Subject: Designed And Built By PROFESSIONALS....
From: PAMNO (N2EY)
Date: 11/5/2004 6:02 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes:

Kiss my yes, Jimmie boy.

What does that mean, Len?

You've admitted that you haven't homebrewed any HF transceivers. You refuse
or
are unable to use the homepage facilities provided by AOL

His last endeavour, copied to the list by myself, was an AOL "profile" in
which he conceptualized himself as the little old man on a park bench, getting
purse-whupped by Ruth Buzzy.

He's never posted a single character-specific item on himself, family,
career or accomplishments..

Guess it comes from being too incompetent to handle the technology.

73

Steve, K4YZ

Subject: Designed And Built By PROFESSIONALS....
From: PAMNO (N2EY)
Date: 11/5/2004 6:02 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes:

For that matter, I've also seen part of
the GC Electronics operations when their wire-stripper line was still a
part of it...and known two who worked there (in 1956). [GC is now a
merge with Walsco and most of their 'products' are produced by others
on an OEM basis]

So?

Don't discourage him, Jim!

He's moved from 1953 to 1956!

I have a small collection of Greenlee punches which have been
gathering rust and dust. About every 5 years or so I may take them
out, oil them and rub them with some steel wool. Haven't used them
for about 9 years or so.

I'll give ya $5 each for them.

Maybe if he knew what Greenlee punches were for they might not gather so
much rust.

I suppose next you will demand I show up at Dayton with the
"citations" to prove I do things? Harrrr!!!!

None of us have seen anything you've built at home. None of your articles in
'ham radio' were construction articles. You've lots of criticism for others'
construction projects, but when asked to show what HF radio projects *you*
have
built at home, with your own resources and on your own time, the result is a
big fat zero.

Len, you're all talk and no action. All show and no go. All sizzle and no
steak.

There aren't any...Not HF...Not VHF...Not in ANY electronics discipline.

Use all the old holes for the
"new design?" Make everything "fit" those existing holes?

bwahahahahahahahahaha!

You really have no imagination when it comes to practical radio, Len.

The key word there was, of course, "practical".

That means BUYING chassis somewhere...or
snaffling ("swipe") them.

You mean steal? I don't do that.

Heavens, no!

That's right.

Did you ever "snaffle" parts, Len?

Must be a 1950's era term.

Right now its wondering why I'm wasting
all this time writing a reply to an unrepentant PCTA-er who is bound
and determined to rationalize (one way or the other) that he is perfect
ham in every way.

I've never claimed to be perfect or god-like in anything, Len. I'm just a
radio
amateur who has homebrewed some amateur radio stations over the past 37
years.
You haven't done any of that, yet you set yourself up in judgement.

The only one I've ever seen in this forum even remotely suggest they are
perfect was some potty-mouthed ex-radio technician who suggested, at one time,
that he and any two of his engineering buddies were worth just about everyone
else in the Amateur Radio service.

Prove that. Show your work.

Why?

Lennie's always demanding engineer-level performance from evryone else,
but is incapable of taking a simple Amateur Radio exam or getting a 2N2222
oscillating.

U.S. Army radio station ADA sent 220 thousand TTY messages a
month in 1955 in 24/7 operations, radio circuits all over the Pacific
on HF.

And there were how many personnel stationed there?

Good thing you didn't ask him "...how many COMPETENT personnel",
Jim...Wudda had to subtract at least one!

Wouldn't matter anyway...Lennie was not an authorized operator then,
either...Just a radio mechanic, according to the MOS's he's supplied.

that item in it ('Stripes' was and is still available to the military
public
and to dependents). Each and every team supervisor at transmitters
was immediately responsible to keep those radio transmitters
operating when scheduled.

It was their *job* and sole responsibility, right? For which they were
trained,
fed, housed, clothed and otherwise cared for, right? Who paid for all that
radio equipment and supporting stuff, Len?

Why JIM..! How DARE you ask! We all KNOW that Lennie waived all his
paychecks, paid his own keep out of pocket, and designed, built and operated
ALL his OWN gear!

Jimmie, I can get even MORE specific about all of that old stuff
because: (1). I was there; (2). I have documents to prove it;
(3). I have personal photographs as well as Signal Corps photos
(with mimeoed ID on the backs, as military standard then) from
those days; (4). I have other documents obtained as gifts from
a now-retired civilian engineer who was there at the time and stayed
with the station complex after the USAF took over in 1963 (he now
lives in California); (5). I have been in correspondence, both
written and telephone, with another who was there at the same time
as I, has been a amateur radio licensee for years; (6). The
Pacific Stars & Stripes did check out some of my material and
published it (article by staffer Rick Chernitzer who did the interview)
on 10 November 2002 (it's in the middle of that Sunday edition, a
"double truck" or two-page spread as the publishing folks sometimes
call it).

Nobody doubts that you were there, Len. Yet you get all defensive about it.

Ironic...10 November...the MARINE CORPS Birthday...Huh, Lennie....

In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:


We've already seen how you react to others who have served our country in
both military and nonmilitary government service.

Right...for making lots of brags and claims and implied "combat
experience" as in "seven hostile actions." :-)

Or those who were "in Vietnam" yet can't be specific about what
they did or where.

Or those who "served the country" by being a minor civilian sort for a
defense contractor on a USN aircraft carrier. [I tend to dismiss
the claims of "taking photographs for naval intelligence" as having
any importance]

"Dave" wants his State experiences enobled as wonderful radio
acts for the nation or something. State Department just doesn't
have the size or scope to compete with the U.S. military commo
facilities. The DSN has taken over the day-to-day task for that
and the U.S. Army Signal Corps has long served State for the
vital sensitive communications means (which "Dave" will
immediately argue since he is most sensitive to any sort of
negativism to "Dave").

Ooooo...I've "insulted" a member of the USMC? Horrors!

Yes, I was unaware that the USMC is hero of the U.S. military and
the savior of all wars and is therefore ALLOWED (perhaps
encouraged) to insult and demean all other U.S. military service
branch veterans. See cute little Yiddish pejoratives such as "Putz"
(which means 'penis head').

Tsk. I am "guilty" of an inter-service faux pas according to your
veteranism (or veterinarianism or vegetarianism) as a military
veteran yourself. I was unaware that standing retreat (a military
ceremony at sundown) honoring 23 members of my military
battalion was somehow "dishonoring them" (according to the
medically-discharged USMC veteran). Mea culpa.

That USMC "veteran" (who never claimed any USMC commo
experience) thinks my MOS was as a "radio mechanic" despite
my giving the official U.S. Army Military Occupation Specialty
brief description.

All that because the U.S. Army never used any morse code in
long-distance 24/7 operation HF communications 51 years ago.

Tsk. Well, you've had all that "experience" at Washington Army
Radio because you read a rather dated (almost pre-WW2) article
by a very olde-tymer hamme and thus you "were there" and
"knew all about" ACAN (Army Command and Administrative
Network) in which I took part. No sweaty dah.

You've neglected to "correct" me on many other things that
involved communications that I've experienced since 1956...
except some brief mentions on SURPLUS equipment of WW2
era radio. You don't know SINCGARS or the IHFR families
which are the mainstay of small-unit operations in today's
military...IHFR involves HF spectrum communications and the
present-day PRC-104 is part of that IHFR effort since 1986.

Show us your heroism and wonderful deeds that makes YOU so
superior you can denigrate those of us who DID serve in the military.

Where have I "denigrated" anyone's military or other government service?

Myself and Brian Burke by implication if not directly. Further,
you've supported or condoned other PCTAs for personally insulting
the both of us. All that has been in public view here.

You've made considerable "fun" out of my having a professional
career in radio-electronics and try to denigrate professionals in
many areas besides radio. Yet you CLAIM to be a "pro" in your
day job and have never been specific in what you are supposed
to be doing "in electronics." Have you joined the IEEE yet? :-)

I've brought out the FACT in the U.S. military communications (on
HF) as of a half century ago NOT INVOLVING morse code for fixed-
point to fixed-point "traffic." You kept diverting to USN shipboard
operations trying somehow to "prove" that morse was the Big
Thing in the military...which you didn't prove since TTY was the
major traffic carrier (by far) for all military branches a half century
ago. I can't possibly disturb your Belief System (a polite
euphemism for league brainwashing) since you've had all that
direct experience (through reading about it) in all those other
radio services. No sir. :-)

No, "N2EY," I'm just not going to accept your fantasyland notions
of communications, not even in amateur radio. No matter what
the subject matter in here, you WILL attempt to "correct" me for
the simple reason of being an NCTA. You are SO touchy about
being corrected yourself, even to the implication of negativisms
about anything you do. Time is wasted trying to dicuss anything
with you about anything.

In article ,
(William) writes:

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

(N2EY) wrote in message
...

Or the guy who claims to have operated from T5 but cannot recall what
bands,
modes, radios, or antennas were used?

He recalls, but the green envy and the accusations ****ed him off.

But...but...but...Jimmie's "been there, done all that" and "knows
exactly what it is like!" Hi hi.

In the grand scheme of things, N2EY has been very few places and has
done very few things of importance.

Tsk. He has an AOL Homepage! :-)

He owes N2EY no explanation, and N2EY will receive none.

Right on!

..

He hopes N2EY will understand.

Hah! Fat chance!

No matter. Really.

True. Except "N2EY" is most disturbed about that. "N2EY"
has SET the rules and what he say goes...

Jimmie thinks he is the "perfect ham" and can do NO wrong, always
"corrects" others who "make all those mistakes." That's been the
recurring underlayer in his postings here.

N2EY has been wallowing in the slop and slurry of late. But he thinks
he still smells sweetly.

Of course he does. He nose all. :-)

PCTAs never apologize...except in a blue moon (when their hair
mysteriously grows out...)



Blue Moon. A delicious micro-brew in the belgian-wheat tradition.

Haven't tried it. Not into any beers and don't bother to drink much.

I follow the mathematician's rule: "Never drink and derive." :-)

In article ,
(William) writes:

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

It is a sad state of affairs the the organization that specifies a
Morse Code Exam cannot define Morse Code. Usurpers of regulatory
authority took it upon themselves up the reduced 5 WPM rate to a
healthy 13-15 WPM rate in defiance of Part 97.

Well, in all honesty, the FCC does have a definition of it, but not an
exact one. They still reference an out-of-date (and no longer existing)
CCITT document and do not specifically state a word rate. Considering
all the technical things the FCC does, definitely, define and describe,
it is a wonder that they are so lax on International Morse Code.

It's as if they don't care about the code anymore.

Tsk. The FCC should obey the dicta of the PCTA and remake
morsemanship into the very finest accomplishment of all hamkind
(that it once was). :-)

We've both seen the numerous rationalizations of the "Farnsworth"
spacing but nobody, and I mean NOBODY, has seen that specifically
stated in any official version of Part 97, Title 47 C.F.R. (which is
published every two years in October by the Government Printing
Office and made available for free at the GPO website).

It's as if they don't care about the code anymore.

Morse code skill is the very finest of all possible skills of HF radio
amateurs...according to the PCTA. Too bad the FCC can't see
the Glory and Majesty of that very finest attribute of any amateur.

Sic transit gloria mundi.

["so goes the glory of the world"]

What we got is an "interpretation" by the FCC that Farnsworth spacing
"is okay for VECs to use in testing." Not in any Part 97 and never even
left the Commission (except to the supreme court of the league).

Yep. Sumbuddy said it was OK.

The ARRL posted a "notice" to that effect. It might even be buried
somewhere on the FCC website...haven't searched for it. Have to
search for it since it isn't given some extra-special link at the FCC
at the Wireless Bureau or the sub-page devoted to Amateur Radio
nor at the OET page.

If the ARRL has posted the "notice" then that is "just as good" as
being official. [the league can do no wrong...according to so many
league Believers]

Not to worry. With the re-election of the Administration there will be
"four more years" of the same "attention" to amateur radio affairs as
has been for the last 3 1/2 years, the same Commissioner in Chief,
and full speed (with lots of champagne) to BPL.

Wish I were on that gravy train.

"Man with one-track mind often get train of thought derailed."

Lots of "incentive" to attract more newcomers into hamme raddio.
All that and those warm-hearted ghouls of the PCTA dissing and
cussing all those not wanting to emulate or recreate olde-tyme
radio.

Tsk. All those "professionals" in law-making and fund-raising and
membership-organization-running... :-)



I guess we need our own Constitutional Amendment.

Not to worry. All the licensured constitutionalists have taken care of
that. Here's a synopsis of what they've come up with:

1. The ONLY way to show any interest in radio is to get a ham
license. Any other endeavor, interest, curiosity is meaningless
without that official authoritzation to operate (but only in the ham
bands). Industry employment doesn't count, ever.

2. The ONLY way to show any capability of doing anything in radio
is to home-build an HF transceiver (for the ham bands) and then
display it on an AOL home page. All else is meaningless.

3. Newsgroup gabble about non-amateur-radio subjects is absolutely
permitted, even encouraged...because it is done by authorized,
licensured, official amateurs who are regulars in this newsgroup
and self-designated as the saviors of the amateur radio future.

4. Anyone not a PCTA is forbidden to even mention radio policy
subjects and such should always be cat-called, heckled,
personally insulted for the slightest hint of negativism expressed
against the god-like words of the PCTA and their beloved morse
code ability.

5. No one, absolutely none, is permitted to say anything negative
(however slight) against the claims, brags, or statements of any
PCTA. All must shower such with accolades and respect worthy
of heroes, leaders, and statesmen lest they be offended and run
home from the schoolyard crying for their mamas.

6. There is NO other radio except amateur radio. The excellence of
all radio (no exceptions) lies in HF bands operations as done by
official, licensured amateurs working DX with CW. Implications
that there are other radio services (including evil CB) is an
aberration and is punishable by all manner of personal insult to
anyone bringing such subjects to the newsgroup.

7. Anyone who has met the old Amateur Extra federal examination
and passed is automatically elevated to expertise in:
A. Entertainment business production and ethics.
B. Architectural techniques, including engineering for same.
C. National and International politics and policies.
D. Aerospace business, industry, and technology.
E. Rail and other vehicle transportation.
F. Medical technology and application, regardless of
licensure.
G. Parenting and family values, plus pediatrics.
H. Absolute insider knowledge on the decisions made by
the Federal Communications Commission.
I. Intimate knowledge and understanding of all amateur
radio technology and how it came to be through history.
J. The righteousness and correctness of the ARRL in all
matters on amateur radio (for they are blessed as the
saviors of U.S. amateur radio as sung in the hymnals
at the Church of St. Hiram - the Divine).
K. Anything else not covered in items A through J.

8. The Constitution of the United States of America has NO freedom
of speech allowed to any No-Code-Test Advocate.

9. The Federal Communications Commission requires all staffers and
commissioners to hold valid amateur radio licenses in order to
regulate U.S. amateur radio. Such INVOLVEMENT is absolutely
necessary and may even be a legal requirement under the law.

10. It is impossible to know ANYTHING in any subject without any
class of amateur radio license, foreign or domestic.

11. In order to discuss getting into amateur radio one MUST already
be licensed and have licensure IN amateur radio.

12. All those already licensed (and with licensure) in amateur radio
know EXACTLY how every other radio amateur thinks, feels,
experiences, believes, behaves...in perfect understanding.

13. Anyone getting into amateur radio MUST also achieve
cognizance by ALL other radio amateurs for their dedication
and resolve and devotion to the ONLY radio - amateur radio.

Okay, that's just a baker's dozen items expressed or implied by
those PCTA gurus of radio who reside in this royal mounted olympus
newsgroup.

There's a 14th item but that involves HUMOR and amateur radio is
a most SERIOUS subject. The PCTA will lose their amateur jobs
if they give in to humor. The P in PCTA also stands for
PROFESSIONAL. The PCTA are never ever amateurish.

Subject: Designed And Built By PROFESSIONALS....
From: (William)
Date: 11/5/2004 11:16 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Dat tree.

Along with some mental health counselling, I could find you a decent
speech pathologist.

Don't disgrace the Marine Corps on their birthday.

How could I?

Steve, K4YZ

In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes:

In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:

We've already seen how you react to others who have served our country in
both military and nonmilitary government service.

Right...for making lots of brags and claims and implied "combat
experience" as in "seven hostile actions." :-)

Mostly just for daring to disagree with you.

Or those who were "in Vietnam" yet can't be specific about what
they did or where.

I don't think that would make any difference to how you behaved towards them.

Or those who "served the country" by being a minor civilian sort for a
defense contractor on a USN aircraft carrier. [I tend to dismiss
the claims of "taking photographs for naval intelligence" as having
any importance]

Yet all these people should show respect for *your* service even though you
show absolutely none for *theirs*.

"Dave" wants his State experiences enobled as wonderful radio
acts for the nation or something. State Department just doesn't
have the size or scope to compete with the U.S. military commo
facilities. The DSN has taken over the day-to-day task for that
and the U.S. Army Signal Corps has long served State for the
vital sensitive communications means (which "Dave" will
immediately argue since he is most sensitive to any sort of
negativism to "Dave").

So you think it's OK to treat K8MN the way you did, and continue to do.

Ooooo...I've "insulted" a member of the USMC? Horrors!

Yes, I was unaware that the USMC is hero of the U.S. military and
the savior of all wars and is therefore ALLOWED (perhaps
encouraged) to insult and demean all other U.S. military service
branch veterans. See cute little Yiddish pejoratives such as "Putz"
(which means 'penis head').

It would be interesting to see when that pejorative was first used, and what
you did to encourage it.

Tsk. I am "guilty" of an inter-service faux pas according to your
veteranism (or veterinarianism or vegetarianism) as a military
veteran yourself. I was unaware that standing retreat (a military
ceremony at sundown) honoring 23 members of my military
battalion was somehow "dishonoring them" (according to the
medically-discharged USMC veteran). Mea culpa.

It's more like your constant badgering and insulting of anyone who disagrees
with you.

That USMC "veteran" (who never claimed any USMC commo
experience) thinks my MOS was as a "radio mechanic" despite
my giving the official U.S. Army Military Occupation Specialty
brief description.

So - "can't you take a little tweak"?

All that because the U.S. Army never used any morse code in
long-distance 24/7 operation HF communications 51 years ago.

You know this for a fact? How?

Tsk. Well, you've had all that "experience" at Washington Army
Radio because you read a rather dated (almost pre-WW2) article
by a very olde-tymer hamme and thus you "were there" and
"knew all about" ACAN (Army Command and Administrative
Network) in which I took part. No sweaty dah.

Was the article factual or not?

It seems to me that you're very opposed to Morse Code getting *any* credit for
*anything* useful.

You've neglected to "correct" me on many other things that
involved communications that I've experienced since 1956...

You make too many mistakes for me to keep up with, Len ;-) ;-)

except some brief mentions on SURPLUS equipment of WW2
era radio. You don't know SINCGARS or the IHFR families
which are the mainstay of small-unit operations in today's
military...IHFR involves HF spectrum communications and the
present-day PRC-104 is part of that IHFR effort since 1986.

So what? Why is SINCGARS of any relevance to amateur radio?

Can hams get the sets in surplus? Can hams use them legally? How much does a
new one cost?

Show us your heroism and wonderful deeds that makes YOU so
superior you can denigrate those of us who DID serve in the military.

Where have I "denigrated" anyone's military or other government service?

Myself and Brian Burke by implication if not directly.

You take *any* comment that is not butt-kissing suck-up praise as an insult.

Show us some examples of these so-called "denigrations". My posts are all in
google.

Further,
you've supported or condoned other PCTAs for personally insulting
the both of us. All that has been in public view here.

"Supported or condoned"?

What would you suggest that I do?

Seems to me that you expect me to somehow stop others from saying anything you
perceive as an insult, but at the same time allow you to insult them freely.

Here's a clue, Len: That's not how it works. Each of us is responsible for our
own postings.

You've made considerable "fun" out of my having a professional
career in radio-electronics and try to denigrate professionals in
many areas besides radio.

Where? Show us, Len.

Yet you CLAIM to be a "pro" in your
day job and have never been specific in what you are supposed
to be doing "in electronics."

Where did I claim any of that? Show us, Len.

I've brought out the FACT in the U.S. military communications (on
HF) as of a half century ago NOT INVOLVING morse code for fixed-
point to fixed-point "traffic."

How do any of us know it's a FACT except because you say-so?

How do we know that the entire US military (not just the Army) did the same
thing?

Most of all: *WHY* is that supposed FACT of any importance to amateur radio
*today*?

C'mon - explain it to us. Show us why it has any importance at all.

You kept diverting to USN shipboard
operations trying somehow to "prove" that morse was the Big
Thing in the military

Not true, Len.

I was simply showing that Morse Code use in the US military continued for
decades beyond 1952. You may denigrate the USN and USCG as not being
"big-time", but they are.

...which you didn't prove since TTY was the
major traffic carrier (by far) for all military branches a half century
ago.

How do we *know* that except for your say-so, Len?

Most of all: *WHY* is that supposed FACT of any importance to amateur radio
*today*?

Subject: Designed And Built By PROFESSIONALS....
From: (William)
Date: 11/6/2004 6:56 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(Steve Robeson K4YZ) wrote in message
...
Subject: Designed And Built By PROFESSIONALS....
From: (William)
Date: 11/5/2004 11:16 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Dat tree.

Along with some mental health counselling, I could find you a decent
speech pathologist.

Don't disgrace the Marine Corps on their birthday.

How could I?

Steve, K4YZ

By being yourselves.

You mean by being honest and unwilling to tolerate chronic liars like you
and your scumbag mentor...???

OK!

Steve, K4YZ

In article ,
(William) writes:

(Steve Robeson K4YZ) wrote in message
...
Subject: Designed And Built By PROFESSIONALS....
From: (William)
Date: 11/5/2004 11:16 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Dat tree.

Along with some mental health counselling, I could find you a decent
speech pathologist.

Don't disgrace the Marine Corps on their birthday.

How could I?

Steve, K4YZ

By being yourselves.

He can't be. Himself.

The USMC had its "birthday" by itself. Without "Steve."

The USMC rejected "Steve." Medical discharge. Out.

"Steve" is no longer involved in the USMC!

Sunnuvagun!

LHA / WMD

In article ,
(William) writes:

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

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

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message
...
Subject: Designed And Built By PROFESSIONALS....
From: (William)
Date: 10/31/2004 7:53 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Dave Heil wrote in message
...
Len Over 21 wrote:

There's no reasoning with emotional belief systems...such as
the
PCTA's insistence that all who come after must jump through
the
same hoops they had to when younger.

You have a point. There is no reasoning with emotional belief
systems.
Take a guy who believes that those tested in amateur radio are
"jumping
through hoops" or that the testing elements given today are the
same
as
those in years past. How would you deal with such a guy?

True enough. The Volunteer Examiners are giving Farnsworth exams
rather than the FCC/Part 97 specified Morse Code exams.

There is no such thing as a "Farnsworth exam".

Volunteer examiners will tell you otherwise.

"Steve" says he's a VE and he's OK. :-)

And supposedly being a VE, you should know that.

Whatever "Steve" does is OK. Under "Steve Rulez."

The FCC is required to ensure that all exams and exam materials
used in
the conduct of exams on their behalf are appropriate.

The FCC is required to ensure that what they enforce on Howard Stern
is also enforced on Oprah.

According to "Steve," the FCC pays a lot of attention to what a bunch
of radio hobbyists do in the service of their country...

In reality there is a difference story...but the fantasylanders don't
want to tarnish the patina of their embellishments.

I said before the restructuring and I'll say it again, "What I fear
most about restructuring is a lack of enforcement, and what I fear
most about maintaining the status quo is a lack of enforcement."

Amateur Radio is now in it's 30th year of a lack of enforcement.

Actually, longer. CB (on HF) became legal 46 years ago...NO
code test then to get on HF, not even a single test to take.

After a few years the "licensure" (token callsign on completion
of application) was removed.

To the best of my knowledge,

Well there you go. You're basing your opinion upon your own limited
knowledge.

True enough. But, "Steve" has LICENSURE and is "fully authorized"
to operate (radiating RF) within the boundaries of amateur radio
regulations. That's enough to make him imagine anything that he
wants is real, legal, and the Absolute Truth. [I still say it is all
due
to some post-traumatic stress problem, perhaps from those "seven
hostile actions"]

not a single exam in service today has been
identified by the FCC as being inappropriate or not in confomance
with
FCC
requirements, nor has the FCC ever directed the removal from service
of
any
Morse Code exam as unacceptable.

Nor would they. It is Morse Code that is specified in Part 97.
You're going to have to try a little harder to unseat my informed
opinion.

The FCC still hasn't fully qualified its own definition of
International
Morse Code in Part 97, Title 47 C.F.R. Neither do they fully
and unambiguously define telegraphy "word rate."

However, "Steve" imagines he is still Boss NCO of the unit and
gives Orders as if everyone else were the recruits in the "corps."
As if...

Steve, K4YZ

Yeh, sure. Whatever.

Opus' Mayor Bill (the Cat) has the last word..."Pbthththth..." :-)



Steve has an incredibly uninformed knowledge bank wrt Volunteer
Examining. Luckily for the ARS, he is busy being a volunteer for
numerous other organizations.

His "bank" has no interest. Come to think of it, I'm not much
"interested" in that "knowledge." :-)

Good thing because you won't find much. His bank not even FDIC
insured.

Bankrupt.

Alan Greenspan can't regulate him. :-)


Careful, "Steve" is going to "show you his 'citations' at Dayton!"
[I think his singular citation is swingting...as the saying goes]

Steve Puffy Flightsuit will not be able to verify the pedigree of his
medal collection at Dayton or any other American city.

Who knows...maybe he has a championship caliber collection?

That Spanish American War service medal looks nice.

Must have had lots of "hostile action" on San Juan Hill.

I'm still curious as to "Steve's" citations for those 'seven hostile
actions' he claimed he had.

Mere claims. Then there is reality, which has passed him by.

What? Just "claims?" Oh, my!

Tsk. The desert around Barstow, CA, is kinda "hostile."

Or the acknowledgement that DoD
really does run MARS and does so OUTSIDE the ham bands.

Oh, my. Now there is a diffy cult one to validate. Hi!

Not to worry. Some ARRL propagandist (maybe even Pres. Sumner
hisself) will exonerate him somehow. :-)

Or "Steve's" power (as a licensured health professional) to pick
up a phone and have just anyone "picked up" by the authorities.

Dat boy be well connected. He one powerful mamma jamma. Hoodo dat
voodooo?

"Voodoo?" I know he tries to "pin" lots of things on others.

I'm still waiting for the "authorities" to come pick me up after that
awesome, powerfull single phone-call by a "health professional."
So far its only been the USPS, FedEx, and United Parcel Service.
:-)

That's just up in the top 3 of dozens of his claims. Ho hum.



Claims. Mere claims. No validation.

"Validation?" He no need no steenking validation!

He say. That be all dat's necessary.

All that makes Steve Robeson a ....

Whoa! Don't say it!

That will start another special personal-insult thread by his high
holiness!

Actually, it did...sad to say.

In article ,
(William) writes:

(Steve Robeson K4YZ) wrote in message
...
Subject: Designed And Built By PROFESSIONALS....
From: (William)
Date: 11/5/2004 11:16 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Dat tree.

Along with some mental health counselling, I could find you a decent
speech pathologist.

Tell it to Kelly. Bwha-ha-ha-hi-hi!

Don't disgrace the Marine Corps on their birthday.

How could I?

You could be yourselves.

NONE of those "selves" are IN the USMC.

None of him is INVOLVED!

USMC didn't want him no more.

In fact, MARS was STARTED by the U.S. Army. The USAF was
next to join. The USN (and by default the USMC) joined MARS
LAST. Tsk.

Must have been a very long clean-up of those "hostile actions?"

"Steve" says "MARS IS amateur radio!" Hi hi and a ho ho.

DoD say they run it. Tsk. "Steve" try to argue with da gubmint?

Must be. Maybe he "see" da gubmint at Dayton? :-)

In article ,
(William) writes:

(N2EY) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Len Over 21) writes:

In article ,

(N2EY) writes:

We've already seen how you react to others who have served our country in
both military and nonmilitary government service.

Right...for making lots of brags and claims and implied "combat
experience" as in "seven hostile actions." :-)

Mostly just for daring to disagree with you.

Oh Bull-****, N2EY!

I DARE to agree with Len on a topic, any topic.

He can't do that. He is superior because of his federally-tested
high rate of morsemanship. Superiors do NOT condescend to
agree with lowly inferiors. :-)

Disagreeing with him is PCTA SOP; requires no effort whatsoever. Be a
Maverick like John McCain and take an itsy bitsy chance for -once- in
your life.

John McCain served in the USN, flying in combat.

Jimmie got as far as looking up Bear bombers in some book.

Jimmie knew Soviet air tactics like the back of your hand. He
saw the film "Dr. Strangelove: etc." and that makes him an
"expert" on SAC, TAC, Manny, Moe, and Jack. :-)


Rest of your bile snipped.

Well, that bile has to go somewhere. Better here than polluting
some PA community. :-)

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:

We've already seen how you react to others who have served our country in
both military and nonmilitary government service.

Right...for making lots of brags and claims and implied "combat
experience" as in "seven hostile actions." :-)

Or those who were "in Vietnam" yet can't be specific about what
they did or where.

Can't be or won't be, Leonard? Fact is, I did a tour in Viet Nam in the
USAF, 1970-1971. You made insulting remarks about it. I can Google
some up for you if you like.

Or those who "served the country" by being a minor civilian sort for a
defense contractor on a USN aircraft carrier. [I tend to dismiss
the claims of "taking photographs for naval intelligence" as having
any importance]

When does a defense contractors work aboard a USN aircraft carrier
become a "minor civilian sort". You say it all when you add the
parenthetical material. You seem to have difficulty making a statement
about someone's work or military service without insulting them. This
has long been your method.

"Dave" wants his State experiences enobled as wonderful radio
acts for the nation or something.

When was that ever claimed by me?

By the way, Dave is my name. It needs no quotes. "William's" name
isn't William.

State Department just doesn't
have the size or scope to compete with the U.S. military commo
facilities.

....or it could just be that needs of the Department of State aren't the
same as those of the U.S. military.

The DSN has taken over the day-to-day task for that
and the U.S. Army Signal Corps has long served State for the
vital sensitive communications means (which "Dave" will
immediately argue since he is most sensitive to any sort of
negativism to "Dave").

Dave will argue because there are no facts to support your silly claim.
The U.S. Army Signal Corps not only hasn't "long served State", it plays
absolutely no role in providing the U.S. Department of State with
communications. Once again, you make a statement of supposed fact with
the truth omitted. Do you ever get anything correct?

Ooooo...I've "insulted" a member of the USMC? Horrors!

Yes, I was unaware that the USMC is hero of the U.S. military and
the savior of all wars and is therefore ALLOWED (perhaps
encouraged) to insult and demean all other U.S. military service
branch veterans. See cute little Yiddish pejoratives such as "Putz"
(which means 'penis head').

Steve has never insulted my Air Force service. You have. Brian Burke
has. I get the feeling that Steve's pet name for you has nothing to do
with the fact that you served in the Army. He insults you, not the
Army.
You aren't the Army.

Tsk. I am "guilty" of an inter-service faux pas according to your
veteranism (or veterinarianism or vegetarianism) as a military
veteran yourself. I was unaware that standing retreat (a military
ceremony at sundown) honoring 23 members of my military
battalion was somehow "dishonoring them" (according to the
medically-discharged USMC veteran). Mea culpa.

You weren't insulted for standing retreat. You were insulted for trying
to associate their deaths with your service. The two were not connected
except that you later served in the same unit in a different place. Your
attempt backfired in much the same way as your "Sphincter post", the one
in which you describe how someone feels in battle. The only problem
was, you were never in battle.

You've neglected to "correct" me on many other things that
involved communications that I've experienced since 1956...
except some brief mentions on SURPLUS equipment of WW2
era radio. You don't know SINCGARS or the IHFR families
which are the mainstay of small-unit operations in today's
military...IHFR involves HF spectrum communications and the
present-day PRC-104 is part of that IHFR effort since 1986.

That's all nice. Thanks for yet another irrelevant restatement of your
knowledge of SINCGARS, IHFR and small unit military communications. I
never served in a small unit nor do I need SINCGARS or IHFR in my
amateur radio operations. Come to think of it, I never needed them in
my Department of State communications.

Show us your heroism and wonderful deeds that makes YOU so
superior you can denigrate those of us who DID serve in the military.

Where have I "denigrated" anyone's military or other government service?

Myself and Brian Burke by implication if not directly. Further,
you've supported or condoned other PCTAs for personally insulting
the both of us. All that has been in public view here.

You're long on emotion and short on facts, Len. There are any number of
things taking place in the world on which you've not commented. By your
logic, you must support or condone them.

Dave K8MN

William wrote:

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


What we got is an "interpretation" by the FCC that Farnsworth spacing
"is okay for VECs to use in testing." Not in any Part 97 and never even
left the Commission (except to the supreme court of the league).

Yep. Sumbuddy said it was OK.

You should certainly understand that concept, "William". It mirrors
your amateur radio experience in Somalia.

Dave K8MN

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article ,
PAMNO (N2EY) writes:

In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes:

In article ,
(William) writes:

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

(N2EY) writes:

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

N2EY wrote:

In article ,

(Len Over 21) writes:

In article , Robert Casey
writes:

"Greenlee punch or Nibbler?"

Such relevant questions.

From two nonbuilders...

Kiss my yes, Jimmie boy.

My hometown is where the Greenlee company IS and I've even been
in that part of Greenlee and SEEN those punches being made...in
1949.

You've actually SEEN them being made? I'm really impressed. I guess
that makes you something of an expert. I've actually sold them but I've
never SEEN them being made.

[that part of Greenlee is just two large rooms of punch-making
and grinding machinery, very very small compared to the Main
Building they are located in] For that matter, I've also seen part of
the GC Electronics operations when their wire-stripper line was still a
part of it...and known two who worked there (in 1956). [GC is now a
merge with Walsco and most of their 'products' are produced by others
on an OEM basis]

Did you snaffle any Q-Dope?

I have a small collection of Greenlee punches which have been
gathering rust and dust.

That's believable. Apparently, you don't actually build anything. I'll
bet you've SEEN people build things.


That means BUYING chassis somewhere...or
snaffling ("swipe") them.

You mean steal? I don't do that.

Heavens, no! That would be a SIN and you'd still be mumbling
Hail Marys...

Don't you consider stealing to be wrong, Leonard?


The excuse to be given will be that he "bought it at a flea market"
or some hamvention for "a very low price." :-)

How is that an "excuse", Len? It's the truth, in some cases. In others,
chassis, panels and other parts were recycled from other sources.

Riiiighhhht.

What does your response indicate, Len?

For example, the transmitter section is built in the case from a BC-191/375
tuning unit, with a new panel made from a piece of sheet aluminum. Total cost
about $2.

Riiiiighhhht. :-)

What does your response indicate, Len?

another recounting of the ADA tale snipped


Dave K8MN

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article ,

(N2EY) writes:

We've already seen how you react to others who have served our country in
both military and nonmilitary government service.

Right...for making lots of brags and claims and implied "combat
experience" as in "seven hostile actions." :-)

Or those who were "in Vietnam" yet can't be specific about what
they did or where.

Can't be or won't be, Leonard? Fact is, I did a tour in Viet Nam in the
USAF, 1970-1971.

Wow! A whole year! See any "action?" :-)

What EXACTLY did you do? (you never mentioned that in detail)

You made insulting remarks about it.

I ran out of medals and pretty certificates (suitable for framing).

Or those who "served the country" by being a minor civilian sort for a
defense contractor on a USN aircraft carrier. [I tend to dismiss
the claims of "taking photographs for naval intelligence" as having
any importance]

When does a defense contractors work aboard a USN aircraft carrier
become a "minor civilian sort". You say it all when you add the
parenthetical material. You seem to have difficulty making a statement
about someone's work or military service without insulting them. This
has long been your method.

Tsk. I'm just copying the style of the PCTA...all "heroes" if from
their glowing self-styled words. Any NCTA never "really" served
their country.

"Dave" wants his State experiences enobled as wonderful radio
acts for the nation or something.

When was that ever claimed by me?

It's in between just about every line you write... :-)

By the way, Dave is my name. It needs no quotes. "William's" name
isn't William.

I thought you were "K8MN." Apparently that is the formal name
that other PCTA use in referring to you.

"Dave" is your legal signature? It isn't "David?" Tsk. My bad.

State Department just doesn't
have the size or scope to compete with the U.S. military commo
facilities.

...or it could just be that needs of the Department of State aren't the
same as those of the U.S. military.

The DSN has taken over the day-to-day task for that
and the U.S. Army Signal Corps has long served State for the
vital sensitive communications means (which "Dave" will
immediately argue since he is most sensitive to any sort of
negativism to "Dave").

Dave will argue because there are no facts to support your silly claim.
The U.S. Army Signal Corps not only hasn't "long served State", it plays
absolutely no role in providing the U.S. Department of State with
communications.

Tsk. For years the U.S. Army Signal Corps has been assigned
the task of providing communications for the President of the
United States. When the "hotline" was operational (I don't know
if it still is), it was manned by Signal Corps personnel at the
Washington end. [public references are available for that
information]

The DSN is now the main communications means for all government
communications, military and civilian alike. The DSN is maintained
by military personnel, usually by USA or USAF units depending on
the territory.

Once again, you make a statement of supposed fact with
the truth omitted. Do you ever get anything correct?

Well, "Dave without the quote marks," last time I looked, the
President of the United States is rather OVER the State
Department. [see any government organization chart]

The "hotline' (continuous TTY circuit, Washington to Moscow)
served for at least three decades, all that time run at this end
of the circuit by U.S. Army Signal Corps people. [one can see
a couple photos of that in David Kahn's "The Codebreakers,"
NYT best-seller listing in the early 1960s]


You weren't insulted for standing retreat. You were insulted for trying
to associate their deaths with your service.

Tsk. "Steve" deliberately made that "dishonor" statement (false)
and you must back it up because you want to personally insult
me. Rather SOP in here among the rezidentura PCTA extras. :-)


The only problem was, you were never in battle.

Almost true. :-) Was shot AT just once on TDY to the Land of
Morning Calm. Never saw who did the shooting.

In retrospect, I think it might have been a PCTA or some USMC
rebel. :-)

Perhaps BOTH? :-)


That's all nice. Thanks for yet another irrelevant restatement of your
knowledge of SINCGARS, IHFR and small unit military communications. I
never served in a small unit nor do I need SINCGARS or IHFR in my
amateur radio operations. Come to think of it, I never needed them in
my Department of State communications.

What DID you use? AN/FRC-93? :-)

Tsk. Department of State communications isn't REALLY relevant
to U.S. amateur radio, is it?

Hello, do I hear some hypocrisy from a PCTA critic? :-)


You're long on emotion and short on facts, Len.

Tsk. You are big on wind-bagedness and get your "corrections"
WRONG.

Sunnuvagun!

There are any number of
things taking place in the world on which you've not commented.

Tsk. Those aren't relevant to U.S. amateur radio POLICY, are they?

I mean, such as U.S. Presidential politics...the space business...
choo-choo trains...professional medical practice...oh, a whole host
of things mentioned by the PCTAs who are "involved" in something
or other...but not discussing amateur radio policy matters. :-)

Radio is radio. It obeys physical laws, not the laws of mankind.

The FCC is tasked to regulate all of U.S. civil radio. Oddly enough,
the FCC is most "involved" in U.S. amateur radio even though NO
commissioner or staffer is required to hold any amateur radio license.

Sunnuvagun!

In article ,
(N2EY) writes:

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

(N2EY) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Len Over 21) writes:

In article ,
PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:

We've already seen how you react to others who have served our country
in
both military and nonmilitary government service.

Right...for making lots of brags and claims and implied "combat
experience" as in "seven hostile actions." :-)

Mostly just for daring to disagree with you.

Oh Bull-****, N2EY!

I DARE to agree with Len on a topic, any topic.

Yes, "William" 'dares' to agree with Len on any and every topic.

I agree with Len on some topics (like BPL being A Bad Thing) and
disagree on others.

You "agree?!?" Har!

He can't do that.

Can't do what? Agree with Len? That's already been disproved.

Tsk. Jimmie be without fault. He be "correcting" others right
away.

The slightest exception to the rule will prove him "right." :-)


John McCain served in the USN, flying in combat.

Jimmie got as far as looking up Bear bombers in some book.

Naw, just the Internet. Found out they weren't a threat to Len when he
was in Japan.

Sunuvagun!

Tsk. You seem to be saying there were NO Soviet bombers in
range of Japan in the 1950s?

Jimmie be expert on TAC? He be called on the carpet then.

We wind up with carpet TACs.


Jimmie knew Soviet air tactics like the back of your hand.

Where did you get that idea, Len?

It just came to me. Some messages "just write themselves!"

He
saw the film "Dr. Strangelove: etc." and that makes him an
"expert" on SAC, TAC, Manny, Moe, and Jack. :-)

Where have I ever claimed to be an expert on anything?

Tsk. You are superior to all who come close to disagreeing with you
with all those "corrections." :-)


Rest of your bile snipped.

Can't deal with the facts, I see.

Well, that bile has to go somewhere. Better here than polluting
some PA community. :-)

The bile on rrap comes from the three-way Steve/Len/Wiliam whizzing
contest. You all must get something from it, because you sure put a
lot of effort into it.

Tsk. Rev. Jim is readying another Sermon on the Antenna Mount?

Rev. Jim "puts a lot of effort" into making SURE that all those
he thinks need "corrections" get those "corrections!" QED.

btw, Len, a little googling turned up the fun fact that Steve began
calling you a putz back on August 6, 1999 - if not earlier. Of course
you had previously made a habit of calling him "nursie" and other
names, and referring to him by the wrong gender.

Tsk. You are still being Judge and Jury via Google, aintfcha?

:-)

When Rev. Jim runs out of arguments in the present, he MUST
resort to Googling to "prove" something.

Jimmie thinks he can "win" some past arguments by repeating and
rehashing OLD ones? Of course...if for no other reason that Jimmie
Must Be Right in his own mind. Subject itself be damned, concentrate
on defaming the opponent in order to "win." Tsk.

Perhaps you need to try some new techniques if you want him to stop.

Ah...you must have run out of damp hankies to slap folk on the
wrist as self-styled moderator! :-)

But I don't think you want him to stop.

Doesn't really matter to me. There will ALWAYS be some yo-yo
out there who can't argue a subject for squat and does the personal
insult thing in order to "win an argument." :-) Those are all easy
marks. Plenty of them. :-)

So...have you found a new job yet to resume your "professional"
career?"

Dave Heil wrote in message ...
William wrote:

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


What we got is an "interpretation" by the FCC that Farnsworth spacing
"is okay for VECs to use in testing." Not in any Part 97 and never even
left the Commission (except to the supreme court of the league).

Yep. Sumbuddy said it was OK.

You should certainly understand that concept, "William". It mirrors
your amateur radio experience in Somalia.

Dave K8MN

Wow! Farnsworth testing is like Somalia.

William wrote:

Dave Heil wrote in message ...
William wrote:

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


What we got is an "interpretation" by the FCC that Farnsworth spacing
"is okay for VECs to use in testing." Not in any Part 97 and never even
left the Commission (except to the supreme court of the league).

Yep. Sumbuddy said it was OK.

You should certainly understand that concept, "William". It mirrors
your amateur radio experience in Somalia.

Dave K8MN

Wow! Farnsworth testing is like Somalia.

The words were there right in front of you and still you managed to get
it wrong.

Farnsworth spacing used in morse testing - Somebody said it was okay.

Your amateur radio operation from Somalia - Somebody said it was okay.

Dave K8MN

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article ,

(N2EY) writes:

We've already seen how you react to others who have served our country in
both military and nonmilitary government service.

Right...for making lots of brags and claims and implied "combat
experience" as in "seven hostile actions." :-)

Or those who were "in Vietnam" yet can't be specific about what
they did or where.

Can't be or won't be, Leonard? Fact is, I did a tour in Viet Nam in the
USAF, 1970-1971.

Wow! A whole year! See any "action?" :-)

Yeah, a whole year. Care to figure out how much longer than John Kerry
I was there?

What EXACTLY did you do? (you never mentioned that in detail)

(no, I never mentioned that in detail. enjoy the suspense.)

You made insulting remarks about it.

I ran out of medals and pretty certificates (suitable for framing).

You no more issue medals and certificates for Viet Nam service than you
participate in amateur radio.

Or those who "served the country" by being a minor civilian sort for a
defense contractor on a USN aircraft carrier. [I tend to dismiss
the claims of "taking photographs for naval intelligence" as having
any importance]

When does a defense contractors work aboard a USN aircraft carrier
become a "minor civilian sort". You say it all when you add the
parenthetical material. You seem to have difficulty making a statement
about someone's work or military service without insulting them. This
has long been your method.

Tsk. I'm just copying the style of the PCTA...all "heroes" if from
their glowing self-styled words. Any NCTA never "really" served
their country.

You're actually just copying your own style.

"Dave" wants his State experiences enobled as wonderful radio
acts for the nation or something.

When was that ever claimed by me?

It's in between just about every line you write... :-)

You should get together with your fan base, "William". Both of you
spend your time reading what isn't written instead of what is written.

By the way, Dave is my name. It needs no quotes. "William's" name
isn't William.

I thought you were "K8MN." Apparently that is the formal name
that other PCTA use in referring to you.

We radio amateurs are issued callsigns. We often use them instead of
names. You may forgiven your ignorance since you're an outsider.

"Dave" is your legal signature? It isn't "David?" Tsk. My bad.

Is "Len" your legal signature? You recently told someone to call you
"Len"...or ".

State Department just doesn't
have the size or scope to compete with the U.S. military commo
facilities.

...or it could just be that needs of the Department of State aren't the
same as those of the U.S. military.

The DSN has taken over the day-to-day task for that
and the U.S. Army Signal Corps has long served State for the
vital sensitive communications means (which "Dave" will
immediately argue since he is most sensitive to any sort of
negativism to "Dave").

Dave will argue because there are no facts to support your silly claim.
The U.S. Army Signal Corps not only hasn't "long served State", it plays
absolutely no role in providing the U.S. Department of State with
communications.

Tsk. For years the U.S. Army Signal Corps has been assigned
the task of providing communications for the President of the
United States.

That's wonderful news, Leonard. I'd have never known anything about
WHCA if not for your insider information. Haw! The Department of State
is not involved with POTUS communications. My involvement in the '97
Clinton-Yeltsin summit in Helsinki dealt with obtaining frequency
clearances, obtaining permission to use repeater sites, obtaining a
mini-switch and the requested number of telephone lines for the site
hotel and obtaining a number of cellular telephones for the President's
team.

When the "hotline" was operational (I don't know
if it still is), it was manned by Signal Corps personnel at the
Washington end. [public references are available for that
information]

And this information, relates to Department of State communications in
what particular way?

The DSN is now the main communications means for all government
communications, military and civilian alike.

....or so you apparently think.

The DSN is maintained
by military personnel, usually by USA or USAF units depending on
the territory.

In all my days in Department of State communications, I never once dealt
with military personnel as a part of normal operations. That was true
whether the circuit was radio or leased line.

Once again, you make a statement of supposed fact with
the truth omitted. Do you ever get anything correct?

Well, "Dave without the quote marks," last time I looked, the
President of the United States is rather OVER the State
Department. [see any government organization chart]

I see you've come up with a simplistic view of things. That might have
led you to make some very incorrect assumptions. The President is OVER
the CIA. The military does not run CIA communications. The President
is OVER the Department of Energy. The military does not run Department
of Energy communications. You're batting zip.

The "hotline' (continuous TTY circuit, Washington to Moscow)
served for at least three decades, all that time run at this end
of the circuit by U.S. Army Signal Corps people. [one can see
a couple photos of that in David Kahn's "The Codebreakers,"
NYT best-seller listing in the early 1960s]

....and this relates to the Department of State in what way? The fact
is, you're completely incorrect. You don't know what you're talking
about.
If it is possible, you know less about Department of State
communications than you know of amateur radio.

You weren't insulted for standing retreat. You were insulted for trying
to associate their deaths with your service.

Tsk. "Steve" deliberately made that "dishonor" statement (false)
and you must back it up because you want to personally insult
me. Rather SOP in here among the rezidentura PCTA extras. :-)

Yes, Steve made a statement. If I'm not mistaken, he viewed your
attempt to associate yourself with those who died in battle as
dishonoring them.

I note that you snipped my remarks about your classici Sphincter post,
the one in which you described what it feels like to be in battle. My
remakrs ended with the line below:

The only problem was, you were never in battle.

Almost true. :-) Was shot AT just once on TDY to the Land of
Morning Calm. Never saw who did the shooting.

You were shot at once while on TDY and that became the basis for the
Sphincter Post?

In retrospect, I think it might have been a PCTA or some USMC
rebel. :-)

Or one of your Army colleagues who tired of hearing the ADA lectures.
:-)

Perhaps BOTH? :-)

Why? Were you shooting off your mouth about morse testing back then?

That's all nice. Thanks for yet another irrelevant restatement of your
knowledge of SINCGARS, IHFR and small unit military communications. I
never served in a small unit nor do I need SINCGARS or IHFR in my
amateur radio operations. Come to think of it, I never needed them in
my Department of State communications.

What DID you use? AN/FRC-93? :-)

Keep guessing.

Tsk. Department of State communications isn't REALLY relevant
to U.S. amateur radio, is it?

It is at least as relevant as your experience at ADA--a lot more recent
too. Then again, you brought up my State Department service.

Hello, do I hear some hypocrisy from a PCTA critic? :-)

None at all. You, Leonard Anderson, introduced my State Department
communications experience. You crowed about how the military controls
Department of State communications. You were flat wrong.

You're long on emotion and short on facts, Len.

Tsk. You are big on wind-bagedness and get your "corrections"
WRONG.

"Bagedness"? This newsgroup has never seen your equal as a
pontificating windbag. Trouble is, much of your information is just
wrong.

Sunnuvagun!

There are any number of
things taking place in the world on which you've not commented.

Tsk. Those aren't relevant to U.S. amateur radio POLICY, are they?

Ohhhhhhhh. So when you commented to Jim about supporting or condoning
something Steve might have written, you meant just those things directly
relating to amateur radio policy? Is that correct?


Radio is radio. It obeys physical laws, not the laws of mankind.

The FCC is tasked to regulate all of U.S. civil radio.

That has to be a tough assignment since, as you said, radio obeys only
physical laws, not the laws of mankind. Just how does the Commission
manage to make radio behave?

Oddly enough,
the FCC is most "involved" in U.S. amateur radio even though NO
commissioner or staffer is required to hold any amateur radio license.

It isn't odd at all, Len. Let me paint your a pictu

FCC: Regulates radio. Paid to do so. Involved in amateur radio.

Radio Amateurs: Tested and licensed to use radio under Part 97 of
FCC regs. Taking payment for providing radio
service is prohibited. Involved in amateur radio.

Len Anderson: Does not regulate amateur radio. Not licensed under Part
97 of FCC rules. Not involved in amateur radio.

There.

Dave K8MN

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article ,
(N2EY) writes:

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

(N2EY) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Len Over 21) writes:

In article ,
PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:

Jimmie got as far as looking up Bear bombers in some book.

Naw, just the Internet. Found out they weren't a threat to Len when he
was in Japan.

Sunuvagun!

Tsk. You seem to be saying there were NO Soviet bombers in
range of Japan in the 1950s?

That's wrong (again), Leonard. He is saying that Soviet "Bear" bombers
could not have been a threat to you during your military service in
Japan, despite what you indicated here. As with your well known
"Sphincter Post", it leads some of us to question your character.


The bile on rrap comes from the three-way Steve/Len/Wiliam whizzing
contest. You all must get something from it, because you sure put a
lot of effort into it.

Tsk. Rev. Jim is readying another Sermon on the Antenna Mount?

Jim states a fact. Don't you have an acceptable response?

Rev. Jim "puts a lot of effort" into making SURE that all those
he thinks need "corrections" get those "corrections!" QED.

What has that to do with your whizzing contest?

btw, Len, a little googling turned up the fun fact that Steve began
calling you a putz back on August 6, 1999 - if not earlier. Of course
you had previously made a habit of calling him "nursie" and other
names, and referring to him by the wrong gender.

Tsk. You are still being Judge and Jury via Google, aintfcha?

:-)

Jim is? Not at all, Leonard. Your archived words and the dates on
which you posted them are archived. It is proof of your actions. In
this case, things didn't happen the way you claim they did.

When Rev. Jim runs out of arguments in the present, he MUST
resort to Googling to "prove" something.

....and it looks like the Google archives of newsgroup posts did just
that. The archive seems to prove that version of events is not correct.

Jimmie thinks he can "win" some past arguments by repeating and
rehashing OLD ones?

When you start the "Jimmie" stuff, it is obvious that he has zapped you
good. You made a recent statement and issued it as a factual account of
something which took place. The trouble is, the Google archives say
otherwise.

Of course...if for no other reason that Jimmie
Must Be Right in his own mind. Subject itself be damned, concentrate
on defaming the opponent in order to "win." Tsk.

Diversion on your part. If you didn't want to be batted around on this
issue, you could have refrained from, "Well, HE started it".

Perhaps you need to try some new techniques if you want him to stop.

Ah...you must have run out of damp hankies to slap folk on the
wrist as self-styled moderator! :-)

When did it become Jim's job to regulate Steve?

But I don't think you want him to stop.

Doesn't really matter to me. There will ALWAYS be some yo-yo
out there who can't argue a subject for squat and does the personal
insult thing in order to "win an argument." :-) Those are alleasy
marks. Plenty of them. :-)

If anyone would know, you'd know.

You don't want anyone else doing what you do.

Dave K8MN

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Are you gonna bring back your classic "sphincter post", Leonard?

March 28, 2000, right here on rrap.

Fun fact about that one:

The thread "Morse Monleys Are The Worst" (which contains that classic) was
started by "Meg A Hertz" who preferred to be anonymous. Discussion went on
between various parties but "Lenof21" (the screen name Len was using at the
time) did not get involved until the classic. IOW, it wasn't a response to
someone's posting to him.

Most interesting, of course, is the fact that Len tears into and insults the
*military radio communications* experiences of another, without provocation of
any kind.

Unless....perhaps "Meg A Hertz" and "Lenof21" are one and the same?

73 de Jim, N2EY

Subject: Designed And Built By PROFESSIONALS....
From: Dave Heil
Date: 11/8/2004 11:12 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article ,
(N2EY) writes:

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

(N2EY) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Len Over 21) writes:

In article ,
PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:

Jimmie got as far as looking up Bear bombers in some book.

Naw, just the Internet. Found out they weren't a threat to Len when he
was in Japan.

Sunuvagun!

Tsk. You seem to be saying there were NO Soviet bombers in
range of Japan in the 1950s?

That's wrong (again), Leonard. He is saying that Soviet "Bear" bombers
could not have been a threat to you during your military service in
Japan, despite what you indicated here. As with your well known
"Sphincter Post", it leads some of us to question your character.

"...some of us"...?!?!

How about everyone except Brain? Vippy finally showed enough common sense
to bow out when the facts were laid before him IRT Lennie the Lame.

Jim is? Not at all, Leonard. Your archived words and the dates on
which you posted them are archived. It is proof of your actions. In
this case, things didn't happen the way you claim they did.

Jimmie thinks he can "win" some past arguments by repeating and
rehashing OLD ones?

When you start the "Jimmie" stuff, it is obvious that he has zapped you
good. You made a recent statement and issued it as a factual account of
something which took place. The trouble is, the Google archives say
otherwise.

Brain and Lennie have a hard time not tripping over their own stories.
Pretty danged stupid, if you ask me, considering all thye have to do is spend a
couple minutes paging back through

Of course...if for no other reason that Jimmie
Must Be Right in his own mind. Subject itself be damned, concentrate
on defaming the opponent in order to "win." Tsk.

Diversion on your part. If you didn't want to be batted around on this
issue, you could have refrained from, "Well, HE started it".

Since when did Jim "defame" anyone?

But I don't think you want him to stop.

Doesn't really matter to me. There will ALWAYS be some yo-yo
out there who can't argue a subject for squat and does the personal
insult thing in order to "win an argument." :-) Those are alleasy
marks. Plenty of them. :-)

If anyone would know, you'd know.

You don't want anyone else doing what you do.

Slam dunk.

73

Steve, K4YZ