In article , Mike Coslo
writes (under " Able Baker Charlie" thread):

N2EY wrote:
In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

snip

There are all sorts of reasons to be involved in a newsgroup. Some of
us like to post to exchange knowledge, some to debate, and others to
have an adventure - using other posters as pro or antagonists in a sort
of text based adventure game.

Good precis, Mike. However, there's one group left out from this
venue, the Traditionalist-Fundamentalist who has adopted a very
rigid set of geas set out to cleanse a personal involvement with
an avocational radio activity. ("geas" refers to magical gimmicks
set to keep devils out of a local territory)

With the different personalities involved, the games can get pretty
interesting and funny, or sometimes they can become boring and
repetitive. The MARS is Ham radio stuff is a good example of the latter.

Agreed. But, the "MARS is amateur radio" statement is an
example of not only a Traditionalist-Fundamentalist but one who
wants to make a hobby into a surrogate of a military life, of
rigid obeyance of some kind of "orders" from a fantasy of what
a hobby really is...and then fails to note the existance and the
raison d'etre of that particular originally-military radio service.

MARS was originally conceived (under the previous AARS) to
get radio amateurs involved with the U.S. Army communications
of 1925. Comms of any radio service of 1925 were rather
simple. Even the Army admitted that. The AARS never grew to
be a big thing and WW2 put a halt on everything amateur insofar
as operations. There's not much about "phone patches" as a
goodwill effort to give servicemen a link with home through
amateur radio prior to 1942... :-)

During the Cold War times, phone patches, whether through
MARS or individual hams, were very good for boosting morale,
especially for those stuck in so many foreign places. It hit a
high point with the Vietnam War, the southeast Asian MARS
stations handling up to 42,000 phone patches a month up to
1970. That's referenced at the Army's Center For Military
History (CMH) and available for download by anyone. [I gave
the link in here]

But, the Vietnam War ended 29 years ago, almost a generation
and a half in the past. MARS still has the task of involving
civilians with military radio but MARS has, for a long time,
changed its mission to be a true auxilliary radio service in the
military, that of being an affiliate communications service with
other U.S. government radio services. The one-month exercise
two years ago of Grecian Firebolt 2002 showed that MARS
does function quite well on its own without civilian radio amateurs
to fulfill its mission.

The existance and definition of MARS is covered by publicly-
available documents. However, the image in the minds of many
is solely from amateur publications (who overemphasize ham
involvement relative to the bigger mission picture) and that
image is about three decades out of date.

If a poster is the type that is trying to antagonize others - that is
to say one that is using the group in the text adventure mode - he or
she does not want to get people so angry that they don't respond. That
would be losing the game. This player will want to be antagonistic of
course, but will want to allow other posters to stay just this side of
filtering or ignoring him or her.

Some have their minds made up and will never change. :-)

In here, several operate slightly differently in that perceived personal
"honor" is involved. They say something wrong or make an error and
then refuse to admit it until pinned against several walls and had it
rubbed all over them. :-)

That applies on any subject in any computer-modem venue, was so
even back in the late 1970s on ARPANET...then the original
USENET (probably the worst are academics not yet risen to their
full titled heights, heh heh)...continued on into BBSs and now the
Internet.

Amateur radio in general seems to be one of the most conservative
of all radio services...plus the fact that most of the hobbyists are
quite unaware of what goes on in other radio services. Amateur
radio publications seldom mention other radio services in the USA.
As a result there is a great deal of insularity (a sort of "dielectric
materialism") which, in turns, breeds even more conservatism.

Most interesting, that conservatism. Radio communications involves
the sharing of information. Radio does it very fast, yet the technology
advancements are all coming from the designer-manufacturers.

Some here filter Len, but enough do not that he finds a steady stream
of willing participants in his game.

The regulars are a very, very tiny percentage of the entire hum radio
licensees...and they seem to be staunchly, archly, embedded-in-old-
concept holes in the ground on what amateur radio "should be." Not
a good venue to discuss anything but hidebound status-quoism.

Those who aren't in agreement with keeping things absolutely the
same as when those olde-tyme hammes got their beloved licenses
is in for a rough go. :-)

Face it, he is good at it. It may not be what you are in here for, but
he succeeds in his game.

It may be a game to others, Mike, but it is a lunchtime amusement for
me. :-)

In one way, it is fun to poke holes in others' faulty concepts such as
telegraphy and the Absolute Need to test all licensees for that ability
forever and ever into the end of time in order to invade their precious
HF turf! :-)

51 years ago I lucked out in my military service and got stationed at
a major communications facility. That changed my concepts of what
radio communications was about. Practically a wholesale revision,
having had little exposure prior, all from amateur publications.
The Army, the Navy, the Air Force just didn't use any telegraphy then
for fixed-point to fixed-point radio communications. They had not
done so since WW2. The USN depended on on-line cryptographic
communications in the fleet, on cruisers and heavier class ships back
in 1940 (that's how the USN could coordinate movements to engage
in the Battle of Midway). That crypto messaging was by RTTY, not
manual telegraphy. The "Sigaba" crypto TTY system was never
compromised.

The regulars in this venue don't want to hear of that. It wasn't
about "amateur radio" and it hasn't been publicized in QST. Except
for Heil, none of the regulars were involved in any big-time radio
communications experience. As a result, many are openly
antagonistic against anyone who has done so and try to divert the
thread into claims that I "embellish" my "CV," tooting my own horn
so to speak :-) Really no. I'm trying to point out that "CW" was
already being downsized a half century ago and its use is constantly
decreasing until it has virtually disappeared for communications
everywhere but in amateur radio.

Note this does not apply to the strange fringe postings that appear to
be personal battles, such as the one that Dave seems involved in with
some hams in his locale. That is just really wierd stuff.

The true antagonistic poster seldom gets much response. Those get
a large charge out of saying the worst things about another. That's
part of the time-distance isolation "safety factor" for them in computer-
modem communications. They can get away with it! :-)

What gets "weird" (or 'wired') is when another replies with correct
facts and Strong response. The original antagonists almost go
berserk. :-) [see the posts of the one who likes to use the word
"putz"] The original antagonists Hate that sort of thing. It spoils
their private little sociopathy game they so enjoy. :-)

You
(or anyone here) know what will happen when you rise to the bait, you
know pretty much what the resulting exchange will be, and yet it is
irresistable.

Naw, it's totally resistible. And predictable.

And yet you are now involved once more!

He can't help it. His "honor" is at stake...someone put a stake through
a vital part back when he was trying to peddle Uber-status-quoism all
about keeping amateur radio forever locked into the old standards and
practices.

It may be an "evangelical" kind of thing. Or just brainwashed syndrome.

Ethnic cleansing must be done, impure concepts washed away.

This is no small accomplishment. I for one have to respect that.

I don't.

You don't have to, that much is true.

Life is tough and then you newsgroup... :-)

"Sine die" - someone turned off the audio oscillator...

QED is not one of the "Q codes" in telegraphy.

Back to trying to find out what's holding me down in my search for
anti-gravity...

Subject: The Game's Afoot!
From: (Len Over 21)
Date: 6/16/2004 2:59 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

With the different personalities involved, the games can get pretty
interesting and funny, or sometimes they can become boring and
repetitive. The MARS is Ham radio stuff is a good example of the latter.

Agreed. But, the "MARS is amateur radio" statement is an
example of not only a Traditionalist-Fundamentalist...(SNIP TO...)

MARS was originally conceived (under the previous AARS) to
get radio amateurs involved with the U.S. Army communications
of 1925....(SNIP TO....)

During the Cold War times, phone patches, whether through
MARS or individual hams...(SNIP TO.....)

But, the Vietnam War ended 29 years ago, almost a generation
and a half in the past. MARS still has the task of involving
civilians with military radio but MARS has, for a long time,
changed its mission to be a true auxilliary radio service in the
military, that of being an affiliate communications service with
other U.S. government radio services. The one-month exercise
two years ago of Grecian Firebolt 2002 showed that MARS
does function quite well on its own without civilian radio amateurs
to fulfill its mission.

In order for PRESENT DAY MARS to continue to fulfil it's federal mission,
it is DEPENDANT upon volunteer civilian licensees of the Amatuer Radio Service.

Otherwise some nicely packaged editorializing by someone who is not active
in the program and has no practical experience on the subject he's
pontificating about.

51 years ago I lucked out in my military service...(SNIP)

Here we go again...."Back at ADA......"

(UNSNIP)...and got stationed at
a major communications facility. That changed my concepts of what
radio communications was about.

No...that CEMENTED what your concepts of what radio communication was
about.

Very little in what you post here deviates from what you say you
experienced in the 50's, yet YOU take every opportunity to denigrate any
Amateur who has the temerity to suggest discussing ANYthing that happened more
than a week ago as "traditionalist-fundamentalist".

The regulars in this venue don't want to hear of that. It wasn't
about "amateur radio" and it hasn't been publicized in QST.

Well golly gee whiz, Your Putziness...Ya think it might be due to the fact
that (a) it happened over FIVE decades ago, and (B) has NOTHING to do with
AMATEUR RADIO...?!?!aphy.

Back to trying to find out what's holding me down in my search for
anti-gravity...

It could be the lead in your....head.

Putz..

Steve, K4YZ

Len Over 21 wrote:

Amateur radio in general seems to be one of the most conservative
of all radio services...plus the fact that most of the hobbyists are
quite unaware of what goes on in other radio services. Amateur
radio publications seldom mention other radio services in the USA.
As a result there is a great deal of insularity (a sort of "dielectric
materialism") which, in turns, breeds even more conservatism.

I'm so glad I re-read this one - I missed that pun the first
read-through. Simply excellent.


- Mike KB3EIA -

Subject: The Game's Afoot!
From: Mike Coslo
Date: 6/17/2004 1:39 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Len Over 21 wrote:

Amateur radio in general seems to be one of the most conservative
of all radio services...plus the fact that most of the hobbyists are
quite unaware of what goes on in other radio services. Amateur
radio publications seldom mention other radio services in the USA.
As a result there is a great deal of insularity (a sort of "dielectric
materialism") which, in turns, breeds even more conservatism.

I'm so glad I re-read this one - I missed that pun the first
read-through. Simply excellent.

It wasn't meant as a pun, Mike. He's being insulting. Again.

Not to mention that the paragraph you cited was yet another utterance of
ignorance, in particularly the part about ".....(radio) hobbyists are quite
unaware of what goes on in other radio services.".

He couldn't be MORE wrong....Well...Yes, he could, but it's hard to tell
with him.

I like the part about "Amateur radio publications seldom mention other
radio services in the USA".

First of all, they do. Regularly. Therefore Lennie's busted lying again.
(I know...he makes a joke out being labelled a liar, but hey, if the shoe
fits....)

Secondly, there are several "radio hobbyist" magazines available in the
US, espcially "Popular Communications" and "Monitoring Times" that cover the
"SWL" and scanning disciplines. If someone is interested in "other radio
services", then they can go to those other sources.

Lastly, why would an Amateur Radio-specific publication spend an
inordinate amount of time on "other" radio services? Where does this idiot
(and I am being a bit liberal with praise there...) get the idea that an
AMATEUR RADIO publication should discuss issues pertaining to Public Service,
Common Carrier or military services when the topic does not correspondingly and
directly affect Amateur Radio...?!?!

One has to wonder what Lennie could have REALLY amounted to if he'd been
issued some grade-school level common sense.

73

Steve, K4YZ

In article , Mike Coslo writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

Amateur radio in general seems to be one of the most conservative
of all radio services...plus the fact that most of the hobbyists are
quite unaware of what goes on in other radio services. Amateur
radio publications seldom mention other radio services in the USA.
As a result there is a great deal of insularity (a sort of "dielectric
materialism") which, in turns, breeds even more conservatism.

I'm so glad I re-read this one - I missed that pun the first
read-through. Simply excellent.

Thank you. [there may be more... :-) ]

I can't do too much of that in here. Rev. Jimmie's Bible Class
will have me in the corner for "demonstrating childlike
behavior" or something very un-serious. :-)

That, too, is very PREDICTABLE. :-)

Meanwhile, if I ever find out what's holding me down on the anti-
gravity invention, I will rise above it all... :-)

In article , (Steve
Robeson K4CAP) writes:

Subject: The Game's Afoot!
From: (Len Over 21)
Date: 6/16/2004 2:59 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

With the different personalities involved, the games can get pretty
interesting and funny, or sometimes they can become boring and
repetitive. The MARS is Ham radio stuff is a good example of the latter.

Agreed. But, the "MARS is amateur radio" statement is an
example of not only a Traditionalist-Fundamentalist...(SNIP TO...)

MARS was originally conceived (under the previous AARS) to
get radio amateurs involved with the U.S. Army communications
of 1925....(SNIP TO....)

During the Cold War times, phone patches, whether through
MARS or individual hams...(SNIP TO.....)

But, the Vietnam War ended 29 years ago, almost a generation
and a half in the past. MARS still has the task of involving
civilians with military radio but MARS has, for a long time,
changed its mission to be a true auxilliary radio service in the
military, that of being an affiliate communications service with
other U.S. government radio services. The one-month exercise
two years ago of Grecian Firebolt 2002 showed that MARS
does function quite well on its own without civilian radio amateurs
to fulfill its mission.

In order for PRESENT DAY MARS to continue to fulfil it's federal mission,
it is DEPENDANT upon volunteer civilian licensees of the Amatuer Radio
Service.

No...MARS can and does function by itself. It is controlled by the
military and therefore run by the military using government
radio equipment. Getting civilians involved is only part of the task.

MARS has never involved "amatuer radio," only amateur radio.

For information on Army MARS, see the Fort Huachuca website
and follow the links there. While Huachuca is the Military
Intelligence School Hq, Army MARS is headquartered there off
to one side.

Otherwise some nicely packaged editorializing by someone who is not
active
in the program and has no practical experience on the subject he's
pontificating about.

Now, now. I've been to Huachuca. :-)

I've controlled MARS transmissions. :-)

51 years ago I lucked out in my military service...(SNIP)

Here we go again...."Back at ADA......"

It could have been AGA (San Francisco) or AHA (Hawaii)
or Seattle or Manila or Okinawa or even Anchorage. :-)

What isn't realized is that the U.S. military did NOT
depend on fixed-point communications via manual
telegraphy, only teleprinter telegraphy (TTY on landline
or RTTY by radio). Did NOT depend as far back as a
half century ago. They don't even today.

(UNSNIP)...and got stationed at
a major communications facility. That changed my concepts of what
radio communications was about.

No...that CEMENTED what your concepts of what radio communication was
about.

Nursie did not exist a half century ago. He isn't in any way,
shape, or form able to conceptualize much of anything of
that time unless spoon-fed the information from some ARRL
publication.

Nursie should stop trying to dictate what others said long ago
or experienced long ago...or even what they say they thought
long ago...when nursie didn't exist. :-)

Very little in what you post here deviates from what you say you
experienced in the 50's, yet YOU take every opportunity to denigrate any
Amateur who has the temerity to suggest discussing ANYthing that happened
more than a week ago as "traditionalist-fundamentalist".

Nope. Only very specific amateurs. Principally those which
hang out in here trying to make noises like they are special
representatives from Newington. :-)

If anyone keeps harping on obeyance-adherence to the
standards and practices of the 1930s in amateuism of the
2000s, then they automatically join the "traditionalist-
fundamentalist" club. If anyone uses manual telegraphy
skill testing as a requirement for use of amateur HF bands
then they are automatically in the "traditionalist-fundamentalist"
club. Time can't be frozen but those club members all want to
freeze out anyone not thinking as they do.

The regulars in this venue don't want to hear of that. It wasn't
about "amateur radio" and it hasn't been publicized in QST.

Well golly gee whiz, Your Putziness...Ya think it might be due to the fact
that (a) it happened over FIVE decades ago, and (B) has NOTHING to do with
AMATEUR RADIO...?!?!aphy.

Poor nursie. Never did any big-time radio communications in
his military days...resents anyone who did.

Poor nursie...never did any radio-electronics engineering and
resents anyone who did.

Poor nursie...never could take an opposite opinion to his in
here and is bitterly resentful to anyone who had spoken out
in opposition to him.

ACAN (Army Command-Administration Network) of the late
1940s through all of the 1950s and into some of the 1960s
was worldwide on HF at 14 major communications centers
from Karlsruhe to Asmara to Taiwan to Tokyo to the Canal
Zone. The Signal Corps had plenty of royalty-free, non-
copyrighted pictures and information available to anyone who
cared to publish them. [by law, the U.S. government cannot
copyright its own works] Even though the USAF was given
responsibility of operation of the entire ADA station facilities
in 1963, it never ceased its 24/7 communications function
until the final 1978 U.S. military transmission from Camp
Tomlinson. Nothing of that was ever printed in U.S. amateur
radio publications.

The Army, again, was heavy into communications work in
Vietnam from 1962 on through 1970 as explained at the Army
Center for Military History on signal efforts in southeast Asia.
New concepts were introduced there, the first military satellite
relay operations began there, and troposcatter multi-channel
radio was put to the test in a war zone. I don't recall anything
of that effort published even as general interest items in any
U.S. amateur radio publication.

Is there ever any mention in U.S. amateur publications of the
U.S. government's own involvement in HF radio, through
SHARES? I don't think so. FEMA gets a passing mention
although FEMA is a small part of the whole of SHARES.
SHARES takes in MARS as a member. For an example of
the MARS-SHARES operation, read the Army Communicator
for operation Grecian Firebolt 2002 held over a four-week
period. Grecian Firebolt 2002 didn't involve civilian radio
amateurs of MARS.

Tsk, tsk, tsk...poor nursie wants to concentrate solely on
amateur RADIO as if it works by different physical principles
than other radio of other radio services. It doesn't. The
examples useful to amateur radio are neglected in the amateur
press, therefore nursie doesn't want to know anything except
what is spoon-fed him through hum radio magazines.

Back to trying to find out what's holding me down in my search for
anti-gravity...

It could be the lead in your....head.

Poor nursie...bitter and resentful to the last. I'll bet nursie loves
to heckle entertainers from the audience while they are trying
to entertain an audience. :-)

Nursie can't lighten up. Always has to make fun of others. Not
a good mental health sign.

Putz..

Well, back to nursie's name-calling again. "Meaningful discourse"
in the only way nursie can get along...dissing and cursing those
who won't agree with him.

Must be the "new" 'inherent good will of radio amateurs'...

LHA / WMD

In article , (Steve
the Grate Meaningful Communicator) writes:

Subject: The Game's Afoot!
From: Mike Coslo
Date: 6/17/2004 1:39 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Len Over 21 wrote:

Amateur radio in general seems to be one of the most conservative
of all radio services...plus the fact that most of the hobbyists are
quite unaware of what goes on in other radio services. Amateur
radio publications seldom mention other radio services in the USA.
As a result there is a great deal of insularity (a sort of "dielectric
materialism") which, in turns, breeds even more conservatism.

I'm so glad I re-read this one - I missed that pun the first
read-through. Simply excellent.

It wasn't meant as a pun, Mike. He's being insulting. Again.

Poor nursie...can't even take some simple word-play.

Note "dielectic materialism" v. "dielectric materialism."

See "dialectic" as "a logical test of ideas for validity" versus
"dialectric" which is a fancy word for "insulator." :-)

Tsk, tsk...some are strung so tight that they are "insulated"
from a little levity. :-)

Not to mention that the paragraph you cited was yet another utterance of
ignorance, in particularly the part about ".....(radio) hobbyists are quite
unaware of what goes on in other radio services.".

He couldn't be MORE wrong....Well...Yes, he could, but it's hard to tell
with him.

I like the part about "Amateur radio publications seldom mention other
radio services in the USA".

First of all, they do. Regularly.

Oh? Where? When? :-)

Was the SINCGARS family of radios ever mentioned? A quarter million
of those radios have been produced since 1989 and are in standard
small-unit communications use of the U.S. military today. Made by
ITT, Fort Wayne, IN.

Has the PRC-104 HF manpack radio ever been mentioned? Dates back
before 1986, still in use today. The R/T module is standard in a variety
of ground radios, from the manpack through vehicular to the fixed-site
systems. Made by Hughes Ground Systems. Neat little antenna
tuner module in the manpack version...uses the same Bruene detector
first used on the USMC-contract T-195 HF transmitter back in 1955.

Has the AN/FRC-93 ever been mentioned? It should. Amateurs know
it as the ham version of the Collins KWM2. :-) Trouble is, the FRC-93
is the military-labeled version of the COMMERCIAL KWM2 which is
supplied with a quartz crystal pack covering much more than ham bands.

Ham publications have strummed HAARP and mentioned only the ham
involvement in MARS...and lots of ancient stuff of old radio stations
before most everyone's time. Just nothing in the last two decades.

Therefore Lennie's busted lying again.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. Nursie getting all red in the face with rage again and
can't pull out any information from all those "secret" military radios
"he can't talk about." :-)

Secondly, there are several "radio hobbyist" magazines available in the
US, espcially "Popular Communications" and "Monitoring Times" that cover the
"SWL" and scanning disciplines. If someone is interested in "other radio
services", then they can go to those other sources.

Won't be much there, either. :-)

There's much more on the Internet, especially the military collector
sites...but those are about as behind the times as the boatanchor
and surplus sites.

Or, anyone that is interested in what is done today in the military
(or of two decades back) can just ask anyone in the defense
electronics industry. Very little of the "radios" built for the U.S.
military or government are classified or "sensitive" (for security
reasons, not receiver sensitivity).

Lastly, why would an Amateur Radio-specific publication spend an
inordinate amount of time on "other" radio services?

"Inordinate?!?" No one was asking for "inordinate." Even a minor
mention might draw some interest...except for those who wish to
remain insular, isolated from having to learn anything but the latest
DX contest scores. :-)

Where does this idiot
(and I am being a bit liberal with praise there...) get the idea that an
AMATEUR RADIO publication should discuss issues pertaining to Public Service,
Common Carrier or military services when the topic does not correspondingly
and directly affect Amateur Radio...?!?!

Must be more of this "meaningful discourse" again. :-)

The "A" in APCO does NOT refer to Amateur.

The "A" in SHARES does NOT refer to Amateur.

The "A" in MARS does NOT refer to Amateur.

Nursie needs to know his "A" from a hole in the ground. :-)

One has to wonder what Lennie could have REALLY amounted to if he'd been
issued some grade-school level common sense.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. "Meaningful discourse?"

Poor nursie. Still resentful that someone took the time and trouble
to educate himself and keep working in radio-electronics in the
aerospace industry as a design engineer in radio-electronics and
then retire with a comfortable income. :-)

Sucks to be nursie? :-)

LHA / WMD

Subject: The Game's Afoot!
From: (Len Over 21)
Date: 6/17/2004 4:45 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Meanwhile, if I ever find out what's holding me down on the anti-
gravity invention, I will rise above it all.

You mean walking on water wasn't enough...?!?!?

Steve, K4YZ

Subject: The Game's Afoot!
From: (Len Over 21)
Date: 6/17/2004 4:45 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

In article ,
(Steve
Robeson K4CAP) writes:

In order for PRESENT DAY MARS to continue to fulfil it's federal
mission,
it is DEPENDANT upon volunteer civilian licensees of the Amatuer Radio
Service.

No...MARS can and does function by itself. It is controlled by the
military and therefore run by the military using government
radio equipment. Getting civilians involved is only part of the task.

MARS is dependent upon Amateurs to do the bulk of it's traffic.

It was true during Viet Nam, it's true today.

MARS has never involved "amatuer radio," only amateur radio.

Again your only defensible argument is that I transposed two letters.

For information on Army MARS, see the Fort Huachuca website
and follow the links there. While Huachuca is the Military
Intelligence School Hq, Army MARS is headquartered there off
to one side.

I know you'll find this hard to believe, but life exists beyond websites.

Otherwise some nicely packaged editorializing by someone who is not
active
in the program and has no practical experience on the subject he's
pontificating about.

Now, now. I've been to Huachuca.

I am sure you've been lot's of places. An active imagination allows for
that.

I've controlled MARS transmissions.

Uh huh.

51 years ago I lucked out in my military service...(SNIP)

Here we go again...."Back at ADA......"

It could have been AGA (San Francisco) or AHA (Hawaii)
or Seattle or Manila or Okinawa or even Anchorage.

Uh huh.

No...that CEMENTED what your concepts of what radio communication was
about.

Nursie did not exist a half century ago. He isn't in any way,
shape, or form able to conceptualize much of anything of
that time unless spoon-fed the information from some ARRL
publication.

Regardless of my birthdate, your rhetoric and spamming of the NG exists
TODAY, and it is rife with your tales of what you did five decades ago.

None of it has anything to do with Amateur Radio.

Nursie should stop trying to dictate what others said long ago
or experienced long ago...or even what they say they thought
long ago...when nursie didn't exist.

"Dictating" what you said?

All I have to do is quote it. I couldn't invent some of the silly stuff
you come up with!

Very little in what you post here deviates from what you say you
experienced in the 50's, yet YOU take every opportunity to denigrate any
Amateur who has the temerity to suggest discussing ANYthing that happened
more than a week ago as "traditionalist-fundamentalist".

Nope. Only very specific amateurs. Principally those which
hang out in here trying to make noises like they are special
representatives from Newington.

The ONLY people who have ever presented themselves as "representitives
from Newington" were Ed Hare and Jon Bloom, and even then they were quite clear
in stating that thier persoanlly held opinions did not represent the ARRL.

Only YOU make that assertion, and it's still a lie.

If anyone keeps harping on obeyance-adherence to the
standards and practices of the 1930s in amateuism of the
2000s, then they automatically join the "traditionalist-
fundamentalist" club.

Then I guess we get to heap you into that pile, Your Scumminess, since YOU
are the ONLY one making any such assertion.

No one in this forum has made any such assertion. Even those who
staunchly support Morse Code testing have advocated advancement in the service.

I encourge you to provide even ONE quote that supports your assertion to
the contrary....

If anyone uses manual telegraphy
skill testing as a requirement for use of amateur HF bands
then they are automatically in the "traditionalist-fundamentalist"
club. Time can't be frozen but those club members all want to
freeze out anyone not thinking as they do.

And again that would be you.

Everyone MUST be Lennie, otherwise they are
"traditionalist-fundamentalist, jack-booted Nazi thugs".

The regulars in this venue don't want to hear of that. It wasn't
about "amateur radio" and it hasn't been publicized in QST.

Well golly gee whiz, Your Putziness...Ya think it might be due to the
fact
that (a) it happened over FIVE decades ago, and (B) has NOTHING to do with
AMATEUR RADIO...?!?!

Poor nursie. Never did any big-time radio communications in
his military days...resents anyone who did.

This is a forum about AMATEUR RADIO. And yes, I did "big time radio
communication" in the military.

Poor nursie...never did any radio-electronics engineering and
resents anyone who did.

I don't resent your alleged engineering career, Lennie. I know several
electronics engineers, and they are fine fellows who make meaningful
contributions.

You are NOT a fine fellow, and there's more than a few indicators that
your "contribution" to radio communications were limited to your few articles
sold to Ham Radio magazine. (No doubt a last resort in "getting published"
since I am sure the professional journals cut you off at the knees.)

Even then I can't find a single example where any of your "work" was
original, nor can I find any example of where your "contributions" were
complimentary to the advancement of ANY radio communications discipline.

Poor nursie...never could take an opposite opinion to his in
here and is bitterly resentful to anyone who had spoken out
in opposition to him.

I am only "bitterly resentful" of pathological liars and persons who
proactively seek to cause

ACAN (Army Command-Administration Network) of the late...(SNIP) has
NOTHING to do with Amateur Radio, then or now.

Tsk, tsk, tsk...poor nursie wants to concentrate solely on
amateur RADIO as if it works by different physical principles
than other radio of other radio services. It doesn't. The
examples useful to amateur radio are neglected in the amateur
press, therefore nursie doesn't want to know anything except
what is spoon-fed him through hum radio magazines.

Another lie.

I have repeatedly stated it's not the physics.

It's the application.

And it's too bad YOU don't avail yourself of the "hum radio magazines".
(Your true colors are showing, Scumbag.)

Poor nursie...bitter and resentful to the last. I'll bet nursie loves
to heckle entertainers from the audience while they are trying
to entertain an audience.

If I paid money to see someone who isn't, in my opionion, entertaining, I
do one better...I get up, go the manager and get my money back on the way out
the door.

Nursie can't lighten up. Always has to make fun of others. Not
a good mental health sign.

Untrue again.

I find it QUITE "enlightening" to keep an eye on you.

And I don't have to make fun of you. You do it yourself.

And I am still waiting for you to post your credentials to tell us what
qualified you to make determinations as to what is or isn't "good mental
health". Leafing through wifey's correspondence courses doesn't qulify.

Putz..

Well, back to nursie's name-calling again. "Meaningful discourse"
in the only way nursie can get along...dissing and cursing those
who won't agree with him.

It's not name calling if it's true. And you ARE a putz.

Of course I could gobact through tons of YOUR "name calling" and recite
it...Or is Lennie the Liar ABOVE lving up to his own rhetoric...?!?!

Must be the "new" 'inherent good will of radio amateurs'...

You're not an Amatuer and this forum isn't regulated by Part 97 of the FCC
Rules and Regulations.

Steve, K4YZ

Subject: The Game's Afoot!
From: (Len Over 21)
Date: 6/17/2004 5:24 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

In article ,
(Steve
the Grate Meaningful Communicator) writes:

"I am only here to civilly debate the Morse Code test issue"...Leonard H.
Anderson

Was the SINCGARS family of radios ever mentioned? ...(SNIPPED)

There are a LOT of military radio systems and equipment NOT mentioned in
Amateur media...and byt eh same token most of those systems are NOT mentions in
a great many professional journals, either...! ! ! ! !

Your point?

Therefore Lennie's busted lying again.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. Nursie getting all red in the face with rage again and
can't pull out any information from all those "secret" military radios
"he can't talk about."

Only you've tried to make it "secret".

Secondly, there are several "radio hobbyist" magazines available in the
US, espcially "Popular Communications" and "Monitoring Times" that cover the
"SWL" and scanning disciplines. If someone is interested in "other radio
services", then they can go to those other sources.

Won't be much there, either.

Then you've not been reading any of THOSE publications either.

There's much more on the Internet, especially the military collector
sites...but those are about as behind the times as the boatanchor
and surplus sites.

Then carry your rants THERE, Lennie. I am sure your spiteful wit and
willingness to be antagonistic will be as well received there as it is here.

At least it will be a bit more pertinent in those forums...Not by much,
but some.

Lastly, why would an Amateur Radio-specific publication spend an
inordinate amount of time on "other" radio services?

"Inordinate?!?" No one was asking for "inordinate."

Sure "they" are....Well, at least YOU are.

Even a minor
mention might draw some interest...except for those who wish to
remain insular, isolated from having to learn anything but the latest
DX contest scores.

Perhaps the Amateur Radio magazines limit the scope of thier content for
the same reasons you don't find a whole lot of fly fishing technique articles
in "Cosmo"...?!?!

Where does this idiot
(and I am being a bit liberal with praise there...) get the idea that an
AMATEUR RADIO publication should discuss issues pertaining to Public
Service,
Common Carrier or military services when the topic does not correspondingly
and directly affect Amateur Radio...?!?!

Must be more of this "meaningful discourse" again.

The "A" in APCO does NOT refer to Amateur.

The "A" in SHARES does NOT refer to Amateur.

The "A" in MARS does NOT refer to Amateur.

Sure it does...to what other radio service is MARS "affiliated"
with...?!?!

Nursie needs to know his "A" from a hole in the ground.

Too bad YOU don't realize that all those "A"'s don't represent "Army
communications of ocer 50 years ago".

One has to wonder what Lennie could have REALLY amounted to if he'd
been
issued some grade-school level common sense.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. "Meaningful discourse?"

Poor nursie. Still resentful that someone took the time and trouble
to educate himself and keep working in radio-electronics in the
aerospace industry as a design engineer in radio-electronics and
then retire with a comfortable income.

Too bad there weren't some human relations courses in that 14 years of
night school, Lennie.

And I don't resent your efforts to be an engineer. One day you may be
one.

That you invested your money well was, as I have acknowleged before, one
of your only positive acts in your adult life. Congratulations. My nest egg
isn't quite as secure yet, but then I still have another 15-20 years to go
before I think I'll be ready to stop wotking.

Unlike you, I DO have the pleasure of seeing a meaningful, positive impact
on my chosen profession.

When I retire, I'll stop by your grave and see if all of YOUR "comfortable
income" got you any farther than it does any other working person.

Sucks to be nursie?

If there was a "nursie" here, it might.

But we KNOW it sucks to be Lennie!

Putz.

Steve, K4YZ