KeepOurTanker.com A Big Hit

By Jamie Burch

M50o93H7pQ09L8X1t49cHY01Z5j4TT91fGfr KeepOurTanker.com A Big Hit

Published: Fri, June 27, 2008 - 5:33 pm
Last Updated: Friday, June 27, 2008 - 5:40 pm

The website started by Mobile County after Boeing filed it's protest of the $40 billion tanker contract continues to soar.

Between 20-30,000 people visit keepourtanker.com every day.

“It’s great to see the response,” said Mobile County Commissioner Mike Dean. “Despite the recent GAO ruling, this community will continue to fight for the KC-45.”

On February 29, the Air Force awarded the contract to build its next generation of refueling tankers to Northrop Grumman/EADS. Boeing protested the award and on June 18, the Government Accountability Office upheld eight of Boeing’s 111 claims. The Department of Defense is now reviewing the GAO findings.

If Northrop Grumman/EADS keep the contract, they would assemble the planes at Brookley Field in downtown Mobile. The companies say the project would create 48,000 jobs in 49 states.

“That’s why this contract is so important, not just to Mobile or the Gulf Coast, but to the entire nation,” said Mobile County Commissioner Merceria Ludgood.

The majority of hits on keepourtanker.com come from states in the southeast. But the website is also getting visitors from New Jersey, New York, Texas, California and from overseas: the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Germany, Spain, France, Sweden, and Japan.

Almost 45,000 people have signed a petition on keepourtanker.com in favor of the KC-45.

“I encourage people to sign the petition to send a message to Washington that despite a lot of noise from Boeing, there is tremendous support to give our fighting men and women the better plane,” said Mobile County Commissioner Stephen Nodine.

On June 18, following the release of the GAO report, keepourtanker.com had almost a half million visitors.

News Map

Email to a Friend

Printer Friendly

So point out the difference with the French procuring international bids, to Boeing procuring, in their words “a global market.” There is ABSOLUTELY NO basis for your argument. Airbus stated, the first 4 will be built in France, the rest to built in the US. Boeing will ship ALL, or most business overseas or to Mexico. Why can you not understand that?

Posted by rmseek1234 on 07/01/08 - 2:43 pm • Report Abuse

I think Boeing has taken advantage of it’s privileged status already by trying to lease that tankers to the Airforce at a huge inflated cost. What are you going to say when Boeing closes the plant in Kanas and moves it to Mexico? For America do not respond to post only offer up what you can find on google.

Posted by asda on 07/01/08 - 12:52 pm • Report Abuse

French white paper published this month!

As regards the other technologies and capacities that it may wish to acquire, France believes that the European framework must be privileged: combat aircraft, drones, cruise missiles, satellites, electronic components etc., although procurement policy must include acquisitions on the world market.”

The term “privileged” is key. It means a bias to “Buy European” in defense contracting. The “etc.” in the list of high-end systems to be covered by this policy could be nearly limitless. International industrial rivalry is always an important subject. It is particularly timely at the moment, given the ongoing dispute over whether the U.S. Air Force should buy a partially French built A330 Airbus for its new $35 billion air refueling tanker program, instead of a Boeing 767-based tanker. If European firms are to be “privileged” within the EU, shouldn’t American firms be privileged within the U.S.?

Posted by For America on 07/01/08 - 12:12 pm • Report Abuse

To all of those that are griping about Airbus being from France, I pose a question....How many of you use Allegra for allergies, Michelin or Uniroyal tires, BIC products (including razors, pens and lighters? How many wear Christian Dior, DKNY, or Maybelline makeup? Do you ever stay at a Red Roof Inn or Motel 6? Do you drive a Nissan. Do you read Car and Driver Magazine, Road and Track Magazine,Woman’s Day or Rolling Stone Magazine? Do you drink Seagram’s, Wild Turkey or Hennessy? Do you watch Jerry Springer, listen to Motown records, watch the Sci-fi channel or go to Universal Studios? Do you play video games made by Sierra Entertainment. Do you use T-fal cookware or Rowenta toasters, coffee makers, etc? Do you watch your Boeing propaganda on an RCA TV? If you answered yes to any of these, please be aware these are FRENCH companies-same as Airbus. So quit your griping-the French have provided a lot of products to us,as we have to them. Your point about using French companies is silly.

Posted by rmseek1234 on 06/30/08 - 7:53 pm • Report Abuse

Let’s do the math-is it better to benefit 2 states or 49? I would be enormously surprised if those two states (Washington and Kansas) even realized much of a benefit, other than in name only. I have a real strong feeling that most of those jobs would be shipped to cheaper Mexican and Chinese labor. I like the idea of insourcing, even if it does mean foreign dollars. The Euro is stronger than the American dollar now, so there would be no reason for the jobs to go overseas-in other words-America is the “cheaper” labor for AB, but the benefits for ALL Americans are limitless.

On the other hand, if Boeing is set up in a strong Muslim nation, if they declare jihad, then I suppose they will have the advantage of being right there-unless of course their site is obliterated!

Posted by rmseek1234 on 06/30/08 - 6:22 pm • Report Abuse

Although, the Mexican and other foreign jobs take away from AMERICAN workers. But, yeah Boeing will do the right thing and make sure NO jobs are outsourced. Yet, we have the opportunity to have jobs “insourced” so that perhaps someone can avoid bankruptcy, or get off government assistance. And you Boeing brainwashed people think that is bad. Or, if Boeing should somehow miraculously get it-those jobs will be outsourced. American workers lose them (unless they want to move to Mexico or China), the taxpayers will be paying for (Boeing) workers who are now collecting government benefits. I personally don’t care who gets the jobs CREATED by NG/EADS, whether it’s Alabama, or one of the other 48 states this deal will help. But no doubt, NG/EADS is the better deal for our economy, our taxpayer and our military, as already established by the AF.

Posted by rmseek1234 on 06/30/08 - 6:21 pm • Report Abuse

Please look up Northrup-Grumman. Where do you see offices located? They have offices in that third world country close to you-CALIFORNIA-oops that is part of the US, isn’t it. They also have a base in MISSISSIPPI-also part of the US. Which, no one seems to mind them building Naval ships, yet it is un-American for them to build AF tankers? Now, look at Boeing-locations in China, Italy, Japan, India and now Mexico. I don’t see any of them on my US map-oh wait, there’s Mexico, south of the border. Aren’t they the one’s causing all the illegal immigration fuss. Oh yeah, Boeing built that fence to keep them out. But it doesn’t work and cost us how much?

Now, think about it. Would you rather have jobs brought into the US, by AB, from France (our ally) or would you rather have jobs sent to some communist, Muslim nation, or Mexico. Well, Mexico may be OK, maybe it would employ enough of them to keepp them on their side of the border-that would help with the illegal alien influx.

Posted by rmseek1234 on 06/30/08 - 6:20 pm • Report Abuse

Why don’t you read the article For America-link on this page. What he is accused of doing is wrong, if true and should be punished. But gee, how much “insider trading” and corrupt practices has Boeing done? Not to mention STILL doing. Don’t go to the bank on those jobs of Boeing’s, and if I were currently employed there, I think I’d be checking out Mexican real estate or looking for another job.

Posted by rmseek1234 on 06/30/08 - 6:18 pm • Report Abuse

For America,

I seriously doubt he will be personally making the planes. Granted, if that is true, it is wrong and deserves punishment. But how about investigating who WILL be making the planes-primarily Northrup. An American based company. EADS is a very minute part of the contract. And I believe his title is “former” so doesn’t that make it a moot point?

Posted by rmseek1234 on 06/30/08 - 6:10 pm • Report Abuse

For America, Concluding that damage to two new combat helicopters at the Boeing Co. plant was “a deliberate act,” federal authorities said today they had launched a criminal probe and offered a reward in the hunt for suspects.

Posted by rosepetal on 06/30/08 - 2:16 pm • Report Abuse