text:
People's Party (Panama)

The People's Party (Partido Popular) is a Panamanian Christian democratic political party. Founded in 1956, it was made up of middle-class professionals, intellectuals and students, with support from trade unions, particularly the Federation of Christian Workers. It went on to become one of Latin America's most conservative and anti-communist Christian democratic parties. The ideological foundation of the party is based on the social doctrine of the Catholic Church. The PP is a full member of the Christian Democrat International and Christian Democratic Organization of America.

History
The People's Party traces its origins to the “First Week of Christian Studies,” which met at Las Cumbres in March 1956. Those who participated in this and the “Second Week of Christian Studies” in July 1956 included intellectuals who had expressed their desire for Social Christian action. The group that organized these meetings formally established itself on 12 April 1956 and first called itself Social Democratic Action (Acción Social Demócrata). From 1957 to 1960 it called itself the National Civic Union (Unión Cívica Naciona) for the Christian Democratic Movement. In 1960, the organizers decided on the name Christian Democratic Party of Panama (Partido Demócrata Cristiano de Panama, PDC).

The PDC's leading figures were middle-class professionals, intellectuals and students, but support also came from the trade union. In particular, the Federation of Christian Workers, established in 1961, was closely aligned with the PDC.

Early in 1964 the party chose its first set of candidates for a national election. For that year's elections, the PDC presented its first presidential candidate, José Antonio Molino, who was supported by Panama's Teachers Union. He received 9,681 votes (2.98%), coming in fourth among seven nominees. That was considered a success for the new party and was enough to assure its registration as a legal party. The Christian Democrats continued to be a small but well-organized element in Panamanian politics in the succeeding years. In the 1968 general election, the PDC candidate, Antonio González Revilla, received 11,371 votes (3.55%). In 1964 and 1968 the PDC won one parliamentary seat.

In 1968, the radical wing of the leadership was expelled, and the increasingly right-wing party supported the government of Arnulfo Arias. It was backed by a tiny electorate consisting of urban professionals and a business group led by the Romero family. Arias chose a member of the PDC as minister of education, but his government lasted only 11 days.

All political parties such as the PDC were banned by Omar Torrijos after the military coup of 1968. During the Torrijos government (1968–1978), the Christian Democrats opposed the military regime and called for a civilian-ruled democracy. In the 1970s and the 1980s, the PDC was generally regarded as a well-organized and binding element of the opposition. The PDC was one of the few parties within National Opposition Front (FRENO) (a coalition of eight opposition parties formed in March 1979) that offered a programmatic alternative to military government policy by calling for substantial social reforms and expanded participation in democratic processes. The PDC advocated for introducing nationalist social reforms to preclude revolutionary action. Its leader, Ricardo Arias Calderón, was the main promoter of the formation of a united opposition against the Democratic Revolutionary Party (PRD). The leaders of the party strongly opposed the government, seeing in its actions "a furthering of communist penetration into Central America."

The PDC re-registered on 28 August 1980. The PDC won 20.6% of the vote and two seats in the 1980 legislative elections (to 19 of the 56 seats in the newly formed National Legislative Council, the other 37 being filled by nominees of a non-party National Assembly of Community Representatives established in 1972).

In December 1981, Calderón was elected president of the Organization of Christian-Democratic Parties of America.

In 1984, it was part of the Democratic Opposition Alliance (ADO), which supported the presidential candidacy of Arnulfo Arias of Authentic Panameñista Party (PPA). Ricardo Arias Calderón was a Second Vice-Presidential candidate. The ADO lost the presidential and legislative elections following suspected widespread fraud by the military. In 1987, the PDC became increasingly involved in confrontations with the government, openly campaigning by strikes (supported mainly by businesses rather than labor unions) and street demonstrations (which were often violently repressed) for the resignation or removal of General Manuel Noriega. Ricardo Arias Calderón referring to charges against Manuel Noriega of murder, drug trafficking, corruption, and electoral fraud, described him as "virtually a dictator and gangster".

For the 1989 elections, the PDC was the main component of the Democratic Alliance of Civic Opposition (ADOC), with the Guillermo Endara as the coalition's presidential candidate. Calderón was viewed as a likely successor to Arias as the principal spokesman for the opposition, eventually accepting nomination as ADOC First Vice-Presidential candidate in 1989.

The PDC polled 261,598 votes (40.18%), coming in first among twelve nominees. After the official ratification of the results following the US military invasion in December 1989, Calderón became First Vice-President and Interior and Justice Minister, and the PDC became the largest party in the Legislative Assembly with 28 of the 67 seats. Emboldened by a plurality within the Legislative Assembly, the PDC was estranged from its coalition partners in September 1990 when they joined with the opposition PRD to reject its nominees for chamber officials. The party stayed within the ADOC until April 1991, when its ministerial delegation was ousted by President Guillermo Endara for displaying "disloyalty and arrogance." That had followed months of infighting during which Calderón had publicly described Guillermo Endara's economic program, which advocated severe austerity measures and the privatization of state enterprises, as "senseless." Its withdrawal from the ADOC coalition government caused a political crisis.

In succeeding months, the PDC became the leader of the opposition, to such an extent that it was exerting strong influence within such organizations as the Civic Crusade, an organization from which Endara had drawn his strongest support and called for a plebiscite to decide on his desirability of Endara remaining in office. In September 1991, the PDC was judged firmly to have secured its political influence on parliamentary committees as a direct result of facilitating the victory of a dissident Authentic Liberal Party (PLA) candidate in the election of a new President of the Legislative Assembly. Calderón resigned as First Vice-President of the Republic in December 1992 in a move that was seen as reflecting a desire to distance himself from Endara.

In 1994, Eduardo Vallarino, the candidate of PDC, unsuccessfully ran in the presidential elections, obtaining only 25,476 votes (2.39%). As a result, the party only managed to gain one seat in the legislative elections. For the 1999 elections, the PDC was the main component of the Opposition Action Alliance (AAO), with the PDC's Alberto Vallarino Clement as the coalition's presidential candidate. He polled 221,459 votes (17.38%) and came fourth (the PDC – 140,824 and 11.05%). The PDC won 5 legislative seats.

On 10 September 2001, the PDC changed its name to People's Party. In 2004, the PP allied with the New Fatherland (PN) and its candidate Martín Torrijos Espino of Democratic Revolutionary Party (PRD). In 2009, the PP allied with the One Country for All (UPPT) and its candidate Balbina Herrera of Democratic Revolutionary Party (PRD).

In 2014, the PP allied with the Panameñista Party and its candidate Juan Carlos Varela to form the El Pueblo Primero alliance, which won the election with 39% of the vote on May 4, 2014. As a result, several members of the party served in the Varela Administration, highlighted by the party's president Milton Henriquez serving as Minister of Government.

The PP is a full member of the Christian Democrat International and Christian Democratic Organization of America.

PARLACEN elections
The amount of seats allocated for the PARLACEN is based on the vote share obtained by each party in the presidential election.

title: People's Party (Panama)


text:
Every Man a Tiger

Every Man a Tiger (1999) is Tom Clancy's second book in his "Study in Command" series. It is partially a biography of General Chuck Horner (CENTAF during Operation Desert Storm and Desert Shield), but mostly it is a study of the command decisions, preparations, and execution of air war of Operation Desert Storm.

The book is mostly written by Tom Clancy with sections where he uses General Horner's own words.

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

title: Every Man a Tiger


text:
User talk:Rendezvous puneet

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.

Here are some tips to help you get started:

 * Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
 * If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Remember Neutral point of view
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Good luck!

[[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]]

P.S. One last helpful hint. To sign your posts like I did above (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).

title: User talk:Rendezvous puneet


text:
People's Party of Panama

The People's Party of Panama (Partido del Pueblo de Panamá, PPP) was a communist party in Panama. It was founded on 4 April 1930 as the Communist Party of Panama (Partido Comunista de Panamá, PCP), after Panamanian communists broke away from the Labour Party. Early leaders of the PCP included Eliseo Echévez and Cristóbal Segundo. The PCP joined the Communist International and reached its apogee of popularity during and right after World War II. In 1943 the PCP changed its name to the People's Party of Panama.

The small but well-organized party then exerted considerable influence on the Panamanian Federation of Students and on the trade union movements in Panama and the Canal Zone. It long controlled the Trade Union Federation of Workers of Panama. "After World War II the party concentrated on attacking the United States presence in Panama, leading the Panamanian government to crack down on it and then outlaw it in 1953. Subsequently, Communist influence in Panama's trade unions declined greatly and many party members defected to other groups".

In the mid-1960s, the U.S. State Department estimated the party's membership to be approximately 400.

Although small in membership, for several years during the 1970s the PPP acted as the principal source of organized political support for the Omar Torrijos government, particularly on the Panama Canal issue. It resisted the formation of the broader based Democratic Revolutionary Party (PRD) and lost a considerable amount of its power during the late 1970s as a result. The party was permitted to operate semi-publicly. In 1979 it applied for formal recognition and, with some 77,000 members, was easily able to demonstrate the required level of support. One of its candidates, running as an independent, obtained a Legislative Council seat in 1980.

In 1984 the party broke from the pro-government National Democratic Union (UNADE) coalition because UNADE no longer followed the reformist ideas of Omar Torrijos. The PPP ran its own presidential candidate in 1984 (Carlos Del Cid); in 1989 it allied with the National Liberation Coalition (COLINA) and its candidate Carlos Duque.

Since 1951 the General Secretary of the PPP has been Ruben Darío Sousa Batista (sometimes known by his pseudonym, Vicente Tello).

The PPP was derecognized by the Electoral Tribunal on 1 July 1991.

title: People's Party of Panama


text:
Mehmed Said Pasha

Mehmed Said Pasha (محمد سعيد پاشا; 1838–1914), also known as Küçük Said Pasha ("Said Pasha the Younger") or Şapur Çelebi or in his youth as Mabeyn Başkatibi Said Bey, was an Ottoman monarchist, senator, statesman and editor of the Turkish newspaper Jerid-i-Havadis. He served as grand vizier for nine years in total, seven times during the reign of Abdul Hamid II and twice during the Second Constitutional Monarchy. He was known for his opposition to the extension of foreign influence in the Ottoman Empire. He was among the statesmen who were disliked by the Committee of Union and Progress (CUP). However in his last two grand vizierships, Said Pasha was supported by the CUP in the Chamber of Deputies, and his last grand vizierate ended in 1912 with a military memorandum against the Unionists.

Early life
Mehmed Said was born in Erzurum. His father was Ali Namık Efendi, a foreign minister. According to his contemporary Petre Kharischirashvili, he was of Georgian descent. His education was in the madrasa, which started in Erzurum and continued in Istanbul. There he learned French. He joined the Kalemiye in Istanbul, and soon the petty civil service.

Bureaucratic career
He returned to Erzurum for his first civil service assignment in 1853 where he worked in the eyalet's bureau of commutations (tahrirat kalemi). In 1857 he joined the Anatolian army's bureau of communications. Said went back to Istanbul, where he was the deputy clerk of the Supreme Council (Meclis-i Vâlâ halife kâtip). He then became chief of the Archipelago Vilayet municipal council (Adalar Bölgesi Belediye Dairesi reisi) and chief clerk of the Rumeli Inspection Committee (Rumeli Teftiş Heyeti başkatibi) following which he became the chief clerk of the government printing office (Matbaa-i Amire başkatibi). After a brief stint as chief clerk of the Court of Cassation (Dîvân-ı Ahkâm-ı Adliyye muhakemat başkatibi) he became director of communication of the Ministry of Trade (Ticaret Nezareti mektupçusu) before taking on the same role in the Ministry of Education.

Mehmed Said contributed to the provincial reform by writing the Regulation on the General Administration of Provinces (İdare-i Umumiye-i Vilayet Nizamnamesini). This caught the attention of Mehmed Emin Âli Pasha.

High politics
He became first secretary to Sultan Abdul Hamid II shortly after the sultan's accession, and is said to have contributed to the realizations of his majesty's design of concentrating power in his own hands; later he became a senator, minister of the interior, minister of finance, royal treasurer, then governor of Ankara and then Bursa, justice minister, finally reaching the high post of grand vizier in 1879. It is not known what his role was in the 1876 coups d'état.

He was grand vizier seven times under Abdul Hamid II, and twice under his successor, Mehmed V.

First premiership
October 1879 can be accepted as the date when the political uncertainties of the beginning of Abdul Hamid's reign ended and the power without question passed to the palace. During Said Pasha's first grand viziership, he mostly dealt with financial and economic measures and tried to reduce government expenditures. He was dismissed from the position of grand vizier in June 1880.

Second premiership
He began his second term as Grand Vizier on September 12, 1880. The most important events of the premiership were the trial of Mithat Pasha in Yıldız Palace. Ottoman debts were then collected through the establishment of Ottoman Public Debt Administration with the Muharrem Decree. In 1881, France declared Tunisia a French colony a brief military campaign while in Egypt Urabi Pasha lost his nationalist struggle against the Europeans. Due to these events, Mehmed Said Pasha did not succeed in measures to reduce state debts and provide stability. He was dismissed as grand vizier on May 2, 1882, due to the direct intervention of the British in the Egypt issue.

Third premiership
However, two months later, the new grand vizier Abdurrahman Nureddin Pasha was dismissed as Grand Vizier since Abdul Hamid did not share his concern on the European attempts to invade Egypt, which started with the bombing of Alexandria in July. Mehmed Said Pasha was appointed grand vizier for the third time on 12 July 1882. This period began when Egypt came under British control. He was dismissed two months later on 30 November 1882 due to clashes between himself and the sultan. He was arrested three days later.

Fourth premiership
He was brought back to the grand viziership for the forth time on 3 December 1882. This time his ministry lasted for 2 years and 2 months. In this period, he civil service reform. Recruitment, appointment, promotion and retirement of civil servants were reformed and reorganized. He also brought about educational reforms. First of all, importance was given to the opening of a large number of new schools in the country. However, he wanted to suppress the Bulgarian nationalist revolt that broke out in Eastern Rumelia, but Sultan Abdul Hamid thought that these troops could use them against him, so he vetoed the operation. On September 18, 1885, Eastern Rumelia was annexed by Bulgaria. He was dismissed from office a week later. For ten years he was without a job.

Fifth premiership
During the height of the Hamidian massacres, Western states demanded reforms. In order to implement these reforms, Said Pasha was brought to the grand viziership for the fifth time on 8 June 1895. This time, he was at odds with the Sultan because of the Armenians demonstrating in Istanbul. Said Pasha claimed that the War Mınıster Nazım Pasha was negligent in his duties of quelling unrest and demanded that he be removed from office. However, Abdul Hamid did not agree to this and dismissed Said Pasha after less than three months.

Two months later the took refuge at the British embassy in Constantinople, and, though then assured of his personal liberty and safety, remained practically under house arrest with his son for six years.

Sixth premiership
In November 1901, he was appointed grand vizier again after he wrote to the Sultan that he would serve as a Grand Vizier like a bailiff. However this new interpretation of his role in government was too much for him and he complained that the premiership was reduced to being like a scarecrow. After two years in this post, he had a disagreement with the War Minister Mehmed Rıza Pasha about the problems in the Rumelian army. He gave an ultimatum to the Sultan that if he did not arrest Rıza, he would resign. Said was instead dismissed one month after this resignation threat.

Seventh premiership
He came into temporary prominence again during the revolution of 1908. On 22 July he succeeded Mehmed Ferid Pasha as grand vizier, and mediated the declaration of the Second Constitutional Monarchy. However, in the first two weeks, disagreements arose within the government delegation over who would be the minister of war and who would be the minister of the navy. Said Pasha was uneasy about the sultan's intervention in the establishment of this government. For this reason, he resigned on 6 August 1908, after two weeks of vizierate, citing the Sultan's interference in the cabinet list, and he was replaced by the more liberal Kâmil Pasha, at the insistence of the Young Turks.

Also during 1908, Mehmed Said Pasha bought the famed Istanbul arcade in the Beyoğlu district, today known as Çiçek Pasajı ("Flower Passage"). The modern name became common in the 1940s; during Mehmed Said Pasha's ownership in the 1900s and 1910s, the arcade was known as Sait Paşa Pasajı ("Said Pasha Passage").

Eighth and ninth premiership
Following the resignation of Ibrahim Hakkı Pasha in the wake of Italy's declaration of war on the Ottoman Empire in 1911, he was again called to the premiership. He attempted to resign on New Years Eve 1911 on disagreements with his cabinet on whether to dissolve parliament, but he was reappointed the same day. His time as Grand Vizier was under the de-facto rule of the Committee of Union and Progress (CUP) and the War Minister Mahmut Şevket Pasha.

In the "election of clubs" held in February 1912, he allowed the CUP to seize the parliament through egregious voter fraud and intimidation. However with Şevket Pasha's departure from government and another Albanian revolt, a military clique known as the Savior Officers who backed the defeated Freedom and Accord Party forced him to resign from the grand viziership for the last time.

Following his departure Said Pasha became head of the Council of State and then as the head of the Ottoman Senate.

Death
Just before the start of World War I, he developed bronchitis and died on 1 March 1914 in Istanbul. He was buried at the entrance of Eyüp Sultan Mosque.

title: Mehmed Said Pasha


text:
Imagine (Eva Cassidy album)

Imagine is the third studio album (sixth overall) by American singer Eva Cassidy. Released in 2002, six years after her death, it peaked on the U.S. Billboard Top 200 at No. 32, and was her second U.K. No. 1 album.

title: Imagine (Eva Cassidy album)


text:
Talk:Imagine (Eva Cassidy album)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Imagine (Eva Cassidy album). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061112173514/http://www.theofficialcharts.com/all_albums_album.php?id=899 to http://www.theofficialcharts.com/all_albums_album.php?id=899

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:58, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Imagine (Eva Cassidy album)


text:
Talk:Linking Books

Linking Books was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was MERGE AND REDIRECT to D'ni items

 * An item from Myst, not worthy of an article Deus Ex 18:21, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Sure, linking books are an integral part of Myst, which is a rather large franchise by now. No brainer Keep if you ask me. Kim Bruning 19:18, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep or Delete all, part of Myst or D'ni items. (see motivation) Kim Bruning 13:44, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Merge into Myst Wolfman 20:39, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to Myst. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 21:16, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Could also be merged to D'ni items (which could, with more discussion, be an excellent article). [[User:Aranel|Aranel ("Sarah")]] 22:27, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect, several possibilities where as described above. Andrewa 01:04, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to D'ni items.   — Gwalla | Talk 05:56, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect - --Cyprus2k1 11:26, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to D'ni items. — siro  χ  o  14:14, Oct 29, 2004 (UTC)

I thought that Linking Books hadn't been mentioned in the Myst article and I anted to give the Myst fans a little more knowledge or insight. But I was mistaken.... -- Linkbookmaster (not a member of Wikipedia and creator of this Myst Article)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like other '/delete' pages is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.

title: Talk:Linking Books


text:
Stephen Wade (executioner)

Stephen Wade (14 December 1887 – 22 December 1956) was one of England's executioners from 1940 until 1955. He assisted Tom and Albert Pierrepoint on 31 occasions and also carried out 28 executions as principal executioner.

One of his first assignments was on 31 October 1942, assisting Albert Pierrepoint in his first execution as a senior, that of Antonio Mancini at HMP Pentonville. After the Second World War he worked for a time at a coach dealership in his home town of Doncaster. His first execution as principal executioner was the hanging of Arthur Charles at HMP Durham on 26 March 1946. Following this, he was usually selected by the Sheriff of Yorkshire for executions at HMP Armley from 1947 onwards. The execution of Walter Sharpe (aged 20) took place at the prison on 30 March 1950, when he was assisted by Harry Allen.

His final assignment was the execution of Alec Wilkinson (aged 22), whom he hanged at Leeds on 12 August 1955. Wade's assistant at this execution was Robert Leslie Stewart. Wilkinson had been convicted of murdering Clara Farrell, his mother-in-law.

Wade died in Doncaster Royal Infirmary, of stomach cancer, shortly after his 69th birthday.

title: Stephen Wade (executioner)


text: User talk:83.108.132.76

title: User talk:83.108.132.76


text:
The Muppets Take Manhattan

The Muppets Take Manhattan is a 1984 American musical comedy-drama film directed by Frank Oz and the third theatrical film featuring the Muppets. The film stars Muppet performers Jim Henson, Oz, Dave Goelz, Steve Whitmire, Richard Hunt, Jerry Nelson, as well as special appearances by Art Carney, James Coco, Dabney Coleman, Gregory Hines, Linda Lavin, Liza Minnelli, Joan Rivers, and Brooke Shields. Filmed in New York City during the prior summer, it was released theatrically on July 13, 1984, by TriStar Pictures. A fantasy sequence in the film introduced the Muppet Babies, toddler versions of the lead Muppet characters.

Muppets Take Manhattan was the first film to be directed solely by Oz, who previously co-directed The Dark Crystal with Henson. The film received mostly positive reviews from critics with praise for its puppetry, humor, songs and characters but criticism for some of its writing. The film was also a box office success grossing $25.5 million on a budget of $8 million.

Plot
The Muppets perform their theatrical production of Manhattan Melodies for their graduating class at Danhurst College, and encouraged by the audience's enthusiastic response, decide to take the show to Broadway, certain they will become instant stars. Arriving in Manhattan, the group meet producer Martin Price, but are interrupted by the police, who have arrived to arrest him as a wanted con artist, whose real name is Murray Plotsky. The Muppets try other producers to no avail, depleting both their morale and their finances. Thinking they are becoming a burden to Kermit when he snaps at them, the rest of the Muppets agree to go their separate ways to find work, though Miss Piggy secretly remains in Manhattan to keep an eye on Kermit. Though disappointed by the development, Kermit vows to make the show a hit and enlists the assistance of diner owner Pete, his aspiring fashion designer daughter Jenny, and the diner's staff of rats led by Rizzo.

Kermit's attempts to promote the show fail, while he learns from letters received from his friends that Scooter manages a Cleveland, Ohio movie theater; Fozzie has joined some other bears hibernating in Maine but can't sleep; Dr. Teeth and the Electric Mayhem have a gig in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, performing in a retirement home; Gonzo and Camilla are trying to make a successful water skiing act in Michigan; and Rowlf is working at a dog kennel in Delaware. In Central Park, Jenny comforts Kermit about his setbacks, while an envious Piggy watches. While she is distracted, Piggy's purse is stolen but she gives chase and, in the ensuing chaos, reunites with Kermit, and takes a job at Pete's.

Kermit receives a letter from producer Bernard Crawford, who is interested in the musical. However, Kermit discovers the letter was actually written by his son Ronnie, who is eager to prove himself as a producer and believes that Manhattan Melodies is a worthwhile endeavor. His father reluctantly agrees to support him. Thrilled, Kermit heads back to the diner but is so distracted that he walks into oncoming traffic and is struck by a passing taxi.

Piggy summons the rest of the Muppets back to New York, only to discover that Kermit has disappeared. At the hospital, Kermit has lost his memory. He finds his way to Madison Avenue where he meets a trio of frogs, Bill, Gill and Jill, who work in advertising and offer him a job. The rest of the Muppets search in vain for Kermit, and on opening night reluctantly accept that the show will have to go on without him. Meanwhile, Bill, Gill, Jill and Kermit have ended up at Pete's diner, and Kermit's friends recognize him when he unknowingly taps out a tune from the show on glasses of water. At the Biltmore Theatre, Kermit still doesn't remember his friends, but when he ridicules the idea of being in love with Piggy, she karate chops him, curing his amnesia. As they hurriedly prepare for the opening number, the Muppets ask Kermit if their new friends can watch from backstage. Kermit, realizing the show needs more Muppets, suggests that the Madison Avenue frogs, the dogs, the bears, the chickens and others become supernumerary actors.

The show is a smash hit, culminating in what is intended to be a staged wedding between Kermit and Piggy's characters, only for a real minister to appear in lieu of Gonzo. With all of the Muppets, including the ones from Sesame Street and Fraggle Rock present, the show ends with their marriage.

Live-action cast

 * Louis Zorich as Pete, the owner and chef of Pete's Diner.
 * Juliana Donald as Jenny, Pete's kind daughter, a waitress and aspiring fashion designer.
 * Lonny Price as Ronnie Crawford, Bernard's son and an aspiring Broadway producer.
 * Gates McFadden as Nancy, the secretary to Martin Price.
 * Graham Brown as Mr. Wrightson, the stuffy manager of the perfume store where Miss Piggy briefly works.

Muppet performers

 * Jim Henson as Kermit the Frog, Rowlf the Dog, Dr. Teeth, the Swedish Chef, Waldorf, The Muppet Newsman, Baby Kermit, Baby Rowlf and Ernie
 * Frank Oz as Miss Piggy, Fozzie Bear, Animal, Sam Eagle, Baby Piggy, Baby Fozzie, Bert and Cookie Monster
 * Jerry Nelson as Floyd, Camilla the Chicken, Lew Zealand, Crazy Harry, Pops and Bear
 * Richard Hunt as Scooter, Janice, Statler, Baby Scooter and Beaker
 * Dave Goelz as Gonzo the Great, Chester the Rat, Bill the Frog, Zoot, a Penguin, Jim the Dog, Baby Gonzo, Beauregard and Dr. Bunsen Honeydew
 * Steve Whitmire as Rizzo the Rat, Gill the Frog and Hap
 * Kathryn Mullen as Jill the Frog
 * Karen Prell as Yolanda the Rat and Frank the Dog
 * Brian Muehl as Tatooey the Rat
 * Bruce Edward Hall as Masterson the Rat and Beth Bear

Cameo guest stars

 * Frances Bergen as Mr. Winesop's receptionist
 * Art Carney as Bernard Crawford, a renowned theatrical producer and Ronnie's father.
 * James Coco as Mr. Skeffington, a man who leaves his dog at the kennel where Rowlf works.
 * Dabney Coleman as Murray Plotsky, a con artist posing as a theatrical producer named Martin Price.
 * Elliott Gould as a police officer at Pete's Diner. Gould previously appeared as a cameo in The Muppet Movie.
 * Gregory Hines as a roller skater whose skates are borrowed by Miss Piggy.
 * Dr. Cyril Jenkins as the minister performing Kermit and Miss Piggy's wedding.
 * Mayor Edward I. Koch as himself
 * John Landis as Leonard Winesop, a known theatrical producer.
 * Linda Lavin as Kermit's doctor, who diagnoses his amnesia.
 * David Lazer as a customer at Sardi's
 * Liza Minnelli as herself
 * Joan Rivers as Eileen, a perfume saleswoman who works with Piggy.
 * Brooke Shields as a Pete's Diner patron
 * Vincent Sardi Jr. as himself

Production
Under the working title of Muppet Movie III, Jim Henson initially planned to film in late spring 1983. Having directed The Great Muppet Caper and The Dark Crystal back-to-back, Henson decided to serve as executive producer while David Lazer served as producer. Upon selecting fellow Muppet performer and The Dark Crystal co-director Frank Oz to handle directorial duties, Henson stated, "I was looking at the year ahead and I thought my life was very busy and I thought maybe it was a time to have Frank directing one of these."

The first draft titled The Muppets: The Legend Continues, written by Muppet Caper screenwriters Jay Tarses and Tom Patchett, was dismissed by Oz for being "way too over jokey". After being given Henson's encouragement to tinker with the script, Oz revised the screenplay in an effort to develop the "oomph of the characters and their relationships". Once the script was completed and the sets were built, special consultant David Misch was brought in to write cameos for some guest star appearances. Originally, this list of guest stars contained Dustin Hoffman, Steve Martin, Michael Jackson, Lily Tomlin, Richard Pryor and Laurence Olivier, to name a few. According to Misch, Hoffman was going to play a Broadway producer and planned to do an imitation of film producer Robert Evans (The Godfather), which he later did in the 1997 film Wag the Dog. However, at the last minute, Hoffman decided that the role could be offensive to Evans and dropped out, following which all the other big names left as well. Because of the dropped cameos, Misch and Oz ended up rewriting most of the dialogue.

Music
Jeff Moss was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Original Song Score for the music he composed for The Muppets Take Manhattan, but lost to Purple Rain by Prince.

The Muppets Take Manhattan: The Original Soundtrack contains all of the songs written by Jeff Moss and prominent score cues composed by Ralph Burns from the film, as well as several portions of dialogue and background score. The album reached No. 204 on Billboard's Bubbling Under the Top LPs chart and was nominated for a Grammy Award for Best Recording for Children, but lost to Shel Silverstein's audio edition of Where the Sidewalk Ends.

This is the only Muppet film soundtrack that has not been released on CD. However, three tracks from the album can be found on the 2002 compilation album The Muppet Show: Music, Mayhem, and More. A new version of "Together Again (Again)" was performed in the 2014 film Muppets Most Wanted and its soundtrack.

Marketing
The Muppets Take Manhattan was adapted by Marvel Comics in 1984, as the 68-page story in Marvel Super Special #32. The adaptation was later re-printed into a three-issue limited series, released under Marvel's Star Comics imprint (November 1984 – January 1985). The film's script was adapted into comic form by writer Stan Kay with art by Dean Yeagle and Jacqueline Roettcher. Unlike in the film, the comic depicts Gonzo, Floyd Pepper, Animal, Janice, Dr. Teeth, and Zoot in their customary outfits from The Muppet Show.

In addition, a book-and-record set of the film was released in the form of a vinyl record through the Muppet Music Records label.

Home media
Unlike Henson's previous films (The Muppet Movie, The Great Muppet Caper, and The Dark Crystal), The Muppets Take Manhattan was originally released by TriStar Pictures and not produced by ITC Films, mainly because ITC was suffering from extreme financial difficulties at the time. Therefore, unlike the previous films, the distribution rights to The Muppets Take Manhattan did revert to The Jim Henson Company in 1998, but did not revert to The Walt Disney Company in 2004. Because of this, it is one of three Muppet films (along with Muppets from Space and the direct-to-video feature Kermit's Swamp Years) whose home video and television distribution rights are still controlled by Sony Pictures, and not the Walt Disney Studios.

The Muppets Take Manhattan was first released on VHS and the now defunct CED Videodisc format by CBS/Fox Video in 1985, which then reissued it in 1991, followed by a release from Columbia TriStar Home Video and Jim Henson Home Entertainment on June 1, 1999. The 1999 VHS contained a slightly edited cut from previous versions, possibly derived from the TV broadcast version. Cuts include removal of the audio from the TriStar logo, the scenes of Animal shouting "Bad man!" to Mr. Price, the same goes for the sound of Kermit's panting for breath immediately after leaving Leonard Winesop's office, removal of the words "Oh my God" in one scene, and scenes with Miss Piggy hitting the purse snatcher.

A DVD version was released on June 5, 2001 with the cuts from the 1999 VHS version restored. A Blu-ray edition was released on August 16, 2011, and contains the same bonus features as the DVD. A 4K remaster of the film was released on October 24, 2023, on 4K Ultra HD Blu-ray, making it the first film that features the Muppets to receive a 4K Ultra HD Blu-ray release.

Box office
On its opening weekend, The Muppets Take Manhattan grossed $4.4 million, ranking at fifth place at the box office. The film ultimately earned $25.5 million in the United States and Canada, placing it as the second highest-grossing G-rated film of 1984 (behind a re-issue of Walt Disney Productions' Pinocchio).

Critical reaction
Roger Ebert of the Chicago Sun-Times gave the film three stars (out of four), stating in his review that "the plot of [the] movie has been seen before." However, Ebert went on to say that just about everything in the film was enjoyable and that Kermit finally solves his long-lasting identity crisis. Gene Siskel of the Chicago Tribune gave the film $3 1/2$ stars (out of four) writing it was "a most enjoyable backstage musical, culminating, as you probably have heard, with a wedding ceremony between you-know-who and you-know-who." Variety positively stated: "The Muppets Take Manhattan is a genuinely fun confection of old-fashioned entertainment that will appeal to both children and their parents, weaned on Henson's syndicated tv series." Sheila Benson of the Los Angeles Times, who expressed disappointment in The Great Muppet Caper, felt the Muppets "have found their footing adroitly now; the emphasis is back on real values and identifiable emotions." In his annual Movie Guide, Leonard Maltin gave the film a three star rating (out of four) as well citing that the film is an "enjoyable outing with bouncy songs, [with a] nice use of N.Y.C. locations."

Gary Arnold of The Washington Post described the film as being "progressively lackluster", finding the Muppets' disbandment to be a "misbegotten juncture that the script proceeds to unravel, losing a unified storytelling thread while keeping tabs on the scattered troupe until the inevitable reunion." He further felt the film lacked "rousing musical numbers", in which he blamed Henson and Oz for pinning "everything on a poorly calculated and staged marital spectacular, as Miss Piggy finally cons Kermit to the altar -- a terminally sappy bad idea to begin with." Vincent Canby of The New York Times wrote: "This may be only an impression, based on the fact that the past always looks greener than the present, but The Muppets Take Manhattan seems just a little less extraordinaire than the two other features." Kathleen Carroll of the New York Daily News gave the film a 2½ star rating out of four, remarking that "despite the contribution of such well known actors as Mayor Koch, The Muppets Take Manhattan is strangely flat. It's no wonder that the Muppets' severest critics, the grumpy Waldorf and Statler, are less than pleased with this mushy movie. Watching Miss Piggy and "Kermie" cuddle together in a hansom cab, Waldorf grimly notes, 'They're in love.' Growls Statler: 'Kind of makes you sick, doesn't it?'." Rob Salem of The Toronto Star, remarked that "the Muppet charm has been as stretched as far is it can go. Now that the pig and the frog are blissfully wedded, it's time to lay them to rest. Better that Jim Henson and associates continue to branch out, as they did with The Dark Crystal, into new and very different stories and characters. Otherwise, in Muppet Movie IV, they'll be forced to deal with the reality of married life between a pretend pig and a phony frog. And that could get a little tricky."

Review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes reports that 85% of 26 critics have given the film a positive review, with an average rating of 7/10. The site's consensus stated that "if it's not quite as sharp as The Muppet Movie, The Muppets Take Manhattan is still a smart, delightfully old-fashioned tale that follows the formula established by the first two movies -- a madcap adventure assisted by a huge group of human stars." On Metacritic, the film has a score of 64 out of 100 based on 9 critics, indicating "generally favorable reviews".

Abandoned follow-up series
On February 7, 2019, it was announced that Once Upon a Time showrunners Edward Kitsis and Adam Horowitz were working with actor Josh Gad on a TV series titled Muppets Live Another Day, set after the film's events, for Disney+. The series was to focus on the Muppets, who disbanded some time after the film's events, reuniting after Rowlf disappears. However, on September 9, 2019, it was announced that the series had been scrapped due to creative differences following an executive change at The Muppets Studio.

title: The Muppets Take Manhattan


text:
Humanist International

The Humanist International (also known as the International Humanist Party) is a consortium of political parties adhering to universal humanism founded in 1952.

The five basic principles of Humanist International are:

 * 1) The value of human life as the central value, above money and power, etc.
 * 2) Equality of all human beings
 * 3) Freedom of belief and ideas
 * 4) Development and creation of alternative economic models to the current neoliberal one
 * 5) Methodology of active non-violence

History
Humanist International was founded in Florence, Italy, on January 4, 1989, by the approval of foundational documents and statutes by over 40 Humanist Parties from around the world. These foundational documents included the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, a declaration of principles, a thesis and a basis for political action.

The second congress of the Humanist International was held in Moscow in October 1993. In this meeting, the document of the Humanist Movement was added to the foundational documents.

In January and July 1999, the Humanist International launched the regional bodies of Latin America and Europe respectively. Africa and Asia are in the process of forming their own regional bodies.

In December 1989, in Chile, Laura Rodríguez became the first elected representative of any Humanist Party in the world after winning a seat as part of the Concertación coalition, after Augusto Pinochet handed over power.

The Argentine Humanist Party won a seat in the Deliberative Council in Santa Rosa, La Pampa in 2015.

The Chilean Humanist Party was a part of the Broad Front coalition for the 2017 parliamentary elections. The coalition won 20 seats in the Chamber of Deputies, three of which went to the Humanist Party.

Member parties

 * Humanist Party of Angola
 * Humanist Party (Argentina)
 * Humanist Party (Chile)
 * Humanist Party (Iceland)
 * Humanist Party (Italy)
 * Humanist Party (Spain)
 * Humanist Party (Spain)

Defunct member parties

 * Humanist Party (Czech Republic)
 * Humanist Party (Denmark)
 * Humanist Party (Hungary)
 * Humanist Party (Portugal)
 * Humanist Party of Ontario
 * Humanist Party of Quebec
 * Humanist Party of Switzerland
 * Romanian Humanist Party
 * Paraguayan Humanist Party

title: Humanist International


text:
Midhat Pasha

Ahmed Shefik Midhat Pasha (احمد شفيق مدحت پاشا; 1822 – 26 April 1883) was an Ottoman politician, reformist, and statesman. He was the author of the Constitution of the Ottoman Empire.

Midhat was born in Istanbul and educated from a private. In July 1872, he was appointed grand vizier by Abdulaziz ((r. 1861 – 1876)), though was removed in August. During the First Constitutional Era, in 1876, he co-founded the Ottoman Parliament. Midhat was noted as a kingmaker and leading Ottoman democrat. He was part of a governing elite which recognized the crisis the Empire was in and considered reform to be a dire need. Midhat was reportedly killed in al-Ta'if.

Early life and family
Ahmed Shefik Midhat Pasha was born in Istanbul in the Islamic month of Safar in 1238 AH, which began on 18 October 1822. His family consisted of well-established Muslim scholars. His father, Rusçuklu Mehmed Eşref, was a native of Ruse. The family seem to have been professed Bektashis. Born into an Ilmiye family, he received a private and medrese education.

He spent his youth in his parents' home in Vidin, Lovech and later Istanbul, where his father held judicial office. In 1836 he worked in the secretariat of the grand vizier, and in 1854 the Grand Vizier Kıbrıslı Mehmed Emin Pasha gave him the task of pacifying the province of Adrianople, and he succeeded in putting down banditry in the Balkans in 1854–1856. In 1858 he spent six months traveling in western Europe for studies, including in Vienna, Paris, Brussels and London.

Early political career
In 1861 he was appointed governor of Niš, where he was instrumental in introducing the vilayet system in the Balkans. Fuad Pasha, in order to implement the 1864 Vilayet Law, began with a pilot program in the form of the model and experimental vilayet of the Danube, in which Midhat Pasha was appointed its first Vali. He was governor of the Danube Province from 1864 to 1868. He played a major role in the accommodation of Muslim refugees from Serbia, who were expelled by the government in 1862. During his governorship, he built countless schools and educational institutes, built hospitals, granaries, roads and bridges, paying for these projects through voluntary contributions from the people. Within two years Midhat Pasha restored order, introduced the new reformed hierarchy, provided agricultural credits (through the first agricultural credit co-operatives), extended roads, bridges, and waterways, started industries, opened schools and orphanages, founded a newspaper, and increased the revenues of the province from 26,000 to 300,000 purses. He clashed with the Grand Vizier Mehmed Emin Ali Pasha, which led to his appointment as governor of Baghdad in 1869, as the appointment to such a remote posting was intended as a punishment.

After his arrival in Baghdad in 1869, he opened a series of government schools, as the city previously had no state educational institutions. He also emphasized reforming the Sixth Army, and to that end he opened military schools. The military schools were to have the more lasting impact: by 1900, the civil preparatory high school was attended by only 96 students, compared to 256 for the military preparatory school, and 846 for the military middle school in the same year.

He helped modernize the province, and he re-established Ottoman rule in al-Hasa. He enacted the vilayet system in Baghdad, and applied the 1858 land decree under which miri land could be granted to individuals, under a system known as nizam tapu. Sir Henry Dobbs recognised the three years of Midhat Pasha's governorship as the most stable and secure period of Ottoman rule in the region. He left the post in 1872, returning to Istanbul.

Grand Viziership
In 1872, he was appointed grand vizier by Abdulaziz ((r. 1861 – 1876)). His first tenure came to an abrupt end, mainly due to his clashes with Abdulaziz over financial and economic issues. He was dismissed after two months. He also served as Minister of Justice in 1873 and 1875, but his tenure in these offices was short-lived, owing to his inclination towards a constitutional regime.

The emerging internal, financial and diplomatic crises of 1875–1876 provided him with a chance to introduce the constitution of 1876.

On 15 June 1876, an Ottoman infantry officer named Çerkes Hasan assaulted a meeting in the mansion of Midhat Pasha, where all the chief ministers were present. The Minister of War Huseyin Avni Pasha was shot, and the Foreign Minister Rashid Pasha was killed, as was one of Midhat's servants, named Ahmed Aga. In total, 5 were killed and 10 were wounded, and Hasan was sentenced to death for the crime, in an incident known as the Çerkes Hasan Olayı.

Midhat Pasha was again appointed Grand Vizier, in place of Mehmed Rushdi Pasha, on 19 December 1876. When he was appointed, he promised to continue on the path of reform, and announced on 23 December 1876 that a constitution would be promulgated and a representative parliament established. Though not a member of the commission that drafted the constitution, he played an important part in its adoption. The constitution provided for equal rights for all citizens without distinction of race or creed, abolition of slavery, an independent judiciary based on civil (rather than religious) law, universal elementary education, and a bicameral parliament, with a Senate appointed by the Sultan and a directly elected Chamber of Deputies. Midhat Pasha asserted in the Nineteenth Century that "in Islam the principle of government rests upon bases essentially democratic, inasmuch as the sovereignty of the people is therein recognized."

Popular support for the constitution began to plummet when it became known that it was to grant equal rights for non-Muslims. The softas, which had been Midhat's supporters just months earlier, became largely opposed. Midhat Pasha managed to pressure Abdul Hamid II into approving the constitution, but the Sultan was able to include the notorious article 113, which gave him the power to banish anyone from the empire without trial or other legal procedure.

Abdul Hamid had no real interest in constitutionalism, and on 5 February 1877, he exiled Midhat Pasha. Sent to Brindisi on the imperial yacht, from there he visited France, Spain, Austria-Hungary and the United Kingdom, where he wrote memoranda supporting the Ottoman cause in the Russo-Turkish War of 1877–78, and a pamphlet defending Ottoman reforms. Midhat's popularity in Europe, coupled with British pressure, led Abdul Hamid to allow him to return from exile, and he arrived in Crete on 6 September 1878.

After the war ended, Sultan Abdul Hamid II dismissed the government and returned to despotic rule.

Governorship of Syria
The intervention of the British led to his appointing as governor again, and he became governor of the Vilayet of Syria on November 1878, a post he held until 31 August 1881. During his tenure he endeavoured to reform the province. He used a charitable association for education, which had been formed by some of Beirut's prominent Muslim citizens, into a centrepiece of his educational reform, and encouraged the formation of similar associations in Damascus and elsewhere.

He admitted many Arabs in the civil service, including in the positions of qaimaqam and mutasarrif, and gave minorities broad representation in the administration. He encouraged the development of the press, and the number of newspapers rose to more than twelve. He took an interest in the construction of roads, and in the maintenance of security. He involved local notables in the financing of local projects, such as the tramway system in Tripoli and the founding of the Beirut Chamber of Commerce. He then resigned the post, as he felt Istanbul was offering him an insufficient amount of support. His reputation in Europe was that his reforming zeal was an aberration, based on individual strength of personality. They believed Midhat Pasha could not succeed, citing the inefficient and corrupt nature of the Ottoman state, and the fractured nature of its society.

Imprisonment and death
He served briefly in İzmir as governor of the vilayet of Aydin, but on 17 May 1881, after only a few months on that post, he was arrested. Ahmed Cevdet Pasha, the justice minister, brought him to Istanbul, where he was charged with the murder of Sultan Abdulaziz. The interrogation and court proceedings took place at Yildiz. In conclusion, he was convicted and charged with the murder, and was sentenced to death. However the execution was commuted to life imprisonment in Taif in Hejaz.

Some historians claim that these to be trumped-up accusations as they believe that confessions were extracted from some suspects through the use of torture, and the use of forged evidence and paid witnesses led to his conviction. However, they claim that the British pressure impeded his execution, so he was imprisoned in the fortress of Taif, in Hejaz. It was reported that, soon after his arrival, the Emir of Mecca received a message from Istanbul demanding the death of Midhat from "an accident". The incumbent Emir Abdul Muttalib was a close friend of Midhat however, and no action was taken by him. As a result, Osman Pasha (Uthman Pasha), governor of Hejaz, surrounded the Emir's summer residence in Taif and imprisoned him. After that, Midhat Pasha's fate was sealed. He was assassinated in his cell on 26 April 1883.

Midhat Pasha's remains were brought from Taif and interned in the Monument of Liberty on 26 June 1951, in a ceremony attended by President Celâl Bayar.

Legacy
The British historian Caroline Finkel describes Midhat as "a true representative of Tanzimat optimism, who believed that separatist tendencies could be best countered by demonstrating the benefits of good government." The Midhat Pasha Souq in Damascus still bears his name. Bernard Lewis describes Midhat Pasha "one of the ablest administrators in the Ottoman service." Going on to state "[his] term of office as Vali of the Danube province showed that, given the necessary goodwill and ability, the new system could work very well." Midhat Pasha is described as a person with a liberal attitude.

title: Midhat Pasha


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carby

Carby

 * Does not need to be a separate article Deus Ex 18:28, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * I'd like to see this kind of information merged into an article on the whole "shipping" culture (Harry Potter fandom would be a good place to start if anyone is interested who knows the subject matter). But I would not be overly sad if it were just deleted. [[User:Aranel|Aranel ("Sarah")]] 23:29, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC) (forgot to sign, sorry)
 * Delete: What the hell is it about? If you don't share their mania, their precise mania, you don't get a clue.  I thought encyclopedias explained things. Geogre 05:10, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. ER fancruft.   — Gwalla | Talk 05:58, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Ugh. There are ridiculous names for the fan hopes on just about every soap opera pair in existence.  Delete.  RickK 05:59, Oct 25, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: fancruft. Wile E. Heresiarch 13:54, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Hahah, that's hilarious. I'm an ER fan myself, but this is just too much.. Nadavspi | talk 17:29, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Good Lord! Delete. Indrian 17:32, Oct 25, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete this garby. JamesMLane 23:39, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Oy gevalt. Somebody actually thought this was encyclopedia-worthy? Delete. Bearcat 17:46, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)

title: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carby


text:
Missile defense

Missile defense is a system, weapon, or technology involved in the detection, tracking, interception, and also the destruction of attacking missiles. Conceived as a defense against nuclear-armed intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), its application has broadened to include shorter-ranged non-nuclear tactical and theater missiles.

China, France, India, Iran, Israel, Italy, Russia, Taiwan, the United Kingdom and the United States have all developed such air defense systems.

Missile defense categories

Missile defense can be divided into categories based on various characteristics: type/range of missile intercepted, the trajectory phase where the intercept occurs, and whether intercepted inside or outside the Earth's atmosphere:

Type/range of missile intercepted
These types/ranges include strategic, theater and tactical. Each entails unique requirements for intercept; a defensive system capable of intercepting one missile type frequently cannot intercept others. However, there is sometimes overlap in capability.

Strategic
Targets long-range ICBMs, which travel at about 7 km/s (15,700 mph). Examples of currently active systems: Russian A-135, which defends Moscow, the US Ground-Based Midcourse Defense that defends the United States from missiles launched from Asia and the Israeli Arrow 3 which defends Israel from ICBMs. Geographic range of strategic defense can be regional (Russian system) or national (US and Israeli system's).

Theater
Targets medium-range missiles, which travel at about 3 km/s (6,700 mph) or less. In this context, the term "theater" means the entire localized region for military operations, typically a radius of several hundred kilometers; defense range of these systems is usually on this order. Examples of deployed theater missile defenses: Israeli Arrow 2 missile and David's Sling, American THAAD, and Russian S-400.

Tactical
Targets short-range tactical ballistic missiles, which usually travel at less than 1.5 km/s (3,400 mph). Tactical anti-ballistic missiles (ABMs) have short ranges, typically 20–80 km (12–50 miles). Examples of currently-deployed tactical ABMs:israeli Iron Dome, American MIM-104 Patriot and Russian S-300V.

Trajectory phase
Ballistic missiles can be intercepted in three regions of their trajectory: boost phase, midcourse phase, or terminal phase.

Boost phase
Intercepting the missile while its rocket motors are firing, usually over the launch territory.

Advantages:
 * Bright, hot rocket exhaust makes detection and targeting easier.
 * Decoys cannot be used during boost phase.
 * At this stage, the missile is full of flammable propellant, which makes it very vulnerable to explosive warheads.

Disadvantages:
 * Difficult to geographically position interceptors to intercept missiles in boost phase (not always possible without flying over hostile territory).
 * Short time for intercept (typically about 180 seconds).

Mid-course phase
Intercepting the missile in space after the rocket burns out (example: American Ground-Based Midcourse Defense (GMD), Chinese SC-19 & DN-series missiles, Israeli Arrow 3 missile).

Advantages:
 * Extended decision/intercept time (the coast period through space before reentering the atmosphere can be several minutes, up to 20 minutes for an ICBM).
 * Very large geographic defensive coverage; potentially continental.

Disadvantages:
 * Requires large, heavy anti-ballistic missiles and sophisticated powerful radar which must often be augmented by space-based sensors.
 * Must handle potential space-based decoys.

Terminal phase
Intercepting the missile after it reenters the atmosphere (examples: American Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System, Chinese HQ-29, American THAAD, American Sprint, Russian ABM-3 Gazelle)

Advantages:
 * Smaller, lighter anti-ballistic missile is sufficient.
 * Balloon decoys do not work during reentry.
 * Smaller, less sophisticated radar required.

Disadvantages:
 * Very short intercept time, possibly less than 30 seconds.
 * Less defended geographic coverage.
 * Possible blanketing of target area with hazardous materials in the case of detonation of nuclear warhead(s).

Intercept location relative to the atmosphere
Missile defense can take place either inside (endoatmospheric) or outside (exoatmospheric) the Earth's atmosphere. The trajectory of most ballistic missiles takes them inside and outside the Earth's atmosphere, and they can be intercepted in either place. There are advantages and disadvantages to either intercept technique.

Some missiles such as THAAD can intercept both inside and outside the Earth's atmosphere, giving two intercept opportunities.

Endoatmospheric
Endoatmospheric anti-ballistic missiles are usually shorter ranged (e.g., American MIM-104 Patriot, Indian Advanced Air Defence).

Advantages:
 * Physically smaller and lighter
 * Easier to move and deploy
 * Endoatmospheric intercept means balloon-type decoys won't work

Disadvantages:
 * Limited range and defended area
 * Limited decision and tracking time for the incoming warhead

Exoatmospheric
Exoatmospheric anti-ballistic missiles are usually longer-ranged (e.g., American GMD, Ground-Based Midcourse Defense).

Advantages:
 * More decision and tracking time
 * Fewer missiles required for defense of a larger area

Disadvantages:
 * Larger and heavier missiles required
 * More difficult to transport and place compared to smaller missiles
 * Must handle decoys

Countermeasures to missile defense
Given the immense variety by which a defense system can operate (targeting nuclear-armed intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), tactical, and theater missiles), there are some unarguably effective exoatmospheric (outside the Earth's atmosphere) countermeasures an attacking party can use to deter or completely defend against certain types of defense systems, ranges of ACBM's, and intercept locations. Many of defenses to these countermeasures have been implemented and taken into account when constructing missile defense systems, however, it does not guarantee their effectiveness or success. The US Missile Defense Agency has received scrutiny in regards to their lack of foresight of these countermeasures, causing many scientists to perform various studies and data analysis as to the true effectiveness of these countermeasures.

Decoys
A common countermeasure that attacking parties use to disrupt the efficacy of Missile Defense Systems are the simultaneous launching of decoys from the primary launch site or from the exterior of the main attacking missile itself. These decoys are usually small, lightweight dud rockets that take advantage of the interceptor sensors tracking and fool it by making many different targets available in an instant. This is accomplished via the releasing of decoys in certain phases of flight. Because objects of differing weights follow the same trajectory when in space, decoys released during the midcourse phase can prevent interceptor missiles from accurately identifying the warhead. This could force the defense system to attempt to destroy all incoming projectiles, which masks the true attacking missile and lets it slip by the defense system.

Common types of decoys
Since there can be many forms of this type of deception of a missile system, different categorizations of decoys have developed, all of which operate and are designed slightly different. Details of these types of decoys and their effectiveness were provided in a report by a variety of prominent scientists in 2000.

Replica decoys
This categorization of decoy is the most similar to the standard understanding of what a missile decoy is. These types of decoys attempt to mask the attacking ICBM via the release of many similar missiles. This type of decoy confuses the missile defense system by the sudden replication and the sheer amount that the defense has to deal with. Knowing that no defense system is 100% reliable, this confusion within the targeting of the defense system would cause the system to target each decoy with equal priority and as if it was the actual warhead, allowing the real warheads chance of passing through the system and striking the target to increase drastically.

Decoys using signature diversity
Similar to replica decoys, these types of decoys also take advantage of the limitations in number within the missile defense systems targeting. However, rather than using missiles of similar build and trace to the attacking warhead, these types of decoys all have slightly different appearances from both each other and the warhead itself. This creates a different kind of confusion within the system; rather than creating a situation where each decoy (and the warhead itself) appears the same and is therefore targeted and treated exactly like the "real" warhead, the targeting system simply does not know what is the real threat and what is a decoy due to the mass amount of differing information. This creates a similar situation as the result of the replica decoy, increasing the chance that the real warhead passes through the system and strikes the target.

Decoys using antisimulation
This type of decoy is perhaps the most difficult and subversive for a missile defense system to determine. Instead of taking advantage of the missile defense system's targeting, this type of decoy intends to fool the operation of the system itself. Rather than using sheer quantity to overrun the targeting system, an anti-simulation decoy disguises the actual warhead as a decoy, and a decoy as the actual warhead. This system of "anti-simulation" allows the attacking warhead to, in some cases, take advantage of the "bulk-filtering" of certain missile defense systems, in which objects with characteristics of the warhead poorly matching those expected by the defense are either not observed because of sensor filters, or observed very briefly and immediately rejected without the need for a detailed examination. The actual warhead may simply pass by undetected, or rejected as a threat.

Cooled shrouds
Another common countermeasure used to fool missile defense systems are the implementation of cooled shrouds surrounding attacking missiles. This method covers the entire missile in a steel containment filled with liquid oxygen, nitrogen, or other sub-zero coolants that prevent the missile from being easily detected. Because many missile defense systems use infrared sensors to detect the heat traces of incoming missiles, this capsule of extremely cold liquid either renders the incoming missile entirely invisible to detection or reduces the system's ability to detect the incoming missile fast enough.

Other types of infrared stealth
Another commonly applied countermeasure to missile defense is the application of various low-emissivity coatings. Similar to cooled shrouds, these warheads are fully coated with infrared reflective or resistant coatings that allow similar resistance to infrared detection that cooled shrouds do. Because the most effective coating discovered so far is gold, though, this method is often overstepped by cooled shrouds.

Biological and chemical weapons
This is perhaps the most extreme approach to countering missile defense systems that are designed to destroy ICBMs and other forms of nuclear weaponry. Rather than using many missiles equipped with nuclear warheads as their main weapon of attack, this idea involves the release of biological or chemical sub-munition weapons or agents from the missile shortly after the boost phase of the attacking ICBM. Because missile defense systems are designed with intent to destroy main attacking missiles or ICBMs, this system of sub-munition attack is too numerous for the system to defend against while also distributing the chemical or biological agent across a large area of attack. There is currently no proposed countermeasure to this type of attack except through diplomacy and the effective banning of biological weaponry and chemical agents within war. However, this does not guarantee that this countermeasure to missile defense system will not be abused via extremists or terrorists. An example of this severe threat can be further seen in North Korea's testing of anthrax tipped ICBMs in 2017.

Dynamic trajectories
Countries including Iran and North Korea may have sought missiles that can maneuver and vary their trajectories in order to evade missile defense systems.

In March 2022, when Russia used a hypersonic missile against Ukraine, Joe Biden characterized the weapon as "almost impossible to stop". Boost-glide hypersonic weapons shift trajectory to evade current missile-defense systems.

Glide Phase Interceptor (GPI) will provide defense against maneuvering hypersonic weapons.

Multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicles
Another way to counter an ABM system is to attach multiple warheads that break apart upon reentry. If the ABM is able to counter one or two of the warheads via detonation or collision the others would slip through radar either because of limitations on ABM firing speeds or because of radar blackout caused by plasma interference. The first MRV was the Polaris A-3 which had three warheads and was launched from a submarine. Before regulations on how many warheads could be stored in a MIRV, the Soviets had up to twenty to thirty attached to ICBMs.

Jammers
Jammers use radar noise to saturate the incoming signals to the point where the radar cannot discern meaningful data about a target's location with meaningless noise. They can also imitate the signal of a missile to create a fake target. They are usually spread over planned missile paths to enemy territory to give the missile a clear path to their target. Because these jammers take relatively little electricity and hardware to operate, they are usually small, self-contained, and easily dispersible.

Command and control, battle management, and communications (C2BMC)
Command and control, battle management, and communications (C2BMC) systems are hardware and software interfaces that integrate a multitude of sensory information at a centralized center for the ballistic missile defense system (BMDS). The command center allows for human management in accordance to the incorporated sensory information- BMDS status, system coverage, and ballistic missile attacks. The interface system helps build an image of the battle scenario or situation which enables the user to select the optimal firing solutions. The first C2BMC system became operational in 2004. Since then, many elements have been added to update the C2BMC, which act to provide further sensory information and allow for enhanced communications between combatant commanders. A C2BMC is even capable of initiating live planning system before any engagement has even started.

GMD fire control and communication
The function of ground-based midcourse defense (GMD) systems is to provide combatants the ability to seek and destroy intermediate- and long-range ballistic missiles en route to the US homeland. Data are transmitted from the defense satellite communication system, and compiles an image using the coordinated information. The system is able to relay real-time data once missiles have been launched. The GMD can also work to receive information from the C2BMC, which allows Aegis SPY-1, and TPY-2 to contribute to the defense system.

A problem with GMD is that the ground systems have increasingly becoming obsolete as the technology was initially installed as early as the 1990s. So, the ground sensors had been replaced sometime in 2018. The update was to add the capability of handling up to 44 systems; it would also reduce overlapping redundancies and inefficiencies.

Missiles are a link that connects communication between land, air, and sea forces to support joint operations and improve operability. The system is intended to improve the interoperability for joint operations of NATO and coalition forces. Link-16 is also used by the US Army and Navy for air and sea operations. An important feature of Link-16 is its ability to broadcast information simultaneously to as many users as needed. Another feature of Link-16 is its ability to act as nodes, which allows for a multitude of distributed forces to operate cohesively.

The newest generation of Link-16 is the multifunctional information distribution system low-volume terminal (MIDS LVT). It is a much smaller unit that can be fitted on air, ground, and sea units to incorporate data. The MIDS LVT terminals are installed on most bombers, aircraft, UAVs, and tankers, allowing for the incorporation of most air defense systems.

Integrated Air and Missile Defense Battle Command System
The Integrated Air and Missile Defense Battle Command System (IBCS) is an unified command and control network developed by the US Army. It is designed to integrate data relay between weapon launchers, radars, and the operators, which allows air-defense units to fire interceptors with information being relayed among radars. The advantage of such a system is it can increase the area an air unit can defend and reduce interceptor spending by ensuring than no other air defense unit would engage the same target. The IBCS will be able to integrate with air defense networks of foreign military as the global C2BMC system.

IBCS engagement stations will integrate raw data from multiple sensors and process it into a single air picture, and choose elect different weapons and launcher locations depending on the detected threat instead of being limited to particular unit capabilities.

The IBCS system is intended to be operational in 2019; between 2016 and 2017, implementation of IBCS had to be put on hold due to software issues with the system. In 2021, F-35 sensor data were linked via airborne gateway to ground-based IBCS, to conduct a simulated Army fires exercise, for future Joint All-Domain Command and Control (JADC2).

History
The problem was first studied during the last year of the Second World War. The only countermeasure against the V-2 missile that could be devised was a massive barrage of anti-aircraft guns. Even if the missile's trajectory were accurately calculated, the guns would still have a small probability of destroying it before impact with the ground. Also, the shells fired by the guns would have caused more damage than the actual missile when they fell back to the ground. Plans for an operational test began anyway, but the idea was rendered moot when the V-2 launching sites in the Netherlands were captured.

In the 1950s and 1960s, missile defense meant defense against strategic (usually nuclear-armed) missiles. The technology mostly centered around detecting offensive launch events and tracking inbound ballistic missiles, but with limited ability to actually defend against the missile. The Soviet Union achieved the first nonnuclear intercept of a ballistic missile warhead by a missile at the Sary Shagan antiballistic missile defense test range on 4 March 1961. Nicknamed the "Griffon" missile system, it would be installed around Leningrad as a test Throughout the 1950s and 1960s, the United States Project Nike air defense program focused initially on targeting hostile bombers before shifting focus to targeting ballistic missiles. In the 1950s, the first United States anti-ballistic missile system was the Nike Hercules, which had the ability to intercept incoming short-range ballistic missiles, but not intermediate-range ballistic missiles (IRBMs) or ICBMs. This was followed by the Nike Zeus, which was capable of intercepting ICBMs by using a nuclear warhead, upgraded radar systems, faster computers, and control systems that were more effective in the upper atmosphere. However it was feared the missile's electronics may be vulnerable to x-rays from a nuclear detonation in space. A program was started to devise methods of hardening weapons from radiation damage. By the early 1960s the Nike Zeus was the first anti-ballistic missile to achieve hit-to-kill (physically colliding with the incoming warhead).

In 1963, Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara diverted funds from the Zeus missile program, and instead directed that funding to the development of the Nike-X system, which utilized the high-speed, short-range Sprint missile. These missiles were meant to intercept incoming warheads after they had descended from space and were only seconds from their targets. To accomplish this, Nike-X required advances in missile design to make the Sprint missile quick enough to intercept incoming warheads in time. The system also included advanced active electronically scanned array radar systems and a powerful computer complex.

During the development of Nike-X, controversy over the effectiveness of anti-ballistic missile systems became more prominent. Critiques of the Nike-X included an estimate that the anti-ballistic missile system could be defeated by Soviets manufacturing more ICBMs, and the cost of those additional ICBMs needed to defeat Nike-X would also cost less than what the United States would spend on implementing Nike-X. Additionally, McNamara reported that a ballistic missile system would save American lives at the cost of approximately $700 per life, compared to a shelter system that could save lives at a lower cost of approximately $40 per life. As a result of these estimations, McNamara opposed implementation of Nike-X due to the high costs associated with construction and perceived poor cost-effectiveness of the system, and instead expressed support for pursuing arms limitations agreements with the Soviets. After the Chinese government detonated their first hydrogen bomb during Test No. 6. in 1967, McNamara modified the Nike-X program into a program called Sentinel. This program's goal was to protect major US cities from a limited ICBM attack, especially on one from China. This would be done by building fifteen sites across the continental US, and one site in each of Alaska and Hawaii. This in turn reduced tensions with the Soviet Union, which retained the offensive capability to overwhelm any US defense. McNamara favored this approach as deploying the Sentinel program was less costly than a fully implemented Nike-X program, and would reduce congressional pressures to implement an ABM system. In the months following the announcements regarding the Sentinel program, Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara stated: "Let me emphasize—and I cannot do so too strongly—that our decision to go ahead with a limited ABM deployment in no way indicates that we feel an agreement with the Soviet Union on the limitation of strategic nuclear offensive and defensive forces is in any way less urgent or desirable.

With the conclusion of the Cuban Missile Crisis and the withdrawal of Soviet missiles from their strategic positions in Cuba, the USSR started to think about a missile defense systems. A year after the crisis in 1963 the Soviets created the SA-5. Unlike its predecessors like the SA-1 or Griffon systems, this system was able to fly much higher and further  and was fast enough to intercept some missiles however its main purpose was to intercept the new XB-70 supersonic aircraft the U.S was planning to make. However, since these types of aircraft never went into production in the U.S, the project was abandoned, and the Soviets reverted to the slower, low altitude SA-2 and SA-3 systems. In 1964 the Soviets publicly unveiled their newest interceptor missile named the "Galosh" which was nuclear armed and was meant for high altitude, long range interception. The Soviet Union began installing the A-35 anti-ballistic missile system around Moscow in 1965 using these "Galosh" missiles and would become operational by 1971. It consisted of four complex around Moscow each with 16 launchers and two missile tracking radars. Another notable feature of the A-35 was that it was the first monopulse radar. Developed by OKB 30, the Russian Special Design Bureau, the effort design to create a monopulse radar started in 1954. This was used to conduct the first successful intercept in 1961. There were known flaws with the design such as an inability to defend against MIRV and decoy style weapons.The reason for this was because the detonation of a nuclear interceptor missile like the "Galosh" creates a cloud of plasma that temporarily impairs radar readings around the area of the explosion limiting these kinds of systems to a one-shot capacity. This means that with MIRV style attacks the interceptor would be able to take out one or two but the rest would slip though. Another issue with the 1965 model was that it consisted of 11 large radar stations at six locations on the borders of Russia. These bases where visible to the US and could be taken out easily leaving the defense system useless in a concentrated and coordinated attack. Finally, the missiles that could be held on each base was limited by the ABM treaty to only 100 launchers maximum, meaning that in a massive attack they would be depleted quickly. During installation, a Ministry of Defense commission concluded that the system should not be fully implemented, reducing the capabilities of the completed system. That system was later upgraded to the A-135 anti-ballistic missile system and is still operational. This upgrade period started in 1975 and was headed by Dr. A.G. Basistov. When it was completed in 1990, the new A-135 system had a central control multifunctional radar called the "Don" and 100 interceptor missiles. Another improvement was the layering of interceptor missiles where high acceleration missiles are being added for low flying targets and the "Galosh" style missiles where improved further for high altitude targets. All of these missiles where moved underground into silos to make them less vulnerable, which was a flaw of the previous system. The SALT I talks began in 1969, and led to the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 1972, which ultimately limited the US and USSR to one defensive missile site each, with no more than 100 missiles per site. This included both ABM interceptor missiles as well as launchers. Originally, the agreement made by the Nixon administration and the Soviet Union stated that both of the two nations were each allowed to have two ABM defensive systems present in their own countries. The goal was to effectively have one ABM defense system located near each nation's capital city as well as another ABM defense system placed near the nation's most important or strategical ICBM field. This treaty allowed for an effective form of deterrence for both sides as if either side were to make an offensive move, the other side would be capable of countering that move. However, a few years later in 1974 both sides reworked the treaty to include only one ABM defensive system present around an ICBM launch area or the nation's capital city. This occurred once both sides determined the other side was not going to construct a second ABM defensive system. Along with limiting the amount of ballistic missile defense systems each nation could have, the treaty also stated if either country desired to have a radar for incoming missile detection, the radar system must be located on the outskirts of the territory and must be aligned in the opposite direction of one's own country. This treaty would end up being the precedent set for future missile defense programs, as any systems that were not stationary and land-based were a violation of the treaty.

As a result of the treaty and of technical limitations, along with public opposition to nearby nuclear-armed defensive missiles, the US Sentinel program was re-designated the Safeguard Program, with the new goal of defending US ICBM sites, not cities. The US Safeguard system was planned to be implemented in various sites across the US, including at Whiteman AFB in Missouri, Malmstrom AFB in Montana, and Grand Forks AFB in North Dakota. The Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty of 1972 placed a limit of two ABM systems within the U.S, causing the work site in Missouri to be abandoned, and the partially-completed Montana site was abandoned in 1974 after an additional agreement between the US and USSR that limited each country to one ABM system. As a result, the only Safeguard system that was deployed was to defend the LGM-30 Minuteman ICBMs near Grand Forks, North Dakota. However, it was deactivated in 1976 after being operational for less than four months due to a changing political climate plus concern over limited effectiveness, low strategic value, and high operational cost.

In the early 1980s, technology had matured to consider space based missile defense options. Precision hit-to-kill systems more reliable than the early Nike Zeus were thought possible. With these improvements, the Reagan administration promoted the Strategic Defense Initiative, an ambitious plan to provide a comprehensive defense against an all-out ICBM attack. In pursuit of that goal, the Strategic Defense Initiative investigated a variety of potential missile-defense systems, which included systems utilizing ground-based missile systems and space-based missile systems, as well as systems utilizing lasers or particle beam weapons. This program faced controversy over the feasibility of the projects it pursued, as well as the substantial amount of funding and time required for the research to develop the requisite technology. The Strategic Defense Initiative earned the nickname "Star Wars" due to criticism from Senator Ted Kennedy in which he described the Strategic Defense Initiative as "reckless Star Wars schemes.". Reagan established the Strategic Defense Initiative Organization (SDIO) to oversee the development of the program's projects. Upon request by the SDIO, the American Physical Society (APS) performed a review of the concepts being developed within SDIO and concluded that all of the concepts pursuing use of Directed Energy Weapons were not feasible solutions for an anti-missile defense system without decades of additional research and development. Following the APS's report in 1986, the SDIO switched focus to a concept called the Strategic Defense System, which would utilize a system of space-based missiles called Space Rocks which would intercept incoming ballistic missiles from orbit, and would be supplemented by ground-based missile defense systems. In 1993, the SDIO was closed and the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO) was created, which focuses on ground-based missile defense systems utilizing interceptor missiles. In 2002, BMDO's name was changed to its current title, the Missile Defense Agency (MDA). See National Missile Defense for additional details. In the early 1990s, missile defense expanded to include tactical missile defense, as seen in the first Gulf War. Although not designed from the outset to intercept tactical missiles, upgrades gave the Patriot system a limited missile defense capability. The effectiveness of the Patriot system in disabling or destroying incoming Scuds was the subject of congressional hearings and reports in 1992. In the time following the agreement of the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, it was becoming increasingly more and more difficult for the United States to create a new missile defense strategy without violating the terms of the treaty. During the Clinton administration, the initial goal the United States had interest in, was to negotiate with the former Soviet Union, which is now Russia, and hopefully agree to a revision to the treaty signed a few decades prior. In the late 1990s the United States had interest in an idea termed NMD or National Missile Defense. This idea essentially would allow the United States to increase the number of ballistic missile interceptors that would be available to missile defense personnel at the Alaska location. While the initial ABM treaty was designed primarily to deter the Soviet Union and help create a period of détente, the United States was primarily fearing other threats such as Iraq, North Korea, and Iran. The Russian government was not interested in making any sort of modification to the ABM treaty that would allow for technology to be developed that was explicitly banned when the treaty was agreed upon. However, Russia was interested in revising the treaty in such a way that would allow for a more diplomatic approach to potential missile harboring countries. During this period, the United States was also seeking assistance for their ballistic missile defense systems from Japan. Following the testing of the Taepo Dong missile by the North Korean government, the Japanese government became more concerned and inclined to accept a partnership for a BMD system with the United States. In late 1998, Japan and the United States agreed to the Naval Wide Theater system which would allow the two sides to design, construct, and test ballistic missile defense systems together. Nearing the end of Clinton's time in office, it had been determined that the NMD program was not as effective as the United States would have liked, and the decision was made to not employ this system while Clinton served out the rest of his term. The decision on future of the NMD program was going to be given to the next president in line, who ultimately would end up being George W. Bush.

In the late 1990s, and early 2000s, the issue of defense against cruise missiles became more prominent with the new Bush administration. In 2002, President George W. Bush withdrew the US from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, allowing further development and testing of ABMs under the Missile Defense Agency, as well as deployment of interceptor vehicles beyond the single site allowed under the treaty. During the Bush's time in office, the potentially threatening countries to the United States included North Korea as well as Iran. While these countries might not have possessed the weaponry that many countries containing missile defense systems had, the Bush administration expected an Iranian missile test within the next ten years. In order to counter the potential risk of North Korean missiles, the United States Department of Defense desired to create missile defense systems along the west coast of the United States, namely in both California and Alaska.There are still technological hurdles to an effective defense against ballistic missile attack. The United States National Ballistic Missile Defense System has come under scrutiny about its technological feasibility. Intercepting midcourse (rather than launch or reentry stage) ballistic missiles traveling at several miles per second with a "kinetic kill vehicle" has been characterized as trying to hit a bullet with a bullet. Despite this difficulty, there have been several successful test intercepts and the system was made operational in 2006, while tests and system upgrades continue. Moreover, the warheads or payloads of ballistic missiles can be concealed by a number of different types of decoys. Sensors that track and target warheads aboard the kinetic kill vehicle may have trouble distinguishing the "real" warhead from the decoys, but several tests that have included decoys were successful. Nira Schwartz's and Theodore Postol's criticisms about the technical feasibility of these sensors have led to a continuing investigation of research misconduct and fraud at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

In February 2007, the US missile defense system consisted of 13 ground-based interceptors (GBIs) at Fort Greely, Alaska, plus two interceptors at Vandenberg Air Force Base, California. The US planned to have 21 interceptor missiles by the end of 2007. The system was initially called National Missile Defense (NMD), but in 2003 the ground-based component was renamed Ground-Based Midcourse Defense (GMD). As of 2014, the Missile Defense Agency had 30 operational GBIs, with a total 44 GBIs in the missile fields in 2018. In 2021 an additional 20 GBIs of 64 total were planned, but not yet fielded. They are tasked with meeting more complex threats than those met by the EKV.

Defending against cruise missiles is similar to defending against hostile, low-flying crewed aircraft. As with aircraft defense, countermeasures such as chaff, flares, and low altitude can complicate targeting and missile interception. High-flying radar aircraft such as AWACS can often identify low flying threats by using doppler radar. Another possible method is using specialized satellites to track these targets. By coupling a target's kinetic inputs with infrared and radar signatures it may be possible to overcome the countermeasures.

In March 2008, the US Congress convened hearings to re-examine the status of missile defense in US military strategy. Upon taking office, President Obama directed a comprehensive review of ballistic missile defense policy and programs. The review's findings related to Europe were announced on 17 September 2009. The Ballistic Missile Defense Review (BMDR) Report was published in February 2010.

Mechanisms
The Conference of National Armaments Directors (CNAD) is the senior NATO committee which acts as the tasking authority for the theater missile defense program. The ALTBMD Program Management Organization, which comprises a steering committee and a program office hosted by the NATO C3 Agency, directs the program and reports to the CNAD. The focal point for consultation on full-scale missile defense is the Reinforced Executive Working Group. The CNAD is responsible for conducting technical studies and reporting the outcome to the Group. The NRC Ad hoc Working Group on TMD is the steering body for NATO-Russia cooperation on theater missile defense.

In September 2018, a consortium of 23 NATO nations met to collaborate on the Nimble Titan 18 integrated air and missile defense (IAMD) campaign of experimentation.

Missile defense
By early 2010, NATO will have an initial capability to protect Alliance forces against missile threats and is examining options for protecting territory and populations. This is in response to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and their delivery systems, including missiles of all ranges. NATO is conducting three missile defense–related activities:

Active Layered Theater Ballistic Missile Defense System capability
Active Layered Theater Ballistic Missile Defense System is "ALTBMD" for short.

As of early 2010, the Alliance has an interim capability to protect troops in a specific area against short-range and medium-range ballistic missiles (up to 3,000 kilometers).

The end system consists of a multi-layered system of systems, comprising low- and high-altitude defenses (also called lower- and upper-layer defenses), including Battle Management Command, Control, Communications and Intelligence (BMC3I), early warning sensors, radar, and various interceptors. NATO member countries provide the sensors and weapon systems, while NATO has developed the BMC3I segment and facilitate the integration of all these elements.

Missile Defense for the protection of NATO territory
A Missile Defense Feasibility Study was launched after NATO's 2002 Prague summit. The NATO Consultation, Command and Control Agency (NC3A) and NATO's Conference of National Armaments Directors (CNAD) were also involved in negotiations. The study concluded that missile defense is technically feasible, and it provided a technical basis for ongoing political and military discussions regarding the desirability of a NATO missile defense system.

During the 2008 Bucharest summit, the alliance discussed the technical details as well as the political and military implications of the proposed elements of the US missile defense system in Europe. Allied leaders recognized that the planned deployment of European-based US missile defense assets would help protect North American Allies, and agreed that this capability should be an integral part of any future NATO-wide missile defense architecture. However, these opinions are in the process of being reconstructed given the Obama administration's decision in 2009 to replace the long-range interceptor project in Poland with a short/medium range interceptor.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has stated that NATO's pattern of deployment of Patriot missiles indicates that these will be used to defend against Iranian missiles in addition to the stated goal of defending against spillover from the Syrian civil war.

Aegis-based system
In order to accelerate the deployment of a missile shield over Europe, Barack Obama sent ships with the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System to European waters, including the Black Sea as needed.

In 2012 the system will achieve an "interim capability" that will for the first time offer American forces in Europe some protection against IRBM attack. However, these interceptors may be poorly placed and of the wrong type to defend the United States, in addition to American troops and facilities in Europe.

The Aegis ballistic missile defense-equipped SM-3 Block II-A missile demonstrated it can shoot down an ICBM target on 16 Nov 2020.

ACCS Theater Missile Defense 1
According to BioPrepWatch, NATO has signed a 136 million euro contract with ThalesRaytheonSystems to upgrade its current theater missile defense program.

The project, called ACCS Theater Missile Defense 1, will bring new capabilities to NATO's Air Command and Control System, including updates for processing ballistic missile tracks, additional satellite and radar feeds, improvements to data communication and correlation features. The upgrade to its theater missile defense command and control system will allow for NATO to connect national sensors and interceptors in defense against short and medium-range ballistic missiles. According to NATO's Assistant Secretary General for Defense Investment Patrick Auroy, the execution of this contract will be a major technical milestone forward for NATO's theater missile defense. The project was expected to be complete by 2015. An integrated air and missile defense (IAMD) capability will be delivered to the operational community by 2016, by which time NATO will have a true theater missile defense.

Defense systems and initiatives

 * Akash missile surface-to-air missile defense system
 * Arrow missile
 * Chū-SAM (中SAM) Japan's JGSDF Medium-Range Surface-to-Air Missile
 * David's Sling
 * HQ-9 regional air defence/anti-ballistic missile
 * IAMD The SMDC is leading the United States Army's laser efforts to replace MIM-104 Patriot.
 * Indian Ballistic Missile Defense Program
 * Iron Dome
 * Italian-French SAMP/T missile air defense system
 * KS-1 regional air defence missile
 * L-SAM
 * Medium Extended Air Defense System (MEADS)
 * Patriot surface-to-air missile system
 * Hawk medium range surface-to-air missile (SAM) system
 * RIM-161 Standard Missile 3
 * Russian A-135 anti-ballistic missile system
 * S-400 Triumf
 * Skyguard chemical laser-based area defense system proposed by Northrop Grumman
 * Sky Bow
 * Strategic Defense Initiative ("Star Wars")
 * Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD)
 * Vigilant Eagle Airport surface-to-air missile protection system
 * Iran Belief System 373(Bavar-373)
 * Iran Arman long-range anti-ballistic missile system
 * Khordad 15

title: Missile defense


text:
Talk:Federal Express Fast-Talker

Before any edit wars ensue, I made this a redirect to FedEx because the existing article—

 * Federal Express Fast-Talker was an animated mascot for FedEx (originally Federal Express), and he also appeared on any of the company's television commercials.

—was largely incorrect: The "fast talker" was an unnamed character in their commercials, played by John Moschitta, and he was not called "Federal Express Fast-Talker" nor was he animated or a "mascot."

Any information about these commercials would be better placed in the main FedEx article, preferably by someone who is actually familiar with the ads. —tregoweth 18:30, Oct 24, 2004 (UTC)

title: Talk:Federal Express Fast-Talker