Cingular cell phone service - Re: Rapid shutdown of AMPS within months (Steven Scharf dead wong again)

Author

Re: Rapid shutdown of AMPS within months (Steven Scharf dead wong again)

Joel Koltner

2007-12-26, 10:33 pm

"John Navas" < spamfilter1@navasgro
up.com> wrote in message
news:u204n3tsbidd9q5
dc2nk7u49qpchhkhjsv@
4ax.com...
> <http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcon...n1.2a4dbb8.html>

Interesting article... surprising that it's "impossible" to upgrade OnStar
units from analog to digital, though -- clearly it has to just be a matter of
it not being cost effective or something, but that seems odd given that the
lady who complained received a $500 coupon towards a new card... hmm...
Granted, I suppose that a $500 coupon is really only "worth" a small fraction
of that amount since the likelihood she'd be able to use it (or sell it) is
quite slim.

John Navas

2007-12-26, 10:33 pm

On Wed, 26 Dec 2007 15:29:08 -0800, SMS ???• ?
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in
< 4772e33c$0$84246$742
ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:

>Joel Koltner wrote:
>
>Actually most rural AMPS (Analog) networks will remain operational even
>after the FCC AMPS mandate expires. The operators of the rural networks
>have already stated this. They have no incentive to drastically reduce
>their coverage.

False. They'll reuse the spectrum for far more profitable digital
roaming.

>The large carriers that have AMPS networks (AT&T, Verizon, and Alltel)
>will turn off most or all of their AMPS networks soon after the mandate
>expires. However per FCC rules, they are forbidden from turning off AMPS
>in areas where doing so will result in any loss of wireless coverage.

False. There is no such requirement.

>According to the FCC website, "Cellular licensees that intend to
>discontinue analog service after February 18, 2008 are permitted, in
>lieu of making a revised Cellular Geographic Service Area (CGSA)
>showing, to file a certification stating that the discontinuance of
>analog service will not result in any loss of wireless coverage
>throughout an affected CGSA."

The key word there is "permitted".

>If the FCC actually enforces their own rules (doubtful under a
>Republican administration), this virtually guarantees that AMPS service
>will remain available in areas where the digital coverage is less than
>the AMPS coverage. Personally I could tell the FCC many areas even in
>the San Francisco Bay Area where there is only AMPS coverage,

False. As shown by carriers own coverage maps.

>Operators of small rural cellular networks have already indicated that
>their AMPS networks will remain intact "for the foreseeable future."
>This is because it would cost them a considerable amount of money to
>install enough digital towers to duplicate their analog coverage.

False. Fake quote made up by you.

>The real question is whether Verizon, AT&T, and Alltel will comply with
>the FCC rules and keep AMPS up and running in areas where there are not
>sufficient digital towers to provide equivalent coverage to AMPS. ...

There is no real question. They've already made it clear that AMPS will
be shut down completely.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/ Cingu...less_FA
Q>

John Navas

2007-12-27, 4:33 am

On Wed, 26 Dec 2007 20:48:56 -0800, SMS ???• ?
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in
< 47732e30$0$84167$742
ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:

>DTC wrote:

>
>The rural carriers appear to have installed all the towers that they're
>going to install. According to the statements from the rural carriers,
>AMPS is going to be around for a very long time. That's good news for
>people like me that often travel into those areas.

In fact they plan to migrate to digital, just like the majors.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/ Cingu...less_FA
Q>

Jud Hardcastle

2007-12-27, 10:33 am

In article <O3Fcj.32691$JD.2428@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net>,
me@nothingtoseehere.zzx says...
> John Navas wrote:
>
> Considering how large of remaining analog foot print Verizon has
> in Texas ("As shown by carriers own coverage maps." - Navas), its hard
> to imagine them turning up digital service in less than a year. Analog
> will indeed fade away, but not next year or even the year after perhaps.
>
> BTW, the analog foot print appears to have been static for the past
> few years.
>
>
Static because Verizon doesn't own/operate many AMPS towers in rural
Texas--they're roaming on other carrier's systems MOST of which are
ALREADY digital--but GSM/TDMA not CDMA. AMPS (and TDMA) *can* be turned
off by those carriers on the shutdown date--no need to "turn up" digital
because it's already done. The rural carrier's MAY add a few more towers
to cover areas where high-power AMPS reached and digital doesn't but
they're under no obligation to ADD CDMA. Verizon has been taking
advantage of analog roaming to tout their "more coverage" than ATT--and
correctly for those with dual mode phones (although no larger than my
GAIT phone/plan)--but the advantage is about to end.
--
Jud
Dallas TX USA

clifto

2007-12-27, 12:33 pm

SMS ???? ? wrote:
> In California and Florida I've often roamed onto AT&T AMPS where there
> is no digital coverage of any kind. If the major carriers really do shut
> down _all_ their AMPS then they will be violating the FCC rules that
> mandate that digital coverage be available in the areas where AMPS is
> being shut down.

Tell me more about these rules. I had the impression they could shut down
AMPS wherever and whenever they felt the urge, no matter who it disabled.

--
Dec. 6 (Bloomberg) -- Government officials and activists flying to Bali,
Indonesia, for the United Nations meeting on climate change will cause
as much pollution as 20,000 cars in a year.

Tinman

2007-12-27, 12:33 pm

SMS ???. ? wrote:
> Jud Hardcastle wrote:
>
> Unlikely to end any time soon. All the news reports about the AMPS
> mandate ending always have statements by the rural carriers that they
> will keep AMPS operating for the foreseeable future (they really have
> no choice but to do so both for legal and practical reasons).
> Similarly, if AT&T, Verizon, and Alltel intend to comply with the FCC
> rules, then they will have to leave their fringe area AMPS network
> up, even if they don't want to talk about doing so.
>

News flash: AT&T has already stated their intentions, and in fact began
shutting down AMPS/TDMA back in June.

"http://ap.google.com/article/ ALeqM5iiczkwxq1jK5IK
XGCsNQkWgOHmQAD8TM1P
KG0"

"Verizon Wireless, AT&T Inc. and Alltel Corp. are the largest carriers that
still have analog networks. Alltel will take more time than Verizon and AT&T
to close its network, shutting down in three stages ending in September.
Each carrier will keep its portion of the newly available spectrum, and will
use it to boost their digital services."

"The larger carriers say their digital buildout will cover any gaps left by
the demise of analog service."

According to the above the carrier that will take the longest to shut down
AMPS, Alltel, will be finished by September. The chicken little-like comment
about fringe areas is wishful thinking.

Heck, even Canadian carriers--who have not already done so--intend on
shutting down AMPS come February to be inline with the US. Rogers shut it
down back in May.

The world doesn't revolve around the less than 1% of users who still use
AMPS.

>
> In any case, the bottom line is that the original poster is incorrect.
> Portions of the AMPS system will be shut down in February, but much of
> it will remain operational if you believe what the rural carriers are
> all saying.

In fact it's just the opposite: most of AMPS will be shut down with only a
handful of rural operators--statistically insignificant--that cling to AMPS.
From the same link:
"A few rural cellular providers may keep their networks up. Plateau
Wireless, which provides service in eastern New Mexico and western Texas,
will maintain its analog network alongside a digital one "for the
foreseeable future," according to Chief Executive Tom Phelps."

Whether you choose to accept it or not AMPS is going away sooner rather than
later. That doesn't mean by February 19 it will be completely gone. But a
year from now it will be in its death throes. Before you go off on some
rural tangent, rural areas don't run the country. The Amish still ride in
buggies but that doesn't mean we build interstate highways for them.

--
Mike

Larry

2007-12-27, 12:33 pm

John Navas < spamfilter1@navasgro
up.com> wrote in
news:nvi6n357epv05bi
j3qffbgargiuojj7vp2@
4ax.com:

> In fact they plan to migrate to digital, just like the majors.
>
> --
> Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
> John Navas
<http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/ Cingu...less_FA
Q>
>
>

That's odd. There were ONLY 11 responses about AMPS sunset sent to the
FCC. The big guns Verizon, Alltel, ATT/Cingular, of course, want it off
to install more digital bandwidth in the cities. But, the comments from
the rural carriers that responded say differently from your conjecture.

Plateau Cellular, a rural carrier in Texas and New Mexico gives some
insight into the situation in the countryside:

"1. Current State of AMPS
Plateau currently provides AMPS service to approximately 58% of its
customer base.
Approximately 2.8% of such customers use Plateau’s analog service
utilizing bag phones and invehicle
installations of mobile radios. Specifically, rural farmers utilize AMPS
bag phones to
control and monitor center pivot agricultural irrigation systems for
their farm operations.2 This
service provides farmers the ability to utilize cellular service at
greater distances with the higher
power bag phones compared to a digital handset. It is important for the
farmers and the farming
industry that valuable resources such as water, energy, money and time
are conserved. These
conservation efforts are promulgated through the use of AMPS controlled
irrigation systems. In
addition, Plateau provides roaming service to subscribers of its roaming
partners whose home
markets are CDMA. Since there are areas within Plateau’s market where no
CDMA coverage
exists, those subscribers who have dual mode phones will revert to analog
service. These
subscribers use approximately 3.7% of all analog roaming minutes. As 58%
of Plateau’s
customer base continues to use analog service, Plateau believes such
service is critical to its
customers in the rural areas in which it operates and therefore serves
the public interest.
While the percentage of bag phone and in-vehicle mobile radio users may
seem relatively
small, it represents several hundred customers. Similarly, though the
percentage of roaming
minutes used by Plateau’s CDMA roaming partners’ subscribers is small in
relation to the overall
magnitude of Plateau’s roaming service, Plateau provides several hundred
thousand minutes per
month on analog to the roaming public. This is significant for those
portions of this rural market
where there is no CDMA coverage or no alternative roaming partners
available, and it is an
important factor for nationwide ubiquitous coverage since, without
Plateau’s analog service,
there would be no roaming alternative."

With the farming community using AMPS to control irrigation and to have
RELIABLE AMPS comms across vast areas of the countryside, like in Plateau
country, I'll bet the old bagphone will still connect to a stable, long-
range little carrier way past 2010, when your digital only SELLphones are
all reading NO SERVICE 300 ft from the 500' AMPS towers in the boondocks.

This is all a scam about maximizing profits in LARGE CITIES with traffic
overload. Out in Farmtown, USA, traffic isn't a problem, RANGE is. AMPS
still provides range no 150mw digital toyphone can dream of on a Texas
ranch. You go try to pull that AMPS from under the dash in the truck on
that ranch.....you'll find out how much buckshot is in a 12 guage shell!

Larry
--
I worked hard under Social Security since I was 12.
My SS retirement check is one oz of gold per month.
Can we afford to start any more wars for corporations?

Larry

2007-12-27, 12:33 pm

clifto <clifto@gmail.com> wrote in
news:ts2d45-hdu.ln1@remote.clifto.com:

> SMS ???? ? wrote:
>
> Tell me more about these rules. I had the impression they could shut
> down AMPS wherever and whenever they felt the urge, no matter who it
> disabled.
>

Nope, that's just not true, either. There's an FCC form they must
complete telling the FCC cutting off AMPS won't effect their customers,
which would be a lie in rural America, of course. Only 11 responses, so
far. Only the city big guns are cutting off AMPS. The rural carriers
are telling FCC a different line than you're getting from the big gun
fanboys here.

Read what they say....well, only the part the big boys want you to see,
anyways.....on:
http://wireless.fcc.gov/services/index.htm?
job=cellular_reports
&id=cellular

Notice how blacked out Verizon's responses are. What are they hiding,
the truth again??

Rural carriers wanted nothing to do with digital and its short range in
the first place. What the hell good is a cellphone that only goes 2
miles on the open range in Texas? How stupid....

Larry
--
I worked hard under Social Security since I was 12.
My SS retirement check is one oz of gold per month.
Can we afford to start any more wars for corporations?

Larry

2007-12-27, 3:33 pm

"Tinman" <ask@for.it> wrote in news:5ti65tF1dme12U1
@mid.individual.net:

> Whether you choose to accept it or not AMPS is going away sooner
> rather than later. That doesn't mean by February 19 it will be
> completely gone. But a year from now it will be in its death throes.
> Before you go off on some rural tangent, rural areas don't run the
> country. The Amish still ride in buggies but that doesn't mean we
> build interstate highways for them.
>
>
> --
> Mike
>

Mike, I'm curious. What benefit do you think Mike, himself, is going to
realize by this AMPS shutdown, that makes you so happy? Do you think your
service is going to take some leap or be increased if AMPS is shutdown for
those who use it?

Why are you so hyped up about its demise?

Larry
--
I worked hard under Social Security since I was 12.
My SS retirement check is one oz of gold per month.
Can we afford to start any more wars for corporations?

Tinman

2007-12-27, 3:33 pm

SMS ???. ? wrote:
> Tinman wrote:
>
>
> What you don't understand is that those handful of rural operators,
> while insignificant as far as their own subscriber numbers, are
> providing roaming coverage to tens of millions of Verizon and Sprint
> subscribers (and getting revenue from doing so). I don't care that a
> company like Golden State Cellular has only a few hundred thousand
> subscribers, they still provide CDMA and AMPS coverage to me in many
> areas where there is no other coverage at all. GSM users are SOL in
> those areas.

Your argument assumes a great many AMPS-capable phones still in use. I don't
buy that argument, as most people don't use AMPS/CDMA or AMPS/TDMA phones
anymore (and GAIT never took off). I haven't had one in over two years. And
quite frankly I've not been all that impressed with the quality of AMPS on
CDMA/AMPS phones for about 5 years now.

Moreover, the number of AMPS-capable digital phones is going to drop even
more so next year. Any carrier who can't rely on their own subscribers to
make a living is in serious trouble if they think they can instead rely on
AMPS roaming. And you can forget about OnStar users for revenue...

--
Mike

Bob Scheurle

2007-12-27, 10:33 pm

On Thu, 27 Dec 2007 13:33:23 -0700, "Tinman" <ask@for.it> wrote:
>Your argument assumes a great many AMPS-capable phones still in use. I don't
>buy that argument, as most people don't use AMPS/CDMA or AMPS/TDMA phones
>anymore (and GAIT never took off). I haven't had one in over two years. And
>quite frankly I've not been all that impressed with the quality of AMPS on
>CDMA/AMPS phones for about 5 years now.

I have a tri-mode phone that's almost 6 years old. I usually have it set
to 'digital only' unless I'm traveling through the Adirondacks or
southern Quebec, which only has AMPS service.

One time, I made an AMPS call connecting to a tower 50 miles away. (I
was on top of a mountain in Hawaii.) CDMA won't work at that distance.

Larry

2007-12-27, 10:33 pm

=?UTF-8?B? U01TIOaWr+iSguaWh+KA
oiDlpI8=?= <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote in news:47740300$0$8423
4$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net:

> I think that the government should have something similar to the REA.
> Maybe the RDA (Rural Digitalization Authority) that helps fund digital
> wireless coverage in rural areas where it is otherwise not cost
> effective.
>
>

Why are we so hell bent on installing short range digital when long range
AMPS has worked so good for years in markets where traffic is relatively
low and users are quite satisfied with the results? If it doesn't NEED
fixing, why can't we leave it alone?

Are we going to replace all those irrigation AMPS systems? At whos
expense, the farmers? The government (taxpayers)? The SELLphone
company's? Someone would have to pay.

The AMPS equipment is in place and obviously works quite well for these
rural areas where more power with better antennas works so well. Do we
HAVE to screw it up just to satisfy the city fanbois? No 200mw radios
with shitty, near non-existant antennas, are going to give good service
in dense woods, massive ranches, over long ranges AMPS was made for.
That would be a gross error and an economic disaster for smaller carriers
who ALREADY have the AMPS system running fine. How stupid it is to try
to change it so some teenie bopper's little pink toyphone works without
an AMPS transceiver in it.

We already XXXXed 'em one time when we destroyed the paging business,
with its great rural coverage with serious power from multiple
transmitters. Why again?

Larry
--
I worked hard under Social Security since I was 12.
My SS retirement check is one oz of gold per month.
Can we afford to start any more wars for corporations?

Larry

2007-12-27, 10:33 pm

=?UTF-8?B? U01TIOaWr+iSguaWh+KA
oiDlpI8=?= <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote in news:477400eb$0$8417
4$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net:

> Tinman wrote:
>
>
> What you don't understand is that those handful of rural operators,
> while insignificant as far as their own subscriber numbers, are
> providing roaming coverage to tens of millions of Verizon and Sprint
> subscribers (and getting revenue from doing so). I don't care that a
> company like Golden State Cellular has only a few hundred thousand
> subscribers, they still provide CDMA and AMPS coverage to me in many
> areas where there is no other coverage at all. GSM users are SOL in
> those areas.
>

And ALL of that problem lays directly on the shoulders of the FCC who
refuse to enforce their own regulations when they hand out a license to
these thieves. There's no enforcement when SELLular lies or simply
refuses to respond to poor coverage issues where it's not particularly
profitable, something ONLY the FCC can force them to do.

Some powerful organization needs to take a very investigative look at the
money flowing up this pyramid from the carriers on the bottom through the
FCC to the damned politicians. The whole thing is corrupt to the core.

Larry
--
I worked hard under Social Security since I was 12.
My SS retirement check is one oz of gold per month.
Can we afford to start any more wars for corporations?

Bob Scheurle

2007-12-28, 12:33 pm

On Fri, 28 Dec 2007 08:00:36 -0800, SMS ???• ?
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>Wait, so you mean to say that you don't plan your travels so that you
>are never out of range of digital coverage? You are actually willing to
>travel to and through places with only AMPS coverage? You would actually
>drive on a road with no digital coverage?

Not only that, but I travel on roads with - gasp! - no coverage at all!

I traveled for 45 years without a cell phone. I think I can manage
without one for a bit, thank you.

--
Bob Scheurle
Visit the NJ-ARP Blog at http://www.nj-arp.org/blog

Pegleg

2007-12-28, 12:33 pm

On Fri, 28 Dec 2007 17:25:19 GMT, Bob Scheurle <njtbob2@X-verizon-X.net>
wrote:

>Not only that, but I travel on roads with - gasp! - no coverage at all!
>
>I traveled for 45 years without a cell phone. I think I can manage
>without one for a bit, thank you.

Yea, no shit...does that idiot realize there are huge areas of the US
that don't have any kind of coverage? Are we only suppose to travel
where there is cell coverage? That would be a pretty damn boring life!

Larry

2007-12-28, 10:33 pm

Pegleg <Pegleg@usnavyret.mil> wrote in
news:r7dan3hj9htptp2
kutllob927v75moquj4@
4ax.com:

> On Fri, 28 Dec 2007 17:25:19 GMT, Bob Scheurle <njtbob2@X-verizon-
X.net>
> wrote:
>
all![color=darkred]
>
> Yea, no shit...does that idiot realize there are huge areas of the
US
> that don't have any kind of coverage? Are we only suppose to
travel
> where there is cell coverage? That would be a pretty damn boring
life!

>

Same offshore. That's why there's Iridium...(c;)

www.iridium.com

Larry
--
I worked hard under Social Security since I was 12.
My SS retirement check is one oz of gold per month.
Can we afford to start any more wars for corporations?

Larry

2007-12-28, 10:33 pm

=?UTF-8?B? U01TIOaWr+iSguaWh+KA
oiDlpI8=?= <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote in news:47753597$0$8420
3$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net:

> I had an idea once where instead of everyone carrying cell phones,
and
> paying all that money, that someone should just install phones that
you
> pay to use when you need them. They could be installed at stores,
> restaurants, gas stations, etc. You could just insert a token or
some
> coins and make a call. Maybe someday someone will do something like
this
> and cell phones will be obsolete.
>

I'm looking for a Presidential candidate to vote for that wants to
divert funds away from stupid wars for the bankers to get rich off of
to install WiMax across the country anywhere there's PCS phone
service, then we can work on the countryside. The difference in
price between war and WiMax is about 90:1 and we can use the surplus
to feed starving AMERICANS, for a change, instead of everyone else.

Any FCC licensee who objects would have his license immediately
revoked for 20 years and any govt employee or politician caught
taking a telecom bribe would be hung in effigy in the Rotunda as a
reminder to the rest of them who is actually in control, the folks
paying the bills back home that want WiMax, not War!

"WIMAX NOT WAR" will be our slogan....

Any other voters for that?

Larry
--
I worked hard under Social Security since I was 12.
My SS retirement check is one oz of gold per month.
Can we afford to start any more wars for corporations?

Bob Scheurle

2007-12-28, 10:33 pm

On Fri, 28 Dec 2007 09:45:05 -0800, SMS ???• ?
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:>>
>
>
>Wow, you are brave. I've only found one area with no coverage at all in
>the past year, which was the road from Lake Louise up to Jasper.

I-87 through the Adirondacks has no cell phone coverage. They have
roadside emergency phones every two miles.

Someone died in an accident there about a year ago after they ran off the
road in an area with no cell phone coverage. The car was not visible
from the road. The occupants were injured and unable to leave the car,
so they couldn't walk back to the roadway. It took 32 hours to find
them, and the driver passed away from hypothermia in the meantime.

>I had an idea once where instead of everyone carrying cell phones, and
>paying all that money, that someone should just install phones that you
>pay to use when you need them. They could be installed at stores,
>restaurants, gas stations, etc. You could just insert a token or some
>coins and make a call. Maybe someday someone will do something like this
>and cell phones will be obsolete.

Someone stole your idea. We have phones like that in New Jersey. Some
of them are even placed so you can make calls while sitting in your car.

Todd Allcock

2007-12-28, 10:33 pm

At 28 Dec 2007 20:48:19 +0000 Bob Scheurle wrote:

>
> Someone stole your idea. We have phones like that in New Jersey. Some
> of them are even placed so you can make calls while sitting in your car.

Ironically, the last time I saw someone actually using a payphone, he was
making an international call to his cellphone provider in South Africa to
ask why his phone wasn't roaming here in the US despite their promise to
him that it would! ;-)

Todd Allcock

2007-12-28, 10:33 pm

At 28 Dec 2007 16:26:46 -0600 Jer wrote:
> I was on a land line waiting list for over a year before my first one.

It must be tough to be old enough to have your first phone autographed by
A. G. Bell himself, huh? ;-)

Haven't heard from you here in a little while, Jer, nice to have you back!

clifto

2007-12-28, 10:33 pm

SMS ???? ? wrote:
> Obviously sarcasm doesn't work well on Usenet.

Sometimes I think we should offer free batteries for sarcasm detectors. But
those reading the offers, having depleted batteries, wouldn't recognize that
the offer was itself sarcasm, and might find themselves chasing their own
tails in perpetuity, trying to figure out what they just read. Which, if you
think of it, might not be a bad idea.

--
Dec. 6 (Bloomberg) -- Government officials and activists flying to Bali,
Indonesia, for the United Nations meeting on climate change will cause
as much pollution as 20,000 cars in a year.

marx404

2007-12-29, 10:33 pm

Thanks for this post, John. I have been getting many calls in the past week
from concerned customers about this.
Most don't understand that it will only affect old versions of OnStar. Most
ppl don't keep their OnStar subscriptions beyond the initial free 1st yr, so
this isn't a major issue and as it mainly affects analog subscribers (which
will be in vehicles now 5 yrs old mostly and older) most will have traded in
their cars for newer ones w/in 5 yrs anyways. Statically speaking, most that
would hold onto a 5 or 10 yr old car would least likely be paying for
continuance of OnStar coverage as expensive as it is.

--
marx404

"Larry" <noone@home.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9A13CB7A76ED
noonehomecom@208.49.80.253...
> =?UTF-8?B? U01TIOaWr+iSguaWh+KA
oiDlpI8=?= <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
> wrote in news:477400eb$0$8417
4$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net:
>
>
> And ALL of that problem lays directly on the shoulders of the FCC who
> refuse to enforce their own regulations when they hand out a license to
> these thieves. There's no enforcement when SELLular lies or simply
> refuses to respond to poor coverage issues where it's not particularly
> profitable, something ONLY the FCC can force them to do.
>
> Some powerful organization needs to take a very investigative look at the
> money flowing up this pyramid from the carriers on the bottom through the
> FCC to the damned politicians. The whole thing is corrupt to the core.
>
> Larry
> --
> I worked hard under Social Security since I was 12.
> My SS retirement check is one oz of gold per month.
> Can we afford to start any more wars for corporations?

LinkBot