[Kenwood] Re: RE: [SOC] BPL - Email the White House

[Peter A Markavage]

What's wrong with speaking German? It's good to have knowledge of a
second language. Heck, I even know some French and Polish.
Pete,WA2CWA

On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 11:22:00 -0400 <mwbesemer@cox.net> writes:
> Amazing how many people are willing to go down without the slightest 
> amount of fight.  No wonder the country is going down the toilet.  
> If our fathers had so little gumption when they were called to 
> service in WWII, we'd all be speaking German now.  
> 
> You can be a spectator and let it happen to you, or a participant 
> and they to alter the course.  
> 
> 
> > 
> > From: "Reicher, James" <JReicher@hrblock.com>
> > Date: 2004/04/28 Wed AM 09:16:23 EDT
> > To: <soc@mailman.qth.net>, 
> >         "Kenwood List Server" <kenwood@mailman.qth.net>
> > Subject: RE: [SOC] BPL - Email the White House
> > 
> > That's a hopeless cause.  W's buddies stand to make a huge bundle 
> on
> > BPL.  That's why the FCC is ignoring good engineering practice and 
> the
> > usual procedures.
> > 
> > 73 de N8AU, Jim in Raymore, MO
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: soc-admin@mailman.qth.net [mailto:soc-admin@mailman.qth.net] 
> On
> > Behalf Of Mike Besemer (KG8L)
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2004 9:43 PM
> > To: Kenwood List Server; SOC Mailing List
> > Subject: [SOC] BPL - Email the White House
> > 
> > 
> > As many of you know, President Bush addressed BPL in a speech made 
> on 26
> > April.   (http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2004/04/27/1/?nc=1) 
> > 
> > Now is the time to email the White House, offer your opinion, and 
> ask
> > for
> > Mr. Bush's withdrawal of BPL support.
> > 
> > To email the White House, use the following URL.  
> > 
> > https://sawho14.eop.gov/PERSdata/intro.htm
> > 
> > Remember... Be specific, concise, credential yourself, offer 
> technical
> > reasons for your position, and offer alternatives.  Also... Be 
> polite...
> > You
> > don't want the Secret Service or the FBI knocking on your door.
> > 
> > Below is a copy of what I sent forward.
> > 
> > <snip>  
> > 
> > 
> > On 26 April 2004, you endorsed the development and deployment of a 
> new
> > broadband delivery medium known as Broadband Over Powerline, or 
> BPL.
> > While
> > I understand the need for exploration of new broadband delivery 
> mediums,
> > the
> > concept behind BPL is technically flawed and could represent a
> > tremendous
> > danger to the security of our nation in the event of another 9/11 
> type
> > terrorist act.  
> > 
> > BPL utilizes our existing power grid to deliver broadband data.  
> It
> > accomplishes this by inducing radio frequency energy onto the 
> powerline.
> > This energy is then transmitted by the powerline from point to 
> point.
> > Unfortunately, the radio frequency energy induced on these 
> powerlines
> > represents a tremendous interference potential to licensed radio
> > services
> > such as military, police, public safety, and amateur radio.  It is 
> the
> > very
> > design and concept of BPL that causes potential for interference; 
> that
> > is to
> > say, BPL, by its very nature, must radiate radio frequency 
> energy.
> > 
> > My particular concern is for the amateur radio service.  I am a 
> licensed
> > radio amateur, Call Sign KG8L.  I have held the highest class of 
> license
> > available, Amateur Extra, for over 25 years and have considerable
> > experience
> > in a variety of amateur radio operations.  Additionally, I am a 
> 23-year
> > veteran of the U.S. Air Force with a background in radio 
> communications
> > and
> > radar.  
> > 
> > Amateur radio operators have served the public for decades to 
> provide
> > communications for public service and disaster relief when all 
> other
> > methods
> > of communications have failed.  I sincerely fear that in the event 
> of
> > another major attack upon our country, or in the case of a 
> natural
> > disaster
> > or other event that impedes or disables our day-to-day 
> communications
> > mediums (police radio, television, broadcast radio, cell phone, 
> etc.)
> > the
> > ability of amateur radio operators to provide critical backup
> > communications
> > would be severely hampered or eliminated by interference caused by 
> the
> > deployment of BPL technology.  Current FCC regulations calling 
> for
> > mitigation of BPL interference are neither aggressive enough nor 
> fully
> > technically deployable to the extent required to eliminate the
> > interference
> > potential.
> > 
> > Other alternatives, such as Broadband Wireless Access, provide
> > reasonable
> > alternatives to BPL and present no potential for interference 
> with
> > licensed
> > radio services and therefore no danger to the security of our 
> nation.  I
> > urge you to reconsider your support for BPL and ask you to direct 
> the
> > exploration of other methods of broadband delivery.
> > 
> > <snip>
> > 
> > 73 to all,
> > 
> > Mike
> > KG8L
>