N9OGL wrote:

Even if your reply had included attributions, Todd, it would still be
difficult to read.

Under the Communication Act of 1934 the FCC has juridiction over
interstate and foreign commerce via wire or radio, Intrastate
communications is the juridiction of the state.

That's simply wrong if you're discussing radio.

First off you F--king C--K S--KER, what I was refering to was the FCC
pushing the burden of proof onto people in the courts, The old saying
you innocent into proven guilty is not true to the FCC...

Your archived posts pretty well do you in. It looks like you went from
"innocent into proven guilty" all by your lonesome. Your own archived
words show you to be guilty of breaking any number of FCC regs.
...is more like
your guilty until you prove yourself innocent, In some instance the FCC
has already made their decision before all the facts are gathered.

Doesn't look that happened with regard to issuing you a broadcast
license.


No dumb ass, the point is the FCC should serve the public's interest a
lot better then they do, instead the serve the special interest more
The special interest is only there to serve one person...themselves.

Wow! That's quite enlightening. The special interests are in reality
just one person?

The point of 10 was, and although it's screwed up i'll explain. The
question of Interstate Communications is not defined, simple for this
reason. the courts and congress believe that ALL RADIO transmissions,
despite their power, antenna height, and frequency is interstate by
nature. This stems from a federal court case dealing with a radio
station from the 1930's and later to CB cases in the late 50's on to
present time.

Interstate communications regulation was defined long ago. Your lack of
understanding doesn't mean that there is no definition.


The problem with interference of the aircraft band is although there
has been cases of interference there is really no "proof" that it
happened.

Really? And you know this how?

K4YZ: "(I am kinda hoping K2ASP might "drop a dime" on some old friends
in Gettysburg to start the mill moving on Toddie now!)"

GO FO IT!!! I DARE YOU!!! but you better know what your getting
youself into....

A debate with a mental midget? A lawsuit from a guy who doesn't seem to
have enough loot to pay an attorney's retainer? What would he or Phil be
getting into, Todd? All that's needed for proof of your misdeeds and
lack of character is copies of your archived posts and perhaps some
copies of letters you've written to public figures. If you keep acting
like a mad man, you could end up getting your amateur radio license
yanked. If it happens, you can blame yourself.

Dave K8MN

That's simply wrong if you're discussing radio

I suggest you read Section 151 of the communication Act of 1934.


=A7 151. Purposes of chapter; Federal Communications Commission created

For the purpose of regulating interstate and foreign commerce in
communication by wire and radio so as to make available, so far as
possible, to all the people of the United States, without
discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin,
or sex, a rapid, efficient, Nation-wide, and world-wide wire and radio
communication service with adequate facilities at reasonable charges,
for the purpose of the national defense, for the purpose of promoting
safety of life and property through the use of wire and radio
communications, and for the purpose of securing a more effective
execution of this policy by centralizing authority heretofore granted
by law to several agencies and by granting additional authority with
respect to interstate and foreign commerce in wire and radio
communication, there is created a commission to be known as the
"Federal Communications Commission", which shall be constituted as
hereinafter provided, and which shall execute and enforce the
provisions of this chapter.

As well as 152 of the communication act

=A7 152. Application of chapter

(a) The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all interstate and
foreign communication by wire or radio and all interstate and foreign
transmission of energy by radio, which originates and/or is received
within the United States, and to all persons engaged within the United
States in such communication or such transmission of energy by radio,
and to the licensing and regulating of all radio stations as
hereinafter provided; but it shall not apply to persons engaged in wire
or radio communication or transmission in the Canal Zone, or to wire or
radio communication or transmission wholly within the Canal Zone. The
provisions of this chapter shall apply with respect to cable service,
to all persons engaged within the United States in providing such
service, and to the facilities of cable operators which relate to such
service, as provided in subchapter V-A.


or how about 153 of the communication act


=A7 153. Definitions

(22) Interstate communication
The term "interstate communication" or "interstate
transmission" means communication or transmission
(A) from any State, Territory, or possession of the United States
(other than the Canal Zone), or the District of Columbia, to any other
State, Territory, or possession of the United States (other than the
Canal Zone), or the District of Columbia,
(B) from or to the United States to or from the Canal Zone, insofar as
such communication or transmission takes place within the United
States, or
(C) between points within the United States but through a foreign
country; but shall not, with respect to the provisions of subchapter II
of this chapter (other than section 223 of this title), include wire or
radio communication between points in the same State, Territory, or
possession of the United States, or the District of Columbia, through
any place outside thereof, if such communication is regulated by a
State commission.

do I need to go on.......

Your archived posts pretty well do you in. It looks like you went from

"innocent into proven guilty" all by your lonesome. Your own archived
words show you to be guilty of breaking any number of FCC regs.
This post dickhead had nothing to do with me...it had to do with the
behavior of the FCC and pirate radio operators and their "alleged
interference" with boadcast Stations. No where in that post did I state
anything about me, but Dumb asses like yourself read into stuff that
isn't there.


A debate with a mental midget? A lawsuit from a guy who doesn't seem
to
have enough loot to pay an attorney's retainer? What would he or Phil
be
getting into, Todd? All that's needed for proof of your misdeeds and
lack of character is copies of your archived posts and perhaps some
copies of letters you've written to public figures. If you keep acting

like a mad man, you could end up getting your amateur radio license
yanked. If it happens, you can blame yourself.

Dave K8MN


Like I said Davy GO FOR IT!!!!! I DARE YOU.


Todd O'Dochartaigh N9OGL

N9OGL wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:

(Attributions inserted for sanity)

That's simply wrong if you're discussing radio

I suggest you read Section 151 of the communication Act of 1934.

§ 151. Purposes of chapter; Federal Communications Commission created

As well as 152 of the communication act

§ 152. Application of chapter

or how about 153 of the communication act

§ 153. Definitions

do I need to go on.......

You didn't need to insert them to begin with. I've read 'em. You've
read and misinterpreted them.

Your archived posts pretty well do you in. It looks like you went from "innocent into proven guilty" all by your lonesome. Your own archived
words show you to be guilty of breaking any number of FCC regs.

This post dickhead had nothing to do with me...

Sure it does, Todd Not-Very-Swift. It is all about you.

it had to do with the
behavior of the FCC and pirate radio operators and their "alleged
interference" with boadcast Stations. No where in that post did I state
anything about me, but Dumb asses like yourself read into stuff that
isn't there.

Wise up, Todd. I posted a number of your archived posts in two parts.
In a number of them, you admit to operating pirate radio and TV stations
which operate on self-assigned frequencies in excess of Part 15 power
levels (by a bunch). You confess to operating without a license in some
places and in others you profess that you'll go back to operating
without a license. You've admitted, publicly to being a scofflaw. I
didn't read anything which wasn't plainly stated by you.

A debate with a mental midget? A lawsuit from a guy who doesn't seem
to
have enough loot to pay an attorney's retainer? What would he or Phil
be
getting into, Todd? All that's needed for proof of your misdeeds and
lack of character is copies of your archived posts and perhaps some
copies of letters you've written to public figures. If you keep acting

like a mad man, you could end up getting your amateur radio license
yanked. If it happens, you can blame yourself.

Like I said Davy GO FOR IT!!!!! I DARE YOU.

Actually, you said, "Go Fo It". What is it that I'd be letting myself
in for, Toddkins?

Todd O'Dochartaigh N9OGL

Awwww! You've used that fictitious name again. Now you won't have to
ask "what ficticious name?". It is the one thing you've really
invented.

Dave K8MN

Dave Heil wrote:
N9OGL wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:

(Attributions inserted for sanity)

That's simply wrong if you're discussing radio

I suggest you read Section 151 of the communication Act of 1934.

=A7 151. Purposes of chapter; Federal Communications Commission
created

As well as 152 of the communication act

=A7 152. Application of chapter

or how about 153 of the communication act

=A7 153. Definitions

do I need to go on.......

You didn't need to insert them to begin with. I've read 'em. You've
read and misinterpreted them.

Your archived posts pretty well do you in. It looks like you
went from "innocent into proven guilty" all by your lonesome. Your
own archived
words show you to be guilty of breaking any number of FCC regs.

This post dickhead had nothing to do with me...

Sure it does, Todd Not-Very-Swift. It is all about you.

it had to do with the
behavior of the FCC and pirate radio operators and their "alleged
interference" with boadcast Stations. No where in that post did I
state
anything about me, but Dumb asses like yourself read into stuff
that
isn't there.

Wise up, Todd. I posted a number of your archived posts in two
parts.
In a number of them, you admit to operating pirate radio and TV
stations
which operate on self-assigned frequencies in excess of Part 15 power
levels (by a bunch). You confess to operating without a license in
some
places and in others you profess that you'll go back to operating
without a license. You've admitted, publicly to being a scofflaw. I
didn't read anything which wasn't plainly stated by you.

WELL YOU ****ING BITCH IF THEY WOULD OF CONSIDER MY APPLICATION AND
WAIVER LIKE THEIR SUPPOSE TOO THEN I WOULDN'T OF DID WHAT I DID, WHY
SHOULD I CONTINUE TO SPEND THE TIME AND MONEY YOU ****ING ASSHOLE ON
APPLYING FOR A LICENSE???



A debate with a mental midget? A lawsuit from a guy who doesn't
seem
to
have enough loot to pay an attorney's retainer? What would he or
Phil
be
getting into, Todd? All that's needed for proof of your misdeeds
and
lack of character is copies of your archived posts and perhaps some
copies of letters you've written to public figures. If you keep
acting

like a mad man, you could end up getting your amateur radio license
yanked. If it happens, you can blame yourself.

Like I said Davy GO FOR IT!!!!! I DARE YOU.

Actually, you said, "Go Fo It". What is it that I'd be letting
myself
in for, Toddkins?

Todd O'Dochartaigh N9OGL

Awwww! You've used that fictitious name again. Now you won't have
to
ask "what ficticious name?". It is the one thing you've really
invented.
IT'S NOT FICTICIOUS YOU ****ING SLUT



Dave K8MN

N9OGL wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:
N9OGL wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:

(Attributions inserted for sanity)

That's simply wrong if you're discussing radio

I suggest you read Section 151 of the communication Act of 1934.

=A7 151. Purposes of chapter; Federal Communications Commission
created

As well as 152 of the communication act

=A7 152. Application of chapter

or how about 153 of the communication act

=A7 153. Definitions

do I need to go on.......

You didn't need to insert them to begin with. I've read 'em.
You've
read and misinterpreted them.

Your archived posts pretty well do you in. It looks like you
went from "innocent into proven guilty" all by your lonesome.
Your
own archived
words show you to be guilty of breaking any number of FCC regs.

This post dickhead had nothing to do with me...

Sure it does, Todd Not-Very-Swift. It is all about you.

it had to do with the
behavior of the FCC and pirate radio operators and their "alleged
interference" with boadcast Stations. No where in that post did I
state
anything about me, but Dumb asses like yourself read into stuff
that
isn't there.

Wise up, Todd. I posted a number of your archived posts in two
parts.
In a number of them, you admit to operating pirate radio and TV
stations
which operate on self-assigned frequencies in excess of Part 15
power
levels (by a bunch). You confess to operating without a license in
some
places and in others you profess that you'll go back to operating
without a license. You've admitted, publicly to being a scofflaw.
I
didn't read anything which wasn't plainly stated by you.

WELL YOU ####ING ##### IF THEY WOULD OF CONSIDER MY APPLICATION AND
WAIVER LIKE THEIR SUPPOSE TOO THEN I WOULDN'T OF DID WHAT I DID, WHY
SHOULD I CONTINUE TO SPEND THE TIME AND MONEY YOU ####ING ###HOLE ON
APPLYING FOR A LICENSE???

The point is you SHOULDN'T, Toddie!

You're not adequately qualified to be a broadcast licensee.

Period.

A debate with a mental midget? A lawsuit from a guy who doesn't
seem
to
have enough loot to pay an attorney's retainer? What would he or
Phil
be
getting into, Todd? All that's needed for proof of your misdeeds
and
lack of character is copies of your archived posts and perhaps
some
copies of letters you've written to public figures. If you keep
acting

like a mad man, you could end up getting your amateur radio
license
yanked. If it happens, you can blame yourself.

Like I said Davy GO FOR IT!!!!! I DARE YOU.

Actually, you said, "Go Fo It". What is it that I'd be letting
myself
in for, Toddkins?

Todd O'Dochartaigh N9OGL

Awwww! You've used that fictitious name again. Now you won't have
to
ask "what ficticious name?". It is the one thing you've really
invented.

IT'S NOT FICTICIOUS YOU ####ING ####.

Sure it is. Either that, or you've lied on your FCC license.

One or the other is wrong. Now which is it?

Steve, K4YZ

The point is you SHOULDN'T, Toddie!
You're not adequately qualified to be a broadcast licensee.
Period.

Prove it you freaking moron.


Sure it is. Either that, or you've lied on your FCC license.
One or the other is wrong. Now which is it?


NO it isn't you dumbass, O'Dochartaigh and Daugherty are the same
thing...so **** YOU!!!!!

N9OGL wrote:

Without attributes again... very inconsiderate, Todd.

The point is you SHOULDN'T, Toddie!
You're not adequately qualified to be a broadcast licensee.
Period.

Prove it you freaking moron.

I don't have to, Todd.

YOU prove it EVERY time you post...EVERY time.

Sure it is. Either that, or you've lied on your FCC license.
One or the other is wrong. Now which is it?


NO it isn't you dumbass, O'Dochartaigh and Daugherty are the same
thing...so #### YOU!!!!!

No, they are NOT the same thing.

Your legal name is either O'Dochartaigh or it's Daugherty.

Steve, K4YZ

N9OGL wrote:
The point is you SHOULDN'T, Toddie!
You're not adequately qualified to be a broadcast licensee.
Period.


Prove it you freaking moron.


Sure it is. Either that, or you've lied on your FCC license.
One or the other is wrong. Now which is it?


NO it isn't you dumbass, O'Dochartaigh and Daugherty are the same
thing...


No they are not. On your FCC license, as any legal document, it must be
spelled like your legal name, so if it isn't spelled correctly on your
FCC license, then your license isn't valid because it doesn't contain
your legal signature and that means every time you get on the air, you
are illegal.

so **** YOU!!!!!

There goes the Jr. Highschool language again. Grow up toddyboy!

N9OGL wrote:

The point is you SHOULDN'T, Toddie!
You're not adequately qualified to be a broadcast licensee.
Period.


Prove it you freaking moron.


Sure it is. Either that, or you've lied on your FCC license.
One or the other is wrong. Now which is it?


NO it isn't you dumbass, O'Dochartaigh and Daugherty are the same
thing...


No it isn't toddyboy, the way it is spelled on your birth certificate is
your legal name, unless you have had it legally changed, the other
spelling is not. Now if you have the incorrect spelling on your FCC
Amateur Radio License, which is a legal document, then your Amateur
Radio License isn't valid and you are operating illegally when you
transmit using that license.

so **** YOU!!!!!

Grow up toddyboy!!!!!

N9OGL wrote:

WELL YOU ####ING ##### IF THEY WOULD OF CONSIDER MY APPLICATION AND
WAIVER LIKE THEIR SUPPOSE TOO THEN I WOULDN'T OF DID WHAT I DID, WHY
SHOULD I CONTINUE TO SPEND THE TIME AND MONEY YOU %%%%ING &&&HOLE ON
APPLYING FOR A LICENSE???

By the way, Todd...It's illegal to do another illegal act just
because you don't like the way things are going. There is absolutely no
legal justification for going ahead and breaking the law to do what you
were told "no" for in the first place.

IT'S NOT FICTICIOUS YOU ****ING &&&&.

To quote Mr. Spock..."Nothing unreal exists..."

It's just NOT your legal name. It's an alias. An "AKA" to law
enforcement. It, like your claim to operating a broadcast station,
both on TV, FM-broadcast, and Amateur Radio frequencies, has no legal
standing.

Personally, I think you're just acting silly.

Steve, K4YZ