Lardass Lloyd's fatass "Rant" whined in message
...
Wogie,

Lardass, you really should quit trying to suck Roger's "woger" you've
got quite a cocksucking lisp!

You were retested by the FCC because *Evidence* lies flushed

Oh, so you are speaking for the FCC, now Lardass? Funny how the retest
letter doesn't give a reason except that the FCC has the authority to
retest.
But you don't let the truth stand in the way of your lies, do you?

Here's the letter, where does it say *anything* about interference?

------------
July 11, 2000

CERTIFIED MAIL--RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

Mr. Roger L. Wiseman

610 Glen Haven Avenue

Glendale, WV 26038-1302

SUBJECT: Amateur Radio license KC8JBO

Dear Mr. Wiseman:

Pursuant to Section 97.519(d)(2) of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.
Section 97.519(d)(2), the Commission has the authority to
re-administer any
examination element previously administered by Volunteer Examiners
(VE's).
The Commission may either administer the examination itself, or under
the
supervision of a Volunteer Examiner Coordinator (VEC) or VE designated
by
the Commission.

Accordingly, we are requiring you to re-take the General Class Amateur
Examination, (Elements 2, 3(A) and 3(B)) under the supervision of an
American Radio Relay League Volunteer Examiner Coordinator. This
examination
must be completed on or before September 11, 2000. The required code
speed
that you must demonstrate is 5 words per minute.

Please be prepared to verify your current address and to present a
photo
identification. Pursuant to Commission rules, your license will be
cancelled
if you do not appear for re-examination. You will be granted an
Amateur
Radio license consistent with the elements you pass upon
re-examination.


Sincerely,



W. Riley Hollingsworth

Special Counsel, Amateur Radio

Enforcement Bureau
------------------------------

Oh, that's right, you got it from the ARRL Enforcement log releases on
the subject. You string together that release that states that Roger
got a warning letter which may or may not indicate inappropriate
activity occuring
(despite this disclaimer, posted along with the logs, which you
somehow "forgot" to include with your retelling:
NOTE: Issuance by the FCC of a Warning Notice indicates that the FCC
has what it believes to be reliable evidence of possible rules
infractions and not necessarily that the recipient has violated FCC
rules. The FCC has the authority, pursuant to §97.519(d)(2) of the
rules to readminister any examination element previously administered
by a volunteer examiner. ) a preemtive letter to Wiseman and
Gopherface Tunder and the above retest letter, which gives no
indication that interference had ANYTHING to do with the letter being
sent out. BTW, explain why Wiseman PASSED the retest and the code test
(while you couldn't the first time) and even upgraded.
(space reserved for your backpedaling)

On 8 Jun 2004 04:42:06 -0700, (AB8MQ) wrote:


Oh, so you are speaking for the FCC, now Lardass? Funny how the retest
letter doesn't give a reason except that the FCC has the authority to
retest.

What's funny is how you think that everyone is Lloyd.

Haywood Jablomee. wrote in message . ..
On 8 Jun 2004 04:42:06 -0700, (AB8MQ) wrote:


Oh, so you are speaking for the FCC, now Lardass? Funny how the retest
letter doesn't give a reason except that the FCC has the authority to
retest.

What's funny is how you think that everyone is Lloyd.

What's equally funny is how you think everyone is Roger, too.