Academic literature on the topic 'Truffa - Storia'

MacIntyre è il grande avversario lottatore contro modernità e post-modernità. Egli scopre, ed argomenta, che all'origine della affermazione "moderna" c'è una grande truffa fondata sulla presunzione di liberarsi dalla soggezione alla storia, intesa sia come Tradizione sia come metodo con una sua epistemologia per comprendere l'uomo e il suo operare. L'epilogo di tale pretesa è sotto gli occhi: un razionalismo autoreferenziale che non ha più contatto con la realtà e che proprio per questo si riduce a delirio di onnipotenza o di potenza decaduta per resistenza indebita di storia e tradizioni "portatrici solo di oscurantismo!". La realtà porta, invece, a scoprire l'identità dell'uomo come «io» contestualizzato, che nasce da una storia, una storia di amore, e si realizza in un contesto di condizioni e condizionamenti, con cui bisogna sempre fare i conti se si desidera essere lealmente attenti a cogliere le notizie che da essa provengono per comprendere chi è questo essere speciale e particolare. Anche altri filosofi hanno risposto alla "pretesa modernista", però spesso o con un atteggiamento di «falso irenismo», teorizzando un dialogo con cui, prendendo a prestito il metodo illuministico, si è cercato di asserirne "dialetticamente" la falsità, cercando di trattenerne, invece, "le cose buone"; oppure ponendosi come pensatori alternativi al pensiero "comunista" distruttore della «comunità» e della «persona». Secondo MacIntyre, l'errore di questi è nel non aver inteso che la falsità "moderna" è proprio nel suo metodo che ha posto come a-priori non negoziabile, in ogni riflessione e ricerca, il rifiuto della storia, della concretezza, del particolare, della tradizione, propugnando che solo la "spersonalizzazione", la "universalizzazione", insomma: solo il regno della "ragion pura" e auto-purificatasi ha ragione e dignità di essere l'a-priori per eccellenza nella ricerca filosofica. Il «personalismo», nella versione europea, non raramente è incorso in questa confusione.

La sezione si compone di tre contributi. Dal primo, Il duce.. vero o presunto, intervista di Paolo Ferrari a Mimmo Franzinelli (autore di Autopsia di un falso. I Diari di Mussolini e la manipolazione della storia), emergono sia i molti elementi che dimostrano la falsitŕ dei diari di Mussolini editi da Bompiani, sia le ragioni e le modalitŕ del tentativo, da parte di chi ne ha promosso la pubblicazione, di accreditare un'immagine pubblica ‘emendata' del dittatore, puntando a una sua ‘riabilitazione', alla costruzione di un fascismo "immaginato", privato dei suoi aspetti liberticidi, guerrafondai e razzisti: una vicenda culturale di lungo periodo che ha avuto inizio subito dopo la fine della dittatura. Il secondo, Il Discorso della Corona e i falsi diari di Lucio Ceva, illustra e commenta una nuova prova della loro non autenticitŕ. Infatti, mentre in essi, alla data 23 marzo 1939, il preteso Mussolini critica e dileggia i contenuti del Discorso della Corona, pronunciato nel 1939 da Vittorio Emanuele III, questo discorso, secondo gli usi e come confermato dal documento autografo pubblicato in appendice e conservato presso l'Archivio centrale dello Stato (ACS), era stato scritto proprio dal duce. Conclude la sezione la Perizia grafico-grafologica di Nicole Ciccolo, che compara i testi pubblicati da Bompiani sia con gli autografi di Mussolini conservati presso l'ACS sia con gli autografi di Amalia Panvini, giŕ condannata nel 1960 per falso e truffa in quanto creatrice e venditrice di falsi diari di Mussolini, giungendo alla conclusione di attribuire a quest'ultima anche la stesura dei Diari pubblicati da Bompiani, e confermando cosě, da una diversa angolazione di analisi, la tesi formulata da Franzinelli.

The banjo tune “Foggy Mountain Breakdown” took a roundabout path to become the voice of the genre-changing film Bonnie and Clyde, first released in 1967. The movie’s eventual star, Warren Beatty, was behind the scoring and several stories are presented about his decision. The movie script, by Esquire staffers Robert Benton and David Newman, also passed through a succession of hands—including those of French New Wave auteurs François Truffaut and Jean-Luc Godard—before Beatty, its champion, succeeded in getting the services of American director Arthur Penn. The resulting movie, a fictionalization of criminals Clyde Barrow and Bonnie Parker’s murderous episodes, had a slow start but eventually galvanized audiences with its dark humor and raucous score. NYT critic Bosley Crowther saw his career at the paper end after fervently dissing the film.

<em>Abstract.</em>—Urban streams typically have increased flows, high suspended sediment concentrations, and reduced water quality during rainstorms as a result of changes within the watershed related to human activity. In the 6-month periods from May through October of 2001 and 2002, water quality was monitored continuously at five sites along Rapid Creek within Rapid City, South Dakota. Water quality samples were collected for eight base flows (nonevents) and eight storm events. Blood samples were collected from wild adult brown trout <em>Salmo trutta </em>during base flow conditions and six of eight storm events to determine if storm events could elicit physiological stress responses. Blood samples were also collected 24, 48, and 96 h after each storm event had started. Water monitoring results showed significant increases in runoff volume and peak flows during storm events. Water quality parameters exceeding South Dakota’s water quality criteria for a coldwater fishery were total suspended solids and temperature. Plasma concentrations of cortisol and lactate, during and after storm events, were not significantly different than those measured during base flow conditions. Plasma glucose values were lower during storm events than during nonevent periods. These observations were compared to those predicted by a suspended sediment dose–response model developed for adult salmonids. The dose–response model overpredicted the severity of the effects of increased total suspended sediment on the brown trout during stormwater runoff events.

Abstract.—Native golden trout of California’s upper Kern River basin have inspired anglers and scientists alike with their beauty, ecology, and evolutionary history. Three Rainbow Trout <i>Oncorhynchus mykiss</i> subspecies comprise the golden trout complex: California Golden Trout <i>O. m. aguabonita</i>, Little Kern Golden Trout <i>O. m. whitei</i>, and Kern River Rainbow Trout <i>O. m. gilberti</i>. This chapter focuses on restoration and management of the first two subspecies, California Golden Trout and Little Kern Golden Trout. Agency biologists, other scientists, and citizens have all worked for more than 100 years to protect and save these subspecies from a range of threats, some of fishery managers’ own making and some threats evolving over time. Major problems have included overharvest by anglers, overgrazing of habitat by livestock, competition and predation by nonnative Brown Trout <i>Salmo trutta</i> and Brook Trout <i>Salvelinus fontinalis</i>, and hybridization with introduced nonnative forms of Rainbow Trout subspecies; these factors drove both species perilously close to extinction by the late 1960s. Little Kern Golden Trout were listed as threatened in 1978 under the U.S. Federal Endangered Species Act. That same year, the federal government designated large portions of California Golden Trout and Little Kern Golden Trout native watersheds as the Golden Trout Wilderness. Management actions to prevent extinction and conserve these subspecies have included angling regulations, livestock grazing restrictions, barrier construction, chemical treatments to remove nonnative trout, and research to identify and quantify genetic introgression of nonnative Rainbow Trout genes into native golden trout populations. Restoration efforts have, thus far, averted extinction, allowed populations to rebound, and provided several important lessons on genetic management of closely related subspecies, including pitfalls of a zero-introgression target for conservation, the potential need to continue management indefinitely, being responsive to emerging threats, recognizing that barriers to upstream fish movement can be useful, the caveats of using hatcheries for conservation, the potential role of native trout donor populations to facilitate restoration, and the need to harness public and stakeholder understanding and support for species conservation.

<i>Abstract</i>.—The Vindel River (Vindelälven), Sweden, is 450 km long with a mean annual discharge of 190 m³/s and runs through sparsely populated areas in northern Sweden, joining the Ume River near the Baltic Sea. A severe decline in Atlantic Salmon <i>Salmo salar</i> and Brown Trout <i>S. trutta</i> during the past century was caused by (1) intense timber-floating activities starting in the mid-1800s, which degraded stream habitat; (2) hydropower development in the early 1900s, which limited or blocked upstream migration; and (3) an expanded coastal/ocean fishery after 1950, which overharvested anadromous populations. Restoration efforts during the 1970s and 1980s failed due to low efficacy of stocking programs and insufficient habitat restoration. A legislative reform to unify the fishery right owners (FROs) along the river helped initiate restoration efforts in the late 1990s, focusing on improving fish migration past a hydropower station and restoring degraded habitat. Sweden’s membership in the European Union made large funding for restoration projects possible. The number of returning Atlantic Salmon increased significantly after migration conditions improved around the hydropower station and with stricter regulations on the offshore fishery. Successful habitat restoration was based upon gaining trust from landowners and FROs via extensive communication to gain access to their land. Restoration work was adaptive and experiences gained were incorporated into restoration guidelines. Involvement of universities, as a provider of expertise and as an unbiased interpreter of data, provided support to legal processes and when evaluating restoration measures. During the course of the restoration work, managers learned that stocking often did not produce satisfactory results. By studying historical documents from the timber-floating era, managers learned that the scope of modifications of the tributaries had been much greater than previously thought and that habitat restoration needed to be extensive. In many tributaries, the number of juvenile Brown Trout increased significantly after habitat restoration, sometimes dramatically exceeding expectations, which made the managers question the validity of established production estimates for northern boreal streams. The experience and knowledge gained from the Vindel River restoration served as the catalyst for many other major restoration projects in rivers emptying into the Baltic Sea.

<em>Abstract</em>—The Weber River is primarily known as a blue-ribbon Brown Trout <em>Salmo trutta </em>fishery; however, this river also supports populations of two jeopardized fishes, Bonneville Cutthroat Trout <em>Oncorhynchus clarkii utah </em>and Bluehead Sucker <em>Catostomus discobolus</em>. At least one population of Bonneville Cutthroat Trout in the Weber River provides an important and popular local fishery and expresses a fluvial life history where main-stem individuals grow large (300–500 mm total length) and migrate into small tributaries for spawning. Bluehead Suckers currently occur in the main stem of the Weber River, where they travel distances of 20 km between spawning and overwintering habitats. The habitat for both species has been fragmented by more than 300 barriers composed of irrigation diversions, road crossings, and utility stream crossings. Beginning in 2010, the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources and Trout Unlimited began undertaking barrier removal for native fish as a priority conservation action. Initially, the effort to reconnect habitat was slow and the lack of relationships with stakeholders such as water users, government agencies, private landowners, and utility companies was hampering progress with habitat reconnection. New barriers were being built at a faster rate than barriers were being removed. To build these relationships, a steering committee was formed to secure a small grant, hire a consulting firm, organize stakeholder meetings to identify broad stakeholder priorities, and write a watershed plan that ultimately identified Bonneville Cutthroat Trout and Bluehead Sucker as priority conservation targets. The watershed plan and subsequent stakeholder meetings developed a framework for the Weber River Partnership. The partnership holds an annual symposium where larger watershed issues are discussed. The symposium also provides a platform where all stakeholders can understand the activities occurring throughout the watershed and where there are opportunities to collaborate. The Weber River Partnership has provided a forum where fisheries managers have told the story of Bonneville Cutthroat Trout and Bluehead Sucker and the importance of habitat connectivity. Through collaborative relationships with nontraditional partners, the relevance of fisheries in the Weber River has been realized. Further relevance in the watershed is evidenced by the development of a wide range of on-the-ground actions. Fish passage has been re-established at three main-stem and four tributary barriers. Additional projects are in various stages of development, including a large fish ladder that will be built as part of a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission relicensing project at a small hydroelectric dam, and we continue to be contacted by water users with interest in developing irrigation diversion reconstruction projects that incorporate fish passage.