|
There is little doubt Baxter has several contacts (leaks, informants,
etc.) inside the FCC. The commission continues to be powerless to rectify its internal security problems. Commercial interests have taken full advantage of FCC informants, and one can be certain over the years that Baxter has developed several credible sources of information inside the FCC. Just one case in point. Two commission employees in the Northeast/DC areas would become aware of imminent CB enforcement actions. They would email others specific details about the imminent enforcement effort, and worse yet, would discuss it on ham repeaters. Within hours, illegal CB equipment was pulled from shelves, and local freeband frequencies would go quiet. Legal CB channels, area ham repeaters, and email would be full of specific details of the pending enforcement actions. The same two commission employees served as valuable sources of information for commercial interests, allowing them lead time to prepare for FCC inspections. Overheard a ARRL official once say he guessed there were dozens of reliable sources of information inside the FCC. |
Yes, the content has changed vastly: 1) His rhetoric has risen to
leading a conspiracy against the US governmnet, i.e. urging hams not to follow FCC interpretation of Part 97 while urging them to follow his construction, 2) He now has a call in radio show, which may or may not be violative, 3) He has involved himself and ham radio in many instances of foreign policy, 4) There is now a commercial twist that was never present in 1989, 5) He has begun defaming the man in charge (Riley Hollingsworth], not present in 1989. Even if his rule construction in certain aspects is correct and the FCC's, incorrect, our system affords a way to handle that situation through declaratory ruling in the administrative sector. None of us has the right to urge others into non-compliance. Moreover, to defame Riley Hollingsworth amounts to leading a conspiracy against our government, because if we listen to Baxter, we're supposed to disregard Hollingsworth, anti-thetical to a functioning Republic. Tieing into his bulletins his Web Site, where he advertises money-making endeavors is commercial, a Part 97 no-no. Supporting revolutions, such as the one in Bougainville, clearly violates the Patriot Act, because none of us can presume to do foreign policy, especially over ham radio. This piece, not a complete analysis by any means, is but the tip of the iceberg. |
has he even been on the air recently?? haven't heard him in quite a while
on the old frequencies on 20m and 75m he had been occupying. "Morris" wrote in message oups.com... Yes, the content has changed vastly: 1) His rhetoric has risen to leading a conspiracy against the US governmnet, i.e. urging hams not to follow FCC interpretation of Part 97 while urging them to follow his construction, 2) He now has a call in radio show, which may or may not be violative, 3) He has involved himself and ham radio in many instances of foreign policy, 4) There is now a commercial twist that was never present in 1989, 5) He has begun defaming the man in charge (Riley Hollingsworth], not present in 1989. Even if his rule construction in certain aspects is correct and the FCC's, incorrect, our system affords a way to handle that situation through declaratory ruling in the administrative sector. None of us has the right to urge others into non-compliance. Moreover, to defame Riley Hollingsworth amounts to leading a conspiracy against our government, because if we listen to Baxter, we're supposed to disregard Hollingsworth, anti-thetical to a functioning Republic. Tieing into his bulletins his Web Site, where he advertises money-making endeavors is commercial, a Part 97 no-no. Supporting revolutions, such as the one in Bougainville, clearly violates the Patriot Act, because none of us can presume to do foreign policy, especially over ham radio. This piece, not a complete analysis by any means, is but the tip of the iceberg. |
Morris wrote: Yes, the content has changed vastly: 1) His rhetoric has risen to leading a conspiracy against the US governmnet, i.e. urging hams not to follow FCC interpretation of Part 97 while urging them to follow his construction, well I hear alot any govt conspriay stuff ont he air these days 2) He now has a call in radio show, which may or may not be violative, not sure how but it would a change 3) He has involved himself and ham radio in many instances of foreign policy, 4) There is now a commercial twist that was never present in 1989, 5) He has begun defaming the man in charge (Riley Hollingsworth], not present in 1989. was not flaming others though in those days? Even if his rule construction in certain aspects is correct and the FCC's, incorrect, our system affords a way to handle that situation through declaratory ruling in the administrative sector. None of us has the right to urge others into non-compliance. I could find a lot of people to disagree with you, there is a well established (outside Ham radio) tradition of civl disobeince Moreover, to defame Riley Hollingsworth amounts to leading a conspiracy against our government, because if we listen to Baxter, we're supposed to disregard Hollingsworth, anti-thetical to a functioning Republic. I'll have to pass that one onto Carl Rove with the suggestion that GW start arresting his opponents for treason Tieing into his bulletins his Web Site, where he advertises money-making endeavors is commercial, a Part 97 no-no. but does the ARRL mention its website which certainly involved in fundrasing and has links to comercail sitie Supporting revolutions, such as the one in Bougainville, clearly violates the Patriot Act, because none of us can presume to do foreign policy, especially over ham radio. Suporting govt change is NOT a violation of the patroit act. This piece, not a complete analysis by any means, is but the tip of the iceberg. I thank you for it, but honestly I don't see anything beyond some suggestions that Baxter might be best dealt by Mental health and not the FCC. He seems to be not a nice person, but is not in and of itself a rules violation |
"an_old_friend" wrote in message oups.com... Morris wrote: Yes, the content has changed vastly: 1) His rhetoric has risen to leading a conspiracy against the US governmnet, i.e. urging hams not to follow FCC interpretation of Part 97 while urging them to follow his construction, well I hear alot any govt conspriay stuff ont he air these days 2) He now has a call in radio show, which may or may not be violative, not sure how but it would a change 3) He has involved himself and ham radio in many instances of foreign policy, 4) There is now a commercial twist that was never present in 1989, 5) He has begun defaming the man in charge (Riley Hollingsworth], not present in 1989. was not flaming others though in those days? Even if his rule construction in certain aspects is correct and the FCC's, incorrect, our system affords a way to handle that situation through declaratory ruling in the administrative sector. None of us has the right to urge others into non-compliance. I could find a lot of people to disagree with you, there is a well established (outside Ham radio) tradition of civl disobeince Moreover, to defame Riley Hollingsworth amounts to leading a conspiracy against our government, because if we listen to Baxter, we're supposed to disregard Hollingsworth, anti-thetical to a functioning Republic. I'll have to pass that one onto Carl Rove with the suggestion that GW start arresting his opponents for treason Tieing into his bulletins his Web Site, where he advertises money-making endeavors is commercial, a Part 97 no-no. but does the ARRL mention its website which certainly involved in fundrasing and has links to comercail sitie Supporting revolutions, such as the one in Bougainville, clearly violates the Patriot Act, because none of us can presume to do foreign policy, especially over ham radio. Suporting govt change is NOT a violation of the patroit act. This piece, not a complete analysis by any means, is but the tip of the iceberg. I thank you for it, but honestly I don't see anything beyond some suggestions that Baxter might be best dealt by Mental health and not the FCC. He seems to be not a nice person, but is not in and of itself a rules violation A sensible comment from 'an old friend'....again I am amazed....wait a minute.....'an old friend' recognizing Glenn Baxter is in need of a rubber room......right off the bat, eh? Perhaps a bit of experience 'old friend'? Dan/W4NTI |
Dan/W4NTI wrote: "an_old_friend" wrote in message oups.com... Morris wrote: Yes, the content has changed vastly: 1) His rhetoric has risen to leading a conspiracy against the US governmnet, i.e. urging hams not to follow FCC interpretation of Part 97 while urging them to follow his construction, well I hear alot any govt conspriay stuff ont he air these days 2) He now has a call in radio show, which may or may not be violative, not sure how but it would a change 3) He has involved himself and ham radio in many instances of foreign policy, 4) There is now a commercial twist that was never present in 1989, 5) He has begun defaming the man in charge (Riley Hollingsworth], not present in 1989. was not flaming others though in those days? Even if his rule construction in certain aspects is correct and the FCC's, incorrect, our system affords a way to handle that situation through declaratory ruling in the administrative sector. None of us has the right to urge others into non-compliance. I could find a lot of people to disagree with you, there is a well established (outside Ham radio) tradition of civl disobeince Moreover, to defame Riley Hollingsworth amounts to leading a conspiracy against our government, because if we listen to Baxter, we're supposed to disregard Hollingsworth, anti-thetical to a functioning Republic. I'll have to pass that one onto Carl Rove with the suggestion that GW start arresting his opponents for treason Tieing into his bulletins his Web Site, where he advertises money-making endeavors is commercial, a Part 97 no-no. but does the ARRL mention its website which certainly involved in fundrasing and has links to comercail sitie Supporting revolutions, such as the one in Bougainville, clearly violates the Patriot Act, because none of us can presume to do foreign policy, especially over ham radio. Suporting govt change is NOT a violation of the patroit act. This piece, not a complete analysis by any means, is but the tip of the iceberg. I thank you for it, but honestly I don't see anything beyond some suggestions that Baxter might be best dealt by Mental health and not the FCC. He seems to be not a nice person, but is not in and of itself a rules violation A sensible comment from 'an old friend'....again I am amazed....wait a minute.....'an old friend' recognizing Glenn Baxter is in need of a rubber room......right off the bat, eh? Perhaps a bit of experience 'old friend'? even agre with you and get flamed for it OTOH I did not mention a rubber room either, simple mental health work very few people are need of the rubber room. I have no evidence that K1MAN would even benifit from one let alone need it I take it then you agree with me that K1MAN is not much of an issue for the FCC then Dan/W4NTI |
On 9 Sep 2005 19:31:08 -0700, N9OGL wrote:
LETTER TO G4WNE FROM FCC SPECIAL SERVICES DIVISION CHIEF Robert H. Mc Namara - 2 November 1989: (signed) Robert H. Mc Namara Chief, Special Services Division Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 There never was a "Special Services Division" for Bob McNamara to be chief of. -- 73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane |
Yes there was a Special Services Division of the Private Radio Bureau
when McNamara wrote his letter in 1989. Having been in contact on 20 meters with Kenneth Black in the U.K., I received a copy of this letter from the recipient, who said he received it via regular mail in the UK. In addition, I flew to DC and interviewed Mcnamara, together with Counsel Tom Fitzgibbons, for the express purpose of airing over ham radio. Accordingly, the interviews ran for a few weeks over Baxter's Network, then called the IARN. Bob Sherin, W4ASX |
In article
Lloyd wrote: you an others are just jelous of k1man but nobody could stop him since 1987 and it is to late now. barf will probaly merger with the iarn if the talks go good and then they will grow biger than the arrl. barf and the Says the "self-appointed" barfie Lloydie....who Herb Schoenbaum thought was an idiot. Along with the rest of the ham community. iarn are in talks right now so watch out. k1man is a great man and he will lead us to victory and bring a new day to ham radio esp after cw is droped from the exam and real radio hobbiests can become hams and iarn members. barf and iarn rule!!!!! That's our Lardass Lloyd Davies, always running his stupid mouth never knowing what the hell he is talking about. You are waiting to see if they will drop the code to get your General, Davies, you are too stupid and lazy to EARN your General, you want it handed to you because you are not all there. Sort of "affrimative action," you want the standards lowered because you can't pass them as they currently stand. On Sat, 10 Sep 2005, Bob Sherin, W4ASX wrote: In all deference Lloyd, I take issue with you. He is neither great nor is the FCC afraid of him. Rather, I believe with age mental disorder is advancing and the FCC today is into cost effectiveness, which means solve problems without litigation. Lloyd Davies, N0VFP is a mentally ill retard. LARDASS Davies admits he's mentally challenged in http://www.network54.com/Hide/Forum/...eid=1073965472 "I have no problems with learning code. I get stuck after I work on about 5-10 letters. I cannot go any further. I'm stuck. I get a mental block." |
"an_old_friend" wrote in message ups.com... Dan/W4NTI wrote: "an_old_friend" wrote in message oups.com... Morris wrote: Yes, the content has changed vastly: 1) His rhetoric has risen to leading a conspiracy against the US governmnet, i.e. urging hams not to follow FCC interpretation of Part 97 while urging them to follow his construction, well I hear alot any govt conspriay stuff ont he air these days 2) He now has a call in radio show, which may or may not be violative, not sure how but it would a change 3) He has involved himself and ham radio in many instances of foreign policy, 4) There is now a commercial twist that was never present in 1989, 5) He has begun defaming the man in charge (Riley Hollingsworth], not present in 1989. was not flaming others though in those days? Even if his rule construction in certain aspects is correct and the FCC's, incorrect, our system affords a way to handle that situation through declaratory ruling in the administrative sector. None of us has the right to urge others into non-compliance. I could find a lot of people to disagree with you, there is a well established (outside Ham radio) tradition of civl disobeince Moreover, to defame Riley Hollingsworth amounts to leading a conspiracy against our government, because if we listen to Baxter, we're supposed to disregard Hollingsworth, anti-thetical to a functioning Republic. I'll have to pass that one onto Carl Rove with the suggestion that GW start arresting his opponents for treason Tieing into his bulletins his Web Site, where he advertises money-making endeavors is commercial, a Part 97 no-no. but does the ARRL mention its website which certainly involved in fundrasing and has links to comercail sitie Supporting revolutions, such as the one in Bougainville, clearly violates the Patriot Act, because none of us can presume to do foreign policy, especially over ham radio. Suporting govt change is NOT a violation of the patroit act. This piece, not a complete analysis by any means, is but the tip of the iceberg. I thank you for it, but honestly I don't see anything beyond some suggestions that Baxter might be best dealt by Mental health and not the FCC. He seems to be not a nice person, but is not in and of itself a rules violation A sensible comment from 'an old friend'....again I am amazed....wait a minute.....'an old friend' recognizing Glenn Baxter is in need of a rubber room......right off the bat, eh? Perhaps a bit of experience 'old friend'? even agre with you and get flamed for it OTOH I did not mention a rubber room either, simple mental health work very few people are need of the rubber room. I have no evidence that K1MAN would even benifit from one let alone need it I take it then you agree with me that K1MAN is not much of an issue for the FCC then Dan/W4NTI Your ability to understand is obviously defective. Let me try again. I think K1MAN has mental problems. As you apparantly do also. I think MAN is a discrace to Ham Radio, and should be removed for several infractions of the rules and regulations. I am HAPPY not to hear his "opinions" on his "First ever Ham Radio Call in Talk SHow". Dan/W4NTI |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:52 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com