All Josua's denial does is prove he is a Liberal--after all, they are not responsible for anything either!
He did not address the fact that he removed his postings directly after he was suggested as the hacker. Must have been Harper that did it, eh?

Posted by: George at May 7, 2006 02:18 PM

---

I think you mean "ingenious" -- "ingenuous", from which is derived the work "ingenue," is someone playing dumb.

Posted by: PhantomObserver at May 7, 2006 03:02 PM

---

Oops. Thanks for the catch. Fixed it.

Posted by: Steve Janke at May 7, 2006 03:55 PM

---

Too funny!!! Once again great work Steve. I sure wouldn't want you coming after me!!!

Syncro

Posted by: Syncrodox at May 7, 2006 06:28 PM

---

i have been folloewing your posts concerning this alleged "liberal attack" on the unsuspecting Go Train riders and am increasingly dimayed with the path you are taking. As someone who would discribe themselves as a small c conservative I find that your reaction to this harmless (and rather amusing) prank is indicative of the systemic problem that the right has, especially in the east. You need to learn to laugh at yourselves! Why be such a hard ass? If you devoted as much energy to resposiable or productive activities as you clearly have done "tracking down" the person you feel is reponsiable then the consevative agenda might not be such a scary notion as it is for a good number of Canadians.
Have a sence of humor, because if you can't laugh at yourself outhers will laugh at you.

Posted by: Conservitivewithhumor at May 7, 2006 07:56 PM

---

Conservativewithhumor? Sorry, but breaking the law is breaking the law... it has nothing to do with what is funny. If I went up to any other advertisement and did the same thing -- posting a message across it -- I would be a vandal. What makes this joker any different?

And what do you care if Steve tracks this down? Perhaps your moniker should be ConservativeWithaGodComplex if it is so imporant for you to dictate what somebody should or shouldn't do with their own free time.

Personally, I tend to agree with Steve's interpretation of events. Somebody who isn't afraid of trouble wouldn't have gone through all of the effort this Joshua did. My only question is this:

If the sign could only be controlled locally via short-wave -- i.e. inside the particular GO train -- and this Joshua says he saw it "that day" himself, does that not mean he has just admitted to being at the scene? After all, GO said that the sign was affected in only 1 car on Thursday and Friday and three cars the following Monday.

Posted by: Surecure at May 7, 2006 11:40 PM

---

"He did not address the fact that he removed his postings directly after he was suggested as the hacker. Must have been Harper that did it, eh?"

LOL... Yeah George... Stephen Harper eats babies AND blogs.

Posted by: Surecure at May 7, 2006 11:42 PM

---

ConservativeWithHumour, This whole Toronto Tempest in a Teapot is mainly humour and you are part of it when you fail to sense the humour start to finish.

Janke sure knows how to dig though. The only digging I tried was to get a background peek at all of Kinealla*s web surfing. I found the whole log and except for a few mistaken sites, it seemed reasonable. I kind of felt a little guilty though. So even if it can be done it*s batter not to.

So lighten up, conservative with Humour, you sure want to avoid the real naughty at:

http://TheCanadianSentinel.blogspot.com

Now that is serious stuff and be sure Mom and the kids are not in the room. This is something we will have to put a stop to...sooner not later. TG

Posted by: TonyGuitar at May 8, 2006 02:00 AM

---

>>>then the consevative agenda might not be such a scary notion as it is for a good number of Canadians

Conservitivewithhumor <- doubtful name. A conservative of any humour or size is not likely to spout off a sentence phrase such as the one above.

Posted by: CERDIP at May 8, 2006 06:54 AM

---

Hey conservativewithhumour

Humour is important, RIGHT on!
What's really funny is how gutless lefty vandals are.
I get a laugh at their ingrained chicken shit mewlings when partnered up with their cut and run defeatist fall back position.

It makes it so easy to disregard anything they have to say, with a laugh.

Remember Jack Layton at the gaypride parade,... now that, was funny!
Sympathy sleeveless tight tee.
Bwaaahahahaha

Or,... or, How about that time Jumpin Jack was protesting at queens park on the same side as masked vandals hitting horses with nailstudded boards.
Oh man that's rich!
I love the laughs, that clown brings!

Posted by: richfisher at May 8, 2006 10:13 AM

---

Wow. As a guy who is critical of the way mainstream media handles retractions, you've certainly confirmed for me that blogdom...or your corner of it, anyway...has a long way to go before you even begin to approach something resembling journalistic integrity.

Posted by: balbulican at May 8, 2006 10:21 AM

---

Balbicon:

Did you see a retraction? I didnt see a retraction. 'Retract' is 'take back' what one admits to having said or done.

Joshua hasnt retracted anything. Joshua has denied doing anything, and then followed up that denial with a bunch of activity that can only be considered suspicious -- covering his tracks, etc?

I think Angry will know how to respond to a genuine retraction.

Posted by: at May 8, 2006 11:03 AM

---

This whole Joshua the hacker thing is a great blog post. Some commenters just need to lighten up. This illustrates regular people getting the news out away from the mainstream media.

Keep up the great work !

Posted by: Angry Canadian at May 8, 2006 12:15 PM

---

Surecure: "If the sign could only be controlled locally via short-wave -- i.e. inside the particular GO train -- and this Joshua says he saw it "that day" himself, does that not mean he has just admitted to being at the scene? After all, GO said that the sign was affected in only 1 car on Thursday and Friday and three cars the following Monday."

I said that I saw the signs...just like hundreds of others did that day. I didn't say that I saw them being programmed. I see the signs everyday on my way to school. So when the sign that usually displays messages about dick pills and timeshare vacations was displaying a baby eating message...ya I noticed.

I took down the blog postings after a reporter sent me a message asking to interview me...thinking I was the hacker. I sent her an email back telling her I was not the hacker, but she had already written the article. I hadn't checked Steve's site in a while, so had not seen the posting fingering me as the hacker. I don't live on my computer nor do I check MySpace emails and blogs every 10 minutes. The blog postings came down because I thought that people were taking it the wrong way...which obviously they were.

Posted by: Joshua Arsenio at May 8, 2006 01:00 PM

---

"I didn't say that I saw them being programmed."

LOL. Yeah, because that's what I said... you walked on a train and saw this dude reprogramming the signs. You're hilarious.

But I understand of course Joshua. Makes sense to me: people on your Myspace congratulate you for doing this and instead of just saying you didn't, you erase the postings. Just like any other blogger/myspace person would do, right?

Posted by: Surecure at May 8, 2006 01:14 PM

---

this whole thing is funny. what a conspiracy, of hackers and who did it ? isn't the item at just a little better then a remote control for your t.v. any monkey could use? hell, thats not rocket science. a humourus break from advertizing it'nt so bad . as for "who did it?" who cares? what is done is done.. but as the saying goes "he who smelt it , delt it. but wait , doesn't that mean Gerry smelt it first? and if he worked for Mr. Harper he would know what he eats.this seams like a case for scooby doo... those meddling kids will figure it out...J.A.P.C. (just another pinko commie)

Posted by: bill smith at May 8, 2006 01:29 PM

---

So... did Joshua see the signs being reprogrammed, or not? I note he didn't tell us.

Of course, if he didn't see that, that might just mean he did it with his eyes closed.

And if I'd committed a crime, I think I'd be concerned that my various boasts about it were being "taken the wrong way".

Posted by: ebt at May 8, 2006 02:01 PM

---

think about getting a lawyer, joshua. he insults you by calling you stupid - well, nothing you can really do about that. but he's libelled you, man. and he continues to do it. and he hasn't erased any of the comments which are even more libellous. nine articles and counting. how many people read his site? how many read that article? calling you a criminal without a shred of evidence. pretty low. pretty libellous. you couldn't sue him for millions but might be worth exploring. C

Posted by: c at May 8, 2006 04:43 PM

---

And I like root beer bill. How about you?

Posted by: Surecure at May 8, 2006 07:43 PM

---

When snowballs don*t melt in hell. The courts are bogged down with real cases.

No damage done. Security on GO improved. No judge could spare time for this minimum, non - malicious grafiti. Dismissed! TG

Posted by: TonyGuitar at May 9, 2006 02:03 AM

---

Actually, knowing a bit about defamation laws, I think Steve may have stepped into it deeply. If this kid Joshua did not do it or, more technically, if Steve can't show that he did it, then it is pretty cut and dried. Steve accused him of committing a crime and he hasn't retracted in any way. His concession that Joshua didn't do it is so full of additional libellous inuendo that it makes things worse for him not better. Bloggers aren't in any way exempt from the rules of defamation that apply to the rest of us.

Tony G, judges don't get to decide which cases come before them or not, who gets to file or not, and the pleadings for defamation cases if they do get brought rarely get struck. Meaning you could try to defend it but on what grounds? That it is minor goes to how much money Joshua could sue Steve for not whether he was legally wronged by Steve.

The interesting thing would be figuring out just how much he could get from Steve. And for that you'd have to consider how many viewers have read any of the 10 or so posts on this subject and how many have read that article (if it was sourced from Steve). Add to that because others have linked to at least some of his posts.

Steve, I know lots of libel lawyers if Joshua decides to insist upon his rights.

Ted
Cerberus

Posted by: Ted at May 9, 2006 01:33 PM

---

Steve has printed nothing that isn't demonstrably true. Steve never "suggested" anything. Joshua's actions, and his actions alone, consistently suggested that he was the culprit. Steve pointed that out.

I think brutal rape is wonderful, and I openly advocate it. I was actually present at a brutal rape, and I am frequently publicly praised by my friends for taking part in it. But if you point out that I'm an obvious suspect in that rape, I'll sue you! Yeah, right.

Posted by: ebt at May 9, 2006 02:32 PM

---

How about "conservitiveinneedofspellcheck" instead? Actually, that's the first self-avowed conservative I've encountered that doesn't know how to spell the word. Oh, and for the other trolls, it's "libelous." Call me a schoolmarm, but the proof is in the details as Angry frequently demonstrates.

Posted by: angryinthecornbelt at May 9, 2006 02:47 PM

---

ebt:

Innuendo is libelous.

This is at the very least innuendo:

"Is Joshua the GO Transit hacker?" [Heading]

"So is Joshua are electonic vandal? I'll reserve judgment, but "dani elle" seems to think so."

"But then why did he clean up his blog? Why did he remove the posting that stated that the "snowball" had been started, and this amounted to a "revolution"? Why did he remove the postings in which he reproduced the various newspaper articles reporting on the incident, more evidence of the "snowball"? Am I alone in thinking his denial would have sounded better had he not acted in a guilty manner?"

If I was Joshua, I'd be chatting with a lawyer right about now.

Posted by: Ted at May 9, 2006 03:20 PM

---

Hey Ted... all this lawyer talk has got me thinking. Do you go by any other name in the real world?

Like Warren Kinsella?

Posted by: Surecure at May 9, 2006 06:38 PM

---

Warren Kinsella would let me know directly if there was a problem.

Posted by: Steve Janke at May 9, 2006 08:47 PM

---

This media looks big to us, the users, but in fact it is tiny and very narrow in focus.

99% of Torontonians may not know what a Blog site is much less spend time in our political rightish area.

Those who do blog may well be into games, chat and porn.

A judge would have to know all the job opportunities Joshua lost due to being exposed here.

In fact, an employer may decide to hire Jushua, if he finds this accidently and needs to hire someone who can push buttons on an FM rf hand held remote.

Case dismissed.. TG

Posted by: TonyGuitar at May 10, 2006 04:37 AM

---

No, Surecure, I am indeed Ted and Cerberus is indeed my website. Not trying to hide anything here.

I think there was libel here, but TG's got it right, there are minimal damages here. Probably not enough to bother suing over.

What I object to, quite frankly, is the style of Steve's of going after non-conservatives with this kind of all on attack. It's one thing to go after politicians - because after all everything goes with them, right? - but Steve also goes after private citizens and spreads rumours of criminal wrongdoing. This kid may be a jerk, may think the GO Transit sign was funny (like many conservatives, mind you), but Steve doesn't so he's got to impune criminality on him.

He's done it before and I think it really reduces blog-land to the worst kind of rumour and spreading machine instead of an information source. Reproducing the worst of what you criticize in the "mainstream media".

Ted
Cerberus

Posted by: Ted at May 10, 2006 07:15 AM

---

Ted is wetting himself at the thought that he could silence Steve and get loads of traffic to his site.

You lefties kill me. You can call anyone on the right the most libellous name (Rae calling Bush Hitler) or out right slurs against a blogger's character, race or medical aliment, because you are supposedly "Spaeaking Truth TO Pwer) (tm) or some bs like that.

However, Steve goes and gets some doofus claiming credit for a hack and prints his own words and suddenly you are all up in arms about the "propriety" of it all.

What an absolute hypocrite and boor, you are little man. Grow up.

Posted by: capt joe at May 10, 2006 12:11 PM

---

I for one do not want to bar Steve from going after anyone, private or *Public Politico*.

Steve has shown some enthusiasm in this event,and that*s natural enough when one is having a bit of fun.

But let*s face it. This is not malicious so much as tiny issue fun. In future You can bet Steve will spread out the facts so the obvious is evident.

There will be less tendency to make personal statements as to personality I*m sure.
It will not be required. TG

Posted by: TonyGuitar at May 10, 2006 03:56 PM

---

Little known; Hizbullah whupped France and US both!

Wha.? A few paragraphs about when two big guys backed off from Hizbullah in Lebananon a while ago.

I condensed this to an easy to read short form, but the link to authority is there for the full picture.

http://TonyGuitar.blogspot.com

We put things off then and now look at the clean-up that needs doing.

Gives you the gist, but saves a wading through history. TG

Posted by: TonyGuitar at May 10, 2006 03:58 PM

---

I can't believe you viewed our myspace accounts and didn't even add us....Wow don't ever expect comments or kudos from me Steve.

P.S. Myspace is for teenagers and young adults. You oldies visiting that site for whatever reasons is creepy.

Posted by: Dan Lang at May 10, 2006 06:30 PM

---

zansspkyrw

Posted by: at May 11, 2006 06:30 AM

---

dznecdoya

Posted by: at May 11, 2006 07:46 AM

---