THE OFFICIAL 147.450 FLAMEBOOK! THEFLAMEBOOK.COM
W0RKF / AA0IN - THE RETARD Ron Foster
450 Sunday Night Trivia
With your host Sue KD6UVD
8PM Pacific
Listen to 147.450 LIVE:
22,994 Entries
Comments: Question: What if I don't use a Baofeng but another radio brand for the SPARC alarm contest? Is this acceptable per rules of the contest? Answer: Other brands might be acceptable if you can perfectly emulate the childish wail of the cheap Baofeng siren. If you really want to follow KA6JMM's questionable advice and achieve maximum points you should consider the purchase of "..100 Baofengs for right around three hundred bucks.." although only Our Dear Lord knows where JMM could truly obtain that price or if the cheap loser ever spends that much groceries money in one go. 24-Slevin
Comments: Nothing like listening to an old fucking liar tell his lies 24 7 What a shitshow Lie and give money to a pussy.. all while pretending not to know anything That lying old kook has the victim routine down better than a millenial Even his wife cant stand him. Goes on vacations to other countries to avoid his statin riddled adipose diabetic ass.
Comments: Not The FCC We saw the discussion about hams who flaunt the FCC rules so they can have (illegal) fun talking to unidentified stations called squeakies. We are sharing a sound basis for criticism of KA6JMM and others for their regular and outright friendly conversations with an unidentified station they called "Squeakers", "Squeaky", “KI6Squeaky”, “our own personal Squeaky” and often declared “We love our Squeaky”. This "Squeaky" person operated for at least three years on the W6CDW repeater during KA6JMM's tenure as the Control Op and up to the point KA6JMM was permanently banned from the repeater. As a control operator he condoned his repeater friends’ (KM6ACH, N6FTW & KE6RXE) similar behavior when communicating with the unidentified station they identified as “Squeaky” and occasionally an unidentified station they called "CW Guy". Our sources have told us that the repeater owner, Cliff Wallace overheard JMM talking to “Squeaky” and ordered JMM to “get rid of him by any means necessary”. Incredibly, JMM did not stop talking to the unidentified station and Cliff took note of it. These LEGAL recordings were captured on 3/11/18, 8/01/18, 12/31/18, 1/29/19, 2/07/19, 2/17/19, 3/01/19 by various stations, hence the differing quality of audio. Each clip is separated by the repeater ID. There are too many hours of original material to audit and parse so we offer these 7 examples of what occurred almost nightly as this unidentified "Squeaky" drove to and from work. Interception and rebroadcast of amateur transmissions is specifically allowed under FCC rules, Title 18 of the USC . FCC rules specifically prohibit use of the amateur bands with a view toward a pecuniary interest; Richard Bebout can't copyright said transmissions without having a pecuniary interest. Because this is a recording of an Amateur Radio broadcast Richard Bebout cannot have any monetary interest nor does he own a company that can claim ownership of the audio content from an amateur radio broadcast. See §97.3(4): "Amateur service. A radio communication service for the purpose of self-training, intercommunication and technical investigations carried out by amateurs,that is, duly authorized persons interested in radio technique solely with a personal aim and without pecuniary interest." [See also §97.113(3)] Also see 18 USC §2511(2)(g)(i): "It shall not be unlawful under this chapter or chapter 121 of this title for any person—to intercept or access an electronic communication made through an electronic communication system that is configured so that such electronic communication is readily accessible to the general public" ...and 18 USC §2511(2)(g)(iii)(III): "It shall not be unlawful under this chapter or chapter 121 of this title for any person—to intercept ANY radio communication which is transmitted—by a station operating on an authorized frequency within the bands allocated to the amateur, citizens band, or general mobile radio services" ...and also reference §97.113(c):
Comments: Hammy Sammy I'm a bit embarrassed by your praise. I'm sort of a newbie ham trying to reconcile what I hear on some repeaters with the FCC rules that should be of concern to amateur operators displaying poor operating practices. So possibly for the sake of discussion I'd like to ask anyone at all to share an audio recording that we might examine for a direct application of the rules. Definitely illustrating someone who blatantly communicates on ham frequencies with unidentified and possibly unlicensed stations (squeakies) on a long term basis. So more than one example would be needed along with some sort of timeline of the recordings.
Comments: In reply to "Ham Sandwich" who said... honestly, I'm not sure what most of what you said is supposed to mean. "Casual conversation does not require justification of your motives or invasive inquiries of others." While what goes on here may in abstract be classified "casual" conversation, when you get to the point you're accusing people of, among other things, child molestation, when we know, if nothing else, that there is no sound basis for such an accusation, the motives of the defaming party are a legitimate subject for discussion. Also, the defaming party has dropped hints as to the reasons for his obsessive, creepy campaign of stalkerish harassment; attempting to discern if there is merit to those hints is hardly "invasive". When you stand up in the public square and you point the finger of blame for, among other things, ugly, despicable, criminal sex acts against others, you best be prepared to defend your claims, even if you do it while cowering behind a mask. If you imagine that these questions are "invasive" because the answers may in some way serve to identify the anonymous blowhard who has been spamming here for at least five years, you might consider that if there is, in fact, any legitimate basis for his claims, then KA6JMM already knows who he is. Beyond that, one of this person's claims is that JMM obtained personal information about him from something he carelessly discarded. If that claim is true, JMM not only knows who he is, but he knows that he is responsible, in part if not in total, for the harassment JMM has been subject to on multiple amateur radio repeaters, as well as for that person's stalkerish following of him and photographing of his property. "Your purpose is not congruent with the truth". Huh? What's my purpose? What's "the truth"? Which truth? The objective, verifiable, unimpeachable truth based on fact, or subjective, unsubstantiated, unverifiable, unbelievable anecdotes that some people mistakenly label "truth"? "...you have sold nothing." If I were selling something, that might be a problem. I'm seeking knowledge on a particular subject. If you have any, please share. It would be much more interesting than your non-responses.
Comments: Casual conversation does not require justification of your motives or invasive inquiries of others. Your perspective or projection of your purpose Hammy Sammy on Flamebook is not congruent with the truth. You can post your lengthy and colorful sales pitches here all day but in the end you have sold nothing. NO SALE! Again and again.
Comments: What if I don't use a Baofeng but another radio brand for the SPARC alarm contest? Is this acceptable per rules of the contest?
Comments: is Buzz t-hunting for SPARC?
Comments: In re: to "Not the FCC" - who SHOULD be with the FCC, but for the fact that the FCC doesn't generally employ people with common sense and critical thinking skills - who said: "Amateur radio is ONLY for communicating with other licensed amateur stations who clearly identify with their amateur service call sign. Any amateur displaying poor operating practices and even better yet who is _documented_ displaying such poor behavior is to be condemned. Wouldn't you agree?" Generally I would. That said, the criticism of RXZ for talking to an "unlicensed" station attached to that video may - MAY - have been a misstatement. In that specific instance, an argument could - COULD - be made that Joan should be classified as "third-party-traffic". Now, obviously, she herself did not specifically identify as third-party traffic, nor did any licensee ID and specifically refer to her as TPT operating via their station, or via a non-RF input to the repeater. But it's my understanding that she was getting in via a Roger Blight-approved medium. Now, we know that Roger Blight allows a great many things that are properly classified as rule violations to go on on his repeater, that he allows people who he likes to have "priority" access through VOIP, "private" RF inputs and phone patches, and he has no problem with them violating the rules - specifically not identifying - and that he even encourages his control operators [who are all unrepentant rulebreakers, persons who have boasted of being "bootleggers" (the way Roger has), persons who on a near daily basis jam stations they don't like or who they imagine are jamming them] to violate Part 97 with impunity under the doctrine of, "your repeater, your rules". I believe it's pretty clear that "your repeater, your rules" does not mean that you can violate Part 97, but it doesn't seem to be that Roger or his control operators understand that. So while it may be "approved" by Roger, and while it's clear that he fundamentally misunderstands the doctrine of "your repeater, your rules", AND while it doesn't appear that there was a legitimate operator exercising proper station control during that audio capture, I can see where the FCC's position would be that while there might have been a failure to ID, you're still - effectively - dealing with a person who is operating as third-party traffic. All other criticisms of Henry's poor behavior remain valid as a basis for criticism. And let me take this opportunity to thank you for your well-reasoned thoughts on the matter, and your gentlemanly way of conversing. You get bonus points for your choice of warning letters to cite as a reference.
Comments: I don't care so much about the squeakies as it is the FCC's paid jobb to catch them. Hams who don't want to volunteer there time to help catch the unidentifieds should not be talking to them and ultimately encouraging the squeakies to continue. Screw WA6RXZ. I hope he gets a warning letter from the FCC.
Comments: Hammy Sammy! Regarding the topic of: "WA6RXZ engaging with unidentified [unlicensed?] persons" The FCC has sent out numerous warning notices and sometime levied fines for hams that violate Section 97.1 and in particular Section 97.111(a)(1). This applies to hams who claim they knew the unidentified station had a valid amateur license or even if they ask the unidentified station for a call sign but still continue to communicate with them. Amateur radio is ONLY for communicating with other licensed amateur stations who clearly identify with their amateur service call sign. Any amateur displaying poor operating practices and even better yet who is _documented_ displaying such poor behavior is to be condemned. Wouldn't you agree? Notes: Section 97.111(a) provides for two-way communications. In summary, amateur stations are authorized to exchange messages with other stations in the amateur service Every control operator in the Amateur Radio Service (with few exceptions) is required to broadcast a station identification (call sign) at least once every ten minutes during periods of communication. §97.119 Station identification. (a) Each amateur station, except a space station or telecommand station, must transmit its assigned call sign on its transmitting channel at the end of each communication, and at least every 10 minutes during a communication, for the purpose of clearly making the source of the transmissions from the station known to those receiving the transmissions. No station may transmit unidentified communications or signals, or transmit as the station call sign, any call sign not authorized to the station. ---------------------------------------- One example out of the many I researched for the discussion: March 31, 2014 Mr. Daniel G. Churovich (Address withheld) Ripley, TN 38063 Re: WARNING NOTICE Amateur Radio License N9RSY EB-FIELDNER-14-00014749 Dear Mr. Churovich: On Friday, March 28, 2014, you were heard by staff at the Commission's High Frequency Direction Finding (HFDF) Center communicating repeatedly on 14.313 MHz with an individual who you identify only as "cowboy." This individual failed to provide his call sign during your conversation, a fact that you were aware of as you repeatedly demanded that he provide his name, call sign and location. Despite being aware of the rule violation on the part of this other individual, you continued communicating with him for an extended period of time.^ This incident constitutes unauthorized transmissions in violation of the Commission's rules. Your operation as described above is contrary to the basis and purpose of the amateur radio service as set out in Section 97.1 and is a violation of Section 97.111(a)(1) of the Commission's rules, which states in pertinent part "[a]n amateur station may transmit the following types of two-way communications: [t]ransmissions necessary to exchange messages with other stations in the amateur service . . . ".^ There is no evidence that the individual with whom you were communicating with on March 28^th was an amateur radio operator as he failed to provide his call sign as required by Commission rules. Please be advised that the Commission expects you to abide by its rules This letter serves as notice that, if operation of this type reoccurs after receipt of this letter, you could be subject to severe penalties, including license revocation, monetary forfeiture (fines),^ or a modification proceeding to restrict the frequencies upon which you may operate. Sincerely, Laura L. Smith, Esq. Special Counsel Enforcement Bureau Cc: Atlanta Field Office South Central Regional Director ^ The Commission employee used direction finding equipment and confirmed the transmissions were coming from your location. The employee recorded the offending transmissions, and provided undersigned counsel with recordings of the incident in question. Should you desire a copy of the recording, one will be made available to you. ^ See 47 C.F.R. SS 97.1 and 111(a)(1). ^ Fines normally range from $7,500 to $10,000.
Comments: If you disagree with what darin isbdoing to 435 Please call the jamming hotline at 323-877-8977 Darin will personally guide you to the right customer service rep I approve of kc6ubp jamming the 435 rptr night and day. Sincerely. Roger Bly
Comments: Just a couple of other bits of audio for those people - all three of them - who imagine there isn't a sound basis for criticism of, among others, N6UZS and KE6RJI: KE6RJI expanded verbal abuse of K6NEC: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_z_UOPiIGOd5q60OFEuqZMecP_7V2lqk/view?fbclid=IwAR0Z4VT1dZBm1MpSiGP2l-0y4Du-WLmhbULjIIeURfeRstHuT-A9n_e6xZI N6UZS uses racial slurs and is "banned" from K9KAO [on SPARC]: https://garchives1.broadcastify.com/20400/20200523/202005230149-354970-20400.mp3
Comments: Here's my new selfie 
Comments: My son was arrested. 
Comments: YOU CAN TALK ON 450, BUT YOU CAN'T TALK ON 450, THAT'S NOT RENEGADE HAM RADIO !!!
Comments:
Comments: In reply to the "Snitchboi" spammer - who seems to not understand the concept of paragraphs - who blathered: "For the record let's sum up Hammy "SnitchBoy" Sammy's obsessive Flamebook activities" I'm engaged in no "obsessive" activities. My commentary here is entirely casual. "Hammy "Snitchboy" Sammy the self-imposed Judge, Jury, Jailor, and Jesus of the "Brotherhood of Licensed Legal Amateur Radio Operators"," Yet again, that you or one of the possibly two anonymous blowhards who echos all your ridiculous talking points, characterizes me so does not make it so, nor does it mean that I have presented myself as such. I haven't. I've casually, cogently attempted to obtain information about your creepy and obsessive half-decade+ crusade of buffoonery and defamation on this website which, by your implication, is a result of things that went on as much as twenty years ago - and very likely weren't all that important then. "Anonymous Boot-Licker and Defender of KA6JMM..." I'm merely asking questions about your unsubstantiated claims. You could have easily answered my questions and, in so doing, provided a legitimate basis for criticism of JMM. Only you know why you're so spun up by my legitimate quest for information. "Trollish Spammer of Flamebook..." That my comments may be, occasionally, lengthy or wordy, doesn't make them spam. Even if I was engaged in "trolling" - I'm not - or if my comments could legitimately be described as "spam" - they can't - you'd be in no position to take issue with it, having legitimately spammed this website for over five years with ridiculous commentary and graphics. "...generating a massively hypocritical harassment manifesto of Endless Undeserved or Excessive Criticisms..." I've subjected no person to "harassment" or to "endless" or "excessive" criticism. "...with despicable commentary viciously bullying mocking and defaming LEGALLY licensed amateur radio operators (UZS,LYI, RJI, YDO etc.)" I have not "defamed" any of those people; to "defame" someone, you have to accuse them of something they're demonstrably not guilty of [generally, criminal activity or some gross sexual misconduct]. An example of such activity would be falsely accusing someone of molesting children - the way you have falsely accused people of molesting children. By contrast, I've accused no person at all - in particular those listed people - of any such thing. In point of fact, I have no idea who "LYI" is supposed to be. Beyond that, none of my commentary about any of the above could legitimately be characterized as "vicious" or "bullying". Mocking, sure - but always in way that is commiserate with their poor behavior. "...Operating Wholly without offering a single shred of authoritative evidence, photographs, documents, links, or audio recordings..." The amount of evidence that exists online of the poor behavior of anyone I've ever been critical of here is literally overwhelming, and very much a matter of public record. One need only go to Youtube and type in the call-signs N6UZS, KE6YDO, KE6RJI, K6MWT, KD6CQS, etc., and you'll be treated to a veritable feast of ridiculousness that each and every one of those operators has engaged in gleefully. That's saying nothing of audio posted to websites like soundboard.com, clyp.com, Facebook and several private websites that host hours of content displaying the poor behavior of those operators and others associated with the 435 repeater. Here are just a few samples of some of the worst of those operators: N6UZS repeatedly using racial slurs in reference to KC6UBP: WA6RXZ engaging with unidentified [unlicensed?] persons and verbally abusing an obviously mentally impaired person: K6MWT gleefully boasting of, effectively, stalking members of the 435 user-base [characterizing it as having them followed by "private investigators"] KE6RJI falsely accusing someone of murder, giving out their personal information and threatening to murder them: KC6UBP verbally abusing KE6RRI [one of four 435 owners to ban him from the repeater]: K6SYW & KD6CQS vulgar, homophobic rant followed by KD6CQS verbally abusing putrid Pat simply because he stated the truth - for once - about CQS's behavior: KE6YDO deranged, using racial slurs: KE6YDO deranged, possibly under the influence, threatening the same operator his brother falsely accused of murder: KE6YDO & KE6RJI defaming K6NEC: ...and these are just a few examples of things I've legitimately criticized those operators for. "...let alone he's incapable of or unwilling to provide any evidence of his own possession of a valid Amateur Radio License... I'm perfectly capable of doing it, but why should I do what you're unwilling to? "...but instead Hammy "SnitchBoy" Sammy endlessly repeats, retypes and regurgitates/reformats limitless mentally defective opinions, baseless accusations, shrill lies, relentless whining and petty half-truths..." I'm not sure how an opinion in and of itself can be "mentally defective", but with regard to the rest of it, not one allegation I've raised has been "baseless", nothing I've said is false or "half-true". I suppose to the person whose commentary I'm critical of, it could be viewed as whining - but only for the fact that you can't deal with being criticized in a way that's entirely tame compared to your own despicable comments. "...as well as repetitively demanding documentation, evidence and other "proof" which he never, ever provides (notice that?).." You mean like I just did above? Not that it was necessary because many of those videos have been linked to here before and the despicable behavior of all of those operators is widely known and discussed almost daily, and there is ample evidence of it on several places online. This, as contrast to your "evidence" of the poor character of JMM which simply doesn't exist anywhere aside from in a few short audio clips, none of which actually display any behavior equivalent to that which you've just seen evidence of from those people I'm critical of [along with many others who have posted those clips and many others long before I showed up], and none of which actually fits with your own description of the audio. "...outside of asserting laughable "discussions with people in the know" without ever offering a statement that was attributed to a specific individual (nor will he respond to requests to do so)..." Again, I COULD do that, but doing so would betray a confidence. I know it's crazy but there are people out there who really don't like the idea of being smeared as child molesters simply for disagreeing with you. And why do you imagine you deserve to know the identities of people who aren't even part of this discussion when you, despite making many and serious allegations, refuse to reveal your own? "...but instead doubles down on the childish validity of his own spam-like, generic, repetitive, unattributed, anecdotal claims while being incapable of offering a cogent explanation..." None of your comments make sense, friend. You honestly come off as retarded. "...for his obsession with being the sole voice on Flamebook on all matters pertaining to KA6JMM..." Again, I'm merely seeking information about why you've chosen to dedicate at least half a decade of your life to making lame comments on this website about a person who, based on all available evidence, might be somewhat goofy in his activities as a ham radio operator but is otherwise harmless. "...who after five bans..." Almost all of which can be credited to your illegal activities on the radio. "...is no longer a welcomed individual in the brotherhood of licensed, legal amateur radio operators..." The brotherhood of amateur radio encompasses far more than either of the "renegade" repeaters, the largely unused "CLARA" repeater, the W6CDW repeater or the seemingly confused about it's identity - is it another "renegade" repeater or is it a "good buddy" repeater? - SPARC. With the exception of CLARA, the amateur community generally views the repeaters JMM has had problems on - due almost entirely to your illegal activities - are viewed as "problem" repeaters - sometimes unfairly - where only LIDS operate. Given the buffoonery you hear in the clips above, some of which comes from the owner of 435 and four of his "control operators" [among whom can be counted a person banned from 435 at least four times by four different repeater owners], that's not an entirely unfair characterization of things. So the bans you keep making a big deal about, which you caused to happen in large part - while operating illegally, mean very little. I hold out hope that at some point you'll have some reply that isn't nonsensical and that actually addresses the issue.
Comments: Q1. If I win the Baofeng alarm contest, where is Johnny going to take me in his white pickup truck? A1. In order to have the full "JMM Experience" the following will occur - You will be banned from SPARC, 435, CLARA, W6CDW and 450. You will be driven by BB's house late at night while making veiled threats over the air and demanding an apology from BB. Next you will be driven to Costco to buy a large package of chocolate muffins to eat alone at home. Then you will be driven by JMM's trailer to view the back lot full of crap (two broken down motor homes, large pile of useless solar panels, piles of leaves and weeds, etc.) Q2. Can we drive around JMM's trailer and take pictures? A2. Please reread the contest's rules. You are to submit your own pictures as part of the structured bonus points awards. 24 Slevin
Comments: If I win the Baofeng alarm contest, where is Johnny going to take me in his white pickup truck? Can we drive around JMM's trailer and take pictures? |
| < Previous 20 | Next 20 > |
Back to THE OFFICIAL 147.450 FLAMEBOOK!