| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Thank you to the Vets--and Civilians who help
I thought of today and what it means and came across this article.
Here's a bit from the Seattle Times of May 30, 2005, from Nancy Bartley, staff reporter: Florence Abrahamson was only 15 when she went to war for the first time. She was a married mother of three, with a son in the Navy, when duty called again more than 20 years later. Now 102, Abrahamson is being honored by legislators, officials in her hometown of Aberdeen, and by Seattle's Museum of Flight as one of a number of "Rosie the Riveters" who worked on Boeing and de Havilland airplane assembly lines during wartime. Abrahamson, however, is among the rarest of them all: She is the Northwest's last surviving "Rosie" from two world wars - and perhaps the only one anywhere, Museum of Flight officials believe. An upcoming trip to Seattle for the recognition ceremony and a tour of Boeing, all part of the museum's week of Memorial Day events, have significance for Abrahamson: For the first time, she will actually see a finished version of the B-17 bomber she worked on during World War II. For the Aberdeen woman, whose blue eyes loom large behind her spectacles, it's all much ado about what, to her, was "just duty" and "what anyone would have done." "Here is a gal who worked in two world wars," said Polson Museum Director John Larson. The rarity of that "just blew us away." The museum selected Abrahamson as this year's "Pioneer of the Year" for her contributions to the community and for her long history in the Grays Harbor area. Abrahamson's work life began shortly after her father died, which left her mother a widow with five children to support. Abrahamson and her brother were the two eldest. In 1917, at the beginning of America's entrance into "The Great War," the Grays Harbor Commercial Co. in Cosmopolis, one of the first sawmills in the harbor and located where the Weyerhaeuser pulp mill is now, needed help manufacturing de Havilland warplanes. While Abrahamson's brother was readily accepted, the company was torn over whether to hire women. When Abrahamson was hired in 1918, she dressed in overalls - daring attire at a time when proper ladies wore long skirts - and walked to work at the factory every morning from the family home less than a mile away. She spent her days making spruce lath for the de Havilland DH-4 biplane, the only U.S.-built warplane to see World War I combat. Her life was regulated by the steam plant's whistle, which signaled the start of work, lunch and end of the day. World War I was different from the war that followed, she said. Although Grays Harbor citizens - including her husband-to-be, Hugo Abrahamson - served in the military, the fighting in Europe seemed more remote than that of World War II. After the 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor, Aberdeen citizens shaded their windows at night. The Boeing Aberdeen factory was camouflaged with trees on the roof. Japanese submarines lurked off the coast. And American warplanes patrolled the harbor. By then, Florence and Hugo were married and living in house they built in 1925. He was working at a mill, and she was employed at a small grocery when the new war effort called. She tied a red bandana over her hair, donned a pair of slacks and became a riveter, fastening the aluminum skin onto B-17s. But as she placed rivet after rivet, she always wondered what the final plane looked like, with all those carefully laid rivets stitching the aluminum together as precisely as if she had been cross-stitching a sampler. She was so fast that co-workers asked her if she was "trying to win the war all by yourself." And she proved herself so capable - despite being left-handed in an occupation set up to accommodate only the right-handed - that she became an inspector, checking the work of others. Later, she would help make components for more than 5,000 B-29s. Now, Abrahamson's day of discovery is closing in. "The important title being bestowed on you must fill your heart with fond memories and a warm sense of pride for your enormous wartime contributions," state Rep. Gigi Talcott, R-Tacoma, wrote to her. Her efforts are "appreciated by every American who has experienced liberty and freedom." Thursday, Abrahamson will join a number of other Rosie the Riveters as guests of the Museum of Flight. Sporting her Boeing security badge from World War II, she will be accompanied by four of her six grandchildren for a tour of Boeing and the museum's B-17G "Fuddy Duddy." Abrahamson's husband died in 1974 and the last of her three children in 2004, but she is adored by her surviving grandchildren and six great-grandchildren. All have heard her colorful stories: Her assembly-line days; the ordeal of taking a driver's test for the first time at 57, after her son taught her to drive in a Pontiac so large she nicknamed it "the beast." After failing once, she passed the test on her second try but slammed the cranky license examiner against the dash when she braked too hard. "I wake up at night thinking about it even after all these years," she said. And no one will forget her arrest - sometime past the age of 60 - for a fishing violation. "I was caught fishing in a fish hatchery," she admitted sheepishly. Fishermen friends kept advising her to go farther up the Satsop River. "How was I to know it was part of the hatchery?" Afterward, when she showed up at church, the congregation "sang the prisoner's song" when she walked in, she recalled. And there was a fund drive at some stores to help her pay her fine. The judge ultimately dismissed the charge as long as she promised to "fish somewhere else." She figured that was good advice and went to Westport, Grays Harbor County, where she then won a 1964 fishing derby with a 48-pound salmon. She smiles in satisfaction at the thought. Just like she does when she thinks of those days during the war when she could fasten a rivet quick as anything. Nancy Bartley: 206-464-8522 or [email address had been here] in a letter to Florence Abrahamson Copyright © 2005 The Seattle Times Company -- 'X-No-Archive: yes' That's the story |
"Kim" wrote in message .. . I thought of today and what it means and came across this article. I'm sure the fine lady was an excellend riveter, but the copyrighted article (you had permission to reproduce it?) has NOTHING to do with Memorial Day, when we honor those who made the ultimate sacrifice. |
K=D8HB wrote: "Kim" wrote in message .. . I thought of today and what it means and came across this article. I'm sure the fine lady was an excellend riveter, but the copyrighted arti= cle (you had permission to reproduce it?) has NOTHING to do with Memorial= Day, when we honor those who made the ultimate sacrifice. (sigh) Steve, K4YZ |
KØHB wrote:
"Kim" wrote in message .. . I thought of today and what it means and came across this article. I'm sure the fine lady was an excellend riveter, but the copyrighted article (you had permission to reproduce it?) has NOTHING to do with Memorial Day, when we honor those who made the ultimate sacrifice. As Charlie Brown would say, 'good grief!!" Don't you have something to do today Hans? |
K4YZ wrote: K=D8HB wrote: "Kim" wrote in message .. . I thought of today and what it means and came across this article. I'm sure the fine lady was an excellend riveter, but the copyrighted ar= ticle (you had permission to reproduce it?) has NOTHING to do with Memori= al Day, when we honor those who made the ultimate sacrifice. (sigh) =20 Steve, K4YZ Where's Jimmy "the Riveter" on this one? |
No, Hans, I did not have permission to reproduce it said sarcastically. I
believe I've seen many, many times, articles from newspapers and websites quoted on the web. Wrong? Don't know. And, I beg to differ with you. For me, it had everything to do with Memorial Day. Kim W5TIT "KØHB" wrote in message ink.net... "Kim" wrote in message .. . I thought of today and what it means and came across this article. I'm sure the fine lady was an excellend riveter, but the copyrighted article (you had permission to reproduce it?) has NOTHING to do with Memorial Day, when we honor those who made the ultimate sacrifice. |
For me, Memorial Day is more than honoring those who have died. Death comes
naturally for a soldier (I've heard that somewhere and it's something that really made an impression upon me). But, everyone who ever had anything to do with creating war, going to support it's efforts, staying home to support it's efforts (as in the case of the article from the Seattle Times), all kinds of heroes: sung and unsung, they all deserve our moment of pause and recognition--MORE than on days like today. But, days like today give us all a collective moment or two to recognize the magnitude of sacrifice that those people made--whether on the shores of war or in the cities of our nation to keep her engines moving and take care of our soldiers and their families and, if you'll think about it, to give those soldiers something to come home to, even. 'Nuff said... Kim W5TIT PS--Who's "Jimmy" the riveter (or was that a colloquialism for a "man" riveter? "bb" wrote in message oups.com... K4YZ wrote: KØHB wrote: "Kim" wrote in message .. . I thought of today and what it means and came across this article. I'm sure the fine lady was an excellend riveter, but the copyrighted article (you had permission to reproduce it?) has NOTHING to do with Memorial Day, when we honor those who made the ultimate sacrifice. (sigh) Steve, K4YZ Where's Jimmy "the Riveter" on this one? |
"Kim" wrote in message .. . For me, Memorial Day is more than honoring those who have died. Death comes naturally for a soldier (I've heard that somewhere and it's something that really made an impression upon me). But, everyone who ever had anything to do with creating war, going to support it's efforts, staying home to support it's efforts (as in the case of the article from the Seattle Times), all kinds of heroes: sung and unsung, they all deserve our moment of pause and recognition--MORE than on days like today. But, days like today give us all a collective moment or two to recognize the magnitude of sacrifice that those people made--whether on the shores of war or in the cities of our nation to keep her engines moving and take care of our soldiers and their families and, if you'll think about it, to give those soldiers something to come home to, even. 'Nuff said... Kim W5TIT And very nicely said. It reflects how I feel too. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
Kim wrote: For me, Memorial Day is more than honoring those who have died. Death comes naturally for a soldier ... I should hope not. I think that death comes hard for most, soldier or not. |
"KØHB" wrote in message ink.net... "Kim" wrote in message .. . I thought of today and what it means and came across this article. I'm sure the fine lady was an excellend riveter, but the copyrighted article (you had permission to reproduce it?) has NOTHING to do with Memorial Day, when we honor those who made the ultimate sacrifice. That is typical W5TWIT, totally bassackwards thought pattern. Dan/W4NTI |
"Kim" wrote in message .. . For me, Memorial Day is more than honoring those who have died. SNIP There it is. She does not even know what Memorial Day means. No further discussion needed. Dan/W4NTI |
"Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message link.net... "KØHB" wrote in message ink.net... "Kim" wrote in message .. . I thought of today and what it means and came across this article. I'm sure the fine lady was an excellend riveter, but the copyrighted article (you had permission to reproduce it?) has NOTHING to do with Memorial Day, when we honor those who made the ultimate sacrifice. That is typical W5TWIT, totally bassackwards thought pattern. Dan/W4NTI Sorry, Dan I will respond on group to this. Thanks for your non-thoughts. ZBM-2, Jim AA2QA |
"Kim" wrote For me, Memorial Day is more than honoring those who have died. At the risk of appearing to be an unsensitive old galoot, and at the further risk of alienating the 2 YL's who want to honor Rosie the Riveter on Memorial day, I must strenuously disagree. There are a lot of well-deserved "days" to honor veterans and servicemen in general, and those others out of uniform who labored "in the cause", but Memorial Day is NOT that day. Memorial Day (originally called "Decoration Day" because the main activity wasn't an extra Monday off for a barbeque in the back yard, but rather decorating grave sites) was established specifically to remember those honored comrades in arms who LAID DOWN THEIR LIVES for us. Let's never dilute that sacred honor by turning Memorial Day into another "feel good day" for every other patriotic group who wants to tag along on their glorious sacrifice. The rest of us have Veterans Day/Armistice Day, Labor Day, Armed Forces Day, Navy Day, etc. to recognize our contributions. Can we be content with that? de Hans |
"KØHB" wrote in message ink.net... "Kim" wrote For me, Memorial Day is more than honoring those who have died. At the risk of appearing to be an unsensitive old galoot, and at the further risk of alienating the 2 YL's who want to honor Rosie the Riveter on Memorial day, I must strenuously disagree. There are a lot of well-deserved "days" to honor veterans and servicemen in general, and those others out of uniform who labored "in the cause", but Memorial Day is NOT that day. Memorial Day (originally called "Decoration Day" because the main activity wasn't an extra Monday off for a barbeque in the back yard, but rather decorating grave sites) was established specifically to remember those honored comrades in arms who LAID DOWN THEIR LIVES for us. Let's never dilute that sacred honor by turning Memorial Day into another "feel good day" for every other patriotic group who wants to tag along on their glorious sacrifice. The rest of us have Veterans Day/Armistice Day, Labor Day, Armed Forces Day, Navy Day, etc. to recognize our contributions. Can we be content with that? de Hans .. Point well made, Hans. Feel no qualms about alienating the 2 YL's. They meant well despite their lack of direction on the true purpose of this day. You are not insensitive. You are correct. (a slow salute to those who gave all they had) |
I don't think you're the slightest bit interested in whether you are
alienating me or not, Hans. So, your feeble attempt to reconcile the angst of your original response to mine is lost, since I'm sure you're more interested in the fact that Dee (someone who you are probably more inclined to want to pat on the head) aligned herself along the lines of what I was thinking. In addition, no matter what the "original" Memorial Day was intended for. We've come a long way in this country. As you mention, there are days specifically angled at the military (Veterans Day, Armed Forces Day) wherein it may be more appropriate to remember "just" our military heroes. However, I doubt "back in the day" a second thought was even raised or given to remember the "civilian" side of the military. A parallel might be something along the lines of completely disregarding that many amateur radio operators have been involved in the public safety efforts of our hometown heroes--and I've never yet seen a major display of recognition or thanks for that. It's true that our police forces and rescue forces, right down to the 911 call handlers and dispatchers locked away in the confines of the office, are all paid and are "in there" for our safety, and confronting dangerous situations. It's also true that there are many civilian aspects, amateur radio for one, that are "in there" for our safety, and confronting dangerous situations also. You may wish to remember only those who are/were in the military--and of those, maybe only persons who have perished, Hans. And, I point out, I haven't jumped down your throat for a thing. I posted a wonderful article about a fantastic person and you came back with nothing but hate, contempt, and angst. You could have made the adult decision to allow someone else their belief. You did not, and you still haven't "changed my mind." Do you know why? Because my choice to remember another aspect of the defense and continuation of the United States of America on a day like Memorial Day is my personal choice. I'll point out here that there are many civilians who have died in the support of our military, home and abroad. And, I did not say I remember them at the absence of anything grand or proud about Memorial Day. I remember our civilian contribution *in addition* to the military one. It is in the spirit of the times (the fact that we've "grown up" in this country--note that the female contribution to the military has always been there; but hardly has it always been celebrated and recognized as it is today) that I take pause every Memorial Day and remember the people who settled this land which, incidentally, were the North American Indians, the people who conquered this land (our forefathers), the people who shaped our nation (our ancestors), and the people whom have defended her since--our military and others who "have served." And, I shall continue to do that, Hans, as you shall continue in your traditional way. As and aside, I find it interesting that you chose to point out "Veterans Day/Armistice Day, Labor Day, Armed Forces Day, Navy Day, etc." (minus Labor Day, incidentally) as days "the rest of us" have to celebrate others' contributions. I would certainly not set aside Veterans Day to recognize and celebrate the contributions of civilians, nor for Armed Forces or Navy Day. For me (note the "for me," Hans?) those days are especially for those who have served...in the military. And, you are an in[sic]sensitive old gloat and that appeared long ago, not because of this exchange. Kim W5TIT "KØHB" wrote in message ink.net... "Kim" wrote For me, Memorial Day is more than honoring those who have died. At the risk of appearing to be an unsensitive old galoot, and at the further risk of alienating the 2 YL's who want to honor Rosie the Riveter on Memorial day, I must strenuously disagree. There are a lot of well-deserved "days" to honor veterans and servicemen in general, and those others out of uniform who labored "in the cause", but Memorial Day is NOT that day. Memorial Day (originally called "Decoration Day" because the main activity wasn't an extra Monday off for a barbeque in the back yard, but rather decorating grave sites) was established specifically to remember those honored comrades in arms who LAID DOWN THEIR LIVES for us. Let's never dilute that sacred honor by turning Memorial Day into another "feel good day" for every other patriotic group who wants to tag along on their glorious sacrifice. The rest of us have Veterans Day/Armistice Day, Labor Day, Armed Forces Day, Navy Day, etc. to recognize our contributions. Can we be content with that? de Hans |
"Arf! Arf!" wrote in message
... Point well made, Hans. Feel no qualms about alienating the 2 YL's. They meant well despite their lack of direction on the true purpose of this day. You are not insensitive. You are correct. (a slow salute to those who gave all they had) How rather parental and condescending of you. Lack of direction, eh? What an idiot... Kim W5TIT |
From: "Kim" on Tues 31 May 2005 12:07
I don't think you're the slightest bit interested in whether you are alienating me or not, Hans. So, your feeble attempt to reconcile the angst of your original response to mine is lost, since I'm sure you're more interested in the fact that Dee (someone who you are probably more inclined to want to pat on the head) aligned herself along the lines of what I was thinking. ... Well said, Kim. There's a strong undertone (perhaps "undertow") of unwanted machismo present in this group of "mighty warriors." In the morning edition of the Los Angeles Times, 30 May 2005, was the story of Marie Michell Robinson, a 20 year old WASP (Womens Air force Service Pilots) who died in the October 1944 crash of a B-25 twin-engine bomber she was co-piloting in the Mojave Desert region of California. WASPs were not military members but neither were they exactly ciivlians. They earned a base pay of $250 a month but had to pay all of the meal and lodging costs out of that (even if stationed at military bases) and had to pay for their own uniforms. Marie had been married just two weeks to Major Hampton Robinson, an Army medical doctor. The crash site was re-found by a trio of amateur aviation "archaeologists" in southern California who had (on their own time) searched for over a year to relocate the crash site. The trio found it in early May. While Marie's body had been recovered over a half century before, the trio uncovered her personal belongings: A wedding band, bracelet (with name and wings emblem), a WASP pin, nail file, and a wris****ch whose hands had stopped at 1:40 PM, the time of the crash. Personal items of the other two crew members were recovered and all are being returned to their surviving family members. WASPs were not given veterans' status until 1979. Source: LA Times, 30 May 2005, Valley Edition, Section B, page 1, written by H. G. Resa, Times Staff Writer; includes photos of personal articles and one of the amateur aviation archaeologists. In addition, no matter what the "original" Memorial Day was intended for. We've come a long way in this country. As you mention, there are days specifically angled at the military (Veterans Day, Armed Forces Day) wherein it may be more appropriate to remember "just" our military heroes. During World War II the WASPs weren't military, weren't civilian, yet they served the nation by giving up their time to aid the war effort. Some gave everything: 38 WASPs died in that service. They were not acknowledged as "veterans" by the U.S. government until 25 years later. This country is a bit late on following-through about "coming a long way" but it just barely manages to keep up. Three civilians, on their own voluntary time and not members of the military or government, relocated the crash site and uncovered personal belongings, found and notified remaining family members. They honored the true spirit of Memorial Day. Several individuals in here do NOT keep up and they pervert the meaning of Memorial Day to serve their own egos. Most of those were not even born when World War II ended...yet they seem to demand strict adherence to Their "Rules" of memorialism. Some have rather insane definitions of honoring the fallen such as remembrance and honor being classified as a "dishonor." All that in a newgroup supposedly about policies in a HOBBY radio activity. Tsk. ex-RA16408336, U.S. Army 1952-1960, Signal Corps, Sgt (E=5) |
Christy D wrote: On Tue, 31 May 2005 12:07:05 GMT, Kim wrote: [102 lines snipped] The correctness of the original opinion is directly proportional to the length of the attempted rebuttal. inversely proportional? |
"KØHB" wrote in message ink.net... "Kim" wrote For me, Memorial Day is more than honoring those who have died. At the risk of appearing to be an unsensitive old galoot, and at the further risk of alienating the 2 YL's who want to honor Rosie the Riveter on Memorial day, I must strenuously disagree. You won't alienate me unless you stoop to the disgusting tactics of the likes of Todd. I seriously doubt that you would ever fall to such depths. There are a lot of well-deserved "days" to honor veterans and servicemen in general, and those others out of uniform who labored "in the cause", but Memorial Day is NOT that day. There is no day to honor those not in uniform who gave all they could to support the soldiers. I've searched every holiday list I can find and there is nothing. It harms no one for me to choose to include those people in my thoughts. Memorial Day (originally called "Decoration Day" because the main activity wasn't an extra Monday off for a barbeque in the back yard, but rather decorating grave sites) was established specifically to remember those honored comrades in arms who LAID DOWN THEIR LIVES for us. Let's never dilute that sacred honor by turning Memorial Day into another "feel good day" for every other patriotic group who wants to tag along on their glorious sacrifice. I do not believe it dilutes their sacred honor. The rest of us have Veterans Day/Armistice Day, Labor Day, Armed Forces Day, Navy Day, etc. to recognize our contributions. Can we be content with that? None of these honor the civilian contributions to support the soldiers. Labor Day has nothing whatsoever to do with honor those who supported our soldiers. Instead it was proposed in the 1880s by the labor unions and adopted as a way to recognize the everyday worker for their contributions to the economy and society. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
"KØHB" wrote in message ink.net... "Kim" wrote For me, Memorial Day is more than honoring those who have died. At the risk of appearing to be an unsensitive old galoot, and at the further risk of alienating the 2 YL's who want to honor Rosie the Riveter on Memorial day, I must strenuously disagree. There are a lot of well-deserved "days" to honor veterans and servicemen in general, and those others out of uniform who labored "in the cause", but Memorial Day is NOT that day. Memorial Day (originally called "Decoration Day" because the main activity wasn't an extra Monday off for a barbeque in the back yard, but rather decorating grave sites) was established specifically to remember those honored comrades in arms who LAID DOWN THEIR LIVES for us. Let's never dilute that sacred honor by turning Memorial Day into another "feel good day" for every other patriotic group who wants to tag along on their glorious sacrifice. The rest of us have Veterans Day/Armistice Day, Labor Day, Armed Forces Day, Navy Day, etc. to recognize our contributions. Can we be content with that? de Hans And there it is. Dan/W4NTI |
Christy D wrote: On 31 May 2005 15:40:05 -0700, bb wrote: Christy D wrote: On Tue, 31 May 2005 12:07:05 GMT, Kim wrote: [102 lines snipped] The correctness of the original opinion is directly proportional to the length of the attempted rebuttal. inversely proportional? No. The longer the rebuttal attempt, the more likely it is that the original opinion was correct. Hence the direct proportionality. Len will be pleased to here that. |
bb wrote: Christy D wrote: On 31 May 2005 15:40:05 -0700, bb wrote: Christy D wrote: On Tue, 31 May 2005 12:07:05 GMT, Kim wrote: [102 lines snipped] The correctness of the original opinion is directly proportional to the length of the attempted rebuttal. inversely proportional? No. The longer the rebuttal attempt, the more likely it is that the original opinion was correct. Hence the direct proportionality. Len will be pleased to here that. "Len will be pleased to here that."...?!?! (Since you seem to enjoy busting me for typos....) I don't think you were paying attention, Brain...(Like THAT'S new...) Re-read what was written...Lennie will NOT be pleased...(Like THAT'S new either!!!) Steve, K4YZ |
K4YZ wrote: bb wrote: Christy D wrote: On 31 May 2005 15:40:05 -0700, bb wrote: Christy D wrote: On Tue, 31 May 2005 12:07:05 GMT, Kim wrote: [102 lines snipped] The correctness of the original opinion is directly proportional to the length of the attempted rebuttal. inversely proportional? No. The longer the rebuttal attempt, the more likely it is that the original opinion was correct. Hence the direct proportionality. Len will be pleased to here that. "Len will be pleased to here that."...?!?! (Since you seem to enjoy busting me for typos....) Only when it's obvious that you're hallucinating. I don't think you were paying attention, Brain...(Like THAT'S new...) Such baseless accusations (lies) you're always making. Re-read what was written...Lennie will NOT be pleased...(Like THAT'S new either!!!) Steve, K4YZ Pull your head out and re-read it yourself. You won't be pleased. Christy said that the longer the reply, the more likely it is that the original opinion was correct. Len has long replies. Sometimes really, really long replies. Do you want to argue that, too? |
bb wrote: K4YZ wrote: Len will be pleased to here that. "Len will be pleased to here that."...?!?! (Since you seem to enjoy busting me for typos....) Only when it's obvious that you're hallucinating. Who's hallucinating? You can't seem to get through your own fantasies, Brain... I don't think you were paying attention, Brain...(Like THAT'S new...) Such baseless accusations (lies) you're always making. It's not baseless. IE: Unlicesed Devices, ARES, MARS, Lawful Operating from Foreign Soil, etc. You've been proven wrong on every single one. Re-read what was written...Lennie will NOT be pleased...(Like THAT'S new either!!!) Steve, K4YZ Pull your head out and re-read it yourself. You won't be pleased. Nothing to re-read. Yuo got it wrong. Now you've gotten it wrong twice. Christy said that the longer the reply, the more likely it is that the original opinion was correct. Uh huh. I say Lennie's an idiot. Lennie takes six paragraphs to tell us how he knows everything and how his years at ADA make him ultimately qulified to be an idiot. I retort and call Lennie a BIG idiot. He comes back with 12 paragraphs. Proves Christy's Law that my original assertion (he's an idiot) was correct. Christy's Law. It works Len has long replies. Sometimes really, really long replies. Do you want to argue that, too? What's to argue? Lennie uses his verbostiy to hide his failings and inadequacies. It's legend. Steve, K4YZ |
From: bb on Jun 2, 6:27 pm
K4YZ wrote: bb wrote: Christy D wrote: Christy said that the longer the reply, the more likely it is that the original opinion was correct. "Christy," singing like a New Minstrel, might belong to that irritated group that gets tired tracing out more than 50 words with their finger... :-) Len has long replies. Sometimes really, really long replies. Do you want to argue that, too? The Avenging Angle of Dearth will ARGUE-FIGHT-INSULT anything I write in here. :-) |
K4YZ wrote: bb wrote: K4YZ wrote: Len will be pleased to here that. "Len will be pleased to here that."...?!?! (Since you seem to enjoy busting me for typos....) Only when it's obvious that you're hallucinating. Who's hallucinating? You can't seem to get through your own fantasies, Brain... Any fantasy of mine cannot influence your ability to string together a sentence. I don't think you were paying attention, Brain...(Like THAT'S new...) Such baseless accusations (lies) you're always making. It's not baseless. IE: Unlicesed Devices, ARES, MARS, Lawful Operating from Foreign Soil, etc. You've been proven wrong on every single one. Yet we're talking about What Christy has written, and you've been shown to be wrong. Again. Re-read what was written...Lennie will NOT be pleased...(Like THAT'S new either!!!) Steve, K4YZ Pull your head out and re-read it yourself. You won't be pleased. Nothing to re-read. Yuo got it wrong. Now you've gotten it wrong twice. I asked for clarification. Christy gave it. You're wrong. Christy said that the longer the reply, the more likely it is that the original opinion was correct. Uh huh. I say Lennie's an idiot. It's not about you. It's about what Christy said that would please Len. Too bad for you. |
bb wrote: K4YZ wrote: You can't seem to get through your own fantasies, Brain... Any fantasy of mine cannot influence your ability to string together a sentence. Why would I want to "string together a sentence" based on any fantasy of yours, Brain? You're a discredited liar. I have no desire to emulate that. I don't think you were paying attention, Brain...(Like THAT'S new...) Such baseless accusations (lies) you're always making. It's not baseless. IE: Unlicesed Devices, ARES, MARS, Lawful Operating from Foreign Soil, etc. You've been proven wrong on every single one. Yet we're talking about What Christy has written, and you've been shown to be wrong. Again. Nope. Re-read what was written...Lennie will NOT be pleased...(Like THAT'S new either!!!) Steve, K4YZ Pull your head out and re-read it yourself. You won't be pleased. Nothing to re-read. Yuo got it wrong. Now you've gotten it wrong twice. I asked for clarification. Christy gave it. You're wrong. No, I'm not. Christy said that the longer the reply, the more likely it is that the original opinion was correct. Uh huh. I say Lennie's an idiot. It's not about you. It's about what Christy said that would please Len. Too bad for you. Too bad I was right? Why? QUOTE: On 31 May 2005 15:40:05 -0700, bb wrote: Christy D wrote: On Tue, 31 May 2005 12:07:05 GMT, Kim wrote: [102 lines snipped] The correctness of the original opinion is directly proportional to the length of the attempted rebuttal. inversely proportional? No. The longer the rebuttal attempt, the more likely it is that the original opinion was correct. Hence the direct proportionality. UNQUOTE Sorry, Brain...You've screwed the pooch...Again... Steve, K4YZ |
From: "K4YZ" on Thurs 2 Jun 2005 17:48
bb wrote: K4YZ wrote: Len will be pleased to here that. "Len will be pleased to here that."...?!?! (Since you seem to enjoy busting me for typos....) Only when it's obvious that you're hallucinating. Who's hallucinating? Stebie. You can't seem to get through your own fantasies, Brain... Stebie brain got SOP for everbody's fantasies? :-) Pass the peyote, Stebie-san, high-high. :-) I don't think you were paying attention, Brain...(Like THAT'S new...) Such baseless accusations (lies) you're always making. It's not baseless. Stebie stole 4th base, claims it his. Stebie not in ball park. IE: Unlicesed Devices, ARES, MARS, Lawful Operating from Foreign Soil, etc. You've been proven wrong on every single one. Stebie high honcho in gubmint? Ober FCC? Uber FCC? :-) Stebie be Riley Robeson? Stebie be Sevie Hollingsworth? Stebie have ham shield in wallet, show and make arrests? Re-read what was written...Lennie will NOT be pleased...(Like THAT'S new either!!!) Steve, K4YZ Pull your head out and re-read it yourself. You won't be pleased. Nothing to re-read. Yuo got it wrong. Now you've gotten it wrong twice. Who "Yuo?" New basketball player for Texas team? Dey got Yao. Christy said that the longer the reply, the more likely it is that the original opinion was correct. Uh huh. I say Lennie's an idiot. Stebie Einstein? Stebie make General law of Relatives? Stebie go Switzerland, be patent clerk? Stebie a freud? Stebie give yodel lessons? Lennie takes six paragraphs to tell us how he knows everything and how his years at ADA make him ultimately qulified to be an idiot. I retort and call Lennie a BIG idiot. Stebie forget "PUTZ," "gutless coward," etc. :-) He comes back with 12 paragraphs. Proves Christy's Law that my original assertion (he's an idiot) was correct. Christy's Law. It works Who "Christy?" Musical group? New holiday? Stebie change gender and be "Christy?" Stebie not say. Stebie need "sked?" Good name be "Rosebud" for snow sked. Fits. Len has long replies. Sometimes really, really long replies. Do you want to argue that, too? What's to argue? Lennie uses his verbostiy to hide his failings and inadequacies. It's legend. Stebie have legend. Stebie be legend. Stebie is legend in his own mind. Stebie have myth? Wifie#2 find out, bye-bye Mithter Stebie. ...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. |
From: "bb" on Fri 3 Jun 2005 03:51
wrote: From: bb on Jun 2, 6:27 pm K4YZ wrote: bb wrote: Christy said that the longer the reply, the more likely it is that the original opinion was correct. "Christy," singing like a New Minstrel, might belong to that irritated group that gets tired tracing out more than 50 words with their finger... :-) Who's to say? I know...:-) But, we have the solitary tomb sentinel busy "guarding" the territory for ANY opinions other than his own. We are stuck with the Avenging Angle of Dearth. Ho hum. Eventually the "pop" will be an artery and he will become the usual vegetable garden typical to stroke victims. We will be able to see that while we are still alive. :-) That is going to put a damper on his Class A behavior and incessant machismo attitude of always "being right" (in his own mind). His stress is building. Tsk. Len has long replies. Sometimes really, really long replies. Do you want to argue that, too? The Avenging Angle of Dearth will ARGUE-FIGHT-INSULT anything I write in here. :-) I tire of Steve's incessant lying. I tire of his peers always giving him a pass on his tirades. They're all a pretty useless assembly of Extras. Understand fully. They aren't ever going to be role models of anything they way they act and posture in here. Many years ago at a division of a national corporation there was a long-time Amateur Extra near retirement age. He was a good sort, knew his stuff, never tried to put his hobby into the forefront as a Lifestyle. He also had a mischevious sense of humor and was quite tolerant of younger staff getting way too overworked over their hobby discussions. When he found a couple of radio amateurs engaged in a heated argument he would listen a minute or so, then casually interrupt with "Say, did you know that ham is the butchered meat of swine?" The arguers would be momentarily stunned. He would grin slightly and amble away, the grin growing. He had the right balance of priorities. He retired and showed up at some L.A. Council meetings since. Lost track of him. I've never forgotten that (correct) statement he made more than once. :-) |
K4YZ wrote: bb wrote: K4YZ wrote: You can't seem to get through your own fantasies, Brain... Any fantasy of mine cannot influence your ability to string together a sentence. Why would I want to "string together a sentence" based on any fantasy of yours, Brain? You're a discredited liar. I have no desire to emulate that. I stand corrected. I should have said, "...your inability..." I don't think you were paying attention, Brain...(Like THAT'S new...) Such baseless accusations (lies) you're always making. It's not baseless. IE: Unlicesed Devices, ARES, MARS, Lawful Operating from Foreign Soil, etc. You've been proven wrong on every single one. Yet we're talking about What Christy has written, and you've been shown to be wrong. Again. Nope. ... Re-read what was written...Lennie will NOT be pleased...(Like THAT'S new either!!!) Steve, K4YZ Pull your head out and re-read it yourself. You won't be pleased. Nothing to re-read. Yuo got it wrong. Now you've gotten it wrong twice. I asked for clarification. Christy gave it. You're wrong. No, I'm not. ... Christy said that the longer the reply, the more likely it is that the original opinion was correct. Uh huh. I say Lennie's an idiot. It's not about you. It's about what Christy said that would please Len. Too bad for you. Too bad I was right? Why? ... QUOTE: On 31 May 2005 15:40:05 -0700, bb wrote: Christy D wrote: On Tue, 31 May 2005 12:07:05 GMT, Kim wrote: [102 lines snipped] The correctness of the original opinion is directly proportional to the length of the attempted rebuttal. inversely proportional? No. The longer the rebuttal attempt, the more likely it is that the original opinion was correct. Hence the direct proportionality. UNQUOTE Sorry, Brain...You've screwed the pooch...Again... "Screwed the pooch?" It that a marine corps thing? And why can't you explain why you posted my street address on RRAP? |
bb wrote: K4YZ wrote: No. The longer the rebuttal attempt, the more likely it is that the original opinion was correct. Hence the direct proportionality. Sorry, Brain...You've screwed the pooch...Again... "Screwed the pooch?" It that a marine corps thing? Marine Corps is capitalized, just like Air Force, Brain... And why can't you explain why you posted my street address on RRAP? I didn't post your "street address" on RRAP, Brain... A street address consists of a house number, apartment or suite if applicable, and the name or number of the street. EG: 151 12th Avenue Northwest. That is a "street address, albeit not a complete "mailing address". A "mailing address" consists of a full street address or appropriate box number, a city, state and postal code where postal codes are employed. The name of the country of the destination address is the last line if different from the originating address. I'd think after having been deployed overseas and, I assume, having mailed things home before that you'd kow this bit of information. So...you want to try again...?!?! Steve, K4YZ |
"K4YZ" wrote A "mailing address" consists of a full street address or appropriate box number, a city, state and postal code where postal codes are employed. The name of the country of the destination address is the last line if different from the originating address. Thank you, Captain Obvious. Perhaps that information was useful to someone. Out in the barn. dit dit de Hans, K0HB |
K4YZ wrote: bb wrote: K4YZ wrote: No. The longer the rebuttal attempt, the more likely it is that the original opinion was correct. Hence the direct proportionality. Sorry, Brain...You've screwed the pooch...Again... "Screwed the pooch?" It that a marine corps thing? Marine Corps is capitalized, just like Air Force, Brain... Who could tell? You usually capitalize every other word. And why can't you explain why you posted my street address on RRAP? I didn't post your "street address" on RRAP, Brain... A street address consists of a house number, apartment or suite if applicable, and the name or number of the street. EG: 151 12th Avenue Northwest. That is a "street address, albeit not a complete "mailing address". A "mailing address" consists of a full street address or appropriate box number, a city, state and postal code where postal codes are employed. The name of the country of the destination address is the last line if different from the originating address. I'd think after having been deployed overseas and, I assume, having mailed things home before that you'd kow this bit of information. So...you want to try again...?!?! Steve, K4YZ "Lessee....430" What was that supposed to mean? Why must you dodge? Why must you use weasle words? Why can't you answer the question? |
K=D8HB wrote: "K4YZ" wrote A "mailing address" consists of a full street address or appropriate box number, a city, state and postal code where postal codes are employed. The name of the country of the destination address is the last line if different from the originating address. Thank you, Captain Obvious. Perhaps that information was useful to someo= ne. Out in the barn. dit dit de Hans, K0HB Steve won't answer my question, won't "educate" me. Steve won't say what he meant by "Lessee....430." Steve dodges. Steve won't be a "man" about it and accept responsibility for his actions. It's like he's anonymous WRT "Lessee....430." =20 Steve fears something. |
wrote: From: "bb" on Fri 3 Jun 2005 03:51 wrote: From: bb on Jun 2, 6:27 pm K4YZ wrote: bb wrote: Christy said that the longer the reply, the more likely it is that the original opinion was correct. "Christy," singing like a New Minstrel, might belong to that irritated group that gets tired tracing out more than 50 words with their finger... :-) Who's to say? I know...:-) But, we have the solitary tomb sentinel busy "guarding" the territory for ANY opinions other than his own. We are stuck with the Avenging Angle of Dearth. Ho hum. Eventually the "pop" will be an artery and he will become the usual vegetable garden typical to stroke victims. We will be able to see that while we are still alive. :-) That is going to put a damper on his Class A behavior and incessant machismo attitude of always "being right" (in his own mind). His stress is building. Tsk. Notice how the coward won't explain what he meant by "Lessee...430." I need to start tabulating the dodges like the time I kept track of his new lies for three weeks. Len has long replies. Sometimes really, really long replies. Do you want to argue that, too? The Avenging Angle of Dearth will ARGUE-FIGHT-INSULT anything I write in here. :-) I tire of Steve's incessant lying. I tire of his peers always giving him a pass on his tirades. They're all a pretty useless assembly of Extras. Understand fully. They aren't ever going to be role models of anything they way they act and posture in here. Steven J. Robeson has soiled his father's name. Many years ago at a division of a national corporation there was a long-time Amateur Extra near retirement age. He was a good sort, knew his stuff, never tried to put his hobby into the forefront as a Lifestyle. He also had a mischevious sense of humor and was quite tolerant of younger staff getting way too overworked over their hobby discussions. When he found a couple of radio amateurs engaged in a heated argument he would listen a minute or so, then casually interrupt with "Say, did you know that ham is the butchered meat of swine?" The arguers would be momentarily stunned. He would grin slightly and amble away, the grin growing. He had the right balance of priorities. He retired and showed up at some L.A. Council meetings since. Lost track of him. I've never forgotten that (correct) statement he made more than once. :-) Careful, now. You might upset the mighty machismo morsemen, especially "Jimmy the Riveter." |
bb wrote: wrote: From: "bb" on Fri 3 Jun 2005 03:51 wrote: From: bb on Jun 2, 6:27 pm K4YZ wrote: bb wrote: Christy said that the longer the reply, the more likely it is that the original opinion was correct. "Christy," singing like a New Minstrel, might belong to that irritated group that gets tired tracing out more than 50 words with their finger... :-) Who's to say? I know...:-) But, we have the solitary tomb sentinel busy "guarding" the territory for ANY opinions other than his own. We are stuck with the Avenging Angle of Dearth. Ho hum. Eventually the "pop" will be an artery and he will become the usual vegetable garden typical to stroke victims. We will be able to see that while we are still alive. :-) That is going to put a damper on his Class A behavior and incessant machismo attitude of always "being right" (in his own mind). His stress is building. Tsk. Notice how the coward won't explain what he meant by "Lessee...430." I need to start tabulating the dodges like the time I kept track of his new lies for three weeks. None of those added up to "1". You claimed there were lies present, but never substantiated a single claim. So start in on this if you'd care to...It will just keep you from bothering others. Len has long replies. Sometimes really, really long replies. Do you want to argue that, too? The Avenging Angle of Dearth will ARGUE-FIGHT-INSULT anything I write in here. :-) I tire of Steve's incessant lying. I tire of his peers always giving him a pass on his tirades. They're all a pretty useless assembly of Extras. Understand fully. They aren't ever going to be role models of anything they way they act and posture in here. Steven J. Robeson has soiled his father's name. No, I've not. However YOU have a lot of explaining to do to your Son and Spouse. Documented. Archived. Steve, K4YZ |
From: "bb" on Sat 4 Jun 2005 05:54
wrote: From: "bb" on Fri 3 Jun 2005 03:51 wrote: From: bb on Jun 2, 6:27 pm K4YZ wrote: bb wrote: I know...:-) But, we have the solitary tomb sentinel busy "guarding" the territory for ANY opinions other than his own. We are stuck with the Avenging Angle of Dearth. Ho hum. Eventually the "pop" will be an artery and he will become the usual vegetable garden typical to stroke victims. We will be able to see that while we are still alive. :-) That is going to put a damper on his Class A behavior and incessant machismo attitude of always "being right" (in his own mind). His stress is building. Tsk. Notice how the coward won't explain what he meant by "Lessee...430." I need to start tabulating the dodges like the time I kept track of his new lies for three weeks. Well, don't expect him to change any time soon. He's tried the same thing with me (10048 being my house number) except that my entire mailing address has been printed in HR in every article (common procedure in amateur radio periodicals). The solitary tomb sentinel has an ugly habit of bullying others to "gain supremacy" or something similar. He can do so in relative "safety" from the time-distance isolation of this medium. Bullies take advantage of that "protection" (and usually act a lot "tougher") but all it shows is ordinary cowardice. I tire of Steve's incessant lying. I tire of his peers always giving him a pass on his tirades. They're all a pretty useless assembly of Extras. Understand fully. They aren't ever going to be role models of anything they way they act and posture in here. Steven J. Robeson has soiled his father's name. Yes, and probably soiled his pants on encountering some who don't feel threatened by his bullying machismo. :-) way too overworked over their hobby discussions. When he found a couple of radio amateurs engaged in a heated argument he would listen a minute or so, then casually interrupt with "Say, did you know that ham is the butchered meat of swine?" The arguers would be momentarily stunned. He would grin slightly and amble away, the grin growing. He had the right Careful, now. You might upset the mighty machismo morsemen, especially "Jimmy the Riveter." Heh heh heh. I'm not worried about Jimmie. He gets upset so easily, thinks I am "calling him names." Tsk, tsk. I've called him all sorts of names: James, Jim, Jimmy, Jimmie, James Miccolis, and just Miccolis. He feels so "insulted" now about being called all those NAMES that he just wastes everyone's time. Ham radio has certainly changed since I first heard about it back in the 40s. So many uptight folks in it now, so easily bruised, some wanting to bully, terrorize, and FIGHT! :-) |
wrote: From: "bb" on Sat 4 Jun 2005 05:54 wrote: From: "bb" on Fri 3 Jun 2005 03:51 wrote: From: bb on Jun 2, 6:27 pm K4YZ wrote: bb wrote: I know...:-) But, we have the solitary tomb sentinel busy "guarding" the territory for ANY opinions other than his own. We are stuck with the Avenging Angle of Dearth. Ho hum. Eventually the "pop" will be an artery and he will become the usual vegetable garden typical to stroke victims. We will be able to see that while we are still alive. :-) That is going to put a damper on his Class A behavior and incessant machismo attitude of always "being right" (in his own mind). His stress is building. Tsk. Notice how the coward won't explain what he meant by "Lessee...430." I need to start tabulating the dodges like the time I kept track of his new lies for three weeks. Well, don't expect him to change any time soon. He's tried the same thing with me (10048 being my house number) except that my entire mailing address has been printed in HR in every article (common procedure in amateur radio periodicals). The solitary tomb sentinel has an ugly habit of bullying others to "gain supremacy" or something similar. He can do so in relative "safety" from the time-distance isolation of this medium. Bullies take advantage of that "protection" (and usually act a lot "tougher") but all it shows is ordinary cowardice. I tire of Steve's incessant lying. I tire of his peers always giving him a pass on his tirades. They're all a pretty useless assembly of Extras. Understand fully. They aren't ever going to be role models of anything they way they act and posture in here. Steven J. Robeson has soiled his father's name. Yes, and probably soiled his pants on encountering some who don't feel threatened by his bullying machismo. :-) way too overworked over their hobby discussions. When he found a couple of radio amateurs engaged in a heated argument he would listen a minute or so, then casually interrupt with "Say, did you know that ham is the butchered meat of swine?" The arguers would be momentarily stunned. He would grin slightly and amble away, the grin growing. He had the right Careful, now. You might upset the mighty machismo morsemen, especially "Jimmy the Riveter." Heh heh heh. I'm not worried about Jimmie. He gets upset so easily, thinks I am "calling him names." Tsk, tsk. I've called him all sorts of names: James, Jim, Jimmy, Jimmie, James Miccolis, and just Miccolis. He feels so "insulted" now about being called all those NAMES that he just wastes everyone's time. Ham radio has certainly changed since I first heard about it back in the 40s. So many uptight folks in it now, so easily bruised, some wanting to bully, terrorize, and FIGHT! :-) These are certainly not the good people that I first met when I became a ham. The trouble with amateur radio started with the advent of the no-code license. People began entering the service that did not worship at the altar of St. Hiram, and did not kneel and kisst the feet of Extras. |
bb wrote: wrote: Ham radio has certainly changed since I first heard about it back in the 40s. So many uptight folks in it now, so easily bruised, some wanting to bully, terrorize, and FIGHT! Perhaps, Lennie, if certain mischevious scumbags weren't looking to "bruise" people there wouldn't be such a propensity to be as defensive. Such as the deceitful and misleading barbs YOU disseminate in this forum. Guess you now think it's wrong for one to defend one's self? These are certainly not the good people that I first met when I became a ham. The trouble with amateur radio started with the advent of the no-code license. People began entering the service that did not worship at the altar of St. Hiram, and did not kneel and kisst the feet of Extras. The problem didn't start with the No Code test...It started almost 20 years before that with the influx of 11 meter operators via the Bash Book route and the subsequent codification of the "open pools". Steve, K4YZ |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:57 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com