The Alamo chapel, unfinished facade, as it appeared in the 1830s and 1840s.The major points in this story are fairly well known.
The mission-fortress was garrisoned by Colonels Bowie and Travis, co-commanding between 180 and 250 soldiers of the new Texas Army and volunteers. In late February, they were besieged by the Mexican Predient/General/Dictator Antonio de Padua María Severino López de Santa Anna y Pérez de Lebrón and some 2400 of his soldiers. The siege ended on 6 March when the walls were overrun and the defenders were all killed. The delay of the Mexican advance allowed the provisional Texas government time to write and sign a formal Texas Declaration of Independence.
Historian Lon Tinkle (1906 -- 1980) wrote the definitive popular history of this battle in 1958, entitled Thirteen Days to Glory: The Siege of the Alamo.
The battle has been studied and documented more or less regularly ever since the ashes cooled. Curiously, though, the majority of the longer, published works have been works of fiction. Mr. Tinkle‘s book was only the second full length factual study of the siege. Not all the information is undisputed. Distinguished Dallas book critic A. C. Greene, wrote that Tinkle’s book "gives the essence of the Alamo story without attempting to exhaust history's explanation", and "is more revealing of the minds and wills that were behind the fateful decision to stay on to death" than other, later treatments of the battle.
The book is still widely available and is well worth the reading.
I was at first tempted to try to recount all the high points of the siege, so far as they are known. As a voracious reader and proudly chauvinistic Texan, I have been reading all I can find on this topic for almost as long as I’ve been able to read. I know the various points of view, the controversies, the sometimes acrimonious disputes as to this point or that about the battle. For instance, it is well known and documented, but frequently glossed over, that, but for a massive and overt act of insubordination, the properly designated “Shrine of Texas Liberty” would likely have crumbled into gravel, noted only in passing as an early landmark from the days of revolution. Working on the best information available at the time, Sam Houston, military commander of Texas forces, ordered Colonel James Bowie to destroy the fortifications and to spike or carry away the artillery. Instead, Bowie, with Col. James Neill, decided to hold in place, to engage the Mexican forces for as long as possible.
While I have sufficient reference works on hand to make a pretty good job of such a recounting, I must confess that I would be doing little more than rehashing the work of better scholars than I. I have no newly located papers, letters, journals, or other sources. While well-read on the topic, I’ve made no independent studies of this already well-researched stretch of history and folklore. This being the case, I’ll content myself with recognizing the significance of certain dates for the next couple of weeks, as a reminder to all of us that there were, indeed, giants in the land in those days.
JPG
Modern appearance of the Alamo ChapelProbably during the 1850s, while being used by the US Army, the Alamo was greatly repaired. The campanulate, or bell-shaped facade, was added to the front wall of the chapel. Until that time, the front had never been finished, and no roof had been placed.
LATE ADDITION: Since writing the above, I note that Robert at Blackfork has written another blog installment. In it, he gives much of the detail that I would have inserted over the next few days. He was first, and I’ll defer to him. Nice work, Robert.
The squadron of 
Thompson was assigned to the new 12th Aero Squadron, and on July 28
The young engineer was apparently an enthusiastic and talented warrior. Thompson intentionally sought out combat in company with the French allies before his own squadron was operational. He managed three kills of first-line German fighter planes. His weapons in both fights were twin .303 Lewis guns on Scarff ring mounts, with rather primitive ring sights. He was stoic enough to perform auto-surgery under adverse conditions.
There are, indeed, two different sides to this story. Many think it was a miscarriage of justice to charge the BP agents to begin with. They are scandalized that the agents were prosecuted for shooting --and not even killing-- a dope smuggler. This faction --and a huge faction it is-- think that President Bush should have totally pardoned both agents. The other side is gladdened that there has at least been an attempt to apply to federal officers a similar standard of justice to that applied to private individuals. It is clear, though, that the 11 and 12-year sentences were far heavier than some given in arguably more serious convictions. That side decries any reduction of the sentences. 
