text:
Maya codices

Maya codices (: codex) are folding books written by the pre-Columbian Maya civilization in Maya hieroglyphic script on Mesoamerican bark paper. The folding books are the products of professional scribes working under the patronage of deities such as the Tonsured Maize God and the Howler Monkey Gods. The codices have been named for the cities where they eventually settled. The Dresden codex is generally considered the most important of the few that survive.

The Maya made paper from the inner bark of a certain wild fig tree, Ficus cotinifolia. This sort of paper was generally known by the word huun in Mayan languages (the Aztec people far to the north used the word āmatl for paper). The Maya developed their huun-paper around the 5th century. Maya paper was more durable and a better writing surface than papyrus.

"Our knowledge of ancient Maya thought must represent only a tiny fraction of the whole picture, for of the thousands of books in which the full extent of their learning and ritual was recorded, only four have survived to modern times (as though all that posterity knew of ourselves were to be based upon three prayer books and Pilgrim's Progress)."

Background
Before the arrival of Spanish conquistadors, the Aztecs eradicated many Mayan works and sought to depict themselves as the true rulers through a fake history and newly written texts.

There were many books in existence at the time of the Spanish conquest of Yucatán in the 16th century; most were destroyed by the Catholic priests. Many in Yucatán were ordered destroyed by Diego de Landa in July 1562. Bishop de Landa hosted a mass book burning in the town of Maní in the Yucatán peninsula. De Landa wrote: "We found a large number of books in these characters and, as they contained nothing in which were not to be seen as superstition and lies of the devil, we burned them all, which they regretted to an amazing degree, and which caused them much affliction."

Such codices were the primary written records of Maya civilization, together with the many inscriptions on stone monuments and stelae that survived. Their range of subject matter in all likelihood embraced more topics than those recorded in stone and buildings, and was more like what is found on painted ceramics (the so-called 'ceramic codex'). Alonso de Zorita wrote that in 1540 he saw numerous such books in the Guatemalan highlands that "recorded their history for more than eight hundred years back, and that were interpreted for me by very ancient Indians".

Dominican friar Bartolomé de las Casas lamented when he found out that such books were destroyed: "These books were seen by our clergy, and even I saw part of those that were burned by the monks, apparently because they thought [they] might harm the Indians in matters concerning religion, since at that time they were at the beginning of their conversion." The last codices destroyed were those of Nojpetén, Guatemala in 1697, the last city conquered in the Americas. With their destruction, access to the history of the Maya and opportunity for insight into some key areas of Maya life was greatly diminished.

Three fully Mayan codices have been preserved. These are:

 * The Dresden Codex also known as the Codex Dresdensis (74 pages, 3.56 m); dating to the 11th or 12th century.
 * The Madrid Codex, also known as the Tro-Cortesianus Codex (112 pages, 6.82 m) dating to the Postclassic period of Mesoamerican chronology (circa 900–1521 AD).;
 * The Paris Codex, also known as the Peresianus Codex (22 pages, 1.45 m) tentatively dated to around 1450, in the Late Postclassic period (AD 1200–1525)

A fourth codex, lacking hieroglyphs, is Maya-Toltec rather than Maya. It remained controversial until 2015, when extensive research finally authenticated it:

 * The Grolier Codex, also known as the Sáenz Codex (10 pages) or Códice Maya de México.

Dresden Codex
The Dresden Codex (Codex Dresdensis) is held in the Sächsische Landesbibliothek (SLUB), the state library in Dresden, Germany. It is the most elaborate of the codices, and also a highly important specimen of Maya art. Many sections are ritualistic (including so-called 'almanacs'), others are of an astrological nature (eclipses, the Venus cycles). The codex is written on a long sheet of paper that is 'screen-folded' to make a book of 39 leaves, written on both sides. It was probably written between the twelfth and fourteenth centuries. After it was taken to Europe and was bought by the royal library of the court of Saxony in Dresden in 1739. The only exact replica, including the huun, made by a German artist is displayed at the Museo Nacional de Arqueología in Guatemala City, since October 2007.

It is not clear who brought the Dresden Codex to Europe. It arrived sometime in the late 18thcentury, potentially from the first or second generation of Spanish conquistadores. Even though the last date entry in the book is from several centuries before its relocation, the book was likely used and added to until just before the conquerors took it.

About 65 per cent of the pages in the Dresden Codex contain richly illustrated astronomical tables. These tables focus on eclipses, equinoxes and solstices, the sidereal cycle of Mars, and the synodic cycles of Mars and Venus. These observations allowed the Mayans to plan the calendar year, agriculture, and religious ceremonies around the stars. In the text, Mars is represented by a long nosed deer, and Venus is represented by a star.

Pages 51–58 are eclipse tables. These tables accurately predicted solar eclipses for 33years in the 8thcentury, though the predictions of lunar eclipses were far less successful. Icons of serpents devouring the sun symbolize eclipses throughout the book. The glyphs show roughly 40 times in the text, making eclipses a major focus of the Dresden Codex.

The first 52 pages of the Dresden Codex are about divination. The Mayan astronomers would use the codex for day keeping, but also determining the cause of sickness and other misfortunes.

Though a wide variety of gods and goddesses appear in the Dresden Codex, the Moon Goddess is the only neutral figure. In the first 23 pages of the book, she is mentioned far more than any other god.

Between 1880 and 1900, Dresden librarian Ernst Förstemann succeeded in deciphering the Maya numerals and the Maya calendar and realized that the codex is an ephemeris. Subsequent studies have decoded these astronomical almanacs, which include records of the cycles of the Sun and Moon, including eclipse tables, and all of the naked-eye planets. The "Serpent Series", pp. 61–69, is an ephemeris of these phenomena that uses a base date of 1.18.1.8.0.16 in the prior era (5,482,096 days).

Madrid Codex
The Madrid Codex was rediscovered in Spain in the 1860s; it was divided into two parts of differing sizes that were found in different locations. The Codex receives its alternate name of the Tro-Cortesianus Codex after the two parts that were separately discovered. Ownership of the Troano Codex passed to the Museo Arqueológico Nacional ("National Archaeological Museum") in 1888. The Museo Arqueológico Nacional acquired the Cortesianus Codex from a book-collector in 1872, who claimed to have recently purchased the codex in Extremadura. Extremadura is the province from which Francisco de Montejo and many of his conquistadors came, as did Hernán Cortés, the conqueror of Mexico. It is therefore possible that one of these conquistadors brought the codex back to Spain; the director of the Museo Arqueológico Nacional named the Cortesianus Codex after Hernán Cortés, supposing that he himself had brought the codex back.

The Madrid Codex is the longest of the surviving Maya codices. The content of the Madrid Codex mainly consists of almanacs and horoscopes that were used to help Maya priests in the performance of their ceremonies and divinatory rituals. The codex also contains astronomical tables, although fewer than the other two generally accepted surviving Maya codices. A close analysis of glyphic elements suggests that a number of scribes were involved in its production, perhaps as many as eight or nine, who produced consecutive sections of the manuscript; the scribes were likely to have been members of the priesthood.

Some scholars, such as Michael Coe and Justin Kerr, have suggested that the Madrid Codex dates to after the Spanish conquest but the evidence overwhelmingly favours a pre-conquest date for the document. It is likely that the codex was produced in Yucatán. J. Eric Thompson was of the opinion that the Madrid Codex came from western Yucatán and dated to between 1250 and 1450 AD. Other scholars have expressed a differing opinion, noting that the codex is similar in style to murals found at Chichen Itza, Mayapan and sites on the east coast such as Santa Rita, Tancah and Tulum. Two paper fragments incorporated into the front and last pages of the codex contain Spanish writing, which led Thompson to suggest that a Spanish priest acquired the document at Tayasal in Petén.

Paris Codex

The Paris Codex (also or formerly the Codex Peresianus) contains prophecies for tuns and katuns (see Maya Calendar), as well as a Maya zodiac, and is thus, in both respects, akin to the Books of Chilam Balam. The codex first appeared in 1832 as an acquisition of France's Bibliothèque Impériale (later the Bibliothèque Nationale, or National Library) in Paris. Three years later the first reproduction drawing of it was prepared for Lord Kingsborough, by his Lombardian artist Agostino Aglio. The original drawing is now lost, but a copy survives among some of Kingsborough's unpublished proof sheets, held in collection at the Newberry Library, Chicago.

Although occasionally referred to over the next quarter-century, its permanent rediscovery is attributed to the French orientalist Léon de Rosny, who in 1859 recovered the codex from a basket of old papers sequestered in a chimney corner at the Bibliothèque Nationale where it had lain discarded and apparently forgotten. As a result, it is in very poor condition. It was found wrapped in a paper with the word Pérez written on it, possibly a reference to the Jose Pérez who had published two brief descriptions of the then-anonymous codex in 1859. De Rosny initially gave it the name Codex Peresianus ("Codex Pérez") after its identifying wrapper, but in due course the codex would be more generally known as the Paris Codex. De Rosny published a facsimile edition of the codex in 1864. It remains in the possession of the Bibliothèque Nationale.

Maya Codex of Mexico

Formerly named the Grolier Codex, but renamed in 2018, the Maya Codex of Mexico was discovered in 1965. The codex is fragmented, consisting of eleven pages out of what is presumed to be a twenty-page book and five single pages. The codex has been housed at the National Museum of Anthropology in Mexico City, Mexico, since 2016, and is the only of the four Maya codices that still resides in the Americas. Each page shows a hero or god, facing to the left. At the top of each page is a number, and down the left of each page is what appears to be a list of dates. The pages are much less detailed than in the other codices, and hardly provide any information that is not already in the Dresden Codex. Although its authenticity was initially disputed, various tests conducted in the early 21st century supported its authenticity and Mexico's National Institute of Anthropology and History judged it to be an authentic Pre-Columbian codex in 2018. It has been dated to between 1021 and 1154 CE.

Other Maya codices
Given the rarity and importance of these books, rumors of finding new ones often develop interest. Archaeological excavations of Maya sites have turned up a number of rectangular lumps of plaster and paint flakes, most commonly in elite tombs. These lumps are the remains of codices where all the organic material has rotted away. A few of the more coherent of these lumps have been preserved, with the slim hope that some technique to be developed by future generations of archaeologists may be able to recover some information from these remains of ancient pages. The oldest Maya codices known have been found by archaeologists as mortuary offerings with burials in excavations in Uaxactun, Guaytán in San Agustín Acasaguastlán, and Nebaj in El Quiché, Guatemala, at Altun Ha in Belize and at Copán in Honduras. The six examples of Maya books discovered in excavations date to the Early Classic (Uaxactún and Altun Ha), Late Classic (Nebaj, Copán), and Early Postclassic (Guaytán) periods. Unfortunately, all of them have degraded into unopenable masses or collections of very small flakes and bits of the original texts. Thus it may never be possible to read them.

Breaking the Mayan code
Yuri Valentinovich Knorozov, a Soviet linguist, epigrapher and ethnographer played a pivotal role in the decipherment of the Maya script. He was also award the Order of the Quetzal by the President of Guatemala in 1991 and the USSR State Prize in 1977.

In May 1945, Knorozov, as a solider in the Red Army, saved a book from the burning Prussian State Library (now the Berlin State Library). This book contained reproductions of the Dresden, Mardrid, and Paris codies. This story is recounted in an award winning film, Breaking the Mayan Code.

title: Maya codices


text:
Pindolol

Pindolol, sold under the brand name Visken among others, is a nonselective beta blocker which is used in the treatment of hypertension. It is also an antagonist of the serotonin 5-HT1A receptor, preferentially blocking inhibitory 5-HT1A autoreceptors, and has been researched as an add-on therapy to various antidepressants, such as clomipramine and the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), in the treatment of depression  and obsessive-compulsive disorder.

Medical uses
Pindolol is used for hypertension in the United States, Canada, and Europe, and also for angina pectoris outside the United States. When used alone for hypertension, pindolol can significantly lower blood pressure and heart rate, but the evidence base for its use is weak as the number of subjects in published studies is small. In some countries, pindolol is also used for arrhythmias and prophylaxis of acute stress reactions.

Contraindications
Similar to propranolol with an extra contraindication for hyperthyroidism. In patients with thyrotoxicosis, possible deleterious effects from long-term use of pindolol have not been adequately appraised. Beta-blockade may mask the clinical signs of continuing hyperthyroidism or complications, and give a false impression of improvement. Therefore, abrupt withdrawal of pindolol may be followed by an exacerbation of the symptoms of hyperthyroidism, including thyroid storm.

Pindolol has intrinsic sympathomimetic activity and is therefore used with caution in angina pectoris.

Pharmacodynamics
Pindolol is a first generation, non-selective beta blocker in the class of β-adrenergic receptor antagonists. On the receptor level it is a competitive partial agonist. It possesses intrinsic sympathomimetic activity, meaning it has some degree of agonist effects in the absence of competing ligands. Pindolol shows membrane-stabilizing effects like quinidine, possibly accounting for its antiarrhythmic effects. It also acts as a serotonin 5-HT1A receptor partial agonist (intrinsic activity = 20–25%) or functional antagonist.

Pharmacokinetics
Pindolol is rapidly and well absorbed from the GI tract. It undergoes some first-pass-metabolization leading to an oral bioavailability of 50-95%. Patients with uremia may have a reduced bioavailability. Food does not alter the bioavailability, but may increase the resorption. Following an oral single dose of 20 mg peak plasma concentrations are reached within 1–2 hours. The effect of pindolol on pulse rate (lowering) is evident after 3 hours. Despite the rather short halflife of 3–4 hours, hemodynamic effects persist for 24 hours after administration. Plasma halflives are increased to 3–11.5 hours in patients with renal impairment, to 7–15 hours in elderly patients, and from 2.5 to 30 hours in patients with liver cirrhosis. Approximately 2/3 of pindolol is metabolized in the liver giving hydroxylates, which are found in the urine as gluconurides and ethereal sulfates. The remaining 1/3 of pindolol is excreted in urine in unchanged form.

History
Pindolol was patented by Sandoz in 1969 and was launched in the US in 1977. Towards end of February 2020 FDA added this product to their "DRUG SHORTAGE" list stating this is due to "Shortage of an active ingredient" and this is likely to be related to Coronavirus outbreak and related supply chain impacts.

Depression
Pindolol has been investigated as an add-on drug to antidepressant therapy with SSRIs like fluoxetine in the treatment of depression since 1994. The rationale behind this strategy has its basis in the fact that pindolol is an antagonist of the serotonin 5-HT1A receptor. Presynaptic and somatodendritic 5-HT1A receptors act as inhibitory autoreceptors, inhibit serotonin release, and are pro-depressive in their action. This is in contrast to postsynaptic 5-HT1A receptors, which mediate antidepressant effects. By blocking 5-HT1A autoreceptors at doses that are selective for them over postsynaptic 5-HT1A receptors, pindolol may be able to disinhibit serotonin release and thereby improve the antidepressant effects of SSRIs. The results of augmentation therapy with pindolol have been encouraging in early studies of low quality. A 2015 systematic review and meta-analysis of five randomized controlled trials found no overall significant benefit at 2.5 mg although, with regard to patients with SSRI-resistant depression, "once-daily high-dose pindolol (7.5 mg qd) appears to show a promising benefit in these patients". On the other hand, a 2017 systematic review indicated that pindolol's efficacy has been demonstrated in high evidence studies. Initiating pharmacotherapy with an SSRI plus pindolol might accelerate the SSRI's therapeutic impact. Pindolol's antidepressive efficacy may predominantly result from its ability to desensitize 5-HT1A autoreceptors.

Others

 * Pindolol is a potent scavenger of nitric oxide. This effect is potentiated by sodium bicarbonate. Inhibition of nitric oxide synthesis has an anxiolytic effect in animals.
 * Augmentation therapy of premature ejaculation: According to a recent study, pindolol can be effectively added to a standard anti-premature-ejaculation therapy, which usually consists of daily doses of an SSRI antidepressant such as fluoxetine or paroxetine. Augmentation of pindolol results in substantial increase of ejaculatory latency, even in those who previously did not experience in an improvement with the SSRI monotherapy.

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

title: Pindolol


text:
Maria Robsahm

Maria Robsahm (before June 2008 Maria Carlshamre; born Maria Kelldén on 3 February 1957 in Enköping) is a Swedish politician who was a Member of the European Parliament from 2004 to 2009. She was elected as a member of the Liberal People's Party, part of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe. However, she defected to Feminist Initiative on 1 March 2006.

She sat on the European Parliament's Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and the Committee on Women's Rights and Gender Equality. She was also a substitute for the Committee on Culture and Education and a member of the Delegation to the EU-Moldova Parliamentary Cooperation Committee.

Robsahm was convicted of accounting irregularities in August 2005, following the bankruptcy of a company owned jointly by herself (then known as Maria Carlshamre) and her former husband. She was given a suspended sentence. As a result of her conviction, the leadership of the Liberal People's Party called on her to resign from her seat in the European Parliament. Instead, she left that party and joined Feminist Initiative. This move received some Swedish media attention for the fact that one of the two co-leaders of Feminist Initiative, Gudrun Schyman, had been convicted on another finance-related crime, tax evasion.

Education

 * 1979: Bachelor's degree in philosophy
 * 1988–90: University diploma in journalism

Career

 * 1979–88: lecturer in philosophy at University of Gothenburg
 * 1992–95: Editor at TV4
 * 1996: Grand prize for journalism
 * 1996–97: Journal Moderna tider
 * 1998–2002: Documentary film producer at TV4
 * 2002–03: Political editor at Dagens Nyheter

title: Maria Robsahm


text:
Charles A. Lockwood

Charles Andrews Lockwood (May 6, 1890 – June 6, 1967) was a vice-admiral and flag officer of the United States Navy. He is known in submarine history as the commander of Submarine Force Pacific Fleet during World War II. He devised tactics for the effective use of submarines, making the members and elements of "silent service" key players in the Pacific victory.

Early life and career
Lockwood was born in Midland, Virginia, on May 6, 1890, graduated from Lamar High School (Missouri) in 1905, then graduated from the United States Naval Academy in the class of 1912. Following brief cruises aboard the battleships USS Mississippi (BB-23) and USS Arkansas (BB-33), and a short tour as instructor in the Naval Training Station, Great Lakes, in September 1914 he reported to the tender USS Mohican (1883) for indoctrination in submarines.

Submarine commander, World War I and postwar era
By December 1, 1914 he had his first submarine command, USS A-2, followed by USS B-1 (SS-10). American entry into World War I found him in command of Submarine Division 1, Asiatic Fleet.

From that time, with the exception of a tour on the Asiatic station where he commanded gunboats USS Quiros (PG-40) and USS Elcano (PG-38) on the Yangtze Patrol and the destroyer USS Smith Thompson (DD-212), practically all his sea service was in and connected with submarines.

In addition to those listed above, Lockwood also served on the submarines USS G-1 (SS-19½), USS N-5 (SS-57), SM UC-97 (ex-imperial German navy), USS R-25 (SS-102), USS S-14 (SS-119), and USS Bonita (SS-165).

World War II service
In June 1939, he became Chief of Staff to the Commander Submarine Force, U.S. Fleet, on the light cruiser USS Richmond (CL-9). This important service was interrupted in February 1941 when he was sent to London as naval attaché and principal observer for submarines.

Following promotion to rear admiral in May 1942, he arrived in Perth, Western Australia as Commander, Submarines, Southwest Pacific (COMSUBSOWESPAC). Lockwood also acted as Commander Allied Naval Forces, Western Australia, until July 1942, overseeing the major bases at Fremantle and Exmouth (Codename "Potshot"), amongst others.

In February 1943, following the death of the COMSUBPAC, Rear Admiral Robert Henry English, in a plane crash in California, Lockwood was transferred to Pearl Harbor to become Commander, Submarines, Pacific Fleet (COMSUBPAC), in which capacity he served the rest of the war, being promoted to vice admiral in October 1943. Lockwood's strong leadership and devotion to his sailors won him the nickname "Uncle Charlie". Submarine patrols were long voyages and many times the crew finished up on "iron rations" of poor food as their food supplies ran out, so Lockwood made great strides in providing for rest and recuperation (R & R) for his sailors when they returned to port, such as two-week stays at the Royal Hawaiian Hotel, and crates of ice cream and leafy vegetables to greet returning submarine crews.

Lockwood oversaw the introduction into the Pacific Fleet of several hundred newly constructed fleet submarines from American shipyards, and the manning of them with newly trained officers and men. Older boats, like the S-class, were removed from combat and sent back to the U.S. for use in training or to be scrapped.

He oversaw the moving forward of the Pacific Fleet submarine bases from Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, and Australia to places like Saipan – where a submarine tender was stationed for a period of time – Guam, the Admiralty Islands, and Subic Bay in the Philippines. This reduced the very long ocean voyages for American submarines, and steadily tightened the noose on Imperial Japanese supply lines, especially in the East China Sea and the South China Sea.

He pushed the Navy's Bureau of Ships and Bureau of Ordnance to provide his men with the most effective submarines and torpedoes possible. He oversaw the tests that proved the unreliability of U.S. torpedoes, which at the time were often running too deep or failing to detonate, and prompted the improvements that made them the highly effective weapons they became in 1944 and 1945. In fighting for better torpedoes, Lockwood had to fight the Mark 14 torpedo and Mark 6 exploder supporter Rear Admiral Ralph Waldo Christie, who had been involved in the development of these weapon systems in the 1920s and 1930s, and who was convinced that their reported problems were caused by poor maintenance and errors on the part of the captain and crew. During a tense Washington conference with fellow admirals in early 1943, he demanded that, "If the Bureau of Ordnance can't provide us with torpedoes that will hit and explode, or with a gun larger than a peashooter, then for God's sake get the Bureau of Ships to design a boathook with which we can rip the plates off the target's sides."

Most importantly, Lockwood cleaned out the "dead wood", replacing timid and unproductive submarine skippers with (often) younger and more aggressive officers. During the early stages of the Pacific War, U.S. skippers were relatively complacent and docile, compared to their German counterparts who understood the "life and death" urgency in the Atlantic. There was plenty of room for error and cautious judgment since the Japanese did not take the U.S. submarine threat seriously.

In 1942 and early 1943, U.S. submarines proved little threat to Japanese warships and merchant ships alike. As a result of Lockwood's initiatives, the "silent service" suddenly began racking up many kills, including key enemy warships. Most importantly, U.S. submarines were responsible for severing Japan's shipping routes to their colonies in Southeast Asia, by sinking close to half of their merchant ships. The Imperial Japanese Navy was caught off guard and never recovered.

Lockwood's wartime awards were the Navy Distinguished Service Medal three times, and the Legion of Merit award.

Post-war career and retirement
After the war, Lockwood served as the Naval Inspector General until his retirement in June 1947. In retirement at Los Gatos, California, he authored and contributed to several best-selling books on naval history and submarine operations, including Tragedy at Honda, Sink-Em All, Through Hell and Deep Water, Hell at 50 Fathoms, Zoomies, Subs and Zeros, Hellcats of the Sea, Battles of the Philippine Sea, and Down to The Sea in Subs: My Life in the U.S. Navy.

He served as the technical advisor for the 1951 film Operation Pacific starring John Wayne. This film is considered a classic depicting submarine warfare. He was technical advisor for the 1957 film Hellcats of the Navy (a fictionalized version of his book Hellcats of the Sea), which starred Ronald Reagan and Nancy Davis. He also served as technical advisor to the 1959 films On the Beach and Up Periscope.

In one of his book-promotion speeches following the war, Lockwood mentioned that he was an avid deer hunter. After the speech, he was approached by Ralph T. Duncan, a pharmacist living in Los Gatos, California. Duncan invited Lockwood to be his guest that year at Jake's Opening Hunting Club, near Boonville, California. They became fast friends. After Lockwood had been deer and quail hunting at the club for several years as Duncan's guest, Lockwood learned of an amazing coincidence: Lockwood's predecessor as submarine fleet commander, Robert Henry English, had died on the same hunting club property in the crash of the Philippine Clipper flying boat. Upon Admiral English's death, Lockwood had been given command of the Pacific submarine fleet.

Lockwood died on June 6, 1967. He is buried at Golden Gate National Cemetery in San Bruno, California, alongside his wife and Admirals Chester Nimitz, Raymond Spruance, and Richmond Kelly Turner, an arrangement made by all of them while living. His wife, Phyllis Natalie Irwin, was a daughter of Rear Admiral Noble E. Irwin.

Namesake
The frigate USS Lockwood (FF-1064) was named in his honor.

The Naval Submarine League presents an annual Vice Admiral Charles A. Lockwood Award for Submarine Professional Excellence which recognizes individuals (Active or Reserve) for achievement, contribution, specific action or consistent performance, which best exemplifies the traditional spirit embodied in the Submarine Force.

title: Charles A. Lockwood


text:
Talk:Said Nursî

Criticism Section and Sources
A new section was added to the article entitled "Criticism". The sources for this section consists of:

Frankly speaking, the above sources are questionable as the above websites are clearly promotional in nature. Please read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources#Questionable_sources.
 * http://www.ihsaneliacik.com. This is the official website of the "anti-Capitalist" writer Ihsan Eliacik (please see http://www.economist.com/blogs/charlemagne/2013/07/turkish-politics). Whilst Eliacik might hold an anti Nursi view, he is clearly a controversial figure and has a POV.
 * http://www.erdemyolu.com/coktanriciliksirk2/kur%E2%80%99an-isiginda-cemaatcilik-7-prof-abdulaziz-bayindir.html. This is a broken link.
 * http://www.islamkutuphanesi.com. This is a Shi'a polemic site and not an academic source. Again this is not reliable and clearly holds a POV.
 * http://19.org. This is a website of those who believe in the "Number 19 miracle" in the Qur'an. The group are callled "Qur'anists" and there leader is Edip Yuksel. Again this is not an academic or reliable source as Yuksel is himself controversial and holds a clear POV.
 * http://www.islamkutuphanesi.com. This is a Shi'a polemic site and not an academic source. Again this is not reliable and clearly holds a POV.
 * http://19.org. This is a website of those who believe in the "Number 19 miracle" in the Qur'an. The group are callled "Qur'anists" and there leader is Edip Yuksel. Again this is not an academic or reliable source as Yuksel is himself controversial and holds a clear POV.
 * http://19.org. This is a website of those who believe in the "Number 19 miracle" in the Qur'an. The group are callled "Qur'anists" and there leader is Edip Yuksel. Again this is not an academic or reliable source as Yuksel is himself controversial and holds a clear POV.

Additionally, We read the following quote in this section: "Said Nursi's attempts at revitalizing Islam have also been criticized for compromising the fragile modernization efforts of the early Republic of Turkey" and the source given is "A Modern History of the Kurds: Third Edition. I.B.Tauris. pp. 210–211. ISBN 978-1-85043-416-0."

However, after reading the given source, I noticed no evidence to support this statement. What was present in the text were instances of Nursi being imprisoned for praying in Arabic and pamphleteering.

The last claim being made is that Mustafa Sabri Efendi criticised Nursi. Since this is disputed the text of the article should reflect this.

It should also be noted that almost all the references in this section are from Turkish sources. It would be strongly preferable to find sources in the English language given that this is an English encyclopedia.

Further, none of the claims have come from secondary sources. As per Wikipidea guidelines, we need to use reliable secondary sources particularly for a criticism section. Please read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:IRS#Primary.2C_secondary.2C_and_tertiary_sources.

As a final point, whilst it is useful to add a genuine section on criticism, these should be provided from reliable sources. Very little of this section fits in as a reliable source.

I have re-written the section in line for the above reasons. RookTaker (talk) 08:07, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for going through them. I agree that a lot of the sources were bad; in fact, this whole article is poorly sourced. However, a lot of your edits are POV, such as the sentence "During his life, Nursi had plenty of secular critics who were ready to argue that devout Muslims made bad citizens". That's not a criticism of Nursî; it is a talking point. Furthermore, qualifying people as "anti-Capitalist writer" and capitalizing "Prophet" point to POV in some of the edits. Let's keep the article well-sourced and neutral. Even furthermore, the whole point of the Criticism section is to... list criticism. That's why the words "accuse" and "charge" are used instead of "Said Nursî is a liar!". While sensitivity is good and helps prevent POV, the words used also do that. Ithinkicahn (talk) 22:52, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I've made one of the sources into a proper cite template (the dead link one). There's plenty of work to do on the rest as well. Ithinkicahn (talk) 23:02, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

 * Hi, the only reason I added the initial sentences was to try and provide references from secondary sources as per Wikipedia guidelines (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:IRS#Primary.2C_secondary.2C_and_tertiary_sources). The sentences I added were:

 * "During his life, Nursi had plenty of secular critics who were ready to argue that devout Muslims made bad citizens"

 * This has been taken word for word from Ian S. Markham, Suendam Birinci Pirim, An Introduction to Said Nursi: Life, Thought and Writings, p 60. ISBN: 1409407713. Please see here (http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=xtpM-ae-P6QC&printsec=frontcover&dq=An+Introduction+to+Said+Nursi:+Life,+Thought+and+Writings&hl=en&sa=X&ei=1o3rUvuNNKuX7Qav5YG4Aw&ved=0CD0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=An%20Introduction%20to%20Said%20Nursi%3A%20Life%2C%20Thought%20and%20Writings&f=false)

 * Likewise, the sentence "Nursi was subsequently persecuted by the secularist state for having invested in religious revival." has been taken word for word from Gerhard Böwering, Patricia Crone, Mahan Mirza, The Princeton Encyclopedia of Islamic Political Thought, p 482. ISBN: 0691134847.

 * i.e. These are secondary sources without any original research and are therefore reliable.

 * On the other hand, all the references that you have provided are primary sources and original research (please read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research). Whilst the claims might be true, it is not reliable to base an encyclopedia on non academic controversial websites such as www.19.org etc...

 * I defined Ihsan Eliacik as "anti-Capitalist" as this is the way he is described in the economist magazine. Please read (http://www.economist.com/blogs/charlemagne/2013/07/turkish-politics). I found very little about this man in the English language. Why is he notable? Why should his views on Nursi matter? The only description I could find of any worth was from the Economist Magazine which is why I referred to him as "anti-Capitalist". How else would you describe him?

 * I have no doubt that Nursi was criticised by a significant number of people (including secular Turkish authors) and would be happy to add this to the article. What you need to do however is add from reliable academic secondary sources. There are a number of books on Nursi available in the English language and I am sure that if you were to look hard enough you would find reliable criticisms. What we cannot do however is add the above sources as they are frankly inadequate.RookTaker (talk) 12:12, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia isn't for word for word borrowings from books and other sources. Language that might be in books is often not appropriate for Wikipedia, as it is not encyclopedic, such as "During his life, Nursi had plenty of secular critics who were ready to argue that devout Muslims made bad citizens." That is definitely not encyclopedic language. I guarantee you I can find many other secondary sources that say opposite of what those say; just because something is in a secondary source does not mean it is a reliable source in every single sentence that is in it. And "Certain Shi'a groups criticise Nursi for believing in supernatural events" also seems to be to lessen the criticisms as Shi'a, since you made a point to mention that twice (both in the original sentence "In recent years a number of claims have been made against Nursi by non-Sunni authors" and this one).

 * I would not describe Ihsan Eliacik as "anti-capitalist" just because an Economist article referred to him that way. There is no indication that that is his main or only aim in life, and it seems to be based on a single passing remark. The only thing that adjective is doing in this Wikipedia article is to try to lessen his opinion, and I know you knew that when you added it. And how would you explain your capitalization of "Prophet" in the article? Also, you have removed the cleaned up references that I have made. Furthermore, you have changed "A book by the former Sheikh ul-Islam (supreme religious authority) of the Ottoman Empire Mustafa Sabri Efendi, titled Nurculuk Hakkında, was published in 1964," into "According to some, the former Sheikh ul-Islam (supreme religious authority) of the Ottoman Empire Mustafa Sabri Efendi wrote a book entitled". What was the point of that? The book was published.

 * "In recent years a number of claims have been made against Nursi by non-Sunni authors." is also not a fair change. Sunni people are also among the criticisms; have you even seen the source by the theologian Abdülaziz Bayındır? I have left in your "Others" have doubted the authenticity part, since the source didn't indicate that they were a follower of Nursi. Ithinkicahn (talk) 22:15, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

 * Hi, you stated that "I guarantee you I can find many other secondary sources that say opposite of what those say". I think you are probably right and this is what we should add to the article based on Wikipedia recommendations. Please read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research#Primary.2C_secondary_and_tertiary_sources. Here we read, "Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published secondary sources and, to a lesser extent, on tertiary sources and primary sources. Secondary or tertiary sources are needed to establish the topic's notability and to avoid novel interpretations of primary sources. All interpretive claims, analyses, or synthetic claims about primary sources must be referenced to a secondary source, rather than to an original analysis of the primary-source material by Wikipedia editors."

 * The references you have provided so far are all primary sources and have been interpreted by you. This is not suitable for an encyclopedia.

 * There are a number of academic books on Nursi available such as:

 * Said Nursi: Makers of Islamic Civilization by Colin Turner and Hasan Horkuc (Oxford Press). ISBN: 1845117743
 * The Qur'an Revealed: A Critical Analysis of Said Nursi's Epistles of Light (Gerlach Press). ISBN: 3940924288

 * The latter seems to be useful in providing criticism of Nursi. If you genuinely want to add a reliable criticism section on Nursi then please add evidences from academic secondary sources such as the above.

 * As mentioned earlier, www.19.org is a polemic site of the non-Sunni Qur'anist movement. Edip Yuksel is a believer in the "number 19 miracle" of the Qur'an. This is not a secondary academic source but a primary source from a very controversial writer.

 * Likewise, http://www.islamkutuphanesi.com/ is a polemic shi'a site. If you are to add this as a source, then it should be explained as such.

 * As mentioned previously I found very little about Ihsan Eliacik in the English language. Why is he notable? Why should his views on Nursi matter? The only description I could find of any worth was from the Economist Magazine which is why I referred to him as "anti-Capitalist". How else would you describe him?

 * Additionally, the book Nurculuk Hakkında was published 10 years after Sabri's death. It has been attributed to him but not everyone agrees that the book was genuinely written by him.

 * On reflection, the "references" provided are so poor that we should remove the entire section until something reliable can be found. We seem to be going round in circles so I would suggest getting support from other Wikipedians. There is a Wikipedia page with lists of people who can provide assistance here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Editor_assistance) and if you are ok with the idea I can choose somebody to help us. Until then I will remove the section entirely.RookTaker (talk) 08:33, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Another editor has pointed out that the so-called book by Sabri Efendi has been even called a hoax by critics of Nursi, so I'm deleting that part. The rest of the criticisms are well-sourced. Edip Yüksel is a well-known writer and intellectual in Turkey and abroad, and Abdülaziz Bayındır is a well-respected theologian in Turkey as well. No reason to delete theirs and other criticisms though. Ithinkicahn (talk) 20:23, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

 * I added the "Original Research" tag to this section as it is entirely your research and has not been backed up by any secondary sources. As mentioned previously, this section is extremely weak as it fails https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research#Primary.2C_secondary_and_tertiary_sources and really ought to be removed. To avoid conflict I have left it in here so as to give you time to find reliable secondary sources as you mentioned above that you could "find many other secondary sources that say opposite of what those say". Please do so before removing the tags. If you disagree with this, then we can go down the route of the Dispute resolution noticeboard and get some clarity from there. RookTaker (talk) 07:27, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

 * It's been over 6 months since the criticism section was first added and not a single reliable secondary source has been provided. Instead, all the "sources" refer to unreliable polemic sites such as www.19.org and fails WP:RS. As such, I have removed the section entirely. RookTaker (talk) 00:29, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

 * Some reliable sources should be there. However, For example, "Anti-Capitalist" writer Ihsan Eliacik is a controversial figure and has been criticizing everybody but himself. Also he is the leader of so called "Anti-Capitalist Muslims", which makes him a kind of rival of Nursi. Yakamoz51 (talk) 05:46, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Faith Movement or Islamic Movement
There seems to be a dispute regarding the use of the phrase "faith movement" instead on "Islamic movement". I used the sentence "Nursi inspired a faith movement" instead of "Nursi inspired an Islamic movement" as this is the way Nursi's movement has been described in a number of reliable secondary sources. Examples of this include:

As such, I believe that there is sufficient evidence to show that the phrase "faith movement" is a more accurate description of his movements. If you believe that the phrase Islamic movement should be used then please provide reliable evidence. RookTaker (talk) 08:27, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
 * "Said Nursi was an ethnic Kurd who authored several volumes of of exegisis on the Kuran known as Risale-i nur {epistle of light}. Nurculuk starting with the 1950's, became the most powerful text-based faith movement in Turkey." Omer Taspinar, Kurdish Nationalism and Political Islam in Turkey: Kemalist Identity in Transition (Middle East Studies: History, Politics & Law), p. 228. ISBN: 041594998X
 * "The internal organization of the "faith movement" of the nurcu is a diffuse one which..." Şerif Mardin, Religion and Social Change in Modern Turkey: The Case of Bediuzzaman Said Nursi, p. 23. ISBN: 0887069967.
 * "Nursi inspired a faith movement that has played a vital role in the revival of Islam in Turkey." Sukran Vahide, Islam in Modern Turkey: An Intellectual Biography of Bediuzzaman Said Nursi, p. 425. ISBN:
 * "Bediüzzaman Said Nursi, whose treaties on Islamic faith and morality have shaped an important faith movement..." Gürkan Çelik, The Gülen Movement: Building Social Cohesion Through Dialogue and Education, p. 47. ISBN: 9059723694.
 * "Nursi inspired a faith movement that has played a vital role in the revival of Islam in Turkey." Sukran Vahide, Islam in Modern Turkey: An Intellectual Biography of Bediuzzaman Said Nursi, p. 425. ISBN:
 * "Bediüzzaman Said Nursi, whose treaties on Islamic faith and morality have shaped an important faith movement..." Gürkan Çelik, The Gülen Movement: Building Social Cohesion Through Dialogue and Education, p. 47. ISBN: 9059723694.
 * "Bediüzzaman Said Nursi, whose treaties on Islamic faith and morality have shaped an important faith movement..." Gürkan Çelik, The Gülen Movement: Building Social Cohesion Through Dialogue and Education, p. 47. ISBN: 9059723694.
 * Was it a faith movement for Christians? Was it a faith movement for Jews? Obviously not; the purpose is to inform exactly, not to make ambiguous comments. Ithinkicahn (talk) 16:19, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

 * Nursi's movement has been described as a "faith movement" by a number of secondary sources (see above). This is why it is an accurate way to describe his movement. If you feel that his movement should be described as an "Islamic movement" then please provide evidence from reliable secondary sources as per wikipedia guidelines. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:BURDEN#Burden_of_evidence. RookTaker (talk) 22:14, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

 * In the article, there are several reference to that Said Nursi is a Sunni Muslim. So, I think when you say "faith movement" it will not make any ambiguity, Unless a reader, read only that sentence. Yakamoz51 (talk) 05:46, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't know why you're insisting on the more ambiguous "faith movement". I have provided multiple sources for "Islamic movement", which is also the more naturally specific term. Anything other than that serves to ambiguate the matter, especially in the lede. This is not a contentious issue; it's obvious, and has a place in the lede, whose purpose is to quickly inform and summarize the article. The sources were already included in the article, but here:

 * Ithinkicahn (talk) 23:31, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

 * Thanks - we therefore see the use of both the terms "Faith Movement" (as per the sources I provided above) and "Islamic Movement" (as per the sources you have provided). The phrase "Islamic Movement" is often used as a synonym for Islamism or political Islam. Nursi was certainly against the use of violence and Islamism. We read for example:

 * "New Said forbade himself any political engagement. He found it harmful to have any political agenda while trying to serve the Qur'an." [Gerhard Böwering, Patricia Crone, Mahan Mirza, The Princeton Encyclopedia of Islamic Political Thought, p. 482. ISBN: 0691134847]

 * "Nursi rejected political radicalism. and focused his energy on articulating a religious worldview and moral code compatible with the modern world." [Constantine Arvanitopoulos, Turkey’s Accession to the European Union: An Unusual Candidacy, p 189. ISBN: 1317986466]

 * "Said Nursi (1877-1960) was an advocate of a form of Islam strongly committed to non-violence and constructive engagement with the West and Christianity." [Ian Markham, İbrahim Özdemir, Globalization, Ethics and Islam: The Case of Bediuzzaman Said Nursi, ISBN: 0754650154]

 * Perhaps it would therefore be more appropriate to use the sentence "Nursi inspired an apolitical Islamic movement" to distinguish his movement from those movements that adhere to violence and extremism. What are your thoughts? RookTaker (talk) 19:41, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I have changed "faith" to "religious". In the context of the lede (as it is currently worded) it is obvious that it is Islamic. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 16:33, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Theosophy?
I see that my edit has been reverted so that this article perpetuates the false notion that Said Nursi has some association with the so-called theosophy of Helena Blavatsky. There is absolutely no evidence for this. The English word "theosophy" has been used by scholars to translate the Arabic word "hikmah" or "hikmat," as in the transcendent theosophy (al-hikmat al-muta'āliyah) of Mulla Sadra. The Akbariyya school that began with Ibn 'Arabi has also been called theosophical Sufism but, again, this has nothing to do with the late 19th century occultist movement started by Blavatsky.

I am going to fix this false association again, because I have seen no evidence for it. If someone can demonstrate the influence of Blavatskian theosophy on Nursi, fine, but I think this is either a simple misunderstanding or an ill-intended effort to tarnish his reputation. Spelare108 (talk) 00:40, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
 * That would be 's fault. They've since declared they won't engage in such edits.
 * although we don't go with editor interpretation or knowledge but with cited sources, you do appear more familiar with this topic than me. Would Transcendent theosophy be a better link?  Ian.thomson (talk) 06:44, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

No, because Transcendent theosophy refers specifically to the school of Mulla Sadra, and I'm not sure Said Nursi knew of him. The appropriate reference would be to theosophical (aka philosophical) Sufism, exemplified by the Akbariyya school that followed Ibn Arabi and the Illuminationist (ishraqi) school of Suhrawardi. Said Nursi definitely read and was influenced by these authors, giving him some affinity with Mulla Sadra's transcendent theosophy without direct contact. Spelare108 (talk) 01:09, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
 * My advice would be to remove ALL references to theosophy. It’s just an error that has crept in apparently because of a translation error. Best regards, George Custer's Sabre (talk) 05:52, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Train Wreck
Parts of this article are written from a biased opinion, and on the whole it appears to be a bit of a train wreck. I can't make heads or tails of half of the information in the "Teachings and Movement" section. Can anyone help whoever wrote this out? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.114.76.181 (talk • contribs) 11:41, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Said Nursî


text:
Cecilia Malmström

Anna Cecilia Malmström (born 15 May 1968) is a Swedish politician who served as European Commissioner for Trade from 2014 to 2019. She previously served as European Commissioner for Home Affairs from 2010 to 2014 and Minister for European Union Affairs from 2006 to 2010. She was a Member of the European Parliament (MEP) from Sweden from 1999 to 2006.

She was a member of the Swedish Liberals, part of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe until 2023.

Malmström is a long standing critic of the Sweden Democrats. It was also for that reason, or to be exact because of Liberal partys stance regarding that party in recent years, because the Liberal party in practice helped the Sweden Democrats, that she left the Liberal party in May 2023.

Early life
Malmström was born in Brännkyrka parish in southern Stockholm and grew up in Gothenburg.

She was a student at the University of Gothenburg from 1992 to 1999, becoming a research assistant (1994). She then gained a PhD in political science with a thesis titled The Region, the Power and the Glory: Regional Parties in Western Europe (1998), and became a senior lecturer at the Department of Political Science at the University of Gothenburg (1998–99). Her thesis was on regional parties in western Europe, focusing on Catalonia, Spain and Lombardy, Italy. She has researched and taught in the fields of European politics, regionalism, immigration and terrorism.

Malmström has also worked in Stuttgart and in Barcelona.

She is fluent in Swedish, English, Spanish and French, and has intermediate skills in German and Italian.

Political career
Malmström has been a member of the Swedish Liberals party since the late 1980s, sitting on the party executive since 1997, and was a member of the Västra Götaland Regional Council from 1998 to 2001. In 2007, when Jan Björklund was elected party leader, she was appointed first vice party chairman.

Member of the European Parliament, 1999–2006
In 1999, Malmström was elected as an MEP for Sweden and she was re-elected again in 2004. During her tenure she served on the Committees on Foreign Affairs, Committee on Constitutional Affairs, Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection and also on the Subcommittee on Human Rights and Subcommittee on Security and Defence. In addition, she served as vice-chair of the parliament's delegations to Hungary (before it joined in 2004) and Croatia.

As a member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Malmström wrote a critical report on the EU's Russia strategy. In 2002 she became the Liberal group's spokeswoman on foreign affairs. She nominated Cuban dissident Oswaldo Payá for the Sakharov Prize, which he received from the Parliament in 2002.

During her time as an MEP, Malmström initiated the oneseat.eu web campaign, which aims to make Brussels the permanent seat of the European Parliament. It was the first such petition to gain one million signatures, a nod to the right of petition under the Treaty of Lisbon.

In 2001, Malmström and nine fellow MEPs – including Nick Clegg and Helle Thorning-Schmidt – founded the Campaign for Parliamentary Reform (CPR) to press for changes to the way the European Parliament functions on a day-to-day basis. She has also campaigned for greater public access to official documents.

Swedish Minister for European Affairs, 2006–2010
Following the 2006 Swedish elections which saw the victory of the centre-right coalition of Fredrik Reinfeldt, Malmström returned to Sweden to take up the job of Minister for European Affairs in Prime Minister Reinfeldt's cabinet, which took office on 6 October 2006. Her responsibilities included institutional issues, review of the EU budget, Baltic Sea Strategy, the Lisbon Strategy and coordinating the Swedish Presidency of the Council of the European Union in 2009.

Malmström supports Swedish adoption of the euro currency, and in August 2007 she was one of the politicians calling for another referendum on euro membership (the first was in 2003). "We respect the result of the referendum, of course, but still think that one should be able to argue for something one believes in, a lot had changed since the 2003 referendum, Slovenia has joined, Malta and Cyprus are joining at the beginning of next year. Next year, at least two Baltic countries will join. In 2010-11 there could be eight or nine new members. The more members there are, the greater the political price of being outside, because we can't make a difference, Sweden had lost out economically by not joining the single European currency." She cited a report from the National Board of Trade: "We have lost 100 billion kronor in exports and the same amount in imports. Our trade with the eurozone would have been 13–14 percent greater if we had been members."

European Commissioner for Home Affairs, 2010–2014
On 17 November 2009 Malmström was nominated by her government as Sweden's next European Commissioner. In his nomination, Prime Minister Reinfeldt also said that Carl Bildt, the foreign minister, was not nominated because it was unlikely that a Swede would be appointed to the post of President of the European Council or as High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.

The President of the European Commission, José Manuel Barroso offered Malmström the role of Commissioner for Home Affairs, which was created as a result of a liberal demand to split the previous portfolio, which had also included human rights. Despite this post being security oriented, Commissioner Malmström made clear to the Members of the European Parliament that she would not be a bad cop to the fundamental rights portfolio's good cop. She was approved by MEPs, and took up the post on 10 February 2010.

One of her first initiatives as a Commissioner of the European Union was to propose a directive advocating stronger sanctions against sexual abuse of children, in which one of the proposals was to create a duty for EU member states to block access to child pornography on the Internet. Critics interpret that as the creation of a net censorship infrastructure which would not help children, but would indeed be counterproductive and a dangerous threat to democracy. NGOs working for children's rights, such as Save the Children and NSPCC, have, however, defended the proposal. Malmström was quickly rewarded with the nickname 'Censilia' on the social web and in – mostly German – dailies,  a portmanteau word blending the word "censorship" and her given name ("Cecilia"), in imitation of the "Zensursula" nickname of the German minister Ursula von der Leyen who failed to establish similar filtering techniques in Germany following a decision to prioritize the deletion of illegal websites.

At the same period (March 2010), in pursuit of her efforts to strengthen the safety and security of European citizens, Malmström secured a political agreement between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission to implement Article 10 of the United Nations' Firearms Protocol that combats the trafficking of illicit civilian firearms.

On 11 March 2011, during the Seventh European Day of Remembrance of Victims of Terrorism, at a conference on "The role of Victims of Terrorism in preventing violent radicalization", which was held in Brussels, Malmström gave a speech setting out the devastating effects of terrorism on a personal as well as on a state level, closing with the announcement of the forthcoming (R.A.N.) project (see next paragraph).

In September 2011, Malmström officially launched the Radicalisation Awareness Network (R.A.N.), a project aimed at tackling terrorism and violent extremism through preventive measures, rather than through confrontation. The project comes as an additional tool of the EU's Counter-Terrorism and Measures to Combat Radicalisation and Recruitment to Terrorism Strategies.

Less than a year later, the project had become a pan-European network of scientists, psychologists, NGOs, victims of terrorism, religious leaders, representatives of civil society and police officers, together with an advisory board.

On 2 May 2012, Malmström gave a lecture to students and professors at Harvard University on immigration and asylum, discussing with her audience various issues related to integration, terrorism and human trafficking, as well as the European crisis. The visit in Cambridge was followed by a meeting with the US Attorney General Eric Holder in Washington, D.C., and an evening at the F.B.I., where there was a major exchange of views about the planning of the forthcoming European Cybercrime Centre (E.C.3). Malmström's short trip in the US was completed with a speech on Cyber Security at a Conference in the C.S.I.S.

On 26 November 2012, together with Rob Wainwright, director of Europol, Malmström announced the launch of the new European Financial Coalition against Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children Online. The aims of the Coalition are to support international law enforcement investigations wherever possible through co-operation with private stakeholders; to assess and study commercial child sexual exploitation on the Internet through all kinds of Internet environments, such as hosting services and newsgroups; to help protect legitimate private business interests from possible misuse of their services by criminals aiming to distribute child sexual abuse content through different information and communication technologies; to enable law enforcement and private companies to counteract the problem through training and resource-sharing; and to keep decision makers informed and raise awareness among the public.

On 5 December 2012 on a conference held in Brussels, Belgium, under the High Patronage of Her Majesty Queen Paola of Belgium, Malmström and US Attorney General Eric Holder launched the Global Alliance against Child Sexual Abuse Online.

The alliance, which met strong support from Wainwright, is an initiative aimed at uniting decision-makers all around the world, in order to improve the identification of, and assistance to, victims, and the prosecution of the perpetrators. The alliance is one of the greatest projects ever created in this field, as its participants include 48 nations worldwide (The 27 EU member states, as well as 21 non EU countries – Albania, Australia, Cambodia, Croatia, Georgia, Ghana, Japan, Moldova, Montenegro, New Zealand, Nigeria, Norway, the Philippines, Serbia, Republic of Korea, Switzerland, Thailand, Turkey, Ukraine, United States of America, and Vietnam).

On 11 January 2013, Wainwright and Malmström officially launched the European Cybercrime Centre (EC3), which is aiming to tackle cybercrime:
 * committed by organised groups to generate large criminal profits, such as online fraud
 * causing serious harm to the victim, such as online child sexual exploitation
 * affecting critical infrastructure and information systems in the EU

Malmström assumed the duties of EU Commissioner for Trade on 1 November 2014, as a member of the Juncker Commission.

European Commissioner for Trade, 2014–2019
In July 2014, Swedish prime minister Fredrik Reinfeldt nominated Malmström for a second term as European Commissioner. By September, the European Parliament gave its support to her nomination. She assumed the duties of EU Commissioner for Trade on 1 November 2014, as a member of the Juncker Commission.

Already in her nomination hearing, amid the Russo-Ukrainian War, Malmström rejected Russia's demands for amendments to a free-trade agreement between the EU and Ukraine. In December 2015, she failed in her final attempt to reach a breakthrough over Russia's concerns, some of which were contrary to European and World Trade Organization rules.

The mission letter for Malmström's position also included, as one of her key duties, the "successful conclusion" of the controversial trade negotiations with the US, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), though with a number of restrictions and confinements to the negotiation mandate to address European public concerns over TTIP. Having expressed a view strongly in favour of the treaty, she tried to revive the negotiations with the USA two weeks after entering office. Despite claims of an "unprecedented level of transparency", the treaty drafts could not be read by all parliaments of EU member states, such as the German Bundestag, or political leaders such as then-vice chancellor Sigmar Gabriel.

In May 2015, Malmström and Turkish Economy Minister Nihat Zeybekci announced a framework for broadening the European Union–Turkey Customs Union, extending it to include services, government contracting and most agricultural goods. Also under her leadership, the EU finalized the negotiations on a major trade agreement with Vietnam in August 2015, removing 99 per cent of tariffs between Europe and Vietnam over the following decade as well as non-tariff barriers to trade, services, investment, intellectual property, sanitary and phytosanitary measures, government procurement, dispute settlement and sustainable development.

Later career
Since 2019, Malmström has been a visiting professor at the School of Business, Economics and Law at the University of Gothenburg. Also since 2019, she has been serving on the Transatlantic Task Force of the German Marshall Fund and the Federal Chancellor Helmut Schmidt Foundation (BKHS), co-chaired by Karen Donfried and Wolfgang Ischinger.

In September 2020, the government of Prime Minister Stefan Löfven nominated Malmström as Sweden's candidate for secretary general of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). During the selection process, she became a finalist but ultimately lost out against Mathias Cormann in March 2021.

From 2021 to 2022, Malmström was a member of the Trilateral Commission’s Task Force on Global Capitalism in Transition, chaired by Carl Bildt, Kelly Grier and Takeshi Niinami.

In 2022, Malmström joined the Brussels office of law firm Covington & Burling as senior advisor. Since 2023, she has been part of the Centre for European Policy Studies/Heinrich Böll Foundation High-Level Group on Bolstering EU Democracy, chaired by Kalypso Nicolaïdis.

In May 2023, Malmström announced that she had quit the Swedish Liberal Party, due to her opposition to the party's participation in the Tidö Agreement.

Other activities

 * European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR), Member
 * Friends of Europe, Member of the Board of Trustees (since 2020)
 * Migration Policy Institute (MPI), Member of the Board of Trustees (since 2020)
 * Transatlantic Leadership Network, Member of the Council of Advisors
 * Trilateral Commission, Member of the European Group (since 2020)

Controversy
In a discussion with John Hilary, the executive director of War on Want, which he wrote about in The Independent on 12 October 2015, Malmström reportedly acknowledged "that a trade deal has never inspired such passionate and widespread opposition" and is reported to have commented: "I do not take my mandate from the European people." Malmström later denied having said this, calling it a "fabricated quote" extrapolated from her explanations about the TTIP negotiation mandate, which is determined by the European governments and not by the Europeans themselves. She also argued before the European Parliament that she did take her mandate from the European people since she was approved as Commissioner by the MEPs who represent them. Hilary did not retract his version of the story.

Personal life
Malmström is married and has children. She lives in Brussels, Belgium. She is the author of several books, articles and essays on regional parties, regionalism, Spanish politics, European politics, immigration and terrorism.

Education

 * 1991: University degree, University of Gothenburg
 * PhD (1998) in political science, University of Gothenburg

Career

 * 1989–1992: Psychiatric nurse, Lillhagen Hospital
 * 1991–1992: Teacher of social studies, municipal adult education service
 * 1992–1999: Researcher at Gothenburg University
 * 1998–2001: Member of Västra Götaland regional council
 * 1999–2006: Member of the European Parliament
 * since 1999: Member of the Swedish Institute for International Affairs (Utrikespolitiska Institutet)
 * 1999–2006: Member of the EP Committee on Foreign Affairs
 * 1999–2004: Member of the EP Committee on Constitutional Affairs
 * 1999–2004: Vice-Chairwoman of the EP Delegation to the EU-Hungary Joint Parliamentary Committee
 * 1999–2006: Member of the ELDR/ALDE Group Bureau
 * 2002–2004: ELDR Group spokeswoman on foreign affairs
 * 2006-2010: Minister of European Affairs in Sweden
 * 2010-2014: European Commissioner for Home Affairs Barroso II Commission
 * since 2014: European Commissioner for Trade Juncker Commission
 * since 2019: Member of the Transatlantic Task Force of the German Marshall Fund and the Bundeskanzler-Helmut-Schmidt-Stiftung (BKHS)

title: Cecilia Malmström


text:
Talk:Jörg Friedrich (author)

Introductory paragraph
The first part of the article is a mess. Could someone take care of the grammar, get the sentences straight and erase parts which are not important or just confusing? Does it matter what some English conservatives call Friedrich (trotzkist or whatever)? Who is the Chancellor Friedrich is connected to? Does it matter that he's "well connected"? 71.247.157.179 05:25, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

"independent historian"
We have to explain what that means. Anybody a clue? Not affiliated with any academic research center? Not fully accepted within the academic community? Publishing where? 71.247.157.179 05:25, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * "A historian without a university paycheck" BGinOC (talk) 09:13, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Nato General
Here is the next one: " with a former NATO General and friend of Friedrich's accusing Churchill of war crimes" Does anyone know the name of the General? Philip Baird Shearer 09:24, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

German Chancellor
Gerhard Schröder is not a former German Chancellor, but the current one. Could whoever wrote this amend it to say whatever it ought to say? That is, was it a former German Chancellor (Helmut Kohl?) or Schröder? Saforrest 12:13, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC)

 * Kohl of course. Thanks for picking that up.  Some kind of mental auto-completion / auto-correct automatically completes German Chancellor with Schroeder.  Now I've evem put in a correct reference to make up for it. Mozzerati 18:56, 2005 Feb 14 (UTC)

comments from Tobias with response
Let me explain the additions and removals I have made:

 * "Trotskyist": Friedrich was a member of the APO, which contained a hodge-podge of leftist positions, but I have not found one German source describing him as Trotskyist, so I omitted that.

 * he was described as "Trotskyist" in the Guardian; that is perfectly acceptable as a source even if German sources do not cover this issue. I suggest providing a contrary source.  Given that it's single sourced right now, I have, however, rephrased.
 * Trotskyist simply is not a political label which is used in Germany for the time period in question. That he has been occasionally called one is closer to the truth.

 * "Revisionist": Neither did Friedrich style himself as a revisionist, and he most certainly has not marketed his work under this "guise".

 * Harding: "Friedrich admits he is a revisionist"
 * his works certainly appear revisionist; however, there may be many reasons why he does not publicise that connection.
 * I have in no German source seen any indication that Friedrich describes himself as "revisionist", nor that he "accepted that label". Nor did he do so personally when talking at a meeting at our college.

 * Focus on Dresden: This seems to be assumed by the original author, but Friedrich's books cover the whole of the bombing campaign, not just Dresden. "Brandstätten" definitely is not limited to photographs of Dresden.

 * Whilst Dresden may not be the only focus of his books, his media interviews in which he has suggested that Dresden was a war crime are one of the most important aspects of his views in this area. This makes it a crucial subject.  Whilst other cities such as Hamburg have always been more clearly understood as "military" targets, Dresden has often been typed as a cultural capital.  This makes controversy over Dresden of special import and worthy of specific attention.
 * Friederich himself says "Dresden symbolisiert den Luftkrieg" (Dresden symbolizes the air war), which makes it crucial in undestanding his own views of the war.
 * Really, people: Read the damn books. Don't talk about something you simply have no idea of. Dresden is not a central point. In fact, in the interview cited Friedrich states: "Dresden symbolizes aerial war, *but*...." and he goes on to explain that it was merely one point in an extended military campaign.

 * General NPOV issues: Several criticisms of Friedrich were presented as fact, others had nothing to do with his work specifically but were aimed at a discussion of the issue of air warfare in general (which is not the topic of Friedrich's books), and still others were factually nonsensical (German actions in Russia having effect on the decisions made by the British and German militaries in 1940 and early 1941?).

 * The bombing of Dresden was part of an action specifically requested by the Soviet authorities and part of Britain's attempt to demonstrate that it was actually fighting the war at a time when the Soviets were bearing the brunt of the land war. This directly causally links the two events.  However, the issue at point is the moral context of the time.  Germany and Japan had specifically stopped the adoption of Geneva conventions against aerial bombardment prior to the war, followed by heavy strategic bombing attacks in their successful attack on Poland.  This can be seen to have had two effects.
 * Germany (it's unfortuate at this point that we are also talking about innocent civilians in the abstract, but so be it) had abandoned any moral claim to protection against attacks on civilians.
 * Success through aerial attacks in the defeat of Poland seemed to suggest that it was a valuable strategy. Disentagling it from other, more valid parts of blitzkrieg, such as cryptography and concentrated attacks by combined forces, is something we can only do now with the benefit of hindsight.
 * A key point in Friedrich's case against Churchill is the claim that bombing of civilians in the Second World War was initiated by Germany. However, the war was initiated against Poland, and Britain's entry into the war was specifically to defend Poland.  Early attacks against civilians in Poland are of relevance to Britain's decisions about such attacks against Germany.  Mozzerati 22:09, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Friedrich does not have a "case against Churchill". Neither is he in the least concerned with the wider context of the war. He writes on the strategic decision-making in Britain, on the technical side of bombing warfare, but mostly about the experience of those who were victims of the attacks. Read the book, for god's sake.

I have also tried to make the language more neutral (Kohl certainly didn't "tell" Friedrich to publish anything. It's not like he is his boss or something :) .)

 * I have changed this to "convinced" based on the original source

 * I have changed this to the more syntactically correct "persuaded."

 * Added information: I added some points regarding Friedrich's bio and some more points of criticism raised against his work in Germany.

 * I have found a reference (html) for a Jörg Friedrich as an actor. There's no way to tell if it's the same man, however.  I'm going to search for more to try to restore your text.
 * With several online bios claiming he was an actor, I would assume so.

Tobias R 11:26, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Typos: Misspelling of "Brand" as "Brandt" (unless Friedrich has a biography of Willy Brandt in the works ;)) and some others.

 * thanks for your correction Mozzerati 21:10, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

'From an edit commment "I've read the interview in "Der Tagesspiegel" now. Nowhere does Naumann directly 'accuse Churchill of war crimes.'"

 * I've now found the original article online original article and linked it in. Friederich makes the suggestion that not only could Dresden be seen as a crime but the entire conduct of the war a criminal enterprise ("handelt es sich nicht um ein Kriegsverbrechen, sondern – wenn ich Ihrer Logik folge – um eine verbrecherische Kriegführung").  Naumann does not respond clearly to this but rather says he wouldn't personally have done it ("Ich kann dazu nur sagen, dass ich meinen Namen niemals dazu hergeben würde, einen solchen Angriff in die Wege zu leiten."), but when Friederich pushes further: for moral or legal reasons ("Aus rechtlichen oder aus moralischen Gründen?), Naumann responds "Aus beiden" - both.
 * Since all laws other than the laws of war are suspended during a war, the only reasonable meaning is that he believes the bombing would be likely to have been a war crime. Mozzerati 22:09, 15 December 2005 (UTC) (and 12:42, 18 December 2005 (UTC))
 * From Naumann's POV, this is obvious. Under current German military law, any military action against civilian targets is a war crime. Doesn't say anything about whether it was then.

 * I can't help thinking that terms like "Trotskyist", "revisionist" and "leftist" are all entirely subjective and at least partially prejudicial. They are not really very helpful in an objective article.Flanker235 (talk) 13:16, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

specific unsourced edits
Here are some edits for Tobias which still need sources. They are removed but should be added back as we find sources covering these topics. I believe most of this below is true, and I've found German tabloid sources for some of them but no reputable source yet.

 * worked as an actor, director and script writer
 * [after the Vietnam war] worked as a journalist
 * Among others, he contributed to Yad Vashem's Encyclopedia of the Holocaust
 * helped the former deputy chief prosecutor at the Nuremberg Trials, Robert Kempner, write his autobiography.
 * Jörg Friedrich currently resides in Berlin.
 * Another point of criticism is his portrayal of Nazi vengeance acts against Jews, which some see as an attempt to blame parts of the Holocaust on the Allied bombing campagin. - I saw a source for this in one of the book reviews, I think.
 * The 2002 publication of "Der Brand" spawned a new discussion of the topic in Germany, and several new works—some espousing Friedrich's approach, others being critical of his scholarship and his views—have appeared. Sort of clearly true, but we should really add specific names of books.

specific problem edits
There are some edits Tobias made which cannot really stand

 * Friedrich has repeatedly denied that such an intent exists and has explicitly stated that he does not mean to compare the bombing campaign to the Holocaust, as he has been accused of by some critics.

This is literally true but is seriously misleading, which is why nothing similar to it appears alone in any reputable source. Words such as "einsatzgruppen" and "gas chamber" have only one meaning in the postwar world, along with words like Shoa and Holocaust. When Friedrich uses these words (einzatsgruppen == RAF pilots; gas-chamber == basement where civilians died of carbon monoxide poisoning from the fumes from the burning buildings), he does directly and clearly make a comparison. Any denial of this link points in a direction which leads towards holocaust denial. That these relations are made is clear; his failure to clearly apologise for any misunderstandings of his words is telling. The article as it stands is very far from what should be said about him.

The appropriate Wikipedia policy for this is the requirement to cite reputable secondary, not primary, sources. Statements about a person by that person should be included from a context where they have been reported by others and any subtexts or misdirection have been analysed. Some of the German reviews of his books do exactly this and are very instructive.

Mozzerati 12:42, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
 * So, it is irrelevant in your eyes if the word "Gaskammer" = "Gas Chamber" does not appear in the book? And likewise irrelevant that the word "Einsatzgruppe" is still used in a generic sense in German (or is the local fire brigade were I live an SS unit in disguise?) Again, you seem to have no idea of what you are talking about. And what about the insinuation that Friedrich would deny the Holocaust if he was allowed to. What are your sources for that, now?
 * The whole article is simply one big slander without any serious sources except personal opinion, and then you ask for negative evidence when someone removes the most crass nonsense?
 * The "secondary over primary sources" is patently ridiculous. If a newspaper claims "F. considers himself XY", that is more believable than he himself stating, "I consider myself XY" in an interview? Furthermore, you are being exceedingly selective with sources—the positive reviews of Der Brand or even the positive aspects entirely missing. Nor are there any sources for many statements ("well connected in military circles"? "Relativism"?)
 * I rather suspected this right from the start and I am in no mood for an edit-war... shouldn't have even edited the spelling, but left the article as the biased misspelled mess that it was. Suffice to say, the article as it now stands is a political pamphlet, not an encyclopedia article. And what's most ironic, it doesn't really address the most important point of criticism against Der Brand: its sloppiness in regard to scholarship and research.82.83.221.106 14:05, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

An interesting book would be an analysis of the reaction to an author branching out from one narrow perspective. When Jorg wrote about what bad guys the Nazis were, his Wiki article would have gushed praise. Now that he has written a couple of books reevaluating the actions of the good guys, his Wiki article approaches Irving's in venom. (You should tighten up the prose in the article; there are a couple of places where the article says exactly the opposite of an earlier, lamentable section.) Being called a "revisionist" and/or "denier" because he has researched WW2 a little deeper than Wiki feels comfortable with—oohhh, nasty man. (What level of subservience do Wiki-ish folks want—total? And to what?)159.105.80.141 19:24, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

I altered the sentence in which it was claimed that Friedrich accepted being called a revisionist historian. Firstly, the sentence was syntactically and semantically a mess. Secondly, it is deeply unfair to claim that Friedrich would accept being called a revisionist historian in the current sense of that term (i.e., Irvin = revisionist historian). When Friedrich was asked whether he did not fear to be called a revisionist historian, he answered that every historian has to be a revisionist. It was clear that in that general sense he would accept being called a revisionist historian. If one cares to be fair and unbiased, it is obvious that Friedrich by no means accepted "revisionist historian" in its usual polemical definition as a label for himself. His answer implicitly drew attention to the fact that "revisionist historian" is indeed not a very intelligent coinage. A mediaevelist who would present a new picture of Charlemagne as a rather mediocre and incompetent ruler would revise conventional wisdom about the emperor and thus be a "revisionist historian". By disregarding the context in which Friedrich "accepted" being called a revisionist and by silently (and, I suspect, intentionally) misinterpreting his statement, the phrase in the sentence was apt to place Friedrich on the same level as someone like Irving. That is wrong and very unfair; I therefore deleted the phrase.141.91.129.5 10:28, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

J.M. Spaight [i]Bombing Vindicated[/i]
A lot of what is claimed about this book is untrue. Spaight claims (correctly) the opposite of everything that is claimed here. I'll remove these comments.

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 23:03, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Compare this article to the one on Friedrich in Wikipedia.de ...
... and you will understand the difference between a competent and balanced article (that is in no way overly sympathetic to Friedrich!) and a lousy piece of malicious maligning. It's outrageous how Friedrich's work is reduced to the single topic of "Der Brand", as if "Freispruch für die Nazi-Justiz" and "Das Gesetz des Krieges" had never existed. In a meager two-line footnote, "Das Gesetz des Krieges" is falsely portrayed as being a criticsm of the Nürnberg trials, while in fact it is a scathing accusation of the immoral Wehrmacht high command and its support for the Nazi extermination politics in Eastern Europe. Also, Friedrich is simultaneously accused of being both a "left-wing Trotzkist" and "revisionist" (i.e. a Neo-Nazi) without quoting any reliable source. Obviously, some people in Britain have a strong desire to besmirch Friedrich's reputation in an effort to palliate the harrowing effects of the Anglo-Saxon area bombing campaigns from Dresden and Hiroshima over Hanoi to Baghdad and Afghanistan. Incidentally, I don't like Friedrich's polemical and sometimes even arrogant style, and many of his theses are rightly disputed, but at least I have read most of his books, so I know what I am talking about, and I'm not relying on Fleet Street for information. Reibeisen 23:03, 11 Oktober 2007 (MEZ)

Extremely POV
The attempt to discredit a respected historian's work merely because a) He describes historical events from the perspective of those human beings who were affected by them, and b)  Because he raises the specter of the Allies having possibly done something wrong in the campaign against Nazi Germany is symptomatic of an all-or-nothing, black-and-white view of history that has no place in rational discourse. Put another way, the first victim of war is truth.

I've read "The Fire" (Hello! It's been out in English for more than a year!) and while I think there are many organizational flaws in the work and also some questionable translations and terminology, its accounts of what actually happened on the ground in scores of German cities bears reading for all who question the morality of weapons of mass destruction, which the Allied bombers certainly were.

Nowhere does Friedrich remotely suggest that Nazi Germany was not the aggressor and prime culprit in WWII and its associated horrors. What he does argue, and this only indirectly, is that indiscriminate bombing of civilian centers inevitably kills many human beings -- and destroys much cultural infrastructure -- without necessarily furthering the supposed legitimate military/political objective. This brings to mind Robert McNamara's conclusion about the bombing of North Vietnam: That the means, and the destruction, were out of proportion to the miltary/political objective.

To tar and feather Friedrich with the term "revisionist" seems to imply that historical accounts should never be revised, and that whatever the most widely accepted view is must be inviolate. Nothing more intellectually dishonest can be imagined.

Sca (talk) 21:42, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

 * Yeah, this looks like a smearjob to me. I mean a section on "other related historians" which talks mostly about David Irving? I would like to know if any of the cited sources actually describe Irving and Freidrich as "related," or if that is just some Wikipedian working in some original-research FUD. <eleland/talkedits> 02:07, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

On p.61 of Der Brand (tr. The Fire, Columbia University Press, 2006), writing about Britain and Germany in 1940, Friedrich says, 'Because he could do nothing right, Churchill considered whether Hitler could possibly do something wrong: "to attempt invasion... even if he decided against it now and went eastwards; and he would not succeed." [Note the quotation has been edited to the point of grammatical meaninglessness.] Both countries were in limbo, fighting a war of attrition. They could and should have stopped the war, but instead, each waited for the other side to make a mistake.'

That is the neo-Nazi doctrine of 'moral equivalence'. Friedrich attempts to blame Winston Churchill for Adolf Hitler's war of aggression. Couldn't be clearer. The only way Britain could have 'stopped the war' in 1940 would have been to surrender to the Fuhrer's will, and this is necessarily what Friedrich is therefore advocating. As for referring to RAF Bomber Command crews as 'Einsatzgruppen'... He's hardly trying to hide where he's coming from.Khamba Tendal (talk) 19:29, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Part I
The article said: ''However, the discussion surrounding his books on the allied bombing campaign has led to a reappraisal of his position and a re-examination of his earlier books. His criticism of post-war Germany and denazification, which have previously been understood as being a criticism of power-politics and the selective prosecution of those not useful to the new administration can now be seen as a direct criticism of interference in German national sovereignty:''

 * "Jörg Friedrich describes the denazification program as a form of political purge with no basis in international law. The Hague rules of land warfare do not authorize an occupier to undertake any such interference in the enemy's domestic affairs."

''Once taken in this light, alongside Friedrich's recent admission that he is a "revisionist historian", Friedrich's modern books and the choices and omissions he has made in them have been seen to take on a rather different meaning. ''

Most of the claims of these paragraphs are unsourced, constituting original research aiming at passing judgment. See also the many complaints above. -- Zz (talk) 15:47, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Part II
The article further stated: By choosing as his standard of comparison for Dresden the bombing of London, Friedrich avoids covering the topics of Stalingrad, where 40,000 Soviet civilians are known to have been killed in one day of German bombing, Leningrad where approximately a million Soviet civilians were killed or with Warsaw where, 200,000 Polish civilians were killed in the Warsaw Uprising, often in ground based attacks which used a similar mixture of explosive and incendiary weapons to those used by the allies in Germany, but, by contrast to Dresden, where general areas were targeted, also involved deliberate and selective targeting of clearly marked hospitals with dive bombers and ground forces.

This is an attempt at giving a historical base for the evaluation -- or rather judgment -- of Friedrich's work. In the form presented, however, it is original research and has no place in Wikipedia. It has been marked for two years without action. -- Zz (talk) 15:52, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Part III
The article also used weasel words without any for placing him close to Irving: ''Comparisons between the bombing of Dresden and the extermination of the Jews in the second world war were first made popular through the work of the holocaust denier David Irving. Whilst Jörg Friedrich, who always operates within German law, where holocaust denial as carried out by Irving would be illegal, has not directly made that comparison. He has described the death of civilians killed by carbon monoxide poisoning in their cellars as "gassing", the attacks in general as a "massacre" and claimed that the attacks of 1945 had little or no military value.''

''Irving was the first person to claim a death toll of over 100,000 for the bombing of Dresden, which even he was later forced to withdraw. Jörg Friedrich has never made such extreme claims. His claim of 40,000 is around the current best estimates of 25,000 to 35,000 (see Bombing of Dresden). ''

See the comments by others above, "smear campaign". All the text is trying to imply evil on behalf of Friedrich - "always operating within German law", "has not directly made that comparison" - implies that he has an agenda that reaching beyond, and the juxtaposition with Irving tells us where... It is telling that texts like these can stay on Wikipedia for so long. -- Zz (talk) 16:00, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Self acknowledged revisionist historian?
The article stated: now considered by some critics as a revisionist historian, a label which he has acknowledged. This claim is sourced. However, it appears in only one newspaper without quoting Friedrich on it. That is hardly sufficient evidence in the case of a historian who has got as much coverage as Friedrich. For one, acknowledging something implies that he faced with the claim (in which form exactly?) and Friedrich accepting it. For another, it is strange to have single souced claim of that kind in the lead of the article. -- Zz (talk) 16:09, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

The source, a newspaper article, was in no way sufficient to make such a claim. It did not contain an exact quote and only briefly referred to it in the end of the article, without describing the context of the alleged statement. It should be noted that most historians engage in "revisionism", the primary meaning of which is "the critical re-examination of presumed historical facts and existing historiography". Ulrichaho (talk) 11:23, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Such a position...
The article wrote: ''Such a position is impossible to justify and ignores the previous examples of the Luftwaffe's targeting of civilians. The Germans had bombed civilians during the Spanish Civil War, notably at Guernica. During the Second World War they had deliberately targeted columns of French refugees caught up in the civilian exodus from the battle zone. In the bombing of Rotterdam, no attempt was made to hit military targets.'' No source is given, and it is the opinion of the contributor. -- Zz (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:30, 30 May 2011 (UTC).

Jörg Friedrich
Jörg Friedrich is born 17. 8. 1944 Essen/Germany. He is German. Please look Wikepedia de — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fibe101 (talk • contribs) 16:10, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

I am so sorry ...
Yes, there were many unspeakable atrocities committed by Germans during their wars. You should see: fighting such an enemy doesn't mean to acquire his methods but to avoid any of those seemingly most despicable acts brought to oneself. Beating an unjust and unfair enemy with just and fair methods and keeping the moral high-ground should be essential in the process of a righteous war. - But of course that's not what war is about.

To your article: Jörg Friedrich claims that analyzing the firestorm in London led to a method to induce such firestorms taking into account the ratio of incendiary and explosive bombs as well as the housing situation on the ground. Areas to create a firestorm had to be tightly inhabited with narrow streets with high (a few storeys) and flammable buildings (to bundle the airflow and create a horizontal chimney-effect). So you start bombing the middle of the target area to create a larger fire which is drawing in its surrounding air. Further bomb the outskirts of the area and those smaller fires will spread guided by the airflow created by the fire in the center. This leads to several conclusions: it works only on certain urban areas, it didn't work on Berlin because there was too much space between the buildings and its not working on industrial areas with modern buildings and even wider space. The effect on people taking shelter in their cellars could be lack of oxygen, excess of carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide or to be cooked like in an airflow oven. In a sort-of documentary (it was a "themed evening") Jörg Friedrich stated, what he was most puzzled about was that there were mostly older people, children and wounded - all the others would have been in the trenches were they thought they could make a difference (or fled to the countryside of course). And they even presented a few whiny RAF pilots stating "we had our orders" and "when we were done we had time to look at the ground and thought about the people" - oh man grow some testicles. So, yes, the main target of the firestorms had to be the life and housing of civilians. And yes, a wee bit smiting can be oh so comforting for ones soul. And of course those old and young were as responsible for enabling Hitler to do what he did and had daughters who bred sons who raped and bombed and killed and robbed. Oh wait... the young couldn't - oh so what... it hit one of us so it should be a thousand off the others if there could only be found a solution for all of them because the enemy hides everywhere...

Sorry for that rant. Feel free to delete it (unnecessarily said). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.43.140.170 (talk) 23:48, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV
I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
 * This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
 * There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
 * It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
 * In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:22, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Jörg Friedrich (author). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20050524113718/http://www.chicagotribune.com:80/news/nationworld/chi-0303070303mar07,1,20636.story?ctrack=1&cset=true to http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0303070303mar07,1,20636.story?ctrack=1&cset=true

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 01:17, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Jörg Friedrich (author). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050310082103/http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/GENOCIDE/reviewsw159.htm to http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/genocide/reviewsw159.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050310082103/http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/GENOCIDE/reviewsw159.htm to http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/genocide/reviewsw159.htm
 * Added tag to http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0303070303mar07,1,20636.story?ctrack=1&cset=true
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050108232950/http://quadrant.org.au/php/archive_details_list.php?article_id=592 to http://www.quadrant.org.au/php/archive_details_list.php?article_id=592
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050108232950/http://quadrant.org.au/php/archive_details_list.php?article_id=592 to http://www.quadrant.org.au/php/archive_details_list.php?article_id=592
 * Added tag to http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0303070303mar07,1,20636.story?ctrack=1&cset=true
 * Added tag to http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0303070303mar07,1,20636.story?ctrack=1&cset=true
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050310082103/http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/GENOCIDE/reviewsw159.htm to http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/genocide/reviewsw159.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050310082103/http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/GENOCIDE/reviewsw159.htm to http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/genocide/reviewsw159.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050310082103/http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/GENOCIDE/reviewsw159.htm to http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/genocide/reviewsw159.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:17, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Jörg Friedrich (author)