Suchergebnisse

Persian poetry in the twentieth century is undergoing changes that would have been scarcely imaginable a century or even half a century ago. The dispute of ancients and moderns rages in Persian literary circles, and exponents of both traditional and modern styles are regarded as traitors by both sides. I should be foolhardy to join battle in this domestic struggle, and the purpose of this memoir is only that of setting on record the outlines of the life and poetical works of a poet generally regarded as the greatest Persia has seen for a long time.

Sometime between 1533 and 1536, a certain Ivan laganov, writing from prison, addressed a petition to the child ruler Ivan IV in which he suggested that his release would be in the interests of state security. laganov apparently had enjoyed a successful career as a political informer under Ivan's father, and after the death of Vasilii III had continued to serve his new sovereign in the same manner. On his last mission, he explained, he had reported to Ivan's boyars as ordered, informing them of the "dangerous talk" he had overheard: "At that time, Sire, I could not plug my ears with pitch; what I heard, Sire, I reported, in the way in which I served and reported to thy father." As a result, laganov now found himself in fetters, tortured "in the manner of evil traitors and brigands," and deprived of food and drink.

RECENT DEBATES IN BRITAIN ABOUT SECRECY IN CENTRAL government have become immersed in the traditional tension between espionage and secrecy. Espionage concerns spies and others who intend to help an enemy and who deliberately harm the security of the nation. Secrecy means 'the compulsory withholding of knowledge reinforced by the prospect of sanctions for disclosure'. Leakage of official information may involve persons having no intention of damaging the nation. However, harm to the country may ensue from information getting into the wrong hands, whether by espionage or leakage. Experience of this tension in practice was a major factor leading to the enactment of the Official Secrets Act 1911, with section 1 covering espionage and section 2 unauthorized disclosure of information, with the risk of prosecution for either offence. Journalists in particular are aggrieved that they may be subject to prosecution under the Act used to charge spies and traitors. Jonathan Aitken, one of the journalists prosecuted in 1970 under section 2 of the 1911 Act over extracts from a British diplomat's report leaked to the Sunday Telegraph about the Nigerian civil war, was acquitted and published his own version of the Nigerian case in his book Officially Secret (1971), which heavily criticized the Official Secrets Act.

Jokūbas Jasinskis was the organiser and leader of the 1794 uprising in Lithuania. He held radical views, adhered to the Jacobinic system of terror against traitors and proclaimed the struggle for universal equality. He called to forget class distinctions and defend the native land. This, however, proved to be not sufficient for mass participation of peasants in the uprising. J. Jasinskis was a supporter of the republican and sovereign Lithuania, independent of Poland. Because of his radical views he fell into disgrace of the Polish gentry and was dismissed from the post of the commander of the Lithuanian Army. J. Jasinskis was killed on the 4th of November, 1794, in the defence of Warsaw. ; Straipsnyje pristatoma Jokūbo Jasinskio visuomeninė politinė veikla ir pažiūros. J. Jasinskis buvo XVIII a. pabaigos nacionalinio išsivaduojamojo judėjimo Lietuvoje organizatorius ir vadovas. Pritarė teroristinių priemonių taikymui tėvynės išdavikams. Savo atsišaukimuose jis kvietė pamiršti klasinius skirtumus ir ginti tėvynę, žadėdamas visuotinę laisvę ir lygiateisiškumą, nors tai ir neįtikino valstiečių masiškai dalyvauti sukilime. J. Jasinskis buvo savarankiškos, nepriklausomos nuo Lenkijos Lietuvos respublikos šalininkas. Savo radikaliomis pažiūromis ir pasisakymais jis sukėlė lenkų bajorų priešiškumą ir buvo pašalintas iš lietuvių sukilėlių kariuomenės vyriausiojo vado pareigų. Kai sukilimas 1794 m. buvo numalšintas, J. Jasinskis nuvyko į Varšuvą ir įstojo į "Revoliucijos ir Krokuvos akto palaikymo organizaciją". Aiškino, kad sukilimą pražudė neryžtingi jo vadovybės sprendimai ir šlėktų reakciniai sluoksniai.

The Manchus inherited from the Ming Dynasty the images of the overseas Chinese as well as the policy towards them. The tarnished images of the overseas Chinese as 'deserters', 'criminals', and 'potential traitors' of the Ming were taken over by the early Ch'ing rulers. These images were soon transformed into new images of 'political criminals', 'conspirators' and 'rebels', for in the first four decades after the Manchu conquest of North China in 1644, the overseas Chinese in Southeast Asia were directly involved in the resistance movement on the southeast coast of China. The leader of the movement, Cheng Ch'eng-kung (known in the West as Koxinga), seems to have enlisted the support of the overseas Chinese, particularly from Vietnam, Cambodia and Siam, for his resistance. It is claimed that Koxinga's naval power was partly drawn from Nanyang (Southeast Asia) shipping, and financed from the profits of the Nanyang trade. Of course those overseas Chinese who supported Koxinga made no apology for their involvement. They saw the Manchus as alien usurpers and as the oppressors of the Han Chinese, and the support for Koxinga's resistance movement was seen as an act of patriotism to save Han Chinese from the oppressive Manchu rule. The government countered the overseas Chinese involvement by introducing stringent laws against private overseas trade. In 1656 (13th year of the Emperor Shun-chih), a decree was proclaimed that'….any traders who go overseas privately and trade or supply the rebels with provisions will be beheaded, and their goods confiscated.

Early this year, Aziz Nesin led a group of people who drafted a petition which was signed by 1,383 intellectuals. The petition, entitled 'Observations and Demands for a Democratic System in Turkèy', was delivered to the office of President Kenan Evren and to Mr Necmettin Karaduman, the Speaker of the National Assembly, on 16 May. At first there was a news blackout about the petition, but later, when a foreign correspondent asked Prime Minister Turgut Ozal at his monthly press conference in June about this petition, the blackout was lifted. An inquiry on the petitioners was soon started by the military authorities. At a public rally in his home town in Manisa province on 28 May, President Kenan Evren launched a violent attack on the petitioners. He accused them of being 'traitors' who wanted to embarrass Turkey abroad with their allegations of disrespect of human rights in the country. In his speech President Evren accused the petitioners of wanting books on Fascism, Marxism, Leninism and Maoism to be published freely in the country. 'All they want is to see a new generation of young people poisoned by reading such publications,' the President said. 'The other things that they want are freedom for the press and the autonomy of Turkish Radio and Television. First of all,' continued the President, 'I wish to point out that we have nothing against press freedom, but we are now under martial law. The whole nation has witnessed how the Communists made good use of Turkish radio and television before September 1980.' President Evren also said: 'These people who call themselves intellectuals claim their views are the only right ones. Your thoughts and mine are not important to them. Only they know what is best. We have seen too many such intellectuals who have chosen to flee the country in the end… What can I do with such intellectuals?" Many Turkish observers believe President Evren's speech in Manisa has greatly influenced the outcome of the inquiries by the military authorities. Aziz Nesin and 55 other leading intellectuals who signed the petition have now been charged with 'acting against the orders of the martial law authorities'. They face a new prison sentence of from three to six months.