Comments on: FT 12,567 by Monk http://www.fifteensquared.net/2007/09/19/ft-12567-by-monk/ Never knowingly undersolved. Wed, 22 May 2013 21:12:33 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1 By: nmsindy http://www.fifteensquared.net/2007/09/19/ft-12567-by-monk/#comment-4839 nmsindy Thu, 20 Sep 2007 11:42:29 +0000 http://fifteensquared.net/2007/09/19/ft-12567-by-monk/#comment-4839 That looks like it, Testy, thanks.

]]> By: Testy http://www.fifteensquared.net/2007/09/19/ft-12567-by-monk/#comment-4830 Testy Thu, 20 Sep 2007 10:11:05 +0000 http://fifteensquared.net/2007/09/19/ft-12567-by-monk/#comment-4830 I thought it was MI’s (i.e. Military Intelligence’s) but now you mention MI5 I guess the idea is if you slightly misread MI5CHIEF you get MISCHIEF

]]> By: nmsindy http://www.fifteensquared.net/2007/09/19/ft-12567-by-monk/#comment-4827 nmsindy Thu, 20 Sep 2007 09:31:09 +0000 http://fifteensquared.net/2007/09/19/ft-12567-by-monk/#comment-4827 I did not fully understand the wordplay. The boss I took as chief leaving mis – I thought it might be MI5 shortened with ‘s to follow. Earlier on I thought it might refer to M – James Bond’s boss if memory serves. Solution confirmed as correct today.

]]> By: Testy http://www.fifteensquared.net/2007/09/19/ft-12567-by-monk/#comment-4823 Testy Thu, 20 Sep 2007 08:50:13 +0000 http://fifteensquared.net/2007/09/19/ft-12567-by-monk/#comment-4823 Re 1A Spy’s boss slightly misread malicious behaviour

I couldn’t see the relevance of the “slightly misread” bit (other than for the surface). Can you clarify?

]]>