On Tue, 02 Sep 2003 20:37:16 GMT, "Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this
mindspring.com wrote:


"Brian" wrote in message
. com...
"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message
...
"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message
hlink.net...

"Brian" wrote in message
om...
"Dick Carroll;" wrote in message
...
It isn't on the FCC's website yet but you can read it here....


http://www.eham.net/articles/6371


Enjoy!


I thought that FISTS sold themselves as a non-political club?

How is sending in a petition a political act? Does that mean when NCI
sent
in a petition it was political? Or perhaps they were simply following
proceedures.

Of course participating in the regulatory process is a "political"
thing.

And yes, FIST's position in the past (and IIRC, their charter) was
that they were *not* a politically-oriented group ... just a group that
was supposed to foster the *use* of Morse.

Right. So where NCI is purposely a politically-oriented group, and
behaves accordingly, FISTS is specifically a non-political group who
is now behaving politically.

Why don't we hear any whining about how FISTS has broken with their
charter from the people that are always whining about NCI?

Usual PCTA double-standard?

Not only a dumb ass, but a knee jerk bleeding heart liberal to boot.

Dan/W4NTI

Another logical rebuttal I see. Is the pro code postion this weak or
does it just attract people who can't make effective rebuttals?