On 23 Nov 2005 04:30:28 -0800, "Major Dud" wrote in
. com:


an old friend wrote:
wrote:
From: on Nov 18, 2:08 am


You may have to watch an online ad, but it's worth the wait.

http://www.elecdesign.com/Articles/A...164/11164.html

"Wait?" That EDITORIAL piece was in the 13 October 2005 issue,
Jimmie. Today is 18 November. Why are you so LATE?

My paper copy of Electronic Design has been sitting
around for a month. It's a no-charge subscription to those
IN the electronics industry; aren't you one of those? The
cover feature is "Weapons of Mass Protection." Feature
article is (on page 27) subtitled "Where the Homeland
Security Dollars Are."

Oh, I understand, you are against making a profit. An
unusual attitude for someone who claims professional (for
money) employment. Tsk, tsk...no wonder you won't reveal
your employer's name!

in all fairness that refusual is one of the reasonsi try to cut jim
some slack. it is the senible thing

Stevie wants us to know he is an ER LPN which means given his address
(qrz of course) and check of the phone book (online of course) one
could work out where he works and deliver to him the trouble he tries
to deal out to others

This was a point? And relevent to the FACT that one of the
"professional" jopurnals that Lennie claims doesn't discuss Amateur
Radio DOES not only DISUCSS it, but lauds it?


"relevant", "journals", "DISCUSS"


And Markie, you can TRY to "deal out" what ever you care to do...It
will only get dismissed as incoherent rantings.

Jim and dave for that matter have enough sense not to reveal there
employment info online, Steve OTOH doesn't have that much sense hemakes
easy and tempting to look it up and try to raise havoc with it, and
flames the restof usfor not puting ourselves out there where we can be
hit

No...YOU put out information where you can be "hit".

And I STILL don't see where ANY comments made by Lennie, Dave, Jim,
or ANYone has any relevence to your rantings, Markie.


"relevance"


Not a one.

Steve "wannabe-Marine" Robeson, K4YZ


Address the issues, Dud:


You didn't know that avionics techs (your alleged MOS) are regularly
deployed with the FMF.

You didn't know about the VINSON system. To wit: "I know who Col
Vinson was and I know where Ft Gordon is. Never served with him/for
him/within 100 miles of him." Neither did you know that the VINSON
system replaced almost all outdated crypto systems in the late '70's,
including the old punch-pin monsters (KY-28/38 of the NESTOR system,
which had been almost completely replaced by the VINSON system by the
early '80's).

You didn't know the difference between a 'hitch', a 'cruise', and a
'float'.

You mistakenly assumed the origination of the phrase "One Shot One
Kill" was from the Army Sniper School; wrongfully presumed that it is
a tactic taught to all Marine recruits; then proceeded to demonstrate
your ignorance about basic combat tactics, the use of shotguns, and
the very common 40mm grenade launchers (M-79 & M-203).

You claimed that "the only targets used to train Marine riflemen (and
all recruits) [are] head shots and 'center mast', or chest shots", but
didn't know that the standard round marksmanship-type targets are also
used, and much more often than "dog" targets. In fact, most of rifle
qualification is done with the round targets. But you didn't know that
despite your claim to have "[taken] home an 'Rifle Expert' on each and
every trip to the range".

You didn't know that only the results of an Article 15 proceeding are
recorded, not the entire proceedings; and you don't even know what
page in the SRB they are recorded.

You didn't know that Marines are often prohibited from taking any
off-duty employment, nor did you know that such a decision is usually
made by the CO, not HQMC.

You didn't know that outside communications can be prohibited during a
base lock-down or unit activation.

You defined a 'chit' as "A Naval term for a 'permission
slip'", when in fact it means -any- piece of paper with something
written on it.

You didn't know that a dishonorable discharge can only be given as a
result of a conviction in a General court-martial, and is usually
given after a few years at Leavenworth and a reduction to Private.

You didn't know that the Corps doesn't use cutting scores for
promotions.

You misquoted your SIX alleged promotion certificates (a misquote that
I later found on google verbatim).

You didn't understand that "years and months in specialty" (box 11 on
the DD-214) is not the same as time in service, yet claimed that you
have -several- DD-214's.

You claimed that time on the delayed entry program was considered to
be time in reserve status but never was.

You stated that "My DD-214 says 'Honorable'...", yet after 1979 there
is no box on the form to designate character of service. The DD-214 is
only a "release or discharge from active duty", not a final discharge
certificate. Only that latter will denote the character of service.

You claimed to have served from 03 September, 1974 to 29 May, 1992.
That's only 17 years and 9 months. Yet you also claim to be retired,
which can only happen if you served 20 years. You also claimed to have
been discharged for medical reasons, having your discharge later
upgraded (a claim which you have both denied and acknowledged). You
didn't know that medical discharges cannot be upgraded, nor that time
not served cannot be arbitrarily added to the end of an enlistment in
order to obtain retirement benefits.

And with all your careers, activities and obligations, where do you
find the time to post as much as you do on Usenet?









----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----