text:
Iraq death figures - exchange with Jon Snow
To Channel 4 News and the BBC asking them to explain and amend their use of Iraq Body Count death figures in reports and presentations.
To Channel 4 News
presenters Jon Snow and Krishnan Guru-Murthy:
Dear Jon and Krishnan,
I wonder if Channel 4 News would care to review what appears to be its selective use of Iraq Body Count (IBC) figures for civilian war deaths in Iraq.
The problem is discussed here, with reference to a particular Channel 4 News report on Iraq:
As noted, the following suggests a simplified alternative which, rather than IBC's limited and misleading count, offers a more informed and balanced range of figures:
Civilian war deaths in Iraq
(range):
Iraq Body Count (IBC)
(till Dec 2012)
Lancet/Johns Hopkins survey
(March 2003 - end of June 2006)
Opinion Research Business (ORB) survey
(August 12–19, 2007)
I'd be most grateful for your thoughts on replacing sole reference to IBC with this fairer and more viewer-serving graphic.
Reply from Jon Snow:
Thanks John..it is eternally controversial..from my own experience reporting in Iraq the IBC count has always seemed very low..I try not to use it....The Lancet figure may be more truthful...I doubt we can be more accurate in reality than say that credible sources believe more than half a million died and at least four million were displaced.
Thanks for your help..best wishes,
Hi Jon
Many thanks for replying. It's very much appreciated.
I also appreciate your open acknowledgement that the IBC count "[seems] very low", your reticence about using it and that the Lancet figure "may be more truthful".
Alas, the report referred to specifically didn't offer viewers any information on those more "credible sources" indicating, at least, over half a million dead.
Which returns us to the original question of what specific undertaking Ch 4 News might give in replacing the IBC count with a more informative set of figures. Any further thoughts?
Also sent:
Hi Jon,
Another contributor at the Media Lens message board makes this further vital point:
"Perhaps it should also be pointed out that The Lancet and others are cited without reservation on other issues (I think mass-killings in Congo is an example). Hence, for the sake of not just balance but consistency too, news broadcasters should necessarily be citing other estimates (e.g. Lancet) too."
No further response, as yet, received.
To BBC (via online complaints form):
I'd like to request that the BBC end its selective use of Iraq Body Count (IBC) when denoting civilian war deaths in Iraq.
The issue of BBC bias towards IBC and the false impressions it serves is discussed here.
Please consider replacing sole reference to IBC with this fairer and more viewer-serving graphic.
The use of IBC as an 'authoritative' and singularly-mentioned figure is widespread across the BBC, which suggests that a specific executive/editorial decision has been taken in this regard.
I'd like to see any copy or/and details of that decision-making process.
As the BBC's own charter/editorial guidelines specify a requirement to be neutral and impartial, I look forward to a fairer presentation of this key information. If such an alteration is not undertaken, I intend to seek a ruling on this matter from the BBC Trust.
For the purposes of this complaint, I cite the following online report and its singular, biased use of IBC figures:
Iraq 10 years on: In numbers
It's also worth recalling here that in 2007 the BBC's own World Service obtained restricted government information denoting advice from a senior MoD adviser that the Lancet study was "robust":
"Asked by officials to comment on the survey, the chief scientific adviser to the Ministry of Defence, Sir Roy Anderson, concluded: "The study design is robust and employs methods that are regarded as close to 'best practice'." He recommended "caution in publicly criticising the study"."
This confirmation of authenticity further undermines the BBC's ongoing omission of the Lancet study and the use of IBC as its sole or principal source.
Getting the BBC to concede any of these points is, of course, interminably difficult. As many who have used the BBC's labyrinthine complaints system may attest, the prospects of receiving any official acknowledgement of bias, imbalance or breach of guidelines is unlikely. But, as ever, one useful purpose of the exercise is to further highlight that very process of evasion and denial.
Posted by John Hilley at 09:47 No comments:
Iraq death figures - simple and balanced
How often are we still seeing media outlets use a specious, low-ended figure for civilian war deaths in Iraq?
For example, last week's Channel 4 News '10 years after' report on Iraq (featuring stories of UK military victims) showed a graphic from Iraq Body Count (IBC) with its figure of 111,827 civilian deaths.
The standard presentation of IBC figures by the BBC, Guardian, Independent, Channel 4 News and almost every other 'authoritative' news outlet allows for a gross understatement of fatalities.
And it's that simple viewer/reader familiarity with IBC which represents such stark and effective propaganda.
Given the 'moderate number of deaths' message conveyed by IBC's figure, and the obvious interests that serves, it's unlikely that this selective source will be replaced by media like the BBC.
So, perhaps there's a need to press for an equally simplified set of words stating the actual range of figures.
How hard would it be for the BBC, Channel 4 or any other media organisation to source, write and put out something as simple and informative as this:
This doesn't tell the viewer everything, of course. But it does offer a fair summary of the available information.
While varying issues of methodology and application remain to be understood (as in the distinction between IBC's limited count procedure and the Lancet/ORB epidemiologist-based estimations of all war-related mortality) this kind of graphic, at least, permits the simple, straight message of a credible body of research pointing to much higher figures than that suggested by IBC.
And why, after all, should IBC's figure be deemed more credible than the peer-reviewed Lancet studies, (generally viewed as a 'highly prestigious' place to be published) or that of ORB, a much-used polling/research-based organisation?
Given their own proclaimed codes of 'balance' and 'impartiality', the BBC have a particular obligation to reflect such differentiation in their reports, graphics and other presentations.
Some may say that, whether 100,000, 650,000 or 1,000,000, a terrible crime has been committed, all such losses are appalling and that we needn't dwell on the actual numbers.
Yet, how easily that denies the rights of those mass victims, their families and humanity at large, while allowing the convenient impression, for the perpetrators, that a 'minimal war' has been waged with 'limited' casualties. As in any conflict, there's an ethical duty to establish the actual extent of the killing in Iraq, as well as the mass refugee crisis, social breakdown and wider suffering that's gone with it.
Ongoing efforts to expose the political and media disguising of Iraq's fatality figures are also important in serving to limit the potential for further murderous 'interventions' and pretence death counts.
* Please see/support this "campaign to raise funds for a poll of the UK public to discover estimates of Iraqi deaths since 2003".
Posted by John Hilley at 11:27 1 comment:
Greenwald challenges Guardian over Chomsky smears
In an honourable article, Guardian columnist Glenn Greenwald has challenged another key Guardian piece over its smearing of Noam Chomsky.
In denouncing the 'interview'-based report by Aida Edemariam, Greenwald has, effectively, rebuked the Guardian itself over such crude and shallow output.
Greenwald states:
"One very common tactic for enforcing political orthodoxies is to malign the character, "style" and even mental health of those who challenge them.
He goes on:
"This method is applied with particular aggression to those who engage in any meaningful dissent against the society's most powerful factions and their institutions.
And, as Greenwald reminds us:
"Nobody has been subjected to these vapid discrediting techniques more than Noam Chomsky."
Greenwald summarises Edemariam's charges against Chomsky:
"Chomsky is a sarcastic, angry, soporific, scowling, sneering self-hating Jew, devoid of hope and speaking from hell, whose alpha-male brutality drives him to win at all costs, and who imposes on the world disappointingly crude and simplistic arguments to the point where he is so inconsequential that one wonders whether he has ever changed even a single thing in his 60 years of political work."
And, while acknowledging Edemariam's more complimentary references to Chomsky's life and work, Greenwald concludes that:
"the entire piece is infused with these standard personality caricatures that offer the reader an easy means of mocking, deriding and scorning Chomsky without having to confront a single fact he presents."
Edemariam is, of course, still only one other Guardian writer, so Greenwald's criticisms, one might argue, doesn't mean the Guardian itself is culpable in smearing Chomsky. Yet, it's notable that Edemariam seems sufficiently confident of editorial approval to be writing such pieces, particularly after the Guardian's last disgraceful savaging of Chomsky in the paper's infamous Emma Brockes article.
In this regard, the Guardian does have some core responsibility for Edemariam's piece, giving Greenwald's denunciation of it more serious weight.
With the same presumed approval, Edemariam has authored other such character-assaulting pieces, perhaps most notably on the Liberal Democrat MP David Ward after his alleged 'anti-semitic' comments on Palestine-Israel and Jews.
Admirably, following Edemariam's article, Chomsky himself defended Ward, completely rejecting such charges.
The cultivation of Greenwald's own particular autonomy at the Guardian, meanwhile, is now quite fascinating to observe. Again, some might argue that, just like Edemariam's 'freedom to comment', so do we have Greenwald's 'freedom to disagree' - all serving to enhance the Guardian's proclaimed 'openness'.
Yet, this has to be seen in the context of Greenwald as a 'prize catch' for the Guardian, with its specific eye on generating a US online readership, a corporate-driven strategy which involved the Guardian agreeing to give Greenwald complete editorial control over his own output at the paper. It also serves to shore-up the Guardian's claim to being a seriously 'radical-reforming' organ.
In practice, the Guardian has a news reportage dominated by dutiful lobby correspondents like Michael White and Ewen MacAskill, an editorial output infused with Alan Rusbridger's Oxbridge sensibilities and a comments section crowded with liberal favourites like Jonathan Freedland, Polly Toynbee, Simon Tisdall, Rory Carroll, Marina Hyde and Aida Edemariam, all running character pieces praising or excusing 'our' elite while attacking and smearing people like Assange and Chavez - a treatment which, as Greenwald suggests, is "applied with particular aggression to those who engage in any meaningful dissent".
Notable as they are, the only two regular counter figures at the Guardian, Greenwald and Seumas Milne, still plough limited, if encouraging, furrows against that dominant, power-serving output.
Which makes Greenwald's noble defence of Chomsky against such standard Guardian abuse all the more welcome.
Panorama, Peter Taylor and other journalist 'fools'
Panorama's special edition The Spies Who Fooled the World is a typically contrived BBC pitch that, while claiming to show a tangled web of deceit over the war in Iraq, still absolves both the intelligence establishment and political leaders of outright blame.
Presenter Peter Taylor's report is part of a wider, well-crafted BBC narrative on 'regrettable' actions: the 'mistaken' rush to war, the intelligence 'oversights' and political 'errors' that allowed it, and, once commenced, the tactical 'miscalculations' made in its prosecution.
Taylor reports how Western intelligence followed spurious informants, doubting their information, yet came to use it as the basis for war in Iraq. In essence, we were 'hoodwinked' through a chain of 'calamitous' intelligence calls and political 'misjudgements'.
Yet, contrary to Taylor's line, most of the world was never fooled by these 'sources', the intelligence chiefs who cultivated them or the politicians who sought to trick us all with their deceitful spin.
Nor, as evidenced by the mass anti-war protests, was the world entirely taken-in by all the slavish media outpourings pressing us into war.
So, it comes as a notable 'admission' that Taylor was himself 'fooled' by Blair.
Replying to messages from a contributor at the Media Lens message board, Taylor states:
"For your information, at the time I believed what the Prime Minister said, not having the knowledge that I have now. I suspect there are many like me." (20 March 2013)
It's a revealing, yet not entirely surprising, claim of 'veiled ignorance'.
One suspects that there are, indeed, many journalists like Taylor still using this shallow excuse of believing Blair's claims in the 'absence' of alternative information. We know, for example, that flagship Newsnight presenter Jeremy Paxman also accepted without question Colin Powell's spurious war pitch to the UN.
And yet, in the approach to war there was a wealth of credible information casting massive doubt on the West's charges of Iraqi WMD, notably from key on-the-ground weapons inspectors and monitors like Hans Blix and Scott Ritter. Why was so much of their assessment ignored or marginalised?
Besides the automatic 'instincts' that, instead, draw journalists like Taylor to official 'sources', what might we say, then, about their own 'limited intelligence' in supposedly 'falling' for Blair's crass distortions?
Consider, after all, that Taylor, veteran of many reports into black operations in Northern Ireland, is hailed as, perhaps, the BBC's most 'intelligence-savvy' investigator. Could someone of his 'deep understanding', in all seriousness, have bought such facile claims?
A more intelligent reading of Taylor's apologia is that such journalists are not 'duped' but constrained from following any reading that might lead dangerously beyond the official script. Thus, they reflexively place their trust in 'our' leaders, 'our' system of governance and 'our' media's capacity to hold it all to account.
They may still endeavour to 'expose' certain elite manipulations, deceits, even outright lies, but the default response is to believe in the ultimate decency and enlightened intentions of 'ours'. And when working for the BBC, that means a particular respect for safe establishment boundaries.
When further asked about taking Blair's claims at face-value, Taylor responded:
"To end this conversation. I believed him at the time – September 2002 – but now know, as do we all, that he was wrong. I do not believe he deliberately lied. I agree with what Lord Butler said in the programme, that he misled himself."
Precisely how, one wonders, might Blair have "misled himself"? On what basis can Taylor assert such inner understanding of Blair's thinking? Isn't it so very trusting of Taylor to endorse Lord Butler's protective claim and conclude that Blair didn't actually lie?
Even the military-siding Max Hastings, writing in the Daily Mail, now claims to have little doubt about this question, having also admitted to being 'duped' by Blair and British intelligence:
"Before 2003 I wrote many times in these pages that Britain should have nothing to do with a recklessly irresponsible American Republican adventure in Iraq. But then I read the government's report on Saddam's weapons. I felt that this had to be believed, and an invasion reluctantly supported. My wife Penny, who never swallowed Blair and Campbell's claims, argued bitterly with me. I said pompously: 'It's impossible that the Government and the Secret Intelligence Service would lie to us about something this big.' I was as wrong as I could be. Blair, Campbell and Scarlett made fools of many of us. What seems to make it all much worse is that they got away with it."
Denouncing the celebrity reception now enjoyed by Blair and key accomplices like Campbell, Hastings now wants to say it clearly to Blair: "You lied, you lied, you lied."
And yet, again, what can we say of this apparent 'loss' and sudden 'recovery' of journalistic alertness? Tragically for Iraq and its decimated people, belated 'honesty' can't quite make up for a servile unwillingness to question power when it really matters.
It seems reasonable to assume that many journalists have no particular or special ability to read such situations. But the more basic point is their ready conformity to standard reporting of them. And this includes the current 'confessions' of 'once-fooled' journalists, a now safe, self-indulgent, 'from-a-distance' retrospective which can speak of 'errors' past but rarely of the system itself that keeps many of them still 'believing' that the war was all just a ghastly set of 'mistakes'.
This circumvention of blame involves a prudent silence on two other awkward issues: the extent of Iraqi deaths, including the pre-war sanctions that were already ravaging the population; and the complicit role of the media itself, notably its liberal arm, in ignoring such suffering, rationalising the case for war and continuing to protect Blair thereafter.
Thus, Hastings is conveniently less expressive on these core questions, animated mainly about 'our' country's losses. Again, such reticence to engage these issues suggests the base truth that most journalists instinctively understand the career 'foolishness', the real mistake, for them, in 'deviating' from a safe, moderated reportage.
Notably absent in either Taylor's Panorama package or the angry lament from Hastings is any reference to the million Iraqi deaths denoted in the Lancet studies or the media's selective repetition of 'presentable' figures like Iraq Body Count's 100,000 or under.
All the rational evidence before the invasion showed that Blair was scheming with Bush to oust Saddam in pursuit of Iraq's oil, a brazen imperialist enterprise which, with a million UN-estimated deaths already from sanctions alongside the million more from war, represents the greatest mass killing of modern times.
So, what faith should the public now place in 'fooled' reporters like Taylor who, having 'trusted' Blair, are still engaged in trying to fathom his 'mistakes' rather than his crimes?
Despite the wealth of information that was always available to journalists, both before and during the invasion, it's telling that so many 'duped' ones like Taylor are still prominently here now, ten years on, 'informing' us of all the 'lamentable errors' that were made.
Spinning this line, the politicians and intelligence heads that led us to war can be presented as 'foolish', even 'duplicitous', but never truly calculating, and certainly never criminal.
Yet, alert to so much past distortion, many won't be fooled again by such media subterfuge.
Like Blair and the intelligence chiefs, Taylor is, ultimately, no fool. Nor can we assume that, as said of Blair, he was misled or that he misled himself.
Rather, like so many other journalists who now find themselves on the provenly 'wrong side of history', Taylor's Panorama film is a not-so-foolish exercise in damage limitation, a sly revisionism that seeks to mitigate and excuse the judgements of Blair and his cabinet, the intelligence elite, the BBC and, not least, power-serving journalists like Taylor himself.
New press regulation won't curtail liberal media deceit
Much proprietorial indignation and editorial concern has been expressed over new powers about to be granted to an 'independent' press regulator.
Yet while the post-Leveson deal struck by the three main parties and pressure group Hacked Off gives seeming protection against unreasonable or invasive reportage, it's a sideshow to the greater issue of liberal media distortion and the system-sustaining function of papers like the Guardian.
Indeed, it's darkly ironic of the liberal press's own sense of self-importance that, while welcoming the new regulator, it still considers any such scheme a worrying constraint on its own 'vanguard' role against powerful politicians and media owners.
Typically, the Guardian's Polly Toynbee has been 'handing out' medals to Miliband for leading the charge against Cameron and the press barons, to Clegg for joining with him and to the Guardian, Independent and Financial Times for supporting their endeavours against the wrath of the Sun, Mail, Express and tabloid others.
Also commending Tory rebels and the campaigning Hugh Grant, Toynbee applauds this alliance for pushing Cameron, fearful of a Commons defeat on the issue, to drop his outright rejection of regulation.
Toynbee herself revels in the role of high liberal protector here, berating the hypocrisy of Sun editor Trevor Kavanagh and his associates who have been quoting lofty statements on the loss of core freedoms. In righteous denunciation, Toynbee asserts:
"They set a raucous rightwing news and opinion agenda that distorts the balance of public debate and warps the broadcasters' search for the centre ground."
Thus, we have Toynbee 'guiding us back' towards that 'balanced debate', a 'proper centre-grounded' discussion on press 'rights and responsibilities', proclaiming an outcome that all, Cameron included, can now say will protect the public from unwarranted intrusion.
So, who would reasonably deny that, championed by the likes of Toynbee, a victory of sorts has been realised for public protection from wilful hacking and other personal invasions?
Certainly, those for whom the price of such 'securities' come at the cost of serious free speech. And, as the shadow of state authoritarianism looms ever darker, this is a concern that can't be ignored.
And yet, it's here we see crusading liberals not just chiding Kavanagh et al but pitching their own righteous roles as principled proponents of moderated freedoms.
While acknowledging the need for new press regulation after the hacking scandals, many liberal editorials have been asking readers if they really want a censored press, one that would, for example, have placed restrictions on reporting the Savile issue.
The Independent, thus, urged a week before the agreement:
"Britain needs a media watchdog that protects individuals and press freedoms alike. That means the industry building bridges and hammering out a compromise – and doing so in public."
And of the actual outcome:
"Given the behaviour of parts of the press over the past few years, and given the Prime Minister's decision to appoint a judge to shine so unflinching a light on it, something akin to what was agreed yesterday was always the probable outcome. It is not perfect, from the press perspective. But it could have been worse. Now, all the press must put the posturing and face-saving behind it, accept the new system and move on. Most importantly, we must begin to rebuild public trust in journalism."
All seemingly noble, cathartic and cooperative words. Yet, like most of the liberal press, these are stunningly posturing reactions from an organ which has shown little interest in moral, accountable journalism.
How many of these liberal papers have been seriously reporting the higher, hideous behaviour of this country's politicians and their darkest war crimes? More particularly, how many are actually campaigning to have the perpetrators indicted? And, testing the real reach of a free and courageous press, how many journalists and editors are ready to discuss the media's complicity in these matters across their own 'freedom-serving' pages?
In a model discussion of Iraq and media servility, the latest Media Lens alert notes, in particular, how the Guardian, Independent and other liberal organs slavishly editorialised 10 years ago in favour or rationalisation of the war, and, even after all the deceit and carnage, still came to protect Blair and his circle.
While Murdoch covets freedom to print celebrity voyeurism, character stripping and other tittle-tattle, 'qualities' like the Guardian warn about the possible spiking of more critical news and comment. While the Guardian seem reconciled to the new regulatory arrangement, underpinned by Royal Charter rather than primary legislation, they maintain 'misgivings' over the potential curtailment of investigative journalism.
Again, all seemingly honourable. But consider that these warnings come from a paper that has launched every kind of personal slur against Julian Assange, that, through reporters like Rory Carroll, have demonised and caricatured Hugo Chavez and, as noted, has used every opportunity to protect Blair and his coterie.
It's also the same newspaper's editor, Alan Rusbridger, who told how he had forewarned David Cameron about his involvement with Andy Coulson.
Is that the proper role of a 'vanguard, power-monitoring' newspaper? Or does it indicate the kind of political-media clubability that, like this new regulatory agreement, keeps the whole system of power smoothly functioning?
Good media, bad media? Good club, bad club? Good regulation, bad regulation?
The most subtle and effective propaganda is not that which proclaims the 'truth', but that which purports to set the 'choices'; to define the very terms of debate.
Thus, are we fed this narrative-setting 'dilemma' between personal privacy or press freedoms, a liberal tugging of 'morals' and 'rights' which, conveniently, never pulls towards any critical questioning of the corporate-driven media itself.
Hence, we have Toynbee, in good-media persona, pitching the Miliband-Clegg-Guardian-Indy axis against that of Murdoch, the Mail and sleazy right wing others - a queasy, self-acclaiming posture we saw all throughout Leveson.
And, in complementary form, Toynbee, Rusbridger, Miliband, Clegg and Hacked Off can all say that Leveson, a strangulated, gentlemanly 'inquiry', was ultimately successful in its remit, findings and recommendations.
Thus, the liberal media 'debate' becomes a system-reinforcing exercise in itself: authenticating the 'consultative', 'reforming' capacities of token inquiries; praising the parliamentary class for navigating these 'difficult' negotiations; and back-slapping the liberal media for bringing all the 'essential' questions to public light.
No more effective propaganda boost could the establishment wish for.
Free speech? How insulting
Here's an illuminating tale of state punishment creep from Bethan Tichborne who was convicted for saying that David Cameron "had blood on his hands".
Bethan, a teacher working with disabled children, was arrested, beaten by police and subsequently fined by District Judge Tim Pattinson after protesting the large number of people now dead as a result of the disability cuts enforced by Cameron and his government.
Judge Pattinson said her comments could "hardly be more insulting to anyone, whether a politician or not".
One can, of course, see the particular hurt, distress and career worry Mr Cameron must have felt over such insults. And how reassuring to have this judge's objective and impartial sentencing on such matters. To think of the whining ingratitude of people like Tichborne after all the cost-saving fatalities Mr Cameron and Mr Osborne (with the caring help of ATOS) have helped deliver for the country. Despite all those now dying through the loss of life-sustaining benefits, we just can't have these misguided protesters and other moaning malcontents going around besmirching the good name of our esteemed leaders.
It's rumoured that Tony Blair is greatly encouraged by the ruling and may now use it to sue the many millions who have caused him similar emotional upset and career embarrassment with their scandalous accusations that he's a liar, a money-making opportunist and a war criminal.
Pope Francis and Latin America - identities past and present
Whatever the wider reasoning of cardinals in Rome for the elevation of Jorge Mario Bergoglio to Pope Francis I, it's an appointment of vital significance for Latin America, the world's largest Catholic-populated region.
In particular, the conclave's selection of Bergoglio raises two key questions: one about his past 'pastoral' identity, and a second about how his political identity might now be felt across Latin America.
The first relates to his alleged involvement with the Argentinian junta during its 'dirty war' against leftist dissidents, most notably, for Bergoglio, his alleged complicity in the regime's 1976 abduction of two leftist Jesuit priests, Orlando Yorio and Francisco Jalics, both, as noted at the Guardian:
"seized by navy troops in the slums of Buenos Aires and held and tortured for five months at the ESMA camp, a navy base in the capital where 5,000 people were murdered by the military junta."
The second issue concerns Bergoglio's populist conservatism and how his elevation may be read as an effort to stem the rise of leftist social movements, much of it closely linked to liberation theology, across Latin America.
In a revealing interview, Horicio Verbitsky, the Argentinian journalist, head of human rights group Center for Legal and Social Studies and author of El Silencio - charting Bergoglio's associations with the junta between 1976-83 - has spoken to Democracy Now about both issues.
Before outlining the claims of the book, Verbitsky offers his primary view of the new pope:
"The main thing to understand about Francis I is that he's a conservative populist, in the same style that John Paul II was. He's a man of strong conservative positions in doctrine questions, but with a touch for popular taste. He preaches in rail stations, in the streets. He goes to the quarters, the poor quarters of the city to pray. He doesn't wait the people going into the church; he goes for them. But his message is absolutely conservative."
Verbitsky goes on to discuss the documents he found in the course of his research, incriminating Bergoglio in the surrendering of the two Jesuit priests to the military:
"The first document is a note in which Bergoglio asked the ministry to [renew] the passport of one of these two Jesuits that, after his releasing, was living in Germany, asking that the passport was renewed without necessity of this priest coming back to Argentina. The second document is a note from the officer that received the petition recommending to his superior, the minister, the refusal of the renewal of the passport. And the third document is a note from the same officer telling that these priests have links with subversion—that was the name that the military gave to all the people involved in opposition to the government, political or armed opposition to the military—and that he was jailed in the mechanics school of the navy, and saying that this information was provided to the officer by Father Jorge Mario Bergoglio, provincial superior of the Jesuit company. This means, to my understanding, a double standard. He asked the passport given to the priest in a formal note with his signature, but under the table he said the opposite and repeated the accusations that produced the kidnapping of these priests."
Despite strong denials from Bergoglio and new dismissals by the Vatican, both priests,Verbitsky claims, confirmed their accounts of torture and collusion to him, Orlando Yorio, who died in 2000, adding that Bergoglio was party to his interrogation, and Francisco Jalics, still in a German monastery, now reconciled and reticent about pursuing any further case against Bergoglio.
News of Bergoglio's election has sparked much recrimination from many of the families of those tortured and disappeared. Others rationalise Bergoglio's position during the period as 'pragmatic engagement' of the regime rather than outright collaboration. Yet they also concede that he made no courageous effort to defend the priests or voice strong opposition to dictator Jose Rafael Videla. It's a rancour that also affects Bergoglio's relations with Argentinian president Cristina Fernández de Kirchner who has appeared keen to assist those still in pursuit of those linked to the junta.
Whatever efforts made by the Vatican and general media to dismiss or excuse Bergoglia's guilt or involvement, such complicity is unlikely to be erased or forgotten, a shadow over his papacy which prompts further suggestions of his appointment as an establishment populist.
Democracy Now presenter Juan Gonzalez goes on, in this regard, to ask Ernesto Seman, an academic historian and former reporter in Argentina, about contextual similarities between the elevation of John Paul II and Francis I:
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: I wanted to ask you about that, precisely, and the parallels, it seems to me, in terms of the cardinals selecting John Paul II, when he was elevated to pope, he coming out of Poland, where there was a Solidarity movement and in opposition to the previous government, that, in essence, his elevation helped to fortify that movement. I'm wondering whether there's some parallel now with the changes in Latin America now to the elevation of a very conservative cardinal from that region, might help to bolster forces that are opposed to continuing this enormous change that's occurring in Latin America.
ERNESTO SEMÁN: You might say so. The problem that you have there is to what extent that's going to make the gap between the church and the Catholic followers even deeper. In the case of Argentina and some of the social issues that happened over the last decade, you see that in a country that 75 percent of people consider themselves Catholic, has been a strong support to some of the social decisions made by the Kirchner administration that Bergoglio opposed. The last and most important one was the same marriage law—that is, matrimonio igualitario in Argentina, egalitarian marriage.
Bergoglio's opposition to Kirchner on doctrinal issues is not, of course, atypical of wider feelings among the church's cardinals. Like most, he is rigidly opposed to same-sex marriage, abortion, contraception and homosexual relationships - though has, apparently, advocated greater tolerance for the latter.
But the cardinals' choice of Bergoglio also appears to favour the promotion of a politically-moderated social conservatism, particularly for Latin America, in opposition to liberation theology and its associate social movements. Internal to this is the Vatican's negation of Latin American priests working in the same brave, community spirit as Oscar Romero, Bishop of El Salvador, assassinated in 1980 by a CIA-backed death squad.
In these regards, it's telling how much political and media praise Bergoglio has enjoyed in the days of his papal ascendancy compared with the widespread castigation of Hugo Chavez following his death. While Bergoglio approves a kind of 'spiritual' social justice tied to charitable awareness, Chavez championed revolutionary social justice underpinned by decisive economic transformation.
Reflecting popular celebration in Buenos Aires, Bergoglio's appointment would appear to confirm a continuity of his affable persona, the much-noted 'common man'. Yet, on both doctrinal and social positions, none of that appears to include any kind of radical agenda. And it's the latter which, in particular rejection of anything Bolivarian, is certain to endear him to Washington and the wider Western elite.
His arrival, for Latin America, even the 'Catholic world' at large, may provide some soothing objections to the harshest neoliberalism while still holding to a conservative market-determinism. As with the Obamafication of politics and social hopes in the US, one might see this as a certain Francisification of social expectations in Latin America. Like 'brand Obama's' pacification of a poor, notably black, underclass, none of Bergoglio's pastoral pacifying of social discontent, again in contrast to that proclaimed by Chavez, will be unwelcome by Wall Street, the IMF or their corporate-vested associates.
As Democracy Now further enquire of the pope's personality and political persuasions:
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Do you have any expectations that, now that he's been elevated to pope, that he may have some change in his perspectives on some of these issues? Or do you expect him to maintain the same populist conservatism that you say have marked his rise through the church hierarchy?
HORACIO VERBITSKY: I do believe that he is a man—he is the man he is, and he will not change. His first days as a pope show perfectly this attitude of humility. He refused the limousine and took the bus. He asked the people to pray for him, instead of praying him for them. These kind of gestures would be common in his tenure as a pope. And it's possible that he would be revered by the masses because of this different attitude that seems more democratic and less monarchical than that of the former Benedicto XVI.
But in doctrinary questions, he would be tied to conservative [ideas], and this is the thing that I wait. And I believe that he can play, concerning Latin America and the populist governments of the region, the same role that Pope John Paul played against East Europe during the first years of his tenure.
AMY GOODMAN: Horacio Verbitsky, do you think that Cardinal Bergoglio would have become Pope Francis if he hadn't played the role he did during the dirty wars, if he had sided with these two Jesuit priests, who were speaking up for the poor at the time and who were great proponents of liberation theology?
HORACIO VERBITSKY: He was against liberation theology. He was a man, during his tenure in the Jesuit company—the publication of the Jesuit company are full of articles, of pieces, against liberation theology. Being among the poor doesn't mean to be for the poor.
Assaulted by the vast issues of Vatican corruption, paedophilia and other sex scandals, the Catholic hierarchy may now be trusting in the new sweep and renewing force of this incoming pope.
And yet, despite all the celebratory theatre and promoted profile of the political 'outsider', Pope Francis also carries with him this dark, past baggage of insider complicity in regime terror.
It also remains to be seen whether Bergoglio's seeming humility and ease among the marginalised might translate into any more meaningful agenda for social reform.
Perhaps 'repentance', if not confession, of an identity past might be offered up in more evangelical opposition to the unholy junta of Washington and Wall Street.
Yet, for those across Latin America and elsewhere struggling to escape the ravages of neoliberalism and working in liberationist hope of a Chavez-style participatory democracy, there's still little to be inspired by in Bergoglio's words or actions.
Verbitsky's last line here is worth holding to: "Being among the poor doesn't mean to be for the poor."
Iraq and the BBC - 'success or failure'?
Here's a seemingly instructive, compassionate and moving story from the BBC's Kevin Connolly on the suffering victims of Iraq.
Connolly takes us through the terrible pain and disfigurement of US bombing victim Marwa Shimari, her heroic struggle to make a life and the empathy he himself feels for her.
Marwa, just twelve on that fateful day in 2003, lost her right leg. Her sister, Adra, eight, was killed in the bombing.
Expressions of anger towards their Western attackers are noted in the words of an admirable German writer and former politician who gave generously in money and other support in helping Marwa to recover.
Connolly also couples Marwa's story with the near-death experience of US bomber pilot Captain Kim Campbell, still traumatised by her service in Iraq:
"She was brave and resourceful but war is an arbitrary and fickle business - if the ground fire that hit her aircraft had been just a few feet to the right or the left then all that courage and resourcefulness might have counted for nothing. The truth is that Kim Campbell was lucky. Marwa Shimari was not."
He might also have said, more explicitly, that Kim Campbell was part of a criminal bombing campaign, while Marwa Shimari was a direct victim of that crime.
Connolly's compassion for victims like Marwa may be genuine, an expression of basic humanity, but it's also superficial in its resistance to the actual truth of the West's invasion and mass murder.
Aside from the article's shameful evasions on the overall death toll in Iraq - likely to have been in excess of a million victims - Connolly also resorts to this kind of crude distortion:
"It is part of Iraq's tragedy that its oil wealth could easily have been spent on providing top-class hospitals as good as those of Switzerland or Germany or the US. But of course it wasn't. The ramshackle health system provided under the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein couldn't cope with the flow of casualties."
As Media Lens asked of this remark:
"Do you think Connolly has any idea what the 1991 Gulf War and US-UK-led sanctions from 1990-2003 did to the Iraqi health service?" (ML message board, 12 March 2013.)
There's also classic understatement from Connolly on the depth of opposition to the West's invasion and killing:
"The Iraq war had always been controversial in Europe - even in Britain which was part of the coalition that sent troops to fight. That political scepticism - and a profound sense of shock at the devastation that modern warfare brings - quickly translated into an impulse to do something to help the people of Iraq." (Italics added.)
Remember, this was a war defiantly opposed by millions on the streets of Britain, Europe and across the world.
And with this vacuity of facts and absence of blame, Connolly's concluding words on the invasion underline his betrayal of Marwa and the suffering others of Iraq:
Ten years on from the invasion of Iraq, there is a huge temptation to try to judge whether the intervention was a success or a failure - a temptation to which we are certainly not immune.
And it is possible to make a couple of simple observations about how life is returning to the streets of Baghdad, where there are new restaurants and new car showrooms, and a new sense of normality in many places, much of the time.
But judging the outcome of military interventions like the allied invasion of 2003 will take many years. Certainly far more than 10.
A "success or a failure"? How many times have we heard that queasy, power-supporting question posed by liberal-leaning journalists, especially from the BBC?
The very premise behind such comments suggest that while reporters like Connolly may feel compassion for victims like Marwa, they are also deeply complicit in mystifying and disguising the true, premeditated nature of the West's "intervention" and the specific crimes of the perpetrators.
It needn't take ten minutes, never mind ten years or more, to work out the simple truth of an historic war crime. But Connolly hides behind a deceitful BBC 'etiquette' of 'impartial' reflection and supposed 'balance', never once, clearly and unequivocally, denouncing the guilty.
Compassion for victims like Marwa require more than human sympathy, empathy or elucidatioin of their suffering. It requires the courage, the journalistic integrity, to say on their behalf, and in a spirit of proactive care, that Blair, Bush and the rest of their murderous circle are directly responsible and should be on trial for high war crimes.
Ten years on, as the rest of its feeble, apologetic coverage has shown, the BBC is still in complicit denial of such basic truths.
The Western powers and their corporate clients didn't 'fail' in Iraq, they did precisely what they intended and got all the essential things they went after, including the murder and chaotic disintegration of a society.
As with Connolly's lame, liberal and ultimately mendacious pondering on the West's "success or failure" in Iraq, neither should this article on that country's suffering people be judged a "success or failure". It's actually a journalistic disgrace and a moral crime in itself.
BBC-speak and an antidote from Thomson
Another neat example of state and service media speaking as one voice on the selective denunciation of murder.
In reporting the execution of seven foreign construction workers in Nigeria, one British, at the hands of Jama'atu Ansarul Muslimina Fi Bidalis Sudan (Ansaru), the BBC gave headline prominence to UK Foreign Secretary William Hague, announcing that:
Mr Hague condemned the killings as "an act of pure, cold-blooded murder".
And with that headline delivery, the BBC's Security Correspondent Frank Gardner elaborated on the perpetrators, a splinter faction of "violent Islamist group Boko Haram", itself a franchise of Al-Qaeda.
Charting the escalation of its campaign in Nigeria, Gardner concluded:
"It's clear that Al-Qaeda's terror tactic of kidnapping for propaganda has spread south from the Sahara to take root in Nigeria."
What wasn't clear from the BBC's coverage or Gardner's 'analysis' was any key context for this upsurge: notably, the backlash against Western interventionist forces and the murderous conditions they have helped promote in states like Algeria, Mali and others in the region.
While the origins and 'motivations' of Ansaru were noted by Gardner, any headline message that their violence is largely in response to the West's own violent engagement across Africa was carefully elided, particularly in Gardner's 'specialist' summations on the main news bulletins.
Gardner's labelling of 'violent Islamic fanatics' may seem reasonably accurate to many viewers - how attuned we now seem to such banner media language. And who, in true humanity, could not share in simple sympathy for the victims or feel appalled by the killings?
Yet, imagine Gardner or any other mainstream correspondent speaking of Blair, Bush, Cameron or Obama as 'violent Western fanatics', or asking us to consider their executive orders as "[acts] of pure, cold-blooded murder".
Consider the possibility of Gardner offering background detail not just on the "violent Islamist group Boko Haram", but the 'violent expansionist force, Nato'.
The very idea of calling Nato something like 'the terrorist arm of Western governments' seems utterly unthinkable for most reporters - and, largely because of that, for most of the public.
So, it's heartening to come across a notable journalist saying almost these precise words.
In a short but commendable Channel 4 blog piece, chief correspondent Alex Thomson provides that very rarest of mainstream media offerings: serious criticism of selected, loaded and plainly biased media language.
In particular, Thomson asks, who gets to decide the difference between "murder" and "killing"?:
An old debate given new life this morning by a curious tweet from an experienced BBC Correspondent commenting on the latest killings in Afghanistan. Killings…note that word.
Curious because he describes the deaths of children and civilians as "murder".
It's an odd word to choose and in the context of a war fought by some Afghans against foreign occupation, a loaded one. In the context of any war, a loaded one.
Murder is a crime. Killing is an act of war. You do not find the BBC calling NATO's latest killing of women and children in Afghanistan "murder".
So it underlines the need for careful and more objective terms when covering the brutal business of premeditated killing – aka warfare. The NATO drone operator in the Nevada desert is just a[s] much a premeditated killer as the insurgent suicide bomber pressing the button on Kabul's ever-congested Jalalabad Road or wherever.
Again, remarkable comment, indeed, given the almost blanket absence of journalists able to even comprehend calling our state leaders and their operatives things like "premeditated killers".
Thomson goes on to question the selective application of that other media favourite, "militant":
Of course the debate goes further. "Militant" is routinely used in the mainstream media to describe people (usually Muslims at the moment) killed by the west.
But if the reporter sees these people as "militants" what does that say about the reporter's position on the story? Well it says they have one for starters – and it's broadly sympathetic to western extra-judicial killing.
The word implies some kind of justification for targeting; acceptance at face value of what's being spun; and just a hint thereby that the target is slightly dehumanised in the word – a 'militant', not a 'man' or 'woman' and militant to whom?
And, with the standard synonym for "militant" being "terrorist", who, Thomson asks, should get to apply that designation:
It goes more widely. Are the founders of Israel "terrorists"? Or Nelson Mandela and the ANC? Or the French government blowing up Greenpeace's ship in a New Zealand harbour? Or the British colluding with Loyalist killers? Or Mossad killing its enemies across the globe? Or the Americans in Iraq? Or…? Or…?
Of course, what's published at a Channel 4 blog piece, even by that outlet's chief correspondent, still lacks the mass exposure of BBC headlining and the staged 'gravitas' of 'security' correspondents like Gardner.
But, perhaps encouraged by such pieces and, inter alia, the maturing of an alternative, independent media that's forever speaking such rational truths, a few other journalists may now feel a little less inhibited in calling Western invasions, drone attacks and other such aggressions the murderous terror acts they really are.
Panorama, Peter Taylor and other journalist 'fools...
New press regulation won't curtail liberal media d...
Pope Francis and Latin America - identities past a...
Chavez and left-liberal media - not so independent...
Chavez - media savaging in life and death
Wheels of apartheid: Israel's segregated buses
Latest ML Cogitation - ego-watching the ego
David Ward now on probation - 'We'll teach him'
ZDT and 5 Broken Cameras - award avoidance


There are usually three camps of movie lovers. There are the Modernist Big Budget Fanatics who covet all things new, sleek, CGI-laden as well as fast camera cuts and maybe an explosion or two. There are the classic film aficionados, vintage connoisseurs, old movie devotees who love the crackly sound of a movie that is at least 20 years old. Lastly, there are the lovers of all film. If it's got a reel, a story arch and it's entertaining, they're into it. We all have our preferences, and at Rare DVDs, we have rounded up some of our favorite original classic flicks available in our store and compared them to the more modern version. Pick your favorite!
What separates an original versus a classic film? We'll see!
There are actually three variations of this film that are officially Disney. However, our fact comparisons today are between the two live-action versions!
The Original: The Jungle Book released in 1994 and starred Jason Scott Lee, Lena Headey and Sam Neill. It had a budget of $30 million and had a running time of 111 minutes.
The Rookie: Disney has recently released a 2016 version of The Jungle Book which promises to be an all-new, live-action epic adventure. It has received positive reviews and high ratings. Starring Neel Sethi, Bill Murray, Ben Kingsley and Idris Elba. It has a budget of an estimated $175 million and runs for 105 minutes.
Most Notable Differences: All the locations and talking animals are computer-generated VFX in the new one, and Kaa the Snake is portrayed as a female.
The Original: The dynamite 1973 The Three Musketeers features powerful actors Oliver Reed, Raquel Welch and Rochard Chamberlain. The stunts were so real that Oliver Reed was seriously injured and could have died from a stab in the throat during a duel scene.
The Not-So-New Rookie: The 1993 version had a budget of $30 million and had some of the most famous actors of the early 90s like Charlie Sheen, Kiefer Sutherland, Chris O'Donnell and Oliver Platt play the swashbuckling swordsmen.
Most Notable Differences: The Original 1973 version was filmed utilizing real muskets and is said to keep more true to the Dumas novel. At RareDVDs, we offer a two-for-one disc of the original and its sequel. Both films were actually shot at the same time and were split into two without prior notice to its actors.
The Rookie: The 2007 version of The Heartbreak Kid cast included Ben Stiller, Malin Akerman and Michelle Monaghan.
Most Notable Differences: While the 2007 version was moderately successful, Rolling Stone named it the "Worst Remake" of 2007. "Ben Stiller and the Farrelly brothers drown the wit and wisdom of Elaine May's 1972 original in an ocean of crude stupidity." Ouch.
Well call us biased, but we're going to stick with our Original films. No amount of money or CGI effects can replace classic and stellar acting! Check out our entire collection of hard-to-find old movies from decades past on our store!


text:
Meet our Faculty Trustee... Yinka Makinde
Bio Trustee
We have something slightly different for you this month! As the Faculty has become an independent body and set up a Trustee board, we spoke to one of our Lay Trustees Yinka Makinde about her career in digital health and her experience of the Faculty so far. Yinka is an experienced healthcare and technology leader and entrepreneur, who previously practised as a front-line pharmacist for 12 years across England, Singapore and Australia. She is currently the Programme Director at DigitalHealth.London (DH.L).
Hi Yinka! As one of the Faculty's Lay Trustees, please could you introduce yourself and explain what your current role is?
Currently, I am serving as Programme Director at DigitalHealth.London, and have been, since its inception in 2016. DigitalHealth.London successfully connects validated digital health innovations with NHS need and equity investment, whilst facilitating the NHS to access and implement new digital innovations that can drive efficiencies in care delivery and improved patient experience and/ or outcomes.
Having worked in the health care sector now for 27 years, initially as a Pharmacist, and subsequently in technology- led healthcare innovation (since 2004), which included a short time as an Entrepreneur and Founder of my own technology company, the last 4 years have been a privilege in terms of being able to work directly with 'the system' to embrace, and fully exploit the benefits of technology.
As the Programme Director for DigitalHealth.London, how did you first get involved in digital health and healthcare innovation?
I got involved in healthcare innovation initially purely by chance. After completing my MBA in 2001, and having spent at that point 8 years as a front-line Pharmacist, I was seeking new opportunities to expand the perspective and scope of my role in healthcare delivery, and to develop new skills. I had many ideas at the time for how the Community Pharmacy model could be vastly transformed, and had made attempts to table my ideas with various ministers. To no avail. Eventually the opportunity came up for me to join a high performing team as a Pharmacy Subject Matter Expert at the consulting firm Accenture, which had just been awarded a major contract with the government to deliver part of the National Programme for IT. Not having had any proactive interest in IT before, I was immediately thrown into a completely new field of Health IT, and this is where my opportunity to be part of healthcare innovation was born.
What were your expectations of the Faculty when you became a Trustee, and has anything surprised you?
I am still very early in my posting as a Trustee with the Faculty. I have to say, it is a privilege to have been invited to join. I was aware that the Faculty was very newly formed, with the remit of supporting clinicians with an interest in developing their informatics careers. My expectations were that it was a priority of the Faculty to broaden the reach of the support offer to a diverse population of clinicians, and potentially non-clinicians. Diverse in every sense of the word. One of the reasons why I felt I could offer value to the Faculty was that diversity has been central for me in running the NHS Digital Pioneer Fellowship Programme which has succeeded in reaching both clinicians and non-clinicians at all grades, across multiple clinical disciplines, and care settings.
What would you like to see from the Faculty as it develops?
It is vastly critical that we tackle the workforce issues around technology-led transformation as broadly as possible. Transformation is everyone's business within an organisation, not just board level executives or people in the IT department. Everyone has a part to play in the process – both clinicians and non-clinicians. It would be a positive move for the Faculty to work closely with the other bodies with a vested interest in the 'professionalism' agenda, to ensure that career paths and associated support are mapped out and made available to both clinicians and non-clinicians with an interest in health informatics. And that the career and development path is clear. Further, clearly articulating the value proposition of the Faculty, and how it will grow and sustain itself are also key. I am looking forward to being able to contribute to this planning.
What improvements would you like to see in the near future in digital health and informatics?
The sector has made several advances in the time I have been leading DigitalHealth.London in the last 4 years, in terms of market awareness, funding to drive technology uptake, policy to focus effort, guidance to facilitate better product evaluation, programmes to support NHS staff leading digital transformation, and direct support for digital health innovators trying to access the NHS. Procurement still remains a challenge as does interoperability – a contentious issue. There is further work to be done around defining standards, and balancing data privacy with appropriate use of data for the good of the population. Continued investment in gearing up the workforce to be able to embrace the change and deliver the change, cannot be underestimated. Funding for this needs to be continuous and long-sighted not short-sighted. We need to move beyond 2-year funded programmes of work, firmly embedding this into every aspect of strategic planning when it comes to digital health and informatics. Sustainable change doesn't happen without this.
Finally, what advice would you give to yourself back when you were just starting out in your career?
Step outside of your silo as early as possible in your career, to develop a better understanding of how your service impacts on all of the other parts of the health and care system and visa versa. Broaden your network to gain as diverse a perspective as possible, as transformation is complex involving multiple players. The more you understand about the complexity, the greater the chance you have of influencing and delivering change.
FCI Interview with Professor John Williams

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Ground floor alteration comprising of a new kitchen, bathroom and dining / living area with bi-fold access to courtyard. Upper floor addition consisting of two bedrooms, a study and a bathroom.
"Good Foundations Building were referred to us from a friend and after the initial quote and discussions we felt very comfortable and decided to contract with them to undertake a first storey renovation and second story addition to our house in Neutral Bay.
Andrew is a very hard working and efficient builder. He was a great project manager and communicator and always kept us abreast of every development throughout the whole process. Importantly, Andrew worked closely with our architect and engineer to provide a seamless building programme and he has a very experienced and reliable team of sub-contractors that share his vision of quality trademanship and attention to detail.
The communication at site and with the team enabled our project to be completed on budget and ahead of schedule.
Andrew and the team always left the building site clean and tidy and worked well with all of our neighbours. Andrew's team were of exceptional quality and always turned up as agreed.
Andrew has provided us with an amazing new home and the extra space has made a huge difference to family life. We have already recommended Good Foundations Building to some of our friends as we are extremely confident they will be just as happy as we are."


The 40 Year Old is particularly special, as it's created using the remnant vatting system. Each year, our Malt Master hand selects truly exceptional casks and marries them with the remnant of previous 40 year old vattings. This unique process results is a peerless single malt Scotch whisky of infinite richness and harmony.
After a weeklong stint in Australia, I flew to Japan where we carried out three large master classes in three cities over three days, Nagoya, Tokyo and Sapporo. The master classes were for the 400-strong Japanese bartenders association and the Glenfiddich Rich Oak was the tipple of focus. It's a unique single malt delicately finished for up to 12 weeks in brand new American and new Spanish oak casks after being patiently matured for 14 years. I managed to avoid sushi (not my favourite snack) until we hit Sapporo where we started with squid legs or tentacles. I was taken with the table centrepiece, which appeared to continually change colour until my hosts explained that this was the rest of the squid, so basically he was watching me eat his legs. Yum yum.


text:
Q: While loop not working I am inputting this text file into the command line:
800    5    10
800    1    8
800    7    7
810    2    9
845    2    10
850    1    3

first column is time,then priority,then length
the output is sorted by time plus the length, and the next item is outputted if the time of the item is less than or equal to the current time, with the highest priority going first (yes its confusing, but its a class project)
which will output:
Job: [800,1,8] Start time: 800 End time:808
Job: [800,5,10] Start time: 800 End time:818
Job: [810,2,9] Start time: 810 End time: 819
Job: [800,7,7] Start time: 800 End time: 807
Job: [845,2,10] Start time: 845 End time 855
Job: [850,1,3] Start time: 850 End time: 853

im using a linked list with queue methods called event, and a priority queue called queue
my problem is that the while loop while (event.size() != 0 && queue.size() != 0) is not executing at all.
If i change it to a do while loop, I get null pointer exception errors on while (event.peek().time <= currentTime) and if (event.peek().time > currentTime)
I have tried fixing the null pointer exceptions by adding event.peek() != null and it still doesnt work. Event (linkedlist) has 6 Job objects in it so I dont know why event.peek() is returning null.
import java.util.*;
import java.io.*;

public class pj2
{
    Queue<Job> event = new LinkedList<Job>();//interface queue
    PriorityQueue<Job> queue = new PriorityQueue<Job>();

    public static void main(String[] args) throws IOException
    {
        if (args.length != 1)
        {
            System.out.println("Usage: java pj2 jobs.txt");
            System.exit(0);
        }
        else
            new pj2(args[0]);
    }

    public pj2 (String textFile) throws IOException
    {
        File file = new File(textFile);
        if (!file.exists())
        {
            System.out.println(textFile + " does not exist.");
            System.exit(0);
        }

        //add time,priority,length to event queue
        Scanner data = new Scanner(file);
        while (data.hasNext())
        {
            int time = Integer.parseInt(data.next());
            int priority = Integer.parseInt(data.next());
            int length = Integer.parseInt(data.next());
            Job temp = new Job(time,priority,length);
            event.add(temp);
        }
        data.close();

        int currentTime = 0;
        //loop through priority queue, outputting results
        while (event.size() != 0 && queue.size() != 0)
        {
            if (queue.size() == 0)
                currentTime = event.peek().time;
            while (event.peek().time <= currentTime)
            {
                currentTime += event.peek().length;
                queue.offer(event.poll());
            }

            if (event.peek().time > currentTime)
            {
                currentTime = (event.peek().time + event.peek().length);
                queue.offer(event.poll());
            }

                System.out.println(queue.peek() + " Start time: " + queue.peek().time + " End time: " + (queue.peek().time + queue.peek().length));
                queue.poll();
        }

    }
}

public class Job implements Comparable<Job>
{
    int time, length, priority;

    public Job(int time, int priority, int length)
    {
        this.time = time;
        this.priority = priority;
        this.length = length;
    }
    public int compareTo(Job that)
    {
        if (this.priority == that.priority)
            return this.time - that.time;
        return this.priority - that.priority;
    }
    public String toString()
    {
        return "[" + time + "," + priority + "," + length + "]";
    }

}

A: +1 to previous poster's pointer to the debugger tutorial.  If you look at the values being found when the loop condition is evaluated, you will be able to find this problem instantly.  ("Oh, event.size() != 0 && queue.size() != 0 is false because queue.size() != 0 is false.")
Generally, your thought process for solving problems like this should be, "If the while loop is not executing, its condition is false.  I need to find out which part of the condition is false.  From there I can figure out whether the bug is 'the previous part of my program is making this false where it should be true', or 'this shouldn't actually be part of the loop condition'."
In this case, you require event.size() != 0 AND queue.size() != 0, but you don't add anything to queue prior to the loop.  I think you need to rethink your loop conditions.

A: While reading the input file you fill the event list, but filling the queue is left to the while loop, so your condition:
    while (event.size() != 0 && queue.size() != 0)

never will be true as the queue is still empty. So either you need to change your
loop condition to:
    while (event.size() != 0 || queue.size() != 0)

to handle information as long as either the list or the queue still holds data, or
you might have to split your loop into 2 loops, one to fill the queue from the list
followed by one that uses the queue to determine your answer.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
Q: SQL Server Linked Server : OLE DB provider 'MSDAORA' reported an error I have an issues with linked server to Oracle...
at first the server running SQL Servre 2000 and Oracle8i, and the linked server works well...
But after IT Department installs an Oracle 11g Client on the server...
When I execute my open query in SQL Server, I get an error message

[OLE/DB provider returned message: Oracle error occurred, but error message could not be retrieved from Oracle.]
  OLE DB error trace [OLE/DB Provider 'MSDAORA' IDBInitialize::Initialize returned 0x80004005:   ].
Msg 7399, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
  OLE DB provider 'MSDAORA' reported an error.

Hope you guys can help me out, thanks.


text:
Business briefs: Former NFL player joins leading brain-imaging company
Tim Krumrie
Small_Tim
Steamboat Springs — Steamboat Springs resident and former NFL coach Tim Krumrie has joined CereScan, a leading brain-imaging company that specializes in the detection of traumatic brain injuries.
In his role at CereScan, Krumrie will help raise awareness about the capability of locating and measuring chronic damage from concussions.
"I'm really excited about joining the CereScan team," Krumrie said in a press release. "My passion is to help others through my own experiences and to support my new teammates in their mission to help anyone suffering from chronic brain injuries."
Krumrie played for the Cincinnati Bengals.
He also has coached football in Steamboat.
"We are very honored to have Tim join our team of professionals," said John Kelley, CereScan's CEO. "His experience as both a player and a coach allows him to speak authentically to fellow athletes and military personnel. He is an extremely well-respected person in professional and collegiate athletics and will greatly enhance CereScan's efforts to raise awareness about brain injuries and new developments that hold great promise for these types of disorders."
New associate joins Colorado Group Realty
Kara Mann has joined the Colorado Group Realty team. She is the newest associate, which includes a group of more than 60 owners and associates.
Mann has spent years in the business industry handling marketing, training and communications for a quick, casual restaurant company. Later in her career, she utilized her online social marketing knowledge to assist book publishers with their needs.
Mann is a graduate of CU Boulder with a degree in psychology and business. The mountains were calling her from a young age, as she used to spend a lot of time with her family in the mountains growing up. Life brought her, her husband and their two children to Steamboat.
"We feel so fortunate to call Steamboat home and plan to do so forever," Mann said.
"We are excited to have Kara join Colorado Group Realty. She brings enthusiasm, professionalism and knowledge that will help benefit the company and her clients as she begins her journey with Colorado Group Realty. This type of addition to the company is what makes Colorado Group so successful," said Eliese Pivarnik, broker/owner.
Steamboat Grand hires new chef
Ariel Robey has been named executive chef of the Steamboat Grand Hotel.
Robey will oversee the culinary direction for the restaurants at the hotel, which include The Cabin, the Grand Café and the Poolside Bistro.
Robey will also oversee conference and banquet and in-room dining.
"I couldn't think of a more qualified individual for this position than Ariel, and am excited about the enthusiasm and direction he will bring to the hotel in his new position," Mike Lomas, vice president and general manager of the Steamboat Grand, said in a news release. "Having worked at the Steamboat Ski Resort for several years, he not only knows firsthand what it takes to run a first-class culinary operation, but also brings a wealth of knowledge and exciting ideas with him."
Robey has served as chef de cuisine at Hazie's for the past two years.
Food Services at East Grand School District in GRANBY
Food Services - Part Time - The Food Services works with the proper finishing and heating of main course items…
Steamboat Sticker
Production Artist at Steamboat Sticker in STEAMBOAT SPRINGS
Production Artist Steamboat Sticker, one of Steamboat's most innovative and creative companies has an immediate opening for a full time…
Town of Hayden
Fitness Director, Gues Services Representative at Town of Hayden in HAYDEN
HAYDEN CENTER * Fitness Director * Guest Services Rep. Job details available at www.haydencolorado.com Town of Hayden an EOE
Health Partnership
Multiple Positions at Health Partnership in STEAMBOAT SPRINGS
The Health Partnership is known and respected throughout Northwest Colorado for compassionately connecting people to health and well-being resources, through…
Atmost Energy
Construction Operator at Atmost Energy in STEAMBOAT SPRINGS
Has rewarding opportunities for the following position Full-time Construction Operator This position would be responsible for customer service field activities…
Resort Management Group
Maintenance Technician(s) at Resort Management Group in Granby and Winter Park
Maintenance Technician(s) Granby & Winter Park The maintenance technician position is responsible for performing routine building maintenance tasks in more…


text:
by Craig Howieson
Looking inwards to provide a message of hope in the face of adversity, M.C Taylor's latest record is testament to musics uniting force
'It's cradle to the grave / So be good to each other.' (Hardlytown)
Quietly Blowing It by Hiss Golden Messenger
America is a land of wide open spaces and supposedly limitless opportunities. Mountain ranges and dusty plains, it is a cornucopia of possibilities to find not only peace, but to find yourself. It is a country that Hiss Golden Messenger, led by chief songwriter, M.C Taylor, have captured better than most over the past decade. From the now fabled kitchen table recordings that made up Bad Debt, to the full blown country rockers of the Grammy nominated Terms of Surrender, Taylor harls his songs with the scuffed denim resilience of his North Carolina base – while simultaneously delving deep into the harder to access recesses of the heart and soul.
Not dissimilar to the equally prolific Damien Jurado, Taylor has masterfully crafted his own voice, and, despite never straying too far from it, he works to the extremities of his parameters. His latest offering, Quietly Blowing It, is mounted upon the backdrop of a crumbling Mount Rushmore as Taylor casts a fearful and despairing eye on the implosion of decency and the disintegration of his homeland around him.
However, despite its outward gaze, the record does not find Taylor looking for an external rescue. He is clear that the work it takes to make a meaningful change starts far closer to home: in how he can better himself to become a more positive impact on the world, and use his position in some small way to uplift and inspire others to do the same. Amidst the lazy day swell of surf rock guitars and smooth soul of It Will If We Let It, he reminds us 'You're not alone.' And in fact, compassion and citizenship are at the heart of Quietly Blowing It, as is the notion that we need to look out for one another, as Taylor sings on the title track, 'You gotta let someone in / That's all that'll save you.'
Hiss Golden Messenger have always had more depth to their well than many of their alt-country counterparts, drawing from the rich history of American music like thirsty roots delving deep into drought blighted ground. Country, soul, gospel, rock, funk and jazz all find a place on Quietly Blowing It as Taylor celebrates the diverse origins of his country's richest traditions as a means of providing hope for the future. As the squall of guitar bleeds out over a thicket of horns in the outro of Way Back In The Way Back, it is hard not to be reminded of the redemptive power of music and the promise of better times it can conjure.
In dark times, we need a light to cling to. Or perhaps, as Taylor puts it on one of the record's most resonant lines, we should 'hope hope is contagious' (If It Comes In The Morning). Amen to that.
Album: Hiss Golden Messenger – Quietly Blowing It review
Published: June 20, 2021 Author: secretmeeting	Category: ALBUMS, NEW MUSIC
Previous: Album: Maple Glider – To Enjoy Is The Only Thing review
Next: Songs: Mid Year Review 2021


Lok Everest is situated in Mumbai. This project hosts all features that a contemporary home buyer would desire to have. The Project is a part of the suburban area of Mulund West. Mulund West is linked to neighboring localities by wide roads. inhabitants of the locality have easy access to community utilities like schools, colleges, hospitals, recreational areas and parks. The facilities within the complex are thoughtfully created.
Everest is a premium housing project launched by Lok in Mulund West, Mumbai. These 2, 3, 4 BHK Apartment in Central Mumbai Among the many luxurious amenities that the project hosts are , Table Tennis Court, Aerobics Rooms, , Billiards etc.
Lok Everest by Lok Housing And Construction Limited is a landmark residential project being developed in Mulund West, Mumbai.
Lok Everest, Mulund West offers multiple flats for sale including 2 BHK in various sizes. 2 BHK flats in Lok Everest has a carpet area of 674sqft.
What are the amenities available at Lok Everest at Mulund West, Mumbai?
At Lok Everest by Lok Housing And Construction Limited , there are multiple amenities on offer for residents including Club House, Party Hall, Furnishing, Indoor Games, Power Backup, and Parking.
The project also offers sporting amenities to the sports lovers. The amenities include Gym, Swimming Pool, Tennis Court, and Squash.
Lok Housing And Construction Limited is one of the leading real estate player in India. They don't only provide luxury real estate for residential buildings but also provide the commercial solution. They have created more thirty projects in multiple cities of India. They pride themselves on providing a quality product. They are very passionate to innovate and always provide the most up-to-date technology for their new project. They desire to earn people's trust and confidence while they create whenever they launch their new product and services. The company's main goal is to provide the best real estate in all the areas they serve. Company has impacted largely on the real estate industry in India.


text:
The NCAA Fencing Championships are awarded at the annual tournament held in March to determine the NCAA's national collegiate individual and team championships in fencing. Individual champions are determined by performance during the NCAA fencing team championship competition. Unlike most NCAA sports, the fencing championship is a single National Collegiate championship rather than being split into divisions.

History
Prior to 1990, separate men's championships were held, but since then, fencing has been a coed sport with teams having men's and women's squads, although some schools field only a women's team. Fencing is a single-division sport with schools from all three NCAA divisions competing against each other.

Fencing was one of twelve women's sports added to the NCAA championship program for the 1981–82 school year, as the NCAA engaged in battle with the Association for Intercollegiate Athletics for Women (AIAW) for sole governance of women's collegiate sports. The AIAW continued to conduct its established championship program in the same twelve (and other) sports; however, after a year of dual women's championships, the NCAA conquered the AIAW and usurped its authority and membership.

NCAA fencing follows the rules of the U.S. Fencing Association with several modifications.

Criticism of coed model
After major publicity regarding the differences in facilities provided to participants in the 2021 Division I men's and women's basketball tournaments, the NCAA commissioned the law firm Kaplan Hecker & Fink to conduct a broad-based review of gender equity issues surrounding all of its championship events. The first phase dealt exclusively with Division I basketball; the second phase investigated all other NCAA championships, including fencing. In the second phase, both fencing stakeholders and NCAA staff identified a major gender inequity issue stemming from the NCAA's 1990 decision to combine the men's and women's team championships. As of the date of the report (the 2021–22 school year), no NCAA fencing programs fielded only a men's team, but many fielded only women's teams. Because the team champion is determined by combining each school's men's and women's points earned, and entry rules limit the number of participants of each sex per school and region, women-only teams cannot win the team championship. Some stakeholders have suggested that men's and women's team championships be reintroduced, either as substitutes for or supplements to the current coed championship. The NCAA's fencing committee has discussed this change, but it was still "under consideration" as of the report date.

Champions

Co-ed team championships (1990–present)

Separate team championships (1982–1989)

Men's-only team championships (1941–1981)

Note: Team scoring in 1990 was based on weapon team events standings. From 1991 to 1994, point values increased due to fencers not qualifying as part of a team being able to contribute points from individual performances. Weapon team events were eliminated in 1995, and team scoring was based entirely on individual performances; women's épée was added as a fifth weapon. Since 1998, team scoring has been based on a one-point system; women's sabre was added as a sixth weapon in 2000.

Team Titles

See also
List of NCAA fencing schools
AIAW Intercollegiate Women's Fencing Champions
Pre-NCAA Men's Fencing Champions
Pre-NCAA Women's Fencing Champions
USFA Division I National Championship
Ivy League Fencing Championships

References

External links
NCAA fencing

Fencing
Fencing competitions
College fencing in the United States
Fencing

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


These stylish 70x50cm Picture Frames are supplied by KENRO who have supplied the Photography Trade since 1973. All 70x50cm Picture Frames are fully assembled with backs, glazing & Hanging hooks. All Frames can be mounted in a landscape or Portrait Orientation (Horizontally or Vertically). Kenro frames are excellent quality and will last a lifetime.
50x70cm Senator Black Hand Crafted Wood Picture Frame with A2 Removable Mount. Matt Finish. Flat Profile: 20mm wide x 30mm deep.
50x70cm Senator White Hand Crafted Wood Picture Frame with A2 Removable Mount. Matt Finish. Flat Profile: 20mm wide x 30mm deep.


Costs for residence range from $8,500 to $17,000 (HOEM residence an 11.5 month stay) plus meal plan for the academic year.
Pitman Hall is Ryerson's largest residence, with 14 floors and 566 rooms (single, double, paired and apartment style rooms). Meal plans are mandatory.
As with all of our residence buildings, first-year students are given priority for Pitman Hall housing. Residence floors and room styles are open to all gender identities.
The ILC is an 11-storey former hotel. It can accommodate 256 residence students (single- and double-style rooms). Meal plans are mandatory.
As with all of our residence buildings, first-year students are given priority for ILC housing. Residence floors and room styles are open to all gender identities.
HOEM residence opens in 2018 and is Ryerson's largest residence, with 30 floors and 593 rooms. It features study rooms and lounges. The second floor includes a large student lounge, maker space, gym facilities, and yoga studio. All suites are fully furnished and include a kitchen, living room and single bedrooms.
We're growing to support you! Ryerson has four residence buildings on campus, including more than 900 new residence spaces added in 2018 and 2019.
Pitman Hall: Resident Advisors are located on each floor; Academic Links are assigned to each faculty and assist with academic resources; TV lounges on each floor; floor kitchens, laundry facilities, 24-hour security; cafeteria in the building; high-speed internet access. Four different room styles: single, paired, apartment, double. Mandatory meal plan.
ILLC: Resident Advisors are located on each floor; Academic Links are assigned to each faculty and assist with academic resources; common kitchen and TV lounges on each floor; cafeteria in building; laundry facilities; classes and conferences run in the non-residential areas of building; 24-hour security; high-speed internet access. Two different room styles: single, double. Mandatory meal plan.
HOEM: Find information about HOEM's suite types, amenities and services.
Daphne Cockwell Health Sciences Complex: Opening 2019, more information to come.
Between these 4 buildings there are a range of room styles including 2- to 4-bedroom apartments, single bedrooms with shared hallway washrooms, and some individual rooms with private washrooms. You'll have an opportunity to identify your preferred room style in the residence application.
We do not guarantee residence for first-year students. When offering a space in residence, Ryerson University gives priority to first-year students traveling the furthest distance away from our campus.
You must complete a residence application form after accepting a Ryerson offer of admission. The first round of offers is made in mid-June. Offers continue to be made throughout the summer and school year until the waiting list is exhausted.
A $50 application fee is required with your application.
All you care to eat at Pitman and ILLC Dining Halls: Meal plan dollars go towards unlimited access to eat as much or little as you like at Pitman Dining Hall or the ILLC Dining Hall. Your OneCard grants you access to the Pitman and ILLC Dining Halls.
$400 to spend at other retailers on campus: You also get $400 to spend at campus eateries like the Hub Café or participating food retailers including Balzac's, Oakham Café and Ram in the Rye. Purchases are deducted from your flex dollar account in a declining balance.
Depending on where you live, residence students have a few options for meal plans.
Residence students living at the ILLC or Pitman Hall are automatically enrolled in the 7-day meal plan. If you are living in apartment-style units at Pitman Hall, you can also choose the 5-day meal plan to supplement your own cooking.
Students living at HOEM are encouraged to sign up for either the 7-day or 5-day meal plans, though it is not mandatory. Students can also choose to load any dollar amount onto their OneCard to spend on food at any time.
The 7-day plan costs $5,300, which works out to be $22 per day for all you care to eat at Pitman Dining Hall and ILLC Dining Hall every day of the week. Plus, you get $400 in flex dollars to spend at participating retailers.
The 5-day plan costs $3,900, which works out to be $22 per day for all you care to eat at Pitman Dining Hall and ILLC Dining Hall from Monday to Friday. Plus, you get $400 in flex dollars to spend at participating retailers.
Visit the Ryerson housing website for further information.


Tai Chi has its roots in ancient Chinese medicine, dating back to around 500 BCE. It is a martial art whose ancestor is qigong.
Unlike the quick and aggressive movements of most martial arts, the main features of Tai Chi are slow and graceful movements and regulated breathing, with the combined intention of being a form of self-defense and a technique of enhancing inner calm and equilibrium. Tai Chi experts are able to balance their mental and muscular strength and exert energy more efficiently, with maximum force, in order to inhibit a much more energetic aggressor without tiring or losing control.
There are many potential health benefits that have been connected to the practice of Tai Chi, from lengthening life and slowing degenerative conditions associated with aging, to increasing flexibility and endurance, to toughening muscles and lowering stress. Practicing Tai Chi has also been shown to provide another major benefit, especially for older people: improved balance and lower likelihood of falling.
Stress itself is known to be a killer, and has been linked to the incidence and escalation of many chronic diseases, such as diabetes, heart disease and cancer. Observing a mindful regiment that includes Tai Chi can positively affect daily life and future health by reducing stress and promoting overall physical and mental well-being. Tai Chi exercises can be practiced alone or in groups.
A 2009 study published JAMA showed a link between Tai Chi and lower blood pressure and increased exercise capacity for patients with Cardiovascular Disease (CVD) and those with CVD risk factors, such as diabetes.


Check out the Thunderbolt 3 AirStream trailer at B&H's NYC SuperStore on May 7, 2017, starting at 10:00 AM. The first 200 people that come to the SuperStore for Thunderbolt Education Day will receive a special promo code for a free external hard drive.
The Thunderbolt 3 AirStream trailer will make its way from the NAB Show in Las Vegas, all the way across the country to the front of the B&H Photo SuperStore in New York City. Learn about the differences between Thunderbolt 3 and its previous versions. Test your Thunderbolt 3 knowledge by playing a game inside the AirStream trailer, or check out the product demos inside the B&H Photo SuperStore.
The B&H Event Space will also be hosting two seminars featuring Thunderbolt. For registration and more details on the seminars, click here and here.
As the world's largest source of photography, video, and audio equipment, as well as computers, drones, and home and portable entertainment, B&H is known worldwide for its attentive, knowledgeable sales force and excellent customer service, including fast, reliable shipping. B&H has been satisfying customers worldwide for over 40 years.
Visitors to the website can access a variety of educational videos and enlightening articles. The B & H YouTube Channel has an unmatched wealth of educational content. Our entertaining and informative videos feature product overviews from our in-house specialists. You can view the B&H Event Space presentations from many of the world's foremost experts and interviews with some of technology's most dynamic characters. Tap into this exciting resource by subscribing to the B&H YouTube Channel here. In addition to videos, the B&H Explora blog presents new product announcements, gear reviews, helpful guides, and tech news written by product experts and industry professionals.
When you're in Manhattan, take a tour of the B&H Photo SuperStore, located at 420 Ninth Avenue. The techno-carousel spins all year round at the counters and kiosks at B&H. With hundreds of products on display, the B&H Photo SuperStore is the place to test-drive and compare all the camera gear.
Discover how you can use Lightroom CC to quickly elevate your photography to new heights with powerful global and local adjustments while keeping your entire library organized and accessible.
Come to the Thunderbolt™ and Adobe session to learn how the combination of Thunderbolt™ 3 and Adobe Premiere Pro and After Effects can help your workflow.


text:
Seeds of the Dead
by Andy Kumpon & Gary Malick
Peter Malik is a scientist for Moonstar Foods Inc., the Corporation that is feeding the over-populated world with genetically modified food. However, when Peter discovers what Moonstar's genetically modified seeds do to his lab rat, Lil' Pete, he decides to turn whistle-blower not suspecting that Moonstar will exact revenge by contaminating a free food giveaway…
Seeds of the Dead is a fun, fast-paced read. It's not my normal genre but it certainly delivers as a spoofy, humorous and gruesome Zombie Apocalypse novel. The story is fairly straightforward and the plot neat; once Peter has turned against Moonstar, he faces a race against time to save the inhabitants of his hometown, Green Bluff, and try to win back his ex-girlfriend, who runs an organic grocery. The prose is confident; it's clear the Authors had a lot of fun writing this and it does not take itself too seriously. It's unashamedly full of genre tropes and they work well; it's not overdone and all pretty plausible too despite the majority of the narrative. The writing throughout is deceptively strong and although the story does not hold many surprises, it has a contemporary feel. It could be argued that the overwhelming control that Moonstar Inc., has over the population who are enslaved to their products could serve as a satirical commentary on contemporary life and with that in mind, Seeds of the Dead, has a slightly uncomfortable, thought-provoking layer in amongst the comedy.
The Zombies are disgusting and no grisly, fluid-filled, descriptive detail in spared in bringing them to life; it's visually visceral and pockets of hilarity ensue. There are the usual assortment of slightly misfit and caricaturised characters that survive and assume a unit to try to overwhelm the Zombies. And, as usual, the solution to getting rid of them is simple and effective. I thought the situation with Peter's Dad, Eugene, was a nice inclusion, adding a serious note in otherwise humorous banter. The owners of the Moonstar Empire, Richard and Sofia Beaudette were suitably rendered as the villains. I also loved Flo, the diner waitress and despite knowing the Peter should dispose of Lil' Pete, in keeping with the tradition of these tales, you just know he won't part with him and he serves as the book's mascot.
The ending maybe comes a little loose and over-confident but overall, this is a thoroughly entertaining, gore-splattered, comedic Zombie horror.


Many traders today use trading robots to get ahead in the highly competitive world of forex trading. There are many brands of trading robots out there with varying levels of effectiveness, price, and trading styles. From big time traders to those who trade at smaller scales, there is a robot that will suit their trading styles and preferences.
The Forex Megadroid, a creation of the trading experts John Grace and Albert Perrie, enhanced currency trading with its patented software called the Reverse Correlated Time and Price Analysis. This software program is what enables this robot to do its analysis, forecasts, and trading. By using this robot, traders are assured by the creators that their chances of winning will increase.
Unlike other robots, the Forex Megadroid only trades with one currency pair, which is the Euro and US dollar. With just one currency pair to focus on, this is ideal for those who have just started with currency trading.
The trading style of this forex robot is less aggressive and then will suit traders who want to participate in trades that are less risky. This is because the Megadroid trades more selectively than other robots. This way, the robot ensures that the chances of getting profits are maximized and the losses that one might incur are minimized.
One other thing that this robot do that makes it ideal for new or small scale traders is that it can handle the live trades by itself even if the trader is not around. So the trader can do some other personal business that needs his attention and go back to trading when one is done with that errand.
As the familiarity of the trader increases with frequent use of the software, he can become more comfortable and confident in currency trading. He may be able to tweak the settings of the Megadroid later on so that it will be more customized according to his preferences and willingness to take on higher risks. Indeed, the Forex Megadroid has made it a lot easier for new traders to adjust and even excel in currency trading.


text:
Q: Some turtle functions not working on new turtle So i have created a new turtle by doing bassel = turtle.Turtle(), however, some functions such as tracer() and onkeypress() just don't work, I get an error saying 'Turtle' object has no attribute 'tracer' or 'Turtle' object has no attribute 'onkeypress'...
But as soon as I replace bassel by turtle it works
So for instance, bassel.onkeypress() doesn't work ('Turtle' object has no attribute 'onkeypress')
But if I put turtle.onkeypress(), it works perfectly.
Here's some part of the code
bassel = turtle.Turtle()
bassel.tracer(0)
bassel.hideturtle()

A: Right.  Those functions are not attributes of a SPECIFIC turtle object, they are services offered by the turtle module.  Just use turtle.tracer and turtle.onkeypress.