On Sun, 16 Aug 2009 10:37:30 -0700, "The Real Truth MVP" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>MBAM has added definitions to their software that attempts to detect and
>remove my Remove-it software. They did this in direct retaliation of a post
>I made in the newsgroups criticizing their new IP blocking technology. I
>pointed out several flaws and instead of fixing them they block me. I had a
>friend go through the proper channels and report a false positive. But as
>soon as it was discovered that the poster knew me MBAM locked the thread and
>immediately updated their software. You can find that thread here
>http://www.malwarebytes.org/forums/i...howtopic=21669
>You will also find that others have reported the same issues.
>http://www.malwarebytes.org/forums/i...7&showforum=42
>It is clear that MBAM has no intention to remove that bad IP address so I
>have updated my Remove-it software, it will now disable MBAM so you will be
>able to freely surf to any website you wish. You can download my software
>from here http://www.ms-mvp.org MBAM has turned their fight against Malware
>to a personal battle against me SHAME ON YOU MBAM!

I paid for MBM but ending up taking it off my machine. They did the same
thing to Evidence Eliminator as they did you. That act was total
political correctness in order to get even with EE for their spamming in
the past. The actions of the publishers of EE has absolutely nothing to
do with the quality of their program. I have been using that program
since it costs somewhere around $29.95 many years ago. That was before
they went crazy and started charging some exorbitant price. Back then,
their program was the most versatile and complete of the 'wipers'.

The fact that MBM would do such an underhanded thing against a fine
program really torqued me. I couldn't even get the damn thing to ignore
EE files entirely. I lost all faith in its impartiality.

Which other programs or publishers would they blackball simply because
they didn't like the people behind the software? They should have at
least had the gonads to explain why they block certain software because
of their distaste for the publisher. Their attitude sucks. They are
liars who cannot be trusted, as far as I'm concerned. (The fact they
have a cvrpr bs fuvg like Raid [Slam] working for them shows me their
moral character better than anything else.

As for the vendetta taking place in this group, why don't you
hate-filled jerks let the publishers of the so-called stolen software
deal with the plagiarizer, if indeed he is, and keep your constant
filthy language and anger out of this group. In other words, grow up!

(Matter of fact, I notice that this "software thief" has much better
manners and is far more mature than his hateful enemies.)

(E-Mail Removed) wrote:

> (Matter of fact, I notice that this "software thief" has much better
> manners and is far more mature than his hateful enemies.)

If you really did read Buttface's posts, you'd notice that most of them
are littered with words like "you dumbass" or "trolls" and much worse.

He must have hired the professional writer again for the post you
responded to. It is a totally different writing style.

--
-bts
-Friends don't let friends drive Windows

(E-Mail Removed) wrote in
news:(E-Mail Removed):

> On Sun, 16 Aug 2009 10:37:30 -0700, "The Real Truth MVP"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>MBAM has added definitions to their software that attempts to detect
>>and remove my Remove-it software. They did this in direct retaliation
>>of a post I made in the newsgroups criticizing their new IP blocking
>>technology. I pointed out several flaws and instead of fixing them
>>they block me. I had a friend go through the proper channels and
>>report a false positive. But as soon as it was discovered that the
>>poster knew me MBAM locked the thread and immediately updated their
>>software. You can find that thread here
>>http://www.malwarebytes.org/forums/i...d97362baacc137
>>968fc609&showtopic=21669 You will also find that others have reported
>>the same issues.
>>http://www.malwarebytes.org/forums/i...8ce03aa574c5c5
>>ebe55a57&showforum=42 It is clear that MBAM has no intention to remove
>>that bad IP address so I have updated my Remove-it software, it will
>>now disable MBAM so you will be able to freely surf to any website you
>>wish. You can download my software from here http://www.ms-mvp.org
>>MBAM has turned their fight against Malware to a personal battle
>>against me SHAME ON YOU MBAM!
>
> I paid for MBM but ending up taking it off my machine. They did the
> same thing to Evidence Eliminator as they did you. That act was total
> political correctness in order to get even with EE for their spamming
> in the past. The actions of the publishers of EE has absolutely
> nothing to do with the quality of their program. I have been using
> that program since it costs somewhere around $29.95 many years ago.
> That was before they went crazy and started charging some exorbitant
> price. Back then, their program was the most versatile and complete of
> the 'wipers'.
>
> The fact that MBM would do such an underhanded thing against a fine
> program really torqued me. I couldn't even get the damn thing to
> ignore EE files entirely. I lost all faith in its impartiality.

I was asked to post this.

http://www.google.com/search?q=%22shdocpl.dll%22
+evidence+eliminator&hl=en&lr=&num=100&filter=0

Have a good day sir.


--
Regards,
Dustin Cook
Malware Researcher
MalwareBytes - http://www.malwarebytes.org

<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...

> (Matter of fact, I notice that this "software thief" has much better
> manners and is far more mature than his hateful enemies.)

Funny, I find the opposite. The fact is that I gave it the benefit of
the doubt regarding the accusations, and only spoke of my distaste for
the way it conducted itself in the newsgroups. Now that irrefutable
proof has been given regarding at least one of those accusations, I feel
comfortable labeling it as a thief. To witness the lies concocted by PC
Butts while being exposed as a thief is to be made aware of its
untrustworthiness an the label "liar" as well as "thief" is appropriate.

Readers should be made aware of these findings, so that they can make an
informed decision about executing its offered software.

The Fake Truth MostValuablePirate wrote:

> "nobody >" wrote:
>> It's also funny that his ButtWare only seems to *target stuff* that
>> shows up fairly often in newsgroups populated by n00bs.
>
> That's another lie, people find my site thru search engines

That's not what he wrote. Learn to read and comprehend.

(Actually, it only targets stuff that the original author puts in the
batch file before Butt copies it.)

--
-bts
-Friends don't let friends drive Windows

"The Real Truth MVP" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:-76dncDiuZLtFhXXnZ2dnUVZ_t-(E-Mail Removed)...
> First there was McAfee's Site advisor that everyone posted a link to
> but they said my software was safe and that was so shocking to
> everyone they started posting to the new WOT who does not test
> software like site advisor does. But then you have 13 people 4 of
> which are the same person 3 of which has never used my software and
> the troll 1PW who even admits in his post that he has "heard" that it
> is bad. Where are the other 33 thousand people who visited my site?
> 13 out 33323 unique visitors, do the math.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lies,_d...and_statistics

On Sun, 16 Aug 2009 14:25:20 -0500, (E-Mail Removed) wrote:
>
>On Sun, 16 Aug 2009 14:25:20 -0700, "nobody >"
><(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>"tommys.place.net" doesn't exist, but I think the folks at
>http://www.place.net/ might be interested in knowing about you..
>especially since you are "defending" a bogus MVP and fraud.

Were you also a snitch in school, thinking that gave you power over
the rest of the class?

>BTW, *YOU* don't show any posting history anywhere but here. It does
> seem funny for a new nym to show up just after Buttsies' latest
>rant. Eternal-september accounts can be set up almost
>instantaneously, and they don't leave IP / provider trails, perfect
>for sock puppetry. The "PCBUTTS 1" we know wouldn't give a rat's
>ass about theft of services by using place.net instead of a really
>invalid domain for a munge.

Oh, yes, Usenet rule #1: If anyone disagrees with you, discredit
them immediately as a sock or a troll.

Also, my "theft of services" on a scale of 1 to 10 ranks about a -24.

Do you also snitch on your co-workers and friends when they goof?

Of course you do. You don't have the gonads or smarts to earn
attention any other way.

>(E-Mail Removed) wrote:
>
>>(Matter of fact, I notice that this "software thief" has much better
>> manners and is far more mature than his hateful enemies.)
>
>You haven't followed 'his' posting history much, have you?

The dozens of hate-filled posts surrounding his makes it not
worthwhile following all the rants. However, the few posts I have
read of his are not nearly as crazy angry as are the ones by posters
such as yourself. As far as I'm concerned, he has reason to lose it
once in awhile.
>
>FWIW, "Use my Remove-it software, it will remove that malware from
>your system. Choose yes for all options when prompted. Download it
>here http://www.ms-mvp.org/"
>
>Remove-it isn't on http://www.ms-mvp.org/ (64.202.189.170) That's
>GoDaddy hosted. They don't do squat on fraud websites, and "play
>games" on copyright issues. But Buttsie's cute, his theft's not
>there.

I have no idea what the above illogical rant is about, except that any
website that "plays games" with copyright issues would lose their arse
in lawsuits.

>So http://209.237.163.173/downloads/Remove-itSA.zip That's Web.com,
>there's nothing about copyright issues other than their own in their
> TOS.

Whether or not they have a copyright disclaimer would not protect them
in case of a lawsuit. They don't get to dictate when or where
copyright infringement can take place. They are also responsible the
moment a software publisher warns them of the infringement. (Do you
know anything at all about the real world outside of your ridiculous
vendetta with "Buttsie"?)

>MBAM "calls it as they see it". Anything that modifies the HOSTS
>file the way Buttsie's crapware does is malware, both by their
>definition as well as mine (and a large portion of the anti-malware
>community as well).
>
>His version of a HOSTS file has been blocking anything that would
>have spotted his crap for a long time. All MBAM did was to "return
>the favor".

If I were a software publisher, I would do the same thing - protect my
product from vigilantes who think they and they alone are the arbiter
of what goes in a Host file without ever documenting their reasons for
such action. By "documenting", I do not mean hearsay or rambling,
illogical rants such as yours. Matter of fact, MBAM has blacklisted
one of the finest "wipers" ever, Evidence Eliminator. It was the
forerunner of all the good "wipers" extant today. Why did they do it?
Because Robin Hood, EE's publishers, were stupid or crooked enough to
hire out their software to "assistants" who spammed the hell outta
Usenet for a period of time. Now, if MBAM would have stated such a
reason for banning EE in their anti malware, one would at least
consider them honest enough not to disclaim the worth of the software
itself. What they did was dishonest. If they did it to side with the
majority on EE, why can't it be also true about why they are doing to
"Buttsie"?

For an outfit like MBAM to endeavor to take the high ground when they
open their software to scum like Raid [Slam] tells me they cannot be
trusted. That's why it is off my machine, despite the fact I paid for
the lifetime version. Matter of a fact, I also hate firewalls that
endeavor to keep me from many sites because they deem them to
commercial and little more than website spam. Let me make that
decision. I don't want to have to turn off my firewall every time I
have to visit a major software site simply because some idiot in a
software company thinks I shouldn't help that site succeed.

I don't like rigid, constipated minds that try to enforce their values
on me.

>I haven't gone deep into the code as Dave and others have, but I
>have installed Buttsies' crap on a clean virtual machine, as well
>as 'dirty' VMs with problems intentionally caught, just to test
>ButtWare versus real stuff like MBAM. I've seen Buttface's HOSTS
>tricks, and his failed attempts on undoing things that MBAM and
>others have succeeded with.

Big deal! He removed himself from a Host file. So, exactly how
dangerous is that? Do you have any proof that his programs have harmed
the computers of his customers? I don't see any outrage against that
qnza cvrpr bs fuvg Raid for the computers he has ruined. He did much
more than change a host file, yet you "defenders of the faith" sit in
here and talk to him as if he were a decent human being, when in fact
he is a vicious, cruel sociopath who should never be trusted by
anyone, especially a software company that pretends to be anti malware.
Get real, children!

>It's also funny that his ButtWare only seems to target stuff that
>shows up fairly often in newsgroups populated by n00bs.

More speculation. More guilt by perceived association.

Get a life, you hate mongers and leave this group clear of your rants.
Let the software publishers/authors from whom he is supposed to be
stealing settle their own problems. If it isn't worth their time,
or they simply cannot prove the facts before a court, who are you
people to take up about 3/4 of this group with your hate everyday? The
truth of the matter is you people have frustrating, anger producing
problems in your own lives that you can't or don't have the guts to
handle, so you come in here each day to dump your vitriol.

Get a life, let "Buttsie's" customers decide for themselves whether
his software has harmed them or helped them. (Although, I'm sure now a
few you in the guise of customers will post more manufactured drivel.

By the way, in regard my being a sock, does my writing *really* bear
any similarity to "Buttsie"s?

(E-Mail Removed) wrote in news:6698f4a17453476c6be8299c199be421
@msgid.frell.theremailer.net:

> The dozens of hate-filled posts surrounding his makes it not
> worthwhile following all the rants. However, the few posts I have
> read of his are not nearly as crazy angry as are the ones by posters
> such as yourself. As far as I'm concerned, he has reason to lose it
> once in awhile.

Naturally, every single one of us who hosts a FAQ or info page about
pcbutts are just ranting. That makes alot of sense. /sarcasm.


>>
>>FWIW, "Use my Remove-it software, it will remove that malware from
>>your system. Choose yes for all options when prompted. Download it
>>here http://www.ms-mvp.org/"
>>
>>Remove-it isn't on http://www.ms-mvp.org/ (64.202.189.170) That's
>>GoDaddy hosted. They don't do squat on fraud websites, and "play
>>games" on copyright issues. But Buttsie's cute, his theft's not
>>there.
>
> I have no idea what the above illogical rant is about, except that any
> website that "plays games" with copyright issues would lose their arse
> in lawsuits.

And these lawsuits are free are they?

>>So http://209.237.163.173/downloads/Remove-itSA.zip That's Web.com,
>>there's nothing about copyright issues other than their own in their
>> TOS.
>
> Whether or not they have a copyright disclaimer would not protect them
> in case of a lawsuit. They don't get to dictate when or where
> copyright infringement can take place. They are also responsible the
> moment a software publisher warns them of the infringement. (Do you
> know anything at all about the real world outside of your ridiculous
> vendetta with "Buttsie"?)

Pure stupidity on your part, being as you've obviously never filed a DMCA
notice in your life; yet you claim the website HAS to do this or that.

It doesn't work that way. Those of us who have had the displeasure of
doing it know better.

>>MBAM "calls it as they see it". Anything that modifies the HOSTS
>>file the way Buttsie's crapware does is malware, both by their
>>definition as well as mine (and a large portion of the anti-malware
>>community as well).
>>
>>His version of a HOSTS file has been blocking anything that would
>>have spotted his crap for a long time. All MBAM did was to "return
>>the favor".
>
> If I were a software publisher, I would do the same thing - protect my
> product from vigilantes who think they and they alone are the arbiter
> of what goes in a Host file without ever documenting their reasons for
> such action. By "documenting", I do not mean hearsay or rambling,
> illogical rants such as yours. Matter of fact, MBAM has blacklisted
> one of the finest "wipers" ever, Evidence Eliminator. It was the

Evidence Eliminator has a horrible history. I really have no idea why you
seem to think it's such a fine program.

> forerunner of all the good "wipers" extant today. Why did they do it?
> Because Robin Hood, EE's publishers, were stupid or crooked enough to
> hire out their software to "assistants" who spammed the hell outta
> Usenet for a period of time. Now, if MBAM would have stated such a
> reason for banning EE in their anti malware, one would at least

Did you mis the post I gave you with the url? Oh hell, just lookup
evidence eliminator in google; you won't find very many urls supporting
it, But you will find alot of users wanting to be rid of it.

> consider them honest enough not to disclaim the worth of the software
> itself. What they did was dishonest. If they did it to side with the
> majority on EE, why can't it be also true about why they are doing to
> "Buttsie"?

I suspect your a conspiracy nut with the way your ranting and defending
Pcbutts here.

> For an outfit like MBAM to endeavor to take the high ground when they
> open their software to scum like Raid [Slam] tells me they cannot be
> trusted. That's why it is off my machine, despite the fact I paid for
> the lifetime version. Matter of a fact, I also hate firewalls that

You previously told us it was removed from your machine after the
detection routines were added for EE and we refused to remove them. So, I
doubt it's because I have anything to do with them; you apparently just
like to whine about 10+ year old news. You really do live in the past. 1.
You think EE is the best thing since sliced bread. 2. You think Raid
[Slam] is a big deal; a decade after I retired from the vx scene. I'm a
bit paranoid of you myself now, you seem to be a groupie.

> I don't like rigid, constipated minds that try to enforce their values
> on me.

I don't think many people do.

> Big deal! He removed himself from a Host file. So, exactly how
> dangerous is that? Do you have any proof that his programs have harmed
> the computers of his customers? I don't see any outrage against that

They aren't his programs. That seems to be something your missing or just
not understanding, here..

> qnza cvrpr bs fuvg Raid for the computers he has ruined. He did much
> more than change a host file, yet you "defenders of the faith" sit in

Very lame rot13 work, Did you learn that from our fun with pcbutts
recently? Which computers did I *ever* ruin? Please list.. even one.....

At the same time, I can find lots of posts where my own program BugHunter
has helped people and I've been thanked for it. IT people really enjoy
using it. The first public version has been available since 2005; And in
all this time, not one computer has been intentionally or accidently
harmed or heh, ruined as you say, by BugHunter.

> here and talk to him as if he were a decent human being, when in fact
> he is a vicious, cruel sociopath who should never be trusted by
> anyone, especially a software company that pretends to be anti malware.
> Get real, children!

Sure I am, that's why I've spent years developing software designed to
help people be rid of malicious programs and other junk they don't want.
I'm such a bad bad person, I gave a useful program away since day one!

One of us certainly does need to get real, but it sure as hell isn't me.

> truth of the matter is you people have frustrating, anger producing
> problems in your own lives that you can't or don't have the guts to
> handle, so you come in here each day to dump your vitriol.

Sir, your the one who seems to have anger producing problems in your own
life and the inability to get over things which happened a very long time
ago. I have the nuts despite my past to atleast post with my real name,
and you just sit and attack me without the balls to let anyone even know
who you are. Your just a nameless face in the crowd, a mindless lemming,
nothing more and nothing less.


--
Dustin Cook [Malware Researcher]
MalwareBytes - http://www.malwarebytes.org
BugHunter - http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk

<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...

> I don't like rigid, constipated minds that try to enforce their values
> on me.

....and for those that *do* like that sort of thing, there are 'hosts'
files springing from those minds just about everywhere. Are you
forgetting that users choose to allow their 'hosts' file to be modified
by these minds? You don't like it, remove it - nobody's 'enforcing' you
to submit.

From: <(E-Mail Removed)>

| On Sun, 16 Aug 2009 14:25:20 -0500, (E-Mail Removed) wrote:

>>On Sun, 16 Aug 2009 14:25:20 -0700, "nobody >"
>><(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>>"tommys.place.net" doesn't exist, but I think the folks at
>>http://www.place.net/ might be interested in knowing about you..
>>especially since you are "defending" a bogus MVP and fraud.

| Were you also a snitch in school, thinking that gave you power over
| the rest of the class?

>>BTW, *YOU* don't show any posting history anywhere but here. It does
>> seem funny for a new nym to show up just after Buttsies' latest
>>rant. Eternal-september accounts can be set up almost
>>instantaneously, and they don't leave IP / provider trails, perfect
>>for sock puppetry. The "PCBUTTS 1" we know wouldn't give a rat's
>>ass about theft of services by using place.net instead of a really
>>invalid domain for a munge.

| Oh, yes, Usenet rule #1: If anyone disagrees with you, discredit
| them immediately as a sock or a troll.

| Also, my "theft of services" on a scale of 1 to 10 ranks about a -24.

| Do you also snitch on your co-workers and friends when they goof?

| Of course you do. You don't have the gonads or smarts to earn
| attention any other way.

>>(E-Mail Removed) wrote:

>>>(Matter of fact, I notice that this "software thief" has much better
>>> manners and is far more mature than his hateful enemies.)

>>You haven't followed 'his' posting history much, have you?

| The dozens of hate-filled posts surrounding his makes it not
| worthwhile following all the rants. However, the few posts I have
| read of his are not nearly as crazy angry as are the ones by posters
| such as yourself. As far as I'm concerned, he has reason to lose it
| once in awhile.

>>FWIW, "Use my Remove-it software, it will remove that malware from
>>your system. Choose yes for all options when prompted. Download it
>>here http://www.ms-mvp.org/"

>>Remove-it isn't on http://www.ms-mvp.org/ (64.202.189.170) That's
>>GoDaddy hosted. They don't do squat on fraud websites, and "play
>>games" on copyright issues. But Buttsie's cute, his theft's not
>>there.

| I have no idea what the above illogical rant is about, except that any
| website that "plays games" with copyright issues would lose their arse
| in lawsuits.

>>So http://209.237.163.173/downloads/Remove-itSA.zip That's Web.com,
>>there's nothing about copyright issues other than their own in their
>> TOS.

| Whether or not they have a copyright disclaimer would not protect them
| in case of a lawsuit. They don't get to dictate when or where
| copyright infringement can take place. They are also responsible the
| moment a software publisher warns them of the infringement. (Do you
| know anything at all about the real world outside of your ridiculous
| vendetta with "Buttsie"?)

>>MBAM "calls it as they see it". Anything that modifies the HOSTS
>>file the way Buttsie's crapware does is malware, both by their
>>definition as well as mine (and a large portion of the anti-malware
>>community as well).

>>His version of a HOSTS file has been blocking anything that would
>>have spotted his crap for a long time. All MBAM did was to "return
>>the favor".

| If I were a software publisher, I would do the same thing - protect my
| product from vigilantes who think they and they alone are the arbiter
| of what goes in a Host file without ever documenting their reasons for
| such action. By "documenting", I do not mean hearsay or rambling,
| illogical rants such as yours. Matter of fact, MBAM has blacklisted
| one of the finest "wipers" ever, Evidence Eliminator. It was the
| forerunner of all the good "wipers" extant today. Why did they do it?
| Because Robin Hood, EE's publishers, were stupid or crooked enough to
| hire out their software to "assistants" who spammed the hell outta
| Usenet for a period of time. Now, if MBAM would have stated such a
| reason for banning EE in their anti malware, one would at least
| consider them honest enough not to disclaim the worth of the software
| itself. What they did was dishonest. If they did it to side with the
| majority on EE, why can't it be also true about why they are doing to
| "Buttsie"?

| For an outfit like MBAM to endeavor to take the high ground when they
| open their software to scum like Raid [Slam] tells me they cannot be
| trusted. That's why it is off my machine, despite the fact I paid for
| the lifetime version. Matter of a fact, I also hate firewalls that
| endeavor to keep me from many sites because they deem them to
| commercial and little more than website spam. Let me make that
| decision. I don't want to have to turn off my firewall every time I
| have to visit a major software site simply because some idiot in a
| software company thinks I shouldn't help that site succeed.

| I don't like rigid, constipated minds that try to enforce their values
| on me.

>>I haven't gone deep into the code as Dave and others have, but I
>>have installed Buttsies' crap on a clean virtual machine, as well
>>as 'dirty' VMs with problems intentionally caught, just to test
>>ButtWare versus real stuff like MBAM. I've seen Buttface's HOSTS
>>tricks, and his failed attempts on undoing things that MBAM and
>>others have succeeded with.

| Big deal! He removed himself from a Host file. So, exactly how
| dangerous is that? Do you have any proof that his programs have harmed
| the computers of his customers? I don't see any outrage against that
| qnza cvrpr bs fuvg Raid for the computers he has ruined. He did much
| more than change a host file, yet you "defenders of the faith" sit in
| here and talk to him as if he were a decent human being, when in fact
| he is a vicious, cruel sociopath who should never be trusted by
| anyone, especially a software company that pretends to be anti malware.
| Get real, children!

>>It's also funny that his ButtWare only seems to target stuff that
>>shows up fairly often in newsgroups populated by n00bs.

| More speculation. More guilt by perceived association.

| Get a life, you hate mongers and leave this group clear of your rants.
| Let the software publishers/authors from whom he is supposed to be
| stealing settle their own problems. If it isn't worth their time,
| or they simply cannot prove the facts before a court, who are you
| people to take up about 3/4 of this group with your hate everyday? The
| truth of the matter is you people have frustrating, anger producing
| problems in your own lives that you can't or don't have the guts to
| handle, so you come in here each day to dump your vitriol.

| Get a life, let "Buttsie's" customers decide for themselves whether
| his software has harmed them or helped them. (Although, I'm sure now a
| few you in the guise of customers will post more manufactured drivel.

| By the way, in regard my being a sock, does my writing *really* bear
| any similarity to "Buttsie"s?


No, you are not a Sock Puppet of Butts.

However, you are naieve on what takes place in reality concerning intellectual property
rights, copyrights and plagiarism.

In short, Butts is NOT a person to support. Those who know about him are very disgusted
with his actions. Those who support him are immediately negated due to the perponderance
of evidence against Butts.

Please take the time to do your research before you make a post such as you made.

If you want to see Butts in court - great. Please provide the monetary funds to to take
action.

--
Dave
http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html
Multi-AV - http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp