Re: Happy St Patrick's Day, Boss!

"keithr" <kei...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, who has now been stung into telling
us his name is Richardson, wrote:

> "Andre Jute" <fiul...@[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.

Definition of S***: Overage, overweight, overwrought schoolyard
bullies running around the net in packs picking on victims. Behaviour
especially prevalent among failed "engineers" and their hangers-on
among the jumped-up janitors.

> 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.

Gee, ****, Richardson, you must be a better class of engineer than
some of the s*** we're used to on RAT, who thought nothing of faking
letters and sending them in my name and then complaining to my ISP
about the letters they themselves wrote. Just a pity you still lie so.

> > 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.

You're tenth-rate as a stalker as well, Richardson. In the last week
you got my birthdate wrong several time. Now you appear not to know
that I make a habit of setting traps for undesirables like you, in
which they expose their true motives. Everyone else knows that I
trapped Krueger, several times, and Pinkerton about fortnightly for a
couple of years on end, and Pasternack, and before that the entire
Magnequest S***, and some clowns whose names I've forgotten.

When a tenth-rate mind like yours can as much as catch me breathing,
I'll turn into a chinaman.

> >> 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.

Ah, wishful thinking. Isn't it a fine thing?

> > Andre Jute
> > Visit Jute on Amps athttp://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/
And here Keith Richardson childishly changed this:
***
"wonderfully well written and reasoned information
for the tube audio constructor"
John Broskie TubeCAD & GlassWare
"an unbelievably comprehensive web site
containing vital gems of wisdom"
Stuart Perry Hi-Fi News & Record Review
***
into this
> "an unbelievably trite piece of self serving trivia"

One has to wonder if Keith Richardson, whom none of us have ever heard
of, really thinks his opinion is worth more than that of John Broskie
or than HI-Fi News & Record Review. In fact, one has to wonder why
even Keith Richardson considers Keith Richardson's opinion worth ****.

> Keith Richardson
> Not anonymous after all

I notice you post from Australia, Richardson. As an Australian myself,
I can only say you're an embarrassment to the flag.

Unless you know something startling about tubes, Richardson, I suggest
you **** off right smartly, before I turn you into lunch. You might
notice that some of the other clowns, like Poopie, are not whole any
more. They won't ever again be whole, either. They tried to **** with
me for too long and paid the price. You will too.

Andre Jute
Standing tall for the truth
And this prophetic truth is worth repeating:
> > 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.