Topband: 1845 KC CW Intentional QRM

[Bill Tippett]

Hello Thomas,

At 11:24 AM 4/17/04, Thomas Giella KN4LF wrote:
>Bill,
>   You can blather all that you want including listing people in your 
> email that you worked on 1837.5 kc the past two nights but your wasting 
> your breath. You can try to slander me in front of Mr. Hollingsworth by 
> bringing up my historical knowledge of Adolph Hitler or try to have Mr. 
> Hollingsworth garner an unfavorable opinion of me without knowing me. I 
> did not cc: Mr. Hollingsworth in my initial email to you. But as I see 
> that you just did I will do the same. You have an open vendetta against 
> me because I led the charge in opposition to RM-10352 via my website of: 
> 160-10 Meter Amateur Radio Resources & More 
> <http://www.kn4lf.com>http://www.kn4lf.com and in comments to the FCC.

         You're very humorous Thomas, and I'm sure Riley
who is a trained attorney is having a good belly laugh!  Let
me define slander for you:

1 : the utterance of false charges or misrepresentations which defame and 
damage another's reputation
2 : a false and defamatory oral statement about a person -- compare libel

Since I kept copies of the E-mails you sent me defending Adolf
Hitler as a devout Christian, I will be happy to produce them
in a court of law if that is what you wish.  Slander and libel only
apply if a person cannot document their statements.  I can, so
I suggest you drop your references to slander.  If anything, that
word better describes your unsubstantiated claims about me.

         I believe you flatter yourself regarding the failure of
RM-10352.  It was not accepted by the FCC for one very simple
and obvious reason...namely that ARRL did not support it.  ARRL
supported Novice Refarming which got far fewer public comments
(>120 total) yet it did NOT support RM-10352 which got >520
comments with ~80% in favor of it.  If anyone feels ARRL is
representing us, I believe they should examine that support and
the inconsistency in ARRL's position supporting mode segmentation
on the HF bands but not on 160.  Why?  Again the logic escapes
me.  We had broad support on RM-10352, but not from the only
organization that the FCC listens to.  This is one reason I may
make no further comments on the NPRM.  It clearly doesn't matter
what I think...it only matters what ARRL thinks.  QED.

>   Adolph Hitler was a Christian and a Catholic but that historical fact 
> has nothing to do with the issue at hand. As you are trying to shine me 
> in a bad light let me advise Mr. Hollingsworth that I served my country 
> in the U.S. Coast Guard and protected my society in law enforcement and 
> became disabled because of that service. Did you serve in the military? 
> What have you done for your country?

         Members of Al Quaeda have also served in our military,
so exactly what does that prove?  You were the one who first
brought up the religious analogy "get over it and act like an
adult and a Minister instead of an elitist child having a tantrum".
You also may want to review your definition of "elitism".  I always
thought that word applied to people who held themselves above the
law or other people.  Your actions by operating outside established
Bandplan guidelines seem to fit this definition quite well.

>   Back to the issue at hand, an equal number of people can state that you 
> do not "normally" operate on 1837.5 kc. Also the fact that "you" 
> identified the station to me via email (AG4T) as the station that started 
> calling CQ in CW on top of us on 1845 kc last night without asking QRL, 
> is proof that the incident last night was a conspiracy by you and your 
> elitist cronies to try and set us up. I will repeat, you sent the station 
> AG4T to QRM us on 1845 kc hoping that we would QSY down to 1840 kc, as 
> 1849 kc was in use. We did QSY down to 1840 kc, then there you were 
> calling CQ DX on 1837.5 kc, so that you could accuse us of malicious 
> interference and of operating in opposition to the IARU and ARRL band 
> plans, which by the way are not in agreement. Per 47 CFR Part 97 we could 
> legally QSY down to 1840 kc, due to the malicious interference on 1845 kc 
> last night. While I'm talking malicious interference why do you and your 
> cronies continue to send CW on top of my PSK31 and MFSK16 operations on 
> and around 1807 kc? You and your cronies do not want any mode of 
> operation on 160 meters but CW, that's the bottom line. Many a night 
> there is no CW activity on or near 1807 kc until we start operating our 
> 31 hz PSK31 and 350 hz MFSK digital modes. Then boom big signals show up 
> on top of us calling CQ DX in CW!!!

         You are completely misconstruing the facts again.  I operate
CW anywhere in the CW band between 1800 and 1840.  I operate
SSB from 1843 up.  In fact the only QSO's I have logged on 160
SSB this year were a few contacts in the CQ 160 SSB Contest with
friends and 5 DX QSO's on SSB...LU6FL on 24 February, G6PZ on 6
March, CU2CE on 7 March, 3B9C on 8 April and T33C on 14 April,
with all of these latter 5 on 1843 or higher.  Very funny about AG4T...
you still missed the point that I only heard him answer me on 1837.5.
I never listened on 1845 so how would I have heard him there?  I don't
even know him and am not even positive I copied his call correctly.
I repeat, I was very busy last night chasing two potential new ones.
Regarding your statement about IARU and ARRL Bandplans not being
in complete agreement, they ARE in agreement in restricting no SSB
BW below 1840 (edge of LSB bandwidth which implies a carrier of 1842-3 for
2-3 kHz BW LSB transmissions).  The FCC's NPRM was humorous to me
in that even the FCC did not comprehend the difference between ARRL's
carrier limit of 1843.0 in our new Bandplan and the former Bandplan's LSB
lower bandwidth limit of 1840.  In fact, for a 3 kHz LSB signal, they are
identical.  Is even the FCC dumbing down to match the rest of us these
days?  :-((

http://www.iaru-r2.org/hf_e.htm

         I never "identified the station to me via email (AG4T) as the station
that started calling CQ in CW on top of us on 1845 kc".  I identified that 
station
as one who answered me on 1837.5 CW when I was calling CQ DX.  I am not
even positive about his call because he was very weak.  Just use your head
for a moment...since I was chasing two new countries on 1837.5 (UK8GK) and
1815.0 (YA8G), exactly what makes you believe I would be wasting my
time listening to SSB on 1845, much less having the time to harass you?
Believe me I've got better things to do with my time.  For your information,
my receiver was never even set to SSB last night except to briefly check
where the SSB was coming from when it landed on a frequency I had been
using continuously for the previous half hour (i.e. since 00z).  I have no 
idea
who is causing you problems but it is not me, so I would appreciate
immediate cessation any implication that I am.  If you do not, you may
indeed learn the definition of slander and libel from your attorney.

>   Your actions last night on 160 meters were inflammatory, antagonistic 
> and child like, a setup by you and your cohorts against us, like you 
> baited the SSB guys out in the Midwest a few years ago. Your attempt to 
> create your own personal CW only gated community playground on 160 
> failed. The FCC ruled against your co-sponsored RM-10352 so get over it 
> and act like an adult instead of an elitist child having a tantrum. Just 
> because you have 300 DXCC countries does not make you owner of or 
> policeman over the 160 meter band. You have a personal dislike of SSB and 
> SSB operators, you stated that years back and I have that evidence, your 
> motivation for creating problems with SSB operators. Again I state that 
> you and your cronies do not want any mode of operation on 160 but CW, 
> that's the bottom line. And by nearly everyone one in our SSB group on 
> 1845 kc operate CW also, so we are not motivated by hatred like you are.

         Which "actions" were those and where is any shred of evidence?  I was
using 1837.5 CW, well within the ARRL Bandplan, for 30 minutes prior to you
and others moving to 1840 LSB, which is 3 kHz outside the ARRL Bandplan
for SSB.  Yes I have a dislike for many of the red neck nets that frequent
75 meters, which is one reason I no longer use 75 SSB.  They are frankly a
disgrace to Amateur Radio and a disease that will spread to 160 if present
trends continue.  I would be quite ashamed for non-amateurs or children to hear
the garbage-mouth nets on 75 SSB, and applaud Riley's efforts to clean up that
trash.  On 160, I normally never even listen above 1840, so I don't know what
goes on up there, and could frankly care less.

>   You picked the wrong person to try and bully. I have been running a 
> tape recorder every night on 1845 kc, as we rag chew and work DX, since 
> before you proposed RM-10352, because of the previous trouble you have 
> tried to cause. All we want to do is legally and peaceably enjoy the 
> "hobby" of amateur radio so leave us alone. Remember it's a hobby not a 
> fanatical profession like you have made it personally for yourself. Get a life.

         Thomas, truth will always bully who it will bully.  The truth is, 
I don't
care what you say on SSB as long as you stay on 1843 and above, since I
seldom listen on 160 SSB except for the very rare occasions noted above.
Since the FCC apparently wants Bandplan enforcement done as Riley
did it for W5TZ et al, I will be very happy to accommodate them with
documented evidence of stations transmitting outside of ARRL Bandplan
recommendations and interfering with others in the CW band.  If you truly want
to "legally and peaceably enjoy the "hobby" of amateur radio",  I very 
strongly
suggest you follow ARRL's Bandplan,  or else be prepared to suffer the
same consequences as W5TZ et al.

         Unfortunately this mess reminds me of the rather obvious intentional
interference from W8VLN on CW who landed on JD1YBJ while W6UB was in
the process of working him.  Now I'm inspired to fully document that
incident as I remember it and forward it to the FCC.  If everyone begins
doing the same, I suspect a lot of this nonsense will cease very quickly,
with or without RM-10352.

                                 73,  Bill  W4ZV