Honeywell International, Northrop Grumman, BAE Systems, Lockheed Martin, and General Dynamics topped the list of companies profiting from nuclear weapons expenditures.
That flood of public funds to private contractors was coupled by significant spending by these companies on efforts to shape the debate around government spending. The companies spent $118 million lobbying governments in the U.S. and France in 2023 and donated more than $6 million to think tanks researching and writing about nuclear weapons.
Lockheed Martin contributed to the most think tanks, including: Atlantic Council, Brookings Institution, Chatham House, Center for a New American Security, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Hudson Institute, and Observer Research Foundation.
Wealthy donors have long funded think tanks with official-sounding names that produce research that reflects the interests of those funders (Extra!, 7/13). The weapons industry is a major contributor to these idea factories; a recent report from the Quincy Institute (6/1/23) demonstrates just how much influence war profiteers have on the national discourse.
*But anonymous sources, at the State Department, told me that ‘patient zero’ had COVID-19! 🙄
Cleared by Congress, legislation later signed by US President Joe Biden in March ordered the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) to declassify information regarding the potential origins of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. The measure forced the DNI to declassify its report within 90 days.
Hu and two of his WIV colleagues were thrown into the furious COVID-19 origin debate on 13 June when an online newsletter called Public said the three scientists developed COVID-19 in November 2019. That was prior to the outbreak becoming public when a cluster of cases at the end of December 2019 surfaced in people linked to a Wuhan marketplace. Public’s report was quickly embraced by a camp that argues COVID-19 came from a virus stored, and possibly manipulated, at WIV, rather than from infected animal hosts, perhaps being sold at the Wuhan market. A Wall Street Journal (WSJ) article on 20 June that said it had “confirmed” the allegations against the three, without referring to any public evidence or named sources with direct knowledge, fueled the flames even more. Social media and other publications spread the charges—and the scientists’ names.
In his speech last week, Sullivan said the world was at an “inflection point” that demanded “new strategies for achieving the same goal we’ve held since the Cold War: Reduce the risk of nuclear conflict.” Instead, we seem to be inching inexorably back toward a time when, as Kennedy commented 60 years ago, any “two men, sitting on opposite sides of the world, [can] decide to bring an end to civilization.”
*Disclaimer: The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Ms. Cat’s Chronicles.
How bad has the military-industrial complex gotten? The arms industry donates tens of millions of dollars every election cycle, and the average taxpayer spends $1,087 per year on weapons contractors compared to just $270 for K-12 education.
Classified war documents detailing secret U.S. and NATO plans for building up the Ukrainian military before a planned offensive against Russia were posted this week on social media channels, senior U.S. officials said.
…
U.S. officials were working to get them deleted but had not, as of Thursday evening, succeeded.
You must be logged in to post a comment.