Quote:

Luke's been predicting this for awhile--like JRV said in the other thread, probably based on tips. The terrorism thing is a bit of a stretch of credulity.



Incidentally I'd assume that the "terrorism" stuff is strictly internal politics. By claiming a terrorism link, however tenuous, that agency may be able to get access to special budget funds and not have to pay people out of their normal budget.

In any organization if the figureheads at the top keep pronouncing "Our #1 goal is to fight terrorism" then pretty soon everybody starts adding the word "terrorism" to all of their sentences, in order to stay on the overall radar and have access to the fattest budget.

There might be elements of turf war too. Perhaps the Washington FBI office is trying to claim priority on terrorism issues over other offices. Your "Corporate Warfare 101" textbook says the standard countermeasure is to launch your own terrorism effort, keeping the other guy out of the picture, so that you have a precedent to fight off empire-building elsewhere.

Luke says that US Customs is involved. That's strange - are they trying to make a human trafficking case?

As for senators etc being on "the list": since the dawn of time prostitutes have been careful to keep names of mayors, police chiefs, preachers, etc, on their customer lists. It goes without saying that in any major bust like this the customer list can't be trusted.
_________________________
"If they can't picture me with a knife, forcing them to strip in an alley, I don't want any part of it. It's humiliating." - windsock