I presume my time is close to being up, but you're characterizing it as hearsay. That would be one way to characterize it.
It's a responsibility of a judge to ensure that the information is corroborated, that it seems to be reliable. The part that's missing, it seems to me, is there's no one to challenge that on behalf of the people of Canada or on behalf of the person they are trying to withhold under a security certificate.
The other comment, Mr. Waldman, is that I expect the profile you're talking about would be similar to that of a lot of people who are arrested and come to trial. Many of them say they're not guilty. I was just reading in the paper--not to trivialize this--that O.J. Simpson has said on many occasions he has done nothing. I'm not surprised people would dispute the fact that they're part of some group or that they have done certain things, but whether that--