bb wrote:

So, is lie #16 the conversation with a former colleague of Len's? Or
is lie #16 Steve's tenure on RRAP? Or is it actually lies #16 and
#17?

Neither, but nice try.

Now...what about those "unlicensed devices"...?!?!?

Steve, K4YZ

K4YZ wrote:
bb wrote:

So, is lie #16 the conversation with a former colleague of Len's?
Or
is lie #16 Steve's tenure on RRAP? Or is it actually lies #16 and
#17?

Neither, but nice try.

Steve, you lied. The only question is which time?

The conversation with a former colleague of Len's?

The length of tenure on RRAP?

Or both.

Fess up.

From: "bb" on Sat,Apr 16 2005 6:34 am

K4YZ wrote:
wrote:

Amazing. After a total of six trips to NADC and a total
time there of about three months, this (fantasy) person
"knows" me? 34 years AFTER the fact?!?

Actaully at the time I found you out it was only 20-some years,
and no, he didn't "know" you off the top of his head. He did some
research, however, on contractors who had been there.

Inneresting. The difference between 34 years after the fact and 20
years is ~14 years. And Steve claims he hasn't been on RRAP even a
decade. So somehow, more than 4 years before Steve was on RRAP and
ever heard of Len, he was having a conversation with a former
colleague
of Lens, discussing Len's performance reports.

"Captain, I find it Quiteillogical" Spock

So, is lie #16 the conversation with a former colleague of Len's? Or
is lie #16 Steve's tenure on RRAP? Or is it actually lies #16 and
#17?

Psychotic Pstevie is doing a MARVELOUS job of back-
pedalling! :-) But...his LIE is still a LIE.

There were three contract numbers involved in SECANT.
I have the exact number on the first two generations;
I was at NADC on the first contract...representing RCA
Corporation, the REAL "contractor." Adminstratively
and for the purpose of my VISITING there, I was NOT
listed as "the" contractor. "Contractor personnel,"
perhaps...for the on-site security group (civilians
at NADC) and for the project reports, if then (I was
NOT listed as anything but one of the visitors in
the NADC report, a rather low-rank at that! :-)

Somewhere in the dusty archives of someplace MIGHT be
a few mentions of me 34 years ago signing for a
VISITOR badge plus a VISITOR parking placard for the
rented vehicle I had plus a sign-off on a two-page
standard form for VISITORS on-site. I could care
less, been there and done that at other sites. :-)
While VISITING there, I worked daily with only two
NADC engineers on a regular basis, maybe every two
days with the lead engineer, met the group leader a
couple times, the pilots of the test aircraft, and
the maintenance officer at the NAS. Pstevie thinks
I was "supposed" to do "stellar" things there, but
doesn't understand that I was simply a representative
of the contractor who knew the whole system under
test. There was no time or budget for a "technical
manual" (seldom is on an R&D program), just a tech
rep and a bunch of ozalid copies of schematics plus
a few photos of the system as set up. There wasn't
any chit-chatting "off-duty" nor was there any
"hoisting a few after hours." Neither did we "get
liberty" but were on our own recognizance as to
working hours. [must be amazing fact to a
conditioned military mindset like Pstevie's...:-) ]

Pstevie uses the word "colleague" as if I was working
for NADC. Was NOT the case. I tried to explain that,
but to no avail. :-) So..."performance reports" of
civilian contractor personnel are NOT done by
contractees. If they don't like a tech rep's
whatever, they can simply call up the contractor and
complain, probably have the tech rep replaced. Did
not happen with me...there were NO "reports" filed by
NADC as to behavior, demeanor, performance skills or
anything else except for a brief mention of my name
in an NADC internal project report.

So...not only is Pstevie all forked up on his
arithmetic but he don't know fecal matter from shoe
polish on how contracts with civilian firms are
handled...he doesn't really know much about anything
what happened across the street from the NAS.

As to REAL arithmetic on his LYING, it's hard to pin
that down. Most of his blabbering on personal
attacks after the first one is simply attempts at
rationalizing (badly) on his original LIE. Tsk.

wrote:

As to REAL arithmetic on his LYING, it's hard to pin
that down. Most of his blabbering on personal
attacks after the first one is simply attempts at
rationalizing (badly) on his original LIE. Tsk.



That appears to be the story of his life; lying and rationalizing his
lies.

bb wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
bb wrote:

So, is lie #16 the conversation with a former colleague of Len's?
Or
is lie #16 Steve's tenure on RRAP? Or is it actually lies #16
and
#17?

Neither, but nice try.

Steve, you lied. The only question is which time?

The conversation with a former colleague of Len's?

The length of tenure on RRAP?

Or both.

Fess up.

Well well...Looks like I made an error in math. My bust.

Lennie's ex-colleague is stil in PA and still remains anonymous,
however. As for your allegeations of lies 1-17, Brian, you still have
yet to document a single one.

Now...About those unlicensed devices...?

About your Somalia "operation"...?

About your assertions about how poor ARES is...?

About that "worked DXCC from HL and KH"...?

Steve, K4YZ

wrote:

Psychotic Pstevie is doing a MARVELOUS job of back-
pedalling! But...his LIE is still a LIE.

No backpedalling.

There were three contract numbers involved in SECANT....(SNIP of
ususal trying to hide under the blustery rhetoric)

So...not only is Pstevie all forked up on his
arithmetic but he don't know fecal matter from shoe
polish on how contracts with civilian firms are
handled...he doesn't really know much about anything
what happened across the street from the NAS.

You keep trying to redirect to "contracts", Lennie.

Your work at NADC was not up to what they wanted. Period.

As to REAL arithmetic on his LYING, it's hard to pin
that down. Most of his blabbering on personal
attacks after the first one is simply attempts at
rationalizing (badly) on his original LIE. Tsk.

Still waiting for you to enlighten us as to what the "original
lie" was, Lennie.





Steve, K4YZ

K4YZ wrote:
bb wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
bb wrote:

So, is lie #16 the conversation with a former colleague of
Len's?
Or
is lie #16 Steve's tenure on RRAP? Or is it actually lies #16
and
#17?

Neither, but nice try.

Steve, you lied. The only question is which time?

The conversation with a former colleague of Len's?

The length of tenure on RRAP?

Or both.

Fess up.

Well well...Looks like I made an error in math. My bust.

Well, well...it took you Quitesometime to fess up.

Now where is Len's apology?

bb wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
bb wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
bb wrote:

So, is lie #16 the conversation with a former colleague of
Len's?
Or
is lie #16 Steve's tenure on RRAP? Or is it actually lies
#16
and
#17?

Neither, but nice try.

Steve, you lied. The only question is which time?

The conversation with a former colleague of Len's?

The length of tenure on RRAP?

Or both.

Fess up.

Well well...Looks like I made an error in math. My bust.

Well, well...it took you Quitesometime to fess up.

Now where is Len's apology?

Right behind HIS apology to this NG for years of lying, accusing,
deceiving and antagonism, Brian...Right behind!

Just hold your breath and wait!

Steve, K4YZ

K4YZ wrote:
bb wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
bb wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
bb wrote:

So, is lie #16 the conversation with a former colleague of
Len's?
Or
is lie #16 Steve's tenure on RRAP? Or is it actually lies
#16
and
#17?

Neither, but nice try.

Steve, you lied. The only question is which time?

The conversation with a former colleague of Len's?

The length of tenure on RRAP?

Or both.

Fess up.

Well well...Looks like I made an error in math. My bust.

Well, well...it took you Quitesometime to fess up.

Now where is Len's apology?

Right behind HIS apology to this NG for years of lying, accusing,
deceiving and antagonism, Brian...Right behind!

Just hold your breath and wait!

Steve, K4YZ

Well, well. So much for your "strength of conviction."

You won't do what you know to be right because someone else isn't doing
what you know to be right. I'm just glad the world isn't full of
people like you. Actually, I thank my lucky stars every night that the
world isn't full of people like you.

bb wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
bb wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
bb wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
bb wrote:

So, is lie #16 the conversation with a former colleague
of
Len's?
Or
is lie #16 Steve's tenure on RRAP? Or is it actually
lies
#16
and
#17?

Neither, but nice try.

Steve, you lied. The only question is which time?

The conversation with a former colleague of Len's?

The length of tenure on RRAP?

Or both.

Fess up.

Well well...Looks like I made an error in math. My bust.

Well, well...it took you Quitesometime to fess up.

Now where is Len's apology?

Right behind HIS apology to this NG for years of lying,
accusing,
deceiving and antagonism, Brian...Right behind!

Just hold your breath and wait!

Steve, K4YZ

Well, well. So much for your "strength of conviction."

Lennie is YEARS BEHIND coming clean on his errors, lies and
deceit, Brian... Y E A R S ! ! ! !

You won't do what you know to be right because someone else isn't
doing
what you know to be right.

I AM, repeat AM doing "what's right".

You and Leonard are lairs, Brian. You don't tell the truth. YOU
make glaring errors, and then when I make a simple one, all of a sudden
you think your slates are wiped clean.

Sorry...Doesn't work that way.

I already count two acknowledgements of errors I have made this
week.

I haven't seen a single one from you acknowledging your ARES
errors alone...

I'm just glad the world isn't full of
people like you. Actually, I thank my lucky stars every night that
the
world isn't full of people like you.

As well you should. It's got to be embarrassing getting your nose
rubbd in all the errors YOU make by just little ole me...You'd not
withstand more than one.

Here's your sign, Brian LOSER

Steve, K4YZ