|
Home > Archive > Anonymous Servers > May 2007 > mIRC, Tor, and SocksCap
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
mIRC, Tor, and SocksCap
|
|
| bodyodorismything@yahoo.com 2007-05-17, 7:13 am |
| This is my fourth time trying to post this with Google. It's not
showing up for some reason.
I've been successful in Torifying mIRC from within SocksCap. It's
working for me. I use ZoneAlarm and only allow mIRC to have access to
127.0.0.1:9050. I don't allow it to have any other access or to act as
a server.
When I sniff my traffic with SmartSniff, I occasionally see my real IP
address being transmitted. Here's a sample>
GET /tor/server/d/..........................
HTTP/1.0
Host: 192.108.114.19:9030
HTTP/1.0 200 OK
Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 04:07:30 GMT
Content-Type: application/octet_stream
X-Your-Address-Is: xx.xxx.xxx.xxx
Content-Encoding: deflate
Pragma: no-cache
This is followed by the usual Tor encrypted gobbledy-gook. The
xx.xxx.xxx.xxx is my real IP. Am I correct in assuming that this
breaks anonymity, and this is something that Privoxy usually takes
care when you use Tor with a web browser.
If so, is there any way to take care of this?
B.O
| |
| Anonymous 2007-05-17, 7:13 am |
| In article <1179385672.983613.288180@h2g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>
bodyodorismything@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> This is my fourth time trying to post this with Google. It's not
> showing up for some reason.
All 4 of your posts showed up.
> I've been successful in Torifying mIRC from within SocksCap. It's
> working for me. I use ZoneAlarm and only allow mIRC to have access to
> 127.0.0.1:9050. I don't allow it to have any other access or to act as
> a server.
>
> When I sniff my traffic with SmartSniff, I occasionally see my real IP
> address being transmitted. Here's a sample>
>
> GET /tor/server/d/..........................
> HTTP/1.0
> Host: 192.108.114.19:9030
>
>
> HTTP/1.0 200 OK
> Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 04:07:30 GMT
> Content-Type: application/octet_stream
> X-Your-Address-Is: xx.xxx.xxx.xxx
> Content-Encoding: deflate
> Pragma: no-cache
That is Tor connecting to a directory server and getting up to date
information about the tor network. Tor has to know what nodes are up,
where they are located, what their keys are...
That part doesn't need to be anonymous. The fact that you use Tor
isn't anonymous, what you use it for *is*. That also has nothing to do
with mIRC.
As a side note, you should be aware that mIRC looks up your own IP
address and passes it to the server in the USER string it sends when
it connects.
| |
| bodyodorismything@yahoo.com 2007-05-17, 7:13 pm |
|
Anonymous wrote:
>
> As a side note, you should be aware that mIRC looks up your own IP
> address and passes it to the server in the USER string it sends when
> it connects.
Sorry for the multiple posts. My posts didn't show up for several
hours after I posted them. Are you referring to the "Local Info" area
where mIRC attempts to fill in your local host and IP address? It
doesn't appear to be able to do that when I run it from within
SocksCap. Initially when I tried Torifying mIRC without SocksCap, by
just filling in the proxy info (like everyone told me to try it), it
would always find my real IP and fill it in there. When I run it from
SocksCap, it always has 127.0.0.1 (0.0.0.1) filled in.
And when I start up mIRC, it always says "Local Host: 127.0.0.1
(0.0.0.1)" instead of my real IP. That's why I started running it from
SocksCap to begin with. So, does that take care of the problem you
were referring to, or am I wrong about that too? Is there any way for
me to actually test what it's sending from within SocksCap? I can't
really tell because everything is encrypted by Tor. If it is still
sending my IP address despite my best efforts, is there another client
that won't do this?
Thanks
B.O
| |
| bodyodorismything@yahoo.com 2007-05-18, 1:14 am |
|
bodyodorismyth...@yahoo.com wrote:
> Anonymous wrote:
>
>
>
> Sorry for the multiple posts. My posts didn't show up for several
> hours after I posted them. Are you referring to the "Local Info" area
> where mIRC attempts to fill in your local host and IP address? It
> doesn't appear to be able to do that when I run it from within
> SocksCap. Initially when I tried Torifying mIRC without SocksCap, by
> just filling in the proxy info (like everyone told me to try it), it
> would always find my real IP and fill it in there. When I run it from
> SocksCap, it always has 127.0.0.1 (0.0.0.1) filled in.
>
> And when I start up mIRC, it always says "Local Host: 127.0.0.1
> (0.0.0.1)" instead of my real IP. That's why I started running it from
> SocksCap to begin with. So, does that take care of the problem you
> were referring to, or am I wrong about that too? Is there any way for
> me to actually test what it's sending from within SocksCap? I can't
> really tell because everything is encrypted by Tor. If it is still
> sending my IP address despite my best efforts, is there another client
> that won't do this?
>
> Thanks
>
> B.O
I just wanted to say thanks for the help. I tried sniffing my traffic
while web browsing with Tor, and I found that my IP was transmitted as
well. I'm surprised I never noticed that before. I've been using Tor
while web browsing and sniffing my traffic for years now. I guess I
must have forgotten or never noticed it. mIRC is a new program for me,
and it now seems that it's working correctly with Tor.
As far as mIRC being able to transmit my IP. I'm confident that it
can't transmit my IP address because it doesn't seem to even be able
to find my IP address when used with SocksCap (just 0.0.0.1). I don't
think mIRC transmits IP addresses anyway. I tried using mIRC without
any proxy, and I didn't notice it transmitting my IP. Obviously, the
remote server will still know my IP address if I'm not using a proxy,
but not due to anything mIRC is transmitting. I'll just continue using
SocksCap anyway, but I don't think it's necessary.
So, my only remaining concern is that occasionally (actually rarely),
Tor reports that there may be DNS request leaks. Again, my guess would
be that it's not really a leak but Tor is interpreting it that way due
to the way mIRC operates. Am I correct about that?
Thanks again.
B.O
| |
| bodyodorismything@yahoo.com 2007-05-18, 1:14 am |
| Here's a sample USER string when I connect with no proxy:
USER Anonymous "host" "irc.abjects.net" :xxxxx
It has my local host ("host") and my name (xxxxx) but no IP address. I
searched everything transmitted but found no IP address. mIRC did
correctly find my IP (when I'm not using SocksCap) but didn't transmit
it. The server I'm using to contact irc.abjects.net is correctly
listed. When I use no proxy then it's my local server. When I use a
proxy then it's the Tor node I'm using.
I'm currently using mIRC ver. 6.21. Perhaps this occurred in previous
versions or I'm just not searching correctly or interpreting the data
correctly.
B.O
Anonymous wrote:
>
> As a side note, you should be aware that mIRC looks up your own IP
> address and passes it to the server in the USER string it sends when
> it connects.
| |
| Anonymous 2007-05-18, 1:14 am |
| bodyodorismything@yahoo.com wrote:
> I just wanted to say thanks for the help. I tried sniffing my traffic
> while web browsing with Tor, and I found that my IP was transmitted as
> well. I'm surprised I never noticed that before. I've been using Tor
No, it wasn't, at least not the way you think it was because it's not
possible for you to see it that way. If you IP was "transmitted" it was
either sent by some other program, or wen somewhere you really don't
have to worry about.
| |
| macarro 2007-05-18, 7:13 am |
| bodyodorismything@yahoo.com wrote:
> This is my fourth time trying to post this with Google. It's not
> showing up for some reason.
Consider webmail2news http://eelbash.yi.org:8080
> When I sniff my traffic with SmartSniff, I occasionally see my real IP
> address being transmitted.
My theory is that the first Tor node still needs to know your IP and
that is why it is being transmitted, so:
YourIP>>TorIP1>>TorIP2>>TorIP3>>irc.server.com
Accept my theory at your own risk.
--
Customized News: http://news.spotback.com
| |
| Anonymous 2007-05-18, 7:13 am |
| In article <464d6d05$0$36704$892e0abb@auth.newsreader.octanews.com>
macarro <email@is.invalid> wrote:
>
> bodyodorismything@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> Consider webmail2news http://eelbash.yi.org:8080
Seeing as the guy is obviously interested in anonymity and privacy,
why would you suggest he use a web page that is run by a person who
has proven he hates both and admits logging, filtering, and censoring?
| |
| Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer 2007-05-18, 1:13 pm |
| macarro <email@is.invalid> wrote:
> bodyodorismything@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> Consider webmail2news http://eelbash.yi.org:8080
Yes. Consider the fact that the person who owns that site can see every
single thing you do, and that person is known to monitor, log, censor,
harass, and even reveal the identities of his users to the general
public if he only mistakenly believes they're doing something this
person doesn't like.
Consider not using the services of a person that's so loony even
remailer operators themselves have excommunicated him completely. The
group of people most attuned to the ideals of free speech, refuse to
allow him to participate because he's such a nut.
>
>
> My theory is that the first Tor node still needs to know your IP and
> that is why it is being transmitted, so:
No. The entry node doesn't need to know your IP, it *does* know your IP
because without that knowledge nothing would work at all. But the
poster is *not* seeing what he believes he's seeing because that
information is encrypted before it ever reaches your network card, the
point at which all packet sniffers do their job. The poster is either
seing the connection itself, or something else entirely. Not his IP
being "transmitted" to the entry node over a Torified connection.
| |
| macarro 2007-05-19, 7:13 am |
| Anonymous wrote:
> In article <464d6d05$0$36704$892e0abb@auth.newsreader.octanews.com>
> macarro <email@is.invalid> wrote:
>
> Seeing as the guy is obviously interested in anonymity and privacy,
> why would you suggest he use a web page that is run by a person who
> has proven he hates both and admits logging, filtering, and censoring?
>
My theory being that it is sure that Great Britain has infiltrated the
remailer network with a rogue logging remailer. Great Britain and the
USA in less measure have a long proven record of not allowing anyone to
keep their privacy and spying on their own citizens.
Much better having your emails read by someone who can't manage a
remailer with skill than a 1st class remailer managed from by big brother.
--
Customized News: http://news.spotback.com
| |
| Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer 2007-05-20, 1:13 am |
| macarro <email@is.invalid> wrote:
> My theory being that it is sure that Great Britain has infiltrated the
Your "theory" is pure crap, just like your "theories" about seeing your
IP address when using Tor because Tor is connecting to directory
servers and updating the information that's essential to providing the
anonymity you obviously don't understand.
If you had been bright enough to take 5 minutes to look up what port
9030 means to Tor, you'd already know all this and not be making a fool
of yourself with your moronic "theories".
> remailer network with a rogue logging remailer. Great Britain and the
> USA in less measure have a long proven record of not allowing anyone to
> keep their privacy and spying on their own citizens.
>
> Much better having your emails read by someone who can't manage a
> remailer with skill than a 1st class remailer managed from by big brother.
This is quite possibly the dumbest thing I've seen posted to this
group. You're saying it's not safe to drive a Sherman tank because the
guy who put together your Kia is a retard.
Please.... have your meds adjusted, get that brain transplant, or
whatever it is you need to do to raise your IQ to an acceptable level
for participation in this group. It's not a high standard, you
shouldn't have too much trouble in you just put forth a tiny bit of
effort.
Thanks in advance,
The Management
| |
|
| On Sat, 19 May 2007 10:22:10 +0100, macarro wrote:
> My theory being that it is sure that Great Britain has infiltrated the
> remailer network with a rogue logging remailer. Great Britain and the
> USA in less measure have a long proven record of not allowing anyone to
> keep their privacy and spying on their own citizens.
>
> Much better having your emails read by someone who can't manage a
> remailer with skill than a 1st class remailer managed from by big brother.
<snicker>
| |
| Gogarty 2007-05-20, 1:13 pm |
| In article < 559e23812b531a1980d99bb2fb158bb7@remaile
r.cyberiade.it>,
anonymous@remailer.cyberiade.it says...
>
>
>macarro <email@is.invalid> wrote:
>
>
>Your "theory" is pure crap, just like your "theories" about seeing your
>IP address when using Tor because Tor is connecting to directory
>servers and updating the information that's essential to providing the
>anonymity you obviously don't understand.
>
>If you had been bright enough to take 5 minutes to look up what port
>9030 means to Tor, you'd already know all this and not be making a fool
>of yourself with your moronic "theories".
>
>
>This is quite possibly the dumbest thing I've seen posted to this
>group. You're saying it's not safe to drive a Sherman tank because the
>guy who put together your Kia is a retard.
>
>Please.... have your meds adjusted, get that brain transplant, or
>whatever it is you need to do to raise your IQ to an acceptable level
>for participation in this group. It's not a high standard, you
>shouldn't have too much trouble in you just put forth a tiny bit of
>effort.
>
>Thanks in advance,
>The Management
>
Jeez! What a total jerk you are.
| |
| Anonymous 2007-05-20, 1:13 pm |
| In article <464ec1c2$0$84104$892e0abb@auth.newsreader.octanews.com>
macarro <email@is.invalid> wrote:
>
> My theory being that it is sure that Great Britain has infiltrated the
> remailer network with a rogue logging remailer.
It wouldn't matter. Read up on the remailer network and you will see
that it was designed to withstand rogue remailers. Even if a country
(or many countries) had a remailer that logged everything, as long as
one remailer in your chain was okay then your anonymity is safe.
> Much better having your emails read by someone who can't manage a
> remailer with skill than a 1st class remailer managed from by big brother.
That doesn't make any sense. Are you seriously suggesting that posting
directly through a web page run by a known enemy of anonymity and
privacy is better than using the remailer network?
| |
| Anonymous 2007-05-20, 7:13 pm |
| Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu> wrote:
> Jeez! What a total jerk you are.
Coming from an incompetent XXXXwit like you that's a compliment.
| |
|
| On Sun, 20 May 2007 22:15:56 -0000, Anonymous <nobody@mixmin.net>
wrote:
>Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu> wrote:
>
>
>Coming from an incompetent XXXXwit like you that's a compliment.
That sounded pretty stupid pal.
--
Usenet lits score:
GIT-R-DONE!
alt.usenet.legends.lamey
http://blu05.port5.com
#20 Usenet XXXXXXX
#6 Lits Slut
#9 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine
<approved by Lionel>
#11 Most posting trolls/hunters/flonkers 2007
#1 Disenfranchised AUK Kookologist.
#1 AUK Galactic Killfile Award
Rhiannon" <rhianon@sympatico.ca> wrote:
> Oh fer XXXXsakes. Welcome to my killfile you annoying little gnat.
<working on one of them specheel AUK awards>
| |
| Gogarty 2007-05-21, 7:13 am |
| In article <4cbcbf983be9c869e6cb3f0fa87071a2@anon.mixmaster.mixmin.net>,
nobody@mixmin.net says...
>
>
>Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu> wrote:
>
>
>Coming from an incompetent XXXXwit like you that's a compliment.
You never fail to rise to the bait, do you?
| |
| Borked Pseudo Mailed 2007-05-21, 1:13 pm |
| Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu> wrote:
> In article <4cbcbf983be9c869e6cb3f0fa87071a2@anon.mixmaster.mixmin.net>,
> nobody@mixmin.net says...
>
> You never fail to rise to the bait, do you?
ROTFL!
Pretending we were begging for our cockslap are we?
What a PATHETIC little incompetent XXXXwit you are!
Try to post any binaries to nonbianry froups lately??
LOL! LOL! LOL!
| |
| Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer 2007-05-21, 1:13 pm |
| teandson@hotmail.com (Lamey) wrote:
> On Sun, 20 May 2007 22:15:56 -0000, Anonymous <nobody@mixmin.net>
> wrote:
>
>
> That sounded pretty stupid pal.
What in the XXXX are you babbling about kook?
>
> --
> Usenet lits score:
>
> GIT-R-DONE!
> alt.usenet.legends.lamey
> http://blu05.port5.com
> #20 Usenet XXXXXXX
> #6 Lits Slut
> #9 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine
> <approved by Lionel>
> #11 Most posting trolls/hunters/flonkers 2007
> #1 Disenfranchised AUK Kookologist.
> #1 AUK Galactic Killfile Award
> Rhiannon" <rhianon@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> <working on one of them specheel AUK awards>
>
| |
| Gogarty 2007-05-21, 7:14 pm |
| In article <d13faf65b2b4e8f350a36266bc9e443c@pseudo.borked.net>,
nobody@pseudo.borked.net says...
>
>
>Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu> wrote:
>
>
>ROTFL!
>
>Pretending we were begging for our cockslap are we?
>
>What a PATHETIC little incompetent XXXXwit you are!
>
>Try to post any binaries to nonbianry froups lately??
>
>LOL! LOL! LOL!
>
Point made -- in spades.
| |
| Nomen Nescio 2007-05-21, 7:14 pm |
| On Mon, 21 May 2007, Borked Pseudo Mailed <nobody@pseudo.borked.net> wrote:
>
>Try to post any binaries to nonbianry froups lately??
"Froup"?
Grow the XXXX up, will you?
| |
| Gogarty 2007-05-21, 7:14 pm |
| In article <11b0c1d63e9a4f6f007caffe6f3a43a3@dizum.com>, nobody@dizum.com
says...
>
>
>On Mon, 21 May 2007, Borked Pseudo Mailed <nobody@pseudo.borked.net> wrote:
>
>"Froup"?
>
>Grow the XXXX up, will you?
>
They can't. They are retarded geeks.
| |
| George Orwell 2007-05-21, 7:14 pm |
| On Mon, 21 May 2007 10:59:58 -0600, Borked Pseudo Mailed wrote:
> Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu> wrote:
>
>
> ROTFL!
>
> Pretending we were begging for our cockslap are we?
>
> What a PATHETIC little incompetent XXXXwit you are!
>
> Try to post any binaries to nonbianry froups lately??
>
> LOL! LOL! LOL!
Amazing.
Well, there is an old saying: when you lie down with lice, you get lousy.
And there's another old saying about lying down with dogs and getting up
with fleas.
| |
|
| On Mon, 21 May 2007 22:10:06 +0200 (CEST), Nomen Nescio
<nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 21 May 2007, Borked Pseudo Mailed <nobody@pseudo.borked.net> wrote:
>
>"Froup"?
>
>Grow the XXXX up, will you?
Teh Froups is usernet talk, you kook.
--
Usenet lits score:
GIT-R-DONE!
alt.usenet.legends.lamey
http://blu05.port5.com
AUK Offishal Tinfoil Sombrero award 05/07
#20 Usenet XXXXXXX
#6 Lits Slut
#9 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine
<approved by Lionel>
#11 Most posting trolls/hunters/flonkers 2007
#1 Disenfranchised AUK Kookologist.
#1 AUK Galactic Killfile Award
< we all know how well that works...LOL >
Rhiannon" <rhianon@sympatico.ca> wrote:
> Oh fer XXXXsakes. Welcome to my killfile you annoying little gnat.
<working on one of them specheel AUK awards>
| |
|
| On 21 May 2007 19:20:53 +0200, Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer
<anonymous@remailer.cyberiade.it> wrote:
>teandson@hotmail.com (Lamey) wrote:
>
>
>What in the XXXX are you babbling about kook?
>
Just how stupid you cowards look.
--
Usenet lits score:
GIT-R-DONE!
alt.usenet.legends.lamey
http://blu05.port5.com
AUK Offishal Tinfoil Sombrero award 05/07
#20 Usenet XXXXXXX
#6 Lits Slut
#9 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine
<approved by Lionel>
#11 Most posting trolls/hunters/flonkers 2007
#1 Disenfranchised AUK Kookologist.
#1 AUK Galactic Killfile Award
< we all know how well that works...LOL >
Rhiannon" <rhianon@sympatico.ca> wrote:
> Oh fer XXXXsakes. Welcome to my killfile you annoying little gnat.
<working on one of them specheel AUK awards>
| |
| Gogarty 2007-05-22, 1:13 am |
| In article < 94c3cfa07dbee9e81128c77c6a856987@mixmast
er.it>,
nobody@mixmaster.it says...
>
>
>On Mon, 21 May 2007 10:59:58 -0600, Borked Pseudo Mailed wrote:
>
>
>Amazing.
>
>Well, there is an old saying: when you lie down with lice, you get lousy.
>And there's another old saying about lying down with dogs and getting up
>with fleas.
>
The latter is Turkish, which my wife quotes at me from time to time.
But yes. Amazing.
Anyone want to discuss privacy? Or anon-servers?
| |
|
| On Mon, 21 May 2007 21:38:23 -0400, Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu>
wrote:
>In article < 94c3cfa07dbee9e81128c77c6a856987@mixmast
er.it>,
>nobody@mixmaster.it says...
>The latter is Turkish, which my wife quotes at me from time to time.
>
>But yes. Amazing.
>
>Anyone want to discuss privacy? Or anon-servers?
No, let's talk about titties and beer.
--
Usenet lits score:
GIT-R-DONE!
alt.usenet.legends.lamey
http://blu05.port5.com
AUK Offishal Tinfoil Sombrero award 05/07
#20 Usenet XXXXXXX
#6 Lits Slut
#9 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine
<approved by Lionel>
#11 Most posting trolls/hunters/flonkers 2007
#1 Disenfranchised AUK Kookologist.
#1 AUK Galactic Killfile Award
< we all know how well that works...LOL >
Rhiannon" <rhianon@sympatico.ca> wrote:
> Oh fer XXXXsakes. Welcome to my killfile you annoying little gnat.
<working on one of them specheel AUK awards>
| |
| Paynekiller Jane 2007-05-22, 1:13 am |
| Lamey wrote:
> On Mon, 21 May 2007 21:38:23 -0400, Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu>
> wrote:
>
>
> No, let's talk about titties and beer.
>
Let's talk about blubirds. I see you're getting smacked around in the
privacy groups. Hope you don't get whiplash.
| |
| Lamey The AUK Guy 2007-05-22, 1:13 am |
| On Mon, 21 May 2007 22:35:48 -0400, Paynekiller Jane <pkj@yahhoo.orgs>
wrote:
>Lamey wrote:
>
>Let's talk about blubirds. I see you're getting smacked around in the
>privacy groups. Hope you don't get whiplash.
My little stalker is here. Smacked around? LOL
You're funny
Got a pedo lame to toss out?
--
Usenet lits score:
GIT-R-DONE!
alt.usenet.legends.lamey
http://blu05.port5.com
AUK Offishal Tinfoil Sombrero award 05/07
#20 Usenet XXXXXXX
#6 Lits Slut
#9 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine
<approved by Lionel>
#11 Most posting trolls/hunters/flonkers 2007
#1 Disenfranchised AUK Kookologist.
#1 AUK Galactic Killfile Award
< we all know how well that works...LOL >
Rhiannon" <rhianon@sympatico.ca> wrote:
> Oh fer XXXXsakes. Welcome to my killfile you annoying little gnat.
<working on one of them specheel AUK awards>
| |
| Paynekiller Jane 2007-05-22, 1:13 am |
| Lamey The AUK Guy wrote:
> On Mon, 21 May 2007 22:35:48 -0400, Paynekiller Jane <pkj@yahhoo.orgs>
> wrote:
>
>
> My little stalker is here. Smacked around? LOL
>
> You're funny
>
> Got a pedo lame to toss out?
>
>
Funny that you dare to call someone stalker, Prongslave.
You're lames don't work in sci.electronics.design so what made you think
that they work in the privacy groups, Prongslave.
| |
| Crash Street Kidd 2007-05-22, 1:13 am |
| On May 21, 10:18 pm, teand...@hotmail.com (Lamey) wrote:
> On Mon, 21 May 2007 21:38:23 -0400, Gogarty <Goga...@Clongowes.edu>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> No, let's talk about titties and beer.
Give the blue-eyed beauty too much beer and she shows her titties.
They are spectacular.
Crash Street Kidd
Yeah we're drinking and we're dancing
but there's nothing really happening
and the place is dead
as Heaven on a Saturday night
And my very close companion
gets me fumbling gets me laughing
she's a hundred
but she's wearing something tight
and I lift my glass to the Awful Truth
which you can't reveal to the Ears of Youth
except to say it isn't worth a dime
And the whole damn place goes crazy twice
and it's once for the devil and once for Christ
but the Boss don't like these dizzy heights
we're busted in the blinding lights,
busted in the blinding lights
of CLOSING TIME
- Leonard Cohen
>
> --
> Usenet lits score:
>
> GIT-R-DONE!
> alt.usenet.legends.lameyhttp://blu05.port5.com
> AUK Offishal Tinfoil Sombrero award 05/07
> #20 Usenet XXXXXXX
> #6 Lits Slut
> #9 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine
> <approved by Lionel>
> #11 Most posting trolls/hunters/flonkers 2007
> #1 Disenfranchised AUK Kookologist.
> #1 AUK Galactic Killfile Award
> < we all know how well that works...LOL >
>
> Rhiannon" <rhia...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> <working on one of them specheel AUK awards>- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
| |
| Fritz Wuehler 2007-05-22, 7:13 am |
| On Mon, 21 May 2007 22:10:06 +0200, Nomen Nescio wrote:
> On Mon, 21 May 2007, Borked Pseudo Mailed <nobody@pseudo.borked.net> wrote:
>
> "Froup"?
>
> Grow the XXXX up, will you?
You must be Eelbash to talk that way.
|
|
|
|
|