Senators-in-Chief

Your little one phrase basis for Secretary Rumsfeld's alleged lying has been disproved several time now. It seems you may finally be accepting that since you're now trying to shift the focus to another topic - the bunker bombing - that happened even earlier in the history on the war.

What about that one phrase basis? It's been widely repeated as the "final word" on the matter. In reality it was a brief extract from a telephone conversation between a news reporter and a representative of one supplier. We don't have a full transcript of that converstation. We don't know exactly how the question was framed nor what else was discussed. We don't have a sworn statement from the supplier claiming his customer - the Dept. of Defense - was lying about anything. We don't even have the name of the person who made and recorded the telephone call. So much for "convincing evidence".

It doesn't stack up against the mountain of conflicting reports that are fully documented. Those reports all show the changing needs, the response, the progress, and the status along that path.

We can even produce a reasonably detailed listing a purchase orders from the Dept. of Defense to AM General and Armor Holdings for HMMWV vechicles and upgrade kits.

Give it up Galation. You're wrong about the lying. You just want it to be true and you're willing to discard all facts to make it so.

 

Chanting that the troops lied, the media lied, the suppliers lied (anyone I missed) lied, isn't proof. It just demonstrates that no matter what the evidence, you won't accept it.

I know, the reporter lied, the supplier lied. We heard it before. And yes, even doing it once, is lying.

The longer you spin it, The more clear it gets.

"Everyone was lying except Rumsfeld."

Sure.

 

Again, you misrepresent what I wrote. You're good at that!

We've all seen the infamous short phrase extracted by a news reporter from a telephone conversion with the President of Armor Holding's Aerospace & Defense Group. We haven't seen the full transcript of that alleged conversion so we need more to put it into context. Was the quote literally true. Probably. But is the meaning and implication of the phrase true. Absolutely not!

Here, now is some more information to counter the so called "convincing evidence" of lying on the part of Secretary Rumsfeld:

Let's start with what Armor Holdings said in early 2004 regarding 2003:

So, the company recognized the need - as any good business does - and responded to the requirements of the Dept. of Defense. Note that the customer "made it clear to industry" that it would need more armored tactical vehicles and body armor for "every deployable soldier". Note also that Armor Holdings was projecting it could, starting in July with 300 vehicles per month, increase it's production by 50 per month to an excess of 400 vehicles per month by the end of 2004. That's what the Dept. of Defense was told could be done.

In early 2005 Armor Holdings reported the following:

So it's clear that they increased their production capacity "as demand grew over the year" to "unprecedented levels" by improving their manufacturing techniques. They now projected they could archive 550 vehicles per month in early 2005 which was more than they original forecasted or than the Dept. of Defense expected. Note that they weren't able to do that in November or December 2004 but, rather, in early 2005. This was good news for both the company - the supplier who's made tremendous profits from their investments - and the troops in the field with the need for improved survivability.

Isn't capitalism great? Isn't America's ability to meet its needs great? What negative is there is this story? None - absolutely none! No one, most especially Secretary Rumsfeld, lied about anything.

Guess what? The challenges and progress didn't end in early January. Here's what Armor holdings said early last year:

[SIZE=+1]

Armor Holding's believes they are "in a position to meet requirements the military places on our production capabilities" which is good for them and good for the military and good for the nation. If needs change - up or down - they'll adjust. You can count on that!

The U.S. Army and its supplier's have come up with an even better solution than the previous one. The M1151, and variants, is now being produced and deployed where needed. This version can have the armor removed or added in the field depending upon tactical requirements. Just as is always the case, changing needs, production capacity, costs, etc. are all factors which must be managed.

I love America! I love our military!



[/SIZE]

 

Closed per previous notice. LE