{"id":6142,"date":"2009-09-22T15:08:11","date_gmt":"2009-09-22T23:08:11","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/?p=6142"},"modified":"2009-09-22T15:10:02","modified_gmt":"2009-09-22T23:10:02","slug":"today-acorn-tomorrow-lockheed-martin-northrop-grumman","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/2009\/09\/22\/today-acorn-tomorrow-lockheed-martin-northrop-grumman\/","title":{"rendered":"Today ACORN, Tomorrow &#8230; Lockheed Martin? Northrop Grumman?"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Not much can top a federally-funded ACORN associate telling a (supposed) prostitute how she can launder her income &#8212;<a href=\"http:\/\/www.nypost.com\/p\/news\/local\/brooklyn\/pimp_hooker_catch_staff_Js4YPEcsCcxLZhAEehLhmL\" target=\"_blank\"> on camera.<\/a> Except for maybe this:<\/p>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignnone size-medium wp-image-6143\" src=\"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2009\/09\/armorgroup-1-300x225.jpg\" alt=\"armorgroup-1\" width=\"300\" height=\"225\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2009\/09\/armorgroup-1-300x225.jpg 300w, https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2009\/09\/armorgroup-1.jpg 630w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px\" \/><\/p>\n<p>or this:<\/p>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignnone size-medium wp-image-6145\" src=\"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2009\/09\/armorgroup71-300x224.jpg\" alt=\"armorgroup7\" width=\"300\" height=\"224\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2009\/09\/armorgroup71-300x224.jpg 300w, https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2009\/09\/armorgroup71.jpg 630w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px\" \/><\/p>\n<p>Those are guards from the federally-funded ArmorGroup, which has a $184 million contract to protect our embassy in Afghanistan. When these photos emerged from a FOIA request by the Project on Government Oversight (POGO), ArmorGroup <a href=\"http:\/\/www.associatedcontent.com\/article\/2142673\/us_embassy_employees_fired_in_kabul.html\" target=\"_blank\">fired 14 guards<\/a> for a whole host of inappropriate, and perhaps even illegal activities. <a href=\"http:\/\/www.npr.org\/templates\/story\/story.php?storyId=112728404\" target=\"_blank\">Subsequent reports<\/a> indicate that the guards may have even been involved in running a prostitution ring.<\/p>\n<p>According to <a href=\"http:\/\/www.huffingtonpost.com\/2009\/09\/22\/whoops-anti-acorn-bill-ro_n_294949.html\" target=\"_blank\">Ryan Grim over at Huffington Post<\/a>, the ironies have not been lost on Democratic lawmakers who have been whipsawed in recent days by legislation passed by the House and Senate to punish ACORN. The\u00c2\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/www.opencongress.org\/bill\/111-h3571\/text\" target=\"_blank\"> House bill <\/a>, however, would in essence de-fund <em>any <\/em>federally-funded organization guilty of a wide range of ethical and legal violations, including fraud. That, according to POGO, would apply not only to ACORN, but to possibly the ArmorGroup, and a <em>long line of federal defense contractors<\/em>, including tip-toppers like Northrop Grumman and Lockheed Martin. So far, <a href=\"http:\/\/pogoblog.typepad.com\/pogo\/2009\/09\/if-congress-attacks-the-mighty-oak-of-contractor-misconduct-it-shouldnt-just-settle-for-an-acorn.html\" target=\"_blank\">they have identified 87 cases of fraud among 43 contractors<\/a>.\u00c2\u00a0 <a href=\"http:\/\/www.contractormisconduct.org\/\" target=\"_blank\">Here&#8217;s the lis<\/a>t &#8212; have fun.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Not much can top a federally-funded ACORN associate telling a (supposed) prostitute how she can launder her income &#8212; on camera. Except for maybe this: or this: Those are guards from the federally-funded ArmorGroup, which has a $184 million contract to protect our embassy in Afghanistan. When these photos emerged from a FOIA request by [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":69,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_seopress_robots_primary_cat":"","_seopress_titles_title":"","_seopress_titles_desc":"","_seopress_robots_index":"","_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"coauthors":[],"class_list":["post-6142","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"meta_box":{"disable_donate_message":"","custom_donate_message":"","subtitle":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6142","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/69"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6142"}],"version-history":[{"count":8,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6142\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":6153,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6142\/revisions\/6153"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6142"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6142"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6142"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=6142"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}