In article ,
says...

top-posting corrected ... Please don't top-post!

"Dr. Anton T. Squeegee" wrote in message

For someone who claims such a broad base of knowledge, your
viewpoint is pretty short-sighted.

No. It is not short-sighted. Ham Radio is a technical
pursuit with technical privileges and I wish it to remain so.

Well, that's fine. You can, in your own way, make your
participation in amateur radio as technical as you want.

HOWEVER -- Technical pursuits are NOT the only reason the SERVICE
exists. You apparently did not take my advice to read the material at
the links I provided on Part 97 of the FCC regs, more specifically the
section which defines what the amateur service is. Had you done so, you
would have read that there's a lot more than the technical side
involved.

Any sitting-on-the-sidelines while the Mongolian hordes
of turnip-brained CBers pour in is ill-advised because the
powers-that-be will come to perceive Ham Radio to have
become indistinguishable from CB Radio and the technical
privileges will be in danger of being withdrawn.

blink

You know, up until you made that utterly inaccurate and utterly
loony statement, I was under the impression that you could be
reasonable.

Far from being short-sighted, the viewpoint that I
express is long-sighted.

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion. I would, however,
point out that the "Mongolian hordes" (are we being racist now as well?)
have been "pouring in" for the last several decades.

While there has been a noticeable (and, IMO, lamentable) decline
in the number of tinkerers, as it were, amateur radio is still around,
and I think it will continue to be around for many moons to come.

For the sake of avoiding newsgroup clutter, I will no longer
debate these points with you. It is apparent that you do not care enough
to take Part 97 (or whatever its UK equivalent is) seriously.

God help whatever newcomer asks you an 'elmer' type question about
amateur radio...

*PLONK!*


--
Dr. Anton T. Squeegee, Director, Dutch Surrealist Plumbing Institute.
(Known to some as Bruce Lane, ARS KC7GR,
kyrrin (a/t) bluefeathertech[d=o=t]calm -- www.bluefeathertech.com
"If Salvador Dali had owned a computer, would it have been equipped
with surreal ports?"

"Airy R. Bean" wrote in message
...

snip

"Ham Radio" is for amateurs. That's why it's called Amateur Radio.

Airy Bean, like most folks on this NG, is a radio_AMATEUR. Unlike most
folks on this NG he has little of any consequence to help or assist other
(or prospective) radio amateurs.

J.

"Airy R. Bean" wrote in message
...

snip

"Ham Radio" is for amateurs. That's why it's called Amateur Radio.

Airy Bean, like most folks on this NG, is a radio_AMATEUR. Unlike most
folks on this NG he has little of any consequence to help or assist other
(or prospective) radio amateurs.

J.

You behave like a 5-year old.

wrote in message
...
You've done it now Bill! You'll be on Airy's blacklist. Expect to be
called "5 year old", "she", "infant". etc etc ... in fact all the
inane claptrap that we have been pestered with since Airy (also known
as Gareth Alun Evans, G4SDW, of Chippenham, England) slipped headfirst
down the "john"...

You behave like a 5-year old.

wrote in message
...
You've done it now Bill! You'll be on Airy's blacklist. Expect to be
called "5 year old", "she", "infant". etc etc ... in fact all the
inane claptrap that we have been pestered with since Airy (also known
as Gareth Alun Evans, G4SDW, of Chippenham, England) slipped headfirst
down the "john"...

I wonder what was Mr.Reay's purpose in publishing
his rather silly and somewhat infantile attention
seeking outburst that is quoted from him below?

Was it to demonstrate that not only is he a _LOSER_,
but that he is well aware of the fact?

Was it to demonstrate that anybody who holds, or who
has ever held, an M3/CB Fools' Licence can never be
a _REAL_ Radio Ham because of the associated
gentlemanly traditions?

Was it to demonstrate the really big mistake that was made
when the gangrenous degeneration that is the M3/CB Fools'
Licence was introduced?

Was it a further Freudian Slip on his part showing that
the insecurity that he holds to be in every _REAL_ Radio
Ham is a part of every fibre of his being and that he is
trying to make himself feel better by blurting out some
playground-style insults?

Was it to demonstrate that his sneering 'n' jeering in
the company and style of so many of the toilet-mouthed
gutter-denizens of this NG makes him a CBer fair and square?

Was it to divert attention away from a style of debate that
can at best be described as, spin-doctoring, side-stepping,
bull****ting and downright lying?

Was it to demonstrate that the RSCB, of whose politbureaux
he is a significant member, has degenerated into a
cesspit of CBers and is no longer relevant to Ham Radio?

Was it to make a fool of himself in front of Victoria,
Rebecca and Michaela when the time comes that he is no longer
able to censor their Usenet access, and they get to see
what a hypocrite he is by comparing his behaviour against
the standards that he imposes on them as they grow up?

Was it to demonstrate that despite his _BOASTS_ of being in
possession of a number of degrees that he is incapable of
stringing two or more words together in a civil and rational
discussion?

Was it to demonstrate that once again, having sneered 'n'
jeered in the CB fashion he is going to run away when
challenged?

Was it because he was annoyed that his gaffe in stating
that e^(-jwt) was a function that decreased with increasing time
was so well publicised, and he wanted to stamp his tiny little
foot in a pique of anger?

"Brian Reay" wrote in message
...
Actually Bill, the best bit is that "Airy" (real name Gareth) actually
shows
very little evidence of having the technical knowledge he likes to claim.

I wonder what was Mr.Reay's purpose in publishing
his rather silly and somewhat infantile attention
seeking outburst that is quoted from him below?

Was it to demonstrate that not only is he a _LOSER_,
but that he is well aware of the fact?

Was it to demonstrate that anybody who holds, or who
has ever held, an M3/CB Fools' Licence can never be
a _REAL_ Radio Ham because of the associated
gentlemanly traditions?

Was it to demonstrate the really big mistake that was made
when the gangrenous degeneration that is the M3/CB Fools'
Licence was introduced?

Was it a further Freudian Slip on his part showing that
the insecurity that he holds to be in every _REAL_ Radio
Ham is a part of every fibre of his being and that he is
trying to make himself feel better by blurting out some
playground-style insults?

Was it to demonstrate that his sneering 'n' jeering in
the company and style of so many of the toilet-mouthed
gutter-denizens of this NG makes him a CBer fair and square?

Was it to divert attention away from a style of debate that
can at best be described as, spin-doctoring, side-stepping,
bull****ting and downright lying?

Was it to demonstrate that the RSCB, of whose politbureaux
he is a significant member, has degenerated into a
cesspit of CBers and is no longer relevant to Ham Radio?

Was it to make a fool of himself in front of Victoria,
Rebecca and Michaela when the time comes that he is no longer
able to censor their Usenet access, and they get to see
what a hypocrite he is by comparing his behaviour against
the standards that he imposes on them as they grow up?

Was it to demonstrate that despite his _BOASTS_ of being in
possession of a number of degrees that he is incapable of
stringing two or more words together in a civil and rational
discussion?

Was it to demonstrate that once again, having sneered 'n'
jeered in the CB fashion he is going to run away when
challenged?

Was it because he was annoyed that his gaffe in stating
that e^(-jwt) was a function that decreased with increasing time
was so well publicised, and he wanted to stamp his tiny little
foot in a pique of anger?

"Brian Reay" wrote in message
...
Actually Bill, the best bit is that "Airy" (real name Gareth) actually
shows
very little evidence of having the technical knowledge he likes to claim.

"Jedi" jedi@nospamhere wrote in
:

"Airy R. Bean" wrote in message
...

snip

"Ham Radio" is for amateurs. That's why it's called
Amateur Radio.

Airy Bean, like most folks on this NG, is a radio_AMATEUR.
Unlike most folks on this NG he has little of any
consequence to help or assist other (or prospective) radio
amateurs.

.......which goes against the true spirit that has taken
amateur radio to it's present position.

If the pioneers in the 1920s who did the first amateur
transmissions had adopted the same opinions and stand-points
as Gareth, we'd have got nowhere.

Long may he sit and rule his own empire. Thankfully that
empire ends at his front door except for his publicity machine
that is the internet.

"Jedi" jedi@nospamhere wrote in
:

"Airy R. Bean" wrote in message
...

snip

"Ham Radio" is for amateurs. That's why it's called
Amateur Radio.

Airy Bean, like most folks on this NG, is a radio_AMATEUR.
Unlike most folks on this NG he has little of any
consequence to help or assist other (or prospective) radio
amateurs.

.......which goes against the true spirit that has taken
amateur radio to it's present position.

If the pioneers in the 1920s who did the first amateur
transmissions had adopted the same opinions and stand-points
as Gareth, we'd have got nowhere.

Long may he sit and rule his own empire. Thankfully that
empire ends at his front door except for his publicity machine
that is the internet.

WRONG!

"Dr. Anton T. Squeegee" wrote in message
...
HOWEVER -- Technical pursuits are NOT the only reason the SERVICE
exists.

WRONG!

"Dr. Anton T. Squeegee" wrote in message
...
HOWEVER -- Technical pursuits are NOT the only reason the SERVICE
exists.

If you wish to make some point in debate, then make it
yourself. I'm not going to go away and learn up on
your failings, OM!

"Dr. Anton T. Squeegee" wrote in message
...
You apparently did not take my advice to read the material at
the links I provided on Part 97 of the FCC regs, more specifically the
section which defines what the amateur service is. Had you done so, you
would have read that there's a lot more than the technical side
involved.

If you wish to make some point in debate, then make it
yourself. I'm not going to go away and learn up on
your failings, OM!

"Dr. Anton T. Squeegee" wrote in message
...
You apparently did not take my advice to read the material at
the links I provided on Part 97 of the FCC regs, more specifically the
section which defines what the amateur service is. Had you done so, you
would have read that there's a lot more than the technical side
involved.

The Childish Broadcaster (CBer) quoted below reveals himself every time
that he resorts to personal remarks.

Shame on you.

Ham Radio has traditions of gentlemanly conduct.

"Dr. Anton T. Squeegee" wrote in message
...
You know, up until you made that utterly inaccurate and utterly
loony statement, I was under the impression that you could be
reasonable.

The Childish Broadcaster (CBer) quoted below reveals himself every time
that he resorts to personal remarks.

Shame on you.

Ham Radio has traditions of gentlemanly conduct.

"Dr. Anton T. Squeegee" wrote in message
...
You know, up until you made that utterly inaccurate and utterly
loony statement, I was under the impression that you could be
reasonable.

Close your mind to the infestation that is the turnip-brained CBer
and the disease will spread.

"Dr. Anton T. Squeegee" wrote in message
...
For the sake of avoiding newsgroup clutter, I will no longer
debate these points with you. It is apparent that you do not care enough
to take Part 97 (or whatever its UK equivalent is) seriously.
God help whatever newcomer asks you an 'elmer' type question about
amateur radio...
*PLONK!*

Close your mind to the infestation that is the turnip-brained CBer
and the disease will spread.

"Dr. Anton T. Squeegee" wrote in message
...
For the sake of avoiding newsgroup clutter, I will no longer
debate these points with you. It is apparent that you do not care enough
to take Part 97 (or whatever its UK equivalent is) seriously.
God help whatever newcomer asks you an 'elmer' type question about
amateur radio...
*PLONK!*

"Airy R. Bean" wrote in
:

WRONG!

"Dr. Anton T. Squeegee"
wrote in message
...
HOWEVER -- Technical pursuits are NOT the only reason the
SERVICE exists.


Gareth - do us all a _FAVOUR_ - take your silly little
squabbles to email. Shows true usenet netiquette.

There's a good girl.



--

#!/bin/sh {who;} {last;} {pause;} {grep;} {touch;} {unzip;}
mount /dev/girl -t {wet;} {fsck;} {fsck;} {fsck;} {fsck;} echo
yes yes yes {yes;} umount {/dev/girl;zip;} rm -rf {wet.spot;}
{sleep;} finger: permission denied

"Airy R. Bean" wrote in
:

WRONG!

"Dr. Anton T. Squeegee"
wrote in message
...
HOWEVER -- Technical pursuits are NOT the only reason the
SERVICE exists.


Gareth - do us all a _FAVOUR_ - take your silly little
squabbles to email. Shows true usenet netiquette.

There's a good girl.



--

#!/bin/sh {who;} {last;} {pause;} {grep;} {touch;} {unzip;}
mount /dev/girl -t {wet;} {fsck;} {fsck;} {fsck;} {fsck;} echo
yes yes yes {yes;} umount {/dev/girl;zip;} rm -rf {wet.spot;}
{sleep;} finger: permission denied

"Airy R. Bean" wrote in
:

The Childish Broadcaster (CBer) quoted below reveals
himself every time that he resorts to personal remarks.

Shame on you.

Ham Radio has traditions of gentlemanly conduct.

How dumb are you dumbo?

I see you're trapped in an usenet argument corner, so you've
pulled the Airy-Arse book of old cliches out have you?




"Dr. Anton T. Squeegee"
wrote in message
...
You know, up until you made that utterly inaccurate and
utterly loony statement, I was under the impression that
you could be reasonable.






--

#!/bin/sh {who;} {last;} {pause;} {grep;} {touch;} {unzip;}
mount /dev/girl -t {wet;} {fsck;} {fsck;} {fsck;} {fsck;} echo
yes yes yes {yes;} umount {/dev/girl;zip;} rm -rf {wet.spot;}
{sleep;} finger: permission denied

"Airy R. Bean" wrote in
:

The Childish Broadcaster (CBer) quoted below reveals
himself every time that he resorts to personal remarks.

Shame on you.

Ham Radio has traditions of gentlemanly conduct.

How dumb are you dumbo?

I see you're trapped in an usenet argument corner, so you've
pulled the Airy-Arse book of old cliches out have you?




"Dr. Anton T. Squeegee"
wrote in message
...
You know, up until you made that utterly inaccurate and
utterly loony statement, I was under the impression that
you could be reasonable.






--

#!/bin/sh {who;} {last;} {pause;} {grep;} {touch;} {unzip;}
mount /dev/girl -t {wet;} {fsck;} {fsck;} {fsck;} {fsck;} echo
yes yes yes {yes;} umount {/dev/girl;zip;} rm -rf {wet.spot;}
{sleep;} finger: permission denied

"Airy R. Bean" wrote in
:

Close your mind to the infestation that is the
turnip-brained CBer and the disease will spread.

You're wasting your broadband connection and ISP time now
Gareth - the guy ain't listening to your loony claptrap
anymore.

"Dr. Anton T. Squeegee"
wrote in message
...
For the sake of avoiding newsgroup clutter, I will no
longer debate these points with you. It is apparent that
you do not care enough to take Part 97 (or whatever its UK
equivalent is) seriously. God help whatever newcomer asks
you an 'elmer' type question about amateur radio...
*PLONK!*







--

#!/bin/sh {who;} {last;} {pause;} {grep;} {touch;} {unzip;}
mount /dev/girl -t {wet;} {fsck;} {fsck;} {fsck;} {fsck;} echo
yes yes yes {yes;} umount {/dev/girl;zip;} rm -rf {wet.spot;}
{sleep;} finger: permission denied

"Airy R. Bean" wrote in
:

Close your mind to the infestation that is the
turnip-brained CBer and the disease will spread.

You're wasting your broadband connection and ISP time now
Gareth - the guy ain't listening to your loony claptrap
anymore.

"Dr. Anton T. Squeegee"
wrote in message
...
For the sake of avoiding newsgroup clutter, I will no
longer debate these points with you. It is apparent that
you do not care enough to take Part 97 (or whatever its UK
equivalent is) seriously. God help whatever newcomer asks
you an 'elmer' type question about amateur radio...
*PLONK!*







--

#!/bin/sh {who;} {last;} {pause;} {grep;} {touch;} {unzip;}
mount /dev/girl -t {wet;} {fsck;} {fsck;} {fsck;} {fsck;} echo
yes yes yes {yes;} umount {/dev/girl;zip;} rm -rf {wet.spot;}
{sleep;} finger: permission denied

"Airy R. Bean" wrote in message
...
I wonder what was Mr.Reay's purpose in publishing
his rather silly and somewhat infantile attention
seeking outburst that is quoted from him below?

Was it to demonstrate that not only is he a _LOSER_,
but that he is well aware of the fact?

If you are ever lucky enough to meet Dr Reay then you will learn why he
posts the odd jibe at you. While you are directing your bile at him it goes
into his kill file and he ignores you knowing that newcomers will see you as
the nasty bit of work your are. That means the M3 are left alone and you do
less harm. Brian isn't the sort of man to be worried by a toe rag like you.

More power to your elbow Brian

GW

"Airy R. Bean" wrote in message
...
I wonder what was Mr.Reay's purpose in publishing
his rather silly and somewhat infantile attention
seeking outburst that is quoted from him below?

Was it to demonstrate that not only is he a _LOSER_,
but that he is well aware of the fact?

If you are ever lucky enough to meet Dr Reay then you will learn why he
posts the odd jibe at you. While you are directing your bile at him it goes
into his kill file and he ignores you knowing that newcomers will see you as
the nasty bit of work your are. That means the M3 are left alone and you do
less harm. Brian isn't the sort of man to be worried by a toe rag like you.

More power to your elbow Brian

GW

On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 17:49:46 +0000, the Has-Bean wrote:

The Childish Broadcaster (CBer) quoted below reveals himself every time
that he resorts to personal remarks.


Then in another post

Was it to demonstrate that not only is he a _LOSER_,
but that he is well aware of the fact?

You _ARE_ that CBer!

On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 17:49:46 +0000, the Has-Bean wrote:

The Childish Broadcaster (CBer) quoted below reveals himself every time
that he resorts to personal remarks.


Then in another post

Was it to demonstrate that not only is he a _LOSER_,
but that he is well aware of the fact?

You _ARE_ that CBer!

On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 17:46:44 -0000, "Airy R. Bean"
wrote:

I wonder what was Mr.Reay's purpose in publishing


you left out

posing for photgraph after sucessfully passing the morse appreciation
for the new wonderful m3 licence that he didnt like the look of at
first...all because the m3 had access to hf above those with a more
advanced licence.

On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 17:46:44 -0000, "Airy R. Bean"
wrote:

I wonder what was Mr.Reay's purpose in publishing


you left out

posing for photgraph after sucessfully passing the morse appreciation
for the new wonderful m3 licence that he didnt like the look of at
first...all because the m3 had access to hf above those with a more
advanced licence.

On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 14:30:41 -0800, Bill Turner
wrote:

Actually, I love these guys. Think how awfully boring the world would
be if everyone was perfectly sensible. Keep 'em coming, Airyhead!

and without those who HAVE THE BALLS to call a corck a crock.


The emperor has no clothes and most b-licesees know it.
just too afraid to say it...thats why 2500 ran away from a morse test.

On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 14:30:41 -0800, Bill Turner
wrote:

Actually, I love these guys. Think how awfully boring the world would
be if everyone was perfectly sensible. Keep 'em coming, Airyhead!

and without those who HAVE THE BALLS to call a corck a crock.


The emperor has no clothes and most b-licesees know it.
just too afraid to say it...thats why 2500 ran away from a morse test.

On 23 Mar 2004 22:00:09 GMT, Shaven Granulate
wrote:

None of the 7 people who I instructed for the M3 licence wanted
nor were bothered about having their pictures taken for PW or
Radcom.

(Actually one screwed his exam up first time and actually failed
his resit too!)

And, as a club, we weren't fussed either.


what ???!!

u mean...u mean...

(sound of dramatic music...)

u DONT have a picture of your clubmates posing
with a BIG YELLOW SHEET OF PAPER ??

( flash of lightning...bang of thunder )

On 23 Mar 2004 22:00:09 GMT, Shaven Granulate
wrote:

None of the 7 people who I instructed for the M3 licence wanted
nor were bothered about having their pictures taken for PW or
Radcom.

(Actually one screwed his exam up first time and actually failed
his resit too!)

And, as a club, we weren't fussed either.


what ???!!

u mean...u mean...

(sound of dramatic music...)

u DONT have a picture of your clubmates posing
with a BIG YELLOW SHEET OF PAPER ??

( flash of lightning...bang of thunder )

Sounds like that "insecurity" that he projects Freudianly
onto all those who know the true position.

"zpk" wrote
in message ...
On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 17:46:44 -0000, "Airy R. Bean"
wrote:
I wonder what was Mr.Reay's purpose in publishing
you left out
posing for photgraph after sucessfully passing the morse appreciation
for the new wonderful m3 licence that he didnt like the look of at
first...all because the m3 had access to hf above those with a more
advanced licence.

Sounds like that "insecurity" that he projects Freudianly
onto all those who know the true position.

"zpk" wrote
in message ...
On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 17:46:44 -0000, "Airy R. Bean"
wrote:
I wonder what was Mr.Reay's purpose in publishing
you left out
posing for photgraph after sucessfully passing the morse appreciation
for the new wonderful m3 licence that he didnt like the look of at
first...all because the m3 had access to hf above those with a more
advanced licence.