Development of Legal Protection in EU Courts Dissertation

Development of Legal Protection in EU Courts - Dissertation Example Each established judicial system offers a mechanism for testing the legitimacy of the measures adopted by its respective institutions. In the European Union judicial system, given the democratic deficit as well as the restricted supervisory functions of the European Parliament, it is of the essence that a system be created to control the actions, decisions or privileges enjoyed by the European Union institutions. In this case, the fundamental position rests with the European Union Court of Justice, which is considered as an independent institution charged with defending the rule of law within the Union (Albors-Llorens, 1996).Before the Treaty of Lisbon brought amendments to the European Union, the major procedure in the event of judicial review was provided for in Article 230 EC Treaty, which gave non-privileged applicants the right to directly challenge the unjustifiable acts of the Union’s institutions such as the European Parliament, the Commission, the Council and the Euro pean Union Central Bank. Hypothetically, this previous mechanism stood as the standard judicial review instrument that was open to individuals. However, in reality, the possibility has been limited given its restrictive requirements on the issue of standing conditions for annulment and the strict interpretation of the requirements of individual concern that was adopted by the Court in the Plaumann case (Albors-Llorens, 2003), (Note 1). This means that these possibilities have been restrictive given the nature of the requirements.... This means that these possibilities have been restrictive given the nature of the requirements on the locus standi conditions, which are very strict. Again, hypothetically, they should be the primary channel for individuals to seek when reviewing the EU measures (Parfouru, 2007). The restrictive nature of the action for annulment as well as its strict interpretation by the Court denote a key impediment to access by the non-privileged applicants to the Court contrary to the privileged position enjoyed by the Member States and the EU institutions. This off-putting approach has been at the center of controversy and has been strongly criticized by members of the judiciary and scholars (Note 2). For instance, the adversaries of the system have challenged the approach claiming it violates the principle of effective judicial protection (Gormley, 2006). According to them, such restrictive approach is unfortunate as it leads to denial of justice. This condition is inconsistent with the common constitutional values, including the European Convention on Human Rights and Charter of Fundamental Rights, both of which the EU is based. The action for annulment, as provided for by Article 263 TFEU, is at the focal point of the EU judicial system. Its origin can be traced in the annulment proceedings against the unlawful administrative action as referred as by the Member States’ legal system. The Article allows non-privileged applicants, who may comprise any natural or legal person, to directly challenge the illegal measures. This results from the direct effect, which the EU has with regard to natural and legal persons as well as the Member States. Further, the restrictive locus standi to bring an action for annulment is one of

African Migration Essay Example for Free

African Migration Essay The African origin of early modern humans 200,000150,000 years ago is now well documented, with archaeological data suggesting that a major migration from tropical east Africa to the Levant took place between 130,000 and 100,000 years ago via the presently hyper-arid Saharan-Arabian desert. The path out of East Africa leads across North Africa, through the Nile corridor, and across the Red Sea, or across the Indian Ocean and the strait of Bab el Mandeb to the Arabian peninsula and beyond to Eurasia. Most of this interconnected landmass of the so-called Old World, the continental area encompassing Africa, Europe, and Asia, received migrants from East Africa by about 1. 5 million years ago. This migration was dependent on the occurrence of wetter climate in the region. Whereas there is good evidence that the southern and central Saharan-Arabian desert experienced increased monsoon precipitation during this period, no unequivocal evidence has been found for a corresponding rainfall increase in the northern part of the migration corridor, including the Sinai-Negev land bridge between Africa and Asia. The major feature of world populations through time is their increasing numbers. It is likely that many early human migrations resulted from the pressure of such demographic increases on limited food resources; disease, drought, famine, war, and natural disaster figure among the most important causes of early human migrations. Approximately 100,000 years ago, the first migrations of Homo sapiens out of their African homeland likely coincided with the ability to use spoken language and to control fire. Over the next 87,000 years humans migrated to every continent, encompassing a wide variety of natural environments. The Americas were the last continents to be reached by Homo sapiens, about 13,000 years ago. Why these earliest migrants left Africa to colonize the world is a complex, important question. The answer is likely to be found in a web of interrelated factors centered around human behavior, specifically behavior selected to reduce risk and increase the individuals’ fitness for survival. Calculated migration must have resulted from information sharing, alliance building, memory, and the ability to negotiate— all skills that necessarily accompanied increasingly complex social and cultural groups. The increasing complexity of existence inevitably led hominids out of Africa, resulting in a global distribution of diverse human groups. Increasing population may have prodded the migration of some groups. Armed with the attributes of culture, the distinctive, complex patterns of behavior shared by human groups, humans eventually adapted to and conquered virtually all global environments. Whatever the nature of human origins, whenever or wherever human societies and cultures first appeared, the peopling of our globe has been a product of migration from place to place. Given the small numbers of people and the vast distances they traversed, and considering their technologically limited modes of transportation, the movement of people around the globe seems miraculous. The examples of global colonization described below depended on interactions between people and between people and their environments. Gradually, sometime during the Middle Stone Age (perhaps 100,000 to 200,000 years ago), distinct patterns of interaction among humans and between them and the landscapes in which they lived emerged. Because the distinctive physical and social environments to which humans adapted were themselves constantly changing, cultures too continually changed. That early humans acquired technological and social skills can be inferred from widespread evidence of their material culture—stone tools and utensils, carved figurines, rock and cave art, and the like, dating from about 40,000 years ago—which has been found in most parts of the globe. The development of language unquestionably furthered the social and technological evolution of humans and facilitated systems of reciprocity and social exchange. For example, the division of labor in food production and the exchange and transportation of goods and products were greatly expedited by speech. Being able to assign different tasks to different individuals furthered cooperation and fueled the processes of social and cultural evolution. http://www.learner.org/courses/worldhistory/unit_readings_3.html http://www.learner.org/courses/worldhistory/unit_overview_3.html

Romanicism In 19th Century Lit Essay -- essays research papers

#1)  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  If one were to look up realism in the thesaurus, romanticism will be found as the antonym. However in the works of Harriet Prescott Spofford and Kate Chopin these two elements go hand in hand. Focusing on Spofford’s short story, â€Å"Circumstance,† and Chopin’s short story, â€Å"The Storm,† these two selections maintain a smooth transition between realism and romanticism.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  In Harriet Prescott Spofford’s â€Å"Circumstance† she tells of a woman who is visiting a sick neighbor. Where they live neighbors are miles apart, with the woods between being home for many wild animals, as well as Indian tribes. The woman stays with the neighbor too long and does not realize night is approaching, and she hurries home. Spofford begins the story in a very realistic tone. On her way home she is attacked by a sort of mountain lion. Spofford gives a romantic description of the beast, never giving the exact name of the animal. â€Å"Suddenly, a swift shadow, like the fabulous flying-dragon, writhed through the air before her, and she felt herself instantly seized and borne aloft. It was that wild beast- the most savage and serpentine and subtle and fearless of out latitudes- known by hunters as the Indian Devil.† (86) In her definition she keeps the beast from being real. Describing the animal as a beast, a flying dragon, and a devil gives the reader a mysterious impression of the animal, rather than being realistic and calling this flying dragon ...

Korea: MacArthurs war with Truman :: essays research papers

Korea: MacArthur’s war with Truman 1946-1952 The movie starts out with a pretty good background on the whole Korean War. It tells of how after WW II, Korea, at that time was ruled as a colony of Japan, was split along the 38th parallel. With the Russians controlling North Korea, and the U.S. backing South Korea. Both the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. chose leaders from the countries to be more of a governor than a president for the two nations. MacArthur, though in many ways was a failed general in that he lost many troops and strategic strong holds, was still a very popular â€Å"hero† from WW II. Although it depends on who you talk to. My great-grand father was U.S.S. Colorado and everyone in the Pacific during the was thought MacArthur was a horrible leader, and commander. MacArthur tended to make his own choices on U.S. foreign policy. MacArthur wanted to take troops all the way up to the Yule River on the border of Korea and China. Truman hated MacArthur for this, absolutely hated him. Truman felt that MacArthur’s daring had unduly escalated the war. China was now involved, and Truman feared Russia was to follow. Even though at that time Russia was considered a friend, Truman knew it was only one major conflict away from another world war. MacArthur wanted to bring in Chinese nationalist from Thailand into the war and attack Mainland China. MacArthur even went as far as to fly to Thailand and meet with na tionalist leaders to discuss doing so. MacArthur even suggested using up to 20 atomic bombs on strategic Chinese locations. He did not want his soldiers to die for a stalemate, he wanted total victory. Both Truman, and the U.S. Joint Chief’s of Staff (a collection of high ranking officers from all of the armed forces) disapproved of MacArthur’s actions, but were reluctant to do anything about it because of his tremendous popularity. In Tokyo, MacArthur met with diplomats from Spain and Portugal, and made it clear he wanted war with China. The diplomats related this to their home governments in telegrams that were intercepted by the NSA (National Security Agency). This was reported to Truman and he knew that MacArthur needed to be fired. The problem was that Truman could not report that the US had been listening in on other countries secret communications. So Truman was forced to wait until there was another reason to let MacArthur go, one that could be published and not embarrass the US.

Malcolm Gladwell

Interaction Between Personality and Environment A theory that an individual’s behavior is most likely based on factors such as personal convictions, personality, or inherited genes is a common belief in nowadays’ society. This theory seems like reasonable and logical because it is quite natural that a person’s behavior follows his or her characters. Malcolm Gladwell, however, in his essay, â€Å"The Power of Context: Bernie Goetz and the Rise and Fall of New York City Crime,† examines those factors affecting peoples’ behaviors and comes up with his own theory.Gladwell believes that the environmental conditions have the most significant influence on how one behaves. Throughout his essay, he presents a few different studies to help persuade the readers and to substantiate his argument. However, those cases and Gladwell’s theory are quite radical because they are only implied to certain situations, not to all circumstances and criminal cases. Ev en though environmental conditions have a more substantial impact on people’s behaviors, it is the interaction between personality and environment that actually determines the criminal actions.The influence that people’s immediate environment has on them is significant; people are affected by their environmental conditions more than by their previous intention. Gladwell discusses the relationship between environment or situation and an individual’s behavior in the Power of Context; that is, surroundings are closely related to a person’s character, and this theory is well applied when studying the criminals.As Gladwell insists, â€Å"[Broken Windows Theory and the Power of Context] are both based on the premise that an epidemic can be reversed, can be tipped, by tinkering with the smallest details of the immediate environment† (Gladwell 157). The outcome can be a whole different story by a simple and trivial factor. Similar to Broken Windows Theory, if one is at the place, where is dirty and depressed and has relatively high crime rates, one will likely think that violations of law such as throwing away garbage on the road and even committing a serious crime are fairly acceptable.In contrast, even though one was once intended to commit a crime, if one is at the place where is comfortable and tidy, one cannot commit a violent act easily and actually begins to think again about breaking a law. This theory flows into Gladwell’s argument about the Tipping Points that forces people toward violence. Gladwell believes that the little things around people can act as catalysts and significantly change the outcomes of certain situations. As Gladwell notes, â€Å"The Power of Context is an environmental argument.It says that behavior is a function of social context† (Gladwell 159). There has been a similar argument about influence of surroundings in earlier days, but it shows little difference from the claim of Gladwell. Ea rly environmentalism emphasizes the importance of fundamental social factors; crime is the result of social injustice, structural economic inequities, racism, and decades of social neglect (Gladwell 159). However, according to the Power of Context, Tipping Point – the critical point in an evolving situation that leads to an irreversible development – may be as simple and trivial.People do not have to solve the big problems or undertake some heroic steps to decrease a crime rate. All they need to do is scrubbing off graffiti and arresting fare-beaters. An individual’s personality or character also plays an important role in decision-making. Although environmental conditions can greatly affect individual’s action more than anything, their characters may also become a significant factor that determines violent behaviors.Personal convictions, experiences, and even genes can affect disposing individuals to crime. As Gladwell reveals, â€Å"All of those theori es are essentially ways of saying that the criminal is a personality type – a personality type distinguished by an insensitivity to the norms of normal society †¦ People who aren’t taught right from wrong are oblivious to what is and what is not appropriate behavior† (Gladwell 159). Most criminal cases are strongly related to criminals’ personal backgrounds or personal issues.It is quite obvious that people who have not taught what is and what is not right or wrong from their parents or in schools as they grew up are ignorant of illegal or violent actions and more likely commit crimes than educated people. Personality can be built throughout one’s entire life. Whether it is from family, friends, or teachers, the impact of these external forces can influence one’s character significantly. Those external forces may seem like an environmental condition, but the concept is quite different from the environmental factors that Gladwell uses in his argument because they are continuous surroundings.Family, friends, or teachers are usually key components of one’s life, and thus they play a crucial role in shaping one’s personality. Gladwell, in his essay, discusses many aspects of an individual’s character development. As he proposes an example, â€Å"People who grow up poor, fatherless, and buffeted by racism don’t have the same commitment to social norms as those from healthy middle-class homes† (Gladwell 159). This example perfectly demonstrates the idea that personality is shaped by individual’s constant character development and that character can have great influence on his or her decision-making.Those continuously shaped personalities or characters often interact with context in determining an individual’s behavior. Through effective examples of psychological and social experiments, Gladwell stresses his argument of the Power of Context. Interrelationship between person ality and environment eventually determines the individual’s behavior. In the example of the poor, the fatherless, and people suffered by racism committing violent actions, it is not because of either their pure personalities or environmental conditions; interact between both is that forces those people to commit a crime.Poor or fatherless surrounding is obviously the environmental factors, but those factors shape people’s personality throughout their life. As Lillian Rubin, Goetz’s biographer, writes, â€Å"there seems to be something seductive about the setting† (Gladwell 159). The Power of Context reveals that a poor environment leads people to commit violent actions, but people themselves are the one who are motivated to do immoral things. As Gladwell asserts, â€Å"Environmental Tipping Points are things that we can change: we can fix broken windows and clean up graffiti and change the signals that invite crime in the first place† (Gladwell 16 5).Motivations that come from environment, whether they are trivial or significant, force people to commit a crime even more. However, as the quotation insists, those Tipping Points can be changed and fixed easily by people’s little attention and slight changes in the surroundings. Gladwell uses the example of graffiti to support this argument. Even a little motivation such as graffiti in a subway can act as a catalyst that leads people to commit a severe crime because it may stimulate some people with bad experiences of childhood.The effects that environmental conditions have are quite significant, but those situations usually interact with people’s inner minds or personality greatly. People are influenced by the small changes in circumstances and force themselves into committing crimes, but this also means that the rate of crime can be decreased by fixing the slight things that affect people’s behaviors and that force people toward violent actions. Environment al conditions cannot be solid reasons for every crime occurred; personality is closely related to the surroundings when studying the criminal cases.In today’s world, building one’s personality is a multi-layered experience, influenced by environmental conditions. Some people may argue that the influence of immediate environment on decision-making is significant while others claim that personality or character plays a key role in controlling one’s action. However, the interrelationship between personality and environment is the most influential factor that determines one’s all kinds of behaviors. Every person carries pieces of identity that are not identical to other people’s, but even those, in some ways, are influenced by others all the time.Moreover, personality or character is affected not only by other people but also by social structures a person resides within, the family he lives with, and even the media he always faces. Personality can be f lexible depending on the surroundings. Therefore, although environmental conditions have a much more significant influence on people’s actions, the interaction between personality and environment is the one that actually controls how and why people behave in a certain way. Malcolm Gladwell Interaction Between Personality and Environment A theory that an individual’s behavior is most likely based on factors such as personal convictions, personality, or inherited genes is a common belief in nowadays’ society. This theory seems like reasonable and logical because it is quite natural that a person’s behavior follows his or her characters. Malcolm Gladwell, however, in his essay, â€Å"The Power of Context: Bernie Goetz and the Rise and Fall of New York City Crime,† examines those factors affecting peoples’ behaviors and comes up with his own theory.Gladwell believes that the environmental conditions have the most significant influence on how one behaves. Throughout his essay, he presents a few different studies to help persuade the readers and to substantiate his argument. However, those cases and Gladwell’s theory are quite radical because they are only implied to certain situations, not to all circumstances and criminal cases. Ev en though environmental conditions have a more substantial impact on people’s behaviors, it is the interaction between personality and environment that actually determines the criminal actions.The influence that people’s immediate environment has on them is significant; people are affected by their environmental conditions more than by their previous intention. Gladwell discusses the relationship between environment or situation and an individual’s behavior in the Power of Context; that is, surroundings are closely related to a person’s character, and this theory is well applied when studying the criminals.As Gladwell insists, â€Å"[Broken Windows Theory and the Power of Context] are both based on the premise that an epidemic can be reversed, can be tipped, by tinkering with the smallest details of the immediate environment† (Gladwell 157). The outcome can be a whole different story by a simple and trivial factor. Similar to Broken Windows Theory, if one is at the place, where is dirty and depressed and has relatively high crime rates, one will likely think that violations of law such as throwing away garbage on the road and even committing a serious crime are fairly acceptable.In contrast, even though one was once intended to commit a crime, if one is at the place where is comfortable and tidy, one cannot commit a violent act easily and actually begins to think again about breaking a law. This theory flows into Gladwell’s argument about the Tipping Points that forces people toward violence. Gladwell believes that the little things around people can act as catalysts and significantly change the outcomes of certain situations. As Gladwell notes, â€Å"The Power of Context is an environmental argument.It says that behavior is a function of social context† (Gladwell 159). There has been a similar argument about influence of surroundings in earlier days, but it shows little difference from the claim of Gladwell. Ea rly environmentalism emphasizes the importance of fundamental social factors; crime is the result of social injustice, structural economic inequities, racism, and decades of social neglect (Gladwell 159). However, according to the Power of Context, Tipping Point – the critical point in an evolving situation that leads to an irreversible development – may be as simple and trivial.People do not have to solve the big problems or undertake some heroic steps to decrease a crime rate. All they need to do is scrubbing off graffiti and arresting fare-beaters. An individual’s personality or character also plays an important role in decision-making. Although environmental conditions can greatly affect individual’s action more than anything, their characters may also become a significant factor that determines violent behaviors.Personal convictions, experiences, and even genes can affect disposing individuals to crime. As Gladwell reveals, â€Å"All of those theori es are essentially ways of saying that the criminal is a personality type – a personality type distinguished by an insensitivity to the norms of normal society †¦ People who aren’t taught right from wrong are oblivious to what is and what is not appropriate behavior† (Gladwell 159). Most criminal cases are strongly related to criminals’ personal backgrounds or personal issues.It is quite obvious that people who have not taught what is and what is not right or wrong from their parents or in schools as they grew up are ignorant of illegal or violent actions and more likely commit crimes than educated people. Personality can be built throughout one’s entire life. Whether it is from family, friends, or teachers, the impact of these external forces can influence one’s character significantly. Those external forces may seem like an environmental condition, but the concept is quite different from the environmental factors that Gladwell uses in his argument because they are continuous surroundings.Family, friends, or teachers are usually key components of one’s life, and thus they play a crucial role in shaping one’s personality. Gladwell, in his essay, discusses many aspects of an individual’s character development. As he proposes an example, â€Å"People who grow up poor, fatherless, and buffeted by racism don’t have the same commitment to social norms as those from healthy middle-class homes† (Gladwell 159). This example perfectly demonstrates the idea that personality is shaped by individual’s constant character development and that character can have great influence on his or her decision-making.Those continuously shaped personalities or characters often interact with context in determining an individual’s behavior. Through effective examples of psychological and social experiments, Gladwell stresses his argument of the Power of Context. Interrelationship between person ality and environment eventually determines the individual’s behavior. In the example of the poor, the fatherless, and people suffered by racism committing violent actions, it is not because of either their pure personalities or environmental conditions; interact between both is that forces those people to commit a crime.Poor or fatherless surrounding is obviously the environmental factors, but those factors shape people’s personality throughout their life. As Lillian Rubin, Goetz’s biographer, writes, â€Å"there seems to be something seductive about the setting† (Gladwell 159). The Power of Context reveals that a poor environment leads people to commit violent actions, but people themselves are the one who are motivated to do immoral things. As Gladwell asserts, â€Å"Environmental Tipping Points are things that we can change: we can fix broken windows and clean up graffiti and change the signals that invite crime in the first place† (Gladwell 16 5).Motivations that come from environment, whether they are trivial or significant, force people to commit a crime even more. However, as the quotation insists, those Tipping Points can be changed and fixed easily by people’s little attention and slight changes in the surroundings. Gladwell uses the example of graffiti to support this argument. Even a little motivation such as graffiti in a subway can act as a catalyst that leads people to commit a severe crime because it may stimulate some people with bad experiences of childhood.The effects that environmental conditions have are quite significant, but those situations usually interact with people’s inner minds or personality greatly. People are influenced by the small changes in circumstances and force themselves into committing crimes, but this also means that the rate of crime can be decreased by fixing the slight things that affect people’s behaviors and that force people toward violent actions. Environment al conditions cannot be solid reasons for every crime occurred; personality is closely related to the surroundings when studying the criminal cases.In today’s world, building one’s personality is a multi-layered experience, influenced by environmental conditions. Some people may argue that the influence of immediate environment on decision-making is significant while others claim that personality or character plays a key role in controlling one’s action. However, the interrelationship between personality and environment is the most influential factor that determines one’s all kinds of behaviors. Every person carries pieces of identity that are not identical to other people’s, but even those, in some ways, are influenced by others all the time.Moreover, personality or character is affected not only by other people but also by social structures a person resides within, the family he lives with, and even the media he always faces. Personality can be f lexible depending on the surroundings. Therefore, although environmental conditions have a much more significant influence on people’s actions, the interaction between personality and environment is the one that actually controls how and why people behave in a certain way.

Andersonville Prison in the Civil War

Andersonville Prison in the Civil War The Andersonville prisoner of war camp, which operated from  February 27, 1864, until the end of the American Civil War  in 1865, was one of the most notorious in U.S. history. Underbuilt, overpopulated, and continuously short on supplies and clean water, it was a nightmare for the nearly 45,000 soldiers who entered its walls. Construction In late 1863, the Confederacy found that it needed to construct additional prisoner of war camps to house captured Union soldiers waiting to be exchanged. As leaders discussed where to place these new camps, former Georgia governor, Major General Howell Cobb stepped forward to suggest the interior of his home state. Citing southern Georgias distance from the front lines, relative immunity to Union cavalry raids, and easy access to railroads, Cobb was able to convince his superiors to build a camp in Sumter County. In November 1863, Captain W. Sidney Winder was dispatched to find a suitable location. Arriving at the tiny village of Andersonville, Winder found what he believed to be an ideal site. Located near the Southwestern Railroad, Andersonville possessed transit access and a good water source. With the location secured, Captain Richard B. Winder (a cousin to Captain W. Sidney Winder) was sent to Andersonville to design and oversee the construction of the prison. Planning a facility for 10,000 prisoners, Winder designed a 16.5-acre rectangular compound that had a stream flowing through the center. Naming the prison Camp Sumter in January 1864, Winder used local slaves to construct the compounds walls. Built of tight-fitting pine logs, the stockade wall presented a solid facade that did not allow the slightest view of the outside world. Access to the stockade was through two large gates set in the west wall. Inside, a light fence was built approximately 19-25 feet from the stockade. This dead line was meant to keep prisoners away from the walls and any caught crossing it was shot immediately. Due to its simple construction, the camp rose quickly and the first prisoners arrived on February 27, 1864.   A Nightmare Ensues While the population at the prison camp steadily grew, it began to balloon after the Fort Pillow  incident on  April 12, 1864, when Confederate forces under Major General Nathan Bedford Forrest massacred black Union soldiers at the Tennessee fort. In response, President Abraham Lincoln demanded that black prisoners of war be treated the same as their white comrades. Confederate President Jefferson Davis refused. As a result, Lincoln and Lt. General Ulysses S. Grant suspended all prisoner exchanges. With the halt of exchanges, POW populations on both sides began to grow rapidly. At Andersonville, the population reached 20,000 by early June, twice the camps intended capacity. With the prison badly overcrowded, its superintendent, Major Henry Wirz, authorized an expansion of the stockade. Using prisoner labor, a 610-ft. addition was built on the prisons north side. Built in two weeks, it was opened to the prisoners on July 1. In an effort to further alleviate the situation, Wirz paroled five men in July and sent them north with a petition signed by the majority of the prisoners asking for POW exchanges to resume.  This request was denied by the Union authorities. Despite this 10-acre expansion, Andersonville remained badly overcrowded with the population peaking at 33,000 in August. Throughout the summer, conditions in the camp continued to deteriorate as the men, exposed to the elements, suffered from malnutrition and diseases such as dysentery. With its water source polluted from the overcrowding, epidemics swept through the prison. The  monthly mortality rate was now around 3,000 prisoners, all of whom were buried in mass graves outside the stockade. Life within Andersonville was made worse by a group of prisoners known as the Raiders, who stole food and valuables from other prisoners. The Raiders were eventually rounded up by a second group known as the Regulators, who put the Raiders on trial and pronounced sentences for the guilty. Punishments ranged from being placed in the stocks to being forced to run the gauntlet. Six were condemned to death and hanged. Between June and October 1864, some relief was offered by Father Peter Whelan, who daily ministered to the prisoners and provided food and other supplies.   Final Days As Major General William T. Shermans troops marched on Atlanta, General John Winder, the head of Confederate POW camps, ordered Major Wirz to construct earthwork defenses around the camp. These turned out to be unnecessary. Following Shermans capture of Atlanta, the majority of the camps prisoners were transferred to a new facility at Millen, GA. In late 1864, with Sherman moving toward Savannah, some of the prisoners were transferred back to Andersonville, raising the prisons population to around 5,000. It remained at this level until the wars end in April 1865. Wirz Executed Andersonville has become synonymous with the trials and atrocities faced by POWs during the Civil War. Of the approximately 45,000 Union soldiers who entered Andersonville, 12,913 died within the prisons walls- 28 percent  of Andersonvilles population and 40 percent of all Union POW deaths during the war. The Union blamed Wirz. In May 1865, the major was arrested and taken to Washington, DC. Charged with a litany of crimes, including conspiring to impair the lives of Union prisoners of war and murder, he faced a military tribunal overseen by Major General Lew Wallace that August. Prosecuted by Norton P. Chipman, the case saw a procession of former prisoners give testimony about their experiences at Andersonville. Among those who testified on Wirzs behalf were Father Whelan and General Robert E. Lee. In early November, Wirz was found guilty of conspiracy as well as 11 of 13 counts of murder. In a controversial decision, Wirz was sentenced to death. Though pleas for clemency were made to President Andrew Johnson, these were denied and Wirz was hanged  on November 10, 1865, at the Old Capitol Prison in Washington, DC. He was one of two individuals tried, convicted, and executed for war crimes during the Civil War, the other being the Confederate guerrilla Champ Ferguson. The site of Andersonville was purchased by the Federal government in 1910 and is now the home of Andersonville National Historic Site.

Free Essays on Homeless

In the article, â€Å"Are the Homeless Crazy,† from the book, Rachel and Her Children, which was published in 1988, Jonathan Kozol challenges the widely accepted claim that homelessness is a result of deinstitutionalization that took place in the 1970s. Jonathan states that â€Å"those who work among the homeless† believe the principal cause of homelessness is economic, due to the shortage of low income housing, and wages to lease them. They cite decreasing welfare benefits to families with children, and the lack of entry-level jobs to justify their claim. Jonathan further explains that every year low income housing units are being converted to condominiums and office buildings, an effect of the â€Å"accelerated gentrification of our major cities,† while the families in the remaining units are being charged more rent, forcing many into the streets. He indicates the results of a study published by the Massachusetts Medical Society, that mental illness only ac counts for 12% of the illnesses among the homeless, excluding alcohol and drug abuse. He believes that mental illness in the United States bears a â€Å"stigma,† that society assumes the homeless are mentally ill because it is easier for us to blame the problem on an uncontrollable mental illness then to accept responsibility and try to help, and we do not want to feel guilty for renting or purchasing those newly renovated condominiums. Jonathan argues that mental illness does not make people homeless that being homeless make people mentally ill. He gives an example of a woman protesting the eviction from her home, on a Manhattan traffic island who was ridiculed as a â€Å"paranoid in the street,† by a reporter, who lacked any psychiatric training, and yet no one offered to help her. Jonathan thinks that we are too hesitant to judge, he points out that some psychiatrists believe that not showing anger, after being evicted, would be a greater illness. He concludes t hat politicians... Free Essays on Homeless Free Essays on Homeless In the article, â€Å"Are the Homeless Crazy,† from the book, Rachel and Her Children, which was published in 1988, Jonathan Kozol challenges the widely accepted claim that homelessness is a result of deinstitutionalization that took place in the 1970s. Jonathan states that â€Å"those who work among the homeless† believe the principal cause of homelessness is economic, due to the shortage of low income housing, and wages to lease them. They cite decreasing welfare benefits to families with children, and the lack of entry-level jobs to justify their claim. Jonathan further explains that every year low income housing units are being converted to condominiums and office buildings, an effect of the â€Å"accelerated gentrification of our major cities,† while the families in the remaining units are being charged more rent, forcing many into the streets. He indicates the results of a study published by the Massachusetts Medical Society, that mental illness only ac counts for 12% of the illnesses among the homeless, excluding alcohol and drug abuse. He believes that mental illness in the United States bears a â€Å"stigma,† that society assumes the homeless are mentally ill because it is easier for us to blame the problem on an uncontrollable mental illness then to accept responsibility and try to help, and we do not want to feel guilty for renting or purchasing those newly renovated condominiums. Jonathan argues that mental illness does not make people homeless that being homeless make people mentally ill. He gives an example of a woman protesting the eviction from her home, on a Manhattan traffic island who was ridiculed as a â€Å"paranoid in the street,† by a reporter, who lacked any psychiatric training, and yet no one offered to help her. Jonathan thinks that we are too hesitant to judge, he points out that some psychiatrists believe that not showing anger, after being evicted, would be a greater illness. He concludes t hat politicians...