Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Black Hawk Look-Alike Flies in China
AIN ONLINE ^ | JANUARY 10, 2014 | DAVID DONALD

Posted on 01/09/2014 9:35:08 PM PST by sukhoi-30mki

January 9, 2014, 8:03 AM China’s newest military helicopter made its first flight on December 23 at a location in “northeastern China,” a site presumed to be the Harbin facility. The aircraft, believed to be designated Z-20, is in the “10-tonne” class, and is thought to be a collaborative effort among Harbin, Changhe and the 602 Institute. It closely resembles the Sikorsky S-70 Black Hawk that has been in Chinese army service for nearly three decades. The first public glimpse of the Z-20 came in August 2013, when the heavily wrapped fuselage was photographed being transported by road.

China acquired 24 Sikorsky S-70C-2s in the mid-1980s, and they were pressed into service with the army for missions in the mountainous regions of China, such as Tibet, where their high-altitude performance greatly impressed the People’s Liberation Army. With further supplies and spares support from the U.S. cut off after 1989, the army began acquiring sizeable numbers of Mi-17/171s from Russia, while Changhe began to reverse-engineer parts to keep the S-70 fleet flying. This work, and access to live examples, allowed the Z-20 design team to draw heavily on the Sikorsky helicopter. Some sources allege that Pakistan allowed Chinese engineers access to the heavily modified Black Hawk destroyed during the bin Laden raid.

Although strikingly similar to the S-70, the Z-20 exhibits some differences, the most notable of which is a five-blade main rotor instead of the Black Hawk’s four-blade unit. Compared with the Black Hawk’s, the Z-20’s cabin is longer and wider, while the main rotor head appears to be positioned farther aft, making the forward fuselage seem longer than that of the S-70. The undercarriage and tail also show differences.

In terms of powerplant and dynamics, it is likely that the Z-20 draws on the same technology as employed in the Z-10 attack helicopter. Both have their roots in the China Medium Helicopter (CMH) program of the late 1990s, for which Western help was received. The prototype Z-20 may be powered by the indigenous WZ-6C turboshaft, with the more powerful (1800 kW) WZ-10 slated for production machines.

Development of a utility helicopter that can be used for assault, fire support, electronic warfare and special-operations missions is seen as important to the development of PLA Army Aviation. However, it is understood that the development of the Z-20 was delayed while the design team focused on the higher priority Z-10. As well as augmenting and expanding the army’s helicopter fleet, the Z-20 could also find a use at sea, particularly aboard the aircraft carrier Liaoning.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: aerospace; blackhawk; china; russiachina; russiachinaalliance; sikorsky

The Z-20 gets air under its wheels for the first time at a snowy location in China, almost certainly at the Harbin factory. (Photo via Chinese internet)

1 posted on 01/09/2014 9:35:08 PM PST by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

Pei-Ping.


2 posted on 01/09/2014 9:38:02 PM PST by Army Air Corps (Four Fried Chickens and a Coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki; Army Air Corps

We need to get used to the fact that China is going to become a major superpower and it’s in our best interest to cultivate them as an ally as quickly as we can and cement an alliance.

Despite their Communist government, we are used to allies with incompatible government systems. Look at how we’re allies with the British, despite the fact that they have a monarchical system where the people of Great Britain are subjects, not citizens and I don’t think our alliance with Great Britain has been good for us.


3 posted on 01/09/2014 9:47:40 PM PST by CorporateStepsister (I am NOT going to force a man to make my dreams come true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CorporateStepsister

The UK has a constitutional monarchy with a pluralistic political system and parliamentary government. Their system of governance is not “incompatible” with our own.


4 posted on 01/09/2014 9:51:50 PM PST by Army Air Corps (Four Fried Chickens and a Coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Jet Jaguar

Ping.


5 posted on 01/09/2014 9:54:30 PM PST by Army Air Corps (Four Fried Chickens and a Coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CorporateStepsister

We need to get used to the fact that China is going to become a major superpower and it’s in our best interest to cultivate them as an ally as quickly as we can and cement an alliance.
..........
unfortunately the Chinese view of the world is very very different. They are just like the moslems and jihad after 1973. They are just like the Germans and Japanese after 1900. What do all these have in common?

They all came into sudden fabulous wealth and power and set out to rule the world.

The Chinese are no different than the others. Unless they are stopped — they will seek to continuously expand their power and influence. They will soon enough turn to military means as other instruments of power lose momentum.

That’s just the way it works.


6 posted on 01/09/2014 10:05:23 PM PST by ckilmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
From April 22, 2012 (Lenin's birthday)...

China-Russia Yellow Sea naval drills begin
AP via Yahoo News ^ | April 22, 2012

BEIJING (AP) — China and Russia launched joint naval exercises Sunday that highlight warming ties between their militaries and growing cooperation in international affairs.
[snip]
"It's an excellent exchange for China to be able to drill jointly in such sensitive areas," Yin told CCTV.
[snip]
Much of that cooperation takes place within the confines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, a grouping of Central Asian states that seeks to check U.S. influence in the region and began holding joint drills in 2005.

Formerly Cold War rivals for leadership of the communist world, China and Russia have since found common ground in countering liberal democratizing trends across Asia and Eastern Europe and frequently vote against Western initiatives in the United Nations Security Council. ..."

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...

_____________________________________________

From the Sino-Russian Joint Statement of April 23, 1997:
"The two sides [China and Russia] shall, in the spirit of partnership, strive to promote the multipolarization of the world and the establishment of a new international order."

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/HI29Ag01.html
______________________________________________________________

"Joint war games are a logical outcome of the Sino-Russian Friendship and Cooperation Treaty signed in 2001, and reflect the shared worldview and growing economic ties between the two Eastern Hemisphere giants."

http://www.heritage.org/research/commentary/2005/09/war-games-russia-china-grow-alliance

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,170287,00.html

7 posted on 01/09/2014 10:12:34 PM PST by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
Chinese armored forces advance in Peace Mission-2013

Xinhua | 2013-8-10

A Chinese helicopter hovers the field for drill as Chinese armored forces advance during the Peace Mission-2013 China-Russia joint military drill in Chelyabinsk, Russia, on August 9, 2013. The 20-day Peace Mission-2013 China-Russia joint military drill began in Chelyabinsk on July 27. (Xinhua/Xian Yunqiang) 

http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/802946.shtml

8 posted on 01/09/2014 10:13:11 PM PST by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

LOL, despite the 5 blades it looks just like a Blackhawk, including the moveable stabilator.


9 posted on 01/09/2014 10:14:06 PM PST by USNBandit (sarcasm engaged at all times)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

“It closely resembles the Sikorsky S-70 Black Hawk that has been in Chinese army service for nearly three decades.”

Huh?


10 posted on 01/09/2014 10:28:03 PM PST by SoCal Pubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

Well then, we better gear up for yet another world war, eh?

If we’re clever we could form some sort of alliance, or send over a bunch of bitter singletons to marry and thus placate the horny Chinese men in the military.


11 posted on 01/09/2014 10:37:31 PM PST by CorporateStepsister (I am NOT going to force a man to make my dreams come true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Army Air Corps

The Brits are still considered ‘subjects’ and I don’t trust the British monarchy. Their cultural influence has not been good for us.


12 posted on 01/09/2014 10:38:36 PM PST by CorporateStepsister (I am NOT going to force a man to make my dreams come true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: CorporateStepsister

Well then, we better gear up for yet another world war, eh?
.............
Yeah pretty much. In order to have peace you have to prepare for war. That’s the way its always worked.
.....................

If we’re clever we could form some sort of alliance, or send over a bunch of bitter singletons to marry and thus placate the horny Chinese men in the military.
..............
The alliances are already in place. What would you do ally with the Chinese against the Japanese? That would defeat the Japanese and further embolden the Chinese and redraw the line of confrontation with China further out in the Pacific. Basically you’re looking at a replay of the 1920’s and 1030’s only this time instead of Japan playing the role of the aggressor—China is doing that job.

There’s no placating the Chinese. They have power for the first time in centuries and they mean to use it.

The Chinese can be stopped. The sooner they are stopped in their Pacific expansion, the better for everyone—including the Chinese because any successful battles will give the PLA and PLAN the upper hand in the Chinese government. Then there would be no choice but war. Same thing happened in Japan. Early victories by the military gave the military the upper hand and finally full control over the government. Since the only thing the military knows how to do is wage war. Japan waged war.

Same scenario is in the works if the Chinese Navy is allowed success.


13 posted on 01/09/2014 10:58:56 PM PST by ckilmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

Yeah I know; this is why I’m thankful the Constitution we have makes our military subordinate and publicly apolitical.

Thing is, that the Chinese are almost satanically clever and will use bio-warfare and chemical warfare if possible.

There has to be some way to create a triple alliance with Japan and China, with the US in the center of it all. It would be a perfect way of making the US powerful while at the same time, at least publicly binding the Chinese and Japanese to a peaceful accord.


14 posted on 01/09/2014 11:04:22 PM PST by CorporateStepsister (I am NOT going to force a man to make my dreams come true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
In other news, Chinese producers are releasing a blockbuster military epic: Brackhawk Down.
15 posted on 01/09/2014 11:05:25 PM PST by 60Gunner (Fight with your head high, or grovel with your head low.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CorporateStepsister

I doubt anyone, with the exception of God, Is capable of joining Japan and China together within an alliance. The hated between them runs deeeep.


16 posted on 01/10/2014 12:25:50 AM PST by catbertz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: CorporateStepsister

You do realised that the Monarchy is essentially a figurehead one and that power rests chiefly with the democratically elected House of Commons?


17 posted on 01/10/2014 1:42:43 AM PST by sinsofsolarempirefan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

I wonder where those blueprints came from?


18 posted on 01/10/2014 2:07:18 AM PST by fella ("As it was before Noah so shall it be again,")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CorporateStepsister; Army Air Corps

>>We need to get used to the fact that China is going to become a major superpower and it’s in our best interest to cultivate them as an ally as quickly as we can and cement an alliance.<<

AHAHA! Are you sober?

>Despite their Communist government, we are used to allies with incompatible government systems. Look at how we’re allies with the British, despite the fact that they have a monarchical system where the people of Great Britain are subjects, not citizens and I don’t think our alliance with Great Britain has been good for us.<

Do you realize that Britain is a monarchy-in-name-only?

Do you realize a difference between Consitutional and absolutist monarchy?

The entire idea of American system and conservative values rooting from British system.

To have one say Chinese communist system is closer to US values actually shows how far your public indoctrination brought you.


19 posted on 01/10/2014 2:10:50 AM PST by cunning_fish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Yep.. they copy anything. That’s what happens when you have no talent to design and build anything on your own:

http://acidcow.com/cars/1945-fake-chinese-car-brands-32-pics.html


20 posted on 01/10/2014 2:26:42 AM PST by maddog55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki; Jeff Head

BTTT!


21 posted on 01/10/2014 2:42:29 AM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cunning_fish

Google DF-21D Carrier Killer ballistic missile and tell me if you still think the Chinese aren’t a threat.


22 posted on 01/10/2014 3:43:08 AM PST by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer

They are a threat fed by US government and businesses since 1970s. If not for a free trade crap it could have been still ox and cart.


23 posted on 01/10/2014 4:07:04 AM PST by cunning_fish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: cunning_fish

We can thank the Clintoooooons for all the progress China has made in its military powers, after all they gave the Chinese the blueprints.


24 posted on 01/10/2014 5:37:57 AM PST by DaveA37
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Progov

In fact you can track that back to Nixon.


25 posted on 01/10/2014 5:44:56 AM PST by cunning_fish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: CorporateStepsister
Their cultural influence has not been good for us.

Skipped a few history and civics classes, did you? The seed of the American Revolution was the desire for the colonists to enjoy the same rights as those of British subjects in the Home Islands (especially parliamentary representation). Yeah, representative government is such a negative cultural influence. I suppose that a system of Common Law is also an evil cultural influence?
26 posted on 01/10/2014 6:18:10 AM PST by Army Air Corps (Four Fried Chickens and a Coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

China purchased 24 S-70 from Sirkosky before Tiennamen Square and the embargo. They were purchased to operate at the higher altitudes possible with the S-70.

The have now created this, which does have some changes.

1) Five blade rotor instead of four.
2) Different tail rotor assembly.
3) Different landing gear.
4) Larger cabin.

So, they have made it their own, though it is clearly based on those S-70s they purchased.


27 posted on 01/10/2014 6:43:41 AM PST by Jeff Head
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: SoCal Pubbie
Not common knowledge. From here (you'll have open the cached page):

The PLA Army Aviation Corps operates around 20 Sikorsky S-70C transport helicopters, which are known as the UH-60 Black Hawk in the U.S. Army. The PLA purchased these helicopters from the U.S. in the mid-1980s. Despite the speculations that the PLA faced some difficulties in obtaining the necessary spares to keep these helicopters operational as a result of the U.S. sanction after 1989, some, if not all, of these helicopters remain in active service with PLA today for tactical transport roles.

The purchase of the 24 Sikorsky S-70C Black Hawk multirole army helicopters is one of the most notable military cooperation programmes between China and the U.S. in the 1980s honeymoon of their relations. To help China modernise its ground forces against the Soviet Army, the U.S. offered its army helicopter to the PLA. Two major U.S. helicopter manufacturers, Bell and Sikorsky, were chosen as main bidders for an immediate deal of 20~30 helicopters, and a possible purchase of over 100 additional units afterwards.

Sikorsky sent one of its newest S-70C Black Hawk (known as UH-60 in the U.S. Army) multirole helicopter as a counter to the Bell 204 (known as UH-1 in the U.S. Army). Both helicopters flew in most regions of China, including Tibet which is infamous for its harsh weather conditions. Eventually the PLA chose S-70C and a deal of 24 helicopters were delivered to the PLA Air Force in 1985. In 1987 these helicopters were handed over to the newly founded Army Aviation Corps.

Both Sikorsky and the PLA expected deals of additional helicopters after the successful deployment of the initial batch of the S-70C in China. However, after the 1989 incident, the U.S. government froze all military relations with China. The remaining helicopters in the PLA were also hardly well maintained due to the difficulty in obtaining necessary spare parts from the United States. Unconfirmed reports indicated in 1992 that these helicopters were offered for sale, but it appeared that the PLA managed to keep them flying. In 1997 and 2002, Sikorsky tried to persuade the U.S. government to waive the sanctions, but was rejected by the White House.

Today the S-70Cs are still used by the PLA, and were spotted in many occasions during the military exercises in the 1990s. They appear often in the PLA’s publicity photos and video images of Army exercises, and have been reported to be flying in high-altitude locations in Tibet. At least 3 helicopters have been lost due to bad weather and pilot faults. As these helicopters begin to reach their flying life hours in the coming years, they are likely going to replaced by the Russian Mi-17V5 in the future.

Design The S-70Cs in service with the PLA are generally identical to the UH-60s in the U.S. Army, apart from their specially-designed gear box which were derived from the SH-60 Sea Hawk.

The S-70C is equipped with two General Electric T700-701A turboshaft engines. The internal fuel tanks have a capacity of 1,360 litres. Auxiliary fuel can be carried with 1,400 litres in two internal fuel tanks and 1,740 litres externally.

The S-70 is equipped with a voice and data communications suite including VHF, UHF communications. The S-70Cs sold to China were specially enhanced with the LTN3100VLF weather radar accommodated in the under-nose radome.

The cabin provides accommodation for eleven fully equipped troops or four litters (stretcher patients) with a medical officer for medical evacuation missions. The cabin is equipped with a ventilation and heating system. The S-70 can carry external loads up to 4,072kg on the cargo hook -- for example, a 155mm howitzer. The main cabin can be cleared of troop seats for transportation of cargo.

28 posted on 01/10/2014 6:49:15 AM PST by logi_cal869
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: SoCal Pubbie
Not common knowledge. From here (you'll have open the cached page):

The PLA Army Aviation Corps operates around 20 Sikorsky S-70C transport helicopters, which are known as the UH-60 Black Hawk in the U.S. Army. The PLA purchased these helicopters from the U.S. in the mid-1980s. Despite the speculations that the PLA faced some difficulties in obtaining the necessary spares to keep these helicopters operational as a result of the U.S. sanction after 1989, some, if not all, of these helicopters remain in active service with PLA today for tactical transport roles.

The purchase of the 24 Sikorsky S-70C Black Hawk multirole army helicopters is one of the most notable military cooperation programmes between China and the U.S. in the 1980s honeymoon of their relations. To help China modernise its ground forces against the Soviet Army, the U.S. offered its army helicopter to the PLA. Two major U.S. helicopter manufacturers, Bell and Sikorsky, were chosen as main bidders for an immediate deal of 20~30 helicopters, and a possible purchase of over 100 additional units afterwards.

Sikorsky sent one of its newest S-70C Black Hawk (known as UH-60 in the U.S. Army) multirole helicopter as a counter to the Bell 204 (known as UH-1 in the U.S. Army). Both helicopters flew in most regions of China, including Tibet which is infamous for its harsh weather conditions. Eventually the PLA chose S-70C and a deal of 24 helicopters were delivered to the PLA Air Force in 1985. In 1987 these helicopters were handed over to the newly founded Army Aviation Corps.

Both Sikorsky and the PLA expected deals of additional helicopters after the successful deployment of the initial batch of the S-70C in China. However, after the 1989 incident, the U.S. government froze all military relations with China. The remaining helicopters in the PLA were also hardly well maintained due to the difficulty in obtaining necessary spare parts from the United States. Unconfirmed reports indicated in 1992 that these helicopters were offered for sale, but it appeared that the PLA managed to keep them flying. In 1997 and 2002, Sikorsky tried to persuade the U.S. government to waive the sanctions, but was rejected by the White House.

Today the S-70Cs are still used by the PLA, and were spotted in many occasions during the military exercises in the 1990s. They appear often in the PLA’s publicity photos and video images of Army exercises, and have been reported to be flying in high-altitude locations in Tibet. At least 3 helicopters have been lost due to bad weather and pilot faults. As these helicopters begin to reach their flying life hours in the coming years, they are likely going to replaced by the Russian Mi-17V5 in the future.

Design The S-70Cs in service with the PLA are generally identical to the UH-60s in the U.S. Army, apart from their specially-designed gear box which were derived from the SH-60 Sea Hawk.

The S-70C is equipped with two General Electric T700-701A turboshaft engines. The internal fuel tanks have a capacity of 1,360 litres. Auxiliary fuel can be carried with 1,400 litres in two internal fuel tanks and 1,740 litres externally.

The S-70 is equipped with a voice and data communications suite including VHF, UHF communications. The S-70Cs sold to China were specially enhanced with the LTN3100VLF weather radar accommodated in the under-nose radome.

The cabin provides accommodation for eleven fully equipped troops or four litters (stretcher patients) with a medical officer for medical evacuation missions. The cabin is equipped with a ventilation and heating system. The S-70 can carry external loads up to 4,072kg on the cargo hook -- for example, a 155mm howitzer. The main cabin can be cleared of troop seats for transportation of cargo.

29 posted on 01/10/2014 6:51:07 AM PST by logi_cal869
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Army Air Corps

Please, stop making sense. It seems like you are arguing with a full-blown communist.


30 posted on 01/10/2014 7:13:53 AM PST by cunning_fish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: logi_cal869

Had no idea!


31 posted on 01/10/2014 10:35:24 AM PST by SoCal Pubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Why was China allowed to buy Blackhawks in the first place?


32 posted on 01/10/2014 10:41:36 AM PST by GeronL (Extra Large Cheesy Over-Stuffed Hobbit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: catbertz

Koreans and Japanese have bad blood between them, but China as a common problem makes them work together like allies at times.


33 posted on 01/10/2014 10:45:15 AM PST by GeronL (Extra Large Cheesy Over-Stuffed Hobbit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: CorporateStepsister

There has to be some way to create a triple alliance with Japan and China, with the US in the center of it all. It would be a perfect way of making the US powerful while at the same time, at least publicly binding the Chinese and Japanese to a peaceful accord.
..................
No this doesn’t cut it. Why would there be a triple alliance. who would the USA china and japan ally against. russia? korea? australia? india?

No. China is confronting all the countries on its periphery. even the russians are uneasy.

the most dangerous place is the south china sea where there are overlapping territorial claims. these issues have become urgent as the chinese look for more energy resources for their population. its believed that there is a lot of oil/gas in the south china sea. the problem could be more peacefully solved if energy could be got from other sources easily...like thorium lftr reactors or natural gas on china’s mainland. (china is said to have the largest deposits of natural gas in the world—mostly in their norther provinces.)


34 posted on 01/10/2014 10:56:01 AM PST by ckilmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

True that China pays the bad guy that allows Japan and Korea to cooperate. Now who plays the enemy that allows China and Japan to cooperate? Nobody. Sure Japanese business has utilized Chinese manufacturing, but there will always be a state of soft cold war.


35 posted on 01/10/2014 11:55:08 AM PST by catbertz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: CorporateStepsister

On one hand you say they are satanically clever and will use WMD against us, then you say we need to ally with them?

we already have several very strong alliances in the Pacific to ensure the freedom of commerce and safety on the Sea. One is our involvement in the ASEAN alliance, another is our individual alliances with Japan, South Korea, and Australia.

India is also rising and modernizing their fleet and increasing its size because of their own concerns about China. We are making more and more overtures to them and what is really needed is an alliance of the representative governments in the Western and Southern Pacific to include India. In essesnce we already do...but it should be an entire alliance of all of us together. The US, Japan, India, South Korea, Australia, the Philippines and Singapore. Those nations together are capable of outstripping anything China can do...particularly if we ourselves stop feeding China’s maw.


36 posted on 01/10/2014 8:31:50 PM PST by Jeff Head
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson