gretavo's picture

thanks Jpass

I agree 100%. Still, the way I look at it, it's significant that having not explicitly endorsed CD as a group in the past they have decided for whatever reason that it is now prudent to do so. You are right to question the specific language--it may clue us into what agenda, if any, they may in fact be promoting. I find the word "loophole" in particular to stand out, sore thumb-like. Lapses in security protocol, sure--but "loopholes"? Sounds like they're driving at something specific--what might that be? We might look at their statement in the context of Kevin Ryan's recent series on "access" which seems to have been written as either a trial balloon or a laying of the groundwork for Limited Hangout 1.0™ ...

Reply