text:
Malaysia's Mahathir Mohamad. Photo Credit: US State Dept, Wikipedia Commons.
1 Social Issues World News
Malaysia PM's Call For Rohingya Citizenship Or Separate State Rankles Myanmar
August 5, 2019 August 5, 2019 BenarNews 0 Comments
By BenarNews
The Myanmar government on Friday denounced Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad over comments he made suggesting the creation of a separate state for the country's persecuted Rohingya Muslims, calling it a violation of ASEAN's non-interference principle.
In an interview with Turkey's Anadolu Agency on July 26, Mahathir said Myanmar's Rohingya had faced a genocide during a brutal military-led crackdown in Rakhine state in 2017, and that those who fled their homeland should be granted the right to citizenship or given a self-governing territory.
Thousands of Rohingya were killed during the scorched-earth campaign, while some 750,000 others led to safety across the border to Bangladesh, where they now live in crowded, unsafe camps.
Mahathir's suggestion did not help the situation, said Myanmar government spokesman Zaw Htay during a news conference held by the president's office in the capital Naypyidaw.
"What the Malaysian prime minister had said is not in line with ASEAN's non-interference policy as well as with basic principles in the ASEAN Charter," he said, referring to the constituent instrument of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, a regional intergovernmental organization comprising 10 countries in Southeast Asia.
"Myanmar and ASEAN are working together on many issues in Rakhine state and what he said did not help, but instead weakened our cooperation," he said.
Zaw Htay also said that the comment could affect cooperation between the Myanmar and Bangladeshi governments on a refugee repatriation program they both agreed to in November 2017. The returns have yet to get underway because almost none of the Rohingya has expressed a willingness to cross back into Myanmar under current conditions.
"Myanmar cannot accept this kind of [interference] in other nation's internal affairs," the spokesman said.
Myint Thu address ambassador
Myint Thu, permanent secretary of Myanmar's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, summoned Malaysia's ambassador on Wednesday to express his dismay and the government's objections to Mahathir's comments.
Besides lambasting the diplomat for going against ASEAN's cardinal principle of non-interference in the internal affairs and respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the organization's member states, Myint Thu informed him that Myanmar categorically rejects allegations of genocide, the official Myanmar News Agency reported.
The exchange came just days after Myint Thu led a high-level Myanmar delegation that included representatives from ASEAN on an official visit to Bangladesh's Cox's Bazar region to meet with refugees from various camps to brief them on preparations for repatriation and inform them that full citizenship for the stateless minority was not an option.
It was the second time that Myanmar officials have visited the camps to try to convince the apprehensive Rohingya to begin the repatriation process.
About 1.2 million Rohingya refugees live in the sprawling camps in southeastern Bangladesh, some of whom fled there from previous violence in Myanmar.
The refugees have said they will not return to Myanmar unless they are granted full citizenship and given guarantees of safety in the country, which considers them illegal immigrants from Bangladesh, denies them citizenship, and subjects them to systematic discrimination.
'It can be done'
Malaysian officials voiced support for Mahathir's proposal.
Ahmad Fahmi Mohd Shamsudin, deputy president of the Muslim Youth Movement of Malaysia, a local NGO, said it would be possible to create a separate territory and citizenship for the Rohingya refugees.
"It can be done by putting pressure on and louder action by the international community, especially the ASEAN countries and communities, so this issue can be solved completely," he said in a statement to the Malay daily Sinar Harian.
The "human tragedy" that occurred in Rakhine state can only be resolved if the Myanmar government acknowledges the rights to citizenship for the Rohingya, Ahmad Fahmi said.
"The citizenship recognition will allow the ethnic group to get their rights and fair treatment based on the principle of humanity," he said. "The right to citizenship is important as it will allow the ethnic group to have access to the political system and also the socio-economy of the said government."
Syed Hamid Albar, former Malaysian foreign minister and former special envoy from the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) to Myanmar, also weighed in on the issue.
"We welcomed the statement by Dr. Mahathir that urges that the 1.2 million Rohingya refugee be given full citizenship in Myanmar, or be given their own territory to form a state," he tweeted.
"The call made by an ASEAN leader has to be fully supported to solve the ongoing crisis with humanity and justice," he wrote.
Syed Hamid went on to point out that Myanmar originally comprised many separate states, and that British colonial rule had forced various ethnic groups to become one nation.
"And now they should be treated as citizens or [have territory returned to them] to allow them to form a state," he tweeted.
'Myanmar's internal issue'
Bangladeshi officials took a different tack, however.
"Our prime minister has made it clear that Bangladesh does not support harming Myanmar's sovereignty. This is our official position," Bangladesh Information Minister Hasan Mahmud told BenarNews, an RFA-affiliated online news service, on Friday.
A foreign ministry who spoke on condition of anonymity because he had not been authorized to speak publicly on the issue said the country does not support giving the Rohingya a separate state.
"Rohingya are people from Myanmar," he said. "What Bangladesh only wants is the safe, voluntary, and sustainable return of all Rohingya who entered Bangladesh."
"It is Myanmar's internal issue whether they will grant citizenship to the Rohingya," the official added.
Reported by RFA, a BenarNews-affiliated online news service. Muzliza Mustafa and Ali Nufael in Kuala Lumpur and Kamran Reza Chowdhury in Dhaka also contributed to this report.
← Seabirds Threatened By Hazardous Chemicals In Plastics
Houthi Purge A Reflection Of Group's True Nature – OpEd →
BenarNews' mission is to provide readers with accurate news and information that reflects the complex and ever-changing world around them. With homepages in Bengali, Thai, Bahasa Malaysia, Bahasa Indonesia and English, BenarNews brings timely news to its diverse audience. Copyright BenarNews. Used with the permission of BenarNews


The regulation on a Common Market Organisation for fisheries and aquaculture products (CMO, Reg. EU 1379/2013) commits the Commission to submit a feasibility report on options for a union-wide ecolabel scheme for fishery and aquaculture products. The consultation contributed to this feasibility study.
The consultation was intended to assist the Commission to understand opinions on the impacts and issues associated with fisheries and aquaculture ecolabels (positive and negative) from different stakeholder groups.


The Everlux maritime product range is organized and displayed according to the appropriate IMO Resolution and/or applicable standards within our catalogue. Each product chapter provides a brief overview and introduction to the relevant type of signage system and its legal framework.
We firmly believe that this layout will help ship chandlers, ship suppliers, ship builders, owners and operators, and their safety officers and purchasing managers to easily understand the relevant technical details of the safety signage system's design and installation and to comply with current standards in order to provide a safe environment for their crews and passengers.


Welcome to Metal Detecting Gear Forum. You must Register to post (it's quick!). I added a form just below that's MUCH easier process than registering within the forum. If you want an email notice of a post reply you must click the "Subscribe to this topic" button. You should post within 24 hours of making an account or I will think you're spam.
What detector do you use? Where do you like to detect?
After clicking Register, check your email for confirmation. Then Login to Forum.
Leave website feedback here and I'll randomly draw a name to win a US Coin Red book 4 times a year!
We want this website to be a terrific reference for detectorists of all levels. Here's your chance to give feedback on how the site can be the best it can be. If you leave constructive feedback I'll enter your name in a random drawing every 3 months to win a US Coin Red Book or a similar coin guide for your country, if not in the USA. IMPORTANT: You must register to post (sorry, got spammed), so I'll have your email to alert you.
Posts with only "I like the site" or "Your site stinks" will not be considered. Please make your feedback longer and something I can consider and improve on.
In your latest video(#64?), you asked for feedback and told us about your website. I wanted to check out the site. I found it but adding a link when there is a suggested site, would be handy. Not, a major issue but it makes it more likely that someone will follow your suggestion. Thanks for your content. Just found you a few days ago and have found your content valuable and interesting.
Close, it's Damian. I will definitely give the link more. It's hard to get a forum going especially with most people going to Friendly or just posting on Facebook, but I wanted to provide a means to answer anyone's question who wanted to leave it. In the Gear section I try to keep adding new things detectorists might want (and yes we make a small commission off items bought from Amazon links, we can't afford to buy all the gear we review.) The Resource section is where the most updating goes, if there is a VDI chart or a spoon guide, I want to know about it and place it there, so if I missed a resource you know of please share it. Blog is where all my YouTube and sometimes just regular posts go. History section is a fun place to find out how we got here. If you see an error or omission let me know. And I sometimes get my best finds up on the Best Finds section, though to me every find is a great one.
Thanks for the post and I'll put you in the random drawing for the coin book soon!
Wow! This forum's new theme is GREAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Love it!! This is THE place for all things metal detecting!!!
What I have seen so far is interesting, but the forum is painfully slow. I have no problems with other forums (MD & fishing mostly).
It's good to hear you like it TQD!
Thanks, a fast forum is a good thing! I'm doing what I can to keep things fast. One deal is the forum can't be cached or messages won't show up for a while, and without cache on the forum, it slows some page loading. Clint I'm putting your name on the random giveaway.
Just came to the site. Lots of info. I am not that swift on a computer so I don't have much feed back for you.
Thanks for registering and posting TwoTracks. I'm always adding resources to the site and really welcome feedback on the experience. I hear you on the Deus. I went from an Ace 250 to an AT Pro and there were many times I was sure what I was doing. Andy's book and bootcamp really helped. Don't be tempted to copy other people's programs because you are probably not hunting in the same soil they are.
I recently took a look at Deus Fast, which is what many suggest to start with, and the settings are very decent. Just remember as you get on less trashy ground and want more depth.. dial back on reactivity, like 1 or 0, BUT remember any change to reactivity autochanges silencer, and too much of that effects depth. I was always putting silencer on -1 but Andy assured me 0 is ok too. It quiets the machine chatter a bit.
Hopefully V4 will sever the tie between reactivity and silencer so we can leave silencer on 0 as we move from trashy to non trashy ground. I'll add some detector-specific forums so we can yammer on about the Deus in more detail.
I like the site, there are a ton of resources. Thanks!!
Thanks for registering and comment matterny4!


"Respected Manmohan Singhji, I am writing this letter from Tihar Jail with the aim of saving innocent youths from getting trapped by unscrupulous security officials. My name is Irshad Ali, s/o Mohammad Yunus, incarcerated in ward no. 5 (high risk ward), cell no. 13 in jail no. 8 of Delhi's Tihar Jail.
"You have read my story in The Times of India dated 13 September, 2007 citing a CBI report confirming that IB and Special Cell of Delhi Police had framed us. But I doubt if the CBI will nail the actual culprits. I was working as an informer for the Special Cell of Delhi Police, which works closely with the IB. Having worked with them, I feel duty bound to apprise the Nation of how they manufacture terrorists. Have you ever noticed how quick our agencies are in nabbing the culprits even before they strike? But how is it that they still have not yet been able to lay their hands on any terrorist involved in the Mumbai and Delhi blasts?
"I have the answers. In order to keep their ranks and earn rewards the Special Cell creates terrorists. They have employed a number of youths on a very paltry remuneration. They are not regular employees, but vagabonds who are given mobile phones and protection. They are asked to fan out and hire accommodation somewhere in the city. They mingle with unemployed youth and befriend people. After identifying vulnerable targets, they form a group, arrange weapons and incite these youth to go for a robbery. Special Cell secretly also provides them a stolen vehicle, which is procured from known car thieves. These youths who repose all their trust in the Special Cell agent finally one day decide to go for an operation. On reaching the target, they are trapped in the net. The police are already there and they are all nabbed.
"Interestingly, the agent, who is also a mastermind, is never caught. Medals and bravery awards follow. The Intelligence Bureau (IB) feeds the government and media with concocted stories. Have you noticed that those killed in encounters are invariably found carrying details like their names, rank in the organisation etc in their pockets? They die without firing a bullet and even if they fire, it never hits the target.


text:
Fake Euthanasia Statistics
Posted on August 29, 2013 by Scott Alexander
I promised I'd write something clearing up statistics on euthanasia in the Netherlands, so let's start with Anne McTavish: The Netherlands' Euthanasia Stats Are Appalling. She writes:
I want to focus on the doctors and the rest of us who will be harmed if [a Canadian case on euthanasia] becomes law. We don't need to speculate. The Netherlands has already gone down this slippery slope and provided the grizzly statistics that should stop us going down the same path.
Now, I will be the last person to deny that there are indeed some grizzly statistics on euthanasia. For example, did you know the most recent grizzly to be euthanized in Yellowstone had twenty five instances of aggressive behavior before finally being caught? Or that a grizzly euthanized in Montana two months ago had killed eight sheep and injured two more? Or that a a grizzly euthanized last month in Fresno was 38 years old, the oldest living bear in an American zoo?
Yet McTavish inexplicably ignores this vast trove of useful information and chooses to focus on highly questionable medical data instead:
In 1990, 130,000 people died in the Netherlands: 2,300 people asked doctors to kill them; 400 asked doctors to provide them with the means to kill themselves; 8,100 died when doctors deliberately gave them an overdose of pain medication to kill them (for which 4,941 patients didn't consent); 1,040 people died when doctors euthanized them without their knowledge or consent (72 per cent of those never having given any indication they would want their lives terminated).
That's breathtaking in more than one way.
It's not so much that nine per cent died at the hands of doctors, which is alarming in and of itself. What should raise our cries of outrage is that 4,941 people (four per cent) did not give their consent to being killed. A doctor who operates on someone without their consent can be successfully sued and made to pay huge dollars for having done so. The same should apply for killing a person without their consent.
And it's the 1,040 people (one per cent) who were killed without their knowledge or consent and the 749 who never wanted to die early that should get us up in arms.
"In only 23 years, Dutch doctors have gone from being permitted to kill the terminally ill who ask for it, to killing the chronically ill who ask for it, to killing newborn babies in their cribs because they have birth defects, even though by definition they cannot ask for it. Dutch doctors also engage in involuntary euthanasia without significant legal consequence, even though such activity is officially prohibited," writes Wesley J. Smith in Forced Exit: The Slippery Slope from Assisted Suicide to Legalized Murder.
So here's where it gets confusing. The article doesn't cite its sources, but a quick Googling finds that all its numbers come from an article by the "Patients Rights Council", which does cite its source as the Remmelink Report, a huge report by the Dutch government in 1990.
The Remmelink Report is not on the Internet, and in any case it is in Dutch. However, an English language paper summarizing the results was published in the Lancet, and an English language digest of the report is on Google's cache.
The numbers in the digest and the Lancet article are somewhat different from the numbers in the article, and I was somewhat uncertain who to believe – the people who seem to have a much more complete copy of the report in the original Dutch, or my own lying eyes?
Luckily, some people who ought to know have weighed in to guide me. Some of the authors of the Remmelink Report, in a biting English-language article called "Dances With Data", complain about constant misrepresentations and lies about their research and request that "we can only hope that the truly interested reader will take the trouble of reading the Lancet article or the English version of the report itself, instead of relying on this faulty description."
So I'm going to take this as carte blanche to trust that the Lancet article and the English language digest of the report correctly capture the report's findings and to start criticizing these other articles based on that. So:
Both the McTavish/Patients' Rights articles and the Lancet version of the Remmelink Report agree that there were 2300 cases of active voluntary euthanasia and 400 of physician assisted suicide.
These are the cases we would classically treat as euthanasia. The report says that they were all done consensually, and in fact this is tautological as if they had not been done consensually they would have been classified as murder rather than euthanasia. Of these cases the report (but not the article) clarifies that:
We found that in the Netherlands over 25 000 patients per year seek assurance from their doctors that they will assist them if suffering becomes unbearable. Each year there are about 9000 explicit requests for euthanasia or assisted suicide, of which less than one-third are agreed to. In most cases alternatives are found that make life bearable again, and in some instances the patient dies before any action has to be taken.
In 96% of instances of euthanasia and assisted suicide the physicians stated that the request of the patient was explicit and persistent. (The finding that there always was a request of some sort is circular since such a request is at the core of the definition of euthanasia in the Netherlands.) In 94% the request had been made repeatedly; in 99% the physicians felt sure that the request had not been made under pressure from others; and in all cases they were convinced that the patient had sufficient insight and knowledge of the course of disease
Along with these cases, both report and article agree that there were about 1000 people who were killed by physicians without "a clear and explicit request from the patient". However, the article simply leaves it at that, whereas the report adds:
"In 59% of life terminating acts without explicit request the physician had some information about the patient's wish [eg the patient had previously asked to be euthanized if a situation like this one arose]; in 41% discussion on the decision would no longer have been possible. The physician (specialist or general practitioner) knew the patient on average 2.4 years and 7.2 years, respectively. Life was shortened by between some hours and a week at most in 86%. In 83% the decision has been discussed with relatives and in 70% with a colleague. In nearly all cases, according to the physician, the patient was suffering unbearably, there was no chance of improvement, and palliative possibilities were exhausted."
So baaasically, patients with only a few hours left to live who are in comas and have usually previously asked their physicians to euthanize them and whose family members have all said this is what the patient would have wanted and who have been evaluated by a bunch of doctors who say there's no way they're waking up – sometimes these people get mercy killed. It's unclear to me whether this was legal in the Netherlands at the time or not, but it's hard to call this grisly.
The articles and report then go into two more categories which are a little more worrying:
First, there are "22 500 cases where the patient had died after the administration of drugs to alleviate pain and symptoms in such dosages that the risk of shortening the patient's life was considerable. In 6 per cent of these cases life-termination was the primary goal and in the remainder it was the secondary goal. In about 40 per cent of these cases the decision to increase drug dosages and the possibility that this might hasten death had been discussed with the patient. In 73 per cent of the cases where these matters had not been discussed with the patient, the patient was incompetent." According to another Lancet paper, "In 85 percent of all such cases, the physician said that he or she had no intention of hastening death, but had taken into account the probability or certainty that death would occur. In 64 percent of cases the physician estimated that the patient's life had been shortened by less than 24 hours, and in 16 percent it was shortened by less than one week"
This situation is pretty common everywhere. The patient's clearly on her deathbed and in terrible pain. The physician says "We need to up the dose of morphine to keep her comfortable." The intern says "We can't up the dose of morphine! She's already close to the maximum dose of morphine my pharmacology book says is safe for her body weight!" The physician just glares, and says "What's the worst that could happen? She dies an hour from now instead of a day from now? That'd be a f@*king tragedy, wouldn't it? Just give her the damn morphine."
These numbers provide no evidence that any of the six to fifteen percent of cases in which life shortening was a significant goal overlap with the cases in which the patient was not asked for consent. Actually, they don't even provide any evidence that the patient died because of these drug doses, just after them (and it seems pretty reasonable that death comes after being given drugs for a rationale that includes a person being on their deathbed). I'm classifying this as "worrying" only because we can't prove from these numbers that there was no one who should have been asked for consent but wasn't.
The second of these two categories is withholding of treatment. The report says: "There were 22 500 cases where death had resulted from non-treatment decisions (ie withdrawal or withholding of medical treatment), representing 17.5 per cent of all deaths. In 30 per cent of these cases the non-treatment decision had been discussed with the patient. In 62 per cent of these cases it had not. In 88 per cent of all cases where the non-treatment decision had not been discussed with the patient, the patient was incompetent."
Here we can calculate that in about 7% of these cases, decision to withhold treatment was not discussed with a competent patient. However, the authors of this study have mentioned elsewhere that they include futile treatment in these numbers – ie treatment that wasn't working or was just making the patient worse. They also mention that these treatments included feeding tubes, ventilators, et cetera – so that this "withdrawal of treatment" is just what we would call "pulling the plug" in an American hospital. Once again, I include this statistic in the "worrying" category only because we can't prove from these numbers alone that non-futile treatment was never withdrawn without consent.
But here's the thing: giving near-death people dangerously high drug doses and withdrawing medical treatment without patient consent are not classified as euthanasia and are both completely legal here as well. In fact, the Remmelink Report says outright that "The Dutch data on medical practices which shortens life, in the cases of non-competent or of competent but not-consulted patients, are indeed a matter of concern… [but there] really is not a shred of evidence that the frequency of this sort of behaviour is higher in the Netherlands than, for example, in the United States; the only thing that is clear is that more is known about it in the Netherlands. In short, there is no reason to assume … a causal relationship between limited legalisation of euthanasia and 'lack of control' over other sorts of medical behaviour." These sorts of non-euthanasia incidents are where nearly all of the so-called "euthanized without consent" numbers are coming from – the article's claim of 4941 Dutchmen "euthanized without consent" is actually greater than the total number of Dutch people euthanized in the study.
So here are the differences between the statistics as presented in the grizzly article & its Patients' Rights inspiration, and the statistics as presented in the Remmelink Report:
The numbers themselves are pretty different.
The article classifies patients who asked to be euthanized if they ever had X happen to them – and then had X happen to them, and because of X were unable to explicitly consent to euthanasia at that moment – as "euthanized without consent".
The article classifies patients whose doctors gave them unusually high doses of drugs with the aim of providing relief for pain or symptoms but without the primary goal of ending their lives as "euthanized without consent".
The article classifies patients whose doctors withdrew treatment, including futile or invasive treatment, as "euthanized without consent"
The article classifies patients who were unable to consent, for example in terminal comas, but whose families said they would have wanted to be euthanized in such a situation – as "euthanized without consent".
The article classifies patients whose lives were shortened by only a few horrible hours as "euthanized without consent".
The article classifies several categories of actions that are not euthanasia and which are currently both legal in and widely practiced in the United States as "euthanized without consent".
And then – surprise, surprise – it finds that a lot of people are "euthanized" "without" "consent" in the Netherlands.
But we shouldn't have to take our statistics from second-hand misinterpretations of a twenty-five year old untraceable report anyway. Back in 1990 when the Remmelink Report was written, euthanasia was in fact still illegal in the Netherlands (though decriminalized). Since then, it has been fully legalized, resulting in the ability to collect much better data. Let's see what we can find.
One very simple statistic that doesn't even require any digging is the life expectancy in the Netherlands. At 80.2 years, this is 15th highest in the world. It's also higher than all the Netherlands' neighbors, including Germany (79.8), Belgium (79.8), and its cross-Channel neighbor the United Kingdom (79.5) – not to mention of course higher than the United States (78.0). Claims from some quarters (*cough* Rick Santorum *cough*) that the Dutch elderly are living in constant fear of being murdered are hard to square with the fact that the Dutch elderly live a good deal longer than our own.
But we can do much better than this. Four years ago, the original authors of the Remmelink Report as well as some new researchers teamed up to produce Two Decades of Research On Euthanasia From The Netherlands: What Have We Learnt And What Questions Remain?
This is important because euthanasia was in fact only legalized in the Netherlands in 2002, so if we want to see what a country with legal euthanasia looks like, we need something more recent than those same few statistics the anti- crowd keeps bringing up. Further, by comparing current (legalized euthanasia) statistics to past (decriminalized euthanasia) statistics, we have a good basis for time comparison and looking at trends that might plausibly be attributed to greater legalization.
The review begins by stating the requirements for euthanasia under the Netherlands' law:
1. The patient's request is voluntary and well-considered;
2. The patient's suffering is unbearable and hopeless;
3. The patient is informed about his situation and prospects;
4. There are no reasonable alternatives. Further,
5. Another independent physician should be consulted; and
6. The termination of life should be performed with due medical care and attention.
It then evaluated the 5,600 cases of legal euthanasia in the Netherlands to determine how many of them had failed one or more of those criteria. They found that "In the period 2003–2005, the review committees gave the verdict of non-compliance in 15 cases on a total of 5,600 reported cases. The main reason for the verdict of non-compliance was a failure to fulfill the requirement of consultation of a second independent physician."
99.8% of Dutch euthanizations were performed in cases where
suffering was described as "unbearable". This is sufficient to
disprove the contention that Dutch euthanasia is "grizzly".
So remember how the article said that 72% of Dutch euthanasia was nonconsensual? The actual number seems more like 0.2% not following the letter of the law, and 0% involving actual consent violations.
In 1990, 1.7% of all deaths were preceded by euthanasia, as compared with 2.4% in 1995 and 2.6% in 2001 (see Table 1). This trend reversed in 2005, when 1.7% of all deaths were the result of euthanasia (approximately 2,300 cases). The number of euthanasia requests also decreased in this period: from 9700 in 2001 to 8400 in 2005.
So, we go from claims of "slippery slopes" and "as soon as it's legal there will be pressure to apply it to more and more different groups and incidents" to "actually, incidence has been going down for the past few years."
Table 1 further shows that the frequency of ending of life without an explicit patient request decreased from 0.8% of all deaths in 1990 to 0.4% in 2005 (approximately 550 cases annually). Further analyses of the cases of ending of life without an explicit request show that these concern nearly always patients who are very close to death, are incompetent but with whom the hastening of death has been discussed earlier in the disease trajectory and/or with their relatives, and for whom opioids were used to end life
The number of patients killed without consent was cut in half after euthanasia was legalized, and these deaths continue to be overwhelmingly done with reasonable justification.
Forgoing of potentially life prolonging treatments (either withholding or withdrawing) and intensified alleviation of symptoms occurred much more often than active ending of life. In all of the studied years, the frequency of forgoing of life-prolonging treatments was rather stable, between 16–20% of all deaths. The percentage of the use of intensified alleviation of symptoms increased from 19% of all deaths in 1990 up to 25% in 2005.
My prediction that euthanasia funges against use of potentially deadly symptom-relieving drugs seems to be disconfirmed, as that has increased over the period euthanasia has been more legal.
The prediction that euthanasia would be used as a way to get rid of the elderly was also disconfirmed. The practice was much less common among the elderly than among younger people; in 2005, 3.5 percent of deaths below age 65 were euthanasia, as opposed to 0.8% of deaths above age 80. The report attributes the discrepancy to euthanasia being a more common practice in cancer patients (who tend to be younger than most terminally ill people), plus of course the overwhelmingly higher number of other causes of death in the elderly.
Okay. Here's the part I want to stress, because it is a study with a very good methodology on exactly the sort of question we're worried about. Anne McTavish and the Patients' Rights Council are concerned that there were 1040 incidents in the Netherlands of doctors ending patient lives without explicit patient request. I noted that this was not euthanasia as commonly defined and should not be expected to differ between countries with and without legalized euthanasia. So let's see what actually happened. A study compared Netherlands (which has legalized euthanasia) with Switzerland (which has a much more limited version), and with Sweden, Denmark, Belgium and Italy (in which euthanasia was illegal at the time of this study, although Belgium has since legalized it).
They found that although the Netherlands obviously had much more euthanasia and assisted suicide than any of these other countries, it was pretty unremarkably in the middle with regard to "ending of life without explicit patient request" – Belgium was higher, Denmark was tied, and Switzerland, Sweden, and Italy were lower. However, even this doesn't tell the whole story, since we know the Netherlands' rate of this practice has cut in half when euthanasia was legalized after these numbers were collected in 2001. Assuming the other countries' rates stayed stable, it should now have the third lowest rate of this practice among the six countries.
Furthermore, the Netherlands was near the bottom in "intensified alleviation of symptoms", which I think is this study's version of the "giving symptom-relieving drugs in quantities that might cause death". The Netherlands had less "intensified alleviation" than Denmark, Belgium, Sweden, and Switzerland, and was beaten only by Italy. Notice that a huge amount of anti-euthanasia advocates' claims about the evils of euthanasia in the Netherlands come from deaths from intensified alleviation, yet the Netherlands is actually one of the most conservative countries in Europe in this regard!
The report ends by concluding that:
A last important lesson that can be learnt is that the legalization of euthanasia in the Netherlands did not result in a slippery slope for medical end-of-life practices. Besides religious or principal-based arguments, the slippery slope argument is the mainstay of opponents of the legalization of euthanasia. Briefly, the argument states that: if we allow A (the use euthanasia at the request of terminally ill patients), B (abuse of euthanasia, that is, ending the life of vulnerable patient groups without their consent) will necessarily or very likely follow. B is morally not acceptable; therefore, we must not allow A (Griffiths et al. 1998; van der Burg 1992). Our studies show no evidence of a slippery slope. The frequency of ending of life without explicit patient request did not increase over the studied years. Also, there is no evidence for a higher frequency of euthanasia among the elderly, people with low educational status, the poor, the physically disabled or chronically ill, minors, people with psychiatric illnesses including depression, or racial or ethnic minorities, compared with background populations (Battin et al. 2007).
Here is my executive summary of these findings:
Anti-euthanasia advocates point out that in 1990 the Netherlands killed 1040 patients without explicit consent. However, closer examination of these cases shows somewhere between most and all to have taken place in circumstances most reasonable people would consider justified. Further, incidence of this practice declined after euthanasia was legalized. Most importantly, the Netherlands' incidence of this practice is actually relatively low compared to other European countries, and there is no evidence that its attitudes on euthanasia are causing this to happen more often.
The numbers of "people killed without consent" are further inflated by adding people who have been given drugs like morphine for symptomatic relief. In the overwhelming majority of cases, this drugs are not intended to kill the patient and in fact do not. The Netherlands' incidence of this practice is, once again, significantly less than the average incidence for comparable European countries and there is no evidence that its attitudes on euthanasia affect this.
Actual euthanasia never affects more than about 2.5% of deaths in the Netherlands, affects the elderly disproportionately little, and does not disproportionately affect minorities, the disabled, or any of the other groups anti-euthanasia advocates suggest it might disproportionately affect. It is practically always done in accordance with strict official guidelines, after repeated and persistent explicit patient request, with the approval of family members, and with the certification of several physicians agreeing that the patient's disease is terminal and likely to cause intense suffering.
The statistics used by opponents of euthanasia are almost universally built on the same misinterpretation of a 25 year old report – a misinterpretation that takes its numbers out of context, which willfully misclassifies non-euthanasia causes of death as euthanasia, which ignores better and more recent data, and which has been soundly condemned as a perversion of their data by the authors of the report itself.
All responsible research on euthanasia in the Netherlands has found it to be applied responsibly, consensually, and in accordance with the legal guidelines, with no evidence of misapplication or of a slippery slope. These findings have been replicated in other countries that have more recently legalized euthanasia, such as Belgium.
This is why I felt comfortable saying in my last post that "there's loads of good data…we can use to estimate how nonconsensual and slippery-slopey real world euthanasia is, and the answer is statistically indistinguishable from zero."
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged politics, statistics. Bookmark the permalink.
← Fake Consensualism
Military Strikes Are An Extremely Cheap Way To Help Foreigners →
56 Responses to Fake Euthanasia Statistics
If Amanda Baggs is correct, then these numbers aren't very useful, because doctors will refuse to consider alternatives, patients will be told there aren't any and pressured to die, anything they say that could plausibly be interpreted as a request for euthanasia will be, and whether suffering is unbearable will be judged by the doctor rather than the patient, or the patient now rather than the patient six months later who survived on conventional treatment despite predictions to the contrary. That seems a lot harder to measure, though.
Indeed, it should never be a doctor's decision to end a person's life, it should always be their own decision – which then has to be respected absolutely and unconditionally, irregardless of any suffering or reason. For instance, you should have the right to freely buy the respective drugs and take them as you see fit.
Your life is yours, you don't need a reason to end it. The very idea makes a mockery of self-ownership.
A man chooses. A slave obeys.
Yadal says:
I support this basically speaking, although I anticipate quite the argument on it. My defence of it would be that the alternative would be an imposistion of our utility function on another person, fitting the general idea of "Do what we'd want in their shoes, not what they actually want", which at basis (simply speaking) is contrary to morality.
this is all well and good if you're paying for your own care.
Which everyone obviously should.
I would point out, however, that forcing someone to pay for other people's care while young and then forcing them to endure care against their will while old is still worse than forcing them to pay and then allowing them to access painless euthanasia services when old (on a voluntary basis).
One instance of coercion is bad, two instances of coercion are worse.
Sometimes, at least, it should be 'all well and good' even if the government is. Take an individual who, hypothetically speaking, has contributed $3 billion worth of taxes over their lifetime and whose care costs $3 million.
amuchmoreexotic says:
Would you kindly stop spouting Objectivist dogma?
Would you kindly stop telling other people what opinions they can express?
You can be a slave if you want, tortured by strangers and then made to pay for it, exclaiming your gratitude for the mistreatment.
But don't think for one second you won't pay a price for forcing the same violence on me.
Andrew Ryan?
I get the reference. But thankfully, the "would you kindly" doesn't work on me because I'm not genetically programmed like that.
Medivh says:
" Your life is yours […]"
Thanks a lot for writing this. I absolutely needed to hear this. There are just to many assholes around who think they own other peoples lifes.
So the numbers are useful for criticizing euthanasia and painting pictures of slippery slopes & discrimination, but they aren't useful for supporting euthanasia? What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
Could you give a link to Baggs's specific discussions of this? (The front page has some discussion of feeding tubes, but I think I saw better examples, once.)
Hand of Lixue says:
"If Amanda Baggs is correct, then these numbers aren't very useful"
Sure they are. Do you have some reason to believe that either (a) this occurs in the Netherlands or (b) it would be significantly more likely to occur in the US? If the answer to both is "no", then this is just Amanda Baggs having a scary thought or not being aware of the research.
If the answer to the first is "yes", it should be fairly easy to find at least a few examples of local disability communities protesting, or tearful families that had their loved ones stolen away. In short, it falls on you to actually provide your evidence, rather than just allude that your opponent is wrong 🙂
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if the second question was "yes", but… that's the sort of cheap excuse we use to prevent National Healthcare, Electoral Reform, and the Metric System. "Oh, sure, it works everyplace else, but the US is a special snowflake." Given all of the GOOD that could be done by not assuming the US is a special snowflake, and given the ability to *repeal* bad laws, I think we'd, again, need to see actual *evidence* before this is more than just a scary thought.
Amanda Baggs claims that horrible abuse of disabled people is routinely ignored, so the lack of Dutch protests against involuntary euthanasia doesn't say more than the lack of American protest against – well, all the things she keeps blogging about.
… I thought the point was that this research might be underreporting patients who were pressured/misinformed?
You could use all of those points to argue against hospice care.
She does.
nazgulnarsil says:
I volunteer to euthanize torture apologists.
I might point out, of course, that the statistics of a person's life being ended without their consent in ways that aren't euthanasia are worrying as well. This is not a problem restricted to just the Netherlands, of course.
If hospitalised I would want to be kept alive for as long as possible, but based on what I've seen on this site I fear doctors wouldn't respect this.
DanielLC says:
What about right now? Do you avoid leaving the house so you won't get killed in a car accident? Or do you only care about being kept alive for as long as possible when you're hospitalized?
The difference is that in the hospital there are no other factors involved- it's simply a choice of Stay Alive and In Pain or Die. The way I see it, there's a hierarchy: "Decent Life" (broadly speaking)>Non-decent life (say, in a hospital)>Death. I would always choose a higher one on the list over a lower.
Non-decent life is not well-defined, and some people see a fourth category below Death, e.g. Live not worth living (according to whatever standards they may have).
Most people prefer anesthesia during surgery, even though the unconsciousness reduces their total conscious lifespan.
This was – well, is – my position as well, but if you can bring cryonics into the mix it becomes a lot easier to optimize.
I know what some people see- the categorisation was from my own perspective.
You've made some assumptions though. Although I put a different value on conscious v.s unconscious lifespan, I put a higher value on unconscious lifespan than I do on being dead.
I don't have to appeal to 'most people' regarding the consistency of my own preferences. However, the distinction between the value of being dead v.s being unconscious explains why my preferences are consistent.
It seems odd to value unconscious lifespan. That seems to imply you would trade off some other good (e.g. conscious lifespan) for a large amount of unconscious lifespan. Maybe all conscious life for very very much unconscious life.
Makes no sense to me.
It just occurred to me that maybe we can use these weird biases to solve the euthanasia conflict:
For everyone who wants euthanasia, instead offer them permanent coma with guaranteed unconsciousness until the day they die.
Make that a basic human right for everyone who doesn't like living anymore, and make the pro-life moralists pay the financial costs -> moral problem solved.
This thing won't let me respone to Anonymous directly, but I'll point out that the problem of tradeoffs is a problem of all philosophies based on trading utilities.
As for your solution, if you could pull that off medically I think it would work.
@Johnwbh says:
I basically agree with you so don't have much to say. But since the other posts are angrily opposed I thought I'd publicly agree with you.
Funnily enough, it's not out-and-out euthanasia that I'm so concerned about; it's those gray areas of "ending of life without the patients' request" where it's not a case of actively intervening to bring about death, it's things like "no resuscitation" and so forth.
I think there is a greater potential of misuse or error here, because it's hard to tell when someone is on their absolute last legs, when they might live a year or so longer but in poor condition, and when they have a good chance of a substantial period of life left. I think the Netherlands is very closely monitored and they have a good system in place, but (as I've mentioned here before in relation to the Liverpool Care Pathway), in other countries it might not be as rigorously checked or it could be misinterpreted to be run by the administrative, not the medical, authorities in a hospital (so hitting targets for freeing up beds by putting elderly ill patients on 'end of life' protocols on the assumption that Mrs. F is going to die in a week or two anyway, why drag it out?)
As ever, anecdotes are not data, but from my own personal experience: my father, in his mid-70s, suffered catastrophic kidney failure. The hospital more or less told us that it wouldn't be any use resuscitating him as he would only die eventually anyway, and asked us did we really want them to do that? We insisted that yes, we did want him treated that way. He had two episodes of cardiac arrest (clinical death, he insisted afterwards) and had we not been adamant, he would have not been revived.
They let him home to us, with the very evident attitude that he was only going home to die. Well, he didn't; he had to go on weekly dialysis, but he had a further eight years of life, and good quality life too (he wasn't bed-bound, he was active). The consultant nephrologist (who, by the way, was a decent man and a great doctor interested in and very involved in the treatment of his patients, not something I can say about all the consultants in that hospital) often referred to him as "my miracle man" (and we the family scoffed in the background that yeah, if it wasn't for us, you lot would have let him die.
Eight years later, he had a stroke (related to a decades-long problem with blood clots from a faulty heart valve) and this time, we agreed no resuscitation because this time, he had grown feeble, you could see him fading physically and mentally, and we more or less knew he wouldn't last out the year. So this time, he was ready to die and we were ready to let him go.
The first time, the hospital were not pushing euthanasia; they were (to the best of their judgement) thinking "Here's an elderly man in very bad condition, it's not likely he'll survive, even if he does it won't be for long and he'll be in dreadful state; let him go". Yet if we had acquiesced, my father would have missed eight years of life. His family (including grandsons) would have missed those eight years. That's my worry.
Fair enough, but part of the point of this post is that that's going to happen at a constant rate whether euthanasia is legal or not.
This is actually a good point – I wish we had a better source of figures, because in medicine, there's a lot of uncertainty involved in things like "this only cost them a few hours before dying".
Wow, this was a brutal takedown. I'm especially disturbed that Anne is a lawyer.
Throwing in the Catholic view (I stand back and await the showers of rotten vegetables for even mentioning the unclean entity of the Church), regarding the example you use of potentially lethal doses of painkillers, this is the principle of double effect and is permissible and not considered euthanasia (i.e. the intention is to relieve pain and suffering, not to hasten death):
2278 Discontinuing medical procedures that are burdensome, dangerous, extraordinary, or disproportionate to the expected outcome can be legitimate; it is the refusal of "over-zealous" treatment. Here one does not will to cause death; one's inability to impede it is merely accepted. The decisions should be made by the patient if he is competent and able or, if not, by those legally entitled to act for the patient, whose reasonable will and legitimate interests must always be respected.
2279 Even if death is thought imminent, the ordinary care owed to a sick person cannot be legitimately interrupted. The use of painkillers to alleviate the sufferings of the dying, even at the risk of shortening their days, can be morally in conformity with human dignity if death is not willed as either an end or a means, but only foreseen and tolerated as inevitable. Palliative care is a special form of disinterested charity. As such it should be encouraged
That was my first thought on reading that line.
<.<
I'm disappointed in your grizzly euthanasia statistics. Just because the New York Times calls it euthanasia doesn't mean it is. I'm all for capital punishment, but we should call a spade a spade.
*laughs* 🙂
I'm glad I got a laugh out of HOL, but let me try that again: Yes, claims of Dutch murder buried under the name of euthanasia are wildly exaggerated, but two thirds of "grizzly euthanasia" are euphemisms for executions.
For what it is worth, I believe the Remmelink Report was translated into English, under the same title as the Lancet summary. See here, here or here.
Perhaps more convincing of the existence of the English translation is a book review thereof. (It says pretty much the same as Scott.)
Things that cost money don't count!
(but thanks, not sure how I missed that)
I didn't say it was worth much, but you made separate complaints of (a) in Dutch and (b) not on internet. If anyone is looking for it in a university library, it might be easier to find as two issues of a journal* than as a book. But there's really no point, since the same authors have written so much is that is accessible.
* Health Policy 1992;22(1+2):1-262; not on internet, even for money
Claims from some quarters (*cough* Rick Santorum *cough*) that the Dutch elderly are living in constant fear of being murdered are hard to square with the fact that the Dutch elderly live a good deal longer than our own.
Surely this isn't inconsistent with the idea that they could leave even longer, were there no legal euthanasia? I don't disagree with your overall point, but this immediately struck me as faulty logic.
Lachlan Cannon says:
Above anonymous comment is mine. Didn't expect the system would let me accidentally submit an anonymous comment.
The thing that concerns me more is that "higher life expectancy" and "longer-lived elderly" are not at all the same; one country can have higher life expectancy than another by losing fewer people at younger ages. What matters here is something like "life expectancy at age 60". Anyone got those figures for the Netherlands and the US?
Here's a time series of Dutch life expectancy at age 65 and US life expectancy at all ages in 2009. The US is 17.5/20.2, which the Dutch exceed by maybe half a year.
Look at the Dutch time series: elderly life expectancy is rapidly rising, starting around the year 2000, as is true in the US; probably because of the Spanish flu. Thus it is important to compare use 2009 data for both countries.
The US numbers are here.
Agreed. I guess my comment assumes an "and there's no great reason for the Dutch to be a huge outlier in terms of life expectancy, which would be required for them to still beat their neighbors even with life expectancy being drastically reduced by excessive euthanasia."
Pingback: Rtistry & Rbominations :: linklist, sunday 2013-09-01
houseboatonstyx says:
A late thought. When the ambulance came for an elderly relative of mine, the medic asked me if he had a DNR request, or if he would prefer to be revived.
I said: "I don't know. Bring him back; if he doesn't like it, he can commit suicide later."
Medic: "He may not be able to; DNR may be his only chance to avoid a long process in hospital."
So, in this sort of case, availability of legal euthanasia on demand would encourage keeping the patient alive when in doubt.
There might also people who avoid contact with the medical system when it would be most useful to them, because they anticipate it will undermine their freedom, e.g. depressed people who consider talking to a doctor about their suicidal ideation, and then think, "Wait, they can lock me up for that", and then bury the idea. Or old or sick people who kill themselves at home alone with inferior methods instead of being institutionalized when it would otherwise become unavoidable.
The numbers of life-years lost this way should certainly be of interest for the pro-lifers.
I had a friend who, still active but anticipating decline, did kill himself after much research on methods. He concluded that he would have to do it before he became bedridden or otherwise unable to complete a somewhat demanding and illegal action.
Honestly, you've convinced me, this slippery slope seems quite well-guarded against if it were ever greased at all.
But I'm still pretty curious: how reliable are those numbers, considering that the doctor who euthanizes the patient is unlikely to say there were other/better options? And how much uncertainty is involved here, especially for things like "they would have lived less than an hour anyway"?
Pingback: The correct Position on Euthanasia – REVEALED! | Pseudonym Writes
Phil Goetz says:
Impressive work, Scott. I think euthanasia is like the death penalty: A waste of attention and energy. Effort goes into fighting for or against the death penalty, instead of into fighting a justice system that regularly sentences people to long incarcerations with little evidence or for victimless crimes, or fighting crime or its causes. Effort goes into fighting for or against euthanasia that should go into fighting the legal and cultural strangleholds on doctors that prevent them from giving their patients effective treatments, and that prevent patients from having control over their own bodies, in every circumstance.
Boris Kotchoubey says:
It is quite interesting that a paper about "fake data" operates with faked data itself.
The number of 1040 patients killed without consent, mentioned in the article of McTavish, can also be found in the doctoral dissertation of L.Pinjenborg, see Table 1 on p.30.
Even more importantly: The present paper, published 2013, cites the paper of Ritjens et al (2009), indicating that the number of euthanasia cases DEcreases in Netherlands. This is true: this number decreased slightly from 2001 to 2007. However, 2013 already data for the following 4 years were available. And these data demonstrate DOUBLE INCREASE of active euthanasia:
https://www.euthanasiecommissie.nl/overdetoetsingscommissies/jaarverslag/
To sum up: Who works with falsified numbers, shoud not criticize others for their incorrect interpretation of correct numbers.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


While you live in bustling streets and high-rise building, there is always that desire for a secret garden. A hidden green space you can call your own.
Bring the outdoors in. Pale calm walls reflect light from the large windows, and bring the garden view in focus. The interior flows right outside and boundary ceases to exist between the inside and outdoors.
Choose the dine alfresco! Just by choosing the color, dine transported to open fields of green or sunlit terraces of yellow.


Competition microsite for a vampire film produced by NBC, encouraging users to find their inner vampire. After answering a series of questions, users were entered into a competition to win a walk on part in the film. I worked as art director and illustrator on this project, from concept, through character design to final design and illustration.


text:
Rome (Oxford Archaeological Guides) (Paperback)
By Amanda Claridge, Judith Toms (Contribution by), Tony Cubberley (Contribution by)
Oxford University Press, USA, 9780199546831, 540pp.
Publication Date: October 15, 2010
Capital and showcase of the Roman Empire and the center of Christian Europe, the city of Rome is the largest archaeological site in the world. In the new Second Edition of her popular handbook, Amanda Claridge again presents an indispensable guide to all significant monuments in Rome dating from 800 BC to 600 AD, including such breathtaking structures as the Capitoline Hill, the Roman Forum, the Colosseum, the Mausoleums of Augustus and Hadrian, the Circus Maximus, and the Catacombs. Featuring over 220 high-quality maps, site plans, diagrams, and photographs, the edition is divided into fourteen main areas, with star ratings to help you plan your visit in advance. The book also features glossaries of architectural terms, information about opening times, suggestions for further reading, and much more. The Second Edition has been extensively revised--the author has added more than 20 new sites and illustrations, re-organized and expanded the itineraries to suit the many changes that have taken place in the past decade, and fully updated the practical information.
Amanda Claridge is Professor of Roman Archaeology at Royal Holloway University of London. Assistant Director of the British School at Rome from 1980 to 1994, her wider archaeological activities have included fieldwork in Rome, elsewhere in Italy, North Africa, and Turkey, and the study of Romanmarbles and sculptural techniques, on which she is a noted authority.


The traditional cheese dairy in Milos ''Charalampakis''is situated in Pachena of Milos and operates from the early 20th century. In 2014, it was expanded, updated and certified according to the international safety standards ISO22000 and HACCP, so its products can be sent to the whole Greek market, and not only in Milos. Charalampakis family has its own goats, carefully selected and bred with care and love.
Goats in free-range farming, fed with grass salted by the sea, they are grown and bred for the creamery's needs, exclusively. Their milk is collected every morning and gives cheese products of exceptional quality and special taste. The main feature is the natural caves of the cheese dairy, where cheeses mature and get their special flavor and aroma.
From 100% Greek local goat milk and by full vertical production, the cheese dairy ''Charalampakis'' in Milos, combines the modern technology with the traditional cheese recipes and supplies the market with all the traditional cheese types of Milos, like manoura, skotyri, xinomyzithra, imichloro, imichloro with oil and of course, the fine Mileiko cheese.
Do not miss a quick tour in the creamery, try all the cheese types from the family and take with you the ones that stood out for your tastes. In any case, they are all packed in vacuum, so you can take some of Milos' taste with you and share them with your beloved ones!
Όλη η αλυσίδα παραγωγής δίνει εκλεκτά τυροκομικά προϊόντα, που θα σας συναρπάσουν με τη μοναδική νοστιμιά τους! Εκτός από τη Μήλο, θα τα βρείτε και σε επιλεγμένα καταστήματα σε όλη την Ελλάδα..
© 2017 Τυροκομείο. All Rights Reserved.


text:
DigiLibraries.com
Anthropology4
Archaeology7
Criminology2
Emigration & Immigration2
Folklore & Mythology46
Slavery10
Sociology10
Sociology of Religion1
Download links will be available after you disable the ad blocker and reload the page.
Showing: 41-50 results of 79
The Ancient Irish Epic Tale Tain Bo Cualnge
by Joseph Dunn
I. The Prologue One night at the palace of Cruachan in Connacht, a dispute arose between Queen Medb, the sometime wife of Conchobar, king of Ulster, and her consort Ailill, as to the amount of their respective possessions. It may be remarked in passing that in those days in Ireland, married women retained their private fortune independent of their husbands, as well as the dowry secured to them in marriage. To procure the evidence of their... more...
The Age of Fable
by Thomas Bulfinch
If no other knowledge deserves to be called useful but that which helps to enlarge our possessions or to raise our station in society, then Mythology has no claim to the appellation. But if that which tends to make us happier and better can be called useful, then we claim that epithet for our subject. For Mythology is the handmaid of literature; and literature is one of the best allies of virtue and promoters of happiness. Without a knowledge of... more...
by Charles Lamb
CHAPTER ONE The Cicons.—The Fruit of the Lotos-tree.—Polyphemus and the Cyclops.—The Kingdom of the Winds, and God Aeolus's Fatal Present.—TheLaestrygonian Man-eaters. This history tells of the wanderings of Ulysses and his followers in their return from Troy, after the destruction of that famous city of Asia by the Grecians. He was inflamed with a desire of seeing again, after a ten years' absence, his wife and native... more...
The Adventures of Odysseus and The Tales of Troy
by Padraic Colum
I his is the story of Odysseus, the most renowned of all the heroes the Greek poets have told us of—of Odysseus, his wars and his wanderings. And this story of Odysseus begins with his son, the youth who was called Telemachus. It was when Telemachus was a child of a month old that a messenger came from Agamemnon, the Great King, bidding Odysseus betake himself to the war against Troy that the Kings and Princes of Greece were about... more...
Tanglewood Tales
THE WAYSIDE. INTRODUCTORY. A short time ago, I was favored with a flying visit from my young friend Eustace Bright, whom I had not before met with since quitting the breezy mountains of Berkshire. It being the winter vacation at his college, Eustace was allowing himself a little relaxation, in the hope, he told me, of repairing the inroads which severe application to study had made upon his health; and I was happy to conclude, from the excellent... more...
Tales of Troy: Ulysses, the sacker of cities
by Andrew Lang
THE BOYHOOD AND PARENTS OF ULYSSES Long ago, in a little island called Ithaca, on the west coast of Greece, there lived a king named Laertes. His kingdom was small and mountainous. People used to say that Ithaca "lay like a shield upon the sea," which sounds as if it were a flat country. But in those times shields were very large, and rose at the middle into two peaks with a hollow between them, so that Ithaca, seen... more...
Sociology and Modern Social Problems
by Charles A. (Charles Abram) Ellwood
CHAPTER I THE STUDY OF SOCIETY What is Society?—Perhaps the great question which sociology seeks to answer is this question which we have put at the beginning. Just as biology seeks to answer the question "What is life?"; zoölogy, "What is an animal?"; botany, "What is a plant?"; so sociology seeks to answer the question "What is society?" or perhaps better, "What is association?" Just as biology, zoölogy, and botany cannot... more...
Society Its Origin and Development
by Henry K. (Henry Kalloch) Rowe
CHARACTERISTICS OF SOCIAL LIFE 1. Man and His Social Relations.—A study of society starts with the obvious fact that human beings live together. The hermit is abnormal. However far back we go in the process of human evolution we find the existence of social relations, and sociability seems a quality ingrained in human nature. Every individual has his own personality that belongs to him apart from every other individual, but the... more...
Sketch of the Mythology of the North American Indians First...
by John Wesley Powell
THE GENESIS OF PHILOSOPHY. The wonders of the course of nature have ever challenged attention. In savagery, in barbarism, and in civilization alike, the mind of man has sought the explanation of things. The movements of the heavenly bodies, the change of seasons, the succession of night and day, the powers of the air, majestic mountains, ever-flowing rivers, perennial springs, the flight of birds, the gliding of serpents, the growth of trees,... more...
Roman Antiquities, and Ancient Mythology For Classical Schools...
by Charles K. (Charles Knapp) Dillaway
CHAPTER I. Foundation of Rome and Division of its Inhabitants. Ancient Italy was separated, on the north, by the Alps, from Germany. It was bounded, on the east and north-east, by the Adriatic Sea, or Mare Superum; on the south-west, by a part of the Mediterranean, called the Tuscan Sea, or Mare Inferum; and on the south, by the Fretum Siculum, called at present the strait of Messina. The south of Italy, called Græcia Magna, was peopled... more...
© 2019 DigiLibraries.com


Another page written yesterday, and three more today. Not much momentum yet, but better than I have done in some while. I stayed at home today, gardened, read, and wrote. The weather was a bit cooler than yesterday, which helped: hard to imagine a cool, wet day in Ireland when it's this hot and dry.
Lots of squash and tomatoes, and the apples are getting ripe: time to make chutney, as soon as I get a cool enough evening. Summer's passing: almost September, and the days are visibly shorter since Lammas. Maybe a month left for the garden, if I'm lucky, before the first frost.


text:
Eduard Karl Julius Theodor Stocken, seit 1871 von Stocken, (* 27. Oktober 1824 in Halberstadt; † 24. Oktober 1897 in Hannover) war ein preußischer Generalleutnant.

Leben

Herkunft
Er war der Sohn des Postdirektors August Heinrich Leopold Stocken (1789–1873) und dessen Ehefrau Auguste, geborene Biebler († 1870).

Militärkarriere
Stocken besuchte Gymnasien in Halberstadt und Schweidnitz. Am 1. April 1847 trat er als Einjährig-Freiwilliger in das 10. Infanterie-Regiment der Preußischen Armee ein und wurde nach seiner Dienstzeit als Unteroffizier zur Reserve entlassen. Anlässlicher der Niederschlagung der Badischen Revolution wurde er im gleichen Jahr einberufen und nahm während des Feldzuges in Baden als Sekondeleutnant an dem Gefecht bei Ladenburg teil. Stocken entschloss sich daraufhin eine Militärkarriere einzuschlagen. Nach bestandener Prüfung wurde er am 15. August 1850 beim 14. Infanterie-Regiment angestellt. Vom 27. Februar 1858 bis zum 5. Juni 1862 war er als Militärlehrer zur Zentral-Turnanstalt nach Berlin kommandiert und wurde zwischenzeitlich am 31. Mai 1859 Premierleutnant. Anschließend avancierte Stocken zum Hauptmann und Kompaniechef. Am 22. September 1863 folgte seine Versetzung zu den Offizieren von der Armee sowie seine Ernennung zum Leiter der Zentral-Turnanstalt. Unter Belassung in dieser Stellung wurde er am 15. Dezember 1863 à la suite des 3. Pommerschen Infanterie-Regiments Nr. 14 gestellt. Anlässlich des Krieges gegen Österreich entband man Stocken von seiner Stellung bei der Zentral-Turnanstalt und er kehrte zu seinem Regiment in den Truppendienst zurück. Mit dem Verband nahm er an den Kämpfen bei Podkost und Gitschin sowie der Königgrätz teil. Nach dem Friedensschluss kehrte Stocken in seine alte Funktion an der Zentral-Turnanstalt zurück. Unter vorläufiger Belassung in dieser Eigenschaft wurde er am 22. März 1868 als Major à la suite des 2. Hannoverschen Infanterie-Regiments Nr. 77 gestellt und am 18. Juni 1869 zum Kommandeur des I. Bataillons im 3. Brandenburgischen Infanterie-Regiment Nr. 20 ernannt. Dieses Bataillon führte er 1870/71 im Krieg gegen Frankreich in den Schlachten bei Gravelotte und Le Mans sowie der Belagerung von Metz. In der Schlacht bei Vionville sowie dem Gefecht bei Azay, wo Stocken durch einen Gewehrschuss leicht verwundet wurde, konnte er sich besonders bewähren und erhielt beide Klassen des Eisernen Kreuzes.

Nach dem Vorfrieden von Versailles wurde Stocken beim feierlichen Einzug der preußischen Truppen in Berlin am 16. Juni 1871 durch König Wilhelm I. "wegen der im Kriege gegen Frankreich vor dem Feinde bewiesenen Tapferkeit" in den erblichen preußischen Adelsstand erhoben. Er stieg am 22. März 1873 zum Oberstleutnant auf, wurde am 12. Februar 1876 mit der Führung des 1. Ostpreußischen Infanterie-Regiments beauftragt und am 11. März 1876 zum Regimentskommandeur ernannt. In dieser Eigenschaft avancierte er am 22. März 1876 zum Oberst. Als solcher kommandierte Stocken ab dem 12. März 1878 das 3. Garde-Grenadier-Regiment "Königin Elisabeth" und erhielt für seine Leistungen in der Truppenführung am 18. September 1880 den Kronenorden II. Klasse. Unter Stellung à la suite des Regiments wurde Stocken am 17. August 1882 zum Kommandeur der 26. Infanterie-Brigade in Minden ernannt und am 13. September 1882 zum Generalmajor befördert. Seine langjährigen Leistungen wurden am 20. September 1884 durch die Verleihung des Roten Adlerordens II. Klasse mit Eichenlaub gewürdigt. In Genehmigung seines Abschiedsgesuches wurde Stocken am 12. Juni 1886 unter Verleihung des Charakters als Generalleutnant mit der gesetzlichen Pension zur Disposition gestellt.

Er verbrachte seine letzten Lebensjahre zurückgezogen in Hannover und wurde nach seinem Tod am 28. Oktober 1897 auf dem Invalidenfriedhof in Berlin beigesetzt.

Familie
Stocken hatte sich am 17. September 1857 in Bromberg mit Maria Hedwig Quassowski (1832–1906) verheiratet. Aus der Ehe gingen folgende Kinder hervor:

 Maria Emilie Auguste Hedwig (* 1858) ⚭ 7. Oktober 1885 Oskar Hülsen, preußischer Oberstleutnant z.D. und Bezirkskommandeur von Konitz
 Leo August Eduard (1862–1926), preußischer Generalleutnant
 Erich Eduard Friedrich (1866–1914), Gutsbesitzer und preußischer Offizier

Literatur

 Kurt von Priesdorff: Soldatisches Führertum. Band 10, Hanseatische Verlagsanstalt Hamburg, o. O. [Hamburg], o. J. [1942], , S. 177–179, Nr. 3151.
 Erich von Stocken: Offizier-Stammliste des Königin Elisabeth Garde-Grenadier-Regiments Nr. 3. E.S. Mittler & Sohn, Berlin 1910, S. 118–119.

Einzelnachweise

Generalleutnant (Königreich Preußen)
Person im Deutschen Krieg
Person im Deutsch-Französischen Krieg
Träger des Roten Adlerordens 2. Klasse
Träger des Preußischen Königlichen Kronenordens 2. Klasse
Nobilitierter (Preußen)
Deutscher
Geboren 1824
Gestorben 1897
Mann

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


Amalgam Well ظ3.5 cm h, 3.5 cm ..
Amalgam Well ظ2 cm h, 4 cm ..
Amalgam Well ظ2 cm h, 2.5 cm ..
Amalgam Instrument 22cm Medium / Small ..
Amalgam Instrument 22cm Medium / Jumbo ..
Amalgam Instrument 17.5 cm Small ..
Amalgam Instrument 17.5 cm Medium ..
Amalgam Instrument 17.5 cm Large ..
Amalgam Instrument 17.5 cm Jumbo ..


text:
Parallax occlusion mapping (сокращённо POM) — программная техника (методика) в трёхмерной компьютерной графике, усовершенствованный вариант техники «parallax mapping». Parallax occlusion mapping используется для процедурного создания трёхмерного описания текстурированной поверхности с использованием карт смещения (:en:Displacement mapping) вместо непосредственного генерирования новой геометрии. Методику «Parallax occlusion mapping» условно можно назвать «2.5D», так как она позволяет добавлять трёхмерную сложность в текстуры, не создавая реальные трёхмерные графические структуры. В отличие от более простых методик рельефного текстурирования вроде bump mapping, normal mapping или parallax mapping, данная техника позволяет корректное определение перспективы и самозатенение в реальном времени, не требуя исполнения проходов рендеринга графического процессора для создания такого же эффекта с геометрическими вычислениями.

История создания и использование
Первая работа, посвященная данной методике, появилась в 2004 году на «ShaderX3», её авторами были Зоя Броули () и Наталия Татарчук (). Наталия Татарчук провела презентацию технологии на мероприятии SIGGRAPH 2005, которое проводилось в Лос-Анджелесе в конце лета 2005 года. Далее техника «Parallax occlusion mapping» использовалась компанией ATI в демонстрации «Toy Shop Demo» для презентации возможностей третьей версии шейдерной модели в новейшей на то время видеокарте Radeon X1800.

Первым игровым движком, в котором использовался Parallax occlusion mapping, стал CryEngine 2 от немецкого разработчика Crytek, который впервые использовался в компьютерной ПК-игре Crysis 2007 года выпуска. Также эта технология очень интенсивно используется в популярном графическом бенчмарке 3DMark Vantage от компании Futuremark.

Методика «Parallax occlusion mapping» может использоваться в интерактивной компьютерной графике реального времени (графические движки для компьютерных игр и другие интерактивные приложения), для офлайн-рендеринга (редакторы трёхмерной графики) и для генерации отдельных стереоскопических изображений.

Описание
Parallax Occlusion Mapping является усовершенствованной и в то же время одной из наиболее вычислительно сложных разновидностей Parallax Mapping. «Parallax Occlusion Mapping» полностью обрабатывается и исполняется на графическом процессоре () видеокарты как пиксельный шейдер. Фактически представляет собой форму локального рейтрейсинга (трассировка лучей) в пиксельном шейдере. Трассировка лучей используется для определения высот и учёта видимости текселей. Иными словами, данный метод может позволить создавать еще большую глубину рельефа при небольших затратах полигонов и применении сложной геометрии. Недостаток метода — невысокая детализация силуэтов и граней. Реализовать Parallax Occlusion Mapping возможно в рамках функционала API DirectX 9 SM3 как пиксельный шейдер, однако для получения оптимальной производительности видеокарта должна обеспечивать надлежащий уровень скорости исполнения операций ветвления в пиксельном шейдере.

Примечания

Ссылки
 gamedev.net. A Closer Look At Parallax Occlusion Mapping
 Parallax Occlusion Mapping in GLSL on sunandblackcat.com
 Dachsbacher, C., Tatarchuk, N. Prism Parallax Occlusion Mapping with Accurate Silhouette Generation as a .pdf
 Dachsbacher, C., Tatarchuk, N. Prism Parallax Occlusion Mapping with Accurate Silhouette Generation as a .mov

Освещение в трёхмерной графике
Методы текстурирования


text:
About RCD | Questions | Contacts | Privacy policy | How to shop
Classical Assembly
Czech Historical Recordings
Historical Recordings
Memory of the Heart
Russian Chamber Music
Russian Choir Shool
Russian Composing School
Russian Conductor's School
Russian Folk Music
Russian Piano School
Russian Romance
Russian Sacred Music
Russian Violin School
Russian Vocal School
Talents of Russia
Piano, page 71
Found CDs: 1497
Prokofiev - Sanatas for two pianos - Romeo and Juliet and Cinderella - L. Berlinskaya (piano) - A. Ansell (piano)
ID: MELCD1002207
Collection: Instrumental
Subcollection: Piano
Firma Melodiya presents recordings of the suites for two pianos from Sergei Prokofiev's ballets. This album is the first original project of Melodiya for the last twenty years that introduces a new generation of Russian music performers (by virtue of circumstances, Firma Melodiya has been re-releasing the recordings made in the former USSR). The piano duet of Lyudmila Berlinskaya and Arthur Ancelle was formed in 2011. They have won acclaim of the public and some leading musical periodicals for their concerts and recordings. Lyudmila Berlinskaya is a representative of a renowned musical dynasty, an Honoured Artist of Russia and grand prix winner of prestigious international competitions. Arthur Ancelle was born in Paris to an artistic family and has given concerts in France and overseas since 13. He is a well-known interpreter of 20th century music and an author of piano arrangements of symphonic works by various composers. This album features his piano transcriptions of two fragments from Romeo and Juliet. The transcriptions for two piano fragments from the ballet Cinderella featured on the album were made by the outstanding contemporary pianist Mikhail Pletnyov. Prokofiev's suites were recorded by Berlinskaya and Ancelle in 2013.
Katerina Zaitseva, piano - F. Schubert - Schumann - Liszt
ID: CR156
Glenn Gould in Moscow - (The first visit to Moscow)
Live recording of Glenn Gould's meeting with the students of the Moscow conservatory in 1957. At that time he was not well-known to the general public and his performances demonstrated a degree of freedom in relation to the musical text that had never been heard before in Russia. The CD includes Gould speaking to the students and a Russian interpreter.
S. Karas, piano - Scriabin - Tchaikovsky
ID: ART225
Cherubini - Beethoven - Almost a Fantasy - Davide Cabassi, piano
ID: CNT2064
Great attention to be focused on the Capriccio, ou etude pour le fortepiano written by Luigi Cherubini, the great Italian-French composer born in Florence.
and in 1786 he settled permanently in Paris where later on he received the highest and most prestigious honours of France: he was made Commandeur de la Légion d'honneur, the first musician to receive such a title.
Il Capriccio written in 1789 is a true arduous music folly on the piano, a masterpiece which is quite rarely performed.
Beethoven regarded Cherubini as the greatest of his contemporaries.
Nothing new to be pointed out on the famous Sonatas op. 27 no. 1 & 2 by Beethoven.
An absolutely outstanding CD and our artist Davide Cabassi is performing once again on his piano with great intensity.
13.00 eur Temporarily out of stock
Schubert - Impromptus and Ecossaises - Michel Dalberto
ID: DSPRCD062
Originally recorded for Denon in 1992-3.
Highly acclaimed performances from one of the world's leading pianists.
Digitally remastered for Dal Segno.
Rachmaninov - Piano Concerto No.2 - Piano Sonata No.2 - Etudes Tableaux : Preludes
ANDREA LUCHESI - Piano Sonatas & Rondos - Roberto Plano
Roberto Plano
Piano Steinway&Sons - Mod. D
Raffaele Cacciola
Bartok Studio
13th/14th July 2011, at Bernareggio (Milan, Italy)
It may already be common knowledge, at least in part, that Andrea Luchesi (or Luchese, Lucchesi Luckesi, but regardless of how his name is spelled, what counts is what the name reveals: the spelling of the name varies, but the city of origin is clear: he descended from those who left Lucca in 1300 for Venice) sits at the heart of a querelle which has reached what is an unusual tone, at least as far as the world of classical music is concerned. Was he or wasn't he Beethoven's maestro? Was he or was he not the real composer of some of the most renown masterpieces attributed to Mozart and to Haydn? And more generally what relationship did he have with Weiner Klassik? In spite of the polemics, posing these very questions, as vexing as they are, indicate to all just how important a composer he was. Here, Roberto Plano interprets his Sonatas for the first time on a modern instrument, a Steinway, bringing out all the totally unexpected greatness and splendor of this composer, a composer the history of music had completely forgotten.
We're very proud to introduce you to another great Italian pianist, First Prize Winner of the 2001 Cleveland International Piano Competition and finalist at the 12th Van Cliburn International Piano Competition in 2005.
He just started collaborating with us, being this his first debut with our Label.
Vera Gornostaeva, piano - Prokofiev - Shostakovich - Tchaikovsky
ID: SMCCD0046
Tchaikovsky - Children's Album
Shostakovich - Doll's Dances,
Prokofiev - Romeo and Juliet
Alexey Zuev, piano - Recital in St. Petersburg
Collection: Russian Virtuosos 21th century
Customer: not signed in
Interprets
Numerical listing


The Risk Management Struggle. The majority of organizations are struggling to implement a risk-based approach to security -- even though risk reduction has become the primary metric for measuring the effectiveness of enterprise security strategies.... A wireless network is a network that uses radio waves to link computers and other devices together. The implementation is done at the Layer 1 (physical layer) of the OSI model. The implementation is done at the Layer 1 (physical layer) of the OSI model.
A wireless network is a network that uses radio waves to link computers and other devices together. The implementation is done at the Layer 1 (physical layer) of the OSI model. The implementation is done at the Layer 1 (physical layer) of the OSI model.
And if you are scared that hacking a wifi network is so easy, you can learn to make RJ45 connectors and build a LAN network so nobody can hack you. It is the best way nobody messes with you. It is the best way nobody messes with you.


You are going to add a classified ad in category Fish for sale and location Indianapolis. Please fill in the form below to post the ad. We will verify your ad and show it in Fish for sale Indianapolis listings.
Fish for sale Indianapolis Post classified for FREE, free classifieds.


text:
Q: cannot get css sprite working with background-repeat I try to get css sprite working on my page. but if I adds background-repeat:no-repeat. then the css sprite stops working.  If I remove it from my stylesheet, will work again.
I couldn't figure out why I cannot use background-repeat.
here's my code.  I also upload it to jsfiddle, you can test it there.
http://jsfiddle.net/F49b5/2/

                test

A: Try switching your background-position to -194px instead of 194px:
#logo a
{
    background-position: 0 -194px;
    width: 309px;
    height: 133px;
    display: block;
}

By setting the y-axis to 194px, it will push the background image down 194px, which is out of the view of your #logo height. Instead, you'll want to "pull up" the image by setting the y-axis to a negative number.

A: You have set the background position outside of the height of the box.
Repeat repeats the whole image from 0:0 of the element which is why you see it.
Remove your background position and it will work.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
This was the ninth time India participating in Commonwealth Games India ranked 6th in the medal tally.

Medalists

Gold Medalists

Silver medalists

Bronze medalists

References

Nations at the 1982 Commonwealth Games
India at the Commonwealth Games
1982 in Indian sport


text:
use object::read::{Object, ObjectSection, ObjectSymbol};
use object::{read, write};
use object::{
    Architecture, BinaryFormat, Endianness, RelocationEncoding, RelocationKind, SectionKind,
    SymbolFlags, SymbolKind, SymbolScope, SymbolSection,
};

mod bss;
mod comdat;
mod common;
mod elf;
mod macho;
mod tls;

#[test]
fn coff_x86_64() {
    let mut object =
        write::Object::new(BinaryFormat::Coff, Architecture::X86_64, Endianness::Little);

    object.add_file_symbol(b"file.c".to_vec());

    let text = object.section_id(write::StandardSection::Text);
    object.append_section_data(text, &[1; 30], 4);

    let func1_offset = object.append_section_data(text, &[1; 30], 4);
    assert_eq!(func1_offset, 32);
    let func1_symbol = object.add_symbol(write::Symbol {
        name: b"func1".to_vec(),
        value: func1_offset,
        size: 32,
        kind: SymbolKind::Text,
        scope: SymbolScope::Linkage,
        weak: false,
        section: write::SymbolSection::Section(text),
        flags: SymbolFlags::None,
    });
    object
        .add_relocation(
            text,
            write::Relocation {
                offset: 8,
                size: 64,
                kind: RelocationKind::Absolute,
                encoding: RelocationEncoding::Generic,
                symbol: func1_symbol,
                addend: 0,
            },
        )
        .unwrap();

    let bytes = object.write().unwrap();
    let object = read::File::parse(&*bytes).unwrap();
    assert_eq!(object.format(), BinaryFormat::Coff);
    assert_eq!(object.architecture(), Architecture::X86_64);
    assert_eq!(object.endianness(), Endianness::Little);

    let mut sections = object.sections();

    let text = sections.next().unwrap();
    println!("{:?}", text);
    let text_index = text.index();
    assert_eq!(text.name(), Ok(".text"));
    assert_eq!(text.kind(), SectionKind::Text);
    assert_eq!(text.address(), 0);
    assert_eq!(text.size(), 62);
    assert_eq!(&text.data().unwrap()[..30], &[1; 30]);
    assert_eq!(&text.data().unwrap()[32..62], &[1; 30]);

    let mut symbols = object.symbols();

    let symbol = symbols.next().unwrap();
    println!("{:?}", symbol);
    assert_eq!(symbol.name(), Ok("file.c"));
    assert_eq!(symbol.address(), 0);
    assert_eq!(symbol.kind(), SymbolKind::File);
    assert_eq!(symbol.section(), SymbolSection::None);
    assert_eq!(symbol.scope(), SymbolScope::Compilation);
    assert_eq!(symbol.is_weak(), false);

    let symbol = symbols.next().unwrap();
    println!("{:?}", symbol);
    let func1_symbol = symbol.index();
    assert_eq!(symbol.name(), Ok("func1"));
    assert_eq!(symbol.address(), func1_offset);
    assert_eq!(symbol.kind(), SymbolKind::Text);
    assert_eq!(symbol.section_index(), Some(text_index));
    assert_eq!(symbol.scope(), SymbolScope::Linkage);
    assert_eq!(symbol.is_weak(), false);
    assert_eq!(symbol.is_undefined(), false);

    let mut relocations = text.relocations();

    let (offset, relocation) = relocations.next().unwrap();
    println!("{:?}", relocation);
    assert_eq!(offset, 8);
    assert_eq!(relocation.kind(), RelocationKind::Absolute);
    assert_eq!(relocation.encoding(), RelocationEncoding::Generic);
    assert_eq!(relocation.size(), 64);
    assert_eq!(
        relocation.target(),
        read::RelocationTarget::Symbol(func1_symbol)
    );
    assert_eq!(relocation.addend(), 0);

    let map = object.symbol_map();
    let symbol = map.get(func1_offset + 1).unwrap();
    assert_eq!(symbol.address(), func1_offset);
    assert_eq!(symbol.name(), "func1");
    assert_eq!(map.get(func1_offset - 1), None);
}

#[test]
fn elf_x86_64() {
    let mut object =
        write::Object::new(BinaryFormat::Elf, Architecture::X86_64, Endianness::Little);

    object.add_file_symbol(b"file.c".to_vec());

    let text = object.section_id(write::StandardSection::Text);
    object.append_section_data(text, &[1; 30], 4);

    let func1_offset = object.append_section_data(text, &[1; 30], 4);
    assert_eq!(func1_offset, 32);
    let func1_symbol = object.add_symbol(write::Symbol {
        name: b"func1".to_vec(),
        value: func1_offset,
        size: 32,
        kind: SymbolKind::Text,
        scope: SymbolScope::Linkage,
        weak: false,
        section: write::SymbolSection::Section(text),
        flags: SymbolFlags::None,
    });
    object
        .add_relocation(
            text,
            write::Relocation {
                offset: 8,
                size: 64,
                kind: RelocationKind::Absolute,
                encoding: RelocationEncoding::Generic,
                symbol: func1_symbol,
                addend: 0,
            },
        )
        .unwrap();

    let bytes = object.write().unwrap();
    let object = read::File::parse(&*bytes).unwrap();
    assert_eq!(object.format(), BinaryFormat::Elf);
    assert_eq!(object.architecture(), Architecture::X86_64);
    assert_eq!(object.endianness(), Endianness::Little);

    let mut sections = object.sections();

    let section = sections.next().unwrap();
    println!("{:?}", section);
    assert_eq!(section.name(), Ok(""));
    assert_eq!(section.kind(), SectionKind::Metadata);
    assert_eq!(section.address(), 0);
    assert_eq!(section.size(), 0);

    let text = sections.next().unwrap();
    println!("{:?}", text);
    let text_index = text.index();
    assert_eq!(text.name(), Ok(".text"));
    assert_eq!(text.kind(), SectionKind::Text);
    assert_eq!(text.address(), 0);
    assert_eq!(text.size(), 62);
    assert_eq!(&text.data().unwrap()[..30], &[1; 30]);
    assert_eq!(&text.data().unwrap()[32..62], &[1; 30]);

    let mut symbols = object.symbols();

    let symbol = symbols.next().unwrap();
    println!("{:?}", symbol);
    assert_eq!(symbol.name(), Ok(""));
    assert_eq!(symbol.address(), 0);
    assert_eq!(symbol.kind(), SymbolKind::Null);
    assert_eq!(symbol.section_index(), None);
    assert_eq!(symbol.scope(), SymbolScope::Unknown);
    assert_eq!(symbol.is_weak(), false);
    assert_eq!(symbol.is_undefined(), true);

    let symbol = symbols.next().unwrap();
    println!("{:?}", symbol);
    assert_eq!(symbol.name(), Ok("file.c"));
    assert_eq!(symbol.address(), 0);
    assert_eq!(symbol.kind(), SymbolKind::File);
    assert_eq!(symbol.section(), SymbolSection::None);
    assert_eq!(symbol.scope(), SymbolScope::Compilation);
    assert_eq!(symbol.is_weak(), false);

    let symbol = symbols.next().unwrap();
    println!("{:?}", symbol);
    let func1_symbol = symbol.index();
    assert_eq!(symbol.name(), Ok("func1"));
    assert_eq!(symbol.address(), func1_offset);
    assert_eq!(symbol.kind(), SymbolKind::Text);
    assert_eq!(symbol.section_index(), Some(text_index));
    assert_eq!(symbol.scope(), SymbolScope::Linkage);
    assert_eq!(symbol.is_weak(), false);
    assert_eq!(symbol.is_undefined(), false);

    let mut relocations = text.relocations();

    let (offset, relocation) = relocations.next().unwrap();
    println!("{:?}", relocation);
    assert_eq!(offset, 8);
    assert_eq!(relocation.kind(), RelocationKind::Absolute);
    assert_eq!(relocation.encoding(), RelocationEncoding::Generic);
    assert_eq!(relocation.size(), 64);
    assert_eq!(
        relocation.target(),
        read::RelocationTarget::Symbol(func1_symbol)
    );
    assert_eq!(relocation.addend(), 0);

    let map = object.symbol_map();
    let symbol = map.get(func1_offset + 1).unwrap();
    assert_eq!(symbol.address(), func1_offset);
    assert_eq!(symbol.name(), "func1");
    assert_eq!(map.get(func1_offset - 1), None);
}

#[test]
fn elf_any() {
    for (arch, endian) in [
        (Architecture::Aarch64, Endianness::Little),
        (Architecture::Arm, Endianness::Little),
        (Architecture::Avr, Endianness::Little),
        (Architecture::Bpf, Endianness::Little),
        (Architecture::I386, Endianness::Little),
        (Architecture::X86_64, Endianness::Little),
        (Architecture::X86_64_X32, Endianness::Little),
        (Architecture::Hexagon, Endianness::Little),
        (Architecture::Mips, Endianness::Little),
        (Architecture::Mips64, Endianness::Little),
        (Architecture::Msp430, Endianness::Little),
        (Architecture::PowerPc, Endianness::Big),
        (Architecture::PowerPc64, Endianness::Big),
        (Architecture::Riscv32, Endianness::Little),
        (Architecture::Riscv64, Endianness::Little),
        (Architecture::S390x, Endianness::Big),
        (Architecture::Sparc64, Endianness::Big),
    ]
    .iter()
    .copied()
    {
        let mut object = write::Object::new(BinaryFormat::Elf, arch, endian);

        let section = object.section_id(write::StandardSection::Data);
        object.append_section_data(section, &[1; 30], 4);
        let symbol = object.section_symbol(section);

        object
            .add_relocation(
                section,
                write::Relocation {
                    offset: 8,
                    size: 32,
                    kind: RelocationKind::Absolute,
                    encoding: RelocationEncoding::Generic,
                    symbol,
                    addend: 0,
                },
            )
            .unwrap();
        if arch.address_size().unwrap().bytes() >= 8 {
            object
                .add_relocation(
                    section,
                    write::Relocation {
                        offset: 16,
                        size: 64,
                        kind: RelocationKind::Absolute,
                        encoding: RelocationEncoding::Generic,
                        symbol,
                        addend: 0,
                    },
                )
                .unwrap();
        }

        let bytes = object.write().unwrap();
        let object = read::File::parse(&*bytes).unwrap();
        println!("{:?}", object.architecture());
        assert_eq!(object.format(), BinaryFormat::Elf);
        assert_eq!(object.architecture(), arch);
        assert_eq!(object.endianness(), endian);

        let mut sections = object.sections();

        let section = sections.next().unwrap();
        println!("{:?}", section);
        assert_eq!(section.name(), Ok(""));
        assert_eq!(section.kind(), SectionKind::Metadata);
        assert_eq!(section.address(), 0);
        assert_eq!(section.size(), 0);

        let data = sections.next().unwrap();
        println!("{:?}", data);
        assert_eq!(data.name(), Ok(".data"));
        assert_eq!(data.kind(), SectionKind::Data);

        let mut relocations = data.relocations();

        let (offset, relocation) = relocations.next().unwrap();
        println!("{:?}", relocation);
        assert_eq!(offset, 8);
        assert_eq!(relocation.kind(), RelocationKind::Absolute);
        assert_eq!(relocation.encoding(), RelocationEncoding::Generic);
        assert_eq!(relocation.size(), 32);
        assert_eq!(relocation.addend(), 0);

        if arch.address_size().unwrap().bytes() >= 8 {
            let (offset, relocation) = relocations.next().unwrap();
            println!("{:?}", relocation);
            assert_eq!(offset, 16);
            assert_eq!(relocation.kind(), RelocationKind::Absolute);
            assert_eq!(relocation.encoding(), RelocationEncoding::Generic);
            assert_eq!(relocation.size(), 64);
            assert_eq!(relocation.addend(), 0);
        }
    }
}

#[test]
fn macho_x86_64() {
    let mut object = write::Object::new(
        BinaryFormat::MachO,
        Architecture::X86_64,
        Endianness::Little,
    );

    object.add_file_symbol(b"file.c".to_vec());

    let text = object.section_id(write::StandardSection::Text);
    object.append_section_data(text, &[1; 30], 4);

    let func1_offset = object.append_section_data(text, &[1; 30], 4);
    assert_eq!(func1_offset, 32);
    let func1_symbol = object.add_symbol(write::Symbol {
        name: b"func1".to_vec(),
        value: func1_offset,
        size: 32,
        kind: SymbolKind::Text,
        scope: SymbolScope::Linkage,
        weak: false,
        section: write::SymbolSection::Section(text),
        flags: SymbolFlags::None,
    });
    object
        .add_relocation(
            text,
            write::Relocation {
                offset: 8,
                size: 64,
                kind: RelocationKind::Absolute,
                encoding: RelocationEncoding::Generic,
                symbol: func1_symbol,
                addend: 0,
            },
        )
        .unwrap();
    object
        .add_relocation(
            text,
            write::Relocation {
                offset: 16,
                size: 32,
                kind: RelocationKind::Relative,
                encoding: RelocationEncoding::Generic,
                symbol: func1_symbol,
                addend: -4,
            },
        )
        .unwrap();

    let bytes = object.write().unwrap();
    let object = read::File::parse(&*bytes).unwrap();
    assert_eq!(object.format(), BinaryFormat::MachO);
    assert_eq!(object.architecture(), Architecture::X86_64);
    assert_eq!(object.endianness(), Endianness::Little);

    let mut sections = object.sections();

    let text = sections.next().unwrap();
    println!("{:?}", text);
    let text_index = text.index();
    assert_eq!(text.name(), Ok("__text"));
    assert_eq!(text.segment_name(), Ok(Some("__TEXT")));
    assert_eq!(text.kind(), SectionKind::Text);
    assert_eq!(text.address(), 0);
    assert_eq!(text.size(), 62);
    assert_eq!(&text.data().unwrap()[..30], &[1; 30]);
    assert_eq!(&text.data().unwrap()[32..62], &[1; 30]);

    let mut symbols = object.symbols();

    let symbol = symbols.next().unwrap();
    println!("{:?}", symbol);
    let func1_symbol = symbol.index();
    assert_eq!(symbol.name(), Ok("_func1"));
    assert_eq!(symbol.address(), func1_offset);
    assert_eq!(symbol.kind(), SymbolKind::Text);
    assert_eq!(symbol.section_index(), Some(text_index));
    assert_eq!(symbol.scope(), SymbolScope::Linkage);
    assert_eq!(symbol.is_weak(), false);
    assert_eq!(symbol.is_undefined(), false);

    let mut relocations = text.relocations();

    let (offset, relocation) = relocations.next().unwrap();
    println!("{:?}", relocation);
    assert_eq!(offset, 8);
    assert_eq!(relocation.kind(), RelocationKind::Absolute);
    assert_eq!(relocation.encoding(), RelocationEncoding::Generic);
    assert_eq!(relocation.size(), 64);
    assert_eq!(
        relocation.target(),
        read::RelocationTarget::Symbol(func1_symbol)
    );
    assert_eq!(relocation.addend(), 0);

    let (offset, relocation) = relocations.next().unwrap();
    println!("{:?}", relocation);
    assert_eq!(offset, 16);
    assert_eq!(relocation.kind(), RelocationKind::Relative);
    assert_eq!(relocation.encoding(), RelocationEncoding::X86RipRelative);
    assert_eq!(relocation.size(), 32);
    assert_eq!(
        relocation.target(),
        read::RelocationTarget::Symbol(func1_symbol)
    );
    assert_eq!(relocation.addend(), -4);

    let map = object.symbol_map();
    let symbol = map.get(func1_offset + 1).unwrap();
    assert_eq!(symbol.address(), func1_offset);
    assert_eq!(symbol.name(), "_func1");
    assert_eq!(map.get(func1_offset - 1), None);
}

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub