Personal attacks on the list

[Petr Mares]

Dear Samar Abbas
you wrote:
> 2. If the default setting of these proxies is still in place ie. `GLOBAL',
> any Tom, Dick and Harry not just from Lockheed, but from anywhere in the
> world can use these proxies and the emails will appear to come from the
> same IP address. Just because the emails come through a proxy server does
> not mean that they originate at the proxy server. How ? Check your
> Netscape Options or Network Preferences and look under proxies. Just fill
> in the correct address and port numbers and there you go ! I can't tell
> you which port numbers, because that would waste my quota on this list,
> which is not devoted to teaching such tricks.

The proxy server administrator will have to make the proxy public. Is it the case of Lokheed??
>
> 3. If Ganesan wanted to do such a thing, there was no need to sign up all
> accounts from hotmail. He could have got free email accounts from
> www.rocketmail.com, www.mailcity.com, www.excite.com, www.yahoo.com,
> www.netforward.com, www.angelfire.com, www.fortunecity.com or any of the
> 1000s of free email providers out there. To have all people signed up at
> hotmail would make things just too obvious.

That simply proves the ignorance not innocence.

> 4. He could also forge his opponents' emails if he wanted using any of the
> publicly available forge-your-email servers. That would be more effective
> than signing up to many hotmail accounts, and would make a fool of his
> opponents in a much stronger way.
That will be so apparent as the real person will  vindicate himself.

He could also use a proxy other than, or
> in addition to, the Lockheed one, which would effectively change his IP
> address to an arbitrary one.
He did not, what that certifies??

>
>   In other words, since the IP node in question is a Proxy server,
There are two nodes they all used, just one is proxy and one is
public ISP. All have the same ISP in Houston and all use the same
proxy in the second case, right?
the
> allegations effectively have no meaning. Nothing can be `proven' from our
> detectives' results.
It certainly does oproove the whole matter to anybody cosidering
their unisono attacks.
>    Moreover, even if these are all one person (something which cannot be
> proven) he has only used his freedom of speech gauranteed to him under the
> Second Amendment of the USA, and the Internet tradition (which is not a
> crime).
No one claim it is illegal, it is just disgusting.

Sincerely

Pertr Mares
Petr Mares
Lengqie Research
Hlavacova 1163
182 00, Prague 8
Czech Republic
Fax:420-2-2423-9157
Tel: 420-2-2422-9755
email: lengqie at gmx.net