"an old friend" wrote:

Mike could end it almost at once by admitting what we all know he was
obliged to give up the call based on threat of action by the FCC
wether than tell th e CUURENT LIE he did so of his own free will

There was no "threat of action" by the FCC.

The FCC asked for documents.
I opted not to supply them.
FCC cancelled the callsigns.

Pretty simple.

At no time was there any "threat of action", i.e. a "warning notice" which
would later become a "license revocation" or a "forfeiture proceeding". No
matter how much you wish it true, it ain't gonna change history, available
for anyone to google if they so wish.

Of course, there's an entire argument to be made that the documentation
requested by the FCC in their correspondence to me (i.e. meeting minutes,
meeting times) is not required under Part 97. 97.5(b)(2) only states that
"The club must be composed of at least four persons and must have a name, a
document of organization, management, and a primary purpose devoted to
amateur service activities consistent with this part." There is no
requirement stated in 97.5(b)(2) that an organization keep minutes or
publish a schedule of meetings -- in fact, the way 97.5(b)(2) reads, you
could have 1 meeting every 10 years and still be in compliance.


If I was so inclined, and if I was so "dishonest" as some people in this
forum claim, I could have easily created such documents and supplied them.

On Feb 16, 2:49�pm, wrote:
On Feb 16, 3:55?pm, "
wrote:

* *fraudulently claimed a Hawaiian
? ?Post Office Box address as being his "residence," one
? ?that would allow him to obtain a Hawaiian amateur radio
? ?station call sign. ?

I suggest you read Part 97 again.

I suggest you stuff it up yer nose.

The regulations do not require that someone give the FCC
their "residence". All the FCC requires is a valid mailing
address. In the case of certain callsigns, the mailing address
must be in certain locations, such as Hawaii, but there is
no residence requirement.

FCC used to care about where a licensee lived, and the
actual station location. But all that changed many years
ago, and all they have required for may years is a valid
mailing address where the licensee may receive mail
from FCC.

So, you NOW work for the US government in the FCC?

Riiiiiiight..."may receive mail from FCC." Four, maybe six
days to get to Hawaii, several days before Herman would
pick it up and forward it to Deignan's real postal address,
then four to six days to get back to DC with a needed
reply. At least two weeks elapsed time. Real "quick"
and "fast-moving" communications, right?

After all, the FCC did accept and process the vanity call
applications, and did issue the callsigns. Perhaps it was
simply a misunderstanding of the intent of the rules,
rather than the letter of the law.

Sweetums, you are indeed NAIVE. "Misunderstanding
the intent of the rules" is total bull**** on your part.
Deignan saw what others were already doing and wanted
a piece of the action, plus getting a spiffy Hawaiian call
in the same process. He took advantage that few would
notice it in Gettysburg (they didn't) and bingo, there was
the spiffy "vanity call" denoting the state of Hawaii!

You never saw all the "club call" listings at www.ah0a.org?
Must not have (you turn a blind eye on many things).

FCC has issued some vanity callsigns that some consider
inappropriate for the amateur radio service. Those callsigns
would not normally be issued in sequence, so the FCC is
aware of the controversy, yet they issued those callsigns
when requested through the vanity program.

Go and admonish some yokel who thinks you are some
kind of ancient guru-figure official. We regulars know
better.

Besides - all that stuff about the club calls is more than six
years old.

Tsk, tsk! That's one year NEWER than your many-times-
repeated "boast of mine" about getting "an extra out-of-the-
box."

Why are you living in the past?

...so asks the ancient guru of hamme raddio expounding on
"Bandplans of 1940" in www.eham.net AS IF they ever applied
to His life experience.

Is it because the
person who held all those calls was and is an advocate of
complete Morse Code test elimination?

Total bull****, ancient guru. Deignan was always out for Deignan.
Yeah, he passed an extra test at one time in the past. He got
an extra call. But...the ex-captain of the "Effluvia" WANTED
MORE. So, with the aid of a buddie in Hawaii, he conspires to
get a spiffy HAWAIIAN call (the "KH6" prefix) that would NOT
be issued to a (then) Rhode Island resident. Not only that, he
dreamed up a dozen FAKE "clubs" and got callsigns for them,
too.

Why don't you go back to your private little corner of OLDE TYMES
and memorize all the OLD rules so you can play the ancient guru
"authority" on times long gone? Or go get laid. [have you lost
your
virginity yet?]

Better yet, why don't you arrange a 'sked' with K4YZ on "CW."
Then you can slap him directly over your very own raddio instead
of pretending to be a tuff guy in here?

LA

you are a fraud you invented clubs and got caught

you borrowed poboxes and you got caught doing something

Morkie knows fraud when he sees it. After all, he's been one for years.

wrote in message
...
On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 19:41:13 -0500, "KH6HZ" wrote:

"an old friend" wrote:

Mike could end it almost at once by admitting what we all know he was
obliged to give up the call based on threat of action by the FCC
wether than tell th e CUURENT LIE he did so of his own free will

There was no "threat of action" by the FCC.

lying agin Mike

The FCC asked for documents.

they demanded the docs or else

My. You're feeling pretty sassy this evening, Mark. You must have just
finished one of your beer enemas.

wrote in message
...
On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 20:58:14 -0500, "Paul W. Schlock" PWS@Flatulence
wrote:


You must have just
finished one of your beer enemas.

you just can't post without sex dloyd


What does a beer enema have to do with sex? Unless of course YOU think of it
as a sexual act.
And just as your name is not Markie, mine is not "dloyd".


--
you have again demotrated your blantant disresgard

On Feb 15, 8:40 pm, "KH6HZ" wrote:
wrote:
I disapprove of individual amateurs collecting a bunch of club
callsigns.

Nobody really cares about your approval, or lack thereof.

Welp, Riley came around to my way of thinking, so I don't care that
you don't care...

On Feb 16, 5:23 am, "KH6HZ" wrote:
sputtered and stammered:

Nobody seems to care for a call thief, either.

I'll always have 1 more amateur radio license than you, Len!

Did Riley guarantee that?

On Feb 16, 1:51 pm, "
wrote:
On Feb 16, 2:23?am, "KH6HZ" wrote:

sputtered and stammered:

? Nobody seems to care for a call thief, either.

I'll always have 1 more amateur radio license than you, Len!

A DOZEN more, in fact, but in PAST tense.

And I will have had 51 years of licensing as a Radiotelephone
(Commercial) Radio Operator...being co-owner of a PLMRS
business radio...a 55-year career in radio-electronics as a
professional...with design engineering responsibility...all
for a living since 1960...and four years active duty in the
United States Army serving my country.

I will NEVER EVER top you as a fraudulent residency
person, one who "borrows" others' Post Office box
numbers to scam the government into getting some
AMATEUR radio station license call sign. Sorry, I've
lived AT my present address for 44 years and enjoy
that. My address is on file with the United States
government in several agencies including the FCC and
I have no need for fraudulently reporting any other
address for any reason.

By the way, another licensed radio amateur has you
BEAT by a ratio of about 2.5:1 on EXCESS amateur
radio station call signs. He even has a website
bragging of that. Go "top" him...if you can. I don't
think you've got the cojones to do it. Easterners
aren't good for that sort of thing.

But Mike is the toughest of the tuff RF Commandos of the Eastern
variety. He might have even been in seven (7) hostile RF
environments.

On Feb 16, 5:49 pm, wrote:
On Feb 16, 3:55?pm, "
wrote:

fraudulently claimed a Hawaiian
? ?Post Office Box address as being his "residence," one
? ?that would allow him to obtain a Hawaiian amateur radio
? ?station call sign. ?

Len:

I suggest you read Part 97 again.

I suggest you go to your local Post Office and ask them about renting
a PO Box then using it for other people.

The regulations do not require that someone give the FCC
their "residence". All the FCC requires is a valid mailing
address.

Just any valid mailing address?

In the case of certain callsigns, the mailing address
must be in certain locations, such as Hawaii, but there is
no residence requirement.

Just any valid mailing address?

FCC used to care about where a licensee lived, and the
actual station location. But all that changed many years
ago, and all they have required for may years is a valid
mailing address where the licensee may receive mail
from FCC.

What do the Postal Regulations say about it?

After all, the FCC did accept and process the vanity call
applications, and did issue the callsigns. Perhaps it was
simply a misunderstanding of the intent of the rules,
rather than the letter of the law.

The government can be defrauded as well as anyone, and there was no
misunderstanding. It was poor amateur practice.

FCC has issued some vanity callsigns that some consider
inappropriate for the amateur radio service. Those callsigns
would not normally be issued in sequence, so the FCC is
aware of the controversy, yet they issued those callsigns
when requested through the vanity program.

We're not talking about Kim, we're talking about Michael P. Deignan of
the RF Commandos.

Besides - all that stuff about the club calls is more than six
years old. Why are you living in the past?

In ham years that was barely yesterday.

Is it because the
person who held all those calls was and is an advocate of
complete Morse Code test elimination?

It's because the individual incessantly tells others how to live their
ham-lives, then defrauds his friend and the FCC.

Jim, N2EY

On Feb 16, 7:41 pm, "KH6HZ" wrote:
"an old friend" wrote:

Mike could end it almost at once by admitting what we all know he was
obliged to give up the call based on threat of action by the FCC
wether than tell th e CUURENT LIE he did so of his own free will

There was no "threat of action" by the FCC.

The FCC asked for documents.
I opted not to supply them.
FCC cancelled the callsigns.

Pretty simple.

Cancelling a dozen fraudulent callsigns is "inaction."

At no time was there any "threat of action", i.e. a "warning notice" which
would later become a "license revocation" or a "forfeiture proceeding". No
matter how much you wish it true, it ain't gonna change history, available
for anyone to google if they so wish.

Cancelling a dozen fraudulent callsigns is "inaction."

Of course, there's an entire argument to be made that the documentation
requested by the FCC in their correspondence to me (i.e. meeting minutes,
meeting times) is not required under Part 97. 97.5(b)(2) only states that
"The club must be composed of at least four persons and must have a name, a
document of organization, management, and a primary purpose devoted to
amateur service activities consistent with this part." There is no
requirement stated in 97.5(b)(2) that an organization keep minutes or
publish a schedule of meetings -- in fact, the way 97.5(b)(2) reads, you
could have 1 meeting every 10 years and still be in compliance.

What? You just had "verbal" meeting minutes? You didn't get them in
writing???

If I was so inclined, and if I was so "dishonest" as some people in this
forum claim, I could have easily created such documents and supplied them.

Like a cat covering up "something."

There were no clubs, there were no members, and there were no
documents of organization.

There were no meetings, and there were no minutes recorded.

At best there were a couple of guys who wanted a bigger piece of the
public pie than was reasonable. A much bigger piece.

You should be in politics.