Sunday, 15 July 2012

Persian eyes


Alexander the not so Great: History through Persian eyes

Circa 330 BC, Alexander the Great King of Macedonia, on his horse Boucephalus
Alexander the Great is portrayed as a legendary conqueror and military leader in Greek-influenced Western history books but his legacy looks very different from a Persian perspective.
Any visitor of the spectacular ruins of Persepolis - the site of the ceremonial capital of the ancient Persian Achaemenid empire, will be told three facts: it was built by Darius the Great, embellished by his son Xerxes, and destroyed by that man, Alexander.
That man Alexander, would be the Alexander the Great, feted in Western culture as the conqueror of the Persian Empire and one of the great military geniuses of history.
Indeed, reading some Western history books one might be forgiven for thinking that the Persians existed to be conquered by Alexander.
A more inquisitive mind might discover that the Persians had twice before been defeated by the Greeks during two ill-fated invasions, by Darius the Great in 490BC and then his son, Xerxes, in 480BC - for which Alexander's assault was a justified retaliation.
The ruins of the ancient imperial city of PersepolisAlexander the Great razed the ancient city of Persepolis
But seen through Persian eyes, Alexander is far from "Great".
He razed Persepolis to the ground following a night of drunken excess at the goading of a Greek courtesan, ostensibly in revenge for the burning of the Acropolis by the Persian ruler Xerxes.
Persians also condemn him for the widespread destruction he is thought to have encouraged to cultural and religious sites throughout the empire.
The emblems of Zoroastrianism - the ancient religion of the Iranians - were attacked and destroyed. For the Zoroastrian priesthood in particular - the Magi - the destruction of their temples was nothing short of a calamity.
The influence of Greek language and culture has helped establish a narrative in the West that Alexander's invasion was the first of many Western crusades to bring civilisation and culture to the barbaric East.
But in fact the Persian Empire was worth conquering not because it was in need of civilising but because it was the greatest empire the world had yet seen, extending from Central Asia to Libya.
Persia was an enormously rich prize.
Look closely and you will find ample evidence that the Greeks admired the Persian Empire and the emperors who ruled it.
Much like the barbarians who conquered Rome, Alexander came to admire what he found, so much so that he was keen to take on the Persian mantle of the King of Kings.
And Greek admiration for the Persians goes back much earlier than this.

Through Persian Eyes

Prof Ali Ansari is one of the world's leading experts on Iran and its history.
He presents Through Persian Eyes - a three part series on BBC Radio 4 exploring world history from a Persian perspective.
Xenophon, the Athenian general and writer, wrote a paean to Cyrus the Great - the Cyropaedia - showering praise on the ruler who showed that the government of men over a vast territory could be achieved by dint of character and force of personality:
"Cyrus was able to penetrate that vast extent of country by the sheer terror of his personality that the inhabitants were prostrate before him…," wrote Xenophon, "and yet he was able at the same time, to inspire them all with so deep a desire to please him and win his favour that all they asked was to be guided by his judgment and his alone.
"Thus he knit to himself a complex of nationalities so vast that it would have taxed a man's endurance merely to traverse his empire in any one direction."
Later Persian emperors Darius and Xerxes both invaded Greece, and were both ultimately defeated. But, remarkably, Greeks flocked to the Persian court.
The most notable was Themistocles, who fought against Darius's invading army at Marathon and masterminded the Athenian victory against Xerxes at Salamis.
Falling foul of Athenian politics, he fled to the Persian Empire and eventually found employment at the Persian Court and was made a provincial governor, where he lived out the rest of his life.
In time, the Persians found that they could achieve their objectives in Greece by playing the Greek city states against each other, and in the Peloponnesian War, Persian money financed the Spartan victory against Athens.
Achaemenid soldiers carved on the wall of the eastern stairway of the Apadana palace in the ancient Persian city of PersepolisAchaemenid soldiers, seen in wall-carvings in Persepolis
The key figure in this strategy was the Persian prince and governor of Asia Minor, Cyrus the Younger, who over a number of years developed a good relationship with his Greek interlocutors such that when he decided to make his fateful bid for the throne, he was able to easily recruit some 10,000 Greek mercenaries.
Unfortunately for him, he died in the attempt.
Soldier, historian and philosopher Xenophon was among those recruited, and he was full of praise for the prince of whom he said: "Of all the Persians who lived after Cyrus the Great, he was most like a king and the most deserving of an empire."
There is a wonderful account provided by Lysander, a Spartan general, who happened to visit Cyrus the Younger in the provincial capital at Sardis.
Lysander recounts how Cyrus treated him graciously and was particularly keen to show him his walled garden - paradeisos, the origin of our word paradise - where Lysander congratulated the prince on the beautiful design.
When, he added, that he ought to thank the slave who had done the work and laid out the plans, Cyrus smiled and pointed out that he had laid out the design and even planted some of the trees.
On seeing the Spartan's reaction he added: "I swear to you by Mithras that, my health permitting, I never ate without having first worked up a sweat by undertaking some activity relevant either to the art of war or to agriculture, or by stretching myself in some other way."

“Start Quote

In time, the Persians were to come to terms with their Macedonian conqueror”
Astonished, Lysander applauded Cyrus and said: "You deserve your good fortune Cyrus - you have it because you are a good man."
Alexander would have been familiar with stories such as these. The Persian Empire was not something to be conquered as much as an achievement to be acquired.
Although Alexander is characterised by the Persians as a destroyer, a reckless and somewhat feckless youth, the evidence suggests that he retained a healthy respect for the Persians themselves.
Alexander came to regret the destruction his invasion caused. Coming across the plundered tomb of Cyrus the Great in Pasargad, a little north of Persepolis, he was much distressed by what he found and immediately ordered repairs to be made.
Had he lived beyond his 32 years, he may yet have restored and repaired much more. In time, the Persians were to come to terms with their Macedonian conqueror, absorbing him, as other conquerors after him, into the fabric of national history.
And thus it is that in the great Iranian national epic, the Shahnameh, written in the 10th Century AD, Alexander is no longer a wholly foreign prince but one born of a Persian mother.
It is a myth, but one that perhaps betrays more truth than the appearance of history may like to reveal.
Like other conquerors who followed in his footsteps even the great Alexander came to be seduced and absorbed into the idea of Iran.
Ali Ansari is a professor in modern history and director of The Institute of Iranian Studies at The University of St Andrews, Scotland.

Friday, 6 July 2012

The BBC are guilty of propaganda advertising for Sunscreen compnies !

animal rights extremism


Three arrests in animal rights extremism inquiry

New Scotland YardScotland Yard says the arrests mark a "significant development" in its inquiry
Three people have been arrested in Amsterdam and London as part of a Europe-wide inquiry into blackmail linked to animal rights extremism.
A woman, 50, was held in Croydon, south London, on suspicion of conspiracy to blackmail following her arrest by counter terrorism officers, police say.
A man and a woman, both aged 25, were also arrested at a residential address in the Netherlands.
Searches are ongoing at business addresses linked to all three.
'Significant'
BBC home affairs correspondent Danny Shaw said Scotland Yard was not revealing who or what the alleged target of the blackmail plot was, but it is understood it was in the UK.
Sources said the operation was one of the most significant that police tackling animal rights extremism have conducted for some time, he added.
It was led by the Metropolitan Police Service Counter Terrorism Command, in liaison with the National Domestic Extremism Unit and Dutch National Crime Squad.

More on This Story

Wednesday, 27 June 2012


NHS hospital loans under PFI in question

Queen Elizabeth Hospital signSouth London Healthcare runs hospitals in Orpington, Sidcup and Woolwich

Related Stories

A political row has erupted over the legacy of PFI for the health service as one hospital trust faces insolvency.
South London Healthcare, a merger of three hospital trusts, is spending 14% of its income on repayments to a private finance initiative (PFI).
The government says the financial problems are caused by a PFI scheme signed off under Labour.
Labour says there are wider financial pressures in the NHS, and PFI also delivered many new hospitals.
The government could appoint an administrator within weeks, but in the meantime the trust's hospitals will continue to run as normal.
The move raises the prospect that other trusts could follow in its wake.
There are another 20 trusts that have declared themselves financially unsustainable in their current form.

PFI in the NHS

  • Private finance initiatives are partnerships between private companies and public services
  • The private company stumps up the finance for the public service - in this case, NHS hospitals
  • PFI offers a way of funding major capital investments, without immediate recourse to the public purse
  • The NHS then repays the private company under a system of annual fees
Work has already started to rectify their problems and therefore wholesale dissolving is considered unlikely.
However, the move over South London Healthcare does act as a warning that the government is prepared to use the measure, which was made possible by legislation Labour introduced in 2009.
'Deep challenges'
South London Healthcare amalgamated the Princess Royal University Hospital in Orpington, Queen Mary's Hospital in Sidcup, and the Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Woolwich in 2009.
When the three hospitals became one organisation they inherited a large debt - mainly from the private finance initiative (PFI) that had been used for the buildings at Orpington and Woolwich.

“Start Quote

We welcome this decision. The NHS can't go on with short-term fixes to financial problems”
NHS Confederation head Mike Farrar
Last year it finished £69m in deficit on a turnover of £424m.
As well as struggling financially, the trust also has some of the longest waiting times for operations, and longer-than-average waits in A&E. However, it does have low infection and death rates.
If a decision was made to break up the trust, it would not necessarily mean the closure of all services. Another more successful NHS organisation or private provider could end up taking on some.
But for that to happen, there would need to be a formal process of review and consultation.
While South London Healthcare Trust is carrying a heavy burden of PFI repayments, there are more complex factors behind the financial pressures facing some other trusts.
Wake-up call
Andrew Haldenby, from the think tank Reform, told the BBC that some other PFI schemes had delivered good hospitals and good value for taxpayers. But he warned that difficult decisions about the numbers of hospitals in England could not be postponed.

Time line for action

  • Under section 65 of the National Health Service Act 2009, the health secretary can appoint a special administrator to review an NHS trust
  • To do so, the health secretary must first alert the trust and regional health bosses of his intention and consult with them. This is the stage that has been reached with South London Healthcare
  • When and if an order is made, the health secretary must explain to Parliament why an administrator is being brought in
  • The administrator is then given five working days to start
  • Within 45 working days the administrator must provide the health secretary with a draft report setting out what should be done. This must be published
  • There must then be a consultation period of 30 working days - which must start within five days of the report being published
  • Once that is over, the administrator has 15 working days in which to produce a final report, which again must be published
"One in five hospitals are in real financial difficulty. Every hospital - even if it is in the black right now - needs to be looking really hard at this. Although we are talking about South London today, every NHS Chief Exec needs to be looking at this today."
Any decision about South London Healthcare would need to be signed off by Health Secretary Andrew Lansley and reported to Parliament.
In a letter to the trust, Mr Lansley said: "A central objective for all providers is to ensure they deliver high-quality services to patients that are clinically and financially sustainable for the long term.
"I recognise that South London Healthcare NHS Trust faces deep and long-standing challenges, some of which are not of its own making.
"Nonetheless, there must be a point when these problems, however they have arisen, are tackled. I believe we are almost at this point."
Mike Farrar, head of the NHS Confederation, which represents trusts, said: "We welcome this decision. The NHS can't go on with short-term fixes to financial problems.
"That might mean some tough decisions, but hopefully will deliver financial sustainability in the long term."
Chris Streather, chief executive of South London Healthcare, said patients could be assured that services would continue as normal during this process.
He added: "There is a huge gap in our financial plan in order for us to become viable in the long term and this intervention if it solves that problem which it is designed to do is absolutely welcome and will be helpful."
The trust expects the discussions to come to a conclusion in the second week of July, when a decision on whether to put it in administration will be taken by the secretary of state. However, it will probably be October by the time the review is completed.
But Labour accused the government of "losing its grip" on NHS finances and wasting billions of pounds on an NHS reorganisation which is "opposed by patients and health professionals".
Shadow chancellor Ed Balls said he accepted that some early PFI deals were poor value for money but defended the investment in hospitals.
"The big picture is up till 1997 we had no new hospitals being built at all and in constituencies across the country people were crying out for decent healthcare. We built tens and tens of new hospitals."
But Health Minister Simon Burns said it was time for "decisive action" instead of "sweeping this under the carpet."
Along with South London Healthcare, the other 20 trusts identified by the government as facing financial difficulties are: Newham University Hospital, Barking, Havering and Redbridge, North Cumbria Hospital, Surrey and Sussex Healthcare, Epsom and St Helier Hospitals, Trafford Healthcare, Scarborough and North East Yorkshire, Winchester and Eastleigh, George Eliot Hospital, Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre, Oxford Learning Disability Trust, Whipps Cross Hospital, North Middlesex Hospital, Ealing Hospital, Hinchingbrooke Hospital, North West London Hospitals, Weston Area Health, Great Western Ambulance Service, Dartford and Gravesham and Suffolk Mental Health Partnership

Saturday, 23 June 2012

Miliband shifts immigration policy, saying Labour 'got it wrong'


Miliband shifts immigration policy, saying Labour 'got it wrong'


He said Gordon Brown and Tony Blair should not have allowed uncontrolled immigration from new EU states in 2004.
Labour leader Ed Miliband has promised to deter firms from exclusively employing workers from overseas, admitting his party "got it wrong" on immigration when in government.
He also pledged to ban recruitment agencies which use only foreign workers at the expense of "local talent".
But the Conservatives said Labour had "no credibility" on immigration.
In 2004, the government allowed free migration to the UK for workers from EU accession states including Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic.
'Dazzled'
But its estimates that only about 13,000 people a year would come to the country were soon proved wrong, with a peak net migration figure, from the EU and elsewhere, of 252,000 in 2010.
Some countries imposed transitional controls to slow the speed of movement.
In a speech to the IPPR think-tank, Mr Miliband said: "It was a mistake not to impose transitional controls on accession from Eastern European countries. We severely underestimated the number of people who would come here. We were dazzled by globalisation and too sanguine about its price.

Two incidents encapsulated what many saw as the Labour government's failure to "get" why so many people were worried about immigration.
In 2007 Gordon Brown promised "British jobs for British workers". It was an impossible promise to keep, with the free movement of people within the European Union.
Mr Brown then famously described a pensioner from Rochdale, Gillian Duffy, as a "bigot" after she raised immigration with him during the general election campaign.
Ed Miliband acknowledged Labour got it wrong and in so doing alienated some of their core supporters.
Expect him to take this message to key seats he will need to win back for Labour if he is ever to be prime minister.
"By focusing exclusively on immigration's impact on growth, we lost sight of who was benefiting from that growth - whose living standards were being squeezed. We became disconnected from the concerns of working people."
He said Labour had told people concerned about the biggest peacetime migration to the UK to "like it or lump it" and that the public had been "ahead of us" on the issue.
Many in the party blamed the effects on immigration, including the lowering of wages and pressures on social services, for the scale of Labour's defeat in the 2010 general election.
Acknowledging that this was a factor, Mr Miliband said some employers had a "nasty, brutish and short-term" attitude to taking on staff, leading to greater exploitation of overseas and British workers.
He added that cutting numbers of immigrants was part of the solution but "not enough". He also accused the government of being unrealistic in saying it will limit net migration to "tens of thousands", as the vast majority of those coming to the UK were from EU countries.
Instead he promised measures including:
  • Forcing medium and large employers to declare if more than a quarter of their workforce is foreign, so that gaps in training British workers can be addressed, allowing them better to compete
  • Banning employment agencies from taking on only overseas workers
  • Extending the scope of the Gangmasters Licensing Authority to all sectors where workers are being exploited
  • Setting up an early-warning system, run by the Migration Advisory Council, to highlight areas where the workforce is "dominated by low-wage labour from other countries"
  • Identifying where British jobseekers need better training
  • Tougher legislation on the minimum wage, with a doubling of the fine from £5,000 to £10,000 for those who break the law
He said he would not make "promises that can not be kept" on cutting immigration from within the EU, which is beyond the control of British governments.
But he would seek ways to "level" the playing field for British workers in the jobs market.
And he vowed that a future Labour government would introduce "maximum transitional controls" to limit migration if the EU expanded to include more countries.
Referring to the phrase used by Mr Brown as prime minister, Mr Miliband said: "We are not calling for 'British jobs for British workers' because you can't do that and we shouldn't promise it."
The Labour leader said there was "nothing wrong with anyone employing Polish builders, Swedish childminders or French chefs".
But he added: "The problem we need to address is in those areas and sectors where local talent is locked out of opportunity."

Immigration figures

  • Net migration is around 80,000 higher, or one and a half times what it was 10 years ago
  • Net migration from outside the EU is 25,000, or 1.1 times higher than 10 years ago
  • Net migration from the EU is 67,000, or 10 times higher than it was 10 years ago
  • Source: BBC Research
For the Conservatives, immigration minister Damian Green said: "Until Ed Miliband supports the government's measures to cut and control immigration, Labour will have no credibility at all.
"Under his leadership, Labour have opposed our aim to get annual net migration down to the tens of thousands, and they have opposed the cap on economic migration, our changes to student visas and our reforms to family visas.
"They refuse to admit that immigration is too high, and they refuse to say immigration needs to come down."
Shailesh Vara, the Conservative MP for North West Cambridgeshire, called for an apology from Mr Miliband.
He said: "Ed Miliband could actually start apologising to people such as myself and other Conservatives who in the past have tried to talk about immigration in a measured and sensitive way, but whenever we've tried to do that we've been accused of racism by the Labour Party."
Sir Andrew Green, head of the Migration Watch think tank, told the BBC that Labour's "real concern is that they've lost an awful lot of their own supporters, who of course are the people who, mainly, suffer the consequences of immigration on this scale, in terms of social housing and so on and so forth".
But he added: "I think the other thing that was wrong with this discussion is that there's been a lot of focus on EU migration.
"The reality is this - in the Labour years there was net foreign immigration of three and a half million. Only one in five of those was actually from the European Union."

Thursday, 21 June 2012

Mongolian Tyrannosaurus


US government to seize $1m Mongolian Tyrannosaurus Bataar


The near-complete skeleton of the Tyrannosaurus Bataar which was dug up in 1995 but illegally exported to the US in 2010, according to a New York court.The Tyrannosaurus Bataar was erroneously valued at $15,000 when it was shipped to the US

Related Stories

A 70 million-year-old Tyrannosaurus Bataar, unearthed in the Gobi Desert, is to be seized by the US Department of Homeland Security.
A New York court has issued a warrant forcing an auction house to return the fossil to modern-day Mongolia, where it was discovered about seven years ago.
The dinosaur was sold at auction in New York last month by Heritage Auctions, for more than $1m (£600,000).
But the court says it was illegally imported to the US via the UK in 2010.
The Tyrannosaurus Bataar, an Asian cousin of the better-known Tyrannosaurus Rex, is currently being held by a fine art property company in Queens.
Since 1924, Mongolia has enacted laws protecting fossils. They have been declared the property of the state and their export is banned.
The Mongolian government objected to the May auction but, despite an injunction, the sale went ahead.
Dorset journey
A spokesman for the dealer said that the skeleton had been taken in "good faith" and that it had been sold conditionally, subject to court rulings, and was still in storage.
Co-founder of Heritage Auctions Jeff Halperin said: "We have cooperated in the investigation process for palaeontologists to expeditiously examine the skeleton, and we will continue to cooperate with authorities."
The skeleton initially found its way to Dorset, in southern England, where a collector kept the bones in a warehouse.
It was then transported to the US under the erroneous claim that the so-called "T. Bataar" had been dug-up in Britain and was worth $15,000.
According to the lawsuit, the prehistoric bones arrived in Gainesville Florida in March 2010.
The first Tyrannosaurus Bataars were discovered in the Gobi desert in 1946 by archeological expeditions which were supported by the Soviet Union.

Saturday, 16 June 2012

Culling bats does not halt rabies


Culling bats does not halt rabies, says report

Related Stories

Until now, it had been assumed that controlling bat numbers would, in turn, control the spread of the rabies virus.
Common vampire bat caught in a net, Brazil (Image: AP)
Researchers say rabies is found in most bat populations, but vampire bats - which feed on mammals' blood - are responsible for most infections.
"We found that rabies is there no matter what," said co-author Daniel Streicker, an ecologist at the University of Georgia, US.
"The size of the bat colony didn't predict the proportion of bats that were exposed to the virus.
"That's important because if there is no relationship between bat population density and rabies, then reducing the bat population won't reduce rabies transmission within bats."

In detail: Common vampire bat

Common vampire bat (Image: Photolibrary.com)
  • Scientific name: Desmodus rotundus
  • Need to feed on blood almost daily to avoid starvation
  • They do not actually suck blood, but lap it up from cuts made by their razor-sharp teeth
  • A chemical in the bats' saliva stops blood clotting and numbs the wound
  • Primarily feed on abundant livestock
For about three decades, the main focus in Peru to halt the spread of the virus - which is transmitted from animals to humans or livestock, and results in death if left untreated - has been to cull common vampire bats (Desmodus rotundus) using poisons, or even explosives.
The researchers, writing in their paper, explained that the data they collected over a 40-month period from 20 sampling sites revealed that culling was not having the desired effect.
In fact, Dr Streicker explained, the findings suggested that culling had a potentially counterproductive impact.
"In areas that were sporadically culled during the course of the study, we saw an increase in the proportion of bats exposed to rabies," he said.
Colonies that were frequently culled had slightly lower rates, the study showed, yet the ones that had never been culled had the lowest rates of all.
It is suggested that increasing levels of human encroachment into areas with vampire bat populations has exacerbated the problem.
Dr Streicker and the team said the study would continue for another two years, with the goal of developing a scientific-based solution.
The researchers hope the findings will help deliver a more effective method to protect public health and agricultural interests from the virus.