Rich II DD- 820 - History

Rich II DD- 820 - History

We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

Passage to Vietnam in 1972

On the morning of October 17, 1972, m y ship USS Rich (DD 820) departed our homeport in Norfolk, Virginia beginning the long passage to Vietnam. Four days later in company with USS Bordelon (DD 881) we arrived at the Panama Canal Zone early morning on October 21, 1972. As our ship approached the Cristobal breakwater and entered into Limon Bay, the Panama Canal Pilot boarded the ship from the pilot boat. Within a short period of time, the pilot ordered the ship to begin maneuvering to the first lock, the Gatun Lock. Seeing Gatun Lock for the first time makes for an impressive picture. The three successive lock chambers look like a huge staircase. The lock area itself is a lot of concrete and buildings located on either side of the lock. Beyond the grass areas on either side of the lock began the tropical jungle of dark trees and dense foliage.

USS Rich (DD 820) and USS Bordelon (DD 881) starting our transit of the Panama Canal, bound for Vietnam. Photo by shipmate Ron Ciervo.*

For many on board, this would be their first trip through the Panama Canal. The canal should be considered one of the man-made wonders of the world. Its length is about 44 nautical miles (about 50 statute miles) from the Atlantic/Caribbean coast to the Pacific coast. While going through the Panama Canal, a ship will be raised and lowered 85 feet. After going through Gatun Lake and Gaillard Cut, the ship enters Pedro Miguel Locks and is lowered 31 feet. After Pedro Miguel Locks, one mile downstream the ship next enters the Miraflores Locks to be lowered about another 54 feet to the level of the Pacific Ocean.

As the ship proceeded to and along the lock wall of the Gatun Lock, small boats came out to the ship to deliver the canal line handlers. Then wire ropes were sent over to the ship from small electronic locomotives called Mules. The Mules ran on steel rail tracks laid along the top of the lock walls and were located on both sides of the locks. After the Mules passed wire ropes to both sides of the ship, they were made fast to the ship’s deck bitts.

Wire ropes were passed from the Mules to both sides of the ship, they were made fast to the ship’s deck bitts. The Mules were then used to tow the ship on the wire ropes alongside the lock walls, and ultimately towed the ship into each lock chamber.*

Once the wire ropes were secured, the Mules began to winch-in, taking the slack out of the wire ropes. The Mules were then used to tow the ship on the wire ropes alongside the lock walls, and ultimately towed the ship into each lock chamber and assisted the pilot in positioning the ship within each lock chamber. This process would be repeated at each of the lock chambers throughout the ship’s canal passage.

The Gatun Locks consisted of three successive lock chambers. When a ship left the Gatun Locks and entered Gatun Lake, it had been raised 85 feet to the level of the lake. Gatun Lake was a man-made lake and covered an area of about 164 square miles. The shipping channel through the lake was about 15 nautical miles in length. Upon leaving Gatun Lake, you arrived at the more historical section of the canal, the Gaillard Cut, also known as the Culebra Cut, which traversed about eight miles through the Continental Divide of Panama, the highest point on the isthmus.

The Panama Canal. From the Caribbean Sea at point “A”‘ via Limon Bay to point “B” the Pacific Ocean.*

After the ship passed through the Gaillard Cut, the first of two more locks were reached. The first lock, Pedro Miguel, had one chamber, and lowered the ship 31 feet. From Pedro Miguel, the ship moved into Lake Miraflores and proceeded about one mile to the Miraflores Locks. The Miraflores Locks had two chambers, which lowered the ship the remaining distance, depending upon the height of the Pacific Ocean tides, back to sea level. Being a military vessel, the ship proceeded from the Miraflores Locks about eight more miles to the docks at the Rodman Naval Station across from Balboa. The canal transit had taken over eight hours, so the ship moored at the Rodman Naval Station docks at about 1600 that afternoon.

Aerial view of Rodman Naval Station, Panama Canal zone*

Except for the duty section, the crew was granted overnight liberty. My section had the duty that night, so no liberty in Panama City for us. The ship was scheduled to get underway the next morning at 1000 to begin our passage to Pearl Harbor. QM1 Janson asked that Jeff, one of the other quartermasters, and I double-check the time, speed, and distance calculations in the passage plan from Panama to Hawaii. We initially got a bit distracted from the task when something caught our eye on the first navigation chart leaving the Canal Zone out to the Gulf of Panama.

On the chart was a location just down the coast labeled “Leper Colony.” The Leper Colony was located just west on the coast from the Pan-American bridge. We looked in the Sailing Directions publication and sure enough, it discussed the community of Palo Seco. Palo Seco was a leprosarium, or hospital, operated in the canal-zone since the disease-ridden days of canal construction, and was actually funded by the U.S. Congress. Both of us were surprised about the existence of the colony. I associated leprosy with biblical stories, not modern times. The rest of our night in Panama was spent checking latitude and longitude coordinates, re-measuring distances, and calculating time, speed, and distance to double-check the estimated time of arrivals (ETAs) at each route leg waypoint.

The next morning, down in the berthing compartment, returning crew were talking about their night in Panama City. One place mentioned by many was a spot called the Blue Goose. The Blue Goose in Panama City was a brothel that was supposedly sponsored by the Panamanian government. One guy aptly described the place as probably being much like a Prohibition era roadhouse, where anything went. Those of us who had duty quickly grew tired of hearing how we had missed out on all the fine women and what a great place the Blue Goose was.

The other thing the crew was happy about was that it was Sunday. Once the ship was out to sea and secured from the sea and anchor detail, for those not going on watch, “holiday routine” would be set. The holiday routine meant that those nursing their hangovers and/or suffering from exhaustion because they had been up all night while on liberty would be able to hit their racks and get some sleep.

Pan-American bridge, “The Bridge of the Americas.”*

At 1000, the ship got underway from the Rodman Naval Station dock. Once the ship was fair in the outbound channel, it proceeded to pass under the Pan-American bridge (The Bridge of the Americas) and headed outbound to the Gulf of Panama, and then on to the Eastern Pacific Ocean. The passage distance of close to 4,700 nautical miles lay ahead of us from the Panama Canal to Pearl Harbor…To read “Striking Eight Bells,” use one of the following links to booksellers: Books, Barnes and Noble Booksellers, BAM –Books A Million and eBooks.

Civilizations before history: Ancient Sumer and the Sumerian King list

As a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, this site may earn from qualifying purchases. We may also earn commissions on purchases from other retail websites.

There have been numerous discoveries that seem to disagree with history as we know it. Ancient civilizations that predate our times are known to have existed across the globe, but who were they and were they that different from us? What were their beliefs? Their purpose and origin? That is something that has “bothered” archaeologists who are not convinced with their existence.

Ancient Egypt is one of the most incredible ancient civilizations to have inhabited our planet. According to history, Ancient Egypt came to be around 3000 BC. The earliest texts speak of ancient Mesopotamia around 4000 BC, but from these periods, if we travel further back in time, we will see that other civilizations inhabited our planet, and we are seeing evidence of their existence today.

Robert Bauval and Graham Hancock, authors of the book “The Orion Mystery”, were able to find out, using a computer program that recreated the astronomical landscape in the past, that the Giza plateau was positioned above the constellation of Orion at around 10500 BC. This is one of the pieces of evidence that has led researchers to believe that history as we know it is quite wrong.

Ancient texts speak of the great flood, a story that is repeated in numerous civilizations across the globe, the great flood has also been confirmed by the bible. On the other hand, mainstream history and archaeology seem to tell their own story and suggest that these ancient texts are misinterpreted and are only myths created by our ancestors. Researchers have done a fine job denying recorded history written and depicted on tablets, walls, sculptures and monuments.

In Ancient Mesopotamia we have very interesting pieces of ancient history. Mesopotamia is a Greek name meaning “between the rivers” this region spreads between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. This vast area of land was composed of several regions such as Southern Sumer, Akkad, and Assyria to the North. In these regions, researchers have found evidence that speaks of a past that seems to disagree with our conventional way of looking at history.

Akkad for example, is a city located 50 km northwest of Babylon. It is commonly referred to as Akkad, Agade, Abu Habba, and Sippar, which means “city of books.” This ancient city was very popular because of their libraries. According to research, it was the capital of the eighth antediluvian monarch, Emenduranna, who reigned for 21,000 years. If we move 80km southeast of Babylon we will find the city of Nimrod and the tablets of Nimrod. Between 1880 and 1900 archaeologists from the University of Pennsylvania excavated 50,000 tablets believed to have been written during the third millennium BC. Among their findings, archaeologists discovered a library of 20,000 volumes, dictionaries and complete works on religion, literature, law and science. Researchers also discovered a list of rulers that lived for thousands of years.

The Sumerian King list is perhaps, one of the most important archaeological discoveries. There are more than a dozen of copies of Sumerian King Lists, found in Babylon, Susa, and Assyria, and the Royal Library of Nineveh from the VII century BC. All of these are believed to originate from one original list believed to have been written during the Third Dynasty of Ur or even earlier. The best preserved specimen of the Sumerian King List is called the Weld-Blundell Prism, which is a clay, cuneiform inscribed vertical prism housed in the Ashmolean Museum. The Weld-Blundell Prism was written in cuneiform around 2170 BC by a scribe who signed as Nur-Ninsubur from the end of the Isin Dynasty. This incredible document provides a comprehensive list of the Sumerian Kings from the beginning, before the great flood, and the 10 kings who lived before the Flood who lived for thousands of years. The clay prism was found in Larsa, home of the fourth antediluvian king Kichunna, a few kilometers north of Ur.

The first part of the Sumerian King List:

𔄙-39 After the kingship descended from heaven, the kingship was in Eridug. In Eridug, Alulim became king he ruled for 28800 years. Alaljar ruled for 36000 years. 2 kings they ruled for 64800 years. Then Eridug fell and the kingship was taken to Bad-tibira. In Bad-tibira, En-men-lu-ana ruled for 43200 years. En-men-gal-ana ruled for 28800 years. Dumuzid, the shepherd, ruled for 36000 years. 3 kings they ruled for 108000 years. Then Bad-tibira fell (?) and the kingship was taken to Larag. In Larag, En-sipad-zid-ana ruled for 28800 years. 1 king he ruled for 28800 years. Then Larag fell (?) and the kingship was taken to Zimbir. In Zimbir, En-men-dur-ana became king he ruled for 21000 years. 1 king he ruled for 21000 years. Then Zimbir fell (?) and the kingship was taken to Curuppag. In Curuppag, Ubara-Tutu became king he ruled for 18600 years. 1 king he ruled for 18600 years. In 5 cities 8 kings they ruled for 241200 years. Then the flood swept over.”

The real meaning of the Sumerian King list is to demonstrate that the “royalty” came down from the heaven and a specific city was chosen to dominate over all others.

According to the Sumerian King List, after the flood this is how history continued:

After the flood had swept over, and the kingship had descended from heaven, the kingship was in Kic . In Kic , Jucur became king he ruled for 1200 years. Kullassina-bel ruled for 960 (ms. P2+L2 has instead: 900) years. Nanjiclicma ruled for (ms. P2+L2 has:) 670 (?) years. En-tarah-ana ruled for (ms. P2+L2 has:) 420 years ……, 3 months, and 3 1/2 days. Babum …… ruled for (ms. P2+L2 has:) 300 years. Puannum ruled for 840 (ms. P2+L2 has instead: 240) years. Kalibum ruled for 960 (ms. P2+L2 has instead: 900) years. Kalumum ruled for 840 (mss. P3+BT14, Su1 have instead: 900) years. Zuqaqip ruled for 900 (ms. Su1 has instead: 600) years. (In mss. P2+L2, P3+BT14, P5, the 10th and 11th rulers of the dynasty precede the 8th and 9th.) Atab (mss. P2+L2, P3+BT14, P5 have instead: Aba ) ruled for 600 years. Macda , the son of Atab , ruled for 840 (ms. Su1 has instead: 720) years. Arwium , the son of Macda , ruled for 720 years. Etana , the shepherd, who ascended to heaven and consolidated all the foreign countries, became king he ruled for 1500 (ms. P2+L2 has instead: 635) years. Balih , the son of Etana , ruled for 400 (mss. P2+L2, Su1 have instead: 410) years. En-me-nuna ruled for 660 (ms. P2+L2 has instead: 621) years. Melem-Kic , the son of En-me-nuna , ruled for 900 years. (ms. P3+BT14 adds:) 1560 are the years of the dynasty of En-me-nuna . Barsal-nuna , the son of En-me-nuna , (mss. P5, P3+BT14 have instead: Barsal-nuna ) ruled for 1200 years. Zamug , the son of Barsal-nuna , ruled for 140 years. Tizqar , the son of Zamug , ruled for 305 years. (ms. P3+BT14 adds:) 1620 + X ……. Ilku ruled for 900 years. Iltasadum ruled for 1200 years. En-men-barage-si , who made the land of Elam submit, became king he ruled for 900 years. Aga , the son of En-men-barage-si , ruled for 625 years. (ms. P3+BT14 adds:) 1525 are the years of the dynasty of En-men-barage-si . 23 kings they ruled for 24510 years, 3 months, and 3 1/2 days. Then Kic was defeated and the kingship was taken to E-ana .

What we have described in the Sumerian King list is something amazing since it tells us what exactly happened, who ruled and for how long. The only question that remains is… How did certain kings rule for thousands of years? Were they ordinary human beings? Or did they in fact come from the “heaven”?

More Americans Supported Hitler Than You May Think. Here's Why One Expert Thinks That History Isn't Better Known

T hese days, and especially since the deadly rally in Charlottesville, Va., last August, it has become clear to many Americans that the specter of Nazism in their country is not resigned to 1930s history. But until very recently, even that part of the story was less well known than it is today.

In fact, when Bradley W. Hart first started researching the history of Nazi sympathy in the United States a few years ago, he was largely driven by the absence of attention to the topic. Hart&rsquos new book Hitler&rsquos American Friends: The Third Reich’s Supporters in the United States argues that the threat of Nazism in the United States before World War II was greater than we generally remember today, and that those forces offer valuable lessons decades later &mdash and not just because part of that story is the history of the &ldquoAmerica First&rdquo idea, born of pre-WWII isolationism and later reborn as a slogan for now-President Donald Trump.

&ldquoThere&rsquos certainly a raw and visceral shock to seeing swastikas displayed in American streets,&rdquo Hart tells TIME. &ldquoBut this is a topic I&rsquod been working on for quite a while at that point, and while it wasn&rsquot something I expected, it was a trend I&rsquod been observing. I wasn&rsquot terribly shocked but there&rsquos still a visceral reaction when you see that kind of symbolism displayed in the 21st century.&rdquo

Hart, who came to the topic via research on the eugenics movement and the history of Nazi sympathy in Britain, says he realized early on that there was a lot more to the American side of that story than most textbooks acknowledged. Some of the big names might get mentioned briefly &mdash the radio priest Father Charles Coughlin, or the highly public German American Bund organization &mdash but in general, he says, the American narrative of the years leading up to World War II has elided the role of those who supported the wrong side. And yet, American exchange students went to Germany and returned with glowing reviews, while none other than Charles Lindbergh denounced Jewish people for pushing the U.S. toward unnecessary war. In its various expressions, the pro-Nazi stance during those years was mostly focused not on creating an active military alliance with Germany or bringing the U.S. under Nazi control (something Hitler himself thought wouldn&rsquot be possible) but rather on keeping the U.S. out of war in Europe.

So why was that past overlooked for so long?

In part, Hart theorizes, it&rsquos because the American story of World War II is such a powerful national narrative. The United States, that narrative says, helped save the world. Rocked by Pearl Harbor, Americans stepped up to turn the tide for the Allies and thus solidified their nation’s place as a global superpower. That narrative doesn&rsquot have much room for the relatively small, but significant, number of Americans who were rooting for the other side.

&ldquoIt&rsquos always been uncomfortable in this country to talk about isolationism, though the ideas are still out there,&rdquo he says, &ldquoIt&rsquos part of the American mythology. We want to remember ourselves as always having been on the right side in this war.&rdquo

It was also possible for those who had participated in Nazi-sympathetic groups to later cloak their beliefs in the Cold War&rsquos anti-communist push &mdash a dynamic that had in fact driven some of them to fascism in the first place, as it seemed “tougher on communism than democracy is,” as Hart puts it. (One survey he cites found that in 1938, more Americans thought that communism was worse than fascism than vice versa.) Such people could truthfully insist that they&rsquod always been anti-communist without revealing that they&rsquod been fascists, and their fellow Americans were still so worried about communism that they might not press the matter.

&ldquoWe still don&rsquot totally know the scope of this,&rdquo he adds, noting that some important documents are still classified.

A 1938 Nazi Law Forced Jews to Register Their Wealth—Making It Easier to Steal

The new law came mere weeks after the Anschluss, Nazi Germany’s annexation of Austria. On April 26, 1938, the “Decree for the Reporting of Jewish-Owned Property” issued by Hitler’s government took effect, requiring all Jews in both Germany and Austria to register any property or assets valued at more than 5,000 Reichsmarks (around $2,000 in American currency of the period, or $34,000 today). From furniture and paintings to life insurance and stocks, nothing was immune from the registry. By July 31 of that year, German finance officials had collected paperwork from some 700,000 Jewish citizens𔃏 billion Reichsmarks-worth of wealth ripe for state-sanctioned theft known as “aryanization.”

“Aryanization was essentially a gigantic, trans-European trafficking operation in stolen goods,” writes historian Götz Aly in Hitlers Beneficiaries: Plunder, Racial War, and the Nazi Welfare State. As Nazi-occupied territory grew from Austria to Poland to more of Eastern Europe, so, too, did the number of Jewish families the Nazis could steal from. Jews had faced discrimination in Germany—and much of Europe—before the April 1938 edict, but that new law marked a turning point. One legal advisor for the Nazi Ministry of Economics deemed it the “forerunner to a complete and definitive removal of Jews from the German economy.”

When Adolf Hitler first came to power in 1933 thanks to the Enabling Act that gave him and his ministers all legislative control, the German economy was still reeling from the Great Depression. Hitler committed his government to two main economic policies: military armament and Autarky, or economic self-sufficiency. By promoting the use of German coal and putting taxes towards the military, Hitler steered his country towards a thriving economy. But even as the nation’s financial state recovered, he needed more money for the military, and so he created a fictional private enterprise to underwrite promissory notes, writes historian Aly. Somehow that fake money had to be made real so that various government entities, like the military, would actually have the capital to function without bringing down the economy, and that’s where Jewish wealth came to play.

Hitler espoused a virulent form of anti-Semitism that offered German citizens an enemy to rally around. He held Jews responsible for Germany’s military humiliation in World War I and also encouraged the belief that Jews grew wealthy through theft from Aryans. “The robbery part [of Hitler’s decree] is embedded in this ideology that these people are parasites who attach themselves to us, and they live by sucking our blood, and we are entitled to punish them and take it all back,” says Peter Hayes, professor emeritus of history and German at Northwestern University and the author of How Was It Possible? A Holocaust Reader.

What’s more, Nazi ideology held that Jews were particularly wealthy citizens of Germany, despite the reality that the majority of Jewish families fell somewhere in the middle class, Hayes says. Not only would the 1938 edict return wealth to non-Jewish citizens, whom Nazis considered to be the rightful owners, it would also encourage more Jews to leave the country, another of Hitler’s goals at that point. (The decision to pursue the wholesale extermination of Jews, known as the “Final Solution,” wouldn’t come for several more years, in late 1941.)

Following the April 1938 property registry, Jewish citizens faced an increasing number of economic laws that chipped away at their livelihood. They lost allowances and exemptions for having children, and were forced into the highest tax bracket regardless of their income, writes historian Martin Thurau. From there, many Jewish-owned firms were falsely charged with tax evasion going back to the 1920s, on which they were forced to pay arrears.

For those Jews with the means to leave the country, legally emigrating meant relinquishing 50 percent of one’s monetary assets, and then exchanging the rest of the remaining Reichsmarks for the currency of whatever country would be the final destination. “By late 1938, they were allowing Jews to keep only 8 percent of what their Reichsmarks were worth in the foreign country,” Hayes says—which only made it harder to find a safe haven, since the Jewish refugees couldn’t take any of their savings with them.

And to make matters more dire, where would they even emigrate to?

“The way I formulate this is, American immigration policy toward Jews was awful, except in comparison to every other nation on the globe,” Hayes says. While the U.S. placed ever stricter laws on immigration, limiting the number of Jews who could enter the country, Canada only took around 5,000 Jewish immigrants in total, and Britain only temporarily allowed greater numbers following the November 1938 Kristallnacht pogroms before returning to a postwar policy that excluded Jews.

Whether Jewish citizens stayed in Germany and Austria or left, they were doomed to lose much, if not all, their property. Just under half of those assets went directly to the German state. According to Hayes, in the national budget for 1938-1939, an entire 5 percent came solely from wealth confiscated from Jews. The rest of the assets went to non-Jewish citizens, in the form of houses, businesses and goods sold for vastly less than their value.

This left Jewish citizens without means of supporting themselves, without homes, and without any connection to their previous lives. As historian Lisa Silverman writes of the edict’s effect in Austria, “The failure of law to protect their property was one of the first steps toward the erasure of both the present and future identities of Austrian Jews.”

And ordinary citizens were more than willing to participate in the looting of Jewish property. “When the Nazis wipe out the Jewish inhabitants of a village in eastern Poland [later in the war], one of the first things they would do is distribute all the property to the locals,” Hayes says. “This was a way of winning popular support. It created a complicity between the occupiers and the occupied, and a common interest, and the Nazis exploited that.”

Business owners benefitted as much as private individuals. Companies like Neckermann, which sold mail-order goods and vacation packages, and Evonik, a manufacturing group formerly known as Degussa, bought businesses formerly owned by Jewish people. The ability to consolidate power made them leaders of their industries, and implicit partners with the Nazi government. Each of these transactions were legal, and many were meticulously recorded.

By the end of the war, around 6 million Jews had been murdered in the Holocaust. For the survivors, the challenges posed by returning to their homes varied from country to country. While France and Germany relied on their records to return property and make some form of reparations for businesses lost and assets seized over the course of decades, other countries proved more reluctant to offer restitution. In Austria, for example, “the government felt no obligation to compensate claimants” because the country considered itself a victim of Nazi Germany, writes Silverman. The Dutch government didn’t begin offering compensation for stocks stolen from Jewish citizens in World War II until 2000, after years of calls for investigations into the matter. The record is even worse for Eastern European countries like Poland, Romania and Hungary.

For Hayes, the lesson to be learned from the April 1938 law and all that followed is how deeply the anti-Semitic Nazi ideology penetrated different levels of society in countries across Europe. “It’s troubling to watch how they slowly tightened the screws on people, and the ways in which a state can make one’s life miserable and make you feel like you are up against this giant machine.”

But even more appalling, he says, is they way in which property was valued more highly than lives. “It is remarkable that the killing of people was the easy part of what the Nazis did,” Hayes says. “They could do it fast, they could do it cheap, but then they spent ages on the property, keeping records of it, processing it. It’s remarkable that people are easier to liquidate than property.”

Early Radio Career

Limbaugh landed his first radio job when he was in high school using the pseudonym "Rusty Sharpe," he worked as a DJ for the local station KGMO (co-owned by his father). Following high school, Limbaugh briefly attended Southeast Missouri State University he left the school in 1971, after one year of enrollment, to pursue a career in radio. 

However, Limbaugh had trouble keeping a position. He was fired from stations in Missouri and Pennsylvania for being too controversial as news commentator. "My whole family thought I was destined for failure," he later recalled.

Following a stint as a ticket salesman for Major League Baseball&aposs Kansas City Royals, in the mid-1980s, Limbaugh landed a job as an on-air host at KFBK in Sacramento, California, with the help of a radio executive friend. There, Limbaugh took over Morton Downey Jr.&aposs slot, and met with success when his ratings surpassed his predecessor&aposs. Less than a year later, Limbaugh became known as Sacramento&aposs top radio host.

In 1987, the Federal Communications Commission repealed a long-standing rule known as the Fairness Doctrine, which required both television and radio stations to air for an equal amount of time each side to a political argument. The repeal of the Fairness Doctrine ultimately paved the way for Limbaugh&aposs now-distinct, politically conservative radio style to take shape. Not long after, the on-air host left KFBK for a position at the ABC Radio Network, bringing his newfound fame with him, as well as a reputation for having strong, right wing ideologies.

TAG Heuer Monaco

As the world’s first water-resistant watch with a square case and the first square automatic chronograph, the Heuer Monaco is a very iconic and easily identifiable watch. It immediately grew in popularity with actor Steve McQueen wore it while filming racing movie, Le Mans. The Heuer Monaco was discontinued in the mid-1970s, but was re-introduced in the 1990s by TAG Heuer. The watch was slightly updated, but its new design was relatively the same as the original, legendary Heuer design.

Priced at $3,800, the TAG Heuer Monaco ref. WW2110.FC6177 is the most basic of the Monaco models. It is available with a black dial with a date window and a seconds subdial. The movement is a Calibre 6 automatic movement.

While these are the prices for these specific model of TAG Heuer watches, you can also submit the info your TAG Heuer watch and the Crown & Caliber team and provide you with a quote on its value.

The most expensive and elaborate of the TAG Heuer Monaco watches is the ref. WAW2080.FC6288 priced at $70,000. This watch has a dial with seven bridges and the V4 movement is seen through the sapphire crystal glass. It is a limited edition watch and is titanium and ceramic.

TAG Heuer Monaco $3,800 – $70,000

Rich II DD- 820 - History

After shakedown in the Caribbean, Johnston reported to Newport, R.I., 16 May 1947 for duty with the Atlantic Fleet. Operating out of Newport, her home port, she sailed 9 February 1948 for Northern Europe where she visited ports in Great Britain, France, and Scandinavia before returning to Newport 26 June. For 14 months she operated along the Atlantic coast, then sailed 23 August 1949 for the Mediterranean. From then until 4 October 1961 she deployed with the mighty 6th Fleet on eight occasions and supported peace-keeping efforts in the Middle East.

While on her first Mediterranean deployment, she helped to stabilize the Adriatic Sea during the Trieste crisis and she patrolled the coast of Greece to bolster her freedom and national security against threatened Communist domination. Johnston returned to Newport 26 January 1950. She operated out of Newport from Canada to the Caribbean until 4 June 1951 when she departed with Midshipman at sea training off Northern Europe. Following her return to Newport 28 July, she cleared the East Coast for the Mediterranean 3 September and joined the 6th Fleet in operations that carried her from French Morocco to Turkey she then returned to home port 4 February 1952.

Johnston departed Newport 7 January 1953 for NATO operations in the North Atlantic. Before sailing for duty in the Mediterranean 16 March Johnston aided the Dutch after storms in the North Sea had caused extensive flooding in the Netherlands her crew donated bundles of warm clothing and more than $1,200 for the storm victims. She operated in the Mediterranean until 8 May when she steamed for Newport, arriving 18 May.

After a 4-month deployment in the Mediterranean during early 1954, Johnston operated for more than 17 months along the Atlantic coast from New England to Cuba. On 5 November 1955 she steamed for maneuvers off Northern Europe, followed by another tour of duty in the Mediterranean While operating in the eastern Mediterranean during February 1956, she patrolled off Israel and Egypt as the Middle East rumbled over the developing Suez Canal crisis. Returning to Newport 5 March, she embarked midshipmen 5 June for 2 months of at-sea training off Northern Europe, after which she resumed operations out of Newport.

Johnston sailed once again 6 May 1957 for peace-keeping operations with the 6th Fleet. Before returning to the United States 1 August she ranged the Mediterranean from Spain to Sicily on ASW barrier patrols. While at Marseilles, France, 3 July, she helped fight a destructive blaze on board Lake Champlain (CVS-39). Steaming from Newport 3 September, she Joined the mighty Atlantic Fleet for the NATO Exercise “Strike Back” in the North Atlantic. She returned to Newport 22 October, then resumed operations that sent her into the Caribbean and the Gulf of Mexico.

Returning to the North Atlantic 6 June 1959 for further NATO maneuvers, Johnston steamed to Charleston, S.C., 25 July and joined DesRon 4 for deployment to the Mediterranean. Departing Charleston 21 September, she conducted Fleet operations in the western Mediterranean, on 18 December she Joined naval units from France, Italy and Spain along the French coast for a review in honor of President Eisenhower. Following patrols along the Greek coast, she departed Athens for the United States 24 March 1960, arriving Charleston 10 April.

Before deploying again to the Mediterranean, Johnston joined in NATO Exercise “Sword Thrust” during the fall of 1960 then she departed Charleston 8 March 1961 to bolster the 6th Fleet’s continuing efforts to maintain peace in the Middle East. After returning to the United States 4 October, she steamed 19 November for patrol duty off the Dominican Republic. During this brief but important duty her presence did much to stabilize a situation “which had threatened to plunge the country into bitter fighting and a return of the Trujillo dictatorship.”

Johnston returned to Charleston 26 November and following coastal operations, she steamed to Boston where she underwent FRAM I overhaul from 4 January to 31 October 1962. During this time she received the latest equipment, including ASROC system and DASH facilities, to prepare her for new assignment in the modern Navy. Departing Boston 2 November, she arrived Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, via Charleston, 10 December for Caribbean operations. While steaming near Mona Island 1 February 1963, she rescued sinking Honduran freighter Kirco and towed her to Mayaguez, P.R. Continuing her Atlantic operations, she supported Polaris missile firing tests. As Thomas Jefferson (SSB(N)-618) fired two underwater missiles off the Florida coast 14 March, Johnston became the first destroyer to serve as “primary support ship for an underwater firing of a Polaris missile.”

After more than 4 months of ASW tactical operations, Johnston departed Charleston 6 August for her ninth deployment to the Mediterranean. While operating with the ever-vigilant 6th Fleet, she steamed the length and breadth of the Mediterranean and entered the Black Sea 27 September. During the cruise to Turkish Black Sea ports she served as a symbol of America’s determination to safeguard peace on land through strength on the sea. Following 2 months of ASW operations, Johnston departed Cannes, France, for the United States 7 December and arrived Charleston 23 December for coastal operations through 1964.

The veteran destroyer departed Charleston 6 January 1965 for the Mediterranean to resume peace-keeping operations with forces of other NATO countries. She returned to Charleston 7 June, and devoted the rest of the year to operations with Polaris submarines, amphibious exercises, and overhaul to prepare for future service.

Johnston began New Year 1966 as sonar school training ship at Key West, Fla. During this period of training she visited Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, for refresher training and in February while Johnston’s crew was spending weekend liberty at Kingston, Jamaica, her sailors swiftly answered a call for help on the 27th. The famous Myrtle Bank Hotel had caught fire and threatened the whole water front. Johnston sailors rushed to the fire and averted disaster.

Johnston operated off the East Coast until departing Charleston 29 September for Mediterranean and Middle East deployment. After operating on the far side of the Suez Canal, she again transited the Suez Canal to rejoin the 6th Fleet in the Mediterranean. There her exercises with this powerful deterrent force helped to stabilize the area while bringing her to peak readiness for any emergency which might threaten the peace. She returned to Charleston 9 February 1967 and operated on the East Coast through mid-year.

After returning to her home port, Johnston entered the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard in 1973. She left the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard on 15 November 1973 and continued to operate on the East Coast until she was decommissioned in October 1980 and transferred to Taiwan on February 27, 1981.

There is a gap in the history from 1967 to 1973, then from the end of 1973 to 1980. Hopefully we will be able in the future to fill in these gaps of very important history.

Ancient Jewish History: The Cult of Moloch

Evidence concerning Moloch worship in ancient Israel is found in the legal, as well as in the historical and prophetic literature of the Bible. In the Pentateuch, the laws of the Holiness Code speak about giving or passing children to Moloch (Lev. 18:21, 20:2𠄴) and the law in Deuteronomy speaks of "passing [one's] son or daughter through fire" (18:10). Although Moloch is not named in the Deuteronomy passage, it is likely that his cult was the object of the prohibition.

The author of the Book of Kings speaks about "passing [one's] son and daughter through fire" (II Kings 16:3 [son], 17:17, 21:6 [son]). II Kings 23:10 speaks about "passing [one's] son or daughter through fire to Moloch." Some scholars interpret the phrase lә-ha⯺vir ba-esh, as a reference to a divinatory or protective rite in which children were passed through a fire but not physically harmed. However, the same phrase lә-ha⯺vir ba-esh is found in an unmistakable context of burning in Numbers 31:23.

Other biblical texts refer to the sacrifice of children. Psalms 106:37� speaks of child sacrifice to the unnamed idols of Canaan. In prophetic sources, Jeremiah 7:31 and Ezekiel 20:25𠄶 speak disapprovingly of sacrificing children to Yahweh (for the "bad statutes" referred to by Ezekiel, see Ex. 22:28� but see Friebel) Jeremiah 19:5 speaks of sacrificing children to Baal Ezekiel 16:21, 20:31, 23:37, 39 of sacrificing children to unnamed divinities as does Isaiah 57:5. In none of these is there a mention of Moloch. Only in Jeremiah 32:35 is Moloch mentioned by name and there he is associated with Baal.

Distinction should be made between human sacrifice as a sporadic deed at a time of crisis and distress, such as the holocaust of the son of Mesha king of Moab (II Kings 3:27), or as an act which serves to express an unusual degree of religious devotion as the binding of Isaac (cf. Micah 6:7), on the one hand, and the Moloch cult which was an established institution with a fixed location (the Topheth), on the other. As the classical sources have it, the sacrifices of children at Carthage, a colony founded by Phoenicians on the coast of Northeast Tunisia, usually came after a defeat and a great disaster – a religious practice based upon an ancient mythological tradition. Thus Phoenician tradition ascribed to Sanchuniaton relates that the god Elos (= El) sacrificed his son following a war which brought disaster upon the state. If the classical reports are accurate, it could be maintained that there is no real connection therefore between the Phoenician-Punic child sacrifices which are sporadic and conditioned by crisis and the Moloch worship which was an institution or cult. In contrast though to the classical reports, the archaeological discoveries at Carthage, which attest some 20,000 burials of infant bones along with animal bones in what are evidently not instances of natural death appear to conflict with the classical reports. There is as yet no evidence of child sacrifice in the Carthaginian homeland, the cities of Phoenicia (Lebanon) proper, where far less excavation has been done.

The Name

The Nature of the Worship

As already indicated above, the legal and historical sources speak about passing children to Moloch in fire. According to the rabbinic interpretation, this prohibition is against passing children through fire and then delivering them to the pagan priests. In other words, according to this interpretation, this refers to an initiation rite. This kind of initiation or consecration is actually attested to in various cultures (see T.H. Gaster, in bibl.) and the Septuagint interprets Deuteronomy 18:10 in a similar manner. This is a Midrash of the rabbis likewise attested by the Septuagint. A similar non-sacrificial tradition, perhaps more ancient, is found in the Book of Jubilees. The Book of Jubilees 30:7ff. connects intermarrriage or rather the marrying off of one's children to pagans with the sin of Moloch. This tradition seems to be echoed in the dissenting opinion of R. Ishmael (cf. Meg. 4:9) in Sifrei Deuteronomy 18, who explains the prohibition of Moloch as the impregnation of a pagan woman, an interpretation lying behind the Syriac translation in Leviticus 18 and 20. The common denominator of all these traditions is the understanding of Moloch worship as the transfer of Jewish children to paganism either by delivering them directly to pagan priests or by procreation through intercourse with a pagan woman. This tradition is in keeping with the general rabbinic tendency to make biblical texts relevant to their audiences, who were more likely to be attracted to Greco-Roman cults and to intercourse with pagan women than to the sacrifice of humans to a long-forgotten god.

In the framework of the penalty clauses of some neo-Assyrian contracts, there is the threat that if one of the parties violates the contract, he will burn his son to Adad the king and give his daughter to Ishtar, or Belet-ṣēri. Some of these documents showed that Adadmilki or Adadᘚrru ("Adad the king") was actually the god to whom children, sometimes firstborn, were burned. Ch.W. Johns, who first published these documents, contended that burning is used here in the figurative sense, meaning dedication (Assyrian Deeds and Documents, 3 (1923), 345𠄶). This figurative interpretation was accepted by Deller and Weinfeld, but context indicates that they are to be taken literally (see CAD Š/II, 53 SAA VI: 102). From the fact that Ahaz, who opened the door to Assyria and Assyrian culture and religion (see e.g., II Kings 16:6ff.), was the first king to indulge in the worship of Moloch, it may be deduced that this was introduced through Assyrian influence, along with other practices such as the burning of incense on the roofs (II Kings 23:12), the sun chariots (23:11), and the tents for the Asherah (23:7). There is no reason to suppose that the Moloch was introduced as a result of Phoenician influence, as is commonly supposed. Were this true, one would expect to find the Moloch worship in Northern Israel, which was overwhelmed by Phoenician influence, especially at the period of the Omri dynasty. No allusion, however, to this practice in the Northern Kingdom has been found. The worship of Moloch, which was practiced at a special site (outside the walls of Jerusalem in the valley of Ben-Hinnom) called Topheth, became firmly established in the time of King Manasseh, his son Amon, and at the beginning of Josiah's reign. If it was completely eradicated by Josiah within the framework of his reform activities (II Kings 23:10), then Jeremiah's references to this worship (7:31, 19:1ff., 32:35) might apply to the days of Manasseh and also to the time of Josiah before the reform (see Y. Kaufmann , Toledot, 3 (1960), 382�).

Sources: Encyclopaedia Judaica. © 2008 The Gale Group. All Rights Reserved.

Ḥ. Albeck, Das Buch der Jubil๎n und die Halacha (1930), 26ff. O. Eissfeldt, Molk als Opferbegriff im Punischen und Hebräischen… (1935), 46ff. N.H. Tur-Sinai, Ha-Lashon ve-ha-Sefer, 1 (1954 2 ). 81ff. H. Cazelles, in: DBI Supplément, 5 (1957), 1337� R. de Vaux, Studies in Old Testament Sacrifice (1964), 52� M. Buber, Malkhut Shamayim (1965), 99� K. Deller, in Orientalia, 34 (1965), 382𠄶 T.H. Gaster, Myth, Legend and Custom in the Old Testament (1969), 586𠄸. ADD. BIBLIOGRAPHY: M. Weinfeld, in: UF, 4 (1972), 133� M. Smith, in: JAOS, 95 (1975), 477� M. Held, in: ErIsr, 16 (1982), 76� B. Levine, JPS Torah Commentary Leviticus (1989), 258� R. Clifford, in: BASOR, 279 (1990), 55� A. Millard, in: DDD, 34� G. Heider, in: DDD, 581�, incl. bibl. K. Friebel, in: R. Troxel et al. (eds.), Seeking Out the Wisdom of Ancients..Essays … M. Fox (2005), 21�.

Download our mobile app for on-the-go access to the Jewish Virtual Library

Monumental Battleships of Charleston

For history buffs and maritime aficionados, a Charleston vacation isn’t truly complete without a visit to Patriots Point Naval & Maritime Museum. Home to legendary World War II battleships such as the USS Yorktown, the museum is one of only two museums in the country that has more than two battleships, making it one of the most popular attractions in the Holy City.

Located in the top-rated city of Mount Pleasant on the beautiful Charleston Harbor, the museum offers visitors a chance to see Charleston’s magnificent monumental battleships up close and learn about the heroes aboard them. As the fourth largest naval museum in the country, you won’t be short on things to do at Patriots Point.

The USS Yorktown (CV0-10)

Docked at Patriots Point is the USS Yorktown, the 10 th aircraft carrier to serve in the U.S. Navy and one of only 24 Essex-class aircraft carriers built during World War II. Named after the Battle of Yorktown in the American Revolutionary War, the Yorktown has played a pivotal role in our country’s history.

A Brief History of the USS Yorktown

The USS Yorktown was built in just 16 ½ months—a short time for a battleship of its size. Commissioned on April 15, 1943, the “Fighting Lady,” as she was called, participated in the Pacific Offensive, which resulted in an Allied victory over Japan in 1945.

Her service in World War II earned the USS Yorktown the Presidential Unit Citation and 11 battle stars, but she wasn’t finished yet. In the 1950s, the Yorktown was used as an anti-submarine aircraft carrier and took part in the Vietnam War (1965-1968), for which she earned five battle stars.

In December 1968, the Yorktown would complete her final mission: recovering the Apollo 8 crew after a successful mission to the moon.

The USS Yorktown was decommissioned in 1970 and became a museum ship at Patriots Point five years later. Now a National Landmark, the USS Yorktown is nearly 75 years old and still attracts hundreds of thousands of people each year who wish to step aboard the legendary monumental battleship.

The USS Laffey (DD-724)

Docked next to the USS Yorktown is the USS Laffey, an Allen M. Sumner-class destroyer built by Bath Iron Works in Maine. Also referred to as “The Ship That Would Not Die,” the USS Laffey is the only surviving Sumner-class destroyer in North America, after withstanding multiple attacks and bombings during World War II.

A Brief History of USS Laffey

On February 8, 1944, the USS Laffey was commissioned at Bath, Maine with Rear Admiral Frederick Becton in command. After initial training, the boat prepared for the invasion of Normandy, where the Sumner-class destroyer would support Allied forces in the fight against the Germans in June 1944.

In addition to surviving the tumultuous D-Day landings at Normandy, the USS Laffey also withstood multiple bombings from 22 Japanese Kamikaze planes and conventional bombers while operating off Okinawa in 1945. Fighting for 80 minutes, the ship managed to shoot down many incoming planes, but not without taking serious hits as well.

Seven suicide planes crashed into the USS Laffey, and two bombs hit the ship, killing 32 and wounding 71 of the 336-man crew. Still, the USS Laffey survived and earned her famous wartime name, “The Ship That Would Not Die.”

The ship’s service in World War II also resulted in the Presidential Unit Citation and five battle stars. After serving in the Korean War and braving mine-infested waters at Wonsan Harbor, the USS Laffey would earn two additional battle stars.

The USS Laffey was decommissioned in 1975 and designated a National Historic Landmark in 1986. Now docked at Patriot’s Point, she is a must-see for history lovers.

The USS Clamagore (SS-343)

The USS Clamagore is an iconic Cold War Battleship that served for 30 years during the Cold War. She is the only GUPPY III submarine preserved in the United States.

The USS Clamagore was commissioned in June 1945 at the end of World War II. Built as a Baleo-class submarine by Electric Boat Division of General Dynamics Corporation, the Clamagore first operated off Key West, Florida under Commander S.C. Loomis, Jr.

After assuming numerous operations and tours, the USS Clamagore returned to Charleston in 1960. In 1948, she became one of only nine submarines to undergo GUPPY III conversion, an initiative by the U.S. Navy to improve her underwater performance. To clarify for those outside of the military, GUPPY is an acronym for the Greater Underwater Propulsion Power Program, with the “y” added for pronounceability.

During the conversion, the battleship was cut in half, and a new hull section was added. She received an impressive upgrade for a World War II-era submarine, with the latest fire control system and electronics installed.

The USS Clamagore was decommissioned in 1975 and was added to the Patriots Point Fleet in 1981. She was made a National Historic Landmark in 1989.

Unfortunately, the USS Clamagore suffers from serious structural fatigue, costing an estimated $6 million to repair. In January 2017, the museum signed a deal with Artificial Reefs International-Clamagore to sink the USS Clamagore in the ocean near Florida, making it an artificial reef.

Watch the video: You Need this GM Guide! (June 2022).