arachne-digest Sunday, July 6 2003 Volume 01 : Number 2171
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 06 Jul 2003 05:58:31 -0500 From: "Samuel W. Heywood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: (delete now if not interested in my opinions) Re: OT: Already found the reason for the war ? On Sat, 05 Jul 2003 18:06:37 -0400, Glenn McCorkle wrote: > On Fri, 04 Jul 2003 11:00:10 -0500, Samuel W. Heywood wrote: >> On Sat, 05 Jul 2003 13:30:28 +0200, Richard Menedetter wrote: >>> Hi >>> Go to http://www.google.com >>> enter weapons of mass destruction into the searchfield >>> and press the I'm feeling lucky button. >>> read and start to think. >>> Naturally this 404 - not found page is meant only as a joke. >>> But it really gives me the creep, if a elected (??) leader of a >>> democratic country can knowingly lie to the world, and get away with it. >> We have no proof that he lied to anyone. He said that he knew for a >> fact that there were WMD in Iraq. He also said that the establishent >> of the "facts" was based on conclusions drawn from the analysis of >> military intelligence reports. >> Most people who know anything at all >> about the value of military intelligence know that the "facts" are >> often not as they might appear to be. > All of the following is IMHO, > Take it for whatever you feel it's worth. > (or disregard all of it as being simply the rantings of a 'raving lunatic')<g> > IMHO, > You are mistaken in that statement. > "FACTS" are ALWAYS EXACTLY what they appear to be. > That is why they are called "FACTS". > http://www.webster.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?fact Note that I had used the word within quotations so as to indicate that the "facts" might not have really been proven as such. > On the other hand..... > "LIES" are not always what they appear to be. > That is why they are called "LIES". > http://www.webster.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?lie > (context... lie[3,verb] ) >> From the very beginning of >> the hype about the WMD that were supposedly hidden in Iraq, the "facts" >> were being questioned. Just because your interpretation and analysis >> of the information on which the "facts" are based are different from >> somebody else's analysis does not mean that the other person is a liar, >> even if you should succeed in proving that he is wrong. Lying is about >> one's lack of moral integrity. Lying is not about one's alleged lack >> of accurate perception. > "FACTS" are not open to interpretation. True, but when you see the word used within quotations it indicates that we are speaking of statements that are open to question. > "FACTS" are pieces of information which have been PROVEN to be TRUE. If by definition all "FACTS" are statements that have been PROVEN to be TRUE, then why do we always hear so many politicians and news analysts using the phrase "true facts"? Is there any such thing as a "false fact"? > "LIES" and "CONJECTURE" and "GUESSES" *are* open to interpretation. > These are pieces of information which have NOT been proven to be true. Some lies have been proven to be lies. Otherwise nobody would have ever been convicted of perjury. In order to convict anyone of perjury you have to prove that he has told a lie under oath. In order to prove that he has told a lie you have to prove that what he said wasn't even true "to the best of his knowledge and belief". This means that you would have to prove that he couldn't possibly have believed that what he was saying was the truth. If a person signs an affidavit saying that he saw some flying saucers and some little green men you can't prove that he is lying unless you can prove that he never believed that he actually saw such things. If it can be proven that the person has been going about bragging and laughing about how he is having some fun by upsetting the civil authorities by starting some UFO rumors as a prank, then you could prove that he is lying about what he claims to have seen, even if he can point out as evidence some crop circles that he and his friends have so artfully created. >> So far we have not found any WMD in Iraq. Absence of evidence is not >> evidence of absence. > Quite correct. > However, > We were told that FACTS existed which would PROVE the existence of the > "phantom" WMDs. It is true that we were told that. It is known that facts existed which would prove that WMD's did exist in some places in Iraq at various times in history. Now we are being told that it isn't known whatever happened to them. The problem with what we were told is that we were told that WMD's existed in Iraq at the time when we recently invaded the country. So far we have seen no proof of that. > So far, all we have been shown is...... NOTHING. True. We ain't seen nothing yet. > Please do not misinterpret my meaning here. > I *do not* say that we have been lied to. > I *do not* say that we have told the truth. > What I *do* point-out is the FACT that we have not been shown the PROOF > that we were told existed. > I *do* DEMAND the we be shown this (as yet), 'phantom' proof. You cannot expect your demands to be met as long as the government persists in claiming that the "phantom" proof is found only in some classified documents. There are a lot of things that the American people *demand* to know about, but the government refuses to release the information. >>> American soldiers and iraqi people have a constant party since america >>> freed them. >>> They sing together, dance together and have fun. >>> Only the oil industry is disappointed, because they could not get hold >>> of the iraqi oil. >>> HEY STOP ... it is exactly the other way round ! >> The only people who have stolen any oil from the Iraqi people are >> Saddam and his terrorist henchmen. > Richard made no accusation of 'theft'. It is my interpretation that he insinuated "theft". > He *did* point-out the proven FACT the the oil companies now have their > hands on oil from Iraq. > This is the same oil which was 'out of their reach' before the > Bush administration attacked Iraq. > So... Your accusation that "Saddam and his terrorist henchmen" had been > steeling the oil from the Iraqi people is a pretty strong accusation to make . > Do you have PROOF of this? > If so...... > Show us the PROOF that the possession of such oil had been in the > hands of the Iraqi people. > Show us the PROOF that such possession was STOLEN from them by > "Saddam and his terrorist henchmen". > Show us the PROOF in-fact that Saddam actually HAD "terrorist henchmen". All of Saddam's goons who carried out the tortures and mass executions of innocent people are his "terrorist henchmen". Most of us are already aware of the proof that exists that shows that such things happened under Saddam's regime. > If you can PROVE these items. > Only THEN do they become FACTS. > Until then... they are ACCUSATIONS not FACTS. > If the TRUTH turns out to show the opposite..... > The accusations have been PROVEN to be LIES. Whenever a country devotes its wealth and resources to building up its military might to a level far exceeding what is reasonable and necessary for providing for the country's defense and security, then the government is stealing from the people. The wealth should be dedicated for expenditures to benefit the people instead of for so much unnecessary weaponry and equipment and personnel for its military forces. > There IS proof the the United States government helped Saddam to achieve > what power he *did* have. > http://images.embarrassing.net/Rumsfeld-vs-Saddam.jpg > This is but one very small piece of such proof. > (many more exist) > So, "from a certain point of view" I suppose that the US government *could* > be considered justified in their actions of simply 'taking back' the power > which they gave to him in the first-place. Right. There are always many strings attached to accepting military aid from another country. Sam Heywood - -- This mail was written by user of The Arachne Browser: http://browser.arachne.cz/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 6 Jul 2003 06:34:35 -0400 (EDT) From: Klaus Hameyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Accessing FTP sites in A166 vs A171UE Hello Gregy, Gregg, and Glenn: I tried Glenn's suggestion of adding the trailing "/", e.g., ftp://ftp.fu-berlin.de/unix/ but that didn't help. Gregg's suggestion of: >Under the Options/Internet Settings, I have selected "Don't use FTP >Proxy Server". If you are set for something different, then this may be >the cause of your troubles, but that's just a guess on my part. Here is that section of ARACHNE.CFG: ... [internet] HTTPproxy proxy.provider.com:8080 UseProxy No HomePage c:\browsers\hotlist.htm <= changed from default SearchPage http://search.arachne.cz/ SearchEngine http://www.altavista.com/cgi-bin/query?q= FTPusername user FTPpassword xxxxxx FTPhost ftp.provider.com FTPpath /home/user/ AcceptCharset ISO-8859-1,* ... and in any case, it is the same as in A166. The ARACHNE.CFG file was produced with the installation wizard with some changes maded afterward to suit my situation. So, although I can access FTP sites with A166, this is a bit of a mystery to me. Thanks anyway for your advice. Sincerely, Klaus Hameyer Burlington, VT (USA) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2003 20:17:23 +00 From: "Bastiaan Edelman, PA3FFZ" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: OT: Already found the reason for the war ? To launch a war on a nation is a very serious matter and the evidence should be solid, very solid. The evidence for weapons of mass destruction has been very soft and it still is. To present it to the American people (and the world) as hard core evidence is a lie. Making it an urgent matter, THAT pressing the US army could not wait untill the UN-inspectors ended their job, is making this a very big lie. Even if those weapons do exist... Iraq could not deliver them to the USA by the lack of carrying rockets. So there was never a great threat to the US. The lie is growing. There is still no evidence, there never was, about a connection between Al Quaida and Iraq. Next lie... If Sadam would have the possesion of WOMD... the US would not have attacked. Perhaps the fact they did attack is the best prove there are and were NO weapons of mass destruction. Any dictator threatened by the US is trying to get hold of weapons of mass destruction because this is the only way to have the Americans think twice... proliferation?? Americans are a curious people: backing an administration that tells lies, not one lie but many. Bringing democracy to Iraq or any other country can not start with lies and can not be enforced with guns. What good did this war based on lies... nothing (until now) What bad did this war do to the US... - costed a lot of money - costed many lives - friends are lost - goodwill is lost and who will believe the Bush administration when the next crisis arrives? Even Tony Blair will hesitate! Regards, Bastiaan . ************************* Technische Redactie CQ-PA Bastiaan Edelman, PA3FFZ ************************* Attentie: e-mail adres bij Wanadoo niet meer gebruiken! [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.hetnet.nl/~ba8tian/index.html - -- Virusvrij e-mailen? => Arachne browser/mailer - -- This mail was written by user of Arachne, the Ultimate Internet Client ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2003 19:09:17 +00 From: "Bastiaan Edelman, PA3FFZ" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Site won't load On Sat, 05 Jul 2003 07:59:16 +0930, Greg Mayman wrote: > Hi List buddies. > I'm having trouble with downloading this file > http://www.natrailmuseum.org.au/news/SH_Book_Sale.doc > which I am assured is a standard word document. But when Arachne > downloads it, it then gives me the DOS error message "Bad command or > filename" and starts downloading it again. > The webmaster says that he has no trouble with it using IE or Opera, > naturally both are running under a late version of Windoze. Hi Greg, I had a similar event recently. I had an attachment to an e-mail with a Word file named: on line.doc send by a fellow that uses Win XP. Before he installed Win XP the word documents with names like that did have the "space" in the filename replaced by a "_"... the name would then be: on_line.doc Arachne could not handle a name like that. So, I tried to rename the file with Norton Commander. But :-((( It looks like this is not an Arachne problem but a DOS problem. A space seems to be a non valid character in DOS file-names. I asked for the same file with a name without spaces in it => now all was OK. Is this a new M$ trick to get rid of DOS? CU, Bastiaan > I suspect the file is trying to start MS-Word, which of course i don't > have on my computer. > If anyone else can download it successfully, I'd be pleased to know the > secret, and also what they find in the beginning of the file. > Thanks to all. > from Greg Mayman, in Adelaide, South Australia > Home of the Bay to Birwood Vintage and Classic motor runs > http://www.baytobirdwood.com.au > Visit me at http://homepages.picknowl.com.au/greg_mayman/default.htm > -- Arachne V1.71;UE01, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/ ************************* Technische Redactie CQ-PA Bastiaan Edelman, PA3FFZ ************************* Attentie: e-mail adres bij Wanadoo niet meer gebruiken! [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.hetnet.nl/~ba8tian/index.html - -- Virusvrij e-mailen? => Arachne browser/mailer - -- This mail was written by user of Arachne, the Ultimate Internet Client ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2003 18:56:22 +00 From: "Bastiaan Edelman, PA3FFZ" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Accessing FTP sites in A166 vs A171UE :-))) On Fri, 04 Jul 2003 15:51:00 +0930, Greg Mayman wrote: > On Thu, 3 Jul 2003 06:22:38 -0400 (EDT), Klaus Hameyer wrote: >> Hello Glenn and others: >> I have a question regarding accessing FTP URLs. When I install >> Arachne 1.66 (without any TELNET.APM), I can access URLs such >> as ftp://ftp.fu-berlin.de/unix without any problem, in spite of the >> fact that the APM has not been installed. >> This is not the case with Arachne 171UE. "Out-of-the-box", >> 171UE will not access an FTP URL. And after installing TELNET.APM, >> it behaves exactly the same as far as I can tell. The configuration >> files for the two versions are comparable. > That's odd. > I'm running Arachne 171UE01, straight "out-of-the-box" although I've > reset some of the configuration to reflect my preferences. AFAIK the > TELNET.APM is not installed unless it came as part of the basic package. > I clicked on the URL in your message and after the usual delays it came > up with no trouble at all. For the first time... after a lot of failures I connected an FTP site :-) by just clicking the above URL. And... I could download some files. The FTP directories were showed and I just clicked at the files to download. (Arachne 1.61) :-)) Bastiaan > Under the Options/Internet Settings, I have selected "Don't use FTP > Proxy Server". If you are set for something different, then this may be > the cause of your troubles, but that's just a guess on my part. > -- Arachne V1.71;UE01, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/ ************************* Technische Redactie CQ-PA Bastiaan Edelman, PA3FFZ ************************* Attentie: e-mail adres bij Wanadoo niet meer gebruiken! [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.hetnet.nl/~ba8tian/index.html - -- Virusvrij e-mailen? => Arachne browser/mailer - -- This mail was written by user of Arachne, the Ultimate Internet Client ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2003 19:20:35 +00 From: "Bastiaan Edelman, PA3FFZ" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Site won't load On Sat, 05 Jul 2003 07:59:16 +0930, Greg Mayman wrote: > Hi List buddies. > I'm having trouble with downloading this file > http://www.natrailmuseum.org.au/news/SH_Book_Sale.doc Downloaded the "Second Hand Railway & Tramway Book Sale" without any problem ;-) Would you like a copy? CU, Bastiaan . ************************* Technische Redactie CQ-PA Bastiaan Edelman, PA3FFZ ************************* Attentie: e-mail adres bij Wanadoo niet meer gebruiken! [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.hetnet.nl/~ba8tian/index.html - -- Virusvrij e-mailen? => Arachne browser/mailer - -- This mail was written by user of Arachne, the Ultimate Internet Client ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 06 Jul 2003 16:29:23 +00 From: "Bastiaan Edelman, PA3FFZ" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: (delete now if not interested in my opinions) Re: OT: Already found the reason for the war ? On Sat, 05 Jul 2003 18:06:37 -0400, Glenn McCorkle wrote: > On Fri, 04 Jul 2003 11:00:10 -0500, Samuel W. Heywood wrote: >> On Sat, 05 Jul 2003 13:30:28 +0200, Richard Menedetter wrote: <snip> >> Most people who know anything at all >> about the value of military intelligence know that the "facts" are >> often not as they might appear to be. > "FACTS" are ALWAYS EXACTLY what they appear to be. > That is why they are called "FACTS". > "LIES" are not always what they appear to be. > That is why they are called "LIES". > "FACTS" are not open to interpretation. > "FACTS" are pieces of information which have been PROVEN to be TRUE. Quite correct. However, FACTS are not just FACTS. FACTS are presented and the PRESENTATION can turn a FACT into a LIE. Example #1 A photograph of a lorry in the dessert was presented in the UN. Let's suppose the picture was not faked in a Hollywood studio. Now we have a FACT... but was this a recent picture and did this image realy show a mobile laboratory for making chemical or biological weapons? In the aftermath of the war "FACTS" are presented that those lorries were used to make H2 gas for the inflation of weather balloons. Example #2 Presented as FACTS: Sadam was involved in the Al Qaida terrorist organisation. This terrorist organisation is a threat to the US. So the US has to attack Iraq... The PRESENTATION of FACTS without PROVE as a pretext to launch a war is a deleberated LIE to the public and the soldiers who have to do the dirty and dangerous job. A democratic society can not function if the rulers have a "hidden agenda" or are telling "unverified facts". IMHO "unverified facts" used to manipulate the public are LIES. To be unwilling or unable to present PROVE to the "FACTS" is a shame and does not enhance the credibility of the Bush administration. > However, > We were told that FACTS existed which would PROVE the existence of the > "phantom" WMDs. > So far, all we have been shown is...... NOTHING. > Please do not misinterpret my meaning here. > I *do not* say that we have been lied to. > I *do not* say that we have told the truth. > What I *do* point-out is the FACT that we have not been shown the PROOF > that we were told existed. > I *do* DEMAND the we be shown this (as yet), 'phantom' proof. If this phantom PROOF will not show up very soon... we must conclude this war was launched based on FANTHOM FACTS, in other words LIES. If we live long enough we will know the truth... the archives will be open to the public after abt. 25 years. That's how democracy functions in practice... lies are disclosed after 25 years and/or after the last living responsible person died... > If you can PROVE these items. > Only THEN do they become FACTS. > Until then... they are ACCUSATIONS not FACTS. Until then... they are PRESENTATIONS not FACTS > If the TRUTH turns out to show the opposite..... > The accusations have been PROVEN to be LIES. Regards, Bastiaan ************************* Technische Redactie CQ-PA Bastiaan Edelman, PA3FFZ ************************* Attentie: e-mail adres bij Wanadoo niet meer gebruiken! [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.hetnet.nl/~ba8tian/index.html - -- Virusvrij e-mailen? => Arachne browser/mailer - -- This mail was written by user of Arachne, the Ultimate Internet Client ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 6 Jul 2003 11:15:40 -0400 From: Roger Turk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Accessing FTP sites in A166 vs A171U Klaus, Try: [internet] HTTPproxy proxy.provider.com:8080 UseProxy No HomePage c:\browsers\hotlist.htm SearchPage http://search.arachne.cz/ SearchEngine http://www.altavista.com/cgi-bin/query?q= FTPusername anonymous <------------------------------------ FTPpassword [EMAIL PROTECTED] <--------------------------- FTPhost ftp.provider.com FTPpath /home/user/ AcceptCharset ISO-8859-1,* ... Roger Turk ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 06 Jul 2003 12:24:11 -0500 From: "Samuel W. Heywood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: OT: Already found the reason for the war ? On Sat, 05 Jul 2003 20:17:23 +00, Bastiaan Edelman, PA3FFZ wrote: > To launch a war on a nation is a very serious matter and the evidence > should be solid, very solid. > The evidence for weapons of mass destruction has been very soft and it > still is. To present it to the American people (and the world) as hard > core evidence is a lie. > Making it an urgent matter, THAT pressing the US army could not wait > untill the UN-inspectors ended their job, is making this a very big lie. > Even if those weapons do exist... Iraq could not deliver them to the USA > by the lack of carrying rockets. > So there was never a great threat to the US. The lie is growing. Bush wanted to launch a war to overthrow Saddam's regime. His reasons for wanting to do that are probably very complex and difficult to explain to the American people. He might have figured from an analysis of some intelligence data that Saddam had WMD's at the time when the recent war was launched. We do know that he had WMD's at various times in history and that many of the WMD's have not yet been accounted for. Bush used accusations of Saddam's still having WMD's as a rallying cry and as hype for launching the war. He could have used other reasons to justify going to war against Iraq, but such other reasons as he might have had might not have worked as a rallying cry to insure widespread support. It might have been a mistatement on Bush's part that he had "proof" that Saddam still had WMD's at the time when the recent war was launched. He probably figured that the alleged WMD's would be quickly found after Saddam is deposed. So far they have not yet been found. Anyway, the good news is that Saddam has been overthrown. The Iraqi people and most of the rest of the world are happy and rejoicing that the old regime is gone. > There is still no evidence, there never was, about a connection between > Al Quaida and Iraq. Next lie... The bad guys always tell lies about the good guys first. Then the good guys retalliate by telling lies about the bad guys. The good guys and the bad guys always lie about the evils that happen in the camps of their enemies. This happens in every war and in every election. > If Sadam would have the possesion of WOMD... the US would not have > attacked. The US probably would have attacked regardless. > Perhaps the fact they did attack is the best prove there are > and were NO weapons of mass destruction. > Any dictator threatened by the US is trying to get hold of weapons of > mass destruction because this is the only way to have the Americans > think twice... proliferation?? > Americans are a curious people: backing an administration that tells > lies, not one lie but many. All governments tell many lies. Bad governments tell lies about good governments and good governments retalliate by telling lies about bad governments. If the truth were known to all, then there would be no further need for war nor for government. > Bringing democracy to Iraq or any other country can not start with > lies and can not be enforced with guns. Democracy cannot be established nor preserved without guns or some other weapons that are useful for making democracy work the way it does. > What good did this war based on lies... nothing (until now) > What bad did this war do to the US... > - costed a lot of money > - costed many lives > - friends are lost > - goodwill is lost > and who will believe the Bush administration when the next crisis > arrives? Even Tony Blair will hesitate! Bush doesn't need any support from other countries or from the UN. He needs only the support of the American people. As long as Bush tells lies only about the bad guys then he will continue to enjoy the support of the American people. Pray for whirled peas. Sam Heywood - -- This mail was written by user of The Arachne Browser: http://browser.arachne.cz/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 06 Jul 2003 19:05:18 +0200 From: "Michal H. Tyc" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Site won't load On Sat, 05 Jul 2003 19:09:17 +00, Bastiaan Edelman, PA3FFZ wrote: > Arachne could not handle a name like that. So, I tried to rename the > file with Norton Commander. But :-((( > It looks like this is not an Arachne problem but a DOS problem. A space > seems to be a non valid character in DOS file-names. Space is a valid character for DOS filenames at the level of DOS function calls (i.e., the strings passed to INT 21h can contain spaces). The problem is at the command line interface, where spaces work as command parameter separators, e.g., REN MY FILE.DOC MY_FILE.DOC will be interpreted as "rename MY to FILE.DOC" plus some extra input (unneeded third parameter MY_FILE.DOC). The remedy is to use double quotes: REN "MY FILE.DOC" MY_FILE.DOC But quotes not always work -- it depends on DOS version an on the command. External programs may support quotes or not. So it's best to avoid spaces. BTW, there is similar problem with the forward slash ("/"). DOS functions accept both "\" (DOS-like) and "/" (Unix-like) path separators. But on the command line "/" is interpreted as a command switch character by all DOS commands and many external programs (these ported from Unix often prefer "-", many accept both "/" and "-"). Hope this helps, Michal ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 06 Jul 2003 12:19:15 -0500 From: david gunnells <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: OT: Americans, "democracy" and Dubya; was: Already found the reason for the war ? hello :) Yes, we are a curious people, but please do not lump us all into the same category, especially considering less than half of voters who turned out for the 2000 Presidential election (out of roughly half of those eligible to vote[1], out of less than half the total population[2]) voted for the man. What does this mean? Well: 281,421,906 - total U.S. population in 2000 110,826,000 - total voters in 2000 39.4 - percentage of population who voted in 2000 for the discerning reader: [1] http://www.census.gov/population/socdemo/voting/p20-542/tab01.txt - roughly 54.7% of those 18+ voted in the 2000 election: 110,826,000 [2] http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/QTTable?ds_name=D&geo_id=D&qr_name=DEC_2000_SF2_U_QTP1&_lang=en - - there were 281,421,906 people in 2000, meaning that 39.4% of the population voted. For those who need help connecting the dots: Dubya was elected by less than 19.7% of the people who live in the U.S., hardly enough to call all of us Americans "backers" of his administration. How's that for some food for thought... cheers, david p.s. another good source of info on the 2000 election is http://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/p20-542.pdf Bastiaan Edelman, PA3FFZ wrote: >Americans are a curious people: backing an administration that tells >lies, not one lie but many. > > ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 06 Jul 2003 22:23:57 +00 From: "Bastiaan Edelman, PA3FFZ" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Arachne's FTP uploads On Wed, 09 Apr 2003 20:10:42 -0400, Glenn McCorkle wrote: > On Tue, 08 Apr 2003 17:23:38 +0930, Greg Mayman wrote: > <snip> >> There is a second problem with Arachne in that I cannot view the remote >> site using the "ftp://[EMAIL PROTECTED]" form of command on >> the URL line. All I get after a query for my password is a message >> "230-Welcome to your FTP Server." >> Glenn McCorkle says that at that stage I should see a listing of my >> directory. Well, I don't see anything other than the above message. I had planned to look into this matter for some months now. I looked with "RS232 Tester" that tracks the data send or recieved via the RS232 port connected to the modem. I logged the FTP-connection made with 'windows commander'. It made connection, a file was downloaded, a file was uploaded and the uploaded file was deleted again. The FTP login was on my own homepage that does not allow anonymous login. My conclusions: If "230 Welcome" is returned you are in successful :-) But now the provider is waiting for commands: LIST (returns the directory) RETR balun12.jpg (downloads the file balun12.jpg) STOR her'der.wp5 (uploads the file her'der.wp5) DELE her'der.wp5 (deletes the file her'der.wp5) QUIT (ends the FTP-connection) But how to give these commands from Arachne? My provider is using: Microsoft FTP Service (Version 5.0) Windows_NT version 5.0 Regards, Bastiaan . <snip> > ftp://ftp.lineo.com/ is 100% fine with Arachne. > as are all of these > ftp://ftp.caldera.com/ > ftp://sunsite.icm.edu.pl:21/pub/ > ftp://ftp.gui.uva.es:21/pub/ > ftp://ftp.adobe.com:21/pub/ <snip> These are ":21" anonymous login FTP sites. Of course your own homepage is secured by a password and do not work the same. (Bastiaan) ******************************** ************************* Technische Redactie CQ-PA Bastiaan Edelman, PA3FFZ ************************* Attentie: e-mail adres bij Wanadoo niet meer gebruiken! [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.hetnet.nl/~ba8tian/index.html - -- Virusvrij e-mailen? => Arachne browser/mailer - -- This mail was written by user of Arachne, the Ultimate Internet Client ------------------------------ End of arachne-digest V1 #2171 ******************************
