Hi, looking for some misc carbon comp resistors in 1/2watt size. Like to
find misc values (e.g. 1meg, 220k, whatever) to keep for my
amp/boatanchor projects. if you have any extras laying around whether 20
or 100 or whatever qty let me know at . thanks, dave,
n5wnm, okla city, ok


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

http://www.mouser.com/





"David Austerman" wrote in message
news:d017f0b4a4c7a5593add915b9f5a986f.32924@mygate .mailgate.org...
Hi, looking for some misc carbon comp resistors in 1/2watt size. Like to
find misc values (e.g. 1meg, 220k, whatever) to keep for my
amp/boatanchor projects. if you have any extras laying around whether 20
or 100 or whatever qty let me know at . thanks, dave,
n5wnm, okla city, ok


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

"David Austerman" wrote

Hi, looking for some misc carbon comp resistors in 1/2watt size. Like to
find misc values (e.g. 1meg, 220k, whatever) to keep for my
amp/boatanchor projects. if you have any extras laying around whether 20
or 100 or whatever qty let me know at . thanks, dave,
n5wnm, okla city, ok

I've been asked to inventory and sell off the ham shack of an SK ham who was
also an avid homebrewer. One of the items I noticed in my first visit were two
or three Ohmite cabinets with many drawers each of resistors organized in
ascending value, starting down around 10 ohms and going up in standard steps up
into the megohm range (didn't notice if they are half or quarter-watt). In the
few drawers that I opened I didn't notice any vacant compartments. After the
holidays (the widow is spending the holidays with out-of-state kids/grandkids)
I'll be going back and will photo the stuff and put it on eBay.

73, de Hans, K0HB

In article . net,
says...


or three Ohmite cabinets with many drawers each of resistors organized in
ascending value, starting down around 10 ohms and going up in standard steps
73, de Hans, K0HB




Hans the Ohmite Cabinets are worth probably more than the resistors... and
the guys will pay a little more for them if they are full ...

resistors in quantity are maybe 2 cents each.

John k9uwa

"John Goller, k9uwa" wrote in message
news:MBhtd.151223$V41.46914@attbi_s52...

resistors in quantity are maybe 2 cents each.

John k9uwa


I wish I could find carbon comps (decent values) for two cents
each! Those days are long gone around these parts.

Pete

In article ENqtd.176750$cJ3.163057@fed1read06,
PAM says...


I wish I could find carbon comps (decent values) for two cents
each! Those days are long gone around these parts.

Pete


www.mouser.com

looks like a lot of Carbon Film ones are in the 3 cents each price
range to me..... those are 100 lot prices.... so its 3 buks a 100

They are a Dime Each if you wanna onze twoze them ..... so then its
3 buks for 30 of them......

John k9uwa

of modern history. With people like Davis
translating for them, RFK does not pursue Giancana, they are
actually pals in MONGOOSE. The Kennedys agree with the Joint
Chiefs: we should invade Cuba. And then escalate in Vietnam.
Disinformation feeds on disinformation, and whatever the record
shows is shunted aside as the tabloid version becomes "accepted
history," to use Davis' phrase (p. 290). The point of this
blurring of sources is that the Kennedys, in these hands, become
no different than the Dulles brothers, or Nixon, or Eisenhower.
In fact, Davis says this explicitly in his book( pp. 298-99). As
I noted in the last issue, with Demaris and Exner, the Kennedys
are no different than Giancana. And once this is pounded home,
then anything is possible. Maybe Oswald did work for Giancana.
And if RFK was working with Sam, then maybe Bobby unwittingly had
his brother killed. Tragic, but hey, if you play with fire you
get burned. Tsk. Tsk.

But beyond this, there is an even larger gestalt. If the Kennedys
were just Sorenson-wrapped mobsters or CIA officers, then what
difference does it make in history if they were assassinated? The
only people who should care are sentimental Camelot sops like
O'Donnell and Powers who were in it for a buck anyway. Why waste
the time and effort of a new investigation on that. For the CIA,
this is as good as a rerun of the Warren Commission, since the
net results are quite similar. So its no surprise to me that the
focus of Hersh's book has shifted between Oswald did it for the
Mob, and an all out trashing of the Kennedys.

The standard defense by these purveyors is th

public interest in the
hearings had been that of assassination. CIA Director Bill Colby
very clearly drew the line that the CIA had never plotted such
things domestically. Colby's admission was a brilliant tactical
stroke that was not appreciated until much later. First, it put
the focus on the plots against foreign leaders that could be
explained as excesses of anti-communist zealotry (which is
precisely what the drafters of Church's report did). Second, all
probes into the assassinations of JFK, RFK, and MLK would be off-
limits. The Church Committee would now concentrate on the
performance of the intelligence community in investigating the
death of JFK; not complicity in the assassination itself. This
distinction was crucial. As Colby must have understood, the
Agency and its allies could ride out exposure of plots against
Marxists and villains like Castro, Patrice Lumumba of the Congo
and Rafael Trujillo of the Dominican Republic. The exposure of
domestic plots against political leaders would have been lethal.

Colby's gambit, plus the strictures put on the investigation as
outlined by Marchetti above, enabled the intelligence community
to ride out the storm. The path chosen for limited exposure was
quite clever. The most documentation given up by the CIA was on
the Castro assassination plots. Further, the Agency decided to
give up many documents on both the employment of the Mafia to
kill Fidel, and the AM/LASH plots, that is, the enlistment of a
Cuban national close to Castro to try and kill him. Again, not
enough credit has been given to the wisdom of these choices. In
intelligence parlance, there is a familiar phrase: muddying the
waters. This

picked it up. There
had been an apparent falling out between Truitt and Bradlee and
Truitt said that he wanted to show that Bradlee was not the
crusader for truth that Watergate or his book on Kennedy had made
him out to be. In the National Enquirer, Truitt stated that Mary
had revealed her affair with Kennedy while she was alive to he
and his wife. He then went further. In one of their romps in the
White House, Mary had offered Kennedy a couple of marijuana
joints, but coke-sniffer Kennedy said, "This isn't like cocaine.
I'll get you some of that."

The chemical addition to the story was later picked up by drug
guru Tim Leary in his book Flashbacks. Exner-like, the angle grew
appendages. Leary went beyond grass and cocaine. According to
Leary, Mary Meyer was consulting with him about how to conduct
acid sessions and how to get psychedelic drugs in 1962. Leary met
her on several occasions and she said that she and a small circle
of friends had turned on several times. She also had one other
friend who was "a very important man" who she also wanted to turn
on. After Kennedy's assassination, Mary called Leary and met with
him. She was cryptic but she did say, "They couldn't control him
any more. He was changing too fast

And the things Summers
leaves out are as important as what he puts in. For instance, he
omits the facts that her psychiatrist did not know the drugs that
her internist was prescribing; the weird nature and background of
her house servant Eunice Murray; and her pending reconciliation
with Joe DiMaggio which, of course, makes her "torrid romance"
with Bobby even more incredible. The reconciliation makes less
credible Summers' portrait of an extremely neurotic Monroe, which
he needs in order to float the possibility that she was going to
"broadcast" her relationship with the Kennedys.

Summers' book attracted the attention of Geraldo Rivera at ABC's
20/20. Rivera and his cohort Sylvia Chase bought into Goddess
about as willingly as Summers bought Slatzer. They began filing a
segment for the news magazine. But as the segment began to go
through the editors, objections and reservations were expressed.
Finally, Roone Arledge, head of the division at the time, vetoed
it by saying it was, "A sleazy piece of journalism" and "gossip-
column stuff" (Summers p. 422). Liz Smith, queen of those gossip-
columnists, pilloried ABC for censoring the "truth about 1962."
Rivera either quit or was shoved out by ABC over the controversy.
Arledge was accused by Chase of "protecting the Kennedys" (he was
a distant relative through marriage). Rivera showed his true
colors by going on to produce syndicated specials on Satanism and
Al Capone's vaults (which were empty). He is now famous for
bringing tabloidism to television. Arledge won the battle. Rivera
and Liz Smith won the war. Until 1993.

The Truth About Marilyn

In 1993, Donald Spoto wrote his bio of Monroe. After reading the
likes of Haspiel, Slatzer and Summers, picking up Spoto is