Monday Music "867-5309Jenny" by Tommy Tutone

I was a sophomore in high school when this song came out, We would catch the video's on "Solid Gold" and later on MTV.    I thought it was a good but corny song, very early 80's after Disco receded and before the 2nd British Invasion called "New Wave".  I decided to run with this song because I was driving around and it came on my Sirius XM radio in my truck on the 80's channel. 

"867-5309/Jenny" is a 1981 song written by Alex Call and Jim Keller and performed by Tommy Tutone that was released on the album Tommy Tutone 2, on the Columbia Records label. It peaked at #4 on the Billboard Hot 100 chart and #16 on the Billboard Top Tracks chart in May 1982 (see 1982 in music).
The song caused a fad of people dialing 867-5309 and asking for "Jenny".

Lead guitarist Jim Keller, interviewed by People in 1982, said "Jenny is a regular girl, not a hooker. Friends of mine wrote her name and number on a men's room wall at a bar. I called her on a dare, and we dated for a while. I haven't talked with her since the song became a hit, but I hear she thinks I'm a real jerk for writing it."
On March 28, 2008, Tommy Tutone lead singer Tommy Heath stated on the WGN Morning News that the number was real and it was the number of a girl he knew. As a joke, he wrote it on a bathroom wall in a motel where they were staying. "We laughed about it for years," he said.
"There was no Jenny," songwriter Alex Call told a Tampa, Florida, columnist in June 2009. "The number? It came to me out of the ether."
In the music video, the "Jenny" character is played by Karen Elaine Morton.

The song, released in late 1981, initially gained popularity on the American West Coast in January 1982; many who had the number soon abandoned it because of unwanted calls.

"When we'd first get calls at 2 or 3 in the morning, my husband would answer the phone. He can't hear too well. They'd ask for Jenny, and he'd say 'Jimmy doesn't live here any more.' (...) Tommy Tutone was the one who had the record. I'd like to get hold of his neck and choke him."

— Mrs. Lorene Burns, an Alabama householder formerly at +1-205-867-5309; she changed her number in 1982.

Asking telephone companies to trace the calls was of no use, as Charles and Maurine Shambarger (then in West Akron, Ohio at +1-216-867-5309) learned when Ohio Bell explained "We don’t know what to make of this. The calls are coming from all over the place." A little over a month later, they disconnected the number and the phone became silent.
In some cases, the number was picked up by commercial businesses or acquired for use in radio promotions.

• In 1982, WLS radio obtained the number from a Chicago woman, receiving 22,000 calls in four days.
• In 1982, Southwest Junior High School received up to two hundred calls daily asking for Jenny in area code 704.
• Brown University obtained the +1-401-867 prefix in 1999, assigning 867-5309 to a student dormitory room which was promptly inundated with nuisance calls. In 2002 the university transferred the number to Gem Plumbing & Heating, a local business in Lincoln, Rhode Island. Gem began using the number in advertising campaigns both in Rhode Island and in eastern Massachusetts (area code 617), trademarking the number in 2005.
• A February 2004 auction for the number in a New York City area code was shut down by eBay after objections from Verizon; bidding had reached $80,000. The US Federal Communications Commission takes the position that most phone numbers are "public resources" that "are not owned by carriers or their customers" but did not rule out the number being sold as part of a business.
• A subsequent February 2004 auction for the number in area code 800 and 888 listed Jeffrey Steinberg's Philadelphia business JSS Marketing for sale, including both numbers as part of the bundle. This circumvents eBay restrictions which prevent selling the numbers on their own.
• In 2004, Weehawken, New Jersey resident Spencer Potter picked up the number for free after discovering to his surprise that it was available in the 201 area code, hoping it would improve his DJ business. Unable to handle the overwhelming volume of calls, he sought to sell the number on eBay in February 2009. Although bids reached $1 million, his inability to confirm the identity of the bidders led him to sell it privately to Retro Fitness, a gym franchise with a location in Secaucus, New Jersey that felt the 1980s origin of the number tied in perfectly with their business's retro theme.
• In 2006, Benjamin Franklin Franchising, a large national plumbing franchise, began using a toll-free version of the number (+1-866-867-5309), which it advertises as "867-5309/Benny".In 2007, Gem Plumbing & Heating brought suit against Clockwork Home Services, the parent company of Benjamin Franklin Franchising, alleging a violation of its trademark. Clockwork contended that Gem's trademark was invalid. Effective in May 2007, Clockwork was ordered by a court to stop using the number in New England. As of 2011 +1-866-867-5309 remains in the hands of Benjamin Franklin Franchising as a valid method of reaching BFF customer support. According to Tommy Heath, lead singer of Tommy Tutone, "It's ridiculous. If I wanted to get into it, I could probably take the number away from both of them."
• In 2009, nutrition firm Natrient LLC leased +1-800-867-5309 from 5309 Partners Ltd for $25 million as part of a radio ad campaign.
• In July 2009, Jason Kaplan had the number assigned to a Vonage phone line in the name of a small business in area code 267 and then listed the entire business for sale on eBay. The auction closed at $5,500. Whereas telephone numbers are the legal property of the wireline carrier, the logic behind this company and several others was that Vonage as a VOIP provider did not own the numbers, making them open for sale, with eBay being the typical medium.
• When area code 855 was opened in 2010, +1-855-867-5309 was taken in the first 47 seconds on the first day, while Pennsylvania 6-5000 was assigned on the twenty-first day. A captive RespOrg "Voice Box International", controlled by the same people who operate "5309 Partners" and "Five309 LLC", also reserved +1-844-867-5309 in the first few seconds after that area code's December 7, 2013 opening. In January 2013, Five309 LLC announced plans to use 855-867-5309 and 888-867-5309 to promote website JennySearch.com but as of 2013 that site is not being actively updated.
• Associate Justice Elena Kagan's opinion in the unanimous 2013 Supreme Court case American Trucking Associations v. Los Angeles uses the number as a hypothetical placard on each truck inviting calls with safety or environmental complaints.
• In 2013, the number was still ringing up fifty misdialled calls daily for Florida realtor, Carrie Routt, in area code 850

Different opponents faced by the British Victorian Army

I bought a book in the early 90's called "The Zulu Wars" and a bit later a book called "The khaki and the Red". These books were fascinating to read the different history and battles that the Victorian era British army faced in defending the empire and "PAX BRITANNIA".   Those books along with a book I used in college called "The Defense of Duffers Drift" which talked about small unit tactics during the Boer war.  Some of the stuff was no longer relevant but it encouraged critical thinking.  One of my favorite movies is "Zulu", having the British soldiers stand and fight the word I remember from the movie was "Get some good pikeman", for the use of the bayonet would be needed.

As I recall part of the British soldier to deal and adapt was part of the Victorian heritage that was prevalent at the time, the British soldiers and the culture believed that they were superior to everyone because they were British, it was part of the DNA.  For this reason they pushed the sphere of influence to a point where it was said that "The Sun never sets on the British Empire".  Also I remembered another movie with Michael Caine and Sean Connery "The man who would be King"

It is a different time and I wonder what a Britisher from back then would think about the empire today and the problems that the British are having from the E.U and the invasions of the "Kiffirs" from the subcontinents.


Maintaining your status as a global power is no easy thing. The British Victorian Army was one of the best equipped and most experienced in the world, its forces active from North Africa to the South Pacific. But while this gave many British soldiers useful experience, it also created unique challenges for them, their commanders and the politicians putting them into the field.
The British army was the same wherever they went, but their opponents were wildly different, each one presenting a new combination of skills, tactics, and weaponry for the British to overcome.

1. Egyptian Nationalists

By 1879, the Egyptian government was massively corrupt, inefficient, and favorable to Europeans over locals. Even the law gave better protection to wealthy Europeans in the country than its native inhabitants. France and Britain in particular held huge sway.
Egyptian nationalists led by Colonel Ahmed ‘Urabi seized control of the country, seeking to bring about democratic reforms that would take power away from the elite and reduce foreign influence. France refused to intervene. Britain, on the other hand, used the death of 50 Europeans in riots to justify an invasion in 1882, whose real purpose was the defense of economic interests.
The forces they faced were trained and equipped by Europeans and fought like a regular army. But the British proved superior, defeating ‘Urabi at the Battle of Tel-el-Kebir and taking control of Egypt.

2. Ashanti

The defeat of the Ashantees, by the British forces under the command of Coll. Sutherland, July 11th, 1824.

As in Egypt, the British fought the Ashanti Empire, located in modern Ghana, for control of economic resources. They wanted to control gold from the region, and ownership or favorable peace treaties could prevent other European powers from getting involved.
The Ashanti were primitively armed but experienced and smart at fighting in local terrain. Launching ambushes out of the hills and jungle, they gained the element of surprise and often outflanked their opponents.
The downside of Ashanti tactics was a lack of cohesion and close order discipline. In the face of increasingly accurate rifles, dispersed troops were more vulnerable than they had been a century before. Unable to break British formations, they were repeatedly defeated.

3. Zulus

Perhaps the most famous of Britain’s colonial opponents, the Zulu Empire was defended by warriors called impis. Tough and aggressive, they could run for miles before charging into battle and overwhelming their opponents with short stabbing spears. They were also highly disciplined, able to maneuver swiftly and coherently on command and willing to throw themselves in waves against the enemy.
To gather together various territories in southern Africa, the British needed to conquer the Zulus. They sent an ultimatum that triggered the war and then invaded Zulu lands.
The Zulus achieved an early victory at Isandlwana, where appalling leadership crippled the British  forces. The famous defense of Rorke’s Drift followed, in which 150 British and colonial troops fought off 3-4,000 Zulus in a desperate engagement.

Defense of Rorke’s Drift.

Despite these early events, the ferocity, tenacity, and courage that had served the Zulus so well were not enough to let Spears beat modern guns. By the final Battle of Ulundi, courageous charges were creating massive casualties for little gain. However, the war had shaken British confidence, teaching some not to under-estimate a technologically inferior force.

4. Maoris

Hone Heke cuts down the flagstaff on Flagstaff Hill at Kororāreka.

A similar lesson was taught in the New Zealand Wars (1845-1872). With settlers spreading across New Zealand, and the colonial authorities backing them against the native Maoris, many locals took up arms to resist.
The Maori way of warfare was the polar opposite of that used by the Zulus. Impi tactics were flowing and aggressive, adapted to fight other African tribes. Those of the Maoris were stationary and defensive, adapted to counter European guns. Creating fortified earthen strongholds called pā, the Maoris held off British and then colonial militia troops, firing from well-prepared defensive positions, forcing the attackers into costly advances. Though the result was once again domination by white colonials, fighting was nowhere near as decisive as in the Zulu Empire.

5. Xhosa

Resistance fighters defend a stronghold in the forested Water Kloof during the 8th Xhosa war of 1851. Xhosa, Kat River Khoi-khoi, and some army deserters are depicted.

The Zulus were not the only natives the British fought in their attempt to unite southern Africa. Further, east, the Xhosa also resisted, triggering the Ninth Xhosa War (1877-9)
Unable to beat the well-equipped British in open battle, the Xhosa retreated to the Amatola Mountains. Here they fought a guerrilla war, making use of the terrain to launch a string of ambushes. By never presenting the British with a target and always withdrawing when put under pressure, they prevented the invaders from gaining an advantage. It was only by building a string of fortifications and creating an elaborate system of mounted pursuit that the British beat them.

6. Mahdists

The Battle of Omdurman.

The Mahdists in Sudan faced the British with a different challenge in the 1880s and 1890s. Believing their leader Muhammad Ahmad to be the Mahdi, a prophesied Islamic religious leader, they fought with fanatical fervor against foreign influence.
This religious fervor led to frontal assaults even more determined than those of the Zulus. Though these served the Mahdists well early on, they were no match for well-prepared troops equipped with the latest guns. It was such a force that broke them finally broke them at Omdurman in 1898.

7. Boers

Boer militiamen at Spionkop.

While many opponents used elements of guerrilla warfare against the British, the Boer version came closest to what we see in the modern world. The descendants of Dutch settlers, the Boers became caught up in the British attempt to unify southern Africa, and like the natives they resisted.
Smart, accurate marksmen with talented leaders who understood European warfare, they were foes unlike any others the British had faced. They were able to gain large armies and adapt elements of guerrilla warfare to the battlefield, defeating the British in bloody confrontations as well as small actions.
Ultimately, the Boers were undone not by their enemies’ superior tactics or leadership. Indeed, British leadership in the war was often among the worst in history. Yet even the tenacious Boers could not defeat the superior resources of the British Empire, and sheer weight of numbers eventually wore them down

Eating Crow....The media

We saw a couple of days ago when Mr. Trump made a point of ignoring a CNN reporter after CNN tried to substantiate a fan fiction that was pushed by buzzfeed as a hack job on the President Elect..

The backstory is that a hack outfit called "buzzfeed" published a 35 page report that was a fiction created by some place called 4chan and it talks about that Trump paid hookers to urinate on a bed that was slept on by Obama.  Well it was total fabrication to use a polite word and buzzfeed ran it and CNN linked the story.  Needless this came out right before Trump's first press conference after he won the election.    He was rightfully pissed and made a point to ignore the CNN reporter.

Well Neil Cavuto made a comment to CNN "How does it feel to be dismissed CNN".  President Obama has been dismissing Fox news and feuding with Fox for 8 years.  The other networks have been used to soft-balling questions to the ruling establishment and having access and of course they disseminate the party line to the people in flyover country. 

   The problem is the media is seeing themselves as the voice of the resistance now rather than actual journalist.  They totally went into the tank for Hillary, from feeding their questions to her campaign in advance to help her cause to totally tilting the coverage between Trump and Hillary.  I remember when Trump talked bout "grabbing some P***Y", there was like 28 minutes of coverage of that and like 3 minutes of Hillary and her classified emails.   This is a big part that cost the media their credibility and the average American really could see their bias for it was always talked about in the conservative side and it was in the past dismissed as "paranoia" but this last election cycle the bias was so blatant that the average American saw it. 

  Like I said, the media views themselves as the voice of the resistance against Trump .  The shock of their idol Hillary being defeated really rattled them to the core and all the protest from the liberals have given them hope and they are trying to delegitimize Trumps election, kinda like what they did to "W" on his first term after Gore tried to sandbag him in Florida.  Now we are seeing this on a grand scale with Trump.   I don't know what it is with Liberals, when Obama got elected, I and other conservatives were not happy but we didn't try to shank his presidency until we saw the damage he was trying to do.  We gave him the benefit of the doubt and respected the electorial process, but the liberals are not doing the same.

Police Recruitment with a Star Wars flair

Yes I am channeling my inner geek with these video's.  Apparently Forth Worth Police Dept are using Star Wars as a recruitment aid.    I am continuing from the post I did Yesterday with the "Storm Trooper Performance in Contemporary Operations".  I will look for some stuff relating to Star Trek,

Interviewing Darth Vader

Storm Trooper at the Range...

Storm Troopers with the theme from "Cops"

Troops is a mockumentary film by Kevin Rubio, which made its debut on the Internet in 1997. The film is a parody of COPS, set in the Star Wars universe. In the film, Imperial stormtroopers from the infamous Black Sheep Squadron patrolling the Dune Sea on the planet Tatooine run into some very familiar characters

Storm Trooper Performance in Contemporary Operations

I shamelessly cribbed this from "The Angry Staff Officer", Mac hooked me on this guy a while back so blame him.  I like the way the author brings modern operations with a Star Wars flair, he does this to make the material understandable to the troops especially since the Star Wars influence is a part of the culture.


My fellow Imperial Officers and classmates,
I hope this communique finds you well, I’ve enjoyed reading the updates from my classmates from Coruscant to the Outer Rim. I apologize for being offline for the past few years. In my last three years in Fleet Strike Force 2, the pace of action has often prevented me from sitting down and writing a note to my friends. It’s been interesting and filled with challenges. I know everyone thought I was crazy to volunteer for this assignment, but as future senior leaders,  I can assure your subordinates that this is a capable and fulfilling assignment.
Several of our classmates have sent me notes over time asking what life is like in a “nerf herder assignment” as a liaison officer to the Stormtrooper Corps.  I wanted to share some updated TTPs with our group as most of you have Stormtroopers and other Army personnel under your command. I’ve witnessed various tactical issues with our Stormtrooper and dismounted security forces, mostly not their fault or a fault of Imperial doctrine. By and large, our troopers are superior in training and capacity to Rebel forces and criminal entities that I met in combat operations. As a Navy pilot and weapon systems officer, in all honesty, I dreaded my assignment to ground forces out of the Imperial Academy but with my class standing I didn’t have many options. In this assignment, I found not only fulfillment in the ability to lead our Emperor’s best men and women, but exceptional opportunities for career advancement.  Over operations in 20 different systems with combined arms forces in multiple counter-insurgency campaigns I’ve observed the following trends.
1.  Rumored Poor Performance of Stormtroopers: There have been lots of jokes floating around about Stormtroopers not hitting the broad side of a Bantha. I can assure you that the combat focused teams of Stormtroopers are professional and deadly. The issue that revolves around poor marksmanship and battlefield prowess is nested within the duality of missions for Imperial Security forces. Long periods of security and policing functions or guard duty on Imperial Vessels and installations lead to issues of combat effectiveness. Much of Stormtrooper training occurs against drone or robotic targets. Due to experiences from the Clone Wars, these training targets are highly mobile and deadly but lack an issue that I’ve observed in Stormtrooper engagements. All of the training and conditioning at the academies fail to account for the issue of engaging and killing fellow humans. I’ve seen less of an issue with engaging non-humanoids but have seen a reluctance of human Stormtroopers to engage fellow Humans…aliens don’t seem to cause as much of an issue. Additionally, recurring training of small arms and combat shooting is vital.

Ship-to-ship breaching is an important and dangerous task. (Lucasfilm)

Luckily, within my Strike Force we maintained duty rotations that allowed for increased combat ability with a focus on search and destroy and responding to galactic flare ups. Anyway, back to training, while most Troopers would rotate off of combat training/campaigns to periods of guard duty or police operations before being trained back up to full combat operations. Our group was able to maintain a focus on recurring combat operations instead of counter-insurgency. Despite the excellent training of our Stormtrooper Corps, skills atrophy in certain environments and must be acknowledged. Too often troopers are ad hoc grabbed from various duties to quick deployment to combat operations; these additions to trained Stormtrooper teams too often result in tactical mistake. Furthermore, Imperial Navy or Stormtrooper corps officers bear a heavy burden of casualties and are often not present for tactical fights resulting in a lack of command and control during engagements.
2.  Lack of resources for combat training: As mentioned, due to assignment of Stormtroopers to menial security duties, too often combat readiness atrophies as troops get comfortable in assignments. The Rebels and other forces have taken advantage of these lapses in readiness, attacking troopers patrolling cantinas and in other assignments. In Strike Force 2, we were fortunate to have multiple combined arms exercises on the Outer Rim prior to major engagements. If Imperial Officers don’t divert resources to allow for collective training, then various duties will take hold over combat readiness of ground forces. In certain quiet sectors, troopers are not engaged in individual task or collective task training ensuring combat readiness. They may look the part with spit polished armor, but I assure you that these troopers are not ready for engaging with hostile forces in a recurring expeditionary manner. This is particularly evident in poor performance of combined arms teams utilizing space and armored support. If the first time you integrate TIE Fighter and AT-AT support is in combat, chances are it’s not going to go well. With these crews available within our fleets, it’s only through a lack of advocating for resources that we don’t train with our other forces. We would routinely “search” for rebel forces on less than inhabited worlds with a robust task force to exercise these relationships. They might spend a lot of time covered in grease, but a Naval officer can gain a lot of luck through a bottle of Corellian whiskey and some time spent in their maintenance bays.  

Less time spent on the bridge, the better. Believe me. (Lucasfilm Ltd)

3.  There is a recurring trend in my note, one that you as mid level officers in the Imperial Forces can help fix. There is a tendency to view ground force and strike force assignments as less preferable to ship staff, flight assignments, and ship engineering assignments. I routinely see Naval officers who are inexperienced with the capacity of Stormtrooper corps implementing and directing poor tactical utilization of ground forces often due to hubris or arrogance. Due to a mindset that focuses on polish over substance, I routinely saw other groups of Stormtroopers led by Imperial officers in the wrong armor and camouflage for a particular environment. They make about 6 variants and everyone is trying to rock whites all the time. With all of the various equipment modifications and intelligence on planetary conditions that we have available, deploying with the equipment for the wrong planetary environment is just inexcusable. I once saw a team land in a forest in polished white armor while we were hanging out in the bush with our reactive dark armor; thankfully no indigenous personnel made Bantha fodder out of them.  Our tendency towards equipping Stormtroopers with lightweight weaponry that aids to guard duty and security patrolling, fails to reach out and touch Rebels the way a proper laser rifle will. The E-11 is great in close confines of a ship, but fails to work the way an A280 would on-planet. Officers unfamiliar with operations on planet too often dictate equipment based on their experiences in simulations at the Academy or on-ship.
I’m hoping to spend the holiday back home on Drall, but have to attend mandatory reintegration training at the Academy before a period of leave. Found that after I’m done cavorting -I mean studying – at Coruscant that I’m off to the Executor. I know a few of you are out in the fleet, so hope to link up with a few of you over a pint of Corellian ale in one of the messes in our Task Force.
Hail the Empire,
Hale Dorgan
Junior Commander
Fleet Strike Force 2

Monday Music "simply Irresistable" by Robert Palmer and a bonus video

I have been busy at work and dealing with stuff this week that relates to my job, I will mention it once I know I am good:).  This song popped up in my Sirius XM Billboard 1989 hits and it was near the top.  The music is kinda like an earworm...it sticks in your head.  Personally I liked "addicted to Love" better but both are real good songs and they showcase the 80's quite well.  Robert Palmer passed on in 2003 due to cardiac arrest in Paris, I remembered it came as a shock. because to us he wasn't "old" he represented the 80's quite well.  Besides my adding the "Simply Irresistible" video, I also added the "Addicted to Love".  As I recall the feminist movement had a stroke back then about the video's..I wonder how bad it would be today in the "snowflake Generation."


"Simply Irresistible" is the first single released by English rock singer Robert Palmer from the 1988 studio album Heavy Nova and is presented in one of the most distinctive and memorable music videos of the 1980s.
In 1988, the song reached #2 on the Billboard Hot 100 singles chart (behind "Sweet Child o' Mine" by Guns N' Roses) and was #1 on the Billboard Hot Mainstream Rock Tracks chart for three weeks. It also earned Palmer his second Grammy Award the following year, and the song was nominated for the Brit Award for Best British Single.
Along with "Addicted to Love" and "I Didn't Mean to Turn You On", "Simply Irresistible" is among Palmer's most recognized songs, in part because of the iconic music video by renowned British fashion photographer Terence Donovan, famously parodied in a Pepsi commercial in 1989, which in turn was parodied again in another Pepsi commercial during Super Bowl XXXVI featuring Britney Spears, and in 2014 it was parodied in Ingrid Michaelson's single "Girls Chase Boys".

The videos show Palmer surrounded by enigmatic women, styled in the manner of the artist Patrick Nagel. The video featured the leading supermodels and leading dancers that he met while visiting the Kentucky Derby (Karen Aubrey McElfresh, Kim Jones and Cheryl Day); Donovan's lighting and direction set the style for that era of music videos.
"Simply Irresistible" later appeared in the 1999 Tony Award-winning musical Contact. It later featured in the 2000 cult drama picture American Psycho. The song was recently used in the 2013 animated special Madly Madagascar and in the video game Saints Row IV, as well as the show Happy Endings.

"Addicted to Love"

The 1986-produced music video (which uses the shorter single version of this song), directed by British photographer Terence Donovan, was one of the most iconic of the era. The video features Palmer performing the song with an abstract "band", being a group of female models whose pale skin, heavy makeup, dark hair and seductive, rather mannequin-like expression follow the style of women in Patrick Nagel paintings.
The five models in the video are Julie Pankhurst (keyboard), Patty Kelly (guitar), Mak Gilchrist (bass guitar), Julia Bolino (guitar), and Kathy Davies (drums).
Mak Gilchrist recalled to Q magazine:

"I was 21 and got the part on the strength of my modelling book. We were meant to look and 'act' like showroom mannequins. Director Terence Donovan got us tipsy on a bottle of wine but as we were having our make-up retouched, I lost balance on my heels and knocked the top of my guitar into the back of Robert’s head, and his face then hit the microphone."

The Army and the M16A2

When I was in the service, I did basic in 1985 and we were issued the M16A1 pattern rifle.  I always was fascinated with the M16 rifle.  I completed Basic, went to AIT at Fort Devens and went to Germany with the 1st Infantry Division (Big Red One), while I was with 1ID we got issued M16A2, I liked the A2 better, it felt more substantial and studier than the A1 but I didn't care for the 3 round burst.  I preferred the full auto version.  We went to the range and got training and qualified with the rifle.  The biggest reason I didn't like the A2 was the 3 round burst.  I honestly believed the a well trained soldier can control the weapon better than a mechanical device.  Other than that I really liked the weapon.  When I went to my second unit, we still had the A1.  I became the armorer of this unit and went to SAM31(Small Arm Maintenance) class at Hohenfels, after I came back, I ordered A2 furniture and depending on the soldier, I would "size" the rifle for the soldier.  The A2 stock was longer than the A1 stock and I would use variations of A1 and A2 options to make the rifle more comfortable to shoot.  I hate to brag, but this is part of the reason I got an ARCOM for my Armorer duties.  When we went to the Gulf, a lot of the rifles we had were modified A1's, Mine had the A2 furniture and the barrel and upper was A2 but the lower was A1.  I preferred this configuration.  When I got out I bought my AR, it looked like this..

Even down to the Flash Supressor, ..

Mine looks like this one...

This was the style of my rifle since the mid 90's, not very practical. but I shot for accuracy back then.

This is the current configuration.   I love the modular configuration.

This is both configurations, One day I will buy a lower and make 2 rifles rather than play mix and match.  

I am very comfortable with the A2 pattern rifle, I would carry one into war tomorrow, I am very comfortable with it.  Although I would try to find a A1 lower and match it up like what I carried in the Gulf when I got deployed.

   I saw this on WeaponsMan blog and decided to snag it.  I grabbed a bunch of pics from "google" to add to the story.

The M16A2 was adopted by the Marines in 1983, and then by the Army three years later, but all of its development was done, largely on a shoestring, by the Marines

For example, the finger bump on the A2 pistol grip? The very first prototype was built up by a Marine officer on an A1 grip, using plastic wood or body filler! Most of the modifications to the A2 were aimed at:

1. Increased practical accuracy;
2. Increased effective range;
3. Increased durability; and,
4. NATO compliance (adopting a NATO round equivalent to the FN SS109 round).

In a brief overview of the service life of the M16 series for American Rifleman in June, 2012, Martin K.A. Morgan encapsulated this history well:

In November 1983, the U.S. Marine Corps adopted a product-improved version of the M16A1 chambered for the 5.56×45 mm NATO round. The new rifle was called the M16A2 and it differed significantly from its predecessor: improved rear sights, a brass deflector, a heavier barrel and 1:7-inch rifling were among the changes. The M16A2 also replaced the M16A1’s “AUTO” selector setting with a “BURST” setting delivering three rounds with every trigger pull. The Army followed the Marine Corps’ adoption of the improved rifle in March 1986 when it ordered 100,176 M16A2 rifles from Colt. In September 1988, the U.S. government placed an initial order for 266,961 M16A2s with Fabrique Nationale’s North American subsidiary, FN Mfg., Inc. of Columbia, S.C. Late the following year, when 57,000 U.S. military personnel conducted the Operation Just Cause invasion of Panama, the M16A2 was used in combat for the first time.

For practical accuracy, the A2 had new sights, with a square front post; for range, a new round with a heavier bullet, and new rifling to match; and for durability, new stocks and handguards and significant metal reinforcement in the lower receiver’s weak areas, the pivot pin bosses and buffer tower.
The rifle was not without controversy in the Army. Indeed, contractors for the Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences examined the rifle and concluded that, as their paper’s abstract notes:

[U]se of the M16A2 rifle by the Army would be extremely problematic, a-fact due, in part, to the vast differences between the marksmanship training philosophies of the Army and the Marine Corps.

(The paper is here: http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a168577.pdf)
The Army had been researching improvements to the M16A1 for years, but hadn’t actually implemented any. In the foreword to the Army Research Institute paper, the word “problematic” crops up again and one gets the sense that the problem was this solution was Not Invented Here, and moreover, not developed the way the Army wanted to develop one. 
Referring to earlier research, they wrote:

A detailed evaluation of M16Al performance was conducted to determine adequacy, peculiarities, etc. The findings clearly indicated that the M16Al was an adequate combat rifle; however, many shortcomings were identified that should be addressed in a new rifle or any rifle Product Improvement Program (PIP).

They considered that the improvements in the A2, listed below, were suitable only for the peculiar circumstances of Marine Corps service.

The Marine Corps test results stated the following advantages for the PIP [Product Improvement Program -Ed.] rifle:

• Ease of training (handling and ease of sight movement).
• Improved safety (no hazard when adjusting elevation on the rear sight even with loaded weapon).
• Increased effectiveness at long ranges (more hits, better accuracy, and greater penetration).
• Improved handling characteristics and durability in hand-to-hand close combat.
• Reduced barrel jump and muzzle climb during automatic and rapid fire.
• Increased contrast and less glare with square front sight post.
• Stronger, more durable and improved grasping characteristics of front handguard.
• Stronger barrel with quicker twist to take advantage of increased effectiveness provided by new ammunition.
• Improved sighting characteristics providing quick target acquisition for moving targets and better detection of targets in low level light conditions at close ranges, and more accurate long range fire by use of two modified rear sight apertures.
• Increased ammunition conservation and more effective use of ammunition with burst control device.
• Conformity to human factors standards by lengthening stock (alleviating bruised eyebrows, noses, and lips).
• Stronger, more durable stock.
• Stronger, more durable buttcap which also reduces slipping on the shoulder during firing.
• More controllable and comfortable pistol grip contoured to the shape of the hand.
• Improved brass deflector which protects left handed shooters from hot ejected brass casings.
• Can use NATO type improved ammunition (XM855) which provides improved performance and penetration at long ranges.

The Army evaluators were impressed by that list of solutions, but thought they all traced back to four specific USMC objectives or requirements:

The above list of advantages is very impressive. It appears that the rifle meets the primary requirements stated by the Marines:

• A sight adjustable to 800 meters.
• A bullet with better accuracy at 800 meters and the capability to penetrate all known helmets and body armor at ranges of 800 meters.
• A rifle with more durable plastic parts and barrel which will take a beating during bayonet training and extended field exercises.
• The replacement of the full automatic capability with a burst mode which fires a maximum of three rounds with each pull of the trigger.

…but they thought that the requirements were too Marine-centric.

The list, however, represents the objective and subjective evaluation of Marine Corps personnel who are emphasizing the most positive aspects of rifle characteristics as they pertain to envisioned Marine Corps requirements.

This is the first of a three part series. In the second part, tomorrow on WeaponsMan.com, the Army contractors damn the A2 with faint praise and list a litany of A1 shortcomings that they believed that the A2 did not resolve. In the third part, the modifications that they suggested in lieu of or in addition to the A2 mods are enumerated.
As it was, the contracting officer’s representative approved the paper in February, 1986. In March, and probably before any of the responsible officers read the paper, the Army went ahead and adopted the M16A2, just the way the Marines had shaken it out.
That makes this paper a time capsule

he M16A2 was adopted by the Marines in 1983, and then by the Army in 1986. Shortly before its adoption, an Army contract analyzed the M16A2 — and found it all wrong for  the Army. The report is here: http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a168577.pdf
This is the second of a three part series. In the first part, yesterday on WeaponsMan.com, the Army contractors noted the specific solutions implemented on the A2 and the problems the Marines solved thereby, but complained that the problems and solutions were too USMC-specific. In this part, we’ll discuss just what they thought was wrong about the Marines’ product. In the third part, which we’ll post tomorrow, we’ll list the modifications that they suggested in lieu of or in addition to the A2 mods.

M16A1 (top) and M16A2.

As we recounted in yesterday’s post, the Army let a contract to analyze the Marines’ product-improved M16A1, originally called the M16 PIP (Product Improvement Program but in November 1983, type-classified as the M16A2. Did the A2 meet the Army’s needs for an improved rifle? The contractors recounted 17 improvements in the A2 versus the A1, and traced those improvements back to four or five fundamental goals of the Marine program: more range, accuracy and penetration at that range, more durability, and a burst-fire capability in place of the full-auto setting.
The Army contractors recognized what the USMC had done — and damned it with faint praise.

The M16A2 rifle was developed and tested by the U.S. Marine Corps. The purpose of this present analysis was to evaluate M16A2 rifle features as they relate to U.S. Army training and combat requirements. It was found that the M16A2 did not correct major shortcomings in the MI6Al and that many M16A2 features would be very problematic for the Army. Accordingly, this report provides several suggested rifle modifications which would improve training and combat performance.

The A1 shortcomings that the paper’s authors thought went unameliorated, or were worsened, by the A2 included:

1. 25 Meter Setting: The M16A2 does not have a sight setting for firing at 25 meters, where zeroing and most practice firing occurs.
2. Battlesight Zero: The M16A2 does not have a setting for battlesight zero, i.e., 250 meters.
3. Aperture Size: The M16A2 probably does not have an aperture suitable for the battlesight, e.g., the single aperture used for most marksmanship training, the record fire course, the primary aperture for combat, etc. The 5mm aperture used for 0-200 meters is probably too large and the 1-3/4mm aperture used for 300-800 meters is probably too small.
4. Sighting System: The M16A2 sighting system is too complex, i.e., elevation is changed three different ways, leaving too much room for soldier error.
5. Sight Movement: Sight movements on the M16A2 result in changing bullet strike by different amounts; .5, 1, 1.4, and 3 minutes of angle (MOA)*. The sights intended for zeroing, .5 and 1.4 MOA, are not compatible with old Army zero targets or the new targets being fielded.
6. Zero Recording: The M16A2 does not have a sighting system which allows for easy recording of rifle zero. Also, the zero cannot be confirmed by visual inspection.
7. Returning to Zero: The M16A2 does not have a reliable procedure for setting an individual’s zero after changing sights for any reason, e.g., using MILES or .22 rimfire adaptors.
8. Night Sight: The M16A2 does not have a low light level or night sight.
9. Protective Mask Firing: The M16A2 has not been designed to aid firing while wearing a protective mask.
10. Range Estimation: The M16A2 sight has not been designed to aid in the estimation of range

Let’s consider those, briefly. Note that every single one of those objections relates to the sights. There are no complaints about the other Marine improvements (not even the hated burst switch). Most of the sight squawks were because the sight was different from the sights of the A1, which were pretty much as Stoner, Sullivan et. al. designed them circa 1959 (the earlier AR-10 sights are different, but the later AR-15 prototypes and their descendants all used something extremely close to the M16 and M16A1 sights. (The USAF/USN M16 and the Army/Marine M16A1 differed only in the absence and presence respectively of a forward assist). Even the protective mask issue is basically a sighting problem — with the then current US M17 gas mask, the rifle had to be held canted to use carrying-handle based rear sights.
Complaints 1-5 relate only to the M16A2 sights, but 6-10 are just as applicable to the then-issued Army M16A1.
Even at the time, it was clear that optical sights were better than irons — scopes for distance and red dots for close-in work. Army special operators had already tested — on the flat range, in the tire house, and on the two-way range — such early red-dots and both-eyes-open sights such as the Single Point and the Armson Occluded Eye Gunsight (OEG). In the early 21st Century, universal optics would end the long run of the M16A2, and sweep away all these problems the 1986 Army contractors worried about. But there was no way to predict that in 1986, not with any certainty.
And that’s Part 2 of our story. Tomorrow, we’ll cover the modifications to the M16 that the authors recommended in place of the A2.

The previous two stories set the stage, for a look at a report drafted for the Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences the Army was still pursuing the “best” (an upgraded M16 meeting all Army objectives) instead of the “good” (the M16A2, which was developed and revised to meet Marine objectives). Of course, we all know the spoiler aleady: the Army accepted the Marine M16A2 as is, leaving the report as an orphaned artifact. The report is here: http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a168577.pdf

Colt factory shot of the M16A2. The A2 was developed by the USMC, but was manufactured by Colt and FNMI.

This is the third of a three part series. In the first part, Thursday on WeaponsMan.com, the Army contractors noted the specific solutions implemented on the A2 and the problems the Marines solved thereby, but complained that the problems and solutions were too USMC-specific. In the second part, posted yesterday, we discussed just what they thought was wrong about the Marines’ product. In this, third, part, we’ll list the modifications that they suggested in lieu of or in addition to the A2 mods.

Most of the Army’s problems with the A2 related to the burst mechanism, and the sights, especially the complicated rear sight. (This is actually an A3/A4 or M4: note the knobs, left, for removing the carrying handle. The A2 handle was forged as part of the upper receiver.

Reliability

We should note that the Marines’ tests, as reported in this document (p,7), demonstrated significantly lower reliability, and increased fouling in the A2 compared to its older brother. These tests are suspect because the early lot of XM855 used was considered bad ammo, but the M16A1 did outperform the A2.

Thirty Ml6A1 rifles firing 26,010 rounds of M193

Failures to fire – none
Failures to feed – 3 (Not locking magazine in place)

Thirty M16A2 rifles firing 26,010 rounds of XM855

Failures to fire – 52 (27 – bad ammunition) (25 – mechnanical [sic] malfunctions)
Failures to feed – 3 (Improperly loaded magazines)

Those failures to fire that were not attributed to bad ammo were thought to be caused by the A2 trigger system’s Achilles’s heel, the burst trigger mechanism. The A2 performed even worse in a cold weather test, but again, it was with the questionable ammunition, and many of the failures to fire were also laid at the feet of the burst mechanism.
The report has an interesting discussion of the burst mechanism and its rationale in Marine, but not Army, small arms doctrine:

The M16A2 has less combat capability due to the elimination of full automatic fire. Full automatic fire enhances the ability of Army units to clear and defend buildings, to conduct final assaults on enemy positions, to defend against an enemy final assault, to conduct an ambush, to react to an enemy ambush, to engage an enemy helicopter or fast moving vehicle, etc.
While the Marines claim greater accuracy and conservation of ammunition for the 3-round burst control, no data were generated during the test to support these contentions and no supportative [sic] data are known to exist.
Also, it should be noted that room-to-room fighting was conducted with blanks, no close-in firing was conducted, no firing with short time limits was conducted, no firing at aircraft was conducted, etc. In other words, for all of the automatic/burst firing conducted during the test, a semi-automatic mode of fire would have probably resulted in a greater number of target hits.
Finally, to be given very serious consideration, is the fact that the burst control requires nine (9) new parts in the lower receiver, evidently contributing to the large number of weapon malfunctions during testing of the M16A2.

They also took issue with the heavy barrel (“heavy in the wrong place”), the twist rate (preferred 1:9), stock length increased when even the A1 stock was too long for small soldiers, and the fast twist’s incompatibility with the .22 subcaliber system. 
The article includes an extensive comparison of the pros and cons of Marine KD vs. Army Trainfire marksmanship modalities. These training differences result from the different combat envelopes for the rifleman: the Marines need to engage with rifles in the 300-to-800 meter space, because they don’t have the supporting arms that the Army can count on, at least, not in the same quantity. A unit that must fight with just its organic weapons needs to get the very most out of these weapons. The Army of 1986 did not consider a 500 or 600 meter target a primary rifle target, but a crew-served-weapons target.
In the end, the recommendations the contractors made were mostly about the sights. They put their recommendations in a table with the M16A1 and M16A2 stats. Since the latter are probably familiar to most readers, we omit them now to save time, and just show the contract recommendations.

Item	Recommended
Front sight (day)	Fixed blade, 0.090″
Front sight (night)	Luminous dot on each sightguard
Rear Sight (day)	single 2mm peep. A single elevation knob marked for 200, 250, 390, 25, 400, 500, 15, 600, 700, and 800 meters. Windage knob at rear. Each click equal to 1 MOA
Rear Sight (night)	Two luminous dots on upper portion of receiver (or a single flip- up luminous dot located forward of the carrying handle) are aligned with front dots for shooting at night
Zero Recording	Yes
Zero Inspection	Yes
25m setting (day and night sights)	Yes
Mechanical Zero	Yes
250-m battlesight	Yes
Firing mode	Semi and Auto
Barrel	20″. Slightly heavier than A1 at receiver and mid-barrel. 1:9″ twist
Handguard	Same as M16A2 except held in place with a securely fastened ring nut to provide rigidity.
Buttstock	Same material as M16A2. Same length as M16A1. Option for adjustable length.

There are several interesting observations to make here. First, the contractors recommended that the Army make changes that would decrease the mechanical accuracy of the proposed M16Ax relative to the Marines’ A2. Specifically, these changes included the wider fixed front sight blade, the 1-MOA adjustments on the rear sight (A2 offers ½-MOA), and arguably the simplification of the rear sight. The trade-off was simplicity and ease of training, instead of superior bullseye performance.

Second, some of the proposals would definitely improve the utility of the firearm, including restoring the short stock, or replacing it with an adjustable one; increasing the barrel diameter towards the chamber rather than the muzzle, thus improving sustained fire accuracy and reliability; reverting to automatic fire from the burst mechanism (which also has side benefits, in improving the trigger’s feel and consistency). The night-sight proposal was truly ingenious.

Third, in some of these road-not-taken proposals, the Army was reverting to the original AR-10 design and rejecting changes that were largely imposed on the AR design by the Army in the previous decade. These include the rigid fastening of the handguard, and the fixed front sight blade.

Finally, these proposals were almost the last gasp of the iron-sighted military rifle. As this  document passed from the contracting officer to file cabinets across the service, without action, special operators were already wringing out scopes and single-point sights, and a few visionaries were already arguing that the day of the iron sight had run its three centuries, and was now at an end. A new generation of optical technology was eliminating the two objections that had kept optics off the rifles of most soldiers: less durability than irons, and slower target acquisition. Many men’s efforts went into winning over the Voices of Experience who still said “no” to anything with a lens, thanks to memories of Uncle Joe’s elk lost because his scope fogged up, or the VC that got away because somebody attached an unauthorized 4×32 Colt scope to the carrying handle of his M16.

Traveling.....

I went on a trip at the company's behest and they sent me to the "Ice Palace" A.K.A Minneapolis MN,
     I got put up at the Raddison Blu which is next to the Mall of America.  I walked around the Mall of America and took several pictures of the facility.  All I can say is that it is Huuuge

The Mall of America has a gross area of 4,870,000 sq ft (452,000 m²) or 96.4 acres (390,000 m²), enough to fit seven Yankee Stadiums inside, with 2,500,000 sq ft (230,000 m²) available as retail space^. The mall is nearly symmetric, with a roughly rectangular floor plan. More than 530 stores are arranged along three levels of pedestrian walkways on the sides of the rectangle, with a fourth level on the east side. Four anchor department stores are located at the corners. The mall is organized into four different zones, each of those zones had its own decorative style until a series of renovations from 2010 to 2015 led to a unified and more luxurious style, as well as to coincide with the mall's first major expansion.

Despite Minnesota's cold winters, only the mall's entrances and some below ground areas are heated. Heat is allowed in through skylights above Nickelodeon Universe. The Mall of America originally had Camp Snoopy, but due to an expired contract the park was taken over by a new organization. The majority of the heat is produced by lighting fixtures, other electric devices, and people in the mall. In fact, even during the winter, air conditioning systems may still be in use during peak hours to ensure a comfortable shopping environment. Although the common areas are unheated, the individual stores do have heating systems.

Two nearly identical seven-story parking ramps on the east and west sides of the mall provide 12,287 parking spaces. Overflow parking north of the building provides an additional 1,200–1,500 spaces, and 1,407 spaces are provided by IKEA (1,407 spaces) that is part of the Phase II expansion of the mall which is under construction.

Nickelodeon Universe is an indoor theme park in the center of the mall. The park features roller coasters, among numerous other rides and attractions, and is the largest indoor theme park in the United States. Unlike many indoor amusement parks, Nickelodeon Universe has a great deal of natural foliage in and about the park, and its floor has a wide variance in height – the highest ground level in the park is 15 feet (4.6 m) above the lowest. The rides include the roller coasters SpongeBob SquarePants Rock Bottom Plunge and Avatar Airbender, and a thrill ride called BrainSurge. The latter roller coaster bills itself as a "rather peculiar" ride. It also has a miniature golfing section called Moose Mountain. This miniature golf course features eighteen holes and a relatively fast astroturf surface. 

At the Sea Life Minnesota Aquarium, guests travel through a 300-foot-long (91 m) curved tunnel through 14 feet (4.3 m) of water to view over 4,500 sea creatures including sharks, turtles, stingrays, and many more. Sea Life Minnesota Aquarium offers special events such as sleepovers, scuba diving, snorkeling, and birthday parties.

The Mall recently added Crayola Experience and FlyOver America to the list of family attractions.

   I did enjoy my "business trip" to the Ice Palace but I am glad to be coming home.  

Monday Music "Prayers for the Dying" and "Kiss from a Rose" by Seal

I decided to roll with a song or actually 2 songs from the 90's from Seal.  I heard of Seal when his "Prayer for the dying" came out.  I thought it was a haunting song and to me it talked about dying, crossing over and rebirth, it was a really good song.  But I couldn't find anything about the song in any of my sources.  But I added the song as the first video.   I also included Seal's "Kiss from a Rose" from Batman as the other song.  It is also a good song and it did well in the charts. 

"Kiss from a Rose" is a song from Seal's second eponymous album. The song was first released as a single in July 1994. Re-released in 1995, it was included on the Batman Forever film soundtrack, helping it top the charts in the U.S. and Australia. At the 1996 Grammy Awards, it won awards for Record of the Year, Song of the Year, and Best Male Pop Vocal Performance.

"Kiss from a Rose" was written in 1987, several years prior to the release of Seal's eponymous debut album from 1991. After writing the song Seal felt "embarrassed by it" and "threw the tape in the corner". Seal did not present it to producer Trevor Horn until the recording sessions for Seal II. In 2015, Seal said of the song: "To be honest, I was never really that proud of it, though I like what Trevor did with the recording. He turned that tape from my corner into another 8 million record sales and my name became a household name."
"Kiss from a Rose" was the second single taken from the Batman Forever film soundtrack, and topped the U.S. Billboard Hot 100 for one week in August 1995. It also went to number four on the UK Singles Chart. The single originally made it to #20 in 1994, but upon being re-released after being featured in the film, it reached the top position. It also won the MTV Movie Award for Best Song from a Movie in the 1996 edition. Seal talked about the long, strange journey that the song went through on The Brian McKnight Show season finale that aired 30 May 2010. He described how the song initially dropped out of the charts shortly after its release. Joel Schumacher subsequently called Seal, and requested use of the song to play over a love scene between the characters played by Nicole Kidman and Val Kilmer in Batman Forever. Although the song was eventually not incorporated into this scene, it was instead used to play over the end credits; Seal believes this change contributed to the song's eventual popularity.

Two versions of the music video were produced:   I knew the second version, but saw the top version this morning doing this blog post.

• The original version is set in a photographic studio and was co-directed by Matthew Rolston and William Levin. The 1966 film Blowup was heavily referenced in the video.

• The second version was directed by Joel Schumacher and has Seal performing the song beside the Bat-Signal, interspersed with clips from the film Batman Forever, with one clip from Batman Returns. This is the more popular video of the song. The director of photography of this version of the music video was Neil Abramson.

Happy New Years day and a party yesterday...

Happy New Year to my fellow bloggers and readers, I hope 2017 is a bit less interesting than 2016 was.  

Although the father time kinda looks like Old NFO and pushing the analogy, the baby can be Jace, his grandson, lol

    Yesterday we said good bye 2016, a very tumultuous year, I was really concerned that the PIAP* would get elected and we would be continue to pursue the idiotic policies of that metrosexual in the white house and the doubling down of the stupid further inflaming the people in "flyover" country with the predictable results.

*Pig in a pantsuit

   Yesterday we went to my friend "Mac" going away party at camp.  Mac has been a regular fixture at camp for years with the exception of getting activated and deployed to A-Stan.

 Mac and Father time Old NFO

  Mac was medically retired as a Army Officer a Capt due to injuries suffered by an IED.  Mac is a class act and a straight up nice guy and I am honored to know him.   Mac until yesterday was camp director at my boy scout camp. He was always there to help the scouts out either with camping or at OA events.

This is Mac being "sociable" with the ladies of Frozen, at least that is what he called it...other people called it "no-no" zone.  This was at a "Klondike" event

Mac is known for helping out doing whatever is necessary to help out the troops or the scouts, his knowledge of the camp and the inner workings are legendary.  Here is Mac helping out in the kitchen after an Order of the Arrow event a couple of years when my son was an ordeal member.

 I would call Mac up when I wanted to go shooting,  I liked quiet places where I could shoot at my leisure.  The setup was good, and sometimes Mac would join me to do shooting,

This is Mac shooting my "old School" AR much to his joy, he made some reference to having "Vietnam War" flashbacks from all the movies he had watched.

There was a party thrown at the camp for Mac, who has decided it is time to spend more time with Jackie who is a class act and a real nice girl and go somewhere else that will pay him better.  Face it to work at a scout camp, you gotta love the job but it don't pay very much and in my opinion, he was very underpaid for all that he did.  

 This is Mac and My son who proudly wore that shirt at the party.

A bunch of staffers and some scouters came in to give Mac a proper sendoff and I was glad and honored to attend.  I had asked Mac what he wanted, either ammo or booze and knowing Mac's proclivity for ammo so I brought him this..

   He was appreciative of the libation, and I was pleased to give my friend something that was appreciated as a "thank you" for all that he has done for me and for the scouts.  He will be missed at the camp though.