The Specifics of Mortgage Fraud

This is how it's done:

Federal prosecutors said Thursday that owners of the Metropolitan Money Store targeted homeowners who risked losing their homes and then used straw buyers, fraudulently obtained loans and inflated real estate appraisals to strip equity from more than 100 homes in the Washington area.

The homeowners seeking help ended up losing whatever money they had invested and their homes.

[SNIP]

Maryland investigators began to hear complaints from homeowners about Metropolitan in 2006. According to the indictment, Metropolitan lured in strapped owners through ads on television, radio and in print. The owners were told they didn't qualify for a refinancing of their mortgage, and in return were offered a "Foreclosure Reversal Program."

Under the program, they signed away their title to third parties, but were supposed to get help from Metropolitan to obtain a better mortgage that would allow them to repurchase the home.

Instead, Metropolitan allegedly used the straw buyers, who were paid $10,000 each, to take out big loans on the homes using inflated appraisals. They then stripped any equity out of the homes - allegedly $10 million - and allowed the homes to fall into foreclosure.

What would have stopped them? Simple, basic regulation and oversight. At the first sign of an inflated appraisal, at the first sign of a foreclosed property, at the first instance of a complaint from a borrower, something should have clicked. The investigators got wind of the problem in 2006, but weren't able to indict until now--a delay which cost millions. If they had been able to move against this scheme more quickly, it seems likely that the scheme itself would never have progressed as far as it did. Instead of a handful of properties, a hundred were done. Had there been a thousand, what would be the difference?

So what did all of the money fleeced out of these people buy?

The 25-count indictment unsealed Thursday names Lanham-based Metropolitan Money Store and its president, Joy Jackson, 40, who allegedly used some of the money to pay for a lavish wedding for herself and Kurt Fordham, one of the other seven indicted. The wedding reportedly cost $800,000 and included a designer gown with a 40 foot train and a concert by Grammy-award winning singer Patti LaBelle

WBAL-TV 11 News reports that Jackson was a former exotic dancer turned mortgage broker and is alleged to have been the ringleader of the scheme prosecutors say defrauded homeowners and lenders.

The charges include conspiracy, mail fraud and money laundering. Prosecutors also seek the return of $35 million in fraudulent loans that the group allegedly took out from lenders. Each count of the conspiracy carries a maximum penalty of 30 years in prison.

Ah, the gilded age. Only in America can an ex-stripper steal millions, pay for a lavish wedding, and probably get away with it. They called it the "Metropolitan Money Store" and they lavished the proceeds all over themselves like cheap, tawdry people without morals usually do. Who was paying attention? After all, they were doing this publicly, out in plain sight, out in plain view. One would think someone, anyone would have asked a couple of questions. Like...I don't know. Patti LaBelle? At your wedding?

I say probably get away with it, but the reality is that this case will probably languish in the courts, some of the money will be returned, most of it will never be repaid, a few hundred people will probably lose their homes, and at the end of the day, another scheme to defraud people will work its way through a system that is simply not flexible enough to stop the crooks.

Remember when Reagan said "In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem"? It led to the kind of thinking that says that we can't have regulators and rules and bureaucrats watching over what goes on. It led to the kind of thinking that has brought us understaffed and overworked investigators and regulators all over the country. It has brought us to a point in our society when there's no one doing what is necessary to keep thieves from stealing millions by preying on desperate people who were already victims of a practice where people who weren't even indicted yesterday sold them homes they couldn't afford.

Reagan unleashed a predator society, an underclass of people who took the idea of anything goes and deregulation and, like virtually any good Republican usually does, he left us a hefty bill our grandchildren are going to have to pay off.

If you let the fox guard the henhouse, expect a lot of dead chickens everywhere

In case you were wondering, no, you shouldn't let the fox guard the henhouse:

The tax manager charged as the mastermind of the biggest fraud in the District's history helped play a role in designing the agency's computer system while she was allegedly stealing millions of dollars a year, current and former employees said.
Following Harriette Walters's input, officials left her small unit out of the new software system, making it easier for her to escape detection as she allegedly produced fake checks that prosecutors say amounted to $50 million.

Directors in the scandal-plagued tax department now want to scrap the $135 million system rather than try to upgrade it to make it more secure. The chief financial officer's technology manager says the system, installed between 2000 and 2004, is too outdated and clumsy to be worth fixing.

Before her arrest in November, Walters was a 26-year tax employee known among her colleagues as a problem solver with a knack for finding solutions by using the department's antiquated and balky computers or finding a way around them. Although she did not have final say over the new Accenture Integrated Tax System, Walters contributed to the decision that her unit, which handled real estate tax refunds, be left out of it.

Chief Financial Officer Natwar M. Gandhi has budgeted $10 million for a search for a new program that can process the city's income, business and real estate taxes. The Accenture computer system is not directly to blame for the embezzlement scandals that have racked the agency, officials said. Rather, the fault lies with the decisions of what was left out of it.

"It was the things that were not included that cost us," said Mike Teller, who took over as Gandhi's technology chief in 2005. "The specification did not include things that, in hindsight, should have been included."

Those decisions by officials were made under dire conditions, and with an alleged mole in their midst.

Walters's guidance came at a critical time in setting up the computers, which were designed to help lift District finances from the 1990s nadir of near-bankruptcy.

The convoluted way that the District of Columbia has to govern itself without being an actual "city" with a clear and defined relationship to an entity like the State of Maryland or the State of Virginia between it and the Federal government--or, better yet, actual STATUS as a STATE--means that this kind of thing will continue into perpetuity. Having a state government above it between it and the Feds wouldn't solve every problem, but it is nice when a regulator can pop in from time to time and encourage the city to do things that actually make sense. Like keep the tax manager under some kind of scrutiny. And, you know, audit the finances. And, maybe, just maybe, catch the people who are robbing the city blind. For years on end.

Or not.

--WS

Hayden Goes Hysterical

In an unprecedented move, CIA director Michael Hayden has ordered an internal inquiry into the work of the Inspector General over the agency. The IG, John L. Helgerson, has been dedicated to the investigation of the CIA’s detention and interrogation programs, and this stern oversight has rankled many operatives.

Helgerson’s willingness to look into the dark crannies has prompted Hayden to order an investigation of the IG’s office, focusing on complaints that the Inspector General’s office has not acted in a fair and impartial manner when judging agency operations. Hayden accuses the IG of embarking on a “crusade” against those who have gone along with the morally bankrupt Bush administrations detention and interrogation programs.

This move by Hayden has taken many aback, as it threatens to undermine the independence of the IG’s office. Former IG for the CIA, Frederick Hitz, who served in that capacity from 1990 to 1998, was astounded by Hayden’s order. In his opinion, any move by the agency’s director to examine the work of the inspector general would “not be proper.”

“I think it’s a terrible idea,” said Mr. Hitz, who now teaches at the University of Virginia. “Under the statute, the inspector general has the right to investigate the director. How can you do that and have the director turn around and investigate the I.G.?”

Current and former officials said that Hayden’s inquest had involved formal interviews with members of the IG’s staff, and his little inquisition is being headed up by a loyal minion to Hayden, Robert L. Deitz, who served as General Counsel to the NSA when Hayden ran that agency.

Inspectors General are not immune from accountability – but Hayden’s approach is astounding in it’s brazen nature. In a normal, sane administration, the proscribed grievance process would be followed. That would involve filing a complaint with the Integrity Committee of the President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency, which oversees all the inspectors general. The second option is for the director of the aggrieved agency to plead his or her case directly to the President, and if the case is made, the President can remove the Inspector General from his post.

How quaint. These proscribed mechanisms afford accountability, and would have avoided the current awkwardness; while protecting the independence of the IG’s office.

The existing mechanisms just didn’t have the right element of authoritarian and histrionic theatrics about them to suit Hayden’s fancy, apparently.

And therein lies the rub…maybe the IG has been overreaching. I don’t know – But now it isn’t likely that we will find out. Another important issue has been reduced to political Kabuki, when what is needed is sober assessment.

Condi Continues her Contempt for Congress & Oversight

Representative Henry Waxman, Chairman of the House Oversight Committee, on Tuesday leveled charges that Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice has interfered with congressional investigations into corruption by the Iraqi government; as well as the activities of the mercenary security outfit Blackwater USA.

State Department officials have repeatedly told the Oversight Committee that details of corruption in the Iraqi government could not be provided to the committee because the information is treated as a “state secret” and can not be revealed to the public (nor, apparently to our elected representatives).

"You are wrong to interfere with the committee's inquiry," Waxman said in a letter to Rice. "The State Department's position on this matter is ludicrous," added Waxman, a vocal opponent of the Bush administration's Iraq policies.

The State Department did not comment on the letter or Waxman’s comments, but in the past, Rice’s State Department has blown off the requests of the committee, and attempted to dismiss Waxman as “partisan” and inconsequential.

In the case of Blackwater, which was involved in an apparently unprovoked attack on civilians that left at least 11 civilians dead, the company insists that, as they contract their mercenaries to provide security for State Department employees in Iraq, they can not hand over documents and cooperate with Congress without prior approval of the State Department, which will not give it.

"Congress has a constitutional prerogative to examine the impacts that corruption within the Iraqi ministries and the activities of Blackwater may have on the prospects for political reconciliation in Iraq," Waxman wrote to Rice.

Along with the latest letter Waxman wrote to Rice and released to the press, a letter from the State Deparment’s Contracting Officer, Kiazan Moneypenny, to Blackwater, which confirms the obstruction Waxman accuses the State Department of engaging in: "I hereby direct Blackwater to make no disclosure of documents or information ... unless such disclosure has been authorized in writing by the contracting officer." Undeterred by the stonewalling, Waxman has scheduled a hearing on the Blackwater matter for October 2.

Rice has been overtly contemptuous of congressional oversight, ignoring requests to appear before committees, answer questions or even acknowledge that Congress indeed has a legitimate oversight role. With her star waning, and her influence in the White House virtually nil, might she find herself escorted before the committee by the Sergeant of Arms of the House?

Waxman Investigating the IG for State

House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform charged today in a 13-page letter that Howard J. Krongard, the Inspector General for the State Department has exhibited a persistent tendency to censor reports that might embarrass the administration, and has repeatedly thwarted investigations of the State Department. The letter was signed by Chairman Henry Waxman and released today by the committee.

The Oversight Committee based the charges on the testimony of seven current and former members of the IG’s staff, including two former senior officials who spoke on the record with no stipulation of anonymity. The letter clarifies that the charges are not limited to a single unit, but that the pattern is pervasive, affecting all three divisions of the IG’s office – audits, investigations and inspections.

…The letter charged that Krongard "interfered with ongoing investigations to protect the State Department and the White House from political embarrassment." It said that "your strong affinity with State Department leadership and your partisan political ties have led you to halt investigations, censor reports and refuse to cooperate with law enforcement agencies."

…Waxman accused Krongard of refusing to send investigators to Iraq and Afghanistan to investigate $3 billion worth of State Department contracts; preventing his investigators from cooperating with a Justice Department probe into waste and fraud in the construction of the U.S. embassy in Iraq; using "highly irregular" procedures to personally exonerate the embassy's prime contractor of labor abuses; interfering in the probe of a close friend of former White House adviser Karl Rove; censoring reports on embassies to prevent full disclosure to Congress; and refusing to publish critical audits of State's financial statements.

Inspectors General are supposed to be independent and objective investigators of waste, fraud and abuse, rather than ideology-driven agenda whores. Of course, the Bush maladministration has stood this notion on it’s head and applied a test of partisanship to everything. Prior to the appointment of Krongard, the IG for State had traditionally been a Foreign Service officer. Krongard was previously employed by an international law firm and had been general counsel for Deloitte & Touche

Emails of exchanges between staff members discussing Krongard’s decision to stonewall the Justice Department on the embassy investigation.

"Wow, as we all [k]now that is not the normal and proper procedure," an investigator wrote to Assistant IG John A. DeDona. DeDona forwarded the e-mail to the Deputy IG, William E. Todd, saying, "I have always viewed myself as a loyal soldier but hopefully you sense my frustration in my voicemail yesterday."

Todd wrote back: "I know you are very frustrated. John, you need to convey to the troops the truth, the IG told us both Tuesday to stand down on this and not assist, that needs to be the message."

DeDona responded: "Unfortunately, under the current regime, the view within INV [the office of investigations] is to keep working the BS cases within the beltway, and let us not rock the boat with more significant investigations."

The committee subpoenaed the work product for the embassy report which Krongard personally drafted, that exonerated the contractor building the new embassy in Iraq, First Kuwaiti General Trade and Contracting Co. The company was accused of horribly abusive labor practices, including holding employees against their will, but Krongard let First Kuwaiti off the hook with a mere six pages of vague, handwritten notes, showing that he interviewed only six employees – who were selected by First Kuwaiti. "Contrary to established investigative procedures, you allowed the subject of the investigation, First Kuwaiti, to select the employees you interviewed," Waxman charged. He added that the interview notes “did not show how thoroughly each employee was interviewed.”

Waxman charges that Krongard has, by his actions, created a “dysfunctional office environment” and that he routinely berated and belittled personnel, treated career government professionals contemptuously, and fostered an environment where people actually feared coming to work. The letter asserts that the high turnover in the department – which has resulted in only seven of 27 investigator positions currently filled – is due to the feckless leadership of Krongard.

Oh for the good old days of $500 hammers and $600 toilet seats!

Those 1980’s abuses of the American taxpayer seem downright quaint in comparrison. What were they thinking, marking up the price of the goods themselves? The real profit margin is in fraudulent shipping and handling! (Pikers!)

A South Carolina defense contractor pleaded guilty yesterday to bilking the Pentagon out of $20.5 million over nearly 10 years by adding hundreds of thousands of dollars to the cost of shipping spare parts such as metal washers and lamps. The parts were bound for key military installations, including those in Iraq and Afghanistan. In one instance, in 2006, the government paid C&D Distributors $998,798 in transportation costs for shipping two 19-cent washers. Charlene Corley, 47, co-owner of C&D Distributors, used the money to pay for luxury homes, cars, plastic surgery and jewelry, according to court documents.

"It is a troubling case because the fraud took place during a time of war," said Kevin McDonald, the first assistant U.S. attorney for the District of South Carolina. The $20 million "that could have gone to assist our military was diverted and used in a fraudulent manner for excessive personal enjoyment."

C&D billed the Pentagon for materials and shipping separately, and they received payment on 112 of the fraudulent invoices submitted before the scam was uncovered. Among the abuses of your checkbook and mine was a $445,640 shipping invoice for an elbow pipe that cost less than ten dollars, and six machine screws worth a total of $59.94 were shipped at a cost of $403,436.

But there is even more salacious detail…C&D was owned and operated by twin sisters, and one of them committed suicide last fall after being questioned by investigators. The surviving sister is trying to make sure that most of the blame is shifted to her former womb-mate in an effort to reduce her prison time.

"We do not dispute that we participated and benefited in and from the conspiracy," Harris said. "We have, however, always maintained that her sister was the primary actor in this fraud, the primary beneficiary of this fraud, and unfortunately she is not here to today to assist us in distinguishing their roles in the fraud."

And this, boys and girls, is why we need oversight!

Pale Rider on FISA (with an assist from yours truly)

Let’s cut to the chase: There was no compelling reason to "change" or modify any existing FISA laws. That is the LIE they are telling to justify this.

FISA has been amended as technology has changed. If someone invents a new way to communicate wirelessly, FISA can and will be amended and updated to adapt to that new technology, if it is needed.

The “security” angle was a figleaf. This was about removing the oversight, not increasing the ability to conduct surveillance. We have always had, under FISA, the ability to monitor communications for 72 hours without a warrant. We have always had the ability to surveil foreigners without a warrant. And, MOST IMPORTANTLY, if anyone talks to a terrorist, no matter who they are, those communications can be collected without a warrant.

This is irregardless of whether the communications are "routed" through US territory or through a telecommunications switch located in the US. This has nothing to do with the location of switches or anything like that. In fact, read up on how most of the world's telecommunications traffic is routed through a certain switch physically located in Northern Virginia and then perhaps you can explain why a certain intelligence agency and several hundred billion dollars worth of facilities, personnel and technology also happens to be located in that same general area of Northern Virginia.

The intercepted communications of anyone engaged in planning, supporting, financing or backing a terrorist against this country has not nor has it ever required to have any kind of a warrant so long as one of the parties involved is, in fact, a foreigner engaged in that activity. If that person talks to a US person, a FISA warrant most certainly is not required, but the communications are simply reviewed as part of the ongoing process of collecting and disseminating information. (Bet you didn't know that, did you? Because so long as one end of the conversation is a non-US entity, we have always been able to collect that information--something they simply don't want you to know.)

Now, warrantless surveillance can commence even when both parties are US Persons, and continue for 72 hours, until such time as the FISA court can convene and see the evidence. The operation will not be stopped unless ordered to stop by the FISA court. Anyone engaged in collecting on these persons has to ANSWER to a higher authority for their actions--this is called accountability. If an intel agent has legitimate reasons to conduct surveillance, the courts and the oversight personnel will gladly sign off on the work being done.

Please STOP viewing this through the media-and-popular entertainment filter.

There is no dastardly, unimaginative bureaucrat engaged in thwarting the efforts of an intrepid and dazzling young intel agent who just wants to stop the terrorists while the bean counters just want to save money. This is not a "plot line" and there is no correlation between this issue and whatever crap sandwich of a TV show you think you remember.

Oversight is of increasing and desperate importance, given that the US Attorneys in this country are now the political enforcement arm of the Republican Party. Any US Attorney can now indict a US citizen based on what they "discover" as evidence, thanks to the new FISA laws. How would that happen? With no oversight whatsoever, the surveillance capability of the United States of America can be used against any US citizen.

We now know that at least one judge resigned from the FISA court because of abuses of power. We have clear evidence that the FBI has abused the power of National Security Letters. Now we see that other intelligence agencies can combine that with the most technologically advanced surveillance capabilities in existence. They have the complicity of virtually every telecommunications company in this country and now no reason to comply with the wishes of any company that dissents. So if the full weight of the US government can now be wielded against a US citizen--with no oversight, no check on the overreaching power--what reasonable person could conclude that this system will not be abused?

It's not like there is no history of overreach and abuse. FISA was created out of the findings of the Church Committee in the 1970s, which discovered rampant abuse of surveillance abilities by the Executive Branch for political purposes. The abuse of power is not limited to the Republicans or Democrats. Therefore, we need oversight to keep all of them in line. The FISA court, was there to ensure these basic rules were followed and that there was a check on the power of the Executive should they attempt to collect communications outside of these basic rules.

This has a lot more to do with intimidation of political opponents than it does security. As their grip on the rudder of power slips further, they grow increasingly desperate.

The threat of terror is what is being used to scare you into giving them unprecedented access to the tools they need to intimidate their political enemies. They don't give a damn whether a terrorist kills you or not--if they did, would they really be in Iraq, creating more terrorists? Would they allow the northwest region of Pakistan to become the headquarters of al Qaeda? Would they reduce the numbers of first responders and leave the borders open? Would they spend billions to create a department of "Homeland Security" and then botch the job so completely as to allow this department to become the laughingstock of organized society? DHS can stop your Grandma from bringing a bottle of shampoo on an aircraft but it can't stop the people who test the system from showing, time after time, that the screening process misses guns, knives and bomb materials.

That's called "checks and balances" and your government just flushed that concept, along with your Fourth Amendment rights.

FISA has granted tens of thousands of warrants, blocked about 6 of them, and has served as a check on the power of the Executive to intimidate and collect information on its internal political enemies.

They want you to yawn and say, okay, I'll buy it, and they want you to go back to watching boobies on TV and to stop paying attention.

But they've always had the ability to stop terrorists. Always! And what they want you to do is act all scared and concerned and look the other way while they go about intimidating and marginalizing their political enemies.

Wake up. They don't give a shit about you. They care about holding on to power.

The Must-Have Accessory for Spring: Oversight

In a span of fifteen minutes today, a whole slew of subpoenas will be considered for a variety of current and former administration officials, including Condoleeza Rice, Andrew Card and Monica Goodling.

There are so many oversight opportunities to choose from that Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Reid have appointed staffers to keep track of what fights are being picked and why. Seriously. They have had to appoint scandal coordinators.

Since Democrats assumed control of Congress in January, they have hired more than 200 investigative staffers for key watchdog committees. They include lawyers, former reporters and congressional staffers who left oversight committees that had all but atrophied during the six years that the GOP controlled Congress and the White House. They have already begun a series of inquiries on subjects ranging from allegations of administration meddling in federal scientists' work on global warming and the General Services Administration's alleged work for Republican campaigns to how disproved claims that Iraq had purchased nuclear material from Niger evolved into a case for war.

Democrats have been emboldened, investigators say, by their House and Senate judiciary committee colleagues' inquiries into the firings of U.S. attorneys. Last week's day-long testimony by Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, some Democrats said, was a reminder of how rare Cabinet-level grillings had become on Capitol Hill. By the end of today, the Senate Judiciary Committee alone is set to authorize subpoenas for 15 people in the inquiry on the prosecutor dismissals.

"Oversight is just as important, if not more important, than legislation," said Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.), chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. The new investigations illustrate just how many questions went unanswered in the six years when Democrats "couldn't hold hearings, we couldn't compel information . . . all we could do was ask for it," he said.

Now, Waxman said, what to tackle next "is something we're always thinking about."

Since the Democrats came to power, nearly 100 research and investigation staffers have been hired to investigate potential violations of congressional rules and federal and state laws. As part of the new culture of accountability that the Democrats campaigned on (and which is our raison d’etre) the Democrats are pushing forward with investigations.

The subpoenas are about to fly. I do believe the events of this week are going to be a hell of a lot of fun to watch.

Waxman has reached his limit...

Representative Waxman’s patience is at an end. Condoleeza Rice has blown him off and ignored his respectful requests that she appear before the Oversight Committee he chairs and answer questions about the false claims of a Niger-Iraq connection that was used as justification for a pre-emptive war against Iraq.

Now that Condoleeza Rice has officially blown off the Oversight Committee (Rep. Waxman sent a letter last month, in which he requested she appear on April 17^th) the full Oversight Committee will convene on Wednesday, 25 April to consider compelling testimony with subpoenas.

If subpoenaed, will Ms. Rice ignore that, too? Will it go that far? (I would pay to see it.) Ignore a subpoena and the Capitol Police can arrest you and deliver you to the committee.

Next week is going to be very interesting indeed.

Waxman Won’t be Ignored

The days of Condi dismissing the oversight committee are numbered. By my count, there are about 18 left…

Congressman Waxman let it be known today that ignoring him would not make him go away.

On 12 March, 2007, Congressman Waxman reopened an investigation into the specious allegations of lies about yellowcake Uranium and aluminum centrifuge tubes. At that time, the Congressman sent a letter to Secretary of State Rice that should have made it clear he wants answers (even if she was distracted by thoughts of shoeshopping).

Since 2003,I have written 16 letters to you, either in your capacity as National Security Advisor or Secretary of State.

According to Committee records, you have satisfactorily

responded to only five of those l6 letters. Those five were co-signed by Republicans.

Under the Bush Administration, several agencies followed a policy of not responding to minority party requests.

Although I do not agree with this policy, I presume that you were also following it when you decided not to respond to my requests for information.

I am now renewing my requests as the chairman of the chief oversight committee in the U.S. House of Representatives.

(She blew off that March 12 letter as well.)

So the Congressman sent another along today, and attached a copy of the March 12 letter, and told her she is expected to appear before the committee on 18 April. (.pdf warning)

Talk about missing the point...

Everyone is all atwitter about the use of RNC email servers to coordinate the political purge of U.S. Attorneys by members of the Department of Justice.

While everyone is debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin i.e. whether executive privilege is waived when non-secured servers are used, I am focusing on that other word…

Non-secured.

Read that as “hackable.”

If there is even a 1% chance that any issue of national security could have been revealed to hostile interests, Congressman Waxman should seize the RNC servers and they should be examined thoroughly by experts in computer forensics.

And oh yeah – everyone can shut the hell up about the Republicans being the party of virile national security when they will sell out security to cheat at politics.

GAO: Unsecured Munitions Responsible for Half of U.S. Casualties in Iraq

A Government Accountability Office report was released yesterday, concurrent with testimony given in front of the National Security subcommittee of the House Oversight Committee.

The testimony of Davi M. D'Agostino, Director of Defense Capabilities and Management at GAO was really a damning indictment of the mismanagement of the entire war by the Bush administration and the Department of Defense under their control, including the Joint Chiefs.

You might recall the incident at al Qa Qaa, where 380 tons of conventional weaponry and explosives went missing? That was only a drop in the bucket. Conventional munitions caches were scattered all over the country, and the failure of the DoD to properly secure these ammo dumps has been directly responsible for fully one half of the deaths and injuries sustained by U.S. Service personnel serving in Iraq.

In our report, we concluded that a fundamental gap existed between the OIF war plan assumptions and the experiences of U.S. and coalition forces in Iraq, contributing to insufficient troops being on the ground to prevent widespread looting of conventional munitions storage sites and resulting in looted munitions being a continuing asymmetric threat to U.S. and coalition forces. The human, strategic, and financial costs of this failure to provide sufficient troops have been high, with IEDs made with looted munitions causing about half of all U.S. combat fatalities and casualties in Iraq and killing hundreds of Iraqis and contributing to increasing instability, challenging U.S. strategic goals in Iraq. Further, DOD does not appear to have conducted a theaterwide survey and assessed the risk associated with unsecured conventional munitions storage sites to U.S. (P. 12 of .pdf)

Read the entire report. Put simply: Absolutely every thing has been done absolutely wrong. Everything. From the very first faulty and outlandishly foolish assumptions of a cakewalk and a capitulated Iraqi military providing security and post-war Iraq would not be a U.S. concern and resistance would be minimal (the whole “greeted as liberators” thing). All the way to fecklessly failing to secure munitions that have subsequently killed 1600 Americans and severely injured 10-15,000 more.

Am I supposed to just shrug and say "so what?" here? Because I can't do that.

Congress is right to take control away. They can not point to a single thing they have done right, there is no reason to trust them now, and it’s time to start taking reasoned and reasonable steps to end the war and bring our troops home.


[Cross-posted from Watching Those We Chose and linked on Political Animal]