Boeing assails European characterization of WTO ruling

Airbus is in denial over the WTO reports. They need to convince the locals that they are right and everyone else is wrong.

Same old, same old from the French and others. I do not know how the European public can put up with the tax implications of the huge Airbus subsidies.

So, Airbus received subsidies for the development of its A380. And Boeing, and Loockeed, received subsidies for the development of the airplane that was going to be the B747 and the C5A....Interesting reading on the subject:
MILITARY AIRLIFT AND AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT:
THE CASE OF THE C–5A, by Marcelle Size Knaack,
Air Force History & Museums Program,
WASHINGTON, D.C. 1998

http://www.fas.org/man//dod-101/sys/ac/docs/
KNAACK.PDF

Enjoy the reading and you will see that none of the two large manufacturers is totally innocent!

Yes they are right it is different, repayable launch aid says it all: Aribus is repaying! For every dollar they received they paid back 1,40 dollars. The NASA thing on the other hand is free transfer of research that has been paid by the taxpayer. If Boeing had had to pay for it it would have amounted in a couple billion dollars... Those same billions the American taxpayer will never get back, just so that a Company can stay competitive. Talk about capitalism here !

The first several posts above are correct. Furthermore, although Airbus engineers & produces fine products, they're largely Boeing knock-offs & little more. Euro's have engaged in industrial sabotage for yrs. They can't beat Boeing fair & square on a level field, so they do what the Russkies did for yrs. They steal US designs, amongst other things, & tweak 'em slightly & call 'em theirs --- & "better", which they are certainly not. Viva la Boeing.

Many legitimate investment firms consider the A-380 alone, a 25 billion euro write-off.
Claiming that Boeing has cheated too, is like comparing a coffee stain to a train-wreck.

TCS Statement on Inspector General Tanker Report

Taxpayers for Common Sense commends the Inspector General for this comprehensive study of the K-767 Tanker deal, the billion dollar Boeing bailout that has become the biggest military procurement scandal in decades. The 256-page report chronicles how senior Pentagon officials let Boeing play by a different set of procurement rules in attempting to award them this unprecedented sweetheart deal. The report also implicates numerous other military officials and throws cold water on the lone gunman theory that Darleen Druyun is entirely to blame for this mess. If that were true, we could close this case once and for all, but the report suggests that the deal had far deeper roots, and we are now left with more questions than answers.

We now know that at the highest levels of the Pentagon and the White House, the wheels were greased to direct billions in corporate welfare to the Boeing despite there being virtually no evidence that there was an immediate need to replace the current tanker fleet. However, because the names of military officials, Boeing officials and lawmakers were redacted from the report, we still don’t know everyone that was involved. This overzealous use of the Sharpie marker to redact key portions of the report does a disservice to the nation by leaving federal taxpayers in the dark.

It is also disappointing that the Inspector General did not take more time to interview Edward Aldridge. Mr. Aldridge is the most senior official implicated in the tanker hubbub. A few phone calls and certified letters are not enough; Aldridge was in a position to know more than anyone else that has been implicated, and he alone can fill-in some of the remaining information gaps. Taxpayers have lost faith in how the military purchases weapons systems. The concern is that defense contractors run the show and there is no one that is ready to hold them accountable for their actions. This report could have changed that belief. The aggressive redaction of significant portions of the report and the softball interview process spoiled this golden opportunity to eliminate the cloud of controversy surrounding the military's acquisition process.

Boeing, Boeing, Boeing........blah, blah, blah, the sour grape saga continues.

By IguanaDC3
The mere THOUGHT of American taxpayer monies being spent on a Franco-German airtanker in lieu of a Boeing product is revolting, let alone needless.

But you have no problem with your country spending billions of taxpayers dollars on an illegal and totally unnecessary war in Iraq. You and most likewise thinking Americans should see a shrink.

What about China? How much aide was received for their new aircraft?