text:
Bellingcat unloads 4,000-word piece on Tulsi Gabbard over her questioning Syria chemical attacks
05 Monday Aug 2019
Bellingcat, British propaganda, media lies, President Bashar Al Assad, syria, Tulsi Gabbard, USA
Elliot Higgins, founder of the UK-based 'citizen investigation' outlet Bellingcat, wrote a whopping 4,000-word piece attacking Gabbard's negative attitude toward regime change wars.
Via RT…
Running as an anti-war candidate in the US comes with a target painted on your back that draws fire from those rooting for foreign interventions. In case of Tulsi Gabbard, it includes a lengthy piece on chemical attacks in Syria.
Gabbard, a Democratic presidential hopeful, became the most-googled candidate during the second primary debate – but the surge of public interest came with renewed attacks against her anti-interventionist agenda. In case you've missed it all, Gabbard has been branded a 'Russian' spoiler for whichever candidate is eventually picked, and, once again, an apologist for Syrian President Bashar Assad.
Joining the chorus of bashers on Sunday was Elliot Higgins, the founder of the UK-based 'citizen investigation' outlet Bellingcat, who wrote a whopping 4,000-word piece attacking Gabbard's negative attitude toward regime change wars. In particular, Higgins didn't like her skepticism over chemical weapons attacks in Syria reflected on her campaign website. The attacks were used by Washington to justify missile attacks against the country's government – and by extension continued illegal US military presence in the country.
Eliot Higgins
✔@EliotHiggins
I just wrote 4000 words on @TulsiGabbard's "Reports on Chemical Attacks in Syria". Dear Reader, it's really bad.https://www.bellingcat.com/news/mena/2019/08/04/tulsi-gabbards-reports-on-chemical-attacks-in-syria-a-self-contradictory-error-filled-mess/ …
Tulsi Gabbard's Reports on Chemical Attacks in Syria – A Self-Contradictory Error Filled Mess -…
During the 2020 Democratic Party presidential primaries one candidate has stood out from the rest due to her stance on the conflict in Syria. Tulsi Gabbard has drawn fire from commentators and her…
1:01 PM – Aug 4, 2019
The mammoth piece starts with screenshots featuring logos of RT and InfoWars (Russian propaganda, dear readers, conspiracy theories!) and goes on to criticise anyone doubting the US-favoured narrative about what happened in Syria.
MIT Professor Theodore Postol gets an honourable mention, with whom Higgins no longer debates in person since their encounter in 2018. Back then, Higgins failed to address Postol's technical criticisms of his investigations and instead resorted to mocking applauses and calling his opponent a tool of Russian propaganda.
While the West squarely laid the blame for most, if not all, chemical incidents in Syria on the government forces – and Bellingcat did their best to "prove" it – Damascus and Moscow have insisted the attacks mentioned by Gabbard and Higgins were false-flag operations by Al-Qaeda-affiliated militants.
Particularly infamous was the one in Douma on April 7, 2018, in which the Oscar-winning 'White Helmets' doused unsuspecting children with cold water on camera, so as to fake the treatment of the alleged "victims." They might not have expected for witnesses to later come forward and speak on the record at the Hague, denouncing the whole affair as staged.
Syrian war aside, some may find a bit of irony in how Bellingcat has found a good use for US taxpayer money, which it receives through one of its sponsors, the National Endowment for Democracy – and then gets to do a little meddling in the 2020 presidential campaign.


text:
Probe Ordered Into Opposition Leader as Graft Allegations Spread in Brazil
Presidential candidate of the Brazilian Social Democratic Party (PSDB) Aécio Neves listens to a question at a press conference on Oct. 23, 2014 in Rio de Janeiro
Mario Tama—Getty Images
By Simon Lewis
Brazil's prosecutor-general has ordered the country's Supreme Court to investigate a leading opposition politician as a probe into corruption involving state-run companies expands.
The scandal has engulfed numerous figures at the top of Brazilian politics as President Dilma Rousseff, who is not under investigation for corruption herself, is facing impeachment for breaching budgetary rules. A list of about 50 politicians accused of taking bribes included Senator Aécio Neves, but an investigation in to the 2014 presidential candidate was previously shelved, Reuters reports.
Now, Neves — who leads the Social Democratic Party (PSDB), the largest party in the main coalition opposing Rousseff's government — has been implicated by a senator-turned-witness in graft at state-run power company Furnas, part of utility Electrobras. Prosector-General Rodrigo Janot also called for an investigation into a judge and a congressman from the ruling Workers Party, Marco Maia.
Reuters said the alleged scheme was similar to that at Petrobras, where company executives overcharged the state oil company for work and passed the proceeds on to politicians.
Brazil's Culture Minister Fired After Quoting Joseph Goebbels in a Speech
Brazilian Judge Orders Netflix to Remove Gay Jesus Christmas Special
Both politicians denied the allegations.
[Reuters]
Write to Simon Lewis at simon_daniel.lewis@timeasia.com.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
{{#if pages}}

Sitemap

    {{#each pages}}

{{this}}

    {{/each}}

{{else}}
<form action="/create" method="POST">
    <legend>Create a page</legend>
    <fieldset>

            Name
            <input name="name" id="name" style="width: 700px" type="text" />

            Contents
            <textarea name="contents" id="contents" style="width: 700px" rows="30"></textarea>

            <input type="submit" value="Create Page" class="btn btn-large btn-primary" />

    </fieldset>
</form>

{{/if}}

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


At least 37 Iraqis were killed and 83 more were wounded in the latest attacks. One incident involved Iranian soldiers at the border. One American soldier was killed and two were wounded in a roadside bombing near Diwaniya on Sunday. Also, Shi'ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr has called for weekly protests against the U.S.-Iraqi security deal.
A car bomb blew up in a Tal Afar marketplace, killing four people and wounding 46 more.
In Baghdad, three dumped bodies were found. An Awakening Council (Sahwa) member was killed and three others were wounded in Adhamiya. During security operations, eight suspects and and three security members were killed; five security members were wounded. Also, 290 detainees were released.
A bomb at the home of a Sahwa member in Diyala province killed one member and wounded six people, including a civilian suspected of involvement in the blast.
Gunmen killed three oil technicians working on a pipeline n Baiji.
In Mosul, a policeman was shot and killed in a crowded area. Gunmen killed a woman in a western neighborhood. Six civilians were wounded during a roadside bombing in al-Darkazliya. In Zahra, 11 policemen were injured during a roadside bombing.
Gunmen killed an Iraqi army soldier and wounded a second one in Hibhib. A child was also wounded.
Seven gunmen were killed and two policemen were injured during clashes in al-Salam.
In Amara, an Iraq army soldier was shot dead.
A roadside bomb in Fallujah killed a policeman in al-Senaa. South of town, another bomb injured a policeman and a civilian.
No casualties were reported after rockets blasted Ashraf. The camp is home to Iranian refugees, including members of the People's Mujahideen Organisation of Iran (PMOI).
Iranian soldiers shot and killed a border guard near Sulaimaniyah. In recent weeks, the Iranian military has launched artillery into the area targeting suspected Party of Free Life of Kurdistan (PJAK) rebels hiding there.
Five suspects were arrested west of Kirkuk. Gunmen shot dead a civilian.
A special groups leader was detained in Suwayra. "Special groups" is a term used by the U.S. military to describe associations suspected of receiving support from Iran.
Six gunmen were arrested near Karbala.


I wrote this shortly after arriving in India for a three month international rotation. It's one of the essays that remains most important to me. It was written for CFA Institute and first published on the Enterprising Investor.
Fees are like mosquitoes: They're everywhere, nobody has anything positive to say about them, and most people don't know why they exist.
We also need to look at the fees some of our cousins in the banking industry are assessing with seeming impunity.
I know this because when I did, I found a combination of market failure, moral outrage, and missed opportunity.
Janice is an imaginary friend of mine. She is single, has no kids, and worked a full 40 hours every week in 2016 at a small shop on the Grand Concourse in the Bronx, one of the five boroughs of New York City. Since her employer is a small business, she earned the $9-an-hour minimum wage, $18,720 total for the year.
After deducting taxes and making conservative estimates of what she needs to spend every year on rent, food, health insurance, clothing, and so on, I estimate Janice has about $4,570 a year in "discretionary" income. That's $380.83 a month.
I won't talk you through the model because you can inspect it directly, but I have likely significantly overstated her financial flexibility.
For simplicity, I assumed she never dines out, has an emergency, or spends money on entertainment. She will eventually develop scurvy thanks to the diet I used to estimate her food costs. She has also managed to secure an apartment in New York City for $468 a month.
Say whatever you want about my analysis, but I'm not being too tough.
Well over half — or 57.4% — of unbanked Americans cite not having enough money as the reason they have not opened a bank account, according to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). Janice is one of them. This is not without reason.
New York City comptroller, Scott Stringer, has produced a tool intended to help low-income New Yorkers find bank accounts and to estimate the annual cost of holding one. The comptroller's estimate is reasonable but also quite conservative. It includes one overdraft a year and accounts for the effect of a low, fluctuating balance. I took the data presented there and with the help of a research assistant from Perssist, focused just on those listed banks with branch locations in the Bronx. As above, you can inspect this work directly.
If Janice were to randomly pick a bank in the Bronx, she can expect her account to require $92 per year in cash, 81% of which ($75) will go towards some kind of fee. That is about 1.5% of her "discretionary" income. If she were to walk into the first bank branch she saw on the street, I expect the cost would be substantially higher: $139 a year, 85% ($118) of which will go to some kind of fee. That is about 2.5% of her "discretionary" income.
She is well aware of this figure, and that is why she hasn't opened a bank account. Unfortunately, she's not aware of the comprehensive cost of her alternatives.
If you don't have a bank account in the United States, you might use a check-cashing service and a prepaid debit card instead.
A check-cashing service puts its own capital at risk when clearing a check, so naturally it seeks to earn a return. In New York, the fee the services can charge is capped at 2.01% of the value of the check, but that still means Janice pays a total of $316 a year to access her funds, which is 6.9% of her discretionary income.
This is 31% more than she pays for health insurance, and she's paying it just to use money she has already earned.
She also has a prepaid debit card for online purchases and for convenience. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CPFB) gave her a small amount of protection after the "catastrophic system failure" of one prepaid card provider drew attention to this fast-growing sector and its customers' remarkable lack of recourse.
In researching these cards, I learned about fees I had never imagined. There are balance inquiry fees and 32 line fee tables. Of course, not all of the cards function this way, but separating the wheat from the chaff is a Sisyphean task. I have a reasonable claim to financial expertise, yet I am not sure how I would begin to estimate the full costs of some of these services.
In the Corporation for Enterprise Development's (CFED) 2014 estimation, Bronx County is the second-most underbanked county with more than 100,000 residents in the United States. The CFED estimates that 20.8% of its residents do not have a bank account, and 27.2% are "underbanked," meaning that they have a bank account but still rely on a mix of financial services to fulfill their needs.
Separately, the Urban Institute produced slightly higher estimates in 2015. It pegs the combined percentage of unbanked and underbanked Bronx households at 52.3%. Remember, the Bronx is an 11-mile drive from the New York Stock Exchange.
When I first joined CFA Institute, I contributed to some research on the fees of variable annuities. The highest upfront sales charge permitted on these instruments by the National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD) is 8.5%, but this fee is assessed on investment capital.
Because Janice is subject to such substantial fees before she can even amass investment capital, the possibility that she ever will is reduced. This is no one organization's fault, but it is wrong.
I am doing a rotation in our Mumbai office, and the comparison is striking. India is moving light years ahead of the United States when it comes to providing banking access to the poor, and the country's example is worth paying attention to.
In August 2014, the government introduced a plan called the Pradhan Mantri Jan-Dhan Yojana (PMJDY, Scheme for People's Wealth) that provides not just free bank accounts to all citizens, but also free overdraft insurance. In a country where about 17% of the country is Dalit ("Untouchable") and faces profound discrimination, the government recognizes that a bank account is a pathway to personal autonomy.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi nails it when he refers to the unbanked as financial untouchables. If you think wealth creation is good and want it to happen, freeing the unbanked where you find them is an obvious step.
How long will New York City remain a leading financial center if its own residents can't obtain decent bank accounts?


text:
Download It! (PDF)
When two singers want a full medley of their entire history on Broadway, you give it to them, including using "Hasa Diga Eebowai" as a transition between songs, perhaps a little liberally.
I am always of the opinion that any song can be covered, and there is no right way to do it. Bringing the powerhouse vocals of Kristin Daush to an Ani Difranco song, we had to pump up the volume ourselves, so here's my arrangement of "In or Out."
Digging into and honoring music of all styles is an absolute joy, and I was so glad when Ani came to me wanting to put lay down some jazz in her native Heyeren.
One more with Arbender Robinson, my longtime collaborator. Here, a tender ballad we did together at our first 54 Below show.
When you have the option to take a piano solo and harmonize Michael Jackson with three Broadway Belters, you do exactly that.
A significant part of my musical upbringing is in Hip-hop and Soul (with a touch of Metal). There's nothing quite like playing organ, bass, and Rhodes all on the same track when there's such an open form to "talk" to yourself each time you play the tune.
© 2020 by James Rushin. Proudly created with Wix.com


text:
Annie and the Adventures
The Passport Series
larice121
Magic in the Moonlight (2014)
Stanley (Colin Firth) is a magician during the forties who specializes in pulling the wool over his audiences' eyes. He goes to a friend's mansion off the coast of France to de-bunk a young psychic, Sophie (Emma Stone). After a series of magic and mystery, true love is found between both characters.
Woody Allen movies are like Christmas presents from weird family members (or whatever holiday you choose to celebrate, we are very inclusive here at Annie and the Adventures), they come every year whether you actually want it or not.
Magic in the Moonlight is a good representation of that. It had that bizarre, light magical feel that all Woody Allen movies seems to have, but I think it would have been a better on-stage play than a film. It had the same time setting with the same title sequence font and same use of a "jazz horn" soundtrack. There is consistency in his films which can be great, but it is now starting to become too repetitive.
Now, I love Colin Firth with all my heart and all my soul, but I thought that this wasn't his best performance. I also had the same feelings with Emma Stone. Both had roles that were very different than their other films.
Maybe I didn't like Magic in the Moonlight as much as I expected to because I'm still in L-O-V-E LOVE with Midnight in Paris. But as far as movies go, Magic in the Moonlight is a still worth seeing especially because it will almost certainly be nominated for a couple academy awards this winter.
All in all, it was a very whimsical film that was a great addition to my day. I just wish that there would be a lot more variety in Allen's films, but then again he wouldn't be Woody Allen without all of his specific trademarks.
Thoughts and tid bits
One isn't always the loneliest number
Going to the movies has always been a group affair. Typically you spend a lazy Sunday going to the movie with your friends to see the latest blockbuster hit. People choice their first dates at the movies for a reason: It's socializing enough, but still requires a lot of silence. Every year there are Christmas specials on ABC Family and any basic cable shows because it is easy to get a group together and bond over cheesy love-stories with semi-predictable endings. Netflix makes that even easier by being able to stream a semi-forgotten movie as long as you have an Internet connection.
But what happens when one ventures out to the theatre, dare I say it, by yourself.
The horror.
Now, I'm the first to admit that I may or may not have a co-dependent friendship with a lot of my friends, so I completely understand the fears of getting in your car, driving to the theatre, and purchasing a ticket for one.
"Just one ticket for today, ma'am?"
You're darn right. Matinee movie: party of one.
So let's now explore the pros and cons of this potentially good/terrible idea.
Don't have to share popcorn with anyone
That's right all of the snacks are yours. You can order whatever you want with whatever drink you want. Get made fun of for eating Junior Mints with popcorn and have a Coke slushy on the side? Not today, my friend. Going to the movies by yourself allows you all of this freedom.
Both armrests are yours
No longer do you have to awkwardly claim arm rest territory that can sometimes break friendships. We all have that one friend that decides that both armrests, (Hint hint: that person is usually me. Sorry everyone!) but today they are both yours.
You can see whatever you want
Absolutely. Anything. Cheesy Rom-Com? You got it. Something slow and painfully dramatic? All you. That one actor that was a child star and now is trying to revive his career? Better bring the popcorn and get ready. This is the perfect opportunity to finally see that kinda weird movie that none of your friends/family/significant other want to see.
Yet seeing movies on your own also has some cons like…
Lots of phone time pretending to text friends and look social while waiting for the movie to start
It's sad but true, there isn't enough Twitter or Instagram feeds long enough to look occupied before a movie. If you are going to venture this alone, I suggest you hold off of the social media before you sit down for 10 minutes.
Looks of pity from happy couples
People keep looking at me and having that sad face that read "aww look at her, she is here by herself. That's so brave…" blah blah blah. It was uncomfortable, but no need to fear, the whole room gets dark for at least an hour and a half. Sit in the back so no one can see you.
Going to the movies isn't for everyone, but it is definitely a completely different experience that going with friends or your significant other. So if you have two hours to kill on an afternoon, go see that one movie that you have been dying to see. Order a large Coke slushy and a large popcorn. Treat yo self!
Skeleton Twins (2014)
Estranged twins, Milo (Bill Hader) and Maggie (Krsiten Wiig), are reunited after 10 years of separation after Milo tries to commit suicide. Maggie flies out to L.A. to see him, and invites him to stay with her and her husband, Lance (Luke Wilson) until he gets back on his feet.
When I first saw this trailer at my local theatre (shout-out to you, Ragtag!), I thought that this would be another dorky, SNL-actor filled comedy. I was pleasantly surprised by how deep the plot went. Skeleton Twins pegged exactly how it is for arguing siblings to learn to love each other again.
I was mostly surprised by Bill Hader's performance. He had perfect comedic and dramatic timing. Him and Wiig had great chemistry and that showed throughout the movie. Luke Wilson was also hilarious and was an excellent supporting character by acting like the dorky husband.
Even though some parts were slower than other, it was still a great movie to watch on a casual Saturday. It does deal with issues like suicide and a dysfunctional family, but there are also funny parts like when Milo tries to cheer Maggie up by lip-syncing "Nothing's Gonna Stop Us Now."
Overall: 3.5 out of 5 stars
The Endless Search
Final Work in Progress
CPOY Post
Self-Reflection- Group Project
Pat Rice on Work in Progress
Pat Rice on Eclipse day
Pat Rice on The Final Stop: Rome (Days Nin…
stretchingittotravel on Day Eleven and Twelve
The Queen Mother on Day Seven
The Adventures:
The Passport Series (13)
Thoughts and tid bits (38)
A man, who identified himself as "Good Citizen," holds an American flag while carrying multiple guns during the Close the Camps counter protest. This man and four others were a small counter group that brought American flags, Trump flags and guns to the counter protests across the street.
About two weeks ago, @aaronmontes91 and I were sent to cover the Deming, New Mexico, migrant shelter for USA Today. We are still in the process of editing that project, but we decided to give the kids at the shelter disposable cameras to photograph the site from their perspective. All the following photos are made by children seeking asylum from either Honduras, El Salvador or Guatemala.
Corpus Christi Hooks' JJ Matijevic prepares to catch the ball in the game against the Midland RockHounds. Matijevic returns after a 50-game suspension after violating the Minor League Drug Prevention and Treatment Program after a second positive test for a "drug abuse."
It was fun to be back in the studio, especially to photo Madi Hale, the 2019 All-South Texas Softball MVP.


Drafting well is the most obviously important factor in building a successful fantasy football team. But navigating the NFL season and making smart adjustments is arguably just as critical.
Even if you draft the perfect lineup, injuries and bye weeks ensure that you won't be able to start it every single week. With players like Jay Ajayi and Albert Wilson now out, guys like Rob Gronkowski and Sammy Watkins dealing with injuries and players like Adam Thielen and Phillip Lindsay on byes, there's a good chance you'll be faced with some less-than-ideal matchups here in Week 10.
This doesn't mean you can't field a top-tier lineup, though, and we're here to help. We're going to break down some of the toughest matchups of the week by analyzing factors like opponent, early-season performance and player health. We'll be making our choices based on point-per-reception (PPR) scoring formats.
All rankings and fantasy statistics are courtesy of FantasyPros.
The Jacksonville Jaguars defense has taken a step back from last season, but it still isn't the most friendly unit for opposing quarterbacks. Jacksonville is allowing an NFL-best 190 yards passing per game and ranks sixth in fantasy points allowed to opposing quarterbacks.
Don't let this scare you, though, if you have Indianapolis Colts signal-caller Andrew Luck on your roster.
Luck is averaging 273.4 yards passing and nearly three touchdowns per game this season, with an average of one interception per contest. Even in games in which he hasn't racked up the yardage—like in Week 7 against the Buffalo Bills (156 yards, four touchdowns)—Luck has been a great fantasy performer.
Luck only has one game without multiple touchdown passes and has thrown at least three in each of his last five games.
Expect the Colts to keep Jacksonville's defense off-balance with the running game, with Luck taking advantage in the red zone.
We trust Luck this week, but we can't say the same for Dallas Cowboys quarterback Dak Prescott.
The Cowboys added first-round pick Amari Cooper in a trade just before their Week 8 bye. Cooper has helped add a different dimension to the passing game, but he didn't help Prescott push the ball down the field last week against the Tennessee Titans. Don't expect him to do so against the Eagles this week, either.
Prescott is most efficient when throwing short-to-medium passes as a complement to the running game. He's going to have a difficult time doing that against an Eagles defense that is one of the best against the run.
Philadelphia is allowing an average of just 83.8 yards rushing per game. The Eagles will be able to limit running back Ezekiel Elliott, and that's going to put a ton of pressure on Prescott. He won't be able to carry the offense on his own.
Titans running back Dion Lewis has been performing well for the Titans as both a runner and a receiver. He has amassed 339 yards rushing, 259 yards receiving and two touchdowns. The New England Patriots are not surprised.
"He was going to have success wherever he went," Patriots running back James White said, per Kevin Duffy of the Boston Herald.
Expect Lewis to have success again in Week 10, and not just because he's facing his former team.
The Patriots defense has shown improvement in recent weeks, as it continues to develop under new defensive coordinator Brian Flores. However, it still ranks a mediocre 18th in fantasy points allowed to opposing running backs this season.
Last week, Aaron Jones—another versatile back—had two receptions and 85 combined rushing and receiving yards. Expect Lewis to have an even better outing behind Tennessee's run-oriented offense.
Detroit Lions rookie running back Kerryon Johnson has added a new element to the offense this season, and when he gets going, Detroit's offense can be tough to stop. Unfortunately, he'll struggle to get going against the Chicago Bears this week.
The first issue is Chicago's defense, which allows an average of just 85.0 yards rushing per game, third-fewest in the NFL. The other issue is that Detroit will have a harder time keeping the Bears defense off-balance with the passing game. Golden Tate is no longer around to help stretch the field, and the Bears will be able to focus more on shutting down the run.
In addition, Johnson was listed on the injury report with an ankle issue this week. If he is banged up on Sunday, he's a clear must-sit. Even if he is healthy, though, you shouldn't expect high-end production.
We don't like playing Prescott against the Eagles this week. If you happen to own Cooper, though, we think you'll be safe starting him.
The Eagles' ability to slow the run will have a negative impact on Prescott's performance. It shouldn't affect Cooper too much, though. He's going to remain Prescott's go-to target and should be even more effective in his second outing with Dallas.
The Eagles are allowing the fifth-most fantasy points to opposing wide receivers this season. They also may be without starting cornerback Jalen Mills (foot).
"We'll evaluate him day-by-day," Eagles head coach Doug Pederson said of Mills, per Mike Kaye of NJ.com. "He may be a touch longer, but he's coming [along], and we'll see where he's at by the end of the week."
This is a good matchup for Cooper, who should at least match his production (five receptions, 58 yards, one touchdown) from last week.
The Oakland Raiders traded Cooper to the Cowboys for a first-round pick. The problem is that Oakland doesn't have a No. 1-type receiver to replace him. It certainly isn't offseason acquisition Jordy Nelson, who has had exactly one standout game this season.
Nelson racked up 173 yards against the Miami Dolphins in Week 3. He hasn't topped the 50-yard mark in any other game this season. He also hasn't had more than two receptions in any of his last three games.
The Los Angeles Chargers, who have allowed the ninth-most fantasy points to wide receivers this season, aren't the most daunting challenge. However, Nelson simply isn't a significant part of the offense right now, and the Raiders don't seem to have a lot of fight left in them this season.
Quarterback Derek Carr, who was sacked seven times by the San Francisco 49ers last week, could be in for an even longer day. Expect the Chargers to break Oakland's will early, and expect Nelson to be a non-factor.
Should you trust Cleveland Browns wide receiver Rashard Higgins in Week 10? That's a fair question, as Higgins caught just three passes for 19 yards last week after missing nearly a month with an MCL injury.
Against the Atlanta Falcons, we do believe Higgins can be trusted. He's become one of Baker Mayfield's favorite targets, and he has used his time away from the field to focus on improving his game.
"Seeing it from the other side, I got to critique a lot of stuff," Higgins said, per Jimmy Watkins of the team's official website. "I got to see how I can take my game to another level."
Stopping Higgins won't be the top priority for the Falcons defense, which is allowing the third-most fantasy points to opposing wide receivers. Atlanta will be more concerned with stopping Jarvis Landry and tight end David Njoku, which should get Higgins plenty of one-on-one looks that Mayfield can exploit.
The Buffalo Bills aren't quite sure who they'll have at quarterback against the New York Jets this week. Derek Anderson is in concussion protocol, and while rookie Josh Allen is working his way back from an elbow injury, it isn't clear when he'll return.
We haven't seen any setbacks in his rehab, but we're going to take it one day at a time," head coach Sean McDermott said of Allen.
With the bye week coming in Week 11, Buffalo may again go with Nathan Peterman this week. Even if Allen or Anderson makes a surprise return, we can't recommend sticking by wide receiver Kelvin Benjamin.
Benjamin has been a major disappointment this season. He's topped the 50-yard mark just once, and he only has one touchdown grab on the year.
The Jacksonville defense has been solid against tight ends this season—11th-fewest fantasy points allowed to the position—but we expect Luck and his tight ends to still have some success against it. The big question is whether Eric Ebron or Jack Doyle will be the tight end to rely on.
We actually believe both tight ends are start-worthy this week. Between the two, however, we're going to give the edge to Doyle. The Western Kentucky product made his return from injury against the Raiders in Week 8 and racked up 70 yards and a touchdown on six receptions.
Jacksonville does have a defense better than Oakland's. However, the Colts should be able to integrate Doyle into the offense even more coming out of last week's bye, and he should be Luck's top red-zone target.
The Seattle Seahawks defense may not be what it once was, but it's been a solid option in fantasy this season. Seattle has logged 21 sacks and 10 interceptions so far and has allowed an average of just 14 points over the last three games.
However, this is a good week to turn away from the Seattle defense. The last time the Seahawks faced the Los Angeles Rams, they surrendered 33 points. Not too surprisingly, this matches the 33.2 points per game Los Angeles is averaging.
In fact, the Rams have been held under 30 points only twice this season. Rams quarterback Jared Goff has been sacked an average of 1.9 times per game and has thrown just six interceptions on the season.
Seattle's defense may make a couple of big plays, but it won't be a top-tier fantasy unit this week.


Recent events appeared quite head-spinning for the entire Bitcoin community. The price was falling and rising, and then falling again, even lower than before.
However, now Bitcoin seems to have recovered its position along with its price. After rocketing down to the lowest bottom for the last couple of weeks ($5,600), BTC has significantly improved its position, and its price has increased back to over $6,900.
Generally, it is due to CME Group's announcement of the launch of its bitcoin futures exchange. The company confirmed that the platform will start its work in December 2017. Moreover, BTC has got itself authoritative supporters, such as a billionaire Mike Novogratz and some other high-profile investors.
Recently, the community had a chance to watch a clash between BTC and its "child" born after SegWit in August. The lower Bitcoin was falling, the higher the price of BCH went.
However, it seems the "father" is still more reputable and reliable, so the experts anticipate a further increase of its price or, at least, a stabilization.


text:
Carleton University's Black History Month Calendar
http://cusaonline.com/rechall
Posted in News and tagged activism, black feminism, black history month, black women, Carleton University on January 31, 2015 by femmefataleckcu. Leave a comment
Papi Pacify- The Gaze, Consent and Kink and why I Love It
I first discovered this song when I searched up Top Feminist Songs of 2013 and it ranked very high on the list. By just looking at screen shots of the music video one sees an almost violent encounter between a man and woman, as he chokes her and forces fingers into her mouth. Yet upon closer investigation the video combined with the lyrics show a unique intersection between consent, kink and feminism. In fact, Twigs "tops from the bottom" in many ways as she expresses her desire to be dominated to the point where her tongue seeks his fingers to be put into her mouth.
What makes this video a visual representation of feminism and kink is her explicit use and awareness of The Gaze. Throughout the video, she is continually looking at the viewer in a purposefully and interactive kind of way. Women in popular culture mediums like music videos or advertisements are often the objects of the gaze and experience a dehumanizing objectification. Men are often portrayed as directly gazing back at the viewer, as if they are aware of the viewing relationship and they are refusing to be objectified by it. In Twigs' video, this gendered dynamic is switched, where she is the active viewer/viewed and her male partner is objectified by the viewer's gaze. He is, in a sense, a tool for her pleasure and she demands his and the viewer's attention. This is not to say that in order to achieve equality, we must objectify men but I am in fact acknowledging the pattern of The Gaze within popular culture and how Twigs uses and challenges the conventional gaze.
This song and video also looks at the relationship between consent, kink and race. Both Twigs and her male pattern appear to be racialized persons and yet, their race doesn't really matter. By no means does it appear that the video is relying on racist stereotypes of the sexual beastly black male. It instead looks to the sexual and sensual relationship between bodies. While still focusing on Twigs, as she is often in the centre of the frame or appears alone, the relationship between Twigs and her partner is powerfully real. With the aspect of kink involved, the cardinal rule within the community: Safe, Sane, and Consensual, is paramount within the video. While not everyone digs getting fingers put into their mouth, Twigs obviously wants it and expresses in multiple ways that she is consenting to this kind of play. The same goes for the breath play (or choking) involved in the video.
Note: Breath play is dangerous and is considered extreme within the kink community. Do not do this kind of play without researching techniques and does or don'ts (like never wrap rope around the neck). Safe is the first part of the cardinal rule, and make sure you discuss any kind of play you are interested in with your partner before the fun stuff.
In my opinion, FKA Twigs' video Papi Pacify is a wonderful popular culture representation of the relationship between consent, kink and feminism. You don't have to be into kink to be a feminist but it is a lot of fun!
Lilith Out!
Want more on Kink and Feminism check out another blog post here!
To check out the lyrics click here!
Posted in My Feminism and tagged BDSM, feminism, FKA Twigs, music, music video, Papi Pacify, Racialized, sexuality on January 29, 2015 by femmefataleckcu. Leave a comment
My Feminism Plays Nice with BDSM
As a feminist I struggle with what i feel is objectifying and counter to my feminist philosophies daily, as I encounter various television shows, movies, books and hashtag activism online. I've even struggled with how i interact with pornography. As a staunch sex-positive person, I feel that embracing pleasure as a right and exploring one's body in whatever way (consensually and legally speaking) pleases oneself is healthy and wonderfully fulfilling. Yet, one cannot deny the truth, some pornography (I will not generalize and say that all or even most) is demeaning and perpetuates the very sexist patriarchal institutions that we (as a people) must negotiate for our very safety and equity everyday. This brings me to what type of porn can I personally watch which is less offensive and gets me off still. There is in fact feminist pornography which uses many sex-positive tactics and consent-based platforms to show conversation…
Posted in Uncategorized on January 17, 2015 by femmefataleckcu. Leave a comment
We wouldn't accept actors blacking up, so why applaud 'cripping up'? | Frances Ryan | Comment is free | theguardian.com
We wouldn't accept actors blacking up, so why applaud 'cripping up'?
Eddie Redmayne, who won a Golden Globe for playing Stephen Hawking, is the latest in a long line of non-disabled actors to portray disabled characters
Frances Ryan
theguardian.com, Tuesday 13 January 2015 12.46 GMT
"If you do a film about the Holocaust, you're guaranteed an Oscar," goes the famous Kate Winslet joke in Extras. The same can be said for an actor doing a film about disability. Unless you're a disabled actor, that is. Then you're lucky to even get the part.
This week, when Eddie Redmayne won a Golden Globe for his portrayal of Stephen Hawking in The Theory of Everything, he became the latest in a long line of non-disabled actors to portray disabled characters. And to walk away – literally – with an award for doing so. From Daniel Day Lewis in My Left Foot to Dustin Hoffman in Rain Man, the ability to play "disability" is a definite asset for an actor, a source of genuine acclaim.
But is this as harmless as mainstream audiences seem to see it? While "blacking up" is rightly now greeted with outrage, "cripping up" is still greeted with awards. Is there actually much difference between the two? In both cases, actors use prosthetics or props to alter their appearance in order to look like someone from a minority group. In both cases they often manipulate their voice or body to mimic them. They take a job from an actor who genuinely has that characteristic, and, in doing so, perpetuate that group's under-representation in the industry. They do it for the entertainment of crowds who, by and large, are part of the majority group.
Daniel Radcliffe, centre, with Sarah Greene and Pat Shortt in The Cripple Of Inishmaan at the Cort Theatre in New York. Photograph: Andrew Toth/Getty Images
The explanations for "cripping up" are obvious. The entertainment industry is a business, after all, and stars sell. When Daniel Radcliffe played a disabled orphan in The Cripple of Inishmaan this won more headlines for the production than if a disabled, lesser-known actor had been cast. On a practical level too, perhaps hiring a non-disabled actor is easier. The ability to walk allows Redmayne to portray Hawking before being diagnosed with motor neurone disease. But I can't get away from the fact that, if these arguments were made for white actors "playing black", our outrage would be so great that the scenes would be left on the cutting room floor.
There's a theory of why non-disabled actors playing disabled characters leads to success: audiences find it reassuring. Christopher Shinn, a playwright who had a below-the-knee amputation, describes the act of watching a disabled character being played by an actor who we know is really fit and well as allowing society's "fear and loathing around disability" to be "magically transcended".
When it comes down to it, Shinn says, "pop culture is more interested in disability as a metaphor than in disability as something that happens to real people".
Daniel Day Lewis in My Left Foot. Photograph: ITV/Rex Features
After all, disabled characters create powerful images and sentiments for audiences. They can symbolise the triumph of the human spirit over so-called "adversity". They can represent what it is to be "different" in some way, an outsider or an underdog who ultimately becomes inspirational. These are universal feelings every audience member can identify with. And there is something a little comforting in knowing, as we watch the star jump around the red carpet, that none of it – the pain or negativity we still associate with disability – was real.
Perhaps that's part of the problem. Perhaps as a society we see disability as a painful external extra rather than a proud, integral part of a person, and so it doesn't seem quite as insulting to have non-disabled actors don prosthetics or get up from a wheelchair when the director yells "cut". But for many disabled people in the audience, this is watching another person fake their identity. When it comes to race, we believe it is wrong for the story of someone from a minority to be depicted by a member of the dominant group for mass entertainment. But we don't grant disabled people the same right to self-representation.
Perhaps it is time to think before we next applaud "cripping up". Disabled people's lives are more than something for non-disabled actors to play at.
We wouldn't accept actors blacking up, so why applaud 'cripping up'? | Frances Ryan | Comment is free | theguardian.com.
Posted in Uncategorized and tagged "cripping up", disability, feminism, movies, stephen hawking on January 14, 2015 by femmefataleckcu. Leave a comment
The Backlash Against African Women – NYTimes.com
The Backlash Against African Women
By SISONKE MSIMANGJAN. 10, 2015
JOHANNESBURG — A FEW weeks ago, as I was leaving my office, I stopped at a traffic light and watched a young woman cross the street in front of me. She wore a pair of jean shorts cut fashionably high, and I could see the crease of her left buttock extend each time she took a step. She wouldn't have been out of place in London or New York or Tokyo. Except that this was Johannesburg, the biggest city in a country known for its high levels of violence against women. As I pulled away, I worried that she might be assaulted.
I'm not suggesting that she was inviting trouble. I was anxious because she was walking near the spot where a young woman in a miniskirt had been attacked by a crowd of men a few years earlier. I'd also just watched footageof a crowd attacking and stripping a miniskirt-clad woman in Nairobi just days after the release of the viral video of a woman in New York being catcalled. A few weeks later, another video surfaced in Zimbabwe's capital, Harare. A girl in a short dress was dragged from a minibus onto the street, where an angry crowd of men stripped her naked.
Public strippings represent the front lines of a cultural war against women's advancements in traditionally conservative but rapidly urbanizing societies. They aren't really about what women are wearing. They are much more about where women are going.
And many African women are going places quickly. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala became the first female finance minister in Nigeria; Liberia's president, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, is one of a handful of elected female heads of state in the world. Lupita Nyong'o's Oscar win and Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie's literary successes have brought attention to the artistic triumphs of a younger generation of women.
Nowhere has progress been more remarkable than in Africa's legislatures. Africans have significantly outpaced their female peers in America and Europe. In the United States, women hold less than 20 percent of the seats in Congress; similarly, in Britain, women make up just over one-fifth of the members of the House of Commons. Compare this to South Africa, where more than 40 percent of representatives in the National Assembly are women, or Rwanda, where 64 percent of all members of Parliament are women — making it the only country in the world where women outnumber men in the legislature.
Beginning in the 1980s, many African countries started to invest in girls' education and in small enterprise projects. A generation later, an equal number of girls and boys are enrolled in primary schools across the continent. Many women are successful entrepreneurs and, of course, politicians. Precisely because of these rapid changes in women's status, the backlash from churches, political parties, traditional leaders and rural officials has been forceful. Outrage at bold women is both spontaneous and organized. The mob mentality that leads to public strippings arises in urban milieus where male aggression against women is seen as acceptable. Meanwhile, many churches systematically preach female subservience, while traditional tribal leaders often blame women for dislodging men from their rightful places in modern societies.
It has taken some time for this conservative backlash to develop into a coherent and organized force, but today these churches, traditional leaders and politicians are forming powerful coalitions that are seeking to challenge decades of progress.
First, this loose men's movement developed a set of "decency bills" urging women not to undermine their African culture by dressing "inappropriately." In Uganda, an anti-pornography bill initially sought to criminalize the display of "sexual parts of a person such as breasts, thighs, buttocks or genitalia" and to ban behavior that might cause sexual excitement. Overzealous police officers began to arrest women wearing short skirts even before Parliament voted on the measure. Fierce opposition from women's groups forced changes to the final bill signed last year by President Yoweri Museveni, but it remains a vague and problematic law that gives broad discretion to state officials to define pornography and arrest those suspected of an ill-defined crime.
Second, and more pernicious, the movement against women's rights has resorted to bullying and baiting successful women in public spaces. In South Africa, one of the most popular and trusted figures in the country is Thuli Madonsela, who holds the office of public protector. Political cartoonists often depict her as a caped superhero on a mission to bust corrupt politicians. She is widely respected for her refusal to back down in the face of political pressure related to her investigation of the government's spending on a palatial personal residence for President Jacob G. Zuma.
Despite her popularity, it hasn't been an easy ride for Ms. Madonsela and other women who occupy prominent public positions. They have often been subjected to sexist verbal abuse and taunts and jeers about how they look and dress. Members of the ruling party have had to be called to order after insulting Ms. Madonsela's appearance. Last year, a pregnant member of Parliament was mocked so viciously about the outfit she was wearing that she had to be hospitalized for stress.
THESE verbal assaults in the halls of power are mirrored by the experiences of women on the streets, who don't have easy access to the constitutional or party protections that public figures enjoy. Ordinary African women, it seems, are bearing the brunt of their sisters' progress. Street harassment is often a sign of deep-seated resentment of women's changing status in society. For men who were raised to believe that they are entitled to be breadwinners and receive sexual gratification and domestic subservience from women, the shift hasn't been easy. For younger men, modern values have jostled sharply against the lessons about manhood they learned at home. With high levels of unemployment and gaping inequalities, old conceptions of masculinity die hard.
South Africa has what is considered the most progressive constitution in the world, including a bill of rights that promotes and protects women's rights. Despite this, in 2012, the Congress of Traditional Leaders of South Africa sponsored a bill in Parliament that would have effectively made all women in rural areas legal minors, subject to the whims of traditional chiefs. Had it become law, the bill would have created a separate legal system for millions of people living in rural areas. Chiefs would have been able to force their subjects to adhere to customary laws and practices that are outmoded and unconstitutional, and it would have been a crime for those living in areas covered by traditional courts to opt out and seek justice in the formal legal system.
This attempt to disenfranchise millions of women in one of Africa's most vibrant constitutional democracies demonstrates the extent to which advances in gender equality are often met with hostility.
Fortunately, the continent is home to loud and organized women's movements that have thus far been able to repel many attempts to undermine women's progress through protests and parliamentary campaigns and the creative use of media and technology.
Their protests have been daring and their collective message has been clear: The walk from the streets to the halls of power may be long, but the goal is well within reach.
Sisonke Msimang is a columnist for the South African website The Daily Maverick and the former executive director of the Open Society Initiative for Southern Africa.
A version of this op-ed appears in print on January 11, 2015, on page SR4 of the New York edition with the headline: The Backlash Against African Women.
The Backlash Against African Women – NYTimes.com.
Posted in Community Posts, Uncategorized and tagged backlash, black feminism, black women, feminism, racism on January 13, 2015 by femmefataleckcu. 1 Comment
As a feminist I struggle with what i feel is objectifying and counter to my feminist philosophies daily, as I encounter various television shows, movies, books and hashtag activism online. I've even struggled with how i interact with pornography. As a staunch sex-positive person, I feel that embracing pleasure as a right and exploring one's body in whatever way (consensually and legally speaking) pleases oneself is healthy and wonderfully fulfilling. Yet, one cannot deny the truth, some pornography (I will not generalize and say that all or even most) is demeaning and perpetuates the very sexist patriarchal institutions that we (as a people) must negotiate for our very safety and equity everyday. This brings me to what type of porn can I personally watch which is less offensive and gets me off still. There is in fact feminist pornography which uses many sex-positive tactics and consent-based platforms to show conversation, expression of desires and needs, and the mutual fulfilment of both (or all) parties involved. What about if you just want to jerk it, quick and dirty so you can go to sleep quickly? Maybe watching porn with no volume, no English subtitles, what about Henti? That way you don't have to worry about those people being real. The jury is still out for me about porn, but I don't judge others (nor myself at times) for watching it.
As I mentioned, feminists have it hard sometimes because it seems like wherever you turn, there is something wrong. To be clear, I am not suggesting that feminists should stop being so easily offended or that being politically correct is really being overly sensitive and wanting to be offended. When you open your eyes to the world around us, you start to see a lot of ridiculous and wrong things around you, and just because you happen to not let your friend get away with that HILARIOUS racist joke, does not mean that you are intolerant of intolerance (in a bad way).
So what does a feminist do when they are into kink or BDSM? Well, the first step is research. In some ways, kink is a wonderful expression of core feminist ideology because the proper exploration and enjoyment of kink is dependent on trust, conversation and consent. A popular saying within the BDSM community is Safe, Sane, and Consensual. In a Dominant and Submissive relationship or a Master and Slave relationship, the conversation on what each person is hoping to get from the interaction, what each desires and the hard lines they do not enjoy nor they want to explore is key to a successful and fulfilling relationship. BDSM is honest and enjoys the power dynamics which exists between people in today's society but instead of men dominating women (which some are into for kink), power dynamics are amazingly diverse within the community. Women dominate men, LGBTQ+ individuals dominant/submissive others, and everything else one can think of. Power in the BDSM community is not the privilege of a select few determined by the sex assigned at birth or the colour of one's skin but rather it is earned, respected and given within a circle of trust and communication. Furthermore, power does not lie solely in the hands of the Dominant or Master but instead, much of the power is controlled by the Submissive or Slave. This is achieved by the use of a safe word, which if used properly, immediately stops whatever the individual is uncomfortable with or does not enjoy.
A true Dom or Master does not want to abuse (i use this word deliberately) their Sub or Slave, in fact, many of those kinds of relationships are ones of friendship, and love. Partially this is because BDSM and Kink are still viewed as deviant and undesirable sexualities within the larger mainstream culture and therefore, sharing part of one's true sexual self and sexual culture can be intimate and wonderfully liberating. The image the mainstream society has of kink and BDSM as a Sub crying in the corner, beaten and bruised is not a true representation of the culture and community but is instead a horrible backlash to an alternative of the sexuality we are taught to have and the sex we are taught to participate in. The variety that one sees in the people around them can be seen in the kind of sex people have, kinky or otherwise. Furthermore, not all are into pain, and those who are, experiment in a safe and educated way.
It must be said that while I love kink and BDSM, there are those who abuse the culture and community and those who do not in essence, follow the rules. There are predators, just like anywhere you go (sadly), one must be careful when entering any new community with little knowledge and people to look out for you. There are abusers which say they are Dominants or Masters, just look at the Jian Ghomeshi. I won't sugarcoat it and say that everyone respects the core ideology of BDSM but I will say that there are by far (by far far far) more wonderful, inclusive people in the community than there are predators (the male, female or otherwise kind). Because of the core ideology of BDSM the support within the community is overwhelming for newcomers or longtime practitioners. I love Kink and BDSM for that, it and its community members gives me a kind of power built on trust and communication and I give power back. The kind of feminism I believe in and practice everyday, feels totally great about kink because its what I enjoy and what many others do as well. You don't have to be into kink to be a feminist, you don't have to be into whips and chains (though they can be a lot of fun), but in my kind of feminism; you can't hate or discriminate against someone who practices Safe, Sane, Consensual fun just because you don't enjoy the same thing.
Posted in My Feminism and tagged BDSM, feminism, Kink, Pornography, Sex-positive on January 11, 2015 by femmefataleckcu. 1 Comment
I'm not a feminist because I'm not a victim: bullshit.
Insightful and honest. Just because I identify as a feminist does not mean that I think feminism is perfect but I do think we need it.


text:
End Of The Myth Of The French Revolution
December 1, 2020 Arnaud Imatz
Celebrated with great pomp at the end of the last century, the bicentenary of the French Revolution (1789-1989) did not fail to rekindle debates and controversies over the interpretation of the event. Many French intellectuals and academics were still dreaming of the "blessed" era when Clemenceau invited them to take the "Revolution as a bloc." After all, it was justifiable or excusable for them to pass over in silence the Terror, the Vendée "genocide," the terrible treatments inflicted by the Republic and its leaders on "monsters," "sub-humans," the "execrable race," that it was appropriate to "exterminate" or "purge" the nation.
Under blows from foreign authors, in particular English-speaking ones, it had to be admitted that the "heroes" of the revolutionary gesture could not escape historical research. The corruption of Danton, the intrigues of Mirabeau, the paranoid delirium of Robespierre, the fanaticism of Saint-Just, the violence of Marat, the deceit of Hébert, the villainy of Barras were very troublesome. These men hardly corresponded to the idealized image that Republican education (primary and secondary school) had long given of this period to legitimize the foundations of a regime that had become uncertain. How many already seemed old and outdated, such as, the Robespierrolatry of a Laponneraye (1842), or the hagiographies of Danton by Quinet (1865), of Saint-Just by Hamel (1859) or of Hébert by Tridon (1864). But on the whole, the myth of the Revolution as a veritable monolithic bloc still held firm. No one imagined the magnitude of the earthquake that a group of researchers and academic historians would cause in the late 1980s.
For nearly two centuries, the theories of interpretation of the Revolution have opposed each other and clashed. But justification, advocacy, and respect for the vulgate remained the rule of research and higher education – a strict, imperative prescription that no reasonable researcher could break without risking his career.
Diverse and contradictory, the theses and interpretative theories of the French Revolution can be grouped into three categories. Of course, the historiography of the subject cannot be reduced to these three antagonistic schools, but this classification at least has the merit of clarity and convenience.
The first school of thought sees the Revolution as a mythical phenomenon, as a revelation of absolute values pushed onto the stage of history under the pressure of Justice, Liberty and the People. Suddenly enlightened and responding to the call of revolutionary divinities, the People spontaneously revolted against tyranny. The archetype of this dogmatic literature is the Histoire de la Révolution française by Jules Michelet, published from 1847 to 1853. It is perpetuated, to varying degrees, in the spirit of primary and secondary education textbooks and in cultural news delivered by the mainstream media. We find it sometimes in the liberal-Jacobin form, sometimes in the socialist form, the latter mainly deriving from L'histoire socialiste de la Révolution française, by Jean Jaurès (1901-1904).
A second school, to which most academics are closely or remotely attached, sees the Revolution as a mechanism, a social phenomenon. This positivist, sociological interpretation inspired classic Marxist historians from Georges Lefebvre to Albert Soboul (and later Michel Vovelle), but also historians of socialist (Blanc), radical (Mathiez), radical-socialist (Aulard), Jacobin- republican (Reinhard, Godechot), liberal-conservative (Mignet, Thiers, Guizot, Tocqueville) and nationalist-republican (Edgar Quinet) alliance.
One of the main representatives of this interpretation, Hippolyte Taine, who published from 1875 to 1894 Les origines de la France contemporaine, saw the Revolution as a process of degeneration and dissolution. His thesis was then systematized by Augustin Cochin (La Mécanique de la Révolution, 1926) who gave a remarkable description of the fundamental role of the Societies of thought (Sociétés de pensée) in the genesis and development of the Revolution. His teaching would later be taken up in terms of the reconstruction of facts and events, by Pierre Gaxotte in his Révolution française (1928).
Finally, a third school, that of the "traditionalist" or "counter-revolutionary" current (Edmund Burke, Joseph de Maistre, Louis de Bonald) considered the Terror as the fruit of the principles of 1789 and, more generally, that revolutionary logic inevitably leads to terror. One part of this approach, the supporters of a conspiracy theory, refers primarily to the works of the Jesuits Augustin Barruel and Nicolas Deschamps, or to those of Crétineau-Joly and Monseigneur Delassus. According to them, the French Revolution was the fruit of a triple conspiracy hatched by Jansenism, Masonry and other sects such as the Illuminati of Bavaria. This conspiracy theory has been the subject of fierce criticism from pro-revolutionary historiography, deeming it fanciful and untrustworthy. However, it received an unexpected reinforcement from Marxist or socialist historians, like Albert Mathiez, and Freemasons, like Albert Lantoine and Louis Blanc, who, without using the term "conspiracy," insisted heavily on the "project" and on the "plan" of the Jacobin group and of the Masons, which could not be fully realized, solely because of the lack of maturity of the masses and their ignorance.
The proponents of this third school of thought point out that for the most conscious protagonists of the Revolution, the revolutionary movement was imagined and executed against Christianity, against the Church and in the last analysis against God. This is the thesis set out in the works of Louis Daménie, La Révolution (1970), and Jean Dumont, La Révolution française, ou, Les prodiges du sacrilège (1984), for whom the Revolution was persecuting and oppressive of the Church and the people, of God, because it was anti-Christian, capitalist and bourgeois.
Since the 19th century the various currents dominating French political life have not ceased to oppose and tear each other apart on the subject. On the right, for the Orleanists, the Bonapartists and soon the nationalists, 1789 is sacred, 1793 is hated. For legitimists and traditionalists, the distinction is not appropriate: 1789 announces 1793. With them, Maurras's Action Française placed a heavy responsibility on an Old regime that had been contaminated for too long. On the left, they chose 1793. The left said, "No" to so-called human rights that it stigmatizes as individual, formal and bourgeois rights. The fascists of the 20th century followed suit. Drieu la Rochelle explained that Hitlerites and Mussolinians wanted to break with the legacy of 1789, which was liberal, but not with that of 1793, which was Jacobin and totalitarian.
For more than a century and a half, the battles of the Revolution, like its internal struggles, were an inexhaustible fuel for the political battles and ideological quarrels of the time. Under Louis Philippe (1830-1848), after the adventures of the Revolution and the Empire, French liberalism drew lessons from the double experience. It refocused on the right. The golden mean, eclecticism, compromise, seeking the middle ground were now the watchwords. A moderate historiography was forged by Thiers (Histoire de la Révolution, 1827) and Lamartine (Histoire des Girondins, 1847). But gradually the official discourse was radicalized on the left.
At the turn of the 20th century, outside of the usual minority, the "Revolution" was taboo. Its protests were sometimes seen as unpleasant, but it was also seen as the necessary step in achieving universal equality, freedom and prosperity. The basis of the consensus rested on a few words: "Let us forget, and do not question what is achieved."
The first specialized chair in the history of the Revolution was created at the Sorbonne in 1866, on the initiative of the Council of Paris. It was occupied by Alphonse Aulard. The act was clearly political. Aulard until then taught only literature and philology. On the other hand, he was an ardent republican, appreciated by the authorities and by Clemenceau. Radical and aggressive, he was soon overtaken on his leftism by his pupil and rival, Albert Mathiez. The master was radical and anticlerical, the disciple was radical-socialist and Robespierrist. The two antagonists imposed their truth on the Sorbonney.
Allied to communism in 1917, Mathiez presented himself and imposed himself for succession to Aulard in 1926. To his posterity belonged primarily Georges Lefebvre, Albert Soboul, Michel Vovelle and Claude Mazauric – and later, in the 2000s, the pure Jacobins, Jean-Pierre Jessenne and Michel Briard. All were or had been militants, sympathizers or "fellow travelers" of the Communist Party. They reigned almost unchallenged over the French University for more than forty years. "The Revolution," historian Pierre Chaunu would say, "was the privileged place of ideological manipulation padlocked by a Sorbonicole nomenklatura from Mathiez to Soboul… Masters who knew the way, ensured the scholastic self-functioning in a vacuum closed by the monopoly of recruitment." They have thus built "one of the most beautiful monuments of institutionalized stupidity" (Le Figaro, December 17, 1984).
After the Second World War, the ideological and cultural hegemony of Marxism oriented and directed official historiography. In the 1960s, Albert Soboul still appeared as "the great specialist whose work is essential." Intellectual terrorism marginalized or condemned to silence the independent, non-conformist researcher. The revolutionary catechism mechanically identified revolutionaries with the capitalist bourgeoisie.
This catechism made 1789 the first step in a process of which 1917 and the Russian Revolution was the final step. This thereby legitimized the Jacobin=Bolshevik equation.
But times and fashions change. The 1970s and the beginning of the 1980s were marked by a major break. English-speaking historians, little suspecting of espousing the quarrels of French academics, were the first to open the breach. Let us take two titles among others. The first, The Debate on the French Revolution, 1789–1800 by Alfred Cobban, was published in 1950 and translated into French in 1984, after the author's death. This incisive book helped shake the commonplaces and conventionalisms of the Marxist vulgate, destroying the simplistic thesis of a bourgeois and capitalist revolution which would have replaced an old feudal regime.
Not everything is memorable in Cobban's work. Thus, he is wrong when he insists on the population explosion. Pierre Chaunu demonstrated, with Jacques Dupâquier and Jean-Pierre Bardet, that France was the country in Europe where the population had increased the least (from 22 to 28 million in a century), and whose demographic dynamism was broken, everywhere, twenty years before 1789. But we must nevertheless salute in Cobban the first truly operative iconoclastic approach.
A second English, quite remarkable, should be cited – The French Revolution and the Poor by Alan Forrest, 1981 (translated into French in 1986), in which the author masterfully dismantles the mechanism of the evils of revolutionary ideology, the deadly refusal of realities on the part of revolutionary leaders.
François Furet and Denis Richet took up where these two English-world authors left off. In La Révolution française (1965), they tackled the already old thesis of the slippage from a first liberal revolution of the elites to a second Jacobin revolution. From a position that was still on the left, since they refused to take the plunge and to think that 1793 could have been contained to a certain extent in 1789; or, in other words, they refuse to think that the logic of the revolution carried massacre, extermination and genocide within it. Nevertheless, they did undermine Marxist dogmas.
A former communist (1947-1959), François Furet did not yet distinguish clearly enough between Jacobin liberalism (Latin, essentially egalitarian), from English liberalism (essentially elitist or even aristocratic). But in 1978, in Penser la Révolution, he rehabilitated the forgotten and proscribed analyses of Tocqueville, of Taine, even of Augustin Cochin. Notably absent in his book is Edmund Burke, the brilliant Irishman who differentiated 1793 from 1790. Furet's work was later continued by Patrice Gueniffey (see, La politique de la Terreur: essai sur la violence révolutionnaire, 1789-1794). But it may also be useful to recall the words that Pierre Chaunu confided to me: "When Furet and I discuss in private the origins, causes and consequences of the Revolution, know that we are 90% in agreement."
An important point must be stressed – the reflection initiated by French academic historians on revolutionary terror comes at the very moment when Marxist ideology is experiencing its first major cultural setbacks. At the top of the state (François Mitterrand was then president), reactions were quick to come. Max Gallo, spokesman for the socialist government, was sounding the alarm bells.
Gallo, historian, novelist and essayist, a former Communist who joined the PS in 1981, then reacted as the guardian of the temple. He left the Socialist Party and supported Sarkozy's UMP in 2007, but in the 1980s, he was at the forefront of the political and cultural struggle of the Mitterrandist left. Censoring the new Muscadins in an Open Letter to Maximilien Robespierre, he churned out articles and virulent statements against them in the media. The politically condemned academics were accused of nothing less than Vichyism, even Nazi nostalgia. They were "guilty," he said, of spreading a "right-wing" vision of the Great Revolution. Behind him were the ex-fellow travelers of the communist organizers, responsible for more than 100 million deaths around the world. All shamelessly set themselves up as masters of republican morality. Ridicule is not fatal!
It did not matter to Gallo and his political friends at the time that non-university historians, such as Jean-François Chiappe or Jean Dumont, published anti-revolutionary works. What was unbearable and unacceptable to them was "the betrayal of the University."
One of the main targets of the socialist authorities was Pierre Chaunu, professor at the Sorbonne, member of the Institut de France (of the l'Académie des sciences morales et politiques). The prestige of this Protestant historian was considerable. Renowned Hispanist (author with his wife Huguette Chaunu of Séville et l'Atlantique, 1504-1650, in 11 volumes), specialist in classical European civilization (La civilisation de l'Europe classique), and enlightenment civilization in Europe (La civilisation de l'Europe des Lumières), founder of "quantitative history," he was one of the outstanding figures of French academia.
But Pierre Chaunu was not the only intellectual blacklisted. There was no shortage of targets for government hostility. In the disorder let us mention Frédéric Bluche for Septembre 1792: Logiques d'un massacre; Jean Baechler, for his Preface to the reissue of L'esprit du jacobinisme by A. Cochin; Jean-Joël Brégeon for Carrier et la terreur nantaise, and co-editor with Sécher of La Guerre de Vendée and the depopulation system of Gracchus Baboeuf; and finally, Reynald Sécher for La Vendée-vengé. Le génocide franco-français ,and Du génocide au mémoricide, supplemented in 2017 by the work of Jacques Villemain, Vendée 1793-1794. The latter cited documents that leave no room for doubt – the Committee of Public Safety wanted to exterminate the entire Vendée population.
The genocide thesis was supported by Reynald Sécher first in 1986 and 25 years later in Du génocide au mémoricide. The Robespierrist point of view, denying the genocide, is still developed in particular by Jean-Clément Martin. The losses are estimated at a minimum of 100,000 souls from a total population of 800,000 inhabitants.
To this incomplete list of "reprobate authors," we must add the names of Jean Tulard, co-author of Histoire et dictionnaire de la Révolution française and responsible for the university edition of La Révolution française by Pierre Gaxotte; Émile Poulat for Liberté, laïcité: la guerre des deux France et le principe de la modernité; Stéphane Rials for Révolution et contre-révolution au XIXème siècle; Florin Aftalion for L'Économie et la Révolution française; Jean-François Fayard for La Justice révolutionnaire; René Sédillot for Le coût de la Révolution; François Crouzet for De la supériorité de l'Angleterre sur la France; Jean de Viguerie for Christianisme et révolution and Histoire du citoyen; Xavier Martin for Naissance du sous-homme au cœur des Lumières and Régénérer l'espèce humaine; and finally a whole host of young academics who, at the turn of the 21st century, are at the dawn of their careers. Among them Philippe Pichot Bravard, author of a quite remarkable overview, La Révolution française (2014), has to be mentioned.
Clearly, the death of Lenin-Soviet eschatology has done immense damage to the Marxist and crypto-Marxist historiography of the French Revolution. The simplistic idea, popularized by vulgar Marxism, that the French Revolution is a bourgeois revolution which destroyed feudalism and replaced it with a new, essentially capitalist regime, is totally questioned. The objections are significant.
Professor Emmanuel Leroy Ladurie, himself a former Communist, sums them up in these terms: "The first is that the bourgeoisie which made the revolution is not a capitalist class of financiers, traders or industrialists, who were then 'apolitical' or 'aristocrats.'" The bourgeoisie was thus juridical; it was composed of officers, civil servants, lawyers, doctors, intellectuals, whose role and action could not consist in giving birth to an industrial revolution. Second objection, the example of England shows that in a rural society, like 18th century France, the evolution towards agricultural capitalism passed through the great seigniorial domain. On the contrary, the Revolution tended towards the fragmentation of farms and further retarded their technological progress. Finally, the third objection, "it put a definite halt to big capitalism, that is to say, colonial capitalism, foreign trade and big industries." Foreign trade did not regain its high level of 1789 until 1825. The Revolution "represented in a sense the triumph of the landed strata of society, conservatives, large and small, including many former nobles… a landed bourgeoisie… and finally small peasant owners" (Le Figaro, December 17, 1984).
The revolutionary explosion of the summer of 1789 appears to be the culmination of the contradictions of the Ancien Régime, which was unable to reform in time. At the origin of the Revolution there was the financial crisis – the debt had become too heavy a burden for the finances of the kingdom. The expenses of the American War were too great. After forty years of economic expansion and prosperity, the situation deteriorated in the 1780s. A succession of bad harvests, the great drought of 1785, and a particularly harsh winter increased the difficulties.
At the same time, an "aristocratic reaction" from the traditional nobility and the nobility of the robe challenged absolute monarchy and demanded parliamentary control, which would allow it to better retain its privileges and prerogatives in the face of the rise of a bourgeoisie that desired its share of power. To this can be added the evolution of ideas, the social critiques of Jean-Jacques Rousseau and the encyclopedists, the determining role of "Sociétés de pensée." Finally, we must also take into account the errors of Louis XVI, who was undoubtedly a good man, but who was not on top of things.
Scientific history has shown that the Revolution ruined France; that it broke its economic momentum; and that it downgraded it. This is the conclusion of the most serious studies. Le livre noir de la Révolution française, published in 2008, leaves little room for doubt. But while academic research has shed all kinds of light on the horrific gray areas of the French Revolution, its results still needed to be accessible to the general public. Pierre Chaunu achieved this objective, thanks to a comprehensive, rigorous and attractive work, Le grand déclassement (1989), about which it is appropriate to say a few words.
Republican, Protestant and Gaullist, hardly suspected of sympathy for the "complex of counterrevolutionary sensibilities," Pierre Chaunu (1923-2009) has undermined the sacrosanct myth of the two revolutions, one liberal, the other authoritarian, centralizing, liberticide – striking head-on one of the pillars of official historiography. And he got it right.
Let us sum up his argument. In 1789, France was roughly fifth in size, in Europe; but in power, it commanded nearly a third of available resources. Overall, she was pretty much the first. An example – the literacy rate was higher in England, Scotland and a few provinces of Prussia, but France had many more literate people than England, Scotland, Prussia and practically as many as the rest of Europe. Between 1710 and 1780, the number of those who reached the stage of independent reading and fluent writing tripled and quadrupled. After the great ebb that the Revolution brought about in this area, in which progress did not resume until 1830.
In 1789, France had at least 28 million inhabitants. Its population growth rate of 0.5% per year was one of the lowest, if not the lowest, in Europe. 16% of the population was urban. The distribution of the population was relatively more equitable than in the rest of Europe. Two million households owned 40% of the land (with some 5% of communal property). The rest of the land belonged to the nobility (25%). Finally, 10% was Church property, and 25% bourgeois property. The Third Estate therefore owned 65% of the land and the so-called "clergy" were, in large part, social assets, that supplied schools and hospitals. Peasant property was encumbered with seigneurial rights, but they were more irritating and vexatious than limiting. Common land was more expensive on average than noble land.
Overall, seigneurial rights were less heavy in France than anywhere else on the continent, except in England. Nowhere else was peasant ownership so widespread.
England broke the record in the West for the concentration of land in a few hands. But in France, the Revolution would not change anything. Since taxes were generally heavier afterwards, the levy on the peasant mass was roughly the same in 1815 as in 1789. Social upheavals affected only one tenth of the population at most. The Revolution only distributed a tenth or a fifth in value of a good part of the land, and therefore brought wealth and prestige to just a minority of its apparatchiks and associates. It was all really restricted to a few permutations at the top.
In 1758, the tax burden per capita was double in England, being around 190 in 1789, while France was at 100. At equal wealth, from the second half of the 18th century, the English paid at least one and a half times as much as the French. France, a tax haven, would nevertheless engage in a rotating strike. Almost 15% of the GNP and 3.5% of the population were in the service of the state. The King of France had 10 times fewer men on hand to control his capital than the King of Prussia, or the British Parliament.
The entire 18th century was driven by the halt that the Parliaments, recklessly reestablished in their prerogatives by Louis XVI, brought to the ministerial reform initiative. Here was the drama of the monarchy. From 1774 to 1789, the Parliaments, where only the privileged strata of society were to be found, were the winners across the board. The Ancien Régime was paralyzed by the encroachment of the law. Parliaments do not represent society, either in their composition or in their thoughts. The court was never less costly, yet its usefulness never less evident. The system was jammed, unable to match its resources to its needs; it was considered tyrannical when it was only powerless.
In 1789, most French people were Catholics and most were devout – 97 to 98% of the French people believed in God, more than 80% were attached to their Church. On the intellectual and moral quality of the clergy and on their generosity, which redistributed a good half to the poor and a share to hospital and school assistance, there was no real criticism, no bad marks. Better, the almost unanimous claim of the register of grievances is that the priests, who were well-loved and whose worth was widely felt, should be give more.
Finally, no one died had of hunger since 1709. It was not until 1794-1795 and run-away inflation that the specter of famine loomed again and that people died from it as before. In the 1780s, faced with a population growing at a rate of 0.5% annually (a growth rate lower than the English rate), production increased at a rate of 1.9%.
Paradoxically, in general, it is prosperity, not misery, that carries the risk of revolution. French society remained sufficiently open. France lived, changed, evolved. The state was jammed, motionless, paralyzed. Between the two, tensions continued to grow.
The Revolution began with a plunder, the easiest – that of the property of the Church. Monastic France was soon sold. The finest jewels of Romanesque and Gothic art were broken. They were removed, disassembled, sawed apart, broken, looted. The artistic rampage was immense. No modern war has destroyed so much wealth.
The Revolution was not the mass phenomenon that they want us to believe. There were 50,000 Parisian sans-culottes, 80,000 profiteers of national property and 200,000 onlookers. The number of angry, hateful and guillotinous dechristianizers hardly exceeded 40,000. But you only win and lose if you convince the small active number.
When, on July 12, 1790, the civil constitution of the clergy was adopted, only 4 bishops out of 136 agreed to swear to the constitution. 44% (40% after withdrawals) of the clergy swore. This is not much, because not to swear meant the loss of employment, of all resources, misery, the threat to freedom and life, banishment from the community. Since dozens of episcopal seats had to be filled all at once, Talleyrand, "a pile of shit in a woolen stocking" as Napoleon called, devoted himself to the task. He was the only one of four bishops who accepted to carry out coronations. All those poor jurat priests, some of whom claimed to have rediscovered the simplicity and rigor of the primitive Church, would know by the end of the winter of 1791 what the words of the constituent deputies were worth – a reprieve for the guillotine.
Thanks to the assignat, famine and the ruin of the economy, people died as much and more than from the guillotine during the winter of 1794-1795. The famous paper money assignat was criminal folly. To pay off its promises, fuel its fantasies and finance the war of aggression against a peaceful Europe, the Revolution had only one means – inflation, the most unjust tax.
The mortal sin of the Revolution was, after religious persecution, gratuitous war. The war allowed murder to be legalized, any internal opponent being equated with foreign enemies.
For the period 1792 to 1797, losses amounted to at least 500,000 men. Disease killed more than bullets (3 to 4 times more). If we add the civilian losses, men, women, children (mainly in Vendée), the losses of the revolutionary period came to cost nearly 1 million human lives. The Empire would add a second million to the first. In total, 4.5 to 5 million dead, in a Europe of less than 150 million souls. The responsibility, all the responsibility for the outbreak of war rests with the revolutionary power. It deliberately chose war; it provoked, attacked, invaded.
The war broke France's growth; it slowed it down everywhere else, even in Great Britain, but in which case the slowdown only affected consumption. In the France-England equality ratio, we go to a gap of 10 to 6. France had, per capita, caught up with England in 1789; it was in the ratio of 100 to 60-65 in 1799. Ten years of assignats and the great massacres definitively downgraded France. The gap would no longer be made up.
Let Pierre Chaunu conclude in a concise manner: "While all the work of history released from the myth establishes that the chaotic process which created the revolutionary vortex was the effect of chance – September (1792), Fouquier Tinville (public accuser of the Revolutionary Tribunal), ruin by the assignat, and the war, the destruction of the artistic, moral and religious cultural heritage, the depopulation and the devastation of the demographic impetus, the genocide-populicide of the Vendée and the populicides of Lyon, Toulon and elsewhere – all this follows implacably from the most implacable revolutionary logic. Once the Revolution is born, it kills. Death is its profession, annihilation its end."
Product of chance, execution of a deliberate project, direct or indirect consequence of one or more social factors, the debate on the interpretation of the Revolution is not about to end. But one point is clear – for rigorous and serious history, the Revolution led France to a terrible moral, social, economic and political collapse.
Arnaud Imatz, a Basque-French political scientist and historian, holds a State Doctorate (DrE) in political science and is a correspondent-member of the Royal Academy of History (Spain), and a former international civil servant at OECD. He is a specialist in the Spanish Civil War, European populism, and the political struggles of the Right and the Left – all subjects on which he has written several books. He has also published numerous articles on the political thought of the founder and theoretician of the Falange, José Antonio Primo de Rivera, as well as the Liberal philosopher, José Ortega y Gasset, and the Catholic traditionalist, Juan Donoso Cortés.
The image shows, "The Zenith of French Glory: The Pinnacle of Liberty. Religion, Justice, Loyalty & all the Bugbears of Unenlightend Minds, Farewell!". A satire of the radicalism of the French Revolution. A picture by James Gillray. February 1793.
Translated from the French by N. Dass.
This entry was posted in Europe, Features, History, Politics, The West and tagged Civilization, France. Bookmark the permalink.


text:
Efecto secundario puede referirse a:
 En medicina, un Efecto secundario, es una reacción adversa a un tratamiento en particular.
 En farmacología una Efecto secundario (farmacología);
 En informática, a un efecto secundario, o cambio de estado causado por un llamado a una función;

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
Tschen ist der Familienname folgender Personen:
 Iolanda Jewgenjewna Tschen (* 1961), russische Dreispringerin
 Oleg Borissowitsch Tschen (* 1988), russischer Gewichtheber

Siehe auch:
 Chen


text:
Q: Objective C:Cant understand the logic of looping I am new to Objective C. Currently, I am trying out some examples in Objective C. I am not getting the correct output. I could not understand the logic behind the correct output which I have included here.
main.m
#import <Foundation/Foundation.h>
#import "BudObj.h"
#import "Transaction.h"

int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {

        Budget* europeBudget=[Budget new];
        NSMutableArray *transactions=[[NSMutableArray alloc] initWithCapacity:10];

        [europeBudget createBudget:1000.00 withExchangeRate:1.2500];

        Transaction* aTransaction;
        aTransaction = [Transaction new];
        for(int n=1;n<2;n++){

                [aTransaction createTransaction:n*100 ofType:credit];
                [transactions addObject:aTransaction];

        }

        int n=1;
        while (n<3) {

                [aTransaction createTransaction:n*100 ofType:cash];
                [transactions addObject:aTransaction];
                n++;
        }

        do{
                [aTransaction createTransaction:n*100 ofType:credit];
                [transactions addObject:aTransaction];
                n++;
        }while (n<=3);

        for(Transaction *aaTransaction in transactions){
         switch ([aTransaction returnType]) {
                case cash:
                    [europeBudget spendDollars:[aaTransaction returnAmount]];
                    break;
                case credit:
                    [europeBudget changeForeignCurrency:[aaTransaction returnAmount]];
                    break;
                default:
                    break;
         }
        }

        return 0;
}

BudObj.m
#import <Foundation/Foundation.h>
#import "BudObj.h"
#import "Transaction.h"

@implementation Budget

- (void) createBudget: (double) aBudget withExchangeRate: (float) anExchangeRate{
        budget = aBudget;
        exchangeRate = anExchangeRate;
}

- (void) spendDollars:(double)dollars{
    budget = budget - dollars;
        NSLog(@"Converting %0.2f US Dollars into Foreign Currency leaves $%0.2f",dollars,budget);
}

- (void) changeForeignCurrency:(double)foreignCurrency{
    exchangeTransaction = foreignCurrency * exchangeRate;
        budget = budget - exchangeTransaction;
        NSLog(@"Charging %0.2f in Foreign Currency leaves $%0.2f",foreignCurrency,budget);
}

@end

BudObj.h
#import <Foundation/Foundation.h>

@interface
Budget : NSObject {

        float  exchangeRate;
        double budget;
        double exchangeTransaction;

}

- (void) createBudget: (double) aBudget withExchangeRate: (float) anExchangeRate;
- (void) spendDollars: (double) dollars;
- (void) changeForeignCurrency: (double) foreignCurrency;

@end

Transaction.h
#import <Cocoa/Cocoa.h>

typedef enum{cash,credit} transactionType;

@interface Transaction : NSObject {

        transactionType type;
        double amount;

}

-(void)createTransaction:(double)theAmount ofType:(transactionType)theType;
-(double)returnAmount;
-(transactionType)returnType;

@end

Transaction.m
#import "Transaction.h"

@implementation Transaction

-(void)createTransaction:(double)theAmount ofType:(transactionType)theType{

        type=theType;
        amount=theAmount;

}

-(double)returnAmount{

        return amount;

}

-(transactionType)returnType{

        return type;

}

@end

OUTPUT:
2011-04-10 17:31:28.717 BudObj.m[3751:a0f] Charging 300.00 in Foreign Currency leaves $625.00
2011-04-10 17:31:28.719 BudObj.m[3751:a0f] Charging 300.00 in Foreign Currency leaves $250.00
2011-04-10 17:31:28.720 BudObj.m[3751:a0f] Charging 300.00 in Foreign Currency leaves $-125.00
2011-04-10 17:31:28.720 BudObj.m[3751:a0f] Charging 300.00 in Foreign Currency leaves $-500.00

But the expected output is
Converting 100.00 US dollars into foreign currency leaves $900.00
Charging 100.00 in foreign currency leaves $775.00
Charging 200.00 in foreign currency leaves $525.00
Charging 300.00 in foreign currency leaves $150.00
Converting 100.00 US dollars into foreign currency leaves $1900.00
Charging 100.00 in foreign currency leaves $1750.00

A: Your ultimate problem is you are using the same transaction object. You set aTransaction once on this line and never set it anywhere else. I do see from your comments it was once right though.
Transaction* aTransaction;
aTransaction = [Transaction new];

When you add the the transaction to the array all of them point to the same object and what ever change you make to what you are thinking is 1 aTransaction is really changing them all. So when it comes time to print you have multiple references to the same transaction all of type credit and you keep sending the same return amount.
Also remember that indexes are usually 0 based and int n = 1; may not get you the correct number elements you are looking for.
To achieve your expected output with as close to your orignal code as I can try this. (may need some tweaking)
#import <Foundation/Foundation.h>
#import "BudObj.h"
#import "Transaction.h"

int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {
        Budget* europeBudget=[[Budget alloc] init];

        [europeBudget createBudget:1000.00 withExchangeRate:1.2500];

        Transaction* aTransaction;
        for(int n=1;n<2;n++){

                aTransaction = [[Transaction alloc] init];
                [aTransaction createTransaction:n*100 ofType:cash];
                [transactions addObject:aTransaction];
                [aTransaction release];
        }

        int n=0;
        while (n<3) {
                aTransaction = [[Transaction alloc] init];
                [aTransaction createTransaction:n*100 ofType:credit];
                [transactions addObject:aTransaction];
                [aTransaction release];
                n++;
        }
        //n = 3 at this point
        do{
                aTransaction = [[Transaction alloc] init];
                [aTransaction createTransaction:n*100 ofType:cash];
                [transactions addObject:aTransaction];
                [aTransaction release];
                n++;
        }while (n<=3);

        //n = 4 at this point
        aTransaction = [[Transaction alloc] init];
        [aTransaction createTransaction:n*100 ofType:credit];
        [transactions addObject:aTransaction];
        [aTransaction release];

        for(Transaction *aaTransaction in transactions){
         switch ([aTransaction returnType]) {
                case cash:
                        [europeBudget spendDollars:[aaTransaction returnAmount]];
                        break;
                case credit:
                        [europeBudget changeForeignCurrency:[aaTransaction returnAmount]];
                        break;
                default:
                        break;
         }
        }
        [transactions release];
        [europeBudget release];
        return 0;
}

Now I did not check that your dollar amounts are correct but this should print out the correct order of Converting/Charging. I also didn't assume there was Garbage Collection so I just added all the releases.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


Usually characterized by WWE, professional wrestlers are dedicated athletes that thrive on discipline to survive. Professional wrestling demands a bit of entertainment, sure, but it also requires a physically fit body to "fall" an opponent. Professional wrestlers aren't just born, and they are made.
You should improve your body by exercising intensely. Be careful about what you eat and drink, and stick to an exercise program. You need to look strong and actually be one. You shouldn't look like a stick that could be blown away by a strong wind. However, don't work out too much. Listen to your body and stop when you're in pain or feeling nauseated. You can even be unique when working out. You could do some woodworking as a way of exercise. Weird as it may sound, working with a table saw could definitely improve your body.
Step 2: Train in a wrestling school.
Enroll yourself in wrestling school to help you learn all the things you need to know from the jargon/terms and rules down to the skills. Remember that weightlifting isn't the same with professional wrestling, so just because you can lift heavy weights doesn't mean you can be a wrestler right away. They are two different things. Going to wrestling school will clear that.
Step 3: Stick to a healthful diet.
Watch what you eat. Consume a diet rich in protein. Eat different kinds of fruits and vegetables. Avoid food and drinks that are high in fat and sugar. Professional wrestlers are disciplined especially when it comes to food, and you have to remember that.
Step 4: Read. Read. Read.
Purchase or borrow books about how to become a professional wrestler. Apply what you've learned during training. Reading won't make you less masculine. In fact, the more you learn about professional wrestling, the higher your chances of exiting the ring as a winner. It's just like a beginner handyman trying to improve his skills by studying the do's and don'ts related to his/her job.
If you're just starting out as a carpenter or handyman, you will first try your luck with small stuff, won't you? After all, you have to be reliable with the small repairs before you can be entrusted with bigger and more demanding projects. The same can be applied for beginner wrestlers. Begin your career in a local league. Get some experience first before going to the major ones. Sure, you won't get paid much, but it'll improve your skills. Don't worry about making huge money immediately. Your time will come. Just keep improving and gradually make your way to the top. And remember to stay humble no matter how far you've come.
Anyone who has ever had any success in keeping fit will understand the role of a good diet plays in achieving it. Planning to eat healthily, however, is often easier said than done. For some people, preparing nutritious meals can be a real challenge while others are not so keen on eating what may seem like more boring meals. If improving your diet may seem like a daunting goal, you will be happy to find that eating right is something you can do and enjoy at the same time. Whether you are looking for a pizza sushi recipe or something you can prepare for a post-workout meal, here are some of the best fitness and healthy food cookbooks to help you find what you need. 1. Cook Japan, Stay Slim, Live Longer by Reiko Hashimoto Japanese cuisine is widely considered as one of the healthiest in the world. This cookbook by Hashi cookery school founder Reiko Hashimoto an extensive selection of recipes to help you prepare delectable and healthy Japanese meals. 2. Feed Zone Portables: A Cookbook of On-the-Go Food for Athletes by Allen Lim and Biju Thomas Feed Zone Portables provides you with meal or snack ideas and recipes to help you maintain a healthy diet even you are always on the go. 3. Good Food Eat Well: Healthy Diet Plans by Good Food Planning meals for a healthy diet does not have to be a chore. And with some help from this cookbook, you can enjoy tasty and nutritious eats every day so you do not have to help you stay on track with your fitness goals.