| Fraud In Iraq? Impossible. [message #204596] |
Tue, 20 June 2006 12:55  |
 |
SuperFlyingEngi
Messages: 1756
Registered: November 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/20/washington/20cnd-cong.html ?ex=1308456000&en=09b84bc82f790b49&ei=5090&partn er=rssuserland&emc=rss
| The New York Times |
Earlier today, Republicans defeated a Democratic proposal for an investigation into waste and fraud in military contracts. The proposal, made by Senator Byron L. Dorgan of North Dakota, called for a panel like the one led by Harry Truman when he was a Senator, which uncovered many abuses in military spending during World War II. It failed by a 52-to-44 vote.
|
Republicans try hard to avoid accountability. It's almost like they've been profiting through the War In Iraq...
Various Scandals (Courtesy of Salon.com, through http://www.ecolivingcenter.com/board/politics/messages/73.ht ml)
Halliburton: Pumping Up Prices
The scandal: In 2003, Halliburton overcharged the army for fuel in Iraq. Specifically, Halliburton's subsidiary Kellogg, Brown & Root hired a Kuwaiti company, Altanmia, to supply fuel at about twice the going rate, then added a markup, for an overcharge of at least $61 million, according to a December 2003 Pentagon audit.
The problem: That's not the government's $61 million, it's our $61 million.
The outcome: The FBI is investigating.
Halliburton's Vanishing Iraq Money
The scandal: In mid-2004, Pentagon auditors determined that $1.8 billion of Halliburton's charges to the government, about 40 percent of the total, had not been adequately documented.
The problem: That's not the government's $1.8 billion, it's our $1.8 billion.
The outcome: The Defense Contract Audit Agency has "strongly" asked the Army to withhold about $60 million a month from its Halliburton payments until the documentation is provided.
Money Order: Afghanistan's Missing $700 Million Turns Up in Iraq
The scandal: According to Bob Woodward's "Plan of Attack," the Bush administration diverted $700 million in funds from the war in Afghanistan, among other places, to prepare for the Iraq invasion.
The problem: Article I, Section 8, Clause 12 of the U.S. Constitution specifically gives Congress the power "to raise and support armies." And the emergency spending bill passed after Sept. 11, 2001, requires the administration to notify Congress before changing war spending plans. That did not happen.
The outcome: Congress declined to investigate. The administration's main justification for its decision has been to claim the funds were still used for, one might say, Middle East anti-tyrant-related program activities.
Iraq: More Loose Change
The scandal: The inspector general of the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq released a series of reports in July 2004 finding that a significant portion of CPA assets had gone missing -- 34 percent of the materiel controlled by Kellogg, Brown & Root -- and that the CPA's method of disbursing $600 million in Iraq reconstruction funds "did not establish effective controls and left accountability open to fraud, waste and abuse."
The problem: As much as $50 million of that money was disbursed without proper receipts.
The outcome: The CPA has disbanded, but individual government investigations into the handling of Iraq's reconstruction continue.
Iraq: The Case for War
The scandal: Bush and many officials in his administration made false statements about Iraq's military capabilities, in the months before the United States' March 2003 invasion of the country.
The problem: For one thing, it is a crime to lie to Congress, although Bush backers claim the president did not knowingly make false assertions.
The outcome: A war spun out of control with unknowable long-term consequences. The Iraq Survey Group has stopped looking for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)
"The danger to political dissent is acute where the Government attempts to act under so vague a concept as the power to protect "domestic security." Given the difficulty of defining the domestic security interest, the danger of abuse in acting to protect that interest becomes apparent. --U.S. Supreme Court decision (407 U.S. 297 (1972)
The Liberal Media At Work
An objective look at media partisanship
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Fraud In Iraq? Impossible. [message #204745 is a reply to message #204596] |
Wed, 21 June 2006 09:50  |
|
SuperFlyingEngi
Messages: 1756
Registered: November 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
Well then explain why the Republican Congress refuses to investigate any fraud in Iraq. You can't just ignore things you don't agree with. And I would hesitate to call my words "angry".
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)
"The danger to political dissent is acute where the Government attempts to act under so vague a concept as the power to protect "domestic security." Given the difficulty of defining the domestic security interest, the danger of abuse in acting to protect that interest becomes apparent. --U.S. Supreme Court decision (407 U.S. 297 (1972)
The Liberal Media At Work
An objective look at media partisanship
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Fraud In Iraq? Impossible. [message #204779 is a reply to message #204596] |
Wed, 21 June 2006 11:49 |
|
SuperFlyingEngi
Messages: 1756
Registered: November 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
When you say some of it is true, you're implying that some isn't, and so I challenge you to identify what exactly is incorrect.
And ACK, if you're expecting me to pander to feigned idiocy, I shall not.
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)
"The danger to political dissent is acute where the Government attempts to act under so vague a concept as the power to protect "domestic security." Given the difficulty of defining the domestic security interest, the danger of abuse in acting to protect that interest becomes apparent. --U.S. Supreme Court decision (407 U.S. 297 (1972)
The Liberal Media At Work
An objective look at media partisanship
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Fraud In Iraq? Impossible. [message #204809 is a reply to message #204779] |
Wed, 21 June 2006 15:14 |
 |
PlastoJoe
Messages: 647
Registered: October 2005
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
| SuperFlyingEngi wrote on Wed, 21 June 2006 13:49 |
When you say some of it is true, you're implying that some isn't, and so I challenge you to identify what exactly is incorrect.
And ACK, if you're expecting me to pander to feigned idiocy, I shall not.
|
Because he is in Congress and should know. 
You may be a fundamentalist atheist if...
Toggle Spoiler
| Blazer wrote on Fri, 04 August 2006 18:53 |
If you wanna be a badass ex-marine law enforcment game programmer college graduate, then you can be! I'm just glad we don't see the other part of you where you join AOL chat rooms as "hotchik69" and cyber with guys while you spank off into a sock and then cry yourself to sleep on your cock-shaped pillow.
|
| tzarmind wrote on Sat, 06 January 2007 20:52 |
Not only did you immaturely edit what J_Ball said in your quote. But you fucking got in the irony truck and drove it straight off a cliff.
|
| Canadacdn wrote on Tue, 23 October 2007 12:04 |
California burns down every year. I think it's part of nature's cycle.
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Fraud In Iraq? Impossible. [message #204815 is a reply to message #204803] |
Wed, 21 June 2006 15:44 |
|
SuperFlyingEngi
Messages: 1756
Registered: November 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| DarkDemin wrote on Wed, 21 June 2006 17:36 |
Wasting money to find out who wasted money just to throw those people in prison just to waste more money is just that... a waste of money.
|
So your position is that we shouldn't enforce laws in America? That's completely ridiculous. And the point isn't that people wasted money, it's that they stole it. When over a billion dollars in taxpayer money is even possibly stolen, it's always worth investigating. Because who's to stop it from continually occuring?
Even only taking into account which option is cheaper, which is stupid, investigating where this money went is definitely the better option. And since Congressional Republicans are so adamantly opposed to doing so, what does that tell you?
Honestly, that's a really doltish opinion you had there.
EDIT: Grammatical Errors
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)
"The danger to political dissent is acute where the Government attempts to act under so vague a concept as the power to protect "domestic security." Given the difficulty of defining the domestic security interest, the danger of abuse in acting to protect that interest becomes apparent. --U.S. Supreme Court decision (407 U.S. 297 (1972)
The Liberal Media At Work
An objective look at media partisanship
[Updated on: Wed, 21 June 2006 15:45] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Fraud In Iraq? Impossible. [message #204830 is a reply to message #204596] |
Wed, 21 June 2006 17:25 |
|
SuperFlyingEngi
Messages: 1756
Registered: November 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
Billions of dollars is not routine. Honestly I'm not entirely sure why you seem to be avoiding the point that this amazingly large sum of money was apparently stolen from the U.S. government and now such theft is apparently being covered up by the Republicans in Congress. And this theft occuring through a war that was justified and initiated based on lies and deceit by those same Republicans.
Your quotations are misguided. What is suggested by people such as the Pentagon auditors is outright theft. Not "stealing". Stealing. It's also important to note that this missing money is implied to have been transferred to individuals, not the government. As such, thieves in the U.S. are now driving their new luxury yacht with American tax dollars.
If you really have such an apathetic view on such incredible theft, then how can you have any political opinion? I mean, come on, what's worse than "massive stealing through fake war"? A 0.5% tax hike to fund city schools?
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)
"The danger to political dissent is acute where the Government attempts to act under so vague a concept as the power to protect "domestic security." Given the difficulty of defining the domestic security interest, the danger of abuse in acting to protect that interest becomes apparent. --U.S. Supreme Court decision (407 U.S. 297 (1972)
The Liberal Media At Work
An objective look at media partisanship
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Fraud In Iraq? Impossible. [message #204908 is a reply to message #204596] |
Thu, 22 June 2006 08:32 |
|
SuperFlyingEngi
Messages: 1756
Registered: November 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
Either out of stupidity or lack of an aggressive response.
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)
"The danger to political dissent is acute where the Government attempts to act under so vague a concept as the power to protect "domestic security." Given the difficulty of defining the domestic security interest, the danger of abuse in acting to protect that interest becomes apparent. --U.S. Supreme Court decision (407 U.S. 297 (1972)
The Liberal Media At Work
An objective look at media partisanship
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Fraud In Iraq? Impossible. [message #204919 is a reply to message #204596] |
Thu, 22 June 2006 10:49 |
|
SuperFlyingEngi
Messages: 1756
Registered: November 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
Don't forget that you're the one refusing to acknowledge obvious theft.
And since you haven't given me a reasoned point to change my mind to, I'm not entirely sure what action you want me to take. Your forfeiture of continued debate seems to be a bit premature.
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)
"The danger to political dissent is acute where the Government attempts to act under so vague a concept as the power to protect "domestic security." Given the difficulty of defining the domestic security interest, the danger of abuse in acting to protect that interest becomes apparent. --U.S. Supreme Court decision (407 U.S. 297 (1972)
The Liberal Media At Work
An objective look at media partisanship
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Fraud In Iraq? Impossible. [message #204922 is a reply to message #204596] |
Thu, 22 June 2006 11:02 |
|
SuperFlyingEngi
Messages: 1756
Registered: November 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
Vague, amorphous "fact". The best kind.
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)
"The danger to political dissent is acute where the Government attempts to act under so vague a concept as the power to protect "domestic security." Given the difficulty of defining the domestic security interest, the danger of abuse in acting to protect that interest becomes apparent. --U.S. Supreme Court decision (407 U.S. 297 (1972)
The Liberal Media At Work
An objective look at media partisanship
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Fraud In Iraq? Impossible. [message #204972 is a reply to message #204596] |
Thu, 22 June 2006 17:18 |
MadDave
Messages: 8
Registered: June 2006
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
|
The Bush administration is good at pulling shit and then covering it up. And for those of you who keep replying with "TOO LONG DIDN'T READ", no one cares if you read it or not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
