Rtx RAYTHEON 2

RAYTHEON REBRAND

ED ROYCE

---

RTX Corp | AFSC Investigate

QUAKERS

BDS SHORTLIST

The world's second-largest military company, formerly known as Raytheon Technologies. It makes missiles, bombs, components for fighter jets, and other weapon systems used by the Israeli military against Palestinian civilians. Its surveillance technology is also used to monitor the U.S.–Mexico border.

Gaza Genocide

Weapons and Military Equipment

Raytheon Technologies Corp, headquartered in Arlington County, Virginia, designs, manufactures, and sells military weapons and equipment, including combat aircraft, avionics, missiles, bombs, battlefield fighting vehicles, and cybersecurity systems. It was formed in 2020 as a merger of Raytheon Company and United Technologies Corporation. The merger made it the world's second-largest military company, with $64.4 billion in revenue as of 2022, 96% of which derives from its defense sector. Among its notable subsidiaries are Collins Aerospace Systems and aircraft engine manufacturer Pratt & Whitney.

The company has long supplied U.S. and international militaries with weapon systems and equipment. Between 2008 and 2021, it signed contracts worth $52 billion with the Department of Defense (DOD). Additionally, the company was one of the top contractors of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) in the agency's efforts to erect a "smart/virtual" wall on the U.S.–Mexico border between 2005 and 2019 (see below for more details).

War Crimes Against Palestinian Civilians

Surveillance of the US–Mexico Border

Raytheon has been one of the main contractors of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). It was highlighted as one of 14 "giants in the border security business" in a 2019 report by the Transnational Institute and No más Muertes. Between 2005 and 2021, the company held contracts worth $67.9 million with CBP and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) for tracking and monitoring devices, satellites, ground sensors, surveillance and radar systems for maritime drones, and other technologies.

Two Raytheon systems are installed in CBP's Guardian Predator B, a maritime variation of General Atomics' MQ-9 Reaper drone. One of the systems, the MTS-B Multi-Spectral Targeting System, is the same technology that is used to guide munitions in killer drones. Although CBP has yet to arm its drones, it has previously considered adding "non-lethal" weapons to its Predator drones in order to "immobilize" people trying to cross the border. In 2013, CBP stated that it did not have plans to arm drones and was using Raytheon's technology only to perform "surveillance and reconnaissance."

The second Raytheon system installed in CBP's Guardian drones is the SeaVue marine search radar, which allows CBP agents to "spot small targets" at sea. The SeaVue system is also installed in CBP's fleet of Lockheed Martin P-3 Orion and Bombardier DHC-8 (Dash-8) planes. CBP acquired at least $33 million of SeaVue radars from Raytheon between 2010 and 2015. In 2023, CBP's budget will include a $10 million increase for its drone program and its continuity of "SeaVue usage."

In addition to patrolling U.S. borders, CBP's aircraft fleet has also been used to assist local law enforcement agencies, including in monitoring civilian protests. In 2020, the Department of Homeland Security deployed its helicopters, airplanes, and drones over at least 15 U.S. cities during protests following the murder of George Floyd. A CBP Predator drone was flown, for example, over Minneapolis. These aircraft logged at least 270 hours of surveillance. Out of 92,800 hours of flight logged by CBP's Air and Marine Operations in 2020, 8,000 hours were spent responding to requests for assistance from law enforcement agencies around the country.

Raytheon also had one major contract with ICE from 2011 to 2013. ICE awarded Raytheon a $45 million contract to develop its Investigative Case Management (ICM) system and allow the agency to collect data and share information across more than 100 databases with local law enforcement agencies in order to surveil, track, report, and detain undocumented people. ICE terminated the contract with Raytheon in 2013 due to delays and hired the software company Palantir to complete the ICM system, which has become the "engine" of the U.S. deportation and detention machine and is critical to ICE's functioning.

Pain/Heat Ray Less-Lethal Weapon

Raytheon's Active Denial System (ADS), nicknamed the "pain ray," was developed for the U.S. Department of Defense for use in Afghanistan and Iraq. A less-lethal directed energy weapon, the pain ray emits targeted radiation that penetrates under the skin and causes an intense burning sensation. According to Physicians for Human Rights, use of the weapon is "disproportionate by design" and introduces "very serious concerns about prolonged exposure, the risk of cellular damage and high degree burns, and the potential for abuse." Since 2010, Raytheon has marketed the ADS, as well as a smaller mobile version called the Silent Guardian, to non-military prison, police, and security authorities.

Raytheon first sold a Silent Guardian weapon, to the Los Angeles County Jail, in 2010. According to the ACLU, introducing this weapon created "a wholly unjustified risk that detainees [would] be needlessly subjected to excessive force -- indeed, a use of force tantamount to torture." In 2013, the company was sued by a man incarcerated at the Los Angeles County Jail who suffered from serious burns and long-term health complications after sheriff's deputies shot him with a Raytheon heat ray weapon.

While there is no evidence of current use of this weapon against civilians, law enforcement has still considered it to be a viable option for use in border policing and crowd-control. In 2018, CBP officials suggested deploying it to prevent asylum seekers from crossing the U.S.–Mexico border. In 2020, a lead military police officer attempted to secure the weapon to disperse protests in Washington, DC, following the police murder of George Floyd. In both cases, the weapon was not ultimately deployed.

Other Controversies

Economic Activism Highlights

Unless specified otherwise, the information in this page is valid as of

29 October 2022

---

6 24

­C­o­m­p­a­n­i­e­s P­r­o­f­i­t­i­n­g f­r­o­m t­h­e G­a­z­a G­e­n­o­c­i­d­e

AEROVIRONMENT (NASDAQ: AVAV)

AGILITE

AIMPOINT

AM GENERAL

*BAE SYSTEMS (LSE: BA)

*BOEING (NYSE: BA)

*CATERPILLAR (NYSE: CAT)

*COLT (PSE: CZG)

CORSIGHT

DAY & ZIMMERMANN

DJI

*ELBIT SYSTEMS (NASDAQ & TASE: ESLT)

EMTAN

FLYER DEFENSE

FORD (NYSE: F)

*GENERAL DYNAMICS (NYSE: GD)

*GENERAL ELECTRIC (NYSE: GE)

GENERAL MOTORS (NYSE: GM)

GHOST ROBOTICS

GOOGLE/ALPHABET (NASDAQ: GOOG)

HYUNDAI (KRX: 329180)

INFINIDOME

ISRAEL AEROSPACE INDUSTRIES

JCB

*L3HARRIS TECHNOLOGIES (NYSE: LHX)

*LEONARDO (BIT: LDO)

LEUPOLD & STEVENS

*LOCKHEED MARTIN (NYSE: LMT)

MDT ARMOR

MERCEDES (FWB: MBG)

NEXTVISION

NORDIC AMMUNITION COMPANY

*NORTHROP GRUMMAN (NYSE: NOC)

OSHKOSH (NYSE: OSK)

*PALANTIR (NYSE: PLTR)

*PAZ OIL (TASE: PZOL)

PLASAN

RAFAEL

*RENK (FRA: ZAR)

RHEINMETALL (FWB: RHM)

*ROLLS-ROYCE (LSE: RR)

*RTX (NYSE: RTX)

SHIELD AI

SK GROUP

SKYDIO

SMARTSHOOTER

SPEARUAV

*TEXTRON ( NYSE: TXT)

*THYSSENKRUPP (FWB: TKA)

TOYOTA (NYSE: TM)

*VALERO (NYSE: VLO)

WOODWARD INC (NSDQ: WWD)

XTEND

---

DUCK 2 26

1. Companies Profiting from the Gaza Genocide The companies listed here have provided Israel with weapons and other military equipment used in its attacks on Gaza, the West Bank, Lebanon, and Syria since October 2023.

• ### Our Work 67 Sueños is an Oakland-based youth organizing program with political education, ARTivism, and trauma-healing work at its center.
  • ### Elbit Systems Ltd Elbit Systems Ltd is headquartered in Israel, designs, manufactures, and sells munitions, combat vehicles, drones, electronic warfare systems, cybersecurity technologies, and other weapons and surveillance systems. It also manufactures aviation systems, medical instruments, and other products for the commercial market (see below). As of 2022, it is the 24th-largest weapons manufacturer in the ...

Business & Human Rights Resource Centre

https://www.business-humanrights.org › en › latest-news › rtx-corporation-did-not-respond-to-urgent-call-by-un-experts-to-cease-the-transfer-of-arms-to-israel

RTX Corporation did not respond to the urgent call by UN Experts to ...

Jul 12, 2024RTX (formerly Raytheon) has not responded to I/OPT: Experts call on arms manufacturers & investors to end the transfer of arms to Israel while media & civil society allege companies' involvement in the war on Gaza Story 24 Jul 2024

VICE

https://www.vice.com › en › article › protesters-are-targeting-defense-contractors-that-bragged-about-profits-from-gaza

Protesters Are Targeting Defense Contractors That Bragged About ... - VICE

The three biggest defense contractors in the U.S. that sell supplies to Israeli forces have all faced pro-Palestinian protests in the last month.

ahmedeldin.substack.com

https://ahmedeldin.substack.com › p › weapons-makers-fueling-gaza-genocide

Weapons Makers Fueling Gaza Genocide: Their Grip on the Atlantic ...

Aug 21, 2025The following weapons manufacturers have supplied military hardware used in Israel's Gaza genocide and are documented in strikes on civilians, refugee camps, and infrastructure, and have simultaneously funneled funds to the Atlantic Council.

Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › List_of_companies_involved_in_the_Gaza_war

List of companies involved in the Gaza war - Wikipedia

The following list documents of companies and corporations involved in supplying weapons, technology, logistical and financial support to Israel during the Gaza war. These companies provide a range of products and services—from advanced fighter jets, drones, and bombs to cloud computing, surveillance, and military logistics.

People's World

https://www.peoplesworld.org › article › u-s-weapons-makers-tell-investors-to-expect-big-profits-from-israel-war

U.S. weapons makers tell investors to expect big profits from Israel's ...

The top 10 U.S. government defense contractors, as of 2022, with the values of their contracts. Greg Hayes, the CEO of RTX, delivered an earnings report to investors on Tuesday.

eccpalestine.org

https://www.eccpalestine.org › the-companies-arming-israel-and-their-financiers

The companies arming Israel and their financiers

Jun 20, 2024From 2019 to 2023, six of the world's largest arms producers -Boeing, General Dynamics, Leonardo, Lockheed Martin, RTX and Rolls-Royce- have sold weapons or weapon systems to Israel. Through these sales, these companies run a high risk of contributing to severe violations of international humanitarian law in Gaza.

Responsible Statecraft

https://responsiblestatecraft.org › wall-street-weapons-industry

Wall Street ignores own rules while investing in arms bound for Israel

May 6, 2024Many of these weapons have been used in Israel's offensive in Gaza. Bank of America holds over $1.7 billion worth of shares in RTX and endorses the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights, the International Labor Organization's Fundamental Conventions, and the U.N. Guiding Principles.

Palestine Solidarity Campaign

https://palestinecampaign.org › psc-company › rtx-corporation

RTX Corporation - Palestine Solidarity Campaign

Apr 9, 2025RTX Corporation, previously known as Raytheon, is a US-based arms company. It has supplied Israel with a range of weapons and military technology used in its militarised attacks on Palestinians. RTX Corporation supplies guided air-to-surface missiles, which have been used by Israel in its militarised attacks on Palestinians, including its genocide in Gaza. More information …

Whoprofits.org

https://www.whoprofits.org › publications › report › 170?the-companies-supplying-weapons-to-israel-s-attack-on-gaza

The Companies Supplying Weapons to Israel's Attack on Gaza

December 2023 In this Update, Who Profits scrutinizes the use of commercially-manufactured weapons in Israel's 2023 unprecedented, deadly attack on Gaza, and the companies that supply them to the Israeli military. The indiscriminate military attacks being carried out against the people of besieged Gaza

---

---

rebrand to RTX

---

---

6 24

­C­o­m­p­a­n­i­e­s P­r­o­f­i­t­i­n­g f­r­o­m t­h­e G­a­z­a G­e­n­o­c­i­d­e

AEROVIRONMENT (NASDAQ: AVAV)

AGILITE

AIMPOINT

AM GENERAL

*BAE SYSTEMS (LSE: BA)

*BOEING (NYSE: BA)

*CATERPILLAR (NYSE: CAT)

*COLT (PSE: CZG)

CORSIGHT

DAY & ZIMMERMANN

DJI

*ELBIT SYSTEMS (NASDAQ & TASE: ESLT)

EMTAN

FLYER DEFENSE

FORD (NYSE: F)

*GENERAL DYNAMICS (NYSE: GD)

*GENERAL ELECTRIC (NYSE: GE)

GENERAL MOTORS (NYSE: GM)

GHOST ROBOTICS

GOOGLE/ALPHABET (NASDAQ: GOOG)

HYUNDAI (KRX: 329180)

INFINIDOME

ISRAEL AEROSPACE INDUSTRIES

JCB

*L3HARRIS TECHNOLOGIES (NYSE: LHX)

*LEONARDO (BIT: LDO)

LEUPOLD & STEVENS

*LOCKHEED MARTIN (NYSE: LMT)

MDT ARMOR

MERCEDES (FWB: MBG)

NEXTVISION

NORDIC AMMUNITION COMPANY

*NORTHROP GRUMMAN (NYSE: NOC)

OSHKOSH (NYSE: OSK)

*PALANTIR (NYSE: PLTR)

*PAZ OIL (TASE: PZOL)

PLASAN

RAFAEL

*RENK (FRA: ZAR)

RHEINMETALL (FWB: RHM)

*ROLLS-ROYCE (LSE: RR)

*RTX (NYSE: RTX)

SHIELD AI

SK GROUP

SKYDIO

SMARTSHOOTER

SPEARUAV

*TEXTRON ( NYSE: TXT)

*THYSSENKRUPP (FWB: TKA)

TOYOTA (NYSE: TM)

*VALERO (NYSE: VLO)

WOODWARD INC (NSDQ: WWD)

XTEND

---

---

bombs in yemen 918 DN

---

https://theintercept.com/2020/12/08/biden-defense-secretary-lloyd-austin-raytheon/

last MONTH, two progressive members of Congress sent President-elect Joe Biden a letter requesting that he commit to nominating a secretary of defense with no previous ties to weapons manufacturers. The letter, from Rep. Mark Pocan, D-Wisc., and Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Calif., cited President Donald Trump’s Defense Secretary Mark Esper — a former lobbyist for Raytheon, one the country’s largest defense contractors — and called on Biden to adopt a different standard and find a nominee with “no prior employment history with a defense contractor.”

But on Tuesday, Biden announced that he will nominate retired four-star Gen. Lloyd Austin III, once the top commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East and now a member of the board of directors at Raytheon. The company has been in the spotlight during the Trump administration in part because it supplies air-to-ground munitions for Saudi Arabia’s war in Yemen, and Austin’s role with Raytheon could be central to his confirmation fight.

austin oversaw U.S. operations in the Middle East until March 2016, a year after the Saudi-led intervention began. He retired from the military the next month and later joined the board of United Technologies, a defense contractor that merged with Raytheon earlier this year. In 2019, Raytheon proceeded with an $8 billion arms sale to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, which included air-to-ground munitions. After congressional Democrats blocked the sale on human rights grounds, the Trump administration helped force the sale through by declaring a state of emergency.

“Raytheon manufactures the bomb components that are used in Yemen. He bears a direct responsibility,” Phyllis Bennis, who directs the New Internationalism Project at the Institute for Policy Studies, told The Intercept. “He was making money as a board member of this company that is directly responsible for the death and destruction there.”

William Hartung, the director of the Arms and Security Project at the Center for International Policy, told The Intercept that picking Austin was “tantamount to making the position of secretary of defense the ‘secretary of defense contractors.’”

“The potential for conflicts is huge,” Hartung said. “Raytheon is deeply involved in controversial programs from unworkable missile defense projects to nuclear weapons — the new nuclear-armed cruise missile — to precision-guided bombs that have killed untold numbers of civilians in Saudi Arabia’s brutal war in Yemen. If General Austin were to recuse himself from decisions on programs and policies involving Raytheon, he could not carry out large parts of his job as defense secretary.”

Austin was reportedly selected from a pool of other leading contenders with ties to top weapons companies: Michèle Flournoy, the former undersecretary of defense for policy, joined the board of Booz Allen Hamilton in 2018, and Jeh Johnson, the former secretary of Homeland Security under President Barack Obama, sits on the board of Lockheed Martin.

One of only a few African Americans to ever become a four-star general in the Army, Austin was the first African American in charge of a regional combatant command, overseeing U.S. forces in the Middle East. And if confirmed, he will be the first Black secretary of defense. The Congressional Black Caucus leaned heavily on Biden to select either him or Johnson, who is also Black.

Austin was formerly the commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, where he oversaw major troop withdrawals under Obama, before becoming the top U.S. commander in the Middle East. In the U.S. campaign against the Islamic State, he reportedly pushed for more restrictive rules of engagement in an effort to reduce civilian casualties, but from congressional Republicans who wanted the military to intervene in Syria.

“I’ve never met the man, but people who have worked with him say it will be easy for the White House with him in charge,” said Bennis. “That is, he’s unlikely to challenge his commander-in-chief. When you’re talking about orders that might violate international law or lead to the death of civilians, you want somebody who is willing to push back. That doesn’t sound like him.”

In contrast with other military leaders during the Obama administration, like Gens. David Petraeus or Stanley McChrystal, who maintained high profiles and sometimes clashed with the White House, Austin is known as a quieter presence. He earned the trust of many in Obama’s inner circle, including Biden.

In an op-ed in The Atlantic on Tuesday, Biden said that Austin “played a crucial role in bringing 150,000 American troops home from the [Iraqi] theater of war.”

“Pulling that off took more than just the skill and strategy of a seasoned soldier. It required Austin to practice diplomacy, building relationships with our Iraqi counterparts and with our partners in the region. He served as a statesman, representing our country with honor and dignity and always, above all, looking out for his people,” Biden wrote.

“I am certain that General Austin will find other ways to serve his country in retirement,” Obama said as the general exited the government in 2016. But since he left the military more than four years ago, Austin has formed extensive private-sector ties that could surface during his confirmation hearing. In addition to Raytheon, he joined the board of directors of the steel production company Nucor Corporation, Tenet Healthcare Corporation, and Guest Services Inc., a hospitality management company.

And both Austin and Antony Blinken — Biden’s nominee for secretary of state — have ties to Pine Island Capital Partners, a large investment firm that has raised hundreds of millions of dollars for acquisitions in defense companies this year,according to the New York Times.

Led by John Thain, the chief executive of Merrill Lynch at the time of its collapse in 2008, Pine Island boasts of an “experienced investment team with a group of deeply-connected and accomplished former senior government and military officials,” according to its website. In documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the firm notes that its team not only has “extensive connections to industry leaders,” but “unusual access to information.” Just last month, Pine Island raised $218 million to finance investments in “businesses in the defense, government service and aerospace industries.”

Austin joins an increasing number of generals and top military officials who exit to the private sector, holding lucrative positions at top companies. One 2018 study by the Project on Government Oversight tracked 380 cases of former military officers and Department of Defense officials who, in the previous years, became board members, executives, lobbyists, or consultants with defense companies.

Private-sector work was the subject of intense scrutiny during the confirmation hearing of Esper,Trump’s last defense secretary. Prior to joining the Trump administration in 2017 as army secretary, Esper worked as a senior lobbyist for Raytheon. He faced sharp questioning from Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., over whether he would fully recuse himself from matters involving Raytheon as defense secretary.

When Esper did not commit to fully recusing himself from any decision involving Raytheon, Warren said that it “smacks of corruption, plain and simple.” It is unclear whether Senate Democrats will hold Austin to the similar standard, but his role with Raytheon could create ethics complications.

Austin is slated to face a rocky confirmation process, not only due to his business ties, but also because his nomination already was criticized as a violation of civil-military relations. By law, the secretary of defense position is a civilian position and not supposed to be held by recently retired officers. The rule is meant to emphasize civilian control over the military, and Austin has not yet undergone a legally required seven-year “cooling off” period. Austin’s confirmation will require Congress to waive that requirement — just as they did with Trump’s first defense secretary, retired Gen. James Mattis.

That puts Senate Democrats is a difficult position. Seventeen voted against granting Mattis the waiver, and the top Democrat on the Armed Services Committee, Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., said at the time that he was unlikely to support a similar waiver in the future. In a statement on Tuesday, Reed said that he would review the nomination carefully. “One cannot separate the waiver from the individual who has been nominated,” the statement said.

Warren told CNN on Tuesday that she would oppose Austin’s nomination on the grounds that Congress shouldn’t grant waivers to recently retired generals.

“The principle of civilian control of the military is important. It’s not a guarantee that a civilian will be any more conscious of the consequences of war, but the prohibition should not be waived lightly,” said Bennis.

==

jim h

https://www.alternet.org/2020/07/meet-the-true-trump-loyalists-influence-peddlers-practicing-the-dark-art-of-bending-government-power/

the Donald is in a funk. He’s been outsmarted by an inert virus. His poll numbers are tanking, and even his demagogic pep rallies are falling flat.

So, who to turn to for political comfort? Why, of course, Trump’s true loyalists: his diehard cadre of Washington’s corporate lobbyists. I don’t merely mean those elites of K-Street and Wall Street who dominate his Cabinet, constituting the official Trump government of, by, and for corporate greed. He also has a “kitchen cabinet.” Operating out of public view, it’s an unofficial collection of highly paid influence peddlers who’re still practicing the dark art of bending government power to the wishes of selfish corporate interests. Each of them is paid hundreds of thousands of dollars a year by brand-name clients — from Amazon to Walgreens — to get favors from Trump. In turn, these little-known lobbyists have now adopted The Donald as their chief client, funneling millions of special-interest dollars into his reelection campaign with the understanding that he’ll keep channeling tax breaks, regulatory exemptions and public dollars to the corporate donors. It’s the Washington money-go-round, merrily corrupting our government.

Who are these no-name corrupters?David Urban is one, considered the best-connected corporate huckster in the Trump swamp. He’s an old college pal of both Pentagon chief Mark Esper and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. Moreover, he’s become such a close buddy of Donald himself that he’s known as a “Trump Whisperer,” able to work around the furies that rage in that strange orange head.

Such cozy ties to the top mean Urban gets his calls returned, an invaluable asset for his favor-seeking clientele, including Raytheon, Goldman Sachs, Bayer, Nike and Toyota. They, in turn, have made Urban rich, paying the once-obscure lobbyist more than $25 million since the Trumpeteers took office. And why wouldn’t they? For example, in 2019 the giant weapons maker Raytheon wanted to sell several billion dollars’ worth of missiles to Saudi Arabia’s royal rulers, but there was a congressional ban on such sales. No problem: (1) Raytheon enlisted Urban as their fixer; (2) he asked his pal Pompeo to meet with Raytheon’s CEO; and (3) voila! — the arms dealer promptly got a state department waiver to make the sale.

So, Washington lobbyists like Urban are now the top strategists and fundraisers for Trump 2020, hoping to get another four-year ride on the corrupt money-go-round.

During today’s COVID-19 crisis, the PR departments of every brand-name corporation are running slick ads nobly proclaiming: “We’re all in this together!”

Simultaneously, the corporate lobbying departments are ignobly using the public’s focus on the health crisis as cover for selfishly grabbing government favors for the corporation — everyone else be damned. And Trump’s totally corporate White House has been their corrupt cohort, serving as a front-end loader for everything from more corporate tax giveaways to jiggered labor rules that stiff workers.

One of the grabbiest special interests are well-off corporate and parochial private schools, where students from some of America’s wealthiest families get their education. For years, the nonpublic entities have been lobbying relentlessly to make taxpayers finance their schools, even though the schools are not open to all and usually have a narrow ideological or religious curriculum — including some extremist courses teaching that public schools should be eliminated.

That extremist nook is where Betsy DeVos resides. She’s a multibillionaire heiress and long-time funder of far-right causes. Chosen by Trump to run America’s education department, she’s been trying — by hook or crook — to run our schools straight into private hands… but with no success. Along came the COVID-19 federal relief package, including funds to help meet the education needs of low-income students in hard-hit public schools.

Hallelujah! shouted DeVos, grabbing the coronavirus as a way to advance her ideological agenda. In May, she issued an edict from on high requiring local public school districts to divert millions of the relief dollars from their disadvantaged students, forcing them to share their allotment with even the richest private schools. Astonishingly, Trump’s haughty education secretary rationalized her directive as a matter of economic fairness, piously informing locals that they must not “discriminate” against the rich.

DeVos’ “share-with-the-rich” dictum can be a bit imbalanced. Officials in New Orleans, for example, note that under her formula, 77% of its allotment would end up in private hands. Luckily, her “order” does not have the force of law, and public schools are fighting back. For information and action, go to the National Coalition for Public Education: NCPEcoalition.org.

==

==

oops 2x

https://www.alternet.org/2019/07/dwight-eisenhowers-worst-nightmare-has-come-true/

no lnx

Eisenhower’s worst nightmare has come true

Written by William Hartung / Truthdig July 19, 2019

When, in his farewell address in 1961, President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned of the dangers of the “unwarranted influence” wielded by the “military-industrial complex,” he could never have dreamed of an arms-making corporation of the size and political clout of Lockheed Martin. In a good year, it now receives up to $50 billion in government contracts, a sum larger than the operating budget of the State Department. And now it’s about to have company.

Raytheon, already one of the top five U.S. defense contractors, is planning to merge with United Technologies. That company is a major contractor in its own right, producing, among other things, the engine for the F-35 combat aircraft, the most expensive Pentagon weapons program ever. The new firm will be second only to Lockheed Martin when it comes to consuming your tax dollars — and it may end up even more powerful politically, thanks to President Trump’s fondness for hiring arms industry executives to run the national security state.

Just as Boeing benefited from its former Senior Vice President Patrick Shanahan’s stint as acting secretary of defense, so Raytheon is likely to cash in on the nomination of its former top lobbyist, Mike Esper, as his successor. Esper’s elevation comes shortly after another former Raytheon lobbyist, Charles Faulkner, left the State Department amid charges that he had improperly influenced decisions to sell Raytheon-produced guided bombs to Saudi Arabia for its brutal air war in Yemen. John Rood, third-in-charge at the Pentagon, has worked for both Lockheed Martin and Raytheon, while Ryan McCarthy, Mike Esper’s replacement as secretary of the Army, worked for Lockheed on the F-35, which the Project on Government Oversight (POGO) has determined may never be ready for combat.

And so it goes. There was a time when Donald Trump was enamored of “his” generals — Secretary of Defense James Mattis (a former board member of the weapons-maker General Dynamics), National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster, and White House Chief of Staff John Kelly. Now, he seems to have a crush on personnel from the industrial side of the military-industrial complex.

As POGO’s research has demonstrated, the infamous “revolving door” that deposits defense executives like Esper in top national security posts swings both ways. The group estimates that, in 2018 alone, 645 senior government officials — mostly from the Pentagon, the uniformed military, and Capitol Hill — went to work as executives, consultants, or board members of one of the top 20 defense contractors.

Fifty years ago, Wisconsin Senator William Proxmire identified the problem when he noted that:

“the movement of high ranking military officers into jobs with defense contractors and the reverse movement of top executives in major defense contractors into high Pentagon jobs is solid evidence of the military-industrial complex in operation. It is a real threat to the public interest because it increases the chances of abuse… How hard a bargain will officers involved in procurement planning or specifications drive when they are one or two years away from retirement and have the example to look at of over 2,000 fellow officers doing well on the outside after retirement?”

In other words, that revolving door and the problems that go with it are anything but new. Right now, however, it seems to be spinning faster than ever — and mergers like the Raytheon-United Technologies one are only likely to feed the phenomenon.

The Last Supper

The merger of Raytheon and United Technologies should bring back memories of the merger boom of the 1990s, when Lockheed combined with Martin Marietta to form Lockheed Martin, Northrop and Grumman formed Northrop Grumman, and Boeing absorbed rival military aircraft manufacturer McDonnell Douglas. And it wasn’t just a matter of big firms pairing up either. Lockheed Martin itself was the product of mergers and acquisitions involving nearly two dozen companies — distinctly a tale of big fish chowing down on little fish. The consolidation of the arms industry in those years was strongly encouraged by Clinton administration Secretary of Defense William Perry, who held a dinner with defense executives that was later dubbed “the last supper.” There, he reportedly told the assembled corporate officials that a third of them would be out of business in five years if they didn’t merge with one of their cohorts.

The Clinton administration’s encouragement of defense industry mergers would prove anything but rhetorical. It would, for instance, provide tens of millions of dollars in merger subsidies to pay for the closing of plants, the moving of equipment, and other necessities. It even picked up part of the tab for the golden parachutes given defense executives and corporate board members ousted in those deals.

The most egregious case was surely that of Norman Augustine. The CEO of Martin Marietta, he would actually take over at the helm of the even more powerful newly created Lockheed Martin. In the process, he received $8.2 million in payments, technically for leaving his post as head of Martin Marietta. U.S. taxpayers would cover more than a third of his windfall. Then, a congressman who has only gained stature in recent years, Representative Bernie Sanders (I-VT), began to fight back against those merger subsidies. He dubbed them “payoffs for layoffs” because executives got government-funded bailouts, while an estimated 19,000 workers were laid off in the Lockheed Martin merger alone with no particular taxpayer support. Sanders was actually able to shepherd through legislation that clawed back some, but not all, of those merger subsidies.

According to one argument in favor of the merger binge then, by closing half-empty factories, the new firms could charge less overhead and taxpayers would benefit. Well, dream on. This never came near happening, because the newly merged industrial behemoths turned out to have even greater bargaining power over the Pentagon and Congress than the unmerged companies that preceded them.

Draw your own conclusions about what’s likely to happen in this next round of mergers, since cost overruns and lucrative contracts continue apace. Despite this dismal record, Raytheon CEO Thomas Kennedy claims that the new corporate pairing will — you guessed it! — save the taxpayers money. Don’t hold your breath.

Influence on Steroids

While Donald Trump briefly expressed reservations about the Raytheon-United Technologies merger and a few members of Congress struck notes of caution, it has been welcomed eagerly on Wall Street. Among the reasons given: the fact that the two companies generally make different products, so their union shouldn’t reduce competition in any specific sector of defense production. It has also been claimed that the new combo, to be known as Raytheon Technologies, will have more funds available for research and development on the weapons of the future.

But focusing on such concerns misses the big picture. Raytheon Technologies will have more money to make campaign contributions, more money to hire lobbyists, and more production sites that can be used as leverage over members of Congress loathe to oppose spending on weapons produced in their states or districts. The classic example of this phenomenon: the F-35 program, which Lockheed Martin claims produces 125,000 jobs spread over 46 states.

When I took a careful look at the company’s estimates, I found that they were claiming approximately twice as many jobs as that weapons system was actually creating. In fact, more than half of F-35-related employment was in just two states, California and Texas (though many other states did have modest numbers of F-35 jobs). Even if Lockheed Martin’s figures are exaggerated, however, there’s no question that spreading defense jobs around the country gives weapons manufacturers unparalleled influence over key members of Congress, much to their benefit when Pentagon budget time rolls around. In fact, it’s a commonplace for Congress to fund more F-35s, F-18s, and similar weapons systems than the Pentagon even asks for. So much for Congressional oversight.

Theoretically, incoming defense secretary Mike Esper will have to recuse himself from major decisions involving his former company. Among them, whether to continue selling Raytheon-produced precision-guided bombs to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) for their devastating air war in Yemen that has killed remarkable numbers of civilians.

No worries. President Trump himself is the biggest booster in living memory of corporate arms sales and Saudi Arabia is far and away his favorite customer. The Senate recently voted down a package of “emergency” arms sales to the Saudis and the UAE that included thousands of Raytheon Paveway munitions, the weapon of choice in that Yemeni air campaign. A similar vote must now take place in the House, but even if it, too, passes, Congress will need to override a virtually guaranteed Trump veto of the bill.

The Raytheon-United Technologies merger will further implicate the new firm in Yemeni developments because the Pratt and Whitney division of United Technologies makes the engine for Saudi Arabia’s key F-15S combat aircraft, a mainstay of the air war there. Not only will Raytheon Technologies profit from such engine sales, but that company’s technicians are likely to help maintain the Saudi air force, thereby enabling it to fly yet more bombing missions more often.

When pressed, Raytheon officials argue that, in enabling mass slaughter, they are simply following U.S. government policy. This ignores the fact that Raytheon and other weapons contractors spend tens of millions of dollars a year on lobbyists, political contributions, and other forms of influence peddling trying to shape U.S. policies on arms exports and weapons procurement. They are, in other words, anything but passive recipients of edicts handed down from Washington.

As Raytheon chief financial officer Toby O’Brien put it in a call to investors that came after the murder of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi, “We continue to be aligned with the administration’s policies, and we intend to honor our commitments.” Lockheed Martin CEO Marillyn Hewson made a similar point, asserting that “most of these agreements that we have are government-to-government purchases, so anything that we do has to follow strictly the regulations of the U.S. government… Beyond that, we’ll just work with the U.S. government as they are continuing their relationship with [the Saudis].”

How Powerful Are the Military-Industrial Combines?

When it comes to lobbying the Pentagon and Congress, size matters. Major firms like Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and Raytheon can point to the jobs they and their subcontractors provide in dozens of states and scores of Congressional districts to keep members of Congress in line who might otherwise question or even oppose the tens of billions of dollars in government funding the companies receive annually.

Raytheon — its motto: “Customer Success Is Our Mission” — has primary operations in 16 states: Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Indiana, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas, Utah, and Virginia. That translates into a lot of leverage over key members of Congress and it doesn’t even count states where the company has major subcontractors. The addition of United Technologies will reinforce the new company’s presence in a number of those states, while adding Connecticut, Iowa, New York, and North Carolina (in other words, at least 20 states in all).

Meanwhile, if the merger is approved, the future Raytheon Technologies will be greasing the wheels of its next arms contracts by relying on nearly four dozen former government officials the two separate companies hired as lobbyists, executives, and board members in 2018 alone. Add to that the $6.4 million in campaign contributions and $20 million in lobbying expenses Raytheon clocked during the last two election cycles and the outlines of its growing influence begin to become clearer. Then, add as well the $2.9 million in campaign contributions and $40 million in lobbying expenses racked up by its merger partner United Technologies and you have a lobbying powerhouse rivaled only by Lockheed Martin, the world’s largest defense conglomerate.

President Eisenhower’s proposed counterweight to the power of the military-industrial complex was to be “an alert and knowledgeable citizenry.” And there are signs that significant numbers of individuals and organizations are beginning to pay more attention to the machinations of the arms lobby. My own outfit, the Center for International Policy, has launched a Sustainable Defense Task Force composed of former military officers and Pentagon officials, White House and Congressional budget experts, and research staffers from progressive and good-government groups. It has already crafted a plan that would cut $1.2 trillion from the Pentagon budget over the next decade, while improving U.S. security by avoiding unnecessary wars, eliminating waste, and scaling back a Pentagon nuclear-weapons buildup slated to cost $1.5 trillion or more over the next three decades.

The Poor People’s Campaign, backed by research conducted by the National Priorities Project of the Institute for Policy Studies, is calling for a one-year $350 billion cut in Pentagon expenditures. And a new network called “Put People Over the Pentagon” has brought together more than 20 progressive organizations to press presidential candidates to cut $200 billion annually from the Department of Defense’s bloated budget. Participants in the network include Public Citizen, Moveon.org, Indivisible, Win Without War, 350.org, Friends of the Earth, and United We Dream, many of them organizations that had not, in past years, made reducing the Pentagon budget a priority.

Raytheon and its arms industry allies won’t sit still in the face of such proposals, but at least the days of unquestioned and unchallenged corporate greed in the ever-merging (but also ever-expanding) arms industry may be coming to an end. The United States has paid an exorbitantly high price in blood and treasure (as have countries like Afghanistan and Iraq) for letting the military-industrial complex steer the American ship of state through this century so far. It’s long past time for a reckoning.

---

==

https://www.alternet.org/2019/07/merger-mania-the-military-industrial-complex-is-on-steroids/

hartung cmn dreams

When, in his farewell address in 1961, President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned of the dangers of the “unwarranted influence” wielded by the “military-industrial complex,” he could never have dreamed of an arms-making corporation of the size and political clout of Lockheed Martin. In a good year, it now receives up to $50 billion in government contracts, a sum larger than the operating budget of the State Department. And now it’s about to have company.

Raytheon, already one of the top five U.S. defense contractors, is planning to merge with United Technologies. That company is a major contractor in its own right, producing, among other things, the engine for the F-35 combat aircraft, the most expensive Pentagon weapons program ever. The new firm will be second only to Lockheed Martin when it comes to consuming your tax dollars — and it may end up even more powerful politically, thanks to President Trump’s fondness for hiring arms industry executives to run the national security state.

Just as Boeing benefited from its former Senior Vice President Patrick Shanahan’s stint as acting secretary of defense, so Raytheon is likely to cash in on the nomination of its former top lobbyist, Mike Esper, as his successor. Esper’s elevation comes shortly after another former Raytheon lobbyist, Charles Faulkner, left the State Department amid charges that he had improperly influenced decisions to sell Raytheon-produced guided bombs to Saudi Arabia for its brutal air war in Yemen. John Rood, third-in-charge at the Pentagon, hasworked for both Lockheed Martin and Raytheon, while Ryan McCarthy, Mike Esper’s replacement as secretary of the Army, worked for Lockheed on the F-35, which the Project on Government Oversight (POGO) has determined may never be ready for combat.

And so it goes. There was a time when Donald Trump was enamored of “his” generals — Secretary of Defense James Mattis (a former board member of the weapons-maker General Dynamics), National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster, and White House Chief of Staff John Kelly. Now, he seems to have a crush on personnel from the industrial side of the military-industrial complex.

As POGO’s research has demonstrated, the infamous “revolving door” that deposits defense executives like Esper in top national security posts swings both ways. The group estimates that, in 2018 alone, 645 senior government officials — mostly from the Pentagon, the uniformed military, and Capitol Hill — went to work as executives, consultants, or board members of one of the top 20 defense contractors.

Fifty years ago, Wisconsin Senator William Proxmire identified the problem when he noted that:

“the movement of high ranking military officers into jobs with defense contractors and the reverse movement of top executives in major defense contractors into high Pentagon jobs is solid evidence of the military-industrial complex in operation. It is a real threat to the public interest because it increases the chances of abuse… How hard a bargain will officers involved in procurement planning or specifications drive when they are one or two years away from retirement and have the example to look at of over 2,000 fellow officers doing well on the outside after retirement?”

In other words, that revolving door and the problems that go with it are anything but new. Right now, however, it seems to be spinning faster than ever — and mergers like the Raytheon-United Technologies one are only likely to feed the phenomenon.

The Last Supper

The merger of Raytheon and United Technologies should bring back memories of the merger boom of the 1990s, when Lockheed combined with Martin Marietta to form Lockheed Martin, Northrop and Grumman formed Northrop Grumman, and Boeing absorbed rival military aircraft manufacturer McDonnell Douglas. And it wasn’t just a matter of big firms pairing up either. Lockheed Martin itself was the product of mergers and acquisitions involving nearly two dozen companies — distinctly a tale of big fish chowing down on little fish. The consolidation of the arms industry in those years was strongly encouraged by Clinton administration Secretary of Defense William Perry, who held a dinner with defense executives that was later dubbed “the last supper.” There, he reportedly told the assembled corporate officials that a third of them would be out of business in five years if they didn’t merge with one of their cohorts.

The Clinton administration’s encouragement of defense industry mergers would prove anything but rhetorical. It would, for instance, provide tens of millions of dollars in merger subsidies to pay for the closing of plants, the moving of equipment, and other necessities. It even picked up part of the tab for the golden parachutes given defense executives and corporate board members ousted in those deals.

The most egregious case was surely that of Norman Augustine. The CEO of Martin Marietta, he would actually take over at the helm of the even more powerful newly created Lockheed Martin. In the process, he received $8.2 million in payments, technically for leaving his post as head of Martin Marietta. U.S. taxpayers would cover more than a third of his windfall. Then, a congressman who has only gained stature in recent years, Representative Bernie Sanders (I-VT), began to fight back against those merger subsidies. He dubbed them “payoffs for layoffs” because executives got government-funded bailouts, while an estimated 19,000 workers were laid off in the Lockheed Martin merger alone with no particular taxpayer support. Sanders was actually able to shepherd through legislation that clawed back some, but not all, of those merger subsidies.

According to one argument in favor of the merger binge then, by closing half-empty factories, the new firms could charge less overhead and taxpayers would benefit. Well, dream on. This never came near happening, because the newly merged industrial behemoths turned out to have even greater bargaining power over the Pentagon and Congress than the unmerged companies that preceded them.

Draw your own conclusions about what’s likely to happen in this next round of mergers, since cost overruns and lucrative contracts continue apace. Despite this dismal record, Raytheon CEO Thomas Kennedy claims that the new corporate pairing will — you guessed it! — save the taxpayers money. Don’t hold your breath.

Influence on Steroids

While Donald Trump briefly expressed reservations about the Raytheon-United Technologies merger and a few members of Congress struck notes of caution, it has been welcomed eagerly on Wall Street. Among the reasons given: the fact that the two companies generally make different products, so their union shouldn’t reduce competition in any specific sector of defense production. It has also been claimed that the new combo, to be known as Raytheon Technologies, will have more funds available for research and development on the weapons of the future.

But focusing on such concerns misses the big picture. Raytheon Technologies will have more money to make campaign contributions, more money to hire lobbyists, and more production sites that can be used as leverage over members of Congress loathe to oppose spending on weapons produced in their states or districts. The classic example of this phenomenon: the F-35 program, which Lockheed Martin claims produces 125,000 jobs spread over 46 states.

When I took a careful look at the company’s estimates, I found that they were claiming approximately twice as many jobs as that weapons system was actually creating. In fact, more than half of F-35-related employment was in just two states, California and Texas (though many other states did have modest numbers of F-35 jobs). Even if Lockheed Martin’s figures are exaggerated, however, there’s no question that spreading defense jobs around the country gives weapons manufacturers unparalleled influence over key members of Congress, much to their benefit when Pentagon budget time rolls around. In fact, it’s a commonplace for Congress to fund more F-35s, F-18s, and similar weapons systems than the Pentagon even asks for. So much for Congressional oversight.

Theoretically, incoming defense secretary Mike Esper will have to recuse himself from major decisions involving his former company. Among them, whether to continue selling Raytheon-produced precision-guided bombs to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) for their devastating air war in Yemen that has killed remarkable numbers of civilians.

No worries. President Trump himself is the biggest booster in living memory of corporate arms sales and Saudi Arabia is far and away his favorite customer. The Senate recently voted down a package of “emergency” arms sales to the Saudis and the UAE that included thousands of Raytheon Paveway munitions, the weapon of choice in that Yemeni air campaign. A similar vote must now take place in the House, but even if it, too, passes, Congress will need to override a virtually guaranteed Trump veto of the bill.

The Raytheon-United Technologies merger will further implicate the new firm in Yemeni developments because the Pratt and Whitney division of United Technologies makes the engine for Saudi Arabia’s key F-15S combat aircraft, a mainstay of the air war there. Not only will Raytheon Technologies profit from such engine sales, but that company’s technicians are likely to help maintain the Saudi air force, thereby enabling it to fly yet more bombing missions more often.

When pressed, Raytheon officialsargue that, in enabling mass slaughter, they are simply following U.S. government policy. This ignores the fact that Raytheon and other weapons contractors spend tens of millions of dollars a year on lobbyists, political contributions, and other forms of influence peddling trying to shape U.S. policies on arms exports and weapons procurement. They are, in other words, anything but passive recipients of edicts handed down from Washington.

As Raytheon chief financial officer Toby O’Brien put it in a call to investors that came after the murder of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi, “We continue to be aligned with the administration’s policies, and we intend to honor our commitments.” Lockheed Martin CEO Marillyn Hewson made a similar point, asserting that “most of these agreements that we have are government-to-government purchases, so anything that we do has to follow strictly the regulations of the U.S. government… Beyond that, we’ll just work with the U.S. government as they are continuing their relationship with [the Saudis].”

How Powerful Are the Military-Industrial Combines?

When it comes to lobbying the Pentagon and Congress, size matters. Major firms like Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and Raytheon can point to the jobs they and their subcontractors provide in dozens of states and scores of Congressional districts to keep members of Congress in line who might otherwise question or even oppose the tens of billions of dollars in government funding the companies receive annually.

Raytheon — its motto: “Customer Success Is Our Mission” — has primary operations in 16 states: Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Indiana, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas, Utah, and Virginia. That translates into a lot of leverage over key members of Congress and it doesn’t even count states where the company has major subcontractors. The addition of United Technologies will reinforce the new company’s presence in a number of those states, while adding Connecticut, Iowa, New York, and North Carolina (in other words, at least 20 states in all).

Meanwhile, if the merger is approved, the future Raytheon Technologies will be greasing the wheels of its next arms contracts by relying on nearly four dozen former government officials the two separate companies hired as lobbyists, executives, and board members in 2018 alone. Add to that the $6.4 million in campaign contributions and $20 million in lobbying expenses Raytheon clocked during the last two election cycles and the outlines of its growing influence begin to become clearer. Then, add as well the $2.9 million in campaign contributions and $40 million in lobbying expenses racked up by its merger partner United Technologies and you have a lobbying powerhouse rivaled only by Lockheed Martin, the world’s largest defense conglomerate.

President Eisenhower’s proposed counterweight to the power of the military-industrial complex was to be “an alert and knowledgeable citizenry.” And there are signs that significant numbers of individuals and organizations are beginning to pay more attention to the machinations of the arms lobby. My own outfit, the Center for International Policy, has launched a Sustainable Defense Task Force composed of former military officers and Pentagon officials, White House and Congressional budget experts, and research staffers from progressive and good-government groups. It has already crafted a plan that would cut $1.2 trillion from the Pentagon budget over the next decade, while improving U.S. security by avoiding unnecessary wars, eliminating waste, and scaling back a Pentagon nuclear-weapons buildup slated to cost $1.5 trillionor more over the next three decades.

The Poor People’s Campaign, backed by research conducted by the National Priorities Project of the Institute for Policy Studies, is calling for a one-year $350 billion cut in Pentagon expenditures. And a new network called “Put People Over the Pentagon” has brought together more than 20 progressive organizations to press presidential candidates to cut $200 billion annually from the Department of Defense’s bloated budget. Participants in the network include Public Citizen, Moveon.org, Indivisible, Win Without War, 350.org, Friends of the Earth, and United We Dream, many of them organizations that had not, in past years, made reducing the Pentagon budget a priority.

Raytheon and its arms industry allies won’t sit still in the face of such proposals, but at least the days of unquestioned and unchallenged corporate greed in the ever-merging (but also ever-expanding) arms industry may be coming to an end. The United States has paid an exorbitantly high price in blood and treasure (as have countries like Afghanistan and Iraq) for letting the military-industrial complex steer the American ship of state through this century so far. It’s long past time for a reckoning.

---

---

https://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/why-russian-spies-love-american-universities

Under the alias Cynthia Murphy, Russian spy Lydia Guryeva attended Columbia Business School, and ingratiated herself with a key fundraiser for Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign. Guryeva’s instructions from Moscow, according to a 2010 FBI complaint, were to “strengthen…ties w. classmates on daily basis incl. professors who can help in job search and who will have (or already have) access to secret info” and to report “on their detailed personal data and character traits w. preliminary conclusions about their potential (vulnerability) to be recruited by Service.”

Now another graduate student at an urban East Coast university, who similarly cultivated powerbrokers and political operatives, is accused of being a Russian spy and taking orders from high-ranking officials in her homeland. Maria Butina,who received a master’s degree in international relations this past spring from American University in Washington, D.C., courted the National Rifle Association’s top guns and sought access to Republican presidential candidates Scott Walker and Donald Trump. She pleaded innocent last week to charges of conspiring to act as a foreign agent.

If the charges against Butina are accurate, she’s only the latest in a long line of Russian agents to infiltrate U.S. universities. Dating back to the Soviet era, Russian spies have sought to take advantage of academia's lax security, collaborative, global culture, and revolving door with government. Russian intelligence understands that today’s professor of international relations may be tomorrow’s assistant secretary of state, and vice versa. Although cyber-spying and hacking offer opportunities to glean secrets at less personal risk, the traditional strategies of human espionage persist, and sending a spy to school is prominent among them.  In that respect, little has changed since 1938, when Semyon Markovich Semyonov became the first Soviet agent to enroll at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and made contacts vital to stealing scientific secrets. Or since 1958, when KGB officer Oleg Kalugin entered Columbia’s journalism school. After graduation, posing as a Radio Moscow correspondent at the United Nations, Kalugin attended events at Columbia and reported back on them to Moscow. His report on a speech about U.S.-Soviet relations by Zbigniew Brzezinski, then a Columbia professor and later national security adviser to President Jimmy Carter, earned kudos from the Communist Party’s Central Committee.

After that, “I went all across the country, from Harvard to Columbia and the West Coast, listening to what people said and reporting it if I thought it was interesting,” Kalugin told me. He rose to head the KGB’s foreign counterintelligence branch before falling out of favor in Russia, moving to Washington, D.C., and becoming an American citizen.

Sometimes, Russian agents join the academic community as students or instructors. Of Guryeva and the other nine “illegals” — sleeper agents without diplomatic cover — who pleaded guilty in 2010 to conspiring to act as foreign agents and were swapped back to Russia, seven went to U.S. universities, including Harvard, The New School, and the University of Washington. One taught politics for a semester at Baruch College, lambasting American foreign policy.

In other cases, agents hold diplomatic posts at an embassy or consulate and forage in nearby campuses for recruits and information. It’s easier, cheaper and less conspicuous for Russian intelligence to enlist a student or professor who can be steered to a federal agency than to lure someone already in a sensitive government position. Exploiting open campuses, spies slip unnoticed into lectures, seminars and cafeterias, where they befriend the computer scientist or Pentagon adviser sitting beside them.

Butina enrolled in American University’s School of International Service in the summer of 2016, university spokesman Mark Story said. She concentrated in cyber policy and became a research assistant at the university’s Kogod School of Business. With research funding from the Kogod Cybersecurity Governance Center, she and two professors, Mark A. Clark and J. Alberto Espinosa, co-authored a March 2018 paper on “Cybersecurity Knowledge Networks.” (The paper is still on the center’s website.) Clark and Espinosa declined comment.

University spokesman Story declined to say whether Butina’s involvement with the center raises any concerns, or if the university plans to review her activities. He added that the center doesn’t do classified work and has no contracts with intelligence agencies.The cybersecurity center was founded in 2015 to provide “guidance specifically to boards of directors, senior executives, and other leaders so that they can make informed decisions about cybersecurity.” It has a partnership with defense contractor  Raytheon Co., and was headed from June 2017 to March 2018 by a former lawyer for the National Security Agency.

Raytheon spokesman Michael Doble said, “There is no connection between our support of this respected school and what one of its students may or may not have done.”

Butina participated in February 2017 in a “weekend of seminars and cultural immersion” in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, which brought together 10 American University students from Russia, Ukraine, Belarus and Azerbaijan with a dozen students from Gettysburg College to discuss U.S.-Russian relations in the post-Soviet era. Susan Eisenhower — a frequent adviser to businesses and the U.S. Department of Energy, and an expert on foreign policy and national security issues —led the seminars as well as a tour of the Gettysburg home of her grandfather, President Dwight Eisenhower.....

==

5. Raytheon Co.

5. Raytheon Co.

US Army

Contributions: $795,512.

Based in New Jersey, Raytheon Co. makes everything from command-and-control systems to missile-defense systems and precision weapons, like the TOW missile system seen above.

Thus far in the 2018 election cycle, 61.2% of its contributions have gone to Republicans.

In the 2016 cycle, its largest recipients were Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump as well as Republican Sens. John McCain and Ted Cruz.

4. General Dynamics.

4. General Dynamics.

General Dynamics

Contributions: $821,144.

Virginia-based General Dynamics makes a variety of combat aircraft, land vehicles, and ships, including the Littoral Combat Ship seen above.

Thus far in the 2018 election cycle, 59.8% of its contributions have gone to Republicans.

In the 2016 cycle, it donated to both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.

3. Boeing Co.

3. Boeing Co.

Screenshot/Twitter via @PacificCommand

Contributions: $1,159,645.

Based in Chicago, Boeing designs all kinds of private and military aircraft, including the F/A-18 Hornet seen above.

Thus far in the 2018 election cycle, 62.4% of its contributions have gone to Republicans.

In the 2016 cycle, it donated heavily to Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump as well as Democratic Sen. Bernie Sanders and Republican Sen. Ted Cruz.

2. Lockheed Martin.

2. Lockheed Martin.

US Air Force

Contributions: $1,342,248.

In 2016, Maryland-based Lockheed Martin received $43.4 billion in federal contracts, the most of any US defense contractor. It manufactures all kinds of combat aircraft, naval systems, missiles, unmanned systems, and more. It was also recently contracted to develop a laser for US fighter jets.

In the 2018 election cycle thus far, 66.1% of its contributions have gone to Republicans.

In the 2016 election cycle, it donated to presidential candidates Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump, Ben Carson, Jeb Bush, Jill Stein, Carly Fiorina, Gary Johnson, Mike Huckabee, John Kasich, and Lawrence Lessig.

1. Northrop Grumman.

1. Northrop Grumman.

US Air Force

Contributions: $1,439,162.

Based in Virginia, Northrop Grumman makes all kinds of manned and unmanned combat aircraft, among many other things, and is developing the B-21 Raider for the US Air Force.

Thus far in the 2018 election cycle, 54.2% of its contributions have gone to Republicans.

In the 2016 cycle, its largest recipients were both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump as well as Republican Rep. Mac Thornberry and Democratic Rep. Adam Smith.

==

==

Pollution From Air Force Keeps Causing Cancer in Tucson, Residents Say

Twenty-seven years ago, 1,600 residents of Tucson, Arizona's south side settled an $84.5 million dollar lawsuit with Hughes Aircraft (now Raytheon Missile Systems Co.), claiming the Air Force contractor had been dumping the industrial solvent trichloroethylene (TCE) into the water table for 29 years since 1952, causing cancers and other ailments.

:{:{==}:

}:

reese blackswan  raytheon blackwater

http://s3.amazonaws.com/hamptonroadscom/store/1451.pdf

==

==

tomahawk missle

https://secure.marketwatch.com/story/tomahawk-maker-raytheon-leads-premarket-gainers-after-syrian-missile-strike-2017-04-07

trump

http://www.rawstory.com/2017/04/donald-trump-personally-profited-from-missile-maker-raytheons-stock-jump-after-his-syria-attack/

==

14) Raytheon

Last but far from least, Raytheon was shown earlier this year to have secretly developed a program called Riot that is, according to the Guardian, “capable of tracking people’s movements and predicting future behaviour by mining data from social networking websites.” Here we have a military defense contractor—the fifth largest in the world—working on a product that combines social networking, big data, and analytics in ways that could be extremely invasive to the privacy of average, law-abiding citizens. Like TrapWire, Riot boasts predictive powers that might be dangerously misused or just plain wrong. It recalls the concept of pre-crime from the short story/film The Minority Report. Clients of Raytheon are buying into the promise of predictive analytics: techniques from statistics, modeling, machine learning and data mining are being applied to complex human behavior.

==

cluster bombs, missles israel divest stanford/UC ? 

http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/LM/Our-Research-Products/Cluster-Munition-Monitor

 http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=129630188  silent guadian microwave ppl?--Raytheon – murders and maims civiliansI. Raytheon and Cluster Bombs  Raytheon produces the AGM154 Joint Standoff weapon (JSOW), an air-delivered bomb with some cluster munition variants. For example the AGM154A, the standard version, contains 145 BLU-97/B sub munitions. Also the Tomahawk cruise missile has amongst its variants a submunition warhead. (Netwerk 2007, Explosive Investments)II. Cluster Munitions Coalition  Forty-six countries (as of March 2007) have signed a joint declaration committing themselves to sign a treaty banning the production, use and stockpiling of cluster munitions by 2008. The UK is now a signatory of the declaration. This campaign is being organized by the Cluster Munitions Coalition. In the UK, members of the Coalition include: Amnesty International, CAAT, Handicap International and Landmine Action.Thomas Nash, the coordinator of the Cluster Munitions Coalition, has called for the further step of banning investments in companies that produce cluster munitions. This proposal was on the table for discussion at the Coalition’s meeting in Lima, Peru in May 2007.In 2005, a European Parliament resolution was introduced to ban investments in companies that produce cluster munitions.Also in 2005, the Advisory Council on Ethics for the Norwegian Government Petroleum Fund excluded Raytheon from the Fund, along with other manufacturers of cluster munitions.In 2007, Belgium passed a law banning all investments in companies that produce cluster munitions.More information on cluster munitions and the campaign against them can be found at:www.stopclustermunitions.org, www.handicap-international.org.uk,www.landmineaction.orgChildren Killed and Maimed in Cluster Bomb Attack on Town III. Raytheon in Wales  Raytheon already has a presence in Wales, with a production facility at Hawarden Airport in Broughton. The facility there works on systems integration, namely the ASTOR (Airborne Stand-Off Radar) Programme, and the modification, integration and test flying of Sentinel R Mk 1 aircraft.Raytheon is a central member of the Metrix Consortium, that was awarded the St Athan Defence Training Academy contract in January 2007. According to Metrix CEO, Raytheon is “at the core of the training system redesign” the Consortium proposed to the UK Ministry of Defence. IV. Raytheon Profile   Raytheon is the third largest military company in the world, and one of the largest missile manufacturers, producing the Stinger, Tomahawk, Sidewinder, Maverick, Patriot and Javelin missiles.Raytheon’s bunker-buster bomb (GBU-28) is a depleted uranium weapon. Its Tomahawk cruise missile can carry a nuclear warhead.Raytheon is a major arms exporter, selling its weapons to countries such as Israel, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Indonesia, Malaysia, Oman, Singapore, Taiwan and South Korea.A Raytheon bomb hit Qana, Lebanon in 2006, killing at least 28 civilians, including 16 children; a Raytheon bomb hit the Shu’ale market in Baghdad in 2003, killing at least 62 civilians. See the Raytheon 9’s response.Raytheon is a major promoter of the US missile defence shield and the US project to militarise outer space.Raytheon is the developer of the Silent Guardian heat ray, a weapon that has been criticized by Amnesty International and the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture for its “potential to be used for torture and ill treatment.” Civil rights groups have expressed alarm over the implications of the Silent Guardian for democracy, freedom of speech and collective protest.According to the US Project on Government Oversight, between 1990-2002, Raytheon had 24 instances of misconduct or alleged misconduct, resulting in $128.7 million in fines, penalties, restitutions and settlements. This misconduct included false work claims, overpricing, cost inflation and corporate espionage.More information on Raytheon can be found at: www.raytheon.com,www.corporatewatch.org.uk, www.corpwatch.org, www.caat.org.uk,www.worldpolicy.org/projects/armsSee Raytheon cluster bomb demonstration in Derry photos.  =this town; bill lynn got waiver from BO policy no lobby sec of def asst raytheoncorp watchRaytheon, a U.S. military manufacturer, is selling a new software surveillance package named “Riot” that claims to predict where individuals are expected to go next using technology that mines data from social networks like Facebook, Foursquare and Twitter.  Based just outside of Boston, Massachusetts, Raytheon sells $25 billion worth of equipment a year to military clients like the Pentagon. Some of its most famous products include Sidewinder air-to-air missiles, Maverick air-to-ground missiles, Patriot surface-to-air missiles and Tomahawk submarine-launched cruise missiles.  Raytheon’s Rapid Information Overlay Technology (Riot) software extracts location data from photos and comments posted online by individuals, and then analyzes this information to create a variety of spider diagrams to show where the individuals like to go, what they like to do and whom they communicate with.  A video demonstration of the software was recently published online by the Guardian newspaper. In it, Brian Urch of Raytheon shows how Riot can be used to track “Nick” – a company employee – to predict that the best time and place to steal his computer or put spy software on it.  “Six a.m. appears to be the most frequently visited time at the gym,” says Urch in the video which is dated November 2010. “So if you ever did want to try to get a hold of Nick - or maybe get a hold of his laptop - you might want to visit the gym at 6:00 a.m. on Monday.”  "Riot is a big data analytics system design we are working on with industry, national labs and commercial partners to help turn massive amounts of data into useable information to help meet our nation's rapidly changing security needs,” Jared Adams, a spokesman for Raytheon's intelligence and information systems department, told the Guardian.  Adams says that nobody has bought the software – which is still under development - yet. However, company filings indicate that Riot is classified as an "Export Administration Regulations 99" item which allows it to be sold or exported to any client.  But it is certainly true that a number of U.S. government agencies have been eagerly pursuing surveillance software to exploit the vast quantities of data that individuals are posting online about themselves. In January 2012 the Federal Bureau of Investigation posted a request for an application that would allow it to “provide an automated search and scrape capability of social networks including Facebook and Twitter … and (i)mmediately translate foreign language tweets into English.”  Last month the U.S. Transportation Security Administration asked contractors to propose applications “to generate an assessment of the risk to the aviation transportation system that may be posed by a specific individual” using “specific sources of current, accurate, and complete non-governmental data.” The initial plan is to use it to screen volunteer flyers who will be offered the benefits of “expedited screening lanes … leave on their shoes, light outerwear and belts, as well as leave laptops and … compliant liquids in carry-on bags.”  Privacy activists say that the Riot package is troubling. "This sort of software allows the government to surveil everyone," Ginger McCall, the director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center's Open Government program, told NBC News. "It scoops up a bunch of information about totally innocent people. There seems to be no legitimate reason to get this."  “(T)he government has no business rooting around people's social network postings—even those that are voluntarily publicly posted—unless it has specific, individualized suspicion that a person is involved in wrongdoing,” writes Jay Stanley,  a senior policy analyst at the Speech, Privacy and Technology Project of the American Civil Liberties Union. “Among the many problems with government “large-scale analytics” of social network information is the prospect that government agencies will blunderingly use these techniques to tag, target and watchlist people coughed up by programs such as Riot, or to target them for further invasions of privacy based on incorrect inferences.”  Indeed, it would also be possible for a tech-savvy malcontent to lead security officials on a wild goose chase, or even deliberately frame anyone they wanted.  http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=15817&printsafe=1Key FindingsThe media debate surrounding the question of whether to launch a military attack on Syria in August and September of 2013 was dominated by defense industry-backed experts and think tanks. These individuals and organizations are linked to dozens of defense and intelligence contractors, defense-focused investment firms, and diplomatic consulting firms with strong defense ties, yet these business ties were rarely disclosed on air or in print. This report brings transparency to these largely undocumented and undisclosed connections.For more on the methodology used to identify commentators, think tanks, and industry ties, please see the “Methodology” section below.Commentators22 commentators. The report identifies 22 commentators who weighed in during the Syria debate in large media outlets, and who have current industry ties that may pose conflicts of interest. The commentators are linked to large defense and intelligence contractors like Raytheon, smaller defense and intelligence contractors like TASC, defense-focused investment firms like SCP Partners, and commercial diplomacy firms like the Cohen Group.111 appearances, 13 attempts at disclosure. These commentators made 111 appearances – as op-ed authors, quoted experts, or news show guests – in major media outlets such as CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, Bloomberg, and the Washington Post. Despite the commentators’ apparent financial and professional stakes in military action, major media outlets typically failed to disclose these relationships, noting them, often incompletely, in only 13 of the 111 appearances (see table below for media outlet breakdown).Varying types of conflicts of interest. In some cases, commentators have undisclosed industry ties that pose significant and direct conflicts of interest. In other cases, the undisclosed ties were less direct, but still suggest that the commentator has a financial interest in continuing heightened levels of US military action abroad. A number of consultants are included because their business relationships are foreign policy-focused and likely involve work for defense clients, though most do not disclose client lists. One consulting relationship highlighted in the report is with the Department of Defense – not an industry connection, but a significant conflict of interest.Largely supportive of military action. The commentators profiled have largely expressed support for military action in Syria, and many have framed the decision as an issue of national security. However, the opinions they expressed were not uniformly supportive of military action. Several commentators identified, such as Robert Scales, opposed military intervention outright. (see correction)The following is a selection of commentators, profiled at greater length below, who have multiple undisclosed ties to the defense industry and have expressed strong support for military intervention in Syria in multiple appearances:Jack Keane has strongly supported striking Syria on PBS, the BBC, and Fox News. Though Keane is currently a director of General Dynamics, one of the world’s largest military services companies, and a venture partner of SCP Partners, a defense-focused investment firm, only his military and think tank affiliations were identified in all sixteen appearances.General Anthony Zinni has expressed support for military action in Syria during three appearances on CNN and one on CBS This Morning, and has been quoted in the Washington Post. Though a director with major defense contractor BAE Systems and an advisor to defense-focused private equity firm DC Capital Partners, only Zinni’s military experience was considered relevant by the media outlets interviewing him all five times.Stephen Hadley has voiced strong support for a strike on Syria in appearances on Bloomberg TV, Fox News, and CNN, as well as in a Washington Post op-ed. Though he has a financial stake in a Syria strike as a current Raytheon board member, and is also a principal at consulting firm RiceHadleyGates, he was identified all four times only as a former National Security Advisor to George W. Bush.Frances Townsend has appeared on CNN’s Anderson Cooper 360 six times strongly favoring action in Syria. Though Townsend holds positions in two investment firms with defense company holdings, MacAndrews & Forbes and Monument Capital Group, and serves as an advisor to defense contractor Decision Sciences, only her roles as a CNN national security analyst and member of the CIA and DHS advisory committees were revealed in all six appearances.Think TanksSeven think tanks. The report profiles seven prominent think tanks with significant industry ties that weighed in on intervention in Syria. These think tanks were cited 144 times in major US publications from August 7th, 2013 to September 6th, 2013. The Brookings Institution, Center for Strategic and International Studies, and The Institute for the Study of War were the most cited think tanks from our dataset.Experts with The Brookings Institution were cited in 31 articles on Syria in our dataset, more than any other think tank. Brookings is an influential think tank that is presented in the media as an independent authority, yet it receives millions in funding from the defense industry, including $1 – 2.5 million from Booz Allen Hamilton and $50,000 – $100,000 from Boeing, General Dynamics, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Palantir Technologies. Brookings Executive Education’s Advisory Council Chair, Ronald Sanders, is a Vice President and Senior Fellow at Booz Allen Hamilton.The Center for Strategic and International Studies was cited in 30 articles on Syria. CSIS has ample individual connections to the defense industry through its advisors and trustees, including CSIS Senior Advisor Margaret Sidney Ashworth, Corporate Vice President for Government Relations at Northrop Grumman, and CSIS Advisor Thomas Culligan, Senior Vice President at Raytheon. CSIS President and CEO John Hamre is a director for defense contractor SAIC.Analysts representing The Institute for the Study of War were cited in 22 articles on Syria in our dataset. One such article by former ISW Senior Research Analyst Elizabeth O’Bagy was cited by Secretary John Kerry and Senator John McCain during congressional hearings in their effort to justify intervention.1 ISW’s Corporate Council represents a who’s who of the defense industry and includes Raytheon, SAIC, Palantir, General Dynamics, CACI, Northrop Grumman, DynCorp, and L-3 Communication.The report also includes profiles on the Council on Foreign Relations, the American Enterprise Institute, the Atlantic Council, and the Center for American Progress. Each profile includes a selection of commentary from analysts associated with the think tank and a selection of defense industry ties. These ties are both organizational (corporate sponsorships and donations) and individual (ties through their directors, advisors, trustees, fellows, and analysts).  TomDispatch.com [1] / By Pratap Chatterjee [2]How Private Tech Companies Are Collecting Data on You and Selling Them to the Feds for Huge ProfitsOctober 8, 2013  |  To stay on top of important articles like these, sign up to receive the latest updates from TomDispatch.com here [3]. Big Bro is watching you. Inside your mobile phone and hidden behind your web browser are little known software products marketed by contractors to the government that can follow you around anywhere. No longer the wide-eyed fantasies of conspiracy theorists, these technologies are routinely installed in all of our data devices by companies that sell them to Washington for a profit.That’s not how they’re marketing them to us, of course. No, the message is much more seductive: Data, Silicon Valley is fond of saying [4], is the new oil. And the Valley’s message is clear enough: we can turn your digital information into fuel for pleasure and profits -- if you just give us access to your location, your correspondence, your history, and the entertainment that you like.Ever played Farmville? Checked into Foursquare? Listened to music on Pandora? These new social apps come with an obvious price tag: the annoying advertisements that we believe to be the fee we have to pay for our pleasure. But there’s a second, more hidden price tag -- the reams of data about ourselves that we give away.  Just like raw petroleum, it can be refined into many things -- the high-octane jet fuel for our social media and the asphalt and tar of our past that we would rather hide or forget.We willingly hand over all of this information to the big data companies and in return they facilitate our communications and provide us with diversions. Take Google, which offers free email, data storage, and phone calls to many of us, or Verizon, which charges for smartphones and home phones. We can withdraw from them anytime, just as we believe that we can delete our day-to-day social activities from Facebook or Twitter.But there is a second kind of data company of which most people are unaware: high-tech outfits that simply help themselves to our information in order to allow U.S. government agencies to dig into our past and present. Some of this is legal, since most of us have signed away the rights to our own information on digital forms that few ever bother to read, but much of it is, to put the matter politely, questionable.This second category is made up of professional surveillance companies [5]. They generally work for or sell their products to the government -- in other words, they are paid with our tax dollars -- but we have no control over them. Harris Corporation [6] provides technology to the FBI to track, via our mobile phones, where we go; Glimmerglass [7] builds tools that the U.S. intelligence community can use to intercept our overseas calls; and companies like James Bimen Associates [8] design software to hack into our computers.There is also a third category: data brokers like Arkansas-based Acxiom [9]. These companies monitor our Google searches and sell the information to advertisers. They make it possible for Target to offer [10] baby clothes to pregnant teenagers, but also can keep track of your reading habits and the questions you pose to Google on just about anything from pornography to terrorism, presumably to sell you Viagra and assault rifles.Locating YouEdward Snowden has done the world a great service by telling us [11] what the National Security Agency does and how it has sweet-talked, threatened, and bullied the first category of companies into handing over our data. As a result, perhaps you’ve considered switching providers from AT&T to T-Mobile or Dropbox to the more secure SpiderOak. After all, who wants some anonymous government bureaucrat listening in on or monitoring your online and phone life?Missing from this debate, however, have been the companies that get contracts to break into our homes in broad daylight and steal all our information on the taxpayer's dime. We’re talking about a multi-billion dollar industry whose tools are also available for those companies to sell to others or even use themselves for profit or vicarious pleasure.So just what do these companies do and who are they?The simplest form of surveillance technology is an IMSI catcher [12]. (IMSI stands for International Mobile Subscriber Identity, which is unique to every mobile phone.) These highly portable devices pose as mini-mobile phone towers and can capture all the mobile-phone signals in an area.  In this way, they can effectively identify and locate all phone users in a particular place. Some are small enough to fit into a briefcase, others are no larger than a mobile phone. Once deployed, the IMSI catcher tricks phones into wirelessly sending it data.By setting up several IMSI catchers in an area and measuring the speed of the responses or "pings" from a phone, an analyst can follow the movement of anyone with a mobile phone even when they are not in use.One of the key players in this field is the Melbourne, Florida-based Harris Corporation, which has been awarded [13] almost $7 million in public contracts by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) since 2001, mostly for radio communication equipment. For years, the company has also designed software for the agency's National Crime Information Center to track missing persons, fugitives, criminals, and stolen property.Harris was recently revealed to have designed an IMSI catcher for the FBI that the company named "Stingray." Court testimony by FBI agents [14] has confirmed the existence of the devices dating back to at least 2002.  Other companies like James Bimen Associates of Virginia have allegedly designed custom software to help the FBI hack into people's computers, according to [8] research by Chris Soghoian of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).The FBI has not denied this. The Bureau "hires people who have hacking skill, and they purchase tools that are capable of doing these things," a former official in the FBI's cyber division told [15] the Wall Street Journal recently. "When you do, it's because you don't have any other choice."The technologies these kinds of companies exploit often rely on software vulnerabilities. Hacking software can be installed from a USB drive, or delivered remotely by disguising it as an email attachment or software update. Once in place, an analyst can rifle through a target's files, log every keystroke, and take pictures of the screen every second. For example, SS8 [16] of Milpitas, California, sells software called Intellego that claims to allow government agencies to "see what [the targets] see, in real time" including "draft-only emails, attached files, pictures, and videos." Such technology can also remotely turn on phone and computer microphones, as well as computer or cellphone cameras to spy on the target in real-time.Charting YouWhat the FBI does, however intrusive, is small potatoes compared to what the National Security Agency dreams of doing: getting and storing the data traffic not just of an entire nation, but of an entire planet. This became a tangible reality some two decades ago as the telecommunications industry began mass adoption of fiber-optic technology.  This means that data is no longer transmitted as electrical signals along wires that were prone to interference and static, but as light beams.Enter companies like Glimmerglass, yet another northern California outfit. In September 2002, Glimmerglass started to sell a newly patented product [17]consisting of 210 tiny gold-coated mirrors mounted on microscopic hinges etched on to a single wafer of silicon.  It can help transmit data as beams of light across the undersea fiber optic cables that carry an estimated 90% of trans-border telecommunications data. The advantage of this technology is that it is dirt cheap and -- for the purposes of the intelligence agencies -- the light beams can easily be copied with almost no noticeable loss in quality."With Glimmerglass Intelligent Optical Systems (IOS), any signal travelling over fiber can be redirected in milliseconds, without adversely affecting customer traffic," says [18] the company on its public website.Glimmerglass does not deny that its equipment can be used by intelligence agencies to capture global Internet traffic.  In fact, it assumes that this is probably happening.  "We believe that our 3D MEMS technology -- as used by governments and various agencies -- is involved in the collection of intelligence from sensors, satellites, and undersea fiber systems," Keith May, Glimmerglass's director of business development, told [19] the trade magazineAviation Week in 2010. "We are deployed in several countries that are using it for lawful interception."In a confidential brochure [20], Glimmerglass has a series of graphics that, it claims, show just what its software is capable of. One displays a visual grid of the Facebook messages of a presumably fictional “John Smith.” His profile is linked to a number of other individuals (identified with images, user names, and IDs) via arrows indicating how often he connected to each of them. A second graphic shows a grid of phone calls made by a single individual that allows an operator to select and listen to audio of any of his specific conversations. Yet others display Glimmerglass software being used to monitor webmail and instant message chats."The challenge of managing information has become the challenge of managing the light," says an announcer [21] in a company video on their public website. "With Glimmerglass, customers have full control of massive flows of intelligence from the moment they access them." This description mirrors technology described in documents provided by Edward Snowden [22] to the Guardian newspaper.Predicting YouListening to phone calls, recording locations, and breaking into computers are just one part of the tool kit that the data-mining companies offer to U.S. (and other) intelligence agencies.  Think of them as the data equivalents of oil and natural gas drilling companies that are ready to extract the underground riches that have been stashed over the years in strongboxes in our basements.What government agencies really want, however, is not just the ability to mine, but to refine those riches into the data equivalent of high-octane fuel for their investigations in very much the way we organize our own data to conduct meaningful relationships, find restaurants, or discover new music on our phones and computers.These technologies -- variously called social network analysis or semantic analysis tools -- are now being packaged by the surveillance industry as ways to expose potential threats that could come from surging online communities of protesters or anti-government activists. Take Raytheon, a major U.S. military manufacturer, which makes Sidewinder air-to-air missiles, Maverick air-to-ground missiles, Patriot surface-to-air missiles, and Tomahawk submarine-launched cruise missiles. Their latest product is a software package [23] eerily named “Riot” that claims to be able to predict where individuals are likely to go next using technology that mines data from social networks like Facebook, Foursquare, and Twitter.Raytheon's Rapid Information Overlay Technology software -- yes, that’s how they got the acronym Riot -- extracts location data from photos and comments posted online by individuals and analyzes this information.  The result is a variety of spider diagrams that purportedly will show where that individual is most likely to go next, what she likes to do, and whom she communicates with or is most likely to communicate with in the near future.A 2010 video demonstration of the software was recently published online [24] by the Guardian.  In it, Brian Urch of Raytheon shows how Riot can be used to track "Nick" -- a company employee -- in order to predict the best time and place to steal his computer or put spy software on it. "Six a.m. appears to be the most frequently visited time at the gym," says Urch. "So if you ever did want to try to get a hold of Nick -- or maybe get a hold of his laptop -- you might want to visit the gym at 6:00 a.m. on Monday.""Riot is a big data analytics system design we are working on with industry, national labs, and commercial partners to help turn massive amounts of data into useable information to help meet our nation's rapidly changing security needs," Jared Adams, a spokesman for Raytheon's intelligence and information systems department, told [25] the Guardian.  The company denies that anyone has yet bought Riot, but U.S. government agencies certainly appear more than eager to purchase such tools.For example, in January 2012 the FBI posted a request for an app [26] that would allow it to "provide an automated search and scrape capability of social networks including Facebook and Twitter and [i]mmediately translate foreign language tweets into English."  In January 2013, the U.S. Transportation Security Administration asked contractors [27] to propose apps "to generate an assessment of the risk to the aviation transportation system that may be posed by a specific individual" using "specific sources of current, accurate, and complete non-governmental data."Privacy activists say that the Riot package is troubling indeed. "This sort of software allows the government to surveil everyone," Ginger McCall, the director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center's Open Government program, told NBC News [28]. "It scoops up a bunch of information about totally innocent people. There seems to be no legitimate reason to get this."Refining fuel from underground deposits has allowed us to travel vast distances by buses, trains, cars, and planes for pleasure and profit but at an unintentional cost: the gradual warming of our planet. Likewise, the refining of our data into social apps for pleasure, profit, and government surveillance is also coming at a cost: the gradual erosion of our privacy and ultimately our freedom of speech.Ever tried yelling back at a security camera? You know that it is on.  You know someone is watching the footage, but it doesn’t respond to complaint, threats, or insults. Instead, it just watches you in a forbidding manner. Today, the surveillance state is so deeply enmeshed in our data devices that we don’t even scream back because technology companies have convinced us that we need to be connected to them to be happy.With a lot of help from the surveillance industry, Big Bro has already won the fight to watch all of us all the time -- unless we decide to do something about it.See more stories tagged with: surveillance [29] Source URL: http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/how-private-tech-companies-are-collecting-data-you-and-selling-them-feds-hugeLinks: [1] http://www.tomdispatch.com [2] http://www.alternet.org/authors/pratap-chatterjee [3] http://tomdispatch.us2.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=6cb39ff0b1f670c349f828c73&id=1e41682ade [4] http://www.marketplace.org/topics/tech/data-economys-new-oil [5] http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=15665 [6] http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904194604576583112723197574.html [7] http://www.glimmerglass.com/products/intelligent-optical-systems/ [8] http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=15864 [9] http://acxiom.com/ [10] http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/19/magazine/shopping-habits.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 [11] http://www.theguardian.com/world/the-nsa-files [12] http://arstechnica.com/security/2013/09/the-body-worn-imsi-catcher-for-all-your-covert-phone-snooping-needs/ [13] http://www.usaspending.gov/search?form_fields=%7B%22search_term%22%3A%22HARRIS%22%2C%22recipient_duns%22%3A%5B%22002204600%22%5D%2C%22dept%22%3A%5B%221500%22%5D%2C%22spending_cat%22%3Anull%2C%22extent_competed%22%3Anull%2C%22psc_code%22%3Anull%2C%22naics_code%22%3Anull%2C%22fyear%22%3Anull%7D&sort_by=dollars&per_page=100 [14] http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/?p=55640 [15] http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323997004578641993388259674.html [16] http://www.ss8.com/products-interception-forensics-intellego%E2%84%A2 [17] http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/tech/news/techinnovations/2002-11-18-bonus-glimmerglass_x.htm [18] http://www.glimmerglass.com/solutions/telecom-central-office/ [19] http://wikileaks.org/spyfiles/docs/glimmerglass/274_electronic-blitz-intelligence-ops-are-poised-to-gather-move.html [20] http://www.wikileaks.org/spyfiles/docs/glimmerglass/55_glimmerglass-cybersweep.html [21] http://www.glimmerglass.com/optical-signal-distribution-for-the-intelligence-community/ [22] http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/31/nsa-top-secret-program-online-data [23] http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=15817 [24] http://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2013/feb/10/raytheon-software-tracks-online-video [25] http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/feb/10/software-tracks-social-media-defence [26] https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&tab=core&id=64c7a3014f6e2944e30c05266eedd9b4&_cview=0 [27] https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=837adf97515e1884116d9a819d40afbc&tab=core&_cview=1 [28] http://www.nbcnews.com/technology/super-search-engine-tracks-terrorists-you-social-networks-1B8327842 [29] http://www.alternet.org/tags/surveillance [30] http://www.alternet.org/%2Bnew_src%2B  =stock up on homeland sechttp://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Raytheon---2007 http://www.prwatch.org/node/6416 Last week we started a new participatory project to expose the government agencies, corporations and lobbying groups that have been censoring, whitewashing or otherwise spinning Wikipedia. (See CMD Senior Researcher Diane Farsetta's great blog post for some background on this sordid tale.) So far we've logged several attempts at spin into the respective SourceWatch profiles, including:Chevron deleting the article on "Biodiesel";Military contractor Raytheon deleting information on them spying on their competitors and the U.S. Air Force;Republican-friendly broadcaster Clear Channel adding allegations of plagiarism to Democratic Senate Candidate Al Franken's profile;PR firm Hill & Knowlton removing descriptions of the political repression by the government of the Maldives, an H&K client;Amway parent company Alticor removing descriptions of the company's use of "Google bombing" to drive down the search engine rankings of Web sites critical of the company;Electronic voting machine company Diebold removing descriptions of the controversies surrounding their machines' failures and glitches;Conservative news network Fox News changing Keith Olbermann's profile (and not in a good way - see Olbermann's reaction on this video); ---drones  ===BLIMP PATROL: This fall, we can expect a pair of helium blimps, each approaching the length of a football field (243 feet), to begin standing watch over Washington, monitoring airborne and ground threats to the capital.  The new detection system, JLENS, will be tethered to the ground somewhere in the capital (locations undisclosed) by Sept. 30, and they could stay for up to three years, according to a Reuters report. The pair of white whales costs $450 million. One will have long-range surveillance radar and a 360-degree view for 340 miles; the other has radar for targeting threats. The JLENS can float up to 10,000 feet for a month at a time, detecting such airborne threats as missiles, drones, rockets and also vehicles (boats, cars, trucks, airplanes).  JLENS, which stands for Joint Land Attack Cruise Missile Defense Elevated Netted Sensor System, is produced by heavy-hitter defense contractor Raytheon. Raytheon spent $7.45 million on lobbying last year, part of which was for its efforts to secure support and funding for the JLENS project.  Raytheon is also a powerful campaign financier, contributing $385,850 and $141,050 to 74 members of the House and Senate Armed Services committees, and $251,500 to 35 members of the House Appropriations Committee. The following are the top 10 recipients of combined campaign contributions from Raytheon, its employees and its PAC:     Name Contribution▼Committee Assignment 1Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.)$88,550.00Armed Services (formerly)2Rep. Buck McKeon (R-Calif.)$34,000.00Armed Services, Chairman3Rep. Ron Barber (D-Ariz.)$27,000.00Armed Services, Homeland Security4Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah)$25,500.00Finance, Judiciary5Rep. Jim Langevin (D-R.I.)$25,150.00Armed Services6Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.)$23,000.00Armed Services, Judiciary7Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine)$23,000.00Commerce/Science, Finance, Small Business (formerly)8Rep. John Boehner$22,900.00Speaker of the House9Rep. Silvestre Reyes (D-Texas)$22,000.00Armed Services (formerly)10Rep. Pete King (R-N.Y.)$21,000.00Homeland Security, Chairman; Financial Services  Name Contribution▼Committee Assignment                                                                                    The JLENS allows more time to react to threats than the radars, helicopters and aircrafts currently guarding the capital. Using blimps is also cheaper and they can spend more consecutive hours in the air, though Reuters reports overall funding to the JLENS program will be cut to manage the federal deficit. http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2013/02/capital-eye-opener-feb-5-modern-gol.html?utm_source=CRP+Mail+List&utm_campaign=2796671efa-Newsletter_2_7_2013&utm_medium=email#blimp===  RaytheonFrom SourceWatchJump to: navigation, searchRaytheon is the fifth largest defence manufacturer in the world [1]. The company has four business areas: Missile Defense; Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance; Precision Engagement; and Homeland Security. It is most famous for missiles - as Raytheon says, its "range of weapon systems needs little introduction. The company is a global leader in the development and deployment of advanced technology missile systems and air combat and strike systems" [2]. Products include the AIM-9 Sidewinder air-air missile, the AIM-120 AMRAAM air-air missile and the Tomahawk Block IIIC Cruise Missile.According to its website, the company aspires to be "the most admired defense and aerospace systems supplier through world-class people and technology. Raytheon today is focused on defense, government and commercial electronics and business aviation and special mission aircraft". Raytheon is headquartered in Lexington, MA, and employs 77,500 people worldwide.The company's seven businesses include:Integrated Defense SystemsIntelligence & Information SystemsMissile SystemsNetwork Centric SystemsSpace & Airborne SystemsRaytheon Technical Services CompanyHomeland SecurityEffective June 20, 2003, Raytheon Aerospace LLC changed names to Vertex Aerospace LLC. This completes a two-year separation agreement with Raytheon Company (NYSE: RTN) of Lexington, Mass., which divested the majority of its equity position in Raytheon Aerospace in June, 2001, to Veritas Capital.[3]Raytheon is famous for it's missile systems including the Patriot missile, and 'bunker busters' missiles which contain depleted uranium. It was a Raytheon missile that struck a Baghdad market in 2003, killing at least 62 civilians, during the second Gulf War. Consumer watchdog Raytheon Watch say "Raytheon Company's positive public image stands in stunning contrast to its criminal record, mistreatment of workers, sale of weapons to dictators, and abuse of corporate power."Some of the allegations against Raytheon include:close involvement with the CIA and National Security Agency to the extent that, according to a secret informant to the Washington Post, they are "virtually indistinguishable" entities.close involvement with drug enforcement activities of the CIA in Taiwan and Mexico (Corpwatch)In the early 90s Raytheon was found liable for inflating the cost of missile test equipment, Patriot missiles, and a US$72m radar contract, to the US government. They were ordered by court to pay US$2.5, US$3.7m and US$4m respectively.Raytheon, along with other military contractors Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman, Boeing and Ericsson, are now being employed by the US government for border control enforcement. They are building a 'virtual fence' of technology to accompany the real fence now being constructed on the Mexico border to keep out illegal immigrants."Raytheon has a package of sensor and video equipment used to protect troops in Iraq that monitors an area and uses software to identify suspicious objects automatically, analyzing and highlighting them even before anyone is sent to respond." Lipton, New York Times, 2006 Contents[hide]1 Political contributions2 Lobbying3 Spin on Wikipedia4 Personnel5 Contact6 Related SourceWatch articles7 References8 External links  Political contributionsRaytheon gave $970,918 to federal candidates in the 05/06 election period through its political action committee - 42% to Democrats, 58% to Republicans. [1] LobbyingThe company spent $5,978,157 for lobbying in 2006. $2,428,000 went to 18 outside lobbying firms with the remainder being spent using in-house lobbyists. Some of the firms were DLA Piper, Arent Fox PLLC, and Barbour, Griffith and Rogers. [2] Spin on WikipediaOn October 25, 2005, Someone with an IP at Raytheon deleted 6 embarrassing paragraphs about the company, including spying on a rival bidder for a contract to service military aircraft (the other company sued them, and Raytheon admitted guilt and agreed to pay damages), illegally obtaining classified Air Force budget and planning documents, and the poor performance of the Patriot missile in the 1991 Gulf War. The edit was made anonymously but was picked up by the WikiScanner tool. [4] Personnel Key executives and 2006 pay: [3]      Options exercisedWilliam H. Swanson, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer  N/A  N/ADavid C. Wajsgras, Chief Financial Officer  $1,260,000  N/ALouise L. Francesconi, President of Missile Systems  $1,020,000  $410,000Jay B. Stephens, Secretary and General Counsel  $1,330,000  $290,000 Board of Directors: [4]Barbara M. Barrett, International Business and Aviation AttorneyVernon E. Clark, Retired Chief of Naval Operations, U.S. NavyJohn Mark Deutch (since 1998), Institute Professor, Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyFrederic M. Poses, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, American Standard Companies,Inc.Michael C. Ruettgers, Special Advisor and Retired Chairman, EMC CorporationRonald L. Skates, Retired President and Chief Executive Officer, Data General CorporationWilliam R. Spivey, Retired President and Chief Executive Officer, Luminent, Inc.Linda G. Stuntz, Partner, Stuntz, Davis & Staffier, P.C.Former board members:Daniel P. Burnham, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Raytheon CompanyThomas E. Everhart, President Emeritus, California Institute of TechnologyWarren Bruce Rudman (since 1993), Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison Contact870 Winter Street Waltham, MA 02451 USA Phone: 781-522-3000 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting              781-522-3000      end_of_the_skype_highlighting Fax: 781-522-3001 Web: http://www.raytheon.com Related SourceWatch articlesDefense contractorsLocations of Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and TRWMilitary-industrial complex References↑ 2006 PAC Summary Data, Open Secrets, accessed July 2007.↑ Raytheon lobbying expenses, Open Secrets, accessed October 2007.↑ Raytheon Key Executives, Yahoo Finance, accessed October 2007.↑ Raytheon, board of directors, accessed July 2007. External linksCampaign Against the Arms Trade, Raytheon company profileRaytheon Gets Contract for Missile Radar, Reuters, April 7, 2003.National Commission for Economic Conversion & Disarmament, Major Defense Contractors: A Mixed Record on Conversion; see entry on Raytheon.Raytheon WatchCorporate Watch: Raytheon: Corporate CrimesCorp Watch: RaytheonEric Lipton US: Bush Turns to Big Military Contractors for Border Control, The New York Times, May 18th, 2006. === By Corporate Watch UK Completed May 2002 1.OVERVIEW 1.1 Industry Area1.2 Market Share / Importance1.3 History1.4 Products  'Raytheon: Aspiring to be the most admired defense and aerospace systems supplier through world-class people and technology.'[1]  1.1 Industry Area Raytheon produces military and commercial electronic systems and business and special mission aircraft. The company's 2001 revenues came from electronic systems (46%); command, control, communication and information systems (21%); aircraft (14%); technical services (11%); aircraft integration systems (6%); commercial electronics (2%).[2]  1.2 Market Share / Importance: Raytheon is the 4th largest US defence contractor, after Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and Northrop Grumman.[3] The company is often labelled as America's third largest aerospace company. Raytheon is ranked no. 119 in the 2002 FORTUNE 500 list of America's largest corporations.[4] The company is the world's largest missile-maker.[5]  Raytheon claims to be 'a global leader in defence and government electronics, business and special mission aviation[6], as well as in areas of weapons manufacture such as air-air missile systems.'[7] In 2000, the company employed 87,200 employees worldwide and had revenues equalling $16.9 billion.  Back to top 1.3 History The Beginning The American Appliance Company was started up in 1922 to make artificially cooled radiators. This was a commercial failure however and instead the company moved into making radio tubes under the brand name Raytheon. By 1925 it had also changed its company name to Raytheon, literally, ‘light of the gods’.[8] The company remained in the growing radio tube market until the onset of the Second World War. At this time the company expanded its operations, becoming the leading western manufacturer of radar systems and establishing the field of missile guidance systems.[9] After the war Raytheon kept up its close association with the military into the 60’s.  Expansion and Diversification In the mid-60’s 83% of Raytheon’s business came from the US government.[10] Deciding to diversify, the company established an aircraft division, an energy services division and an appliances division among others. In 1967 Raytheon produced the first reliable countertop microwave oven and it also manufactured the first electronic depth sounder. Due to its diversification by 1990 the US government accounted for only half of Raytheon's sales. (However, according to Hoover's Online Business Information, the US government currently accounts for about 70% of sales).[11]  In 1967 Raytheon was awarded the contract to develop the US armies surface to air missile. Nine years later the ‘Patriot’ entered full-scale production9. In the 1980’s Congress almost cancelled funding due to its high cost ($1.1 million a missile) and because it was thought to be inaccurate against the latest soviet missiles such as the SS-20[12]. (1/10 the size and 10 times as fast as Iraqi scuds). It was not until the Gulf War in 1991 that patriots were first used in combat, without much success (see Corporate Crimes). In February 1991 George Bush travelled to Raytheon’s Andover plant in Massachusetts to thank his ‘friend’, retiring chairman Tom Phillips for building what he called the ‘scud busters’[13]  Back to top  Recent History Raytheon streamlined in the 1990’s, getting rid of its publishing, laundry and home appliances sectors amongst others. In 2000 it also sold its large construction subsidiary. It acquired a number of businesses in the defence and electronics industry, culminating in the 1997 merger with Hughes Electronics, a $9.5 billion transaction. President Bush's plans to step up national security spending boosted Raytheon's profits.[14]  However, Raytheon has suffered a number of setbacks in recent years. Funding for the Space-Based Infrared System Low (SBIRS-Low), a satellite surveillance and targeting system that Raytheon has worked on with TRW (TRW is a company that provides the defence industry with technology and services), has been held up by Congress due to repeated cost overruns and schedule slippages and funding has also been scaled back for Raytheon’s Joint Standoff Weapon system (JSOW), a precision-guided "glider" bomb designed to hit targets from as far as 40 miles away. Also, in late 2001, the Pentagon’s Missile Defense Agency (MDA) announced that it was cancelling the $9 billion Navy Area Defense (NAD) program, a short-range missile defence system that was to use interceptors based on the Raytheon standard missile. However, this did come with a $300 million contract termination fee paid by the US taxpayer and split between Raytheon and the other 3 top contractors on the project.  War profits These setbacks for the company have been more than compensated for by the overall rise in Raytheon’s business since September 11th, including a 26% rise in stock prices. In early 2002, the firm also received a $1.2 billion multi-year contract to provide over 200 T-6A "Texan" training aircraft to the Air Force and Navy. This was despite criticisms just six weeks earlier by the Pentagon’s Office of Independent Testing and Evaluation that there were serious performance problems in the T-6A program.[15]  The expansion of NATO to countries like Poland, Hungary and the Czech republic is also good news for the company. New members are required to spend at least 3% of their budget on NATO compatible military spending. This will inevitably result in contracts for the big arms companies and Raytheon is poised to receive a sizable chunk of the estimated $35 billion[16] that will have been spent between 1998 and 2008.[17]  Raytheon’s official history can be found at http://www.raytheon.com/about/history.htm, where their World War II radars are credited as ‘making the Germans feel for the first time like the hunted not the hunters’; their microwaves ‘ put women on the way to avoiding laborious house chores’ and the Patriot missile is credited with ‘changing the course of the [Gulf] War’!10  Back to top 1.4 Products Raytheon produces a huge range of products and services, including many well-known products such as Cruise, Patriot and Sidewinder missiles. In addition, Raytheon produces the world's leading cruise missile, the Tomahawk. The US Navy describes the Tomahawk (which has a price tag of $500,000[18]) as their 'weapon of choice'.[19] Raytheon also produces the AIM-65 Maverick, an air-to-surface missile that the company describes as 'the most widely used precision guided munition in the free world. . . integrated on virtually every fighter aircraft in the free world'.[20]  For a full list of Raytheon's products see their web page: http://www.raytheon.com/products  Online Sales To take advantage of the opportunities opened up by the Internet, Raytheon, Boeing, Lockheed Martin and BAE Systems agreed to form an online exchange for sales totalling billions of pounds a year. Everything from aircraft and weapons to data services is available on the new exchange.[21]  Back to top  References  [1] 'About Raytheon', Raytheon home page: http://www.raytheon.com/about/index.htm accessed 16 April 2002 [2] Raytheon News Release, 23 January 2002: http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/micro_stories.pl?ACCT=149999&TICK=RTN&STORY=/www/story/01-23-2002/0001654074&EDATE=Jan+23,+2002 (source: PRNewswire), accessed 16 April 2002 [3] Raytheon Profile, Hoover's Online Business Information: http://www.hoovers.com/co/capsule/1/0,2163,11261,00.html accessed 16 April 2002 [4] 2002 FORTUNE 500, http://www.fortune.com/lists/F500/index.html accessed 16 April 2002 [5] 'European missile giant formed', BBC News, 27 April 2001, BBC web site: http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/business/newsid_1238000/1238846.stm accessed 17 April 2002 [6] Raytheon home page: http://www.raytheon.com/about/index.htm accessed 16 April 2002 [7] Press Archive EADS, European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company web-site: http://www.eads.net/eads/en/index.htm?/xml/intl/press/archiv/foundingpartners/casa2000/20000jun_1.xml&press accessed 16 April 2002 [8] Company website: www.raytheon.com/about/early.htm accessed 16 April 2002 [9] Corporate Profile: 'The Patriots by Raytheon', by Jim Donahue, web-site: www.essential.org/monitor/hyper/issues/1991/03/mm0391_10.html accessed 16 April 2002 [10] Ibid [11] Brief company overview, by Hoover's Online Business Information, web-site: http://www.hoovers.com/co/capsule/1/0,2163,11261,00.html accessed 16 April 2002 9 Company website: www.raytheon.com/about/tech.htm accessed 16 April 2002 [12] Corporate Profile: 'The Patriots by Raytheon', by Jim Donahue, web-site: http://www.essential.org/monitor/hyper/issues/1991/03/mm0391_10.html accessed 16 April 2002 [13] Ibid [14] 'European missile giant formed', BBC News, 27 April 2001, BBC web site: http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/business/newsid_1238000/1238846.stm accessed 17 April 2002 [15] 'Raytheon Profile', Reviewing Nuclear Proliferation, Reaching Critical Will web-site: www.reachingcriticalwill.org/dd/ray.html accessed 17 April 2002 [16] William D. Hartung (May, 1998), NATO Boondoggle, The Progressive [17] 'Future of a Delusion', The Progressive Comment, The Progressive Magazine, at:  http://www.progressive.org/comment9906.htm accessed 17 April 2002 10 Company website, www.raytheon.com/about/history.htm accessed 17 April 2002 [18] 'Cruise Missiles "Made in Brazil"', BBC News, 4 September 2001, BBC website: http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/business/newsid_1525000/1525374.stm accessed 17 April 2002 [19]'United States Tomahawkä Cruise Missile Program', Strike Weapons and Unmanned Aviation, web-site:www.strikenet.js.mil/pao/tomhis.doc accessed 17 April 2002 [20] Raytheon web-site: http://www.raytheon.com/es/esproducts/dssmav/dssmav.htm accessed 17 April 2002 [21] Read more: http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/business/newsid_694000/694049.stm ('Aerospace industry reaps internet benefits', BBC News, 28 March 2000)  ===wikiRaytheon Company is a major American defense contractor and industrial corporation with core manufacturingconcentrations in weapons and military and commercial electronics. It was previously involved in corporate and special-mission aircraft until early 2007. Raytheon is the world's largest producer of guided missiles.[5]Established in 1922, the company reincorporated in 1928 and adopted its present name in 1959. The company has around 63,000 employees worldwide[6] and annual revenues of approximately US$25 billion. More than 90% of Raytheon's revenues were obtained from military contracts and, as of 2012, it was the fifth-largest military contractor in the world,[7] and is the fourth largest defense contractor in the United States by revenue.Raytheon's headquarters moved from Lexington, Massachusetts, to Waltham, Massachusetts, in 2003.[8] The company was previously headquartered in Cambridge, Massachusetts, from 1922 to 1928, Newton, Massachusetts, from 1928 to 1941, Waltham from 1941 to 1961, Lexington from 1961 to 2003, and back to Waltham from 2003 onwards.Contents  [hide] 1History1.1Early years1.2During World War II1.3After World War II1.41980s1.51990s1.62000s1.72010s2Company structure2.1Businesses2.1.1Strategic Business Areas2.2Leadership2.3International2.4Ownership3Products and services3.1Overview3.2Air traffic control systems3.3Radars and sensors3.4Satellite sensors3.5Communications3.6Radioactive materials detection system3.7Semiconductors3.8Missile defense systems3.9Missiles3.10Hi-tech simulators3.11Training Services and Learning Outsourcing4Controversies4.1Government relationship4.2Case of illegally obtaining classified information in a bidding process4.3Disputed claims of the Patriot missile4.4Contract disputes4.5Brazilian SIVAM project4.6AGES lawsuit4.7Securities litigation4.8Swanson's Unwritten Rules of Management4.9Silent Guardian testing on prisoners4.10Harvesting personal data from social networking websites5Environmental record6Corporate Social Responsibility6.1Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) Education6.2Armed Services Support6.3Philanthropy6.4Employee Engagement6.5Workplace diversity6.6Advocacy7See also8References9External linksHistory[edit] In 1925, the company changed its name to Raytheon Manufacturing Company and began marketing its rectifier, under theRaytheon brand name, with great commercial success. In 1928 Raytheon merged with Q.R.S. Company, an American manufacturer of electron tubes and switches, to form the successor of the same name, Raytheon Manufacturing Company. In 1933 it diversified by acquiring Acme-Delta Company, a producer of transformers, power equipment, and electronic auto parts. By the 1930s, it had already grown to become one of the world's largest vacuum tube manufacturing companies. In 1922, two former Tufts engineering college roommates Laurence K. Marshall and Vannevar Bush, along with scientist Charles G. Smith, founded the American Appliance Company in Cambridge, Massachusetts.[9] Its focus, which was originally on new refrigeration technology, soon shifted to electronics. The company's first product was a gaseous (helium) rectifier that was based on Charles Smith's earlier astronomical research of the star Zeta Puppis.[10] The electron tube was christened with the name Raytheon ("light of/from the gods"[11]) and was used in a battery eliminator, a type of radio-receiver power supply that plugged into the power grid in place of large batteries. This made it possible to convert household alternating current to direct current for radios and thus eliminate the need for expensive, short-lived batteries.Early yearsDuring World War II[edit]Early in World War II, physicists in the United Kingdom invented the magnetron, a specialized microwave-generating electron tube that markedly improved the capability of radar to detect enemy aircraft. American companies were then sought by the US government to perfect and mass-produce the magnetron for ground-based, airborne, and shipborne radar systems, and, with support from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's Radiation Laboratory (recently formed to investigate microwave radar), Raytheon received a contract to build the devices. Within a few months of being awarded the contract, Raytheon had already begun to mass manufacture magnetron tubes for use in radar sets and then complete radar systems. At war's end in 1945 the company was responsible for about 80 percent of all magnetrons manufactured. During the war Raytheon also pioneered the production of shipboard radar systems, particularly for submarine detection. Raytheon ranked 71st among United States corporations in the value of World War II military production contracts.[12]Raytheon's research on the magnetron tube revealed the potential of microwaves to cook food. In 1945, Raytheon's Percy Spencer invented the microwave oven by discovering that the magnetron could rapidly heat food. In 1947, the company demonstrated the Radarange microwave oven for commercial use.After World War II[edit]In 1945, the company expanded its electronics capability through acquisitions that included the Submarine Signal Company (founded in 1901), a leading manufacturer of maritime safety equipment. With its broadened capabilities, Raytheon developed the first guidance system for a missile that could intercept a flying target. In 1948, Raytheon began to manufacture guided missiles. In 1950, its Lark missile became the first such weapon to destroy a target aircraft in flight. Raytheon then received military contracts to develop the air-to-air Sparrow and ground-to-air Hawk missiles—projects that received impetus from theKorean War. In later decades, it remained a major producer of missiles, among them the Patriot antimissile missile and the air-to-air Phoenix missile. In 1959, Raytheon acquired the marine electronics company Apelco Applied Electronics, which significantly increased its strength in commercial marine navigation and radio gear, as well as less-expensive Japanese suppliers of products such as marine/weather band radios and direction-finding gear. In the same year, it changed its name toRaytheon Company.During the post-war years, Raytheon also made generally low- to medium-powered radio and television transmitters and related equipment for the commercial market, but the high-powered market was solidly in the hands of larger, better financed competitors such as Continental Electronics, General Electric and Radio Corporation of America, in the US and got into the educational publishing business with the acquisition of D.C. Heath. In the 1950s, Raytheon began manufacturing transistors, including the CK722, priced and marketed to hobbyists.In 1961, the British electronics company A.C. Cossor merged with Raytheon, following its sale by Philips. The new Company's name was Raytheon Cossor. The Cossor side of the organisation is still current in the Raytheon group as of 2010.In 1965, it acquired Amana Refrigeration, Inc., a manufacturer of refrigerators and air conditioners. Using the Amana brand name and its distribution channels, Raytheon began selling the first countertop household microwave oven in 1967 and became a dominant manufacturer in the microwave oven business.1980s[edit]In 1980, Raytheon acquired Beech Aircraft Corporation, a leading manufacturer of general aviation aircraft founded in 1932 by Walter H. Beech. In 1993 the company expanded its aircraft activities by adding the Hawker line of business jets by acquiring Corporate Jets Inc., the business jet product line of British Aerospace (now BAE Systems). These two entities were merged in 1994 to become the Raytheon Aircraft Company. In the first quarter of 2007 Raytheon sold its aircraft operations, which subsequently operated as Hawker Beechcraft, and since 2014 have been units of Textron Aviation. The product line of Raytheon's aircraft subsidiary included business jets such as the Hawker 800XP and Hawker 4000, the Beechjet 400A, and the Premier I; the popular King Air series of twin turboprops; and piston-engine aircraft such as the Bonanza. Its special-mission aircraft included the single-turboprop T-6A Texan II, which the United States Air Force and United States Navy had chosen as their primary training aircraft.1990s[edit]In 1991, during the Persian Gulf War, Raytheon's Patriot missile received great international exposure, resulting in a substantial increase in sales for the company outside the United States. In an effort to establish leadership in the defense electronics business, Raytheon purchased in quick succession Dallas-based E-Systems(1995), Chrysler Corporation's defense electronics and aircraft-modification businesses, which had previously acquired companies such as Electrospace systems (1996) (portions of these businesses were later sold to L-3 Communications), and the defense unit of Texas Instruments—Defense Systems & Electronics Group(1997). Also in 1997, Raytheon acquired the aerospace and defense business of Hughes Aircraft Company from Hughes Electronics Corporation—a subsidiary ofGeneral Motors, which included a number of product lines previously purchased by Hughes Electronics including the former General Dynamics missile business (Pomona facility), the defense portion of Delco Electronics (Delco Systems Operations), and Magnavox Electronic Systems.[citation needed]Raytheon also divested itself of several nondefense businesses in the 1990s, including Amana Refrigeration and Seismograph Service Ltd (sold to Schlumberger-Geco-Prakla). On October 12, 1999 Raytheon exited the personal rapid transit (PRT) business as it terminated its PRT 2000[13] system due to high-cost of development and lack of interest.[14] The PRT 2000 prototype now sits idle at their Marlboro, Massachusetts facility.[15]2000s[edit]In November 2007, Raytheon purchased Sarcos for an undisclosed sum, seeking to expand into robotics research and production.[16]In September 2009, Raytheon entered into an agreement to acquire BBN Technologies.[17] The acquisition was completed on October 29, 2009.[18]In December 2010, AST(Applied Signal Technology) agreed to be acquired by military contractor Raytheon for $490 million.[19]2010s[edit]In October 2014, Raytheon beat rivals Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman for a contract to build a next-generation long-range radar system for the US Air Forceworth an estimated $1 billion.[20]Company structure[edit]Businesses[edit]Raytheon is composed of four major business divisions: