PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message ...

Just for starters. Actually I've lost track of how many different names Len has
made up for me. Seems he just can't bring himself to call me "Jim" or "N2EY",
even though I call him "Len" or "Mr. Anderson".

I can call you Jim. Doesn't matter because you don't like my message.

But Len and Biran get you to call them "Putz", "Loser", "Brain" and
"PuppetBoy", just for starters. Which is probably their entire game, really.

Ahem, that's "Brian." And we don't "get him to call us" anything.
Steve does so on the free volition of any number of his various
personalities.

The other is because last month Brain stated others "can't help
yourself, you have to respond...".

Prove him wrong.

Please do. It'll be a first.

Guess they have a hard time with objectivity, not that we had any
doubts.

Of course. So why play their game?

I can be Quiteobjective. Try me with some rational discourse.

Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting?
From: (William)
Date: 9/16/2004 5:14 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(N2EY) wrote in message
...

Just for starters. Actually I've lost track of how many different names Len
has
made up for me. Seems he just can't bring himself to call me "Jim" or
"N2EY",
even though I call him "Len" or "Mr. Anderson".

I can call you Jim. Doesn't matter because you don't like my message.

But Len and Biran get you to call them "Putz", "Loser", "Brain" and
"PuppetBoy", just for starters. Which is probably their entire game,
really.

Ahem, that's "Brian." And we don't "get him to call us" anything.
Steve does so on the free volition of any number of his various
personalities.

Oh, I have no "various personalities", Brian.

Just K4YZ. Not any one of several different screen names or
nomme-de-guerre, such as yourself, Brian.

The other is because last month Brain stated others "can't help
yourself, you have to respond...".

Prove him wrong.

Please do. It'll be a first.

Guess they have a hard time with objectivity, not that we had any
doubts.

Of course. So why play their game?

I can be Quiteobjective. Try me with some rational discourse.

More like "Quiteobjectionable", Brian.

And try the "rational discourse" yourself. Start with some validation of
your "Unlicensed services play a major role in emergency comms" assertion.

Steve, K4YZ

Another classic example of how pure democracy doesn't work because there're
so many idiots (greek for 'non-officeholder) out there...for what it (isn't)
worth...

LJD
"Steve Robeson K4CAP" wrote in message
...
Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting?
From: (William)
Date: 9/16/2004 5:14 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(N2EY) wrote in message
...

Just for starters. Actually I've lost track of how many different names
Len
has
made up for me. Seems he just can't bring himself to call me "Jim" or
"N2EY",
even though I call him "Len" or "Mr. Anderson".

I can call you Jim. Doesn't matter because you don't like my message.

But Len and Biran get you to call them "Putz", "Loser", "Brain" and
"PuppetBoy", just for starters. Which is probably their entire game,
really.

Ahem, that's "Brian." And we don't "get him to call us" anything.
Steve does so on the free volition of any number of his various
personalities.

Oh, I have no "various personalities", Brian.

Just K4YZ. Not any one of several different screen names or
nomme-de-guerre, such as yourself, Brian.

The other is because last month Brain stated others "can't help
yourself, you have to respond...".

Prove him wrong.

Please do. It'll be a first.

Guess they have a hard time with objectivity, not that we had any
doubts.

Of course. So why play their game?

I can be Quiteobjective. Try me with some rational discourse.

More like "Quiteobjectionable", Brian.

And try the "rational discourse" yourself. Start with some
validation of
your "Unlicensed services play a major role in emergency comms" assertion.

Steve, K4YZ

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ...
Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting?
From: (William)
Date: 9/16/2004 5:14 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(N2EY) wrote in message
...

Just for starters. Actually I've lost track of how many different names Len
has
made up for me. Seems he just can't bring himself to call me "Jim" or
"N2EY",
even though I call him "Len" or "Mr. Anderson".

I can call you Jim. Doesn't matter because you don't like my message.

But Len and Biran get you to call them "Putz", "Loser", "Brain" and
"PuppetBoy", just for starters. Which is probably their entire game,
really.

Ahem, that's "Brian." And we don't "get him to call us" anything.
Steve does so on the free volition of any number of his various
personalities.

Oh, I have no "various personalities", Brian.

You must.

Just K4YZ. Not any one of several different screen names or
nomme-de-guerre, such as yourself, Brian.

Who is K4CAP?

The other is because last month Brain stated others "can't help
yourself, you have to respond...".

Prove him wrong.

Please do. It'll be a first.

Guess they have a hard time with objectivity, not that we had any
doubts.

Of course. So why play their game?

I can be Quiteobjective. Try me with some rational discourse.

More like "Quiteobjectionable", Brian.

And try the "rational discourse" yourself. Start with some validation of
your "Unlicensed services play a major role in emergency comms" assertion.

Steve, K4YZ

I was talking to Jim.

Sorry, Steve, but you you've blown it in the rational discourse
department. Try it with someone else.

Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting?
From: (William)
Date: 9/17/2004 5:46 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message
...
Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting?
From: (William)
Date: 9/16/2004 5:14 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(N2EY) wrote in message
...

Just for starters. Actually I've lost track of how many different names
Len
has
made up for me. Seems he just can't bring himself to call me "Jim" or
"N2EY",
even though I call him "Len" or "Mr. Anderson".

I can call you Jim. Doesn't matter because you don't like my message.

But Len and Biran get you to call them "Putz", "Loser", "Brain" and
"PuppetBoy", just for starters. Which is probably their entire game,
really.

Ahem, that's "Brian." And we don't "get him to call us" anything.
Steve does so on the free volition of any number of his various
personalities.

Oh, I have no "various personalities", Brian.

You must.

Just K4YZ. Not any one of several different screen names or
nomme-de-guerre, such as yourself, Brian.

Who is K4CAP?

Still me. Or was.

K4CAP is just an FCC assigned call sign. It was mine briefly. Until May
of 2005 it can be mine again without waiting 2 years.

It wasn't an alias for me. I still sign my posts "Steve". The
combination of letters and number on FCC Form 660 does not dictate who I am.

The other is because last month Brain stated others "can't help
yourself, you have to respond...".

Prove him wrong.

Please do. It'll be a first.

Guess they have a hard time with objectivity, not that we had any
doubts.

Of course. So why play their game?

I can be Quiteobjective. Try me with some rational discourse.

More like "Quiteobjectionable", Brian.

And try the "rational discourse" yourself. Start with some validation
of
your "Unlicensed services play a major role in emergency comms" assertion.


Steve, K4YZ

I was talking to Jim.

Sorry, Brian. You posted in a public, unmoderated forum.

Your posts are open fare.

Sorry, Steve, but you you've blown it in the rational discourse
department. Try it with someone else.

Sorry, Brian, you've not proven a thing.

You still have unanswered questions vis-a-vis Amateur Radio other there.
We're still waiting and wondering...Will you ever fess up, or was your
admission of never getting DXCC approval for your "T5" operation the only
acknowledgement we'll ever see that your claims are bogus?

Steve, K4YZ

In article , (Steve
Robeson K4CAP) writes:

Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting?
From: (William)
Date: 9/17/2004 5:46 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message
...
Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting?
From: (William)
Date: 9/16/2004 5:14 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(N2EY) wrote in message
...

Just for starters. Actually I've lost track of how many different names
Len
has
made up for me. Seems he just can't bring himself to call me "Jim" or
"N2EY",
even though I call him "Len" or "Mr. Anderson".

I can call you Jim. Doesn't matter because you don't like my message.

But Len and Biran

oops - make that "Brian".

get you to call them "Putz", "Loser", "Brain" and
"PuppetBoy", just for starters. Which is probably their entire game,
really.

Ahem, that's "Brian." And we don't "get him to call us" anything.
Steve does so on the free volition of any number of his various
personalities.

Oh, I have no "various personalities", Brian.

You must.

Just K4YZ. Not any one of several different screen names or
nomme-de-guerre, such as yourself, Brian.

Who is K4CAP?

Still me. Or was.

K4CAP is just an FCC assigned call sign. It was mine briefly. Until
May
of 2005 it can be mine again without waiting 2 years.

And if someone goes to qrz.com and enters "k4cap" they are redirected to
"k4yz". No problem.

It wasn't an alias for me. I still sign my posts "Steve". The
combination of letters and number on FCC Form 660 does not dictate who I am.

The other is because last month Brain stated others "can't help
yourself, you have to respond...".

Prove him wrong.

IOW, drop the rope. Prove that Brian and Len need you more than you need them.

Please do. It'll be a first.

Guess they have a hard time with objectivity, not that we had any
doubts.

Of course. So why play their game?

I can be Quiteobjective. Try me with some rational discourse.

More like "Quiteobjectionable", Brian.

Now see, there you go, feeding the game.

And try the "rational discourse" yourself. Start with some
validation
of
your "Unlicensed services play a major role in emergency comms" assertion.


Steve, K4YZ

I was talking to Jim.

Sorry, Brian. You posted in a public, unmoderated forum.

Your posts are open fare.

The funny part is that I only saw Brian's post when you quoted it. And the idea
that a newsgroup post is directed to just one person and all others should keep
out is hilarious.

Sorry, Steve, but you you've blown it in the rational discourse
department. Try it with someone else.

Sorry, Brian, you've not proven a thing.

You still have unanswered questions vis-a-vis Amateur Radio other there.

We're still waiting and wondering...Will you ever fess up, or was your
admission of never getting DXCC approval for your "T5" operation the only
acknowledgement we'll ever see that your claims are bogus?

What bogus claims, Steve?

Consider this scenario:

Suppose there was a military radio setup in /T5 that could do HF. (I'm sure Len
can write a long missive full of nomenclature and other irrelevancies detailing
what would be in use and how the military doesn't use Morse Code, etc.) Let's
nomenclature this hypothetical HF radio set as "UP/URS-2"

And suppose said radio setup covers 10 meter SSB. (Even a civilian like me
knows that most post WW2 military HF gear covers at least 3-30 MHz).

So Mr. Burke finds himself at or near said radio setup. Of course the main
point-to-point military radio traffic nowadays goes by satellite, with HF as
backup, right? So the UP/URS-2 sits idle most of the time. The comms folks
check it out once in a while just to be sure it works.

Mr. Burke sees all this and asks "Sarge" if he can use it on the ham bands.
"Sarge" says "yeah, sure, lemme make sure the autotuner works up that high". Of
course it does, so T5/N0IMD is on the air and makes a few 10 meter SSB
contacts. Maybe in due course a few QSLs are exchanged with hams in places like
the Ukraine and Lebanon.

No paperwork is ever sent to ARRL - DXCC accreditation is not considered. Only
a few contacts are made and the "mainstream DX community" never hears of the
operation.

All of the above fits with the claims Mr. Burke has made here. Maybe it happned
pretty close to the way I described, maybe not. He won't tell us the details
anyway, so why worry about it?

73 de Jim, N2EY

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ...
Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting?
From: (William)
Date: 9/17/2004 5:46 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message
...
Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting?
From: (William)
Date: 9/16/2004 5:14 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(N2EY) wrote in message
...

Just for starters. Actually I've lost track of how many different names
Len
has
made up for me. Seems he just can't bring himself to call me "Jim" or
"N2EY",
even though I call him "Len" or "Mr. Anderson".

I can call you Jim. Doesn't matter because you don't like my message.

But Len and Biran get you to call them "Putz", "Loser", "Brain" and
"PuppetBoy", just for starters. Which is probably their entire game,
really.

Ahem, that's "Brian." And we don't "get him to call us" anything.
Steve does so on the free volition of any number of his various
personalities.

Oh, I have no "various personalities", Brian.

You must.

Just K4YZ. Not any one of several different screen names or
nomme-de-guerre, such as yourself, Brian.

Who is K4CAP?

Still me. Or was.

K4CAP is just an FCC assigned call sign. It was mine briefly. Until May
of 2005 it can be mine again without waiting 2 years.

Dave thinks that callsigns are hams. He forgets that there'sa real
person behind the call/

It wasn't an alias for me. I still sign my posts "Steve". The
combination of letters and number on FCC Form 660 does not dictate who I am.

Tell David about it.

The other is because last month Brain stated others "can't help
yourself, you have to respond...".

Prove him wrong.

Please do. It'll be a first.

Guess they have a hard time with objectivity, not that we had any
doubts.

Of course. So why play their game?

I can be Quiteobjective. Try me with some rational discourse.

More like "Quiteobjectionable", Brian.

And try the "rational discourse" yourself. Start with some validation
of
your "Unlicensed services play a major role in emergency comms" assertion.


Steve, K4YZ

I was talking to Jim.

Sorry, Brian. You posted in a public, unmoderated forum.

Your posts are open fare.

Sorry, Steve, but you you've blown it in the rational discourse
department. Try it with someone else.

Sorry, Brian, you've not proven a thing.

You still have unanswered questions vis-a-vis Amateur Radio other there.
We're still waiting and wondering...Will you ever fess up, or was your
admission of never getting DXCC approval for your "T5" operation the only
acknowledgement we'll ever see that your claims are bogus?

Steve, K4YZ

You still owe an apology for your homosexual and pedophilia inuendo.

Best of Luck.

In article ,
(William) writes:

(N2EY) wrote in message
...

Just for starters. Actually I've lost track of how many different names Len
has
made up for me. Seems he just can't bring himself to call me "Jim" or
"N2EY",
even though I call him "Len" or "Mr. Anderson".

I can call you Jim. Doesn't matter because you don't like my message.

But Len and Biran get you to call them "Putz", "Loser", "Brain" and
"PuppetBoy", just for starters. Which is probably their entire game,
really.

Ahem, that's "Brian." And we don't "get him to call us" anything.
Steve does so on the free volition of any number of his various
personalities.

The other is because last month Brain stated others "can't help
yourself, you have to respond...".

Prove him wrong.

Please do. It'll be a first.

Guess they have a hard time with objectivity, not that we had any
doubts.

Of course. So why play their game?

I can be Quiteobjective. Try me with some rational discourse.

The PCTA's only "game" is that they've lost at validity of keeping
a morse code test and try to "get back" at NCTA using all manner
of personal insults and denigrations.

"Rational discourse" to the PCTA means having to like morse
code...anyplace, anytime.

Speak the least thing negative about morse code and the PCTA
immediately go ballistic, holler and shout that NCTA are
"insulting their honor" (or whatever they bitch about du jour).

Boils down to that in here.

Seems to me that the PCTA code lovers should be on their radios
happily beeping away...instead of sitting at keyboards snarling
nastygrams at any NCTA within sight or hearing. :-)

Hi hi.

Len Over 21 wrote:

Seems to me that the PCTA code lovers should be on their radios
happily beeping away...instead of sitting at keyboards snarling
nastygrams at any NCTA within sight or hearing. :-)

It really doesn't mean diddly squat what it seems to you that radio
amateurs should be doing. You aren't one of them. They can operate or
not. They can use morse code or not. They can post here or not.

You, on the other hand, have little to do but post--what do you call
them--nastygrams?--in a newsgroup dealing with something in which you
play no part. :-)

The tired, old, incontinent California landshark can't help being what
he is. Keep a stiff dorsal fin!

Dave K8MN

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

(N2EY) wrote in message
...

Just for starters. Actually I've lost track of how many different names Len
has
made up for me. Seems he just can't bring himself to call me "Jim" or
"N2EY",
even though I call him "Len" or "Mr. Anderson".

I can call you Jim. Doesn't matter because you don't like my message.

But Len and Biran get you to call them "Putz", "Loser", "Brain" and
"PuppetBoy", just for starters. Which is probably their entire game,
really.

Ahem, that's "Brian." And we don't "get him to call us" anything.
Steve does so on the free volition of any number of his various
personalities.

The other is because last month Brain stated others "can't help
yourself, you have to respond...".

Prove him wrong.

Please do. It'll be a first.

Guess they have a hard time with objectivity, not that we had any
doubts.

Of course. So why play their game?

I can be Quiteobjective. Try me with some rational discourse.

The PCTA's only "game" is that they've lost at validity of keeping
a morse code test and try to "get back" at NCTA using all manner
of personal insults and denigrations.

I've seen it.

"Rational discourse" to the PCTA means having to like morse
code...anyplace, anytime.

Speak the least thing negative about morse code and the PCTA
immediately go ballistic, holler and shout that NCTA are
"insulting their honor" (or whatever they bitch about du jour).

Boils down to that in here.

Seems to me that the PCTA code lovers should be on their radios
happily beeping away...instead of sitting at keyboards snarling
nastygrams at any NCTA within sight or hearing. :-)

Hi hi.



I just read a David Heil post where he thinks you shouldn't suggest
anything. But I can recall post after post after post scolding me for
spending my spare time on RRAP rather than with a code practice
oscillator.

These guys are PCTA, and exhibit the PCTA double-standard at every
opportunity.