When your luck runs out

True that!

 

And this requires you to confess all your sins? Feeling for warmth and using that as evidence in a federal case could not be more full of bull. Or do you agree with the marxist states of amerika? While there is an ever increasing number of 'citizens' who despise the constitution I can thankfully say I for one am not one of them.

Cuba is only a couple hundred miles south of you if you are unhappy here.

 

Well since you do not agree with the FCC and the rule that you WILL allow them to inspect your station them you must agree if they win you will pay the price ?

BTW I'm a veteran a long line of them in this family and many Cubans here are very loyal to this country ....

 

"Well since you do not agree with the FCC and the rule that you WILL allow them to inspect your station them you must agree if they win you will pay the price ?

BTW I'm a veteran a long line of them in this family and many Cubans here are very loyal to this country .... "
----------------------------------------------------
I can see I am not dealing with a rocket scientist here. Clearly you are unable to read what I said and at the same time understand what I said. Quote the text where I said:

A - I will not allow them to inspect
B - they have no right to inspect.

After answering the above, move on to:

C - you are required by law to admit to a government agent you were unlawfully operating a station.

In effect you are saying the mere possession of a station requires you to incriminate yourself, forever negating the fifth amendment merely because you have a license to operate a radio station. Oh wait, we must include by your definition the mere possession of equipment negates the Bill of Rights and therefore all of your rights under the law of the land.

After completing the above, write a 5,000 word essay on how being a licensed radio operator voids all of you rights under both the constitution and the bill of rights including a subsection clarifying how a ham ticket voids your civil rights. Extra credit will be given if you can provide proof that having said 'ticket' negates your local rights under both the tenth and fourteenth amendments.

I can also see by your feigned being offended due to your ancestral nationality and construing said 'offense' came from text I posted that you are also unable to differentiate between a statement concerning a Marxist government and the people who inhabit the area occupied by said government. Or are you saying all Cuban people were born communists millenia ago long before the Bay of Pigs and long before Fidel was ever born. So that therefore by inference making derogatory comments about a governmental system should then equate to comments about the people living under said system. Just because you were a veteran does not by implication prove you support the constitution. I know many who were drafted during Vietnam who to this day hate the government for forcing them to go over there against their will under threat of imprisonment. Not surprising then that virtually all of them to this day are democrats.

Going further, just what exactly does the statement 'if they WIN' mean, and how does this winning based upon improper evidence such as 'feeling warm' apply to justice and the proper enforcement of law? Are you saying it is all a sham, a scam, a game where to win or not to win is the goal? Is this how law enforcement is conducted at the jail where you work? Yes it is all a game and therefore any possible corruption of constitutional law is fine just so long as we 'win'.

I can see by the position you have taken concerning this subject that you and I have very marked differences of both justice and the constitution. Fortunately for me I have the founding fathers backing up my perspective I assume this leaves you with only Karl Marx to validate yours?

Merely because there are many Cubans loyal to this country cannot be construed to indicate you believe and justify the constitution based solely upon these other individuals and their beliefs, as it applies to you and your stance that having a station negates a persons legal rights under the law. Not to mention it is classless to reply in public to my post inferring I was making some form of slander towards yours or anyone Else's national heritage. It is below the belt, crude, rude, and downright pathetic.

Bottom line is the horse in your last post won't fly and I am not buying it.

 

Please foward your comments to Laura Smith at the FCC I'm shure she would be happy to answer any questions as to your RIGHTS .....

 

" I know many who were drafted during Vietnam who to this day hate the government for forcing them to go over there against their will under threat of imprisonment. Not surprising then that virtually all of them to this day are democrats."

Sorry to displell this but I'm not a democrat and served during Vietnan as did my older brother also not a democrat ....

Me in the army 1968 ....

 

Well I never thought the FCC did anything but sit on their butts and collect a government paycheck but they did come to town and pay one of our local base stations a visit, to bad they only visited one. Two agents or what ever they are called knocked on the door of one local loud mouth and visited him for about two hours he said. They inspected his radio and went over FCC regulations and rules. They had received complaints about him bleeding over on the neighbors and so on. He doesn't run a linear or didn't at the time they showed up but was told he can not have or use echo or reverb on his radio and cussing is against the rules also. I tuned out after another local got on the radio and started cussing and using his echo up loud in protest.

 

skip is rolling

 

I must not have a big enough radio nobody ever replies back.

 

"Please foward your comments to Laura Smith at the FCC I'm shure she would be happy to answer any questions as to your RIGHTS ....."

Why would I ask her or even give any credence to her a mere bureaucratic executive as to her opinion of my rights? This is the response of someone who thinks that the way things are running in this country is both right and proper. Nothing could be further from the truth. This attitude of complacence by far too many citizens is allowing the destruction of liberty and ushering in tyranny. How sad it is that you think I should obtain my rights from her instead of from God and the constitution. She does not establish law, we have lawmakers for that. When was this authority of establishing law (or rights) transferred to a bureaucrat? Sorry to hear you are not a student of history. If you were one you would be familiar with the unlawful reign of Woodrow Wilson. The way the country was being run created misery for millions not to mention the re-establishment of segregation both in the military and in Washington. The following administration changed much of this which prompted a spurt of prosperity called the roaring 20's and which generated such songs as 'happy days are here again'.

During His administration taxation increased to upwards of 80 percent. Under the next administration this was reduced to in the 20's, and suddenly jobs and prosperity once again became the societal norm. Also helpful was the release of nearly 120,000 political prisoners incarcerated during his administration for daring to speak out against what was going on in Washington. His favorite book was 'Philip Dru: Administrator', and his favorite media adviser Edward Bernays later wrote a book titled 'Propaganda'. Possibly you agree with the first lines in his book "THE conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country."? In his memoirs Joseph Goebbels praised Bernays as being the teacher (through study of this book) which aided in the establishment of the Third Reich. You see as a student of history I have learned that when you turn to an Administrator to gain your rights in the end you have none. So no I will not be consulting Laura Smith at the FCC to obtain my rights.


" Sorry to displell this but I'm not a democrat and served during Vietnan as did my older brother also not a democrat"

I do not know whether the problem you have is with the language or merely reading comprehension skills. To use the phrase 'to dispel this' implies someone first put forth the charge against you. Nowhere in any of my comments did I make any statements concerning you and the content of this subject. If you will try again to read my previous words you will see my comments concerned 'many of my friends'. Since you are not now nor have you ever been one of my 'friends' this subject can in no way be taken to be directed at you by anyone capable of rational thought. This is quite similar to your inference that somehow I was being disparaging towards your ancestral heritage considering the fact I know nothing about you when I made this comment: "Cuba is only a couple hundred miles south of you if you are unhappy here.".

Rational thought would indicate this had political connotations as in if you think our rights are established (and/or disseminated as they see fit) by mere bureaucrats rather than the constitution then perhaps you are more comfortable in a form of government such as what exists in Cuba.

You can spare us a reply since you made your opinion quite clear with your post "Please foward your comments to Laura Smith at the FCC I'm shure she would be happy to answer any questions as to your RIGHTS .....".

Correction: foward = forward, shure (a microphone) = sure; in the context of your statement.

By the way did you know the thread would be a much cleaner read and the waste of server space would decrease if when quoting you were to just copy the pertinent text, instead of filling the board with a large block of the entire post being quoted.