Paul is Dead! Okay, He isn't Dead, But Nobody Cares! *sniff*!

I, backinfullforce, have long been a fan of Rudy de Haas, otherwise known as Paul Murphy! Now, on top of the fact that 'Paul' is a devastatingly sexy man, he is also a kindred spirit of mine in that he constantly writes about things he hasn't got the first clue about! His main weapon is ignorant conjecture, just like me!

That is why I was simply *crestfallen* to learn that Paul is feeling "ostracised" of late, what with his inability to find himself on Google, Groklaw or slashdot!

Here is *a link to Paul's heartbreaking tale*!:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Murphy/?p=860

Paul says:

If you go to google's Mac only search page and do a search for "Paul Murphy" you won't get many recent hits. Why not?

Now I don't want to suggest that Paul is lying, but I did the search and the first item was from "9 May 2007", which by my reckoning was *two days ago*! Maybe Paul forgot to go online before using Google!

Paul also says:

If you search slashdot for Paul Murphy you won't find much recent stuff either - and why not? because the regular editors have an unspoken policy: no Republicans -and no Canadians who hold right wing opinions either.

I had no idea that Paul has the power to *read minds*! Is that why he wears that disguise all the time? I found a whole bunch of stuff searching slashdot for Paul Murphy, so maybe I've been brainwashed!

Naturally, Paul also takes aim at Groklaw, saying:

And, of course, if you try to search groklaw for my name using the (imaginary) "no:expletives" option you won't find me there either.

Again, I wouldn't want to suggest that Paul is *full of shit*, but an eagle eyed Y!SCOX poster named sba9630 tried searching Groklaw and found:

Maybe because you're an idiot that doesn't know how to do a search? Or you're just lying:

(Groklaw) Searched for the phrase 'paul murphy'. Found 170 items (3.2252 seconds)

(Groklaw) Searched for the phrase 'rudy de haas'. Found 16 items (3.2518 seconds)

http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_%28A_to_Z%29/Stocks_S/threadview?m=tm&bn=2942&tid=421126&mid=421161&tof=1&rt=1&frt=2&off=1


Like I said previously: maybe Paul forgot to go online before looking for himself.

Or perhaps he is lying. Or maybe he has trouble operating his computer.

Well, good old biff hasn't forgotten you, little buddy!

Remember to turn your computer on before trying to search for yourself next time, you rapscallion!

Let's Show Groklaw That We Mean Business!

So immense is my canon of legal analysis that even I can't remember all the incredible high points.

So I am asking you, my adoring public to help me find the very best moments so that we can display them here as a counter balance to Groklaw's evil misinformation!

So look up my 'oeuvre' and send in your favorite backinfullforce analysis!

Here is a link to my 'oeuvre'

Remember I called Judge Brooke Wells a 'whore'? Send me the link! Add your own commentary if you like. Together we can use my collected wisdom to build this place into the perfect foil for that irksome Groklaw!

We can't lose!

I Also Enjoy Calling Amy Sorenson a 'Bitch'!

While I do enjoy frequently calling Judge Brooke Wells a 'slut', I also like to express my irrational fear and loathing of females by calling other women names too!

What better way to help SCO win the case and generate some much needed goodwill than by cravenly calling women disparaging names while hiding behind an alias?

Here I am calling Amy Sorenson a 'Bitch'!:

Yes, or maybe PJ writing another article as the sick journalist she is and pointing to the actual content of the article Amy was referring to to describe some people's over-publication, should not have exposed Amy as either a shamelessly manipulating, lying bitch or an incredibly stupid bag of shit. Depending on whether Amy in her arguments before the Court said "press releases" or ""press clippings".
It says something about the level of arguments IBM nowadays has to fabricate and next rely on.
Smart move, Amy. Smart move, PJ.

http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Business_%26_Finance/Investments/Stocks_%28A_to_Z%29/Stocks_S/threadview?bn=2942&tid=413842&mid=413893

Actually, I called Amy Sorenson both a "shamelessly manipulating, lying bitch" and "an incredibly stupid bag of shit"! I should have been a lawyer! ;)

We can't lose!

I Call Judge Brooke Wells a 'Slut' a Lot! III

Man do I ever enjoy calling Judge Brooke Wells a 'slut'! I like the fact that as an anonymous poster on Yahoo I can do that! It makes me feel manly, and I don't get to feel that way very often! I just know that every time I call Judge Brooke Wells a 'slut' I am helping SCO win the case and restore dignity to their unfairly tarnished image! Here I go again!:

Something is telling me that SCO was not really expecting to find much material, necessary and relevant code implementations ( or yet to become such code on June 28, 2006 uh,... I mean on July 1, 2005, whatever ), but that SCO was instead rather looking for testimony and confirmation of what it already had indications for.
Another thing is telling me that BW may feel one day like the abused, manipulated slut IBM took her for, again and again. Girls next do ugly things to get even. Especially when their entire career is put at risk. Not as a slut, but as a Judge.

http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Business_%26_Finance/Investments/Stocks_%28A_to_Z%29/Stocks_S/threadview?bn=2942&tid=392257&mid=392377

This time I called Judge Brooke Wells an "abused, manipulated slut"! Is that genius or what?

We can't lose!

I Call Judge Brooke Wells a 'Slut' a Lot! II

When I said that I call Judge Brooke Wells a 'Slut' a lot I wasn't kidding!

Here I go again!:

There is much more to select and put in context,as BW does.
Question is what makes BW believe that when she completely lost grip of this case, acting like a slut next saves her face as a judge.
Media coverage?

- "Did you produce all AIX related code, Todd?"
- "I'll say this straight into your face,BW,so there is no misunderstanding: OF COURSE NOT! We didn't even search for it."
- "OK, Todd. That's clear. I'll take that as a Yes."
- "But SCO can't do that, BW."
- "That's true,Todd. 'All' evidence will have needed to should have been brought to the table."
- "Don't tell them yet, BW. We have this Randall fellow up our sleeve."
- "Sure Todd, I'll wait."

http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Business_%26_Finance/Investments/Stocks_%28A_to_Z%29/Stocks_S/threadview?bn=2942&tid=410327&mid=410557

See? Like how I made up completely fake "quotes" from the Judge and an IBM lawyer?

We can't lose!

I Call Judge Brooke Wells a 'Slut' a Lot!

While those despicable propaganda artists over on Groklaw stick to using legal arguments and common sense to present their side of the story, I forego such niceties, and prefer to utilize vicious brain dead vitriol! What better way to foster goodwill with the public and cast my SCO masters in a good light than by calling the judge presiding over our case a 'slut' repeatedly? We can't lose!

Here I am on Y!SCOX giving that uppity Judge what for!:

[[Sounds like a good way for SCOX to get SVR4 stuff into the trial.]]

Compulsory?
Maybe SCOX had to remember that IBM's interrogatory asked for *everything* in Linux that SCOX was claiming _any_ rights to.

Anyway, SCO copyright infringement in Linux was a marvellous Wookie for IBM to hide its own troubles with SCO behind the next few years and take advantage of BW's limited intellect not to mix separate issues.
Gee, did we play the poor little slut or not?
Linux contributions are public, Your Honor. OK, our code behind contributed methods to Linux is not. But that is hardly non-public Linux contribution information, is it?
Anyway, Randall is only gonna make that argument two years from now. Meanwhile it is very difficult for us to reasonably assess the proper scope of discovery in this case. But having IBM CC10 attached to it in a permissive, no, excuse me, ... in a compulsory way sure helps to keep it that way for us. Until Randall is ready. Deal?
http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Business_%26_Finance/Investments/Stocks_%28A_to_Z%29/Stocks_S/threadview?bn=2942&tid=410327&mid=410563

See what I mean? Not only did I call Judge Brooke Wells a "poor little slut", I also said she has a "limited intellect"!

We can't lose!

Welcome to the Anti Groklaw

Until now only the Linux Conspiracy has had their side of the SCO vs IBM saga being told to the world through Groklaw, who seem to think that careful analysis of the filings and transcripts based on existing law and common sense is the only way to look at it.

Well, SCO may have abandoned the idea of prosco.net, but I backinfullforce am not so easily discouraged! I have been covering this case as long as PJ and have been almost as prolific, if not more! I have spent each and every waking hour of the last several years of my life posting my valuable legal analysis on the Yahoo Finance SCOX Message Board, only to have the organized minions of the Linux Conspiracy invade and try to muddy the water with facts.

I realize now that it is high time that SCO was afforded the same advantage as IBM in the court of public opinion, so I am erecting this looming edifice of my collected airtight legal analysis to counter the propaganda generated by Groklaw's hyper evil information minister PJ and the likes of Moglen, Stallman, et al.

Why the anonymity, 'biff'?

Much has been made of my decision to remain anonymous, especially in light of the fact that I hypocritically carry on about others 'hiding', etc.

Well, my remaining anonymous is a matter of National Security! Planetary Security even! Just imagine what could happen if the Taliban or Martians were able to capture me and study my giant brain! No more NASCAR, that's for sure! So don't be silly. I mean, do you really think SCO would pay someone to write positive things about them when there is already so much love for them wherever tech minded people gather? Pffft!

I will be adding samples of my searing insight from past and present whenever my master Ralph Yarro doesn't require me to run around the CP80 Offices with this ornate ceramic bedpan, allowing the high level power brokers here to urinate while still conducting business.

"Piss boy! Over here!"

Oops! Gotta run!