Bushco, Inc. Keeping us Safe!

[TexasTiger 13,006]

Report Raps Pentagon Equipment Sales

Report: Investigators found that Pentagon allowed sensitive military equipment sales to public

WASHINGTON, Jul. 22, 2006

By ANDREW MIGA Associated Press Writer

------------------------------------------------------------------------

(AP) Undercover government investigators purchased sensitive surplus military equipment such as launcher mounts for shoulder-fired missiles and guided missile radar test sets from a Defense Department contractor.

Much of the equipment could be useful to terrorists, according to a draft report by the Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress.

In June, two GAO investigators spent $1.1 million on such equipment at two excess property warehouses. Their purchases included several types of body armor inserts used by troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, an all-band antenna used to track aircraft, and a digital signal converter used in naval surveillance.

"The body armor could be used by terrorists or other criminal activity," noted the report, obtained Friday by The Associated Press. "Many of the other military items have weapons applications that would also be useful to terrorists."

Thousands of items that should have been destroyed were sold to the public, the report said. Much of the equipment was sold for pennies on the dollar.

The list included circuit cards used in computerized Navy systems, a cesium technology timing unit with global positioning capabilities, and 12 digital microcircuits used in F-14 Tomcat fighter aircraft.

At least 2,669 sensitive military items were sold to 79 buyers in 216 sales transactions from November 2005 to June 2006.

"DOD has not enforced security controls for preventing sensitive excess military equipment from release to the public," the report concluded. "GAO was able to purchase these items because controls broke down at virtually every step in the excess property turn-in and disposal process."

In the report, the GAO said it had briefed Pentagon officials on its findings but that the Pentagon had no response because it had not had time to perform a detailed review.

Rep. Christopher Shays, R-Conn., chairman of the House Government Reform Committee's national security panel, will hold a hearing on the matter Tuesday. Earlier GAO reports also had found lax security controls over sensitive excess military equipment.

"During previous hearings we learned DOD was a bargain basement for would-be terrorists due to lax security screening of excess military equipment," Shays said in a statement Friday. "Based on GAO's most recent undercover investigation it looks like the store is still open."

The GAO findings were first reported by CBS News and ABC News.

[AURaptor 1,126]

So, anything that remotely goes wrong anywhere in the entire Fed Gov't. is now Bush's fault ?

That's pretty ******* lame, even for you.

[TexasTiger 13,006]

So, anything that remotely goes wrong anywhere in the entire Fed Gov't. is now Bush's fault ?

That's pretty ******* lame, even for you.

250901[/snapback]

A presidential administration is not responsible for the Department of Defense? :huh:

Who is, the DNC?

At least 2,669 sensitive military items were sold to 79 buyers in 216 sales transactions from November 2005 to June 2006.

"DOD has not enforced security controls for preventing sensitive excess military equipment from release to the public," the report concluded. "GAO was able to purchase these items because controls broke down at virtually every step in the excess property turn-in and disposal process."

You guys don't seem to think the President is responsible for much. Not sure why you care who happens to be the President since it is so inconsequential.

[Captain Liger 0]

So they're fired up over some mounts, a radar, circuit cards.....and body armor? Wooooooooowwwwwwwwwww. I seriously doubt any of the equipment in question is even being used anymore. That's why it was referred to as "excess." Excess is a military term for outdated equipment no longer used and marked for permanent turn-in.

Still not as bad as Clinton selling nuclear secrets to China.

Clinton in treason's shadow

Peter Zhang

BrookesNews.Com

Thursday 19 June 2003

Seeing as Hillary Clinton's book has decided to mock history in an attempt to clear a path to the White House, I think it behoves us to once again draw attention to the enormous damage her husband wilfully did to America's national security.

Several years ago I put forward the view that Clinton's cooperation with Beijing's intelligence operations were so extensive that it could be decided in the interest of saving the presidential office to suppress evidence that might directly incriminate Clinton and some of his associates. I also stated that "the damage to American national security is very deep and longstanding".

The release of the Cox Report tends to support the first statement and most certainly confirms the second. In addition, FBI wire taps appear to have confirmed that Jiang Zemin approved the cover stories for the PLA's money conduits. Whatever Jiang did was done with the knowledge of Zhu Rongji and the rest of the leadership. It is now believed that FBI investigations also led to the conclusion that Clinton was fully aware of the details, including payments of what amounted to nothing less than bribes.

As I have said more than once: "The Americans gave Clinton the key to the candy store and he sold it to Beijing." And this, readers, is basically what the Cox Committee discovered. My old English teacher used to say that "the devil is in the details". I also said that "in accordance with my previous assessment, that it is these very details that will be withheld from the American public." This is exactly what has been done.

Despite the spin Clinton and his horde of media friends tried to put on this terrible situation, it still boils down to treason.

Observing the Clinton propaganda machine, even from this distance, I predicted that, using its media allies, it would launch a multi-pronged attack: 1. It would claim that most of the damage was done during previous administrations. 2. That most of spying occurred in nuclear facilities. 3. In any case, the loss of American military secrets to China represent only a marginal threat to national security. Again, I was right. What is more, none of these excuses can withstand an honest appraisal of the facts, which a quick examination will easily reveal.

Number one is simply not true. If it were, why was Chung given a top security clearance and access to the White House at the suggestion of Chinese officials? I made clear elsewhere that Beijing laid down conditions that gave it access to all of America's secrets. To fulfil this condition Clinton abolished Department of Energy internal controls that restricted access to sensitive facilities thus allowing Chinese intelligence operatives free reign.

In addition, and this is of critical importance, Clinton virtually abolished controls on exports to China of high-tech equipment that had important military applications. Moreover, to make it even easier to access this equipment and knowledge Clinton transferred responsibility for technology exports from defence to the Commerce Department. Why? Because this had the effect of removing these technologies classified status.

What is not classified cannot therefore be secret. This is the Clintons' devious legalistic logic at work. "How could I have sold secrets", he can now claim, "when they weren't secret?"

This allowed certain companies to sell formerly classified equipment to the People's Liberation Army in return for making heavy donations to the Democrats — especially one in particular. One would have to be incredibly naive, or fanatically partisan, to think all of this was due to administrative ineptitude. The important fact here is that previous presidents did not sell their country's secrets.

Defence number two that espionage of any significance only occurred in nuclear laboratories is made risible by a mountain of evidence to the contrary. Such a defence is the fruit of desperation. The third defence that any damage to US security is only marginal is worthless.

Marginal or not it would still have unnecessarily put at risk the lives of a great many Americans. Moreover, this too is a hollow defence. By selling this technology to the PLA Clinton strengthened the hand of China's crude nationalists at the expense of more liberal forces. The longer it took the PLA to develop these technologies the more time Chinese liberals would have had to consolidate their influence.

Clinton has also saved Beijing an enormous amount of time and resources, which can now be put to other military uses.

Even if the damage has been greatly over-stated, it should not be used to conceal the fact that treason is treason. An American who did far less by giving secrets to Israel is now serving a very long prison term. Clinton should do no less. Unfortunately this will never happen. I fear the American people could not live with the disgrace of knowing that a president had betrayed them, even though the networks apparently can.

Americans are now confronted with the spectacle of Hillary Clinton cynically trying lay down the foundations for a presidential bid. This woman is far worse than her husband ever was. God help America, not to mention the rest of us, should she manage to fulfil her overriding ambition.

Link

[AURaptor 1,126]

You get upset over missing body armor, other's see concern when missle technology falls into the hands of the Red Chinese or when the N.Koreans upgrade their nuclear capacity.

I'd say someone's priorities need to be checked.

[TexasTiger 13,006]

So Raptor and Liger are on the record as being in favor of selling launcher mounts for shoulder-fired missiles to whomever. Who else?

[Captain Liger 0]

So Raptor and Liger are on the record as being in favor of selling launcher mounts for shoulder-fired missiles to whomever.  Who else?

251013[/snapback]

Dude, anyone in this country can go out and buy a fully automatic, military grade machine gun (ones no longer used by the military). Hell, I've even seen where you can purchase a working mortar system (ones no longer used by the military but that fire rounds still used by the military). This was made possible LONG before GWB came into office but I suppose, according to your logic, it's somehow his fault too. It's still possible to get hand grenades (remember David Koresh? Yeah, he got his hands on them during the Clinton administration). Did you know that you can still buy, sell, and trade WWII/Korean/Vietnam era bomber/fighter aircraft with working bombay doors/racks and operational armament? I guess we should ban that too. Airshows are such a waste of time anyway.

You're just looking for a reason to bitch and complain and that's it. I'm SO sure that you're to the point where you're so heated over shoulder mounts that you can barely function in your day to day life. The author did not go on to clarify that there's a difference in what is USEFUL to terrorists and what terrorists are actually INTERESTED in. He also didn't state in what manner the undercover government agents presented themselves. I'm sure they didn't just go up to the defense contractor and say "hey, I'm Joe Blow right off the street. Got any missle mounts for sale?" Gimme a break. Out of all the terrorists my unit killed and captured I don't ever remember confiscating any mounts for shoulder fired missles or for that matter, sholder fired missles themselves. What I do remember confiscating were Russian made AK-47s, RPGs, RPKs as well as thousands of rounds of ammunition, artillery shells to be used as IEDs, cell phones to be used as detonators (maybe we should ban cell phones), etc, etc. See where I'm going? Terrorists aren't interested in shoulder mounts, body armor AVAILABLE to the public ANYWAY, and friggin' circuit cards.

Relax Tex. Everything will be ok. When defense contractors start selling F-14s and M1 tanks with ammunition on the open market, THEN I'd be worried.

[TexasTiger 13,006]

So Raptor and Liger are on the record as being in favor of selling launcher mounts for shoulder-fired missiles to whomever.  Who else?

251013[/snapback]

Dude, anyone in this country can go out and buy a fully automatic, military grade machine gun (ones no longer used by the military). Hell, I've even seen where you can purchase a working mortar system (ones no longer used by the military but that fire rounds still used by the military). This was made possible LONG before GWB came into office but I suppose, according to your logic, it's somehow his fault too. It's still possible to get hand grenades (remember David Koresh? Yeah, he got his hands on them during the Clinton administration). Did you know that you can still buy, sell, and trade WWII/Korean/Vietnam era bomber/fighter aircraft with working bombay doors/racks and operational armament? I guess we should ban that too. Airshows are such a waste of time anyway.

You're just looking for a reason to bitch and complain and that's it. I'm SO sure that you're to the point where you're so heated over shoulder mounts that you can barely function in your day to day life. The author did not go on to clarify that there's a difference in what is USEFUL to terrorists and what terrorists are actually INTERESTED in. He also didn't state in what manner the undercover government agents presented themselves. I'm sure they didn't just go up to the defense contractor and say "hey, I'm Joe Blow right off the street. Got any missle mounts for sale?" Gimme a break. Out of all the terrorists my unit killed and captured I don't ever remember confiscating any mounts for shoulder fired missles or for that matter, sholder fired missles themselves. What I do remember confiscating were Russian made AK-47s, RPGs, RPKs as well as thousands of rounds of ammunition, artillery shells to be used as IEDs, cell phones to be used as detonators (maybe we should ban cell phones), etc, etc. See where I'm going? Terrorists aren't interested in shoulder mounts, body armor AVAILABLE to the public ANYWAY, and friggin' circuit cards.

Relax Tex. Everything will be ok. When defense contractors start selling F-14s and M1 tanks with ammunition on the open market, THEN I'd be worried.

251022[/snapback]

Liger reiterates his support and nonconcern over terrorists having shoulder mounts. Remember that when a commercial airliner is taken out.

[AURaptor 1,126]

So Raptor and Liger are on the record as being in favor of selling launcher mounts for shoulder-fired missiles to whomever. Who else?

'

TT, that is the definition of a LIE. Speaking for myself, there's no way what so ever can you make the above statement w/ out lying. I never did any such thing as go on record as being in favor of selling launcher mounts for shoulder- fired missles to whomever.... . You can't find any quote of mine which remotely draws that conclusion. Typically, you have to make up facts to attack others.

If something ilegal has happened, then its imparative that an investigation takes place to see what has gone wrong, who did it , and punish those responsible. That seems to be exactly what is going on here, under Bush.

By contrast, Clinton expressly PROMOTED the giving of technology to China and granting N.Korea nuclear materials which facillitated their advancing the creation of an ICBM.

Once again, your priorities are completely out of whack, and now you've added lying to your repertoire.

Bravo.

[Captain Liger 0]

and now you've added lying to your repertoire.

251065[/snapback]

Added? Raptor, habitual and subconscious lying are a prerequisite for being a liberal. That's not something you can add, liberals are born with it. I would know, I was married to one for four miserable years.

And Tex, I never said I support terrorists having shoulder fired missles or the mounts that go with them. That's something YOU said, not me. I just tried to put the sale of outdated military equipment into perspective for you, but, apparently that went completely over your head much like anything else that doesn't fit your liberal agenda. The only thing I support terrorists having is a one way ticket to hell to spend an eternity with their 72 Helen Thomas look-a-like virgins.

Everybody knows that the US flooded the market with shoulder fired missles during the 70s and 80s. Where do you think the Afghans got them during their war with the Soviets? Shoulder fired missles are out there and have been for a very long time. I'm sure the Russians and the Chinese have done their part as well of making them available. If a civilian airliner were going to be shot down with one by a terrorist it would have already happened by now. Why hasn't it? I dunno. Maybe you can answer that one. If terrorists are as knowledgeable about using them like Zarqawi was about using an M249 then we probably don't have anything to worry about.

[TexasTiger 13,006]

I would know, I was married to one for four miserable years.

251076[/snapback]

You were married? To a female? She put up with you for four miserable years? I'd love to hear her side of that one.

[Captain Liger 0]

I would know, I was married to one for four miserable years.

251076[/snapback]

You were married? To a female? She put up with you for four miserable years? I'd love to hear her side of that one.

251099[/snapback]

If you can get her off cocaine and out of the abortion clinic long enough, let me know. I'd like to hear it too.

[TexasTiger 13,006]

I would know, I was married to one for four miserable years.

251076[/snapback]

You were married? To a female? She put up with you for four miserable years? I'd love to hear her side of that one.

251099[/snapback]

If you can get her off cocaine and out of the abortion clinic long enough, let me know. I'd like to hear it too.

251102[/snapback]

Was she that way when you met her?

[Captain Liger 0]

I would know, I was married to one for four miserable years.

251076[/snapback]

You were married? To a female? She put up with you for four miserable years? I'd love to hear her side of that one.

251099[/snapback]

If you can get her off cocaine and out of the abortion clinic long enough, let me know. I'd like to hear it too.

251102[/snapback]

Was she that way when you met her?

251114[/snapback]

I was assured at the time, by her, that that part of her life was behind her. Come to find out at the end of our marriage that it had all been a lie and her "ways" had never really ended. She fooled me, obviously. I've never touched drugs so I never knew what to look for. It was never in the house to my knowledge so when she had the opportunity to do it is beyond me. Of course, she took full advantage of the year that I was in Iraq to make up for lost time...and to do some other extracurricular activities with the opposite sex. She's pretty much the reason that I detest liberals. It starts to wear on you when you're called an idiot on a weekly basis for believing in God and have a shred of decency. I think the downward spiral really started when I was berated by her and her mother right before I left for Iraq when I made a snide comment about Bill Clinton. Of course, it was a tongue in cheek comment to counter their belittlement of Ronald Reagan. Or maybe it was the day I was cursed out by her father for deciding to stay in the military after my obligation was up. I believe "F'ing dumba$$ idiot" was the term he used to describe me for deciding to stay in. It's obvious he cherishes his freedom. I dunno, either way her and her idiot family are garbage in my book and are poster children for the far left movement. I don't know what the hell I was thinking when I married her and I thank God everyday that I'm out of that horrible nightmare of a marriage.

But I'm not bitter, not at all.

[TexasTiger 13,006]

I would know, I was married to one for four miserable years.

251076[/snapback]

You were married? To a female? She put up with you for four miserable years? I'd love to hear her side of that one.

251099[/snapback]

If you can get her off cocaine and out of the abortion clinic long enough, let me know. I'd like to hear it too.

251102[/snapback]

Was she that way when you met her?

251114[/snapback]

I was assured at the time, by her, that that part of her life was behind her. Come to find out at the end of our marriage that it had all been a lie and her "ways" had never really ended. She fooled me, obviously. I've never touched drugs so I never knew what to look for. It was never in the house to my knowledge so when she had the opportunity to do it is beyond me. Of course, she took full advantage of the year that I was in Iraq to make up for lost time...and to do some other extracurricular activities with the opposite sex. She's pretty much the reason that I detest liberals. It starts to wear on you when you're called an idiot on a weekly basis for believing in God and have a shred of decency. I think the downward spiral really started when I was berated by her and her mother right before I left for Iraq when I made a snide comment about Bill Clinton. Of course, it was a tongue in cheek comment to counter their belittlement of Ronald Reagan. Or maybe it was the day I was cursed out by her father for deciding to stay in the military after my obligation was up. I believe "F'ing dumba$$ idiot" was the term he used to describe me for deciding to stay in. It's obvious he cherishes his freedom. I dunno, either way her and her idiot family are garbage in my book and are poster children for the far left movement. I don't know what the hell I was thinking when I married her and I thank God everyday that I'm out of that horrible nightmare of a marriage.

But I'm not bitter, not at all.

251147[/snapback]

Well, I'm not sure how representative she is of "liberals", but I'm sorry you had such a bad experience.

[Captain Liger 0]

I would know, I was married to one for four miserable years.

251076[/snapback]

You were married? To a female? She put up with you for four miserable years? I'd love to hear her side of that one.

251099[/snapback]

If you can get her off cocaine and out of the abortion clinic long enough, let me know. I'd like to hear it too.

251102[/snapback]

Was she that way when you met her?

251114[/snapback]

I was assured at the time, by her, that that part of her life was behind her. Come to find out at the end of our marriage that it had all been a lie and her "ways" had never really ended. She fooled me, obviously. I've never touched drugs so I never knew what to look for. It was never in the house to my knowledge so when she had the opportunity to do it is beyond me. Of course, she took full advantage of the year that I was in Iraq to make up for lost time...and to do some other extracurricular activities with the opposite sex. She's pretty much the reason that I detest liberals. It starts to wear on you when you're called an idiot on a weekly basis for believing in God and have a shred of decency. I think the downward spiral really started when I was berated by her and her mother right before I left for Iraq when I made a snide comment about Bill Clinton. Of course, it was a tongue in cheek comment to counter their belittlement of Ronald Reagan. Or maybe it was the day I was cursed out by her father for deciding to stay in the military after my obligation was up. I believe "F'ing dumba$$ idiot" was the term he used to describe me for deciding to stay in. It's obvious he cherishes his freedom. I dunno, either way her and her idiot family are garbage in my book and are poster children for the far left movement. I don't know what the hell I was thinking when I married her and I thank God everyday that I'm out of that horrible nightmare of a marriage.

But I'm not bitter, not at all.

251147[/snapback]

Well, I'm not sure how representative she is of "liberals", but I'm sorry you had such a bad experience.

251159[/snapback]

She's pretty adamant about being a liberal since that's the word she uses to describe herself. She once told me that there is no difference between abortion and what I do as a soldier. No lie. She actually believes the two are the same.

At any rate, it's over and I've moved on. Hey, I know...maybe we can her hook her up with the government contractors in question on this thread and have them sell HER to the terrorists!

[channonc 466]

If something ilegal has happened, then its imparative that an investigation takes place to see what has gone wrong, who did it , and punish those responsible. That seems to be exactly what is going on here, under Bush.

I am assuming you are referring to the GAO investigation when you make this statement. Just to clarify, a President cannot direct GAO to do an investigation, only a Member of Congress. So basically, some in Congress had an idea this was going on, and sent GAO to do a full investigation, which will probably lead to some hearing in the House and Senate Armed Services Committees.