Research Results For 'Attack'

ALLIANCE

An alliance is a league between two or more powers. Alliances are divided into offensive and defensive. The former are for the purpose of attacking a common enemy, and the latter for mutual defence. An alliance often unites both of these conditions. Offensive alliances, of course, are usually directed against some particular enemy; defensive alliances against anyone from whom an attack may come.

ANTHRAX KILLER

In September 2001 the USA was attacked by letters containing the phrases 'Death to America' and 'Death to Israel' infected with anthrax being sent through the post. Five people died, 18 more were injured, and 35000 were forced to take precautionary antibiotics. Official reports suggested that the anthrax was released by the Muslim al-Qaeda terrorist movement, but investigations by forensic scientists at the FBI revealed that the sender of the poisoned letters was most likely a member of the American CIA, probably trying to encourage support for President Bush's 'war on terrorism' by spreading terror and paranoia throughout the western world directed at the more fundamental Islamic countries.

The FBI's conclusion was further proved when on the 17th of June, 2003 the head of the British intelligence service, MI5 Ms Manningham-Buller, warned that an attack on a Western city was 'only a matter of time', and went on to say 'We are faced with a realistic possibility of a form of unconventional attack that could include chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear (CBRN)'. 'It is only a matter of time before a crude version of a CBRN is launched on a Western city.' Clearly indicating that to date no such terrorist attack had taken place, and that the FBI were correct in their finding that the Anthrax attack had been carried out by a member of the CIA, though suggesting that he was not a rogue criminal at all.
Research Anthrax Killer

BARBED WIRE

Barbed Wire is wire-rope used for fencing or other purposes, having fixed in it short bent pieces of wire with sharp projecting points, which serve to keep animals from pressing against it. Barbed wire may also be used for various protective purposes, and especially in war to form an impediment to the attack of an enemy - some barbed wire is designed to snag clothing and cause minor scratches, other types with longer spikes are designed to cause more serious injuries. Razor-wire, which evolved from barbed wire is fitted with razor-sharp metal blades intended to kill or maime any person trying to pass through it. There was an act of Parliament passed in 1893 to prevent the use of barbed wire fences that form a nuisance on a public road or path; and a person employing barbed wire for fencing could render himself liable for damages caused by it to another person who was legitimately using the adjoining ground.
Research Barbed Wire

BLASPHEMY

Blasphemy is the denying of the existence of God, assigning to him false attributes, or denying his true attributes; contumelious reproaches of Jesus; profane scoffing at the Holy Scriptures, or exposing them to ridicule and contempt. In Catholic countries it also includes the speaking contemptuously or disrespectfully of the Holy Virgin or the saints. By the former common law of England blasphemies of God, as denying his being and providence, all contumelious reproaches of Jesus Christ, etc, were punishable by fine and imprisonment, or corporal punishment. According to a celebrated judgment of Lord Hales, 'Christianity being parcel of the law of England, to reproach the Christian religion was to speak in subversion of the law;' but in a case decided in 1883 it was held that a person may attack the fundamentals of religion without being guilty of a blasphemous libel 'if the decencies of controversy are observed.'
Research Blasphemy

CENTO

A cento is a poem formed out of verses taken from one or more poets, so arranged as to form a distinct poem. CENTO (Central Treaty Organisation) was a defensive union of the 1950s to 1970s comprising the member states of the USA, UK, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan and Turkey with the aim of meeting a Communist attack on one of the member states. Iraq withdrew in 1958 and Pakistan in 1972 before the organisation was dissolved.
Research Cento

DISSOLUTION OF THE MONASTERIES

The dissolution of the monasteries in England was carried out by Henry VIII between 1535 and 1539. This was an attack on Church property for three reasons. First, the monks were the main supporters of the Papal authority in England, and they were members of orders which were spread over Europe. It had proved possible to separate the English bishops and clergy from allegiance to the Pope; this was not possible with the monastic orders, which were international, not insular, institutions. The second reason was the wealth of the monasteries, which was the result of the pious bequest of many centuries. The cry against monastic wealth had been raised many times previously in English history, particularly by John Wycliffe and others from the time of Edward III and Richard II. The courtiers of Henry VIII and the rising middle class were greedy for land, and Henry VIII saw that by ministering to their greed he could make his new nobility and their new property a firm support of his Reformation. The third reason for ending the monasteries was
the reason given to Parliament: that the monks had outlived their day of usefulness and were abandoned to idleness and vice. There were over 600 religious houses in England, and no doubt there was some truth in this charge. Zealous churchmen had long known that all was not well with these ancient institutions. In Henry VII's reign the Oxford Reformers had rebuked monkish follies, and Cardinal Morton had noted the 'incurable uselessness' of many of the smaller houses where the monks were idle and ignorant. Cardinal Wolsey had obtained a Papal Bull to visit the monasteries, and had begun to suppress some, intending to use their revenues for the benefit of education and the New Learning and to found new bishoprics. One of them, St. Frideswide's Priory at Oxford, he converted into Cardinal College (later Christ Church).

In 1535 Henry VIII made Thomas Cromwell his Vicar-General, 'with power to visit any monastery in England'. The character of Cromwell was sufficient guarantee that the visitation would not be conducted fairly. He knew what was expected of him; he was to be 'The Hammer of the Monks'. His agents hurried through England, visited some of the monasteries, and drew up an evil report. This report unfortunately no longer exists. Our only information is derived from Cromwell's note-books and from the letters of his agents, from which we may gather something of their methods. For example, Dr. Layton, vicar of Harrow-on-the-Hill, dashed through southern England from Gloucestershire to Rent between August and October 1535. He condemned monasteries wholesale, on insufficient evidence, although at the same time he did not scruple to accept bribes from some, or to help himself to plate and jewels from others.

However, Parliament was satisfied, and the country squires, anxious for the 'goods of the Church', shouted ' Down with them!' The Act dissolving 276 of the lesser monasteries of England in 1536 was the last important Act of the Reformation Parliament. In dissolving the smaller monasteries first, Henry VIII had cautiously tested his power. But his violent measures had by 1536 caused grave discontent, especially in the west and north, and in Parliament itself. His wholesale destruction of the smaller monasteries was followed by two popular uprisings. The first occurred in Lincolnshire, where the rebels were crushed by a military force under the Duke of Suffolk. The second rising, in Yorkshire in 1536, known as the Pilgrimage of Grace, was much more serious. The following year the famous shrine of Becket at Canterbury was attacked. Thomas Becket was declared in April 1538 'a false saint and a traitor to the Supreme Head of the Church'; his bones were burnt; his shrine pillaged and its offerings confiscated.

Then Henry VIII was ready to turn his attention to the greater monasteries, although Parliament had saved them earlier because of their good conduct. Cromwell and his agents in 1539 began a persecution of the abbots: many were induced to surrender their abbeys to the king; others could only be reduced by methods of terror. The Abbots of Reading and Colchester were tried for treason; the Abbot of Glastonbury for felony. All three were executed. The odious methods of Cromwell are well shown in some notes left in his own handwriting: 'To see that the evidence be well sorted and the indictments well drawn against the said abbots. The Abbot of Reading to be sent down to be tried and executed at Reading with his accomplices. The Abbot of Glaston to be tried at Glaston, and also executed there with his accomplices.' The last Abbot of Glastonbury, a pious, venerable man beloved in the countryside, was executed with two of his brethren on Glastonbury Tor, after a mock trial in November 1539. These ferocities had the desired effect: many less brave spirits gave in, and soon there were no monasteries left. The dissolution of 616 religious houses was the greatest revolution in the ownership of land in England since the Norman Conquest. The monastic income has been variously estimated at between one-fifth and one-third of the total rental of England.

This newly acquired wealth the king might have used in developing public works, such as education. Some of it was spent in re-building the Navy; but the king's own greed and the greed of courtiers swallowed most of the spoil. A thousand newly enriched families became the nobility on which Henry in future relied for support. The 'Abbey' where the descendants or successors of these Tudor families now live is a name to be found in many an English village. But sad indeed was the fate of the original buildings. Some, like the great church at Tewkesbury, have been preserved in the form of parish churches; others have been partly preserved to form cathedrals. But the greater number were ruthlessly destroyed by their new possessors, their roofs despoiled for the valuable lead, their walls made quarries for new buildings, their treasures scattered, and their ruins left desolate. Whatever defence may be made for the suppression of the monastic orders, no excuse can be offered for this orgy of destruction, which deprived England of some of her noblest monuments.
It is probable that at least 15000 persons were cast adrift. These people went to swell the already large number of the unemployed, for whom Tudor statesmanship could find no better relief than the savage punishments inflicted on thieves and vagabonds. Some of the monks were given benefices or pensioned by the Government, but the pensions were not always paid; the occupants of the lesser houses fared worse than those of the greater. The hospitality which the monks had always given to the poor was now removed. There was nothing to take its place, and many monks and nuns joined the ranks of those who had formerly subsisted on their charity. Many gaps were left in national life, for the abbeys, said Aske 'were one of the beauties of this realm to all men and strangers passing through the same; all gentlemen much succoured in their needs with money, and in nunneries their daughters brought up in virtue. And such abbeys as were near the danger of seabanks were great maintainers of sea-walls and dykes, builders of bridges and highways, and such other things for the commonwealth.'
Research Dissolution of the Monasteries

GABRIEL'S INSURRECTION

Gabriel's Insurrection was an insurrection incited among the Negro slaves of the vicinity of Richmond, Virginia. in 1800, by a slave of Thomas Prosser, called 'General Gabriel', and 'Jack Bowler'. They intended to attack Richmond by night with a thousand Negroes and murder the inhabitants. An escaped Negro revealed the plot. Governor James Monroe ordered out the militia and attacked the insurgents. The ringleaders were captured and 'punished'.
Research Gabriel's Insurrection

JARGON

Cant, sometimes defined as false or insincere language, also (like argot) refers to the jargon and slang used by thieves and beggars and the underworld. Colourful terms and phrases such as mug (either a police photograph or to attack a victim), payola (graft or blackmail), hooker (prostitute), and to rub out or to blow away (to kill) are examples of cant that eventually became commonly known to, and adopted as slang by, society in general. Some writers reserve the term jargon for technical language. Applied to colourful occupational expressions such as liquorice stick, the concepts of jargon and slang overlap greatly. In general, however, slang is more casual and acceptable to outsiders than jargon.

Slang and cant are more vivid than jargon, with a greater turnover in vocabulary. The special in-group speech of young people and of members of distinct ethnic groups is generally called slang, especially when it is understood by outsiders. Some writers use the term argot in a generalized way that covers cant, in-group slang, and occupational jargon- no uniform terminology has been adopted for these common ways of using language. The term jargon, however, also pertains in general to gibberish and unintelligible language and to over inflated, needlessly technical language. In addition, it can refer to specific dialects resulting from a mix of several languages (as in Chinook Jargon, used by American Indian traders).
Research Jargon

KIBBUTZ

A Kibbutz is a co-operative village, or communal farm, in Israel, where all property is collectively owned and work is organised on a collective basis. Members contribute by working according to their capacity and in return receive food, clothing, housing, medical services, and other domestic services according to their needs. Dining rooms, kitchens, and stores are central, and schools and children's dormitories are communal. Each village is governed by an elected assembly. Although most kibbutzim are entirely agricultural, some have manufacturing industries. The first kibbutz was founded on the bank of the Jordan River in 1909. This type of community was necessary to the early Jewish immigrants to Palestine. By living and working collectively, they were able to build homes and to begin to irrigate and farm the barren desert land. Each person could contribute individual abilities to the growth of the community. Since many kibbutzim were established along Israel's frontiers after independence in 1948, they became important in the defence of the new nation. Strategically located kibbutzim have been subject to attack from Palestinian forces. Kibbutz members, although a small percentage of the Israeli population, wield much political power.
Research Kibbutz

LONG PARLIAMENT

The meeting of the Long Parliament (as it was afterwards called) in November 1640 ended the great days of the English monarchy, and sowed the seeds for the English Civil War. The Commons were determined on reform; they meant to put an end to the king's unconstitutional methods in both Church and State. Charles I himself, though he seldom faced facts, saw that some concessions would be necessary. But a real settlement was not achieved, chiefly because tempers were rising and the atmosphere soon became that of a revolution. Charles was partly to blame. He had no real desire for a lasting understanding with Parliament, and his shifty character aroused general distrust. But he found that the more he gave way to Parliament, the more it demanded. John Pym, a squire of Somerset, was the acknowledged leader of the Commons.

His enemies nicknamed him 'King Pym'. He was 'the first great popular organiser', for he used the press, the petition, and even the platform to support his cause. He now led the attack on the chief instruments of the late personal government. The judges who had upheld Charles's financial exactions in the Courts were arrested and imprisoned, and so was Archbishop Laud, who was beheaded in 1645. But the principal victim was Strafford. He was charged with having tried to 'subvert the fundamental laws and government of England and Ireland, and instead thereof to introduce an in March arbitrary and tyrannical government against law'. 1641 he was brought to Westminster Hall to be tried for high treason. But his accusers were at once faced with a difficult point. Strafford may have tried to 'subvert the laws'; but treason meant treason to the king, and had Strafford been a traitor to Charles? It was difficult to prove that he had, and as the trial proceeded it became clear that the verdict would be Not Guilty. But the Puritan majority in the House was determined that Strafford should die. Parliament therefore passed a special Bill of Attainder, condemning the minister to death without trial.

The Lords passed the Bill of Attainder, and it remained for the king to give or to withhold his consent. Some may think that it was Charles's duty to risk his life to defend Strafford. But the mob raged round Whitehall, howling for blood. Charles feared for the safety of the queen and his children, and he gave way. ' If my own person only were in danger', he told the Council, with tears in his eyes, 'I would gladly venture it to save Lord Strafford's life.' Three days later the earl was led to his execution in May 1641 in the presence of a crowd of 200000 people who had come to witness the end of 'Black Tom Tyrant'. No man ever died more bravely. 'I thank my God', he said, as he prepared to die, 'I am not afraid of death, but do as cheerfully put off my doublet at this time as ever I did when I went to bed.' The executioner offered to cover his eyes with a handkerchief. 'Thou shalt not bind my eyes.' said Strafford, 'for I will see it done.' And so he placed his head upon the block.

His misfortune, wrote Laud, was that 'he served a mild and gracious prince, who knew not how to be, or be made great'. That summer Parliament was busy passing a number of Acts intended to make absolute government impossible for the future. One Act declared that the present Parliament could not be dissolved without its own consent; another - the Triennial Act - that in future Parliaments should be Called every three years. The three Courts by which the king and Laud had carried out their religious and financial measures were abolished - the Star Chamber, the Court of High Commission, and the Council of the North. Finally Ship-Money and other arbitrary forms of taxation were declared illegal. These abolitions of the year 1641 were the permanent, constructive work of the Puritan revolution; nor were the institutions then destroyed restored with the monarchy in 1660. Meanwhile another Bill had come up for discussion. A petition was presented to Parliament praying for the ending of episcopacy (that is, the rule of the Church by bishops) 'in all its roots and branches'.

The thorough-going Puritan members considered the petition, and a 'Root-and-Branch' Bill in 1641 was prepared, but it fell through. For now a new factor came into play. Hitherto a large majority, both of Lords and Commons, had been united in their opposition to the king. But this Bill divided parliamentarians for the first time. There were many who began to fear extremes; and a moderate party now sprang up. It was out of this debate on the Root-and- Branch Bill that the germs of the future Roundhead and Cavalier parties were formed. The extremists - the Roundheads - included Pym, Hampden, and Oliver Cromwell. The chief figures on the other side were Lord Falkland and Sir Edward Hyde, afterwards the famous Earl of Clarendon, the future Chancellor and historian. Parliament adjourned for six months, but met again at the end of October. It had no sooner assembled than terrible news arrived from Ireland. Now that the stern hand of Strafford was withdrawn, the crushed Irish had risen against their lords. There was a sudden and horrible rebellion thousands of Protestants were massacred in cold blood. When this news was received in London it only served to increase the Puritan fury. Meanwhile the Commons drew up a Grand Remonstrance in November 1641, in which they recited the past acts of the king and his servants to which they objected - there were 201 items - and stated a programme for the future. Some of its clauses prayed the king to reduce the power of the bishops and to remove 'oppressions in religion'. Another clause asked His Majesty to employ ministers 'such as the Parliament may have cause to confide in' - which in later times solved the problem of disputes between king and Parliament.

All this shows that Parliament had considerably advanced its demands. During the months from November 1640 to September 1641 they, had succeeded in placing constitutional checks on the king's power. From November 1641 to August 1642 they were bent on seizing control of both Church and State, until they forced Charles to reply: ' If I granted your demands, I should be no more than the mere phantom of a king.' The Grand Remonstrance was passed by a majority of only eleven - a fact which illustrates the growth of the anti-Puritan party.

The situation, at the end of 1641, was dangerous in the extreme. On the one hand the queen and the swaggering ' Cavaliers' of the Court were urging Charles to strike at King Pym and his fellow leaders before it was too late. On the other hand, London was a stronghold of Puritanism, and it was the London merchants who had felt the weight of Charles's taxation most heavily. The London ' prentices' and the king's swordsmen were itching to get at one another's throats. Never the less Pym proceeded steadily on his way. He was determined to deprive the king of the command of the militia; for it was obvious that if the Irish rebellion was to be crushed a militia must be called out. And once Charles had command of the national armed forces, would he not use them to crush Parliament and destroy English liberty for ever? Pym had no doubt that he would. A Militia Bill was therefore brought in, and - contrary to all English law and custom - it took the command of the military forces out of the king's hands. To this Charles of course refused his consent.

Early in January 1642 he took the queen's advice, and instructed the Attorney- General to impeach Pym, Hampden, and three other leading members of the Commons. The members were alarmed, but Charles promised them 'on the word of a king' that no violence should be done them. The next day - the 4th of January 1642 - he went down to the House with 400 swordsmen. He left his guard at the door, and walked in accompanied only by Prince Rupert, his German nephew. But the five members, warned of his intention, had fled by river. There was a dead silence as the king looked round. He asked the Speaker, Lenthall, where the missing members were. 'I have neither eyes to see', Lenthall replied, 'nor tongue to speak in this place, but as this House shall direct me.' There was another pause as Charles scanned the benches. 'I see', he said at last, 'all the birds are flown. I do expect you will send them to me as soon as they shall return hither.' Then, amid cries of 'Privilege, privilege', he walked out. By this revolutionary act the king had outlawed himself. All hope of reconciliation being now past, he determined to try the issue of war. He left his capital on the 10th of January, sent the queen out of the country, and took up his quarters at York. Parliament claimed the control of the militia and secured the command of the fleet. During the spring and summer of 1642 both sides were busy raising troops. The great strength of the Puritan cause was London. The city contained a tenth of the population of England - 500000 out of five million. The number of troops which London provided was more than sufficient to quell any Royalist opposition in the surrounding country. The London 'train-bands' therefore protected the Puritan leaders during the eight months that the king was gathering his army in the north - January to August 1642. And so the English Civil War started.
Research Long Parliament

	The Probert Encyclopaedia was designed, edited and programed by Matt and Leela Probert ©1993 - 2009 The Probert Encyclopaedia Southampton, United Kingdom