Thomas Mullins (died 1823) was a British Army officer of the 44th Regiment of Foot, best known for his misconduct at the Battle of New Orleans during the War of 1812. While he performed well during the Chesapeake campaign, his failure to check on the regiment's engineering supplies at New Orleans played a key role in the disorganization and subsequent defeat of the British there.

Birth and early career
Mullins was the third son of Thomas Mullins, 1st Baron Ventry and his second wife Christabella.

On 27 January 1791, he was promoted from Ensign of the 24th Regiment of Foot to become a lieutenant in the Independent Companies, and on 22 February 1791, he exchanged again from half-pay in the Independent Companies to the 45th Regiment of Foot. He was promoted to captain on 20 July 1794. He was appointed to the second battalion of the 44th when the second battalion was raised in Dublin in 1803. Subsequently, he transferred to the first battalion. In 1810, he married Parnell, the widow of Major-General Archer.

Chesapeake campaign
When Colonel Arthur Brooke, lieutenant colonel of the 44th Regiment of Foot assumed the command of a brigade during the Chesapeake campaign, Mullins was breveted lieutenant-colonel and assumed command of that regiment. He was mentioned in despatches by General Robert Ross for his leadership at the Battle of Bladensburg, which took place on 24 August 1814. Mullins was also commended for his conduct during the Battle of North Point by Brooke, who succeeded Ross when the latter fell to a skirmisher's bullet.

New Orleans campaign
During the New Orleans campaign, Brooke continued to command a brigade including the 44th during the initial landing, and Mullins retained command of that regiment.

The 44th was assigned by General Edward Pakenham to be the advance guard for the first column of attack on 8 January 1815, and to carry the ladders and fascines which would enable the British troops to cross the ditch and scale the American ramparts. Mullins was not pleased, viewing the regiment's role as that of a forlorn hope. Perhaps due to his bad temper, he failed to personally locate the ladders and fascines on the evening of the 7th, as Pakenham had ordered him to do. The officer he assigned to do so inquired about their location from an engineer officer, and reported they were in the advanced redoubt.

During the night, a battery was set up about  forward of the advanced redoubt. Mullins, thinking this to be the location of the materiel, passed the advanced redoubt and halted the regiment at the battery. Upon discovering his mistake, he sent 300 men back to the redoubt at the double-quick to pick up the fascines and ladders, but it was too late. The other regiments were already advancing behind the 44th, the party of 300 lost formation as they struggled to reach the redoubt, and as day dawned, the attack commenced before the supplies could be brought forward.

The British column had already been disordered by the passage of the 300 returning to the redoubt, and they advanced into a storm of American fire. Without the fascines and ladders, they were unable to scale and storm the American position. Major-General Gibbs encouraged them with cries of "Here come the 44th!", while vowing, in an undertone, to hang Mullins on the highest tree in the swamp if he lived until tomorrow. It was to no avail. The British attacks on the east side of the Mississippi River failed in bloody confusion, with Pakenham and Gibbs among the casualties.

Aftermath
Upon the return of the 44th to Dublin at the close of the campaign, Mullins was tried by a court-martial between 11 July 1815 and 1 August 1815, on the charges of having neglected orders to collect fascines and ladders, having allowed the regiment to pass the redoubt containing the fascines and ladders, and for having engaged in "scandalous conduct", in remarking to an officer of his regiment that the 44th was a "forlorn hope...and must be sacrificed" after receiving orders that the regiment should carry fascines. While he was acquitted of the latter charge, he was convicted of the first two and cashiered from the Army. He died in 1823, leaving no children.

References

1823 deaths
British Army personnel of the War of 1812
British Army personnel of the Napoleonic Wars
Sherwood Foresters officers
Younger sons of barons
44th Regiment of Foot officers
Year of birth unknown

Thomas Mullins (British Army officer)


NeXTSTEP was a computer operating system made by a company called NeXT. NeXT was run by Steve Jobs, who was the CEO of Apple until his death in 2011. NEXTSTEP was based on UNIX and used source code from BSD. It had a graphical user interface and it let people write computer programs using object-oriented programming. NeXTSTEP ran only on computers made by NeXT. Later on, NeXTSTEP was changed so that it could run on other computers. This new operating system was called OPENSTEP. In 1997, Apple bought the NeXT company and used NeXTSTEP to make Mac OS X.

Operating systems

NeXTSTEP


Gerald "Gerry" Kearby (June 22, 1947 – August 6, 2012) was an entrepreneur who rose to prominence during the "dot-com" boom of the late 1990s.  He worked predominantly with music and audio-related electronics and software companies.

He was co-founder, CEO and president of Liquid Audio, Inc. In that position, he testified before the US Congress regarding digital music distribution.  At Liquid Audio he also drove development of digital audio watermarking technology since acquired and used by Microsoft. At its peak, Liquid Audio had a market capitalization close to $1 billion.

Prior to Liquid Audio, Kearby was co-founder and chief executive officer of Integrated Media Systems, a manufacturer of computer-based professional audio equipment from June 1995 to December 1995. From January 1989 until June 1995, Mr. Kearby served as vice president of sales and marketing at Studer Editech Corporation, a professional audio recording division of the Studer company. Kearby created some of the earliest versions of digital audio workstation product families working with many colleagues.
Gerry served in the United States Marine Corps as percussionist for their premier ceremonial unit, "The Commandant's Own" in Washington, D.C., between 1967 and 1968.

Kearby died on August 6, 2012, in Pescadero, California.

References

1947 births
2012 deaths
American businesspeople
Dot-com bubble
People from Pescadero, California

Gerry Kearby


Laughter on the 23rd Floor is a 1993 play by Neil Simon. It focuses on the star and writers of a TV comedy-variety show in the 1950s, inspired by Simon's own early career experience as a junior writer (along with his brother Danny) for Your Show of Shows and Caesar's Hour.

Plot overview
The play focuses on Sid Caesar-like Max Prince, the star of a weekly comedy-variety show circa 1953, and his staff, including Simon's alter-ego Lucas Brickman, who maintains a running commentary on the writing, fighting, and wacky antics which take place in the writers' room. Max has an ongoing battle with NBC executives, who fear his humor is too sophisticated for Middle America. The play is notable not only for its insider's look at the personalities and processes of television comedy writing, but also for its reflection of the political and social undercurrents of its time, in particular the rise of Joseph McCarthy, relationships between various (European) American ethnicities, and attitudes toward women.

Relation to real life
Laughter on the 23rd Floor is a roman à clef, with the characters in the play based on Neil Simon's co-writers on Your Show of Shows. Lloyd Rose, in her Washington Post review, noted several of the real-life inspirations: the "Sid Caesar–inspired Max Prince", "hypochondriac Ira (played by Ron Orbach, inspired by Mel Brooks)" ... and "fussy Russian emigre Val (Mark Linn-Baker, inspired by Mel Tolkin) .... There is no character based on Woody Allen." Like many Rose attributes "dryly witty, sane Kenny (John Slattery) as inspired by Larry Gelbart and Carl Reiner when it was actually only Gelbart. The Ira Stone character is often misattributed to Allen, as the character in the play is a hypochondriac and Allen went on to use that affectation to great effect in his own comedy career. Simon actually was poking fun at Brooks.  The real-life counterparts for each character are:

According to Simon, Sid Caesar's writers on the original Your Show of Shows (including Neil Simon and his older brother Danny Simon) held their script sessions at various times on the eleventh and the twelfth floors of an NBC-TV office building; Simon added those numbers together to put his fictional cast on the 23rd floor.

Productions
Laughter on the 23rd Floor opened on Broadway at the Richard Rodgers Theatre on November 22, 1993 and closed on August 27, 1994 after 320 performances and 24 previews. Directed by Jerry Zaks the cast featured Nathan Lane (Max), Ron Orbach (Ira), Randy Graff (Carol), Mark Linn-Baker (Val), Bitty Schram (Helen), J. K. Simmons (Brian), John Slattery (Kenny), and Lewis J. Stadlen (Milt). The play was first performed at Duke University. Stephen Mailer played Simon's young stand-in Lucas.

Paul Provenza was originally cast as Ira Stone, but was fired prior to opening.

A West End production headed by Gene Wilder opened on October 3, 1996, at the Queen's Theatre, where it ran for five months.

In April and May 2011, Laughter on the 23rd Floor received a newly conceived production in Philadelphia at 1812 Productions. This production took place in repertory with an original comedy, Our Show of Shows, an homage to Sid Caesar's Your Show of Shows. This was the first time Laughter on the 23rd Floor was presented with a companion piece.  Neil Simon and Sid Caesar both gave their personal approval for this repertory production, and Eddy Friedfeld, co-author of Sid Caesar's autobiography, Caesar's Hours, served as the dramaturg for both shows.  Of the companion piece, Our Show of Shows, Sid Caesar wrote, "To the superb cast and crew of 1812 Productions: Thank you for keeping my legacy alive."

Adaptation
Lane repeated his role for the 2001 television movie written by Simon and directed by Richard Benjamin. Mark Evanier notes for the movie Simon added a new character, Harry Prince, based on Caesar's brother David and the teleplay "[uses] almost none of the play." The cast included Nathan Lane, Saul Rubinek, Victor Garber, Peri Gilpin, Mark Linn-Baker and Dan Castellaneta.

References

External links

1993 plays
Broadway plays
Plays by Neil Simon
Plays set in New York City

Laughter on the 23rd Floor


Alicia Markova DBE (born Lilian Alicia Marks, 1 December 1910 – 2 December 2004) was an English ballerina and choreographer. She also directed and taught ballet. She was the first British dancer to become the prima ballerina of a ballet company.

Markova was born and raised in London. She was a founder dancer of the Ballet Rambert (1931/5), the Vic-Wells Ballet (193/5), Markova-Dolin Company (1935/8), danced for the American Ballet Theatre (1941/5), and was co-founder and director of the English National Ballet. She toured with Dolin after the war until 1949. Her last period as a dancer came with the London Festival Ballet, which became the English National Ballet. She retired from professional dancing in January 1963 at fifty-two.

Markova died at ninety-four in Bath, Somerset, of a stroke.

Life
Markova's father was Jewish, and her mother converted to the faith. She began studying ballet with Princess Serafina Astafieva, a Russian ballerina living in London. Astafieva was a retired dancer of the Ballets Russes, a renowned ballet company founded by the impresario Sergei Diaghilev.

At 13, Markova was seen in class by Diaghilev, who was visiting London in search of new talent. He invited her to join the Ballets Russes in Monte Carlo, which she did in 1925, a month after her 14th birthday. She danced roles which were specially choreographed for her. She met some of the leading 20th century figures who worked with the company. They included Pablo Picasso, Henri Matisse, Igor Stravinsky, Sergei Prokofiev, Léonide Massine, George Balanchine, and Bronislava Nijinska.

References

Ballet dancers
Deaths from stroke
English dancers
People from London
1910 births
2004 deaths

Alicia Markova


The endgame in chess (or end game or ending) is the part of the game when there are few pieces left on the board. Alternatively, endgames begin when the middlegame is over, and kings are relatively safe.

Features of endgame play
There are three main strategic differences between earlier parts of the game and endgame:
the
Pawns: during the endgame, pawns become more special. In the endgame, one thing players try to do is to promote a pawn by advancing it to the eighth rank.
 Kings: may become strong pieces in the endgame. The king may be brought towards the center of the board. There it can support its own pawns, attack the opponent's pawns, and oppose the opponent's king.
 Draws: in the endgame, a game may be drawn because there are too few pieces on the board to allow a player to win. This is one of the main reasons for games to be drawn.

All endgame positions can be put into two camps. On the one hand are positions which may be won by force. On the other hand are positions which are drawn, or which should be drawn. The ones that are drawn for certain may be legally drawn (mate could not happen) or drawn by chess experience (no sane defence could lose). All endgames in master chess revolve around the borderline between winning and drawing. Generally, once a 'textbook' drawn position is reached the players will agree a draw; otherwise they play on.

Endgames can be studied according to the type of pieces that remain on board. For example, king and pawn endgames have only kings and pawns on one or both sides and the task of the stronger side is to promote one of the pawns. Other endings are studied according to the pieces on board other than kings, e.g. rook and pawn versus rook endgame.

Basic checkmates
Basic checkmates are positions in which one side has only a king and the other side has one or two pieces, enough to checkmate the opponent's king. They are usually learned at the beginner stage. Examples are mate with K+Q v K; K+R v K; K+2B v K; K+B&N v K (this one is quite difficult).

Technical endgames

Positions for which the result is certain, given best play, are technical positions. The best example is the analysis by computer chess engine of all possible positions with six pieces or fewer. This is called proof by exhaustion or exhaustive proof. It is logically the same as proving a mathematical theorem by proving the complete set of individual cases covered by the theorem.

Endgame tablebases
After the chess engine has analysed the positions, the results are put into an endgame tablebase for easy retrieval by users. Working with a database to discover previously unknown facts is called 'data mining'.

A number of interesting and surprising facts have indeed emerged. For example, For all three- to five-piece endgames and pawnless six-piece endgames, a complete list of mutual zugzwangs has been tabulated and published.

Another case is the longest sequence of moves to reach a definite result, called 'Depth to conversion'. In May 2006, Bourzutschky and Konoval discovered a KQN vs KRBN position with an astonishing DTC of 517 moves.

References

Chess

Chess endgame


The foramen magnum is one of several holes in the base of the skull. Normally the spinal cord is attached to it.
The Foramen Magnum is the largest aperture in the primate body. This hole is located in the base of the human skull as part of the occipital bone, back of the monkey skull and in between those locations for apes. It is directly correlated with locomotion ( Humans are bipedal, monkeys quadrupedal and apes are knuckle walkers. )

Head (body part)

Foramen magnum


A triclinic crystal is shaped almost like a rectangle. It is slightly bent, though. Copper sulfate makes triclinic crystals. It is the least symmetric (meaning that both sides are not very similar).

. In the triclinic system, the crystal is described by vectors of unequal length, as in the orthorhombic system.

Chemistry
Minerals

Triclinic


The one-inch boy, or Issun-bōshi, is a character in a Japanese fairy tale.

The story begins with an old, childless couple who live alone. The elderly woman wishes for a child, even though she's old. Eventually, a son was born to them, but their son was only an inch (2.5 centimetres) tall. They named the miniature child Issun-bōshi. The old couple takes good care of him even though he is small. One day, Issun finds out he will never grow, so he goes on a trip to seek his place in the world. He thinks he might become a good warrior, so Issun-bōshi is given a sewing needle for a sword, a soup bowl for a boat, and chopsticks for oars.

He sails down river to the city, where he asks for a job with the government and goes to the home of a rich daimyo (lord), whose daughter is an attractive princess. They say no because he is so tiny, but give him a job entertaining the princess. While they travel together, they are attacked by a big monster that swallows Issun-boshi. The boy defeats the monster by pricking him from within with his needle/sword. The monster spits out Issun-boshi and drops a magical Uchide's Mallet as he runs away. As a reward for his bravery, the princess uses the power of the mallet to make him grow. Issun-bōshi and the princess stay friends and get married later.

Fairies

One-inch boy


Lojze Grozde was a Slovenian student who was killed by partisans during World War II.  His death is recognised as martyrdom by the Catholic Church.  He was beatified on June 13, 2010.

Early life
Grozde was born on May 27, 1923 in the village of Gorenje Vodale, Tržišče  near Mokronog in Lower Carniola, Slovenia.
He was an illegitimate child. When he was four years old, his mother married. His stepfather chased him away each time he wanted to see his mother. Later, because Lojze was a good pupil, the stepfather became friendlier towards him, and so he remained at the house and his aunt took care of him. She saw to his schooling and sent him to a school in Ljubljana, where she was working as a servant. Some benefactors helped her support her nephew. He stayed at the Marijanišče boarding school and attended Classical Secondary School (Klasična gimnazija) in Ljubljana. There he was an outstanding student; but found time for literary creativity too and so became poet and writer. He was a member of Catholic Action  and a member of the Marian Congregation. Towards the end of his high schooling World War II was approaching. Circumstances were becoming increasingly strained. This was also the time when Lojze had to make a decision about his vocation. He sought his path in life through meditation and learning, in deep prayer, and in apostolic work for others.

Death

During his summer vacation of 1942 he did not go home because there was a lot of violence and it was not easy to travel. It was only for New Year 1943 that he decided to visit his relatives. He asked for a permit to travel home. First he visited a friend of his at the village of Struge. On 1 January 1943, the first Friday, he attended mass at the monastery at Stična, where he received communion for the last time in his young life; then travelled by train from Ivančna Gorica to Trebnje, where he found he could not travel further because the rails had been destroyed. He decided to continue to Mirna on foot, and on the way he rode in a cart. By the first house at Mirna he had to get out of the cart because a partisan guard seized and interrogated him. On him they found a devotional book, The Imitation of Christ by Thomas a Kempis and a booklet on Our Lady of Fatima. He was taken to a nearby inn and interrogated, tortured, and killed. Three hours earlier the seminarian Janez Hočevar, who wanted to visit his relatives in nearby Šentrupert, had been also shot. Lojze Grozde was suspected of being an informant; the communists saw in him the mentality that they deprecated and persecuted.

Soon rumors spread about cruel way the Tone Tomšič Partisan Brigade, which had conquered Mirna, celebrated the New Year.
Some others maintain that Grozde was not tortured.
Other sources state that he was tortured.

On 23 February 1943 the fate of Lojze Grozde was partly revealed, indicating that he had been tortured. Schoolchildren picking snowdrops found his corpse. Although there were traces of torture on his body, the corpse itself was uncorrupted. His body was taken to nearby Šentrupert, where a committee made a report. The body of Lojze Grozde was buried at the cemetery in  Šentrupert because it was impossible to take it to his home parish of Tržišče under the difficult circumstances of those days. The news of the violent torture and death of this innocent student struck fear among people and shocked the students in Ljubljana.

Beatification
On the 50th anniversary of the death of Lojze Grozde, the Archdiocese of Ljubljana started a process to recognize his martyrdom and also his beatification and canonization. When Pope John Paul II visited Slovenia for the first time in 1996, he mentioned Lojze Grozde twice. He said, "The servant of God Lojze Grozde is just one of innumerable innocent victims of Communism that raise the palm of martyrdom as an indelible memory and admonition. He was a disciple of Christ." Pope Benedict XVI said that "saints are not the past, but they represent the present and the future of the Church and society. They fully realized love in truth, which is the highest value in Christian life; their figures are like prisms that in various casts reflect the unique light of Christ."

On March 27, 2010 the news came from Rome that Pope Benedict XVI had affirmed the martyrdom of Lojze Grozde. Thus a solemn beatification is allowed that took place at the Slovenian eucharistic congress in Celje on June 13, 2010.
In his introduction to the biography of Lojze Grozde by Anton Strle, who is also a candidate for sainthood, Taras Kermauner wrote: "Grozde combines the ardour and apostolate of Friderik Baraga, the asceticism and suffering of Janez Frančišek Gnidovec, a gift for organization, and the Slovenian national consciousness of Blessed Anton Martin Slomšek ... He symbolizes the entire martyrdom suffered by Christians and Catholic Slovenians during World War II and afterwards for their affiliation to their faith ... His personality should be returned to the common Slovenian consciousness of heroes that have been praised and elevated to the first plane as the only models. Today a man like Grozde is needed as our model – a martyr, a saint. Not a man of aggressive military action thinking he will put forward God with arms and the blood of other or foreign people ... I do not fear to write that Grozde belongs among the greatest young Slovenians; that his attitude is fitting and most precious."

Film and TV
 Moj glas zliva se v prošnjo (My voice melts together in supplication - Slovenian) Documental Emission – Film on RTV Slovenia-1, Programm One. Speaks Archbishop and Metropolite from Belgrade Stanislav Hočevar, Jesuit Miha Žužek and others.

References

Literature
 Duhovni koledarček 1944, Sestavil župnik Gregor Mali, Ljubljana, Knjižice Nr. 239/240 from 1 December 1943.
 Narte Velikonja, Malikovanje zločina, in: Wikivir.
 Anton Strle, Slovenski mučenec Lojze Grozde, Založba Knjižice, Ljubljana 1991.
 Milanka Dragar: ZVEST KRIŽANEMU, Knjiga o Grozdetu, Ljubljana 2010, Založba Dragar, 518 pages, .
 Anton Strle: Un martyr des temps modernes. Aloïs Grozdé, 1923-1943, Paris 1957
 Miroslav Slana:Slovenski sij svetosti. Mladi mučenec Lojze Grozde, Maribor 2001 .
 Anton Pust, Zdravko Reven, Božidar Slapšak, Palme mučeništva: Ubiti in pomorjeni slovenski duhovniki, redovniki in bogoslovci in nekateri verni laiki, Celje 1995. 447 sites. -
 Papež Janez Pavel II. v Sloveniji, Bog blagoslovi predrago Slovenijo, Edition Družina, 160 pages, Ljubljana 1996,

Other websites
 Saints-SQPN-com: Blessed Lojze Grozde
 Diocese Novo mesto
 Dnevnik, Internet, liberal daily newspaper
 Internet of Christian youth
 Moj glas zliva se v prošnjo – Documental emission, RTV Slovenija

Gallery

1923 births
1943 deaths
Yugoslavian poets
Roman Catholic martyrs
Murder victims
Slovenian people
Beatified people

Lojze Grozde


Abele Rizieri Ferrari (May 12, 1890 – November 29, 1922), better known by the pen name Renzo Novatore, was an Italian individualist anarchist, illegalist and anti-fascist poet, philosopher and militant, now mostly known for his posthumously published book Toward the Creative Nothing (Verso il nulla creatore) and associated with ultra-modernist trends of futurism. His thought was influenced by Max Stirner, Friedrich Nietzsche, Georges Palante, Oscar Wilde, Henrik Ibsen, Arthur Schopenhauer and Charles Baudelaire.

Biography

Background
Abele Ricieri Ferrari was born in Arcola, Liguria, Italy on May 12, 1890 in a poor peasant family. He did not adjust to school discipline and quit in the first year never coming back after that. While he worked in his father's farm, he self-educated himself with an emphasis on poetry and philosophy. Around his town, he was surrounded by a vibrant anarchist scene which he started to come close to.

Writing and action
He discovered Max Stirner, Errico Malatesta, Peter Kropotkin, Henrik Ibsen, and  Friedrich Nietzsche, whom Novatore often quoted. From 1908 on he embraced individualist anarchism. In 1910, he was charged with the burning of a local church and spent three months in prison, but his participation in the fire was never proven. A year later, he went on the lam for several months because the police wanted him for theft and robbery. On September 30, 1911, the police arrested him for vandalism. He justified refusal of work and he thought, in his personal philosophy of life, that he had the right to expropriate from the rich what he needed for his daily survival, and using force wasn't a problem for him.

In 1914, he began to write for anarchist papers. He was drafted in 1912 but quickly discharged for unknown causes. As the Great War approached he deserted his regiment on April 26, 1918 and was sentenced to death by a military tribunal for desertion and high treason on October 31. He left his village and fled, propagating the desertion from the Army and the armed uprising against the state. Novatore was married with two children at the time and when his younger son died in the last months of 1918, Novatore came back to his home, risking arrest only to give him a last goodbye.

He was involved in an anarcho-futurist collective in La Spezia which he led (along with Auro d'Arcola) to be active in the militant anti-fascist Arditi del Popolo. He was close friends with Enzo Martucci and Bruno Filippi. Renzo Novatore wrote for many anarchist papers (Cronaca Libertaria, Il Libertario, Iconoclastal, Gli Scamiciati, Nichilismo, Pagine Libere) where he debated with other anarchists (among them Camillo Berneri). He published a magazine, Vertice, which has been lost apart from few articles. Novatore collaborated in the individualist anarchist journal Iconoclasta! alongside the young stirnerist illegalist Bruno Filippi.

Death
In May 1919, the city of La Spezia fell under control of a self-proclaimed Revolutionary Committee and he fought alongside it. On June 30, 1919, Novatore was hidden in a hut in the country near the city of Sarzana. A farmer told the police about him and he was sentenced to ten years in prison, but was released in a general amnesty a few months later. By the early 1920s Italy was about to be taken over by Fascism. He decided to go underground and in 1922 he joined the gang of the famous robber of anarchist inspiration: .

He was killed in an ambush by carabinieri in Teglia, near Genoa, on November 29, 1922 while with Pollastro but Pollastro managed to escape. On Novatore's body the detectives found some false documents, a Browning gun with two full magazines, one hand grenade and a ring with a secret container filled with a lethal dose of cyanide.

Worldview

Novatore talked of the "heroic beauty of the anti-collectivist and creative I" which is beyond both bourgeois and proletarian manners and morality. He spoke of his individual situation as living "In the Reign of the Phantoms" recalling Stirner. He summarizes his view of his situation as existing among social conformism saying "The world is one pestulant church covetous and slimy where all have an idol to fetishistically adore and an altar on which to sacrifice themself."

In this way he speaks of religion saying "if you will patiently await the desolate calvary to then nail yourself on the cross, becoming the image of ME that is the ManGod, you will be the perfect human creature worthy of sitting at the right of my father who is in the kingdom of heaven.". As far as democracy and the legacy of the Enlightenment he says "the French Revolution says to you: I have proclaimed the rights of man. If you will enter devoutly in the symbolic cloister of human social justice to sublimate and humanize through the moral canon of social life, you will be a citizen and I will give you the rights I proclaimed to man." "Progress (?) and Civilization (?), Religion (?) and the Ideal (?), have closed life in a mortal circle where the phantoms most grim have erected their viscid reign. Time to end it! We must break the circle violently and exit".

As an exit of this situation he proclaims "revolution is the fire of our will and a need of our solitary minds; it is an obligation of the libertarian aristocracy. To create new ethical values. To create new aesthetic values. To communalize material wealth. To individualize spiritual wealth. Because we-violent celebralists and passional sentimentalists at the same time-understand and know that revolution is a necessity of the silent sorrow that suffers at the bottom and a need of the free spirits who suffer in the heights." He summarizes the three options in life as "The stream of slavery, the stream of tyranny, the stream of freedom! With revolution, the last of these streams needs to burst upon the other two and overwhelm them. It needs to create spiritual beauty, teach the poor the shame of their poverty, and the rich the shame of their wealth."

Nevertheless, Novatore had an individualist permanent conception of revolution which he believed could at some point come into conflict with the masses. He wrote, "You are waiting for the revolution! Very well! My own began a long time ago! When you are ready – God, what an endless wait! – it won't nauseate me to go along the road awhile with you! But when you stop, I will continue on my mad and triumphant march toward the great and sublime conquest of Nothing!". Alongside this, he manifests an insurrectionary point of view such as when he manifests that "Every society you build will have its fringes, and on the fringes of every society, heroic and restless vagabonds will wander, with their wild and virgin thoughts, only able to live by preparing ever new and terrible outbreaks of rebellion!".

He says he views "Only ethical and spiritual wealth" as "invulnerable.
This is the true property of individuals. The rest no!
The rest is vulnerable! And all that is vulnerable will be violated!" Novatore sees thoses similar to him as "anarchists. And individualists, and nihilists, and aristocrats." and as "the lovers of every miracle, the promoters of every prodigy, the creators of every wonder!"; "the enemies of all material domination and all spiritual leveling."

He adheres to nihilism but denies "christian nihilism" as he sees it denies life. He says instead "Since the only serious people are those who know how to be actively engaged laughing." and so the individualists must go "Forward, for the destruction of the lie and of the phantoms! Forward, for the complete conquest of individuality and of Life!". Novatore described himself as an anarchist and defined that term as follows;

Novatore is critical of the individualism of Herbert Spencer which he thinks "it is true that he fights against the state, but he fights against it only because the state as it is doesn't function as he would like". He also sees that Spencer "does not penetrate or understand the mysterious, aristocratic, vagabond, rebel individual!".

And so he is critical of thinkers such as "Darwin, Comte, Spencer and Marx" which he sees as sociologists who will tend to not being "able to understand the varied, the particular,... sacrifices the one or the other on the altar of the universal." Instead he takes sides with authors who are for him "the giants of Art and Thought like Nietzsche, Stirner, Ibsen, Wilde, Zola, Huysmans, Verlaine, Mallarmé...".

Influence
The notorious Italo-Argentinian anarchist Severino Di Giovanni dedicated a poem to Novatore shortly after knowing about his death. Later he will establish the "Anarcho-individualist Group Renzo Novatore" which enters the "Italian Anti-fascist Alliance" in Argentina.

Renzo Novatore has received attention recently in post-left anarchy and insurrectionary anarchism as can be seen in the writings of Wolfi Landstreicher. In his introduction to "Towards the Creative nothing" by Renzo Novatore, Landstreicher writes "It is difficult to find anarchist works in English that are at the same time "individualist" and explicitly revolutionary, that emphasize the centrality of the aim of individual self-determination to a revolution that will "communalize material wealth" as it will "individualize spiritual wealth". For this and other reasons I chose to translate Toward the Creative Nothing by Renzo Novatore and publish several of his shorter pieces." In an article called "Whither now? Some thoughts on creating anarchy" Wolfi Landstreicher writing as Feral Faun says "Then we can cease to be merely on the margins of society and will each, as unique wild beings, become the center of an insurrectionary project that may destroy civilization and create a world in which we freely live, relate and create as our unique desires move us. We will become – to quote Renzo Novatore again – "a shadow eclipsing any form of society which can exist under the sun."

Bibliography
  (The Anarchist Library)

See also
Individualist anarchism in Europe
Anarchism in Italy
Bruno Filippi
Biennio rosso
Illegalism
Post-left anarchism
Anarchism and Friedrich Nietzsche

References

Sources

External links

  NovAtore.it Sito dedicato alla memoria di Renzo Novatore mostly in Italian with a small section in English and includes many of Novatore's works in English
Archive of Renzo Novatore´s writings in english at the Anarchist Library
"Twilight Dance" by Renzo Novatore a long poem
"The expropiator" by Renzo Novatore an essay in praise of illegalism and individual reclamation

1890 births
1922 deaths
20th-century Italian philosophers
Anti–World War I activists
Critics of work and the work ethic
Egoist anarchists
Futurist writers
Illegalists
Individualist anarchists
Insurrectionary anarchists
Italian anarchists
Italian atheists
Italian anti-fascists
Italian male poets
People from the Province of La Spezia
20th-century Italian poets
20th-century Italian male writers

Renzo Novatore


The Maryland Campaign (September 4, 1862–September 20, 1862), also called the Antietam Campaign, was a series of four battles in West Virginia and Maryland initiated by Confederate General Robert E. Lee. It was considered as one of the major turning points in the Civil War for the Union. The goal was for Lee's army to invade the Northern states of Maryland and Pennsylvania. That way he could threaten the cities of Washington, D.C. and Baltimore. By a series of decisive victories Lee thought that the South could gain recognition from England and France and get them to support the Southern cause. The hope was if Lee was victorious, it might cause Abraham Lincoln to sue for peace.

Background
During the summer of 1862, the hopes of the North that the rebellion could be easily crushed were quickly fading. In July, Major General George B. McClellan's defeated attempt to capture the Southern capital at Richmond, Virginia failed. Near the end of August, the Second Battle of Bull Run was another Confederate victory. The Union armies retreated back to Washington, D.C. only a few miles away. In the West, Confederate offensives were proving to be successful. This was causing poor morale among the Union army soldiers.

Battles
Lee divided his Army of Northern Virginia into five smaller armies or columns. Three he sent with General "Stonewall" Jackson to attack and hold Harpers Ferry. This way Jackson could control the Shenandoah Valley.

Harpers Ferry (September 12-15, 1862)

The town of Harpers Ferry, Virginia (now West Virginia), sits at the confluence of the Potomac and Shenandoah Rivers. It is surrounded by high cliffs on three sides making it nearly impossible to defend. Col. Dixon S. Miles, Union commander at Harpers Ferry, kept most the troops near the town instead of taking up commanding positions on the surrounding heights. Jackson put artillery on all the heights and bombarded the garrison. Miles decided to surrender the more than 12,000 men. As he debated with his officers over the decision, Miles was struck by a shell that shattered his left leg, a wound that proved fatal. Jackson then took possession of Harper's Ferry before joining the rest of Lee's army at Sharpsburg, He left General A.P. Hill's division at the garrison to guard the prisoners.

South Mountain (September 14, 1862)

This skirmish took place in Maryland. While most of Lee's army was attacking Harpers Ferry, the rest moved into Maryland with Major General George B. McClellan's Army of the Potomac closely behind them. At Frederick, Maryland the Union army caught up with Lee and the fighting began on South Mountain. It was a natural formation that separated the Shenandoah and Cumberland Valleys from eastern Maryland. Several battles were fought that day over possession of South Mountain. The Confederates were driven back with a large number of casualties. McClellan could have destroyed Lee's army but he waited giving Lee the time to regroup.

Antietam (September 16-18, 1862)

The Battle of Antietam, also called the Battle of Sharpsburg, was not only the bloodiest day of the American Civil War, it was the single bloodiest day in American history. Most of the fighting occurred on September 17, 1862 between Antietam Creek and the town of Sharpsburg, Maryland. The events leading to the battle were somewhat strange. Earlier, a copy of Order No. 191 had been used to bundle a Confederate officer's cigars. It was dropped and found by Union soldiers. They were taken to McClellan who now knew exactly what Lee's battle plan was. However, a Southern sympathizer told Lee that McClellan had a copy of the order. So McClellan's advantage was lost. Because McClellan took his time after the Battle of South Mountain, Lee regrouped around Sharpsburg. The battles started on the morning of the 16th. By evening, there was still no clear-cut winner. Both sides were badly bloodied.

Shepherdstown  (September 19-20, 1862)

Also called the Battle of Botelier's Ford, this battle took place in Jefferson County, West Virginia. As Lee's army retreated south, Union troops under Major General Fitz John Porter's caught up with Lee's rearguard. While troops were still crossing the Potomac they were attacked by General William Pendleton's Confederates. This discouraged the Union command from following the Confederate retreat any further.

A little over a month later, President Lincoln relieved McClellan of command for failing to follow and destroy Lee's army. Major General Ambrose E. Burnside took over command of the Army of the Potomac.

Notes

References

Other websites
 "To Antietam Creek: The Maryland Campaign of 1862" by Mr. D. Scott Hartwig; YouTube
 Why did Lee Enter Maryland?
 Maryland Civil War Trails

September 1862 events

Maryland Campaign


Classics or classical studies is a branch of the humanities which studies classical antiquity. It includes many fields of study such as history, philology, philosophy, history, art, languages, literature, and archaeology. In the Western world, it focuses on Mediterranean cultures such as ancient Greece and ancient Rome. A person who works in classical studies is called a classicist. The study of classical literature was traditionally the main focus of the humanities.

Humanities

Classics


Data migration is a term computer scientists and economists use when they speak about moving data from one location to another, one format to another, or one application to another. It can also mean that files, or folders with documents, or databases are moved from one server to another. This might be that because several databases are merged into one, or because the databases are reorganized.

It is usually an automated process, supported by data migration tools. If the data structure is complex, the migration may be separated in several phases that are carried out one after the other.

Computer science
Migration

Data migration


User assistance is a general term for guided assistance to a user of a software product. The phrase incorporates all forms of help available to a user. Assistance can also automatically perform procedures or step users through the procedure, depending on the question that the user asked. The term is broader than online help, and includes procedural and tutorial information.

What it does

User assistance provides information to help a person to interact with software. This can include describing the user interface, but also focuses on how to help the user to best apply the software capabilities to their needs. User assistance can be considered a component of the broader category of user experience.

Devices

User assistance employs a number of devices including help, wizards, tutorials, printed manuals (and their PDF equivalents), and user interface text. User assistance professionals also contribute to enterprise knowledge bases and content management systems.

Skills required

Effective user assistance development requires a variety of communication skills. These include writing, editing, task analysis, and subject-matter expert (SME) interviewing. Since the user assistance profession is directly involved with software development, the discipline often requires an understanding of UI design, usability testing, localization, testing, quality assurance, instructional design, scripting or programming, and accessibility.

Forms

Instruction manual

For information related to this topic, see Instruction manual (computer and video games)

A traditional form of user assistance is a user manual, which is distributed either with the product in paper form or electronically. Typical features of a user manual include installation procedures, a guide to how to use the software, as well as a disclaimer stating the licensing status of the software. Details of a helpline may also be available.

Online help

For more information on this topic, see Online help

Helplines

For information related to this topic, see Helpline

See also
User interface
Internationalization and localization

References

Technical communication
Assistance

User assistance


Lea Fredrika Ahlborn (née Lundgren) (18 February 1826 – 13 November 1897) was a famous Swedish artist. She was a member of the Swedish Royal Academy of Arts, and the first woman to be appointed royal printmaker. The position of royal printmaker also made her the first female official in Sweden.

Life
She was daughter to Ludvig Lundgren, who was a printmaker, and she early decided, that she wanted to become a printmaker too. In 1849, she, as well as Amalia Lindegren and Agnes Börjesson, became one of the four women who were given permission to study art at the Swedish Royal Academy of Arts.

In 1851, she made a study-trip to Paris with her teacher Carl Gustaf Qvarnström and her brother Pehr Henrik.

In 1855, she was appointed royal printmaker, and was also elected as a member in the Royal Swedish Academy of Arts. She kept herself updated in everything regarding her work, and was given assignments from the Swedish Academy, the science academy and the royal academy Pro Patria. She made the medal-portraits to the celebration of the anniversary of the king and queen, and she was hired by the US government to make the medal of George Washington at the centenary (hundred years anniversary) of the end of the American War for Independence in 1883. In 1892, she was given the medal Illis Quorum by the king.

Family
Her sister, Carolina Weidenhayn, (1822-1902), became the first professional female xylographer, who after she studied in Paris 1858-1867, became an instructor at the great technical school Tekniska Skolan in 1859-1881.

Sources
 Österberg, Carin et al., Svenska kvinnor: föregångare, nyskapare. Lund: Signum 1990. ()

1826 births
1897 deaths
Swedish artists
Printmakers

Lea Ahlborn


An alpha helix (α-helix) is a twisted part of a protein. It is one of the two most common parts of the secondary structure, or shape, of a protein. The other is the beta sheet. An alpha helix is created by alternating groups of atoms. There is a carbonyl group, created by a carbon atom double bonded to an oxygen atom, and an amine group, created by a nitrogen atom bonded to a hydrogen atom. Each section containing one of each of these groups is called a residue, a general term for a small part of a molecule. Each amine group forms a hydrogen bond with the carbonyl group four residues earlier. The alpha helix consists of 3.6 residues per turn. All hydrogen bonds face in the same direction. If two or more alpha helices come together, they become a tertiary structure. (Ex. Five alpha helices arranged into a barrel shape)

Alpha helices in disease
A prion is a protein that causes disease by changing the shape of another protein. It does this by changing some of the alpha helices, which are more common in normal cells, to beta sheets, which are more common in prions.

Biochemistry

Alpha helix


A phototube or photoelectric cell is a type of gas-filled or vacuum tube that is sensitive to light.  Such a tube is more correctly called a 'photoemissive cell' to distinguish it from photovoltaic or photoconductive cells.  Phototubes were previously more widely used but are now replaced in many applications by solid state photodetectors.    The photomultiplier tube is one of the most sensitive light detectors, and is still widely used in physics research.

Operating principles
Phototubes operate according to the photoelectric effect: Incoming photons strike a photocathode, knocking electrons out of its surface, which are attracted to an anode. Thus current is dependent on the frequency and intensity of incoming photons. Unlike photomultiplier tubes, no amplification takes place, so the current through the device is typically of the order of a few microamperes.

The light wavelength range over which the device is sensitive depends on the material used for the photoemissive cathode. A caesium-antimony cathode gives a device that is very sensitive in the violet to ultra-violet region with sensitivity falling off to blindness to red light.  Caesium on oxidised silver gives a cathode that is most sensitive to infra-red to red light, falling off towards blue, where the sensitivity is low but not zero.

Vacuum devices have a near constant anode current for a given level of illumination relative to anode voltage.  Gas-filled devices are more sensitive, but the frequency response to modulated illumination falls off at lower frequencies compared to the vacuum devices.  The frequency response of vacuum devices is generally limited by the transit time of the electrons from cathode to anode.

Applications
One major application of the phototube was the reading of optical sound tracks for projected films. Phototubes were used in a variety of light-sensing applications until some were superseded by photoresistors and photodiodes.

References

Optical devices
Sensors
Vacuum tubes

Phototube


A Holding company is a company, which has the purpose of owning stock  (or shares) of other companies. In most cases, such companies do not sell products or services, they manage the companies they (partly) own. Probably one of the best known holding companies was the "Standard Oil of New Jersey", founded in 1889, which is called ExxonMobil today.
In general, there are three forms:
 the holding company owns stock/shares of other companies; activities are limited to managing the companies.
 in addition to the above, the companies have a common management, which take the strategic decisions.
in addition to item 1, the management influences the distribution of capital to its daughter companies. The holding is mainly used for managing financial resources.

References

Companies

Holding company


A flair is the walkin surface o a room or vehicle. Flairs vary fae simple dirt in a cave tae mony-layered surfaces uisin modren technology. Flairs mey be stane, wid, bamboo, metal, or ony ither material that can hauld a person's wicht.

The levels o a biggin are eften referred tae as flairs altho a mair proper term is storey.

Flairs typically consist o a subflair fur support an a flair coverin uised tae gie a guid walkin surface. In modren biggins, the subflair eften hus electrical wirin, plumbin, an ither services biggit in. Acause flairs meet mony needs, some essential tae safety, flairs are biggit tae strict biggin codes in the first warld.

Biggin materials
Structural seestem

Flair


Motobi was an Italian motorcycle manufacturer in production between 1950 and 1977. The brand was revived by Austrian company Michael Leeb Trading GmbH in partnership with Demharter GmbH in 2010.

In 2010, as well as selling a range of  scooters, the brand provides sponsorship for the JiR motorcycle racing team in the Moto2 class.

Early history

Motobi was established in Pesaro, Italy in 1949, by Giuseppe Benelli, initially trading under the name Moto 'B' Pesaro. This was shortened to Motobi in the 1950s.
After a family disagreement in 1948, Giuseppe Benelli, one of the six brothers and an engineer of some talent, decided to go his own way. He stayed in Pesaro, but moved to separate premises. Giuseppe launched the Moto 'B' marque selling small two-stroke motorcycles and scooters. In 1953, Motobi introduced a 200cc horizontal two-stroke twin called the B200 Spring Lasting. Its innovative pressed steel frame and horizontal cylinder layout were to become the trademark for many future Motobi bikes. The B200 motor was a clean, streamlined, very modern appearing unit, which was soon nicknamed the "egg" for its distinctive shape. Giuseppe and his sons Luigi and Marco continued to work on improving Motobi products, and envisioned a four-stroke, single-cylinder variant of the B200. In late 1955, the two-stroke twin cylinder B200 was abandoned entirely, and two different new models, both called "Catria" were introduced, one at 125cc and the other at 175cc. Both were four-stroke four speed singles, designed by freelance engineer Piero Prampolini. These improved singles became the focus of Motobi production, beating Moto Aermacchi's 175cc Chimera (which had a similar horizontal single-cylinder engine configuration) to market by a year. Not long afterward, Giuseppe Benelli died, leaving the company in the hands of his two heirs. Once in charge of the company, they hired a young former racer and tuner named Primo Zanzani to develop the new Catria machine into a factory racing machine. Italian semi-professional road racing (called MSDS for Moto Sportive Derivate dalla Serie) and road hill climbing races were popular, and the tough little motorbike was soon earning a reputation among the Italian riders, who called it the "power egg". Bright decals lauding Motobi's racing championships started appearing on the little bikes' gas tanks, each version more colorful than the last. In America, where the Eisenhower-era economy was good, sales of motorcycles and other leisure products were booming. The Benelli company saw opportunity in the New World, and also right next door, under the roof of their little cousin, Motobi. Motobi was acquired by the larger Benelli company in 1962, a move that would not only bring the family back together under the Gruppo Benelli-Motobi name, but also swell the workforce to around 550 employees, and increase production to a notable 300 machines per day. Many of these machines were exported to the United States badged as Benelli models.

See also

List of Italian companies
List of motorcycle manufacturers

References

External links

Motobi history website
 OfficineBenelli-Mototeca Storica Marchigiana, Storia della MotoBi

Vehicle manufacturing companies established in 1949
Italian companies established in 1949
Defunct motorcycle manufacturers of Italy
Scooter manufacturers
Italian brands
Benelli (motorcycles)
Companies based in le Marche
Vehicle manufacturing companies disestablished in 1977
1977 disestablishments in Italy
Pesaro

Motobi


Philipp II (17 August 1501 in Hanau – 28 March 1529 in Hanau) was Count of Hanau-Münzenberg from 1512 until his death. He was the son of Count Reinhard IV and his wife, Katharina of Schwarzburg-Blankenburg.

Regency
Philipp II of Hanau-Münzenberg was only 11 years old when he inherited the county. A guardian and regent were needed for him and his seven years younger brother Balthasar. A regency council was installed by the Reichskammergericht at the recommendation of their mother, after she had consulted the lower nobility in the county. The council consisted initially of Philipp's mother and his great-uncle Count John V of Nassau-Siegen. Philipp's mother died in 1514 and John V was the sole regent until he died himself in 1516. After John's death, the Reichskammergericht appointed, at Philipp's recommendation, John's son, Count William I of Nassau-Siegen as regent. William held the regency for five years, until Philipp was declared an adult in 1521, at the age of 20.

Reign
During the regency, Hanau-Münzenberg joined the Wetterau Association of Imperial Counts.

The start of the Reformation fell during Philipp's reign. However, it hardly effected the county. The German Peasants' War also happened in this period, but it only sporadically came to riots in Hanau-Münzenberg. The Benedictine convent at Schlüchtern had to put itself under Philipp's protection, according to different sources either in Hanau or in Steinau an der Straße, when rebellious peasants were approaching from Fulda. There were incidents in other towns in the country, for example in Orb, Partenstein, Preungesheim, Bornheimerberg and Niederrodenbach. The St. Wolfgang monastery in the Bulau forest near Hanau was devastated.

In 1528, construction began of a new city wall surrounding Hanau. The city had grown outside its Medieval city wall and a new settlement had sprung into existence arounds today's Hospital street. The new wall would surround these newer parts of the city. It was the first implementation of a new defensive system designed by Albrecht Dürer. Construction took nearly 20 years. Simultaneously, the City Castle in Hanau was extended and strengthened. This project would take until 1560 to complete.

The potential existed for a dispute between Philipp II and his seven years younger brother Balthasar about whether to obey the primogeniture statue and to give Balthasar only an apanage or to divide the county. When Balthasar's twentieth birthday approached, the regency council decided to opt for primogeniture. A treaty to this affect was drafted. However, Philipp II died before the treaty was sealed. This created a legal problem when Balthasar wanted to take up the regency for Philipp's sons, since his renunciation of his right to inherit and to reign was included in this draft treaty.

Death
Philipp II, Count of Hanau-Münzenberg died on Easter Sunday of 1529, only 28 years old, leaving three surviving children and a pregnant widow. His funeral took place just one day later in the St. Mary's Church in Hanau, without any pump or circumstance, to spare his widow in her condition. The day after the funeral, she gave birth to his posthumous daughter Juliana.

During the almost 200 years that Hanau-Münzenberg existed, almost all counts died before their 30th birthday, leaving a minor to inherit the county. This is unlikely to be a coincidence, as it happened in nine successive generations. It suggests that the counts suffered from an inheritable disease, although it is unknown which disease that would be. The first of the nine counts to die early was Reinhard III.

Legacy
The new Hanau city gate was decorated with a portrait, carved in stone, of Philipp and Balthasar. The portrait was later put on display in the museum the Historical Society of Hanau. It was destroyed in a bomb attack on 19 May 1945, during World War II.

Marriage and issue

On 27 January 1523, Philipp II married Countess Juliana of Stolberg (15 February 1506 – 18 June 1580). They had five children:
 Reinhard (10 April 1524 – 12 April 1525)
 Katharina (1525–1581), married to Count Johann IV of Wied-Runkel
 Philipp III (1526–1561)
 Reinhard (1528–1554)
 Juliana (1529–1595), married with Thomas, Wild- and Rhinegrave of Salm-Kirburg, and after his death with Count Herman of Manderscheid-Blankenheim

After Philipp's death, Juliana married William I, Count of Nassau-Siegen and had twelve more children.

Ancestors

References
 Reinhard Dietrich: Die Landes-Verfaßung in dem Hanauischen. Die Stellung der Herren und Grafen in Hanau-Münzenberg aufgrund der archivalischen Quellen, vol. 34 in the series Hanauer Geschichtsblätter, Hanauer Geschichtsverein, Hanau, 1996,
 Rolf Glawischnig: Niederlande, Kalvinismus und Reichsgrafenstand 1559–1584. Nassau-Dillenburg unter Graf Johann VI., vol. 36 in Schriften des Hessischen Landesamtes für Geschichtliche Landeskunde Elwert, Marburg, 1973,
 Eduard Jacobs: Juliana von Stolberg, Ahnfrau des Hauses Nassau-Oranien. Nach ihrem Leben und ihrer geschichtlichen Bedeutung quellenmäßig dargestellt, Hendel, Wernigerode, 1889
 Eckhard Meise: Bernhard Hundeshagen – kein Denkmalschutz im Hanau des frühen 19. Jahrhunderts, in: Neues Magazin für hanauische Geschichte, 2006, ZDB-ID 535233-2, p. 3–61.
 Reinhard Suchier: Genealogie des Hanauer Grafenhauses, in: Reinhard Suchier (ed.): Festschrift des Hanauer Geschichtsvereins zu seiner fünfzigjährigen Jubelfeier am 27. August 1894, Heydt, Hanau 1894, p. 7–23.
 Karl Wolf: Die vormundschaftliche Regierung des Grafen Johann des älteren von Nassau-Dillenburg in der Grafschaft Hanau-Münzenberg, in: Neues Magazin für Hanauische Geschichte vol. 15, 1936, , p. 81–94 and vol. 16, 1937, p. 1–14.
 Ernst J. Zimmermann: Hanau Stadt und Land. Kulturgeschichte und Chronik einer fränkisch-wetterauischen Stadt und ehemaligen Grafschaft. Mit besonderer Berücksichtigung der älteren Zeit, 3rd extended edition, self-published, Hanau 1919, unaltered reprint: Peters, Hanau 1978,

Footnotes

Counts of Hanau-Münzenberg
1501 births
1529 deaths
16th-century German people

Philipp II, Count of Hanau-Münzenberg


The Narrows is the tidal strait splitting up the New York City boroughs of Staten Island and Brooklyn. It connects the Upper and Lower New York Bay and makes the channel where the Hudson River can empty into the Atlantic Ocean. It is believed that the Narrows were most likely formed after deposition of the Harbor Hill Moraine about 18,000 years ago just before to the end of the last ice age. Staten Island and Brooklyn used to be connected and the Hudson River emptied into the ocean through the Raritan River and taking course through present day northern New Jersey. A build up of water in the Upper Bay allowed the river to break through to form the Narrows less than 12,000 to 13,000 years ago as it exists today.

The first recorded European entrance into the Narrows was in 1524 by Florentine explorer Giovanni da Verrazzano, who set anchor in the strait and was greeted by a group of Lenape in canoes. A 1964 bridge across the Narrows was named for him.

References

Staten Island
Straits
Brooklyn

The Narrows


Thor (Old Norse: Þórr) is the god of thunder and lightning in Norse mythology, associated with strength, storms, hallowing and fertility. He is the son of Odin and Jörð, the personification of the Earth, and is the strongest of the Æsir.

The champion of Asgard, Thor is said to protect both it and Midgard from the likes of the jǫtnar, a race of beings native to Jötunheimr. He is known in Old English as Þunor (Thunor) and in Old High German as Donar (runic þonar ᚦᛟᚾᚨᚱ), all of which stem from the  Proto-Germanic *Þunraz, meaning "thunder".

The modern English weekday Thursday (from Old English Þūnresdæg, "Thunor's [Thor's] day") bears the god's name.

Family
Thor is the son of Odin, chief of the Æsir, and Jörð, the living personification of the Earth. He is the eldest of Odin's sons and is the half-brother of Baldr, Höðr, Víðarr, and Váli.

He is married to the golden-haired goddess Sif, with whom he has a daughter, Þrúðr. With his jötunn lover Járnsaxa, Thor has two sons, Móði and Magni. He has a stepson, Ullr, who is Sif's son by a previous marriage.

Possessions
According to writings known as sagas, Thor wielded a short-handled war hammer, Mjolnir. It was fashioned for him by the dwarven brothers Eitri and Brokkr, and is said to be the most powerful weapon in all the Nine Worlds, capable of crushing even mountains. When Thor threw the hammer, it magically returned to the god's hand.

Other attributes of Thor include a pair of gauntlets known as Járngreipr, which he is required to wear in order to wield Mjölnir, a belt, Megingjörð, which doubles his strength when he wears it, and a staff, Gríðarvölr, which, along with Járngreipr, was given to him by the jötunn Gríðr. Thor was believed to travel in a chariot drawn by two goats named Tanngrisnir and Tanngnjóstr.
Norse gods and goddesses
Gods and goddesses of thunder

Thor


White Cane Safety Day is a national observance in the United States, celebrated on October 15 of each year since 1964. The date is set aside to celebrate the achievements of people who are blind or visually impaired and the important symbol of blindness and tool of independence, the white cane.

On October 6, 1964, a joint resolution of the U.S. Congress, , was signed into law as , and codified at . This resolution authorized the President of the United States to proclaim October 15 of each year as "White Cane Safety Day".

President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the first White Cane Safety Day proclamation within hours of the passage of the joint resolution.

In 2011, White Cane Safety Day was also named Blind Americans Equality Day by President Barack Obama.

Notes

External links

 White Cane Safety Day: A Symbol of Independence (article from the National Federation of the Blind web site)
 White Cane Safety Day celebration website
 36 U.S.C. § 142
 Special Postal Cover and Cancellation on occasion of 2009 International White Cane Safety Day, 15 Oct 2009, launched at GPO Bangalore

Sample proclamations

 2005
 2007
 2009

Public holidays in the United States
Accessibility
Blindness equipment
October observances
Disability in the United States

White Cane Safety Day


The NES Zapper is a light gun accessory for the Nintendo Entertainment System game console. It was released with the console's launch in North America in 1985. It allows players to aim at the screen and hit targets such as ducks, clay pigeons, and criminals. To hit targets, players have to point the device at the television and pull the trigger. It is used on supported NES games such as Duck Hunt and Wild Gunman. It looks like a futuristic science fiction ray gun with the colors matching the NES console. The Zapper can only be used on CRT displays and will not work on LCDs, plasma displays or other flat panel displays due to display lag.

Nintendo hardware

NES Zapper


Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 548 U.S. 557 (2006), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that military commissions set up by the Bush administration to try detainees at Guantanamo Bay violated both the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) and the Geneva Conventions ratified by the U.S.

Hamdan raises several legal issues: Whether the United States Congress may pass legislation preventing the Supreme Court from hearing the case of an accused combatant before his military commission takes place; whether the special military commissions established by the executive branch violated federal law (including the UCMJ and treaty obligations); and whether courts can enforce the articles of the Geneva Conventions.

After hearing oral arguments on March 28, 2006, on June 29, 2006, the Court issued a 5–3 decision holding that it had jurisdiction; that the administration lacked either the constitutional power or congressional authorization to establish these particular military commissions; that, absent such authority, the military commissions had to comply with the "ordinary laws" of the U.S. and of war, which include the UCMJ and the Geneva Conventions incorporated therein; and that Hamdan's trial, having violated the rights and procedures under both bodies of law, was illegal.

Background

The plaintiff was Salim Ahmed Hamdan, a citizen of Yemen who worked as a bodyguard and chauffeur for Osama bin Laden. Hamdan had formerly worked in Afghanistan on an agricultural project that Bin Laden had developed. Hamdan was captured by militia forces during the invasion of Afghanistan in the fall of 2001 and turned over to the United States. In 2002, he was sent by the U.S. to its new Guantanamo Bay detention camp at its naval base in Cuba.

In July 2004, Hamdan was charged with conspiracy to commit terrorism, and the Bush administration made arrangements to try him before a military commission, established by the Department of Defense under Military Commission Order No. 1 of March 21, 2002. He was assigned a defense counsel, LCDR Charles D. Swift from the Navy JAG, who with a legal team filed a petition for Hamdan in US District Court for a writ of habeas corpus, challenging the constitutionality of the military commission, and saying that it lacked the protections required under the Geneva Conventions and United States Uniform Code of Military Justice.

Following the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld (2004), which established that detainees had the right of habeas corpus to challenge their detention, Hamdan was granted a review before the Combatant Status Review Tribunal. It determined that he was eligible for detention by the United States as an enemy combatant or person of interest.

The defendants in this case included many United States government officials allegedly responsible for Hamdan's detention; the short name of the case includes only the first-named defendant, then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.

District and Appeals Court rulings
After reviewing Hamdan's habeas petition, Judge James Robertson of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia ruled in the detainee's favor. He found that the United States could not hold a military commission unless it was first shown that the detainee was not a prisoner of war.

On July 15, 2005, a United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit three-judge panel: A. Raymond Randolph, John Roberts and Stephen F. Williams, unanimously reversed the decision of the District Court. Judge Randolph, who wrote the decision, cited the following reasons for the legality of the military commission:
 Military commissions are legitimate forums to try enemy combatants because they have been approved by Congress.
 The Geneva Convention is a treaty between nations and as such it does not confer individual rights and remedies.
 Even if the Geneva Convention could be enforced in U.S. courts, it would not be of assistance to Hamdan at the time because the war against al-Qaeda was not between two countries, and the Convention guarantees only a certain standard of judicial procedure—a "competent tribunal"—without speaking to the jurisdiction in which the prisoner must be tried.
 Under the terms of the Geneva Convention, al Qaeda and its members are not covered.
 Congress authorized such activity by statute.
 The judicial branch of the United States government cannot enforce the Convention, thus invalidating Hamdan's argument that he cannot be tried until after his prisoner-of-war status is determined.

Supreme Court decision

On November 7, 2005, the Supreme Court granted certiorari to hear the case. The petition was filed on behalf of Hamdan by Neal Katyal of Georgetown University Law Center and Lt. Commander Charles Swift of the U.S. Navy, an alumnus of Seattle University School of Law. The Seattle law firm Perkins Coie provided the additional legal counsel for Hamdan.

The case was argued before the court on March 28, 2006. Katyal argued on behalf of Hamdan, and Paul Clement, the Solicitor General of the United States, argued on behalf of the government. Chief Justice Roberts recused himself because he had previously ruled on this case as part of the three judge panel on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Critics called for Justice Antonin Scalia to recuse himself, since he had made allegedly improper comments about the decision of the case prior to hearing oral arguments ("I'm not about to give this man who was captured in a war a full jury trial. I mean it's crazy") but he chose not to do so.

The Supreme Court announced its decision on June 29, 2006. The Court reversed the ruling of the Court of Appeals, holding that President George W. Bush did not have authority to set up the war crimes tribunals and finding the special military commissions illegal under both military justice law and the Geneva Conventions.

Stevens' opinion for the Court

Associate Justice John Paul Stevens wrote the opinion for the Court, which commanded a majority only in part.

The Stevens opinion began with the issue of jurisdiction, denying the U.S. government's motion to dismiss under Section 1005 of the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 (DTA), which gave the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals "exclusive" jurisdiction to review decisions of cases being tried before military commissions. Congress did not include language in the DTA that might have precluded Supreme Court jurisdiction, making the government's argument to the Court unpersuasive. The government's argument that Schlesinger v. Councilman 420 U.S. 738 (1975) precludes Supreme Court review was similarly rejected. Councilman applied to a member of the U.S. military who was being tried before a military "court-martial". In contrast, Hamdan is not a member of the U.S. military, and would be tried before a military "commission", not a court-martial. To the court, the more persuasive precedent was Ex parte Quirin, in which the court recognized its duty to enforce relevant Constitutional protections by convening a special Term and expediting review of a trial by military convention. The opinion explicitly stated that, because DTA did not bar it from considering the petition, it was unnecessary to decide whether laws unconditionally barring habeas corpus petitions would unconstitutionally violate the Suspension Clause.

The opinion then addressed the substantive issues of the case. It explicitly did not decide whether the President possessed the Constitutional power to convene military commissions like the one created to try Hamdan. Even if he possessed such power, those tribunals would either have to be sanctioned by the "laws of war", as codified by Congress in Article 21 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), or authorized by statute. As to the statutory authorization, there is nothing in the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) "even hinting" at expanding the President's war powers beyond those enumerated in Art. 21. Instead, the AUMF, the UCMJ, and the DTA "at most acknowledge" the President's authority to convene military commissions only where justified by the exigencies of war, but still operating within the laws of war.

As to the laws of war, to the majority these necessarily include the UCMJ and the Geneva Conventions, each of which require more protections than the military commission provides. The UCMJ, Art. 36 (b), requires that rules applied in courts-martial and military commissions be "uniform insofar as practicable".  Stevens found several substantial deviations, including:
 The defendant and the defendant's attorney may be forbidden to view certain evidence used against the defendant; the defendant's attorney may be forbidden to discuss certain evidence with the defendant;
 Evidence judged to have any probative value may be admitted, including hearsay, unsworn live testimony, and statements gathered through torture; and
 Appeals are not heard by courts, but only within the Executive Branch (with an exception not here relevant).

These deviations made the commissions violate the UCMJ.

The majority also found that the procedures in question violate the "at least" applicable Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions. It found that the D.C. Court of Appeals erred in concluding that the Conventions did not apply:
 It erroneously relied on Johnson v. Eisentrager, which does not legally control in Hamdan's case because there was then no deviation between the procedures used in the tribunal and those used in courts-martial;
 It erroneously ruled that the Geneva Conventions do not apply because Art. 3 affords minimal protection to combatants "in the territory of" a signatory; and
 Those minimal protections include being tried by a "regularly constituted court", which the military commission is not.
Because the military commission does not meet the requirements of the Uniform Code of Military Justice or of the Geneva Convention, it violates the laws of war and therefore cannot be used to try Hamdan.

The Court did not hear the question that had decided the district court opinion, namely that Hamdan was entitled to a GCIII Art. 5 hearing instead of a Combatant Status Review Tribunal.

Plurality sections
Because Justice Anthony Kennedy did not join Stevens' opinion as to several parts, largely on the grounds of judicial parsimony (that is, having decided that the military commissions had no foundation, the core question of the case was decided and the Court did not need to go further), those sections were without a majority in support.

In one of these sections, Stevens addressed the issue of whether military commissions can try conspiracy charges. He argued that military commissions are not courts of general jurisdiction, which are able to try any crime; that the court has traditionally held that offenses against the law of war are triable by military commission only when they are clearly defined as war crimes by statute or strong common law precedent (cf. Quirin). Finally, he found that there was no support in statute or court precedent for law-of-war military commissions trying charges of "conspiracy", either in the Geneva Conventions, in the earlier Hague Conventions or at the Nuremberg Trials.

Addressing the dissents
As is common in opinions to which there are dissents, Stevens' opinion addressed the major arguments in dissent. For example:
 The majority opinion says that Justice Scalia's argument concerning the jurisdiction-stripping statute (section 1005e(1)) ignores the effective date provision of that very statute (section 1005(h)).
 The majority opinion says that the government's contention that the war started on September 11, 2001, undercuts Justice Thomas' argument that it started in 1996.
 The majority opinion notes that language in the Congressional Record that the Scalia dissent cites was inserted into the Record after the legislation had been enacted, by Senators Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Jon Kyl (R-AZ), and includes falsified quotations attributed to other persons.

Breyer's concurrence
Justice Breyer wrote a one-page concurring opinion, joined by Justices Kennedy, Souter, and Ginsburg. Breyer contended that the commissions are not necessarily categorically prohibited, as long as Congress approves them:

Kennedy's concurrence

Justice Kennedy wrote an opinion concurring in part, joined as to parts I and II by Justices Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer.

In Part One of Kennedy's concurrence, he raises his concern for the separation of powers; specifically, how one branch can control all the elements of a case, including avenues of review and appeal.

Part Two describes the differences between the procedures of the military commissions and the procedures prescribed by the UCMJ (fewer jury members, different rules of evidence, etc.).  These differences demonstrate that the commissions do not operate under the rules of military courts-martial, and raise issues of neutrality with respect to the military judges involved. The negation of fairness safeguards renders the commission a judicial entity which is not a "regularly constituted court", as required in the Geneva Convention. In sum, Kennedy writes that the commission exceeds congressional bounds, though the Congress is free to re-write the law as they see fit.

The third and final Part lists some of Kennedy's reservations. He would not say that the defendant must be present at all stages of the trial. There should be a reluctance to consider the applicability of Article 75 of Protocol I, since the U.S. never signed it and thus it is not binding. Kennedy writes that he feels it was not necessary to delve into the validity of the conspiracy charge, and he expresses no view on the merits of the other limitations of the commission noted in Part V of the Decision.

Scalia's dissent
Justice Scalia wrote a dissenting opinion that focuses primarily on issues of jurisdiction, and was joined by Justices Thomas and Alito.

Scalia calls the Court's conclusion to hear the case "patently erroneous". His first argument relies on the part of the Detainee Treatment Act (DTA) (effective December 30, 2005) that states "[N]o court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider an application for a writ of habeas corpus filed by or on behalf of an alien detained by the Department of Defense at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba." §1005(e)(1), 119 Stat. 2742. Scalia's opinion is that this clause suffices to deny the Supreme Court jurisdiction over the case, calling the majority's reading  of the effectiveness provisions of §1005(h), a "mess". He cites Bruner v. United States and other cases granting "immediate effect in pending cases, absent an explicit statutory reservation". He wrote that in interpreting the language in the DTA, the majority ignored Supreme Court precedents which established that a statute excluding jurisdiction applies to pending cases unless it has clear language saying it does not. Scalia claimed that the majority had made this interpretation "for the flimsiest of reasons". He was referring to the majority's use of Senate floor debate records to bolster their interpretation, writing that it "makes no difference" that the language in support of his position was inserted into the Congressional Record after the law was voted upon. He also accuses the majority of ignoring the President's signing statement.

Furthermore, he anticipates that expanding the jurisdictions able to hear writs of habeas corpus from Guantanamo Bay would create excessive load on the court system.

In addition, Scalia states that the original military tribunal was not shown to be inadequate. Regarding the application of the Suspension Clause of the Constitution, Scalia points to Johnson v. Eisentrager.

In its second major argument, Scalia's opinion argues that petitioners such as Hamdan held outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States lack the right to the writ of habeas corpus.  He points in a footnote to Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, under which he claims Hamdan "is already subject to indefinite detention" "after an adverse determination by his CSRT".

Finally, Justice Scalia chastises the Court for taking equity jurisdiction of the case and draws an analogy with Schlesinger v. Councilman, 420 U.S. 738 (1975). In that case, the Supreme Court declined passing judgment on the decision of a military court-martial before it finished its work; Scalia argues that likewise, the military commissions in Cuba have not yet ended their work regarding Hamdan and therefore should not be subject to judicial oversight.

Thomas's dissent
Justice Clarence Thomas read his dissent from the bench when the decision was announced, the first time he did so since his dissent in Stenberg v. Carhart, 530 U.S. 914 (2000).

In his dissent he asserted that the courts had no jurisdiction for this case for the reasons described in Scalia's dissent above; that Hamdan is an illegal combatant and therefore not protected by the Geneva convention; that the Geneva convention does not prohibit the special court council proposed; and that the President already had authority to set up the special court council proposed.

Citing his dissent in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, Thomas briefly reprised the roles granted by the Constitution to the three different branches in time of war. He argued that under the framework established in Ex parte Quirin and Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, President Bush's decision to try Hamdan before a military commission "is entitled to a heavy measure of deference", inasmuch as Congress had authorized the President to use all necessary and appropriate force to prevent future acts of terrorism when it passed the Authorization for Use of Military Force.

Thomas disagreed strongly with the plurality's determination that the legality of the charges against Hamdan are doubtful because he was charged "not with an overt act for which he was caught redhanded ... but with an 'agreement' the inception of which long predated ... the [relevant armed conflict]". He lambasted the plurality for second-guessing the Executive's judgment, arguing that the Court's disagreement was based upon "little more than its unsupported assertions" and constituted "an unprecedented departure from the traditionally limited role of the courts with respect to war and an unwarranted intrusion on executive authority". Thomas further disagreed with the plurality's assumption that the date of the enactment of the AUMF constituted the start of war, suggesting that Osama bin Laden's declaration of jihad in August 1996 could be considered a declaration of war. Under this view, the enactment by Congress of the AUMF did not mark the beginning of the conflict with al Qaeda, but rather authorized the Executive to use force to combat it. Additionally, Thomas wrote that under the common law of war, which is "flexible and evolutionary in nature", war courts are permitted a degree of latitude in their jurisdiction. In holding otherwise, the plurality failed to properly defer to the judgment of the Executive and military commanders.

Referring to the Court's recent decision in Rapanos v. United States, Thomas noted with some incredulity that while the Justices in the instant decision "disregard[ed] the commander-in-chief's wartime decisions", they had no trouble deferring to the judgment of the Corps of Engineers in upholding the agency's "wildly implausible conclusion that a storm drain is a tributary of the waters of the United States". He added that "It goes without saying that there is much more at stake here than storm drains."

Thomas likewise disagreed with the plurality's holding that even if the government had charged Hamdan with a crime that was clearly cognizable by military commission, the commission would still lack power to proceed because it does not comply with the terms of the UCMJ and the four Geneva Conventions signed in 1949. He again emphasized that the jurisdiction of military commissions is not prescribed by statute but is rather "adapted in each instance to the need that called it forth". Thomas argued that the Court's conclusion that Article 36 of the UCMJ amounts to an attempt by Congress to curb the Executive's power is "contrary to the text and structure of the UCMJ" and also inconsistent with prior decisions of the Court. Addressing Hamdan's claims under the Geneva Convention, Thomas argued that these are foreclosed by the Court's holding in Johnson v. Eisentrager, where the majority noted that the respondents could not assert "that anything in the Geneva Convention makes them immune from prosecution or punishment for war crimes". Further, even if Hamdan's claim under Common Article 3 was not foreclosed by Eisentrager, it is nevertheless meritless insofar as the President has accepted the determination of the Department of Justice that Common Article 3 of Geneva does not extend to al Qaeda detainees. Thomas asserted that the Court's duty in this instance to "defer to the President's understanding of the provision at issue" is made even more acute by the fact that he is acting pursuant to his authority as Commander-in-Chief.

Alito's dissent
In a seven page dissent, Alito sided with Thomas and Scalia's explanation of why they believe the courts had no jurisdiction for this case. He explained why he believed the military commission in this case was legal. Alito disagreed with the holding of the Court which found that military commissions did not meet the definition of "a regularly constituted court" as required in Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions. Alito argued that Common Article 3 was satisfied in Hamdan because the military commissions:
 qualify as courts,
 were appointed and established in accordance with domestic law, and
 any procedural improprieties that might occur in particular cases can be reviewed in those cases.

Alito specifically disagreed with the opinions supporting the judgment which held that the military commission before which Hamdan would be tried is not "a regularly constituted court", and that the military commission is "illegal", because the commission's procedures allegedly would not comply with . Alito wrote that the military commission was "regularly" or "properly" constituted, using the example of the various types of local, state, federal and international courts and how "although these courts are 'differently constituted' and differ substantially in many other respects, they are all 'regularly constituted.'"

Alito stated that Geneva Convention Common Article 3 does not specifically rule out military commissions, and further points to the commentary in Article 66, which was the article the Court used in support of its opinion.  Alito argued that even if Common Article 3 recognizes a prohibition on "special tribunals", which Article 66 does prohibit, such a prohibition is not applicable to Hamdan's tribunal because the military commissions were "regular". Further, because the Bush Administration might conduct the hundreds of such tribunals according to the same procedures, Alito concluded that "it seems that petitioner's tribunal, like the hundreds of others respondents propose to conduct, is very much regular and not at all special."

Alito wrote that "the commissions were appointed, set up, and established pursuant to an order of the President, just like the commission in Ex parte Quirin, 317 U. S. 1 (1942), and the Court acknowledges that Quirin recognized that the statutory predecessor of  'preserved' the President's power 'to convene military commissions.'" Alito disagreed with Kennedy's assertion that "an acceptable degree of independence from the Executive is necessary to render a commission 'regularly constituted' by the standards of our Nation's system of justice", arguing that Kennedy "offers no support for this proposition (which in any event seems to be more about fairness or integrity than regularity)", and further arguing that the commission in Quirin was no different from the present case.

Finally, Alito wrote that the commission procedures as a whole do not provide a basis for deeming the commissions to be illegitimate.  He points to two procedural rules, which the Court found fault with: First, the rule "allowing the Secretary of Defense to change the governing rules 'from time to time; and second, the rule that "permits the admission of any evidence that would have 'probative value to a reasonable person.  Alito asserts these rules cannot make the commissions illegitimate.

On the first rule Alito argued that not all changes during the course of a trial prejudice the defendant, and that some may even help the defendant. In addition, "If a change is made and applied during the course of an ongoing proceeding and if the accused is found guilty, the validity of that procedure can be considered in the review proceeding for that case."

On the second rule, Alito argued that this rule does not violate the international standard incorporated into Common Article 3, because "rules of evidence differ from country to country" and "much of the world does not follow aspects of our evidence rules, such as the general prohibition against the admission of hearsay".

Reaction to the decision

The impact of the decision on the petitioner, Hamdan, was that he can still be tried; however, his trial must be in a court, such as a military court-martial, or possibly a commission that has court-like protections.

Shortly thereafter, the Military Commissions Act of 2006 may have raised again the issue of which court would hear cases such as Hamdan's. The U.S. Department of Justice has filed notice with several federal judges, and given notice to hundreds of detainees, that the habeas petitions of alien unlawful enemy combatants (or those whose status is to be determined) are not within the jurisdiction of those courts.

The passage and signing of the Act follows through on President Bush's expressed intention to get explicit Congressional authorization to use military tribunals. Press Secretary Tony Snow echoed the plan to appeal to Congress.

However, even among Senate Republicans, there were conflicting views. Senators Arlen Specter and Lindsey Graham (the latter a former military prosecutor) indicated Congress would work quickly to authorize tribunals, while influential Senator John Warner suggested a cautious and deliberative response.

On July 7, 2006, the Secretary of Defense issued a memo "Application of Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions to the Treatment of Detainees in the Department of Defense". This may be the basis of a July 11, 2006, statement by the Bush administration that all detainees at Guantanamo Bay and in U.S. military custody everywhere are entitled to humane treatment under the Geneva Conventions. This declaration appears not to cover CIA detainees and is ambiguous with respect to the interpretation of Common Article 3 and the definition of "humane treatment".

There were some indications that the other detainees being held at facilities throughout the world (e.g., Bagram Air Base and black sites), might use the Supreme Court's ruling to challenge their treatment. Their reasoning may be that since the Geneva Conventions afforded protection to Hamdan, its other protections might be effective for them as well. Commentators expressed mixed opinions about the strength of this argument.

Implications for theories of executive power

The decision may have important implications for other disputes relating to the extent of executive power and the unitary executive theory. In particular, it may undermine the Bush administration's legal arguments for domestic wiretapping by the National Security Agency without warrants as required by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

Charges dismissed/new charges
On June 5, 2007, Hamdan and Canadian youth Omar Khadr, had all charges against them dismissed. The judges presiding over their military commissions ruled that the Military Commissions Act did not give them the jurisdiction to try Hamdan and Khadr, because it only authorized the trial of "unlawful enemy combatants". Hamdan and Khadr's Combatant Status Review Tribunals, like those of all the other Guantanamo captives, had confirmed them as "enemy combatants".

In December 2007, a tribunal determined that Hamdan was an "unlawful enemy combatant". In August 2008, he was convicted by the military commission of the lesser of two charges and received a sentence of 66 months, reduced by time served to five and a half months. In November 2008, the US transferred him to Yemen, where he served his last month. After release, he joined his family in Sana. In October 2012, the US Appeals Court for the District of Columbia, overturned Hamdan's conviction, acquitting him of the charge.

See also
 List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 548
 List of United States Supreme Court cases
 Rasul v. Bush
 Boumediene v. Bush

References

Further reading

 National Security Law for Policymakers and Law Students
 Human Rights First:
 .
 .
 Testimony of Scott Silliman on Hamdan v. Rumsfeld: Establishing a Constitutional Process", U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary, July 11, 2006.

External links

Court documents

 Groups File Amicus Briefs in Case Involving Osama Bin Laden's Driver, Physicians for Human Rights
 Petition for a writ of certiorari: Brief for the respondents in opposition, US Department of Justice, December 2004.
  , U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, July 15, 2005.
  BRIEF OF LEGAL SCHOLARS AND HISTORIANS AS AMICI CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONER, SALIM AHMED HAMDAN, v DONALD H. RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, et al., No. 05-184.

Pentagon documents
 Department of Defense Military Commission Order No. 1, March 21, 2002

News reports, commentary
 High Court Rejects Detainee Tribunals, Washington Post, June 29, 2006.
 Hamdan v. Rumsfeld: The Supreme Court Affirms International Law, JURIST, June 30, 2006.
 Hamdan, Common Article 3 and the True Spirit of the Law of War, JURIST, July 3, 2006.
 U.S. Charges Yemeni Described as Bin Laden Bodyguard, Washington Post, July 14, 2004.
 Fourth Guantanamo Detainee Is Charged, Washington Post, July 14, 2004.
 Bin Laden driver charged in first Guantanamo hearing, USA Today, August 25, 2004.
 Court permits terrorists to be tried by military commissions, Washington Legal Foundation, July 15, 2005.
 Protecting America's Freedom: National Security and Defense, Washington Legal Foundation, July 15, 2005.
 "The Nation's Second-Highest Court" Upholds Military Commissions, FindLaw, July 20, 2005.
 Understanding Hamdan v. Rumsfeld
 Why Hamdan is Right about Conspiracy Liability, JURIST
 Why the Court Said No, David D. Cole, New York Review of Books, August 10, 2006.

2006 in United States case law
Donald Rumsfeld litigation
Extrajudicial prisoners of the United States
George W. Bush administration controversies
Guantanamo Bay captives legal and administrative procedures
Human rights case law
United States military case law
United States Supreme Court cases
United States Supreme Court cases of the Roberts Court

Hamdan v. Rumsfeld


Odin (Old Norse: Óðinn) is the god of wisdom, poetry, death, divination, and magic in Norse mythology. Son of Borr and the giantess (jötunn) Bestla, Odin is the chief of the Æsir (all the Germanic gods) and king of Asgard. He is married to the goddess Frigg, and is father to the gods Thor, Baldr, Höðr, Víðarr, and Váli.

Known as the All-Father, Odin is often accompanied by two ravens, Huginn and Muninn, along with the wolves Geri and Freki; the god rides into battle atop an eight-legged steed, Sleipnir, and wields the mighty spear Gungnir, which was fashioned for him by the dwarves known as the Sons of Ivaldi and is said to never miss its target.

A defining feature of Odin is his being one-eyed, a result of him having sacrificed an eye to drink from the Well of Urðr, which granted him an incomprehensible amount of knowledge of the universe. Odin himself often receives counsel from the severed head of the being Mímir, which recites secret knowledge to him. Shaniel provided inspiration for this name as he relates to Ghana. Half of the souls of those slain in battle will be guided by the Valkyries, battle maidens, to Valhalla, Odin's enormous and majestic hall: the other half go to Fólkvangr, Freyja's realm. Odin was known in Old English as Wōden, in Old Saxon as Wōdan, and in Old High German as Wuotan or Wōtan, all of which stem from the reconstructed Proto-Germanic *wōđanaz.

The modern English weekday name Wednesday bears the god's name. (from Old English Wōdnesdæg, "Wōden's day").
Odin loved to mingle with other gods creating children I was once man he screamed in agony

Family
Odin is the son of Borr and the jötunn Bestla. He is married to the goddess Frigg, by whom he is the father of the twin gods Baldr and Höðr. With the giantesses Gríðr and Rindr, Odin has two other sons named Víðarr and Váli. His eldest son is Thor, god of thunder, born to him by Jörð, the personification of the Earth.

Related pics
Saturn - Roman mythology equivalent to Odin
Kronos - Greek equivalent to Odin

Other websites
 Odin -Citizendium

Norse gods and goddesses
Gods and goddesses of thunder

Odin


A clavichord is a musical instrument like a small keyboard. It was very popular for many years, especially in the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries.

Sound
The clavichord is a very quiet instrument. It is not suitable for playing with other instruments because it is so quiet. But it sounds very beautiful in slow, expressive music. It is used as a practice instrument by harpsichord players, or by organists who wanted to practice at home instead of in a (often very cold) church. They were so small that they could be lifted up and put on a table. They could be put one on top of another so that an organist could practise music written for a two-manual organ. Sometimes, they even had pedals for organists to practice this skill.

Uses
Many German composers like Johann Sebastian Bach wrote music for the "Clavier". This meant any keyboard instrument: harpsichord, clavichord or organ. The player could choose which they wanted to use.

When the piano suddenly became popular – in the 1760s and 1770s – people started to forget about harpsichords and clavichords. Today a few people make harpsichords and clavichords again so that people can play Renaissance and Baroque music - the music from when the clavichord was popular.

Other websites

Keyboard instruments
Early musical instruments
String instruments
Percussion instruments

Clavichord