18 March 1941

18 March 1941


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

18 March 1941

March 1941

1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031
>April

Diplomacy

Eden meets with the Turkish Foreign Minister

North Africa

Rommel is refused permission to launch an early offensive in North Africa



March 19, 1941

It was the 12th Wednesday of 1941. If you were born on this date your birthday numbers 3, 19 and 1941 reveal that your life path number is 1. Your zodiac sign is Pisces with a ruling planet Neptune , your birthstone is the Aquamarine , and your birth flower is the Daffodil . You are 80 years old, and were born in 1940s, in the middle of Silent Generation. The generation you are born into makes an impact on your life. Swipe up to find out what it all means.

→ March 19, 1941 was a Wednesday
→ Zodiac sign for this date is Pisces
→ This date was 29,313 days ago
→ 1941 was the Year of the Serpent
→ In 2022, March 19 is on Sunday

View interesting March 19, 1941 birthday facts that no one tells you about, such as your life path number, birthstone, ruling planet, zodiac sign and birth flower.

People born on this day will turn 81 in exactly .

If you were born on this date:

You have been alive for . You were born in the Year of the Serpent. Your birth sign is Pisces with a ruling planet Neptune. There were precisely 994 full moons after you were born up to this day. Your billionth second was on was on November 25, 1972.

→ You’ve slept 9,771 days or 26.77 years.
→ Your next birthday is away
→ You’ve been alive
→ You were born in the Year of the Serpent
→ You have been alive 703,527 hours
→ You are 42,211,678 minutes old
→ Age on next birthday: 81 years old


A moment in history: March 18, 1941

On this day in 1941, Edmonton's medical health officer was in the newspaper expressing concern about traffic fatalities.

Dr. G.M. Little was worried about 11 traffic deaths in 1940, "the biggest total of the past 10 years." The number is indeed alarming, especially considering that Edmonton's population was about 92,000 at the time. We now have more than 10 times as many people living here, and we registered 14 traffic fatalities in 2019.

The goal is to get to zero, of course, and to that end, Vision Zero will soon roll out its Street Labs program, inviting community-led ideas this spring for making residential streets safer for pedestrians and cyclists.

It's interesting to note that Little urged both motorists and pedestrians to "use 'responsible behavior' in an earnest effort to cut down the annual death toll," showing that the often criticized tendency to assign equal responsibility to both parties goes back many decades.

This clipping was found on Vintage Edmonton, a look at Edmonton's history from armchair archivist @revRecluse — follow @VintageEdmonton for daily ephemera via Twitter.


Michael Stolleis (1941 – 2021)

There are few images that have shaped our idea of the early modern state as much as the frontispiece of Thomas Hobbes’ Leviathan, published in 1651. Above the head of the majestic colossus is written ‘There is no power on earth to be compared to him’.

Those who were born in 1941 in Germany and studied law in the 1960s had every reason to question the power of the state: after the injustices committed by the state – also through the use of the law – after the failure of the elites, after the role of the ‘terrible jurists’ in National Socialism. However, the 1968 movement and Brandt’s ‘Dare more democracy’ (Mehr Demokratie wagen) in turn gave many hope that a different state could be possible: a constitutional and welfare state that would not become a means of oppression, but rather one that could ensure justice and offer life opportunities for all.

For Michael Stolleis, the confrontation with German history already began at a young age. His birthday on 20 July, and his own family history, appear from a later perspective as a mandate to engage with the unfathomable. As a seventeen year old, his visit to the theatre at Schiffbauerdamm to see Brecht’s ‘The Resistable Rise of Arturo Ui’ was formative. While studying law, first in Heidelberg, then in Würzburg, he bought, like so many others at the university entrance, the ‘Brown Book’ from the GDR, which published material on jurists from the Federal Republic and their involvement in National Socialism. He attended the first lecture series on National Socialism and sought out an untainted doctoral supervisor.

He found more than such a person in the Munich legal historian Sten Gagnér. His dissertation on the late enlightenment philosopher Christian Garve was not least about the Staatsräson (‘reason of the state’), ie the boundary between the validity of the law and the violation of law, about the state of emergency as an instrument of law, about law in situations of injustice – one of the great problems of legal history that accompanied Michael Stolleis throughout his life. His habilitation thesis on formulas for the common good (Gemeinwohlformeln) in national socialist law directly addressed this lifelong topic. The study of National Socialism appeared to him, as he put it in a speech on the occasion of being awarded the Balzan Prize in 2000, to be both scientifically interesting and a requirement of political morality: From his student days, he asked himself why does a brutal and martial dictatorship – one that from the very beginning beat up, imprisoned and killed its political opponents – continue to use legal form? Why is it, following Brecht, that the times of extreme oppression are also generally the times when there is so much talk of great and lofty things? The method of carefully reconstructing the use of language that Michael Stolleis employed to examine the formulas for the common good owed much to his encounter with the Wittgensteinian critique of language in Sten Gagnér’s seminar. It became a creed for him, as it did for many other students of the now largely forgotten Gagnér. Language also includes images, as Michael Stolleis demonstrated in his well-known study on the metaphor and image of ‘The Eye of the Law’ (Das Auge des Gesetzes).

To submit a dissertation like this on National Socialism in 1973 at the Munich law faculty – ie that of Karl Larenz and Theodor Maunz – was not without risk to his further academic career, even if pioneering studies such as that of Bernd Rüthers had paved the way for an examination of the role of law in National Socialism. The Savigny journal, the flagship of the discipline, limited itself to a short announcement of his thesis, perhaps also because the field of ‘contemporary legal history’ did not even exist yet it was Michael Stolleis himself who later gave the decisive impulse for its establishment in the canon of university subjects. In addition, the combination of public law with legal history and canon law was no guarantee for his career prospects. However, in Frankfurt, where he was appointed professor in 1974, a liberal spirit prevailed. The university was growing, the basic legal subjects were strong and original minds were sought. Social law and Protestant church law, which he had engaged with as assistant to Axel Freiherr von Campenhausen, became his main focus areas in public law.

In legal history, Michael Stolleis turned back to the early modern period, to the time of the growth of the Leviathan. This resulted in studies on political philosophers of the 17th and 18th centuries, on the political theory of the 17th century and on the state and the ‘reason of the state’ in the early modern period. Above all, however, his plan for a history of the science of public law was maturing. The first volume was published in 1988 three others followed. Initially conceived as a single-volume counterpart to Franz Wieacker’s history of private law, this highly influential book that was based on a strong philosophical conviction about the nature of law, the history of public law became much more: an erudite overall account of ius publicum between 1600 and 1990 emerged such as had never existed before, not in Germany, not in Italy, not even in France, to which he felt particularly attached. Guided by the firm resolution to avoid writing a highbrow history of great minds or narratives of progress, and oriented towards guides such as Johann Stefan Pütter’s ‘Litteratur des Teutschen Staatsrechts’ (1776-1783) and Robert von Mohl’s ‘Geschichte und Literatur der Staatswissenschaften’ (1855-1858), it explores, down to the smallest details, the institutional contexts of knowledge production, the histories of the fields of law and politics, literary histories, constitutional history and the history of ideas over four centuries. For legal history, traditionally concentrated on private law, this work opened a new world.

In parallel, he produced countless reviews on the legal history of the modern period, collected works on German lawyers of Jewish origin, works on the history of legal history, and studies on social law and its history. In a large-scale research project at the Max Planck Institute for European Legal History, the institution where Michael Stolleis became director in 1991 and which he decisively shaped for two decades, a repository of early modern so-called police ordinances (Policeyordnungen) grew through a patient collection of sources. The research on early modern police ordinances that built on this uncovered a dimension of authoritarian and state control of behaviour that until then had been practically unknown to legal history. At the same time, it led the subject into a new dialogue with the historical sciences, in particular in relation to secularisation, confessionalisation, social discipline and norm implementation. The fact that Michael Stolleis clearly defined legal history as a historical subject, argued with an awareness of method and presented with a brilliant rhetoric, made him a sought-after dialogue partner in legal and historical scholarship. Over the decades, an overall picture emerged which he increasingly embedded in a European context. Against the background of his history of public law, he claimed that the shared European ideal not only involved the search for the binding of state power to the law, the protection of zones of privacy and autonomy, and legal protection through judicial decisions, but also the responsibility of the authorities for a just social order.

It was also this insight into the rule of law and the welfare state as cultural achievements in European history that motivated Michael Stolleis to turn with particular enthusiasm to the legal history of the GDR and Eastern Europe after the fall of the Berlin Wall, and the Max Planck Institute gave him the institutional framework to do so. For this purpose, he used the funds from the Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz Prize awarded in 1991, and in the 2000s he completed a larger project on the legal history of South Eastern Europe in cooperation with the Cluster of Excellence ‘The Formation of Normative Orders’. Support for young researchers from these regions was a particular concern of his, just as he spent a great deal of time and had a great personal commitment to developing and training the young European legal history research community. The Institute and the cooperation with the legal historians at the Goethe University Frankfurt gave him the possibility to do just this, and he never regretted having decided for legal history and against the directorship also offered to him at the Max Planck Institute for Foreign and International Social Law in Munich. There has been no lack of prizes and honours: a few years ago he was inducted into to the order Pour le Mérite for Sciences and Arts and more recently was appointed to its Office of Vice Chancellor, along with receiving numerous academic memberships and honorary doctorates. He was always pleased to receive these, and could certainly state this with a quiet self-irony.

Above all, however, Michael Stolleis saw himself as an observer and narrator of the history of law, this history of the great attempt to lay the foundations for peaceful and just coexistence – which is, at the same time, also a history of the constant threat to civilisational achievements and the fragility of human existence. As a historian and thus one who works with language (Spracharbeiter), as he saw himself, the virtues of craftsmanship were important to him, as he had learned them in his apprenticeship as a vintner in his native Palatinate region. He valued integrity more than extravagance he did not need to strive for elegance. He considered self-discipline, attention to detail, reliability and fairness to be the essential prerequisites for scientific work, and if they were lacking, he could be quite blunt. He viewed the emphasis on collaborative research structures and the associated rhetoric of relevance with increasing scepticism for him it was a mark of the highest esteem to call someone erudite. His generosity with his time and his knowledge, kindness and understanding became exemplary for many of his companions and students.

As someone who would have preferred to study literature and art, in recent years he was increasingly drawn to storytelling. Playing with form and genre was also a piece of freedom he enjoyed after decades of disciplined research. The Akademie für Sprache und Dichtung (Academy for Language and Poetry) was particularly dear to his heart, and in the book ‘Margarethe und der Mönch’ he told legal history in stories. The last volume, which he completed just a few weeks ago, is entitled ‘recht erzählen’ (telling the story right and, at the same time, narrating law). They are tales from Frankfurt and his native region, reflecting the growth of the Leviathan, whose power and greatness had been a lifelong preoccupation of his.


Sweetwater Reporter (Sweetwater, Tex.), Vol. 44, No. 266, Ed. 1 Tuesday, March 18, 1941

Daily newspaper from Sweetwater, Texas that includes local, state and national news along with advertising.

Physical Description

six pages : ill. page 21 x 16 in. Digitized from 35 mm. microfilm.

Creation Information

Creator: Unknown. March 18, 1941.

Context

This newspaper is part of the collection entitled: Texas Digital Newspaper Program and was provided by the Sweetwater/Nolan County City-County Library to The Portal to Texas History, a digital repository hosted by the UNT Libraries. It has been viewed 23 times. More information about this issue can be viewed below.

People and organizations associated with either the creation of this newspaper or its content.

Creator

Publishers

Audiences

Check out our Resources for Educators Site! We've identified this newspaper as a primary source within our collections. Researchers, educators, and students may find this issue useful in their work.

Provided By

Sweetwater/Nolan County City-County Library

The Library was established in 1907 and seeks to provide a secure and dynamic environment for learning to the community with access to informational, recreational, and educational resources. Through a combination of technology and traditional library services, the Library aims to adequately serve all citizens of Nolan County.


The Fire Raids on Japan

The fire raids on Japan started in 1945. The fire raids were ordered by General Curtis LeMay, who some see as the ‘Bomber Harris’ of the Pacific War, in response to the difficulty B-29 crews had in completing pinpoint strategic bombing over Japanese cities. LeMay, therefore, decided that blanket bombing raids on cities to undermine the morale of civilians were an appropriate response. After the attack on Pearl Harbour in December 1941 (referred to as “unprovoked and dastardly” by President Roosevelt), no-one was willing to speak out on behalf of the Japanese citizens.

On November 1st, 1944, a B-29 Superfortress flew over Tokyo for the first time in what was a propaganda victory flight as opposed to anything else. The B-29 was designed to carry a 20,000 lb bomb load for a distance of 5000 miles. It was designed for long flights and the crew had pressurised compartments to give them a degree of comfort on these flights. Based in the Marianas and China, the B-29 groups were under the direct command of General H Arnold and the Joint Chief-of-Staff in Washington DC.

The difficulty of strategic bombing had been seen on June 15th, 1944, when a raid on Yawata’s iron and steel works resulted in just 2% of the complex being damaged. On August 20th, a raid on the same plant led to 18 bombers being shot down out of 70 planes – an attrition rate of 25%. The target was barely touched. Such losses for so little reward convinced many crews that strategic bombing was untenable.

Curtis LeMay had experienced the bombing of cities in Germany as the leader of the 8th Air Force. Now in the Pacific theatre, he was convinced of one thing – that any city making any form of contribution to Japan’s war effort should be destroyed.

As the Allies had advanced through the Pacific Islands using MacArthur’s ‘island hopping’ tactic, they captured Saipan, Tinian and Guam. These islands became bases for the B-29’s of 21st Bomber Command. The bases for the B-29’s had to be huge. At Saipan the airstrips were 200 feet wide and 8,500 feet long and they were served by 6 miles of taxiways and parking bays. The runways at Tinian were 8,000 feet long and 90 miles of roads were built just to serve the bomber base there. The runways on Saipan and Tinian were ready by October 1944, just 2 months after the fighting on the islands had finished.

The first bombing raid against Tokyo occurred on November 24th. The city was 1,500 miles from the Marianas. Brigadier-General Emmett O’Donnell flying the ‘Dauntless Dotty’ led 111 B-29’s against the Musashima engine factory. The planes dropped their bombs from 30,000 feet and came across the first of a number of problems – accuracy. The B-29’s were fitted with an excellent bomb aimer – the Norden – but it could not make out its target through low cloud. Also flying at 30,000 feet meant that the planes frequently flew in a jet stream wind that was between 100 and 200 mph which further complicated bomb aiming. Of the 111 planes on the raid, only 24 found the target.

In January 1945, Curtis LeMay flew to the Marianas to take control of 21st Bomber Command. The 20th Bomber Command, which had been based in India and China, was also transferred to the Marianas and LeMay was given command of this as well. Both units became the 20th Air Force. By March 1945, over 300 B-29’s were taking part in raids over Japan.

However, flights over Japan remained risky as there were very many young Japanese men who were willing to take on the risk of attacking a B-29, despite its awesome firepower (12 x .50 inch guns and 1 cannon). When Japan introduced its ‘George’ and ‘Jack’ fighters, the number of casualties for the 20th Air Force increased and the damage done by the bombers was not really worth the losses. In March 1945, the capture of Iwo Jima meant that P-51 Mustangs could be used to escort the B-29’s. P-61 ‘Black Widows’ gave night time protection to the bombers during night raids. The Mustang was more than a match for the ‘Jack’ and ‘George’ fighters and daylight bombing raids over Japan became less hazardous with such protection.

LeMay still experienced one major problem though. The investment the Allies were getting for the number of bombs dropped was small. The bombers were not having a discernable impact on manufacturing in Japan. Pinpoint bombing was simply not giving the returns that LeMay wanted. He was also acutely aware that any potential invasion of Japan would be massively costly for the Americans if the Japanese Home Defence Force was well-equipped with reasonably modern weapons. If the manufacturing industries of Japan could not be destroyed, then there was no doubt in his mind, that the force would be well equipped – to the detriment of the Americans.

LeMay, having already seen the success of a fire raid on Hankow when B-29’s flew much lower than their normal 30,000 feet and dropped incendiary bombs.

LeMay decided that Tokyo would be the first target for a massive raid on Japan itself. The raid was planned for the night of March 10th and the B-29’s were to fly at between 5,000 and 8,000 feet. As Japan was not expected to send up night fighters, the guns from the planes were taken off as was anything that was deemed not useful to the raid. By effectively stripping the plane of non-essentials, more bombs could be carried for the raid. Along with Tokyo, Kobe, Osaka and Nagoya were also targeted. As each had flourishing cottage industries that fed the factories of each city, LeMay hoped to starve these factories of required parts. He also hoped that the fires that would be started would also destroy the larger factories as well. As the target for the raid was so large – a city area – the B-29’s did not have to fly in strict formation, especially as little resistance was expected from the Japanese.

The incendiary bombs dropped were known as M-69’s. These weighed just 6 lbs each and were dropped in a cluster of 38 within a container. One B-29 usually carried 37 of these containers, which equated to just over 1,400 bombs per plane. The bombs were set free from the container at 5,000 feet by a time fuse and then exploded on contact with the ground. When they did this, they spread a jelly-petrol compound that was highly inflammable.

For the attack on Tokyo, over 300 B-29’s were involved. They took off for a flight that would get them to Tokyo just before dawn, thus giving them the cover of darkness, but with daylight for the return journey to the Marianas. They flew at 7,000 feet. This in itself may have baffled the city’s defenders as they would have been used to the B-29’s flying at 30,000 feet.

The raid had a massive impact on Tokyo. Photo-reconnaissance showed that 16 square miles of the city had been destroyed. Sixteen major factories – ironically scheduled for a future daylight raid – were destroyed along with many cottage industries. In parts of the city, the fires joined up to create a firestorm. The fires burned so fiercely and they consumed so much oxygen, that people in the locality suffocated. It is thought that 100,000 people were killed in the raid and another 100,000 injured. The Americans lost 14 B-29’s under the 5% rate of loss that was considered to be ‘acceptable’.

On March 12th, a similar raid took place on Nagoya. The raid was less successful as the fires did not join up and just over 1 square mile of the city was destroyed. On March 13th, Osaka was attacked. Eight square miles of the city were destroyed. Nearly 2.5 square miles of Kobe was also destroyed by incendiary raids. In the space of ten days, the Americans had dropped nearly 9,500 tons of incendiaries on Japanese cities and destroyed 29 square miles of what was considered to be important industrial land.

Few men who flew on the raids felt that what they did was immoral. The Japanese treatment of prisoners and civilians in its occupied zones was all too well known to the flight crews and many felt that the Japanese had brought such attacks on themselves. The incendiary raids were carried out at night and the chance of a crew returning from such a raid was high. Only 22 bombers were lost in this ten-day period – an overall loss of 1.4%. If crews needed to land early, they could do so at Iwo Jima and the return flight to the Marianas was covered by ‘Dumbos’ and ‘Superdumbos’ – polite nicknames for the planes that escorted back the B-29’s and provided lifeboats for them if they had to ditch in the sea. These planes, usually Catalina’s and B-17’s, also radioed ahead the position of crews that had ditched in the sea and ships could picked them up with due speed.

LeMay was highly impressed with the destructive results of the raids – as were the Joint Chiefs-of-Staff. For the Japanese government, the raids must have brought huge despair as they had no way of fighting back and it was obvious to all civilians who knew about the raids, that Japan was defenceless against them.

LeMay developed the tactic so that incendiary raids took place during the day. Without the cover of night, the B-29’s flew at between 12,000 and 18,000 feet. Any attacks by Japanese fighters were covered by P-51 Mustang and P-47 Thunderbolt fighters. The Americans believed that the massive damage done to Tokyo by the fire raids would have persuaded Japan’s leaders to surrender but they did not. Instead, the B-29 bomber would be needed for another raid – an atomic one. On August 6th, the Enola Gay took off for Hiroshima. On August 9th, Bockscar took off for Nagasaki. Japan surrendered shortly after.

“A month after the March raid, while I was on a visit to Honjo on a particularly beautiful cherry-blossom day, I saw bloated and charred corpses surfacing in the Sumida River. I felt nauseated and even more scared than before.”

“We ourselves were burned out in the fire raid of May 25th 1945. As I ran I kept my eyes on the sky. It was like a fireworks display as the incendiaries exploded. People were aflame, rolling and writhing in agony, screaming piteously for help, but beyond all mortal assistance.”


1941 & The Art of Hitting .400

Did you know that Ted Williams was the youngest player in Major League history to hit over .400? During the 1941 season he turned twenty-three (23). Those closest to him are Ty Cobb, who at twenty-four (24) hit .420 in 1911, and Joe Jackson, who at twenty-four (24) hit .408 in 1911.

Ted Williams, who joined the .400 Hitters Club during the 1941 season, not suprisingly won the Triple Crown of hitting the very next season (1942).

Serious fans of Teddy Ballgame should search (use Ted Williams then choose 'Exact Phrase") Baseball Almanac as his name appears across the site on more than two-hundred pages.


18 March 1941 - History

Below is a timeline of some of the things which were rationed during the war

1939 World War Two begins

1939 - Petrol rationing (ended May 1950 )

8 January 1940 - Rationing of bacon, butter and sugar

11 March 1940 - All meat was rationed

July 1940 - Tea and margarine were added to the list of rationed foods.

March 1941 - Jam was put on ration.

May 1941 - Cheese was rationed

1 June 1941 - Rationing of clothing (ended 15 March 1949)

June 1941 - Eggs were put on ration

July 1941 - Coal was rationed because more and more miners were called up to serve in the forces.

January 1942 - Rice and dried fruit were added to the list of rationed foods.

February 1942 - Soap was rationed so that oils and fats could be saved for food.

Tinned tomatoes and peas were were added to the list of rationed food.

By 17 March 1942, coal, gas and electricity were all rationed

26 July 1942 - Rationing of sweets and chocolate. Each person was allowed about 2oz (55 grams) a week

August 1942 - Biscuits rationed

1943 - Sausages are rationed

1945 World War Two Ends
Rationing continued on many items until 1954.

1948 - The end of rationing begins. It is another 5 years before rationing of all products is stopped.

25 July 1948 - end of flour rationing

15 March 1949 - end of clothes rationing

19 May 1950 - rationing ended for canned and dried fruit, chocolate biscuits, treacle, syrup, jellies and mincemeat.

September 1950 - rationing ended for soap

3 October 1952 - Tea rationing ended

February 1953 - Sweet and sugar rationing ends

4 July 1954 - Food rationing ends

Further Information

Shopping Game
Click and drag food items into your bag. Answer the questions correctly and you get to keep what you have chosen.

Food Rationing www.woodlands-junior.kent.sch.uk
. Everyone was allowed 16 points per month to use on what ever food items they wished. This was later increased to 20 points per month. . Sweets and chocolate were also rationed: 12oz (350g) per person every four weeks.

Clothes Rationing
It wasn't just food that was rationed during World War II. Clothing also became scarce.

Memories of Rationing
. I preferred to eat salted margarine than butter, the rest of the family had my butter ration.

© Copyright - please read
All the materials on these pages are free for homework and classroom use only. You may not redistribute, sell or place the content of this page on any other website or blog without written permission from the author Mandy Barrow.

Congress Profiles

The 1st Congress (1789–1791) finished what the Founders started: filling out the U.S. Constitution’s skeletal framework by addressing concerns raised during ratification and by creating the federal architecture—a revenue system, the first executive departments, and the judiciary. Congress also assumed state Revolutionary War debts and decided the location of the future capital. Under the leadership of Representative James Madison of Virginia, this Congress authored the constitutional amendments which eventually became the Bill of Rights. Amid this activity Congress moved from New York to Philadelphia in 1790.


Farnborough Camera Club

Welcome to the website of Farnborough Camera Club, an active group of photography enthusiasts based in Farnborough, Hampshire, UK.

Our programme consists of a mixture of talks, practical evenings and competitions. We meet most Thursday evenings between September and May, with our home at the Cody Sports and Social Club.

All photographers are welcome whether you have decades of experience or are new to picking up a camera. For those just beginning their photographic journey, there is no better way to learn the art than by spending time with those of like mind. And for those with more experience, the club is a great place for inspiration and motivation.

If you are potentially interested in joining, then feel free to come along and spend an evening or two meeting us and sampling our activities. If you have any queries, please contact the membership secretary.

Annual PDI Trophy – Results

Thursday 1st April Farnborough Camera Club held its Annual PDI competition… here are the results


Watch the video: Russian Front - summer 1941


Comments:

  1. Kaphiri

    bye ... some kind of stupidity

  2. Dulkis

    Also that we would do without your very good idea

  3. Markel

    Very very



Write a message