Every large prostitution/pimping/pandering bust is a squirming can of worms. Unfortunately, there are always legal and moral issues galore that continually plague our (the escort) community and they need to be brought out in the open. For the most part, they transcend the usual legalities, topics and discourse that we see on boards like TER.

One of the most pronounced is this:  An overwhelming percentage of clients of prostitutes/escorts have wives and/or children. These wives and children truly and sincerely hate escorts/prostitutes. It is the age old "home wrecker syndrome". This syndrome has been with us as long as the world's oldest profession; and, in spite of the well-meaning intentions of many a big-hearted, all caring, prostitute/therapist, The "home wrecker syndrome" is not going to go away. For the most part, this is the predominate view outside our rather tight knit community.

Now, again, in lieu of this predominate view, Paul was not a savior who kept the poor and down trodden off the streets and provided them with a better life. There are many in our community who know and will attest to the fact that Paul is an arrogant, ego-centric control freak who used and at the least mentally abused, and pressured and cajoled many a naive and unfortunate young lady.

There are many young ladies who would have chosen another course in life if it wasn't for the likes of duplicitous predators like Paul.

The fathers and mothers and sisters and brothers of the young ladies who succumb to the enticements of arrogant, ego-centric control freaks, like Paul, truly, sincerely and passionately hate him and his entire ilk...

It is a fact that the general public is not on the defendant’s side. RICO, the Mann act and the IRS notwithstanding, Paul got rich from the labors of working girls who sold sex. That is against the law. It’s just that simple...

He will go to jail for a very long time.

PEACE,

Sheika Fatima
[email protected]



-- Modified on 10/26/2008 5:51:00 PM

You have kept your identity, and thus your role in this industry, secret for years.  Some think you're a hobbyist.  Nobody believes you're a provider.

In the end, though, you are no more knowledgeable than crusty old Dave of Phoenix...repeating what you've been told, perhaps 2nd or 3rd hand...without any real knowledge.  You post your opinions and assumptions as though they were facts.  You are a rumor monger and now a stirrer up of worry and trouble.  If you supposedly want to benefit the providers in this community, since Paul is gone, why harm those who are still here trying to work (including those who worked for Paul!) by again raising the specter of the bust and depressing hobbyists' interest in getting active?

I'm no apologist for Paul & Co., but I can't sit silent when someone like you posts something like this that you purely pulled out of your ass.

-- Modified on 10/27/2008 7:41:15 AM

There are still those out there that have the same business (as Paul) and you choose not to FLAME them. Only a coward picks a fight with someone who can not defend themselves. I never heard a thing about Paul from you  when he was active on the board.
That's my view!

I never heard much good about Paul, but this hobby is a TWO way street. Abaz, your post is tired, old, and adds no new info, or insight.




-- Modified on 10/27/2008 10:49:21 AM

I think it is naive to believe that Providers are responsible for the demise of a marriage.  First, I've been male all of my life, and from my experience, I can assure you of a couple of things.  One is that men want sex with attractive women.  This is so blatantly obvious that it seems a waste of time even to point it out.  Another thing of which you can be sure is that, whether there are Providers or not, men will FIND sex with attractive women.  We are biologically programmed for it, which is why we have a population of nearly 6 billion.  To suggest that the marriage would have been saved if there had been no Provider is tantamount to suggesting that no one would have been killed in auto accidents had Ford not invented the car.  It's true, but it's pointless to make the argument.  We need cars in order to survive, and we will always have them.
Next, it's just as absurd to think that there will ever be a time when there are NOT Providers.  In one form or another, all women sell sex anyway.  Some want dinner and a movie, or many such experiences, some want long term relationships, and some want marriage, but all of them want something in exchange for sex.  No woman gives it away.  Even women who seem to have random, pointless sex gain something from the experience, or they wouldn't do it.
Finally, there is an advantage to the family in having Providers.  While it would be ideal if all marriages were happy ones and no husband ever wanted sex with anyone but his wife, that is not the way the world works.  If a married man sees a Provider, you may be sure the marriage had problems, probably sexual ones, in the first place.  When he sees a Provider, it's usually a one time occurrence.  He isn't in love with her, he's not going to run away with her, he is simply satisfying desires with her.  If, however, no Provider is available, he will still find a woman with whom to have his extra-marital affair, but now the situation becomes much worse.  Now  he may well run away with her, and, even if he doesn't his feelings will be divided from his wife.  He will almost surely develop feelings for this other woman, and everything is worse than it would have been had he simply gone to a Provider and gotten it done.
As far as Paul goes, I'm not competent to comment about Paul personally. I do think, though, that you level charges against him without providing even anecdotal evidence, and I find that reprehensible.  I have no idea whether he is arrogant or a control freak, and I don't think that's relevant to the bust.  If he broke some laws, then that's for the courts to decide, not us.  The character assassination, however, is uncalled for, and, possibly, unjust.
You suggest that had it not been for Paul, the girls who worked for him would never have gotten into this line of work, and I submit there is no way to know that.  I don't know, and neither do you, what causes a girl to become a Provider, but I would suspect it has something to do with money.  Studies may well have been done about what happens in many situations, and there may be explanations for general reasons girls make that choice, but none of those are specific to the women who worked for Paul, and I don't know how you could know what effect, if any, Paul had on their decisions.  To attack someone who is not here for things he may or may not have done, again, seems to me to be uncalled for.
Should you have new information to share, I would be happy to read it.  If, however, all you wish to do is to condemn without facts to support the particular charges you level, I would urge you to do so elsewhere.
Just my opinion, for whatever little it may be worth.

Maybe sheika wanted to dig this up one more time for Halloween and parade it around like a zombie.

you are the frontrunner for most idiotic post of the year.  Even better news, you've set the bar high enough that you will likely get the award, esp. with only 2 months remaining. I doubt anyone has it in them to surpass you.  With your conjecture, baseless opinions, and cowardice of piling on after the fact, you've indeed become the one to beat.  I know nothing about Paul at all, and I suspect you don't either.  I honestly  thought you had more class than this.
And here I thought constantly talking in the 3rd person was your most irritating trait....boy was I wrong.

The Sheika’s consistent theme has been that ladies in the escort trade have been exploited by men who physically and mentally abused them. Whether she has previously named names I would not know, but the guilty would know who she has been talking about.

           As to this particular guy, if you read the public information concerning the charges, you would conclude that he might be a scary guy so it is common sense –not a lack of courage – to refrain from calling him out personally. So the criticism from Newbrew and Piranhad on this point is not well founded.

          As to Overcafeinated’s criticism that the Sheika has “concealed her identity,” (a) all posters on this Board conceal their identity; (b) she could have posted under an alias had she wanted to conceal her handle and avoid scurrilous attacks like she has received but she did not: and (c) what difference does it make if she is simply advancing her opinions? Nor does she (or I for that matter) have any obligation to disclose whether she is a hobbyist or provider or neither.

         As to the allegations that she is just “stirring up trouble,” another way you could say this is – she is trying to stimulate dialogue on an important issue.  
       
      Piranhad seems particularly off base with his comments. While I agree with your comments in the abstract, they are not responsive to her post. She never said “providers are responsible for the demise of a marriage.” So you lost me with the entire first half of your commentary.

         And while I agree with you that she should have a factual basis to make her charges against this guy: 1. much of this information is in published accounts; and 2 she says that many in the community have personal knowledge of the misdeeds she alleges. So she does have a factual basis for the charges.
       
       At the end of the day, is there anything in her post that is factually untrue? Not that I can see. Does she speculate on some issues such as whether the girls would have become providers? Of course she does but so what?


         I am not an apologist for this lady. I have disagreed with her on this Board on several occasions in the past. I just think she deserves better criticism than what she has received so far.


         Come on guys – if you are going to fire your guns, you should at least aim them first.

your just compostionally kicking paul in the nuts while he's down. this post solves nothing and really adds nothing new to the discussion.

theres a place for verbal masturbation on the board. however your post doesnt just get you off it shoots dna over a bunch of folks who didnt deserve to get caught in a bukakke shower.

Personally im too much of a libertarian to worry about the decisions of other adults. I usually just assume they can make their own decisions for good or ill. I also assume they have the moral fiber to accept the consequences of those decisions be they good or foul.

Why your judging the actions of anyone else is mystifying to me. There are always issues in a situation where power is exchanged or pussy for that matter.

I certainly am not so presumptious to think i can solve the problems of the average working girl so i cant understand why you think you can.

finally, im more concerned about the plight of the abused women on the street and in the shadows giving 10 dollar blowjobs for another rock.
they are the ones in need of my pity rather than a young lady of above average.
attractiveness pulling 15k a week taxfree.
selling something they will probably be giving away free to some lucky bastard in the fullness of time.

since your first post ever was back 5/1/08 when you were in mr/mrs 3rd persons corner. In seems a little strange that you come from nowhere with no reviews and nobody knows you outside the fact that you popped up after the bust and you take this persons side at any occasion.

The lack of courage that I am stating (since you misinterpret the obvious), is the the fact that Paul is not able to defend himself and none of this was said about him when he was on the board. These attacks this way is a display of a coward.

Your sole role on this board has been nothing other than this persons minion.

I have never met this lady nor corresponded with her except on the public board. I have defended when I felt she was right and criticized her when I disagreed with her post.

       Most notably, she in my judgment unfairly criticized Texas Toast -who in my view makes intelligent and informative posts -  one time and I took her to task for that.

      I post primarily on the Vegas and Legal Corner Board and have never even been to Phoenix, so I am clearly not minding my own business here and it is fair to criticize me for that.

But rest assured my defense of her is in good faith and at arm's length.

       I did understand your point about this guy not being able to defend himself since he is legal jeopardy. And frankly I personally am not in favor of kicking a guy when he is down, even if he is charged with a number of felonies.


        But my response was she has consistently called out men who abuse the ladies, as shecontends he has done. I doubt he ever responded to these challenges when he was free to do so.

         Nothing wrong with your defending him and attacking her. And nothing wrong with my defending her.

Your comments actually have little to do with the "bust" and are (as others have pointed out) misguided.

My earlier comments were specific to the realities of the bust. If you cant talk about it and quantify the relative risks then business freezes. Once you recognize and evaluate the risks then you can act accordingly and move on. The fundamental dangers are over, if your caught up in it then thats how it is, otherwise its over and life goes on.

The US is the only 1st world country with the draconian laws on prostitution we have. Exploitation is one thing but freedom of choice is something else entirely. The real issue here is simple, illegal prostitution is big business and makes tons of money...just like illegal betting.

I'm not going to comment on Paul (or Scott) beyond the simple reality that I told him personally his accountant was going to put him in jail unless his ego and visibility did 1st. Was he a greedy arrogant SOB...sure...but then again aren't most A type personality guys.

The nature of weapons found clearly indicates and reflects the realities of an illegal enterprise that generates a lot of cash. Crossing anyone active in a big money criminal enterprise is a bad idea.

I've met over 1000 gals engaged in "high end" escorting on every continent thats inhabited. Some come from literally dirt poor backgrounds and have gone on to great things. My orginal PHX ATF was an ASU student from Casa Grande who worked her way thru undergrad school (she used to call me her scolarship fund. We've stayed in touch over the years and she happened to have emailed me last week that she was just told she made senior associate at her SF law firm.

Life is lived individually and we're all entitled to make our own choices. It's not my place to judge whats good or bad in that choice, I never met a gal working for any agency that felt "exploited" in any way.

The first post did, in fact, discuss what she called "Homewrecker Syndrome," and the idea that most people view Providers that way.  She seemed to me to advocate that view by pointing it out, and the first half of my post was simply an argument against the idea that Providers are Homewreckers. They're not.
As far as the factual basis for calling someone an egocentric control freak, I fail to find any facts that would support those epithets.  While it may be true, I have no way of knowing that.  If there are facts to support these allegations (even something factually anecdotal), there might be cause to attack him that way.  Those facts, however, were not shown in her post.

I'm interested to know anything there is to learn about the bust, and I come here daily looking for new information.  I read her post hoping there might be some.  All there was, that I could see, was an attack on Providers in general and the charge that Paul was a predator.  I disagree with both of those assertions.  Perhaps I didn't make that sufficiently clear, and I'm sorry if my writing skills are not up to par.  
For now, my thought is, let's not attack the Providers or Paul unless there is something to be gained by it for someone.  I'm aware of no one coming out ahead in this thread, and I think the prelminary post is needlessly and pointlessly hurtful.
Thanks for your thoughts.

So that is probably why she's bringing it up,

For the purpose of discussion.

If you disagree with her, then it becomes a discussion but the majority of you guys don't ever post anything except to criticize someone else's post.

Do you really think you're adding something when you're just telling someone that they aren't adding anything ?

Nobody wants to post anything anymore because they are bound to be criticized for it.

Then you wonder why noone posts anymore.

Sheika I disagree with you. I think Paul did in fact, keep many of these girls off the streets and last time I checked being an arrogant, ego centric control freak isn't against the law.

I dont think he enticed women into doing something that they werent looking to do. After all, they did come to him for employment and I've never heard of any of the girls being physically harmed.

There are 2 sides, 1 is Paul and the Divas, etc and the other is the government entities prosecuting this mess.  

If you're not in support of Paul, then you're not in support of the Divas either.

Please, oh please, don’t shoot the Sheika. I’m just the messenger; I’m just a humble purveyor of some very unfortunate and very unpleasant, but all too real truths about the escort trade.

In a simple way, in my last post, I tried to give an over view of the general public’s perception of our community and the recent bust/s. I guess I wasn't very clear, so I'll try again.

Simply put, the general public does not like us very much. The general public does not like prostitutes and they do not like their customers. In the initial post at the begining of this thread, the Sheika tried to outline some of the timely reasons why…

Though our analyses or the issues may differ, I can assure the participates of this board that we are all on the same side. The Sheika dearly loves you all.

For some reason or other, over the last few years, the Sheika’s posts struck a rather dissonant cord with Paul Nichta. They piqued his interest in an intriguing sort of way.

He sent me more than a few extremely gracious and enticing e-mails in which he inevitable would end by asking me out, or to meet him for coffee, or lunch, or dinner, etc.. Of course, I politely declined.

Paul seemed to know some things about me that I have never revealed on this board.

I wondered: how he knew those things? And, for the life of me, I wondered: why he'd want to know them?

It seemed to me, in a mellifluous, honey coated sort of way, the man was trying to collect information to work some sort of business angle. This is a pattern that is all too common in the escort trade and it is easily recognized.
 
Good riddance to the bad guys, and peace and prosperity to those who play the game with respect and honesty.

PEACE and LOVE,

Sheika Fatima
[email protected]




-- Modified on 10/30/2008 1:37:48 PM

-- Modified on 10/30/2008 1:47:38 PM

has someone been convicted of prostitution ?

i thought the girls on here were escorts ?

wtf is going on around here, i dont want to meet any prostitutes.

2TM:

Darling, you are absolutely correct. No one has been convicted of prostitution.

Indeed, no one has been convicted of anything.

However, unfortunately, the general public perceives escorting and prostitution as the same; and, unfortunately, many in the general public perceive arrest and conviction as the same.

On the other hand, we sophisticates of this community can thrash these issues back and forth ad infintium--all those web-site disclaimers not withstanding.

If a client is looking to buy sex, he goes on the inter-net and googles escort, or he goes to a board such as this and clicks on one of many links, or he goes to Eros, or he goes to Desert Divas, etc. I'm sure you know the drill.

Again, darling, the Sheika is sorry for any offense, but the truth is the truth.

Enshalla,


Sheika Fatima
[email protected]


-- Modified on 11/2/2008 1:07:23 PM

-- Modified on 11/2/2008 1:08:54 PM

-- Modified on 11/2/2008 2:51:17 PM