Saturday, October 25, 2014
Clinton's "Forehead" gets his panties in a wad over Thomas Jefferson's view of the Second Amendment.
No, usurper, they should scare YOU.
Rosey had some accumulated days off at work, so yesterday she took one and carried me to see the new war movie, Fury. Fury is a gritty look at armored and armored infantry combat in World War II, and it presents the dangers American tankers and their supporting infantry faced. My Uncle Bill was an armored infantryman in World War II, and I wish now that I had asked him more questions about his experiences when he was alive. One thing that came through loud and clear to me was Bill's absolute hatred of Nazis and especially the SS. From the few conversations I had with him after I was grown up enough to appreciate them, I got the feeling that members of the Waffen SS had a tough time surrendering to Bill's outfit, especially after news of the Malmedy massacre got around. This is portrayed in the movie with unblinking eye.
The time is April 1945 and as the Americans move deeper into Germany they come across evidence of Nazi atrocities, including the summary execution of civilians (including children) who are deemed by the SS to be "deserters" to the cause of the Fatherland. Their bodies are left dangling from telephone poles with signs on them. One SS officer captured in the movie is summarily executed after the burgomaster, in response to a question from Brad Pitt's character, condemns him with a nod as one of the ones who has been executing children.
In another scene, a German soldier is captured wearing a GI overcoat. This outrages the tankers and armored infantrymen. Subsequently he is shot and Rosey did not understand why. He was a prisoner, after all, and due the protections of the Geneva Convention. I pointed out that the coat didn't seem to have any holes in it or blood on it. What pissed off the armored infantrymen was that the guy had probably made his captive strip it off. Had he killed the GI afterward? We cannot know, but the GIs, as with all soldiers in combat, assumed the worst, hence he had to die. Somebody in that unsympathetic crowd was bound to shoot him, although how he meets his end at the unwilling hands of a green replacement is perhaps the most controversial scene in the movie. I don't think my Uncle Bill would have quibbled with it's portrayal, though.
The fact that there were absolutely green replacements with no tank experience used in the latter part of the war is incontrovertible. This was made necessary by the ghastly casualty rates among tankers as they pitted their substandard, poorly armed and armored Shermans against superior German tanks. (Worse than the other defects was the fact that our tanks were gasoline-powered, which made them so susceptible to "brewing up" in a ball of flame when hit that the British called them "Ronsons" after their cigarette lighter.) As Third Armored Division ordnance officer Belton Y. Cooper wrote in his memoir Death Traps The Survival of an American Armored Division in World War II, his division entered France with 232 Sherman tanks, but by the end of the war, it had lost 648 Shermans totally destroyed, and an additional 700 had been knocked out of action and later repaired - a loss rate of 580%. Men -- trained armored crewmen -- died along with those tanks (a full crew for a Sherman was five, although losses often dictated that a tank might have to operate with as few as three men) and the stateside replacements could not be trained fast enough to make good the losses, hence the use of raw place-fillers. That, in turn, got a lot of other good men killed, something that is portrayed in Fury with an unblinking eye.
I was also lucky when I was growing up to live down the road from a one-eyed Buckeye farmer named Cliff McMahon. Mr. McMahon described himself as one of the luckiest men alive. I went to school with one of his sons and participated in 4H so I got to know Cliff, a tanker with the 1st Armored Division, who had lost an eye at Kasserine Pass crewing an M-3 Grant tank. The M-3, predecessor to the Sherman, was even worse, with the main gun, a low velocity 75mm, located in a sponson on the side, making it necessary to traverse the whole tank in order to engage targets on the move. Worse than that, however, was the fact that the Grant had riveted armor plate rather than cast, and when struck even a glancing blow with a German anti-tank projectile, would blow the rivets inward, ricocheting around the inside like so many bullets. It was one of these that took out Cliff's eye and ended his war.
M-3 Grant tank with riveted construction.
Cliff called himself the luckiest man alive because of all the men in his tank company in North Africa, very few survived to the end of the war.
M-3 Grant tank after an encounter with the Germans in North Africa.
Fury, the tank in the movie, is an M4A3E8, known as an "Easy Eight." Upgraded from earlier Shermans in response to its glaring deficiencies, the Easy Eight has much better suspension and a high-velocity 76mm gun which at least gave it a fighting chance against most German tanks, although the frontal armor of the Tigers would still resist them. Most tank-to-tank kills with such behemoths were accomplished by flanking tactics of the more numerous Shermans, getting around the Germans for a flank or rear shot. This was necessarily wasteful of tanks and their precious crews and is portrayed with nail-biting accuracy in Fury.
I had a few quibbles with the final climactic battle scene, but all in all, Fury is one of the best war movies I've ever seen, better certainly than Saving Private Ryan. (Plus, I loved the Grease Guns killing Nazis.)
15 minutes of hard hitting news, followed by Sharyl's interview with Rick that starts at the 25:00 minute point of this Friday the 24th, 1 hour taped broadcast. Sharyl describes how stories like Fast and Furious were crushed by lack of effort by the press corps, direct censorship of news, and the chilling new addition of Zampolits, quite literally press commissars who listen in on staffers interviews and ensure that Barry's "forbidden material" always remains on the cutting room floor.
Regulate THIS, FCC.
Meanwhile, Fast and Furious guns will continue to be used by criminals on both sides of the border. And bold independents like Felina will continue living in terror, assuming they do live. But the chances of Mexico’s richest man, and the newspaper he holds much sway over, exposing the truth are, pun intended, Slim to none.
Friday, October 24, 2014
“It's like my feeling about gun control,” he volunteered when asked about politically-correct pressure to change the name of the Washington Redskins. "I get it. You have the right to have guns. But look, let's forget that right. Let's forget the pleasure you get safely on your range, because it's in the wrong hands in other places."
Given the timing and subject of these e-mails, it seems clear that Jarrett quickly became a key player in the Fast and Furious cover-up in the immediate aftermath of the revelation that Holder had lied to Congress.
You know, the more chaos in the streets (jihadi attacks, Ferguson riots, etc.), the more popular the armed citizenry is going to become with folks who previously were hoplophobes.
With purchases spread out during one year. (If you think you have that long.)
CT gun grabbers should take note. Blood dancers disappointed at Canadian jihadi's choice of weapons but two attacks illustrate the impossibility of defending against Fourth Generation Warfare.
Confusion reigns in the firearm-ignorant press, with the Canadian jihadi's weapon described as a "30-30 Winchester lever action shotgun." From the photographs (above and those at the scene) it seems plain that the weapon was in fact a Model 94 rifle in caliber .30-30. This comes as a distinct disappointment to the firearm confiscationist blood dancers who no doubt are weeping that a semi-auto "assault rifle" was not used. In the American context, the gun grabbers understand that, as much as they'd like, lever-action rifles are off the menu for now since to advocate their confiscation would be to rouse the great, somnambulant giant known as Elmer Fudd and fill him with a terrible resolve. (It remains to be seen how a drug addict living in a homeless shelter was able to conceal the long gun.)
Much has been been speculated upon in what passes for the cable news "press" about the precise links between the Parliament shooter and the other Canadian jihadi who plowed into soldiers with his car the day before (killing one) and their links to ISIS -- as if that matters. They are missing the whole point of 4th Generation Warfare. No orders need be given, no money needs to change hands. In 4GW, the targets are known and understood by all, the individual actions are targeted to specific enemy vulnerabilities. It is the IDEA that is weaponized. This makes defending against such attacks almost impossible, since you cannot kill an idea, nor can you trace a command structure that doesn't exist, nor "decapitate" it if you could find it.
As for the individuals who carry out the attacks, the only concern is how to avoid detection while sizing up, stalking and taking down the command structure of your enemy -- the war makes and decision takers. In retrospect we should be grateful that this jihadi didn't think that through and went for a common, unarmed soldier at a war memorial rather that heading directly for the high-value targets on Parliament Hill.
As disappointed as the gun confiscationists must be at the facts of this case, they (especially those in the state of Connecticut) should pay attention to this truth -- if you start a civil war by raiding heretofore law-abiding Americans for their politically-incorrect firearms, you will not be able to defend against the 4GW attacks that you spark. And, I daresay, the folks who come after the warmakers and decision takers in righteous self-defense in the context of an American civil war that the gun raiders start will not be addled, inadequate jihadis.
As an aside, and totally unrelated, are you sure, Governor Malloy, that you don't want to publicly declare that enforcement of your Intolerable Act will be suspended until the Supreme Court has a chance to rule? Or are you going to give in to the darker impulses of Mike "KGB" Lawlor and start the gun raids after your re-election? Some reflections upon the lessons of 4GW might be in order, don't you think? I'm just trying to help you out, here.
It is no secret to my friends that the M-3A1 "Grease Gun" has long been my favorite submachine gun. (It is also no secret to the ATF, apparently, since three times in the 90s snitches tried to offer me one for sale in a "can't miss" deal. Each time I picked up the phone and called the state police and the snitch went away. The devil, it must be said, knows your temptations better than you do so be prepared to resist them.)
I first fired an original M-3 back in the 70s -- a specimen that bore no paperwork since it had been stolen by someone else, who stole it from someone else, who, presumably, stole it from Uncle Sugar. This was during my Benedict Arnold period when I handled quite a lot of illegal weapons. I have loved that clunky, junky SMG chambered in the justly revered caliber of .45 ACP ever since.
Thursday, October 23, 2014
A human blockade temporarily formed on I-75/85 northbound Wednesday evening as protesters halted traffic. The incident was part of a protest in response to the Aug. 9 fatal shooting of a 18-year-old African-American by a white police officer in Ferguson, Mo.
Even as the authorities worked to confirm that Mr. Spencer was infected with Ebola, it emerged that he traveled from Manhattan to Brooklyn on the subway on Wednesday night, when he went to a bowling alley, and then took a taxi home.
This is the first time that the Obama administration has provided a detailed listing of all records being withheld from Congress and the American people about the deadly Fast and Furious gun running scandal. The 1307-page “draft” Vaughn index was emailed to Judicial Watch at 8:34 p.m. last night, a few hours before a federal court-ordered deadline. In its cover letter, the Department of Justice asserts that all of the responsive records described in the index are “subject to the assertion of executive privilege.”
Also unexamined is how demonstrable personal biases of a prosecutor, and the career interests of staff attorneys reporting to him, impact the course of impartial justice for defendants and protect the interests of all the people. Whether this will result in change of venue attempts or even bar complaints are also questions yet to be answered.
Interested in hearing from any Threepers who intend to go to this. Please email me at GeorgeMason1776ATaolDOTcom.