This guy drives me nuts, I can only presume that this post was some last-ditch effort to salvage some credibility, but in his quest to restore said trust, he continues to bloviate. He refers to himself several times as an "Internet 'shock jock'" and (my favourite) "industry’s most notorious internet “shock jock”.

Just like George Costanza couldn't pick his own nickname ("T-Bone"), YOU cannot decide who the most "notorious shock jock" is. Until I heard about your lying bullshit, I had never heard of you before.

Cram it up your ass you self-important douche.

I realize that is a viable strategy, what I'm musing about is why is the reporter asking that question in the first place? I'm no journalist, but I don't think you are supposed to lead an interviewee like that.

It showed to me that the person writing the article was using the "journalist" as a device to get pre-ordained responses from the "repentant scammer".

I read both parts one and two and both (though two moreso than one) had the stink of bullshit all over it. The interview reads more like poorly constructed movie or television dialogue (George Lucas may be responsible here), the second part of the interview is full of very leading questions (possibly indicating an anticipated answer). Add on the fact that the interviewee doesn't really offer any insight into the world of 419 scams, and this adds up to a concocted interview. The intent of the publisher may have been to educate the innocent, but I feel friends that we ourselves have been 'scammed'.

My favourite part: "Do you think that your teachers at school had reported your talents to the gang master?". Yeaaaaahhhhh Right.