Author Topic: Knight to queen's bishop 3 - Snowden charged with espionage. (Read 421286 times)

IainB · « **Reply #600 on:** July 16, 2014, 06:05 AM »

@Renegade: Yes, I was concerned when I read about that. As you say:

These guys are GOOD at what they do.

And there'll be no stopping them. If they were not employed by the State, they'd be classified as criminal hackers.
It's a great country they're making for themselves over there in the UK.
I hear that some people reckon that the UK must be in a race with the US to see who can get to Hell first in a handbasket, but I couldn't possibly comment.

Renegade · « **Reply #601 on:** July 16, 2014, 06:28 AM »

And there'll be no stopping them. If they were not employed by the State, they'd be classified as criminal hackers.
-IainB (July 16, 2014, 06:05 AM)

Exactly. Imagine this email...

Dear President/Prime Minister,

Say your prayers. Your time is limited. I'm going to kill you, and there is nothing you can do to stop me. Make your peace now,

Love,

YOUR NAME HERE (or whatever)

Then conveniently sent from your email account using your IP address.

Your door wouldn't stand a chance. Your dog would certainly be killed. And any toddlers in cribs would get a flashbang surprise. Meanwhile, you'd have the b'jeez kicked out of you as you're deafened by a gang of 20 guys screaming "STOP RESISTING!" After you got out of intensive care and your coma, you'd be quickly railroaded into prison, if you're lucky enough not to end up at a black site.

It's not like they haven't done things like that before. J i-m Be l.l ended up in prison shortly after writing a short article that wasn't "state-friendly". He's far from alone.

Renegade · « **Reply #602 on:** July 16, 2014, 08:08 AM »

I'll stick this in this thread simply to avoid starting another. It's related, but a different whistle blower.

Bill Binney interviewed by Bill Still.

That's part 1 of 9. You can look up the rest at Bill Still's Youtube channel.

Binney goes on about a lot of the same things Snowden/Greenwald say, but also other things. They're all related.

IainB · « **Reply #603 on:** July 20, 2014, 08:52 AM »

(Copied below sans embedded hyperlinks/images.)

Edward Snowden urges professionals to encrypt client communications
Exclusive: Whistleblower says NSA revelations mean those with duty to protect confidentiality must urgently upgrade security
• Watch Snowden's interview with the Guardian in Moscow
• Read the full interview with Snowden by Alan Rusbridger and Ewen MacAskill on Friday
Alan Rusbridger and Ewen MacAskill
The Guardian, Thursday 17 July 2014 17.14 BST

Link to video: Edward Snowden: 'If I end up in chains in Guantánamo I can live with that'

The NSA whistleblower, Edward Snowden, has urged lawyers, journalists, doctors, accountants, priests and others with a duty to protect confidentiality to upgrade security in the wake of the spy surveillance revelations.

Snowden said professionals were failing in their obligations to their clients, sources, patients and parishioners in what he described as a new and challenging world.

"What last year's revelations showed us was irrefutable evidence that unencrypted communications on the internet are no longer safe. Any communications should be encrypted by default," he said.

The response of professional bodies has so far been patchy.

A minister at the Home Office in London, James Brokenshire, said during a Commons debate about a new surveillance bill on Tuesday that a code of practice to protect legal professional privilege and others requiring professional secrecy was under review.

Snowden's plea for the professions to tighten security came during an extensive and revealing interview with the Guardian in Moscow.

The former National Security Agency and CIA computer specialist, wanted by the US under the Espionage Act after leaking tens of thousands of top secret documents, has given only a handful of interviews since seeking temporary asylum in Russia a year ago.
Edward Snowden during his interview with Guardian editor Alan Rusbridger and reporter Ewen MacAskill Edward Snowden during his interview with the Guardian in Moscow. Photograph: Alan Rusbridger for the Guardian

During the seven hours of interview, Snowden:

• Said if he ended up in US detention in Guantánamo Bay he could live with it.

• Offered rare glimpses into his daily life in Russia, insisting that, contrary to reports that he is depressed, he is not sad and does not have any regrets. He rejected various conspiracy theories surrounding him, describing as "bullshit" suggestions he is a Russian spy.

• Said that, contrary to a claim he works for a Russian organisation, he was independently secure, living on savings, and money from awards and speeches he has delivered online round the world.

• Made a startling claim that a culture exists within the NSA in which, during surveillance, nude photographs picked up of people in "sexually compromising" situations are routinely passed around.

• Spoke at length about his future, which seems destined to be spent in Russia for the foreseeable future after expressing disappointment over the failure of western European governments to offer him a home.

• Said he was holding out for a jury trial in the US rather a judge-only one, hopeful that it would be hard to find 12 jurors who would convict him if he was charged with an offence to which there was a public interest defence. Negotiations with the US government on a return to his country appear to be stalled.

Snowden, who recognises he is almost certainly kept under surveillance by the Russians and the US, met the Guardian at a hotel within walking distance of Red Square.

The 31-year-old revealed that he works online late into the night; a solitary, digital existence not that dissimilar to his earlier life.

He said he was using part of that time to work on the new focus for his technical skills, designing encryption tools to help professionals such as journalists protect sources and data. He is negotiating foundation funding for the project, a contribution to addressing the problem of professions wanting to protect client or patient data, and in this case journalistic sources.

"An unfortunate side effect of the development of all these new surveillance technologies is that the work of journalism has become immeasurably harder than it ever has been in the past," Snowden said.

"Journalists have to be particularly conscious about any sort of network signalling, any sort of connection, any sort of licence-plate reading device that they pass on their way to a meeting point, any place they use their credit card, any place they take their phone, any email contact they have with the source because that very first contact, before encrypted communications are established, is enough to give it all away."

Journalists had to ensure they made not a single mistake or they would be placing sources at risk. The same duty applied to other professions, he said, calling for training and new standards "to make sure that we have mechanisms to ensure that the average member of our society can have a reasonable measure of faith in the skills of all the members of these professions."

He added: "If we confess something to our priest inside a church that would be private, but is it any different if we send our pastor a private email confessing a crisis that we have in our life?"

The response of professional bodies in the UK to the challenge varies, ranging from calls for legislative changes to build in protection from snooping, to apparent lack of concern.

Ross Anderson, professor of security engineering at Cambridge University, said he shared Snowden's concerns about the vulnerability of the professions to surveillance by spy and law enforcement agencies.

"If you think your HIV status is secret from GCHQ, forget it," he said. "The tools are available to protect data and communications but only if you are important enough for your doctor or lawyer to care."

Timothy Hill, technology policy adviser at the Law Society, which represents UK lawyers, said the profession was concerned.

"Legal professional privilege – the right to consult a legal adviser in confidence – is a long established common law right. Its fundamental role in our legal system needs to be reasserted."

The society is pressing to have existing legislation rewritten to include explicit protection for legal professional privilege from government surveillance.

"There needs to be a debate about the implications of the Snowden revelations for professional privilege in the digital age," Hill said. "It is not happening. This is not being debated in parliament."

He said the society was seeking to strengthen law firms' cybersecurity awareness but that a stronger statutory framework was essential.

Michelle Stanistreet, the National Union of Journalists general secretary, echoed the concerns. "For democracy to function, it needs to have a free press and journalists who are able to do their job without fear or hindrance. But this is becoming increasingly under threat."

She added: "Last year's revelations show that unencrypted communications can mean that journalists may be unwittingly handing over their contacts, footage or material, against their will."

The General Medical Council provides guidance to UK doctors about protecting information against improper disclosure.

Niall Dickson, the GMC chief executive, said: "Modern communication offers huge benefits for patients in terms of research, access to professionals, as well as speed of care and treatment. But of course it also carries risk, and confidentiality and trust are at the heart of the doctor-patient relationship.

"We recognise that keeping up with advances in technology and its implications for confidentiality are challenging for all healthcare professionals. We do have guidance which explains what doctors need to do if they are concerned about the security of personal information or systems they have been given to use. But in this rapidly changing area, we also need to keep on top of this ourselves, and we do regularly review our guidance to take account of changes in the external environment."

Renegade · « **Reply #604 on:** July 20, 2014, 09:58 AM »

Kind of on topic...

http://www.buzzfeed....ugliest-buildings-in

Journalist gets harassed at different sites while taking pics. Because...

You are suspicious, and we are in a post-9/11 world

Right...

Renegade · « **Reply #605 on:** July 20, 2014, 10:47 PM »

Washington's Blog comes out swinging hard (as usual):

http://www.washingto...ckmailing-world.html

Exclusive: High-Level NSA Whistleblower Says Blackmail Is a Huge – Unreported – Part of Mass Surveillance

The Untold Story In the NSA Spying Scandal: Blackmail

It is well-documented that governments use information to blackmail and control people.

More at the link.

If government can't be bought & paid for, it can be blackmailed...

Renegade · « **Reply #606 on:** July 22, 2014, 02:55 AM »

Another fellow blowing the whistle:

http://www.theatlant...ower-emerges/374722/

New Surveillance Whistleblower: The NSA Violates the Constitution

A former Obama administration official calls attention to unaccountable mass surveillance conducted under a 1981 executive order.

More at the link.

Shows how far back some of the "rules" go - 1981 in this case.

Renegade · « **Reply #607 on:** July 22, 2014, 04:41 AM »

This is kind of old news, but I suppose it's "official" now:

http://www.theguardi...-terror-plots-report

Government agents 'directly involved' in most high-profile US terror plots

• Human Rights Watch documents 'sting' operations
• Report raises questions about post-9/11 civil rights

Nearly all of the highest-profile domestic terrorism plots in the United States since 9/11 featured the "direct involvement" of government agents or informants, a new report says.

Some of the controversial "sting" operations "were proposed or led by informants", bordering on entrapment by law enforcement. Yet the courtroom obstacles to proving entrapment are significant, one of the reasons the stings persist.

More at the link.

Renegade · « **Reply #608 on:** July 22, 2014, 08:37 PM »

Lengthy article on TOR & Snowden, etc.

http://pando.com/2014/07/16/tor-spooks/

Almost everyone involved in developing Tor was (or is) funded by the US government

It goes into history and quite a bit of depth on the topic.

tl;dr - Tor isn't the ultimate answer and the NSA & GCHQ aren't opposed to it.

Renegade · « **Reply #609 on:** July 24, 2014, 06:59 AM »

Got your popcorn?

Cue in 3... 2... 1...

The Secret Government Rulebook For Labeling You a Terrorist

https://firstlook.or...4/07/23/blacklisted/

How can you get on a list? Oh, they have many ways! Oh, so many, many ways...

While the guidelines nominally prohibit nominations based on unreliable information, they explicitly regard “uncorroborated” Facebook or Twitter posts as sufficient grounds for putting an individual on one of the watchlists. “Single source information,” the guidelines state, “including but not limited to ‘walk-in,’ ‘write-in,’ or postings on social media sites, however, should not automatically be discounted … the NOMINATING AGENCY should evaluate the credibility of the source, as well as the nature and specificity of the information, and nominate even if that source is uncorroborated.”

There are a number of loopholes for putting people onto the watchlists even if reasonable suspicion cannot be met.

One is clearly defined: The immediate family of suspected terrorists—their spouses, children, parents, or siblings—may be watchlisted without any suspicion that they themselves are engaged in terrorist activity. But another loophole is quite broad—”associates” who have a defined relationship with a suspected terrorist, but whose involvement in terrorist activity is not known. A third loophole is broader still—individuals with “a possible nexus” to terrorism, but for whom there is not enough “derogatory information” to meet the reasonable suspicion standard.

(I wish Greenwald would release the documents in text, and not PDFs of images. Text is MUCH easier to read/search.)

40hz · « **Reply #610 on:** August 02, 2014, 04:09 PM »

Interesting article posted on Lawfare regarding Snowden and some reasoned speculation on how the Russian game strategy appears to be changing...

Is Putin Selling Out Edward Snowden?

By Benjamin Wittes
Thursday, July 31, 2014 at 5:24 PM

This is rank, arguably irresponsible, speculation. I have had no—that is to say zero—conversations with anyone who knows anything about Snowden’s status in Russia. I can thus offer no particularly good reason to believe that Vladimir Putin is getting ready to rid himself of Edward Snowden.

But would you take four bad reasons? When you put them all together, I think there’s enough there to make you wonder what’s going on behind the scenes.
...

Are we heading for the endgame?

Read the full article here.

Renegade · « **Reply #611 on:** August 02, 2014, 09:24 PM »

Are we heading for the endgame?

Read the full article here.
-40hz (August 02, 2014, 04:09 PM)

I don't know what to make of that. Lawfare is associated with The Brookings Institute -- the same think tank that put together "Which Path to Persia", which is a plan to invade Iran. They're associated through the grape vine with Zbigniew Brzezinski. The list goes on and on.

So, which strand of the spider's web is "Lawfare"? Are we being given an accurate prediction? Is this misdirection? Or perhaps just a regular contributor speculating off-the-cuff?

His reasoning in the article makes sense though. Not sure what to make of all of it.

40hz · « **Reply #612 on:** August 03, 2014, 07:27 AM »

So, which strand of the spider's web is "Lawfare"? Are we being given an accurate prediction? Is this misdirection? Or perhaps just a regular contributor speculating off-the-cuff?
-Renegade (August 02, 2014, 09:24 PM)

@Ren - You do have a predilection for dividing by zero do'n’t you? as Lewis Carrol might put it.

Once you go down that rabbit hole of self-referential accusations and 'proofs' you might as well ask which strand of "the spider's web" 40hz represents for merely posting such a link? (Since there's every chance he didn't "merely" post it.)

FWIW, regardless of which side of the political spectrum somebody comes down on, most people don't talk about things without some sort of agenda (i.e. to get you to agree with them, believe them, do something, don't do something, like the person who's speaking, etc.).

Renegade · « **Reply #613 on:** August 03, 2014, 09:59 AM »

Once you go down that rabbit hole of self-referential accusations and 'proofs' you might as well ask which strand of "the spider's web" 40hz represents for merely posting such a link? (Since there's every chance he didn't "merely" post it.)
-40hz (August 03, 2014, 07:27 AM)

Compartmentalisation.

You can't really believe that think tanks sponsor organisations with no agenda. That's what they do.

And a think tank like Brookings?

While it may sound paranoid, when you start looking in closer detail, there are clear connections.

The same names of the same people keep coming up again and again. (Which is why I mentioned Zbigniew Brzezinski as he keeps popping up all over.)

There are clear connections between Brookings and other organisations and individuals. Denying that is just silly as they are established facts. Asking about what Brookings expects from its investment in Lawfare is a legitimate question.

Asking about consumers though... that's a bit of a stretch. What I can see there is:

A) 40hz reads Lawfare
B) 40hz reads Popehat
C) Both Lawfare & Popehat are legal blogs/web sites
D) 40hz probably enjoys reading legal blogs/web sites

And, as a bonus:

E) 40hz probably enjoys SCOTUS blog & Courthouse News (or would if he doesn't already)

D & E are reasonable assumptions, but certainly not guaranteed.

What would be a stretch there is to assume that you like BCND or Cop Block or PINAC because the nature of those deviates significantly from Popehat & Lawfare.

However, with established relationships like with Brookings & Lawfare, it's certainly reasonable to assume that Lawfare gets people aligned with its vision (which is supported by Brookings) to post articles. There *IS* a relationship there.

Now, whether the article is significant there, I don't know, as I pointed out above.

I'm not dividing by zero. I'm simply looking at the obvious relationships and wondering what is going on and what the motivations are.

What would be silly is asking what established relationships Mark Potok has to Brookings in this context. I wouldn't rule out that there is a relationship because there are a lot of incestuous relationships between think tanks & organisations like that which Mark Potok speaks for. But in this context, it makes no sense.

There are some interesting questions raised by other whistle blowers and geo-political analysts about Edward Snowden. (I'm relatively certain that very few people here have heard any of their questions. I know there is at least 1 person here who might have heard their line of questions.)

I raise some of the questions I have above because this is indeed a very complicated spider's web of treachery, deceit, and treason. There is a conspiracy going on here. It's not a theory. We have facts & documentation of it now.

Many whistle blowers in the past have brought up exactly what Snowden has proved so far. So, is this new information? No. Not at all. The only difference now is our confidence in that information.

We have yet to see any really big revelations come out of the Snowden leaks. That's going to piss off some people, but that's how it is.

William (Bill) Binney - worth looking into.

Sibel Edmonds - worth looking into.

Snowden is just one piece on the board. Pawn? Knight? Bishop? He had a blistering hot girl friend, so we know he wasn't a Queen.

But no matter what, he's rooked!

40hz · « **Reply #614 on:** August 03, 2014, 01:18 PM »

While it may sound paranoid, when you start looking in closer detail, there are clear connections.
-Renegade (August 03, 2014, 09:59 AM)

It still sounds fairly paranoid to me. These guys are nowhere near that good - and they're certainly not very subtle if that's truly the case. (That's probably not a bad thing when all factors in this scenario are taken into consideration however.)

Asking about what Brookings expects from its investment in Lawfare is a legitimate question.

Asking about consumers though... that's a bit of a stretch. What I can see there is:

A) 40hz reads Lawfare
B) 40hz reads Popehat
C) Both Lawfare & Popehat are legal blogs/web sites
D) 40hz probably enjoys reading legal blogs/web sites

And, as a bonus:

E) 40hz probably enjoys SCOTUS blog & Courthouse News (or would if he doesn't already)

D & E are reasonable assumptions, but certainly not guaranteed.
-Renegade (August 03, 2014, 09:59 AM)

Lets see how well you did:

a) 40hz very occasionally reads Lawfare. Maybe once or twice a month he gives it a skim.

b) 40hz religiously reads Popehat. Mostly because he can see a time where he might need to appeal to them for a Popehat signal.

c) Good conclusion. Obvious. But valid.

d) Not particularly. But I do like Popehat because I have a peculiar like-hate thing about Ken White. Mostly it's like insofar as it's questionably possible to like an attorney.

e) I generally prefer to read the actual SC decisions rather than try to follow the court watcher and judicial fanboy blogs when it comes to the Dangerous Nine. One thing I've learned about the Supreme Court over the years - don't ever attempt to predict or second guess how they'll rule. That way madness lies. Something I learned as a sophomore in high school thanks to an absolutely brilliant American History teacher (an practicing attorney) who had us look at US history through the lens of significan legislation and court rulings. We used to be presented with a case case, have to write an opinion over the weekend, and then read the SC's actual decision on Monday - at which point we'd discuss it. This teacher's attitude was that the United States was nothing more than a diverse group of people living under a set of written laws. And to truly understand the forces that shaped the nation, you'd needed to be aware of the role of the courts and how judical interpretation (and its evolution) directed and shaped what this country was and did over the years.

I've followed the SC ever since. And from what I can see, this instructor was right.

I'm not dividing by zero. I'm simply looking at the obvious relationships and wondering what is going on and what the motivations are.

Oh, that's easy enough.

You have a large number of well-connected and powerful people (along with a fair number of the general public) that like things pretty much the way they are who are willing to take steps necessary to preserve the current status quo and (ideally) enhance their position in it.

That's not a conspiracy per se. That's just people teaming, and ganging up, to push through their own agenda. In some cases, cheating when it's felt it's necessary. That's what people do. Always have. Always will.

But no matter what, he's rooked!

Pretty much. Which just goes to show nobody in ANY government or institution likes a tattler. No matter what they tell you. Because all institutions have dirty laundry. ANd whenever people in positions of autority in such institutions see somebody like Snowden, they can't help but think "There but for the grace of God (and a healthy dose of threatening those who would tell tales), go we."

Renegade · « **Reply #615 on:** August 06, 2014, 08:23 PM »

A new Snowden?

http://www.defenseon...dward-snowden/90665/

Edward Snowden is not alone.

Authorities have concluded there is at least one other leaker spilling classified secrets about the government’s surveillance programs, according to CNN reporter Evan Perez.

Close observers of the surveillance leaks have for months speculated that there may be another leaker besides Snowden. The Intercept, a channel of First Look Media launched by journalist Glenn Greenwald, has routinely published leaks from Edward Snowden since it formed earlier this year. But two recent stories, including one published Tuesday about the government’s terrorist watch database, cited unnamed sources.

One document is from August 2013, months after Snowden, a former National Security Agency contractor, downloaded documents while employed at Booz Allen Hamilton in Hawaii and fled to Hong Kong, where he met Greenwald.

40hz · « **Reply #616 on:** August 06, 2014, 09:12 PM »

"Unknown leaker" according to "unnamed sources?" $:-\$

Why not just report: "The 'authorities' (whoever that may be this time around) are now saying "All we know is there's gotta be somebody else."

It's about the same thing - and equally well substantiated. (As in not.)

FWIW, I think this guy is his accomplice:

Renegade · « **Reply #617 on:** August 06, 2014, 11:55 PM »

"Unknown leaker" according to "unnamed sources?" $:-\$

Why not just report: "The 'authorities' (whoever that may be this time around) are now saying "All we know is there's gotta be somebody else."

It's about the same thing - and equally well substantiated. (As in not.)

FWIW, I think this guy is his accomplice:
(see attachment in previous post)
-40hz (August 06, 2014, 09:12 PM)

Yup. That.

The level of ambiguity is stretching a bit far.

These rumours have been around for a while, but... Doesn't mean much.

This could very well just be controlled leaks by an intelligence service. Who knows?

For the moment, this is a "wait & see".

tomos · « **Reply #618 on:** August 07, 2014, 05:34 AM »

Snowden's lawyer announces a three year extension granted to asylum.
Just heard it on the radio - dont see any reports online yet, hang on here's one:
http://www.wsbt.com/...enextension/27349448

Renegade · « **Reply #619 on:** August 07, 2014, 06:41 AM »

Snowden's lawyer announces a three year extension granted to asylum.
Just heard it on the radio - dont see any reports online yet, hang on here's one:
http://www.wsbt.com/...enextension/27349448
-tomos (August 07, 2014, 05:34 AM)

Nice! I imagine Putin is snickering, laughing, and joking with some FSB buddies about how much this will piss off the Americans.

Ah... the international arena of ~~diplomacy~~ shits & giggles.

40hz · « **Reply #620 on:** August 07, 2014, 10:16 AM »

^Hoo-boy! And US congressional elections are coming up soon too! That one should make for some fine political posturing, right-wing sabre rattling, and rhetorical firework displays.

IainB · « **Reply #621 on:** August 07, 2014, 11:37 AM »

Interesting.
Of course, this could presumably all be a deliberately manufactured "fog".
If it is a manufactured fog, then someone is controlling the fog generator.
If Snowden really did leak the stuff he is supposed to have done, we have certainly only been allowed to see certain bits of it, so someone somewhere is censoring things.
If there is a censor, then there is a control over the release/flow of information.
Thus, whereas it may seem that Snowden is in Russia because of a series of accidents or circumstances outside of his control, that could be by calculated design.
If it was by calculated design, then someone was the designer, and someone implemented the design.
Thus Snowden may be in exactly the place he was supposed to have ended up in at the outset.

I wouldn't put anything past the US NSA/SS administration.

My head is hurting. I think I shall go for a cup of tea and a lie-down now...

superboyac · « **Reply #622 on:** August 07, 2014, 11:54 AM »

Interesting.
Of course, this could presumably all be a deliberately manufactured "fog".
If it is a manufactured fog, then someone is controlling the fog generator.
If Snowden really did leak the stuff he is supposed to have done, we have certainly only been allowed to see certain bits of it, so someone somewhere is censoring things.
If there is a censor, then there is a control over the release/flow of information.
Thus, whereas it may seem that Snowden is in Russia because of a series of accidents or circumstances outside of his control, that could be by calculated design.
If it was by calculated design, then someone was the designer, and someone implemented the design.
Thus Snowden may be in exactly the place he was supposed to have ended up in at the outset.

I wouldn't put anything past the US NSA/SS administration.

My head is hurting. I think I shall go for a cup of tea and a lie-down now...

-IainB (August 07, 2014, 11:37 AM)

I don't know if it's true, but it was awesome!! Good one Iain.

Stoic Joker · « **Reply #623 on:** August 08, 2014, 02:31 PM »

While only tangentially related, I didn't want to start another thread for this.

"We are going to make [Cisco] equipment very difficult to tamper with," Chambers said in a recent interview with CRN. "We are going to ship it with a lot of information on it, and we are going to say 'How do we do this better than anyone else?'"

Cisco will alert customers at any sign of their Cisco equipment having been compromised, Chambers added.

"If we find anyone -- doesn't matter if it's hackers or governments -- involved in any of our customer environments anywhere in the world, we tell our customers, period," Chambers said. "And we do that in the U.S., in Europe and China and India. And we have done it."

Full Article

Perhaps only posturing, but it makes a nice line in the sand for the moment.

Renegade · « **Reply #624 on:** August 08, 2014, 08:42 PM »

Perhaps only posturing, but it makes a nice line in the sand for the moment.
-Stoic Joker (August 08, 2014, 02:31 PM)

It's good to hear, though I'm not sure that people can really have much faith in anyone anymore. It would be nice to think that they're serious and genuine.