Historien

Neuenzer DE -150 - Historie

Neuenzer DE -150 - Historie


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

Neunzer
(DE-150: dp. 1.200; 1. 306 ', b. 36'7 ", dr. 8'7", s. 21 k., Cpl. 186; a. 3 3 ", 2 40 mm., 8 20 mm ., 2 akt., 1 dcp. (Hh); cl. Edsall)

Neunzer (DE-150) blev fastlagt af Consolidated Steel Corp., Orange, Tex., 29. januar 1943, lanceret 1. juni 1943; sponsoreret af fru Weimar E. Neunzer, enke efter maskinist Neunzer; og bestilt den 27. september 1943, løjtnant John E. Greenbacker i kommando.

Destruderens eskortere, der var designet til at tage stedet for flåde -destroyere på konvojtjeneste, beviste deres værdi i lange miles med dampning på ledsagelse og ubåde. Deres indsats spillede en stor rolle i at besejre tyske ubådsforstyrrelser på et tidspunkt, hvor U-bådene truede med at udslette allierede forsyningslinjer.

Neunzer dampede til Galveston, Tex., Og derefter til New Orleans, La., For at passe ind. I løbet af oktober og november 1943 gennemgik hun shakedown ud for Bermuda. Den nye destroyer -eskorte besøgte derefter Charleston, S.C., undervejs i Quonset Point, R.I. I 4 uger opererede hun med en forskningsgruppe i Atlantic Fleet, der udviklede nyt udstyr til krigsførelse mod ubåd.

Efter at have eskorteret en gruppe troppetransporter fra Boston for at slutte sig til en stor konvoj på vej til England fra New York fortsatte Neunzer til Norfolk og sluttede sig til TF 62 den 1. januar 1944. Med denne gruppe eskorterede hun en stor konvoj til Middelhavet og tilbragte 8 dage i Gibraltar inden der sejles hjem.

På sin rejse hjemad hyrede hun fem italienske ubåde til Bermuda til træningsformål. Under denne rejse udførte Neunzer en operation, der menes at være unik for en destroyer -eskorte. Hun tankede to italienske subs på havet og pumpede 12.000 liter brændstof gennem et brandstik og 200 fod brandslange til ubåden.

Efter yderligere to rejser, der eskorterede konvojer til Middelhavet, blev Neunzer løsrevet fra TF 62 for at slutte sig til eskorte hangarskib Guadalcanal (CVE 60) i en jæger-dræbergruppe. Efter træning i Caseo Bay, Maine og Bermuda lavede taskgruppen to eftersøgningspatruljer efter ubåde i Mellematlanten, der tankede i Bermuda. Ingen af ​​disse patruljer afdækkede ubåde, og Neunzer vendte tilbage til New York i slutningen af ​​august.

I løbet af oktober gik gruppen til søs igen, denne gang på jagt efter ubåde i Nordatlanten. Selvom der ikke blev opdaget ubåde, løb styrken gennem en meget alvorlig storm, der beskadigede nogle af skibene. Patruljen blev endelig brudt af; opgavegruppen tankede op i Ponta Delgada, Azorerne, inden han vendte hjem tidligt i november.

Antisubmarigruppen sejlede fra Norfolk 1. december til kort træning i Bermuda undervejs Jacksonville, Fla., Hvor transportøren i 5 uger uddannede studenterpiloter. Gruppen fortsatte til Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, sidst i januar 1945 for 2 ugers øvelser; derefter vendte Neunzer tilbage til New York for en kort eftersyn.

Efter at have vendt tilbage til Cuba til øvelser i begyndelsen af ​​marts, gik destroyer -eskorten til Miami i 3 uger som træningsskib for studenterofficerer i Naval Training Center der.

Men nu var tyskerne klar til deres sidste skub og sendte deres nye snorkeludstyrede subs over Atlanterhavet for at angribe østkysten. Neunzer modtog pludselig en besked ved midnat den 8. april om at komme i gang 6 timer senere til Newfoundland. Efter tankning og levering i Argentia forlod hun den 19. og mødtes midt i havet med en af ​​flere transportørgrupper, der spændte ud over Atlanterhavet mellem St. John's, Newfoundland og Fayal på Azorerne som et net for at fange snorkelerne.

Frederick C. Davis (DE-136) lavede eontset med U-646 den 24. april og fortsatte med at angribe, da ubåden affyrede et akut skud, som rev DE fra hinanden og sendte hende ned med store tab af mennesker.

Otte destroyer -ledsagere sluttede sig straks til handlingen. Neunzer og Hayter (DE 212) foretog en søgning, mens Pill $ begrave (DE-133) cirkulerede rundt i området, og Flaherty (DE-135) hentede overlevende. Flaherty lavede eontaet på mindre end en time, og med Pillsbury gik han til angreb. Tho U-båd gik til 600 fod. Contset gik tabt fra 1045 til 1201, da Varian (DE-798), Janssen (DE-396) og Jos. C. Hubbard (DE-211) indledte endnu et angreb.

Neunzer kom ind i kampen efter flere angreb fra de andre DE'er og leverede et krybende angreb med Varian og Hubbard, mens Chatelain (DE 149) instruerede. Omkring 1600 mistede Contaet endnu en gang, og Chatelain og Neunzer blev beordret til at vende tilbage til spejderlinjen.

Linjen blev udvidet, og skibene begyndte at feje gennem området, fast besluttet på at forhindre ubådens flugt. Varian lavede eontset en mere i 1731, og Flaherty blev beordret til at angribe. Hun fyrede i 1810. Fire minutter senere begyndte en lille oliesmæk at komme til overfladen. Flaherty foretog endnu et hed-hog-angreb i 1828, og i 1838 brød U-båden overfladen.

Hvert skib i linjen inden for rækkevidde begyndte at skyde. I 1844 efter mere end ti og en halv times angreb rullede U-546 under for hendes sidste dyk. 33 af hendes besætning, herunder kaptajnen, blev taget til fange.

Efter VE-dagen vendte Neunzer tilbage til New York i 2 uger ~ og forlod den 25. maj for at eskortere den sidste atlantiske konvoj fra Anden Verdenskrig fra New York til Southampton, England. Hun vendte tilbage uden konvoj og blev i New York havn fra 15. juni til 6. juli.

I juli uddannede skibet i Caseo Bay, Maine, og tjente som mål for Motor Torpedo Boat Training Center, Melville, RI Den 1. august sejlede hun til New London, Conn., For at eskortere den tyske ubåd U-505, fanget af Guadalcanals opgave gruppe i juni 1944. Suben blev udstillet langs østkysten og Golfen i slutningen af ​​1945 i et forsøg på at sælge War Bonds.

Efter operationer langs Atlanterhavskysten nedlagde Neunzer i januar 1947 og trådte ind i Atlantic Reserve Fleet. I 1970 forbliver hun liggende i Philadelphia.

Neunzer modtog en kampstjerne for Anden Verdenskrigs tjeneste.


USS Neunzer (DE-150)

USS Neunzer (DE-150) var en destroyer-eskorte i Edsall-klasse bygget til den amerikanske flåde under Anden Verdenskrig. Hun tjente i Atlanterhavet og ydede destroyer -eskortebeskyttelse mod ubåde og luftangreb til flådefartøjer og konvojer.

Hun blev navngivet til ære for maskinisten Weimar Edmund Neunzer, der blev dræbt i aktion 2. juli 1942 under Aleutian Islands -kampagnen og posthumt blev tildelt luftmedaljen. Hun blev fastlagt af Consolidated Steel Corp., Orange, Texas, 29. januar 1943 lanceret 1. juni 1943 sponsoreret af fru Weimar E. Neunzer, enke efter Maskinist Neunzer og bestilt den 27. september 1943, løjtnant John E. Greenbacker i kommando.

Destruderens eskortere, der var designet til at tage stedet for flåde -destroyere på konvojtjeneste, beviste deres værdi i lange miles med dampning på ledsagelse og ubåde. Deres indsats spillede en stor rolle i at besejre tyske ubådsforstyrrelser på et tidspunkt, hvor U-bådene truede med at skære de allierede forsyningslinjer.


USS Weeden (DE-797) var en Buckley-klasse destroyer escort i den amerikanske flåde. Hun blev opkaldt efter fenrik Carl A. Weeden (1916 �), som blev dræbt under angrebet på Pearl Harbor.

USS Ira Jeffery (DE-63/APD-44), a Buckley-klasse destroyer escort af den amerikanske flåde, blev navngivet til ære for fenrik Ira Weil Jeffery (1918-1941), der blev dræbt i aktion under det japanske angreb på Hawaiiøerne, mens han tjente ombord på slagskibet Californien .

USS William T. Powell (DE/DER-213), a Buckley-klasse destroyer escort af den amerikanske flåde, blev navngivet til ære for Gunner's Mate William T. Powell (1918-1942), der blev dræbt i aktion ombord på den tunge krydser USS  San Francisco ud for Guadalcanal den 12. november 1942.

USS Scott (DE-214), a Buckley-klasse destroyer escort af den amerikanske flåde, blev navngivet til ære for Machinist's Mate First Class Robert R. Scott (1915 �, der blev dræbt i aktion under det japanske angreb på Pearl Harbor den 7. december 1941, mens han tjente ombord på slagskibet USS  Californien . Han blev posthumt tildelt Medal of Honor for sin heltemod.

USS Solar (DE-221), a Buckley-klasse destroyer escort af den amerikanske flåde, blev navngivet til ære for Boatswain's Mate First Class Adolfo Solar (1900 �), der blev dræbt i aktion under det japanske angreb på Pearl Harbor den 7. december 1941.

USS Spangenberg (DE/DER-223), a Buckley-klasse destroyer escort af den amerikanske flåde, blev navngivet til ære for Gunner's Mate Kenneth J. Spangenberg (1922-1942), der døde som følge af sår påført under søslaget ved Guadalcanal, mens han tjente ombord på den tunge krydser San Francisco  (CA-38). Han blev posthumt tildelt Navy Cross.

USS Alexander J. Luke (DE/DER-577), a Buckley-klasse destroyer escort af den amerikanske flåde, blev navngivet til ære for sergent Alexander J. Luke (1916 �), der blev dræbt i aktion under angrebet på Tulagi den 6. august 1942. Han blev posthumt tildelt Sølvstjernen.

USS Major (DE-796) var en Buckley-klasse destroyer escort erhvervet af den amerikanske flåde under sidste del af Anden Verdenskrig. Hun tjente som eskortefartøj og beskyttede allierede skibe, både i Atlanterhavet og senere i Stillehavet. Da krigen med Japan sluttede, Major oplevede den japanske overgivelse fra hendes køje i Tokyo Bay.

USS Roche (DE-197) var en Kanon-klasse destroyer escort i service United States Navy fra 1944 til 1945. Hun ramte en mine i slutningen af ​​september 1945. Da det var uøkonomisk at reparere hende, blev hun ødelagt i marts 1946.

USS Andres (DE-45) var en Evarts-klasse destroyer escort konstrueret til den amerikanske flåde under Anden Verdenskrig. Sendt til det farlige farvand i det nordlige Atlanterhav under slaget ved Atlanterhavet for at beskytte konvojer og andre skibe mod Nazitysklands Kriegsmarine U-både og kampfly, Andres udført eskorte- og ubådsoperationer.

USS Smartt (DE-257) var en Evarts-klasse destroyer escort af den amerikanske flåde under Anden Verdenskrig. Hun blev sendt ud i farlige farvande i det nordlige Atlanterhav for at beskytte konvojer og andre skibe mod tyske ubåde og kampfly. Hun udførte eskorte- og ubådsoperationer i kampområder, inden hun sejlede sejrrigt hjem i slutningen af ​​konflikten.

USS Amick (DE-168) var en Kanon-klasse destroyer escort bygget til den amerikanske flåde under Anden Verdenskrig. Hun tjente i Atlanterhavet og derefter Stillehavet og leverede escorttjeneste mod ubåde og luftangreb for flådefartøjer og konvojer.

USS Straub (DE-181) var en Kanon-klasse destroyer escort i tjeneste med den amerikanske flåde fra 1943 til 1947. Hun blev solgt til skrot i 1974.

USS Garfield Thomas (DE-193) var en Kanon-klasse destroyer escort bygget til den amerikanske flåde under Anden Verdenskrig. Hun tjente i Atlanterhavet og Stillehavet og leverede escorttjeneste mod ubåd og luftangreb for flådefartøjer og konvojer.

USS Sturtevant (DE-239) var en destroyer -eskorte i Edsall -klasse i tjeneste med den amerikanske flåde fra 1943 til 1946 og fra 1951 til 1960. Hun blev skrottet i 1973.

USS Tomich (DE-242) var en ødelægger-eskorte i Edsall-klasse i tjeneste med den amerikanske flåde fra 1943 til 1946. Hun blev skrottet i 1974.

USS Stanton (DE-247) var en Edsall-klasse destroyer escort bygget til den amerikanske flåde under Anden Verdenskrig. Hun tjente i Atlanterhavet Stillehavet og ydede destroyer -eskortebeskyttelse mod ubåde og luftangreb til flådefartøjer og konvojer.

USS Cockrill (DE-398) var en Edsall-klasse destroyer escortin service med den amerikanske flåde fra 1943 til 1946. Efter at have tilbragt årtier i reserve blev hun sænket som et mål i november 1974.

USS Neunzer (DE-150) var en destroyer-eskorte i Edsall-klasse i tjeneste med den amerikanske flåde fra 1943 til 1947. Efter at have tilbragt flere årtier i reserve blev hun solgt til skrot i 1973.

USS Varian (DE-798) var en Buckley-klasse destroyer escort af den amerikanske flåde.


Neuenzer DE -150 - Historie

I FAA's øjne stammer alle Cessna 150'erne og 152'erne strengt taget fra og er i det væsentlige det samme fly. Cessna foretog mange ændringer af flyet i løbet af sin 27 -årige historie, og ligesom andre flyproducenter tildelte de de fleste produktionsår forskellige modelbetegnelser.

Desværre brugte Cessna ikke en logisk progression af hverken serienumre eller modelbetegnelser. Det er svært at matche modelår og serienumre uden et snydeblad. Se Cessna Production Trivia for mere information om dette, end du sandsynligvis vil vide.

Der blev ændret på flyene hvert modelår, selvom mange af dem var kosmetiske. Vi kan opdele modelforskellene i tre kategorier: betegnelsesændringer, kosmetiske ændringer og designændringer.

FAA "År" vs Cessna "År"

Inden vi starter, kan der være en forskel i "år" -betegnelsen på din Cessna 150. FAA bestemmer flyets "år" for alt papirarbejde og regulering som det år, hvor flyet blev bygget. Cessna brugte derimod "modelår" som din yndlingsbil. For eksempel, hvis flyet rullede af samlebåndet i november 1973, siger FAA, at det er en '73, men i Cessnas øjne er det en '74.

Betegnelse ændres

I løbet af flyets 27 års produktionshistorie var der præcis 31 forskellige modelbetegnelser.

Den første model blev simpelthen kaldet Cessna 150. Den model kørte fra det første fly i 1959 til og med modelåret 1960. Fra og med 1961 -års model blev bogstaver tilføjet hvert år, '61 150A, '62 150B, '63 150C, '64 150D, '65 150E, '66 150F, '67 150G og '68 150H.

I 1969 sprang Cessna over et brev, der er ikke noget "150I", flyet fra 1969 er 150J. De fortsatte med 150K i 1970 og brugte derefter 150L fra 1971 til 1974 og 150M 1975 til 1977.

I 1970 introducerede Cessna 150 Aerobat og betegnede disse modeller med et førende "A", med resten det samme som hver models betegnelse, A150K, A150L, ​​A150M.

Fra 1966 begyndte Cessna at samle og fremstille i Frankrig, for det meste var disse fly de samme modeller som i USA, men franskbyggede modeller førte med en "F", F150F, F150G, F150H, F150J, F150K, F150L, ​​F150M . Franske Aerobats blev betegnet FA150 og modelbrevet. En unik model for Frankrig var 130 HP Rolls Royce/Continental udstyret Aerobat, der blev betegnet FRA150L og FRA150M. Listen rundes af to 1972-1973 modeller fremstillet i Frankrig, men samlet i Argentina (i alt 47 fly) Disse blev kaldt A-150L og A-A150L.

Da Cessna introducerede 152, stoppede de med at genudpege modeller efter år. Der er kun 4 betegnelser for alle 8 modelår på 152'erne (1978 - 1985). De er 152, A152 for Aerobat og F152 og FA152 for de fly, der er bygget i Frankrig.

Kosmetiske ændringer

Flymaskinernes malingsplaner og indvendige udnævnelser blev ændret hvert år. Ligesom bilproducenter tilbød Cessna standard- og deluxe -modeller og endda specialudgaver. Opgraderede modeller blev kaldt "Pendlere" og opgraderede 152'er blev betegnet 152II'er. Der blev tilbudt særlige udgaver, der promoverede flyvning, inkluderet modellen "Discover Flying" (populært kendt som HoJo, fordi den brugte Howard Johnsons farver fra 1970'erne) og modellerne "TakeOff" med patriotisk tema fra 1977. Fly bygget i Frankrig eller eksporteret havde også forskellige malingsordninger. Alt i alt var der et forvirrende udvalg af mere end 60 forskellige malingsplaner. Cessna 150-152-klubben har indsamlet data om de originale farver, layout og modelvalg i flere år nu. Vi forventer i sidste ende at få et komplet sæt tegninger til rådighed her på hjemmesiden.

Designændringer

Selvom der var snesevis af individuelle designændringer model år for modelår, nogle operationelle, andre kosmetiske (medlemmer kan se en nøjagtig liste over år for år ændringer.) Var der kun tre øjeblikkeligt genkendelige ændringer i visuelt design.


Den grusomme virksomhed med ansvarlighed

Denne html -artikel er fremstillet af en ukorrigeret tekstfil gennem optisk tegngenkendelse. Inden 1940 -artiklerne er al tekst blevet rettet, men fra 1940 i dag er de fleste stadig uberettigede. Artefakter af scanninger er stavefejl, fodnoter og sidebjælker uden for kontekst og andre inkonsekvenser. Ved siden af ​​hver tekstfil er en PDF af artiklen, som præcist og fuldstændigt formidler indholdet, som det fremgik af nummeret. De ukorrigerede tekstfiler er inkluderet for at øge søgbarheden af ​​vores indhold, på vores websted og i søgemaskiner, for vores medlemskab, forskningssamfundet og medieorganisationer. Vi arbejder nu på at levere rene tekstfiler til hele samlingen.

”En nat siden gik omkring 30.000 tons skibe mod hinanden gennem mørket. Da de havde mødt hinanden, lå 2000 tons skib og 176 mand på bunden af ​​havet et fjernt sted.

”Nu kommer den grusomme virksomhed med ansvarlighed. Dem, der var der, dem, der er tilbage fra dem, der var der, skal svare på, hvordan det skete, og hvis fejl var, at det skete.

“. . .på havet er der en tradition ældre end traditionerne i selve landet. . . . Det er traditionen, at med ansvar går autoritet d na med dem begge går ansvar.

”Denne ansvarlighed er ikke for intentionerne, bn 1 for gerningen. Kaptajnen på et skib får ligesom kaptajnen ° 1 en stat ære og privilegier og tillid ud over andre mænd. Men lad ham sætte den forkerte kurs, lad ham røre jorden, lad ham bringe katastrofe til sit skib eller $ sine mænd, og han må svare for det, han har, 1 'Uanset hvad kan han ikke undslippe ... "

læser delvist den berømte og bredt genoptrykte redaktion, der optrådte i The Wall Street Journal efter kollisionen mellem USS Wasp (CV-18) og USS Hobson (DMS-26) natten til 26. april 1952. Dets forfatterskab tilskrives generelt Tidsskriftredaktør Vermont C. Royster, selv escortskipper i anden verdenskrig. Søværnets traditionelle ultimative redskab til håndhævelse af den ansvarlighed, som redaktionen henviste til, har været krigsretten. I sagen om Hobson var der en undersøgelse, men ingen krigsretlig hendes kaptajn var en af ​​de 176.

At komme i vejen for et hangarskib kan have en ødelæggende virkning på et mindre skib, som disse fotos levende viser. Øverst er USS Belknap (CG-26) efter hendes kollision i 1975 med USS John F. Kennedy. USS Frank E. Evans (DD-754) blev skåret i to af det australske luftfartsselskab Melbourne i 1969.

Det mest omtalte seneste tilfælde af en kollision mellem et manøvrerende hangarskib og hendes flyvagtskib fandt sted om aftenen den 22. november 1975, da USS Belknap (CG-26) kolliderede med flydækkets udhæng af USS John F. Kennedy (CV- 67). Otte besætningsmedlemmer døde, og 48 andre blev såret. I dette tilfælde fulgte almindelige krigsretter for kaptajnen og betjenten på dækket på Belknap, men med hvad mange anså for at være bizarre resultater. Ingen af ​​dem dukkede op for en almindelig krigsret bestående af sine professionelle jævnaldrende. Hver, i overensstemmelse med hans juridiske ret, blev kun prøvet for en militær dommer. I tilfælde af den øverstbefalende officer, der så en film i Belknaps stue indtil det sidste, uundgåelige øjeblikke før kollisionen, blev spørgsmålet indsnævret til spørgsmålet om, hvorvidt han havde efterladt skibet i hænderne på en behørigt kvalificeret person sæt af urstande. Han blev fundet uskyldig ved militærdommerens afgørelse om, at anklagemyndigheden ikke engang havde anlagt en sag umiddelbart. Officeren i dommen blev fundet skyldig, men der blev ikke tildelt straf^ & gt på militærdommerens afgørelse om, at selve dommen fra en almindelig krigsret i sig selv var en tilstrækkelig og passende straf.

Disse fantastiske retslige beslutninger skabte naturligvis en betydelig mængde halsbrand blandt mange gamle og ikke så gamle havhunde. Man kan fairl) formode, at Søværnet ikke igen, ligesom c, omstændigheder vil forsøge at bruge krigsretten som et ve skjul for at håndhæve den faglige ansvarlighed 0 de ansvarlige for dens skibe til søs.

Dødsretten til en krigsret som et godkendelsesmiddel for disponering af rent erhverv* forfald-i andre end de sjældneste tilfælde, der angår forsætlighed eller hensynsløshed-kunne have forudset oksekød i 1951 med udskiftning af H nl-formularen Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for ærværdige artikler til marinens regering. På grund af Anden Verdenskrig førte offentlig bekymring over påståede misbrug af disciplinær myndighed, unødig kommando og flydende over resultatet af krigsretter og konsekvenserne af behandlingen blandt tjenesterne til, at UCMJ blev vedtaget og dets stærkt øgede beskyttelse af anklagedes rettigheder. Den tidligere kode var designet til at sikre opretholdelsen af ​​d | S cipline og præstationsstandarder og for at forhindre og straffe rent kriminelle handlinger. Den nye UCMJ har stor vægt på de kriminelle handlinger. Efterfølgende vedtagelser og retslige fortolkninger forstærker denne egenskab i en sådan grad, at der i dag er lille forskel mellem en anklagemyndighedsdomstol og retssag i en føderal distriktsdomstol I årenes løb har advokaten for en krigsret efterhånden overtaget større og større kontrol over sagen. På nuværende tidspunkt er medlemmernes medlemmer af en almindelig krigsret i det væsentlige en jury. Desuden nyder en krigsretlig tiltalt en større ret end den, der gives af føderale distriktsdomstole. Han er berettiget til retten til prøvelse af militærdommer alene, ubegrænset af begrænsningen i de føderale domstole for samtykke. Det er betydningsfuldt, at denne ret også blev udøvet af kommandanten for USS Frank E. Evans (DD-754) efter dette skibs kollision med det australske hangarskip Melbourne. Han blev fundet skyldig og dømt til en påtale på anklager om uagtsomhed og pligtforsømmelse. Selvom den langsigtede visdom ved at vælge en enmandsretter er tvivlsom fra et karrieremæssigt synspunkt, anses det naturligvis af tiltalte i sådanne sager for at tilbyde en fordel i retssagen.

Det praktiske resultat af alt dette er, at bortset fra tilfælde af kriminel uagtsomhed eller forsætlig forseelse, vil krigsretter ikke længere effektivt behandle fejl i dommen fra velmenende mænd, der er ansvarlige for sikkerheden ved søværnets skibe og deres besætninger. Dette blev illustreret i retssagen mod Eelknaps kaptajn. Den påståede overtrædelse af en flåderegulering, der gør kommandanten ansvarlig for sikkerheden og effektiviteten af ​​sin kommando, blev afvist af militærdommeren på grundlag af, at den pågældende regulering udgjorde en retningslinje for ydeevne kun og ikke kunne håndhæves af kriminelle sanktioner.

Understøttelse af denne tilgang er begrebet kriminel forsæt. En sådan hensigt skal være til stede under vores strafferetlige system, faktisk eller ved formodning, før en konstatering af skyldig kan nås. I tilfælde af kriminel uagtsomhed er graden af ​​uagtsomhed sådan, at den anses for at give den nødvendige kriminelle hensigt. Dette står i kontrast til det niveau af uagtsomhed, som den fornærmede normalt foretager oprejsning for ved civile handlinger. Sondringen er i mange tilfælde lille, men den er aldrig vigtig i de nuværende ansøgninger om Uniform Code of Military Justice.

Sådan har det ikke altid været. I måske søværnets største spektakulære katastrofe i fredstid førte en eskadrillehøvding syv af hans fjorten destroyere ind på Che-klipperne nær Point Arguello, Californien, den 8. september 1923- Han blev kendt skyldig i "skyldig ineffektivitet i udførelsen af ​​pligt" og " uagtsomt tilladt søfartøjsfartøjer at køre på r ° cks eller stimer. ” Den første anklagelse vedrørte kun standarder for professionel præstation, der indeholdt beskyttelsesordet "skyldig" for at formidle kravet om en alvorlig ineffektivitet, før retslige anklager kunne findes bevist. Denne lovovertrædelse er væk fra den ensartede kodeks for militær retfærdighed sammen med det mere farverige sprog i artiklerne for flådestyrelsen, såsom "sten eller stimer."

Der var andre krigsretter forbundet med Point Arguello-katastrofen, og to af dem illustrerer et træk ved det gamle system, som er fraværende i det nye. Dette er begrebet fritagelse, et vigtigt redskab i ethvert sæt procedurer til regulering af professionel adfærd og opretholdelse af standarder for professionel præstation. Af de 11 officerer, der blev forsøgt tabt af de syv destroyere, blev to divisionskommandører og seks af de befalingsmænd fundet skyldige. Der var imidlertid en væsentlig sondring i frifindelsen af ​​anklager. De seks kommandanter blev simpelthen "frikendt". De to divisionschefer blev "fuldstændigt og ærligt frikendt". Meningen med denne sondring var, at selv om anklagerne mod kommandanterne ikke blev bevist ud over rimelig tvivl, blev beviserne mod divisionscheferne ikke alene ikke bevist ud over rimelig tvivl, men deres handlinger med hensyn til anklagerne blev fundet af retten til være skyldfri. Dette var befrielse fra disse to betjente. Kriminelle regler i dette land, herunder den ensartede kodeks for militær retfærdighed, giver ikke mulighed for fritagelse. Bortset fra afvisning af anklager af tekniske juridiske årsager kommer frifindelse kun, fordi skyld ikke kan fastslås ud over rimelig tvivl. Intet mere kan udledes af en sådan frifindelse. Selv en overvægt af beviserne, der er tilstrækkelige til ansvar i civile sager, opfylder ikke den strengere bevisstandard i straffesager. Den uskyldige anklagede, civil eller militær, kan meget vel fortjene frifindelse, men hverken de føderale og statslige straffelove eller Uniform Code of Military Justice kan give ham det.

Alle otte uskyldige fund i Point Arguello -sagerne blev afvist af marinesekretæren efter anbefaling fra dommeradvokaten. Dette var en meningsløs uenighed med resultaterne. Men det er betydningsfuldt, at selvom Washington ikke kunne lide dommene, blev de otte fundet skyldige af et panel af deres professionelle jævnaldrende, to af dem fuldstændig fritaget. Disse tjenestemænds efterfølgende karriere udmattede dommen fra den almindelige krigsret. Frikendelse kunne da selvfølgelig og kan nu komme på andre måder. En undersøgelse eller en undersøgelsesdomstol kan anbefale fritagelse, men den kan kun anbefale. Hvis indkaldelsesmyndigheden ikke er enig, kan han stadig tage disciplinære skridt eller anlægge retssager. Krigsretten i henhold til artiklerne for flådenes regering kunne frikende med finalitet.

Udtrykket af afdelingsmisbilligelse i

Belknap -sagerne gør det klart, at genet:

det er givet til det, der sker. Dette, mens det virkelig er

i tilfælde af større forfald og kan i øvrigt pålægges mindre alvorlige brud på standarder- Eksempler ville være urimelige krav til hans besætning fra en overivrig kaptajn eller måske endda en topløs go-go-danser, der optrådte på sejlet 0 a undervandsbåd. Inden for det formelle disciplinære område er straffen til påtale utvivlsomt den stærkeste handling, der kan træffes uden for krigsretten. Når det udstedes i forbindelse med passende administrative sanktioner, er det bestemt sU '

Point Arguello-sager var ikke usædvanlige i sådanne sager og afspejler måske en for snæver vifte af sanktioner, der er tilgængelige for krigsretter, selv under de gamle artikler for Marines regering. Da de krigsretter, der var resultatet af 1950'ens grundstødning af USS Missouri (BB-63), var i gang, undersøgte indkaldelsesmyndigheden, der søgte i præcedenserne, alle større grundstødssager, der havde fundet sted i flåden i løbet af de foregående 30 år. I næsten alle sådanne tilfælde blev de pålagte straffe betragtet af flådeministeriet som utilstrækkelige, selvom ingen af ​​disse påtegninger gav nogen vejledning om, hvad en passende straf kunne være. Typisk involverede de tab af numre på Søværnets lineære liste, ganske vist ikke meget af en håndgribelig straf, hvis dens eneste praktiske effekt er at forsinke ufrivillig pensionering i mange års tjeneste ud over det tidspunkt, hvor det ellers ville have fundet sted. Reduktion i rang var tilgængelig, men sjældent brugt, og den led af den samme mangel som tab af tal i karakter. Selvom afskedigelse fra tjenesten var en tilladt sanktion, ville tabet af løn og fordele til en pensionist-berettiget officer have været alvorligt. Måske hvis straks ufrivillig pensionering eller adskillelse med fratrædelsesgodtgørelse havde været til rådighed, kunne disse straffe i nogle tilfælde være blevet pålagt. I tilfælde af Missouri blev kaptajnen, operationsofficeren og navigatoren fundet skyldig og dømt til tab af numre.

Uanset manglerne ved de gamle artikler for flådestyrelsen, gav de stadig brugbare metoder til at håndtere professionelle fejl.

krigsret efter Uniform Code of Mil & gt tar y Justice tilbyder ikke længere et køretøj, der tjener dette formål, undtagen i de næsten ikke-eksisterende tilfælde af vilje eller uagtsomhed, der er så grov, at det udgør hensynsløs tilsidesættelse. Det skal naturligvis huskes på, at der stadig findes en række mindre sanktioner, nogle af dem falder ind under Uniform Code og nogle af dem administrative. Det væsentlige spørgsmål er, om dette indsnævrede område er tilstrækkeligt. Hvis ikke, skal der findes en erstatning for krigsretten.

Uanset svaret på dette spørgsmål minimeres effektiviteten af ​​de sanktioner, der stadig er til rådighed, ikke. På det laveste niveau er den ulempe og tab af professionel agtelse, der er forbundet med pubh c '

undertiden personligt katastrofalt, er mere en sub 'bevidst tilbageholdenhed end sanktion. Næste er rekord af præstationer akkumuleret i en officers fitnessportportfil. Det kan i sidste ende resultere i fejl i bevægelsen og tidligere adskillelse fra aktiv tjeneste, men dens virkning er normalt meget adskilt fra begivenheden i tide. I perioder, hvor overa* forfremmelsesmuligheden er lav, vil valg af fejl også ramme dem med pletfrie rekorder såvel som dem med utilfredsstillende eller ugunstige fitnessrapporter- Der er imidlertid mere umiddelbare administrative sanktioner, hvoraf de mest drastiske er den opsummerende fjernelse fra kommandoen. Selvom det er en utvivlsomt effektiv eKtiv handling, følger det næsten altid med andre sanktiver til at håndtere langt de fleste urolige

hændelser, der kan ramme et skib, såsom at trække på grund, mens de er forankret i dårligt vejr, mindre kollisioner og forskellige interne tab.

Men hvis kaptajnens absolutte ansvar for sit skib skal opretholdes, i tilfælde af skyldig ineffektivitet, der fører til større hændelser, er denne mindre række sanktioner ikke tilstrækkelig. Der skal findes en erstatning for den almindelige krigsret. For det første kan alle de andre handlinger træffes mod betjente, der er skyldige i dømmefejl, der fører til mindre alvorlige resultater. Der ser ud til at være lidt forskel i behandlingen af ​​den øverstbefalende, hvis skib er alvorligt beskadiget eller tabt, og et hvis skib er midlertidigt grundstødt eller lider af en relativt mindre kollision. Måske lige så vigtigt er tabet af den kollektive indgivelse af et panel af uinteresserede professionelle jævnaldrende. Although a letter of censure can be appealed °ne level, it is still essentially the action of a single senior in the chain of command. By the same token, exoneration by such a senior will have less impact r han that by such a panel.

In the most serious cases the reaction outside the service must also be considered. It is questionable Whether the public will accept what is primarily an administrative disposition in cases involving substan­ t ial loss of life or the loss of a major unit of the fleet. Removal from command and issuance of a letter of r eprimand may be as devastating to the individual Concerned as anything else that might conceivably be done to him, but the import of such actions is not Understood by the public and is often perceived as a slap on the wrist.” Finally, where there is pressure for more drastic action, the Navy will probably be 'Ocreasingly hesitant to resort to the court-martial, in v iew of the increasing emphasis being given to the concept of criminality in the evolution of the law applicable to court-martial proceedings. The Navy should properly be reluctant to stigmatize as a crimi­nal an officer of the deck who was doing his level best to stay out of the way of a maneuvering aircraft carrier while attempting to perform the evolution in a manner consistent with what he understood to be the desires of his commanding officer. In this con­nection it should be noted that among the charges recommended by the investigating command to be brought against the Belknap’s officer of the deck was that of manslaughter. Fortunately, this charge was not included among those actually preferred.

An adequate substitute for the now practically un­available court-martial in cases of errors in profes­sional judgment need not have all the powers of such a court. It would not need the power to fine or im­prison, and it certainly should not be deemed to have the power to impose criminal sanctions. It should, however, be empowered to exonerate and to impose sanctions with finality, subject to mitigation through appeal. Such appeal should extend to court review in the case of the most severe sanctions. The powers of such a tribunal should include the imposition of sev­eral levels of censure such as, possibly, a letter of caution, letter of admonition, and letter of rep­rimand—and extend in the most serious cases to the loss of the privilege of continuing in the profession. Separation from active duty, with or without sever­ance pay, should certainly be included among the ac­tions permitted. Dismissal of a retirement-eligible officer, while not entirely indefensible, is perhaps too drastic a power to give an administrative body. Less­er disqualifications should include revocation of formal designation of qualification in a warfare spe­cialty or for command at sea.

None of the various techniques currently available to the Navy, administrative or judicial, can fulfill the requirements outlined above. A regular officer’s right to tenure on the active list of the Navy is closely prescribed by statute, and therefore legislative authority would have to be obtained to establish any administrative body empowered to remove such an officer from active duty. It is certain that any ap­proach which smacked of an attempted return to the general court-martial as it existed under the Articles for the Government of the Navy would never be ac­ceptable to the Congress. However, there are other precedents, still in good standing, which have not only been established by legislative authority but have also been found constitutionally acceptable to the courts. Probably the professional licensing pro­cess, including revocation authority, as it exists under the regulation of various federal and state agencies, most closely parallels the administrative powers needed by the Navy as its chief method for the enforcement of professional standards through the use of sanctions. The Coast Guard regulates the licensing of merchant marine personnel. In cases of casualties involving merchant shipping, a Coast Guard board investigates, fixes blame, and can ini­tiate action to suspend or revoke licenses.

At the state level, a similar function is provided for in various professional fields. All, or virtually all, states regulate the practice of professions within their respective borders by prescribing licensing require­ments, establishing administrative bodies to super­vise the licensing process, and by providing for the policing of licensed practitioners. Typically, an ap­pointed board made up of members of the profession involved is responsible for the execution of both the licensing and policing functions, controlling those who would practice that profession within the boun­daries of the state. The governing statute may pro­vide, either generally or in detail, those standards the breach of which can lead to suspension or revocation of licenses. Procedures may include the right to a hearing, to be represented by counsel, and ultimate appeal to the courts. Highlighting the contrast be­tween the administrative licensing procedure and the stricter constitutional requirements pertaining to a criminal statute, the list of professional derelictions may include “other unprofessional conduct.” The key similarities between this proposal and the instrument the Navy once had, are in the general charges of “culpable inefficiency” and “conduct unbecoming,” and the fact that these professionals must account to a body of their peers.

There also exists a useful precedent closer at hand. The Army and the Air Force have possessed in recent years statutory authority to convene a hierarchy of boards to determine whether an officer shall be re­quired to show cause for his retention on active duty. This can come about either because his performance of duty has fallen below standards required or be­cause of moral dereliction, professional dereliction, or because his retention is clearly not consistent with the interests of national security. In the development of a uniform officer personnel act beginning in I960, a concept still awaiting enactment under the title o Defense Officer Personnel Management Act, this au­thority would have been extended to the Secretary o the Navy. While this provision would not fit the needs of the Navy for a board empowered to act with the required broad range of options following its in­vestigation of a specific incident, it does include the parallel of “professional dereliction” and has the value of relatively recent (1950s) congressional ap­proval .

The foregoing examples in no way represent an exhaustive search of all the possible precedents. Such a thorough study should, of course, be a preliminary to the actual task of formulating a legislative propo­sal. What these few examples do make clear is that there are in existence comparable systems which p r0 ' vide for portions of what is needed and which have proved acceptable to the legislative bodies which enacted them and to the courts which reviewed then operation. It should not be difficult to adapt a distil­lation of these approaches to the needs of the Navy-

Whatever the precise details of such a system f° r assigning responsibility and enforcing professional accountability in specific cases, its essential elements are clear. Judgment should be by a panel of p r0 ' fessional peers, enabled to act with finality, except for mitigation. The maximum sanctions available should be stern, including dismissal from the service- Finally, and just as important as the power to con­demn, it must have the power to exonerate, to “fully and honorably acquit.”

A graduate of the U. S. Naval Academy with c ^ e Class of 1940, Captain Greenbacker’s first assignment C was t0 tbe CSS Yorktown (CV-5), in which he serve

until her loss at the Battle of Midway. During his sub sequent career, his commands have included the sub marine chaser SC

1472, the USS Neunzer (DE-150), USS Lloyd E. Acne (DE-356), the USSCotry (DD-81?)- the USS Fremont (APA-44), Destroyer Division 262, and Destroy er Squadron Six. Ashore, he served on the staff of the Military Sea Trans portation Service, two tours in the Bureau of Naval Personnel and as Operations and Readiness Officer on the staff of CinCLantFIt. He at tended the Naval War College and has an M. A. degree in Internationa Relations from George Washington University. He received his Bachel 0 of Laws and Master of Laws degrees from Georgetown University- bf retired from active duty in 1969 and is currently engaged in the practR of law in Halifax, Virginia.


Execution 150 Years Ago Spurs Calls for Pardon

MANKATO, Minn. — On Dec. 26, 1862, thirty-eight doomed Dakota Indians wailed and danced atop the gallows, waiting for the trapdoors to drop beneath them. The square scaffold, built here to accommodate the largest mass execution in United States history, swayed under their weight.

“It seemed that the purpose of the singing and dancing was only to sustain each other in their last ordeal,” a witness observed. “As the last moment rapidly approached, they each called out their name and shouted in their native language: ‘I’m here! I’m here!’ ”

Thirty-seven of the men were among the “most ferocious” followers of the Dakota leader Little Crow, according to the federal government. They stood accused of killing approximately 490 settlers, including women and children, in raids along the Minnesota frontier.

But one man, historians say, did not belong there. A captured Dakota named We-Chank-Wash-ta-don-pee, often called Chaska, had had his sentence commuted by President Abraham Lincoln days earlier. Yet on the day after Christmas 1862, Chaska died with the others.

It was a case of wrongful execution, Gary C. Anderson, a history professor at the University of Oklahoma and Little Crow biographer, said last week in an interview. “These soldiers just grabbed the wrong guy,” he said.

Although the story of the mass execution in Mankato is well-known locally, scholars say the case of Chaska — spared by Lincoln, then wrongfully executed — has been long overlooked by the federal government and all but forgotten even by the Dakota.

Now, an effort to keep the story alive is taking root on campuses and even on Capitol Hill as the 150th anniversary of the execution, in 2012, approaches. Commemorative events will include symposiums, museum exhibits, monument re-dedications, book publications and an original symphony and choral production.

“It’s time to talk about it and time for people to know about it,” said Gwen Westerman, a professor of English at Minnesota State University at Mankato and a member of the Dakota who is planning to investigate Chaska’s case and the cultural context of the conflict with a class. She says she is hoping her students can “put together some more pieces of the puzzle.”

“Because there is a historical record” for Chaska’s commutation, Ms. Westerman said, “that’s a good place to start.”

A move to award Chaska (pronounced chas-KAY) a posthumous pardon has drawn some initial support. Before his defeat in November, Representative James L. Oberstar, Democrat of Minnesota, said a federal pardon would be “a grand gesture and one I think our Congressional delegation should support.”

“A wrong should be righted,” he added.

Senator Al Franken, a Minnesota Democrat who sits on the Committee on Indian Affairs, issued a statement last week signaling that he might move the issue forward.

“Senator Franken recognizes that this is a tragic period in history,” said his press secretary, Ed Shelleby. “The senator will continue to look into this incident in the next Congress.”

Tension between the Dakota, historically called the Sioux, and the influx of settlers had been mounting for years before the Civil War, which further strained United States resources, disrupting food and supplies promised to the Dakota in a series of broken peace treaties. One local trader, Andrew Myrick, said of the Indians’ plight, “If they are hungry, let them eat grass.”

Enraged and starving, the tribe attacked and plundered the new state’s settlements. Of the 400-plus Dakota and “mixed blood” men detained by Brig. Gen. Henry Hastings Sibley, 303 were sentenced by a military court to death. But Lincoln found a lack of evidence at most of the tribunals, and he reduced the number of the condemned to 38.

Billede

We-Chank-Wash-ta-don-pee’s case was No. 3 and not listed in the execution order handwritten by Lincoln, but his fate may have been the result of mistaken identity. The man he died for was No. 121, identified by Lincoln as Chaskey-don or Chaskey-etay, who had been condemned for murdering a pregnant woman.

But historians say something far more complex may have been responsible for Chaska’s death: rumor. During the raids, Chaska took a white woman, Sarah Wakefield, and her children prisoner — not an uncommon occurrence during the Dakota War.

What was uncommon, however, was Wakefield’s defense of her captor at his military tribunal. Chaska defended her and her children, she said, and kept them from certain death and abuse at the hands of his fellow tribesmen. “If it had not been for Chaska,” Wakefield said, “my bones would now be bleaching on the prairie, and my children with Little Crow.”

One prison chaplain wrote to her after the hanging: “Dear Madam: In regard to the mistake by which Chaska was hung instead of another, I doubt whether I can satisfactorily explain it.”

Wakefield firmly believed that Chaska was executed on purpose, in retaliation for her testimony and in reaction to rumors that she and Chaska were lovers. General Sibley, who appointed the tribunal that convicted Chaska, privately referred to him as Wakefield’s “dusky paramour.”

Wakefield denied any sexual relationship in the booklet she wrote the year after his death, titled “Six Weeks in the Sioux Teepees.” She wrote, “I loved not the man, but his kindly acts."

Some details of the conflict have been willfully buried or forgotten, by both sides of the war. The Dakota conflict came in 1862, which historians have described as Lincoln’s “darkest year” during the Civil War. It was the year the president lost his 11-year-old son, Willie, to typhoid fever. Thousands died on the battlefields at the Battle of Bull Run and at Fredericksburg, as Lincoln fought with his own generals. In large part, the narrative of mass execution in Mankato was lost in the United States’ struggle to preserve the union.

Lincoln himself was distressed at the speed of the military tribunals that condemned 303 men, and his decision to commute most of the sentences was politically dangerous. But he said, “I could not afford to hang men for votes.” The 265 Dakota Indians Lincoln spared from the gallows were either fully pardoned or died in prison.

Modern Mankato, once a prairie outpost, is now a city of 37,000, where a modest downtown struggles for survival, competing against outlying strip malls and chain stores.

The only reminders that 38 Indians died here is a Dakota warrior statue and plaque outside the local library. The location of the actual scaffold is now called Reconciliation Park.

Glenn Wasicunna, a Dakota language teacher and husband of Ms. Westerman, said that for decades, his people would not even drive through Mankato during the day. The place carried too many memories, too much cultural trauma, he said.

“These were our family,” Ms. Westerman added. “These were people my great-grandparents knew. They have a direct effect on who we are.”

Each year on Dec. 26, the annual Mankato memorial run acknowledges those who died in the mass execution. But Wayne Wells, a Dakota language teacher on the nearby Prairie Island reservation, said there would be a range of response to a pardon just for Chaska. Many Dakota, he said, “consider all of them to be innocent martyrs — people who stood up and died for us.”

However, Leonard Wabasha, a local Dakota leader, said a federal pardon for Chaska would “shine a light.”

“It would cause people to read and research into it a little deeper,” Mr. Wabasha said. “It would be a step in the right direction.”


Indhold

It's amazing, what lengths pro-military types on Wikipedia will go to deny past crimes of Western imperialism. Even 'small' ones, like here. The firebombing of german and japanese cites -- and the atomic warcrime, of course -- etc., are something else again entirely, huh? Still -- someone had to just come out and say it finally, in this article, if for no other reason but that it is incontrovertible fact. Endnu stadig attempt to justify it.

We're still not quite out of the Dark Ages yet, are we.

I think this article remains a tad distant from any 'final' state of objectivity.

Pazouzou (talk) 01:04, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

None of the references I consulted labeled the treatment of the German POWs 'torture' the strongest wording is that it was a "singular atrocity", and that's been included in the article. Intererstingly enough, the historian who used this term (Philip K. Lundeberg) was actually a survivor of the ship which the submarine sank. Nick-D (talk) 06:56, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

I felt that the language describing the treatment of prisoners was weaselly. They were tortured.Keith-264 (talk) 20:05, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

If you can find a source which calls it 'torture' then by all means change the wording. I tend to agree, but am constrained by what the sources I've been able to find say. Nick-D (talk) 21:28, 8 November 2009 (UTC) I agree. I think the use of euphemisms is a reflection of the time the action took place. Morrison, for example, states that the crew would not talk until they "enjoyed a little "hospitality" in the Marine Corps brig". --4wajzkd02 (talk) 22:19, 8 November 2009 (UTC) Western imperialism? You do realize Germany is considered part of the "West", yes? These were all Western powers fighting each other, not noble little brown people of bon sauvage mytologi. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.67.11.162 (talk) 19:31, 19 July 2012 (UTC) Your point? Xyl 54 (talk) 22:40, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

It seems the article of this ship USS Varian (DE-798) claims it disabled and forced the U-boat to surface.--Operation Teardrop (talk) 05:52, 8 September 2009 (UTC) It seems that five destroyers engaged the U-boat at the same time, Varian, USS Pillsbury (DE-133), USS Chatelain (DE-149), USS Neunzer (DE-150) and USS Flaherty (DE-135), the combat being described in this article, but. not one reference!--Operation Teardrop (talk) 06:33, 8 September 2009 (UTC) Ok, that entire combat description was lifted from here [1] --Operation Teardrop (talk) 06:35, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

The Background section says the information came from the interrogation of a spy named Oscar Mantel. The Operation Elster page says those spies, Gimpel and Colepaugh, gave this information. Was Mantel one of these people, or was he a different captive giving the same story. Anybody know? Xyl 54 (talk) 23:21, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

I believe this is wrong. See Actions of 5/6 May 1945 and U-853. I believe the above statement should be amended to mention that these subs were the last two sunk in US waters. It is not clear which was the last one sunk as the events happened at about the same time, and nobody knows which shot sank U-853 during the lenthy attack it was subjected to. Jehochman Talk 04:53, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

There has been some mention of carriers and destroyers in the article, which I've corrected. Escort carriers (CVE) are much smaller than the ships usually called carriers, fleet carriers and destroyer escorts (DE) are smaller and slower than (fleet) destroyers (the Royal Navy classified them as frigates rather than any sort of destroyer). Cheap, expendable, ships produced in huge quantities. Pol098 (talk) 08:39, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

I have just modified one external link on Operation Teardrop. Brug et øjeblik på at gennemgå min redigering. Hvis du har spørgsmål eller har brug for botten til at ignorere linkene eller siden helt, kan du besøge denne simple FAQ for yderligere oplysninger. Jeg foretog følgende ændringer:

Når du er færdig med at gennemgå mine ændringer, kan du følge instruktionerne i skabelonen herunder for at løse eventuelle problemer med webadresserne.

Fra og med februar 2018 genereres eller overvåges "diskuterede sider" "Eksterne links ændret" ikke længere InternetArchiveBot . Der kræves ingen særlig handling med hensyn til disse diskussionsmeddelelser, bortset fra regelmæssig verifikation ved hjælp af arkivværktøjsinstruktionerne herunder. Redaktører har tilladelse til at slette disse "Eksterne links ændrede" diskussionssektioner, hvis de ønsker at fjerne diskussionssider, men se RfC, før de foretager massesystematiske fjernelser. Denne meddelelse opdateres dynamisk gennem skabelonen <> (sidste opdatering: 15. juli 2018).


Precautions

Before taking irbesartan, tell your doctor or pharmacist if you are allergic to it or if you have any other allergies. This product may contain inactive ingredients, which can cause allergic reactions or other problems. Talk to your pharmacist for more details.

Before using this medication, tell your doctor or pharmacist your medical history, especially of: liver disease, severe loss of body water and minerals (dehydration).

This drug may make you dizzy. Alcohol or marijuana (cannabis) can make you more dizzy. Do not drive, use machinery, or do anything that needs alertness until you can do it safely. Limit alcoholic beverages. Talk to your doctor if you are using marijuana (cannabis).

This medication may increase your potassium levels. Before using potassium supplements or salt substitutes that contain potassium, consult your doctor or pharmacist.

Before having surgery, tell your doctor or dentist about all the products you use (including prescription drugs, nonprescription drugs, and herbal products).

This medication is not recommended for use during pregnancy due to the risk for harm to an unborn baby. Consult your doctor for more details. (See also Warning section.)

It is unknown if this drug passes into breast milk. Consult your doctor before breast-feeding.

Consult your pharmacist or physician.


How We Juneteenth

Gov. Andrew Cuomo of New York signed an executive order on Wednesday making Juneteenth a holiday for state employees the same goes for tech companies like Twitter, and even where I work, at The New York Times. This year, Juneteenth, a holiday that celebrates the arrival of the news of emancipation from slavery, seems to be a bigger deal across the nation.

But there’s a conversation I’ve been having with my friends: Is celebrating this holiday enough to begin to fix all that’s so very broken? And, one tick further, is the national embrace of what has been known as the African-American Independence Day a dangerous idea? Some people wonder — if we sip on our traditional red drinks as we socially distance on screens and porches — will we be lulled into feeling more free than we really are?

Saidiya Hartman, the author of “Wayward Lives, Beautiful Experiments” and a 2019 MacArthur “genius” grant winner whose work explores the “afterlife of slavery in modern American society,” said: “How to live a free life, how one can live, is the pressing question for black folks in the wake of slavery’s formal end.” Ms. Hartman said that imagining a freer life and a more just society has been the purpose of generations of black people since the days of Reconstruction.

“Recently, I heard Angela Davis talk about the radical imagination,” Ms. Hartman said. “And a fundamental requirement is believing that the world you want to come into existence can happen. I think that that is how black folks have engaged with and invested in and articulated freedom, as an ideal and as an everyday practice.”

I couldn’t agree more. As someone who has celebrated Juneteenth for a long time, I think we need it now — not in lieu of the freedom, justice and equality we are still fighting for — but in addition, because we have been fighting for so very long.

The elemental sermon embedded into the history and lore of Juneteenth has always been one of hope. The gifts of the holiday are the moments of connection, renewal and joy for a people who have had to endure so much, for so long.

To me, Juneteenth matters because it says: Keep going, the future you want is coming. — Veronica Chambers

“Words of Emancipation didn’t arrive until the middle of June so they called it Juneteenth. So that was it, the night of Juneteenth celebration, his mind went on. The celebration of a gaudy illusion. ” — Ralph Ellison, “Juneteenth”


Neuenzer DE-150 - History

Hart Island

For over 150 years, it has been the New York City Department of Correction&rsquos solemn duty to manage burials on Hart Island. The Island serves as the City&rsquos public cemetery and is the final resting place of over one million individuals. The NYC Department of Correction is committed to ensuring that the public has access to the island and has several services available to help the individuals find and visit their loved ones on Hart Island.

To contact the Department about Hart Island, please call the Hart Island Information Line at (718) 546-0911 or [email protected] This line is staffed by a dedicated member of the Office of Constituent and Grievance Services Monday through Friday, 9 a.m. &ndash 5 p.m. If you call outside of these hours, please leave a message and your call will be returned the following business day. All emails will receive a response within 24 to 48 hours, absent any extenuating circumstances.

Information on Hart Island

Visiting Hart Island

The Department of Correction welcomes the public to visit Hart Island, pay their respects, and maintain vital connections to those that have passed away. The island can be accessed by scheduling either a public gazebo visit or a private gravesite visit. Visits to Hart Island are provided solely by the Department of Correction and are free of charge to visitors.

Gravesite visits are reserved for those with close personal ties to a decedent, including family members, chosen family members, close friends, and partners. Gravesite visits are intended to provide an opportunity for loved ones to spend peaceful time at the final resting place of the decedent. Gazebo visits can be accessed by the general public, as well as family and friends of a decedent.

Type of Visits

For individuals wishing to visit the final resting place of a loved one, the Department offers gravesite visits to Hart Island twice a month, on weekends. A visitor who requests a gravesite visit is permitted to be accompanied by up to four (4) additional guests. Anyone wishing to visit a gravesite with more than four (4) additional guests should contact the Hart Island Information Line. The Department will make reasonable efforts to accommodate any such requests.

Gravesite visits are reserved for individuals with close ties to a specific decedent.

The Department offers gazebo visits on the third Thursday of every month at 9 a.m. Reservations for gazebo visits may be scheduled by anyone, regardless of whether they have a loved one interred on the Island. During a gazebo visit, visitors are escorted to a designated location at the gazebo and remain there for the entirety of the visit, with time to reflect on the memories of those buried on the Island. Many of the Island burial sites and monuments can be viewed from the gazebo and there is also a question and answer session with knowledgeable staff who work on the Island.

Scheduling and Preparation

Reservations to Visit Hart Island

Reservations to visit Hart Island may be scheduled by calling (718) 546-0911 via email at [email protected] or by submitting a Visit Request Form online .
All visits must be scheduled at least five (5) business days in advance, but the Department will work to accommodate special requests when possible. If you need more information or assistance with schedule a visit to Hart Island, please contact the Department&rsquos Hart Island Information Line at (718) 546-0911.

Availability for Gazebo Visits

In an effort to limit the spread of COVID-19, the Department is not scheduling gazebo visits at this time.

Availability for Gravesite Visits

Two (2) gravesite visit opportunities are available each scheduled day, one beginning at 9 a.m. and one beginning at 12 p.m. Each gravesite visit lasts approximately two (2) hours and can accommodate up to 10 visitors.

By submitting the visit request form for a gravesite visit, a requestor will affirm a close personal relationship with a decedent. Documentation of a requestor&rsquos relationship to the deceased is not required unless there is a reasonable basis for concluding that no relationship exists between the requestor and the deceased, in which case the Department may require documentation if it has been unable to confirm the relationship through other credible means.

How to Prepare for Your Visit

Prior to visiting, each family member or guest should sign and submit a liability waiver by emailing a signed copy to [email protected], or mailing it to:

NYC Department of Correction
Office of Constituent and Grievance Services
75-20 Astoria Boulevard
East Elmhurst, New York 11370

A visitor may also provide a signed copy in person on the day of visitation, and blank copies of the liability waiver will also be available at the City Island dock on the day of visitation.

What to Expect on the Day of Your Visit

The Department is committed to providing a safe and respectful visit experience and is following all recommended public health guidelines for the City of New York, and requires that visitors do the same.

Upon arrival at the City Island dock, all visitors are required to present valid photo identification and sign the Hart Island Visitor Book. The Department reserves the right to search visitors consistent with its security policy and works diligently to maintain a peaceful and respectful environment during visits to Hart Island.

Department staff and visitors are required to wear appropriate face coverings and maintain safe social distance throughout the visit. If visitors do not have a mask, one will be provided. If a guest refuses to wear a mask, they will not be permitted to participate in a gravesite visit that day.

All visitors will be screened prior to boarding the bus that will transport them onto the ferry. Visitors will review a COVID-19 symptom screening questionnaire and sign an affirmation form stating that they are cleared to proceed with their visit based on their review of the questionnaire. If a visitor answers yes to any of the screening questions, they will not be permitted to participate in a gravesite visit that day.

During your visit, the Department will not ask you to social distance from the person(s) in your visitor group and may not be able to afford visitors in the same group with six feet of distance from each other. We encourage you to visit with member of your household only. The Department will require that each visitor group maintain social distance from the next closest visitor group.

All vehicles used for transportation have social distancing cues to note appropriate distance, a filtration system, and will be sanitized between each visit. For the safety of staff and visitors, all visitors will be required to board the bus on the City Island dock and remain on the bus for the duration of the ferry trip to Hart Island visitors will also be required to board the bus to depart from Hart Island and remain on the bus for the duration of the ferry trip to return to the City Island dock.
When visiting Hart Island, please consider any inclement weather conditions, especially during the summer and winter seasons, and dress appropriately. The island is accessed by a brief ferry ride from a dock on City Island, and all transportation on Hart Island is provided by the Department. Uniformed Correction Officers will escort all groups and individuals to their designated visit sites, but will maintain a respectful distance in order to allow for a peaceful visit.

Visit Availability and Limitations

Visits will be scheduled for the requested date unless accommodation for a request is not feasible due to inclement weather, no availability on the date requested because maximum capacity has been reached, and any other factors beyond the Department&rsquos control. In such cases, the Department will make reasonable efforts to reschedule the visit for the next date requested.

If space is unavailable on the preferred visit day, the Department will contact the individual who submitted the request within three (3) business days of a request for a visit to modify the request or seek to reschedule the request. In the event that demand for visits exceeds capacity, visits for family members, chosen family members, and partners will be prioritized. Any other visitor whose visit needs to be rescheduled in order to afford a visit opportunity for a family member, chosen family member, or partner will receive at least three (3) business days notice.

If a deceased person&rsquos specific gravesite is either unidentifiable or inaccessible for reasons that cannot be remedied before the date of the visit, the requestor will be notified in advance of the visit and may be asked to reschedule. Alternatively, the requestor is permitted to visit an alternate gravesite or other location reasonably proximate to the requested gravesite.

Directions and Transportation

The ferry to Hart Island departs from a dock in City Island located at the east end of Fordham Street.

There is no parking on the City Island dock and parking near the dock is extremely limited. All visitors are strongly encouraged to take public transportation or carpool if possible. The Bx29 bus stops at the intersection City Island Ave and Fordham Street, which is a ten (10) minute walk to the dock. All visitors are reminded to follow local parking regulations.

How to Find a Loved One Buried on Hart Island

The Department has created a searchable database of Hart Island burial records dating back to 1977, which enables members of the public to determine if a loved is buried on the island. Records dated before 1977 are preserved by the New York City Municipal Archives, a division of the New York City Department of Records and Information Services. Some records were destroyed in a fire in the 1970s, and location information cannot be determined for these interments. The searchable database is available for public access to search for individuals by name, age, birth date, date of death, or by the assigned Medical Examiner number. The Medical Examiner number may be obtained through the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner of New York City.

Please click the following link to access the Hart Island searchable database to determine if your loved one has been interred on Hart Island. If you know the plot number of your loved one, you can locate them on the Island by referencing a Map of Hart Island burial locations (Hart Island Map 1, Hart Island Map 2).

If you need more information about an individual record or assistance locating a record, please call the Hart Island Information Line at (718) 546-0911 or email [email protected] The Department has redacted personally identifying information from records of fetal remains in order to protect the personal privacy of family members. Any family member seeking information on fetal remains that may have been buried on Hart Island should call the Hart Island Information Line.

Disinterment

Upon confirming that a loved one is buried on Hart Island, families may request a disinterment and reburial elsewhere, such as in a private cemetery. The Department does not charge for locating and disinterring remains of the deceased.

To arrange for relocation and reburial of your loved one, you must contact a licensed funeral director, who will charge a fee for services. The funeral director will help with obtaining a disinterment permit from the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene&rsquos Office of Vital Records. Once a permit is granted, the funeral director must mail the following documents to the Department of Correction:

  1. The original Disinterment Permit
  2. A formal request for disinterment on letterhead from a licensed funeral home.

The address to mail these two (2) documents is:

NYC Department of Correction
Facility Maintenance and Repair Division
75-20 Astoria Boulevard
Elmhurst, NY 11370

The Department of Correction will schedule the disinterment and coordinate with the funeral home for transfer of the remains. For more information, please contact the Office of Constituent and Grievance Services via the Hart Island information Line by calling (718) 546-0911 or by email at [email protected]

Burial assistance is available to help pay for funeral expenses/burials/cremations of eligible low-income New Yorkers through the HRA&rsquos Office of Burial Services. A burial allowance application can be made for funeral costs related to the disinterment and reburial of a decent buried on Hart Island. To learn more about burial assistance, visit HRA&rsquos Office of Burial Services website, email [email protected], or call (929) 252-7731 during regular business hours. If you call outside of regular business hours, please leave a message and your call will be returned the next business day. You may also visit the Office of Burial Services in person on Wednesdays between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. at:

HRA Office of Burial Services
33-28 Northern Blvd., 3rd Floor
Long Island City, NY 11101

Ofte stillede spørgsmål

Q: Who is buried on Hart Island?

Individuals are buried on Hart Island because their identity is unknown at the time of their death and a next of kin could not be located to arrange for burial services, because the individual&rsquos family could not afford burial costs, or because the individual&rsquos family preferred that their loved one be buried on Hart Island. The internment location of each individual is recorded and maintained by the Department.

Q: Can I get help paying for a burial or cremation of a loved one who passed away ?

Ja. Burial assistance is available to help pay for funeral expenses/burials/cremations of eligible low-income New Yorkers. Applications, along with our documents, will be reviewed by the HRA Office of Burial Services to see if eligibility criteria for a burial allowance are met. To learn more about burial assistance and apply for a burial allowance, visit HRA's Office of Burial Services, website, email [email protected], or call (929) 252-7731 during regular business hours. If you call outside of regular business hours, please leave a message and your call will be returned the next business day. You may also visit the Office of Burial Services in person on Wednesdays between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. at:

HRA Office of Burial Services
33-28 Northern Blvd., 3rd Floor
Long Island City, NY 11101

Q: Who are considered chosen family members? Does the Department allow chosen family to visit?

Chosen families are non-biological kinship bonds, whether legally recognized or not, deliberately chosen for the purpose of mutual support and love. Chosen family members have the same access to Hart Island as biological family members.

Q: I am not a relative but would like to visit the gravesite of a close friend or co-worker. Am I eligible for a gravesite visit?

Individuals with close personal ties to a specific decedent are eligible for gravesite visits, however, visits for family members, chosen family members, and partners are prioritized. To discuss individual visits, please contact the Hart Island Information Line.

Q: How may visitors sign up to visit Hart Island?

Reservations to visit Hart Island may be scheduled by calling (718) 546-0911, or via email at [email protected] , or by submitting a Visit Request Form online .

Q: How many people can visit Hart Island during a visitation period?

The Department works to accommodate each request submitted for a visit to Hart Island. In order to allow for safe social distancing, a maximum of 10 visitors can be accommodated for each gravesite visitation period.

Q: Can I take personal items on a gravesite visit?

Visitors are permitted to leave the following mementos at gravesites: flowers without vases, small stuffed animals, photographs, prayer cards, small flags, and blankets. The Department may require visitors to surrender electronic devices, which will be safeguarded and returned to visitors at the conclusion of the visit. When requesting a visit, requestors may seek permission to bring other mementos, which will be considered on a case-by-case basis.

Q: Can I take pictures while I&rsquom on Hart Island?

Film and photography while on Hart Island are prohibited without the express permission of the NYC Department of Correction. The Department offers two (2) Media Day visits to the Island per year for members of the media. For more information about Media Day visits, please contact the Department&rsquos Office of Public Information at [email protected]

Q: I&rsquom having trouble determining whether my loved one is buried on Hart Island, who can I contact for help?

You can contact the Hart Island Information Line by calling (718) 546-0911 or emailing [email protected]

Q: What happens if my preferred visit day is unavailable?

Visits to Hart Island are scheduled on a first-come-first-served basis. When a visitation period reaches capacity, a waitlist is created for that visitation period. As scheduled visitors notify the Department of a cancellation, the Department reaches out to visitors on the waitlist to notify them that a scheduled visit has become available on their preferred day and add them to the schedule accordingly. Alternately, the Department will offer to schedule the visitors on a later date.

Q: Does the Department charge a fee for visits to Hart Island?

All visits to Hart Island are free of charge and are authorized solely and entirely by the Department. The Department does not work with third-party vendors or outside organizations to schedule or provide visits to Hart Island. All visits to Hart Island should be scheduled directly with the Department.

Q: What is the Department doing to reduce the spread of COVID-19 during visits?

The safety of our staff and visitors is the Department&rsquos top priority and several policies have been put in place to ensure visits are safe and respectful. In order to facilitate safe social distancing, each visit is limited to a maximum of 10 guests. Prior to departing on the visit, all guests are required undergo a COVID-19 screening by answering several questions related to COVID-19 symptoms. All staff and guests are required to wear a face covering and maintain safe social distance for the duration of the visit, and transportation vehicles will have social distancing cues and will be sanitized between each visit. If you have any questions or concerns related to the health and safety measures in place for gravesite visits, please reach out to the Hart Island Information Line by calling (718) 546-0911 or emailing [email protected] .

For the Media

Twice a year, accredited members of the media may attend a two-hour tour of Hart Island. The tour can accommodate approximately five media outlets, with no more than two people per outlet. Deltagerne på turen bestemmes efter først til mølle-princippet og skal udfylde følgende formularer på forhånd:



Kommentarer:

  1. Twitchell

    It is a pity that I cannot express myself now - I am late for the meeting. Jeg kommer tilbage - jeg vil absolut udtrykke udtalelsen om dette spørgsmål.

  2. Walt

    In it something is also I think, what is it good idea.

  3. Wayland

    Undskyld for det, jeg griber ind ... Jeg forstår dette spørgsmål. Jeg inviterer til diskussion. Skriv her eller i PM.

  4. Akker

    Remarkable the valuable information

  5. Kinsey

    Godt sætte mig ned, jeg venter på din robot

  6. Baen

    Alle ventede godt, og vi falder på halen



Skriv en besked