Lloyd:

Mixing LSD with Psilocybin and Mescaline is dangerous--I must caution
against such abuse...

John

"Lloyd" wrote in message
...

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
Lloyd:

Come back when the effects of those drugs have worn off... if this
condition of your is organic in nature, seek help from a qualified
professional.

Here is wishing for your speedy recovery...

John



An additional humble apology from you is not necessary.
I accepted your first apology. Now it appears you may
not have learned anything. Sad.

73,

Lloyd

"an_old_friend" wrote in message
oups.com...


Jim Hampton wrote:
The HF bands are, many times, international in scope. This story is not
about the FCC, it is about international agreements.

What is said in the story is true; many 3rd world countries would love
80
meters as it would provide cheap communications (they don't have to pay
to
build all the infrastructure of a telephone system to cover their
country).
If the world community decides that 80/75 meters is to no longer be an
amateur allocations, the FCC will have nothing to say about it.

If the world decides and we decide to go along with it and...

If you look at cell phones, you might get an idea of the extent of the
problem. In developed countries, cell phones have become big business.
In
the U.S., every teenager "needs" one. It takes a lot of cell phone
towers
to provide service, not to mention ever increasing needs of frequencies.

I believe that when I was first licensed (in 1962) amateurs could use
any
frequency above 30 GHz. There was little gear that could function at
all at
that frequency and dx records could be measured in yards or a few miles.
Nowadays, there are some amateur bands intermingled with other segments
going up to 300 GHz, at which point amateurs can use anything above 300
GHz.
300 GHz in far infra-red light!

Somehow, communications devices are going to have to become more
efficient
at using available frequencies (amateurs included). Even assuming they
do
(and they have become more band-width friendly), there will be pressure
on
all users to use it (effectively) or loose it.

agreed which is agood resaon to stopp using Morse code and realy use HF

As to the FCC, they can easily reassign users at VHF and above as it
doesn't
carry world-wide. Those segments are also in jeopardy by big business.
Note that the Supreme Court ruled that local governments can exercise
their
right to take property (with compensation to the owners) and sell it to
someone else.

Big business and the Republicans rule.

Next time be careful of who you vote for.



73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA


"an_old_friend" wrote in message
oups.com...

I doubt it HF is all but useless to the FCC they want peiecs of VHF
etc
John Smith wrote:
I think anyone over-looking the bigger picture has to suspect that
HF
will, rather quickly, be taken from amateurs. The abundance of
techs is
being created to drop the percentage of hams using HF. At some
point I
suspect a "move" will be made on these all important HF bands and
they
will be removed from amateur service.

I suspect that techs account for about 50% of activity on the bands
now--when that reaches 66%, and certainly 75%, I think HF will be
pulled...

Here is Hollingsworth on his "vision(s)", some may interpret it
differently:


http://www.wr6wr.com/newSite/article...longbeach.html

John



Other than PSK-31, name me a mode that takes less bandwidth than Morse code.

The silence is deafening.

Morse is very spectrum efficient; it only uses perhaps 100 Hertz (200 with
harsher keying to accommodate high speeds). SSB occupies up to 3,000 Hz,
enough room to accommodate 30 Morse QSOs. AM occupies more than twice the
space of SSB. FM occupies even more (which is why it is restricted to the
upper portion of 10 meters and VHF and above).

Your point about the world and "if the FCC decides to go along with it" has
no bearing. The FCC will have *nothing* to say about world-wide allocations
on HF and below. The United States is but one voice of many. Majority rule
s. The FCC can hand out authorizations based upon the framework of the
world agreements, but they can't step outside of that framework. Should the
world take away the 75/80 meter amateur allocation, the FCC could *not*
allocate those frequencies to American hams.

Of course, if you are a die-hard Republican, you either won't or can't
understand that concept. The spectrum below 30 MHz is decided between many
countries.

Unless, of course, those countries are hiding all those weapons of mass
destruction )) In that case, maybe we could get involved in a 10 or 20
year war. Good for business, I guess.



73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA

Hello, John

You are correct - HF (and MF) amateur radio is not isolated. Signals cross
international boundaries. As to "sovereign nation, it sounds good and is,
except that what we are discussing crosses international boundaries. The
international agreements will have to happen - or would you prefer that
Radio Moscow rear it's head on a directional array running 5,000,000 watts
in the middle of our AM broadcast band?

VHF and above does not often stray far (although the stuff from 30 MHz to
perhaps a bit above 6 meters can and does at times, especially during the
peak of the sunspot cycle); therefore the FCC is very free to rearrange
things that don't affect satellite transmission/reception.

Heck, when you said "one world order", I thought you were going to mention
our friend, GW


73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA



"John Smith" wrote in message
...
Jim:

Yes, you touch on globalization and "one world order" and/or "new order"
(hey, wasn't that a phrase invented by Adolph Hitler's klick?)

Seems like a little more thought on "sovereign nation" and just exactly
what that is might be to our best interest.

Also, seems with each passing day "they" are anxious to give us reasons
why we should lose respect for gov't and authority and, the effects of
this are rather frightening--it even touches my neighborhood--a place
which was once safe and secure.

I can hardly see how this is not having an effect on this great
hobby--amateur radio is not an isolated island.

John

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
Lloyd:

Mixing LSD with Psilocybin and Mescaline is dangerous--I must caution
against such abuse...

John


John,

You apologized twice, when only once was necessary. Now you
are groveling. AND, worst of all, Secwet Woger is your fwiend.
I cannot help you any further, perhaps someone else here can.

73,

Lloyd

wrote:
Although several years ago, Riley's comments are worth a look:

"This Amateur Radio service is serious business."

Not once in the speech is the word "hobby" used.

Must be why this newsgroup is on "rec" along with all the other
hobbies.

"...I know that when a natural disaster hits, they're [cell towers]
the first ones to go down. And the few that are remaining are jammed
and you can't get access. The people who are going to be taking care
of the real communications are sitting right here in this room. It's
the Amateur Radio service. And in the first few days, or the first few
hours of these multi-jurisdictional incidents, it's the amateurs who
keep things going."

Perhaps.

"There was a big newspaper chain that had a reporter with headphones on
listening to the hurricane emergency net. That made us nervous. The
last thing we wanted was some bad publicity for the Amateur Radio
service anywhere."

Can't newspaper reporters read Morse Code?

"Our people that go to these ITU meetings will tell us that it's
often a personal embarassment to them when these countries play back
tapes of what they hear on 75 and 20 Meters in the American amateur
bands."

Shirley they're not embarassed by what comes across headline news about
their country. It's only when some old fhart on 75/20M gets riled and
makes a fool of himself that causes national embarassment in America.

On the American 'phone subbands. Not CW/data subbands...

The Coders should take over the phone bands. Revolution!

"It puts them in a very difficult position when they have to defend
examples of conduct that other countries hear."

What's wrong with them???

They shouldn't defend it. They should condemn it.

Should be "'nuff said".....

73 de Jim, N2EY

Should be, but never is....

Jim Hampton wrote:
The HF bands are, many times, international in scope. This story is not
about the FCC, it is about international agreements.

It's about both, really.

What is said in the story is true; many 3rd world countries would love 80
meters as it would provide cheap communications (they don't have to pay to
build all the infrastructure of a telephone system to cover their country).
If the world community decides that 80/75 meters is to no longer be an
amateur allocations, the FCC will have nothing to say about it.

The US delegation to the radio conferences looks to FCC for input,
though. (Not just FCC, of course.) There's a big difference between
what happens if FCC says that 75 is such a mess it isn't worth
defending at the conferences versus the reverse.

I think the main point of all this is that it's really up to *us hams*
to
show that we're worth our allocations. That's one reason on-air
behavior really matters!

There's also a lesson in human nature in there, too. When Rudy Giuliani
was elected mayor of NYC, one of his priorities was enforcement of
"minor" laws,
like going after turnstile-jumpers, graffiti and trash/rubbish
violations. Some people asked if tax money wouldn't be better spent
going after drug dealers and murderers. RG's theory was that if you
allow the "little stuff" to get slack, the big stuff gets slack too. In
any event, NYC's crime, large and small, went down.

Same principle applies on the ham bands. But FCC can't do it all -
there's the question of what we hams consider acceptable behavior. FCC
enforcement is complaint-driven - just ask K1MAN. A key factor in his
case is that many,
many hams complained about his violations over a long period of time.

If you look at cell phones, you might get an idea of the extent of the
problem. In developed countries, cell phones have become big business. In
the U.S., every teenager "needs" one. It takes a lot of cell phone towers
to provide service, not to mention ever increasing needs of frequencies.

Right - but those will be VHF/UHF, not HF.

I believe that when I was first licensed (in 1962) amateurs could use any
frequency above 30 GHz. There was little gear that could function at all at
that frequency and dx records could be measured in yards or a few miles.
Nowadays, there are some amateur bands intermingled with other segments
going up to 300 GHz, at which point amateurs can use anything above 300 GHz.
300 GHz in far infra-red light!

Sure - but isn't that the way it's always been?

Back in 1912, hams had access to "200 meters and down" (note - that did
not mean any ham could use any frequency above 1500 kHz! It meant that
individual hams could apply for, and receive, licenses to use specific
frequencies above 1500. So could anyone else, but the professionals and
experts of the time thought those frequencies were useless for
long-distance communications.

When HF was carved into bands, US hams had lots of room. Before 1929,
40 meters was 7000 to 8000 kHz and 20 meters was 14,000 to 16,000 kHz -
exact harmonics of 80!

Somehow, communications devices are going to have to become more efficient
at using available frequencies (amateurs included). Even assuming they do
(and they have become more band-width friendly), there will be pressure on
all users to use it (effectively) or loose it.

I agree up to a point.

Most of the communications revolution has nothing to do with radio.
It's all about fiber optics. Heck, I bet that the vast majority of
telecommunications today (in terms of bits/mile) does *not* go by
radio, but by copper or glass. Cell phones, Wi-Fi, etc. are simply a
way of getting the last mile without a wire or fiber. Broadcasting as
we knew it will probably morph into something aimed mostly at mobile
users.

Heck, the real value of HF (as perceived by regulators) is demonstrated
by BPL.

As to the FCC, they can easily reassign users at VHF and above as it doesn't
carry world-wide.

*Some* of our bands are not protected by treaty, others are. 144-146 is
worldwide exclusive amateur, FCC can't touch it without a treaty
change. 146-148 could be reallocated whenever FCC feels like it.

Those segments are also in jeopardy by big business.
Note that the Supreme Court ruled that local governments can exercise their
right to take property (with compensation to the owners) and sell it to
someone else.

They took eminent domain to a new high - or low.

Think what it means! Once it was the case that your house could be
taken to build a public works project (road, school, bridge) on the
theory that the public good demanded it. Now the Supremes are saying
that "the public good" includes a *private industry* developer who
wants to put up McMansions.

Big business and the Republicans rule.

"What's good for General Bullmoose...."

Next time be careful of who you vote for.

I've always been careful that way...

But the Dems have a way of nominating candidates that too many people
won't vote for. They're well on the way to doing it again with Hillary.
She's the best friend the 'pubs ever had!

Friend of mine once said that if you gave the DNC the job of organizing
a firing squad, they'd put the squad in a circle around the condemned
person.


73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA

73 de Jim, N2EY

From: on Mon 27 Jun 2005 03:19

Although several years ago, Riley's comments are worth a look:

"This Amateur Radio service is serious business."

From Riley Hollingsworth's position as Special Counsel to the
FCC Spectral Enforcement office of the Enforcement Bureau,
obeyance of federal law IS "serious business."

Not once in the speech is the word "hobby" used.

?

Hollingsworth is NOT in the FCC "Key People," "Division Chiefs,"
or "Regional Director" listings at the FCC of their Enforcement
Bureau. One has to go deeper into the Spectral office of the
Enforcement Bureau where Hollingsworth is listed as second from
bottom on that office's "key people" listing...as one of two who
are "Special Counsel."

Hollingsworth is NOT over at the Wireless Telecommunications
Bureau, the one that is immediately responsible for amateur radio
at the FCC.

It is true that nowhere in Title 47 C.F.R. are the words "hobby"
or "ham radio" given. On the other hand, Part 97 rather
specifically defines amateur radio as an activity done for a
NON-pecuniary reason. That doesn't even mention "money" though
it is obvious that it means that amateur radio CANNOT accept
money for doing any communications service for others.

Amateur radio in the USA is forbidden by law to engage in
broadcasting. Amateur radio in the USA is forbidden by law to
be a public communications common carrier...that is, specifically
as a provider of radio communications services. Amateur radio
regulations even state that amateur communications themselves
are to be of a trivial nature and amateurs themselves are
supposed to avail themselves of commercial communications
services for non-trivial communications.

Amateur radio in the USA is NOT a "national service." All
throughout Title 47 C.F.R. the word "service" is a regulatory
term denoting a type and kind of radio activity being regulated.

Is the Citizens Band Radio SERVICE a "national service?" No.
Is the Amateur Radio Service a "national service?" No.

There's a difference between words used "de jure" (by law as
stated) and "de facto" (what it really is in practice). Amateur
radio is a HOBBY...a recreational pursuit done for personal
pleasure, federally regulated only because of the physical nature
of radio wave propagation and possible interference with other
radio users. DE FACTO a HOBBY.


"...I know that when a natural disaster hits, they're [cell towers]
the first ones to go down. And the few that are remaining are jammed
and you can't get access."

Hollingsworth is "playing to his audience" (to use a show business
phrase).

Physically, the cellular telephone services, an adjunct to the
wired telephone infrastructure, does NOT "go down" either "first"
or last. TELEPHONE communications is "jammed" only by too many
panic-stricken subscribers trying to use it simultaneously at the
onset of some emergency. The TELEPHONE infrastructure would not
have survived as a communications service provider if "all"
subscribers were free to use it simultaneously.

" The people who are going to be taking care
of the real communications are sitting right here in this room. It's
the Amateur Radio service. And in the first few days, or the first few
hours of these multi-jurisdictional incidents, it's the amateurs who
keep things going."

In light of recent REAL EMERGENCIES, REAL HISTORY has shown
that the commercial services HAVE CONTINUED TO WORK despite
SOME of their facilities being "downed." Facilities are NOT
RESTRICTED to JUST telephones, wired and/or cellular. There
are, in this nation, literally, hundreds of thousands of OTHER
radios which can, and have, been used for two-way communications.
That is NOT counting CB or the approximately 100 million
cellular telephone radio handsets.

Eleven and a half years ago, during the Northridge Earthquake in
Los Angeles, NO amateur radio "emergency communications" were
working in the first hours of the earthquake-induced TOTAL AC
POWER OUTAGE. Public safety and utility radio services were
on the air and working despite the total electrical mains supply
being OFF. It took at least six hours for the Los Angeles area
power to BEGIN to be restored to subscribers on that necessary
BLACK START. Public safety and utility radios continued to
function, police and fire and paramedics rolled on calls,
hospitals were there with their own electric power and serving
patients. TEN MILLION residents were affected by that quake
and total power outage.

Hollingsworth is a special counsel to the Enforcement Bureau's
Spectral enforcers. He should KNOW BETTER than to perpetuate
such myths as he stated. But, Hollingsworth does NOT
specifically speak FOR amateur radio. He is little more than
a "radio cop in a suit."


"There was a big newspaper chain that had a reporter with headphones on
listening to the hurricane emergency net. That made us nervous. The
last thing we wanted was some bad publicity for the Amateur Radio
service anywhere."

"Our people that go to these ITU meetings will tell us that it's
often a personal embarassment to them when these countries play back
tapes of what they hear on 75 and 20 Meters in the American amateur
bands."

On the American 'phone subbands. Not CW/data subbands...

Oh, my, another MYTH. Simon Pure morseman "does not swear with
morse code!" He is "safe to be around the children?"

[how many children did you say you "parented?"]

"It puts them in a very difficult position when they have to defend
examples of conduct that other countries hear."

All those "75 and 20 Meters" radiotelephone users were
CODE TESTED (or had the equivalent of same).

The CODE TEST does NOT prevent verbal abuse via radio.

Should be "'nuff said".....

Here's another: David Sumner's editorial pieces in QST are done
by David Sumner. James Miccolis has not been invited to become
any "guest commentator" or "moral guardian" of U.S. amateur radio.
But, he has set himself out as the same sort of "moral guardian"
and "giver of ethos" as if he was "respresentative" of over
700 thousand U.S. amateur radio licensees.

Even then he perpetuates the past with parodic perfidy.

Mean ole K1MAN is playing in my part of the
sandbox BWAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Why wont mr Riley get him away from me?
BWAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

The shrill whining & crying of cry baby hams goes on
and on.

If there was ever a hobby of immature selfish whining
cry babies, then ham radio is it. Grown men who
continually whine and cry about one ham radio operator
in Maine.

BWAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

Jim:

Well, go take of your french buddies, maybe you will want to appease the
muslims too...

John

"Jim Hampton" wrote in message
...
Hello, John

You are correct - HF (and MF) amateur radio is not isolated. Signals
cross
international boundaries. As to "sovereign nation, it sounds good and
is,
except that what we are discussing crosses international boundaries.
The
international agreements will have to happen - or would you prefer
that
Radio Moscow rear it's head on a directional array running 5,000,000
watts
in the middle of our AM broadcast band?

VHF and above does not often stray far (although the stuff from 30 MHz
to
perhaps a bit above 6 meters can and does at times, especially during
the
peak of the sunspot cycle); therefore the FCC is very free to
rearrange
things that don't affect satellite transmission/reception.

Heck, when you said "one world order", I thought you were going to
mention
our friend, GW


73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA



"John Smith" wrote in message
...
Jim:

Yes, you touch on globalization and "one world order" and/or "new
order"
(hey, wasn't that a phrase invented by Adolph Hitler's klick?)

Seems like a little more thought on "sovereign nation" and just
exactly
what that is might be to our best interest.

Also, seems with each passing day "they" are anxious to give us
reasons
why we should lose respect for gov't and authority and, the effects
of
this are rather frightening--it even touches my neighborhood--a place
which was once safe and secure.

I can hardly see how this is not having an effect on this great
hobby--amateur radio is not an isolated island.

John

N2Ey:

Yep, the little stuff really matters... while you chase mice the
elephants trample the village--gee, I think I seen that movie before...

John

wrote in message
ps.com...
Jim Hampton wrote:
The HF bands are, many times, international in scope. This story is
not
about the FCC, it is about international agreements.

It's about both, really.

What is said in the story is true; many 3rd world countries would
love 80
meters as it would provide cheap communications (they don't have to
pay to
build all the infrastructure of a telephone system to cover their
country).
If the world community decides that 80/75 meters is to no longer be
an
amateur allocations, the FCC will have nothing to say about it.

The US delegation to the radio conferences looks to FCC for input,
though. (Not just FCC, of course.) There's a big difference between
what happens if FCC says that 75 is such a mess it isn't worth
defending at the conferences versus the reverse.

I think the main point of all this is that it's really up to *us hams*
to
show that we're worth our allocations. That's one reason on-air
behavior really matters!

There's also a lesson in human nature in there, too. When Rudy
Giuliani
was elected mayor of NYC, one of his priorities was enforcement of
"minor" laws,
like going after turnstile-jumpers, graffiti and trash/rubbish
violations. Some people asked if tax money wouldn't be better spent
going after drug dealers and murderers. RG's theory was that if you
allow the "little stuff" to get slack, the big stuff gets slack too.
In
any event, NYC's crime, large and small, went down.

Same principle applies on the ham bands. But FCC can't do it all -
there's the question of what we hams consider acceptable behavior. FCC
enforcement is complaint-driven - just ask K1MAN. A key factor in his
case is that many,
many hams complained about his violations over a long period of time.

If you look at cell phones, you might get an idea of the extent of
the
problem. In developed countries, cell phones have become big
business. In
the U.S., every teenager "needs" one. It takes a lot of cell phone
towers
to provide service, not to mention ever increasing needs of
frequencies.

Right - but those will be VHF/UHF, not HF.

I believe that when I was first licensed (in 1962) amateurs could use
any
frequency above 30 GHz. There was little gear that could function at
all at
that frequency and dx records could be measured in yards or a few
miles.
Nowadays, there are some amateur bands intermingled with other
segments
going up to 300 GHz, at which point amateurs can use anything above
300 GHz.
300 GHz in far infra-red light!

Sure - but isn't that the way it's always been?

Back in 1912, hams had access to "200 meters and down" (note - that
did
not mean any ham could use any frequency above 1500 kHz! It meant that
individual hams could apply for, and receive, licenses to use specific
frequencies above 1500. So could anyone else, but the professionals
and
experts of the time thought those frequencies were useless for
long-distance communications.

When HF was carved into bands, US hams had lots of room. Before 1929,
40 meters was 7000 to 8000 kHz and 20 meters was 14,000 to 16,000
kHz -
exact harmonics of 80!

Somehow, communications devices are going to have to become more
efficient
at using available frequencies (amateurs included). Even assuming
they do
(and they have become more band-width friendly), there will be
pressure on
all users to use it (effectively) or loose it.

I agree up to a point.

Most of the communications revolution has nothing to do with radio.
It's all about fiber optics. Heck, I bet that the vast majority of
telecommunications today (in terms of bits/mile) does *not* go by
radio, but by copper or glass. Cell phones, Wi-Fi, etc. are simply a
way of getting the last mile without a wire or fiber. Broadcasting as
we knew it will probably morph into something aimed mostly at mobile
users.

Heck, the real value of HF (as perceived by regulators) is
demonstrated
by BPL.

As to the FCC, they can easily reassign users at VHF and above as it
doesn't
carry world-wide.

*Some* of our bands are not protected by treaty, others are. 144-146
is
worldwide exclusive amateur, FCC can't touch it without a treaty
change. 146-148 could be reallocated whenever FCC feels like it.

Those segments are also in jeopardy by big business.
Note that the Supreme Court ruled that local governments can exercise
their
right to take property (with compensation to the owners) and sell it
to
someone else.

They took eminent domain to a new high - or low.

Think what it means! Once it was the case that your house could be
taken to build a public works project (road, school, bridge) on the
theory that the public good demanded it. Now the Supremes are saying
that "the public good" includes a *private industry* developer who
wants to put up McMansions.

Big business and the Republicans rule.

"What's good for General Bullmoose...."

Next time be careful of who you vote for.

I've always been careful that way...

But the Dems have a way of nominating candidates that too many people
won't vote for. They're well on the way to doing it again with
Hillary.
She's the best friend the 'pubs ever had!

Friend of mine once said that if you gave the DNC the job of
organizing
a firing squad, they'd put the squad in a circle around the condemned
person.


73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA

73 de Jim, N2EY