Homolka and Harriman - Decoy Husbands In June, 1991 - Hidden Matrix 5 Man-In-The-Middle Attacks - Clipper Encryption Chip - Lesbian-Friendly

The Abel Danger White House Group to those whom it may concern

December 5, 2011

Did Homolka and Harriman marry decoys to hide Clipper crime scenes 9-1-1?

We believe that Crown Agents Sisters Homolka and Harriman married decoy husbands in June 1991 to hide Matrix 5 man-in-the-middle attacks and the development of a Clipper encryption chip to monitor the response of 9-1-1 operators to lesbian-friendly crime scenes.

Prequel 1.
Mary Elizabeth Harriman - Entrust Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) Devices - Phony COG Exercise On 9/11 - Canadian Commercial Corporation

Abel Danger Mischief Makers - Mistress of the Revels - 'Man-In-The-Middle' Attacks

“[Note that FBI profilers’ communications with 9-1-1 operators and crime scene investigators were targeted for man-in-the-middle attacks since at least 1979 by Robert Hanssen and his Senior Executive Service handler, Kristine Marcy] FBI Profile of the Scarborough Rapist 1988 Complete FBI Profile Note: This profile was composed before the rapist was caught and identified as Paul Bernardo. OFFENDER CHARACTERISTICS AND TRAITS: Your offender is a white male, 18 to 25 years of age. It should be cautioned that age is a difficult category to profile since an individual's behaviour is influenced by emotional and mental maturity, and not chronological age. No suspect should be eliminated based on age alone. The behaviour exhibited throughout these assaults suggests a youthful offender rather than an older more mature one. As noted above, we believe your offender lives in the Scarborough area. He is familiar with Scarborough, especially the initial assault sites, and, therefore, in all probability lives in the immediate vicinity of those first assaults. The offender's anger towards women will be known by those individuals who are close to him. He will speak disparagingly of women in general conversation with associates. He had a major problem with women immediately before the onset of these attacks. His anger would have been apparent not only for the particular woman involved but those close to him. He is sexually experienced but his past relationships with women have been stormy and have ended badly. In all probability he has battered women he has been involved with in the past. He places the blame for all his failures on women. If he has a criminal record, it will be one of assaultive behavior. The arrests will likely be for assault, disturbing the peace, resisting arrest, domestic disturbance, etc. His aggressive behavior would have surfaced during adolescence. His education background will be at the high school level with a record of discipline problems. He may have received counseling for his inability to get along with others, his aggressiveness, and/or substance abuse. He is bright, but an underachiever in a formal academic setting. He is nocturnal and spends a good deal of time on foot in the target assault area. We believe your offender is single. The offender has an explosive temper and can easily become enraged. This rage transfers over into the rest of his life. He blames everyone else for his problems. His work record will be sporadic and spotty as he cannot hold a job due to his inability to handle authority. He is financially supported by his Mother or other dominant female in his life. He is a lone wolf type of person. He can deal with people on a superficial level but prefers to be alone. The personal property of the victims which your offender took from the assault scenes is being kept by him. These effects are viewed as trophies by the offender and allow him to relive the assaults. He will keep these items in an area which is under his personal control and in which he feels is secure, but yet allows him ready access to them. The nature of these attacks will continue to be episodic and sporadic. In all probability, they will continue to occur outdoors as he is familiar with the area and this familiarity gives him a sense of freedom and mobility which would be denied if he were to attack indoors. Each attack is precipitated by a stressor in the offenders life. This stressor could be either one in fact or in his mind. The offender recognizes his inadequacies and attempts to mask them, but very often overcompensates. These inadequacies are not known by casual acquaintances, but are well known by those closest to him. POST OFFENSE BEHAVIOUR: Your offender harbours no guilt or remorse for these crimes. He believes his anger is justified and, therefore, so are the resultant attacks. His only concern is being identified and apprehended.”

“[Harriman allegedly began working with Homolka about June 1991 after discovering that their decoy husbands enjoyed the same kind of role play at lesbian-controlled 9-1-1 crime scenes cf. JonBenet Ramsey’s visit by NORAD Santa on Christmas Day 1996!] Scarborough Rapist: Over the next few years the relationship between Homolka and Bernardo intensified and they shared and encouraged each other's psychotic behavior. It was during this time that Bernardo was involved in raping women with the approval of Homolka. The uncaught Bernardo was dubbed as the Scarborough Rapist by the police and the media. His specialty was to attack women getting off of busses, making them endure violent anal rape and different levels of humiliation. A Surrogate Virgin: One of Bernardo's constant complaints with Homolka was that she was not a virgin when they met. Homolka, devoted to pleasing Bernardo every way possible, knew of his attraction to her 15-year-old sister, Tammy, whose virginity was intact. The two decided that they would force Tammy into being a surrogate virgin for her older sister. To help accomplish this, Homolka stole the animal anesthetic, Halothane from the vet clinic where she worked. Death In Exchange for Pleasure: On December 23, 1990, at a Christmas party at the Homolka family home, Bernardo and Homolka served Tammy alcoholic drinks spiked with halcyon. After family members retired, the two took Tammy to the basement and Homolka held a cloth soaked in Halothane to Tammy's mouth. Once Tammy was unconscious the couple raped her. During the rape Tammy began choking on her own vomit and ultimately died. The drugs in Tammy's system went undetected and her death was officially ruled an accident. Replacing Tammy: Homolka and Bernardo, unscathed by the death of Tammy, moved in together. Bernardo blamed Homolka for Tammy's death and complained that she was no longer around for Bernardo to enjoy sexually. Homolka decided a teenager named Jane would make a good replacement. She was young and virginal and seemed to idolize the attractive and older Homolka. Homolka invited the unsuspecting teen out to dinner, and like with Tammy, she spiked the girl's drinks then invited the intoxicated teen to her home. Another Present for Bernardo: Once there, Homolka administered the Halothane, and presented her present, the young pretty Jane, to Bernardo. The couple then engaged in brutal sexual attacks of the unconscious teen, capturing the events on videotape. The next day when the teenager awoke, she was sick and sore but had no idea of the violation her body had endured. Jane, unlike others, was one victim that managed to survive the encounter with the couple. Leslie Mahaffy : The thirst for Bernardo to share his rapist activities with his lover Homolka increased. On June 15, 1991 Bernardo kidnapped Leslie Mahaffy and brought her to the couple's home. Bernardo and Homolka repeatedly raped Mahaffy over a course of several days, videotaping many of the assaults. They eventually killed Mahaffy and cut her body into pieces, encased the pieces in cement, and threw the cement in a lake. On June 29 Mahaffy's remains were found by a couple canoeing on the lake. Bernardo and Homolka Marry: June 29 was also the day that Bernardo and Homolka were married in an elaborate wedding held at the Niagara-on-the-Lake church. Bernardo had been in control of the wedding plans which included the two riding in a white horse-drawn carriage with the bride dressed in an expensive white gown. The wedding guests were served a lavish sit-down meal after the couple exchanged their vows which included, at Bernardo's insistence Homolka vowing to "love, honor, and obey' her new husband. Kristen French On April 16, 1992, the couple kidnapped 15-year-old Kristen French from a church parking lot after Homolka lured her to their car, pretending to need directions. The couple brought French to their home and for several days videotaped their acts of humiliating, torturing and sexually abusing the teen. French tried hard to survive the attack but right before the couple left for Easter Sunday dinner with Homolka's family, they killed her. Her body was found on April 30 in a ditch in Burlington.”

“[Harriman allegedly ordered Canada’s Governor General David Johnston – a Special Investor in the CAI/Macdonald Dettwiler and Associates’ Clipper chip backdoor into 9-1-1 crime scene communications – to send men from Trenton air force base to collect her decoy husband’s uniform and burn evidence of the DNA of snuff film victims and perpetrators; ergo, we make a spoliation inference that she and her husband are guilty of crimes with the same M.O. as Karla Homolka and Paul Bernardo] How did Col. Williams' wife not know? .. The man Mary Elizabeth Harriman knew would hold her hand on walks. They went on vacations. And in what, for some, can be the ultimate test of a marriage, they golfed together. That man is under arrest and scheduled to plead guilty Monday in a Belleville court to two murders, two sex assaults and a string of fetish break-ins. She has to live with the unfathomable fact that the man she loved — Russell Williams, the former commander of CFB Trenton — was leading a double life. It raises the obvious question: How could she have had no clue? Quite easily, according to experts and a slim but consistent body of research on the wives of serial killers. “People do not believe that you could have lived with a serial killer and had not known,” says Jack Levin, professor of sociology and criminology at Northeastern University, and author of Serial Killers and Sadistic Murders — Up Close and Personal. “That is true in many cases: the idea that the spouse, the wife, is totally ignorant of her husband's killing spree.”Public perception of the families of serial killers is often unfair and judgmental. “When we think of victims, we think of the families of the victims who obviously suffer tremendous loss, but we almost never think of the family of the killer,” says Levin. Mothers are often maligned for raising monsters. Wives are blamed for being either stupid or complicit. But from all indications, Russell Williams was living completely separate lives. He was a competent base commander and loving husband — and also a serial killer with escalating tendencies and urges. Harriman has not uttered a public word since her husband's arrest. In a brief affidavit, filed in an ongoing civil suit launched by one of her husband's victims, Harriman said the news of the criminal charges was “devastating to me.” Unlike some serial killers, who were controlling and abusive to their spouses, Williams appeared the opposite and was far from a social misfit. Often the spouse is submissive and afraid of losing her husband. It doesn't appear Harriman fits that billing either. Of the two, Harriman is the more outgoing. The two wed in June 1991 in a ceremony in Winnipeg. They were a power couple, with no children, and, due to the nature of Williams' job, spent periods of time apart. Harriman, who at 52 is five years older than her husband, is the associate executive director of the Heart and Stroke Foundation in Ottawa. Following the arrest of her husband, she was described in a statement from her workplace as a “kind and compassionate individual” and a “long-serving, greatly admired and universally liked member of our team.” After taking a leave, Harriman is back at work and appears to be living in the Ottawa home the couple purchased last year. To many, the couple appeared very much normal and in love. There was never any outward indication of marital tension. Harriman likely didn't have a clue her husband was breaking into homes and stealing lingerie, that he was stalking women, and that he eventually graduated to sexually assaulting and killing them. Williams was a regular jogger, which made it easy to slip out and do his misdeeds. He stole undergarments and other personal items in dozens of fetish break-ins. An avid photographer, he also took pictures of the sexual assault victims. Some married serial killers have kept no-go spaces in their homes and on their property to store “trophies” — places where spouses were not allowed access. Keeping secret a stash of underwear and photographs would not be as difficult as hiding a body. But Williams had a hiding spot — reportedly in the rafters of his locked Ottawa garage — and it appears he was quite meticulous about cataloguing the items he stole. Glenn Woods, former RCMP director of behavioural sciences, says a “woman knows what's going on in the house, but . . . I suspect there are probably parts of that house she wasn't allowed to be in.” When police slapped an additional 82 charges on Williams for fetish break and enters at 47 homes in Tweed and Ottawa, some victims were completely unaware their homes had been burglarized. Also included in the charges were “attempt” break and enters that no one but Williams would know of, indicating he either kept a log discovered by police or he had a photographic memory and divulged all to investigators [or his wife was tracking him through a Clipper backdoor into lesbian-friendly 9-1-1 operators in a conspiracy to set him up as a decoy to be sacrificed before the 2010 Vancouver Olympic Games cf. Abel Danger warning delivered by David Hawkins to Stephen Harper in August 2009]. All this he kept from his wife, continuing to seem perfectly normal.”

“The Clipper chip was the flagship component of a controversial National Security Agency-designed "key escrow" cryptography scheme, in which intercepted encrypted traffic could be decrypted easily by law enforcement or intelligence agencies for surveillance purposes. The program was extremely controversial and, in the end, not a success. Aside from the obvious fundamental problems (the security risks of having a large database of citizen's keys, the need to implement cryptography in expensive secret hardware, etc), the Clipper architecture had technical flaws that made it possible to circumvent the escrow features and preclude the possibility of law enforcement access. (See "Protocol Failure in the Escrowed Encryption Standard" [pdf format], for details.) AT&T (my employer at the time) was the first (and ultimately only) company to produce a product based on the ill-fated system. The AT&T TSD-3600D, announced in 1992, was a voice encryption device designed to be installed in a standard telephone (between the phone base and the handset). Calls placed to other TSD-3600-equipped telephones could be automatically digitized (at 4800bps) and encrypted, making eavesdropping on the conversation (by legal or illegal means) effectively infeasible. When the US government learned of AT&T's plans to market the device, it worried that criminals might use them to thwart wiretaps. Plans for a new encryption system with a wiretap backdoor were hurriedly drawn up by the NSA, and AT&T was persuaded to replace the regular (non-escrowed) DES-based encryption scheme in the original TSD product with the new system, called the Clipper chip. The Clipper-based model TSD-3600E hit the market in 1993. As incentive for AT&T's cooperation, the government agreed to purchase a significant quantity of Clipper-equipped TSD-3600Es, which sold for over $1000 each in quantity. Hobbled by the controversial key escrow features and the high retail price, the government ended up being the TSD's only major customer, and even most of the units they bought sat unopened in storage for over ten years. AT&T, for its part, sold off the division that produced the product. I'm aware of five different TSD-3600 models produced between 1992 and the product's cancellation, differing in the cipher algorithm used. The TSD-3600D was the original, using standard DES with a 56 bit key. (These were [allegedly procured by EW/ELINT expert Russell Williams for use by Paul Bernardo and their respective wives to monitor 9-1-1 calls from crime scenes but were] quickly recalled and disappeared from the market after Clipper was announced). The 3600F was an exportable model that used a proprietary 40 bit cipher that, I was told, was "embarassingly" weak even given the short key. The 3600P used a proprietary 56 bit cipher similar to DES (but not inter-operable with the 3600D). The 3600E was the first controversial key escrowed model, with the then-classified Skipjack cipher and key escrow features implemented on a tamper-resistant MYK-78T Clipper chip. A later model, the 3600S, included a Clipper chip but would also downgrade (or upgrade, depending on your opinion of key escrow) to the F or P ciphers when communicating with those models. All five models use a Diffie-Hellman key exchange (768 bit, if I recall correctly) to establish a session key, a 4 character hash of which is displayed on each unit's LCD. To detect "man-in-the-middle" attacks, users could verify (by voice) that their displayed hashes matched.”

As Pascal said; “We have a moral obligation to think hard” so check the clues in the JonBenet ransom note to see if the child was tasered and raped at a 9-1-1 lesbian-friendly crime scene