Quantum Pranx


The Case for IMF Chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn Being Set-Up

with 2 comments

by Robert Wenzel
The Economic Policy Journal
Originally posted May 19, 2011 

ALTHOUGH IT IS VERY POSSIBLE that IMF Chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn is a mad dog and sexually attacked a maid at the Sofitel Hotel in New York City without warning, there remains the possibility that the story is more complex and that he was set-up by those who understood his weakness for women. There are facts that could perhaps resolve the question of whether a set-up occurred or not. Herein lies the curiosities of the case that suggest much more than a simple attack was going on and the facts that need to be answered that could eliminate the possibility of a set-up or indeed make the case of a set-up stronger.

First, it is somewhat interesting that the alleged attack was reported to the police at all. From experiences I have had, I suspect hotels try to stop such incidents from becoming public.

Many years ago I happened to be in  the lobby of a Waldorf-Astoria Hotel in New York City when I heard a commotion and then a gagging sound from the stairs leading to the level below me (For those familiar with the hotel this was by the internal entrance on 48th St to the Bull and Bear restaurant). I headed down the stairs and there was a Japanese guest of the hotel on the floor being held at knife point by a mugger. My heading down the stairs caused the mugger to flee. When security finally arrived, their main concern was to get the shaken Japanese guest from public view. They weren’t interested in who I was, my description of the attacker or anything else.

I later thought about that and realized that hotels really don’t want a lot of police blotter activity about their hotels. If they can keep something internal, all the better.

During another experience with a hotel, I was booked into a hotel in Los Angeles by a client, a very high profile person. You would recognize the name. I arrived at the hotel early at 10:00 AM and proceeded to see if I could get an early check-in. A somewhat surly hotel front desk agent told me that there would be no rooms available until the 3:00 PM check-in time. I had given him my name and as he was casually looking at the screen, he appeared to notice something on the screen. He became apologetic and went to get the general manager of this very large hotel. The general manager came over to me and apologized profusely for not having my room  ready and told me that the room would be ready in ten minutes. He then stayed with me for the full 10 minutes. He offered to get me coffee, offered to give me the passcode so I could use my laptop for the ten minutes I was in the lobby. When the call came down that my room was ready, the general manager picked up my bags and carried them to my room. He didn’t even look for a bellman. He just picked up the bags. You have not lived until the general manager of a major hotel carries your bags to your room.

At some point I asked the maid for something, I forget what, and I remember her actually leaving the floor to get what I asked for. I asked her why everyone was going so much out of their way for me and she showed me her room chart where I was marked as a VIP.

So I’m guessing that my two experiences are common at most major hotels, such as the Sofitel where DSK was staying. To the degree they can, they try to squelch negative reports to the police and employees may not know a person is a VIP just by name, but there is likely some kind of designation for all employees to know that someone is a VIP.

So you had two factors here working to keep the sexual attack on the down-low. Hotels don’t like to appear in police blotters and employees know not to mess with VIP’s. That’s why it doesn’t come to me as a surprise that Reuters is reporting:

New York investigators are questioning why the Sofitel hotel in New York waited an hour to call police after International Monetary Fund chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn left the hotel…

I’m a little bit surprised the call was made at all. Now maybe hotel security simply had to locate the general manager to get approval to call the police and the manager felt the attack on an employee was horrific and a call should be made immediately to the police and it was done so. But what suddenly prompted the call after an hour should be investigated. This delay isn’t the main point that proves a set-up, but it does show there was some kind of hesitancy to call the police and this hesitancy was over-ruled by someone.

It also should be noted that the accuser is Muslim and wears a head scarf. France just banned the wearing of face veils in their country. She is also originally from the very poor country of Guinea, which at one time was a French colony. This probably all means nothing but should be noted. I would be curious to know if this maid was working her regular schedule, whether this was the regular floor she worked on and anything normal or abnormal about her work on that day. It is also interesting that this woman, who lives in the Bronx, is described as shy, keeps to herself and is an immigrant from Guinea, managed to hire a midtown Manhattan attorney. The attorney refuses to say anything about how he became her attorney other than stating that it was through a “mutual acquaintance.” It’s possible they have a mutual acquaintance, but it would be interesting to know who that is. Again, nothing necessarily sinister going on here, but a few more facts might help to clarify things.

Now here’s where things start to get interesting. Despite DSK’s reputation as a “great seducer”, the man used call girls when he was in New York City, as revealed by former madam Kristin Davis. Thus the elements of how a set-up could have taken place, by a group with serious assets and technology.

If it is known that DSK used hookers, at least in NYC, and you have the capability to monitor his cell phone and hotel phone activities, then you have the ability to set a trap. He calls for a pro, you send in a willing or unwilling “innocent”. Thus, it would be very interesting to know if DSK made any calls to escort agencies from his hotel phine or any of his cell phones (especially the one that DSK thought was missing and appears to have disappeared). I continue to believe that the most likely explanation for him coming out of the bathroom naked is that he was expecting someone.

If he did make a call to an escort service than I fully believe a government agency could have set DSK up. What’s more, this is a major French hotel, which means it his highly likely that French government agents are floating around the hotel as guests and employees. Now as far as motive, there is certainly a reason on the part of the U.S. government to look the other way, if, say, there was a set-up by the French government. Michael Whitney writes:

Strauss-Kahn had recently broke-free from the “party line” and was changing the direction of the IMF…

Whitney then quotes Joseph Stiglitz on DSK:

The annual spring meeting of the International Monetary Fund was notable in marking the Fund’s effort to distance itself from its own long-standing tenets on capital controls and labor-market flexibility. It appears that a new IMF has gradually, and cautiously, emerged under the leadership of Dominique Strauss-Kahn….Strauss-Kahn is proving himself a sagacious leader of the IMF….

Here are DSK comments he delivered at an address at George Washington University that would certainly not endear him to the one world types:

Globalization has delivered a lot . . . but it also has a dark side, a large and growing chasm between the rich and the poor. Clearly we need a new form of globalization’ to prevent the ‘invisible hand’ of loosely regulated markets from becoming ‘an invisible fist.’

But the person with the real motive to take DSK down was French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who was badly trailing in the polls against DSK, leading up to next year’s election. The takeout of DSK, especially given its timing, could very easily be seen as a type of ‘double tap’ by Sarkozy government operatives. What do I mean by a double tap and the timing? In Cannes, a very negative biopic of Sarkozy, “The Conquest”, was screened about him on Wednesday. AP said of the film:

Hyped as a behind-the-scenes glance at the private lives of the Sarkozys, “The Conquest” is arguably the most highly anticipated French movie at the Cannes Film Festival, where it screened Wednesday.

A week ago the Telegraph wrote:

The biopic of Nicolas Sarkozy that charts his rise to power and break-up of his marriage has been selected for the Cannes Film Festival, threatening to turn the unpopular French president into an international laughing stock…Mr Sarkozy now faces a dilemma over his attendance at the festival. He had been expected to walk his wife, Carla Bruni-Sarkozy, down the red carpet at the premiere of her film, Woody Allen’s Midnight in Paris, which will open the 10-day event.

Sarkozy and his wife were no shows at Cannes, including for a screening of the film she is in. But what happened to the, even a week ago, much anticipated biopic? DSK happened. WSJ explains:

Call it bad timing. As the evolving Dominique Strauss-Kahn Affair continues to eclipse Cannes Festival prime-time coverage on the French nightly news, the long-awaited biopic on President Nicolas Sarkozy, by French director Xavier Durringer was met with amused chuckles but tepid applause at this morning’s world-premiere screening. What great timing for Sarkozy! Just as a major “much anticipated” negative film is about to dominate the news about Sarkozy, Sarkozy’s chief political opponent is caught in a major sex scandal that not only knocks him out of the race but results in knocking news about the Sarkozy negative film off the front pages in France.

Bottom line: Sarkozy is one very, very lucky dude, or France’s Direction générale de la sécurité extérieure is pretty damn good.

Anonymous said…
Even if the entire episode was unscripted and played out as reported and there was no “setup” per se; had DSK not left the reservation and was still in the good graces of the IMF and by extension the USG and the NWO elites, the one hour window before the hotel called the police would have been plenty of time for alibis, coverups, and hush money to be doled out (it has happened before, apparently). Clearly, his services were no longer required and he had to be replaced. The most innocent (non-conspiratorial) case scenario is that DSK’s enemies simply took advantage of a “indiscretion” for which DSK assumed he would have cover.


2 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. I am sure it wasn’t Sarkozy; how could he have let DSK out on bail the moment he tendered his resignation? Nice timing for the bio-pic though, but Sarkozy goes out with the bin bags nexttime anyway whatever happens to DSK.

    DSK has more chance of becoming president now than he had before his arrest, unless of course they find him guilty of whatever happened in the hotel room. He will then have to wait twenty years for his next chance.


    24/05/2011 at 10:50 pm

  2. The Strauss Kahn Frame-Up: The Amerikan Police State Strides Forward

    The Strauss-Kahn Honeytrap

    Was Dominique Strauss-Kahn Trying to Torpedo the Dollar?


    13/06/2011 at 11:42 am

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: