Lockheed and their Magic Pixie Dust Gets Skunked
1 view
Skip to first unread message
James M. Atkinson
Jun 27, 2009, 6:57:16 PM6/27/09
to TSCM-L
Ouch,
It looks like Lockheed skunk words has gotten skunked again by trying to sprinkle their magic public relations pixie dust on a project, and once again the covered up a major screw-up of a huge national security program with their own special trademarked, and patented line of bullsh*t (similar to the trademarked line of horsesh*t sold by NG, but far more damaging to national security, and far more pungent).
I can understand having problems with the paint, using multiple coats, problems with clumping, weight increase, and problems with getting adherence of the coatings. But what I can not understand is why Lockheed (rhymes with "Lost Ethics") would put peoples lives at risk in the name of greed, and then cover-up such a massive failure like this that could result in aircraft getting detected or even shot down.
When a defense contractor (or any company) screws the government it is just a matter of time before somebody gets unhappy with how they got treated at some point and goes and talks to the government, or files suit against the company that did the fraud. It is even more likely that the high cost of dealing with the leak lawsuits, inquires, and investigations will be far more expensive then just doing the job correctly the first time around.
It is even easier just to tell the government about a project deviancy at the time of the problem, then it is to try to spin control it afterwards, especially if the government finds out about it afterwards from an unhappy employee that the contractor shafted at some point.
Folks, look... It is really quite simple. If you are a government contractor, be straight and up-front with the government (or any other customer you have). It really doesn't matter who the customer is (government or non-government), the kind of project it is (TSCM or not TSCM), or what kinds of goods and services you are providing them with... be honest with your customers.
If a product has a weakness or vulnerability then come right out and tell them about it, and explain to them how to work around it. If fact if the product has a weakness (and all products have weaknesses) then you can also provide then with some kind of patch or countermeasure to the weakness or potential problem.
If there is something that your company can do really well, then tell you customers about it, but also be willing to tell customers what you are not good at (they will respect you more for this).
Never be afraid to send your customers to your competitors, and never be afraid to tell a customer that you can not do something.
Lockheed has been caught cheating and endangering national security yet once again.
Sometimes the most important words in business is "I don't know", "I apologize", or "We Need to Talk". Hopefully you will not need to use to use them very often. But also, when it comes time for you to step up and do the right thing (when you make the mistake, NOT after you get caught) you will have the moral fortitude to do the right thing... unlike Lockheed.
Readers should also remember that as defined by federal law Lockheed is a convicted felon, but since they are a sole source for many things the U.S. Government (and other governments) have to deal with them even though they are know to be both unethical, and often quite incompetent.
See attached PDF file.
-jma
It looks like Lockheed skunk words has gotten skunked again by trying to sprinkle their magic public relations pixie dust on a project, and once again the covered up a major screw-up of a huge national security program with their own special trademarked, and patented line of bullsh*t (similar to the trademarked line of horsesh*t sold by NG, but far more damaging to national security, and far more pungent).
I can understand having problems with the paint, using multiple coats, problems with clumping, weight increase, and problems with getting adherence of the coatings. But what I can not understand is why Lockheed (rhymes with "Lost Ethics") would put peoples lives at risk in the name of greed, and then cover-up such a massive failure like this that could result in aircraft getting detected or even shot down.
When a defense contractor (or any company) screws the government it is just a matter of time before somebody gets unhappy with how they got treated at some point and goes and talks to the government, or files suit against the company that did the fraud. It is even more likely that the high cost of dealing with the leak lawsuits, inquires, and investigations will be far more expensive then just doing the job correctly the first time around.
It is even easier just to tell the government about a project deviancy at the time of the problem, then it is to try to spin control it afterwards, especially if the government finds out about it afterwards from an unhappy employee that the contractor shafted at some point.
Folks, look... It is really quite simple. If you are a government contractor, be straight and up-front with the government (or any other customer you have). It really doesn't matter who the customer is (government or non-government), the kind of project it is (TSCM or not TSCM), or what kinds of goods and services you are providing them with... be honest with your customers.
If a product has a weakness or vulnerability then come right out and tell them about it, and explain to them how to work around it. If fact if the product has a weakness (and all products have weaknesses) then you can also provide then with some kind of patch or countermeasure to the weakness or potential problem.
If there is something that your company can do really well, then tell you customers about it, but also be willing to tell customers what you are not good at (they will respect you more for this).
Never be afraid to send your customers to your competitors, and never be afraid to tell a customer that you can not do something.
Lockheed has been caught cheating and endangering national security yet once again.
Sometimes the most important words in business is "I don't know", "I apologize", or "We Need to Talk". Hopefully you will not need to use to use them very often. But also, when it comes time for you to step up and do the right thing (when you make the mistake, NOT after you get caught) you will have the moral fortitude to do the right thing... unlike Lockheed.
Readers should also remember that as defined by federal law Lockheed is a convicted felon, but since they are a sole source for many things the U.S. Government (and other governments) have to deal with them even though they are know to be both unethical, and often quite incompetent.
See attached PDF file.
-jma
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
James M.
Atkinson
Phone: (978) 546-3803
Granite Island
Group
Fax: (978) 546-9467
127 Eastern Avenue
#291
Web:
http://www.tscm.com/
Gloucester, MA
01931-8008
E-mail:
mailto:jm...@tscm.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/jamesmatkinson
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No enterprise is more likely to succeed than one concealed from the
enemy until it is ripe for execution. - Machiavelli, The Prince,
1521
Its from Onion
Jun 28, 2009, 7:26:02 PM6/28/09
to TSCM-...@googlegroups.com
Jim,
I see no judgment entered here...in fact it was
just re-filed by the complaintent against Lockheed....and he also served papers
on the Justice Department.
The complaintent, Olsen, wants "a share" of the
three times the alleged damages suffered by the government PAID TO
HIM.
I will wait until the trial before I say Lockheed
is a felon.
Paul E. Niedermeyer
Jun 28, 2009, 8:06:46 PM6/28/09
to TSCM-...@googlegroups.com
It's standard procedure for complainants to request damages in federal court proceedings involving fraud.
In fact, if properly invoked, federal statutes mandate compensation to those parties who can prove (and root out) government corruption.
James M. Atkinson
Jun 28, 2009, 9:44:52 PM6/28/09
to TSCM-...@googlegroups.com
Lockheed has previously been convicted on multiple occasions. In some
cases they plead guilty, in other cases they were found guilty.
Hence, Lockheed is in fact already a convicted felon based on prior criminal convictions.
Federal law rewards someone who finds and prosecutes corruption with a bounty as a portion of the amount the government collects from the person or company that ripped off the government. His requests is normal in a case of this nature, as by law he is acting on behalf of the government, and pushing the case forward outside of the assistance of the Justice Department. It is normal to request three times the amount of the fraud, and then to give the person who fingers Lockheed a percentage of the proceeds.
-jma
Hence, Lockheed is in fact already a convicted felon based on prior criminal convictions.
Federal law rewards someone who finds and prosecutes corruption with a bounty as a portion of the amount the government collects from the person or company that ripped off the government. His requests is normal in a case of this nature, as by law he is acting on behalf of the government, and pushing the case forward outside of the assistance of the Justice Department. It is normal to request three times the amount of the fraud, and then to give the person who fingers Lockheed a percentage of the proceeds.
-jma
Izaac
Jun 30, 2009, 2:33:28 PM6/30/09
to TSCM-...@googlegroups.com
On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 06:26:02PM -0500, Its from Onion wrote:
> The complaintent, Olsen, wants "a share" of the three times the
> alleged damages suffered by the government PAID TO HIM.
> The complaintent, Olsen, wants "a share" of the three times the
> alleged damages suffered by the government PAID TO HIM.
Treble damages are fairly standard for a qui tam action.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qui_tam
--
. ___ ___ . . ___
. \ / |\ |\ \
. _\_ /__ |-\ |-\ \__
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages