Thomas Bilotti

Thomas „Tommy“ Bilotti (March 23, 1940 – December 16, 1985) was a New York mobster with the Gambino crime family who served as underboss for two weeks. It was this promotion that helped trigger the 1985 assassination of Gambino boss Paul Castellano.

As a young man, Bilotti joined the Staten Island crew of Gambino capo Michael D’Alessio. Bilotti also spent time as Alexander DeBrizzi’s chauffeur and bodyguard. Bilotti later became a criminal associate of John D’Alessio, Michael’s brother. Bilotti was involved in labor racketeering, extortion and loansharking.

Bilotti soon gained a reputation for violence. In one incident, Bilotti assaulted Colombo associate Robert Pate. In 1970, D’Alessio allegedly recruited Bilotti and his brother Joseph to murder Thomas Ernst, the boyfriend of D’Alessio’s daughter. However, the murder attempt failed when D’Alessio’s daughter shot at them.

Over the years, Bilotti became a close aide-de-camp, confidant and chauffeur for capo Paul Castellano. Bilotti was a regular visitor to Castellano’s Todt Hill, Staten Island mansion and was considered a close family friend. However, when Castellano started an affair with his maid, Bilotti kept it secret from Castellano’s wife. He would also act as his chauffeur. Bilotti and Castellano were said to make an odd pair. Castellano, a gangster who thought himself more as a businessman, and Bilotti, a brutish loan shark.

Bilotti had a no-show job at Scara-Mix, Castellano’s cement company on Staten Island. He was also heavily involved in the Steam Fitters Local 638 of the Plumbers Union that was represented by George Daly, an associate who belonged to his crew. Daly served as Local 638’s business agent until his 1987 conviction for soliciting bribes to ensure labor peace.

When Castellano became Gambino boss in 1976, he gave Bilotti a crew to manage. Many members of the Gambino family were contemptuous of Bilotti and considered him to be Castellano’s stooge. This attitude was widespread in the traditional, „blue collar“ wing of the family, led by underboss Aniello Dellacroce. This wing considered Castellano to be greedy and out of touch of with their concerns.

On December 2, 1985 Gambino underboss Aniello Dellacroce died of cancer. Immediately after his death, Castellano decided to appoint Bilotti as the new underboss. News of the Bilotti promotion, along with a perceived slight to the Dellacroce family by Castellano, stirred up considerable anger in the family. Capo John Gotti and Salvatore Gravano orchestrated a plan to kill both Castellano and Bilotti.

Salvatore „Sammy the Bull“ Gravano planned to murder Bilotti. One idea was to have associate Joseph Watts tell his wife that he wanted his house painted, and they would put up plastic on the walls and floor to protect it from „paint“. Then sometime early in the morning Watts would call to arrange a meeting with Bilotti.

Watts would open the door for Bilotti and walk him into the home’s front corridor. Gravano would hide in the archway with Frank DeCicco. As Bilotti would walk past, Gravano would step out and shoot him in the head. They would then discard the plastic and body.

DeCicco would then go up to Paul Castellano’s home and tell him Bilotti called in sick so he would act as Castellano’s replacement driver. Then, DeCicco would shoot Castellano when he was in his car. But after some cautious thinking, Gravano and DeCicco thought that it was too haphazard of a plan.

A few minutes before 6:00 p.m. on December 16, 1985 Bilotti chauffeured Paul Castellano to where they were ambushed outside Sparks Steak House in Manhattan, apparently on the orders of caporegime John Gotti. He pulled his black Lincoln right up in front of the restaurant. As Castellano began exiting the car, two gunmen (including Tony Rampino) walked up and fired at least six bullets at him, including a final shot to his head. As Bilotti stepped out, he was approached by the other shooters. Gambino crime family mob associate Anthony Rampino shot Bilotti six times in the head and chest after Castellano was gunned down. The fatal meeting was arranged by Frank DeCicco, James Failla, Gene Gotti and Armando Dellacroce, the son of former Gambino crime family underboss Aniello Dellacroce, who were against the age-old ban on narcotics as a business option.

Bilotti and Castellano most certainly saw their approaching executioners before being shot dead. From descriptions of the shooters given by witnesses, including a pedestrian who witnessed the shooting from only a few feet away, police detectives believe it was John Gotti associate Anthony Rampino who gunned down Bilotti as he was getting out of his black Lincoln. After the shooting, an off-duty registered nurse went to Bilotti’s aid in a vain attempt to revive him. Police found Bilotti to be in possession of $6,300 at the time of his death and was not armed.

Thomas Bilotti is buried fifty yards away from Castellano in the Moravian Cemetery of New Dorp, Staten Island. Bilotti left behind ten children, including a six-week-old baby daughter. Bilotti’s wife Donna suffered a nervous breakdown and a miscarriage.

Gotti appointed Frank DeCicco as his new underboss. Gambino associate Joseph Watts wanted Gotti to kill Bilotti’s brother Joseph because he might seek revenge. However, Gravano persuaded Gotti that Joseph would accept his brother’s death.

On April 2, 1992, John Gotti was convicted in the 1985 Bilotti and Castellano murders. He was later sentenced to life in federal prison.

Singapore Flyer

Der Singapore Flyer ist mit einer Höhe von 165 Metern das zweithöchste Riesenrad der Welt. Von März 2008 bis April 2014 war die Anlage das weltweit höchste Riesenrad. Es steht in einer ufernahen Grünanlage am Rande der Stadt im Stadtstaat Singapur und löste bei seiner Eröffnung den Stern von Nanchang als größtes Riesenrad der Welt ab. Am 1. April 2014 musste der Singapore Flyer den Titel an The High Roller in Las Vegas abgeben.

Erbaut wurde der Singapore Flyer von der Great Wheel Corporation; die Baukosten betrugen etwa 135 Millionen Euro und wurden von deutschen Investoren aufgebracht. Verantwortlich für die sicherheitstechnische Abnahme des Riesenrads ist der TÜV Süd.

Am 11. Februar 2008 wurden erstmals Gäste auf dem Riesenrad befördert; die Eröffnung für die Allgemeinheit erfolgte am 1. März.

Der Singapore Flyer löste den Stern von Nanchang als größtes Riesenrad der Welt ab und wurde am 31. März 2014 durch den High Roller in Las Vegas abgelöst. Derzeit werden zwei noch größere Riesenräder in Dubai (185 Meter) sowie Peking (208 Meter) gebaut bzw. geplant.

Am 23. Dezember 2008 um ca. 17 Uhr Ortszeit führte ein Kurzschluss in einem der Motoren des Riesenrads zu einem sechsstündigen Stromausfall. Etwa 170 Passagiere waren vorübergehend eingeschlossen; ein Teil von ihnen wurde in einer stundenlangen Rettungsaktion aus den Kapseln abgeseilt. Kurz nach 23 Uhr Ortszeit war die Panne behoben, so dass die übrigen Passagiere die Kapseln selbst verlassen konnten. Der Betreiber legte das Riesenrad nach dem Zwischenfall für einige Tage still.

Seit der Eröffnung von The High Roller im Vergnügungskomplex The Linq in Las Vegas am 1. April 2014 ist der Singapore Flyer nur noch das zweithöchste Riesenrad der Welt. Der neue Rekordhalter ist um rund drei Meter höher.

Die Bauweise des Singapore Flyer orientiert sich an der des London Eye. Das Rad ist mit 112 je 8 cm dicken Stahlseilen an der Nabe befestigt. Da ein so konstruiertes Rad erst geschlossen in sich stabil wird, wurde es beim Aufbau mit massiven Speichen stabilisiert.

Das Rad dreht sich langsam aber gleichmäßig und wird zum Einsteigen nicht angehalten. Eine Umdrehung dauert in etwa 30 Minuten. Der Eintrittspreis für eine Fahrt beträgt umgerechnet etwa 20 Euro pro Person.

Das Riesenrad verfügt über 28 Gondeln, die jeweils bis zu 28 Personen fassen, was eine Gesamtkapazität von 784 Personen ergibt. Die Zahl „28“ hat dabei eine auch symbolische Bedeutung: Die 8 gilt bei Chinesen als Glückszahl, die 28 wird entsprechend als doppeltes Glück verstanden. Die Gondeln sind in jeweils zwei Ringen gelagert außerhalb des Rades befestigt, damit dieses auch in höchster Position nicht die Sicht behindern, die bis zu 45 km weit reichen kann. Da die großen Glasflächen einen Treibhauseffekt erzeugen, verfügt jede der Kabinen über vier Klimaanlagen, die die Luft kühlen und trocknen, wobei pro Stunde und Gondel 32 Liter Kondenswasser anfallen. Das Wasser wird nach jeder Runde aus den Gondeln abgelassen. Damit sich kein Wasser aus der Außenluft an der Oberfläche der gekühlten Gondeln niederschlägt, wird die Raumtemperatur der Kabinen bei jeder Durchfahrt der Station individuell angepasst.

Die starken Winde in Singapur erzeugen Luftverwirbelungen um die zwei Pfeiler, die damit auftretenden Luftdruckschwankungen versetzen diese in Schwingungen. Um Materialermüdung zu vermeiden ist jeder mit einem Schwingungsdämpfer ausgerüstet, der über eine 85 m hohe Leiter erreicht werden kann. Als Schwingungsdämpfer dienen jeweils zweieinhalb Tonnen Stahl, die 10 cm Spielraum zum Schwingen haben. Sie nehmen die Bewegung der Pfeiler in sich auf, die dann von Stoßdämpfern in Wärme umgewandelt wird.

Koordinaten:

Trey Azagthoth

Trey Azagthoth (born George Michel Emmanuel III March 26, 1965 in Bellingham, Washington, United States) is an American musician best known as founder and guitarist of the Florida death metal band Morbid Angel.

Emmanuel grew up in Tampa, Florida, in a Baptist household. He began playing guitar, at the age of 16, when he received his first guitar, a B.C. Rich Ironbird. He later bought some effect pedals, including a Morley Wah.

In 1982 Emmanuel formed his first band called Ice with high school friend Mike Browning and played mainly covers of bands like Black Sabbath or Iron Maiden.

After his graduation in 1983 Emmanuel founded his second band under the name Heretic and began to write his first songs. The band later renamed itself Morbid Angel and Emmanuel adopted the nickname Trey Azagthoth. The name Trey refers to the name component „III“ (the third) and Azagthoth to the Ancient One of the grimoire Necronomicon by Simon. Trey claims Azagthoth to be his spirit name. Musically and lyrically, Azagthoth draws much of his inspiration from occult experiences with the Ancient Ones of the Simon Necronomicon, Mystical Qabala, and video games. He has stated in interviews that the purpose of the band is to praise the Ancient Ones. Throughout the years and despite the numerous line-up changes Azagthoth has remained a constant member and the main songwriter of the band.

In the late 1990s and early 2000s Azagthoth recorded a number of demo tracks with Mike Davis of Nocturnus as an instrumental music project. The idea was however soon abandoned by Azagthoth.

When he started to play guitar, Azagthoth first learned classic heavy metal riffs from bands such as Black Sabbath or Judas Priest and then went on to develop his own style. He cites Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, Jimi Hendrix, Tony Iommi, Eddie Van Halen, Michael Schenker and Randy Rhoads as huge influences and inspiration on his music. His playing features much utilization of the whammy bar, complex finger tapping, extensive use of a Morley Wah pedal and other effects, and wailing guitar solos that have a distinct tone fans consider to be his trade-mark sound. In an interview Azagthoth described his soloing technique as follows:

„It’s been an evolution, beginning with identifying and connecting with the pure flow of the music I grew up on. I think that back then I used what would be called Creative Visualization: using my mind and my imagination to access a deeper place within myself, to open myself and allow myself to be moved by the vibes coming out of the speakers—not thinking in terms of notes and keys but rather just riding the waves.“

A collection of some of his famous guitar solos from Morbid Angel’s sixth album Formulas Fatal to the Flesh were put on a B-side record entitled Love of Lava which later were included on the second disc of Morbid Angel’s 8th album, Heretic. Decibel Magazine ranked him number 1 on their list of the 20 best death metal guitarists,[citation needed] and he was listed at number 7 in Joel McIver’s 2009 book The 100 Greatest Metal Guitarists.[citation needed]

Azagthoth plays a variety of six and seven strings guitar from different brands. They are all equipped with a floating bridge and Dimarzio pickups. The six strings tend to be explorer, V or X shaped models whereas the seven strings are principally Ibanez superstrats models. His guitars are tuned to D# and A# standard. He currently endorses Dean guitars but also plays B.C. Rich, Ibanez and Jackson guitars. His guitar collection, both past and current, include the following models:

For amplification Azagthoth mainly uses Marshall heads such as the JCM 800 and 900 and 4 x 12″ cabinets. He uses a ProCo Rat distortion pedal or rack unit to boost his overdrive signal. Furthermore, Azagthoth runs a number of effect unit for his lead sound like a TC Electronic G Major Processor, a Morley Bad Horsie, an MXR Phase 90, a Locobox Flanger. In the past, Azagthoth was known for using an Eventide processor.

Emmanuel’s non-musical interests include anime, video games, firearms, martial arts, nature, the occult and spirituality. His favorite shows are Sailor Moon and Gundam and his favorite video games include the Doom and Quake series, Castlevania, Street Fighter, Devil May Cry, Legacy of Kain and Metal Gear Solid. In between writing and recording the 2003 album Heretic, Emmanuel created a zdoom level called „Chambers of Dis“. The level was on his personal Myspace page and can be found on the Morbid Angel home page.

Morbid Angel

Meine Ehre heißt Treue

Si vous disposez d’ouvrages ou d’articles de référence ou si vous connaissez des sites web de qualité traitant du thème abordé ici, merci de compléter l’article en donnant les références utiles à sa vérifiabilité et en les liant à la section « Notes et références » (, comment ajouter mes sources ?).

« Meine Ehre heißt Treue », que l’on pourrait traduire en français par « Mon honneur s’appelle fidélité », était la devise national-socialiste de la Schutzstaffel (SS).

Cette phrase, prononcée dans un contexte national socialiste, fait allusion à des paroles d’Adolf Hitler. En 1931, des unités de la Sturmabteilung (SA) de Berlin, sous les ordres de Walter Stennes, tentèrent de renverser la direction de la section berlinoise du NSDAP. Alors que le chef de section, Joseph Goebbels, ainsi que ses collaborateurs, parvenaient à s’échapper, une poignée de SS se firent rouer de coup en essayant de repousser les SA. Les SS de Berlin, sous le commandement de Kurt Daluege, démontrèrent ainsi, aux yeux d’Hitler, une « loyauté imperturbable au Führer », et Hitler gratifia Daluege d’une lettre de remerciement, dans laquelle il écrivit, entre autres, cette phrase : „… SS-Mann, deine Ehre heißt Treue!”. Peu après, le chef SS Heinrich Himmler fit de cette phrase la devise des SS.

Dans le serment des SS, le terme « fidélité » fait référence à la personne d’Adolf Hitler.

L’obéissance inconditionnelle ne pouvait pas être atteinte en recourant à la loi, en ce qu’elle réclamait l’adhésion du soldat, adhésion rendue possible par ce dévouement des idéaux de vertu traditionnels.

À partir de 1932, cette devise était gravée sur les boucles de ceinturons des SS (ou apparentés).

Dans certains pays, comme l’Autriche, à partir de 1947, ou l’Allemagne (article § 86 a du Code Pénal sur l’utilisation de symboles d’organisations anticonstitutionnelles), l’utilisation de cette devise, ou de variations de cette devise, est proscrite.

Frank Borman

Frank Frederick Borman, II (* 14. März 1928 in Gary, Indiana, USA) ist ein ehemaliger amerikanischer Astronaut.

Nachdem Borman 1950 an der Militärakademie in West Point sein Luftfahrttechnikstudium beendet hatte, diente er bis 1953 als Kampfpilot der Luftwaffe auf den Philippinen, danach als Fluglehrer in Georgia und Arizona. 1957 erhielt Borman einen Master in Luft- und Raumfahrt. Danach lehrte er bis 1960 als Assistenzprofessor in West Point Thermodynamik und Fluidmechanik. Dann kehrte er an die Edwards Air Force Base in Kalifornien wieder ins Cockpit zurück: zuerst in der Ausbildung zum Testpilot, danach als Ausbilder.

Am 17. September 1962 wurde er von der NASA in die zweite Astronautengruppe gewählt. Als Spezialaufgabe übernahm er die Raketen, die die Raumschiffe in die Erdumlaufbahn bringen sollten.

Ende 1963 war Borman als Ersatzpilot für den Jungfernflug Gemini 3 vorgesehen. Durch die Fluguntauglichkeit des vorgesehenen Gemini-3-Kommandanten Alan Shepard und die Verschiebung der Missionsprofile wurde Borman dann jedoch Ersatz-Kommandant von Gemini 4, was am 27. Juli 1964 der Öffentlichkeit mitgeteilt wurde.

Nachdem der Flug im Juni 1965 erfolgreich durchgeführt worden war, wurde Borman zum Kommandanten von Gemini 7 nominiert. Borman war damit nach James McDivitt der zweite NASA-Astronaut, dem schon beim ersten Flug das Kommando über ein Mehrpersonenraumschiff übertragen wurde. Zusammen mit Jim Lovell umkreiste er vom 4. Dezember bis zum 18. Dezember 1965 die Erde, ein Langzeitrekord, der erst 1970 gebrochen wurde.

Am 29. September 1966 wurde er als Ersatzkommandant für den zweiten bemannten Apollo-Flug eingeteilt, doch dieser Flug wurde schon wenige Wochen später wieder gestrichen, weil es eine unnötige Wiederholung des ersten Fluges sei.

Nach der Katastrophe von Apollo 1, bei dem drei Astronauten ums Leben kamen, war Frank Borman Mitglied der Untersuchungskommission. In der Folge bekam er die Aufgabe, das Team zum Umbau der Apollo-Kommandokapsel zu leiten.

Nachdem die NASA die Planungen für bemannte Weltraumflüge wieder aufgenommen hatte, wurden am 20. November 1967 die Einteilungen für den zweiten und dritten Apolloflug (Missionen D und E) bekannt gegeben. Borman war als Kommandant für Mission E vorgesehen. Zusammen mit ihm wurden Michael Collins and William Anders eingeteilt. Dies sollte der erste bemannte Flug der neuen Rakete Saturn V werden und bis zu 11 Tage dauern.

Im Sommer 1968 zeichnete sich jedoch ab, dass die Mondlandefähre, die im zweiten bemannten Apolloflug (der Mission D) getestet werden sollte, nicht rechtzeitig einsatzbereit sein würde. Im August entschied die NASA, vorerst ohne die Öffentlichkeit zu informieren, dass die Mission E vorgezogen werden könnte und Bormans Team als Mission C‘ den Mond umrunden sollte. Allerdings musste sich Michael Collins einer Operation unterziehen und wurde durch Jim Lovell ersetzt.

Nachdem die Mission C (Apollo 7) erfolgreich verlief, entschied die NASA am 10. November endgültig, dass Bormans Mannschaft die erste sein sollte, die zum Mond fliegt. Der historische Flug von Apollo 8 begann am 21. Dezember 1968 und dauerte sieben Tage. Für Borman war dies der zweite und letzte Raumflug. Er war einer der wenigen Astronauten des Gemini- und Apollo-Projekts, die selbst nie als Verbindungssprecher (Capcom) gearbeitet hatten.

Im Juli 1969, kurz vor der Mondlandung von Apollo 11 besuchte Borman offiziell die Sowjetunion. Er wurde dabei von seiner Frau und seinen 15- und 17-jährigen Söhnen begleitet. Borman traf Nikolai Kamanin, den Leiter der sowjetischen bemannten Raumfahrt, sowie die Kosmonauten Feoktistow, Titow, Schatalow, Volynow, Beregowoi und Tereschkowa. Kamanin würdigte Borman als geübten Redner und Diplomaten sowie als geborenen Politiker.

Am 1. Juli 1970 schied Frank Borman bei der NASA aus und ging zur amerikanischen Fluggesellschaft Eastern Air Lines, zuerst als Vizepräsident, ab 1976 als Vorsitzender. Während seiner Zeit bei Eastern gelangen der Gesellschaft die vier profitabelsten Jahresabschlüsse ihrer Geschichte.

Als Eastern-Air-Lines-Flug 401 am 29. Dezember 1972 in den Everglades in Florida verunglückte, beteiligte Borman sich noch in derselben Nacht persönlich an den Rettungsmaßnahmen.

1986 zog er sich bei Eastern zurück. Derzeit beschäftigt er sich mit der Restaurierung von Flugzeugen.

Borman wurde 1978 als zweitem Astronauten die Congressional Space Medal of Honor verliehen.

Er ist Mitglied in der National Aviation Hall of Fame, in der wenige Astronauten Mitglied sind.

1968 war er mit seinem Kameraden von Apollo 8 Mann des Jahres des Time Magazine.

Die Astronauten David Bowman und Frank Poole vom Roman 2001: Odyssee im Weltraum von Arthur C. Clarke wurden nach Frank Borman genannt.

Der Name des Softwareunternehmens Borland wurde ebenfalls von Bormans Namen inspiriert.

Grissom | Young | McDivitt | White | Cooper | Conrad | Schirra | Stafford | Borman | Lovell | Armstrong | Scott | Cernan | Collins | Gordon | Aldrin | Bassett | See 

Aldrin | Anders | Armstrong | Bean | Borman | Brand | Carr | Cernan | Chaffee | Collins | Conrad | Cunningham | Duke | Eisele | Evans | Garriott | Gibson | Gordon | Grissom | Haise | Irwin | Kerwin | Lousma | Lovell | Mattingly | McDivitt | Mitchell | Pogue | Roosa | Schirra | Schmitt | Schweickart | Scott | Shepard | Slayton | Stafford | Swigert | Weitz | White | Worden | Young

Kuruzen

Der Begriff Kuruzen, Kuruzzen, Kurutzen (ungarisch kuruczok/kurucok [sg kuruc(z)], slowakisch kuruci [sg. kuruc], rumänisch curuți [sg. curuț]) bezeichnete 1514 die revoltierenden Kreuzzugsteilnehmer von György Dózsa, die das Königreich Ungarn plünderten. Bekannter sind die ebenso genannten bewaffneten antihabsburgischen, aufständischen Bauern im Königreich Ungarn von 1671 bis 1711. Von Siebenbürgen aus eroberten sie zusammen mit Teilen des verarmten, niederen ungarischen Adels in mehreren Wellen weite Teile Ungarns, bevor sie von kaiserlichen Truppen besiegt wurden.

Schon vor den Kuruzen gab es immer wieder Aufstände und Revolten im Osten des Habsburgerreiches. Nach György Dózsa revoltierten von 1604 bis 1645 nacheinander Stephan Bocskay, Gabriel Bethlen, Peter Császár und Georg I. Rákóczi meist mit osmanischer Unterstützung von Nordungarn oder Siebenbürgen aus. Alle diese Aufstände wurden niedergeschlagen.

Der Frieden von Vasvár 1664, durch den Kaiser Leopold I., der den Türken trotz einer türkischen Niederlage (1663–1664) weite Gebiete im Königlichen Ungarn überließ, empörte viele Adelige im Königlichen Ungarn gegen die Habsburger. Es kam daher 1664–1670/71 zur Magnatenverschwörung, einer Adeligenverschwörung im Gebiet der heutigen Slowakei, Ungarns und Kroatiens gegen Habsburg, die aufgedeckt und zerschlagen wurde.

Die Verschwörer bezeichnet man aber nicht als Kuruzen, sondern hier handelte der Hochadel des Königlichen Ungarns unter anderen Franz Wesselényi, Petar Zrinski, Fran Krsto Frankopan, Franz I. Rákóczi, Stephan Thököly. Nach der militärischen Niederschlagung der Verschwörung Wesselényis durch kaiserliche Truppen im Jahre 1670 sah die kaiserliche Regierung ihre Gelegenheit zu absolutistischen Maßnahmen. Unter der Leitung von Graf Johann von Rottal nahm im selben Jahr ein Untersuchungsausschuss in Levoča/Leutschau seine Tätigkeit auf und wurde zu einem Sondergericht in Bratislava/Pressburg umgewandelt, der 1671 über 200 verdächtige Adlige, einschließlich protestantischer Kleriker, vorlud. Die meisten wurden wieder entlassen, einige bekamen lebenslänglich, sieben wurden hingerichtet, drei davon in Bratislava. Viele flohen bereits 1670 massenweise nach Siebenbürgen, einem selbständigen türkischen Vasallenstaat, oder in das von den Türken direkt besetzte Ungarn; ihre Besitztümer wurden von den Habsburgern beschlagnahmt. Betroffen waren die Familien Nádasdy, Zrinski, Thököly, Wesselenyi und andere. Darüber hinaus wurde die Gegenreformation verstärkt und die Steuern wurden deutlich angehoben. Oft erfolgte der Einsatz habsburgischer Truppen, um den Evangelischen ihre Kirchen gewaltsam zu entreißen, was diverse Unruhen hervorrief.

Den geflohenen Adeligen im Exil, die sich selber als bujdosók (ung. ‚Landflüchtlinge‘) bezeichneten, schlossen sich bald schlecht bezahlte sowie seit Ende 1671 wegen Rationalisierungsmaßnahmen entlassene Soldaten aus den antitürkischen Grenzfestungen in der Hoffnung auf Beschäftigung sowie Untertanen aus den Städten und mittleres Bürgertum an. Somit war die Niederschlagung der Verschwörung erst der Auslöser der blutigen Kuruzenaufstände.

Die Herkunft des Namens ist zum Teil umstritten:

Nachdem sich jedoch 1514 die arme Bevölkerung des Königreichs, die ursprünglich als Kreuzzugteilnehmer-Kuruzen versammelt worden war, im heutigen Ungarn und der Südslowakei im Aufstand von György Dózsa, dem Ungarischen Bauernaufstand, gegen den Adel aufgelehnt hatte, gewann der Begriff eine neue Bedeutung. Er stand für Rebellen, Aufständische u. ä. Gleich nach Dózsas Aufstand (1514) trat der Begriff in den Hintergrund und wurde erst in den 60er Jahren des 17. Jahrhunderts wieder aufgegriffen. Er tauchte dann wieder als kurus, kuroc, kurudsch mit der Bedeutung Räuber, Bandit auf.

Der Begriff wurde 1671 von Meni, dem Beglerbeg Pascha von Eger (Ungarn), zur Bezeichnung der überwiegend adligen Flüchtlinge nach der Magnatenverschwörung aus dem Gebiet der Slowakei, die damals das habsburgische Gebiet „Königliches Ungarn“ war, verwendet. Danach bürgerte sich der Name schnell ein und wurde 1671–1711 in ungarisch-, slowakisch- und türkischsprachigen Texten als die Bezeichnung für Aufständische im Königlichen Ungarn und nördlichen Siebenbürgen, genauer: in der Slowakei, der westlichen Karpatoukraine und im heutigen Nordostungarn, gebraucht. Es handelte sich dabei um die letzte Phase der seit 1604 andauernden antihabsburgischen Aufstände (1604–1711), die sich bis auf den Aufstand von Franz II. Rákóczi fast ausschließlich auf dem Gebiet der Slowakei abspielten. Franz II. Rákóczi selbst verwendete den Namen jedoch nicht, und statt des Begriffes Kuruzen gebrauchten die damaligen Quellen oft auch das Wort die Malcontenten (französisch ‚Unzufriedene‘, ‚Aufständische‘).

In den heutigen Geschichtstexten wird der Begriff Kuruzen fast nur in dieser letzten Bedeutung verwendet. An die Kuruzen erinnert der deutsche Fluch kruzitürken ‚Kuruzen und Türken‘. Der Gegenbegriff zu Kuruzen waren seit 1526, häufiger seit 1678 die Labanzen.

Die Kuruzenaufstände sind eine Sammelbezeichnung für folgende Aufstände:

Als Kuruzenaufstand wird in der deutschsprachigen Literatur oft fälschlicherweise der Zeitraum 1671/72–1680 bezeichnet. 1680 wurde Thököly zwar offiziell Kuruzen-Anführer, de facto jedoch bereits 1678. Das Ende des Aufstands von Emmerich Thököly wird wiederum oft fälschlicherweise mit 1682 statt 1687/88 angegeben. 1682 wurde zwar ein Waffenstillstand unterzeichnet und Thököly wurde zum Fürsten, der Kampf mit den Kuruzen in der Slowakei ging aber parallel zum Großen Türkenkrieg intensiv weiter.

Die Kuruzen waren überwiegend diverse geflohene Untertanen sowie Soldaten, die von den habsburgischen antitürkischen Grenzfestungen entlassen worden waren, aber auch einige Adlige, vor allem diejenigen, die 1671 nach der Magnatenverschwörung geflüchtet waren. Von der ethnischen Zusammensetzung her handelte es sich größtenteils um Slowaken, Kroaten und Ruthenen/Ukrainer, aber auch sehr viele Magyaren. Obwohl überwiegend protestantische Adelige zu den Kuruzen kamen, gab es auch viele Katholiken bei den Aufständischen.

Der Erste Kuruzenfeldzug begann im Frühling 1672, als die von István Petróczy, einem protestantischen Baron, und von Michael Teleki, dem Kanzler von Siebenbürgen, geführten und von den Osmanen unterstützten Kuruzen Teile der Ostslowakei eroberten und dort die katholischen Priester auswiesen. Im Sommer entstand zugleich der so genannte Arwa- oder Pika-Aufstand, bei dem Kuruzen unter der Führung von Gašpar Pika in die Komitate Liptov/Liptau und Orava/Arwa vordrangen und mit Hilfe eines Aufstands fast der gesamten dortigen Bevölkerung im Oktober die wichtige Arwaburg eroberten. Die Kuruzen in der Ostslowakei wurden in der Schlacht von Ďurkov im Oktober und die in der Arwa im November von den habsburgischen Truppen geschlagen. Pika und 25 seiner örtlichen Anhänger wurden hingerichtet.

Die Folgen der Niederschlagung dieses ersten Kuruzen-Feldzugs waren wieder verheerend. 1672–1678 folgte ein Partisanenkrieg der Kuruzen in der Slowakei, seit 1673 unter der Führung des Katholiken Paul Wesselényi, ab 1675 dann unter der Führung des evangelischen Kanzlers von Siebenbürgen, Michael Teleki. Die Anzahl der Kuruzen nahm dabei ständig zu, und die Ostslowakei wurde weitgehend verwüstet. Sie wurden von Siebenbürgen sowie seit 1677 wegen eines seit 1673 dauernden Krieges Frankreichs gegen Österreich von Frankreich, unterstützt. Es handelte sich dabei um einen Bürgerkrieg, in dem die Kuruzen gegen kaiserliche Truppen sowie gegen pro-habsburgische Adlige und Städte kämpften. Eine andere Folge war die Einführung eines achtköpfigen Rats, bestehend aus vier Ungarn und vier Österreichern, unter Johann Kaspar Ambringen als autoritäre Regierung im habsburgischen Ungarn im Jahre 1673. Das Königliche Ungarn wurde zu einer habsburgischen Provinz erklärt, das traditionelle Amt des Palatins, die höchste Funktion im Königlichen Ungarn, der Landtag sowie die ganze Verfassung wurden aufgehoben. Im Religionsbereich hatte der gescheiterte Feldzug eine neue Welle der aggressiven Verfolgung von Protestanten zur Folge. 1673/74 fand am Sondergericht von Bratislava/Pressburg ein riesiges Verfahren gegen die Evangelischen statt.

Seit 1677 nahm auch der evangelische Adelige Emmerich Thököly, der 1670 aus der Arwa-Burg seines Vaters Stephan Thököly geflohene Neffe von István Petróczy, an dem Kuruzenaufstand teil. Im Oktober 1677 schlugen polnische Truppen im Dienste Frankreichs die habsburgischen Truppen im Komitat Máramaros im heutigen Rumänien, was die Kuruzen veranlasste, statt des Partisanenkriegs von Siebenbürgen aus einen neuen Feldzug zu beginnen. Dieser leitete den Aufstand von Emmerich Thököly (1678–1687) ein. Den Kern der Kuruzen bildeten zur Zeit des auch als „slowakischer König“ oder „Kuruzenkönig“ bezeichneten Thökölys, ehemalige Grenzsoldaten sowie zahlreiche zweifelhafte Personen, die sich der zivilen Bevölkerung gegenüber schlimmer verhielten als die Türken, die große Teile des heutigen Ungarn besetzt hielten. 1680 eroberten die Kuruzen mit Ausnahme gut befestigter Städte wie Bratislava/Pressburg die gesamte Slowakei und einen Teil Mährens.

Thökölys Erfolge sowie ein bevorstehender Krieg gegen die Türken zwangen den Kaiser den achtköpfigen Regierungsrat von 1673 aufzuheben und 1681 in Sopron/Ödenburg den ungarischen Landtag wieder einzuberufen. Der seit 1681 auch von den Türken unterstützte Thököly wurde 1682 von den Türken zum König Oberungarns, das heißt der Ostslowakei, erklärt. Sein Fürstentum (1682–1685) reichte im Westen bis zum Fluss Waag. Der von den Türken unterstützte Aufstand Thökölys deckte sich in seiner letzten Phase mit dem Großen Türkenkrieg (1683–1699) zwischen den Habsburgern und den Türken. Viele Kuruzen kämpften in der türkischen Armee und nahmen an der zweiten Türkenbelagerung Wiens teil. Nach der Niederlage der Türken vor Wien am 12. September 1683 endete langsam Thökölys Aufstand. Nachdem bekannt geworden war, dass die Türken Thököly 1685 inhaftiert hatten, weil sie ihn als den Verursacher des Großen Türkenkriegs betrachteten, verloren die Kuruzen im selben Jahr ihre Hauptstadt Košice/Kaschau. 1688 fiel schließlich die Festung von Mukatschewe in der heutigen Ukraine unter der Führung von Thökölys Frau Helena Zrinska als letzte Kuruzen-Festung in die Hände der Kaiserlichen.

Als Folge des Aufstands Thökölys wurden 1687 nach dem „Eperieser Blutgericht“ 24 Personen, die letzten Anhänger Thökölys, aber auch unschuldige Protestanten, öffentlich hingerichtet. Vorsitzender des Tribunals war Generalkriegskommissar Antonio von Caraffa, der zum Teil eine Verschwörung erfand, um an das Geld der Verurteilten zu kommen. Der Kaiser löste das Gericht anschließend schnell auf.

In den Folgejahren ging die Auseinandersetzung um die Restaurierung des politischen und gesellschaftlichen Systems im Königlichen Ungarn weiter, darunter der Aufstand von Franz II. Rákóczi. 1697 brach in der Stadt Prešov ein neuer kleiner Kuruzenaufstand aus, der sich dann in die Komitate Saris/Scharosch und Zemplín/Semplin ausbreitete. In der Gegend von Tokaj ging es konkret um die Steuerfreiheit des Weinanbaus. Aber die Armee schlug den Aufstand schnell nieder.

1703–1711 folgte der große Aufstand von Franz II. Rákóczi, mit dem die Kuruzenaufstände 1711 endeten.

Natalia Kalinina

Natalia Grigoriyevna Kalinina (Ukrainian: Наталія Григорівна Калініна, Russian: Наталья Григорьевна Калинина; born 16 December 1973 in Kherson) is a former artistic gymnast that competed for the Soviet Union and Ukraine. She was a member of the last Soviet world championship team to win a gold medal in 1991. She was the 1990 European champion on the uneven bars. At the 1990 Goodwill Games, she won a medal on every single event with 4 golds and 2 silvers, including the all-around gold medal. She was not selected to compete for the Unified Team at the 1992 Summer Olympics. She believes that politics would only allow three gymnasts to come from one republic, and there were already three gymnasts from Ukraine selected.

Natalia Grigoriyevna Kalinina was born in Kherson, Ukrainian SSR, Soviet Union on December 16, 1973. Her parents are Georgiy Kalinin and Antonina Kalinina. She has a sister named Svetlana. She began gymnastics in 1979.

Kalinina’s international debut was at the 1988 Junior Friendship Tournament (Druzhba) where she won gold with her team and finished fifth in the all-around. Later that year she competed in the Junior GDR-USSR Dual Meet, and she won medals in every event, four gold and two silver.

In 1989, Kalinina won a silver medal in the all-around at the Chunichi Cup behind teammate Natalia Laschenova. At the DTB Cup, she finished ninth in the all-around, but finished fifth on vault and won silver on the uneven bars. Kalinina then competed at the Tokyo Cup, where she won gold on the uneven bars. She finished seventh in the all-around at the USSR National Championships, and she finished third in the all-around and second on bars at the USSR Cup.

Kalinina’s first competition in 1990 was the American Cup, and she finished second in the all-around behind American Kim Zmeskal. She finished in first on the vault, beam, and floor exercise. She then went on to compete at the 1990 European Championships, where she won silver in the all-around behind teammate Svetlana Boginskaya. In the event finals, she finished fourth on vault, won silver on balance beam, and gold on uneven bars. Then Kalinina went on to compete at the 1990 Goodwill Games, and this turned out to be her international breakthrough. Kalinina won a medal in all six events. The Soviet Team won team gold, and Kalinina won the all-around gold medal with a total of 39.836 and a perfect 10 on floor. In the event finals, she won gold on beam and floor, and she won silver on vault and bars. She teamed up with Alexander Kolyvanov for the International Mixed Pairs Competition, where they finished in fourteenth. At the USSR Championships, Kalinina finished second in the all-around behind Elena Sazonenkova. She finished fifth in the all-around at the USSR Cup, but she won bronze medals on bars, beam, and floor. Kalinina finished the season by winning gold on the uneven bars at the Moscow News event.

Kalinina’s first competition of the year was the Blume Memorial, where she finished sixth in the all-around. She then competed at the World Stars event. She finished second in the all-around behind teammate Tatiana Gutsu, and she won gold in the balance beam final with a 9.925. At the USSR Championships, she finished third in the all-around behind Tatiana Gutsu and Tatiana Lysenko. In the event finals, she finished seventh on vault, fourth on beam, and won gold on bars with a 9.987. At the ITA-USSR Dual Meet, she finished sixth in the all-around and won gold with the team. She was then selected for what would be the last Soviet World Championship team. The Soviet team won the gold medal by almost two points. Kalinina was fourteenth in the all-around in the prelims, but she did not qualify for the final due to three of her teammates placing ahead of her.

At the CIS Championships, Kalinina placed fifth in the all-around. However, she was not named to compete for the Unified Team at the 1992 Summer Olympics. She has stated that she believes that politics would not allow more than three gymnasts from one republic. Tatiana Gutsu, Tatiana Lysenko, and team alternate Ludmilla Stovbchataya were already on the roster for Ukraine. She then competed at the World Stars event, where she finished third in the all-around behind Gutsu and Lysenko.

Kalinina began attending college in Kiev, but she continued to compete. She finished fourth in the all-around at the 1993 Chunichi Cup. Later that year at the Tokyo Cup, she finished sixth on bars and seventh on floor. Kalinina then competed at the 1993 Summer Universiade, and the Ukrainian team won gold, and Kalinina finished sixth in the all-around. In the event finals, she won gold on vault and beam.

Kalinina competed at the 1994 European Championships, and she finished eighth in the all-around. She was the 1994 Ukrainian all-round champion. Her last competition before retirement was the 1995 Summer Universiade. She finished fourth in the all-around, and won bronze on floor.

After graduating from college, Kalinina moved to Moscow, where she joined the circus. She married fellow performer Mikhail Tsitsilin, and they relocated to his hometown, Voronezh, where they began coaching gymnastics. They moved to the United States in 2000. She coached gymnastics at the Peninsula Gymnastics club in San Mateo, California until 2009, and now works at Gold Star Gymnastics in Mountain View, California. She now goes by Natasha, the informal name of Natalia in Russian.

VK 30 series

The Versuchs Konstruktion 30 were two series of tank designs by Germany in World War II, originally intended as heavy ‚breakthrough‘ tanks, but later switching completely to designate medium tanks to succeed the Panzer III, IV, and the planned VK 20 series tanks. These were requested in response to the Soviet T-34 and KV-1 tanks, with far heavier armour and armament than the mobile armoured vehicles fielded by the Wehrmacht at the time. Many German companies submitted projects, including Maschinenfabrik Augsburg-Nürnberg (MAN), Daimler-Benz (DB), Henschel, and Porsche. The winning entry tanks would go on to become the famous Tiger I and Panther tanks, and capable opponents to the T-34 if ultimately too late and at too small of a scale to affect the course of the war.

The origins of the first VK 30 began with the need for a breakthrough tank, or Durchbruchwagen in 1937, resulting in a few successive iterations. Porsche submitted heavily armoured tank designs, but they were unconventional and also unsuccessful. This was dropped in 1938, around the same time as the start of the VK 20 project, in favour of the first VK 30 designs. These were submitted by Henschel and Porsche. However, it slowly grew in weight and Henschel redubbed it the VK 36.

On May 26 1941, Hitler ordered the production of prototypes for a new heavy tank, resulting in the VK 45 project, and later the VK 45H Tiger I. The VK 45P or Porsche-Tiger, was later turned into the Ferdinand tank destroyer and used at the Battle of Kursk.

On 13 May 1942, the entries for the medium tank were submitted to the Panzer branch of the Waffenamt Prüfwesen (Wa Prüf 6). These included the MAN and DB models. DB presented an entry very similar to the T-34, but upgraded to German standards. It incorporated a similar full front plate sloped armour design akin to their entry for the VK 20 series of tanks. The DB entry held an early lead and was much simpler. However, the MAN entry finally won due to complications in turret production for the DB design that would have resulted in delayed production.

Furry Vengeance

Furry Vengeance is a 2010 American family comedy film directed by Roger Kumble, produced by Robert Simonds and Keith Goldberg, written by Michael Carnes and Josh Gilbert, co-produced by Participant Media, Imagenation Abu Dhabi and Robert Simonds Productions with music by Edward Shearmur and distributed by Summit Entertainment in the USA and Nordisk Film in Denmark. It stars Brendan Fraser, Matt Prokop, Ken Jeong, Angela Kinsey, Skyler Samuels, Ricky Garcia, Jim Norton, Patrice O’Neal, Toby Huss, Wallace Shawn, Gerry Bednob, Samantha Bee, Alice Drummond, Dick Van Dyke, Rob Riggle, Dee Bradley Baker and Brooke Shields. It was theatrically released on April 30, 2010. The film received negative reviews from critics and it earned $36,236,710 on a $35 million budget.

In the wilderness of Oregon, a prairie dog screams after Riggs‘ (Rob Riggle) car passes by and throws a cigar at it. This causes an unnamed raccoon to signal a mink to release a boulder that pushes Riggs‘ car to the edge of a cliff, teetering back and forth. After that, the raccoon throws the cigar back to Riggs, who yells „you’re a bad raccoon!“. The raccoon then blows the car down the cliff. Riggs quits Mr. Lyman’s company, so a real estate developer from Chicago, Dan Sanders (Brendan Fraser), is brought in as his replacement. He is given the task of turning the forest into a residential development by his boss Neal Lyman (Ken Jeong). This all transpires much to the objections of Dan’s son, Tyler (Matt Prokop), who discovers that Rocky Springs is a forest reserve. He warns his father that „many have tried to conquer it but they all fail“. His wife Tammy (Brooke Shields) is unhappy in Rocky Springs, she misses her life in Chicago. Unfortunately for Dan, the animals, who are led by the raccoon refuse to sit back and watch their forest to be destroyed. They manage to turn the tables on him by disturbing his progress, interrupting his meetings, and humiliating him. So Dan signs orders to have a forest ranger capture and cage all the animals.

Meanwhile, Tammy is forced to plan an „eco-friendly“ fair with a senile teacher (Alice Drummond) at the high school which is sponsored by Lyman’s company, unaware of Lyman’s plans to cut down the forest to build houses and a shopping mall „with a forest theme“. Dan, figuring this out, decides to set the animals free. Once released the raccoon and his friends immediately wreak havoc on the eco-fair, causing the guests and entertainers to flee. Lyman accidentally tranquilizes the sponsor for the construction, Mr. Gupta, after he attempted to break their deal. He flees into a worm tunnel with the animals in close pursuit. The animals began attacking him, as a bear drives a golf cart, pulling the tunnel away into a bush.

Three months later, the forest is reclaimed as a nature preserve, with Dan working at the park as a ranger who fines anyone $1,000,000.00 for violating this ruling.

Summit Entertainment and Participant Media were involved in the development of the film. It was filmed in and around Boston, Saugus, and Topsfield, Massachusetts, United States. Steve Carell and Jeremy Piven were considered for the role eventually given to Brendan Fraser.

Songs appearing in the film include:

Original music for Furry Vengeance was composed by Edward Shearmur.

The trailer is available on the film’s official website, Apple’s Movie Trailers website and was attached to The Spy Next Door and Tooth Fairy.

Furry Vengeance was near-universally panned by critics. Rotten Tomatoes reported that 8% of critics gave the film positive reviews based on 91 reviews with an average score of 2.5/10, with the consensus being: „A thin premise stretched far beyond serviceable length, Furry Vengeance subjects Brendan Fraser — and the audience — to 92 minutes of abuse.“ It was the lowest rated film of 2010 until the release of The Last Airbender and Vampires Suck, which received a 6% and 4% rating, disrespectively. Another review aggretator, Metacritic, which assigns a weighted average based on reviews based on mainstream critics, calculated a „generally unfavorable“ score of 23% based on 21 reviews. The film was also criticized for its use of some stereotypes, notably Asian people and senior citizens. The film debuted at #5 at the box office with an estimated $6.5 million during its opening weekend. At the end of its run, it came up with $32 million. However, it has earned at least $3 million with DVD sales, ultimately recouping the film’s $35 million budget.

Assault

In criminal and civil law, assault is an attempt to initiate harmful or offensive contact with a person, or a threat to do so. It is distinct from battery, which refers to the actual achievement of such contact.

An assault is carried out by a threat of bodily harm coupled with an apparent, present ability to cause the harm. It is both a crime and a tort and, therefore, may result in either criminal and/or civil liability. Generally, the common law definition is the same in criminal and tort law. There is, however, an additional criminal law category of assault consisting of an attempted but unsuccessful battery. The term is often confused with battery, which involves physical contact. The specific meaning of assault varies between countries, but can refer to an act that causes another to apprehend immediate and personal violence, or in the more limited sense of a threat of violence caused by an immediate show of force. Assault in many US jurisdictions[which?] and Scotland is defined more broadly still as any intentional physical contact with another person without their consent; but in England and Wales and in most[citation needed] other common law jurisdictions in the world, this is defined instead as battery. Some jurisdictions have incorporated the definition of civil assault into the definition of the crime making it a criminal assault intentionally to cause another person to apprehend a harmful or offensive contact.

Assault usually accompanies battery if the assailant both threatens to make unwanted contact and then carries through with this threat. See common assault. The elements of battery are (1) a volitional act (2) done for the purpose of causing a harmful or offensive contact with another person or under circumstances that make such contact substantially certain to occur and (3) which causes such contact. Thus throwing a rock at someone for the purpose of hitting him is a battery if the rock in fact strikes the person, and is an assault if the rock misses.

Aggravated assault is, in some jurisdictions, a stronger form of assault, usually using a deadly weapon. A person has committed an aggravated assault when that person attempts to:

Aggravated assault can also be charged in cases of attempted harm against police officers or other public servants.

Although the range and precise application of defenses varies between jurisdictions, the following represents a list of the defenses that may apply to all levels of assault:

Exceptions exist to cover unsolicited physical contact which amount to normal social behavior known as de minimis harm. Assault can also be considered in cases involving the spitting on, or unwanted exposure of bodily fluids to others.

Consent may be a complete or partial defense to assault. In some jurisdictions, most notably England, it is not a defense where the degree of injury is severe, as long as there is no legally recognized good reason for the assault. This can have important consequences when dealing with issues such as consensual sadomasochistic sexual activity, the most notable case being the Operation Spanner case. Legally recognized good reasons for consent include surgery, activities within the rules of a game (Mixed martial arts, wrestling, boxing, or contact sports), bodily adornment (R v Wilson[citation needed]), or horseplay (Jones and others[citation needed]). However, any activity outside the rules of the game is not legally recognized as a defense of consent. In Scottish Law, consent is not a defense for assault.

Police officers and court officials have a general power to use force for the purpose of performing an arrest or generally carrying out their official duties. Thus, a court officer taking possession of goods under a court order may use force if reasonably necessary.

In some jurisdictions such as Singapore, judicial corporal punishment is part of the legal system. The officers who administer the punishment have immunity from prosecution for assault.

In the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia and Canada, corporal punishment administered to children by their parent or legal guardian is not legally considered to be assault unless it is deemed to be excessive or unreasonable. What constitutes „reasonable“ varies in both statutory law and case law. Unreasonable physical punishment may be charged as assault or under a separate statute for child abuse.

Many countries, including some US states, also permit the use of corporal punishment for children in school. In English law, s58 Children Act 2004, limits the availability of the lawful correction defense to common assault under s39 Criminal Justice Act 1988.

This may or may not involve self-defense in that, using a reasonable degree of force to prevent another from committing a crime could involve preventing an assault, but it could be preventing a crime not involving the use of personal violence.

Some jurisdictions allow force to be used in defense of property, to prevent damage either in its own right, or under one or both of the preceding classes of defense in that a threat or attempt to damage property might be considered a crime (in English law, under s5 Criminal Damage Act 1971 it may be argued that the defendant has a lawful excuse to damaging property during the defense and a defense under s3 Criminal Law Act 1967) subject to the need to deter vigilantes and excessive self-help. Furthermore, some jurisdictions, such as Ohio, allow residents in their homes to use force when ejecting an intruder. The resident merely needs to assert to the court that he felt threatened by the intruder’s presence.

This defense is not universal: in New Zealand (for example) homeowners have been convicted of assault for attacking burglars.[citation needed]

Assault is an offence under s. 265 of the Canadian Criminal Code. There is a wide range of the types of assault that can occur. Generally, an assault occurs when a person directly or indirectly applies force intentionally to another person without their consent. It can also occur when a person attempts to apply such force, or threatens to do so, without the consent of the other person. An injury need not occur for an assault to be committed, but the force used in the assault must be offensive in nature with an intention to apply force. It can be an assault to „tap“, „pinch“, „push“, or direct another such minor action toward another, but an accidental application of force is not an assault.

The potential punishment for an assault in Canada varies depending on the manner in which the charge proceeds through the court system and the type of assault that is committed. The Criminal Code defines assault as a dual offence (indictable or summary offence). Police officers can arrest someone without a warrant for an assault if it is in the public’s interest to do so notwithstanding S.495(2)(d) of the Code. This public interest is usually satisfied by preventing a continuation or repetition of the offence on the same victim.

Some variations on the ordinary crime of assault include:

An individual cannot consent to an assault with a weapon, assault causing bodily harm, aggravated assault, or any sexual assault. Consent will also be vitiated if two people consent to fight but serious bodily harm is intended and caused (R v Paice; R v Jobidon). A person cannot consent to serious bodily harm.

The Indian Penal Code covers the punishments and types of assault in Chapter 16, sections 351 through 358.

Whoever makes any gesture, or any preparation intending or knowing it to be likely that such gesture or preparation will cause any person present to apprehend that he who makes that gesture or preparation is about to use criminal force to that person, is said to commit an assault.

The Code further explains that „mere words do not amount to an assault. But the words which a person uses may give to his gestures or preparation such a meaning as may make those gestures or preparations amount to an assault.“ Assault is in Indian criminal law an attempt to use criminal force (with criminal force being described in s.350). The attempt itself has been made an offence in India, as in other states.

The Criminal Code Act (chapter 29 of Part V; sections 351 to 365) creates a number of offences of assault. Assault is defined by section 252 of that Act. Assault is a misdemeanor punishable by one year imprisonment; assault with „intent to have carnal knowledge of him or her“ or who indecently assaults another, or who commits other more-serious variants of assault (as defined in the Act) are guilty of a felony, and longer prison terms are provided for.

Marshall Islands

The offence of assault is created by section 113 of the Criminal Code. A person is guilty of this offence if he unlawfully offers or attempts, with force or violence, to strike, beat, wound, or do bodily harm to, another.

Section 2 of the Non-Fatal Offences against the Person Act 1997 creates the offence of assault, and section 3 of that Act creates the offence of assault causing harm.

South African law does not draw the distinction between assault and battery. Assault is a common law crime defined as „unlawfully and intentionally applying force to the person of another, or inspiring a belief in that other that force is immediately to be applied to him.“ The law also recognises the crime of assault with intent to cause grievous bodily harm, where grievous bodily harm is defined as „harm which in itself is such as seriously to interfere with health.“ The common law crime of indecent assault was repealed by the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and Related Matters) Amendment Act, 2007, and replaced by a statutory crime of sexual assault.

Abolished offence:

English law provides for two offences of assault: common assault and battery. Assault (or common assault) is committed if one intentionally or recklessly causes another person to apprehend immediate and unlawful personal violence. Violence in this context means any unlawful touching, though there is some debate over whether the touching must also be hostile. Confusingly, the terms „assault“ and „common assault“ often encompass the separate offence of battery, even in statutory settings such as s 40(3)(a) of the Criminal Justice Act 1988.

A common assault is an assault that lacks any of the aggravating features which Parliament has deemed serious enough to deserve a higher penalty. Section 39 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 provides that common assault, like battery, is triable only in the magistrates‘ court in England and Wales (unless it is linked to a more serious offence, which is triable in the Crown Court). Additionally, if a Defendant has been charged on an indictment with assault occasioning actual bodily harm (ABH), or racially/religiously aggravated assault, then a jury in the Crown Court may acquit the Defendant of the more serious offence, but still convict of common assault if it finds common assault has been committed.

In Scots Law, assault is defined as an „attack upon the person of another“. There is no distinction made in Scotland between assault and battery (which is not a term used in Scots law), although, as in England and Wales, assault can be occasioned without a physical attack on another’s person, as demonstrated in Atkinson v. HM Advocate wherein the accused was found guilty of assaulting a shop assistant by simply jumping over a counter wearing a ski mask. The court said:

[A]n assault may be constituted by threatening gestures sufficient to produce alarm

Scottish law also provides for a more serious charge of aggravated assault on the basis of such factors as severity of injury, the use of a weapon, or Hamesuken (to assault a person in his own home). The mens rea for assault is simply „evil intent“, although this has been held to mean no more than that assault „cannot be committed accidentally or recklessly or negligently“ as upheld in Lord Advocate’s Reference No 2 of 1992 where it was found that a „hold-up“ in a shop justified as a joke would still constitute an offence.

It is a separate offence to assault on a constable in the execution of his duty, under Section 90, Police and Fire Reform (Scotland) Act 2012 (Previously Section 41 of the Police (Scotland) Act 1967 which provides that it is an offence for a person to, amongst other things, assault a constable in the execution of his duty or a person assisting a constable in the execution of his duty.

Several offences of assault exist in Northern Ireland. The Offences against the Person Act 1861 creates the offences of:

The Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act (Northern Ireland) 1968 creates the offences of:

That Act formerly created the offence of ‚Assault on a constable in the execution of his duty‘. under secction 7(1)(a), but that section has been superseded by section 66(1) of the Police (Northern Ireland) Act 1998 (c.32) which now provides that it is an offence for a person to, amongst other things, assault a constable in the execution of his duty, or a person assisting a constable in the execution of his duty.

The term ‘assault’, when used in legislation, commonly refers to both common assault and battery, even though the two offences remain distinct. Common assault involves intentionally or recklessly causing a person to apprehend the imminent infliction of unlawful force, whilst battery refers to the actual infliction of force.

Each state has legislation relating to the act of assault, and offences against the act that constitute assault are heard in the Magistrates Court of that state or indictable offences are heard in a District or Supreme Court of that State. The legislation that defines assault of each state outline what the elements are that make up the assault, where the assault is sectioned in legislation or criminal codes, and the penalties that apply for the offence of assault.

In New South Wales, the Crimes Act 1900 defines a range of assault offences deemed more serious than common assault and which attract heavier penalties. These include:

Assault with further specific intent

Assault causing certain injuries

American common law has defined assault as an attempt to commit a battery.

Assault is typically treated as a misdemeanor and not as a felony (unless it involves a law enforcement officer). The more serious crime of aggravated assault is treated as a felony.

Four elements were required at common law:

Simple assault can be distinguished without the intent of injury upon another person. The violation of one’s personal space or touching in a way the victim deemed inappropriate can be simple assault. In common law states an assault is not committed by merely, for example, swearing at another; without threat of battery, there can be no assault.

As the criminal law evolved, element one was weakened in most jurisdictions so that a reasonable fear of bodily injury would suffice. These four elements were eventually codified in most states.

Laws on assault vary by state. Since each state has its own laws, there is no universal assault law. Acts classified as assault in one state may be classified as battery, menacing, intimidation, reckless endangerment etc. in another state. Modern American statutes may define assault as including:

The laws on assault differ significantly from state to state as exemplified below.

In Tennessee assault is defined as follows:

39-13-101. Assault.

In Kansas the law on assault states:

North Dakota law states:

Simple assault.

States vary on whether it is possible to commit an „attempted assault“ since it can be considered a double inchoate offense.

In some states, consent is a complete defense to assault. In other jurisdictions, mutual consent is an incomplete defense, with the result that the misdemeanor is treated as a petty misdemeanor.

In New York State assault as defined in the New York State Penal Code Article 120, requires an actual injury. Other states define this as battery. There is no crime of battery in New York. The threat of imminent injury without physical contact in New York is called Menacing. New York also has specific laws against Hazing when such threats are made as requirement to join an organization.

Furthermore, the crime of assault generally requires that both the perpetrator and the victim of an assault be human. Thus, there is no assault if an ox gores a man. However, the Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 treats the fetus as a separate person for the purposes of assault and other violent crimes, under certain limited circumstances. See

Some possible examples of defenses, mitigating circumstances, or failures of proof are:

Assault in Ancient Greece was normally termed hubris. Contrary to modern usage, the term did not have the extended connotation of overweening pride, self-confidence or arrogance, often resulting in fatal retribution. In Ancient Greece, „hubris“ referred to actions which, intentionally or not, shamed and humiliated the victim, and frequently the perpetrator as well. It was most evident in the public and private actions of the powerful and rich.

Violations of the law against hubris included what would today be termed assault and battery; sexual crimes ranging from forcible rape of women or children to consensual but improper activities; or the theft of public or sacred property. Two well-known cases are found in the speeches of Demosthenes, a prominent statesman and orator in ancient Greece. These two examples occurred when first, Meidias punched Demosthenes in the face in the theater (Against Meidias), and second when (in Against Konon) a defendant allegedly assaulted a man and crowed over the victim.

Hubris, though not specifically defined, was a legal term and was considered a crime in classical Athens. It was also considered the greatest sin of the ancient Greek world. That was so because it not only was proof of excessive pride, but also resulted in violent acts by or to those involved. The category of acts constituting hubris for the ancient Greeks apparently broadened from the original specific reference to mutilation of a corpse, or a humiliation of a defeated foe, or irreverent, „outrageous treatment“, in general.

The meaning was eventually further generalized in its modern English usage to apply to any outrageous act or exhibition of pride or disregard for basic moral laws. Such an act may be referred to as an „act of hubris“, or the person committing the act may be said to be hubristic. Atë, Greek for ‚ruin, folly, delusion‘, is the action performed by the hero, usually because of his/her hubris, or great pride, that leads to his/her death or downfall.

Crucial to this definition are the ancient Greek concepts of honor (timē) and shame. The concept of timē included not only the exaltation of the one receiving honor, but also the shaming of the one overcome by the act of hubris. This concept of honor is akin to a zero-sum game. Rush Rehm simplifies this definition to the contemporary concept of „insolence, contempt, and excessive violence“.