RadioBanter - View Single Post - BTW Stevie were watch the news lately about NASA

October 16th 05, 12:52 PM

wrote:
From: on Oct 15, 8:14 am

There you go personalizing everything. You're just itching for a
fight, aren't you?.

Dudly the Imposter is a MIGHTY WARRIOR...on-screen. Off-screen
the best he can do is pose in some kind of uniform and pretend
to be a great "hero."

Any amount of service in any uniform, even sanitation service,
would be more than any service ever performed by Leonard H. Anderson in
ANY uniform.

He has dishonored his Nation, his Branch of Servuice and Unit with
his cowardly attempts to place himself beside Men who died in combat
for the SOLE PURPOSE of "polishing his brass" in a USENET forum.

Leonard H. Anderson is a coward and a liar.

Period.

Big Snip

Your buddy on the liberal coast is the ONLY one here who routinely
"rails against" anyone based upon RADIO (ie technical and theoretical)
experience.

Not true.

Is true. Unless we include you.

Citation, please.

Dudly the Imposter issues his own citations. He makes them up on
the spot to suit his personal HATRED of certain others.

And here we have Lennie PROVING his liarship.

Dudly seems to be the usual east-coastie kind of geographical
BIGOT. He wants to call anyone on the west coast of the United
States as a "liberal." Once in a while as a "leftist."

But you are. Your posts clearly establish it.

Tennessee doesn't have a seacoast at all. Dudly must have ENVY
of anyone being on any "coast."

I've been on both coasts. I've been on the gulf coast. I've been
on the South China Sea coast and the Japanese Pacific coast.

And Tennessee DOES have inland waterway ports which serve to
seaports. Several of them.

Without the hurricaines and "En Nino".

More Big Snip

However the Chairman and his staff DO have Amateurs on the FCC
payroll from whom thye take counsel.

Conflict of interest.

A few things on the above... First of all, the FCC has "counsel"
from LAWYERS since they are a legal regulatory agency of the federal
government. The FCC regulates MANY DIFFERENT radio services,
ALL the civil radio services in the United States.

Better break out the Websters and refresh your memory on what the
word "counsel" means, Lennie..

Secondly, I do have some experience in emergency communications,
but definitely not as an amateur. While that is irrelevant to this
so-
called "discussion," Dudly the Imposter is, as usual, WRONG in his
personal attacks.

What "experience"...?!?! Some 11 meter REACT team in 1965?

Loading some sandbags in 1971 doesn't hack it.

Cut-and-pastes from from OES websites in order to mount attacks in
this forum do not count as "experience".

Actually DOING IT counts as "experience".

Third, by definition of LAW, an amateur radio license grant covers
BOTH operator AND station.

Uh huh.

Something you don't have.

Fourth, "operating" any radio is just operating it. Dudly's
interpretation refers only to the use of on-off keying morse code
as "operation." Such morse code use is found only in the
AMATEUR service and a very few vessels in Maritime Radio Service.

Who's Dudly?

Yet another Leonard H. Anderson lie.

Again.

Fifth, expressing an OPINION on radio regulations is NOT any
pretense of being an "authority." It is just expression of an
OPINION. Dudly the Imposter has NO "authority" on radio
regulations. Neither do any of the current communicators in this
newsgroup.

Who's Dudly, and what is he an imposter of?

As for YOU and your OPINION in this forum, YOU have stated that
your SOLE purpose in this forum was to see to the removal of the Morse
Code test requirement for an Amateur Radio license.

That statement in and of itself establishes your deceitfulness
just by the "body count" of your other-than-Morse-related posts...And
ESPECIALLY by the personal attack/slander posts you've set in motion.

Sixth, Jim Haney, elected president of the ARRL, has been IN this
newsgroup some years ago, but only for a short while. I advised
him in private e-mail that this would lead to trouble within the
newsgroup from others who were not happy with ARRL policies...and
that would create a bad image of the ARRL as a result of flak from
those that (like Dudly) love to personally insult anyone.

The only trouble would come form you, Lennie.

This is a proven fact.

Seventh, the full organization of the FCC is explained on their
website, including all of the higher staff positions of Bureaus
and Offices and Working Groups. To reiterate, the FCC is not
concerned solely with amateur radio since their charter by LAW
is to regulate the ENTIRETY of civil radio in the United States.

What's to "reiterate"...?!?!

He's nothing of the sort.

Your adaptation of his diversion about how "we" allegedly "diss"
him along some ill-perceived lines of how radios work or RF propagates
is assinine.

Not true. Lie #4.

Is true. And I can see you're back in form.

Myself and others have "called" Lennie based upon NUMEROUS errors
as they pertain to Amateur Radio policy and practice.

Everyone makes mistakes. Even you as, I have pointed out so many times
before.

The "makes numerous errors" charge is another FALSE one, but often
used in newsgroups (even way back before USENET existed and all
there was was the original ARPANET) to color an opponents' posts.

Not "false". Absolutely true.

We can start out with your "the ARRL is dishonest" rants. More
than likely the reason for your "advice" to Jim Haney to rethink
participating in RRAP.

We can then move on to numerous regulatory errors you've made, ie:
the "radio service for recreational purpsoes only"...We STILL don't
have any references from you substantiating THAT one...

Your "ham radio is just for hobby communications" one has been
disproven over and over and over and......

Of course there are many, MANY "off topic" errors you've made on
non-Amateur Radio related subjects.

The "numerous errors" derive from certain individuals using THEIR
personal preferences as THE judgemental point...any deviation from
that personal preference is considered "wrong."...(SNIP)

Nope.

A deviation from FACTS gets your stuff labelled "wrong".

A typical one is
some kind of "fact" that morse code is supposed to be "basic to
the knowledge of any radio amateur." In itself that is false insofar
as operating any radio communication device of any radio service,
grounded in personal preferences. The morsemen try to "legalize"
that by playing barracks lawyer in the newsgroup and showing the
license test requirements as their "proof."

Whoa! Lennie accusing OTHERS of being "barracks lawyers".

Dudly the Imposter has never "pertained to amateur radio policy
and practice" but only repeated a few morse myths and posted many
news items (which he did not participate in nor did he report
as any kind of journalist).

Who's Dudly?

Dudly has not been able to categorize
subjects, cannot properly use all of the words he thinks are
'necessary' (such as "venue" or "licensure" lately, confusing
their application in other fields far removed from radio).

With the exception of the "nomenclature" (a favorite "See Mom! I
know big words!" word of Lennie's...) of specific devices, words are
words. "venue" and "licensure" can both be used in THIS forum as well
as any other where they may be appropriate.

Lennie's lame diversion on the use of some words is laughable.

Dudly
has NO ("zero-point-zero") experience in ANY radio communication
(other than perhaps CB) before 1970 and thus - by his own
standards - cannot possibly express any sort of qualified opinion
of amateur radio operation before then.

Who's Dudly?

And who said no one can comment on radio before 1970?

gee, Lennie...YOU are the one ALWAYS claiming that others stretch
their limits by discussing ANYthing that occured since you were born,
whether or not you played a part in it then or not...But let anyone
ELSE comment, and it's yet another rant from you....

You and he are the ONLY ones suggesting that the theory of
electronics or radio wave propagation are issues here.

You are the one suggesting it. Len and I are the ones pointing it out.

I'm just pointing out the HOLES in Dudly's "reasoning" and the
personal insults he continually hurls at certain individuals he
obsessively HATES.

Who's Dudly?

And so far, you've not pointed out any holes except in your own
stories, Lennie.

Lastly, the original argument was about contributions that
Amatuers made during WW2. All of the references I made were to
electronics-related fields for which AMATEURS were SPECIFCIALLY sought
and recruited due to thier already-demonstrated competency or skill in
radiocommunications.

Hmmmm? There's that damned one way valve again. Amateurs can jump in
and fill military and commercial radio roles, but commercial and
military radio Ops can have absolutely NO knowledge of amateur comms!

Hi, hi! Talk about an Iron Curtain! Your brain is on "diode."

Nope.

Where did I say that, Brian?

Then tell us how it works, again.

Brian, do not expect the impossible.

Why not?

He thinks that "admiring" liars and deceivers is an appropriate
character attribute.

Dudly the Imposter has NO existance prior to 1955.

Who's Dudly?

He cannot possibly "know" anything of World War 2 by personal experience.

Of course not. But then YOU presume to lecture us on WW2-era
programs despite the fact that you had not even reached puberty by
then.

All his input comes from AMATEUR RADIO literature.

Why do you INSIST on making comments that are so blatantly
dishonest, Lennie?

Such amateur radio literature is colored to favor the wish-fulfillment of radio amateurs.
Actually, the much wider field of electronics has considerable REAL history of
who did what for whom.

None of which includes the name "Leonard H. Anderson".

No one, myself included, ever stated that thier licensure was the
end-all or sole reason for thier employment or service.

Steve, K4YZ

Cronyism and Nepotism are as good reasons as any. You could do worse
by having someone who actually knows something about RF making comments
on the ARS.

What does knowing ANYthing about "RF" have to do with knowing
about the Amateur Radio service?

The FCC tests us on knowledge of RF for "licensure." Take it up with
them.

Apparently Dudly the Imposter does NOT know anything about "radio"
or the propagation of electromagnetic radiation! Or he has
forgotten anything to do with RF on his amateur radio license test.

Who's Dudly?

The Volunteer Examiner Coordinators' Question Pool Committee
generates the questions and answers for the amateur radio license
test. The FCC either approves or disapproves those questions and
answers. Testing of radio amateurs for their licenses is done
almost entirely by the Volunteer Examiner Coordinator groups (the
FCC can demand certain individuals to be tested by the FCC in
certain dispute cases...that is also the LAW).

Uh huh.

I've been a VE almost since the program's inception, Lennie...

Please remind us of how long YOU have been a VE...?!?!

The FCC does NOT use the term "licensure" in regards to amateur
radio licenses or the licensing process. That term is used in
some civil governments for licensing in other fields of activity.

Now Lennie the Moderator chooses our words for us.

I wasn't aware that we could only use words that appear in FCC
publications, Lennie...

Can you please show me where that rule is...?!?!

Dudly may think he is "highbrow" or an "authority" if he uses
the word "licensure."

Who's Dudly?

And you need to open a Websters once in a while, Lennie. You'd be
amazed at all the enat words in there.

I worked with many engineers in 2000. About a third of them were
Amateur licensees. The rest weren't. They were excellent in thier
fields. But they knew nothing of Amateur Radio.

Holy Cow! A third of the engineers were amateur radio operators but
knew nothing of Amateur Radio? Were they RF engineers?

Dudly the Imposter admitted he worked as a PURCHASING AGENT for
a set-top-box manufacturer.

Who's Dudly?

I, on the otherhand, worked for a research and development company
that was co-located with ANTEC in Duluth, GA. My only "affiliation"
with them was use of thier server for our Internet connections and
e-mail servers. We didn't manufacture anything. And it was for longer
than the "six months" that Lennie has also gotten wrong...repeatedly.

Purchasing Agents do NOT do any
sort of "design" work nor do they do any testing of the final
product, whatever that may be. Purchasing Agents are the
equivalent of technical bookkeepers and form-filler-outers and
their "communications knowledge" is limited to using a
telephone.

Wrong.

Again.

Dudly has "zero-point-zero" experience in electronics engineering
of any kind, "zero-point-zero" experience as a "bench top
technician" (in the industry). He has NO baseline for judgement
other than continually being obsessed with insulting others from
his obsessive HATRED.

Who's Dudly?

And sorry, Lennie, but I DO have "bench top technician"
experience.

Lennie's "knowledge" of "Amateur Radio" comes from having used an
Amateur Radio magazine to get his "writings" into print and from his
flailing's-about in this forum.

It's too bad that you are allowed to continue to denigrate a fine
amateur radio builders publication merely to discredit Len's articles
that were contained within it's covers.

Dudly the Imposter will insult anyone if he can make "message
points" and partially soothe his obsessive HATRED of some in
this newsgroup. [that is continually on display in here]

Who's Dudly?

And what are these "message points" you continually make reference
to?

I could list the Editors in Chief of Ham Radio magazine and
describe much of its 22-year independent existance as an
amateur radio technical publication. Suffice to say that all
22 years of articles in it are on a three-CD set available
from CQ or the ARRL bookstores for $150 (shipping charges
extra).

Yes, they are. And Leonard H. Anderson does NOT appear in all 22
years of it.

Nor were any of his articles IN it ever of much importance. Not a
single reference can be found that ever footnoted an LHA article.

Not one.

HR is still considered the "top" of the technical
periodicals for amateur radio worldwide (the RSGB's "Radio
Communication" magazine perhaps a close second). HR, like
CQ and 73, never had the backing of an entire membership
organization to assure it of continued existance (as QST
does) and they managed to exist for 22 years solely on
income from advertising sales. My hat is off and a salute
given to Jim Fisk (SK), Alf Wilson, Rich Rosen, and Terry
Northrup, wherever they are now, for editorial leadership
throughout those 22 years.

Too bad they made the decision to get you on board,
Lennie...Things went "toes-up" from there on out...

Tsk, I've written for other electronics magazines and have
had the pleasure of being acquainted with radio amateurs
since 1947...among them Gene Hubbell (the first H of H&H
Electronics in Rockford, IL, now SK), Captain William P.
Boss, Officer in Charge of ADA Transmitters (1953-1954),
Sergeant First Class Don Ross (NCOIC at ADA Transmitters
1954-1956, holder of an Amateur Extra as well as both
First Telegraph and First Phone Commercial licenses),
Eugene Rosenbaum (retired from the FAA and living in
Long Island, NY), Allan Walston (W6MJN, best man at my
wedding and co-worker in the RCA Cube Farm), James Hall
(KD6JG, retired and on the RCA network from near Grass
Valley, CA, on Saturdays), and a whole bunch of other
good people that I've known and/or worked with over the
last 58 years.

I am reminded of the guy who defends his racist behaviour by
citing his personal acquaintence with "persons of color" when I read
this.

Lennie "knew" some people in the same way a kid gets autographs.

"Mister Mister! Can I get my picture taken with you...?!?!"

It doesn't require personal acquaintenship
to "know about amateur radio" since nothing of it is
either "secret" or "sensitive" or "to be kept within the
confines of a fraternal order." United States amateur
radio is NOT a guild, union, or trade craft that takes
some kind of special learned-over-many-years experience,
nor is it some "national service" organization vital to
the nation. It is a fun hobby, an activity done for
personal pleasure but one that requires federal regulation
due to the nature of EM propagation. Some want it to be
MUCH MORE than what it is in order to fulfill some kind of
daydream they have to show their personal greatness. shrug

It IS "MUCH MORE"...

And THANKFULLY we do not have you in it's ranks.

Best of Luck.

For what? Pulling the rug out from underneath you and Lennie?

That didn't need luck...You make it all too easy.

You are truly delusional.

Dudly the Imposter is a delusional sociopath with an unfulfilled
ego. That manifests itself as an obssessive hatred of certain
individuals who will not suck up to him and his opinions. Tsk.

Who's Dudly?

Judging by the rest of the paragraph, I'd have to say it was
Leonard H. Anderson.

Let's see....

Lennie pretended to have been "part of the team" in Korea...(3
years before he enlisted...)

Lennie presuemed to tell us about "serving under the threat of the
Soviet Bear bomber"

He's regaled us with stories of what it's like to be on the
receiving end of artillery fire. (Lennie was a rear-area radio
mechanic in post-war Japan..that's post KOREAN war Japan...)

He's the resident expert on at least a dozen emergency
communications programs despite not actually participating in ANY of
them.

He's presumed to render diagnosis on a wide range of mental and
physical afflictions despite not even having been an EMT, let alone a
physician or nurse.

He's tried to tell us how various volunteer organizations, again
one's he's not a memeber of, fit into the "bigger scheme" of things.

He's presumed to "demonstrate" his aerial navigation skills
despite being a non-soloed student pilot sometime in the late 50's or
early 60's.

He cannot "discuss", only insult others who disagree with him.
This will continue until he gets some professional help for
his mental affliction.

Yep! I was right! Lennie Anderson IS "Dudly"!~

Steve, K4YZ