Deborah Jeane Palfrey filing pro se "Motion for "Pretrial Conference to Consider Matters Relating to Classified Information"

"[N]o one of course ID’d them self as a member of the House of Saud, in such a situation. Folks from this part of the world [the Middle East]–unlike the Dick Morris’s in this country–do not brag or draw attention to their true identities. With this said, we had many, many clients from the Middle East; especially, prior to 9/11." --Jeane Palfrey (personal correspondence with the author, 09.02.2007)

Washington D.C.--This is a major-step in the legal predicament of the so-called "DC Madam," and one that could yield a significantly different version of the last fourteen years of American political and diplomatic history. Under "The Classified Information Procedures Act," it's possible that Ms. Palfrey and her civil attorney Montogmery Sibley Blair will be able to finally gain the right of discovery process in her case (the evidence for-or-against her). In a recent interview with Lori Price of Citizens for Legitimate Government, Palfrey dropped a real bombshell (though not to readers of this site):

My attorney, Mr. Sibley, and I, have very good reason to believe my case involves matters relating to national security and intelligence gathering operations. One has to remember I was in business in a city, which is home and host to some of the most powerful and connected men - not only in this country, but to foreign officials, dignitaries and businessmen from abroad for almost 13 years, from 1993 to 2006. Particularly, my firm was patronized by a significant number of Middle-Eastern clients over the years; most especially, prior to 9/11. I have contended from the onset and have stated accordingly on numerous occasions, that my situation has absolutely nothing to do with prostitution related issues. (www.legitgov.org, 09.01.2007)

This is a large part of why this case interested this writer from the start--it's possibly part of the nexus of a submerged war between the United States and Saudi Arabia, and could involve illegal warrantless surveillance of Ms. Palfrey under the questionable stewardship of former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales at various points (though it extends-back to the tenure of AG Ashcroft).

But we all know that all roads lead to the White House in these matters, where the responsibility for all of this resides. Like most Americans who watched the airliners slamming-into the World Trade Center towers on that fateful day six-years-ago, I had to wonder "why"? "Who did it?" All these years, we've known: it was the Saudi government, utilizing middle-class nationals (a number with backgrounds as career professionals, presumably with access to power), religious fanatics.

Why is Saudi Arabia one of the most religiously fanatical Muslim nations? The answer is fairly simple. It's a form of social control in-lieu of a legitimate system of government, and the regime can be counted as a high-tech version of Medieval theocratic tyranny. There is domestic opposition within the Saudi state, and not all of it is Al-Qaeda-like groups and cells. As Dr. Noam Chomsky stated in an interview this May, ..."people don't give up." That's correct--they join Madrases and terrorists cells.

The individuals joining some of these groups are trying to take down the Saudi Royal family
and the ruling clans of Saudi Arabia in order to achieve their liberty in some fashion. They're keenly aware that without the support of the United States and other Western and international powers, this ruling system wouldn't exist. Thus begins a terrible and fateful dance, because this also plays-into how Middle Eastern politics has traditionally worked for ages: blaming the outsider rather than extending reform to the people of Saudi Arabia and the region.

For the House of Saud to continue their rule, they must both seek the support of the State Department, while simultaneously casting the United States as "the Great Satan." American intrusion into Iraq and Afghanistan is a legitimate concern for nation who has traditionally been crucial to keeping global oil prices lower. One should also reexamine the issue of American military bases in the region, one of the prime catalysts in the creation of Al-Qaeda, a rallying-call to extremism.

The Saudi hierarchy must also correctly view the invasions as a gambit by Western petrochemical interests to control oil in the region. But all this aside, when domestic problems in a Middle Eastern nation reach an apex through obvious misrule, you blame the outsider, and in our case, the guilt is certainly earned. It's not just plausible--Saudis understand better than most Americans that the regime of the Sauds wouldn't exist without the support of the State Department, Congress, and sundry other Western corporate interests. Added to this mix is that all nations have natural competing interests.

This author believes that Jeane Palfrey's legal predicament could play-into this nexus of international criminality and misrule. Particular intelligence entities are likely involved. It remains to be seen exactly how it does, but we could be seeing something akin to the unfolding of an American Profumo scandal...ora Dreyfus affair. Treason could be part of the equation. America could be having a full-on identity crisis very soon, perhaps much sooner than you think. And how much of it would we know about were it not for bumbling old George W. Bush?

The American public has a right to know its history--it's crucial to the continuance and functioning of any democracy. At-minimum, the declassification of information in the case of Ms. Palfrey will protect due process in this nation, as well as maintaining the real world security of the public with various disclosures. This new motion in her case could be a beginning into what 9/11 really means to all of us, not the spoon-fed versions. Nothing less will do. This is not about prostitution, it never was. Senator Leahy, are you listening?
 

Citizens for Legitimate Government, 09.01.2007: http://www.legitgov.org/dc_madam_update_010907.html

SEN. LARRY E. CRAIG RESIGNS: WHY NOT VITTER?

"No wonder why we're going down the tubes."
--Sgt. Dave Karsnia, arresting officer of former GOP Senator Larry E. Craig.

Washington D.C.--Yes, it would be nice to have real leadership in Washington, wouldn't it? Notice that it's primarily just the GOP incumbents and party leadership calling for Craig's ouster? Why not do the same with David Vitter? Because he's probably not working on anyone's campaign....anymore. Well not Rudy Giuliani's, and that was the likely goal--to hurt the campaigns of these runners, the ones running against Fred Thompson for president on the GOP ticket. Thompson, Griffin & Rove must feel that the Giuliani campaign has a better chance, as they've hit them hardest: in June of this year South Carolina Treasurer Thomas Ravenel was indicted for possession of cocaine. He's no-longer with Giuliani. Why isn't 'America's Mayor' hitting Rove & Co. for this? Where are the allegations? Surely, he knows it's them.

The McCain campaign has also been hit similarly. This is the Republican Party eating her own, there's no doubt here. But, by retaining Vitter in politics, they keep more of their margin in the Senate, whereas Craig was probably becoming too much of a liability as a homosexual. Sometimes, it's just easier to deep-six someone who's more high maintenance. He would do as a sacrificial goat, but it's a gamble. He could start telling us all where some of the bodies are buried. Nice job: Karl Rove & associates are running around doing all of this, and the media's being had (again). While American and coalition soldiers and Iraqis are dying for interests of a few, the Senator was trying to score some ass in a Minneapolis airport bathroom. His behavior--it seems--is not unique in Washington.

My advice to Larry E. Craig: start talking.

Rob Zombie's Halloween (2007) review

In 1978, I tried to see the original John Carpenter film, but I was only ten-years-old. Interestingly, the local theater played it again in 1980, as the word-of-mouth on the film had spread and it had become a major independent hit.

For a long time it was the most successful independent film ever made, though the lousy Blair Witch Project ended that record. What can I write about the original that hasn't already been written? It's incredible, and very atmospheric, a favorite, and still pretty plausible and creepy. It could happen. The same could be said for the new version.

Rob Zombie has given genuine horror fans a wonderful gift: we don't have to feel bad about missing the original when it came out anymore. This is equally good and pays incredible respect to the original, and Zombie discussed the project and his take on it with John Carpenter beforehand, something that wasn't done with the so-so 'Dawn of the Dead' remake.

Shot in the same widescreen Panavision (2.35:1), we get a familiar story with some significant changes: gone is the possible supernatural quality of Michael Myers, a phantasm who becomes something non-human, a part of the holiday itself. He's just 'the shape' emerging fully-formed in the 1978 version. In Zombie's recasting of the original screenplay by John Carpenter and Debra Hill (RIP), the focus isn't on the mystery surrounding the killer, but offers some explanations as to why he is what he is.

This version makes the killer and his victims human, and this is where a number of so-called horror fans are going to be split. To make his point clear, the director begins the film before the prologue killings of the original, and paints a more contemporary and honest view of American family life, while setting it as a period piece in the late-1970s (the time of the original film's release).

It's a very vivid recreation of the decade that was my childhood, and it has an aspect of social realism to it, regardless of the stylization of the film itself. It's an awfully realistic depiction of squalid American working-class family life during that era, which I bore witness to in other families around my neighborhood. These are the people nobody cares about. Little has changed, as the movie makes clear, and the seeds are now bearing their fruit.

Rather than the brief glimpses of a straight-laced 1963 Myers family, we see a disaster of sexual, emotional, and physical abuse. This wouldn't have been possible in 1978 to the degree it's depicted by Zombie and his collaborators (if you wanted an 'R-rating' then), and actor William Forsythe (Patty Hearst, Dick Tracy, The Devil's Rejects, and much more) does a fine job playing an abusive step-father to Sheri Moon's stripper mother. It's not a healthy home environment.

What I found mind-blowing, however, was just how well Rob Zombie remembers the cultural landscape of late-1970s America, it was jaw-dropping. From the expletive-laden, sexually humiliating slang of the kids bullying young Michael in a school bathroom, to the music, the kitsch (t-shirts and joke-stickers abound), and the attitudes, he's brought the 1970s to gasping, breathing life again. It's an incredible time-capsule, and it made for what is a great way to adapt the story to a contemporary culture and setting: NOW.

As one would expect, there is a lot of movie history and homage to be found in this film, and it's a real joy, but the director decided to take-up the aesthetic of Kubrick and Peckinpah in his depictions of violence and murder. What's that you say? Read on.

If you've ever watched a Sam Peckinpah film, you already know what I mean. If you've ever watched--truly watched--Stanley Kubrick's "A Clockwork Orange" (1971-72--cut and re-released due to an early 'X-rating'), you understand what an anti-violence movie must do in order to get its message across: it has to show mayhem for what it is, which is drawn-out, ugly, and something that has consequences for the perpetrators and society. You're not supposed to get-off on the violence, you're supposed to be repulsed and fearful of it.

Insofar as violence and murder are concerned, it's well-established that once the door has been opened, it's rare that it ever gets shut until all the players are dead or neutralized in some fashion. Will gore hounds love Zombie's 'Halloween'? Yes and no. They'll enjoy the brutality and grimness--there's plenty of that on-offer here--but they're not going to find the violence entirely enjoyable or even tolerable...that is, if they're normal.

From "The Wild Bunch" (1969), to "Straw Dogs" (1971), and even to "Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia" (1974) and his final film, "The Osterman Weekend" (1983), Sam Peckinpah wanted to show us that violence has consequences and that it is something ugly and to be feared. His message was cautionary, and that same message is apparent in Rob Zombie's take on Halloween. It's not meant to replace the original at all, but to compliment it.

The story-jump of fifteen-to-twenty-years is covered more here--the time that Michael Myers is locked-away in the mental institution, and his time with Dr. Sam Loomis. As most fans of the original remember, it was the late Donald Pleasance who played this part, and exceptionally well. Cult legend Malcolm MacDowell lends the same authority to the role, we well as cementing the anti-violence message of the film by his mere presence, and his performance is of a more caring Loomis. He pities Michael Myers, and in a nice touch, his relationship with the killer is extended back further as a school counselor.

As in the last two Rob Zombie movies, we get a gaggle of b-movie legends: the great Ken Foree (1978's Dawn of the Dead, From Beyond, and much more), the incredible Bill Moseley (Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2, House of 1,000 Corpses, etc.), Joe Pilato (The Matrix, and almost everything else), the great Udo Kier (Andy Warhol's Dracula, Shadow of the Vampire), Brad Dourif (Blue Velvet, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, Dune), Clint Howard (everything), Danny Trejo (Grindhouse, Maniac Cop 2, Whore, From Dusk Till Dawn, etc.), Richard Lynch (God Told Me To, The Sword & the Sorcerer, Deathsport, Vampire, and more), and several others who will please most movie buffs.

But what I found really smart was casting the Laurie Strode character (originally played by Jamie Lee Curtis) with someone with a low-profile as an actress--Scout Taylor-Compton. Little Daeg Faerch as '10-year-old Michael Myers' is the real eye opener here, and he makes the movie very unsettling. Imagine watching a child descend into insanity--I cannot think of anything more disturbing, but that's what Zombie depicts. It's like a slice of Poe, it's the essence of horror. We get to see the process unfold, even after the initial murders, and it's not exactly entertaining. It's truly horrifying to watch a little boy transform into a killer.

Very few films--to my knowledge--have ever depicted a child murdering another child in a drawn-out fashion (think Hitchcock's "Topaz"). The Loomis character adds to the 'whys' of how Michael Myers became a murderer--that he was a 'perfect storm' of 'internal and external influences,' someone with pre-existing tendencies who was pushed too-far by his environment. It might have went in another direction in another home, another community...another life. But it didn't. Rob Zombie's Halloween, then, can only be a classic tragedy that is almost mythic in its examinations of violence and the family.

Wisely utilizing an original score with the original Carpenter themes (albeit adapted) and a bulk of new musical-cues , as well as that same William Shatner Halloween mask, Zombie has scored a classic study in what makes a serial killer while retaining what made the original so good. One could find comparisons to Richard Speck or even Henry Lee Lucas and Ted Bundy. The parallels are there for the curious to examine. A must-see for those concerned about the roots of violence, and a solid addition to the canon of horror. Evil has a destiny alright--constructing its own demise. Rob Zombie has nothing to prove after this film, good job.

THE NERVE GAS VIALS AT THE UN: FRAUD

New York, New York--No, this didn't happen because the Bush administration is in-trouble, not-at-all. They wouldn't do something illegal, would they? It appears that we've finally found those WMDs...in New York City. Small wonder the 9/11 hijackers hit the Big Apple: they wanted their goddamned nerve agents back. Those pesky Saudis, I tell ya.' One thing's certain: if they were nerve agents "from Iraq," they were likely made in the USA, or created with our assistance during the Iran-Iraq war (1982-1988). Ah, that Ronald Reagan and Donald Rumsfeld. They're the gifts that keep on giving! Oceania has always been at war with EastAsia, note that one. Desperate people do desperate things when they're cornered. We're beginning to see this behavior in such acts. Prediction: we will never know the real identities of who placed these vials at the U.N.'s offices. Nobody genuine will ever be "caught." I wonder if SAIC is involved? They're known to handle toxins, maybe even polonium-210.

THERE IS NO CONNECTION WHATSOEVER BETWEEN THE OUTING OF GOP SENATOR LARRY E. CRAIG AND FRED THOMPSON'S DECISION TO RUN FOR PRESIDENT IN 2008

Washington D.C.--As the saying goes: "Washington D.C. is Hollywood for ugly people." Words were never truer when applied to Fred Thompson, former GOP mole on the Watergate committee, and lousy actor, as well as philanderer. No, there's no-connection at all, none.

It appears Tim Griffin is busy-at-work with his boss/mentor, Karl Rove, working to get the long-shot candidate elected.

Question: will they be able to steal the elections again by barring Black Americans from the polls? If not, they're not going to be winning. Journalists and other researchers had better start looking-into what SAIC's contributions to the Thompson campaign might be--one could expect very questionable donations, but since the FEC is controlled by the Bush administration, they have a good-shot. A shame that the oath of office means nothing anymore (if it ever did). Why would the GOP do this? They've never done this before, have they?

Two-words: John McCain (who's part of the game this time!). Perverse doesn't even cover it.

SOME GOOD KIDS WRAP KARL ROVE'S JAGUAR IN PLASTIC (LIKE LAURA PALMER)

Washington D.C.--Hey kids, don't try this at home or the White House, and definitely not on the cars of any Republican incumbents: the best way is to get a potato, a broom, and place the potato into the end of the tail-pipe. Now, take the broom and ram that potato as far into the hypothetical tail-pipe as you can. Next, take your mom's car-keys, and make the deepest-scratches you can into the hypothetical, imaginary car. Also, those imaginary tires are easily flattened, just pick a good, sharp-object and slam it into the tire with a lot of blunt force. Sugar or sand in the gas tank of any imaginary automobile also has a very interesting effect. And never, ever shadow or follow Mr. Rove and his associates you've identified through research. Do not tail them everywhere they go, making their lives unpleasant, as though they were living in a human fishbowl...
[Ed., 09.01.2007-In what can only be described as a 'Jungian-coincidence,' the author had the exact same model of Jaguar pull out in-front of his vehicle just yesterday on his way to see 'Halloween.' It was a boss at a nearby factory coming-back from lunch. Amazing.]

You didn't ask for it, but you're getting it: Baby Zofia!

South Bend, Indiana--Here's an older photo of my niece, little baby Zofia (we had no-choice in the spelling of her name, I would have used an "S"). This is the first-time Baby Z played drums ever! She was just one, now she's two.

I didn't and still don't care about the death of my father's mother, who could best be described as an undiagnosed psychotic. Conversely, when my grandmother and grandfather died (my mother's parents), it was devastating to my family and still is. Family is family, and not purely by blood, but also through behavior. Cruelty has its price: alienation. "Lil" had no friends left before her final descent into madness and dementia, and she earned it.

But this baby is the best consolation we could ever have for those we have loved and lost, and she looks so much like a Blough--like my mother and brother especially--that it's uncanny. Babies are such a joyous occasion, the good-side of life, and her coming helped me understand that life goes on and that mortality is necessary. She's the sweetest little baby I've ever had the honor to know, and this blog is my humble contribution towards making a better world for her to live in. Getting your hands dirty is part of the job, and there's a lot of work to do. How do we begin making a better world?

A first-step means taxing the ultra-rich out-of-existence and ending the legal existence of corporations. It's our world too, including Zofia's.

All I can think of is this baby's smile and her giggles. A natural musician? We'll see, it runs on my mother's side of the family! My great-grandmother played barrel house and juke-joint piano, ragtime, etc., like a charm. And girls can play drums now, it's safe to come out! We're all going to live together or die together, and babies are why we must have peace in this world, forget the adults.

Revised 10.13.2008

Senator Larry E. Craig: "I am not gay."

Castro District, San Francisco/Washington D.C.--And neither was Liberace or Rock Hudson, dearie, and neither is Rupaul. Melissa Etheridge isn't, and Ellen DeGeneres is straight, she's not living with Portia DiRossi. Sen. Craig, they're laughing at you in the Castro District tonight, and every gay community in America...and everywhere else. Vice cops belittling the untimely death of Judy Garland sparked the three-day riots at Stonewall during that hot Summer of 1969 (fuck you Bryan Adams) in NYC. Craig will spark riotous-laughter. Larry, I love and accept you as a gay man, just not as the crypto-fascist nutjob you really are. I hope this detroys your political career and the margin of the GOP in Congress. I'd say you'r a hypocrite for wanting to pass a ban on gay marriage, but that's too obvious. But then, so are you, and you're busted. It's over, and it's time to finally be a man.

WATCH THAT MARGIN IN THE SENATE ERODE: SEN. LARRY E. CRAIG CAN'T KEEP IT IN HIS PANTS, THEN LIES ABOUT IT

“At the time of this incident, I complained to the police that they were misconstruing my actions. I was not involved in any inappropriate conduct. I should have had the advice of counsel in resolving this matter. In hindsight, I should not have ple[a]d guilty. I was trying to handle this matter myself quickly and expeditiously.” --GOP Sen. Larry E. Craig, 08.27.2007 (Boise Weekly).

Minneapolis, Minnesota--Of course, as we all know, this is the fault of Bill Clinton and the Democratic Party. Unknown to most Americans is an ultra-secret program created by the DNC (or by SAIC?) that makes Republican incumbents lose control of their sexual-impulses in every regard. Resignation--it seems--is the only relief these poor souls can find in such a manipulated and highly-agitated state (Minnesooooota) of sexual arousal. It's unclear whether the program utilizes microwaves or ultrasonic waves, but it's said that the victims often experience delusions of adequacy and competence where there is none.

What's interesting is that this story was covered-up. It's the same treatment that the well-heeled clients of Deborah Jeane Palfrey have enjoyed (and are still enjoying thanks to a docile media), in a way that's similar to the cover-ups and obstructing that Sen. David Vitter once enjoyed in New Orleans and Washington D.C. thanks to the Justice Department under the Bush administration (and possibly the Clinton administration as well). It could be that we're finally receiving confirmation on this story because those protecting these politicians engaged in surreptitious sexual behavior are beginning to fall, and in increasing numbers.

Another possibility to add to this mix is that Karl Rove is at it again with his submerged electoral tactics, and likely wants to aid Fred Thompson through his protege Tim Griffin (via "dirty tricks"). It's not improbable that we're hearing about this story due to Alberto Gonzales's abrupt and belated resignation yesterday. Getting-laid with an adult male in an airport restroom in Minnesota appears to be a top-priority of Craig's:

The officer said he was staking out the bathroom at the Minneapolis-St. Paul Airport after complaints about homosexual activity. He said Craig sat down in the adjacent stall and put his bag against the stall door. He then tapped his right foot. "I recognized this as a signal used by persons wishing to engage in lewd conduct," the officer wrote. "The presence of others [in the bathroom] did not seem to deter Craig as he moved his right foot so that it touched the side of my left foot which was within my stall area," the report states. (New York Post, 08.27.2007)

Maybe the Senator wasn't getting at home what he really needed and craved--sex with a man. This is getting predictable and tiresome. He's married. So what? Does it make sense that he backed an amendment that would have banned gay marriage? Yes. I'd say the term "gay marriage" would describe his situation in many respects, but why do these individuals think that if they crow loudest against something that they won't be noticed? Mark Foley was a big advocate for protecting children, while he was approaching them for sex on Capitol Hill. Surely, then, they want these laws to control their behavior in what could be viewed as a classic case of psychological "projection" of what one is "guilty" of.

The original incident happened on June 11th in a restroom stall at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. I've been to this airport, and one would have to go out of their way to get into the trouble Senator Craig is now finding himself in. The media should get-to-the-bottom of why we're learning about this now, though again, it's likely that the Justice Department and local authorities quashed it as long as they could under pressure. Release of the story at this historical moment seems timed for some impact, and eyes should be focused on Tim Griffin and Karl Rove. But the fact known today is that Craig pleaded guilty and is on-probation for his behavior of trying to solicit sex with an undercover police officer named Sgt. Dave Karsnia in an airport restroom. Who sat on the story? Who kept the records away from the media? Why is it being released now? Who leaked it? Is Sgt. Karsnia attractive? It bears all the MO of Rove and his associates.

We're also beginning to hear about an August 8th hearing, so that's probably when some of the mainstream media began to know about this, or shortly thereafter. Remember when the New York Times sat on the warrantless surveillance story until well-after the 2004 elections? They might want to tell us exactly why they did this, but we do know for-a-fact that the Bush administration told them they "would have blood on their hands."

Threats and the use of fear as a weapon appear to have been very useful for the White House since 9/11. Apparently they never heard or read FDR's comments on the emotion. Compliantly, the New York Times sat on the warrantless surveillance story for almost an entire year after George W. Bush had been safely reelected--but it also took the GOP stealing the elections again, partly through voter "caging-lists." This was courtesy--in-part--of the Gonzales Justice Department looking the other way, and through political operatives like J. Timothy Griffin coordinating the illegal activities in several states. A very ugly picture is beginning to emerge, and history will not be kind in its judgement.

Griffin now serves (or does he?) on Fred Thompson's presidential campaign team. Again, it begs-the-question whether Karl Rove is behind the release of this information in some way, since it will certainly do some harm to Mitt Romney's campaign. The Giuliani campaign has been facing similar embarrassments. How much harm has been done to both campaigns is an unknown at this time. The other potential factor in all of this is an unspoken system of cover-up for whoever happens to be in-power. This writer would wager that it's bipartisan in many areas, but falls predominantly on the GOP-side as they are currently holding power. Who was it that obstructed justice who isn't currently in the right place(s )to do so anymore? Why did the story break? Why now? Obviously, the Senator couldn't wait to have sex, and it wasn't a matter of "wait until I get home."

In the Senate, Mr. Craig, who is married and has three children [Ed.-Not his, but his wife's from a previous marriage], is known for his advocacy for the rights of gun owners and has a close association with the National Rifle Association. When Republicans controlled the Senate in the last Congress, Mr. Craig was chairman of the Veterans Affairs Committee. He is a former member of the party’s Senate leadership. He represented Idaho in the House before first winning election to an open Senate seat in 1990 and he was easily re-elected in 1996 and 2002. In 2006, Mr. Craig publicly rejected allegations by a gay rights advocate that he had engaged in a homosexual behavior, calling them “completely ridiculous.” (New York Times, 08.27.2007)

Yes, how ridiculous, how absurd it is to have to deny who one really is simply to get elected, but that's America. If this doesn't clue most of the public to the fact that political and economic elites don't have problems with homosexuality--merely using it to divide the rest of us in America--they'll never get it, or anything else. It's an obvious lesson, and the GOP's leadership will do as much as they can to downplay any of these lessons since it's one of the few methods they've had left to get into office...besides barring Black Americans from voting, a high crime. Blacks haven't traditionally voted Republican for several generations, they vote predominantly Democratic.

But back to Larry E. Craig and his peers in the GOP: besides lacking any sexual control, it appears many Republican incumbents have little-or-no respect for the rule of law. No, it's not just the president. People do these things when someone (the president? the former AG?) has given them the indication that they can do it with impunity, and they hold most of the power in Washington and elsewhere. It's something that's unspoken in the corridors of power. Somehow, these GOP incumbents forgot that they lost the 2006 midterms and that many of their protectors were gone (except within the mainstream media).

It's important to examine elements of Craig's statement released today: ..."I should have had the advice of counsel in resolving this matter. In hindsight, I should not have plead guilty. I was trying to handle this matter myself quickly and expeditiously." Right, you thought that just by being a U.S. Senator that it would go-away, that you didn't need a lawyer. As we all know today, Craig was wrong. He was observed and arrested by an honest policeman. The statement of the arresting officer corroborates Craig's callous attitude towards the law.

...Craig kept asking what was going to happen. ...Once outside the restroom, Craig stopped near the entrance and was hesitant to comply. I told Craig that we would speak in a private area without embarrassing him or causing a disturbance. Craig was still hesitant to follow me at first, but then complied. ...Craig handed me a business card that identified himself as a United States Senator as he stated, "What do you think about that?" I responded by setting his business card down on the table and again asking him for his driver's license. (talkingpointsmemo.com, original arrest statement, filed 06.26.2007)

Said perpetrator plead guilty because he was caught. That's it. There's nothing complicated about it. He's on unsupervised probation until the Summer of 2008. For that reason alone, it's unlikely that Larry E. Craig is going to be running for reelection anytime soon, and that his seat is going to taken by a Democrat in the most conservative state in the Union, Idaho. In addition to this, Craig has already resigned from his post on Mitt Romney's presidential campaign. None of this is of any real concern to someone like Karl Rove or those who he serves. Romney is a long-shot. It's likely that someone wishes only to give Fred Thompson a more level playing-field in 2008. The press should be shadowing Karl Rove and his operatives all-the-time, this could be another one of their jobs.

The original police report from 06.26.2007 (why the lag?): http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/docs/craig-arrest-doc/?resultpage=1&

The New York Times yesterday: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/28/washington/28cnd-craig.html?hp

NY POST (thanks for once, Rupert), wit' da' most, 08.27.2007: http://www.nypost.com/seven/08282007/news/nationalnews/senator_busted_in_toilet.htm

Tim Griffin's e-mails to Monica Goodling from the House Judiciary Committee: http://judiciary.house.gov/media/pdfs/DOJDocsPt7-8070319.pdf

The Masthead was never truer than today!

J-7's sitemeter--Check-it-out, and you'll see a cluster of hits from 'Potomac, Maryland,' or the DOJ. Note the search, and note what they read when they were here. Also, a tin-teardrop. Don't forget to get eggs-and-milk on your way home either. My advice to all Bush/Gonzales appointments at Justice, and throughout the federal bureaucracy: resign now.

HIRING PRACTICES AT THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT: WIDESPREAD PATRONAGE APPOINTMENTS UNDER BUSH ADMINSTRATION? (Repost of June 14th article)

"We anticipate that many of our graduates are going to go and be change agents in society." --Regent School of Law Dean, Jeffrey Brauch to the Boston Globe (04.08.2007)

Washington D.C.--While it's beyond the scope of this blog to fully-investigate this--something that only Congress can truly find-out--there could be connections between "Hookergate" and the U.S. Attorney firing scandal, and they could be legion. Take former senior counsel to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Monica Goodling: she's now 33, but was in her late-twenties when she was tapped for Justice by...who?

That would be Alberto Gonzales, who answers to the president. Goodling--a graduate of lowest-tiered Regent School of Law--hired ex-U.S. Attorney (not fired) Tim Griffin in what could be a widespread game of appointment-leapfrog, and helped draw-up a list of prosecutors to fire. There is ample-evidence at this time to believe they were fired for political reasons. According to an April Boston Globe article on Regent, there is ample-evidence the Bush administration hires-and-fires for political reasons. Hey, that's fair:

But even in its darker days, Regent has had no better friend than the Bush administration. Graduates of the law school have been among the most influential of the more than 150 Regent University alumni hired to federal government positions since President Bush took office in 2001, according to a university website. One of those graduates is Monica Goodling , the former top aide to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales who is at the center of the storm over the firing of US attorneys. Goodling, who resigned on Friday, has become the face of Regent overnight -- and drawn a harsh spotlight to the administration's hiring of officials educated at smaller, conservative schools with sometimes marginal academic reputations. (Boston Globe, 04.08.2007)

Hey, the president didn't have good grades either. He must have a soft-spot (his head) for them. It would seem it's the Bush administration and their appointments, once ensconced within the bureaucracy, who decide on the hiring now.

How widespread is this? Is it politically-based? It appears it could very well be. There have been rumblings about this for months-and-months, but we got an earful around May 7th regarding the Justice Department probe:

"We are highly disturbed by the emerging information, because it seems to repeat this pattern going on at the [Department of Justice] where people are chosen for their positions not for their experience and qualifications, but rather whether or not they match a certain political ideology," Sanchez said. Among those raising concerns is Joseph Rich, a 36-year veteran of the department, who left in 2005 after serving as head of the Civil Rights Division's section that deals with voting rights. "The whole hiring process had been changed to put the decision-making in political appointees' hands, and it was clear it was being politicized in that manner," Rich told CNN. (CNN, 05.07.2007)

Tim Griffin could tell us more about the problems at the Civil Rights Division. But is it just at Justice? This is the connection to Deborah Jeane Palfrey and her case. Palfrey's impressions of the postal agents who contacted her realtor on October 3rd of 2006 appeared to be in their "late-twenties."

Her mother Blanche was visited at her home in Florida on June 5th of this year by IRS agent Troy Burrus...and one of the postal investigators, Maria Couvillon [Ed.-Quite possibly the daughter of federal district court judge Irvin Couvillon who works out of Louisiana]. Her mother had the same impression, and Palfrey adds, "...my mother thought the “kids” appeared to be very young."

Is it a strange question to ask: are hiring practices throughout the rest of our government bureaucracy are the same as they are at Justice (under the Bush administration)? This is an administration that has made-it-plain that they're at war with the departments of our government--could politically-based hiring be of any surprise after warrantless wiretapping?

It's being alleged that Bradley Schlozman (former top official in the Civil Rights Division of Justice) had the party-affiliation of Ty Clevenger (a Republican) removed from his application for employment at the department. Again, the public isn't allowed to know these details under federal law, based on protecting investigative procedures and privacy. The public isn't allowed access to this information.

Is standard procedure a legitimate front (highlighted by legal counsel like Harriet Miers, or even someone like Goodling?), something that the Bush administration was counting on? What's strange is the multi-jurisdictional quality of Palfrey's case, it seems confused: the USPS, the Justice Department, and the IRS (more?). There could be other departments involved, but the question is: why? Was authorizing the use of postal investigators a way to federalize the case? Could the same be said about the involvement of the IRS? Is this how "Hookergate" began:

Lawmakers from both parties yesterday called for limits on antiterrorism laws in response to a Justice Department report that the FBI improperly obtained telephone logs, banking records and other personal information on thousands of Americans." It also found that the FBI had hatched an agreement with telephone companies allowing the agency to ask for information on more than 3,000 phone numbers -- often without a subpoena, without an emergency or even without an investigative case. (Washington Post, 03.10.2007)

This sounds very familiar, and might cover the predicament that Ms. Palfrey has found herself in. Were antiterrorism laws used--and abused--in her case? Many in Congress have been calling for a rollback on statutes within the Patriot Act. We could be finding-out soon whether Deborah Jeane Palfrey was caught-up in this net, but this aspect can only be covered by Congress--or by whistle-blowers.

CNN, 05.07.2007: http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/05/07/justice.prosecutors/index.html

The Washington Post, 03.10.2007: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/09/AR2007030902356.html

The Boston Globe on Regent School of Law, 04.08.2007:http://www.boston.com/news/education/higher/articles/2007/04/08/scandal_puts_spotlight_on_christian_law_school/?page=full

Ed.-Minor revisions added 08.27.2007. FOIAs were filed in July of this year by J-7 on all members of the investigation and prosecution team at Justice involved in the case of Ms. Palfrey. They are pending, but could aid in substantiating if others at DOJ were hired for ideological reasons. [Ed., 08.28.2008--The FOIAs were laughable with no detail on the prosecutors' backgrounds, merely their loyalty oaths.]

The 'Boss' (Gonzales) Quits, and the Underlings Start Shitting: DOJ Revisits J-7

J-7--Heh-heh-heh. The google search was for William R. Cowden, assistant U.S. attorney in-charge of the prosecution of one Deborah Jeane Palfrey. They must be nervous about their jobs, as well as potential-and-upcoming legal problems for many of them. They might consider following their "boss" out the door.

Don't let it hit you on the way out, assholes, especially you twats from Regents School of Law. We got em' now Bubba! I wonder who's upholding the law while these turds cover their asses? Take your "unitary executive theory" and shove it. You're the enemy within, the real fifth columnists.

Domain Name
usdoj.gov ? (U.S. Government)
IP Address
149.101.1.# (US Dept of Justice)
ISP
US Dept of Justice
Location
Continent: North America
Country: United States (Facts)
State: Maryland
City: Potomac
Lat/Long: 39.023, -77.1993 (Map)
Language
English (U.S.) en-us
Operating System
Microsoft WinXP
Browser
Internet Explorer 6.0Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; DI60SP1001)
Javascript
version 1.3
Monitor Resolution: 1024 x 768
Color Depth: 16 bits
Time of Visit
Aug 28 2007 2:55:53 am
Last Page View
Aug 28 2007 2:55:53 am
Visit Length
0 seconds
Page Views
1
Referring URL
http://www.google.co..._rights=&safe=images
Visit Entry Page
http://chickasawpick...mation-on-these.html
Visit Exit Page
http://chickasawpick...mation-on-these.html
Out Click
Time Zone
UTC-5:00
Visitor's Time
Aug 27 2007 2:55:53 pm
Visit Number
20,033

TIME FOR CROCODILE TEARS: ATTORNEY GENERAL ALBERTO GONZALES FINALLY RESIGNS (SHUT UP LITTLE MAN)

"Mr. Rove acted as if he was above the law. That is wrong... Now that he is leaving the White House while under subpoena, I continue to ask what Mr. Rove and others at the White House are so desperate to hide. Mr. Rove's apparent attempts to manipulate elections and push out prosecutors citing bogus claims of voter fraud shows corruption of federal law enforcement for partisan political purposes, and the Senate Judiciary Committee will continue its investigation into this serious issue." --Senate Judiciary Chair Sen. Patrick Leahy

Washington D.C.--Can't you hear the cries of anguish in the Hispanic communities of America? Me neither. Remember those huge parades that the Hispanic community had when he was appointed? Me neither. Like Black Americans with Colin Powell in the 1990s, this writer would wager that not many Hispanic people knew who this individual was before his untimely patronage appointment by George W. Bush as attorney general--unless they had the misfortune to stand before him as a corrupt and incompetent judge in Texas. This is a good day for America, and whoever the doofus-in-Chief appoints, they're going to have watch themselves, because House and Senate Judiciary Chairs Rep. John Conyers and Sen. Patrick Leahy will be watching, and round-the-clock.

It's perverse when the attorney general of the United States is so embattled, and so defiant of the rule of law. What's more, this attorney general has been nothing but an embarrassment to this country. To further embarrass all of us all, he's going to be pardoned. That's great for him, and once more, bad for the rule of law. Congress might consider ending the ability of the executive branch to issue them after this administration (and all the others). History will not judge the former-attorney general kindly, and that hurts for individuals like Alberto Gonzales who have always wished for some kind of immortality through fame, fortune, and power. He might escape with two of the aforementioned bounties, but his time as a powerful man is done. What's interesting is the timing.

September is coming for the ostensible assessments in Congress for how badly the war in Iraq is truly going (not the president's sheltered version of "reality"--someone should introduce them sometime). It's great that Alberto Gonzales praised public service today--he should try it sometime. What's odd is that one can almost see the logic in this abrupt resignation, and that it's going to somehow stop the investigations into the U.S. attorney firing scandal. It will not. Sen. Patrick Leahy is unlikely to let this rest, because he understands--perhaps as few others in Congress do anymore--that the criminal actions of the Bush administration and her associates cannot go uninvestigated, undocumented, and unpunished. The damage to the Consitution of the United States has been far too impaired to let any of this rest. Certainly, a pardon will be in-the-offing for Gonzales, but the timing will have to be extremely precise.

On Saturday night, Gonzales was contacted by his press spokesman to ask how the department should respond to inquiries from reporters about rumors of his resignation, and Gonzales told the spokesman to deny the reports. White House spokesmen also insisted on Sunday that they did not believe that Gonzales was planning to resign. Aides to senior members of the Senate Judiciary Committee said over the weekend that they had received no suggestion from the administration that Gonzales intended to resign. (IHT, 08.27.2007)

Yes, he lies about virtually everything, even when it doesn't matter, and has no solid benefit to the liar. This is what pathological liars do. What needs to happen next? A purging of literally every single Gonzales appointment by Congress, possibly through impeachment. This would include such luminaries as Jeffrey A. Taylor, the individual who was to obstruct justice if Gonzales had continued to stonewall, and the Justice Department U.S. attorney who will obstruct on all the subpoenas still coming for former Bush administration officials like Harriet Miers and Karl Rove. That problem isn't likely to go away, and he will likely have to be removed on constitutional grounds.

The attorney general's storied history of ignoring his duty to the Constitution (TORTURE) and the rule of law first and foremost cannot go unpunished, just as it didn't go unrewarded in the criminal echelons of the Bush White House. The Nation's John Nichols made a good observation of why the departure is occurring at this time: the natives were restless in Congress, and support for his continuing on as AG was eroding rapidly:

A proposal by Washington Democrat Jay Inslee, a respected former prosecutor, to have the House Judiciary Committee investigate whether Gonzales should be impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, attracted 27 cosponsors during the current recess and would have drawn many more with the return of the House in early September. The Attorney General was ripe for impeachment -- or, at the very least, the censure proposed by U.S. Senator Russ Feingold, D-Wisconsin -- because of a rapidly broadening recognition that Gonzales had displayed a blatant disregard for the law since his arrival in Washington in 2001 at the side of his longtime friend and political benefactor George Bush. (The Nation/Yahoo, 08.27.2007)

As Nichols astutely points-out, the resignation is also to protect George W. Bush and Vice President Cheney from further exposure and investigation, not merely Gonzales and his cohorts in the Justice Department. In-the-end, it's all been petty moves that put personal loyalty above the time honored traditions of our Constitution--the primary responsibility of the executive branch, and by-virtue of this, the responsibility of the attorney general. This responsibility was forfeit upon his "confirmation" as attorney general. Watchdog group CREW's statement today also mirrors what most of us are thinking today.

Attorney General Gonzales' resignation is welcome – and overdue – news. His resignation should not, however, end congressional and Department of Justice investigations into misconduct by the Attorney General and his former top aides. Questions of whether Justice Department officials lied to Congress, conducted criminal inquiries to further political ends, illegally fired U.S. Attorneys and made hiring decisions based on political affiliation still merit investigation regardless of Mr. Gonzales' resignation. ... (www.citizensforethics.org)

This sentiment can be found far-and-wide throughout the internet emanating from America today, with few-exceptions. Rags like the Washington Times are saying this is "partisan," but we know they're not the answer to any of this. They're its genesis. Now, it's time to take down this administration. Whether you're a Democrat or a Republican, a John Bircher, or a Black American, a woman, a Christian, or a Muslim, a Libertarian, a Socialist, a unionist, or an advocate for immigrant rights--it's time to save our Constitution and the liberties we all cherish. This can only come about by the downing of the Bush White House and everyone in it.

I'm not a Democrat, I'm an American. I'm not a Republican, I'm an American. It's time to be proud of this fact again, and it's time to make the promises of this nation real. Nothing less will do, and these crimes against our rights and our Constitutional traditions must be corrected. Those who did the damage must be punished, but judged fairly under the rule of law. There's nothing "radical" about this whatsoever. It's as American as apple pie. Good riddance, and prepare to be subpoenaed, former-attorney general. The president's allies in Congress--both Democrats and Republicans--are going to start feeling very-very lonely soon. That's why a number of them aren't running for reelection in 2008. Shut-up little man. Do-not-talk.

"The Caucus" (NYT blog) today: http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/08/27/gonzales-its-official/

John Nichols (The Nation) on the resignation: http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20070827/cm_thenation/1226927

On Pathological liars: http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/08/27/america/27gonzales3.php

The Madness Continues: Another Bearded Intruders Horoscope for the week of August 26th!

Bearded Intruders Horoscope for the week of August 26th, 2007

Current mood: awesome
Category: awesome Dreams and the Supernatural


Hello, folks. We're here for another installment of Bearded Intruders Weekly Horoscope. We got a letter from little Timmy Johnson in Stockdale, Oklahoma. He asked, "Why do you call your horoscope "weekly" when it doesn't come out every week? Didn't you FORESEE this when you named your horoscope?"Well, Timmy, we call it a "weekly" horoscope because our revelations are only for a one week period. NOT because we intend to do one every single week.

We feel like, and we've stated this before, that you people become too dependent on our revelations when we divulge too much too often. And we're NOT psychics (fuck those assholes), we're ASTROLOGICAL TECHNICIANS. We're not "seeing" anything except what the stars mapped out before us a million years ago. It's all there in the skies. And if you ever take that kind of tone with us again, Timmy, written OR otherwise, we'll kick your snot-nosed little ass. And I don't care if you're seven. Now on to your futures.

For the week of August 26, 2007:

ARIES (March 21-April 19): Put things in perspective. Keep in mind that, while YOU might think you're hot stuff, not everyone has that good of an opinion about you. In fact, a lot of people say some nasty things about you behind your back. We're not naming any names, but some things are being said. You may want to rethink the tube top. [Ed.-I know who killed me.]

TAURUS (April 20-May 20): Not just anyone can be the "biggest whore in town." That's something you have to work hard to achieve. But your determination is impressive. In the week ahead you will have a chance to make a concentrated effort to attain worthy ambitions. [Ed.-Enough about the GOP already--haven't they had enough abuse?! Nope, we've just begun.]

GEMINI (May 21-June 20): Trust is a deciding factor. Sure, you lied about that job. And you lied about your inheritance... and your "friends" in city hall. You lied about getting the payment in on time, and about leaving the mayonnaise on the counter. That doesn't mean people don't trust you. If one or two people can't forgive and forget, that's their problem. It's not like you lied about every single thing. Not EVERY day.

CANCER (June 21-July 22): Turn away from hassles. Go hunting in the parks or dark alleyways for that "just perfect" trophy of conquest. You may be thrown in contact with ambitious, hardworking individuals, so stay on your toes. Avoid Scorpios. [Ed.-Chief Justice Scalia might want to cancel anymore hunting-trips with Vice President Cheney.]

LEO (July 23-Aug. 22): Tell it like it is. That "casserole" was atrocious. Being nice to save someone's feelings is only going to make matters worse. It was unbearably disgusting, and the only decent thing to do is to let everybody know so it doesn't happen again. Little white lies will only ensure that you get another helping in the future. Think of the children.

VIRGO (Aug. 23-Sept. 22): Those pictures that you posted online have finally "come home to roost." So you've lost your internet privileges. You were just attracting a bunch of skeezy losers anyway. Get in touch with Slick down at the club. He'll set you up with some real contacts. Be ready for anything. For extra good luck, give a Scorpio a fifty dollar bill, and tell him he's got a nice butt.

LIBRA (Sept. 23-Oct. 22): In some cases, kindness trumps intelligence. Since you're both mean and stupid, you don't have to worry about this. Try to not be an asshole for five minutes this week. If you try this once a week, for a year, you MIGHT be able to bump it up to six minutes. With determination, you might even make a friend someday. We all have to live with you, so let someone know if they can help. [Ed.-It ain't easy being the president.]

SCORPIO (Oct. 23-Nov. 21): Perfectionism can affect your reputation in a favorable way. Since you're about as close to perfect as one can get, you should have smooth sailing, as per usual. Look out for Cancer people (they're acting weird this month), and make friends with a Virgo (it might pay off).

SAGITTARIUS (Nov. 22- Dec. 21): You'll be slapped in the face with bird shit some time very soon. Do not try to avoid your fate, it will only make things worse. For example, if you try to stay inside, a bird might get inside your home and shit all over your sofa, as well as your face. Just take it. There's nothing you can do. Also, be prepared for a new nickname.

CAPRICORN (Dec. 22-Jan. 19): Call someone's bluff. Just because they have a bunch of tattoos, and work as a dishwasher, that's not evidence that they really went to prison. He's probably just some weak, lying coward. Let him know you're on to him, and you're just the one to show him who's boss. Even if he really has been to prison, he'll respect that. [Ed.-Alberto Gonzales's new job will be a rough transition, yes.]

AQUARIUS (Jan. 20-Feb. 18): Accept an invitation, and you will be treated like family. Unfortunately for you, it's not the kind of family you would ever WANT to be a part of. Everything seems nice and innocent at first, but after dinner, the skeletons come out of the closet. Take a compass. [Ed.-CHARLIEEEEEE!!!!!!!]

PISCES (Feb. 19-March 20): You're being watched. You can feel it. The hot feeling on the back of your neck. Someone is following you, keeping track of everything you do. Preparing for some kind of awful conclusion. Don't say I didn't warn you. [Ed.-Well yeah, look at the site meter, ferchrissakes. And now, my new song is called 'CIA Heart-Attack (Killed by Death)]


IF YOUR BIRTHDAY IS THIS WEEK: Treat yourself to some awesome music. Just go to www.myspace.com/beardedintruders. Their songs can be downloaded for free, and it's all totally over the top. Check it out. You'll fall in love and have a new reason to live after you hear some Bearded Intruders. You're Welcome! and Happy Birthday!

Riding the Privatization Wave: SAIC Scores Another Navy Contract

McLean,Virginia/San Diego, California/Norfolk,Virginia/Washington D.C.--J-7 doesn't contend that brother Ron and brother Gary Roughead had anything whatsoever to do with this contract:

Government contractor SAIC Inc. said Thursday it received a contract, worth more than $473 million if all options are exercised, to provide engineering and support services to the Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center in San Diego. The support includes command, control, communications, computers and intelligence programs for sea, land, air and foreign military sales, the company said. (AP, 08.16.2007)

Nothing here, move along. Nothing to do with Duke Cunningham or any related or similar activities here. You think SAIC services Saudi Arabia on anything? Sorry, you can't ask those questions. Keep your opinions and analysis to yourselves, leave it to the experts and professionalized journalists, they know best. They know what's proper and good for all of us.

And brother Ron's call to Pamela Martin & Associates in 2005--that had nothing to do with any defense contracts whatsoever, there's no possibility whatsoever that it resembles Cunningham's and Brent Wilkes's procurement of prostitutes for CIA contracts (spanning the years 2002-2005) in DC. No, let's just focus on the politicians while these folks get to hide in the shadows. And there's no connection that Wilkes worked out of San Diego, where SAIC's headquarters is, not even tangential. The press isn't ignoring these potential connections either, and are doing a fine job pulling it all together (snicker). We should know any day now, rather than decades later when it doesn't matter anymore. We can also rest assured that there were several other bidders in the contract that SAIC won (move along). And no, if you do a google search of "Brent Wilkes SAIC," you won't find any pertinent articles at all, none. And Duane P. Andrews probably doesn't figure into all of this either, nor his connections to Dick Cheney.

Also, Kyle Dustin "Dusty" Foggo (former San Diego cop, now CIA spook and defendant) is not a procurer of prostitutes any more than Ed Norris (former convicted Baltimore Police Commissioner). And as we all know, SAIC never uses minorities in San Diego to sign-on as subcontractors to more easily procure a contract, not ever. It's a good thing the FBI pacified those folks in San Diego back in the late-1960s, early-70s (when SAIC was being founded), so they could exploit them to procure those coveted defense and intelligence contracts on-the-sly through loopholes. Thank you J. Edgar Hoover, thank you so very much.

AP, 08.16.2007: http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/08/16/ap4026174.htmlhttp://dell.myway.com/

Nothing to do with SAIC or the Rougheads: http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/wilkes.php

The American Prospect (nothing on SAIC or Duane P. Andrews here), 03.30.2007: http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?articleId=12612

Another article that has nothing to do with SAIC and Cunningham's possible connections and similar MOs, 06.06.2006: http://www.sdreader.com/php/cityshow.php?id=20060607

Is Ann Coulter really James St. James? (Apologies to James)

You tell me, man...

"HOOKERGATE," RANDALL L. TOBIAS, & PAUL WOLFOWITZ: THE AMERICAN PROFUMO SCANDAL? (Repost of a June 17th, 2007 article)

Washington D.C.--In e-mails and in our interview, Ms. Palfrey compared her situation as being very much like the "Profumo" scandal, and that it might involve a government official divulging information to a sex worker who was an operative for a foreign intelligence agency (though it should be noted here that many operatives frequently work all sides). It's an incredible assertion, and Palfrey has yet to provide evidence of it. However, this writer tends in that direction as well.

The evidence could very well be in her phone records, and she's currently waiting for a decision on the gag ruling by Federal District Judge Gladys Kessler. She's been correct about the majority of her public assertions so far: just ask Randall L. Tobias. Then, there's Harlan K. Ullman, military strategist and think tank advisor, professor, author, and-then-some. He's refused to talk at all, despite the defendant's attempts to subpoena him. An examination of the Profumo affair is instructive here:

What brought Profumo down even more than his deceit of the [House of] Commons, was the startling revelation that Keeler had also slept with Eugene Ivanov, the naval attache at the Soviet embassy. It was that detail which captured world attention, notably in the United States, where the FBI compiled a detailed report called Operation Bowtie [Ed.-the FOIA link to the files is now dead]. In Britain, Profumo's downfall naturally caused a huge sensation, inflated by the establishment's crude and cruel attempts to find scapegoats for its own embarrassment. As usual, official wrath was turned on those least able to defend themselves. Stephen Ward was prosecuted for living on immoral earnings. On the last day of his trial, he killed himself with an overdose of sleeping tablets. Keeler was also tried and imprisoned on related charges. (Guardian, 04.10.2001)

Tory War Minister John Dennis Profumo slept with Keeler, who slept with a Soviet spy. He might have said things to Keeler that he shouldn't have, and she may have conveyed it (accidentally?) to the Soviet Eugene Ivanov. Do we have a similar scenario here? Were federal investigators looking for something else entirely when they searched Deborah Jeane Palfrey's Vallejo home? What were 12 SWAT-equipped ("assault-rifles and masks," says one source) Howard county police doing at Brandy Britton's (former employee of Palfrey's) home when she was first arrested?

She says the authorities have unfairly singled her out, made up lies, mistreated, stalked and harassed her since Jan. 17, when a team of Howard County officers burst into her quiet suburban home and ransacked the place, breaking her belongings, upsetting her pets and arresting Britton on prostitution charges. “It sounds paranoid, but they did really serious criminal stuff,” Britton says. “They’ve broken into my house 10 or 15 times. They’ve tapped my phones. They put a tail on me and follow me everywhere.” (examiner.com, 10.26.2006)

That sounds like overkill for a woman who was anonymously accused of soliciting sex.What were they looking for? Was it an e-mail or document(s) relating to a scenario much like that between War Minister Profumo and Christine Keeler? Who is the Christine Keeler in this case? Who is/are the Profumo(s)? This leads us to...

Paul Wolfowitz's recent scandal could very well be connected to all of this: was his "girlfriend" really his beau? What is the entire background of Shaha Ali Riza? Could she be a deep cover agent for a Middle Eastern nation? There appears to be some smoke here, and it behooves us to ask the question of whether Wolfowitz compromised himself by uttering national security secrets in the presence of Ali Riza, and maybe others--could this be the real heart of this whole scandal?

Is there a connection between Wolfowitz and Tobias in all of this? Is there a connection between them and their "concerns" over the international sex trade and human trafficking? Gulf state nations like Saudi Arabia are notorious violators of such international agreements, importing sex-slaves from the region, including Southeast Asia, South Korea, and Africa. Read on.

Amazingly, the world press and everyone but the American public knew that Wolfowitz's girlfriend already worked at the World Bank before his appointment, and were reporting it widely:

There is Republican pressure to reform the World Bank so that it becomes more of a facilitator for private-sector involvement and less of a direct intervener. Mr Wolfowitz’s girlfriend, Shaha Ali Riza, works at the World Bank. Ms Riza, who was born in Tunis and grew up in Saudi Arabia, is an ardent proponent of spreading democratic rights throughout the Arabic world. Her low-key presence in Mr Wolfowitz’s life surprises critics, who assert that he masterminds a Zionist conspiracy from the Pentagon. (The Times, 03.17.2005)

Again, this was even before Wolfowitz was appointed World Bank President. Someone might want to ask Ms. Ali Riza if she's ever worked for the Saudi General Intelligence Directorate under Prince Turki al-Faisal (once Saudi Arabia's ambassador to the United States, Great Britain, and Ireland). How did Shaha Ali Riza--a British subject at the time--obtain security clearances for the State Department and the Pentagon? Is she a triple-agent? No answers appear to be forthcoming here.

Of course, much of this is connected to late-April of this year, when the Wolfowitz/World Bank scandal broke. Paul Wolfowitz had--and still has--many detractors, but there was an odd "defender": former U.S. Attorney and international law and diplomacy prof at John Hopkins, Ruth Wedgwood. Her own location puts her very close geographically to the death of Brandy Britton, as well as what could be a sprawling web-of-corruption in Baltimore involving prostitution, police corruption at the highest-levels, political warfare, and much more. Where does Wedgwood fit into all of this? On April 17th, 2007, she did something peculiar: she wrote a defense of World Bank President Paul Wolfowitz for the L.A. Times called "The Wolfowitz non-story."

The authors of this acrid affair have nakedly forgotten the standards of fairness and due process owed Riza, who is a member of the bank staff association and entitled to its fiduciary protections. And the scandal-mongers have recklessly ignored a written record of bank documents that serves not to condemn but to exculpate Wolfowitz. (L.A. Times, 04.17.2007)

Oddly, a number of the facts she trots-out in the opinion piece tends towards the thesis that Ali Riza has an intelligence background. As we all know now, she was wrong about Wolfowitz on several counts, and hid her credentials as a staunch-supporter and beneficiary of the Bush administration (they appointed her as an Assistant U.S. Attorney) and Wolfowitz.

Wedgwood's article is a smokescreen, and her credibility is in-question. A reply was in-the-offing, and it came to the L.A. Times on April 30th from "Islamic Law expert and photojournalist" Sarah Whalen after angry readers pointed-out Wedgwood's connections to the Bush administration and the embattled World Bank President:

Ordinarily, expert opinions by former assistant U.S. attorneys like Wedgwood count for something. But Wedgwood, sputtered one angered reader, is biased. "For the Times to publish her column without disclosing her close ties to the Bush administration is inexcusable," scolded reader Gerald Shea. ...Wedgwood should address the real legal question facing Wolfowitz and Shaha: How did Shaha, a Libyan national with British citizenship, get her Pentagon and U.S. State Department security clearances? Sidney Blumenthal first raised this issue in his recent Guardian article, "Wolfowitz Sinking Into Endless Scandal." Shaha needed security clearances for her Wolfowitz-engineered "leave of absence" from the World Bank to her consulting job at Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) [Ed.-This is the same intel contractor who employs Ron Roughead, found in the phone records of Pamela Martin & Associates. Emphasis added] and later to her State Department job. But she apparently didn't have them. "Who intervened?" Blumenthal asks. (L.A. Times, 04.30.2007)

That's right, who allowed Shaha Ali Riza those security clearances? When we know their name(s), they're going to be leaving office. Perhaps they already have--in-part--in the person of Paul D. Wolfowitz...and possibly Randall L. Tobias. It's important to put your middle-initial in there to at least look and sound prominent. Merely sleeping with a woman does not explain Tobias's immediate departure from the State Department. What generates and motivates these kinds of scandals and the usage of "honey traps"? Usually, overarching national and strategic-aims...

Saudi Arabia has been concerned about the status of the several break-away Republics in Central Asia which are primarily Muslim. They also provide pipeline routes and sources of oil and natural gas. The aims of all of this--employing someone like Shaha Ali Riza in deep cover--would be to ascertain what the State Department's and the Pentagon's planning on these regions would entail. Whether he knew it or not, Paul Wolfowitz might have allowed a spy for MI6/MI1c/SIS/the Saudi Intelligence Directorate/etc. to have extraordinary access and clearance within these institutions. This could be some of that context:

At the same time, members of the ruling dynasty, including the directors of several big oil companies and high-ranking officers of the General Intelligence Service, were pursuing clearly practical aims. They viewed Central Asia as part of a larger region, stretching from Pakistan in the South, to the Russian Caucasus in the North. Besides the diffusion of their influence over the local Muslims, and the competition with Turkey and Iran, the Saudis were interested in participating in a greater number of regional projects for the mining and transporting of energy resources.

Not having the possibility of neutralizing the competition with the Eurasian states in the oil and gas markets, Riyadh relied on getting a share of the income from their future profits. It was with this purpose in mind that Delta Oil Company developed its activity in Afghanistan; Gulf Star company and Dallah al-Baraka Group did the same in Kazakhstan; and the Caucasian Investment Bank was established for developing work in the Caucasus (with the help of the commercial structures belonging to the Saudi billionaire, Adnan Khashoggi). Pakistani partners were actively helping the Saudis to attain their goals. (axisglobe.com, 11.30.2005)

Is this a segment of "hookergate's" genesis? Sources are telling me that it could be. Was Shaha Ali Riza a sex worker? Did she have connections to these channels? "On December 11th, 2006, then-ambassador Prince Turki al-Faisal left his post "after 15 months." ('Saudi Ambassador Abruptly Resigns, Leaves Washington." (Washington Post, 12.12.2006) Is there a connection? More later.

The Guardian on the Profumo affair (2001): http://politics.guardian.co.uk/politicspast/story/0,9061,471383,00.html

The Washington Post on the suicide of Brandy Britton (and a curious admission on their part),01.30.2007: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/29/AR2007012900654.html

The Times on Shaha Ali Riza, March 17, 2005: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article429379.ece

"Complete 911 Timeline": http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline

The L.A. Times' "Wedgwood piece," 04.17.2007: http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-oe-wedgwood17apr17,1,4026819.story

and the reply: http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oew-whalen30apr30,0,364571.story?coll=la-opinion-center

"UNDER THE SIGN OF ANDIJAN-Saudi Intelligence Versus the Pentagon: http://www.axisglobe.com/article.asp?article=506