RadioBanter - View Single Post - Feb 23 is the No-code date

[email protected] · January 23rd 07, 12:20 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy

wrote:
From: "KH6HZ" on Mon, Jan 22 2007 6:53 am
wrote:
lolol.
Poor senile old boy.

I think its funny you obsess over me so much, even after 10 years.

"Judge"

has "ruled" that there is no statute of
limitartions in newsgroups. Take it to his court...

"limitartions"?

For the record, my Ship License was WCN4898, not WCD6729. Anyone with half a
brain can check the ULS and see the FRN on my (expired) ship license.

Are we to assume that "coincidences" justify attempts at
"legally" defrauding the US government?

Ship radio license WCD6729 was granted 1 Feb 94, no FRN given,
FCC required mailing address given as Grapeview, WA, 98546.

Ship radio license WCN4898 was granted 13 Oct 94, FRN given
as 0003639002, mailing address given as Chepachet, RI.

Both ship radio licenses expired in 2004.

Both ship radio licenses were granted to "Deignan, Michael P."

Based on long-ago "discussions" about club callsigns in
here - and on such places as the AH0A amateur statistics -
"Deignan, Michael P." had OVER 10 amateur radio "club"
licenses at one time...PLUS having given his "residence"
address to the FCC as a Post Office Box in Hawaii, not
only for those alleged "club" calls but also his own Vanity
license application. Was "Deignan, Michael P." EVER a
RESIDENT in the state of Hawaii? Residency is not defined
as temporarily staying there as on a vacation.

"Deignan, Michael P." isn't a common name. Are we to assume
that there is more than one Deignan with the same given first
name and middle initial in the USA? I think not. The names
and dates all point to a single individual.

FCC ULS data show that "Deignan, Michael P." prefers Post
Office Box "addresses," regardless of state. That's
called a "tell" to investigators. A common characteristic
of those seeking to hide something. Anyone with a full
brain can see these alleged "coincidences" aren't quite
so coincidental.

Now, I could go into the collusion you had with Jeffrey
Herman on your KH6 vanity callsign...but that has already
been done and you've been forced to give up your "club"
calls by the FCC. Tsk, tsk. The mighty "RF Commandos"
were mustered out and the VA offers them NO benefits.

It's rather obvious also that you refused to give an
explanation for taking out so many "club" calls or the
misleading "residence address" of Hawaii for you vanity
callsign. [a KH6 must be oh, so tres chic in New England
area, much better than a plebian KD1 like your previous
license of KD1HZ, another vanity call]

Jot that down on a yellow sticky and put it next to your acoustic modem, ok,
Lennie?

I have neither "yellow stickys" nor acoustic modem.

Might wanna get the visiting nurse to come and change your diaper a little
more often too, you get so grumpy when you're soiled.

Tsk, tsk, an amateur extra betraying

boast that
all pro-coders are "polite, civil" people who never
utter personal insults?

Who said that, Len? Give us a direct quote, please.

Yes, they DO exist as proven by
the quotes above.

Not proven at all, Len. In fact, when you argue with Mike,
you are arguing with a nocodetest person.

You have obviously forgotten that KH6HZ is, and was,
*against* the Morse Code test for an amateur license.

This isn't a new thing, or a secret. Look up his 1998 comments to
the FCC on the subject, if you don't believe me.

He specifically asked FCC to do the following in response to NPRM
98-143:

1) Reduce all Morse Code testing to a single 5 wpm test, but only
because
the treaty then in effect required some sort of test

2) Include a "sunset clause" that would automatically eliminate that
test when
and if the treaty changed, *without* any further NPRMs, petitions
or other
actions being required.

IOW, he *supported* the NCI proposal of that time! He's a
dyed-in-the-wool
no-coder!

He also suggested:

3) Reduction of the number of amateur radio license classes to two.

4) Changes to the written test methods (not the content as much as the
test methods).

This was almost ten years ago. I don't think Mike has changed his

I have no "visiting nurse" and do not use or wear "diapers."
But, to drop to the vernacular of the ugly, feel free to
eat my shorts. :-)

Aloha,

Well, it's interesting to see that you can be nasty to those who agree
with you....