Where's the beef?
 

wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:

At one time I noted that most of the violations were awarded to the
higher class licensees.

But was that really true?

Did you provide any statistics, or did it just seem that way to you?

It's really true that I noted that. If you have unsupervised numbers
to contradict me, you 're welcome to post them. This is America, after
all.

IOW, you have no statistics to back up your claim.

IOW, your role here is to merely cast aspersions without having any
unsupervised numbers whatsoever.

I don't know if that was an artifact of the
FCC picking on them because they should know better, or if it had to do
with the kind of attitudes of so many of the Extra's display on RRAP
carrying over the the bands.

Fun fact: The $42,000 fines for ex-KG6IRO have been upheld. When you
read what the guy did, it's pretty awful.

KG6? From Guam?

From Bell, California. Just a few miles from yer buddy Len's house
in Sun Valley. You know, the neighborhood zoned R1....

Never been there. Is it a nice R1?

Guess what class of license he held. And how old he is.

Ex-KG6IRO held no license (kind of the reason you had to say "ex").

He briefly held a Technician license back about 2000. Then FCC
figured out who he was and revoked the license.

Good. I am for getting rid of the bad elements regardless of license
class. Back in '98 concerning the restructuring, I told the FCC that
what bothered be most about restructuring was a lack of enforcement and
what bothered me most about maintaining the status quo was a lack of
enforcement.

That was part of the problem.

The big part was things like deliberate interference to MARS
and other communications.

Not really. I hate to break it to you Jim, but MARS communications do
not fall under AMATEUR RADIO, nor the FCC's jurisdiction. This guy
could have ended up in a secret prison in Rumania. ;^)

How old he is?

He's 69 years old.

Prime age for bowel problems. Makes 'em cranky.

Is there an age limit on hams?

Thankfully, there isn't.

As long as "thier" lucid.

Reasonable and unique, was One Class of Amateur Radio License?
 

Reasonable and unique, was One Class of Amateur Radio License?
 

Reasonable and unique, was One Class of Amateur Radio License?
 

Dee Flint wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
Dee Flint wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
From: on Dec 7, 5:28 pm
wrote:
From: Bill Sohl on Dec 6, 6:11 am
wrote in message

[snip]

Is that why the FCC gives ALL power priveleges to their ENTRY LEVEL
LICENSEES?


Entry level licensees do NOT have all power privileges. Technicians with
code are an entry level license. On HF frequencies, they are limited to 200
watts output.

Now you've gone and spoiled a perfectly good rant, Dee.

Dave K8MN

Reasonable and unique, was One Class of Amateur Radio License?
 

Reasonable and unique, was One Class of Amateur Radio License?
 

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
From: on Thurs, Dec 15 2005 4:14 am


wrote:
From: on Dec 13, 7:32 pm
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
From: on Dec 7, 5:28 pm
wrote:
From: Bill Sohl on Dec 6, 6:11 am
wrote in message

The starting path under discussion was the path to an amateur radio
license. You haven't taken the first step on that path.

"The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single
step"...some ancient Chinese proverb, I suppose.

Lao Tzu.

Any relation to Zack Lao?

I found some Chinese proverbs which seem quite fitting to your role he

"A crane is too obvious when it stands among a flock of chickens and
looks very awkward. It is also true with a camel amidst a flock of sheep
and a flea when it stands on top of a hairless head. They all carry a
pejoritary tone: the thing that outstands others is something awkward if
not necessarily bad."

You are the crane, the camel or the flea.

You are the chicken, the sheep or the hairless head?

"There is an argument between a bird who stopped to drank at a well and
a frog therein. They were arguing about how the sky looked like.
Regarding where they were, they each had a different view. The frog's
vision was of course very limited. Therefore, this proverb refers to
somebody who has a very narrow-minded and insulated view of what they
see or what they think."

You are the frog.

The frog gives the bird.

I obtained a COMMERCIAL radio operator license 49 years ago.
First Class, one test, no repeats necessary.

Yeah? So?

One exam to run a 100,000 watt transmitter? What would Jim say?

WHY was it "required" that I obtain an amateur license?

Who ever told you that it was?

It isn't, but the way you and Jim needle Len about getting one...

Was it necessary to punish amateurs?

Who was "punished"?

You tell us. You are the one into the dominatrix role.

No, *you* need to tell us. You wrote of amateur radio ops being
punished over incentive licensing. Back up your claim.

I asked about amateurs being punished. Jim said he lost privileges.
He was no longer in the privileged class.

but you find a way to personalize it.

The rules changes of 1968 and 1969 affected me at the time.
They affected everyone after you as well.

They did not affect you and they did not affect Len.

You're simply wrong on that one, Quitefine.

Lots of us radio pros without amateur licenses just didn't bother
to get an amateur license...not necessarily as a result of
"changes of 1968 or 1969."

That's fine, Len. Nobody says you have to get ana amateur radio
license.

"Ana amateur radio license?"

Ah, but YOU already said I had some kind of moral imperative
to get an amateur radio license. Hypocrite.

No one has told you anything of the kind. That's another of your
factual errors.

Then we will hear no more from you and Jim about Len not having one,
right?

But it does seem a bit odd that you're expending so much
time and energy on the requirements for a license you aren't
going to get...

"Not going to get?" Who said that...besides YOU?

Why, *you* said it.

Why did he say it?

I'm just wanting the morse code test for an amateur radio
license eliminated.

That's at least the third version you've told here. Previously, you've
waffled between the other two--that you were going to get the "Extra
right out of the box or that you weren't going to obtain an amateur
radio license.

Can't a person want more than one thing? Is Dave putting limits on
what people can want?

Why are YOU "spending so much time and energy" trying to
throw **** on all of those desiring that test element 1
deletion?

Doing what?

That voodoo that you do.

What are you afraid of? Loss of your personal status,
title, and privileges?

What are you afraid of, Len? That radio amateurs won't show you the
respect which you feel is your due?

That has certainly been the case on rrap.

That you won't get into amateur
radio before you're past your expiration date?

Len has an expiration date? What is it?

What the heck, I'd already started
15 and 14 years before in HF comms where the operating
environment was a HELLUVA LOT TOUGHER on all concerned than any
amateur activity.

How was it "a HELLUVA LOT TOUGHER", Len? I saw your "My 3 Years" thing.

The amateur radio service does not require its licensees to
wage war and kill the enemy.

Did you wage war or kill an enemy?

He put himself in the pool of combattants. After that he followed
orders.

The military "field days" were not little outings in a park
once a year.

Did you ever participate in a military "field day"?

He put himself in the pool of combattants. After that he followed
orders.

Amateur radio doesn't operate in an environment of high
explosive ordinance going off nearby.

Did you operate in an environment of high explosive ordinance going off
nearby?

He put himself in the pool of combattants. After that he followed
orders.

What did Jim do? Did he excuse himelf? Was he unfit to serve?

And why all the comparisons? You seem to feel a need to prove that you
had it "TOUGHER" than anybody else.....

To use a quaint and traditional military phrase, "****in-A!"

Then I suppose you're disappointed that you're efforts toward proving it
have fallen a little short.

One hundred seventy five miles uphill both ways to the FCC examiners
office. In the snow.

Yes, sweetums, I - and every other military person - had it
TOUGHER than you civilians safe at home.

Really? How tough was the rear area life in Japan, Len? I don't recall
my military service as having been very TOUGH.

Must have been why you got out so quickly.

Problem is, Jimmie doesn't think that others can think differently
so he doesn't think about the thousands of newcomers who MIGHT want
to get into amateur radio.

Len, I don't have any problem thinking others can think differently.
That doesn't mean I must agree with them.

Then why does your lofty highness insist all MUST agree
with YOUR opinions?

What's with your schtick here, Leonard? Your posts seem to indicate
that you believe that all MUST agree with YOUR opinions.

It would be nice that once someone rejects an opinion that they say
why.

Saying that Len doesn't hold an amateur license is not a good reason
to reject Len's opinions wrt the ARS.

There's no specification for a lot of things in Part 97, yet there's no
problem.

Yes there is. License test regulations REQUIRE a code test for
any class having below-30-MHz operation privileges...BUT...the
FCC does not mandate all amateur USING morse code modes over
and above any other mode. All are optional.

Well now! Yessir, that presents a real dilemma, doesn't it. You should
be able to suck it up. After all, your military service was way TOUGHER
than this easy civilian stuff.

The regulations don't even define Morse Code let alone Farnsworth Code,
but the FCC can deny a license based upon an exam it can't define.

There's been two whole years of 18 Petitions commented on at length
since the end of WRC-03 and now NPRM 05-143 which can settle the
morse code testing for a license issue.

Probably. But you won't be satisfied with that, despite your frequent
claims of only wanting to eliminate the Morse Code test.

Jimmie Noserve, GIVE UP trying to tell me "what I will do."

You don't have the authority nor the qualifications to be ME
nor judgemental on "what I will do."

We can only go by what you've written, Len.

You've written that you contacted out of band Frenchmen on 6m.

Why can't Technicians operate on 14.026? Why can't hams operate on
13.976?

And there you go with the ultimatums and strawmen.

Jimmie with newsgroup wordplay again. About this point, Hans will
jump in saying you are "simply mistaken" and babbling about how
the "IARU and ITU" are different or other semi-sweet non-sequitur.

Can't answer the questions, eh?

Jimmie, you present NO valid questions. Ergo, no valid answers
required.

The questions were valid enough. You just didn't answer them.

Why don't you answer them, Dave?

You constantly bring up much older history ("My 3 Years") that doesn't
apply to anything NOW....

Tsk, tsk, tsk, that's an entirely different "discussion"
concerning overt LYING of military service by Dudly the
Imposter (aka "K4YZ").

Your tales precede your manufacturer of the term "Dudly the Imposter" by
quite some time.

"manufacture"

I brought up a VALID example some years ago on why the
majority of military communications worldwide was NOT done
by morse code mode since 1948...for the reason being that I
was assigned at a major Army communications station serving
a theater command Hq and stayed there for three years.

YOU have NEVER done anything approaching that. In fact, YOU
have NEVER served in any military service of the USA.

Naturally you would be upset about anyone else doing something
big and important in HF communications. TS.

That's funny. Jim knows what I've done in professional communications
and I've seen no indication that he has ever become upset over it. Then
again, I've never made it seem that what I did professionally carried
any weight in amateur radio.

Your "career" was your DXpedition meal ticket.

For example, I think the ARRL made a big mistake not letting WK3C run for
Director of the Atlantic Division. That's *my* division, btw...

Is your Division mobilized and ready to ship out to fight
the War on Terror? Bon voyage.

Maybe they can just show up on r.r.a.p, read your posts and begin waging
the War on Error.

Steve's gonna hate a bunch of usurpers showing up here. No way he's
gonna let them edge him out. And so the war escalates.

The change of zoning near your house did not remove any privileges from
you, did it, Len? It didn't make your taxes go up or require you to change
your house in any way, right?

Irrelevant to RADIO REGULATIONS. Local zoning laws have NOTHING
to do with federal radio regulations. Give it up.

Did you miss seeing the parallel to your actions in regard to amateur
radio? It was quite evident.

Amateur radio regulations are a subset of "RADIO REGULATIONS."

Or someone who tells a US Navy veteran to shove something up his I/O
port?

One military veteran can tell another military veteran lots
of things. Brakob, Burke, and myself are all military
veterans. YOU have NEVER been an military veteran.

I'm a military veteran. You've told me lots of things. I take offense
to some of them.

Ditto.

Here's a quaint old military phrase given in the tradition
and sincerity of the military service: "Go **** yourself!"

That will take care of Saturday night for you...

You certainly write like a fellow who has lost an argument.

Dave K8MN

Maybe if he refreshes the screen...

Easier licensing
 

wrote:
From: on Dec 10, 3:48 pm,
wrote:
From: on Dec 7, 5:28 pm
wrote:
From: Bill Sohl on Dec 6, 6:11 am
wrote in message

Face it, Jimmie, all those classes GREW in order to
satisfy some POLITICAL reasons within the amateur
community.

Such as? Back up your claim - if you can.

Tsk, your little political heart have a malfunction?
[need a "valve" replacement?]

What were the POLITICAL reasons, Len?

The "back-up" is the NON-ARRL history of amateur radio
regulations, indeed ALL the radio regulations since
1912.

How is a non-ARRL history of amateur radio regulations any
different from an ARRL history of amateur radio regulations, Len?

Can you cite specific things that are different in the two histories?

POLITICS, little Jimmie. It's been pervasive
in the very being of the league since 1914.

Even if true, is that a bad thing?

And how do you know? You weren't there in 1914, Len.

A "one-
party" system more or less in between the World Wars
and on to the immediate post-WW2 era.

Nonsense, Len. The ARRL doesn't elect government officials.
Nor does it make regulations. One of its roles is as an advocacy
group for amateur radio, just like the NRA is an advocacy group
for those who believe in citizens' rights to firearms, and the AARP
is an advocacy group for senior citizens (even though the "R"
originally
meant "retired", one doesn't have to retire to belong to AARP).

By the 1970s
other groups were being heard from and the league's
virtual oligarchy was beginning to dwindle.

What other groups? And why the 1970s?

There were "other groups" back in the 1940s, Len. I don't think
you can name two of the largest.

Just the
beginning of their influence, but it IS dwindling to
the REAL law-makers.

You're not one of them, Len.

In the beginning there was only ONE license.

In the beginning there were no licenses at all.

The time of one-amateur-radio-license-class ended
more than 70 years ago, Len.

U.S. amateur radio licensing began in 1912 92 years
ago. [historical fact]

93 years, actually. ;-) Can't you get anyhting right? ;-)

The FCC has been in existance for 71 years. [law of
the land as of the Communications Act of 1934]

"existence", Len.

Yes. Amateur radio licenses are earned by passing the
required tests.

Strange, the FCC says it GRANTS them.

Only after they are EARNED.

As far as the federal government is concerned, it is a NON-PAYING
radio activity that is expressly forbidden to broadcast or engage
in common-carrier communications.

That's true.

Whoa...if you agree to what I said, how can you say you
"earned" your license?

One earns things other than money, Len. Look it up.

How did stamp collecting help with hurricane relief?

Amateur radio provided shelter, food, clothing for hurricane
victims?

It helped to provide those things.

Geez, here I thought all they were doing was
relaying health and welfare messages...some of the time.

Well, you're wrong.

Amateur radio is basically a HOBBY.

But that's not all it is, Len. Grow up and accept that shouting the
same old tired lines doesn't convince anyone.

Hello? See the word "basically" in my quoted sentence?

Yes. So what?

Individuals engaged in that HOBBY are licensed because the FCC,
the federal agency regulating all civil radio, think that
licensing is a tool of regulation.

That's partly true.

Entirely true. FCC is NOT an academic organization, "grading"
amateurs on their radio skills.

Actually, it *does* grade them. That's why there are different levels
of amateur radio license.

You're taking the experience of a few people and a few transmitters
and demanding that it apply to everyone and all transmitters. That's
just nonsense.

Tsk, I thought it was an example. An example that I lived
through. An example that you did NOT live through.

And what does that example prove, Len? What does your one
example prove about *amateur* radio in 2005?

Besides, you've already contradicted yourself. The "very ordinary young men"
all had some form of technical training, and had been selected for the task.

"Selected for the task:" Personnel requirements were for N number
of warm bodies within X number of MOS ranges. :-)

So they were selected for the task and trained for it.

Tsk. Jimmie, you just don't understand how the military works.

I understand well enough, Len. You go on at length here about
things you're not involved in - why can't others do the same?

If you were a "warm body" in the area and came even close to the
requirements of filling a TO&E (Table of Organization and Equipment)
then you "got selected."

See? There you go!

The transmitters they adjusted were already set up, operating, and the
procedures to use them completely worked out. Those "very ordinary young men"
all had more-experienced supervision to teach them the tasks and make
sure they did it right.

Did you expect that everyone had to build everything themselves?!?

Not at all. But radio amateurs sometimes do. You wouldn't know about
that
since you've never done it.

Do you expect sailors to all get sheet steel and torches and
build the ship they are going to serve on?

Not at all. But radio amateurs sometimes build their equipment from
the most basic parts - including sheet metal work. You wouldn't know
about that
since you've never done it.

Do you expect airmen to all get aluminum and engines and build
the aircraft they are going to serve on?

Of course not.

Do you expect choo-choo drivers to build their locomotives
themselves? :-)

"Choo-choo drivers"? The "drivers" on a steam locomotive are
the wheels that are powered, Len. Do try to keep up.

And yet it took *days* of on-the-job instruction before they could be left to
do the job on their own!

Yes, ONE TO THREE DAYS, the latter for the slow-learners and goof-
offs. :-)

1 to 3 *days* of instruction....

Even then, the more-experienced supervision was
always on-call if a problem arose.

That's usually the situation with EVERY military or civilian
organization. :-)

But not in amateur radio.

After some experience, the formerly-inexperienced BECAME the
"experienced supervision" people.

Sure. So what?

Len, you don't seem to be able to understand the concept of "amateur
radio station", let alone "operating".

Jimmie, YOU don't understand that every other radio service
does NOT define either "station" or "operating" by amateur
radio "rules." :-)

Which means your example isn't valid, Len.

UNLICENSED people by the thousands every day in the
USA are OPERATING TRANSCEIVERS.

Not operating in the amateur radio sense.

Oh, you want PLMRS mobiles to send QSLs on "contacts?"

Not at all. Do you?

Do you want "radiosport contests" among aviation radio or
maritime radio services?

Why should I?

Do you think policemen carrying neat little two-way radios
subscribe to QST? :-)

Some of them do.

"Morse code operation in amateur radio" does NOT
involve ALL "skilled operators."

Yes, it does. Those operators have skills that you do not
have, and I think that bothers the heck out of you.

No bother at all to me, Jimmie.

Then why are you so upset over K0HB's stories?

I just disregarded any
NEED to learn morse code since I was never, ever
required to use it in the military or in the much longer
civilian life career I still have.

In other words, since there was no money in it for you...

It seems to really bother you that I'm better than you
at Morse Code.

Har! No.

Yes. It sure seems that way.

So? It's a test of Morse Code skill at a very basic level. Entry-
level, nothing more. It nevertheless requires that the operator
have the skills.

That's the current law, Jimmie. It's just a political thing.

It's a good thing.

Since no higher deity commanded that morse code testing be
done for amateur radio licenses, ordinary humans must have
done it. Whatever humans have done, humans can UNDO.

Not necessarily. Humans seem to have trouble undoing certain
types of messes, such as pollution.

The radios they USE are either owned by their employers
(businesses, public safety agences as examples) or
themselves (private boat or aircraft owners as an
example). Some of those radios DO require a licensed
person to oversee their operation and technical details,
but some do NOT. Depends on the particular radio service.

In amateur radio, a licensed amateur radio operator is required.

You have a macro for that sentence? :-)

Yes, Jimmie, I'm well aware of Title 47 C.F.R.'s Part 97.

You sure don't seem to be, Len. Like when you told us that
all amateurs with expired-but-in-the-grace-period licenses
could still operate their amateur radio stations legally....

That's what I've been telling you all along.

Well, there you go again with the posturing arrogance...

Is it posturing arrogance to tell you the truth?

Tsk, tsk, ADJUSTMENT can be done by anyone in a non-radiating
test. Takes NO "license" to perform a test-alignment-calibration
such as done by factory folks on ham equipment.

But that's not "operating", Len.

Radar isn't for communications. And the SGC2020 is dirt simple
compared to most amateur radio HF transceivers - even the Southgate
series are much more complex to operate.

Oh, dear, here it comes with posturing arrogance again...

From you? Certainly not from me.

On top of all that, the radio users cited above may not be
FCC licensed, but they are trained, tested and often certified in
proper radio procedures for the radios they use.

"Certified?" They get neat little certificates (suitable
for framing)? Wow!

Yes - did you ever see an FAA pilot's license?

No, couldn't afford to continue.

Poor baby!

I did pass the written
test and have the confirmation document digitized. Need
to see it? :-)

Why would I? You're the one hung up on certifications....

Yeah, they pay by plastic, perhaps follow the maker's
instructions and fumble around until things sound right.

Is there something wrong with using a credit/debit card?

Or following manufacturer's instructions?

Besides - it's something *you* haven't done.

Tsk, tsk, tsk...something I HAVE done, sweetums. Years ago
a bunch of us got together to give a friend his retirement
and birthday gift, an HF transceiver.

That's nice.

I had the "plastic"
higher level and paid for it, another with a station wagon
transported the boxes, yet another provided the Bird
Wattmeter and dummy load and we all went through the
instruction manual to make sure it worked. NON-radiating
test, Jimmie. Perfectly legal.

Of course - because you are not qualified to do it on-the-air.

There are more than a few of us radio amateurs who design
and build our own amateur stations. You haven't done any
of that, Len, yet you pass judgement on us as if you are
somehow superior.

"Modern" amateur band transceivers, transmitters, receivers, etc.
are ready-to-play right out of the box. Those are aligned,
tested, calibrated, ready-to-go. Sort of like the SGC 2020
private marine version SSB transceiver. :-)

The modern amateur radio transceivers I use didn't come that way.

Yes, yes, Jimmie, whatever YOU use applies to all other
700+ thousand U.S. amateur radio licensees. :-)

None of the others USE anything but what you've USED?

Not the point, Len. You said that "MODERN" equipment is a certain
way, yet that's not true for all amateur radio equipment.

Six months of microwave school, a transmitter that was all set up
and ready to go, an experienced instructor, and it still took you
an *hour* of instruction?

Yes. :-)

By the way, part of that Signal Schooling was radar fundamentals.
That was because of the close similarity of radar electronics
to the electronics used in radio relay equipments coming after
WW2. Absolutely NONE of it prepared us for operating ANY of the
HF transmitters (36 of them at first) at station ADA in 1953.

That's bull. No power supply theory? No electron tube theory?

NONE of it prepared anyone for teletypewriter operation, for
operation of the VHF and UHF radio relay equipment, for operation
of the "carrier" bays. NONE of it involved learning of the
General Electric commercial microwave radio relay equipment that
ADA would use for primary communication link of transmitters to
the rest of the station...we got a two-week "course" by two GE
tech-reps to "prepare" us for that in late 1954.

No basic electricty or electronics?

And just what is
YOUR experience at ham bands of 220 MHz and up?

More than yours, Len!

I've only listened to the predecessor of the Condor Net in
Newbury Park, CA, demonstrated by one of the ham-licensed
employees there. At Teledyne Electronics, my employer
during the late 70s. It was the first state-long network
to use all tone switching for routing without using any
microprocessor control.


Gosh, you *listened*! I've done a lot more than that!

Who is sneering? Not me. The Technician failed in its original purpose.
That's a fact.

That's only an OPINION, Jimmie. Tsk, better learn some acting
skills, redirect that sneer. You can do it with practice.

Right now the combined numbers of no-code-Technician and Technician
Plus classes make up a bit more that 48% of ALL U.S. amateur radio
licenses granted. Almost HALF, Jimmie.

48.1% - 318,462 out of 661,800 as of December 9.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. That doesn't agree with www.hamdata.com figures.

I didn't use those figures.

Oh, yes, you are quoting NON-grace-period figures derived
from elsewhere as "official." Heavens, I have to keep
taking THAT into account, don't I? :-)

You should.

But that percentage is *down* from what it was 5 years ago, right after
the rules changes.

Well now, www.hamdata.com figures also show the totals of
EXPIRATIONS versus NEW (never before licensed) licensees.
Expirations still exceed the NEW licensees and have for the
last year.


And for more than 5-1/2 years, the only choice new hams have had for
their first license class is the Technician, General, or Extra.

Duuhhhhh...stating the obvious again, aren't you?

Oh, my, you DO have to try NOT to talk down to everyone. It
help you lose your posturing arrogance of superiority...


So you let a *name* - a single *word* - stop you from getting
an Amateur Radio license.

A long time ago another called me a "sunnuvabitch." I put
him down with a bleeding nose and lip.

Is that a threat, Len? You're not even a novice at amateur radio.

Certain words DO have an effect on people, Jimmie.

A word of advice: Avoid street fighting...you ain't good at it.

Are you?

You mean like somebody who thinks the zoning ideas of
1960 should still apply 30-40-45 years later?

In most cases, absolutely YES. :-)

Does local residence zoning affect radio of any kind? I
think not.

Residences are for LIVING in, Jimmie. It is HOME.

SO why shouldn't it change?


on entering military service

No. The ONLY aptitude test given in regards to radio was
a morse code cognition test given to all recruits.

Ah - and you didn't make the grade on that one, eh?
Explains a lot.

I'm glad I didn't make a good aptitude there. Would have wound
up in Field Radio and had to go through the remainder out in
the boonies somewhere. :-)

Now it's clear. You weren't top of the form in Morse Code, so the
code must be a bad thing....
tsk, tsk.

Reasonable and unique, was One Class of Amateur Radio License?
 

From: Dave Heil on Dec 18, 8:51 am

wrote:
From: on Dec 14, 6:22 pm
Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
From: on Tues, Dec 13 2005 4:32 pm


Jim has tatoos?

I was imagining his performances in here to be the equivalent of
James Mitchum's creepy "preacher" in an old, scary black-and-white
film released in the 1950s.

Robert Mitchum. 1954. Night of the Hunter from the novel by Davis Grubb.
The author was from up the road in Moundsville. The story is set in
this area.

Hmmmm...that explains a lot about Davie Heil's character...:-)

How so? Neither Robert Mitchum nor the character he played came from
this area. I wasn't in the movie.

Tsk, the way you ACT in here wouldn't get you to the
"beginners" entry line to either SAG or SEG. :-)

You couldn't even pass for an A-1 Sauce dish at the caterer's
table on a set, let alone as an "A-1 Op" in the movies. :-)

It might to you, but then again, you got the original story wrong too.

Tsk, tsk, tsk, if you want to do rec.movies.critique.negative
go to the appropriate newsgroup.

The book's author, Davis Grubb had a hard time with reality.

PCTAs have a hard time with reality also... :-)

In one
interview, he said that he could remember that whenever an execution
took place at the prison in Moundsville, the lights all over town would
dim.

No doubt the electricity was wired in by an "A-1 Operator."

That would have been something since, when Grubb was living in
Moundsville, executions were by hanging. Electrocution wasn't begun
until the 1950's.

Difficulty in carrying out Ohm's Law? :-)

Slow going through the CIRCUIT Court of Appeals? :-)


Did they ever catch him, or is he still running around the hills of
Moundsville?

Was he a ham preacher?

He is apparently of the undead, this time inhabiting the corpus
of a corpulent K8 ham?

You've really not watched the movie in some time.

Tsk, I just asked a question.

True, I don't make it a habit to watch creepy black-and-white
movies about deranged characters.

It is much easier to access RRAP and watch all the creepy
black-and-white PCTAs pontificate, postulate, and pustulate
all over everyone else. PCTAs are as deranged as could be.

Another of Grubb's
books was turned into a movie called "Fool's Parade" with James Stewart,
George Kennedy and Kurt Russell.

No doubt you have a well-thumbed Leonard Maltin movie guidebook
from which to draw your wealth of old motion picture factoids.

Somehow that doesn't qualify you as an "A-1 Op" in a cinema.

It was shot on location in Moundsville and Marshall County in 1970.

Did that factoid make it into Variety or Hollywood Reporter? :-)

Was it in QST?

You'd have been a natural "Fool's Parade" extra.

No. I don't have a SEG membership. Wanna see my AFTRA card?

"Corp diem?"

"Corpus"

Tsk, tsk, a blank-and-white literalist. Colorless.

I was making a Play on Words between Latin and English. Since
you only claim expertise on Hunnish, you couldn't understand it.

You didn't understand the Latin oxymoron "primus inter pares"
so it is useless to get you to unbend your dictatorial
Prussian persistence in puling orders.


Don't you get anything right?

I'm not an unbending blank-and-white ultra-conservative
RIGHTIST. Reality requires recognizing shades of gray and
being liberal towards others. You fail there.

Corporations have paid me real money to "get things right" and
I have, consistently. Since you see things only by your
dictatorial blank-and-white Prussian puerility, there is no
point in trying to discuss any matter with you.

I'm sure you would give both Ebert and Roeper a "thumbs down"
when it comes to movie reviews. However, THAT doesn't make
you an "A-1 Op." Doesn't even make you good for A-1 Sauce.

...and a "Bone apetit" to Kathy Reichs and Tempe Brennan.

bit bit

Reasonable and unique, was One Class of Amateur Radio License?
 

Reasonable and unique, was One Class of Amateur Radio License?