VISUAL AIRCRAFT RECOGNITION

----------
In article . net, Tankfixer
wrote:

If it were classified secret FAS would have been closed for publishing
it to the web.

Actually, that's not true.



D

In article et,
mumbled
----------
In article . net, Tankfixer
wrote:

If it were classified secret FAS would have been closed for publishing
it to the web.

Actually, that's not true.

Are you saying one can post current classified publications on the net
and not get in trouble ?


--
Usenetsaurus n. an early pedantic internet mammal, who survived on a
diet of static text and
cascading "threads."

"Tankfixer" wrote in message
ink.net...
In article et,
mumbled
----------
In article . net,
Tankfixer
wrote:

If it were classified secret FAS would have been closed for publishing
it to the web.

Actually, that's not true.

Are you saying one can post current classified publications on the net
and not get in trouble ?

I can see you are trying to twist things into the other person showing some
kind of weakness. Now, put your EID kit away and go play somewhere else or
dummy up a bit more. Classifications change faster than the wind direction.

In article ,
mumbled

"Tankfixer" wrote in message
ink.net...
In article et,
mumbled
----------
In article . net,
Tankfixer
wrote:

If it were classified secret FAS would have been closed for publishing
it to the web.

Actually, that's not true.

Are you saying one can post current classified publications on the net
and not get in trouble ?

I can see you are trying to twist things into the other person showing some
kind of weakness. Now, put your EID kit away and go play somewhere else or
dummy up a bit more. Classifications change faster than the wind direction.


Sure daryl, twist it anyway you like.

While you are at it tell us again about the FB-4 nuclear bombers of the
1960's.


--
Usenetsaurus n. an early pedantic internet mammal, who survived on a
diet of static text and
cascading "threads."

"Tankfixer" wrote in message
news
In article ,
mumbled

"Tankfixer" wrote in message
ink.net...
In article et,
mumbled
----------
In article . net,
Tankfixer
wrote:

If it were classified secret FAS would have been closed for
publishing
it to the web.

Actually, that's not true.

Are you saying one can post current classified publications on the net
and not get in trouble ?

I can see you are trying to twist things into the other person showing
some
kind of weakness. Now, put your EID kit away and go play somewhere else
or
dummy up a bit more. Classifications change faster than the wind
direction.


Sure daryl, twist it anyway you like.

While you are at it tell us again about the FB-4 nuclear bombers of the
1960's.

LOL, you have already been blown out of the water on that one. Guess you
are just recycling your old lies. Ask Ed if he ever was on a Nuke loaded
Phantom. He's already stated he has. But, again, don't let facts get in
the way of you recycling your lies. You and Leturd must go drinking
together soon.

In article ,
mumbled

"Tankfixer" wrote in message
news
In article ,
mumbled

"Tankfixer" wrote in message
ink.net...
In article et,
mumbled
----------
In article . net,
Tankfixer
wrote:

If it were classified secret FAS would have been closed for
publishing
it to the web.

Actually, that's not true.

Are you saying one can post current classified publications on the net
and not get in trouble ?

I can see you are trying to twist things into the other person showing
some
kind of weakness. Now, put your EID kit away and go play somewhere else
or
dummy up a bit more. Classifications change faster than the wind
direction.


Sure daryl, twist it anyway you like.

While you are at it tell us again about the FB-4 nuclear bombers of the
1960's.

LOL, you have already been blown out of the water on that one. Guess you
are just recycling your old lies. Ask Ed if he ever was on a Nuke loaded
Phantom. He's already stated he has. But, again, don't let facts get in
the way of you recycling your lies. You and Leturd must go drinking
together soon.

There is no question that F-4's darried nukes.
The point of contention was your claim they were called "FB-4"

No one every supported that claim.


--
Usenetsaurus n. an early pedantic internet mammal, who survived on a
diet of static text and
cascading "threads."

"Tankfixer" wrote in message
ink.net...
In article ,
mumbled

"Tankfixer" wrote in message
news
In article ,
mumbled

"Tankfixer" wrote in message
ink.net...
In article et,
mumbled
----------
In article
. net,
Tankfixer
wrote:

If it were classified secret FAS would have been closed for
publishing
it to the web.

Actually, that's not true.

Are you saying one can post current classified publications on the
net
and not get in trouble ?

I can see you are trying to twist things into the other person
showing
some
kind of weakness. Now, put your EID kit away and go play somewhere
else
or
dummy up a bit more. Classifications change faster than the wind
direction.


Sure daryl, twist it anyway you like.

While you are at it tell us again about the FB-4 nuclear bombers of
the
1960's.

LOL, you have already been blown out of the water on that one. Guess
you
are just recycling your old lies. Ask Ed if he ever was on a Nuke
loaded
Phantom. He's already stated he has. But, again, don't let facts get
in
the way of you recycling your lies. You and Leturd must go drinking
together soon.

There is no question that F-4's darried nukes.
The point of contention was your claim they were called "FB-4"

No one every supported that claim.

McDonnell Douglas classed it as a Fighter/Bomber. Do you mean they are
wrong and you are right?

Standard 404thk00k 3rd grade debating as usual.

On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 12:07:54 -0700, Daryl Hunt wrote:

"Tankfixer" wrote in message
news

snip

While you are at it tell us again about the FB-4 nuclear bombers of the
1960's.

LOL, you have already been blown out of the water on that one. Guess you
are just recycling your old lies. Ask Ed if he ever was on a Nuke loaded
Phantom.

Yes, let's ask Ed. From Google http://preview.tinyurl.com/2h5fw5 when Ed
wrote the following:

The 401st TFW out of Torrejon conducted most of the rotational support
for the Victor mission out of Incirlik, although over the years of the
cold war there were a lot of tactical aircraft that sat alert with
nukes. Torrejon F-4s were originally E-models, but the wing converted
to C's in '73 in a rearrangement of all the USAFE F-4s to standardize
E's in Germany, D's in England and the C wing in Spain. I sat Victor
in an F-4C, but never heard it referred to as an FB or BF.

He's already stated he has.

Yes, he's stated that he sat alert in an F-4C and never heard of it
referred to as an FB-4.

But, again, don't let facts get in the way of you recycling your lies.

He's recycling the very things you yourself have said.

--

-Jeff B.
zoomie at fastmail fm

"Yeff" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 12:07:54 -0700, Daryl Hunt wrote:

"Tankfixer" wrote in message
news

snip

While you are at it tell us again about the FB-4 nuclear bombers of the
1960's.

LOL, you have already been blown out of the water on that one. Guess
you
are just recycling your old lies. Ask Ed if he ever was on a Nuke
loaded
Phantom.

Yes, let's ask Ed. From Google http://preview.tinyurl.com/2h5fw5 when
Ed
wrote the following:

The 401st TFW out of Torrejon conducted most of the rotational support
for the Victor mission out of Incirlik, although over the years of the
cold war there were a lot of tactical aircraft that sat alert with
nukes. Torrejon F-4s were originally E-models, but the wing converted
to C's in '73 in a rearrangement of all the USAFE F-4s to standardize
E's in Germany, D's in England and the C wing in Spain. I sat Victor
in an F-4C, but never heard it referred to as an FB or BF.

He's already stated he has.

Yes, he's stated that he sat alert in an F-4C and never heard of it
referred to as an FB-4.

But, again, don't let facts get in the way of you recycling your lies.

He's recycling the very things you yourself have said.

Yes he is. And he's trying to hide the fact he's just a low level troll.
Besides, I guess the Fighter/Bomber designation from MD says they haven't a
clue to the own AC usage is supposed to be.

I can see that you are coming to their aid since they are cornered once
again. I thought you had given up on that. Well, you just got demoted back
to the dismal 404thk00ks. Nice job. You are now wide open for any and all
criticism that comes their way. Guess you will never learn.

----------
In article . net, Tankfixer
wrote:

If it were classified secret FAS would have been closed for publishing
it to the web.

Actually, that's not true.

Are you saying one can post current classified publications on the net
and not get in trouble ?

Yes.

Look up the example of the classified history of the CIA's involvement in
the Iranian coup in the 1950s. Short story: the classified document was
leaked and put on the web. The government did nothing.

It is actually not illegal to publish classified information (with some very
specific exceptions). Newspapers do it all the time. If you want other
examples, next time you go to a big bookstore, look for books by Bill Gertz.
Gertz (a reporter for the conservative newspaper The Washington Times) has
published classified documents in the back of several of his books. He has
never been charged with anything.

If you're interested in learning about the subject, go to the FAS website
and read multiple issues of Secrecy and Government Bulletin. You'll get a
sense of the limitations concerning the press and classified information.



D