Sweden 'helped US bomb Iraq in 2003': report

Holy crap. The Vets brains were impacted by the concuss from a bunker busters, not from any IED by the "insurgents"(which can't be good either)
or it was this
Massive Ordnance Penetrator
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massive_Ordnance_Penetrator
Can Boeing be sued for this?

According to a report in the Expressen newspaper, which obtained previously classified documents from the US military's Central Command, a Swedish intelligence agency helped US war planners determine which targets to hit in a bombing raid to be carried out in March 2003.

Specifically, the US military was interested in learning more about Swedish-built bunkers in the Iraqi capital as the Pentagon suspected that one bunker, which was officially a safe room for civilians, may have also been used by the Iraqi military or the country's leaders.

The document explains that the US military obtained data about the bunkers through "intelligence exchanged with Sweden and the U.S.".

Last autumn, Expressen reported that high-ranking US military experts made a secret visit to Sweden in January/February 2003 to meet with officials from Swedish military intelligence agency MUST, reportedly to discuss the bunkers.

The revelations prompted a Swedish prosecutor to launch a preliminary investigation into whether a single

Pentagon OK with selling US drones to 66 countries

As many as 66 countries would be eligible to buy U.S. drones under new Defense Department guidelines but Congress and the State Department, which have a final say, have not yet opened the spigots for exports, a senior Pentagon official said on Wednesday.

The 66 countries were listed in a Defense Department policy worked out last year to clear the way for wider overseas sales of unmanned aerial systems, as the Pentagon calls such drones, said Richard Genaille, deputy director of the Pentagon's Defense Security Cooperation Agency. He did not name them.

"We don't really have a comprehensive U.S. government policy" on such exports, he told an industry conference called ComDef 2012. "It hasn't moved quite as fast as we would like, but we're not giving up."

Northrop Grumman Corp chief executive Wes Bush on Wednesday praised the Obama administration for what he described as significant moves to boost arms exports, but voiced frustration at delays in

Defense-Spending Bill Enters Uncharted Waters.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703628204575618660950071410.html?mod=WSJ_hp_MIDDLENexttoWhatsNewsThird

God forbid the defence contractors not have the authorization to use the open credit card to buy some more badly needed defense weapons.
How smart is it to use i-pads out in the sand? But it was sold as the latest and greatest must have for any war.

Political upheaval in Washington has upended the Pentagon's traditional budget cycle, creating serious uncertainty for the military and the defense industry.

At issue is passage of two bills that set spending priorities for the Pentagon: the national defense authorization act and the defense appropriations bill. In an unusual turn of events, neither bill has been passed for the new fiscal year, which began Oct. 1.

Legislators returning to Washington for a "lame duck" session following the Nov. 2 elections have a dwindling number of days to pass the bills, and defense contractors are worried that delays could potentially imperil some weapons-buying programs.

Pentagon's Cyber Command seeks authority to expand its battlefield

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/05/AR2010110507304.html


The "full spectrum" seems to mean invading the entire world's computer systems.
The United States governing forces seem to have massive control issues.
They seem to want to control everyone else except themselves.

The Pentagon's new Cyber Command is seeking authority to carry out computer network attacks around the globe to protect U.S. interests, drawing objections from administration lawyers uncertain about the legality of offensive operations.

Cyber Command's chief, Gen. Keith B. Alexander, who also heads the National Security Agency, wants sufficient maneuvering room for his new command to mount what he has called "the full spectrum" of operations in cyberspace.

Offensive actions could include shutting down part of an opponent's computer network to preempt a cyber-attack against a U.S. target or changing a line of code in an adversary's computer to render malicious software harmless. They are operations that destroy, disrupt or degrade targeted computers or networks.

But current and former officials say that

Audit show Pentagon's new accounting system is busting it's own budget

http://coburn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news?ContentRecord_id=a2f48abc-ddd6-477b-99e5-b09ca279bf87&ContentType_id=abb8889a-5962-4adb-abe8-617da340ab8e&Group_id=2b5f5ef9-5929-4863-9c07-277074394357&MonthDisplay=9&YearDisplay=2010

Auditable books? What a unique idea, to use a proven method,
It always seemed to have worked in the olden days.
What do they call that process again, it's been so long since they used it, most people have forgotten.
Oh Yeah, now I remember
A Paper Trail.
By the way check Senator Coburns voting record out
Perception is not nearly enough to vote on
Check them out and make sure that they really will represent you and not just Corporate America



CQ Today - by John M. Donnelly
Lawmakers complained Wednesday that the Pentagon is mismanaging a systemic overhaul of its accounting systems, casting doubt on the Defense Department’s efforts to better manage its nearly $700 billion budget.

A new Government Accountability Office (GAO) audit found that new computer systems intended to improve the Pentagon’s financial oversight are themselves nearly $7 billion over budget and well behind schedule.

The larger problem of financial disarray at the Pentagon has been a longstanding one that lawmakers, auditors and Defense Department officials said is ever more pressing as record defense budgets have added to the federal debt. An inability to properly track and manage assets has broad ramifications for the U.S. military, they said.

The overruns and delays on the accounting software represent “the best argument for having auditable books,” said Robert E. Andrews, D-N.J., chairman of the House Armed Services Committee’s Defense Acquisition Reform Panel. “If they can’t keep track of setting up an auditing system, it suggests they can’t keep track of anything else.”

ENTERPRISE RESOURCE PLANNING

Virginia Lawmakers Blast Gates Plan to Cut Major Military Command

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/08/09/gates-cut-major-military-command-norfolk-officials-say/



Defense Secretary Robert Gates on Monday announced a plan to shed a major military command in Virginia as part of his effort to strip billions from the Pentagon budget, drawing heated objections from state lawmakers who call the center essential.

Gates, in a lengthy press conference Monday afternoon, outlined his plan to eliminate Joint Forces Command in Norfolk, Va., and seek deep cuts elsewhere in the budget. He acknowledged the economic impact the closure could have for thousands of workers in the Norfolk region, but stood by his decision as a critical step in bringing defense spending under control.

"I am determined to change the way this department has done business for a long time," Gates said.

Gates estimated that the Virginia command accounts for 2,800 military and civilian positions, as well as 3,000 contractors, at an annual cost of at least $240 million. Though some employees could be reassigned elsewhere, Gates said a "substantial number" of full-time workers would have to find other positions or leave the Defense Department.

Pentagon warns Congress: accounts running dry

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100714/pl_nm/us_usa_pentagon_budget

As a taxpayer, it's my belief that our troops should be paid before the hired mercenaries. Odds are though that's not the way it works

The Pentagon said on Wednesday it may be forced to take extreme measures -- like not paying salaries -- if the Democratic-led Congress fails to pass a $37 billion defense spending bill before lawmakers begin an August recess.

A senior Democratic aide said lawmakers would find a way to get it done. "We will pass it this work period. We have to," the aide said.

Tensions are growing in the Pentagon about the fate of the bill, which has languished in Congress despite repeated pleas for action by Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who needs to fund a 30,000-troop surge for the Afghan war.

The White House has added to the drama, threatening to veto the bill over $800 million in education spending cuts that were added by the House of Representatives.

"While we hope and expect the Congress will get this done, we also are obligated now to begin seriously planning for the possibility that they don't," Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell told reporters.

He noted that "absent more drastic action" certain Army and Marine Corps spending accounts would run dry in August.

Pentagon rethinking value of major counterinsurgencies

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/05/12/94058/pentagon-rethinking-value-of-major.html#storylink=omni_popular




Nearly a decade after the United States began to focus its military training and equipment purchases almost exclusively on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, U.S. military strategists are quietly shifting gears, saying that large-scale counterinsurgency efforts cost too much and last too long.

The domestic economic crisis and the Obama administration's commitment to withdraw from Iraq and begin drawing down in Afghanistan next year are factors in the change. The biggest spur, however, is a growing recognition that large-scale counterinsurgency battles have high casualty rates for troops and civilians, eat up equipment that must be replaced and rarely end in clear victory or defeat.
The economic downturn is driving much of the change within the Pentagon. Military spending has risen steadily since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

When former Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld arrived at the Pentagon in 2001, the Defense Department budget was $291.1 billion, or $357.72 billion in today's dollars. The current budget is $708 billion for defense costs and funding the wars.

Pentagon planners say budget cuts are inevitable, and that the change in strategy will help make them.

"We now have to figure out what works. We used to have a practically unlimited budget. Not anymore," said a senior military officer, who spoke only on the condition of anonymity in order to talk candidly. "There is no more room to experiment."

After most major conflicts in U.S. history, defense spending has dropped to prewar levels within two years, accounting for inflation, said James Quinlivan, a military analyst at the RAND Corp. The ends of the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan aren't likely to make spending drop that quickly, Quinlivan said

Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/05/12/94058/pentagon-rethinking-value-of-major.html#storylink=omni_popular#ixzz0nqSJ2kFe



Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/05/12/94058/pentagon-rethinking-value-of-major.html#storylink=omni_popular#ixzz0nqRxhbg0

Pentagon in Race for Raw Materials

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704608104575220112898707130.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_MIDDLENexttoWhatsNewsSecond

Oh look the military wants permission to spend even MORE money!
For RISK management.
Just in case we need it in a hurry.
Stock piling for the future
Lol like we can afford that
We can't even afford our now, let alone be saving up for our future.
I wonder what this will do for Wall Street, or the defence contractors


The U.S. military is gearing up to become a more active player in the global scramble for raw materials, as competition from China and other countries raises concerns about the cost and availability of resources deemed vital to national security.

The Defense Department holds in government warehouses a limited number of critical materials—such as cobalt, tin and zinc—worth about $1.6 billion as of late 2008. In the coming weeks, the Pentagon is likely to present a plan for Congress to overhaul its stockpiling program,



.The new plan, dubbed the Strategic Materials Security Program by the Pentagon, would give the military greater power to decide what it stockpiles and how it goes about buying the materials. It would also speed up decision making at a time when military technology evolves rapidly, commodity markets swing widely and countries around the world fight to secure access to natural resources.

"It's a risk-management program," said Paula Stead, who oversees the effort for the Defense National Stockpile Center at Fort Belvoir, in Virginia. The goal is to be able to obtain "a much broader" array of materials in "a much shorter time," she said.

Right now, the military can't add to the stockpile list without congressional approval, a process that can take as long as two years. The military wants to remove that restriction. It also wants the authority to strike long-term deals with companies or allied nations to provide emergency supplies of materials that the military says are irreplaceable for making weapons, jet engines, high-powered magnets and other gear.

The military also wants the latitude to have private companies stockpile materials in "buffer stocks" that the military can tap if other supplies dry up.

Pentagon panel has contractor contacts

http://www.usatoday.com/news/military/2010-03-01-pentagon_N.htm

Oh yeah there's no conflict of interest seen here now is there?

More than half of the panel members appointed to review the Pentagon's latest four-year strategy blueprint have financial ties to defense contractors with a stake in the planning process, a USA TODAY analysis shows.
Congress created the 20-member panel in 2006 to analyze the Defense Department's four-year plan, known as the Quadrennial Defense Review. Lawmakers called for the committee to provide an independent "alternate view" of the Pentagon's plan, which shapes future military policy and spending on weapons and other needs.

A dozen of the unpaid panelists were appointed by Defense Secretary Robert Gates and eight by the top Republican and Democrat members of the House and Senate Armed Services committees. Eleven work for defense contractors as employees, consultants or board directors, records show.

"The Pentagon often talks about its cooperation with industry, but this makes you wonder who's wearing the pants in this relationship," said Mandy Smithberger, national security investigator for the Project on Government Oversight.

The Pentagon’s mad science arm

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/02/pentagon-looks-to-breed-immortal-synthetic-organisms-molecular-kill-switch-included/

A kill switch, and what happens if it somehow breeds with something that doesn't have a kill switch
Shit happens, think about it
And in keeping with the tax payer bitch and the rapidly growing pace of our National debt, I ask the question: Is this a want or a need? Because "WE" can't afford anymore wants on a whim


The Pentagon’s mad science arm may have come up with its most radical project yet. Darpa is looking to re-write the laws of evolution to the military’s advantage, creating “synthetic organisms” that can live forever — or can be killed with the flick of a molecular switch.

As part of its budget for the next year, Darpa is investing $6 million into a project called BioDesign, with the goal of eliminating “the randomness of natural evolutionary advancement.” The plan would assemble the latest bio-tech knowledge to come up with living, breathing creatures that are genetically engineered to “produce the intended biological effect.” Darpa wants the organisms to be fortified with molecules that bolster cell resistance to death, so that the lab-monsters can “ultimately be programmed to live indefinitely.”

Of course, Darpa’s got to prevent the super-species from being swayed to do enemy work — so they’ll encode loyalty right into DNA, by developing genetically programmed locks to create “tamper proof” cells. Plus, the synthetic organism will be traceable, using some kind of DNA manipulation, “similar to a serial number on a handgun.” And if that doesn’t work, don’t worry. In case Darpa’s plan somehow goes horribly awry, they’re also tossing in a last-resort, genetically-coded kill switch:



Read More http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/02/pentagon-looks-to-breed-immortal-synthetic-organisms-molecular-kill-switch-included/#ixzz0epMq0aKp

Senate sends big Pentagon budget bill to Obama

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20091219/D9CME1M80.html



Senators worked through a December blizzard Saturday to pass legislation ensuring that U.S. troops are armed and the jobless don't lose their benefits - and take one more step toward a Christmas week showdown over health care.

The 88-10 early morning vote on the $626 billion defense spending bill and other must-pass items cleared Congress' plate of a major item of unfinished business and meant lawmakers immediately could resume their acrimonious debate on health care.

Gas Costs $400 a Gallon in Afghanistan

http://www.military.com/news/article...=1186032325324

The logic about how the war in Iraq would pay for itself from oil revenues never did pan out in spite of the fact that it’s an oil-rich country. How much worse is the situation in Afghanistan, then, where there is no oil industry and the very cost of getting fuel to U.S. forces – buying, shipping and hauling – has become embarrassingly high?

About $400 per gallon worse.

That’s the figure the Pentagon has come up with after crunching all the costs related to getting gasoline into the tanks, Humvees and helos operating in the Afghan theater, according to the Pentagon.


The number emerged after the Pentagon’s comptroller was directed to spell out why the Afghan war costs about $1 billion for every 1,000 Americans deployed there, according to a report in The Hill newspaper, which said the Obama administration uses that number in estimating costs of sending the up-to-40,000 new troops requested by Gen. Stanley McChrystal, commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan.

The reasons given for the overall high price for fuel – what the Pentagon calls the “fully burdened cost of fuel” – is the lack of infrastructure in Afghanistan and a geography that’s unforgiving of ground transport bound for remote bases in mountainous regions.

General of all American Intelligence: 911 was a fraud!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=daNr_TrBw6E



Major General Albert "Bert" N. Stubblebine III, head of all intelligence says:

Pentagon NOT hit by a plane
WTC 7 brought down by explosives
Media in America is controlled


A terrible pilot hits pentagon accounting office holding records of missing 3 trillion in oil for money scheme & missing 2.3 trillion in DOD expenses

Pentagon debris a single 3 foot engine Proven not related to 757

FBI took all recordings & refuses to show

The FCC had all records on criminals like Paulson, Geithner, Ruben, Summers & others engaging in that illegal activity. But all the records of those illegal trades were destroyed when WTC 7 was brought down by thermite on 9/11!