-Caveat Lector- from: http://www.narconews.com/cuibono.html Click Here: <A HREF="http://www.narconews.com/cuibono.html";>Narco News Publishes Catherine Austin Fitts on …</A> ----- (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 http://www.washingtontechnology.com/top-100-2001/top-100.html http://www.washingtontechnology.com/top-100-2001/index.html http://www.govexec.com/top200/01top/mag.htm USEFUL WEBSITE ON FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CONTRACTORS BY STATE: http://www.eagleeyeinc.com 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. http:www.edgar-online.com http://finance.yahoo.com/ SELECTED RANKINGS ON THE LARGEST FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CONTRACTORS Rankings from August 2001, Government Executive Magazine: http://www.govexec.com/top200/01top/mag.htm 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. <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
