Coughlan had a 500 page document of Ferrari designs
CatharticF1
148.hbs
Auto Motor und Sport report that Coughlan had a 500 page document
containing:
- car designs and data of the F2007
- secret details of internal structures and operations in Maranello
- senior engineers
- data about the vehicle tuning
- running strategy
- the preparation of the cars
- development plans for the future
- standards of quality control and test results.
--
CatharticF1
"What you thought was freedom is just greed."
Tony
"CatharticF1" <efer...@heaven.net> wrote in message
news:Xns99656C142A205...@202.83.64.15...
If that information was all together, someone worked long
and hard to assemble it. I've worked in engineering for 30+
years and have never seen an example of that breadth and
depth of information about a project being contained in a
one single document.
There is no engineering or management need to combine
all that information in one document.
Tony S.
Mark
Not to mention that wouldn't it be in some electronic form, ie, so it
can be searched, and giving it to someone would simply be handing them a
memory stick rather than a telephone book that is easily spotted.
Matti Vuori
> If that information was all together, someone worked long
> and hard to assemble it. I've worked in engineering for 30+
> years and have never seen an example of that breadth and
> depth of information about a project being contained in a
> one single document.
Absolutely. The Auto motor und Sport article didn't say that it was a
"document", just that the copied information was more than 500 pages.
--
Matti Vuori, <http://sivut.koti.soon.fi/mvuori/index-e.htm>
ric zito
> http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/sport/formel_1/hxcms_article_505220_14
> 148.hbs
>
> Auto Motor und Sport report that Coughlan had a 500 page document
> containing:
>
> - car designs and data of the F2007
> - secret details of internal structures and operations in Maranello
> - senior engineers
> - data about the vehicle tuning
> - running strategy
> - the preparation of the cars
> - development plans for the future
> - standards of quality control and test results.
Oh yes, that story that was also featured on planet-f1.com a few days
back... but which they later took down. I wonder why. Was the 500-page
document covered in white powder?
Brendan, I'm surprised at you. I've never seen you stir the shit this
much before, only to then feign surprise when people get defensive.
"This newsgroup needs balance". LOL. That's balance? I would've hoped
that your attitude would have been "wait and see", rather than "string
'em up!".
Anyway, look on the bright side : you all have your perfect excuse for
when Ferrari lose the WCC and WDC. That's what you're really looking
for, isn't it?
--
ric at pixelligence dot com
CatharticF1
news:1i0tpcd.b6cskvrwjxkuN%add...@in.sig:
> CatharticF1 <efer...@heaven.net> wrote:
>
>> http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/sport/formel_1/hxcms_article_505220
>> _14 148.hbs
>>
>> Auto Motor und Sport report that Coughlan had a 500 page document
>> containing:
>>
>> - car designs and data of the F2007
>> - secret details of internal structures and operations in Maranello
>> - senior engineers
>> - data about the vehicle tuning
>> - running strategy
>> - the preparation of the cars
>> - development plans for the future - standards of quality control and
>> test results.
>
> Oh yes, that story that was also featured on planet-f1.com a few days
> back... but which they later took down. I wonder why. Was the 500-page
> document covered in white powder?
>
> Brendan, I'm surprised at you. I've never seen you stir the shit this
> much before, only to then feign surprise when people get defensive.
> "This newsgroup needs balance". LOL. That's balance? I would've hoped
> that your attitude would have been "wait and see", rather than "string
> 'em up!".
I didn't see the planet-f1.com site (it's drivel and I don't look there).
But why is posting a link to an article not balanced against suggestions
that "Ferrari are starting to stink even more than they usually do" - to
quote Paul..
I can live with that slight :)
> Anyway, look on the bright side : you all have your perfect excuse for
> when Ferrari lose the WCC and WDC. That's what you're really looking
> for, isn't it?
No - I wanted a fair fight.
As you know full well I was not happy with what happened to Alonso last
season and believe he deserved the championship. And up to this point you
hadn't seen complaints or wild accusations from me. ANd you still
haven't.
But this is not the same as last season Ric.
And what you're reading from the other side here is not guarded restraint
- it's excuse making using assumptions and speculation no less extreme
than the side of the fence I am sitting on is being accused of.
--
CatharticF1
'What you thought was freedom is just greed'
ric zito
> And what you're reading from the other side here is not guarded restraint
> - it's excuse making using assumptions and speculation no less extreme
> than the side of the fence I am sitting on is being accused of.
Oh? I don't see how "innocent until proven guilty" or "innocent until we
know what the f**k this is all about" is as extreme as "guilty by
default".
Bigbird
So most of your shit stirring was preemptive of this predictable
response to... er your shit stirring.
> I can live with that slight :)
>
> > Anyway, look on the bright side : you all have your perfect excuse
> > for when Ferrari lose the WCC and WDC. That's what you're really
> > looking for, isn't it?
>
> No - I wanted a fair fight.
>
I rather think your idea of a fair fight does not stray far from
Ferrari dominance.
> As you know full well I was not happy with what happened to Alonso
> last season and believe he deserved the championship. And up to this
> point you hadn't seen complaints or wild accusations from me. ANd you
> still haven't.
>
Yes we have. Plenty. Review you own threads. Your in denial.
> But this is not the same as last season Ric.
>
> And what you're reading from the other side here is not guarded
> restraint - it's excuse making using assumptions and speculation no
> less extreme than the side of the fence I am sitting on is being
> accused of.
ROFL. You can't even see the fence from where you are sitting.
--
Pete Fenelon
> If that information was all together, someone worked long
> and hard to assemble it. I've worked in engineering for 30+
> years and have never seen an example of that breadth and
> depth of information about a project being contained in a
> one single document.
I'm thinking here of the movie "The Man Who Never Was", and also the old
SOE principle that "What is on the body is false". ;)
pete
--
pe...@fenelon.com "how many clever men have called the sun a fool?"
Dr Hfuhruhurr
> In article <Xns99656C142A205eferrariheaven...@202.83.64.15>,
>
> CatharticF1 <eferr...@heaven.net> wrote:
> >http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/sport/formel_1/hxcms_article_50522...
> > 148.hbs
>
> > Auto Motor und Sport report that Coughlan had a 500 page document
> > containing:
>
> > - car designs and data of the F2007
> > - secret details of internal structures and operations in Maranello
> > - senior engineers
> > - data about the vehicle tuning
> > - running strategy
> > - the preparation of the cars
> > - development plans for the future
> > - standards of quality control and test results.
>
>
> PERMANENTLY!
BAM BAM!!!!
Doc
Paul-B
> On 6 Jul, 14:47, noone <n...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> > In article <Xns99656C142A205eferrariheaven...@202.83.64.15>,
> >
> > CatharticF1 <eferr...@heaven.net> wrote:
> > > http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/sport/formel_1/hxcms_article_50
> > > 522... 148.hbs
> >
> > > Auto Motor und Sport report that Coughlan had a 500 page document
> > > containing:
> >
> > > - car designs and data of the F2007
> > > - secret details of internal structures and operations in
> > > Maranello - senior engineers
> > > - data about the vehicle tuning
> > > - running strategy
> > > - the preparation of the cars
> > > - development plans for the future
> > > - standards of quality control and test results.
> >
> > BAM MCLAREN NOW!
> >
> > PERMANENTLY!
>
> BAM BAM!!!!
>
> Doc
PEBBLES!
--
Paul-B
peter
>On 6 Jul, 14:47, noone <n...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>> In article <Xns99656C142A205eferrariheaven...@202.83.64.15>,
>> > containing:
>>
>> > - car designs and data of the F2007
>> > - secret details of internal structures and operations in Maranello
>> > - senior engineers
>> > - data about the vehicle tuning
>> > - running strategy
>> > - the preparation of the cars
>> > - development plans for the future
>> > - standards of quality control and test results.
>>
>> BAM MCLAREN NOW!
>> PERMANENTLY!
>
>BAM BAM!!!!
>
--
Peter
skulkr...@googlemail.com
> scandal in F1, and you still justify McLaren.
>
> Shameless.
>
I'm not a McLaren fan but you can't have been watching F1 for long if
you think this is the biggest scandal in F1!
(Assuming the worst case scenario is proven, then it would be a
scandal, but we need to wait for the facts to emerge)
Dr Hfuhruhurr
> In article <xn0f8dmrn23vv92...@news.individual.net>,
>
> "Bigbird" <bigbird.use...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I rather think your idea of a fair fight does not stray far from
> > Ferrari dominance.
>
>
> You can't win unless you skew the rule book or steal plans.
In this case "You" means Ferrari, no?
Doc
Dr Hfuhruhurr
> In article <1i0tpcd.b6cskvrwjxkuN%addr...@in.sig>,
> addr...@in.sig (ric zito) wrote:
>
> > Brendan, I'm surprised at you. I've never seen you stir the shit this
> > much before, only to then feign surprise when people get defensive.
>
> scandal in F1, and you still justify McLaren.
Who's this we. Oh, you and Marky and Brendan.
Get a room
> Shameless.
That must be a label you use.
Doc
Bigbird
> In article <xn0f8dmrn...@news.individual.net>,
> "Bigbird" <bigbird...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> > I rather think your idea of a fair fight does not stray far from
> > Ferrari dominance.
>
>
> When F1 has a level playing field, Ferrari wins 80% of the races.
>
> You can't win unless you skew the rule book or steal plans.
You are too thick to even realise that you have just accused Ferrari of
gross misconduct and criminality.
There will shortly come a time when, though I use it rarely, you must
reside in the bozo bin. It is ridiculous how little sense any of your
posts make. Put a monkey in front of your keyboard and no-one would be
able to tell the difference.
--
Dr Hfuhruhurr
> In article <1183732030.332368.254...@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
At least we're consistent.
Doc
ric zito
> > Brendan, I'm surprised at you. I've never seen you stir the shit this
> > much before, only to then feign surprise when people get defensive.
>
> We thought you McLaren fans had **some** ethics. This is the biggest
> scandal in F1, and you still justify McLaren.
Until such time as the truth comes out and definitively incriminates
them, yes.
RBrickston
Hell and High Water
In other words:
'That Never Happened'
...right?
-Bob
DC
wrote:
Yes they would. It would make a lot more sense...
David
ric zito
> And about that material you and Paul have crafted out of the thin blue,
> accusing me of everything shy of 9/11, that you trot about with such
> confidence? Is there any definite incrimination in that?
Oh, you mean the Microsoft Netscan page itemising all the newsgroups
visited, posted to and touched by a certain no...@nowhere.com? Who just
happens to be YOU? It's a very clear record indeed of your activities,
as of mine and anyone else here.
In fact, the page that I quoted is still online : care to see it again?
Oh,perhaps you should know that the MSN service continued to record your
activities until it closed on 31/5/07. And they kept all the pages
online.
You're toast. You were busted bigtime, pervert, and no amount of tears
and squirming will undo that.
ric zito
> Because, of course, nobody else uses that spamblocker.
Not in this newsgroup, no. You damned fool - you know it's you, I know
it's you, the whole goddamned world knows it's you. You're squirming
like the hooked worm that you are.
Click on rasf1 and then tell me that those posts aren't you. Go on,
fuckwit, try it.
> You hang your hat on that?
Yep. So sue me. LOL.
> > In fact, the page that I quoted is still online : care to see it again?
> > Oh,perhaps you should know that the MSN service continued to record your
> > activities until it closed on 31/5/07. And they kept all the pages
> > online.
> >
> > You're toast. You were busted bigtime, pervert, and no amount of tears
> > and squirming will undo that.
>
> See above. If I could get to you, you'd be slapped with a lawsuit.
ROFL! Bollocks. You already tried that bluff once and finished with egg
on your face. You utter failure. All macho bluster and Kleenex. Stick to
jacking off to "transsexual action", it's more your style.
> You're a horrible example for your children.
Feel that? That was me sticking a fork in your fat arse. You're done.
Phil Carmody
> noone <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
> > Because, of course, nobody else uses that spamblocker.
>
> Not in this newsgroup, no. You damned fool - you know it's you, I know
> it's you, the whole goddamned world knows it's you. You're squirming
> like the hooked worm that you are.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/2x9yn7
>
> Click on rasf1 and then tell me that those posts aren't you. Go on,
> fuckwit, try it.
Erm, since when has he denied posting to rasf1?
I think you've got the wrong end of the stick.
Wrong stick probably.
Phil
--
"Home taping is killing big business profits. We left this side blank
so you can help." -- Dead Kennedys, written upon the B-side of tapes of
/In God We Trust, Inc./.
Phil Carmody
>
> Yep. So sue me. LOL.
Whilst I have about ->.<- that much respect for your, and everyone's,
antagonist, I believe that people should not make accusations unless
they are based on fact. From a 5 minute investigation which anyone
with moderate forensic skills could perform, I can ascertain that our
resident loon _does_ post to the gun/politics newgroups (not clear
which is where he reads them, because many are crossposted), but
does *not* post to erotica newsgroups, especially ones pertaining to
strong taboos. It seems that there are two different guys using that
spamblock to post to the porn groups, neither is our resident creep.
For people to have made the accusations without performing an
equivalent amount of research is irresponsible.
Criticise him for his real flaws and weaknesses, not for ones that
you wish he had just so you could more strongly justify your animosity.
It's little better than the cries of "gay Schumacher".
ric zito
> I think you've got the wrong end of the stick.
> Wrong stick probably.
Really? Based on what evidence?
Paul-B
> I can ascertain that our
> resident loon does post to the gun/politics newgroups (not clear
> which is where he reads them, because many are crossposted), but
> does not post to erotica newsgroups, especially ones pertaining to
> strong taboos.
Really?
> It seems that there are two different guys using that
> spamblock to post to the porn groups, neither is our resident creep.
Care to share your in-depth knowledge with us?
So who actually is no...@nowhere.com? You know, the guy who, if you are
correct, would be within his rights to take action against, for
instance, myself, for making posts calling him a criminal and a
pervert? And who hasn't, despite saying he would and having all the
necessary information to contact my lawyers?
--
Paul-B
Luigi Topolino
<tifo...@OVEcomcast.net> wrote:
>In article <eMhji.4$Oz...@newsfe19.lga>, som...@cox.net says...
>> "CatharticF1" <efer...@heaven.net> wrote in message
>> news:Xns99656C142A205...@202.83.64.15...
>> > http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/sport/formel_1/hxcms_article_505220_14
>> > 148.hbs
>> >
>> > Auto Motor und Sport report that Coughlan had a 500 page document
>> > containing:
>> >
>> > - car designs and data of the F2007
>> > - secret details of internal structures and operations in Maranello
>> > - senior engineers
>> > - data about the vehicle tuning
>> > - running strategy
>> > - the preparation of the cars
>> > - development plans for the future
>> > - standards of quality control and test results.
>>
>> and hard to assemble it. I've worked in engineering for 30+
>> years and have never seen an example of that breadth and
>> depth of information about a project being contained in a
>> one single document.
>>
>> There is no engineering or management need to combine
>> all that information in one document.
>
>In other words:
>
>'That Never Happened'
>
>...right?
Seems so, of the 'in my day, we didn't' variety.
That fact that a flash drive could easily contain 500pages equivalent
of several discrete documents seems to have fallen into a generational
gap.
Phil Newnham
> That fact that a flash drive could easily contain 500pages equivalent
> of several discrete documents seems to have fallen into a generational
> gap.
Which makes a complete mockery of this story about Coughlan photocopying
the documents in a copy shop, does it not? The whole thing smells of
bullshit, to me - it's all far too convenient and far too unprofessional
for two guys who've been in F1 for as long as Stepney and Coughlan have.
You could get a lot more than 500 pages of information on a flash drive,
especially if you work for an F1 team sponsored by a computer company
and 16Gb usb sticks are basically free.
--
Phil
News
Even the sharpest tools in the shed are usually sharp on only one edge.
Phil Newnham
So are you buying this whole idea of him going into his local copy shop
and photocopying documents clearly marked in big letters "TOP SECRET
FERRARI PLANS" whilst wearing his McLaren team shirt, and the guy in the
copy shop putting two and two together and ringing up Ferrari? Come on,
even Hollywood blockbusters aren't that contrived.
--
Phil
News
Not at all, just pointing out that none of the parties involved is in
all likelihood a trained, expert thief, thus they are all likely to have
made mistakes of one sort or another. Thus, errors are believable.
Phil Carmody
> Phil Carmody <thefatphi...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > I think you've got the wrong end of the stick.
> > Wrong stick probably.
>
> Really? Based on what evidence?
I will answer that if you respond again with my full post quoted.
In short - Yes, based on seeing you grab the wrong end of the wrong stick.
ric zito
> add...@in.sig (ric zito) writes:
> > Phil Carmody <thefatphi...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > > I think you've got the wrong end of the stick.
> > > Wrong stick probably.
> >
> > Really? Based on what evidence?
>
> I will answer that if you respond again with my full post quoted.
>
> In short - Yes, based on seeing you grab the wrong end of the wrong stick.
>
> Phil
Here we go :
> Erm, since when has he denied posting to rasf1?
> I think you've got the wrong end of the stick.
> Wrong stick probably.
I'm not suggesting he denied posting to rasf1. I'm suggesting that the
profile on that page is indeed him, and using the rasf1 posts to
corroborate that.
Phil Carmody
> Phil Carmody wrote:
>
> > I can ascertain that our
> > resident loon does post to the gun/politics newgroups (not clear
> > which is where he reads them, because many are crossposted), but
> > does not post to erotica newsgroups, especially ones pertaining to
> > strong taboos.
>
> Really?
Yes.
> > It seems that there are two different guys using that
> > spamblock to post to the porn groups, neither is our resident creep.
>
> Care to share your in-depth knowledge with us?
Look at the headers. Duh! Ain't rocket surgery.
> So who actually is no...@nowhere.com?
The question is *meaningless* as stated. There are about half
a dozen people who use that handle. Our resident loon is only
one of them.
> You know, the guy who, if you are
> correct, would be within his rights to take action against, for
> instance, myself, for making posts calling him a criminal and a
> pervert? And who hasn't, despite saying he would and having all the
> necessary information to contact my lawyers?
I am familiar with the one who posts via teranews.
What's he got to do with the guy who posts via 4ax?
Please explain the connection.
You show me a post via teranews to a smutty newsgroup, and I'll
accept that you have a point; until then, you only have a sequence
of 17 ASCII characters that anyone in the world, myself and yourself
included, could have used to post to usenet.
Show me _just one post_ supporting your claim that he makes
posts to smutty newsgroups, that's all I ask. A single Message-ID
is all I ask for.
a_Frank
<tif...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>That fact that a flash drive could easily contain 500pages equivalent
>of several discrete documents seems to have fallen into a generational
>gap.
>
I photocopied one of those the other day. It was a pain, i could
hardly stuff the copy into the USB port. Never again..
--
Regards, Frank
Phil Carmody
> Phil Carmody <thefatphi...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > add...@in.sig (ric zito) writes:
> > > Phil Carmody <thefatphi...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I think you've got the wrong end of the stick.
> > > > Wrong stick probably.
> > >
> > > Really? Based on what evidence?
> >
> > I will answer that if you respond again with my full post quoted.
> >
> > In short - Yes, based on seeing you grab the wrong end of the wrong stick.
> >
> > Phil
>
> Here we go :
>
> > Erm, since when has he denied posting to rasf1?
> > I think you've got the wrong end of the stick.
> > Wrong stick probably.
That wasn't the whole of my post, my post included a quantity of
quoted material. Is you a bit fick?
In particular it containted the following:
<<<
add...@in.sig (ric zito) writes:
> noone <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
> > Because, of course, nobody else uses that spamblocker.
>
> Not in this newsgroup, no. You damned fool - you know it's you, I know
> it's you, the whole goddamned world knows it's you. You're squirming
> like the hooked worm that you are.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/2x9yn7
>
> Click on rasf1 and then tell me that those posts aren't you. Go on,
> fuckwit, try it.
>>>
> I'm not suggesting he denied posting to rasf1.
You were goading him into denying that those rasf1 posts weren't him.
> I'm suggesting that the
> profile on that page is indeed him, and using the rasf1 posts to
> corroborate that.
In that case, you haven't got a clue how usenet works, or must
otherwise be as thick as pigshit.
You want to use his posts to rasf1 to prove that he posts to
rec.sex.with.pigs or whatever? You complete fucking idiot. No
other words for it.
That page isn't a profile of an individual poster, numbnuts.
It's the combined profile of all archived posters who have used
that identifier. As far as I can see there are at least five
different posters represented:
One into racing, guns, politics, and insulting muslims (our one)
One into porn and warez cooking, role playing games, and who knows about alt.test
One into porn and sci-fi
One into classical music (though the porn/warez dude is too)
One into emacs/AIX, and computer tax programs
One into linux
One into survivalism (not the same guy as into guns), and god.
(I may have put some of those in the wrong row)
Of course, many of the records of posts may have been follow-ups to
trolls (our one, for example has posted to alt.support.childfree and
alt.tv.simpsons in response to trolls).
Sheesh, you've been conversing with him for too long, you've caught
a case of his stupid.
Luigi Topolino
wrote:
Since I don't read the Royal Cockney Fishwrapper, I'm not familiar
with that, dramatized for morons, version of events.
Unlike yourself, and the other parochial nitwits, I've commented only
on what the FIA, McLaren and Ferrari themselves are stating.
You, as usual, are relying on sources of much lesser veritability.
Hal S.
"ric zito" <add...@in.sig> wrote in message
news:1i0vk5m.n0ngy01v29p2sN%add...@in.sig...
---------------------------------------
Mr Zito: You really are in need of a more fulfilling and rewarding life. I
got rid of "Noone's" inanities by killfilling. I've, over the last couple
of years, enjoyed quite a few of your postings, but you've become another
"Noone," bringing him back with all you responses and foolishness. I know
you don't give a rip, but I guess I'll have to send you to the killfiles
also, where you can play pattycake with "Noone." The fact that you choose
to engage him in debate shows as much about you as it does about him.
By the way, Netscan is not a clear record of "Noone's" activities. It is a
record of the various persons who have posted under that monicker, which is
far from unique.
--
Hal S.
ric zito
>> > I'm not suggesting he denied posting to rasf1. I'm suggesting that
the
> > profile on that page is indeed him, and using the rasf1 posts to
> > corroborate that.
>
> Ric, now would be the time for you to man up and apologize.
Indeed. I owe you a full and complete apology. I was completely wrong
and way out of order.
ric zito
> > > Ric, now would be the time for you to man up and apologize.
> >
> > Indeed. I owe you a full and complete apology. I was completely wrong
> > and way out of order.
>
> Aiiight.
>
> Be chill.
I'm not proud of what I did. It was pretty disgraceful, and I apologise
once again. I acted like a complete dick.
Phil Newnham
> On Sat, 07 Jul 2007 16:47:17 +0100, Phil Newnham <pnew...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>> News wrote:
>>> Phil Newnham wrote:
>>>> Luigi Topolino wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> That fact that a flash drive could easily contain 500pages equivalent
>>>>> of several discrete documents seems to have fallen into a generational
>>>>> gap.
>>>> Which makes a complete mockery of this story about Coughlan
>>>> photocopying the documents in a copy shop, does it not? The whole
>>>> thing smells of bullshit, to me - it's all far too convenient and far
>>>> too unprofessional for two guys who've been in F1 for as long as
>>>> Stepney and Coughlan have. You could get a lot more than 500 pages of
>>>> information on a flash drive, especially if you work for an F1 team
>>>> sponsored by a computer company and 16Gb usb sticks are basically free.
>>> Even the sharpest tools in the shed are usually sharp on only one edge.
>> So are you buying this whole idea of him going into his local copy shop
>> and photocopying documents clearly marked in big letters "TOP SECRET
>> FERRARI PLANS" whilst wearing his McLaren team shirt, and the guy in the
>> copy shop putting two and two together and ringing up Ferrari? Come on,
>> even Hollywood blockbusters aren't that contrived.
>
> Since I don't read the Royal Cockney Fishwrapper, I'm not familiar
> with that, dramatized for morons, version of events.
I read it here, on rasf1, written by the usual suspects. I'm not
familiar with the Royal Cockney Fishwrapper.
> Unlike yourself, and the other parochial nitwits, I've commented only
> on what the FIA, McLaren and Ferrari themselves are stating.
Have you bollocks. You've spun, interpreted and inferred like crazy to
support your rosso-tinted world view, as always.
> You, as usual, are relying on sources of much lesser veritability.
I'm not relying on any sources, I'm reacting to the sheer amount of
rubbish in here that appears mostly to be written by you, Bob or Brendan.
--
Phil
ric zito
> > I'm not proud of what I did. It was pretty disgraceful, and I apologise
> > once again. I acted like a complete dick.
>
> Like I said, Aiight. We're done.
You've been very correct about this, and I appreciate that. Cheers.
Phil Carmody
> noone <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
> > > I'm not proud of what I did. It was pretty disgraceful, and I apologise
> > > once again. I acted like a complete dick.
> >
> > Like I said, Aiight. We're done.
>
> You've been very correct about this, and I appreciate that. Cheers.
Sorry if I had to get medieval, but I thought it was better
to stop it than let it run.
Right, back to criticising people for the things they have
said and done...
Luigi Topolino
Piss off already . The rubbish is entirely due to vermin who really
do believe something isn't cheating if it helps England win a
championship.
...Fucking assholes, the lot of you.
Dr Hfuhruhurr
> On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 12:34:42 +0100, Phil Newnham <pnewn...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >Luigi Topolino wrote:
> >> On Sat, 07 Jul 2007 16:47:17 +0100, Phil Newnham <pnewn...@yahoo.com>
You anglophobic twat. Any semblance to rational argument you post is
totally unravelled by such bigoted diatribe.
Doc
ric zito
> Sorry if I had to get medieval, but I thought it was better
> to stop it than let it run.
You did the right thing. When I behave like a fool, I expect to be
treated like one.
--
ric
Phil Newnham
> Piss off already . The rubbish is entirely due to vermin who really
> do believe something isn't cheating if it helps England win a
> championship.
I don't see any rampant speculation coming from people who are
pro-McLaren, only calls for waiting to see what happens. The majority of
speculative rubbish is from people calling from McLaren to be kicked out
of the sport, your good self included as far as I can tell, based on no
hard evidence whatsoever. Unless you're also sitting on the fence and
waiting for the results of a full investigation and will happily agree
that McLaren are innocent until proven guilty?
--
Phil
CatharticF1
@mid.individual.net:
No - what you see are people denying what it means when McLaren say in a
press release that they have 'learnt that this individual had personally
received a package of technical information from a Ferrari employee'.
But because you and Paul et al don't want to treat it as a fact you dismiss
it on the wording. And you wonder why we take the mickey..!
If you accepted what is known your position would surely shift somewhat.
--
CatharticF1
'What you thought was freedom is just greed'
peter
>No - what you see are people denying what it means when McLaren say in a
>press release that they have 'learnt that this individual had personally
>received a package of technical information from a Ferrari employee'.
>
>But because you and Paul et al don't want to treat it as a fact you dismiss
>it on the wording. And you wonder why we take the mickey..!
>
other statements as fact also?
In which case McLaren as a team are completely innocent of receiving any
Ferrari IP.
--
Peter
Phil Newnham
> Phil Newnham <pnew...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:5fefqtF3behitU1
> @mid.individual.net:
>
>> Luigi Topolino wrote:
>>> Piss off already . The rubbish is entirely due to vermin who really
>>> do believe something isn't cheating if it helps England win a
>>> championship.
>> I don't see any rampant speculation coming from people who are
>> pro-McLaren, only calls for waiting to see what happens. The majority of
>> speculative rubbish is from people calling from McLaren to be kicked out
>> of the sport, your good self included as far as I can tell, based on no
>> hard evidence whatsoever. Unless you're also sitting on the fence and
>> waiting for the results of a full investigation and will happily agree
>> that McLaren are innocent until proven guilty?
>
> No - what you see are people denying what it means when McLaren say in a
> press release that they have 'learnt that this individual had personally
> received a package of technical information from a Ferrari employee'.
It means that someone has told them that. It isn't an admission of guilt
and it's only your wishful thinking that makes you see one written there.
> But because you and Paul et al don't want to treat it as a fact you dismiss
> it on the wording. And you wonder why we take the mickey..!
I'm not dismissing it - McLaren have so far reacted entirely properly.
Serious allegations have been made and they went on to say in their
statement that the employee concerned has been suspended while a full
investigation takes place. Of *course* we all expect you to assume that
Coughlan and McLaren are guilty, and of course you will then read into
their statement things that are not actually there, but that's your
choice. I bet you don't believe them when they say they're innocent.
--
Phil
Jonathan Peirce
> Paul Ralph paulr...@rogers.com said:
>> I wonder who the dweeb at the corner Kwik-Copy was who said "thank-you, Sir".
>>
>> Took the documents to copy, noticed Ferrari's stamp on them, then
>> raised the alarm?
>>
>> Actually, I can tell you what the poor, underpaid copy shop slave will
>> be driving a year from now; and it won't be a British car. :)
>>
>>
>
> Addendum:
>
> Any imbecile who has in his hand 500 pages of stolen important
> documents from Ferrari should purchase his own photocopier to copy them!
>
> It's worth the investment!
>
> Not a good idea to out source that task.
His wife did it for him!
"Honey, I took that stuff down to Kinko's for you"
"WHAAAAT?!?!?! NOOOOOOOOOOO...."
ric zito
Dr Hfuhruhurr
::taps on noone's forehead::
Hello McFly!
Doc
a_Frank
I don't know, maybe they did jump into a DeLorean and went to Bruce's
house.. :-)
--
Regards, Frank
Dr Hfuhruhurr
> On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 13:36:03 -0000, Dr Hfuhruhurr
>
> >On 11 Jul, 14:23, addr...@in.sig (ric zito) wrote:
> >> noone <n...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >> > at McLaren's house.
>
> >> There's your error. Time and again.
>
> >::taps on noone's forehead::
> >Hello McFly!
>
> I don't know, maybe they did jump into a DeLorean and went to Bruce's
> house.. :-)
Maybe the plans were for an early iteration of Ferraris Flux
Capacitor.
Doc
David Melville
doc.hfu...@gmail.com says...
Dave