10:29 pm, July 11, 2014

FederalNewsRadio.com - Purpose of Comments statement Click to show

Hubbard Radio, LLC encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comment boards following articles, blog posts and other content can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior here. We encourage your thoughtful comments which:

  • Have a positive and constructive tone
  • Are on topic, clear and to-the-point
  • Are respectful toward others and their opinions

Hubbard Radio, LLC reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

  • 1
       

  • Intel expenses need scrutiny
    Honest Broker
    Due to the Intel high security, many unnecessary expenses and tasks are hidden from scrutiny so I see the US Government paying for duplication and their own development. I'm a little disturbed how many companies are building duplicate surveillance analysis software capabilities for NSA, CIA or others, and then come around peddling it as their own with an exorbitant mark up. I treat our Intel as a National Security asset like a secret weapon, so you do not tell the world about nor hand it over to a for profit company. Being in the acquisition position to procure or develop this surveillance technology, it bothers me that many of my military customers will have to do without because the Intel agencies hand out these development contracts with no US Government ownership and pay out huge amounts with no scrutiny about the price or aligning its design with mainstream components. I would like to see sequestration hit the Intel community to quit this duplication of effort, paying too much for the hardware and handing over technology to the contractors to peddle around the globe.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }