Simon Mason recently said:

".........in distress as do the police on a weekly basis as I hear them on my
scanner."

I would be interested in how it is done : listening in to police
communications.

(I thought it was illegal - but now understand that it isn't - and people like
Simon do it quite legally)

On 23/12/2016 11:58, Judith wrote:
Simon Mason recently said:

".........in distress as do the police on a weekly basis as I hear them on my
scanner."

I would be interested in how it is done : listening in to police
communications.

(I thought it was illegal - but now understand that it isn't - and people like
Simon do it quite legally)


Judith, why don't you find something more constructive to do with your
life, instead of stalking and bullying people? Simon may be a bit of a
fantasist, but that doesn't explain or excuse your behaviour towards him.

Judith wrote:
Simon Mason recently said:

".........in distress as do the police on a weekly basis as I hear them on my
scanner."

I would be interested in how it is done : listening in to police
communications.

(I thought it was illegal - but now understand that it isn't - and people like
Simon do it quite legally)


Judith, do you know what happened to Burt when he checked up on Paul,
Judith?

--
STC / M0TEY /
http://twitter.com/ukradioamateur

On 23/12/2016 11:58, Judith wrote:
Simon Mason recently said:

".........in distress as do the police on a weekly basis as I hear them on my
scanner."


Not in the UK you don't



I would be interested in how it is done : listening in to police
communications.

(I thought it was illegal - but now understand that it isn't - and people like
Simon do it quite legally)

"Stephen Thomas Cole" wrote in message
news
Judith wrote:
Simon Mason recently said:

".........in distress as do the police on a weekly basis as I hear them on
my
scanner."

I would be interested in how it is done : listening in to police
communications.

(I thought it was illegal - but now understand that it isn't - and people
like
Simon do it quite legally)


Judith, do you know what happened to Burt when he checked up on Paul,
Judith?

STC / M0TEY /

===

Please do tell?



--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 11:58:27 +0000, Judith wrote:

Simon Mason recently said:

".........in distress as do the police on a weekly basis as I hear them on my
scanner."

I would be interested in how it is done : listening in to police
communications.

(I thought it was illegal - but now understand that it isn't - and people like
Simon do it quite legally)


I was wrong - the person who answered the question made a typo !!

It is apparently illegal to listen in - despite what others have claimed.

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 12:49:34 +0000, GB wrote:

On 23/12/2016 11:58, Judith wrote:
Simon Mason recently said:

".........in distress as do the police on a weekly basis as I hear them on my
scanner."

I would be interested in how it is done : listening in to police
communications.

(I thought it was illegal - but now understand that it isn't - and people like
Simon do it quite legally)


Judith, why don't you find something more constructive to do with your
life, instead of stalking and bullying people? Simon may be a bit of a
fantasist, but that doesn't explain or excuse your behaviour towards him.

Simon is a knob. He has posted certain things about me in the past which he
should not have done.

I will continue to take the **** out of him on a regular basis.

I do not stalk him.

Judith wrote:

Simon Mason recently said:

".........in distress as do the police on a weekly basis as I hear them on my
scanner."

I would be interested in how it is done : listening in to police
communications.

(I thought it was illegal - but now understand that it isn't - and people like
Simon do it quite legally)

Some countries may be a bit more easy-going than our Calvinism will
allow us. That applies to contributors to Usenet as well as TPTB.

--

Roger Hayter

On 23/12/2016 12:49, GB wrote:
On 23/12/2016 11:58, Judith wrote:
Simon Mason recently said:

".........in distress as do the police on a weekly basis as I hear
them on my
scanner."

I would be interested in how it is done : listening in to police
communications.

(I thought it was illegal - but now understand that it isn't - and
people like
Simon do it quite legally)


Judith, why don't you find something more constructive to do with your
life, instead of stalking and bullying people? Simon may be a bit of a
fantasist, but that doesn't explain or excuse your behaviour towards him.

+1

On 23/12/2016 13:45, Judith wrote:

Judith, why don't you find something more constructive to do with your
life, instead of stalking and bullying people? Simon may be a bit of a
fantasist, but that doesn't explain or excuse your behaviour towards him.

Simon is a knob. He has posted certain things about me in the past which he
should not have done.

I will continue to take the **** out of him on a regular basis.

Don't get me wrong. A bit of banter on usenet is absolutely fine. But it
shouldn't spill over into real life.



I do not stalk him.


Good.

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 13:45:40 +0000, Judith wrote:

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 12:49:34 +0000, GB wrote:

On 23/12/2016 11:58, Judith wrote:
Simon Mason recently said:

".........in distress as do the police on a weekly basis as I hear
them on my scanner."

I would be interested in how it is done : listening in to police
communications.

(I thought it was illegal - but now understand that it isn't - and
people like Simon do it quite legally)


Judith, why don't you find something more constructive to do with your
life, instead of stalking and bullying people? Simon may be a bit of a
fantasist, but that doesn't explain or excuse your behaviour towards
him.

Simon is a knob. He has posted certain things about me in the past
which he should not have done.

I will continue to take the **** out of him on a regular basis.

I do not stalk him.


Did you or did you not write a letter to his employer regarding his use
of usenet?

Did you or did you not attend a shareholders' meeting to ask questions
about his use of usenet?

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 14:44:39 +0000, Custos Custodum wrote:

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 13:45:40 +0000, Judith wrote:

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 12:49:34 +0000, GB
wrote:

On 23/12/2016 11:58, Judith wrote:
Simon Mason recently said:

".........in distress as do the police on a weekly basis as I hear
them on my scanner."

I would be interested in how it is done : listening in to police
communications.

(I thought it was illegal - but now understand that it isn't - and
people like Simon do it quite legally)


Judith, why don't you find something more constructive to do with your
life, instead of stalking and bullying people? Simon may be a bit of a
fantasist, but that doesn't explain or excuse your behaviour towards
him.

Simon is a knob. He has posted certain things about me in the past
which he should not have done.

I will continue to take the **** out of him on a regular basis.

I do not stalk him.


Did you or did you not write a letter to his employer regarding his use
of usenet?

Did you or did you not attend a shareholders' meeting to ask questions
about his use of usenet?



Judith, do you know what happened to Burt when he checked up on Paul
Cummins, Judith? And have you got any idea why Rich said he had
progressed to a full amateur radio licence when he actually on had an
intermediate amateur radio licence, Judith?


Thanks, Judith.

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 15:01:47 +0000, pamela wrote:


On the contrary, Simon thrusts real life into his post

I'm not convinced that Simon has a real life. Or that he does much in the
way of thrusting.

On 23/12/16 11:58, Judith wrote:
Simon Mason recently said:

".........in distress as do the police on a weekly basis as I hear them on my
scanner."

I would be interested in how it is done : listening in to police
communications.

(I thought it was illegal - but now understand that it isn't - and people like
Simon do it quite legally)


It is illegal to deliberately listen (or attempt to listen) to any
transmission not intended for general/public reception.

Plus, since police comms have 'gone digital' (probably) everywhere in
the UK, it is technically far from easy if not impossible in the UK.
The days of listening to the police on (relatively) cheap scanners have
long gone.

jimbo tomlinkinson and stepanus wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 14:44:39 +0000, Custos Custodum wrote:

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 13:45:40 +0000, Judith wrote:

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 12:49:34 +0000, GB
wrote:

On 23/12/2016 11:58, Judith wrote:
Simon Mason recently said:

".........in distress as do the police on a weekly basis as I hear
them on my scanner."

I would be interested in how it is done : listening in to police
communications.

(I thought it was illegal - but now understand that it isn't - and
people like Simon do it quite legally)


Judith, why don't you find something more constructive to do with your
life, instead of stalking and bullying people? Simon may be a bit of a
fantasist, but that doesn't explain or excuse your behaviour towards
him.

Simon is a knob. He has posted certain things about me in the past
which he should not have done.

I will continue to take the **** out of him on a regular basis.

I do not stalk him.


Did you or did you not write a letter to his employer regarding his use
of usenet?

Did you or did you not attend a shareholders' meeting to ask questions
about his use of usenet?



Judith, do you know what happened to Burt when he checked up on Paul
Cummins, Judith? And have you got any idea why Rich said he had
progressed to a full amateur radio licence when he actually on had an
intermediate amateur radio licence, Judith?


Thanks, Judith.


Also, Judith, do you know how many car aerials Burt has had snapped so far
this school holiday, Judith?

--
STC / M0TEY /
http://twitter.com/ukradioamateur

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 13:39:16 -0000, Judith wrote:

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 11:58:27 +0000, Judith wrote:

Simon Mason recently said:

".........in distress as do the police on a weekly basis as I hear them on my
scanner."

I would be interested in how it is done : listening in to police
communications.

(I thought it was illegal - but now understand that it isn't - and people like
Simon do it quite legally)


I was wrong - the person who answered the question made a typo !!

It is apparently illegal to listen in - despite what others have claimed.

If it's encrypted, then you're hacking. If it's (and it did used to be) open, then you're not breaking any law.

--
Women generally don't fart as much as men, because they never shut up long enough to build up pressure.

"pamela" wrote in message
...
On 13:56 23 Dec 2016, GB wrote:

On 23/12/2016 13:45, Judith wrote:

Judith, why don't you find something more constructive to do
with your life, instead of stalking and bullying people? Simon
may be a bit of a fantasist, but that doesn't explain or
excuse your behaviour towards him.

Simon is a knob. He has posted certain things about me in the
past which he should not have done.

I will continue to take the **** out of him on a regular basis.

Don't get me wrong. A bit of banter on usenet is absolutely
fine. But it shouldn't spill over into real life.

On the contrary, Simon thrusts real life into his post and does it
in a deliberately provocative manner. It seems entirely
predictable that someone might choose to make real life
rejoinders.

I don't know any specific details but it seems that Judith has
taken certain matters into real life which is exactly what Simon
was angling for.

If Simon posts his stream of nonsense then I feel Judith is
providing a service by offering consequences a child would
understand. It helps keep the provocations down.

I've seen not a shred of evidence that Simon has changed the
way he does anything as a result of that arsehole's stalking.

I do not stalk him.


Good.

James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 13:39:16 -0000, Judith wrote:

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 11:58:27 +0000, Judith wrote:

Simon Mason recently said:

".........in distress as do the police on a weekly basis as I hear them on my
scanner."

I would be interested in how it is done : listening in to police
communications.

(I thought it was illegal - but now understand that it isn't - and people like
Simon do it quite legally)


I was wrong - the person who answered the question made a typo !!

It is apparently illegal to listen in - despite what others have claimed.

If it's encrypted, then you're hacking. If it's (and it did used to be)
open, then you're not breaking any law.


Sure, but, James, what happened to Burt when he checked up on Paul, James?

--
STC / M0TEY /
http://twitter.com/ukradioamateur

"Brian Reay" wrote in message
news
On 23/12/16 11:58, Judith wrote:
Simon Mason recently said:
".........in distress as do the police on a weekly basis as I hear them
on my
scanner."

I would be interested in how it is done : listening in to police
communications.

(I thought it was illegal - but now understand that it isn't - and people
like
Simon do it quite legally)

It is illegal to deliberately listen (or attempt to listen) to any
transmission not intended for general/public reception.

Plus, since police comms have 'gone digital' (probably) everywhere in the
UK, it is technically far from easy if not impossible in the UK.
The days of listening to the police on (relatively) cheap scanners have
long gone.

I remember the days when all you needed was an FM radio.
--
;-)
..
73 de Frank Turner-Smith G3VKI - mine's a pint.
..
http://turner-smith.uk

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 18:25:59 -0000, Stephen Thomas Cole wrote:

James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 13:39:16 -0000, Judith wrote:

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 11:58:27 +0000, Judith wrote:

Simon Mason recently said:

".........in distress as do the police on a weekly basis as I hear them on my
scanner."

I would be interested in how it is done : listening in to police
communications.

(I thought it was illegal - but now understand that it isn't - and people like
Simon do it quite legally)


I was wrong - the person who answered the question made a typo !!

It is apparently illegal to listen in - despite what others have claimed.

If it's encrypted, then you're hacking. If it's (and it did used to be)
open, then you're not breaking any law.


Sure, but, James, what happened to Burt when he checked up on Paul, James?

I don't know who either of those people are.

--
He was deeply in love. When she spoke, he thought he heard bells, as if she were a dustcart reversing.

James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 18:25:59 -0000, Stephen Thomas Cole
wrote:
James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 13:39:16 -0000, Judith
wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 11:58:27 +0000, Judith
wrote:
Simon Mason recently said:

".........in distress as do the police on a weekly basis as I
hear them on my scanner."

I would be interested in how it is done : listening in to police
communications.

(I thought it was illegal - but now understand that it isn't -
and people like Simon do it quite legally)


I was wrong - the person who answered the question made a typo !!

It is apparently illegal to listen in - despite what others have
claimed.

If it's encrypted, then you're hacking. If it's (and it did used
to be) open, then you're not breaking any law.


Sure, but, James, what happened to Burt when he checked up on Paul,
James?

I don't know who either of those people are.

FFS don't tell him!
If you do he will infest and destroy your group. This well known troll
destroyed uk.rec.driving

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 18:39:50 -0000
"FranK Turner-Smith G3VKI" wrote:

"Brian Reay" wrote in message
news
On 23/12/16 11:58, Judith wrote:
Simon Mason recently said:
".........in distress as do the police on a weekly basis as I hear
them on my
scanner."

I would be interested in how it is done : listening in to police
communications.

(I thought it was illegal - but now understand that it isn't - and
people like
Simon do it quite legally)

It is illegal to deliberately listen (or attempt to listen) to any
transmission not intended for general/public reception.

Plus, since police comms have 'gone digital' (probably) everywhere
in the UK, it is technically far from easy if not impossible in the
UK. The days of listening to the police on (relatively) cheap
scanners have long gone.

I remember the days when all you needed was an FM radio.

We often used to listen to them on our Radiogram!

On 23/12/16 20:39, FranK Turner-Smith G3VKI wrote:
"Brian Reay" wrote in message
news
On 23/12/16 11:58, Judith wrote:
Simon Mason recently said:
".........in distress as do the police on a weekly basis as I hear
them on my
scanner."

I would be interested in how it is done : listening in to police
communications.

(I thought it was illegal - but now understand that it isn't - and
people like
Simon do it quite legally)

It is illegal to deliberately listen (or attempt to listen) to any
transmission not intended for general/public reception.

Plus, since police comms have 'gone digital' (probably) everywhere in
the UK, it is technically far from easy if not impossible in the UK.
The days of listening to the police on (relatively) cheap scanners
have long gone.

I remember the days when all you needed was an FM radio.

I remember the days when all you needed was a Hifi amp actually.

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 19:36:29 -0000, Stephen Thomas Troll wrote:

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 18:51:42 +0000, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 18:25:59 -0000, Stephen Thomas Cole
wrote:

James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 13:39:16 -0000, Judith
wrote:

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 11:58:27 +0000, Judith
wrote:

Simon Mason recently said:

".........in distress as do the police on a weekly basis as I hear
them on my scanner."

I would be interested in how it is done : listening in to police
communications.

(I thought it was illegal - but now understand that it isn't - and
people like Simon do it quite legally)


I was wrong - the person who answered the question made a typo !!

It is apparently illegal to listen in - despite what others have
claimed.

If it's encrypted, then you're hacking. If it's (and it did used to
be) open, then you're not breaking any law.


Sure, but, James, what happened to Burt when he checked up on Paul,
James?

I don't know who either of those people are.

We-l-l, Burt is uk.radio.amateur's TurNiP, but with much better keyboard
skills, and he's retired from a glittering career in the security
services (Ssshh, he doesn't like to talk about it). Paul is
uk.amateur.radio's Simon Mason, but not as likeable, or unemployable.

Paul says that Burt got into trouble when he checked up on him, but
neither he or Burt will say what sort of trouble, or why Burt was
checking up on him in the first place.

All clear to you now?

As clear as mud.

--
I used to not get along with my mother-in-law, but over the last few
months, I've developed quite an attachment for her. It goes over her
head, and a strap comes down under her chin to keep her mouth shut.

On 23/12/16 21:36, Stephen Thomas Troll wrote:
We-l-l, Burt is uk.radio.amateur's TurNiP
Impossible. No one comes anywhere close.

On 23/12/2016 19:27, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 19:12:14 -0000, Mr Pounder Esquire
wrote:

James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 18:25:59 -0000, Stephen Thomas Cole
wrote:
James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 13:39:16 -0000, Judith
wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 11:58:27 +0000, Judith
wrote:
Simon Mason recently said:

".........in distress as do the police on a weekly basis as I
hear them on my scanner."

I would be interested in how it is done : listening in to police
communications.

(I thought it was illegal - but now understand that it isn't -
and people like Simon do it quite legally)


I was wrong - the person who answered the question made a typo !!

It is apparently illegal to listen in - despite what others have
claimed.

If it's encrypted, then you're hacking. If it's (and it did used
to be) open, then you're not breaking any law.


Sure, but, James, what happened to Burt when he checked up on Paul,
James?

I don't know who either of those people are.

FFS don't tell him!
If you do he will infest and destroy your group. This well known troll
destroyed uk.rec.driving

It is not possible for someone to destroy a group. People are welcome
to killfile me. Nemo is the sort of troll who is making a mess of
uk.rec.driving.

And the Peeler and the Burke.

James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 18:25:59 -0000, Stephen Thomas Cole
wrote:

James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 13:39:16 -0000, Judith wrote:

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 11:58:27 +0000, Judith wrote:

Simon Mason recently said:

".........in distress as do the police on a weekly basis as I hear them on my
scanner."

I would be interested in how it is done : listening in to police
communications.

(I thought it was illegal - but now understand that it isn't - and people like
Simon do it quite legally)


I was wrong - the person who answered the question made a typo !!

It is apparently illegal to listen in - despite what others have claimed.

If it's encrypted, then you're hacking. If it's (and it did used to be)
open, then you're not breaking any law.


Sure, but, James, what happened to Burt when he checked up on Paul, James?

I don't know who either of those people are.


James, Burt is a long-time poster to ukra who has a habit of ****ting the
bed on a regular basis, whether it's posting tearful screeds about local
youths snapping his car aerial and posting dog-turds through his letterbox
or ****ing up his newsreader and posting with the wrong sock or long
grumbles about the police seizing all of his computers in a dawn raid (some
of which were eventually returned damaged). He claims a decades long civil
service/intelligence service career and regularly posts near-verbatim Le
Carre plot-points as evidence but seems convinced that M&S microwave meals
are haute cuisine. He also insists that he holds a "Class A" amateur radio
licence despite previously posting that he has to call in "licensed
friends" to test his equipment and antenna on transmit and consistently
demonstrating near-zero radio-related knowledge or understanding. He's very
old and really hates being reminded that he's going to die soon. In short,
he's a real piece of work, 2 parts ****wit and 6 parts kook. Paul is
Cummins, and I presume you've had the displeasure.

HTH.

--
STC / M0TEY /
http://twitter.com/ukradioamateur

Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:
James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 18:25:59 -0000, Stephen Thomas Cole
wrote:
James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 13:39:16 -0000, Judith
wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 11:58:27 +0000, Judith
wrote:
Simon Mason recently said:

".........in distress as do the police on a weekly basis as I
hear them on my scanner."

I would be interested in how it is done : listening in to police
communications.

(I thought it was illegal - but now understand that it isn't -
and people like Simon do it quite legally)


I was wrong - the person who answered the question made a typo !!

It is apparently illegal to listen in - despite what others have
claimed.

If it's encrypted, then you're hacking. If it's (and it did used
to be) open, then you're not breaking any law.


Sure, but, James, what happened to Burt when he checked up on Paul,
James?

I don't know who either of those people are.

FFS don't tell him!
If you do he will infest and destroy your group. This well known troll
destroyed uk.rec.driving

I don't think that ukra is able to be ruined anymore than it already is.
Gareth Alun Evans G4SDW ****ed it ragged about a decade ago.

--
STC / M0TEY /
http://twitter.com/ukradioamateur

James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 19:36:29 -0000, Stephen Thomas Troll
wrote:

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 18:51:42 +0000, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 18:25:59 -0000, Stephen Thomas Cole
wrote:

James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 13:39:16 -0000, Judith
wrote:

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 11:58:27 +0000, Judith
wrote:

Simon Mason recently said:

".........in distress as do the police on a weekly basis as I hear
them on my scanner."

I would be interested in how it is done : listening in to police
communications.

(I thought it was illegal - but now understand that it isn't - and
people like Simon do it quite legally)


I was wrong - the person who answered the question made a typo !!

It is apparently illegal to listen in - despite what others have
claimed.

If it's encrypted, then you're hacking. If it's (and it did used to
be) open, then you're not breaking any law.


Sure, but, James, what happened to Burt when he checked up on Paul,
James?

I don't know who either of those people are.

We-l-l, Burt is uk.radio.amateur's TurNiP, but with much better keyboard
skills, and he's retired from a glittering career in the security
services (Ssshh, he doesn't like to talk about it). Paul is
uk.amateur.radio's Simon Mason, but not as likeable, or unemployable.

Paul says that Burt got into trouble when he checked up on him, but
neither he or Burt will say what sort of trouble, or why Burt was
checking up on him in the first place.

All clear to you now?

As clear as mud.


James, let me see if I can help you, James. Paul said that something
happened to Burt when he checked up on Paul, James, but didn't say what
happened to Burt when he checked up on Paul or why, James, Burt checked up
on Paul in the first place. So, we've been asking Burt what happened to
Burt when he checked up on Paul, James, but Burt hadn't let on what
happened to Burt when he checked up on Paul, James. Jim then got involved,
James, and started asking what happened to Burt, James, when Burt checked
up on Paul, James, but then Jim said that Jim wasn't interested in what
happened to Burt after Burt checked up on Paul even though Jim had
literally just asked what happened to Burt when he checked up on Paul,
James. Jim asked me to ask Burt what happened to Burt when Burt checked up
on Paul, so I asked Burt what happened to Burt when Burt checked up on Paul
but Jim then said Jim was going on holiday, James. Hopefully, we'll get to
the bottom of what happened to Burt when Burt checked up on Paul when Jim
gets back from his break, but if you, James, can shed any light on the
whole Burt/Paul saga in the meantime, James, that'd be much appreciated,
James.

--
STC / M0TEY /
http://twitter.com/ukradioamateur

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/12/16 21:36, Stephen Thomas Troll wrote:
We-l-l, Burt is uk.radio.amateur's TurNiP
Impossible. No one comes anywhere close.

Burt is a right ****ing idiot, though. And very old. He's going to die
soon.

--
STC / M0TEY /
http://twitter.com/ukradioamateur

Stephen Thomas Troll wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 19:48:31 +0000, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 19:36:29 -0000, Stephen Thomas Troll
wrote:

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 18:51:42 +0000, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 18:25:59 -0000, Stephen Thomas Cole
wrote:

James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 13:39:16 -0000, Judith

wrote:

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 11:58:27 +0000, Judith
wrote:

Simon Mason recently said:

".........in distress as do the police on a weekly basis as I hear
them on my scanner."

I would be interested in how it is done : listening in to police
communications.

(I thought it was illegal - but now understand that it isn't - and
people like Simon do it quite legally)


I was wrong - the person who answered the question made a typo !!

It is apparently illegal to listen in - despite what others have
claimed.

If it's encrypted, then you're hacking. If it's (and it did used to
be) open, then you're not breaking any law.


Sure, but, James, what happened to Burt when he checked up on Paul,
James?

I don't know who either of those people are.

We-l-l, Burt is uk.radio.amateur's TurNiP, but with much better
keyboard skills, and he's retired from a glittering career in the
security services (Ssshh, he doesn't like to talk about it). Paul is
uk.amateur.radio's Simon Mason, but not as likeable, or unemployable.

I meant to write 'employable' rather than 'unemployable'. Soz, Simes.

Paul says that Burt got into trouble when he checked up on him, but
neither he or Burt will say what sort of trouble, or why Burt was
checking up on him in the first place.

All clear to you now?

As clear as mud.

Join in anyway! I'm sure you'll pick it up as you go along.



ukra could do with some fresh blood to brighten the place up. Burt has left
a right stench in the group from all the times he's shat the bed there.

--
STC / M0TEY /
http://twitter.com/ukradioamateur

In article . com,
lid (Stephen Thomas Troll) wrote:

Paul says that Burt got into trouble when he checked up on him

I have made no such claim.

This has nothing to do with ukra, followups set.


--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
Please Help us dispose of unwanted virtual currency:
Bitcoin: 1LzAJBqzoaEudhsZ14W7YrdYSmLZ5m1seZ

Stephen Thomas Cole wrote:
James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 19:36:29 -0000, Stephen Thomas Troll
wrote:

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 18:51:42 +0000, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 18:25:59 -0000, Stephen Thomas Cole
wrote:

James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 13:39:16 -0000, Judith
wrote:

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 11:58:27 +0000, Judith
wrote:

Simon Mason recently said:

".........in distress as do the police on a weekly basis as I
hear them on my scanner."

I would be interested in how it is done : listening in to
police communications.

(I thought it was illegal - but now understand that it isn't -
and people like Simon do it quite legally)


I was wrong - the person who answered the question made a typo
!!

It is apparently illegal to listen in - despite what others have
claimed.

If it's encrypted, then you're hacking. If it's (and it did
used to be) open, then you're not breaking any law.


Sure, but, James, what happened to Burt when he checked up on
Paul, James?

I don't know who either of those people are.

We-l-l, Burt is uk.radio.amateur's TurNiP, but with much better
keyboard skills, and he's retired from a glittering career in the
security services (Ssshh, he doesn't like to talk about it). Paul is
uk.amateur.radio's Simon Mason, but not as likeable, or
unemployable.

Paul says that Burt got into trouble when he checked up on him, but
neither he or Burt will say what sort of trouble, or why Burt was
checking up on him in the first place.

All clear to you now?

As clear as mud.


James, let me see if I can help you, James. Paul said that something
happened to Burt when he checked up on Paul, James, but didn't say
what happened to Burt when he checked up on Paul or why, James, Burt
checked up on Paul in the first place. So, we've been asking Burt
what happened to Burt when he checked up on Paul, James, but Burt
hadn't let on what happened to Burt when he checked up on Paul,
James. Jim then got involved, James, and started asking what happened
to Burt, James, when Burt checked up on Paul, James, but then Jim
said that Jim wasn't interested in what happened to Burt after Burt
checked up on Paul even though Jim had literally just asked what
happened to Burt when he checked up on Paul, James. Jim asked me to
ask Burt what happened to Burt when Burt checked up on Paul, so I
asked Burt what happened to Burt when Burt checked up on Paul but Jim
then said Jim was going on holiday, James. Hopefully, we'll get to
the bottom of what happened to Burt when Burt checked up on Paul when
Jim gets back from his break, but if you, James, can shed any light
on the whole Burt/Paul saga in the meantime, James, that'd be much
appreciated, James.

You have just wasted part of your life replying to the well known troll/
unemployable dickhead Peter Hucker.
Aka:
Uncle Peter:
Mr Macaw:
PHucker:
Tough Guy:
James Wilkinson:
James Wilkinson Sword.
Etc.

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 14:44:12 +0000 (UTC), Custos Custodum
wrote:

snip

Did you or did you not write a letter to his employer regarding his use
of usenet?

Did you or did you not attend a shareholders' meeting to ask questions
about his use of usenet?


You will never know. Unless you ask Mason (and believe him that is)

Stephen Thomas Troll wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 20:34:00 +0000, Paul Cummins wrote:

In article . com,
lid (Stephen Thomas Troll) wrote:

Paul says that Burt got into trouble when he checked up on him

I have made no such claim.

Sophism:

On Mon, 14 Nov 2016 18:37:00 +0000, Paul Cummins wrote:

Yes - so why don;t you ask Spike, who DID check, what comeback he had as
a result...



This has nothing to do with ukra, followups set.


panto


OH YES IT DOES!


Followups restored.


Paul, why the FURIOUS backpedal, Paul? We're just trying to get to the
bottom of what happened to Burt when Burt checked up on you, Paul, and why
Burt checked up on you in the first place, Paul. Paul, Jim was saying you'd
spent some time at a place that Jim called "the big hoose", Paul. Now, I
don't speak Scottish so wasn't entirely sure what Jim was going on about,
Paul, when Jim said that you'd been to "the big hoose", Paul, so was
wondering if you could help clear up exactly what Jim meant when Jim said
that you'd been to "the big hoose", Paul? Thanks, Paul.

--
STC / M0TEY /
http://twitter.com/ukradioamateur

On 23/12/2016 22:02, Stephen Thomas Cole wrote:
Stephen Thomas Troll wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 20:34:00 +0000, Paul Cummins wrote:

In article . com,
lid (Stephen Thomas Troll) wrote:

Paul says that Burt got into trouble when he checked up on him

I have made no such claim.

Sophism:

On Mon, 14 Nov 2016 18:37:00 +0000, Paul Cummins wrote:

Yes - so why don;t you ask Spike, who DID check, what comeback he had as
a result...



This has nothing to do with ukra, followups set.


panto


OH YES IT DOES!


Followups restored.


Paul, why the FURIOUS backpedal, Paul? We're just trying to get to the
bottom of what happened to Burt when Burt checked up on you, Paul, and why
Burt checked up on you in the first place, Paul. Paul, Jim was saying you'd
spent some time at a place that Jim called "the big hoose", Paul. Now, I
don't speak Scottish so wasn't entirely sure what Jim was going on about,
Paul, when Jim said that you'd been to "the big hoose", Paul, so was
wondering if you could help clear up exactly what Jim meant when Jim said
that you'd been to "the big hoose", Paul? Thanks, Paul.


'The big hoose' = prison AFAIK

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 20:44:44 -0000, Stephen Thomas Cole wrote:

Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:
James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 18:25:59 -0000, Stephen Thomas Cole
wrote:
James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 13:39:16 -0000, Judith
wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 11:58:27 +0000, Judith
wrote:
Simon Mason recently said:

".........in distress as do the police on a weekly basis as I
hear them on my scanner."

I would be interested in how it is done : listening in to police
communications.

(I thought it was illegal - but now understand that it isn't -
and people like Simon do it quite legally)


I was wrong - the person who answered the question made a typo !!

It is apparently illegal to listen in - despite what others have
claimed.

If it's encrypted, then you're hacking. If it's (and it did used
to be) open, then you're not breaking any law.


Sure, but, James, what happened to Burt when he checked up on Paul,
James?

I don't know who either of those people are.

FFS don't tell him!
If you do he will infest and destroy your group. This well known troll
destroyed uk.rec.driving

I don't think that ukra is able to be ruined anymore than it already is.
Gareth Alun Evans G4SDW ****ed it ragged about a decade ago.

Nothing can be ****ed by one person. Are you incapable of ignoring one person?

--
Debugger: a tool to remove evidence of rear entry.

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 21:39:33 -0000, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:

Stephen Thomas Cole wrote:
James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 19:36:29 -0000, Stephen Thomas Troll
wrote:

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 18:51:42 +0000, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 18:25:59 -0000, Stephen Thomas Cole
wrote:

James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 13:39:16 -0000, Judith
wrote:

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 11:58:27 +0000, Judith
wrote:

Simon Mason recently said:

".........in distress as do the police on a weekly basis as I
hear them on my scanner."

I would be interested in how it is done : listening in to
police communications.

(I thought it was illegal - but now understand that it isn't -
and people like Simon do it quite legally)


I was wrong - the person who answered the question made a typo
!!

It is apparently illegal to listen in - despite what others have
claimed.

If it's encrypted, then you're hacking. If it's (and it did
used to be) open, then you're not breaking any law.


Sure, but, James, what happened to Burt when he checked up on
Paul, James?

I don't know who either of those people are.

We-l-l, Burt is uk.radio.amateur's TurNiP, but with much better
keyboard skills, and he's retired from a glittering career in the
security services (Ssshh, he doesn't like to talk about it). Paul is
uk.amateur.radio's Simon Mason, but not as likeable, or
unemployable.

Paul says that Burt got into trouble when he checked up on him, but
neither he or Burt will say what sort of trouble, or why Burt was
checking up on him in the first place.

All clear to you now?

As clear as mud.


James, let me see if I can help you, James. Paul said that something
happened to Burt when he checked up on Paul, James, but didn't say
what happened to Burt when he checked up on Paul or why, James, Burt
checked up on Paul in the first place. So, we've been asking Burt
what happened to Burt when he checked up on Paul, James, but Burt
hadn't let on what happened to Burt when he checked up on Paul,
James. Jim then got involved, James, and started asking what happened
to Burt, James, when Burt checked up on Paul, James, but then Jim
said that Jim wasn't interested in what happened to Burt after Burt
checked up on Paul even though Jim had literally just asked what
happened to Burt when he checked up on Paul, James. Jim asked me to
ask Burt what happened to Burt when Burt checked up on Paul, so I
asked Burt what happened to Burt when Burt checked up on Paul but Jim
then said Jim was going on holiday, James. Hopefully, we'll get to
the bottom of what happened to Burt when Burt checked up on Paul when
Jim gets back from his break, but if you, James, can shed any light
on the whole Burt/Paul saga in the meantime, James, that'd be much
appreciated, James.

You have just wasted part of your life replying to the well known troll/
unemployable dickhead Peter Hucker.
Aka:
Uncle Peter:
Mr Macaw:
PHucker:
Tough Guy:
James Wilkinson:
James Wilkinson Sword.
Etc.

Stalking is a sign of love. Do you want to sleep with me sir? My cock is bigger than yours!

--
Flanders and Swann on MOT tests:
Our car is getting a bit old, it'll have to be tested soon.
You know they started these tests for 10-year-old cars, they brought it down to six, now five, they'll bring it down to three.
There's even been some talk of having them tested before they leave the factories."

On 23/12/2016 14:44, Custos Custodum wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 13:45:40 +0000, Judith wrote:

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 12:49:34 +0000, GB wrote:

On 23/12/2016 11:58, Judith wrote:
Simon Mason recently said:

".........in distress as do the police on a weekly basis as I hear
them on my scanner."

I would be interested in how it is done : listening in to police
communications.

(I thought it was illegal - but now understand that it isn't - and
people like Simon do it quite legally)


Judith, why don't you find something more constructive to do with your
life, instead of stalking and bullying people? Simon may be a bit of a
fantasist, but that doesn't explain or excuse your behaviour towards
him.

Simon is a knob. He has posted certain things about me in the past
which he should not have done.

I will continue to take the **** out of him on a regular basis.

I do not stalk him.


Did you or did you not write a letter to his employer regarding his use
of usenet?

Did you or did you not attend a shareholders' meeting to ask questions
about his use of usenet?

Only in Mason's imagination. His grasp of reality is sketchy at best.

--
Dave - The Medway Handyman

On 23/12/2016 11:58, Judith wrote:
Simon Mason recently said:

".........in distress as do the police on a weekly basis as I hear them on my
scanner."

I would be interested in how it is done : listening in to police
communications.

(I thought it was illegal - but now understand that it isn't - and people like
Simon do it quite legally)

Not only illegal, ****ing impossible. Airwave is utterly secure. Mason
lives in a world of his own.

--
Dave - The Medway Handyman