On Thu, 21 Oct 2004, "Ormond Laplunk" <orm@canada.com> wrote:
>"Michael Yardley" <yardleymj@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
>news:858bd3a9.0406061139.4c951c68@posting.google.com... 
>
>I suspect it has backdoors ever since Phil Zimmermann caved in under
>terrific pressure from the US Government.
>http://www.skypoint.com/members/gimonca/philzima.html  or
>http://www.spectacle.org/795/zimm.html
>
>I would venture that the only relatively safe version is  PGP263i
>http://www.pgpi.org/cgi/download.cg...ame=pgp263i.zip
>
>or you could  use GnuPG 1.2.2   instead.
>
>Orm

SHUT UP, CHRISTMAN
We know that *YOU* are the source of that anti-PGP, anti-Reliable,
anti-JBN FUD.
And we know your motives:

That's smoke screen to hide the incontrovertible fact:
QS BLEW UP ITS USER'S PRIVACY 3 TIMES ALREADY

By attacking safe programs like PGP, JBN, RELIABLE, you want to hide
QS *real* flaws.
Your defence is "like PGP/JBN/RELIABLE, QS is getting bad press"
The truth is: "unlike PGP/JBN/RELIABLE, QS was *repeatedly* found at
fault, and *really* blew up its users' privacy"

Now, go away, you and your minions, sock puppets and goons.
You'd get a better chance trying to *still* convince us that Iraq had
weapons of mass destruction, and that Usama was Saddam's brother.

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]