> Markoff. Isn't that the guy who may have fabricated (artistic license) > portions of a less than adequately documented book for personal profit, > then collaborated on an even more ficticious movie? "May have fabricated", you don't have any proof, but you don't like what he wrote. As Cartman would say that's weak man. Since the accusations appear to come from Mitnick's supporters they have to be considered somewhat suspect. I know enough people who were involved in the previous investigations of Mitnick to corroborate the points I made, namely that Mitnick is a nasty piece of work and a pathetic loser rather than the harmless chap his defence attorney would have people believe. Phill
- Vin McLellan & Charles Mudd On Denial of Service ... Matthew Gaylor
- Re: Vin McLellan & Charles Mudd On Denial of... Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Vin McLellan & Charles Mudd On Denia... Steve Mynott
- Re: Vin McLellan & Charles Mudd On Denial of... Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Vin McLellan & Charles Mudd On Denial of... Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Vin McLellan & Charles Mudd On Denia... John Young
- Re: Vin McLellan & Charles Mudd On Denia... Declan McCullagh
- Re: Vin McLellan & Charles Mudd On D... Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Vin McLellan & Charles Mudd ... Tim May
- RE: Vin McLellan & Charles ... Phillip Hallam-Baker
- RE: Vin McLellan & Char... Tim May
- RE: Vin McLellan & ... John Young
- Cypherpunk photo archive no... Declan McCullagh
- Re: Vin McLellan & Charles ... Bill Stewart
- Re: Vin McLellan & Charles Mudd ... Steve Mynott