Wikipedia - Benutzerbeiträge [de]

Anthony Comstock

2008-05-25T06:27:13Z

24.6.157.14: Not correct to say that Comstock had them imprisoned. A judge can order imprisonment, a law enforcement officer can only make an arrest.

[[Image:Anthony Comstock.jpg|thumb|200px|right|Portrait of Anthony Comstock]]

'''Anthony Comstock''' ([[March 7]] [[1844]] – [[September 21]] [[1915]]) was a former [[United States]] Postal Inspector and politician dedicated to ideas of [[Victorian morality]].

== Biography ==

He was born in [[New Canaan, Connecticut]]. As a young man, he enlisted and fought for the Union in the [[American Civil War]] from [[1863]] to [[1865]]. He served without incident, but objected to the profanity used by his fellow soldiers.{{Fact|date=February 2007}} Afterward he became an active worker in the [[YMCA|Young Men's Christian Association]] in [[New York City]].

In [[1873]] Comstock created the [[New York Society for the Suppression of Vice]], an institution dedicated to supervising the [[morality]] of the public. Later that year, Comstock successfully influenced the [[United States Congress]] to pass the [[Comstock Law]], which made illegal the delivery or transportation of both "obscene, lewd, or lascivious" material as well as any methods of, or information pertaining to, [[birth control]]. [[George Bernard Shaw]] coined the term "[[wiktionary:comstockery|comstockery]]", meaning "censorship because of perceived obscenity or immorality", after Comstock alerted the New York police to the content of Shaw's play [[Mrs. Warren's Profession]]. Shaw remarked that "Comstockery is the world's standing joke at the expense of the United States. Europe likes to hear of such things. It confirms the deep-seated conviction of the Old World that America is a provincial place, a second-rate country-town civilization after all." Comstock thought of Shaw as an "Irish smut dealer".<ref>Reefer Madness, by Eric Schlosser, page 120</ref>

Comstock's ideas of what might be "obscene, lewd, or lascivious" were quite broad. During his time of greatest power, even some [[anatomy]] [[textbook]]s were prohibited from being sent to medical students by the [[United States Postal Service]].

[[Image:Leedscomstock.jpg|thumb|200px|right|1887 Letter from Anthony Comstock to Josiah Leeds]]

Comstock aroused intense loathing from early [[civil liberty|civil liberties]] groups and intense support from [[church]] based groups worried about public morals. He was a savvy political insider in [[New York City]] and was made a special agent of the [[United States Postal Service]], with police powers up to and including the right to carry a weapon. With this power he zealously prosecuted those he suspected of either public distribution of [[pornography]] or commercial [[fraud]]. He was also involved in shutting down the [[Louisiana Lottery]], the only legal lottery in the [[United States]] at the time, and notorious for corruption.

Comstock is also known for his persecution of [[Victoria Woodhull]] and [[Tennessee Claflin]], and those associated with them. The men's journal ''The Days Doings'' had popularised lewd images of the sisters for three years and was instructed by its editor (while Comstock was present) to stop producing images of "lewd character". Comstock also took legal action against the paper for advertising contraceptives. When the sisters published an expose of an adulterous affair between Reverend [[Henry Ward Beecher]] and [[Elizabeth Tilton]], he had the sisters arrested under laws forbidding the use of the postal service to distribute 'obscene material'—though they were later acquitted of the charges.

Less fortunate was [[Ida Craddock]], who committed suicide on the eve of reporting to Federal prison for distributing via the U.S. Mail various sexually explicit marriage manuals she had authored. Her final work was a lengthy public suicide note specifically condemning Comstock.

Comstock claimed he drove fifteen persons to suicide in his "fight for the young". He was head vice-hunter of the [[New York Society for the Suppression of Vice]]. Comstock, the self-labeled "weeder in God's garden", arrested [[D. M. Bennett]] for publishing his "An Open Letter to Jesus Christ" and later entrapped the editor for mailing a free-love pamphlet. Bennett was prosecuted, subjected to a widely publicized trial, and imprisoned in the Albany Penitentiary.

He had numerous enemies, and in later years his health was affected by a severe blow to the head from an anonymous attacker. He lectured to college audiences and wrote newspaper articles to sustain his causes. Before his death, Comstock attracted the interest of a young law student, [[J. Edgar Hoover]], interested in his causes and methods.

During his career, Comstock clashed with [[Emma Goldman]] and [[Margaret Sanger]]. In her autobiography, Goldman referred to Comstock as the leader of America's "moral [[eunuch]]s". Through his various campaigns, he destroyed 15 tons of books, 284,000 pounds of plates for printing 'objectionable' books, and nearly 4,000,000 pictures.{{Fact|date=March 2008}} Comstock boasted that he was responsible for 4,000 arrests and 15 suicides.<ref name = "economist"> {{cite journal
| year =2008
| month =March 13th
| title =The hypocrites' club Now with a new diamond-level member
| journal =The Economist
| url = http://www.economist.com/world/na/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10852872
}} </ref>

A biography of Comstock written in 1927, "Anthony Comstock: Roundsman Of The Lord" by [[Heywood Broun]] and [[Margaret Leech]] of the [[Algonquin Round Table]] examines his personal history and his investigative, surveillance and law enforcement techniques.

==Works==
* ''Frauds Exposed'' (1880)
* ''Traps for the Young'' (1883)
* ''Gambling Outrages'' (1887)
* ''Morals Versus Art'' (1887)

He wrote numerous magazine articles relating to similar subjects.

==References in fiction and culture==
*Comstock is one of many prominent New Yorkers of his time that appear in the historical fiction novel ''[[The Alienist]]'', by [[Caleb Carr]].

*The protagonist of [[F. Scott Fitzgerald]]'s novel ''[[The Beautiful and Damned]]'' is named for Comstock.

*[[James Branch Cabell]] was prosecuted on obscenity charges relating to his novel ''[[Jurgen, A Comedy of Justice]]'' after lobbying by the Society. Cabell retaliated with a [[chapbook]] entitled ''The Judging of Jurgen'' (later inserted into subsequent reprints of the novel), in which the title character is consigned to oblivion for being "obscene, lewd, lascivious and indecent" in a trial presided over by a [[dung beetle]] who swears "by Saint Anthony".

*Anthony Comstock is one of the four "point of view" characters in [[Marge Piercy]]'s novel ''[[Sex Wars]]''. Piercy explores Comstock's personal history and mindset as he goes from clerk to active "vice" suppressor.
*[http://www.comstockfilms.com/ Comstock Films], a company that produces erotic documentaries, is named after Anthony Comstock.

==See also==
*[[Comstock Act]]
*[[New York Society for the Suppression of Vice]]

==External links==
*[http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/pill/peopleevents/e_comstock.html Anthony Comstock's "Chastity" Laws]
* [http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=19982 Find-A-Grave profile for Anthony Comstock]

==References==
<references/>

__NOTOC__

{{DEFAULTSORT:Comstock, Anthony}}
[[Category:People from Connecticut]]
[[Category:People of Connecticut in the American Civil War]]
[[Category:American political writers]]
[[Category:American activists]]
[[Category:Anti-pornography activists]]
[[Category:1844 births]]
[[Category:1915 deaths]]

Anthony Comstock

2008-05-24T13:57:41Z

24.6.157.14: not imprisoned, per se. Held for trial.

NonStop

2008-04-04T16:40:46Z

24.6.157.14: /* History */

'''Tandem Computers''' was an early manufacturer of [[fault tolerant]] [[computer]] systems, marketed to the growing number of [[transaction processing]] customers who used them for [[Automatic teller machine|ATM]]s, [[bank]]s, [[stock exchange]]s and other similar needs. Tandem systems used a number of redundant processors and storage devices to provide high-speed "[[failover]]" in the case of a hardware failure, an architecture that they called '''NonStop'''. Over the two decades from the 1970s into the mid-90s, Tandem systems evolved from custom hardware to commodity CPU designs. The company was eventually purchased by [[Compaq]] in 1997 in order to provide that company with more robust [[Server (computing)|server]] offerings. Today it is still known as NonStop, as a separate product line offered by [[Hewlett-Packard]].

==History==

Tandem Computers was founded in 1974 by a group of engineers from [[Hewlett-Packard]]: [[James Treybig]], Mike Green, Jim Katzman, and Jack Loustaunou. Their business plan called for systems that were safe from "[[single-point failure]]s" that were only marginally more expensive than competing non-[[fault tolerant]] systems. Tandem considered this to be very important to their business model. Limiting the additional expense was important since customers often developed procedural solutions to failures when the price of fault tolerant hardware was too high.

The first system was the '''Tandem/16''' or '''T/16''' (later called '''NonStop I''' after the introduction of its successor, the NonStop II). The system design was complete in 1975, and the first example was sold to [[Citibank]] in 1976. The machine consisted of between 2 and 16 processors, each capable of about 0.7 [[Instructions per second|MIPS]] with their own memory, [[I/O]] buses, and dual connections to their custom inter-CPU [[computer bus]], '''Dynabus'''. The modules were constructed with dual paths so that any single failure would always leave at least one bus (both I/O and Dynabus), free for use by the other modules. The CPU was influenced by the [[HP3000]] CPU, a [[microcode|microprogrammed]] [[16-bit]] [[stack machine|stack-based machine]] with [[16-bit]] user addressing. Like the HP3000, the NonStop CPU added a number of [[processor register|registers]] for fast access, such as base addresses for global and local variables.

The Tandem NonStop series ran a custom [[operating system]], initially called '''T/TOS''' ('''Tandem Operating System'''), later '''Guardian''', and finally '''NonStop Kernel'''. It supported a "NonStop" programming paradigm that allowed a program to be completely fault tolerant. Several other companies introduced failover technologies but only Guardian supported completely fail-safe transaction processing. A properly constructed Guardian program could fail at any point and resume transaction processing without any loss of data.

While conventional systems of the era, including [[Mainframe computer|mainframes]], had failure rates on the order of a few days, the NonStop system was designed to fail 100 times less, with "uptimes" measured in years. Nevertheless the NonStop was deliberately designed to be price-competitive with conventional systems, with a simple 2-CPU system priced at just over two times that of a competing single-processor mainframe, as opposed to four or more times of most competing solutions.

NonStop I was followed by the '''NonStop II''' in 1981, a slight improvement in speed to 0.8 MIPS, but a more measurable upgrade in memory from a maximum of 1 MB per CPU in the later versions of the NonStop I, to 2 MB in the II, and the addition of a revamped [[virtual memory]] system allowing for considerably larger address spaces. The NonStop I was limited to 4 virtual memory segments (System Data, System Code, User Data, User Code) each limited to 128 kB in size.

The NonStop II increased the number of memory maps from 4 to 16, 8 of which were used for I/O, and provided a 32 bit address mode with user-accessible "extended segments" virtually unlimited in size. The same basic system, including the physical packaging, was used in 1983's '''NonStop TXP''' system that more than doubled the speed to 2.0 MIPS, and increased the physical memory to 8 MB. In all of these machines the same Dynabus system was used, which had been overdesigned in the NonStop I so they could avoid changing it in the future.

Introduced along with the TXP was a new [[fibre optic]] bus system, '''FOX'''. FOX allowed a number of TXP and NonStop II systems to be connected together to form a larger system with up to 14 nodes. Like the CPU modules within the computers, Guardian could failover entire task sets to other machines in the network.

The company attempted to grab a piece of the rapidly-growing [[personal computer]] market in 1985 with its introduction of the [[MS-DOS]] based '''Dynamite''' PC/workstation. Sadly, numerous design compromises (include a unique 8086-based hardware platform incompatible with expansion cards of the day and extremely limited compatibility with [[IBM]]-based PC's) relegated the Dynamite to serving primarily as a smart terminal. It was quietly withdrawn from the market within a short period of time.

In 1986 a major upgrade to the system was introduced, the '''NonStop VLX'''. VLX used a new Dynabus, increasing speed from 13 Mbit/s to 40 Mbit/s (total, 20 Mbit/s per independent bus). They also introduced '''FOX II''', increasing the size of the networks from 1 km to 4 km. Using the original FOX VLX systems could be used with the older NonStop II and TXP's, but these systems were not supported on FOX II.

VLX was partnered with the '''NonStop CLX''', a [[minicomputer]] sized machine for smaller installations. The CLX had roughly the same performance as the earlier TXP, but was much smaller and less expensive. By the end of its lifetime the CLX had increased in speed considerably, and competed with the VLX, 1991's CLX 800 was only about 20% slower than the VLX, with the main difference being more limited expansion abilities.

In 1986 Tandem also introduced the first fault-tolerant [[SQL]] database, [[NonStop SQL]]. Developed totally in-house, NonStop SQL included a number of features based on Guardian to ensure [[Consistency model|data validity]] across nodes. NonStop SQL was famous for [[scalability| scaling linearly ]] in [[speedup|performance]] with the number of nodes added to the system, whereas most databases of the era had performance that plateaued quite quickly, often after two CPUs. A later version released in 1989 added transactions that could be spread over nodes, a feature that remained unique for some time. Later, the SQL database group was first co-opted then absorbed into Microsoft's SQL development effort. One outcome of this collaboration was Microsoft's clustered system technology.

The '''NonStop Cyclone''' was introduced in 1989, introducing a new [[superscalar]] CPU design. It was otherwise similar to earlier systems, although much faster. In general terms the Cyclone was about four times as fast as the CLX 800, which Tandem used as their benchmark. On the downside the new CPU was complex and expensive, requiring four circuit boards to implement a single CPU.

In 1991 Tandem followed this with [[RISC]]-implementations of Guardian, running on [[MIPS Technologies|MIPS]] [[MIPS architecture|R3000]]-based CPU modules in the '''Cyclone/R''' and '''CLX/R'''. Programs written for the earlier stack-based CPU design were automatically translated on the fly into R3000 code in an [[Interpreter (computer software)|interpreter]], although they ran considerably slower than on earlier machines. Tandem also provided a number of tools to easily port existing [[object code]] to the new systems, resulting in code that was some 25% slower than the original Cyclone. [[Source code]] compilers were also available. While slower, the new system was considerably less expensive, and it was clear that RISC performance was outpacing CISC. By making the move when they did, they were banking on increases in MIPS performance quickly wiping out any performance disadvantages the system had at the time. In 1993 the '''NonStop Himalaya K-Series''' using the MIPS R4400 was shipped.

In 1997 Tandem introduced the NonStop Himalaya '''S-Series'''. The S-Series machines were the first systems that changed the underlying architecture of the NonStop family, basing both the I/O and inter-CPU communication on their new '''ServerNet''' interconnect. Whereas Dynabus and FOX linked the CPU's together into a [[ring network]], ServerNet was a true point-to-point network replacing both, and ran at much higher speeds. ServerNet later was used as the basis of the [[InfiniBand]] industry standard. The S-Series machines continued the use of MIPS processors, including the R4400 and R10000.

All the more recent systems were based on microprocessors, and the internal circuits of these chips are not fully checked. To assure correct computation, each logical processor had two microprocessors operating in [[lockstep (computing)|lockstep]]. If the results coming out ever disagreed, the processor was considered to be faulting and instantly stopped. At that point Guardian would move that task to another processor as in earlier systems, guaranteeing that bad data was never written out due to hardware failures.

A different approach was used in a separate family of computers, the '''Integrity''' line. These computers used additional redundant CPUs running the same instruction stream. When a fault was detected (e.g. by lockstep mismatch), the failing module was disabled but the redundant module continued processing the instruction stream without interruption. Since this was handled primarily in hardware, it could be used with a slightly modified conventional operating system; Integrity used a Unix variant rather than Guardian. The line was introduced in 1989, apparently as a response to the machines of [[Stratus Technologies]] (which were remarketed by IBM as ''IBM System/88''). Although distinct from the NonStop line, the Integrity designs were also based on the MIPS processors. With the introduction of the Integrity S4000 in 1995, the line was the first to use ServerNet and moved towards sharing hardware designs with the NonStop line.

Tandem was acquired by [[Compaq]] in [[1997]]. Compaq was in turn acquired by HP in 2002, bringing Tandem back to its original roots. As of 2003, the NonStop product line continues to be produced, under the HP name.

After being acquired by HP, the NonStop line has moved to [[Itanium]] based processors, called Integrity NonStop Servers. The original Integrity line is no longer produced but the name 'Integrity' has been adopted by HP for all Itanium based servers.

The NonStop Kernel (NSK) can run multiple OS's. In addition to the Guardian OS, the modern NonStop platform incorporates a [[POSIX]] compatible environment (OSS) and [[Java_(Sun)|Java]]. There is also an effort by HP to run [[Linux]] on the NonStop hardware.<ref>CNET article on HP bringing Linux to NonStop[http://news.com.com/HP+works+to+bring+Linux+to+NonStop+servers/2100-7344_3-5825765.html]</ref> Also, [[Linux]] or other [[Unix]] based operating systems could be installed on the NonStop platform via a [[virtual machine]] environment.

==Culture==

Tandem treated its employees with a great deal of respect, especially in the years leading to the company's first billion-dollar yearly sales figure. Innovative programs included:
* TOPS ("Tandem Outstanding PerformerS") - every employee in the company could be nominated for this award, which was awarded to about the top 5% of employees annually. Winners (and a guest of their choosing) were treated to an all-expense paid trip to locations such as Hawaii, Vail, and similar resort areas for several days of fun and teambuilding. Management actually worked the event as hosts. TOPS was known, among other things, for its 24-hour open bar, where one could encounter senior VPs and even the company CEO dishing out drinks and stories of the company's early years.
* Annual stock option - every employee of the company received a 100-share stock option each fall. As the company's stock rose (or split), employees could share in the company's financial success.
* Sabbaticals - all US employees earned a six-week paid '''sabbatical''' (contiguous vacation) every four years, which could be augmented with personal vacation. Employees who chose to perform public service during their sabbatical could apply for an additional three weeks.
* "First Friday" - the award-winning in-house Tandem TV staff produced a monthly program, broadcast live to all Tandem locations world-wide. While generally educational about some aspect of the company, the programs usually featured some member of the senior management team in a humorous way.
* "Beer Bust" - Tandem sponsored a weekly get-together for its employees world-wide. It was called "beer bust" due to the availability of beer and wine, paid for by the company, in addition to other beverages and prepared food. This gave employees a way to cross barriers. It was not uncommon to see employees from various functions huddled in a corner, beer in hand, working to solve a problem.
* "Third Class Mail" - Tandem was one of the first companies in which every employee had access to e-mail, which was divided into first, second, and third classes. Third Class mail allowed employees to buy and sell goods, ask questions, and share information that was not company-related. A wide variety of "SIGs" (Special Interest Groups) allowed employees to share a variety of interests with each other.

As the company entered the 90's, however, sales and profits slowed, and many of these innovative programs were either curtailed or eliminated totally. By the end, Tandem was pretty much a company like any other in the computer field, culminating in the buyout by Compaq, who wasted little time eliminating almost all of these. Only beer bust, in a greatly watered down form (literally - many sites banned alcohol), survived.

==References==
<div class="references-small"><references/></div>

==See also==
*[[Stratus Technologies]]

==External links==
* [http://h20223.www2.hp.com/nonstopcomputing/cache/76385-0-0-0-121.aspx NonStop Computing Home] - the main Nonstop Computing page at HP
* [http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/tandem/ Tandem Technical Reports] - a page at HP with a number of Tandem white papers
* [http://www.hpl.hp.com/hpjournal/tandem/ Tandem Systems Review] PDFs 1983-1994

[[Category:Defunct computer companies of the United States]]
[[Category:Companies established in 1974]]

[[de:Tandem Computers]]
[[fr:Tandem Computers]]
[[ja:タンデム・コンピュータ]]
[[fi:Tandem Computers]]
[[zh:天登電腦公司]]

Benutzer:HistorianoftheMarch/Duell Burr–Hamilton

2008-03-18T07:33:19Z

24.6.157.14: Not quite accurate to describe the VP this way at the time.

[[Image:Hamilton-burr-duel.jpg|thumb|320px|A contemporary artistic rendering of the July 11, 1804 duel between Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamilton by J. Mund.]]
The '''Burr-Hamilton duel''' was a [[duel]] between two prominent [[United States|American]]
politicians, the former [[United States Secretary of the Treasury|Secretary of the Treasury]] [[Alexander Hamilton]] and sitting [[Vice President of the United States|Vice President]] [[Aaron Burr]], on [[July 11]], [[1804]].<ref>{{cite web|url= http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/today/jul11.html|title=Today in History: July 11|publisher=Library of Congress|accessdate=2007-04-23}}</ref> Burr shot and mortally wounded Hamilton. Hamilton was carried to the home of one William Bayard, who lived on the Manhattan shore. There Alexander Hamilton died at 2:00pm the next day, 12 July, 1804. A large bloodstain on the floor under where Hamilton had lain and died was not cleaned away by the Bayard family for many years.{{Fact|date=March 2008}}

==Background==
The most famous duel in [[History of the United States|American history]], the Burr-Hamilton duel arose from a long-standing political and personal rivalry that had developed between both men over a course of several years. Tensions reached a bursting point with Hamilton's journalistic defamation of Burr's character during the 1804 [[Governor of New York|New York gubernatorial race]] in which Burr was a candidate. Fought at a time when the practice of dueling was being outlawed in the northern United States, the duel had immense political ramifications. Burr, who survived the duel, would be [[indictment|indicted]] for [[murder]] in both [[New York]] and [[New Jersey]] (though these charges were either later dismissed or resulted in [[acquittal]]), and the harsh criticism and animosity directed towards him would bring about an end to his political career and force him into a self-imposed [[exile]]. Further, Hamilton's untimely death would fatally weaken the fledgling remnants of the [[Federalist Party (United States)|Federalists]] which, following the death of [[George Washington]] (1732-1799) five years earlier, were left without a strong leader.

The duel was the final skirmish of a long conflict between [[Democratic-Republican Party (United States)|Democratic-Republicans]] and Federalists. The conflict began in [[1791]] when Burr captured a Senate seat from [[Philip Schuyler]], Hamilton's father-in-law, who would have supported Federalist policies (Hamilton was [[United States Secretary of the Treasury|Secretary of the Treasury]] at the time.). When the [[United States Electoral College|electoral college]] deadlocked in the [[U.S. presidential election, 1800|election of 1800]], Hamilton's maneuvering in the [[United States House of Representatives|House of Representatives]] caused [[Thomas Jefferson]] to be named President and Burr Vice President. In [[1800]], the Aurora published "''The Public Conduct and Character of [[John Adams]], Esq., President of the United States''," a document highly critical of Adams, which had actually been authored by Hamilton but intended only for private circulation. Some have claimed that Burr leaked the document, but there is no clear evidence for this, nor that Hamilton held him responsible. When it became clear that Jefferson would drop Burr from his ticket in the [[U.S. presidential election, 1804|1804 election]], the Vice President ran for the [[Governor of New York|governorship of New York]] instead. Hamilton campaigned viciously against Burr, who was running as an independent, causing him to lose to [[Morgan Lewis (governor)|Morgan Lewis]], a [[Democratic-Republican]] endorsed by Hamilton.

Both men had been involved in duels in the past. Hamilton had been a principal in 10 shot-less duels prior to his fatal encounter with Burr, including duels with [[William Gordon]] (1779), [[Aedanus Burke]] (1790), [[John Francis Mercer]] (1792-1793), [[James Nicholson (naval officer)|James Nicholson]] (1795), [[James Monroe]] (1797), [[John Adams]] (1800), and Ebenezer Purdy/[[George Clinton (vice president)|George Clinton]] (1804). He also served as a second to [[John Laurens]] in a 1779 duel with [[Charles Lee (general)|General Charles Lee]] and legal client John Auldjo in a 1787 duel with [[William Pierce (politician)|William Pierce]].<ref>Freeman, 1996, p. 294-295.</ref> In addition, Hamilton claimed to have had one previous honor dispute with Burr;<ref>Nathaniel Pendleton to Van Ness. [[June 26]], [[1804]]. ''Hamilton Papers'', 26:270.</ref> Burr claimed there were two.<ref>Burr to Charles Biddle. July 18, 2004. ''Papers of Aaron Burr'', 2: 887.</ref>

Additionally, Hamilton's son, [[Philip Hamilton|Philip]], was killed in a [[November 23]], [[1801]] duel with [[George I. Eacker]] initiated after Philip and his friend Richard Price partook in "hooliganish" behavior in Eacker's box at the [[Park Theatre]]. This was in response to a speech, critical of Hamilton, that Eacker had made on [[July 3]], [[1801]]. Philip and his friend both challenged Eacker to duels when he called them "damned rascals."<ref>Fleming, 1999, p. 7-9.</ref> After Price's duel (also at Weehawken) resulted in nothing more than four missed shots, Hamilton advised his son to ''[[delope]]'', and throw away his fire. However, after both Philip and Eacker stood shotless for a minute after the command "present", Philip leveled his pistol, causing Eacker to fire, mortally wounding Philip and sending his shot awry. This duel is often cited as having a tremendous psychological impact on Hamilton in the context of the Hamilton-Burr duel.<ref>Id.</ref>

===Election of 1800===
Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamilton first came into public opposition during the famed [[election of 1800]]. In the election, Aaron Burr ran on the [[Democratic-Republican Party|Republican Party]] ticket against [[Thomas Jefferson]] (also on the Republican ticket) and [[John Adams]] (the incumbent [[Federalist Party (United States)|Federalist]]). The Republicans won the election, and were expected to nominate Jefferson as President and Burr as Vice President. [[Electoral college]] rules at the time gave each elector two votes for president, with the candidate receiving the second most votes becoming vice president. The Republican party therefore planned to have 72 of their 73 electors vote for both Jefferson and Burr, with the remaining elector voting for Jefferson but not Burr. However, the electors failed to execute this plan, so Burr and Jefferson tied with 73 votes each. As mandated by law in the event of no candidate winning a majority, the election was moved to the [[United States House of Representatives]], which was controlled by the Federalists, many of whom were loath to vote for Jefferson, who had been their party's nemesis since 1789. There, after much debate and a week-long gridlock involving 35 inconclusive ballots being cast by the House, the influence of Alexander Hamilton, a very respected Federalist, said he supported Jefferson because he was "by far not so dangerous a man" as Burr. On the 36th ballot, the House of Representatives gave Jefferson a sufficient majority to ascend to the presidency, with Burr becoming vice president.

===Charles Cooper's letter===
{{wikisourcehas|original texts related to|[[wikisource:Hamilton-Burr duel correspondences|Hamilton-Burr duel correspondences]]}}
On [[April 24]], [[1804]], a vitriolic letter originally sent from [[Charles Cooper|Dr. Charles D. Cooper]] to [[Philip Schuyler]], Hamilton's father-in-law<ref>Cooper to Philip Schuyler. ''Hamilton Papers''. April 23, 1804. 26: 246.</ref> was published in the ''[[List of newspapers in the United States|Albany Register]]'' in the context of opposing Burr's candidacy.<ref>Cooper, Charles D. April 24, 1804. Albany Register.</ref> It claimed to describe "a still more despicable opinion which General Hamilton has expressed of Mr. Burr" at a political dinner. In a letter delivered by William P. Van Ness, Burr demanded "a prompt and unqualified acknowledgement or denial of the use of any expression which would warrant the assertion of Dr. Cooper". Hamilton's reply on May 20 indicated that he could not be held responsible for Cooper's interpretation of his words. Burr's reply on May 21, also delivered by Van Ness, stated that "political opposition can never absolve gentlemen from the necessity of a rigid adherence to the laws of honor and the rules of decorum".<ref name="Winfield 216">Winfield, 1874, p. 216.</ref> Hamilton replied that he had "no other answer to give than that which has already been given". This letter was delivered to [[Nathaniel Pendleton]] on May 22 but did not reach Burr until May 25.<ref name="Winfield 216" /> The delay was due to negotiation between Pendleton and Van Ness in which Pendleton submitted the following paper:

{{cquote|General Hamilton says he cannot imagine what Dr. Cooper may have alluded, unless it were to a conversation at Mr. Taylor's, in Albany, last winter (at which he and General Hamilton were present). General Hamilton cannot recollect distinctly the particulars of that conversation, so as to undertake to repeat them, without running the risk of varying or omitting what might be deemed important circumstances. The expressions are entirely forgotten, and the specific ideas imperfectly remembered; but to the best of his recollection it consisted of comments on the political principles and views of Colonel Burr, and the results that might be expected from them in the event of his election as Governor, without reference to any particular instance of past conduct or private character.<ref>Winfield, 1875, p. 216-217.</ref>}}

After the delivery of Hamilton's second letter, a second paper submitted by Pendleton further offered "in relation to any other language or conversation or language of General Hamilton which Colonel Burr will specify, a prompt or frank avowal or denial will be given." This offer was not accepted and a challenge was formally offered by Burr and accepted by Hamilton.<ref>Winfield, 1875, p. 217.</ref>

Many subsequent historians have considered the causes of the duel to be flimsy and have thus either characterized Hamilton as "suicidal", Burr as "malicious and murderous," or both.<ref>Freeman, 1996, p. 290.</ref>

==The Duel==
[[Image:Hamilton-Burr pistols.jpg|thumb|right|The pistols used in the duel]]
In the early morning hours of [[July 11]], [[1804]], Burr and Hamilton departed by separate boats from Manhattan and rowed across the [[Hudson River]] to a spot known as the [[Weehawken, New Jersey|Heights of Weehawken]] in [[New Jersey]], a popular dueling ground below the towering cliffs of the [[New Jersey Palisades|Palisades]]. Hamilton and Burr agreed to take the duel to Weehawken because dueling had been outlawed in New York (The same site was used for 18 known duels between 1700 and 1845.).<ref>Demontreux, 2004, p. 3.</ref> In an attempt to prevent the participants from being prosecuted, procedures were implemented to give all witnesses plausible deniability. For example, the pistols were transported to the island in a [[portmanteau (suitcase)|portmanteau]], enabling the rowers (who also stood with their backs to the duelists) to say under oath that they had not seen any pistols.

Burr, William P. Van Ness (his second), Matthew L. Davis, and another (often identified as Swartwout) plus their rowers reached the site first at half past six, whereupon Burr and Van Ness started to clear the underbrush from the duelling ground. Hamilton, Judge Nathaniel Pendleton (his second), and Dr. David Hosack arrived a few minutes before seven. Lots were cast for the choice of position and which second should start the duel, both of which were won by Hamilton's second who chose the upper edge of the ledge (which faced the city) for Hamilton.<ref name="Winfield 219">Winfield, 1874, p. 219.</ref> However, according to historian and author [[Joseph Ellis]], since Hamilton had been challenged, he had choice of both weapon and position. Under this account, it was Hamilton himself that chose the upstream or north side position.<ref name="Ellis 24">Ellis, Joseph. Founding Brothers. p. 24</ref>

All first-hand accounts of the duel agree that two shots were fired; however, Hamilton and Burr's seconds disagreed on the intervening time between the shots. It was common for both principals in a duel to fire a shot at the ground to exemplify courage, and then the duel could come to an end. Hamilton apparently fired first, and into the air, though it is not clear whether this was intent, much less that Burr perceived him to be "throwing away his fire" (as it did not follow the standard protocol). Burr returned fire and hit Hamilton in the lower abdomen above the right hip. The bullet ricocheted off Hamilton's second or third [[False ribs|false rib]]—fracturing it—and caused considerable damage to his internal organs, particularly his [[liver]] and [[Thoracic diaphragm|diaphragm]] before becoming lodged in his first or second [[lumbar vertebra]]. According to Pendleton's account, Hamilton collapsed immediately, dropping the pistol involuntarily, and Burr moved toward Hamilton in a speechless manner (which Pendleton deemed to be indicative of regret) before being hustled away behind an umbrella by Van Ness because Hosack and the rowers were already approaching. Burr returned on his barge and had breakfast in Manhattan. According to Van Ness, he ate eggs and toast.<ref>Winfield, 1874, p. 219-220.</ref>

It is entirely uncertain which principal fired first, as both seconds' backs were to the duel in accordance with the pre-arranged regulations of the duel (and also so the men could later testify that they "saw no fire"). After much research to determine the actual events of the duel, Pulitzer-prize winning historian Joseph J. Ellis gives his interpretation:
<blockquote>Hamilton did fire his weapon intentionally, and he fired first. But he aimed to miss Burr, sending his ball into the tree above and behind Burr’s location. In so doing, he did not withhold his shot, but he did waste it, thereby honoring his pre-duel pledge. Meanwhile, Burr, who did not know about the pledge, did know that a projectile from Hamilton’s gun had whizzed past him and crashed into the tree to his rear. According to the principles of the [[code duello]], Burr was perfectly justified in taking deadly aim at Hamilton and firing to kill.<ref name="Ellis 24" /></blockquote>

===Dr. David Hosack's account===
Dr. David Hosack, the physician, wrote his account on [[August 17]], about one month after the duel had taken place. Hosack testified that he had only seen Hamilton and the two seconds disappear "into the wood", heard two shots, and rushed to find a wounded Hamilton when his name was called. Hosack also testified that he had not seen Burr, who had been hidden behind an umbrella by Van Ness, his second.<ref>''William P. Van Ness vs. The Pople''. 1805.</ref> In a letter to William Coleman, Dr. Hosack gives a very clear picture of the events:

{{cquote|When called to him upon his receiving the fatal wound, I found him half sitting on the ground, supported in the arms of Mr. Pendleton. His countenance of death I shall never forget. He had at that instant just strength to say, 'This is a mortal wound, doctor;' when he sunk away, and became to all appearance lifeless. I immediately stripped up his clothes, and soon, alas I ascertained that the direction of the ball must have been through some vital part. His pulses were not to be felt, his respiration was entirely suspended, and, upon laying my hand on his heart and perceiving no motion there, I considered him as irrecoverably gone. I, however, observed to Mr. Pendleton, that the only chance for his reviving was immediately to get him upon the water. We therefore lifted him up, and carried him out of the wood to the margin of the bank, where the bargemen aided us in conveying him into the boat, which immediately put off. During all this time I could not discover the least symptom of returning life. I now rubbed his face, lips, and temples with spirits of [[hartshorn]], applied it to his neck and breast, and to the wrists and palms of his hands, and endeavoured to pour some into his mouth.<ref name="Hosack Coleman">Dr. David Hosack to William Coleman, [[August 17]], [[1804]]</ref>}}

Dr. Hosack goes on to say that in a few minutes Hamilton had revived, either from the hartshorn or fresh air. Hosack finishes his letter:

{{cquote|Soon after recovering his sight, he happened to cast his eye upon the case of pistols, and observing the one that he had had in his hand lying on the outside, he said, "Take care of that pistol; it is undischarged, and still cocked; it may go off and do harm. Pendleton knows " (attempting to turn his head towards him) 'that I did not intend to fire at him.' 'Yes,' said Mr. Pendleton, understanding his wish, 'I have already made Dr. Hosack acquainted with your determination as to that' He then closed his eyes and remained calm, without any disposition to speak; nor did he say much afterward, except in reply to my questions. He asked me once or twice how I found his pulse; and he informed me that his lower extremities had lost all feeling, manifesting to me that he entertained no hopes that he should long survive.<ref name="Hosack Coleman" />}}

===Statement to the press===
Pendleton and Van Ness issued a press statement about the events of the duel. The statement printed out the agreed upon dueling rules and events that transpired, that being given the order to present, both participants were free to open fire. After first fire had been given, the opposite's second would count to three and the opponent would fire, or sacrifice his shot.<ref name="URL">{{ru icon}} [http://odur.let.rug.nl/~usa/B/hamilton/hamil43.htm From Revolution to Reconstruction: Biographies: A. Hamilton -document]</ref> Pendleton and Van Ness disagree as to who fired the first shot, but concur that both men had fired "within a few seconds of each other" (as they must have: neither Pendleton nor Van Ness mention counting down).<ref name="URL" />

In Pendleton's amended version of the statement, he and a friend went to the site of the duel the day after Hamilton's death to discover where Hamilton's shot went. The statement reads: {{cquote|They [Mr. Pendleton and an accomplice] ascertained that the ball passed through the limb of a cedar tree, at an elevation of about twelve feet and a half, perpendicularly from the ground, between thirteen and fourteen feet from the mark on which General Hamilton stood, and about four feet wide of the direct line between him and Col. Burr, on the right side; he having fallen on the left.<ref>Nathaniel Pendleton’s Amended Version of His and William P. Ness’s Statement of [[July 11]], [[1804]]</ref>}}

===Hamilton's intentions===
In ''Statement on Impending Duel with Aaron Burr'', a letter that Hamilton wrote the night before the duel,<ref>The letter is not dated, but the consensus among Hamilton's contemporaries (including Burr) and historians suggests it was written [[July 10]] [[1804]], the night before the duel. See: Freeman, 1996, note 1.</ref> Hamilton stated that he was "strongly opposed to the practice of dueling" for both religious and practical reasons and continued to state:

{{cquote|I have resolved, if our interview is conducted in the usual manner, and it pleases God to give me the opportunity, to reserve and throw away my first fire, and I have thoughts even of reserving my second fire.<ref>Hamilton, 1804, 26:278.</ref>}}

When Burr later learned of this, he responded: "Contemptible, if true."<ref>Joseph Wheelan, ''Jefferson's Vendetta: The Pursuit of Aaron Burr and the Judiciary'', New York, Carroll & Graf Publishers, 2005, ISBN 0786714379, p. 90</ref>

In addition, after being mortally wounded, Hamilton, upon regaining consciousness told Dr. Hosack that his gun was still loaded and that “Pendleton knows I did not mean to fire at Col. Burr the first time”. This is evidence for the theory that Hamilton intended not to fire, honoring his pre-duel pledge, and only fired accidentally upon being hit.<ref>Nathaniel Pendleton’s Amended Version of His and William P. Ness’s Statement of [[July 11]], [[1804]]</ref>

However, 20th century historians have debated to what extent Hamilton's statements and letter represent his true beliefs, and how much of this was a deliberate attempt to ruin Burr once and for all should worse come to worst and Hamilton fall. An example of this may be seen in what some historians have considered to be deliberate attempts to provoke Burr on the dueling ground, specifically that:

{{cquote|Hamilton performed a series of deliberately provocative actions to ensure a lethal outcome. As they were taking their places, he asked that the proceedings stop, adjusted his spectacles, and slowly, repeatedly, sighted along his pistol to test his aim.<ref>Ogeden, 1979, p. 60.</ref>}}

In addition, Hamilton had been reported as having severe mood swings, characteristic of a manic-depressive starting as early as 1800. If Hamilton was indeed manic-depressive, his intentions for dueling with Burr may have been psychologically delusional.

This, along with Hamilton's conspicuous choice of dueling pistols (the same pair which had once shot a button off of Aaron Burr's coat some five years earlier during a duel with Hamilton's brother-in-law), has caused many historians in recent years to re-examine the circumstances of the engagement and Hamilton's true intentions on the morning of the 11th of July.

===Burr's intentions===
Burr was reputed as not being a very good shot, but there is little doubt that he had every intention of seeking full satisfaction from Hamilton by blood.<ref>Winfield. 1874. p. 220.</ref> The afternoon after the duel, Burr was quoted as boasting that had his vision not been impaired by the morning [[mist]], he would have shot Hamilton in the [[heart]].<ref>''N.Y. Spectator''. [[July 28]] [[1824]].</ref> According to the account of [[Jeremy Bentham]], who met with Burr in 1808 in England (four years after the fact), Burr claimed to have been certain of his ability to kill Hamilton, and Bentham concluded that Burr was "little better than a murderer."<ref>Sabine. 1857. p. 212.</ref>

Towards the end of his life, Burr remarked: "Had I read [[Laurence Sterne|Sterne]] more and [[Voltaire]] less, I should have known the world was wide enough for Hamilton and me."<ref>[http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/ah/1975/5/1975_5_45.shtml AmericanHeritage.com / The Fateful Encounter]</ref>

There is, however, much evidence in Burr's defense. Had Hamilton apologized for his "despicable opinion of Mr. Burr",<ref>Steven C. Smith. My Friend Hamilton-Whom I Shot. [http://www.wright.edu/studentorgs/pat/doc/burrhamilton.pdf]</ref> all would have been forgotten. However neither principal could avoid the confrontation honorably and thus each was forced into a duel: Burr to regain his honor and Hamilton to sustain his.<ref>Joanne B. Freedman. Dueling as Politics: Reinterpreting the Burr-Hamilton Duel</ref>

Furthermore it should be noted that Burr was unsure of Hamilton's intentions (as historians still are today). Watching Hamilton's shot soar through the air into the brush above his head, Burr could not be sure if Hamilton had thrown his shot or just missed. According to the principles of the ''code duello'' Burr was entirely justified in taking aim at Hamilton.<ref>Gian A. Pepe. This Is a Mortal Wound, Doctor</ref>. Furthermore, it is not even clear that Burr did more than reacting to hearing Hamilton fire, before he had any time to observe where it went.

===The Pistols===
Others have attributed Hamilton's apparent misfire to the hair-triggered design of the [[Wogdon & Barton|Wogdon]] [[duelling pistol]]s, both of which survive today. Only Hamilton, familiar with the weapons, would have known about and been able to use the hair-trigger. However, when asked by Pendleton before the duel if he would have the "hair-spring" pistol, Hamilton reportedly replied "not this time."<ref name="Winfield 219" /> The "hair-spring" pistol provided an advantage because it took less time to fire, being more sensitive to the movement of the trigger finger.

The pistols belonged to Hamilton's brother-in-law, John Barker Church, who was a business partner of both Hamilton and Burr. He purchased the pistols in London in 1797. They had previously been used in a 1799 duel between Church and Burr, in which neither man was injured. In 1801, Hamilton's son, Philip, used them in the duel in which he died. In [[1930]] the pistols were sold to the [[Chase Manhattan Bank]], now preserved by [[J.P. Morgan Chase & Co.|JPMorgan Chase & Co]]. The guns are on display in the Executive Conference center of 277 Park Avenue in Manhattan.

For the [[United States Bicentennial]] anniversary in 1976, Chase Manhattan allowed the pistols to be removed and loaned to the U.S. Bicentennial Society of Richmond. When the original pistol was examined, the concealed hair trigger was discovered.<ref>http://www.aaronburrassociation.org/Smithsonian.htm Pistols shed light on famed duel (Smithsonian magazine, November 1976)</ref>

==Aftermath==
A mortally wounded Hamilton died the following day and was buried in the [[Trinity Churchyard Cemetery]] in [[Manhattan]] (Hamilton was nominally [[Episcopal Church in the United States of America|Episcopalian]]). [[Gouverneur Morris]], a political ally of Hamilton's, gave the eulogy at his funeral and secretly established a fund to support his widow and children.

Burr was charged with murder in [[New York]] and [[New Jersey]], but neither charge reached trial. In [[Bergen County, New Jersey]], a [[grand jury]] indicted Burr for [[murder]] in November 1804, but the [[New Jersey Supreme Court]] quashed the indictment on a motion from Colonel Ogden.<ref>''Centinel of Freedom. November 24, 1807, cited in Winfield, 1874, p. 220.</ref>

Burr fled to [[South Carolina]], where his daughter lived with her family, but soon returned to [[Washington, D.C.]] to complete his term of service as Vice President. He presided over the [[Samuel Chase]] [[Impeachment in the United States|impeachment trial]] "with the dignity and impartiality of an angel and the rigor of a devil." Burr's heartfelt farewell speech in March [[1805]] moved some of his harshest critics in the Senate to tears.<ref>[http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/Indicted_Vice_President_Bids_Senate_Farewell.htm U.S. Senate: Art & History Home > Historical Minutes > 1801-1850 > Indicted Vice President Bids Senate Farewell]</ref>
[[Image:Hamiltonmonumentmap.jpg|thumb|left|An 1841 map showing the location of a Hamilton Monument.]]
With his political career apparently over, Burr went west, where he became involved in "filibuster" plans, which some later claimed were intended to establish a new independent empire carved out of the [[Louisiana territory]]. However, after [[James Wilkinson|General James Wilkinson]], who had worked with Burr, backed out of their plans and William Eaton accused Burr to [[Thomas Jefferson|President Jefferson]], Burr was charged with [[treason]] after being detained in Missouri in the process of recruiting for his coup. He was later acquitted due to lack of physical evidence. Wilkinson, his chief accuser, was revealed during the trial to have tampered with evidence, and has since been revealed as a "double-agent", paid by the Spanish.

Years later, Burr returned to [[New York City]] to practice law and was tried and acquitted for his role in the duel. He died in [[1836]] in [[Staten Island]], [[New York]], never having apologized to Hamilton's family.

===Monuments===
The first memorial to the duel was constructed in 1806 by the [[Saint Andrew Society]], of which Hamilton was formerly a member. A 14 foot [[marble]] [[cenotaph]], consisting of an [[obelisk]] topped by a flaming urn and a plaque with a quote from [[Horace]] surrounded by an iron fence, was constructed approximately where Hamilton was believed to have fallen.<ref>Demontreux, 2004, p. 3-4.</ref> Duels continued to be fought at the site and the marble was slowly vandalized and removed for souvenirs, leaving nothing remaining by 1820. The tablet itself did survive, turning up in a junk store and finding its way to the [[New York Historical Society]] in [[Manhattan]], where it still resides.<ref>Demontreux, 2004, p. 4.</ref>

From 1820 to 1857, the site was marked by two stones with the names Hamilton and Burr placed where they were thought to have stood during the duel. When a road from [[Hoboken, New Jersey|Hoboken]] to [[Fort Lee, New Jersey|Fort Lee]] was built through the site in 1858, an inscription on a boulder where a mortally wounded Hamilton was thought to have rested—one of the many pieces of [[graffiti]] left by visitors—was all that remained. No primary accounts of the duel confirm the boulder anecdote. In 1870, [[railroad]] tracks were built directly through the site, and the boulder was hauled to the top of the Palisades, where it remains today.<ref>Demontreux, 2004, p. 5.</ref> In 1894, an iron fence was built around the boulder, supplemented by a bust of Hamilton and a plaque. The bust was thrown over the cliff on [[October 14]], [[1934]] by vandals and the head was never recovered; a new bust was installed on [[July 12]], [[1935]].<ref>Demontreux, 2004, p. 6.</ref>

The plaque was stolen by vandals in the 1980s and an abbreviated version of the text was inscribed on the indentation left in the boulder, which remained until the 1990s when a granite pedestal was added in front of the boulder and the bust was moved to the top of the pedestal. New markers were added on [[July 11]], [[2004]], the 200th anniversary of the duel.<ref>Demontreux, 2004, p. 7-9.</ref>

==References==
*Berg, Al and Sherman, Lauren. 2004. "[http://duel2004.weehawkenhistory.org/pistols.pdf Pistols at Weehawken]." Weehawken Historical Commission.
*Coleman, William. 1804. ''A Collection of Facts and Documents, relative to the death of Major-General Alexander Hamilton''. New York.
*Cooke, Syrett and Jean G, eds. 1960. ''Interview in Weehawken: The Burr-Hamilton Duel as Told in the Original Documents''. Middletown, Connecticuit.
*Cooper, Charles D. [[April 24]], [[1804]]. ''Albany Register''.
*Demontreux, Willie. 2004. "[http://duel2004.weehawkenhistory.org/Duel2004%20Monument.pdf The Changing Face of the Hamilton Monument]." Weehawken Historical Commission.
*Flagg, Thomas R. 2004. "[http://duel2004.weehawkenhistory.org/flagg.pdf An Investigation into the Location of the Weehawken Dueling Ground]." Weehawken Historical Commission.
*Flemming, Thomas. 1999. ''The Duel: Alexander Hamilton, Aaron Burr, and the Future of America''. New York: Perseus Books. ISBN 0-465-01736-3
*Frazier, Ian. [[February 16]], [[2004]]. "[http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?040216fa_fact3 Route 3]." ''The New Yorker''.
*Freeman, Joanne B. 1996. "[http://www.jstor.org/view/00435597/di976426/97p0642y/0 Dueling as Politics: Reinterpreting the Burr-Hamilton duel]." ''The William and Mary Quarterly'', 3rd series, 53 (2): 289-318.
*''The Papers of Alexander Hamilton''. Harold C. Syrett, ed. 27 vols. New York: 1961-1987
*Pepe, Gian A. 2007. "This Is a Mortal Wound, Doctor: Interpreting the Burr-Hamilton Duel."
**Hamilton, Alexander. "Statement on Impending Duel with Aaron Burr," [June 28-July 10], 26: 278.
**Cooper to Philip Schuyler. [[April 23]], [[1804]]. 26: 246.
*Lindsay, Merrill. 1976. [http://www.aaronburrassociation.org/Smithsonian.htm "Pistols Shed Light on Famed Duel."] ''Smithsonian'', VI (November): 94-98.
*McGrath, Ben. [[May 31]], [[2004]]. "[http://www.newyorker.com/talk/content/?040607ta_talk_mcgrath Reënactment: Burr vs. Hamilton]." ''The New Yorker''.
*New-York Evening Post. [[July 17]], [[1804]]. "[http://duel2004.weehawkenhistory.org/hamobit.pdf Funeral Obsequies]." From the Collection of the New York Historical Society.
*Thomas H. Ogden, “On Projective Identifications,” in International Journal of Psychoanalysis (1979), 60, 357. Cf. Rogow, A Fatal Friendship, 327, note 29.
*PBS. 1996. ''[http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/duel/filmmore/transcript/index.html American Experience: The Duel]''. Documentary transcript.
*Reid, John. 1898. "[http://duel2004.weehawkenhistory.org/Duel-JohnReid.pdf Where Hamilton Fell: The Exact Location of the Famous Duelling Ground]." Weehawken Historical Commission.
*Rorabaugh, W.J. 1995. "The Political Duel in the Early Republic: Burr v. Hamilton." ''Journal of the Early Republic''. 15:1-23.
*Sabine, Lorenzo. ''Notes on Duels and Duelling''. Boston.
*Van Ness, William P. 1804. ''A Correct Statement of the Late Melancholy Affair of Honor, Between General Hamilton and Col. Burr. New York.
*''William P. Ness vs. The People.'' January 1805. Duel papers, William P. Ness papers, New York Historical Society.
*Wilson, James Grant. 1869. "[http://duel2004.weehawkenhistory.org/appleton.htm The Weehawken Dueling Ground]." ''Literature, Science, and Art'', 1 (11): 339-340.
*Winfield, Charles H. 1874. ''History of the County of Hudson, New Jersey from Its Earliest Settlement to the Present Time''. New York: Kennard and Hay. Chapter 8, "[http://duel2004.weehawkenhistory.org/winfieldch8duels.pdf Duels]." p. 200-231.

==Notes==
<div class="references-small">
<references/>
</div>

==External links==
*[http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/duel/index.html American Experience - The Duel] - Official PBS Hamilton-Burr Duel Documentary site
*[http://duel2004.weehawkenhistory.org/ Duel 2004] - A site dedicated to the 200th anniversary of the duel.

[[Category:American political scandals]]
[[Category:Dueling]]
[[Category:1804 in the United States]]
[[Category:Political history of the United States]]
[[Category:Alexander Hamilton|Duel]]
[[Category:Political violence in the United States]]

[[yi:בור העמילטאן דועל]]

Brothers to the Rescue

2008-01-30T07:08:19Z

24.6.157.14: /* Juan Pablo Roque */

[[Image:Cuba-Florida map.jpg|250px|right|thumb|[[Cuba]] is 90 miles (145 km) south of [[Florida]] in the US]]
'''Brothers to the Rescue''' ([[Spanish language|Spanish]]: '''''Hermanos al Rescate''''') is a [[Miami]]-based [[activist]] organization headed by [[José Basulto]]. Formed by [[Cuban exile]]s, the group is widely known for its [[Opposition to Fidel Castro|opposition]] to the [[Cuba]]n government and [[President of Cuba|President]] [[Fidel Castro]]. The group formed in 1991 and describes itself as a humanitarian organization aiming to assist and rescue raft refugees emigrating from Cuba and to "support the efforts of the Cuban people to free themselves from dictatorship through the use of active nonviolence".<ref name="Brothers website">Website of Brothers to the Rescue - Background and information. [http://www.hermanos.org/Background%20and%20Information.htm]</ref>

The Cuban government on the other hand accuses them of involvement in [[terrorism|terrorist acts]].<ref name="Cubaunletter>Annex to the letter dated 29 October 2001 from the Permanent Representative of Cuba to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General. Summary of principal terrorist actions against Cuba (1990-2000). [http://www.un.org/documents/ga/docs/56/a56521.pdf]</ref><ref name="cubasolidarity">"The Cuban Downing of the Planes. The News We Haven't Been Hearing...." Article from Cuban Solidarity Net [http://www.cubasolidarity.net/planes2.html]</ref> In the course of many flights throughout the early 1990s, the group's planes made repeated incursions into Cuban territory. While these were widely considered airspace violations, Brothers to the Rescue believes that these were acts of legitimate resistance against the government. In 1996, ignoring a final warning by Cuba, two Brothers to the Rescue planes were shot down by the Cuban Air Force, leading to international condemnation.

==Rafting missions==
[[Image:BTTR leaflet.jpg|thumb|right|150px|Sample political leaflet dropped by Brothers to the Rescue on Cuba in 1996.]]
In the first years, the group was actively rescuing rafters from Cuba, being credited with rescuing thousands of Cubans who were emigrating from the country.<ref name="Brothers website"> Website of Brothers to the Rescue - Background and information. [http://www.hermanos.org/Background%20and%20Information.htm]</ref> Eventually, the group's focus shifted after [[Wet feet, dry feet policy|changes in U.S. immigration policy]] meant that rafters would be sent back to Cuba. The group's founder has stated that after August 1995 it stopped seeing rafters in the water. Heavily dependent on funding for rafting activities, the group's funding rapidly dropped to $320,455 in 1995, down from $1.5 million the year before. As a result, the group shifted its activities. At least once, the group's founder dropped leaflets on Cuba.<ref name="spytrial">Court testimony from the Cuban spy trial, referred in ''The Miami Herald'' March 13, 2001. [http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/exile/basulto-testifies.htm]</ref>

==Juan Pablo Roque==
One of the group's pilots, Cuban [[sleeper agent]] Juan Pablo Roque (a former Cuban MiG pilot), unexpectedly left on February 23, 1996, the day before the two planes were shot down, and turned up in [[Havana]] where he condemned Brothers to the Rescue. Roque, a former major in the Cuban air force, pretended to defect from Cuba four years earlier and was soon after recruited by Brothers to the Rescue where he flew several missions. Despite being dismissed as a Cuban agent by US officials, Roque denied that he worked for the Cuban government. He said he returned home because he had become disillusioned with the methods of the Brothers, including what he said were its plans to carry out attacks on military bases in Cuba and to disrupt its defense communications. Roque appeared on Cuban television on February 26, 1996, where he denounced Brothers to the Rescue as an illegal and anti-Cuban organization the fundamental purpose of which is to provoke incidents that aggravated relations between Cuba and United States. In an interview with ICAO, he stated that the group had planned to introduce anti-personnel weapons into Cuba and blow up high tension pylons to interrupt the energy supply.<ref name="ICAO">"Report on the shooting down of two U.S.-registered private civil aircraft by Cuban military aircraft on 24 February 1996", C-WP/10441, June 20, 1996, United Nations Security Council document, [http://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N96/164/16/img/N9616416.pdf?OpenElement S/1996/509], July 1, 1996.</ref>

While in Miami, Roque had contacts with and was paid by the [[Federal Bureau of Investigation|FBI]]. Roque's declarations brought questions about the role of agencies such as the FBI and [[Central Intelligence Agency|CIA]] in the activities of the exile community. However, White House spokesperson David Johnson said that "there does not exist, nor has there existed, any tie between the North American intelligence services and Hermanos al Rescate," adding that the organization is "not a [[Front organization|front]]" for those services, nor is it financed by them.<ref name="cubasolidarity">/</ref><ref name="Notisur">/</ref>

==1996 shootdown incident==
[[Image:BTTR_southernmost_positions.gif|thumb|250px|right|Map showing the southernmost positions (prior to the incident) of the three planes according to US and Cuban data.]]
[[Image:BTTR_location_of_shootdown.gif|250px|thumb|right|The map shows the locations where the two planes were reportedly shot down. Finding many inconsistencies in US and Cuban data, the ICAO investigation determined the most likely location to be that determined from information from the ship "Majesty of the Seas".
.]]

On February 24, 1996 Cuban [[MiG-23]] and [[MiG-29]] jets shot down two Brothers to the Rescue planes, killing pilots Carlos Costa, Armando Alejandre, Jr., Mario de la Peña, and Pablo Morales. A third plane, flown by Basulto, escaped. The planes used were unarmed [[Cessna 337]]s, a twin-engine civilian light plane known for its safety and simple operation. A type similar to those owned by Brothers to the Rescue, instead designated the O-2A Super Skymaster, had a decade earlier been used by the [[United States Air Force]], but all of the aircraft owned and flown by Brothers to the Rescue were civilian type Cessna 337 Skymasters, as were those that were shot down that day. Nonetheless, Cuba claimed that the letters USAF were still clearly visible on them. However, the Cuban Air Force pilots' radio transmissions proved that they had been identified as belonging to Brothers to the Rescue before the shootdown.

The incident was investigated in detail by the [[International Civil Aviation Organization]] (ICAO). The report concluded that the authorities in Cuba had notified the authorities in the United States of multiple violations of their airspace since May 1994.<ref name="ICAO"/> In at least one case (13 July 1995), the pilot had released leaflets over Havana. The United States authorities had issued public statements advising of the potential consequences of unauthorized entry into Cuban airspace and had initiated legal actions against the above-mentioned pilot, which proved to be groundless; Basulto retained his certifications to fly. After Basulto was warned by an [[Federal Aviation Administration|FAA]] official about the possibility of being shot down, he replied, "You must understand I have a mission in life to perform," disregarding the potential danger involved. He would later say he considered the group's activities to be acts of [[civil disobedience]] against the regime, and a demonstration that such disobedience was possible.<ref name="spytrial">Court testimony from the Cuban spy trial, referred in ''The Miami Herald'' March 13, 2001. [http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/exile/basulto-testifies.htm]</ref>

According to Cuban authorities, two light aircraft entered Cuban territorial airspace on 9 and 13 January 1996, and released leaflets which fell on Cuban territory. According to the pilot of one of the aircraft, half a million leaflets were released on January 13; he also claims they were released outside the 12-mile (22 km) Cuban territorial limit and the wind carried them to [[Havana]]. This version of events was even detailed by none other than Juan Pablo Roque, the man who had returned to Cuba the day before the shootdown and who later implicated as having helped organize the shootdown as a Cuban spy placed with the group. According to Roque, however, Basulto had dropped the leaflets from 10 miles north of Havana, not the stated 12 miles from a high altitude on a day when the winds would carry them south toward Cuba. Specifically, in a Cuban television interview days after the shootdown took place, Roque, from within Cuba, stated, "I personally have violated air space, specifically the last was on January 9, 1996. where I got a call the day before to participate in a flight to Havana where thousands of leaflets were going to be released from a height of morn than 9.500 feet at a distance of less than 10 miles from the coast."

Following that incident, the ICAO report states, the Commander of the Anti-Aircraft Defence of the Air Force of Cuba was instructed to intercept any further flights and authorized to shoot them down, whether or not they had entered Cuban airspace.

On [[February 24]], [[1996]], the group's planes flew another search and rescue mission. According to the ICAO report, the Cuban Air Force shot down the first plane while all three planes were north of the 12 mile limit of Cuban airspace. Afterwards, Basulto trespassed into Cuban airspace, still heading east, for less than 45 seconds. The second plane was then shot down, approximately ten miles farther north. Thus, it is beyond question that one plane, Basulto's N2506, entered Cuban airspace that day, albeit on very briefly and apparently by accident in the confusion of the events, having spotted the MiG fighters. 

Two of the group's three planes flying that day were shot down. The third, with Basulto on board, was also identified for intercept and was to be shot down. Two Cuban Air Force MiG-23 jet fighters were scrambled to chase him northward. Thereafter, based on the timing of subsequent transcripts and Basulto's known position, they chased his airplane across the 24th Parallel and into US airspace before the mission was aborted when Cuban authorities apparently realized that they were running great risks flying that far north. According to the U.S. Military, the fact that no USAF F-15s were launched from Homestead AFB was a matter of a "communications error."

It is disputed whether the planes were over Cuban territorial airspace at the time of the shootdown, but it is undisputed that at least one of their planes actually entered Cuban airspace prior to the shootdown.<ref name="ICAO"/> Finding US and Cuban radar-based data on the location in mutual contradiction (see image), the ICAO used the known positions of the U.S. cruise liner [[Majesty of the Seas]] and fishing boat Tri-Liner to locate the incidents at 10 to 11 miles (18 to 20 km) outside Cuba's 12-mile limit. That is two to three miles (4 to 6 km) from where the U.S. radar tracks put them, and roughly 16 to 17 miles (30 to 32 km) from where the Cuban government claimed that the planes went down. Five years later, testimony from a retired US colonel supported Cuba's claim that both Brothers aircraft, along with a third flown by Brothers founder and pilot [[José Basulto]], were only four to five miles off the Cuban coast.<ref>Court testimony of retired US colonel Buchner, reported in ''The Miami Herald'', March 22, 2001 "Fliers downed by MiGs violated Cuban airspace, colonel says".[http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/espionage/buchner-testimony.htm]</ref> However, numerous other U.S. officials, including the sworn testimony of a U.S. Government radar operator, Major Jeffrey Houlihan, himself a former intercept officer who used to coordinate the defense of the southern U.S. border, make it clear that the aircraft were not in Cuban airspace at the time. His testimony was backed up by actual screen prints from his radar displays.

Notably, the aircraft that were shot down were both very near the U.S fishing vessel, Tri-Liner (in one case directly above), and nearby the cruise ship, Majesty of the Seas, which filmed the smoke cloud from the shootdown itself. Clearly, these vessels, both with GPS navigation systems were not within Cuban waters. Sworn depositions were taken from the crew members and captain of these vessels as to their location and what they saw that day.

The ICAO report also states that means other than interception, such as radio communication, had been available to Cuba, but had not been utilized, and that this conflicts with the ICAO principle that interception of civil aircraft should be undertaken only as a last resort. Nor did the Cuban Air Force make any attempt to direct the aircraft beyond the boundaries of national airspace, guide them away from a prohibited, restricted or danger area or instruct them to effect a landing.

===Reactions to the incident===
====International====
Following the incident, U.S.-sponsored [[United Nations Security Council Resolution 1067]] (1996) condemning Cuba was passed. Dissenting members believed that the resolution was singling out Cuba for condemnation, and instead should have issued a call which urged states both to refrain from shooting down civilian airplanes as well as to prevent the improper use of civil aviation.<ref>United Nations press release SC/6247: Security Council condemns use of weapons against civil aircraft; calls on Cuba to comply with international law. 27 July 1996 [http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/1996/19960727.sc6247.html]</ref> In the [[European Union]], the incident was condemned.

====United States====
In the United States, the incident led to widespread and sharp condemnation of Cuba, and the incident in turn prompted the adoption of the [[Helms-Burton Act]], which strengthens and continues the [[United States embargo against Cuba]].The high-profile and controversial trial of the "[[Cuban Five]]" on [[espionage]] and [[conspiracy]] charges resulted in convictions and long prison sentences for five Cuban agents.

In Miami, reaction from the exile community was swift. [[Jorge Mas Canosa]], head of the powerful [[Cuban American National Foundation]], condemned the attack: "For two warplanes from the Castro government to shoot down two unarmed civilian planes with American flags on a humanitarian mission should be considered an act of war against the US".<ref name="Notisur">/</ref>

====Cuban response====
Miguel Alfonso Martinez of the Cuban Foreign Ministry stated in an interview that during the previous 20 months, planes belonging to the Hermanos group had flown into Cuban airspace 25 times. He asked, "What would happen if an unidentified, or an identified, aircraft piloted by declared enemies of the US was detected flying over Washington? What would the US authorities do? Would they allow it to continue flying undisturbed?" He also said that the two aircraft that were shot down were "not common civilian aircraft," as suggested by the US. "This is not the case of an innocent civilian airliner that, because of an instrument error, departs from an air corridor and gets into the airspace of another country". "These people knew what they were doing. They were warned. They wanted to take certain actions that were clearly intended to destabilize the Cuban government and the US authorities knew about their intentions".<ref name="Notisur"> "U.S. TIGHTENS SANCTIONS AGAINST CUBA AFTER DOWNING OF TWO EXILE PLANES OFF CUBAN COAST". In NotiSur - Latin American Political Affairs ISSN 1060-4189, Volume 6, Number 9 March 1, 1996 [http://ssdc.ucsd.edu/news/notisur/h96/notisur.19960301.html]</ref>

Pro-Cuba groups, while not approving the shootdown, responded that "the policies of the United States government of indefensible hostility against the island of Cuba that sit at the heart of the matter", citing constant threats and a history of military and paramilitary attacks on Cuba from the US and paramilitary groups.<ref name="cubasolidarity">/</ref>

==See also==
{{portalpar|Cuba|Flag of Cuba.svg}}
*[[Cuba-United States relations]]
*[[List of Cuba-US aircraft hijackings]]

==Notes==
{{Reflist}}

==External links==
*[http://www.hermanos.org/ Brothers to the Rescue Homepage]
*[http://www.theshootdown.com Shoot Down] A 2006 film about the event, co-produced by the niece of one of the four victims.

{{Cuba-United States relations}}

[[Category:Cuban-American relations]]
[[Category:Organizations based in Florida]]
[[Category:Miami, Florida]]
[[Category:Accidents and incidents in general aviation]]
[[Category:Opposition to Fidel Castro]]

[[it:Hermanos al Rescate]]

Brothers to the Rescue

2008-01-30T07:07:28Z

24.6.157.14: /* Juan Pablo Roque */

[[Image:Cuba-Florida map.jpg|250px|right|thumb|[[Cuba]] is 90 miles (145 km) south of [[Florida]] in the US]]
'''Brothers to the Rescue''' ([[Spanish language|Spanish]]: '''''Hermanos al Rescate''''') is a [[Miami]]-based [[activist]] organization headed by [[José Basulto]]. Formed by [[Cuban exile]]s, the group is widely known for its [[Opposition to Fidel Castro|opposition]] to the [[Cuba]]n government and [[President of Cuba|President]] [[Fidel Castro]]. The group formed in 1991 and describes itself as a humanitarian organization aiming to assist and rescue raft refugees emigrating from Cuba and to "support the efforts of the Cuban people to free themselves from dictatorship through the use of active nonviolence".<ref name="Brothers website">Website of Brothers to the Rescue - Background and information. [http://www.hermanos.org/Background%20and%20Information.htm]</ref>

The Cuban government on the other hand accuses them of involvement in [[terrorism|terrorist acts]].<ref name="Cubaunletter>Annex to the letter dated 29 October 2001 from the Permanent Representative of Cuba to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General. Summary of principal terrorist actions against Cuba (1990-2000). [http://www.un.org/documents/ga/docs/56/a56521.pdf]</ref><ref name="cubasolidarity">"The Cuban Downing of the Planes. The News We Haven't Been Hearing...." Article from Cuban Solidarity Net [http://www.cubasolidarity.net/planes2.html]</ref> In the course of many flights throughout the early 1990s, the group's planes made repeated incursions into Cuban territory. While these were widely considered airspace violations, Brothers to the Rescue believes that these were acts of legitimate resistance against the government. In 1996, ignoring a final warning by Cuba, two Brothers to the Rescue planes were shot down by the Cuban Air Force, leading to international condemnation.

==Rafting missions==
[[Image:BTTR leaflet.jpg|thumb|right|150px|Sample political leaflet dropped by Brothers to the Rescue on Cuba in 1996.]]
In the first years, the group was actively rescuing rafters from Cuba, being credited with rescuing thousands of Cubans who were emigrating from the country.<ref name="Brothers website"> Website of Brothers to the Rescue - Background and information. [http://www.hermanos.org/Background%20and%20Information.htm]</ref> Eventually, the group's focus shifted after [[Wet feet, dry feet policy|changes in U.S. immigration policy]] meant that rafters would be sent back to Cuba. The group's founder has stated that after August 1995 it stopped seeing rafters in the water. Heavily dependent on funding for rafting activities, the group's funding rapidly dropped to $320,455 in 1995, down from $1.5 million the year before. As a result, the group shifted its activities. At least once, the group's founder dropped leaflets on Cuba.<ref name="spytrial">Court testimony from the Cuban spy trial, referred in ''The Miami Herald'' March 13, 2001. [http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/exile/basulto-testifies.htm]</ref>

==Juan Pablo Roque==
One of the group's pilots, Juan Pablo Roque (a former Cuban MiG pilot), unexpectedly left on February 23, 1996, the day before the two planes were shot down, and turned up in [[Havana]] where he condemned Brothers to the Rescue. Roque, a former major in the Cuban air force, pretended to defect from Cuba four years earlier and was soon after recruited by Brothers to the Rescue where he flew several missions. Despite being dismissed as a Cuban agent by US officials, Roque denied that he worked for the Cuban government. He said he returned home because he had become disillusioned with the methods of the Brothers, including what he said were its plans to carry out attacks on military bases in Cuba and to disrupt its defense communications. Roque appeared on Cuban television on February 26, 1996, where he denounced Brothers to the Rescue as an illegal and anti-Cuban organization the fundamental purpose of which is to provoke incidents that aggravated relations between Cuba and United States. In an interview with ICAO, he stated that the group had planned to introduce anti-personnel weapons into Cuba and blow up high tension pylons to interrupt the energy supply.<ref name="ICAO">"Report on the shooting down of two U.S.-registered private civil aircraft by Cuban military aircraft on 24 February 1996", C-WP/10441, June 20, 1996, United Nations Security Council document, [http://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N96/164/16/img/N9616416.pdf?OpenElement S/1996/509], July 1, 1996.</ref>

While in Miami, Roque had contacts with and was paid by the [[Federal Bureau of Investigation|FBI]]. Roque's declarations brought questions about the role of agencies such as the FBI and [[Central Intelligence Agency|CIA]] in the activities of the exile community. However, White House spokesperson David Johnson said that "there does not exist, nor has there existed, any tie between the North American intelligence services and Hermanos al Rescate," adding that the organization is "not a [[Front organization|front]]" for those services, nor is it financed by them.<ref name="cubasolidarity">/</ref><ref name="Notisur">/</ref>

==1996 shootdown incident==
[[Image:BTTR_southernmost_positions.gif|thumb|250px|right|Map showing the southernmost positions (prior to the incident) of the three planes according to US and Cuban data.]]
[[Image:BTTR_location_of_shootdown.gif|250px|thumb|right|The map shows the locations where the two planes were reportedly shot down. Finding many inconsistencies in US and Cuban data, the ICAO investigation determined the most likely location to be that determined from information from the ship "Majesty of the Seas".
.]]

On February 24, 1996 Cuban [[MiG-23]] and [[MiG-29]] jets shot down two Brothers to the Rescue planes, killing pilots Carlos Costa, Armando Alejandre, Jr., Mario de la Peña, and Pablo Morales. A third plane, flown by Basulto, escaped. The planes used were unarmed [[Cessna 337]]s, a twin-engine civilian light plane known for its safety and simple operation. A type similar to those owned by Brothers to the Rescue, instead designated the O-2A Super Skymaster, had a decade earlier been used by the [[United States Air Force]], but all of the aircraft owned and flown by Brothers to the Rescue were civilian type Cessna 337 Skymasters, as were those that were shot down that day. Nonetheless, Cuba claimed that the letters USAF were still clearly visible on them. However, the Cuban Air Force pilots' radio transmissions proved that they had been identified as belonging to Brothers to the Rescue before the shootdown.

The incident was investigated in detail by the [[International Civil Aviation Organization]] (ICAO). The report concluded that the authorities in Cuba had notified the authorities in the United States of multiple violations of their airspace since May 1994.<ref name="ICAO"/> In at least one case (13 July 1995), the pilot had released leaflets over Havana. The United States authorities had issued public statements advising of the potential consequences of unauthorized entry into Cuban airspace and had initiated legal actions against the above-mentioned pilot, which proved to be groundless; Basulto retained his certifications to fly. After Basulto was warned by an [[Federal Aviation Administration|FAA]] official about the possibility of being shot down, he replied, "You must understand I have a mission in life to perform," disregarding the potential danger involved. He would later say he considered the group's activities to be acts of [[civil disobedience]] against the regime, and a demonstration that such disobedience was possible.<ref name="spytrial">Court testimony from the Cuban spy trial, referred in ''The Miami Herald'' March 13, 2001. [http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/exile/basulto-testifies.htm]</ref>

According to Cuban authorities, two light aircraft entered Cuban territorial airspace on 9 and 13 January 1996, and released leaflets which fell on Cuban territory. According to the pilot of one of the aircraft, half a million leaflets were released on January 13; he also claims they were released outside the 12-mile (22 km) Cuban territorial limit and the wind carried them to [[Havana]]. This version of events was even detailed by none other than Juan Pablo Roque, the man who had returned to Cuba the day before the shootdown and who later implicated as having helped organize the shootdown as a Cuban spy placed with the group. According to Roque, however, Basulto had dropped the leaflets from 10 miles north of Havana, not the stated 12 miles from a high altitude on a day when the winds would carry them south toward Cuba. Specifically, in a Cuban television interview days after the shootdown took place, Roque, from within Cuba, stated, "I personally have violated air space, specifically the last was on January 9, 1996. where I got a call the day before to participate in a flight to Havana where thousands of leaflets were going to be released from a height of morn than 9.500 feet at a distance of less than 10 miles from the coast."

Following that incident, the ICAO report states, the Commander of the Anti-Aircraft Defence of the Air Force of Cuba was instructed to intercept any further flights and authorized to shoot them down, whether or not they had entered Cuban airspace.

On [[February 24]], [[1996]], the group's planes flew another search and rescue mission. According to the ICAO report, the Cuban Air Force shot down the first plane while all three planes were north of the 12 mile limit of Cuban airspace. Afterwards, Basulto trespassed into Cuban airspace, still heading east, for less than 45 seconds. The second plane was then shot down, approximately ten miles farther north. Thus, it is beyond question that one plane, Basulto's N2506, entered Cuban airspace that day, albeit on very briefly and apparently by accident in the confusion of the events, having spotted the MiG fighters. 

Two of the group's three planes flying that day were shot down. The third, with Basulto on board, was also identified for intercept and was to be shot down. Two Cuban Air Force MiG-23 jet fighters were scrambled to chase him northward. Thereafter, based on the timing of subsequent transcripts and Basulto's known position, they chased his airplane across the 24th Parallel and into US airspace before the mission was aborted when Cuban authorities apparently realized that they were running great risks flying that far north. According to the U.S. Military, the fact that no USAF F-15s were launched from Homestead AFB was a matter of a "communications error."

It is disputed whether the planes were over Cuban territorial airspace at the time of the shootdown, but it is undisputed that at least one of their planes actually entered Cuban airspace prior to the shootdown.<ref name="ICAO"/> Finding US and Cuban radar-based data on the location in mutual contradiction (see image), the ICAO used the known positions of the U.S. cruise liner [[Majesty of the Seas]] and fishing boat Tri-Liner to locate the incidents at 10 to 11 miles (18 to 20 km) outside Cuba's 12-mile limit. That is two to three miles (4 to 6 km) from where the U.S. radar tracks put them, and roughly 16 to 17 miles (30 to 32 km) from where the Cuban government claimed that the planes went down. Five years later, testimony from a retired US colonel supported Cuba's claim that both Brothers aircraft, along with a third flown by Brothers founder and pilot [[José Basulto]], were only four to five miles off the Cuban coast.<ref>Court testimony of retired US colonel Buchner, reported in ''The Miami Herald'', March 22, 2001 "Fliers downed by MiGs violated Cuban airspace, colonel says".[http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/espionage/buchner-testimony.htm]</ref> However, numerous other U.S. officials, including the sworn testimony of a U.S. Government radar operator, Major Jeffrey Houlihan, himself a former intercept officer who used to coordinate the defense of the southern U.S. border, make it clear that the aircraft were not in Cuban airspace at the time. His testimony was backed up by actual screen prints from his radar displays.

Notably, the aircraft that were shot down were both very near the U.S fishing vessel, Tri-Liner (in one case directly above), and nearby the cruise ship, Majesty of the Seas, which filmed the smoke cloud from the shootdown itself. Clearly, these vessels, both with GPS navigation systems were not within Cuban waters. Sworn depositions were taken from the crew members and captain of these vessels as to their location and what they saw that day.

The ICAO report also states that means other than interception, such as radio communication, had been available to Cuba, but had not been utilized, and that this conflicts with the ICAO principle that interception of civil aircraft should be undertaken only as a last resort. Nor did the Cuban Air Force make any attempt to direct the aircraft beyond the boundaries of national airspace, guide them away from a prohibited, restricted or danger area or instruct them to effect a landing.

===Reactions to the incident===
====International====
Following the incident, U.S.-sponsored [[United Nations Security Council Resolution 1067]] (1996) condemning Cuba was passed. Dissenting members believed that the resolution was singling out Cuba for condemnation, and instead should have issued a call which urged states both to refrain from shooting down civilian airplanes as well as to prevent the improper use of civil aviation.<ref>United Nations press release SC/6247: Security Council condemns use of weapons against civil aircraft; calls on Cuba to comply with international law. 27 July 1996 [http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/1996/19960727.sc6247.html]</ref> In the [[European Union]], the incident was condemned.

====United States====
In the United States, the incident led to widespread and sharp condemnation of Cuba, and the incident in turn prompted the adoption of the [[Helms-Burton Act]], which strengthens and continues the [[United States embargo against Cuba]].The high-profile and controversial trial of the "[[Cuban Five]]" on [[espionage]] and [[conspiracy]] charges resulted in convictions and long prison sentences for five Cuban agents.

In Miami, reaction from the exile community was swift. [[Jorge Mas Canosa]], head of the powerful [[Cuban American National Foundation]], condemned the attack: "For two warplanes from the Castro government to shoot down two unarmed civilian planes with American flags on a humanitarian mission should be considered an act of war against the US".<ref name="Notisur">/</ref>

====Cuban response====
Miguel Alfonso Martinez of the Cuban Foreign Ministry stated in an interview that during the previous 20 months, planes belonging to the Hermanos group had flown into Cuban airspace 25 times. He asked, "What would happen if an unidentified, or an identified, aircraft piloted by declared enemies of the US was detected flying over Washington? What would the US authorities do? Would they allow it to continue flying undisturbed?" He also said that the two aircraft that were shot down were "not common civilian aircraft," as suggested by the US. "This is not the case of an innocent civilian airliner that, because of an instrument error, departs from an air corridor and gets into the airspace of another country". "These people knew what they were doing. They were warned. They wanted to take certain actions that were clearly intended to destabilize the Cuban government and the US authorities knew about their intentions".<ref name="Notisur"> "U.S. TIGHTENS SANCTIONS AGAINST CUBA AFTER DOWNING OF TWO EXILE PLANES OFF CUBAN COAST". In NotiSur - Latin American Political Affairs ISSN 1060-4189, Volume 6, Number 9 March 1, 1996 [http://ssdc.ucsd.edu/news/notisur/h96/notisur.19960301.html]</ref>

Pro-Cuba groups, while not approving the shootdown, responded that "the policies of the United States government of indefensible hostility against the island of Cuba that sit at the heart of the matter", citing constant threats and a history of military and paramilitary attacks on Cuba from the US and paramilitary groups.<ref name="cubasolidarity">/</ref>

==See also==
{{portalpar|Cuba|Flag of Cuba.svg}}
*[[Cuba-United States relations]]
*[[List of Cuba-US aircraft hijackings]]

==Notes==
{{Reflist}}

==External links==
*[http://www.hermanos.org/ Brothers to the Rescue Homepage]
*[http://www.theshootdown.com Shoot Down] A 2006 film about the event, co-produced by the niece of one of the four victims.

{{Cuba-United States relations}}

[[Category:Cuban-American relations]]
[[Category:Organizations based in Florida]]
[[Category:Miami, Florida]]
[[Category:Accidents and incidents in general aviation]]
[[Category:Opposition to Fidel Castro]]

[[it:Hermanos al Rescate]]

Thrall

2007-11-27T07:20:09Z

24.6.157.14:

{{otheruses }}
{{Unreferenced|date=November 2006}}

A '''thrall''' (''Þræll''; ''Þír'', [[grammatical gender|f.]]) was a [[slavery|slave]] in [[history of Scandinavia|Scandinavian]] culture during the [[Viking Age]]. [[Slavery]] was one of the primary sources of income for the [[Viking]]s. Thralls were first described by the [[Ancient Rome|Roman]] [[historian]] [[Tacitus]], who wrote in AD [[98]] that the [[Swede]]s ([[Suiones]]) had no right to carry arms, but that the weapons were locked inside and protected by a slave only to be distributed when they were attacked by enemies.

The system of slavery was supported by [[Norse mythology]], which claimed that the thralls had a separate ancestry through [[Ríg]].

A person could become a thrall by giving himself up because of [[starvation]], being captured and sold, or being born into a slave family. The first was considered to be the most shameful way of entering slavery and was the first method of acquiring slaves to be forbidden. The most common way of acquiring thralls remained the capture of prisoners in [[foreign]] countries or the buying of such captured foreigners. As in the [[Slavery in antiquity|Roman practice of slavery]], Nordic thralls could be of any ethnic origin. Furthermore a thrall had social status but to a lesser degree than other [[castes]] in the society, regarded more like a [[domestic worker]].

The thralls were kept as [[livestock]] and their [[Master (form of address)|master]] had the power of their [[life]] and [[death]]. One who was born of a [[female]] thrall by a free father was considered to be free, whereas those who were born by a free woman having a thrall father were considered to be a thrall.

When [[Christianity]] arrived in Northern Europe, there was increasing demand for non-Christian slaves, and the [[Scandinavia]]ns had a de facto [[monopoly]] on trading them because of geographic access to large non-Christian populations.

As Scandinavia was Christianized, slavery became socially unacceptable and was abolished in 1335 .

Christian priests, who came to Sweden and the rest of Scandinavia in the 10th century, were often captured and sold as thralls.
When people were baptized they were sometimes given white clothing as a sign of their entrance to the kingdom of heaven. This made it very popular to get baptized for the clothing, then enslave or kill the priest.

[[Category:Viking Age people]]
[[Category:Slavery]]

[[da:Træl]]
[[ja:スレール]]
[[nn:træl]]
[[sv:träl]]

Makenzie kehrt zur Erde heim

2007-10-29T03:04:59Z

24.6.157.14:

'''''Imperial Earth''''' (ISBN 0-15-144233-9) is a [[novel]] written by [[Arthur C. Clarke]], and published in time for the U.S. [[United States Bicentennial|bicentennial]] in [[1976]] by [[Ballantine Books]]. It follows the protagonist (Duncan Makenzie) on a trip to [[Earth]] from his home on [[Titan (moon)|Titan]], ostensibly for a diplomatic visit to the U.S. for its 500th birthday, but really in order to have a clone of himself produced.

The puzzle game [[Pentomino]]s features in a prominent subplot of the novel.

The book offers socially liberal ideas about sexuality and racial attitudes. Duncan Makenzie is [[Black (people)|Black]], which is not mentioned until approximately halfway through the book, because the fact is of no more importance to him than his hair color. At several points he also reminisces about sexual affairs with males, and that [[bisexuality]] is now considered the norm. Exclusive [[heterosexuality]] or [[homosexuality]] is not generally practiced.

It is common in science fiction to offer perspectives of social issues. Clarke addresses issues of racism, the spectre of cloning (which was a very new topic in the early 1970s), and the economics of energy production and control.

Clarke describes in great detail throughout the book a personal communications device called a 'minisec' combining mobile video phone and PDA with global data connectivity. He also describes a larger desk 'comsole' or communications console giving similar access to global information services.

== Editions ==

The original UK hardcover edition (ISBN 0-575-02011-3) has the subtitle "A Fantasy of Love and Discord" and has 38 chapters and "Acknowledgments and Notes". The later US hardcover edition has 43 chapters, drops the subtitle, and expands the Acknowledgements and Notes. The later US paperback edition adds a quote from [[Ernest Hemingway]] and an "Additional Note" about a possible biological error in the plot.

==Plot summary==

Duncan Makenzie, a black bisexual, is the latest generation of the 'first family' of Titan, a colonised moon of Saturn. Originally settled by Malcolm Makenzie in the early 23rd century, Titan's economy has flourished based on the harvest and sale of hydrogen mined from the atmosphere, hydrogen that fuels the fusion engines of interplanetary spacecraft.

As the plot opens in 2276, a number of factors are combining to make a diplomatic visit to the 'mother world' of Earth a necessity. Firstly, the forthcoming 500th anniversary of US Independence which is bringing in colonists from the entire Solar System, obviously needs a suitable representative from Titan. Secondly, the Makenzie family carry a fatal damaged gene that means any normal continuation of the family line is impossible — so both Duncan and his father Colin are clones of his grandfather Malcolm. Human cloning is a mature technology, but is even at this time ethically controversial. And thirdly, technological advances in spacecraft drive systems — specifically the 'asymptotic drive' which improves the fuel efficiency by orders of magnitude — means that Titan's whole economy is under threat as the demand for hydrogen is about to collapse.

A number of other sub-plots suggest some sort of greater mystery, but remain unexplored. The book ends with him returning home with his new "child" (who is a clone of brilliant but erratic former best friend Karl Helmer), leaving the other plot threads dangling.

{{Footer The Novels of Arthur C. Clarke}}
[[Category:1976 novels]]
[[Category:Novels by Arthur C. Clarke]]
[[Category:Science fiction novels]]
[[Category:Titan in fiction]]

[[fa:امپراتوری زمین]]
[[nl:Imperial Earth]]

Inslaw

2007-09-22T22:41:48Z

24.6.157.14: "allegedly suspicious" doesn't make sense. What's "alleged" is whether they were murders, not that they were suspicious

{{Unreferenced|date=March 2007}}
'''Inslaw, Inc.''' is a [[software]] company which enhanced a software package it had developed for the [[United States Government]], calling it the [[Prosecutor's Management Information System]] (PROMIS). Developed during the administration of the [[Cabazon]] Indian Tribal government led by the Chief Administrative Officer Patrick L. Schoonover.

The government modified its contract with INSLAW to obtain delivery of the modified version of PROMIS but refused to pay for it after taking delivery. This allegation of [[Copyright infringement of software|software piracy]] led to trials in three different federal courts and [[United States Congress|Congressional]] investigations that generally ruled in Inslaw's favor, though as of 2006, the company has not recovered any monies or royalties.

==Origins==
Inslaw, once called the '''Institute for Law and Social Research''', was a [[nonprofit]] corporation funded almost entirely through Government grants and contracts created by William Hamilton. When President [[Jimmy Carter]] terminated the [[Law Enforcement Assistance Administration]], INSLAW converted the company in 1981 to INSLAW, Inc., a for-profit corporation to commercially market PROMIS (('''Pro'''secutor's '''M'''anagement '''I'''nformation '''S'''ystem designed to handle the ever-growing papers and documents generated by law enforcement and the courts).

The new corporation made several significant improvements to the original PROMIS software and the resulting product came to be known as INSLAW's ''Enhanced PROMIS''. The original PROMIS was funded almost entirely with government funds. As the author of PROMIS, INSLAW owned the copyright rights to each version. The government had licenses to use this early version of PROMIS, but not to modify or distribute the software outside the federal government.

==PROMIS contract and allegations of theft==
In March 1982, the [[United States Department of Justice|Department of Justice]] awarded INSLAW Inc., a $10 million, 3-year contract to implement a version of PROMIS to which the government had already obtained a license in the 22 largest United States Attorneys Offices.

While the PROMIS software could have gone a long way toward correcting the Department's longstanding need for a standardized case management system, the contract between INSLAW and Justice quickly became embroiled in bitterness and controversy which has lasted for over two decades. The conflict centered on the question of whether INSLAW had ownership of its privately-funded "Enhanced PROMIS," a different version of the software, for which the government had never obtained a license. Enhanced PROMIS was eventually installed at numerous U.S. Attorneys Offices following an April 1983 modification to the contract.

In his court cases, William Hamilton was represented by lawyer [[Elliot Richardson]], formerly the U.S. Attorney General under President Nixon.

==Federal investigations==
Two different federal courts made fully litigated findings in the late 1980s that the Justice Department "took, converted, stole" the Enhanced PROMIS installed in U.S. Attorneys Offices "through trickery, fraud, and deceit," and then attempted "unlawfully and without justification" to force INSLAW out of business so that it would be unable to seek restitution through the courts. These courts ruled that the Justice Department used the contract modification to steal a version of PROMIS for which it had no license.

The [[House Judiciary Committee]], in September 1992, issued an Investigative Report confirming the Justice Department's theft of PROMIS after the Justice Department had convinced a federal appellate court to set aside the decisions of the first two federal courts on a jurisdictional technicality but without addressing the merits of the dispute. The Committee also reported investigative leads indicating that friends of the Reagan White House had been allowed to sell and distribute PROMIS domestically and overseas for their personal financial gain and in support of the intelligence and foreign policy objectives of the United States.

In May 1995, the Senate ordered the U.S. Court of Federal Claims to determine if the United States owes INSLAW compensation for the government's use of PROMIS. In August 1998, the Chief Judge of the court sent an Advisory Report to the Senate stating that INSLAW owns the copyright rights to PROMIS and never granted the government a license to modify PROMIS to create derivative works, and that the United States would be liable to INSLAW for copyright infringement damages if the government had created any unauthorized derivatives from PROMIS.

The government flatly denied during the court proceedings what it later admitted, i.e., that agencies such as the FBI and U.S. intelligence agencies used PROMIS to keep track of their classified information. The U.S. Government has never paid INSLAW for any of these unauthorized uses of PROMIS.

==Later developments==
In early 1999, the British journalist and author, [[Gordon Thomas]], published an authorized history of the Israeli [[Mossad]] entitled "Gideon's Spies: The Secret History of the Mossad". The book quotes detailed admissions by the former long-time deputy director of the Mossad about the partnersip between Israeli and U.S. intelligence in selling in excess of $500 million worth of licenses to a Trojan horse version of PROMIS to foreign intelligence agencies in order to spy on them.

In 2001, the ''[[Washington Times]]'' and ''[[Fox News]]'' each quoted federal law enforcement and/or intelligence officials familiar with the debriefing of former FBI Agent [[Robert Hanssen]] as claiming that Hanssen had stolen for the Soviet KGB copies of PROMIS-derivative software used within the FBI and U.S. intelligence agencies to track the intelligence information they produce, and used by U.S. intelligence within banks to track financial transactions. These reports further stated that [[Osama bin Laden]] later bought copies of the same PROMIS-derivative software on the [[Russia]]n [[black market]] for $2 million and [[al Qaeda]] used the software to penetrate U.S. intelligence database systems so that it could move its funds through the banking system and evade detection and monitoring by U.S. law enforcement and intelligence agencies.

==Deaths allegedly related to the Inslaw case==
While investigating elements of this story, journalist [[Danny Casolaro]] died in what was twice ruled a suicide. Casolaro had warned friends prior to his death if they were ever told he had committed suicide not to believe it, and to know he had been murdered.[http://www.webcom.com/~lpease/collections/conspiracies/inslaw.htm] Many have argued that the death was curious, deserving closer scruitiny; some have argued further, believing the death was a murder, committed to hide whatever Casolaro had uncovered. [[Kenn Thomas]] and [[Jim Keith]] discuss this in their book, ''The Octopus: Secret Government and the Death of Danny Casolaro'' (''The Octopus'' was the name that Casolaro had intended to give his book). A [[United States House of Representatives]] report on the Inslaw affair thought that the circumstances of Casolaro's death were suspicious: "As long as the possibility exists that Danny Casolaro died as a result of his investigation into the INSLAW matter, it is imperative that further investigation be conducted."[http://venus.soci.niu.edu/~cudigest/CUDS4/cud451.txt]

There were a number of other suspicious deaths or disappearances connected to the Inslaw case:
*The triple homicide involving Fred Alvarez, Ralph Boger, and Patricia Castro in late June/early July 1981. Alvarez was the Deputy Tribal Chairman of the Cabazon Band of Mission Indians. Before the execution style murders Alvarez had met with members of the press foretelling of the fate of him and his friends. Alvarez and Boger were to meet with an unknown party giving proof of many of the misuses of the tribal land the day after the bodies were discovered.
*the shooting death of Anson Ng (a reporter and friend of Casolaro). According to a 1991 issue of the ''TC Technical Consultant'' story, "In July, Anson Ng, a reporter for the ''[[Financial Times]]'' of [[London]] was shot and killed in [[Guatemala]]. He had reportedly been trying to interview an American there named Jimmy Hughes, a one- time director of security for the Cabazon Indian Reservation secret projects."[http://www.miamitopics.com/octopus.html];
*the shooting death of Dennis Eisman (Riconosciuto's [[attorney]]). According to the same ''TC Technical Consultant'' story, "In April, a Philadelphia attorney named Dennis Eisman was found dead, killed by a single bullet in his chest. According to a former federal official who worked with Eisman, the attorney was found dead in the parking lot where he had been due to meet with a woman who had crucial evidence to share substantiating Riconosciuto's claims."
*the poisoning death of Ian Spiro, who was supposedly a Casolaro informant and was allegedly involved in the Inslaw affair; Spiro's wife and children had been killed a few days before Spiro's body was found. In 1995, [[Kevin Brass]] reported in [[San Diego magazine]] that Spiro's brother-in-law, Greg Quarton suspected the [[Mossad]] was involved in Spiro's death, while "Ex-hostage Peter Jacobsen confirmed to the media that Spiro was indeed involved in the release of hostages in the Middle East." Brass further notes that "According to court documents filed shortly after the murders, Spiro was holding computer equipment essential... to prove a Justice Department conspiracy to steal sophisticated computer software"[http://www.sandiegomag.com/issues/october95/murder.shtml]
*the mysterious death of Bill McCoy, a retired Chief Warrant Officer from the U.S. Army's Criminal Investigation Division, who had been involved in the investigation of the PROMIS software saga. He died at home in 1997, and his body was cremated within 48 hours, despite his saying several times over the previous years that he wanted to be buried next to his wife, and in less than four days all of McCoy's furniture, records and personal belongings had been removed from his home by his son, a full Colonel in the Army. The house had been sanitized and repainted and, aside from the Zen garden in the back yard, there was no trace that McCoy had ever lived there.

==External links==

* [http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/1997/August97/323civ.htm Inslaw case dismissed in Federal court, 8/4/97]
* [http://www.webcom.com/~pinknoiz/covert/inslaw.html The Inslaw Affair]
* [http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/1.01/inslaw.html The INSLAW Octopus], at ''Wired''
* [http://oraclesyndicate.twoday.net/stories/2726093/ Promisgate: World's longest spy scandal still glossed over / Part I]
* [http://oraclesyndicate.twoday.net/stories/2731885 Promisgate: World's longest spy scandal still glossed over /Part II]
* [http://oraclesyndicate.twoday.net/stories/2737253/ Promisgate: World's longest spy scandal still glossed over /Part III]
* [http://oraclesyndicate.twoday.net/stories/2945207/ FBI’S INCAPACITATING COVER-UP by William A. Hamilton]

[[Category:Conspiracy theories]]
[[Category:Software piracy]]
[[Category:American political scandals]]