Entries Tagged 'Crime' ↓

Frontline’s long-awaited report on international bribery and corruption finally aired last night and did not disappoint. I have been writing about this investigative report for months now in anticipation of the finished product. Lowell Bergman goes into great detail to show how an agreement between the British and Saudi governments for fighter jets became a gift from Allah, so to speak, for the Saudi royal family, among many others. Investigators have tracked money from BAE Systems in the UK to Washington, the British Virgin Islands, Switzerland and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

The allegations are not trivial and were enough for Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan to threaten to end cooperation in terrorism investigations if the original British investigation into the deal continued. The British government complied and Tony Blair ended the investigation. However, we will have to wait and see whether the FBI will be forced to end its investigation as well, due to BAE System’s critical participation in US defense and American jobs. Prince Bandar is a longtime friend of the Bush family, Clinton’s and Carters, so with the new administration perhaps this investigation has wings. As one of the original French prosecutors involved in the creation of the international anti-bribery laws said, we are good at prosecuting low level and mid level corruption but only by accident are we able to successfully investigate and prosecute high level corruption and bribery cases.

Investigations involving major international defense contractors employing 10’s of thousands of jobs (in the US alone), the leading family of the largest oil distributing country in the world (not to mention the good personal friends of every US President since and including Carter) and government officials of some of the largest economies in the world do not play themselves out easily. The political will needed to allow such an investigation to see its way through is more than I can imagine. The US Justice Department didn’t have the political will to be able to fully investigate the 2000 presidential election, so I’m skeptical to say the least that this will see the light of day. However, the FBI must try, even though Prince Bandar is being legally represented by former FBI Director Louis Freeh. I know!! What better way to beat a charge than hire the investigative body’s former head as your attorney! The video is embedded below, however please go to Frontline’s website to continue reading and watching this tremendous job of reporting by journalists from all over the world.

This is the first of a two-part series on international bribery and the use of offshore accounts. We first touched on this subject a couple of months ago when pointing you towards Lowell Bergman and Frontline’s excellent work on international bribery. I’d like to thank Frontline for pointing me to the following report. They have compiled some great reporting on bribery which can be seen here. However, the greater issue here is transparency vs. secrecy, what part politicians play and how the media report on such activities, or not… The second part of this series will focus on the ongoing US financial bailout and how US taxpayers’ money is being used to prop up companies who invest millions in the politicians they lobby.

Below are two reports from a Swedish television crew who investigated a multinational arms deal between Sweden and the Czech Republic. Demonstrating great investigative reporting, they uncover how SAAB (working with BAE Systems) used third parties and offshore holdings to influence the deal in their favor, to the tune of millions of euros in compensation to any number of agents, politicians and defense contractors. The Czech deal was just one of many, including similar arrangements with South Africa and Hungary. The first video explains the Czech deal and the second video goes into greater detail when the reporters work under cover to expose the rampant bribery going on in the international arms industry.

Glenn Greenwald, of Salon.com, has for a long time been an outspoken critic of the Bush administration for all the right reasons (or should I say correct reasons, as he can be just as judgemental of Democratic decisions or inaction). In his latest piece written yesterday, Greenwald rightfully chastises the New York Times, Washington Post and AP for their inability to separate fact from fiction.

His discussion, which goes on in great detail describing why terms like ‘policy disputes’ must not be used in place of the actual description (‘war crimes’), is very, very valid and should not be discounted in its importance. As we all know, words are powerful things and nothing is more important to a journalist than the words he or she chooses to use in reporting on a story. So, Greenwald has a point when criticizing Mark Mazzetti of the New York Times when he wrote yesterday,

“The opposition to Mr. Brennan had been largely confined to liberal blogs, and there was not an expectation he would face a particularly difficult confirmation process. Still, the episode shows that the C.I.A.’s secret detention program remains a particularly incendiary issue for the Democratic base, making it difficult for Mr. Obama to select someone for a top intelligence post who has played any role in the agency’s campaign against Al Qaeda since the Sept. 11 attacks.” (Emphasis courtesy of Salon.com)

Mazzetti’s inability to report the facts is not only a failure to do his job correctly, but an insult to those of us who read that and automatically think, WHAT THE HELL WERE YOU THINKING?!?

Greenwald makes a very valid point in summing up this portion of his piece… The rest of it is well worth the read here.

“Hence:  ”war crimes” were transformed into “policy disputes” between hawkish defenders of the country and shrill, soft-on-terror liberals.  “Torture” became “enhanced interrogation techniques which critics call torture.”  And, most of all, flagrant lawbreaking — doing X when the law says:  ”X is a felony” — became acting “pursuant to robust theories of executive power” or “expansive interpretations of statutes and treaties” or, at worst, ”in circumvention of legal frameworks.”"

Every night it seems the local news is highlighting another case of burglary, also known as breaking and entering. It is one of the most common felonies committed in the US every year and does deserve the attention because of its seriousness. Nothing to laugh about, but I feel the issue is treated a bit like a circus.

A local blogger in Concord, California recently posted a great summary of local crime statistics with some decent advice as to how to prevent crime. However he, like so many others, believe incorrectly that a burglar alarm is the best answer to prevent home invasions.

“Most people do not think of burglaries until they happen to you or your neighbor. Home alarms are worth their weight in gold when used properly and have connections to all doors and windows. Having a sticker or sign on the exterior of your house is also a visual deterrent to would-be burglars.”

While a sticker on the window may help to prevent a burglar on a very elementary level, this only covers a small percentage of potential burglars. According to Pulitzer prize-winning investigative journalist and author David Cay Johnston (“Free Lunch”), the following statistics are true. You can hear his entire argument in the embedded podcast below, but according to a report published by the Department of Justice, these figures are not unknown to the government.

• The US taxpayer spends about 2 billion dollars a year for police to respond to burglar alarms.
• 99% (according to industry and independent data) of all alarms are false.
• 1 in 5 households have an alarm. Therefore, 80% of the population is being taxed for 20% of a service where 99% of the time it is a false alarm.
• Year 2000 figures (no doubt these have increased since) state that is costs around $50 to respond to each call.
• Tyco can be connected to 1/4 of the house alarms installed.
• The average profit margin in the alarm industry is about 77%.
• So, with a cost of approximately $50 per call, the US taxpayer is paying 500 million dollars a year to Tyco alone in free labor (on top of their huge profit margins).
• 1 out of every 8 calls to the police are for burglar alarms.

Let’s think for a moment, what the cops and civil services could do with all of that free time and money if the alarm industry had to respond to these calls instead… Or at least pay for their inaccurate product. And why is the mainstream media against reporting this issue in greater detail? Given that in the city of Concord alone, (population 126,539) there were 5,253 incidents of property crime versus 398 acts of violence reported in the year ConcordBlogger cites. Where is the true cost and how can this be fixed?

Here is the talk where David Cay Johnston discusses the alarming statistics: