The artwork of Gustav Klimt is controversial Research Paper

The artwork of Gustav Klimt is controversial - Research Paper Example rtwork, Klimt was among the acknowledged founders, and also worked as the chair of the 1997 Vienna Secession; he was also a major player in the group’s Sacred Spring (27). The paintings done by Klimt attracted top prices for the works of art done by artists. One of the artworks from his collection, which attracted a top price was the portrait Adele Bloch-Bauer of 1907; it was bought by Ronald lauder for the Neue Galeria at US 135; it was the highest-priced painting in 2006 (30). The artwork (paintings) done by Gustav Klimt are controversial. The rationale for this Experiential Learning Project is to learn more about Klimt’s artwork. The goal is to educate the reader on why Klimt’s artwork was controversial (Whitford 57). The research contained within this paper will support the thesis and provide examples for the reader. Gustav has numerous works of art demonstrating his radical ideas, which was deemed controversial (Bisanz-Prakken 25).This project will focus on expert and personal research by experiencing the art created by Klimt. The design of this research will be based on books, and case studies. The ELP Experimental Research Data contains the personal research of the writer of this paper. All research was conducted from July 13th to August 8th, 2014. The controversial nature of Gustav’s artworks can be traced and understood after gaining a detailed understanding of his birth place, family and the work of his father and family. Firstly, Gustav’s father was a silver and gold engraver living and working around Vienna. Partly, due to the influence of the father’s career, he received training in the field of arts at the Vienna-based decorative arts learning centre (Partsch 267). Later on, in 1882, together with a friend and brother, he started a studio, which specialized in the development of mural paintings. The studio was quite successful right from the start, and it won assignments from establishments like museums, theatres, semi-public and also

Compose Methodology Section Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Compose Methodology Section - Assignment Example Given that the research will be conducted on a common problem, the population is expected to be wider. So, it is incumbent upon the researcher to use Pulaski County School District as a case study. It is here in which studies will be conducted to find out more about this problem. Public education is a wide sector that involves a lot of players-government, educationists, school administrators, teachers, pupils, parents, guardians and the general public. Each of these in concerned about the management and quality of service delivery in these schools. In this regard, for the researcher to gather adequate data to be relied upon during the studies, a proper choice of participants to be engaged in a research needs to be made. In order to conduct the research, the instrument of choice will be interview. As the main instrument of the research, the researcher will design a set of closed and open-ended questions to ask the selected participants. It will give the researcher an opportunity to ask all sorts of questions that need to be answered about the research topic. Interview is the most preferred data collection instrument because it has a potential of enabling the researcher to directly involve the participants in the research process (Boyatzis, 1998). The use of interview schedules can be an appropriate choice for this kind of research. First, it would provide a face-to-face platform in which the researcher will gather first-hand information from the respondents. Besides, the researcher can get a chance to seek for clarifications and answers to all the questions that can address the research problem. However, to effectively conduct an interview, the researcher will need to make a lot of ethical considerations. A proper plan should be put in place to seek the consent of these participants and give them enough time to participate in the interviews. Since participation in the interview will be voluntary, no one should be forced to do so. At the same time,

Chemistry revision notes Essay Example for Free

Chemistry revision notes Essay The oxidation state or oxidation number, is a value assigned to a chemical species which represents its actual or nominal electrical charge. The oxidation number in a free or uncombined element is zero. This means that, metallic magnesium has an oxidation number of zero, and chlorine in Cl2 form has an oxidation state of zero. For simple ionic compounds, the oxidation state of the single atom ions is simply the charge on the ions. In most compounds the oxidation number for hydrogen is +1 and for oxygen is -2. The exceptions include the hydrides (the oxidation state is -1) and the peroxides (the oxidation state for oxygen is -1). In the compounds, halides usually have the oxidation number -1. The sum of all the oxidation numbers in a compound have to be equal to zero. The sum of all the oxidation states in a complex ion is the same as the charge on the ion. Semiconductors A covalent element such as silicon or germanium which has a higher conductivity than that of a typical non-metal but a much lower conductivity than that of a metal is described as a semiconductor. Semiconductors are also referred to as metalloids and they occur at the division between metals and non-metals in the Periodic Table. Key facts : 1. The electrical conductivity of semiconductors increases with increasing temperature. 2: Doping pure crystals of silicon or germanium with certain other elements produces 2 types of semiconductors: n- type and p-type semiconductors. The addition of small quantities of certain substances to pure silicon greatly enhance its conductivity and makes possible the construction of electronic devices. This controlled addition of impurities is called ‘doping’. 1. doping pure silicon with phosphorus or arsenic (group 5 elements) these elements have 5 valence electrons, a few of the silicon atoms are replaced by P, As atoms 1 electron is left over after the 4 bonds have been formed. The extra electron is free to conduct an electric current and the phosphorus-doped silicon becomes a conductor called n-type. B. doping with boron or aluminium (group 3 elements). By doping with an element having 3 valence electrons some of the silicon atoms are replaced by boron atoms, but because each boron has only 3 electrons, one of the four bonds to each boron atom has only 1 electron in it. We can think of this as a vacancy or hole in the bonding orbital. An electron from a neighbouring atom can move in to occupy this vacancy. As a result of this movement this type of conductor is called p-type. Superconductors 1. Superconductors are a special class of materials that have zero electrical resistance at temperatures near absolute zero. 2. Achieving temperatures near absolute zero is difficult and costly so application of superconduction at these temperatures is impractical. 3. Recently superconductors have been discovered which have zero resistance up to temperatures above the boiling point of liquid nitrogen- temperatures which are less costly to attain. 4. Superconductors may have a future applications in power transmission and electrically powered forms of transport.

Causes of the Collapse of the Weimar Republic

Causes of the Collapse of the Weimar Republic Collapse of the Weimar Republic To what extent can it be said that the Great Depression and the overburdening of the German welfare State were the main causes of the Collapse of the Weimar Republic? When considering the importance and extent to which the Great Depression and the overburdening of the German welfare state were the main causes of the collapse of the Weimar, it is necessary to assess other factors which also added to its failure. This essay intends to argue, the Great Depression and overburdening of the welfare state were prominent reasons in the latter stages of the Weimars collapse, they accelerated its failure in 1929 and by 1932 arguably the Weimar Republic was realistically unworkable. Despite this, the main cause of the collapse was the continuous poor economic state of Germany which hindered the success of democracy and finally resulted in the failure of the Weimar. The legacy of the First World War, the effects of the Treaty of Versailles and the 1923 hyperinflation crisis significantly worsened Germanys economic problems. The Great Depression and the overburdening of the welfare state derived from this constant financial strain that the government suffered under and eventually spiralled the situation out of control which proved unmanageable for the government. This created a cut back in support from those who were in favour of democracy and produced resentment amongst the radical Right and Left wing party members themselves. Finally, much attention will be given to the Weimars inability to deal with the crisis via unsuccessful decision making and the long term traditional attitudes of the elites within the government that were also highly important contributions to the collapse of the Weimar. Consequently with detrimental ongoing economic crisis and contributing political factors, the Weimar Republic was doomed from the outset[1], resulting in its collapse. Arguably the Great Depression and the overburdening of the welfare state played a vital role in the collapse of the Weimar but was not the main reason. The Great Depression was a severe worldwide economic crisis that began in the United States with the Wall Street Crash on October 29th, 1929. International trade, incomes, and profits plummeted. The Depression had massive repercussions on Germany as they relied on loans from America to facilitate their prosperity, pay off their reparations and revive their economy. Arguably the Depression was prominent in the very last stages of the Weimars life as it was not until after 1929, the economic outlook changed from gloomy to distinctly stormy[2]. The use of the word gloomy indicates that previous to the Depression, Germany was already struggling economically and thus this statement adds weight to the notion that the Depression acted as a catalyst to the eventual breakdown of the government. Furthermore, the outburst of the Depression in 1 929 had a disastrous impact on the German economy [3] as almost one third of German production was exported by 1920. However after this time, exports had decreased. As imports had fallen by two thirds, this had linkage effect on German workers as many lost their jobs between 1929-1933. Official figures in January in 1928 stood at 1,862,000 unemployed and by 1930 when the Depression had taken real effect in Germany, this increased to 3,218,000.[4] These statistics indicate that even before the Depression Germanys unemployment rate was high, thus Germany was in a financial crisis before the Depression and the Weimars reputation was already on the verge of failure. Although the government attempted to resolve the problem of unemployment for example, chancellor Heinrich Brunning who introduced a series of policies to deal with this fiscal crisis. He cut down wages, salaries and prices in an effort to restore confidence in the German financial and industrial system.[5] His efforts were unsuccessful and ineffective as subsequent to this by 1931 there were nearly 4.5 million people out of work, thus illustrating the Weimars inability to deal with the crisis contributing to its own collapse. This initiated further opposition and bitterness towards the Republic. Clearly the depression contributed to the Weimars unpopularity and more so its collapse. Additionally both liberal parties, the DVP(Germans People Party) and DDP (German Democrat Party) witnessed a decrease in votes during the 1930 election as much of their support rested on the middle class; these white collar workers with status, who were monetary advantageous to the average class man felt humiliated, betrayed and angry towards the Weimar Government.[6] Consequently faced with insoluble economic problems many people turned to force and coercion[7], (the Nazi party) in hope of a radical solution to their troubles. This strengthens the argument that economics was central to the collapse of the Weimar, the Depression added the final touches. Furthermore with large firms dependent on USA loans and German banks that also had taken out loans to invest in businesses, when the depression struck it destroyed the relative stability of the financial system and hence placed an overwhelming burden on the welfare state. The welfare States purpose was to provide benefits for the unemployed, pensioners and disabled. In 1927 the welfare state introduced the unemployment insurance Act. By 1929 as a result of the depression it was unable to provide unemployment insurance for the amount of unemployed people. Arguably these two factors were linked as without the Great Depression the welfa re state would not have suffered an overwhelming burden. This is evident as the percentage of unemployed supported by the unemployment insurance declined from 80 per cent at the beginning of 1929 (before the Depression) to 30 per cent in January 1932 when six million people were unemployed. The welfare states failure to deliver this unemployment Insurance during this crucial period reflected the weakness of the Weimar system itself. Henig agrees with the concept that the welfare state played a key role in the collapse of the Weimar arguing, ironically this major achievement of the unemployment insurance threatened to engulf the government in a major financial crisis.[8] Additionally as people expected a great deal from the welfare state, when these expectations were not met they became sour and anti-democratic.[9] On the other hand Bookbinder challenges this argument that economic crisis was the main reason to the Weimars failure proclaiming, in times of crisis such as the 1923 hyperinflation, these difficulties endangered the order and resilience of the Weimar but did not make the Republics failure inevitable.[10] However one may say the fact that these economic problems persistently occurred, suggests that this was the Weimars governments downfall and resulted in its failure; the Great Depression and overburdening of the welfare state were just the last straw. Evidently economic instability was the main reason of the Weimars collapse as the inflation problem was announced before the First World War had ended.[11] More so, on top of the colossal debt incurred from financing the war of around 150 milliard marks, Germany was even more devastated when they received their reparations bill of 6.600 million pounds.[12] With the country already in social and political ruin, the economic reparations ultimately destroyed the foundations of the Weimar. This proved too much for the Government to handle and by 1922 they declared themselves unable to make payments.[13] Additionally due to heavy taxation which, was also an effect of inflation meant students, pensioners and people with savings lost all their money; thus the governments status deteriorated amongst these groups.[14] Even more, German agriculture was fiancially tarnished as farmers suffered from the fatiguing effort to supply Germany during the war and by 1920 they were experiencing low crop yields and diminished number of livestock.[15] Heavy industrial owners were also financially effected as they witnessed a decline in their profits and what is more they were a vital part of the anti- republican bloc and made life difficult for the republic.[16] Peukart also holds economics responsible for the main cause of collapse arguing, these problems hindered the new Republic from guaranteeing their survival.[17] Post-war inflation further affected German political parties, for example the liberal parties who struggled to afford paper and stamps by 1920 and suffered extreme financial difficulties.[18] The First World War deteriorated the economic situation in Germany even more, as Weitz argues, the legacy of World War One was the republics greatest obstacle. It hobbled developments at every turn and gave the enemies of democracy endless rounds of ammunition.[19]Bookbinder strengthens this opinion stating, before the war Germany was a strong nation producing 13.1 million tons of pig iron and 13 million tons of steel. Arguably it was there involvement in the war which initiated their national debt and an inflated currency.[20] Germanys decision to finance the war through borrowing money instead of increasing taxations accelerated their economic downturn even more , this programme of war financing precipitated the monitory inflation which was to continue through to 1923.[21] Subsequently wages increased but for some people this did not match the increase in the cost of their living.[22] White collar workers, who in pre war years had great prestige, were now experiencing economic har dship due to the war and inflation.[23] The Treaty of Versailles was also a result of the First World War and had disastrous impact on the German economy contributing to the Weimars failure. The government accepted responsibility of the war and signed the War Guilt Clause (article 231), this encouraged social unrest in Germany and resentment especially amongst the Right wing nationalists. Mckenzie claims that Versailles presented the Nationalists with a persuasive pretext for mounting the blame of Germanys troubles on the Republic, they felt betrayed and stabbed in the back[24]. During this time, the fact that the Weimar was a newly established democracy meant it was vulnerable and under threat. It is important to remember that for a newly established democracy to survive, it must have the support of the people in especially in turbulent the most times. However the Weimar government lacked this assistance as Mommsen notes, German people did not really support democracy from the beginning, instead they viewed it as the onl y possible outcome for the new state. [25] On the other hand it could be argued that German people were in favour of democracy but lacked the principle foundations of it, as many envisioned a progressive reform of their previous monarch system. Never the less it is clear that the Weimar was never whole heartedly supported even before it came into practice. Additionally Right wing groups also attacked democracy mainly because of the signing of the Treaty of Versailles, because their members were incredibly powerful being were highly integrated into the major institutions of state, society, business, civil service, army, universities and churches.[26] This highlights a flaw in the Weimar government, because the coalition parties were not united with a common goal this was proved difficult to implement policies and deal with opponents. Attacks from the Left wing radicals also endangered democracy. In January 1919 an attempt was made from the Left wing group, the Spartacuss who attempted to overthrow the government, however this was crushed by the army and the Freikorps. Although the Weimar did survive these attacks, arguably these uprisings only failed not because these opposition groups lacked clear aims and an alternative system. Even more the economic burden created by the Treaty, made continued reforms and tax policies difficult.[27] Thus Germany was now economically weaker then previously in 1914 as they had increased national debts, inflated currency and reparation stood at the value of 132 billion marks.[28] On the other hand Hobsbawm disagrees with the view that the radical Right wing oppositions came about due to the resentment of the Treaty of Versailles and states, The rise of radical Right after the First World War, was undoubtedly a response to the danger.of social revolution and working class power in general, to the October revolution and Leninism in particular. Without these, there would have been no fascism[29]. Despite this, it is evident that the Right wing movements were an outcome of the First World War. Hyperinflation in 1923 another crucial disaster brought the inflationary situation to its final crisis phase[30]. The economic effects of the occupation were catastrophic. Kolb also agrees with this opinion describing it as a miracle[31] the Weimar survived. However, chancellor Stresemann rescued Germany and introduced new currency and borrowed loans from America to facilitate Germanys finances, following on from this it could be argued that the German economy did experienc e a period of prosperity. However the solution was temporary and one that depended on international loans.[32] Again reflecting a grave decision made by the government as having provided a permanent solution, this would have prevented the severity Great Depressions impact on Germany. Stresemann himself described this period of affluence as dancing on a volcano[33] , this exemplifies that too was aware that depending on American loans was risky. Still in 1929 when the Depression hit, Germany was once again faced with economic problems. Economic historian Borchhardt believes that even without the occurrence of the Depression Germanys economy was abnormal and would not have been able to continue in the same way.[34]This reinforcing the view that economics was the main cause of the collapse of the Weimar. Clearly, the Weimar governments failure to take firm action played a vital role to the collapse of the Weimar. This is particularly evident with invasion of the Ruhr, as previous to this the SPD (Social Democrat Party) had the backing of the working class who were protected from the inflation via trade unions and also the support of large landowners who were able to pay of their debts which if made the efficient decisions could have excelled on this support. However in 1923 their misguided efforts to print money steered them in to hyperinflation. Hinton and Hite strengthen this argument claiming, although some of the problems were beyond Germanys power to control, the collapse came about due to the Weimars weak policies and lack of decisive action.[35] Consequently endless economic disasters became too unmanageable for the government to keep combating, as with any government this repeated economic crises would too inevitably lead to their failure. Another equally significant factor w hich contributed to the collapse of the Weimar Republic, was the traditional attitudes of the ruling elites and a lack of bureaucratic culture. Furthermore because democracy was introduced the most inauspicious circumstances[36] , the old elites such as the DVP and the DNVP ( German National Peoples Party) were monarchs at heart and never fully fledged their support to the Republic or the notion of democracy [37] , consequently they wanted a reversion back to the old system. However the KPD (communist party) and the NSDAP (The Nazi Party) was determined to unify the people of Germany. Germany had always been an imperialist country and headed by constitutional monarch, this meant the long term values of democracy were deficient in order for the Weimar to be successful. Subsequently by 1930 there was a powerful current of opinion in Germany demanding a more authoritarian government.[38] The elites could not regard the new republic as a rightful descendant to the pre-war imperial regim e,[39] thus if the ruling class were not in favour democracy how was the rest of the country going to support it? The Weimar was unable to accomplish unconditional support of these traditional elites such as the Junkers and army officers.[40] Kocka reinforces this notion and believes the failure of the Weimar was due to the bourgeoisie who seemed relatively weak and unbourgeois .[41] Consequently with the combination of old and new political forces present in the government, this halted the triumph of democracy. In conclusion it is clear that economics was the foremost reason to why the Weimar collapsed as even before the Great Depression which was followed by the overburdening of the welfare state, Germany was constantly faced with financial constraints that was caused by the damage of the First World War, this meant straight away the Weimar was forced to introduce a new democratic way of life in the most unpromising conditions. Even more, the reparations of the Treaty of Versailles and the exacerbated the governments financial pressures, thus resulting in a decline of support of the Weimar and the rise of radical Right and Left wing parties which threatened democracy. Lastly the major hyper inflation crisis in 1923 meant money completely lost its value, subsequently as demand rapidly decreased many people lost their jobs. However the introduction of a new currency and loans form the America temporarily revitalised their economy. Yet when the depression hit, America could no longer assist t hem and as Germany had no money of its own to aid its finances, this resulted in the unemployment of six million people. This placed a overwhelming burden on the welfare state and led to severe poverty as by 1932 people who had worn out their entitlement to state benefit and were thrown on the streets to beg for food.[42] The Depression tore apart the fragile political compromise that the Weimar had made via the welfare state and placed an enormous burden on to it. No doubt, the actions of the government themselves contributed to their own downfall as incremental thoughtlessness decisions decreased their popularity and status amongst Germany. Alongside this attribute lies the ruling elites for example the DNVP as their failure to support the vulnerable democratic meant the regime itself lacked confidence. Together these were a vital contribution to the collapse of the Weimar Republic. It is evident t .hat economic hurdles occurred throughout the Weimars life and led to abnormalities within the system and eventually its collapse. This concludes me to suggest that the Weimar Republic itself was the special path that Germany followed (the Sonderweg), as this failed experiment of democracy ultimately caused Germany to propel towards the Nazi regime. BIBLIOGRAPGHY: Hobsbawm .E, The Age of Extremes 1919-1941 (London 1995) Baldeston .T, The Origins and Course of the German Economic Crisis, (Berlin, 1993) Jones .L, German Liberalism and the Dissolution of the Weimar party system, 1918-1933, (Chapel Hill, 1988), Kocka .J, Asymmetrical Historical Comparison: The case of the German Sonderweg, History and theory, 38, (1999), p.40-50 Henig. R, The Weimar Republic 1919-1933 (London, 1998) Mckenzie P. R. J,Weimar Germany 1918-1933 (London 1971) Bookbinder . P, Weimar Germany, The Republic of the Reasonable, (Manchester, 1996) Weitz E.D, Weimar Germany Promise and Tradgedy, (New Jersey 2007) Hidden .J, The Weimar Republic 2nd Edition (London 1969) Hinton .C and Hite . J , Weimar and Nazi Germany, (London, 2001), Kolb .E The Weimar Republic, Second Edition (New York, 2005) Childs .D, Germany Since 1918, (London 1971) Stachura .D P (ed.), Unemployment and the Great depression in Germany, (London, 1986) Mazower. M, Dark Continent, (London, 1999) Evan. J. R, and Geary D (eds), The German Unemployed, (London, 1987) To what extent can it be said that the Great Depression and the overburdening of the German welfare State were the main causes of the Collapse of the Weimar Republic? [1] Henig, The Weimar Republic, p.78 [2]Henig, The Weimar Republic, p.61 [3] P. Bookbinder, Weimar Germany, The Republic of the Reasonable, (Manchester, 1996), p.178 [4] Bookbinder, Weimar Germany, p. 174 [5] Bookbinder, Weimar Germany, p. 146 [6] Bookbinder, Weimar Germany, p. 167 [7] E. Hobsbawm, The Age of Extremes,(London, 1995), p.136 [8] Henig, The Weimar Republic, p.60 [9] J. Kocka, Asymmetrical Historical Comparison: The case of the German Sonderweg, History and theory, 38, (1999), p 46 [10] Bookbinder, Weimar Germany, p. 161 [11] J. Hidden, The Weimar Republic 2nd Edition (London 1969)p.30 [12] Hidden, The Weimar, p.30 [13] Hidden, The Weimar, p.31 [14] Bookbinder, Weimar Germany, p.166 [15] Hidden, The Weimar, p. 34 [16] Bookbinder, Weimar Germany, p. 171 [17] Henig, The Weimar Republic, p.83 [18] L. Jones, German Liberalism and the Dissolution of the Weimar party system, 1918-1933, (Chapel Hill, 1988), p. 165. [19] E. D. Weitz, Weimar Germany Promise and Tradgedy, (New Jersey 2007)p.127 [20] Bookbinder, Weimar Germany, p.163 [21] Bookbinder:164 [22] Bookbinder: 164 [23]Bookbinder, Weimar Germany, p. 166 [24] J. R. P. Mckenzie,Weimar Germany 1918-1933 (London 1971)p.71 [25] Henig, The Weimar Republic, p.78 [26] Weitz, Weimar Germany Promise and Tradgedy, p92 [27] Bookbinder, Weimar Germany, p.164 [28] Bookbinder, Weimar Germany, p.164 [29] E. Hobsbawm, The Age of Extremes 1919-1941 (London 1995)p.124 [30] Bookbinder, Weimar Germany, p.167 [31] E. Kolb, The Weimar Republic, Second Edition, (New York, 2005), p.35 [32] Hidden, The Weimar, p.32 [33] C. Hinton and J. Hite, Weimar and Nazi Germany, (London, 2001), p.74 [34]C. Hinton and J. Hite, Weimar and Nazi Germany, p.75. [35] Hinton and John , Weimar and Nazi Germany, p.103. [36] Henig, The Weimar Republic, p.78 [37] Weitz, Weimar Germany Promise and Tradgedy, p.92 [38] Henig, The Weimar Republic, p.62 [39] Henig, The Weimar Republic, p.79 [40] Henig, The Weimar Republic, p.84 [41] Kocka, Assymetrical Histroical Comparison, p. 42 [42] Henig, The Weimar Republic, p.67

The Impact of Television on American Society Essay -- essays research

The Impact of Television on American Society   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  What role does television play in society? For decades we have seen many parts of our world rapidly going through changes in technology. Today’s society has been transformed by means of communication and the available information through mass media. Most Americans rely on television for news, sports, and entertainment. Television is just one of the many examples of how technology has changed our lives. Since the invention of the television in the early 1900’s, it has played a very important role in our lives. Having a television set in the home has become very essential in today’s society. We depend on it to entertain us with its sitcoms and to inform us about current world issues. The problem is that sometimes what we hear or see on television is not always accurate or correct. Sometimes news stories give us the wrong information and we believe that it is true because it is being said on television. They may give you a story, but they may lea ve out some details to prove their point or to make the story more interesting. Americans are among the most ill-informed people in the world. Television, in other words, is not the great information machine. It is the great disinformation machine. TV tends to mislead us with its stories and in many ways we allow ourselves to be fall behind in the world as we tend to want to watch the entertainment shows and not the news broadcasts. Thus, we are not informed about what is going on in o...

A Mothers Biggest Fair :: Essays Papers

A Mothers Biggest Fair One spring afternoon a mother met her greatest fear head-on. Crystal Beck and her three-year-old son Travis were shopping for a new spring and summer wardrobe at a local mall. The mall was very hectic for the middle of the afternoon and to make matters worse Crystal had forgotten her sons stroller at home after taking him for a walk earlier that day. She had told her inquisitive son to say by her side. After visiting a few stores Crystal began to notice that Travis was becoming very anxious. So she made the decision to finish her son’s shopping in JC Penney at the far end of the mall, the two made their way to the children’s clothing section located on the third floor. As Crystal searched through the cluttered racks looking for the perfect outfits for her son, still glancing back at Travis who was looking through a bin of stuffed toys. She looked back to the rack for a split second to find the size she needed, and when she looked back up to check on her son he was gone. Crystal began calling his name, waiting for a response, no response ever came. She called again, but louder this time â€Å"Travis, where are you?† With every call for her son her heart began to beat fast and harder inside of her chest. She could feel herself beginning to tremble and shake, her vision became gray and distorted, she then began running though the store call her son and crying uncontrollably. A salesperson stopped her to try to calm her down and find out what had happened. Crystal explained to her still crying and shaking what had happened. The salesperson assured her not to worry, that he would be found. The girl notified security for the store, they brought Crystal to their office and asked for a description of the boy. She told them that he was a three years old boy, with blonde hair and blue eye, and standing 36 inches in height. He was wearing a blue baseball cap, a red long sleeved shirt, blue jeans, and a pair of white Reebok sneakers. When she was done with the description of her son the security officer offered her a glass of water, but she refused it. Her stomach felt as if there was a solid piece of metal lying at the bottom of it.

The Congressional Medal of Honour

The Medal of Honour is the highest military decoration awarded by the United States government. It is given to a member of the United States armed forces who distinguishes himself â€Å"conspicuously by gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty while engaged in an action against an enemy of the United States†. Because of the nature of its criteria, the medal is often awarded posthumously. Members of all branches of the U. S. military are eligible to receive the medal, and each service has a unique design with the exception of the Marine Corps and Coast Guard, which both use the Navy's medal. The Medal of Honour is often presented personally to the recipient or, in the case of posthumous awards, to next of kin, by the President of the United States. Due to its high status, the medal has special protection under U. S. law. The Medal of Honour is one of two military neck order awards issued by the United States Armed Forces, but is the sole neck order awarded to its members. The other is the Commander's Degree of the Legion of Merit and is only authorized for issue to foreign dignitaries comparable to a US military chief of staff. While American service members are eligible for the Legion of Merit, they are awarded the lowest degree, â€Å"Legionnaire†, which is a standard suspended medal. The medal is frequently, albeit incorrectly, called the Congressional Medal of Honour, stemming from its award by the Department of Defence in the name of Congress. The first formal system for rewarding acts of individual gallantry by American soldiers was established by George Washington on August 7, 1782, when he created the Badge of Military Merit, designed to recognize any singularly meritorious action. This decoration is America's first combat award and the second oldest American military decoration of any type, after the Fidelity Medallion. Although the Badge of Military Merit fell into disuse after the American Revolutionary War, the concept of a military award for individual gallantry by members of the U. S. armed forces had been established. In 1847, after the outbreak of the Mexican-American War, a Certificate of Merit was established for soldiers who distinguished themselves in action. The certificate was later granted medal status as the Certificate of Merit Medal. Early in the Civil War, a medal for individual valour was proposed by Iowa Senator James W. Grimes to Winfield Scott, the Commanding General of the United States Army. Scott did not approve the proposal, but the medal did come into use in the Navy. Public Resolution 82, containing a provision for a Navy Medal of Valour, was signed into law by President Abraham Lincoln on December 21, 1861. The medal was â€Å"to be bestowed upon such petty officers, seamen, landsmen, and Marines as shall most distinguish themselves by their gallantry and other seamanlike qualities during the present war. Secretary of the Navy Gideon Welles directed the Philadelphia Mint to design the new decoration. Shortly afterward, a resolution of similar wording was introduced on behalf of the Army and was signed into law on July 12, 1862. This measure provided for awarding a Medal of Honour, as the Navy version also came to be called to such non-commissioned officers and privates as shall most distinguish themselves by their gallantry in action, and other soldier-like qualities, during the present insurrection. The Medal of Honour has evolved in appearance since its creation in 1862. The present Army medal consists of a gold star surrounded by a wreath, topped by an eagle on a bar inscribed with the word â€Å"Valour. † The medal is attached by a hook to a light blue moire. There is a version of the medal for each branch of the U. S. armed forces: the Army, Navy and Air Force. Since the U. S. Marine Corps is administratively a part of the Department of the Navy, Marines receive the Navy medal. Before 1965, when the U. S. Air Force design was adopted, members of the U. S. Army Air Corps, U. S. Army Air Forces, and Air Force received the Army version of the medal. The Coast Guard Medal of Honour, which was distinguished from the Navy medal in 1963, has never been awarded, partly because the U. S. Coast Guard is subsumed into the U. S. Navy in time of declared war. No design yet exists for it. Only one member of the Coast Guard has received a Medal of Honour, Signalman 1st Class Douglas Munro, who was awarded the Navy version for action during the Battle of Guadalcanal. In the rare cases, 19 so far, where a service member has been awarded more than one Medal of Honour, current regulations specify that an appropriate award device be cantered on the Medal of Honour ribbon and neck medal. To indicate multiple presentations of the Medal of Honour, the U. S. Army and Air Force bestow oak leaf clusters, while the Navy Medal of Honour is worn with gold award stars. A ribbon which is the same shade of light blue as the neckband, and includes five white stars, pointed upwards, in the shape of an â€Å"M† is worn for situations other than full dress uniform. When the ribbon is worn, it is placed alone above the centre of the other ribbons. For wear with civilian clothing, a rosette is issued instead of a miniature lapel pin (which usually shows the ribbon bar). The rosette is the same shade of blue as the neck ribbon and includes white stars. The ribbon and rosette are presented at the same time as the medal. On October 23, 2003 a Medal of Honour flag was to be presented to recipients of the decoration. The flag was based on a concept by retired Army Special Forces 1SG. Bill Kendall of Jefferson, Iowa, who designed a flag to honour Medal of Honour recipient Captain Darrell Lindsey. Kendall's design of a light blue field emblazoned with thirteen white five-pointed stars was nearly identical to that of Sarah LeClerc's of the Institute of Heraldry. LeClerc's design, ultimately accepted as the official flag, does not include the words â€Å"Medal of Honour† and is fringed in gold. The colour of the field and the 13 white stars, arranged in the form of a three bar chevron, consisting of two chevrons of 5 stars and one chevron of 3 stars, replicate the Medal of Honour ribbon. The flag has no set proportions. The first Medal of Honour recipient to receive the official flag was Paul R. Smith. The flag was cased and presented to his family along with his medal. A special ceremony presenting this flag to 60 Medal of Honour recipients was held onboard the USS Constitution Template:WP Ships USS instances on September 30, 2006. There are two distinct protocols for awarding the Medal of Honour. The first and most common is nomination by a service member in the chain of command, followed by approval at each level of command. The other method is nomination by a member of Congress and approval by a special act of Congress. In either case, the Medal of Honour is presented by the President on behalf of the Congress. Several months after President Abraham Lincoln signed Public Resolution 82 into law on December 21, 1861, a similar resolution for the Army was passed. Six Union soldiers who hijacked the General, a Confederate locomotive were the first recipients. Raid leader James J. Andrews, a civilian hanged as a Union spy, did not receive the medal. Many Medals of Honour awarded in the 19th century were associated with saving the flag, not just for patriotic reasons, but because the flag was a primary means of battlefield communication. During the time of the Civil War, no other military award was authorized, and to many this explains why some seemingly less notable actions were recognized by the Medal of Honour during that war. The criteria for the award tightened after World War I. In the post-World War II era, many eligible recipients might instead have been awarded a Silver Star, Navy Cross or similar award. During the Civil War, Secretary of War Edwin M. Stanton promised a Medal of Honour to every man in the 27th Regiment, Maine Infantry who extended his enlistment beyond the agreed upon date. Many stayed four days extra, and then were discharged. Due to confusion, Stanton awarded a Medal of Honour to all 864 men in the regiment. In 1916, a board of five Army generals convened by law to review every Army Medal of Honour awarded. The commission, led by Nelson Miles, recommended that the Army rescind 911 medals. This included the 864 medals awarded to members of the 27th Maine, 29 who served as Abraham Lincoln's funeral guard, six civilians (including Dr Mary Edwards Walker, the only woman to have been awarded the medal), Buffalo Bill Cody, and 12 others whose awards were judged frivolous. Dr. Walker's medal was restored posthumously by President Jimmy Carter in 1977. Cody's award was restored in 1989. Early in the 20th century, the Navy awarded many Medals of Honour for peacetime bravery. For instance, seven sailors aboard the USS Iowa received the medal when a boiler exploded on January 25, 1904. Aboard the USS Chicago in 1901, John Henry Helms received the medal for saving Ishi Tomizi, the ship's cook, from drowning. Even after World War I, Richard Byrd and Floyd Bennett received the medal for exploration of the North Pole. Thomas J. Ryan received it for saving a woman from the burning Grand Hotel in Yokohama, Japan following the 1923 Great Kanto earthquake. Between 1919 and 1942, the Navy issued two separate versions of the Medal of Honour, one for non-combat bravery and the other for combat-related acts. Official accounts vary, but generally the non-combat Medal of Honour was known as the Tiffany Cross, after the company that manufactured the medal. The Tiffany Cross was first issued in 1919 but was rare and unpopular, partly because it was presented both for combat and non-combat events. As a result, in 1942, the United States Navy reverted to a single Medal of Honour, awarded only for heroism. Since the beginning of World War II, the medal has been awarded for extreme bravery beyond the call of duty while engaged in action against an enemy. Arising from these criteria, approximately 60% of the medals earned during and after World War II have been awarded posthumously. Capt. William McGonagle is an exception to the enemy action rule, earning his medal during the USS Liberty incident. A 1993 study commissioned by the Army described systematic racial and religious discrimination in the criteria for awarding medals during World War II. At the time, no Medals of Honour had been awarded to black soldiers who served in World War II. After an exhaustive review of files, the study recommended that several black Distinguished Service Cross recipients be upgraded to the Medal of Honour. On January 13, 1997, President Bill Clinton awarded the medal to seven African American World War II veterans. Of these, only Vernon Baker was still alive. A similar study of Asian Americans in 1998 resulted in President Bill Clinton awarding 21 new Medals of Honour in 2000, including 20 to Japanese American members of the 442nd Regimental Combat Team, among them Senator Daniel Inouye. In 2005, President George W. Bush awarded the Medal of Honour to Jewish veteran and Holocaust survivor Tibor Rubin, whom many believed to have been overlooked because of his religion. This medal’s history stretches back into our bloody war history, it has seen its own trials and tribulations and like America is has grown and melded itself into the prestigious award that it is today. I believe the medal has been properly issued to service members and at the same time given away freely, but that does not take away from the honour and respect each recipient deserves. These recipients are text book example of perfect military stature and then some. All of them go above and beyond anyone’s expectations that even they themselves had. The most surprising thing is that all of them did these marvellous and mind blowing deeds of service at such a young military age, the same and even younger age of my own. It not only blows my mind at how they accomplish or even began to go through with what they did but they did it without an order or a self doubt, to me they got in the perfect mindset of selfless service and their one goal was to help other and complete the mission. My first pick of recipients is Private First Class Willy F. James, U. S. Army, Company G, 413th Infantry near Lippoldsberg, Germany, 7 April 1945. Private First Class Willy F. James, Jr. distinguished himself by extraordinary heroism at the risk of his own life on 7 April 1945 in the Weser River Valley, in the vicinity of Lippoldsberg, Germany. On 7 April 1945, Company G, 413th Infantry, fought its way across the Weser River in order to establish a crucial bridgehead. The company then launched a fierce attack against the town of Lippoldsberg, possession of which was vital to securing and expanding the important bridgehead. Private First Class James was first scout of the lead squad in the assault platoon. The mission of the unit was to seize and secure a group of houses on the edge of town, a foothold from which the unit could launch an attack on the rest of the town. Far out in the front, Private First Class James was the first to draw enemy fire. His platoon leader came forward to investigate, but poor visibility made it difficult for Private First Class James to point out enemy positions with any accuracy. Private First Class James volunteered to go forward to fully reconnoiter the enemy situation. Furious crossfire from enemy snipers and machine guns finally pinned down Private First Class James after he had made his way forward approximately 200 yards across open terrain. Lying in an exposed position for more than an hour, Private First Class James intrepidly observed the enemy’s positions, which were given away by the fire he was daringly drawing upon himself. Then, with utter indifference to his personal safety, in a storm of enemy small arms fire, Private First Class James made his way back more than 300 yards across open terrain under enemy observation to his platoon positions, and gave a full detailed report on the enemy disposition. The unit worked out a new plan of maneuver based on Private First Class James’s information. The gallant soldier volunteered to lead a squad in an assault on the key house in the group that formed the platoon objective. He made his way forward, leading his squad in an assault on the strongly-held enemy positions in the building and designating targets accurately and continuously as he moved along. While doing so, Private First Class James saw his platoon leader shot down by enemy snipers. Hastily designating and coolly orienting a leader in his place, Private First Class James instantly went to the aid of his platoon leader, exposing himself recklessly to the incessant enemy fire. As he was making his way across open ground, Private First Class James was killed by a burst from an enemy machine gun. Private First Class James’s extraordinarily heroic action in the face of withering enemy fire provided the disposition of enemy troops to his platoon. Inspired to the utmost by Private First Class James’s self sacrifice, the platoon sustained the momentum of the assault and successfully accomplished its mission with a minimum of casualties. Private First Class James contributed very definitely to the success of his battalion in the vitally important combat operation of establishing and expanding a bridgehead over the Weser River. His fearless, self-assigned actions far above and beyond the normal call of duty exemplify the finest traditions of the American combat soldier and reflect the highest credit upon Private First Class James and the Armed Forces of the United States. Private First Class James is a prime example of what a man should be. He ran through enemy fire, and then while in the midst of the fire still had the discipline and the bravery to observe fire positions and any other useful information that he could see from his position. On top of that he still was able to fall back to his platoon 300 meters behind him.