CargoAdmin, Bureaucrats, Moderators (CommentStreams), fileuploaders, Interface administrators, newuser, Push subscription managers, Suppressors, Administrators
12,811
edits
EDO Corporation: Difference between revisions
m
Text replacement - "The New York Times" to "The New York Times"
m (Text replacement - "CNN" to "CNN") |
m (Text replacement - "The New York Times" to "The New York Times") |
||
| Line 137: | Line 137: | ||
On 20 September 2006, ''[[Rolling Stone magazine]]'' published an article on the story entitled "Another Tale of Waste and Fraud Unpunished".<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20061017051243/http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/11729724/the_low_post_another_tale_of_waste_and_fraud_unpunished "Your tax dollars at work: In Washington, another tale of waste and fraud unpunished"], ''[[Rolling Stone magazine]]'', September 19, 2006</ref> | On 20 September 2006, ''[[Rolling Stone magazine]]'' published an article on the story entitled "Another Tale of Waste and Fraud Unpunished".<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20061017051243/http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/11729724/the_low_post_another_tale_of_waste_and_fraud_unpunished "Your tax dollars at work: In Washington, another tale of waste and fraud unpunished"], ''[[Rolling Stone magazine]]'', September 19, 2006</ref> | ||
On 28 September 2006, '' | On 28 September 2006, ''The New York Times'' reported that the F-22 multiyear contract had been approved by Congress despite opposition from [[Donald Rumsfeld]], [[George W. Bush]] and the present and future chairmen of top U.S. Government military procurement committees. ''The New York Times'' suggested that the military industrial lobby that pushed the F-22 multiyear programme was more powerful than the elected officials who oversee government military spending including the [[President of the United States]] himself.<ref>[https://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F10F15FD3D540C7B8EDDA00894DE404482 "Air Force Jet Wins Battle in Congress"], September 28, 2006</ref> | ||
On 1 December 2006, ''The Washington Post'' reported that the U.S. Inspector General had found that although Blair had indeed violated IDA's conflict of interest policy by working for both EDO and IDA at the same time, his actions had not affected IDA's results on the F-22.<ref>{{cite news| url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/01/AR2006120101451.html | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121025031642/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/01/AR2006120101451.html | url-status=dead | archive-date=2012-10-25 | newspaper=The Washington Post}}</ref> It also found that Blair's involvement in the IDA F-22 MYP study was "minimal," with no involvement in conducting the analysis or preparing or reviewing the report before it was finalized.<ref name="coireport" /> | On 1 December 2006, ''The Washington Post'' reported that the U.S. Inspector General had found that although Blair had indeed violated IDA's conflict of interest policy by working for both EDO and IDA at the same time, his actions had not affected IDA's results on the F-22.<ref>{{cite news| url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/01/AR2006120101451.html | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121025031642/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/01/AR2006120101451.html | url-status=dead | archive-date=2012-10-25 | newspaper=The Washington Post}}</ref> It also found that Blair's involvement in the IDA F-22 MYP study was "minimal," with no involvement in conducting the analysis or preparing or reviewing the report before it was finalized.<ref name="coireport" /> | ||