Robert Priddy Deception On SaiSathyaSai.com

Exposing The Anti-Sai Activist: Robert Priddy

Robert Priddy’s Colossal Ignorance About IP Addresses:

Internet Protocol (IP) Menu (click on a link to go to relevant section):

What is an ‘IP’? Information About IPs: RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE

An IP is an acronym for “Internet Protocol”, which is an address that can uniquely identify a computer-user to his/her ISP (Internet Service Provider). An IP usually resolves to a “netname” and country unless it is a proxy IP. Proxy IPs are generated by masking one's real IP with an anonymous IP generated through an anonymous server. An IP contains 4 sets of numbers that are separated by periods (for example: 213.78.122.150). IPs usually fall within a “range” that makes the last 2 sets of number static. For example, the IP: 213.78.122.150 would fall into the IP range:

213.78.64.0 - 213.78.127.255

This means that the last 2 sets of numbers may vary between 64.0 to 127.255. Although these last 2 sets of numbers may be static, they will not change the ISP, netname or country that the IP resolves to and is not indicative of multiple users or different computers.

Robert Priddy Attempted (And Failed) To Make His Case For Cloaked IPs Against Joe Moreno: RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE

At home.chello.no/~reirob/geodata.htm, Robert Priddy duplicated four of my known IPs (yes, I fully acknowledge they are mine) and said the following about them:

“Three different geographical locators showed the following results for one of the IPs used by Gerald Moreno: Anyone can check Moreno’s various IPs at these websites...The source data for the mailform sent to ExBaba.com was forwarded to me by the webmaster and I copy it here below. This is only necessary because Moreno would doubtless deny having sent it otherwise. His other e-mails and visits to ExBaba are also duly recorded for anyone who wishes to check these facts. The can send a mailform to ExBaba on the Guestbook if they wish for further verification of Moreno’s use of cloaked and anonymous IPs...67.0.236.65”

The four IPs in question are:

  • 67.0.236.65
  • 67.0.212.28
  • 4.240.144.145
  • 4.240.213.36

Attempting to prove that these IPs were “cloaked” and “anonymous” Robert Priddy published screen-capped IP results from the GeoBytes, MelissaData and GeoPinPoint IP Address Locator websites.

View the results for yourself (along with other Internet Protocol Address Locator results):

IP LOCATOR: GEOPINPOINT: RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE

IP LOCATOR: GEOBYTES (does not allow direct linking): RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE

  • 67.0.236.65 (Resolves to Deming, 33% Certain, Is not a Proxy IP)
  • 67.0.212.28 (Resolves to Las Cruces, 88% Certain, Is not a Proxy IP)
  • 4.240.144.145 (Resolves to Las Cruces, 41% Certain, Is not a Proxy IP
  • 4.240.213.36 (Resolves to Angel Fire, 80% Certain, Is not a Proxy IP)

IP LOCATOR: MELISSADATA: RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE

IP LOCATOR: ARIN: RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE

IP LOCATOR: UNIVERSALWEBSERVICES: RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE

IP HOST LOCATOR: IPCOUNTRY: RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE

  • 67.0.236.65 Resolves to Host: 0-1pool236-65.nas17.albuquerque1.nm.us.da.qwest.net
  • 67.0.212.28 Resolves to Host: 0-1pool212-28.nas7.albuquerque1.nm.us.da.qwest.net
  • 4.240.144.145 Resolves to Host: dialup-4.240.144.145.Dial1.Phoenix1.Level3.net
  • 4.240.213.36 Resolves to Host: dialup-4.240.213.36.Dial1.Phoenix1.Level3.net

IP LOCATOR: MAXMIND: RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE

One will notice how various IP Address Locators resolve the same IPs differently. For example, my 4.240.144.145 IP resolved to: Tucson, Arizona - Broomfield, Colorado - Las Cruces, New Mexico - Mount Vernon, Washington - Unresolved Location. One will also notice how several of these “What Is My IP” websites gave percentages of certainty (as they know IPs do not always resolve to the exact city of the user). Since my ISP is a national provider, my IPs (I have three of them) will not resolve the same way and will even resolve to a different state. Apparently Robert Priddy is clueless about these facts.

Why Do The IP Addresses Resolve Differently? RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE

The answer is quite simple: Software. Not all IP software is the same. Different software parameters (each website utilizes its own IP software) establishes possible locations for an IP based on the software’s components and parameters. Some software is more complex than others and this would account for the differences one sees on IP Locator websites. Some IP websites can only establish the Country for the IP while other IP websites can list potential cities, latitudes/longitudes and other information. Most IP websites do not list the Host for an IP but ipcountry.org does. This is due to IP software.

Because the four IPs did not resolve exactly the same way and because the four IPs did not miraculously divulge my name, address and phone number, Robert Priddy erroneously concluded that I was using “cloaked” and “anonymous” IPs. What is amusing about this is that Robert Priddy published a screencap from GeoBytes which clearly showed that my IP was not a Proxy (aka “cloaked” or “anonymous”) IP. I ran all four of my IPs through GeoBytes’ IP Address Locator and they all show that my IPs were not cloaked or anonymous (see “is proxy” line):

Robert Priddy’s himself supplied proof that I am not using cloaked or anonymous IPs (even though he cited GeoBytes as proof that I was using cloaked and anonymous IPs). Apparently Mr. Priddles forgot to read the line that stated the IPs tested “false” for a Proxy IP. This is the guy who claims he is a “scholar” and knows how to research like one. Pretty pathetic if you ask me.

Robert Priddy Attributed The 127.0.0.1 IP To Joe Moreno: RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE

Robert Priddy also claimed that I used the anonymous “loopback” IP of 127.0.0.1.

Needless to say, it is clear that Robert Priddy is unaware that the “loopback” IP originated from the internal computer system that opened the email to begin with. As a matter of fact, the IP 127.0.0.1 is discussed on Wikipedia:

“IETF document ‘Special-Use IPv4 Addresses’ (RFC 3330) describes the 127.0.0.0/8 as a reserved IPv4 address block for loopback...Within a host system, the loopback interface is normally assigned the address '127.0.0.1' with subnetwork mask '255.0.0.0'. This makes the routing table of the local system set with a routing entry of '127.0.0.0/8', so that packets destined to any address of this '127.0.0.0/8' would be routed internally within the local system.

HUMOR: An urban legend involving 127.0.0.1 is often circulated among the more technical computer related forums on the web. The story often involves an antagonist often referred to as ‘The World’s Worst Computer Hacker’. The story generally involves the Hacker hacking himself when tricked into using 127.0.0.1 as the IP address to hack into.

HUMOR: In the same vein, 127.0.0.1 is often used as an IP address given to inexperienced computer users as a practical joke. Another story involves a user who, after finding that pinging 127.0.0.1 pings his computer, tells all of his associates that his IP is 127.0.0.1.” (Reference)

It is clear that Robert Priddy and Anti-Sai Activists do not know how to properly read email headers and attribute inaccurate IPs to me. Another example is cited next.

Conny Larsson Cited The Wrong IP Header Against Joe Moreno: RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE

Conny Larsson claimed that I used an anonymous IP that my IP resolved to iana.org. Conny’s email provider is mail.com (conny@mail.com). I decided to set up my own mail.com account to view the type of headers used on their emails (and compare them to the headers that Conny attributed to me).

I sent an email from my yahoo.com account to my new mail.com account and discovered that Conny Larsson purposely lied about my IP. Indeed, an iana.org IP appeared in “X-ob-received line”, however, my IP clearly showed up in the “received” line, below the “message-ID” line. Here is the relevant information:

The: “X-Ob-Received: from unknown (192.168.9.68)” resolves to IANA, however, the “Received: from [67.0.236.139]” is the correct line that shows my IP. Compare these headers with the incorrect headers that Conny Larsson posted and attributed to me:

Return-Path: vishvarupa108(a.t.)yahoo.com
Delivered-To: conny:mail.com@mail.com
Received: (qmail 15141 invoked by uid 0); 9 Nov 2005 23:52:04 -0000
X-OB-Received: from unknown (192.168.9.27) by mta1-6.us4.outblaze.com; 9 Nov 2005 23:52:04 -0000
Received: from web53006.mail.yahoo.com (web53006.mail.yahoo.com [206.190.49.36])

Another perfect example of the hypocrisy and chronic lies that Conny Larsson & Co. resort to smear my name. Conny purposely posted only 5 lines when there were actually 12 lines (leaving out the line that had my IP). Anyone is free to set up a mail.com account and verify this information first-hand for him/her self. Needless to say, Robert Priddy repeated Conny’s lie about my IP like a well trained parrot.

A Look At Robert Priddy’s IP & Penchant For Proxy IP Accusations: RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE

On Wikipedia, Robert Priddy submitted a signed comment under the IP 80.111.21.76 (Ref). Running this IP through GeoPoint, Arin and UniversalWebServices the following results were obtained:

Does this mean that Robert Priddy is using cloaked and anonymous IPs? Using Robert Priddy’s illogic, the answer is “yes”.

Needless to say, I am not the only person who Robert Priddy erroneously accused of using Proxy IPs. On wordpress, the owner of the “awmyth” blog (using the name “little indian”) wrote an article entitled Just Another Arrogant Westerner about Robert Priddy's systematic bashing of India and Hinduism.

In a second blogged article entitled Arrogant Westerner Continued, “little indian” duplicated emails sent to him by Robert Priddy in which he accused “little indian” of “using different anonymous IPs” and “suffering from a deep cognitive disorder”. “Little indian” responded by saying:

“I have Google Web Accelerator installed on my browser. I do not control, or modify my IP, Google does that, ‘from Texas’. Maybe you do not know what that is.”

Not only does Robert Priddy believe that he is perfectly entitled to defame others with impunity, he also feels he is perfectly entitled to bludgeon others with his colossal ignorance about IPs, which he obviously can't research despite his claims to being a scholar.

Proxy IPs - In Conclusion: RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE

Let it go on record that I fully acknowledge that the following four IPs belong to me:

  • 67.0.236.65
  • 67.0.212.28
  • 4.240.144.145
  • 4.240.213.36

All of these IPs faithfully resolve to known destinations and are not listed on any Proxy IP websites. I have openly used these IPs on Wikipedia, Yahoo Groups and in my Email Correspondence with Ex-Devotees. I have absolutely nothing to hide and I am not afraid to state the truth of this matter.

Although Robert Priddy takes such a vehement stand against cloaked and anonymous IPs, he completely disregards it when his fellow Anti-Sai friends use Proxy Servers and IPs to spam me with hate mail and submit my email to pornography websites. This has been shown (with proof) to be the case with Sanjay Dadlani (who even posted a link to my site through a proxy server on a Yahoo Group: 01 - 02), Afshin Khorramshahgol (who admitted using Proxy IPs 01 - 02) and Reinier Van Der Sandt (who spammed me with hate mail through Proxy IPs).

One will not find even one word from Robert Priddy remonstrating his fellow friends and their proven attempts in subterfuge and deceit. This was even more the case when Ex-Devotees thought their IPs were not being recorded on QuickTopic (they were) and they collectively used no less than 90+ fake identities (including my identity). These are the shameless hypocrites and equivocators who consistently fail to make a sober argument against me (even less so with Sathya Sai Baba).

P.S.
I emailed Robert Priddy a link to this page so he could trace my IP again :-)
Let’s hope this time the poor chap does it right.