Thanks to NSA spying, Boeing lost a $4.5 billion contract
— By Tyler Falk on December 19, 2013, 6:44 AM PST
It saddens me a little that Boeing's losing a foreign contract is considered a big reason to oppose laws enacted in violation of the rights of us ordinary citizens.
I'm also puzzled that the people who complain loudest about "government waste" aren't howling like dogs, at the idea of paying people to collect and wade through all the extra rubbish.
When Enron went broke, and the FERC, suspecting them of shenanigans, demanded documents in which there might be found evidence of that, the FERC received vast quantities of paper clearly intended to overload whatever staff they could assign to the analysis.
Chances are that Brazil was leaning towareds Saab AB for the contract, and found opportunity to bash the NSA as a cause for not going with Boeing. Boeing is not the NSA, even if they're both entities within the U.S.
Likely, Saab AB won because their could build the jet fighters are lower costs. But, the planes won't be as advanced as what Boeing would have built.
Brazil is on a nationalistic campaign to position itself as THE leader in South American politics, and sticking it to the U.S.A., is one way to get the attention of other South American countries.
As an email service provider, I'd say it's definitely been complicated. People don't want to be spied on. As a company based in the US, I must follow US law - that should be expected for any company you do business with, otherwise they're just not trustworthy. Unfortunately it doesn't help when other companies (Lavabit) won't follow the law and then blame the NSA for their problems.
Now we have user's clamoring for offshore storage, or changing to companies based in other nations. Some with legitimate concerns, others who believe the flat out lies of Lavabit.
It's not a good time right now.
@adornoe In the package, Saab AB is also transferring technology and assembling the planes in Brazil. Even though they are not the most advanced technologically, the Brazilians don't see a need for the ultimate fighters because there is not any tradition of conflicts in the area.
Assembling them locally gives them a lot of opportunities for new businesses, not necessarily by the books, because one of the main characteristics of the politicians in the region is to like to be perpetuated in power (at party level...) so money out of the books is always welcome to finance their way to keep the status quo ...
A few days ago I read abut a deal where a sophisticated physiotherapy piece of equipment was bought from Swiss and somebody made the appropriation of around 5 million Euros... but the actual price is just 1.2 millions... so somebody is making a huge commission from this single acquisition. I'm not saying that this is a rule, but in a country where ten years ago members of the Congress in the opposition received money to vote as pleased the current party in power, I wouldn't be surprised if there is something already set to make payments not exactly for the Swedish company but middlemen.
Under those rules, it is hard to win, no matter how advanced you are...
@Havokmon You don't need a law degree to understand the Constitution of the United States which makes it clear that gathering information on citizens without a court order is illegal. Writing, enforcing and following "laws" that are so clearly illegal reveals what rouge governments and businesses we have now.
I admire and support those companies brave enough to resist. Remember, it was legal to murder Jews in Nazi Germany, many followed that law, some did not.
I am angry that those who violate Constitutional law, from grounds keepers to the President, are not prosecuted.
I am curious.
Why do you think that Lavabit is speaking “flat out lies” about the US government wanting their encryption key?
This should have been no surprise considering shortly prior to the Lavabit shutdown the administration had moved to force companies to provide encryption keys.
Lavabit shut down in August 2013 and would be considered as one of the smaller companies without the large legal staffs needed to defend themselves spoken of in this story.
The movement for a law forcing companies to provide keys goes back to 1998 under Clinton.
@Hates Idiots It's also another prime example of how "big government" ultimately favors "big business" over small business.