For three days in February, Khamis Gadhafi attended class at Northwestern University under a fake name and bogus identity.
Gadhafi and a Libyan companion sat in on a Kellogg School of Management leadership class on the Northwestern campus taught by the famous wellness doctor Deepak Chopra. It was a three day session entitled, "The Soul of Leadership."
"What motivates is power, influence peddling, cronyism, corruption and bureaucracy, very unhealthy traits," said Dr. Deepak Chopra, NU Kellogg School professor.
At that moment back in Libya, junior Ghadhafi's homeland was motivated by a revolution. Protests had already begun aimed at loosening the 41-year stranglehold by Gadhafi's father.
But students in the Kellogg MBA class had no idea who their new classmate was. According to Chopra, he claimed only to be "from north Africa," worked in the investment business and didn't use the name Gadhafi.
So, just a few weeks before the U.S. sent cruise missiles to Libya, Libya sent Mohammar Gadhafi's son to the U.S. on a so-called educational tour.
Northwestern University officials would not speak on camera about this or even let ABC7 onto the private campus to work on this story.
Kellogg Dean Sally Blount states that Gadhafi's "visit occurred prior to the uprising in Libya, and before the recent, very troubling allegations against him surfaced." She says Kellogg is committed to respecting human dignity and the integrity of the learning environment, and they promise to review all enrollment procedures and criteria and determine changes that need to be made.
The 27-year-old Gadhafi's American tour was officially an "internship" custom-designed for him by a U.S. company called AECOM, that until recently had a multi-billion dollar construction-training deal with the Libyan government.
In a statement, company spokesman Paul Gennaro told the I-Team they did not fund the trip. Gennaro said: "At the time, [GADHAFI] was registered as a student at a Spanish university pursuing an MBA degree."
"We were aware of the student's family relationship, but we were not informed of any military connection whatsoever...When we read reports citing the student's role in the crisis in Libya, we were shocked and outraged...Before this program began, the U.S. Dept. of State was aware of, and approved, all meetings."
However, State Department officials say they had no role in approving Gadhafi's visit or the 36-day itinerary that included meetings in Chicago with several Aecom attorneys on "global contract management, legal affairs training and foreign corrupt practices training."
What do you think? Is this ethical for AECOM to have done? What if this man is arrested and charged for war crimes in the coming weeks?
Whether or not it is ethical, it is how business is done. AECOM does not not care one whit about the conduct of Gadhafi family while they have a "Multi-billion dollar construction training deal with the Libyan Government".
This is where we are in the 21st Century. I would have preferred getting the flying cars that we were promised...
This is a very complex question that I think deserves more attention than I can give it today. Just posting to say thanks, make, for posting it and I hope a good discussion can follow.
But there's ethics in the Professional Act and if you aid and abet someone in lying about their identity while visiting in a foreign country, aka spying, then that's a real question of whether you upheld the Professional Act. My hunch is they didn't.
well just another example of the rich doing what they do best, paying off people and remaining anonymous. I wonder if these classes made some kind of positive impact oh the guy because he is still pretty young. Someone is trying to convince me to go to law school or business school, and Northwestern is on my list. It would really be creepy to know that you were sitting next to a guy accused of killing who knows how many people. Wouldn't customs or immigration officers have detained him ? or atleast turned him back. Maybe if we protected the eastern border, as well as the Mexican border he wouldn't have made it to the lectures.
"and if you aid and abet someone in lying about their identity while visiting in a foreign country, aka spying, then that's a real question of whether you upheld the Professional Act"
That's a bit of a stretch. I'm sure he entered the country with his real name. Celebrities use fake names when staying at hotels. This is only slightly different.
The issue is that since then Jr. has become a bit of a murderous asshole.
Blame Obama, Bush Jr, Clinton, Bush, and Reagan for really confusing international policies that over the years actually encouraged genocide across the globe.
We're also talking about a company whose chairman controls water rights in southwest England, natural gas in San Diego and one of the largest investment firms in the world.
Conflicts of interest!
Sempra energy, the San Diego gas company, has been fined nearly a billion dollars over the course of the last decade.
In addition, if AECOM is developing superior infrastructure in America... then why does Capital Group Companies only invest in German business?
The people were nice there and the projects were pretty good but there were some seriously ugly ugly corporation politics in the aftermatth of all the mergers.
Nothing surprising about having to have a TS or Secret clearance there or any other firm. The AECOM office I worked on did a lot of classified projects for the federal government.
After 9-11, if you're a foreign national, arrive in the USA and you sign up for a class under a fake name and an American helps you, you're next stop could be Guantanamo... I'll look at the law but I don't think that this was lawful...
The problem with security clearances is primarily that they don't work very well.
Even more surprising is that between one-fourth and one-fifth of all security clearances were never completed often missing critical paperwork. There is also no guidelines from the Office of Personnel Management regarding what is considered an actual appropriate security clearance.
What security clearances do, primarily, is isolate and maintain a group of people with like-minded values (political, religious, sexual)-- variation is a sort of risk.
This is primarily remnant of McCarthy-Era paranoia-- using process and intimidation to root out communists, homosexuals, conscientious objectors and other undesirables. Combine rigid conformity with larger-than-normal salaries and you have a lot of people who don't feel the need to 'step out of line.'
In that situation, there's no accountability to general philosophical ethics and no accountability to the general public.
A specific example would be the government contractor who swindled the government of hundreds of millions of dollars selling non-bullet-proof bullet-proof vests and other armor to the government for years? Why didn't anyone notice that? Why didn't anyone do anything sooner? It's kind of hard to notice that bullet-proof armor isn't actually bullet-proof!
Better yet... how do I know that AECOM isn't buildign illegal war prisons in other countries?
From a standpoint-- completely ignoring the illegal war prison part-- how does anyone know about the conditions of these prisons?
Are the cells at least the minimum allowable size? Do the prisoners' have immediate access to toilets? Do they have access to basic plumbing (showers, sinks)? Is food prepared on-site? Do these prisons also provide basic medical care? Is there infrastructure in place to maintain a level of comfort and hygiene (air circulation, humidity control, climate control, filtration, sterilization?
If my country is going to be operating an illegal prison... I'd at least like it to be a high-quality illegal prison.
What separates the 'best countries' from 'third-world shitholes' is maintaining and preserving a level of dignity that applies to all people from citizen to enemy.
And if you had my clearance level, you'd know how I know that.
I'm sorry, I don't have anything else to offer on this except that I'm glad I don't have to worry about ethical breaches of this substantial a level.
I do ask my students on ProPrac to consider this quandary: you want to turn down a project because you have an ethical problem with it, but that will cause you to have to lay off 10 staff members and see their families lose that salary. Which is the bigger breach?
(And let's assume that you, Ms. Principal, have already taken a deep salary hit to try to avoid layoffs already.)
Also, my rant on AECOM isn't necessarily about not doing evil, boring or possibly ineffective work.
It's more of a transparency issue for two reasons:
1) Cost-analysis and competition
2) Cultural cronyism
As for the first part, "Top Secret" security clearance jobs may not be getting adequate and widespread scrutiny because I'm pretty sure that the government isn't going to issue an RFP for "Top Secret Strategic Missile Silo."
Could OMA or Fosters + Partners building a prettier and or cheaper missile silo? Could KPF deliver it on a tighter schedule? Do stainless-steel seatless toilets really cost $2399.95? Could we source half the furnishings from IKEA?
I'm sure the STORNÄS Dining table could also be used for waterboarding?
And now the second issue... would most design firms-- say FAT or Bjarke Ingels-- qualify for a "Top Secret" security clearance? Or would their cultural and artistic involvements discount their ability to work in a meaningful capacity for 'the government?' Or how about Morphosis?
Is there an even open dialogue about how to design war machines? If we have to do the evil, can we at least do it with style?
That's what really bugs me about this is the glaring lapse of judgment.
Apr 7, 11 10:41 pm ·
·
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.
ABC news says AECOM arranged a class in Chicago and a tour of America for "Bloodthirsty" Dictator Ghadafi's son under a fake name
ABC news says AECOM arranged a class in Chicago and a tour of America for "Bloodthirsty" Dictator Ghadafi's son under a fake name:
http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/iteam&id=8057894
For three days in February, Khamis Gadhafi attended class at Northwestern University under a fake name and bogus identity.
Gadhafi and a Libyan companion sat in on a Kellogg School of Management leadership class on the Northwestern campus taught by the famous wellness doctor Deepak Chopra. It was a three day session entitled, "The Soul of Leadership."
"What motivates is power, influence peddling, cronyism, corruption and bureaucracy, very unhealthy traits," said Dr. Deepak Chopra, NU Kellogg School professor.
At that moment back in Libya, junior Ghadhafi's homeland was motivated by a revolution. Protests had already begun aimed at loosening the 41-year stranglehold by Gadhafi's father.
But students in the Kellogg MBA class had no idea who their new classmate was. According to Chopra, he claimed only to be "from north Africa," worked in the investment business and didn't use the name Gadhafi.
So, just a few weeks before the U.S. sent cruise missiles to Libya, Libya sent Mohammar Gadhafi's son to the U.S. on a so-called educational tour.
Northwestern University officials would not speak on camera about this or even let ABC7 onto the private campus to work on this story.
Kellogg Dean Sally Blount states that Gadhafi's "visit occurred prior to the uprising in Libya, and before the recent, very troubling allegations against him surfaced." She says Kellogg is committed to respecting human dignity and the integrity of the learning environment, and they promise to review all enrollment procedures and criteria and determine changes that need to be made.
The 27-year-old Gadhafi's American tour was officially an "internship" custom-designed for him by a U.S. company called AECOM, that until recently had a multi-billion dollar construction-training deal with the Libyan government.
In a statement, company spokesman Paul Gennaro told the I-Team they did not fund the trip. Gennaro said: "At the time, [GADHAFI] was registered as a student at a Spanish university pursuing an MBA degree."
"We were aware of the student's family relationship, but we were not informed of any military connection whatsoever...When we read reports citing the student's role in the crisis in Libya, we were shocked and outraged...Before this program began, the U.S. Dept. of State was aware of, and approved, all meetings."
However, State Department officials say they had no role in approving Gadhafi's visit or the 36-day itinerary that included meetings in Chicago with several Aecom attorneys on "global contract management, legal affairs training and foreign corrupt practices training."
What do you think? Is this ethical for AECOM to have done? What if this man is arrested and charged for war crimes in the coming weeks?
Whether or not it is ethical, it is how business is done. AECOM does not not care one whit about the conduct of Gadhafi family while they have a "Multi-billion dollar construction training deal with the Libyan Government".
This is where we are in the 21st Century. I would have preferred getting the flying cars that we were promised...
This is a very complex question that I think deserves more attention than I can give it today. Just posting to say thanks, make, for posting it and I hope a good discussion can follow.
There's no ethics in capitalism. Hopefully you have laws at hand that prevent the most abrasive of ethical abuses.
And anyways, Ghadafi was our friend as little as 3 months ago.
If you are going to equate morality of an architect with that of our client, we are all going to hell in a handbasket.
But there's ethics in the Professional Act and if you aid and abet someone in lying about their identity while visiting in a foreign country, aka spying, then that's a real question of whether you upheld the Professional Act. My hunch is they didn't.
well just another example of the rich doing what they do best, paying off people and remaining anonymous. I wonder if these classes made some kind of positive impact oh the guy because he is still pretty young. Someone is trying to convince me to go to law school or business school, and Northwestern is on my list. It would really be creepy to know that you were sitting next to a guy accused of killing who knows how many people. Wouldn't customs or immigration officers have detained him ? or atleast turned him back. Maybe if we protected the eastern border, as well as the Mexican border he wouldn't have made it to the lectures.
That's a bit of a stretch. I'm sure he entered the country with his real name. Celebrities use fake names when staying at hotels. This is only slightly different.
The issue is that since then Jr. has become a bit of a murderous asshole.
Blame Obama, Bush Jr, Clinton, Bush, and Reagan for really confusing international policies that over the years actually encouraged genocide across the globe.
But hey, at least we still have embargo on Cuba.
Does anyone else think it's slightly fishy that AECOM employees sometimes have to qualify for "Top Secret" security clearances?
That whole company is pretty rotten in my opinion.
We're also talking about a company whose chairman controls water rights in southwest England, natural gas in San Diego and one of the largest investment firms in the world.
Conflicts of interest!
Sempra energy, the San Diego gas company, has been fined nearly a billion dollars over the course of the last decade.
In addition, if AECOM is developing superior infrastructure in America... then why does Capital Group Companies only invest in German business?
I've worked at AECOM.
None of this surprises me one bit.
And yes - I had to have a TS while I was there.
The people were nice there and the projects were pretty good but there were some seriously ugly ugly corporation politics in the aftermatth of all the mergers.
Nothing surprising about having to have a TS or Secret clearance there or any other firm. The AECOM office I worked on did a lot of classified projects for the federal government.
After 9-11, if you're a foreign national, arrive in the USA and you sign up for a class under a fake name and an American helps you, you're next stop could be Guantanamo... I'll look at the law but I don't think that this was lawful...
The problem with security clearances is primarily that they don't work very well.
Even more surprising is that between one-fourth and one-fifth of all security clearances were never completed often missing critical paperwork. There is also no guidelines from the Office of Personnel Management regarding what is considered an actual appropriate security clearance.
What security clearances do, primarily, is isolate and maintain a group of people with like-minded values (political, religious, sexual)-- variation is a sort of risk.
This is primarily remnant of McCarthy-Era paranoia-- using process and intimidation to root out communists, homosexuals, conscientious objectors and other undesirables. Combine rigid conformity with larger-than-normal salaries and you have a lot of people who don't feel the need to 'step out of line.'
In that situation, there's no accountability to general philosophical ethics and no accountability to the general public.
A specific example would be the government contractor who swindled the government of hundreds of millions of dollars selling non-bullet-proof bullet-proof vests and other armor to the government for years? Why didn't anyone notice that? Why didn't anyone do anything sooner? It's kind of hard to notice that bullet-proof armor isn't actually bullet-proof!
Better yet... how do I know that AECOM isn't buildign illegal war prisons in other countries?
From a standpoint-- completely ignoring the illegal war prison part-- how does anyone know about the conditions of these prisons?
Are the cells at least the minimum allowable size? Do the prisoners' have immediate access to toilets? Do they have access to basic plumbing (showers, sinks)? Is food prepared on-site? Do these prisons also provide basic medical care? Is there infrastructure in place to maintain a level of comfort and hygiene (air circulation, humidity control, climate control, filtration, sterilization?
If my country is going to be operating an illegal prison... I'd at least like it to be a high-quality illegal prison.
What separates the 'best countries' from 'third-world shitholes' is maintaining and preserving a level of dignity that applies to all people from citizen to enemy.
I will neither confirm nor deny that. Rusty writes better comedy than I do though...
;-)
Our cover is blown. Run make!
Wait, why am I talking to myself here?
Rusty!
I am high-tailin' it outta here!
make and rusty are not the same person.
And if you had my clearance level, you'd know how I know that.
I'm sorry, I don't have anything else to offer on this except that I'm glad I don't have to worry about ethical breaches of this substantial a level.
I do ask my students on ProPrac to consider this quandary: you want to turn down a project because you have an ethical problem with it, but that will cause you to have to lay off 10 staff members and see their families lose that salary. Which is the bigger breach?
(And let's assume that you, Ms. Principal, have already taken a deep salary hit to try to avoid layoffs already.)
Donna's full time job has become telling people I'm not someone else.
I think this Donna alias is in on this fake account conspiracy.
I think Donna is Archinect itself.
And Archinect was started by Muammar Gaddafi.
But everyone knows that.
Shh, don't tell everyone that Archinect is comprised solely of a single entity.
Bourbon blackouts are a bitch!
Also, my rant on AECOM isn't necessarily about not doing evil, boring or possibly ineffective work.
It's more of a transparency issue for two reasons:
1) Cost-analysis and competition
2) Cultural cronyism
As for the first part, "Top Secret" security clearance jobs may not be getting adequate and widespread scrutiny because I'm pretty sure that the government isn't going to issue an RFP for "Top Secret Strategic Missile Silo."
Could OMA or Fosters + Partners building a prettier and or cheaper missile silo? Could KPF deliver it on a tighter schedule? Do stainless-steel seatless toilets really cost $2399.95? Could we source half the furnishings from IKEA?
I'm sure the STORNÄS Dining table could also be used for waterboarding?
And now the second issue... would most design firms-- say FAT or Bjarke Ingels-- qualify for a "Top Secret" security clearance? Or would their cultural and artistic involvements discount their ability to work in a meaningful capacity for 'the government?' Or how about Morphosis?
Is there an even open dialogue about how to design war machines? If we have to do the evil, can we at least do it with style?
That's what really bugs me about this is the glaring lapse of judgment.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.