Re: Happy St Patrick's Day, Boss!

"Andre Jute" <fiultra@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:6d5275cf-244b-41e8-b72e-a7d6d571f2a8@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Anonymous "keithr" <kei...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> "Peter Wieck" <p...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>
>>
news:7e146691-3e55-4efa-9630-a2108c0f7013@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> On Mar 17, 3:19 pm, flipper <flip...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >> On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 20:29:33 +0200, "Iain Churches"
>>
>> >> <Iai...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>> >> >"Peter Wieck" <p...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> >>
>news:b2884b82-ee97-487a-a319-095efdd2f0e2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> >> >> X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en-us)
>> >> >> AppleWebKit/523.15.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0.4 Safari/
>> >> >> 523.15,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
>>
>> >> >From where do you get this info, Peter?
>>
>> >> In Outlook Express, right click on the message in the preview pane
and
>> >> select properties, then the details tab.
>>
>> > Yep. That's the way. Each reader has its own very similar system, but
>> > the end-results are the same.
>> > Every machine has a unique signature which cannot be disguised by the
>> > "typical" anonymous remailer - at least not since 9/11. One cannot
get
>> > (easily) to a location or an original e-mail address, but one can
>> > determine whether the same machine sent various messages.
>>
>> I think that you actually mean an anonymous proxy rather than 
>> remailer,but
>> that is a quibble, the effect is the same.
>
> Where do you get the infernal cheek from to call yourself a "computer
> expert" and waste our bandwidth for weeks now with your computer
> inanities, anonymous keifer?

I don't actually recall ever calling myself a computer expert Andre, but
if 
I have done then undoubtably you will be able to provide the reference. On

the other hand, having been gainfully employed in the industry for 38
years 
does confer some degree of knowledge of the subject.

> Quite contrary to what you say, it is a
> proxy server *and* it anonymises the mail and remails it to the proxy
> it has found. It is not a quibble.

It may be both a proxy and remailer, but as you were posting via google 
groups and using Safari then it was being used as a proxy at that time.

> It is what protects Gray and me from s*** like you and Worthless Wiecky 
> harassing our ISP.

Definition: S*** - anybody who dares to question Andre Jute's authority on

any subject.
Now why would I want to harrass your ISP? In almost 20 years of using the 
internet, the only IPSs that I have ever corresponded with have been my
own.

> It is what
> makes poor Worthless Wiecky's touted expose ludicrous. (In addition to
> his errors and/or lies about what the data proves -- below I show that
> the data is "unique" to hundreds of thousands of computers!)
>
>>The headers have nothing to do
>> with 9/11, they have been a part of usenet fron the start, just delve 
>> back
>> in google groups an look at old messages.
>
> I wonder if Worthless Wiecky will apologize to people for telling them
> that lie, or if Poopie, another supposed "computer expert". will
> apologize for letting Worthless Wiecky's ignorance pass.
>
>> The information above doesn't actually pin it to a machine since a
proxy 
>> was
>> used, however it is unusual enough to make it fairly certain that both
>> messages came from joot.
>
> ROTFLOL. See below about 297,000 "unique" instances.
>
> And, even if you could pin the information to unique machine, guess
> what, it would be the unique machine at the proxy *server*, which
> sends it to the proxy used, which forwards it to Google.
>
If it were 2 random messages, it would mean nothing, but an ass licking 
message from your alter ego followed minutes later by a royal wave of the 
hand from the carriage window from yourself is too much of a coincidence.
A 
jury of your peers would/has convict you without a second's hesitation.

>>Funny, if he wasn't such an Apple nazi, and had
>> used outlook express, nobody would have noticed.
>
>> > What set me onto it was that there were two message within eight
>> > minutes of each other at 2:46am and 2:54am both Irish time. One
>> > through a South African remailer, one through a Pacific Rim remailer.
>> > Go figure. And, South Africa is two hours different from Ireland such
>> > that the time-stamps could not work anyway - nor a Pacific Rim time-
>> > stamp of course.
>>
>> > It is really too bad. Andre could have made a much more credible
>> > effort simply by going to a local internet cafe or computer seller
and
>> > ask for a demonstration or some such. He must have been drinking
(more
>> > than usual, that is) to be caught in so transparent a lie. Or he
could
>> > have messed with the time-stamp on his computer making the lie less
>> > obvious.
>>
>> It is even easier than that (on a PC at least) all you need is a usb 
>> storage
>> key and you can disguise everything other than your IP address and that

>> is
>> what proxies are for
>>
>>
>>
>> > Equally too bad that the Italian Sock-Puppet e-mails are so far back
-
>> > it might have been possible to discern the origin of them as well
very
>> > likely putting Andre into another lie.
>>
>> What was the sockpuppet's name? very little gets lost on the internet,
it
>> may still be possible to check.
>>
>>
>>
>> > Ah, well...
>>
>> > Peter Wieck
>> > Wyncote, PA
>>
>> Jootie has been caught by his unique mixture of arrogance and
ignorance,
>> arrogant enough to think that nobody was clever enough to notice,
>
> To notice what, anonymous keefie? You just finished explaining, though
> as always you did only half a job, that the information supplied
> identifies nothing unique.
>
>>and
>> ignorant enough to be unable to do anything about it.
>
> I don't need or want to do anything about it. I asked Gray to help me
> set a trap for you self-declared "computer experts" and have succeeded
> in making you lot look foolish beyond my fondest expectation. I expect
> to make you look even more foolish in the rash of mutual incrimination
> and self-justification and pure simple hysterics which will now follow
> as day follows night.

yearh right. You have been caught bang to rights Jooty baby. You could 
always claim it was your twin brother wot done it and you were pedalling 
your dutch bike through Bantry at the time, it would be just as
believable.
>
>> Keith
>
> Welcome to Professor Jute's online motivational psychology laboratory,
> Keefer. Mind that some of the other rats don't mistake you for lunch.
>
> If you've wondered why I'm called The Boss, you're about to find out.

The only one to call you the boss is one Andre Jute, under whatever 
pseudonom he happens to be using at the time.
>
> Andre Jute
> Visit Jute on Amps at http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/
"an unbelievably trite piece of self serving trivia"
Keith Richardson
Not anonymous after all