SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

   Non-TechGENI: GenesisIntermedia.com Inc


Previous 10 Next 10 
To: afrayem onigwecher who wrote (495)4/22/2003 10:38:55 AM
From: StockDung
   of 574
 
.HOOKERS AND ADNAN "HONEY" KHASHOGGI

"She was also friendly with multi- millionaire arms dealer Adnan Khashoggi, who was one of her biggest clients and liked her to call him "Honey"."

"Adnan Khashoggi called her regularly to ask for girls and he loved being called `Honey'. He would even refer to himself by that name."

THE AMAZING FALL OF HIGH SOCIETY VICE PRINCESS

Madam to the super-rich now lives in a Scots council flat

Derek Alexander Exclusive

SHE was the high-society vice princess who led a champagne lifestyle and mingled with Royalty.

Blonde Zoe Paine's little red book was like a directory of the British aristocracy and provided the rich and famous with high-class hookers.

She counted Princess Diana's brother Earl Spencer as a friend and rubbed shoulders with criminal Darius Guppy.

But ex-society madam Paine's existence is now a million miles away from that of her powerful and flamboyant friends.

The mum is now broke and living on benefits in a Glasgow housing scheme.

The designer-label clothes have been swapped for a worn T-shirt, denims and trainers.

Her new home is a council flat in the city's Carmyle, instead of the £250,000 village home she had in High Wycombe, Bucks.

Glasgow-born Paine ran the Diplomat escort agency in London in the 90s and was the boss of dozens of prostitutes.

Her agency was a favourite with the jet set and her girls charged Hooray Henrys £1000 per night for their steamy services.

Many of her prostitutes would accompany Diplomat's wealthy clients on foreign sex and drug trips.

Paine raked in thousands of pounds each week from her international prostitution empire.

She was also friendly with multi- millionaire arms dealer Adnan Khashoggi, who was one of her biggest clients and liked her to call him "Honey".

She once boasted that one of her clients was a world leader from the Middle East.

But her decadent lifestyle has now collapsed and she's now living on £53.95-a-week income support from the Government.

Mum-of-two Paine was raised in Glasgow before moving south of the border. Her Scots accent has been replaced with a high-pitch Cockney chirp.

Friends say she is writing a book about her sexploits and is looking for a publisher.

A friend said: "Zoe's agency was the most popular in London. Diplomat's clients wanted a certain type of girl.

"The girls were educated and many had their own professional careers away from being call girls. It's easy to see why so many men in powerful positions would use Zoe.

"But it's changed days for her now. She doesn't have a job and scrapes by on benefits. It's hard to believe she used to keep company with Earl Spencer and other rich and famous people. She got on well with them and didn't look out of place. Zoe was never a prostitute and was motivated purely by making money out of running the business.

"But things have gone sour for her and the people she once socialised with would be shocked to see her life now.

"She's spent time writing a book about her life. It will leave a lot of her former clients in a sweat.

"Adnan Khashoggi called her regularly to ask for girls and he loved being called `Honey'. He would even refer to himself by that name."

Paine was a close friend of inter-national fraudster Darius Guppy and attended his wedding to Patricia Holder.

She was also on the guest list for Earl Spencer's marriage ceremony when he tied the knot with model Victoria Lockwood. Friends say the Earl was shocked when he discovered Paine led a secret life as a madam.

Guppy was jailed for five years when he was found guilty of a £1.8 million diamond sting. He paid a man £15,000 to stage a robbery in a New York hotel room and then lodged an insurance claim with Lloyd's.

But he was caught a year later and sent to prison when accomplice Peter Risdon told police about the plot.

Paine's Diplomat Agency was at the centre of a murder inquiry when one of her girls was murdered.

Sharon Hoare, 19, was found strangled in a London flat in 1991.

A murder squad detective was carpeted by Scotland Yard when he made sexual suggestions to a woman helping with the investigation.

When the Sunday Mail approached Paine, she said: "I'm broke and I don't have the same lifestyle I used to.

"But I still have the same friends and know of a lot of secrets belonging to a lot of powerful people.

"I'm not involved in the vice industry any more. I just want to come back to my roots."

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: afrayem onigwecher who wrote (495)7/6/2003 3:31:47 PM
From: StockDung
   of 574
 
A Diamond Is Forever: amfar.org

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: StockDung who wrote (476)1/12/2004 11:46:04 PM
From: trueblood986
   of 574
 
I dont get what this has to do with GENI

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


From: StockDung4/10/2004 4:07:02 PM
   of 574
 
Adnan Khashoggi:Substantial rewards are offered for information leading to the assets of:Adnan Khashoggi
adnankhashoggi.com

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: tradermike_1999 who wrote (440)1/10/2005 12:51:01 PM
From: StockDung
   of 574
 
.GENI Ramy El-Batrawi fans. madcowprod.com

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: trueblood986 who wrote (503)2/8/2005 6:19:12 AM
From: Glenn Petersen
   of 574
 
Financial Commentator Arrested for Fraud

nytimes.com

By BLOOMBERG NEWS

Published: February 8, 2005

A financial commentator who appeared on CNBC, CNN and Bloomberg Television was arrested yesterday on charges of failing to disclose that he received more than $1 million in cash and stock from a marketing company whose shares he promoted.

Courtney Smith, 53, was arrested at his Manhattan apartment after a nine-count indictment from a federal grand jury, according to the United States attorney's office in Los Angeles. Mr. Smith owns Courtney Smith & Company, a money management firm in New York.

Mr. Smith promoted the stock of GenesisIntermedia, which is now defunct, as a "very hot speculative pick" and "very cheap from my perspective" in television appearances from late 1999 to mid-2001, according to the indictment. Unknown to viewers, Mr. Smith had received $100,000 cash and company shares valued at $1.2 million, the indictment said.

The Securities and Exchange Commission also sued Mr. Smith yesterday for fraud in United States District Court in Los Angeles. The suit seeks unspecified monetary penalties.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


From: StockDung3/2/2005 7:21:15 PM
   of 574
 
LUNCH WITH THE CHAIRMAN
by SEYMOUR M. HERSH
Why was Richard Perle meeting with Adnan Khashoggi?

Issue of 2003-03-17
Posted 2003-03-10

At the peak of his deal-making activities, in the nineteen-seventies, the Saudi-born businessman Adnan Khashoggi brokered billions of dollars in arms and aircraft sales for the Saudi royal family, earning hundreds of millions in commissions and fees. Though never convicted of wrongdoing, he was repeatedly involved in disputes with federal prosecutors and with the Securities and Exchange Commission, and in recent years he has been in litigation in Thailand and Los Angeles, among other places, concerning allegations of stock manipulation and fraud. During the Reagan Administration, Khashoggi was one of the middlemen between Oliver North, in the White House, and the mullahs in Iran in what became known as the Iran-Contra scandal. Khashoggi subsequently claimed that he lost ten million dollars that he had put up to obtain embargoed weapons for Iran which were to be bartered (with Presidential approval) for American hostages. The scandals of those times seemed to feed off each other: a congressional investigation revealed that Khashoggi had borrowed much of the money for the weapons from the Bank of Credit and Commerce International (B.C.C.I.), whose collapse, in 1991, defrauded thousands of depositors and led to years of inquiry and litigation.

Khashoggi is still brokering. In January of this year, he arranged a private lunch, in France, to bring together Harb Saleh al-Zuhair, a Saudi industrialist whose family fortune includes extensive holdings in construction, electronics, and engineering companies throughout the Middle East, and Richard N. Perle, the chairman of the Defense Policy Board, who is one of the most outspoken and influential American advocates of war with Iraq.

The Defense Policy Board is a Defense Department advisory group composed primarily of highly respected former government officials, retired military officers, and academics. Its members, who serve without pay, include former national-security advisers, Secretaries of Defense, and heads of the C.I.A. The board meets several times a year at the Pentagon to review and assess the country’s strategic defense policies.

Perle is also a managing partner in a venture-capital company called Trireme Partners L.P., which was registered in November, 2001, in Delaware. Trireme’s main business, according to a two-page letter that one of its representatives sent to Khashoggi last November, is to invest in companies dealing in technology, goods, and services that are of value to homeland security and defense. The letter argued that the fear of terrorism would increase the demand for such products in Europe and in countries like Saudi Arabia and Singapore.

The letter mentioned the firm’s government connections prominently: “Three of Trireme’s Management Group members currently advise the U.S. Secretary of Defense by serving on the U.S. Defense Policy Board, and one of Trireme’s principals, Richard Perle, is chairman of that Board.” The two other policy-board members associated with Trireme are Henry Kissinger, the former Secretary of State (who is, in fact, only a member of Trireme’s advisory group and is not involved in its management), and Gerald Hillman, an investor and a close business associate of Perle’s who handles matters in Trireme’s New York office. The letter said that forty-five million dollars had already been raised, including twenty million dollars from Boeing; the purpose, clearly, was to attract more investors, such as Khashoggi and Zuhair.

Perle served as a foreign-policy adviser in George W. Bush’s Presidential campaign—he had been an Assistant Secretary of Defense under Ronald Reagan—but he chose not to take a senior position in the Administration. In mid-2001, however, he accepted an offer from Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld to chair the Defense Policy Board, a then obscure group that had been created by the Defense Department in 1985. Its members (there are around thirty of them) may be outside the government, but they have access to classified information and to senior policymakers, and give advice not only on strategic policy but also on such matters as weapons procurement. Most of the board’s proceedings are confidential.

As chairman of the board, Perle is considered to be a special government employee and therefore subject to a federal Code of Conduct. Those rules bar a special employee from participating in an official capacity in any matter in which he has a financial interest. “One of the general rules is that you don’t take advantage of your federal position to help yourself financially in any way,” a former government attorney who helped formulate the Code of Conduct told me. The point, the attorney added, is to “protect government processes from actual or apparent conflicts.”

Advisory groups like the Defense Policy Board enable knowledgeable people outside government to bring their skills and expertise to bear, in confidence, on key policy issues. Because such experts are often tied to the defense industry, however, there are inevitable conflicts. One board member told me that most members are active in finance and business, and on at least one occasion a member has left a meeting when a military or an intelligence product in which he has an active interest has come under discussion.

Four members of the Defense Policy Board told me that the board, which met most recently on February 27th and 28th, had not been informed of Perle’s involvement in Trireme. One board member, upon being told of Trireme and Perle’s meeting with Khashoggi, exclaimed, “Oh, get out of here. He’s the chairman! If you had a story about me setting up a company for homeland security, and I’ve put people on the board with whom I’m doing that business, I’d be had”—a reference to Gerald Hillman, who had almost no senior policy or military experience in government before being offered a post on the policy board. “Seems to me this is at the edge of or off the ethical charts. I think it would stink to high heaven.”

Hillman, a former McKinsey consultant, stunned at least one board member at the February meeting when he raised questions about the validity of Iraq’s existing oil contracts. “Hillman said the old contracts are bad news; he said we should kick out the Russians and the French,” the board member told me. “This was a serious conversation. We’d become the brokers. Then we’d be selling futures in the Iraqi oil company. I said to myself, ‘Oh, man. Don’t go down that road.’” Hillman denies making such statements at the meeting.

Larry Noble, the executive director of the Washington-based Center for Responsive Politics, a nonprofit research organization, said of Perle’s Trireme involvement, “It’s not illegal, but it presents an appearance of a conflict. It’s enough to raise questions about the advice he’s giving to the Pentagon and why people in business are dealing with him.” Noble added, “The question is whether he’s trading off his advisory-committee relationship. If it’s a selling point for the firm he’s involved with, that means he’s a closer—the guy you bring in who doesn’t have to talk about money, but he’s the reason you’re doing the deal.”

Perle’s association with Trireme was not his first exposure to the link between high finance and high-level politics. He was born in New York City, graduated from the University of Southern California in 1964, and spent a decade in Senate-staff jobs before leaving government in 1980, to work for a military-consulting firm. The next year, he was back in government, as Assistant Secretary of Defense. In 1983, he was the subject of a New York Times investigation into an allegation that he recommended that the Army buy weapons from an Israeli company from whose owners he had, two years earlier, accepted a fifty-thousand-dollar fee. Perle later acknowledged that he had accepted the fee, but vigorously denied any wrongdoing. He had not recused himself in the matter, he explained, because the fee was for work he had done before he took the Defense Department job. He added, “The ultimate issue, of course, was a question of procurement, and I am not a procurement officer.” He was never officially accused of any ethical violations in the matter. Perle served in the Pentagon until 1987 and then became deeply involved in the lobbying and business worlds. Among other corporate commitments, he now serves as a director of a company doing business with the federal government: the Autonomy Corporation, a British firm that recently won a major federal contract in homeland security. When I asked him about that contract, Perle told me that there was no possible conflict, because the contract was obtained through competitive bidding, and “I never talked to anybody about it.”

Under Perle’s leadership, the policy board has become increasingly influential. He has used it as a bully pulpit, from which to advocate the overthrow of Saddam Hussein and the use of preëmptive military action to combat terrorism. Perle had many allies for this approach, such as Paul Wolfowitz, the Deputy Secretary of Defense, but there was intense resistance throughout the bureaucracy—most notably at the State Department. Preëmption has since emerged as the overriding idea behind the Administration’s foreign policy. One former high-level intelligence official spoke with awe of Perle’s ability to “radically change government policy” even though he is a private citizen. “It’s an impressive achievement that an outsider can have so much influence, and has even been given an institutional base for his influence.”

Perle’s authority in the Bush Administration is buttressed by close association, politically and personally, with many important Administration figures, including Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith, the Under-Secretary of Defense for Policy, who is the Pentagon’s third-ranking civilian official. In 1989, Feith created International Advisors Incorporated, a lobbying firm whose main client was the government of Turkey. The firm retained Perle as an adviser between 1989 and 1994. Feith got his current position, according to a former high-level Defense Department official, only after Perle personally intervened with Rumsfeld, who was skeptical about him. Feith was directly involved in the strategic planning and conduct of the military operations against the Taliban in Afghanistan; he now runs various aspects of the planning of the Iraqi war and its aftermath. He and Perle share the same views on many foreign-policy issues. Both have been calling for Saddam Hussein’s removal for years, long before September 11th. They also worked together, in 1996, to prepare a list of policy initiatives for Benjamin Netanyahu, shortly after his election as the Israeli Prime Minister. The suggestions included working toward regime change in Iraq. Feith and Perle were energetic supporters of Ahmad Chalabi, the controversial leader of the anti-Saddam Iraqi National Congress, and have struggled with officials at the State Department and the C.I.A. about the future of Iraq.

Perle has also been an outspoken critic of the Saudi government, and Americans who are in its pay. He has often publicly rebuked former American government officials who are connected to research centers and foundations that are funded by the Saudis, and told the National Review last summer, “I think it’s a disgrace. They’re the people who appear on television, they write op-ed pieces. The Saudis are a major source of the problem we face with terrorism. That would be far more obvious to people if it weren’t for this community of former diplomats effectively working for this foreign government.” In August, the Saudi government was dismayed when the Washington Post revealed that the Defense Policy Board had received a briefing on July 10th from a Rand Corporation analyst named Laurent Murawiec, who depicted Saudi Arabia as an enemy of the United States, and recommended that the Bush Administration give the Saudi government an ultimatum to stop backing terrorism or face seizure of its financial assets in the United States and its oil fields. Murawiec, it was later found, is a former editor of the Executive Intelligence Review, a magazine controlled by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr., the perennial Presidential candidate, conspiracy theorist, and felon. According to Time, it was Perle himself who had invited Murawiec to make his presentation.

Perle’s hostility to the politics of the Saudi government did not stop him from meeting with potential Saudi investors for Trireme. Khashoggi and Zuhair told me that they understood that one of Trireme’s objectives was to seek the help of influential Saudis to win homeland-security contracts with the Saudi royal family for the businesses it financed. The profits for such contracts could be substantial. Saudi Arabia has spent nearly a billion dollars to survey and demarcate its eight-hundred-and-fifty-mile border with Yemen, and the second stage of that process will require billions more. Trireme apparently turned to Adnan Khashoggi for help.

Last month, I spoke with Khashoggi, who is sixty-seven and is recovering from open-heart surgery, at his penthouse apartment, overlooking the Mediterranean in Cannes. “I was the intermediary,” he said. According to Khashoggi, he was first approached by a Trireme official named Christopher Harriman. Khashoggi said that Harriman, an American businessman whom he knew from his jet-set days, when both men were fixtures on the European social scene, sent him the Trireme pitch letter. (Harriman has not answered my calls.) Khashoggi explained that before Christmas he and Harb Zuhair, the Saudi industrialist, had met with Harriman and Gerald Hillman in Paris and had discussed the possibility of a large investment in Trireme.

Zuhair was interested in more than the financial side; he also wanted to share his views on war and peace with someone who had influence with the Bush Administration. Though a Saudi, he had been born in Iraq, and he hoped that a negotiated, “step by step” solution could be found to avoid war. Zuhair recalls telling Harriman and Hillman, “If we have peace, it would be easy to raise a hundred million. We will bring development to the region.” Zuhair’s hope, Khashoggi told me, was to combine opportunities for peace with opportunities for investment. According to Khashoggi, Hillman and Harriman said that such a meeting could be arranged. Perle emerged, by virtue of his position on the policy board, as a natural catch; he was “the hook,” Khashoggi said, for obtaining the investment from Zuhair. Khashoggi said that he agreed to try to assemble potential investors for a private lunch with Perle.

The lunch took place on January 3rd at a seaside restaurant in Marseilles. (Perle has a vacation home in the South of France.) Those who attended the lunch differ about its purpose. According to both Khashoggi and Zuhair, there were two items on the agenda. The first was to give Zuhair a chance to propose a peaceful alternative to war with Iraq; Khashoggi said that he and Perle knew that such an alternative was far-fetched, but Zuhair had recently returned from a visit to Baghdad, and was eager to talk about it. The second, more important item, according to Khashoggi and Zuhair, was to pave the way for Zuhair to put together a group of ten Saudi businessmen who would invest ten million dollars each in Trireme.

“It was normal for us to see Perle,” Khashoggi told me. “We in the Middle East are accustomed to politicians who use their offices for whatever business they want. I organized the lunch for the purpose of Harb Zuhair to put his language to Perle. Perle politely listened, and the lunch was over.” Zuhair, in a telephone conversation with me, recalled that Perle had made it clear at the lunch that “he was above the money. He said he was more involved in politics, and the business is through the company”—Trireme. Perle, throughout the lunch, “stuck to his idea that ‘we have to get rid of Saddam,’” Zuhair said. As of early March, to the knowledge of Zuhair, no Saudi money had yet been invested in Trireme.

In my first telephone conversation with Gerald Hillman, in mid-February, before I knew of the involvement of Khashoggi and Zuhair, he assured me that Trireme had “nothing to do” with the Saudis. “I don’t know what you can do with them,” he said. “What we saw on September 11th was a grotesque manifestation of their ideology. Americans believe that the Saudis are supporting terrorism. We have no investment from them, or with them.” (Last week, he acknowledged that he had met with Khashoggi and Zuhair, but said that the meeting had been arranged by Harriman and that he hadn’t known that Zuhair would be there.) Perle, he insisted in February, “is not a financial creature. He doesn’t have any desire for financial gain.”

Perle, in a series of telephone interviews, acknowledged that he had met with two Saudis at the lunch in Marseilles, but he did not divulge their identities. (At that time, I still didn’t know who they were.) “There were two Saudis there,” he said. “But there was no discussion of Trireme. It was never mentioned and never discussed.” He firmly stated, “The lunch was not about money. It just would never have occurred to me to discuss investments, given the circumstances.” Perle added that one of the Saudis had information that Saddam was ready to surrender. “His message was a plea to negotiate with Saddam.”

When I asked Perle whether the Saudi businessmen at the lunch were being considered as possible investors in Trireme, he replied, “I don’t want Saudis as such, but the fund is open to any investor, and our European partners said that, through investment banks, they had had Saudis as investors.” Both Perle and Hillman stated categorically that there were currently no Saudi investments.

Khashoggi professes to be amused by the activities of Perle and Hillman as members of the policy board. As Khashoggi saw it, Trireme’s business potential depended on a war in Iraq taking place. “If there is no war,” he told me, “why is there a need for security? If there is a war, of course, billions of dollars will have to be spent.” He commented, “You Americans blind yourself with your high integrity and your democratic morality against peddling influence, but they were peddling influence.”

When Perle’s lunch with Khashoggi and Zuhair, and his connection to Trireme, became known to a few ranking members of the Saudi royal family, they reacted with anger and astonishment. The meeting in Marseilles left Perle, one of the kingdom’s most vehement critics, exposed to a ferocious counterattack.

Prince Bandar bin Sultan, who has served as the Saudi Ambassador to the United States for twenty years, told me that he had got wind of Perle’s involvement with Trireme and the lunch in Marseilles. Bandar, who is in his early fifties, is a prominent member of the royal family (his father is the defense minister). He said that he was told that the contacts between Perle and Trireme and the Saudis were purely business, on all sides. After the 1991 Gulf War, Bandar told me, Perle had been involved in an unsuccessful attempt to sell security systems to the Saudi government, “and this company does security systems.” (Perle confirmed that he had been on the board of a company that attempted to make such a sale but said he was not directly involved in the project.)

“There is a split personality to Perle,” Bandar said. “Here he is, on the one hand, trying to make a hundred-million-dollar deal, and, on the other hand, there were elements of the appearance of blackmail—‘If we get in business, he’ll back off on Saudi Arabia’—as I have been informed by participants in the meeting.”

As for Perle’s meeting with Khashoggi and Zuhair, and the assertion that its purpose was to discuss politics, Bandar said, “There has to be deniability, and a cover story—a possible peace initiative in Iraq—is needed. I believe the Iraqi events are irrelevant. A business meeting took place.”

Zuhair, however, was apparently convinced that, thanks to his discussions with Trireme, he would have a chance to enter into a serious discussion with Perle about peace. A few days after the meeting in Paris, Hillman had sent Khashoggi a twelve-point memorandum, dated December 26, 2002, setting the conditions that Iraq would have to meet. “It is my belief,” the memorandum stated, “that if the United States obtained the following results it would not go to war against Iraq.” Saddam would have to admit that “Iraq has developed, and possesses, weapons of mass destruction.” He then would be allowed to resign and leave Iraq immediately, with his sons and some of his ministers.

Hillman sent Khashoggi a second memorandum a week later, the day before the lunch with Perle in Marseilles. “Following our recent discussions,” it said, “we have been thinking about an immediate test to ascertain that Iraq is sincere in its desire to surrender.” Five more steps were outlined, and an ambitious final request was made: that Khashoggi and Zuhair arrange a meeting with Prince Nawaf Abdul Aziz, the Saudi intelligence chief, “so that we can assist in Washington.”

Both Khashoggi and Zuhair were skeptical of the memorandums. Zuhair found them “absurd,” and Khashoggi told me that he thought they were amusing, and almost silly. “This was their thinking?” he recalled asking himself. “There was nothing to react to. While Harb was lobbying for Iraq, they were lobbying for Perle.”

In my initial conversation with Hillman, he said, “Richard had nothing to do with the writing of those letters. I informed him of it afterward, and he never said one word, even after I sent them to him. I thought my ideas were pretty clear, but I didn’t think Saddam would resign and I didn’t think he’d go into exile. I’m positive Richard does not believe that any of those things would happen.” Hillman said that he had drafted the memorandums with the help of his daughter, a college student. Perle, for his part, told me, “I didn’t write them and didn’t supply any content to them. I didn’t know about them until after they were drafted.”

The views set forth in the memorandums were, indeed, very different from those held by Perle, who has said publicly that Saddam will leave office only if he is forced out, and from those of his fellow hard-liners in the Bush Administration. Given Perle’s importance in American decision-making, and the risks of relying on a deal-maker with Adnan Khashoggi’s history, questions remain about Hillman’s drafting of such an amateurish peace proposal for Zuhair. Prince Bandar’s assertion—that the talk of peace was merely a pretext for some hard selling—is difficult to dismiss.

Hillman’s proposals, meanwhile, took on an unlikely life of their own. A month after the lunch, the proposals made their way to Al Hayat, a Saudi-owned newspaper published in London. If Perle had ever intended to dissociate himself from them, he did not succeed. The newspaper, in a dispatch headlined “washington offers to avert war in return for an international agreement to exile saddam,” characterized Hillman’s memorandums as “American” documents and said that the new proposals bore Perle’s imprimatur. The paper said that Perle and others had attended a series of “secret meetings” in an effort to avoid the pending war with Iraq, and “a scenario was discussed whereby Saddam Hussein would personally admit that his country was attempting to acquire weapons of mass destruction and he would agree to stop trying to acquire these weapons while he awaits exile.”

A few days later, the Beirut daily Al Safir published Arabic translations of the memorandums themselves, attributing them to Richard Perle. The proposals were said to have been submitted by Perle, and to “outline Washington’s future visions of Iraq.” Perle’s lunch with two Saudi businessmen was now elevated by Al Safir to a series of “recent American-Saudi negotiations” in which “the American side was represented by Richard Perle.” The newspaper added, “Publishing these documents is important because they shed light on the story of how war could have been avoided.” The documents, of course, did nothing of the kind.

When Perle was asked whether his dealings with Trireme might present the appearance of a conflict of interest, he said that anyone who saw such a conflict would be thinking “maliciously.” But Perle, in crisscrossing between the public and the private sectors, has put himself in a difficult position—one not uncommon to public men. He is credited with being the intellectual force behind a war that not everyone wants and that many suspect, however unfairly, of being driven by American business interests. There is no question that Perle believes that removing Saddam from power is the right thing to do. At the same time, he has set up a company that may gain from a war. In doing so, he has given ammunition not only to the Saudis but to his other ideological opponents as well.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


From: StockDung10/1/2005 6:26:35 PM
   of 574
 
"A Long Island, N.Y. Internet advertising company filed a lawsuit against CNN analyst Courtney Smith (among other defendants) for "talking up" AppOnline.com's stock when he allegedly had a stake, according to an article in the New York Law Journal earlier this year. Cyber Media reportedly asserts that it agreed to a sale of the company to Apponline.com in a stock-for-stock purchase agreement after Apponline.com principals directed Cyber Media officers to watch a CNN program in which Smith said that Apponline.com was a "double your money stock." The article said Cyber Media alleged that Smith was an officer in the venture capital fund Inculab, whose stock was directly tied to Apponline.com, and that he benefited from the "double your money stock" statement."

3/14/02 | |

Seven Indicted In Internet Mortgage Fraud Scheme

By Sam Garcia
MortgageDaily.com

The U.S. Attorney's Long Island office has filed two indictments against seven defendants in 2 cases related to a bankrupt online mortgage lender. Filed in the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York, the indictment accuses the defendants of deceiving investors and warehouse lenders, manipulating the publicly traded shares of bankrupt AppOnline.com, Inc. and using warehouse funds -- intended for loan fundings -- for daily operations.

Previously known as Island Mortgage Network Financial Corporation, the publicly traded company's "chief venture" was Island Mortgage Network, Inc. a retail residential mortgage banker with more than 50 offices in 17 states by June 2000. According to the indictment, the company changed its name to AppOnline.com in 1999.

The defendants named in the first case are Carl Delia, Donald Catapano and Craig Brandwein, each a registered representative; and George Carhart & Rocco Siclari, undisclosed principals of a New York broker-dealer where defendant Ashley Nemiroff served as president and trader.

Paul Skulsky -- named as a coconspirator in the case but not as a defendant -- was an undisclosed principal of AppOnline.com who owned his interest through two corporations. USA Today reported in July 2000 that Skulsky served four years in prison for tax evasion, mail fraud and racketeering in connection with a cable TV company called Cable/Tel, according to public records. His brother, Jeff Skulsky, was president of AppOnline.com.

The U.S. Attorney alleges that "a principal goal of the coconspirators was to manipulate" the share price of AppOnline.com "so that it would remain artificially high." Some of the defendants are accused of accepting substantial undisclosed payments -- in the form of cash, securities and other items of value -- as compensation for recommending and selling the stock to investors. According to the indictment, the secret payments were often as much as 50% of the price of the securities involved.

Several companies were allegedly used by the defendants to hide their ownership.

A separate indictment was filed against Jeffrey Schneider, a CPA and auditor accused of using "a number of misleading accounting entries" to hide AppOnline.com's true financial condition. Schneider was extensively involved in the accounting work for AppOnline.com, according to the indictment, and eventually maintained an office at the company.

That indictment accuses AppOnline.com of directing warehouse lenders -- including Residential Mortgage Services, Prudential Securities Credit Corp. and Greenwich Capital Financial Products -- to wire mortgage funding proceeds to escrow accounts secretly controlled by AppOnline.com and its principals. The company was able to use warehouse proceeds from one loan to make up the "haircut" -- or two percent of the loan that it was supposed fund -- on other loans. It also allegedly used the warehouse proceeds to illegally fund its operating expenses.

The indictment said that eventually, the company began falsely representing that loans were ready to close. If the loan did not close within five days, AppOnline.com would go to another warehouse lender to fund the loan and payoff the previous warehouse lender. By June 2000, the company had $37 million in outstanding loans due and needed $30 million to cover outstanding checks. At that point, AppOnline.com's primary warehouse lender shut down the line. This was followed by a revocation of its license by the New York State Banking Department and a Chapter 11 bankruptcy petition.

A July 2000 Specialty Lender Weekly article said that at that point, the company had collected fees from consumers in connection with roughly $150 million in loans that had yet to close. That story went on to say that AppOnline.com's acquisition strategy suggested that it had been urgently chasing cash or cash-ready assets. In just over a year, the company reportedly made nine acquisitions, primarily of small mortgage banks that do only originations.

The second indictment went on to say that Schneider's accounting improprieties enabled AppOnline.com to provide financial statements to the Securities and Exchange Commmisiion and to its warehouse lenders that allowed it to remain in business far longer than it would have with legitimate financial statements. The warehouse liabilities were disguised in the financial statements as a payable to a related party. This debt, which ultimately grew to approximately $47 million, was partially offset by the issuance of more than 18 million shares of AppOnline.com's stock.

A Long Island, N.Y. Internet advertising company filed a lawsuit against CNN analyst Courtney Smith (among other defendants) for "talking up" AppOnline.com's stock when he allegedly had a stake, according to an article in the New York Law Journal earlier this year. Cyber Media reportedly asserts that it agreed to a sale of the company to Apponline.com in a stock-for-stock purchase agreement after Apponline.com principals directed Cyber Media officers to watch a CNN program in which Smith said that Apponline.com was a "double your money stock." The article said Cyber Media alleged that Smith was an officer in the venture capital fund Inculab, whose stock was directly tied to Apponline.com, and that he benefited from the "double your money stock" statement.



Copyright © 2002 MortgageDaily.com
Distributed by
Mortgage Bankers Association
Washington, DC

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


From: StockDung10/23/2005 4:58:24 PM
   of 574
 
His wealth brought him closer to the most prominent Saudi families. In his book, "The Kingdom: Arabia and the House of Saud" (Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1981), Robert Lacey describes bin Laden's ties with Adnan Kashoggi of the famous Saudi family. Mohammed bin Laden was indirectly responsible for Adnan Kashoggi's fortune, writes Lacey.

In the 1950s, Kashoggi returned to Saudi Arabia from the United States. He met with Mohammed bin Laden, who was a friend of his father. Bin Laden told him that he was urgently in need of trucks. Kashoggi promised to help. He put bin Laden in contact with an American truck manufacturer whom he'd known during his college years.

According to Lacey, a half-million-dollar deal was closed several weeks later and Kashoggi received $25,000 in commission from the American manufacturer. He sent the check to bin Laden, who promptly sent back a check for double the amount. Don't be ashamed to take a commission, he told Kashoggi. And this is how Kashoggi's career as a middleman began, writes Lacey.

64.233.187.104

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: Glenn Petersen who wrote (506)12/3/2005 7:17:13 AM
From: Glenn Petersen
   of 574
 
A jury lets Courtney Smith off the hook:

Commentator Acquitted in Fraud Trial

By BLOOMBERG NEWS
Published: December 3, 2005

Courtney D. Smith, a financial commentator who was accused of failing to disclose payments by the now-defunct GenesisIntermedia to promote the company's stock, was acquitted by a federal jury.

The jury in Los Angeles acquitted Mr. Smith, 53, of all 10 counts on Thursday, Thelen Reid & Priest, the law firm representing him said yesterday. The district court previously dismissed one charge for lack of evidence, the firm said. Mr. Smith owned a money management firm in New York and appeared on CNBC, CNN and Bloomberg Television.

Prosecutors failed to persuade the jury that deals Mr. Smith conducted with GenesisIntermedia were sham transactions to hide compensation in exchange for stock promotions on financial TV programs, George Newhouse Jr., Mr. Smith's lawyer, said.

The evidence showed that they were proper business transactions and that Mr. Smith disclosed that he held a big position in GenesisIntermedia after he sold his Web site to the company in exchange for stock, Mr. Newhouse said.

Mr. Smith still faces a civil suit.

nytimes.com

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)
Previous 10 Next 10