Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

William wrote:

Mark, you must first understand the mind of Heil and Heil apologists.

You left out "his running dogs and lackeys".

Incorrect...YOU are here...


After re-reading Brian's statement and my response, your comment makes
no sense whatever.

Dave K8MN

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

After re-reading Brian's statement and my response, your comment makes
no sense whatever.

Poor baby. Another with intellectual presbyopia. Tsk, tsk.

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

After re-reading Brian's statement and my response, your comment makes
no sense whatever.

Poor baby. Another with intellectual presbyopia. Tsk, tsk.

Len Over 21 wrote:

William wrote:

Mark, you must first understand the mind of Heil and Heil apologists.

You left out "his running dogs and lackeys".

Incorrect...YOU are here...

In article , Dave Heil writes:

After re-reading Brian's statement and my response, your comment makes
no sense whatever.

Poor baby. Another with intellectual presbyopia. Tsk, tsk.

I had no idea that's what you were diagnosed with, Len. I'm awfully
sorry. I should have realized that there was something behind these
seemingly senseless outbursts of yours. I did you a favor and
re-inserted the part you snipped. If you look at the whole thing,
perhaps it'll become clear to you how you made your error.

Dave K8MN

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

William wrote:

Mark, you must first understand the mind of Heil and Heil apologists.

You left out "his running dogs and lackeys".

Incorrect...YOU are here...

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

After re-reading Brian's statement and my response, your comment makes
no sense whatever.

Poor baby. Another with intellectual presbyopia. Tsk, tsk.

I had no idea that's what you were diagnosed with, Len.

HAR! YOU are the one diagnosed with it... :-)

Presbyopia: A common condition in humans around 40 and older
where the eyeball becomes less flexible, thus requiring bifocal or
trifocal lens correction for wide-range optical focussing.

Intellectual presbyopia: A common condition among olde-tyme
hammes of the morse persuasion whose mind has become
inflexible and incapable of understanding communications they
are not familiar with or not explained by the League in some
publication such as "Talking for Dummies."

I'm awfully sorry.

True enough. [surprising self-depreciatory admission!]

I should have realized that there was something behind these
seemingly senseless outbursts of yours.

Yes, those "outbursts" are down in the noise level of independent
thought. You don't have much of that.

I did you a favor and re-inserted the part you snipped.

Why? Did your letter-tracing-finger run down to the bottom of the
monitor again?

If you look at the whole thing,
perhaps it'll become clear to you how you made your error.

My only "error" is considering that olde-tyme hammes of the morse
persuasion MIGHT try to be civil or at least accept the fate of morse
testing defeat with some grace. In that regard I was absolutely
wrong and admit it freely. :-)

Was there anything else, then?

LHA / WMD

JJ wrote in message ...

They would have had to successfully flown solo several times before
getting a license.

Gotta love this logic. You get to fly an airplane solo several times
before you can get a pilots license, but can't get on HF without first
taking a morse code test and getting a license.

Dave Heil wrote in message ...
William wrote:

Mark, you must first understand the mind of Heil and Heil apologists.

You left out "his running dogs and lackeys".

Dave K8MN

"Heil apologists" covers it, don't you think?

In article ,
(William) writes:

JJ wrote in message
...

They would have had to successfully flown solo several times before
getting a license.

Gotta love this logic. You get to fly an airplane solo several times
before you can get a pilots license, but can't get on HF without first
taking a morse code test and getting a license.

ONLY in the "amateur service," Brian.

Way back in 1958 any U.S. civilian could get on HF without any
code test or ANY other test. :-) Been that way ever since.

SGC's SG-2020 HF transceiver is sold to private boat owners who
don't have to take any morse test to operate it legally on HF. Not
even if they buy power amplifiers to boost 20 W output to 400 W.

Many, many, many government and military personnel operate on
HF quite legally every day without having to take any morse test
to "prove their technical ability" to be a "skilled radio operator."

Nope...in the US of A radio amateurs aren't "real" hams until they
pass that archaic morse test...sez the "amateur community."

That's the LAW, and, by [expletive deleted], those olde-tyme
hamme raddio kopps are going to enforce it no matter what!

LHA / WMD

Len Over 21 wrote:
In article ,
(William) writes:

Gotta love this logic. You get to fly an airplane solo several times
before you can get a pilots license, but can't get on HF without first
taking a morse code test and getting a license.

So, there are a lot of things you must do first before you can solo in
an aircraft, like learning how to land, takeoff, read sectional maps,
navigate using landmarks, use the VOR for navigation, how to operate the
radio and communicate with traffic control using proper procedures ect.,
ect., and prove to the instructor you can do all this and be safe in the
aircraft by yourself. It is a lot more than learning simple Morse code.
And by the way, you must be familier enough with Morse code to be able
to look at the sectional map and interperate dots and dashes so you can
identify VOR's, as the id is sent in code. Them are the rules...don't
like it? then don't get a pilots license or ham license. Until the rules
change, those are the requirements to meet, like it or not.


ONLY in the "amateur service," Brian.

Way back in 1958 any U.S. civilian could get on HF without any
code test or ANY other test. :-) Been that way ever since.

Not on the ham bands.


SGC's SG-2020 HF transceiver is sold to private boat owners who
don't have to take any morse test to operate it legally on HF. Not
even if they buy power amplifiers to boost 20 W output to 400 W.

But not for operation on the ham bands. Different service, different set
of rules.


Many, many, many government and military personnel operate on
HF quite legally every day without having to take any morse test
to "prove their technical ability" to be a "skilled radio operator."

But not on the ham bands, different service, different set of requirements.

Nope...in the US of A radio amateurs aren't "real" hams until they
pass that archaic morse test...sez the "amateur community."

Yep, until the rules change, to get a license for HF operation you must
pass the code test. You claim you have no interest in getting a ham
license so it shouldn't matter a whit to you, so what's your beef old
man? Oh, I know, you can't pass the test.

That's the LAW, and, by [expletive deleted], those olde-tyme
hamme raddio kopps are going to enforce it no matter what!

No, the olde-type hamme raddio kopps don't enforce anything, the FCC
does and until the FCC changes the rules, it is the law. Even if the
code test requirement is dropped you still won't be able to get a ham
license because you can't pass the test, even as simple as it is today.

SGC's SG-2020 HF transceiver is sold to private boat owners who
don't have to take any morse test to operate it legally on HF. Not
even if they buy power amplifiers to boost 20 W output to 400 W.

Yepper ...the same idiots I hear on the fishing boats utilizing the "F" bomb
every other word on the bottom of the 30 meter band. CB afloat .... real
role models .... and ya know what ...I don't even like tuna.

73 Tom KI3R