From: Dave Heil on Sun, 04 Feb 2007 05:39:16 GMT

wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Sat, 03 Feb
wrote:
On Feb 2, 8:09?pm, wrote:
On Feb 2, 10:16?pm, Cecil Moore wrote:
wrote:

I've been in that situation too, Cecil, and a lot more recently than
the 1950s.
Oh? Was that when you served the country in your
"other ways?"

You are so intimate with Miccolis that you speak for him?

Allow me to paraphrase Leonard Anderson and advise you that this is a
public newsgroup where anyone may respond to any post.

Tsk, you are NOT answering Miccolis' question.

I'll try again:

Are you so intimate with Miccolis that you speak for him?

Yes or no.

"Intimate" does not automatically include sexual intimacy.

Why can't Miccolis answer for himself?


Miccolis, as usual, INFERRED something but never supplied
any details. Inference is NOT fact.

You aren't quoting Jim correctly and you know it.

Writing "I've been in that situation too...more recently
than the 1950s" says NOTHING of detail. It has NO factual
basis. It is INFERENCE.

That fine example of the modern American amateur extra,
Steven James Robeson was doing that for years. Never
supplied ANY true, references of HIS involvement.

Let's face it, Len. You don't know if Steve's statements are accurate
or not. Confirmation of his USMC service can easily be found on the
web. Did you ever find it?

WHERE "on the web" is this "confirmation?"

Tsk, I was the one pointing out the authoritative source
for military records at NARA, National Archives and
Records Administration, in St. Louis. I also repeated
their explanation of who is entitled to information.

Didn't you read that? It is still available at NARA.
But only to law enforcement personnel or the individual
who is on the records or his blood relations.

Are you in law enforcement? Do you have a nice shiny
shield in a wallet with your station callsign on it?
That is NOT an ID of real law enforcement.

Robesin is a FAKE, a FRAUD, a bluffer who has NOT ONCE
made available ANY document copies of HIS to anyone.

Why do you defend fakes, frauds, and bluffers? Maybe
you LIKE those types of sociopaths?


Let's review facts, shall we?

You have NO "facts" which are referencible.

I served *in* Vietnam, a country which
was at war during my service. I drew combat pay for the entire period
of that Vietnam service.

"Drawing combat pay" is NO "reference" to actually being
IN combat. Military pay is an administrative function.
Neither do you have third-party PROOF of this "combat
pay" (a supplement to regular military monthly income)
that is visible to anyone.

Your statement is INFERENCE and only YOUR statement.


You never did much in
Vietnam therefore you don't have any details to supply.

I could supply you with plenty of details.

Feel free to do so.

I've advised that you could easily find almost exactly what
I did elsewhere on the internet. Look for it or not, I don't care.

WHERE is this "easily found" data?

WHO can access it?

You are BLUFFING.

You were never in combat against the Viet Cong...

Fact: You have no idea what I did in Vietnam.

Quite true! You will NOT supply any information.

You don't know where third-party records are kept.

You wish to make braggart claims made by yourself and
state those are "FACTS." They are NOT fact. They are
simply CLAIMS.

You are behaving exactly like that fraud Robesin
behaved for years in here.



I am still in contact with both civilian and military
personnel who worked at the same signal facilities I did and
at the same time.

And? Do you believe yourself to be the only person on the planet who
maintains contact with those he served with in the military?

I do not. But, you have NOT said anything of substance,
only substituted a QUESTION in an attempt to misdirect.

You use a good misdirection ploy, but it is ONLY a
misdirection ploy.

If you have actual PROOF, then copies of such proof will
(if not forged) be enough proof. You have NOT provided
such proof.

You are behaving exactly like Robesin...his bluff was just
"call the VA." A delaying tactic until he could think up
another bluff.

The Veterans Administration will NOT automatically divulge
such information to just anyone. They confirm such data
through NARA.


My service, like yours, is also history and fact. The big difference is
that I haven't shared my history with you. Now what?

Now you must prove your "history and fact." Personal claims
are NOT fact.

Your bluffing period is over. Produce some copies of
referenced documents, OFFICIAL documents.


You simply don't know that. You don't have any information.

Tsk, you CANNOT PROVE something with null data.

You are trying to misdirect again. If you have this
"information" then you should have no qualms about
sharing it. So far you haven't revealed ANY data
other than your CLAIM.

We can see
what you do without facts and we know what you've written about others
when you have a few facts.

I call obvious bluffers for bluffers. I call obvious
liars for liars. I call obvious "snake oil salesmen"
for "snake oil salesment." I put you down for all three.


How much military training has Miccolis received?

He hasn't told me. I don't suppose that he has told you either.

Answer: NONE.

You don't know that.

Miccolis said he never served in any military.

Are there "easy places on the web" where one can find
personal data about the NEVER SERVING?

Show us how you "PROVE" something with a NOTHING.

All one can prove with a nothing is nothing.


He wants to "lecture me" on how I
treat REAL military veterans?

I think he can observe your actions here.

"WE" call all see YOUR actions here.

You simply disguise your personal hatred for someone with
allegations of misconduct or lying, whether it be on
personal military service or anything else.

That is quite visible to all.


I made no factual error there, Len.

You have "made" nothing. You have NO references, will
not tell anyone where those "easy" references are found
on the Internet.

You are simply trying to "PROVE" something with NOTHING.

That is bluffing, that is lying. That is the standard
operating procedure of Robesin in here for years.



I moved the "You rant about getting into amateur radio but you've never
gotten into amateur radio or even tried to do so" portion of my quote
text back to where it belongs to illustrate the lengths you'll go to in
order to create diversion, to pretend that my words were about something
else.

You are describing YOUR actions in here, not mine.

You are acting as "reply agent" for Miccolis. Why are you
inserting all these statements of YOUR personal dislike and
terrible "CHARGES" of misconduct in here? If you are reply
agent, why cannot you include his personal dislike instead
of your own.

Answer: You are attempting a technique of denigration of
others through selective editing, false "interpretations"
of what "others really think or do." Example:

You tale about the artillery barrage you were never in relates to
the amateur radio service you were never in.

There is NO relation. That is a MANUFACTURED charge.

Are you trying to say that "amateur radio service" is
involved in artillery fire? [other than in newsgroups]

Are you saying that ONLY radio amateurs "experience
combat?"

Other than making specious CLAIMS of your own, what is
your point OTHER than trying to denigrate and defame
your perceived opponents in here?

You and alleged "military expert" Miccolis have gone on
and on and on and on about a long-ago post in here as if
it were some sort of "prime moral-ethical felony" that
should be "punished" in a court of law. Why? For only
one plausible reason: Your own personal vendetta
against someone who doesn't agree with your own self-
aggrandizement, self-defined "importance" AS IF you
were "superior" in all aspects of everything. BS.

You and Miccolis have MANUFACTURED some mytical moral
perfidy of "not completing" some sort of imaginary
"promise" to achieve an amateur extra class license
exam. That seven-year-old statement was NEVER a
"promise" but a simple comment AT THE TIME. Miccolis
began manufacture out of his own SPITE to "get back"
at one of his critics. You, as well-behaved little
monkey, took up the chittering for the same reason.

You two have made a spiteful little noise in here about
past statements, ones that were NOT DONE AT THE TIME
of the original posting. You wish to keep OLD arguments
going and going and going for WHAT reason? Other than
to please yourself. You wish to be JUDGE OF ALL, yet
have NO authorization and are "guilty" of other
"crimes."

I've stated in the beginning in here, and continuously
up to now that my purpose was the advocacy of elimination
of the code test for a license.

So? Who asked you?

No one. Are you the "new moderator" for RRAP? Are you
"qualified" to pick and choose who gets to say what?

You are NOT so qualified, indeed should RECUSE yourself
from any such attempts and trying to silence your
opponents.

The code test for ALL amateur radio licenses will be
gone after 23 Feb 07. That has nothing to do with
your "combat pay" (whether that was real or imaginary
in your mind) nor of your attempts at being JUDGE OF
ALL just because you feel you are. FCC 06-178 was
a decision of the FCC based upon a democratic process
of proposal-commentary-decision by the only civil
radio regulating agency of the United States. Whether
YOU like it or not has no bearing on your own
sociopathic conduct in here, one-sided thinking and
attempts at silencing (by any means you feel necessary)
your own "opponents."


It was not about getting into amateur radio. It was a story you've told
countless times here, but it was not about getting into amateur radio.

"Countless times?" No. "Countless" relates towards
infinity. Your own mind, busy busy trying to
MANUFACTURE some false moral-ethical perfidy, has
conjured so badly you've lost the ability to count.

Are YOU "involved in getting into amateur radio?"
How is such "involvement" done? By sitting in an
amateur radio newsgroup and berating all who do not
agree with you? Or are you constantly going to VE
sessions and taking tests all the time?

How do you "qualify" BERATING all who disagree with
your opinions (and greatness of self-worth) with
getting anyone IN AMATEUR RADIO (other than sado-
masochists)?

Why do you set yourself up as some kind of "king" or
"emperor," the only one to JUDGE what others can do?


Great, Len. A number of us have experience with long haul HF
communications for periods of much longer than three years.

A "number of you?" '1' is a number. I would count
Hans Brakob as that one, having served the USN in
radio. Who are the "YOU" you refer to?

You've related snippets of information about the
Department of State stations at Embassies (counsolates?)
but have yet to provide any NUMBERS. Did ANY of them
have three dozen high-power HF transmitters capable of
24/7 operation? Plus VHF and UHF microwave radio relay
equipment to back up links with a command center?
Did any of "your" State stations relay messages at a
rate of greater than 200 thousand a month? Well,
did they?

You wish to denigrate the efforts of a whole battalion
of signalmen on keeping one of many links of federal
government communication operating during the Cold War
just on the basis of your personal dislike of a
newsgroup opponent? Why are you so anti-Army? Why do
you wish to denigrate the whole Department of Defense
of the United States of America?


I'm sorry that it bothers you that my work permitted me to operate from
some rare spots.

Bothers me NOT. Embassies and consulates are necessary
for the United States. They are NOT "amateur radio
station" are they? They are NOT "military radio
stations," are they?

Just WHY do you think that military radio networks
were "smaller" than State's? That they are "lesser"
in importance so much that you feel free to denigrate
and defame anyone who served in them? Why do you
seem to hate the US military so much?


You have a real inferiority complex, don't you?

None at all. I know what I am, I know what I've done,
I know my capabilities. I am content with what I've
accomplished and have enthusiasm for what I MIGHT
do in the future. I don't need to brag or bluff or
make vague CLAIMS of what I've done at any time in
my life. You see, I DO have references, third-
party references, am not afraid to post public data
on such where it does not conflict with national
security or business details. I HAVE posted some
of that. Not for my personal aggrandizement, not for
bragging or bluffing, just as personal history or for
those who might be interested in radio as it was
done a half century ago. I can post much more of
that but it takes away time that I would rather
spend enjoying for my own activities.

You seem to conveniently IGNORE statements I've
made in the past on what I've done, the available
digital copies of documents I have. Naturally you
want to ignore those or simply shine them off.
They are in opposition to your little personal
vendettas of denigrating all your "opponents."


Let me turn that around for you, Len. You act arrogant, bossy and
self-righteous here and you aren't even involved in amateur radio.
You're a non-participant in amateur radio.

Tsk. Are you constantly trying to be JUDGE of who
gets access in "your" newsgroup? Who appointed you?
Besides yourself, that is. Or do you think you ARE
God?!?

I act firmly, actively, and don't go in for gratuitous
nice-nice phrases to the obvious "superiority complex"
types such as yourself. I don't honor and respect the
ARRL. I don't honor and respect olde-tyme morsemen
who insist that their morsemanship makes them "superior"
to all others.

Why do you have such a failure to understand what I've
said? I stated long ago and kept repeating that I was
an advocate for eliminating the morse code test for
US amateur radio testing. I never said I was a
"participant" in licensed radio amateurism. I have
been a HOBBYIST in radio and electronics since 1947.
NO license was required for that. Why do you
constantly look down on hobbyists who are not
"licensed?"

Amateur radio is basically a HOBBY.

What does the FCC call it, Len?

What part of "BASICALLY a hobby" does Heil not understand?


You've commented. You still are not a part of amateur radio.
Got that, wizened geezer?

"Wizened geezer?"

Is that Heil's habit to continue denigration of others
who are chronologically older than he? Must be.


There is nothing to indicate that your scenario is based in fact. There
simply aren't many free services from the ARRL, Len. It charges
additional fees for most things. The DXCC program used to cost the
League quite a bit of money. I think it is largely, if not completely
self-sustaining these days. That's simply one example. There are
numerous others.

What some New Englanders do as a business while disguised
as a "non-profit" membership organization is not my
concern. If it is yours, then complain to THEM.


If I want fairy stories all I need to do is tickle one
of the self-righteous, self-defined "experts in radio"
(morsemen all) to hear fairy stories about the "service
to the nation" of hamateur radio.

Oh, that's right, you're some sort of puppet master and we all dance to
your tune. ;-) We been hYPnO-tIZeD!

Puppeteers do not hypnotize. I can, and have, yanked
chains. Have you considered oiling yours? They are
rather rusty.


No one has spouted more deliberate distortion and untruths in this
newsgroup regarding the state of amateur radio than you, Len.

Tsk. "Big Brother truths." "Truthspeak." George Orwell
would have a chuckle or two over your statement.

I know of none who've spouted (and spit) more deliberate
distortion and untruths than the olde-tyme morsemen.
Yourself included. See? You aren't forgotten!


I can think of only a few pseudo-friends you have here in the newsgroup,
Leonard.

I have few "friends" in this newsgroup. I do not expect
to have any. I don't look for "love" in the wrong places.
Some of us are like-minded on opposition to the code test.
We feel various degrees of victory in FCC 06-178. Tsk,
that must make the pro-coders very irritated. Boo hoo.

My friends and acquaintences OUTSIDE of this newsgroup
are more and varied than you think. There's no sense
is being detailed about that since your hatred would
only cause you to insult THEM as well...

I don't care for you at all.

NO?!? :-) Irrelevant. Newsgroups are NOT cozy little
kaffeklatsch gatherings of hive minds, all "enjoying" the
same nice-nice about shared likes. They are places of
DEBATE ABOUT IDEAS, LAWS, and SUBJECTS, not personalities
who feel they should DICTATE who says what and where.

Why do you DICTATE so much?


I've leveled with you very often, Len. You didn't like it.

"Leveled?!?" Hardly. You've been busy busy busy
INFERRING things, telling half-truths, insulting all
who disagreed with you.

Heh, if your "level" were used in Pisa, that leaning
tower would have fallen centuries ago...



I think there are things in which you've been a success, Len and I
believe that there are things in which you've been a failure.

I admit to failure in not inventing anti-gravity. Something
was always holding me down...


... You did boast seven years back of getting the "Extra right
out of the box".

I've toasted. I've never boasted.

It hasn't happened.

Has the universe ended? :-)

You never even tried.

I've never been tried for anything. Have you been tried?
If so, what was the REAL judges' ruling? That you pay a
certain amount of alimony? [I was never divorced]


Wanna pick up those
teeth of yours littering the floor? :-)

Since I know your age, I'll agree that you mean the smiley in this instance.

For yourself then. My teeth are firmly in place, do not come
out at night, will only come out if a DDS does it under
anaesthetic. Are you now an "expert" on dentistry?

Of course you are an "expert" on dentistry...you were tested
and passed under maximal-rate morse code!


There's not any really solid indication that your statement is factual.

Believe what you want to believe. Fairy tales for you?
Pipe-dreams? Peyote-induced glory and magnificence?


You still seem to think that you are somehow involved, that you're
"one of the guys" in amateur radio.

I was just trying to eliminate the code test for US amateur
radio licensing. No "licensing requirements" needed for
that. Hello? That code test was all about GETTING INTO
amateur radio.

What part of "being IN a licensed radio service" do you NOT
understand? Hello? Getting INTO something does NOT mean
"being IN" something. Are you clear on that?

We all get the idea that YOU consider hobbists without an
"official" amateur license to be anything but "lesser" than
Mighty Macho Masters of Morse who've been licensed forever
in the marvelous SERVICE of amateurism. sigh Some
folks are SO deluded...may even harbor delusions of
immortality!

I've been IN the larger world of ALL radio, little man.
For a long time now. I was only advocating the elimination
of the code test for a US amateur radio license. There is
NO law that forbids me from commenting to my government
on such advocacy. In HERE, there is some misguided "law"
which "forbids" such advocacy?

Too bad. My governmen listened and acted. Bye-bye code
test after 23 Feb 07.

All that seems to be left are all you mighty macho masters
of morse sitting around spitting and spouting and trying to
heap abuse on us NCTAs. Now just WHO is the delusional,
the sociopathic sunsabishes sweating over keyboards NOW?
Hmmm?

The name "Walter Mitty" comes to mind when I think of you.

Danny Kaye played that role in a funny movie. Nice guy.
Went to one of his TV shows long ago, enjoyed it with
the rest of the audience. Kaye (rest his soul) had
appreciation for a wide group of people he entertained.

Now, how come I think of an overweight Don Knotts for
you? :-)


There are always folks better at something than others. There are
always folks who can meet the established requirements for partaking in
an endeavor and there are those who can't.

"Endeavor?" That's not the space shuttle I saw being
built by Rockwell. Husband of one of my schoolchums
worked on that. I've helped test out space shuttle
main engines at another division of Rockwell (now a
Boeing division). "Atlantis" was the SS I saw up close
and personal. Not "Endeavor."

Can you be more specific?

I've been an electronics design engineer for over three
decades. Proof is in all kinds of documents, from
personnel records to drawing sign-offs as approving
project engineer.

I've been a part-time professional writer, some on
hobby electronics. Was a part-time Associate Editor
of a ham-interest monthly...was listed on the
masthead.

I'm also an illustrator (an artist who draws things as
they really are). Have done that for both money and
for my own pleasure.

I've even rebuilt several rooms in our southern house,
some of that requiring government approval. None of
the above required I be LICENSED AS AN AMATEUR with
the federal government!

Oh, my, I've "failed established requirements?" No.
I 'partook.' Things got done. Oh, my, and the FCC
eliminated the morse code test for US amateur radio
license testing! Oh, my! And I was a Commenter on
the NPRM! [my name is listed in the last half of
FCC 06-178, sunnuvagun!]


I told you that you don't know me.

"Countless" times! :-)

Hey, if you don't wanna share anything then go sit in
the corner and pout.

You have precious little in the way of fact.

Tsk, tsk, I have lots and lots of FACT. Bookshelves
full of books and notebooks of things I've done in
my workshop. Now it may not be "precious" but it
DOES exist.


I'm a large man, Len and I've stomped the old terra.

Tsk, was that a Scottish terra or a wire-haired terra?

Why do you treat dogs so brutally?

Would you "stomp" a german shepherd?

I've enjoyed 43
years of amateur radio and I plan to enjoy another decade or two.

Have a ball, "Mr. DX." Is anyone stopping you? :-)

A newsgroup is NOT licensed amateur radio.

I'm not pained to see that you won't be joining in on the fun.

You have precious little in the way of fact. :-)

You have NO ability to predict the future. Some wonder
if you have any future at all...