Former DC Madam Montgomery Blair Sibley's account "Why Just Her" now available through internet

WWW--As a participant in some of what happened, this is going to take some recalibration, but having perused through Mr. Sibley's book today, I have to say that first impressions are everything and that my own is a good one.

Amazon.com began exclusive sales yesterday, the first anniversary of Jeane's untimely death, and it's a wait-and-see what the public and critical responses are going to be. Having been "burned" (some of this remains to be seen) by Palfrey on several occasions, it's hard to say if any of the mainstream media or press are going to bite. At 598 pages, it's a hefty tome, but definitely a page-turner, and the public shouldn't be dissuaded that it's going to be a litany of legal citations, it is not.

From what I'm seeing in the text based on my own experiences, they should find a very intriguing story that would rival most pulp detective stories for their twists-and-turns.

Sibley writes:

Jeane became an internationally known, heroic figure for living her life without excuses and standing up to the Bush Administration’s misogynist, right-wing pandering, political agenda. The book identifies the external and internal demons that drove Jeane from an initially defiant woman willing to fight the government to a woman so despairing as to take her own life prior to sentencing upon her conviction for Prostitution Racketeering and Money Laundering. (Homepage, www.whyjusther.com, 05.01.2009)

I don't entirely agree or disagree with Mr. Sibley's contentions of the first sentence of the paragraph, but there is a core truth to it. She really was up against a culture of institutionalized misogyny--a culture that will go to great lengths to protect itself in the courts. To his credit, Sibley doesn't pander to the contention that Palfrey was somehow murdered by the federal government.

If anyone might feel compelled to, it would be him. Good show, and an honorable thing.

But truly, one lone woman actually did have to stand up to the questionable Bush II Justice Department, it's just the truth of the matter. In a way, she was an unwilling reformer. In a Hermetic reversal, Palfrey handily took down the State Department's Randall L. Tobias, just another dubious appointee of a totally corrupt administration; she exposed former Clinton adviser Dick Morris (this is frequently forgotten), and exposed a standing Republican senator as a hypocrite and a liar. Her case made it plain what the legal disparities are in prostitution cases in America between the prostitutes and their clients. Most of the time, the "johns" walk and the women go to jail. Palfrey's case could be the final underscoring of this fact. But the book--by its nature as an account--is also about former counsel Montgomery Blair Sibley.

In keeping with this, there was there was another related action on the very same day of the release of Sibley's book: the upholding of the three year suspension of his law license in D.C. . In just another curiously timed decision in what can only be called a bizarre saga, the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled yesterday that Sibley cannot practice law in the District of Columbia for three years, but with a hitch that might be missed by the layman.

Sibley's suspension is partially retroactive, but the actual suspension will be three years upon its completion, ostensibly in the spring of 2011:

We subsequently appointed amicus curiae to assist the court and heard argument at Sibley’s request. The issues before the court are whether the procedures [PAGE BREAK] employed by the Florida Supreme Court and the Referee appointed by that court were so lacking in notice or the opportunity to be heard as to constitute a deprivation of due process and whether the Florida Supreme Court issued a sanction with such infirmity of proof as to require further review. We find that Sibley has failed to demonstrate that there was a lack of notice or infirmity of proof and thus suspend Sibley from practicing before this court for three years, nunc pro tunc to May 12, 2008, on the same conditions as imposed by the Florida Supreme Court. (U.S. Court of Appeals Docket case "No. 08-7121, IN RE: MONTGOMERY BLAIR SIBLEY, RESPONDENT," uscourts.gov, 05.01.2009)

"Nunc pro tunc" is a legal term meaning that the suspension is retroactive to May 12, 2008. In other words, he's already "served" the first year already, simple.

A review of Why Just Her will be forthcoming at this location. Expect more of the unexpected.

"Court Suspends License of D.C. Madam's Lawyer," The Blog of Legal Times, 05.01.2009: http://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/2009/05/dc-circuit-suspends-lawyer-for-three-years.html

U.S. Court of Appeals Docket case "No. 08-7121, IN RE: MONTGOMERY BLAIR SIBLEY, RESPONDENT ": http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200905/08-7121-1178624.pdf

The official site of Why Just Her:www.whyjusther.com

Official: Deborah Jeane Palfrey committed suicide

Tarpon Springs, Florida--I haven't been reading my email for several days, but this was no surprise and nothing missed. Jeane Palfrey killed herself by her own hand. Not to be outdone by reality, entrepreneurial demagogues like Alex Jones are going to keep digging deeper holes insisting that there's a cover-up. Keep digging, Alex, everyone cranes their necks at a car wreck. At least ethically-impaired author Bill Keisling understood what we were looking at on May 1st of this year--suicide. I'm not so sure in the case of Palfrey's erstwhile civil attorney Montgomery Blair Sibley. Recently, he seemed to be leaning towards a strong possibility that Palfrey was the victim of foul play. Why exactly that would be necessary for his version of the narrative escapes me. Doesn't it seem obvious that the woman was unwell?

The unasked question remains: why was there no competency hearing during the legal proceedings of Deborah Jeane Palfrey? Are the answers in sealed court documents? I'm saying yes. How sick and depraved is it to use the legal system to run a mentally-unbalanced woman to her death? What kind of message does that send? At best, a pretty weird one. This was a witch trial-of-sorts, make no mistake of it. But it wasn't the kind that Ms. Magazine and other outlets are saying it was. Palfrey was a businesswoman, a capitalist, an employer, but most of all, she was a pimp. She wasn't an ordinary one, however, and there's no indication that she was any more abusive and exploitative than any other American employer. She was not.

But her clients were extremely well-heeled, even incredibly powerful. Does that mean they "murdered" her? No. There was no reason to after her conviction, and she was holding a bad hand--there were no more "big" names that Palfrey was aware of. By the end, it was a bluff on her part, though it's possible there are other names yet to be revealed in her remaining phone records. She was playing a very dangerous game considering her clientele. Her crime was telling us some their names, their identities. The common mistake of the press--namely the mainstream media--was that this was all about "big names," a trap that Palfrey fell into herself. The reasons for this error on their part is complicated, and this new report isn't going to fuel anything but the most base and paranoid of imaginations. Proof: you have none. She killed herself because she was disturbed. Get over it, and yourself.

Along with the Jack Abramoff and Randy Cunningham scandals, Palfrey proved that there's an institutionalized culture of bribes that include sex in Washington D.C., and that blackmail is likely a part of a very noxious-mix. In a surveillance culture like our own, someone is always watching, taking notes, and that the implications for frail politicians (and the rest of us) are grim. The government and the mainstream press did their best to keep the rest of us from knowing that what she did was commonplace in the nation's Capital.

The downing of New York Governor Eliot Spitzer during her legal proceedings only underscored the fact that the government is constantly watching and cherry-picking who gets "outed" based on who's running the executive branch at the time. The case of Republican Senator David Vitter's treatment after his own indiscretions were made public just makes the hypocrisy all-the-more obvious. Justice? Good luck finding much in America these days, guilty-or-not. My former co-researcher Monique Rawlings (aka "SP Biloxi,") is likely to contend that Jeane was "innocent," another assertion that I find not only intellectually dishonest, but utterly bizarre.

That's not important now, the truth is. I told you so.

Songs from the Site Meter: Friends of Randall Tobias?

SITE METER--While John McCain and Twitt Romney tag-team on Barack Obama today, someone at Eli Lilly is still very concerned about former CEO Randall Tobias's association with the now-deceased DC Madam, Jeane Palfrey. Tobias now runs the Indianapolis Airport Authority, which contrary to what right-wing pundits are saying, is a major step down from his post as head of USAID at the State Department.

Yes, the disgraced Tobias was once a Deputy Secretary of State, but now he runs an airport frequently noted to have brothels ringing the area around it...uh, did I just write that? Hey, he has to get laid somehow. He and Dan Burton have to get some "leg," give them a break. Mark Foley, anyone?

Domain Name		lilly.com ? (Commercial)
IP Address		40.0.40.# (Eli Lilly and Company)
ISP		Eli Lilly and Company
Location		Continent : North America Country : United States (Facts) State : Indiana City : Indianapolis Lat/Long : 39.8062, -86.1407 (Map)
Language		English (U.S.) en-us
Operating System		Microsoft WinXP
Browser		Internet Explorer 6.0 Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; LLY-US-EN; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; InfoPath.1)
Javascript		version 1.3
Monitor		Resolution : 1024 x 768 Color Depth : 32 bits
Time of Visit		Jun 12 2008 2:56:41 am
Last Page View		Jun 12 2008 2:56:41 am
Visit Length		0 seconds
Page Views		1
Referring URL		http://www.google.co... website&btnG=Search
Search Engine		google.com
Search Words		dc madam website
Visit Entry Page		http://chickasawpick...-jeane-palfreys.html
Visit Exit Page		http://chickasawpick...-jeane-palfreys.html
Out Click
Time Zone		UTC-5:00
Visitor's Time		Jun 11 2008 2:56:41 pm
Visit Number		36,949

DC Madam Deborah Jeane Palfrey found guilty by federal jury

Washington D.C.--It's over...or is it? Is this story ever over? It certainly hasn't been for me since early-June of last year. There will, of course, be an appeals process, but will it lead anywhere? That's unlikely. For the record, I was employed for the defense in December of 2007 to do specific research. An interesting fact is that I was finally paid by the federal defender's office the day the trial began, on April 7th.

The likelihood is that the prosecution didn't want any openings for a claim of an unfair trial and that proper resources weren't allocated to the defendant.

The research was factual not legal. This is why I generally stopped writing on the story. To do so would have been a conflict of interest. I know this doesn't bother many in Washington, the press, or in corporate boardrooms, but it bothers me. And the "Johns"? They get their free-pass as usual. Guilty? It's a matter of degree. There were other players here, and most of them never had to testify, because that's how Washington works (or doesn't, depending on your viewpoint).

It's my hope that the defendant releases myself and others to disseminate the raw-materials we may have uncovered. It's also hoped she can provide further context for these materials. The heat's off for the politicians and defense contractors for now, but a window was opened here. Now that the defense on the technicalities surrounding money laundering, racketeering, and prostitution charges have all failed, it's possible that there's more-to-come. She pulled-her-punches for a defense strategy that wasn't going to go anywhere; that's the cold, hard truth. It's up to her now, unless most of this has been a bluff. But has it?

I don't think that's the case: we've seen very real damage inflicted on the Bush administration and her appointees. There has been a political body count, a record that Congress should envy. We saw the downing of now former USAID director Randall Tobias at the State Department, and much needed pressure applied on Senator David Vitter for his illegal solicitation of prostitutes in multiple-locations.

We've seen people like Harlan Ullman--the military strategist who devised the "shock and awe" strategy used in the invasion of Iraq--dragged into the spotlight, and quite a few others. For many of them, this story is never going to end, and it never should. It should dog them for the rest of their lives. The fact that many of their former phone numbers are now in the public record is a victory. Did I always think she was guilty? That's not exactly the right question.

Does the verdict prove Palfrey's guilt? Ask me some time. What I believe to be certain is this: the prosecution and the defendant did their best to drag the process out for different reasons. Deborah Jeane Palfrey was found guilty by a federal jury on tax day. This had to end months before the 2008 elections, but also had to continue long enough to limit any potential damage to the White House and the GOP in a general sense. Tax day. It all makes a certain sense.

WRITER Knows that Radar and Bigheaddc Knows That You Know That I Know They are Failing to Save Face

"Sen. Vitter needs to do everything he can to avoid becoming a sound bite, and it would be best if he said nothing." --An anonymous GOP Senate aide.

WWW--I'm sending this e-mail off to Rob Capriccioso in a few moments, and these are going to be my last words on this whole affair wherein Rob and Radar's Editor John Cook thought they had a "big one." They didn't, and if they don't believe Ms. Palfrey is lying in her assertion that Sam Donaldson's presence in her now-defunct escort service's phone records has no significance, then what do they really assert?

To save face, I recommend the following constructive suggestion: start doing some real investigating of the people in the shadows who were her real clients, and drop the gossip. It should be noted here that none of this is to suggest that Ms. Palfrey was running a prostitution ring--that's not a necessary component.

What's very likely is that Senator David Vitter and others solicited her subcontractors to engage in acts that would constitute prostitution. There has been no trial yet, and Ms. Palfrey must be presumed innocent until proven guilty under our system of justice (or what's left of it). Go after the leads in the case of Ronald Roughead (and possibly his brother, CNO Gary Roughead), Randall L. Tobias, and Senator David Vitter.

Many in the GOP, fearing political consequences, want Vitter to fight the subpoena or refuse to answer questions by invoking Fifth Amendment protection from self-incrimination. Vitter has yet to say whether he will fight the subpoena. ...Vitter's allies contend the record already shows Vitter had an alleged taste for the high-priced escorts, particularly Paula Neble, so there is nothing he can add that can help Palfrey. (New York Daily News, 11.17.2007)

Of course, they would know, wouldn't they? Especially considering some of them could be--or individuals associated with them--are still to be uncovered in the phone records, and if there was actually some substantial investigation occurring by those with the means to do so. Instead, we get Sam Donaldson rooked into all of this because of some misdialing, but the show still had to go on at Radar and Bigheaddc. As a result, their behavior has all the appearance of being just like the corrupt, lazy, and apathetic mainstream press. While people are attempting to cover their asses, the bad-guys are getting away (presumably with murder in many cases).


The e-mail to Rob Capriccioso:

Dear Rob:

I'm posting this e-mail at my site:

I've read your piece, and in fairness, I am giving you some benefit of the doubt. However, simply because you've done hours of interviews with Palfrey does not support your thesis, and I'm skeptical there will be any follow-up explanations. In fact, nothing in the posting 'Blogger Thinks We Think Palfrey Is Lying; He’s Wrong,' supports the contentions that there was ever a worthwhile story here. It's my opinion that you're not seeing the forest for the trees, but you're hardly alone on this.

Of course ABC mishandled the phone records and behaved suspiciously, that's been obvious since May. Certainly, there is a strong likelihood that they were concerned about their ranks being in the records as well. But what of it? This is the same media that carried this administration's water--almost to the man and woman--and got us into this absurd and illegal war in Afghanistan and Iraq. Do you think your efforts are going to make any real difference?

ABC's not the real story, and Ms. Palfrey confirmed my thesis that there was no story with Sam Donaldson in the phone records and that you jumped the gun on all of this. She has confirmed my assertions in correspondence as being "spot-on." You contend that you don't believe she lying, which makes no sense in this context at all. You need to be watching real clients of her phone records, like Senator David Vitter, Ret. Army Colonel Ronald Roughead (US Navy CNO Rear Admiral Gary Roughead's brother), and even a fellow named Mark Capansky, a former intern of Pennsylvania Rep. Bob Goodlatte. You also need to be looking into affairs at Annapolis, a short drive for you and your associates. You're too interested in the easy fix and the smut side of the story, and the ABC story is very likely a red herring, a dead end. We can all do better than this.

I could be wrong, but you're acting just as ABC did last Spring: only being interested in the "big names," the smut or salacious side of the story, and not really interested at all in getting-to-the-bottom of the whole affair. I assume a lot of this is for the sake of brevity--it takes explaining a story of genuine significance, and the rewards are often meagre. I will not disrespect you by calling you a journalist, as it's not a good thing to be called these days.

Thanks to all this running-in-place by the press and bloggers, Senator Vitter can now be replaced with a Republican appointed by Louisiana's new Republican Governor, Bobby Jindal. However, it's possible now that the GOP's incumbents in the Senate are going to turn on Vitter because of this fact. Will Vitter's counsel move to quash the subpoena? That's likely, but it doesn't mean it's going to be successful. We can only wait and see how Judge Kessler will rule on this.

Why you continue to assert that there is something to the Donaldson story puzzles me, but that's for others to find-out and publish, I'm done with this sideshow. This is a very broad scandal with implications that strike to the core of our political and economic system. As someone living around Washington D.C., you need to start hitting the pavement and tracking-down the real clients of Pamela Martin & Associates. You're hardly alone in being distracted from what is likely the real focus of the story: specific clients like Vitter, Tobias, Roughead, Capansky, and others who haven't been uncovered yet, but who are probably the cause of the whole scandal.

I was in close-communication with Ms. Palfrey during the aftermath of the ABC debacle, and I can tell you that it's more about the people who own the network and their representatives in Congress and elsewhere in the political sectors of this country. Perhaps you agree, but clinging to the Donaldson story isn't necessarily going to get to the heart of things at the network. There is definitely more than enough smoke implicating the role of lobbyists in the Palfrey case as well. ABC's ownership made the decision not to report on a number of individuals, not merely Sam Donaldson.

There were hints very early-on that there might be journalists in there, and possibly even some from ABC--the contention isn't new. I'm frankly uninterested in the quick-fix school of journalism which takes the view of what sells best as factoid news, a rush towards bringing in those advertising dollars. ABC's Brian Ross and his producers fought a hard battle with ownership and lost, and there are stories of yelling matches at the network. That's something to think about. Accountability: it's not just for breakfast anymore. Make us proud and start hitting the bad-guys.

The New York Daily News, 11.17.2007:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2007/11/17/2007-11-17_republicans_urge_politican_to_stay_quiet.html

11.20.2007: PS to Rob--I'm a writer, not a blogger. One might wonder why Rob won't return my e-mails anymore, but I don't. He's already dug a deep enough hole with all of this.

Fun at Wikipedia: Palfrey and Vitter Information from Yardbird.com and J-7 Posted, Then Removed, Then...

Wikipedia.com-I posted this basic information yesterday at the entry for 'Deborah Jeane Palfrey,' and today--POOF!--it was gone! These things just magically happen, like the hacking of Ms. Palfrey's phone lines and e-mail accounts. Then, there's the possibility that Senator Vitter and/or his interns or congressional staff removed it...why, that could be an abuse of his office. My guess is it's some n'er-do-well Republican pud, just some wrong-headed vigilante checking it, becoming enraged (which is always a good thing), and deleting it. Anyway, here's the sum, (re)posted today with some slight-differences, but basically the same:

On July 9th, 2007 Palfrey released the supposed entirety of her phone records for public viewing and download on the Internet in TIFF format. Senator David Vitter (R-LA) acknowledged that he had been a customer of Palfrey's escort service. On September 2nd of 2007, writer Bill Keisling noted that USAID's Randall L. Tobias presence in the phone records of Pamela Martin & Associates amounted to a violation of his duties as a ranking minority member of the Foreign Relations Committee. [Ed.-final version, 09.22.2007]

Questions remain as to whether Tobias's background check was shoddy, or whether investigators deliberately looked the other way, or even helped facilitate his behavior. As a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Vitter also holds a high security clearance. Even while Vitter attempts to weather what he describes as a personal sex scandal, and deflects attention away from his committee oversight failures, more questions are being raised about the alleged procurement of prostitutes by U.S. government agencies and the United States military for foreign diplomats, and others. (http://www.yardbird.com/)
As of September 18th, 2007, there has been no serious oversight or ethics investigation of Senator Vitter. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deborah_Jeane_Palfrey)

The majority of my additions today are of Bill Keisling's observations, and there are others on Col. Roughead in other areas that aren't quoted here. Just a couple other facts like that he was a defense attache, possibly present at the U.S. embassy bombing in Kenyan, etc. There are some indications that Col. Roughead was also involved in the investigations of the Kenyan bombing. Why, one might think he's been part of crafting the war on terrorism from its earliest inception. Fancy that.

So, I went back today and reinserted what had been deleted. [Ed.-I think they should hold at this point, 09.22.2007] I defy others to prove the additions wrong, and any further deletions by third-parties other than Wikipedia will be countered with a reinsertion of what is factual. Be logical, reasonable, and fair--prove them wrong if you can and then they can be removed by an arbitrator (Wikipedia). Just a FYI to CYA.

Interestingly, whomever did the redactions forgot or didn't care about removing the information on Ret. Colonel Ronald Roughead who works for SAIC, and can be found in the December 2005 Cingular records of Pamela Martin & Associates. He called three times in short-duration calls. What's interesting is that the calls were itemized, therefore in the front, just four-pages-in. Did he call collect? Why would he think he could do that if he did?

[Ed., 09.13.2008-No apologies forthcoming here. Nothing to be ashamed of.]

DEAR MR. RANDALL L. TOBIAS: ELI LILLY VISITS J-7 AGAIN

Site Meter--Mr. Tobias, if you wish to speak with myself and/or Ms. Palfrey's legal representation--or even Ms. Palfrey herself--you need to do so directly. Quit delegating this to someone else and start reaching-out and explaining what you know about her case, she could use your testimony for her defense. You're not messing with a child here, and you can ask anyone--this writer isn't intimidated easily.

If it's just someone at Eli Lilly checking on the story and its impact on the corporation: I hope you all lose your jobs from Eli Lilly going bankrupt, you're a bunch of crooks and criminals on all of our backs. The corporation you serve is an inhuman, criminal enterprise that causes the deaths of thousands every year through exploitation and neglect.

You need to start explaining yourself and what you know, your country needs you (not that any of you appear to have a real understanding of genuine patriotism). Mr. Tobias, you could try to be a public servant for once in your storied life. You are not a "state hero," but a very questionable man. You can make this right by doing something proper and correct for once. You can heal this nation. If you know anything about Senator Vitter's possibly breach of his security clearance on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, you should start talking about it. You can be that good man you once thought you could be.

Dan Quayle (the Quayles and Bush clans own substantial shares in the corporation): kiss-my-ass. Describing you as a moron is an insult to morons everywhere. You are a failure and a disgrace as a human being, and an embarrassment to Indiana and the nation. It's sad that you reproduced, but there it is. "Potato" is only spelled with an "e" when it's a plural, incidentally. Now go play with your pal Dan Burton, the adulterer.

Domain Name
(Unknown)
IP Address

40.0.40.# (Eli Lilly and Company)
ISP
Eli Lilly and Company
Location
Continent: North America
Country: United States (Facts)
State: Indiana
City: Indianapolis
Lat/Long: 39.7795, -86.1328 (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; LILLY-US-EN; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; InfoPath.1)
Javascript
version 1.3
Monitor Resolution: 1024 x 768
Color Depth: 16 bits
Time of Visit
Sep 2 2007 7:22:33 pm
Last Page View
Sep 2 2007 7:22:33 pm
Visit Length
0 seconds
Page Views
1
Referring URL
http://www.google.co...m&btnG=Google Search
Search Engine
google.com
Search Words
dcphonelist.com
Visit Entry Page
http://chickasawpick...ber-lifted-from.html
Visit Exit Page
http://chickasawpick...ber-lifted-from.html
Out Click
Time Zone
UTC-5:00
Visitor's Time
Sep 2 2007 7:22:33 am
Visit Number
20,248

"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

A Spirited Conversation with author William Keisling Part II of II

"It is impossible that any deed could have been wrought with a more thorough deliberation. For weeks, for months, I pondered upon the means of the murder. I rejected a thousand schemes, because their accomplishment involved a chance of detection. At length, in reading some French memoirs, I found an account of a nearly fatal illness that occurred to Madame Pilau, through the agency of a candle accidentally poisoned: The idea struck my fancy at once. I knew my victim's habit of reading in bed. I knew, too, that his apartment was narrow and ill-ventilated. But I need not vex you with impertinent details. I need not describe the easy artifices by which I substituted, in his bedroom candle-stand, a wax-light of my own making, for the one which I there found. The next morning he was discovered dead in his bed, and the coroner's verdict was, 'Death by the visitation of God.'" --Edgar Allan Poe, 'The Imp of the Perverse,' 1845.

 

The murder of Jonathan P. Luna is a sprawling case involving municipal, federal, and organized crime entities. It also reaches into the politics of Maryland and Pennsylvania, and without Bill Keisling's book, "The Midnight Ride of Jonathan Luna," we wouldn't know many of the problems with the government's story. Like the night ride of Paul Revere, Jonathan P. Luna is still warning us of the approaching threat...from his grave. We only need listen to hear his warning. He might be telling us where Special Agent Steven Skinner was that night.

Like the horror of a tale by Edgar Allan Poe, the murder was committed with extreme malice and some forethought. Whoever murdered assistant U.S. attorney Jonathan Luna in the first-days of December back in 2003 is still free, running around. A vicious murderer is free. Perhaps they're still murdering others out there as I write this, roaming the streets of Baltimore, and the mafia environs of Pennsylvania. In our second installment of this conversation, Mr. Keisling and I hit on a number of interesting themes related to the murder of Luna, as well as its cultural context.

One needn't wonder why modern horror arose in America when considering such crimes as the immolation of the Dawson family in Baltimore, or the discovery of the mutilated-corpse of Jonathan Luna, face down in a Pennsylvania stream, states-away from his office and home. Central to all of this is the trial of Walter Poindexter and Deon Smith, proprietors of Stash House records, and known heroin dealers. It was known during the trial of the two (on completely unrelated drug charges) by the U.S. attorney's office under Thomas DiBiagio, that Poindexter had likely murdered one Alvin Jones.

Special Agent Steve Skinner surely knew this was a fact, as the crime was drug-related, and required prosecution under federal law. This was Luna's stance, and no deals of immunity or skirting the crime in the trial were acceptable to the assistant U.S. attorney. Where was the "Safe Streets Task Force" when the Dawsons were calling 911? Watching Stash House's Poindexter and Smith, and chasing their informant Warren Grace around. Why weren't the Dawsons' 36 calls forwarded to the federal task force? There are a lot of unanswered questions surrounding all of these events in Baltimore during the period surrounding the murders in Baltimore and Pennsylvania.

Matt Janovic: Does anybody know what the whereabouts of Special Agent Steve Skinner were on the night [and morning] of Luna's murder?

Bill Keisling: I think that's an important question. ...With a murder, you want to know [where everybody was]. Usually, a murder is a very simple crime with people right there, having committed it. You know, for example, a shooting at a Burger King or a dry cleaner's--you want to know who was there, what was everybody's alibi is, and so that's we have to do that with this case. ...

Matt Janovic: So this hasn't been adequately addressed by any investigation?

Bill Keisling: No, and what I'm trying to do is point people's attention to that very question. The family and the public needs to know where everybody was, and it's just unacceptable not to tell us. You know, again, if this was your family member you'd have a right to know where everybody was. ...You know what? We're going to find it out.

Matt Janovic: So, we don't even know where [informant] Warren Grace was that night, do we?

Bill Keisling: Well, a read of the records says that he was being ferried back-and-forth by agent Skinner and [Baltimore PD] Detective Tom Moody of the quote, unquote "Safe Streets Task Force"[to a Philadelphia jail]. And attorney Ravenell--one of the defense attorneys [for Smith & Poindexter]--wanted Skinner and Moody (this is the last day of Luna's life) to be removed from that duty. They wanted U.S. Marshals to be doing it. Where Grace was being kept was the Philadelphia Detention Center, away from Baltimore while he testified. And the presumption is that they were taking him back-and-forth to Philadelphia before-and-after the trial--that is when they weren't taking him for conjugal visits, and God knows what else...to Disneyland to do heroin... So, here you have Luna driving halfway to Philadelphia that night. Draw your own conclusions.

Matt Janovic: I noticed that, that in the [official] timeline his car avoids Philadelphia at some point.

Bill Keisling: It's like it's driving around Philadelphia--somebody doesn't want to be seen. ...Again, draw your own conclusion.

Matt Janovic: One of the things that I found very interesting in your book was that Special Agent Skinner seemed to know quite a bit about Luna's being in trouble, or subdued, on the day of his no-show at the Poindexter/Smith trial...

Bill Keisling: ...And that's a very important point. In the very last chapter of the book, called "No Man, No Problem," the court records of that are the most remarkable things I have ever read. It's [also] one of the best things I've ever written. There are a couple things: here they're saying that Luna didn't want to do this case. He says the plea deal is unlawful"because Poindexter has committed this drug-related murder [of Alvin Jones]. He says it's unlawful--repeatedly. [laughs] There are all-kinds of meetings and everything else.

The two really important things that happen on that day while Luna's laying face-dead in the stream: they're [federal attorneys and the FBI] up in his office trying to get that plea deal pasted together--so that's called a crime scene, they're violating the crime scene. This would be akin to if you or I and people we knew were in an office and one of their people goes missing. They would know, if they're up in the office, fooling around with those records, that they're going to be in trouble. Well, I think the Justice Department is in trouble, they violated that crime scene, and they're pretending not to know what a crime scene is. First point.

The second point is: as you point out, they're mysteriously telling the judge, "Oh, we're concerned about Luna," while they're up in his office doing this stuff. So, on the one-hand, they're pretending not to know that it's a crime scene, while on the other hand they're running around saying, "Oh, we've got to look for him, we're worried about him," when, as you know, the day before, Luna was late. I made the point that he could have been out skylarking, getting a cup of coffee. They're acting in a very strange way.

Matt Janovic: Has Skinner ever explained his behavior and this air of foreknowledge?

Bill Keisling: No, and we need to have congressional and public hearings about that.

Matt Janovic: One person who seemed to be prominent in the book [Midnight Ride] was the court stenographer. He seemed to be more concerned about the facts surrounding Luna's murder than the FBI.

Bill Keisling: Well, he liked Luna! That's the whole point: that everybody liked Luna, except these goons in the FBI. Who then put out this crap--these blatant falsehoods--to destroy his character [after his murder]. In New York City, we just had two policemen murdered in the line of duty, and you don't hear--I don't know of any other case where you have someone in law enforcement go down, and you have people putting-out what a bad guy he was....except in Luna's case.

Matt Janovic: ...Do you think that a part of Baltimore's problems emanate from organized crime domains in Pennsylvania?

Bill Keisling: Oh certainly. Historically, Baltimore was always a pick-up area between New York, Jersey, Philadelphia, and Pa. mobsters. They always have their own home grown stuff, but it was always fought over. One of the things that's documented in the book is where there's Justice Department figures that there are 50-60 thousand heroin addicts within Baltimore, and another 50-60 thousand addicts in the outlying areas. So, you have around 120,000 heroin addicts, and you do the math...that's a billion dollar industry [per-year].

Matt Janovic: It's massive.

Bill Keisling: It's massive, and obviously it's [the] mob, and obviously for it to continue, it's police corruption.

Matt Janovic: Yeah, it couldn't continue any other way.

Bill Keisling: Again, look at the Warren Grace case. You have an informant dealing heroin, and they know it. They catch him with heroin the same day the Dawson house [burned-down].

Matt Janovic: Do you think that that they [the Baltimore FBI and U.S. attorneys office] were concerned about that serendipitous moment?

Bill Keisling: I think it's what I say in the book--normally, this stuff goes on all the time. The Baltimore Sun and the Washington Post are in the tank, nobody cares, so they figure, "Who's going to give-a-hang?" And what happened when the Dawson house burned down is that suddenly a lot of people cared. Luna was left holding the bag, and he couldn't have liked it. He grew up in that sort of an environment, he wanted to help people like that, and instead he sees that he works with people who are dealing heroin that are protecting perpetrators.

Matt Janovic: I can't imagine he would have done nothing about it.

Bill Keisling: I can imagine that there could be U.S. attorneys and assistants who don't care about that sort of thing. But it seems from Luna's victimology, that he would be the one who would be most likely to care about that sort of thing.

Matt Janovic: Right, he had direct experience with it [drug-related crime] in his childhood [in the Bronx].

Bill Keisling: Yeah, and I find it impossible to believe that Jonathan wouldn't care about that. And again, in the book, his friend Dan Rivera says [paraphrase], "Did you stop to think that all the loopy-things he's doing during the trial were intentionally to get the judge to order an investigation of Skinner?" ...

Matt Janovic: During your investigations, were you ever threatened?

Bill Keisling: Ohhhhh, just by family members who wanted me to do other things! ...My mentality has always been that, I 'd really rather write novels and that I'll probably get back to it. I just think that there's a role in society for writers to write about these things, and we have to do it. I've always been afraid of what happens when people don't do this. ...

Matt Janovic: Why do you think the FBI wanted to take-down Stash House records so badly, and allow an informant like Warren Grace to run around terrorizing his neighbors and deal drugs?

Bill Keisling: Well, the book gets into that. The court reporter makes the point that, here they have 100 hours of [surveillance] tape--this isn't 'Gone With the Wind.' ...You need 40 seconds of tape to have somebody taking the drugs and exchanging money for it, case closed. ...Here's what the public should understand: at the very time that the Dawsons were trying to get help (before they burned alive with their kids), the FBI's Safe Streets Task Force was trying to take over a rap music studio. That's what they were busy doing--dealing heroin and trying to take over a rap music studio...

Matt Janovic: But couldn't that have been [U.S. attorney Thomas] Dibiagio's fault?

Bill Keisling: Although he's in-charge, if you get into the history of the FBI, these guys pretty much do what they want. Relations [between the Baltimore U.S. attorneys' office and] with the Bureau weren't all that good. The point is, when the Dawson's home burned down, you have this guy who did it--Darrell Brooks--[and] you have DiBiagio coming-out saying this drug punk's going to be put away forever, but he doesn't mention the drug punks he's responsible for. I think they thought Smith and Poindexter would flip, that the FBI would be controlling Stash House records, and I think it was almost cynical and funny to them that you would have all these young rappers coming in and rapping their crimes into the FBI's microphone.

Matt Janovic: So, would they have just kept running it [Stash House records] as a business, as a front for years and years?

Bill Keisling: That's a good question, and I think the record shows that that's what happens.

Matt Janovic: ...I suppose this is getting into really arcane federal statutues, but what if they ran-a-profit?

Bill Keisling: [agreeing] What if they put-out good records? [laughter all-around]

Matt Janovic: What if they had a hit?

Bill Keisling: [laughing] I don't know Matt! [a hilarious conversation on "mother-approved" pornography ensues, as well as the bizarreness of what government-approved rap might be] ...the whole thing was incompetent: Skinner, Moody, the Safe Streets Task Force, the death of the Dawsons was an atrocity--the public should understand that family burned to death because these guys were dealing heroin, they didn't want to answer the phone, and they were trying to take over a rap music studio. What was going on, and what wasn't going-on?

Matt Janovic: One gets the feeling when reading 'The Midnight Ride of Jonathan Luna," that either not much has changed since Edgar Allan Poe lived there [Baltimore], or that things have come full-circle. Which do think might be the case?

Bill Keisling: Oh, I kinda like your idea that not much has changed. In the Poe case, actually he was found dying just a few-blocks away from that federal courthouse. Now the best guess is that he was a victim of a practice called "cooping" where you would take unsuspecting people and give them liquor and put different clothes on them and march them around to the polling places. The polling place bar where he was found outside of, a week-or-so before (he couldn't have known), but it was charged that that practice was going on there. It was a sheriff's election. I think Edgar Allan Poe might be the most important writer America has produced.

Matt Janovic: Absolutely. I have to ask a question [relating to the case of] Ms. Palfrey. It's interesting that in both cases--that of [former Baltimore Police Commissioner] Ed Norris and Ms. Palfrey, that you have involvement of the IRS, harrassment of said defendent's families, use of "cooperating witnesses" (or "confidential informants")--but in Palfrey's case, FBI investigators are curiously absent. Why do you think that is?

Bill Keisling: I'm sure they're busy doing other things, huh? What I say in [Midnight Ride] is that you don't often see the FBI's fingerprints, they're more like little traces. You know what I mean?

Matt Janovic: Their role can sometimes be submerged.

Bill Keisling: Right. You can see little traces of it, almost like Luna's EZ pass. You see these little clues, and I think that's the way they like it.

Matt Janovic: What do you think is the significance of this new development with Luna's father contacting the Lancaster [Pennsylvania] county coroner?

Bill Keisling: Well I think his father has the right to that, and what happened here was this gadfly went and filed on his own behalf saying he was representing the friends and family, and it gave the courts the excuse to shut everybody out. But that said, I interviewed the undertaker, and I know what the wounds were, and they're pretty horrific. I think that there's disinformation that they put out--suicide, bogus information about Luna's alleged personal life...you put out stuff like that to distract people from what they should be looking at; and what we should be looking at is the Safe Streets Task Force, Skinner and Moody, their handling of Warren Grace, the deaths of the Dawsons--I think that's where we need to be turning our attention.

Now, where it really ties-in with Palfrey is, that in Pennsylvania, in a murder case, you don't release the autopsy report because you want to have information there that only the perpetrator would know about. So, it's a tool for law enforcement to keep certain cards close to the vest, so that you can identify the true perpetrator who would have information about this. That said, what's in-common between this case and Palfrey's is, the Justice Department isn't acting in good faith--as we saw with Vitter and Tobias--they're actually concealing law-breaking with their actions, and that's unacceptable. ...The public can take the truth, the public is smart [enough]. 

Part I:

http://chickasawpicklesmell.blogspot.com/2007/07/spirited-conversation-with-author_30.html

End of Part II

Statement of intellectual ownership: All content in this interview (and all content on this site produced by the Editor), and its subsequent part are the intellectual property of Matt Janovic, sole proprietor of this website. Quotations of more than four lines requires written permission from the author.

"HOOKERGATE," RANDALL L. TOBIAS, & PAUL WOLFOWITZ: THE AMERICAN PROFUMO SCANDAL?

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 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-riles 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 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) 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