Henry J Cobb wrote:
Alan Minyard wrote:
On Sun, 28 Mar 2004 13:19:35 -0800, Henry J Cobb wrote:
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercu...ld/8297433.htm
But the e-mail and other documents show just how intent the Air Force
was on steering the deal to Boeing, even though Airbus' tankers were
more capable and cost less.

The "San Jose Mercury News" is famous for its inaccurate reporting and
far left wing POV. This one does not pass the "smell test".

How about Knight Ridder?

http://www.kansas.com/mld/eagle/busi...on/8317604.htm
Pentagon's audit agrees: Air Force fudged specs
The audit report finds that the Air Force tailored its bidding
specifications document to the Boeing 767, and the Air Force and
Boeing failed to meet important requirements that would make the
aircraft fit for war, the officials told Knight Ridder, speaking on
condition of anonymity.

Well, given that the Murky Snooze is a Knight Ridder paper (and that
Knight Ridder is now headquartered in San Jose), you can draw your own
conclusions.

(The Mercury and News, as it was then called, became part of Ridder
Newspapers in 1952.)

--
Marc Reeve
actual email address after removal of 4s & spaces is
c4m4r4a4m4a4n a4t c4r4u4z4i4o d4o4t c4o4m