text:
Napoleon Disentimed

Napoleon Disentimed is a science fiction novel by American writer Hayford Peirce, first published by Tor Books in 1987. It is a humorous treatment of two standard science fiction themes, those of time travel and of parallel universes. The protagonist is a dapper, clever con man who, although born to humble origins in Bangor, Maine, United States, calls himself Sir Kevin Dean de Courtney MacNair of MacNair. Part of it is set in two alternate universes to our own. In one of them, Napoleon won the Napoleonic Wars and subdued Great Britain and Russia in 1806, thereafter securing global dominance for him and his descendants- a Napoleon V still sits on his world's French imperial throne in its 1980s. In another, the British royal family made different dynastic arrangements, leading to the birth of a male heir to King William IV rather than Queen Victoria, Frederick I, whose descendants still rule the United Kingdom- Frederick IV is the reigning monarch in its 1987. Through a complicated series of misadventures MacNair ends up impersonating Napoleon Bonaparte for the dictator's so-called "Missing Years", 1806–1808. By the end of the book he has succeeded in not only acquiring a beautiful wife and a slightly run-down château in France but in also inventing both the modern indoor flush toilet and Champagne. A sequel to Napoleon Disentimed, also featuring the MacNair, is The Burr in the Garden of Eden.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Napoleon Disentimed


text:
Paul Caligiuri

Paul David Caligiuri (born March 9, 1964) is an American former professional soccer player who played as a defensive midfielder.

Caligiuri's professional career spanned 16 years, during which he played for numerous teams in the United States and Germany, and for the U.S. national team. During his 14 years as a defender and defensive midfielder with the national team, he earned 110 caps and scored five goals.

Caligiuri is best remembered for his game-winning goal widely dubbed the "Shot heard round the world," which he scored in a 1–0 World Cup qualifier victory over Trinidad and Tobago on November 19, 1989. The victory qualified the United States for the 1990 FIFA World Cup in Italy, its first World Cup berth since 1950. There Caligiuri notched the first World Cup goal for the U.S. national team in 40 years, scoring in a 5–1 defeat against Czechoslovakia. He is a member of the National Soccer Hall of Fame.

High school and college
Caligiuri was born in Westminster, California. After graduating from Walnut High School, he attended UCLA from 1982 to 1985. During his four seasons with the Bruins, he was twice named an NCAA All-American. He also captained the Bruins to an NCAA Championship his junior year.

San Diego Nomads
After graduating from UCLA, Caligiuri played the 1986 season with the San Diego Nomads of the Western Soccer Alliance, earning the league's Most Valuable Player award. He was also named the 1986 U.S. Soccer Athlete of the Year.

Germany
Caligiuri's rookie professional accomplishments attracted the attention of German Bundesliga club Hamburger SV, who signed him after his appearance in the 1986 FIFA/UNICEF All Star Game.

In 1988, Hamburg transferred Caligiuri to SV Meppen of the German 2. Bundesliga, where he played for two seasons. From Meppen, he moved to FC Hansa Rostock in East Germany, with whom he would win the East German professional championship. From 1991 to 1992 he played for Second Bundesliga club SC Freiburg.

Los Angeles Salsa
On May 4, 1995, Caliguiri returned to the United States from Germany to sign with the Los Angeles Salsa of the American Professional Soccer League to gain match fitness before the U.S. national team's games that summer. (The Salsa played the season however in the USISL Pro League.) Caligiuri donated his entire salary from the Salsa to the victims of the Oklahoma City bombing.

Loan to St. Pauli
In August, the Salsa loaned Caligiuri to Bundesliga club FC St. Pauli, where he appeared in 14 games. In January 1996, the team elected not to exercise an option in Caligiuri's contract.

Major League Soccer
Caligiuri returned to the United States, where he signed with the emergent Major League Soccer. Despite Caligiuri's stated position that a contract clause that dictated he play for his hometown Los Angeles Galaxy, MLS allocated Caligiuri to the Columbus Crew. During his lone season with the Crew, he scored three goals. Caligiuri sued Major League Soccer to play for the LA Galaxy, and in March 1997 was placed with Los Angeles for the 1997 season, despite his high salary and the fact that the Galaxy were close to the salary cap. He played there until his 2001 retirement, finishing his MLS career with nine goals and 14 assists accumulated during 135 games, including 123 starts.

Caligiuri's final professional appearance was in the 2001 U.S. Open Cup Final on October 27, 2001, where the LA Galaxy defeated New England Revolution 2–1 in extra time.

International career
Caligiuri represented the U.S. at the 1983 Pan American Games. While at UCLA Caligiuri had earned his first cap for the national team, playing October 9, 1984 against El Salvador. Caligiuri eventually tallied 110 appearances for the United States, and scored five goals from his position in the midfield. Perhaps his biggest goal was in a 1989 World Cup qualifier in Trinidad and Tobago that gave the U.S. a 1–0 victory and sent the Americans to the World Cup finals for the first time in 40 years.

On March 14, 1990, Caligiuri signed a contract with USSF making him a full-time national team member. He remained on contract with USSF for several years. In 1993, he briefly considered moving to a British or German club after being omitted from the U.S. team's Gold Cup roster, but ultimately chose to dedicate himself to the national team as it prepared for the 1994 World Cup.

Caligiuri was a central figure in the national team from the 1980s through the mid-1990s, and started every U.S. match in both the 1990 and 1994 World Cups. In 1997, he played his final game for the national team.

Caligiuri played with the U.S. Futsal team in 1996, earning four caps and scoring one goal.

International goals

 * Scores and results list the United States' goal tally first, score column indicates score after each Caligiuri goal.

Post-soccer career
Caligiuri was appointed head coach of both the men and women's soccer teams at Cal Poly Pomona before the beginning of their 2001 fall seasons, although he did not take over until 2002. He held the women's team's coaching position through the 2005 season and the men's team's coaching position through the end of the 2008 season.

Personal life
In 2004, Caligiuri was inducted into the U.S. National Soccer Hall of Fame. He serves as an athlete representative on the board of directors of the United States Soccer Federation. Caligiuri coached a BU-19 and GU-14 team for California Football Academy in Mission Viejo, California. He is currently an Area Director for the Pateadores Soccer Club. He is also the Head Coach for the Orange County Football Club, Men's Semi-Pro soccer team in the NPSL (National Premier Soccer League). This was OCFC's first season in the league where they ended the season in a 1–0 loss in the Western Conference Final of the NPSL.

title: Paul Caligiuri


text:
Hougham Battery

Hougham Battery is a World War II coastal defence battery built in 1941 between Dover and Folkestone in southeast England. It is on the cliff-edge between Abbot's Cliff and Shakespeare Cliff.

The battery was equipped with three 8-inch (203 mm) Mark VIII naval guns. The complex was built in 1941 and manned by men of 520 Coastal Regiment Royal Artillery

The construction of the A20 in the 1970s caused most of the battery to be covered with earth, so little can be seen on the surface, though access is possible to the underground battery plotting room. Some of the observation posts on the cliff edge are also visible.

The batteries to the east and west of Dover were each designated as a fortress and each fortress had an underground plotting room from where the guns could be controlled. At Hougham. there are No.1, No.2 and No.3 Gun emplacements.

The North Downs Way (long-distance path) leads over Round Down (on the Dover Cliffs) between Folkestone and Dover. The path passes by several observation posts of the battery.

title: Hougham Battery


text:
Talk:Rabin cryptosystem

 * Article: de:Rabin-Kryptosystem (merge into our stubby Rabin cryptosystem)
 * Corresponding English-language article: merge into our stubby Rabin cryptosystem
 * Originally Requested by: — Matt 18:12, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Status: Mpolo 07:49, Oct 3, 2004 (UTC)
 * Other notes: Math should be checked. I have an M.A., but that was long, long ago....

Only the signature, not encryption is as secure as integer factorization
If the message m squared m*m is smaller than n, since m can be calculated as the square root (without remainder) independend of n, p and q. In such a case the encryption is not secure at all. 109.90.224.162 (talk) 15:04, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

How do you compute square roots of very large integers? How do you even decide if it is a square? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8109:D3F:E9A4:5928:4A75:2880:DD7E (talk) 19:46, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

This code will find the square root of a perfect power, which the algorithm as described in this article is. Note that Rabin's original paper does not say $$m^2 \pmod{n}$$.

Rabin's original paper (https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA078415.pdf)

Evaluation, a proposal
As discussed in other sections of this discussion page, it is not exactly clear, why a chosen ciphertext attack should break the Rabin Cryptosystem. To shed some light on what Michael Rabin wrote in his original paper and what exactly the problem is, I propose to include a subsection under "Evaluation", which explains how finding square roots is connected to factoring the public key. I propose to use an example based on the two prime numbers "p=19","q=23","n=p*q=323". Rough outline:
 * Start with "k*k = s mod n", that means that "k" is one of the square roots of "s".
 * "n-k" is another square root of "s", because "(-k)*(-k) = s mod n". So "-k = n-k mod n" is the second square root of "s".
 * Now from Rabins paper we know, that there has to be another number "h", with "h != k mod n" and "h != -k mod n", so that "h*h = s mod n". This "h" is the third square root of "s".
 * "-h" is the fourth square root of "s".
 * Rabin shows that if you can find two square roots "k" and "h", with "h != k mod n" and "h != -k mod n", then you can very easily calculate "p" and "q", because: either "gcd(k-h,n) = p" or "gcd(k-h,n) = q". (gcd here means Greatest common divisor).
 * Example: "p=19,q=23,n=p*q=437". "s=233", "k=200, -k=237", "h=85, -h=352". (Simple check: "k*k mod n = 200*200 mod 437 = 233 = s")"k-h=200-85=115", "gcd(115,437) = 23 = q", voila we found one of the two prime factors.
 * Consequences:
 * Any attacker can create pairs of "k" and "s": Simply randomly generate a "k" and calculate "s = k*k mod n" ("n" is public).
 * If an attacker can additionally find "h" with "h != k mod n" and "h != -k mod n", the attacker is able to find "p" and "q". This is exactly what Rabin proves in his paper: Finding square roots "mod n" is as hard as factoring "n", because if you have the square roots you can efficiently calculate the prime factors of "n". Note: This of course applies to any cryptosystem, which relies on the assumption that factoring is hard (like for example this also applies to RSA).
 * What has to be avoided at all costs is, that the owner of the private key ("p" and "q") calculates such a "h" ("h*h = s mod n, h != k mod n, h != -k mod n") and sends it back to the attacker. If this should ever happen, the attacker can easily calculate "p" and "q" as shown before.
 * Possible threat: There exist "h" for which "h*h = s" with "1<=s<n" (important here, no "mod n"!). You can calculate "h" from "s" easily in this case (simple integer square root algorithm). When using Rabins Cryptosystem for signatures the signer should make sure that the signature "k", with "k*k = s mod n" does not produce a "s" which has an integer square root; of course the probability that this ever happens is minuscule and can be easily avoided completely. Again all this applies to any cryptosystem based on prime factors: An attacker can always create a huge amount of random "k*k = s mod n" pairs and check if "s" has an integer square root; this is just a randomized way to factor "n".

In my opinion the last two points are, why some people seem to say that Rabins Cryptosystem is vulnerable. But of course this is only true, if you construct the protocol in such a way, that the owner of the private key does send back the critical "h" square root. This can be easily avoided or at least I really cannot think of any scenario in which it cannot be avoided. Of course in a way this means that Rabins Cryptosystem is more "sensitive" (lack of a better word) in a manner than RSA:
 * Rabin: If you have a "ciphertext(s) <-> plaintext(k)" pair, then there exists an alternative "plaintext(h)" which MUST NOT be revealed by the owner of the private key. (Revealing a stand-alone "ciphertext(s) <-> plaintext(k)" pair DOES NOT break anything!).
 * RSA: There are only pairs of "ciphertext <-> plaintext" and no alternative "plaintext" exists. Revealing such a "ciphertext <-> plaintext" pair does not break anything.

Note under the "Security" section it says that: "(This assumes that the plaintext was not created with a specific structure to ease decoding.)". If you read what I wrote above, this quote is nonsense: ANY plaintext "k" (regardless of structure) produces a ciphertext "s" with "s = k*k mod n". If an attacker can find the an alternative plaintext "h", so that "h != k mod n" and "h != -k mod n", the cipher has been broken; this is true for ALL plaintexts "k", so why has that anything to do with the structure of the plaintext ? Lundril (talk) 13:26, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Rabin for signatures, and Blum-Williams modification
Rabin cryptosystem is not a permutation, so there may be issues when used for pubkey encryption, but there should not when used in signature schemes. Can somebody write something about this?
 * answering to myself... Ok, Rabin is totally insecure as a signature scheme under CCA. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.124.63.18 (talk) 23:03, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Also, Blum and Williams have suggested to use primes p and q which are both equivalent to 3 mod 4, in which case the solution is unique, i.e. the scheme becomes a permutation. Can somebody write something about this as well?

Thanks, 141.201.123.144 (talk) 14:44, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Security
The security stuff on this page is definitely wrong -- appropriate padding makes Rabin stronger, not less strong. I'll try and fix it when I have time ciphergoth 10:26, 2004 Nov 16 (UTC)

 * It's been fixed, I think. —Lowellian (reply) 01:50, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

From the page:
 * By adding redundancies, for example, the repetition of the last 64 bits, the system can be made to produce a single root. This thwarts the chosen-ciphertext attack, since the decoding algorithm then only produces the root that the attacker already knows. If this technique is applied, the proof of the equivalence with the factorization problem fails, so it is uncertain as of 2004 if this system is secure.

This is not followed by a reference and I think it is simply not true ? As far as I understand the proof of the equivalence with the factorization problem (I read the original paper), the equivalence simply means: If someone is able to compute FOUR square-roots from only a single number, then from these FOUR square-roots, you can factorize "n". Now "n" is public; so an attacker ALWAYS will know "n". So how would an attacker break the system by Chosen Ciphertext Attack: He would repeatedly give the decryption oracle a ciphertext which was simply created by choosing a random number X and then calculating "X*X mod n".So the attacker already knows two square roots of "X*X" (X itself and N-X), if the decryption oracle gives him a third square root Y (so that Y*Y=X*X mod n), then the attacker knows all four square-roots and thus can factor "n".

I do not see at all why putting redundancies in "X" (the number from which the cipher text X*X mod n is created) does have anything to do with the equivalence to factorization. It simply means an attacker will always get back X instead of Y. The equivalence to factorization is not touched by that fact. It also means that an attacker cannot chose X arbitrarily any more, so it puts constraints on the attacker. I completely fail to see why this should weaken the cipher.

I also find it strange that people seem to have some bad feelings about putting redundancy in X. If you use RSA with 2048 to encrypt a message, the message (in current crypto systems) usually is a symmetric key comprised of something like 256 bits. For encrypting this key, first a number with 2048 bits is produced by padding the 256 bits with something like Optimal Asymmetric Encryption Padding. So RSA also uses padding, so why does it seems to be a problem for Miller Rabin encryption to use some padding in X to introduce some redundancies ?

A comment about costs: It is claimed that because the decryption algorithm needs to calculate four square roots that decryption introduces additional costs. Well yes, but these "costs" are completely marginal when compared to the costs you need to find the square roots "mod p" and "mod q" or compared to calculating the logarithm "mod n" for RSA: Generating the four square roots takes 4 additions/subtractions "mod n", speaking of "additional costs" gives the impression that these costs are high and this is simply wrong... 92.194.229.8 (talk) 11:14, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I can only totally agree to that analysis. I really would like to see that paper that says that rabin cryptosystem is insecure against chosen ciphertext attacks. This really only applies if you implement it in a fairly dumb manner (oracle which for a given ciphertext produces the four square roots and then RANDOMLY selects one of the square roots and sends it back to the attacker). For non-signature applications (like exchange of a symmetric key for setup of a secure communcation channel) this really is NO problem at all, because the sender (the one which encrypts by using the public key) simply can be forced to additionally send proof of the secret (like for example a hash key of the secret) and the decrypting entity will simply check which square root was used by checking the proof. For signature applications the problem is more complicated, because in this case the decrypter needs to proof that it is able to generate square roots by providing one for a cipher text which is generated out of the data which should be signed. But still it is not clear how an attacker could use that: In the signature scenario the decrypter has TONS of freedom how exactly it proofs that it can calculate square roots. The DECRYPTER (and not the attacker) has full control over the signature process, so it is completely unclear how an attacker should be able to lure the decrypter into providing useful information... You really get the feeling that rabin cryptosystem is dismissed for completely different reasons (marketing; RSA is patented and probably some people pay license fees.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.194.141.107 (talk) 01:01, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

 * I disagree. Section 7.2.4 of the lecture notes by Goldwasser and Bellare confirms the quote from the article. There Goldwasser and Bellare explain that adding sufficient redundacy to the plaintext before encrypting it, has the consequence that proof of equivalence of the cryptosystem and factoring no longer works. Concretely, the section concludes with
 * "Therefore, either Rabin's scheme is not equivalent to factoring, which is the case when inverting on a sparse message space, or (when M is not sparse) it is insecure before a chosen ciphertext adversary."
 * First of all is there any way to point a reader of the article to this section ? I just read the section and I think it would help if the argument would be repeated in a more readable fashion in the article:Let me try to explain: Rabin proved that if you can calculate the four square roots of a single arbitrary number "c" (the ciphertext == encrypted message), then you can factorize n (the public key). Now if you limit the message space (by enforcing certain patterns in the message), then it might be that for this particular message space an adversary can decrypt ciphertext, but is still not able to factor the public key; so if you limit the message space, then decrypting might not be as hard as factoring. A trivial example: We have an N (public key) with 1024 bit and we limit the message space to numbers "0 .. 2^400-1" (so numbers with a length of 400 bit maximum). The ciphertext "c = m*m mod n" will have at most 800 bit (since m is at most a 400 bit number) meaning that you never actually did any modulo operation. An adversary has to find the integer square root of your 800 bit ciphertext. Calculating integer square roots is easy, so an adversary can easily reverse the encryption and will still not be able to factorize "N". Conclusion: If you enforce certain patterns on the message to be encrypted, then it is not clear that decrypting is as hard as factoring.My problem with this whole argument: There is a much better way. Instead of enforcing a pattern on the message, enforce that the encrypter additionally has to send a cryptographic hash of the message along with the ciphertext. With this approach decrypting is as hard as factoring and you defeat chosen ciphertext attacks. Lundril (talk) 18:20, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

 * Of course, the chosen ciphertext attack can be prevented by chosing an appropriate padding scheme, though like RSA this is not completely trivial. E.g. the proposal above to append a hash of the encrypted message loses semantic security and thus is not appropriate. Claims what constitutes a good padding scheme should therefore come with a citation, this discussion page is not the right place to argue that a certain padding is not susceptible to an attack. 62.202.80.11 (talk) 00:55, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I did not mean padding. I meant encrypt your message (without padding), and additionally to the ciphertext you must send a cryptographic hash of your unencrypted message (cleartext). This kind of step is not necessary with RSA, because RSA is a 1-to-1 mapping whereas Rabin is a 4-to-1 mapping. The chosen ciphertext attack against Rabin as far as I can tell works like this:
 * You enforce a certain pattern on the message to be encrypted to make sure, that the decrypter can pick the right square root.
 * A lot of messages have to fit that pattern (otherwise it is not clear that decryption is equivalent to factoring).
 * You have an oracle to which you can send ciphertext and it will return the decrypted message (provided there is a decrypted message, which fits the enforced pattern).
 * An attacker randomly produces ciphertext, by picking a message which does NOT fit the pattern and encrypting it (c=m*m mod n).
 * The oracle tries to decrypt the ciphertext.
 * Since there ar many messages which fit the enforced pattern, after a reasonable amount of time the attacker will find a ciphertext for which the oracle produces the decrypted answer.
 * With this decrypted answer (second pair of square roots), the attacker is able to reproduce the private key (p,q).
 * By enforcing that a sender must additionally send a cryptographic hash of the unencrypted message, this attack is thwarted and you do not need to put any constraints on the message (which would prevent equivalency to factorization). To reproduce the private key, an attacker would have to
 * pick a number "x", generate ciphertext "c = x*x mod n"
 * generate a cryptographic hash "h", which fits to the unknown alternative square root "y".
 * Ask the oracle to decrypt "c"
 * The oracle produces "y" and answers because "h" fits "y".
 * The attacker can now reproduce the public key (p,q)
 * The question is how should an attacker be able to produce the cryptographic hash "h" ?The whole chosen ciphertext against Rabin stuff only works under the assumption that an oracle will produce answers to a given ciphertext with high probability. And yes: It is pretty easy to prevent this. BTW: If anybody suddenly suggests this scheme of adding a cryptographic hash of the unencrypted message: I proposed it first :-). Lundril (talk) 18:55, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Duplicate
It appears that this article is duplicated on the Rabin-Williams encryption page. I suggest that the best parts of each of the explanations be taken to form a single article and a redirect be made from the redundant page. Which page becomes the redundant page depends on which name is most appropriate. Does anyone know how this scheme came to be known under two names?

Worked Example
In the example given on the page, mq = 9. By my calculations, mq = 2.

mq2 (congruent to) c mod 11

mq2 (congruent to) 15 mod 11

mq2 = 4

mq = 2

Apologies for poor formatting.

--Newheroicideal 15:07, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

No-one seems to object, so I changed it myself. --Newheroicideal 15:18, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

 * In the article square roots are computed using $$m_q\equiv c^{(q+1)/4}\pmod{q}$$. Thus $$m_q\equiv 15^3\equiv 9\pmod{11}$$ is the correct result. But, notice that $$2\equiv -9\pmod{11}$$. Hence 2 is the other square root of $$c$$ modulo 11, just not the one computed with described method. 85.2.2.33 20:33, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Legendre Symbol
From $$c\equiv m^2\pmod{pq}$$ follows that c is a quadratic residue. Hence $$\left({c\over p}\right)=1$$ Why is this so? Doesn't seem to be correct to me after reading an article on Jacobi symbol... —Ram3ai (talk) 21:25, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

 * If $$c\equiv m^2\pmod{pq}$$ then $$c = m^2 + npq$$ for some integer n. So $$c\equiv m^2\pmod{p}$$. reetep (talk) 11:27, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

What is 'r'
In decryption section a variable 'r' appears "out of the blue", then proabably reused by a possible solution. This proabably comes from different editors not keeping consistency. Even knowing what a Rabin scheme is, it introduces much confusion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Janislaw (talk • contribs) 14:48, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

1 or 6?
From the article:

In our example we get $$m_p = 1$$ and $$m_q = 9$$.

Since we took p=7, m=20, the first remainder must equal 6 and not 1 (unless any other possible input is considered). Isn't it the case? --Microcell (talk) 19:38, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

The Python script
Python (programming language) version 2.x: http://iaktueller.de/rabin.py — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.118.82.226 (talk) 21:54, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

That code is not Python, it is JavaScript, and does not do the encryption. It is largely an implementation of BigInt and a primality test. Miller-Rabin in particular, and not the Rabin algorithm.

As hard as factorization - I don't believe it!
Assume $$m^2$$ is smaller than $$n$$, then decryption is trivial. We must just calculate the ordinary square root without modulo, since the $$\bmod n$$ operation has no effect.

But we may add a large hash function to the message $$m$$ so that $$m^2$$ is much larger than $$n$$. The Clou - decryption becomes unique.

The density of squares as compared to primes
The Prime Number Theorem says that the density of primes smaller or equal $$n$$ is $$1/ln(n)$$. The density of square numbers is $$1/n$$ which is much smaller for large numbers.

As consequence a random number $$ r >= 2^{512} $$ has only a probability smaller than $$ \frac{1}{2^{256}} $$ of being a square number. We can conclude, that the rabin signature is secure for hash function values larger or equal than $$ 2^{512} $$ provided that integer factorization is hard.

Hmmmm - yes the signature of a random message can not be forged, since it very likely that with n larger than $$ 2^{1024} $$ a random message is much larger than $$ 2^{512} $$. Ok, so we can add for example a 1024 bit random value to the message and sign this sum instead of the original message. If we include the random value in the signature, it is perfect. --84.118.82.226 (talk) 17:49, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Expected value of 4 vs 4 tries
The following sentence in the article

>It has the disadvantage that each output of the Rabin function can be generated by any of four possible inputs;

seems unsupported by the Rabin paper - four is the expected number of attempts, but it could be much higher - am I missing something? TD-Linux (talk) 16:36, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

 * Yes I think you're missing something but I'm not sure exactly what the misunderstanding is. The point is that given any number k which is the encryption of a number p1, there are also exactly three other numbers p2, p3 and p4 which also encrypt to k. What part of the Rabin paper do you think contradicts this? Are you by chance looking at section 4 (Inversion is Equivalent to Factorization)? This demonstrates a probabilistic technique for factoring in which the algorithm is repeated an arbitrary number of times until it succeeds, but this is completely unrelated to decryption; it is part of the proof that decryption is as hard as factorization. Someone wishing to decrypt a message wouldn't use the algorithm in section 4, they would use the deterministic algorithm presented in section 2, which produces exactly 4 answers. CodeTalker (talk) 16:57, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

 * I'm actually looking at the signing section (section 3). I guess that sentence in the intro was referring to the decryption process, not signing process. TD-Linux (talk) 17:29, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

 * Ah I see. Yes, the mention of 4 tries in the signature algorithm is unrelated to the fact that each encrypted message has 4 possible decryptions. This article discusses only encryption and decryption. There should probably be a section mentioning Rabin's signature scheme as well. CodeTalker (talk) 17:56, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Adolf Kunerth's modular square root algorithm challenges Rabin's assertion that his cryptosystem is as hard as factoring

 * The Rabin cryptosystem was the first asymmetric cryptosystem where recovering the plaintext from the ciphertext could be proven to :be as hard as factoring.

See Kunerth%27s_algorithm where a modular square root can be taken without factoring the modulus. Thus Rabin's assertion that his m^2 mod p*q is equivalent to integer factorisation since Kunerth's method does not need to factor the modulus and can do composite modula Endo999 (talk) 04:22, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

See the talk page on Kunerth's algorithm where the modular square root of 5 mod x^4+18*x^2+1 is easily taken. If the modulus, p*q, happens to be this formula and the ciphertext is 5 then the cipher can be broken within seconds, and Rabin's cryptosystem has flaws in it. Endo999 (talk) 04:31, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

I've been working with Kunerth's algorithm for 9 months now and I have not been able to get two modular square roots of the same ciphertext. The algorithm doesn't seem to do this well, so therefore, it is good at getting one modular square root of a p*q modulus, but not two (which is necessary for factorisation). There Kunerth's method can sometimes (when the associated quadratic is squared) break Rabin, without being able to factor the modulus. Endo999 (talk) 04:39, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

See Talk:Kunerth%27s_algorithm for a modulus that is x^4+18x^2+1 that is a P*Q semiprime and which can have the root of 5 taken without factoring the modulus Endo999 (talk) 06:27, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

The Blum-Goldwasser cryptosystem, also a system where the modular square root is featured, may also be subject to the Kunerth challenge. See Blum%E2%80%93Goldwasser_cryptosystem Endo999 (talk) 14:26, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

"inverting has been mathematically proven to be as hard as factoring"
Following this edit, the introduction states:

"The Rabin trapdoor function has the advantage that inverting it has been mathematically proven to be as hard as factoring integers".

It's left untold what "inverting" exactly means. The original source MIT-LCS-TR-212 Theorem 1) makes that: "finding one of the solutions of y² ≡ m (mod n) whenever a solution exits". In the context of textbook Rabin signature (resp. encryption), m is the message (resp. ciphertext), and one of the solutions y is the signature (resp. plaintext). The "whenever a solution exits" can be loosened to: "with non-vanishing probability for random m", but not to "for some exponentially large class of m" (counterexample to the later: it's easy to invert the function for m := y² and 0≤y<√n )

One option is to change the statement "The Rabin trapdoor function has the advantage that inverting it whenever possible has been mathematically proven to be as hard as factoring integers". That's directly supported by the original article, and "whenever" points to a critical and easily overlooked limitation of the proof. Fgrieu (talk) 14:52, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

 * I don't think the formal details of the definition of inverting are important to expound upon in the article summary. The point is that there is some primitive mechanism that is easy to compute one way and hard the other, without secret knowledge, which is what being a trapdoor function is about, and without a factoring algorithm, which is what the security reduction is about and what makes it noteworthy compared to RSA.
 * Obviously if you're given a quadratic nonresidue you won't find a preimage even if you can compute square roots of quadratic residues, and obviously a function to return a square root is limited to choosing one of up to four possibilities even if restricted to quadratic residues. Same with squaring negative real numbers: colloquially it is perfectly natural to say that the square root function inverts the square function on real numbers, even if it gives only one output and doesn't work on negatives.
 * But this is all very detailed jargon that doesn't belong in a summary. If you want all the details, you can find them in the literature or somewhere deeper inside an article.
 * I'm also not citing Rabin's original articles as a source for the summary because the original articles by Rabin aren't even about encryption at all! The sources I gave (Bellare & Goldwasser's lecture notes, Galbraith's book) go into more formal detail about trapdoor function security (Theorem 2.38 of B&G) or one-way encryption security (Secs. 1.3.1 and 2.1.3 of Galbraith for definition, Sec 24.2.3 for theorems about Rabin encryption) if you really want that. Taylor Riastradh Campbell (talk) 15:35, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
 * On second taught, I agree to the "that doesn't belong in a summary" argument. And I'm happy with the current state of that section, and the additional details given in the security section. Fgrieu (talk) 05:39, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Signature is not encryption with private key
@49.236.16.238 This revert reintroduced a conceptual error about encryption and signature schemes that the reverted change had fixed.

Creating a signature is not encrypting with a private key, despite pop science or lazy textbook expositions that give this misconception. Sometimes there are signature schemes and encryption schemes that use a common underlying mathematical primitive, like RSA-FDH and RSA-KEM which can both use cubing modulo a product of large secret primes but are otherwise different in just about every respect. Other signature schemes, like the hash-based SPHINCS, have no corresponding encryption scheme (in the case of hash-based schemes, they can't: Merkle puzzles are optimal).

Rabin's original paper described a signature scheme, not an encryption scheme; variants of it for encryption came later, generally with security problems rendering them useless for real-world applications and fit only for textbook examples of how not to design encryption schemes. Secure encryption schemes based on the Rabin trapdoor function (none of which appear in this article, but here's an example secure Rabin-based public-key encryption scheme) take a KEM approach that doesn't feed any plaintexts for encryption into the squaring function at all. Even the insecure textbook variants often involve padding plaintexts with redundancy, so it's ambiguous what 'encrypting' or 'decrypting' mean here even in context. For more detail, references, and history about the signature scheme, see the full article on Rabin signatures.

Describing parts of the signature scheme as 'encrypting' numbers is wrong, and saying the actual standard mathematical operation is unambiguous, so I've restored the edits which correctly describe them as squaring or finding square roots. If you still want the changes reverted, can you please discuss your reasons here? Taylor Riastradh Campbell (talk) 17:56, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Rabin cryptosystem


text: Category:Unincorporated communities in Oregon


text:
File:Primrose-hill-2004 2.jpg

Primrose Hill. View over London. 2004

2004 Hans Andersen

title: File:Primrose-hill-2004 2.jpg


text:
Lydden Spout Battery

Lydden Spout Battery is a World War II coastal defence battery built in 1941 west of Dover. Originally armed with three 6-inch Mark VII naval guns on Mark V mountings, later upgraded to Mark XXIV guns on the same mountings. Fan Bay Battery to the east of Dover is built to the same plan.

The battery is to the south of the current A20. Most of the buildings have been demolished and the emplacements filled with concrete, but the catering rooms survive.

Lydden Spout Battery's remaining buildings above ground: Warrant Officer's Mess/Sergeants Mess in the foreground. Dining room and cook house is the L-shaped building behind.

title: Lydden Spout Battery


text:
Psycho Realm

The Psycho Realm is a Mexican-American hip hop group started in 1989 by the brothers Sick Jacken and Big Duke both born from Mazatlan Sinaloa raised in the Downtown neighborhood of Pico-Union area of Los Angeles.

History
The group started as a duo of Sick Jacken (Joaquín Gonzalez) and Big Duke (Gustavo Gonzalez) in 1989; the two were later joined by Ferruco (Jose Martinez) in 1993. The group recorded various demo songs, but one track ("Scandalous") appeared on the soundtrack to the 1994 film Mi Vida Loca. Ferruco departed from the group in 1994. The following year, B-Real (Louis Freese) of the rap group Cypress Hill saw Psycho Realm performing at Olvera Street for an End Barrio Warfare concert. Their performance inspired B-Real to the point that he wanted to join the group.

In 1997 Sony released the first Psycho Realm album, labelled as an addition to the Cypress Hill Family by the sticker placed on the CD case. Due to conflicts with the record label, the Gonzalez brothers were dropped from Sony. As Jacken explains, "the machine was just trying to censor me / Didn't do it for Sony so they ended up releasing me / Independent, no longer locked down for an infinity / So my vicinity stays true to my identity." The brothers then went on to form Sick Symphonies, their own record label, which lacked the big budget for promotion and distribution in chain stores along with group member B-Real, who was stuck on his contract with Sony for Cypress Hill.

Tragedy
At 12:35 a.m. on January 29, 1999, one month before the expected release of the second Psycho Realm album, Duke was shot in the neck in a confrontation while trying to split up a fight at Tommy's Burger Stand at Beverly and Rampart Boulevard in Los Angeles. This left him paralyzed from the neck down for life. The shooter, a 24-year-old named Robert Gorcsi, who was on parole at the time of the shooting, was given a bond set at $1.6 million. He was eventually jailed for attempted murder. Later in 2000, Jacken released A War Story Book I with B-Real only appearing on one song. In 2001, the Sick Symphonies label released The Steel Storm, the first album of a new group called Street Platoon. Jacken, with the help of Street Platoon, finished A War Story Book II, which was released in the latter half of 2003 and nearly complete before the shooting of Duke.

Style and lyrics
The group aims to inject pride and knowledge into those who live in gang-infested, poverty-ridden neighborhoods, while at the same time aiming to open the minds of the ones on the outside who look down upon them. Jacken attempts to explain to outsiders with his statement: "my people’s exodus results in prejudice / you ask us why in poverty we become terrorists/ well let me tell you this we don’t choose to tote gats / and selling on the corner is to avoid tax." Duke views the group not as rappers, but neighborhood reporters. They choose to document "a time when it's in fashion to be gun-flashing, blasting... strapped ready for rivals harassing." The Psycho Realm spoke about the corruption of Rampart police officers from their experiences living in the Rampart district, before the Rampart Scandal hit the media. The group also promotes the unification of gangs with remarks such as, "think about who dies when we let the lead out, we’re killing family tragically." The Psycho Realm has grown a worldwide following of "soldiers," and have performed in Mexico, Latin America, Japan, and Europe. At the moment, Duke is in charge of all merchandising for Psycho Realm. Duke is known to personally reply to many of his fans' emails, and is actively involved in a large percentage of production in Psycho Realm's and other affiliates' works.

Albums

 * 1997: The Psycho Realm
 * 2000: A War Story Book I
 * 2003: A War Story Book II

Sick Jacken appearances

 * 1999: Videodrone track "Pig In A Blanket" from the self-titled album.
 * 2000: Delinquent Habits track "Midnite Spin" from the album Merry Go Round.
 * 2003: Cartel De Santa track "Jake Mate" from the album Cartel de Santa.
 * 2003: blink-182 track "The Fallen Interlude" from the album blink-182.
 * 2004: RBX track "West Side Story" from the album The Shining.
 * 2006: P.O.D. tracks "On the Grind" and "Mark My Words" from the album Testify.
 * 2006: Swollen Members track "Sinister" from the album Black Magic.
 * 2007: Evidence track "Born in LA" from the album The Weatherman LP.
 * 2007: Cormega track "Live From The Caves" from the album Who Am I?.
 * 2007: Delinquent Habits track "Sick Habits" from the album New and Improved
 * 2008: Immortal Technique track "Hollywood Driveby" from the album The 3rd World.
 * 2008: Snowgoons track "Sick Life" from the album Black Snow.
 * 2008: DJ Babu track "Black and Brown Army" from the album Duck Season Vol. 3.
 * 2008: OuterSpace track "Anointing of The Sick" from the album God's Fury.
 * 2008: DJ Muggs vs. Planet Asia track "Death Frees Every Soul" from the album Pain Language.
 * 2009: B-Real track "Psycho Realm Revolution" from the album Smoke N Mirrors.
 * 2009: La Coka Nostra tracks "Brujeria", "Soldier's Story" and "Fuck Tony Montana" from the album A Brand You Can Trust.
 * 2010: Vinnie Paz track "No Spiritual Surrender" from the album Season of the Assassin.
 * 2010: Strong Arm Steady track "Pressure" from the album In Search of Stoney Jackson.
 * 2010: DJ Muggs vs Ill Bill tracks "Trouble Shooters" and "Narco Corridos" from the album Kill Devil Hills.
 * 2010: Q-Unique track "Between Heaven and Hell" from the album Between Heaven & Hell.
 * 2010: Kemo The Blaxican track "The Gathering" from the album Upside of Struggle.
 * 2010: HCP track "La verdad" from the album De las calles para las calles.
 * 2010: MURS & 9th Wonder track "The Problem Is..." From the album Fornever
 * 2011: OuterSpace track "Lost Angels" From the album My Brother's Keeper
 * 2012: Adil Omar track "One by One" from the album The Mushroom Cloud Effect.
 * 2012: P.O.D. track "Murdered Love" from the album Murdered Love.
 * 2012: Bambu track "Th Eshit" from the album ...one rifle per family .
 * 2016: La Coka Nostra tracks "I Need Help", and "High Times" from the album To Thine Own Self Be True.
 * 2022: Madchild single “Work For It”, featuring Obnoxious

Psycho Realm presents Sick Symphonies

 * 2005: Psycho Realm and Street Platoon Present... Sick Symphonies: Sickside Stories
 * 2007: Sick Symphonies Presents DJ FM Street Mixes Vol.1

Sick Jacken albums

 * 2006: Sick Jacken & Cynic - Terror Tapes Vol. 1
 * 2007: DJ Muggs vs. Sick Jacken - Legend of the Mask and the Assassin
 * 2009: Sick Jacken - Stray Bullets
 * 2012: Sick Jacken & Cynic - Terror Tapes Vol. 2
 * 2016: Sick Jacken - Psychodelic

title: Psycho Realm


text:
Silverton, New South Wales

Silverton is a small village at the far west of New South Wales, Australia, 26 km north-west of Broken Hill. At the, Silverton had a population of 50.

The town sprang up after the discovery of rich silver deposits, although it was soon eclipsed by an even richer silver-lead-zinc ore body at nearby Broken Hill. The town is often referred to as a ghost town; however, there remains a small permanent population and mainly tourist-related businesses.

History
The earliest human settlers in the area are thought to be the Wiljakali people, although this was probably only intermittent due to lack of permanent water sources. As in much of Australia, a combination of disease and aggression by European settlers drove them from their lands.

The first European to visit the area was the then-Surveyor General of New South Wales, Major Thomas Mitchell, in 1841. Three years later, in 1844, the explorer Charles Sturt saw and named the Barrier Range while searching for an inland sea; the range was so named as it was a barrier to his progress north. Burke and Wills passed through the area in their famous 1860–61 expedition, setting up a base camp at nearby Menindee. Pastoralists first began settling the area in the 1850s, with the main trade route to the area along the Darling River.

Prospectors began working in the area in 1867 when a local station-hand claimed to have found gold there. It was later discovered that his plan was merely a pretext for stealing a horse.

Some years later in 1875, two men drilling a well on a station south of the town site hit a lode of silver. Silverton was recognised as a town on 17 September 1880 and Richard O'Connell was sent in charge of the police. Among his many other duties was Acting Clerk of Petty Sessions, Mining Registrar and Warden's Clerk.

In October 1886, the Silverton Municipal Council was formed and held its inaugural meeting in January 1887 in the Silverton Municipal Chambers, which still exist. The town's population quickly increased reaching a peak around 3,000 in the 1890s, and the Silverton Tramway was opened in 1888 connecting the town to South Australia.

Many of the houses built were of simple iron and canvas construction. The rapid depletion of the high-grade ore around Silverton, along with the discovery of an even richer silver-lead-zinc ore body in nearby Broken Hill led to a sudden decline in Silverton's population, with many of those leaving taking their homes with them.

20th century
By 1901, the town and immediate area was home to less than 300 people, but it remained popular as a venue for recreational outings by Broken Hill residents. In 1915, the Battle of Broken Hill took place when a New Year's Day picnic train from Broken Hill to Silverton was attacked by two armed persons, one from Afghanistan, and the other from modern-day Pakistan.

Penrose Park, named after John Penrose, a pioneering brewer at Silverton, was the attraction for these picnic excursions. Located beside Umberumberka Creek in a rare belt of greenery at the outskirts of Silverton, it was not so much a product of the early mining era at Silverton as of the mining boom at Broken Hill. In 1893, it was the unsuccessful site for a racecourse. Then for decades it became a picnic ground, but remained relatively neglected until the mid-1930s when the Broken Hill mining companies decided it was an admirable recreation site for their employees. Money was spent on upgrading sporting facilities, playgrounds, and parklands, such that throughout the 1940s and 50s it became a major recreational facility. Huge annual picnics/fairs were held there by social and sporting clubs, and by mining companies. For example, it was reported that the eighth annual Zinc Mine employees picnic in 1941 attracted one fifth of the entire town of Broken Hill. The convoys of family cars headed to and from Broken Hill to Penrose Park were so heavy that it became one of the first sealed roads outside Broken Hill. By the mid-1960s, interest began to wane, as did support from the mining companies, and so the park fell into slow decline. Penrose Park remains today, but is now a quiet public campground, popular with families and 'grey nomads'. Although it is a mere shadow of its heyday half a century ago when it thronged with activity, many relics of that era remain.

Demographics
In the 2016 Australian census, Silverton inhabitants were 46.9% male and 53.1% female with a median age of 53. It has a total of 12 families in 39 private dwellings with a median household income of $899 per week.

Present day
Silverton today is inhabited by a permanent population of only about 50 people, but its history and location make it a relatively popular tourist destination. Several artists live in or around the town, including Peter Browne, Albert Woodroffe and John Dynon, with some maintaining their own galleries. This is in line with the significant number of artists working out of nearby Broken Hill, as the surrounding landscape and lighting is particularly amenable to the creation of art.

Most of the original buildings have now vanished or lie in ruins, but there are some interesting buildings that remain, including the Silverton Hotel and the Silverton Gaol. By 2007, Silverton had been the scene for more than 140 films and commercials thanks to the light, the character-filled colonial buildings and its scenic desert surrounds.

The hotel has been seen in several productions, and its inside walls are covered with memorabilia. These productions include Razorback, The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert, The Flying Doctors, and Dirty Deeds. A 'lookalike' of the famous Mad Max car the 'Interceptor' was on display outside the hotel from 2002 but has since been sold and is no longer there. There is now, however, a privately owned Mad Max 2 Museum that pays homage to the movie that was filmed in the region, with much memorabilia and housing two Interceptor replicas. The Silverton Hotel was used in the series 800 Words as the location where Woody tracked down his wife to sign divorce papers.

Silverton cemetery
Just outside town, there is the Silverton cemetery (GPS -31.87426°N, 141.23172°W). It houses 402 identified grave sites and has an area of 42 acres.

title: Silverton, New South Wales


text:
Neelam Sanjiva Reddy

Neelam Sanjiva Reddy (19 May 1913 – 1 June 1996) was an Indian politician who served as the sixth president of India, serving from 1977 to 1982. Beginning a long political career with the Indian National Congress Party in the independence movement, he went on to hold several key offices in independent India – as Deputy Chief minister of Andhra state and the first chief minister of Andhra Pradesh, a two-time Speaker of the Lok Sabha and a Union Minister— before becoming the Indian president.

Born in present-day Anantapur district, Andhra Pradesh, Reddy completed his schooling at Adayar and joined the Government Arts College at Anantapur. He quit to become an Indian independence activist and was jailed for participating in the Quit India Movement. He was elected to the Madras Legislative Assembly in 1946 as a Congress party representative. Reddy became the deputy chief minister of Andhra State in 1953 and the first Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh in 1956. He was a union cabinet minister under Prime Ministers Lal Bahadur Shastri and Indira Gandhi from 1964 to 1967 and Lok Sabha Speaker from 1967 to 1969. He later retired from active politics but returned in 1975, responding to Jayaprakash Narayan's call for "Total Revolution" against the Indira Gandhi Government.

Elected to Parliament in 1977 as a candidate of the Janata Party, Reddy was unanimously elected Speaker of the Sixth Lok Sabha and three months later was elected unopposed as President of India. As president, Reddy worked with Prime Ministers Morarji Desai, Charan Singh and Indira Gandhi. Reddy was succeeded by Giani Zail Singh in 1982 and he retired to his farm in Anantapur. He died in 1996 and his samadhi is at Kalpally Burial Ground, Bangalore. In 2013, the Government of Andhra Pradesh commemorated Reddy's birth centenary.

Education and family
Reddy was born into a Telugu-speaking Hindu family in Illur village, Madras Presidency (present-day Anantapur district, Andhra Pradesh) on 19 May 1913. He studied at the Theosophical High School at Adayar in Madras and later enrolled at the Government Arts College at Anantapur, an affiliate of the University of Madras, as an undergraduate. In 1958, Sri Venkateswara University, Tirupati bestowed the degree of Honorary Doctor of Laws on him because of his role in its founding.

Reddy was married to Neelam Nagaratnamma, the sister of politician T. Nagi Reddy. The couple had one son and three daughters.

Role in the Indian independence movement
Reddy joined the Indian struggle for independence from the British Raj following Mahatma Gandhi's visit to Anantapur in July 1929 and dropped out of college in 1931. He was closely associated with the Youth League and participated in a student satyagraha. In 1938, Reddy was elected Secretary of the Andhra Pradesh Provincial Congress Committee, an office he held for ten years. During the Quit India Movement, he was imprisoned and was mostly in jail between 1940 and 1945. Released in March 1942, he was arrested again in August and sent to the Amraoti jail where he served time with activists T Prakasam, S. Satyamurti, K Kamaraj and V V Giri till 1945.

Political career
Elected to the Madras Legislative Assembly in 1946 as a Congress representative, Reddy became secretary of the Congress' legislature party. He was also a Member of the Indian Constituent Assembly from Madras. From April 1949 to April 1951, he was the Minister for Prohibition, Housing and Forests of the Madras State. Reddy lost the 1951 election to the Madras Legislative Assembly to the Communist leader Tarimela Nagi Reddy, his brother-in-law.

Deputy Chief Minister of Andhra State
In 1951, in a closely contested election, he was elected President of the Andhra Pradesh Congress Committee defeating N G Ranga. When the Andhra State was formed in 1953, T. Prakasam became its Chief Minister and Reddy became the deputy.

Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh (1956–60, 1962–64)
After the formation of the state of Andhra Pradesh by incorporating Telangana with the Andhra State, Reddy became its first Chief Minister from 1 November 1956 to 11 January 1960. He was Chief Minister for a second time from 12 March 1962 to 20 February 1964, thus holding that office for over five years. Reddy was MLA from Sri Kalahasti and Dhone respectively during his stints as Chief Minister. The Nagarjuna Sagar and Srisailam multipurpose river valley projects were initiated during his tenure. The Government of Andhra Pradesh later renamed the Srisailam project to Neelam Sanjiva Reddy Sagar in his honour.

The Congress governments under Reddy placed emphasis on rural development, agriculture and allied sectors. The shift towards industrialisation remained limited and was largely driven by the central government's investments in large public sector enterprises in the state. Reddy's first term as Chief Minister ended in 1960 after he resigned on being elected President of the Indian National Congress. In 1964, he resigned voluntarily following unfavourable observations made against the Government of Andhra Pradesh by the Supreme Court in the Bus Routes Nationalisation case.

Congress President (1960–62) and Union Minister (1964–67)
Reddy served thrice as President of the Indian National Congress at its Bangalore, Bhavnagar and Patna sessions during 1960 to 1962. At the Congress session at Goa in 1962, Reddy's speech stating India's determination to end the Chinese occupation of Indian territory and the irrevocable nature of the liberation of Goa was enthusiastically received by attendees. He was thrice member of the Rajya Sabha. From June 1964, Reddy was Union Minister of Steel and Mines in the Lal Bahadur Shastri government. He also served as Union Minister of Transport, Civil Aviation, Shipping and Tourism from January 1966 to March 1967 in Indira Gandhi's Cabinet.

Speaker of the Lok Sabha (1967–69)
In the general elections of 1967, Reddy was elected to the Lok Sabha from Hindupur in Andhra Pradesh. On 17 March 1967, Reddy was elected Speaker of the Fourth Lok Sabha becoming only the third person to be elected Speaker of the house during their inaugural term. To emphasize the independence of the Speaker's office, Reddy resigned from the Congress Party. His term as Speaker was marked by several firsts including the admission of a No-Confidence Motion on the same day as the President's address to a joint session of Parliament, the handing down of a sentence of imprisonment for Contempt of the house and the setting up of the Committee on the Welfare of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. During his term as Speaker a defamation suit filed against him by an MP resulted in the Supreme Court's ruling that parliamentarians had complete freedom of speech in the House and that the courts had no say in such matters. Reddy described his role as being the 'watchman of the Parliament'. He however had several hostile encounters with Prime Minister Indira Gandhi in the House that proved costly when he became, two years later, the Congress Party's nominee to succeed Zakir Hussain as president.

Presidential election of 1969
In 1969, following President Zakir Husain's death, the Congress party nominated Reddy, a member of its Syndicate faction, as candidate for president although Prime Minister Indira Gandhi opposed him. She was forced to accept Reddy as the Congress party's official candidate and feared his election would allow the Syndicate to expel her from office. She asked Congress legislators to "vote according to their conscience" rather than blindly toe the Party line, in effect giving a call to support the independent candidate V V Giri. In a closely fought election held on 16 August 1969, V V Giri emerged victorious, winning 48.01 per cent of the first preference votes and subsequently getting a majority on counting the second preference votes. In the final tally, Giri had 420,077 votes against the quota of 418,169 votes required to be elected president and Reddy had 405,427 votes. The election led to much discord within the Congress Party and culminated in the historic split of 1969 and the subsequent rise of Indira Gandhi in Indian politics.

Subsequently, Reddy, who had resigned as Speaker of the Lok Sabha to contest the election, retired from active politics and moved back to Anantapur where he took to farming.

Return to active politics (1975–82)
In response to Jayaprakash Narayan's call for a Total Revolution, Reddy emerged from his political exile in 1975. In January 1977, he was made a member of the Committee of the Janata Party and in March, he fought the General Election from the Nandyal (Lok Sabha constituency) in Andhra Pradesh as a Janata Party candidate. He was the only non-Congress candidate to be elected from Andhra Pradesh. The Congress Party led by Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was defeated, ending 30 years of Congress rule in India and a five party coalition with Morarji Desai as its leader came to power. Reddy was unanimously elected Speaker of the Sixth Lok Sabha on 26 March 1977. However he resigned a few months later to contest in the presidential elections of July 1977. Reddy's second term as Speaker lasted three months and 17 days and remains till date the shortest tenure for anyone to have held that post.

Presidential election of 1977
The presidential election of 1977 was necessitated by the death in office of the incumbent Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed. Although Prime Minister Morarji Desai wanted to nominate danseuse Rukmini Devi Arundale for the post, she turned down the offer. Reddy was elected unopposed, the only President to be elected thus, after being unanimously supported by all political parties including the opposition Congress party. At 64, he was the youngest person to be elected President of India until Droupadi Murmu was elected President in 2022. He was also the only serious presidential candidate to have contested twice – in 1969 against V V Giri and in 1977. 37 candidates had filed their nominations for the presidency of whom 36 were rejected by the returning officer. Following these disqualifications, Reddy remained the only validly nominated candidate in the fray which made elections unnecessary. Reddy thus became the first person to be elected President of India without a contest and remains the only President to have been elected unopposed.

President of India
Neelam Sanjiva Reddy was elected on 21 July 1977 and was sworn in as the sixth President of India on 25 July 1977. Reddy worked with three governments, with Prime Ministers Morarji Desai, Charan Singh and Indira Gandhi. Reddy announced, on the eve of India's thirtieth anniversary of Independence, that he would be moving out of the Rashtrapati Bhawan to a smaller accommodation and that he would be taking a 70 percent pay cut in solidarity with India's impoverished masses.

Morarji Desai government (1977–79)
Relations between Reddy and Desai soon soured over the latter's promotion of his son, Kanti Desai, in politics and over Desai's communication with Chief Ministers Vengala Rao and Channa Reddy on the issue of land ceilings in Andhra Pradesh. Following mass defections from the Janata Party and from the cabinet, Morarji Desai's 30-month-old government ended in July 1979 after he handed in his resignation to Reddy before a no-confidence motion could be tabled against his government in Parliament. Reddy's actions following Desai's resignation have been much debated. His decision to accept Desai's resignation before an alternative government created a ministerial vacuum in the executive according to H. M. Seervai. The faction of the Janata Party supporting Desai continued to have the support of 205 MPs as opposed to Charan Singh's 80 MPs. Reddy used presidential discretion in choosing Charan Singh as the next Prime Minister over a contending claim from Jagjivan Ram, the leader of the Janata Party.

Charan Singh government (1979)
Following Desai's resignation and the fall of the Janata government headed by him, Reddy appointed Charan Singh as prime minister. This was on the condition that he should prove his majority on the floor of the House before the end of August. Singh was sworn in on 28 July 1979 but never faced Parliament to prove his majority when Reddy convened it on 20 August. Reddy had appointed him Prime Minister since he had produced a letter claiming to have a parliamentary majority with the support of the opposition Congress Party led by his rival, the former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. In return for her support, Gandhi demanded that a law establishing special courts to try her and her son Sanjay Gandhi be repealed – a proposition that was unacceptable to Charan Singh. Gandhi therefore withdrew her support, forcing Singh to resign. His government lasted 24 days and he never faced Parliament. The convention of appointing a prime minister in a hung House but with conditions on time to prove majority was later adopted by President R Venkataraman.

Following Charan Singh's resignation, Reddy summoned Chandrashekhar and Jagjivan Ram to Rashtrapati Bhavan to look into the possibility of forming an alternate government. Reddy, convinced that they would not be able to form one, accepted Singh's advice and dissolved Lok Sabha, calling for a mid term election. Singh was asked to continue as the caretaker prime minister till a new government was sworn in after the election. Reddy's decision was met with angry denunciations and protests by members of the Janata Party who even threatened to have him impeached. Although heading a caretaker government, Singh proposed as many as seven ordinances on a broad range of matters from effecting changes in company law, providing state funding of elections and reservation of jobs for the backward classes. Reddy however refused to promulgate the ordinances arguing that such momentous changes could not be made by a caretaker government.

Indira Gandhi's return to power (1980–82)
In the elections of 1980, Indira Gandhi's party the Indian National Congress (I) returned to power by winning 351 seats in the Lok Sabha. Neither the Janata Party nor Charan Singh's Lok Dal won the 54 seats needed for recognition as the official opposition in Parliament. Indira was sworn in as prime minister by Reddy for what would become her last term in office in January 1980. Between 1980 and 1982 President Reddy led seven state visits abroad, visiting the USSR, Bulgaria, Kenya, Zambia, the UK, Ireland, Indonesia, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Yugoslavia. At home, as president, he signed an ordinance that gave the new government wide powers to imprison people for up to a year without trial under preventive detention and ordered the imposition of President's rule in nine opposition-ruled states on the advice of the government.

Later life and death
Reddy was succeeded as president by Giani Zail Singh, who was sworn in on 25 July 1982. In his farewell address to the nation, Reddy criticised the failure of successive governments in improving the lives of the Indian masses and called for the emergence of a strong political opposition to prevent governmental misrule. Following his presidential term, the then Chief Minister of Karnataka Ramakrishna Hegde invited Reddy to settle down in Bangalore but he chose to retire to his farm in Anantapur. He died of pneumonia in Bangalore in 1996 at the age of 83. His samadhi is at Kalpally Burial Ground, Bangalore. Parliament mourned Reddy's death on 11 June 1996 and members cutting across party lines paid him tribute and recalled his contributions to the nation and the House.

Reddy authored a book, Without Fear or Favour: Reminiscences and Reflections of a President, published in 1989.

Commemoration
Sanjiva Reddy's birth centenary was celebrated in 2013 by the Government of Andhra Pradesh with the concluding ceremony in Anantapur being addressed by President Pranab Mukherjee and with the Chief Ministers of Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka in attendance. The Postal Department of India released a commemorative stamp and special cover in honour of Reddy on the occasion of his birth centenary. In Hyderabad, there is the Neelam Sanjeeva Reddy College of Education. As part of the centenary celebrations of his birth, the Government of Andhra Pradesh has announced that it will rename the Andhra Pradesh State Revenue Academy, Reddy's alma mater the Government Arts College and the Government Medical College, Anantapur after the former president. In the 1960s, when he was Union Minister for Mines, a statue of him had been unveiled at Vijayawada by K. Kamaraj, the then president of the Congress Party, prompting Reddy to ask for its removal as he deemed the practice of erecting statues of people holding public office undesirable. A statue of Sanjiva Reddy, unveiled in 2005, stands at the Andhra Pradesh Secretariat (now Telangana Secretariat) in Hyderabad.

In popular culture
Neelam Sanjiva Reddy – President of India is a 1982 short documentary film directed by Prem Vaidya & C. L. Kaul and produced by the Films Division of India, covering his term of presidency.

The character Mahendranath, Chief Minister of the fictional state of Afrozabad in former Prime Minister P V Narasimha Rao's novel, The Insider, is based on Reddy, portraying his career in Andhra Pradesh and his political rivalry with Kasu Brahmananda Reddy.

title: Neelam Sanjiva Reddy


text:
Kevin Ara

Kevin Ara (born February 8, 1984) is an American soccer player, who played defensive midfielder for D.C. United.

Ara played his college soccer at Harvard University, where he had a rather distinguished career. While at Harvard, he was named first team All-Ivy, first team All-New England and an NCAA All-American. Ara was placed on the short list of finalists for the prestigious Herman Trophy during his senior season.

After graduating from Harvard, Ara was selected 24th overall in the 2004 MLS SuperDraft. Ara managed to make an impact and earned playing time during his 2004 rookie season while winning a championship with D.C. United.

After the 2004 season, Ara was selected 18th overall by Real Salt Lake in the Expansion Draft.

After retiring from professional soccer, Ara started a career in finance and currently is a portfolio manager at a hedge fund.

title: Kevin Ara


text:
Dymchurch Redoubt

Dymchurch Grand Redoubt is a fortification at Palmarsh on the coast of Kent in England, built during the Napoleonic War as part of a large defensive scheme to protect the country from an expected French invasion.

Description
Dymchurch Redoubt is circular in form and built of brick with granite and sandstone dressings. It measures up to 68 metres in diameter and stands 12 metres above the floor of its 9-metre-wide ditch or dry moat. It lacks the caponiers or musketry galleries of the otherwise similar Eastbourne Redoubt. Beyond the moat, an earth bank or glacis helped to protect the masonry from artillery fire. Built on two stories, the upper floor had open emplacements for ten 24 pounder guns mounted on wooden traversing platforms. The lower floor featured twenty-four vaulted barrack and storage casemates that opened onto a circular parade ground. They were designed to accommodate 350 officers and men. Entry was originally via a wooden footbridge supported by stilts, which could be collapsed in an emergency.

History
The design and purpose of the redoubt were finalised at a conference in Rochester in 1804. It was built between 1804 and 1812 to support a chain of 21 Martello Towers that stretched between Hythe in Kent and Rye in Sussex, and to act as a supply depot for them. It specifically protected the sluices that were the key to the drainage of Romney Marsh. By the time it was finished, the invasion threat was over. During World War I, it was used for troop accommodation, although there was a question in Parliament about the damp conditions. In World War II, the south coast was again at risk of invasion, and two 6 inch breech-loading guns were mounted in casemates built over the original gun emplacements. A prominent battery observation post was built and pillboxes were sited on the parapet in order to repel an infantry attack. It was fully operational by 1942 as an Emergency Coastal Battery. After the war, the observation post was used as a Coastguard lookout and radar was installed to monitor shipping in the English Channel. The army constructed a mock-up of a street of buildings in the interior, for training in urban warfare. The redoubt remains the property of the Ministry of Defence. It is a Scheduled Monument and is listed by English Heritage as a Building at Risk, although a conservation plan has been agreed.

Location
The Dymchurch Redoubt is located on the south (seaward) side of the A259 main road roughly halfway between the village of Dymchurch and the town of Hythe. It is located on the edge of the Palmarsh community, and about two miles from Dymchurch, whose name it bears. It is not open to the public, but walking along the sea wall allows a close approach on the south side. Further access may be restricted when there is firing on Hythe Ranges. When the ranges are in use, prominent red flags are flown, supplemented by red lights during night firing practice. Due to the risk of ricochet during firing, a Range Safety Boat is present to prevent boats entering the danger area.

title: Dymchurch Redoubt


text:
User:Veeven

I am Veeven. My full name is Veera Venkata Chowdary. I am from Nizamabad, India. Currently, I live in Hyderabad.

I am a sysop at Telugu Wikipedia. I participate in Telugu localization of various projects, including MediaWiki.

title: User:Veeven


text:
Peter Lalor

Peter Fintan Lalor (5 February 1827 – 9 February 1889) was an Irish-Australian rebel and, later, politician who rose to fame for his leading role in the Eureka Rebellion, an event identified with the "birth of democracy" in Australia.

Early life
Peter was born at Tenakill House, Raheen, in Queen's County (later Laois) in Ireland, which was part of the United Kingdom at the time. He was the son of Ann (née Dillon) and Patrick "Patt" Lalor, a landowner and supporter of the abolition of tithes who was a member of the British parliament (MP) in 1832–1835; Patt Lalor was the first Catholic MP from Queen's County since the anti-Catholic Test Acts of the 17th century. He had 11 children: Joseph Lalor, James Fintan Lalor, Richard Lalor, Mary Lalor, Patrick Lalor, Thomas Lalor, Catherine Lalor, Margrett Ellen Lalor, Jerome Lalor, John Lalor and William A. Lalor Sr., of whom Peter was the youngest. The eldest brother was James Fintan Lalor, who was later involved in the Young Ireland movement and the unsuccessful rebellion of 1848. Another brother, Richard Lalor, also became a member of the British Parliament, representing the Parnellite nationalist party. Their mother died on 4 June 1835; Patt Lalor later remarried, to Ellen Mary Anne Loughnan (with whom he had no children). Peter Lalor was educated at Carlow College and then trained as a civil engineer at Trinity College.

Three of the Lalor brothers migrated to America and fought on both sides of the Civil War. However, Peter and his brother Richard decided to go to Australia, arriving in Victoria in October 1852. Lalor worked first in the construction of the Melbourne–Geelong railway line, but resigned to take part in the Victorian Gold Rush. He began mining in the Ovens diggings (Beechworth), then moved to the Eureka Lead at Ballarat where he befriended Duncan Gillies (who later became Premier of Victoria). His brother Richard returned to Ireland, becoming politically active and himself a member of the House of Commons.

Events leading to the Eureka Stockade
The agitation against the goldfields licences began at Bendigo in 1853, and was quickly taken up at Ballarat, and a Reform League was formed amongst the diggers on the various goldfields for the redress of grievances. In October 1854, the Government ordered the police to go out hunting for unlicensed diggers two times a week.

In the later half of 1854 a digger named James Scobie was killed in a scuffle at the Eureka Hotel, on Specimen Hill; Bentley who was the publican, was considered by the diggers to have participated in the murder. He and others were charged with the murder and arrested, but with the police court, they were discharged.

An indignation meeting was held at Ballarat on 17 October, close to the spot where Scobie was killed. At this meeting a committee was appointed, of which Peter Lalor was one. The authorities, fearing that the meeting might lead to an attack on Bentley's hotel, sent police to act as a guard over it. A youth threw a stone at the lamp in front of the building, breaking the glass. That act of violence was the spark. With cries of "Down with the house" and "Burn it", the angry mob stormed the hotel and set fire to it. Three people were arrested and charged with act of incendiarism, and were committed and imprisoned.

A mass meeting was held on Bakery Hill on 11 November 1854, to demand the release of the alleged incendiaries. It also passed resolutions affirming the right of the people to full representation, manhood suffrage, the abolition of the property qualification for members, payment of members, short Parliaments, and the abolition of the Gold Commission and the diggers' licenses. Bentley, in the meantime, had been re-arrested on the advice of the Attorney-General William Stawell for the murder of Scobie, and convicted. He was sentenced to three years on the roads.

On 29 November a meeting of about 12,000 men was held at Ballarat. This is said to be the first public meeting that Lalor addressed. He moved one of the resolutions submitted and passed. It called for a meeting of the Reform League for the following Sunday to elect a central committee. The "insurgent flag" was hoisted on the platform. It represented the Southern Cross constellation. One of the resolutions passed at the meeting declared the license fee to be an unjustifiable imposition. A bonfire was soon kindled and the licences burnt. At this meeting, the rebellion was formally inaugurated.

Eureka Stockade
Lalor led the miners' opposition against the incompetent and often brutal administration of the goldfields, and was elected to lead the men in the armed uprising after the meeting on Bakery Hill. The diggers formed a barricade, where they were attacked by troops and police on 3 December. Lalor was seriously wounded in the left arm, resulting in its amputation. A warrant for Lalor's arrest on charges of sedition was initially sought, but he was taken from Ballarat and hidden by his supporters in the Young Queen Hotel at South Geelong. The warrant was withdrawn in June 1855 after juries had found 13 other ringleaders not guilty of sedition.

As a result of the uprising a number of the miners' complaints were resolved. Legislation was passed to give miners the right to vote. A new form of licensing of Miners Rights costing £1 per year was introduced. The monthly gold tax was abolished. A general amnesty for the three miners arrested after the Bentley's Eureka Hotel fire and the 114 arrested at the Eureka Stockade was proclaimed.

Lalor's escape
While the victors of Eureka were removing them alive from the stockade, Peter Lalor, the diggers' leader, lay under the pile of slabs in which he had been hidden, bleeding from the wound in his arm. A musket ball had shattered the bone close to the shoulder, and the few who knew where he was lying saw the blood trickling from beneath the pile of slabs even while the soldiers, keen to capture him, were still in the stockade. When the last of them had gone, Lalor was helped from his hiding place, put upon a white horse, and rode away through the bush towards Warrenheip. There he claimed shelter at the hut of a man he knew. The digger was absent, and his wife went to look for him. Lalor, however, doubted her genuineness, and believing that she had gone to communicate with the police, he took to the bush again for shelter. All that night he wandered about, with his crushed arm still swinging useless and unattended. He was greatly weakened from loss of blood, and only his indomitable pluck kept him up. Towards morning he determined to seek assistance from Stephen Cummins, an old friend whom he could trust, and who lived with his wife on Pennyweight Hill.

It was on the early morning of the Monday following the fight that Mrs. Cummins drew her husband's attention to a man walking slowly between the holes on the flat, and said, "That is Peter Lalor; I feel sure of it". "As I ran down to help him", Steve Cummins told a friend, "his face was grey and worried. He looked like a frail old man rather than a powerful young one, so greatly had pain and loss of blood during the 24 hours weakened him. I helped him into the hut, where as well as we could, my wife and I bandaged the wounded arm. I knew that my hut was no place for him. A reward of £200 had been offered for his arrest, and there were many mean spirits keen to earn it. Our friendship was well known, and I felt sure that sooner or later my place would be searched by the police. I ran at once across the gully to the Roman Catholic Presbytery and told Father Smyth that Lalor was in my tent badly wounded and in need of surgical assistance. I told him my fears as to the police visiting us, and Father Smyth said, 'He will be safer here, I think. Bring him over after dark.' So that night we took him across to the presbytery, meeting, fortunately, not a soul upon the road." Steve Cummins's intuition had served him well, for next night the police searched his hut, just at the time when he was watching Drs. Doyle and Stewart amputating Peter Lalor's arm, for the severity of the wound and the delay in treating it precluded any possibility of the arm being saved. Through the ordeal of amputation, as in every other emergency of life, he showed that fine courage which nothing could shake!

A man employed about the Presbytery took the severed arm away as soon as the operation was over, and threw it down an abandoned shaft, but by Father Smyth's orders it was recovered later and properly buried. The first operation was not complete. A portion of the bullet remained lodged in the stump of the arm, and it was only after a second operation at Geelong that the wound healed properly.

Politics
Due to the political changes caused by the Eureka Stockade, Lalor was elected to the Victorian Legislative Council in November 1855 as Member for the new district of Ballaarat, and remained in this role until March 1856. In November 1856, under the new, more democratic constitution (featuring near-universal white male suffrage) Lalor was elected unopposed to the Legislative Assembly seat of North Grenville (Ballarat West). As he was the Eureka hero his policies were not scrutinised at all before the election and his later voting record as a parliamentarian shows he once opposed a bill to introduce full white male suffrage in the colony of Victoria.

During a speech in the Legislative Council in 1856 he said, "I would ask these gentlemen what they mean by the term 'democracy'. Do they mean Chartism or Communism or Republicanism? If so, I never was, I am not now, nor do I ever intend to be a democrat. But if a democrat means opposition to a tyrannical press, a tyrannical people, or a tyrannical government, then I have been, I am still, and will ever remain a democrat."

Weston Bate wrote that the role of landowner and company director seemed to suit him more than that of rebel, and that Peter Lalor "disgraced himself in democratic eyes" by trying to use Chinese as strike-breakers at the Clunes mine, of which he was a director. Some argue that he was ruthless in using low-paid Chinese workers to get rid of Australians seeking better and safer working conditions. In parliament he supported a repressive land Bill in 1857 which favoured the rich. There were 17,745 Ballarat signatures to a petition against Lalor's land Bill. Withers and others were puzzled and hurt that the folk hero should prove to be a better fighter for money and political position than for the people's rights. Like many young radicals he undoubtedly became more conservative in later life. However, he was consistent in being a risk-taker and, in his later business career, undoubtedly suffered lows as well as highs, at one point narrowly avoiding having to declare bankruptcy. Lalor held North Grenville until August 1859, but never represented Ballarat again, and in the October 1859 election he stood for and won South Grant in the Legislative Assembly instead.

Lalor held South Grant for over eleven years after this point, finally losing it in January 1871. In 1871 he also contested but lost the seat of North Melbourne. In May 1874 he was re-elected to South Grant, holding it until April 1877, then taking the Legislative Assembly seat of Grant in May 1877, which he would hold for another almost twelve years until his death in February 1889.

Lalor's key political postings were as Commissioner Trade & Customs and Postmaster-General of Victoria from August to October 1875, then Commissioner Trade & Customs from May 1877 until March 1880, as well as postmaster-general again from May to July 1877. Lalor also served as chairman of committees in the period from 1859 to 1868.

As successor to Sir Charles Gavan Duffy, his most effective political post was probably that of Speaker, a post he held from 1880 until 1887 when illness forced his retirement; he was awarded a pension of £4,000 by parliament.

Later life and death

Lalor married Alicia Dunne on 10 July 1855 in Geelong. Their daughter, Anne (Annie), was born in Prahran in 1856; their son Joseph was born at Sandridge (now called Port Melbourne) on 18 December 1857. Annie Lalor married Thomas Lempriere in 1882, but died three years later of pulmonary phthisis. Joseph Lalor became a medical doctor, marrying Agnes McCormick of Dublin, Ireland and leaving descendants.

Alicia Lalor died on 17 May 1887 at the age of 55 years. Following her death, Peter Lalor took leave from Parliament and visited San Francisco, California.

Lalor died on Saturday, 9 February 1889 at age 62, four days after his birthday, at his son's home in Richmond and was buried at the Melbourne General Cemetery.

Legacy
A statue of Peter Lalor was erected at Sturt Street in Ballarat in 1893. It was presented to the municipality by a friend of Lalor's, James Oddie, who was also first chairman of the city, and was unveiled by another friend, the Premier, the Hon Duncan Gillies.

The Melbourne suburb of Lalor, Victoria, was named after him in 1945. The suburb was originally pronounced "LAW-luh", after Peter Lalor, and although many people still pronounce it as such, in recent times the pronunciation "LAY-lor" has become predominant.

Peter Lalor Vocational College (formerly Peter Lalor Secondary College), in the Lalor area, is named in his honour.

A federal electorate in the south-western suburbs of Melbourne, the Division of Lalor, was named after him in 1948. It has been held successively by senior Labor figures Reg Pollard, Jim Cairns, Barry Jones and Julia Gillard. The suburb of Lalor is not in the electorate, which is pronounced "LAW-luh".

Lalor Street in Ballarat East was also named in his honour.

The University of Ballarat (now known as Federation University Australia) honoured him by naming one of the two Mt Helen campus' Halls of Residence after him (the other being named after Bella Guerin, the first woman to graduate from an Australian university).

Portrayals of Lalor's role in the Eureka Rebellion appear in film.

The first film to have Lalor appear in is supposed to be Eureka Stockade, but only a seven-minute fragment thereof has survived. In 1915, Lalor was portrayed by Leslie Victor in the silent film The Loyal Rebel—this film is also considered lost. Next, he was played by Chips Rafferty in the 1949 British film Eureka Stockade (released in United States of America under the title, Massacre Hill). He was played by Australian actor Bryan Brown in Eureka Stockade, a two-part television mini-series which aired on the Seven Network in 1984. The last film to date to picture Lalor was the Australian documentary Riot or Revolution: Eureka Stockade 1854 from 2006, with Lalor played by Andrew Larkins.

For further information about the various films depicting Peter Lalor, see: Eureka Rebellion in popular culture.

Lalor has also been depicted in the commemorative Son et lumière "Blood Under the Southern Cross" at Sovereign Hill since 1992.

A caricature bollard by artist Jan Mitchell depicting Peter Lalor holding the Eureka flag was erected on the Geelong foreshore in 1999 as part of the Waterfront Geelong bollard walk.

His portrait is featured on two commemorative postage stamps, a 38c Ireland stamp released on 3 May 2001 in the "Rebel Spirit, Irish Heritage of Australia" series and a 2004 AUD2.45 Australian stamp commemorating the Eureka Stockade.

title: Peter Lalor


text: User talk:66.55.217.243

title: User talk:66.55.217.243


text:
Eastbourne Redoubt

Eastbourne Redoubt is a circular coastal defence fort at Eastbourne, East Sussex, on the south coast of England. It was built in 1805 as part of the British anti-invasion preparations during the Napoleonic Wars. The building is now owned by the local authority and is open to the public.

Description
The redoubt is a circular structure, measuring 224 feet (68 metres) in diameter and is built almost entirely of brick with some granite facing. The lower tier is composed of a ring of 24 casemates or vaulted chambers, which open into a central parade ground. Casemate 11 was the main magazine for the redoubt, casemate 8 was modified in the 1870s as a cook house and casemates 23 and 24 were altered in the 1880s to provide a detention room and two cells.

The upper tier above the casemates forms the terreplein or gun platform, which has a tall parapet pierced by granite-faced embrasures for eleven guns. Beside each gun position is an L-shaped expense magazine which held a supply of ammunition for the guns to use in combat and could also be used as a shelter for the gun crews during an enemy bombardment. The low roof of these magazines forms a banquette or fire step so that the garrison could fire their muskets over the parapet in the event of an infantry attack. The parapet is also pierced by the main gate, which was originally the only access to the redoubt.

The redoubt is surrounded by a ditch or dry moat which is 30 feet (9 metres) from the top of the parapet and 25 feet (7 metres) wide. On the far side of the moat, a glacis or earth ramp slopes away to ground level. Both the moat and the glacis have been removed on the seaward side during construction of a sea wall and promenade in 1890. The floor of the ditch is traversed by five caponiers or covered galleries with loopholes that allowed the defenders to fire at any attackers who had reached that point. These are unique in any of the circular redoubts and are thought to have been added in the mid-19th century. Access to the main gate of the redoubt is across a wooden drop bridge, which is a modern reconstruction of the original, built in 2003 with help from the Royal Engineers. A second entrance from the ditch was created in 1957 by inserting a large doorway through the scarp wall into one of the casemates.

Origin
The decision to build the redoubt was made at a conference held in Rochester on 21 October 1804, to discuss defence against Napoleon's planned invasion of the United Kingdom, preparations for which were gaining momentum on the opposite side of the English Channel. The meeting, which was attended by the Prime Minister, William Pitt the Younger, agreed to adopt a revolutionary scheme to build a chain of mutually-supporting circular artillery towers along a stretch of the Channel coast where the French were thought to be most likely to land. The scheme had been devised by Captain William Henry Ford of the Royal Engineers and championed by Brigadier-General William Twiss who commanded the Royal Engineer Southern District. The original plan called for 83 Martello towers, each mounting a single heavy gun, at intervals along the coast and three 11-gun towers at Sea Houses (Eastbourne), Rye Harbour and Dymchurch. In the event, 74 Martello Towers were actually built and plans for the 11-gun tower at Rye were abandoned. The 11-gun towers, which came to be known as "circular forts" or "grand redoubts", were intended to act as barracks and stores depots for the rest of the Martello chain, as well as formidable fortresses in their own right. A third redoubt was later constructed at Harwich in Essex to support the Martello chain built to defend the east coast; although broadly similar, it differs in some details from the south coast redoubts.

Construction and the Napoleonic Wars
The contract to build the redoubt at Eastbourne was awarded to William Hobson. Five million bricks were brought around the coast by barge from London for the project and others were made locally. Work started on 16 April 1805, but a report by Brigadier-General Twiss to the Board of Ordnance in May 1808 recommended that the money to settle Hobson's account be withheld until all the work was completed. The structure was built on a raft of compacted chalk laid directly onto the natural shingle. It was constructed almost entirely of brick, over 50,000 being used in a single course.

Cavities within the structure were filled with shingle. The redoubt was initially armed with 24-pounder guns on traversing carriages; although there are embrasures for 11 guns, only 10 appear to have been mounted. These were replaced shortly afterwards by longer ranged 36-pounder guns, after fears the redoubt could be bombarded at a distance by heavier French weapons. By the time that the redoubt had been fully armed and garrisoned, the likelihood of an invasion had become very remote and the guns were only fired in anger once; in 1812 two shots were fired at a passing French warship but missed.

Later 19th-century developments
By the 1830s, Europe was experiencing a long peaceful period and the garrison consisted of only seven gunners and a gate keeper, together with their families. The main role of the redoubt was as a barracks rather than a fortress, with troops being stationed there for a few weeks at a time while using nearby training facilities. Although it was intended for 350 men, it is thought unlikely that more than 200 could be accommodated at any one time. Despite this, the armament of the fort was progressively improved throughout the century. In 1853, the 36-pounders were replaced by 68-pounder smoothbore guns. In 1859, the Royal Commission on the Defence of the United Kingdom which had been set up by Lord Palmerston to review Britain's fortifications, reported that the redoubts and Martello towers were "not an important element of security against attack". Nevertheless, by 1873, the armament had been increased to four 8 inch rifled muzzle loaders and three 110-pounder rifled breech loaders, together with two of the older 68-pounders. Various improvements were made to the living conditions in the barracks including the addition of a cookhouse in the 1870s and a latrine outside the main gate in the 1880s.

The World Wars and later
During the First World War the military police used the redoubt as a headquarters and temporary gaol. Following this, Eastbourne Borough Council purchased the redoubt for £150 with the plan to turn it into a venue for leisure activities. The only part of the plan to be implemented was in 1934; the construction of a new bandstand in the gardens just to the west of the redoubt and an associated colonnade to shelter the audience, which was built over part of the moat. During the Second World War, the army requisitioned the building to use for storage. The remaining artillery pieces were sold for scrap.

In 1944, anti-aircraft guns were mounted on the gun platforms to counter passing V-1 flying bombs. In 1957, the redoubt was leased to an entrepreneur named Benjamin White, who created a model village on the parade ground and constructed a new entrance from the moat, with a staircase that gives access from the promenade. The bandstand colonnade was converted into the Blue Grotto Aquarium, which was captured in 3D by VistaScreen. The model village was vandalised and then removed in the 1970s, and the aquarium closed in 1996.

Access and events
The redoubt and cafe is open to the public between April and mid-November, every day from 10 am to 5 pm. Access to the gun platform and the parade ground is free. There is an admission charge to visit the inside of the fortress, which includes the regimental museums of the Queen's Royal Irish Hussars and the Royal Sussex Regiment, with the Sussex Combined Services military collection. The fortress has an events programme, including films, lectures, tours, stargazing and ghost nights. It encourages families to visit, has permanent children's area and through the school holidays runs daily events to keep children entertained.

title: Eastbourne Redoubt