"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 4 Sep 2011 10:44:12 +1000, "Why are people so cruel"
wrote:


"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 4 Sep 2011 04:58:46 +1000, "Why are people so cruel"
wrote:


"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
m...
On Sat, 3 Sep 2011 16:08:38 +1000, "Why are people so cruel"
wrote:


"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
news:8v936792idin045lsp4dd2aacmagdt8lqh@4ax. com...
On Sat, 3 Sep 2011 10:51:52 +1000, "Why are people so cruel"
wrote:


"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
news:4rj26799cl4ar52mbslg6f2rsbdqe0ec9b@4a x.com...
On Sat, 3 Sep 2011 04:23:17 +1000, "Why are people so cruel"
wrote:

Saw an interesting news item about waste and corruption in the
payments to "contractors" in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Congress
bipartisan ctte had found that the Army (mainly) had paid out
more than $60 billion in overpayments, corrupt payments and in
a lot of cases plain blood money to contractors

Define "blood money"?

Money paid to contractors who had an employee killed/maimed, that
money
was supposed to be paid to family of the deceased - but in some
cases
was
kept by the contractors.


Paid by whom?

Or are you claiming death or dismemberment insurance is "blood
money"?

I personally am not claiming anything, but the Congress report
indicated
that the $60 billion in waste was paid by the (mainly) US Army to its
250,000
contractors. Included in the $60 billion was an element of blood money
that some contractors did not pay to families of the deceased or to
the
injured. This was one item amongst a host of others. Other items were
things
such as paying for a 50 hour week and only working 10 hours. Paying
for destroyed leased equipment for years after the destruction.
Contractors
"self approving" invoices to the Army. Employment agencies invoicing
for
non existant recruits.

The one that struck home most was the payment of protection money that
was then used to make IEDs and used against NATO troops - in effect
the
US Army was paying to maim and kill its allies and own troops.

The Congressman interviewed was not laying blame, but was stating that
they
would be setting up some sort of recovery program against blatantly
corrupt
contractors. He stated that the system was wrong, the Army had been
stripped
of its contract administrators in the 1990s and the contractors had
exploited that
shortcoming in procedures and approval processes.


Would those contractors be US based, or foreign nationals in those
countries?

That was not stated in the report.

Yet you spewed not knowing the facts.

Well I guess if you want to read the whole report it will be available
from the Library of Congress. I was commenting on an interview
on TV about the misuse of taxpayers money. The congressional
ctte which published the report was (according to the congressman)
a non party/bipartisan report as it was backed by all the congressmen
on the ctte. Left wing, right wing makes no difference, what it
highlights is a failure to have in place adequate controls over purchasing
in the armed services. Sounds like you are worried that someone from
the Army is going to come knocking on your door looking for the
overpayments?


Odd then that the tone of your statements seemed to cast aspersions on
US contractors. Must be that knee jerk reaction against people when
Leftwingers start flapping their jaws...against everyone but the guilty
parties.

My personal view would be why are contractors used in the first place,
the US had a nearly perfect example of how to win the peace at the end
of WWII. The German and Japanese populations were put to work cleaning
up the mess that their country was in - the reward was being fed. But
instead
the lure of big money was too great and contractors were employed at an
enormous cost to the taxpayer to build roads, schools (with no teachers),
hospitals (with no doctors), drive trucks, and a host of other things that
locals
would do for a fraction of the cost of imported labor from the NATO
countries.

Have a look at photos of Kabul and there is still bomb sites from the days
of
the Russian invasion - so not exactly a shining example of how to win hearts
and minds.

Just think of what $60 billion off the national debt would have done.