MI5 Persecution: Watch Out, Forger About 27/9/95 (3771)
3 réponses
MI5Victim
From: ray@ultimate-tech.com (Ray Dunn)
Newsgroups: uk.misc,soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: An apology from Mike Corley
Date: Wed Sep 27 14:20:36 1995
In referenced article, David Wooding says...
>Well, Mike Corley might or might not have written the apologies, but I
>think not. I thought the following line both witty and imaginative.
>
>>>It was the razor blades stuffed down between the keys that told me.
Corley himself denies posting this "apology", but I'm impressed if it
is a forgery.
Here's the header of my received email. It looks very genuine except
for the fact that postings to newsgroups are directed through demon's
mail to news gateway, which is strange.
Also the message id is <m0sxbx2-000JEeC@bloor.torfree.net> which seems
to be in a different format from previous Corley postings, e.g.
<DFJJB3.6Ft.0.bloor@torfree.net
The mail seems to have been received directly from mail.torfree.net.
One way of telling for sure would be if anyone on the recipient list
contacted torfree, but did not publish any complaints on the newsgroups
- he would not have had access to their address in that case.
>Received: from SpoolDir by ULTIMATE (Mercury 1.20); 26 Sep 95 12:00:14
+0500
>Return-path: <bu765@torfree.net>
>Received: from mail.torfree.net by smtp.ultimate-tech.com (Mercury
1.20);
> 26 Sep 95 12:00:04 +0500
>Received: from bloor.torfree.net ([199.71.188.18]) by mail.torfree.net
> (/\==/\ Smail3.1.28.1 #28.6; 16-jun-94)
> via sendmail with smtp id <m0sxbyy-000LXSC@mail.torfree.net>
> for <ray@ultimate-tech.com>; Tue, 26 Sep 95 11:31 EDT
>Received: from torfree.net by bloor.torfree.net with smtp
> (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0sxbx2-000JEeC; Tue, 26 Sep 95 11:29 EDT
>Message-Id: <m0sxbx2-000JEeC@bloor.torfree.net>
>Apparently-To: bu765@torfree.net, snail@objmedia.demon.co.uk,
> ray@ultimate-tech.com, Frank@acclaim.demon.co.uk,
> p.marshall@axion.bt.co.uk, me93jrb@brunel.ac.uk, >
mikeh@mordor.com,
> michael@everyman.demon.co.uk, tim@xara.co.uk,
> Alan.Holmes@brunel.ac.uk, uk.misc@news.demon.co.uk,
> uk-misc@news.demon.co.uk, uk-media@news.demon.co.uk,
> uk.media@news.demon.co.uk, uk.legal@news.demon.co.uk,
> uk-legal@news.demon.co.uk, alt-conspiracy@news.demon.co.uk,
> alt.conspiracy@news.demon.co.uk,
> soc.culture.british@news.demon.co.uk,
> soc-culture-british@news.demon.co.uk,
> soc-culture-canada@news.demon.co.uk,
> soc.culture.canada@news.demon.co.uk
>Newsgroups: uk.misc, uk.media, soc.culture.british,
soc.culture.canada, uk.legal, alt.conspiracy
>From: bu765@torfree.net (Mike Corley)
>Subject: Oops! Sorry!
>Organization: Toronto Free-Net
>X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
>Date: Thu, 26 Sep 1995 01:23:45 GMT
>Lines: 27
>X-PMFLAGS: 33554560
--
Ray Dunn (opinions are my own) | Phone: (514) 938 9050
Montreal | Phax : (514) 938 5225
ray@ultimate-tech.com | Home : (514) 630 3749
Cette action est irreversible, confirmez la suppression du commentaire ?
Signaler le commentaire
Veuillez sélectionner un problème
Nudité
Violence
Harcèlement
Fraude
Vente illégale
Discours haineux
Terrorisme
Autre
roman
french! français!!!!
a écrit dans le message de news:
From: (Ray Dunn) Newsgroups: uk.misc,soc.culture.british Subject: Re: An apology from Mike Corley Date: Wed Sep 27 14:20:36 1995
In referenced article, David Wooding says...
Well, Mike Corley might or might not have written the apologies, but I think not. I thought the following line both witty and imaginative.
It was the razor blades stuffed down between the keys that told me.
Corley himself denies posting this "apology", but I'm impressed if it is a forgery.
Here's the header of my received email. It looks very genuine except for the fact that postings to newsgroups are directed through demon's mail to news gateway, which is strange.
Also the message id is which seems to be in a different format from previous Corley postings, e.g.
The mail seems to have been received directly from mail.torfree.net.
One way of telling for sure would be if anyone on the recipient list contacted torfree, but did not publish any complaints on the newsgroups - he would not have had access to their address in that case.
Received: from SpoolDir by ULTIMATE (Mercury 1.20); 26 Sep 95 12:00:14 +0500
Return-path: Received: from mail.torfree.net by smtp.ultimate-tech.com (Mercury 1.20);
26 Sep 95 12:00:04 +0500 Received: from bloor.torfree.net ([199.71.188.18]) by mail.torfree.net (/==/ Smail3.1.28.1 #28.6; 16-jun-94) via sendmail with smtp id for ; Tue, 26 Sep 95 11:31 EDT Received: from torfree.net by bloor.torfree.net with smtp (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0sxbx2-000JEeC; Tue, 26 Sep 95 11:29 EDT Message-Id: Apparently-To: , , , , , , > ,
-- Ray Dunn (opinions are my own) | Phone: (514) 938 9050 Montreal | Phax : (514) 938 5225 | Home : (514) 630 3749
3771
french!
français!!!!
<MI5Victim@mi5.gov.uk> a écrit dans le message de news:
m07050813272078@4ax.com...
From: ray@ultimate-tech.com (Ray Dunn)
Newsgroups: uk.misc,soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: An apology from Mike Corley
Date: Wed Sep 27 14:20:36 1995
In referenced article, David Wooding says...
Well, Mike Corley might or might not have written the apologies, but I
think not. I thought the following line both witty and imaginative.
It was the razor blades stuffed down between the keys that told me.
Corley himself denies posting this "apology", but I'm impressed if it
is a forgery.
Here's the header of my received email. It looks very genuine except
for the fact that postings to newsgroups are directed through demon's
mail to news gateway, which is strange.
Also the message id is <m0sxbx2-000JEeC@bloor.torfree.net> which seems
to be in a different format from previous Corley postings, e.g.
<DFJJB3.6Ft.0.bloor@torfree.net
The mail seems to have been received directly from mail.torfree.net.
One way of telling for sure would be if anyone on the recipient list
contacted torfree, but did not publish any complaints on the newsgroups
- he would not have had access to their address in that case.
Received: from SpoolDir by ULTIMATE (Mercury 1.20); 26 Sep 95 12:00:14
+0500
Return-path: <bu765@torfree.net>
Received: from mail.torfree.net by smtp.ultimate-tech.com (Mercury
1.20);
26 Sep 95 12:00:04 +0500
Received: from bloor.torfree.net ([199.71.188.18]) by mail.torfree.net
(/==/ Smail3.1.28.1 #28.6; 16-jun-94)
via sendmail with smtp id <m0sxbyy-000LXSC@mail.torfree.net>
for <ray@ultimate-tech.com>; Tue, 26 Sep 95 11:31 EDT
Received: from torfree.net by bloor.torfree.net with smtp
(Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0sxbx2-000JEeC; Tue, 26 Sep 95 11:29 EDT
Message-Id: <m0sxbx2-000JEeC@bloor.torfree.net>
Apparently-To: bu765@torfree.net, snail@objmedia.demon.co.uk,
ray@ultimate-tech.com, Frank@acclaim.demon.co.uk,
p.marshall@axion.bt.co.uk, me93jrb@brunel.ac.uk, >
mikeh@mordor.com,
From: (Ray Dunn) Newsgroups: uk.misc,soc.culture.british Subject: Re: An apology from Mike Corley Date: Wed Sep 27 14:20:36 1995
In referenced article, David Wooding says...
Well, Mike Corley might or might not have written the apologies, but I think not. I thought the following line both witty and imaginative.
It was the razor blades stuffed down between the keys that told me.
Corley himself denies posting this "apology", but I'm impressed if it is a forgery.
Here's the header of my received email. It looks very genuine except for the fact that postings to newsgroups are directed through demon's mail to news gateway, which is strange.
Also the message id is which seems to be in a different format from previous Corley postings, e.g.
The mail seems to have been received directly from mail.torfree.net.
One way of telling for sure would be if anyone on the recipient list contacted torfree, but did not publish any complaints on the newsgroups - he would not have had access to their address in that case.
Received: from SpoolDir by ULTIMATE (Mercury 1.20); 26 Sep 95 12:00:14 +0500
Return-path: Received: from mail.torfree.net by smtp.ultimate-tech.com (Mercury 1.20);
26 Sep 95 12:00:04 +0500 Received: from bloor.torfree.net ([199.71.188.18]) by mail.torfree.net (/==/ Smail3.1.28.1 #28.6; 16-jun-94) via sendmail with smtp id for ; Tue, 26 Sep 95 11:31 EDT Received: from torfree.net by bloor.torfree.net with smtp (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0sxbx2-000JEeC; Tue, 26 Sep 95 11:29 EDT Message-Id: Apparently-To: , , , , , , > ,
-- Ray Dunn (opinions are my own) | Phone: (514) 938 9050 Montreal | Phax : (514) 938 5225 | Home : (514) 630 3749
3771
roman
french! français!!!!
a écrit dans le message de news:
From: (Ray Dunn) Newsgroups: uk.misc,soc.culture.british Subject: Re: An apology from Mike Corley Date: Wed Sep 27 14:20:36 1995
In referenced article, David Wooding says...
Well, Mike Corley might or might not have written the apologies, but I think not. I thought the following line both witty and imaginative.
It was the razor blades stuffed down between the keys that told me.
Corley himself denies posting this "apology", but I'm impressed if it is a forgery.
Here's the header of my received email. It looks very genuine except for the fact that postings to newsgroups are directed through demon's mail to news gateway, which is strange.
Also the message id is which seems to be in a different format from previous Corley postings, e.g.
The mail seems to have been received directly from mail.torfree.net.
One way of telling for sure would be if anyone on the recipient list contacted torfree, but did not publish any complaints on the newsgroups - he would not have had access to their address in that case.
Received: from SpoolDir by ULTIMATE (Mercury 1.20); 26 Sep 95 12:00:14 +0500
Return-path: Received: from mail.torfree.net by smtp.ultimate-tech.com (Mercury 1.20);
26 Sep 95 12:00:04 +0500 Received: from bloor.torfree.net ([199.71.188.18]) by mail.torfree.net (/==/ Smail3.1.28.1 #28.6; 16-jun-94) via sendmail with smtp id for ; Tue, 26 Sep 95 11:31 EDT Received: from torfree.net by bloor.torfree.net with smtp (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0sxbx2-000JEeC; Tue, 26 Sep 95 11:29 EDT Message-Id: Apparently-To: , , , , , , > ,
-- Ray Dunn (opinions are my own) | Phone: (514) 938 9050 Montreal | Phax : (514) 938 5225 | Home : (514) 630 3749
3771
french!
français!!!!
<MI5Victim@mi5.gov.uk> a écrit dans le message de news:
m07050813272078@4ax.com...
From: ray@ultimate-tech.com (Ray Dunn)
Newsgroups: uk.misc,soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: An apology from Mike Corley
Date: Wed Sep 27 14:20:36 1995
In referenced article, David Wooding says...
Well, Mike Corley might or might not have written the apologies, but I
think not. I thought the following line both witty and imaginative.
It was the razor blades stuffed down between the keys that told me.
Corley himself denies posting this "apology", but I'm impressed if it
is a forgery.
Here's the header of my received email. It looks very genuine except
for the fact that postings to newsgroups are directed through demon's
mail to news gateway, which is strange.
Also the message id is <m0sxbx2-000JEeC@bloor.torfree.net> which seems
to be in a different format from previous Corley postings, e.g.
<DFJJB3.6Ft.0.bloor@torfree.net
The mail seems to have been received directly from mail.torfree.net.
One way of telling for sure would be if anyone on the recipient list
contacted torfree, but did not publish any complaints on the newsgroups
- he would not have had access to their address in that case.
Received: from SpoolDir by ULTIMATE (Mercury 1.20); 26 Sep 95 12:00:14
+0500
Return-path: <bu765@torfree.net>
Received: from mail.torfree.net by smtp.ultimate-tech.com (Mercury
1.20);
26 Sep 95 12:00:04 +0500
Received: from bloor.torfree.net ([199.71.188.18]) by mail.torfree.net
(/==/ Smail3.1.28.1 #28.6; 16-jun-94)
via sendmail with smtp id <m0sxbyy-000LXSC@mail.torfree.net>
for <ray@ultimate-tech.com>; Tue, 26 Sep 95 11:31 EDT
Received: from torfree.net by bloor.torfree.net with smtp
(Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0sxbx2-000JEeC; Tue, 26 Sep 95 11:29 EDT
Message-Id: <m0sxbx2-000JEeC@bloor.torfree.net>
Apparently-To: bu765@torfree.net, snail@objmedia.demon.co.uk,
ray@ultimate-tech.com, Frank@acclaim.demon.co.uk,
p.marshall@axion.bt.co.uk, me93jrb@brunel.ac.uk, >
mikeh@mordor.com,
From: (Ray Dunn) Newsgroups: uk.misc,soc.culture.british Subject: Re: An apology from Mike Corley Date: Wed Sep 27 14:20:36 1995
In referenced article, David Wooding says...
Well, Mike Corley might or might not have written the apologies, but I think not. I thought the following line both witty and imaginative.
It was the razor blades stuffed down between the keys that told me.
Corley himself denies posting this "apology", but I'm impressed if it is a forgery.
Here's the header of my received email. It looks very genuine except for the fact that postings to newsgroups are directed through demon's mail to news gateway, which is strange.
Also the message id is which seems to be in a different format from previous Corley postings, e.g.
The mail seems to have been received directly from mail.torfree.net.
One way of telling for sure would be if anyone on the recipient list contacted torfree, but did not publish any complaints on the newsgroups - he would not have had access to their address in that case.
Received: from SpoolDir by ULTIMATE (Mercury 1.20); 26 Sep 95 12:00:14 +0500
Return-path: Received: from mail.torfree.net by smtp.ultimate-tech.com (Mercury 1.20);
26 Sep 95 12:00:04 +0500 Received: from bloor.torfree.net ([199.71.188.18]) by mail.torfree.net (/==/ Smail3.1.28.1 #28.6; 16-jun-94) via sendmail with smtp id for ; Tue, 26 Sep 95 11:31 EDT Received: from torfree.net by bloor.torfree.net with smtp (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0sxbx2-000JEeC; Tue, 26 Sep 95 11:29 EDT Message-Id: Apparently-To: , , , , , , > ,
-- Ray Dunn (opinions are my own) | Phone: (514) 938 9050 Montreal | Phax : (514) 938 5225 | Home : (514) 630 3749
3771
Pierre Pallier
roman a écrit dans <news:46695c6f$0$5105$
french! français!!!!
On ne répond PAS à ce genre de truc, forcément annulé. Et c'est bien peu d'intelligence que tu montres là en citant intégralement le message, et en plus dans le mauvais sens. -- R: Parce que ça renverse bêtement l'ordre naturel de lecture ! Q: Mais pourquoi citer en fin d'article est-il si effroyable ? R: Citer en fin d'article. Q: Quelle est la chose la plus désagréable sur les groupes de news ?
roman a écrit dans <news:46695c6f$0$5105$ba4acef3@news.orange.fr>
french!
français!!!!
On ne répond PAS à ce genre de truc, forcément annulé.
Et c'est bien peu d'intelligence que tu montres là en citant intégralement
le message, et en plus dans le mauvais sens.
--
R: Parce que ça renverse bêtement l'ordre naturel de lecture !
Q: Mais pourquoi citer en fin d'article est-il si effroyable ?
R: Citer en fin d'article.
Q: Quelle est la chose la plus désagréable sur les groupes de news ?
On ne répond PAS à ce genre de truc, forcément annulé. Et c'est bien peu d'intelligence que tu montres là en citant intégralement le message, et en plus dans le mauvais sens. -- R: Parce que ça renverse bêtement l'ordre naturel de lecture ! Q: Mais pourquoi citer en fin d'article est-il si effroyable ? R: Citer en fin d'article. Q: Quelle est la chose la plus désagréable sur les groupes de news ?
