September 17,
2001
Narco News 2001
CUI
BONO?
Building
a Map to
Solve
the Crime
By Catherine Austin
Fitts
Special to
The Narco News Bulletin
(Catherine Austin
Fitts is former U.S. Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban
Development and former managing director of Dillon Read. Today
she is CEO of the Solari Group.)
To
understand events such as wars or any
of the events on the nightly news, always ask the question "Cui
bono?" which translates as "Who benefits?"
Cui Bono?
Who Benefits?
Who financed the perpetrators?
Whose bank and wire transfer systems does
their money and precious metals or gems flow through?
Who trained them and supported them over
time and now?
Who provides them with critical intelligence?
Who sold them their equipment and arms
and did they take payment in cash or drugs?
Whose satellites, phone lines, and internet
lines do they use?
Who failed to prevent wrongdoing and do
their careers and budgets go up or down?
Whose budget goes up?
Whose business prospers?
Who knew and said nothing?
Who else will make money?
Who will sell arms and supplies?
Who has insurance on what and does the
declaration of war relieve the insurance companies of their responsibilities?
Who will acquire databases, new technology,
oil rights, mineral rights, bank deposits, land, financial assets,
telecommunications, media and consumer markets?
What groups and investors are crosscutting
to the people who benefit?
Who will benefit from a distraction?
How do the people who benefit compare
with those funding the political campaigns of those making decisions,
or those who appoint those who do?
How do the people who benefit compare
to those who are government are dependent on to finance their
deficits?
Whose power will increase?
Who will pay for this in terms of taxes
and government debt and loss of rights, property and life?
I find that if I watch what happens over
a period of time and collect up the many possible answers to
that question ---whether it is who makes money, who loses money,
who gains in power and prestige, and who loses power and prestige,
over time, I can learn a great deal about who's responsible and
what their goals are.
Part of asking "cui bono" is
to understand the power of distraction. While the country invested
a tremendous amount of interest in Monica Lewinsky and then a
Presidential election, as much as $3 trillion went reported unaccounted
for and/or missing from federal agencies without notice. The
IOU for that missing money were expected to come due this fall
along with various crises in the gold, derivatives, and stock
markets. One symptom was the quiet logjam on the defense budget
until last week.
Anytime
you are tempted to say "But so-and-so
would never do that," or "But so-and-so would never
exploit something like this in such a way," I would encourage
you to reconsider and reach out for the hard data. A review of
the statistics on who makes how much money in arms trafficking,
narcotics trafficking, warfare and other forms of organized crime
indicate that governments, banks and legal and illegal corporations
and their investors worldwide consider these to be excellent
businesses.
History has shown that powerful but historically
invisible wealth has a pattern of financing and ultimately manipulating
all sides in a conflict. We all may say these things are wrong,
but we in America have traditionally benefited from the rich
flow of the profits relative to other people. Our inability in
America over the last fifty years to move to local resources
accountability and to increase our productivity in balance with
our resource use is part of the drive for warfare, covert operations
and organized crime worldwide. We have traditionally voted in
the marketplace or voted at the polls for the folks who generated
the most money for us through these methods.
We should also ask why Americans or people
who are not Americans might want to kill innocent Americans.
Sam Smith published the following yesterday:
RECOVERED HISTORY
May 1996
LESLEY STAHL, 60 MINUTES: We have
heard that a half million children have died [because of sanctions
against Iraq]. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima
and and you know, is the price worth it?"
U.N. Secretary of State
Madeleine Albright: I think this is a very hard choice, but the price
we think the price is worth it."
Sam's reference was to 500,000 children
dead. I would add the impact of money laundering on Russia. In
1992, there were 14 million people living below poverty in the
former Soviet Republics. Today that number is 147 million and
rising. That is the result of global banks and investors, with
the support of the US National Security Counsel, the US Treasury,
the Federal Reserve, and their contractor in Russia, Harvard
University, vacuum cleaning the Russian banking and financial
system illegally. These are two examples. There are more. It
may be a good time to collect up a list of how many people have
died from genocide and warfare in the last decade and who is
responsible.
To build a good map of current events,
keep asking yourself as events unfold, "Cui bono."
Ultimately, if enough people do this the manipulations of those
who are responsible will fail to achieve their intended purpose.
To exercise the responsibilities of citizens requires understanding
how the money and operations works on any issue or set of issues,
and how it relates to the general flow of resources.
Or in the words of Bishop Owens, "If
we can face it, God can fix it."
CUI
BONO?: FEDERAL CONTRACTORS
Part
of the trick to asking and answering
the question "cui bono" is getting lots of hard numerical
data about how the money and operations work around any situations.
As an example, let's look at some of the data about one group
who can be expected to benefit from the US declaring war---federal
contractors.
A historically large percentage of this
war will be designed, run and implemented by contractors. This
may be our first true corporate war.
Here are some websites and ranking lists
for largest federal government contractors to help you familiarize
yourself re how the money works on US contracting capacity.
Size is important. So is control of databases
and knowledge, hence the importance of understanding the information
technology (including accounting and financial transaction budgets).
So is influence on events that impact profits in the marketplace
through regulation or change in control of land, assets, etc.
such as in times of war. That is why it is always interesting
to look at the other companies owned by investors in large government
contractors to see the ways that the investment network may profit
from their role in helping to run the government and the policies
that impact a wide group of affiliated companies.
Intelligence agency rankings are not included
as the $30 billion plus intelligence agency budgets are generally
not available to the public. My best guess is that if the CIA,
NSA and other intelligence agency contracting data were available,
they would show the same thing that the defense data shows. Our
civilian agencies are essentially run by the military and intelligence
contractors.
USEFUL
WEBSITES ON FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CONTRACTING BY FUNCTION
USEFUL
WEBSITE ON FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CONTRACTORS BY STATE:
USEFUL
WEBSITES FOR INVESTMENT AND FINANCIAL DATA ON FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
CONTRACTORS:
Check individual company sites for Securities
and Exchange Data as well as Edgar-Online.
SELECTED
RANKINGS ON THE LARGEST FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CONTRACTORS
Rankings from August 2001, Government
Executive Magazine:
August 1, 2001
Top Five Defense Contractors
TOTAL DEFENSE PURCHASES $132,125,790,000
FOR FISCAL 2000 CONTRACT AWARDS ($000s)
Rank Parent Company Total DoD........Air
Force........Army..............Navy
1 Lockheed Martin Corp. .............15,801,357.......9,249,624........2,529,496......3,803,629
2 Boeing Co. ....................................12,036,113......5,839,013........1,345,762.......3,730,929
3 Raytheon Co. .................................7,513,249.......2,582,415........1,809,834.......2,797,321
4 Northrop Grumman Corp. ...........5,962,349.......1,752,231........803,078..........3,088,173
5 General Dynamics Corp. ............4,062,323...........385,906.........1,454,896.......2,181,190
August 1, 2001 DoD Foreign Contractors
and Foreign Military Sales DoD
Foreign Contractors TOTAL PURCHASES $5,254,092,000
Rank Parent Company................Amount
($000s).........Market Share (%)
1 BAE Systems 1,019,232 19.40
2 Canadian Commercial Corp. 661,701 12.59
3 Government of Germany 410,555 7.81
4 Rolls Royce PLC 215,741 4.11
5 Motor Oil Hellas 148,432 2.83
6 Okinawa Electric Power Co. 96,653 1.84
7 Duchossois Industries Inc. 92,427 1.76
8 European Utilities Companies 83,840 1.60
9 Daimler-Chrysler 80,548 1.53
10 Kuwait National Petroleum Co. 80,134 1.53
11 Tokyo Denryoku KK 74,207 1.41
12 FN Fabrique Nationale De Herst 72,634 1.38
13 SKE Maintenance GMBH 59,864 1.14
14 Snecma 56,932 1.08
15 Texaco Inc. 54,186 1.03
16 Siemens AG 52,821 1.01
17 Hyundai Corp. 50,811 0.97
18 Government of the Netherlands 48,819 0.93
19 Bilfinger & Berger 42,353 0.81
20 Williams Holdings PLC 40,263 0.77
21 Warehouses Service Agency SARL 37,736 0.72
22 Greenland Contractors 36,422 0.69
23 Compania Espanola de Petroleos 33,370 0.64
24 Racal Electronics PLC 32,775 0.62
25 Ericsson 31,852 0.61
DoD Foreign Military Sales TOTAL PURCHASES
$8,576,475,000
Rank Parent Company Amount ($000s) Market
Share (%)
1 Lockheed Martin Corp. 3,431,950 40.02
2 Raytheon Co. 916,557 10.69
3 Boeing Co. 525,128 6.12
4 Canadian Commercial Corp. 455,658 5.31
5 Northrop Grumman Corp. 364,135 4.25
6 General Dynamics Corp. 330,531 3.85
7 TRW Inc. 297,288 3.47
8 Science Applications Intl. Corp. 256,031 2.99
9 United Technologies Corp. 159,830 1.86
10 General Electric Co. 96,106 1.12
11 Honeywell Inc. 91,697 1.07
12 Renco Group 71,842 0.84
13 Carlyle Group 59,540 0.69
14 Engineering Mgmt. Concepts 48,821 0.57
15 Government of the Netherlands 48,819 0.57
August 1, 2001
The Top 100 Civilian Agency Contractors
TOTAL PURCHASES $71,716,604,000 FISCAL
2000 CONTRACT AWARDS ($000s)
Rank Parent Company Total Energy Department
NASA
1 Lockheed Martin Corp. .................4,817,838...........2,002,190...........2,242,193
2 University of California System...3,406,804 ..........3,343,074................27,399
3 Boeing Co. .......................................2,624,617
................16,172...........2,604,230
4 Bechtel Group Inc. .........................2,058,495 ...........2,046,739..................7,436
5 BNFL Inc. .........................................1,814,248............1,804,847........................85
August 1, 2001
Information Technology Contractors
TOTAL PURCHASES $32,985,893,000
Rank Parent Company Amount ($000s) Market
Share (%)
1 Lockheed Martin Corp. 2,585,040 7.84
2 Northrop Grumman Corp. 1,894,975 5.74
3 Raytheon Co. 1,886,146 5.72
4 Computer Sciences Corp. 1,155,877 3.50
5 Science Applications Intl. Corp. 1,070,865 3.25
6 Electronic Data Systems Corp. 969,181 2.94
7 General Dynamics Corp. 880,985 2.67
8 AT&T 812,479 2.46
9 TRW Inc. 560,431 1.70
10 Hughes Electronics Corp. 528,117 1.60
August 1, 2001
Information Technology Contractors - Computer Services &
Software
TOTAL PURCHASES $19,332,872,000
Rank Parent Company Amount ($000s) Market
Share (%)
1 Lockheed Martin Corp. 1,421,269 7.35
2 Northrop Grumman Corp. 1,114,384 5.76
3 Computer Sciences Corp. 1,105,094 5.72
4 Science Applications Intl. Corp. 1,035,132 5.35
5 Electronic Data Systems Corp. 639,833 3.31
6 Raytheon Co. 467,892 2.42
7 Unisys Corp. 408,409 2.11
8 ACS 378,319 1.96
9 IBM Corp. 345,050 1.78
10 Booz Allen & Hamilton Inc. 323,085 1.67
11 General Dynamics Corp. 299,179 1.55
12 GTSI 281,131 1.45
13 TRW Inc. 271,098 1.40
14 Titan Corp. 224,737 1.16
15 DynCorp 201,625 1.04
16 CACI International Inc. 189,245 0.98
17 Oracle Corp. 180,544 0.93
18 SRA International Inc. 173,779 0.90
19 Azimuth Technologies Inc. 172,528 0.89
20 Getronics 150,974 0.78
Rankings from Washington Technology, 5/01
Top Federal Prime Contractors in Information
Technology
http://www.washingtontechnology.com/top-100-2001/top-100.html
1. Lockheed Martin Corp.
http://www.lockheedmartin.com
$3,317,769,000
Bethesda, Md.
2 Northrop Grumman Corp.
http://www.northgrum.com
$1,608,871,000
Los Angeles
3 United Space Alliance
http://www.unitedspacealliance.com
$1,608,804,000
Houston
4 Computer Sciences Corp.
http://www.csc.com
$1,387,688,000
El Segundo, Calif
5 Raytheon Co.
http://www.raytheon.com
$1,381,670,000
Lexington, Mass.
6 Science Applications International Corp.
http://www.saic.com
$1,232,509,000
San Diego
7 Electronic Data Systems Corp.
http://www.eds.com
$970,397,000
Plano, Texas
8 TRW Inc.
http://www.trw.com
$922,927,000
Cleveland
9 General Dynamics Corp.
http://www.gd.com
$833,816,000
Falls Church, Va.
10 AT&T Corp.
http://www.att.com
$796,187,000
New York
11 Boeing Co.
http://www.boeing.com
$788,334,000
Seattle
12 Booz-Allen & Hamilton Inc.
http://www.bah.com
$514,293,000
McLean, Va.
13 Dell Computer Corp.
http://www.dell.com
$455,670,000
Round Rock, Texas
14 Unisys Corp.
http://www.unisys.com
$452,018,000
Blue Bell, Pa.
15 GTSI Corp.
http://www.gtsi.com
$414,228,000
Chantilly, Va.
16 Motorola Inc.
http://www.motorola.com
$373,975,000
Schaumburg, Ill.
17 Affiliated Computer Services Inc.
http://www.acs.com
$370,480,000
Dallas
18 IBM Corp.
http://www.ibm.com
$359,410,000
Armonk, N.Y.
19 BAE Systems Plc
http://www.baesystems.com
$331,044,000
Farnborough, U.K.
20 CACI International Inc.
http://www.caci.com
$318,502,000
Arlington, Va.
21 Titan Corp.
http://www.titan.com
$318,100,000
San Diego
22 DynCorp
http://www.dyncorp.com
$309,792,000
Reston, Va.
23 Anteon Corp.
http://www.anteon.com
$271,070,000
Fairfax, Va.
24 ARINC Inc.
http://www.arinc.com
$240,726,000
Annapolis, Md.
25 American Management Systems Inc.
http://www.amsinc.com
$230,116,000
Fairfax, Va.
26 Verizon Communications Inc.
http://www.verizon.com
$209,977,000
New York
27 ManTech International Corp.
http://www.mantech.com
$203,196,000
Fairfax, Va.
28 WorldCom Inc.
http://www.worldcom.com
$201,024,000
Clinton, Miss.
29 Compaq Computer Corp.
http://www.compaq.com
$195,661,000
Houston
30 Harris Corp.
http://www.harris.com
$180,116,000
Melbourne, Fla.
31 Oracle Corp.
http://www.oracle.com
$174,725,000
Redwood Shores, Calif.
32 SRA International Inc.
http://www.sra.com
$172,836,000
Fairfax, Va.
33 Getronics NV
http://www.getronics.com
$167,705,000
Amsterdam
34 ITT Industries
http://www.itt.com
$161,934,000
White Plains, N.Y.
35 Jacobs Engineering Group Inc.
http://www.jacobs.com
$161,069,000
Pasadena, Calif.
36 Signal Corp.
http://www.signal.com
$159,406,000
Fairfax, Va.
37 Lucent Technologies Inc.
http://www.lucent.com
$157,200,000
Murray Hill, N.J.
38 Honeywell International Inc.
http://www.honeywell.com
$156,883,000
Morristown, N.J.
39 Colsa Corp.
http://www.colsa.com
$156,469,000
Huntsville, Ala.
40 Resource Consultants Inc.
http://www.resourceconsultants.com
$155,568,000
Vienna, Va.
41 KPMG Consulting Inc.
http://www.kpmgconsulting.com
$150,466,000
McLean, Va.
42 OAO Corp.
http://www.oao.com
$150,097,000
Greenbelt, Md.
43 Micron Technology Inc.http://www.micron.com
$147,077,000
Boise, Idaho
44 Sprint Communications Corp.
http://www.sprint.com
$138,967,000
Westwood, Kan.
45 PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
http://www.pwcglobal.com
$126,950,000
New York
46 Carlyle Group
http://www.carlylegroup.com
$112,384,000
Washington
47 Milcom Systems Corp.
http://www.milcomsystems.com
$111,415,000
Virginia Beach, Va.
48 Technology Management & Analysis
Corp.
http://www.tmac.com
$110,518,000
McLean, Va.
49 PlanetGov Inc.
http://www.planetgov.com
$109,724,000
Chantilly, Va.
50 Eagan McAllister Associates
http://www.emainc.com
$107,472,000
Lexington Park, Md.
Information Without
Advertisers