wrote:
From: "bb" on Wed,May 25 2005 3:35 pm

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.

Tsk, the "knocking" stopped about 32 years ago. Jimmie has NO
worry. He could sit back in comfortable safety in PA and read
all about the military and international realpolitik without
once having participated in anything.

How many Soviet aircraft did you see when you were in Japan in the
1950s, Len?

He became a Virtual
military expert without once being IN any branch or working in
any office of the Department of Defense.

I don't claim to be an expert in anything.

You've never been "IN" amateur radio, yet you want to tell us How It
Should Be.

Getting to the heart of the matter, Jimmie feels TERRIBLY "insulted"
when one doesn't like what Jimmie likes.

Not true. You're the one who calls people names, and tells them to shut
up
if they don't agree with you.

[he is regularly bringing up old, faded postings from Google as
if to continue to "do battle" on those topics forever and ever]

Gee, Len, you bring up even older and more faded stuff about defunct
ham radio magazines and your experiences of a half-century ago. Why
is it OK for you to rehash events of 20, 30, 50 years ago, but not
OK for others to remind you of the events of 2 or 3 years past?

Seems like a double standard on your part.


Jimmie wants NUMBERS? He is regularly giving some sort of
tabulation
on the "valid licenses" of radio amateurs in the USA.

No, I'm not. You're mistaken, Len. Wrong again.

The numbers I post here twice a month are those of current, unexpired
FCC amateur licenses held by individuals. That's stated in each post.
The word
valid is not used to describe them.

You've claimed that FCC doesn't use the word "expired" to describe
licenses in the grace period, but Part 97 shows that you're wrong on
that.

However, he
has not described the sorting program used or which download of the
FCC database used as a base of that tabulation. [slightly over
three quarters of a million records to process]

So? You've posted the numbers from hamdata.com without describing how
they are generated.

We are to accept
his NUMBERS as "correct" because Jimmie never makes mistakes. All
others, ESPECIALLY those challenging him, always "make mistakes."

That's just not true, Len.

Most folks would accept some website that regularly downloads the
huge FCC amateur database, sorts it, and presents gross totals.

Then why don't you accept the numbers I post?

Not Jimmie. He wants "massaged" NUMBERS, showing only the "valid"
licensees..."valid" in HIS viewpoint.

Nope.

The numbers I post come from a website that regularly downloads the
huge FCC amateur database, sorts it, and presents gross totals. All I
do is copy them and post them here.

No "massaging".

Jimmie needs MASSAGING
of those NUMBERS in order to "show us" something...and thus we get
the INTERPRETATIONS of those "valid" numbers.

How? The numbers are what they are.

I especially like his "reason" for maintaining the code test for
all amateurs having below-30-MHz operating privileges: "Morse
code is the SECOND-most popular mode on HF, therefore the code
test 'deserves' to remain!"

I'm glad you like it, Len. It's a really good, valid reason to keep a
test of basic Morse Code skill for an amateur radio license.

wrote:
From: on Thurs,May 26 2005 4:35 am

K4YZ wrote:
wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
wrote:
wrote:

Whether the discussion is "informed" or not isn't the issue,
Steve. My point was about Len's ability to have *civil*
(as in well-mannered) discussion with those who disagree
with him.

Point taken. You're quite right.

I've tried many times, but Len insists on responding to
my disagreement with direct insults, even though I didn't
insult him. Apparently he sees my disagreement as an insult.

Obviously.

Of course his insistance on using diminutives when you clearly
address him with at least the accepted social civility
demonstrates what we've been saying all along.

Think about why Len does all that.

Heh heh heh. It couldn't be because of Robeson calling me
penis head in Yiddish or now trying to level a charge of
"shame" on my military service record? :-)

Maybe. Trouble is, Len, you respond to everyone who disagrees with you
in the same way, whether they call you such names or not.

You and Steve have been insulting each other steadily for years now. It
would be interesting to go back in Google and see which of you started
that game. Of course, you won't do that.

But if I just call him Len, or Mr.
Anderson, his attempt to misdirect fails.

Sir James, you need not bow but you can quit trying to give
me the finger...! :-)

Where am I trying to give you anything, Len?

This does not mean letting his mistakes go unchallenged. Nor does
it mean not calling his bull**** what it is.

Ah...there it is...ANY disagreement with Sir James of Miccolis
is "bull****!" :-)

Nope. I just call your bull**** what it is.

No one doubts his "inside the black box" knowledge,

I do, Steve. Len talks a lot of nomenclature and buzzwords
but when it comes to actually solving practical radio problems
we don't see anything. His articles for ham radio (22 years
ago) were all basic theory, not practical projects.

That's "simply untrue," your most esteemed noble highness
Sir James of Miccolis. Tsk, tsk, tsk, you haven't read
beyond your ham publications! :-)

Sure I have - but that's not the point. When it comes to solving
practical
amateur radio problems, you don't have anything to show us.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm....Good point. And when I think back on
it, Lennie fought tooth-and-nail to get involved in a meaningful
discussion on microwave technology.

Tsk, tsk. Stebie has been told a MILLION times not to
exaggerate! :-)

Anybody can "discuss" with a little point-and-click research. I'm
talking about actually *doing* something, such as an actual project.

Tsk. Jimmie is invited to the Long Beach, CA, International
Microwave Symposium during the entire second week of June this
year. "Actual projects!" :-)

By whom, Len?

Len will tell you all about some piece of gear he worked on at some job
years ago. But ask him what he has recently built at home, on his own
time, with his own resources, and he's got nothing to show you.

WHY must Sir James "be shown?"

You don't have anything to show, do you, Len?

He'll go on and on about "some Extras" at the radio store who didn't
know much about the triple loop PLL system in his R-70 - 22+ years ago.
But in fact he didn't design or build the thing.

Tsk. Mention something just twice in here and Sir Jimmie puts
the label of "going on and on about it!" :-)

You've told the story many times, Len.

So, how many "projects" has Jimmie designed and built using
PLLs? Or DDSs?

How many Soviet aircraft did you see when you were in Japan in the
1950s, Len?

How many amateur radio receivers, transmitters or transmitters have you
designed and built, Len?

How many of your articles for ham radio magazine were for construction
projects?

How many "radios" has Jimmie designed/built at his work?
Especially those NOT done from kits...?

How many have you designed and built at home with your own resources,
Len?

Of couse ALL he has offered Amateur Radio are arguments, name
calling and the aforementioned articles in said defunct magazine.

That's "simply untrue," Pilot In Command Stebie...[search Google]

I have. It's true. You don't have anything practical to show us.

If Len were really interested in microwaves and amateur radio, he'd
have gotten a license years ago. The Tech only required 5 wpm code,
when it had a code test.

Tsk, tsk, tsk! Jimmie gonna have a fit now, I did it differently.

Yes, your fits are very different...

Was a supervisor of microwave radio relay terminals in 1954-1956
while in the Army, terminals operating at 1.8 GHz.

There you go, rehashing the past again.

Did you design and build the microwave equipment, or just install and
maintain it?

Did you teach yourself how to do the job, or work your way through
school, or did you learn on the taxpayer's tab?

Did you pay for any of the equipment or other resources, or was it all
provided free for your use to do the job?


Then I got a
First Class Radiotelephone (Commercial) Operator License (only
one exam) in 1956, entered the California aerospace industry first
working at Hughes Aircraft Company in El Segundo, CA, worked some
more at microwaves (up in X-Band region) as well as from DC on up
to microwaves. So far, there wasn't any need to learn morse code
or "pass any morse code test" to transmit.

And none of it was amateur radio.

Not even in 1960 when
I was working on Ka-Band microwave equipment (as well as UHF high
power sources).

Not ham radio either.

Class D CB was authorized in 1958 and that rather
ended any need for a "ham license" to use a voice transceiver.

On a few channels, using low-power type-accepted equipment.

Tsk. I've since transmitted from VLF on up to microwaves, in LF,
MF, HF, VHF, UHF on land, in the air, on the water, all without
having to pass any amateur radio license or pass any morse
code test! ["Sunnuvagun!"] All very LEGAL.

None of it amateur radio. Almost all of it on someone else's station
license, with someone else paying the way.

Well, Judge Sir James of the Noble Houses of CW decrees that I
shall NOT ever set foot in here without expressing some personal
desire of obtaining an amateur radio license!

Simply not true, Len. I've never told you nor anyone else here to shut
up. Nor have I ever said that a license is required to post here.

You, on the other hand, have told people here to shut up, go away, etc.

Tsk, tsk, Tsk, TSK...all I'm trying to do is argue against the
retention of the morse code test in federal regulations on U.S.
amateur radio.

Then why all of your commentary on other, nonrelated subjects, Len? You
go on and on about things completely unrelated to the Morse Code test.

Instead, I am called names (in Yiddish by non-
Yiddish speakers), accused of Sedition and Treason Against The
State,

Not by me!

and told that my opinions are "simply not true!"

Some of your statements here are not based on fact. Like the claim that

FCC doesn't use the word "expired" to describe licenses in the grace
period.

Not THOSE I doubt were his...

however he
knows almost "diddly squat" about Amatuer Radio practice or
policy.

Not the point.

It is when he's humiliating himself by making assinine assertions
that are obviously not rooted in fact.

So? Correct his mistakes without behaving the way he does. Or just
ignore him.

Tsk, tsk. Stebie CANNOT ignore anyone. He is emotionally
volatile and triggers off faster than a vial of nitroglycerine
in a blender. Stebie shouts and hollers and insults and even
speaks in tongues, defaming ANYONE disagreeing with him! :-)

Just like *you*, Len. I think you like it - you *want* others to behave
the way you do.

I won't do that, which seems to really tick you off.

Ah, but there is now Love and Harmony in the PCTA Extra Double
Standard bearers. Jimmie now condones Stebie's actions.

Not all of them. Where do you get that idea?

Judge Sir James, Night of the Noble Houses of CW, keep
defending the NEED for the morse code test because it is the
SECOND-most-popular mode on HF ham bands!

I will! It's a good, sound, valid reason for a test of basic skill. Not
the only reason by any means, though.

Be sure and spit on
any U.S. military veterans who don't love and cherish morse
code on Memorial Day.

I don't "spit on" any US military veterans, Len.

From: "K4YZ" on Fri 27 May 2005 06:02

wrote:
From: on Thurs,May 26 2005 4:35 am



I've restrained myself on a lot of my adjectives of choice,
Lennie, but that comment warrants the re-issuance of the title
"scumbag" upon your shouders.

You brazenly wordsmith yourself into familiarity with Soldiers who
died in combat before you were ever in the service, then claim victim
status as a "veteran" when it suits you for your own emotional
handwringing.

FYI, Lennie...Since your offering of a middle finger salute the
other day I've started collecting caffinated drinks...I'll have a very
special 'salute' for YOUR funeral...(Hint to Mrs Lennie...wear
Scotchguarded footwear that day...)

...the sun sets on the Tomb of the Unknown Solder as a solitary
figure in a patch-adorned flight suit slowly paces out his lonely
path of anger, J-38 in one hand, bayonetted USMC soldering iron
in the other. Pre-recorded marine marches softly fill the air,
interspersed with dits and dahs of a few PCTA morsebirds not yet
extinct. The Tomb of the Unknown Solder is a lonely place, deep
in the valley of neuroses, anger, and frustration. The single
sentinel counts cadennce to himself, muttering "flux you, flux
you" between the slow steps. His fists are clenched, eager to do
bottle but only sipping a cup of unkindness. It is sad but the
sentinel at the Tomb of the Unknown Solder keeps going. He does
not know why and that is the tragedy. The sun slowly sets on the
Tomb of the Unknown Solder leaving only the red light of fire in
the eyes of the muttering sentinel. Those glow in the dark like
LED pilot lights. Hatred lives on in his twilight of despair.

Temper fry.

wrote:
From: "bb" on Wed,May 25 2005 3:56 pm

K4YZ wrote:
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.

That never stopped Mike Powell or any of his predecessors. But it must
stop Len. Len must be stopped "SOMEhow!" At any cost.

The Avenging Angle of Dearth is off on another tangent.

The Tangential Gunny. Smokey Bear hat is tilted.

Gosh, do you think that "experience" is ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY?

If it is, then Steve can no longer speak of MARS.

The FCC doesn't require ANY staff or commissioners to hold
amateur radio licenses in order to REGULATE U.S. amateur radio!

["Sunnuvagun!" as Hans might remark...]

Steven J. Robeson is free to petition his government.

"Civil discourse" by Sevie (or Stebie, depending on which alter ego
is gabbling) consists of his wanting to crucify me on charges of
something like Treason or Sedition for honoring the members of my
Signal Battalion, continually calling me a "penis head" using a
Yiddish pejorative, and denouncing my knowledge of radio by not
"knowing the truth" about helicopters! :-)

Steven J. Robeson will disqualify you under every circumstance. He's
the original mean mistreater.

Tsk. The PCTA Extra Double Standard *MUST* prevail to those
"civil discoursairs" ranging the high seas

and the low seas.

and destroying all
vestiges of discontent in their HOBBY.

CW gets through when everything else will.

I especially like Jimmie's "reason" for retention of the code test:
it is the SECOND most popular mode on ham HF bands, therefore the
test MUST remain!"

Way back when amateurs had tails, and the Morse Code was the ONLY
mode, there was no morse code test.

Sevie (or Stebie) would probably require all
examinees to tap out the words to the Marines Him in morse as well.

If they miss a beat, they will forever be known as a LIAR and a Gay Man
(standard Steve way of dealing with discontinuity in his personal
life).

"Civility" = total and absolute agreement with whatever the ARRL
publishes, anytime and anywhere.

1984 came and is still with us.



I read 1984 during the 1983 holidays. There's a lot of Steve in there.

wrote:
wrote:
From: "bb" on Wed,May 25 2005 3:35 pm

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.

Tsk, the "knocking" stopped about 32 years ago. Jimmie has NO
worry. He could sit back in comfortable safety in PA and read
all about the military and international realpolitik without
once having participated in anything.

How many Soviet aircraft did you see when you were in Japan in the
1950s, Len?

I've seen Soviet aircraft without being overseas. I've seen them on
RADAR penetrating CONUS airspace.

So where were you when you saw Soviet aircraft? How did you serve?

He became a Virtual
military expert without once being IN any branch or working in
any office of the Department of Defense.

I don't claim to be an expert in anything.

That would probably be for the best.

You've never been "IN" amateur radio, yet you want to tell us How It
Should Be.

When you merely want to exclude people??? I've no problem with him
anything he might say to you with your kind of attitude.

Getting to the heart of the matter, Jimmie feels TERRIBLY "insulted"
when one doesn't like what Jimmie likes.

Not true. You're the one who calls people names, and tells them to shut
up
if they don't agree with you.

Jim calls them jackasses.

[he is regularly bringing up old, faded postings from Google as
if to continue to "do battle" on those topics forever and ever]

Gee, Len, you bring up even older and more faded stuff about

Highly respected...

defunct
ham radio magazines and your experiences of a half-century ago.

Every issue of QST has excerpts from half a century ago. I've never,
ever, ever seen you complain. Ever.

Why
is it OK for you to rehash events of 20, 30, 50 years ago, but not
OK for others to remind you of the events of 2 or 3 years past?

Because you say it isn't OK for Len to remind you of events of 50 years
ago, but never comment when the ARRL does it.

Seems like a double standard on your part.

Double-standard, indeed. That could be your middle name.

Jimmie wants NUMBERS? He is regularly giving some sort of
tabulation
on the "valid licenses" of radio amateurs in the USA.

No, I'm not. You're mistaken, Len. Wrong again.

Are you absolutely, positively sure?

The numbers I post here twice a month are those of current, unexpired
FCC amateur licenses held by individuals. That's stated in each post.
The word
valid is not used to describe them.

They are invalid numbers? They are invalid licenses?

wrote:
From: "bb" on Thurs,May 26 2005 6:12 pm

wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
bb wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
bb wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
wrote:
wrote:

73 de Jim, N2EY

So in the end, Jim confirms that Steve's "assertion of fact," i.e.,
"Lennie would have to have some sort of experience from which to make
informed opinions or suggestions from" doesn't stop anyone else from
making uninformed decision which changes all of ham radio. So if Mike
Powell can have an uninformed opinion, why can't anyone else?

Nobody can unless they've taken a code test. Mikey Powell
didn't so Judge Sir James of Morsemanhall forced him to
resign... :-)

beep, beep



They're so full of excrement.

From: on Fri 27 May 2005 14:30

wrote:
From: "bb" on Wed,May 25 2005 3:35 pm

wrote:
From: on Mon,May 23 2005 3:57 am



He became a Virtual
military expert without once being IN any branch or working in
any office of the Department of Defense.

I don't claim to be an expert in anything.

Now, now, you are being toooo modest... :-)

You've never been "IN" amateur radio, yet you want to tell us How It
Should Be.

That's simply untrue. :-)

But...one just cannot tell a PCTA Extra anything. :-)

Getting to the heart of the matter, Jimmie feels TERRIBLY "insulted"
when one doesn't like what Jimmie likes.

Not true. You're the one who calls people names, and tells them to shut up
if they don't agree with you.

Tsk, tsk. Someone like that should be removed from this
newsgroup "clubhouse," shouldn't they? :-)

You can begin by removing some 1x2 Extras in here, such
as the one always calling his "opponents" for "Putz."

[he is regularly bringing up old, faded postings from Google as
if to continue to "do battle" on those topics forever and ever]

Gee, Len, you bring up even older and more faded stuff about defunct
ham radio magazines and your experiences of a half-century ago.

Tsk, tsk, tsk, perhaps because I actually DID those things
and you did not? Awwww....

Why is it OK for you to rehash events of 20, 30, 50 years ago, but not
OK for others to remind you of the events of 2 or 3 years past?

Who said "it isn't OK?" Jimmie, you do that all the time
lapsing back to your teenage years and that MIGHTY TEST
for an AMATEUR radio license!

Seems like a double standard on your part.

Awwwww...you seeing double all the time, Jimmie? Yes you
are. Get some medical attention. See Dr. Robeson, both of
him, maybe some of his other alter egos...he has the
"qualifications" to do things. He says.

Jimmie wants NUMBERS? He is regularly giving some sort of
tabulation on the "valid licenses" of radio amateurs in the USA.

No, I'm not. You're mistaken, Len. Wrong again.

They aren't tabulations?!? Are you MAKING THOSE UP?!?!?

The numbers I post here twice a month are those of current, unexpired
FCC amateur licenses held by individuals. That's stated in each post.
The word valid is not used to describe them.

So...where do those NUMBERS come from?

You've claimed that FCC doesn't use the word "expired" to describe
licenses in the grace period, but Part 97 shows that you're wrong on
that.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. There's a GRACE PERIOD, Jimmie. That's in
the regulations. Do you mean each "expired" licensee has to
RETEST? Say goodnight "gracie?" Grazie...

So? You've posted the numbers from hamdata.com without describing how
they are generated.

That's simply untrue, Jimmie.

We are to accept
his NUMBERS as "correct" because Jimmie never makes mistakes. All
others, ESPECIALLY those challenging him, always "make mistakes."

That's just not true, Len.

So...you DO make mistakes?!? Who would have thought that....?

Most folks would accept some website that regularly downloads the
huge FCC amateur database, sorts it, and presents gross totals.

Then why don't you accept the numbers I post?

Tsk. You don't accept www.hamdata.com numbers.

Not Jimmie. He wants "massaged" NUMBERS, showing only the "valid"
licensees..."valid" in HIS viewpoint.

Nope.

The numbers I post come from a website that regularly downloads the
huge FCC amateur database, sorts it, and presents gross totals. All I
do is copy them and post them here.

WHICH website, Jimmie? How can we trust your "honesty"
in anything when you make so many mistakes?

No "massaging".

Your medium is the massage.

Jimmie needs MASSAGING
of those NUMBERS in order to "show us" something...and thus we get
the INTERPRETATIONS of those "valid" numbers.

How? The numbers are what they are.

Tsk, tsk, it's the editorial commentary that you add... :-)

I especially like his "reason" for maintaining the code test for
all amateurs having below-30-MHz operating privileges: "Morse
code is the SECOND-most popular mode on HF, therefore the code
test 'deserves' to remain!"

I'm glad you like it, Len.

That's simply untrue, Jimmie.

It's a really good, valid reason to keep a
test of basic Morse Code skill for an amateur radio license.

It's your bull**** OPINION, Jimmie. NOT a "fact."

It's not an international requirement. It's not something that
the FCC thinks is necessary for amateur license grants. They
keep it in the rules because the PCTA lobbyists from ARRL and
other olde-tymers insist/demand it is "necessary" (because they
HAD to pass it), and because amateur radio isn't that important
to address rules changes right now.

Enjoy the ARS (Archaic Radiotelegraphy Society) in all its
beepery. Keep on recreating the pioneer days in radio that
you were never a part of, poor guy. Hold those ancient
traditions, standards, and practices forever...make sure
nothing is changed and keep on saying to hell with newcomers,
make them work like Jimmie did as a teenager. After all,
wasn't amateur radio created in YOUR image? :-)

wrote:
wrote:
From: "bb" on Wed,May 25 2005 3:35 pm

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.

Tsk, the "knocking" stopped about 32 years ago. Jimmie has NO
worry. He could sit back in comfortable safety in PA and read
all about the military and international realpolitik without
once having participated in anything.

How many Soviet aircraft did you see when you were in Japan in the
1950s, Len?

Only one, but at a distance, couldn't get close enough to read
any manufacturer's tags on the airframe of the MiG. From a
North Korean defector who flew it to South Korea, was in display
at a USAF base on Honshu.

I've seen Soviet aircraft without being overseas. I've seen them on
RADAR penetrating CONUS airspace.

So where were you when you saw Soviet aircraft? How did you serve?

Jimmie did proofreading on the Brit series "Janes All The World
Aircraft." Did that at the local public library.

He became a Virtual
military expert without once being IN any branch or working in
any office of the Department of Defense.

I don't claim to be an expert in anything.

That would probably be for the best.

Ah, but he comes ON like the CEO of the newsgroup. :-)

You've never been "IN" amateur radio, yet you want to tell us How It
Should Be.

When you merely want to exclude people??? I've no problem with him
anything he might say to you with your kind of attitude.

Jimmie needs to be newsgroup CEO.

Getting to the heart of the matter, Jimmie feels TERRIBLY "insulted"
when one doesn't like what Jimmie likes.

Not true. You're the one who calls people names, and tells them to shut up
if they don't agree with you.

Jim calls them jackasses.

PCTA Extra Double Standard. QED.

[he is regularly bringing up old, faded postings from Google as
if to continue to "do battle" on those topics forever and ever]

Gee, Len, you bring up even older and more faded stuff about

Highly respected...

defunct
ham radio magazines and your experiences of a half-century ago.

Every issue of QST has excerpts from half a century ago. I've never,
ever, ever seen you complain. Ever.

Brian, careful, you know how painful it is to remind Jimmie
of the obvious. Pastor Jimmie might write another Sermon on
the Antenna Mount!

Why
is it OK for you to rehash events of 20, 30, 50 years ago, but not
OK for others to remind you of the events of 2 or 3 years past?

Because you say it isn't OK for Len to remind you of events of 50 years
ago, but never comment when the ARRL does it.

Jimmie wants to rehash what I was "supposed to do" in Japan,
but Jimmie has NEVER served in any military anywhere anytime.
That's "okay."

Jimmie wants Total Agreement with his OPINIONS. If there is
no Total Agreement, then dissention is "wrong," must be
BANNED, shouted down, tarred and feathered, etc., etc.

Seems like a double standard on your part.

Double-standard, indeed. That could be your middle name.

I think it should be just "H" (for hypocrite).

Jimmie wants NUMBERS? He is regularly giving some sort of
tabulation
on the "valid licenses" of radio amateurs in the USA.

No, I'm not. You're mistaken, Len. Wrong again.

Are you absolutely, positively sure?

Jimmie is never wrong. Other people are wrong...when they
disagree with Jimmie.

The numbers I post here twice a month are those of current, unexpired
FCC amateur licenses held by individuals. That's stated in each post.
The word valid is not used to describe them.

They are invalid numbers? They are invalid licenses?

Jimmie loves wordplay, spending long hours at his old, faded
computer, exercising his imaginary powers of CEO of the
newsgroup. He's wasting lots of folks' time.

From: "bb" on Fri 27 May 2005 17:39

wrote:
From: "bb" on Wed,May 25 2005 3:56 pm

K4YZ wrote:
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.

That never stopped Mike Powell or any of his predecessors. But it must
stop Len. Len must be stopped "SOMEhow!" At any cost.

The Avenging Angle of Dearth is off on another tangent.

The Tangential Gunny. Smokey Bear hat is tilted.

Poor guy, HAS to be in uniform all the time, shouting orders,
demanding obediance! He must be a real delight at the Legion
Hall bar these days.

Gosh, do you think that "experience" is ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY?

If it is, then Steve can no longer speak of MARS.

I thought Steve IS MARS! :-)

The FCC doesn't require ANY staff or commissioners to hold
amateur radio licenses in order to REGULATE U.S. amateur radio!

["Sunnuvagun!" as Hans might remark...]

Steven J. Robeson is free to petition his government.

Ah, but he doesn't feel that his "opponents" should!


"Civil discourse" by Sevie (or Stebie, depending on which alter ego
is gabbling) consists of his wanting to crucify me on charges of
something like Treason or Sedition for honoring the members of my
Signal Battalion, continually calling me a "penis head" using a
Yiddish pejorative, and denouncing my knowledge of radio by not
"knowing the truth" about helicopters! :-)

Steven J. Robeson will disqualify you under every circumstance. He's
the original mean mistreater.

Textbook egotistic sociopath.

Tsk. The PCTA Extra Double Standard *MUST* prevail to those
"civil discoursairs" ranging the high seas

and the low seas.

Very low...

and destroying all vestiges of discontent in their HOBBY.

CW gets through when everything else will.

That's engraved above the entrance to the Church of St. Hiram.

I especially like Jimmie's "reason" for retention of the code test:
it is the SECOND most popular mode on ham HF bands, therefore the
test MUST remain!"

Way back when amateurs had tails, and the Morse Code was the ONLY
mode, there was no morse code test.

Right...and the only way to generate RF inexpensively was by
SPARK technology! Spark is banned.

Sevie (or Stebie) would probably require all
examinees to tap out the words to the Marines Him in morse as well.

If they miss a beat, they will forever be known as a LIAR and a Gay Man
(standard Steve way of dealing with discontinuity in his personal
life).

Gotta love the sociopath's version of "civility!"

"Civility" = total and absolute agreement with whatever the ARRL
publishes, anytime and anywhere.

1984 came and is still with us.

I read 1984 during the 1983 holidays. There's a lot of Steve in there.

He be "little brother." Big Brother be in Newington.

Little brother get brain washed, still not clean.

wrote:
From: "bb" on Thurs,May 26 2005 6:12 pm

wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
bb wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
bb wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
wrote:
wrote:

73 de Jim, N2EY

So in the end, Jim confirms that Steve's "assertion of fact," i.e.,
"Lennie would have to have some sort of experience from which to make
informed opinions or suggestions from" doesn't stop anyone else from
making uninformed decision which changes all of ham radio. So if Mike
Powell can have an uninformed opinion, why can't anyone else?

Nobody can unless they've taken a code test. Mikey Powell
didn't so Judge Sir James of Morsemanhall forced him to
resign... :-)

beep, beep

They're so full of excrement.

Well, some of that is what they ingested...:-)