0 $
2,500 $
5,000 $
100 $
FEBRUARY 2023

How America’s ‘Defense’ (Aggression) Contractors Control America’s Government

Support SouthFront

How America's 'Defense' (Aggression) Contractors Control America's Government

The F-35 Lightning II, produced by Lockheed Martin Corporation, the company at the top of SIPRI’s Top 100. Photo: Flickr/Jasper Nance

Written by Eric Zuesse

Probably no corporation possesses a bigger share of control over America’s Government than does the one that sells more to the U.S. Government than does any other: Lockheed Martin. Actually, its top owners, or the group of stockholders who dominate the firm and cooperatively together control its policies and determine whom the corporation’s top executives are, are, together with one-another, the individual persons who cooperatively produce the decisions that constitute this “bigger share of control over America’s Government” than any other corporation does (and vastly more than the American public does). Some of these top owners are, themselves, in one way or another, employees or other official agents of Lockheed Martin, but others are not: one needn’t be OFFICIALLY a “part of” the firm in order for the firm to be one’s agent. This is instead the power of money and of ownership — not of any official status. Usually, stockholding is the main means by which it’s exercized. Corporations were planned and designed in this way, in the years 1600 and 1602, in England and in Holland, partly because the then-rising public opposition against the official, titled, nobility or aristocrats, was beginning to raise questions among the aristocracy, as to whether, some day, official titles might become more of a personal burden to be borne than of a personal asset to continue to flaunt publicly (such as by such titles as “Duke” “Lord” “Baron” or etc.). That was one of the main motives for the creation of the corporate form. 

From its very outset, empire was to have its own army and armed forces, in order to be able to coerce the local aristocracy in a seized vassal-nation to cooperate with the imperial power, so as for those two national aristocracies jointly to exploit and extract wealth from the vassal nation and from its population. This was the start of capitalism. The armaments-makers and mercenaries have always been crucial to its foundation, and the result is popularly called “imperialism” or (in the United States, “neoconservatism,” though there is nothing really “neo” about it, except, as Mussolini called the two synonyms, “corporationism” and “fascism,” marking the historical transition away from agrarian-based feudalism, into its replacement by the international-corporate version of aristocracy — which is based on ownership of stock instead of land).

So: as the world’s largest armaments-maker, Lockheed Martin is quite naturally itself foundational to the U.S. empire. A few instances of how it functions that way will here be described:

On 26 January 2020, I headlined “Joe Biden Is as Corrupt as They Come”, and opened:

Bernard Schwartz, a former Vice Chairman and top investor in Lockheed Martin (which is by far the largest seller to the U.S. Government, and also the largest seller to most of America’s allied Governments), is one of Joe Biden’s top donors. CNN headlined, on October 24th, “Biden allies intensify push for super PAC after lackluster fundraising quarter”, and reported that, “Bernard Schwartz, a private investor and donor to the former vice president’s campaign, said he spoke with Biden within the last two weeks and encouraged him to do just that.

And Biden did then follow Schwartz’s advice, and has remained loyal to him. This was an example of Lockheed’s impact upon a Democratic Party public official who serves the military-industrial complex (MIC) instead of the public.

Here is what I wrote on 26 March 2019, under the heading  “Mueller’s Record of Framing Innocent People to Protect the Guilty”, an excerpt concerning a Republican Party official, James Comey, who likewise serves Lockheed and the rest of the MIC instead of the public:

——

The liberal Republican James Comey became the Senior Vice President and General Counsel of Lockheed Martin Corporation during 2005-2010, where his 2009 pay was $6,113,797. During that time, he also was a Director of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s National Chamber Litigation Center, which works to support business interests in the courts, especially the interests of U.S.-based international corporations, including Lockheed Martin. Furthermore, as-of 12 March 2010, Comey also had been granted 162,482 free shares of stock in Lockheed Martin, which number was higher than that of anyone except the Chairman, the CEO President, and an Executive Vice President; so, Comey was among the very top people at Lockheed Martin. Lockheed Martin’s largest foreign customer was the Saudi Government, which is 100% owned by the Saud family. Today, those Comey shares are worth $47,119,780 — after his five years with the company, plus nearly nine years of growth in that stock, from the war-producing policies that Comey had helped to initiate.

Then, Comey bought a $3M mansion in Connecticut and became the General Counsel and a Member of the Executive Committee at the gigantic hedge Fund, Ray Dalio’s Bridgewater Associates, in Connecticut, where Comey’s only publicly known pay was $6,632,616 in 2012. Dalio and Comey became very close — Dalio called Comey his “hero.” But Obama then hired the liberal Republican Comey as FBI Director in 2013, replacing the liberal Republican Mueller in that role, from which Obama’s successor President Trump fired Comey, and congressional Democrats then succeeded in getting Mueller assigned to become the Special Counsel who would supposedly investigate the legitimacy of that firing.

On 21 May 2013, Marketwatch bannered “Bridgewater Associates’ trades for Q2” and reported that

After a number of tech companies — including those we’ve mentioned [Microsoft, Oracle, and Intel] and EMC — the largest single-stock holding in the fund’s portfolio was its roughly 220,000 shares of Lockheed Martin LMT, +1.93%. The company recently reported an increase in earnings compared with the first quarter of 2012, but revenue was down slightly and there is a good deal of speculation that the business will be impacted by cuts in U.S. military spending. … Billionaire Ken Griffin’s Citadel Investment Group reported a position of 1.2 million shares at the end of December.

Lockheed Martin is by far the largest U.S. ‘defense’ contractor, taking 8.3% of all U.S. Government purchases during 2015, as compared to #2 Boeing’s 3.8%, and #3 General Dynamics’s 3.1%.

Other than sales to the U.S. Government, the largest customer of Lockheed Martin is the Saud family, who own Saudi Arabia and own the world’s largest oil company, Aramco, and who hate Shia Muslims and especially hate Iran, which has the most Shia.

As Open Secrets has reported about Comey:

He left Bridgewater and became senior research scholar and Hertog Fellow on National Security at Columbia Law School in February 2013, and also joined the board of London-based HSBC Holdings. As the Center has reported, Comey maxed out his contributions to Mitt Romney in 2012 in an effort to unseat his new boss, and also gave to Obama’s 2008 opponent, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.).

This is a team that’s pro-Saud and pro U.S. billionaires, and pro Israeli billionaires, but rabidly anti Iran and Russia and China, and looking for a fight — war and increased ‘defense’-spending — against any nation (such as Syria) that’s favorable toward those ‘enemies of America’.

——

The MIC has far more key agencies than are generally known. One is In-Q-Tel, whose pernicious character is so obvious that practically nothing can be said about that corporation without revealing its inconsistency with any democratic republic.

Even the CIA-affiliated Wikipedia, in its article “In-Q-Tel”, opens:

In-Q-Tel (IQT), formerly Peleus and In-Q-It, is an American not-for-profit venture capital firm based in Arlington, Virginia. It invests in high-tech companies to keep the Central Intelligence Agency, and other intelligence agencies, equipped with the latest in information technology in support of United States intelligence capability.[4] The name “In-Q-Tel” is an intentional reference to Q, the fictional inventor who supplies technology to James Bond.[5]

In-Q-Tel has stated that the average dollar invested by In-Q-Tel in 2016 attracts fifteen dollars from other investors.[6]

History [edit]

Originally named Peleus and known as In-Q-It, In-Q-Tel was founded by Norm Augustine, a former CEO of Lockheed Martin, and by Gilman Louie, who was In-Q-Tel’s first CEO.[4][5][7] In-Q-Tel’s mission is to identify and invest in companies developing cutting-edge technologies that serve United States national security interests. According to the Washington post, In-Q-Tel started as the idea of then CIA director George Tenet [the man who told G.W. Bush that fooling the American people to believe that Saddam had WMD would be “a slam dunk”]. Congress approved funding for In-Q-Tel, which was increased in later years.[6] Origins of the corporation can also be traced to Ruth A. David, who headed the Central Intelligence Agency Directorate of Science & Technology in the 1990s and promoted the importance of rapidly advancing information technology for the CIA.[5] In-Q-Tel now engages with entrepreneurs, growth companies, researchers, and venture capitalists to deliver technologies that provide superior capabilities for the CIADIANGA, and the wider intelligence community.[8] In-Q-Tel concentrates on three broad commercial technology areas: softwareinfrastructure and materials sciences.

Former CIA director George Tenet says,

“We [the CIA] decided to use our limited dollars to leverage technology developed elsewhere. In 1999 we chartered … In-Q-Tel. … While we pay the bills, In-Q-Tel is independent of CIA. CIA identifies pressing problems, and In-Q-Tel provides the technology to address them. The In-Q-Tel alliance has put the Agency back at the leading edge of technology … This … collaboration … enabled CIA to take advantage of the technology that Las Vegas uses to identify corrupt card players and apply it to link analysis for terrorists [cf. the parallel data-mining effort by the SOCOMDIA operation Able Danger], and to adapt the technology that online booksellers use and convert it to scour millions of pages of documents looking for unexpected results.[9]

In-Q-Tel sold 5,636 shares of Google, worth over US$2.2 million, on November 15, 2005.[10] The shares were a result of Google’s acquisition of Keyhole, Inc, the CIA-funded satellite mapping software now known as Google Earth.[11]

“Nonprofit” — isn’t that nice?

On 22 January 2015, Nafeez Ahmed posted two articles, both researched and documented in depth, “How the CIA made Google”, and “Why Google made the NSA”.

The more that goes to the MIC, the less that goes to everything (and everyone) else; the public increasingly fend for themselves. For example: in a country where the Government doesn’t protect small businesses but only giant ones, this is how they protect themselves — no thanks to, and maybe against the laws of, that MIC-dominated Government. It’s what happens when and where 57.16% of the money that is legally donated to politicians comes from the wealthiest 0.1% — the richest one in ten thousand — of the nation’s population.

Such a nation censors-out the truth, instead of allows it to be reported. Only the lies against those truths are allowed: such as the lie that what happened in February 2014 in Ukraine was a democratic revolution instead of a U.S. coup; and such as the lie regarding Taiwan 5 miles away from mainland China’s coast (or 1.2 miles away, or 100 miles away) — that it belongs to America instead of to China, of which Taiwan has actually been a part since 1684 (except when Japan conquered Taiwan in 1895 and then America seized it in 1945 — as-if Japan’s surrender gave Japan’s conqueror the U.S. a right to control that island 3,236 miles away from America — as-if Taiwan were American instead of Chinese). (Of course: the U.S. says instead that Taiwan is an independent country, which is just as big a lie.) It’s another lie-based land-grab by the voracious U.S. empire, and can be sustained only by means of censorship against essential relevant truths that contradict those lies.

However, at the lower levels — the hirees of the mega-corporations that are doing this, instead of at the top levels that more-directly represent the controlling stockholders — there is far more confusion, and even outright stupidity, as those front-line workers who carry out the censorship are struggling to do their jobs in the face of the multiple self-contradictory hypocritical instructions they get from corporate management, gobblydegook such as this, which is a link from Matt Taibbi’s 2 December 2022 “1. Thread: THE TWITTER FILES”: his report about how the heavily Democratic-Party suckers who had been hired by the heavily Democratic-Party billionaires who control that corporation (Twitter) managed to hide from most Americans (until AFTER the 2022 mid-term elections) the reality of the scandal about what was contained in Hunter Biden’s laptop. Only at the topmost level — the board members and the top executives — is the actual motive (U.S. imperialism. a.k.a., “neoconservatism”) actually known and understood. Blaming the suckers down below can’t even possibly endanger, but instead protects, the real culprits (the beneficiaries — in BOTH Parties — of this imperialism). Censorship itself poisons and kills democracies: all of it is inconsistent with democracy and advances ONLY aristocracy, theocracy or any other form of dictatorship. Whereas the employees of firms such as Google, Twitter, Facebook, New York Times, CNN, Washington PostGuardian, NewsGuard, etc., might not know this, the top-level people there do, and they are the ones who have selected and hired those lower-level workers, to carry out their dirty-work, for the billionaires, and especially for their ‘defense’ contractors, who control the Government. It’s the controlling mega-corporate investors, basically, who are the beneficiaries of what this Government does, and this is the reality of neoconservatism (U.S. imperialism).

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s new book, AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change, is about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public.

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

Support SouthFront

SouthFront

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
11 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
ericv

Eisenhower warned against the Military industrial complex. He was the last true president, everyone that came after was a slave to the war machine

hash
hashed
Boba Lazarević

He did issue a warning, true. But too little, too late. To me it seems like a cop out. Obviously he let it grow under his watch to begin with. And he was himself a military figure for nearly entire career, so why wouldn’t he? That warning just doesn’t seem sincere enough to give him any props. other than for coming up with the term MIC.

Eric Zuesse

He did that three days before leaving office, because he and Truman had started the MIC and he didn’t want to take the blame for it but wanted that blame to go instead to his successors-in-office. He was one of the most deceitful U.S. Presidents, the other being Obama.

RamboDave

Can we please stop with this same theory from Eric Zuesse, over and over again, that it must be big corporate defense industries and their stock holders that are responsible for all of these endless wars?

Eric Zuesse’s theory is that since these corporations benefit from the wars, therefore they must be responsible for them. But, Mr. Zuesse conveniently fails to mention that it is the neocons that are the main beneficiaries and cause of the wars.

The neocons use the U.S. Department of Defense, within the World’s only superpower, as their private playground. And why do they do this? This is a question that Mr. Zuesse would never ask. It is because if the neocons control the only superpower they can dictate the outcome of regional conflicts, such as whether or not Israel gets to keep the land they stole from Palestinians.

hash
hashed
RamboDave

And, it just so happens that Zionism is the favorite project of the neocons!

Mr. Zeusse is writing this same article, published over and over again on SouthFront, to deflect blame for all the wars away from Zionists. Can SouthFront please stop this?

Boba Lazarević

Well, given his surname and the subjects he deals with in his opus, he’s probably one of them.

RamboDave

You are correct. And, Eric Zuesse is not the only author doing this, deflecting the blame for the endless wars. It is a clever coordinated campaign.

Eric Zuesse

Neoconservatism is U.S. imperialism, and that began with Harry Truman on 25 July 1945 accepting the advice from his hero General Dwight Eisenhower that if the U.S. wouldn’t come to rule the world the Soviet Union would, and this statement by his hero convinced him that Winston Churchill’s adviced to him was correct, and this started the “Special Relationship” and the Cold War. Churchill was a follower of Cecil Rhodes, who had sponsored him when Winston was a young man. Rhodes had created in 1877 neoconservatism — his plan for the U.S./UK (both aristocracies) to take over the world. Neoconservatism didn’t need Leo Strauss and Irving Kristol in the 1950s to start neoconservatism; it had already been created by Rhodes and Churchill and Truman and Eisenhower.

RamboDave

The war in Iraq was conceived by 25 neoconservative intellectuals, most of them Jewish, who were pushing President Bush to change the course of history, to make sure that Israel could keep the land they stole.

“Is the Iraq war the great neoconservative war? It’s the war the neoconservatives wanted, NY Times writer Thomas Friedman says. It’s the war the neoconservatives marketed. …. This is a war of an elite. Friedman laughs: I could give you the names of 25 people (all of whom are at this moment within a five-block radius of this office) who, if you had exiled them to a desert island a year and a half ago, the Iraq war would not have happened.”

https://www.haaretz.com/2003-04-03/ty-article/white-mans-burden/0000017f-e398-d804-ad7f-f3fa5d520000

Eric Zuesse

Neoconservatism is U.S. imperialism, and that began with Harry Truman on 25 July 1945 accepting the advice from his hero General Dwight Eisenhower that if the U.S. wouldn’t come to rule the world the Soviet Union would, and this statement by his hero convinced him that Winston Churchill’s adviced to him was correct, and this started the “Special Relationship” and the Cold War. Churchill was a follower of Cecil Rhodes, who had sponsored him when Winston was a young man. Rhodes had created in 1877 neoconservatism — his plan for the U.S./UK (both aristocracies) to take over the world. Neoconservatism didn’t need Leo Strauss and Irving Kristol in the 1950s to start neoconservatism; it had already been created by Rhodes and Churchill and Truman and Eisenhower.

Wayne Gabler

Short version: Brussels barks all the order and drafts the wars and terrorist event that have gone on for 100s of years. Like the start of the Christian Reformation Wars from the 1300s.

hash
hashed
11
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x