Gene Bowyer was born and raised in West Virginia and was the second of eight children. Gene enlisted in the U.S. Marine Corps in 1949 at the age of 17. This was the result of World War II and his dream of becoming a Marine. Over the next twenty-one years he served in several stateside duty stations and various overseas assignments. Gene served with the 3rd Amphibian Tractor Battalion, 1st Marin Division, FMF, in Vietnam in 1967-68 and was involved in the Tet offensive in January - February 1968. Gene enlisted as a Private and was fortunate to have worked his way through the ranks and retired with the rank of Captain in 1970. This is a brief description of some of the events he experiences during his career while in the Marine Corps and subsequently upon his retirement. It also touches on his affiliation with the Marine Corps League, a veteran's organization which he now is able to maintain some of the camaraderie once experienced when on active duty. Gene is also a member of the Marine Corps Mustang Association and was elected a Director at the 2009 annual Muster held in Albuquerque NM in September 2009.

On September 29, 1918, a regiment of volunteers from New York State, many of them rich boys from Manhattan, attacked the feared Hindenburg Line, one of the strongest defensive systems ever devised. At a frightful cost, suffering more killed on a single day than any other regiment in American history, they broke the enemy and helped conclude World War I.

The Model Rules of Professional Conduct provides an up-to-date resource for information on legal ethics. Federal, state and local courts in all jurisdictions look to the Rules for guidance in solving lawyer malpractice cases, disciplinary actions, disqualification issues, sanctions questions and much more. In this volume, black-letter Rules of Professional Conduct are followed by numbered Comments that explain each Rule's purpose and provide suggestions for its practical application. The Rules will help you identify proper conduct in a variety of given situations, review those instances where discretionary action is possible, and define the nature of the relationship between you and your clients, colleagues and the courts.

A group of friends from the Irish section of the Bronx are graduating from college during a period of great political unrest. Communism was gaining support throughout the world, threatening the sovereignty of the United States. The lines of battle were being drawn, the Cold War was heating up, as the Soviet Union was stepping up its pressure on the United States in Wars of National Liberation; especially in Cuba and Vietnam. These native New Yorkers must make life-altering decisions; should they concentrate on starting their careers and finding love, or must they postpone personal aspirations in order to serve a greater purpose. These young men were part of an all but forgotten American culture that were willing to put themselves in harms way by answering the call to Duty, Honor, Country.

Monk Eastman was born in 1873 to a respectable New York family. By the age of eighteen he was running the streets of Lower Manhattan, first starting as a bouncer, and later as a gang leader who led an army of two thousand. He had both politicians and cops in his pocket and seemed untouchable. That all changed when he was sentenced to ten years at Sing Sing prison after several battles with Pinkerton detectives. He ended up losing all his territory and by the time he got out, realized that the streets were no longer safe enough for him to be around. With that, he immediately joined the New York National Guard, going from a street kingpin to a lowly private. Taking what he learned from the streets, Monk quickly proved himself, as his division was put on the front lines during the trench warfare of World War I. He came back to New York a hero and was given a governor’s pardon. He was back on top; but the real question was, would he be able to leave his past behind? This incredible story, told by Neil Hanson, relives for the reader the history of Monk Eastman, New York, and a pivotal point in our country’s history.

General John A. Wickham, commander of the famous 101st Airborne Division in the 1970s and subsequently Army Chief of Staff, once visited Antietam battlefield. Gazing at Bloody Lane where, in 1862, several Union assaults were brutally repulsed before they finally broke through, he marveled, "You couldn't get American soldiers today to make an attack like that." Why did those men risk certain death, over and over again, through countless bloody battles and four long, awful years ? Why did the conventional wisdom -- that soldiers become increasingly cynical and disillusioned as war progresses -- not hold true in the Civil War? It is to this question--why did they fight--that James McPherson, America's preeminent Civil War historian, now turns his attention. He shows that, contrary to what many scholars believe, the soldiers of the Civil War remained powerfully convinced of the ideals for which they fought throughout the conflict. Motivated by duty and honor, and often by religious faith, these men wrote frequently of their firm belief in the cause for which they fought: the principles of liberty, freedom, justice, and patriotism. Soldiers on both sides harkened back to the Founding Fathers, and the ideals of the American Revolution. They fought to defend their country, either the Union--"the best Government ever made"--or the Confederate states, where their very homes and families were under siege. And they fought to defend their honor and manhood. "I should not lik to go home with the name of a couhard," one Massachusetts private wrote, and another private from Ohio said, "My wife would sooner hear of my death than my disgrace." Even after three years of bloody battles, more than half of the Union soldiers reenlisted voluntarily. "While duty calls me here and my country demands my services I should be willing to make the sacrifice," one man wrote to his protesting parents. And another soldier said simply, "I still love my country." McPherson draws on more than 25,000 letters and nearly 250 private diaries from men on both sides. Civil War soldiers were among the most literate soldiers in history, and most of them wrote home frequently, as it was the only way for them to keep in touch with homes that many of them had left for the first time in their lives. Significantly, their letters were also uncensored by military authorities, and are uniquely frank in their criticism and detailed in their reports of marches and battles, relations between officers and men, political debates, and morale. For Cause and Comrades lets these soldiers tell their own stories in their own words to create an account that is both deeply moving and far truer than most books on war. Battle Cry of Freedom, McPherson's Pulitzer Prize-winning account of the Civil War, was a national bestseller that Hugh Brogan, in The New York Times, called "history writing of the highest order." For Cause and Comrades deserves similar accolades, as McPherson's masterful prose and the soldiers' own words combine to create both an important book on an often-overlooked aspect of our bloody Civil War, and a powerfully moving account of the men who fought it.

Between 1815-1860, the tiny American army took on many new and often daunting tasks. In the face of civil opposition to the very existence of a professional military, the first battle officers and supporters had to win after 1815 was that of simply preserving some small professional force. As American interests expanded further west and conflict with Native Americans increased, the army was charged with the dual responsibility of peacekeeper and conqueror. Its most dramatic successes, however, came during the Mexican War and the conquest of the American Southwest. Against this back drop, Wetteman crafts a narrative overview of the rivalries, personalities, and events that defined civil-military relations during this era. Beginning in 1815, the U.S. Army struggled for existence within a society that was not convinced that a standing army was worth the expense. At the same time, many questioned the viability of a professional officer corps, citing the innate ability of the American fighting man as demonstrated in earlier conflicts. Although efforts were undertaken early on to define the role and status of a peacetime army, issues of national defense, domestic security, Indian policy, and internal improvements shaped civil military relations over the next 4 12 decades. While the true position of the citizen-soldier in relation to a standing army had not been clearly defined by 1860, the nation had made giant strides towards full acceptance of the idea that the U.S. Army, a standing force commanded by military professionals, was a national necessity.