In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

N2EY wrote:

There's nothing to respect or admire able about being able to tear down,
insult, and destroy - or attempt to.

Here's a classic for ya - I call it "the sphincter post":

http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...001001%40nso-f
p.aol.com&output=gplain

I hear tell that those air raids on Tokyo in the fifties were exercises
in sheer terror.

I dunno, I've never been to Tokyo. Not even for 30 seconds.

Troll, troll, troll your boat...madly down the steam (puffing away
prodigiously).

Remember the exchanges about how far it is from air bases in North Korea and
Vladivostok to Tokyo, Bear bombers and such? Someone was very unhappy when it
was pointed out that the distance is well over 650 miles, not "about 500
miles". And that the statement "about an hour in a Bear bomber" meant little
because that aircraft did not enter service until the late 1950s.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. Rev. Jim pulled out his Military Google-isms of the past
and tried to make an amphibious bridge over his troubled waters. [he
was all wet]

Pointing out the fact that any American *under* a certain age grew up with the
knowledge that hostile ICBMs could reach us in a matter of minutes sets off a
predictable response, too.

Not in the mid- to late-1950s, senior. :-)

Rev. Jim IS predictable. Lives in the PAST. He MUST keep on
fighting the good fight over ancient postings, again and again and
again and again and...yawn

That sequence (in "34 Years Ago Today") was a classic. ;-)

I have to admit to being a little puzzled by what
appears to be a reference to the writer's multiple sphincters (in the
next to last paragraph).

Perhaps multiple ones are needed in order to handle his prodigious output ;-)

Perhaps Rev. Jim ought to change religious orders away from
the hypocratic hellfire-and-brimstone telegraphy cult. That way
he would not be so mortally wounded again...and again and
again and again and...yawn

Some of these postings "just write themselves." :-)

LHA / WMD

In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes:

In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

N2EY wrote:

There's nothing to respect or admire able about being able to tear down,
insult, and destroy - or attempt to.

Here's a classic for ya - I call it "the sphincter post":

http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...001001%40nso-f
p.aol.com&output=gplain

I hear tell that those air raids on Tokyo in the fifties were exercises
in sheer terror.

I dunno, I've never been to Tokyo. Not even for 30 seconds.

Troll, troll, troll your boat...madly down the steam (puffing away
prodigiously).

Remember the exchanges about how far it is from air bases in North Korea and
Vladivostok to Tokyo, Bear bombers and such? Someone was very unhappy when
it
was pointed out that the distance is well over 650 miles, not "about 500
miles". And that the statement "about an hour in a Bear bomber" meant little
because that aircraft did not enter service until the late 1950s.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. Rev. Jim pulled out his Military Google-isms of the past
and tried to make an amphibious bridge over his troubled waters. [he
was all wet]

Pointing out the fact that any American *under* a certain age grew up with
the
knowledge that hostile ICBMs could reach us in a matter of minutes sets off
a
predictable response, too.

Not in the mid- to late-1950s, senior. :-)

Exactly. When you were in Japan, there weren't even any Bear bombers in
service.

But in the '60s, when I was growing up, the Soviets had much more nuclear
strike capability. I'm old enough to remember the Cuban missile crisis, even
though I was only in elementary school at the time.

Rev. Jim IS predictable.

Who?

Lives in the PAST.

Well, you can't be referring to me.

I'm not the one who repeatedly brings up half-century-old military
communications experience as some sort of qualification to determine amateur
radio policy *today*. While neglecting to mention that the facility involved
was entirely paid for by others, and utilized the full-time contributions of
over 700 other personnel....

Now, *that's* "living in the past"

I don't "live in the past". But I do have a decent memory, and the skills to
use reference resources. That obviously bothers the heck out of you, Len,
judging by how you respond to my posts.

He MUST keep on
fighting the good fight over ancient postings, again and again and
again and again and...yawn

You mean the like the one where you called another poster a "feldwebel" and
told him to "shut the hell up"?

That sequence (in "34 Years Ago Today") was a classic. ;-)

I have to admit to being a little puzzled by what
appears to be a reference to the writer's multiple sphincters (in the
next to last paragraph).

Perhaps multiple ones are needed in order to handle his prodigious output
;-)

In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:

In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes:

In article ,

(N2EY) writes:


Not in the mid- to late-1950s, senior. :-)

Exactly. When you were in Japan, there weren't even any Bear bombers in
service.

Okay, on the basis for one wrong statement, you mount an "air"
assault? :-)

How does a mistaken NATO code name have a relation with the
adoption of the NATO phonetic alphabet in communications in
1955?

Ah! It doesn't. But, Rev. Jimmie is out to discipline "his flock"
for "inaccuracies!" [I sense another Sermon on the Antenna
Mount in preparation! :-) ]

But in the '60s, when I was growing up, the Soviets had much more nuclear
strike capability. I'm old enough to remember the Cuban missile crisis, even
though I was only in elementary school at the time.

...did you also think of U.S. military communications as consisting
of hundreds of radio operators with headsets and code keys busy
tapping out messages? :-)


Lives in the PAST.

Well, you can't be referring to me.

I'm not the one who repeatedly brings up half-century-old military
communications experience as some sort of qualification to determine amateur
radio policy *today*. While neglecting to mention that the facility involved
was entirely paid for by others, and utilized the full-time contributions of
over 700 other personnel....

Hmmm...let's see...Rev. Jimmie brings up all the morse code
ham stuff of the 50s and 60s (plus all sorts of tidbits of old
ham regulations which don't apply today) and I mention that
the U.S. military quit using manual telegraphy for fixed-point
communications in 1948. Now what kind of conclusion can we
draw from that?

Oh, yes, my mention is "wrong" since it fails to honor and
glorify the tradition of morse code in amateurism which must,
in the Belief system of Rev. you-know-who, be preserved
forever and ever in amateur radio regulations.

Okay, any positive statements about morse code are allowed
and even honored even though some of the individuals involved
are obviously fish stories. Those against morse code are evil,
wicked, mean, and nasty, are always incorrect and should never
be considered. :-)

So, some olde-tyme hamme can say he "shot bears for navel
intelligence" and that be okay. Navel intel is fine as long as
person is for morse code.

[someone's belly-button is undone...]

Now, *that's* "living in the past"

Wasn't there some stuff by the good Rev. about "the past is
prologue?" :-)

I don't "live in the past". But I do have a decent memory, and the skills to
use reference resources. That obviously bothers the heck out of you, Len,
judging by how you respond to my posts.

Yes, "obviously." So very serious! :-)

A regular World Sirius, "dogging" my thoughts! :-)

He MUST keep on
fighting the good fight over ancient postings, again and again and
again and again and...yawn

You mean the like the one where you called another poster a "feldwebel" and
told him to "shut the hell up"?

Right. The ROE of this newsgroup is:

1. Any kind of language or lack of civility by any morse code
proponent is perfectly acceptible, even encouraged.

2. Anything said by anyone who does not love, honor, cherish
morse code is to be denigrated, insulted, vilified, and looked
at nasty just because of what they think. All of those sub-
humans must always behave civilly and show respect for the
code lovers even if the code lovers are behaving as iceholes.

That pretty well sums it up. :-)

Rev. Jimmie, go back to Google where you live...

LHA / WMD

In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes:

In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:

In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes:

In article ,

(N2EY) writes:


Not in the mid- to late-1950s, senior. :-)

Exactly. When you were in Japan, there weren't even any Bear bombers in
service.

Okay, on the basis for one wrong statement, you mount an "air"
assault? :-)

Nope.

On the basis of a whole pattern of your errors, I point them out. ;-)

How does a mistaken NATO code name have a relation with the
adoption of the NATO phonetic alphabet in communications in
1955?

It has the same relation as your experiences at ADA. ;-)

Ah! It doesn't.

Neither does your experience at ADA. ;-)

But, Rev. Jimmie is out to discipline "his flock"
for "inaccuracies!" [I sense another Sermon on the Antenna
Mount in preparation! :-) ]

Who is "Rev. Jimmie", Len?

But in the '60s, when I was growing up, the Soviets had much more nuclear
strike capability. I'm old enough to remember the Cuban missile crisis, even
though I was only in elementary school at the time.

...did you also think of U.S. military communications as consisting
of hundreds of radio operators with headsets and code keys busy
tapping out messages? :-)

Nope. I knew they had teletype and voice and lots of other systems.

Even a kid of 7 or 8 knew that, in my time.

Lives in the PAST.

You sure do ;-)

Well, you can't be referring to me.

I'm not the one who repeatedly brings up half-century-old military
communications experience as some sort of qualification to determine amateur
radio policy *today*. While neglecting to mention that the facility involved
was entirely paid for by others, and utilized the full-time contributions of
over 700 other personnel....

Hmmm...let's see...Rev. Jimmie brings up all the morse code
ham stuff of the 50s and 60s (plus all sorts of tidbits of old
ham regulations which don't apply today)

Who is "Rev. Jimmie", Len?

and I mention that
the U.S. military quit using manual telegraphy for fixed-point
communications in 1948.

They did? Everywhere?

Or did they simply start phasing it out in 1948?

And what about non-fixed-point communications, such as between ships?

Now what kind of conclusion can we
draw from that?

That you live in the past, Len. You've mentioned your ADA experience here many,
many times. How there were so many high powered transmitters, all kinds of RATT
systems, millions of messages, etc. And no Morse Code in use. ;-)

That's fine, we're all happy for ya. And the 700+ personnel who were also there
when you were. But what does it have to do with ham radio?

Oh, yes, my mention is "wrong" since it fails to honor and
glorify the tradition of morse code in amateurism which must,
in the Belief system of Rev. you-know-who, be preserved
forever and ever in amateur radio regulations.

Not at all. It's just completely irrelevant to amateur radio policy.

Okay, any positive statements about morse code are allowed
and even honored even though some of the individuals involved
are obviously fish stories.

"some of the individuals involved are obviously fish stories."??

What does that mean?

Those against morse code are evil,
wicked, mean, and nasty, are always incorrect and should never
be considered. :-)

Why should anyone be "against morse code"?

So, some olde-tyme hamme can say he "shot bears for navel
intelligence" and that be okay. Navel intel is fine as long as
person is for morse code.

Do you mean the pictures taken by W3RV? Guess what - they're real. Like it or
not, civilian contractors do go out on US Navy ships. And they do see - and
photograph - some pretty unusual stuff.

Of course such activities are also irrelevant to amateur radio policy.

[someone's belly-button is undone...]

Must be yours, Len ;-)

Now, *that's* "living in the past"

Wasn't there some stuff by the good Rev. about "the past is
prologue?" :-)

Look it up in Google and show us, Len ;-)

I don't "live in the past". But I do have a decent memory, and the skills to
use reference resources. That obviously bothers the heck out of you, Len,
judging by how you respond to my posts.

Yes, "obviously." So very serious! :-)

When you yell and scream and carry on the way you do here, you sure seem upset.
;-)

He MUST keep on
fighting the good fight over ancient postings, again and again and
again and again and...yawn

You mean the like the one where you called another poster a "feldwebel" and
told him to "shut the hell up"?

Right.

Do you think it's OK to tell someone else in a newsgroup to "shut up", Len?

The ROE of this newsgroup is:

1. Any kind of language or lack of civility by any morse code
proponent is perfectly acceptible, even encouraged.

No it isn't.

2. Anything said by anyone who does not love, honor, cherish
morse code is to be denigrated, insulted, vilified, and looked
at nasty just because of what they think.

Not at all.

All of those sub-
humans must always behave civilly and show respect for the
code lovers even if the code lovers are behaving as iceholes.

That pretty well sums it up. :-)

Really? ;-)

Rev. Jimmie, go back to Google where you live...

WHO is "Rev. Jimmie", Len?

Subject: Able Baker Charlie
From: PAMNO (N2EY)
Date: 6/19/2004 6:58 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes:

and I mention that
the U.S. military quit using manual telegraphy for fixed-point
communications in 1948.

They did? Everywhere?

Or did they simply start phasing it out in 1948?

And what about non-fixed-point communications, such as between ships?

I guess we can throw out as "irrelevent" the fact that there has been
rather thorough documentation of the Armed Forces' use of "manual telegraphy"
for routine communications right up to the 80's....And NOT "spoon fed by ARRL
publications".

Of course those are FACTS, and facts don't sit well with one who can't
stand the truth.

Okay, any positive statements about morse code are allowed
and even honored even though some of the individuals involved
are obviously fish stories.

"some of the individuals involved are obviously fish stories."??

What does that mean?

It means that if it ruins one of Lennie's rants it but be a fish story.

Those against morse code are evil,
wicked, mean, and nasty, are always incorrect and should never
be considered. :-)

Why should anyone be "against morse code"?

Becasue to be "for" Morse Code is to be AGAINST Lennie...Can't have that
now!

So, some olde-tyme hamme can say he "shot bears for navel
intelligence" and that be okay. Navel intel is fine as long as
person is for morse code.

Do you mean the pictures taken by W3RV? Guess what - they're real. Like it or
not, civilian contractors do go out on US Navy ships. And they do see - and
photograph - some pretty unusual stuff.

Once again Lennie displays his colors with the "olde tyme hamme"
reference.

He MUST keep on
fighting the good fight over ancient postings, again and again and
again and again and...yawn

You mean the like the one where you called another poster a "feldwebel" and
told him to "shut the hell up"?

Right.

Do you think it's OK to tell someone else in a newsgroup to "shut up", Len?

Obviously he does. He does it frequently. Usually when he's got his tail
caught under yet another rocking chair, which is pretty frequently these days!

The ROE of this newsgroup is:

1. Any kind of language or lack of civility by any morse code
proponent is perfectly acceptible, even encouraged.

No it isn't.

No more or no less than the use of blatant profanity by allegedly college
educated, "professional" engineers who are "against" Morse Code.

2. Anything said by anyone who does not love, honor, cherish
morse code is to be denigrated, insulted, vilified, and looked
at nasty just because of what they think.

Not at all.

No more or less than the insistence by certain alleged "professionals"
that Amateurs show awe and reverence to them as our "superiors"...Recent
suggestions by one of those alleged professionals that some in this forum are
"jealous" or otherwise despise them for BEING an (alleged) engineer is a prime
example.

All of those sub-
humans must always behave civilly and show respect for the
code lovers even if the code lovers are behaving as iceholes.

That pretty well sums it up.

Really?

Again with the inference of profanity.

Some professional.

Rev. Jimmie, go back to Google where you live...

WHO is "Rev. Jimmie", Len?

Sheeesh, Jim...You don't expect Lennie will ever live up to his own
rhetoric and treat others in the same way he demands that HE be treated...even
when you ARE treating him the way he expects...?!?!

Almost seven years now and I STILL have yet to see him do as he professes
or what he says he will do.

And I take the "...go back to Google" remark to be yet another "shut up"
by someone who can't stand being made a fool of with his own words....Again.

73

Steve, K4YZ

In article , (Steve
Robeson K4CAP) writes:

Subject: Able Baker Charlie
From: PAMNO (N2EY)
Date: 6/19/2004 6:58 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes:

and I mention that
the U.S. military quit using manual telegraphy for fixed-point
communications in 1948.

They did? Everywhere?

Or did they simply start phasing it out in 1948?

And what about non-fixed-point communications, such as between ships?

I guess we can throw out as "irrelevent" the fact that there has been
rather thorough documentation of the Armed Forces' use of "manual telegraphy"
for routine communications right up to the 80's....And NOT "spoon fed by ARRL
publications".

And what might those "documentation" be, big-time military
communicator?

It couldn't be DoD Directive 4650.2 (eff. 21 Nov 03) because nursie
sure as heck doesn't understand that.

How about all the alleged uses in Vietnam, 1962 through 1970, as
documented on the U.S. Army Center for Military History website?
Can't be that one, nursie never saw it, let alone read it.

How about Field Manual FM 24-24, December 1994, the index of
Signal Equipment? [available at the Gen. Dennis J. Reimer
digital library, public distribution, even linked-to by several ham
websites] It has all the land forces signal equipment in there,
but, alas, no code keys. Tsk, tsk.

How about "From Flares To Satellites," a USAF history document
available for public download from the USAF Communications
Agency website (public distribution also, but large at ~14 MB but
has pictures for those who can't understand words with more than
two capitalized letters such as "CW")?

Sunnuvagun! Not a single one of those predates the 1990s!

Must be a Big Conspiracy to "hide CW from the masses?"

Riiiight...the motion picture "Independence Day" showed us all
the REAL truth where "CW" is used to defeat alien space
invaders!!!!

Of course those are FACTS, and facts don't sit well with one who can't
stand the truth.

Riiiiiight. In nursieland there be only "FACTS" put there by nursie.


Okay, any positive statements about morse code are allowed
and even honored even though some of the individuals involved
are obviously fish stories.

"some of the individuals involved are obviously fish stories."??

What does that mean?

It means that if it ruins one of Lennie's rants it but be a fish story.

Tsk, tsk, tsk...nursie added that nastygram just for the halibut.


Those against morse code are evil,
wicked, mean, and nasty, are always incorrect and should never
be considered. :-)

Why should anyone be "against morse code"?

Becasue to be "for" Morse Code is to be AGAINST Lennie...Can't have that
now!

Who is "becasue?" [spelled Becky Sue wrong, nursie]

So...the morse code TEST issue is not for U.S. amateur radio
licensing?!?!?

It is all about nursie's hatred and outrage over someone he calls
"Lennie?"

tsk, tsk. Nurise either gone bonkers or has mis-read Steinbeck's
"Of Mice And Men." [the character of Lenny does a murder in
that one...]


So, some olde-tyme hamme can say he "shot bears for navel
intelligence" and that be okay. Navel intel is fine as long as
person is for morse code.

Do you mean the pictures taken by W3RV? Guess what - they're real. Like it or
not, civilian contractors do go out on US Navy ships. And they do see - and
photograph - some pretty unusual stuff.

Riiiiiight. All the newsgroup readers have seen those "real pictures."

Suuurrrrre. :-)

Nursie done flipped out, big time. tsk, tsk.

Yup, like nursie believe Kellie has "26 patents?" :-)

[actually, only one, the other 25 are foreign filings for the same
thing...which doesn't beat mine (3,848,191) assigned to RCA
which has 27 foreign filings...:-) ]


Once again Lennie displays his colors with the "olde tyme hamme"
reference.

Poor baby. Resent getting to be an OF? [pushing 50, nursie, quit
pretending to be under 30...get a toupee and get those teeth fixed]


Do you think it's OK to tell someone else in a newsgroup to "shut up", Len?

Obviously he does. He does it frequently. Usually when he's got his
tail
caught under yet another rocking chair, which is pretty frequently these
days!

Riiiiight. The OF diss-and-cusser wants to more of the same
because his license (engraved border, suitable for framing)
says it is "okay" for him to diss-and-cuss since he passed a
test! :-)


The ROE of this newsgroup is:

1. Any kind of language or lack of civility by any morse code
proponent is perfectly acceptible, even encouraged.

No it isn't.

Tsk, tsk, tsk...VERY true by easily observed examples. :-)

For years. :-)

KH2D was a master at that. Learn from the master, grasshopper.

No more or no less than the use of blatant profanity by allegedly college
educated, "professional" engineers who are "against" Morse Code.

Well, heck and darn, gotta cut down on all those profane words
like "eliminate the morse code test," certainly those terrible
four-letter words like "code" and "test." :-)

Some sissies in here get into hissy-fits with strong language!

2. Anything said by anyone who does not love, honor, cherish
morse code is to be denigrated, insulted, vilified, and looked
at nasty just because of what they think.

Not at all.

No more or less than the insistence by certain alleged "professionals"
that Amateurs show awe and reverence to them as our "superiors"...Recent
suggestions by one of those alleged professionals that some in this forum are
"jealous" or otherwise despise them for BEING an (alleged) engineer is a
prime example.

Awe shucks, Maude, sissie inna hissy-fit again, him
laffin' an' carryin' on about superior intellect or somthin'...

tsk, tsk, tsk...

All of those sub-
humans must always behave civilly and show respect for the
code lovers even if the code lovers are behaving as iceholes.

That pretty well sums it up.

Really?

Again with the inference of profanity.

Some professional.

"Icehole" is profane? Nursie insulting Minnesotans' big winter
sport locations? Tsk, tsk, tsk.

Well, maybe I should have split it into two words?

Ya know, like "Nursie is an ice hole."

Sound better?


Rev. Jimmie, go back to Google where you live...

WHO is "Rev. Jimmie", Len?

Sheeesh, Jim...You don't expect Lennie will ever live up to his own
rhetoric and treat others in the same way he demands that HE be
treated...even when you ARE treating him the way he expects...?!?!

Yup, Maude, sissie still got the hissy-fits...

Almost seven years now and I STILL have yet to see him do as he
professes or what he says he will do.

Well, I admit that trying to change the FCC's mind on eliminating
the morse code test from U.S. amateur radio licensing IS a
long, hard task. Been at that since 1988. Sooner or later, that
WILL happen... :-)

Yes, I did officially retire in 1997 and I AM enjoying that, as I
said I would. :-)

This project of inventing anti-gravity IS VERY DIFFICULT.
Not going at all as good as I expected. Something is holding
me down...

Temper fry...

LHA / WMD

In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:

In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes:

In article ,

(N2EY) writes:

In article ,

(Len Over 21) writes:

In article ,

(N2EY) writes:


Not in the mid- to late-1950s, senior. :-)

Exactly. When you were in Japan, there weren't even any Bear bombers in
service.

Okay, on the basis for one wrong statement, you mount an "air"
assault? :-)

Nope.

On the basis of a whole pattern of your errors, I point them out. ;-)

Sounds like nursie after the remedial English classes.

"WHOLE *PATTERN* OF ERRORS!!!"

:-)

Billions and billions served? Tsk, tsk, tsk...

Rev. Jimmie Who mounts the antenna and transmits a Sermon.

Meanwhile, I thought this thread to be about Phonetic Alphabets.

Must be the "new" English.

It's really about some angry extra trying to get even for losing
arguments in here years ago.

Yawn.

Rev. Jimmie Who is very predictable in that he WILL bring up
old arguments time and again.

We readers aren't sure exactly WHAT will be brought up and
WHEN...and that lends a bit of suspense to the proceedings.

Okay, so Rev. Jimmie Who says this thread is "not" about
phonetic alphabets.

In that case, "Able Baker Charlie" (in the subject field) must
be about some skilled baker with the given name of Charles.

THAT doesn't have much to do with amateur radio, let alone
amateur radio policy, does it?

Rev. Jimmie Who, you are becoming more cryptic every
day.

Reminder: FCC sayeth amateur communications must not
contain encryption or anything intended to obscure meanings.

The 'mean' of "meanings" is obscured, but still visible.

So...tell us about YOUR days in military communications?

Or civilian communications (other than amateur)?

LHA / WMD

PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message ...


and I mention that
the U.S. military quit using manual telegraphy for fixed-point
communications in 1948.

They did? Everywhere?

Or did they simply start phasing it out in 1948?

And what about non-fixed-point communications, such as between ships?

And what about the CW courses still being taught at Fort
Huncha-something somewhere in the southwest? Ohyez, the feds still
have an abiding and ongoing interest in the use of CW.



So, some olde-tyme hamme can say he "shot bears for navel
intelligence" and that be okay. Navel intel is fine as long as
person is for morse code.

Do you mean the pictures taken by W3RV? Guess what - they're real. Like it or
not, civilian contractors do go out on US Navy ships. And they do see - and
photograph - some pretty unusual stuff.

Har, I forgot about that, you did see some of those shots I took
didn't ya? Geez that pile of old photos was a real trip back huh?
Gotta love the way the Putz has twisted 'em into "Naval intel" BS. No
such thing, they were typical on-the-road personal unclassified
snapshots and I never claimed otherwise.

I wasn't a contractor, I was a direct employee of the U.S. Department
of Defense and an offical civilian guest of the skipper while I was
aboard. The Putz never managed to be either, his types did my drudge
work for me for cheap.
Steerage dwellers.


Of course such activities are also irrelevant to amateur radio policy.

End of.

w3rv

In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

(N2EY) wrote in message
...

and I mention that
the U.S. military quit using manual telegraphy for fixed-point
communications in 1948.

They did? Everywhere?

Or did they simply start phasing it out in 1948?

And what about non-fixed-point communications, such as between ships?

And what about the CW courses still being taught at Fort
Huncha-something somewhere in the southwest? Ohyez, the feds still
have an abiding and ongoing interest in the use of CW.

That's for intel intercept. Listening to others use it, and maybe some spoofing
and such.

However, amateur radio isn't the military. We don't have the same mission - or
the same resources.

So, some olde-tyme hamme can say he "shot bears for navel
intelligence" and that be okay. Navel intel is fine as long as
person is for morse code.

Do you mean the pictures taken by W3RV? Guess what - they're real. Like it
or
not, civilian contractors do go out on US Navy ships. And they do see - and
photograph - some pretty unusual stuff.

Har, I forgot about that, you did see some of those shots I took
didn't ya?

Yep. Some of them. Quite impressive, actually, both the photography and the
subject.

Geez that pile of old photos was a real trip back huh?

Oyez.

Gotta love the way the Putz has twisted 'em into "Naval intel" BS.

Bad pun of "navel" noted.

No
such thing, they were typical on-the-road personal unclassified
snapshots and I never claimed otherwise.

That's true!

I wasn't a contractor, I was a direct employee of the U.S. Department
of Defense and an offical civilian guest of the skipper while I was
aboard.

Always nice to be friends with the guy in charge.

The Putz never managed to be either, his types did my drudge
work for me for cheap. Steerage dwellers.

Of course such activities are also irrelevant to amateur radio policy.

End of.

roger that!

73 de Jim, N2EY

PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message ...
In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

(N2EY) wrote in message
...

and I mention that
the U.S. military quit using manual telegraphy for fixed-point
communications in 1948.

They did? Everywhere?

Or did they simply start phasing it out in 1948?

And what about non-fixed-point communications, such as between ships?

And what about the CW courses still being taught at Fort
Huncha-something somewhere in the southwest? Ohyez, the feds still
have an abiding and ongoing interest in the use of CW.

That's for intel intercept. Listening to others use it, and maybe some spoofing
and such.

Sure, they'd be grossly negligent if they didn't. I'll just bet that
Osama Baby has at least looked at CW for his purposes and that since
9/11 our guys have ramped up their volume of poking around for it. So
yes, the feds certainly do have an ongoing and abiding interest in the
use of CW, one-way for their purposes and/or otherwise.

However, amateur radio isn't the military. We don't have the same mission - or
the same resources.

Even if we did I wouldn't go anywhere near it.

So, some olde-tyme hamme can say he "shot bears for navel
intelligence" and that be okay. Navel intel is fine as long as
person is for morse code.

Do you mean the pictures taken by W3RV? Guess what - they're real. Like it
or
not, civilian contractors do go out on US Navy ships. And they do see - and
photograph - some pretty unusual stuff.

Har, I forgot about that, you did see some of those shots I took
didn't ya?

Yep. Some of them. Quite impressive, actually, both the photography and the
subject.

Geez that pile of old photos was a real trip back huh?

Oyez.

Gotta love the way the Putz has twisted 'em into "Naval intel" BS.

Bad pun of "navel" noted.

Another example of the Putz in his seven-yer-old mode. Which he
consistently drops into when he can't find an adult comment to post.

No
such thing, they were typical on-the-road personal unclassified
snapshots and I never claimed otherwise.

That's true!

Every time the Soviets buzzed a carrier it became a tourist event,
bloomin' hoot. Kodak could have made money with a flight deck photo
processing kiosk after those flybys.


I wasn't a contractor, I was a direct employee of the U.S. Department
of Defense and an offical civilian guest of the skipper while I was
aboard.

Always nice to be friends with the guy in charge.

Nah, it was just another bit of Naval tradition, DoD civilian
professionals were treated as officers and were expected to
reciprocate the courtesies received. I had to introduce myself to both
the skipper and the air boss and join them for dinner in officer's
mess on Friday evenings, etc. I knew nothing about any of it when I
logged aboard the first time. A crusty Chief Yeoman sat me down in his
office and went thru the list of what I had to do and not do.

The Putz never managed to be either, his types did my drudge
work for me for cheap. Steerage dwellers.

Of course such activities are also irrelevant to amateur radio policy.

End of.

roger that!

73 de Jim, N2EY

w3rv