My Famous Blahg - Unenforced changes

[porky....@outlook.com]

I know that most of you, if not all, are regular readers of my excellent blahg
on my personal web-site. You will probably have noticed a very minor change to
some of the pages over the last couple of days.

You will almost certainly have been regular readers of the pages entitled:
"Cloudy, turning to fud later" - which of course has (well, actually "had"
now) hurled regular insults at "Another sociopath in uk.rec.cycling (urc)
<who> calls himself "Judith Smith" (JMS). "

If you cannot recall the page, it was the one which had the accusation that the
person named above had visited the AGM of BP in order to dob someone in it. I
now understand that that person had not attended the AGM at all; but "my
accusation was totally without merit." (NB I have purely put quotes around
that sentence for no particular reason whatsoever - and certainly not because
it was suggested by someone unknown)

Anyway, I digress.

I have just taken a number of pages down from my website purely as an "Autumn
Cleaning" session.

I can assure you all that the decision was purely my own, and it had nothing to
do with a letter I didn't receive from Amazon Legal Services regarding the web
pages and talk about something called an AUP. I can tell you now, anyone who
suggests anything like that will find themselves the subject of their own
personal web page on my blahg in double-quick time. (For most of you who won't
know, that is a musical term which I, unlike you, as a first class choir singer
am very familiar with)

My pages are of course hosted on the Amazon Cloud service.

Coincidentally I think that I may have fallen for some sort of scam where
Amazon select users of their service at random - and threaten them with some
sort of trumped up accusation if random pages are not removed.

Finally: I wish to make it clear that I am an IT professional with an excellent
understanding of what is, and what is not acceptable on public web-pages; and I
am an authority on IP addressing and covering one's tracks; consequently anyone
who writes to Dell with any details of this non-event will find themselves the
subject of a Norwich Pharmacal order pretty damn quick.

Regards

Lou Knee

[Peter Turtill]

A Norwich Pharmacutical is unnecessary really. Judith Smith is Anthony
Bournes and I posted his address here a few years back so just search
Usenet archives for Anthony Bournes:-)

pete

[Judith]

On Fri, 09 Nov 2012 12:56:17 +0000, Peter Turtill <recent:tur...@gmail.com>
wrote:

<snip>

>A Norwich Pharmacutical is unnecessary really. Judith Smith is Anthony
>Bournes and I posted his address here a few years back so just search
>Usenet archives for Anthony Bournes:-)
>
>pete

"I also require you to make a substantial payment in compensation to me for the
great injustice you have caused me and the expense and health problems you have
willingly and maliciously caused me."
A quote by Peter Turtill when attempting to sue a man who is both deaf and
blind. He failed

I've had sex with 13 14 15 year olds and in this country too not
Bangkok. I see no problem with it personally if they can understand
what their bodies are telling them. It is taken for granted in some
parts of the world I can tell you.
(Peter Turtill 9 September 2005)

Many years ago on a deserted beach in Libya and hungry for sexual
contact I saw 2 girls sun bathing. I tried being friendly but they
were Finnish and according to them gay. They asked me if I would keep
an eye on their camera while they went for a swim. My manhood was
with wrinkles and I took a snap of it with their camera.
Peter Turtill 28 June 2004

[Janitor of Lunacy]

"Judith" <jmsmi...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:d49q9897mo73uj0l0...@4ax.com...

I normally try to avoid the childish exchanges here, but are you denying Mr
Turtill's allegation by attacking him? If so, why do you think that gives
you any credence?

[Judith]

On Fri, 9 Nov 2012 15:52:11 -0000, "Janitor of Lunacy" <zo...@zonk.com> wrote:

<snip>

>I normally try to avoid the childish exchanges here, but are you denying Mr
>Turtill's allegation by attacking him? If so, why do you think that gives
>you any credence?
>

Not at all - I wasn't trying to deny his accusations.

I was purely taking the opportunity, as he had crept out of the sewer, to
remind people of the disgusting things he has said and done.

He is quite despicable.

[Mentalguy2k8]

"Judith" <jmsmi...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:d49q9897mo73uj0l0...@4ax.com...

>My manhood was with wrinkles

What a delightful phrase!

[Jacob Von Hogflume]

"I've had sex with 13 14 15 year olds and in this country too not
Bangkok."

Really must forward that one to Ipswich plod.

[GB]

On 09/11/2012 16:47, Jacob Von Hogflume wrote:

> "I've had sex with 13 14 15 year olds and in this country too not
> Bangkok."
>
> Really must forward that one to Ipswich plod.
>

He's almost certainly referring to the age of the condoms he used. They
do seem to last very well, based on that data.

[Brian Gaff]

Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling,uk.legal,uk.rec.sheds

Not sure what these groups have in common.
No idea about the content either. Too many folk crossposting withgay
abandon..

Brian


--
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active
<porky....@outlook.com> wrote in message
news:8upp98p2l5b5afs5u...@4ax.com...

[Janitor of Lunacy]

"Brian Gaff" <Bri...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:k7jgpv$7s7$1...@dont-email.me...

> Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling,uk.legal,uk.rec.sheds
>
> Not sure what these groups have in common.
> No idea about the content either. Too many folk crossposting withgay
> abandon..
>
> Brian

Idiots do this, for some reason best kept to themselves.

[John Williamson]

Brian Gaff wrote:
> Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling,uk.legal,uk.rec.sheds
>
> Not sure what these groups have in common.
> No idea about the content either. Too many folk crossposting withgay
> abandon..
>

A certain poster, against whom someone has a vendetta. I believe there
was some sort of disagreement in the cycling froup, which spills out
occasionally. BICBW, of course.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[Peter Turtill]

On Fri, 9 Nov 2012 15:52:11 -0000, "Janitor of Lunacy" <zo...@zonk.com>
wrote:

>I normally try to avoid the childish exchanges here, but are you denying Mr
>Turtill's allegation by attacking him? If so, why do you think that gives
>you any credence?

He attacks me by posting inaccurate stuff which fools like Periander
then re-post. I don't see his posts unless they are replied to by
somebody not in my killfile but I think most people who have been
posting here for a long time know me. I never lie intentionally and if
the stuff being posted as true copy was indeed true I would admit it
or even argue about the way it seems to read but I will not be
involved with anything that is purposely false. He used to live quite
close to me once and I went to see him for a straightener but he had
run away to another council house much too far away for me to bother
with.

pete

[Judith]

On Fri, 9 Nov 2012 18:22:49 -0000, "Janitor of Lunacy" <zo...@zonk.com> wrote:

>
>"Brian Gaff" <Bri...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:k7jgpv$7s7$1...@dont-email.me...
>> Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling,uk.legal,uk.rec.sheds
>>
>> Not sure what these groups have in common.

I think that they are all groups where Guy Chapman made unsavoury accusations
in the past.

>> No idea about the content either. Too many folk crossposting withgay
>> abandon..
>>
>> Brian
>
>Idiots do this, for some reason best kept to themselves.
>

I think it is often done when say someone has posted lies in a number of
groups, and someone wants to make a clarifying response for the people who will
have read the originals.

[m...@privacy.net]

On Fri, 09 Nov 2012 18:38:40 +0000, Peter Turtill <recent:tur...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Fri, 9 Nov 2012 15:52:11 -0000, "Janitor of Lunacy" <zo...@zonk.com>
>wrote:
>
>
>>I normally try to avoid the childish exchanges here, but are you denying Mr
>>Turtill's allegation by attacking him? If so, why do you think that gives
>>you any credence?
>
>He attacks me by posting inaccurate stuff which fools like Periander
>then re-post. I don't see his posts unless they are replied to by
>somebody not in my killfile but I think most people who have been
>posting here for a long time know me.

Indeed they do.

=======================================================================
>From: smicker <ross...@hotmail.com>
>Newsgroups: uk.legal
>Subject: Re: Murdered paedophile
>Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2003 00:25:48 +0000
>Lines: 60
>Message-ID: <8l72tvsdt5lqbihsq...@4ax.com>
>References: <bqfdkl$1tnben$1...@ID-215193.news.uni-berlin.de>
><307aa6ab.0312...@posting.google.com>
><bqihp4$10g$1...@titan.btinternet.com>
><bckpsvo04a68189i7...@4ax.com>
><bqj8l3$amt$1...@sparta.btinternet.com>
><83krsvgibdlsm6ds5...@4ax.com>
><bqkorp$4c4$1...@sparta.btinternet.com>
><bc35ed69.03120...@posting.google.com>
><jsv0tv4hrjcs8ko2a...@4ax.com>
><6l61tvcblj9lgi17a...@4ax.com>
><bqqq74$2j7$1...@sparta.btinternet.com>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: host81-128-200-189.in-addr.btopenworld.com
>(81.128.200.189)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de 1070670284 72747129 81.128.200.189 ([172695])
>X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.93/32.576 English (American)
>
><<SNIP>>

>I've had sex with 13 14 15 year olds and in this country too not
>Bangkok. I see no problem with it personally if they can understand
>what their bodies are telling them. It is taken for granted in some

>parts of the world I can tell you. I also know that those under 16 are
>punished for serious crimes even in this country. Where's your
>problem?
>smicker

=====================================================================


moderation.org.uk

Rejected posts
Post Id:15122
Reject reason given -->
This is off topic for uk.legal.moderated - see
http://www.uklegal.fsnet.co.uk/ulm.htm

<smicker wrote>:

On Sat, 26 Jun 2004 08:10:06 +0100, "dave @ stejonda"

- Hide quoted text -

<NoSpamTha...@stejonda.freeuk.com> wrote:
>In message <40dc8eb...@news1.homechoice.co.uk>, GB
><NOTsome...@microsoft.com> writes
>>"Mike" <spamd...@fensoft.co.uk> wrote in message
>>news:56I04WVTyF3AFwW$@fensoft.co.uk...

>>> The age of consent is 16 but it's still an offence to have or make
>>> indecent photographs of a person under 18 (except those of a person with
>>> whom you have an "enduring relationship"). Without that relationship,
>>> the law makes no distinction between a 12 year old and a 17 year old so
>>> the only question would be "are the photographs indecent?"

>>Just another incident of the law being an ass?

>Boys being boys, a school trip last year resulted in a roll of film
>being sent off from here containing images of various tumescences - it
>was returned developed/printed without comment by the company concerned
>so somewhere at least the law is being applied sensibly. (Phew!)

Many years ago on a deserted beach in Libya and hungry for sexual
contact I saw 2 girls sun bathing. I tried being friendly but they
were Finnish and according to them gay. They asked me if I would keep
an eye on their camera while they went for a swim. My manhood was

without wrinkles and I took a snap of it with their camera. I know it
was stupid but I done it without thinking of the consequences. I hope
they didn't get into trouble over it.
smicker

=========================================================================


Still deny it do you?

Why not tell people what happened with Derek Hornby - you know the deaf and
dumb person you tried to take to court for compo.

Just think about that for a minute - and wonder what it is like: being totally
deaf and dumb; and then some arsehole threatens you with court.

Why not share that little story with us.

No wonder you have been one of the most hated and despised posters to usenet
many have ever known.

You are disgusting.



Judith Smith

[Peter Turtill]

By the way Periander and others who repeated this nonsense are in my
killfile so I do not see their posts. If Periander has apologised for
his actions I would be grateful is somebody informed me of this. The
same goes for Pedt. I believe anyone who wishes to be taken seriously
on any subject should have the balls to admit making a mistake by
merely re-posting somebody else's nonsense in a cut and paste
operation that indicates a very irresponsible attitude when one puts
forward opinions that are supposed to be from somebody with claimed
expertise in certain aspects of policing and the law such as Periander
whose posts must now be taken with a large pinch of salt..

pete

[PhilO]

On Friday, November 9, 2012 3:52:11 PM UTC, Janitor of Lunacy wrote:

>
> I normally try to avoid the childish exchanges here, but are you denying Mr
> Turtill's allegation by attacking him? If so, why do you think that gives
> you any credence?

This is standard Judith behviour - attacking rather than responding to anything she doesn't like. Try asking her how many names she has used to post. The various tactics used by her to avoid giving an honest answer are quite amusing.

[nik.morgan]

what ever he she or it said wouldn't satisfy you, this whole thing is now
silly and boring, give it a rest why don't you?
--
ennemm

[PhilO]

On Wednesday, November 14, 2012 11:14:10 AM UTC, nik. morgan wrote:

> what ever he she or it said wouldn't satisfy you, this whole thing is now
> silly and boring, give it a rest why don't you?
>
> --
>
> ennemm

Because Judith berates others for being dishonest and yet is unable to answer a simple question honestly. Her double standards should be exposed.

If you find this boring, don't comment.

[nik.morgan]

Why? Who apart from you gives a fuck?


--
ennemm

[M Wicks]

On Nov 14, 3:06 pm, nik.morgan <ig.t...@me.com> wrote:

Yes, exactly. Even the psycholists aren't exactly piling in with their
support.

And in any case, the most infamous examples of dishonesty on this
newsgroup have all concerned psycholist conduct, even if the worst
offenders have since disappeared, or, in at least one case, run off to
the moderated group, where they must be dismayed that difficult
questions from the likes of John Benn and nomen nescio are being let
through...I'm sure they weren't expecting that! They seem to be trying
to ignore them, but that just shows everyone that they have no answer!

Readers of URCM will all have seen Mason boasting about dazzling
drivers with unnecessarily bright lights and then repeatedly ignoring
perfectly reasonable questions about it. One can only draw the
conclusion that he knows he's being a dick by having those lights and
he doesn't care: if you're a psycholist then all other road users are
inferior to you. Of course that doesn't stop him from having a go at
drivers who use foglights. The man must be wasted 24/7 to come up with
(and doggedly stick to) such ludicrous contradictions all the time.

[PhilO]

On Wednesday, November 14, 2012 3:06:48 PM UTC, nik. morgan wrote:

> Why? Who apart from you gives a fuck?
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> ennemm

Obviously not you. So you should be asking yourself why you are commenting.

[PhilO]

On Wednesday, November 14, 2012 3:49:51 PM UTC, M Wicks wrote:

> Readers of URCM will all have seen Mason boasting about dazzling
> drivers with unnecessarily bright lights and then repeatedly ignoring
> perfectly reasonable questions about it.

Which irks you enough to bring it up again, even though it is in the past.
At least I'm am discussing Judith's current refusal to answer a question honestly.
Get up to date.

[nik.morgan]

wrong, I'm just tired of the drivel and wish you would stop doing it.
--
ennemm

[nik.morgan]

But you are not discussing it, you are haranguing at every opportunity,
much to the irritation of others, so you are being told lies, get over it.
--
ennemm

[PhilO]

On Wednesday, November 14, 2012 5:15:15 PM UTC, nik. morgan wrote:
>
> But you are not discussing it, you are haranguing at every opportunity,
> much to the irritation of others, so you are being told lies, get over it.
>

Not as long as the person telling lies is accusing me and others of being liars.

[Just zis Guy, you know?]

On Fri, 09 Nov 2012 12:34:17 +0000, porky....@outlook.com wrote:

>I have just taken a number of pages down from my website purely as an "Autumn
>Cleaning" session.

Yet another wank fantasy with no basis in fact. No complaints have
been referred to me by any service provider. No pages have been
removed, anything lost in the move between hosting providers is purely
accidental - it's probably still there in /cloudy instead of /blog.

Interesting, though, that having presented itself as being proud of
trying to hound Simon Mason off Usenet by going to his managers,
judith acts all butthurt when called on it. Rarely were the words
"anonymous coward" more appropriate.

[Just zis Guy, you know?]

Hi judith.

Sorry you couldn't find the post about you after I moved my sites from
AWS back to Dreamhost. Is this the one you were after?
<http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/cloudy/2012/09/21/on-trolls/>

If you have a complaint you're better off sending it to me directly,
providers tend not to forward green-ink emails so I never got to hear
about it.

[Judith]

Wicked.

So it was better than I thought - they actually kicked you off !!!

So let me get this straight:

You have your web pages on AWS.

I spot the offending page on AWS

I complain to Amazon (AWS)

You claim that you lost the page when you moved your site to Amazon.

And two days later you decide to give up using Amazon - and move back to your
previous provider - who are basically shit-shovellers with no actual hosting -
all they do is just hide originating IP addresses. As they say: CloudFlare is
not a web hosting company and we have no way to remove content from a site.
Good choice - much better than Amazon :-)

What a truly amazing sequence of actions.

ffs - you really are excellent value - and really living up to being the
Porker.


(I love the way that you have had to move to Dreamhost who don't actually host
the webpages and who say that they are therefore not responsible for the
content. Any reason why you moved from Amazon to them? :-)

You and IP addresses !!!!

--

Total number of posts to URC from
IP Address:80.254.146.36 over 6 years = 7

Guy Chapman : 5
Lou Knee: 2

Coincidence?

[PhilO]

On Thursday, November 22, 2012 10:44:20 AM UTC, Judith wrote:

>
> Lou Knee: 2
>

Judith, have you ever posted as Lou Knee?

[paul.c...@outlook.com]

On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 10:51:47 +0000, i...@ster.invalid ( Ï M Poster) wrote:

>Just zis Guy, you know? <g...@chapmancentral.co.uk> wrote:
>

> Why TF is this in the shed?


Because Chapman is a fuckwit of the first order. He brings his many disputes
with him as part of his baggage wherever he goes.

[PhilO]

On Thursday, November 22, 2012 11:24:58 AM UTC, paul.c...@outlook.com wrote:

> Because Chapman is a fuckwit of the first order. He brings his many disputes
> with him as part of his baggage wherever he goes.

Judith, have you ever posted as "Porky Chapman"?

[Paul Cummins]

We were about to embark at Dover, when paul.c...@outlook.com () came
up to me and whispered:

> Because Chapman is a fuckwit of the first order. He brings his
> many disputes
> with him as part of his baggage wherever he goes.

Oops - forgot to change the "From" Address?

--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981

---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----

[Not Dr Paul Cummins]

On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 15:52 +0000 (GMT Standard Time),
uset...@stedtelephone.invalid (Paul Cummins) wrote:

>We were about to embark at Dover, when paul.c...@outlook.com () came
>up to me and whispered:
>
>> Because Chapman is a fuckwit of the first order. He brings his
>> many disputes
>> with him as part of his baggage wherever he goes.
>
>Oops - forgot to change the "From" Address?

No - it is an address which I own - and so I use it; Paul Cummins is not
really my name though - I believe that it is quite "tainted".

I met someone else who claimed that *they* owned the email address - now they
really were a fuckwit; and of course they could provide no proof.

--
"Dr" Paul Cummins - Always a Wanker
Wasting everyone's time since 1981

---- If it's above this line, I didn't write it ----

[Dave - Cyclists VOR]

Have you ever posted as Judith?

--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton, of Lancaster
University, wrote in an interim assessment of the Understanding Walking
and Cycling study. "For them, cycling is a bit embarrassing, they fail
to see its purpose, and have no interest in integrating it into their
lives, certainly on a regular basis."

[Just zis Guy, you know?]

On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 03:45:47 -0800 (PST), PhilO <goo1...@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:

Oh the irony. Who brought this fuckwittery here? Oh yes, it was
judith, trolling around, as always. Stupid troll.

[PhilO]

On Thursday, November 22, 2012 5:20:48 PM UTC, Dave VOR wrote:
>
> > Judith, have you ever posted as "Porky Chapman"?
>
>
> Have you ever posted as Judith?
>

Dave, I can honestly say I have never posted under another name. Judith has admitted to using many different names and seems unable to give an honest answer as to how many she has used. We've had plenty of lies, but I don't believe she's actually owned up yet.

[porky....@outlook.com]

Hello, hello, hello - it's the Master himself

(Ten past eleven - having a night-cap are you?)

[PhilO]

On Friday, November 23, 2012 11:12:15 AM UTC, porky....@outlook.com wrote:
>
> >>Judith, have you ever posted as "Porky Chapman"?
>
> >Oh the irony. Who brought this fuckwittery here? Oh yes, it was
> >judith, trolling around, as always. Stupid troll.
>
> Hello, hello, hello - it's the Master himself
>
> (Ten past eleven - having a night-cap are you?)
>

Judith, how many names have you used to post here?
It's a simple question - have you got an honest answer?