Yeah, certain ethnic groups could not cut the code, so the FCC did the
most illogical thing, they eliminated the code. Same reason our
schools now place in the 2nd 50 places in the world since 1964.
You can **** and moan and say it's not politically correct, but
sometimes truth hurts.



On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 21:32:01 -0500, He'sDoneItAgain
wrote:

Looks like "no-code" is finally here...

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-269012A1.pdf

Brenda Ann wrote:
They already do that with what was once the First Class Radiotelephone
Operator License (now the Radiotelephone Operator Permit). This is a wallet
sized card that literally anyone who can sign their name (or an X) can have.

This is not the same thing as a General Radiotelephone Operator License,
which all First and Second Class Radiotelephone Operator License holders
were issued when the former licenses were abolished. As far as I know, the
GROL has also now been abolished. I can't even get a new copy of my GROL,
as the FCC tells me they no longer issue them. So much for spending the time
and effort to study and receive a First Phone....

About ?20? years ago GROL were given a one time oppertunity to get a
life time license,
on the yuckiest cheap paper you can imagine. When I asked the FCC
engineer I knew
he told me if I lost it it wouldn't be replaced. Last time I asked he
told me he thought
they (FCC) no longer had any records as to who held what commercial
license. He
retired about 5 years ago and died soon after from a massive stroke.

I am sure you could find an image on the web, clean it up and insert
your data
and no one would ever know, or really no one would even care.

Terry

cbx wrote:
Yeah, certain ethnic groups could not cut the code, so the FCC did the
most illogical thing, they eliminated the code. Same reason our
schools now place in the 2nd 50 places in the world since 1964.
You can **** and moan and say it's not politically correct, but
sometimes truth hurts.



It's not so much politically incorrect as it is hearsay that feeds
racism - as I am sure you are aware.

PLONK


--
www.wymsey.co.uk

Brenda Ann wrote:
...
This is not the same thing as a General Radiotelephone Operator License,
...

You might find this interesting:

http://wireless.fcc.gov/commoperators/pg.html

Regards,
JS

cbx wrote:
Yeah, certain ethnic groups could not cut the code, so the FCC did the
...

Frankly, it was my experience that certain ethnic groups were unable to
handle code was not the problem.

Rather, once members of certain ethnic groups obtained licenses, they
were made to "feel uncomfortable" by certain members of the amateur
community. Being white myself, I was ashamed for some of these
operators ...

Regards,
JS

"helmsman" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 21:32:01 -0500, He'sDoneItAgain
wrote:

Looks like "no-code" is finally here...

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-269012A1.pdf

All the CBer's should be happy.


The ham bands sound like LIDville nowadays. Have you not been listening and
the most dysfunctional newsgroups on Usenet are amateur topic groups. I feel
sorry for the good hams that have to put up with the ****. They should make
the test to where anyone with a IQ of less than 120 can not apply. I
remember listening to some pretty sharp guys on the ham bands when I was a
kid. Learned a lot about propagation and antennas etc.. just listening to
them. Now days you gotta dig for a good QSO. They should set a part of the
hf bands for just CW operators and you can't operate unless you have a CW
license and they should have a test to see if your a retarded LID and if so
you get the jackoff spectrum. I mean why not?

BH

Brian Hill wrote:
...
BH



While analog communications decline in importance (and it is a stretch
defining CW as digital), digital communications are where the brains are
at. You might wish to upgrade your equipment.

JS

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
Brian Hill wrote:
...
BH

While analog communications decline in importance (and it is a stretch
defining CW as digital), digital communications are where the brains are
at. You might wish to upgrade your equipment.

JS

I'm not talking about equip, I'm talking about brains. The fight here isn't
about CW so much as it is about a bunch of guys that wish to not hang out
with a bunch of retards and yes there are some sharp people that don't know
or use code that would be welcome but the fear is that no code will bring
more dorks into the mix and I understand their point.

BH

Brian Hill wrote:
I'm not talking about equip, I'm talking about brains. The fight here isn't
...
more dorks into the mix and I understand their point.

BH



Brian:

I find the same ratio of dorks-to-brains exists in amateur radio as
exists in the "normal population." Indeed, the amateur topic newsgroups
reflect this same tendency.

A license and/or knowledge of CW has never been able to help the dorks ...

Regards,
JS

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
Brian Hill wrote:
I'm not talking about equip, I'm talking about brains. The fight here
isn't ...
more dorks into the mix and I understand their point.

BH

Brian:

I find the same ratio of dorks-to-brains exists in amateur radio as exists
in the "normal population." Indeed, the amateur topic newsgroups reflect
this same tendency.

A license and/or knowledge of CW has never been able to help the dorks ...

Regards,
JS

You may be right. I'm just expressing the pro code viewpoint and your not
going to change their mind on it no matter how much you argue the point.

BH