Oil money: Former U.S. official says billions of dollars were ‘squandered’

[pa28]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6621523/

"CPA firm" promised for audit was based in a private residence in San Diego.

[nadinbrzezinski]

1. Ok this may be an incredible

pattern...

one of the hijacker cells was here in San Diego... and nowo this... bush crime family... bush crime family

[jdj]

2. I really don't know what this is about, since I'm busy watching

Ken Jenning lose on jeopardy tonight, but I thought before I clicked the link, that I don't have to know...could be anything, any day of the week, with this admin.

[Anakin Skywalker]

3. Why am I not surprised?

[maddezmom]

4. more from the link: contractors paid in cash

By Lisa Myers & the NBC investigative unit
NBC News
Updated: 6:30 p.m. ET Nov. 30, 2004After the U.S. invasion of Iraq, the United States took control of all of the Iraqi government’s bank accounts, including the income from oil sales. The United Nations approved the financial takeover, and President Bush vowed to spend Iraq’s money wisely. But now critics are raising serious questions about how well the United States handled billions of dollars in Iraqi oil funds.
~snip~

Now, Frank Willis, a former senior American official in Iraq, tells NBC News the United States failed to safeguard the oil money known as the Development Fund for Iraq.

"There was, in my mind, pervasive leakage in assets of Iraq, and to some extent, those assets were squandered," says Willis.

Willis helped run Iraq’s Transportation Ministry. He says government agencies and private contractors had to be paid in cash because Iraq’s banking system was decimated.

"A lot of money did get to the Iraqi people at the grass-roots level, and a lot of it got into the wrong hands," he says.

much more at the link. :(

[UpInArms]

8. do you want to see the Executive Order dated 3/20/03?

http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo/eo-13290.htm

Executive Order 13290 of March 20, 2003
Confiscating and Vesting Certain Iraqi Property

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) (IEEPA), the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code, and in order to take additional steps with respect to the national emergency declared in Executive Order 12722 of August 2, 1990,

I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, hereby determine that the United States and Iraq are engaged in armed hostilities, that it is in the interest of the United States to confiscate certain property of the Government of Iraq and its agencies, instrumentalities, or controlled entities, and that all right, title, and interest in any property so confiscated should vest in the Department of the Treasury. I intend that such vested property should be used to assist the Iraqi people and to assist in the reconstruction of Iraq, and determine that such use would be in the interest of and for the benefit of the United States.

I hereby order:

Section 1. All blocked funds held in the United States in accounts in the name of the Government of Iraq, the Central Bank of Iraq, Rafidain Bank, Rasheed Bank, or the State Organization for Marketing Oil are hereby confiscated and vested in the Department of the Treasury, except for the following:

(a) any such funds that are subject to the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations or the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, or that enjoy equivalent privileges and immunities under the laws of the United States, and are or have been used for diplomatic or consular purposes, and

(b) any such amounts that as of the date of this order are subject to post-judgment writs of execution or attachment in aid of execution of judgments pursuant to section 201 of the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002 (Public Law 107 297), provided that, upon satisfaction of the judgments on which such writs are based, any remainder of such excepted amounts shall, by virtue of this order and without further action, be confiscated and vested.

Sec. 2. The Secretary of the Treasury is authorized to perform, without further approval, ratification, or other action of the President, all functions of the President set forth in section 203(a)(1)(C) of IEEPA with respect to any and all property of the Government of Iraq, including its agencies, instrumentalities, or controlled entities, and to take additional steps, including the promulgation of rules and regulations as may be necessary, to carry out the purposes of this order. The Secretary of the Treasury may redelegate such functions in accordance with applicable law. The Secretary of the Treasury shall consult the Attorney General as appropriate in the implementation of this order.

Sec. 3. This order shall be transmitted to the Congress and published in the Federal Register.

George W. Bush

THE WHITE HOUSE,

March 20, 2003.

and then there was this one on August 29, 2003

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/08/20030829-1.html

Executive Order Blocking Property of the Former Iraqi Regime, Its Senior Officials and their Family Members, and Taking Certain Other Actions

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) (IEEPA), the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.), section 5 of the United Nations Participation Act, as amended (22 U.S.C. 287c) (UNPA), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code, in view of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1483 of May 22, 2003, and in order to take additional steps with respect to the situation in Iraq,

I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, hereby expand the scope of the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13303 of May 22, 2003, to address the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States posed by obstacles to the orderly reconstruction of Iraq, the restoration and maintenance of peace and security in that country, and the development of political, administrative, and economic institutions in Iraq. I find that the removal of Iraqi property from that country by certain senior officials of the former Iraqi regime and their immediate family members constitutes one of these obstacles. I further determine that the United States is engaged in armed hostilities and that it is in the interest of the United States to confiscate certain additional property of the former Iraqi regime, certain senior officials of the former regime, immediate family members of those officials, and controlled entities. I intend that such property, after all right, title, and interest in it has vested in the Department of the Treasury, shall be transferred to the Development Fund for Iraq. Such property shall be used to meet the humanitarian needs of the Iraqi people, for the economic reconstruction and repair of Iraq's infrastructure, for the continued disarmament of Iraq, for the costs of Iraqi civilian administration, and for other purposes benefiting the Iraqi people. I determine that such use would be in the interest of and for the benefit of the United States. I hereby order:

Section 1. Except to the extent provided in section 203(b)(1), (3), and (4) of IEEPA (50 U.S.C. 1702(b)(1), (3), and (4)), or regulations, orders, directives, or licenses that may be issued pursuant to this order, and notwithstanding any contract entered into or any license or permit granted prior to the effective date of this order, all property and interests in property of the former Iraqi regime or its state bodies, corporations, or agencies, or of the following persons, that are in the United States, that hereafter come within the United States, or that are or hereafter come within the possession or control of United States persons, are blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported, withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in:

(a) the persons listed in the Annex to this order; and

(b) persons determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in

consultation with the Secretary of State,

(i) to be senior officials of the former Iraqi regime or

their immediate family members; or

(ii) to be owned or controlled by, or acting or purporting to

act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, any of

the persons listed in the Annex to this order or

determined to be subject to this order.

Sec. 2. The Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State, is authorized to confiscate property that is blocked pursuant to section 1 of this order and that he determines, in consultation with the Secretary of State, to belong to a person, organization, or country that has planned, authorized, aided, or engaged in armed hostilities against the United States. All right, title, and interest in any property so confiscated shall vest in the Department of the Treasury. Such vested property shall promptly be transferred to the Development Fund for Iraq.

Sec. 3. (a) Any transaction by a United States person or within the United States that evades or avoids, has the purpose of evading or avoiding, or attempts to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited.

(b) Any conspiracy formed to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited.

Sec. 4. For purposes of this order:

(a) the term "person" means an individual or entity;

(b) the term "entity" means a partnership, association, trust, joint venture, corporation, group, subgroup, or other organization;

(c) the term "United States person" means any United States citizen, permanent resident alien, entity organized under the laws of the United States or any jurisdiction within the United States (including foreign branches), or any person in the United States;

(d) the term "former Iraqi regime" means the Saddam Hussein regime that governed Iraq until on or about May 1, 2003;

(e) the term "coalition authority" means the Coalition Provisional Authority under the direction of its Administrator, and the military forces of the United States, the United Kingdom, and their coalition partners present in Iraq under the command or operational control of the Commander of United States Central Command; and

(f) the term "Development Fund for Iraq" means the fund established on or about May 22, 2003, on the books of the Central Bank of Iraq, by the Administrator of the Coalition Provisional Authority responsible for the temporary governance of Iraq and all accounts held for the fund or for the Central Bank of Iraq in the name of the fund.

Sec. 5. I hereby determine that the making of donations of the type specified in section 203(b)(2) of IEEPA (50 U.S.C. 1702(b)(2)) by or to persons determined to be subject to the sanctions imposed under this order would seriously impair my ability to deal with the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13303 and expanded in scope in this order and would endanger Armed Forces of the United States that are engaged in hostilities, and I hereby prohibit such donations as provided by section 1 of this order.

Sec. 6. For those persons listed in the Annex to this order or determined to be subject to this order who might have a constitutional presence in the United States, I find that because of the ability to transfer funds or other assets instantaneously, prior notice to such persons of measures to be taken pursuant to this order would render these measures ineffectual. I therefore determine that for these measures to be effective in addressing the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13303 and expanded in scope in this order, there need be no prior notice of a listing or determination made pursuant to section 1 of this order.

Sec. 7. The Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State, is hereby authorized to take such actions, including the promulgation of rules and regulations, and to employ all powers granted to the President by IEEPA and UNPA as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this order. The Secretary of the Treasury may redelegate any of these functions to other officers and agencies of the United States Government, consistent with applicable law. All agencies of the United States Government are hereby directed to take all appropriate measures within their authority to carry out the provisions of this order.

Sec. 8. The Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State, is authorized to determine, subsequent to the issuance of this order, that circumstances no longer warrant inclusion of a person in the Annex to this order and that such person is therefore no longer covered within the scope of the order.

Sec. 9. Nothing in this order is intended to affect the continued effectiveness of any rules, regulations, orders, licenses, or other forms of administrative action issued, taken, or continued in effect heretofore or hereafter under 31 C.F.R. chapter V, except as expressly terminated, modified, or suspended by or pursuant to this order.

Sec. 10. This order shall not apply to such property as is or may come under the control of the coalition authority in Iraq. Nothing in this order is intended to affect dispositions of such property or other determinations by the coalition authority.

Sec. 11. This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, instrumentalities, or entities, officers or employees, or any other person.

Sec. 12. This order is effective on 12:01 a.m. EDT on August 29, 2003.

Sec. 13. This order shall be transmitted to the Congress and published in the Federal Register.

GEORGE W. BUSH

THE WHITE HOUSE,

August 28, 2003.

[Petrodollar Warfare]

12. Funny how Bush used a 1990 Executive order to justify a new war...

Executive Order 13290 of March 20, 2003
Confiscating and Vesting Certain Iraqi Property

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the International Emergency Economic Powers Act"..."and in order to take additional steps with respect to the national emergency declared in Executive Order 12722 of August 2, 1990,...

...so, after 13 years "additional steps" were suddenly needed in order to lauch the USA's first unprovoked, "preventative war." Well, I think the historicans are really going to have a problem with EO 13290 of March 20, 2003...and possible some judges too...

[Left Brain]

9. Good on MSNBC/Lisa Meyers

for reporting it!

[pa28]

11. Shocking

I don't recall her ever reporting something so tough on Bush.

[blm]

5. Funny, how unqualified small companies got such a big job. Remember Harken

and how that little company got huge contracts for no other reason than for the funnelling of money and favors to George W. Bush, the errant son of the House of Saud's closest ally.

>>>>

Iraq’s U.S. administrator, Paul Bremer, pledged last year to hire a certified public accounting firm to ensure proper controls. But the United States gave the contract not to an accounting firm but to a tiny consulting company, Northstar — which NBC News found is headquartered at a private home near San Diego.

"They violated the rules. They picked a contractor who didn’t meet their requirements," says Paul Light, a government contracting expert and professor at New York University.

Northstar’s president says the Pentagon knew Northstar was not a certified public accounting firm and that four experienced employees went to Iraq and did a good job. However, one audit notes that a single Northstar employee maintained spreadsheets tracking billions of dollars.
>>>>>

[Old and In the Way]

6. New Bridge Strategies, LLC.

The new Republican business model.

Create wars and make $ on the contracts

[struggle4progress]

7. Every time Safire tries to crank up the wingnut noise on ...

... the supposed "Oil for Food scandal," there's a reason: something is developing on this real story about the Provisional Authority oil revenue rip-off ...

[Cocoa]

21. absolutely right about the UN garbage

this story will be lost in all that noise.

We'll see how good a job the media does in separating these two stories that could be confused with one another, which of course the RW would not mind.

[Tace]

10. This Is An Important Story -- I'm Surprised To See NBC News Reporting It

As discouraged as we all are, this is some good stuff. I can see the noose tightening on Bushco.

[TahitiNut]

13. Not 'squandered' ... pillaged!

Like a mob of drunken home intruders who found grocery money in the cookie jar, they spent it on whims and cronys.

[bhikkhu]

14. A Beautiful Heist

and all straight and legal. Funny how hard paperwork is to keep up with when you have a war going, but I'm sure its around there somewhere. I imagine a whole set of *'s people got ungodly rich, while the people starve and die in Iraq.

[moonkat]

27. Heist - Three Kings

Is this the too close to reality plot that obstructed the "Three Kings" sequel ?
How about a "Kelly's Heroes" remake -
W in the role of Clint Eastwood
Karl in role of Don Rickles
and Rummy in role of Donald Southerland
suddenly its not as funny as the original.

[lovuian]

15. NorthStar isn't that related to Marsdens report on the election!!!

What a company!!! I wonder if they bidded for that accounting job!!!

[hedda_foil]

17. Can someone check that out?

If Northstar is related to Madsen's report could someone find if it's the same organization?

[BlueDog2u]

28. I think you're confusing it with FiveStar....

Edit: Sorry, I'm wrong. There is also a North Star in Madsen's story, although it is reportedly located in Bellevue, Wn., not in San Diego. I wonder if it is the same company with two different locations? Here is Madsen:





In 1997, the U.S. District Court for the Seventh Circuit affirmed the conviction of Robert L. Ferrera, an individual that court records indicate was connected to Five Star Investments, Ltd. Ferrera was convicted of fraud involving $11 billion in counterfeit Mexican promissory notes. Ferrera claimed to be a general in the Mexican army and an official of the PRI party in Mexico. Judge George Marovich, at Ferrera's sentencing, said "there are aspects of this like the Over-the-Hill Gang." Moreover, the court proceedings referred to the case as "unusual." Ferrera and his associates used two shell corporations in their scheme, American Credit Corporation and Union International Bank and Trust, Ltd. of Grenada. In the case summary it is stated that Ferrera "assigned and delivered some of the Mexican notes to an associate in Lexington, Kentucky, who owned Five Star Investments, Ltd." According to information from the Internal Revenue Service, Tax ID Number 61-6234232 was issued to Five Star Trust, a Foreign Asset Protection Trust registered in the Isle of Man. Five Star Investments claims it has nothing to do with Five Star Trust.

Ferrera's name also surfaced in a 1994 Securities and Exchange Commission investigation of Northstar Investors' Trust of Bellevue, Washington.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=96274

[SKKY]

16. "Squandered"????

I doubt Kojo thinks he "squandered" the money. I don't think Haliburton would use such terminology. I'm sure they were able to buy nice and useful things with the money- for themselves.

[lovuian]

18. Kick

:kick:

[maddezmom]

19. not a word about this story, just Annan and UN on MSM

[Cocoa]

20. it was stolen, not squandered

Naomi Klein has done some excellent reporting on the corporate plundering of Iraq, under Bremer. Not a hint of it has appeared in the mainstream media, really interesting and important stuff. The mainstream media mostly focused on Bremer's boots, not what he was actually doing.

[maddezmom]

22. thanks..here's an interesting one: The Manchurian cover-up

The Manchurian cover-up

Revelations that the Carlyle Group was involved in a secret deal to profit from Iraq's debt have vanished under a spell of silence

Naomi Klein
Tuesday November 2, 2004
The Guardian

Less than 24 hours after it was disclosed that former secretary of state James Baker and the Carlyle Group were involved in a secret deal to profit from Iraq's debt to Kuwait, NBC was reporting that the deal was "dead". At The Nation magazine, which broke the story that was then carried on these pages, we started to get congratulatory calls.
They were commending us for costing the Carlyle Group $1bn, the sum the company would have received in an investment from the government of Kuwait in exchange for helping to extract $27bn of unpaid debts from Iraq.

We were flattered (sort of), until we realised that Carlyle had just pulled off a major PR coup. When the story broke, the notoriously secretive merchant bank needed to find a way to avoid a full-blown political scandal. It chose a bold tactic: in the face of overwhelming evidence of a glaring conflict of interest between Baker's stake in Carlyle and his post as George Bush's special envoy on Iraq's debt, Carlyle simply denied everything. The company issued a statement saying that it does not want to be involved in the Kuwait deal "in any way, shape or form and will not invest any money raised by the consortium's efforts" and, furthermore, that "Carlyle was never a member of the consortium". A spokesperson told the Financial Times that Carlyle had pulled out as soon as Baker was appointed debt envoy, because his new political post made Carlyle's involvement "unsuitable".

Mysteriously, there was no paper
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1341239,00.html

[maddezmom]

23. The multibillion robbery the US calls reconstruction

The multibillion robbery the US calls reconstruction

The shameless corporate feeding frenzy in Iraq is fuelling the resistance

Naomi Klein
Saturday June 26, 2004
The Guardian

The following correction was printed in the Guardian's Corrections and clarifications column, Friday July 23 2004

Tim Spicer, head of the private military security company Aegis, did not "put down rebels and stage a military coup in Papua New Guinea" in the 1990s, as we state in the article below. He was secretly employed by the government but it was overthrown by disgruntled soldiers before the plans could be put into effect.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Good news out of Baghdad: the Program Management Office, which oversees the $18.4bn in US reconstruction funds, has finally set a goal it can meet. Sure, electricity is below pre-war levels, the streets are rivers of sewage and more Iraqis have been fired than hired. But now the PMO has contracted the British mercenary firm Aegis to protect its employees from "assassination, kidnapping, injury and" - get this - "embarrassment". I don't know if Aegis will succeed in protecting PMO employees from violent attack, but embarrassment? I'd say mission already accomplished. The people in charge of rebuilding Iraq can't be embarrassed, because, clearly, they have no shame.
In the run-up to the June 30 underhand (sorry, I can't bring myself to call it a "handover"), US occupation powers have been unabashed in their efforts to steal money that is supposed to aid a war-ravaged people. The state department has taken $184m earmarked for drinking water projects and moved it to the budget for the lavish new US embassy in Saddam Hussein's former palace. Short of $1bn for the embassy, Richard Armitage, the deputy secretary of state, said he might have to "rob from Peter in my fiefdom to pay Paul". In fact, he is robbing Iraq's people, who, according to a recent study by the consumer group Public Citizen, are facing "massive outbreaks of cholera, diarrhoea, nausea and kidney stones" from drinking contaminated water.

If the occupation chief Paul Bremer and his staff were capable of embarrassment, they might be a little sheepish about having spent only $3.2bn of the $18.4bn Congress allotted - the reason the reconstruction is so disastrously behind schedule. At first, Bremer said the money would be spent by the time Iraq was sovereign, but apparently someone had a better idea: parcel it out over five years so Ambassador John Negroponte can use it as leverage. With $15bn outstanding, how likely are Iraq's politicians to refuse US demands for military bases and economic "reforms"?

more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/Column/0,5673,1247887,00.html

[maddezmom]

24. OMFG..."reparations" for Halliburton 18m, Bechtel 7m, Mobil 2.3 mil

But the UNCC's corporate handouts only accelerated. Here is a small sample of who has been getting "reparation" awards from Iraq: Halliburton ($18m), Bechtel ($7m), Mobil ($2.3m), Shell ($1.6m), Nestlé ($2.6m), Pepsi ($3.8m), Philip Morris ($1.3m), Sheraton ($11m), Kentucky Fried Chicken ($321,000) and Toys R Us ($189,449). In the vast majority of cases, these corporations did not claim that Saddam's forces damaged their property in Kuwait - only that they "lost profits" or, in the case of American Express, experienced a "decline in business" because of the invasion and occupation of Kuwait. One of the biggest winners has been Texaco, which was awarded $505m in 1999. According to a UNCC spokesperson, only 12% of that reparation award has been paid, which means hundreds of millions more will have to come out of the coffers of post-Saddam Iraq.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/Column/0,5673,1328888,00.html

[maddezmom]

25. kick

[FECvAkins]

32. KICK N/T

[Just Me]

33. Talk about run amok corruption!!! Good GAWD!!!

Why are these greed freaks getting away with all this horror?

Will no one stop them?

This just makes me ill.

[slaveplanet]

26. kick

[TacticalPeek]

29. Follow the money.

Like the pea under the shells.

Once upon a time, defrauding the government was a serious matter.

[cthrumatrix]

30. we can see this WTF is the media ? I forgot...they are gagged!

[Ready2Snap]

31. Extra Extra Read All About It!!!!!!!!

Terrific article in December Harper's Magazine titled "The U.N. is US" by Prof. Joy Gordon of Fairfield U.
It lays out how the U.S. controlled and subsequently botched the whole program.

[FECvAkins]

35. Another excellent Harper's article - Bagdad Year Zero

The honey theory of Iraqi reconstruction stems from the most cherished belief of the war’s ideological architects: that greed is good. Not good just for them and their friends but good for humanity, and certainly good for Iraqis. Greed creates profit, which creates growth, which creates jobs and products and services and everything else anyone could possibly need or want. The role of good government, then, is to create the optimal conditions for corporations to pursue their bottomless greed, so that they in turn can meet the needs of the society. The problem is that governments, even neoconservative governments, rarely get the chance to prove their sacred theory right: despite their enormous ideological advances, even George Bush’s Republicans are, in their own minds, perennially sabotaged by meddling Democrats, intractable unions, and alarmist environmentalists.

Iraq was going to change all that. In one place on Earth, the theory would finally be put into practice in its most perfect and uncompromised form. A country of 25 million would not be rebuilt as it was before the war; it would be erased, disappeared. In its place would spring forth a gleaming showroom for laissez-faire economics, a utopia such as the world had never seen. Every policy that liberates multinational corporations to pursue their quest for profit would be put into place: a shrunken state, a flexible workforce, open borders, minimal taxes, no tariffs, no ownership restrictions. The people of Iraq would, of course, have to endure some short-term pain: assets, previously owned by the state, would have to be given up to create new opportunities for growth and investment. Jobs would have to be lost and, as foreign products flooded across the border, local businesses and family farms would, unfortunately, be unable to compete. But to the authors of this plan, these would be small prices to pay for the economic boom that would surely explode once the proper conditions were in place, a boom so powerful the country would practically rebuild itself.
...
But Bremer’s economic engineering had only just begun. In September, to entice foreign investors to come to Iraq, he enacted a radical set of laws unprecedented in their generosity to multinational corporations. There was Order 37, which lowered Iraq’s corporate tax rate from roughly 40 percent to a flat 15 percent. There was Order 39, which allowed foreign companies to own 100 percent of Iraqi assets outside of the natural-resource sector. Even better, investors could take 100 percent of the profits they made in Iraq out of the country; they would not be required to reinvest and they would not be taxed. Under Order 39, they could sign leases and contracts that would last for forty years. Order 40 welcomed foreign banks to Iraq under the same favorable terms. All that remained of Saddam Hussein’s economic policies was a law restricting trade unions and collective bargaining.

If these policies sound familiar, it’s because they are the same ones multinationals around the world lobby for from national governments and in international trade agreements. But while these reforms are only ever enacted in part, or in fits and starts, Bremer delivered them all, all at once. Overnight, Iraq went from being the most isolated country in the world to being, on paper, its widest-open market.


http://www.harpers.org/BaghdadYearZero.html

[Raster]

34. "squandered" is codespeak for "sitting in numbered Cayman bank accounts"

[struggle4progress]

36. kick once more

:kick: