Stupidity, or deliberate action?
http://thehill.com/blogs/co...racting-at-its-worst| | | quote | Each year, 650,000 service family members are affected by the military’s need to transfer personnel from one base to another both within the United States and overseas. One benefit the military provides is the shipping and storing of vehicles owned privately by service members. It’s a major operation since, at any given time, 10,000 vehicles are being transported on ships or trucks while another 8,500 are in storage.
Since 1998, the transporting of these privately owned vehicles was handled by American Auto Logistics (AAL), a defense contractor based in New Jersey. From all accounts, military personnel were pleased with the company’s performance. Then, on October 24, 2013, in a surprise move, the contract for these services for fiscal year 2014 (which ends in September 2015) was awarded to International Auto Logistics (IAL), a newly formed company based in Brunswick, Georgia. Of the five bids submitted for the $305 million contract, IAL was a long shot. With ten employees and an annual revenue of less than a half million dollars, the privately-held company had no experience in the area of expertise required by the contract it won.
...
Though the company’s headquarters was in Seoul, Park enjoyed a close relationship with the North Korean regime. At a time when travel between the Koreas is difficult, Park has visited North Korea 200 times. In late 2012, he was even awarded an honorary citizenship in North Korea, only the second person ever to receive such a commendation. “This means that North Korea has acknowledged the trust they had put in me,” Park told Agence France Presse at the time. “They were also encouraging me to start new projects in the North, more freely and aggressively.”
...
When asked if the Department of Defense was concerned about awarding a contract to a company with strong ties to the North Korean communist regime, especially since the job of IAL is to help facilitate troop movements around the world — information the military should want to remain confidential — a spokesperson said the matter had been examined “repeatedly” and the department was “unconcerned” about any national security risk.
|
|
Really? Come on. That's a calculated move.
