Repeating a flawed argument does not make it more logical. See my comment above, repeat as necessary.
If you think TrueCrypt will remain secure forever just because it's been verified as secure in the past, remember that there was a time when computers could not crack a MD5 code. When SHA-1 was considered secure.
I'm not arguing anything, just pointing out the obvious. Secure software today does not mean secure software tomorrow, especially if the software is not getting regular security updates. There is objectively no flaw in that statement.