On 10 Jul 2006 19:42:37 -0700, "an old friend"
wrote:

Al Klein wrote:
On 10 Jul 2006 18:48:09 -0700, "an old friend"
wrote:

I already earned those prevlidges

Earned? By what? Filling out an application? Memorizing enough
answers to just pass the written exam?
exactly the same way you did by passing the tests required at the time

There's a difference between earning and being able to get with no
effort.

I spent plenty of effort overthe years

Evidently it was wasted effort, since it didn't result in your being
able to use CW.

but in any case the FCC will never take my prevledges thay have made
that clear

Right - the government NEVER changes anything. Are you really that
naive?

never no not soon yes

You're the one who said "never".

accordingly you need to learn to deal with what is instaned
of trying to overturn history

I have nothing to deal with - I'm licensed, and could keep my license
if they made 20 wpm, or digital mode testing, a yearly requirement.

yes you wold have to deal with thresult of ruining the ARS

No, I really don't care that my license really means nothing these
days, and will mean even less in the future. I can operate on those
frequencies, and those modes, that I want to use, and talk to those
people I want to talk to. Whether new hams need CW or not.

The biggest problem would be freeing up a day to get to wherever the
test was being given.

and having any freqs left to operate on

That has nothing to do with CW - that's set by international
agreement. Do you really think that if we had "only" 300,000 hams,
we'd lose our frequencies?

lots of differences but at least I am in touch with the real world

Thinking that robbing a bank is earning money? Not very much touch.

so it is cheating it still is obtaining a license

That's about what it's come to these days, isn't it?

that offer was 30 years ago

Oh, I didn't notice. I was licensed for years by that time. I've
never been "offered" anything by the FCC.

It's BEEN hijacked - he's trying to get it back.

if it was hijackewd that was 26 years ago theat service does not exist
anymore

Yes, and?

and you would enact a sytem that would kill they ARS as it is if you
had the power

There were plenty of hams when 13 wpm was the entry level. A 5 wpm
code test and a *real* written test wouldn't kill it, it would just
separate those who are willing to do what it takes to be hams from
those who just want the license without the work.

maybe nut the current entry rates sugest otherwise

Correlation isn't cause.

but it does relate to results

"But" is usually used to refute something, not to just say "is too".
If you take your fingers out of your ears you might hear something.

and He does not
propose 5wpm and writeen test he prososes 13 wpm and a total lack of an
effective entry class and elimiating half the current licees and likely
a lot more than that

Oh, you mean the way it used to be, when there were plenty of hams.

vs the the preusre exerted for our bands

The number of *US* hams has very little to do with what bands are
*internationally* allocated to hams. Especially these days, when US
prestige has sunk so far.

and any "paln" that involves dumping 300,000 hams right of the bat is
pretty going to finish off the ARS

Seems to me we had a pretty good ARS when we only has 100,000 hams. If
dumping 300,000 means losing half, it means having 3 times the number
we used to have. How is tripling "finishing off"?

becuase it would be halfing not triplling and to assume it is only
halfing is generous many of the current generald and extra would be
weed out withon 10 years

300,000 is half of 100,000? What kind of arithmetic are you using? I
can't seem to get my calculator to make it come out that way.

if ham radio looks like it it is dying we will loose oour bands to
anyone that wants em

Your opinion - again, the world at large doesn't really care too much
what the US does these days, as far as number of hams.

indded a likely result would losing many of ou r
hf bands bands to literaly an extpanded CB service our vhf and up
would be savaged

That has nothing to do with frequency allocation. Learn how the ITU
works before you make such funny assertions.

and we would be powerless to resist

We ARE pretty powerless to resist now - but whether we keep a CW
requirement has nothing to do with the ITU. They couldn't care less.