Category Archives: Uncategorized

Like the Patriot Act, There is Nothing Patriotic About the Raytheon Patriot Missile

Like the Patriot Act, There is Nothing Patriotic About the Raytheon Patriot Missile

The prime contractor for the Patriot Air and Missile Defense System is Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems, a component of the Raytheon Company that in 2010 banked some $14.8+ billion in U.S. military and other government contracts that we are allowed to know about:

http://tinyurl.com/4g5dh63

And Raytheon’s Patriot missiles are not sold exclusively to defend the good ole Red, White and Blue.  Any country with a wad of cash and a wink from the State Department can stockpile them, including Arab nations like Kuwait and the UAE.  Osama Bin Laden’s Saudi Arabia homeland, for example, just ponied up $1.7 billion for a Patriot “upgrade”:

http://tinyurl.com/3vy5lec

Yes, this is the same Raytheon that is working on HAARP (see video below).  And along with Lockheed Martin, Boeing Company, Northrop Grumman, and General Dynamics, it ranks perennially not only as a “Big 5” defense contractor (ie. war profiteer) but also as a top offender in the Federal Contractor Misconduct Database (FCMD) maintained by the Project On Government Oversight (POGO) – a toothless Washington watchdog:

http://www.contractormisconduct.org/index.cfm

And although historically Raytheon’s false performance claims, taxpayer overcharges and contractor kickbacks have not been focused exclusively on pushing Patriots out the door, even sans irregularities the cost/benefit ratio of their flagship missile program is a real eyebrow raiser:  Even using PRISON LABORERS paid as little as 23 cents an hour in their manufacture, each Patriot missile produced sports a price tag as high as $5.9 million:

http://tinyurl.com/4bjzsbp

Julian Zdzislaw Starostecki – the Polish-born principal designer of the original Patriot missile – was himself a prisoner in the Soviet Gulag before immigrating to America after World War II.  So in a sense it would be accurate to note with irony that this icon of “freedom” was both developed and produced by prisoners.  Perhaps that explains the constrained success rate of the optimistically-named “Scud Busters” in the first Bush Gulf War, when the probability of a Patriot missile (cost: $1 to $6 million) actually taking out a Scud missile (cost: $0.22 to $1 million) was only 9 percent.

http://tinyurl.com/lwpe4

In all fairness though, we should mention that a dozen years and many billions of taxpayer dollars later the Patriot missile’s targeting accuracy was significantly better in the second Bush Gulf War, although enemy identification continued to be an issue.  Confirmed kills included:  a British Panavia Tornado of RAF Squadron 13 and crew … a U.S. Navy F/A-18C Hornet and Texas pilot Lt. Nathan Dennis White … and perhaps dozens if not hundreds more friendlies and innocents recorded only as “Collateral Damage”.

Related Image:

http://ldrlongdistancerider.com/images/Raytheon_Prisoner_Produced_Patriot_Missiles.jpg

Related Video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ul7Q5Wcu0g

Advertisements

GlaxoSmithKline: Where Billions in Fines Don’t Dent the Bottom Line

GlaxoSmithKline: Where Billions in Fines Don't Dent the Bottom Line

Especially since the SCOTUS “Citizens United v. FEC” decision, both foreign and domestic corporations operating in America now possess many of the rights and privileges of citizenship, but are neither accountable for the related responsibilities nor subject to associated punishments like incarceration or execution, which encourage most of us to conduct ourselves within the bounds of the law.  There may be rare instances where the corporate veil is pierced and the white collar criminals hiding behind it are brought to justice, but in most cases corporations caught breaching legal covenants or violating laws or regulations simply end up having to pay their lawyers and a settlement or other monetary penalty.  And after our Kleptocracy-controlled Supreme Court made it easy for corporations to shield themselves from class action lawsuits with their April 2011 “AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion” decision, those settlements are likely to be much smaller:

http://tinyurl.com/3rkxfzc

http://tinyurl.com/6azuf4n

So for any companies that might be ethically challenged, the pervasive profit motive may often have them asking this:

“Which is better for our bottom line?  To do the right thing, or just pay the fine?”

For the multinational Big Pharma conglomerate GlaxoSmithKline, it would be reasonable to assume that the asking of this question is not an occasional moral crisis but a standard operating procedure.  In support of this contention, consider that only yesterday the Wall Street Journal reported the following:

“In one of the largest settlements of its kind, GlaxoSmithKline PLC said it will pay the U.S. government $3 billion to settle several long-running criminal and civil investigations into the company, including allegations that Glaxo marketed some drugs illegally and defrauded the Medicaid program.  The settlement will also cover a Justice Department probe into Glaxo’s development and marketing of the diabetes drug Avandia, which has been linked to heart-attack risks.  Glaxo said the $3 billion is covered by the large legal provisions the company has taken in recent years as it worked to settle the probes – the company’s total legal provisions at the end of the third quarter were £2.9 billion ($4.6 billion).  The final settlement terms are still under negotiation, the company said, adding that it expects to pay the government next year.  Justice Department officials declined to comment Thursday…  The deal is one of the largest in a string of settlements the U.S. government has struck with drug companies as it tries to stamp out illegal marketing practices that flourished in the 1990s and early 2000s.  Critics of the industry say the sums, while large, are still dwarfed by the profits companies earned from marketing their drugs improperly.  ‘It’s a speed bump,’ said Kevin Outterson, co-director of the health-law program at Boston University.  ‘It’s a cost of doing business.'”

http://tinyurl.com/6yrdb9s

This was not the first time GSK found it more profitable to pay the fine than color inside the lines.  Barely a year ago DrugWatch.com posted this:

“GlaxoSmithKline, the manufacturer of several popular drugs, has agreed to pay a $750 million settlement in response to criminal and civil complaints against the company.  SB Pharmco Puerto Rico Inc., a subsidiary of GlaxoSmithKline, has pled guilty to producing and distributing a number of adulterated drugs, including popular medications Paxil and Avandamet.  As a result, GlaxoSmithKline will pay $150 million in criminal fines and $600 million in civil penalties, the U.S. Department of Justice announced on Tuesday.  An investigation of the company’s manufacturing practices showed that as many as 20 different drugs were unsafely produced for years at a large plant in Cidra, Puerto Rico…  In the case of Paxil, a popular antidepressant, the tablets were produced in a manner that caused them to split inappropriately, resulting in the potential loss of all therapeutic effect.  Avandamet tablets produced at the plant did not always contain the appropriate mix of ingredients and may have contained too much or too little of the active therapeutic agent…  The Cidra plant was the subject of a warning letter sent to GlaxoSmithKline by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration [FDA] in 2002.  GlaxoSmithKline closed the Cidra facility in 2009 because of declining demand for the medications produced there, according to the company.”

http://tinyurl.com/4yzatcl

Let me repeat those last two sentences:

“The Cidra plant was the subject of a warning letter sent to GlaxoSmithKline by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration [FDA] in 2002.  GlaxoSmithKline closed the Cidra facility in 2009 because of declining demand for the medications produced there, according to the company.”

Now let me ask you two questions:

1. If the FDA knew that popular drugs coming out of that plant posed a clear and present danger to the health of potentially millions of Americans in 2002, why did they allow that plant to continue operating until 2009?

2. When GSK finally did close the plant, was their primary motivation to do so the increasing pressure from the FDA, or the decreasing profitability of the products?

Related Image:

http://www.cchrint.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/fda_gsk.jpg

Related Videos:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-gGQCeCYSiI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byxF-zchzHM

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=fda

 

###

This document may contain links shortened using http://tinyurl.com to facilitate emailing. If you are concerned that we would use them to cloak phishing or malware, you should open them with this: http://longurl.org. Also our thanks to the website designs miami beach, website designers miami beach and website developers miami beach who support our efforts.


CDC Director Gerberding Gives Green Light to Gardasil then Goes to Work for Merck

Merck CDC Gerberding Gardasil Vaccine Scam

 

If you sort the Project On Government Oversight (POGO) Federal Contractor Misconduct Database (FCMD) by total misconduct dollars (penalties, fines and settlements) since 1995, you’ll find that Big Pharma (large pharmaceutical companies, i.e. drug manufacturers) in the first three positions with Merck & Co., Inc.’s $5.862 billion at the top.

http://tinyurl.com/3lskpqg

Included in that amount is a 2007 legal settlement under which “Merck & Co. agreed to pay $4.85 billion to end thousands of federal and state personal injury lawsuits claiming injuries and deaths caused by Merck’s prescription pain medication Vioxx. Merck pulled Vioxx from the market in September 2004 after its own [belated or admitted] research showed the drug increased the risk of heart attack and stroke.”

http://tinyurl.com/3n57axf

Not included in that amount is “a $650 million settlement [Merck paid] to escape charges that it routinely overbilled the U.S. government [YOU] for medicines. The government accused Merck of giving or selling pills to hospitals at low or no cost to hook poor patients on expensive medicine, so that when the patients were discharged, they would continue taking the drugs with the government footing the bills. A spokesman for the group Taxpayers Against Fraud said the situation was “heroin-dealer economics … your first shot is for free, and after that it becomes more expensive … not to the hospital, but to Medicaid, which is paying the bill.”

http://tinyurl.com/3zntadv

Despite their history of selling dangerous drugs at inflated prices, Merck continues to be a top pharmaceuticals supplier for the federal government, with 2010 transactions alone of over $992 million. $984 million of that was for “drugs and biologicals” purchases awarded by the Center for Disease Control (CDC):

http://tinyurl.com/3v9bj9d

One of the reasons the CDC gives so many taxpayer dollars to Merck every year is because Merck manufactures 14 of the 17 vaccines the CDC “recommends” for children, and 9 of the 10 “recommended” for adults.

http://tinyurl.com/6ge4ov2

CDC “recommendations” like these are worth their weight in gold to Big Pharma companies like Merck, and one of the persons making those recommendations was Julie Gerberding, CDC Director from 2002 to 2009. Gerberding resigned her government post and – after a mandatory delay of a year and a day – became President of Merck’s Vaccine Division in January 2010. Before going through the BigPharma/CDC revolving door, however, her “Report to Congress ‘Prevention of Genital Human Papillomavirus [HPV] Infection’ paved the way for eventual approval of Merck’s Gardasil vaccine, guaranteeing billions in profits for her future employer. Perhaps the vaccine presidency is Julie’s reward for cementing the relationship between government and Merck via the CDC, the agency that behaves as the de facto marketing arm of the vaccine industry. Another gift to Merck under Gerberding’s management has been the CDC’s continual denial that there is any link between the mercury-based preservative, thimerosal, and autism on the small scale; and vaccinations and autism on the large scale. Recent CDC reports place the incidence of autism at 1 in 110 children, four times higher than previous estimates. A major key to the viability of future vaccines in the pipeline is the tacit denial of any link of autism to the heavy metal, or vaccines in general, now or in the future.”

http://tinyurl.com/yfo35km

http://tinyurl.com/4248b2w

Are the CDC’s vaccination “recommendations” aimed at (a) protecting the health of American citizens, or (b) increasing the wealth of pharmaceutical corporations? For the parents and loved ones of those killed or seriously affected by Merck’s HPV vaccine Gardasil – along with an increasing number of physicians and investigative journalists – the answer is “(b)”:

http://tinyurl.com/5rahqku

http://tinyurl.com/3d9l449

http://tinyurl.com/42edt6r

http://tinyurl.com/3trdbko

Related Image:

http://ldrlongdistancerider.com/images/Merck_CDC_Gerberding_Gardasil_Vaccine_Scam.jpg

Related Videos:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31Irc8CHK0c

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Zilsj-0WuY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=764rxSlHF4w

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dh-nkD5LSIg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2I9G1MQaHhk

This document contains links shortened using http://tinyurl.com to facilitate emailing. If you are concerned that we would use them to cloak phishing or malware, you should open them with this: http://longurl.org

###

PLEASE HELP US STAY IN THIS FIGHT…

Freedom isn’t Free! The revolution needs resources, folks: Your donations will be used to pay our living and operating expenses so we can continue to devote our full time and attention to informing the People and exposing the Kleptocracy pulling all strings Left and Right. Any amount you can spare will make a difference, so please click or go here today:

Donate with WePay


Comcast Pays Politicians to Pressure FCC on NBC-Universal Merger Then Hires FCC Commissioner

Comcast Pays Politicians to Pressure FCC on NBC-Universal Merger Then Hires FCC Commissioner

In January 2011 the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) voted 4-1 to approve the merger of Comcast and NBC-Universal. This “created one of the largest media conglomerates in American history, which critics warn could limit the variety of voices heard by the public and threaten the Internet’s role as a forum for free exchange of information.” Their OK came after FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski received this letter urging approval signed by 97 members of Congress:

http://tinyurl.com/699ttkp

Of those 97 Democratic and Republican politicians, 88 “had received money from Comcast’s political action committee, according to data from the Center for Responsive Politics.”

“Putting pressure on an appointed group of commissioners like the FCC isn’t actually that different from pressuring Congress. ‘As a matter of fact, it can be harder for the public to trace,’ [Craig Holman of Public Citizen] said. ‘It’s quite difficult to analyze much of the lobbying activity for instance when it comes to working with FCC commissioners or others like that doesn’t get reported, it very frequently is not disclosed as lobbying activity.’

Comcast spent more than $75 million on federal lobbyists alone in the last ten years, with much of that sum coming in recent years… Last year alone, during which much of the merger process took place, the company employed 109 federal lobbyists and lobbied both houses of Congress and the FCC. The money a company spends on lobbying is important, Holman said, but even more important is the amount of money they can stuff into political campaigns. ‘Besides direct campaign contributions, which are traceable from PACs, they will do bundling activity, which is very difficult to trace, and in many cases untraceable,’ Holman said. ‘They will also now with Citizens United do direct corporate expenditures through third party groups, which are entirely untraceable, but their lobbyists will be on the Hill letting the lawmakers know what they’re doing with their money.’

While waiting on FCC approval of the merger in the 2010 election cycle, Comcast upped the amount of money they were directly donating through their political action committee, spending $3.5 million on political campaigns… ‘There can also be the direct campaign contributor factor to any lawmakers, they can pull the strings of members of Congress and get members of Congress to apply pressure on FCC commissioners to vote a certain way on various issues, and they do,’ Holman said. ‘The agency regulations are every bit as important as lawmaking, every lobbyist worth his or her salt knows that.'”

http://tinyurl.com/6gfn8m5

Shortly after voting to approve the Comcast/NBC-Universal merger, FCC Commisioner Meredith Attwell Baker resigned her government post and went through the revolving door to become a high-paid lobbyist for Comcast:

http://tinyurl.com/427xacn

Comcast and ALEC:

http://tinyurl.com/5se259w

Comcast owns Maryland:

http://tinyurl.com/6xlug9d

Related Image:

http://ldrlongdistancerider.com/images/Comcast_NBC_Universal_Monopoly.jpg

Related Video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzKcW_DHZ58

This document contains links shortened using http://tinyurl.com to facilitate emailing. If you are concerned that we would use them to cloak phishing or malware, you should open them with this: http://longurl.org

###

WHICH POLITICIANS ARE TAKING CASH FROM VERIZON? IT’S EASIER TO ASK WHICH ONES AREN’T!

http://ironboltbruce.blog.com/files/2011/11/Verizon_Political_Contributions_2010.pdf (524KB PDF)
Federal and state, political action committee (PAC) and corporate contributions

http://ironboltbruce.blog.com/files/2011/11/Verizon_Political_Contributions_2009.pdf (541KB PDF)
Federal and state, political action committee (PAC) and corporate contributions

Our thanks to the patriot who contributed this information. 🙂

###

PLEASE HELP US STAY IN THIS FIGHT…

Freedom isn’t Free! The revolution needs resources, folks: Your donations will be used to pay our living and operating expenses so we can continue to devote our full time and attention to informing the People and exposing the Kleptocracy pulling all strings Left and Right. Any amount you can spare will make a difference, so please click or go here today:

Donate with WePay


Who Actually Owns the Fed and Why That Must End

Who Actually Owns the Fed and Why That Must End

Few questions of late have been asked more frequently or answered with less transparency than this one:

WHO OWNS THE FED?

The domain name for the official website is FederalReserve.gov, the “.gov” extension of which suggests that the Federal Reserve System (a.k.a. the “Fed”) is part of the United States government and therefore owned by the American taxpayers.  But that is not the case.  As the Fed itself states…

“The Federal Reserve System fulfills its public mission as an independent entity within government.  It is not ‘owned’ by anyone and is not a private, profit-making institution.  As the nation’s central bank, the Federal Reserve derives its authority from the Congress of the United States. It is considered an independent central bank because its monetary policy decisions do not have to be approved by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branches of government, it does not receive funding appropriated by the Congress, and the terms of the members of the Board of Governors span multiple presidential and congressional terms.”

http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/about_14986.htm

Parts of that statement are true, sort of, and parts of that statement are not.  Factcheck.org provides a better answer:

“There are actually 12 different Federal Reserve Banks around the country, and they are owned by big private banks.  But the banks don’t necessarily run the show.  Nationally, the Federal Reserve System is led by a Board of Governors whose seven members are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate…  The concept of ‘ownership’ needs some explaining here, however.  The member banks must by law invest 3 percent of their capital as stock in the Reserve Banks, and they cannot sell or trade their stock or even use that stock as collateral to borrow money. They do receive dividends of 6 percent per year from the Reserve Banks and get to elect each Reserve Bank’s board of directors.  The private banks also have a voice in regulating the nation’s money supply and setting targets for short-term interest rates, but it’s a minority voice. Those decisions are made by the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), which has a dozen voting members, only five of whom come from the banks. The remaining seven, a voting majority, are the Fed’s Board of Governors who, as mentioned, are appointed by the president.”

http://www.factcheck.org/2008/03/federal-reserve-bank-ownership/

That’s a better answer, but not a totally complete or correct one.  Yes, there are 12 Federal Reserve Banks, all of which are owned by private banks, and all of which must pay dividends to their owners.  So contrary to what it claims, the Fed is not only privately-owned but a for-profit enterprise.  And yes, there *should* be 7 members of the FOMC appointed by the government and 5 appointed by the banks.  In fact, however, for unstated reasons and for some time now there have been only 5 people seated on the FRB Board of Governors, none of whom are celebrated consumer advocates…

http://www.federalreserve.gov/aboutthefed/default.htm

…which means government appointees do NOT outnumber bank appointees on the FOMC, and you can rest assured that the private banks DO “run the show”:

http://tinyurl.com/6346ltz

So the question then becomes:

WHICH PRIVATE BANKS CONTROL THE FED?

The Web is awash with lists and percentages on this one supported by nothing more than links that refer to other links that refer back to the original and often anonymous post.  A notable exception is the work of Jake Towne, who in March of 2009 applied an admittedly imperfect but plausible engineering approach to the problem and, after some extensive research and number-crunching, concluded the following:

“[The] top 4 banks – Bank of America (BAC), JP Morgan Chase, Citigroup, and Wachovia – would control roughly 50% of the stock of the Federal Reserve Bank, and the top 10 banks, including Wells Fargo (WFC), HSBC (HBC), and the Bank of New York (BK), would control over 68% of the stock.”

http://seekingalpha.com/article/123381-who-owns-the-fed

So according to Jake, whoever ultimately controls these ten banks thereby also controls the Federal Reserve:

Bank of America Corp.
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
CitiGroup
Wachovia Bank (subsequently acquired by Wells Fargo)
Wells Fargo N.A.
US Bank
State Street Corp.
HSBC Bank
Suntrust Bank
Bank of NY Mellon

TO RECAP…  The Federal Reserve System that has used its debt-based currency to exploit our economy since 1913 is a private banking cartel consisting of 12 regional Federal Reserve Banks.  Each of those banks are required to pay dividends to their shareholders, which makes them for-profit enterprises.  Those shareholders are all private banks and obviously also for-profit enterprises that exist not to maintain the welfare of humankind – or even the American subset thereof – but rather to maximize the wealth of their shareholders.

AND WHO ARE THEIR SHAREHOLDERS?

Keep tracing your way up the ownership pyramid, and you may find some have (in)famous names like Rothschild, Rockefeller or Buffett.  Others in this global elite we collectively refer to as “the 1%”.  Either way, their interests align with those of the rest of us – “the 99%” – only in the same manner as those of shepherds and the sheep that they shear in good times and slaughter in bad.

This must end.  And that is why the Fed must end.

Related Image:

http://img338.imageshack.us/img338/9514/fedmembersgraph.jpg

Related Video:

http://tinyurl.com/kleptocracytutorial

###

PLEASE HELP US STAY IN THIS FIGHT…

Freedom isn’t Free! The revolution needs resources, folks: Your donations will be used to pay our living and operating expenses so we can continue to devote our full time and attention to informing the People and exposing the Kleptocracy pulling all strings Left and Right. Any amount you can spare will make a difference, so please click or go here today:

Donate with WePay


At Boeing, Pay-to-Play is the Rule of the Day

At Boeing, Pay-to-Play is the Rule of the Day

“Boeing is the world’s top manufacturer of commercial airplanes, including the 767 and the 747. The company is also a leading military supplier, making fighter bombers, transport planes and the Apache helicopter. The company regularly lobbies Congress to increase defense spending and to win military contracts, although it lost the $300 billion Joint Strike Fighter contract to rival Lockheed Martin in 2001. Boeing has also supported expanding free trade, especially in Asia, where it hopes to sell more commercial aircraft. The company also pushed for Congress to reauthorize the Export-Import Bank, which gives loan guarantees to businesses. In 2001, Boeing got $2.5 billion from the bank.”

http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?cycle=A&type=P&id=D000000100

“Defense aerospace contractors concentrate their political donations on members of the House and Senate Appropriations subcommittees that allocate federal defense money. Prime targets of defense aerospace money also include members of the Armed Services committees, who influence military policy and have the power to create demand for this industry’s commodities… During the 2008 election cycle, the industry donated more than $7.5 million to federal candidates, splitting their contributions almost evenly between Republicans and Democrats… Boeing placed a close second to Lockheed in campaign contributions for the 2008 cycle, at more than $2.1 million. Of that, 56 percent went toward Democrats and 43 percent to Republicans.

http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/background.php?id=D01&year=2010

“The federal government’s selection of Boeing to build the next generation of Air Force aerial refueling tankers comes after years of contentious fighting that’s resulted in sky-high lobbying spending and accelerated campaign contributions to key politicians…. [ In 2010 alone, ] Boeing spent more than $17.8 million on lobbying expenditures, placing it first among companies in the defense aerospace industry… During the 2010 election cycle, Boeing’s political action committee spent more than $2.91 million, donating more than $2.1 million of that amount to federal candidates… Much of this money has gone toward members of Congress who stand to benefit politically from the KC-X tanker program:”

http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2011/02/boeing-eads.html

This is not the first time Boeing used payola to pocket an Air Force tanker contract. But thanks to the United States Supreme Court “Citizens United v. FEC” decision, corporations can now make grease payments over the table that used to slide under. Consider, for example, how Boeing won and lost its previous tanker contract:

“In May 2003, the United States Air Force announced it would lease 100 KC-767 tankers to replace the oldest 136 of its KC-135s. The 10 year lease would give the USAF the option to purchase the aircraft at the end of the contract. In September 2003, responding to critics who argued that the lease was vastly more expensive than an outright purchase, the United States Department of Defense announced a revised lease. In November 2003, the Air Force decided it would lease 20 KC-767 aircraft and purchase 80 tankers… Buying one KC-767 outright costs $150 million. The contract called for 100 aircraft being purchased or leased at an aggregate price of $26b, or $260m per plane. Therefore, the contract, if it had been executed, would have forced the DOD to pay Boeing much more money for each plane than it would have had to if the aircraft were purchased individually… In December 2003, the Pentagon announced the project was to be frozen while an investigation of allegations o!
f corruption by [Pentagon purchasing agent] Darleen Druyun (who had moved to Boeing in January 2003) was begun. Druyun pleaded guilty to inflating the price of the contract to favor her future employer and to passing information on the competing Airbus A330 MRTT bid (from EADS). In October 2004, she was sentenced to nine months in jail for corruption, fined $5,000, given three years of supervised release and 150 hours of community service. She began her prison term on January 5, 2005. She was released from prison on September 30, 2005. The ramifications extended to Boeing CFO Michael M. Sears, who was fired from Boeing, and Boeing CEO Phil Condit resigned. On February 18, 2005, Sears was sentenced to four months in prison. Boeing ended up paying a $615 million fine for their involvement. According to The Federal Times, Darleen Druyun will still be receiving a federal pension.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darleen_Druyun

CBS News called this “the biggest Pentagon scandal in 20 years”, but for Boeing it was just one of many:

http://www.contractormisconduct.org/index.cfm/1,73,221,html?ContractorID=13&ranking=2

And as far as Pentagon scandals go, this one was a drop in the bucket compared to Donald Rumsfeld’s adeptly timed confessions of 10 September 2001:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OlnQTcLHaMM

Related Images:

http://blog.al.com/pr/2008/06/tanker_battle_funny_stuff.html

Related Video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOPbS6H0HEo

###

PLEASE HELP US STAY IN THIS FIGHT…

Freedom isn’t Free! The revolution needs resources, folks: Your donations will be used to pay our living and operating expenses so we can continue to devote our full time and attention to informing the People and exposing the Kleptocracy pulling all strings Left and Right. Any amount you can spare will make a difference, so please click or go here today:

Donate with WePay


At Northrop Grumman, It’s All About the Green

At Northrop Grumman, It's All About the Green

Of the “Big 5” U.S. defense contractors who each year bank billions of taxpayer dollars we know about – and probably billions more we don’t – none appreciate the importance of high-profile, high-volume campaign contributions and legislative lobbying more so than Northrop Grumman. In fact, they even devote one third of their website’s home page slide show to enlisting YOU to lobby for THEM:

http://www.northropgrumman.com

If they change the slideshow or you can’t access flash, here are screenshots of the slides I’m referring to:

http://ldrlongdistancerider.com/NorthropGrumman/Slide6.jpg
http://ldrlongdistancerider.com/NorthropGrumman/Slide7.jpg
http://ldrlongdistancerider.com/NorthropGrumman/Slide8.jpg
http://ldrlongdistancerider.com/NorthropGrumman/Slide9.jpg

Yes, Northrop Grumman would certainly love to have all of us 99 percenters dialing for dollars on their behalf. But even without us, they still have a sizable army of well-heeled lobbyists working the Hill. In 2010, for example, they deployed a force of 65 that included two revolving-door Senators (John Breaux and Trent Lott) as well as two revolving-door Congressmen (Jack Edwards and Robert Livingston):

http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/clientlbs.php?id=D000000170&year=2010

All that good-ole boy networking must have been effective, because that year Northrop Grumman was “awarded” over $15.5 billion in new federal contracts despite a record of government overcharges, mischarges, cost overruns, nonconforming parts, hazardous waste permit violations and outright fraud that only Lockheed Martin or the Boeing Company could envy:

http://www.contractormisconduct.org/index.cfm/1,73,221,html?ContractorID=42&ranking=3

Northrop Grumman is another textbook example of how the Kleptocracy makes a mockery of the dysfunctional two-party system their paid pundits work hard to keep the Sheeple believing is the essence of democracy. They don’t care who gets elected, or which party is in power, so long as fat government contracts keep coming their way. Almost all of their campaign contributions go to the incumbents, and they generally ride the horse that wins. In the 2000 through 2006 election cycles, the majority of their contributions went to the red team (ie. Republicans). In 2008 and 2010, they shifted to the blue side (ie. Democrats). And so far, it looks like they’ll shift back again in 2012:

http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/toprecips.php?id=D000000170&type=P&sort=A&cycle=2000

But don’t get lost in all the color references. Northrop Grumman is not about red, or blue, or the red-white-and-blue plastered all over their marketing propaganda. At Northrop Grumman, it’s all about the green…

Related Image:

http://ldrlongdistancerider.com/images/Northrop_Grumman.jpg

Related Videos:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XLuaebpdAA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMvaK8kl9jM

###

PLEASE HELP US STAY IN THIS FIGHT…

Freedom isn’t Free! The revolution needs resources, folks: Your donations will be used to pay our living and operating expenses so we can continue to devote our full time and attention to informing the People and exposing the Kleptocracy pulling all strings Left and Right. Any amount you can spare will make a difference, so please click or go here today:

Donate with WePay