Thrasher Remailer wrote:
In article . net
Dave Heil wrote:

an_old_friend wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:


Nomen Nescio wrote:

cut


It sounds like you are on some medications
yourself.

You're hearing sounds?


Of course he hearing sounds what do you expect that he smell them
instead. Indeed the only thing anyone hear is sound

Great, Mark, you're hearing sounds on usenet too?


I bet you hear voices in your empty head, don't you?

You know, you're right! I'm thinking it might be the headphones.

You have obvious mental
health issues if you think one man is the only one who posts using anonymous
remailers.

Plenty of folks, usually those with something to hide, use anonymous
remailers. We have only one with an ax to grind with me, who monitors
the local repeaters and the West Virginia net (but doesn't check in).

I sit here reading words. The computer isn't making a single sound.


Oh? You don't have a cooling fan on your CPU or even the system board? You
won't have that computer very much longer.

The fan is totally inaudible. Maybe yours is simply wearing out.

Did you read what the semi-anonymous Roger wrote, or did you just decide to

jump in with both

feet inserted in your yap?

AS I said, it would seem that you need the mental help, if you think this Roger
is the only one who uses anonymous remailers. Perhaps you should seek mental
help and counseling if you think he is behind every anonymous post. Enjoy that
foot in *your* mouth. More pepper?

Read my comments above and be sure to take your lithium.

Dave K8MN

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:
cut


Can you guess how many times you've commented that Len isn't an amateur
radio operator?

I didn't know there was going to be a quiz.


There is always a quiz where your motives are concerned.

I'm taking a whiz on your quiz.

gee where is Stevie on that one
cut


I noticed that you made no comments about "Colonel" Mark Morgan's recent
outrageous lies about me. Why is that? Did you see the quoted Google
material which revealed his claims to be a lie? Aren't you, by your own
standards, responsible for his posts?

because I wasn't lying at worst I was eeing things differently than you

One thing you and Stvie need to learn is that disagreeing with isn't
lying
cut
Dave K8MN

Anonymous via the Cypherpunks Tonga Remailer wrote:
In article et
Dave Heil wrote:

Nomen Nescio wrote:

In article . net
Dave Heil wrote:


Ethan Jones wrote:


In article et
Dave Heil wrote:

Take your medications, Roger. Get plenty of sleep. Tell the doctor if
the voices begin talking to you again.

Who's Roger, you utterly stupid man?

He's living proof that no man is a total loss. Roger serves as a
horrible example.


Your example is one of how you couldn't cut it as a real man.

What do you know of real men, Roger/not Roger? You're reduced to hiding
behind anonymous remailers. You can't use your own name lest you have
the police on your doorstep again. You have to be very, very careful.

No wonder you
were relegated to doing errand type tasks for the "State Department."

I've never filled a job position which entailed "errand type tasks".
How and why are you concerned?

You seem
to have issues seeing one person behind every anonymous post.
As if just one
person would use anonymous remailers. God, are you stupid.

You follow your posts with some mindless drivel about Lloyd Davies and
no one is supposed to know who you are. You monitor local FM repeaters
and the West Virginia net and I'm not supposed to know who you are, heh
heh. Yep, you're the epitome of shrewdness.


It sounds like you are on some medications
yourself.

You're hearing sounds?


No, stupid. If you would perhaps get a clue, you'd be able to have better
audio. Now go take your much needed Valium.

You're as nervous about actually transmitting as you are about using
only anonymous remailers. You don't have *any* audio, Wiseman.

--
Saggytits Lee aka Lloydie Davies steps on his own snip

Dave K8MN

"an Old friend" wrote


because I wasn't lying at worst I was eeing things differently than you


Yup, draftee Colonel Morgan of the Chemical Corps. It's not a lie. At worst,
the US Army is just "eeing things differently than you".

Yup, that's the explanation.

With all kind personal wishes,
de Hans, K0HB

K=D8HB wrote:
"an Old friend" wrote


because I wasn't lying at worst I was eeing things differently than you


Yup, draftee Colonel Morgan of the Chemical Corps. It's not a lie. At w=
orst,
the US Army is just "eeing things differently than you".

that stament of rank was alie as I admited years ago
both you and Dave and stevie refuse to accept that

or adknowledge that a fellow has right to use what tols are at hand
when threatened as stevie did


With all kind personal wishes,

now that staement is a lie one of those common social lies
de Hans, K0HB

an Old friend wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:

cut


Can you guess how many times you've commented that Len isn't an amateur
radio operator?

I didn't know there was going to be a quiz.


There is always a quiz where your motives are concerned.

I'm taking a whiz on your quiz.


gee where is Stevie on that one
cut


I noticed that you made no comments about "Colonel" Mark Morgan's recent
outrageous lies about me. Why is that? Did you see the quoted Google
material which revealed his claims to be a lie? Aren't you, by your own
standards, responsible for his posts?


because I wasn't lying at worst I was eeing things differently than you

You posted baldfaced lies and when you were presented with facts, you
chose to ignore them. In fact, you continued with additional lies. If
you'd stoop to these lies, there's likely nothing about which you'd not lie.

One thing you and Stvie need to learn is that disagreeing with isn't
lying
cut

There was no disagreement. There was only your posting of deliberate,
malicious untruths. You wrote that I was posting in a usenet
"personals" group. I wasn't. You wrote that I was flirting with a
woman. I wasn't. You wrote that I was flirting with a bisexual woman.
I wasn't. You wouldn't know the truth if it whapped you in the face.

You're one of the most sorry human beings I've ever encountered.

Dave K8MN

an Old friend wrote:
KØHB wrote:

"an Old friend" wrote


because I wasn't lying at worst I was eeing things differently than you


Yup, draftee Colonel Morgan of the Chemical Corps. It's not a lie. At worst,
the US Army is just "eeing things differently than you".


that stament of rank was alie as I admited years ago
both you and Dave and stevie refuse to accept that

"Both" is three people? I accept one of your lies as a lie. I accept a
number of your lies as lies. You can't be counted upon to tell the truth.

or adknowledge that a fellow has right to use what tols are at hand
when threatened as stevie did

Right. You lie and it is Steve Robeson's fault. I see.

Dave K8MN

Dave Heil wrote:
an Old friend wrote:
cut

I noticed that you made no comments about "Colonel" Mark Morgan's recent
outrageous lies about me. Why is that? Did you see the quoted Google
material which revealed his claims to be a lie? Aren't you, by your own
standards, responsible for his posts?


because I wasn't lying at worst I was eeing things differently than you

You posted baldfaced lies and when you were presented with facts, you
chose to ignore them. In fact, you continued with additional lies. If
you'd stoop to these lies, there's likely nothing about which you'd not lie.

what bald faced lies?


One thing you and Stvie need to learn is that disagreeing with isn't
lying
cut

There was no disagreement. There was only your posting of deliberate,
malicious untruths. You wrote that I was posting in a usenet
"personals" group. I wasn't. You wrote that I was flirting with a
woman. I wasn't. You wrote that I was flirting with a bisexual woman.
I wasn't. You wouldn't know the truth if it whapped you in the face.

you were posting in group consiting of nothing but presonal adds and
sexual flirtations

you were posting stuff of a flirting nature, directed toward a bisexual
female

I know the turth you lack a nodding understanding of it

again One thing you and Stvie need to learn is that disagreeing with
isn't
lying

You're one of the most sorry human beings I've ever encountered.

you have nevr entounteed me thnak god


Dave K8MN

Dave Heil wrote:
an Old friend wrote:
K=D8HB wrote:

"an Old friend" wrote


because I wasn't lying at worst I was eeing things differently than you


Yup, draftee Colonel Morgan of the Chemical Corps. It's not a lie. At=
worst,
the US Army is just "eeing things differently than you".


that stament of rank was alie as I admited years ago
both you and Dave and stevie refuse to accept that

"Both" is three people? I accept one of your lies as a lie. I accept a
number of your lies as lies. You can't be counted upon to tell the truth.

agreeded

as I have said many times you can't count on me to tell the turth about
where I am how to find me or my past. I don't think that is safe
behavoir

you and Stevie prove me right


or adknowledge that a fellow has right to use what tols are at hand
when threatened as stevie did

Right. You lie and it is Steve Robeson's fault. I see.

another of YOUR lies

I choose to defnd myself I choose that path and it worked quite well
stveie was posting for days about his efforts to track me down

you refuse to accept that I know everyone lies

I know you lie and Stevie lies and everyone else

what I can't stand about you and some other your dishonesty about that
central point and that you make up stuff that you claim someone said
then say they leid in saying it

Dave K8MN
You support and endorse crime for goodness sake you will willing aid
and abet it

and you have admitted to this on hear

From: on Sun 4 Sep 2005 07:48

wrote:
snip
From: on Aug 28, 8:18 am

In the end, if they cannot
lay waste to Len's comments with rational argument(s),
they claim that
his opinions are simply no good because Len isn't a ham.

Actually the logic is quite different. It comes down to
asking why Len is so interested in amateur radio policy
even though Len is not a ham and has never been one. There
has been a nocodetest amateur radio license in the USA since
1991, yet Len never got one. The maximum code test required
for any US amateur radio license has been 5 wpm since 1990 (with
medical waiver) and since 2000 without a waiver.

[Jimmie NEVER got a no-code-test Technician license...]

Nor is Len a manufacturer of amateur radio equipment, nor does
he have anything to do with FCC.

[Jimmie is a "manufacturer of amateur radio equipment"...makes
one of a kind equipment...state-of-the-art style using vacuum
tubes in the 1990s]

More than 5-1/2 years ago, Len told us he was going for Extra,
but didn't say when, and it hasn't happened yet.

[tsk, tsk, make a statement long ago and the Profiler HOLDS ONTO
that as a "lifelong goal"...as he was taught in Seminary...]

So in the end, when Jim Miccolis/N2EY, David Heil/K8MN, Brian
Kelly/W3RV, and Steven J. Robeson/K4YZ/K4CAP point out that Len is not
an amateur, for what purpose do you do so? What do you hope to gain
from pointing out that Len isn't an amateur?

Jimmie has a need to WIN MESSAGE POINTS. :-)

Jimmie wants to be TOP DAWG in here! :-)

And regardless of how someone replies to Len's posts here, Len will
reply according to the profile.

It's just his way.

Why should anyone reply to his posts at all, Dave?

73 de Jim, N2EY

Hi, hi! You reply directly to my comment, then you act as if you are
speaking to Dave. Then you ask why anyone should reply to Len's posts
at all. More hi, hi's!

Jim, when you're ready to have a rational discussion with me, I'll be
here.

Brian, don't expect a "rational discussion" with Jimmie. Repeated
asking will get you PROFILED! :-)

From: on Sun 4 Sep 2005 07:27


wrote:
From: on Sep 3, 4:02 pm

I'm still troubled about being a jerk for not giving Mike greif. I
think I would have been better off if I had given him greif.

Not to worry, Davie Heil gonna give you grief on the spelling
of "greif." :-)

Darnit, you stole my Heil bait. Maybe if we're quiet about it, he'll
still go for it.

Not to worry. Heil will simply look at the printouts he made
of your posts a few months from now and REMIND you...and remind
you...and remind you...all as if it is the MOST IMPORTANT thing
in this newsgroup! :-)

He will probably make a macro on that and remind you for years
in lieu of his replying on some subject. :-)

Be that as it may, the VEC ought to disband. Since newbies "don't
know a thing about amateur radio" they can't possibly pass any
tests for a license. Just have ONE VEC for the "upgraders" (those
already licensed who want a nicer TITLE). Better all around and
satisfies Davie's smug, arrogant "superiority."

That's what I see, two license classes in the spirit of K0HBs vision.
What we'll get is two license classes in the spirit of the Four
Morsemen where all the old Extras bitch and moan as they always have.
Speaking of bitching Extra's, I see Larry's back. I better go say
"Hi!"

Hi hi... :-)

From: on Sun 4 Sep 2005 06:09


Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
From: on Aug 28, 8:18 am

You know, the one which
brought about the creation of Jim's apropos profile of your
likely actions:

N2EY: "Besides, here's a simple, plain fact:

No matter what job, educational level, employer, or
government/military service that a radio amateur has, if
said radio
amateur opposes Mr. Anderson's views, he/she will be
the target of Mr.
Anderson's insults, ridicule, name-calling, factual
errors, ethnic
slurs, excessive emoticons and general infantile behavior."

Actually there's an updated version:

No matter what employment, education, experience or
government/military service a person has, if that
person opposes Mr. Anderson's views, he/she will be
the target of Mr. Anderson's insults, ridicule,
name-calling, factual errors, ethnic/gender/racial slurs,
excessive emoticons and general infantile behavior.

Translation: JIMMIE DOES NOT TOLERATE DISSENT!!! :-)

Wow...talk about "telling someone to 'shut up!'" :-)

I've found it to be a very accurate predictor of Len's
behavior on rrap. Len of course has parodied/plaigirized
and in doing so simply provide more proof of its validity.

Translation: JIMMIE IS *ALWAYS RIGHT*!!! :-)

Note that the profile does not call Len names or
other direct insults. It simply predicts his behavior when
faced with opposition to his views.

Yes, how DARE I speak against the Mighty Miccolis? :-)

Perhaps Len considers such opposition to be the
ultimate insult to him.

Poor baby. Really hurting when you can't stomach the
give-and-take in here? :-)

What Jim hasn't done is to prevent or attempt to
prevent Len from making those comments.

Nor would I. What I have done is to point out errors
in Len's reasoning and claims. And I backed it up
with google quotes and other info.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. Jimmie CANNOT "shut me up" so he tries
the next best thing: Disingenuous insults in the form
of the Profiler's "Prediction" wherein all who disagree
(all those who DARE disagree that is) are uncivilly
chastised in a "formal" manner.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. Jimmie can't even reply directly to me.
No guts, I suppose. shrug

For example, some time back Len posted that all hams could
continue to operate legally with licenses that were in the grace
period. I showed that to be in error, by simply quoting the
appropriate sections of Part 97. Len's behavior in response to
that was typical of the profile.

Right now, there's not a damn thing Jimmie can do about
it...

There's plenty that people "can do about it". No one chooses to.
Not worth the time or effort.

So...why all the "time and effort" to do this INDIRECT REPLY?

:-)

Slow down and regroup, Len. Jim has done nothing to prevent
you from
commenting to this newsgroup or to your government. Your rant is vapor.

Dave, consider that perhaps Len considers *any* opposition to
his views as an attempt to silence him.

Poor baby. Still can't take the give-and-take in a newsgroup,
can you?

The PCTA, including Jim Miccolis/N2EY, immediately set upon
discrediting Len's comments and opinions.

Free speech includes the right to discredit other's comments and
opinions if those comments and opinions are not based on facts and
sound logical reasoning. Some of Len's comments and opinions are not
based on facts and sound logical reasoning.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. "Free speech" does not mean that opposition to
the Words of the ARRL shall be silenced. Jimmie speaks as a
parrot of the Words of the ARRL.

Jimmie wants to re-argue and re-argue and re-argue OLD arguments
that appeared in here, perhaps hoping to "win" one that he lost
long ago? Yes, that is "free speech" but it does NOTHING.

In the end, if they cannot
lay waste to Len's comments with rational argument(s),
they claim that
his opinions are simply no good because Len isn't a ham.

Actually the logic is quite different. It comes down to
asking why Len is so interested in amateur radio policy
even though Len is not a ham and has never been one. There
has been a nocodetest amateur radio license in the USA since
1991, yet Len never got one. The maximum code test required
for any US amateur radio license has been 5 wpm since 1990 (with
medical waiver) and since 2000 without a waiver.

Oh, my, Mighty Miccolis the Moral Minder, meandering the
morass of MOTIVES! :-)

Okay, everyone fill out the Motive form in triplicate so
that Mighty Mindcontrol Miccolis can JUDGE all for "rightness"
in saying anything in here!

Nor is Len a manufacturer of amateur radio equipment, nor does
he have anything to do with FCC.

Jimmie no work at FCC. Jimmie no work in electronics.
Jimmie NOT "manufacturer of amateur radio equipment." Jimmie
make state-of-the-art radio transmitter using vacuum tubes
at cost of $100 in 1990s, show picture on home page. Must be
single prototype of "new product". All cheer, applaud.

More than 5-1/2 years ago, Len told us he was going for Extra,
but didn't say when, and it hasn't happened yet.

Keeps you guessing, donut? :-)

Jimmie hasn't told us of his expertise in "parenting" either.
Jimmie hasn't presented his degrees in pediatrics whereby he
be Expert on raising chilluns. How can you conceive expertise?

Jimmie get laid yet?

And regardless of how someone replies to Len's posts here, Len will
reply according to the profile.

The "Profiler" show on TV got cancelled, Jimmie. Consider you
self going same way... :-)

It's just his way.

"It ain't braggin' if ya done it."

Why should anyone reply to his posts at all, Dave?

Gosh, Ms. Profiler, you sure spent a lot of time on an INDIRECT
reply, dintya? :-)

You really DO waste a lot of your own time in here...

K=D8HB wrote:
wrote

How many years will it take for Miccolis to admit that he was wrong?

I was wrong only once. That was the time I thought I was wrong but it tu=
rned
out that I wasn't.
=20
Beep beep
de Hans, K0HB

Lighten up, Hans.

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:

wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:

Intimidating Leonard H. Anderson? How does one intimidate a piranha?
Len began personal attacks long before he got on the receiving end.
Discussion of moderating a newsgroup is not a forbidden subject.

I remember well when Leneoard was all upset that some regular poster
here decided to meet on 40m CW. Len probably considered his right of
free speech to be violated in that instance. Of course he was wrong.

The fact is that your claim that Jim Miccolis prevented Len from posting
here is utter nonsense. You're becoming well known for nonsense.

The fact is that there are two sides to every story, and you clowns
think you own both. You don't. Get used to it.

That's three things offered by you as fact. Please provide any old
evidence at all that what you've claimed, that Jim Miccolis prevented
Len from presenting his views here. A single instance will do.

Do you ever tire of being wrong?

Do you ever tire of being an A1 Operator and work out of band Frenchmen
on 6 meters?

Do you?

Why no, Brian, I've never tired of being an A-1 Op. Do you tire of
being one?

I have no certificate from Hiram, suitable for framing. But I do take
pride in my station, my signal, and my operating abilities. And if I
were aware that French hams were out of band, I wouldn't be completing
circuits for them nor sending them QSL cards.

bb

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
wrote:

From: on Fri 2 Sep 2005 06:09

Dave Heil wrote:

Len has never worked out of band Frenchmen on 6 meters. As far as I
know, only you hold that distinction and title.

He should be PROUD of it.

Perhaps I'll petition my ARRL to come up with a new operating award.

I encourage you to follow through with your idea. It is certain to be
received with the attention it deserves.

Fantastic! An endorsement from the World's Greatest DXer. I'll
request that it be known as the "Heil Award," in your honor.

Heil believes in the good-old-boys-pecking-order-in-club-house
rule of only those tenured in licensing are "suitable" for
"leadership." Heil doesn't want to understand that ALL U.S. civil
radio is regulated and enforced by the FCC, NOT the licensees.

And the Dept. of State is a vehicle for DX destinations.

It can be, *if* you know what you're doing.

I'm sure there were lines of comm types waiting for some of your
destinations.

Dave, off subject - are you eligible for military hops?

But...Heil is easily upset and so he must VENT in here.

What accounts for non-radio amateur Anderson's VENTING in here? You've
haunted an amateur radio newsgroup for close to a decade. You weren't a
radio amateur back then and you aren't a radio amateur now.

Hmmmm? Why would Heil make such a statement?

It must be close to a decade since Heil ceased being a paid
worker in the "foreign service" of the Department of State.
Absolutely NO evidence has been presented of his having learned
ANY diplomacy there.

There you go, Brian. Len's made another factual error. It won't be
five years until the end of this year.

Fair enough. Should I call him a liar at this point? Do I threaten
bricks through windows, slashed tires, terrorized wives? Maybe I need
to start a new thread about how Len might be homosexual or an idiot or
both?

Do I need to do anything?

As to learning "ANY diplomacy",
there is never an instance where an ambassador calls a communications
type and says, "We've just received news from Washington. I want you to
go to the Foreign Ministry and make a demarche".

And there you have it.

He was merely their messenger.

Perhaps it soothes you to cling to that belief.

In addition to sending messages, what else did you do?

I'll bet
you've retold your fascinating tale of BIG TIME HF work at ADA over
fifty times. It is a story having nothing to do with amateur radio and
everything to do with Len Anderson's desire to be recognized as
somebody. Well, you're certainly recognized, Len.

I especially like Jim's recounting amateur radio's contributions during
WWII when there was no legal amateur radio operations in the USA. He
cracks me up.

Then there's Heil's thrilling tales of African adventures
where he "synchronized" State Department communications via
morsemanship in the 1980s...

He opened and closed rtty circuits with CW?

He surely did, but not on the same frequency as the RTTY circuit.

What frequency?

claiming that "radio communications
paths were so poor that they would not support teleprinter/data
modes."

He was probably doing something wrong.

Actually, I maintained the lowest QSY rate of any AFRECONE station.

Is there an award for keeping folks on frequency too long?

That part about claiming that propagation paths were so poor that there
were times when they wouldn't support encrypted RTTY communications? It
was absolutely true. Then again, neither you nor Len know where the
other end of my circuit was. That'll just have to remain a mystery.

I've operated on encrypted circuits as well. That we lacked enough
frequencies to operate 24/7 is true.

None of that has anything to do with amateur radio...unless one
counts the entirety of the Department of State as an "amateur"
effort of foreign policy.

Do you think has an anti-U.S. Foreign Policy bias, Brian?

I -could- pretend to not understand your question, but that would be
too heilish.

I think that Len has an anti-Heil bias. And when you apparently deny
your professional radio experience, what are we to think? I think that
you choose to not recognize your professional radio experience because
it might get in the way of your denigrations of Len.

"Sorry Len, State Dept. Communications IS Amateur Radio!" Hi,
hi!

You wrote it. It is your quote. Don't be surprised if you see it again.

"Hi, hi!" A joke. You're welcome to bring it up again at anytime - as
a joke.

Tsk. In other government radio, the U.S. military has maintained
teleprinter/data networks 24/7 in equatorial regions as well as
elsewhere some THIRTY YEARS PRIOR to Heil's tale of inability to
get a State Department radio circuit working. [Asmara, Eritrea,
was the principal relay point for DCS/Starcom/ACAN linkage of
Manila, Phillipines, to Pirmasens, FRG, kept open on 24/7 basis
from 1948 to about 1978...Asmara can be considered to be in the
"equatorial region" of the African continent]

I would consider it so. But I only have a degree in Geography.

With that degree, you'd likely be able to figure that Bissau and
Freetown are across the continent from Asmara. When my old colleagues
speak of the "West African Echo" they don't include East Africa. Go
figure. I didn't work into nor did I work through Asmara. The missing
piece of the puzzle for both of you is the location of the station I
worked into. Good luck.

Ascension.

Heil is of the dictatorial view that ONLY licensed radio amateurs
are worthy of commenting/talking/discussing ANYTHING about amateur
radio...the "clubhouse" syndrome. Of course, such an attitude
would NEGATE U.S. government regulation and enforcement of amateur
radio since no Commissioner or FCC staffer is required to hold any
amateur radio license grants.

That's a dichotomy in thinking of Heil as a former employee of the
U.S. government. It's also friggin' WEIRD.

Len has discussed. Len had commented. I'm guessing that Len has
talked, though there's no evidence of it here. Len has insulted. Len
has denigrated. Len has belittled.

I agree. Has Len been insulted? denigrated? belittled?

As to the FCC staffer schpiel, it has been previously addressed a number
of times. Len isn't an FCC staffer, nor is he a radio amateur.

Nor are most FCC staffers, even the ones dealing directly with amateur
radio.

Heil may have spent too much time in the basement with his radios.

Now *that* would be weird. My hamshack consists of two, adjacent second
floor rooms.

You told us you lived in a tarpaper shack.

Heil (who claims to be a linguist of Hunnish) forgot, in another
post, that the fictious name of "Dudley" was used by author Earnest
K. Gann in his book, "Fate Is The Hunter." [my mention in here]
Frank Gilliland and I used another fictitious name of "Dudly" in
reference to another, a military pretender in here. There was no
misspelling of "Dudley" at all, just the use of "Dudly" to
differentiate from Gann's original name use. A shortened form of
"Dudly" is "Dud" which also fits that other, the pretender.

I see. It must be like your use of "Atila" to differentiate between the
real "Attila" and your use of "beligerent" to differentiate between real
warlike "belligerants". The name "Dudley" is an actual name. The name
"Dudly" doesn't exist. Very UNPROFESSIONAL, Leonard; very UNPROFESSIONAL.

It's less unprofessional than working out of band Frenchmen on 6
meters, IMHO.

Heil attempts to word-play in a puerile game of trying to be the
schoolmistress rapping the knuckles of "students" who make minor
"typographical" errors in spelling.

Dave is smug.

I certainly can be from time to time.

From time to time?

Len used a couple of words three
or more times each. He spelled them in the same incorrect way each
time. They were not typographical errors. They were Len's spelling
errors. Did you know that Len claims to be a PROFESSIONAL writer?

Aye. You should see my son's textbooks....

I did not mention any Hun
who wishes to conquer any ham world, only that Heil attempts to be
a master of Hunnish language and the only "judge" on translations
of Hunnish to English.

Dave must be multi-lingual.

If the word belligerent is based in Latin, then I am. Len seems to
think it was used by Attila and his horde.

What word would attila have used?

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
wrote:

From: on Fri 2 Sep 2005 06:09

Dave Heil wrote:

Len has never worked out of band Frenchmen on 6 meters. As far as I
know, only you hold that distinction and title.

He should be PROUD of it.


Perhaps I'll petition my ARRL to come up with a new operating award.

I encourage you to follow through with your idea. It is certain to be
received with the attention it deserves.


Heil believes in the good-old-boys-pecking-order-in-club-house
rule of only those tenured in licensing are "suitable" for
"leadership." Heil doesn't want to understand that ALL U.S. civil
radio is regulated and enforced by the FCC, NOT the licensees.


And the Dept. of State is a vehicle for DX destinations.

It can be, *if* you know what you're doing.


But...Heil is easily upset and so he must VENT in here.

What accounts for non-radio amateur Anderson's VENTING in here? You've
haunted an amateur radio newsgroup for close to a decade. You weren't a
radio amateur back then and you aren't a radio amateur now.

Hmmmm? Why would Heil make such a statement?

It must be close to a decade since Heil ceased being a paid
worker in the "foreign service" of the Department of State.
Absolutely NO evidence has been presented of his having learned
ANY diplomacy there.

There you go, Brian. Len's made another factual error. It won't be
five years until the end of this year. As to learning "ANY diplomacy",
there is never an instance where an ambassador calls a communications
type and says, "We've just received news from Washington. I want you to
go to the Foreign Ministry and make a demarche".

He was merely their messenger.

Perhaps it soothes you to cling to that belief.

I'll bet
you've retold your fascinating tale of BIG TIME HF work at ADA over
fifty times. It is a story having nothing to do with amateur radio and
everything to do with Len Anderson's desire to be recognized as
somebody. Well, you're certainly recognized, Len.

I especially like Jim's recounting amateur radio's contributions during
WWII when there was no legal amateur radio operations in the USA. He
cracks me up.

Then there's Heil's thrilling tales of African adventures
where he "synchronized" State Department communications via
morsemanship in the 1980s...


He opened and closed rtty circuits with CW?

He surely did, but not on the same frequency as the RTTY circuit.

claiming that "radio communications
paths were so poor that they would not support teleprinter/data
modes."


He was probably doing something wrong.

Actually, I maintained the lowest QSY rate of any AFRECONE station.
That part about claiming that propagation paths were so poor that there
were times when they wouldn't support encrypted RTTY communications? It
was absolutely true. Then again, neither you nor Len know where the
other end of my circuit was. That'll just have to remain a mystery.

None of that has anything to do with amateur radio...unless one
counts the entirety of the Department of State as an "amateur"
effort of foreign policy.

Do you think has an anti-U.S. Foreign Policy bias, Brian?

"Sorry Len, State Dept. Communications IS Amateur Radio!" Hi,
hi!

You wrote it. It is your quote. Don't be surprised if you see it again.


Tsk. In other government radio, the U.S. military has maintained
teleprinter/data networks 24/7 in equatorial regions as well as
elsewhere some THIRTY YEARS PRIOR to Heil's tale of inability to
get a State Department radio circuit working. [Asmara, Eritrea,
was the principal relay point for DCS/Starcom/ACAN linkage of
Manila, Phillipines, to Pirmasens, FRG, kept open on 24/7 basis
from 1948 to about 1978...Asmara can be considered to be in the
"equatorial region" of the African continent]


I would consider it so. But I only have a degree in Geography.

With that degree, you'd likely be able to figure that Bissau and
Freetown are across the continent from Asmara. When my old colleagues
speak of the "West African Echo" they don't include East Africa. Go
figure. I didn't work into nor did I work through Asmara. The missing
piece of the puzzle for both of you is the location of the station I
worked into. Good luck.

Heil is of the dictatorial view that ONLY licensed radio amateurs
are worthy of commenting/talking/discussing ANYTHING about amateur
radio...the "clubhouse" syndrome. Of course, such an attitude
would NEGATE U.S. government regulation and enforcement of amateur
radio since no Commissioner or FCC staffer is required to hold any
amateur radio license grants.

That's a dichotomy in thinking of Heil as a former employee of the
U.S. government. It's also friggin' WEIRD.

Len has discussed. Len had commented. I'm guessing that Len has
talked, though there's no evidence of it here. Len has insulted. Len
has denigrated. Len has belittled.

As to the FCC staffer schpiel, it has been previously addressed a number
of times. Len isn't an FCC staffer, nor is he a radio amateur.


Heil may have spent too much time in the basement with his radios.

Now *that* would be weird. My hamshack consists of two, adjacent second
floor rooms.

Heil (who claims to be a linguist of Hunnish) forgot, in another
post, that the fictious name of "Dudley" was used by author Earnest
K. Gann in his book, "Fate Is The Hunter." [my mention in here]
Frank Gilliland and I used another fictitious name of "Dudly" in
reference to another, a military pretender in here. There was no
misspelling of "Dudley" at all, just the use of "Dudly" to
differentiate from Gann's original name use. A shortened form of
"Dudly" is "Dud" which also fits that other, the pretender.

I see. It must be like your use of "Atila" to differentiate between the
real "Attila" and your use of "beligerent" to differentiate between real
warlike "belligerants". The name "Dudley" is an actual name. The name
"Dudly" doesn't exist. Very UNPROFESSIONAL, Leonard; very UNPROFESSIONAL.

It's less unprofessional than working out of band Frenchmen on 6
meters, IMHO.

Heil attempts to word-play in a puerile game of trying to be the
schoolmistress rapping the knuckles of "students" who make minor
"typographical" errors in spelling.


Dave is smug.

I certainly can be from time to time. Len used a couple of words three
or more times each. He spelled them in the same incorrect way each
time. They were not typographical errors. They were Len's spelling
errors. Did you know that Len claims to be a PROFESSIONAL writer?

I did not mention any Hun
who wishes to conquer any ham world, only that Heil attempts to be
a master of Hunnish language and the only "judge" on translations
of Hunnish to English.


Dave must be multi-lingual.

If the word belligerent is based in Latin, then I am. Len seems to
think it was used by Attila and his horde.

Dave K8MN

K=D8HB wrote:
wrote


I recall taking the GROL. Looked identical to the Amatuer Advanced
exam.


The GROL exam has Amateur Radio questions in it?

I never knew that! Sunuvagun!

Beep beep
de Hans, K0HB

You must be in league with the Four Morsemen.

The physics of electronics and radio do not change with the type of
license you test for. Best of luck.

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

wrote:

wrote:

From: on Aug 28, 6:02 pm

Dave Heil wrote:

hot

Dave Heil wrote:

wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:

wrote:
wrote:

From: on Aug 25, 2:42 pm

K4YZ wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:
Frank Gilliland wrote:

I've seen any number of Len's comments made to look like the product of
one who has little experience.

As Len has questioned your net control capabilities.

Not quite true either side. I was citing Heil as a CONTROL FREAK
that he appears to be from all his postings to me. Evident to all.

Closing a net with CW?

The only nets I've ever closed with CW were CW nets.


More word play.

Word play? Hardly. I've never participated in a State Department net
on RTTY or CW.

More word play. Clintonesque.

Further down you just admitted to opening and closing RTTY net using CW
on "another frequency."

I have experience in radio. A considerable amount. Most of it is
PROFESSIONAL radio...that kind that pays money for services
rendered.

Heil must not equate government employ in the Department of State
as "professional" yet he obviously got MONEY for that, PLUS living
expenses.

Obviously he's not professional.

...not any more. There aren't any professional radio amateurs.

When did that end?

It never began.

You should work on your facts.

The W1AW operator is paid a salary to transmit on amateur frequencies.
School teachers may make radio transmissions as a part of their paid
instructions to students.

Professional credentials don't get one a pass into amateur radio.

What? Another set of redundant licensing requirements?

They aren't redundant. They're for different services.

Oh yeh, forgot the physics change with the different services.

I recall taking the GROL. Looked identical to the Amatuer Advanced
exam.

Really? Were there lots of regulatory questions dealing with the
amateur bands?

There were lots of identical electronics and radio physics material.
Identical to the Advanced exam. And whaddayaknow? The exam was
administered by a famous VEC. Go figure?

...they claim that
his opinions are simply no good because Len isn't a ham.

Sometimes Len's opinions are no good because they are issued because he
has no experience in amateur radio. Sometimes his opinions are no good
because they are the rantings of a geezer with an ax to grind. Often,
he makes factual errors and there have been numerous times when he
deliberately fabricates.

You want us to believe that all of Len's comments are to be discarded.

Heil doesn't like my commenting, therefore I am to be "discarded,"
discredited, demeaned, and some other "d" I can't think of. :-)

demonized.

Deep-sixed.

As in murdered?

As in "deep-sixed".

As in "murdered?"

David Heil/K8MN is a primary culprit in that tactic, but Jim has used it as
well.

Oh no, I've by no means been "a primary culprit", but I have
participated over a period of years.

Can you guess how many times you've commented that Len isn't an amateur
radio operator?

He has a macro sentence generator for that. :-)

And there is a purpose for his stating that you're not an amateur.

There certainly is. It is to point out that Len isn't a radio amateur
and that he has no experience in amateur radio.

There must be somthing more to it than that.

A read-between-the-lines guy like you would probably attempt to find a
hidden meaning or agenda.

This is what surprises me. Except for this, your agendas and
double-standards are obvious. This one has me puzzled.

He is to amateur radio

as a fishing rod to deer hunting.

You're not even close enough to be considered a poor analogue.

It'd be tough to come up with something. I'm a long time participant in
amateur radio. The closest Len can come is being an SWL.

Well there you go! You could say that he is a "lurker" on the HF
frequencies. That should sound nefarious enough to raise eyebrows.

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
From: on Aug 25, 2:42 pm
K4YZ wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:
Frank Gilliland wrote:

Just as they have not permitted you to comment about "amateur" radio
because you hold no license, NoServers may not comment about the
military.

Hold on, Sparky. Len has commented here at great length and on many,
many occasions.

And what has Jim's response been to Len's comments?

It has been quite varied and quite mild considering Len's typical
insulting demeanor. What Jim hasn't done is to prevent or attempt to
prevent Len from making those comments.

The PCTA, including Jim Miccolis/N2EY, immediately set upon
discrediting Len's comments and opinions.

Correct. Questioning or discrediting is not what you claimed. What you
said was that Len wasn't permitted to comment. You were incorrect.

We were instructed to discard Len's comments.

...and you always follow instruction--right?

And you always give instruction not to be followed--right?

...and you always follow instruction--right?

....right.

In the end, if they cannot
lay waste to Len's comments with rational argument(s)...

I've seen any number of Len's comments made to look like the product of
one who has little experience.


As Len has questioned your net control capabilities.

Net control capabilities? What in the world are you going on about?

Opening and closing a RTTY net with CW. Hi!

I've been involved in both as a radio amateur. Len wouldn't know
anything about that. I've never been involved in either as a State
Department employee. Len wouldn't know anything about that either.

Calm down.

...they claim that
his opinions are simply no good because Len isn't a ham.

Sometimes Len's opinions are no good because they are issued because he
has no experience in amateur radio. Sometimes his opinions are no good
because they are the rantings of a geezer with an ax to grind. Often,
he makes factual errors and there have been numerous times when he
deliberately fabricates.

You want us to believe that all of Len's comments are to be discarded.

I'd settle for 80-90%.

About the same percentage as your commnets. Imagine that!

No RTTY or CW State Department "commnets".

Frustrated technical writer?

David Heil/K8MN is a primary culprit in that tactic, but Jim has used it as
well.

Oh no, I've by no means been "a primary culprit", but I have
participated over a period of years.

Can you guess how many times you've commented that Len isn't an amateur
radio operator?

I didn't know there was going to be a quiz.

There is always a quiz where your motives are concerned.

I'm taking a whiz on your quiz.

Lay off the branch water.

It has to be fewer than the

number of recountings of his ADA tale or his comments about FCC staffers
don't need to hold amateur radio licenses.

Are FCC staffers required to hold an amateur radio license in order to
hold their positions?

Are they paid for regulating amateur radio? Are DMV employees required
to hold a driving license? Are DNR clerks mandated to have a hunting
license? Do you understand any of this?

FCC staffers - regulate amateur radio - receive a salary

radio amateurs - participate in amateur radio - receive no salary

Len Anderson - not a regulator or participant - receives no salary

So people without licenses and least likely to know anything about
anything are regulating our radio, our drivers, and people with guns???

There ought to be a law!

Len isn't involved in amateur
radio. He wraps himself in bunting and writes of his Constitutional
rights of free speech and to petition his government. Well, he has done
those things. Nothing on this planet can prevent me from lauging at him
or ridiculing him or his ideas.

Nor him you.

That's where I came in. Len's been doing that almost since my first
posts to this newsgroup in 1996.

Congratulations on almost a century of posting meaningless drivel.

A century, huh? That must be the new math.

Sorry, Log -10

Len writes of being denigrated or
insulted by those who do not agree with his him but he often insults and
denigrates those who have the opposite point of view.

Perhaps Len is correct to do so.

The signs point to his not being correct.

Please point out those "signs."

Check under the Google sign. Take some Pepto Bismol first and be
prepared to spend some time.

I've seen plenty of name calling and denigration moving in Len's
direction.

Your point?

He is quick to tell others that they are not discussing amateur radio
policy,

Get a clue, he's giving it back to you. He's been told that he is not
an amateur radio operator and should be here. This is a place only of
amateurs and amateur things.

I don't think Len has ever been told that he should be here. :-)

Typo.

A *big* typo.

"not"

You really are a frustrated technical writer, aren't you?

I'm neither frustrated nor a technical writer. I don't have the knack
for making simple terms seem complex.

Yet you have a knack to make simple typos into undecipherable passages.
You should put your lack of talent to more useful purposes.

Back to the subject.

Really? You're going to lay waste to Frank of Silliland's silliness?

Hi! Robeson is in hiding.

Len has declared a several-decades-long "interest" in amateur radio.

OK.

I'm sure he feels better now that you've blessed the concept.

There's nothing new there. I thought you were the guy that couldn't
take the simple and make it complex. Yet you point out the plain and
obvious and expect me to get excited.

He's never been interested enough to even attempt passing a license
exam.

How do you know that?

That's easy. He has told us so.

OK.

Len was going to go for an "Extra right out of the box" several
years back. That hasn't happened.

How do you know that?

Another easy one. He has told us so.

OK. That means you and the three other Morsemen are still safe from
having to talk to him on the radio.

Is there anything else?

We have him declaring within the
past few months that he has *no interest* in obtaining an amateur radio
license. Tsk, tsk. What is one to believe?

Perhaps he has tried and failed. Many people fail the tests.

It is certainly possible for you to be correct. Do you think Len is
fibbing about taking a test because he doesn't want to embarrass himself?

I certainly thought that dysfunctional and illiterate Bruce was fibbing
about having passed Extra on a lark, without studying, in under 7
minutes, with 100% correct, and winning a wager of $250. But I guess I
was wrong. So after being so wrong with such a slam-dunk, I'd rather
not venture a guess about Len.

then he goes on a multi-post rant having everything to do with
personalities and nothing to do with amateur radio.

Have you ever thought of reigning in Robeson?

Am I in charge of Steve's postings? Feel free to take on the job if you
think it should be done.

Yet you think that you are in charge of Anderson. You take it as a
personal challenge to reign in Len's postings.

I do? I've never told Len to shut up or to go away. I've countered
him, challenged his assertions and ridiculed a number of his ideas.

The word is "rein".

Please forgive me.

Why is that?

It isn't.

Hi!

When you do, get back to
me about Len and we'll talk some more.

Howzzat? Did I suggest that it is up to you to control Len's bad behavior?

Then end your decade-long griping about Len.

Thanks, but no thanks.

Learning theory fails. There's certainly no change in your
behavio[u]r.

Take your own advice and
simply don't read it.

You and others are free to ignore my advice. I feel free to ignore yours.

And you your own. If it is worthless to you, why try to pawn it off on
others?

And don't start tail-ending someone elses
comments as Jim has, in order to comment on Len's opinions. Hi!

How about if I simply ignore your suggestions? There's certainly
precedent for doing so.

There certainly is.

You, of course, are Len's little electrolytic acolyte.

And you are the World Famous DXer that works out of band Frenchmen on 6
Meters.

Well, I certainly operate on 6m, but always within the regs which govern
my amateur radio operation. I don't control French radio amateurs any
more than I'm responsible for Steve's posts.

I'd prefer not to engage out of band Frenchmen on six meters...

You are free to check the allocations of any country's radio amateurs
before working them. You may quiz any foreign or domestic radio
amateurs about whether they are outside their alloted bands or band
segments. You may complain to any country's PTT if its amateurs call you
outside their published allocations. I woulnd't encourage just anyone
to do so but I feel that you need purpose in your life.

"wouldn't" Lots of anger.

...and not
to give Robeson a pass on his outrageous behavio[u]r by remaining
silent.

I don't control the postings of Steve Robeson. He is responsible for
his own postings. I'm free to comment or not comment on them. You
speak of them as outrageous. I feel that comments directed to Steve
about his military service, border on outrageous. You have written some
of them. Frank the CBer and Leonard Anderson have written others.

Steve has repeatedly told me that if I can't show proof, then my claims
didn't happen and that I'm a liar. I merely hold Steve to his own
ethics. Tuff Love.

I noticed that you made no comments about "Colonel" Mark Morgan's recent
outrageous lies about me. Why is that? Did you see the quoted Google
material which revealed his claims to be a lie? Aren't you, by your own
standards, responsible for his posts?

MARK! You bedda stop dat!

Feel better?

You, of course, will do both.

I will operate under the regs imposed by my license. I will not take
personal responsibility for newsgroup posts other than my own. Those
are two things you'll have to live with.

Dave K8MN

I hope you won't mind me sharing.

wrote:
From: on Sun 4 Sep 2005 07:48

wrote:
snip
From: on Aug 28, 8:18 am

In the end, if they cannot
lay waste to Len's comments with rational argument(s),
they claim that
his opinions are simply no good because Len isn't a ham.

Actually the logic is quite different. It comes down to
asking why Len is so interested in amateur radio policy
even though Len is not a ham and has never been one. There
has been a nocodetest amateur radio license in the USA since
1991, yet Len never got one. The maximum code test required
for any US amateur radio license has been 5 wpm since 1990 (with
medical waiver) and since 2000 without a waiver.

[Jimmie NEVER got a no-code-test Technician license...]

But he's got 101 opinions about it.

Nor is Len a manufacturer of amateur radio equipment, nor does
he have anything to do with FCC.

[Jimmie is a "manufacturer of amateur radio equipment"...makes
one of a kind equipment...state-of-the-art style using vacuum
tubes in the 1990s]

He's preparing for the big EM Pulse.

More than 5-1/2 years ago, Len told us he was going for Extra,
but didn't say when, and it hasn't happened yet.

[tsk, tsk, make a statement long ago and the Profiler HOLDS ONTO
that as a "lifelong goal"...as he was taught in Seminary...]

Hey Len, have you ever worked Frenchmen out of band on Six Meters?

So in the end, when Jim Miccolis/N2EY, David Heil/K8MN, Brian
Kelly/W3RV, and Steven J. Robeson/K4YZ/K4CAP point out that Len is not
an amateur, for what purpose do you do so? What do you hope to gain
from pointing out that Len isn't an amateur?

Jimmie has a need to WIN MESSAGE POINTS. :-)

No, there's something else to it. Probably something on Aaron Jones
list of "Morse Myths." By coming out with whatever their motivations
are, it will expose yet another myth. But which one?

Jimmie wants to be TOP DAWG in here! :-)

Never happen if he can't face legitimate discussion.

And regardless of how someone replies to Len's posts here, Len will
reply according to the profile.

It's just his way.

Why should anyone reply to his posts at all, Dave?

73 de Jim, N2EY

Hi, hi! You reply directly to my comment, then you act as if you are
speaking to Dave. Then you ask why anyone should reply to Len's posts
at all. More hi, hi's!

Jim, when you're ready to have a rational discussion with me, I'll be
here.

Brian, don't expect a "rational discussion" with Jimmie. Repeated
asking will get you PROFILED! :-)



Yeh, well.

Mike Coslo wrote:
wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote:
Frank Gilliland wrote:
On 4 Sep 2005 16:44:42 -0700, wrote in
ups.com:
Mike Coslo wrote:
snip

That being said, there is no doubt in my mind that
the world was *not*
created in seven days starting on Sunday, the 23rd of October
in 4004 BC
as determined by Ussher - and put in print in one of my bibles at home.

Actually, Genesis says it took six days - because the Creator
rested on the seventh day.

Rush job, too. Left a lot of holes....

LOL!!!

snip

I highly doubt that it was created by
a supreme being.

Why? Couldn't the Supreme Being have set it all
in motion, and the Bang was just the method?

I get a kick out of some of these discussions. Especially regarding
evolution. These "Christians" are constantly trying to poke holes in
the theory, yet are too short-sighted to consider that 'evolution'
(even with all it's holes) might be one of God's creations. If so,
then they are effectively attacking their own faith.

I've asked them that (one time I was trapped in a car on a 4 hour drive
with a couple fundies- arrrgh) We had a grand old time. I used to keep
me yap shut because it doesn't do much good, but after the second hour
of them trying to save my soul, I unleashed the dogs on them.


Does your soul need saving?

They think so!

Would you be offended if they prayed for your soul?

Turns out

they did not know where the water came from or went to, and didn't know
why the kangaroos had to swim from Australia to the middle east in order
not to drown.

Do you refer to a flood? There's one in New Orleans right now. Do you
know where the water came from? Do you know how it's going to be let
out? Are the zoo animals swimming for Cairo?

The water came from two sources. One was fresh water and the other salt
water from a storm surge. Water that was once some place else came to be
deposited in New Orleans and the world has suffered no increase or
decrease in the amount of water that exists in the world.

Do you know this from first-hand experience, or what?

The world
covering biblical flood is quite a different matter.

The known world in the biblical flood...

A huge amount of
water that doesn't exist here toady would have to had existed at that
time.

Why?

It would have had to be someplace else before the flood, and then
after the flood, it would have had to go some place else.

Much like the water in New Orleans. It wasn't there two weeks ago.
Three months from now it will be somewhere else. Will you be able to
account for all of the water then?

Another interesting question:

During the rain and flood period, the ocean levels would have to raise
by many 10's of thousands of feet. What effect would this have on the
rotational velocity of the earth? Same thing when the water receded.

Probably rotate faster as a water covered earth should have far less
frictional drag than a rough land/mountain covered earth. If you
discount the atmosphere.

Since the water came from rain, and therefore fresh, there should be a
distinct record of the Oceans salinity dropping drastically at that time.

You should have asked Noah if he could float an egg in the water or
not.

Even my more serious questions were troublesome for them,

especially since they were engineers. They really hated my thoughts on
how if they were correct about the young universe and Earth were fact,
some of the "facts" that they tried to use to disprove Evolution, such
as dating anomalies, could not be true because the basic nuclear decay
rates (or is that nukular?) were wrong to begin with.

- Mike KB3EIA -

It's "nuclear." And they should be dating much younger women if decay
is going to be a problem.

I had dated a few anomalies myself in my younger days. Some were fun,
and others.....

Too many cultures have a tradition of a great flood for it to be a
fairy tale.

A. Melon wrote:
In article . com
"an Old friend" wrote:


Dave Heil wrote:
an Old friend wrote:
cut

I noticed that you made no comments about "Colonel" Mark Morgan's recent
outrageous lies about me. Why is that? Did you see the quoted Google
material which revealed his claims to be a lie? Aren't you, by your own
standards, responsible for his posts?


because I wasn't lying at worst I was eeing things differently than you

You posted baldfaced lies and when you were presented with facts, you
chose to ignore them. In fact, you continued with additional lies. If
you'd stoop to these lies, there's likely nothing about which you'd not lie.

what bald faced lies?

Anybody who disagrees with Dave Vile is a liar, didn't you know that? guffaw!
I have noticed

different edition of websters I guess


One thing you and Stvie need to learn is that disagreeing with isn't
lying
cut

There was no disagreement. There was only your posting of deliberate,
malicious untruths. You wrote that I was posting in a usenet
"personals" group. I wasn't. You wrote that I was flirting with a
woman. I wasn't. You wrote that I was flirting with a bisexual woman.
I wasn't. You wouldn't know the truth if it whapped you in the face.

you were posting in group consiting of nothing but presonal adds and
sexual flirtations

you were posting stuff of a flirting nature, directed toward a bisexual
female

Guess he was bored with the one he married.
and interesting that he attacks me so vicously for being a BIsexual
male but will flirt with Bisexual female

an Old friend wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

an Old friend wrote:

cut

I noticed that you made no comments about "Colonel" Mark Morgan's recent
outrageous lies about me. Why is that? Did you see the quoted Google
material which revealed his claims to be a lie? Aren't you, by your own
standards, responsible for his posts?


because I wasn't lying at worst I was eeing things differently than you

You posted baldfaced lies and when you were presented with facts, you
chose to ignore them. In fact, you continued with additional lies. If
you'd stoop to these lies, there's likely nothing about which you'd not lie.


what bald faced lies?

The lies which I outlined below. You know full well which baldfaced lies.

One thing you and Stvie need to learn is that disagreeing with isn't
lying
cut

There was no disagreement. There was only your posting of deliberate,
malicious untruths. You wrote that I was posting in a usenet
"personals" group. I wasn't. You wrote that I was flirting with a
woman. I wasn't. You wrote that I was flirting with a bisexual woman.
I wasn't. You wouldn't know the truth if it whapped you in the face.


you were posting in group consiting of nothing but presonal adds and
sexual flirtations

That is one lie. I was posting in alt.west-virginia.

you were posting stuff of a flirting nature, directed toward a bisexual
female

That is two more lies. I posted nothing of a flirtaceous nature and I
posted nothing to a bisexual female.

I know the turth you lack a nodding understanding of it

You not only don't "know the turth", you incapable of being truthful.

again One thing you and Stvie need to learn is that disagreeing with
isn't
lying

There is no disagreement, Mark. You flat out lied, deliberately,
brazenly and maliciously.

You're one of the most sorry human beings I've ever encountered.


you have nevr entounteed me thnak god

No, I haven't entounteed you. I've encountered you right here.

Why are you "thnaking" a deity in which you have no belief?


Dave K8MN

Dave Heil wrote:
an Old friend wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

an Old friend wrote:

cut

I noticed that you made no comments about "Colonel" Mark Morgan's recent
outrageous lies about me. Why is that? Did you see the quoted Google
material which revealed his claims to be a lie? Aren't you, by your own
standards, responsible for his posts?


because I wasn't lying at worst I was eeing things differently than you

You posted baldfaced lies and when you were presented with facts, you
chose to ignore them. In fact, you continued with additional lies. If
you'd stoop to these lies, there's likely nothing about which you'd not lie.


what bald faced lies?

The lies which I outlined below. You know full well which baldfaced lies.

One thing you and Stvie need to learn is that disagreeing with isn't
lying
cut

There was no disagreement. There was only your posting of deliberate,
malicious untruths. You wrote that I was posting in a usenet
"personals" group. I wasn't. You wrote that I was flirting with a
woman. I wasn't. You wrote that I was flirting with a bisexual woman.
I wasn't. You wouldn't know the truth if it whapped you in the face.


you were posting in group consiting of nothing but presonal adds and
sexual flirtations

That is one lie. I was posting in alt.west-virginia.

no lie it was that named group but you were posting in group consiting
of nothing but presonal adds and sexual flirtations

you were posting stuff of a flirting nature, directed toward a bisexual
female

That is two more lies. I posted nothing of a flirtaceous nature and I
posted nothing to a bisexual female.

both true

I know the turth you lack a nodding understanding of it

You not only don't "know the turth", you incapable of being truthful.

I crtian can be, and yes I certainly can choose not to be

again One thing you and Stvie need to learn is that disagreeing with
isn't
lying

There is no disagreement, Mark. You flat out lied, deliberately,
brazenly and maliciously.
No lie what so ever


You're one of the most sorry human beings I've ever encountered.


you have nevr entounteed me thnak god

No, I haven't entounteed you. I've encountered you right here.

Why are you "thnaking" a deity in which you have no belief?

where do you get that LIE


Dave K8MN

an Old friend wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

an Old friend wrote:

KØHB wrote:


"an Old friend" wrote



because I wasn't lying at worst I was eeing things differently than you


Yup, draftee Colonel Morgan of the Chemical Corps. It's not a lie. At worst,
the US Army is just "eeing things differently than you".


that stament of rank was alie as I admited years ago
both you and Dave and stevie refuse to accept that

"Both" is three people? I accept one of your lies as a lie. I accept a
number of your lies as lies. You can't be counted upon to tell the truth.

agreeded

You might be "agreeding" or you just might be lying about it.

as I have said many times you can't count on me to tell the turth about
where I am how to find me or my past. I don't think that is safe
behavoir

Posting malicious lies about someone on a newsgroup isn't safe behavior
either.

Mark C Morgan, 17366 N River Rd, Chassell, MI 49916

You're pretty easy to find, lies or no lies. The Radio Amateur Callbook
has you listed as does the FCC. Do you think your past is any less easy
to find?

you and Stevie prove me right

You're probably lying.

You came into this newsgroup blowing smoke and lying and you're still
doing it.

or adknowledge that a fellow has right to use what tols are at hand
when threatened as stevie did

Right. You lie and it is Steve Robeson's fault. I see.


another of YOUR lies

Naw, you're likely lying again, Colonel. You tell one lie and then
another to cover up the first.

I choose to defnd myself I choose that path and it worked quite well
stveie was posting for days about his efforts to track me down

Mark, finding anyone's whereabouts just isn't that tough as a rule. It
is even easier to find a U.S. radio amateur. Most Americans aren't in
hiding for any reason.

you refuse to accept that I know everyone lies

I know you lie and Stevie lies and everyone else

I can't believe a thing you say, Mark. You're most likely lying again
to cover another lie.

what I can't stand about you and some other your dishonesty about that
central point and that you make up stuff that you claim someone said
then say they leid in saying it

Let's see you come up with an example of your claim. After all, you
made up some things and attributed actions to me when an examination of
the facts by anyone at all would show you to be an outrageous liar.


You support and endorse crime for goodness sake you will willing aid
and abet it

Call that pool of typists, Mark. You're headed toward writing pure
gibberish. I have not and do not support, endorse or abet crime. You
are either lying or a fool. Which is it?

and you have admitted to this on hear

I know I've said it before, Mark, but it bears repeating: You're a twit.


Dave K8MN

Dave Heil wrote:
an Old friend wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

an Old friend wrote:

K=D8HB wrote:


"an Old friend" wrote



because I wasn't lying at worst I was eeing things differently than =
you


Yup, draftee Colonel Morgan of the Chemical Corps. It's not a lie. =
At worst,
the US Army is just "eeing things differently than you".


that stament of rank was alie as I admited years ago
both you and Dave and stevie refuse to accept that

"Both" is three people? I accept one of your lies as a lie. I accept a
number of your lies as lies. You can't be counted upon to tell the tru=
th.

agreeded

You might be "agreeding" or you just might be lying about it.

I might indeed

as I have said many times you can't count on me to tell the turth about
where I am how to find me or my past. I don't think that is safe
behavoir

Posting malicious lies about someone on a newsgroup isn't safe behavior
either.

more threats Dave boring
more stalking

you and Stevie prove me right

You're probably lying.

not this time

You prove me right with most posts stevie with alomst every post

You came into this newsgroup blowing smoke and lying and you're still
doing it.

or adknowledge that a fellow has right to use what tols are at hand
when threatened as stevie did

Right. You lie and it is Steve Robeson's fault. I see.


another of YOUR lies

Naw, you're likely lying again, Colonel. You tell one lie and then
another to cover up the first.

I choose to defnd myself I choose that path and it worked quite well
stveie was posting for days about his efforts to track me down

Mark, finding anyone's whereabouts just isn't that tough as a rule. It
is even easier to find a U.S. radio amateur. Most Americans aren't in
hiding for any reason.

you refuse to accept that I know everyone lies

I know you lie and Stevie lies and everyone else

I can't believe a thing you say, Mark. You're most likely lying again
to cover another lie.

what I can't stand about you and some other your dishonesty about that
central point and that you make up stuff that you claim someone said
then say they leid in saying it

Let's see you come up with an example of your claim. After all, you
made up some things and attributed actions to me when an examination of
the facts by anyone at all would show you to be an outrageous liar.

your claim that I don't believe in god for example is a case where you
made up something


You support and endorse crime for goodness sake you will willing aid
and abet it

Call that pool of typists, Mark. You're headed toward writing pure
gibberish. I have not and do not support, endorse or abet crime. You
are either lying or a fool. Which is it?

you sure do support crime and are willing to aid it

and you have admitted to this on hear

I know I've said it before, Mark, but it bears repeating: You're a twit.

you are a lair and a bad one too
=20
=20
Dave K8MN

"Mike Coslo" wrote


If you look deeply enough, the snide remarks are not really about God. They
are about the people who would form God in their own image.

Problem is, that is an awful lot of people. Most, in fact.


I could believe in a god in the image of say, Pamela Anderson!

Beep beep!
de Hans, K0HB

wrote

Lighten up, Hans.

My doctor said my weight is (172#) is ideal for my height.

Beep beep!
de Hans, K0HB

KØHB wrote:
"Mike Coslo" wrote


If you look deeply enough, the snide remarks are not really about God. They
are about the people who would form God in their own image.

Problem is, that is an awful lot of people. Most, in fact.



I could believe in a god in the image of say, Pamela Anderson!

I can't accept a slutty, trailer trash deity who looks like five miles
of bad road.

Dave K8MN

Dave Heil wrote:
K=D8HB wrote:
"Mike Coslo" wrote


If you look deeply enough, the snide remarks are not really about God. =
They
are about the people who would form God in their own image.

Problem is, that is an awful lot of people. Most, in fact.



I could believe in a god in the image of say, Pamela Anderson!

I can't accept a slutty, trailer trash deity who looks like five miles
of bad road.

ah yes show a streak of mysogny too

=20
Dave K8MN

an_old_friend wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

an Old friend wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:


an Old friend wrote:

cut


I noticed that you made no comments about "Colonel" Mark Morgan's recent
outrageous lies about me. Why is that? Did you see the quoted Google
material which revealed his claims to be a lie? Aren't you, by your own
standards, responsible for his posts?


because I wasn't lying at worst I was eeing things differently than you

You posted baldfaced lies and when you were presented with facts, you
chose to ignore them. In fact, you continued with additional lies. If
you'd stoop to these lies, there's likely nothing about which you'd not lie.


what bald faced lies?

The lies which I outlined below. You know full well which baldfaced lies.


One thing you and Stvie need to learn is that disagreeing with isn't
lying
cut

There was no disagreement. There was only your posting of deliberate,
malicious untruths. You wrote that I was posting in a usenet
"personals" group. I wasn't. You wrote that I was flirting with a
woman. I wasn't. You wrote that I was flirting with a bisexual woman.
I wasn't. You wouldn't know the truth if it whapped you in the face.


you were posting in group consiting of nothing but presonal adds and
sexual flirtations

That is one lie. I was posting in alt.west-virginia.


no lie it was that named group but you were posting in group consiting
of nothing but presonal adds and sexual flirtations

Well, your lie has started to fall apart and we have you admitting that
the post was in alt.west-virginia. Spammers target that group and
thousands of others, yet there are a goodly number of West Virginians
and transplanted West Virginians who have posted in that newsgroup.

you were posting stuff of a flirting nature, directed toward a bisexual
female

That is two more lies. I posted nothing of a flirtaceous nature and I
posted nothing to a bisexual female.


both true

Mark, if you are going to tell a lie, tell a good one. You provided
links which show your claim to be a lie. I directly quoted the posts
for which you provided links and I posted them right here. The quoted
material proves that you've lied. Your word is worthless.

I know the turth you lack a nodding understanding of it

You not only don't "know the turth", you incapable of being truthful.


I crtian

You cretin?

...can be, and yes I certainly can choose not to be

You continue to post deliberate falsehoods and admit that you can choose
to be untruthful. Well, there we have it.

again One thing you and Stvie need to learn is that disagreeing with
isn't
lying

There is no disagreement, Mark. You flat out lied, deliberately,
brazenly and maliciously.

No lie what so ever

Then again, you are simply lying to cover your other lies.


You're one of the most sorry human beings I've ever encountered.


you have nevr entounteed me thnak god

No, I haven't entounteed you. I've encountered you right here.

Why are you "thnaking" a deity in which you have no belief?


where do you get that LIE

....from Mark Morgan, self-described pagan.

Dave K8MN