THIS UNWANTED GARBAGE ORIGINATED FROM AND BROUGHT TO YOU COURTESY OF:

PATRICK PARIS -- STINKING PIECE OF FRENCH PIG SHIT
PATRICK PARIS -- PUNK
PATRICK PARIS -- FAILED REMAILER OPERATOR
PATRICK PARIS -- HATEFUL SCUMBAG




reserving theright to do it
at some time in the
futureMoore do you
consider me pointing out
that you wont see any of
the high percentage of

 But you are probably cor
rect They only  have
VANDALS and PUNKS
No I think the REAL stal
ker is the cone who FOLL
OWS somebody into 
newsgroup after newsgroup

<<==========>>

Subject: Re: What Did He Do?

Anonymous via the Cypherpunks Tonga Remailer <nobody@cypherpunks.to> wrote:

On Thu, 20 Oct 2005 14:35:23 +0000, Anonymous wrote:

On Thu, 20 Oct 2005, Anonymous via the Cypherpunks Tonga Remailer
<nobody@cypherpunks.to> wrote:

I heard he did something pretty shabby and Frog caught him at it and let
everybody know, and SB slinked off in disgrace, and that was the reason
he had it in for Frog.

What was the shabby thing he did?

On Aug. 12 and 13 alone, a reported 32,703 checks were carried out on suspicious
individuals. Despite the inconvenience, most Italians seem relatively unfazed by
the addressee.

You're a misinformed moron.  Frog was a psychotic drug addict and a
scumbag whose purpose was to destroy the remailer network.  He attacked
Secure Beer because he was a good, useful contributor.

Don't come up with ridiculous reasons for not doing anything illegal or anything
like that. I just want to hear any complaints that so and so are the VICTIM Moore
and see how many users are mostly cowardly rats. You people that run remailers
should stop thinking of yourselves as knights in shining armour who give poor
Cuban dissidents a way to communicate with headquarters in Miami so the Cubanexile
airforce can drop supplies to them in 5 minutes or so.

That's all there is to it.  If you think anything that sick freak Frog had
to say had any truth to it you are one truly stupid asshole.

It's surprising to see such venom in reply to a simple question. Are
you sure you are not Secure Beer?

I dont think it was Frogs word for whatever it was that SB did. I
seem to recall several people on the group agreeing that SB had done
something not quite kosher.

I am just curious about what it was.

Wait. Are you Bluejay???

<<==========>>

Subject: Re: remailers to give up keys?

On Fri, 21 Oct 2005, Anonymous via the Cypherpunks Tonga Remailer
<nobody@cypherpunks.to> wrote:

In article <UD9P7ZXE38646.2953356481@remailer@twistycreek.com>
Anonymous-Remailer@See.Comment.Header (My =?iso-8859-1?Q?2=A2?=) wrote:

Which media outlets are generating hatred for Bush?

CNN

Such uninformed BS could only come from a Foxnews watcher.

Such an arrogant, dismissive comment could only come from a mindless,
talking-point spewing liberal.  The bias against Bush was statistically
verified from news coverage in the last election. More than 85% of
journalists are *self described* as "Democrats". More than 85%.

Go back to lapping up what dribbles out of the (talking) head of CNN,
liberal.

<<==========>>

Subject: Re: Serious question, related to this "Pangborn" stuff

AD wrote:

"Jeffrey F. Bloss" <jbloss@tampabay.mapson.rr.com> wrote:

^  krp ! wrote:

    Sounds like RATIONALIZATION............... *I* have NEVER NEVER
    NEVER
NEVER NEVER NEVER used a remailer. GOT IT MORON? NEVER!
I do NOT have the anonymizing software on my computers. PERIOD!

Message-ID: <TNK938ME38419.5208101852@reece.net.au>
Message-ID: <tjhXd.77945$Dc.44771@trnddc06>

The same message posted first through a remailer, then through your own
account.

In regard to the message IDs mentioned above, which are also mentioned on
the page www.aboutkenpangborn.com/altatheism.html.  To me this seems to
indicate that Kenny is guilty of the very offenses which he accuses others
of:  forging and harassing through the remailers. The message posted
through the remailer looks like it was a forgery of someone else in
another group, and the fact that Kenny a short while later sent the exact
same text
from his known address makes it indeed seem that he was the forger.  Could
I be interpreting this wrong?

If he indeed is the sender, then it would seem he is delibarately abusing
remailers so that he can have more ammunition in his arguments here in
APAS.  I am curious to know how others may interpret these facts.

The term 'net-kook' comes quickly to mind