Official says Iraq contract dispute cost him job

Mon Jun 16, 2008 11:00 PM EDT

WASHINGTON — The senior civilian official who managed the military's largest contract in Iraq says he was reassigned in 2004 when he refused to approve more than $1 billion in charges to KBR until the Houston company provided credible spending records, The New York Times reported.

"They had a gigantic amount of costs they couldn't justify," retired Army official Charles M. Smith told the Times in a story posted on its Web site Monday night. "Ultimately, the money that was going to KBR was money being taken away from the troops, and I wasn't going to do that."

Smith said he was reassigned and that most of the payments he had questioned were later approved.

The Times reported that Army officials denied that Smith had been replaced because of the dispute. They told the newspaper that his decision to block the payments could have eroded basic services to troops.

"We could not let operational support suffer because of some other things," Jeffrey P. Parsons, executive director of the Army Contracting Command, told the Times.

The KBR contract with the Pentagon has cost more than $20 billion so far, the Times reported. Smith, a civilian employee of the Army for 31 years, told the newspaper that he waited until after he had retired, in February, to speak out.

2 Votes
Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Published to:

Associated Press's Column, All of Newsvine
Groups: none
Regions: United States , Iraq , Washington DC

Public Discussion (3)

What's this?

Who's leading the conversation?

This visualization below allows you to see the impact that each user has on the current conversation. The top row contains the group of users who have had the most impact, the 2nd row the group of users who have had the 2nd most impact (et cetera). Users with similar impact are grouped together, and the average score of the group is shown to the left of the group. The author of the article is also shown on the left, in their corresponding group. Each user's score is based on the number of comments the user has made plus the number of votes their comments have received. The scores are calculated relative one another, so while their absolute value is not particularly important, their relative difference does indicate a larger difference in impact on the conversation.

2.6

{"commentId":1983594,"authorDomain":"winsomecowboy"}

winsomecowboy

'some other things" how quaintly transparently evasive.
The fact that Halliburton has been the only victor in Iraq speaks volumes for the @!$%# Americans simply put up with.
Honestly, you deserve all the theft halliburton is responsible for, you know it, they know it and you can get on the inter-tubes and vent if it pleases you but you are collectively patsies too scared/tired/indifferent/comfortable/stupid to care enough to do anything about it and news pieces like this simply reinforce your powerlessness. If they army guys in charge can't do anything then why should you bother right? It's your kids problem.

{"commentId":1983594,"threadId":"291170","contentId":"1582262","authorDomain":"winsomecowboy"}

2 votes

#1 - Tue Jun 17, 2008 1:35 AM EDT

{"commentId":1984238,"authorDomain":"SepticSkeptic"}

SepticSkeptic

Oh, I dunno...there are other winners. Regional food service contractors and truckers, mostly from Kuwait and Turkey, are making a killing. Blackwater's sucking a million a day out of taxpayer pockets...

{"commentId":1984238,"threadId":"291170","contentId":"1582262","authorDomain":"SepticSkeptic"}

2 votes

#2 - Tue Jun 17, 2008 5:48 AM EDT

{"commentId":1984951,"authorDomain":"tacitus13"}

Tacitus13

The senior civilian official who managed the military's largest contract in Iraq says he was reassigned in 2004 when he refused to approve more than $1 billion in charges to KBR until the Houston company provided credible spending records, The New York Times reported.

Surely the Army had a good reason to replace him then, right?

The Times reported that Army officials denied that Smith had been replaced because of the dispute. They told the newspaper that his decision to block the payments could have eroded basic services to troops.

But wait, when you're spending taxpayer money, shouldn't you be allowed to ask for credible spending records FIRST? No wonder so much money has been wasted in Iraq with officials like these in charge. And if he wasn't replaced because of the dispute, why was he replaced?

{"commentId":1984951,"threadId":"291170","contentId":"1582262","authorDomain":"tacitus13"}

1 vote

#3 - Tue Jun 17, 2008 9:27 AM EDT

{"canLink":false,"threadId":"291170","isPrivate":false}

Backyard

Official says Iraq contract dispute cost him job

Published to:

FUN STUFF:

COMPANY STUFF:

LEGAL STUFF:

Army Overseer Tells of Ouster Over KBR Stir	The New York Times	Tue Jun 17	0
Lost Army Job Tied to Doubts on Contractor	The New York Times	Mon Jun 16	3
Army Official Ousted For Refusing To Approve $1 Billion In Questionable Iraq Funds	The New York Times	Tue Jun 17	1
Army Overseer Tells of Ouster Over KBR Stir - NYTimes.com	The New York Times	Tue Jun 17	1
Army Overseer Tells of Ouster Over KBR Stir	The New York Times	Tue Jun 17	6