Geography.

Location.

The municipality lies on the "Deutsche Edelsteinstraße" (“German Gem Road”) in the southern Hunsrück between the Idar Forest in the north and the town of Idar-Oberstein in the south.

Constituent communities.

Also belonging to Kempfeld are the hamlet of Katzenloch and the outlying homesteads of Auf dem Steinberg, Herrenflur and Wildenburg.

Village’s name.

Kempfeld was originally settled by a man named Campo. On the other hand, other researchers derive the name from the Latin "campus", meaning field (and since "Feld" means the same, the name would therefore mean “Field Field”). This hypothesis is, however, contradicted by the dialectal name “Käfelt” and the mediaeval name "cempinvelt" from 1319.

History.

In a copy of the "Liber Aureus" (St. Maximin's Abbey's “Golden Book”), which came into being about 1200, Kempfeld had its first documentary mention.  Matched by the extensive network of paths was relatively heavy settlement in individual homesteads, which belonged mostly to local people, but in almost every municipality in the Kempfeld area, traces of habitation from Roman times (roughly 50 BC to AD 375) can be found. The Romans built their houses from stone, put their dead in stone chests and built memorials to them, and monuments to their gods, out of stone. In 1901, one of these cist graves was unearthed 500 m south of the village on the way to Katzenloch. This, however, yielded no further knowledge.  About 950, the Emichones sat as the "Graugrafen" (“Gau Counts”) in the Nahegau. They were related to the Salian Imperial house. In the 11th century, they already held the Gau in hereditary ownership, and also, they were naming themselves after castles: in 1107 the Counts of Schmidtburg, in 1098 the Counts of Flonheim, in 1128 the Counts of Kyrburg and in 1103 "Comites silvestres", later the Waldgraves (or "Wildgrafen" in German).  Towards the late 12th century, three lines of the Emichones had arisen as two new ones split away from the main one: the Counts of Veldenz in 1129 and the Raugraves in 1140.  In 1263, the Waldgraviate was partitioned, with the Schmidtburg and Kyrburg going to Emich, and Dhaun and Grumbach to Gottfried. The so-called Landgraviate, however, remained undivided and in common ownership. Only nineteen years later, in 1282, came another partition between members of the house's main line: Konrad kept Schmidtburg while Gottfried got Kyrburg and the paternal rights to Bruchweiler, Kempfeld, Breitenthal and Oberhosenbach. High jurisdiction and woodlands remained commonly held. In 1319, the communal high jurisdiction over "Raide" (Veitsrodt), "Horbure" (Herborn), "Bruchwilre" (Bruchweiler), "Schuren" (Schauren), "Kempvelt" (Kempfeld), "Huisinbach" (Niederhosenbach), "Breidendail" (Breitenthal) and three villages that have since vanished, "Dudinsbach" (Diedesbach), "Vockinhusen" (Fuckenhausen) and "Dyfenbach", was documented.  In 1330, the last count of the Schmidtburg line died. He had been in a longstanding feud with his cousin Friedrich von der Kyrburg. So that Friedrich could not get the inheritance to which he was entitled by lawful, written documents, the late count had arranged for Archbishop of Trier Baldwin to be enfeoffed with the Schmidtburg (castle) and its appurtenances, and also Bundenbach. In 1328, Friedrich had built a castle of his own, the Wildenburg, but by 1330 he was forced to enfeoff Archbishop Baldwin with this.  Kempfeld formed together with Veitsrodt in the Middle Ages a lordship of St. Maximin's Abbey in Trier. A letter of enfeoffment from 1483 for the Waldgraves of Dhaun still exists.  Within Kempfeld's municipal limits lie two sites on which once stood now vanished villages. Schalwen, or Schalben, lay below the road leading to Wildenburg and Katzenloch. On the other side of this road once lay the execution place, where the gallows could be set up as needed. After the 1574 boundary-defining "Grenzweistum" (a "Weistum" – cognate with English "wisdom" – was a legal pronouncement issued by men learned in law in the Middle Ages and early modern times), not only Kempfeld's municipal area along with the Wildenburg belonged to the High Court of Wildenburg, but so did Asbach, Herborn, Veitsrodt, the woods of Wenzel and Vitsruth, the now vanished village of Fuckenhausen and part of Kirschweiler. The local hangman, who was also a knacker, lived outside the village of Schalben. The hangman played a role in the people's lives and thoughts. As a knacker he handled, among other things, hides, skins and leather. Both trades were regarded as dishonest, and their practitioners as unclean, hence the reason for his living outside the village rather than in it. He also had to set up his sales stall at markets apart from the rest.  The other vanished village within Kempfeld's municipal limits was Baalsbach, or Badelsbach. Bearing witness to this place is a cadastral name “Auf Baalsbach”.  A report from the time after the Thirty Years' War about Kempfeld mentions both "Schalwen" and "Baalßpach", but by that time, they had both already been forsaken, and their lands conceded to Kempfeld. At that time, though, there were still remnants to be seen of both villages. Even as early as 1514, a "Weistum" had described Baalsbach as "vergangen" (“past” or “bygone”), meaning that it was no longer there.  The last Amtmann of the Wildenburg, Johann Karl Ruppenthal (1767–1798), managed to get himself into the villagers’ bad books. As Ruppenthal rode through the village late one evening with his riflemen, the night watchman apparently blew the wrong signal on his horn. As punishment, the watchman was made to practise the right signal the whole night long, which almost drove the Kempfelders to uncontainable fury. They complained about this inconsiderate disturbance of their usual nighttime quiet at once in Kirn, but nothing was done about Ruppenthal's behaviour.  Another time, the Amtmann happened upon the Kempfelders as they were arguing with a tithe official. Ruppenthal flew into such a rage over the peasants’ supposed stubbornness that without further ado he had his riflemen lock them all up in the church. This, however, only angered the imprisoned men's wives and, arming themselves with brooms and threshing flails, they then drove Ruppenthal out of the village. This scene is still remembered today by a fountain at the square on Allenberger Weg.  In 1529, a church was built in Kempfeld, which was renovated in the 18th century. On 25 August 1911, the church was utterly destroyed in a great fire in which the bells also melted. The plan for reconstructing the church was delivered by the Mayor of Cologne at that time, Senz, who had also headed reconstruction efforts for the church in Hottenbach in 1903.  The whole village was stricken by the fire. It broke out in the afternoon in the Stumm Brewery's stables. That summer's drought made the fire impossible to contain. Within half an hour, all houses and barns near the source of the fire were in flames. Besides the church, five houses, six barns, the brewery and one slaughterhouse were burnt down. The fire came almost exactly a century after another, similar great fire raged in the same place in August 1811.  On 1 August 1914, after the First World War had broken out, 11 Landsturm personnel, 10 Landwehr men, 10 reservists from Kempfeld had to go to war, and 15 recruits from the village found themselves in training. Even by early August, four men from Kempfeld had fallen; by Christmas it was seven.  On Sunday 17 October 1926, a memorial was dedicated at the village graveyard to the 21 who had fallen in the Great War.  During the Second World War, too, Kempfeld suffered heavily, and many local men fell. Moreover, several bombs fell on the village, in which 200 evacuees had taken refuge.  On 30 August 1975, yet another great fire struck Kempfeld, destroying, once again, the church, and also three houses. It broke out in a small house on Hauptstraße towards 10:45. Despite a large contingent from the fire brigade, the fire could not be stopped from spreading to the neighbouring house. A house once owned by a lordship and two, smaller servant's houses burnt right down. Most of the household belongings could be removed before the fire consumed the houses, but these were then kept “safe” in the church, as had been done during the 1911 fire. The householders then had to watch helplessly as their chattels, too, went up in smoke along with the church when the fire reached it.

Politics.

Municipal council.

The council is made up of 12 council members, who were elected by majority vote at the municipal election held on 7 June 2009, and the honorary mayor as chairman.

Mayor.

Kempfeld's mayor is Wolfgang Wannemacher, and his deputies are Horst Albohr and Antje Louis.

Coat of arms.

The German blazon reads: "In schräggeteiltem Schild vorn in Grün ein goldener gezinnter Turm auf einem silbernen Dreiberg, hinten in Gold ein blaubewehrter und -gezungter roter Löwe."  The municipality's arms might in English heraldic language be described thus: Per bend vert a tower embattled Or on a mount of three in base argent and Or a lion rampant gules armed and langued azure.  The tower on the dexter (armsbearer's right, viewer's left) side refers to the former keep on the Wildenburgkopf. The mount of three, a charge called a "Dreiberg" in German heraldry, symbolizes the Wildenburgkopf – a mountain – itself, which is under conservational protection. The lion on the sinister (armsbearer's left, viewer's right) side is a reference to the village's former allegiance to the Waldgraviate-Rhinegraviate.

Culture and sightseeing.

Buildings.

Kempfeld (main centre).

The following are listed buildings or sites in Rhineland-Palatinate’s Directory of Cultural Monuments:

Katzenloch.

Also found in the municipality are an open game reserve on the Wildenburger Kopf, and Germany's only gemstone garden on Schulstraße.

Economy and infrastructure.

Education.

Kempfeld has one kindergarten, one primary school and one regional school on the way out of the village going towards the Wildenburg.

Kempfeld is an "Ortsgemeinde" – a municipality belonging to a "Verbandsgemeinde", a kind of collective municipality – in the Birkenfeld district in Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany. It belongs to the "Verbandsgemeinde" Herrstein-Rhaunen, whose seat is in Herrstein.

Kempfeld ist eine Ortsgemeinde im Landkreis Birkenfeld in Rheinland-Pfalz. Sie gehört der Verbandsgemeinde Herrstein-Rhaunen an. Kempfeld ist ein staatlich anerkannter Erholungsort im Nationalpark Hunsrück-Hochwald.


Innovations and changes.

For the first time, a mountain time trial was scheduled: stage 16b. A rule was added to make it more difficult to finish the race: from the second stage to the seventh stage, the last rider in the classification was to be removed from the race.  The nutrition of the cyclists became more professional: cyclists were reporting that the use of vitamins increased their performance.

Teams.

Because Italy, Germany and Spain did not send teams, the Tour organisation were short on participating cyclists. To solve this, they allowed Belgium to send two teams, and France to send four additional regional teams.  The French cyclists had been successful in the 1930s, but their Tour winners were absent in 1939: 1930 and 1932 winner André Leducq had retired in 1938, as had 1931 and 1934 winner Antonin Magne; 1933 winner Georges Speicher did not ride, and 1937 winner Roger Lapébie was injured. This all made the Belgian team favourite.  The teams entering the race were:

Route and stages.

The highest point of elevation in the race was at the summit of the Col de l'Iseran mountain pass on stage 16b.

Race overview.

In the first stage, regional Amedée Fournier won the sprint of a group of nine cyclists, and was the first cyclist in 1939 to wear the yellow jersey. In the next stage, Romain Maes, who had finished in the same group as Fournier, won the time trial, and captured the lead. He lost it in the second part of that stage, when a group got away. Three regional riders were now on top of the general classification, led by Jean Fontenay.  René Vietto, leader of the regional South-East team, was in second place. In the fourth stage, Vietto got into the winning break, and took over the lead, closesly followed by Mathias Clemens on six seconds.  In the ninth stage, the single Pyrenees stage of 1939, Edward Vissers attacked instead of helping his team leader Sylvère Maes. Vissers won the stage, but Vietto was able to stay with Maes. Maes climbed to the second place in the general classification, three minutes behind Vietto.  Maes was able to win back a little time, and just before the Alps were climbed from stage 15 on, Vietto was still leading, with Maes still in second place, two minutes behind. Sylvère Maes attacked on that stage, and Vietto was not able to follow. Vietto finished 17 minutes behind Maes, and lost the lead. The next stage was split in three split stages. In the first part, Vietto was able to stay close to Maes, but in the second part, the individual mountain time trial, Maes won ten minutes on Vietto. Maes was now leading with a margin of 27 minutes, and the victory seemed secure.  In the last stages, Maes was able to extend his lead with a few more minutes. Maes became the winner, with a margin of more than half an hour.

Classification leadership and minor prizes.

The time that each cyclist required to finish each stage was recorded, and these times were added together for the general classification. If a cyclist had received a time bonus, it was subtracted from this total; all time penalties were added to this total. The cyclist with the least accumulated time was the race leader, identified by the yellow jersey. Of the 79 cyclists that started the race, 49 finished.  For the mountains classification, 10 mountains were selected by the Tour organisation. The mountains classification in 1939 was won by Sylvère Maes. The first cyclist to reach the top received 10 points, the second cyclist 9 points, and so on until the tenth cyclist who received 1 point.  The team classification was calculated in 1939 by adding up the times of the best three cyclists of a team; the team with the least time was the winner. In 1939, there were ten teams of eight cyclists. There were the national teams of Belgium, Switzerland, Luxembourg, Netherlands, and France. Belgium also sent a second team, "Belgium B". Finally, there were four regional French teams: North-East, West, South-West and South-East. The South-West team was registered with eight cyclist, but only seven cyclists started the race. Only two of the South-West cyclists finished the race, so they were not in the team classification.

Aftermath.

Although he did not win the race, René Vietto became a popular cyclist. He was the most popular runner-up in France until Raymond Poulidor.  The sales of the organising newspaper "l'Auto" had dropped to 164000, and the newspaper was sold to Raymond Patenôtre. A few months after Germany had conquered France in the Second World War, Patenôtre sold l'Auto to the Germans.  Directly after the Tour, the organisation announced the 1940 Tour de France would be run in 20 stages and five rest days. But the Second World War made it impossible to hold a Tour de France in the next years, although some replacing races were held. Only in 1947 would the Tour be held again, and Vietto would again play an important role then, holding the yellow jersey as leader of the general classification for 15 of the 21 stages.  The victory of Maes would be the last Belgian Tour victory for 30 years, until Eddy Merckx won the 1969 Tour de France.

The 1939 Tour de France was the 33rd edition of the Tour de France, taking place from 10 to 30 July. The total distance was.

Die 33. Tour de France fand vom 10. bis 30. Juli 1939 statt und führte über 4224 km auf 18 Etappen. Viele dieser Teilstücke waren in Halb- und Dritteletappen aufgeteilt. Es nahmen 79 Rennfahrer teil, von denen 49 das Ziel erreichten.


Biography.

Rasch was born in Friedrichsruh, Northern Germany. As a young man, Rasch fought in the First World War as a naval lieutenant. Following Germany's defeat, Rasch studied philosophy, law, political science, and received doctorates in law and political economy. With 2 university doctorates, Rasch was known as "Dr Dr Rasch", in accordance with German academic tradition. In 1931, Rasch became a private sector lawyer, with a practise based in Dresden. In 1933, Rasch became mayor of Radeberg, followed shortly in 1935 by becoming lord mayor of Wittenberg.  Rasch joined the NSDAP on 1 October 1931 (membership n°. 620,976), and joined the SA in 1933 and the SS on 10 March 1933 (membership °. 107,100). Beginning in 1936, Rasch was employed full-time by the Sicherheitsdienst (SD). On 1 October 1937, as commissioner, Rasch assumed leadership of the State Police (Stapo) in Frankfurt am Main. In March 1938, again as commissioner, Rasch became director of security (based in Linz) for Upper Austria. In June 1938, Rasch was assigned various responsibilities within the RSHA and was appointed chief of the Security Police (SiPo) and SD in Prague.  In November 1939, as inspector of the SiPo and SD, Rasch was transferred to Königsberg. Rasch suggested and oversaw the liquidation of Polish political prisoners (intelligentsia) who had been arrested by the Einsatzgruppen. Rasch himself checked which prisoners were to be killed. Though the killings took place in forests, in an attempt at causing panic, news of the executions was still known. With the approval of Reinhard Heydrich, Rasch organised and founded the Soldau concentration camp in the winter of 1939/40 as a "Durchgangslager" ("Dulag"), or transit camp, for deportations to the General Government, and where Polish intelligentsia could be secretly executed.

Einsatzgruppe.

In June 1941, shortly before the invasion of the Soviet Union, Rasch took command of Einsatzgruppe C. In this capacity, he perpetrated extermination actions against Jews. Rasch, along with General Kurt Eberhard and Paul Blobel, organised the Babi Yar massacre, which saw the murder of over 33,000 Jews.  According to the post-war affidavit of Erwin Schulz, commander of Einsatzkommando 5 (part of Einsatzgruppe C):  Rasch made sure that all Einsatzgruppen personnel, including the commanding officers, personally shot Jews, so that all members were culpable.  In August 1941, Hitler is alleged (in post-war interrogations of German prisoners) to have given a "Führerbefehl" (Leader's Order) for the extermination of entire populations in the Eastern territories. The commando leaders subordinate to Rasch met with him to discuss this order. Paul Blobel later testified that Rasch basically quoted what had been stated by Friedrich Jeckeln, that "the measures against the Jewish population had to be sharper and that he disapproved of the manner in which they had been carried out until now because it was too mild". In other words, the order was to shoot more Jews. Erwin Schulz confirmed this:  Rasch was discharged from his position in October 1941, and at the beginning of 1942, he became the director of Continental Oil, Inc. in Berlin.  Rasch was indicted at the Einsatzgruppen trial at the end of September 1947 but the case against Rasch was discontinued on 5 February 1948 because he had Parkinson's disease and associated dementia. Otto Rasch died later that year on 1 November in Wehrstedt, Lower Saxony.

"SS-Brigadeführer" Emil Otto Rasch (7 December 1891 – 1 November 1948) was a high-ranking Nazi official in the occupied Eastern territories, commanding Einsatzgruppe C (northern and central Ukraine) until October 1941. After World War II, Rasch was indicted for war crimes, but the case was discontinued for medical reasons in 1948. He died in 1948 while in custody.

Emil Otto Rasch (* 7. Dezember 1891 in Friedrichsruh; † 1. November 1948 in Nürnberg) war ein deutscher Jurist, SS-Führer und Kriegsverbrecher. Er machte als Nationalsozialist nach der Machtübernahme der NSDAP unter Adolf Hitler in Gestapo und SS Karriere, zuletzt im Rang eines SS-Brigadeführers und Generalmajors der Polizei. Als Befehlshaber der Einsatzgruppe C verantwortete er die Ermordung von 80.000 Menschen. Dazu gehörte auch das Massaker von Babyn Jar. Nach dem Ende des Zweiten Weltkrieges wurde er als Kriegsverbrecher vor Gericht gestellt.


Geography.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the county has a total area of, of which is land and (0.6%) is water. The Borough of Gettysburg is located at the center of Adams County. This county seat community is surrounded on three sides by the Gettysburg National Military Park (GNMP). The Eisenhower National Historic Site adjoins GNMP on its southwest edge. Most of Adams County's rural landscapes and its mid-19th century roadway pattern remain intact today. Thirteen historic roadways converge at or near Gettysburg Borough. Two circular rings of towns surround Gettysburg; the first is typically found at a distance of about from Gettysburg. The second ring is found at a distance of 12 to from the County Seat. This "spokes and wheel" pattern is one of the few examples of Central Place Theory in the Eastern United States.  The county is in the watershed of the Chesapeake Bay and is drained by the Susquehanna and Potomac Rivers.

Climate.

Adams has a hot-summer humid continental climate ("Dfa").

Government.

Commissioners.

Adams County is administered by a three-person Board of Commissioners, who serve four-year terms. Elections occur in the odd-numbered years that precede U.S. Presidential elections, with the next election falling in 2019. All three Commissioners are chosen in the same election, and voters may vote for no more than two of the candidates. The Commissioners are responsible for the management of the fiscal and administrative functions of the county.

Elected County Officials.

"As of the November 2017 election:"

Politics.

Presidential politics  Adams is a consistently Republican County. In 2016 Donald Trump carried the county with 65.5% of the vote to Hillary Clinton's 29.6%. No Democratic presidential candidate has won Adams County since Lyndon Johnson’s 1964 landslide.  Adams County is staunchly Republican; the last Democratic Presidential candidate to carry the county was Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964, and it has gone blue only three times in the last 100 years.

Pennsylvania House of Representatives.

Adams County consists of two Pennsylvania House Districts. The 91st district is exclusively in Adams County, comprising the southern and middle parts of the county, including Gettysburg. The 193rd District spans into Cumberland County to the north.

Pennsylvania Senate.

Adams County is entirely contained within the 33rd Senatorial District, which also includes parts of York and Franklin Counties.

United States House of Representatives.

From 2012 until 2018, Adams County was part of the 4th Congressional District until the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled that the Commonwealth's Congressional Districts constituted an illegal partisan Gerrymander. As a result, Adams County was moved from the 4th District to the 13th Congressional District and elected a new Representative in the 2018 election.

Voter Registration.

As of November 7, 2017 there was 65,225 registered voters in the county. Republicans hold a majority of the voters. There was 35,686 registered Republicans, 19,164 registered Democrats, 9,806 voters registered to other parties, 468 to the Libertarian Party and 101 voters registered to the Green Party.

Demographics.

As of the 2010 census, there were 101,407 people, 33,652 households, and 24,767 families in the county. The population density was 194 people per square mile (75/km2). There were 35,831 housing units at an average density of 69 per square mile (27/km2). The racial makeup of the county was 95.39% White, 1.21% Black or African American, 0.20% Native American, 0.49% Asian, 0.02% Pacific Islander, 1.71% from other races, and 0.97% from two or more races. 3.64% of the population were Hispanic or Latino of any race. 42.7% were of German, 14.1% American, 8.5% Irish and 7.1% English ancestry. 95.0% spoke English and 3.6% Spanish as their first language.  There were 33,652 households, of which 33.70% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 61.10% were married couples living together, 8.50% had a female householder with no husband present, and 26.40% were non-families. 21.30% of all households were made up of individuals and 9.20% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.61 and the average family size was 3.02.  The county population was spread out with 24.90% under the age of 18, 9.20% from 18 to 24, 28.90% from 25 to 44, 23.00% from 45 to 64, and 13.90% who were 65 years of age or older. The median age was 37 years. For every 100 females there were 96.30 males. For every 100 females age 18 and over, there were 93.80 males. Adams County is one of two counties in Pennsylvania where Latter-Day Saints make up 1% of the population.  Per the Pennsylvania Department of Health, Adams County's live birth rate was 1,132 births in 1990. The County's live birth rate in 2000 was 1,048 births, while in 2011 it had declined to 1,039 babies. Over the past 50 years (1960 to 2010), rural Pennsylvania saw a steady decline in both the number and proportion of residents under 18 years old. In 1960, 1.06 million rural residents, or 35 percent of the rural population, were children.  Adams County had 29 babies born to teens (age15-19) in 2011. In 2014, the number of teen births in Adams County was 27.  According to research by The Center for Rural Pennsylvania, a legislative Agency of the Pennsylvania General Assembly, the poverty rate for Adams County was 10.8% in 2014. The statewide poverty rate was 13.6% in 2014. The 2012 childhood poverty rate by school district was: Bermudian Springs School District – 32.4% living at 185% or below than the Federal Poverty Level, Conewago Valley School District – 37.3%, Fairfield Area School District – 19.5%, Gettysburg Area School District – 42.3%, Littlestown Area School District – 32.1%, and Upper Adams School District – 45.5%.

Metropolitan and Combined Statistical Area.

The US OMB has designated Adams County as the Gettysburg, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). As of the 2010 census the metropolitan area population of 101,407 ranked 19th most populous in the State of Pennsylvania and the 349th most populous in the United States. Adams County is also a part of the larger Harrisburg-York-Lebanon, PA Combined Statistical Area (CSA), which combines the populations of Adams County with those of Cumberland, Dauphin, Lebanon, Perry and York Counties in Pennsylvania. The Combined Statistical Area ranked 5th in the State of Pennsylvania and 43rd most populous in the United States with a population of 1,219,422.

Education.

Public school districts.

The 496 school districts of Pennsylvania that operate high schools were ranked for student academic achievement, as demonstrated by three years of math, reading, writing and science PSSA results.

Public charter schools.

County residents may apply to attend any of the Commonwealth's 14 (as of 2015) public, cyber charter schools at no additional cost to the parents.

Private schools.

As reported by Pennsylvania Department of Education April 2015

Intermediate Unit.

Lincoln Intermediate Unit (IU#12) region includes: Adams, Franklin, and York Counties. The agency offers school districts, home schooled students and private schools many services including: Special education services, combined purchasing, and instructional technology services. It runs Summer Academy which offers both art and academic strands designed to meet the needs of gifted, talented and high achieving students. Additional services include: Curriculum Mapping, Professional Development for school employees, Adult Education, Nonpublic School Services, Business Services, Migrant & ESL (English as a Second Language), Instructional Services, Special Education, Management Services, and Technology Services. It provides a GED program for adults to earn a high school diploma, and offers literacy programs. The Lincoln Intermediate Unit is governed by a 13-member Board of Directors, each a member of a local school board from the 25 school districts. Board members are elected by school directors of all 25 school districts for three-year terms that begin July 1. There are 29 intermediate units in Pennsylvania. They are funded by school districts, state and federal program specific funding and grants; they do not have the power to tax.

Transportation.

Air.

There are currently no scheduled commercial flights into Adams County. The nearest airports with regular commercial service are in Hagerstown, Maryland (Hagerstown Regional Airport), Harrisburg, Pennsylvania (Harrisburg International Airport), and Lancaster, Pennsylvania (Lancaster Airport).

Bus.

Public bus service in Adams County is available through the Adams County Transit Authority.

Recreation.

Recreational areas of Adams County include

Communities.

Under Pennsylvania law, there are four types of incorporated municipalities: cities, boroughs, townships, and, in at most two cases, towns. The following boroughs and townships are located in Adams County, as well as unincorporated areas and CDPs:

Census-designated places.

Census-designated places are geographical areas designated by the U.S. Census Bureau for the purposes of compiling demographic data, but are not actual jurisdictions under Pennsylvania law. Other unincorporated communities, such as villages, may be listed here as well.

Population ranking.

The population ranking of the following table is based on the 2010 census of Adams County.  † "county seat"

Adams County is a county in the U.S. state of Pennsylvania. As of the 2010 census, the population was 101,407. Its county seat is Gettysburg. The county was created on January 22, 1800, from part of York County, and was named for the second President of the United States, John Adams. On July 1–3, 1863, the area around Gettysburg was the site of the pivotal battle of the American Civil War, and as a result is a center for Civil War tourism.

Das Adams County ist ein County im US-Bundesstaat Pennsylvania. Bei der Volkszählung im Jahr 2010 hatte das County 101.407 Einwohner und eine Bevölkerungsdichte von 75,3 Einwohnern pro Quadratkilometer. Der Verwaltungssitz (County Seat) ist Gettysburg.


Definitions.

Many organizations may interpret community capacity building differently than others. Some methods of capacity building include fundraising, training centres, exposure visits, office and documentation support, on-job training, learning centres, and consultations. Developing nations are adopting strategies in the form of capacity building, to avoid becoming perpetually dependent on international aid.  The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) was one of the forerunners in developing an understanding of community capacity building and development. Since the early 1970s, the UNDP offered guidance to its staff and governments on what was considered "institution-building".  The United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR), formerly the United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR), defines capacity development in the DRR domain as "the process by which people, organizations and society systematically stimulate and develop their capability over time to achieve social and economic goals, including through improvement of knowledge, skills, systems, and institutions – within a wider social and cultural enabling environment."  In 1991, the term evolved to be "community capacity building". The UNDP defines community capacity building as a long-term continual process of development that involves all stakeholders. This includes ministries, local authorities, non-governmental organizations, professionals, community members, academics and more. Community capacity building uses a country's human, scientific, technological, organizational, institutional, and resource potentiality. The goal of community capacity building is to tackle problems related to policy and methods of development while considering the potential limits and needs of the people concerned. The UNDP outlines that community capacity building takes place at an individual, an institutional, societal level and non-training level.  Patrick Wakely (1997) from the University College London held similar views to the UNDP about systems nature of capacity. He believed that thinking about capacity building as simple training or human resource development was too limiting and that there needed to be a shift from that mindset. He also believed that increasing the capacity of the individual was not enough to contribute to the advancement of sustainable development alone, and needed to be paired with a supportive institutional and organizational environment. The three aspects of capacity building that Wakely believed to be essential to creating better cities are human resource development, organizational development, and institutional development. Human resource development is defined as "the process of equipping people with the understanding and skills, and access to the information and knowledge to perform effectively". It is where Wakely believes too much emphasis and efforts are focused here. Organizational development involves the processes of how things get done within an organization and require examining how and why an organization does something and what could be improved. Institutional development is the "legal and regulatory changes" that must be made in order for organizations to enhance their capacities.  Community capacity building is defined as the "process of developing and strengthening the skills, instincts, abilities, processes and resources that organizations and communities need to survive, adapt, and thrive in the fast-changing world."  Community capacity building is the element that gives fluidity, flexibility and functionality of a program/organization to adapt to the changing needs of the population that is served.  Infrastructure development has been considered "economic capacity building" because it increases the capacity of any developed or developing society to improve trade, employment, economic development and quality of life.

History.

The term "community capacity building" has evolved from past terms such as institutional building and organizational development.  In the 1950s and 1960s, these terms referred to community development that focused on enhancing the technological and self-help capacities of individuals in rural areas.  In the 1970s, following a series of reports on international development, an emphasis was placed on building capacity for technical skills in rural areas, and also in the administrative sectors of developing countries. In the 1980s the concept of institutional development expanded even more. Institutional development was viewed as a long-term process of building up a developing country's government, public and private sector institutions, and NGOs.  Though precursors to capacity building existed before, they were not crucial topics in international development like capacity building became during the 1990s.  The emergence of capacity building as a leading development concept in the 1990s occurred due to a confluence of factors:

Capacity building as path to sustainable development.

With increasing concerns about environmental issues such as climate change, there has been a focus on achieving sustainable development, or development that maximizes social, economic, and environmental benefit in the long run while protecting the earth. During debates about how to achieve sustainable development. It has become commonplace to include discussions about local community empowerment as well as "related concepts of participation, ownership, agency, and bottom-up planning." In order to empower local communities to be self-sustaining, capacity building has become a crucial part of achieving sustainable development. Many NGOs and developmental organizations end up inducing chronic aid dependency within communities by doing developmental projects for the communities rather than in partnership with them.  Reports like the and ideas like those of Freire's from earlier decades emphasized that "no one could develop anyone else" and development had to be participatory. These arguments questioned the effectiveness of "service delivery programs" for achieving sustainable development, thus leading the way for a new emphasis on capacity building.  In September 2000, a commitment was sealed at the Millennium Declaration in New York by 190 countries with the aim of achieving the Millennium Development Goals by 2015. This commitment, which helped the nations, particularly the developing countries to effectively and speedily respond to the current global economic recession, climate change and other crises, has sparked renewed interest and engagement in capacity building.

In developing societies.

Under the UNDP's 2008–2013 "strategic plan for development", capacity building is the "organization's core contribution to development." The UNDP promotes a capacity-building approach to development in the 166 countries it is active in. It focuses on building capacity at an institutional level and offers a six-step process for systematic capacity building.  The steps are:  The UNDP integrates this capacity-building system into its work on reaching the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). The UNDP focuses on building capacity at the institutional level because it believes that "institutions are at the heart of human development, and that when they are able to perform better, sustain that performance over time, and manage'shocks' to the system, they can contribute more meaningfully to the achievement of national human development goals."  Capacity building in developing countries is explained by Lant Pritchett, Michael Woolcock, and Matt Andrews as a fourfold modernization process in the areas of:  Under this theory, called Modernization Theory, growth over time in these four areas leads to a state becoming developed. The underlying idea behind this theory is that development agencies are tasked with facilitating growth, in these four areas in order to speed up the process of development or make the process more equitable.

In governments.

One of the most fundamental ideas associated with capacity building is the idea of building the capacities of governments in developing countries so they are able to handle the problems associated with environmental, economic and social transformations. Developing a government's capacity whether, at the local, regional or national level will allow for better governance that can lead to sustainable development and democracy. To avoid authoritarianism in developing nations, a focus has been placed on developing the abilities and skills of national and local governments so power can be diffused across a state. Capacity building in governments often involves providing the tools to help them best fulfil their responsibilities. These include building up a government's ability to budget, collect revenue, create and implement laws, promote civic engagement, be transparent and accountable and fight corruption.  Joel S. Migdal explains that governments can strengthen weak states by building capacity through changing land tenure patterns, adjusting methods of taxation, and improving modes of transportation. Migdal cites Mexico's passing of Ley de desamortización in 1856 as an example of establishing property rights as a means to strengthen a government's capacity for rule by establishing order. This establishes a social structure to reduce citizen conflict within the state, and a means to organize agricultural production for optimal output. Adjusting methods of taxation is another way to consolidate power in a weak state's government. This can be done through increasing government revenue through increased taxation and also formalizing tax collection by collecting taxes in cash instead of in kind. Migdal cites the example of 19th Century Egypt's declaration of cash taxes only as of the reason for increased economic capacity as farmers were forced into more market relations, pushing them to produce crops for export to increase cash revenue. This gave the state more liquid income. Also, Migdal explains that new modes of transportation can strengthen a state's capacity through decreased isolation leading to increasing economic opportunity by regional trade, increased accessibility, and reduced cost of transporting goods. Migdal cites the example of the railroad in India in 1853 as a means of growing the cotton export industry by 500%.  Below are examples of capacity building in governments of developing countries:

Isomorphic mimicry.

One approach that some developing countries have attempted to foster capacity building is through isomorphic mimicry. Similar to the concept of mimetic isomorphism used in organizational theory. Isomorphic mimicry refers to the tendency of government to mimic other governments' successes, by replicating methods and policy designs deemed successful in other countries. While such an approach can be effective for solving certain development problems that have "a universal technical solution", it often ignores the political and organizational realities on the ground and produces little benefits to those using it. An example of a failed mimicry relates to the legal reform in Melanesia. In response to a major international assistance mission to improve the quality of the justice system, a jail and a courthouse were built, costing millions of dollars. However, the new justice infrastructure has been rarely used since its establishment, because there has been a lack of bureaucracy and financial sources to support the expensive justice system. As summarized by Haggard et al., accelerated modernization is an entirely inappropriate strategy for enhancing the functionality of the legal system as solutions like this often require state capacities that developing countries do not have. Another example took place in Argentina. During the economic crisis in late 1980s, the government implemented a series of fiscal policies as recommended by IMF to regulate high point inflation affecting the country's economy. However, rather than constraining aggregate spending, the fiscal rule merely shifted spending from the central and to provincial governments. Adopting international best practices do not often translate into positive changes; in the case of Argentina, the mimicry produced little change to the vulnerable economy.

In local communities.

The capacity-building approach is used at many levels, including local, regional, national and international. Capacity building can be used to reorganize and capacitate governments or individuals. International donors like USAID often include capacity building as a form of assistance for developing governments or NGOs working in developing areas. Historically this has been through a US contractor identifying an in-country NGO and supporting its financial, monitoring & evaluation and technical systems. The NGO's capacity is developed as a sub-implementer of the donor. However, many NGOs participate in a form of capacity building that is aimed toward individuals and the building of local capacity. In a recent report commissioned by UNAIDS and the Global Fund, individual NGOs voiced their needs and preference for broader capacity development inputs by donors and governments. For individuals and in-country NGOs, capacity building may relate to leadership development, advocacy skills, training/speaking abilities, technical skills, organizing skills, and other areas of personal and professional development. One of the most difficult problems with building capacity on a local level is the lack of higher education in developing countries. Only between 2 and 5 percent of Africans have been to tertiary school. Damtew Teferra of Boston College's Center for African Higher Education argues that local capacity builders are needed now more than ever and increased resources should be provided for programs that focus on developing local expertise and skills.  The development sector, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa has many decades of 'international technical advisors' working with and mentoring government officials and national non-government organisations. In health service delivery, whether maternal care or HIV related, community organisations have been started and often grown through the strength of their staff and commitment to be national and even regional leaders in their technical fields. Whilst higher education is still an under-served demand, there are significant resources of experienced staff. More recent donor initiatives, including The Global Fund's Community Systems Strengthening and the US PEPFAR Technical Assistance to the New Partners Initiative begins to address the organisation capacity needs and stronger skills to be recognised as part of the national response to health needs in a country. To complete the capacity development cycle, the Global Fund and UNAIDS Technical Support Facility and the TA teams for CSO funded by the New Partners Initiative are staffed and managed by residents and nationals of those same developing countries.  Below are some examples of NGOs and programs that use the term "capacity building" to describe their activities on a local scale:  The first example depicts capacity building as a tool to deliver individuals the skills they need to work effectively in civil society. In the case of Mercy Ships, the capacity building is delivering the capacity for individuals to be stakeholders and participants in defined activities, such as health care.

In NGOs.

Societal development in poorer nations is often contingent upon the efficiency of organizations working within that nation. Organizational capacity building focuses on developing the capacities of organizations, specifically NGOs, so they are better equipped to accomplish the missions they have set out to fulfil. Failures in development can often be traced back to an organization's inability to deliver on the service promises it has pledged to keep. Capacity building in NGOs often involves building up skills and abilities, such as decision making, policy-formulation, appraisal, and learning. It is not uncommon for donors in the global north to fund capacity building for NGOs themselves. For organizations, capacity building may relate to almost any aspect of its work: improved governance, leadership, mission and strategy, administration (including human resources, financial management, and legal matters), program development and implementation, fund-raising and income generation, diversity, partnerships and collaboration, evaluation, advocacy and policy change, marketing, positioning, planning. Capacity building in NGOs is a way to strengthen an organization so that it can perform the specific mission it has set out to do and thus survive as an organization. It is an ongoing process that incites organizations to continually reflect on their work, organization, and leadership and ensure that they are fulfilling the mission and goals they originally set out to do.  Alan Kaplan, an international development practitioner and leading NGO scholar, asserts that capacity development of organizations involves the build-up of an organization's tangible and intangible assets. He argues that for NGOs to be effective facilitators of capacity building in developing areas, they must first focus on developing their organization. Kaplan argues that capacity building and organizational development in organizations should first focus on intangible qualities such as:  Kaplan argues that NGOs who focus on developing a conceptual framework, an organizational attitude, vision and strategy are more adept at being self-reflective and critical, two qualities that enable more effective capacity building. Though he asserts that these intangible qualities are of utmost importance – Kaplan says that tangible qualities such as skills, training and material resources such as tools, handbooks, manuals, advisories, primers, guidelines, etc. are also imperative.  Another aspect of organizational capacity building is an organization's ability to assess, examine and change according to what is most needed and what will be the most effective.

Evaluation.

Since the arrival of community capacity building as a dominant subject in international aid, donors and practitioners have struggled to create a concise mechanism for determining the effectiveness of capacity building initiatives. In 2007, David Watson developed specific criteria for effective evaluation and monitoring of the capacity building. Watson complained that the traditional method of monitoring NGOs based primarily on a linear results-based framework is not enough for capacity building. He argues that evaluating the capacity building ability of NGOs should be based on a combination of monitoring the results of their activities and also a more open flexible way of monitoring that also takes into consideration, self-improvement and cooperation. Watson observed 18 case studies of capacity building evaluations and concluded that certain specific themes were visible:  In 2007, USAID published a report on its approach to monitoring and evaluating the capacity building. According to the report, USAID monitors program objectives, the links between projects and activities of an organization and its objectives, a program or organization's measurable indicators, data collection, and progress reports. USAID evaluates why objectives were achieved, or why they were not, and the overall contributions of projects. It examines qualifiable results that are more difficult to measure, looks at unintended results or consequences, and reviews reports on lessons learned. USAID uses two types of indicators for progress: "output indicators" and "outcome indicators." Output indicators measure immediate changes or results such as the number of people trained. Outcome indicators measure the impact, such as laws changed due to trained advocates.

Capacity building (or capacity development) is the process by which individuals and organizations obtain, improve, and retain the skills, knowledge, tools, equipment, and other resources needed to do their jobs competently. It allows individuals and organizations to perform at a greater capacity (larger scale, larger audience, larger impact, etc). "Capacity building" and "Capacity development" are often used interchangeably. This term indexes a series of initiatives from the 1950s in which the active participation of local communities’ members in social and economic development was encouraged via national and subnational plans.

Als Hilfe zur Selbsthilfe bezeichnet man das Prinzip, das Maßnahmen zu Grunde legt, die den Not leidenden Menschen (z. B. den Mittellosen, den Patienten) dazu befähigen, sich selbst zu helfen bzw. sich selbst Hilfe zu organisieren.


Founding & Early Years.

In 1875, Georg's parents, Ida and Abraham Wertheim (who sometimes went by the name Adolf), had opened a modest shop selling clothes and manufactured goods in Stralsund, a provincial town on the Baltic Sea. An extensive network of family members ensured a low-priced supply of goods. In 1876, one year after the shop opened, the two eldest sons Hugo and Georg (aged 20 and 19 respectively), went to work in the shop following their apprenticeships in Berlin. Three younger sons later joined them.

Expansion & Growth.

The two brothers quickly brought new ideas into the shop: customers were allowed to replace goods, the price of a good was no longer debatable but reliable, and purchases were made strictly with cash. This concept was successful, and after the opening of another branch in Rostock, the first branch in Berlin (Rosenthaler Straße) was founded in 1885.  Wertheim quickly realised the changing demand of the growing city in the period of industrialisation and in 1890 opened the first real department store on Moritzplatz/Oranienstraße in Berlin-Kreuzberg. The shop floor was more generous in size and permitted more elaborate presentation of products for sale, products were put on display, and longer runs allowed lower prices.  However, it increasingly appeared that the limitations, which arose due to the shops' locations within an older-style structures with rooms that were not especially large and this made further expansion difficult.  A store was established in Leipzigerstrasse in 1892, and in 1894 began the sale of goods in the first purpose planned and built department store on the Oranienstraße.  The flagship Wertheim store on the Leipziger Platz opened in 1896 and attracted an upmarket clientele, who until then had held back from patronising his department stores, with all their needs satisfied under one roof. In the following years, Messel had to constantly expand the building.  Other stores on Rosenthaler Straße (1903), Königsstraße (1911) and, again, on Moritzplatz (1913) were rebuilt or expanded. The Moritzplatz Wertheim store helped to finance the redirecting of the U-Bahn (Underground) (copying the model of his competitor Rudolph Karstadt) in order that customers could go directly from the underground platform to the entrance.

Leipziger Platz Store.

The chain's most famous store, on Leipziger Platz in Berlin, was the biggest department store in Europe at the time, and was one of the three largest department stores ("Warenhäuser") in Berlin, the others being Hermann Tietz and Kaufhaus des Westens. This store was constructed between 1896 and 1906 by the renowned architect Alfred Messel who also designed other stores for the firm, such as that at Rosenthaler Straße 27–31/Sophienstraße 12–15 (partially surviving) which was built between 1903-1906.  At its full extent the building covered 26,000 square metres and faced both the Leipzigerstraße and the Voßstraße and stretched nearly all the way from the Leipziger Platz to the Wilhelmstraße. During construction the night-time electric lighting and steel scaffolding caused a sensation, and when the store opened on 15 November 15 1897, the result was traffic chaos on the Leipzigerstraße.  The innovative, vertically structured facade of narrow pillars extending from the ground floor to the roof and interspersed with windows received high praise, not least because it alluded to the building's function.  After passing through a vestibule two-storeys high, one entered a rectangular light well 22 meters high and 450 square meters in size. On the opposite wall an imposing stairway led to the upper sales floors. On the landing was a 6-meter-high (20 ft) statue symbolizing “Labor” by Ludwig Manzel, and the wall above was decorated with monumental frescoes showing an ancient harbor by Max Koch and a modern harbor by Fritz Gehrke.  It featured 83 elevators and two glass-roofed atriums.  With the construction of the corner pavilion on the Leipziger Platz frontage, with its deep portico, in 1904, Messel created nothing less than the "incunabulum" of progressive department store architecture. The traditional formal language, with the quasi-ecclesiastical sculpture employed, was described by critics as a "positive catastrophe", contrasting with the much-derided Berliner Dom (Cathedral), which was completed around the same time. The portico's sculptures, featuring figures from the Old Testament and Greek Mythology were the work of Josef Rauch (1868-1921). Fritz Stahl made the comment that the Leipzigerplatz portico was the "first building of the time to restore sculpture to its true architectonic relationship".  The tremendous impact of the new department store on the general public as well as on architecture experts is documented in newspaper and magazine articles and statements by famous architects and their critics. These included Peter Behrens, Henry van de Velde, August Endell, Bruno Taut, Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, Hermann Muthesius, Karl Scheffler, Walter Curt Behrendt, Fritz Stahl, Alfred Lichtwark, Heinrich Schliepmann amongst others. Brian Ladd called it “the crown jewel of the main shopping street."  The store did not survive World War II. In March 1943 it was damaged by three exploding bombs, and its final destruction was caused by a fire started by a phosphorus bomb. The ruins were cleared away in 1955–56 to make way for a border strip demarcating the Russian sector of Berlin.

The Nazi Period.

The company was subjected to the Nazi Aryanization policies in the 1930s. Jewish employees were forced from their positions by government mandate. The Wertheim family attempted to avoid losing control of the company by making Georg's wife, Ursula, the principal shareholder, since she was considered "Aryan" under Nazi law. In the end this was unsuccessful, even though they divorced to keep the shares in purely "Aryan" hands. The family was forced to sell all their shares at reduced prices to "Aryans" and in 1939 the store was renamed AWAG, an acronym for "Allgemeine Warenhandelsgesellschaft A.G." (General Retailing Corporation).

Post-War.

For many years there were two remaining stores in Berlin which operated under the Wertheim name, even though they were owned by Karstadt. The flagship store was on the Kurfürstendamm. It was built in 1969-71 and was converted to a Karstadt in 2008. The other store was on the Schloßstraße in the Steglitz district. It was demolished in 2009 for construction of a new shopping center.

Poland.

The former Wertheim department store in Breslau is Renoma in Wrocław.

Wertheim was a large department store chain in pre-World War II Germany. It was founded by Georg Wertheim and operated various stores in Berlin, one in Rostock, one in Stralsund (where it had been founded), and one in Breslau.

Der Wertheim-Konzern war ein Kaufhaus-Konzern der Familie Wertheim, der seine Ursprünge in der Hansestadt Stralsund hatte. Der expandierende, bedeutende Konzern wurde von den Nationalsozialisten enteignet und nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg wiedergegründet. Mitte der 1980er Jahre wurde die Marke von "Hertie" und diese Gruppe wiederum 1994 von "Karstadt" übernommen.


History.

New Force was formed within the Tricolour Flame ("Fiamma Tricolore") and then began the process that led it to become a party. Its founders and financiers were two well-known names from the years of militancy in the lead for the movements of the Roman radical right, and for their neo-fascist political beliefs. The split occurred when Tricolour Flame of Pino Rauti began to oppose the distribution among its members of the bulletin of Roberto Fiore and Massimo Morsello.  In 1980, Fiore and Morsello escaped to London as fugitives after arrest warrants aimed at shedding light on the facts of the massacre at the Bologna railway station. The two were considered unrelated to the massacre, although they belonged, according to the judiciary, to the Nuclei Armati Rivoluzionari. They both stayed in England during the first government led by Margaret Thatcher with the status of political refugees for 20 years.  New Force was founded on 29 September 1997 at a meeting in Cave, in the province of Lazio, organized by Francesco Pallottino, leader of a Nazi rock group. The founders Fiore and Morsello were still fugitives in London and did not return until 1999. Fiore was sentenced by a court to 66 months in prison. Morsello was sentenced to 98 months, although he did not serve them as he was dying from cancer (he died in March 2001).  The national launch of the group was in Latina with a conference in April 1998. Forza Nuova was placed on the political scene with the goal at the local level, to broaden their contacts on concrete campaigns against immigration, abortion, crime, and to hold together the conservative right-wing traditionalist with the social channel blocker.  On 25 March 1999, Massimo Morsello returned to Italy, and so did Roberto Fiore on 21 April of the following year. They were welcomed at the airport by deputies of the National Alliance and Forza Italia such as Francesco Storace, Enzo Fragalà, Alberto Simeone, Carlo Taormina, Ernesto Caccavale and Teodoro Buontempo. In early 2001, the movement could count on 2500 members and forty sections scattered across Italy.  In 2001 general election, New Force gained 13,622 votes at the Chamber of Deputies. In 2008 general election, the party won 0.30% in the Chamber and 0.26% in the Senate. It has not been elected a parliamentary presented himself in the lists of the party. Following the resignation of mandatory Alessandra Mussolini, elected to the Chamber of Deputies, Roberto Fiore became MEP.  In 2013 general election, New Force got 89,812 votes (0.26%) in the Chamber of Deputies and 81,521 votes in the Senate, failing to elect any candidate but becoming the largest far-right party in Italy.  In 2016, New Force was featured in an episode of "Huang's World" on the television channel Viceland. In the episode, the members went out to eat with Eddie Huang, the host, and an apparent local Sicilian walked by and happened to recognize the politicians and yelled at them for their far-right views. It ends with the host and camera crew going to jail because, they claimed, the New Force members had them arrested by the police.  For the 2018 general election New Force Joined with Tricolour Flame to form the Italy for the Italians coalition.

Presence outside Italy.

Forza Nuova has longstanding ties to other European far-right organization, including the British National Party. Forza Nuova leader Roberto Fiore was once closely allied with the Ukrainian far-right Svoboda party, but following the beginning of the War in Donbass, Forza Nuova and Fiore "made a considerable shift to the pro-Russian camp." According to the Political Capital Institute, a Hungarian think tank, Forza Nuova is one of a number of Russian-backed radical right political parties in Europe.  In 2016, a Forza Nuova affiliate continued attempts to recruit members in the United States. The group established Forza Nuova—USA chapters in New Jersey (Forza Nuova—USA's headquarters) and Phoenix, Arizona.  In 2018, Forza Nuova joined forces with Polish ultra-right organization National Radical Camp to "patrol" the beaches of Italian Romagna Riviera.

Political platform.

The political movement claims to aim for "national reconstruction" by achieving eleven objectives:  New Force is also characterized by Euroscepticism; Roberto Fiore, FN leader, stated that he wanted to oppose "with all possible legal means" the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty.

New Force ("Forza Nuova", FN) is an Italian far-right political party. It was founded by Roberto Fiore and Massimo Morsello. The party is a member of the Alliance for Peace and Freedom and was a part of the Social Alternative from 2003 to 2006. The party has often been strongly criticized for its radical positions and for acts of violence involving some militants. It was also the protagonist of political campaigns opposed to same-sex marriage and immigration to Italy.

Forza Nuova (FN, deutsch ‚Neue Kraft‘) ist eine rechtsextreme politische Partei in Italien mit Sitz in Rom. Sie wurde 1997 von Roberto Fiore und Massimo Morsello in Großbritannien gegründet. Den Vorsitz hat derzeit Roberto Fiore, der in Italien wegen Zugehörigkeit zu einer illegalen Vereinigung verurteilt wurde. Die Mitgliederzahl beträgt ca. 2500 Personen. Ihr Publikationsorgan heißt ebenfalls "Forza Nuova".


Geography.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the county has an area of, of which is land and (0.5%) is water. It has a warm-summer humid continental climate ("Dfb") and average monthly temperatures in downtown Bradford range from 23.0 °F in January to 67.6 °F in July, while in Mount Jewett they range from 21.2 °F in January to 65.1 °F in July.

Demographics.

As of the 2000 census, there were 45,936 people, 18,024 households, and 12,094 families residing in the county. The population density was 47 people per square mile (18/km2). There were 21,644 housing units at an average density of 22 per square mile (9/km2). The racial makeup of the county was 96.46% White, 1.87% Black, 0.32% Native American, 0.30% Asian, 0.02% Pacific Islander, 0.40% from other races, and 0.61% from two or more races. 1.06% of the population were Hispanic or Latino of any race. 35.0% German, 22.2% Irish, 14.6% Italian, 12.3% English, 10.0% Swedish, 8.6% American, 5.8% Polish, and 3.7% French ancestry.  There were 18,024 households out of which 30.50% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 52.50% were married couples living together, 10.10% had a female householder with no husband present, and 32.90% were non-families. 28.30% of all households were made up of individuals and 13.30% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.40 and the average family size was 2.93.  In the county, the age distribution of the population shows 23.70% under the age of 18, 7.90% from 18 to 24, 28.50% from 25 to 44, 23.20% from 45 to 64, and 16.70% who were 65 years of age or older. The median age was 39 years. For every 100 females there were 100.40 males. For every 100 females age 18 and over, there were 98.70 males.  McKean County's live birth rate was 632 births in 1990. The County's live birth rate in 2000 was 473 births, while in 2011 it had declined to 447 babies. Over the past 50 years (1960 to 2010), rural Pennsylvania saw a steady decline in both the number and proportion of residents under 18 years old. In 1960, 1.06 million rural residents, or 35 percent of the rural population, were children.  According to research by The Center for Rural Pennsylvania, which is a legislative agency of the Pennsylvania General Assembly, the poverty rate for McKean County was 16.6% in 2014. The statewide poverty rate was 13.6% in 2014. The 2012 childhood poverty rate by school district was: Bradford Area School District - 48.4% living at 185% or below than the Federal Poverty Level and Kane Area School District - 42.3, Otto-Eldred School District -49.8%, Port Allegany School District - 46.8, and Smethport Area School District - 44.8%.

Micropolitan Statistical Area.

The United States Office of Management and Budget has designated McKean County as the Bradford, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area (μSA). As of the 2010 U.S. Census the micropolitan area ranked 13th most populous in Pennsylvania and the 277th most populous in the United States with a population of 43,450.

Education.

Public school districts.

The 500 school districts of Pennsylvania were ranked for student academic achievement by the Pittsburgh Business Times in 2008.

Private schools.

As reported by EdNA, Pennsylvania Department of Education, June 2010.

Recreation.

There is one Pennsylvania state park in McKean County. Kinzua Bridge State Park is between U.S. Route 6 and Pennsylvania Route 59, just east of the Allegheny National Forest near Mount Jewett. When it was built, it was the highest and longest railroad bridge in the world. It was chosen by the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (DCNR) and its Bureau of Parks as one of "Twenty Must-See Pennsylvania State Parks" and is a Historic Civil Engineering Landmark. A tornado destroyed much of the bridge in 2003.

Communities.

Under Pennsylvania law, there are four types of incorporated municipalities: cities, boroughs, townships, and, in at most two cases, towns. The following cities, boroughs and townships are located in McKean County:

Population ranking.

The population ranking of the following table is based on the 2010 census of McKean County.  † "county seat"

McKean County is a rural county in the U.S. state of Pennsylvania. As of the 2010 census, the population was 43,450. Its county seat is Smethport. The county was created in 1804 and organized in 1826. It was named in honor of former Pennsylvania Governor and Declaration of Independence signer Thomas McKean.

McKean County ist ein County im Bundesstaat Pennsylvania der Vereinigten Staaten. Bei der Volkszählung im Jahr 2000 hatte das County 45.936 Einwohner und eine Bevölkerungsdichte von 18 Einwohner pro Quadratkilometer. Der Verwaltungssitz (County Seat) ist Smethport.


Present rules.

Observance.

Celebrations of solemnities and feasts are distinguished from those of memorials by, for instance, recitation of the "Gloria in excelsis" in the Mass (an inclusion otherwise allowed only on Sundays) and the "Te Deum" in the Liturgy of the Hours.  The observance of memorials is integrated into the celebration of the occurring weekday (the "feria") according to the norms set forth in the General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM) and the Liturgy of the Hours.  The GIRM lays down that, for memorials of saints, "unless proper readings are given, the readings assigned for the weekday are normally used. In certain cases, particularised readings are provided, that is to say, readings which highlight some particular aspect of the spiritual life or activity of the Saint. The use of such readings is not to be insisted upon, unless a pastoral reason truly suggests it". The Collect proper to the memorial is used or, if this is lacking, one from an appropriate Common. As to the Prayer over the Offerings and the Prayer after Communion, unless these are proper, they may be taken either from the Common or from the weekday of the current time of the year.  Celebrations of memorials occurring between 17 and 24 December and during Lent, which are then never obligatory, consist of replacing the collect of the day with that of the saint.  The General Instruction of the Liturgy of the Hours gives the following indications on celebration of memorials occurring on ordinary days: In the Office of Readings and at Lauds and Vespers:  Celebrations of memorials occurring between 17 and 24 December and during Lent, which are then never obligatory, consist of adding to the Office of Readings, after the patristic reading and responsory of the weekday, the hagiographical reading and responsory of the saint, and concluding with the prayer of the saint; and adding to Lauds and Vespers, after the concluding prayer of the weekday, the antiphon (proper or common) and the prayer of the saint.

Obligatory and optional memorials.

Memorials are either obligatory or optional. The rules governing the celebration of memorials, whether obligatory or optional, are identical. The only difference is precisely that an optional memorial need not be observed, and, with the limitations indicated for the second part of Advent and for Lent, there is the possibility of celebrating instead the Mass either of another memorial assigned to that day, or of the weekday, or of any saint mentioned in the Roman Martyrology for that day, or indeed (except during the first part of Advent, the days from 2 January to the day before Epiphany, and Eastertide), a Mass for Various Needs, or a Votive Mass.  Sometimes memorials that are called obligatory cease to be such. This occurs to those that fall within Lent. If two obligatory memorials coincide (as can happen when the movable memorial of the Immaculate Heart of Mary falls on the date of a fixed obligatory memorial), both become optional.

Pre-Vatican II forms of the Roman Rite.

In approximate correspondence to memorials, Pope John XXIII's 1960 Code of Rubrics spoke of "third-class feasts, as can be seen in the General Roman Calendar of 1960, and gave some of them, either permanently or on the occasions when their celebration coincided with one of higher rank, only a commemoration within the office actually celebrated. The Code of Rubrics laid down that, unless proper psalms are assigned, a third-class office uses the weekday psalms and at matins combines the second and third readings for the ferial day into a second reading, with a reading about the saint or mystery providing the third, followed by the Te Deum. In lauds and vespers, everything after the psalms is either from the proper or the common of the feast. The same is done at terce, sext, and none. There are very few changes at prime. Compline is of the weekday unless otherwise assigned. Third-class feasts are merely commemorated on weekdays of Lent and are not observed on Sundays. During Advent, they add a commemoration of the ferial day, except on 17–23 December, days classified as second-class ferias that thus outrank them. Before the 1960 Code of Rubrics, saints and mysteries were traditionally ranked as doubles, semidoubles and simples, with doubles further subdivided into first-class doubles, second-class doubles, major doubles and mere doubles. A few years before Pope John XXIII's reform, Pope Pius XII had already abolished semidoubles and Pope Pius X had done away with the tradition that any double feast, of which there were over 200 in the course of the year, outranked a normal Sunday celebration.

A memorial in the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church is a lower-ranked feast day in honour of a saint, the dedication of a church, or a mystery of the religion.

Ein gebotener Gedenktag ist in der geltenden liturgischen Ordnung der katholischen Kirche ein niederer Rang der Feierlichkeit, zwischen dem Fest und dem nichtgebotenen Gedenktag.


Early life and career.

Kluge was born on 30 October 1882 in Posen, then in Prussia and now western Poland. His father, Max von Kluge, was from an aristocratic Prussian military family. A distinguished commander, Max was a lieutenant general in the Prussian Army who served in the First World War; he married Elise Kühn-Schuhmann in 1881. Kluge was one of two children, having a younger brother named Wolfgang (1892-1976). Wolfgang served in both world wars, rising to the rank of lieutenant general by 1943, and was commander of Fortress Dunkirk between July and September 1944.  In 1901, Kluge was commissioned in the Prussian Army's 46th Field Artillery Regiment. He served on the General Staff between 1910 and 1918, reaching the rank of captain on the Western Front during the First World War. He remained in the "Reichswehr" following the conflict, becoming a colonel in 1930, major general in 1933, and lieutenant general a year later. On 1 April 1934, Kluge took command of the 6th Division in Münster. Adolf Hitler's proclamation of the Wehrmacht in 1935 precipitated his appointment to the 6th Corps and then the 6th Army Group, which subsequently became the 4th Army.  Kluge believed Hitler's "crude militarism" would lead Germany into disaster. During the Sudetenland Crisis, he was a member of a secret anti-war faction lead by Ludwig Beck and Ernst von Weizsäcker, hoping to avoid armed conflict over the disputed territory. The crisis was averted by the Munich Agreement on 30 September 1938. Although he was privately critical of the Nazis, Kluge believed in the principle of "Lebensraum" and took pride in the rearmament of the Wehrmacht.  He had the nickname "der kluge Hans" ("Clever Hans") after a German horse that could supposedly do arithmetic.

World War II.

Invasion of Poland.

Hitler approved of the German High Command's outline for invading Poland with two army groups during a military briefing on 26–27 April 1939. Kluge's 4th Army was assigned to Army Group North under Fedor von Bock. The Poland Campaign commenced on 1 September, taking advantage of the country's long border with Germany. The 4th Army was to advance eastward toward the Corridor from West Pomerania to link with the 3rd Army; the port city of Danzig fell within the first day.  By the following day, apprehensions of a strong Polish defensive line along the Brda River never materialized. The 4th Army crossed the river, sealing the Polish 9th Infantry Division, 27th Infantry Division, and the Pomeranian Cavalry Brigade in the Corridor. Kluge sent the 10th Panzer Division from his army across the Vistula River, meeting with the 3rd Army on 3 September. The 4th Army's XIX Panzer Corps (Heinz Guderian) captured the city of Brześć on 17 September after three days of fighting in the Battle of Brześć Litewski. Army Group North was informed of the Red Army's invasion of eastern Poland the same day and was directed to remain west of the Bug River. Brześć was turned over to the Soviet forces on 22 September. For his entrapment of Polish forces in the early stages of the invasion, Kluge earned Hitler's praise as one of his most brilliant commanders.

Battle of France.

In preparation for "Fall Gelb" ("Case Yellow"), the invasion of France, Kluge and the 4th Army were transferred to Army Group A under the command of Gerd von Rundstedt. Hitler, still looking for an aggressive alternative to the original plan, approved Erich von Manstein's ideas, known as the Manstein Plan, following a meeting with them on 17 February 1940. The plan outlined that the 4th Army would contribute to an attack through the rugged Ardennes terrain of southern Belgium and Luxembourg to the Meuse River; Kluge entrusted the XV Army Corps, encompassing the 5th and 7th Panzer Divisions, to provide flank cover for Georg-Hans Reinhardt's corps by crossing the Meuse at Dinant.  Launched on 10 May, Case Yellow began successfully. Kluge's corps advanced rapidly, reaching the Meuse in two days. A river crossing, spearheaded by 7th Panzer commander Erwin Rommel, established a bridgehead on the west bank of the Meuse on 13 May and forced the French 9th Army into retreat. Kluge's forces—particularly the 7th Panzer Division—achieved a rapid breakthrough from their bridgehead in the following days; between 16–17 May Rommel captured 10,000 prisoners and 100 tanks, and wiped out the remainder of the French 9th Army at the expense of only 35 casualties. Overextended and well ahead of the army group, the 5th and 7th Panzer Divisions fended off a joint British-French counterattack near the town of Arras on 21 May.  After a conference with Hitler and Rundstedt, Kluge issued an order to his Panzer units to halt on 24 May, from Dunkirk—by then the possible escape route for the British Expeditionary Force. The two-day respite allowed the Allies to consolidate their manpower around Dunkirk and prepare for an evacuation. On 5 June, at the commencement of "Fall Rot" ("Case Red"), the second phase of the invasion plan, Kluge's 4th Army helped achieve the first breakthrough at Amiens and reached the Seine River on 10 June. Kluge's command and Rommel's generalship throughout the invasion led to his promotion to "generalfeldmarschall" (field marshal) on 19 July.

Invasion of the Soviet Union.

Kluge commanded the 4th Army at the opening of Operation Barbarossa as part of Army Group Centre. In addition to his command, the army group included a field army, the 9th Army, and two mobile formations, the 2nd (Heinz Guderian) and the 3rd Panzer Groups (Hermann Hoth).  On 29 June, Kluge ordered that women in uniform were to be shot, in line with the Nazi ideological worldview. It considered female combatants to be yet another manifestation of "barbaric" Bolshevism where natural gender roles were upended. The order was later rescinded, and women in uniform were to be captured instead. On 4 July, the Oberkommando des Heeres (OKH) ("High Command") subordinated the 2nd and the 3rd Panzer Groups to Kluge, to improve coordination between the fast charging armoured spearheads and the slower infantry. The resulting formation provided unity on paper; in reality, the Panzer group commanders often bristled at Kluge's orders. Kluge had to give up all but his two infantry corps; his other corps were assigned to the 2nd Army, which had previously been held in reserve.  Expecting a short war that would not necessitate the exploitation of Soviet labour for the German war effort, the German High Command and military leadership did not make adequate preparations to house prisoners-of-war and civilian internees. In Kluge's area of command, 100,000 POWs and 40,000 civilians were herded into a small open-air camp in Minsk in July 1941. Amid deteriorating conditions and starvation in the camp, Organisation Todt appealed to Kluge to release 10,000 skilled workers. Kluge declined, wishing to make the decisions regarding the prisoners himself.  As part of the Hunger Plan, one of the pillars of the war of annihilation against the Soviet Union, the Wehrmacht was largely expected to "live off the land". Thus looting, pillaging, and abuse of the civilian population was rampant, especially in the areas to the rear. In September 1941, Kluge issued an order to his troops aimed at restoring discipline. It stated that it was "high time to put a "complete end" to the unjustified methods of obtaining supplies, the raids, the plundering trips over vast distances, all the senseless and criminal activity". Kluge threatened harsh measures towards those responsible, along with their superior commanders who failed to maintain discipline.

Battle of Moscow.

During Operation Typhoon, the German advance on Moscow, Kluge had the 4th Panzer Group, under the command of Erich Hoepner, subordinated to the 4th Army. In early October, the 4th Panzer Group completed the encirclement at Vyazma. Much to Hoepner's displeasure, Kluge instructed him to pause the advance as his units were needed to prevent break-outs of Soviet forces. Hoepner was confident that clearing the pocket and the advance on Moscow, could be undertaken at the same time. He viewed Kluge's actions as interference, which led to friction and "clashes" with his superior, as he wrote in a letter home on 6 October. Hoepner did not seem to appreciate that his units were very short on fuel; the 11th Panzer Division reported having no fuel at all. Only the 20th Panzer Division was advancing towards Moscow amid deteriorating road conditions.  On 17 November, the 4th Panzer Group again attacked towards Moscow alongside the V Army Corps of the 4th Army, as part of the continuation of Operation Typhoon by Army Group Centre. The panzer group and the army corps represented Kluge's best forces, most ready for a continued offensive. In two weeks' fighting, the German forces advanced ( per day). A lack of tanks, insufficient motor transport, and a precarious supply situation, along with tenacious Red Army resistance, and the air superiority achieved by Soviet fighters hampered the attack.  Facing pressure from German High Command, Kluge finally committed his weaker south flank to the attack on 1 December. In the aftermath of the battle, Hoepner and Guderian blamed Kluge's slow commitment of the 4th Army's south flank to the attack for the German failure to reach Moscow. Historian David Stahel wrote that this assessment grossly overestimated the capabilities of Kluge's remaining forces. It also failed to appreciate the reality that Moscow was a metropolis, and German forces lacked the numbers to encircle it. With the outer defensive belt completed by 25 November, Moscow was a fortified position which the Wehrmacht lacked the strength to take in a frontal assault. Further attacks were called off on 5 December; the Red Army launched its winter counter-offensive on the same day.

Army Group Centre.

After Fedor von Bock was relieved of his command of Army Group Center on 18 December, Kluge was promoted to replace him. Bitter fighting continued in Army Group Center's sector in the winter and early spring, with neither side being able to make much headway. The German forces held, but barely. During the summer campaign of 1942, Case Blue, the army group was to hold its position.  On 30 October 1942, Kluge received a letter of good wishes from Hitler together with a cheque for a half-million Reichsmarks made out to him from the German treasury. It included a promise that the costs of improving his estate could be billed to the state. This was part of the bribery of senior Wehrmacht officers scheme. Kluge accepted the money. After severe criticism from his chief of staff, Henning von Tresckow, who upbraided him for corruption, he agreed to meet Carl Friedrich Goerdeler, an opponent of the Nazi regime, in November 1942. Kluge promised Goerdeler that he would arrest Hitler the next time he came to the Eastern Front. Then after receiving another "gift" from Hitler, he changed his mind and decided to remain loyal. Hitler, who seems to have heard that Kluge was dissatisfied with his leadership, regarded his "gifts" as entitling him to Kluge's total loyalty. For much of 1942 and early 1943, Army Group Centre was engaged in positional warfare around the Rzhev salient defending against Red Army offensives, collectively known as the Battles of Rzhev. The Soviet forces gained little ground for their losses, especially in the unsuccessful Operation Mars that commenced around the same time as Operation Uranus, the encirclement of the German forces in the Battle of Stalingrad. Kluge's forces were nevertheless depleted and early in 1943, he obtained authorisation to withdraw the 9th Army (General Walter Model) and elements of the 4th Army (General Gotthard Heinrici) from the salient. The resulting Operation Büffel saw the Wehrmacht abandon the salient in phases between 1–22 March 1943. The operation eliminated the Rzhev salient shortening the German lines by miles. The withdrawal was accompanied by a ruthless scorched-earth and security campaign, resulting in widespread destruction, razing of villages, deportation of the able-bodied population for slave labour, and killings of civilians by the troops of the Wehrmacht under the guise of "anti-partisan warfare".  On 13 March 1943, Hitler authorised several offensives, including one against the Kursk salient. As the last Soviet resistance in the Third Battle of Kharkov petered out, Erich von Manstein, commander of Army Group South, attempted to persuade Kluge to immediately attack the Soviet Central Front, which was defending the northern face of the salient. Kluge refused, believing that his forces were too weak to launch such an attack. By mid-April, amid poor weather and with the German forces exhausted and in need of refitting, the offensives were postponed.  On 15 April, Hitler and the OKH issued a new operational order, which called for the offensive codenamed "Zitadelle" ("Citadel"), to begin on 3 May or shortly thereafter against the Kursk salient. Operation Citadel, which led to the Battle of Kursk, called for a double envelopment. Army Group Centre was to provide Model's 9th Army to form the northern pincer. Army Group South's 4th Panzer Army and Army Detachment Kempf would drive north to meet the 9th Army east of Kursk. As the planning and preparations continued, in late April Model met with Hitler to express his concerns about strong defensive positions being established by the Red Army in his sector.  Hitler called his senior officers and advisors to Munich for a meeting on 4 May. A number of options were put forth for comment: going on the offensive immediately with the forces at hand, delaying the offensive further to await the arrival of new and better tanks, radically revising the operation or cancelling it altogether. Manstein advocated an early attack but requested two additional infantry divisions, to which Hitler responded that none were available. Kluge spoke out strongly against postponement and discounted Model's reconnaissance materials. General Heinz Guderian, Inspector of Armoured Forces, argued against the operation, stating "the attack was pointless". The conference ended without Hitler coming to a decision, but Citadel was not aborted.  The operation, launched on 5 July, had misfired from the start. In the northern sector, the Soviet forces had completely halted the German advance by 10 July. On 12 July, the Red Army launched Operation Kutuzov, its counter-offensive against the Orel salient, which threatened the flank and rear of Model's 9th Army. On the evening of 12 July, Hitler summoned Kluge and Manstein to his headquarters at Rastenburg in East Prussia, where he announced the cancellation of Citadel. Amid heavy fighting, the Red Army entered Orel on 5 August and, on 18 August, it reached the outskirts of Bryansk, eliminating the Orel salient. With Army Group Center falling back on prepared defensive positions, the German resistance stiffened and it took the Soviet forces until the end of September to liberate Smolensk.  On 27 October 1943, Kluge was badly injured in a car accident. He was unable to return to duty until July 1944. Field Marshal Ernst Busch replaced Kluge as commander of Army Group Centre.

Western Front.

In July 1944, Kluge was appointed OB West (Commander of the German Army in the West) after his predecessor, Field Marshal Gerd von Rundstedt, was dismissed for remarking that the war was lost. With the initiative belonging to the Allies, Kluge immediately sought to assert authority over Rommel, in charge of Army Group B and build his command's confidence in defending Normandy. Yet by 12 July, having toured the front and been briefed by field commanders, Kluge expressed his skepticism to Alfred Jodl: "I am no pessimist. But in my view, the situation could not be grimmer". Five days later, Rommel was wounded when a Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) Spitfire strafed his staff car, causing the vehicle to veer off the road; Kluge succeeded him in command of Army Group B while retaining his other post. The Allies drove the Germans from the vital heights of Saint-Lô in July, setting the stage for a major offensive in the Normandy Campaign. Launched on 25 July, Operation Cobra was intended for U.S. forces to take advantage of German armies occupied by British and Canadian attacks around Caen and achieve a decisive breakthrough in northwestern France. By 28 July, the operation succeeded in breaking through German lines, and resistance to the Americans was disorganized. Lacking the resources to hold the front, German units launched desperate counterattacks to escape entrapment, while Kluge sent reinforcements, comprising elements of the 2nd and 116th panzer divisions, westward in hopes of avoiding total collapse; in fierce engagements, his forces suffered heavy losses in men and tanks that he could not replace.  In the last days of July, the German army in Normandy had been reduced to such a poor state by Allied offensives that Kluge could no longer sustain a viable defensive position in Normandy; he had no prospects for reinforcements in the wake of Operation Bagration, the Soviet summer offensive against Army Group Centre, and very few Germans believed they could salvage victory. Between 1 and 4 August, seven divisions from the U.S. Third Army, under Lieutenant General George S. Patton, advanced rapidly through Avranches and over the bridge at Pontaubault into Brittany.  Against Kluge's advice to withdraw, Hitler ordered a counterattack, Operation Lüttich, between Mortain and Avranches. He demanded that all available Panzer units cooperate in a concentrated attack aimed at recapturing the Contentin Peninsula and cutting off U.S. forces in Brittany from resupply. According to OB West Operations Officer Bodo Zimmermann, Kluge knew "very well that carrying out this order meant the collapse of the Normandy front", but his misgiving were ignored. Kluge could only muster four depleted Panzer divisions by the time operations commenced on 7 August. The offensive came to a halt from Avaranches, primarily due to Allied air superiority, leaving German units vulnerable to entrapment.  A final offensive, Operation Tractable, was launched by Canadian forces on 14 August in conjunction with American advances northward toward Chambois; their goal was to encircle and destroy the German 7th Army and 5th Panzer Army near the town of Falaise. In his final order as OB West commander, Kluge issued a full-scale retreat eastward on 16 August. The Allies did not capture Falaise until later that same day, leaving a -gap between Canadian and American forces—known as the Falaise Gap. By 22 August, the gap—desperately maintained by the Germans to allow their trapped forces to escape—was completely sealed, ending the Battle of Normandy with a decisive Allied victory. As remnants of Army Group B fled eastward, the Allies advanced without opposition through undefended territory. Although perhaps 100,000 Germans managed to escape, 10,000 were killed and another 40,000–50,000 were captured.

Plot against Hitler.

Through Carl-Heinrich von Stülpnagel, Kluge was aware of the 20 July plot against Hitler; he agreed to support the conspirators’ seizure of power if Hitler was killed. In Paris, the conspirators arrested over 1,200 SS and SD members, and after the assassination attempt failed, Stülpnagel and Caesar von Hofacker met with Kluge at his headquarters in La Roche-Guyon. Having already learned of Hitler's survival, Kluge withdrew his support and rescinded the arrest warrants.  On 15 August, Kluge's car was damaged in an Allied bombing and he was cut off from all contact with his forces for several hours. Hitler immediately suspected Kluge of negotiating with the Allies. He was dismissed two days later and replaced by Model. When he was recalled to Berlin for a meeting with Hitler, Kluge was convinced he had been implicated in the 20 July plot and opted to commit suicide on 19 August using potassium cyanide. In his final testimony, he affirmed his loyalty to Hitler and expressed the view that Germany needed to end the war, writing that "the German people have undergone such untold suffering that it is time to put an end to this frightfulness." After the war, the former SS General Jurgen Stroop boasted about how he dealt with Kluge regarding his involvement in the plot against Hitler. As General Wilhelm Burgdorf did with Rommel, Stroop claimed to offered Kluge a choice between suicide and a show trial. To Stroop's outrage, Kluge demanded his day in court. Stroop then claimed he shot Kluge in the head. Himmler announced the death of the field marshal was a suicide.

Günther Adolf Ferdinand von Kluge (30 October 1882 – 19 August 1944), also known as Hans Günther von Kluge, was a German field marshal during World War II who held commands on both the Eastern and Western Fronts. He commanded the 4th Army of the Wehrmacht during the invasion of Poland in 1939 and the Battle of France in 1940, earning a promotion to Generalfeldmarschall. Kluge went on to command the 4th Army in Operation Barbarossa (the invasion of the Soviet Union) and the Battle for Moscow in 1941.

Günther Adolf Ferdinand (von) Kluge (* 30. Oktober 1882 in Posen; † 19. August 1944 bei Verdun; auch bekannt als "Hans Günther von Kluge") war ein deutscher Heeresoffizier (seit 1940 Generalfeldmarschall) und während des Zweiten Weltkrieges Oberbefehlshaber der 4. Armee sowie verschiedener Heeresgruppen.