Interstate 24 is an Interstate Highway in the Midwestern and Southeastern United States. It runs diagonally from I-57, 10 miles south of Marion, Illinois, to Chattanooga, Tennessee, at I-75; as an even-numbered Interstate, it is signed as an east–west route, though the route follows a more southeast–northwest routing, passing through Nashville, Tennessee. Because the routing of I-24 is diagonal, the numbering is a bit unusual as it does not follow the Interstate Highway System numbering conventions. I-24 constitutes the majority of a high-traffic corridor between St. Atlanta; this corridor utilizes I-64 and I-57 northwest of I-24, I-75 southeast of I-24. I-24 begins near the community of Pulleys Mill; the highway heads southeast into rural Johnson County. It reaches an exit at Tunnel Hill Road, which serves Tunnel Hill; the highway continues south to its next exit at U. S. Route 45 north of Vienna, it reaches its next exit at Illinois Route 146 in eastern Vienna. I-24 heads southeast from Vienna into Massac County.
Its first exit in Massac County is at Big Bay Road, which serves the communities of Big Bay and New Columbia. I-24 continues southward; the highway passes west of Fort Massac State Park. It crosses the Interstate 24 Bridge over the Ohio River. After that, it continues into Kentucky. I-24 crosses into Kentucky on a bridge over the Ohio River, it passes to the west of Paducah and intersects US Routes 60, 45, 62. The freeway passes near Woodlawn-Oakdale and Reidland and connects with US 68; the welcome center in Paducah is Whitehaven. This is the only historic house in the country used as a rest area. East of this point, I-24 runs concurrently with I-69. Through this, it crosses the Tennessee and the Cumberland Rivers; the roadway travels along the north shore of the Cumberland River. I-69 splits off to the east just north of Mineral Mound State Park. I-24 continues away from the river, it runs through farmland for several miles. It passes south of Hopkinsville and interchanges with I-169. Near the Tennessee border, I-24 passes north of Fort Campbell.
Afterwards, it crosses into Tennessee. I-69 runs concurrently with I-24 for 17 miles from Calvert City to Eddyville. More of Interstate 24 is in Tennessee than in any other states combined. I-24 crosses into Tennessee traveling in a southeasterly and northwesterly direction in Clarksville, Montgomery County; the first interchange is with SR 48. I-24 has interchanges with US 79, SR 237, SR 76, crosses the Red River, it enters a long straight section with several steep grades, crossing into Robertson County, has interchanges with SR 256, SR 49 near Springfield, respectively. The route enters the rolling hilly terrain of the Nashville Basin, crosses into Cheatham County, where it has an interchange with SR 249. I-24 crosses into Davidson County, has an interchange with US 431; the interstate continues for several miles through rural woodlands and multiple steep grades before coming to an interchange with SR 45. Three miles I-24 crosses the Nashville Urban Boundary, widens to six lanes, has an interchange with SR 155, the northern beltway around Nashville.
Less than a mile I-24 joins a concurrency with Interstate 65, where the combined routes carry ten through lanes, travel due south. About a mile is an interchange with US 41A/431, about a mile beyond this point, I-65 splits off, I-24 enters downtown Nashville, where it has interchanges with US 41, US 431, US 31E, as well as several city streets. I-24 crosses the Cumberland River, joins in a concurrency with Interstate 40, travelling southeast with eight through lanes, two miles I-40 splits off eastwardly, heading toward Knoxville. Located at this interchange is an interchange with US 41/70S, less than a mile is an interchange with the eastern terminus of Interstate 440, accessible from I-40 nearby. About a mile is once again an interchange with SR 155/Briley Parkway near the Nashville International Airport, I-24 continues southeast, bisecting a major residential area. Here I-24 carries eight through lanes, beginning at the next exit, SR 255, the left lanes operate as HOV lanes during rush hour.
Over the next few miles, I-24 has interchanges with Haywood Lane, SR 254, Hickory Hollow Parkway, SR 253. I-24 continues southeast through the growing suburbs of Nashville, crosses into Rutherford County near the city of LaVergne, where it has an interchange with a connector road to that respective city. Beginning at this point, I-24 is straight and flat for most of its distance through Middle Tennessee; the straightest stretch of highway in Tennessee is located on I-24 between Lavergne and eastern Murfreesboro, where the route is straight for about fifteen miles, although the median widens and narrows. Two miles I-24 reaches Smyrna and has an interchange with SR 266. Four miles is an interchange with SR 102, which serves Smyrna, as well as the Nissan Smyrna assembly plant. Another four miles is an interchange with Interstate 840, the outer southern beltway around Nashville, beyond this point I-24 enters Murfreesboro, the largest suburb of Nashville. In Murfreesboro, I-24 has interchanges with SR 96, SR 99, US 231, respectively
The Golan Heights are a rocky plateau in Western Asia, captured by Israel from Syria in the 1967 Six-Day War. The international community considers the Golan Heights to be Syrian territory held by Israeli under military occupation. Following the war, Syria dismissed any negotiations with Israel as part of the Khartoum Resolution; the Golan was under military administration until the Knesset passed the Golan Heights Law in 1981, which applied Israeli law to the territory. In response, the United Nations Security Council unanimously passed UNSC Resolution 497 which condemned the Israeli actions to change the status of the territory declaring them "null and void and without international legal effect", that the Golan remained an occupied territory. In 2019, the United States became the only state to recognize the Golan Heights as Israeli sovereign territory, while the rest of the international community continues to consider the territory Syrian held under Israeli military occupation. Following World War I, portions of the former territory of the Ottoman Empire was split into several League of Nations mandates under the control of one of the victorious Allied countries of the war.
The British Mandate for Palestine and the French Mandate for Syria were two such mandates, with the border finalized between the two in the Paulet–Newcombe Agreement. The border, drawn in 1923, was the first international border between Syria and Palestine and to date is the last, with the remaining boundaries since having been a result of armistice agreements; the boundary placed the entirety of the Sea of Galilee, along with a ten meter wide strip on the eastern shore, within the British Mandate. The French Mandate ended in 1946 with the independence of the Republic of Syria, Syria demanded changes to the border to allow for greater access to fresh water sources, demands the British refused on the basis that the border had been submitted and approved to the League of Nations and Britain thus considered the matter closed; the 1948 Arab–Israeli War, which followed Israel's declaration of independence, resulted in the newly formed state of Israel in control over 77% of what had been the territory of the British Mandate.
Syria had however advanced to the eastern shoreline of the Sea of Galilee, where the border as delineated by the British and the French was ten meters east of the shoreline. In the armistice negotiations that followed the declaration of a ceasefire, that ten meter strip was included in a demilitarized zone as Israel had argued for. In the 1967 Six-Day War, Israel occupied a majority of the Golan Heights from Syria. Following the war, the United Nations Security Council passed Resolution 242, which called on Israel to withdraw from territories occupied in the war in exchange for the termination of all states of belligerency and recognition of Israel as a sovereign state by the Arab states; the 1973 Arab-Israeli War saw further territorial gains by Israel, though Israel agreed to return to the 1967 ceasefire line in the 1974 disengagement agreement between Israel and Syria. Syria has continued to insist on the return of the Golan in any negotiated peace agreement between the two countries. On 14 December 1981 the Israeli Knesset passed the Golan Heights Law.
While the law did not use the term annexation, it was considered to be an annexation by the Israeli opposition and international community. The action was condemned internationally, in response the United Nations Security Council passed United Nations Security Council Resolution 497 declaring the law "null and void and without international legal effect" and that the Fourth Geneva Convention continued to apply to the Golan as an occupied territory; the international community considers the Golan to be Syrian territory held under Israeli occupation. A number of states recognize the Israeli occupation as being legitimate under the United Nations Charter on a self-defense basis, but do not consider those concerns to allow for the annexation of territory seized by force. In March 2019, the United States, which considered the Golan Heights to be occupied, became the first country to recognize Israeli sovereignty over the territory it has held since 1967; the rest of the international community continues to view the territory as Syrian held under Israeli occupation.
The European Union members of the United Nations Security Council issued a joint statement condemning the US announcement and the UN Secretary-General António Guterres issued a statement saying that the status of the Golan Heights had not changed. The Arab League denounced the US move, declaring that "Trump's recognition does not change the area's status." Borders of Israel Israeli-occupied territories Israel–Syria relations
With the establishment of the People's Republic of China in 1949, American immigration policy towards Chinese emigrants and the controversial subject of foreign policy with regard to the PRC became invariably connected. The United States government was presented with the dilemma of what to do with two separate "Chinas". Both the People's Republic of China and the Republic of China wanted be seen as the legitimate government and both parties believed that immigration would assist them in doing so. During the 1940s and 1950s, the United States, the Republic of China, the PRC used the movement of people, their laws controlling their borders, citizen services, their interactions with the Chinese diaspora to promote the legitimacy and positive image of their respective governments internationally. Overseas Chinese were seen as pertinent to either side claiming legitimacy, as both the Republic of China and the People's Republic of China realized the political and social clout held by those overseas Chinese Americans.
Furthermore, the United States realized that it had to be careful in choosing the right policies with regard to the status of Chinese immigrants. On the one hand the United States had to come to terms with the fact that mainland China was "lost" to Communism and on the other it had to ensure its interests in Taiwan were not compromised. US immigration policy for the next thirty years was implemented with a notion of duality; the United States government would open its doors to Chinese immigrants from both sides of the strait, however. In October 1949, the People's Republic of China was established after a bitter and long civil war that had lasted nearly twenty years; the Communists led by Mao Zedong had forced the Guomindang who had ruled China under the Republic of China to retreat to the island of Taiwan, which in effect created two separate "Chinas". The newly established People's Republic of China began constructing its foreign policy dealings with other countries as a way of legitimizing its rule.
The first of its dealings was with the Soviets. The Soviet Union recognized the People's Republic on October 2, 1949. Earlier in the year, Mao had proclaimed his policy of "leaning to one side" as a commitment to the socialist bloc. In February 1950, after months of hard bargaining and the Soviet Union signed the Treaty of Friendship and Mutual Assistance, valid until 1980. Many Americans were at a loss of; the debate which took place in the United States as a result of the removal of the Kuomintang and Chiang Kai-shek to the island of Taiwan centered on Republican charges that the Democrats "lost" China. "Without question, the critics had by early 1949 convinced many Americans that Truman was, abandoning China, China being equivalent with Chiang's dying order," journalist Robert J. Donovan wrote in his two-volume history of Truman's presidency. There was much debate on what the United States' policies was to be in regards to this new found duality, but for the next three decades the United States maintained a policy of non-recognition in regards to the People's Republic of China.
The Republic of China in Taiwan was to be the legitimate China until 1979. US policy toward China during President Lyndon B. Johnson's administration remained what it had been during the Kennedy and Eisenhower administrations — non-recognition of the People's Republic of China, support for Chiang Kai-shek's Nationalist government and its possession of China's seat in the United Nations, a ban on trade and travel to the PRC, thus The People's Republic of China and the Republic of China fell under the same quota. However, Hong Kong was given a separate quota. Changes in U. S. immigration policy during and after World War II led to the end of Chinese exclusion and opened the door to new and diverse waves of Chinese immigration in the second half of the 20th century. In 1943, Chinese exclusion laws were repealed and small quotas established for Chinese immigration, allowing many families to reunite and for the first time admitting significant numbers of Chinese women to the United States; the establishment of the People's Republic of China in 1949 caused a large influx of Chinese immigrants in the 1950s Mandarin-speaking professionals who were displaced by the revolution and entered the United States under more lenient refugee policies.
Due in part to political and ideological tensions between the United States and the newly established People's Republic of China, the United States maintained that the Republic of China in Taiwan was the only China it would hold official diplomatic relations with. From 1949 until 1979, the People's Republic of China and the United States had no formal diplomatic ties and it was not until the late 1960s the two countries began serious bilateral talks to improve diplomatic relations; as a result of this, the United States maintained the same quota for all Chinese immigrants coming from both the People's Republic of China and the Republic of China. In February 1972, President Richard Nixon traveled to Beijing and Shanghai. At the conclusion of his trip, the U. S. and P. R. C. Governments issued a statement of their foreign policy views, it wasn't until Nixon's trip that the United States recognized the People's Republic of China as the official China. On January 1, 1979, the United States transferred diplomatic recognition from Taipei to Beijing.
The U. S. reiterated the Shanghai Communiqué's acknowledgment of the Chinese position that there is only one China and that Taiwan is a part of China.
The Boston Youth Symphony Orchestras is a youth orchestra based in Boston, Massachusetts under the artistic leadership of Music Director, Federico Cortese. Since 1958, BYSO has served thousands of young musicians from throughout New England with three full symphonic orchestras, two young string training orchestras, six chamber orchestras, a preparatory wind ensemble, a chamber music program and a nationally recognized instrument training program for underrepresented youth from inner-city communities called the Intensive Community Program; the 2017-2018 season marks the celebration of BYSO's 60th Anniversary. Each year, BYSO auditions about 900 elementary and secondary students, accepting around half of them. BYSO offers over 20 performances in some of Boston's venues including Boston Symphony Hall, Jordan Hall at the New England Conservatory, Sanders Theatre at Harvard University and the Tsai Performance Center at Boston University; the orchestras and chamber ensembles rehearse every Sunday from September through June at Boston University College of Fine Arts, where BYSO has been in residence since it was established in 1958.
The College of Fine Arts is a major sponsor of BYSO. BYSO receives funding from the National Endowment for the Arts, the premier federal arts funding agency in the United States, as well as numerous private and public funding sources. In 2007, the Massachusetts Cultural Council, the state’s agency for arts and sciences, announced continued support for the BYSO. BYSO has the largest operating budget of any youth orchestra in the United States, nearly double that of most youth orchestras. Joe Grimaldi is the current President of BYSO Board of Directors; the Boston Youth Symphony, BYSO’s premier ensemble, is composed of 115 advanced players. The group performs a wide range of demanding orchestral repertoire and is led by Music Director, Federico Cortese, Associate Conductor, Adrian Slywotzky. During the season, all members of BYS participate in one of two chamber orchestras, BYS Sinfonietta or BYS Camerata, in which they explore music of the Classical period, including works by Haydn and Beethoven.
BYS annually performs full, semi-staged operas. By studying this repertoire in a chamber orchestra setting, BYS members develop specific techniques of ensemble playing and musical phrasing to a degree they may not otherwise experience within the larger orchestra; the BYS holds an annual concerto competition open to all of its members. BYS performs at venues including Boston Symphony Hall, Sanders Theatre at Harvard University, Jordan Hall at New England Conservatory. BYSO has built an international presence with tours and performances in venues in Israel, Japan, Belgium, Finland, Italy, Estonia, Russia, Portugal, Czech Republic, Great Britain, Ireland and Hungary. Under the direction of conductor Mark Miller, the Repertory Orchestra is an advanced, full symphonic orchestra composed of 107 players of excellent technical and musical ability. Repertory Orchestra has performed in some of Boston's venues including Boston Symphony Hall, Sanders Theatre at Harvard University, Jordan Hall at New England Conservatory and the Tsai Performance Center at Boston University.
During the season, all members participate in one of two chamber orchestras, Repertory Sinfonietta and Repertory Camerata, in which they explore music of the classical period, including great works by Haydn and Beethoven. Mark Miller conducts Repertory John Holland conducts Repertory Camerata; the Junior Repertory Orchestra, conducted by John Holland, has grown from a small string orchestra to a full symphonic ensemble made up of more than 108 members. Members receive group and individual coaching, which enables them to build solid, fundamental technical and musical skills. John Holland began his first season as the JRO conductor in 2012-2013. Under his leadership, JRO performs four times during the year at several venues throughout the Boston area, including Boston Symphony Hall, Boston University's Tsai Performance Center and Sanders Theatre at Harvard University. During the year, all JRO members receive sight-singing and ear-training instruction as part of their experience at BYSO; these classes are taught by BYSO staff.
The Young People’s String Orchestra is conducted by Marta Zurad. YPSO has performed at such venues as Symphony Hall, Boston University’s Tsai Performance Center, Kresge Auditorium at MIT, has been featured as part of WCRB's Cartoon Festival; the Preparatory Winds, directed by Janet Underhill, is the Boston Youth Symphony Orchestras' newest ensemble, beginning its first season in 2006-2007. PW is an ensemble of winds and percussion where students work on orchestral style music in preparation for BYSO’s full symphony orchestras; the Petit Ensemble is BYSO’s newest ensemble. BYSO's opera program began in 2008 with a semi-staged production of Mozart's Così fan tutte. Since BYS has continued to put on a semi-staged opera every year in collaboration with professional singers from around the world. Performances take place at Harvard University's Sanders Theatre under the baton of Music Director Federico Cortese. Keches, Krysten A. Boston Youth Symphony Orchestras, Arcadia Publishing, Images of America series, 2007.
This is a list of notable Western films and TV series, ordered by year and decade of release. For a long-running TV series, the year is its first in production; the movie industry began with the work of Louis Le Prince in 1888. Until 1903, films had been one-reelers lasting 10 to 12 minutes, reflecting the amount of film that could be wound onto a standard reel for projection, hence the term. Edwin S. Porter was a former projectionist and exhibitor who had taken charge of motion-picture production at Thomas Edison's company in 1901, he realised the potential of motion pictures as an entertainment medium and began making longer films that told a story. As with the films of Georges Méliès, these required multiple shots that could be edited into a narrative sequence; the most famous work of early movies, The Great Train Robbery is credited with establishing the movies as a commercial entertainment medium. It was notable including action on a moving train. Although there had been short films that referenced the Wild West or paid homage to it, The Great Train Robbery marked the birth of the genre.
Many movies and television programs and series were filmed at movie ranches in Southern California within the 35-mile limit to avoid union travel stipends. Some were owned by the studios. In the 1960s, Spaghetti Westerns grew in popularity; these films were produced by Italians and Spaniards and shot in their countries with big American stars like Clint Eastwood or Henry Fonda. Films such as those of Sergio Leone's Dollars Trilogy spawned numerous films of the same ilk and similar titles from the mid- to late-1960s and early 1970s. List of Western films before 1920 List of Western films of the 1920s List of Western films of the 1930s List of Western films of the 1940s List of Western films 1950–54 List of Western films 1955–59 List of Western films of the 1960s List of Western films of the 1970s List of Western films of the 1980s List of Western films of the 1990s List of Western films of the 2000s List of Western films of the 2010s
Charles Ethan Porter was an African-American painter who specialized in still life painting. A student at the National Academy of Design in New York City, he was one of the first African Americans to exhibit there, he was the only African-American artist at the turn of the century. Porter was born most in 1847 in Hartford, Connecticut, his father was a mill worker and his mother worked as a servant. Porter's family moved to what was the nearby village of Rockville by the early 1850s; the family suffered many losses. They endured tragedy just a few years after moving to Rockville. Porter lost seven of his siblings to illness and one to war between 1858 and 1868. Porter's brothers and William, enlisted in the Union Army in 1863. Joseph joined the 29th Connecticut Infantry Regiment and William joined the 14th Rhode Island Heavy Artillery. Joseph was killed in Virginia in 1864, was buried in Rockville just days before his regiment returned home. William became ill with malaria and was granted a disability discharge in January 1865.
Porter was his family's first child to attend high school, graduating in 1865. Porter left Rockville in 1868 to study painting in Wilbraham, Massachusetts, a town twenty miles north of Rockville. In 1869, after two years of art study at Wesleyan Academy, Porter enrolled at the prestigious National Academy of Design in October 1869, becoming the first African-American admitted to the school. Porter attended the art school until the spring of 1873. While at the school, for the first time, Porter began exhibiting his work. A painting titled. In May 1870, Porter was among eight art students whose drawings, as part of a large school exhibition, were given special mention in the New York Times. Porter received widespread praise and attention for his work during his four years at the National Academy, earning the support of prominent benefactors such as Frederic Edwin Church and famous author Mark Twain, who lived in Hartford. In the fall of 1873, Porter studied art with Joseph Oriel Eaton, a prominent portrait and landscape painter, for a year.
Every year, he studied and painted in New York City from fall through spring but returned to Rockville in the summer to paint and teach art classes. From 1873 to 1875, Porter started to sell his work. One painting sold for $175, a high price for the artist's level of experience. Little else is known about Porter during this period. Art collectors were losing interest in American artists and traveling overseas, buying contemporary French art and Old Masters. Many young American artists, during the economic downturn, began studying overseas in the 1870's. Sales by American artists would not recover until the 1890's. In 1878, Porter moved to Hartford and established a studio; the city was experiencing tremendous growth, its wealthy citizens were interested in art and culture and had the money to begin or add to art collections. Porter's traditional academic art education made him a standout compared to the many self-taught artists who had moved to Hartford, he was one of the few artists at the time, the only man, to specialize in still life painting.
While in Hartford, Porter created many of the still life paintings. A number of his paintings of fruit were not typical of the period, as they did not include tableware and glassware and unusual touches such as insects, his apple paintings were a commercial success and he painted apples for much of his career. Porter spent a good deal of time outdoors, he was interested in nature, reflected in his paintings of butterflies, dead birds and plants. In 1879, his work gained the attention of influential artist Frederick Edwin Church. Church visited Porter, purchased a few paintings, declared Porter to "have no superior as a colorist in the United States". Church encouraged Porter to paint landscapes. In 1880, Porter visited the Adirondacks for two months of painting, he declared at the time that he would focus his work on landscapes, except for commissioned still life paintings. On March 19, 1881, the Hartford Daily Courant reported that Porter was planning to move to Europe for two years to study art.
The article stated. Half of the paintings sold for a total of $1062. In early November 1881, Porter sailed for Liverpool. After an art tour of London, he traveled to Paris, with letters of introduction from Hartford's most prominent citizens, including Samuel Clemens, the author known as Mark Twain. In Paris he studied the works of the influential artists of the Barbizon school of painting, he enrolled in the Ecole des Arts Decoratifs, where he studied until 1884, when he ran out of money and returned to Hartford. In December 1884, he hosted an art auction of 100 paintings from his time in France, his new work was praised by the Hartford Evening Post, but the auction did not get the attendance or make the sales that Porter had hoped for. In early 1885, Porter opened a studio, he continued to paint. He spent the summer of 1885 in Rockville, teaching art and painting landscapes. By November 1886, Porter was back in Hartford again, he partnered with local artist Daniel Wentworth to hold auctions in 1887 and 1888, Wentworth contributing landscapes and Porter contributing still lifes.
The paintings sold for prices ran