Heroes on the home front : heroism and virtue in post-9/11 American cinema /

This thesis is intended to contribute to critical discussion of the American male hero in mainstream American war and action films post September 11, 2001 . The thesis investigates how these heroes' behaviour echoes a patriotic, conservative construction of the modern American as created through speeches given by George W. Bush in the wake of the events of September 11, 2001 . The thesis examines the hero in six primary sources: the war films We Were Soldiers, Behind Enemy Lines and The Great Raid and the action films Collateral Damage, Man on Fire and The Punisher. By analyzing the ideological subtext, political content, visual strategies and generic implications of the films, as well as the binary constructions of a selection of Bush speeches, and by reviewing historical representations of American male heroes on film produced in the wake of political events, the thesis concludes that the six films mobilize the USA's conservative viewpoint towards war and military action, and in concert with the speeches, contribute to an ongoing militarization of visual culture. Both systems echo a dangerous ideological fantasy of American history, life and patriotism.

The American Naval and Patriotic Songster: As Sung at Various Places of Amusement, in Honour of Hull, Jones, Decatur, Perry, Bainbridge, Lawrence, Etc. Etc. Etc. (1834)

Volume of songs sung in praise of celebrated American War of 1812 heroes.

Message from the President of the United States, transmitting of a report of the Secretary of State, in relation to individuals selected from American prisoners of war, and sent to Great Britain for trial, and also in relation to any orders for retaliation, &c., &c.--

April 16, 1814. Printed by order of the Senate of the United States.

Why are we still at war? : or, The American question considered ; in a series of essays rejected by the journalists as unpopular ; recommended to a candid perusal /

In the Pamphleteer, vol. 4, p. 551-576. London, 1814.

A report of the Secretary of State, in relation to individuals selected from American prisoners of war, and sent to Great Britain for trial, and also in relation to any orders for retaliation

Printed by Roger C. Weightman

Why are we still at war? : or, The American question considered ; in a series of essays rejected by the journalists as unpopular ; recommended to a candid perusal

In the Pamphleteer, vol. 4, p. 551-576. London, 1814

The neo-liberal state and the crisis of public service broadcasting in the Anglo-American democracies /

The NeO'liberal State and the Crisis ofPublic Service Broadcasting in the Anglo-American Democracies The purpose ofthis analysis ofthe present condition ofpublic service broadcasting in the Anglo- American democracies was to investigate whether such media can still be regarded as the primarypublic spherefor a dialogue between each nation 's civil society and the State. The motivationfor this thesis was based on a presumption that such fora for public discussion on the central issues of each society have become viewed as less relevant bypoliticians andpolicy-makers and thepublics they were intended to serve in the Anglo-American democracies over thepast two decades. It is speculated that this is the case because ofa beliefthat the post-war consensus between the respective States andpublics that led to the construction of the Keynesian Welfare State and the notion ofpublic service broadcasting has been displaced by an individualistic, neo-liberal, laissez-faire ideology. In other words, broadcasting as a consumer-oriented, commercial commodity has superseded concerns pertaining to the importance ofthe public interest. The methodology employed in this thesis is a comparative analysisfrom a criticalpolitical economy perspective. It was considered appropriate to focus on the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada and the\ United States because they comprise the four largest Anglo-American nations with democratic political systems andprimarily market economies. Justificationfor this particular sample is reinforced by thefact that case study countries also share a common socio-political and economic tradition. The evidence assembledfor this thesis consisted almost exclusively ofexisting literature on the subjects ofpublic service broadcasting, global economic andpolitical integration, and the ascendance ofthe 'free-market ' ethos in Western democracies since the late mid- to late-1970s. In essence, this thesis could be considered as a reinterpretation ofthe existing literature relevant to these issues. Several important common features werefound among the political, economic and broadcasting systems of the four case study nations. It is proposed that the prevalence of the neo-liberal world view throughout the political and policy environments of the four countries has undermined the stability and credibility of each nation 's national public service broadcasting organization, although with varying intensity and effect,. Deregulation ofeach nation 's broadcasting system and the supremacy ofthe notion of 'consumer sovereignty' have marginalized the view of broadcasting on any basis other than strictly economic criteria in thefour case study countries. This thesis concludes that,for a reconstruction ofa trulyparticipatory anddemocraticpublicsphere to be realized in the present as well as thefuture, a reassessment ofthe conventional concept ofthe 'public sphere ' is necessary. Therefore, it is recommended that thefocus ofpolicy-makers in each Anglo-American democracy be redirectedfrom that which conceived ofan all-encompassing, large, state-ownedand operated public broadcasting service toward a view which considers alternativeforms ofpublic communication, such as local community and ethnic broadcasting operations, that are likely to be more responsive to the needs of the increasingly diverse and heterogeneous populations that comprise the modem Anglo-American democracies. The traditional conception of public broadcasters must change in accordance with its contemporary environment if the fundamental principles of the public sphere and public service broadcasting are to be realized.

The Falkland Islands War of 1982: a legal, diplomatic and strategic evaluation

The Falkland Islands War of 1982 was fought over competing claims to sovereignty over a group of islands off the east coast of South America. The dispute was between Argentina and the United Kingdom. Argentina claims the islands under rights to Spanish succession, the fact that they lie off the Argentine coast line and that in 1833 Great Britain took the islands illegally and by force. The United Kingdom claims the islands primarily through prescription--the fact that they have governed the islands in a peaceful, continuous and public manner since 1833. The British also hold that the population living on the islands, roughly eighteen hundred British descendants, should be able to decide their own future. The United Kingdom also lays claim to the islands through rights of discovery and settlement, although this claim has always been challenged by Spain who until 1811 governed the islands. Both claims have legal support, and the final decision if there will ever be one is difficult to predict. Sadly today the ultimate test of sovereignty does not come through international law but remains in the idea that "He is sovereign who can defend his sovereignty." The years preceding the Argentine invasion of 1982 witnessed many diplomatic exchanges between The United Kingdom and Argentina over the future of the islands. During this time the British sent signals to Argentina that ii implied a decline in British resolve to hold the islands and demonstrated that military action did more to further the talks along than did actual negotiations. The Argentine military junta read these signals and decided that they could take the islands in a quick military invasion and that the United Kingdom would consider the act as a fait accompli and would not protest the invasion. The British in response to this claimed that they never signaled to Argentina that a military solution was acceptable to them and launched a Royal Navy task force to liberate the islands. Both governments responded to an international crisis with means that were designed both to resolve the international crisis and increase the domestic popularity of the government. British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher was facing an all-time low in popularity for post-War Prime Ministers while Argentine President General Galtieri needed to gain mass popular support so he could remain a viable President after he was scheduled to lose command of the army and a seat on the military junta that ran the country. The military war for the Falklands is indicative of the nature of modern warfare between Third World countries. It shows that the gap in military capabilities between Third and First World countries is narrowing significantly. Modern warfare between a First and Third World country is no longer a 'walk over' for the First World country.

A sermon, preached in Boston, August 20, 1812, the day of humiliation and prayer, appointed by the President of the United States, in consequence of the declaration of war against Great Britain /

Published at the request of the hearers.

A sermon, preached in Hingham and Quincy, 20th August 1812, the day of the national fast, on account of the war with Great Britain /

Bibliogr.

Sermon : the question of war with Great Britain, examined upon moral and Christian principles /

Joseph Dana was also considered as the supposed author.

Letter - American soldier's account of battles at Chippewa, Lundy's Lane and Fort Erie, 1814

Transcript (original grammar and spelling retained): My dear wife I take this time to inform you that I am well hoping that these few lines will Reach you and find you the same I shall in form you of all our Battles that we have had sence I left home we crossed in to Canada the 2 day of July and took fort Erie on the 3 day of July without loss of one man. We then marched down to Chipway eighteen miles below the Fort Erie we got there on the forth day and had our first battle on the 5 day our loss was not jistly known But the inemy loss was double to ours. The 6 day we started with the 2 Brigade to make a bridge a crost the crick two miles a bove the fort in Building the Bridge the inemy Brought up their Canon and playd upon us with their artiliery a bout two hours We drove them from the fort our loss was none the inemy loss was nineteen ciled dead on the ground we then marched to Queenston when we got thare our inemy had fledfrom the fort we then remained thair to Queenston ten days then we marched down to Fort George But that caurdly Chaney did not a rive with the fleet so we had to return back to Queenston thare was a bout six hundred militia formed on the heights of land thay fired up on us from their pickets and retreated to the mane body our flankers ciled and wounded and took about twenty before they got to the Maine body we then marched up the hill they gave us two firs but did not damage and then retreated from the field we stayed there one knight and then marched to Chipway and stayed there one night and the next day just as the sun set the first Brigade marched up in order to give them Battle a bout two miles from the Crick and began the Battle the 2 Brigade has to March up to the Niagara path and ingaged them we charged up on their artlery and took all their Canon Miller commanded the four companys that charged....the battles lasted three hours and forty minutes our loss was about 8 hundred cild and wounded our inemies loss was a bout fourteen hundred cild and wounded the next morning we Marched up in order to give them Battle a gin but thay was afraid to ingage us we then marched to Fort Erie and went to fortiffing and made a strong place the inemy folered us up and Began to cananade and held it fifty three days thay a tacked the fort the fifteenth of august thay atacked a bout one hiour be fore day Light we saw them and Blue up our maggerzean & two hundred of our inemy our loss wasa bout forty cild and wounded and our inemy loss was a bout one thousand on the 7 Day of September we atacked them and took their batteries and Broke all their canon and drove them from the field our loss was a Bout two hundred cild and wounded our inemy loss was a Bout 8 hundred cild and wounded...we crossed in to Canada with five thousand and came out with fifteen hundred we then Marched to Sackett’s harbor....am well and harty for the present....a bout comming home it uncarting for there is not any....given this winter as yet But I shall try to Come home if I Can But if I Cant I want you should take good car of the Phiddness[?] I have not Received any Money as yet But soon as I do receive some I send some home. I want you should write to me as soon as you receive this and and how Much Stock you wintor I Received your Letter with Great pleasure I feel uneasy a bout you I am a frade that you are sick or dead this is from your husband Chase Clough

The Military Monitor and American Register- 31 August 1812

The Military Monitor was a weekly periodical that was published every Monday. The first issue was printed for August 17, 1812 and is believed to have ceased in 1814, as the last issue located was April 2, 1814. The periodical was suspended with the November 23, 1812 issue and resumed with the December 14, 1812 issue. The quote at the top of the first page is "The public good our end". The periodical's various authors included: Desnoues, Joseph, 1794?-1837. O'Connor, Thomas, 1770-1855. Hardcastle, John, 1778?-1835. Van Pelt, Peter, 1779?-1843. Wall, Stephen. Van Riper, Nicholas. Other authors are believed to be the American Antiquarian Society. Proprietors: T. O'Connor and S. Wall, 1812; T. O'Connor, 1812- . Printers: Hardcastle and Van Pelt, for T. O'Connor and S. Wall, Sept. 14-Oct. 5, 1812; J. Desnoues, Oct. 12, 1812- ; N. Van Riper, Nov. 6, 1813- . This issue was included in a bound volume of the Military Monitor and American Register. Other Dates included are: 1812 October 12 1812 October 19 1812 November 23 1812 December 14 1812 December 21 1813 January 11 1813 February 1 1813 March 29 1813 April 5 1813 April 12 1813 April 26 1813 May 31

The Military Monitor and American Register- 14 December 1812

The Military Monitor was a weekly periodical that was published every Monday. The first issue was printed for August 17, 1812 and is believed to have ceased in 1814, as the last issue located was April 2, 1814. The periodical was suspended with the November 23, 1812 issue and resumed with the December 14, 1812 issue. The quote at the top of the first page is "The public good our end". The periodical's various authors included: Desnoues, Joseph, 1794?-1837. O'Connor, Thomas, 1770-1855. Hardcastle, John, 1778?-1835. Van Pelt, Peter, 1779?-1843. Wall, Stephen. Van Riper, Nicholas. Other authors are believed to be the American Antiquarian Society. Proprietors: T. O'Connor and S. Wall, 1812; T. O'Connor, 1812- . Printers: Hardcastle and Van Pelt, for T. O'Connor and S. Wall, Sept. 14-Oct. 5, 1812; J. Desnoues, Oct. 12, 1812- ; N. Van Riper, Nov. 6, 1813- . This issue was included in a bound volume of the Military Monitor and American Register. Other Dates included are: 1812 August 31 1812 October 12 1812 October 19 1812 November 23 1812 December 21 1813 January 11 1813 February 1 1813 March 29 1813 April 5 1813 April 12 1813 April 26 1813 May 31