He's crossed the line numerous times: doing foreign policy, defaming
Riley Hollingsworth, going commercial. But he has a case

When Ervin Duggan was FCC Chief Commissioner in the 80s, Baxter
received two NALs similar to the present. Dutifully, he spent a great
deal of time on his response, serving same on the FCC by regular mail.
When the mail was "lost," Baxter resorted to Federal Express with no
better result.

So, here was an agency, pre-Hollingsworth, that had issed two NALs and
had purposely sandbagged K1MAN's answer -- with good reason.

In his answer, Baxter cited two documents of probative value. One was
a letter to Kenneth Black of Ulmerton, UK, responding to his complaint,
that gave K1MAN's operation a clean bill of health, equating it to W1AW
bulletins. It was signed by Robert McNamara, Chief of the FCC,
then-Private Radio Bureau.

The other was a declaratory order on the subject of the length of
Information Bulletins with a footnote that referred to W1AW published
schedules. The essence of the order was, information bulletins cannot
be proscribed by time limits since they are so varied. Rightly or
wrongly, Baxter has drawn his authority to come on when he does from
that Order's footnote.

Small wonder the FCC disregarded K1MAN's answer, which essentially held
that the issue of the NALs had already been settled in his favor. In
legal argot, res judicata.

Though most hams, including myself, want to march Baxter right out of
this service, justice dictates something else. The FCC, it seems to
this commentator, has the burden of first addressing its previous NALs
of the 80s which were never resolved.

An agency of government simply cannot throw a flurry of similar charges
at a citizen, selectively unresponsive to those that can be defended,
while arbitrarily limiting its attention to subsequent charges.
Certainly, to the extent the previous NALs are similar, the legal
principle of collaterol estoppel comes into play in Baxter's behalf.

I don't like what Baxter does any more than you. Indeed, I think he
lost his way years ago. But if we're to have justice for all in these
United States, then we must afford K1MAN justice. Let's not throw out
the baby with the bath water.

Bob Sherin, W4ASX

If this K1MAN is so great, why didn't he just apply for a broadcast license
and broadcast the old-fashioned way.

"Bob Sherin, W4ASX" wrote in message
oups.com...
He's crossed the line numerous times: doing foreign policy, defaming
Riley Hollingsworth, going commercial. But he has a case

When Ervin Duggan was FCC Chief Commissioner in the 80s, Baxter
received two NALs similar to the present. Dutifully, he spent a great
deal of time on his response, serving same on the FCC by regular mail.
When the mail was "lost," Baxter resorted to Federal Express with no
better result.

So, here was an agency, pre-Hollingsworth, that had issed two NALs and
had purposely sandbagged K1MAN's answer -- with good reason.

In his answer, Baxter cited two documents of probative value. One was
a letter to Kenneth Black of Ulmerton, UK, responding to his complaint,
that gave K1MAN's operation a clean bill of health, equating it to W1AW
bulletins. It was signed by Robert McNamara, Chief of the FCC,
then-Private Radio Bureau.

The other was a declaratory order on the subject of the length of
Information Bulletins with a footnote that referred to W1AW published
schedules. The essence of the order was, information bulletins cannot
be proscribed by time limits since they are so varied. Rightly or
wrongly, Baxter has drawn his authority to come on when he does from
that Order's footnote.

Small wonder the FCC disregarded K1MAN's answer, which essentially held
that the issue of the NALs had already been settled in his favor. In
legal argot, res judicata.

Though most hams, including myself, want to march Baxter right out of
this service, justice dictates something else. The FCC, it seems to
this commentator, has the burden of first addressing its previous NALs
of the 80s which were never resolved.

An agency of government simply cannot throw a flurry of similar charges
at a citizen, selectively unresponsive to those that can be defended,
while arbitrarily limiting its attention to subsequent charges.
Certainly, to the extent the previous NALs are similar, the legal
principle of collaterol estoppel comes into play in Baxter's behalf.

I don't like what Baxter does any more than you. Indeed, I think he
lost his way years ago. But if we're to have justice for all in these
United States, then we must afford K1MAN justice. Let's not throw out
the baby with the bath water.

Bob Sherin, W4ASX

Wayne,

You put out such great posts, I'm surprised you aimed this one at me.
Here you raise the predicate "If K1MAN is so great ..." -- I, for one,
don't think he's great, "why didn't he just apply for a broadcase
license and broadcast the old-fashioned way?" I don't have any more of
a clue than you.

Bob Sherin, W4ASX

"Bob Sherin, W4ASX" wrote in message
ups.com...
Wayne,

You put out such great posts, I'm surprised you aimed this one at me.
Here you raise the predicate "If K1MAN is so great ..." -- I, for one,
don't think he's great, "why didn't he just apply for a broadcase
license and broadcast the old-fashioned way?" I don't have any more of
a clue than you.


You got that right!

If this K1MAN is so great, why didn't he just apply for a broadcast license
and broadcast the old-fashioned way.

because it's a lot harder to get a license for broadcast then what you
think.

Todd N9OGL

"N9OGL" wrote in message
ups.com...
If this K1MAN is so great, why didn't he just apply for a broadcast
license
and broadcast the old-fashioned way.

because it's a lot harder to get a license for broadcast then what you
think.

Todd N9OGL


Sure must be. No retards on SW Broadcast, lots on ham radio and this
newsgroup, eh guys?

Dan/W4NTI

That's a fact.


"Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message
.net...

"N9OGL" wrote in message
ups.com...
If this K1MAN is so great, why didn't he just apply for a broadcast
license
and broadcast the old-fashioned way.

because it's a lot harder to get a license for broadcast then what you
think.

Todd N9OGL


Sure must be. No retards on SW Broadcast, lots on ham radio and this
newsgroup, eh guys?

Dan/W4NTI

To obtain a shortwave license you can not LESS then 50,000 watts and
have to pay around 4,000 to 5,000 dollars. FM BROADCAST you can run 6KW
on up at a cost of $50,000 to $100,000 just for the license, Same
applies for AM radio.

Todd N9OGL

SORRY CORRECTION

To obtain a shortwave license you can not RUN LESS then 50,000 watts
and
have to pay around 4,000 to 5,000 dollars. FM BROADCAST you can run 6KW

on up at a cost of $50,000 to $100,000 just for the license, Same
applies for AM radio.