Look! Davie-son, N3CVJ! Just because YOU posted in this group that YOU
get off listening
to children talk about sex by illegally monitoring their private
cordless telephone calls on your scanner, and that YOU have a twistedhed
obsession, deosn not make me a child. If I was a child, I'd call the
cops, 'cause it's a good bet you aren't allowed near them, let alone
talk to them.

In ,
(Twistedhed) wrote:

From: (Frank*Gilliland)
In ,
(Twistedhed) wrote:
Look! Davie-son, N3CVJ! Just because YOU posted in this group that YOU
get off listening
to children talk about sex by illegally monitoring their private
cordless telephone calls on your scanner, and that YOU have a twistedhed
obsession, deosn not make me a child. If I was a child, I'd call the
cops, 'cause it's a good bet you aren't allowed near them, let alone
talk to them.
From: Twistedhed )
Subject: Palomar 225 amp, lo = 30 watts out, med = 50, and high =
51.
Newsgroups: rec.radio.cb
Date: 2002-11-25 13:45:21 PST
".....
Making inquiries of another man's underwear, shooting cbers, and insults
about molesting children (such a matter is NO joke and one who would use
such a topic as their choice of insult and flame troll bait is a scurvy
degenerate) isn't exactly conducive to hammie radio.
...."
Exactly,,only it's NO joke,,Davie-son really admitted to such
bahavior,,,,,did you miss it, Frankiestein? Need to see it again?

Yep. Post it.

O,
wait a second, youre still tripping over your hairlipped lie looking for
that post you claimed I said the same thing about you in,,,,,,still
waiting, Frankie,,,you mean you lied? Again?
Gee...


"I have admitted to lying in this ng n more than one occasion." Frank
Gilliland )
BTW,,,what happened to that Vancouver feed?

Never had one.

Ah never mind,,,,one thing
at a time,,,,,now, about those RF pirates that you claimed affected your
daily work...

That depends who I am this week, Twist. If I'm still N7VCF, I should probably
find out what kind of work he does for a living....






-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

In ,
(Twistedhed) wrote:

Look! Davie-son, N3CVJ! Just because YOU posted in this group that YOU
get off listening
to children talk about sex by illegally monitoring their private
cordless telephone calls on your scanner, and that YOU have a twistedhed
obsession, deosn not make me a child. If I was a child, I'd call the
cops, 'cause it's a good bet you aren't allowed near them, let alone
talk to them.

From: Twistedhed )
Subject: Palomar 225 amp, lo = 30 watts out, med = 50, and high = 51.
Newsgroups: rec.radio.cb
Date: 2002-11-25 13:45:21 PST

".....

Making inquiries of another man's underwear, shooting cbers, and insults
about molesting children (such a matter is NO joke and one who would use
such a topic as their choice of insult and flame troll bait is a scurvy
degenerate) isn't exactly conducive to hammie radio.

......"





-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

From: (Frank=A0Gilliland)
In ,
(Twistedhed) wrote:
Look! Davie-son, N3CVJ! Just because YOU posted in this group that YOU
get off listening
to children talk about sex by illegally monitoring their private
cordless telephone calls on your scanner, and that YOU have a twistedhed
obsession, deosn not make me a child. If I was a child, I'd call the
cops, 'cause it's a good bet you aren't allowed near them, let alone
talk to them.
From: Twistedhed )
Subject: Palomar 225 amp, lo =3D 30 watts out, med =3D 50, and high =3D=

51.
Newsgroups: rec.radio.cb
Date: 2002-11-25 13:45:21 PST
".....
Making inquiries of another man's underwear, shooting cbers, and insults
about molesting children (such a matter is NO joke and one who would use
such a topic as their choice of insult and flame troll bait is a scurvy
degenerate) isn't exactly conducive to hammie radio.
....."
Exactly,,only it's NO joke,,Davie-son really admitted to such
bahavior,,,,,did you miss it, Frankiestein? Need to see it again? O,
wait a second, youre still tripping over your hairlipped lie looking for
that post you claimed I said the same thing about you in,,,,,,still
waiting, Frankie,,,you mean you lied? Again?
Gee...


"I have admitted to lying in this ng n more than one occasion." Frank
Gilliland )
BTW,,,what happened to that Vancouver feed? Ah never mind,,,,one thing
at a time,,,,,now, about those RF pirates that you claimed affected your
daily work...

LMAo,,,keep dumpster diving in google, Frankie,,,,,,LOL,,,,,,you'll need
resort to the same thing KC8LDO does if you continue to let yourself
down as frequently as he does searching the internet for anything you
can find on me.........forging,,,,,,,,,,the scumbag KC8LDO needs to
forge me because he isn't adult enough to carry on a debate without
letting his ego get involved and rule his ignorance..he screwed up so
bad that he's now ****ed at the ARRL (told you there were REAL reps in
the room that have the leagues interest at heart) and using their sig as
a dig toward them........LOL.

In ,
(Twistedhed) wrote:

snip
Yep. Post it.


Sure,,,,,here we have N3CVJ not only intentionally, wanton, willful,
breaking of federal communication law as set forth and defined by the
FCC (shouldn't a hammie of his status know better?) but committing
behavior that is construed by many LEOs to be of pedophilia-like nature,
of which ALL experts believe there is NO cure, only a time span until
they approach another child.
I mean, Frankie,,you just claimed in another thread that there is NO
excuse for breaking the law pertaining to the airwaves....according to
Hall himself, you condone this type behavior he commits...hmmmm,,,but
you hae a problem with DX and freebanding.LOL....your priorities are
whacked, Frankie, and I am certain beyond any doubt whatsoever, not one
person in this group would want either of you near any children.
.
From: Dave Hall
Subject: WhAt FrEqUeNcEy DoEs A mObLiE pHoNe OpPeRaTe On? Date:
1999/12/16
Message-ID: #1/1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References:

Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: tw12.nn.bcandid.com 945352043 207.224.84.38 (Thu, 16 Dec 1999
06:47:23 MST) Organization: Spew Radio Inc. MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 06:47:23 MST Newsgroups:
rec.radio.cb
Who needs "Melrose Place" when you have a scanner? My neighborhood phone
traffic was no less juicy at times. Teenaged girls talking about their
first time with sex

Hmmm.... seems that there is more to that post than what you quoted... let's put
it in context by adding the rest of his post, shall we?

......, wife talking to newly found lover while hubby
watched Monday Night Football in the next room, guys making drug buys,
and even caught one neighbor bitching about ME and all my "radio stuff"
to another.

It's fun to try to figure out who all those voices belong to. Sometimes
more entertaining than TV, becasue it's REAL......

Dave
"Sandbagger"

When not taken out of context, it doesn't sound like pedophilia to me or to any
other reasonable person, which is clearly why you have pulled it out of context
and interpreted it as such.

While there is no doubt that eavesdropping on private conversations is illegal
(and if you have ever read my website you would know that I'm not a big fan of
cordless or cell phones for just that reason), it doesn't interfere with the
conversation or cause any harm or inconvenience. Unless someone is listening for
purposes other than a morbid curiousity, I really don't have a problem with
scanners. I do -not- condone eavesdropping on private conversations. But the
fact is that it does happen, and I -do- warn people about using cordless phones.

Despite all that, the FCC has recognized the issue of eavesdropping on cordless
phones and has taken steps in order to impede the efforts of those that would
listen to private conversations for personal gain or the commission of a crime.
As the older, unsecure phones find their way to the trash heaps, the issue is
gradually becoming moot.

_
Oh, wait a second, youre still tripping over your hairlipped lie looking
for that post you claimed I said the same thing about you in,,,,,,still
waiting, Frankie,,,you mean you lied? Again? Gee...

"I have admitted to lying in this ng and on

more than

one occasion." Frank

Gilliland )

BTW,,,what happened to that Vancouver
feed?

Never had one.

LOL...hokay!
Your Time Warner (TWTelecom) is in Vancouver, Frankie.

My ISP is in Spokane, Twisty.

"I have admitted to lying in this ng, and on

more than one occasion"




Ah never mind,,,,one thing
at a time,,,,,now, about those RF pirates that
you claimed affected your daily work...

Do you want to know the names of the most obnoxious offenders in this area?






-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

From: (Frank=A0Gilliland)
In ,
(Twistedhed) wrote:
snip
Yep. Post it.

Sure,,,,,here we have N3CVJ not only intentionally, wanton, willful,
breaking of federal communication law as set forth and defined by the
FCC (shouldn't a hammie of his status know better?) but committing
behavior that is construed by many LEOs to be of pedophilia-like nature,
of which ALL experts believe there is NO cure, only a time span until
they approach another child.
I mean, Frankie,,you just claimed in another thread that there is NO
excuse for breaking the law pertaining to the airwaves....according to
Hall himself, you condone this type behavior he commits...hmmmm,,,but
you hae a problem with DX and freebanding.LOL....your priorities are
whacked, Frankie, and I am certain beyond any doubt whatsoever, not one
person in this group would want either of you near any children.

From: Dave Hall
Subject: WhAt FrEqUeNcEy DoEs A mObLiE pHoNe OpPeRaTe On? Date:
1999/12/16
Message-ID: #1/1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References:

Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=3Dus-ascii
X-Trace: tw12.nn.bcandid.com 945352043 207.224.84.38 (Thu, 16 Dec 1999
06:47:23 MST) Organization: Spew Radio Inc. MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 06:47:23 MST Newsgroups:
rec.radio.cb
Who needs "Melrose Place" when you have a scanner? My neighborhood phone
traffic was no less juicy at times. Teenaged girls talking about their
first time with sex

Hmmm.... seems that there is more to that

post than what you quoted... let's put

it in context by adding the rest of his post,

shall we?


Certainly. editing it for brevity doesn't alter his beahvior one bit,
nor his violation of the law.

......, wife talking to newly found lover while

hubby watched Monday Night Football in the

next room, guys making drug buys, and even

caught one neighbor bitching about ME and all
my "radio stuff" to another.

It's fun to try to figure out who all those voices

belong to. Sometimes more entertaining than

TV, becasue it's REAL......
=A0
Dave

"Sandbagger"

When not taken out of context,



Out of context? LOL...his statement admitting breaking federal
communication law stands alone.

it doesn't sound like pedophilia to me


No surprise there. You two are quite alike.

or to any other reasonable person, which is

clearly why you have pulled it out of context

and interpreted it as such.



Feel free to ask anyone at all that you cite, or feel is "reasonable" if
they feel listening to minor children talk of their sexual liasons is
"juicy" let alone healthy, conducive behavior of one that continually
spoouts off about other folk's morals,,go on now, do as your told.


While there is no doubt that eavesdropping on
private conversations is illegal (and if you

have ever read my website



LOL...there it is again,,,,that ego,,,,I'm not interested in anything a
confirmed and self-admitted liar sets forth.

you would know that I'm not a big fan of

cordless or cell phones for just that reason), it

doesn't interfere with the conversation or

cause any harm or inconvenience.


Nevertheless,,,you're intentionally glossing over Davie-son's wanton,
illegal behavior. He has called several others here a criminal for no
less than freebanding. By your own words, he is "selecting what rules to
disregard" and, man, have you posted a ton of ignorance concerning how
you feel about such behavior. Not only is Hall's behavior hypocritical,
but your selective whining about WHO breaks laws is laughable in the
face of your ire.

Unless someone is listening for purposes

other than a morbid curiousity, I really don't

have a problem with scanners. I do -not-

condone eavesdropping on private

conversations. But the fact is that it does

happen,



HAhhahah..so does freebanding.


and I -do- warn people about using

cordless phones.


Not here you haven't. But go ahead and do it now and use N3CVJ as an
example.

Despite all that,



Despite your hypocrisy? No, Frankie,,,IN ADDITION, to your hypocrisy,,,,

the FCC has recognized the issue of

eavesdropping on cordless phones and has

taken steps in order to impede the efforts of

those that would listen to private

conversations for personal gain or the

commission of a crime.




Umm,,hey Frankie,,,intentionally monitoring private telephone calls IS a
crime, just as you hold freebanding is.



As the older, unsecure phones find their way

to the trash heaps, the issue is gradually

becoming moot.



Not moot at all. I merely use you and Hall's oft-repeated mantra that
it's the "BEHAVIOR" that makes such criminal acts so bad,,,,the blatant
disregarding of federal rules for personal satisfaction...try not to
lose site of what you selectively hold others to, Frankie.

_
Oh, wait a second, youre still tripping over your hairlipped lie looking
for that post you claimed I said the same thing about you in,,,,,,still
waiting, Frankie,,,you mean you lied? Again? Gee...
"I have admitted to lying in this ng and on
more than
one occasion." Frank
Gilliland )
BTW,,,what happened to that Vancouver
feed?

Never had one.

LOL...hokay!
Your Time Warner (TWTelecom) is in Vancouver, Frankie.

My ISP is in Spokane, Twisty.


Your Time Warner (TWTelecom) is in Vancouver, Frankie, the "feed" you
just lied and denied.

_
"I have admitted to lying in this ng, and on

more than one occasion"



Ah never mind,,,,one thing
at a time,,,,,now, about those RF pirates that you claimed affected your
daily work...

Do you want to know the names of the most

obnoxious offenders in this area?



Not at all. I'm not interested in anything about you. I am being polite,
to you, that is all. Your ego misinterprets such simple acts as much
more than they are. (sigh) Direct a post to myself, I shall respond,
When one makes a post on usenet, they are asking the one they directed
the post toward for attention in the form of a reply. That you can not
grasp the simple fashion in which usenet works, is testament to that
mounting communication deficit that ails you. Such behavior is your
forte and inherent to the unstable.


-----=3D Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored

In ,
(Twistedhed) wrote:

From: (Frank*Gilliland)
In ,
(Twistedhed) wrote:
snip
Yep. Post it.

Sure,,,,,here we have N3CVJ not only intentionally, wanton, willful,
breaking of federal communication law as set forth and defined by the
FCC (shouldn't a hammie of his status know better?) but committing
behavior that is construed by many LEOs to be of pedophilia-like nature,
of which ALL experts believe there is NO cure, only a time span until
they approach another child.
I mean, Frankie,,you just claimed in another thread that there is NO
excuse for breaking the law pertaining to the airwaves....according to
Hall himself, you condone this type behavior he commits...hmmmm,,,but
you hae a problem with DX and freebanding.LOL....your priorities are
whacked, Frankie, and I am certain beyond any doubt whatsoever, not one
person in this group would want either of you near any children.

From: Dave Hall
Subject: WhAt FrEqUeNcEy DoEs A mObLiE pHoNe OpPeRaTe On? Date:
1999/12/16
Message-ID: #1/1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References:

Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: tw12.nn.bcandid.com 945352043 207.224.84.38 (Thu, 16 Dec 1999
06:47:23 MST) Organization: Spew Radio Inc. MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 06:47:23 MST Newsgroups:
rec.radio.cb
Who needs "Melrose Place" when you have a scanner? My neighborhood phone
traffic was no less juicy at times. Teenaged girls talking about their
first time with sex

Hmmm.... seems that there is more to that

post than what you quoted... let's put

it in context by adding the rest of his post,

shall we?


Certainly. editing it for brevity doesn't alter his beahvior one bit,
nor his violation of the law.

......, wife talking to newly found lover while

hubby watched Monday Night Football in the

next room, guys making drug buys, and even

caught one neighbor bitching about ME and all
my "radio stuff" to another.

It's fun to try to figure out who all those voices

belong to. Sometimes more entertaining than

TV, becasue it's REAL......
*
Dave

"Sandbagger"

When not taken out of context,



Out of context? LOL...his statement admitting breaking federal
communication law stands alone.

Yes it does. You brag about breaking federal communication law yourself. I guess
that makes him no better than you, huh? So what are you complaining about?

it doesn't sound like pedophilia to me


No surprise there. You two are quite alike.

Are you an expert on pedophiles? Or are you renewing your accusation that I'm a
child molester?

or to any other reasonable person, which is

clearly why you have pulled it out of context

and interpreted it as such.



Feel free to ask anyone at all that you cite, or feel is "reasonable" if
they feel listening to minor children talk of their sexual liasons is
"juicy" let alone healthy, conducive behavior of one that continually
spoouts off about other folk's morals,,go on now, do as your told.

Since you have no brain, I guess I have to do all the thinking around here.
Let's start with his own words -- he said he heard "teenaged girls talking about
their first time with sex". When you listen to two or more people talking, you
don't know what they are talking about until you listen; and after you listen,
and therefore discover the nature of the conversation, you can't return it for a
refund. Did he say that he sat there and jacked off to the conversation? No. All
he said was that he heard the conversation. He didn't even describe the details
of the conversation. He didn't say if the girls were saying, "It was SO big and
hard, and it hurt so BAD", or if it was more like, "...and when I woke him up he
copped an attitude, drove me home and didn't even open my door! I don't think he
respects me AT ALL!" Well, I grew up with two older sisters, and let me tell you
that the latter is more like what two girls talk about when they are talking
about boys. Yet you automatically assume that the conversation he heard was not
just sexually explicit, but pornographic in nature. And you know what else,
Twist? He also said that he heard other conversations, such as people making a
drug deal. Does that make him a drug addict? Of course not, but according to
your "logic" it does.

Now go finish your chores before your hubby comes home.

While there is no doubt that eavesdropping on
private conversations is illegal (and if you

have ever read my website



LOL...there it is again,,,,that ego,,,,I'm not interested in anything a
confirmed and self-admitted liar sets forth.

Which is worse -- a person that can admit his lies, or one that continues to
stack lie upon lie upon lie? Oh, I forgot, truth is your friend, and everything
you say is the truth. I don't suppose you have told a lie in your entire life,
have you, Twist?

you would know that I'm not a big fan of

cordless or cell phones for just that reason), it

doesn't interfere with the conversation or

cause any harm or inconvenience.


Nevertheless,,,you're intentionally glossing over Davie-son's wanton,
illegal behavior. He has called several others here a criminal for no
less than freebanding. By your own words, he is "selecting what rules to
disregard" and, man, have you posted a ton of ignorance concerning how
you feel about such behavior. Not only is Hall's behavior hypocritical,
but your selective whining about WHO breaks laws is laughable in the
face of your ire.

I'm "glossing over" nothing. Freebanding is necessarily illegal. Using a scanner
isn't. I really don't care if someone spends their time listening to their
neighbor's telephone conversations, just as long as they don't have any
intention of cleaning out bank accounts, or using the info to hurt someone. In
the same vein, I don't have a problem with CB DXing, just as long as the power
and splatter is kept to a minimum so as not to muck up the rest of the band. On
the contrary, I would like to see the 250km limit lifted. The only problem with
that is as soon as it's lifted (if it's ever lifted), there is going to be a
subsequent surge in freebanding and amps.

And no, I don't choose which laws I obey or ignore. But I DO choose which people
I vote for office, and I DO choose to voice my opinion to those people when I
think a law is unfair or useless. A couple of the issues I'm working on now
happen to be the current mess regarding local broadcast station ownership, and
the ban on new Class D station licenses. LPFM might have been an issue if it
wasn't so poorly implemented. But none of that justifies ignoring the laws in
favor of illegal operation.

So I'm not being hypocritical here. The problem is that you can't get past your
obsessions long enough to have a civilized conversation, or to understand
another person's point of view, or even to let someone listen to your opinions
with a sincere interest. IOW, your opinions don't carry much weight when you are
the newsgroup punch-clown.

Unless someone is listening for purposes

other than a morbid curiousity, I really don't

have a problem with scanners. I do -not-

condone eavesdropping on private

conversations. But the fact is that it does

happen,



HAhhahah..so does freebanding.


and I -do- warn people about using

cordless phones.


Not here you haven't.

Oh yes I have. I have mentioned the issue a few times before, and on other
newsgroups as well. And I have also posted my website addy. I would probably
have posted it more often if the name of this newsgroup was rec.radio.scanners
or alt.telephone.cordless.

But go ahead and do it now and use N3CVJ as an
example.

http://www.aimcomm.com/sparky/hi-tech.htm

Despite all that,



Despite your hypocrisy? No, Frankie,,,IN ADDITION, to your hypocrisy,,,,

the FCC has recognized the issue of

eavesdropping on cordless phones and has

taken steps in order to impede the efforts of

those that would listen to private

conversations for personal gain or the

commission of a crime.




Umm,,hey Frankie,,,intentionally monitoring private telephone calls IS a
crime, just as you hold freebanding is.

No it isn't. 18USC2511(2)(g)(v). Even though they should probably find a less
intrusive hobby, it's perfectly legal for anyone to listen to unencrypted
cordless phone conversations. Not my idea of a fun evening, but hell, I'm
wasting my time replying to your posts. I don't know which is worse....

As the older, unsecure phones find their way

to the trash heaps, the issue is gradually

becoming moot.



Not moot at all. I merely use you and Hall's oft-repeated mantra that
it's the "BEHAVIOR" that makes such criminal acts so bad,,,,the blatant
disregarding of federal rules for personal satisfaction...try not to
lose site of what you selectively hold others to, Frankie.

Idiot.

_
Oh, wait a second, youre still tripping over your hairlipped lie looking
for that post you claimed I said the same thing about you in,,,,,,still
waiting, Frankie,,,you mean you lied? Again? Gee...
"I have admitted to lying in this ng and on
more than
one occasion." Frank
Gilliland )
BTW,,,what happened to that Vancouver
feed?

Never had one.

LOL...hokay!
Your Time Warner (TWTelecom) is in Vancouver, Frankie.

My ISP is in Spokane, Twisty.


Your Time Warner (TWTelecom) is in Vancouver, Frankie, the "feed" you
just lied and denied.

My "feed" comes from my ice-box and pantry. My ISP is in Spokane. Where it goes
from there I don't know and I don't care, just as long as it ends up at it's
intended destination. If it goes through Vancouver, so be it. It might also go
through Tacoma, Fargo, DesMoines, or even Tampa, I couldn't care less, but that
doesn't mean I live in or around any of those urbs.

_
"I have admitted to lying in this ng, and on

more than one occasion"



Ah never mind,,,,one thing
at a time,,,,,now, about those RF pirates that you claimed affected your
daily work...

Do you want to know the names of the most

obnoxious offenders in this area?



Not at all. I'm not interested in anything about you.

Then why bother even bringing up the subject? Or did you write it just to read
it yourself?

I am being polite,

ROTFLMMFAO!!!

to you, that is all. Your ego misinterprets such simple acts as much
more than they are.

Your incessant hounding on the subject leads me to properly interpret such a
simple statement as a hub of your obsession about me. Regardless, I responded
politely, yet your ego misinterpreted my simple question as much more than it
was.

(sigh) Direct a post to myself, I shall respond,

Respond to this: If I want you to know anything about me, just ask. If I don't
tell you what you want to hear, deal with it on your own terms, or consult your
imaginary shrink. Or keep begging for another year and a half if you really
want, I couldn't care less.

When one makes a post on usenet, they are asking the one they directed
the post toward for attention in the form of a reply. That you can not
grasp the simple fashion in which usenet works,

Do you mean like the simple way people use greater-than signs to indicate lines
that are quoted from a previous post? You still haven't grasped that yet, Twist.
Let me help you out -- one arrow () means the quote is from a post one step
back in the thread. Now pay attention, Twist: this next part is your hangup,
probably because you can't count this high. TWO arrows () means the line is
from a post that is TWO steps back in the thread. THREE arrows () means THREE
posts back. Are you getting all this? Do you see the pattern? You haven't blown
a mental sprocket trying to understand this SIMPLE concept, have you?

is testament to that
mounting communication deficit that ails you. Such behavior is your
forte and inherent to the unstable.

Fix your own communication deficits, then I'll listen to you whine about mine.
You might want to fix them soon, because in order to keep you from whining about
me snipping the irrelevant crap you write in your posts, I am now quoting your
entire post with each reply. No doubt they are going to get big. I wonder if
webtv has enough bandwidth to compensate for your communication deficit....






-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Frank Gilliland wrote:
Out of context? LOL...his statement admitting breaking federal
communication law stands alone.

Yes it does. You brag about breaking federal communication law yourself. I guess
that makes him no better than you, huh? So what are you complaining about?

I wonder just what federal law, I am supposedly breaking (and in the mid
80's)? If it's transmitted over the air, and I can receive it with
common radio gear, then there can be no expectation of privacy. It's no
different than listening to police or fire calls. A far different
situation than deliberately attempting to break an encryption code, or
attempting unconventional methods to receive these calls, beyond
"common" radio receivers.



it doesn't sound like pedophilia to me


No surprise there. You two are quite alike.

Are you an expert on pedophiles? Or are you renewing your accusation that I'm a
child molester?

The only thing he is expert at is dragging out a moot point, and beating
a dead horse. All for the purposes of attention. It's futile to attempt
to logically debate with him. He does not acknowlege logic. When his
point has been soundly trounced, he'll just spin it into a tangent, and
start down another path. As long as you keep coming back at him, he's
getting his fill of attention. You've become his cyber-mommy.

Since you have no brain, I guess I have to do all the thinking around here.
Let's start with his own words -- he said he heard "teenaged girls talking about
their first time with sex". When you listen to two or more people talking, you
don't know what they are talking about until you listen; and after you listen,
and therefore discover the nature of the conversation, you can't return it for a
refund. Did he say that he sat there and jacked off to the conversation? No. All
he said was that he heard the conversation. He didn't even describe the details
of the conversation. He didn't say if the girls were saying, "It was SO big and
hard, and it hurt so BAD", or if it was more like, "...and when I woke him up he
copped an attitude, drove me home and didn't even open my door! I don't think he
respects me AT ALL!" Well, I grew up with two older sisters, and let me tell you
that the latter is more like what two girls talk about when they are talking
about boys. Yet you automatically assume that the conversation he heard was not
just sexually explicit, but pornographic in nature. And you know what else,
Twist? He also said that he heard other conversations, such as people making a
drug deal. Does that make him a drug addict? Of course not, but according to
your "logic" it does.

He knows no logic, he only exploits a point which he feels can give him
some attention mileage. I was not about to "debate" the issue with him,
for that very reason. You're only feeding his ego, by doing it for me.

So I'm not being hypocritical here. The problem is that you can't get past your
obsessions long enough to have a civilized conversation, or to understand
another person's point of view, or even to let someone listen to your opinions
with a sincere interest. IOW, your opinions don't carry much weight when you are
the newsgroup punch-clown.

Amen to that!


Dave
"Sandbagger"

From: (Frank=A0Gilliland)
In ,
(Twistedhed) wrote:
From: (Frank=A0Gilliland)
In ,
(Twistedhed) wrote: snip
Yep. Post it.
_
Sure,,,,,here we have N3CVJ not only intentionally, wanton, willful,
breaking of federal communication law as set forth and defined by the
FCC (shouldn't a hammie of his status know better?) but committing
behavior that is construed by many LEOs to be of pedophilia-like nature,
of which ALL experts believe there is NO cure, only a time span until
they approach another child.
I mean, Frankie,,you just claimed in another thread that there is NO
excuse for breaking the law pertaining to the airwaves....according to
Hall himself, you condone this type behavior he commits...hmmmm,,,but
you have a problem with DX and freebanding.LOL....your priorities are
whacked, Frankie, and I am certain beyond any doubt whatsoever, not one
person in this group would want either of you near any children.


_
From: Dave Hall
Subject: WhAt FrEqUeNcEy DoEs A mObLiE pHoNe OpPeRaTe On? Date:
1999/12/16
Message-ID: #1/1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References:

Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=3Dus-ascii
X-Trace: tw12.nn.bcandid.com 945352043 207.224.84.38 (Thu, 16 Dec 1999
06:47:23 MST) Organization: Spew Radio Inc. MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 06:47:23 MST Newsgroups:
rec.radio.cb
Who needs "Melrose Place" when you have a scanner? My neighborhood phone
traffic was no less juicy at times. Teenaged girls talking about their
first time with sex
_
Hmmm.... seems that there is more to that

post than what you quoted... let's put

it in context by adding the rest of his post,

shall we?


Certainly. editing it for brevity doesn't alter his beahvior one bit,
nor his violation of the law.
_
......, wife talking to newly found lover while
hubby watched Monday Night Football in the
next room, guys making drug buys, and even
caught one neighbor bitching about ME and all my "radio stuff" to
another.
It's fun to try to figure out who all those voices
belong to. Sometimes more entertaining than
TV, becasue it's REAL......
=A0
Dave
"Sandbagger"
_
When not taken out of context,

Out of context? LOL...his statement admitting breaking federal
communication law stands alone.

Yes it does. You brag about breaking federal

communication law yourself.



I don't. That you misconstrue and misinterpret talking about skip and
freebanding as bragging is your problem.


I guess that makes him no better than you,

huh?



See what type truth you are capable of when forced.




So what are you complaining about?



LOL,,,,once again, replying to your directives and inquiries isn't
contrued as complaining except by those with deficits in communication..

it doesn't sound like pedophilia to me

No surprise there. You two are quite alike.

Are you an expert on pedophiles?

I'm not the issue.

Or are you renewing your accusation that I'm

a child molester?

Poor Frankie..in such great agonizing pain..LOL..really pains you that
you have nothing to back you these days,,no posts, no headers, no
nothing. Just like KC8LDO forging me,,nothing in any archives, no
headers. Liars hang tough together.


_
or to any other reasonable person, which is

clearly why you have pulled it out of context

and interpreted it as such.

Feel free to ask anyone at all that you cite, or feel is "reasonable" if
they feel listening to minor children talk of their sexual liasons is
"juicy" let alone healthy, conducive behavior of one that continually
spoouts off about other folk's morals,,go on now, do as your told.

Since you have no brain,


Temper-temper, Frankie,,,,my brain is much more tangible than your
claims. Nevertheless, I am not the subject. Keep trying

I guess I have to do all the thinking around

here.

Internet Lawyering? Hoo-boy! (chuckle) I think not,,,,,

Did he say that he sat there and jacked off to

the conversation? No. All he said was that he

heard the conversation. He didn't even

describe the details of the conversation.





Sure he did. Your communication deficit prevents you from interpreting
it correctly.
Sex. Their first time. Children. What more do you want?

He didn't say if the girls were saying, "It was

SO big and hard, and it hurt so BAD", or if it

was more like, "...and when I woke him up he

copped an attitude, drove me home and didn't

even open my door! I don't think he respects

me AT ALL!"




No,,that's not in his post anywhere,,LOL.
In fact, he even claimed that listening to the children speak of their
first time of sex was "juicy". He's a pervert, and so are you for
attempting to claim listening to children talk of sex on a private
telephone is somehow innocent.

Well, I grew up with two older sisters, and let

me tell you


No Frankie,,tell someone who cares what yout think about such matters.

He also said that he heard other

conversations, such as people making a drug

deal.




He didn't say it was "juicy".

Does that make him a drug addict? Of course

not, but according to your "logic" it does.


Not my logic, Frankie mah boy,,Davie's OWN logic. He is the one that
claimed that since I DX and freeband, it's a good chance I break other
laws pertaining to society. His hypocrisy bull**** is how this entire
matter with him began. Why didn't you shed some light on his bull****
when he said it instead of waiting until I used his logic?

Now go finish your chores before your hubby

comes home.


LOL,,,,always in search of a a bit of power, no matter how slight...
_
While there is no doubt that eavesdropping on
private conversations is illegal (and if you

have ever read my website

LOL...there it is again,,,,that ego,,,,I'm not interested in anything a
confirmed and self-admitted liar sets forth.

Which is worse -- a person that can admit his

lies, or one that continues to stack lie upon lie

upon lie?



A liar is a liar is a liar, frankie, all your spin in the world won't
change the fact that you are a confirmed liar, lid, and hypocrite, just
like Davie and Nad.


Oh, I forgot, truth is your friend, and

everything you say is the truth.


Everything I post is the truth.

I don't suppose you have told a lie in your

entire life, have you, Twist?

Try to follow, Frankie,,,I'm not the issue..I'm merely *your* issue.
_
Iyou would know that I'm not a big fan of

cordless or cell phones for just that reason), it

doesn't interfere with the conversation or

cause any harm or inconvenience.


Nevertheless,,,you're intentionally glossing over Davie-son's wanton,
illegal behavior. He has called several others here a criminal for no
less than freebanding. By your own words, he is "selecting what rules to
disregard" and, man, have you posted a ton of ignorance concerning how
you feel about such behavior. Not only is Hall's behavior hypocritical,
but your selective whining about WHO breaks laws is laughable in the
face of your ire.

I'm "glossing over" nothing.

Denial ain't a river in Egypt.


Freebanding is necessarily illegal.


So is monitoring private phone conversations.

Using a

scanner isn't.


Neither is using a cb. See above : )~


I really don't care if someone spends their time
listening to their neighbor's telephone

conversations,



Illustrating your blatant hypocrisy and lies you told about how laws are
there for the good of all and selective obeying of laws is of the
criminal element....LOL,,,sure, Frankie.

just as long as they don't have any intention of
cleaning out bank accounts, or using the info

to hurt someone.


Only,,,(and herein lies your malfunction) it's not up to *you* what is
ok and permissable..LOL.

In the same vein, I don't have a problem with

CB DXing, just as long as the power and

splatter is kept to a minimum so as not to

muck up the rest of the band.



Again,,,your ego is in your way,,,it's not about you Frankie, or me, no
matter how much your ego demands it. You have issues, dude, and you
really need someone to teach and instruct you on the finer merits of
internet communication,,,,,your ego is way too involved and dictates and
demand everything relates to you personally, somehow,,,,,,you ain't
right.

_
On the contrary, I would like to see the 250km

limit lifted. The only problem with that is as

soon as it's lifted (if it's ever lifted), there is

going to be a subsequent surge in freebanding
and amps.



Conjecture. Pure speculation and *personal* opinion.

And no, I don't choose which laws I obey or

ignore.



With your lies, you're tough to find a believer.
See, you choose who to harass on usenet for their choice of topic. You
also hypocritically choose which law you feel you have the right to
enforce (that pathetic ego need for power).

But I DO choose which people I vote for office,


Along with every other registered voter.

and I DO choose to voice my opinion to those

people when I think a law is unfair or useless.



And you DO choose to become personal and insultive to those who voice
their opinion against laws you DO feel are fair and useful,.
You also have told those who hae voiced their opinion to stop "whining"
about it and change the law. Take your own advice and you won't be a
hypocrite,,,,,at least to the extent you appear now.
_
A couple of the issues I'm working on now

happen to be the current mess regarding local
broadcast station ownership, and the ban on

new Class D station licenses.



And you callously and ignorantly assume that no others work on any
issues because they choose not to inform you, therefore, you
hypocritically tell them "Stop whining and do something to change the
law."



_


LPFM might have been an issue if it wasn't so

poorly implemented.




What's the matter with LPFM? It has plenty of great uses...oh, that's
right,,,perhaps if you were educated in the manners of which it applies
in the flatlands, you wouldn't be so apt to toss the baby out with the
bathwater based merely on your looking at the water and trying to guess
it's temperature.

But none of that justifies ignoring the laws in

favor of illegal operation.

So I'm not being hypocritical here.


Sure you are..good thing you had me to point them out.


The problem is that you can't get past your

obsessions long enough to have a civilized

conversation,



Yea,,sure,,you go on trying to convince another of that,,LOL.
I'm not the one with the compelling desire to jump into another's
personal life like you do, Frankie,,,even when you offered..LOL..perhaps
this is what is chapping your myopic tail at this point.

? or to understand another person's point of

view, or even to let someone listen to your

opinions with a sincere interest. IOW, your

opinions don't carry much weight when you

are the newsgroup punch-clown.



LOL....only you and KC8LDO have the need to make all your posts
personal, insultive, and of MEMMEMEMMEMMEMEMEMMEMEME! Now, go
on,,,resume telling us about my obsession, Frankie.
_
Unless someone is listening for purposes

other than a morbid curiousity, I really don't

have a problem with scanners. I do -not-


condone eavesdropping on private

conversations. But the fact is that it does

happen,
HAhhahah..so does freebanding.

and I -do- warn people about using


cordless phones.

Not here you haven't.


Oh yes I have. I have mentioned the issue a

few times before, and on other newsgroups as
well.


Post it...right after yiou post your angry accusations claiming I made
false claims about you....come on now,,,,you don't want to become the
punch-clown you fear, do you, Frankie? Whoops...too late..hehe!
_
And I have also posted my website addy.


Ego.

I would probably have posted it more often if

the name of this newsgroup was

rec.radio.scanners or alt.telephone.cordless.
=A0
=A0But go ahead and do it now and use N3CVJ as an example.

http://www.aimcomm.com/sparky/hi-tech.htm


Pacification is a temporary thing with one that has his ego so heavily
bruised as yourself.
_
Despite all that,

Despite your hypocrisy? No, Frankie,,,IN ADDITION, to your hypocrisy,,,,

the FCC has recognized the issue of

eavesdropping on cordless phones and has

taken steps in order to impede the efforts of

those that would listen to private

conversations for personal gain or the

commission of a crime.

Umm,,hey Frankie,,,intentionally monitoring private telephone calls IS a
crime, just as you hold freebanding is.
_
No it isn't. 18USC2511(2)(g)(v). Even though

they should probably find a less intrusive

hobby, it's perfectly legal for anyone to listen

to unencrypted cordless phone conversations.


HAHHAHAHHA! No it's not Frankie. Don't tell me you need 'ol Twist to
cite the passage where it is illegal to INTENTIONALLY monitor any
telephone conversation that is intended for private use without explicit
permission? LOL,,,poor Frankie..you fall more each day. That ego must
really be smarting about now,,hahhahah!

_
Not my idea of a fun evening,


Well, Davie thinks it's "juicy."


but hell,

I'm wasting my time replying


(snicker) You know your ego is getting bashed and can take no more when
you resort to what you know...lying. Once again, you initiated the posts
and threads to myself , Frankie, Your communication defict once again
has you misinterpreting my replies as initiating conversation. You're
way off, Frankie.


to your posts. I don't know which is worse....



You or Dave? So far, Dave denies lying. He hates to be wrong and told
no. ANother destroyed ego by a lowly cber.

As the older, unsecure phones find their way

to the trash heaps, the issue is gradually

becoming moot.
=A0
_
=A0Not moot at all. I merely use you and Hall's oft-repeated mantra that
it's the "BEHAVIOR" that makes such criminal acts so bad,,,,the blatant
disregarding of federal rules for personal satisfaction...try not to
lose site of what you selectively hold others to, Frankie.

Idiot.



Yea,,I figured you'd be pained by rubbing your nose in your mess.

_
Oh, wait a second, youre still tripping over your hairlipped lie looking
for that post you claimed I said the same thing about you in,,,,,,still
waiting, Frankie,,,you mean you lied? Again? Gee... "I have admitted to
lying in this ng and on
more than
one occasion." Frank
Gilliland )
_
BTW,,,what happened to that Vancouver
feed?

Never had one.

LOL...hokay!
Your Time Warner (TWTelecom) is in Vancouver, Frankie.

My ISP is in Spokane, Twisty.

Your Time Warner (TWTelecom) is in Vancouver, Frankie, the "feed" you
just lied and denied.

My "feed" comes from my ice-box and pantry.

My ISP is in Spokane. Where it goes from

there I don't know and I don't care, just as long
as it ends up at it's intended destination. If it

goes through Vancouver, so be it.



Ahahahha..you and Davoe are the same pathetic lids. He claimed the same
thing,,claimed he was a network admin in one post, then claimed he
didn't know how or why his email originated from Villanova U....LOL.
Lids in a pod.



It might also go through Tacoma, Fargo,

DesMoines, or even Tampa, I couldn't care

less, but that doesn't mean I live in or around

any of those urbs.



But it doesnt.It goes throgh Vancouver.
"Nuff said (smirk).

"I have admitted to lying in this ng, and on
more than one occasion"

_
Ah never mind,,,,one thing
at a time,,,,,now, about those RF pirates that you claimed affected your
daily work...

Do you want to know the names of the most

obnoxious offenders in this area?
Not at all. I'm not interested in anything about you.

Then why bother even bringing up the

subject? Or did you write it just to read it

yourself?



You brought it up. I asked the questions that are too painful for a
hypocitical liar like yourself
years to entertain.


_
I am being polite,

ROTFLMMFAO!!!

to you, that is all. Your ego misinterprets such simple acts as much
more than they are.

Your incessant hounding on the subject



No hounding , frank, Just redirecting your failed obfuscation and lies,
You claimed I wouldnt answer your questions,,I indeed claimed I would
answer any question you like after you answer the original questions
posed to yourself based on your claims you made and thought important
enough to share.
_
(sigh) Direct a post to myself, I shall respond,

Respond to this: If I want you to know

anything about me, just ask. If I don't tell you

what you want to hear, deal with it on your

own terms,


My, the hypocrisy is radiant today, Frankie,,absolutely beaming. Take
your own advice, instead of attacking another with all kinds of pathetic
wounded cries about how your questions are being ignored..LOL.


or consult your imaginary shrink.


Once again, and right on cue, only you, Nad, adnd the lid Hall mention
such novelties..the lids of the pod,,the lids and
troublemakers,,,LOL,,,,deal with it on your own terms.


Or keep begging for another year and a half if

you really want, I couldn't care less.

When one makes a post on usenet, they are asking the one they directed
the post toward for attention in the form of a reply. That you can not
grasp the simple fashion in which usenet works,

Do you mean
snip

I mean what I said, That you need far-flung analogies for all your lack
of intellect is your problem, no one elses. I suggest you deal with it
on your own terms.


l Fix your own communication deficits, then I'll
listen to you whine about mine.

I don't address yours, Frankie, except when your deficit acts up and you
direct posts toward myself and then try and claim otherwise.


You might want to fix them soon, because in

order to keep you from whining about me




See above.

I wonder if webtv has enough bandwidth to

compensate for your communication deficit....



Your compulsions have you worrying about all that you are impotent
over...LOL..no wonder you're a disheveled mess.

-----=3D Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =3D-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----=3D=3D