wrote:

On Fri, 1 Sep 2006 01:39:05 +0000 (UTC), get help
wrote:


Sounds just like you, Mark.

realy and how time have I ever gone on voice?

I rarely do
http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/


Scheissman just wants to blame others for his jamming episodes a few
years back when he was running 20 meters and trying albeit weakly to jam
some people on 14.275, 3.950, 14.313 and other frequencies

"Billy Smith" wrote in message
ink.net...
wrote:

On Fri, 1 Sep 2006 01:39:05 +0000 (UTC), get help
wrote:


Sounds just like you, Mark.

realy and how time have I ever gone on voice?

I rarely do
http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/


You claiming your boasts of EME were done via CW? Oh, wait, you DID use
voice, but you were conversing with low power, unconfirmed stations....

Billy Smith wrote:
wrote:

On Fri, 1 Sep 2006 01:39:05 +0000 (UTC), get help
wrote:


Sounds just like you, Mark.

realy and how time have I ever gone on voice?

I rarely do
http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/



Hey, Lardass, why did the FCC recently DF you on 20 meters?

Billy Smith wrote:
Not Cocksucker Lloyd wrote:

Billy Smith wrote:

wrote:


On Fri, 1 Sep 2006 01:39:05 +0000 (UTC), get help
wrote:



Sounds just like you, Mark.

realy and how time have I ever gone on voice?

I rarely do
http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/



Hey, Lardass, why did the FCC recently DF you on 20 meters?


Interesting that you received letters about it. Would you like us to
repost them again?

Repost them all you want. Thay don't prove Roger was jamming. He never
got any fines nor was his license suspended.

NOTE: Issuance by the FCC of a Warning Notice indicates that the FCC
has what it believes to be reliable evidence of possible rules
infractions and not necessarily that the recipient has violated FCC
rules. The FCC has the authority, pursuant to §97.519(d)(2) of the
rules to readminister any examination element previously administered
by a volunteer examiner.

Just like you were jamming 14.313.

Wrong again, dumb****. You can't read can you?

NOTE: Issuance by the FCC of a Warning Notice indicates that the FCC
has what it believes to be reliable evidence of possible rules
infractions and not necessarily that the recipient has violated FCC
rules.

Not Lloyd wrote:
"Billy Smith" wrote in message
ink.net...
wrote:

On Fri, 1 Sep 2006 01:39:05 +0000 (UTC), get help
wrote:


Sounds just like you, Mark.

realy and how time have I ever gone on voice?

I rarely do
http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/


You claiming your boasts of EME were done via CW?
nope I never made such a claim

they were done via JT65B, a digital mode, not voice not CW

Oh, wait, you DID use
voice, but you were conversing with low power, unconfirmed stations....

nope you can't get it right

an old fraud wrote:
Not Lloyd wrote:
"Billy Smith" wrote in message
ink.net...
wrote:

On Fri, 1 Sep 2006 01:39:05 +0000 (UTC), get help
wrote:


Sounds just like you, Mark.

realy and how time have I ever gone on voice?

I rarely do
http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/


You claiming your boasts of EME were done via CW?
nope I never made such a claim

they were done via JT65B, a digital mode, not voice not CW


No, you lied and talked to unlicensed stations.

Oh, wait, you DID use
voice, but you were conversing with low power, unconfirmed stations....

nope you can't get it right

You admitted it on here, dumb****.

wrote:
an old fraud wrote:

they were done via JT65B, a digital mode, not voice not CW


No, you lied and talked to unlicensed stations.
nope

Oh, wait, you DID use
voice, but you were conversing with low power, unconfirmed stations....

nope you can't get it right

You admitted it on here, dumb****.
no woger

learn to read if it is not too late

woger: kook on parade

wrote:

woger: lying kook on parade
http://www.mipsor.state.mi.us/mipsor/default.htm
stop lying

wrote:

..woger try http://www.mipsor.state.mi.us/*mipsor/default.htm
where the state of Michigan makes clear I am not