Poem Annotated Bibliography Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Poem - Annotated Bibliography Example The oppression was being advanced by the whites in various forms such as restrictions to certain facilities and mistreatments. The authors thus portrays how Phillis Whitley composed the poem â€Å"On the Death of General Wooster† which depicts a form of resistance to the state and a protest in a way. Phillis expresses her outrage regarding how the Africa’s race was being treated by the white people. The book can be described as credible since the authors have written other books on the topic before. In the book Stony the Road We Trod: African American Biblical Interpretation, Felder, the author, analyses various poems regarding the poetry works by various authors especially in the 18th century such as the â€Å"An Ante-bellum Sermon† composed by Paul Laurence Dunbar in the 1890s. According to Dunbar’s analysis, the poem is more of a protest as well as a plea to other African Americans to resist the slavery that was being facilitated by the white and which was a great source of poverty among the black race. The poem employs a lot of humor where Dunbar calls for â€Å"Moses† to come and rescue the black people from the slavery. The book Stony the Road We Trod: African American Biblical Interpretation is a compilation of credible analysis of poems from various poets thus can be described to be trustworthy. Haralson is the author of the popular book Encyclopedia of American Poetry which is a compendium of various poetry works in the history of America. In one of the poems is â€Å"The Slave Auction† which was composed by a renowned poet, Watkins Harper in the slavery period of America. In the book Encyclopedia of American Poetry, the author attempts to analyse the various issue presented by Watkins such as the torture and a hard time that African Americans endured at the time of his composing the poem. He condemns the

Impact of Economic Competitiveness on Wages

Impact of Economic Competitiveness on Wages The growth of low wage jobs is inevitable as national governments seek to promote economic competitiveness. Discuss. Introduction This essay discusses the hypothesis that governmental policies aimed at improving a nation’s relative performance in the global economy must lead to an increase in the low paid jobs. If considered in a global context the subject covers a wide spectrum. So the essay considers the United Kingdom’s (UK) economic experiences from the late 1970’s, with particular emphasis on the Thatcher era from 1979-1990 when the foundations for the UK’s economic reforms were laid. The profound change in economic management coupled with the rapid advances in communications and information technology has accelerated the effects of â€Å"globalisation† and led to severe disruption in the UK labour market. Evidence exists that the erosion of the bargaining power of employees due to the twin effects of government policy and globalisation has exacerbated the decrease in real earnings amongst the less skilled workforce. However this vulnerability can be partially off-set by some of the benefits due to improvements in the UK’s international economic competitiveness and an effective mix of domestic labour market policies. Economic Competitiveness: A Definition For centuries, international trade has been the bedrock of the UK’s prosperity. Economists have long debated the effect of government policies on trade and national prosperity. In 1817 during the first stirrings of the industrial revolution David Ricardo developed an argument which can be summarised as: â€Å"The classical theory of international trade and its role in economic development is based on the principle of comparative advantage. The comparative advantage paradigm states that a country performs better by concentrating on the production of those goods and services for which it possesses a comparative advantage over others, and then trade those goods for those of other countries.†[1] Modern economic theory still supports the basic tenets of Ricardo’s argument, which was primarily developed as an attack on government’s protectionist agricultural policies at the time. Recent research, however, goes a step further. Michael Porter devised the concept of National Advantage [2] which argues that governments have a significant role to play in enhancing a nation’s comparative advantage when competing in the global economy. His â€Å"Diamond of National Advantage† (below) suggests that perusing policies that enhance company performance by, say, strict product standards, stimulating demand for advanced products, focusing on factor creation, with improved worker skills and stimulating rivalry by enforcing antitrust legislation will support the development of a strong and internationally competitive trading economy. The UK Experience After the Second World War the UK government pursued policies to reduce unemployment through subsidies, direct support for industry, including nationalisation of some economically challenged sectors such as coal-mining, railways and a major automotive manufacturer, limiting external competition through protectionism. Trade policy was largely governed by favouring Commonwealth countries, through the â€Å"Commonwealth Preference† arrangements. This approach was largely self-defeating as suggested by the Economist as early as 1960. â€Å"A comprehensive system involving the granting of large margins of preference might be expected to have results of two kinds: it should ensure to exporters a larger share of the market than they would otherwise obtain, or enable them to charge higher prices for their goods than in non-preferential markets. An examination of Commonwealth Preference suggests that its effects in both directions are more limited than is implied by the support which it commands in the Commonwealth and the hostility it sometimes arouses in non-Commonwealth countries.† [3] In particular, it was in conflict with some of the concepts of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, (GATT) formed in 1947 to promote economic recovery after the war by reducing barriers in international trade, particularly the reduction in tariff barriers. The UK economy prospered under this regime particularly in the late 50’s and early 60’s but by the 70’s the cracks were beginning to show. By the mid 70’s it was obvious this economic model was not in tune with the needs of a modern nation in a rapidly changing world. Some of the old tenets were under scrutiny and the entrenched bastions of economic power were at loggerheads. In particular, the power of the union movement and the entrenched conservatism and resistance to change of management in the traditional industries such as coal, rail and manufacturing led to conflict and industrial disputation which were ruinous to the economic health of the nation. Successive governments failed to address the underlying economic causes of the problems, until Margaret Thatcher became Prime Minister in 1979 with a new approach to economic governance. Her philosophy was not necessarily based on economic theory, although some of her advisors and ministers were well versed in Keynesian economics. Her government embarked on a series of structural economic reforms including the privatisation of government-owned industries, deregulation of large swathes of UK economic activity, particularly financial services and the pursuance of an aggressive free trade agenda. â€Å"What became known as Thatcherism may have been an agenda which benefited corporate capital, as left critiques emphasize, but its ideological formulation was populist and it employed the petty bourgeois values of thrift, hard work, and family solidarity as the central justifications for privatization, tax cuts, reduction of state expenditure, and hostility to trade unions.†[4] Since that period it is true to say that â€Å"Thatcherism†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦was†¦. to become the ruling consensus of the British government . soon established and exported around the world[5] It is interesting to note that Thatcher’s economic policies predated Porter’s research outlined in section 2, as Hood and Young observed: â€Å"While what has occurred falls short of a systemic approach to counteract market-distorting behavior or to build up created assets, there is little doubt that there have been consistent themes pursued since the Conservative government came to power in 1979. Deregulation, privatization, the restructuring of the handling of labour disputes, and so on have been driven by a clear philosophy concerning the role of the market and the negative economic and social effects of certain types of market distortions†[6] Effect on Employment and Wages As the Thatcher reforms began to bite, the short-term results reverberated around the UK. For example the industrial midlands in the late 70’s was the heart of the automotive and machine tool manufacturing industries. By the mid 80’s it was an industrial wasteland with acres of empty and derelict factory space with many thousands of workers displaced or redundant. This picture was repeated in many communities previously reliant on â€Å"smokestack† industries in the north and west of the UK. Anecdotal evidence suggested many of those displaced from manufacturing jobs had joined the informal self-employed workforce and those still in full-time employment had migrated to low-wage jobs in service industries such as retailing. This is backed up by comments from Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) which reports: â€Å"The labour market plays a crucial role in reaping potential gain from globalisation by facilitating a shift of jobs from decli ning sectors or occupations to expanding ones, in line with the changes in comparative advantage. However, this labour market adjustment is not always smooth because many workers displaced from declining sectors are poorly positioned to move into newly-created jobs in export sectors, which may be located in different regions or require different qualifications†[7] The International Labour Organisation (ILO) also echoes a similar theme: â€Å"Policies aimed at increasing competitiveness by lowering unit labour costs should consider the potential consequences on either workers (via wages) or firms and economic growth (via productivity). For example, on the one hand, an excessive and long-run emphasis on wage moderation may threaten a country’s productivity growth rate as it might discourage innovation and investment in human capital†[8] In the longer term, however the overall benefits to the UK economy were substantial. The shift from a manufacturing to serviced based economy has brought significant benefits to the nation. â€Å"The UK, a leading trading power and financial centre, is one of the quintet of trillion dollar economies of Western Europe. Over the past two decades, the government has greatly reduced public ownership and contained the growth of social welfare programs. Agriculture is intensive, highly mechanized, and efficient by European standards, producing about 60% of food needs with less than 2% of the labor force. The UK has large coal, natural gas, and oil reserves; primary energy production accounts for 10% of GDP, one of the highest shares of any industrial nation. Services, particularly banking, insurance, and business services, account by far for the largest proportion of GDP while industry continues to decline in importance. Since emerging from recession in 1992, Britains economy has enjoyed the longest period of expansion on record; growth has remained in the 2-3% range since 2004, outpacing most of Europe.†[9] Not everyone has benefited from this development. In relative terms the rich have got richer whereas the lower-paid workers have seen their relative position decline. â€Å"The UKs growth in wealth equality has been the fastest among the worlds 30 richest and most developed countries. But in 2005, when the organisation compiled its latest data, the UK remained a more unequal society than three-quarters of OECD countries, with the richest 10% earning nine times more than the poorest 10%.†[10] Striking the Balance Based on the UK government’s experience, seeking to promote economic competitiveness can be beneficial for the national economy overall. â€Å"Open trade and investment policies can be a powerful force for raising living standards. Economists have long emphasised this point and it is confirmed by much research. For example, the OECD’s Growth Study estimated that a 10 percentage point increase in trade openness translates over time into an increase of around 4% in per capita income in the OECD area.†[11] However to mitigate the disruptive effects of such aggressive economic policies, suitable social policies should go hand in hand. For example policies to enhance labour mobility and relocation, income security packages linked to retraining to increase re-employment options, skill-development programs and minimum wage policies to limit low-pay traps. A balanced policy approach can help offset the growth and pervasiveness of low wage jobs. Bibliography Fidelis Ezeala-Harrison, Theory and Policy of International Competitiveness, page 4 Greenwood Publishing Group Michael E. Porter The Competitive Advantage of Nations, Free Press, 1998 Economist Intelligence Unit, The Commonwealth and Europe (London: Economist Intelligence Unit, 1960.) Philip Abbott, Leadership by Exemplar: Reagans FDR and Thatchers Churchill, Presidential Studies Quarterly 27.2 (1997) Simon Jenkins, Thatcher and Sons, page 1, Allen Lane 2006 Neil Hood, and Stephen Young, 8 The United Kingdom, Governments, Globalization, and International Business, ed. John H. Dunning (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999) Globalisation, Jobs and Wages, Policy Brief, OECD, June 2007 ILO Key Indicators of the Labour Market KILM 4th Edition 2005 Central Intelligence Agency Office of Public Affairs Washington, D.C. 20505 The Guardian, Wednesday October 22 2008 Globalisation, Jobs and Wages, Policy Brief, OECD, June 2007 Footnotes [1] Fidelis Ezeala-Harrison, Theory and Policy of International Competitiveness, page 4 Greenwood Publishing Group [2] Michael E. Porter The Competitive Advantage of Nations, Free Press, 1998 [3] Economist Intelligence Unit, The Commonwealth and Europe (London: Economist Intelligence Unit, 1960.) [4] Philip Abbott, Leadership by Exemplar: Reagans FDR and Thatchers Churchill, Presidential Studies Quarterly 27.2 (1997) [5] Simon Jenkins, Thatcher and Sons, page 1, Allen Lane 2006 [6] Neil Hood, and Stephen Young, 8 The United Kingdom, Governments, Globalization, and International Business, ed. John H. Dunning (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999) [7] Globalisation, Jobs and Wages, Policy Brief, OECD, June 2007 [8] ILO Key Indicators of the Labour Market KILM 4th Edition 2005 [9] Central Intelligence Agency Office of Public Affairs Washington, D.C. 20505 [10] The Guardian, Wednesday October 22 2008 [11] Globalisation, Jobs and Wages, Policy Brief, OECD, June 2007

Megans Law Essay -- essays research papers

MEGAN’S LAW PROTECT THE CHILDREN OR THE PEDOPHILES Megan Kanka was an innocent little girl, someone’s daughter, sister, and best friend. The defendant, Jesse Timmendequas, changed all of that. He changed it brutally, savagely, and permanently. In a few moments of unspeakable horror, the defendant destroyed all of Megan’s dreams, all of that joy, all that hope, all that promise. In those few moments, he destroyed Megan Kanka’s life. She would never live to see her wedding day, never have children, and never embrace her family again. Jesse Timmendequas took Megan’s life on July 24, 1994. Her funeral was held on Wednesday, August 3, 1994. Jesse Timmendequas was a twice convicted sex offender. He moved in across the street from Megan’s home without the family’s knowledge of his history as a pedophile. Joseph Cifelli was another convicted sex offender who had spent nine years at the Adult Diagnostic and Treatment Center. He had been convicted after admitting to repeated sexual abuse of a relative that had begun when the child was nine. A third man, Brian R. Jenin had been convicted twice of crimes involving young boys. Jenin, along with Timmendequas, was under investigation in connection with the unsolved murders of two boys in San Diego. All three were Megan's neighbors. Jesse Timmendequas’ convictions stemmed from a 1981 attack on a 5 year old girl, for which he served 9 months. That same year he was convicted for an attempted rape of a 7 year old girl, for which he was sentenced to ten years. After serving only six years, he was free to lure 7 year old Megan into his home where he brutally raped and strangling her with a belt as she bit and fought for life. He knocked her to the floor, hitting her several times in the head. He wrapped her head in plastic shopping bags to prevent her blood from staining the rugs. He then took a toy box and stuffed her inside. Megan’s body was found in a weeded area of a nearby park near a portable toilet. On May 30, 1997, a jury returned a guilty verdict on all counts of murder including capital murder, kidnapping, and aggravated sexual assault and sentenced Jesse Timmendequas to death. It was this little girl’s brutal death that prompted her parents, Richard and Maureen Kanka, to fight for broad based community notification. Megan’s parents believe that if they had known that a pedophile lived nearby, this heinous crime... ...s due process. Due process is best defined in one word--fairness. When a person is treated unfairly by the government, including the courts, he is said to have been deprived of or denied due process. The most common and successful due process challenge is procedural due process. This challenge has occurred mainly in states that classify offenders according to the level of risk they pose to communities. This argument centers on whether an offender is allowed a hearing to challenge a risk classification. The Massachusetts Supreme Court recently found that provisions of the state’s community notification law violated constitutional due process Doe v. Sex Offender Registry Board, Mass. SJC-07608 (July 24,1998). The United States Supreme Court has yet to weigh in it’s opinion as to whether or not offender’s due process or Ex Post Facto rights are being violated by Megan’s Law. Are we bothered by the fact that in the current social climate, the rights of convicted pedophiles are routinely violated and nobody cares. Rules of evidence are stretched, and terms of punishment are increased. The danger of this precedent is impossible to ignore. As parents, though... are we okay with it.

Adhering to various articles of the uniform code of military justice Essay

Today’s Articles of the Uniform Code of Military Justice is the result of a long history of advances in the rights of military personnel in which duty, obligation, and consequences are spelled out. It is the responsibility of every member of the armed services to keep this in mind and to embrace the Articles of the Uniform Code of Military Justice as a guide for appropriate behavior. The precursors to the Articles of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) include the Articles of War (1912-1920), The Elston Act (1948), and The Morgan Draft of 1949, each of which significantly furthered the rights of military personnel while securing the equitable application of justice (Articles of War; Elston Act; Uniform Code of Military Justice). Given the long history of the UCMJ, and the number of revisions that have taken place in order to create the modern Articles of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, military personnel should remember and respect the efforts that were put forth to ensure their protections while serving in the military. All personnel should value the efforts of their predecessors by acting in accordance with the Articles of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. As a dedicated soldier in the Military of the United States of America, it is my duty to adhere to the Articles of the Uniform Code of Military Justice so that I might best represent myself, my Company, and my Country, and I failed in this duty on October XX, 2006 when I did not report to a special work detail. This was an unfortunate event that I should have avoided, and having reflected on the situation, I see that I erred in several respects. In the future, I shall avoid repeating such actions as it is not my intent to perform or reflect poorly on the military, my fellow soldiers, or myself. Although I failed to report to the special work detail, and violated a number of the Articles of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, it was not my intent to ignore my duties or act in a manner that, in retrospect, might be viewed as a lack of effort and dedication on my part as well as, perhaps, being viewed as a general disrespect for my fellow officers. I offer no excuse; however, it is my hope that a brief explanation of the situation will show that I did attempt to fulfill my obligations and that I now understand that my actions should have been different. On October XX, 2006, I made an error by arriving to the designated special work detail location one hour in advance of the actual starting time; this error on my part was due to a simple miscommunication. While the miscommunication itself was an event that was primarily out of my control, my actions following my early arrival could have been different. Instead of making every effort to assure that I was at the correct location and had reported at the correct time, I simply returned home. This was not the best choice, and I regret having erred in this way. I compounded this initial error in judgment by assuming that shortly after leaving the special work detail site that I would be contacted via telephone and informed about where and when I was actually to report. This phone call never came, and I made yet another poor choice in not following up on this on my own. Having thought my actions over, I see clearly that as a member of the armed services, I may be faced with occasional miscommunications. I am aware, now, that it is my responsibility to (when possible and appropriate) confirm my assignments with my fellow soldiers to avoid such miscommunications, and if faced with a situation as was the case on October XX, 2006, it is my duty to do everything in my power to ascertain what my obligations are. The Uniform Code of Military Justice can be viewed as â€Å"the foundation for the United. States military justice system,† and as a member of the Armed Forces, it is important that I respect and follow the Code’s Articles without fail (Index & Legislative History of the UCMJ). I showed poor judgment and an overall lack of respect for myself and my fellow soldiers on October XX, 2006 when I failed to report for a special work detail. This was a failure on my part that occurred as a result of a series of poor choices that I made, and I regret having acted in this manner. When I did not appear for the special work detail on October XX, 2006, I violated several Articles of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and in so doing, I did not do my best in representing myself, my Company, or my Country. I am well aware that there are no valid excuses for my actions, and I intend to do my best not to exhibit further incidents of poor judgment. It is my goal to perform my duties at all times to the best of my abilities, and in a manner that reflects positively on me, my Company, and the United States of America. Violating any of the Articles of the Uniform Code of Military Justice contradicts my intentions, and I regret my actions. Missing the special work detail on October XX, 2006 means I failed to appear at my appointed place of duty at the appointed time which was a violation of Article 86 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice: Absence Without Leave (Powers, Article 86). This action was not appropriate, and I should have made every effort to ascertain when and where I was to have reported. Special work details are a regular part of a soldier’s responsibilities, and by not reporting on October XX, 2006, I let myself and my company down. Obviously, my not being present meant the other members of my work detail had to take up the slack for my not being present: they became responsible for performing my share of the work. This is contrary to my training, and it is contrary to my duties as a soldier. I realize that as a member of a team, my role is one that I must take seriously, and I cannot let the other members of my team down or threaten my team’s ability to succeed by failing to uphold my portion of any given task. This is what happened on October XX, 2006, when I failed to report to the special work detail. This was an action I regret, and one I hope not to repeat. The United States Military relies on each and every one of its members to report to duty fully prepared to perform and in a manner timely enough to perform as required, and because each soldier depends on his fellow soldiers, it is important that no one be absent without leave. It is also possible that one soldier’s failure to report makes more difficult or prevents the ability of other members of his Squad, Platoon, or Company to perform their assigned tasks, and this could create a number of negative consequences that do not reflect well on anyone. I understand that my failing to report where I was required to do so and when I was required to do so on October XX, 2006 when I missed the special work detail was a violation of Article 86 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice: Absence Without Leave, and that this showed a lapse in judgment which should not be repeated in the future. I intend to avoid further violations of this Article as I understand that this failure reflects poorly on the United States of America, the Military, my Squad, Platoon, or Company, and myself. Special work details are often assigned as part of my obligations as a soldier, and by choosing not to report on October XX, 2006, I failed to obey the order of a superior commissioned officer which is a violation of Article 90 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice: Willfully Disobeying a Superior Commissioned Officer (Powers, Article 90). This was disrespectful, and I regret my actions. I am well aware of the importance of following orders, and it was not my intent to fail to do so. The importance of the Chain of Command cannot be over-emphasized. Each member of a Squad, a Platoon, or a Company must know his role and fulfill it without fail. The Chain of Command provides an easy means by which individuals can work together towards a shared goal while avoiding undue confusion whether completing tasks that are simple or completing tasks that are extremely complex. Superior officers give orders to those under their command to ensure that shared goals are met based on the appropriate and necessary actions of their subordinate personnel. I did not fulfill my role, and in failing to do so, I let myself and those who depend on me down, and I may have cast doubt on whether or not others can rely on me in the future. In addition, my inaction in this situation most likely created a hardship on the other members of my Squad, Platoon, Company by requiring that they do extra work. I understand that my failure to follow the orders of a superior was inappropriate, and not in the best interests of myself or my fellow soldiers, and that further violations of Article 90 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice: Willfully Disobeying a Superior Commissioned Officer are not in my best interest. Having thought about this, I see clearly that I should have done everything in my power to fulfill my obligations and to avoid the appearance of disrespecting my superior officer by failing to report as ordered. I failed to appear at my appointed place of duty when I missed a special work detail on October XX, 2006. This was a violation of Article 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice: Failure to Obey an Order or a Regulation (Powers, Article 92). This was an error on my part that I regret and intend to avoid in the future. As a proud and dedicated member of the United States’ Armed Services, I do not have the luxury of deciding whether or not I will abide by an order or a regulation. My job is not to decide whether or not I want to do something; my job is to do what I am ordered to do when I am ordered to do it. It is my responsibility to understand that I play a role in a team, and that my failing to perform my part of a task assigned to the team I am a part of puts all members of that team at risk of failing. In failing to report to the special work detail on October XX, 2006, I let myself and my fellow soldiers down, and I showed poor judgment. Every Company needs order, and the surest way to ensure that individuals come together to form a cohesive group is to establish regulations that must be followed. By failing to report to my special work detail on October XX, 2006, I jeopardized the cohesion of my group, and I brought into question the degree to which I might be relied upon in the future. After thinking about my actions and the effect that my lack of following through had, I regret not having done more to ensure that I knew where and when I was supposed to report on October XX, 2006. I understand that my failure to report to the special work detail on October XX, 2006 was equivalent to failing to obey an order and reflected poorly on myself and my fellow service members, and that violating Article 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice: Failure to Obey an Order or a Regulation does not cast me in a positive light. Because it is my desire to perform all of my duties to the best of my abilities, I regret my actions and hope not to repeat a similar error. My failing to report to the special work detail on October XX, 2006 was in flagrant disregard of good order and discipline and was detrimental to the overall well-being of the command with which I am associated. This was a violation of Article 133 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice: Conduct Unbecoming an Officer and a Gentleman (Powers, Article 133). I now see clearly that missing my assigned task was an error in judgment on my part, and I intend to do everything in my power to avoid a repeat of this error. As a dedicated representative of the United States of America, it is my duty, my responsibility, and my desire to conduct myself in a manner that represents me, my command, and my country in the most positive light possible. When I missed the special work detail on October XX, 2006, I shed negative light on all facets of the Military, and I regret this. Military Units function best when all of their members work in unison towards a common goal, and my missing the special work detail on October XX, 2006 reflects a lack of discipline and an unwillingness to keep good order, both of which are detrimental to my well-being and that of the members of my Company as well as violating Article 133 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice: Conduct Unbecoming an Officer and a Gentleman. It is not my intent to tarnish the image of the Military of the United States of America, and as a representative of the Armed Forces, my failing to report to the special work detail on October XX, 2006 did just that. This is an action I regret. I neglected my duty to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the Armed Forces when I chose to miss the special work detail on October XX, 2006. This action constituted a violation of Article 134c of the Uniform Code of Military Justice: Disorder and Neglect to the Prejudice of Good Order and Discipline (Powers, Article 134c). It also created a hardship to my fellow soldiers and threatened the proper, timely completion of the task at hand. This discipline of a soldier is only truly challenged when he is faced with a duty he does not want to perform. Because the good order of a Squad, a Platoon, or a Company often depends on the discipline of each of its individual members, it is imperative that every single soldier practices good discipline at all times, especially when circumstances challenge what he wants to do with what he must do. When one soldier fails to put his personal desires aside, it shows a lack of respect towards his fellow soldiers, and it may have the additional adverse effect of tempting others to disobey orders as well. Having thought about my actions, I see that my failing to report on October XX, 2006 did just this, and I regret my actions and the effect they may have had on others. I understand that my actions do not reflect well on my desire to uphold good order or discipline, that they cast a negative light on me and my Company, and that further violations of Article 134c of the Uniform Code of Military Justice: Disorder and Neglect to the Prejudice of Good Order and Discipline are not in my best interest. It is my intent to keep this in mind and in the future, to act with a greater degree of appropriate decision-making. I fully appreciate the historical significance of today’s Uniform Code of Military Justice, and my responsibility as a proud and dedicated member of the United States Armed Services to adhere to its Articles. I understand that my actions on October XX, 2006 when I failed to report to my special work detail appears to be an indication on my part of a lack of respect for the UCMJ, the basis of the military justice system, and that in skipping my special work detail on October XX, 2006, I violated Article 86 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice: Absence Without Leave; Article 90 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice: Willfully Disobeying a Superior Commissioned Officer; Article 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice: Failure to Obey an Order or a Regulation; Article 133 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice: Conduct Unbecoming an Officer and a Gentleman; and Article 134c of the Uniform Code of Military Justice: Disorder and Neglect to the Prejudice of Good Order and Discipline. Having taken time to reflect upon my actions, I see clearly that regulations are in place to assist me, as a soldier, in performing my duties in the manner that best suits me individually and my fellow soldiers as a whole, and that in failing to report to my special work detail on October XX, 2006, I let myself and those who count on me down. This lapse in judgment reflects poorly on me, on my Company, and on the United States of America, and I intend to avoid any similar events in my future, so that I might reflect the attitude of the proud, dedicated soldier that I am to those with whom I serve. R eferences Articles of War (1912-1920). , The In Military Legal Resources.Library of Congress. U. S. Govt. Retrieved August 29, 2006, from http://www. loc. gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/AW-1912-1920. html. Elston Act (1948), The. In Military Legal Resources. Library of Congress. U. S. Govt. Retrieved August 29, 2006, from http://www. loc. gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/ Elston_act. html. Index & Legislative History of the UCMJ (1950). In Military Legal Resources. Library of Congress. U. S. Govt. Retrieved August 29, 2006, from http://www. loc. gov/rr/ frd/Military_Law/index_legHistory. html. Pound, Edward T. (2002, December 16). Creating a code of justice. History. U. S. News & World Report. Retrieved August 30, 2006 from http://www.usnews. com/usnews/ news/articles/021216/16justice. b. htm. Powers, Rod. Punitive Articles of the UCMJ: Article 86—Absence without leave. Retrieved August 29, 2006, from http://usmilitary. about. com/od/punitivearticles/a/mcm86. htm. Powers, Rod. Punitive Articles of the UCMJ: Article 90—Assaulting or willfully disobeying superior commissioned officer. Retrieved August 29, 2006, from http://usmilitary. about. com/od/punitivearticles/a/mcm86. htm. Powers, Rod. Punitive Articles of the UCMJ: Article 92—Failure to obey order or regulation. Retrieved August 29, 2006, from http://usmilitary. about. com/od/punitivearticles/ a/mcm92. htm. Powers, Rod. Punitive Articles of the UCMJ: Article 133—Conduct unbecoming an officer and gentleman. Retrieved August 29, 2006, from http://usmilitary. about. com/od/ punitivearticles/a/mcm133. htm. Powers, Rod. Punitive Articles of the UCMJ: Article 134—General article. Retrieved August 29, 2006, from http://usmilitary. about. com/od/punitivearticles/a/134. htm. Uniform Code of Military Justice; Text, References and Commentary Based on the Report of the Committee on a Uniform Code of Military Justice to the Secretary of Defense [the Morgan Draft] (1949). In Military Legal Resources. Library of Congress. U. S. Govt. Retrieved August 29, 2006, from http://www. loc. gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/morgan. html.

Filipino Patriotism Essay

As time passes by, a person’s traits, behavior and personality changes generation to generation, some changes are positive and some are negative, but does Filipino traits today a positive or a negative change when we relate it to the love for our country? Filipinos today are somehow unpredictable. Why? Of course we’re not god to predict what they can or will do that somehow can put the country to shame. But as you can see, we, Filipino’s can do everything now, thanks to our ancestors who successfully freed our country, but sadly some are abusing or overusing the gifts we received from our ancestors. Feeling free and can do everything, Filipinos somehow became spoiled, that they only think and do things for theirselves, never for the country. Some says that all  the Filipinos who work abroad are considered as Filipino patriots. Let’s see. Why do you think some Filipino’s went to other countries just to work? Is it for our country? Or is it because of our country? Many workers reasons are that they need to gain higher amount of money everyday to sustain their and their family needs that they have to sacrifice their lives for their family. It’s really for their family not for the country, yes they are heroes: heroes of their own family. You see, nowadays, you’ll never hear these sentence anymore: â€Å"oh, I went to other countries for our own country. † It’s just a sad thing that we make ourselves believe that when we work abroad we might be already a Filipino patriot, but the real thing is, we are leaving our country behind, we never know that maybe someone out there needs us so bad that when we cooperate with them to contribute in raising our country’s economy. And have you ever noticed that some people, permanently leave this country after they earned enough money, and the worst, others, denies or are ashamed of their nationality. A Filipino in new York posted this, â€Å"Deep down inside every Filipino knows that there is a sense of patriotism soon to erupt. But now is not the time. There’s no sense of showing Filipino pride when we have a government as lame as this. Nakakahiya pa nga minsan eh. † And another Filipino posted this, â€Å"After the September 11 tragedy, you’ll see people wearing American Flag shirts, cars have American Flags hanging out, American tickers being given away free everywhere, and what not. Wow, do *I* have one on my car†¦. well yes, because I live in U. S. soil and I’m a Fil-Am.. but.. wait!!! Deep inside me I’m still a proud Filipino, I will stand behind my country till the end, and it hurts because it looks like no one else besides me thinks Philippines have a chance. † It’s a sad thing hearing or reading posts like this. Is Filipino patriotism, really dying? How about the youth? Wouldn’t they do anything about it? Who is responsible enough to guide and pursue youth to do anything for our country?

Biography- Fat Man in The Middle-Germound essays

Biography- Fat Man in The Middle-Germound essays In the biography Fat Man In A Middle Seat on Jack W. Germonds life as a reporter the reader if not already knowing, learns about a man who knew everyone, saw everything, and went everywhere involving politics. The places, people, and situations involving Germonds life were inflicted in his writing. Some feel strong to say Germond was one, if not the best political writer of his time. There are many positives of a couple of negatives to this biography and the manner in which Germond approached politics in his work. The author was very analytical, using his professional background to support his writing, using the content of politics, which was merely factual in support of his many thesis, Jack W. Germond is a very analytical writer. Since Germond had been around politics and had meet many people in politics he covered every bases possible. Without reading his writings for the Washington Star and Baltimore Sun, in his biography you get a great idea of his style, and approach, toward the facts, and his opinion on politics at the time. Germond being analytical caused him to step on many toes in his writing. Not offending everyday political parties but rather the politics themselves. Society loved Nelson A. Rockefeller, however, in Germonds writing the people saw a side of Rockefeller that know one had really seen, except Germond himself, and he did not hold back in any manner. What Germond saw he wrote for the people themselves to know, and see as if they had met Rockefeller. Knowing what people were all about and what their intentions were, helped Germond to move up the ladder, and analyzing was the platform to do so. Germond was a professional with the background that created success. As said before Germond had many opinions, in which many were liberal. All of Germonds readers no matter what political opinions they had, ...

Free Essays on Why Study Pearl Harbor

Why study Pearl Harbor? An event 60 years past would, on the face of it, seem irrelevant today. Sure, the movie will be out soon and the interest is inevitable. But let's put Pearl Harbor into proper perspective: This attack shaped generations of American military and political thinking. The cold was consumed by a "peace through strength" mentality burned into their memories by the events of that December. As a "baby-boomer" I concur with Thurston Clarke who wrote: "I was... in the earliest of post war generations, one that grew up listening to war stories, surrounded by German helmets, Japanese bayonets, and the flight jackets we wore as teenagers. For us bravery was defined by Omaha Beach, leadership by Winston Churchill, evil by the Holocaust, and treachery by Pearl Harbor. The war we know was immediate, its wounds raw, its issues simple. We were too close to it for historical perspective, too removed to understand its ironies and moral ambiguities. The movies we saw and the books we read were often wartime propaganda, but we were too young to separate the real from the bogus. And after watching all those black and white documentaries, reading those fat histories, and participating in those philosophical disputes that could never be argued without reference to Hitler, and after comparing our restless, unfulfilled generation with the one before it, perhaps it is not surprising we fel t such second-hand nostalgia for a time we had never lived and a was we had never fought, nor surprising that my second-hand memories had become second-hand grudges" [against the Japanese]. For many the wounds are still raw, so be prepared for a two-pronged response to this history section. One generation remembers December 7th, 1941 as a reverent event; another may just think the planes and ships are "cool". Both will respond through their own prisms. All are welcome. Future articles will feature technical stories of ships and planes as well as huma... Free Essays on Why Study Pearl Harbor Free Essays on Why Study Pearl Harbor Why study Pearl Harbor? An event 60 years past would, on the face of it, seem irrelevant today. Sure, the movie will be out soon and the interest is inevitable. But let's put Pearl Harbor into proper perspective: This attack shaped generations of American military and political thinking. The cold was consumed by a "peace through strength" mentality burned into their memories by the events of that December. As a "baby-boomer" I concur with Thurston Clarke who wrote: "I was... in the earliest of post war generations, one that grew up listening to war stories, surrounded by German helmets, Japanese bayonets, and the flight jackets we wore as teenagers. For us bravery was defined by Omaha Beach, leadership by Winston Churchill, evil by the Holocaust, and treachery by Pearl Harbor. The war we know was immediate, its wounds raw, its issues simple. We were too close to it for historical perspective, too removed to understand its ironies and moral ambiguities. The movies we saw and the books we read were often wartime propaganda, but we were too young to separate the real from the bogus. And after watching all those black and white documentaries, reading those fat histories, and participating in those philosophical disputes that could never be argued without reference to Hitler, and after comparing our restless, unfulfilled generation with the one before it, perhaps it is not surprising we fel t such second-hand nostalgia for a time we had never lived and a was we had never fought, nor surprising that my second-hand memories had become second-hand grudges" [against the Japanese]. For many the wounds are still raw, so be prepared for a two-pronged response to this history section. One generation remembers December 7th, 1941 as a reverent event; another may just think the planes and ships are "cool". Both will respond through their own prisms. All are welcome. Future articles will feature technical stories of ships and planes as well as huma...