Colin Powell
The reason why I think Colin Powell should step back into the fight, not with a new Republican party, but as a Democrat maybe not to run for President, but to aid President Obama. Colin Powell has to much mechanics to be sitting around watching the grass grow or given speeches.
Colin Powell a NY Bronx kid who served his country in Vietnam as a soldier, and may have faced more bullets fired at him by bureaucrats while serving four administrations in Washington, without wearing a bullet proof vest. Colin Powell a mans, man, who rose to the ranks in the United States Army a former four-star general, national security adviser, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and secretary of state, and if he wanted to could have been President of the United States. Colin Powell a highly intelligent disciplined warrior a great leader who could bring two parties Republicans & Democrats together, a good listener, a good communicator that willingly will help others. Colin Powell work in Government was never for self financial gain, his character is only matched with that of a President or World leader.
Why Colin Powell left the Bush Administration Rumsfeld and Powell had strong differing views on matters that would end with them fighting it out. President Bush also rejected Powell foreign policy ideas and Vice President Dick Cheney often kept Colin Powell out of the loop on important decisions by the Vice President. For example, President Bush's decision to try detainees in military commissions and strip them of their due process rights & the legal justification for torture was not conveyed to Secretary of State Colin Powell. Powell also wanted to close Guantanamo. The CIA lied to Colin Powell about the Al Qa’ida-Baghdad ties just like they did to everyone else who wasn't a card-carrying Neocon.
Back in Feb.03' there were no weapons of mass destruction stockpiled in Iraq, and there was no case to invade the country.
Colin Powell in his own words: "But the case that we took to the world and the case that we took to the American people rested not just in his human rights abuses or his cheating on the Oil for Food program, it rested on the real and present danger of weapons of mass destruction that he could use against his neighbors, or terrorists could use against us. That was the precipitating issue in my judgment, and it turned out those weapons were not there."
Powell, Colin A. and Joseph Persico, My American Journey
DeYoung, Karen, Soldier: The Life of Colin Powell,
Dates of ranks
Second Lieutenant: June 9, 1958
First Lieutenant: December 30, 1959
Captain: June 2, 1962
Major: May 24, 1966
Lieutenant Colonel: July 9, 1970
Colonel: February 1, 1976
Brigadier General: June 1, 1979
Major General: August 1, 1983
Lieutenant General: March 26, 1986
General: April 4, 1989
Awards and decorations
Badges
Combat Infantryman Badge
Expert Infantryman Badge
Ranger Tab
Parachutist Badge
Pathfinder Badge
Air Assault Badge
Presidential Service Badge
Secretary of Defense Identification Badge
Joint Chiefs of Staff Identification Badge
Army Staff Identification Badge
Military medals and ribbons
Defense Distinguished Service Medal (with 3 Oak Leaf Clusters)
Distinguished Service Medal, Army (with Oak Leaf Cluster)
Defense Superior Service Medal
Legion of Merit (with Oak Leaf Cluster)
Soldier's Medal
Bronze Star
Purple Heart
Air Medal
Joint Service Commendation Medal
Army Commendation Medal (with 2 Oak Leaf Clusters)
Presidential Medal of Freedom (order of precedence, if worn)
Presidential Citizens Medal (order of precedence, if worn)
National Defense Service Medal [with 1 Bronze Service Star]
Vietnam Service Medal [with 1 Silver Service Star]
Army Service Ribbon
Army Overseas Service Ribbon [with numeral 3]
Words of manipulation to force a WAR on Iraq.
George* Bush, US President 18 March, 2003 Saddam's removal is necessary to eradicate the threat from his weapons of mass destruction Jack Straw, Foreign Secretary 2 April, 2003 Before people crow about the absence of weapons of mass destruction, I suggest they wait a bit Tony Blair 28 April, 2003 We are asked to accept Saddam decided to destroy those weapons. I say that such a claim is palpably absurd Tony Blair, Prime Minister 18 March, 2003 It is possible Iraqi leaders decided they would destroy them prior to the conflict Donald Rumsfeld, US Defense Secretary 28 May, 2003
Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction.
Dick Cheney Speech to VFW National Convention August 26, 2002
Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons.
George "aWol" Bush Speech to UN General Assembly September 12, 2002
If he declares he has none, then we will know that Saddam Hussein is once again misleading the world.
Ari Fleischer Press Briefing December 2, 2002 We know for a fact that there are weapons there.
Ari Fleischer Press Briefing January 9, 2003 "25,000 liters of anthrax ... 38,000 liters of botulinum toxin ... materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent ... upwards of 30,000 munitions capable of delivering chemical agents ... several mobile biological weapons labs ... thousands of Iraqi security personnel ... at work hiding documents and materials from the U.N. inspectors."
George*"aWol" Bush State of the Union Address January 28, 2003
We know that Saddam Hussein is determined to keep his weapons of mass destruction, is determined to make more.
Colin Powell Remarks to UN Security Council February 5, 2003
We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have.
George "aWol" Bush Radio Address February 8, 2003 So has the strategic decision been made to disarm Iraq of its weapons of mass destruction by the leadership in Baghdad? . . . I think our judgment has to be clearly not.
Colin Powell Remarks to UN Security Council March 7, 2003
Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised.
George "aWol" Bush Address to the Nation March 17, 2003 Well, there is no
question that we have evidence and information that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical particularly . . . all this will be made clear in the course of the operation, for whatever duration it takes.
Ari Fleisher Press Briefing March 21, 2003 There is no doubt that the regime of Saddam Hussein possesses weapons of mass destruction. And . . . as this operation continues, those weapons will be identified, found, along with the people who have produced them and who guard them.
Gen. Tommy Franks Press Conference March 22, 2003 I have no doubt we're going to find big stores of weapons of mass destruction.
Defense Policy Board member Kenneth Adelman Washington Post, p. A27 March 23, 2003 One of our top objectives is to find and destroy the WMD. There are a number of sites.
Pentagon Spokeswoman Victoria Clark Press Briefing March 22, 2008 We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat.
Donald Rumsfeld ABC Interview March 30, 2003 Obviously the administration intends to publicize all the weapons of mass destruction U.S. forces find -- and there will be plenty.
Neocon scholar Robert Kagan Washington Post op-ed April 9, 2003 I think you have always heard, and you continue to hear from officials, a measure of high confidence that, indeed, the weapons of mass destruction will be found.
Ari Fleischer Press Briefing April 10, 2003 We are learning more as we interrogate or have discussions with Iraqi scientists and people within the Iraqi structure, that perhaps he destroyed some, perhaps he dispersed some. And so we will find them.
George*"aWol" Bush NBC Interview April 24, 2003 There are people who in large measure have information that we need . . . so that we can track down the weapons of mass destruction in that country.
Donald Rumsfeld Press Briefing April 25, 2003 We'll find them. It'll be a matter of time to do so.
George*"aWol" Bush Remarks to Reporters May 3, 2003 I'm absolutely sure that there are weapons of mass destruction there and the evidence will be forthcoming. We're just getting it just now.
Colin Powell Remarks to Reporters May 4, 2003 We never believed that we'd just tumble over weapons of mass destruction in that country.
Donald Rumsfeld Fox News Interview May 4, 2003 I'm not surprised if we begin to uncover the weapons program of Saddam Hussein -- because he had a weapons program.
George*"aWol" Bush Remarks to Reporters May 6, 2003 U.S. officials never expected that "we were going to open garages and find" weapons of mass destruction.
Condoleeza Rice Reuters Interview May 12, 2003 I just don't know whether it was all destroyed years ago -- I mean, there's no question that there were chemical weapons years ago -- whether they were destroyed right before the war, or whether they're still hidden.
Maj. Gen. David Petraeus, Commander 101st Airborne Press Briefing May 13, 2003 Before the war, there's no doubt in my mind that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical. I expected them to be found. I still expect them to be found.
Gen. Michael Hagee, Commandant of the Marine Corps Interview with Reporters May 21, 2003
Given time, given the number of prisoners now that we're interrogating, I'm confident that we're going to find weapons of mass destruction.
Gen. Richard Myers, Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff NBC Today Show interview May 26, 2003*
They may have had time to destroy them, and I don't know the answer.
Donald Rumsfeld Remarks to Council on Foreign Relations May 27, 2003 For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction as justification for invading Iraq because it was the one reason everyone could agree on.
Paul Wolfowitz Vanity Fair interview May 28, 2003
It was a surprise to me then Eit remains a surprise to me now Ethat we have not uncovered weapons, as you say, in some of the forward dispersal sites. Believe me, it's not for lack of trying. We've been to virtually every ammunition supply point between the Kuwaiti border and Baghdad, but they're simply not there.
Lt. Gen. James Conway, 1st Marine Expeditionary Force Press Interview
But for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them. --George W. Bush Interview with TVP Poland 5/30/2003 You remember when [Secretary of State] Colin Powell stood up in front of the world, and he said Iraq has got laboratories, mobile labs to build biological weapons ...They're illegal. They're against the United Nations resolutions, and we've so far discovered two...And we'll find more weapons as time goes on And we'll find more weapons as time goes on --George W. Bush Press Briefing 5/30/2003
But for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them. --George W. Bush Interview with TVP Poland 5/30/2003 You remember when [Secretary of State] Colin Powell stood up in front of the world, and he said Iraq has got laboratories, mobile labs to build biological weapons ...They're illegal.
They're against the United Nations resolutions, and we've so far discovered two...And we'll find more weapons as time goes on And we'll find more weapons as time goes on.
To date, $830.2 billion dollars have been allocated to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. In addition, $77.1 billion dollars have been requested in the recent supplemental that further fund these wars, for a total of $907.3 billion dollars. The national, state, and local numbers we provide are based on the total of the approved and pending amounts through the end of Fiscal Year 2009.
The full FY2010 budget expected in May will contain war funding requests for FY2010. When the FY2010 amounts are approved, we will adjust the counter so that it reaches the new total at the end of FY2010. COSTOFWAR.COM - The Cost of War
Under the Bush Administration, federal contractors have awarded subcontracts to subcontractors, who then award another tier of subcontracts to sub-subcontractors, who then repeat the chain. This type of “layer cake” contract inflates costs and diffuses accountability. Section 202 prevents a contractor from using subcontracts for more than 65% of the work of a contract but all corp. that contract for the U.S. government broke that law.
The Bush Administration has jeopardized taxpayer interests and squandered hundreds of millions of dollars by giving private contractors like Halliburton and Parsons monopolies over huge portions of the reconstruction effort in Iraq. Section 201 prohibits the use of these monopoly contracts, requiring the Administration to use contract vehicles that allow multiple contractors to compete for individual projects.
First, did George W. Bush utilize international bankers and investors, for his seeming personal financial gain, who had previously been involved in the financing of covert wars by the CIA, in violation of the 1984 Congressional Boland Amendment?
Second, did each Bush administration manipulate both the CIA and FBI in a manner intended to prevent the public revelation of these documented Bush-Saudi relationships?
Third, how might manipulation of CIA and FBI “information output” on bin Laden’s archterrorist banker Mahfouz, by either Bush President, have resulted in negative effects on these agencies’ function?
Follow the money
There is no existing database that systematically tracks the extent of wast, fraud, and abuse in federal contracts.
Even before the war in Iraq began the Bush administration were targeting areas in Iraq and had plans to help rebuild the country, after the last of the old regime was dead or in jail. The U.S. Agency for International Development secretly asked six U.S. companies to submit bids for a $900 million government contract to repair and reconstruct water systems, roads, bridges, schools and hospitals in Iraq. Bechtel Group Inc., Fluor Corp., Halliburton Co. subsidiary Kellogg, Brown & Root, Louis Berger Group Inc., Parsons Corp. and Washington Group International Inc. -- contributed a combined $3.6 million in individual, PAC and soft money donations between 1999 and 2002, Sixty-six percent of that total went to Republicans.The bidding process has been criticized for including only a handful of companies, some with substantial political clout and none of which is based outside the United States. The recent invitations to bid on reconstruction contracts went to U.S. corporations for security reasons, and that foreign companies may compete for subcontracting work.
Tiers of Subcontractors
Under the Bush Administration, federal contractors have awarded subcontracts to subcontractors, who then award another tier of subcontracts to sub-subcontractors, who then repeat the chain. This type of “layer cake” contract inflates costs and diffuses accountability. Section 202 prevents a contractor from using subcontracts for more than 65% of the work of a contract but all corp. that contract for the U.S. government broke that law.
Monopoly Contracts
The Bush Administration has jeopardized taxpayer interests and squandered hundreds of millions of dollars by giving private contractors like Halliburton and Parsons monopolies over huge portions of the reconstruction effort in Iraq. Section 201 prohibits the use of these monopoly contracts, requiring the Administration to use contract vehicles that allow multiple contractors to compete for individual projects.
The $8.8 billion was reported to have been lost are stolen.
Some 360 tons of American dollars were stacked on wooden pallets and fork lifted into into cargo planes. The $8.8 billion [that should have been investigated] was reported to have been spent on salaries, operating and capital expenditures, and reconstruction projects. The money came from revenues from the United Nations' former oil-for-food program, oil sales and seized assets all Iraqi money. In one case, they raised the possibility that thousands of "ghost employees" were on an unnamed ministry's payroll.The Pentagon cannot fully account for $19.2 billion worth of equipment provided to Iraqi security forces. Defense Department and components of the Multinational Force-Iraq were responsible. In addition to the $19.2 billion used, the Defense Department recently requested another $2 billion for the program.
Taxpayers are left vulnerable to overpriced contracts
The federal government’s annual procurement spending rose by $174. 4 billion, from $203. 1 billion to $377. 5 billion - procurement spending than jumped by $48 billion. Procurement spending is concentrated on the largest private contractors. The top five recipients of federal contracts - Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, and General Dynamics received $80 billion, more than 21% of the total federal contract dollars. Just twenty corporations received 36% of the total dollars awarded. Lockheed Martin, the largest federal contractor, received $25 billion, more than the budgets of the Department of Commerce, the Department of Interior,the Small Business Administration, and Congress combined government pays for all contract expenditures. The prone contract and the monopoly contract - was widely used in Iraq, contributing to extensive waste and abuse.
Reports of Halliburton’s excessive billings have multiplied since the invasion of Iraq. Former Halliburton employees have described how the company charged $45 for cases of soda and $100 to clean 15-pound bags of laundry. U.S. government auditors have also issued dozens of reports finding questionable billings, including unreasonable fuel prices and charges for meals that were never served to the troops, ghost employees.
The report finds that government auditors at the Defense Contract Audit Agency have identified more than $1 billion in “questioned” Halliburton costs. provide support services to the troops & $219 million in questioned costs under the company’s Restore Iraqi Oil [RIO] contract to rebuild Iraq’s oil infrastructure. The magnitude of these questioned costs significantly exceeds previously known estimates.
Despite their disadvantages for the taxpayer, the Bush Administration has increasingly turned to cost-plus contracts. The Administration’s use of cost- plus contracts increased by 75%. The federal government spent $62 billion on cost-plus contracts. Federal spending on cost-plus contracts had increased by nearly $50 billion to $110 billion. Nearly half of the federal spending on these cost-plus contracts ($52 billion) was spent on cost-plus-award-fee contracts, a type of cost-plus contract in which it is possible for the contractor to receive millions in profits even if the contract goes over budget. The DCAA auditors have also found that an additional $442 million in Halliburton’s charges are “unsupported.” As a result, Halliburton’s total “questioned” and “unsupported” costs exceed $1.4 billion.
The single largest cost-plus contract is the Logistics Civil Augmentation Program contract [called “LOGCAP”] that was awarded by the Defense Department to Halliburton. This contract, which is used in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere to provide food, shelter, and other support services to U.S. troops, is currently valued at $16.4 billion, Halliburton received over $5 billion through the LOGCAP contract.
Cost-Plus Contracts Worth Over $1 Billion
Contractor Contract Value
Health Net Federal Services Managed Health Care for DOD $1,931,014,988
TriWest Healthcare Alliance Managed Health Care for DOD $1,894,225,281
Calif. Institute of Technology [NASA] $1,369,412,482
Westinghouse Savannah River Co. Savannah River Site [DOE] $1,325,619,805
Northrop Grumman DD[X] Destroyer $1,010,929,188
Halliburton – LOGCAP $5,082,435,949
Lockheed Martin Joint Strike Fighter System $3,327,634,511
Boeing Missile Defense Program $2,515,234,778
Lockheed Martin Sandia National Laboratories $2,291,554,411
Humana Military Health care Ser. Managed Health Care for DOD $2,171,654,432
United Space Alliance [NASA] $2,041,458,378
After the OPEC oil embargo was imposed in late 1973, oil prices jumped from an average of slightly less than $4.00 a barrel to $11.40 a barrel in 1974 [or from about $16.75 to $45.40 a barrel in 2005 dollars, adjusted using the U.S. consumer price index]. A decrease in Middle East oil production caused a second major oil shock in 1979-80, pushing prices from approximately $14.00 a barrel in 1978 to $37.20 a barrel in 1980 (or from $41.95 to $88.25 a barrel in 2005 dollars.]
The recent rise in oil prices rivals these two episodes in magnitude, although it has occurred more gradually. Oil prices averaged just under $25.00 a barrel in 2002 and climbed only modestly in 2003. In early 2004, in part owing to surging demand by China, prices began a strong upward trend, averaging $37.75 a barrel that year, $53.35 in 2005, and $65.35 over the first ten months of 2006.
These three episodes of price volatility generated large swings in export revenues for oil-exporting countries. In 1972, oil exporters recorded $24 billion in foreign sales. By 1974, after the first oil price shock, export revenues had grown to $117 billion. Revenues increased steadily but not dramatically over the next several years. The second oil price shock, however, propelled export revenues to roughly $275 billion in 1980 and $250 billion in 1981.
The most recent rise in oil prices has meant new gains for oil-exporting countries. All told, oil-export revenues appear set to reach about $970 billion in 2006, up from just $300 billion in 2002. This dramatic increase raises the natural question of how oil exporters have spent their windfall. Congress passed legislation to permit the government to acquire a wide range of “commercial items” with only minimal competitive bidding and limited oversight. In practice, however, the Bush Administration has interpreted the “commercial item” exemption to cover a multitude of items that are not subject to open market forces.
The White House Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP) issued a memorandum advocating, in bold print, that federal agencies use the commercial item authority to buy noncommercial items. OFPP told procurement officials to “recognize the benefits — and challenges — of buying non-commercial items within a commercial items framework.” OFPP recognized that “the lack of market testing or commercial analogs ... and the potential absence of competition” may pose a challenge, but nonetheless urged agencies to structure contracts within the commercial item framework or “consider using other flexibilities.”
The bulk of the expenditures under the “commercial item” exception came from the Department of Defense. The Defense Department spent $71.2 billion through the commercial item exception in 2005, an increase of 249% from the $20.5 billion spent. As a result, commercial item spending increased
from 15% of the Department’s budget to over 26% of it's budget.
In many instances over the last five years, contract mismanagement began well before any contract was signed. In these cases, federal contracts wasted taxpayer dollars because Administration officials did not adequately determine the government’s needs or think through the contract requirements in advance.
One prominent example of the failure to plan involves the contingency contract for troop support, called the Logistics Civil Augmentation Program [LOGCAP] contract. Prior to the Iraq war, senior Administration officials engaged in an extensive exercise to plan for the takeover of Iraq’s oilfields.97 But these same officials did virtually no planning for how to support or supply the troops after the invasion of Iraq.
Officials at the Department of Defense did not begin planning for the use of the LOGCAP contract to provide food and shelter for the troops until after the fall of Baghdad. Military acquisition rules recommend that “a comprehensive statement of work be developed during the early phases of contingency planning.” We found that the Defense Department did not follow that guidance when planning for the deployment of troops in Iraq. One consequence of the failure to plan was that “cost constraint did not become a factor in using LOGCAP in Iraq and Kuwait until almost a year into the operations,” and the Army set “no spending limits for LOGCAP.
My point, Colin Powell gave his loyalty to an administration that had a different agenda than what they promised him.
Yours truly,
Anthony Smith
Colin Powell a NY Bronx kid who served his country in Vietnam as a soldier, and may have faced more bullets fired at him by bureaucrats while serving four administrations in Washington, without wearing a bullet proof vest. Colin Powell a mans, man, who rose to the ranks in the United States Army a former four-star general, national security adviser, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and secretary of state, and if he wanted to could have been President of the United States. Colin Powell a highly intelligent disciplined warrior a great leader who could bring two parties Republicans & Democrats together, a good listener, a good communicator that willingly will help others. Colin Powell work in Government was never for self financial gain, his character is only matched with that of a President or World leader.
Why Colin Powell left the Bush Administration Rumsfeld and Powell had strong differing views on matters that would end with them fighting it out. President Bush also rejected Powell foreign policy ideas and Vice President Dick Cheney often kept Colin Powell out of the loop on important decisions by the Vice President. For example, President Bush's decision to try detainees in military commissions and strip them of their due process rights & the legal justification for torture was not conveyed to Secretary of State Colin Powell. Powell also wanted to close Guantanamo. The CIA lied to Colin Powell about the Al Qa’ida-Baghdad ties just like they did to everyone else who wasn't a card-carrying Neocon.
Back in Feb.03' there were no weapons of mass destruction stockpiled in Iraq, and there was no case to invade the country.
Colin Powell in his own words: "But the case that we took to the world and the case that we took to the American people rested not just in his human rights abuses or his cheating on the Oil for Food program, it rested on the real and present danger of weapons of mass destruction that he could use against his neighbors, or terrorists could use against us. That was the precipitating issue in my judgment, and it turned out those weapons were not there."
Powell, Colin A. and Joseph Persico, My American Journey
DeYoung, Karen, Soldier: The Life of Colin Powell,
Dates of ranks
Second Lieutenant: June 9, 1958
First Lieutenant: December 30, 1959
Captain: June 2, 1962
Major: May 24, 1966
Lieutenant Colonel: July 9, 1970
Colonel: February 1, 1976
Brigadier General: June 1, 1979
Major General: August 1, 1983
Lieutenant General: March 26, 1986
General: April 4, 1989
Awards and decorations
Badges
Combat Infantryman Badge
Expert Infantryman Badge
Ranger Tab
Parachutist Badge
Pathfinder Badge
Air Assault Badge
Presidential Service Badge
Secretary of Defense Identification Badge
Joint Chiefs of Staff Identification Badge
Army Staff Identification Badge
Military medals and ribbons
Defense Distinguished Service Medal (with 3 Oak Leaf Clusters)
Distinguished Service Medal, Army (with Oak Leaf Cluster)
Defense Superior Service Medal
Legion of Merit (with Oak Leaf Cluster)
Soldier's Medal
Bronze Star
Purple Heart
Air Medal
Joint Service Commendation Medal
Army Commendation Medal (with 2 Oak Leaf Clusters)
Presidential Medal of Freedom (order of precedence, if worn)
Presidential Citizens Medal (order of precedence, if worn)
National Defense Service Medal [with 1 Bronze Service Star]
Vietnam Service Medal [with 1 Silver Service Star]
Army Service Ribbon
Army Overseas Service Ribbon [with numeral 3]
Words of manipulation to force a WAR on Iraq.
George* Bush, US President 18 March, 2003 Saddam's removal is necessary to eradicate the threat from his weapons of mass destruction Jack Straw, Foreign Secretary 2 April, 2003 Before people crow about the absence of weapons of mass destruction, I suggest they wait a bit Tony Blair 28 April, 2003 We are asked to accept Saddam decided to destroy those weapons. I say that such a claim is palpably absurd Tony Blair, Prime Minister 18 March, 2003 It is possible Iraqi leaders decided they would destroy them prior to the conflict Donald Rumsfeld, US Defense Secretary 28 May, 2003
Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction.
Dick Cheney Speech to VFW National Convention August 26, 2002
Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons.
George "aWol" Bush Speech to UN General Assembly September 12, 2002
If he declares he has none, then we will know that Saddam Hussein is once again misleading the world.
Ari Fleischer Press Briefing December 2, 2002 We know for a fact that there are weapons there.
Ari Fleischer Press Briefing January 9, 2003 "25,000 liters of anthrax ... 38,000 liters of botulinum toxin ... materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent ... upwards of 30,000 munitions capable of delivering chemical agents ... several mobile biological weapons labs ... thousands of Iraqi security personnel ... at work hiding documents and materials from the U.N. inspectors."
George*"aWol" Bush State of the Union Address January 28, 2003
We know that Saddam Hussein is determined to keep his weapons of mass destruction, is determined to make more.
Colin Powell Remarks to UN Security Council February 5, 2003
We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have.
George "aWol" Bush Radio Address February 8, 2003 So has the strategic decision been made to disarm Iraq of its weapons of mass destruction by the leadership in Baghdad? . . . I think our judgment has to be clearly not.
Colin Powell Remarks to UN Security Council March 7, 2003
Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised.
George "aWol" Bush Address to the Nation March 17, 2003 Well, there is no
question that we have evidence and information that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical particularly . . . all this will be made clear in the course of the operation, for whatever duration it takes.
Ari Fleisher Press Briefing March 21, 2003 There is no doubt that the regime of Saddam Hussein possesses weapons of mass destruction. And . . . as this operation continues, those weapons will be identified, found, along with the people who have produced them and who guard them.
Gen. Tommy Franks Press Conference March 22, 2003 I have no doubt we're going to find big stores of weapons of mass destruction.
Defense Policy Board member Kenneth Adelman Washington Post, p. A27 March 23, 2003 One of our top objectives is to find and destroy the WMD. There are a number of sites.
Pentagon Spokeswoman Victoria Clark Press Briefing March 22, 2008 We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat.
Donald Rumsfeld ABC Interview March 30, 2003 Obviously the administration intends to publicize all the weapons of mass destruction U.S. forces find -- and there will be plenty.
Neocon scholar Robert Kagan Washington Post op-ed April 9, 2003 I think you have always heard, and you continue to hear from officials, a measure of high confidence that, indeed, the weapons of mass destruction will be found.
Ari Fleischer Press Briefing April 10, 2003 We are learning more as we interrogate or have discussions with Iraqi scientists and people within the Iraqi structure, that perhaps he destroyed some, perhaps he dispersed some. And so we will find them.
George*"aWol" Bush NBC Interview April 24, 2003 There are people who in large measure have information that we need . . . so that we can track down the weapons of mass destruction in that country.
Donald Rumsfeld Press Briefing April 25, 2003 We'll find them. It'll be a matter of time to do so.
George*"aWol" Bush Remarks to Reporters May 3, 2003 I'm absolutely sure that there are weapons of mass destruction there and the evidence will be forthcoming. We're just getting it just now.
Colin Powell Remarks to Reporters May 4, 2003 We never believed that we'd just tumble over weapons of mass destruction in that country.
Donald Rumsfeld Fox News Interview May 4, 2003 I'm not surprised if we begin to uncover the weapons program of Saddam Hussein -- because he had a weapons program.
George*"aWol" Bush Remarks to Reporters May 6, 2003 U.S. officials never expected that "we were going to open garages and find" weapons of mass destruction.
Condoleeza Rice Reuters Interview May 12, 2003 I just don't know whether it was all destroyed years ago -- I mean, there's no question that there were chemical weapons years ago -- whether they were destroyed right before the war, or whether they're still hidden.
Maj. Gen. David Petraeus, Commander 101st Airborne Press Briefing May 13, 2003 Before the war, there's no doubt in my mind that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical. I expected them to be found. I still expect them to be found.
Gen. Michael Hagee, Commandant of the Marine Corps Interview with Reporters May 21, 2003
Given time, given the number of prisoners now that we're interrogating, I'm confident that we're going to find weapons of mass destruction.
Gen. Richard Myers, Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff NBC Today Show interview May 26, 2003*
They may have had time to destroy them, and I don't know the answer.
Donald Rumsfeld Remarks to Council on Foreign Relations May 27, 2003 For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction as justification for invading Iraq because it was the one reason everyone could agree on.
Paul Wolfowitz Vanity Fair interview May 28, 2003
It was a surprise to me then Eit remains a surprise to me now Ethat we have not uncovered weapons, as you say, in some of the forward dispersal sites. Believe me, it's not for lack of trying. We've been to virtually every ammunition supply point between the Kuwaiti border and Baghdad, but they're simply not there.
Lt. Gen. James Conway, 1st Marine Expeditionary Force Press Interview
But for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them. --George W. Bush Interview with TVP Poland 5/30/2003 You remember when [Secretary of State] Colin Powell stood up in front of the world, and he said Iraq has got laboratories, mobile labs to build biological weapons ...They're illegal. They're against the United Nations resolutions, and we've so far discovered two...And we'll find more weapons as time goes on And we'll find more weapons as time goes on --George W. Bush Press Briefing 5/30/2003
But for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them. --George W. Bush Interview with TVP Poland 5/30/2003 You remember when [Secretary of State] Colin Powell stood up in front of the world, and he said Iraq has got laboratories, mobile labs to build biological weapons ...They're illegal.
They're against the United Nations resolutions, and we've so far discovered two...And we'll find more weapons as time goes on And we'll find more weapons as time goes on.
To date, $830.2 billion dollars have been allocated to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. In addition, $77.1 billion dollars have been requested in the recent supplemental that further fund these wars, for a total of $907.3 billion dollars. The national, state, and local numbers we provide are based on the total of the approved and pending amounts through the end of Fiscal Year 2009.
The full FY2010 budget expected in May will contain war funding requests for FY2010. When the FY2010 amounts are approved, we will adjust the counter so that it reaches the new total at the end of FY2010. COSTOFWAR.COM - The Cost of War
Under the Bush Administration, federal contractors have awarded subcontracts to subcontractors, who then award another tier of subcontracts to sub-subcontractors, who then repeat the chain. This type of “layer cake” contract inflates costs and diffuses accountability. Section 202 prevents a contractor from using subcontracts for more than 65% of the work of a contract but all corp. that contract for the U.S. government broke that law.
The Bush Administration has jeopardized taxpayer interests and squandered hundreds of millions of dollars by giving private contractors like Halliburton and Parsons monopolies over huge portions of the reconstruction effort in Iraq. Section 201 prohibits the use of these monopoly contracts, requiring the Administration to use contract vehicles that allow multiple contractors to compete for individual projects.
First, did George W. Bush utilize international bankers and investors, for his seeming personal financial gain, who had previously been involved in the financing of covert wars by the CIA, in violation of the 1984 Congressional Boland Amendment?
Second, did each Bush administration manipulate both the CIA and FBI in a manner intended to prevent the public revelation of these documented Bush-Saudi relationships?
Third, how might manipulation of CIA and FBI “information output” on bin Laden’s archterrorist banker Mahfouz, by either Bush President, have resulted in negative effects on these agencies’ function?
Follow the money
There is no existing database that systematically tracks the extent of wast, fraud, and abuse in federal contracts.
Even before the war in Iraq began the Bush administration were targeting areas in Iraq and had plans to help rebuild the country, after the last of the old regime was dead or in jail. The U.S. Agency for International Development secretly asked six U.S. companies to submit bids for a $900 million government contract to repair and reconstruct water systems, roads, bridges, schools and hospitals in Iraq. Bechtel Group Inc., Fluor Corp., Halliburton Co. subsidiary Kellogg, Brown & Root, Louis Berger Group Inc., Parsons Corp. and Washington Group International Inc. -- contributed a combined $3.6 million in individual, PAC and soft money donations between 1999 and 2002, Sixty-six percent of that total went to Republicans.The bidding process has been criticized for including only a handful of companies, some with substantial political clout and none of which is based outside the United States. The recent invitations to bid on reconstruction contracts went to U.S. corporations for security reasons, and that foreign companies may compete for subcontracting work.
Tiers of Subcontractors
Under the Bush Administration, federal contractors have awarded subcontracts to subcontractors, who then award another tier of subcontracts to sub-subcontractors, who then repeat the chain. This type of “layer cake” contract inflates costs and diffuses accountability. Section 202 prevents a contractor from using subcontracts for more than 65% of the work of a contract but all corp. that contract for the U.S. government broke that law.
Monopoly Contracts
The Bush Administration has jeopardized taxpayer interests and squandered hundreds of millions of dollars by giving private contractors like Halliburton and Parsons monopolies over huge portions of the reconstruction effort in Iraq. Section 201 prohibits the use of these monopoly contracts, requiring the Administration to use contract vehicles that allow multiple contractors to compete for individual projects.
The $8.8 billion was reported to have been lost are stolen.
Some 360 tons of American dollars were stacked on wooden pallets and fork lifted into into cargo planes. The $8.8 billion [that should have been investigated] was reported to have been spent on salaries, operating and capital expenditures, and reconstruction projects. The money came from revenues from the United Nations' former oil-for-food program, oil sales and seized assets all Iraqi money. In one case, they raised the possibility that thousands of "ghost employees" were on an unnamed ministry's payroll.The Pentagon cannot fully account for $19.2 billion worth of equipment provided to Iraqi security forces. Defense Department and components of the Multinational Force-Iraq were responsible. In addition to the $19.2 billion used, the Defense Department recently requested another $2 billion for the program.
Taxpayers are left vulnerable to overpriced contracts
The federal government’s annual procurement spending rose by $174. 4 billion, from $203. 1 billion to $377. 5 billion - procurement spending than jumped by $48 billion. Procurement spending is concentrated on the largest private contractors. The top five recipients of federal contracts - Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, and General Dynamics received $80 billion, more than 21% of the total federal contract dollars. Just twenty corporations received 36% of the total dollars awarded. Lockheed Martin, the largest federal contractor, received $25 billion, more than the budgets of the Department of Commerce, the Department of Interior,the Small Business Administration, and Congress combined government pays for all contract expenditures. The prone contract and the monopoly contract - was widely used in Iraq, contributing to extensive waste and abuse.
Reports of Halliburton’s excessive billings have multiplied since the invasion of Iraq. Former Halliburton employees have described how the company charged $45 for cases of soda and $100 to clean 15-pound bags of laundry. U.S. government auditors have also issued dozens of reports finding questionable billings, including unreasonable fuel prices and charges for meals that were never served to the troops, ghost employees.
The report finds that government auditors at the Defense Contract Audit Agency have identified more than $1 billion in “questioned” Halliburton costs. provide support services to the troops & $219 million in questioned costs under the company’s Restore Iraqi Oil [RIO] contract to rebuild Iraq’s oil infrastructure. The magnitude of these questioned costs significantly exceeds previously known estimates.
Despite their disadvantages for the taxpayer, the Bush Administration has increasingly turned to cost-plus contracts. The Administration’s use of cost- plus contracts increased by 75%. The federal government spent $62 billion on cost-plus contracts. Federal spending on cost-plus contracts had increased by nearly $50 billion to $110 billion. Nearly half of the federal spending on these cost-plus contracts ($52 billion) was spent on cost-plus-award-fee contracts, a type of cost-plus contract in which it is possible for the contractor to receive millions in profits even if the contract goes over budget. The DCAA auditors have also found that an additional $442 million in Halliburton’s charges are “unsupported.” As a result, Halliburton’s total “questioned” and “unsupported” costs exceed $1.4 billion.
The single largest cost-plus contract is the Logistics Civil Augmentation Program contract [called “LOGCAP”] that was awarded by the Defense Department to Halliburton. This contract, which is used in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere to provide food, shelter, and other support services to U.S. troops, is currently valued at $16.4 billion, Halliburton received over $5 billion through the LOGCAP contract.
Cost-Plus Contracts Worth Over $1 Billion
Contractor Contract Value
Health Net Federal Services Managed Health Care for DOD $1,931,014,988
TriWest Healthcare Alliance Managed Health Care for DOD $1,894,225,281
Calif. Institute of Technology [NASA] $1,369,412,482
Westinghouse Savannah River Co. Savannah River Site [DOE] $1,325,619,805
Northrop Grumman DD[X] Destroyer $1,010,929,188
Halliburton – LOGCAP $5,082,435,949
Lockheed Martin Joint Strike Fighter System $3,327,634,511
Boeing Missile Defense Program $2,515,234,778
Lockheed Martin Sandia National Laboratories $2,291,554,411
Humana Military Health care Ser. Managed Health Care for DOD $2,171,654,432
United Space Alliance [NASA] $2,041,458,378
After the OPEC oil embargo was imposed in late 1973, oil prices jumped from an average of slightly less than $4.00 a barrel to $11.40 a barrel in 1974 [or from about $16.75 to $45.40 a barrel in 2005 dollars, adjusted using the U.S. consumer price index]. A decrease in Middle East oil production caused a second major oil shock in 1979-80, pushing prices from approximately $14.00 a barrel in 1978 to $37.20 a barrel in 1980 (or from $41.95 to $88.25 a barrel in 2005 dollars.]
The recent rise in oil prices rivals these two episodes in magnitude, although it has occurred more gradually. Oil prices averaged just under $25.00 a barrel in 2002 and climbed only modestly in 2003. In early 2004, in part owing to surging demand by China, prices began a strong upward trend, averaging $37.75 a barrel that year, $53.35 in 2005, and $65.35 over the first ten months of 2006.
These three episodes of price volatility generated large swings in export revenues for oil-exporting countries. In 1972, oil exporters recorded $24 billion in foreign sales. By 1974, after the first oil price shock, export revenues had grown to $117 billion. Revenues increased steadily but not dramatically over the next several years. The second oil price shock, however, propelled export revenues to roughly $275 billion in 1980 and $250 billion in 1981.
The most recent rise in oil prices has meant new gains for oil-exporting countries. All told, oil-export revenues appear set to reach about $970 billion in 2006, up from just $300 billion in 2002. This dramatic increase raises the natural question of how oil exporters have spent their windfall. Congress passed legislation to permit the government to acquire a wide range of “commercial items” with only minimal competitive bidding and limited oversight. In practice, however, the Bush Administration has interpreted the “commercial item” exemption to cover a multitude of items that are not subject to open market forces.
The White House Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP) issued a memorandum advocating, in bold print, that federal agencies use the commercial item authority to buy noncommercial items. OFPP told procurement officials to “recognize the benefits — and challenges — of buying non-commercial items within a commercial items framework.” OFPP recognized that “the lack of market testing or commercial analogs ... and the potential absence of competition” may pose a challenge, but nonetheless urged agencies to structure contracts within the commercial item framework or “consider using other flexibilities.”
The bulk of the expenditures under the “commercial item” exception came from the Department of Defense. The Defense Department spent $71.2 billion through the commercial item exception in 2005, an increase of 249% from the $20.5 billion spent. As a result, commercial item spending increased
from 15% of the Department’s budget to over 26% of it's budget.
In many instances over the last five years, contract mismanagement began well before any contract was signed. In these cases, federal contracts wasted taxpayer dollars because Administration officials did not adequately determine the government’s needs or think through the contract requirements in advance.
One prominent example of the failure to plan involves the contingency contract for troop support, called the Logistics Civil Augmentation Program [LOGCAP] contract. Prior to the Iraq war, senior Administration officials engaged in an extensive exercise to plan for the takeover of Iraq’s oilfields.97 But these same officials did virtually no planning for how to support or supply the troops after the invasion of Iraq.
Officials at the Department of Defense did not begin planning for the use of the LOGCAP contract to provide food and shelter for the troops until after the fall of Baghdad. Military acquisition rules recommend that “a comprehensive statement of work be developed during the early phases of contingency planning.” We found that the Defense Department did not follow that guidance when planning for the deployment of troops in Iraq. One consequence of the failure to plan was that “cost constraint did not become a factor in using LOGCAP in Iraq and Kuwait until almost a year into the operations,” and the Army set “no spending limits for LOGCAP.
My point, Colin Powell gave his loyalty to an administration that had a different agenda than what they promised him.
Yours truly,
Anthony Smith
© 2024 Created by Raliegh Jones Jr..
Powered by
