From: Dave Heil who, blabbering away on an obvious Troll topic,
scribbled on Thurs, Mar 10 2005 12:14 am:
wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:
You forget his comments to FCC about things like an age
requirement....
He wishes I'd forget about his comments on the minimum age requirement
for radio amateurs.
Tsk. So hard up for Personal Attack subjects that
you pick something from my Comment to the FCC made
SIX YEARS AGO? Wasn't done in here first...
Okay, I'll wait until you stop cheering for all the
"mature, responsible" six-year-olds featured on the
ARRL news as "world's youngest hams?" Riiiiight...
mature and responsible ALL BY THEMSELVES! :-)
How about the 9-year-old "extra?" A "mature,
responsible, law-abiding" pre-teener? :-)
Riiiiight...ALL of them wouldn't think of operating
without parental supervision, would they? Uh-huh.
Tsk. I've never pursued the matter with the FCC
since 1999 but it seems some in here just can't let
it go. They MUST bring it up again, time and time
again as if this is the most hideous of gaffes,
practically a felonious act against the noble, law-
fearing amateurs who never, ever do anything wrong.
The problem is, you don't understand the game Len's playing. Here's
one explanation of it (WARNING! Some explicit language!):
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-.../1358838/posts
The "Never Defend Your Own Points" portion is classic Len Anderson.
He won't answer a question in a straightforward manner.
Tsk. To answer a repeated question by big badass dave,
no, I don't beat (physically) my wife. :-)
You want "straightforward manner answers?" Okay, he
Yes, No, Yes, maybe, No, No, Yes, perhaps.
Now all you have to do is connect those answers with
your LOADED questions you post in here. :-)
Okay, big badass dave, here's a question for YOU:
Where SPECIFICALLY and when SPECIFICALLY did you
see "combat" in Vietnam sufficient to make you this
big badass "combat veteran" you claim for yourself?
Or does that violate the copyrights on your story
in "Soldier of Fortune" magazine?
The world has a right to know...