= TARNISHED WINGS =
__ o __
Graft and Greed at Lockheed Martin
Sightings from The Catbird Seat
~ o ~
Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2007
From: Richard Cummings
Subject: Lockheed Stock and Two Smoking Barrels
To: thecatbird@the-catbird-seat.net
Catbird:
Here's my article in Playboy on Lockheed Martin and the war in Iraq. I sent it in another e mail and forget to give it a title, so it might not have reached you.
www.playboy.com/magazine/features/lockheed/
Cheers,
Richard Cummings
~ ~ ~
Thanks, Richard -
I urge everyone who would like to know what’s really going on with our traitorous public officials to read your excellent and revealing article!
Aloha and best wishes,
The Catbird
January 5, 2006
Norway pulls investments in seven multinationals over ethical concerns
Groups producing nuclear arms components
OSLO (AFP)
Norway has withdrawn investments of more than 500 million dollars (413.6 million euros) from seven multinational corporations, including Boeing and Honeywell of the US, due to ethical concerns over the groups' production of nuclear arms components, the government said on Thursday.
The five other companies are BAE Systems of Britain, Safran of France, Finmeccanica of Italy, and US groups Northrop Grumman and United Technologies.
The withdrawal follows a recommendation from Norway's Advisory Council on Ethics, which is tasked with monitoring the ethics of companies in which Norway places its massive state Pension Fund, formerly known as the Oil Fund.
Norway's finance minister asked the central bank, which manages the fund, to sell the holdings, worth 3.3 billion kroner (416.2 million euros, 502 million dollars). They were sold last year, Finance Minister Kristin Halvorsen told reporters on Thursday. "This does not mean that there won't be other companies (excluded)... Our work will continue," she stressed.
Norway, however, did not withdraw its stake in French oil group Total, in line with the Advisory Council's recommendation. Total has been criticised by several humanitarian aid groups for its controversial business dealings in Myanmar, formerly Burma, which is run by a military junta....
The Advisory Council said it saw "no direct link today between the human rights violations committed by the Myanmar regime and Total's activities in this country." The Norwegian Burma Committee said it was "very disappointed" by the decision. According to the most recent statistics available, the Norwegian state holds 0.679 percent of Total.
Norway's state Pension Fund, into which the state deposits its massive oil and gas revenues, is one of the richest funds in the world. At the end of September 2005, it was worth 1,281.1 billion kroner (161.4 billion euros, 195.2 billion dollars). The sheer size of the fund enables Norway to exert pressure on companies to ensure that their operations are ethical. Norway is the world's third-largest oil exporter behind Saudi Arabia and Russia.
The Scandinavian country has already withdrawn its stakes in 10 other companies, including Thales of France, European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company, and US groups General Dynamics, Lockheed Martin and Raytheon. They are accused of helping manufacture cluster bombs, devices which are particularly lethal for civilian populations. ----
http://nucnews.net/nucnews/2006nn/0601nn/060105nn.txt
March 29, 2005
Pentagon Strips Air Force of
21 Major Weapons Programs
WASHINGTON (AP) - In a highly unusual move, the Pentagon’s top weapons buyer on Monday took away the Air Force’s authority to oversee 21 major programs with a combine value of $200 billion.
The move, called temporary, was made because of a civilian leadership vacuum at the Air Force after the departure last week of Peter Teets, who was under secretary of the Air Force as well as acting secretary. Teets had been fillin in since James Roche resigned as secretary in January.
It also comes amid continuing controversy over the Air Force’s handling of a multibillion-dollar Boeing aircraft lease deal that fell through last year and led to the conviction of former Air Force executive Darleen Druyun on charges of conspiring to violate conflict-of-interest rules.
Druyun admitted in court that she favored Boeing on deals worth billion of dollars because the company gave jobs to her daughter and son-in-law. Her admission led to a detailed Pentagon review of her nearly 10-year tenure as a key weapons buyer for the Air Force and prompted rival defense companies to file protests over Boeing contracts awarded during that period.
The episode has taken a tool on the Air Force. Since Roche departed, the White House has not nominated anyone to replace him as the Air Force secretary, a post that requires Senate confirmation. Some believe the current Navy secretary, Gordon England, will get the nomination.
In addition, no one has been nominated to replace Teets as the under secretary. What’s more, the post of Air Force acquisition chief has been vacant since Marvin Sambur left in January.
With Teets gone, the most senior civilian in the Air Force is Michael I. Dominquez, who has served since August 2001 as assistant secretary of the Air Force for manpower and reserve affairs....
In Monday’s announcement, the Pentagon said it was giving the decision-making authority for the 21 major Air Force weapons programs to Michael Wynne, the No. 2 Pentagon civilian in charge of weapons procurement.
The No. 1 slot has not had a Senate-confirmed holder since May 2003. Wynne was nominate for the top spot but his nomination – and others in the Air Force – have been blocked by Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz, as part of a long-running dispute over the Boeing lease deal....
The 21 programs include a $59.2 billion Boeing contract for C-17A Globemaster II advanced cargo aircraft, and a $31.7 billion Boeing and Lockheed Martin contract for the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle....
Among other programs affected are air-to-air missiles, B-2 bomber radar modernization, C-5 cargo plane improvements, propulsion replacement for the Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile and a $18 billion communications satellite program....
$ $ $
January 28, 2005
Lockheed Team Wins Presidential Chopper
By Andrea Shalai-Esa, MSN Money
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Navy on Friday gave a transatlantic team led by Lockheed Martin Corp. a $1.7 billion contract to build a new fleet of 23 U.S. presidential helicopters, a deal valued at up to $6.1 billion.
The decision was a stunning setback for Connecticut-based United Technologies Corp.’s (UTX) Sikorsky Aircraft unit - which for nearly 50 years has built and maintained the green and white “Marine One” helicopters that fly the president.
Sikorsky had wrapped itself in the American flag to pitch its twin-engined VH-92, based on the Black Hawk helicopter.
But lower cost, a larger cabin and faster delivery schedule allowed No. 1 Pentagon supplier Lockheed to prevail with its US101, based on the three-engined EH101 made by AgustaWestland Inc., a unit of Italy’s Finmeccanica SpA.
The deal attracted international attention, with Prime Ministers Tony Blair of Britain and Silvio Berlusconi of Italy personally pressing President Bush on behalf of Lockheed’s British-Italian design....
Texas-based Textron Inc.’s Bell Helicopter is the other big partner and Los Angeles-based Northrop Grumman Corp. will provide electronics for the new chopper.
Lockheed Vice President Stephen Ramsey said 65 percent of the US101 would be built in the United States, with the remaining 35 percent to be split between Britain and Italy....
[Assistant Navy Secretary John] Young downplayed any impact on the U.S. industrial base, saying both companies enter good bids and met “Buy America” provisions for U.S. content.
Sikorsky President Stephen Finger said the company was disappointed about the decision and insisted its VH-92 flew farther, faster and carried more than the EH-101....
Sen. Joe Lieberman, a Connecticut Democrat, said the decision was “outrageously wrong” because Sikorsky had vowed to build a helicopter that was “100 pct made in America.”
“I am committed to do everything in my power to right this wrong,” Lieberman said in a statement, saying he hoped Sikorsky would challenge the contract award with federal officials....
The cost of the new helicopter will begin at $75 million a copy, gradually rising to about $110 million, Young said....
Analysts said the win could give Lockheed and its partners a competitive edge when the Air Force buys 194 new search and rescue helicopters next year, although Young downplayed that, saying the requirements were very different.
In addition, it could help Bethesda, Maryland-based Lockheed sell another 200 helicopters to the U.S. Coast Guard and Department of Homeland Security in future competitions....
< < < FLASHBACK < < <
(How soon we forget...)
July 24, 2004
$2.6 billion bought Air Force
planes not up to standards
By R. Jeffrey Smith, The Washington Post
WASHINGTON - The Air Force spent $2.6 billion to acquire 50 transport planes that don’t meet military requirements, preventing squadrons based in six states from being fully prepared for their missions in the Middle East and elsewhere, the Defense Department Inspector General’s office disclosed yesterday.
After conducting a lengthy investigation set off by a whistle-blower’s phone call, the Inspector General’s office said the Air Force used an inappropriate procedure to buy the C-130J transport plane from Lockheed Martin and then mismanaged its production. It also said senior Defense Department weapons acquisition officials failed to “provide effective oversight” of the program....
Military officials said yesterday that the C-130J planes have not passed key readiness tests, and so none have been used as planned by the U.S. Air Force Reserve, Air National Guard, or Marine Corps in combat zones or military assaults....
Congress has approved spending $4 billion for the planes, and the entire program likely will cost more than $7.5 billion....
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003
To: “The Catbird”
From: “The Lone Engineer”
Subject: Lockheed Martin should be debarred ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
Okay, here it is:
I began working for Schlockheed-Murder in 1999, as an EMI/EMC test engineer. I also had duties performing vibration, shock, temperature and altitude tests on DoD electronics, inclusive of many variants of a line called the Q-70 (see them on their web site, by the way) and as well as tests on a number of airborne systems for the P-3C BMUP (block modification upgrade program) as well as some work on EA-6B upgrades, and F-16 'new' variants being sold strictly to the UAE and ISRAEL, not to our own forces, by the way, which is paradoxical as the new variants are vastly superior in capability to what our own services have with the F-16's they fly.
As early as 2001, I had a 'gag order' issued to me by a project lead engineer during an EMI test on P-3C BMUP mission computer, at which time, this engineer ordered me "do not talk to government witnesses about deficiencies" and, at which time, I informed him about the 'illegality' of that, as well as went up my chain of command at Schlockheed-Murder to tell them that there "never can be a day when anyone in this building issues me an order never to tell the U.S. Government inspection personnel about deficiencies they have a right to know about" in a meeting with the Engineering Manager.
At the time I was still a contract to permanent hire person, and I informed the contract house that I was working for that either I would be dismissed at the end of my contract period for refusing to go along with gag orders about deficiencies, or that I would possibly be terminated early. The contract house representative, much to his credit, said; "you did the right thing, stay the course.." and told me that they (the contract house) would stand by me on this one.
Ironically, though this attitude of mine not to cooperate with the 'lying by omission' thing they wanted me to embark upon, tended to piss off my manager, a so-called 'christian' that I worked for, he was so angered by this that he made me remain a contractor for an additional six months before I was ultimately hired, much to my surprise.
Not too very long after this, I stayed clear of the project lead who had given me the illegal gag order, though it was clear nothing much happened to him, although at the time I discussed the matter with management, I had asked that he be present (I had an ear-witness in the room, unbeknownst to him, who'd heard everything he said to me, and I was going to have him present, as well) but the engineering manager, shaken by my disclosure to him that I had already been asked to testify before a U.S. Senate Subcommittee (J.D. Dingell's Senate Subcommittee) about another failed weapons platform, the UH-60A Blackhawk Helicopter, which had a severe EMI / EMC problem that caused it to go out of control and crash on a regular basis.
Management kept me at arm's length, but as I was a performer and did my job, I did actually get promoted and receive a nice pay raise (blood money or 'hush money' I suspect) and not much further happened to me. Then, regarding a 'safety of flight' issue that emerged on an airborne system that had already been deployed on as many as '40' aircraft that the Navy was operating, the company began to really lean on my ass over all sorts of things, began to audit my time card, and proceeded down the road to toss me out of the building.
It was 'ironic' that at the same time, I was being adversely impacted by visible colonies of the toxin producing mold, CLADOSPORIUM that was growing on the shield room anechoic cones in the sub-basement laboratory I performed my work in, and as I had requested they remove the mold that was impacting my health and ruining my lungs, making me very ill, they declined, and furthermore, forced me to keep working in that environment until they wrongfully terminated me in March of this year for alleged 'insubordination' which by their accusation, was for not sitting in meetings at which they repeatedly verbally assaulted me and threatened me.
I went to the Government Accounting Office, Office of Special Investigations after discussing the matter with a U.S. Government DCMA employee at length, at which time, as we were close to going to war in Iraq, he compelled me to do everything I could to fast track this and get the aircrews that flew these 'ticking time bombs' aware of the extreme hazard they were in with that Schlockheed-Murder system on board their plane.
The GAO Special Agent who contacted me at home assured me that the Navair community would be IMMEDIATELY told of the deficiency. The nature of that is more or less sensitive information and therefore I won't disclose it...however, I immediately told the Schlockheed-Murder ethics office in Gaithersburg, Maryland about my reporting the problem to the GAO, and this woman, who I won't identify, informed me that it was strictly my job to assist them in covering their asses, and if I did not, I could be terminated for that. I told her that it didn't matter, lives were at stake, and that the company's apparent concern wasn't for human life, but for covering it's asses, collectively.
On a different note, O.S.H.A. found, as I had asked for them to intervene and inspect, that not only was I breathing 98 percent pure CLADOSPORIUM mold in that shield room or anechoic room, but as I wore a monitoring pump, they provided during their investigation, that myself and others actually were breathing asbestos fibres from the fireproofing slurry material on the roof of the sub basement as well as from pipe jacketing. They fined the company but they are appealing the fine.
The state also sided with them and decided not to pay me unemployment benefits, as they also concluded that my having refused to be screamed at and yelled at in meetings constituted 'insubordination' by doing that.
At this time I have a state Congressman looking into the matter, but I do not expect much government help, although O.S.H.A. is launching an investigation into the 'wrongful firing' that ensued when Schlockheed-Murder found out that they were being investigated both by G.A.O. as well as O.S.H.A. because an employee they were injuring didn't like that.
Most co-workers there knew of years of this pattern of 'lying to the government' or intentionally 'covering up' deficiencies of systems built in this plant, but were so very close to retiring that not many of them wished to rock the boat. One airborne system's manager, after I told him about reporting the company to G.A.O. over the problems on the E-2C aircraft (40 or so of them) that he said; "well, you know that you're out of here....probably before the week is over with.." and he was right, I lasted till Monday, and it was Thursday I spoke to him.
So, that's my story about Schlockheed-Murder. Deficient hardware, an entire culture of people intimidated and harassed by management and afraid to report, and U.S. Government personnel really not watching hard enough or doing enough about this in this building, even though the company had a clear pattern of doing this that had them, by law, install an Ethics Hotline.
Oh yes, you get that same bimbo I spoke to that told me, on that Ethics Hotline, that my first priority was to protect the company.
I have over 30 years experience in Weapons Systems qualification programs, and this is the worst case of 'fraud' I have seen, ever!
You can give me a fictitious name as you print this on your web page, and yes, you can use their correct name, though I believe in my soul they are indeed Schlockheed-Murderers.
Program Manager Interviews
November, December, 1995
JOSHUA GOTBAUM
ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR ECONOMIC SECURITY
~ ~ ~
Which Defense Firms Will Survive – Meet the
Man Who Helps the Pentagon Decide
A large white banner is first thing you notice upon entering the reception area of Joshua Gotbaum’s third-floor Pentagon office. In foot-high red letters, it reads: “Please Mr. Gotbaum, Save Natick [Mass.] Labs” (referring to the Base Realignment and Closure [BRAC] recommendation to close Natick).
Secretary Gotbaum, a former Wall Street investment banker, achieved the status of Washington insider in 1 short year. He is respected both by the Pentagon brass and defense industry officials. He influences key decisions ranging from BRAC to which defense industries will survive.
Secretary Gotbaum is the right man for the job at the right time. A 44-year-old lawyer, Secretary Gotbaum is at home in the world of mergers, acquisitions, and restructurings. He heads the new 260-person Pentagon Office of Economic Security and has won the confidence of many defense industry and military officials for helping educate the Pentagon brass on their decisions which impact the nation’s troubled defense industry. And so far, both sides appear pleased with his efforts or their behalf....
www.dau.mil/pubs/pm/pmpdf95/gotbaum.pdf
~ ~ ~
For more recent poop on Joshua Gotbaum, GO TO > > > The Eagle Hooded: The 9-11 Coverup; Hawaiian Airlines: Flying with the Bankruptcy Buzzards; Office of the U.S. Trustee vs. Harmon
Date: July 4, 2004
To: thecatbird@the-catbird-seat.net
Subject: Investigation of Lockheed Martin re: James Finkelstein for U.S. Senate in Georgia
Dear "Catbird"
I would very much appreciate it if you would respond to let me know if you have any further information by from or about the "Lone Engineer" report about Lockheed that you posted- specifically whether this is real or bogus, and whether any investigation has been launched by any official U.S. government agency or Congressional committee.
I am a Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate from Georgia for Zell Miller's soon to be vacated seat. The Senate primary is July 20, 2004, and there are two upcoming televised debates. Lockheed Martin has contributed thousands of dollars to two candidates in this race, both Representatives in Congress, and I have raised the issue of conflicts of interest in their taking this contributions from defense contractors. Obviously, any information you have may be of help.
Also, I have a brief message about my campaign which will give you some insight on who I am and why I am running in this race. If you think my campaign has merit, please pass it along or post it, as you will. Thank you!
Jim Finkelstein
Message to cut and paste:
WHY JAMES (Jim) FINKELSTEIN DECIDED TO RUN FOR THE JULY 20TH GEORGIA DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY FOR THE UNITED STATES SENATE
In March of 2003, when this country sent over a hundred thousand Marines and soldiers based in Kuwait to war in Iraq, hundreds of thousands of parents, spouses, and children back home had to endure indescribable emotions for weeks on end, waiting to hear any word from their loved ones- and dreading a knock on the door. I was one of those parents. When the combat phase of the war ended and I finally heard from my son Ben, a Sergeant in the Marine Corps, and found out he was safe, I can’t tell you how grateful I felt. Last August Ben and the members of his unit came home, and if you want to see how he looked at his homecoming at LeJeune, go to www.finkelstein4senate.org.
But over 5,000 wounded American soldiers and Marines didn’t come home safe, and over 800 more were flown back in flag draped coffins. I decided when my son came home last summer that if this war was still going on, if American lives were still being lost, that I would take a stand- not as a politician, but as a parent. I have no overwhelming desire to be a politician- my life is fulfilled. But I do have an obligation- a duty- to those who didn’t return in one piece, to the soldiers and Marines who are there now or who will be sent there soon, and to their parents, spouses, children, and other loved ones. That duty is to be a voice for them. At the very least, I will be a choice for Georgia voters on July 20th, for those who want to wrap up our mission in Iraq within the next six months and bring the troops home safe. We can accomplish this while leaving the Iraqis the means to retain their newly found freedom under the rule of law. To see how I propose doing this, go to www.finkelstein4senate.org
I also believe that at this moment in time, it is important to the United States of America and to the State of Georgia to have a person running for a national office who recognizes that the phrase “support our troops” means more than lip service. For that reason, I have discussed at debates and candidate forums the equipment, materials, and provisions for the families left behind that the troops in the field have been lacking. I have not hesitated to publicly embarrass three sitting members of the House of Representatives who are running for this Senate seat by revealing that they voted to provide billions of dollars to the defense contractors who funded their campaigns while sending our troops to war in canvas covered humvees that can't stop a rock, let alone a bullet or RPG, vests without the ceramic inserts that make the body armor work, the wrong boots for desert warfare, inadequate eye protection from the desert sand and wind, the wrong rifles for urban combat (M-16's instead of M-4's), and poor or nonexistent communications equipment for individual soldiers and Marines. In addition, they failed to provide for the families of reservists and national guardsmen who were left without medical insurance or other essential benefits.
I am not a “one note” or “one issue” candidate. If you click on "MY PLATFORM" at
the website, you will see some proposals that I think would make this a better
country and a better state. These include my "litmus test" for approving federal
judges and Supreme Court justices, which is a profound respect for the
Constitution of the United States, and, most importantly an understanding and
appreciation for the Bill of Rights and the Due Process and Equal Protection
Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. These also include proposals to provide
catastrophic health insurance for American families, to use corporate profits from
outsourcing jobs to educate, retrain, and if necessary employ laid off workers, and
to provide a system that will eliminate all medical malpractice insurance premiums
for doctors while fairly compensating injured patients without regard to fault.
If you want to read the Coastal Courier's June 18, 2004, and Atlanta Journal-Constitution's June 25, 2004, feature articles on this campaign, click on:
http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=12004357&BRD=1389&PAG=461&dept_id=161952&rfi=6
http://www.ajc.com/today/content/epaper/editions/today/metro_04bdbbef749ba074009f.html
For those who want to see and hear the U.S. Senate candidates, there will be two televised debates: July 11, 2004 at 4:00 P.M. on WSB TV 2 in Atlanta and July 18, 2004, 7:00 P.M. on GPTV. I hope that my presence in this campaign will mean that the debate will focus on issues of importance to this nation and to the State of Georgia.
JAMES N. FINKELSTEIN
Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate
"BRING THE TROOPS HOME SAFE"
_______________________________________________________
Campaign Headquarters: 606 Baldwin Drive ~ Albany, Georgia 31707
PHONE: (229) 436-7824; Toll Free: (888) 436-8445; Home: (229) 435-0533; Cell:
(229) 894-0376; Fax: (229) 436-5657
e-mail: finkelstein4ga@bellsouth.net; www.finkelstein4senate.org
* * *
March 24, 2003
Crowds "shock and awe" Lockheed Martin with their protests
By Brandywine Peace Community
At noon today, a large crowd gathered at the Lockheed Martin Facility behind King of Prussia Mall to protest its role in producing the munitions that are currently devastating Iraq.
"Every weapon produced by Lockheed Martin means billions of dollars transferred from the public treasury to private wealth, from public need to corporate greed. Moreover, every weapon produced by Lockheed Martin means another bombing run, another cruise missile attach, another war." (from the Brandywine Peace Community's Martin Luther King Day litany at Lockheed Martin, January 21, 2002)
For fifteen years
The Brandywine Peace Community is a faith based peace activist group formed in 1977 by people experienced in the nonviolent resistance to the war in Vietnam. After more than two decades, Brandywine continues to organize campaigns of nonviolent direct action to war and to challenge the weapons industry in the Delaware Valley. That challenge of nonviolent protest and civil disobedience was first demonstrated at General Electric weapons facilities in the Delaware Valley in campaign of resistance and public education that lasted for more than 15 years.
In 1993, General Electric sold its Aerospace Division to Martin Marietta. Consequently, Martin Marietta doubled in size and in 1995 merged with Lockheed to become Lockheed Martin. All the facilities which once carried the names of GE Aerospace, Martin Marietta, or Lockheed, are now Lockheed Martin. Since its inception, announced with the slogan "And this is just the beginning!", Lockheed Martin has been and continues to be the world's largest weapons corporation as well as the U.S.'s largest international arms seller and the U.S.'s chief nuclear bomb contractor. Lockheed Martin has also become involved in the privatization [i.e. "for profit management"] of state welfare departments.
The same Lockheed Martin that produces the weapons control systems for Tomahawk Cruise Missiles in Valley Forge, PA (Lockheed Martin's Management & Data Systems) is the very same Lockheed Martin that receives money from state governments (including the state of Pennsylvania) to process data, dispense checks to poor people, and administer jobs programs.
The same Lockheed Martin that manages the Oak Ridge, TN uranium processing complex (including depleted uranium ammunition) and other parts of the national nuclear bomb component, waste, and maintenance complex also produces, in Moorestown, NJ, the Aegis battle command system around which the Navy is producing its fleet of Aegis cruisers and destroyers. The U.S. Navy considers Aegis "the most powerful warfighting system today".
Most of the sealaunched cruise missiles fired into Iraq or as part of the U.S./NATO war in the Balkans came from Aegis warships.
So we resist Lockheed Martin! Join us!
* * *
May 13, 2002
WAGES OF SIN
By Christopher H. Schmitt, U.S. News & World Report
SPECIAL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT: Why lawbreakers still win government contracts
In the mid-1970s, Lockheed Aircraft Corp. was center stage in a scorching bribery scandal. Millions in secret payments were slipped to public officials and political parties around the globe, to curry favor and win government contracts.
Stung by the blowback, the company promised stringent reforms. Two decades later, Lockheed was again in the spotlight, pleading guilty to paying off an Egyptian official to win a deal for C-130 cargo planes. Once more, the company was contrite. Standing before a federal judge in 1995, a top executive pledged Lockheed’s “commitment to the highest ethical standards of conduct.”
In the years since, however, Lockheed’s troubles have only grown. The company has been named in at least 33 more cases covering overcharges on government contracts, improper technology transfer to China, falsifying results of nuclear safety tests, job discrimination, environmental pollution, and more.
These cases, some of which were in motion before the 1995 conviction, have produced at least $145.3 million in penalties, settlements, and restitution. And at least 13 more cases are pending.
Lockheed Martin, as the company is known today, says it has a vigorous ethics and compliance program. And, it turns out, that promise is good enough for the Pentagon. Last October, despite the company’s record, the federal government awarded Lockheed the richest military contract in history – a deal to build the nation’s next generation jet. The project, the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, could be worth as much as $200 billion over several decades....
Little guys.
The military tops the government’s buying list – with contracts for $156.5 billion last year. Not surprisingly, some of the worst offenders are military contractors.
But while the government may be reluctant to move against its biggest suppliers, federal agencies don’t have the same qualms about cracking down on small firms. Officials maintain that federal rules are written evenhandedly, but they acknowledge that larger companies can naigate them more successfully.
Take James Verlander, a Houston-area researcher who in early 1990s got tangled up in Operation Lightning Strike, a federal sting operation targeting NASA suppliers. Federal agents drew Verlander and several others into a scheme revolving around a bogus medical device that supposedly could improve monitoring of space-station astronauts.
Threatened with a heavy prison sentence, he pleaded guilty to having accepted $2,000 as part of an effort to win approval and funding for the device, says his attorney, Charles Portz. Barred from government work ever since, Verlander suffered a nervous breakdown and has since become a medical technician.
By contrast, two big contractors that came under scrutiny in the affair – Martin Marietta and General Electric – settled their involvement by paying $1 million to defray the government’s expenses.
“They didn’t want to make arrests of the higher-up people because it would damage the space program,” says Portz, “so they busted a bunch of little people.”
Small fry get nailed more often because it’s more likely that senior executives were involved in any wrongdoing, say those familiar with the issue. And large contractors have more financial juice to make a case go away – to hire pricey legal talent, create compliance programs, or pay settlements.
“They’re pretty willing to settle it to stay in business,” says Jacques Ganaler, former undersecretary of defense for acquisition, technology, and logistics, who is now a professor of public affairs at the University of Maryland....
For more on NASA’s “Wages of Sin,” GO TO > > > NASA...and the war on truth
$ $ $
October 7, 2002
Lockheed Martin: Key Player in the Conquest and Militarization of Space
From: Nukewatch
We are here today as part of a global effort to call for an end to the weaponization and militarization of space.
The U.S. is seeking to control space through National Missile Defense (NMD), Space-Based lasers and Anti-Satellite weaponry. This facility, Lockheed Martin, is the primary contractor for NMD.
National Missile Defense is marketed to the public as a program that will make our nation a safer, more secure place. In reality, NMD is a costly, deceptive, and ill-conceived program whose principal function is offensive.
Costs
The Congressional Budget Office projected in Jan. 2002 that the NMD program envisioned by the Bush Administration could cost $238 billion by 2025. Since 1957, the U.S. has spent roughly $125 billion on NMD systems without producing a single workable device.
Lockheed Martin is running 30% over budget ($233 million) for the PAC-3 theater missile defense system.
Deception
The Pentagon alleges that the goals of missile defense are defensive. However, the Pentagon is moving ahead on a second front under the rubric of "missile defense" -- Theater Missile Defense (TMD). TMD is an offensive system that aims to support U.S. forces overseas through missiles deployed on land, sea, air and space.
One of Lockheed's proudest moments was the successful test of the Star Wars intercept system in 1984 - a critical factor in validating the much-criticized "missile shield" concept. In 1993, The New York Times revealed that the test was a fraud.
Ineffectiveness
Lockheed Martin's Theater High Altitude Area Defense system (THAAD) has failed in 6 out of 8 tests to date, and yet they still received a contract extension worth up to $4 billion for continuing work on the system.
Jack Ruina, formerly of the Defense Department, writes, "If NMD deployment involved no more than spending a lot of money in pursuit of vain hope, it would only be a waste -- a bad buy. But it's also bad foreign policy."
As the U.S. seeks domination of space, we are violating key international treaties and putting the world at risk of a new arms race. The bad seeds of warfare, greed, exploitation and environmental contamination are threatening this sacred frontier.
Join us in saying NO to Lockheed Martin and Star Wars!
NO to the weaponization and militarization of space!
$ $ $
August 13, 2002
Enron-Tainted Democrat Contributor Has Big Role in Bush Administration
Marc Morano, CNSNews.com
Political analysts are questioning the wisdom of the Bush administration in selecting a prominent Democrat donor with extensive ties to the Enron business scandal as the manager of a $350 million taxpayer supported development project in Africa.
Frank Savage is considered one of the most generous African-American donors to Democratic Party causes, but in light of Enron's bankruptcy, is also characterized by one critic as a "shameless" personification of the recent American corporate scandals.
The Bush administration, receiving conflicting advice from prominent African-American politicians, recently extended Savage's term as managing general partner of the Africa Millennium Fund, sponsored by the federal government's Overseas Private Investment Corp. (OPIC).
The fund will pay for infrastructure projects in sub-Saharan Africa dealing with energy, telecommunications and transportation. It "represents OPIC's largest single financing commitment to date," according to an Aug. 8, 2001 press release issued by the investment firm, Alliance Capital International, which Savage was chairing at that point but was about to leave to take up the position with OPIC.
U.S. taxpayers are due to pick up $227.5 million of the $350 million tab to provide a guarantee for private investors who, at Savage's urging, are supposed to come up with the remaining $122.5 million.
Those private investors are being promised a 30 percent internal rate of return, which includes both income and capital appreciation. Savage's original deadline for raising the private funds was the end of June, which he missed. OPIC recently extended the deadline to Sept. 30.
Ties to Gore, Hillary, Schumer
Time magazine, in a Jan. 14 article, called Savage "a major Democratic donor" who had given at least $100,000 to Democrats since 1999. Among the beneficiaries of Savage's contributions were presidential candidate Al Gore and Sens. Hillary Clinton and Charles Schumer of New York.
As a result of those political activities, some observers wonder why the Bush administration would keep Savage in such a high-profile position. Savage's involvement in the Enron scandal also makes him a liability to the administration, those observers say.
'Savage's Record Is Appalling'
In a June article published by The American Prospect, journalist Joshua Green called Savage "an authentic bad apple" for his past role as a member of Enron's board of directors and for his influence over the Florida state pension fund as chairman of Alliance Capital.
Green, who also edits The Washington Monthly magazine, wrote that "Savage's record is appalling, even by the standards of Enron board members."
The Florida state pension fund lost $334 million while Savage's firm, Alliance Capital, managed the fund.
Under Savage's supervision and using the Florida pension funds, Alliance Capital became Enron's largest institutional investor.
When Enron's stock plummeted as a result of its accounting scandal, so did the value of the Florida pension fund. Green wrote that Savage "wasn't just asleep at one switch - he was asleep at two."
Florida state officials sued Alliance Capital for negligence in May of this year.
However, according to Green, Savage was "shameless" after the Enron scandal became public.
"Not only did he decline to forego his $70,000 a year spot on Enron's board, he refused to step down from the boards of Qualcom and the Lockheed Martin Corporation, despite a shareholder campaign [led by the AFL-CIO] to remove him," Green wrote.
Savage will "serve as a reminder of the need for corporate responsibility," Green added.
Kevin Martin, political and government affairs director for the African American Republican Leadership Council, believes the Bush administration selected Savage because it was trying to heal the political turmoil left over from the hotly contested 2000 Florida election results.
Using 'Sellout' to Make Nice With Democrats
"By having Savage work on this project, that was just one of [President Bush's] ways of attempting to make peace with Democrats," Martin said.
Martin, who believes the administration's peace-making efforts failed, is also critical of Savage.
"He is one of these African-American Democratic sellouts who is more interested in photo-ops and fundraising than the betterment of the community," Martin said.
'Abuse of Federal Authority'
Howard Phillips, chairman of the Conservative Caucus, explained why he believes OPIC selected a Democrat such as Savage to lead the Africa Millennium Fund.
"As usual, they are sucking up to people who despise them," Phillips said.
Phillips believes OPIC's mission in Africa is "comprehensively unconstitutional." He said the fund was using U.S. taxpayers as "the insurer of first resort" and likened Savage's role as manager of the fund to the recent corporate scandals.
"I would characterize it as insider trading. Here is a guy who has contacts with people who are running a government agency and they are in effect using the credit of the taxpayer as political patronage," Phillips explained.
"The very concept is an abuse of federal authority. It's not unlike Enron cheating its employees and shareholders," he added.
A source inside the Bush administration told CNSNews.com that Rep. J.C. Watts, R-Okla., was unhappy with the original selection of Savage to head the Africa Millennium Fund and was further upset when Savage was given his recent fundraising extension. However, a spokesman for Watts had "no comment" about Savage when contacted by CNSNews.com.
Powell, Bloomberg Intervene
The Bush administration source also said Secretary of State Colin Powell and Republican New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg lobbied to have Savage's deadline extended. Both men have previous ties to Savage.
Powell served on the board of trustees for Howard University in Washington, D.C. when Savage chaired the panel. Savage also is on the board of directors for Bloomberg L.P., the company the mayor headed before taking office....
'Lack of Confidence'
The Bush administration official who spoke on condition of anonymity told CNSNews.com, "The inability of Savage to raise money with a government guarantee speaks volumes for the lack of confidence that institutional investors feel toward him."
Phillips noted that Savage would not need U.S. taxpayers to support the Africa Millennium Fund if it was engaged in projects that are financially viable.
"If the investments were sound, private banks and companies would insure them. You wouldn't have to have Uncle Sucker take the hard working money from two-earner families to pay for this garbage," Phillips said.
– Copyright CNSNews.com
* * *