ARE ISLAM AND DEMOCRACY COMPATIBLE?
The lack of democratic system of governments in Muslim nations has too often begged the question, "Are Islam and democracy compatible?" Western scholars such as Bernard Lewis and Samuel Huntington have suggested that Islamic ideology and scriptures do not support the concept of democracy in the Muslim world, citing that for much of its 1400 year history, the Muslim world has been under non-democratic rule.
Western democracy is built on the concept of popular sovereignty or "rule of the masses." Merriam Webster Dictionary defines democracy as "a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections."
In Islamic ideology, all individuals are representatives of God on Earth, and thus are equal to each other. They are responsible to God and no government has an authority over any individual, other than that which has been agreed by those individuals. Islamic governance places an emphasis on governance through consultation (shura) and use of analogical reasoning in interpretation of the law (qiyas).
Far from being incompatible with democracy, Islamic ideology favors it. The lack of democracies in the Islamic world is a symptom of the literal translation of God as the sovereign ruler. Since, in Islam, man is given the freedom of free choice, the sovereignty of God can not be used by its leaders to dictate their own rules and notions in the name of God. Thus, there is no justification for the attitude of some Muslims against democracy, other than their bias towards anything Western, seeing it as being opposed to the ideal of Islam.
In a 1992 interview by the London Observer, Rashid Ghannoushi, the leader of a Tunisian Islamist party, said "If by democracy is meant the liberal model of government prevailing in the West, a system under which the people freely choose their representatives and leaders, in which there is an alternation of power, as well as all freedoms and human rights for the public, then Muslims will find nothing in their religion to oppose democracy, and it is not in their interests to do so."
Indeed today, as has been in the past, we find in many localities in the Islamic world, decision making being done through a process of consultation. On a broader level, countries such as Turkey, Indonesia, Bangladesh, and Nigeria are showing that Islam and democracy can coexist.
Islamic movements in Iran, Palestine, Pakistan, and Egypt have equally been embracing democracy rather than fighting it. After the Islamic revolution in Iran, it was Khomeni who established a parliament, elections, separation of powers, and even a system of public accountability. Thus, democracy in the Muslim world is not only possible, but also achievable. The task is just a little more difficult as it struggles to embrace democratic and socio-economic reforms in the framework of Islamic values.
FOREIGN AID GOALS NOT BEING MET
There is no denying the fact that pure foreign aid- as opposed to the so-called foreign aid provided with some kind of vested interest by rich countries, help the poorest countries accelerate the pace of their economic development. Jeffrey D Sachs, in his treatise “ The End of Poverty’’, argues that only if all of the rich countries follow through on their promise to help the poorest countries by providing aid equal to at least 0.7% of their GNP, extreme poverty characterizing the poorest countries can be ended by 2025. Although it may probably logically impossible or at least difficult to say with a high degree of certainty that if all of them keep their promise, extreme poverty can be ended by 2025, it is true that it can certainly be at least alleviated to a measure after a certain period of time, which can only be specified arbitrarily. But, the poignant fact is that not all of them have followed through on their commitment yet.
The
In 1961, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the objective that the level of official development assistance should increase appreciably “ so as to reach as soon as possible approximately 1% of the combined national incomes of the economically advanced countries.’’ At that time, foreign assistance was about 0.5 % of rich country income. Despite this, foreign aid continued to decline. At various summits, for example, the Rio Earth Summit in 1992 and the Copenhagen Summit on Social Development in 1995, the richer countries promised to reach 0.7% of their GNP. World leaders, including George Bush, adopted once again the target of 0.7% of GNP, with the US being a signatory as part of what was termed as “ the Monterrey Consensus’’ when they met in Monterrey, Mexico.
It appears that the promise and action of many rich countries contrast sharply. It is evidenced by the fact that by the early 1990s, official development assistance was still around 0.33% of donor GNP, and by the early 2000s, it had declined to around 0.2% of GNP. Now it is roughly 0.25% of GNP. It is also evidenced by the fact that the US government often declares these days that it is not bound by any arbitrary numerical target such as 0.7% of GNP. What is more surprising than this is that top US officials even declare that the
Unlike the
By Madan Paudel
TAMERA SUMMER UNIVERSITY ADVOCATES PEACE AND SUSTAINABLE ENERGY
When you talk to Sami Awad you instantly get the feeling that you are speaking to someone special, someone who draws only strength and wisdom from the most adverse of situations. He is Christian Palestinian and founder/director of the Holy Land Trust in Bethlehem, Palestine that
provides non violent communication and action training in the many villages that make up Palestine. For him the Israel/Palestine conflict is not just a local conflict but the result of a global conflict that needs global thinking to find solutions. He also believes that to end the occupation of Palestine would be the easy part, the difficult part is what we do after. How can we develop models and practices that truly create a long term culture of peace?
Jurgen Kleinwachter, innovative solar technologist, understands the urgency of finding answers to this question more than many. He has spent the last 30 years of his life traveling, living and creating new levels of solar technology in the so-called 3rd world countries. He has witnessed
the harsh realities of poverty, of drought, of being fully dependent on multi-national companies and international governmental policy. He has seen the destruction of indigenous peoples because of the consumptive needs of western economy and culture. To begin the steps towards a culture of peace he knows that energy supply and technology must be designed and produced in such a way that supports people to retain an autonomous state of living. Which is why, in cooperation with the Tamera Peace Research Centre in Portugal, he is developing prototype solar technology in the forms of the 'Solar Power Village' and the 'sol e adobe'.
Tamera itself has been working for over 30 years on researching, studying and testing new models of social living and technology. Its co-founders the German philosopher Dr. Dieter Duhm and Nobel Peace Prize nominee Sabine Lichtenfels have dedicated their lives to building up comprehensive models of sustainable and autonomous living. They argue that we, as human beings, have become so separated from the peaceful roots of our humanity that we need to create places of truth and trust where we can again learn, discover and experience peace. Tamera now has over 100 members - researchers, scientists, teachers, artists, journalists, peace activists, political networker's and many students - who all contribute to its work.
Each year Tamera organizes the International Summer University, at which both Sami Awad and Jurgen Kleinwachter as well as speakers of Tamera will give keynote speeches, as an opportunity for people to get to know the global vision of Tamera and the many international groups and individuals who contribute from around the world. At the Tamera Summer University this year, the three year peace experiment Monte Cerro will already have been going for three months.This experiment is a peace education in theory and practise: the students will learn to build up sustainable communities by living together, studying ecology,solar technology, peace journalism and many other peace skills. It will be the first Summer University within this experiment, and the participants can take part in the studies.
By Kate Bunney
See www.tamera.org for more details.
ABDUL RAHMAN, APOSTACY AND ISLAM
"And if thy Lord willed, all who are in the earth would have believed together. Wouldst thou (Muhammad) compel men until they are believers?" (Koran 10:99).
When the companions of Prophet Muhammad asked if they can force their relatives to submit to Islam, the Koran proclaimed "there is no compulsion in religion" (2:256). If that is the case, then why an Afghani national, Abdul Rahman, was on trial recently for having converted to Christianity in 1990. Had he not been released due to worldwide pressure and been found guilty of conversion, he was expected to receive the death penalty. Around the world, the case was made that Islam and freedom of religion in a democratic society are not compatible with each other.
In many Muslim countries today, there are laws that call for a death sentence for those accused of apostasy. These laws invoke the hadiths (sayings of Muhammad) as their basis. Yet these hadiths attributed to the Prophet of Islam, aside from being weak, do not share the same spirit as the above verses mentioned in the Koran. Nor are they in line with the actions of Muhammad, who was known to have pardoned those who had committed apostasy.
These laws were established to punish those who would convert from Islam to another religion and fight against Muslims. This is not too different from treason and even in most democratic countries in the world today, treason can be grounds for a death penalty.
Today, times have changed. Unfortunately, the laws in muslim country have not. This has resulted in a lack of discussion and debate on what laws are applicable in today's society. The discussion is further discouraged by the monarchies and dictatorships that are at the helms of the Muslim world. These rulers have often allied with the conservative theocrats in establishing their legitimacy. In countries such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Pakistan, they have gone out of their way to please the West in order to continue their hold onto absolute power. For Islamic jurisprudence to function effectively, it has to incorporate its individual components into the legal process. These components are the use of analogical reasoning, public interest, and community consensus. Without democratic reforms, Islamic law will continue to remain stagnant.
However, it is important that these reforms come from within the Muslim community rather than being forced from outside. Considering the mistrust in the Muslim world for the West, any coercion from outside would only reinforce conservative fears that non-Muslims want to convert Muslims away from Islam. Islam, for Muslims, is a way of life; just as capitalism and democracy are a way of life for those in the West. With the former, reason and faith go together; in the latter, reason is separated from faith.
WHEN HIV IS DEEMED UNFIT FOR AID
Let me present you with a conundrum. I recently read a news article regarding a rather unusual arrangement involving two men and a goat in rural
I would ask you now to think about your initial reaction upon reading this story. For all those that I asked, this reaction generally fell somewhere between bemusement and incredulity. Not the most culturally informed and sympathetic range of attitudes, perhaps, but comprehensible nonetheless. By our own cultural standards, marriage between a man and a goat falls way below the watermark of acceptable behaviour. Therefore, I do not feel the need to apologise for such reactions. I am sure that there are many features of British culture that would provoke equal disbelief when told to a rural Somali native – try explaining why Chantelle Houghton has an Internet fan club, for example.
The problem that I would like to highlight is that moment when such seemingly innocuous cultural gaps trickle through from Joe Everyday into the places where they really do matter, resulting in vast canyons in knowledge which are not only offensive, but present a very real threat to the development of countries like Somalia. Sadly, this trickle seems to be one that has found its way right to the very top of the development hierarchy - into USAID, the largest funding body in the world, and the positively despicable “morality” doctrine that is currently informing
Past history has shown us that development does not work when carried out on solely western terms. The modernisation projects of the 60s and 70s were, to put it bluntly, outright failures. Why? Because they entirely failed to understand local cultural paradigms, instead relying on the bigoted attitude that West is surely best. Nowadays, most NGOs and charities recognise the necessity of local involvement in the development process, and perhaps more importantly, a sympathetic understanding of the local cultural context, in the successful outcome of a development project. However, such enlightenment means little when those with the money will only open the purse strings to those who agree to promote their agenda of ‘morality.’
For the World Service Trust to tell a prostitute in
By Ivor Hill
ARE THE ARCTIC MONKEYS THE NEW BEATLES?
Are the Arctic Monkeys really a legendary band after just one album? Anything sounds great after the crazy frog
The combination of hysterical music moguls and overzealous record buyers meant the Arctic Monkeys’ album ‘Whatever People Say I Am, That’s What I’m Not’ sold 82 copies a minute on its first day – and finished the week as the most popular debut ever. Whether the rumours of a covert PR machine taking over internet forums is true, you can’t fail to be impressed with the
According to everyone from spotty NME clutching teenagers, to blokes in their thirties talking on the train after a Babyshambles gig, Arctic Monkeys herald the return of intelligent lyrics. Rarely has there been such euphoria over a new band, and there’s even talk that songwriter Alex Turner has filled a void that’s been empty since The Beatles.
Such confident proclamations appear justified when considering the best selling singles of last year were the shove-your-fingers-down-your-throat trio of ‘(Is this the way to) Amarillo’, Shayne Ward’s ‘That’s My Goal’ and, please never ever again, ‘Axel F’ by that bloody frog. As forgettable as 2005 was, caution must be taken before writing off all 36 years of musical history since Macca broke up the Fab Four.
The songwriting on Arctic Monkey’s debut album is undoubtedly brilliant. Despite being just 19, Turner demonstrates a sharp ability for taking the everyday events from his life as a cheeky northern lad, and using them to pen loud pulsating anthems. All 13 tracks take the listener through Turner’s world of boozy nights, nasty bouncers, girls he’s got and girls he wants.
The band is keen to avoid publicity, and even turned down an appearance on Top Of The Pops. This attitude is evident in Turner’s lyrics, as he explained in an interview with The Guardian: "Even the songs that are more personal are done in that observational way because it's not as close to the bone. People can't get at me and say, 'Who's that about then?' It's a bit like you're hiding behind something. Sometimes when you write summat and you come to sing it first time in practice, instead of 'I' you put 'he', without even thinking about it."
Paul Stokes, deputy news editor at the NME, says Turner’s unusual style appeals to fans: “He’s very much like a droll, dour northern comedian. At a gig in Portsmouth the night after they won Best British Breakthrough Act at the Brits, Turner walked on stage and in a matter-of-fact voice said, ‘Well, we won that Brit’, and then got on with the music. That shows he’s different to other bands around now.”
The first song, ‘View From The Afternoon’, dives straight in with a scene recognisable by anyone who has been out on a Saturday night: ‘I want to see all of the things that we’ve already seen. The lairy girls hung out the window of the limousine.’ Those who argue that the Monkeys are a revolutionary band always give the example of Turner’s lyrics about a girl receiving drunken text messages on her mobile: ‘And she won’t be surprised and she won’t be shocked/ When she’s pressed the star after she’s pressed unlock.’
Even the sites of a taxi ride are turned into a witty track, poking fun at drunken fighters: ‘These two lads squaring up proper shouting, bout who was next in the queue/ The kind of thing that would seem so silly but not when they've both had a few.’ The song titles alone make you want to listen, the best being ‘Mardy Bum’ and ‘Perhaps Vampires Is A Bit Strong But…’.
Most people, whether they’ve been converted to the Church of the Arctic Monkeys or not, have heard the single ‘When The Sun Goes Down.’ This is a passionate stab at ‘Mr Inconspicuous’ picking up girls of the night. Turner seamlessly juxtaposes quirky couplets like: ‘She don’t do major credit cards, I doubt she does receipts’, with aggressive attacks on the predator: ‘It’s all infected but he'll be alright/ Cause he's a scumbag, don't you know/ I said he's a scumbag, don't you know!’
Scott Colothan, editor of the biggest independent music website ‘gigwise.com’, says Turner is up there with the best: “There was a lot of eulogising about the band which made me cynical, but when I heard the record I thought Turner could be as good as Jarvis Cocker. It’s a lyrically dense album, and it’s very culturally relevant. The line ‘I can’t see through your fake tan’ is a classic. They’ve filled a gap in the market by relating to younger listeners, appealing to chavs and well off people too.”
Paul Stokes is impressed by Turner’s songwriting ability, but holds back from giving too much praise. “The Monkeys are not new in sonic terms, but they are in indie-rock”, he explains. “They’ve muscled in on Franz and the Kaisers, and they’re already an important band for this generation. But no-one changes the face of music with one album.”
Turner has talent in abundance, this is blatantly true. But to say that he has ‘united a generation’, and is the best lyricist since the Lennon/McCartney combo, is a hyperbole too far. Now before you accuse me of ruining the fantasy and send an angry mob to torch my house, take a minute to consider the opposition.
Bob Dylan’s 43 albums inspired idolisation, and no-one has been as skilled in using image and narrative. His work crossed the genres of rock, folk and gospel, with tracks such as ‘Blowin’ In The Wind’ and ‘Lay Lady Lay’ two of the most famous. The Who’s Pete Townshend penned the classics ‘My Generation’ and ‘The Kids Are Alright’, catching the spirit of the mods. In the 90’s Kurt Cobain was the hero for alternative kids around the world. His songs were at the centre of grunge, and ‘Smells Like Teen Spirit’ was the soundtrack to millions of teenage bedrooms.
Expecting Alex Turner to compete with these legends of songwriting is asking too much too soon. “He’s poetic, but there’s a hell of a long way to go before he matches Morrisey”, says Colothan. ‘Whatever People Say I Am, That’s What I’m Not’ is a great album, and will probably be the best of 2006. In comparison with its contemporaries, the lyrics have got more bite than Starsailor, and they blow Docherty out of the water on intelligence alone. Turner is too young though, and his career too short, to land every superlative available – last week’s three NME awards is already enough to keep any egos ticking over. If you got hold of a ticket for their tour, and resisted selling it on E-bay, then go crazy and sing along to their brilliant tracks. But give them a chance to get out of their teens before you shout out comparisons with The Beatles.
By Neil Lancefield
Shami Chakrabarti, director of
It appears that our current theme du mode is freedom of speech. Like the skinny jeans of political thought, it is a topic ripe for dusting down and weighing up. Hence the apparent profligacy of Chakrabarti’s opinion giving. The rights and wrongs of speaking one’s mind have, of late, been subject to intense scrutiny in the press. Should we have unhindered freedom of speech? Is it right to let people public espouse any view, no matter how odious? Or is curtailing these freedoms the answer? The popularity of such debates has of course been sparked by the quirky coincidence of having several incidents relevant to such questions all occurring at virtually the same time. With the scenes of international havoc and destruction sparked by the infamous Mohammed cartoons still fresh in our minds, we have seen
The common thread in all of this appears to be one of legality – the fact that we have a right to freedom of speech, as laid down 58 years ago in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Such an argument falls down, however, when you look a little closer at the charter. Indeed, one has to look no further than article 1, which states that:
'All human beings…are endowed with reason and conscience
and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.'
and therein lies the rub – yes, we have the right to speak our minds, and I as much as anyone cherish this right; but equally we should have the wherewithal, as reasonable beings, to keep our mouths shut when speaking out will do more harm than good. Both David Irving and Ken Livingstone are in the public eye, and in as such are imbued with a certain level of civic responsibility. Yet in both cases, personal pride and the exercise of rights was put ahead of offending others; an embassy in Damascus has been razed to the ground on account of a Danish cartoonist feeling the need to exercise his.
Lest we forget, the twentieth century has seen the rise and triumph of democracy, yet it has also been the bloodiest century in recorded history. Uncountable numbers have died to ensure the liberties we enjoy today. Is there any need for any more bloodshed now? In theory, unbridled freedom of speech is a cute idea; sadly, theory seldom reflects reality, and practice has shown us that for the sake of public harmony and that ‘spirit of brotherhood’, the only right path is surely one of discretion. We live in an age where any fool with a computer and some half-baked idea can impose his opinion on the globe; the least one can ask for is that our public figures – leaders and opinion makers – can manage, for the sake of our continued freedom, to sometimes just shut up.
By Ivor Hill
TEMPERATURES GETTING RAISED IN THE BLACK SEA
On the south coast of the Black Sea, an ancient, long ruined, church gently returns to the ground from whence it came, sliding silently into the sea. Thought by archaeologists to be the resting place of St Phocas (ironically the patron of gardening and all things ecological), the church is, bit by bit, disappearing. Old Phocas himself has long since been washed away into the inky depths of the Kara Deniz, as the sea is locally known. Yet this is not the poetic allegory of life and death, the physical enactment of ‘ashes to ashes’ that it may seem. Rather, this is the direct, shocking effect of changing sea levels in the Black Sea.
The Black Sea, as an almost entirely enclosed body of water offers a microcosm of the global effects of sea level change, showing exactly what is happening, on a manageable scale. The ebbs and flows of the waters here have been closely monitored for this reason; recently, scientists and archaeologists estimated that sea levels in the Black Sea rose by a full centimetre last year. Clearly, if such a trend continues, it will be more than simply ruined churches that fall foul of the waves; the myriad of villages and fishing communities that pockmark the coastline will be lost, and entire livelihoods ruined. It may not have the immediacy of other natural disasters such as earthquakes, but there is a slow, sickening inevitability in the erosion of a coastline that has held fast for millennia.
However, this situation goes way beyond the simple ecological. In political terms, it is a minefield. One of the major causes of the rising sea levels is the sheer volume of pollution that Russia disgorges into the sea from industrial plants on the northern shore. This pollution cannot escape fast enough through the narrow mouth of the Bosphorus, something that is causing mounting ire in Turkey. Russo-Turkish relations have traditionally been cool; they are fast icing over.
This puts Mr Blair in an awkward position; at the G8 last year, he pledged lasting commitment to climate change. Moreover, Turkey is strategically vital as an ally for his misadventures in the Middle East. This is counterbalanced by a desire to keep Russia sweet during their presidency of the G8. After the recent spy-rock debacle, he is keen to avoid further upset. Students of history will, at this point, recognise the startling resemblance to a similar diplomatic quandary known as ‘the Balance of Power’, whereby Britain attempted, by pandering simultaneously to the desires of the various nineteenth century Great Powers, to preserve the diplomatic status quo at all costs. The innate problem of the Balance of Power was that doing very little was part of its very fabric as a theory of international relations. In doing very little, very little was consequently solved, merely procrastinated, and it only took one flared temper for Europe to descend into all-out war in 1914. Here perhaps the analogy ends, as we are not faced with war, at least not with these particular nations; however, there is a simple yet important lesson to be learned from the failings of the Balance of Power: that is, act strong, act fast. Mr Blair has produced the tough talk with regards climate change; he must now turn words into actions. It is quite simple – Russia is in the wrong, and should be sanctioned and brought in line. As we have seen, Blair has not been afraid to act decisively on issues of more ambiguous morality, namely in Iraq. It should not be hard for him to follow a diplomatic hard-line on an issue that would doubtless meet with much greater public support.
The issue of climate change has, sadly, met with nay-sayers from across the political spectrum. If, as suggested, the Black Sea shows us global trends in miniature, we can at least take one positive. In highlighting the geopolitical consequences that run concurrent to those of ecology, we may be able speak to these political refuseniks in their own language, and hammer home the over-riding importance of dealing with climate change immediately, and not waiting until its true potential as a destructive force has been realised.
By Ivor Hill
ESSO MAKES £18 BILLION PROFITS BUT STILL DOESN'T SPEND ON CLIMATE CHANGE
Exxon Mobil, Esso’s parent company, is the largest oil company in the world. At the end of last month it reported the record breaking profit of £18 billion made in the past year. The burning of oil as a fuel accounts for 23 % of all global greenhouse gas emissions. In the light of these facts, why has Esso run advertising campaigns in the US which are highly critical of the Kyoto agreement? Why also have they funded think-tanks with around $12 million who have questioned the authenticity of climate change?
The answers soon begin to emerge when Esso’s political affiliations are exposed. Esso gave $1.3 million to the Republican Party’s election campaign in 2000. Subsequently when George W. Bush became president he pulled the US out of the Kyoto Agreement which is adhered to by 157 other countries. The Kyoto Protocol is aimed at countries reducing their emissions of carbon dioxide and five other greenhouse gases. With the United states pulling out of this agreement, environmental activists have called this a catastrophic event as The US is responsible for 25% of all the worlds carbon dioxide, yet their citizens only make up 4% of the worlds population.
Esso vehemently denies any link between climate change and differences in weather patterns. Lee Raymond, the chief executive of the company claims, “Some reports in the media link climate change to extreme weather and harm to human health. Yet experts see no such pattern.” However, the World Health Organisation claims that climate change is already responsible for the deaths of 150, 000 people per year.
According to Greenpeace, the executives of Esso have tried to argue their case by talking of a petition signed by 17,000 scientists which dismisses climate change. At first this petition was thought to have come from America’s prestigious National Academy of Sciences. The petition was openly discredited after it emerged that it actually came from scientists that weren’t even experts in climate change. Esso’s name was further tainted when observers of the petition noticed that the list of names included fictional television characters.
Campaigns against Esso are no new thing. NGO’s such as Greenpeace and Friends of The Earth have run large scale protests online and on the streets. Celebrities such as Bianca Jagger and Rory Bremner have shown their opposition to Esso in the public eye. Bremner, a well known political comedian, sums up the campaigns against Esso: “Your choice is their income. Use your choice, make a change”
By Toby Clarke
BIN LADEN'S ENDORSEMENT OF BOOK HELPS IT SOAR UP THE US CHARTS
Book clubs run by the likes of Richard and Judy and Oprah Winfrey should step aside, it seems that the most effective way to endorse a book is to include it in an audio speech against the powers of the west, namely America. This is what the infamous leader of Al-Qa'ida, Osama Bin Laden has just done.
The book, by the until now unheard of American author William Blum has gone from 209,572 on the Amazon.com book list to number 10 today. Rogue State: A guide to the world’s only superpower, is a book about the substantial ‘crimes’ that America has committed and how these outweigh those of America’s enemies. In the book the author, Blum, claims “America cherishes her enemies. Without enemies, she is a nation without purpose and direction.”
.jpg) |
Rogue State: A guide to the worlds only superpower, endorsed by Osama Bin Laden.
William Blum is a vigorous opponent to George W. Bush and his predecessor Bill Clinton. Also on his hit-list are former US Presidents Ronald Reagan and Gerald Ford. Mr Blum continually criticises American foreign policy throughout his now bestselling book and has sympathy for terrorism in the face of the American forces. He declares in Rogue State that “A terrorist is someone who has a bomb but doesn’t have an air force.”
Bin Laden made William Blum a well known name in a matter of seconds in his speech released last week on an Arabic Satellite TV channel. In the speech the Al-Qa'ida leader offered a truce with America on certain conditions, but still threatened to attack them again if they failed to pull their troops out of Iraq. The elusive terrorist leader then went on to say "If Bush decides to carry on with his lies and oppression; it would be useful for you to read the book Rogue State.” Whilst this can be seen as a standard plugging of an anti-American book, there has been speculation that the Al-Qa'ida leader chose a book to advertise to an audience of billions, which can be used to condemn America publicly due to its critical content of the country and its leaders.
Whilst many would assume that Blum would be opposed to the endorsement of a worldwide terrorist leader, he actually told a New York radio station that he “was not turned off by such an endorsement,” and went on to say “I’m not repulsed and I’m not going to pretend I am.” It appears that Bin Laden has helped Blum to further his cause and to reiterate his opinion that America creates its own enemies by intervening into other countries’ affairs. Sam Smith, editor of the Progressive Review in Washington allegedly claimed that he was “calling it the book review of the decade.” The outcome of this “book review” will inevitably favour Mr Blum and Osama Bin Laden and it seems as though this was the aim of the endorsement in the first place.
By Toby Clarke
ONLINE RADIO SHOW GIVES MUSIC PRODUCERS NEW OPPORTUNITIES
.jpg) |
All around the world, there are unsigned drum & bass producers who sit down for hours and hours each day at home making their own music. The majority of them start from scratch, getting hold of software from the internet and teaching themselves how to use it to a standard many signed producers aren't even up to. The amazing thing with these unsigned drum & bass producers is that they know there isn't any money in selling the music of their choice anymore as record sales decrease, yet they still slave away coming up with some amazing tracks along the way simply craving love and attention for their work!
Unfortunately, even in the fairly small scene which is the drum & bass scene, it tends to be who you know, rather than what you know, just like it is with any other genre for the unsigned masses. Getting their tracks played out by the big name DJ’s, aired on radio stations or listened to by people already in the industry can be frustratingly hard.
Since November 2004, a weekly radio show called 'The GreenHouse' founded by Dj Breakz (www.DJBreakz.co.uk) has been helping the unsigned scene achieve the love and attention they crave. The show has a weekly 2 hour slot (Saturday 00:00 - 02:00 GMT) on Leet Radio (www.LeetRadio.com) and a fortnightly 2 hour slot (Wednesday 20:00 - 22:00 GMT) on Witness The Sickness (www.WitnessTheSickness.com) both of which it dedicates to playing only tracks by these hidden musical gods of the drum & bass scene. Producers from all around the world send their brand new unsigned tracks to the show week in week out and the shows hosts, Itchy Fingazzz (www.ItchyFingazzz.com) and Relapse produce a show with no chat, just music of immense quality.
Tracks are mainly sent over the internet through various chat forums, message boards, email and instant messenger programs but CDs can also be sent in at request. The producers get their beloved work played out to the world every week and listeners to the show get to hear the REAL future of drum & bass sometimes months before the record labels even get a listen. The Greenhouse has also spawned its own spin-off show on Wednesdays and countless 'copycat' shows who now dedicate themselves to unsigned producers. This is only a good thing as it’s even more exposure for the hidden talent.
In its first year (2005), the show gained 'Listen Again' sponsorship from Music V2 (www.MusicV2.com) and support from the two biggest drum & bass communities on the net: Drum & Bass Arena (www.breakbeat.co.uk) and Dogs on Acid (www.dogsonacid.com). On top of this, articles have been written about the show in Knowledge Magazine (twice), Mixmag and the Sunday Times newspaper. This in turn brings attention to the radio slot and therefore exposure for the producers. After joining the ever-popular MySpace website, in less than a week, 100 people joined the shows friends list.
The GreenHouse picked "The Ghosts" by Opius as its Track of the Year 2004. Subsequently it went on to getting signed by New Vision Recordings and is available at all good record shops. Opius is now quickly emerging as one of drum & bass’s top producers. The show also picked "Beyond" by Wayz as its Track of the Year 2005 and the track and Wayz has been getting much acclaim for all his hard work, being played all over world by DJ’s and radio stations plus featuring on the Drum & Bass Arena's very first podcast, which is also an unsigned producers only entity.
If you love listening to drum & bass, and you want to hear brand new tunes before anyone else - the GreenHouse is what you need to lock onto! If you are an unsigned producer then you can get your tracks played out live on air to the world by sending them into the show. They play all kinds of drum & bass and all they ask is that you are the producer of the tracks you send in. Due to the volume of music sent in they won’t be able to reply to all tracks received, so just tune into the show to hear if your tracks are played and get your well deserved feedback from the listeners in the chat room.
By Peter Corr