DOCSLIB.ORG

Could You Survive As a Prisoner of War?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

COULD YOU SURVIVE AS A PRISONER OF WAR? Nearly 30 000 Australians became prisoners of war during World War 2. Of these, 8 172 were prisoners Decision-makerof the Germans or Italians, and 22 376 activity were prisoners of the Japanese held in various camps in Asia and the Pacific area. Of the Australian prisoners in Europe, 264, about 3 per cent died. Of the Australian prisoners of the Japanese, 8 031 – 36 per cent – died in captivity. One who did survive was Weary Dunlop, a doctor in the Australian Army, who provided medical treatment and inspirational leadership for the men under his care. In this decision-maker simulation you will learn about his actions as you go through the unit, and you will learn about the situations that POWs faced, and see if you can make decisions that would help a soldier to survive. A statue of Weary Dunlop and other prisoners of war of the Japanese, Benalla 1 © Ryebuck Media and the Sir Edward ‘Weary’ Dunlop Medical Research Foundation Your Task Your task is to look at 25 situations, each of them based on what actually happened with prisoners of the Japanese on the Burma-Thai Railway. You need to read the information about each situation and the options you will face each time, and make the decision that you think will give you (and others) the best chance of survival. There will be implications for each decision, and there will be consequences. Many of the situations are difficult, and often there is no easy option available. But you have to decide. After you have chosen your option for each situation you will get a response that tells you the consequences of your choice. There will be a score for each option, so you can see whether you are likely to survive because of that decision. You will also be able to see what Weary did each time. Scoring Every decision has consequences. There are four main ways in which each decision has an impact on you: Health points – how Resilience points — how do Mateship points Leadership points — does this decision affect I feel about myself? What — where you do where you make a my physical health and is my mental state? Where something that decision that shows an condition? Where the a decision helps you be helps another, acceptance of leadership, decision improves or does optimistic, or has helped you will gain or that influences others not have an effect on your others, or has reduced 1 point. If your positively, you will gain health, you will gain 1 point. anxiety, you will gain 1 point. decision hurts 1 point. Where your Where it may harm you or Where it increases anxiety or another, you will decision does not show leave you more open to fear or tension, you will lose lose 1 point. positive leadership, even disease or starvation you 1 point – even if it seems to if it helps you personally, will lose 1 point. be the right decision. you will lose 1 point. Sometimes you might choose a situation that will give you points in one area but will mean you lose points in others. For example, if you take your sick mate’s food when he cannot eat it, you will gain health points, but lose mateship points. There are also some Random events. These are events that you have no control over. Your aim Your aim is to survive. However, sometimes you may be faced with situations in which you can protect and help yourself, but at a cost to others. You will need to decide whether surviving at any cost is acceptable, or whether there are some options that you just cannot take, even if it hurts you personally not to take them. You will start off with 40 points. If you lose them all you will not survive. FIG ART25081 2 AWM Click to enlarge 2 © Ryebuck Media and the Sir Edward ‘Weary’ Dunlop Medical Research Foundation Steps for the activity You can work through this activity by yourself, or with others. Read the background information about why Australians were prisoners of war of the Japanese. 1 See pages 4–5. Print the score page to keep a record of your decisions and their consequences as you work through 2 each situation. See page 6. Print the situation pages, or read these situations online. Decide which of the three options you will 3 choose, and record it. See pages 7–11. You now have two ways of proceeding: 4 Work through all the situations, making your choice Work through the first situation, then look and recording it, and then look at the Consequences OR at the Consequences page (online or in print page (online or in print on pages 12–16) to work out on pages 12–16), record your score, and then your score for each situation. move on to the next situation. You should record both the four individual components of the result (the Health, Resilience, Mateship 5 and Leadership points), and the total for each situation. If at any time your total running score reaches0 or below you must finish the game — you have not 6 survived the Burma-Thai Railway experience. After the activity The game has been designed as a concept-development activity. We suggest that it should be used at the start of a study of the POW experience, and then you will be in a better position to appreciate the further information you gain as a result of additional research. At every stage of the game we tell you what happened when Weary Dunlop faced these situations. A detailed study of his extraordinary experiences as a POW has been published as an eStudies article, so you will be able to explore in detail what happened to him personally. To see this go to the Weary Dunlop website www.siredwarddunlop.org.au or to the eStudies site www.ryebuck.com.au/estudies/ . Can you make good decisions that will help you and your mates survive the horrors of the Burma-Thai Railway? Let’s see. Good luck! SIR EDWARD ‘WEARY’ DUNLOP MEDICAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION This educational activity has been developed for the Sir Edward ‘Weary’ Dunlop Medical Research Foundation. It was established in 1985 as part of Sir Edward’s life-long undertaking to promote and improve the welfare of our veteran community. The Foundation’s mission is to improve the quality of life of our returned service personnel. For more information and more educational activities go to www.siredwarddunlop.org.au Click to enlarge FIG ART90844 3 AWM 3 © Ryebuck Media and the Sir Edward ‘Weary’ Dunlop Medical Research Foundation Background to the Thai-Burma Railway Why was Australia at war? Australia went to war in September 1939 because Nazi Germany had invaded Poland. Britain and France declared war to stop German expansionism and aggression, and legally Australia also became automatically involved — though it was also a decision that was supported by most Australians. Initially Australian soldiers served in north Africa and the Mediterranean area, while Australian air force crews served in those places and Europe. Australian naval vessels were serving in the Atlantic, Pacific and Indian oceans, and the Mediterranean and North seas. Why did Japan enter the war? On 7 December 1941 Japan attacked the United States naval base at Hawaii, and simultaneously launched invasions of Malaya and Java. The Japanese military leaders had decided that they could secure vital raw materials for their industrial economy www.hellfire-pass.commemoration.gov.au by seizing control of neighbouring areas, and avoiding American economic sanctions imposed after Japan invaded China in 1937. The Japanese hoped to gain control of the natural resources of the invaded areas before the United States could recover from the attack on its aircraft carriers, which were the only weapons that could hold up their advance and defeat them. Australia declared war in support of the British colony of Malaya. By early 1942 Japan controlled Malaya, Singapore, much of New Guinea, New Britain, the Philippines, the Netherlands East Indies, French Indochina, Taiwan, Hong Kong, much of China, and much of the Pacific Ocean. Click to enlarge Who were the POWs? www.hellfire-pass.commemoration.gov.au When the Allies surrendered after defeats in Malaya, Singapore and the Netherlands East Indies there were 130 000 soldiers from Britain, the Netherlands, India and Australia taken prisoner. The largest number of the more than 22 000 Australians were the 15 000 men of the 8th Division, in Malaya and Singapore, and the 1000-strong battalions in Ambon, Timor and New Britain. There were also 2 700 soldiers from the 7th Division in Java, 32 Australian Army nurses, and 320 sailors from the HMAS Perth which had been sunk in the Sunda Strait in February 1942. Click to enlarge Where were they kept? The main POW gaol was at Changi. Many of the prisoners were moved to work on the Burma-Thai Railway, in coal mines in Japan, in Borneo, and in other places. Some were kept where they were captured, and executed or starved to death — www.hellfire-pass.commemoration.gov.au such as at Sandakan. The main groups set to work on the Burma-Thai Railway were: A Force (Oct 1942) F Force (April 1943) Wilkins Force (Oct 1942) H Force (May 1943) Black Force (Oct 1942) H6 Officers (May 1943) No 5 Java Party (Jan 1943) K Force (June 1943) Dunlop Force (Jan 1943) L Force (August 1943) Click to enlarge D Force (March 1943) AWM P00102_015 AWM Click to enlarge 4 © Ryebuck Media and the Sir Edward ‘Weary’ Dunlop Medical Research Foundation What was the Burma-Thai Railway? This was a 415 kilometre long track from Thanbyuzayat in Burma (now Myanmar) to Nong Pladuk in Thailand built between October 1942 and October 1943.
Recommended publications
  • GP Text Paste Up.3

    GP Text Paste Up.3

    FACING ASIA A History of the Colombo Plan FACING ASIA A History of the Colombo Plan Daniel Oakman Published by ANU E Press The Australian National University Canberra ACT 0200, Australia Email: [email protected] This title is also available online at: http://epress.anu.edu.au/facing_asia _citation.html National Library of Australia Cataloguing-in-Publication Entry Author: Oakman, Daniel. Title: Facing Asia : a history of the Colombo Plan / Daniel Oakman. ISBN: 9781921666926 (pbk.) 9781921666933 (eBook) Notes: Includes bibliographical references. Subjects: Economic assistance--Southeast Asia--History. Economic assistance--Political aspects--Southeast Asia. Economic assistance--Social aspects--Southeast Asia. Dewey Number: 338.910959 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher. Cover design by Emily Brissenden Cover: Lionel Lindsay (1874–1961) was commissioned to produce this bookplate for pasting in the front of books donated under the Colombo Plan. Sir Lionel Lindsay, Bookplate from the Australian people under the Colombo Plan, nla.pic-an11035313, National Library of Australia Printed by Griffin Press This edition © 2010 ANU E Press First edition © 2004 Pandanus Books For Robyn and Colin Acknowledgements Thank you: family, friends and colleagues. I undertook much of the work towards this book as a Visiting Fellow with the Division of Pacific and Asian History in the Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, The Australian National University. There I benefited from the support of the Division and, in particular, Hank Nelson and Donald Denoon.
  • Prison Abolition and Grounded Justice

    Prison Abolition and Grounded Justice

    Georgetown University Law Center Scholarship @ GEORGETOWN LAW 2015 Prison Abolition and Grounded Justice Allegra M. McLeod Georgetown University Law Center, [email protected] This paper can be downloaded free of charge from: https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub/1490 http://ssrn.com/abstract=2625217 62 UCLA L. Rev. 1156-1239 (2015) This open-access article is brought to you by the Georgetown Law Library. Posted with permission of the author. Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub Part of the Criminal Law Commons, Criminal Procedure Commons, Criminology Commons, and the Social Control, Law, Crime, and Deviance Commons Prison Abolition and Grounded Justice Allegra M. McLeod EVIEW R ABSTRACT This Article introduces to legal scholarship the first sustained discussion of prison LA LAW LA LAW C abolition and what I will call a “prison abolitionist ethic.” Prisons and punitive policing U produce tremendous brutality, violence, racial stratification, ideological rigidity, despair, and waste. Meanwhile, incarceration and prison-backed policing neither redress nor repair the very sorts of harms they are supposed to address—interpersonal violence, addiction, mental illness, and sexual abuse, among others. Yet despite persistent and increasing recognition of the deep problems that attend U.S. incarceration and prison- backed policing, criminal law scholarship has largely failed to consider how the goals of criminal law—principally deterrence, incapacitation, rehabilitation, and retributive justice—might be pursued by means entirely apart from criminal law enforcement. Abandoning prison-backed punishment and punitive policing remains generally unfathomable. This Article argues that the general reluctance to engage seriously an abolitionist framework represents a failure of moral, legal, and political imagination.
  • The Hostage Through the Ages

    The Hostage Through the Ages

    Volume 87 Number 857 March 2005 A haunting figure: The hostage through the ages Irène Herrmann and Daniel Palmieri* Dr Irène Herrmann is Lecturer at the University of Geneva; she is a specialist in Swiss and in Russian history. Daniel Palmieri is Historical Research Officer at the International Committee of the Red Cross; his work deals with ICRC history and history of conflicts. Abstract: Despite the recurrence of hostage-taking through the ages, the subject of hostages themselves has thus far received little analysis. Classically, there are two distinct types of hostages: voluntary hostages, as was common practice during the Ancien Régime of pre-Revolution France, when high-ranking individuals handed themselves over to benevolent jailers as guarantors for the proper execution of treaties; and involuntary hostages, whose seizure is a typical procedure in all-out war where individuals are held indiscriminately and without consideration, like living pawns, to gain a decisive military upper hand. Today the status of “hostage” is a combination of both categories taken to extremes. Though chosen for pecuniary, symbolic or political reasons, hostages are generally mistreated. They are in fact both the reflection and the favoured instrument of a major moral dichotomy: that of the increasing globalization of European and American principles and the resultant opposition to it — an opposition that plays precisely on the western adherence to human and democratic values. In the eyes of his countrymen, the hostage thus becomes the very personification of the innocent victim, a troubling and haunting image. : : : : : : : In the annals of the victims of war, hostages occupy a special place.
  • Aged Care Service List - VIC - As at 30 June 2017

    Aged Care Service List - VIC - As at 30 June 2017

    Aged Care Service List - VIC - as at 30 June 2017 Physical Physical Address Address Post 2015 Aged Care Planning Residential Home Care Restorative 2016-17 Australian Service name Physical Address Line 1 Physical Address Line 2 Physical Address Suburb State Code Region (ACPR) Care Type Places Places Care Places Provider Name Organisation Type ABS Remoteness Latitude Longitude Government Funding Avonlea Hostel 68-72 Macpherson Street NHILL VIC 3418 Grampians Residential 45 Avonlea Inc Community Based Outer Regional Australia -36.335116 141.655153 $ 893,701 SCC Northcliffe Home 10-12 Northcliffe Road EDITHVALE VIC 3196 Southern Metro Residential 60 Southern Cross Care (VIC) Religious Major Cities of Australia -38.04237294 145.1130356 $ 1,793,545 SCC Corben Home 9-15 Brindisi Street MENTONE VIC 3194 Southern Metro Residential 46 Southern Cross Care (VIC) Religious Major Cities of Australia -37.98393195 145.0621723 $ 2,877,184 Margery Cole Residential Care Service Matthews Crescent TRARALGON VIC 3844 Gippsland Residential 120 "Yallambee" Traralgon Village for the Aged Inc Community Based Inner Regional Australia -38.19535682 146.5485063 $ 6,707,606 Manor Court Werribee Aged Care Ltd 5 Hogan Grove WERRIBEE VIC 3030 Western Metro Residential 100 Manor Court Werribee Aged Care Ltd Community Based Major Cities of Australia -37.89658739 144.6569542 $ 4,946,535 Woorayl Lodge Hostel 71-73 McCartin Street LEONGATHA VIC 3953 Gippsland Residential 40 Woorayl Lodge Inc Community Based Inner Regional Australia -38.47934705 145.9421297 $ 1,529,979 Dorothy
  • AMREP Research Report 2009

    AMREP Research Report 2009

    The Alfred Medical Research and Education Precinct Research Report 2009 Alfred Health Commercial Road, Melbourne, Victoria 3004, Australia Telephone + 61 3 9076 2000 Facsimile + 61 3 9076 2222 2009 www.alfred.org.au The Alfred Medical Research & Education Precinct The Alfred Medical Research and Education Precinct © Alfred Health 2010 This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part of this publication may be reproduced by any process without prior written permission from Alfred Health. Production team: Liana Friedman, Heather Gallichio, Cherry Yu, Eve Kovesdy Enquiries should be directed to the Research Office, [email protected] Design: abCreative Productions ISSN 1445-8853 Printing: Print Media Group contEnts AMREP in 2009/2010 2 AMREP’s Research Performance 4 AMREP Research Facilities 5 About AMREP Ian Potter Library 8 AMREP − Alfred Medical Research and Education Precinct − was established in 2002 Human Research Ethics Committee 9 as a partnership between Alfred Health, Monash University, Baker IDI Heart and Diabetes Animal Ethics Committee 11 Institute and the Macfarlane Burnet Institute for Medical Research and Public Health Translating Research into Clinical Practice 12 (Burnet Institute). La Trobe University and Deakin University joined the partnership in Allergy, Immunology and Respiratory Medicine 14 2005. AMREP is located on the campus of the Alfred Hospital, Melbourne and is one Anaesthesia and Perioperative Medicine 16 of Australia’s leading centres for medical research.
  • Crawford Australian Leadership Forum

    Crawford Australian Leadership Forum

    CRAWFORD AUSTRALIAN LEADERSHIP F ORUM Global Realities, Domestic Choices 29 June - 1 July 2014 CRAWFORD SC HOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY KEY NOTE SPEAKE RS, CHA IRS & PANELISTS Gary Banks Ken Boal Dean, Australian and New Zealand Vice President, Cisco Australia & New School of Government Zealand Dean and CEO of ANZSOG since Joined Cisco in 2004 and led the January 2013, following fifteen years company’s engagement in the heading the Productivity Commission. public sector with Australia’s federal, Formerly Executive Commissioner state and territory governments, with the Industry Commission; defence, education and healthcare; Senior Economist with the GATT subsequently was responsible for Secretariat in Geneva; Visiting Fellow identifying and leading growth and at the Trade Policy Research Centre, development, and managing the sales London. Chaired the COAG Steering Committee for the Review force, in the enterprise and public sectors. Graduated from the of Government Services, and now the OECD’s Regulatory University of Queensland in 1991 with a Bachelor of Electrical Policy Committee. Recently joined the Macquarie Group as an Engineering (Communications & Electronics), commenced his independent director, and appointed to the Prime Minister’s career at Honeywell, and prior to joining Cisco spent ten years at Business Advisory Council. Professorial Fellow at Melbourne Anixter Inc/NetStar, an Asia Pacific network systems integrator as University, and Adjunct Professor and Crawford Public Policy Southern Region General Manager. Fellow at the ANU. Glenys Beauchamp Roger Bradbury Secretary, Department of Industry Coordinator, National Security Research, National Security College, Secretary of the Department of ANU Industry since September 2013. Formerly Secretary, Department of Heads Strategy and Statecraft in Regional Australia, Local Government, Cyberspace research program at Arts and Sport; Deputy Secretary the National Security College in the in Departments of Prime Minister Crawford School of Public Policy.
  • Treatment of American Prisoners of War in Southeast Asia 1961-1973 by John N. Powers

    Treatment of American Prisoners of War in Southeast Asia 1961-1973 by John N. Powers

    Treatment of American Prisoners of War In Southeast Asia 1961-1973 By John N. Powers The years 1961 to 1973 are commonly used when studying American POWs during the Vietnam War, even though history books generally refer to the years 1964 to 1973 in defining that war. Americans were captured as early as 1954 and as late as 1975. In these pages the years 1961 to 1973 will be used. Americans were held prisoner by the North Vietnamese in North Vietnam, the Viet Cong (and their political arm the National Liberation Front) in South Vietnam, and the Pathet Lao in Laos. This article will not discuss those Americans held in Cambodia and China. The Defense Prisoner of War/Missing Personnel Office (DPMO) lists 687 American Prisoners of War who were returned alive by the Vietnamese from 1961 through 1976. Of this number, 72 were returned prior to the release of the bulk of the POWs in Operation Homecoming in 1973. Twelve of these early releases came from North Vietnam. DPMO figures list thirty-six successful escapes, thirty-four of them in South Vietnam and two in Laos. There were more than those thirty-six escapes, including some from prison camps in Hanoi itself. Some escapes ended in recapture within hours, some individuals were not recaptured for days, and some were simply never seen again. There were individuals who escaped multiple times, in both North and South Vietnam. However, only thirty- six American prisoners of war escaped and reached American forces. Of those thirty- six successful attempts, twenty-eight of them escaped within their first month of captivity.
  • Australian War Memorial Annual Report 2009-2010

    Australian War Memorial Annual Report 2009-2010

    Australian War Memorial War Australian Annual Report 2009-2010 Annual Report Australian War Memorial Annual Report 2009-2010 Australian War Memorial Annual Report 2009–2010 Then Prime Minister of Australia, the Honourable The Council Chair walks with Governor-General Her Excellency Kevin Rudd MP, delivers the Address on ANZAC Ms Quentin Bryce through the Commemorative Area following Day 2010. the 2009 Remembrance Day ceremony. Australian War Memorial Annual Report 2009–2010 Annual report for the year ended 30 June 2010, together with the financial statements and the report of the Auditor-General Images produced courtesy of the Australian War Memorial, Canberra Cover image: New Eastern Precinct development at night (AWM PAIU2010/028.11) Back cover image: The sculpture of Sir Edward ‘Weary’ Dunlop overlooks the Terrace at the Memorial cafe (AWM PAIU2010/028.01) Copyright © Australian War Memorial ISSN 1441 4198 This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced, copied, scanned, stored in a retrieval system, recorded, or transmitted in any form or by any means without the prior written permission of the publisher. Australian War Memorial GPO Box 345 Canberra, ACT 2601 Australia www.awm.gov.au Australian War Memorial Annual Report 2009–2010 iii Australian War Memorial Annual Report 2009–2010 iv Australian War Memorial Annual Report 2009–2010 Introduction to the Report The Annual Report of the Australian War Memorial for the year ended 30 June 2010 follows the format for an Annual Report for a Commonwealth Authority in accordance with the Commonwealth Authorities and Companies (CAC) (Report of Operations) Orders 2005 under the CAC Act 1997.
  • THE LAND WARFARE PAPERS Koje Island: the 1952 Korean Hostage

    THE LAND WARFARE PAPERS Koje Island: the 1952 Korean Hostage

    .. ••• • f .._ ., ,,•,. •,,u .••••., "• o • , • ....., ·�.\ �· � , , "'•. 0 , , , , .. ...· _. ...... i THE LAND WARFARE PAPERS No. 19 SEPTEMBER 1994 Koje Island: The 1952 Korean Hostage Crisis William Roskey A National Security Affairs Paper Published on Occasion by THE INSTITUTE OF LAND WARFARE ASSOCIATION OF THE UNITED ST ATES ARMY Arlington, Virginia KOJE ISLAND: THE 1952 KOREAN HOSTAGE CRISIS by William Roskey The Institute of Land Warfare ASSOCIATION OF THE UNITED STATES ARMY The Institute of Land Warfare 's purpose is to extend the educational work of AUSA by sponsoring scholarly publications, to include books, monographs and essays on key defense issues, as well as workshops and symposia. A work selected for publication as a Land Warfare Paper represents research by the author which, in the opinion of the edito­ rial board, will contribute to a better understanding of a particular defense or national security issue. Publication as an Institute of Land Warfare Paper does not indicate that the Association of the United States Army agrees with everything in the paper, but does suggest that the Association believes the paper will stimulate the thinking of AUSA mem­ bers and others concerned about important defense issues. LAND WARFARE PAPER NO.l9, SEPTEMBER 1994 Koje Island: The 1952 Korean Hostage Crisis by William Roskey William Roskey enlisted in the United States Army in March 1965 and spent nearly four years in Army Intelligence as a Kore an translator, serving both on the Korean De­ militarized Zone and at the headquarters of the National Security Agency. For more than 20 years, he has worked for the Health Care Financing Administration, the fe deral agency responsible for administering the Medicare and Medicaid programs.
  • What Is a Prisoner of War For?

    What Is a Prisoner of War For?

    19 WHAT IS A PRISONER OF WAR FOR? Professor John Hickman Associate Professor of Government, Berry College Abstract This article presents a conceptual map of the purposes served by continuing custody of prisoners of war and captured non-combatants. Morally legitimate and non-controversial purposes include preventing prisoners of war from rejoining their comrades-in-arms, preventing both prisoners of war and captured non-combatants from giving material support to combatants still in the field, facilitating orderly release and repatriation at the end of hostilities, and the prosecution for war crimes. Morally illegitimate purposes include punishment, exploitation as conscript labour, recruitment or conscription as combatants, exploitation for intelligence, display as proof of victory, and ideological indoctrination. Analysis of historical cases illustrating each purpose reveal that continuing custody is often motivated by multiple purposes, both legitimate and illegitimate. What explains adoption of multiple and illegitimate purposes for continuing custody? Prisoners are available for legitimate and illegitimate purposes because neither elites nor masses within the captor state typically view prisoners as members of the moral community.1 Continuing custody does not alter the perceived status of the captured as aliens who cannot be intuitively invested with expectations of reciprocity. This suggests both ending custody as soon as legitimate purposes are served and bringing the captured within the moral community while in continuing captivity. Introduction Throughout human history, those captured in war have presented their captors with the basic choice between immediate execution, immediate release, or continuing custody – holding them in custody pending their release or other 1 The moral community comprises those persons to whom moral obligations are owed because moral values are shared.
  • Adelaidean 9 August 99 Vol 8 No 13

    Adelaidean 9 August 99 Vol 8 No 13

    ADELAIDEANVol 8 No 13 N EWS F ROM T HE U NIVERSITY O F A DELAIDE AUGUST 9, 1999 Exchange student AF Jenish on The Vice-Chancellor on the University Profile: Professor Jason White and INSIDE 2 Coping with Goethe 3 and the community 6 addiction research University on show for a successful Open Day ABOUT 12,000 people took advantage of Open Day on Sunday 1 August, with crowds flocking to the North Terrace Campus to get a glimpse of university life. The Career & Course Expo held in Bonython Hall was again a big drawcard, and attendances at course information talks were up by about 30% on last year. Other events and displays, such as the Science Trail, Anatomical Sciences, Engineering and the Humanities & Social Sciences were all busy for most of the day. Muffin Mania had the visitors enthralled in Economics, while a taste of a different kind was on hand at the The Bonython Lions got into the spirit of things by wearing gold and blue History of Food & Drink stall, in the lame bows. form of 19th Century-style pies. The Food Technology & Management group also had mouths watering with their tastings of fresh bread. Music delights of all kinds were on offer, from CASM’s mix of traditional and contemporary, to rock band Revolvar, to rehearsals of Elder Con students. With the smell of food and the sound of music in the air, there was plenty to see, do, taste and listen to at Open Day. This robot was a big attraction in Bonython Hall.
  • Prisoners of War in Cheyenne County, 1943-1946

    Prisoners of War in Cheyenne County, 1943-1946

    Nebraska History posts materials online for your personal use. Please remember that the contents of Nebraska History are copyrighted by the Nebraska State Historical Society (except for materials credited to other institutions). The NSHS retains its copyrights even to materials it posts on the web. For permission to re-use materials or for photo ordering information, please see: http://www.nebraskahistory.org/magazine/permission.htm Nebraska State Historical Society members receive four issues of Nebraska History and four issues of Nebraska History News annually. For membership information, see: http://nebraskahistory.org/admin/members/index.htm Article Title: Prisoners of War in Cheyenne County, 1943-1946 Full Citation: Ralph Spencer, "Prisoners of War in Cheyenne County, 1943-1946," Nebraska History 63 (1982): 438-449 URL of article: http://www.nebraskahistory.org/publish/publicat/history/full-text/NH1982POWCheyenne.pdf Date: 7/30/2013 Article Summary: During World War II, prisoners of war from Europe and Africa were transferred to the United States. Of the 425,000 held in the US, 12,000 were in 20 camps in Nebraska. Scottsbluff and Fort Robinson were two base camps in western Nebraska. This article addresses the formation, conditions and running of the camps for the mostly German and Italian prisoners. Cataloging Information: Names: Clyde B Dempster, Emanuelle Campanella, Peter Kielman, Gino Rizzo, Fernando Trasatti, Walfrido Verdolini, Marzolla Ezio, Facincani Vittorio, Anton Link, Carl Mueller, Beno Mussio, Mr and Mrs Roy Wells Nebraska