. It was an attempt
to undermine Constantine, but it clearly failed to work. Soon after,
another battle followed, at Campus Ardiensis in Thrace. This time
however, neither side gained victory, as the battle proved indecisive.
Once more the two sides reached a treaty (1 March AD 317). Licinius
surrendered all Danubian and Balkan provinces, with the exception of
Thrace, to Constantine. In effect this was little else but confirmation
of the actual balance of power, as Constantine had indeed conquered
these territories and controlled them. Despite his weaker position,
Licinius though still retained complete sovereignty over his remaining
eastern dominions. Also as part of the treaty, Licinius’ alternative
western Augustus was put to death.
The final part of this agreement reached at Serdica was the creation
of three new Caesars. Crispus and Constantine II were both sons
of Constantine, and Licinius the Younger was the infant son of the
eastern emperor and his wife Constantia.
For a short while the empire should enjoy peace. But soon the situation
began to deteriorate again. If Constantine acted more and more in
favour of the Christians, then Licinius began to disagree.
>>From AD 320 onwards Licinius began to suppress the Christian church
in his eastern provinces and also began ejecting any Christians from
government posts.
Another problem arose regarding the consulships. These were by now
widely understood as positions in which emperors would groom their
sons as future rulers. Their treaty at Serdica had hence proposed
that appointments should be made by mutual agreement. Licinius
though believed Constantine favoured his own sons when granting
these positions.
And so, in clear defiance of their agreements, Licinius appointed
himself and his two sons consuls for the eastern provinces for the
year AD 322.
With this declaration it was clear that hostilities between the two
sides would soon begin afresh. Both sides began to prepare for the
struggle ahead.
In AD 323 Constantine created yet another Caesar by elevating his
third son Constantius II to this rank.
If the eastern and western halves of the empire were hostile towards
one another, then in AD 323 a reason was soon found to start a new
civil war. Constantine, while campaigning against Gothic invaders,
strayed into Licinius’ Thracian territory.
It is well possible he did so on purposely in order to provoke a war.
Be that as it may, Licinius took this as the reason to declare war
in spring AD 324.
But it was once again Constantine who moved to attack first in AD 324
with 120’000 infantry and 10’000 cavalry against Licinius’ 150’000
infantry and 15’000 cavalry based at Hadrianopolis. On 3 July AD 324
he severely defeated Licinius’ forces at Hadrianopolis and shortly
after his fleet won victories at sea.
Licinius fled across the Bosporus to Asia Minor (Turkey), but
Constantine having brought with him a fleet of two thousand transport
vessels ferried his army across the water and forced the decisive
battle of Chrysopolis where he utterly defeated Licinius (18 September
AD 324).
Licinius was imprisoned and later executed.
Alas Constantine was sole emperor of the entire Roman world.
Soon after his victory in AD 324 he outlawed pagan sacrifices, now
feeling far more at liberty to enforce his new religious policy. The
treasures of pagan temples were confiscated and used to pay for
the construction of new Christian churches. Gladiatorial contests
were outruled and harsh new laws were issued prohibiting sexual
immorality. Jews in particular were forbidden from owning Christian
slaves.
Constantine continued the reorganization of the army, begun by
Diocletian, re-affirming the difference between frontier garrisons
and mobile forces. The mobile forces consisting largely of heavy
cavalry which could quickly move to trouble spots. The presence of
Germans continued to increase during his reign.
The praetorian guard who’d held such influence over the empire for
so long, was finally disbanded. Their place was taken by the mounted
guard, largely consisting of Germans, which had been introduced
under Diocletian.
As a law maker Constantine was terribly severe.
Edicts were passed by which the sons were forced to take up the
professions of their fathers. Not only was this terribly harsh on
such sons who sought a different career. But by making the recruitment
of veteran’s sons compulsory, and enforcing it ruthlessly with harsh
penalties, widespread fear and hatred was caused.
Also his taxation reforms created extreme hardship. City dwellers were
obliged to pay a tax in gold or silver, the chrysargyron. This tax was
levied every four years, beating and torture being the consequences
for those to poor to pay. Parents are said to have sold their daughters
into prostitution in order to pay the chrysargyron.
Under Constantine, any girl who ran away with her lover was burned
alive. Any chaperone who should assist in such a matter had molten
lead poured into her mouth. Rapists were burned at the stake.
But also their women victims were punished, if they had been raped
away from home, as they, according to Constantine, should have no
business outside the safety of their own homes.
But Constantine is perhaps most famous for the great city which came
to bear his name – Constantinople.
He came to the conclusion that Rome had ceased to be a practical
capital for the empire from which the emperor could exact effective
control over its frontiers.
For a while he set up court in different places; Treviri (Trier),
Arelate (Arles), Mediolanum (Milan), Ticinum, Sirmium and Serdica
(Sofia). Then he decided on the ancient Greek city of Byzantium. And
on 8 November AD 324 Constantine created his new capital there,
renaming it Constantinopolis (City of Constantine).
He was careful to maintain Rome’s ancient privileges, and the new
senate founded in Constantinople was of a lower rank, but he clearly
intended it to be the new center of the Roman world. Measures to
encourage its growth were introduced, most importantly the diversion
of the Egyptian grain supplies, which had traditionally gone to
Rome, to Constantinople. For a Roman-style corn-dole was introduced,
granting every citizen a guaranteed ration of grain.
In AD 325 Constantine once again held a religious council, summoning
the bishops of the east and west to Nicaea. At this council the branch
of the Christian faith known as Arianism was condemned as a heresy
and the only admissible Christian creed of the day (the Nicene Creed)
was precisely defined.
Constantine’s reign was that of a hard, utterly determined and ruthless
man. Nowhere did this show more than when in AD 326, on suspicion of
adultery or treason, he had his own eldest son Crispus executed.
One account of the events tells of Constantine’s wife Fausta falling
in love with Crispus, who was her stepson, and made an accusation
of him committing adultery only once she had been rejected by him,
or because she simply wanted Crispus out of the way, in order to let
her sons acceed to the throne unhindered. Then again, Constantine had
only a month ago passed a strict law against adultery and might have
felt obliged to act. And so Crispus was executed at Pola in Istria.
Though after this execution Constantine’s mother Helena convinced the
emperor of Crispus’ innocence and that Fausta’s accusation had been
false. Escaping the vengeance of her husband, Fausta killed herself
at Treviri.
A brilliant general, Constantine was a man of boundless energy and
determination, yet vain, receptive to flattery and suffering from a
choleric temper.
Had Constantine defeated all contenders to the Roman throne, the need
to defend the borders against the northern barbarians still remained.
In the autumn of AD 328, accompanied by Constantine II, he campaigned
against the Alemanni on the Rhine. This was followed in late AD 332
by a large campaign against the Goths along the Danube until in AD
336 he had re-conquered much of Dacia, once annexed by Trajan and
abandoned by Aurelian.
In AD 333 Constantine’s fourth son Constans was raised to the rank of
Caesar, with in the clear intent to groom him, alongside his brothers,
to jointly inherit the empire. Also Constantine’s nephews Flavius
Dalmatius (who may have been raised to Caesar by Constantine in AD
335 !) and Hannibalianus were raised as future emperors.
Evidently they also were intended to be granted their shares of power
at Constantine’s death.
How, after his own experience of the tetrarchy, Constantine saw it
possible that all five of these heirs should rule peaceably alongside
each other, is hard to understand.
In old age now, Constantine planned a last great campaign, one which
was intended to conquer Persia. He even intended to have himself
baptized as a Christian on the way to the frontier in the waters
of the river Jordan, just as Jesus had been baptized there by John
the Baptist.
As the ruler of these soon to be conquered territories, Constantine
even placed his nephew Hannibalianus on the throne of Armenia, with
the title of King of Kings, which had been the traditional title
borne by the kings of Persia.
But this scheme was not to come to anything, for in the spring of
AD 337, Constantine fell ill. Realising that he was about to die, he
asked to be baptized. This was performed on his deathbed by Eusebius,
bishop of Nicomedia.
Constantine died on 22 May AD 337 at the imperial villa at Ankyrona.
His body was carried to the Church of the Holy Apostles, his mausoleum.
Had his own wish to be buried in Constantinople caused outrage in Rome,
the Roman senate still decided on his deification. A strange decision
as it elevated him, the first Christian emperor, to the status of an
old pagan deity.
ad.php?idx=2201

JUSTICE NEEDED FOR ARMENIAN GENOCIDE
Mona Karaguozian
The SunDial – Daily Sundial, CA
(California State Univ. at Northridge)
Oct 18 2005
Daily Sundial
October 17, 2005
According to Merriam Webster’s dictionary, the term genocide is
defined as the “deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial,
political or cultural group.”
In April 1915, during World War I, the Ottoman Empire began
systematically annihilating Armenians, by first ridding the
intellectuals, men, elderly, women and then children in the Eastern
Anatolia and Western Armenia region, in what should be known as the
first genocide of the 20th century.
The Turkish government has continuously refused to accept
responsibility for the atrocities that have taken place, and it also
refuses to acknowledge the existence of this “alleged” genocide.
The Turkish government makes claims now that the Armenians who were
killed during that period died as wartime casualties and that many
Turks were killed as well. This is false because only the Armenians
that were living in that region in Turkey were being “relocated”
for safety. Why weren’t the other residents of that region being
relocated? It was a deliberate destruction of a specific group
of people.
Who alleges the massacres of 1.5 million people? How could the
destruction of a substantially large number of people be alleged? The
evidence is in the death toll. There are also photographs, hundreds
of chronicles from American newspapers and documentation depicting
the massacres as they were taking place not to mention countless
horror stories passed down generations.
The issue of the Armenian genocide is less than ten years shy of
being a century- long struggle for recognition. Ninety years might
seem like ages ago, but I, as an American born Armenian, still feel
the effects of the massacres. My grandfather was a survivor of the
genocide. I hold knowledge of eyewitness accounts and experiences of
the genocide that were passed down through him. It pains me to be
a third generation Armenian after the genocide and to see that the
struggle for recognition continues to this day.
There are numerous advocacy groups, such as the Armenian National
Committee of America and the Armenian Assembly that are seeking
justice on behalf of the Armenian people. These activists dedicate
their time and effort to spread awareness of the genocide and to gain
recognition for its occurrence.
In a letter sent to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on Oct. 5, ANCA
Chairman Ken Hachikian voiced the profound moral outrage of Armenians
over the Bush administration’s ongoing complicity in Turkey’s campaign
of genocide denial.
Turkey has also been trying to gain admission into the European Union,
yet they continue running into complications. European Union foreign
ministers have attempted to agree on terms for Turkish membership,
but many countries, like Austria, have refused to agree on full
membership. They are only willing to offer Turkey a “privileged
partnership” with the EU until such claims as the Armenian genocide
have been resolved. If the EU is unable to agree on terms with the
Turkish government, there must be a reason. For being just an “alleged”
claim, the Armenian genocide is a substantial cause for concern among
many European countries.
This is not the first attempt by Armenian-Americans to gain a political
voice regarding this issue. Many bills have been presented to Congress,
each of which would have been instrumental toward the fight for
justice, but none have been passed yet.
Instead, all these bills have been shot down. Armenian activists
have also organized many public events, such as marches, protests,
vigils and pickets at the Turkish embassy in Los Angeles as well as
all over the world.
Throughout the years, these activities have gained some local media
exposure. None, however, have had a national effect on legislation.
Many of the local media outlets are familiar with the commemoration
of April 24 due to the heavily concentrated Armenian community Los
Angeles, but the voice is barely heard.
As the years pass the story gets old and people begin to forget. This
is the goal of the denial.
This situation may change with another attempt to pass legislation.
On Sept. 15, after nearly three hours of debate, the House
International Relations Committee, voted overwhelmingly in favor
of two measures calling for proper U.S. recognition of the Armenian
Genocide (H.Res.316 and H.Con.Res.195) and urging Turkey to end its
decades-long denial of this crime against humanity.
The Senate should finish the work started by the House and call
for recognition of the Armenian genocide. Only with the support of
the United Sates will the movement to have the Turkish government
recognize the past crimes of the Ottoman Empire succeed.
Justice needs to be served and not withheld because of politics.
Mona Karaguozian can be reached at [email protected].
ws/display.v/ART/2005/10/17/4353cb4fb78e4

A JOINT WORKING GROUP ON KARABAKH FORMED AT THE PACE
DeFacto Agency, Armenia
Oct 18 2005
A working group on the Karabakh issue has been formed at the PACE.
The corresponding decision was rendered at the latest sitting of
the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly Subcommittee on Nagorno
Karabakh.
According to PanARMENIAN.Net, a member of the Azeri delegation at the
PACE Asim Mollazade stated the new working group had been formed on
the initiative of the Subcommittee Chair lord Russell Johnston. Both
Azerbaijan and Armenia are represented in the group. “It is a joint
working group. The group’s sitting was held at the PACE latest session,
and we arranged to conduct a number of meetings, discuss the program
of the Subcommittee activity”, noted Mollazade.
According to Mollazade, the Subcommittee headed by Russell Johnston
has been formed to implement a resolution on the Karabakh conflict
adopted by the PACE. “It is the Subcommittee’s principal goal. The
structure is to present its report and working plan at the PACE
January session, inform of the work done and planned for the future.
We are currently working over the plan of measures referring to the
PACE resolution implementation. Principal goal in the adoption of
the resolution is promotion of the conflict settlement. The Council
of Europe is eager to participate in the settlement of the Nagorno
Karabakh problem”.
The Azeri Parliamentarian noted substitution of the OSCE Minsk group
for the new working group was not subject for discussions. He stressed
the OSCE MG was the main format of mediation between the conflict
sides. “The Council of Europe is trying to settle the conflict in the
aspect of the values it defends. The resolution was adopted before
that, and the work being done is based on the document”. In his words,
the latest steps undertaken by the CE testify to the organization’s
wish to actively participate in the Karabakh conflict settlement. “The
Council of Europe cannot close eyes to the tragedy within Europe. Using
its authority the CE will render all – round assistance to the conflict
settlement in the international organizations as well. Naturally,
we’ll go on acting within the frames of the organization. I believe
it will have a positive influence on the conflict settlement”, stated
Asim Mollazade.

HELSINKI: TURKISH FM PROMISES TO MEET EU MEMBERSHIP CONDITIONS
Helsingin Sanomat, Finland
Oct 18 2005
Abdullah Gul thanks Finland for support
Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul promised on Monday that his
country would continue its legislative and economic reforms to meet
all criteria set for membership in the European Union.
During a visit to Finland, Gul commented that meeting the conditions
is in Turkey’s interests as well. He also predicted that his country
would be a member of the European Union in ten years.
Finnish Foreign Minister Erkki Tuomioja noted that Finland had worked
hard to get Turkey accepted as an applicant country. There has also
been widespread support for Turkey’s bid in the Finnish Parliament.
Gul also mentioned that he hopes that the Finnish people would back his
country’s membership bid. In other EU countries, tones have been more
critical. Austria, which holds the EU Presidency in the first half of
2006 (just before Finland), tried to block the launch of membership
talks with Turkey, setting talks with Croatia as a precondition for
its approval.
However, Gul said that he does not expect Austria’s turn at the
Presidency to cause problems. Tuomioja also said that he does not
believe that any country will set a very unique agenda.
“Turkey itself knows that it still has much to do, but this is the
beginning of a long process”, Tuomioja said.
The controversial prosecution of Turkish author Orhan Pamuk, who
has written about the Kurdish question and the Armenian genocide,
is not a problem in Gul’s opinion. The trial of Pamuk has not been
called off, and the hearing is scheduled to go ahead on December 16th.
Turkey has already reformed its criminal code, but before it becomes
a member of the EU, it must resolve a number of issues, such as
its attitude toward the new EU member-state Cyprus, an island whose
northern part has been occupied by Turkey for 30 years.
The continued non-recognition of Cyprus by Turkey remains a problem
for its EU membership bid.
The European Commission is to issue a report on Turkey’s progress
early next month.

FORUM EXPLORES IRAQ WAR
By Rick Malwitz
Staff Writer
New Brunswick Home News Tribune, NJ
Oct 18 2005
Home News Tribune Online 10/18/05
RUTGERS – No matter what form of government is created by the
constitution approved by Iraqi voters over the weekend, do not expect
it to look familiar soon.
“We are not going to install Jeffersonian democracy overnight,”
said U.S. Army veteran Gregg Bumgardner, who joined U.S. Rep. Frank
Pallone, 6th Dist., and Prof. Lloyd C. Gardner at a forum on the war
yesterday at the Student Center.
Listening to the three-man panel were about a 12 students and a
half-dozen members from the community. Based on what the panel had
to say, and questions they were asked, everyone in the room agreed
the United States is committing a major blunder in Iraq.
The most immediate cost is borne by the soldiers, according to
Bumgardner, a Collingswood resident who left the military after
12 years.
“We broke it and we are going to buy it, unfortunately, with the cost
of our troops,” he said.
Bumgardner, who can speak Arabic and Persian Farsi, served in
psychological operations, with the task of providing information to
the local citizens.
“They do not share our world view. They are an Islamic society, and
you are never going to be able to separate Islam from the government,”
said Bumgardner.
He recalled speaking to women prior to an election in January. “I asked
them if they were going to vote. They said, “No, it’s not my place.’ ”
The irony of his observations was not lost on Kay Tsurumi of Highland
Park, a member of the Central Jersey Coalition Against Endless War,
discouraged that the proposed Iraqi constitution does little to protect
the rights of women. “George Bush is the first Christian to establish
an Islamic nation,” she said.
The linkage between religion and the state is not uncommon in the
Middle East. Pallone, the co-chairman of the Congressional Caucus
on Armenian Issues, noted Armenia is 95 percent Christian and that
Armenians “don’t want to separate Christianity from the state.”
Beyond religion, there are other factors Americans find difficult to
understand, said Gardner, who has written 15 books on foreign policy.
He noted how the boundaries of modern Iraq were dictated by the British
at the fall of the Ottoman Empire, who declared: “You are Iraq.”
Gardner noted that the United States, with 172 bases worldwide, is
seen as an occupation force. The United States ought to declare it
will not create permanent bases in Iraq, although he said he did not
believe this is possible. “If they aren’t permanent, we have poured
an awful lot of concrete for no reason,” said Gardner.
Asked if Iraqis would believe the United States if it vowed to
leave Iraq without planting permanent bases, Bumgardner said no:
“They don’t believe anything we tell them.”
He said it’s far easier to get Iraqis to believe rumors, such as a
common rumor that the Americans have imported snipers from Israel.
He said for many Iraqis the greatest challenge is a simple one: Getting
a job to support a family. On some projects, civilian employees have
been brought in from places like Pakistan and Syria, while Iraqis
are on the outside of the fence, looking at foreigners getting paid
for work.
The problem is, said Bumgardner, “nobody trusts the people outside
the wire,” not knowing who is an insurgent and who is not.
Pallone, who said we now have an obligation to mend the broken Iraq,
said his preferred solution is to enlist international organizations –
such as the United Nations and NATO – which formed the broad coalition
that fought the Gulf War in 1991.
“It will dispel the notion that the U.S. is a permanent occupying
force, a theme used by the insurgents to justify their continued
attacks,” said Pallone.
He said that would require the Bush administration to “admit they
were wrong” after embracing a “go-it-alone approach.”
Gardner lamented that so few Rutgers Unviersity students seem
interested in the war. Pallone said the war is not given enough
attention in Washington.
“The hurricane dominated the conversation and the war is no longer
on the front burner,” said Pallone.
e?AID=/20051018/NEWS02/510180397/1001

IRAN GAS PRODUCTION TO UP 40M CUBIC METERS/DAY
IranMania News, Iran
Oct 18 2005
LONDON, October 18 (IranMania) – Iran?s natural gas production will
increase by 40 mln cubic meters to reach 420 mln cubic meters a day
this winter, said a senior gas industry official.
According to ILNA, Abdolhossein Samari, the National Iranian Gas
Company?s project manager, told reporters that Iran imported 5.8 bln
cubic meters of gas last year, when it exported 315 bln cubic meters.
Rejecting reports that gas exports will impede proper distribution
nationwide, the official said Iran is ready to import up to 40 mln
cubic meters per day of gas from Turkmenistan to meet a possible
shortage of supply in winter.
?However, the Turkmen side has not yet announced its readiness to
export this amount of gas to Iran,? he said, criticizing the National
Iranian Gas Company?s failure to construct adequate underground
gas storages.
He said lack of proper storage facilities will prevent the company
from ensuring adequate supplies at times of consumption peak.
He, however, said gas supply network is doing well, adding that gas
produced in the southern region of Asalouyeh reaches consumers across
the country within just 40 hours.
Samari said the gas swap agreement with Azerbaijan will enter the
executive phase as of next month, noting that as per the contract,
Iran will import Azeri gas and then export the same amount to
Nakhichivan. He put the swap fee at 15%.
On gas export agreement with Armenia, the official said exports could
increase from 1.1 to 2.3 mln cubic meters.
Iran holds the world?s largest gas reserves second only to Russia.
Twenty two phases of the giant project to develop the world?s largest
offshore gas field, South Pars, which holds almost eight % of the
global gas reserves, will become operational by 2012.
The multi-phased project is a top priority on the national development
agenda.
The field straddles Iranian (South Pars) and Qatari (North Field)
sectors of the Persian Gulf, and Iran?s share is being developed in
28 phases.