text:
São Paulo Forum

São Paulo Forum (FSP), also known as the Foro de São Paulo, is a conference of left-wing political parties and organizations from the Americas, primarily Latin America and the Caribbean. It was launched by the Workers' Party (Partido dos Trabalhadores – PT) of Brazil in 1990 in the city of São Paulo.

The Forum of São Paulo was constituted in 1990, when the Brazilian Workers' Party approached other parties of Latin America and the Caribbean to debate the new international scenario after the fall of the Berlin Wall and rising adoption of some economic liberalization policies implemented at the time by right-leaning governments in the region. The stated main objective of the conference was to argue for alternatives to neoliberalism.

The first meeting held in São Paulo in July 1990 was attended by members of 48 parties and organizations from Latin American and the Caribbean. The original name given to the meeting was Meeting of Left and Anti-imperialist Parties and Organizations of Latin America (Encontro de Partidos e Organizações de Esquerda e Anti-imperialistas da América Latina). Since the 1991 meeting in Mexico City, it started being alternately called Foro de São Paulo in reference to the location of the first meeting. Subsequent meetings have been hosted by many of the parties throughout the region.

Political stance
According to FSP, more than 100 parties and political organizations participate in its conferences today. Their political positions vary across a wide spectrum, which includes: social-democratic parties, left-wing grassroots labor and social movements inspired by the Catholic Church, ethnic and environmentalist groups, anti-imperialist and nationalist organizations, communist parties, and armed guerrilla forces. The latter, however, is true only so far as one is willing to think of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia as an actual member of the FSP, when actually the FARC, although never formally banned from the Forum, have been barred from participating in its meetings as early as 2005, when they were refused admittance to that year's meeting of the FSP in São Paulo.

These groups differ on a range of topics which go from the use of armed force in revolutions to the support of representative democracy. The Communist Party of Cuba, for example, has adopted a single-party system for decades, while Brazil's Workers' Party (PT) supports and participates in a multi-party system of representative democracy. Some parties such as Chile's Social Convergence advocate for radical democracy, participatory democracy, and workplace democracy instead of representative democracy as a primary value. These differences grant special relevance to FSP's final declarations, released at the end of each conference, which state the collective position of its members.

Ever since FSP's first meeting (1990), the Declaration which was approved expressed the participants' "willingness to renew leftist and socialist thought, to reaffirm its emancipating character, to correct mistaken conceptions, and to overcome all expressions of bureaucratism and all absence of true social and massive democracy."

The first Declaration manifests "an active compromise with the validity of human rights, of democracy and of popular sovereignty as strategic values, which place the constant challenge of leftist, socialist and progressive forces renewing their thoughts and actions."

At the second conference (Mexico, 1991), FSP expanded its objectives to add the proposal of working toward Latin American integration, an interchange of experiences, the discussion of the political left's differences and searching for consensus in action. The following conferences reinstate the participants' willingness to exchange experiences and develop a dialogue, while at the regional and continental level FSP's influence grows, with some of its members achieving electoral success and their candidates reaching the presidency of many countries.

During the early 1990s, the FSP was seen by some as expressing the emergence of a new Latin American leftist paradigm: non-authoritarian, de-militarized and grassroots-friendly. As others have noted, however, there is a marked contradiction between the fiery and quasi-revolutionary rhetoric about "socialism of the 21st century" indulged in sometimes by many FSP's leaders, and the plain fact that the positions of power held by such leaders depend, on most cases, on their holding positions in governments which have emerged through the electoral road. In a statement made in 2008 in Lima, before a gathering of Peruvian businessmen, however, Brazil's President Lula would declare, approvingly, that the FSP had "educated" the Left in the understanding of the existence of possibilities of running for elections and gaining power through the democratic way – a declaration that prompted a comment from AFP, reproduced at the Rede Globo site, to the effect that the hallmark of FSP's activities had been its "very moderate" character.

Nevertheless, almost since its inception, the FSP has been the target of criticism from the right in the United States and Latin America, especially in Brazil, describing it as an organization promoting terrorism and/or a revival of communism, something regarded even by mainstream conservatives as unfounded and "exaggerated to say the least". The allegedly subversive character of the Foro's activities, however, was revived during the 2010 Brazilian presidential election campaign, as the vice-presidential candidate in the José Serra ticket, Antônio Pedro de Siqueira Indio da Costa, denounced repeatedly the supposed connection, by way of the Foro, between the Brazilian Workers' Party and the FARC. Alternatively, the Foro is seen also as more than a simple regular gathering, in that policies that had been advised by it came to be actively implemented later – such as the strengthening of Mercosur, or the setting up of Unasur – but that the Foro was better understood as a "brainstorming organization", a "think-tank for politicians".

During the fifth meeting (Montevideo, 1995) a dispute arose about the attendance of the Movimiento Bolivia Libre, which was charged, in a motion presented by ten parties, led by Argentina's Partido Obrero, of support to the repressive actions of the neoliberal government of Gonzalo Sánchez de Lozada in Bolivia. The refusal of the motion by the Foro's plenum led to the permanent withdrawal of Partido Obrero from the meeting. Partido Obrero had already declared itself in opposition to the Foro's positions, having previously made public a note in which it protested against the change in the official name of the organization, as "offering evidence of putting, in the place of actual making of common policies, a kind of purely academic workshop, [a sure sign] of conscious depoliticization leading eventually to the cover-up of rightist policies".

During the 14th meeting in El Salvador, it was resolved that the Foro should organize a number of subordinate organizations and facilities: an electronic bulletin on the Net, a politic-cultural festival, an electoral observatory and a cadre school.

In the final declaration of the FSP's 15th meeting in Montevideo, there is a reinstatement and updating of the Foro's goals: to aid "the progressive forces in the continent who are in power and strive in various ways to build projects which – according to each country's particular characteristics – allow them to face the main problems generated by neoliberalism" – something which added to the statement made at the same time by Belela Herrera, International Relations chargé of the Uruguayan Broad Front, that issues like ecology, exclusion, racism and xenophobia had added themselves inseparably to the Left's traditional agenda. The meeting also debated the ongoing Colombian armed conflict, which prompted a declaration by the International Relations Secretary of the Brazilian Workers' Party, Valter Pomar, who exposed what in his view was the Foro's general stance towards the current Colombian situation: "In Colombia we have a military confrontation that has been going on for decades, having as its players the [Colombian] State, as well as the paramilitary and insurgent forces. The Foro is interested in achieving peace and in having a negotiated process towards reaching this goal".

In the 16th meeting, which opened on 20 August 2009 in Mexico City, the Foro was expected to concentrate discussion on the 2009 Honduran constitutional crisis as well as engaging in efforts to the restoration of the deposed Honduran president Manuel Zelaya. The Vice president of the Mexican Senate, Yeidckol Polevnsky, has invited the Honduran MP Silvia Ayala, as a member of the Democratic Unification Party and leader of the manifestations in support of Zelaya held in San Pedro Sula, to attend the meeting – something that attracted the fury of the pro-government Honduran press.

The ongoing meeting in Mexico will also be the first to organize a parallel youth meeting, where member parties will discuss the impact of the global economic crisis on Latin American youth and the responses that could be offered to it.

In January 2010, the European Left – the broad front of European national Left parties formed in view of a common stand in European politics – at the opening of its Third Congress, expressed its interest in strengthening ties with the FSP.

The Democratic Socialists of America became associate members of the forum in 2023.

In government
The following countries are currently being governed by leaders and member parties of the Foro de São Paulo:
 * 🇧🇴 – Luis Arce (Movement for Socialism) (2020–present)
 * 🇧🇷 – Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (Workers' Party/Brazil of Hope) (2023–present)
 * – Gabriel Boric (Apruebo Dignidad) (2022–present)
 * 🇨🇴 – Gustavo Petro (Historic Pact for Colombia) (2022–present)
 * 🇨🇺 – Miguel Díaz-Canel (Communist Party of Cuba) (2018–present)
 * 🇩🇴 – Luis Abinader (Modern Revolutionary Party) (2020–present)
 * – Xiomara Castro (Liberty and Refoundation) (2022–present)
 * 🇲🇽 – Andrés Manuel López Obrador (Morena) (2018–present)
 * 🇳🇮 – Daniel Ortega (Sandinista National Liberation Front) (2007–present)
 * 🇵🇦 – Laurentino Cortizo (Democratic Revolutionary Party) (2019–present)
 * 🇱🇨 – Philip J. Pierre (Saint Lucia Labour Party) (2021–present)
 * 🇻🇪 – Nicolás Maduro (United Socialist Party of Venezuela) (2013–present)

Aligned governments
The following centre-left and left-wing parties or coalitions, who are currently in government, even though not members of the forum, maintain good relations and have been integrated with the members of the FSP:
 * 🇻🇨 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines – Unity Labour Party (2001–present)
 * 🇪🇸 Spain – United Left (2020–present)

As main opposition
The following countries had members of the Foro de São Paulo as the main opposition parties in their parliaments and/or were the second electoral force in the past elections:
 * 🇩🇴 – Dominican Liberation Party
 * – Broad Front
 * 🇦🇷 – Justicialist Party (Union for the Homeland)

Formerly ruling party or coalition partners

 * 🇦🇷 – 2003–2015 – Front for Victory, coalition with participation of the left-wing faction of the Justicialist Party
 * 🇦🇷 – 2019–2023 – Alberto Fernández (Justicialist Party/Frente de Todos)
 * 🇦🇼 – 2017–2021 – Democratic Network, coalition with participation of the People's Electoral Movement and Proud and Respected People
 * 🇧🇷 – 2003–2016 – Workers' Party (2010–2016 as part of the coalition With the Strength of the People)
 * 🇧🇷 – 2007–2016 – Democratic Labour Party (as a junior government partner; 2010–2016 as part of the coalition With the Strength of the People)
 * 🇨🇱 – 2014–2018 – New Majority, coalition with participation of the Socialist Party, Citizen Left and Communist Party
 * – 2010–2016 – Sovereign People, coalition with participation of the Movement for the Future of Curaçao and Partido MAN
 * 🇩🇴 – 2004–2020 – Dominican Liberation Party
 * 🇪🇨 – 2007–2021 – PAIS Alliance
 * 🇸🇻 – 2009–2019 – Farabundo Martí National Liberation Front
 * – 2008–2012 – Party for a Country of Solidarity and Revolutionary Febrerista Party in coalitions Patriotic Alliance for Change (2008–2010) and Guasú Front (2010–2012)
 * 🇵🇪 – 2011–2016 – Peruvian Nationalist Party, Peruvian Communist Party and Socialist Party in the coalition Peru Wins
 * 🇵🇪 – 2021-2022 – Free Peru
 * 🇹🇹 – 2010–2012 – Movement for Social Justice, coalition with participation of the United National Congress, Congress of the People, Tobago Organisation of the People and National Joint Action Committee
 * – 2005–2020 – Broad Front

Meetings and organization
Meetings were held in São Paulo (1990), Mexico City (1991), Managua (1992), Havana (1993), Montevideo (1995), San Salvador (1996), Porto Alegre (1997), Mexico City (1998), Managua (2000), Havana (2001), Antigua Guatemala (2002), Quito (2003), São Paulo (2005), San Salvador (2007), Montevideo (2008), Mexico City (2009), Buenos Aires (2010), Managua (2011), Caracas (2012), São Paulo (2013), La Paz (2014), Mexico City (2015), San Salvador (2016), Managua (2017), Havana (2018), Caracas (2019) and Brasília (2023).

The Foro's chief authority is its meeting itself. Between meetings, the Foro is represented by an Executive Group (Grupo de Trabalho) composed of a sample of its overall membership that usually meets thrice a year as well as by an Executive Secretariat (Secretariado Executivo).

title: São Paulo Forum


text:
Talk:Slyther

The Slyther's only appeared once. Merge with The Dalek Invasion of Earth. -khaosworks 18:43, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Talk:Slyther


text:
Indian Uzhavar Uzhaippalar Katchi

Indian Uzhavar Uzhaippalar Katchi (Indian Farmers and Toilers Party), is a political party in the Indian state, Tamil Nadu which was founded by Vettavalam Manikandan.

title: Indian Uzhavar Uzhaippalar Katchi


text:
American Tune (album)

American Tune is an album of rehearsal tapes and live recordings by American singer Eva Cassidy, released in 2003, seven years after her death in 1996. It was her second album of mainly live material and her third posthumous album. American Tune spent five weeks on the U.S. Billboard Top 200, and was a UK number one album.

Reception
Writing for Sing Out! magazine, Jamie Anderson calls every song on the album "a gem...either remaining true to the original song or presenting the piece in a new way without syrupy trappings".

Track listing

 * 1) "Drowning in the Sea of Love" [live] (Kenneth Gamble, Leon Huff) – 4:19
 * 2) "True Colors" [live] (Thomas Kelly, Billy Steinberg) – 4:50
 * 3) "The Water Is Wide" [live] (Traditional) – 4:20
 * 4) "Hallelujah I Love Him So" (Ray Charles) – 2:33
 * 5) "God Bless the Child" [live] (Arthur Herzog Jr., Billie Holiday) – 5:17
 * 6) "Dark Eyed Molly" [live] (Archie Fisher) – 3:28
 * 7) "American Tune" [live] (Paul Simon) – 4:06
 * 8) "It Don't Mean a Thing (If It Ain't Got That Swing)" [live] (Duke Ellington, Irving Mills) – 2:23
 * 9) "Yesterday" (Lennon–McCartney) – 3:09
 * 10) "You Take My Breath Away" [live] (Claire Hamill) – 5:39

Personnel

 * Eva Cassidy – guitar, rhythm guitar, vocals
 * Chris Biondo – bass
 * Jimmy Campbell – drums
 * Dan Cassidy – violin
 * Keith Grimes – electric guitar
 * Marcy Marxer – bouzouki, guitar, tin whistle
 * Raice McLeod – drums
 * Bruno Nasta – violin
 * Lenny Williams – organ, piano

Production

 * Producer: Chris Biondo
 * Engineers: Chris Biondo, Cathy Fink, Bryan McCulley
 * Mastering: Robert Vosgien
 * Technical assistance: Brian Grant
 * Arranger: Eva Cassidy
 * Overdubs: Marcy Marxer, Geoff Gillette
 * Sequencing: Bill Straw
 * Design: Eileen White
 * Photography: Chris Biondo
 * Drawing: Eva Cassidy
 * Liner notes: Martin Jennings
 * Compilation: Bill Straw

title: American Tune (album)


text:
Arlington West

Arlington West is a series of projects in coastal California intended to draw public attention to, and to open a discourse on the subject of both military and civilian deaths during the invasion and occupation of Iraq in the early 21st century. The projects, consisting of symbolic grave markers established at beaches, have been implemented at beaches in Santa Barbara, Santa Monica, San Diego, and elsewhere. There is also a similar, but differently named Lafayette Hillside Memorial in the San Francisco Bay Area.

Memorial
Arlington West refers to the "temporary cemetery" itself, as well as Veterans for Peace's project of installing the temporary memorial. The name, Arlington West, was given to the memorial by WWII veteran Ted Berlin and reflects the name of the national cemetery of the United States, Arlington National Cemetery, a burial place of honor for fallen war heroes. Arlington National Cemetery is the location of the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, and is also the final resting place for John F. Kennedy. Arlington West—in a manner similar to "real" cemeteries—is intended by the project organizers to be a place to mourn, reflect, contemplate, grieve, and meditate, to honor and acknowledge those who have lost their lives, and to reflect upon the costs of war.

The memorial in Santa Barbara, which was first put together on November 2, 2003 by local activist Stephen Sherrill, was soon adopted by the local chapter of Veterans for Peace. It is installed each Sunday by a team of volunteers on the beach immediately west of Stearns Wharf. Visitors walking to the tourist attractions on the wharf have a clear view, from the boardwalk, along the beach with the white crosses in the foreground. From the walkway, visitors can see a flag-draped coffin and more than 3,000 crosses, made of wood, which are intended to resemble and represent traditional military grave markers. In addition to the simulated graveyard, a placard listing all the fallen American military personnel since the U.S. invaded and occupied Iraq is prominently displayed; this list is updated weekly. Due to logistical constraints, the number of new crosses was halted at just over 3000 even though the latest death toll has exceeded 4400. Adjacent to the placards is a sign containing the message: "At 3000 crosses, the Arlington West Memorial is 141 feet wide and 310 feet long. A memorial for the Iraqi dead would be 141 feet wide and 12.8 miles long."

The second Arlington West was installed in Santa Monica, California on February 15, 2004, a Sunday. It was built on the sand just north of the pier at Santa Monica Beach, "as a way to acknowledge the costs and consequences of the addiction to war as an instrument of international policy" (quote from Veterans for Peace). Like the initial memorial in Santa Barbara, it has been reinstalled each Sunday and Fourth of July since its inception.

Because of the difficulty of finding out the faiths and/or philosophies of the people who died, the cross (a common symbol of Christianity) was selected to be used as a default marker. But both memorials have many markers that are the Star of David or crescents. Approximately twenty similar memorials have been installed in various locations across the United States and on the West Coast of the U.S.. The San Diego Veterans For Peace, Chapter 91, installs the memorial 6–8 times/year on beaches and parks in San Diego County.

On December 14, 2003 Arlington West Santa Barbara was illuminated by 455 candles in red cups for the city's annual Parade of Lights. The cups glowed a blood red while the light projected upward from the cups caused the white crosses to glow in a flickering, living light. Photojournalists on hand commented that the sight of the illuminated memorial "upstaged the Parade of Lights" (boats in the harbor decked out in Christmas lights). The display drew thousands of spectators during the two hours the candles burned.

Veterans For Peace, an official non-governmental organization founded in 1985 includes men and women veterans from World War II, Korea, Vietnam, the Gulf War, and other conflicts, as well as peacetime veterans. The group has published a 'how-to' for organising, planning and constructing and erecting Arlington West. Several other Memorials have been erected by chapters of Veterans for Peace and other groups.

In the spring and summer of 2005, a similar Arlington West display was taken on a U.S. tour, being installed at places such as Ohio's Kent State University (for the 35th commemoration of the shootings of May 4, 1970), as well as at "Camp Casey," the site of anti-war protester Cindy Sheehan's vigil outside the ranch of President George W. Bush near Crawford, Texas.

In August 2010, the members of the Santa Barbara chapter of Veterans for Peace decided to replace the traditional Arlington West memorial with one which focuses on the War in Afghanistan. The 3000+ crosses for the casualties in Iraq were removed and replaced with 1200+ plastic tombstones representing the fatalities in Afghanistan, ending the memorial dedicated specifically to the Iraq war.

Film
There was a related film, Arlington West: The Film.

Similar memorials
In September 2003, a similar display of ninety white crosses laid out in a military configuration and in the shape of a cross was created by American artist Scott Hemeon and included as one of the art installations for Project One's annual Wind/Sea/Sky beach sculpture exhibition on Easton's Beach in Newport, Rhode Island. This installation, entitled CrossCurrents, predated Arlington West by several months.

First created in 2003, the Lafayette hillside memorial, which overlooks a busy highway in Lafayette, California (near Oakland), has generated considerable controversy since November 2006, when it was expanded and a large sign was added.

title: Arlington West


text:
FSP

FSP may refer to:

Government

 * Florence State Prison, in Arizona, United States
 * Florida State Prison, in the United States
 * Folsom State Prison, in California, United States
 * Food Stamp Program, a program of the United States Department of Agriculture
 * Foreign Service of Pakistan
 * Freeway service patrol, in the United States

Medicine

 * Familial spastic paraparesis
 * Fibrin split products

Politics

 * Foro de São Paulo, a Latin American political assembly
 * Freedom Socialist Party, a political party in the United States
 * Freelance Solidarity Project, a US media-worker union division
 * Free Socialist Party/Marxist-Leninists, a defunct political party in West Germany
 * Free State Project, an American political migration
 * Frontline Socialist Party, a political party in Sri Lanka

Technology

 * Fibre saturation point
 * Fission Surface Power, a lunar colonization research project
 * Finite State Process, the notation used to specify the behavior of concurrent systems
 * Friction stir processing
 * FSP Group, a Taiwanese electronics manufacturer
 * Firmware Support Package, a firmware initialisation and management infrastructure by Intel
 * File Service Protocol

Transport

 * Fateh Singhpura railway station, in Rajasthan, India
 * Frankfurt Stadion station, in Germany
 * Nikolai Airport, in Alaska, United States
 * Saint-Pierre Airport, in Saint-Pierre and Miquelon, France
 * Shenton Park railway station, in Western Australia

Other uses

 * Daughters of St. Paul (Latin: Filiarum Sancti Pauli), a Catholic religious congregation
 * Factory Specification Parts
 * Falguni Shane Peacock, an Indian fashion house
 * Folha de S.Paulo, a Brazilian newspaper
 * Food Service Provider
 * Food self-provisioning
 * French Saddle Pony
 * Functional sentence perspective
 * Full Scope Poly (List of U.S. security clearance terms)

title: FSP


text:
Tewfik Pasha

Mohamed Tewfik Pasha (محمد توفيق باشا Muḥammad Tawfīq Bāshā; April 30 or 15 November 1852 – 7 January 1892), also known as Tawfiq of Egypt, was khedive of Egypt and the Sudan between 1879 and 1892 and the sixth ruler from the Muhammad Ali Dynasty. He inherited a state suffering under the financial and political mismanagement of his predecessor Isma'il. Disaffection in the Egyptian army as well as Anglo-French control of the state in the 1880s culminated in the anti-foreign Urabi revolt. Tewfik also took interest in matters concerning irrigation, education and justice; as well as selling his father's female slaves and closing the court's harem quarters.

Early life
He was the oldest son of Khedive Isma'il, and was born on April 30 or November 15, 1852. His mother was Princess Shafaq Nur Hanim. He was not sent to Europe to be educated like his younger brothers, but grew up in Egypt.

He spoke French and English fluently.

In 1866 Isma'il succeeded in his endeavour to alter the order of succession to the Khedivate of Egypt. The title, instead of passing to the youngest living male descendant of Muhammad Ali, was now to descend from father to son. Ismail sought this alteration mainly because he disliked his uncle, Halim Pasha, who was his heir-presumptive, and he had imagined that he would be able to select whichever of his sons he pleased as his successor. But he found, after the change had been made, that the Great Powers (Britain, Germany, Austria-Hungary, and the Ottoman Empire) interpreted the new arrangement as applying strictly to the eldest son. Tewfik therefore became heir-apparent. He was given a palace near Cairo to live in, and for twelve years he led an uneventful life, farming and establishing a reputation for good sense and fair dealing with his fellow tenants.

Marriage
In Cairo on 15 January 1873 he married Princess Emina Ilhamy (Constantinople, 24 May 1858 – Bebek, Istanbul, 19 June 1931), daughter of Prince Ibrahim al-Hami and Parlanta Qadin.

Presidency
In 1878 he was appointed president of the council after the dismissal of Nubar Pasha. He held this office only for a few months; but this was long enough to show that he had the wisdom to refrain from taking part in the intrigues which then dominated the political life in Egypt and Sudan.

He went back to his estate, and settled down once more to a quiet country life. He was undisturbed only for a short time. On 26 June 1879, Isma'il, at the insistence of Britain and France, was deposed by Sultan Abdul Hamid II, who sent orders at the same time that Tewfik should be proclaimed Khedive.

Reign
The new khedive was so displeased by the news of his accession that he soundly boxed the ears of the servant who first brought the tidings to him. Egypt and Sudan at that time was involved in financial and political troubles brought about by the policy of Isma'il, and the situation was made worse by the inaction of Britain and France for some months following Tewfik's accession. Tewfik's people were dissatisfied, his army disaffected; his advisers were nearly all of the adventurer class, with their own ends to gain; and he himself had neither the character of a strong ruler nor the experience that would have enabled him to secure an orderly administration of affairs. Disorder prevailed until November 1879, when the dual control was reestablished by the governments of Britain and France. For over two years Major Evelyn Baring (afterwards Lord Cromer), Auckland Colvin, and Monsieur Ernest de Blignières practically governed the country, endeavouring to institute reforms while possessing no means of coercion.

During all this time the disaffection in the Egyptian army was increasing. Tewfik had been blamed for his failure to take a firm line with the rebels, but his attitude was governed by his relations with Britain and France, and he was unable to control events. The dissatisfaction culminated in the anti-foreign movement headed by Urabi Pasha, who had gained complete command of the army. In July 1882 the attitude of Urabi, who was carrying out defensive works on a large scale, made the British admiral (Sir Beauchamp Seymour, afterwards Lord Alcester) to declare that he would bombard the forts of Alexandria unless they were handed over to him.

Before the bombardment began it was suggested to Tewfik that he should leave the city and embark either upon a man-of-war belonging to one of the neutral powers, or in his own yacht, or in a mail steamer which was then in the port. His answer was, "I am still Khedive, and I remain with my people in the hour of their danger." At his palace of Qasr el-Raml, three miles (five kilometers) from the town, he was beyond reach of the shells, but his life was nevertheless imperiled. When the rebel soldiers attacked the palace he managed to make his escape and to reach another palace after passing through the burning streets of Alexandria. Here he was obliged to agree that a guard of British bluejackets should protect him from further risk. He showed his courage equally during the cholera epidemic at Alexandria in 1883.

He had gone back to Cairo after the Battle of Tel al-Kebir, had consented to the reforms insisted upon by Britain, and had assumed the position of a constitutional ruler under the guidance of Lord Dufferin, the British special commissioner. When cholera broke out, he insisted upon going to Alexandria. His wife accompanied him, and he went round the hospitals, setting an excellent example to the authorities of the city, and encouraging the patients by kind and hopeful words.

Egyptian Fundamental Ordinance of 1882, a constitution, followed an abortive attempt to promulgate a constitution in 1879. The document was limited in scope and was effectively more of an organic law of the Consultative Council to the khedive than an actual constitution.

In 1884, Sir Evelyn Baring (Lord Cromer) went back to Egypt as diplomatic agent and Consul-General of Britain. His first task was to demand that Tewfik should abandon the Turco-Egyptian Sudan. Tewfik gave his consent with natural reluctance, but, having consented, he did everything he could to ensure the success of the policy which Baring had been sent to carry out. He behaved with equal propriety during the negotiations between Sir H. Drummond Wolff and the Turkish envoy, Mukhtar Pasha, in 1886. His position was not a dignified one but that of a titular ruler compelled to stand by while others discussed and managed the affairs of his country. The Sultan was his suzerain; in Britain he recognized his protector: to the representative of each he endeavoured to show friendliness and esteem. As time went on his confidence in Baring increased, until at last he deferred to the British agent in almost everything. On occasion, however, he acted on his own initiative, as when in June 1888 he dismissed Nubar Pasha and summoned Riaz Pasha to form a ministry, an action influenced, nevertheless, by Tewfik's knowledge of the divergence of views between Nubar and the British agent. Baring encouraged Tewfik to show his activity in matters of administration, and he took a great interest in all matters connected with irrigation, education and justice. He was not an imposing man, but he showed a genuine desire to govern his country for its own benefit. He understood the importance to Egypt of British assistance and support; his natural shrewdness made him accept the British conditions; his natural good feeling kept him from any inclination to intrigue.

Personal life
He was courteous and amiable, he had no desire to keep up the unapproachable state of an oriental ruler. In many ways his manners and habits were less oriental than European. He married in 1873 his ethnic Albanian kinswoman, Emina Ilhamy, with whom he lived very happily. She was his only wife and Tewfik was a strong advocate of monogamy. When Tewfik ascended the throne, he closed the harem quarters in the imperial palace, and sold all of his father's female slaves to slave markets.

Death
He died on 7 January 1892, at the Helwan Palace near Cairo, and was succeeded by his eldest son, Abbas II.

Issue
By his wife he had the following children:
 * Abbas Hilmi II Pasha, Khedive of Egypt;
 * Prince Mohammed Ali Tewfik (Kubba Palace, Cairo, 9 November 1875 – Lausanne, Switzerland, 18 March 1955, and buried in Khedive Tawfik Mausoleum, Kait Bey, Cairo);
 * Princess Nazli Hanim (11 April 1877 – Cairo, c. 1879);
 * Princess Fakhr un-nisa Khadija Hanim (Cairo, 21 May 1880 – Helwan, 22 February 1951);
 * Princess Nimatullah Hanim (Cairo, 23 October 1882 – Nice, France, c. 1965, and buried there at the cimetière de Caucade).

Honours

 * Knight of the Order of the Iron Crown, 1st Class, 1868
 * Order of Honour, Imtiyaz Medal, 1868
 * Order of the Osmans, Nishan-i-Osmania, 1868
 * Order of Nobility, 1868
 * 🇸🇪 Commander Grand Cross of the Order of Vasa, 17 December 1868
 * Grand Cross of the Order of the Red Eagle, 29 January 1870
 * Grand Cross of the House and Merit Order of Peter Frederick Louis, 5 February 1875
 * 🇬🇧 Honorary Grand Commander of the Order of the Star of India, 3 May 1875
 * Grand Cross of the Royal Order of Kalākaua I, 1881
 * Grand Cross of the Order of Saints Maurice and Lazarus, 1886
 * Grand Cross of the Order of Franz Joseph, 1886
 * 🇬🇧 Honorary Grand Cross of the Order of the Bath (civil division), 21 June 1887
 * 🇳🇱 Grand Cross of the Order of the Netherlands Lion, 1890
 * Grand Cross of the Légion d'honneur, 1890
 * 🇸🇪 Knight of the Order of the Seraphim, 18 April 1891

title: Tewfik Pasha


text:
USS Raton

USS Raton (SS/SSR/AGSS-270), a Gato-class submarine, was a ship of the United States Navy named for the raton, a polynemoid fish inhabiting semitropical waters off the Pacific coast of the Americas.

Construction and commissioning
A fleet submarine, Raton was laid down on 29 May 1942 by the Manitowoc Shipbuilding Company at Manitowoc, Wisconsin. She was launched on 24 January 1943, sponsored by Mrs. C. C. West, and commissioned on 13 July 1943.

July–October 1943
Following training in Lake Michigan, Raton moved to Coco Solo in the Panama Canal Zone for additional training. She was off Coco Solo on 11 August 1943 when the merchant ship SS Hiram Maxim′s United States Navy Armed Guard mistakenly opened fire on her, firing one 5 in and two 3 in rounds. Raton immediately crash-dived and sustained no damage.

Raton departed Panama for the South West Pacific Area on 19 September 1943, and upon arriving at Brisbane, Australia, on 16 October 1943, joined Submarine Force, United States Seventh Fleet.

First war patrol, November – December 1943
From Brisbane, Raton headed for Tulagi in the Solomon Islands for her first war patrol which she conducted from 20 November to 6 December 1943 — in the Bismarck Archipelago–Solomons–New Guinea area. On 24 November 1943, while patrolling west of Massau, Raton sighted a Japanese convoy of two cargo ships escorted by two destroyers and a Nakajima A6M2-N (Allied reporting name "Rufe") floatplane. She trailed the convoy and that night made a torpedo attack, sinking the cargo ship Onoe Maru. Displaying excellent antisubmarine warfare proficiency, the two destroyers thwarted four attempts Raton made to sink the remaining cargo ship.

On 28 November 1943, Raton sighted a Rabaul-bound Japanese convoy of five cargo ships accompanied by two escorts. In a submerged attack, Raton sank two of the cargo ships, Hokko Maru and Yuri Maru. After a severe pounding by the escorts, Raton escaped, but she remained in the area to renew her attack on the convoy. In a night attack, she heavily damaged a third cargo ship, then called for assistance, as her torpedoes were nearly expended. The submarine USS Gato (SS-212) arrived and joined the attack, only to be attacked by the two Japanese destroyers. Raton surfaced and raced at flank speed to draw the escorts away from Gato and succeeded, allowing Gato to sink the cargo ship Columbia Maru. Raton concluded her patrol with her return to Milne Bay, New Guinea, for rest and refit there alongside the submarine tender USS Fulton (AS-11).

Second and third war patrols, December 1943–April 1944
Raton departed Milne Bay on her second war patrol— conducted from 11 December 1943 to 25 January 1944 — bound for the Mindanao–Celebes–Halmahera area. On 24 December 1943, she attacked a Japanese convoy of four merchant ships and two destroyers in Morotai Strait, sinking the merchant ship Heiwa Maru and damaging an auxiliary aircraft carrier.

On 2 January 1944, Raton encountered two Japanese tankers escorted by a Fubuki-class destroyer northwest of Faland Island on the Palau shipping lane. She scored hits on one tanker, but then the Japanese escorts interrupted her attack. Raton departed the patrol area on 19 January 1944 and reached Fremantle, Australia, on 25 January 1944 for refit by the submarine tender USS Pelias (AS-14).

Raton conducted her third war patrol from 18 February to 14 April in the Java Sea, the Karimata Strait, and the South China Sea. The submarine USS Rasher (SS-269) sank the only two ships Raton contacted during the patrol.

Fourth war patrol, May–June 1944
Raton′s fourth patrol began on 19 May when she got underway for a patrol area in the South China Sea and Java Sea, which provided good hunting. On 23 May 1944, she intercepted two small intercoastal cargo ships north of the Tambelan Islands and sank both with her deck gun. That same evening, she contacted the Japanese fast convoy Hi-63, which consisted of three transports and four destroyers. She sank the destroyer JAPANESE DESTROYER Iki, and damaged a transport.

On 27 May 1944, Raton′s logbook reported:

"'0615 (H) Ship shaken up considerably by either two underwater explosions or by striking submerged object. People in forward torpedo room thought we had struck something or had been struck by something.'"

This turned out to be two torpedoes fired by the submarine USS Lapon (SS-260). Lapon was looking for a Japanese submarine passing through the area and mistook Raton for that submarine. Lapon′s commanding officer checked fire on the second set of torpedoes realizing he was not shooting at an enemy submarine. Later dry-dock inspection of Raton showed dents where the torpedoes hit. This is the only known friendly fire incident in World War II between two U.S. submarines.

On 28 May 1944, Raton sighted and tracked a Japanese Type L submarine, but was unable to attack due to an unfavorable firing angle.

On 6 June 1944, a bright moonlit night allowed Raton to sight a large Japanese convoy of 11 ships with four destroyer-type escorts. Three hits from a spread of torpedoes Raton fired blew apart one frigate, but Raton received a severe pounding from a prolonged depth charge attack before making her escape.

A boarding party from Raton captured a small sailing vessel on 13 June 1944, taking 11 prisoners-of-war and scuttling the craft. On 17 June 1944, Raton sighted a small cargo ship, sinking it with one torpedo and rescuing nine survivors. Raton returned to Fremantle on 23 June 1944 for upkeep alongside the submarine tender USS Orion (AS-18).

Fifth and sixth war patrols, July–December 1944
Raton′s fifth war patrol, conducted from 18 July to 10 September 1944 with a patrol area in the South China Sea off Luzon, gave her only one victory, a Japanese tanker left beached off Dasol Bay, in the Philippines on 4 August 1944.

Raton had better luck on her sixth war patrol, which she began on 6 October 1944, again with a patrol area in the South China Sea. On the night of 18 October 1944, Raton slipped into the center of a nine-ship Japanese convoy for a surface attack. She fired both sets of torpedo tubes, her bow tubes at six overlapping targets and her stern tubes at a large cargo ship. Two merchant ships — Shiranesan Maru and Taikai Maru — sank, and another vessel was damaged. A final attack resulted in damage to another cargo ship. With her torpedo supply running low and a typhoon approaching, Raton pulled into Mios Woendi in the Schouten Islands for more fuel and torpedoes with which to finish the patrol.

Leaving Mios Woendi 27 October 1944, Raton encountered a Japanese task group of two heavy cruisers and five escort vessels on 6 November 1944. In a submerged attack, she scored three hits on the Mogami-class heavy cruiser JAPANESE CRUISER Kumano, but did not put Kumano out of action.

On 11 November 1944, Raton and the submarine USS Ray (SS-271) attacked a four-ship Japanese convoy guarded by three escorts. In a surface action, Raton sank Unkai Maru and Kurasaki with four torpedoes. Then, both submarines fired torpedoes at the remaining auxiliary ships with unconfirmed results. With only four torpedoes remaining, Raton headed for the United States, arriving at San Francisco, California, on 1 December 1944.

Seventh and eighth war patrols, April–July 1945
On 13 March 1945, after an overhaul at Mare Island Navy Yard in Vallejo, California, Raton headed west for Pearl Harbor, HAwaii, for refresher training. She departed for the Yellow Sea on 20 April 1945 to begin her seventh war patrol. On 2 May 1945, she blew up a loaded Japanese tanker, Toryu Maru, in a night torpedo attack off China′ Shantung Peninsula despite gunfire from two Japanese escorts. That same day, Raton sank a medium-sized Japanese cargo ship, Rezikan Maru, in a submerged torpedo approach. On 16 May 1945, she made a submerged attack on two Japanese transports, sinking the larger one, Eiju Maru. Raton concluded the patrol with her arrival at Guam on 25 May 1945 for upkeep alongside the submarine tender USS Proteus (AS-19).

Raton departed Guam on 22 June 1945 for her final patrol of World War II, tasked with lifeguard duty off Hong Kong. No Allied planes went down in the area, and she made no contact with Japanese forces. Arriving at Subic Bay in the Philippines on 23 July 1945 for upkeep, Raton was preparing for her next patrol when the war ended on 15 August 1945.

1945–1949
On 31 August 1945. Raton departed the Philippines for the United States, arriving at San Francisco in mid-September 1945. Following overhaul at Mare Island Navy Yard, Raton transited the Panama Canal, and arrived Naval Submarine Base New London in New London, Connecticut, on 12 March 1946, where she was assigned to the United States Second Fleet. As the Cold War began, she spent the next 2½ years in training exercises in the North Atlantic Ocean and the Caribbean Sea. After being placed in reserve in the fall of 1948, Raton was decommissioned at Atlantic Reserve Fleet, New London on 11 March 1949.

Radar picket submarine (SSR-270), 1953–1959
Raton remained in the Atlantic Reserve Fleet at New London until July 1952, when she was towed to the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, for conversion to a radar picket submarine. Accordingly redesignated SSR-270 on 18 July 1952, she was recommissioned on 21 September 1953, Commander J. K. Wills in command. Departing Philadelphia on 8 December 1953, Raton underwent training for several months in the Norfolk, Virginia, area, operating from Naval Station Norfolk. Ordered to the Pacific, she arrived at San Diego, California, on 7 March 1954 via the Panama Canal.

Raton spent the next year in local operations before departing San Diego on 11 May 1955 for a six-month deployment to the western Pacific as a unit of the United States Seventh Fleet, her first post-World War II deployment to the Western Pacific. She returned to San Diego on 6 November 1955,and subsequently trained off the United States West Coast. She deployed to the western Pacific for her second post-World War II Seventh Fleet deployment on 13 May 1957. She returned to San Diego on 8 November 1957 and resumed training activities.

After overhaul at Hunter's Point Naval Shipyard in San Francisco from 7 July to 24 November 1958 and subsequent underway training, Raton made a third post-World War II deployment in the Seventh Fleet in the western Pacific from early March to mid-November 1959, participating in operations with forces of the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO) and the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force. In early 1960, Raton was engaged in local operations in the San Diego area, including evaluation of new sonar concepts and the training of Underwater Demolition Team personnel in covert reconnaissance.

Auxiliary research submarine (AGSS-270), 1960–1968
On 1 July 1960, Raton was reclassified as an auxiliary submarine and redesignated AGSS-270. After a major overhaul at Mare Island Naval Shipyard from January to April 1961, she headed west for her fourth post-World War II western Pacific deployment with the Seventh Fleet on 3 July 1961, returning to San Diego on 19 December 1961. She spent 1962 in fleet training operations off the U.S. West Coast, providing services for air, surface, and submarine forces. On 9 April 1962, it was reported that a kite had snagged on Raton, and this incident was referenced in the Peanuts comic strip of 19 May 1962, wherein it is implied that the kite had belonged to the long-suffering Charlie Brown, whose problems with flying kites was a standard running gag of the strip.

Raton′s fifth post-World War II western Pacific deployment, from January to June 1963, included participation in two major anti-submarine warfare exercises with U.S. and SEATO forces. Following an overhaul period from November 1963 to early March 1964, Raton deployed again to the western Pacific from 6 July to 23 December 1964, where she operated with naval forces of Thailand, the Philippines, and the Republic of China, under the Military Assistance Program.

Raton engaged in local fleet and type operations in the San Diego area during 1965 and early 1966. In mid-April 1966, she got underwat for another tour of duty with the Seventh Fleet. While deployed, she exercised with SEATO naval units in Exercise Sea Imp. On 17 October 1966, she returned to San Diego.

Raton spent 1967 in the San Diego area in local operations, conducting United States Naval Reserve training and undergoing a semiannual overhaul. On 20 and 21 May 1968, she served as a test ship to determine whether a small fleet tug could rescue men from a sunken submarine resting on the ocean floor. Raton commenced her final western Pacific deployment 15 July 1968, arriving at Yokohama, Japan, on 7 August 1968. During her deployment, she provided training services to Seventh Fleet and SEATO units. She returned to San Diego on 20 December 1968.

Decommissioning and disposal
Raton was decommissioned at Mare Island Naval Shipyard and stricken from the Navy List on 28 June 1969. Her stripped hull was designated as a target ship for United States Pacific Fleet gunnery exercise. She was sold for scrapping on 10 December 1973.

Honors and awards
Medal]]
 * Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Medal with six battle stars for World War II service
 * Vietnam Service Medal with two battle stars for Vietnam War service

title: USS Raton


text:
Intraocular pressure

Intraocular pressure (IOP) is the fluid pressure inside the eye. Tonometry is the method eye care professionals use to determine this. IOP is an important aspect in the evaluation of patients at risk of glaucoma. Most tonometers are calibrated to measure pressure in millimeters of mercury (mmHg).

Physiology
Intraocular pressure is determined by the production and drainage of aqueous humour by the ciliary body and its drainage via the trabecular meshwork and uveoscleral outflow. The reason for this is because the vitreous humour in the posterior segment has a relatively fixed volume and thus does not affect intraocular pressure regulation.

An important quantitative relationship (Goldmann's equation) is as follows:

 * $$P_o = \frac{F - U}{C} + P_v$$

Where:
 * $$P_o$$ is the IOP in millimeters of mercury (mmHg)
 * $$F$$ the rate of aqueous humour formation in microliters per minute (μL/min)
 * $$U$$ the resorption of aqueous humour through the uveoscleral route (μL/min)
 * $$C$$ is the facility of outflow in microliters per minute per millimeter of mercury (μL/min/mmHg)
 * $$P_v$$ the episcleral venous pressure in millimeters of mercury (mmHg).

The above factors are those that drive IOP.

Measurement
Palpation is one of the oldest, simplest, and least expensive methods for approximate IOP measurement, however it is very inaccurate unless the pressure is very high. Intraocular pressure is measured with a tonometer as part of a comprehensive eye examination. Contact lens sensors have also been used for continuous intraocular pressure monitoring.

Measured values of intraocular pressure are influenced by corneal thickness and rigidity. As a result, some forms of refractive surgery (such as photorefractive keratectomy) can cause traditional intraocular pressure measurements to appear normal when in fact the pressure may be abnormally high. A newer transpalpebral and transscleral tonometry method is not influenced by corneal biomechanics and does not need to be adjusted for corneal irregularities as measurement is done over upper eyelid and sclera.

Classification
Current consensus among ophthalmologists and optometrists defines normal intraocular pressure as that between 10 mmHg and 20 mmHg. The average value of intraocular pressure is 15.5 mmHg with fluctuations of about 2.75 mmHg.

Ocular hypertension (OHT) is defined by intraocular pressure being higher than normal, in the absence of optic nerve damage or visual field loss.

Ocular hypotension, hypotony, or ocular hypotony, is typically defined as intraocular pressure equal to or less than 5 mmHg. Such low intraocular pressure could indicate fluid leakage and deflation of the eyeball.

Daily variation
Intraocular pressure varies throughout the night and day. The diurnal variation for normal eyes is between 3 and 6 mmHg and the variation may increase in glaucomatous eyes. During the night, intraocular pressure may not decrease despite the slower production of aqueous humour. Glaucoma patients' 24-hour IOP profiles may differ from those of healthy individuals.

Fitness and exercise
There is some inconclusive research that indicates that exercise could possibly affect IOP (some positively and some negatively).

Musical instruments
Playing some musical wind instruments has been linked to increases in intraocular pressure. A 2011 study focused on brass and woodwind instruments observed "temporary and sometimes dramatic elevations and fluctuations in IOP". Another study found that the magnitude of increase in intraocular pressure correlates with the intraoral resistance associated with the instrument, and linked intermittent elevation of intraocular pressure from playing high-resistance wind instruments to incidence of visual field loss. The range of intraoral pressure involved in various classes of ethnic wind instruments, such as Native American flutes, has been shown to be generally lower than Western classical wind instruments.

Drugs
Intraocular pressure also varies with a number of other factors such as heart rate, respiration, fluid intake, systemic medication and topical drugs. Alcohol and marijuana consumption leads to a transient decrease in intraocular pressure and caffeine may increase intraocular pressure.

Taken orally, glycerol (often mixed with fruit juice to reduce its sweet taste) can cause a rapid, temporary decrease in intraocular pressure. This can be a useful initial emergency treatment of severely elevated pressure.

The depolarising muscle relaxant succinylcholine, which is used in anaesthesia, transiently increases IOP by around 10 mmHg for a few minutes. This is significant for example if the patient requires anaesthesia for a trauma and has sustained an eye (globe) perforation. The mechanism is not clear but it is thought to involve contraction of tonic myofibrils and transient dilation of choroidal blood vessels. Ketamine also increases IOP.

Significance
Ocular hypertension is the most important risk factor for glaucoma.

Intraocular pressure has been measured as an outcome in a systematic review comparing the effect of neuroprotective agents in slowing the progression of open angle glaucoma.

Differences in pressure between the two eyes are often clinically significant, and potentially associated with certain types of glaucoma, as well as iritis or retinal detachment.

Intraocular pressure may become elevated due to anatomical problems, inflammation of the eye, genetic factors, or as a side-effect from medication. Intraocular pressure laws follow fundamentally from physics. Any kinds of intraocular surgery should be done by considering the intraocular pressure fluctuation. Sudden increase of intraocular pressure can lead to intraocular micro barotrauma and cause ischemic effects and mechanical stress to retinal nerve fiber layer. Sudden intraocular pressure drop can lead to intraocular decompression that generates micro bubbles that potentially cause multiple micro emboli and leading to hypoxia, ischemia and retinal micro structure damage.

title: Intraocular pressure


text:
Apocynum

Apocynum, commonly known as dogbane or Indian hemp, is a small genus of the flowering plant family Apocynaceae. Its name comes from Ancient Greek, from   "away" and   "dog", referring to dogbane (Cionura erecta), which was used to poison dogs. The genus is native to North America, temperate Asia, and southeastern Europe.

Apocynum species are used as food plants by the larvae of some Lepidoptera species, including the mouse moth and the queen butterfly.

Uses
Apocynum cannabinum is used as a source of fiber by Native Americans. Apocynum venetum is used as an herbal tea in China. Dogbane contains cymarin, a cardiotonic agent formerly used to treat cardiac arrhythmia in humans.

Species
Almost 300 names have been proposed in the genus for species, subspecies, and forms. , only the following five species and hybrids are currently recognized, with several subspecies and varieties accepted for A. androsaemifolium and A. venetum (see their respective species pages).

 * Apocynum androsaemifolium L. – Canada, United States, northeastern Mexico
 * Apocynum cannabinum L. – Canada, United States
 * Apocynum × floribundum Greene (a hybrid of A. androsaemifolium and A. cannabinum) – Canada, United States, northern Mexico
 * Apocynum pictum Schrenk – China, Mongolia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan
 * Apocynum venetum L. – southeastern Europe and Asia

title: Apocynum