Lest We Forget
N2...@aol.com
http://www.warmuseum.ca/cwm/opening/celebrate_e.html
Some of the windows spell out "Lest We Forget" in Morse Code.
73 de Jim, N2EY
LenAn...@ieee.org
Let's all stand up and salute this brave "member of the service."
[ex-RA16408336]
N2...@aol.com
How do you know for sure, Len?
Besides - what does it matter?
I've seen how you talk to those who *have*
served in the US military, and for various
departments of the US government. If the
person disagrees with you on almost any
issue, you treat them *and their service*
with little or no respect at all. You
make fun of them and their service for
no apparent reason other than a failed
attempt at what you consider "humor".
Except it isn't funny.
>Let's all stand up and salute this brave "member of the service."
There you go again! So typical.
LenAn...@ieee.org
>LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
>> Lest WE forget..."N2EY" NEVER served in ANY war in ANY military.
>
>How do you know for sure, Len?
>
>Besides - what does it matter?
You want to get all emotional and teary on
World War II? Tsk. Go talk to a REAL WW2
veteran. Better yet, visit a VA hospital and
keep some of them company.
Remember that WW2 ENDED BEFORE you were born.
And, you've NEVER served in any military.
Yet you make this BIG THING about morse code
in a window display...could it be that you
just don't give a damn about WW2 and only want
to make a big emotional showing for morse?
>I've seen how you talk to those who *have*
>served in the US military, and for various
>departments of the US government.
I haven't dissed Bill Sohl about his USN service.
I haven't dissed Brian Burke about his USAF service.
I HAVE dissed those that want to LIE about
their big heroic military "actions" such as
Stebie the wonder murine about his famous
"seven hostile actions" and his failure to
acknowledge that the DoD really does direct
MARS.
Am I supposed to "respect" the infamous Kolonel
Klunk about his very NON-SPECIFIC "service" in
Vietnam? Just because he brags without revealing
any details? Just because he was in the State
Department?
Of course I "should." All those infamous types
are pro-coders and YOU love morse code, so much
so that you think ham radio is all about morse-
manship...and MUST connect morse code to some kind
of imaginary "gallantry in the service." :-)
>If the person disagrees with you on almost any
>issue, you treat them *and their service*
>with little or no respect at all.
Tsk, tsk. Better contact the Department of the
Army of the United States and DEMAND my Good
Conduct medal be given up and sent back! :-)
>You make fun of them and their service for
>no apparent reason other than a failed
>attempt at what you consider "humor".
Tsk, tsk, tsk. Those "veterans" (at least one
with "seven hostile actions") have all been
about as disrespectful to me FIRST. They got
what is known as "return fire." Poor things.
Thought they could pull a snow job on everyone
else and make themselves real "big" in others'
eyes. They should have stayed down at the
Legion Hall bar.
>Except it isn't funny.
Not to you. But, you've NOT served in the military.
Your body too precious to get it harmed in REAL
service for your country?
Couldn't get a dinner date with the Captain
because the King of the Katapults was already
booked on that aircraft carrier?
>>Let's all stand up and salute this brave "member of the service."
>
>There you go again! So typical.
I served. YOU did NOT.
You want to see more of what I did in ARMY service? OK,
go to http://kauko.hallikainen.org/history/equipment and
drop down to "Stations." Once you've downloaded at least
one, we MIGHT have a chat...but then you have this
terrible habit of wanting to message on everything at
long length. Wastes my time.
N2...@aol.com
> From: N2EY on Apr 12, 4:20 pm
>
> >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
> >> Lest WE forget..."N2EY" NEVER served in ANY war in ANY military.
> >
> >How do you know for sure, Len?
You don't know for sure, do you, Len?
> >Besides - what does it matter?
>
> You want to get all emotional and teary on
> World War II?
"You cannot answer a question with another question"
You own words, Len.
What does it matter whether I served in any military or not?
> Tsk. Go talk to a REAL WW2
> veteran.
I've done that - many times. From several branches of the
US military.
> Better yet, visit a VA hospital and
> keep some of them company.
That's a good idea!
>
> Remember that WW2 ENDED BEFORE you were born.
Why is that of any significance? If anything, it is
more important that those of us who weren't alive then
keep the history alive.
I live just up the hill from Valley Forge, where Washington's
army survived a terrible winter. Also down the pike from where
the Paoli Massacre took place.
That war ended long before *you* were born, Len.
> And, you've NEVER served in any military.
How do you know for sure?
And what does it matter anyway?
> Yet you make this BIG THING about morse code
> in a window display...
Is it wrong to mention an interesting architectural feature?
Does it bother you, Len?
Here's a hint: The Canadian military forces used Morse Code in
WW2.
> could it be that you
> just don't give a damn about WW2 and only want
> to make a big emotional showing for morse?
Nope - not at all. I find the history of WW2 to be
very interesting. I think it's important to understand
that war, both how it got started and the aftermath, to
understand current history. And technology.
For example, the very first high-speed, general purpose,
digital electronic computer, ENIAC, was developed and built
right here in Philadelphia - in the basement of the building where I
went to EE school. I've actually seen and handled
pieces of it, read the original papers in the library there.
It was built to compute artillery aiming tables for the US Army,
and was used for ten years at the Aberdeen Proving Grounds. There's
also an unconfirmed story that it was used for atom
bomb calculations.
Or let's talk about the lessons to be learned from the US Navy
Mark XIV submarine torpedo, and its problems.
Perhaps the proximity fuse is more to your liking. Incredible
device, made with tubes originally meant for hearing aids.
I could go on about the political and economic effects, but since this
is a radio newsgroup I thought I'd stick to electronic and
radio subjects.
If I did talk about any military service I had, you would
be certain to make fun of it. It's just what you do, Len.
So typical.
> >I've seen how you talk to those who *have*
> >served in the US military, and for various
> >departments of the US government.
>
> I haven't dissed Bill Sohl about his USN service.
Because he doesn't disagree with you about Morse Code testing in
amateur radio. In fact, he pretty much ignores you.
> I haven't dissed Brian Burke about his USAF service.
Because he doesn't disagree with you about Morse Code testing in
amateur radio. In fact, he pretty much idolizes you.
It's only those who disagree with you about Morse Code testing
that get your disrespect, abuse, name calling, and general
jackass behavior.
>
> I HAVE dissed those that want to LIE about
> their big heroic military "actions" such as
> Stebie the wonder murine
There you go - calling names. So typical.
> about his famous
> "seven hostile actions"
Do you know what they are? Where *you* involved in any of
them?
Is there any reason to doubt that Steve, K4YZ, was involved
if he says he was?
> and his failure to
> acknowledge that the DoD really does direct
> MARS.
I see. His mistake somehow justifies *your* behavior?
> Am I supposed to "respect" the infamous Kolonel
> Klunk
There you go again - calling names.
Godwin invoked. You lose.
Why not use the person's name and callsign?
> about his very NON-SPECIFIC "service" in
> Vietnam? Just because he brags without revealing
> any details?
What difference would details make? Your behavior when
details are given doesn't change. In fact, you simply
use the details as a source of more insults.
OTOH, Brian, N0IMD, refuses to give any details about
his claimed amateur radio operation from Somalia, but
that doesn't bother you a bit.
> Just because he was in the State
> Department?
Do you mean Dave, K8MN, who served in the US State Department
at a number of foreign posts as a communications officer?
His service to our country was much longer than your, Len, and
in many more foreign countries. I recall when he was transferred
to right around the same time the US Embassy in the country he was
transferring to was bombed. We didn't hear from him for weeks.
Luckily he was OK.
Yet you argued with him at length about communications facilities
that he used - even though you've never worked for the State
Department.
>
> Of course I "should."
Yes, you should.
Perhaps you have forgotten the US Coast Guard radio operator who
used to post here? You made fun of his service in that capacity,
in your now-famous "sphincter post".
Why?
> All those infamous types
> are pro-coders and YOU love morse code, so much
> so that you think ham radio is all about morse-
> manship...
Len - lest we forget - you're not a radio amateur. You've never been a
radio amateur. Yet you see fit to tell all how amateur
radio should be. You're not and never have been part of the FCC,
either.
> and MUST connect morse code to some kind
> of imaginary "gallantry in the service." :-)
All I did was mention a museum and some windows. That really
seems to bother you. Too bad - the fact is, the Canadian
armed forces used Morse Code in WW2. Deal with it, Len.
> >If the person disagrees with you on almost any
> >issue, you treat them *and their service*
> >with little or no respect at all.
>
> Tsk, tsk. Better contact the Department of the
> Army of the United States and DEMAND my Good
> Conduct medal be given up and sent back! :-)
I don't demand anything like that, Len.
> >You make fun of them and their service for
> >no apparent reason other than a failed
> >attempt at what you consider "humor".
>
> Tsk, tsk, tsk. Those "veterans" (at least one
> with "seven hostile actions") have all been
> about as disrespectful to me FIRST.
No, they haven't. At least not to anyone rational.
You apparently see any disagreement with your
cherished beliefs about Morse Code testing in amateur
radio as "disrespect", and then proceed in your
completely predictable manner.
> They got
> what is known as "return fire."
For saying good things about Morse Code, apparently.
> Poor things.
> Thought they could pull a snow job on everyone
> else and make themselves real "big" in others'
> eyes. They should have stayed down at the
> Legion Hall bar.
You mean like somebody who tells us the same story,
over and over and over and over again,
about his service at a big radio facility 50+ years
ago? Then gets mad because people point out his
underestimation of distances, and mistakes about
Soviet aircraft deployment dates?
> >Except it isn't funny.
>
> Not to you. But, you've NOT served in the military.
How do you know for sure?
Do *you* think it's funny, Len? Why? Those whom you make
fun of don't seem to be amused.
Besides, the point is that you make fun of the military service of
those who disagree with you about Morse code testing in amateur radio.
Even though you're not an amateur radio operator, never have been, and
probably never will be.
> Your body too precious to get it harmed in REAL
> service for your country?
Why, no, Len. I don't think that at all. Never have.
Is military service the only REAL service, Len? I guess
all those police officers, firefighters, EMTs, and other
uniformed people who go in harm's way don't count, do they?
How about the utility workers who keep the lights on and the water
flowing? Or the highway, airline, transit, railroad and maritime
workers who keep transportation running?
Or health care workers, exposed to who-knows-what every day on the job?
Guess they don't count either - to you.
>
> Couldn't get a dinner date with the Captain
> because the King of the Katapults was already
> booked on that aircraft carrier?
More name calling - so typical of you.
>
>
> >>Let's all stand up and salute this brave "member of the service."
> >
> >There you go again! So typical.
>
> I served. YOU did NOT.
How does that give you the right to insult others' service?
>
> You want to see more of what I did in ARMY service?
No. You've told us over and over and over again. That's
enough.
Dave Heil
>
> LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
> > From: N2EY on Apr 12, 4:20 pm
> >
> > >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
> > >> Lest WE forget..."N2EY" NEVER served in ANY war in ANY military.
> > >
> > >How do you know for sure, Len?
>
> You don't know for sure, do you, Len?
>
> > >Besides - what does it matter?
> >
> > You want to get all emotional and teary on
> > World War II?
>
> "You cannot answer a question with another question"
>
> You own words, Len.
>
> What does it matter whether I served in any military or not?
>
> > Tsk. Go talk to a REAL WW2
> > veteran.
>
> I've done that - many times. From several branches of the
> US military.
It would have difficult to grow up in the times we did and not encounter
larges numbers of World War II vets. My dad was a U.S. Navy veteran of
the Normandy Invasion. A great-uncle was at Bataan. He survived the
Death March and was held by the Japanese until the end of the war.
> > Better yet, visit a VA hospital and
> > keep some of them company.
>
> That's a good idea!
It is a great idea but it isn't necessary to visit just a VA hospital.
I can visit any number here who live quietly with spouses, who are
living alone as widowers or who are in nursing homes.
> > Remember that WW2 ENDED BEFORE you were born.
>
> Why is that of any significance? If anything, it is
> more important that those of us who weren't alive then
> keep the history alive.
> I live just up the hill from Valley Forge, where Washington's
> army survived a terrible winter. Also down the pike from where
> the Paoli Massacre took place.
>
> That war ended long before *you* were born, Len.
You don't quite have the hang of it, Jim. I'd have used, "That war
ended LONG BEFORE YOU WERE BORN, Len".
> > And, you've NEVER served in any military.
>
> How do you know for sure?
>
> And what does it matter anyway?
>
> > Yet you make this BIG THING about morse code
> > in a window display...
>
> Is it wrong to mention an interesting architectural feature?
I read your post and looked in vain for the portion in which you made it
a BIG THING.
> Does it bother you, Len?
You read his lengthy post and saw the style he used. You bet it
bothered him.
> Here's a hint: The Canadian military forces used Morse Code in
> WW2.
> If I did talk about any military service I had, you would
> be certain to make fun of it. It's just what you do, Len.
> So typical.
>
> > >I've seen how you talk to those who *have*
> > >served in the US military, and for various
> > >departments of the US government.
> >
> > I haven't dissed Bill Sohl about his USN service.
>
> Because he doesn't disagree with you about Morse Code testing in
> amateur radio. In fact, he pretty much ignores you.
>
> > I haven't dissed Brian Burke about his USAF service.
>
> Because he doesn't disagree with you about Morse Code testing in
> amateur radio. In fact, he pretty much idolizes you.
> It's only those who disagree with you about Morse Code testing
> that get your disrespect, abuse, name calling, and general
> jackass behavior.
To be fair, Len has exhibited jackass behavior toward K0HB and Hans does
not support retention of morse code testing.
> > I HAVE dissed those that want to LIE about
> > their big heroic military "actions" such as
> > Stebie the wonder murine
>
> There you go - calling names. So typical.
...and utterly predictable.
> > about his famous
> > "seven hostile actions"
>
> Do you know what they are? Where *you* involved in any of
> them?
He doesn't have any idea what they were. It kills him.
> Is there any reason to doubt that Steve, K4YZ, was involved
> if he says he was?
>
> > and his failure to
> > acknowledge that the DoD really does direct
> > MARS.
>
> I see. His mistake somehow justifies *your* behavior?
To my knowledge, Steve has never stated that DOD does not direct MARS.
His claim is that if there were no radio amateurs, there'd have been no
MARS program. In that, he is correct.
> > Am I supposed to "respect" the infamous Kolonel
> > Klunk
>
> There you go again - calling names.
Did you really expect otherwise?
> Godwin invoked. You lose.
> Why not use the person's name and callsign?
>
> > about his very NON-SPECIFIC "service" in
> > Vietnam? Just because he brags without revealing
> > any details?
>
> What difference would details make? Your behavior when
> details are given doesn't change. In fact, you simply
> use the details as a source of more insults.
That's pretty much why I've left details out. As with Steve's military
service, Len doesn't know what I did or where I did it and it kills him.
> OTOH, Brian, N0IMD, refuses to give any details about
> his claimed amateur radio operation from Somalia, but
> that doesn't bother you a bit.
Isn't this about the point at which Leonard or Brian would begin some
litany about a double standard?
> > Just because he was in the State
> > Department?
>
> Do you mean Dave, K8MN, who served in the US State Department
> at a number of foreign posts as a communications officer?
>
> His service to our country was much longer than your, Len, and
> in many more foreign countries.
...and Len has invariably demeaned that service. He has always known
more about my job that I did. Foreign service tours were dismissed as
tropical backwaters, places of insignificance and Cashew capitals.
> I recall when he was transferred
> to right around the same time the US Embassy in the country he was
> transferring to was bombed. We didn't hear from him for weeks.
> Luckily he was OK.
Luckily, he was on holiday between the assignments and was comfy right
here in West Virginia when the news broke. I arrived in Tanzania three
weeks after the embassy bombing. The embassy was in ruins. Operations
were carried out from a residence for six months while a new temporary
embassy was constructed. It was my busiest assignment.
> Yet you argued with him at length about communications facilities
> that he used - even though you've never worked for the State
> Department.
Don't leave out his attempts at insult by stating that my name never
appeared in any lists of embassy staff. That blew up in his face when I
produced a couple of urls in which I was listed. Len's response was to
dismiss the lists as some sort of telephone directory.
> >
> > Of course I "should."
>
> Yes, you should.
>
> Perhaps you have forgotten the US Coast Guard radio operator who
> used to post here? You made fun of his service in that capacity,
> in your now-famous "sphincter post".
>
> Why?
Because Len is all about Len. That isn't the important part though.
The important part is where Len's sphincter post speaks of what it is
like to be in battle. Len was never in battle.
> > All those infamous types
> > are pro-coders and YOU love morse code, so much
> > so that you think ham radio is all about morse-
> > manship...
>
> Len - lest we forget - you're not a radio amateur. You've never been a
> radio amateur. Yet you see fit to tell all how amateur
> radio should be. You're not and never have been part of the FCC,
> either.
As far as I'm concerned, amateur radio is about operating any mode I
choose on any band I choose. Len isn't involved on any level.
> > >If the person disagrees with you on almost any
> > >issue, you treat them *and their service*
> > >with little or no respect at all.
> >
> > Tsk, tsk. Better contact the Department of the
> > Army of the United States and DEMAND my Good
> > Conduct medal be given up and sent back! :-)
> I don't demand anything like that, Len.
> > >You make fun of them and their service for
> > >no apparent reason other than a failed
> > >attempt at what you consider "humor".
> >
> > Tsk, tsk, tsk. Those "veterans" (at least one
> > with "seven hostile actions") have all been
> > about as disrespectful to me FIRST.
>
> No, they haven't. At least not to anyone rational.
No, they haven't.
> You apparently see any disagreement with your
> cherished beliefs about Morse Code testing in amateur
> radio as "disrespect", and then proceed in your
> completely predictable manner.
> > They got
> > what is known as "return fire."
>
> For saying good things about Morse Code, apparently.
> > Poor things.
> > Thought they could pull a snow job on everyone
> > else and make themselves real "big" in others'
> > eyes. They should have stayed down at the
> > Legion Hall bar.
Len knows more about what others did than those involved. Len knows
more about the military. Len knows more about communications. Len
knows more about radio operation. Len knows more about the U.S.
Department of State.
Len knows more about your work. Len knows more about Brian Kelly's
work.
Len knows more about Steve's work.
> You mean like somebody who tells us the same story,
> over and over and over and over again,
> about his service at a big radio facility 50+ years
> ago? Then gets mad because people point out his
> underestimation of distances, and mistakes about
> Soviet aircraft deployment dates?
Whatever Len did at ADA more than a half century ago impacts amateur
radio not in the least. Len tells it because he wants to be sure that
everyone knows of it.
How does it give him the right to insult those who never served?
> > You want to see more of what I did in ARMY service?
>
> No. You've told us over and over and over again. That's
> enough.
Now you've done it, Jim. You've denigrated a veteran.
Dave K8MN
LenAn...@ieee.org
>LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
>> From: N2EY on Apr 12, 4:20 pm
>> >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
>> >> Lest WE forget..."N2EY" NEVER served in ANY war in ANY military.
>> >How do you know for sure, Len?
>You don't know for sure, do you, Len?
Tsk. You aren't in the St. Louis database. :-)
>What does it matter whether I served in any military or not?
This newsgroup is amateur radio policy, not WW2. :-)
>> Remember that WW2 ENDED BEFORE you were born.
>
>Why is that of any significance? If anything, it is
>more important that those of us who weren't alive then
>keep the history alive.
...so, you want to keep U.S. amateur radio as a
living museum of morsemanship. Understand.
Understood before, still understand that. :-)
>I live just up the hill from Valley Forge, where Washington's
>army survived a terrible winter. Also down the pike from where
>the Paoli Massacre took place.
That's nice. Been there, seen that. So, WHAT
does that have to do with amateur RADIO?
>That war ended long before *you* were born, Len.
Absolutely...but, the American Revolutionary War
did NOT involve either morse code or radio.
Remember, this IS an amateur radio policy news-
group, not some teary-eyed emotional hangout for
those that NEVER served.
>> And, you've NEVER served in any military.
>
>How do you know for sure?
The St. Louis database does NOT have you in it.
>And what does it matter anyway?
Not to me, personally. But, remember, this isn't
the History Channel and you AIN'T a docent in it.
>> Yet you make this BIG THING about morse code
>> in a window display...
>
>Is it wrong to mention an interesting architectural feature?
Morse code is NOW an "interesting architectural feature?"
So, you are now an amateur "architect?" :-)
>Does it bother you, Len?
Only in that you are such a transparent hypocrite.
>Here's a hint: The Canadian military forces used Morse Code in
>WW2.
Wow! [...that's a BIG Ben Stein "wowwww...."]
>> could it be that you
>> just don't give a damn about WW2 and only want
>> to make a big emotional showing for morse?
>
>Nope - not at all. I find the history of WW2 to be
>very interesting. I think it's important to understand
>that war, both how it got started and the aftermath, to
>understand current history. And technology.
Tsk, tsk. Then you MUST understand that THIS venue
is NOT for "warfare" or the technology of warfare.
You should also realize that morse code has HAD its
day and is now obsolete for modern communications.
Obsolete for everyone but the retrograde self-
aggrandizement elitist PCTA extras who USE morse
skills to show how much "better" they are than all
other "radio operators." Tsk, tsk.
>For example, the very first high-speed, general purpose,
>digital electronic computer, ENIAC, was developed and built
>right here in Philadelphia - in the basement of the building where I
>went to EE school. I've actually seen and handled
>pieces of it, read the original papers in the library there.
Poor baby, still BEHIND the times, reaching for glory
on someone ELSE's work. Look again. Collossus over in
the UK's Bletchley Park beat ENIAC in the time frame.
Not only that, John Atanasoff's little group over at
Ohio State was before BOTH of them. :-)
You really DON'T know your own industry's history well
and you are griping about others. Tsk, tsk, tsk.
>It was built to compute artillery aiming tables for the US Army,
>and was used for ten years at the Aberdeen Proving Grounds. There's
>also an unconfirmed story that it was used for atom
>bomb calculations.
Sounds like you've been irradiated to sterility of the
mind. LOTS of calculation places were busy doing
ordinance table calculations way back then. Bell Labs
had a RELAY calculator...actually three of them in one
of the first computer "networks" in NYC. Before ENIAC
was started. Tsk, tsk. Get WITH the history program!
>Or let's talk about the lessons to be learned from the US Navy
>Mark XIV submarine torpedo, and its problems.
Oh! You are now an Expert Extra on USN ordinance?
Remember, this is an AMATEUR RADIO POLICY newsgroup.
>Perhaps the proximity fuse is more to your liking. Incredible
>device, made with tubes originally meant for hearing aids.
Tsk, tsk. You had a "prox" go off on YOU, sweetums.
Remember, this is an AMATEUR RADIO POLICY newsgroup.
>I could go on about the political and economic effects, but since this
>is a radio newsgroup I thought I'd stick to electronic and
>radio subjects.
Remember, this is an AMATEUR RADIO POLICY newsgroup.
>If I did talk about any military service I had, you would
>be certain to make fun of it. It's just what you do, Len.
>So typical.
But...you did NOT serve...so HOW can you "talk about"
something that NEVER happened?
Remember, this is an AMATEUR RADIO POLICY newsgroup.
>> I haven't dissed Bill Sohl about his USN service.
>
>Because he doesn't disagree with you about Morse Code testing in
>amateur radio. In fact, he pretty much ignores you.
Bill hasn't been here much. That means he "ignored"
YOU, too! :-)
>> I haven't dissed Brian Burke about his USAF service.
>
>Because he doesn't disagree with you about Morse Code testing in
>amateur radio. In fact, he pretty much idolizes you.
Irrelevant for THIS thread, sweetums. :-)
>It's only those who disagree with you about Morse Code testing
>that get your disrespect, abuse, name calling, and general
>jackass behavior.
Oooooooo! Big PCTA EXTRA tossing your weight around?
Hello? Does the "sign-off" word "PUTZ" mean anything
to you? :-)
Does Kolonel Klunk's "you never did any operating 24/7
in the military" mean anything to you? :-)
>> I HAVE dissed those that want to LIE about
>> their big heroic military "actions" such as
>> Stebie the wonder murine
>
>There you go - calling names. So typical.
Ooooooo! Causing you "great pain and anguish" is it?
Poor baby...must be new to the Internet. :-)
>> about his famous
>> "seven hostile actions"
>
>Do you know what they are?
Nope...the big hero sojer in da TN woods won't say!
Are you reading deprived and can't understand what
your pet buddy is saying about others?
> Where *you* involved in any of them?
Now, HOW could I have been "in" them? My service
time was 1952 to 1960. Check with St. Louis archives
if you don't believe that. :-)
>Is there any reason to doubt that Steve, K4YZ, was involved
>if he says he was?
HUNDREDS OF DOUBTS! :-)
>> and his failure to
>> acknowledge that the DoD really does direct MARS.
>
>I see. His mistake somehow justifies *your* behavior?
Just ONE of DOZENS of his "mistakes." :-)
>Godwin invoked. You lose.
Do you go to the House of Godwin on Sundays?
Sorry, sweetums, I've WON but you can't ever admit it.
>Why not use the person's name and callsign?
Why don't others? Tsk, tsk. You are an elitist PCTA
EXTRA double-standard bearer, Jimmie.
>What difference would details make? Your behavior when
>details are given doesn't change. In fact, you simply
>use the details as a source of more insults.
Awwwww...nobody giving you all that "praise" you get
from your admiring neighbors about your "neat radio
setup" and how you can describe your radio in great
detail to show off for them? :-)
>OTOH, Brian, N0IMD, refuses to give any details about
>his claimed amateur radio operation from Somalia, but
>that doesn't bother you a bit.
Why does that matter to YOU? :-)
>Do you mean Dave, K8MN, who served in the US State Department
>at a number of foreign posts as a communications officer?
WOW! TITLES!!! BIG, IMPORTANT!!!!!! :-)
>His service to our country was much longer than your, Len, and
>in many more foreign countries. I recall when he was transferred
>to right around the same time the US Embassy in the country he was
>transferring to was bombed. We didn't hear from him for weeks.
>Luckily he was OK.
ONE "hostile action" that he was NOT in... :-)
>Perhaps you have forgotten the US Coast Guard radio operator who
>used to post here? You made fun of his service in that capacity,
>in your now-famous "sphincter post".
Tsk, tsk, tsk...YOUR sphincter is way too compressed.
He's a "mathematics LECTURER" in Hawaii...like a TITLE
makes him sooooo expert, etc. He ALSO was a MAIL DROP
for ANOTHER extra, one who lived in Rhode Island and
wanted a Hawaii call sign. Tsk, tsk. Highly unethical.
>Why?
I have NO idea why the Rhode Islander wanted a 6 call
from Hawaii...not to mention a half dozen or so "club
calls" there... :-)
>> All those infamous types
>> are pro-coders and YOU love morse code, so much
>> so that you think ham radio is all about morse-
>> manship...
>
>Len - lest we forget - you're not a radio amateur.
How COULD you PCTA double-standard EXTRAs forget? :-)
>You've never been a radio amateur.
Right. And, judging from the behavior of you PCTA
double-standard EXTRAs, the "role models" are pretty
damn poor.
>Yet you see fit to tell all how amateur radio should be.
Ooooo..."Klunk's last gasp" (at arguments) invoked!
I'm wondering WHAT drives you retrograde PCTA double-
standard EXTRAs to so enforce the RETENTION of morse
code testing for U.S. amateur radio licensing. You
all get SO HOSTILE at ANYONE wanting to delete that
regulation! :-)
>You're not and never have been part of the FCC, either.
Here's the heartbreaking NEWS for you: YOU are NOT.
Either. :-)
[are you out of a job? maybe I can get you on Kevin's
staff...help you out...]
>> and MUST connect morse code to some kind
>> of imaginary "gallantry in the service." :-)
>
>All I did was mention a museum and some windows. That really
>seems to bother you. Too bad - the fact is, the Canadian
>armed forces used Morse Code in WW2. Deal with it, Len.
I DID, sweetums. :-) The miliaries (plural) DROPPED
morse code for communications purposes. They started
DROPPING its use when I was in the military. Morse has
been DEAD for years. [except in retrograde amateurism
where the PCTAs worship the dead...]
>> Tsk, tsk. Better contact the Department of the
>> Army of the United States and DEMAND my Good
>> Conduct medal be given up and sent back! :-)
>
>I don't demand anything like that, Len.
Tsk. Feeling GUILTY about mouthing off to a vet?
>> Tsk, tsk, tsk. Those "veterans" (at least one
>> with "seven hostile actions") have all been
>> about as disrespectful to me FIRST.
>
>No, they haven't.
BULLSHIT! You're starting to sound like Stevie the
wonder murine again...[but you LIKE him calling others
by names...that means you don't have to "lower"
yourself to do so...:-) ]
>You apparently see any disagreement with your
>cherished beliefs about Morse Code testing in amateur
>radio as "disrespect", and then proceed in your
>completely predictable manner.
Tsk, tsk. Apparently you have a READING disability,
sweetums. You just DON'T (or can't) see that morse-
manship is NOT the ultimate skill in amateurism.
>> They got
>> what is known as "return fire."
>
>For saying good things about Morse Code, apparently.
No, for being total mirrors of the olde fahrts in
ham radio...the double-standard PCTA EXTRA elite
who think they are members of some imaginary
"service" to their country. Tsk, tsk.
>You mean like somebody who tells us the same story,
>over and over and over and over again,
>about his service at a big radio facility 50+ years
>ago?
Tsk. YOU didn't do such a thing, did you?
Do we detect "envy" in someone working high-power
HF in REAL 24/7 communications...BIG time...in a
professional manner?
Sure looks like it to me. And to others.
>Then gets mad because people point out his
>underestimation of distances, and mistakes about
>Soviet aircraft deployment dates?
Nah. Soviet aircraft weren't my thing at the time.
Still aren't.
Thing is, I was THERE, sweetums. YOU were NOT.
You READ all about Soviet aircraft in a book, long
after the harm they could cause us was over.
>> Not to you. But, you've NOT served in the military.
>
>How do you know for sure?
Stuff it, sweetums. I KNOW. You are NOT in the
military service archives. Of the United States of
America. Makes one wonder WHERE you "served" in the
military?
Remember, this is an AMATEUR RADIO POLICY newsgroup.
>Do *you* think it's funny, Len? Why? Those whom you make
>fun of don't seem to be amused.
Ooooooo! It just breaks my heart! [he said sarcastically]
TS, big shot. Calling all those NCTAs for "dumbed down"
because they don't care for morsemanship is NOT some
kind of funny business.
>Is military service the only REAL service, Len? I guess
>all those police officers, firefighters, EMTs, and other
>uniformed people who go in harm's way don't count, do they?
Police DO count, sweetums. Are YOU a policeman?
Bad folk try to kill police...and police fire back.
Do YOU have the guts to do that?
>How about the utility workers who keep the lights on and the water
>flowing? Or the highway, airline, transit, railroad and maritime
>workers who keep transportation running?
Don't forget the garbage collectors, the newspaper vendors
the factory workers, and the cafeteria servers...the butcher,
the baker, the candlestick makers...:-)
Remember, this is an AMATEUR RADIO POLICY newsgroup.
You want to do a thing on Human Resouces, you get on
Larry Roll. :-)
>> Couldn't get a dinner date with the Captain
>> because the King of the Katapults was already
>> booked on that aircraft carrier?
>
>More name calling - so typical of you.
Wow! Must have really get you pissed off to get turned
down! Bet you didn't get to shoot any bears either!
>> I served. YOU did NOT.
>
>How does that give you the right to insult others' service?
WHO appointed YOU "god" in here to determine who is to
to what? Hummmm?
Howcomeforwhy YOU get to be critical as all get out about
MY working HF comms IN the military a half century ago?
Hummmm?
Oh! I know! The ARMY didn't bother using morse code or
morsemanship for the long-distance HF comms then! That
MUST make you all angry and frustrated. Poor guy.
>> You want to see more of what I did in ARMY service?
>
>No. You've told us over and over and over again. That's enough.
WHO was it that used to quote (or rather misquote) a
baseball player's phrase, "It ain't braggin if ya done it."
I did it. You did NOT. You have been an amateur while
I've been a professional about as long as you've been
alive.
DEAL WITH THAT... :-]
K4YZ
> Lest WE forget..."N2EY" NEVER served in ANY war in ANY military.
>
> Let's all stand up and salute this brave "member of the service."
Let's see....
Jim Miccolis, who never served in the Armed Forces, takes a moment
to mention a Veteran's memorial that has a cute Morse Code "theme" to
it. No big deal. Thanks, Jim.
Then we have Lennie Anderson. Served ONE tour of duty in a soft,
non-combatant rear area radio station from 1953 to 1956. Finished his
"obligation" as a non-drilling reservist.
Conceptualizes his duty as having jumped on grenades and dragged
wounded buddies from withering machine gun fire.
Never rose above Sergeant (E-4 in those days, I believe, but I may
be wrong).
NEVER served in combat and NEVER fired a shot in anger. DID,
however, attempt to embellish his meager duty by trying to associate
HIS service with the sacrifices of Soldiers who were KIA before he was
even inducted!
Has not doen a thing to serve anyone BUT Lennie Anderson
since...And that by his own admission.
Lennie, who is the King of the Whining Wounded, takes a pot shot
at Jim. Why are we not surprised.
This is why Lennie is the creep that he is. Just like the onld
"7Up" commercial..."Always was...Always will be..."
Guess Lennie has one more story of how he protected that rear area
radio station from those "Hammie Bastards" down at the VFW now...
Steve, K4YZ
LenAn...@ieee.org
>N...@AOL.COM wrote:
>> LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
>> > From: N2EY on Apr 12, 4:20 pm
>> > >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
>> Does it bother you, Len?
>
>You read his lengthy post and saw the style he used. You bet it
>bothered him.
NAH. I did it. Jimmie didn't do it.
>To be fair, Len has exhibited jackass behavior toward K0HB and Hans
does
>not support retention of morse code testing.
Tsk. Everyone who disagrees with Davie is guilty of
"jackass behavior?" :-)
Riiiight...only ARRL-speak and the beauty, nobility,
and grandeur of morsemanship is spoken in here...:-)
>> > about his famous
>> > "seven hostile actions"
>
>> Do you know what they are? Where *you* involved in any of
>> them?
>
>He doesn't have any idea what they were. It kills him.
NAH. It only shows what a snow-jobbing laid-off
murine does under the guise of a U.S. AMATEUR radio
extra callsign. Tosses brags like they were bagels.
>To my knowledge, Steve has never stated that DOD does not direct MARS.
>His claim is that if there were no radio amateurs, there'd have been
no
>MARS program. In that, he is correct.
Bullshit. The United States ARMY started MARS...but
under a different name before WW2. Tsk. Davie ought
to read up on the subject...lots of references.
MARS always was and remains a MILITARY radio system.
A small one, about as effective as having special
services put on shows and entertainment. Morale
boosting thing.
>That's pretty much why I've left details out. As with Steve's
military
>service, Len doesn't know what I did or where I did it and it kills
him.
No problem with me. If you ain't got the guts to
tell the details, you AIN'T done it. Simple as that.
>...and Len has invariably demeaned that service. He has always known
>more about my job that I did. Foreign service tours were dismissed as
>tropical backwaters, places of insignificance and Cashew capitals.
Awwwww...you doing a Rodney Dangerfield? Get no
"respect?" :-)
>Don't leave out his attempts at insult by stating that my name never
>appeared in any lists of embassy staff. That blew up in his face when
I
>produced a couple of urls in which I was listed. Len's response was
to
>dismiss the lists as some sort of telephone directory.
Tsk. Sounds like you are bucking for an Intelligence Star.
Couldn't you get a sponsor at the NSA to award you one?
>Because Len is all about Len. That isn't the important part though.
>The important part is where Len's sphincter post speaks of what it is
>like to be in battle. Len was never in battle.
Only ONE very brief exchange of gunfire. Doesn't count
as a "battle," though.
Big Hero Dave...tell us all YOUR "battle experience."
Were you behind the Viet Cong lines sending intel to
HQ via CW?
>As far as I'm concerned, amateur radio is about operating any mode I
>choose on any band I choose. Len isn't involved on any level.
Everyone NOT licensed in amateur radio "isn't involved."
:-)
The point is that some MIGHT want to GET INTO amateur
radio. Dave loses his perspective on that. [age
causing loss of sight...among other things...]
Davie ought to get with Paul Schleck pronto and have
EVERYONE without a valid amateur radio license TOSSED
OFF this newsgroup! Make it "safe" for the double-
standard elitist PCTA EXTRAs to use as their personal
chat room and blog... :-)
>Len knows more about what others did than those involved.
Nope. But...I DO recognize a bullshit artist from a
long distance. Davie be one of those...
>Len knows more about the military.
I know enough to meet THIS level of homo saps. :-)
Been IN the Army...had lots of contact with Army
as a civilian after service time done.
>Len knows more about communications.
Tsk. I know some about that. Been IN that as a
civilian. :-)
>Len knows more about radio operation.
Tsk. I know HOW they work and the protocols needed
in some radio services. You have a need of info on
those radio services, big honcho?
>Len knows more about the U.S. Department of State.
I do? Oh, my, aren't you stepping off into denied
territory! :-)
>Len knows more about your work.
Tsk. Jimmie "works in the transportation field"
according to one Comment in the ECFS. Other than
that, Jimmie do NOT say squat. He afraid others
find out?
>Len knows more about Brian Kelly's work.
I do? Oh, my. News to me. Isn't Kellie retired?
>Len knows more about Steve's work.
Tsk. Stevie follows REAL DOCTORS' orders...which
includes staying OUT of the Sharps box. :-)
>Whatever Len did at ADA more than a half century ago impacts amateur
>radio not in the least.
Riiiiight old-timer. Ham radio NEVER operated on HF, did
it? :-)
>Len tells it because he wants to be sure that everyone knows of it.
You betcha! :-)
The U.S. military did NOT use morse code in long-distance
fixed-point to fixed-point communications a half century
ago and still don't. Tsk. Some of you olde-tyme hammes
need to get your noses out of old WW2 surplus radio books
and inspect the rest of the radio world.
>How does it give him the right to insult those who never served?
Tsk, tsk, tsk. Those with SUCH thin skin should NOT be
ANYWHERE on the Internet!!!! :-)
>Now you've done it, Jim. You've denigrated a veteran.
Jimmie (and Davie...and Stevie...and every other elitist
double-standard PCTA EXTRA) will, without doubt, insult
ANYONE they care to. It's in the fine print of their
ham privileges as super-dooper under-the-dashboard douche
bag guar-un-teed morsemanship EXTRA AMATEURS!!!!
K4YZ
> >> > about his famous
> >> > "seven hostile actions"
> >
> >> Do you know what they are? Where *you* involved in any of
> >> them?
> >
> >He doesn't have any idea what they were. It kills him.
>
> NAH. It only shows what a snow-jobbing laid-off
> murine does under the guise of a U.S. AMATEUR radio
> extra callsign. Tosses brags like they were bagels.
Who's "snow-jobbing"...???
Who's "laid off"...???
How can one toss an intangible...???
> >To my knowledge, Steve has never stated that DOD does not direct
MARS.
>
> >His claim is that if there were no radio amateurs, there'd have been
> no
> >MARS program. In that, he is correct.
>
> Bull####.
There's the definitive, "professional" response.
> The United States ARMY started MARS...but
> under a different name before WW2. Tsk. Davie ought
> to read up on the subject...lots of references.
It doesn't matter if it was started by the Hand of God himself,
Lennie.
No Radio Amateurs = No MARS...Army, Air Force, OR NAVMARCORPS.
> MARS always was and remains a MILITARY radio system.
> A small one, about as effective as having special
> services put on shows and entertainment. Morale
> boosting thing.
Your limited scope of experience and practice is showing, Lennie.
> >That's pretty much why I've left details out. As with Steve's
> military
> >service, Len doesn't know what I did or where I did it and it kills
> him.
>
> No problem with me. If you ain't got the guts to
> tell the details, you AIN'T done it. Simple as that.
As opposed to YOUR making up details, Lennie?
I am not as predisposed to being a braggart about my military
service. There's no need to. Guys who make a point of sticking the
minute details of what they allegedly did in the Armed Forces usually
prove out to be the rear area radio clerks, etc.
> >...and Len has invariably demeaned that service. He has always
known
> >more about my job that I did. Foreign service tours were dismissed
as
> >tropical backwaters, places of insignificance and Cashew capitals.
>
> Awwwww...you doing a Rodney Dangerfield? Get no
> "respect?"
Please specify there part wherein you feel Dave has misrepresented
YOUR representations of his duties, Lennie.
I say he's spot-on.
> >Don't leave out his attempts at insult by stating that my name never
> >appeared in any lists of embassy staff. That blew up in his face
when
> I
> >produced a couple of urls in which I was listed. Len's response was
> to
> >dismiss the lists as some sort of telephone directory.
>
> Tsk. Sounds like you are bucking for an Intelligence Star.
> Couldn't you get a sponsor at the NSA to award you one?
Dave produces evidence of his claims of service.
You produce excuses.
> >Because Len is all about Len. That isn't the important part though.
> >The important part is where Len's sphincter post speaks of what it
is
> >like to be in battle. Len was never in battle.
>
> Only ONE very brief exchange of gunfire. Doesn't count
> as a "battle," though.
Tripping and accidentally discharging your weapon is NOT an
"exchange of gunfire".
> Big Hero Dave...tell us all YOUR "battle experience."
Please, Lennie...P L E A S E retell the tale of YOUR service under
the threat ot the Soviet Bear...And then again your emotional outburst
about how somone else doesn't know what it's like to be under incomming
artillery fire..as if YOU had been at Khe San or Chosin Resivoir! ! ! !
> >Len knows more about what others did than those involved.
>
> Nope. But...I DO recognize a bull@@@@ artist from a
> long distance. Davie be one of those...
No, he's not. But you sure do "bare the scars" of one.
> >Len knows more about the military.
>
> I know enough to meet THIS level of homo saps.
How?
So far, other than reciting the hearldry of the one unit you were
in in 1953, you haven't gotten a single thing about anyone else's
service right yet!
> Been IN the Army...
Yeah. When Dwight D Eisenhower was President.
> ....had lots of contact with Army
> as a civilian after service time done.
Too bad you didn't learn anything about the Army after that.
> >Len knows more about communications.
>
> Tsk. I know some about that. Been IN that as a
> civilian.
Not very successful though. Muddled through to retirement. No
real accomplishments other than having had the good sense to invest
wisely for your leisure years...Of couse at least ONE of your
"employers" reports that you were rather leisurely WHILE you were in
their "employ".
> >Len knows more about radio operation.
>
> Tsk. I know HOW they work and the protocols needed
> in some radio services. You have a need of info on
> those radio services, big honcho?
You know jack squat about "radio operation", Lennie.
You know a lot of theory...but squat about how they are used.
> >Len knows more about the U.S. Department of State.
>
> I do? Oh, my, aren't you stepping off into denied
> territory!
But it's true. You've tried to nip at Dave's heels for years but
still can't seem to land a good bite in there...
Due primarily to your lack of knowledge and experience in such
issues.
I've not found a single bit of fault in anything Dave has
commented on herein...However YOU ahve been caught with your britches
down on numerous occassions.
> >Whatever Len did at ADA more than a half century ago impacts amateur
> >radio not in the least.
>
> Riiiiight old-timer. Ham radio NEVER operated on HF, did
> it?
Neither did you, according to your MOS's, Lennie...Oh, I have no
doubt that in the process of performing your radio mechanic duties that
you caused some RF to eminate on HF, but you were NEVER an HF operator.
> >Len tells it because he wants to be sure that everyone knows of it.
>
> You betcha!
Now if it were only true.....
> >How does it give him the right to insult those who never served?
>
> Tsk, tsk, tsk. Those with SUCH thin skin should NOT be
> ANYWHERE on the Internet!!!
I love it...
Lennie wrapping himself in patriotic bunting...as he claims others
do...Of course when HE does it it's "OK".
> >Now you've done it, Jim. You've denigrated a veteran.
>
> Jimmie (and Davie...and Stevie...and every other elitist
> double-standard PCTA EXTRA) will, without doubt, insult
> ANYONE they care to. It's in the fine print of their
> ham privileges as super-dooper under-the-dashboard douche
> bag guar-un-teed morsemanship EXTRA AMATEURS!!!!
There's a "douche bag" in this forum, Lennie, but he doesn't have
an Amateur Radio license of ANY class.
Steve, K4YZ
N2...@aol.com
> N2...@AOL.COM wrote:
> >
> > LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
> > > From: N2EY on Apr 12, 4:20 pm
> > >
> > > >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
> > What does it matter whether I served in any military or not?
> >
> > > Tsk. Go talk to a REAL WW2
> > > veteran.
> >
> > I've done that - many times. From several branches of the
> > US military.
>
> It would have difficult to grow up in the times we did and not >
encounter
> larges numbers of World War II vets. My dad was a U.S. Navy
> veteran of
> the Normandy Invasion. A great-uncle was at Bataan. He
> survived the
> Death March and was held by the Japanese until the end of the
> war.
I've known many, many WW2 veterans. Many I got to know quite well.
Some didn't want to talk, others had lots to say.
Just for starters, I know/knew a B-24 navigator who bombed Japan (gave
me some of his maps), a USN submarine torpedoman, a USN radioman (gave
me some of his books - he also served in the Korean War) and a B-24
pilot who bombed Ploesti three times and spent 18 months as "a guest of
the Luftwaffe".
I don't think the latter would find Len's "Kolonel Klunk" insults
to be very funny.
>
> > > Better yet, visit a VA hospital and
> > > keep some of them company.
> >
> > That's a good idea!
>
> It is a great idea but it isn't necessary to visit just a VA
> hospital.
> I can visit any number here who live quietly with spouses, who > are
> living alone as widowers or who are in nursing homes.
>
> > > Remember that WW2 ENDED BEFORE you were born.
> >
> > Why is that of any significance? If anything, it is
> > more important that those of us who weren't alive then
> > keep the history alive.
>
> > I live just up the hill from Valley Forge, where Washington's
> > army survived a terrible winter. Also down the pike from where
> > the Paoli Massacre took place.
> >
> > That war ended long before *you* were born, Len.
>
> You don't quite have the hang of it, Jim. I'd have used, "That war
> ended LONG BEFORE YOU WERE BORN, Len".
Oh yes.
>
> > > And, you've NEVER served in any military.
> >
> > How do you know for sure?
> >
> > And what does it matter anyway?
Notice how Len avoids direct questions?
>
> > > Yet you make this BIG THING about morse code
> > > in a window display...
> >
> > Is it wrong to mention an interesting architectural feature?
>
> I read your post and looked in vain for the portion in which
> you made it a BIG THING.
It's not a big thing - except to Len.
>
> > Does it bother you, Len?
>
> You read his lengthy post and saw the style he used. You bet it
> bothered him.
>
> > Here's a hint: The Canadian military forces used Morse Code in
> > WW2.
> > If I did talk about any military service I had, you would
> > be certain to make fun of it. It's just what you do, Len.
> > So typical.
> >
> > > >I've seen how you talk to those who *have*
> > > >served in the US military, and for various
> > > >departments of the US government.
> > >
> > > I haven't dissed Bill Sohl about his USN service.
> >
> > Because he doesn't disagree with you about Morse Code testing in
> > amateur radio. In fact, he pretty much ignores you.
> >
> > > I haven't dissed Brian Burke about his USAF service.
> >
> > Because he doesn't disagree with you about Morse Code testing in
> > amateur radio. In fact, he pretty much idolizes you.
>
> > It's only those who disagree with you about Morse Code testing
> > that get your disrespect, abuse, name calling, and general
> > jackass behavior.
>
> To be fair, Len has exhibited jackass behavior toward K0HB and Hans
does
> not support retention of morse code testing.
Then I guess what bothers Len is when someone says anyhting good about
Morse Code.
> > > I HAVE dissed those that want to LIE about
> > > their big heroic military "actions" such as
> > > Stebie the wonder murine
> >
> > There you go - calling names. So typical.
>
> ...and utterly predictable.
>
> > > about his famous
> > > "seven hostile actions"
> >
> > Do you know what they are? Where *you* involved in any of
> > them?
>
> He doesn't have any idea what they were. It kills him.
Sure seems to.
>
> > Is there any reason to doubt that Steve, K4YZ, was involved
> > if he says he was?
> >
> > > and his failure to
> > > acknowledge that the DoD really does direct
> > > MARS.
> >
> > I see. His mistake somehow justifies *your* behavior?
>
> To my knowledge, Steve has never stated that DOD does not direct
MARS.
> His claim is that if there were no radio amateurs, there'd have been
no
> MARS program. In that, he is correct.
>
> > > Am I supposed to "respect" the infamous Kolonel
> > > Klunk
> >
> > There you go again - calling names.
>
> Did you really expect otherwise?
>
No. Utterly predictable.
> > Godwin invoked. You lose.
>
> > Why not use the person's name and callsign?
> >
> > > about his very NON-SPECIFIC "service" in
> > > Vietnam? Just because he brags without revealing
> > > any details?
> >
> > What difference would details make? Your behavior when
> > details are given doesn't change. In fact, you simply
> > use the details as a source of more insults.
>
> That's pretty much why I've left details out. As with Steve's
military
> service, Len doesn't know what I did or where I did it and it kills
him.
>
The important fact is that no matter what you actually
did, Len would dismiss it. We've seen that over and over
and over.
That's why I don't mention my employment. Len would simply make
fun of it.
> > OTOH, Brian, N0IMD, refuses to give any details about
> > his claimed amateur radio operation from Somalia, but
> > that doesn't bother you a bit.
>
> Isn't this about the point at which Leonard or Brian would begin some
> litany about a double standard?
Well, they should know ;-)
>
> > > Just because he was in the State
> > > Department?
> >
> > Do you mean Dave, K8MN, who served in the US State Department
> > at a number of foreign posts as a communications officer?
> >
> > His service to our country was much longer than your, Len, and
> > in many more foreign countries.
>
> ...and Len has invariably demeaned that service. He has always known
> more about my job that I did. Foreign service tours were dismissed
as
> tropical backwaters, places of insignificance and Cashew capitals.
>
It wouldn't matter where you were or what you did, Len
would demean and insult your service.
> > I recall when he was transferred
> > to right around the same time the US Embassy in the country he was
> > transferring to was bombed. We didn't hear from him for weeks.
> > Luckily he was OK.
>
> Luckily, he was on holiday between the assignments and was comfy
right
> here in West Virginia when the news broke. I arrived in Tanzania
three
> weeks after the embassy bombing. The embassy was in ruins.
Operations
> were carried out from a residence for six months while a new
temporary
> embassy was constructed. It was my busiest assignment.
I doubt the bombers waited for you to leave when scheduling their
attack.
> > Yet you argued with him at length about communications facilities
> > that he used - even though you've never worked for the State
> > Department.
>
> Don't leave out his attempts at insult by stating that my name never
> appeared in any lists of embassy staff. That blew up in his face
when I
> produced a couple of urls in which I was listed. Len's response was
to
> dismiss the lists as some sort of telephone directory.
Oh yes - I do recall that now.
> > > Of course I "should."
> >
> > Yes, you should.
> >
> > Perhaps you have forgotten the US Coast Guard radio operator who
> > used to post here? You made fun of his service in that capacity,
> > in your now-famous "sphincter post".
> >
> > Why?
>
> Because Len is all about Len. That isn't the important part though.
> The important part is where Len's sphincter post speaks of what it is
> like to be in battle. Len was never in battle.
I think the important part is that Len demeaned and insulted
the services of a skilled military radio operator, for no
good reason at all.
That behavior speaks volumes.
> > > All those infamous types
> > > are pro-coders and YOU love morse code, so much
> > > so that you think ham radio is all about morse-
> > > manship...
> >
> > Len - lest we forget - you're not a radio amateur. You've never
been a
> > radio amateur. Yet you see fit to tell all how amateur
> > radio should be. You're not and never have been part of the FCC,
> > either.
>
> As far as I'm concerned, amateur radio is about operating any mode I
> choose on any band I choose. Len isn't involved on any level.
>
That's right.
Len doesn't know anything about my work. He could not do my
job. That *really* bothers him.
Good question!
>
> > > You want to see more of what I did in ARMY service?
> >
> > No. You've told us over and over and over again. That's
> > enough.
>
> Now you've done it, Jim. You've denigrated a veteran.
>
How?
I simply don't want to read Len's story about ADA again. He's posted it
here so many times I can recite it from memory. But
he never explains why it has any bearing on amateur radio policy today.
I don't want to read it again.
73 de Jim, N2EY
K4YZ
N...@AOL.COM wrote:
> Dave Heil wrote:
> > N2...@AOL.COM wrote:
> > >
> > > LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > From: N2EY on Apr 12, 4:20 pm
> > > >
> > > > >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
> > To be fair, Len has exhibited jackass behavior toward K0HB and Hans
> does
> > not support retention of morse code testing.
>
> Then I guess what bothers Len is when someone says anyhting good
about
> Morse Code.
What bothers Lennie most is that people who DIDN'T get "paid" for
their radio expertise know more about radio than he could hope to know.
Hans has considerable experience, ergo he catches The Wrath of Lennie.
> > > > I HAVE dissed those that want to LIE about
> > > > their big heroic military "actions" such as
> > > > Stebie the wonder murine
What keeps me laughing is that Lennie has mentioned my USMC
service far more than I could ever hope to or want to!
> > > There you go - calling names. So typical.
> >
> > ...and utterly predictable.
> >
> > > > about his famous
> > > > "seven hostile actions"
> > >
> > > Do you know what they are? Where *you* involved in any of
> > > them?
> >
> > He doesn't have any idea what they were. It kills him.
>
> Sure seems to.
And I am more than happy to pull THAT "trigger"...!
> > Don't leave out his attempts at insult by stating that my name
never
> > appeared in any lists of embassy staff. That blew up in his face
> when I
> > produced a couple of urls in which I was listed. Len's response
was
> to
> > dismiss the lists as some sort of telephone directory.
>
> Oh yes - I do recall that now.
He's tried to re-open that can of worms on a couple of
occassions...It didn't work the first time...didn't work on the
subsequent passes.
> > Len knows more about what others did than those involved. Len
knows
> > more about the military. Len knows more about communications. Len
> > knows more about radio operation. Len knows more about the U.S.
> > Department of State.
> > Len knows more about your work. Len knows more about Brian Kelly's
> > work.
> > Len knows more about Steve's work.
>
> Len doesn't know anything about my work. He could not do my
> job. That *really* bothers him.
Part of Lennie's problem is that he didn't want to do much of HIS
work...At least on one occassion that I have inside knowledge of. Or
rather I SHOULD say he wasn't CAPABLE of doing his job...Hence his
interrupted tenure at Warminster. My bad.
> > > > >>Let's all stand up and salute this brave "member of the
> service."
> > > > >
> > > > >There you go again! So typical.
> > > >
> > > > I served. YOU did NOT.
> > >
> > > How does that give you the right to insult others' service?
> >
> > How does it give him the right to insult those who never served?
>
> Good question!
Lennie signed on the dotted line and went to boot camp...wore the
uniform, even. But can we call what he really did "serving"...?!?!? In
even the loosest, most liberal interpretations, I guess he did...
And his "I Am A War Hero Because I Served In A Unit That Had KIA's
Before I Ever Got There" embellishments is like "negative points".
> > > > You want to see more of what I did in ARMY service?
> > >
> > > No. You've told us over and over and over again. That's
> > > enough.
> >
> > Now you've done it, Jim. You've denigrated a veteran.
> >
> How?
Take away his Geritol and you'll see how!
> I simply don't want to read Len's story about ADA again. He's posted
it
> here so many times I can recite it from memory. But
> he never explains why it has any bearing on amateur radio policy
today.
>
> I don't want to read it again.
Amen.
73
Steve, K4YZ
N2...@aol.com
> >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
> >> From: N2EY on Apr 12, 4:20 pm
> >> >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
> >> >> Lest WE forget..."N2EY" NEVER served in ANY war in ANY
military.
>
> >> >How do you know for sure, Len?
>
> >You don't know for sure, do you, Len?
>
> Tsk. You aren't in the St. Louis database. :-)
Does this database cover all military organizations, or just those of
the USA?
Did you know that people can change their names?
>
> >What does it matter whether I served in any military or not?
>
> This newsgroup is amateur radio policy, not WW2. :-)
There you go, Len, behaving like a jackass. Again.
What does it matter whether I served in any military or not?
>
> >> Remember that WW2 ENDED BEFORE you were born.
> >
> >Why is that of any significance? If anything, it is
> >more important that those of us who weren't alive then
> >keep the history alive.
>
> ...so, you want to keep U.S. amateur radio as a
> living museum of morsemanship. Understand.
> Understood before, still understand that. :-)
You don't understand jack, Len ;-)
>
> >I live just up the hill from Valley Forge, where Washington's
> >army survived a terrible winter. Also down the pike from where
> >the Paoli Massacre took place.
>
> That's nice. Been there, seen that. So, WHAT
> does that have to do with amateur RADIO?
About as much as you do, Len. IOW, nothing.
> >That war ended long before *you* were born, Len.
>
> Absolutely...but, the American Revolutionary War
> did NOT involve either morse code or radio.
So?
> Remember, this IS an amateur radio policy news-
> group, not some teary-eyed emotional hangout for
> those that NEVER served.
Who is "teary-eyed"? Not me.
>
> >And what does it matter anyway?
>
> Not to me, personally.
Sure it does. You rag on it constantly.
> But, remember, this isn't
> the History Channel and you AIN'T a docent in it.
Neither are you, Len.
> >> Yet you make this BIG THING about morse code
> >> in a window display...
> >
> >Is it wrong to mention an interesting architectural feature?
>
> Morse code is NOW an "interesting architectural feature?"
The windows are an interesting architectural feature.
> So, you are now an amateur "architect?" :-)
Sure - why not?
> >Does it bother you, Len?
>
> Only in that you are such a transparent hypocrite.
Naw, I'm really more of an honest mirror, showing your
mistakes and errors. Really does bug you, it seems, when
someone like me - whom you consider your inferior in
every way - points out a mistake of yours, or can do
something you can't.
> >Here's a hint: The Canadian military forces used Morse Code in
> >WW2.
>
> Wow! [...that's a BIG Ben Stein "wowwww...."]
>
> >> could it be that you
> >> just don't give a damn about WW2 and only want
> >> to make a big emotional showing for morse?
> >
> >Nope - not at all. I find the history of WW2 to be
> >very interesting. I think it's important to understand
> >that war, both how it got started and the aftermath, to
> >understand current history. And technology.
>
> Tsk, tsk. Then you MUST understand that THIS venue
> is NOT for "warfare" or the technology of warfare.
Then why do you gas us so much?
> You should also realize that morse code has HAD its
> day
It's day is today, too.
> and is now obsolete for modern communications.
That's simply not true, Len. Of course you get all worked up
if anyone says anything good about Morse Code. So typical,
so predictable.
> Obsolete for everyone but the retrograde self-
> aggrandizement elitist PCTA extras who USE morse
> skills to show how much "better" they are than all
> other "radio operators." Tsk, tsk.
There you go - more jackass behavior from Len.
>
> >For example, the very first high-speed, general purpose,
> >digital electronic computer, ENIAC, was developed and built
> >right here in Philadelphia - in the basement of the building
> >where I
> >went to EE school. I've actually seen and handled
> >pieces of it, read the original papers in the library there.
>
> Poor baby, still BEHIND the times, reaching for glory
> on someone ELSE's work. Look again. Collossus over in
> the UK's Bletchley Park beat ENIAC in the time frame.
Bzzt, wrong. Colussus wasn't general purpose.
> Not only that, John Atanasoff's little group over at
> Ohio State was before BOTH of them. :-)
The Atanasoff-Berry Computer (ABC) was never fully completed or
operational. ENIAC was.
> You really DON'T know your own industry's history well
> and you are griping about others. Tsk, tsk, tsk.
You don't know jack about computer history, Len.
>
> >It was built to compute artillery aiming tables for the US
> >Army,
> >and was used for ten years at the Aberdeen Proving Grounds.
> >There's
> >also an unconfirmed story that it was used for atom
> >bomb calculations.
>
> Sounds like you've been irradiated to sterility of the
> mind.
Nope. Just the facts.
> LOTS of calculation places were busy doing
> ordinance table calculations way back then.
Of course. And ENIAC could do in couple of seconds what
they took days or weeks to do. That's a fact.
> Bell Labs
> had a RELAY calculator...actually three of them in one
> of the first computer "networks" in NYC. Before ENIAC
> was started.
Those relay machines were electromechanical, not electronic. They
worked but were very slow compared to ENIAC - not high-speed at all.
> Tsk, tsk. Get WITH the history program!
Get with the facts, Len.
>
> >Or let's talk about the lessons to be learned from the US Navy
> >Mark XIV submarine torpedo, and its problems.
>
> Oh! You are now an Expert Extra on USN ordinance?
I don't claim to be an expert about anything, Len. But I do know the
lessons of the Mark XIV.
Do you?
>
> Remember, this is an AMATEUR RADIO POLICY newsgroup.
Then perhaps you should stay on the subject.
> >Perhaps the proximity fuse is more to your liking. Incredible
> >device, made with tubes originally meant for hearing aids.
>
> Tsk, tsk. You had a "prox" go off on YOU, sweetums.
>
> Remember, this is an AMATEUR RADIO POLICY newsgroup.
>
> >I could go on about the political and economic effects, but since
this
>
> >is a radio newsgroup I thought I'd stick to electronic and
> >radio subjects.
>
> Remember, this is an AMATEUR RADIO POLICY newsgroup.
Yet you go off on lot of tangents...
>
> >If I did talk about any military service I had, you would
> >be certain to make fun of it. It's just what you do, Len.
> >So typical.
>
> But...you did NOT serve...so HOW can you "talk about"
> something that NEVER happened?
It's called a hypothetical, Len. If I served, you'd make
fun of my service. It's what you do when someone disagrees
with you.
>
> Remember, this is an AMATEUR RADIO POLICY newsgroup.
>
> >> I haven't dissed Bill Sohl about his USN service.
> >
> >Because he doesn't disagree with you about Morse Code testing in
> >amateur radio. In fact, he pretty much ignores you.
>
> Bill hasn't been here much. That means he "ignored"
> YOU, too! :-)
When Bill was here, he and I discussed many amateur radio policy issues
in a civil manner.
>
> >> I haven't dissed Brian Burke about his USAF service.
> >
> >Because he doesn't disagree with you about Morse Code testing in
> >amateur radio. In fact, he pretty much idolizes you.
>
> Irrelevant for THIS thread, sweetums. :-)
No, completely relevant.
> >It's only those who disagree with you about Morse Code testing
> >that get your disrespect, abuse, name calling, and general
> >jackass behavior.
>
> Oooooooo! Big PCTA EXTRA tossing your weight around?
Not me, Len.
> Hello? Does the "sign-off" word "PUTZ" mean anything
> to you? :-)
I've never called anyone a PUTZ, here, Len.
> Does Kolonel Klunk's "you never did any operating 24/7
> in the military" mean anything to you? :-)
Only that you never did anything requiring consciousness 24/7, Len. Can
you stay awake 168 continuous hours?
>
> >> I HAVE dissed those that want to LIE about
> >> their big heroic military "actions" such as
> >> Stebie the wonder murine
> >
> >There you go - calling names. So typical.
>
> Ooooooo! Causing you "great pain and anguish" is it?
>
Nope. Just pointing it out.
> >> about his famous
> >> "seven hostile actions"
> >
> >Do you know what they are?
>
> Nope...the big hero sojer in da TN woods won't say!
>
> Are you reading deprived and can't understand what
> your pet buddy is saying about others?
You are more responsible for how he behaves than I am, Len.
> > Where *you* involved in any of them?
>
> Now, HOW could I have been "in" them? My service
> time was 1952 to 1960. Check with St. Louis archives
> if you don't believe that. :-)
>
> >Is there any reason to doubt that Steve, K4YZ, was involved
> >if he says he was?
>
> HUNDREDS OF DOUBTS! :-)
IOW, none at all.
>
> >> and his failure to
> >> acknowledge that the DoD really does direct MARS.
> >
> >I see. His mistake somehow justifies *your* behavior?
>
> Just ONE of DOZENS of his "mistakes." :-)
>
He'll have to work hard to catch up to you, then.
>
> >Godwin invoked. You lose.
>
> Do you go to the House of Godwin on Sundays?
>
> Sorry, sweetums, I've WON but you can't ever admit it.
>
> >Why not use the person's name and callsign?
>
> Why don't others?
Why don't you?
bb
I thought that people went to Canada to avoid war, and here they
dedicate a museum to war. Wonder where Jim went to engineering school?
bb
N2...@AOL.COM wrote:
> What does it matter whether I served in any military or not?
Kind of makes it hard to be a Veteran if you didn't serve.
> Here's a hint: The Canadian military forces used Morse Code in
> WW2.
Oh, now I see the connections. Because you saw photos of Ham soldiers
in QST, and you're a ham, you "served" by extension. The coat-tail
connection.
> I could go on about the political and economic effects, but since
this
> is a radio newsgroup I thought I'd stick to electronic and
> radio subjects.
And Canadian war museum topics.
> If I did talk about any military service I had, you would
> be certain to make fun of it. It's just what you do, Len.
> So typical.
You "served" in other ways. And Kelly has "real" military experience.
> It's only those who disagree with you about Morse Code testing
> that get your disrespect, abuse, name calling, and general
> jack(expletive deleted] behavior.
Do you eat with that mouth?
> Is there any reason to doubt that Steve, K4YZ, was involved
> if he says he was?
Is there any reason to not apply Steve's rules of facts to Steve's
claims?
> I see. His mistake somehow justifies *your* behavior?
Mistake? He's had ample opportunity to correct that mistake. Instead
he piles up the lies.
> There you go again - calling names.
"jack(expletive deleted] behavior"
> Godwin invoked. You lose.
>
> Why not use the person's name and callsign?
Kim, W5TIT.
Miccolis invoked. You lose.
Rest of your double-standards snipped.
LenAn...@ieee.org
>Dave Heil wrote:
>> N2...@AOL.COM wrote:
>> >
>> > LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
>> > > From: N2EY on Apr 12, 4:20 pm
>> > >
>> > > >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
<most skipped for brevity...>
>I simply don't want to read Len's story about ADA again. He's posted
it
>here so many times I can recite it from memory. But
>he never explains why it has any bearing on amateur radio policy
today.
I've already explained the "bearing it has" years ago.
Let's take it again, from the top...
Back in the beginning of the 1950s, the U.S. military
was NOT using any morse code modes for long-distance
point-to-point communications. Most of that message
"traffic" was written teleprinter that carried the
vast majority of military communications.
NO morse code modes were used on such radio circuits
afterwards. That SHOULD have some meaning to rational
persons insofar as the efficacy of morse code for
communications...in short, morse code was way too slow,
too prone to human errors by its operators, and
generally so inefficient that, by now, EVERY other
radio service has either DROPPED the mode (if they used
it at all in the past) or NEVER CONSIDERED it when that
radio service began. The sole exception is AMATEUR
radio...a hobby pursuit, a recreation, something done
on free time for enjoyment.
For over half a century (actually, since before WW2)
the brunt of messaging in the military has been done
by modes OTHER than morse code. An approximation of
the amount of such military traffic is a minimum of
1 1/2 MILLION messages a MONTH back in 1955. It was
not trivial, it wasn't confined to a few ship's radio
rooms. It was the logistical supply "glue" that
enabled the United States military to support itself
worldwide. It was necessary to keep "getting the
messages through" as the old, and still current,
Signal Corps phrase puts it.
It should be obvious to rational people that there is
NO need for any morse code testing for a hobby radio
activity. It is NOT a "national service." It is NOT
needed to "maintain a reserve of 'skilled' radio
operators" for the nation or even a locality.
What morse code testing for a hobby radio activity
has become is a travesty, a gross artificiality kept
in there by old-timers who managed to pass such tests
and keep insisting that all newcomers MUST do as they
did. There is NO rational reason for that. There is
only the artificiality of some hazing exercise so
that those who pass can adopt the artificiality of
doing something that few can. Nonsense.
>I don't want to read it again.
Naturally, since you are one of those old-timers who
thinks of little else but morse code operation on
the HF amateur bands. You want to enforce your own
private desires and accomplishment goals on others
regardless of their wishes or the irrationality of your
demands.
You don't want to read it because someone else was
able to be in a position to do REAL HF communications
all the time. That's way above the average amateur
experience. You resent knowing that another has done
it. But...you are going to have to live with it.
"It ain't braggin if ya done it..." I did it.
LenAn...@ieee.org
>Dave Heil wrote:
>> N2...@AOL.COM wrote:
>> >
>> > LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
>> > > From: N2EY on Apr 12, 4:20 pm
>> > >
>> > > >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
Dave Heil
>
> From: N2...@AOL.COM on Wed,Apr 13 2005 4:28 am
>
> >Dave Heil wrote:
> >> N2...@AOL.COM wrote:
> >> >
> >> > LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
> >> > > From: N2EY on Apr 12, 4:20 pm
> >> > >
> >> > > >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
>
> <most skipped for brevity...>
>
> >I simply don't want to read Len's story about ADA again. He's posted
> it
> >here so many times I can recite it from memory. But
> >he never explains why it has any bearing on amateur radio policy
> today.
>
> I've already explained the "bearing it has" years ago.
> Let's take it again, from the top...
<snip>
Let's don't.
Dave K8MN
Dave Heil
>
> From: N2...@AOL.COM on Wed,Apr 13 2005 4:28 am
>
> >Dave Heil wrote:
> >> N2...@AOL.COM wrote:
> >> >
> >> > LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
> >> > > From: N2EY on Apr 12, 4:20 pm
> >> > >
> >> > > >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
>
> <most skipped for brevity...>
>
> >I simply don't want to read Len's story about ADA again. He's posted
> it
> >here so many times I can recite it from memory. But
> >he never explains why it has any bearing on amateur radio policy
> today.
>
> I've already explained the "bearing it has" years ago.
> Let's take it again, from the top...
Not the first time, not the second time.
<snip>
Dave K8MN
ke...@dvol.com
bb wrote:
> N2...@AOL.COM wrote:
>
> > What does it matter whether I served in any military or not?
>
> Kind of makes it hard to be a Veteran if you didn't serve.
But then comes you. A licensee with no antenna. In your case one has to
conclude that becoming a Veteran was easier than putting up an antenna.
K4YZ
bb wrote:
> N2...@AOL.COM wrote:
>
> > What does it matter whether I served in any military or not?
>
> Kind of makes it hard to be a Veteran if you didn't serve.
Where has Jim EVER claimed ANY aspect of military or federal
service, Brian?
Now answer the man's question.
> > Here's a hint: The Canadian military forces used Morse Code in
> > WW2.
>
> Oh, now I see the connections. Because you saw photos of Ham
soldiers
> in QST, and you're a ham, you "served" by extension. The coat-tail
> connection.
You really are in a max-putz mode today, aren't you?
WHERE did Jim EVER claim to be a Veteran? WHERE did he EVER say
he "served" in the Armed Forces?
> > I could go on about the political and economic effects, but since
> this
> > is a radio newsgroup I thought I'd stick to electronic and
> > radio subjects.
>
> And Canadian war museum topics.
That happened to have a connection to radio communications.
You see, Brian, THAT is why you catch the flak taht yopu do for
your behaviour.
Just like Lennie, you like to stop where it serves you to do so
and ignore facts.
> > If I did talk about any military service I had, you would
> > be certain to make fun of it. It's just what you do, Len.
> > So typical.
>
> You "served" in other ways. And Kelly has "real" military
experience.
Do YOU, Brain?
You were only a weatherman in the USAF. We can make all sorts of
issues if you want.
> > It's only those who disagree with you about Morse Code testing
> > that get your disrespect, abuse, name calling, and general
> > jack(expletive deleted] behavior.
>
> Do you eat with that mouth?
Sure he does.
You kiss your wife with the same lips you have on Lennie's butt
all the time...Does SHE complain?
> > Is there any reason to doubt that Steve, K4YZ, was involved
> > if he says he was?
>
> Is there any reason to not apply Steve's rules of facts to Steve's
> claims?
There are no "rules of facts".
Things either "are" or they "are not".
Like your ARES claims (are not true). And your Somalia claims
(are not true). Then there's your "unlicensed devices" claims. (are
not true).
> > I see. His mistake somehow justifies *your* behavior?
>
> Mistake? He's had ample opportunity to correct that mistake.
Instead
> he piles up the lies.
Thee was no mistake.
YOU have yet to cite a single error or lie, Brain. You keep
claiming one after another refuse to cite why ANY statement is a "lie".
> > There you go again - calling names.
>
> "jack(expletive deleted] behavior"
>
> > Godwin invoked. You lose.
> >
> > Why not use the person's name and callsign?
>
> Kim, W5TIT.
>
> Miccolis invoked. You lose.
>
> Rest of your double-standards snipped.
If "double standards" were "snipped", you'd be extinct already.
Steve, K4YZ
K4YZ
Brian P Burke and Leonard H Anderson both epitomize all of the
things that give other veterans a black eye. I would not want to be in
a social setting where their status as veterans was known and then
announce that I was a vet too. That's one "guilty by association" that
I will gladly avoid.
Steve, K4YZ
N2...@aol.com
> From: N2...@AOL.COM on Wed,Apr 13 2005 4:28 am
>
> >Dave Heil wrote:
> >> N2...@AOL.COM wrote:
> >> >
> >> > LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
> >> > > From: N2EY on Apr 12, 4:20 pm
> >> > >
> >> > > >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
> >I simply don't want to read Len's story about ADA again. He's >
>posted it
> >here so many times I can recite it from memory. But
> >he never explains why it has any bearing on amateur radio
> >policy today.
>
> I've already explained the "bearing it has" years ago.
No, you didn't. Not how *your* experience at ADA (a military radio
station) has any bearing, or relevance, to amateur radio
policy today.
> Let's take it again, from the top...
>
> Back in the beginning of the 1950s, the U.S. military
> was NOT using any morse code modes for long-distance
> point-to-point communications.
How do you know this for sure?
Granted, you didn't see any "morse code modes" in use at
ADA. But to say there was none used at all, anywhere in the
US military is a different thing.
What's interesting is that you have to qualify the statement
as "long-distance point-to-point communications" - because
Morse Code was then still being used *extensively* by the US
Navy, by the maritime radio services, by aircraft and by many
other radio services such as press services.
Your tunnel vision of "long-distance point-to-point communications" by
the US military is about as relevant as the
fact that Morse Code wasn't in use on the AM broadcast band in the
1930s.
> Most of that message
> "traffic" was written teleprinter that carried the
> vast majority of military communications.
Yep.
And it was on fixed, predetermined frequencies, using equipment
most individuals could not afford to buy.
And it was *not* the kind of communications that make up the vast
majority of amateur radio communications.
>
> NO morse code modes were used on such radio circuits
> afterwards.
At some point, anyway. The US Navy was still using Morse Code long
after the beginning of the 1950s. So was the Coast Guard. They are "US
military".
> That SHOULD have some meaning to rational
> persons insofar as the efficacy of morse code for
> communications...
There you go, Len, assuming your conclusion.
What you're saying is that because the Army didn't use it,
nobody should use it.
Here's a hint: Ham radio isn't the US Army. When Uncle Sam
is willing to buy radios for all hams, then maybe you'll
have a point.
> in short, morse code was way too slow,
For some applications, yes. But not for many applications.
> too prone to human errors by its operators,
All communications modes are prone to operator error. The
person typing on a teleprinter can make a mistake, too.
> and
> generally so inefficient that,
Nope. You just don't like the mode.
> by now, EVERY other
> radio service has either DROPPED the mode (if they used
> it at all in the past) or NEVER CONSIDERED it when that
> radio service began.
So what, Len? That's like saying that since almost all motor vehicles
don't have manual transmissions anymore, no vehicles should have them.
gave up having
The main reason Morse Code was replaced by other modes in
other radio services is that it required skilled operators
at both ends of the circuit. Skilled operators cost money
and have to be taken care of, and the speed and accuracy of
communications is limited to their skill level. So the skilled
operator was eliminated by technology, to save time and money.
What you're saying, then, is that you want to eliminate the skilled
operators from ham radio, too.
> The sole exception is AMATEUR
> radio...
It's all those things - and a lot more.
>
> For over half a century (actually, since before WW2)
> the brunt of messaging in the military has been done
> by modes OTHER than morse code.
Even if true, (it's not) so what? Ham radio isn't "the military",
and amateur radio communications isn't only about "messaging".
You're argument says that since most US Navy ships stopped relying on
the wind for propulsion long ago, nobody should own a sailboat today,
even for "a hobby pursuit, a recreation, something done on free time
for enjoyment."
Very illogical.
> An approximation of
> the amount of such military traffic is a minimum of
> 1 1/2 MILLION messages a MONTH back in 1955.
So what? Hams don't have the same resources, nor the same basis and
purpose.
The old Bell Telephone system handled a lot more than 1.5 million
"messages" a month back then, too.
> It was
> not trivial, it wasn't confined to a few ship's radio
> rooms. It was the logistical supply "glue" that
> enabled the United States military to support itself
> worldwide. It was necessary to keep "getting the
> messages through" as the old, and still current,
> Signal Corps phrase puts it.
And it required how many people to do it all? At a cost of how many
millions of taxpayer dollars?
What possible connection does that have to the self-trained,
self-funded amateur radio operator?
>
> It should be obvious to rational people that there is
> NO need for any morse code testing for a hobby radio
> activity.
There's where you make an illogical jump. You hold up what
the US military allegedly did, then say it's somehow connected
to what hams should do.
But you never say what the connection is. Just that "it's obvious to
rational people" - which it isn't.
> It is NOT a "national service."
Actually, amateur radio is internationally recognized by treaty, and
it's a radio service.
> It is NOT
> needed to "maintain a reserve of 'skilled' radio
> operators" for the nation or even a locality.
Sure it is. Just ask those folks who ran the recent emergency drills.
They were very appreciative of the contributions of amateur radio
operators.
> What morse code testing for a hobby radio activity
> has become is a travesty, a gross artificiality kept
> in there by old-timers who managed to pass such tests
> and keep insisting that all newcomers MUST do as they
> did.
No, that's simply not true at all. It's just your way of
rationalizing your hatred, Len.
> There is NO rational reason for that.
Sure there is. Here ya go:
Since amateur radio operators *do* use Morse Code extensively, today,
on the air, for a wide variety of activities, it is perfectly obvious
to rational people that a basic test of Morse code skill is a
reasonable test requirement for a license.
That's the whole thing, right there.
> There is
> only the artificiality of some hazing exercise so
> that those who pass can adopt the artificiality of
> doing something that few can.
Nope. It's a bout a basic skill, that's all. Almost anyone can do it.
>Nonsense.
Yes, that's what your arguments and insults amount to.
>
> >I don't want to read it again.
>
> Naturally, since you are one of those old-timers who
> thinks of little else but morse code operation on
> the HF amateur bands.
No, that's not true at all. That's just one of my interests.
> You want to enforce your own
> private desires and accomplishment goals on others
> regardless of their wishes or the irrationality of your
> demands.
That's a pretty good description of *your* purpose here, Len!
> You don't want to read it because someone else was
> able to be in a position to do REAL HF communications
> all the time.
So what hams do, and did, isn't "REAL"?
Then why are you so concerned about it?
And even you can't do it all the time, Len.
> That's way above the average amateur
> experience.
No it isn't. It's *different from* the amateur radio experience. Just
like riding in a commercial airliner is different from flying your own
private aircraft.
> You resent knowing that another has done
> it.
I don't resent it at all, Len. I'm just bored by your constant
repetition of the same old story and illogical conclusions.
> But...you are going to have to live with it.
Why?
>
> "It ain't braggin if ya done it..." I did it.
All by yourself? Or were there hundreds - thousands - of others there
too, backed up by the enormous resources of the USA - both civilian and
military?
And you still haven't explained how what happened at ADA a half-century
ago has any relevance to ham radio today.
Here's one more analogy to your alleged logic:
Inexpensive calculators have been around for a couple of decades now.
Almost nobody in business or the professions relies on manual
arithmetic anymore - even the smallest businesses, for example, use
electronic cash registers to do the calculations.
Where such manual calculation was once done, it has been completely
replaced by electronic methods. Manual calculation
is too slow, too error-prone, and too dependent on human skill.
Therefore, we should not require anyone to learn how to do such
calculations as addition, subtraction, multiplication or division, let
alone square roots or other techniques.
That's what you're saying. And it's nonsense.
Michael Coslo
bb wrote:
They do have a significant military.
- Mike KB3EIA -
K4YZ
Yeah...Let's just forget that this forum has had at least two
participants who had career-length service in military communications
who have testified that Morse Code was INDEED in daily use.
Morse Code is STILL taught to this day in the Armed Forces.
> Your tunnel vision of "long-distance point-to-point communications"
by
> the US military is about as relevant as the
> fact that Morse Code wasn't in use on the AM broadcast band in the
> 1930s.
>
> > Most of that message
> > "traffic" was written teleprinter that carried the
> > vast majority of military communications.
>
> Yep.
>
> And it was on fixed, predetermined frequencies, using equipment
> most individuals could not afford to buy.
>
> And it was *not* the kind of communications that make up the vast
> majority of amateur radio communications.
> >
> > NO morse code modes were used on such radio circuits
> > afterwards.
>
> At some point, anyway. The US Navy was still using Morse Code long
> after the beginning of the 1950s. So was the Coast Guard. They are
"US
> military".
Didn't Hans put that well into the 70's for the Navy? And I
believe Jeff said the Coast Guard still had SOME facilities into the
80's?
> > For over half a century (actually, since before WW2)
> > the brunt of messaging in the military has been done
> > by modes OTHER than morse code.
>
> Even if true, (it's not) so what? Ham radio isn't "the military",
> and amateur radio communications isn't only about "messaging".
>
> You're argument says that since most US Navy ships stopped relying on
> the wind for propulsion long ago, nobody should own a sailboat today,
> even for "a hobby pursuit, a recreation, something done on free time
> for enjoyment."
>
> Very illogical.
Yep. And since we have drag lines and other "commercial" methods
of fishing, no one may use a hook, line and sinker any more. Who needs
it?
> > An approximation of
> > the amount of such military traffic is a minimum of
> > 1 1/2 MILLION messages a MONTH back in 1955.
>
> So what? Hams don't have the same resources, nor the same basis and
> purpose.
I say that was Bravo Sierra. Bravo Sierra in spades.
That would have been 50,000 pieces of traffic A DAY.
> > It should be obvious to rational people that there is
> > NO need for any morse code testing for a hobby radio
> > activity.
>
> There's where you make an illogical jump. You hold up what
> the US military allegedly did, then say it's somehow connected
> to what hams should do.
For CB radio, absolutely.
For Radio Control models, no contest.
For Part 15 experimenters, no doubt.
For an Amateur Radio license on HF...you don't know what you're
talking about, Lennie.
> > It is NOT a "national service."
>
> Actually, amateur radio is internationally recognized by treaty, and
> it's a radio service.
It's an internationally recognized resource that is codified into
law, and, despite Lennie's protestations to the contrary, DOES provide
a service within the United States of America.
His attempts to draw parallels between "The Amateur Radio Service"
and Amateur Radio as a "service" vis-a-vis the Armed Forces is worn,
lame, and ineffective.
> > It is NOT
> > needed to "maintain a reserve of 'skilled' radio
> > operators" for the nation or even a locality.
>
> Sure it is. Just ask those folks who ran the recent emergency drills.
> They were very appreciative of the contributions of amateur radio
> operators.
And again Lennie utters an assertion in the face of FACTS to the
contrary and demonstrates his own utterly failed understanding of what
it's all about...
> > There is
> > only the artificiality of some hazing exercise so
> > that those who pass can adopt the artificiality of
> > doing something that few can.
>
> Nope. It's a bout a basic skill, that's all. Almost anyone can do it.
Blind and deaf persons have passed the Morse Code exam.
Lennie has made occassional statements that he was, at least at
one time, proficient in Morse Code at about 8-10WPM.
If Lennie can do it, then ABSOLUTELY any one else can do it!
> > Naturally, since you are one of those old-timers who
> > thinks of little else but morse code operation on
> > the HF amateur bands.
>
> No, that's not true at all. That's just one of my interests.
I wonder why Lennie keeps trying to bouy that lie when tons and
tons of conversations in this forum have demonstrated otherwise...?!?!
> > "It ain't braggin if ya done it..." I did it.
>
> All by yourself? Or were there hundreds - thousands - of others there
> too, backed up by the enormous resources of the USA - both civilian
and
> military?
We remember the "1.2 million message" claim from two years ago,
Lennie...Back then you tried to make it sound as if it was YOUR doings
alone.
Then you switched gears after a bit of elementary school math
rubbed the numbers in your face and 'admitted' that it was a 'team
effort' at ADA. It still doesn't put YOU in the comm center other than
to change broken black boxes, because YOUR MOS's were as a radio
mechanic.
You were never a radio operator in the Armed Forces.
Now, in THIS post, it was "1 1/5 MILLION messages average for
"military traffic" in 1955", so you've even further diluted your
original boasts.
Before long you'll be claiming how you saved the Postal Service
because you licked a stamp to send mom and dad a letter.
> And you still haven't explained how what happened at ADA a
half-century
> ago has any relevance to ham radio today.
>
> Here's one more analogy to your alleged logic:
>
> Inexpensive calculators have been around for a couple of decades now.
> Almost nobody in business or the professions relies on manual
> arithmetic anymore - even the smallest businesses, for example, use
> electronic cash registers to do the calculations.
> Where such manual calculation was once done, it has been completely
> replaced by electronic methods. Manual calculation
> is too slow, too error-prone, and too dependent on human skill.
>
> Therefore, we should not require anyone to learn how to do such
> calculations as addition, subtraction, multiplication or division,
let
> alone square roots or other techniques.
>
> That's what you're saying. And it's nonsense.
A...yup!
73
Steve, K4YZ
KØHB
"K4YZ" <k4...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1113483024....@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>
> Didn't Hans put that well into the 70's for the Navy?
>
No, Hans didn't.
The last significant use of Morse in the Navy was in the late 50's/early 60's.
This usage was by small-boys, DD and smaller, on "fox" broadcasts and "A1"
ship/shore circuits.
Both uses ended with fleetwide deployment of Jason and Orestes circuits in the
early 60's. Morse training for general duty Navy RM's ceased at the same time,
and Morse operator became a specialized NEC (MOS to you grunts) held by only a
few sailors, mostly in SPECOM branches (intercept operators, etc.).
The single operational Morse use which survived was the VLF SSBN transmissions
(two transmitters, one Cutler, ME and the other at Jim Creek, WA). That was a
simple slow-speed beaconing system which notified boomers to pop up their
satcomm antennas for the actual communications.
73, de Hans, K0HB
Master Chief Radioman, US Navy
K4YZ
KØHB wrote:
> "K4YZ" <k4...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:1113483024....@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>
> >
> > Didn't Hans put that well into the 70's for the Navy?
> >
>
> No, Hans didn't.
Thank-you for the correction.
> Master Chief Radioman, US Navy
You forgot something..."Retired".
Steve, K4YZ
K4YZ
N2...@AOL.COM wrote:
> LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
> > >You make fun of them and their service for
> > >no apparent reason other than a failed
> > >attempt at what you consider "humor".
> >
> > Tsk, tsk, tsk. Those "veterans" (at least one
> > with "seven hostile actions") have all been
> > about as disrespectful to me FIRST.
>
> No, they haven't. At least not to anyone rational.
>
> You apparently see any disagreement with your
> cherished beliefs about Morse Code testing in amateur
> radio as "disrespect", and then proceed in your
> completely predictable manner.
>
> > They got
> > what is known as "return fire."
Weeeeelp. I don't know why Leonard H. Anderson continues to
manufacture/perpetuate the same, worn, lame, and previously disproven
lies.
Leonard H. Anderson dealt out weeks of "Nazi", "thug", etc etc
endearments by the time I tired of it. His perception of time is
pretty poor. At his age, I guess it is to be expected.
I point out that Leonard's frequent insinuations of having been in
combat ('I returned fire...' and 'you don't know what it's like to be
under incomming artillery fire!') are the very reasons I DON'T discuss
my USMC service and won't...at least not in this forum. It's people
like Lennie that the virtual "Wall of Shame" was created for U.S. Navy
SEAL pretenders.
Maybe we can create a "Wall of Shame" for ex-Army radio mechanics
that try to pretend they were really radio operators?
Leonard H. Anderson was never a licensed Amateur Radio operator,
yet he "pretends" to know what's in our best interests. He did serve
in the Army with a couple of guys who have tickets...One was even
allegedly his Best Man. (That musta grated Lennie's nerves knowing the
B/M was probably standing there during the vows running 40WPM CW
through his mind, wishing the whole mess would get over so he could get
home and get on the air!)
Leonard H. Anderson was never a military radio operator, using ANY
mode, yet he believes that experience he DIDN'T have in the 1950's Army
somehow qualifies his opinions in 21st Century Amateur Radio. He has
produced his former Army MOS's in this forum, and not a one of them say
"Radio Operator", "Comm Center Supervisor", etc. No doubt he keyed the
transmitters in the normal course of his radio mechanic duties, but to
call him a "radio operator" is like calling a guy with a Q-Tip in his
ear a "brain surgeon".
Leonard H. Anderson was never a pilot (albeit we'll give him the
benefit of the doubt on his claim of having been a student
pilot...again in the 50's) yet he has professed skill and knowledge of
aerial navigation techniques and practice. (He does admit to "DXing"
the ATIS and AWOS at LAX...whoopie).
He makes fun of the Civil Air Patrol yet doesn't even know what
kind of aircraft they fly. Kinda hard to screw things up...they only
have the largest fleet of single engine aircraft dedicated to
SAR/DR/Homeland Security. (Lennie...what is CAP's last two
acquisitions, and what new technology do they carry?)
On one particular tirade, Lennie went out of his way to call a
"farce" domestic Civil Defense programs during WW2, including the
aforementioned CAP...Mind you that Lennie had not even reached puberty
by then.
Leonard H. Anderson has never been involved in any
disaster/emergency services communications program of any agency,
service or entity, yet he pontificates at length on how their efficacy.
Does post, re-post, and post again the link to a California agency
that DOES use Amateur Radio operators to help manage it's program. I
know. I knew several of them in the 80's while DOING work with the
Riverside, Orange, San Bernadino and Inyo/Kern County EMA's and the
California Department of Forestry.
Leonard H. Anderson has never been a parent, yet he has gone on to
make suggestions as to how "disruptive" they are, how they are
incapable of operating an Amateur Radio station, and they should be
prohibited from being licensed prior to the age of 14. I guess this is
the point at which Lennie first knew of Amateur Radio, and he figures
if HE was not licensed before 14, no one should be.
Leonard H. Anderson does not now, nor to the best of my knowledge
ever, had any training or certification in any healthcare or mental
health disciplines, yet he routinely demands others "seek help", and
ATTEMPTS to extend his non-knowledge into this forum. He alledges to
sleep with a woman who had some education in same, so I guess he
perceives himself as having that knowledge and experience by virture of
mutual exchange of body fluids.
This short laundry list of Lennie's "Didn't Do But Talk Like I Did"
is not all inclusive but is certainly representitive of his
broggadaccio in this forum.
Steve, K4YZ
Dave Heil
>
> From: Dave Heil on Apr 12, 9:31 pm
>
> >N...@AOL.COM wrote:
> >> LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
> >> > From: N2EY on Apr 12, 4:20 pm
> >> > >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
>
> >> Does it bother you, Len?
> >
> >You read his lengthy post and saw the style he used. You bet it
> >bothered him.
>
> NAH. I did it. Jimmie didn't do it.
So?
> >To be fair, Len has exhibited jackass behavior toward K0HB and Hans
> does
> >not support retention of morse code testing.
>
> Tsk. Everyone who disagrees with Davie is guilty of
> "jackass behavior?" :-)
That's quite incorrect. You, Lena Anderson, exhibits jackass behavior
:-)
> Riiiight...only ARRL-speak and the beauty, nobility,
> and grandeur of morsemanship is spoken in here...:-)
What is ARRL-speak?
> >> > about his famous
> >> > "seven hostile actions"
> >
> >> Do you know what they are? Where *you* involved in any of
> >> them?
> >
> >He doesn't have any idea what they were. It kills him.
>
> NAH. It only shows what a snow-jobbing laid-off
> murine does under the guise of a U.S. AMATEUR radio
> extra callsign. Tosses brags like they were bagels.
In your view, anyone who does anything not blessed by you is a snow job.
Anyone except you who was in the military and is now out of the military
is laid off. An Amateur Extra callsign with the "amateur" in capital
letters is something to be derided.
> >To my knowledge, Steve has never stated that DOD does not direct MARS.
>
> >His claim is that if there were no radio amateurs, there'd have been
> no
> >MARS program. In that, he is correct.
>
> Bullshit.
My statement is quite correct.
> The United States ARMY started MARS...but
> under a different name before WW2. Tsk.
I'm well aware of that.
> Davie ought
> to read up on the subject...lots of references.
Lena is the one who should read up on it. AACS and MARS (with the "A"
standing for "Amateur" were the names used in the past. The current
Military Affliate Radio System would not be in existence without radio
amateurs. I first participated in the MARS program in 1969. I last
participated in 1985. I participated in the program on the military
side in 1969 from the U.S. and in 1971 from Vietnam as a volunteer
(quite separate from my other military communications duties.
> MARS always was and remains a MILITARY radio system.
No kidding? Duh.
> A small one, about as effective as having special
> services put on shows and entertainment.
You must be thinking of something different than MARS.
> Morale
> boosting thing.
It certainly was that.
> >That's pretty much why I've left details out. As with Steve's
> military
> >service, Len doesn't know what I did or where I did it and it kills
> him.
>
> No problem with me.
Apparently it is a problem for you. You've alluded to it on a number of
occasions.
> If you ain't got the guts to
> tell the details, you AIN'T done it. Simple as that.
No, it isn't quite that simple. It has nothing to do with guts. It has
to do with having seen how you treat the experiences of others while
trumpeting your own.
> >...and Len has invariably demeaned that service. He has always known
> >more about my job that I did. Foreign service tours were dismissed as
>
> >tropical backwaters, places of insignificance and Cashew capitals.
>
> Awwwww...you doing a Rodney Dangerfield? Get no
> "respect?" :-)
No comedy, Len, but your insulting behavior over things you aren't in a
position to know.
> >Don't leave out his attempts at insult by stating that my name never
> >appeared in any lists of embassy staff. That blew up in his face when
> I
> >produced a couple of urls in which I was listed. Len's response was
> to
> >dismiss the lists as some sort of telephone directory.
>
> Tsk. Sounds like you are bucking for an Intelligence Star.
> Couldn't you get a sponsor at the NSA to award you one?
Did I write anything of that? Your two-step doesn't disguise that you
aren't in a position to deny my statement.
> >Because Len is all about Len. That isn't the important part though.
> >The important part is where Len's sphincter post speaks of what it is
> >like to be in battle. Len was never in battle.
>
> Only ONE very brief exchange of gunfire.
Did you fire a weapon, Len? Was one fired directly at you? If so, was
it from the enemy?
> Doesn't count
> as a "battle," though.
Then it certain doesn't count as an artillery barrage, does it? Want to
recount your "sphincter post" or shall I?
> Big Hero Dave...tell us all YOUR "battle experience."
I've never claimed to be any kind of hero, much less a big one and I've
never ever posted or written any kind of manufactured tale like your
"sphinter post".
> Were you behind the Viet Cong lines sending intel to
> HQ via CW?
You might actually find the information if you had enough knowledge of
how to use a search engine.
> >As far as I'm concerned, amateur radio is about operating any mode I
> >choose on any band I choose. Len isn't involved on any level.
>
> Everyone NOT licensed in amateur radio "isn't involved."
> :-)
Oh, the FCC is involved here in the United States but you don't work for
the Commission nor are you a radio amateur.
> The point is that some MIGHT want to GET INTO amateur
> radio. Dave loses his perspective on that. [age
> causing loss of sight...among other things...]
I've not lost sight of that, Len. I have a stake in what kind of
qualifications aspiring hams demonstrate in order to enter amateur
radio.
> Davie ought to get with Paul Schleck pronto and have
> EVERYONE without a valid amateur radio license TOSSED
> OFF this newsgroup!
Has Paul Schleck advocated such a thing? I know I haven't.
> Make it "safe" for the double-
> standard elitist PCTA EXTRAs to use as their personal
> chat room and blog... :-)
There are plenty of radio amateurs who post here who don't hold Extra
Class tickets. FYI, this isn't a chat room or a blog. Familiarize
yourself with the definitions of those terms.
> >Len knows more about what others did than those involved.
>
> Nope. But...I DO recognize a bullshit artist from a
> long distance. Davie be one of those...
I'm sure you practiced that recognition from a much, much closer range.
> >Len knows more about the military.
>
> I know enough to meet THIS level of homo saps. :-)
It is evident that you do not.
> Been IN the Army...had lots of contact with Army
> as a civilian after service time done.
So?
> >Len knows more about communications.
>
> Tsk. I know some about that. Been IN that as a
> civilian. :-)
So have many others. I was a civilian in communications in my last
position.
> >Len knows more about radio operation.
>
> Tsk. I know HOW they work and the protocols needed
> in some radio services.
Some radio services? Whoop-de-doo!
> You have a need of info on
> those radio services, big honcho?
No, I'm quite comfortable that I knowledge I have is quite sufficient
for what I did for a living and what I do now.
> >Len knows more about the U.S. Department of State.
>
> I do? Oh, my, aren't you stepping off into denied
> territory! :-)
It wasn't denied territory to me, Len. You made statements about that
which you did not and could not know.
> >Len knows more about your work.
>
> Tsk. Jimmie "works in the transportation field"
> according to one Comment in the ECFS. Other than
> that, Jimmie do NOT say squat. He afraid others
> find out?
I don't believe that Jim is afraid at all. I think he has observed your
actions and that he is being prudent.
> >Len knows more about Brian Kelly's work.
>
> I do? Oh, my. News to me. Isn't Kellie retired?
Is he?
> >Len knows more about Steve's work.
>
> Tsk. Stevie follows REAL DOCTORS' orders...which
> includes staying OUT of the Sharps box. :-)
So you know nothing of his work.
> >Whatever Len did at ADA more than a half century ago impacts amateur
> >radio not in the least.
>
> Riiiiight old-timer. Ham radio NEVER operated on HF, did
> it? :-)
Are you sure that the above is the response you'd like to make to my
statement?
> >Len tells it because he wants to be sure that everyone knows of it.
(the frequent retelling of his ADA tale from 50+ years ago)
> You betcha! :-)
It was obvious.
> The U.S. military did NOT use morse code in long-distance
> fixed-point to fixed-point communications a half century
> ago and still don't. Tsk. Some of you olde-tyme hammes
> need to get your noses out of old WW2 surplus radio books
> and inspect the rest of the radio world.
If we were to desire operating in the rest of the radio world, I'm sure
we would. That radio amateur continue to use morse daily, seems to have
escaped your notice.
> >How does it give him the right to insult those who never served?
>
> Tsk, tsk, tsk. Those with SUCH thin skin should NOT be
> ANYWHERE on the Internet!!!! :-)
Really? Is this from the Gospel according to St. Leonard? Your bluster
is just that--bluster.
> >Now you've done it, Jim. You've denigrated a veteran.
>
> Jimmie (and Davie...and Stevie...and every other elitist
> double-standard PCTA EXTRA) will, without doubt, insult
> ANYONE they care to.
...or they might insult those who have constantly insulted them, someone
who is not involved in amateur radio in the smallest way.
> It's in the fine print of their
> ham privileges as super-dooper under-the-dashboard douche
> bag guar-un-teed morsemanship EXTRA AMATEURS!!!!
What is any of that to you? You aren't involved in amateur radio.
> LenAn...@ieee.org
Dave k8...@arrl.net
bb
There is no guilt in military service, unless you lie about it. Like
saying that you have "real military experience" when you don't, or
saying that you have "seven hostile actions" when you have none.
Best of Luck.
bb
K4YZ wrote:
> bb wrote:
> > N2...@AOL.COM wrote:
> >
> > > What does it matter whether I served in any military or not?
> >
> > Kind of makes it hard to be a Veteran if you didn't serve.
>
> Where has Jim EVER claimed ANY aspect of military or federal
> service, Brian?
Quiterecently Jim has left it open whether he's served or not.
> Now answer the man's question.
Jim did not direct his question to me.
> > > Here's a hint: The Canadian military forces used Morse Code in
> > > WW2.
> >
> > Oh, now I see the connections. Because you saw photos of Ham
> soldiers
> > in QST, and you're a ham, you "served" by extension. The coat-tail
> > connection.
>
> You really are in a max-putz mode today, aren't you?
Sayonara-head to you, too.
> WHERE did Jim EVER claim to be a Veteran? WHERE did he EVER say
> he "served" in the Armed Forces?
He said that he served in unmentionable ways.
> > > I could go on about the political and economic effects, but since
> > this
> > > is a radio newsgroup I thought I'd stick to electronic and
> > > radio subjects.
> >
> > And Canadian war museum topics.
>
> That happened to have a connection to radio communications.
Just "radio communications?" I thought this was the exclusive domain
of AMATEUR radio communications? Other forms of radio communications
knowledge and experiences have absolutely no bearing on this group.
> You see, Brian, THAT is why you catch the flak taht yopu do for
> your behaviour.
Spell much?
> Just like Lennie, you like to stop where it serves you to do so
> and ignore facts.
You'se guys have repeatedly said that this is about AMATEUR radio. Not
other radios and other radio services.
> > > If I did talk about any military service I had, you would
> > > be certain to make fun of it. It's just what you do, Len.
> > > So typical.
> >
> > You "served" in other ways. And Kelly has "real" military
> experience.
>
> Do YOU, Brain?
>
> You were only a weatherman in the USAF. We can make all sorts of
> issues if you want.
Yup. I aimed high. You aimed low. Jim and Kelly missed the target
altogether.
> > > It's only those who disagree with you about Morse Code testing
> > > that get your disrespect, abuse, name calling, and general
> > > jack(expletive deleted] behavior.
> >
> > Do you eat with that mouth?
>
> Sure he does.
>
> You kiss your wife with the same lips you have on Lennie's butt
> all the time...Does SHE complain?
Interesting statement. Is that an opinion or is it an assertion of
fact?
> > > Is there any reason to doubt that Steve, K4YZ, was involved
> > > if he says he was?
> >
> > Is there any reason to not apply Steve's rules of facts to Steve's
> > claims?
>
> There are no "rules of facts".
If a "fact" has no documentation, then it's a "lie."
> Things either "are" or they "are not".
Like: No Documentation = Lies. Like "seven hostile actions" is a
figment of your disturbed mind.
> Like your ARES claims (are not true).
I proved it true.
And your Somalia claims
> (are not true).
Just because I won't send you a QSL card...
Then there's your "unlicensed devices" claims. (are
> not true).
What's not true?
> > > I see. His mistake somehow justifies *your* behavior?
> >
> > Mistake? He's had ample opportunity to correct that mistake.
> Instead
> > he piles up the lies.
>
> Thee was no mistake.
Thee is a mistake.
> YOU have yet to cite a single error or lie, Brain. You keep
> claiming one after another refuse to cite why ANY statement is a
"lie".
Many of your lies are so obviously lies that
> > > There you go again - calling names.
> >
> > "jack(expletive deleted] behavior"
> >
> > > Godwin invoked. You lose.
> > >
> > > Why not use the person's name and callsign?
> >
> > Kim, W5TIT.
> >
> > Miccolis invoked. You lose.
> >
> > Rest of your double-standards snipped.
>
> If "double standards" were "snipped", you'd be extinct already.
I would not exist to you, Steve, because you would cease to exist.
How is it that Jim can say to use a person's name and call, yet he
repeatedly snipped Kim's call in his replies to her???
Miccolis invoked. Miccolis loses.
bb
Dunno. Maybe they were missing their recruitment quotas and Jim went
there to plus them up.
bb
N2...@AOL.COM wrote:
> LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
> > From: N2...@AOL.COM on Wed,Apr 13 2005 4:28 am
> >
> >posted it
> > >here so many times I can recite it from memory. But
> > >he never explains why it has any bearing on amateur radio
> > >policy today.
> >
> > I've already explained the "bearing it has" years ago.
>
> No, you didn't. Not how *your* experience at ADA (a military radio
> station) has any bearing, or relevance, to amateur radio
> policy today.
How does a Canadian Military Museum have any bearing or relevance to
amateur radio policy today?
bb
How's the antenna install that your sister did for you on her last
visit?
Hams and non-hams can serve in the military. Which branch did you
serve in?
LenAn...@ieee.org
Tsk, tsk. You had BETTER avoid it! Once you step away
from the Legion Hall bar YOU are liable to not make it out
of the parking lot! :-)
Sweetums, I have an HONORABLE discharges from military
service. Kellie ain't got a one! Kellie couldn't make it
in or got away with staying out (take a pick, prick).
What have YOU got? A medical discharge. You claim, and then
try to bluff everyone into believing "it was changed to an
'honorable' discharge." Do WE have "proof" of that? NO!
Tsk. I can digitize my 1960 HONORABLE discharge and send it
(have to get it out of the bank's safety deposit box). It can
be verified at the St. Louis military records archives. It can
probably be verified through the VA...but I've had NO need to
do that myself. My employers have all checked and verified
such was true for me, as has Social Security after my 65th
birthday. Not a problem in my case.
So...we've got BIG MOUTH Cuss-Everyone-Out Stevie bad-mouthing
every one who disagrees with him and his claims of "seven
hostile actions" and other bullshit. We have to take his
"word" that all he say is "true." :-) Like his "reference"
to my "employment with NADC." [which never happened since I
was never employed by the USN in any capacity]
Poor Stevie doesn't like to "associate" with myself or Brian.
Tsk, tsk, tsk. Poor baby. He should stay at the Legion Hall
bar and keep telling his fantasy stories. Maybe someone WILL
believe him (if they've had enough to drink). "Belief" is
Stevie's BIG PROBLEM. He can't live with it...makes every-
one else "prove" theirs and then keeps bad-mouthing them
when they do! Psychotic Psteve. Tsk.
Me, I got NO problems associating with REAL military
veterans. Done it much...and NOT at some Legion Hall bar.
Done it for years. I'm proud of what I did and there are
NO blemishes on my military record. I'm sure Brian has a
good record, too. "It ain't braggin if ya did it."
I did it.
Get some mental help, Psychotic Pstevie. You need it.
ex-RA16408336, U.S. Army 1952-1960, HONORABLE discharge
LenAn...@ieee.org
>N2...@AOL.COM wrote:
>
>> What does it matter whether I served in any military or not?
>
>Kind of makes it hard to be a Veteran if you didn't serve.
In his "heart" he served in everything...
>> Here's a hint: The Canadian military forces used Morse Code in
>> WW2.
>
>Oh, now I see the connections. Because you saw photos of Ham soldiers
>in QST, and you're a ham, you "served" by extension. The coat-tail
>connection.
Of course. [he does expert "tailoring" on that coat-tail]
Don't forget that Jimmie "served" in every morse combat
situation...before and after "pioneering the airwaves"
with all the first radiomen...not to mention being a
personal assistant to Reggie Fessenden. :-)
>> I could go on about the political and economic effects, but since
this
>> is a radio newsgroup I thought I'd stick to electronic and
>> radio subjects.
>
>And Canadian war museum topics.
...and ANYTHING else that has emotional appeal to all
those MORSEMEN out there. If it has MORSE in it,
Jimmie MUST stamp it "approved for r.r.a.p. use." :-)
>> If I did talk about any military service I had, you would
>> be certain to make fun of it. It's just what you do, Len.
>> So typical.
>
>You "served" in other ways. And Kelly has "real" military experience.
Riiiight...Kellie was "served" at the Captain's table.
>> It's only those who disagree with you about Morse Code testing
>> that get your disrespect, abuse, name calling, and general
>> jack(expletive deleted] behavior.
>
>Do you eat with that mouth?
...he eats Morse-o-meal for breakfast...
>> Is there any reason to doubt that Steve, K4YZ, was involved
>> if he says he was?
>
>Is there any reason to not apply Steve's rules of facts to Steve's
>claims?
Stevie's "facts" are right out of Twilight Zone.
Stevie is the National Enquirer's wanna-be reporter
who was rejected by the editorial staff en masse as
"being too fanciful for National Enquirer's
standards." :-)
>> I see. His mistake somehow justifies *your* behavior?
>
>Mistake? He's had ample opportunity to correct that mistake. Instead
>he piles up the lies.
It must be eternal spring...whatever Stevie says, Jimmie
approves. [kiss, kiss...]
>> Godwin invoked. You lose.
>>
>> Why not use the person's name and callsign?
>
>Kim, W5TIT.
>
>Miccolis invoked. You lose.
>
>Rest of your double-standards snipped.
Jimmie is thinking along Henry Ford lines...viz, the
old quote about the Model T Ford: "You can have any
color you want...as long as its black."
Anyone can say anything positive about morse code in
here...in any manner the pro-coder wants...and Jimmie
will "judge" them "approved" and even "praise" the
"manly manner" the pro-coder boosts the glory of
Morse. :-)
LenAn...@ieee.org
Thank you for factual corroboration, Hans.
As far as I know now, the VLF stations evolved into ELF
but at different locations. According to a USN Fact
Sheet those locations are at Clam Lake, WI, in the
Chequamegon National Forest (operational since 1985)
and Republic, MI (operational since 1989). The Republic
station is synchronized in time with Clam Lake, all
under operational control of NCTAMS LANT headquarters
at Norfolk, VA. Their transmission protocol is "Deep
Black" slow-speed data and the Boomers' (and Shark's)
electronics rooms (what used to be a tiny "radio room"
cubicle in WW2 boats) have "Black" ELF receivers always
on-line (as are their automatic decoders) for Alerts.
For an illustration of a Boomer electronics room, go
to the www.fas.org site and search down through a
maze of internal links to USN stuff; take info there
as old and not containing all the juicy details but has
the appearance of unclassified USN documents.
My nephew-in-law was an electrician's mate on a shark,
involved with reactor power plants, not radio. All he
said about his shark boat's electronics room was "we
couldn't hang around in there." :-) There was no such
thing as a "nuclear boat/ship" in Canada or any other
Navy during WW2. The only encryption used by the USA
(and Canada as well as the UK) was the "Sigaba" as shown
on the USS Pampanito floating museum and at the NSA
on-line Museum. The "Sigaba" system (TTY), upgraded
to post-WW2 standards was severely compromised by the
capture of the USS Pueblo off the North Korean coast in
1968. The replacement system was compromised by CWO
Walker who was convicted of espionage and is serving a
federal life term. The present encryption methods are
apparently two generations later than the Walker-
compromised crypto systems...and quite secure.
The original "Sigaba" on-line TTY crypto terminal was
first installed in the 1940s and used to relay intercepts
of the infamous "14-part" diplomatic message of Japan
that was supposed to be the formal start of the Japanese
declaration of a state of war. "Sigaba" was later used
to coordinate USN fleet movements to enable the success
of the Battle of Midway. That TTY encryption was never
compromised through intercepts. It was compromised by
actual capture of later-generation hardware on the USS
Pueblo.
The "Sigaba" encryption looked like severely distorted
TTY to any standard, non-crypto TTY terminal, totally
unreadable. The Far East Command Hq (Pershing Heights,
Tokyo, Japan) had their crypto room in the sub-sub-
basement of the main Hq building, the former Japanese
War Ministry Hq. The post-WW2 improved "Sigaba" (known
by various other names) was used by US Army Field Radio
units in "Angry-26" huts during the Korean War. A few
M-209 Code Coverters (WW2 non-electric devices in small
cases of the portable typewriter kind) were used in the
field in Korea for small-radio encryption but that ceased
by the time of the active phase beginning in Vietnam.
By interviews and other correspondence, the U.S. Army
maintained morsemanship as a requisite for Field Radio
MOSs ("NEC" to swabbies?) up to about 1972. USA had
several different communications MOSs then, especially
in TTY over various systems and including the first of
the military satellite communications links. However,
tactical use of morse code in the Army was essentially
nil at that time. Encrypted voice in the field was
first tried operationally during the Vietnam War over
the PRC-25s and PRC-77s through peripheral boxes. Such
is now easily selectable by front panel controls on the
SINCGARS manpack and vehicular sets (COMSEC is built-in
to nearly every radio now, including military HTs).
During the First Gulf War, Special Forces had slightly
old "threes" having 1200 BPS "chiclet" keyboards and
LCD text display working on the military aviation band
of 225-400 MHz. The mil av band was also relayed by
mil satellites as well as "Joint Stars" relay aircraft.
Moderate crypto system built-in on the "threes." There
was no movie-style "behind enemy lines" use of morse
in the 1990-1991 period...or afterwards.
LenAn...@ieee.org
>LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
>> From: N2...@AOL.COM on Wed,Apr 13 2005 4:28 am
>>
[etc., etc., etc...]
>Granted, you didn't see any "morse code modes" in use at
>ADA. But to say there was none used at all, anywhere in the
>US military is a different thing.
Tsk, tsk, tsk. Changing the subject.
Long-distance point-to-point communications bore
the brunt of ALL military branchs' message traffic
to an amount of GREATER than a million messages a
month.
>What's interesting is that you have to qualify the statement
>as "long-distance point-to-point communications" - because
>Morse Code was then still being used *extensively* by the US
>Navy, by the maritime radio services, by aircraft and by many
>other radio services such as press services.
"Extensively?!?" HOW DO YOU KNOW? :-)
Sweetums, I WAS PART OF IT. :-) Army station ADA, as
assigned to Far East Command Headquarters, carried not
only Army traffic, but some USN traffic, some USAF
traffic, some Press Services, even some Red Cross
message traffic. ALL on TTY. Not a bit of morse
code. And ADA was just the third largest station in
ACAN (Army Commmand and Administrative Network). That
"little" station (36 transmitters, all over 1 KW and
on 24/7) relayed 220 thousand messages a month (1955).
WAR (Washington Army Radio) handled over a million a
month then.
Sweetums, that "extensively" is just your wishful
thinking. Of course there was SOME morse being used
by all branches in 1953. But, HOW MUCH? YOU DON'T
KNOW! YOU WERE NEVER IN. YOU NEVER DID IT FOR THE
MILITARY.
>Your tunnel vision of "long-distance point-to-point communications" by
>the US military is about as relevant as the
>fact that Morse Code wasn't in use on the AM broadcast band in the
>1930s.
Tsk. A reducto ad absurdum. You must be getting
rattled, sweetums.
You are too young to have listened to Walter Winchell's
"news broadcasts" on radio. He "used morse code" at
every opening...apparently for some weird "authenticity"
since ol' Walt was getting on towards Alzheimers at the
time.
>And it was on fixed, predetermined frequencies, using equipment
>most individuals could not afford to buy.
Tsk, that's called PROFESSIONAL COMMUNICATIONS, sweetums.
When one is IN the Cold War and trying NOT to let it
develop into a nuclear confrontation, one uses absolutely
the BEST stuff to "get the message through."
I'm sure the Canadian military did the same within their
budget constraints.
You want the U.S. military to act like amateurs? :-)
Some of us think that POLICY of the U.S. government
is "done by amateurs" but that's a whole other story.
So, famous historian of radio, DID THE CANADIANS USE
MILITARY RADIO LIKE AMATEURS?
>And it was *not* the kind of communications that make up the vast
>majority of amateur radio communications.
Don't misdirect, sweetums.
YOU started this thread with an emotional message about
"morse code in the window" at a CANADIAN MILITARY
museum. Try to stay within a few light-years of the
subject.
>At some point, anyway. The US Navy was still using Morse Code long
>after the beginning of the 1950s.
HOW DO YOU KNOW? YOU DIDN'T SERVE.
>So was the Coast Guard.
HOW DO YOU KNOW? YOU DIDN'T SERVE.
>> That SHOULD have some meaning to rational
>> persons insofar as the efficacy of morse code for
>> communications...
>
>There you go, Len, assuming your conclusion.
>
>What you're saying is that because the Army didn't use it,
>nobody should use it.
For the VAST MAJORITY of message traffic in the U.S.
military - ALL BRANCHES - morse code mode was NOT
used "extensively."
What the heck, Jimmie Noserve, you weren't IN any
military, not even in Canada. Why are you all upset?
>Here's a hint: Ham radio isn't the US Army. When Uncle Sam
>is willing to buy radios for all hams, then maybe you'll
>have a point.
OH! OH! ERROR! MISTAKE!
First of all, your buddie and pal, Stevie he say
that "MARS >>IS<< amateur radio!" Tsk. MARS' first
letter in that acronym means MILITARY.
Secondly, check with a REAL MARS civilian volunteer.
You will find out that the military GIVES them radio
goodies. No need to "buy." Military already bought
the stuff and used it. Be NICE to MARS folks,
Jimmie, maybe they'll GIVE you an AN/FRC-93 for
nothing; it's a Collins KWM2 Commercial transceiver
with a military nameplate.
>> too prone to human errors by its operators,
>
>All communications modes are prone to operator error. The
>person typing on a teleprinter can make a mistake, too.
HOW DO YOU KNOW? Don't see any TTY in that picture of
YOUR ham shack! :-)
>Nope. You just don't like the mode.
Sweetums, I just don't LIKE the TEST for it. :-)
Tsk. You get SO confused when someone doesn't "like"
EVERYTHING about morse code!
>> by now, EVERY other
>> radio service has either DROPPED the mode (if they used
>> it at all in the past) or NEVER CONSIDERED it when that
>> radio service began.
>
>So what, Len? That's like saying that since almost all motor vehicles
>don't have manual transmissions anymore, no vehicles should have them.
>gave up having
"...give up having..." Tsk. Got so flustered you couldn't
finish the sentence? :-)
Hello? Have you taken a state driver license exam?
Lately?
Look again and see how many questions there are on
MANUAL TRANSMISSION automobile operation.
Sweetums, I was talking about the morse code TEST.
You began this whole thread with an emotional thing
about "morse code in the window" at a Canadian
military museum. I wasn't talking about automotive
design. There's a rec newsgroup on that but I don't
know it's name. Automotive design doesn't belong in
here anyway.
>The main reason Morse Code was replaced by other modes in
>other radio services is that it required skilled operators
>at both ends of the circuit. Skilled operators cost money
>and have to be taken care of, and the speed and accuracy of
>communications is limited to their skill level. So the skilled
>operator was eliminated by technology, to save time and money.
Riiiight, Jimmie, but you've de-emphasized "other modes"
to try and make your case. You didn't for a lot of
reasons.
Day-in, day-out morse mode manual comms can probably
handle 20 WPM rates. If the morsemen are good. I'm
talking SUSTAINED hour-by-hour operation, NOT burst
mode stuff which CAN be faster.
The OLD teleprinters could chug along CONTINUOUSLY at
60 WPM from the 1930s onward. Paper tape could be
prepared ahead of time and used in automatic transmitting
distributors, be punched at the receiving end also.
By the 1960s the NEWER teleprinters were chugging along
at 100 WPM SUSTAINED. No problem. Teleprinter makers
did excellent electromechanical designs. Just think,
SUSTAINED THROUGHPUT at 100 WPM! 24/7 if there were
folks to keep feeding the machines paper, p-tape, and
electricity. No bathroom breaks, no need to sleep,
no need for food breaks.
By the 1970s the electromechanical systems were being
replaced by DATA, teleprinting by electronics, first
with rates of 300 WPM, then 1200 WPM, then 2400 WPM,
and finally at 56000 WPM over voice-grade circuits.
[getting close to Shannon's limit on today's modems]
>What you're saying, then, is that you want to eliminate the skilled
>operators from ham radio, too.
NO, sweetums. What I've ALWAYS SAID is to toss, throw
away, eliminate the morse code TEST for amateur radio
license. THE TEST.
In the United States, "ARS" does NOT stand for "Amateur
RadioTELEGRAPHY Service." There is NO requirement for
any U.S. amateur licensee to operate on morse code mode.
ALL allocated modes are optional to use for any class.
Why do you keep insisting that the ONLY SKILL in ham
radio is morsemanship?
If morsemanship is such a wonderful thing, then it should
be optional for any ham to become a good morseman ON HIS
OR HER OWN. Since the U.S. government doesn't require
exclusive morse use, it shouldn't be ON the TEST.
>> For over half a century (actually, since before WW2)
>> the brunt of messaging in the military has been done
>> by modes OTHER than morse code.
>
>Even if true, (it's not) so what?
HOW DO YOU KNOW? YOU'VE NEVER SERVED IN THE MILITARY.
>You're argument says that since most US Navy ships stopped relying on
>the wind for propulsion long ago, nobody should own a sailboat today,
>even for "a hobby pursuit, a recreation, something done on free time
>for enjoyment."
Sweetums, this newsgroup is NOT about BOATING.
YOU started this thread with an emotional message about
"morse code in the window" at a Canadian military museum.
Now you want to hoist a sail on your lil sabot? :-)
Show me the SSBN that uses "sail" as an alternate means
of propulsion...or the USS Kennedy aircraf carrier. :-)
Better yet, tell us how the USCG appreciates the use of
morse modes on harbor and river VHF communications? :-)
>Very illogical.
Sweetums, you almost take the prize for today's reducto
ad absurdum message content!
>The old Bell Telephone system handled a lot more than 1.5 million
>"messages" a month back then, too.
HOW DO YOU KNOW? WERE YOU A TELEPHONE OPERATOR?
>What possible connection does that have to the self-trained,
>self-funded amateur radio operator?
WHAT POSSIBLE "CONNECTION" does a NON-VETERAN, NON-
CANADIAN have with a Canadian military museum that
has "morse code in the window?" :-)
>> It should be obvious to rational people that there is
>> NO need for any morse code testing for a hobby radio
>> activity.
>
>There's where you make an illogical jump. You hold up what
>the US military allegedly did, then say it's somehow connected
>to what hams should do.
There's NO "allegedly" going on, Sweetums. It is recorded
history. I was THERE, DOING IT. You were NOT.
>But you never say what the connection is. Just that "it's obvious to
>rational people" - which it isn't.
I never said morsemen are "rational." :-)
>> What morse code testing for a hobby radio activity
>> has become is a travesty, a gross artificiality kept
>> in there by old-timers who managed to pass such tests
>> and keep insisting that all newcomers MUST do as they
>> did.
>
>No, that's simply not true at all. It's just your way of
>rationalizing your hatred, Len.
"Hatred?" Ain't NO "hatred," Jimeee.
You must think the ARS stands for Amateur RadioTELEGRAPHY
Service. You cannot conceive of the possibility that
U.S. amateur radio could ever exist without that beloved
code TEST and all the "importance" "skill" "grandeur" and
"nobility" of morsemanship. :-)
>Since amateur radio operators *do* use Morse Code extensively, today,
>on the air, for a wide variety of activities, it is perfectly obvious
>to rational people that a basic test of Morse code skill is a
>reasonable test requirement for a license.
>
>That's the whole thing, right there.
NO! ERROR! MISTAKE!
The FCC has NOT *REQUIRED* morse use over an above any
other mode, any class licensee, for years. ALL allocated
modes are OPTIONAL for use. Since all those allocated
modes are OPTIONAL, then there is NO reason to require
a morse code test for a license.
Of course, that is a rational reason. Since some
morsemen are irrational in their absolute DEMAND to
RETAIN morse code testing, you might not approve. :-)
>> You resent knowing that another has done
>> it.
>
>I don't resent it at all, Len. I'm just bored by your constant
>repetition of the same old story and illogical conclusions.
Poor baby. Just like your buddie and pal, Psycho Psteve.
Anything against your Godlike judgement is an "error" or
"mistake" and you DISALLOW all such arguments. :-)
>And you still haven't explained how what happened at ADA a
half-century
>ago has any relevance to ham radio today.
Oh, my, you are still "unconvinced?" ADA, as well as AHA,
AGA, and lots of other Army stations used vacuum tube
transmitters. Seems to me that station N2EY uses TUBES!
Tsk, over half a century later and Jimmie still relies
on TUBES! :-)
Oh, and the SAME principles of physics applied to RADIO
then as well as now, regardless of human-designated
radio "service." ADA did its operation on HF. By odd
coincidence (or is it?) station N2EY also uses HF!
Sunnuvagun! :-)
>Here's one more analogy to your alleged logic:
Now, now, Jimmie, you are getting testy... :-)
>Inexpensive calculators have been around for a couple of decades now.
>Almost nobody in business or the professions relies on manual
>arithmetic anymore - even the smallest businesses, for example, use
>electronic cash registers to do the calculations.
Wowee...such "extensive" analogy building. However, some
ERRORS!
"Pa" Watson, the one who began IBM, began as a cash register
salesman for NCR. All-mechanical cash registers. Those
worked real well for SMALL businesses before I was born.
The HP-35 and all the rest of the scientific calculators
that followed obliterated the demand for "slide rules!"
>Where such manual calculation was once done, it has been completely
>replaced by electronic methods. Manual calculation
>is too slow, too error-prone, and too dependent on human skill.
Oh, my, yes!
>Therefore, we should not require anyone to learn how to do such
>calculations as addition, subtraction, multiplication or division, let
>alone square roots or other techniques.
>
>That's what you're saying. And it's nonsense.
Now, now, Jimmie, you are falling into the reducto ad
absurdum "argument" again. :-)
Maybe there's some situation where a cash register or
calculator was "necessary" for radio communication, but
dang if'n I know of one. Try to remember I've been doing
radio communications for a long time now...longer than
you've been alive (or at least born, that is). Never
heard of a radio license exam that REQUIRED demonstrating
basic arithmetic skills to get that license. :-)
Tsk. Anyone wanting logs or trig functions to better
than 5 figures needs to do a Taylor Series or other
polynomial equations to get an accurate answer?!? That's
DUMB, Jimmie, and you SHOULD know that is a complete
waste of time. Let the little scientific calculator do
it...good to 12 digits...double-precision computer
calculations are good to 14 decimal digits.
But, you are trying to make an "analogy" of basic math
skills to RADIO LICENSING! Good grief. Not ONE bit of
morse code involved in basic math skills! Tsk. You
ought to get all ARS licensees to WORK SPARK
TRANSMITTERS! VERY BASIC! THE *FIRST* TRANSMITTERS
FOR AMATEURS! Tradition and all that...long before you
were born, Jimmie.
Yes, I know "spark" is not allowed as an emission. So,
why are you constantly emitting all that nonsense about
the NEED TO KNOW morse code? Why do you force your
personal desires on all newcomers? Why can't you live
and let live...allow the ARS to ADVANCE beyond the
"Archaic Radiotelegraphy Society?"
K4YZ
Lennie's use of the sacrifice of life for his own glorification is
one of the most "intolerable sins" amongst veterans.
Period.
> Best of Luck.
None needed, but thanks.
Steve, K4YZ
K4YZ
LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
> From: "K4YZ" on Thurs,Apr 14 2005 2:27 am
>
> >k...@dvol.com wrote:
> >> bb wrote:
> >> > N2...@AOL.COM wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > What does it matter whether I served in any military or not?
> >> >
> >> > Kind of makes it hard to be a Veteran if you didn't serve.
> >>
> >> But then comes you. A licensee with no antenna. In your case one
has
> to
> >> conclude that becoming a Veteran was easier than putting up an
> antenna.
> >
> > Brian P Burke and Leonard H Anderson both epitomize all of the
> >things that give other veterans a black eye. I would not want to be
> in
> >a social setting where their status as veterans was known and then
> >announce that I was a vet too. That's one "guilty by association"
> that
> >I will gladly avoid.
>
> Tsk, tsk. You had BETTER avoid it! Once you step away
> from the Legion Hall bar YOU are liable to not make it out
> of the parking lot!
I don't drink, Lennie.
> Sweetums, I have an HONORABLE discharges from military
> service.
Yes, you do. But it's your self-serving use of the deaths of
others for your own glorification that dishonored whatever you DID do
good, Lennie.
> Kellie ain't got a one! Kellie couldn't make it
> in or got away with staying out (take a pick, prick).
You've been asked this before, I am asking again: WHAT LAW DID
BRIAN KELLY VIOLATE BY NOT SERVING IN THE ARMED FORCES...?!?!
(Caps not for yelling, but to make it easier for the old man to
read...he has obviouly had a hard with it!)
> What have YOU got? A medical discharge.
Nope. Same Honorable you've got, Lennie.
> You claim, and then
> try to bluff everyone into believing "it was changed to an
> 'honorable' discharge." Do WE have "proof" of that? NO!
It was never "changed" to an Honorable, Lennie. It was Honorable
all along. I was discharged.
> Tsk. I can digitize my 1960 HONORABLE discharge...(SNIP)
Sure you can. Two problems, though. One, you've already done the
"I am going to send you an e-mail" trick wherein you DIDN'T send what
you promised you were going to do.
Trust blown.
Secondly, as I have said over an over, I don't doubt that you have
an "Honorable" discharge. But what I HAVE said over and over it's HOW
YOU DISGRACED YOUR SERVICE WITH YOUR SELFISH USE OF OTHER'S SACRIFICES
THAT MAKE YOU THE SCUMBAG YOU ARE!
> Me, I got NO problems associating with REAL military
> veterans. Done it much...and NOT at some Legion Hall bar.
> Done it for years. I'm proud of what I did and there are
> NO blemishes on my military record. I'm sure Brian has a
> good record, too. "It ain't braggin if ya did it."
> I did it.
You also "did it" when you tried to embellish YOUR "record" with
the deaths of Soldiers who died in combat before you were even
inducted.
> Get some mental help, Psychotic Pstevie. You need it.
Not even remotely as much as you, old man.
> LenAn...@ieee.org
>
> ex-RA16408336, U.S. Army 1952-1960, HONORABLE discharge
Pathologiocal liar and teller of Tall Tales. User Of Other's
Sacrifices.
Putz.
Steve, K4yz
K4YZ
What Hans "corroborated" was the FACT that Morse Code WAS in use by
the Armed Forces well after you said they weren't.
> My nephew-in-law was an electrician's mate on a shark,
> involved with reactor power plants, not radio...(SNIP)
Which only means that there is yet another member of your family
out there with as much practical experience in Amateur Radio as you
have...
> The original "Sigaba" on-line TTY crypto terminal was
> first installed in the 1940s...(SNIP)
And had nothing to do with Amateur Radio practice or policy.
> The "Sigaba" encryption looked like severely distorted
> TTY to any standard, non-crypto TTY terminal, totally
> unreadable...(SNIP)
A lot like most of your anti-Amateur Radio rants.
> By interviews and other correspondence, the U.S. Army
> maintained morsemanship as a requisite for Field Radio
> MOSs ("NEC" to swabbies?) up to about 1972.
Not "required" for "Field Radio MOS's" (yes, NEC's to "swabbies")
however STILL taught and STILL used in the 21st Century.
> There was no movie-style "behind enemy lines" use of morse
> in the 1990-1991 period...or afterwards.
Ohhhhh...Geeeeee....You mean there is SOMEthing our government
doesn't disclose to Leonard H. Anderson..?!?! Imagine that!
Steve, K4YZ
K4YZ
LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
> From: N2...@AOL.COM on Thurs,Apr 14 2005 3:42 am
>
> >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
> >> From: N2...@AOL.COM on Wed,Apr 13 2005 4:28 am
> >>
>
> [etc., etc., etc...]
> >Granted, you didn't see any "morse code modes" in use at
> >ADA. But to say there was none used at all, anywhere in the
> >US military is a different thing.
>
> Tsk, tsk, tsk. Changing the subject.
No he didn't. Just pointed out that YOU tried to change the
parameters to meet your rants again...Didn't work. And you didn't see
any "morse code modes" at ADA...Unless, of course, you're lying to us
again....
> Long-distance point-to-point communications bore
> the brunt of ALL military branchs' message traffic
> to an amount of GREATER than a million messages a
> month.
>
> >What's interesting is that you have to qualify the statement
> >as "long-distance point-to-point communications" - because
> >Morse Code was then still being used *extensively* by the US
> >Navy, by the maritime radio services, by aircraft and by many
> >other radio services such as press services.
>
> "Extensively?!?" HOW DO YOU KNOW? :-)
>
> Sweetums, I WAS PART OF IT.
Liar.
By your own documentation you were nothing more than a radio
mechanic. You never held "radio operator", "message center", or other
similar OPERATOR MOS's.
> Army station ADA, as assigned to Far East....(SNIP)
Same rant. Still irrelevent.
> Sweetums, that "extensively" is just your wishful
> thinking. Of course there was SOME morse being used
> by all branches in 1953. But, HOW MUCH? YOU DON'T
> KNOW! YOU WERE NEVER IN. YOU NEVER DID IT FOR THE
> MILITARY.
He is as likely to know as you are, Lennie. He has the same
resources at his disposal to "research" as you do.
> >And it was on fixed, predetermined frequencies, using equipment
> >most individuals could not afford to buy.
>
> Tsk, that's called PROFESSIONAL COMMUNICATIONS, sweetums.
> When one is IN the Cold War and trying NOT to let it
> develop into a nuclear confrontation, one uses absolutely
> the BEST stuff to "get the message through."
OH WOW!
Now Lennie prevented World War Three! ! ! !
> >And it was *not* the kind of communications that make up the vast
> >majority of amateur radio communications.
>
> Don't misdirect, sweetums.
>
> YOU started this thread with an emotional message about
> "morse code in the window" at a CANADIAN MILITARY
> museum. Try to stay within a few light-years of the
> subject.
He's a lot closer than you are, Your Lyinghsip.
> >At some point, anyway. The US Navy was still using Morse Code long
> >after the beginning of the 1950s.
>
> HOW DO YOU KNOW? YOU DIDN'T SERVE.
So, by YOUR logic, a guy who spent 2 years on KP knows more about
Morse Code usage in the Armed Forces than Jim Miccolis!
> >So was the Coast Guard.
>
> HOW DO YOU KNOW? YOU DIDN'T SERVE.
So, by YOUR logic, a guy who spent 2 years on KP knows more about
Morse Code usage in the Armed Forces than Jim Miccolis!
The REAL QUESTION, Lennie, is HOW DO >>YOU<< know...?!?! You were
NEVER a military radio operator, and yet you "served" in the Army.
> OH! OH! ERROR! MISTAKE!
>
> First of all, your buddie and pal, Stevie he say
> that "MARS >>IS<< amateur radio!" Tsk. MARS' first
> letter in that acronym means MILITARY.
And the SECOND letter is AFFILIATE...As in affiliated with the
Amateur Radio Service...From which this MILITARY program draws it's
operators.
And Lennie...what MARS calls have YOU held?
I was NNN0VVU from 1977 to 1982. I was a guest op briefly for
NNN0MOQ in 1980, then CHOP of NNN0MOF in 1981 and ANCOIC of the Okinawa
Island-Wide MARS Program in that same time frame.
I was also AFA1OQ from 1983 to 1987. I joined ARMY MARS briefly
in 1999 just before my daughter passed...AAT4SA.
> Secondly, check with a REAL MARS civilian volunteer.
> You will find out that the military GIVES them radio
> goodies. No need to "buy."
BBBWWWWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
! ! ! !! ! ! ! !
MARS allows participants who have ALREADY met certain
PARTICIPATION goals to draw equiment from surplus stock!
In other words, you operate YOUR gear on MARS assignments BEFORE
you EVER get to "go shopping"... ! ! ! !
And MARS "issues" of surplus radios dwindled to less than a
trickle YEARS AGO! ! ! !
BBBWWWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
! ! ! ! ! !
> Military already bought
> the stuff and used it. Be NICE to MARS folks,
> Jimmie, maybe they'll GIVE you an AN/FRC-93 for
> nothing; it's a Collins KWM2 Commercial transceiver
> with a military nameplate.
And most likely they never will. Nor are they about to issue any
other gear to anyone who hasn't already established dedicated
participation to warrant ANY "equipment issue".
Big snip of usual divergant rhetoric...
> >> For over half a century (actually, since before WW2)
> >> the brunt of messaging in the military has been done
> >> by modes OTHER than morse code.
> >
> >Even if true, (it's not) so what?
>
> HOW DO YOU KNOW? YOU'VE NEVER SERVED IN THE MILITARY.
What does serving in the Armed Forces have to do with it, Lennie?
YOU constantly insist that since EVERYTHING you could possibly
want to know about "radios" , military or otherwise, is on the net,
it's not necessary for you to be a licensed Amateur to know about
Amateur policy issues.
However your FREQUENT errors, including the ones above vis-a-vis
MARS is GLARING PROOF that your LACK OF PRACTICAL EXPERIENCE make you
ill-prepared, yea incompetent, to make INFORMED opinions on the
matter...
Yet you still bombard this NG with tons of rants pontificating on
matters you are't qualified to discuss.
> >You're argument says that since most US Navy ships stopped relying
on
> >the wind for propulsion long ago, nobody should own a sailboat
today,
> >even for "a hobby pursuit, a recreation, something done on free time
> >for enjoyment."
>
> Sweetums, this newsgroup is NOT about BOATING.
It's "NOT" about a LOT of things that YOU feel free to discuss at
length when the mood strikes you. But you do it anyway.
Anderson, you keep delivering corroborating evidence to my claims
of your ignorance and incompetence in Amateur Radio (and MARS) issues,
and for that I thank you!
What a PUTZ!
Steve, K4YZ
N2...@aol.com
LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
> From: N2...@AOL.COM on Thurs,Apr 14 2005 3:42 am
>
> >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
> >> From: N2...@AOL.COM on Wed,Apr 13 2005 4:28 am
>
> >ADA. But to say there was none used at all, anywhere in the
> >US military is a different thing.
>
> Tsk, tsk, tsk. Changing the subject.
Where?
>
> Long-distance point-to-point communications bore
> the brunt of ALL military branchs' message traffic
> to an amount of GREATER than a million messages a
> month.
How do you know, Len?
Were you in the Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard too?
And even if true - so what?
>
> >What's interesting is that you have to qualify the statement
> >as "long-distance point-to-point communications" - because
> >Morse Code was then still being used *extensively* by the US
> >Navy, by the maritime radio services, by aircraft and by many
> >other radio services such as press services.
>
> "Extensively?!?" HOW DO YOU KNOW? :-)
Same way you know about most things. Others told me, I read source
material, etc.
>
> Sweetums, I WAS PART OF IT. :-)
Part. But not all. Your personal experience was just a small part of
the big picture.
> Army station ADA, as
> assigned to Far East Command Headquarters, carried not
> only Army traffic, but some USN traffic, some USAF
> traffic, some Press Services, even some Red Cross
> message traffic. ALL on TTY.
*Some* of that traffic. Not all of it. So you can't really
speak for what was done through other channels other than by
what you've read and been told - same as me.
> Not a bit of morse
> code. And ADA was just the third largest station in
> ACAN (Army Commmand and Administrative Network). That
> "little" station (36 transmitters, all over 1 KW and
> on 24/7) relayed 220 thousand messages a month (1955).
> WAR (Washington Army Radio) handled over a million a
> month then.
But you weren't at those places, were you?
>
> Sweetums, that "extensively" is just your wishful
> thinking. Of course there was SOME morse being used
> by all branches in 1953.
That's all I'm saying.
> But, HOW MUCH?
A lot. Enough that all branches were training radio operators to use
the mode.
> YOU DON'T
> KNOW!
You don't know, either, Len. You weren't there, were Morse was being
used.
> YOU WERE NEVER IN.
So what? You were never a radio amateur, but you claim to know
all about what hams do and what amateur radio is all about.
> YOU NEVER DID IT FOR THE MILITARY.
You mean operate Morse Code? Neither did you!
> >Your tunnel vision of "long-distance point-to-point
> >communications" by
> >the US military is about as relevant as the
> >fact that Morse Code wasn't in use on the AM broadcast band in
> >the 1930s.
>
> Tsk. A reducto ad absurdum. You must be getting
> rattled, sweetums.
Reductio ad absurdum is a valid argument tool. I'm not rattled at all,
Len. You're the one shouting and carrying on in a very immature way. So
typical, so predictable.
> You are too young to have listened to Walter Winchell's
> "news broadcasts" on radio. He "used morse code" at
> every opening...apparently for some weird "authenticity"
> since ol' Walt was getting on towards Alzheimers at the
> time.
I've heard the recordings. What he used was just a prop.
> >And it was on fixed, predetermined frequencies, using equipment
> >most individuals could not afford to buy.
>
> Tsk, that's called PROFESSIONAL COMMUNICATIONS, sweetums.
> When one is IN the Cold War and trying NOT to let it
> develop into a nuclear confrontation, one uses absolutely
> the BEST stuff to "get the message through."
You didn't have to pay for it yourself, though.
> I'm sure the Canadian military did the same within their
> budget constraints.
>
> You want the U.S. military to act like amateurs? :-)
No. But you seem to want amateurs to act like the US military.
>
> Some of us think that POLICY of the U.S. government
> is "done by amateurs" but that's a whole other story.
OK, Len. Who did you vote for in the US presidential elections
of 2000 and 2004? You've spoken of President Bush's "coronation
day" - so I think you voted for one of the other guys.
>
> >And it was *not* the kind of communications that make up the
> >vast
> >majority of amateur radio communications.
>
> Don't misdirect, sweetums.
Not a misdirection, Len. A simple fact.
> >At some point, anyway. The US Navy was still using Morse Code >
>long
> >after the beginning of the 1950s.
>
> HOW DO YOU KNOW?
Same way you do, Len. From others.
> YOU DIDN'T SERVE.
You were never in the Navy.
>
> >So was the Coast Guard.
>
> HOW DO YOU KNOW?
Same way you do, Len. From others.
> YOU DIDN'T SERVE.
>
You were never in the Coast Guard. But you have made fun of the Coast
Guard service of a CG radio operator.
> >> That SHOULD have some meaning to rational
> >> persons insofar as the efficacy of morse code for
> >> communications...
> >
> >There you go, Len, assuming your conclusion.
> >
> >What you're saying is that because the Army didn't use it,
> >nobody should use it.
>
> For the VAST MAJORITY of message traffic in the U.S.
> military - ALL BRANCHES - morse code mode was NOT
> used "extensively."
How do you know? You didn't serve in those other branches. You weren't
there.
>
> What the heck, Jimmie Noserve, you weren't IN any
> military, not even in Canada. Why are you all upset?
I'm not upset, Len. You're the one shouting and carrying on like a
jackass all over the place, over the mention of the use of Morse code.
>
> >Here's a hint: Ham radio isn't the US Army. When Uncle Sam
> >is willing to buy radios for all hams, then maybe you'll
> >have a point.
>
> OH! OH! ERROR! MISTAKE!
Yes, you do make plenty of those.
> First of all, your buddie and pal, Stevie he say
> that "MARS >>IS<< amateur radio!" Tsk. MARS' first
> letter in that acronym means MILITARY.
Len - I'm not Steve.
> Secondly, check with a REAL MARS civilian volunteer.
> You will find out that the military GIVES them radio
> goodies. No need to "buy." Military already bought
> the stuff and used it.
So *some* hams get the castoffs from the military. Not *all* hams, and
not complete stations.
> Be NICE to MARS folks,
> Jimmie, maybe they'll GIVE you an AN/FRC-93 for
> nothing; it's a Collins KWM2 Commercial transceiver
> with a military nameplate.
Don't want one. And it's a KWM-2A, with the extra crystal positions.
>
> >> too prone to human errors by its operators,
> >
> >All communications modes are prone to operator error. The
> >person typing on a teleprinter can make a mistake, too.
>
> HOW DO YOU KNOW?
Been there, done that.
> Don't see any TTY in that picture of
> YOUR ham shack! :-)
I've done RTTY, Len. At an amateur radio station.
> >Nope. You just don't like the mode.
>
> Sweetums, I just don't LIKE the TEST for it. :-)
No, you just don't like the mode. Your behavior proves it.
K4YZ
N...@AOL.COM wrote:
> LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
> > Sweetums, I WAS PART OF IT. :-)
>
> Part. But not all. Your personal experience was just a small part of
> the big picture.
Lennie was squat. He was a radio mechanic at a rear-area radio
station. His knowledge of the "big picture" was "tunnel vision", at
best when he was "in", and would be no more today if not for the
research resources of the Internet today.
> > Army station ADA, as
> > assigned to Far East Command Headquarters, carried not
> > only Army traffic, but some USN traffic, some USAF
> > traffic, some Press Services, even some Red Cross
> > message traffic. ALL on TTY.
>
> *Some* of that traffic. Not all of it. So you can't really
> speak for what was done through other channels other than by
> what you've read and been told - same as me.
>
> > Not a bit of morse
> > code. And ADA was just the third largest station in
> > ACAN (Army Commmand and Administrative Network). That
> > "little" station (36 transmitters, all over 1 KW and
> > on 24/7) relayed 220 thousand messages a month (1955).
> > WAR (Washington Army Radio) handled over a million a
> > month then.
>
> But you weren't at those places, were you?
Of course not.
But he SERVED! By simple virtue of having gone through boot camp,
he was given all military knowledge of all services in the pre/post
Colonial days and ever since...
> > Tsk, that's called PROFESSIONAL COMMUNICATIONS, sweetums.
> > When one is IN the Cold War and trying NOT to let it
> > develop into a nuclear confrontation, one uses absolutely
> > the BEST stuff to "get the message through."
>
> You didn't have to pay for it yourself, though.
But he SERVED! Again, by simple virtue of having gone to boot
camp, Lennie was given all knowledge of all things "military". He was
also made sole owner, heir and heir apparent to all materiel past,
present and future. Nothing has ever happened in the Armed Forces that
didn't get his explicit consent or approval first.
> > I'm sure the Canadian military did the same within their
> > budget constraints.
> >
> > You want the U.S. military to act like amateurs?
>
> No. But you seem to want amateurs to act like the US military.
But of course! That's the way Lennie learned how to do it, and by
golly, that IS how everyone else is going to do it...
Wait...where have I heard THAT before..?!?!
OH YEAH! Lennie accusing US of making that "demand" of
prospective Amateurs!
> > Some of us think that POLICY of the U.S. government
> > is "done by amateurs" but that's a whole other story.
>
> OK, Len. Who did you vote for in the US presidential elections
> of 2000 and 2004? You've spoken of President Bush's "coronation
> day" - so I think you voted for one of the other guys.
> >
> > >And it was *not* the kind of communications that make up the
> > >vast
> > >majority of amateur radio communications.
> >
> > Don't misdirect, sweetums.
>
> Not a misdirection, Len. A simple fact.
"Simple facts" are not Lennie's forte.
> > What the heck, Jimmie Noserve, you weren't IN any
> > military, not even in Canada. Why are you all upset?
>
> I'm not upset, Len. You're the one shouting and carrying on like a
> jack### all over the place, over the mention of the use of Morse
code.
Lennie brags about "serving", which I would assume to mean that he
adamandtly supported and defended the Constitution of the United
States...
....the SAME Constitution that doesn't REQUIRE military service.
Yet he's yelling and hollering about people NOT "serving"...
What's this putz's problem, Jim? Guess he only supports those
parts that suit him...
> > Secondly, check with a REAL MARS civilian volunteer.
> > You will find out that the military GIVES them radio
> > goodies. No need to "buy." Military already bought
> > the stuff and used it.
>
> So *some* hams get the castoffs from the military. Not *all* hams,
and
> not complete stations.
If MARS just "gave" stuff to Hams, then the MARS rolls would be a
lot more robust than they are today, what with folks getting in line
for free radios and all.....
> > Sweetums, I just don't LIKE the TEST for it.
>
> No, you just don't like the mode. Your behavior proves it.
Actually, it was a diversional lie...to cover up his greater
hatred and disdain for all things "Amateur". Leonard H. Anderson
"likes" nothing but himself.
73
Steve, K4YZ
Dave Heil
> > Secondly, check with a REAL MARS civilian volunteer.
> > You will find out that the military GIVES them radio
> > goodies. No need to "buy."
>
> BBBWWWWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
> ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !
>
> MARS allows participants who have ALREADY met certain
> PARTICIPATION goals to draw equiment from surplus stock!
As of my most recent participation in the MARS program, that equipment
was loaned, not given. It was issued on a hand receipt.
> In other words, you operate YOUR gear on MARS assignments BEFORE
> you EVER get to "go shopping"... ! ! ! !
> And MARS "issues" of surplus radios dwindled to less than a
> trickle YEARS AGO! ! ! !
I knew some fellow in the Shreveport/Bossier City, Louisiana area who
were already long time MARS participants in the late 1960's. Some of
them had items like R-390 receivers, VHF FM gear and the like. None of
them had any transmitting equipment provided by MARS. There was not
much in the way of equipment available from AF MARS at that time.
Nobody with with only a year or two of participation was eligible to
receive any equipment at all. I did snag some lengths of really, really
old coaxial cable. My AF MARS activities were done with equipment I
bought and paid for myself.
I'll chalk this up as something else which Leonard Anderson knows little
about.
Dave K8MN
Dave Heil
>
> LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
> > From: N2...@AOL.COM on Thurs,Apr 14 2005 3:42 am
> > Be NICE to MARS folks,
> > Jimmie, maybe they'll GIVE you an AN/FRC-93 for
> > nothing; it's a Collins KWM2 Commercial transceiver
> > with a military nameplate.
> Don't want one. And it's a KWM-2A, with the extra crystal positions.
It certainly is the KWM-2A.
Nearly a year ago, Len told us:
"The exception was the procurement
of the AN/FRC-93 HF transceiver, the commercial version (full
crystal bank) of the Collins KWM2. [I have the TM on it and can tell
where to get it for free PDF download...even for Canadians... :-) ] "
The commercial version of the Collins KWM-2A is the Collins KWM-2A.
I have a government surplus unit. It has no military nameplate
identifying it as an AN/FRC-93. The units I used in Vietnam had no
military nameplates identifying them as AN/FRC-93 units. The manuals we
had on hand were Collins KWM-2A manuals.
Dave K8MN
Dee Flint
"Dave Heil" <k8...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:425FCD26...@earthlink.net...
Both I and my OM were MARS operators for a short time in the early 1990s,
there was never even a hint that they might offer equipment to either one of
us. Nor did any of the promotional material, training material, etc ever
mention such a possibility.
Dee D. Flint, N8UZE
Dave Heil
Thanks for the confirmation, Dee. I think the equipment gravy train
dried up a long time ago. When it existed, the equipment was loaned. I
understood that after it was in the possession of an individual for some
time, it was occasionally written off. I know of several occasions when
those who were loaned gear were requested to return it.
Dave K8MN
KØHB
KØHB
"K4YZ" <k4...@aol.com> wrote
> You forgot something..."Retired".
What did I forget? My account was as complete as needed.
And what does "Retired" have to do with it?
de Hans, K0HB
K4YZ
Details, Master Chief. You've thumped me over the head with
otherwise trivial "details" on other posts before...Are you not subject
to the same expectation?
73
Steve, K4YZ
LenAn...@ieee.org
Well there ya go! :-)
Everybody ought to run right over to LOGSA (that
stands for LOGistical Supply Agency) and tell them...
THE AN/FRC-93 DOESN'T EXIST!
Gosh yes...and TM 11-5820-554-12 doesn't exist, either!
Guess that LOGSA ought to destroy that particular CD
of TMs because Davie's (in-country?) KWM2 didn't have
an "official" nameplate, just the Collins thing. :-)
Oh, and there are about a half dozen versions of this
non-existant transceiver plus several separate TMs
(that's TM for Technical Manual for you civilians) for
ancilliary Collins units to work with it.
Would you like the NSN (National Stock Number) for
this non-existant-nomenclature radio set? :-)
[before you burn all those CDs in your outrage, or
whatever]
Oh, and the manual produced by Collins Radio was
reproduced for most of this TM. That's rather
common for COTS (Commercial Off-The Shelf) electronic
equipment (and other things) and has been done for
many, many years.
Oh, yeah, and TMs are now also distributed on CDs to
all branches of the military. Saves space and paper
plus the weight on shipping the printed versions.
All the branches have computers now, even stuff in
the field. Those computers have "AN" numbers and
"NSNs" also but I don't DARE write them in here due
to the hostile environment presented by die-hard
PCTAs. Those can't exist if Davie says they don't
exist! :-)
Temper fry...
K4YZ
> stands for LOGistical Supply Agency) and tell them...
>
> THE AN/FRC-93 DOESN'T EXIST!
I'd be interested in learning where in Dave's post he said it
didn't exist.
I only saw where he said the KWM-2A didn't have a name plate with
that nomenclature on it.
I used KWM-2A's at NNN0MOQ, MOF and at "NZJ". No AN/FRC-93 plates
on them either.
Just stock KWM-2A's with Stock Collins operator and repair
manuals. (We did our own repairs at MOF.) (plus cryastals)
> Oh, yeah, and TMs are now also distributed on CDs to
> all branches of the military. Saves space and paper
> plus the weight on shipping the printed versions.
> All the branches have computers now, even stuff in
> the field. Those computers have "AN" numbers and
> "NSNs" also but I don't DARE write them in here due
> to the hostile environment presented by die-hard
> PCTAs. Those can't exist if Davie says they don't
> exist!
He never said "they don't exist".
I haven't seen him say "they didn't exist".
He just said they didn't have a nameplate with that nomenclature.
Of course YOU wouldn't know since YOU weren't there to see it for
yourself. Again, Lennie making accusations without practical
experience to back it up. You DIDN'T SERVE when/where he did.
Nor where I did, for than matter.
> Temper fry...
Putz.
Steve, K4YZ
bb
Every veteran has put themselves in the queu for sacrifice. So Jim
asks what difference serving in the military makes? That is the
answer. Apparently he had something more important to do.
> > Best of Luck.
>
> None needed, but thanks.
>
> Steve, K4YZ
Best of Luck.
bb
Was that the 12th step? Probably has something to do with your medical
discharge.
> > Sweetums, I have an HONORABLE discharges from military
> > service.
>
> Yes, you do. But it's your self-serving use of the deaths of
> others for your own glorification that dishonored whatever you DID do
> good, Lennie.
Jim asked what difference it makes if he served or not? Soldiers die.
> > Kellie ain't got a one! Kellie couldn't make it
> > in or got away with staying out (take a pick, prick).
>
> You've been asked this before, I am asking again: WHAT LAW DID
> BRIAN KELLY VIOLATE BY NOT SERVING IN THE ARMED FORCES...?!?!
Kellie lied about it. He claimed to have "real military service."
> (Caps not for yelling, but to make it easier for the old man to
> read...he has obviouly had a hard with it!)
>
> > What have YOU got? A medical discharge.
>
> Nope. Same Honorable you've got, Lennie.
> > You claim, and then
> > try to bluff everyone into believing "it was changed to an
> > 'honorable' discharge." Do WE have "proof" of that? NO!
>
> It was never "changed" to an Honorable, Lennie. It was
Honorable
> all along. I was discharged.
Was Kelly discharged? Jim?
> > Tsk. I can digitize my 1960 HONORABLE discharge...(SNIP)
>
> Sure you can. Two problems, though. One, you've already done
the
> "I am going to send you an e-mail" trick wherein you DIDN'T send what
> you promised you were going to do.
Why do you use the word "promised?" Is it a cheap Robeson trick to
make greater your injury? Hi!
> Trust blown.
>
> Secondly, as I have said over an over, I don't doubt that you
have
> an "Honorable" discharge. But what I HAVE said over and over it's
HOW
> YOU DISGRACED YOUR SERVICE WITH YOUR SELFISH USE OF OTHER'S
SACRIFICES
> THAT MAKE YOU THE SCUMBAG YOU ARE!
Didn't people who didn't serve make selfish use of other's sacrifices?
> > Me, I got NO problems associating with REAL military
> > veterans. Done it much...and NOT at some Legion Hall bar.
> > Done it for years. I'm proud of what I did and there are
> > NO blemishes on my military record. I'm sure Brian has a
> > good record, too. "It ain't braggin if ya did it."
> > I did it.
>
> You also "did it" when you tried to embellish YOUR "record"
with
> the deaths of Soldiers who died in combat before you were even
> inducted.
What? No marines ever died in combat prior to your service? You
enlisted because it was safe and you knew you'd get back in one piece
(didn't happen, did it?)
Jim asks what difference serving or not serving in the military makes?
I'd like to see you explain it to him.
> > Get some mental help, Psychotic Pstevie. You need it.
>
> Not even remotely as much as you, old man.
Let the professionals make that determination.
> > LenAn...@ieee.org
> >
> > ex-RA16408336, U.S. Army 1952-1960, HONORABLE discharge
>
> Pathologiocal liar and teller of Tall Tales. User Of Other's
> Sacrifices.
>
> Putz.
>
> Steve, K4yz
What about your claim of seven hostile actions?
KØHB
"K4YZ" <k4...@aol.com> wrote
> Details, Master Chief. You've thumped me over the head with
> otherwise trivial "details" on other posts before.
I thought my account was sufficiently detailed to the question at hand. If you
want more non-related detail, ask Len Anderson to go cut and paste some
out-of-context triva from somewhere. Then you two can bicker over it. I'm outa
here.
K4YZ
bb wrote:
> K4YZ wrote:
> > I don't drink, Lennie.
>
> Was that the 12th step? Probably has something to do with your
medical
> discharge.
Nope. Has to do with getting more out of life with a clear head
than without it.
You should try it.
> > > Sweetums, I have an HONORABLE discharges from military
> > > service.
> >
> > Yes, you do. But it's your self-serving use of the deaths of
> > others for your own glorification that dishonored whatever you DID
do
> > good, Lennie.
>
> Jim asked what difference it makes if he served or not? Soldiers
die.
So do construction workers who build bases, or mechanics that
manufacture tanks.
The fact of the matter is that except in the most aggrevious
warfare, more Americans die on the highways at home than do Servicemen.
> > You've been asked this before, I am asking again: WHAT LAW
DID
> > BRIAN KELLY VIOLATE BY NOT SERVING IN THE ARMED FORCES...?!?!
>
> Kellie lied about it. He claimed to have "real military service."
You'll have to show me that one, Brain.
I've seen where he's said he worked WITH the Armed Forces, but
never "I was in..."
> > It was never "changed" to an Honorable, Lennie. It was
> Honorable
> > all along. I was discharged.
>
> Was Kelly discharged? Jim?
I ams till trying to figure out your point here.
> > > Tsk. I can digitize my 1960 HONORABLE discharge...(SNIP)
> >
> > Sure you can. Two problems, though. One, you've already done
> the
> > "I am going to send you an e-mail" trick wherein you DIDN'T send
what
> > you promised you were going to do.
>
> Why do you use the word "promised?" Is it a cheap Robeson trick to
> make greater your injury?
Nope.
Because he lied. An Anderson trick, but not an uncommon one.
> > Trust blown.
> >
> > Secondly, as I have said over an over, I don't doubt that you
> have
> > an "Honorable" discharge. But what I HAVE said over and over it's
> HOW
> > YOU DISGRACED YOUR SERVICE WITH YOUR SELFISH USE OF OTHER'S
> SACRIFICES
> > THAT MAKE YOU THE SCUMBAG YOU ARE!
>
> Didn't people who didn't serve make selfish use of other's
sacrifices?
Oh come on, Burke...Building upon the sacrifices others made is
one tthing...That's how America got to BE America.
Your "mentor" intentionally tried to get away with making it
appear as though HE had "served" with the Soliders who were KIA.
THAT is DISGUSTING.
> > You also "did it" when you tried to embellish YOUR "record"
> with
> > the deaths of Soldiers who died in combat before you were even
> > inducted.
>
> What? No marines ever died in combat prior to your service? You
> enlisted because it was safe and you knew you'd get back in one piece
> (didn't happen, did it?)
>>I<< never tried to convince anyone that I was somehow involved
in a war that happened 3 years before I was enlisted.
> Jim asks what difference serving or not serving in the military
makes?
> I'd like to see you explain it to him.
It DOESN'T matter...It's NOT the law, and not every person was
meant to be a Soldier or Marine.
> > > Get some mental help, Psychotic Pstevie. You need it.
> >
> > Not even remotely as much as you, old man.
>
> Let the professionals make that determination.
I am one of the professionals, Brian. Licensed.
> > > LenAn...@ieee.org
> > >
> > > ex-RA16408336, U.S. Army 1952-1960, HONORABLE discharge
> >
> > Pathologiocal liar and teller of Tall Tales. User Of Other's
> > Sacrifices.
> >
> > Putz.
> >
> > Steve, K4yz
>
> What about your claim of seven hostile actions?
Tried to trust YOU once upon a time, Brain, but you blew YOUR
"trust" opportunity too. Oh well.
Steve, K4YZ
K4YZ
KØHB wrote:
> "K4YZ" <k4...@aol.com> wrote
>
> > Details, Master Chief. You've thumped me over the head with
> > otherwise trivial "details" on other posts before.
>
> I thought my account was sufficiently detailed to the question at
hand.
Guess not sufficiently enough.
> If you
> want more non-related detail, ask Len Anderson to go cut and paste
some
> out-of-context triva from somewhere. Then you two can bicker over
it.
Why? He wouldn't get it right anyway.
>I'm outa here.
Promises, promises.
> Hans, K0HB
> Master Chief Radioman, USN
Retired.
Steve, K4YZ
N2...@aol.com
> From: Dave Heil on Apr 12, 9:31 pm
>
> >N...@AOL.COM wrote:
> >> LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
> >> > From: N2EY on Apr 12, 4:20 pm
> >> > >LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
>
> >> > about his famous
> >> > "seven hostile actions"
> >
> >> Do you know what they are? Where *you* involved in any of
> >> them?
> >
> >He doesn't have any idea what they were. It kills him.
>
> NAH.
YEAH! ;-)
> It only shows what a snow-jobbing laid-off
> murine does under the guise of a U.S. AMATEUR radio
> extra callsign. Tosses brags like they were bagels.
What brags, Len? Look at American foreign policy since the
end of the USA's involvement in Vietnam. Plenty of "hostile
actions" for active-duty, career military personnel to be a part of in
a variety of roles.
And that's just the "hostile actions" we civilians know about.
>
> >To my knowledge, Steve has never stated that DOD does not
> >direct MARS.
>
> >His claim is that if there were no radio amateurs, there'd
> >have been no
> >MARS program. In that, he is correct.
>
> Bullshit.
Well, you're certainly the authority on *that* subject, Len! ;-)
> The United States ARMY started MARS...but
> under a different name before WW2.
Nobody disputes that. The claim - more like an opinion - is that
the program wouldn't have existed without radio amatuers. It's
really unprovable either way, because there *were* radio amateurs long
before the MARS program existed, and radio amateurs have always been
involved.
>
> MARS always was and remains a MILITARY radio system.
But most of the participants aren't in the military.
> A small one, about as effective as having special
> services put on shows and entertainment. Morale
> boosting thing.
Is it a good thing or a bad thing, Len? Or are you only impressed with
size?
>
> >That's pretty much why I've left details out. As with Steve's
> >military
> >service, Len doesn't know what I did or where I did it and it >
>kills him.
>
> No problem with me.
Haw, that's funny. Len, you pretty much come unglued at the slightest
opposition to your cherished statements, or when
someone refuses to feed your insult machine.
> If you ain't got the guts to
> tell the details, you AIN'T done it. Simple as that.
Then you must think that Brian Burke, N0IMD-allegedly-/T5, "ain't done
it", because he won't give any details about his amateur radio
operation in Somalia.
What you're saying, Len, is that something isn't real unless people
tell you all the details. That's called "subjective reality" and it's a
complete crock. Rational people use
objective reality, which exists whether people talk about it or not.
Orwell did a good job describing the subjective reality mindset in his
classic "1984". You remind me of "Big Brother", Len, in the way you
want to rewrite history to fit your mindset.
If a person does something, they've done it whether they talk about it
or not. Or whether you believe it or not. Simple as that.
If N0IMD/T5 really happened, then it happened regardless of whether
details are given or not.
If the State Department really used Morse Code in the 1980s to
coordinate RTTY operations, then it happened regardless of whether you
believe it or not.
And if K4YZ really did participate in seven hostile actions,
then it happened regardless of whether details are given or not.
Now you can say you don't believe something happened, but your belief
is simply an opinion.
> >As far as I'm concerned, amateur radio is about operating any >
>mode I
> >choose on any band I choose. Len isn't involved on any level.
>
> Everyone NOT licensed in amateur radio "isn't involved."
>
> :-)
No, Len, that's not true. FCC is involved - but you're not FCC. Amateur
radio manufacturers are involved - but you're not one of them, either.
You're not involved.
>
> The point is that some MIGHT want to GET INTO amateur
> radio.
Who? Not you, of course. You're not involved.
> >Len knows more about what others did than those involved.
>
> Nope.
It's what you claim.
> But...I DO recognize a bullshit artist from a
> long distance.
You can just look in the mirror....;-)
> >Len knows more about radio operation.
>
> Tsk. I know HOW they work and the protocols needed
> in some radio services.
But not amateur radio. Not Morse Code. Your knowledge is all theory, no
practice, when it comes to amateur radio. Sidewalk superintendent
stuff. All hat and no cattle, all talk and no action.
You did some articles for a now-long-defunct New England-based ham
radio magazine 22+ years ago. None of them were about building or
operating an amateur radio station.
> >Len knows more about your work.
>
> Tsk. Jimmie "works in the transportation field"
> according to one Comment in the ECFS.
Do you mean me, Len?
> Other than
> that, Jimmie do NOT say squat. He afraid others
> find out?
Why no, Len. I'm not "afraid" of others finding out. I just choose not
to give out that information.
Who did you vote for in the presidential elections of 2000 and 2004,
Len?
Are you "afraid" of others finding out?
Perhaps you think that if you don't give the details, you didn't really
do it....
> >Whatever Len did at ADA more than a half century ago impacts
> >amateur radio not in the least.
>
> Riiiiight old-timer. Ham radio NEVER operated on HF, did
> it? :-)
>
> >Len tells it because he wants to be sure that everyone knows of it.
>
> You betcha! :-)
>
> The U.S. military did NOT use morse code in long-distance
> fixed-point to fixed-point communications a half century
> ago and still don't.
Even if that's true - what does it matter to amateur radio policy?
Amateur radio isn't the US military.
> Tsk. Some of you olde-tyme hammes
> need to get your noses out of old WW2 surplus radio books
> and inspect the rest of the radio world.
Is that an order?
Why should what other radio services do be more important to amateur
radio policy than what hams do?
>
> >How does it give him the right to insult those who never
> >served?
>
> Tsk, tsk, tsk. Those with SUCH thin skin should NOT be
> ANYWHERE on the Internet!!!! :-)
>
I see. Well, Len, you have the thinnest skin of all those here, because
you get insulted by *any* opposition..
Who did you vote for in the presidential elections of 2000 and 2004,
Len?
Are you "afraid" of others finding out?
Perhaps you think that if you don't give the details, you didn't really
do it....
KØHB
<LenAn...@ieee.org> wrote in message
news:1113535139.8...@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> The only encryption used by the USA
> (and Canada as well as the UK) was the "Sigaba" as shown
> on the USS Pampanito floating museum and at the NSA
> on-line Museum.
Wrong, kind elderly Gentleman. It wasn't the "only encryption used by the USA".
SIGABA (KL-29/BACCUS) was only ONE of SEVERAL encryption systems used by the USA
during WWII. In fact, it wasn't even the most commonly used one (KL7/ADONIS
holds that honor).
> The "Sigaba" system (TTY), upgraded to post-WW2 standards
> was severely compromised by the capture of the USS Pueblo
> off the North Korean coast in 1968.
Wrong again, SIGANDERSON. SIGABA (and it's "upgrades") were retired from
service in 1959, almost a decade before the Lloyd Bucher shamefully struck his
colors to the Koreans..
Lloyd
"KØHB" <grou...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:6sa8e.7291$An2....@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
Hans is typical of radiomen. The more he runs his mouth, the more
his gross ignorance shows. His earlier statement about Morse no
longer being widely taught or used in the U.S. armed forces is but one
case in point. Now he attacks Lloyd Bucher! Is there any doubt
the Navy was correct in disbanding the Radioman rating? Good
riddance! How's the story telling going down at the Legion Hall
Hans?
73,
Lloyd
bb
K4YZ wrote:
> bb wrote:
> > K4YZ wrote:
>
> > > I don't drink, Lennie.
> >
> > Was that the 12th step? Probably has something to do with your
> medical
> > discharge.
>
> Nope. Has to do with getting more out of life with a clear head
> than without it.
You should try the "clear head" stuff.
> You should try it.
You should.
> > > > Sweetums, I have an HONORABLE discharges from military
> > > > service.
> > >
> > > Yes, you do. But it's your self-serving use of the deaths
of
> > > others for your own glorification that dishonored whatever you
DID
> do
> > > good, Lennie.
> >
> > Jim asked what difference it makes if he served or not? Soldiers
> die.
>
> So do construction workers who build bases, or mechanics that
> manufacture tanks.
>
> The fact of the matter is that except in the most aggrevious
> warfare, more Americans die on the highways at home than do
Servicemen.
And heroes all of them, defending the country.
"""Sorry Hans, a run-over Jay-Walker >>>IS<<< a Veteran!!!""" Hi!
> > > You've been asked this before, I am asking again: WHAT LAW
> DID
> > > BRIAN KELLY VIOLATE BY NOT SERVING IN THE ARMED FORCES...?!?!
> >
> > Kellie lied about it. He claimed to have "real military service."
>
> You'll have to show me that one, Brain.
>
> I've seen where he's said he worked WITH the Armed Forces, but
> never "I was in..."
It was in a brag-tape challenge to one of the rra.misc cretins. You
guys tend to attract the wrong element to rrap.
> > > It was never "changed" to an Honorable, Lennie. It was
> > Honorable
> > > all along. I was discharged.
> >
> > Was Kelly discharged? Jim?
>
> I ams till trying to figure out your point here.
"Just answer the man's question."
> > > > Tsk. I can digitize my 1960 HONORABLE discharge...(SNIP)
> > >
> > > Sure you can. Two problems, though. One, you've already
done
> > the
> > > "I am going to send you an e-mail" trick wherein you DIDN'T send
> what
> > > you promised you were going to do.
> >
> > Why do you use the word "promised?" Is it a cheap Robeson trick to
> > make greater your injury?
>
> Nope.
>
> Because he lied. An Anderson trick, but not an uncommon one.
I've yet to see Len say, "Steve, I promise..." Ever.
So why do you say that he promised? My OPINION is that he did not
promise, and you lied about it. Why do I think that? Because it fits
you to a T.
> > > Trust blown.
> > >
> > > Secondly, as I have said over an over, I don't doubt that
you
> > have
> > > an "Honorable" discharge. But what I HAVE said over and over
it's
> > HOW
> > > YOU DISGRACED YOUR SERVICE WITH YOUR SELFISH USE OF OTHER'S
> > SACRIFICES
> > > THAT MAKE YOU THE SCUMBAG YOU ARE!
> >
> > Didn't people who didn't serve make selfish use of other's
> sacrifices?
>
> Oh come on, Burke...Building upon the sacrifices others made is
> one tthing...That's how America got to BE America.
They had ample opportunity to serve. Jim says he "served in other
ways." Kelly says he has "real military experience."
> Your "mentor" intentionally tried to get away with making it
> appear as though HE had "served" with the Soliders who were KIA.
>
> THAT is DISGUSTING.
Perhaps you got it wrong. Perhaps he served with soldiers that
SURVIVED IN ACTION. I know I did.
> > > You also "did it" when you tried to embellish YOUR "record"
> > with
> > > the deaths of Soldiers who died in combat before you were even
> > > inducted.
> >
> > What? No marines ever died in combat prior to your service? You
> > enlisted because it was safe and you knew you'd get back in one
piece
> > (didn't happen, did it?)
>
> >>I<< never tried to convince anyone that I was somehow involved
> in a war that happened 3 years before I was enlisted.
You tried to convince us that you were involved in 7 hostile actions
that never occurred.
> > Jim asks what difference serving or not serving in the military
> makes?
> > I'd like to see you explain it to him.
>
> It DOESN'T matter...It's NOT the law, and not every person was
> meant to be a Soldier or Marine.
Now you are telling me that your service didn't matter. Hans' service
didn't matter. Len's service didn't matter. Roll's service didn't
matter. Morgan's service didn't matter.
> > > > Get some mental help, Psychotic Pstevie. You need it.
> > >
> > > Not even remotely as much as you, old man.
> >
> > Let the professionals make that determination.
>
> I am one of the professionals, Brian. Licensed.
Wrong.
> > > > LenAn...@ieee.org
> > > >
> > > > ex-RA16408336, U.S. Army 1952-1960, HONORABLE discharge
> > >
> > > Pathologiocal liar and teller of Tall Tales. User Of
Other's
> > > Sacrifices.
> > >
> > > Putz.
> > >
> > > Steve, K4yz
> >
> > What about your claim of seven hostile actions?
>
> Tried to trust YOU once upon a time, Brain, but you blew YOUR
> "trust" opportunity too. Oh well.
Yeh, yeh. You talked on a radio. Is that what you're calling a
hostile action? Did the radio topple off the field desk and dent your
spit-shined boot?
That's right, Gunny. You can't trust anyone. That's one sign of a
mentally ill person (paranoia).
LenAn...@ieee.org
>K4YZ wrote:
>> LenAnder...@ieee.org wrote:
>> > From: "K4YZ" on Thurs,Apr 14 2005 2:27 am
>> > > Brian P Burke and Leonard H Anderson both epitomize all of
the
>> > >things that give other veterans a black eye. I would not want to
be in
>> > >a social setting where their status as veterans was known and
then
>> > >announce that I was a vet too. That's one "guilty by
association" that
>> > >I will gladly avoid.
>> >
>> > Tsk, tsk. You had BETTER avoid it! Once you step away
>> > from the Legion Hall bar YOU are liable to not make it out
>> > of the parking lot!
>>
>> I don't drink, Lennie.
>
>Was that the 12th step? Probably has something to do with your
medical
>discharge.
Er, Brian, Psychotic Pstevie NOW says his discharge was
"honorable all along!" :-)
Gosh, I wonder if some medical tech ever did a culture
on what was in that "discharge?" [might be a medical
breakthrough! :-) ]
Pstevie doesn't drink? Gosh and golly, from the looks
of things in here, I think he strains out the pickles
(KOSHER of course) from those jars and enjoys the dill
juice. Keeps his "Gunnery Sgt command voice" in the
proper sour tone, the lips pursed in proper Dill
Sergeant disapproval. :-)
>> > Sweetums, I have an HONORABLE discharges from military
>> > service.
>>
>> Yes, you do. But it's your self-serving use of the deaths of
>> others for your own glorification that dishonored whatever you DID
do
>> good, Lennie.
>
>Jim asked what difference it makes if he served or not? Soldiers die.
Pstevie MUST get his "insult quotient" of the day in. He
MUST "avenge" his "outrage" (at being caught LYING to
others and not having his brags believed). The original
thread subject is of no consequence to Pstevie. He MUST
take REVENGE!!! :-)
Quite so...soldiers, sailors, airmen may ALL die in the
performance of their military duty. MAY. All of us who
wore the uniform know that, in greater or lesser degree
depending on the individual. We do honor those who
gave their lives...or who had their lives taken from
them in the course of duty.
"Civilians" (those who never served in the military)
don't have a rapport with that. They only have the
emotional, second-hand viewing of movies, TV, and
published accounts, at best a vicarious "experience"
based only on their emotional take on it. Because of
that emotion-only input, they cannot comprehend
being IN any such situation. Because their input is
only second-hand and emotional, they will confuse that
with whatever other emotions they have. A case in
point is Jimmie's apparent glorification of morse
code use on radio in WW2 with warfare itself. All
grand and glorious but the warfare happening well
before his lifetime. He can't really comprehend what
it means to be IN a true warfare situation OR in a
military situation of any kind. He has no baseline
from which to judge. At best, all he can do is an
intellectual exercise of words, of imagination, so
that he can give the appearance of "knowing" what it
is like.
Now we've got Psychotic Pstevie who claims "insult"
that others can actually honor those who died in the
performance of their military duties...especially
those of the same military unit. Jimmie has NO
sense of "unit cohesiveness" that grows in every
military unit, the bond of all who serve in a unit.
Such a bond is not easily explainable in words but
it can be felt deep inside. It is visceral, deep
in the psyche. It can't be fully realized until
one has done it.
Psychotic Pstevie the Psonofabitch perverses such
honoring of a unit's dead in order to produce his
interminable insult-throwing. He is a special case,
perhaps one who should be IN a case, locked away.
When I've stood Retreat at sundown with the special
order of honoring those 19 of the 71st Battalion who
died on 1 July 1950, I was not thinking ahead to
many years later of "bragging" about personal
exploits. Those 19 were ALL "rear area"
communications Signalmen; the 71st served the Far
East Command Headquarters directly and General
Mac had ordered that group to Korea to reinforce
the partly overrun communications system at the
start of the Korean War. Their transport crashed
on landing, killing not only them but also the
four in the aircrew. Stuff happens and none of
them expected that. Army Central Command honored
two of the 19 by naming the Battalion's billet as
Hardy Barracks, later the new transmitter site as
Camp Tomlinson. That is the best that the military
can do besides the "insurance" money and consoling
of their families. The media had not yet come up
with "body counts" of the later Vietnam War, that
sorry excuse to make warfare sound like some pro
football game...which it definitely is not.
Jimmie and Pstevie have made much of "rear area"
military service, as if that is a disreputable
thing. About six out of seven military personnel
ARE "rear area" and not DIRECTLY involved in
actual "battle." Yet, with the mobility of
modern warfare ANY ONE of those six may be thrust
into some kind of "battle" or, in the case of the
19 from the 71st Signal Battalion, dying for no
cause of theirs or the enemy. "Rear area" service
is necessary to prosecute the mass logistics of
warfare...to coordinate supplies arriving to
replenish consumables, to get reinforcements or
replacements...even to perform ground service on
aircraft such as helicopters. None of us "rear
area" personnel are expected to be "in the thick
of battle" (as Jimmie may think, never having
served and getting input only from mass media).
We did our tasks as assigned, following the orders
passed down along chain of command. We did our
DUTY and took pride in what we did, even if we
didn't get our names in magazines or amass "scores"
to show "how good/superious" we were. Most of us
survived to continue life outside of the military.
A few of us "lucked out" in doing our duty, such
as my getting assigned to a big communications
station. I had NO hand in getting such, had to
accept what happened. Some, like myself, availed
themselves of the opportunity to learn, to grow in
knowledge of communications arts, technology.
>> You've been asked this before, I am asking again: WHAT LAW DID
>> BRIAN KELLY VIOLATE BY NOT SERVING IN THE ARMED FORCES...?!?!
>
>Kellie lied about it. He claimed to have "real military service."
Kellie once said he had "26 patents." Actually,
he had only ONE, the other 25 being grants in
other countries for the SAME patent. Same as
I did although my single patent may have had 28
foreign grants; exact number varied depending on
who was contacted at RCA Corporation Legal.
>> It was never "changed" to an Honorable, Lennie. It was
Honorable
>> all along. I was discharged.
>
>Was Kelly discharged? Jim?
They "served in other ways."
However, Pstevie contradicted himself. In here, Pstevie
said he had a Medical discharge "from an accident."
Discharges for enlisted personnel are either Honorable,
Dishonorable, or Medical.
>> > Tsk. I can digitize my 1960 HONORABLE discharge...(SNIP)
>>
>> Sure you can. Two problems, though. One, you've already done
the
>> "I am going to send you an e-mail" trick wherein you DIDN'T send
what
>> you promised you were going to do.
Poor Psycho Pstevie, still ANGRY over another accident.
He neglected (deliberately) to say that he was sent the
correct file later, not once but twice. Pstevie was SO
angry and upset that he REFUSED to look at the correct
file. [his RAGE is legendary...]
>Why do you use the word "promised?" Is it a cheap Robeson trick to
>make greater your injury? Hi!
Pstevie thinks ALL exist to SERVE HIM! :-)
Pstevie is a warlord-wannabe (or some kind of self-
professed nobility person) who demands OBEDIANCE
from those he threatens.
>> Secondly, as I have said over an over, I don't doubt that you
have
>> an "Honorable" discharge. But what I HAVE said over and over it's
HOW
>> YOU DISGRACED YOUR SERVICE WITH YOUR SELFISH USE OF OTHER'S
SACRIFICES
>> THAT MAKE YOU THE SCUMBAG YOU ARE!
>
>Didn't people who didn't serve make selfish use of other's sacrifices?
Psycho Pstevie the Psonofabitch would think that my
periodic placement of flags on veteran's graves is an
INSULT!!! He may think that placing my hand over my
heart (in civilian salute) to the flag of the USA is an
INSULT!!!
Pstevie makes Memorial Day less memorable...
>> You also "did it" when you tried to embellish YOUR "record"
with
>> the deaths of Soldiers who died in combat before you were even
inducted.
>
>What? No marines ever died in combat prior to your service? You
>enlisted because it was safe and you knew you'd get back in one piece
>(didn't happen, did it?)
The USMC uniform was pretty...two colors of blue,
white hat, flashy red stripe on the outside of each
trouser, shiny chromed SWORD! Wowee!
Pstevie says I was "inducted." ERROR. I volunteered.
I was sworn into service. There's a difference.
In the 50s the Army had its own "ASN" or Army Serial
Number. Mine was RA 16 408 336. The "RA" prefix stood
for "Regular Army" and denoted volunteer enlistment.
Draftees (those inducted) had "US" prefixes, standing
for "Army of the United States." Activated National
Guard had "NG" prefixes. Commissioned officer ASN
prefixes were simply "O."
>Jim asks what difference serving or not serving in the military makes?
>I'd like to see you explain it to him.
I wonder if Pstevie will order him to "GET DOWN AND
GIVE ME TWENTY!!!" :-)
>> > Get some mental help, Psychotic Pstevie. You need it.
>>
>> Not even remotely as much as you, old man.
>
>Let the professionals make that determination.
Pstevie gonna say "HE has the 'professional qualifications!'"
:-)
Pstevie still hasn't "picked up the phone to tell
'authorities' to come pick me up for mental stuff!"
He said he "could do that" (apparently by the powers
that be in Pstevieland).
>> Pathologiocal liar and teller of Tall Tales. User Of Other's
>> Sacrifices.
>>
>> Putz.
>>
>> Steve, K4yz
>
>What about your claim of seven hostile actions?
Pstevie gave his life for his country seven times?
He must have cat DNA...but only two lives left!
Psychotic Pstevie should call the VA and ask them
who had ASN RA16408336. Tsk. Not a "tall tale."
Getting tired of the Psychotic One going on his
HATE binges. I thought U.S. ham radio was all about
good fellowship and friendly helping of those who
don't know about radio?
Not in Pstevie's back yard. :-)
LenAn...@ieee.org
>LenAn...@ieee.org wrote:
>> From: Dave Heil on Apr 12, 9:31 pm
>> It only shows what a snow-jobbing laid-off
>> murine does under the guise of a U.S. AMATEUR radio
>> extra callsign. Tosses brags like they were bagels.
>
>What brags, Len? Look at American foreign policy since the
>end of the USA's involvement in Vietnam. Plenty of "hostile
>actions" for active-duty, career military personnel to be a part of in
>a variety of roles.
>
>And that's just the "hostile actions" we civilians know about.
How does that tie in with the use of morse code in
museum windows?
Oh, yes, Jimmie Noserve KNOWS all about "hostile
actions." Sure...READING about them, WATCHING
movies and TV. Wow!
>> >To my knowledge, Steve has never stated that DOD does not
>> >direct MARS.
>>
>> >His claim is that if there were no radio amateurs, there'd
>> >have been no MARS program. In that, he is correct.
>>
>> Bullshit.
>
>Well, you're certainly the authority on *that* subject, Len! ;-)
I know TRUTH as opposed to snow-job braggadoccio.
Psycho Pstevie is an "extra class" snow-jobber.
And, mister wizard, you REWROTE what Robeson wrote.
"Sorry, Hans, MARS >>IS<< amateur radio."
In NO way did Pstevie write what YOU say he wrote.
In NO way did Pstevie's single sentence say what
you IMPLY it did. He is NOT "correct."
>> MARS always was and remains a MILITARY radio system.
>
>But most of the participants aren't in the military.
How do YOU know? Are you now working for the Army
MARS Hq at Fort Huachuca? Or any of the other service
branch MARS Headquarters? Didn't you READ the DoD
directive visible to anyone on the given link?
>Haw, that's funny. Len, you pretty much come unglued at the slightest
>opposition to your cherished statements, or when
>someone refuses to feed your insult machine.
"Insult machine?" Jimmie Noserve wants the exclusive
use of that "machine?"
Oh, yes, that ties right in with a Canadian museum
having morse code in its window...sure...
>> If you ain't got the guts to
>> tell the details, you AIN'T done it. Simple as that.
>
>Then you must think that Brian Burke, N0IMD-allegedly-/T5, "ain't done
>it", because he won't give any details about his amateur radio
>operation in Somalia.
Then you must be as nuts as Psycho Pstevie. Tsk.
Pstevie pervertedly pejorated hisself at least a
couple orders of magnitude with his alleged
"poor repfit" of NADC on my visit there 34 years
ago...and is still trying (vainly) to rationalize
his LIE as some kind of "truth."
I'm just showing what a damn LIAR he is. But,
Pstevie is your BUDDIE and therefore can do NO
wrong. He is PCTA extra Double Standard class
and can therefore say ANYTHING he wants in
your complete approval.
>Orwell did a good job describing the subjective reality mindset in his
>classic "1984". You remind me of "Big Brother", Len, in the way you
>want to rewrite history to fit your mindset.
Pizz off, sweetie. You are going hot and heavy
into this personal insult thing and Brian Burke is
NOT a part of it.
>If a person does something, they've done it whether they talk about it
>or not. Or whether you believe it or not. Simple as that.
Tsk. Turn your phrase around. If a person TALKS
about something, that isn't "proof" that they've
DONE it. :-)
Psycho Pstevie still hasn't come up with a SINGLE
detail of "proof" on his insult of my "fitrep" at
NADC.
>And if K4YZ really did participate in seven hostile actions,
>then it happened regardless of whether details are given or not.
HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT IS TRUTH? :-)
You've NEVER served OR done any "hostile actions"
other than petty intellectual arguments on Internet.
>No, Len, that's not true. FCC is involved - but you're not FCC.
James P. Miccolis is NOT FCC. :-)
>Amateur radio manufacturers are involved - but you're not one
>of them, either.
James P. Miccolis is NOT a "manufacturer of radios."
>You're not involved.
OH! "Not involved!!!"
The U.S. Government gives me the RIGHT to vote, on
anything up for a vote!
I am NOT "involved in government" yet I can vote on
government officials! [really!]
I am NOT "involved" in any of the proposals to be
voted on yet I can VOTE on them!
Wow! I'm "not involved" in so many things!!!!
BULLSHIT, sweetums. The FCC determines who gets a
radio license and sets the standards. The ARRL does
NOT. Jimmie Noserve does NOT. Davie Heil does NOT.
The "ham community" does NOT. It's the FCC, sweetie.
[and that's the absolute truth...pbthththt]
The "F" in FCC stands for "Federal." That means that
ANYONE can make themselves and their opinions known to
them (see the 1st Amendment of the U.S. Constitution).
The FCC does NOT limit itself to amateur regulation
input SOLELY from amateurs. It isn't an exclusive
clubhouse...even though you try to convey that idea.
>Who? Not you, of course. You're not involved.
What? Paradoxical. According to that, one can't
get INTO amateur radio WITHOUT being "involved,"
BUT...to BE "involved" one has to ALREADY be IN
amateur radio.
Tsk. If you don't like paradoxes, all you are doing
is trying to make it all into a private clubhouse.
Sorry, the Communications Act of 1934 took that away
when the FCC was created to regulate ALL civil radio
in the USA. ALL, Jimmie.
>> >Len knows more about radio operation.
>>
>> Tsk. I know HOW they work and the protocols needed
>> in some radio services.
>
>But not amateur radio. Not Morse Code. Your knowledge is all theory,
no
>practice, when it comes to amateur radio. Sidewalk superintendent
>stuff. All hat and no cattle, all talk and no action.
Okay, so you DON'T think that amateur radio works by
the same principles of physics as all other radio
services. Electrons, fields, and waves all work in
in an "amateur fashion" if you have an AMATEUR radio
license! An AMATEUR radio "won't work" unless it has
a valid, certificated amateur radio operator operating
it? Wow. Learn something every day.
Well, no sweat. Someone who doesn't KNOW the "ham way"
should be FIRED, right? Give up their ham job? Be
prosecuted if they don't behave according to YOUR set
of regulations?
Sweetie, I've designed and built those "sidewalks,"
and the "buildings" they are in front of, done the
"civil engineering" testing on those "buildings" to
make sure they are in-spec. Let your aphorisms fly
where they may Luke Skysulker, "may the aphorism be
with you!"
>You did some articles for a now-long-defunct New England-based ham
>radio magazine 22+ years ago. None of them were about building or
>operating an amateur radio station.
Poor baby. Still sulking about NOT getting published
in anything but "Electric Radio?" :-)
Still pissed because I was an Associate Editor there,
and so listed on their masthead?
Awwww...the opportunity could have been YOURS, sweetie.
Better luck, next time.
>> Other than
>> that, Jimmie do NOT say squat. He afraid others
>> find out?
>
>Why no, Len. I'm not "afraid" of others finding out. I just choose not
>to give out that information.
Can't blame you. :-)
>Who did you vote for in the presidential elections of 2000 and 2004,
>Len?
Where there RADIO issues proposed by the candidates
then? I watched the debates on TV rather than listening
to the radio. Fill me in.
HOW is such information REQUIRED to discuss amateur radio
regulations and how to get INTO amateur radio by licensing?
WHO did you VOTE for in Canada on their last election?
Are you "afraid" to say? :-)
>> The U.S. military did NOT use morse code in long-distance
>> fixed-point to fixed-point communications a half century
>> ago and still don't.
>
>Even if that's true - what does it matter to amateur radio policy?
Sorry, Jimmie, under YOUR "rules," if I SAID it, then
it must be true! :-)
Actually, it IS true, but YOU are AFRAID to find out.
The fantasy that the rest of the radio world "still
uses morse code" is way too strong a mental narcotic
for you. You can't go cold turkey.
>Amateur radio isn't the US military.
MARS is military. "Sorry, Hans, MARS >>IS<< amateur
radio!" :-)
Amateur radio is NOT Private Land Mobile Radio Service.
Amateur radio is NOT Mass Media Radio Service.
Amateur radio is NOT Maritime Radio Service.
Amateur radio is NOT Aviation Radio Service.
Amateur radio is NOT Personal Radio Service.
Etc.
>> Tsk. Some of you olde-tyme hammes
>> need to get your noses out of old WW2 surplus radio books
>> and inspect the rest of the radio world.
>
>Is that an order?
Are you afraid to take orders? Is that why you never
volunteered for military service? :-)
>Why should what other radio services do be more important to amateur
>radio policy than what hams do?
Why should amateur radio policy be dictated SOLELY by
already-licensed radio amateurs? That's in direct
VIOLATION of both the 1st Amendment and the Communications
Act of 1934.
>I see. Well, Len, you have the thinnest skin of all those here,
because
>you get insulted by *any* opposition..
What "opposition?" :-)
There's Jimmie Noserve who likes to make out that he
KNOWS ALL about the military...but never served.
There's a psycho-sick whacko inventing "fitreps" about
me that never happened...
There's a few more and have been lots more. Not a
problem. Lots of you knowitalls and control freaks on
the Internet who "get off" on being "superior" on their
screens. Tsk. Been that way since computer-modem
communications got going over three decades ago. :-)
>Who did you vote for in the presidential elections of 2000 and 2004,
>Len?
Maybe I've forgotten! :-)
What Prime Minister candidate did you vote for in
Canada, Jimmie?
What military did you serve in up in Canada, Jimmie?
Did you do any morse code in their military?
Were you in any Canadian "hostile actions?"
Or did you forget?
How did the Morse-o-Meal taste this morning?
[have some crow for supper...]
Bye... :-)
K4YZ
bb wrote:
> K4YZ wrote:
> > The fact of the matter is that except in the most aggrevious
> > warfare, more Americans die on the highways at home than do
> Servicemen.
>
> And heroes all of them, defending the country.
>
> """Sorry Hans, a run-over Jay-Walker >>>IS<<< a Veteran!!!""" Hi!
The point beig, Brain, that civilians die in the course of both
"peacetime" and states of war too.
Do a bit of history research on "Maritime Marine", "Civil Air
Patrol" and "Office of Civilian Defense" during WW2.
CAP "civilians" still lose their lives "in the line of duty", and
they weren't even getting paid for it.
Steve, K4YZ
K4YZ
> Now we've got Psychotic Pstevie who claims "insult"
> that others can actually honor those who died in the
> performance of their military duties...
Your "honoring" was a blatant attempt to put YOU up front.
That's the disgusting part.
> Psychotic Pstevie the Psonofabitch...
Ahhhhhhhhhh, Lennie, even MORE name calling! Why am I not
surprised?
Rest of your ususal pontification and self-righteous indignation
snipped for bandwidth conservation.
You're still a lair, Lennie. You're still not an Amateur Radio
licensee, and will never have a fraction of the experiences in Amateur
Radio that any other person in this NG has.
Sucks to be you!
Steve, K4YZ
K4YZ
> >Amateur radio isn't the US military.
>
> MARS is military. "Sorry, Hans, MARS >>IS<< amateur
> radio!"
No Amateur Radio = No MARS. The "A" in MARS stands for
"Affiliate", as in "Affiliated" with Amateur Radio.
> Amateur radio is NOT Private Land Mobile Radio Service.
But Amateur Radio is used as an emergency adjunct to it, so sayeth
the FCC. (You know, Lennie...the FEDERAL Communications Commission...)
> Amateur radio is NOT Mass Media Radio Service.
But under certain circumstances may be used to assist in that
pursuit...so sayeth the FCC.
> Amateur radio is NOT Maritime Radio Service.
But Amateur Radio is routinely carried aboard both commercial and
pleasure vessles of many types...Including warships of the United
States Navy...So sayeth the FCC >>AND<< the Deaprtment of Defense.
> Amateur radio is NOT Aviation Radio Service.
But with the permission of the pilot-in-command, Amateur Radio
activities may be conducted from both private and commercial
aircarft...So sayeth the FCC >>AND<< the FAA.
> Amateur radio is NOT Personal Radio Service.
But Amateur Radio may be rotinely used for many of the same
purposes of the Personal Radio Service...So sayeth the FCC...
So...so far we have at least three federal agencies telling us
that Amateur Radio CAN be used under all of the flags above that Lennie
said Amateur Radio "wasn't".
Sheeeesh.
Leonard H. Anderson is a putz. A loser again...\
Steve, K4YZ
LenAn...@ieee.org
><LenAn...@ieee.org> wrote in message
>news:1113535139.8...@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>> The only encryption used by the USA
>> (and Canada as well as the UK) was the "Sigaba" as shown
>> on the USS Pampanito floating museum and at the NSA
>> on-line Museum.
>
>Wrong, kind elderly Gentleman. It wasn't the "only encryption used by
the USA".
>
>SIGABA (KL-29/BACCUS) was only ONE of SEVERAL encryption systems used
by the USA
>during WWII. In fact, it wasn't even the most commonly used one
(KL7/ADONIS
>holds that honor).
Of course it's "wrong," you are always "right." :-)
Never had a crypto clearance in the service, certainly
not in WW2. You have one then? [of course you did...]
Have to "dot the i and cross the t" to the EXACT
number or else be sentenced to a capital-crime
felony in here? :-)
All I know is the basic principle of the system,
obtained in a couple of interesting books by
CIVILIANS! :-) Also an article by the Chief
Cryptographer of the U.S. Army...a civilian! :-)
>> The "Sigaba" system (TTY), upgraded to post-WW2 standards
>> was severely compromised by the capture of the USS Pueblo
>> off the North Korean coast in 1968.
>
>Wrong again, SIGANDERSON. SIGABA (and it's "upgrades") were retired
from
>service in 1959, almost a decade before the Lloyd Bucher shamefully
struck his
>colors to the Koreans..
No problem, Super Chief. :-)
Until around 1964 I didn't KNOW the EXACTNESS of
the systems or even how it was done. The crypto
stuff would roll in looking for all the world as
way-off-bias-distortion-prone TTY on any standard
TTY...on what I saw in the Army.
I'm sure you think that the Army sent everything
"in clear" using morse code (to confuse the 'enemy')
and all that. That's another subject of course and
I'm not allowed to talk of that; I need an AMATEUR
RADIO license in order to talk about military/all-
Navy encryption. :-)
The system used then was a "rotor" type (familiar
name). Essentially a set of rotary switches turning
at different rates (according to key settings, crypto
key, not key on a manual keyboard operation). Those
rotary switches ("rotors") scrambled the normal TTY
in synchronism with the TTY motor and would also
UN-scramble received TTY. Neat thing about that,
even with the "wrong" name and all the EXACT number
and letter designators, was that NOBODY COMPROMISED
IT! Sunnuvagun!
Lots and lots of cryptologists and historians have
tried to see if anyone compromised it on any intercepts
during WW2 and somewhat afterwards (I won't say the
EXACT year because you want to snarl and argue about
it if I do) but haven't come up with anything yet.
Of course you are on this wonderful, traditional,
"do or die," "death before dishonor" bullshit attitude
in regards to Commander Bucher. Riiiiight...the USN
thoughtfully "armed" the USS Pueble with a single
machine gun and a few personal arms of some of the
personnel. NOT ENOUGH destruct flares on board to
destroy equipment. Pueblo was surrounded in shallow
water...not a big problem to have NORTH Korean divers
raise enough equipment to sell to the USSR. But...
"being there" (in your heart) you would want everyone
to FIGHT TO THE LAST MAN! Wow, lot of "good" that was
goint to do.
By the way, since you are so picky-picky about EXACT
names and things, the USS Pueblo was captured by
NORTH Koreans. Korea isn't unifed yet, hasn't been
since the USSR jumped in on the tailboard of WW2 and
"occupied" the North and sticking in their communist
government ideas there. As a separate Korean nation,
that is.
The crew of the USS Pueblo (officially a USN ship,
an "oceanographic research vessel" according to our
government) pretty much survived captivity. [do
you need an EXACT body count?] Bucher survived.
But, Bucher died not too long ago. No problem for
you, huh? The USN didn't haul him up for any courts
martial. He was allowed to retire. [you were allowed
to retire, right?]
CWO Walker, USN, STOLE whole technical manuals (by
photographic copying) and Key Lists while SERVING in
the USN. Sold the material to the USSR. Walker was
eventually caught, tried, and sentenced to life in a
federal pen. [do you need the EXACT details on that,
too, and if no one supplies them, are they "all
wrong?"] Walker is STILL ALIVE! Sunnuvagun!
You don't posit that as a "terrible thing," do you?
You want to try and convict (in absentia) a USN
commissioned officer stuck in an untenable position
in his command...but you don't give a shit about
ANOTHER USN officer, a Warrant, doing deliberate
TREASON while SERVING! That's okay?
>73, de Hans, K0HB
>Master Chief Radioman, US Navy
Good grief, you didn't "cross the tee" in your
manuevers properly. You should have pointed out
that the USN closed down ELF transmitters in Clam
Lake, WI, and Republic, MI, at the end of September
2004!!! No more 76 Hz at 1 MW. [too many in the
U.S. north country want to "save the environment"
and "preserve world peace" by withholding the use
of *nuclear* (horrors!) missles] Riiiight...76 Hz
is terribly harmful to the ecology they think!
Tsk, tsk! You could have had a FINE time doing the
pillory bit on me...but you NEGLECTED to do so!
Missle submarines and attack submarines have to use
alerts from VLF stations NAA, NLK, NPM, NML, NAU,
NRK, NWC...frequencies from 19.8 to 40.8 KHz. But,
I almost hesitate to list those since you will NO
DOUBT want the EXACT details, the EXACT locations,
and the EXACT mode, protocol, and all that...or ANY
listing is TOTALLY WRONG!!! :-)
Cool it, Master super-duper Chief (USN). I'm still
a citizen of the U.S. of A. and served in MY
country's (USA) military BEFORE you did. I know
that doesn't count for much in this din of inequity
but it's all I got. :-)
By the way, for EXACTNESS, my surname was NEVER
"SIGANDERSON." You made a "mistake" but I won't
hold anything against you. Well, maybe a bayonet
or such... :-)
Temper fry...
KØHB
<LenAn...@ieee.org> wrote in message
news:1113699100.0...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Walker is STILL ALIVE! Sunnuvagun!
He shouldn't be.
K4YZ
LenAn...@ieee.org wrote:
> Cool it, Master super-duper Chief (USN). I'm still
> a citizen of the U.S. of A. and served in MY
> country's (USA) military BEFORE you did. I know
> that doesn't count for much in this din of inequity
> but it's all I got.
Of course Lennie's reading the riot act to someone about
experience and "seniority", yet is first and loudest to cry foul if
Amateurs point out HIS lack of "experience and seniority".
> By the way, for EXACTNESS, my surname was NEVER
> "SIGANDERSON." You made a "mistake" but I won't
> hold anything against you. Well, maybe a bayonet
> or such...
And Lennie, always quick to find SOME "threat" in anything,
blatantly threatens Hans with a bayonet.
Why am I not surprised?
> Temper fry...
>
> LenAn...@ieee.org
Steve, K4YZ
Mel A. Nomah
"KØHB" <grou...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:6sa8e.7291$An2....@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
: ... almost a decade before the Lloyd Bucher shamefully struck his
: colors to the Koreans..
Shameful is in the eye of the beholder. Captain Bucher was not punished for
surrendering, just as the US didn't punish the Jews who attacked his
sister-ship, USS Liberty on a similar mission. Probably because then the
Navy would have needed to punish those who sent those ships in harms way
without proper means to defend themselves, and further because when Pueblo
signalled for help other forces in the area (7th Fleet, CINCPAC, 5th AF at
Fuchu/Kadena/Clark, etc.) engaged in a messy cluster-fuck deciding whether
and who should send air assets to cover his retreat. Enough shame to go
around!
M.A.N.
--
"I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: "O Lord,
make my enemies ridiculous." And God granted it."
- Voltaire
Jumper 101
There are others of us who 'lurk' hereabouts and several of us are also
Vets.
Hats off to you, Master Chief, and to you I give an Airborne Salute.
Airborne All The Way from a former 101st Abn. Trooper, Ft. Campbell, KY.
Screaming Eagles get the job done. All others are 'legs'.
"K4YZ" <k4...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1113707124.9...@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
K4YZ
Jumper 101 wrote:
> Thank you, Master Chief, for your service. You served our country
well.
> There are others of us who 'lurk' hereabouts and several of us are
also
> Vets.
>
> Hats off to you, Master Chief, and to you I give an Airborne Salute.
>
> Airborne All The Way from a former 101st Abn. Trooper, Ft. Campbell,
KY.
> Screaming Eagles get the job done. All others are 'legs'.
And thanks to you for your service and sacrifices, Jumper!
Steve, GySgt United States Marine Corps 1974 to 1992.
bb
K4YZ wrote:
> bb wrote:
> > K4YZ wrote:
>
> > > The fact of the matter is that except in the most aggrevious
> > > warfare, more Americans die on the highways at home than do
> > Servicemen.
> >
> > And heroes all of them, defending the country.
> >
> > """Sorry Hans, a run-over Jay-Walker >>>IS<<< a Veteran!!!""" Hi!
>
> The point beig, Brain, that civilians die in the course of both
> "peacetime" and states of war too.
Then they would have been wise to have stepped up to the plate and
enlisted.
> Do a bit of history research on "Maritime Marine", "Civil Air
> Patrol" and "Office of Civilian Defense" during WW2.
>
> CAP "civilians" still lose their lives "in the line of duty",
and
> they weren't even getting paid for it.
Then they did something horribly, horribly wrong.
K4YZ
Such as...?!?!
People die every day doing whatever it is they do 100% safely.
Like the local mother of two who was stopped at a traffic light.
She was sober, alert, had her seat belt with shoulder belt on. A drunk
driver careened through the intersection and struck her sqaure in the
door.
3000+ people died three years ago just becasue they went to work
that day.
Did THEY do something "horribly, horribly wrong"...?!?!
There's absolutely no guarantee to life other than you are going
to die. What you do with your life until you do is to some degree in
your own hands. The rest is the roll of the dice.
Steve, K4YZ
N2...@aol.com
> From: N2...@AOL.COM on Sat,Apr 16 2005 8:44 am
>
> >LenAn...@ieee.org wrote:
> >> From: Dave Heil on Apr 12, 9:31 pm
>
> >> It only shows what a snow-jobbing laid-off
> >> murine does under the guise of a U.S. AMATEUR radio
> >> extra callsign. Tosses brags like they were bagels.
> >
> >What brags, Len? Look at American foreign policy since the
> >end of the USA's involvement in Vietnam. Plenty of "hostile
> >actions" for active-duty, career military personnel to be a
> >part of in a variety of roles.
> >
> >And that's just the "hostile actions" we civilians know about.
>
> How does that tie in with the use of morse code in
> museum windows?
The same way your service at ADA ties in with amateur radio policy.
> >> >To my knowledge, Steve has never stated that DOD does not
> >> >direct MARS.
> >>
> >> >His claim is that if there were no radio amateurs, there'd
> >> >have been no MARS program. In that, he is correct.
> >>
> >> Bullshit.
> >
> >Well, you're certainly the authority on *that* subject, Len! ;-)
>
> I know TRUTH as opposed to snow-job braggadoccio.
Really? Like what encryption systems the US Navy used in WW2?
>
> Psycho Pstevie is an "extra class" snow-jobber.
So you're saying he wasn't involved in "seven hostile actions"?
> And, mister wizard, you REWROTE what Robeson wrote.
Not me. You must be thinking of someone else.
> "Sorry, Hans, MARS >>IS<< amateur radio."
That's not what I wrote.
>
> In NO way did Pstevie write what YOU say he wrote.
What did I say he wrote?
> In NO way did Pstevie's single sentence say what
> you IMPLY it did. He is NOT "correct."
>
You're misquoting all over the place, Len. But it doesn't matter. Here,
I'll clear it up:
MARS and amateur radio aren't the same thing. But many radio amateurs
are involved in MARS.
That's my position. If Steve says different, argue with *him*.
> >> MARS always was and remains a MILITARY radio system.
> >
> >But most of the participants aren't in the military.
>
> How do YOU know?
I have sources, Len.
>
> >Haw, that's funny. Len, you pretty much come unglued at the
> >slightest
> >opposition to your cherished statements, or when
> >someone refuses to feed your insult machine.
>
> "Insult machine?"
Yes, that's right. It's what you're all about here.
> Jimmie Noserve wants the exclusive use of that "machine?"
Do you feel insulted by my posts, Len? It seems so - you seem to find
insult in everything.
> Oh, yes, that ties right in with a Canadian museum
> having morse code in its window...sure...
Those windows really seem to bother you.
> >> If you ain't got the guts to
> >> tell the details, you AIN'T done it. Simple as that.
> >
> >Then you must think that Brian Burke, N0IMD-allegedly-
> >/T5, "ain't done
> >it", because he won't give any details about his amateur radio
> >operation in Somalia.
>
> Then you must be as nuts as Psycho Pstevie. Tsk.
Not me, Len. I'm not the one calling people names and telling them to
shut up. You are.
> Pstevie pervertedly pejorated hisself at least a
> couple orders of magnitude with his alleged
> "poor repfit" of NADC on my visit there 34 years
> ago...and is still trying (vainly) to rationalize
> his LIE as some kind of "truth."
What has that to do with your claim that:
"If you ain't got the guts to tell the details, you AIN'T done it.
Simple as that."
That's what you wrote, Len. Does it only apply to Steve and not to
Brian.
> I'm just showing what a damn LIAR he is.
What lie?
The claim he has made is that he found someone who knew you from when
you were allegedly at NADC. And that someone says you didn't do such a
great job there.
Now maybe it's true and maybe it isn't. But it's basically your word
against that of some unknown person.
> But,
> Pstevie is your BUDDIE and therefore can do NO
> wrong.
That's not true at all.
> He is PCTA extra Double Standard class
> and can therefore say ANYTHING he wants in
> your complete approval.
Not true at all, Len, but you would rather claim so than to face the
facts.
> >Orwell did a good job describing the subjective
> >reality mindset in his
> >classic "1984". You remind me of "Big Brother", Len,
> >in the way you
> >want to rewrite history to fit your mindset.
>
> Pizz off, sweetie.
What's the matter, Len? Are you insulted? I'm simply
telling you how you appear in this newsgroup.
You claimed:
"If you ain't got the guts to tell the details, you AIN'T done it.
Simple as that."
which is a pretty good definition of subjective reality, where if
something isn't described, it doesn't exist. Which is what you're
telling us *you* believe.
> You are going hot and heavy
> into this personal insult thing and Brian Burke is
> NOT a part of it.
The personal insults are your bag, Len. Brian plays a related but
slightly different game.
>
> >If a person does something, they've done it whether they talk >
>about it
> >or not. Or whether you believe it or not. Simple as that.
>
> Tsk. Turn your phrase around.
No. The converse of a true statement isn't necessarily true. The
contrapositive is.
> If a person TALKS
> about something, that isn't "proof" that they've
> DONE it. :-)
Which applies to *you*, Len...
>
> Psycho Pstevie still hasn't come up with a SINGLE
> detail of "proof" on his insult of my "fitrep" at
> NADC.
Nor have you proved him to be mistaken.
>
> >And if K4YZ really did participate in seven hostile actions,
> >then it happened regardless of whether details are given or
> >not.
>
> HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT IS TRUTH? :-)
It's basic logic, Len. If K4YZ really did participate in seven hostile
actions, then it happened regardless of whether details are given or
not. That's objective reality.
N2...@aol.com
LenAn...@ieee.org wrote:
> From: N2...@AOL.COM on Sat,Apr 16 2005 8:44 am
>
> >LenAn...@ieee.org wrote:
> >> From: Dave Heil on Apr 12, 9:31 pm
>
>
>
> James P. Miccolis is NOT FCC. :-)
Never claimed to be, Len.
>
> >Amateur radio manufacturers are involved - but you're not one
> >of them, either.
>
> James P. Miccolis is NOT a "manufacturer of radios."
Actually I'm an "amateur radio manufacturer" - you're not.
>
> >You're not involved.
>
> OH! "Not involved!!!"
That's right. You're not involved in amateur radio - other than some
newsgroup rantings and spamming FCC's ECFS.
> The U.S. Government gives me the RIGHT to vote, on
> anything up for a vote!
Same as me. But Part 97 isn't up for a vote.
>
> I am NOT "involved in government" yet I can vote on
> government officials! [really!]
Me too.
Who did you vote for in the presidential elections of 2000 and 2004,
Len?
Or don't you "have the guts" to "give the details"?
> I am NOT "involved" in any of the proposals to be
> voted on yet I can VOTE on them!
No, you can't, Len. You can comment on them but that's not the same
thing as voting.
> Wow! I'm "not involved" in so many things!!!!
That's right, Len. You're not involved in amateur radio beyond your
rantings here and to FCC.
> BULLSHIT, sweetums.
That pretty much describes your involvement, Len.
> The FCC determines who gets a
> radio license
That's what I've said all along, Len.
>and sets the standards.
The standards to get a license, that is.
> The ARRL does NOT.
Len Anderson does NOT, either.
> Jimmie Noserve does NOT.
Len Anderson does NOT, either.
> Davie Heil does NOT.
Len Anderson does NOT, either.
> The "ham community" does NOT.
Len Anderson does NOT, either. He's not even part of the amateur radio
community.
> It's the FCC, sweetie.
And nobody else. Not even you.
> [and that's the absolute truth...pbthththt]
Whoever said differently, Len?
>
> The "F" in FCC stands for "Federal." That means that
> ANYONE can make themselves and their opinions known to
> them (see the 1st Amendment of the U.S. Constitution).
Of course. Not the same thing as voting, though.
> The FCC does NOT limit itself to amateur regulation
> input SOLELY from amateurs. It isn't an exclusive
> clubhouse...even though you try to convey that idea.
I've never said anything different, Len. Why the lecture? You can
comment all you want. That doesn't make you "involved in amateur radio"
to any significant extent.
>
> >Who? Not you, of course. You're not involved.
>
> What? Paradoxical. According to that, one can't
> get INTO amateur radio WITHOUT being "involved,"
> BUT...to BE "involved" one has to ALREADY be IN
> amateur radio.
No, that's not it at all. You're not involved beyond your rantings here
and spamming of ECFS.
>
> Tsk. If you don't like paradoxes, all you are doing
> is trying to make it all into a private clubhouse.
Not at all. You could be involved, but you choose not to be. That's
fine, to each his own. Amateur radio doesn't need you, Len Anderson.
> Sorry, the Communications Act of 1934 took that away
> when the FCC was created to regulate ALL civil radio
> in the USA. ALL, Jimmie.
So what? Nobody denies that FCC makes the rules. That fact does not
mean *you* are somehow *involved in amateur radio* beyond a newsgroup
or two and voluminous nonsense sent to FCC.
> >> >Len knows more about radio operation.
> >>
> >> Tsk. I know HOW they work and the protocols needed
> >> in some radio services.
> >
> >But not amateur radio. Not Morse Code. Your knowledge is all
> >theory, no
> >practice, when it comes to amateur radio. Sidewalk
> >superintendent
> >stuff. All hat and no cattle, all talk and no action.
>
> Okay, so you DON'T think that amateur radio works by
> the same principles of physics as all other radio
> services.
No, that's not true at all.
> Electrons, fields, and waves all work in
> in an "amateur fashion" if you have an AMATEUR radio
> license!
Nope.
> An AMATEUR radio "won't work" unless it has
> a valid, certificated amateur radio operator operating
> it? Wow. Learn something every day.
That's simply your way of avoiding the real issue, Len. The fact is,
you're not knowledgeable about amateur radio "protocols" nor Morse Code
nor are you experienced in amateur radio.
> Well, no sweat. Someone who doesn't KNOW the "ham way"
> should be FIRED, right? Give up their ham job? Be
> prosecuted if they don't behave according to YOUR set
> of regulations?
You're still not involved and not qualified.
>
> Sweetie, I've designed and built those "sidewalks,"
> and the "buildings" they are in front of, done the
> "civil engineering" testing on those "buildings" to
> make sure they are in-spec.
Not on the street called "amateur radio", Len.
> >You did some articles for a now-long-defunct New England-based >
>ham
> >radio magazine 22+ years ago. None of them were about building > >or
> >operating an amateur radio station.
>
> Poor baby. Still sulking about NOT getting published
> in anything but "Electric Radio?" :-)
Not me. I've been published elsewhere. So what? You're not involved. I
am.
> >Who did you vote for in the presidential elections of 2000 and >
>2004, Len?
>
> Where there RADIO issues proposed by the candidates
> then? I watched the debates on TV rather than listening
> to the radio. Fill me in.
>
> HOW is such information REQUIRED to discuss amateur radio
> regulations and how to get INTO amateur radio by licensing?
It's a demonstration of your own concept, Len.
You wrote about having the guts to give details. And about voting.
Don't you have the guts to tell us who you voted for? I guess not.
>
> WHO did you VOTE for in Canada on their last election?
I'm not allowed to vote in Canada - I'm not a Canadian citizen.
Are you an American citizen, Len?
>
> Are you "afraid" to say? :-)
Not at all. I didn't vote in the last Canadian election because I'm not
a Canadian citizen. In fact, I've never been to Canada.
> >> The U.S. military did NOT use morse code in long-distance
> >> fixed-point to fixed-point communications a half century
> >> ago and still don't.
> >
> >Even if that's true - what does it matter to amateur radio
> >policy?
>
> Sorry, Jimmie, under YOUR "rules," if I SAID it, then
> it must be true! :-)
>
Why not just answer the question, Len?
What does it matter to amateur radio policy whether the U.S. military
did or did NOT use morse code in long-distance fixed-point to
fixed-point communications a half century ago and still don't?
> Actually, it IS true, but YOU are AFRAID to find out.
> The fantasy that the rest of the radio world "still
> uses morse code" is way too strong a mental narcotic
> for you. You can't go cold turkey.
Not at all, Len. The question remains: What does it matter to amateur
radio policy whether the U.S. military did or did NOT use morse code in
long-distance fixed-point to fixed-point communications a half century
ago and still don't?
>
> >Amateur radio isn't the US military.
>
> MARS is military. "Sorry, Hans, MARS >>IS<< amateur
> radio!" :-)
>
> Amateur radio is NOT Private Land Mobile Radio Service.
>
> Amateur radio is NOT Mass Media Radio Service.
>
> Amateur radio is NOT Maritime Radio Service.
>
> Amateur radio is NOT Aviation Radio Service.
>
> Amateur radio is NOT Personal Radio Service.
>
> Etc.
Then you've just proved my point, Len. Since amateur radio isn't any of
those, what those services do isn't what should determine what hams do,
nor what the license requirements for an amateur license should be.
> >> Tsk. Some of you olde-tyme hammes
> >> need to get your noses out of old WW2 surplus radio books
> >> and inspect the rest of the radio world.
> >
> >Is that an order?
>
> Are you afraid to take orders?
Not at all - from duly authorized people. You're not in charge, Len -
you're not even involved.
> Is that why you never
> volunteered for military service? :-)
How do you know I never volunteered?
> >Why should what other radio services do be more important to
> >amateur radio policy than what hams do?
>
> Why should amateur radio policy be dictated SOLELY by
> already-licensed radio amateurs?
Nobody says that. Also, you cannot answer a question with another
question.
You're avoiding the important question: Why should what other radio
services do be more important to amateur radio policy than what hams
do?
Try answering that one. Or are you afraid?
> That's in direct
> VIOLATION of both the 1st Amendment and the Communications
> Act of 1934.
Nobody says that only hams should make the rules.
> >I see. Well, Len, you have the thinnest skin of all those here,
> because
> >you get insulted by *any* opposition..
>
> What "opposition?" :-)
Any opposition.
>
> There's Jimmie Noserve who likes to make out that he
> KNOWS ALL about the military...but never served.
Gee, Len, you gave us a lecture here about US Navy communications and
encryption recently. But *you* never served in the US Navy - and there
were several mistakes in your little lecture.
>
> There's a psycho-sick whacko inventing "fitreps" about
> me that never happened...
Here's a clue, Len: I'm not him.
> There's a few more and have been lots more. Not a
> problem. Lots of you knowitalls and control freaks on
> the Internet who "get off" on being "superior" on their
> screens. Tsk. Been that way since computer-modem
> communications got going over three decades ago. :-)
That pretty much sums up what *you* do here, Len. That's what *you* are
involved in...
>
> >Who did you vote for in the presidential elections of 2000 and >
>2004,Len?
>
> Maybe I've forgotten! :-)
I don't think so. More likely, you "don't have the guts" to say so in
public. But I think I know who you voted for.
> What Prime Minister candidate did you vote for in
> Canada, Jimmie?
None - I'm not allowed to vote in Canada. Are you, Len? Are you an
American citizen?
>
> What military did you serve in up in Canada, Jimmie?
I've never been to Canada, Len.
Phil Kane
>Shameful is in the eye of the beholder. Captain Bucher was not punished for
>surrendering, just as the US didn't punish the Jews who attacked his
>sister-ship, USS Liberty on a similar mission. Probably because then the
>Navy would have needed to punish those who sent those ships in harms way
>without proper means to defend themselves
As well as the NSA/USN brass who, when queried by the Israelis,
adamantly denied that the Liberty was a U S Naval vessel even after
being told that the vessel wiil be blown out of the water if it
wasn't a US Naval vessel. The Israelis had every reason to believe
that the Egyptians or their mentors, the Soviets, would fly the US
flag to avoid destruction if they could get away with it.
And the NSA kept denying...
--
73 de K2ASP / 4X4UQ - Phil Kane
anon
"Phil Kane" <Phil...@nov.shmovz.ka.pop> wrote in message
news:cuvyxnansvbet....@news.comcast.giganews.com...
>
> As well as the NSA/USN brass who, when queried by the Israelis,
> adamantly denied that the Liberty was a U S Naval vessel even after
> being told that the vessel wiil be blown out of the water if it
> wasn't a US Naval vessel. The Israelis had every reason to believe
> that the Egyptians or their mentors, the Soviets, would fly the US
> flag to avoid destruction if they could get away with it.
>
> And the NSA kept denying...
>
> --
> 73 de K2ASP / 4X4UQ - Phil Kane
>
YOU ARE A LIAR! You were not there. You have no information.
You are just repeating hearsay from some Jew. There are USS Liberty
survivors who have described what happened many times. The Jews
NEVER queried the U.S for the identity of the Liberty, but the Jews did
recon the Liberty for almost a day prior to the attack, during which time
the
Liberty was flying an oversized American flag, a holiday ensign. The Jews
had no reason to believe Egyptians or any other country would impersonate a
U.S. vessel. The attack was deliberate by the Jews. The Jews knew full
well that the Liberty was intercepting communication which would reveal
that Israel had committed war atrocities and was illegally in territory they
had promised not to enter. The Jews did want the U.S. or the world to
know the truth. Jew jets machine gunned innocent American sailors on
the decks of the U.S. Liberty, sailors who were frantically waving
American flags. Egypt and other enemies of the Jews did not have a single
ship in their inventories which resembled the USS Liberty, and the Jews
knew this. Innocent American blood will always be on the hands of the
Jews, because of the USS Liberty incident.
GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT BEFORE YOU SHOOT YOUR
IGNORANT UNINFORMED MOUTH OFF NEXT TIME!
sam bicke
"anon" <an...@anontruthbetold.net> wrote in message
news:d3ui2r$n79$0...@pita.alt.net...
I worked for the NSA at Fort Meade. He's a liar.
anon
"Phil Kane" <Phil...@nov.shmovz.ka.pop> wrote in message
news:cuvyxnansvbet....@news.comcast.giganews.com...
>
> adamantly denied that the Liberty was a U S Naval vessel even after
> being told that the vessel wiil be blown out of the water if it
> wasn't a US Naval vessel. The Israelis had every reason to believe
> that the Egyptians or their mentors, the Soviets, would fly the US
> flag to avoid destruction if they could get away with it.
>
> And the NSA kept denying...
>
> --
> 73 de K2ASP / 4X4UQ - Phil Kane
>
USS Liberty survivors quickly will set forth facts which they were
*EYE WITNESS* to, and they are very active on the web. If
necessary, they will step forward, identify themselves, and set the
record straight, whenever and wherever they see lies like this and/
or distrotions of the truth, as to what happened during the deliberate
murderous attack on the USS Liberty by Jews who full well knew
it was an American ship, operating in international waters.
ari...@mac.hush.com
anon
Read the TRUTH about the deliberate Jew attack on the
USS Liberty at this website, which is operated by survivors of
the attack:
Dee Flint
It was the Israelis that attacked the ship. Not the Jews. Many Jewish
people are not Israelis.
Dee D. Flint, N8UZE
Len
the National Security Agency"
=Former NSA/CIA Director retired Army Lieutenant General
William Odom on 3 March 2003 in an interview for Naval
Institute Proceedings.
Len
"That the Liberty could have been mistaken for the Egyptian
supply ship El Quseir is unbelievable."
=Special Assistant to the President Clark Clifford, in his report
to President Lyndon Johnson.
Len
"I can tell you for an absolute certainty (from intercepted communications)
that the Israelis knew they were attacking an American ship."
=NSA Deputy Director Oliver Kirby
Len
"Dee Flint" <deefl...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:0_ednWVcOID...@comcast.com...
Tell that to the surviving family members of the American
sailors deliberately killed by the Jews. Which bullets were
Jew and which were Israeli?
Len
"Never before in the history of the United States Navy has a
Navy Board of Inquiry ignored the testimony of American
military eyewitnesses and taken, on faith, the word of their
attackers."
=Captain Richard F. Kiepfer, Medical Corps, U.S. Navy,
Retired, USS Liberty Survivor.
Dee Flint
"Len" <l...@canlenskyr.org> wrote in message
news:d3ulk6$ubj$0...@pita.alt.net...
By your approach, all the Jews in the world should be brought to account for
that event rather than the country of Israel. It is your type of thinking
that perpetuates discrimination. The fault was with the Israeli government
and military not the Jewish people. There are Jewish people in many nations
of the world, including the US, and there were not responsible for this
attack. It would be just as silly and wrong to say that the Christians,
rather than the United States, overthrew the Taliban in Afghanistan.
Dee D. Flint, N8UZE
Ron
Swell! and a great topic for a college classroom debate. When the
jew bullets were raining down on innocent American sailors, they perhaps
should have taken your suggestion for action and identified which
bullets were jew or Israeli?
Ron
Like I said, go tell your theories to the surviving family members of the
innocent American sailors. Another clueless idiot shoots their
clueless mouth off.
Dee Flint
"Ron" <o...@postnewsvmail.net> wrote in message
news:d3umuq$18g$0...@pita.alt.net...
No you are the clueless idiot. For if you insist on using the term Jew
instead of Israeli, then you believe that the Jewish people here in the US
are responsible. If you insist on using the term Jew instead of Israeli,
you are saying that the Israelis who are Christians are innocent simply
because they are Christians.
The attack was wrong. There is no doubt about that.
And are you saying that the USS Liberty had NO Jewish members of her crew?
It's a large enough ship that the odds would indicate that some of the US
crew probably was Jewish. Who knows, perhaps even some of the fatalities
were Jewish Americans?
Are you saying that there are NO Christians or people of other
religious/cultural beliefs in the Israeli population, the Israeli
government, or Israeli military?
Dee D. Flint, N8UZE
K4YZ
N2...@AOL.COM wrote:
> LenAn...@ieee.org wrote:
> > And, mister wizard, you REWROTE what Robeson wrote.
>
> Not me. You must be thinking of someone else.
>
> > "Sorry, Hans, MARS >>IS<< amateur radio."
>
> That's not what I wrote.
That IS what I wrote and what Brain has vainly attempted to use as
some messaging point out of context, but that's OK.
> > In NO way did Pstevie write what YOU say he wrote.
>
> What did I say he wrote?
>
> > In NO way did Pstevie's single sentence say what
> > you IMPLY it did. He is NOT "correct."
> >
>
> You're misquoting all over the place, Len. But it doesn't matter.
Here,
> I'll clear it up:
>
> MARS and amateur radio aren't the same thing. But many radio amateurs
> are involved in MARS.
As a matter of fact, most MARS operatives are licensed Amateur
Radio operators who are civilians. A few are members of the uniformed
Armed Forces of the United States who are also licensee, and
participate in MARS independent of their duties in the Armed Forces.
The remainder are either uniformed mmebers assigned to work in post
stations or are DoD civilians who run the program.
But the FACT remains that under current regulations and staffing
requirements, without Amateur Radio, there would be NO MARS programs.
Period.
> > >> MARS always was and remains a MILITARY radio system.
> > >
> > >But most of the participants aren't in the military.
> >
> > How do YOU know?
>
> I have sources, Len.
Like CQ....QST...The MARS programs themselves...
> > >Haw, that's funny. Len, you pretty much come unglued at the
> > >slightest
> > >opposition to your cherished statements, or when
> > >someone refuses to feed your insult machine.
> >
> > "Insult machine?"
>
> Yes, that's right. It's what you're all about here.
Now he has Todd and Brian as "Affiliates".
And me. Two to one so far.
> > But,
> > Pstevie is your BUDDIE and therefore can do NO
> > wrong.
>
> That's not true at all.
Jim and I have never met save for here and one QSO on the air.
Jim and I have shared many opinions and we have disagreed on many.
Publically. Without name calling.
> > He is PCTA extra Double Standard class
> > and can therefore say ANYTHING he wants in
> > your complete approval.
>
> Not true at all, Len, but you would rather claim so than to face the
> facts.
Google archives prove otherwise, Lennie.
> > >Orwell did a good job describing the subjective
> > >reality mindset in his
> > >classic "1984". You remind me of "Big Brother", Len,
> > >in the way you
> > >want to rewrite history to fit your mindset.
> >
> > Pizz off, sweetie.
>
> What's the matter, Len? Are you insulted? I'm simply
> telling you how you appear in this newsgroup.
That was "Absolute Lennie".
And the analogy wa absolutely accurate.
> > If a person TALKS
> > about something, that isn't "proof" that they've
> > DONE it. :-)
>
> Which applies to *you*, Len...
But...but...but...LENNIE!
This very week you've stated that if anyone had done something,
then they SHOULD brag about it.
Certainly YOU do a LOT of talking in this forum and precious little
corroboration of what you say. Some dubiously original by-lines in a
magazine that went belly-up while you were an "associate editor".
> > Psycho Pstevie still hasn't come up with a SINGLE
> > detail of "proof" on his insult of my "fitrep" at
> > NADC.
>
> Nor have you proved him to be mistaken.
> >
> > >And if K4YZ really did participate in seven hostile actions,
> > >then it happened regardless of whether details are given or
> > >not.
> >
> > HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT IS TRUTH?
>
> It's basic logic, Len. If K4YZ really did participate in seven
hostile
> actions, then it happened regardless of whether details are given or
> not. That's objective reality.
Let him wallow in his doubts, Jim. Nobody could have done
anything before or better than he, ergo none of the things I did in the
Armed Forces could have happened! (chucklechucklesnortsnort...)
73
Steve, K4YZ
twf
"Phil Kane" <Phil...@nov.shmovz.ka.pop> wrote in message
news:cuvyxnansvbet....@news.comcast.giganews.com...
"The evidence was clear, both Admiral Kidd and I believed with certainty
that this attack on the USS Liberty was a deliberate effort to sink an
American ship and murder its entire crew. It was our shared belief that the
attack could not possibly have been an accident. I am certain that the
Israeli pilots and their superiors were well aware that the ship was
American."
= Captain Ward Boston, JAGC, US Navy (retired), senior legal
cousel to the US Navy Court of Inquiry.
Phil Kane
>> GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT BEFORE YOU SHOOT YOUR
>> IGNORANT UNINFORMED MOUTH OFF NEXT TIME!
>
>I worked for the NSA at Fort Meade. He's a liar.
And I worked for the Israeli government in the COMMINT field before,
during, and after the Six Day War, and do know what happened.
More NSA cover-up. 'Nuff of this crap. I've broken the links.
--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane
twf
"Phil Kane" <Phil...@nov.shmovz.ka.pop> wrote in message
news:cuvyxnansvbet....@news.comcast.giganews.com...
And you are still a liar, by your own statements. You are parroting
Jew hearsay. You were not there. The eyewitnesses on board
the USS Liberty were there, being attacked. Israeli high-command
ordered the attack, full well knowing they were attacking an
American ship in International waters. Liberty intercept operators
recorded Israel high command orders to attack the *American*
ship. U.S. submarines in the area filmed the entire deliberate attack.
You are *still* a liar and you *still* don't have a clue as to what you are
talking about.
www.ussliberty.org read it fool, you might learn the truth!
Then read Jim Ennes's Book. Ennes *does* know what he is
talking about, unlike you, because Ennes is a USS Liberty
survivor.
And how about some FACTS, instead of your lame retort
"I was there."
Will you go toe to toe here with Liberty survivors, if I can get one
or more to come on board here?
Ernie
"twf" <t...@twftruthrptorg.net> wrote in message
news:d3v6he$57m$0...@pita.alt.net...
Oh my! Isralei government "COMMINT" (sic)?
I bet Jim Ennes would love to interview this guy. Incidentally, for anyone
who does not already know, Jim Ennes is the author of
"Attack On The Liberty." He is also a Liberty survivor, who is still quite
active in USS Liberty affairs.
LenAn...@ieee.org
>LenAn...@ieee.org wrote:
>> From: N2...@AOL.COM on Sat,Apr 16 2005 8:44 am
>> How does that tie in with the use of morse code in
>> museum windows?
>
>The same way your service at ADA ties in with amateur radio policy.
"My service at ADA" was NOT ever presented as any
form of "justification" about "amateur radio policy."
What I originally presented was factual information
based on personal experience in regards to USE OF
MORSE CODE by a large Army communications station.
Army station ADA (it still exists, by the way) USE OF
MORSE CODE MODE was nil, none, nada from 1953 onwards.
World War II ended in 1945.
Further, I stated that (based on Pacific Stars & Strips
published story of 1955) ADA relayed 220 thousand
messages a month in 1955. ADA (also known by the
TTY message identifier of "RUAP") was only the third
largest Army station in ACAN (Army Command and
Administrative Network). Such traffic operation took
place around the clock, every day ("24/7").
Further, I stated (correctly, from Army documents)
that the ONLY morse code operator training in the
1950s was for Field Radio Operator. Field Radio is
exemplified by operations of Regimental-level
AN/GRC-26 self-contained transmitter-receiver huts
on the bed of a 2 1/2 ton truck. "Angry-26s"
were in use at much lower traffic levels, by unit
command, and also used TTY much more than any morse
code...in Korea, in Japan, or anywhere else in the
Far East Command in the early 1950s. Field radio
did not normally communicate with Far East Command
Headquarters directly, but had the capability.
Such was never witnessed by myself, nor appeared
in any operations orders of the station.
The brunt of military messaging is done by the
(relatively, speaking in 1950s terms) high-speed
TTY that can carry message traffic 24/7. All of
that constituted the NORMAL means of logistical
communications...all of that necessary for troop
movements, shipping of supplies, operational
orders, etc., etc., etc. The total personnel
and installations in the Far East Command then
was akin to a small state, therefore the amount
of communications was quite large. At NO TIME
was any bank of morse code operators seen OR
KNOWN serving either the FEC Hq or Army Central
Command ("central" insofar as Japan). Did I
"know" all that? Yes. It was part of my duty
there to not only be at a part of the
communications station but to make trips to
nearby units. Do I have absolute proof of all
of it by referencible documents? No. Only some.
Am I "lying" in stating any of the above? No.
There is NO reason for me to "lie" about anything
there. There is no reason for N2JTV to say
anything about it, yet Gene was there at the same
time I was, the same station but on a different
operating team. [Gene doesn't access this group]
The gist of all that is that: MORSE CODE WAS NOT
IN USE FOR MAJOR COMMUNICATIONS TRAFFIC. Not in
The Far East Command at the time. That Command
included USAF and USN.
I've seen documents that stated the communications
plans from 1948 onwards would handle ALL normal
message traffic by TTY for the future. I do not
have such a document to "prove" it but can state
that, from 1953 onwards, it WAS TRUE by example,
by all operational orders between 1953 and 1956,
by various Army documents published since 1956,
by various Signal Corps photographs (none of
which show any morse code operators at work) in
the Far East Command.
Was there ANY morse code used in the U.S. military?
Of course. All in Battalion or smaller units for
field radio in the Army...on board ship in what
Hans Brakob describes as "small boys" such as
DDs (destroyers) or lesser-tonnage vessels. Morse
code skill was required by some airborne radio
units (ASW and the like) and for aircraft on long,
over-water flights...also for the (then) Distress
and Safety (international) frequencies shared by
everyone. I do not have any specific cites of
morse code use by SAC units of the 50s or 60s, but
TAC does not include it. Long over-water flights
my USAF military transports required morsemen on
board. What you have to understand is that the
cruiser or heavier class ships had carried RTTY
since first starting with that in 1940. That was
necessary to insure the secure "rotor machine"
encryption terminals (on-line or off-line capable)
for Command orders and responses. Regardless of
nit-picking on the names of such systems or their
absolute, exact nomenclature, their existance was
acknowledged in at least two civilian books first
published in the 1960s (David Kahn's "Codebreakers"
was on the NYT non-fiction bestseller list for
several months, a seminal text on history of
cryptography).
Morse code use in small-unit radio decreased and
decreased from the 1950s onward. All branches,
even the USCG. TTY rates jumped from 60 WPM to
100 WPM, then morphed into "data" in various
forms at rates up to 2400 WPM over HF radio links.
By 1978 the USAF (one of the remaining strong users
of HF) was shutting down HF as a spectrum component
in favor of the new satellite relay and
troposcatter, VHF and UHF (they'd had the 225-400
MHz "military aviation band" since shortly after
WW2). By then the sole use of morse code was
limited to emergency communications as a secondary.
It MAY have been used for ALERT messaging of
submarines but another (with actual experience of
such communications) will have to give details.
By the 1980s, the ALERT messaging to boomers and
sharks was done by some form of encrypted DATA.
As to the SAC messaging on "oil burner routes" or
otherwise on loitering flights, I can't comment
on those formats or content other than to say
morse code was NOT used for those.
So, there has been a lessening NEED for any
"trained morsemen" in the U.S. military over the
past HALF CENTURY. It has VANISHED for use in
actual communications in the military...since
the International Distress and Safesty system
was implemented a few years ago worldwide, the
USCG has stopped monitoring 500 KHz. The military
has had MILLIONS of U.S. citizens in service in
all that time, still has a million-plus serving.
Morse code use in the military is limited solely
to INTELLIGENCE INTERCEPTS (one-way, "silent
listening").
GONE is the NEED for "trained morsemen" of any
kind by the United States government. There is
NO NEED of any sort of "trained pool" of such
morsemen for the national use. That lessening
began about 57 years ago although it was already
happening during WW2 when HF commercial SSB was
carrying TTY messaging to Europe and Asia.
What is left is a lot of daydreaming by amateurs
based on myths begun in WW2 of glorious use of
morse "in battle zones" or as the valiant radio
operators of B-17s and B-24s (actually more
gunners than radio operators) and "fighting men"
in ship radio rooms, etc. Generations of day-
dreaming amateurs passed them on to succeeding
generations until the mythos became almost
palpable. The only radio service in the USA
that requires morsemanship skills is Amateur
Radio Service and that ONLY for privileges below
30 MHz.
When it comes to "handling traffic" on HF, *NO*
amateur radio group or net can come even close
to the amount handled by the third-largest radio
communications station of the Army did a half
century ago. Not even if you use mulltipliers
to make up for the (usually specious) claim that
amateurs "use only their own purchased equipment."
Further, amateurs do NOT do it 24/7 for months
on end, "CW" or not.
You are getting very tiresome on this petulant
complaint about one other radio activity on
HF or bitching about someone who was there.
Put an end to it. All your petulant whining
about the glory and efficacy of morse code is
of NO value in the whole wide world of radio
communications today. All you have left is the
mythology of "greatness in morsemanship" to
rationalize keeping the morse code test for a
HOBBY use of radio by amateur radio hobbyists.
LenAn...@ieee.org
>LenAn...@ieee.org wrote:
>> From: N2...@AOL.COM on Sat,Apr 16 2005 8:44 am
>You're misquoting all over the place, Len. But it doesn't matter.
Here,
>I'll clear it up:
This is NOT a court of law and "exactness" of quoting
is NOT required...except by those who live for the
pitiful "word battle" and self-glorification.
>MARS and amateur radio aren't the same thing. But many radio amateurs
>are involved in MARS.
The MILITARY Affiliate Radio System is DIRECTED by the
Department of Defense. They function quite well by
sole use of military personnel. See the links to the
actual words of the DoD DIRECTIVE posted in here...see
the links to several of the "Grecian Firebolt" radio
exercises posted in here.
>That's my position. If Steve says different, argue with *him*.
Considering that James P. Miccolis is a "good buddie"
of that wonderful representative of a modern U.S.
Amateur Extra, that is a specious comment of yours. :-)
You HAVE supported him in the recent past and not long
ago disavowed any attempt to control his emotional
outbursts.
>> >> MARS always was and remains a MILITARY radio system.
>> >
>> >But most of the participants aren't in the military.
>>
>> How do YOU know?
>
>I have sources, Len.
Tsk, tsk, tsk. That is acceptible ONLY to reputable
journalistic practice. YOU are NOT a "reputable
journalist." You do NOT have the qualifications.
You are NOT INVOLVED in journalism. :-)
>Do you feel insulted by my posts, Len? It seems so - you seem to find
>insult in everything.
Not me. You are the one with daydreaming about the
"need" of morsemanship in amateur radio licensing
test.
>> Oh, yes, that ties right in with a Canadian museum
>> having morse code in its window...sure...
>
>Those windows really seem to bother you.
? I wash windows. I like Microsoft windows.
What "bothers" me is that a NON-SERVUNG (EVER) person
tried to make out like he was the "expert" on the
United States military use of radio.
You are NOT QUALIFIED for such a judgement. <shrug>
>What has that to do with your claim that:
>
>"If you ain't got the guts to tell the details, you AIN'T done it.
>Simple as that."
>
>That's what you wrote, Len. Does it only apply to Steve and not to
>Brian.
Simple. Brian has NOT insulted me personally, not even
many times over. Robeson HAS and continues to do it.
>> I'm just showing what a damn LIAR he is.
>
>What lie?
>
>The claim he has made is that he found someone who knew you from when
>you were allegedly at NADC. And that someone says you didn't do such a
>great job there.
That's the LIE you are referring to.
Why do you say "allegedly" there? If you don't believe I
was there (I was), then Robeson's claim is irrelevant.
Why do you feel you are INVOLVED with Robeson?
You've already disavowed any capability of controlling
his emotional tantrums in here.
>Now maybe it's true and maybe it isn't. But it's basically your word
>against that of some unknown person.
IMAGINARY person.
I can't "disprove" something that doesn't exist.
If you wish a reference to the fact that I WAS at NADC
or that I worked with NADC engineers in the 1970s, you
can verify that with KD6JG.
Jimmie boy, you are getting VERY tiring with all this
"intellectual word gaming" in here. All you are doing
is WASTING TIME of others. I have plenty of time but
grow tired of your constant petulance. You have NO
return on any investment. All you seem to do is follow
your buddie's word and SUPPORT him. You have NO proof
that this imaginary "reference" of Robeson exists,
can NOT present it to anyone else. Why bother with
all your foolish word games in here? Are you that hard
up for something to do?
Bye. Off.