RADIO TO LISTEN : http://english.ruvr.ru/r...st/2248881/91561458.html
Do you know why does "Cher Ami" mean a beggar in Russian?
The author of that so to speak “initiative” was M. Shrinivas, a former member of the parliament who is now a member of the legislative assembly from the opposition party Bharatiya Janata. He mentioned that the huge territory of 135 hectares belonged to the government and is located near Bangalore. Why could not 20 hectares be used to process the garbage?
That announcement did not go unnoticed in Roerich's home country, in Russia. Alexander Stetsenko, deputy director of the International Roerich Center, recalls that the Tataguni estate became a famous scientific and cultural center back during the days when Svyatoslav Roerich and his wife, a movie actress Deviki Rani lived there. Painters, writers and actors from many countries of the world tried to visit them there. Thanks to the efforts of Svyatoslav Roerich the Academy of fine arts was founded in Bangalore that is still in operation.
"The mere idea of turning the place known as an oasis of culture into a dump for garbage processing is sacrilegious in itself! – Says Alexander Stetsenko. – We should not allow that to happen! The Roerichs worshiped India as their second motherland and did everything in order to strengthen the understanding between the Indians and the Russians. Svyatoslav Roerich’s paintings that were created in Tataguni and are stored there testify to that. The International Roerich Center intends to appeal to its public partner organizations in Karnataka, in Bangalore, with which we have been cooperating for years, with a request to preserve Tataguni. According to the will of Svyatoslav Roerich and Deviki Rani a park and other cultural projects were planned there. We hope and we believe that their will will be observed," says Alexander Stetsenko.
Svyatoslav Roerich’s paintings and those of his famous father Nokolai Roerich who glorified the Himalayas, are widely represented in the Moscow State Museum of Oriental Art. There the news from Bangalore was received with great surprise. Vladimir Rosov, the curator of the museum exposition of the Roerich family is perplexed. How could such an inappropriate idea about the heritage of the Roerich family that became the symbol of the Indian-Russian cooperation even be voiced?
"Last year I visited Karnataka as a member of the delegation of the Volga town of Samara, - points out Vladimir Rosov. – Bangalore and Samara are sister cities and are successfully developing their economic and cultural ties. In the course of the meetings with the officials of Bangalore, with the representatives of the artistic world, with the local citizen we heard the most respectful and kind words about the Roerichs, a high appraisal of their works, as well as the plan to preserve and popularize their heritage. We felt that the Indian people have reverence towards the Roerichs. The officials informed us about the decision made to enlarge the art gallery Karnataka Chitrakala Parishad, founded in the 1980s by Svyatoslav Roerich. The authorities of the state are planning to set up a special complex there where they would exhibit the paintings and other materials about the art of the Roerichs. Given this mood, the proposal to turn Tataguni into a dump is unlikely to get approval," supposes Vladimir Rosov.
Somebody on FB said this is in SA...?
The decimated Aboriginal population of Australia recently won a very small battle which has brought their struggle to the forefront, albeit on a small scale, and has many in Australia debating journalistic ethics, freedom of speech and just how far can politicians go to pander to the racist sentiments of their supporters when attacking vulnerable marginalized minorities.
The “victory” in question is a case regarding hate speech which the side of the perpetrator is trying to portray as a freedom of speech issue and deals with just how far Australians are allowed to go when expressing their hatred or making offensive statements about the Aboriginal peoples of Australia and other non-white non-Christian groups.
Nine indigenous Australians filed a complaint in Federal Court against a columnist for the Herald Sun named Andrew Bolt who was then found guilty of violating Australia’s anti-discrimination laws. More specifically breaching section 18 (c) of Australia’s Racial Discrimination Act of 1975.
The case against him include stating that the nine had “identified as Aborigines in order to gain career, social or other advantage” in two articles published in 2009 and two blog posts on the Herald Sun’s website, one titled “It’s so hip to be black.”
Australia, a country where not long ago it was legal to kill Aborigines and take their children away has a very long way to go towards becoming a fair society. Like most of the countries invaded, colonized or taken possession of during the days of the British Empire and the European invasion of the “New World,” countries and lands where the native peoples were brutally exterminated, Australia is ruled and populated by the ancestors of genocidal outcasts and the murderous misfits of European, in this case British society. So watching their system attempt to show that they are just is almost laughable, if it were not so tragic.
Despite the weakness of Australian anti-discrimination laws, as it true in many countries ruled along racial lines, Australia also has laws to “protect” free speech and “freedom of expression,” in this case Section 18D of the same Racial Discrimination Act which allows for exemptions when done “reasonably and in good faith” including public comments in a newspaper.
Such laws and arguments, as in the United States, allow for hate groups and those espousing hate to operate, for the most part, unhindered by the law. As with the US Ku Klux Klan, a group whose only goal is white domination through the killing and eradication of other races, and neo-Nazi groups worldwide who are allowed in many countries to march and hold public gatherings under the protection of governments, Australia’s racists also hide behind the banner of freedom of expression.
Watching the farce of the white justice system attempting to show it is fair, as it rules against its own, is usually saddening and mostly predictable, and this time is no different. The fact that it took four publications and nine plaintiffs to bring about a grudging ruling in this case says a lot for the fairness of the Australian system and the attitudes of white Australians to the issue of the rights of the marginalized natives of the country they have occupied for hundreds of years.
The reaction by the Australian media, such as the newspaper and website The Australian and powerful politicians who were given positions of power by millions of like-minded voters, in this case Australian Representative Tony Abbott, is also a sad reminder as to how racist the system is and how many millions still support and hold extreme racist views.
In the United States, Canada, Europe and other countries, racists and hate groups have made huge gains over the last 20 years. In particular Republicans and the far-right in US who have for the most part succeeded in overturning gains made during the civil rights era. This has for the most part been helped by Islamaphobia, crack downs on civil rights and freedoms and the ensuing battle for “freedom of expression and “equal rights for whites” which have been used as tools to rewrite laws and restructure the white supremacist system in subtle and far reaching ways.
A good indicator that institutionalized racism is worldwide problem is the case of Anders Breivik in Norway who despite his heinous crimes enjoys a suite of rooms and superior treatment for the sole reason that he was fighting for the white race, no matter that he is a mass-murdering lunatic.
Back to the matter at hand: Australia has one of the longest and most brutal histories of genocide, racial hatred and institutionalized discrimination and has only recently begun to correct some of the wrongs in the system. Advocates of Aboriginal rights believe Australia’s Racial Discrimination Act is worth defending, especially in light of the fact that there still exist extreme levels of hatred, along racial, ethnic and religious lines in Australia.
In an article for ABC Australia Mariam Veiszadeh, a lawyer, writer and community rights advocate says, “(Australia’s) … politicians feel the need to score political points at the expense of the most vulnerable members of Australian society.” With regard to freedom of speech she says: “Freedom of speech and expression is inevitably a double edged sword. While it is very much the cornerstone of our democratic rights and freedoms, those who spew hateful and misleading vitriol ultimately thrive from the protection it offers.”
Though expectedly demonized by many “Australians,” last year Australia’s Attorney-General Nicola Roxon, as reported by Mariam Veiszadeh: “…launched a public discussion paper to seek community views on consolidating Commonwealth anti-discrimination law as part of Australia's Human Rights Framework."
Although Australia’s anti-discrimination laws are minimal and need to be strengthened the Attorney General has faced harsh criticism and attacks for her fight for justice. In the same article in The Australian that I mentioned above, the “freedom of speech” argument is blatantly and inaccurately put forward once again with the publication defending hate speech by politicians by stating incorrectly as fact that Attorney-General Nicola Roxon's proposed changes: expand the list of things people can be offended by, expand the jurisdiction into shops, workplaces and sporting clubs, provide a new weapon in the war on free speech, include "political opinion" as a ground on which people can be discriminated against and make “even innocuous political expressions subject to the law.”
The nine “fair-skinned Aboriginals'' as they are being called in the Australian all were carefully targeted for the smear by Bolt. They are all high-achieving Aboriginals who have in various ways advanced the struggle of the Aboriginal people and this is something that racist elements in Australian want to see stopped.
Their claim that their attack was exempt from prosecution because it was free speech was shot down by Justice Mordecai Bromberg who cited the way the "articles were written, including that they contained errors of fact, distortions of the truth and inflammatory and provocative language."
In the verdict which Justice Bromberg read out in court he stated that he had found that "fair-skinned Aboriginal people (or some of them) were reasonably likely, in all the circumstances, to have been offended, insulted, humiliated or intimidated by the imputations conveyed in the newspaper articles."
According to the Australian after the proceedings the author Bolt said “This is a terrible day for freedom of speech in this country'', and the author of the article, the director of the Legal Rights Project, Simon Breheny said: “We've already seen the consequences of the Racial Discrimination Act for freedom of speech. If you thought that was a miscarriages of justice, just wait until you see the extraordinary wave of free speech litigation Roxon's new laws will unleash.” I would argue his own statement is an admission and a clear affirmation that widespread racism is a very serious problem in Australia.
Unfortunately for Australian racists Australia’s genocide of the Aborigines was not as complete as the American genocide of the Indian Nations and the Aboriginal people still exist in numbers large enough to allow them to occasionally be heard. This is also due to Australia’s policy of extermination through assimilation as opposed to the US policy of outright genocide and the following ghettoizing of the Indian people to reservations.
Few, if any, full-blooded Aboriginals in Australia are allowed to advance to the levels that the nine defendants in this case have lifted themselves up to, and we see that this has caused resonance. As with America most people who posses Aboriginal or native blood are supposed to hide that fact and quietly live under subjugation, these nine too often stepped-out-of-line, and were therefore attacked.
Most people of native origin, if living among the “broader” populations of their respective invaded lands, are taught to hide their ancestry, as were the Jews during the Great Patriotic War, and any other groups living surrounded by the “enemy.” Like my father once told me in California, where our family was attacked by skin-heads, when I found out our hidden family history and that I am more than 40% Taino Indian, “It is a white man’s world. We have to live by his rules.”
Yes, Australia, most of the Americas, and many other places are now a “white Anglo Saxon man’s world,” but the fact is that those “worlds” were stolen.
Let this serve as a warning to all Russians and nations of the world to be forever vigilant to encroachment on your peoples and your lands.
The opinions and views expressed here are the writer’s own. He can be reached at email@example.com.
"The only good indian is a dead Indian" GERERAL PHILLIP SHERIDAN - US ARMY
Exhibition In Moscow: Dushevina's Paintings Vera DushevinaMOSCOW, Russia - Vera Dushevina may be known for her groundstrokes on the court, but she also has some mean brushstrokes on the canvas - and last month the Russian put her work on display in the Russian capital of Moscow at a special exhibition that was attended by some very special guests.Dushevina started the paintings seven years ago. "I had the idea of an exhibition four years ago, but then realized I didn't have enough paintings - but it was my dream, and I knew it was in my hands, so I just kept painting. I really enjoy it. I'd like to thank all my friends and family for their support in all of this!"Many of Dushevina's paintings decorate her home, the homes of her friends and family, and one was even given to charity - and that isn't the only sharing going on, as fellow Russian stars Marat Safin, Dinara Safina, Yevgeny Kafelnikov and Anastasia Myskina were among those sharing the moment with her.We at wtatennis.com have prepared two galleries of Dushevina's paintings - the first image below goes to the first gallery, the second image to the second.
In terms of culture, Russia has lots of things they'd be interested in, want to talk about and be highly knowledgeable about. It's not to say that we in the U.K. aren't knowledgeable about culture, but maybe it's not as high on the list of thing that we think about and talk about. The overwhelmingly different thing that I find when talking with Russians - how much more erudite and how much more interested they are to talk about the arts, ballet, literature, design. It's a very-very cultivated and cultured world view. And I think we do well to reflect on that.
And you've done some specific research which led you to believe that when doing business with Russia - and Russia is an important emerging economy - we mustn't forget that cultural aspect to Russian life.
We have some strong research which demonstrates that the more people share culture, the more they tend to trust each other, so the specifics for Russia - less than a third of people on balance would tend to trust people of the U.K. in the context of wanting to do business before having talks about culture. More than 50% would do business talks after having talked about culture. That might be exposing themselves to U.K. art, that might be taking part in cultural exchange programs, but the basic story is - the more culture we share, the more we trust, the more you have circumstances where trade can happen and that means more prosperity to both countries.
So what does that mean in practical terms for a British businessman who's thinking of going to Russia or vice versa?
I'd get around an art gallery, I'd have a look at some balleе, I'd get on Wikipedia and look at top-5 Russian composers and I'd also recommend a quick study of art history. And I think there you have some very interesting talking points and conversational openers which would take you way beyond what perhaps we sometimes start with, which is football scores and the Champions League.
And have you had evidence from businessmen who've reported this kinds of conversations between themselves and Russians?
Yes. I've experienced them myself personally. In 1990s I worked in the telecom's business. It was absolutely the case. Going to the ballet, talking about music, literature in places where people would relax. Now, does that mean that you're not going to drive a hard deal? Absolutely, not. But it does mean, you have a perspective on a person and an organization which basically lubricates and facilitates some form of exchange. You'd understand people better, you trust them a little more, you're ready to shake hands.
And what about promoting Britain through its own culture in Russia? How much of that do you feel needs to be done?
We've had a fantastic year! With the Olympics we recently topped a poll as the world's №1 softpower country, knocking America off the top. So I think we're very well situated this year having thoroughly refreshed and updated perceptions of the U.K. with the cranking Olympics.
From your experience in the British Council, in terms of culture in Britain, what do Russians look forward when they come to Britain? You mentioned that when Brits go to Russia, they think of ballet, Russian literature, history of art. What do Russians find in London or in the U.K.?
I think similar sorts of things. You'd definitely want the Royal Opera House. Clearly, there's theuniversal language of football as well.
People are often referring in the media and politics to a slight chilling in the relations between Russia and the U.K. in the last year or two. Have you encountered anything of that nature?
It's been a warm front for us. Certainly we've had many-many more collaborations, major artists going over, we've had Henry Moore in the Kremlin. We've never done more work in the arts. So it's absolutely a warming. There's been a tremendously warm and positive reception for U.K. culture, in our experience.
Robles: Thanks for agreeing to speak with me. My first question – what was it like for the Indians when the Europeans first landed in North America?
Paul: When the Europeans first invaded the Americas, well, you have to go back when Columbus got lost and landed in what’s today called the Caribbean and attacked the Taino people there. That began the onslaught that was unstoppable from that point on. At that time the Mi'kmaq, for instance, probably had one of the highest standards of living in the world. Our people were well-fed, they had access to an ocean that was abundant, an area, their land base, was teeming with wildlife.
And our civilization was very advanced in humanities. We had such things as divorces and marriages and all the rest, child care, elderly care and so forth and so on. And the system was based on honor and the leadership of the Mi'kmaq nation, and most of the North American nations were democratically elected by the people. And in comparison the Europeans, at that point in time, the vast majority lived under kings and queens and other aristocratic despots. They had very little freedom and they were ruled with iron hands. So, there was a big difference.
Robles: So, would you say democracy began with the Indian nations?
Paul: Democracy was well-practiced in the Americas before the Europeans even knew what democracy was. For instance the United States Government, in 1988 I believe it was, passed a resolution recognizing the fact that their Bill of Rights and the Constitution was copied in a large part from the indigenous people of the Americas and the practices they had, in particular the Iroquois.
Robles: Can you tell us a little bit about that?
Paul: Well, the Iroquois had what is called the Great Law of the People and it spelled out how the people rule. It is quite a document, but essentially it spelled out the democratic principles that a nation should operate under, given: power to the people.
Robles: The true history of the Indian people has been hidden, not only by governments in North America but by governments all over the world. Can you tell us some of the facts that have been hidden?
Paul: Well, there are lots of facts. The biggest fact that’s hidden in this day and age, is that: when the Europeans first invaded they created a lot of propaganda about the people that were living here and depicted them to be bloodthirsty savages and uncivilized people and so forth and so on. And their story telling was so great that they believed it. In fact it was completely wrong. If the people of the Americas had been such terrifying warriors and what have you: How come the Europeans were able to dispossess the people of two continents?
The fact was that Europeans came here as, what I would call, barbarians, in the sense that they came well-armed and they were well-equipped to fight people who really had no weaponry comparable to what the Europeans had. And the reason why the Europeans developed such lethal weaponry was simply because they were fighting among themselves for centuries and had invented better ways to kill one another. And when they brought that over to this side of the ocean, it was… our people didn’t stand a chance. You’ll never hear that taught in school. It is well-hidden and the people here were peaceful people, and if the Europeans had come and interacted friendly with the people here, there would never have been any bloodshed spilled.
Robles: Can you give us an example how Indian tribes would resolve conflicts for example for territory? I remember hearing some stories about that and I thought it was very interesting.
Paul: There were some wars, there is no question about it. But the best I can tell you is; most of the civilizations on this side of the water were based on personal honor. People were taught to honor the elders from the time they were born and to respect one another, and the Great Spirit was of course the keystone among the people, believing in a higher power. Disputes were solved simply: one of the best things I ever read was simple that two men were having an argument between them, they were mad at one at another, so the Chief went to one of them and said: “Do you intend to hate him for the rest of your days?” and he said; “No!” and then he went to the other and asked him the same question. He said: “No”, and then he said: “Why don’t you get together now and get it over with and forgive one another, and that’s it?” And they did. And life went on as normal.
One thing you have to keep in mind when you are talking about North American civilizations, “Civilizations of the Americas,” greed was unknown, personal accumulation of wealth was unheard of. People didn’t know what that kind of thinking was about. And when you are looking at collecting gold and silver and what have you, that was something that was never a big factor in the civilizations on this side of water.
Robles: Can you tell us some of the things about Indian society and Indian culture that might be interesting to listeners?
Paul: Well, one of the things, I think perhaps not too many people would know about is simply the fact that these civilizations that existed in 1492, when Columbus got lost, were civilizations that were well-advanced in their own right. They were people who had developed a way of living. The Mi'kmaq society for instance, it was what I would call a Use Society. And from the time you were born and as you grew as a child you were taught to respect all your friends and neighbors and entire community and to put your community first before your own personal needs.
So, people worked together for the joint welfare of everybody, for the bountiful welfare of everybody and everybody prospered together. So there was no fighting among themselves to gain power or gain wealth, or anything like that, that was something that was unheard of. And the worship in the creator was something that they lived on. It was religion based on nature, they believed that the Great Spirit was in their people, in the trees and in the earth and in everything else. So, it was a civilization that worked quite well.
And I don’t think that at this point in time you could reinvent that kind of thinking among the people, or re-instill it because we are so corrupted by the European God that was imported into the Americas and that is greed. Greed is something that is very destructive and our people were doomed because they had no concept of what greed was, they couldn’t understand it. When you are looking at, Chief Sitting Bull him making a statement that if North America had been twice as large as it is, it still wouldn’t have been large enough for the Europeans, they still would have wanted it all.
In the light of all the noise raised by the international and Russian mass media in relation to the notorious end of the world scheduled for December 21, Pavel Sulandziga’s assessment of the upcoming international conference entitled “The beginning of the era of harmony and becoming one with nature” to take place in Bolivia appears to be quite valuable: “In the last few years Bolivia has become one of the main initiators of the process to defend Mother Earth, which in spirit is very close to what the indigenous people of the world believe in – becoming one with nature, the ties that bind with the environment. And what takes place in Bolivia, those meetings that were initiated by president Evo Morales, are of great importance, because in the long run, one can say that the economics in our world, in the global world plays the dominant role. But it should not be that way. Because besides economics there are plenty of different issues related to the life and activity of people. Of course, it is not an alternative process, but this process shows that there are other values that people live with.
Pavel Vasiyevich, you were invited to the international conference in Bolivia, but nevertheless, you accepted another invitation and chose to attend a different event. Please tell us about that.
Pavel Sulandziga: Yes, we are talking about the annual meeting of the Sioux tribe chiefs, which is one of the largest Native American tribes in the USA. Our association of the indigenous people of the North, Siberia and the Far East has been seeking contacts with them for a long time in order to work jointly. And now, for the first time ever, they have invited an outsider to their Council of the chiefs to take place on December 21-22.
Will you speak at that Council?
Pavel Sulandziga: Yes, I plan to speak on two issues: first of all, on establishing our cooperation and joint activity. The thing is I am currently the chairman of the working group on the international cooperation between the indigenous peoples of Russia and other countries of the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation. There are a number of directions that our group works in that are related with the development of the indigenous peoples. This includes the issues of education, the issues of the youth, the issues of self-government, the issues of the development of the culture and other issues. That is why I would like to raise these issues in a joint discussion.
And secondly, I will talk about the Evenkiya community that the Sioux chiefs' council has voiced its support for. This, by the way, was one of the reasons for my invitation. The problem lies in the fact that the lands of the community attracted high-ranking officials and law enforcement structures, which decided to grab them...
We thank Pavel Sulandziga and wish him a fruitful meeting with the Sioux tribe chiefs. The information that our guest shared in the end was quite unexpected and very powerful.
Pavel Sulandziga: I am currently working on the visit to Russia of a number of Native American chiefs from the USA and Canada, as well as the leaders of indigenous people from other countries. Willie Littlechild, the Honorary Chief of the Crees from the Canadian Province of Alberta, Aali Kirskitaua, vice president of the Sami parliament, Henry Harrison, chief of the Thabas tribe from Alaska have already confirmed their visit. They will come to Russia in mid-January and meet with the indigenous peoples for a joint discussion of the problems and cooperation. We are planning a press conference in Moscow and then will go to Lake Baikal.
Dear Pavel Sulandziga, we thank you heartily for your interview to the Voice of Russia. Our radio station is ready to provide information support for this remarkable and necessary initiative, the invitation for the Council of the Native American tribal leaders and the indigenous people to gather in the Russian capital and at Lake Baikal...
This is part 2 of a three part interview regarding American Indian History. You can find part 1 by clicking on this link: Dr.Daniel Paul Voice of Russia Interview Part 1.
Robles: Can you give us an idea of how many tribes there were in North America when the Europeans invaded?
Paul: In what’s Canada today, there were 34 different tribes and different nations. So, when you are looking at what’s the United States and Mexico and put them all together, I would imagine you are looking at probably somewhere in the neighborhood of 100-140 tribes. InNorthAmerica, that’s North America.
Robles: Can you tell us: what do you make of Columbus saying that they discovered America? I’ve always had a big problem with that. They discovered a land where… there were already people populating it.
Paul: Columbus discovered nothing! Okay? He didn’t discover America; America was here for a long-long time. And there is evidence that people resided in the Americas for up to 25,000 years now. So if Christopher Columbus is 25,000 years old, maybe he did discover America. And brought some invaders with him at the time but he certainly did not. I’ll put it this way my friend: if I need a new car, and you happen to park yours, and I go out and discover your car, what do you call that?
Robles: Of course theft, it’s stealing.
Paul: When you discover something that belongs to somebody else and you take it, I think you are committing theft. And when you kill a large amount of people in the process of stealing something, I think that’s called genocide.
Robles: That’s right. You wrote a very well written piece about the first Thanksgiving and the real history behind that quote; “holiday” in the US. Can you give us some other examples and tell us a little bit about Thanksgiving?
Paul: Columbus Day, in particular is the biggest lie, he didn’t discover America. And the Thanksgiving business was one of the biggest fairytales of all times. What actually happened was that the tribes of that area; what’s called New England and Massachusetts, where the Puritans landed and set up shop, they were very friendly people, and these people, when they set up shop there, began to farm and what have you and they were starving and the native people fed them and helped them out. And 20 years after, the Chief, who was the prime leader in helping these people survive, had his sons captured by these same people and sold into slavery.
There is a lot of misinformation out there: most people think that the first slaves that were sold in the Americas were people from Africa, and the actual fact: it’s not true. The merchandise that was sold in a lot of the slave markets in the earlier part was mostly the indigenous peoples from the Americas.
Thanksgiving is nothing but a fairytale, it is being enhanced. You tell a story and it invariably goes on and by the time and it gets around the world and gets back to you, it is a different story altogether. And the friendly interaction between the Europeans, the Puritans, and the tribes of that area never occurred. As a matter of fact there were scalp proclamations issued for many of them and there were massacres that happened. At one fort, in what is now Connecticut, was burnt to the ground and over 900 men, women and children were slaughtered in that particular area. So, the great interaction between the American Indian and the European is a lot of hogwash.
Robles: I’ve read that at the actual Thanksgiving, they were actually giving thanks that is was so easy to slaughter the Indians and take their lands, is that true?
Paul: That’s more or less what is it all about. There is an old saying: “God help the oppressed! When the oppressed become the oppressor.” The puritans were being oppressed in England and when they came here, they saw their chance they became the oppressors of the people who, I guess extended an olive branch to them, when they first landed and helped them survive. So, really there is a great deal of treachery involved in the history of the Americas that is never talked about.
Even here in Nova Scotia, in Canada, there were three scalp proclamations issued for the Mi'kmaq by the British. The first one was in 1744, the Mi'kmaq had the fort Annapolis Royal surrounded and the governor of the fort at the time, sent a message to Governor William Shirley of the Mass Bay colony asking for assistance and he responded by declaring war upon the Mi'kmaq. And in that declaration he put a price on the heads of men, women and children, for their scalps. The scalps of men, women and children.
Robles: For the scalps of Indians. So, the whole scalping thing, that was something that the Europeans pretty much though up.
Paul: Scalping was going on in Europe for a couple of thousand years. It is not something that was invented on this side of the ocean, by no means.
Robles: I see, that is one of the biggest fables I think. Now you mentioned slaves a minute ago. I know Indians were treated much worse than the African slaves that were brought over. Can you tell us a little bit about that?
Paul:Well, the fact was that the slaves that they took from here, the indigenous people on this side of the ocean, didn’t stand up to mistreatment all that well, and a lot of them simply died on their owners, which made them unsuitable for that purpose. So, then they looked around for a new source and they decided that the Africans would do it and that’s when they started importing boat loads of people from Africa and sell them on slave markets here in America.
Robles: Why weren’t blacks annihilated?
Paul: The blacks were a property, and they had a property value. So, naturally the owners didn’t go out and slaughter them or anything like that because they’d be expending their own money. But they eventually classified our people, the indigenous people of the Americas, as wild animals with no value. So, they could go out and kill an Indian and not expect to suffer any consequences from anybody. You wouldn’t be sued for killing a “property”, if you went and killed somebody’s slave, you were probably sued and would have to pay to the owner of the slave money for destroying their property.
Robles: Could a society that was based and started in that way, could it ever be called democratic or free, or fair?
Paul: All these societies in the Americas, with very few exceptions, were built on genocide, on the slaughter of the indigenous people, the people who were wiped out. Some people put the estimate, for the Caribbean Taino people for instance, at being somewhere in the neighborhood of 5 to 10 million when Columbus landed there, within 50 years they were practically extinct. So, when you are looking at the overall total: it is almost unbelievable.
Dr. Daniel Paul is an Indian Historian and an elder with the Mi'kmaq Nation
You can learn more about the Mi'kmaq and American Indians by visiting Dr. Paul's website at: www.danielnpaul.com
DO CHILDREN OR TEENS NEED THIS KIND OF XBOX 360 GAME (Frame City Killer - Xbox 360) FOR THEIR INTELLECTUAL DEVELOPMENT OR "SOURCE OF ENTERTAINMENT"?
Dartagnan: this kind of game (City Killer - Xbox 360) tells you that it is normal to kill people. It also teaches you to find the right weapon.
Exactly one week ago Adam Lanza entered Sandy Hook elementary school and killed 26 people, including 20 children under the age of 7. In the wake of this horrible tragedy that weighs heavily on the conscience of the American society, many resurrect the old tired debate on arms-control. The proponents of gun-proliferation suggest that Americans are much safer with more individuals having guns in their possession. From this perspective, armed citizens deter crime and are able to defend themselves and others against it when deterrence fails. By contrast, those lobbying for stricter arms control contend that availability of firearms exacerbates the problem of mass shootings since it tempts otherwise ‘peaceful’ individuals toward violent actions. For Ms Margaret Welsh, however, neither approach provides the effective solution to the epidemic of mass shooting sprees occurring in the United States.
Ms Welsh suggests that to tackle the problem effectively, America must embark on genuine, deep, and fundamental socio-cultural change. In her opinion, the root cause behind the mass shootings in America is cultural, not logistical. US history is ‘saturated’ with violence. While the frontier society used violence to bring order to an early economy, the Second Amendment gave these violent urges new dimensions. According to Ms Welsh, the Second Amendment implanted a particular subliminal message in the consciousness of American society – that violence can be used to articulate a position. Subsequently, in the society based on a romanticized view of the ‘free individual against the world’, firearms became a tool to reassert particular rights, attain goals, and seek revenge.
Following this line of argument, Ms Welsh argues that the tragedy in Connecticut is not the price of freedom, as President Obama has recently implied in his memorial service speech, but is instead the price US has to pay for normalization of violence within American culture. In Ms Welsh’s opinion, with the coming of the twenty-first century such normalization is achieved through rapacious use of violence as source of entertainment. Through a great variety of computer games, movies, music, and television young Americans are absorbing a message that violence is a normal, or even worse a fun and thrilling, outlet for anger, pain, resentment, or frustration. Eventually, this leads to growing callousness towards the preciousness of human life. While Ms Welsh does not expect the American youth to become a collectivity of violent mass killers, she suggests such a steady diet of mayhem and gore can ultimately encourage some more vulnerable minds to use violence as their primary tool for achievement of various goals and needs.
Crucially, Ms Welsh suggests that the culturally imposed need to use violence can be expressed with whatever tools one has at his disposal, and if firearms are banned or restricted, hammers, ice picks, or sharpened screwdrivers, could be next. In this respect, Ms Welsh argues that if the US government wants to solve the problem of armed violence, it has to focus on the cause of violence and not the tool. In essence, such an endeavor necessitates a significant socio-cultural change with the ultimate aim to end the culture of violence which has permeated the fabric of American society throughout its existence.
The bronze statue stands near a road leading to his summer house in Melikhovo.
The town is full of fans of dachshund breeds.
Anton Pavlovich Chekhov (29 January 1860 – 15 July 1904) was a Russian physician, dramatist and author who is considered to be among the greatest writers of short stories in history. His career as a dramatist produced four classics and his best short stories are held in high esteem by writers and critics. Chekhov practised as a doctor throughout most of his literary career: "Medicine is my lawful wife", he once said, "and literature is my mistress."
After his father's death in 1898, Chekhov bought a plot of land on the outskirts of Yalta and built a villa there, into which he moved with his mother and sister the following year. Though he planted trees and flowers in Yalta, kept dogs and tame cranes, and received guests such as Leo Tolstoy and Maxim Gorky, Chekhov was always relieved to leave his "hot Siberia" for Moscow or travels abroad. He vowed to move to Taganrog as soon as a water supply was installed there.
In Yalta, Chekhov wrote one of his most famous stories, "The Lady with the Dog" (also called "Lady with Lapdog"), which depicts what at first seems a casual liaison between a married man and a married woman in Yalta. Neither expects anything lasting from the encounter, but they find themselves drawn back to each other, risking the security of their family lives.
Voice of Russia, TASS
PART 1: Democracy existed in the Americas long before the Europeans invaded - Mi'kmaq Elder
PART 2: Indians were classified as wild animals - exclusive interview
Could a society that was based and started in that way, ever be called democratic or free or fair?
All these societies in Americas, with very few exceptions, were built on genocide. A lot of the indigenous people were wiped out. Some people with the estimate for the Caribbean Taíno people, for instance, as being somewhere in the neighborhood of 5-10 million when Columbus landed. Within 50 years they were practically extinct. When you look at the overall total, it is almost unbelievable, and they talk about barbarism and people don’t discuss it too often but the Spaniards used human flesh to feed dogs. And scalp proclamations were one of the favorite things of the English here in the Americas, putting a price on the heads of men, women and children. And then the spreading the smallpox was another thing they used quite liberally in trying to eliminate populations. And then simple starvation, after they destroyed most of the food sources of the indigenous people and trading patterns, the people lived in a state of malnutrition and many were starving to death, and when you get to that state, even a common cold can be fatal to you. So, our population in the Americas was reduced, I would say, almost by 90% by time it was all over. And even in this day and age the Nigma, for instance, in Nova Scotia were down to 1,400 in 1850 and that stayed around the same until the 1940s, and then the Canadian government began to get a little bit of a conscience, or what have you, and started improving health services and food rations and so forth and so on. And today our population is up to about 25,000 now. We’re slowly mature in making the comeback.
How are the other tribes ferrying in Canada and up to the United States?
The United States has owned up to the atrocities that went on there, there’s an apology I believe, that was issued by the Congress in 2010 but as what I call a silent apology. It was never broadcast around the world or anything like that and it was part of a defense Procurement Bill that went through the Congress. But when you are looking at the overall thing, that is not what we need to be done in these countries. What we have to see is they change curriculums and began to place in those school curriculums, the real history of the peoples that were here before the Europeans invaded. And I don’t call it discovery, I call it invasion. It was an invasion by people that were superiorly armed and they brought their wars to the Americas. The French and British were fighting almost constantly on this side of the water, at the same time fighting constantly on the European soil. So, they didn’t bring peace and prosperity to the indigenous people in the Americas - we already had that. And we all had good standards of living and some people like to believe that all our ancestors were standing along the shores of the Americas, cheering on the Europeans for coming over and saving them and civilizing them and so forth and so on, which is a pile of bull.
You mentioned the Taíno people, I’m part Taíno Indian myself, why are groups such as Taíno listed as being extinct when actually some peoples exist?
What’s happened here is, there are probably even some people with Sundiata blood in them. But when you can’t find a member of a tribe that is full-blooded, that is the point where you would call that tribe extinct in the sense that they are no longer with us in that sense, the Biatok’s were wiped out. I believe there may be a few people around with some Biatok blood in them but they didn’t live in the traditional way or what have you.
Can you describe a little bit the present state of the tribes in Canada and the United States?
We live under the state of systemic racism. In the United States and Canada you can’t have open discrimination against us anymore such as they had 30-40 years ago but we are still not viewed as equals in these societies and we are not treated as equals, and we are still seen by the vast majority of the people here, because of lack the lack of education, as people that came from barbarous tribes, savage tribes and not as people who came from civilized a community. So, until we can overcome that kind of perception and like I said before change curriculums in schools and begin to teach the truth, we still got a long way to go before we are treated as people who have come from civilization that had every right to continue to exist and prosper in this world, and stop demeaning our people in the sense that we were never a civilized people, where in fact, we were. And how to get that information out? It is slowly happening, it is going to take a long time and at the rate we’re going, I think we’ll be at it for a couple of centuries before we really make that final step. And one of the biggest steps has to be acceptance by Europeans that the genocide of the American Indians, the indigenous people of the Americas was probably one of the worst mass ethnic cleansings that this world has ever known and begin to make that part of history lessons, so forth and so on. There were great civilizations on this side of the water, there were rural civilizations, hunter-gather civilizations, there were city dwellers and what have you, and all these. And how many people in Americas or around the world know that fact? Very few. And the reason that they don’t know is because it’s not taught.
By the ancestors of the people who committed genocide on them.
Thank you very much. I really appreciate you speaking with me.
China today opened the world's longest high-speed rail line that more than halves the time required to travel from the country's capital in the north to Guangzhou, an economic hub in southern China.Click here for a first class gallery from the opening of the new routeThe opening of the 1,428 mile-line was marked by the 9am departure of a train from Beijing for Guangzhou. Another train left Guangzhou for Beijing an hour later.China has massive resources and considerable prestige invested in its showcase high-speed railways programme.But it has in recent months faced high-profile problems: part of a line collapsed in central China after heavy rains in March, while a bullet train crash in the summer of 2011 killed 40 people. The former railway minister, who spearheaded the bullet train's construction, and the ministry's chief engineer, were detained in an unrelated corruption investigation months before the crash.Trains on the latest high-speed line will initially run at 186 mph with a total travel time of about eight hours. Before, the fastest time between the two cities by train was more than 20 hours.The line also makes stops in major cities along the way, including provincial capitals Shijiazhuang, Wuhan and Changsha.More than 150 pairs of high-speed trains will run on the new line every day, the official Xinhua News Agency said, citing the Ministry of Railways.Railway is an essential part in China's transportation system, and the government plans to build a grid of high-speed railways with four east-west lines and four north-south lines by 2020.The opening of the new line brings the total distance covered by China's high-speed railway system to more than 5,800 miles, about half its 2015 target of 11,250 miles.
Dartagnan: Some people try to rehabilitate Adolf Hitlter in our society and give a positive opinion about Adolf Hilter by building a new statue of Adolf Hitler praying.
WE CAN'T SOLVE AN ECONOMIC CRISIS BY A GLOBAL WAR.
Many residents of Warsaw say that a statue of Adolf Hitler praying on his knees, which was set in the city’s Jewish district in November, insults their feelings.
The statue was set in the place where thousands of Jews were killed when Poland was occupied by Nazi Germany. The author of the statue is Italian Maurizio Cattelan.
A statement by the Simon Wiesenthal Jewish Center calls the statue “a senseless provocation and an insult to the memory of Jews who were killed by Nazis”.
Statue of praying Hitler on display in former Warsaw ghetto
Mixed emotions are being displayed over a statue of Adolf Hitler praying on his knees, which is on display now in the Ujazdowski Castle, a former Warsaw ghetto, where many Jews were killed or died of hunger or diseases. Some are angered by the statue, while others say the statue is provocative, not offensive, and raise moral questions.
The Hitler representation, a work by Italian artist Maurizio Cattelan, is visible from a hole in a wooden gate. Viewers only see the back of the small figure praying in a courtyard. Because of its small size, it appears to be a harmless schoolboy.
Organizers of the installation say the statue is to make people reflect on the nature of evil.
“Every criminal was once a tender, innocent and defenseless child,” a commentary note to the statue said.
Meanwhile, some people are angered by the statue.
“A senseless provocation which insults the memory of the Nazis' Jewish victims,” is what the Simon Wiesenthal Center, a Jewish advocacy group, has called the statue’s placement.
The Huffington Post
Rasputin was born a peasant in the small village of Pokrovskoye, along the Tura River in the Tobolsk guberniya (now Tyumen Oblast) in Siberia
Rasputin was employed by Tsar Nicholas II and Alexandra as a healer for their only son, Tsarevich Alexei, who suffered from hemophilia, and became an influential figure in the later years of the Tsar's reign.
FULL MOVIE (in french):
Depardieu considers moving to Russia
In a related development, he said in Belgium on Sunday that the decision of France’s Constitutional Council to overturn the tax hike will not persuade him to return to France.
In the past 45 years, Depardieu paid an equivalent of 145mln euros in taxes to the French treasury.
Depardieu mulls Russian citizenship?
The French movie star Gerard Depardieu has upped the ante in his tax battle with the government of French President Francois Hollande, saying he is mulling Russian citizenship, Le Monde newspaper reported on Tuesday.
“The Russian President has already sent me a passport!” the actor said in what many believe was a joke. He also said he considered swapping his French citizenship for that of Belgium where had just bought real estate, and of Montenegro where he has many friends and business contacts.
Depardieu's move comes in response to a new 75 percent tax on the wealthy introduced by Hollande's left-leaning government. The new tax rate, which comes in next year, will tax all income above $1.3 million at the new 75 percent rate.
French Prime Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault earlier slammed the actor’s decision to leave the country as “pathetic and disgusting.”
Depardieu said he had paid 145 million euros in taxes over the past 45 years and had never been a tax dodger.