Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

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?

Did you throw away YOUR medals, too?

Not my medals. Not my ribbons.

When did you become a senator or run for the Presidency?

Mr. Kerry and I have something in common: Neither of us are President
of the United States. Can you figure out how much longer I was in Viet
Nam than John Kerry?

[must have missed that part on the news...]

I'm sure there's a lot you miss.

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

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

Yawn...snore

Why do you feign sleep after asking?

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.

I wasn't claiming to "issue medals and certificates for Viet Nam
service (or Vietnam service)." Tsk. You are connecting unrelated
sentences. :-)

One of those sentences was directly under the other. You wrote both of
them. If they aren't connected, what can the second one mean? :-) :-)

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.

I can but I haven't. :-) I'm just copying the style of the PCTA...
but without barfing their puke about morse code being the
ultimate skill of an amateur.

Are you sure you're not some kid, playing with his Mom's computer?

"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.

Tsk. YOU are the one trying to relate unrelated sentences. :-)

You wrote them and placed one above the other. If they are truly
unconnected, there is no reason to have written the second of them. It
would have been totally out of place.

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.

Oh, thank you, thank you, Holy Father!

No need for that, Leonard. My friends call me Dave or K8MN. You may
call me Mr. Heil.

Are we supposed to kiss your ring, too?

If you did, I'd think you a little light in your loafers.

"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 ".

Holy Father, I can't possibly tell a noble radio god what to do!

Well? Can't you answer the question? You did tell someone to call you
Len, didn't you? Is that your legal signature?

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.

That's a growing problem in the Republican adminstration...they
get the wrong information on the communications?

I was there for the Clinton administration. They didn't change the
policy on communications.

Gosh, several Presidents of the U.S. of A. (both parties) have
USED that "hotline" at various times to communicate directly
with the USSR in Moscow. Guess that was "improper" or
something, huh? Those fool adminstrations should have gone
through "proper diplomatic procedures" through the State?

Let's see, you've told us that the hotline was manned by military
personnel. State Department personnel are not military personnel. The
White House is not part of the Department of State. I see some gaps in
your story.

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.

So, you were "involved" but, at the same time, "not involved" with
POTUS (President of the United States) communications.

Arranging the things described was strictly administrative in function.
I handled no Presidential message traffic. POTUS travels with his own
comm center.

You are both ways. Anyplace else that is called "hypocrisy."

Any place else and you'd have to have your ducks in a row, old fellow.

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?

You tell us...(as you surely will, being the "expert" Man from State).

I've told you.

Last I looked the President had the ULTIMATE U.S. say on direct
diplomatic communications, and general stuff like that. You say
that isn't so? That State operates "independently?" Tsk.

I've said no such thing. The words I wrote contained everything
necessary for the average man to understand.

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

...or so you apparently think.

No, I don't "think" so. The U.S. government SAYS so.

But, whathehell, a "seven hostile actions" veteran in here, another
PCTA extra, said that "MARS IS amateur radio!" DoD says
the DoD defines who is what on MARS.

I'm not discussing MARS operation, Len. The Department of State doesn't
handle MARS traffic.

PCTA extras are "naturally" the most "correct" ones, right?

What? Did you ever handle message traffic for the U.S. Department of
State?

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.

Riiiiight. NEVER had any military officer at any embassy, correct?

Ohhhhhhh. I see where you're going. You think that if some Colonel
from the Defense Attache Office comes to the comm center and sez, "Any
message traffic for me?", that constitutes military involvement in State
Department communications? Is that where this is headed?

There were NEVER any USMC guards at embassies (who had their
own radios)?

Sure, did you think the MSG's worked in the comm center? They had
radios, but not their own. They had my radios and used them on my net.
They never handled any State Department message traffic. Then again, in
most embassies, every employee had hand-held radios.

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.

Riiiiight..."Dave" says there is NO such thing as "chain of command."

No, "William"....er, Len. I didn't say any such thing.

If "Dave" says so, it IS so. Amen.

Dave told it like it is. If you choose to retain your previous beliefs,
your ignorance is your responsibility.

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.

Well, heck and darn, neither does the U.S. government (except for
Department of State) "know what it is talking about" since they
released the information on that "hotline" and many other things.

You keep trying to make the assertion that Department of State
communications takes place through military channels. T'ain't so.

If it is possible, you know less about Department of State
communications than you know of amateur radio.

Riiiight...both are highly classified, sensitive, SECRET things.

Much of the information on the State Department is classified. I can't
tell you. None of the information on amateur radio is classified. In
the end, it makes no difference. Your ignorance of both is large.

Or, as in the "Dave" definition "Ayes Only" classification ("correct"
only if all others agree or say "Aye" to whatever "Dave" says).

One can only speculate as to what that is supposed to mean. Is that
what you call humor, Len?

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.

Who is this "Steve?"

Ask "William".

Someone using that name keeps shouting that all who disagree
with him are "penis heads" in Yiddish and saying they are
"pathological liars!" [tsk...he's never been a qualified pathologist
or psychiatric expert]

All who disagree with him? I don't see it like that at all.

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:

Your remarks NEVER end. They keep on dredging up old, old
messages, you fighting them all over and over again. Hopefully
you might "win" one if you keep barfing up old defeats?

Your "Sphincter Post" describes what a man feels under battle. I can
respost it if your memory is hazy. The problem is, the one hostile (you
assume) shot aside, you weren't in battle. It can't be simpler than
that.
You fabricated out of whole cloth.

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

No. Tsk. You've completely IGNORED what I've said about morse
testing from my experience.

You don't have any morse experience to speak of and yes, I've completely
ignored it.

Prior to being assigned at ACAN station ADA...

Here we go again...

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. YOU don't know, do you? Or, you want to imply some kind of
"secrecy" and therefore "don't want to say." :-)

There are things which I can't tell you. There are things which I
choose not to tell you.

Amateurs may know the AN/FRC-93 as the commercial version of
the Collins Radio KWM-2. :-) [Collins made two versions of that
one, full crystal set for the commercial version - entire HF range -
and a limited one for the amateur market]

Uhhhhhhh, the commercial version of the KWM-2 was the KWM-2. Do you
refer to the military version?

After the KWM-2 came the KWM-2A. It has the second crystal deck, though
one can't describe it as covering the entire HF range. Parts of the
entire HF range could be covered in 200 KHz segments if you had the
crystal packs. I have one sitting right here.

According to the Army's Center for Military History, the FRC-93 had
important work in Vietnam to do all those MARS contacts with the
'States (the other 50, not the Department). That's from the Signal
Corps History of Vietnam operations.

That's all swell, Len. It has nothing to do with the Department of
State communications; nothing to do with amateur radio and nothing to do
with my tour in Viet Nam. I did use some Collins KWM-2A units in Viet
Nam and never had a thing to do with an FRC-93. The units I used bore
the KWM-2A label and engravings. I wasn't in the Signal Corps nor was I
in the Army. I never handled communications for the President of the
United States in Viet Nam, even though we recognized that he had--how do
you put it?--the ULTIMATE say. If he wanted us to do anything
differently, he wasn't talking.


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.

I did? You mentioned your illustrious "foreign service" a long time
ago...along with great tales of experiences in Africa at the cashew
nut center of Guinea-Bisseau. Something about "doing good things
with CW in the '80s where CW got through when nothing else did"
(or words to that effect). :-)

Yes, you did. I'm not talking about "a long time ago". I'm talking
about just recently. Neither your manufactured quote nor words to that
effect were used by me.

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

Well then, you should bring out your "fact" that the rest of the
U.S. government and all sorts of journalism media are "wrong."

I've not addressed the USG nor journalists. You, Len Anderson, are
wrong.

Show us the "truth" oh noble god of radio...set us straight and
we will all bow down and kiss your ring in appreciation at the next
Holy Service.

I've shown you. You can lead either end of a horse to water to see
which part drinks...

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?

Tsk, tsk, TSK. The FCC doesn't "make radio behave." It is supposed
to make the PEOPLE who use civil radios behave.

Then you'll want to edit your previous statement. Why'd you snip it?
Now THAT was humor.

Yup, you've got some kind of post-traumatic stress disorder going
since you can't get simple civics lessons straight. Poor "Dave."

Tsk, tsk. We haven't been having a civics lesson, Len. If you like, I
can help you with your spelling after school.

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.

Bad "painting" "Dave." Technique is awful. Your paintings will
not hang in any gallery...but "Dave" should not hang in a gallery,
rather stuffed and mounted in an unnatural history museum as
a species of Humus Morsemanus Ridiculum.

According to "Dave" rules, the FCC is NOT INVOLVED because they
aren't required to license themselves in the amateur radio service!

You'd better go look at that picture, Len. I wrote that the FCC IS
involved.

Since the FCC is "not involved," that means they are paid for doing
illegal work! Call the Supreme Court! Throw the rascals out! :-)

You look silly when you spout off after not having read something
correctly. You're a regular Emily Litella.

"Dave" is a licensed amateur, "involved!"

That's correct.

I'm just a lowly pro in
electronics engineering,

You're right.

... a citizen of the USA, entitled to Rights
under the Constitution of the United States of America.

That's also right.

"Dave"
says that is insufficient, "no involvement!"

It certainly isn't sufficient to make you knowledgeable about how
amateur radio should be regulated. It isn't sufficient to make you a
licensed radio amateur. The fact is, you aren't involved in amateur
radio.

"Dave" recently said "I show NO interest in radio" because I didn't
get an amateur license FIRST!" Tsk. I should have gone through
the ranks like He did...so that I could be both "interested" and
"involved!" My bad. :-)

You cannot at this time, do as I did. You could have earlier but you
didn't. You could have met the current requirements for amateur radio
licensing but you didn't. You don't have quite enough interest to
actually get off your duff and take an exam for any class license.
You are not involved.

Dirty rotten scoundrels, those professionals! Don't know that they
should respect and adore all those amateur morsemen!

It reads like a bunch of sour grapes on your part, Len. You don't have
to adore or respect any radio amateur. You aren't in the game.

Dave K8MN