Let's take back ham radio!
 

"an old freind" wrote in message
oups.com...

get help wrote:
On 27 Aug 2006 13:37:53 -0700, a welfare ham
wrote:

in a time where numbers are declining but that does not maater to al
since the No Code techs are not hams anyway according to AL

Indeed I'm not.

--
Mark caught forging using Steve's name.
"Steve's" post has headers:

X-Complaints-To:
X-Submitted-By: 66.82.9.42

Your reply contains headers:

NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.82.9.42
Injection-Info: 38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com; posting-host=66.82.9.42

'Nuff said.

www.marksspamblog.blogspot.com

Let's take back ham radio!
 

On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 18:49:38 -0400, wrote:
On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 17:57:46 -0500, "Not Lloyd" anon@anon wrote:


"an old freind" wrote in message
roups.com...

get help wrote:
On 27 Aug 2006 13:37:53 -0700, a welfare ham
wrote:

in a time where numbers are declining but that does not maater to al
since the No Code techs are not hams anyway according to AL

Indeed I'm a
poor forger

So why do you forge?

http://marksspamblog.blogspot.com

----
In message . com,
Mark Morgan replied "yes I did. your point?" when accused of
confessing publicly to having beer enemas.

Let's take back ham radio!
 

wrote in message
...
On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 17:57:46 -0500, "Not Lloyd" anon@anon wrote:


"an old freind" wrote in message
roups.com...

get help wrote:
On 27 Aug 2006 13:37:53 -0700, a welfare ham
wrote:

in a time where numbers are declining but that does not maater to al
since the No Code techs are not hams anyway according to AL

Indeed I'm am
yup, im a poor forger
www.marksspamblog.blogspot.com

--
Mark caught forging using Steve's name.
"Steve's" post has headers:

X-Complaints-To:
X-Submitted-By: 66.82.9.42

Your reply contains headers:

NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.82.9.42
Injection-Info: 38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com; posting-host=66.82.9.42

'Nuff said.

Let's take back ham radio!
 

Not Lloyd wrote:

yup, im a poor forger
www.marksspamblog.blogspot.com
yes you are a poor forger

Let's take back ham radio!
 

wrote:

BWHAHAHAHA Fatass Markie admits Wiseman is right!
meltdown in progress

Let's take back ham radio!
 

an old freindless fat faggot wrote:
wrote:

BWHAHAHAHA Fatass Markie admits Wiseman is right!
me

You arfe the one who posted it, dumbass.

Let's take back ham radio!
 

Not Cocksucker Lloyd wrote:
an old freindless fat faggot wrote:
wrote:

BWHAHAHAHA Fatass Markie admits Wiseman is right!
me

You are the one who posted it, dumbass.

typo fixed.

Let's take back ham radio!
 

Not Cocksucker Lloyd wrote:
an old freindless fat faggot wrote:

You arfe the one who posted it, dumbass.
posted what?

Let's take back ham radio!
 

an old fraud wrote:
Not Cocksucker Lloyd wrote:
an old freindless fat faggot wrote:

You are the one who posted it, dumbass.
posted what?

That "Wisemen" was right about you being not a good forger. Learn to
read, stupid.

Let's take back ham radio!
 

OK, who are you going to take it from. And what are you going to do
once you get it.


Not Lloyd wrote:
"an old freind" wrote in message
oups.com...

get help wrote:
On 27 Aug 2006 13:37:53 -0700, a welfare ham
wrote:

in a time where numbers are declining but that does not maater to al
since the No Code techs are not hams anyway according to AL

Indeed I'm not.

--
Mark caught forging using Steve's name.
"Steve's" post has headers:

X-Complaints-To:
X-Submitted-By: 66.82.9.42

Your reply contains headers:

NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.82.9.42
Injection-Info: 38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com; posting-host=66.82.9.42

'Nuff said.

www.marksspamblog.blogspot.com