The Spirit of Major Dud Lives!
AF6AY
I received the following from "micks...@verizon.net"
which was largely a quote of what I wrote to "304 dot
com" in RRAP. I call attention the the very last
paragraph of that:
===========================================
>Does the 101st Airborne ring a bell with you old horse-powered
>ground-pounders? How about a CIB?
>Back in my day we had the then newly issued M-16s, not the old
>bolt action Springfields you probably qualified with.
>And we rode in Hueys, not on horseback.
>
>dit-dit-dit-dah
===========================================
Note the wording. At no time does either "304
dot com" nor "mickslater" say HE was in the
101st Airborne Division. He INFERS he was.
That INFERRENCE is the same technique used by
the infamous "Major Dud" (aka K4YZ) in here.
Just as Major Dud's saying he was in "seven
hostile actions" but never being able to say
where or when those "hostile actions" were.
"Horse-powered?" :-) Jeeps, deuce-and-a-halfs,
three-quarter ton trucks were our mobility in
addition to bipedalism. History of the US Army
will show that mounted cavalry was eliminated
in 1943. The only horse detachment now is a
ceremonial one kept in the Washington, DC area.
Nonetheless, Galvin Manufacturing (later
Motorola) produced a whole series of "horse
mobile" battery-powered HF transceivers during
WWII. They were called the "pogo stick" because
of the cavalry saddle guidon socket pole at the
bottom of that HF radio box. Those were all
converted to vehicle mobile with a mounting kit
(extra contract) and saw some action in the
Pacific. The crystal-controlled plug-in tuning
unit was one of the first war surplus equipment
for sale in civilian radio stores of early 1947.
"Bolt-action Springfields" (the rifle) were a
standard infantry sidearm in the FIRST World War,
not the Second. Nothing in US amateur radio
requires proficiency in gunnery or marksmanship
qualification. Being a "big man" by being
"qualified" on some weapon is self-praise only
for gang-bangers or very insecure males.
The issue sidearm in my voluntary US Army service
was US Carbine, M-2. I qualified Expert on that.
We were all expected to know how to "close with,
and destroy the enemy" in 1952 to 1960 period,
regardless of what our primary military
occupation specialty was. Oh, and we did have
helicopters and I rode in one, the old
reciprocating-engine Sikorsky cargo helo. The
"Huey" might not have been designed then. I
rode in one as a civilian much later. <shrug>
Despite being assigned to a relatively "safe" Army
unit in Tokyo, that unit did suffer 23 KIA during the
Korean War. All while on TDY. We honored them many
times in ceremony. I still do and will do so again
on Memorial Day.
What MATTERED to the US Army was in how we did our
jobs. Not in medals or decorations nor fancy words
of heroism. The Signal Corps (that I was in) had a
secondary motto of "Get The Message Through." That's
what my Signal Battalion did. Anyone can see what
I did in a photo essay at the following website:
http://sujan.hallikainen.org/BroadcastHistory/uploads/My3Years.pdf
Nothing heroic or majestic there. It's just a bit
of history of how the Big Leagues in HF communications
did during the 1950s. No commsats available, no
tropo-scatter, microwave frequencies used only for
LOS radio relay. All vacuum tubes. The only
semiconductors were selenium stack rectifiers and
point-contact diodes. Not a transistor, certainly
not an Integrated Circuit in sight. :-)
Yet the message traffic was 220K per MONTH in 1955,
down from the peak traffic of the Korean War. That
War was June 1950 to July 1953 and has never ended;
it is still in a "permanent" state of Truce. The
Vietnam War ENDED for the USA 35 years ago. Nothing
fancy about modes, just FSK RTTY (TTY tones on
commercial-format 12 KHz SSB) or voice (AM mostly,
FM only for portable/mobile). We did have some
time-multiplexed TTY for HF circuits since the FSK
spread was then 850 cycles standard. It could handle
four TTY channels (old 60 WPM rates) on the same
850 Hz shift on one HF radio. Digital time-
multiplexing done via miniature thyratrons in a USN
contract "MUX" unit. MY station had 4 of those,
complete with blinking lights for each TTY channel.
[LEDs hadn't been invented yet, the lights were neon]
The infamous Major Dud couldn't "compete" with any
similar experience, except mouth some familiarity
with MARS operations. MARS was never a part of the
worldwide Army network of communications, still isn't.
Ol' Dud never handled a SINCGARS small-unit
transceiver despite it becoming operational for all
branches on land in 1989. That radio family is now
the most produced of ALL military radios at 300K made.
I've handled and tested some as a civilian. Just
the same he fired off denigrations and epithets to
all of us who challenged him. He never produced a
single copy of his DD-214 Release from Active Duty
but insisted he'd had an 18-year "career" with the
USMC. Leaving with a "rank" of Gunnery Sergeant.
He could never produce a single source of
verification of his "service" of 18 years, not a
document, not a singler person. A normal minimum
career is 20 years; a full 30 for "lifers."
Robeson (K4YZ) was an archtypical "Stolen Valor"
type. He INFERRED a LOT...yet couldn't prove a
single thing. He denigrated other veterans...if
and only if they didn't believe him. He said he
had "medals" yet couldn't speak about how he got
them. He said he was "in seven hostile actions"
but couldn't identify any of them. He was condoned
here (especially by those who never served) because
he was a "code-tested extra" ham...yet tried to
fart all over anyone who was against the code test
before 2007. He was all words, no substance, no
proof, no real accomplishments, just a con man.
Maybe that's what happens to olde-tymers who get
lost in their imaginations of self-perceived glory
and grandeur in a radio hobby. Others in here, the
unidentified (until they slip in private e-mail)
hiding and tossing words of INFERRED self-praise
carry on this posing, posturing "tradition." NOT
a good tradition.
Temper fry,
73, Len AF6AY
an old friend
his stuff
these keyboard comandos lake even that
AF6AY
> On May 24, 6:16�pm, AF6AY <LenAnder...@ieee.org> wrote:> The spirit of Major Dud returns!
>
> please Len Give Robeson his one due he at least had the guts to sign
> his stuff
No...Major Dud gets NO sort of credit from me.
He's never used a PGP signature and anything similar. You can't
"sign" a post in handwriting on newsgroups. Even if he did, I'd
suspect he bought his pen at a surplus store. :-(
> these keyboard comandos lake even that
Nothing for them, either.
73, Len AF6AY
Tor Johnson
>
> That INFERRENCE is the same technique used by
> the infamous "Major Dud" (aka K4YZ) in here.
> Just as Major Dud's saying he was in "seven
> hostile actions" but never being able to say
> where or when those "hostile actions" were.
>
"USAGE NOTE: Infer is sometimes confused with imply, but the distinction
is a useful one. When we say that a speaker or sentence implies
something, we mean that it is conveyed or suggested without being stated
outright: When the mayor said that she would not rule out a business tax
increase, she implied (not inferred) that some taxes might be raised.
Inference, on the other hand, is the activity performed by a reader or
interpreter in drawing conclusions that are not explicit in what is
said: When the mayor said that she would not rule out a tax increase, we
inferred that she had been consulting with some new financial advisers,
since her old advisers were in favor of tax reductions."
-- http://www.answers.com/topic/infer
You may now continue ...
an old friend
>
troll
Dave Heil
> The spirit of Major Dud returns! In private e-mail
> I received the following from "micks...@verizon.net"
> which was largely a quote of what I wrote to "304 dot
> com" in RRAP. I call attention the the very last
> paragraph of that:
>
> ===========================================
>> Does the 101st Airborne ring a bell with you old horse-powered
>> ground-pounders? How about a CIB?
>> Back in my day we had the then newly issued M-16s, not the old
>> bolt action Springfields you probably qualified with.
>> And we rode in Hueys, not on horseback.
>>
>> dit-dit-dit-dah
> ===========================================
>
> Note the wording. At no time does either "304
> dot com" nor "mickslater" say HE was in the
> 101st Airborne Division. He INFERS he was.
No, YOU inferred that he was.
> That INFERRENCE is the same technique used by
> the infamous "Major Dud" (aka K4YZ) in here.
He'd imply. You'd infer. K4YZ has never called himself "Major Dud".
> Just as Major Dud's saying he was in "seven
> hostile actions" but never being able to say
> where or when those "hostile actions" were.
I don't recall Steve ever not being able to say where or when they took
place. He simply did not do so. You questioned his military service on
a number of occasions. I advised you that I'd found at least one free
site where his USMC service was confirmed. Did you ever find it?
> "Bolt-action Springfields" (the rifle) were a
> standard infantry sidearm in the FIRST World War,
> not the Second.
My father was trained on the Springfield at Great Lakes Naval Training
Center in June of 1943. It was never a sidearm of any kind. It is a rifle.
[about K4YZ]
> He never produced a
> single copy of his DD-214 Release from Active Duty
> but insisted he'd had an 18-year "career" with the
> USMC. Leaving with a "rank" of Gunnery Sergeant.
> He could never produce a single source of
> verification of his "service" of 18 years, not a
> document, not a singler person. A normal minimum
> career is 20 years; a full 30 for "lifers."
"Could never" is not the same as "would not".
I've never produced a copy of my DD-214 for your perusal.
I don't intend to. Yet there are web sites which document my military
service and which describe my work in Vietnam.
> Robeson (K4YZ) was an archtypical "Stolen Valor"
> type. He INFERRED a LOT...yet couldn't prove a
> single thing.
You inferred whether or not he implied. Your "Stolen Valor" claim is
just insulting.
> He denigrated other veterans...if
> and only if they didn't believe him. He said he
> had "medals" yet couldn't speak about how he got
> them.
Not "couldn't"--didn't.
> He said he was "in seven hostile actions"
> but couldn't identify any of them.
Not "couldn't"--didn't.
> He was condoned
> here (especially by those who never served) because
> he was a "code-tested extra" ham...yet tried to
> fart all over anyone who was against the code test
> before 2007. He was all words, no substance, no
> proof, no real accomplishments, just a con man.
Your statements about him offer no proof. There's no proof that Steve
did not serve nor that any of his statements was a lie. We have only
your wild accusations.
Dave K8MN
an old friend
> AF6AY wrote:
> > The spirit of Major Dud returns! In private e-mail
you may not recal but I sure do he deiend he could say he screwed up
basic Marine copr terms (using thier their ARMY based term
he also deiend the existance of whoile army bridages brigades with
website even the proven existnese of various battlions
forged it seems a letter proporting to be from the US Army
ole Steve was a piace of work
and you supported him every step of the way including his coment about
easting feces
never say you do myself but as far as I know nothing confirming his
alleged resume has ever been presented
zzzz zzzzzz
fake
AF6AY
> AF6AY wrote:
> > Just as Major Dud's saying he was in "seven
> > hostile actions" but never being able to say
> > where or when those "hostile actions" were.
>
> I don't recall Steve ever not being able to say where or when they took
> place. �He simply did not do so.
He simply told a LIE. <shrug>
He had NO PROOF of anything, no verification, nothing.
>�... �I advised you that I'd found at least one free
> site where his USMC service was confirmed.
"Confirmed" by a webmaster...by reprinting what readers
had submitted. Same damn falsehood. <shrug>
> "Could never" is not the same as "would not".
> I've never produced a copy of my DD-214 for your perusal.
> I don't intend to. �Yet there are web sites which document my military
> service and which describe my work in Vietnam.
Real official websites? Or just collections of reader submittals?
> You inferred whether or not he implied. �Your "Stolen Valor" claim is
> just insulting.
"Stolen Valor" thieves are an OUT AND OUT INSULT to those
of real valor.
As usual, you condone insulters as long as they are code-
tested extras. You and boy wonder N2EY.
> Your statements about him offer no proof.
Robeson offered NO PROOF.
>�There's no proof that Steve
> did not serve nor that any of his statements was a lie. �We have only
> your wild accusations.
WRONG. We have only Robeson's WILD CLAIMS.
An "18-year career with the USMC" and Robeson had NOTHING
to show for it by HIS WORDS? No buddies mentioned, no copies
of anything, not one damn bit of proof of any sort?
Well, as long as Robeson was a CODE-TESTED EXTRA he
should be "excused" for telling tales, right? That's your only
rationale for trying to challenge a bunch of us in old RRAP
who were all convinced Robeson was LYING.
Temper fry
AF6AY
Mark, Robeson NEVER had any bit of PROOF of anything about
his alleged "18-year USMC career." Quite probably because he
never had one...or it was terminated for some other reason.
Look at what Robeson does now (or at least did a few months
ago). He is a "Major" in the Tennessee Civil Air Patrol. His
assignment is "Public Relations." He had a Licensed Practical
Nurse (LPN) certificate with the state of Tennessee and said
he worked in "ER." Like the TV show "ER" wasn't on TV and
drawing a fair audience. Around here only RNs (Registered
Nurses) work in Emergency Rooms. LPNs might help out but
they are lower on the totem pole.
Years ago Robeson got a "commission" with the Tennessee
STATE Guard as a First Lieutenant, listed as being
"communications officer" with a brigade in TN. State Guards
are NOT part of any National Guard. A TN State Guard
"brigade" has a small group of personnel, roughly the size
of two Army companies. According to the TN State Guard
website they do the equivalent of Military Police work, assigned
to guard armories of National Guard units that are mobilized.
Robeson is no longer on any TN State Guard listing. He said
he "resigned his commission" after a family tragedy...but he
was not on the rolls BEFORE his daughter died.
He made a number of statements about his off-duty
activities (beyone ham radio) that didn't jibe or appeared
to just copy statements from popular publications. All his
USMC phrase writing was old stuff, known to many, and
few REAL marines use those as much as Robeson did.
He FAILED to remember certain details of USMC training
areas which any REAL marine would know, recognize.
He loved to be seen in UNIFORM. Any uniform....scrubs
to cammies to old, worn flight suits. Title, rank, status
were his "decorations."
He is a piece of work, a real CON MAN.
But, he was a CODE-TESTED EXTRA so all the code-
tested hams loved him. They ate up is CON Man prose.
73, Len AF6AY
an old friend
> On May 25, 12:00�pm, an old friend <kb9...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On May 25, 2:28�pm, Dave Heil <k...@frontiernet.net> wrote:
> > never say you do myself but as far as I know nothing confirming his
> > alleged resume has ever been presented
>
> Mark, Robeson NEVER had any bit of PROOF of anything about
> his alleged "18-year USMC career." Quite probably because he
> never had one...or it was terminated for some other reason.
I have rumours of the end of his carreer but can't sure the Robeson at
the center of that affair was ourt own Steven J.
>
> But, he was a CODE-TESTED EXTRA so all the code-
> tested hams loved him. They ate up is CON Man prose.
yep
when did Paul become a mod on the modded he just rejected a post of
claiming I should elblorate more on why I do not think hams treat new
folks very well
I think I was wise to decline to eleborate sinc ehe said it was close
I took the occasion to appel his dicsion to the mods as awhole
>
> 73, Len AF6AY
Dave Heil
> On May 25, 11:28�am, Dave Heil <k...@frontiernet.net> wrote:
>> AF6AY wrote:
>
>>> Just as Major Dud's saying he was in "seven
>>> hostile actions" but never being able to say
>>> where or when those "hostile actions" were.
>> I don't recall Steve ever not being able to say where or when they took
>> place. �He simply did not do so.
>
> He simply told a LIE. <shrug>
You don't know that.
> He had NO PROOF of anything, no verification, nothing.
You don't know that either.
>> �... �I advised you that I'd found at least one free
>> site where his USMC service was confirmed.
>
> "Confirmed" by a webmaster...by reprinting what readers
> had submitted. Same damn falsehood. <shrug>
A webmaster? I guess you didn't find the site.
>> "Could never" is not the same as "would not".
>> I've never produced a copy of my DD-214 for your perusal.
>> I don't intend to. �Yet there are web sites which document my military
>> service and which describe my work in Vietnam.
>
> Real official websites?
How real need they be? They exist. They're run by veterans of various
units.
> Or just collections of reader submittals?
They're exchanges of reminiscences by those who served. The man I
replaced in Vietnam responded to one of my posts. He worked with the
same individuals I worked with.
>> You inferred whether or not he implied. �Your "Stolen Valor" claim is
>> just insulting.
>
> "Stolen Valor" thieves are an OUT AND OUT INSULT to those
> of real valor.
...but you have no knowledge of Steve's service. All you've done is
toss some wild allegations.
> As usual, you condone insulters as long as they are code-
> tested extras.
As usual, you've read between the lines. I have condoned nothing. I've
stated and restated that I found a web site which confirms Steve's USMC
service. I've also stated and restated that you, Leonard H. Anderson,
have no facts to back up your claims regarding Steve. All you have is
suspicions.
> You and boy wonder N2EY.
For a PROFESSIONAL writer, you don't put many sentences together. Can
you advise, O Wizened One, where I can find proof that N2EY condones
claims made by Steve, of his military service?
>> Your statements about him offer no proof.
>
> Robeson offered NO PROOF.
No, he didn't, but you've offered no proof of your insulting claims.
Many have seen the less than honorable things you've written about the
military service or job situation of others. Who owes you proof of
their military service, Len? Who are you supposed to be?
>> �There's no proof that Steve
>> did not serve nor that any of his statements was a lie. �We have only
>> your wild accusations.
>
> WRONG. We have only Robeson's WILD CLAIMS.
You can type "WRONG" until your fingers bleed. Steve made no WILD
CLAIMS. He made statements concerning his military service. Now if you
can disprove any of those claims, fine. Until or unless you do, it'd be
the civil thing to lay off the accusations.
> An "18-year career with the USMC" and Robeson had NOTHING
> to show for it by HIS WORDS? No buddies mentioned, no copies
> of anything, not one damn bit of proof of any sort?
He may a trunk full of photos, letter, documents, uniforms and more.
What he hasn't done is show them to you. You can stamp your feet and
shout, but he owes you nothing.
> Well, as long as Robeson was a CODE-TESTED EXTRA he
> should be "excused" for telling tales, right? That's your only
> rationale for trying to challenge a bunch of us in old RRAP
> who were all convinced Robeson was LYING.
I've excused no one. I have no proof that Steve told any tales.
The "bunch of us" you refer to is yourself, Brian Burke, the
dysfunctional Mark Morgan and a couple of anonymous posters. That's
quite a bunch, howling for Steve's head.
> Temper fry
Tempura fry.
Dave K8MN
an old friend
yes you have you have at least excused steve accusing me of molesting
on tap a 10 yo boy
that was ok by you
> I have no proof that Steve told any tales.
because you don't want any
> The "bunch of us" you refer to is yourself, Brian Burke, the
> dysfunctional Mark Morgan and a couple of anonymous posters. That's
> quite a bunch, howling for Steve's head.
and if you were accused of child rape you have called for Wisemen's
head Dave
AF6AY
>AF6AY wrote:
>
>> He simply told a LIE. <shrug>
>
>You don't know that.
Then, all-knowing seer, HOW can you say he wrote Truth?
>> He had NO PROOF of anything, no verification, nothing.
>
>You don't know that either.
I and uncounted readers saw NO evidence of PROOF given by
ol' Dud anywhere. That much WE KNOW.
>>> ?... ?I advised you that I'd found at least one free
>>> site where his USMC service was confirmed.
>>
>> "Confirmed" by a webmaster...by reprinting what readers
>> had submitted. Same damn falsehood. <shrug>
>
>A webmaster? I guess you didn't find the site.
Tsk, tsk, I can show you a site where Robeson stated he
was with a MARS station in Vietnam...in 1981! :-)
The US of A ended its military actions IN Vietnam in
1973.
>>> "Could never" is not the same as "would not".
>>> I've never produced a copy of my DD-214 for your perusal.
>>> I don't intend to. ?Yet there are web sites which document my military
>>> service and which describe my work in Vietnam.
>>
>> Real official websites?
>
>How real need they be? They exist. They're run by veterans of various
>units.
There is only ONE official website for records, NARA.
Particularly the military records depository in St. Louis.
That's about as OFFICIAL as possible.
Anyone can access NARA websites. But, they have specific
rules as to WHO can get information. If one isn't a
recognized or approved agency, they will need specific info
on the veteran's social security number or military service
number (used before the all-branches use of social security
number went into effect).
That kind of privacy is wonderful for Stolen Valor
thieves. They can make up all kinds of stories and
become web celebrities telling stories and tales of
heroism and wonder...without anyone being able to
disprove a thing about them.
>> Or just collections of reader submittals?
>
>They're exchanges of reminiscences by those who served. The man I
>replaced in Vietnam responded to one of my posts. He worked with the
>same individuals I worked with.
Just HOW is that OFFICIAL?
And just what did Heil DO in Vietnam? Heil never said.
All Heil did was babble about "being in a country at war."
Tsk, I was "in a country at war" for about 4 1/2 years,
the country being the United States of America...between
the end of 1941 and middle of 1945. :-)
Gee, that's so easy, isn't it? Just write where one was
and say - honestly - they were in a country at war. Makes
others think the writer is a great big bona fide hee-row.
It's just an UNspecific statement, saying NOTHING about the
individual.
Heil was USAF. USAF didn't go out on patrol like USA or
USMC did in Vietnam. USAF AIRCREW got into battle but,
was Heil an aircrew man?
>...but you have no knowledge of Steve's service. All you've done is
>toss some wild allegations.
"Wild allegations?!?" Tsk, tsk, those aren't any "wilder"
than Dud's WILD ALLEGATIONS that he was in "seven hostile
actions." Robeson never stated where or what those hostile
actions were. He made a WILD unspecific statement...WITHOUT
ANY PROOF WHATSOEVER.
>> As usual, you condone insulters as long as they are code-
>> tested extras.
>
>As usual, you've read between the lines. I have condoned nothing.
When did YOU challenge Robeson on anything? It certainly
wasn't on Robeson's WILD ALLEGATIONS of his "military
service." You said NOTHING. Ergo, you CONDONED his actions.
In fact, you probably enjoyed the hell out Robeson calling
several of us names and insulting us. Saved you the trouble
of doing so when you disliked all of us so much. :-)
>I've
>stated and restated that I found a web site which confirms Steve's USMC
>service.
You mentioned it only twice. Don't exaggerate. If the
website is not one of the National Archives and Records
Administration or one of the military branches (Army,
Navy, Air Force, Coast Guard), it isn't OFFICIAL.
> Can
>you advise, O Wizened One, where I can find proof that N2EY condones
>claims made by Steve, of his military service?
The LACK of response to Robeson's avalanche of filth and
insults to others is CLEAR ENOUGH EVIDENCE for condoning
Robeson's actions. Boy wonder N2EY made a very few weak-
sister-like "challenges" to Robeson but those had the
effect of a wet noodle on a raging forest fire. Nothing
came of them.
Boy wonder N2EY never served his country in any military
OR governmental capacity. He is hardly anyone who will
get out and FIGHT for any kind of truth, justice, or freedom
UNLESS it involves morse code.
>> Robeson offered NO PROOF.
>
>No, he didn't, but you've offered no proof of your insulting claims.
Tsk, tsk, Robeson NEVER OFFERED ANY PROOF so anyone
challenging his lies "insults" him?!? Wow! Logic and
truth turned upside down!
Okay, here's the assessment of Heil's way of logic and
truth: If one is a code-tested extra, ANYTHING they say
is honest and truthful. Those who challenge the code-
tested extras are insulting liars. Everyone is supposed
to look up to code-tested extras and respect their
bravery and just love them all to pieces.
Yawn. Heil's "argument" and theory of operation is the
reversal of REAL truth and REAL logic.
>Many have seen the less than honorable things you've written about the
>military service or job situation of others.
Just WHAT are those "less than honorable things I've written
about the military service?" Name a few. As a veteran, as a
VOLUNTEER veteran of the US Army (when draftees were going
into the USAF or USN to avoid being IN battle), I respect ALL
who wear the uniform of the United States military.
AS a veteran can, I CAN engage in INTER-SERVICE banter with
another veteran (except when they are code-tested extra
class amateurs). That's typical among service members and
veterans alike. Practically SOP.
Very, very few of us veterans and present-day military
service people condone STOLEN VALOR THIEVES. We KNOW
that some will exaggerate their service records but we
also expect them to back down when confronted with TRUTH
about what these STOLEN VALOR THIEVES have done.
>... Steve made no WILD CLAIMS.
BULLSHIT.
>He made statements concerning his military service.
He made CLAIMS. HE HAD NO PROOF of his claims. NONE.
>Now if you can disprove any of those claims, fine.
Disproof of something THAT DOES NOT EXIST is PROVEN by
the lack of factual evidence on the part of the
claimant.
>Until or unless you do, it'd be
>the civil thing to lay off the accusations.
Ya know, colonel, I'm beginning to think YOU are one of
those STOLEN VALOR THIEVES. You tell everyone to lay
off Robeson despite his very visible, voluble tirades in
here, a showcase of personal insults and invective, and
tell us to "lay off?" Robeson is a code-tested extra.
See any coincidence?
No, I don't think you admit that.
>He may a trunk full of photos, letter, documents, uniforms and more.
>What he hasn't done is show them to you.
Has Robeson showed them to YOU?
How do you know he has only one letter?
Why can't you get him to digitize anything of it to show
the world?
One good reason can be that he really LIED about his
"service." That "trunk" probably doesn't exist. Until
YOU SHOW THAT SUCH RECORDS EXIST, YOU CAN JUST LAY OFF
all these admonitions and shut up about it.
STOLEN VALOR THIEVES dishonor the US military, the country
and, yes, even the amateur community of code-tested extras.
Do you have no HONOR except to your buddies, the code-
tested extras?
kb9rqz
"AF6AY" <LenAn...@ieee.org> wrote in message
news:eaba95a5-b7f1-4721...@m73g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
kb9rqz
"an old friend" <kb9...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:f77755b9-5004-4b17...@d77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> never say you do myself
>
kb9rqz
"an old friend" <kb9...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e1b7018a-2d80-4e66...@56g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
an old friend
> tsk tsk tsk tsk tsk tsk tsk tsk tsk tsk tsk tsk
>
fake fake fake
an old friend
Channel Cop
"an old friend" <kb9...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:a4ec7252-0747-4632...@f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
On May 28, 4:45 pm, "kb9rqz" <kb9pu...@punce.net> wrote:
> tsk tsk tsk tsk tsk tsk tsk tsk tsk tsk tsk tsk
>
fake fake fake
OT OT OT OT OT OT OT OT
Channel Cop
"an old friend" <kb9...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4b801cbb-2ac4-4426...@f63g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
OT OT OT OT OT OT OT OT
an old friend
> "an old friend" <kb9...@hotmail.com> wrote in messagenews:4b801cbb-2ac4-4426...@f63g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> On May 28, 7:37 pm, an old friend <kb9...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On May 28, 4:45 pm, "kb9rqz" <kb9pu...@punce.net> wrote:
>
> > > tsk tsk tsk tsk tsk tsk tsk tsk tsk tsk tsk tsk
>
> > fake fake fake
>
> OT OT OT OT OT OT OT OT
no calling out fraud is always on topic
Dave Heil
> Dave Heil tried to say Con Men are the 'good guys' on May 27, 2008:
>
>> AF6AY wrote:
>>
>>> He simply told a LIE. <shrug>
>> You don't know that.
>
> Then, all-knowing seer, HOW can you say he wrote Truth?
That's simple: I didn't say that he wrote truth or Truth. I wrote that
you didn't know.
>>> He had NO PROOF of anything, no verification, nothing.
>> You don't know that either.
>
> I and uncounted readers saw NO evidence of PROOF given by
> ol' Dud anywhere. That much WE KNOW.
I hope you aren't claiming to speak for uncounted readers. As to the
rest, well DUH! You've just restated what I said--that Steve has
provided no proof to you. That does not indicate that none exists, it
simply means that he hasn't given it to you.
>>>> ?... ?I advised you that I'd found at least one free
>>>> site where his USMC service was confirmed.
>>> "Confirmed" by a webmaster...by reprinting what readers
>>> had submitted. Same damn falsehood. <shrug>
>> A webmaster? I guess you didn't find the site.
>
> Tsk, tsk, I can show you a site where Robeson stated he
> was with a MARS station in Vietnam...in 1981! :-)
Can you? Please do so.
> The US of A ended its military actions IN Vietnam in
> 1973.
I'm aware of that.
>>>> "Could never" is not the same as "would not".
>>>> I've never produced a copy of my DD-214 for your perusal.
>>>> I don't intend to. ?Yet there are web sites which document my military
>>>> service and which describe my work in Vietnam.
>>> Real official websites?
>> How real need they be? They exist. They're run by veterans of various
>> units.
>
> There is only ONE official website for records, NARA.
And?
> Particularly the military records depository in St. Louis.
> That's about as OFFICIAL as possible.
And?
> Anyone can access NARA websites. But, they have specific
> rules as to WHO can get information. If one isn't a
> recognized or approved agency, they will need specific info
> on the veteran's social security number or military service
> number (used before the all-branches use of social security
> number went into effect).
And? You can't access Steve's records? Well, you must not be an
approved agency, must not have his SSN.
> That kind of privacy is wonderful for Stolen Valor
> thieves. They can make up all kinds of stories and
> become web celebrities telling stories and tales of
> heroism and wonder...without anyone being able to
> disprove a thing about them.
You are a suspicious soul, aren't you?
>>> Or just collections of reader submittals?
>> They're exchanges of reminiscences by those who served. The man I
>> replaced in Vietnam responded to one of my posts. He worked with the
>> same individuals I worked with.
>
> Just HOW is that OFFICIAL?
Just WHERE did I write that it is OFFICIAL?
> And just what did Heil DO in Vietnam? Heil never said.
That's right, I don't believe I did. Who wants to know and for what
purpose?
> All Heil did was babble about "being in a country at war."
> Tsk, I was "in a country at war" for about 4 1/2 years,
> the country being the United States of America...between
> the end of 1941 and middle of 1945. :-)
Yep, yuk yuk. Did you draw combat pay during that period? Were you a
member of the military during those years? :-) :-)
> Gee, that's so easy, isn't it? Just write where one was
> and say - honestly - they were in a country at war. Makes
> others think the writer is a great big bona fide hee-row.
That's just more of your foolishness, Len.
> It's just an UNspecific statement, saying NOTHING about the
> individual.
I didn't make UNspecific statements. I stated that I was in the Air
Force. I stated which country I served in. I stated that I drew combat
pay. Your claim is thus a falsehood.
> Heil was USAF.
No, I wasn't USAF. I was in the USAF.
> USAF didn't go out on patrol like USA or
> USMC did in Vietnam.
There are some problems with your blanket statement.
> USAF AIRCREW got into battle but,
> was Heil an aircrew man?
I don't believe that I said.
>
>> ...but you have no knowledge of Steve's service. All you've done is
>> toss some wild allegations.
>
> "Wild allegations?!?"
Yes.
> Tsk, tsk, those aren't any "wilder"
> than Dud's WILD ALLEGATIONS that he was in "seven hostile
> actions." Robeson never stated where or what those hostile
> actions were. He made a WILD unspecific statement...WITHOUT
> ANY PROOF WHATSOEVER.
He may have loads of proof. What you mean is that he never provided it
to you.
>>> As usual, you condone insulters as long as they are code-
>>> tested extras.
>> As usual, you've read between the lines. I have condoned nothing.
>
> When did YOU challenge Robeson on anything? It certainly
> wasn't on Robeson's WILD ALLEGATIONS of his "military
> service." You said NOTHING. Ergo, you CONDONED his actions.
I've not seen statements from you against the violence between Hutus and
Tutsis in Rwanda. There's been nothing from you condemning ritual
female circumcision in Africa. I've read nothing from you which
condemns Barack Obama's pastor Wright's statements from the pulpit. By
your rules, you condone each of those things.
> In fact, you probably enjoyed the hell out Robeson calling
> several of us names and insulting us.
Us? Do you mean yourself?
> Saved you the trouble
> of doing so when you disliked all of us so much. :-)
I've addressed you, Len. I need no other to speak or write for me. :-) :-)
>> I've
>> stated and restated that I found a web site which confirms Steve's USMC
>> service.
>
> You mentioned it only twice.
You'd better recalculate, old timer. If I'd mentioned only twice, that
would be enough to state and restate.
> Don't exaggerate.
I did not.
> If the
> website is not one of the National Archives and Records
> Administration or one of the military branches (Army,
> Navy, Air Force, Coast Guard), it isn't OFFICIAL.
I did not write that it was an OFFICIAL site, Leonard. If you want
access to the OFFICIAL site, you'll have to qualify. I don't believe
you can do so.
>> Can
>> you advise, O Wizened One, where I can find proof that N2EY condones
>> claims made by Steve, of his military service?
>
> The LACK of response to Robeson's avalanche of filth and
> insults to others is CLEAR ENOUGH EVIDENCE for condoning
> Robeson's actions. Boy wonder N2EY made a very few weak-
> sister-like "challenges" to Robeson but those had the
> effect of a wet noodle on a raging forest fire. Nothing
> came of them.
See my statement above. You are guilty, by your own rules, of a vast
number of horrid things. Why do you continue to refer to N2EY as "boy
wonder"?
> Boy wonder N2EY never served his country in any military
> OR governmental capacity.
...or at least that is your impression. You don't have any confirmation
of your statement. Why do you continue to refer to N2EY as "boy wonder"?
> He is hardly anyone who will
> get out and FIGHT for any kind of truth, justice, or freedom
> UNLESS it involves morse code.
You're in the midst of your eighth decade of life. Are you going to go
out and FIGHT for anything. Did you go out and FIGHT during your
military enlistment? Are you going to regale us with that classic
sphincter post of yours?
How do you know what someone else will do in the interest of truth,
justice or freedom?
>>> Robeson offered NO PROOF.
>> No, he didn't, but you've offered no proof of your insulting claims.
>
> Tsk, tsk, Robeson NEVER OFFERED ANY PROOF so anyone
> challenging his lies "insults" him?!? Wow! Logic and
> truth turned upside down!
No, he never offered any proof. Do you think he owes you proof? You've
called him a liar, but you have no proof that he lied.
> Okay, here's the assessment of Heil's way of logic and
> truth: If one is a code-tested extra, ANYTHING they say
> is honest and truthful.
That might be your assessment, but there is nothing to indicate that it
is accurate. I've certainly made no statements that I believe any of that.
> Those who challenge the code-
> tested extras are insulting liars.
Well, there's you. Challenging code-tested Extras isn't what gets you
into hot water. You have certainly been insulting. In that past,
you've been less than forthright. You've exaggerated. You've made
factual errors. You've been disingenuous and you have outright lied.
How's that?
> Everyone is supposed
> to look up to code-tested extras and respect their
> bravery and just love them all to pieces.
It's your statement. If you want to embrace those things, feel free.
> Yawn. Heil's "argument" and theory of operation is the
> reversal of REAL truth and REAL logic.
I don't believe I've espoused a theory of operation.
>> Many have seen the less than honorable things you've written about the
>> military service or job situation of others.
>
> Just WHAT are those "less than honorable things I've written
> about the military service?"
Not "less than honorable things I've written about the military
service", Len. I wrote, "less than honorable things you've written
about the military service or job situation of others".
> Name a few.
See my earlier post of today.
> As a veteran, as a
> VOLUNTEER veteran of the US Army (when draftees were going
> into the USAF or USN to avoid being IN battle), I respect ALL
> who wear the uniform of the United States military.
There's another. You equate the service of those who joined the USAF or
USN as having done so to avoid battle. You made a ridiculous claim that
draftees were going into the USAF or the Navy. No one was ever drafted
into the Air Force. The only Navy personnel who were drafted, entered
the Marine Corps a number of times. You volunteered but you never went
into battle. There is a pattern to your attempts to twist fact.
> AS a veteran can, I CAN engage in INTER-SERVICE banter with
> another veteran (except when they are code-tested extra
> class amateurs). That's typical among service members and
> veterans alike. Practically SOP.
I wouldn't consider taking your act into a VFW post. Some fellows might
decide, in the name of inter-service banter, to give you a wedgie like
you've never seen.
> Very, very few of us veterans and present-day military
> service people condone STOLEN VALOR THIEVES. We KNOW
> that some will exaggerate their service records but we
> also expect them to back down when confronted with TRUTH
> about what these STOLEN VALOR THIEVES have done.
...but you'd better be very, very careful in throwing that STOLEN VALOR
THIEVES term around unless you are very sure of the facts.
>
>> ... Steve made no WILD CLAIMS.
>
> BULLSHIT.
No, Len. Get control of yourself.
>> He made statements concerning his military service.
>
> He made CLAIMS.
Claims, statements. Yes, he did.
> HE HAD NO PROOF of his claims. NONE.
That is not necessarily correct. He showed YOU no proof.
Now what?
>> Now if you can disprove any of those claims, fine.
>
> Disproof of something THAT DOES NOT EXIST is PROVEN by
> the lack of factual evidence on the part of the
> claimant.
That's peculiar.
I've offered you no proof of my Vietnam service. I have loads of
photos, orders and other military documents and a DD-214 which say that
I served. I've offered none of it to you and choose not to reveal it to
you. You're saying that by failing to provide proof to you, my service
never took place. That's an interesting and revealing point of view you
have.
>> Until or unless you do, it'd be
>> the civil thing to lay off the accusations.
>
> Ya know, colonel, I'm beginning to think YOU are one of
> those STOLEN VALOR THIEVES.
I'm not a colonel. I was a Sergeant. It is a safe thing for you to
toss out such a statement on Usenet. If you'd done it to my fact, you'd
find yourself sitting on the floor despite your advanced years.
> You tell everyone to lay
> off Robeson despite his very visible, voluble tirades in
> here, a showcase of personal insults and invective, and
> tell us to "lay off?" Robeson is a code-tested extra.
> See any coincidence?
Steve Robinson has as much right to post here as you do. Your total
word output, much of it consisting of personal insults, invective and
denigration, vastly outweighs Steve's. You had no amateur radio license
at all until a little over a year ago. See any coincidence?
One difference I note between you is that you have repeatedly offered to
show me your DD-214--something I do not need to see or care to see.
> No, I don't think you admit that.
I admit that there have been coincidences between your behavior and Steve's.
>
>> He may a trunk full of photos, letter, documents, uniforms and more.
>> What he hasn't done is show them to you.
>
> Has Robeson showed them to YOU?
No, but I'm not upset that he has not.
> How do you know he has only one letter?
I don't know, but I'm not the one who has worked himself into a froth.
> Why can't you get him to digitize anything of it to show
> the world?
What's my motivation?
> One good reason can be that he really LIED about his
> "service."
It could just as well be that he did not.
> That "trunk" probably doesn't exist.
It could just as likely exist.
> Until
> YOU SHOW THAT SUCH RECORDS EXIST, YOU CAN JUST LAY OFF
> all these admonitions and shut up about it.
You don't give orders and I don't shut up on your say so. You've told
me to shut up before and have gone on about my having tried to stop you
from posting here. That was an outright lie on your part.
> STOLEN VALOR THIEVES dishonor the US military, the country
> and, yes, even the amateur community of code-tested extras.
I was with you right up until the last clause. That has not been
demonstrated. I've seen nothing about radio amateurs as "STOLEN VALOR
THIEVES".
> Do you have no HONOR except to your buddies, the code-
> tested extras?
What do you think, Len? My buddies are not all radio amateurs. Some of
my buddies are friends from school years. Some are former and present
neighbors. Some are fellow military veterans. Some are current or
former State Department employees. Some are radio amateurs. Some are
from my church. Now, let's look at your question and see if it makes
any sense at all.
Now did you reappear in this newsgroup to discuss amateur radio policy,
to moan about your perceived slight at the hands of the moderators of
r.r.a.m. or to simply stir the pot? Have you joined the community of
radio amateurs and can you act like it or are you only a fellow who
obtained an amateur radio license recently but who plays the role of
instant expert?
At the moment, you're acting like Mark Morgan with better spelling.
Dave K8MN
an old friend
> AF6AY wrote:
> > Dave Heil tried to say Con Men are the 'good guys' on May 27, 2008:
>
> >> AF6AY wrote:
>
> >>> He simply told a LIE. <shrug>
> >> You don't know that.
>
> > Then, all-knowing seer, HOW can you say he wrote Truth?
>
> That's simple: I didn't say that he wrote truth or Truth. I wrote that
> you didn't know.
vision of the Bog of TX danicng the little side step
Rabbi Foreskin
................
Speak English, Mark. Your gibberish is indecipherable.
Besides. Len doesn't want your help. He's too busy having his ass handed to
him by Dave Heil.