"If you decide to argue, watch your temper. Your logic, if any is there,
will take care of itself." -Joseph Farrell
"They came at us in the same old way, and we defeated them in the same old
way." -- The Duke of Wellington
It's pretty rare to meet a person that is crazy and rarer still to meet a
group of them that isn't. LP :>)
*-----Original Message-----
*From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Paul D. Robertson
*Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 8:32 AM
*To: HUNGRY PIRANHA
*Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*Subject: Re:
*
*
*On Wed, 29 Nov 2000, HUNGRY PIRANHA wrote:
*
*> all,
*>
*> mr. morrow hits the nail on the head.
*
*Perhaps you can explain how that nail is hit on the head and at the same
*time the product in question sits approved for use in national security
*environments by NCSC?
*
*>
*> paul, i dont remember seeing you at any of the air force
*> briefings on findings for recommendations to the 38th eis wing
*in regards to
*> why checkpoint products were not considered for the cits nms bip, dms or
*> spawar projects. the premise of intel shenanigans was PRECISELY
*what the nsa
*> contingent stated in these meetings.
*> of course, there were other considerations for why
*> sidewinder was chosen (X.500 complicane among others..
*>
*> besides, i could probably figure out a way to get a lamer like
*you to hand
*> me your moms last 500$ bucks.
*
*You said:
*
*"it may be true that you have seen chkptfw-1 in use at dod sites, but not
*under the auspices of dod,,likely a wing or base commander who doesnt care
*whats going on as long it doesnt screw up his career."
*
*To which I cited a DoD site which specificly has FW-1 listed as *approved*
*for protecting national security interests by NCSC. In case you're
**really* dense, that's "Under the auspices of dod[sic]."
*
*You also said:
*
*"the nsa would take great interest in knowing what backdoors
*the 'ha-Mossad le-Modiin ule-Tafkidim Meyuhadim' might have available to
*them"
*
*Yet, provided with the _fact_ that NSA has approved FW-1 and that it's
*certified under their program, the best rebuttal that you can come up with
*is "besides, i could probably figure out a way to get a lamer like you
*to hand me your moms last 500$ bucks."
*
*Once again, in case you're really dense, NSA's interest in backdoors
*wouldn't include approving the product for use in national security
*sensative arenas. They like to be the only keyholders for backdoors.
*
*Better clean off that mirror before you start looking for lamers, it'll
*increase your success rate significantly. You might wanna swing by
*Amazon.com and see if you can find a book on insults too.
*
*Ad Hominem personal attacks in the face of overwhelming factual evidence
*lowers your credibility substantially especially when hiding behind
*aliases and hotmail accounts (or is that uber-krad vogue these days?)
*
*That $500 came from pimping your mom's skank ass for $2.50 a shot.
*
*Paul
*-------------------------------------------------------------------
*----------
*Paul D. Robertson "My statements in this message are personal opinions
*[EMAIL PROTECTED] which may have no basis whatsoever in fact."
*
*-
*[To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
*"unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
*
-
[To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
