Boeing loses $40 billion contract .......

Libsmasher

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2008
Messages
3,151
........ to Airbus. This is great news :D - Boeing is one of the worst anti-white racist companies in the world - always good to see them get kicked in the crotch, ESPECIALLY when their F15 and C17 is winding down too. :)
 
Werbung:
........ to Airbus. This is great news :D - Boeing is one of the worst anti-white racist companies in the world - always good to see them get kicked in the crotch, ESPECIALLY when their F15 and C17 is winding down too. :)
This is assuming you are talking about some relatively old news, that the USAF chose as its new mid air refueler to replace the aging KC-135 design that is based on the Boeing 707 airframe with the KC-30 rather than the
KC-67

This might be the most liberal thread starter I have seen in a long time:D
I am begining to think you are moving to the "dark side", you might want to think about dropping the smasher part of your username. So...

You mean to tell me, you would rather have a government backed corporation based in Europe and specifically France and Germany with the several other European countries involved beat out an American company that as one single corporate entity has secured our national security more than probably any other along with advanced our outer space capabilities.

Now, the KC-30 is by the numbers a slightly better plane over the KC-67. But frankly I am shocked that you, Libsmasher would raise this as an issue, all things considered.

As for the F-15 and C-17, that is old tech, and has been in the process of being phased out for the last 10 years in the case of the F-15 and the C-17 has a very very good chance of seeing service in the civilian cargo arena. Keep in mind that both UPS and FEDEX both cancelled thier A380 orders and are in some limbo as to what to do next. Watch for this.
Boeing is not hurting for orders. The 787 is exceeding expectations for sales.

So what is your motivation in this?
 
You mean to tell me, you would rather have a government backed corporation based in Europe and specifically France and Germany with the several other European countries involved beat out an American company that as one single corporate entity has secured our national security more than probably any other along with advanced our outer space capabilities.

I think that the overriding concern is that the Military get the best equipment. Thus the descision to award the contract to Northrop/EADS which remember was backed not only by the US Government but by the guys that are going to use it and fly it. The mission capability of the aircraft was much better than the 767 not only in terms of fuel it can carry and range but also in passengers and the reliability, unfortunately the 767 was just not up to the EADS/Northrop aircraft......it just plain beat Boeing hands down - tough luck.

In economic terms I would suggest that you will have a better spread of employment opportunities coming from the EADS/Northrop deal, as I understand it they will have a higher percentage of locally manufactuered components over Boeing - don't forget that Boeing source from overseas as well! Anyway about 58% of the aircraft will be US built with additional parts from the Airbus A330 commercial airliner programme which are built mainly in France, Germany, Britain and Spain being brought over for final assembly in the U.S. - the tanker will be assembled in Mobile, Alabama, and estimated employment being around 25,000 workers at about 230 U.S. companies.

It's unlikely that Boeing will make the anywhere near the same level of redundancies at their plants as a result of not being awarded the contract therefore you will still get a net gain in US jobs.


So what is your motivation in this?

...he works for EADS but did'nt get the memo ;)

KC45_banner.jpg

Nice plane
 
This is assuming you are talking about some relatively old news, that the USAF chose as its new mid air refueler to replace the aging KC-135 design that is based on the Boeing 707 airframe with the KC-30 rather than the
KC-67

No, I am talking about how Boeing lost a giant contract.

This might be the most liberal thread starter I have seen in a long time:D
I am begining to think you are moving to the "dark side", you might want to think about dropping the smasher part of your username. So...

Whoa - the above is the most incoherent paragraph I'VE seen in a long time. :)

You mean to tell me, you would rather have a government backed corporation based in Europe and specifically France and Germany with the several other European countries involved beat out an American company that as one single corporate entity has secured our national security more than probably any other along with advanced our outer space capabilities.

No - I mean to tell you I like it when one of the most racist corporations in america loses a contract.

Now, the KC-30 is by the numbers a slightly better plane over the KC-67. But frankly I am shocked that you, Libsmasher would raise this as an issue, all things considered.

Did I raise anything about the technical specs of planes? Nooooooooo.

As for the F-15 and C-17, that is old tech, and has been in the process of being phased out for the last 10 years in the case of the F-15 and the C-17 has a very very good chance of seeing service in the civilian cargo arena. Keep in mind that both UPS and FEDEX both cancelled thier A380 orders and are in some limbo as to what to do next. Watch for this.
Boeing is not hurting for orders. The 787 is exceeding expectations for sales.

They're hurting for ONE $40 billion contract. :D And again, you think I'm talking about aircraft technology - not. Focus man, focus.
 
In economic terms I would suggest that you will have a better spread of employment opportunities coming from the EADS/Northrop deal, as I understand it they will have a higher percentage of locally manufactuered components over Boeing

Yeah - couldn't be better - some people get jobs, and the punks who run Boeing and their shareholders lose a lot of profits! Absolutely great! :D
 
if its a better deal for a better tanker, and does not put security at risk, go for it. I am sick of contracts to build military equipment going to some local area to help a congressman out. COntracts to build 6 new destoryers when the navy never asked for them in such.

that said i want to know know what makes Boeing so much more anti white then other companies?
 
that said i want to know know what makes Boeing so much more anti white then other companies?

There are better persons than me to ask right on this forum how the mind of a white anti-white racist works. :D

Here's my guess:

After losing some bogus discrimination cases, they reasoned thusly:

"We can't keep dealing with these discrimination cases - they are costly and a distraction. Here's what we do - we screw over the white guys by giving the blacks everything they want - undeserved high salaries, promotions, etc etc etc. Now what are the white guys going to do? What do they EVER do? Burn down cities? AHHHHH HA HA HA HA HA!! :D If there is one thing crystal clear in this society, the one thing you can get away with night and day is screw over white guys - nobody ever complains, least of all them. They are society's jail house punks. Of course, that isn't gonna affect us white guys up here at the top! HEE HEE HAR HAR!! Everyone on the board agreed? Good. Now - let's do lunch, and it's gotta be quick - I have a golf date at 2pm."
 
if its a better deal for a better tanker, and does not put security at risk, go for it. I am sick of contracts to build military equipment going to some local area to help a congressman out. COntracts to build 6 new destoryers when the navy never asked for them in such.

that said i want to know know what makes Boeing so much more anti white then other companies?

If I just put my finger over the name... why yes it does in fact sound conservative!
 
Libs,
You are making some pretty heavy claims against Boeing...have any proof of this?
 
Hi Masher - Is this your beef or are you talking about somat else?

Last updated January 11, 2008 8:35 p.m. PT



Boeing discrimination case back in court
By JOSEPH TARTAKOFF
P-I REPORTER

Almost 10 years after a group of African-American employees at The Boeing Co. filed a class-action lawsuit alleging the company had discriminated against them because of their race, the case was back in court Friday.

At issue was whether a U.S. District Court judge had erred in throwing out, without a trial, claims that Boeing had compensated African-American and white employees differently for similar work. The judge did allow a jury to determine whether the company had been fair in its distribution of job promotions. In December 2005, the jury ruled in Boeing's favor.

The hearing Friday before a panel of 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals judges was the latest development in a saga made more complex because of its duration.

In 1998, a group of African-American employees sued Boeing, alleging that the company had systematically discriminated against them because of their race. A year later, Boeing settled the case for $15 million, but the settlement was thrown out in 2003 by a panel of appellate judges who determined that the settlement treated class members differently and the attorney fees were excessive.

So, in 2004, the case went to trial again. But, court filings show, the judge decided to throw out additional claims that Boeing had discriminated in its pay, in part because those claims were based on events that had taken place more than four years before, violating the statute of limitations. A jury then determined that Boeing had not racially discriminated in its promotion policies.

On Friday, Craig Spiegel, a partner at Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP and an attorney for the remaining plaintiffs, argued that the plaintiffs had alleged all the way back to 1998 that Boeing had discriminated in its pay and therefore the court should not have thrown out those claims.

He also said that in the 1999 settlement, Boeing acknowledged the plaintiffs were alleging that Boeing had discriminated in its compensation policies.

"Even if the initial complaints did not allege compensation discrimination, by settling Boeing acknowledged that," he said. Moreover, in court documents, plaintiffs argue that the years during which the 1999 settlement was on appeal should not count under the statute of limitations.

But, in his arguments, Michael Reiss, an attorney at Davis Wright Tremaine who represented Boeing, asked whether "there are any places in the record where an individual ever claims compensation discrimination?"

There are only a few plaintiffs left in the case, and Reiss added that the "notion these four or five individuals are here today seeking to pursue a pre-2000 claim to compensation discrimination is absurd." He asked the court to uphold the district court's decision.

Although the three judges peppered Spiegel with questions, they remained mostly silent during Reiss' arguments.

P-I reporter Joseph Tartakoff can be reached at 206-448-8293 or joetartakoff@seattlepi.com.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/347081_boeing12.html

Boeing Settlement of Lawsuits Alleging Racial Discrimination Approved
SEATTLE,
Sept. 30, 1999

Today, in U.S. District Court in Seattle, the Honorable John C. Coughenour approved a settlement of lawsuits filed against The Boeing Company last year alleging racial discrimination. The $15 million settlement, first announced in January, resolves two nationwide class action lawsuits in a fair and equitable manner.

"We are very pleased with today's court ruling," said Boeing Chairman and CEO Phil Condit. "The court's approval today allows Boeing to continue its movement forward not only on the commitments outlined in the settlement but toward the company's vision of a culture of inclusion, where diverse groups and ideas flourish."

In a ruling issued today, the court approved all monetary and non-monetary terms of the consent decree or settlement as proposed by Boeing and Class Counsel, attorneys Oscar Desper and Bruce Harrell, earlier this year. More than $3.25 million of the $15 million will be paid to 70 named plaintiffs in the lawsuit and 194 other specifically identified class members whose claims surfaced during the litigation. Another $3.4 million will be distributed among approximately 3,400 members of the settlement class who filed claims for monetary awards.

In addition, $3.65 million is reserved for the implementation of several system-wide process improvements, such as a revised process for the selection of first-line managers. The company is also developing an enhanced promotion process for hourly employees, which will increase hourly employees' understanding of the process and provide channels for those not selected for promotion to develop themselves to be more competitive for future opportunities. Finally, the company is implementing a new EEO complaint procedure to investigate and address employee concerns about matters pertaining to alleged racial discrimination, harassment or retaliation.

The terms of the non-monetary relief in the consent decree run for a full three years.

"The Boeing Company is fully committed to implementing all the changes as outlined in the consent decree which was approved today," said Jim Dagnon, Boeing senior vice president of People, whose organization is overseeing and is responsible for carrying out the system-wide process improvements. "We believe that ultimately the process enhancements will go a long way toward addressing the concerns raised by everyone in the course of this litigation."

http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/1999/news_release_990930b.html
 
........ to Airbus. This is great news :D - Boeing is one of the worst anti-white racist companies in the world - always good to see them get kicked in the crotch, ESPECIALLY when their F15 and C17 is winding down too. :)

An Amrerican company loses a big contract to the French, and that is good news to who again? Maybe to the French.

And, it is good news because Boeing is "anti white racist." Does that mean that Airbus is "pro white racist"?

That makes no sense at all.
 
Wait a second...I thought the KC-135 Stratotanker was being replaced by the KC-10 Extender?

Not exactly. The KC-10 is based on the DC-10 of course. Of which they are long out of prodcution and expensive to maintain. The KC-10 was more or less a bandaid to get the USAF to this point, and the KC-10 was not a purpose built tanker. So what apparently is now called the KC-45, whereas I had known it as the KC-30 because the new tanker is based on the Airbus
A330 airframe. It now a much more versatile and capable airframe for the job than the existing and very aged fleet. The KC-135s are between 50-35 years old, use old inefficient enginges, and dont have the capacity or versatility that a modern airframe provides.

The losing Boeing design was based on the 767 airframe.
 
An Amrerican company loses a big contract to the French, and that is good news to who again? Maybe to the French.

And, it is good news because Boeing is "anti white racist." Does that mean that Airbus is "pro white racist"?

That makes no sense at all.


No, Einstein:

anti-white RACIST
 
Werbung:
Libs,
You are making some pretty heavy claims against Boeing...have any proof of this?

Here are some good links to read the whole history. Read CAREFULLY so you don't come back with dumb misinterpretations:

http://www.adversity.net/c33_boeing.htm

http://www.adversity.net/Terms_Definitions/TERMS/Supplier_Diversity.htm

Here's a list of the corporations filing at the USSC amicus briefs against Barbara Grutter, who was denied admission to the University of Michigan law school because of their anti-white racist admissions policy. Boeing is on the list. It was this case Grutter v. Bollinger and Gratz v. Bollinger (re U of M's undergraduate anti-white racist policy) that brought back "affirmative action", frankenstein-like, from the deathbed, when legal analysts I read before the decision had a consensus that this would be the death knell for this harmful policy. Instead, thanks to the vote of retiring Sandra Day O'Connor, the policy of anti-white racist discrimination is back with full force, with corporations picking up the word "diversity" from that case as the euphemism du jour for anti-white policies. Note that Boeing went from fighting the illegitimate discrimination cases to "embracing diversity", a particularly offensive phase used by the race hustlers, and unnecessarily standing up for racism in a case in which it wasn't involved. Look at the list of fortune 500 countries - this is why I say corporate america has become the newest pillar of liberalism.

http://www.vpcomm.umich.edu/admissions/legal/gru_amicus-ussc/um/Fortune500-both.pdf (See page 2)
 
Back
Top