![]() ![]() Beyond that, the implication was also made that Booz Allen may be complicit in a program (electronic surveillance of SWIFT) that may be deemed illegal by the EC. The basic statement was that a conflict of interest may exist. The ACLU and PI filed a memo at the end of their investigation which called into question the ethics and legality of a government contractor (in this case Booz Allen) acting as auditors of a government program, when that contractor is heavily involved with those same agencies on other contracts. government’s SWIFT surveillance program and Booz Allen’s role therein. In 2006 at the request of the Article 29 Working Group, an advisory group to the European Commission (EC), the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and Privacy International (PI) investigated the U.S. She defended a decision to issue a second no-bid contract in 2005 as necessary to keep an essential intelligence operation running until a competition could be held. ![]() But Duke said those matters have been resolved. Duke, the department’s chief procurement officer, acknowledged the problems with the Booz Allen contract. As the project progressed, the department became so dependent on Booz Allen that it lost the flexibility for a time to seek out other contractors or hire federal employees who might do the job for less.Įlaine C. A Government Accountability Office (GAO) report on the contract characterized it as not well-planned and lacking any measure for assuring valuable work to be completed.Ī review of memos, e-mail and other contracting documents obtained by The Washington Post show that in a rush to meet congressional mandates to establish the information analysis and infrastructure protection offices, agency officials routinely waived rules designed to protect taxpayer money. Department of Homeland Security contract with Booz Allen increased from $2 million to more than $70 million through two no-bid contracts, one occurring after the DHS’s legal office had advised DHS not to continue the contract until after a review. “Unfortunately, we have a government run by the conceit of the ruling class that believes they are more powerful than we are.” (Lightly paraphrased) Antonin Scalia on FoxBusiness, 03-12-09Ī JWashington Post article related how a U.S. It was based on a fallacy or two or three or a dozen, which in each case could not be resolved by the checks and balances originally put in place through the founding principles of our nation and secured by its Constitution, Bill of Rights, and Declarations. Attitudes of being untouchable and “entitled”, manipulations of policy choices, poor applications of stated and publicly claimed principles, unintended consequences resulting in deaths, deprivations, impoverishments and macro-economic instability and insecurity – these are all the direct results of this manner of government that has been undulating throughout the US and each of the States. This is now the situation results that has ensued from operating in these ways. Therefore, the only opportunities that exist are underwritten and “granted” by those in power and denied to those that they would choose to deny. It means that opportunities are driven not by supply, demand, necessity, innovation and opportunity, but rather by the decisions and policies of the few who hold power. It is isolationist and excluding in that resources and opportunities are restricted and driven by “favor,” rather than open and inclusive in the manner of a free market economy, a democracy and a Republic. It also precludes a free market economy because the decisions that maneuver and manipulate all resources rest in the hands of a few. Not only is that not a democracy, it undermines the very tenets of that democracy including the rights, freedoms and security that were to be provided by that system and its foundation. That is a crevasse that moves as an acid into the very heart and foundation of the system to crumble it wherever it touches (goes). Their decisions become the final arbitrator of all decisions, policies and choices emanating from them, such that if there is an inherent flaw in their thinking, knowledge, skills or policies, they become enacted throughout the system. “A limiting form of small central government as a system foundation is called, a monarchy.” – my quoteĪ small central government means to let the sum total of power and access to manipulate resources rest in the hands of a few key people who act as autocratic dictators for all. I found the intellectual crevasse into which the last thirty years of US administrations had fallen: (I know what’s made the country this way – we’ve had Jackasses and bimbos running the country, Kasha) ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |