From: on Thurs, Sep 14 2006 3:36 pm

wrote:
From: on Thurs, Sep 14 2006 4:31 am
wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Mon, Sep 11 2006 9:45 pm
wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Mon, Sep 11 2006 2:46 pm
wrote:
From: Dave Heil 940 on Sun, Sep 10 2006 3:26 pm
wrote:
From: on Sun, Sep 10 2006 7:55 am
wrote:
From: on Thurs, Sep 7 2006 6:53 pm
wrote:

YOU are not of the FCC, not an official thereof...

Sometimes there's no other recourse but to use a 2x4
to bang on the heads of 1x2s. :-)

Ah yes - threats of physical violence. Shows how superior your
arguments aren't, Len.

Bad sentence structure, Jimmy Noserve. :-)

Tsk. Sissy-prissy horrifications about "threats of physical
violence?" :-) About some WORD PLAY?!? Poor baby...

You've tried those kinds of threats of violence here before, Len.

Oh, dear, the Mighty Macho Morseman is AFRAID?!?

Afraid of VIOLINS? Shall we all BOW down to him lest
he pop a STRING? He wants to ROSIN his way out?

BWAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Such threats, even with smileys, are the mark of someone who can't make
their point verbally.

Oh, oh, her holiness Mother Superior is on duty!


Fearless Leader wannabes ought to look around inside the
newsgroup for REAL "threats of violence." Go make your
horrified revelations about "threats of violence" to
that other radio amateur "Not Cocksucker Lloyd." He wants
to KILL Mark. Stated that in message(s).

What does that have to do with me? I do not know who "Lloyd" is, where
s/he is, or what the disagreement between "Lloyd" and "Mark" is. He has
not threatened to "use a 2x4 to bang on the heads of 1x2s."

Awwww..."you don't know...." Poor thing isn't aware or
informed. [David Horowitz would be horrified]

Tsk, I post a cute saying (actually thought up by another
amateur extra who did pass a 20 WPM code test) and you
come all UNGLUED! Quick, call Eastman for more
cyanoacrylic adhesive!

In fact I don't read much of rrap at all anymore. Too much noise and
too little signal. You replied to my posting so I read what you wrote.
Now you're all upset, shouting and carrying on like an overtired
two-year-old because I disagree with you and point out your mistakes.

Me, "upset?" I pushed your buttons, mighty morseman
and you come back in TYPICAL fashion, all prissy-sissy.

Makes it very easy to walk all over your posting!

But...you only target the no-code-test advocates for your
whining no-violence "complaints." You say you "can't control
them (other morsemen)."

The only person I can "control" is myself, Len.

Nope. You've lost control after hitting the spike strip
of reality on the morse highway.

For some reason you assign group blame - if one Morse Code test
advocate does something you dislike, you hold *all* Morse Code test
advocates responsible.

Absolutely! :-)

Devout morsemen can either hang together or hang separately.
No problem to me. [got enough rope for either]

Oh! Oh! Tremble, Jimmy, "more violence!" "more violence!"


H Y P O C R I T E

You can't be talking about me when you use that word, Len.

Absolutely AM! :-)



Lowering the requirement may do more harm than benefit.

You mean ELIMINATION OF THE CODE TEST FOR AN AMATEUR LICENSE.

Not just that. Lowering the written test requirements as well.

WHICH no-code-test advocate said that?

[Answer: NONE...that was a fabrication by morsemen]

There is NO UPPER LIMIT on the written test elements
in the Question Pool, Jimmy...leastways NOT from the
FCC. The legal minimum is TEN pool questions for EACH
required pool question. The QPC could generate 10, 20,
maybe 30 times the legal minimum and be lawful...but
eventually the question pool and answers could be
greater than the best eidetic's abilities.

Also the
imposition of age requirements for an amateur radio license.

Poor baby, still FIXATED on 7 years ago!

I STOPPED pursuing that suggestion to the FCC (on the
last page of my Comment on NPRM 98-143) SEVEN YEARS AGO!
Since FCC 99-412 (the Report and Order on Restructuring)
nullified all those Comments in regards to the FCC
decision and did not pick up on my suggestion, I didn't
continue after that.

BUT...all the angry pro-code-test morsemen seem to LIKE
necro-equine flagellation ('beating a dead horse') and
a few beaters (like yourself) are intent on trying to
breathe life in to the creature no matter what.

We can all guess WHY you are doing it, Jimmy. You are
obsessed with trying to prove ME 'doing wrong' and have
MANUFACTURED things that haven't existed for a long time.

DROP it, Jimmy. I did, long ago. All you are doing is
beating off, er beating that very dead horse.

Stop with your necrophilia.


YES, that would do "harm" to all the 20 WPM tested US amateur
extra class who got their status, rank, title, and privileges
through testing for morsemanship. It would strip their
BRAGGING RIGHTS in amateur radio.

How?

Your "friends and neighbors" might not come over to "admire
your work!"

BWAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


btw, I am not in control of what Fred posts here.

Riiiight...but you love to attempt controlling what I
write! :-)


Gee, Len, you spend much of your verbiage here telling us how superior
*you* are.

Mais non, mon petit. I just stated what I did and where
at what time. If you think that was 'better than you'
then you have an odd insecurity problem.



Why do you care, Len?

Why do you care why I care? :-)


No, that's not the case at all, Len.

You have a case by Halliburton. :-)



Some of your statements are wrong, Len. In fact many of the statements
you make here are wrong.

ONLY by self-righteous amateur morsemen standards.

By any objective standards. For example, the ARRL has, in the past, had
more than 25% of US licensed radio amateurs as members.

When? In 1952? In 1939? :-)



It was in a statement by an FCC official. You missed it - I didn't.

I check the Federal Register daily...the FCC website weekly.

When and by whom was this "statement" made?



But, YOU are NOT a regulator of US amateur radio, then,
now, future, or anyplace but your warped imagination.

Neither are you, Len. You're just on the sidelines yelling.

Tsk, tsk, then all YOU are is ON THE SIDELINES YELLING
at no-code-test advocates. :-)


I've had my say with the FCC - that really seems to bother you.

None at all. :-) If you were worth the effort you'd have
been Replied to. No problem.


It's a radio *service*, Len. And like it or not, I'm part of it and
you're not.

All throughout Title 47 C.F.R., the word "service" is a
regulatory term denoting a type and kind of radio activity
being regulated.

See Citizens Band Radio SERVICE or Radio Control Radio SERVICE.

Are you my waiter tonight? Good, then you can serve us
something palatable instead of long-dead, severly beaten
horsemeat.


OH! You must mean FEDERALLY LICENSED "amateur" radio!

That's what the term "amateur radio" means. You're not a part of it.

Do you REALLY understand the definition of "amateur?"

Yes.

Insufficient answer. You already said you were a "SERVICE."

Try to get your act together. And be quick with that
horsemeat.


Are you saying that amateur radio does not perform any service to the
country?

Encapsulated in the briefest meaning, YES.

United States amateur radio could disappear at midnight and
the regular and emergency communications of the USA would
keep on functioning. Police would respond to radio calls,
fire engines would roll, ambulances would be dispatched,
Local governments would continue without pause, already
having lots and lots of radio equipment and operators.
Air traffic would continue, maritime traffic would continue,
trains would still be training, highways would continue to
function (and be repaired/renovated) as needed, all without
ham radio. Cellular telephony would continue (1 in 3
Americans having one), the Internet would continue, landline
telephony would continue. Mass Media (Broadcasting) would
continue unabated. The Forest Service would continue
spotting fires, reporting any via their own radios. River
and Inland Waterways would still have their VHF FM voice
communications. GPSS would continue functioning. NOAA
would still continue with weather information. Emergencies
at sea would still be handled by GMDSS. Emergencies in the
air would still be handled by VHF (over land) and HF voice
(over ocean). Emergencies on land would be handled by a
variety of Public Safety Radio Service facilities, all tied
together in large networks that operate nicely.

All in the preceding paragraph are INDEPENDENT of amateur
radio, Jimmy. They ARE a definite SERVICE to the USA and
the people within it. Public safety 24/7.

Now, it MIGHT happen that aliens from outer space MIGHT
invade the earth. "ONLY" morse code skill can possibly
thwart these advanced aliens who have sufficient knowledge
and intelligence to cross interstellar space? [work on
your script some more...it was already done...]


The fact remains that the training and experience you received in
military service were
subsidized by the taxpayers. So was any work on "government funded"
projects.

Tsk, tsk, tsk...all of Heil's 'foreign service' adventures,
salary, expenses, et al, came DIRECTLY out of government.
No "subsidy" there.

I have NEVER worked for any business, company, corporation
that was "subsidized" by the government. NONE.

You are confused on the use of the word "subsidy."


Who is "we", Len? I know where I work and what I do, as do some of the
folks who read rrap.

And the REST of us are kept in the dark. Is this a mystery
game you made up? :-) Something to take the place of
playing "old maid?"

Are you ASHAMED of your job? AFRAID someone will POKE FUN
at it? Why? You aren't hesitant about poking fun at whatever
job a no-code-test-advocate has...you've done that repeatedly.


There are plenty of people who are not in the military who put their
lives on the line, too. For example, firemen, law enforcement officers,
emergency response people, many health care workers are at risk of
death in their line of work.

Save all your homily grits for the next 9/11 anniversary.

Don't try to weasel out of what I said.


They *all* deserve respect for what they do.

Then start SHOWING that "respect" to some of us you've
made fun of...HYPOCRITE.


Yet you worked on projects that were funded by the government, right?
If so, you were subsidized by the taxpayers.

NOT "subsidies."


... If your employer was paid by the govt. for work you did, then
your paycheck came from the taxpayers.

INCORRECT AGAIN! [don't you ever learn]

My salary checks came from private businesses/corporations.
If you insist on going into some strange financial trail
excursion where you need a CPA with superskills. :-)

But, you still don't have the GUTS to tell "the rest of us"
in this newsgroup what, where of your employment, do you?
No, you want to negatively criticize those of us who are
proud and enthusiastic about what we do, have done.


When you dismount from your high hobby horse you can
- if you have the courage - tell what YOU do for a
living?

Why should I tell you, Len? I already know how you will react.

WE already know, Jimmy...you ain't got the GUTS to do so.


You haven't got the GUTS to explain, do you?

It's not about guts, Len.

Sigh...let me rephrase: You haven't got the COURAGE.

"Guts" is too visceral for sissy-prissies.


All it means is that you aren't a participant. You're all talk and no
action. All hat and no cattle. All theory and no practice.

And here you were, rushing home from "work in transportation"
to answer without much "civility" and with lots of semantic
juggling to attempt defending your previous statements. :-)

I don't HEAR you on the radio! :-)


Tsk. You will quibble semantics forever just to appear
YOU are "right." :-)

No. Because I *am* right.

You "*are* superior" because you are a morseman. :-)

Morsemen are "always right" in your view, aren't they?


Selling something does not make one "right".

YOU are always "selling a bill of goods." :-)

We see your "hat" but we can't hear any hoofbeats of
all that "cattle." :-)

Is your Hide Raw?


Quick, Jimmy...go to Chicago so you can appear as a
guest replacement for Roger Ebert on "Ebert and Roeper!"
There's still a chance for you to get famous. If you
are clever, you can slip in some biased PR for morse
code and reach MILLIONS in the audience! :-)

[that would be one helluva lot better than what the
ARRL has done so far...]

Poor baby...got TWO "thumbs down," did you?


Sweetums, you MANUFACTURE "errors" (that aren't really
errors per se, only some semantic quibbles and bits
that only satisfy your image hunger). Bone apetite,
doggy boy.

Your errors are of all kinds, Len. You make them, not me.

No, sweetums, YOU MAKE THEM UP...then say "I" made them.


For an alleged professional writer you sure don't proofread or check
facts very well.

You want what you paid me for professional work in here
refunded? Okay, attached to this message is a refund. :-)


However, your intolerance of disagreement with your opinions is
demonstrated in practically everything you post here.

Call the ACLU, call the Attorney General, call for
Philip and call for Morris. Poor baby, wanna act
smug and arrogant and superior and hope to get LIKED?!?

Only by some masochist, sweetums. :-)


I'm a judge of what's true and what isn't, Len.

You are a morseman and you're okay... :-)

You are naturally superior in all aspects. Except
your aspect is in a sling.


It's your uncivil and childish behavior that's intolerant, Len.

Oh, you expect ALL your "inferiors" to be masochists?

Tsk, tsk, the FCC has NO age limit on amateur radio.
Now YOU don't like childish behavior? Too bad, the
FCC would allow a 2-year-old to hold a ham license. :-)


Where did I make fun of anyone's military service, Len? Show us.

Drop this "show us" ploy, Jimmy Noserve. That's an OLD
trick, trying to make the challenged go through all those
(if available) archives, cut-and-paste, only to have you
rationalize YOU are "right" because you're a morseman, etc.
:-)

That "show us" response of actually showing where and when
you did it is negative ROI. As I said, you, when
confronted, will DENY it, rationalize some "reasons" that
you are "right" and then ignore it. :-)

Besides, OLD POSTS are in the past...they've already been
argued over. You are NOT going to "win" any such OLD
argument by repetition of the SAME posts from archives!
But...you keep on trying and trying and trying. You got
very trying a long time ago.


What someone else posts here is their business, Len.

Ah! The no-guts rationalization hard at work! :-)

So..."someone else" isn't bothered with, but you DO
try to bring me down every chance you get! :-)

What do you FEAR from me, Jimmy? C'mon, you can level
with the group...

You don't like your image from the other side of your
screen described for others? Tsk...and a Mother Superior
at that!


Now do try and behave a bit more civilly.

Is that an ORDER, Mother? Or just something FROM the Order?

["Give a nun an inch and she thinks she's a ruler!]

Now be good and change your Habit.

Say goodnight...grazie.

Slap, slap,