Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#91
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
wrote
Here's my "salute" to you, Jimmie Noserve, on this upcoming Memorial Day: middle finger upraised Looks like Len chased down a large helping of anchovies with a bad bottle of Chardonnay! dit dit Pardonez mois, cher Hans, but none of that Frog food here. Was inlagd sill (pickled herring to you dootschy types) on knackebrod (hardtack, white rye to be exact), and some cool Tuborg. Plus some skarp ost (sharp cheese, cultured from California happy cows' milk) on the side. Viking snack food. Be careful what you say lest Aliasing Sevie "tells your wife..." BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
#93
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#94
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() bb wrote: K4YZ wrote: wrote: From: "bb" on Sun,May 22 2005 8:29 am The Reluctant Marine! Figures. Even reluctant people serve. So how did Jim serve in other way? Tsk. Stebie was GROUND crew. Steve was an Avionics Technician. MOS's 6612, 6616 and 6323. (And B-Billet 8981...) Care to figure out from what MOS's (among others...) the USMC get's it's Enlisted Aircrews, Lennie? Are those "box-kicking" MOS's? You're welcome to do the homework and find out. Espeically the 8981 MOS. You don't "give" me anything. My service is not up for your approval. Nor mine. I went where I was assigned. Anyone can see where at: Both of your service's ARE "up for approval"...You put it there. You certainly take liberties with "approving" mine. Nope. You've continually denigrated my service and Len's with REMF and box-kicker descriptions. I never "denigrated" your service, Brain. I said your Amateur Radio activities from Somalia were not legal. I've also told you to not lump me into the same pile with you and Lennie. I give you more credit for having been in a forward area, and have acknowledged that. Your mentor's only exposure to any "incomming fire" was required rifle range time. last I checked RF-burns and paper cuts don't count for much. Steve, K4YZ |
#95
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
wrote:
From: on Mon,May 23 2005 3:57 am "who can't argue a subject for squat and does the personal insult thing in order to "win an argument." " Oh, oh! Reverend Jim issued a Sermon On The Antenna Mount! :-) No, Len, I just quoted your own words back to you. They fit your actions best. Not only that, the poor guy is still furious over NOT "winning" a newsgroup argument THREE YEARS AGO! :-) You're the one shouting and carrying on at great length, Len. Not me. Not only that, the "argument" wasn't even about RADIO! So what? Most of your posts here aren't really about "RADIO", either. Hello? This newsgroup is about AMATEUR RADIO POLICY. Military and international socio-political politics are another group. Then why do you go off on so many tangents, Len? You seem to be afraid to have a civil discussion about amateur radio policy here. "RADIO" includes all of the HF portion of the EM spectrum. That's where the major international communications networks WERE in the 1950s. I was part of that - for three years - as a volunteer in the United States Army...operating HF transmitters for an Army station. You and about 700 other military personnel.... A "small" station, only the third largest in the worldwide Army net at the time, just 36 transmitters ranging from 1 to 15 KW in 1953 (43, up to 40 KW in 1956) and none of them using OOK CW modes. And all of them paid for by US taxpayers - most of whom were civilians. At least one transmitter was built by a vacuum-cleaner company. OBTW - most of that equipment was designed and built by civilians... That station was located in Japan, specifically a few miles outside of Tokyo. 24/7 ops attached directly to the Far East Command Headquarters, then in Tokyo...continuous links to Seoul, Pusan, Okinawa, Manila, Saigon, Anchorage, Seattle, Hawaii, San Francisco plus local HF nets all throughout the Kanto Plain of Honshu Island. That's nice, Len. You've told that story here many, many, many, many times. I've looked at your faded photos on that website. What in the world does it have to do with amateur radio policy today? In early 1953 there was still a state of War between the United Nations and North Korea although a truce was imminent (that would settle into a "permanent" Truce in July, 1953). I had voluntarily enlisted in the Army on 13 March 1952...when there was still active warfare in Korea. My assignment to the Far East was ordered by the Army and not subject to my approval or disapproval...one goes where assigned or one goes where the penitentiary is (after a court martial). So? Army duty required a continuous practice on soldiering skills regardless of one's military occupation specialty. In addition to that, there were continuing updates on emergency and contingency plans plus operational tests of same. Note the location of Japan to the easternmost parts of the USSR, then an adversary in the "Cold War." The USSR then possessed the atomic bomb. I know. What's your point? Since I was in the Signal Corps and working on/with radio communications, my unit was NOT briefed on the overall military capabilities of the Soviet Union to the detail outlined in the Janes books. We had one simple directive in the case of military conflict: "Close with, and destroy the enemy." We were all reminded of that in the regular training sessions of Provisional Infantry Platoon ("PIP") practice, along with "you are soldiers FIRST and signalmen second." We were NOT given any of the movie-style practice on identifying Soviet aircraft from little models or silouettes...nor were we instructed in operation of anti-aircraft defense (there were other units for that purpose). Did you *ever* see any Soviet aircraft when you were in Japan, Len? While all that was going on, station ADA kept on 24/7 operations at a rate of nearly a quarter million messages a month through its facilities...thousands of miles from the United States of America. 700+ personnel, too. Was FEC Hq "in danger" from its "rear-area location?" Depends on what you "4F" types want to call "danger" from your safe locations in the states. I was never classified "4F", Len. I still have my draft card, btw. Now, did I make a "mistake" on calling out Soviet "Bear" bomber types in 1953? Yes. At last! Len actually admits a mistake! In the 49 years from 1953 to 2002 (date of your target "example" message) I've seen a LOT of statistics and information on Soviet military power. If I needed to be SPECIFIC, then I would go look up the EXACT thing. But you didn't. In fact it was you who brought up the Bear bombers in the first place - back in 2002 and again a day or two ago. Not me. What you did was to understate the distance from where you were to the Soviet Union, and you overstated the threat by describing it as being about an hour's flight by a bomber that wasn't even in production while you were there. If you want to play that game, Len, how about this: You grew up at a time when the enemies of the USA were thousands of miles away, and could not directly attack CONUS. Even in WW2, the direct threat to the USA was some sabotage, U-boats sinking ships off the east coast, and some Japanese submarine gunfire and incendiary balloons off the west coast. I grew up at a time when the enemies of the USA could directly attack CONUS with nuclear missiles (both landbased and submarine launched) in a matter of minutes. There was no defense against such missiles - in fact, they could be here before an effective alarm could be sounded. I remember the Cuban Missile Crisis even though I was a child at the time. I knew what "the bomb" was and what it could do - and how quick it could get to Philadelphia from Havana. Yes, we've all lived under that threat for many decades now. But you didn't grow up with it - I did. But...Soviet aircraft was NOT in my "line of work" in 1953 to 1956. You still messed up on the distances and the threat. Radio was. HF radio...and VHF, UHF, and microwave radio. RADIO, Jimmie. RADIOS that must operate 24/7, "getting the message through." I made NO "mistakes" there. Did you design or build those radios, Len? Did you pay for them? Or were you part of a large, well-equipped, well-trained team specifically set up to do the job, and provided with everything you needed to do it right? I think the latter. You want to sit safe at your computer and scoff and scoff and show how "expert" you are in military and political matters... BULL****, Len. That's pure and adulterated BULL****. There's just no other word for it. You made several mistakes about Soviet aircraft and distances from the USSR to Japan. I pointed out those mistakes. You have a hissyfit whenever I point out a mistake of yours, which is quite often. I don't claim to be an expert at anything. You got your facts wrong and I pointed out the error. You are not some sort of sacred elder whom everyone must never contradict. and NEVER having served in any government post or military in REAL SERVICE for your country. What constitutes "REAL SERVICE", Len? Is it only uniformed military service? Or can someone serve in other ways? How about law enforcement? Firefighters? Emergency medical personnel? Or don't they count? Besides, I've seen how you address those who *do* have military and government service, but who dare to disagree with you. Their service means nothing to you - in fact, you make fun of it, question their veracity, insult them in every way you can imagine. For example, there's your classic "sphincter post" and the unforgettable "feldwebel post". So it's logical to conclude that no matter what military or government service I had, you'd still behave towards me the way you do, if I dared to disagree with you. It's what you *do*, Len. We've all seen it, many times. You want to "tell me how it is" in the military without wearing a uniform, taking any induction oath, or being shipped out of the country to some foreign base. No, I don't. I simply point out some of your mistakes. You, OTOH, want to tell everyone how things you have no experience with should be. Like the age limit for an amateur radio license, even though you've never been a parent. Jimmie boy, there's NO indication that you EVER worked IN radio...or in aerospace... So what? No matter what experience I had, it's logical to conclude that you'd behave the same way towards me. and you want to be an "expert guru type" on that. I don't claim to be an expert on anything, Len. You've not worked AT the FCC, you've not worked AT the ARRL, you are NOT in the judiciary, Neither have you! yet you try to speak as if you were all of that. Not me, Len. That's your game. All you seem to have is long "tenure" in amateur radio NEWSGROUP MESSAGING. Hours and hours and hours of that. More than I have. Wrong again, Len. You were on rrap before me. Your postings exceed mine in number and volume. I make one little post and you go off like a fire hydrant of words. On Memorial Day you WILL be remembered. We veterans all remember the anti-military civilians who like to spit on military people one way or another, SAFE in their un- touched communities expressing contempt for anyone who has served via the Internet. You served via the internet? ;-) Here's a fact, Len: I'm not one of those you describe, no matter how you try to spin it. Not in any way. Here's another fact, Len: Your military service does not mean your comments here or anywhere else are somehow sacred from challenge or correction of factual and/or logical mistakes. You make a lot of talk about freedom of speech but when someone like me actually exercises that freedom, you tell them to shut up. Perhaps I should repost your classic "feldwebel post". Here's what you told K8MN (who has both military *and* government service, in *radio*): Quoting Len Anderson: "shut the hell up, you little USMC feldwebel" (end quote) Amateur radio is a hobby activity carried on for the purpose of personal enjoyment. That's part of it. But not all of it. There's also the public service aspect. Why don't you mention that aspect? It is, in part, a technological endeavor involving the laws of physics, regulated by the government because ALL radio works by those same physical laws. Gee whiz, Len, tell us something we *don't* know.... Amateur radio is NOT a fifth branch of the armed forces. Nobody claimed it was. Ham operators are NOT "serving their country" any more than stamp collectors or bird watchers or other hobbyists. That's simply not true, Len. You keep ignoring the public service performed by radio amateurs. What constitutes "REAL SERVICE", Len? Is it only uniformed military service? Or can someone serve in other ways? How about law enforcement? Firefighters? Emergency medical personnel? Or don't they count? Try to keep from translating your amateur radio license form into a DD-214. Len, "you do not now have, nor did you ever, nor will you ever have the authority, expertise, training, experience or qualifications to give me an order or to imply you are giving me an order." Those are your words, Len, but they fit perfectly in this situation! Here's my "salute" to you, Jimmie Noserve, on this upcoming Memorial Day: middle finger upraised Gee, Len, that's really impressive. Do you think that sort of behavior somehow makes you "right" and me "wrong"? It sure seems you think that way. |
#96
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() wrote: wrote: Hello? This newsgroup is about AMATEUR RADIO POLICY. Military and international socio-political politics are another group. Then why do you go off on so many tangents, Len? You seem to be afraid to have a civil discussion about amateur radio policy here. In order to have a "civil discussion" on Amateur Radio policy, Lennie would have to have some sort of experience from which to make informed opinions or suggestions from. No one doubts his "inside the black box" knowledge, however he knows almost "diddly squat" about Amatuer Radio practice or policy. His rants on "Morse Code TESTING" are emotionally based and bear no relevence to current Amateur employment of the mode. In other words, "He Just Doesn't Get It". 73 Steve, K4YZ |
#97
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Dave Heil wrote: bb wrote: wrote: "who can't argue a subject for squat and does the personal insult thing in order to "win an argument." " Len, this proves he hangs on your every word. Hi! Doesn't look that way to me. It would appear that Len has been hung by his very words. Dave K8MN How's Six Meters? Heard any out of band Frenchmen? |
#98
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() wrote: From: on Mon,May 23 2005 3:57 am "who can't argue a subject for squat and does the personal insult thing in order to "win an argument." " Oh, oh! Reverend Jim issued a Sermon On The Antenna Mount! :-) Not only that, the poor guy is still furious over NOT "winning" a newsgroup argument THREE YEARS AGO! :-) Not only that, the "argument" wasn't even about RADIO! Hello? This newsgroup is about AMATEUR RADIO POLICY. Military and international socio-political politics are another group. "RADIO" includes all of the HF portion of the EM spectrum. That's where the major international communications networks WERE in the 1950s. I was part of that - for three years - as a volunteer in the United States Army...operating HF transmitters for an Army station. In Jim's circles, there is no "volunteering." You get bad grades and your waiver goes away. Then the Draftsman comes knocking. |
#99
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
bb wrote:
Dave Heil wrote: bb wrote: wrote: "who can't argue a subject for squat and does the personal insult thing in order to "win an argument." " Len, this proves he hangs on your every word. Hi! Doesn't look that way to me. It would appear that Len has been hung by his very words. Dave K8MN How's Six Meters? Heard any out of band Frenchmen? Why would you like to know? Are you operational on 6m? Dave K8MN |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
N9OGL to bust 2 Meter band Plan With "Information Bulletin" Broadcasts | Policy | |||
The FAQ (Well, Question 1, at least) | Homebrew | |||
The FAQ (Well, Question 1, at least) | General | |||
FCC: Broadband Power Line Systems | Policy | |||
Ohio/Penn DX Bulletin #651 | Dx |