Drear BeautywithBrains:
In absence of context and because we have never spoken I have no reference point to your relational model of the world. I must ask you to help me understand how your reply relates to what I said.
Since I do not know you it would be unwise for me to assume meaning in this case. Thus I am doing the smart and fair thing and asking.
How does "proof of something" address my comments about the Spitzer case when we know what triggered the investigation and I cited a source?
Please help me see your prospective, I'm creating a panic? Panic to what?
The Spitzer case is long dead and my list of known "things you don't do" is based on actual study of cases.
Finally what rumors am I spreading? I wasn't aware I presented conjecture however, I can accept being wrong so please tell me so I may correct it?
Most Sincerely,
Lee Dreams
"Sine amore, nihil est vita"
It has been said, hang around escort boards long enough and you get to see it ALL repeat over and over.
Taking this one subject out of the thread below http://goo.gl/roojw to address it, then I have things to do.
MathewRommney said:
The Spitzer case as been discussed ad nauseum, your assertion that the agency is always the reason or was the reason in Spitzers case is flawed.
http://www.theeroticreview.com/discussion_boards/viewmsg.asp?MessageID=211560&boardID=6&page=#211560
Well, unless they have substantial evidence or they can wiretap you and stuff, they cannot do much. Look at all these other high-profile people that went unpunished. Elliot Spitzer was ACTUALLY INVESTIGATED for possible bribery and embezzlement, which led to the FED wiretapping his communications. They just happen to discover a prostitution ring that he was patronizing and spending money. They actually recorded his actions; therefore, he was convicted without a doubt.
http://www.theeroticreview.com/discussion_boards/viewmsg.asp?MessageID=211578&boardID=6&page=#211578
You beat me to it.
Spitzer case was never about the escort agency, that was just a by product of their investigation of him. Then when there wasn't miss use of public funds, they had to serve up something to justify the billable man hours.
" Specifically, the official narrative suggests that a Long Island bank noticed an odd pattern of payments made by Spitzer between different accounts. The payments were not enormous sums and the bank is said to have been concerned that a large number of transfers were made so as to fall below the $10,000 reporting threshold. The Los Angeles Times reports that Spitzer asked that his name be taken off the money wires, which reportedly aroused suspicion. The bank submitted a Suspicious Activity Report (SAR) to the IRS. The payments which totaled up to $80,000, looked suspicious, we are told, and were examined on the basis that they might be an effort to money-launder bribes. This was reported to the IRS in Hauppauge, Long Island, which in turn involved the Public Integrity Section in the Department of Justice."
The New Republic ~March 12, 2008 -
Lee Dreams
1) No drugs and the moment you discover an associate with a drug problem get rid of them immediately
2) No minors
3) Pay your taxes and don't launder money.
4) Deal honestly and with integrity.
4) Be discreet, don't attract attention, don't do TV, Radio or Magazine interviews or end up on the cover of Vanity Fair.
There you go, FantasyClientScreening studies court cases and in the majority of cases two or more of these rules were violated, which according to exhibit A court docs was the motivation for the investigation in the first place.
By the way there are organizations and Agencies in this country 15 to 20 plus years of operation and have never had a legal problem. However, you've never heard of them, why? Because they've never had legal problems and the follow the above rules.
I'm I trying to convince you (universal tense)? NOPE!
Everyone will believe what they want to believe and at the end of the day either you get my point or you don't.
Agency haters will still be agency haters, backpage trollers will still troll and I will be off to have some Sushi and watch some Dr. Who with a Torchwood chaser.
* sigh *
Lee Dreams
"Sine amore, nihil est vita"
..........let's just put this topic to bed, until there is PROOF of something! I do not, and have never worked for an agency, but geeze, you all are creating panic where there is none, at this point in time.
Please do not take up valuable space with rumors, unless you can reply with a fact.
Hugs and Kisses
Drear BeautywithBrains:
In absence of context and because we have never spoken I have no reference point to your relational model of the world. I must ask you to help me understand how your reply relates to what I said.
Since I do not know you it would be unwise for me to assume meaning in this case. Thus I am doing the smart and fair thing and asking.
How does "proof of something" address my comments about the Spitzer case when we know what triggered the investigation and I cited a source?
Please help me see your prospective, I'm creating a panic? Panic to what?
The Spitzer case is long dead and my list of known "things you don't do" is based on actual study of cases.
Finally what rumors am I spreading? I wasn't aware I presented conjecture however, I can accept being wrong so please tell me so I may correct it?
Most Sincerely,
Lee Dreams
"Sine amore, nihil est vita"
.......when my intention was to tell everyone on the board to keep rumors to themselves, unless they can post proof of said investigation. In other words, ladies and gentlemen of the board, do not create panic, without proof.
Hugs, and all the best in 2012.
Hugs, and all the best in 2012.
Dear BeautywithBrains:
I make the conscious effect to say what I mean and not speak in hidden meanings unless I'm being humorous or performing a parody. Often on the boards I make a comment to illicit a laugh or just to have some fun.
In the case of my communications with you I'm being direct and mean what I say. If I felt you were being confrontational I would have said so. My questions were sincere in the fact I did follow your thought process from A to B no more, no less.
Even-though you didn't directly address my specific questions, you did do as I requested and help me understand which was my only objective. You were speaking in a "universe you tense" and more toward the overall thread below. In reality there was no specificity to the information and point I was address in my post which you replied to.
Now that I understand that, ok makes sense which is all I needed.
It was a seeking understand moment, no more no less.
Lee Dreams
"Sine amore, nihil est vita"
although I have always been a fan of your business approach.
Agencies and Independents get busted all the time, usually because the violate some basic rules.
1) No drugs and the moment you discover an associate with a drug problem get rid of them immediately
2) No minors
3) Pay your taxes and don't launder money.
4) Deal honestly and with integrity.
4) Be discreet, don't attract attention, don't do TV, Radio or Magazine interviews or end up on the cover of Vanity Fair.
The basics
Thank You.
We all do not operate the same, nor do we all share the same drivers in or business model.
Dreams/Divinecompanions is not for everyone nor do we try to be. If you never do business with us that's ok, we're obviously not for you or what you have currently is working for you. Either way that is the beauty of the free market system. The consumer spends their money based upon values and principles which matter to them or with vendors they can relate to.
God I love the American Republic and the capitalist free enterprise system of "choice" for all parties concerned.
Lee Dreams
"Sine amore, nihil est vita"
I don't see how anyone can objectively state that the post you criticize was written by an "agency hater". Quite the opposite I would say Lee.
Got a wee chip on your shoulder young man?
HesusChristos:
Wow...
You really failed to grasp the context of my comment if that is your conclusion.
1) I did not say "he was an agency hater".
2) I did say Agency haters (plural) then referenced it with another comparison (universal) as a back handed "what will be will be" in reference to my OVERALL post. I then ended with an implied reference of continuation with my sushi and Dr who comment.
Sorry to disappoint however once again you've missed my point. It is curious how you've done this before with one of my posts. http://goo.gl/9PTtO Three times is a pattern and you are now two for two.
Perhaps it is you who has an issue (chip) with me? In the end doesn't really matter as quote Humphrey Bogart says:
"....I'm no good at being noble, but it doesn't take much to see that the problems of three little people don't amount to a hill of beans in this crazy world. Someday you'll understand that. Here's looking at you, kid. "
Lee Dreams
"Sine amore, nihil est vita"
HesusChristos:
Wow...
You really failed to grasp the context of my comment if that is your conclusion.
1) I did not say "he was an agency hater".
2) I did say Agency haters (plural) then referenced it with another comparison (universal) as a back handed "what will be will be" in reference to my OVERALL post. I then ended with an implied reference of continuation with my sushi and Dr who comment.
Sorry to disappoint however once again you've missed my point. It is curious how you've done this before with one of my posts. http://goo.gl/9PTtO Three times is a pattern and you are now two for two.
Perhaps it is you who has an issue (chip) with me? In the end doesn't really matter as quote Humphrey Bogart says:
"....I'm no good at being noble, but it doesn't take much to see that the problems of three little people don't amount to a hill of beans in this crazy world. Someday you'll understand that. Here's looking at you, kid. "
Lee Dreams
"Sine amore, nihil est vita"