"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message
news

"Splinter" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 21:33:16 -0400, "Mr Ham Radio"
wrote:



K1MAN's program is GOOD, and should be left alone. If he has to go, so
does
W1AW. Enough said, I have spoken. This is the way it WILL be.

I beg to differ. ARRL is within the guidelines of Part 97 of
the Commission's rules and. last I checked, knows that the frequency
is clear before starting their programs. Also, it's widely known and
accepted that W!AW has scheduled "All Station" announcements as well
as Code practice. All within the bounds of the rules.
K1MAN, as I understand it, doesn't care about if the frequency
is is use and walks over everyone in an attempt to gain financially
from selling his equipment over the air.

--
Dan, KD8AGU
Please remove ".nospam" to reply via email.

You have in basically correct Dan. K1MAN, is a radio bully. He seems to
think that whatever he does, thinks, or wants to do takes priority over
everyone and everything else. Case in point...

For a period of about 2 years K1MAN vacated the frequency of 14.275.
During
that time several stations began operating there. One day up comes Glen
Baxter and he tells us to get off because it is time for his broadcast.
He
didn't ask, he didn't even attempt to be polite. He just decided it was
time to resume his trashcasting on ''HIS" frequency. A major fight
erupted
and the latest FCC action against him is the result of it.

Recently he decided to finally move off of the GA Sideband net frequency
of
3975, he moved up the band a bit and ordered the UFO network to get off
his
frequency. Same same from Baxter boy.

Several years before he had a major fight with the 3975 crowd.
Unfortunatly
the rebels capitulated.

Mr. Baxter is 'real popular' with the AM crowd in New England. Ask them
about his ''full carrier AM'' signal on 3890 nightly.


Dan/W4NTI

Dan - Glenn has been running over nets and broadcasting inappropriate junk
so long (in 1998 he was wiping out the Sunday morning Bermuda Net on
14.275mHz) that I begin to wonder if current FCC people realize that it has
been 17 years or more since the FCC was first going to fix the problem.
Baxter is not only a domestic problem, but an international embarrassment.
Hams in other countries are incredulous that the FCC cannot or will not do
something about him.

ak

On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 00:11:26 GMT, King Zulu wrote:

I begin to wonder if current FCC people realize that it has
been 17 years or more since the FCC was first going to fix the problem.

Gone are the "good old days" when the FCC could get a court order
and the US Marshals to enforce same "just for the asking". Neither
the courts nor the Justice Department are interested in doing that
anymore where the sole issue is violation of FCC Rules without
anything else, such as national security or criminal activities
involved..... but that doesn't mean that they won't whenever they
so desire.

The present Enforcement Bureau people are used to working problems
out by exchange of correspondence and lawyer-to-lawyer however long
that takes, rather than getting a task force together with raid
jackets and bolt cutters and taking care of business.

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

Phil Kane wrote:

On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 00:11:26 GMT, King Zulu wrote:


I begin to wonder if current FCC people realize that it has
been 17 years or more since the FCC was first going to fix the problem.


Gone are the "good old days" when the FCC could get a court order
and the US Marshals to enforce same "just for the asking". Neither
the courts nor the Justice Department are interested in doing that
anymore where the sole issue is violation of FCC Rules without
anything else, such as national security or criminal activities
involved..... but that doesn't mean that they won't whenever they
so desire.

The present Enforcement Bureau people are used to working problems
out by exchange of correspondence and lawyer-to-lawyer however long
that takes, rather than getting a task force together with raid
jackets and bolt cutters and taking care of business.

But hasn't enough time passed for resolution of this problem even done
that way, Phil? Here is a person in clear violation of many rules, and
also in violation of criminal statutes too, and yet they must be
powerless to do anything.

Or IS the fact that the League has it's own broadcasts a nasty sticking
point?

- Mike KB3EIA -

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...


Phil Kane wrote:

On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 00:11:26 GMT, King Zulu wrote:


I begin to wonder if current FCC people realize that it has
been 17 years or more since the FCC was first going to fix the problem.


Gone are the "good old days" when the FCC could get a court order
and the US Marshals to enforce same "just for the asking". Neither
the courts nor the Justice Department are interested in doing that
anymore where the sole issue is violation of FCC Rules without
anything else, such as national security or criminal activities
involved..... but that doesn't mean that they won't whenever they
so desire.

The present Enforcement Bureau people are used to working problems
out by exchange of correspondence and lawyer-to-lawyer however long
that takes, rather than getting a task force together with raid
jackets and bolt cutters and taking care of business.

But hasn't enough time passed for resolution of this problem even done
that way, Phil? Here is a person in clear violation of many rules, and
also in violation of criminal statutes too, and yet they must be
powerless to do anything.

Or IS the fact that the League has it's own broadcasts a nasty sticking
point?

- Mike KB3EIA -

Probably a combination of both Mike.
The only thing that MAN has going for him
is that he lives way up in the boonies of Maine.
If he were located in a more 'urban populated' area
it's a guess someone would have probably either cut 5'
sections out of his coax, or took a power saw
cutting wheel to the base of his antenna tower at
3:00 AM a long time ago. (Not that I am condoning or
suggesting any such activity by anyone mind you. I do
not in fact!) Just that for the most part I have observed
that ham QRM'ers and people like CB'er's who cause TVI
located in the more densely populated suburban areas seem to have
their neighbors find the source of the problem and
take 'corrective measures' rather sooner than the FCC does!

On Thu, 09 Sep 2004 21:10:54 -0400, Mike Coslo wrote:

But hasn't enough time passed for resolution of this problem even done
that way, Phil? Here is a person in clear violation of many rules, and
also in violation of criminal statutes too, and yet they must be
powerless to do anything.

Powerless they are not, but I don't walk in Riley's moccasins as to
whether the power is going to be exercised or not. HQ and I had
differening views on using letter-writing versus on-scene enforcement
over the years.

Or IS the fact that the League has it's own broadcasts a nasty sticking
point?

Who knows ??

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

"Phil Kane" wrote in message
et...
On Thu, 09 Sep 2004 21:10:54 -0400, Mike Coslo wrote:

But hasn't enough time passed for resolution of this problem even done
that way, Phil? Here is a person in clear violation of many rules, and
also in violation of criminal statutes too, and yet they must be
powerless to do anything.

Powerless they are not, but I don't walk in Riley's moccasins as to
whether the power is going to be exercised or not. HQ and I had
differening views on using letter-writing versus on-scene enforcement
over the years.

Or IS the fact that the League has it's own broadcasts a nasty sticking
point?

Who knows ??

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane


Phil,

Whenever the subject of K1MAN comes up there is always some block head that
insists on compairing him to W1AW.

During your tenure with the Feds did you happen to hear of a anti stupid
pill that would be available for these folks?

Dan/W4NTI

"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message thlink.net...
"Phil Kane" wrote in message
et...
On Thu, 09 Sep 2004 21:10:54 -0400, Mike Coslo wrote:

But hasn't enough time passed for resolution of this problem even done
that way, Phil? Here is a person in clear violation of many rules, and
also in violation of criminal statutes too, and yet they must be
powerless to do anything.

Powerless they are not, but I don't walk in Riley's moccasins as to
whether the power is going to be exercised or not. HQ and I had
differening views on using letter-writing versus on-scene enforcement
over the years.

Or IS the fact that the League has it's own broadcasts a nasty sticking
point?

Who knows ??

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane


Phil,

Whenever the subject of K1MAN comes up there is always some block head that
insists on compairing him to W1AW.

During your tenure with the Feds did you happen to hear of a anti stupid
pill that would be available for these folks?

Dan/W4NTI

This is just another case where the FCC fell on it's face in the rules
making department. They tried to write a rule where only the ARRL
would qualify.

"William" wrote in message
om...
"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message
thlink.net...
"Phil Kane" wrote in message
et...
On Thu, 09 Sep 2004 21:10:54 -0400, Mike Coslo wrote:

But hasn't enough time passed for resolution of this problem even
done
that way, Phil? Here is a person in clear violation of many rules,
and
also in violation of criminal statutes too, and yet they must be
powerless to do anything.

Powerless they are not, but I don't walk in Riley's moccasins as to
whether the power is going to be exercised or not. HQ and I had
differening views on using letter-writing versus on-scene
enforcement
over the years.

Or IS the fact that the League has it's own broadcasts a nasty
sticking
point?

Who knows ??

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane


Phil,

Whenever the subject of K1MAN comes up there is always some block head
that
insists on compairing him to W1AW.

During your tenure with the Feds did you happen to hear of a anti stupid
pill that would be available for these folks?

Dan/W4NTI

This is just another case where the FCC fell on it's face in the rules
making department. They tried to write a rule where only the ARRL
would qualify.

Those rules lets anyone qualify. All they have to do is abide by the rules.
K1MAN does not abide by the rules.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

"William" wrote in message
om...
"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message
thlink.net...
"Phil Kane" wrote in message
et...
On Thu, 09 Sep 2004 21:10:54 -0400, Mike Coslo wrote:

But hasn't enough time passed for resolution of this problem even
done
that way, Phil? Here is a person in clear violation of many rules,
and
also in violation of criminal statutes too, and yet they must be
powerless to do anything.

Powerless they are not, but I don't walk in Riley's moccasins as to
whether the power is going to be exercised or not. HQ and I had
differening views on using letter-writing versus on-scene
enforcement
over the years.

Or IS the fact that the League has it's own broadcasts a nasty
sticking
point?

Who knows ??

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane


Phil,

Whenever the subject of K1MAN comes up there is always some block head
that
insists on compairing him to W1AW.

During your tenure with the Feds did you happen to hear of a anti stupid
pill that would be available for these folks?

Dan/W4NTI

This is just another case where the FCC fell on it's face in the rules
making department. They tried to write a rule where only the ARRL
would qualify.

And you know this how? Did John Kerry or Al Gore tell you ?

Dan/W4NTI

On 12 Sep 2004 06:41:43 -0700, William wrote:

This is just another case where the FCC fell on it's face in the rules
making department. They tried to write a rule where only the ARRL
would qualify.

Legislators do this all the time. The U S Tax Code is loaded with
exemption clauses like "this does not apply to corporations
incorporated before 1930 for the purpose of transporting lumber
products along the Columbia River whose gross income is more than
one million dollars per annum...."

Let us not forget the famous Arizona law which makes it illegal to
buy an "Indian" a drink, which was intended for a particular "Indian"
but had to be broadly stated to escape Constitutional challenge, albeit
it was never broadly enforced.

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane