Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 06/20/2018 in all areas

  1. 4 points
    Four Catholic ladies are having coffee together, discussing how important their children are. The first one tells her friends, "My son is a priest. When he walks into a room, everyone calls him 'Father.'" The second Catholic woman chirps, "Well, my son is a bishop. Whenever he walks into a room, people say, 'Your Grace.'" The third Catholic woman says smugly, "Well, not to put you down, but MY son is a cardinal. Whenever he walks into a room, people say, 'Your Eminence.'" The fourth Catholic woman sips her coffee in silence. The first three women give her this subtle "Well?" She replies, "My son is a gorgeous, 6' 2," hard-bodied, male stripper. Whenever he walks into a room, people say, "'Oh my God . . ..'"
  2. 4 points
    I'd like to address both of your posts: Just like you, my experiences in dealing with groups is exactly the same. Then you will find individuals do the same, exact thing. Before the Internet, it was much easier. What we did was to make up a flyer inviting people to a militia meeting. We would have that flyer prominently displayed on tables at third party political gatherings, gun shows, and left in the lobby of post offices where people open their mail. Some were placed in magazines at doctor and dentist offices. The meetings were held in a banquet room of a big restaurant. People purchased meals and that paid for the room. We recruited in excess of 1600 members in one year. But, the Internet came along and screwed that up. Plus, some groups are able to get free publicity from the MSM (for an obvious reason) and a few dollars from the government to start organizations that are actually disinformation fronts for the government. It's done in cash and these disadvantages are real difficult to over - come. I didn't say they are impossible. On the Internet are professional trolls. I acquired my very own that follows me 24 / 7 / 365. He threatened me on one board after he discovered I was on this board. He will be come here and try to tell you what a S.O.B. I am. He has followed every movement I've made and posted on every board I've been on trying to discredit me. He is my personal biographer, but what he writes is absolute horse manure. When you've accumulated the experience, the disinformation groups are going to send out their best to take you out. This is a war. Most groups won't work with you because everybody is trying to steal everyone else's piece of the pie. Small groups cannot see that they have a group, but they are not growing. The professional trolls, working for those who don't want to discuss alternative solutions and ideas, are being led and directed by some high profile neo nazis that answer to a man by the name of John Tanton. If you question their talking points; if you ask questions; if you point out the flaws in their strategies, they will overwhelm you with an Internet presence that would look like a swarm of flies on fresh dung. That is the downside. The upside is that you and I met here. Dale has opened the door to discussion. I built a board (where the link to the process of exhausting your remedies is at.) The guys in the militia asked for it and then never used it. They give you that song and dance about being off the grid, etc. You've heard it before. They will promise to come here and help you out, never to bother registering. It makes us look bad. But, you've been there and you're learning what I did. Maybe Dale gives it a shot or maybe he just decides if we work together, we can begin having a dialogue that cannot be derailed by professional trolls. I take your word for what you tell me about you. If someone comes along and tries to derail what we're discussing, we will rely on one another and a show of force, even a small one discourages the professional trolls. Once we think outside the box and once we ask questions that haven't been asked, it will wake up others one at a time. If you really want a group. Start local with people in your hometown. I have people over and the last time, our crowd size was 17 people. Only two or three will actually ever bother to get involved, but most will at least cast an informed vote at the polls. Every little bit will help.
  3. 3 points
    Medium Tank M4 Sherman The M4 Sherman (named after the famous American Civil War general William T. Sherman) is one of the few really iconic fighting vehicles of the Allies during World War Two, and one of the most famous tanks in history. But while this historic status was gained partly thanks to its intrinsic qualities, but also due to the sheer numbers in which they were provided, only surpassed by the Soviet Union’s T-34, with a staggering 50,000 total delivered. It remains by far the most widely used tank on the Allied side during the war. It was derived into countless derivatives and had a very long postwar career which lasted well into the Cold War. It has been largely compared to the T-34, and had the occasion to confront some during the Korean War. However, the Sherman was not as successful as it seemed. Derived in a haste from the previous and controversial M3 Lee/Grant, it was the first to bear a fully-traversing turret with a 75 mm (2.95 in) gun. It was designed from the very beginning for mass-production. Cheap and relatively simple to build, easy to maintain, reliable, roomy, sturdy, fast, well-armored and well-armed, it was the good-all-around armored vehicle the Allies had sought for until 1942, when it first arrived on the North African front. It literally soldiered in every corner of the globe, under many colors, from 1942 to the end of the war. These theaters included (in WWII alone) most of North Africa, Russia, most of Europe, the Eastern Indies, the Philippines, many Pacific islands and China. Genesis and context until 1940 By 1940, Great Britain had found itself desperately short on tanks. Some were provided through the freshly signed Lend-Lease agreement. At the same time, the US Army, fully learning from the shock caused by the Blitzkrieg in Western Europe, was in the process of emergency modernization of its equipment. The M4 was, in fact, the type of medium tank the US industry was not yet prepared to build in early 1940, which led to the intermediate M3 Lee. The latter was to be equipped with a fully revolving turret at first, but the urge in production imposed the choice of a transitional, yet unsatisfactory solution, a 75 mm (2.95 in) gun in a hull sponson. So, by late August 1940, as the M3 production started, work was started on the T6 Medium Tank, the prototype of what would become the Sherman. Design of the M4 Sherman Just like the M3 Lee, the Sherman’s suspension was of the VVSS (Vertical Volute Spring Suspension) type. The running gear comprised three sets of bogies, each with two paired large rubber-covered roadwheels, a rear adjustable track idler wheel and front drive sprocket connected to the gearbox, and three return rollers. The 78-links track was of the standard model, first used on the M1 Combat Car back in 1937, although reinforced and modified to minimize ground pressure. The Continental R975 engine was an air-cooled, gasoline radial engine delivering 400 hp (298 kW) at 2400 rpm. It was fed by two tanks totaling 660 l (175 gal) of gasoline, which gave around 195 km of practical range (about 120 miles). The power-to-weight ratio was 15.8 hp/ton (11.78 kW/ton). The gearbox was spicer, manual, synchromesh, with 5 forward gears (plus overdrive), one reverse. The controlled differential comprised a built-in brake steering system, which was controlled by levers. There was also a parking brake. The engine compartment contained two fixed large fire extinguishers, manned by a crewmember from the fighting compartment. An auxiliary generator provided extra power and helped warm the engine during cold winters. The lower hull was made of large welded parts, although the bogies were bolted to the hull for easier replacement or repair, and the rounded front was made of three bolted steel plates. Other external parts were either bolted or welded. The upper hull, at first cast, was later welded, with a well-sloped glacis, flat sides and slightly sloped engine compartment roof, making a characteristic tumblehome culminating just below the main turret. The back plating included a rear “U” shaped exhaust muffler, distinctive of the early production versions. The armor was 76 mm (3 in) thick on the nose and upper glacis, 51 mm (2 in) on the turret and upper sides and 30 mm (1.18 in) elsewhere. The upper hull, at first welded, was cast and rounded on the M4A1. The driver sat on the left of the front of the hull, while the driver assistant sat on the right, firing a ball mounted cal.30 (7.62 mm) machine-gun. The main turret was roomy, enough for the three other crew members. The loader sat on the left of the main gun and the gunner on the right, while the commander was at the rear, just behind the loader. The three seats had adjustable mountings and could move 30.4 cm (12 in) up and down and 12.6 cm (5 in) forward and backward. The crew had two portable fire extinguishers, a 2-way radio and the use of an interphone. Access and evacuation could be performed through four hatches. Two above the frontal glacis, one revolving on top of the turret and one on the floor, just behind the driver’s seat. Peripheral vision was excellent thanks to five pericopes (one for each crew member), with a 360 degree traverse and vertical tilting. The turret, cast in one piece, comprised a large “basket” which helped turn the entire fighting compartment with it, revolving on a rail thanks to a Bendix electric system. On early models, direct vision slits, protected by thick bulletproof glass and hinged covers, were provided to the driver and assistant, but later eliminated due to wartime experience of bullet splashes. The gunner periscope contained a telescopic sight directly synchronized with the main gun, while the gun itself received a gyrostabilization hydraulic system for more accurate firing while on the move. The gunner aimed the gun with a hand wheel and fired through electronic impulse from foot operated switches. The main gun was a 75 mm (2.95 in) M3 L/40 model, provided with 90 rounds, at first protected by a Combination Gun Mount M34 and coupled with a fixed secondary cal.30 (7.62 mm) Browning M1919A4 machine gun. Both machine-guns (coaxial and hull) received a total of 4750 rounds in cartridge bands, with some tracers. Later models received the new M34A full mantlet, which also protected the machine-gun port. Anti-air and anti-personal defense was provided by the turret roof cal.50 (12.7 mm) Browning heavy machine gun, provided with 400 rounds. The main gun had elevation and azimuth control and FM radio liaison with an artillery center for stationary gunnery support. The M4 was rugged and could endure a 2500 miles (4000 km) run before requiring any form of maintenance. This was particularly appreciated in many emergency situations, notably Patton’s famous “wild rides”, reminiscent of the Blitzkrieg throughout Europe. Production of the M4 The first factory which delivered the M4 was the Lima Locomotive Works. All of these first batches were sent to the British Army through Lend-Lease, and fought in Africa. They found themselves instrumental in many operations which turned the tide of the war in this sector in favor of the Allies. At first, production rate was of 1000 M4s a month, but rose quickly as more factories were involved (11 total), to a figure of 2000 each month by mid-1942. These included (for all variants) Pressed Steel Cars Co., Pacific Car & Foundry, Baldwin Locomotive Works, American Locomotive Co., Pullman Car, Chrysler’s Detroit Tank Arsenal, Pullman Standard Car Manufacturing Co., Federal Welder, Fisher and Grand Blanc in Michigan, the last being specially built for the purpose during the war. A total of 6748 M4s (from July 1942 to January 1944) were produced, as well as 1641 of the late variant equipped with a 105 mm (4.13 in) howitzer for infantry support, the M4(105). Early models had the three-piece bolted nose, while later models had a mixed cast/rolled hull. The gun mantlet also evolved from the M34 to the more protective M34A. The M4A1 (British Sherman Mk.II) This first major version was introduced early on in February 1942. It had a fully cast, rounded upper hull. Production of the regular M4A1 totaled 6281 machines until December 1943, but it was replaced by the M4A1(76)W, which received a more recent 76 mm (2.99 in) M1 main gun. 3396 of these improved models were built until March 1945. The regular “short” M3 L/40 gave a 731 m/s (2400 ft/s) muzzle velocity. But the most efficient was the 1943 model 76 mm (3 in) M1 & M1A1 L/55, which had a 792 to 1036 m/s (2600 to 3400 ft/s) muzzle velocity with the HVAP ammo, being capable of piercing an 100 mm (3.94 in) steel plate at 450 m (1476 ft). The maximum range was 14 km (8.69 mi). Following a painful war experience, the ammo racks and fuel tanks were protected by watery jackets. The commander cupola was also new, featuring 6 prismatic vision blocks 76 mm (3 inches) thick with laminated bullet-proof glass. The engine was the modernized Continental R975-C1. The M4A2 (British Sherman Mk.III) M4A2 and M4A2(75)W This evolution came in April 1942, with a new General Motors 6046 engine (two GM 6-71 General Motors Diesel engines), welded hull with extra applique armor on the hull sides and gunner position (left side of the turret). It was produced to a total of 8053 until May 1944. Early versions of the M4A2(75), had small hatches and protruding drivers’ and co-drivers’ hoods, a 57-degree glacis and dry ammo stowage bins. The rear hull plate was sloped. A transitional version built by Fisher, the M4A2(75)D, had a one-piece 47-degree glacis, with large hatches, but it still used dry ammo bins and applique armor. This model was also produced with a diesel GM 6046, 410 hp, used mostly by the British and the USMC. The range was 241 km (150 mi) with 641 liters (170 gal) of fuel (consumption was 279 liters/100 km or 118.6 gal/mi), total weight 31.8 tons, with a 1.01 kg/cm³ ground pressure. The hull frontal glacis was 108 mm (4.25 in) thick. M4A2(76)W The M4A2(76)W was the upgunned late variant, of which over 3230 will be delivered until May 1945. It was fitted with the modified T23 turret, which housed the M1 L/55 gun, which gave an overall length of 7.57 m (25 feet). With the GM 6046 diesel and 673 liters (178 gal) of fuel, the range was 161 km (100 mi). The weight rose to 33.3 tons. The 108 mm (4.25 in) thick glacis was at 47 degrees, with large hatches. By early 1945, the HVSS suspension was fitted. M4A2E4 Work on this variant of the M4 started in March 1943. The vehicle tested the new independent torsion bar suspension system, which replaced the Sherman’s traditional VVSS suspension. 2 prototypes were produced in the summer of 1943 and tested at the Aberdeen Proving Grounds. The tank borrowed much from the T20E3, another prototype medium tank that would use the same suspension and a 24 inch (0.61 m) wide track. The performance of the suspension on this particular vehicle proved unsatisfactory, and field maintenance too complex. As such, the project was canceled. One of the prototype vehicles at the Aberdeen Proving Grounds – Photo: thearmoredpatrol.com The M4A3 (British Sherman Mk.IV) M4A3 The M4A3 was first delivered by the Ford Motor Company in June 1942, alone delivering 1690 machines by September 1943. It was produced to a total of 5015 by all manufacturers combined. Early versions still had the dry ammunition stowage, direct vision slots for the driver and the 60-degree hull glacis (89 mm/3.5 in). The 3071 next had wet ammo stowage and a newer commander cupola. Most of all, it featured the new liquid-cooled Ford V8 500 hp engine, which was capable of giving a top speed of 42 km/h on road (26 mph), and a 209 km (130 mi) range. The suspension was the unchanged VVSS, but the transmission was now protected by a one-piece cast steel armored cover. Driver vision slots were augmented by bullet-proof glass and protective covers. Mid-production they also saw the adoption of duckbills, extended end connectors for the tracks, which improved the grip on soft terrains. Early series also saw extra 25 mm (1 in) thick applique armor welded over the ammo storage bins and the turret gunner position, later removed. By 1943-44, the recognition white stars were usually painted black or olive drab in order to mask them to enemy gunners, which used them as an aiming point. M4A3(75)W The M4A3(75)W was equipped with the M3 L/40 gun and had wet ammo stowage. Over 3000 were delivered until March 1945. The modification range was similar to the M4A2(75)W. M4A3(76)W The 76 mm (3 in) version, the M4A3(76)W was first introduced in March 1944 and a total of 4500 were delivered until April 1945. Modifications range was similar to the M4A2(76)W. M4A3E2 “Jumbo” The famous M4A3E2 “Jumbo” was a substantially uparmored M4A3 version that gained wide fame in Europe. M4A3(76)W HVSS or M4A3E8 “Easy Eight” A famous derivative, commonly known as the M4A3E8 or “Easy Eight”, first produced by Detroit Arsenal factory, had a 47 degree sloped glacis with large hatches, wet ammo bins, full up-armored sides, new HVSS suspensions, a revised turret with the long 76.2 mm (3 in) gun fitted with a muzzle brake. They were designed on British specs (local denomination “Sherman AY”), and were produced from March 1944 to April 1945, with 4542 units total. Many had upper side skirt protection. They were fast, with the Ford V8 500 hp, giving a maximum 47 km/h (29.2 mph) speed. The “Easy Eight” had a range of 161 km (100 mi), with a 475 l/100 km (201.94 gal/mi) consumption. These saw action in the latest phases of the conflict in Europe and in the Pacific. The “Easy Eight” was retained in service long after the war and saw service in Korea and Vietnam, as well as in many foreign armies. M4A3E9 In an attempt to address the Sherman’s ever lasting ground pressure issues, the addition of extended end connectors, or ‘duckbills’ on the outside of the tracks were added. The ‘E9’ version took this one step further by adding ‘duckbills’ on the inside edge of the track as well. To achieve this, the bogey trucks were space-out at approximately 4.5 inches from the lower hull. The modification did work, but by this time the wider HVSS track system had become available, and this essentially overshadowed the variant. As such only one vehicle is believed to have existed. The M4A4 (British Sherman Mk.V) This series was first introduced in July 1942 and produced until November 1943, to a total of 7499 machines. It had the most resistant welded hull of all the series, despite a downgraded armor (76 mm/3 in glacis), and received a new composite Chrysler multibank engine (made of five car engines) which needed more space (the hull was lengthened by 15 cm/5.9 in) and scrupulous, careful maintenance. This model was not particularly appreciated with US crews and most went to the British and other Allied forces. The Russians were the most prolific “customers” of this version, but they didn’t like it either, because of the sensitive engine and relatively light armor. The British, Canadian, Australians, Free Polish and Free French all fought in Italy with this model. They also saw service at El Alamein, during the Tunisian campaign, Sicily and Western Europe. But by mid-44, up-armored and up-gunned models gradually replaced them. Losses had been heavy, not only because of enemy fire. The engine rarely caught fire when hit, but caused trouble because of complicated maintenance issues and long or delayed repairs. The M4A6 This model had a cast front with welded and lengthened sides and was propelled by a diesel Caterpillar D200A radial. A total of only 75 were delivered between October 1943 and February 1944 by Detroit Arsenal. The howitzer version: M4(105) M4(105) First introduced in February 1944, production of the 105 mm (4.13 in) version stopped in March 1945, after a total of 1641 machines. It was devised during the Italy campaign, to give added infantry support firepower with the advantage of a fully traversing turret. In fact, the M7 Priest was one of the most widely used SPGs during this particular campaign. The standard M1919A4 howitzer was modified and compacted for the task. All existing gun aiming and facilities for indirect fire were improved. The armor was slightly thinner than usual, ranging from 63 mm (2.48 in) (glacis sloped at 47 degrees), 38 mm (1.5 in) for the sides and rear and 19 mm (0.75 in) for the top. The mantlet was 91 mm (3.58 in) thick, turret front was 76 mm (3 in), slopes were 51 mm (2 in) and top 25 mm (0.98 in). The engine was the early radial Continental R975-C4, 9-cylinder 4-cycle, air cooled (15,945 cc and 460 hp at 2,400 rpm), giving a range of 161 km (100 mi) and a cruise speed of 38.6 km/h (24 mph) on road. M4A3(105) Produced from May 1944 to March 1945 with a total of 3039 machines. It had every improvement of the regular A3 series and thus was more successful. It appeared quickly that the punch of a solid HE round was also more than adequate in many tank to tank engagements against German armor. Used in conjunction with “Zippo” (flamethrower) versions, the USMC deployed these support pairs with high profit against Japanese fortifications. A famous offspring: The Firefly The famous Sherman Firefly was, in fact, a British project, equipped with the QF 17-pdr (76.2 mm/3 in) gun. More than 2000 were built and served in the European Theater of Operations. Derivatives M10 Wolverine Tank Destroyer The M10 GMC was armed with a 3 in gun (76.2 mm), being the first of the famous trio of US tank destroyers. Over 6700 were built. M36 Jackson Tank Destroyer The M36 GMC was armed with a far more powerful 90 mm (3.54 in) gun. 1400 were built and they had a long postwar career. M7 Priest HMC The M7 Priest was a self-propelled howitzer using the standard M1/M2 105 mm (4.13 in) howitzer.4443 were built until the end of the war. Grizzly The Grizzly was a Canadian version built using US spare parts at the Montreal Locomotives Factory on the M4A1 chassis. 188 were built. Flame-thrower versions M4A3R3 Zippo: Probably the most famous of these versions, developed by the USMC to deal with Japanese bunkers, reinforced pillboxes and other fortifications. The name came from the famous lighter. It was developed in 1944 after the terrible casualties at Saipan, and first served en masse at Iwo Jima and later at Okinawa. M4 Crocodile: British modified M4s along the same lines as the Churchill Crocodile, for the US 2nd Armored Division. Sherman Badger: An offspring of the Ram Badger, this was a Canadian version of the M4A2 HVSS equipped with a Wasp IIC flamethrower. Sherman Adder: Local conversions kits developed in India for the Sherman III and V which fought in the Eastern Indies campaign. Heavy GMC versions 155 mm Gun Motor Carriage M40: This self-propelled gun used the “Long Tom” (155 mm/6.1 in) artillery piece and was assisted by the T30 cargo ammunition carrier. 203 mm Howitzer Motor Carriage M43: This 8-in howitzer version was closely based on the M40. 250 mm Gun Motor Carriage MMC T94: A 10-in GMC also closely based on the M40, probably the heaviest piece of ordnance ever put on a Sherman. Rocket-launcher versions T34 Calliope: Famous rocket version, developed in 1944 and massively used against German positions in 1945. Fired up to 60 113 mm (4.45 in) (E1) or 183 mm (7.2 in) (E2) rockets. T40/M17 Whizbang: A 1944 special demolition version equipped with a set of short-range 7.2″ HE rockets (183 mm). Sherman Tulip: A handful of Shermans were equipped with two 3-inch (“60 lb”) RP-3 (76.2 mm) rockets on rails on the turret. Genie versions M4 Dozer: M4 fitted, in 1943, with a hydraulic dozer blade from a Caterpillar D8. Widely used in many theaters of war to create airfields and base camps in wooden or jungle areas. First developed as a kit, but later on more turretless Shermans appeared with this equipment fixed permanently. It was largely used in the Normandy Bocage, later replaced by Shermans equipped with the Culin Cutter kit. M4 Doozit: M4 dozer equipped with demolition charges on a wooden platform. Never used in combat, contrary to the T40 WhizBang. M4 Bridgelayer: Many US and Commonwealth versions. First introduced in Italy as a turretless Sherman equipped with a frame-supported assault bridge with a rear counterweight. There were also the British Fascine carrier Crib, Twaby Ark, Octopus used by the 79th Armoured Division, the Plymouth (Bailey Bridge) and the US Sherman AVRE fitted with a Small Box Girder bridge. M4 Mine-clearer: No less than 26 variants, some never operational, came to life between 1943-45. First operational ones appeared in Italy. The US-versions (T1-T6 Roller) used two massive front rollers to explode the mines by ground pressure, while the British versions Sherman Crab (T2-T3 and sub-variants) used a frontal flail roller, similar to the Scorpion. The Canadian CIRD (Canadian Indestructible Roller Device) was a land-mine exploder. There were also a serrated edged disc version, mine exploder versions equipped with a frame with small rollers or a steel plunger, several mortar versions, a remote-control demolition version and a plow version with depth control apparatus. Recovery versions Sherman ARV: (Armored Recovery Vehicle) Several British versions based on the Sherman III (M4A2) and Sherman V (ARV I and ARV II). Sherman BARV: Same, but specialized for beach vehicle recovery. Amphibious versions Sherman DD: (for “Duplex Drive”, but the crews nicknamed it “Donald Duck”) This special-purpose vehicle was specifically developed for D-Day. It featured a flexible waterproof canvas skirt fixed on the mudguard, reinforced with a folding wooden and metal frame. The principle was to create some buoyancy through a “flotation screen”, first developed by the British Hungarian-born engineer Nicholas Straussler in 1940. Several trials were performed with various tank models including the Valentine but later applied to the Sherman in the perspective of future amphibious landings. Other modifications included a bladed propeller fitted at the back, which could be activated by the main engine (hence the name of “duplex drive”). The idea was sound and well-tested during D-Day on June 6, 1944, several hundred British and US DDs, launched from cargo ships 2 miles (3.22 km) from the shore assaulted their respective beach sectors. However, due to the bad weather, many were lost en route to the shore. They had more successes during operation Dragoon (landing in southern France) and when crossing the Rhine by early 1945. Shermans with T6 devices: This was a kit adapted to a limited number of USMC Shermans during the assault on Okinawa. It consisted of four (for each side) boxy pressed-steel floats, called pontoons, which procured buoyancy, while the tracks provided some propulsion. It was only used close to the shore. The equipment was then removed by the crews for the upcoming operations. Shermans with Deep Wading Gear: This apparatus consisted of two large ducts mounted on top of the engine ventilation hatch and exhaust. Thanks to this system, which caught air one meter above the tank, and well-sealed hatches, the Sherman could be deposited by large ships on the sea floor, at more than three meters depth. This kit could also be used to ford large rivers. The USMC used some for operations in the Pacific and in Europe, some took part in the assault on Dieppe (1942), at Salerno and during the Normandy landings in 1944. The Sherman in operations As General Patton himself summarized: “In mechanical endurance and ease of maintenance our tanks are infinitely superior to any other”. This was especially true compared to the Tigers and Panthers which had a high consumption, requiring careful maintenance and limited cross-bridges capabilities. The Sherman’s mobility was improved by a favorable power-to-weight ratio. German reports stated that the Sherman could climb slopes at angles thought impossible for any Panzer. Their narrow build also helped them cross narrow streets, bridges and forested areas as well, but most of all, helped transportation by rail, therefore improving their mobility. Their high, bulky nose helped them crush thick vegetation easily, and they were found sturdy and powerful enough to go through any kind of house or wall, which helped them in many urban fights, especially in Italy. However, despite their moderate ground pressure, the narrow tracks were judged inadequate on soft terrain, especially mud and snow. A partial response was found in the adoption of extra track parts known as “Grousers” or “Duckbills”. This feature was factory-born to help the M4A3E2 Jumbo reduce ground pressure. It became mandatory in the “Easy Eight” as well, and these improved tracks were also fitted on some late types by 1945. The standard VVSS suspension was also the object of some criticism, openly compared to the far more refined torsion arm system used by the Panther, which allowed a very smooth ride and more accurate fire on the move. The solution came in late 1944 with the adoption of the improved HVSS (Horizontal Volute Spring System). The basic system was not changed, but it secured a smoother ride and a better weight distribution, which helped to stabilize the tank. Large-scale production and a limited weight (which never really exceeded 36 tons except for a few machines, the average weight being 31-33 tons) helped the large-scale transatlantic shipping of these, despite U-Boot losses. This allowed overall superiority in numbers on the battlefield. Training required few hours and M3 Lee veteran drivers and even gunners had no problems operating the Sherman, thanks to a high level of standardization. For infantry support, the Sherman looked ideally suited. Dominating the terrain, the commander had an excellent view and the infantry, advancing behind, was well-protected. Two cal.30 (7.62 mm) machine-guns fired in a “blind mode”, just producing a volume of fire, especially into the Normandy hedgerow and thick vegetation areas in general. But the heavy cal.50 Browning 12.7 mm was even more powerful, efficient against all kind of fixed targets: brick walls, wooden structures, metal pillboxes, even concrete, and could destroy most of the German prime movers and vehicles, even the armored “Hanomag”. It could be also lethal, with some luck, against low-flying aircraft. Its downside was the completely exposed position of the machine gunner, as he had to sit on the rear deck of the tank to use it. However, the M4 losses during the war reflect the “dark side” of this story. On every front, single tank-to-tank engagements against German tanks turned to be generally unfair, especially with the early versions. The 76 mm (3 in) frontal glacis just couldn’t stop the most recent German AT guns, not to mention the sides, just 50 mm (1.97 in) thick. The hull, due to the high transmission (required by the radial engine) towered at nearly 3 meters (9.84 ft) above the ground, twice the height of the most common German AFV, the StuG III. Post-war, the Sherman tank gained an unfounded reputation for catching fire easily which still endures. For a tank which in later versions had wet ammo storage and extra protection for ammunition this reputation was meaningless, but nevertheless, it endures long after the Normandy campaign. In Normandy, many Shermans were also killed because of well-hidden and camouflaged AT guns and tanks, helped by the bocage configuration. A partial solution was given by the use of a Culin hedgerow cutter fitted to the lead tank of a company, which was usually also the first one to be killed in action. The Sherman design evolution dictated by wartime experience called for a thickening of the glacis and side armor, from 76 to 89 mm (3 to 3.5 in), then 108 (4.25 in) and finally 178 mm (7 in) on the “Jumbo”. The Jumbos were usually used as leading tanks. Shell-proof, they spotted the enemy and helped out-flanking maneuvers. However, the “Easy Eight” and “Firefly” rarely led companies, but instead, they were called when the enemy was spotted, using their high-velocity gun to terminate the threat. The British and Canadian versions also camouflaged their long 76.2 mm (3 in/17-pdr) barrel to appear just the length of a standard 75 mm gun and trick enemy spotters which had to choose their targets. Additional armor plate was often welded in front of the driver and co/driver’s position at the front of the tank and at the side to give them greater protection. The armor plate at the front was 1 1/2 inches (38.1mm) thick and only welded at the top and bottom at an angle leaving a gap in between. This was a form of early spaced armor. Armor issues led many crews to come up with some sort of impromptu protection made in the field of whatever available, namely sandbags, spare track links, concrete, wire mesh and wood, notably against shaped charge rounds (Panzerfaust and Panzerschreck). General Patton ordered a study of the practice of adding loads of sandbags, ordering some systematic tests, which proved that only in a few particular angles the shaped charge of a Panzerfaust failed to penetrate the armor. Therefore, as this practice both stressed the chassis and overheated the engine, it was soon forbidden. Cold war career and memorabilia Despite being designed in 1941, the Sherman was still in service in many countries as far as the fall of the iron curtain in 1990, leaving the strange impression of a “living fossil”. This could be found in the many improvements performed on its chassis, a testimony to its sturdiness and adaptability, and the huge supplies of spare parts available due to an early standardization and unrivaled, at least in the West, mass production. The “Easy Eight” was the blueprint for some improvements and late wartime versions that fought under the US flag during the Korean war and later the Vietnam war, under South Vietnamese flag. The Israeli completely modernized the type, later known as the M51 “Super Sherman”, which performed well during the 1967 and 1973 wars, armed with a new 105 mm (4.13 in) high velocity gun. M4 Sherman specifications Dimensions 5.84 x 2.62 x 2.74 m 19’2” x 8’7” x 9′ Total weight, battle ready 30.3 tons (66,800 lbs) Crew 5 (commander, driver, co-driver, gunner, loader) Propulsion Continental R975 9-cyl. air-cooled gasoline, 400 hp (298 kW) Maximum speed 48 km/h (30 mph) on road Suspensions Vertical Volute Spring (VVSS) Range 193 km (120 mi) Armament M2 L/32 or M3 L/40 75 mm (2.95 in) with 90 rounds 2xBrowning M2HB cal.30 M1919 (7.62 mm) machine-guns Armor Maximum 76 mm (3 in) Gallery Links & Resources about the M4 Sherman The M4 Sherman (Main Wikipedia article) The M4 on WWIIVehicles The M4 Sherman on globalsecurity.org Complementary data about the M4 on afvdb.50megs.com Fine large scale M4 photos on the Shadock A highly comprehensive list of Sherman books & reviews -modeler friendly Sherman Minutia, tech database (the shadocks) Variants US variants M4A3(105), Company H, 69th Tank Battalion, 6th Armored Division, Ardennes, December 1944. M4A3(105) Sherman, 713th Tank Battalion, Okinawa, 1945. M4A3R2 “Zippo”, late version HVSS, flamethrower variant developed by the USMC, here deployed at Okinawa, in support to the 1st Marine Division, May 1945. M4A3 Calliope from the 40th Tank Battalion, 14th Armored Division, Obermodern, Germany, March 1945 M4 Sherman Crab, Normandy, June 1944. Canadian derivatives Grizzly I, a Canadian-built Sherman M4A1. Only 188 were built by MLW. M4, early production version (1942), 13th Armored Regiment of the 1st Armored Division, Tunisia, March 1943. One of the rare Shermans actually painted sand beige in US Service. M4 Sherman, early production vehicle, 32nd Tank Battalion of the 3rd Armored Division, Normandy, 1944. Notice the “low visibility” stars. Early production M4 Sherman, 40th Tank Battalion, 8th Armored Division, Belgium, February 1945, at the end of the battle of the Bulge. M4 Sherman, 2nd Armored Division, 1st Free French Army, Operation Anvil Dragoon, Provence, August 1944. Early type M4, unknown unit, Normandy, summer 1944. M4 Sherman, mid-production version (1943), of the 756th Tank Batallion, 5th Army, Monte Cassino sector, February 1944. M4 Sherman “Hurricane”, H Company, 66th Armored Regiment, 2nd U.S. Armored Division, Normandy, June 1944. C company, 756th Tank Battalion, 5th Army, Italy, February 1944. 37th Tank Battalion, 4th U.S. Armored Division, Brittany, France, July 1944. Sherman DWG (Deep Wading Gear), C company, 70th Tank Battalion, Utah Beach, Normandy on D-Day. Sherman Mk.I of the 27th Staffordshire Yeomanry Armoured Brigade, C squadron, Second Regiment, Normandy, summer 44. M4 with side skirts, unknown unit, Operation Cobra, Normandy, July 1944. M4 with a composite hull, 175th Tank Battalion, 123rd Regiment, 33rd Infantry Division, Leyte, Philippines invasion, March 1945. M4, composite hull, “Bushmaster” of the 763rd Tank Battalion, 96th Infantry Division, Leyte island, Philippines, fall 1945. Sherman Mk.I Hybrid (composite hull) of the 144th RAC, Italy, March 1944. Sherman DD (Duplex Drive), 743rd Tank Battalion, Omaha Beach, Normandy, D-Day. Sherman M4A1, early production variant, Operation Husky, Sicily, July 1943. Sherman Mk.II, 3rd The King’s Own Hussars, 5th Armoured Brigade, VIIIth Army, Egypt, September 1942. Sherman Mk.II early type, HQ, 3rd Armored Brigade, El Alamein, October 1942. Sherman Mk.II, 9th Queen’s Royal Lancers, 2nd Armoured Brigade, 1st Division, Egypt, November 1942. Sherman Mk.II early type from the 3rd Armored Brigade, El Alamein, October 1942. Sherman Mk.II (Direct Vision Type), C squadron, 3rd Hussars, 9th Armoured Brigade, 2nd New Zealand Division, El Alamein, November 1942. Sherman Mk.III late type, C Squadron, Royal Wiltshire Yeomanry, El Alamein, November 1942. M4A1 mid-production vehicle, U.S. 1st Armored Division, “Henson Force”, Battle of El Guettar, Tunisia, March 1943. M4A1 mid-production, “Major Jim”, 2nd Battalion, 13th Armored Regiment, 1st Armored Division, Kasserine pass, February 1943. M4A1 mid-production, 603rd Armored Regiment of the 41st Infantry Division, Carolines Islands, Pacific, late 1944. M4A1 late production, 7th Infantry Division, Ebeye Island, Pacific, part of the Kwajalein Atoll, Marshall Islands, January-February 1944. Sherman M4A1(76)W, 11th Tank Battalion of the 10th Armored Division, Ardennes, January 1945. Sherman M4A1(76)W HVSS (Horizontal Volute Spring Suspension), Western Germany, March 1945. Sherman M4A2 (early type with a modified commander cupola and duckbills), Iwo Jima, February 1945. M4A2 (mid production) “Adder”, A company, 3rd USMC Tank Battalion, Iwo Jima, March 1945. Sherman M4A2 “King Kong” commanded by Lieutenant Max English, 4th Marine Tank Battalion, Saipan, 1944. M4A2 mid-production, “Jungle Jim”, 4th Marine Tank Battalion, Saipan, 1944. Sherman Mk.III, 3rd County of London Yeomanry (3rd CLY), Italy, Winter line sector, fall 1943. Sherman III “Ellza Poppin II”, 48th Royal Tank Regiment, Anzio, 1944. Russian M4A2 (late production), with the 47-degree slope and an added 108 mm (4.25 in) of frontal armor. Northern Front, fall 1943. Around 2000 M4s were delivered at Arkhangelsk. Most were M4A2s, which were immediately put to use on the Northern Front. Those delivered through the “Persian Corridor” saw action in the Taman peninsula and in Northern Caucasus from early 1943. Russian M4A2(75)W of the 46th Armored Brigade, 1st Armored Division, Northern Front, winter 1943-44. Panzerkampfwagen M4-748(a), captured Sherman in German service, from an unidentified unit in Italy, 1944. Due to their appearance and the fact that few disabled Shermans were left in a repairable condition, perhaps less than twenty Shermans of all versions were ever used in German service, although clear evidence shows this occurred in Tunisia, Italy and during the Battle of the Bulge. M4A2(76)W, early type, in Russian service with duckbills, Northern Front, Eastern Prussia, late 1944. Slogan: “To Berlin!”. M4A2(76)W, late type with duckbills in Russian service, Battle of Berlin, May 1945. Sherman M4A2(76)W HVSS of Patton\’s U.S. 2nd Armored Division, Western Germany, March 1945. M4A3 early type, 3rd Armored Division, Normandy, June 1944. Sherman M4A3 early type, 1st Armored Division, liberation of Rome, June 1944. Sherman M4A3 mid-production “Cheyenne”, 2nd Armored Divison, Normandy, June 1944. M4A3 mid-production vehicle with late train type, 11th Armored Division, in support of the 30th U.S. Infantry Division, Ardennes, Belgium, January 1945. Sherman M4A3(75)W (equipped with duckbills and metal track links) of the 4th Armored Division, 3rd US Army, battle of Nancy, September 1944. An up-armored M4A3 in the Ardennes, January 1945. Because of the lack of protection offered by the early versions, experienced crews took the matter into their own hands and usually applied improvised protective measures in the field. Wooden planks, beams, rails, steel plates, spare track links and improvised cofferdams made of wood and sandbags, like seen here, were some of the solutions found. The engine could not keep up with the extra load, and, after an inquiry following an unusual rate of breakdowns and high consumption figures, Patton forbade tank crews from such practices. M4A3 late production vehicle with an improvised camouflage made of regular washable white paint and mud spots, South-Western Germany, March 1945. M4A3(75)W of the 6th Armored Division, Ardennes, Belgium, January 1945. M4A3(75)W “Beelzebub” of B company, 4th USMC Battalion at Iwo Jima, January 1945. Notice the rare camouflage, wooden panels, Deep Wading Gear and protective grids above the hatches. Notice the protection grids above the driver hatch, turret hatches and commander cupola hatch. They were intended against Japanese suicide squads throwing grenades and other impromptu exploding devices inside. Other crews devised a crown of spiked metal rods, welded around the turret hatches. M4A3(76)W from the 12th African Light Infantry Regiment (1st French Army), Vosges area, fall 1944. Sherman V (M4A4) of the 2nd Armored Brigade, Irish Guards, Operation Goodwood, June 1944. Sherman V of another unidentified Irish unit, Operation Goodwood, Normandy, June 1944. M4A4 (Sherman V) of the RHQ 13/18th Royal Hussars, Normandy, June 1944. Chinese M4A4 from the 1st Provisional Tank Group, Burma, 1945. M4A6 in trials in early 1944. With only 75 produced, the M4A6 never saw operations. M4A3(76)W HVSS of the 41st Tank Battalion, 11th Armored Division, 3rd US Army, Rhine western banks, February 1945 M4A3E8 “Easy Eight”, the last evolution of the Sherman, Southern Germany, May 1945. Colonel Creighton Abrams’ “Thunderbolt VII” and his famous personal insignia, Horazdovice, May 1945. M4A3E8 in Korea, 1951. South Korean Easy Eight in 1952 with the famous “Tiger Pattern”.
  4. 3 points
    Morris Sleaze Dees was the first head honcho of that communist front. Check this out: http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/files/morris_dees_divorce_papers.pdf Pages 13 and 14 are pretty revealing https://dixieoutfitters.com/2015/04/04/dees-exposed/ http://www.deeswatch.com/
  5. 3 points
    They are a government-sponsored "think tank" which compiles records on hate groups... The fairy that used to run the place, Mark Potok, is as pink as they come. If you're not communist, your anti-government.
  6. 3 points
  7. 3 points
    I am most definitely not prejudice to any race or culture. However, we have a dilemma in America: a lot of foreign born citizens are undermining American values. Many are still, even as United States' citizens, more loyal to their home country and agenda than to America's. During the past year of investigating part time, I have found that some corrupt elements of the CIA are utilizing many of Mexican and Oriental descent, undermining what America really stands for. Some of Obama's anti-discrimination policies are being misused, and, merged with Socialist edicts, are destroying our Constitutional values, under a guise of creating liberty and freedom for all, because an element of anti-Americanism exists within the ranks of our foreign born citizens. Education and awareness of foreign countries' governments can ease the severity of the problem greatly.
  8. 3 points
    Both the 14th and 16th Amendments were unconstitutionally ratified. We made so much noise over the 16th Amendment that some people got together in my area and my U.S. Congressman introduced legislation that would have repealed the 16th Amendment, getting rid of the IRS and the income tax. My small contribution was, most likely, bringing the issue to the attention of those who pressured Rep. John Linder to introduce that legislation. I have to disagree with Ripcannon just a bit on this one. We invested heavily in educating people, but the very ones that used to help when we were winning battles against the 14th and 16th Amendments were the first ones to jump on the bandwagon of the National Socialists that reversed all our wins (think so - called "Patriot Act," REAL ID Act- E-Verify.) IF we are going to win, it will take think tanks (start with friends around the kitchen table) and REALLY hash this stuff out. Hold mock debates and have some of your people play the devil's advocate (I sometimes do that here because NO position - not even mine) is flawless. The United States Supreme Court has reversed itself on many important issues, my pet peeve was in the Heller decision where they reversed all standing precedents (including their previous ones) to claim that the Courts grant us our Rights. I've been writing a lot on this board, but it's still opinion except for successes that I can point to. That is what counts. The message I think is most important is that when you view any issue, you have to think about HOW your enemies can use the precedents against you. Right now, the movement (for lack of a more descriptive adjective) is like the guy who brushes his teeth with Drano. Those who criticize him only incur his wrath. He only sees that his teeth are getting white - with no regard to the fact he is poisoning himself. Because the United States Supreme Court has decided points of law, reversed itself, and now we are thinking a new batch of Justices will over-turn what the most recent reversals will correct everything. So, now the left wants more Justices so that they can change the balance of power and start that process all over again. In reality, it was supposed to be that the Court interpreted the law and if we didn't like it, we went back to the legislators. Instead, legislators are allowing the United States Supreme Court to legislate from the bench. If had an answer to the dilemma, I might be the richest man in America. We have to work within the system, but at some point - there are things you cannot even safely think even when you know the answer.
  9. 3 points
    Holy bejeebers. You said something I can agree with. Still, our number ONE problem is that our own system creates worthless welfarites. We start with drugging them in grammar school, encouraging it through high school and when they turn to illegal activity, we put them in jail or prison over their addiction and then lock them out of society by giving the public access to parts of their background that are irrelevant to most jobs. Minimum wage isn't enough to pay the rent anywhere in America. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/minimum-wage-doesnt-cover-the-rent-anywhere-in-the-u-s/ How bad is the situation? I have eleven white males that are supposed to show up this week and we put up a fence. I'm willing to bet anyone on this board that no more than three will show up. ALL of them are currently unemployed and their only source of money is handouts by the government. I only need three and if that many don't show up, I will swing by a strip mall on Friday and come back with a load of Mexican workers that will put the fence up in a couple of hours. I am willing to bet $500 to your $100 that no more than three white guys will show up to work. If you bet against me, if four people show up, you have $600 this week-end for a $100 wager. If I'm wrong, you lose a hundred bucks. Do I have any takers? I do this stuff often because if I hire the foreigners outright, people wail and complain. But, when we're paying people not to work and their mommies think that their children should not have to work, then Americans don't want the job. They've figured out how to live off the government, mommy and those dumb enough to give them various handouts.
  10. 3 points
    Well, there certainly is an invasion from outside, but I also think we've been rotting from the inside for over 30 years now... Globalist ideology, if not outright communism, has debased our ideas of personal excellence and responsibility. We now look for the government to solve all of our (even personal) problems, as opposed to finding our own solutions. We've spawned a generation of snowflakes, and as the years progress there will be more and more of them; to the point where "traditional American values" will be considered unamerican. Hell, you can see it now, and it will only get worse. To start, here are a couple of ideas you can think about. 1. Make English the official language of the United States. 2. Make every school make every student say the Pledge of Allegiance, every day. 3. Make Constitutional literacy a requirement for high school graduation.
  11. 3 points
    Hi people, I am new to the forum; and decided to look into militia venues and found this site. The original poster was asking about the legality of bringing up or discussing this topic of revolution, and for the most part I can not think of how just talking about what a revolution in todays world would look like and what it would take, is illegal in any context. I think the probable scenerio is that actually saying, something like, hi I am so an so of this militia and i am recruiting for the purpose of taking up arms against a political figure and having him or her physically removed from office by violence, and taken to a court of law or executed,,,, i think a discussion like that is when things become a legal problem and could have legal reprocussions. That being said, if one is openly talking about such things on the internet, ya kind of have to expect that the government has already picked up wind of it. There are no secrets on the internet. With the way government spy agencies have the means to have trigger words or sentences raise some kind of flag. forget it. Now are there ways around such dialogue online sure. but the best bet is to always talk in person with someone you have personally known for at least seven years. and to figure out some kind of way of vetting other people. One thing I have noticed on a few responses is that an actual armed conflict/civil war/ revolution is the last option. And that makes and is agreeable, but where the line is in the sand seems really murky. Because we have a system in place where voting is where the difference is made, but as recently seen , a 28 yr old woman just beat a democrat and she ran as a " Democrat Socialist " ... So the thing is, what happens if the nation votes for a " Democrat Socialist President " and does so legally and that person wins.... Because if the line in the sand is confiscating weapons , that is never going to happen because there are laws out the nose where you basically have to sign over an organ and multiple forms of ID so that the government knows who has a firearm. More over there are tons of laws across states that convolte the legality of taking a fire arm across state lines with out registering into that state if you are moving to that state and it just gets more convoluted from there on out that the idea of the second amendment being the line is just not needed. It is far more of a pain in the rear to purchase a fire arm today that confiscation isn't needed. What I do not think the Constitution or the Bill of Rights really states is what is the final straw ? where is the line in the sand, and exactly what is that line in the sand, where American Citizens have the legal right and moral authoraity to take up arms against the government or a political party , to restore the constitution and bill of rights ? I am sure someone will say it is written right here an quote something, but i mean something written so specifically in black and white, that not even the supreme court can debate the legality of it. That it is just bare bones common sense and anyone who says other wise as to what it means is just flat out lying. I personally think, there is no real line in the sand any more, if there was, it was with Obama; I was truly fearful that he was going to try and find a way to end term limits to the presidency and keep his nightmare going. He gave a good try at ending the second ammendment but that was really a waste of time as he was already succeeding at destroying the country on other fronts that he didnt even need to attempt it. Some here have said that If Trump wins in 2020 the left could lose it altogether an go for violence, and maybe, but i cant say that i am that scared of the left to that degree, not when they dont want to use fire arms. I mean a gun versus a screaming loon hurling a bag of crap ? or mace or whatever... meh. I honestly think there is no line which is a breaking point, that conservatives and militias will go okay, enough is enough. Marijuana is being legalized like it or not, freedom of speech gets twisted to mean that you can say what ever you want when you want, and others have to listen or else, you have the right to bare arms, but you have to fill out a novel of paper work and pay fees, no term limits are leading to more and more activist judges having a field day. I really think we could have an open boarder country, and democrats could have control over the nation for the next 20 years, and nothing would happen. No militia across the country I am willing to bet, actually has any kind of document, plan, or vow, what ever you want to call it, that says, if x,y,and z happens, then that is it, it is time to act with violence to make things right.I also think, that if any kind of civil war or revolution to make things right were to take place, it wouldnt be successful with out a real plan of action, and the backing of other friendly nations to at the very least understand where we as a free nation stand, what is actually going on, and to not fight against us but to either help us restore what we lost, prosocute those who have destroyed our nation and or just stay out of our way while we do it ourselves. With no real leadership to a cause, any plan of action would be pointless... and again if anyone has answers, i would love to hear it, specifically where is the line, why is it the line, and any other observations.
  12. 3 points
    A well regulated NRA being necessary to the security of a free State.... That didn't work. Let me try again. A well regulated survivalist group being necessary to the security of free State... Sorry that didn't work either. During the 1980s scores of people were concerned about the threat of nuclear war while others were afraid of more racial / culturally related issues. In 1979 Creason Kearney had released his book Nuclear War Survival Skills and around that time Firepower magazine was available in most places magazines were sold. Firepower magazine would have articles on how to convert two semi-automatics to fully automatic in each issue. It was legal back in those days. Survivalist groups popped up all over America. By the 1990s Bruce Clayton had written a best selling book Life After Doomsday. Here in Georgia, the racial type groups were enjoying the political atmosphere when we thought there was a credible danger to the United States. In one rally they attracted, according to the Georgia Bureau of Investigation, a crowd of at least 8,000 but no more than 10,000 attendees (and I'm talking about people who went there to listen to speakers, not counter-protest.) Unfortunately I cannot recall the year off the top of my head. The late 1980s had racial groups really whizzing people off. They would go in thinking that the white racial groups were going to do something positive about the direction of America only to find they were a part of the problem. In 1987, as best as I can determine, the first substantial militia was started (and is still semi-active.) Those early militia groups were composed of survivalists (the precursors to today's preppers) along with preachers that were fighting for religious Liberty, gun Rights advocates, tax protesters, groups fighting against the NEW WORLD ORDER / One World Government, and so many other groups my memory couldn't recall a third of them. Public meetings were held and the militia ended up opening their doors so that all the issues could be discussed publicly. It wasn't long before people were getting into the militia just in case any of the people representing America's best interests were attacked. The John Birch Society got involved as did people fighting eminent domain abuse, immigration issues, gun control, National ID, the surveillance society, and the issuance of licenses and permits when people had a Right to do whatever they were doing. Preachers who were aware that there is a constant assault on the family unit by the government got concerned. The Right to Life activists joined and supported the militia. Starting in the late 1990s the militia reached its apex. Charlatan Heston had become the head of the NRA and he was for gun control. Y2K had people on edge. The government was trying to float National ID and, at one point, polls had Americans rejecting National ID by about 87 percent (IIRC.) But, despite its many successes, around 2002 the militia began to rapidly die. I remember laughing some of it off. Before Y2k the Washington Times interviewed me for a big front page story about Y2K. I told them everybody would go to bed on the last day of December and life would go on after midnight. It was at that point I got to see the militia die within a couple of years. I saw four things that ended the popularity of civilian militias: 1) Y2K did not provide everyone the opportunity to see actual turmoil in this country and interest in survivalism, the militia, etc. dropped like a rock. We used to see survival shows alone draw 1200 vendors at a single show - ditto for gun shows 2) 9 / 11 provided a pretext for the American people to reverse their thinking about the surveillance society. All of a sudden, the right - of all people, began advocating in favor of the National ID / REAL ID Act (and later E Verify) after being duped by the left. The right became the biggest purveyors of the POLICE STATE, being even more radical than the left had. The left wisely exited this portion of the takeover of America plan, allowing the right to do their dirty work for them 3) The government backed neo-nazis in helping the anti-immigrant effort to begin raiding the civilian militias and making them ineffective on all fronts, save of obsessing over immigration. On that single issue, Americans made peace with the balance of the groups and organizations over-throwing America 4) The government then used "mop up" crews to infiltrate the militia and set up the most vulnerable and naive for sting and entrapment operations. By the early 2000s the militia was dead. Having lived it from the front lines, I could share more if there is any interest, but the point of this thread was to give people a small look into the history so that they can better figure out why they would join, organize or support a militia. Right now, I'm not getting it. The Bible says "A double minded man is unstable in all his ways." Jame 1 : 8 What I'm seeing today are people that do NOT want to support the militia to protect, preserve, defend the principles our for forefathers fought, bled and died for. Rather they see the militia as an expedient way to address individual issues without regard as to how the proposed "solutions" will impact our fundamental Liberties and Freedoms. I'm just trying to get a reading on where it is all headed. If the new militia is rejecting the principles upon which America was founded, it would be nice to know. But right now we're taking two steps forward and three steps back.
  13. 3 points
    Was that supposed to be a sick joke on somebody's part? That article has me at a loss for words. You don't see that very often.
  14. 3 points
    My beliefs are in he Constitution of the USA...including ALL the amendments (even the ones I may not agree with: others do/did and that's how they got to be law). I believe that all men are created equal (the ones born here: others can join)...they don't all take advantage of the opportunities this country provides, but that's their business. I believe that if a person, regardless of race, wants to work hard, and participate in safeguarding our freedoms he should have the opportunity be become a citizen. I believe every country should have secure borders, inside which they can enjoy their own culture. I believe that we all have a right to our opinions, and that we shouldn't all have to be of the same mind-set (100% agreement) before we can take action. I'm a Christian, or try to be, but I don't think that makes me any better than the next guy. What concerns me, I guess, is who is in the foxhole next to me. So, when somebody says we need to do such and so, or this is the way it should be, it makes me wonder exactly where I stand on an issue (like taking up arms).
  15. 3 points
    "Bo Gritz" ... Lord I haven't heard anyone mention him in years! Great man
  16. 3 points
    I think there are two issues- the first is training. I too have experienced difficulty in assembling a large group or finding one that doesn't splinter quickly due to egos. The second issue, which Resister is championing, is education. On this, you can count the public school system out of any meaningful and productive outcome. Homeschool and parochial schools( for the most part), are the answer for the young. For adults you almost need a hook to get them in the door and then the interested ones you have a shot at. I had two terrific opportunities to educate a captive audience at a Christian men's breakfast. I wasn't activity recruiting cause I didn't have a group at the time, but I had great conversation and got people thinking. As for training, we vet our members pretty carefully. Two consecutive meetings with a quarom in town before they're invited to train on the range or in the brush. Eliminate the hotheads and racists right out of the box. We've never fielded more than 6 full members at a time and have remained at 4 for the last year and half. I would like a bigger group and I'd like to cross train with other groups, but the ego issue rears its head again. Good discussion I'm enjoying it.
  17. 3 points
    Hmmm... the cashier would have to have knowledge of how chemicals react so the only thing I can think of is paying cash for three 250-count boxes of ammo and saying “getting ready” when they look at you funny.
  18. 3 points
    A bottle of Astroglide personal water based lubricant, the thickest longest cucumber you can find, and a large roll of Gorilla tape!
  19. 2 points
    We are currently building a Militia. If interested but have any issues or questions in general feel free to contact me at anytime. We are not extremist. We are not anti-government, racist, hate group of any sort. We support the 1st & 2nd amendment, constitution, military, police, firemen, and giving back to help our community. We are a small circle at this moment but working every day to try and grow. Even if you'd just like to ask few questions but would need to think bout it from unassurance please by all means feel free to send questions my way n ill get back with you as quickly as possible if i dont answer right away. For anyone an everyone to even at the least took the time to read this thank ya for taking the time, and we hope to hear from you. -Venom
  20. 2 points
    PRIOR to the media and the government using Hegelian Dialectics to steer people into adopting National Socialist solutions on the immigration issue, many people were getting a real education on the income tax: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uNNeVu8wUak&t=65s Warning, it's a professionally done two hour expose' on the 16th Amendment. You'll get the straight skinny. In the early 2000s I fell victim to the so-called "Patriot Act." During one back and forth with an attorney representing LEOs, I asked, "When in the Hell did we start presuming people were guilty and deny to them Due Process?" Bear in mind that the LEOs had hatched a plan to kill me and claim I resisted arrest. The attorney chuckled and said, "We do it all the time. Haven't you ever heard of an illegal alien?" That is THE reason I will never misuse that term again. It is those little things that trip us up. From a strategic point of view, when we allowed the Tea Party Republicans to push that nutty National ID / REAL ID Act - E-Verify legislation, it killed the Fair Tax legislation proposed by Rep. John Linder because the National ID legislation relies on the SSN as your "unique identifier." The old time constitutionalists refer to the SSN as a Socialist Surveillance Number since, thanks to those who obsess over a single issue, your SSN is used to track you from the womb to the tomb. BTW, prior to the National ID legislation tax protesters had proven that the income tax was voluntary and the way you "volunteered" was by filling out an application for an SSN (which is known as an adhesion contract.) Once you rescinded the contract by pointing out it was signed under fraud and / or duress, it made it extremely difficult for the IRS to legitimately pursue you if you refused to pay the income tax on your labor. Now, having the SSN is "mandatory" (thanks to National ID) and having one is prima facie evidence that you are subject to the tax.
  21. 2 points
    I have addressed this many times. If you are really interested, I'd like to suggest a book for you. It's called The Light and the Glory by Peter Marshall and David Manuel. Here is part of your answer from some excerpts from that book: "When does tyranny become tyranny? Is there a time when it is not only morally correct but the will of God for one to resist legally constituted authority? When does the "Lord's anointed" lose his anointing? When did it become God's will for America to throw off the yoke of Britain? Was it God's will at all?Of all the questions we faced, this last one was the one we dreaded the most. for a strong case could be made against America's ever coming out from under the the mother country's authority. If God did intend this land to be a new Israel, then each major step in the implementation of this plan would have to conform with His righteousness. A holy end, no matter how sublime, could never justify an unholy means. The more we debated this, the more mired down we became. So we prayed to be shown the way out of this mental swamp. And that same morning in Florida, in which we had been unable to discern the true nature of the Puritan's call, the Holy Spirit went on to show us why America had to resist - why, for them to do anything less would have been the gravest disobedience. This part of the revelation began with a Scripture coming to Peter's mind, which, when we looked it up, was Galatians 5 : 1 and which proved to be key to all that followed:For freedom, Christ has set us free; stand fast, therefore and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery."The Light and the Glory by Peter Marshall and David Manuel p. 254 After you have answered the moral questions, you still have go through a process. It's a bit lengthy, so I won't try to reinvent the wheel, but give you a link to get the answer: https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/usmilitias/how-do-we-effect-change-t25.html Happy to discuss it further if you have questions.
  22. 2 points
    I concur with you on the point you made about the 14th Amendment. The 14th Amendment was a back door approach for the federal government to begin the process of claiming that the government bestows upon man his unalienable Rights. That is why when we first started having conversations, I harped on that. Originally, our founding fathers saw themselves as the biblical Israelites of the Bible; America was the New Jerusalem; we had a special commission as the servant race of God. John Winthrop's famous "City on a Hill" speech (given in 1630) was invoked by many U.S. presidents (including Reagan) did not hide what the founders believed about this new world. A couple of excerpts: "Thus stands the cause between God and us: we are entered into covenant with Him for this work. ...Now if the Lord shall please to hear us and bring us in peace to the place we desire, then has He ratified this Covenant and sealed our commission... The Lord will be our God and delight to dwell among us as His own people" http://www.john-uebersax.com/pdf/John Winthrop - Model of Christian Charity v1.01.pdf This is of course referring to the Abrahamic Covenant which was unconditional and everlasting. This Covenant is not one the entire world can claim as its own; therefore, the founders only allowed whites to be part of the body politic. These acknowledged differences in the races and cultures morphed into a political ideology called Manifest Destiny. This belief includes: " the history of the United States is different from other nations.[3] In this view, American exceptionalism stems from the American Revolution, becoming what political scientist Seymour Martin Lipset called "the first new nation"[4] and developing the American ideology of "Americanism", based on liberty, egalitarianism, individualism, republicanism, democracy, and laissez-faire economics." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_exceptionalism This is the view that Trump claims to support; however, he is surrounded by neo nazis with purely socialist solutions. I'll tell you more as we progress.
  23. 2 points
    "Whoever shoots first loses" -- Mike Adams
  24. 2 points
    I agree! I was always taught the Civil War stated when the South was baited into firing on Fort Sumter. I do believe the Democrat Socialist modern Brown Shirts (ANTIFA & idiots like MadMaxine) are goading us. They want a national event to justify taking guns any way they can! Alex Jones (not really a fan) spoke of the goal of Obama/Hillary/Soros was to use the southern invasion as a tool to implement REX 84. The election of Trump threw a massive monkey wrench in their plans. Thank God!
  25. 2 points
    "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside." This brings up the "anchor baby" problem where women come into the United States while pregnant to have their baby so it will become a US citizen. The problem with this is that is not what it states in our constitution even though it is being for all purposes practiced. The phrase "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" is a qualifier to the statement meaning that one of the child's parents must already be a US citizen for their birth in the US to qualify them as a US citizen. The socialists have ignored this and it has become common practice though not constitutionally correct that all babies born in the US are automatically granted citizenship. This unconstitutional practice must be stopped.
  • Newsletter

    Want to keep up to date with all our latest news and information?

    Sign Up

Important Information

Your Privacy Is Important To Us Learn More: Privacy Policy