From: on Dec 3, 3:01 pm

K؈B wrote:
wrote

They're floating museum pieces.
In your dreams, landlubber! Just a couple of examples for you.....

The USS Constitution, homeported at Boston, is a commissioned US Navy ship (in
fact the flagship of the US Navy) with a full active duty crew of sailors. Not
a museum (the museum is across the street from her berth).

Been there, Hans.

There we have it! Presence of his Body makes Him "official." :-)

"Old Ironsides" is a museum piece. A fully operational museum piece that actually
sails every few years, but a museum piece nonetheless. Her main functions are
educational and historic, not military.

Morse code testing for an amateur radio license is then also a
"museum piece" of no educational or historic (nor military)
need.

There are many morse code museums around the USA to display the
"educational and historic needs" for morse code...no federal
license testing is needed to keep up those museums.

If morse code is so damn good as a communications mode, then it
will survive quite well on its own WITHOUT federal license
testing requirements. Strange that all other radio services
of the USA quit using morse code for communications...


The USCG Barque Eagle, homeported at the Coast Guard Academy in Connecticutt,
is a working training ship, used in training future seagoing officers.

Does she go out on search and rescue?

Is morse code part of search and rescue?

Can you shed some light on that or are you blinking in puzzlement?

[a clue a la "Jeopardy"]

Or is her purpose mostly historic and educational?

I'm glad those ships are kept in operation.

Why? You are NOT in the USN or USCG, have never served in uniform.

You are NOT INVOLVED.

But in reality they are working museum pieces.

Tsk, tsk. Jimmie should go on a "cruise" (or "float", whatever)
with the midshipmen of either academy and see for himself. :-)


They're like the steam and first-generation diesel locomotives that a few
Class 1 American railroads have kept on their rosters. Those old locos spend
most of the time in storage, but are occasionally brought out and run
for special purposes. They still work, meet all applicable
requirements, and are technically
on the active roster - but in reality they're museum pieces.

Those old choo-choos are in the military? Do prospective Army
Corps of Engineers cadets from West Point, NY, go on railroad
"cruises" also? I think not. :-)

Do those old choo-choos use morse code for communications?


And the main point remains: Sailboats make up far less than 1% of the
US military fleet.

Was that the "main point?" :-)

Bad on me...I thought that AMATEUR RADIO LICENSING was the "main
point" in this thread. Must be "wrong." :-)

Well, we've all Heard the Word from the Master Mariner of the navel
academy. Up-anchor and sail away into the susnet, beeping all
the way... :-)

wrote:
From: on Dec 3, 3:01 pm
K؈B wrote:
wrote

They're floating museum pieces.
In your dreams, landlubber! Just a couple of examples for you.....

The USS Constitution, homeported at Boston, is a commissioned US Navy ship (in
fact the flagship of the US Navy) with a full active duty crew of sailors. Not
a museum (the museum is across the street from her berth).

Been there, Hans.

There we have it! Presence of his Body makes Him "official." :-)

"Old Ironsides" is a museum piece. A fully operational museum piece thatactually
sails every few years, but a museum piece nonetheless. Her main functions are
educational and historic, not military.

Morse code testing for an amateur radio license is then also a
"museum piece"

How?

Hans says the USS Constitution is not a "museum piece". So neither is a
Morse
Code test.

of no educational or historic (nor military) need.

Why not?

There are many morse code museums around the USA to display the
"educational and historic needs" for morse code...no federal
license testing is needed to keep up those museums.

The USS Constitution is supported by Federal tax dollars and Federal
law.

If morse code is so damn good as a communications mode, then it
will survive quite well on its own WITHOUT federal license
testing requirements.

Maybe it will. There are reports of *more* Morse Code activity and
interest in some countries where the testing has been eliminated.
One such country is Germany.

Strange that all other radio services
of the USA quit using morse code for communications...

Why is that strange? Other radio services do not have the same
Basis and Purposes as amateur radio.

The USCG Barque Eagle, homeported at the Coast Guard Academy in
Connecticutt,
is a working training ship, used in training future seagoing officers.

Does she go out on search and rescue?

Is morse code part of search and rescue?

Can you shed some light on that or are you blinking in puzzlement?

[a clue a la "Jeopardy"]

Or is her purpose mostly historic and educational?

I'm glad those ships are kept in operation.

Why? You are NOT in the USN or USCG, have never served in uniform.

You have never been in the USN or USCG either, Len. You're no more
involved than I am.

You are NOT INVOLVED.

Yes, I am. I pay Federal taxes.

But in reality they are working museum pieces.

Tsk, tsk. Jimmie should go on a "cruise" (or "float", whatever)
with the midshipmen of either academy and see for himself. :-)

So they're not museum pieces. Which means Morse Code isn't either.

They're like the steam and first-generation diesel locomotives that a few
Class 1 American railroads have kept on their rosters. Those old locos spend
most of the time in storage, but are occasionally brought out and run
for special purposes. They still work, meet all applicable
requirements, and are technically
on the active roster - but in reality they're museum pieces.

Those old choo-choos are in the military? Do prospective Army
Corps of Engineers cadets from West Point, NY, go on railroad
"cruises" also? I think not. :-)

Actually, there is a station at West Point. A main line goes *under*
part of the campus.

Do those old choo-choos use morse code for communications?

Guess you never heard whistle signals...

And the main point remains: Sailboats make up far less than 1% of the
US military fleet.

Was that the "main point?" :-)

Yes.

Bad on me...I thought that AMATEUR RADIO LICENSING was the "main
point" in this thread. Must be "wrong." :-)

As usual.

From: on Sun, Dec 4 2005 4:35 pm

wrote:
From: on Sat, Dec 3 2005 8:28 am
wrote:
From: on Dec 2, 5:33 pm
wrote:
From: on Tues, Nov 29 2005 3:38 am
wrote:
From: on Nov 27, 3:55 pm


Wig-wag and sempahore are not the same thing.

Can you wigwag in morse?

Yes.

[no such thing]

You are mistaken, Len. As usual, you are resistant to new
information.

"New" information? No. You did, indeed, provide a link
for OLD information that was made obsolete in ACTUAL USE
by the U.S. Army Signal Corps prior to the U.S.' entry
into World War One.

Note: I am familiar with Fort Gordon as the "home" of
the Signal Corps ever since it was known as Camp Gordon.
That is where I and other signalmen did our Basic Training
as soldiers.

http://www.gordon.army.mil/ocos/Muse...GES/wigwag.gif

For some more information on the HISTORY of the Signal
Corps, United States Army, go to:

http://www.gordon.army.mil/ocos/museum/

I've already worn the collar insignia of the United States Army
Signal Corps, a torch over two crossed signal flags.

The US Army also used wig wag signalling

Okay, they did up to 1912. ? This is 93 years later.

The U.S. Army ALSO used carrier pigeons and spark
transmitters for communications. That ended after
WW1.

The U.S. Army once used smoothbore muskets and sabers
for weaponry. That ended prior to WW1.

ONE-FLAG signaling ended in 1912...according to the
same museum source.

but you don't seem to know about that.

I know far more than you ever will about what the United States
Army Signal Corps has done in the last half century plus a lot
more. I was IN it, you were NOT.


I can never wear the insignia of the Signal Corps? You are
quite mistaken, Len.

Anyone can go purchase (or steal) some insignia and put it
on. The entertainment business has been allowed to do that
for a very long time...as COSTUMES. Play-acting. Dudly
the Imposter tries to get away with his impersonation of
"being a Marine."

Here's some more from Regimental Division, Office Chief of
Signal, United States Army Signal Center, Fort Gordon, GA:

-------------------------------------------------------------

CROSSED FLAGS

"Crossed flags" have been used by the Signal Corps since
1864, when they were prescribed for wear on the uniform coat
by enlisted ment of the Signal Corps. In 1884, a burning
torch was added to the insignia and the present design
adopted on 1 July of that year. The flags and torch are
symbolic of signaling or communication. Two signal flags
crossed, dexter flag - the flag on the right, white with red
center, the sinister flag on the left, red with white center,
staffs of gold, with a flaming torch of gold color upright
at the center of crossed flags. Branch colors: Orange
trimmings and facings were approved for the Signal Service
in 1872. The white piping was added in 1902, to conform
to the custom which prevailed of having piping of a
different color for all except the line branches.

-------------------------------------------------------------

To explain some terms: "Line" branches are those of the Army
directly involved with warfighting; i.e., infantry, artillery,
armor. Infantry uniform piping is, has been, light blue. If
memory serves, artillery had red piping. "Piping" was
principally the thin edge trimming on the soft cap (sometimes
called an "overseas cap" as well as a vulgar feminine name).
Branch COLOR is a heritage symbol, found on branch flags and,
in 1950-1960 used in an issued scarf that replaced the tie
for certain ceremonial functions. [I still have mine as a
memento]

The "crossed flags" have been a collar insignia for enlisted
signalmen for 121 years, and remains. Signal officers have
a similar collar insignia (on the lapels of coats and shirts
worn beneath the letters "U.S." in gold and with color added to
the flags. Date of adoption of that style depends on adoption
of the officer's uniform style that changed between WW1 and
WW2. Enlisted collar branch insignia has been all gold, no
other color, mounted on a disc of gold. Date of adoption of
that collar insignia style (to differentiate officers and
enlisted) unknown exactly but was done prior to WW2.

As a never-served civilian, you no doubt feel free to ridicule
the U.S. military, especially in areas of tradition, heritage,
heraldry, branch colors, and so forth. That is understood.
Having never been a part of an active military you would be
ignorant of the experience of being part of a fighting force
that was born during the "Spirit of '76."

Some other facts about the U.S. Army Signal Corps:

It is the birth-branch of the United States Air Force, having
issued the very first purchase of a heavier-than-air aircraft
in the military (for observation purposes). Note: The USAF
was once a part of the Army, the "Air Corps", but became a
separate service branch in 1948.

The ubiquitous superheterodyne receiver was born in the mind
of Major Edwin Armstrong while he was on duty with the United
States Army Signal Corps in Paris, 1918. The "superhet"
receiver has been made by the millions worldwide since then.

The first field use of balloons for observation were done
during the American Civil War, including the first "airborne"
telegraphy tried then between a lofted balloon and ground.
[that preceded the later massive lighter-than-air ship
effort of the United States Navy]

The first weather stations and their communications of
weather conditions was pioneered prior to the formation of
the "National Weather Service" that was absorbed by NOAA.

The first use of carrier pigeons on a large scale for
communications was done just prior to and during WW1.
Signal Corps developed a field-transportable pigeon coop
on a vehicle. Unfortunately, the pigeons being conscripts
did not want to cooperate fully and that was disbanded
after WW1.

The first handheld Transceiver ("handie-talkie") was the
brainchild of Galvin Manufacturing, Chicago, (legally
changed to Motorola after WW2) and the Fort Monmouth Signal
Office in 1940. Galvin designed, with Signal Corps'
enthusiastic support, the first useable backpack "walkie-
talkie" FM voice radio that saw its first baptism of fire
in the Italian campaign of 1943. [SCR-300 with its 18
tube radio the BC-1000]

The Signal Corps designed, and Galvin later made, the
first horse mobile radio that could be used by a cavalry-
man en ride ("in motion" for you non-equine humans).
The resulting "pogo stick" (for its guidon socket bottom
support pole) radio chest unit may have featured the first
use of a combined speaker-microphone; that combined
speaker-microphone is now a standard feature of public
safety manpack radios. Mounted cavalry was disbanded
during WW2 but those "pogo stick" radios remained in
service, seeing their baptism of fire on Guadalcanal,
man-carried in infantry units.

100 Watt semi-portable spark transmitters were used by
the Army Air Corps in France in 1917-1918, those lap-
held units designed by the Signal Corps. [as far as
can be determined, those were one-way transmissions, air
to ground only due to noise of open-cockpit aircraft]

The first use of regular communications satellite message
relay for military communications, Vietnam, late 1960s,
using a mobile commications van containing microwave
and multi-channel circuits, designed for the purpose by
the Signal Corps.

The first precision target acquisition and gun-tracking
radar, the SCR-584, a joint design by MIT Radiation Lab
and Signal Corps, transportable, saw service in Italy
and France during WW2. Signal Corps had already designed
and contracted out the radar that sighted the first
Japanese air attackers in Hawaii on December 7, 1941.
Signal Corps is the birthplace of the SCR-584 radar
replacement, the MA-1 fire-control system which featured
a Luneberg lens antenna. Radar set design at Fort
Monmouth was transferred to Artillery in the 1960s.

The very first moonbounce proved at Signal Corps
Engineering Laboratories (just outside Fort Monmouth)
in 1946. Proved that the moon can be a reflector of
radio waves. See "Project Diana" for more references.
That used a modified wartime radar set, including its
unmodified antenna. Those laboratories were visible
from the main road connecting Fort Monmouth with Red
Bank, NJ. [Coles, Evans, and Squire laboratories]

With the U.S. Navy, the U.S. Army provided for the
rebirth of cryptographic services in the 1930s. The
Army Signal Corps established a small agency headed
by William Friedman, a civilian, to organize an Army
cryptographic service for military intelligence
purposes. In cooperation with an equally-small unit
of the U.S. Navy (under Captain Stafford) they formed
the cryptologic nucleus for the entire U.S. government
prior to our entry into WW2. Machinists at the
Washington Navy Yard constructed a working prototype
of the Japanese "Red" and "Purple" crypto machine
work-alikes that were designed by the Army. Success
of this led to the USN victory at the Battle of Midway.
The combined service efforts resulted in a superior
"rotor" cryptographic machine that was never known to
be compromised until the physical capture of the USS
Pueblo intelligence ship. Cryptanalysts of both USA
and USN WW2 efforts later worked at the NSA (formed
officially after WW2). [for more references, see
the Fort Huachuca Military Intelligence Museum web
page...that includes some interesting bios of the
Friedmans and some pioneers in Army aircraft not
normally included in popular flying lore]

The Signal Office of the U.S. Army was the head of
the second-highest priority industry during WW2;
Production of quartz crystal units for all branches
and some allies (England, chiefly). Galvin Mfg in
Chicago was the civilian center of some 60 companies
producing a million units a month by the last three
years of WW2. The only other production program
having a higher priority then was the Manhattan
Project. Signal Corps was one of the contractor
backers to provide the first crystal growth processes
to replace small, irregular natural quartz. That
permitted much lower-cost crystal units to be used
in all electronics disciplines.

I'd like to say that the Signal Corps is responsible
for precision time-frequency sources useable over
military field environments, but that isn't strictly
true. Such is a multi-agency cooperative effort. The
USN began the GPSS with a project called NAVSTAR using
miniaturized atomic-resonance oscillators for a
precision time-frequency reference, beginning in 1970.
Theory and practical units were first done by NIST.
Improvements were done by the electronics industry.
Signal Corps concentrated on all-environment precision
quartz crystal oscillators that resulted in the
excellent frequency stability units required for the
successful SINCGARS family of jam-proof, secure
radios (quarter million R/Ts produced since 1987).
The head of IEEE Time-Frequency is (or was) John R.
Vig, one of the theory-and-practice heads at the
Central Electronics Command that was at Monmouth.
SINCGARS can check or update its precision internal
time base by connecting an AN/PSN-11 GPS receiver to
a front panel connector. True also for its Key Fill
equipment. Both got their baptism of fire in the
First Gulf War 1990-1991.

I'd like to say that the Signal Corps is responsible
for direct-select-frequency-synthesizer subsystems on
HF transceivers, especially for SSB AM transceivers,
but that would raise all sorts of hoo-haw between
Collins amateur radio fanatics and several electronics
industry companies, not to mention interservice
rivalry by real veterans of the military. The
military wasn't the first to pioneer SSB techniques
in radio, the civilian communications providers were.
USAF Strategic Air Command was the contracting agency
that led to single-channel SSB communications mini-
revolution on the amateur HF bands, resulting in SSB
AM Voice being the MOST popular mode on HF by amateurs.

USAF demands in frequency-hopping technology (and USN
in radar) led to secure communications and jam-proof
radar use. Refinements in that led to USA frequency-
hopping for field radios, extremely stable time bases
that could network frequency hoppers, the net holding
despite a hop rate of 10 carrier frequency changes
per second.

Who made vacuum tubes producible at a reasonable cost
in the USA? Look up Western Electric, the old
manufacturing arm of the Bell System (you know, the
telephone infrastructure giant that "fails during
every emergency"). Who invented the transistor? Two
scientists at Bell Labs (with help of Bill Shockley).
Signal Corps wasn't first there.

I could probably expand on all the preceding if I had
the time to do real research, provide a whole list of
end-notes and bibliography. The above I can write from
memory without looking up a thing. I was a REAL
signalman, a soldier serving in the Army of the United
States. I did REAL HF (and VHF and UHF and microwave)
communications in facilities that were real and large,
covering the entire globe long before comm sats were
aloft. Modern methods were used as well as those that
existed before WW2. I am proud of what I did and am
thankful that I can share in the heritage of the Signal
Corps both during and after my real service. I don't
have to pretend my remaining uniform sets are some
kind of "costume." When I wore it we were NOT
pretending anydamnthing.

You are welcome to take your wigwaging morse code
and shove it up your I/O port, sissy civilian.

From: on Sun, Dec 4 2005 4:35 pm

wrote:
From: on Sat, Dec 3 2005 8:28 am
wrote:
From: on Dec 2, 5:33 pm
wrote:
From: on Tues, Nov 29 2005 3:38 am
wrote:
From: on Nov 27, 3:55 pm

snip to the sissy civilian being hostile

I went to Art Center for a year at their old campus on
3rd Street in Los Angeles. :-)

Did you flunk out? Or perhaps you just GAVE UP?

I changed my studies from illustration to engineering. Career
choice change.

In other words, you GAVE UP on illustration as a career after a year
of school. Tsk, tsk.

Incorrect. I was a working illustrator, full time, before
voluntarily enlisting in the Army. I was already an art
major in high school, instructor being Richard Martikonis,
(USNR Lieutenant) for three years.

Since changing major college study to engineering, I've done
three contract illustration jobs as part-time employment for
fixed amount of contract work and compensation. I'm not
counting the art work done for Ham Radio magazine.

You do seem to flit about, Len, with all those different jobs and
activities...

"Flit?" In 54 years of working full-time since high school
graduation?!?

Is everyone supposed to enter some castle-like seminary and
sit out their whole lives producing some single product?

Or do you favor some socialist-extreme existance where you
work for a single employer (or the state) until you die?
You are welcome to that sort of rut, comrade.

You don't like CONTRACT work? Too unstable for you? Is that
somehow beneath your lofty and superior standards?

I can't "give up" something I have a natural talent for.

"Talent"?

Talent, aptitude, gifted-ability, whatever. I have it and
accept it as a normal thing.

..that's
built-in, has been used in previous employment. I was accepted
by Art Center on the basis of submitted work that I sent them.

Yet after a year you GAVE UP.

I thought I changed majors. :-)

I hadn't learned anything new about illustration in that first
year at Art Center. :-)

Tsk. You are being HOSTILE again, trying to say I "flunked out"
or "gave up."

How is it being hostile? I'm pointing out that you GAVE UP on
illustration as a career.

Tsk, tsk, I changed career goals. I've told you twice that
I did NOT "give up" and that I've done illustration on a
contract basis since that change.

You are trying to load negativistic words into what I explained.
Ergo, you are expressing hostility by refusing to accept what
I've already done.


Texts and old books seems to be where you get your "experience."

Well, you're wrong about that.

That MUST have been where you got all your "military expertise."

Nope. Guess again.

This isn't a "guessing game," little boy.

Show me some proof of YOUR military experience or shove it up
your military-impersonating I/O port.


Sorry, I was VERY INVOLVED in illustration.

But not in Morse Code.

Absolutely! Hadn't used any morse code in REAL HF radio
communications, didn't need to. Hadn't used any morse
code in the electronics industry, didn't need to.

And you GAVE UP on both illustration as a career and learning Morse
Code at the very modest speed of 13 wpm.

Tsk, tsk, tsk, those are NOT related items. :-)

Can you draw pictures in morse code? Send video information?

BWAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHHAAHHAHAH!!!!!!!!!!!!


I was VERY INVOLVED
in radio and electronics. Both for over a half century.

Past tense, I see.

I'm not tense. Are you tense? See your doctor for some Xanax.
I here that is good for folks like yourself who are tense about
tenses.

Maybe you should take up camping, sleep outdoors in tenses?



?? I'm a lot healthier than you, Len.

How do you KNOW? Are you medically qualified? :-)



You were trying to threaten me physically. You've done that before,
Len.

Oh, my, you ARE mentally disturbed! See your physician
immediately.



He also got current flow in the wrong direction...:-)

Nope, he was just ahead of his time. He described the flow of holes
rather than electrons.

BWWAAAAAAAAAHAAAAHAAAAHAAAHAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !

Jimmie, you are friggin' weird on that.


It's good stuff. Our country was born right here in
Philadelphia.

Been there.

NADC to be exact, right? You weren't exactly begged to
stay there, were you, Len?

The Naval Air Development Center, Warminster, PA, is
located outside of the city of Philadelphia. EXACTLY
I've been IN Philadelphia and IN Camden, NJ, just
across the Delaware River from Philly.

Considering that I was an employee of RCA Corporation
before, during, and after I visited NADC as a field
engineer, I was never approached to join them for any
employment and neither did I seek to get employment
there. I got along fine with NADC civilian and military
personnel there, did my assigned, pre-established work,
departed for my home in California.

I've explained all that before. You again choose to
attempt to CHANGE it to suit your hostile intent.


I've worn the UNIFORM of the United States Army. I've been
under the UNIFORM Code of Military Justice for four years.

Yet you messed up on what "UCMJ" meant.

Never ever while UNDER the UNIFORM CODE OF MILITARY
JUSTICE. That ended 49 years ago for me.

I acknowledged accidentally writing "universal" instead
of uniform a few days ago. I did go to UNIVERSAL CITY
after writing that to meet with some friends. Since the
DD-214 form is applicable to ALL branches of the military
I just made a mistake in associating the word "universal"
with the subject.

In case you've noticed, Lord High Whatever, this newsgroup
is NOT a court of law and no perjury has been committed
over a writing mistake in trying to explain a military
thing to some sissy civilian non-military-veteran.



As far as I'm concerned, there was
NO "vote for 'CW'" as Speroni put his "analysis" of
NPRM 05-143 commentary in WT Docket 05-235.

There are none so blind as those who will not see. You can deny
all you want, but 55% of those individuals who expressed a
preference in comments on 05-235 supported at least some
Morse Code testing. Only 45% supported complete
removal of all Morse Code testing. That's a "vote for CW" to
anyone who thinks rationally.

There are none so blind as the PCTA who insist that
manual morse code testing is "necessary" for a hobby
radio license examination.

There are none so blind as the PCTA who cannot see that
morse code is a dying mode in radio communications.

There are none so blind as the PCTA who cannot see that
all other radio services have GIVEN UP on using morse
code for communications.

"Rationality" is NOT defined as "being 'for' morse code."


Of course the FCC doesn't have to follow that "vote" and
probably won't. But to deny its existence is to deny reality.

There is NO "vote" concerning NPRM 05-143. That's
reality.

The FCC has proposed eliminating ALL code testing for
amateur radio license examinations. That's reality.

The FCC has, in the past two years, allowed the public
to comment on no less than 18 Petitions regarding code
testing. That's reality.

The FCC has NOT seen any "consensus" nor a real "majority"
of opinion for or against morse code testing for an
amateur radio license in the comments concerning amateur
radio regulation petitions. That's reality.

The FCC isn't a clubhouse manager for U.S. amateur radio
to allow ONLY already-licensed radio amateurs to comment
to them. That's reality.


The Commission
was notified on what I thought/analyzed in my Exhibit filing
of 25 Movember 2005 along with a final tally sheet of
the four categories of general comment opinions.

Yes, you spammed them with dozens and dozens of pages
of your verbiage.

My 25 November 2005 filing only had 13 pages, 5 of which
were of tally sheet tallies. NOT "dozens and dozens."

I feel sorry for the poor souls at FCC who
have to read all the worthless junk you send them, Len.

I feel sorry for you, sissy civilian, for having such a
hostile attitude towards freedom and equality in a radio
hobby pursuit.


Yes, Len, we know you can't deal with facts and opinions different
from your own.

:-) You are really going the way of Dudly the Imposter.

I DEAL with them as they occur.

You deal by denial.

I DEAL with things based on my own experience and observations.

I DEAL with things based on what happened in the real world
of communications.

I DEAL with dump hucks as I see they deserve.

If you don't like that DEAL, go to another game and ask for a
marked deck. That's your style.



If someone had written Reply Comments to every procodetest
comment, your system would have counted them as separate
opinions even though they had the same author. That's not a
valid way of analyzing opinion. In short, it stinks.

Go stuff it in your I/O port, morseman.



More important, you didn't follow the rules on Reply Comments
back in 1999.

"Rules?" The "rules" are given by the Commission,

That's right.

And you didn't follow them back in 1999.

Well then, you are over 6 years LATE on bringing me up on
"charges" before the Commission, aren't you?

Make a "citizen's arrest" if you want. Hire Phil Kane
if you can. :-)



You will retain your full amateur rank-status-privileges
regardless of whether the code test goes away or stays.

It's not about those things at all, Len.

No? Then why are you so worried and agitated by it?

Code testing doesn't involve you at all.

Yes, it does. If the Amateur Radio Service is changed for the
worse, I am affected.

"For the worse?!?" BWAAAAAAHAHAHAHHAAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Tsk, you've lost your grip on reality.

PCTA can accept only THEIR concept of reality. Unreal.



Besides, you seem to think that one brave act means all must defer
to your opinions and whims. Doesn't work that way.

WHAT "brave act" have I done before the Commission?

Go against the mighty macho motivated morsemen on code testing?

Hardly a "brave act" to slap around some beep-happy old
morsemen who are mired in their thinking and unable to
accept change.



Suppose you had been born in 1954, Len.

That would have been an interesting alternate universe
considering I was already IN the U.S. Army billeted in
Japan then and had advanced to E-5 rank...and my
parents (both naturalized U.S. citizens) were nowhere
near Japan at the time. :-)

Would you have volunteered to fight in Vietnam in 1972?

The Southeast Asia Live Fire Exercise (Vietnam War)
has already been OFFICIALLY designated as being
August 4, 1964 to January 27, 1973 (date of ceasefire)
by the U.S. Department of Defense.

Oh, now I understand, would I have volunteered to fight
FOR North Vietnam IN Vietnam in 1972? Most assuredly
NOT. Most unequivocally NOT for the North!

In 1972 I had already been discharged from all military
obligations of the United States (my discharge was in
1960) and I had been, and was, working on Department
of Defense contracts for electronics. In 1972 some of
my work was on the Seismic Intrusion Devices (SIDs)
that were intended to be used in Vietnam. [those used
radio to report detected intrusions]

In case it has escaped your movie-conditioned little mind,
the United States has had a WORLDWIDE military presence
since the end of WW2. One does NOT 'volunteer to fight'
anywhere, in any service. One either gets drafted (the
compulsory military service "draft" ended 27 January
1973) or volunteers to "defend the Constitution of the
United States" and must accept whatever assignment
anywhere as deemed necessary by the DoD. Nobody got
a "choice of where to fight" unless one was the son of
a prominent politician (Shrub) or some entertainment
personality (Elvis).



In other words, you and your neighbors wanted to stop other people
from building certain types of buildings on *their own land* - because
it would mess up your *view*.

The only "other people" were contractor firms. Nobody owned
"their own" land yet until the development was finished and
inspected and approved by the city.

The neighborhood organization was against the ZONING change
from "R" (pure residential) to "R1" (residences plus
aparments). The original plan was for "senior citizen
apartments" which we neighbors did not like. Yes, a two-
story house or apartment would block my VIEW that I enjoyed
for over 30 years here.

Perhaps you want me to sit back and take whatever
"authorities" toss at me without complaint? HELL NO!
None of us neighbors did. We showed up at the Zoning
Commission meeting and made our voices heard. It was for
naught according to a later investigation of graft on the
part of the Zoning Commission. That parcel of land got
rezoned to R1 over a decade ago and that was that. No
action on development until several years later.

Perhaps you weren't really learning the REAL Ben Franklin
or even REAL history prior to 1776. Franklin was a
royalist to begin with. Took him a VERY long time to
actually side with the "revolutionaries." [recorded
history, by the way] WE neighbors weren't sheep nor
anything like that and protested.



after spending 9 months of re-arranging the vacant land.

How does anyone "rearrange" land? With a bulldozer?

All manner of earth-moving equipment were used to move
220,000 cubic yards of soil (value from contractor
final report, initial estimate was 250,000 cubic yards).
Actual earth moving took eight months until the final
moving was done for drainage, roadway, and forming the
final lay of each plot.

Nine months of the OHSA back-up beepers getting us up
at 7 AM each working day of the week and some Saturdays.

44 homes on 15 acres is about a third of an acre each.

WAYYYY INCORRECT. You are assuming flat land. Nowhere
near that. Final building plots were on a quarter acre
each average.

Half a million each is a starter home, right?

Subjective.


So - you thought your "view" was more important than
the newcomers' property rights.

No, our neighborhood organization was against changing
the ZONING from pure residential to residences-with-
allowed-apartments.

You thought that those
15 acres should not be developed, even though you
didn't own them.

Our neighborhood organization would accept the original
"R" zoning rating of single-family residences. The
Zoning Commission heard that. We objected to the "R1"
zoning that allowed apartments.

You resisted changes that brought in new people and more progress.

What "progress?" :-) You have no huckin idea of what
the development was/is, its original shape, the shape it is
in now, landscaping or anything else. You are trying to
toss out nasty sarcastic bad words to us that were here
before them. :-)

The SECOND developer managed to develop a walled community
that houses about 150 total, nearly all with little bitty
yards separated by concrete block walls.

Right now there's a possibility of civil action by two
neighbors where the original slope to the edge of the new
walled community gave way and inundated their property.
We'll just have to wait for that to sort itself out.
Meanwhile, you will no doubt make nasty remarks to my
old neighbors for DARING to PROTEST part of THEIR land
from being covered? :-)

You clung to the past and tried to hold back the future.

I'm sorry, but you just don't grasp this NON-RADIO situation.

ZONING laws, particularly in residential areas, ARE where
the past is protected...for those who ALREADY live there.

And you failed.

Yes, we did. I reported that. :-) That's the breaks in
political situations.

And you FAILED.

Yes. But ONLY for the ZONING change. We were able to
enrich the pockets of some Zoning Commission members from
payola from the first contractor...which led to him going
out of business. :-) The second contractor is not in a
good situation either since that company is forced to
settle one way or the other.

NO apartments were built, only single-family residences
were finally built. That is a partial victory although
the Zoning rating still allows for apartments on that land.

What I find most interesting is that you fought change, progress,
and newcomers. And you thought your views should count for
more than the wants and needs of those who owned the land.

What I find "interesting" is your continued hostility and
ignorance of the situation, even when explained to you.
I have well over a hundred images showing the earth-moving
and the house building, have a small box of documents that
go back 15 or so years on that parcel of land, copies of
plans, etc. Our neighborhood organization didn't take
anything lightly.

What spin? What fabrication? What lies?

All that you've tried to "charge." :-)

I simply point out that you and your neighbors feared and opposed
change in the neighborhood. That's the truth.

OK, I simply point out that you are ignorant of the
situation and you are a dump huck.

beep beep

wrote:
From: on Sun, Dec 4 2005 4:35 pm

NADC to be exact, right? You weren't exactly begged to
stay there, were you, Len?

The Naval Air Development Center, Warminster, PA, is
located outside of the city of Philadelphia. EXACTLY
I've been IN Philadelphia and IN Camden, NJ, just
across the Delaware River from Philly.

Considering that I was an employee of RCA Corporation
before, during, and after I visited NADC as a field
engineer, I was never approached to join them for any
employment and neither did I seek to get employment
there. I got along fine with NADC civilian and military
personnel there, did my assigned, pre-established work,
departed for my home in California.

I've explained all that before. You again choose to
attempt to CHANGE it to suit your hostile intent.

Bottom line, NO, he was not asked to return.

Yes, Len, we know you can't deal with facts and opinions different
from your own.

:-) You are really going the way of Dudly the Imposter.

I DEAL with them as they occur.

You deal by denial.

I DEAL with things based on my own experience and observations.

I can buy off on "observations"...But "EXPERIENCE"...?!?!?!

I DEAL with things based on what happened in the real world
of communications.

But you've NOT been involved in "COMMUNICATIONS". You had a
moderately successful career as a bench technician in
"ELECTRONICS"...Got to do just enough of a little of things to "know
the lingo".

I DEAL with dump hucks as I see they deserve.

As do we...Hence the frequent slappings and humiliations you
suffer at the hands of "mere mortals".

If you don't like that DEAL, go to another game and ask for a
marked deck. That's your style.

Ahhh.....Not enough to call Jim "Jimmie", "The Reverend Jim",
"Jimbo", etc...NOW you have to call him a cheat...

Suppose you had been born in 1954, Len.

That would have been an interesting alternate universe
considering I was already IN the U.S. Army billeted in
Japan then and had advanced to E-5 rank...and my
parents (both naturalized U.S. citizens) were nowhere
near Japan at the time.

Lennie, was there a problem with you going along and answering the
question?

Would you have volunteered to fight in Vietnam in 1972?

The Southeast Asia Live Fire Exercise (Vietnam War)
has already been OFFICIALLY designated as being
August 4, 1964 to January 27, 1973 (date of ceasefire)
by the U.S. Department of Defense.

Oh, now I understand, would I have volunteered to fight
FOR North Vietnam IN Vietnam in 1972? Most assuredly
NOT. Most unequivocally NOT for the North!

Poor redirect. Lame dodge.

In 1972 I had already been discharged from all military
obligations of the United States (my discharge was in
1960) and I had been, and was, working on Department
of Defense contracts for electronics. In 1972 some of
my work was on the Seismic Intrusion Devices (SIDs)
that were intended to be used in Vietnam. [those used
radio to report detected intrusions]

Ahhhh.....Working on some of those devices that you claim that
others who "served in other ways" didn't do or didn't contribute...

Uh huh...I see.

I simply point out that you and your neighbors feared and opposed
change in the neighborhood. That's the truth.

OK, I simply point out that you are ignorant of the
situation and you are a dump huck.

So....No one that doesn't live on Lanark Street could possibly
know about "the situation"...?!?!?

Are you NOW stating that is IS impossible for someone to have a
truely INFORMED opinion on something eventhough they are not directly
involved in it, Lennie?

Because you've been telling us for years that there's no reason in
the world for you to get an Amateur Radio license since even without
actually being involved, you "know" what it's like based on second hand
observation and third-party tellings...

Steve, K4YZ

wrote:
From: on Sun, Dec 4 2005 4:35 pm
wrote:
From: on Sat, Dec 3 2005 8:28 am
wrote:
From: on Dec 2, 5:33 pm
wrote:
From: on Tues, Nov 29 2005 3:38 am
wrote:
From: on Nov 27, 3:55 pm

In other words, you and your neighbors wanted to stop other people
from building certain types of buildings on *their own land* - because
it would mess up your *view*.

The only "other people" were contractor firms. Nobody owned
"their own" land yet until the development was finished and
inspected and approved by the city.

The contractor/developers owned the land, right? They wanted to
develop it in a way you didn't like, so you tried to stop them.

The neighborhood organization was against the ZONING change
from "R" (pure residential) to "R1" (residences plus
aparments). The original plan was for "senior citizen
apartments" which we neighbors did not like.

Why not? You're a senior citizen ;-)

Yes, a two-
story house or apartment would block my VIEW that I enjoyed
for over 30 years here.

So you think your "right" to a VIEW is more important than
people having a place to live....

Perhaps you want me to sit back and take whatever
"authorities" toss at me without complaint? HELL NO!

Indeed.

But you want *me* to sit back and take whatever rules
changes "authorities" (like the FCC) toss out without
complaint or protest. HELL NO!

The analogy is clear, whether you admit it or not.

None of us neighbors did.

None of us procodetest folks did either.

We showed up at the Zoning
Commission meeting and made our voices heard.

Yes - you tried to stop progress and development, and to
restrict what others could do on their land. You wanted
the neighborhood to stay just as it was, despite the
changes in American society. (more senior citizens,
more people, etc.)

It was for
naught according to a later investigation of graft on the
part of the Zoning Commission.

Did anyone go to jail? Was anyone found guilty of any
corruption?

That parcel of land got
rezoned to R1 over a decade ago and that was that. No
action on development until several years later.

You folks missed a chance. When the first developer went
bankrupt, you could have all banded together and bought the land.
Then you'd have been able to control its development. But instead
of that free-market, capitalist approach, where you put your money
where your view is, you wanted The Government to value your
views over those of the people who owned that land.

Perhaps you weren't really learning the REAL Ben Franklin
or even REAL history prior to 1776. Franklin was a
royalist to begin with.

Almost all the revolutionaries were royalists to begin with.

Took him a VERY long time to
actually side with the "revolutionaries." [recorded
history, by the way]

WE neighbors weren't sheep nor
anything like that and protested.

Let's see - in his time, anyone seen as a traitor to the crown
could be executed by being drawn and quartered. Which is
more than a little unpleasant, particularly with family and friends
made to watch.

What did you neighbors risk in your protest?

after spending 9 months of re-arranging the vacant land.

How does anyone "rearrange" land? With a bulldozer?

All manner of earth-moving equipment were used to move
220,000 cubic yards of soil (value from contractor
final report, initial estimate was 250,000 cubic yards).
Actual earth moving took eight months until the final
moving was done for drainage, roadway, and forming the
final lay of each plot.

A little digging is always needed.

Nine months of the OHSA

OSHA

back-up beepers getting us up
at 7 AM each working day of the week and some Saturdays.

Awwww....why not get up before 7 AM?

So - you thought your "view" was more important than
the newcomers' property rights.

No, our neighborhood organization was against changing
the ZONING from pure residential to residences-with-
allowed-apartments.

OK, that too. Yet those apartments never got built, right?

And what's wrong with residences-with-allowed-apartments?
People live in the apartments, right? They're not dangerous
or a nuisance. It's not like they wanted to put a refinery or a
chemical
plant there.

You thought that those
15 acres should not be developed, even though you
didn't own them.

Our neighborhood organization would accept the original
"R" zoning rating of single-family residences. The
Zoning Commission heard that. We objected to the "R1"
zoning that allowed apartments.

Why? Because they were 2 story? Because they'd house senior
citizens? Because you just don't like change?

You resisted changes that brought in new people and more progress.

What "progress?" :-)

Diversity and new forms of housing in your restricted, uptight,
NIMBY neighborhood. Why can't you accept a little change?

You sure preach to others about accepting change and not
standing in the way of progress when it comes to amateur
radio rules - which don't affect you at all because you're not
going to become a ham anyway.

You have no huckin idea of what
the development was/is, its original shape, the shape it is
in now, landscaping or anything else.

You have no huckin idea of what operating Morse Code
on the amateur bands was/is, their original shape, the shape
they're in now, the changes that removing the code test
will bring, or anything else.

You don't like an "outsider: like me commenting on "your"
neighborhood, but you demand that everyone accept
your comments on a "neighborhood" (the ham bands)
where you're a complete outsider.

You are trying to
toss out nasty sarcastic bad words to us that were here
before them. :-)

Really?

The SECOND developer managed to develop a walled community
that houses about 150 total, nearly all with little bitty
yards separated by concrete block walls.

Isn't that the walled community you bragged about some time back?
Are those houses worth more or less than yours, now?

Right now there's a possibility of civil action by two
neighbors where the original slope to the edge of the new
walled community gave way and inundated their property.
We'll just have to wait for that to sort itself out.
Meanwhile, you will no doubt make nasty remarks to my
old neighbors for DARING to PROTEST part of THEIR land
from being covered? :-)

Not at all. If they suffered real damages, they deserve their
day in court.

You clung to the past and tried to hold back the future.

I'm sorry, but you just don't grasp this NON-RADIO situation.

Oh yes I do.

ZONING laws, particularly in residential areas, ARE where
the past is protected...for those who ALREADY live there.

Why? And if so, why should radio be any different?


And you failed.

Yes, we did. I reported that. :-) That's the breaks in
political situations.

And you FAILED.

Yes. But ONLY for the ZONING change. We were able to
enrich the pockets of some Zoning Commission members from
payola from the first contractor...which led to him going
out of business. :-) The second contractor is not in a
good situation either since that company is forced to
settle one way or the other.

NO apartments were built, only single-family residences
were finally built. That is a partial victory although
the Zoning rating still allows for apartments on that land.

What I find most interesting is that you fought change, progress,
and newcomers. And you thought your views should count for
more than the wants and needs of those who owned the land.

What I find "interesting" is your continued hostility and
ignorance of the situation, even when explained to you.

It's not ignorance or hostility. It's an alternate view of things. You
don't like alternate views.

I have well over a hundred images showing the earth-moving
and the house building, have a small box of documents that
go back 15 or so years on that parcel of land, copies of
plans, etc. Our neighborhood organization didn't take
anything lightly.

Because you didn't want change or progress. You wanted
things to always stay the way they were, regardless of the
effect on others....

beep beep

Ah! You're imitating an OSHA backup beeper!

wrote:
wrote:

The neighborhood organization was against the ZONING change
from "R" (pure residential) to "R1" (residences plus
aparments). The original plan was for "senior citizen
apartments" which we neighbors did not like.

Why not? You're a senior citizen ;-)

He's a citzen.

There's not a whole lot "senior" about him.

And "forcing" Lennie to live near other's his age would be like
"forcing" him to get an Amateur Radio license...It might "force" him to
realize that he is not the Alpha and Omega of his realm.

Yes, a two-
story house or apartment would block my VIEW that I enjoyed
for over 30 years here.

So you think your "right" to a VIEW is more important than
people having a place to live....

So...We get them to raise a privacy wall around the new buildings
and let the mural artists go to work...Then Lennie can have whatever
"view", however myopic, he wants. Maybe one with no antennas and no
faces over 40?

Steve, K4YZ

K4YZ wrote:
wrote:
wrote:

The neighborhood organization was against the ZONING change
from "R" (pure residential) to "R1" (residences plus
aparments). The original plan was for "senior citizen
apartments" which we neighbors did not like.

Why not? You're a senior citizen ;-)

He's a citzen.

There's not a whole lot "senior" about him.

No, Steve, Len is definitely a senior citizen. He's way past retirement
age.

And "forcing" Lennie to live near other's his age would be like
"forcing" him to get an Amateur Radio license...It might "force" him to
realize that he is not the Alpha and Omega of his realm.

Nobody's "forcing" Len to do any of those things. He's free to move if
he doesn't like how the neighborhood has changed.

My point about the whole zoning thing is *not* that Len or his
neighbors
did anything "wrong". The point is that they resisted a change that
others
wanted, even though the people who wanted it told them it was
"progress"
and would be a good thing for the future.

Yet Len heaps abuse on those who resist a change in the Amateur Radio
Service rules, even though the people who want the change say
it is "progress" and will be a good thing for the future.

As for the claim that those of us with licenses aren't affected by
those
changes in any significant way, note that those who already owned
houses in Sun City aren't really affected by the zoning change of R to
R1
in any really significant way.

Of course Len and his neighbors could have bought the land from the
failed developer and thus protected themselves from future development.

Let's see...if the houses cost a half million, the land for each house
might
be worth a hundred thousand. That's only 4.4 million for 44 houses. Say
5 million with all the costs. Divided among how many neighbors?

The rest is easy:

1) The neighbors pitch in and buy the land, to be held by a corporation
formed for the purpose.
2) Developers are invited to submit proposals for development.
3) When a developer comes up with a proposal that meets all the
neighbors'
requirements, that developer is allowed to proceed, subject to a tight
contract
that only turns over title to the land when all conditions are met.
4) Profit!

Yes, a two-
story house or apartment would block my VIEW that I enjoyed
for over 30 years here.

So you think your "right" to a VIEW is more important than
people having a place to live....

So...We get them to raise a privacy wall around the new buildings
and let the mural artists go to work...Then Lennie can have whatever
"view", however myopic, he wants. Maybe one with no antennas and no
faces over 40?

No mirrors?

From: on Dec 8, 4:45 pm

K4YZ wrote:
wrote:
wrote:


My point about the whole zoning thing is *not* that Len or his neighbors
did anything "wrong". The point is that they resisted a change that others
wanted, even though the people who wanted it told them it was "progress"
and would be a good thing for the future.

Jimmie, you haven't gotten ONE THING right in this very NON-RADIO
subject! Here's the correct chronology:

1. The residential area where I live was zoned ENTIRELY "R"
standing for single-family residences prior to 1960 when
the first development was started. A 15-acre parcel had
been used for freeway base fill from the decomposed granite
common in these Verdugo Hills; that parcel was also zoned
"R."

2. At the time I purchased my house in 1963, the residential
area was half completed up to the next higher cross-street,
that being completed in 1962. The 15-acre parcel remained
vacant, undeveloped.

3. By 1973 the remainder of the residential area was fully
developed, all the way to the top, all the way along Glenoaks
Blvd save for one small open area to the still-undeveloped
15-acre parcel.

4. About 1988, a contractor-developer purchased the 15-acre
parcel and tried various schemes to rearrange this parcel
which had a maximum elevation difference of about 350 feet.
Well before that year the entire area was fully developed
and inhabited, the only easement being the Lutheran church now
named "All Saints" at the intersection of Lanark and Glenoaks.

5. By 1989 the only possible way this first developer could make
any profit at all was to build apartments. Zoning did not
permit apartments so the Zoning Commission was told the
developer he would have to sell the idea to the residents
surrounding that parcel. The first developer tried, using
community meetings at the church. The neighborhood
association opposed that in no uncertain terms.

6. In 1990 the matter was brought up for public discussion at
a Zoning Commission open meeting to change the Zoning from
"R" to "R1," the latter designation meaning residential but
multi-family (apartment) structures. The developer
presented his case. The neighborhood association presented
theirs, pointing out that ALL plots surrounding this parcel
were "R." The Zoning Board made some noises saying that
the planned "senior citizen apartments" would be "beneficial
to the community" (none of the Board members lived within
10 miles of this area and knew dink about it first-hand).

7. In the next ten years the first developer became a figure in
bribery (guess who of) and he managed to sell it to a second
development firm. NO "senior apartments" had been built but
the first developer had been forced to annually clear the
15 acre parcel of dry brush per fire code. The second
developer got a much better civil engineer and planned for a
walled community of 44 two-story homes (upscale) with full
drainage and streets and utilities underground. That plan
was shown to the neighborhood association in late 2000 but
got no admiration. The association could do nothing since
that did not interfere with the ORIGINAL "R" zoning.

8. Earth moving began in early 2001 and continued for 9 months
until the 44 plots could begin building. The amount of
earth moved was somewhere between 220 and 250 thousand
cubic yards. The average size of the plots was a quarter
acre...most are smaller, only the "corner" lots being
as large as a third acre. Sell price began at $500
thousand in 2001, highest being $800 thou. All were sold
before building was completed.

Yet Len heaps abuse on those who resist a change in the Amateur Radio
Service rules, even though the people who want the change say
it is "progress" and will be a good thing for the future.

Poor baby, got "abuse" dumped on you?

Jimmie, you ignorant little flyweight arguer, note the above.
Were there ever anything but RESIDENCES involved? No. At the
time the first developer went for the zoning change, 400 acres
of residences were ALREADY surrounding that empty parcel. Except
for the church (off to one corner), COMPLETELY surrounding that
unused for over 28 years parcel. What "progress" would 44 homes,
all single-family units, have brought to an area ALREADY full of
single-family residences filling 400 acres?

Those much-vaunted "senior citizen apartments" were never built.
The payola to convince the Zoning Commission members only enriched
their pockets. The first developer went out of business.

As for the claim that those of us with licenses aren't affected by those
changes in any significant way, note that those who already owned
houses in Sun City aren't really affected by the zoning change of R to
R1 in any really significant way.

Dumb****, I don't live in "Sun City, Arizona." Where I live is
NOT some "retirement community." Home owner ages range from 30s
(couple across the street from me) to 80s (uphill neighbor) to
50s (two houses below) to 40s (corner house two houses above
me).

Of course Len and his neighbors could have bought the land from the
failed developer and thus protected themselves from future development.

Bull****, ignorant slut. YOU could have gotten the story CORRECT
instead of making up a poor verbal assassination attempt. You
could have at least gotten the suburb NAME correct. My byline
with full surface mail address has been in Ham Radio magazine
enough times...as well as in the FCC ECFS.

Can't you get ANYTHING right?!?

There are NO restrictions on antenna structures in my neighborhood
other than FAA regulations...it is a mile and a half from the
closest part of BUR (Bob Hope Airport in Burbank). Two blocks
uphill from me lives an amateur with an HF beam and some wire
antennas...plus at least three other houses with CB verticals.
Many more satellite broadcast antennas here than ham or CB even
though we have both analog and digital TV cable distribution.

Jimmie boy, you TALK a bit too big for not knowing a damn thing
about the subject. I must admit it would have been fun to see
you at an association meeting or Zoning Commission meeting talking
FOR changing residence zoning from "R" to "R1" "in the name of
PROGRESS!!!" I'll bet you would have run, cowering in fear of
the irate association members, unable to stand up to grown ups
who were living there FIRST!

BWAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Try, oh please TRY to understand that this newsgroup is about
amateur radio policy, NOT residencial zoning laws.

Paul RunningHorse Vigil
FREE Telephone Consultation
http://www.capitalvigilfundingdept.com