Posted on 11/30/2005 10:38:10 PM PST by BlackJack
BlackJack..I am angry that the first article posted is a hit piece, full of unsubstantiated accusations and characterizations. The other articles don't reflect these accusations. All we're doing here is passing on left wing smear crap.
"If you don't like it, you should save up your pittance (after taxes, of course) and start a competing company! I'm sure you have the appropriate "connections."
"As far as "connections?" Please."
Those are your words, not mine. I assume from your response to my post that you are not going to offer any proof of your assertion that Brooks business was built by virtue of "connections" or coming from the "right family". Am I right?
I'll bet you think the guy down the street who buys a new Mercedes is a moron and a disgusting person. You, like others, read a hit piece and believe it word for word without question. Amazing. What kind of intellectual credibility is that?
I think you'd better be prepared to eat crow. This guy is a sleaze.
What? That the vests were defective?
Or the mismanagement of company funds?
So, what did you think about Jim and Tammy Bakker?
If the vests were defective, their would be legal action against DHB Industries. Show me legal filings against DHB. Brooks sold his stock in December 2004. Show me where he has dome something illegal. Show me any article in financial or business publications that characterizes him in the manner of the hit piece. If you own a business and have major stock in that business, you have a right to sell your stock as you see fit and when you see fit. Go to DHB's corporate website and inform yourself. Read the 8k's. Look at the balance sheet.
Don't be so envious of others.
Jim and Tammy Baker were corrupt and got what they deserved. Are you suggesting there is a comparison between Brooks and the Bakers? Is so, what?
"Or the mismanagement of company funds?"
Are you suggesting Brooks mismanaged company funds? Show me where you get this information and what you mean by that.
Show me legal filings against DHB.
SUPREME COURT - STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NASSAU
http://www.nycourts.gov/comdiv/Law%20Report%20Files/May%202003/Plumbers.htm
Schatz & Nobel, P.C. Announces Class Action Lawsuit against DHB Industries, Inc. -- DHB
http://www.primezone.com/newsroom/news.html?d=85695
http://www.dhbt.com/pressreleases.asp#92205
DHB Industries Will Vigorously Defend Lawsuits
Westbury, NY — DHB Industries Inc. (AMEX:DHB), DHB Industries, Inc., operating principally in the field of body armor, announced that, since September 16, 2005, it has been served with a number of lawsuits, all of which contain similar allegations. One of the lawsuits is filed as a derivative action and names the Company and all of its directors as defendants. All of the other lawsuits are purported class actions and name the Company and all or some of its directors as defendants.
* Brooks' brushes with the SEC date to 1992 insider-trading violations that led to a five-year ban from the securities industry.
* In 2004, the SEC disclosed it is investigating charges related to Brooks' compensation and related party transactions.
* In January, police in Broward County, Fla., filed a class-action lawsuit against the company that questions the effectiveness of its body armor. The following month, the company announced it had reached a preliminary settlement subject to court approval. In May, the Marine Corps announced it was recalling 5,277 DHB vests issued to troops in Iraq, Afghanistan and Djibouti after a story in the Marine Corps Times questioned whether the vests met standards of protection.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4189/is_20050603/ai_n14653558#continue
Selling taxpayer purchased defective equipment that endangers the lives of US soldiers in combat is much worse, IMHO, than mishandling money given willingly by the followers of a religious leader that endangered no ones life.
So, actually, there is no comparison, because, even though Jim and Tammy epitomized the greed and excesses of the 80's, there weren't responsible for the death of a single US soldier, because of their greed.
Brooks should be dropped off in Falluhah wearing some of his defective body armor with a sign on his chest saying, "Allah-o-Akbar This, Raghead!"
Having a 4-star General on the company's board helps.
"The vast majority of body armor sold by the Company does not contain any Zylon. This includes substantially all of the body armor sold to branches of the U.S. Military. During the past five years, sales of body armor containing Zylon made up less than five percent of the Company's total revenues. All of these models were certified by the NIJ prior to being sold to customers."
The basis of the lawsuits are the products containing Zylon, products marketed to law enforcement agencies. This does not rise to the level characterizing "our soldiers died" because of Brooks or their military armor. I don't know the Marines motive for recalling their armor other than they might have Concerns because of the bad press. With respect to the financial suits, they always come when business principals sell large quantities or all of their stock. Read any 8k on any company and you will see lawsuit after lawsuit. Brooks and DHB are entitled to have a fair hearing with all facts known before they should be characterized in the manner in the left wing hit piece. Thanks for the research. Keep a level head.
Yep. Just have to get off your butt and dig a little.
The controversy of DHB's vests, and the lawsuits, involves armor manufactured for police departments. Vests containing Zylon material, which comprise 5% of the armor made by DHB.
The armor made for the military does not contain Zylon and has not been a problem for the military. In fact, the military just gave DHB a 70 Million contract for more of the same. Why would the military do that if it didn't protect our soldiers.
Jim and Tammy Baker seems like an odd subject to bring up in this discussion. Are you OK?
Bite me.
"Having a 4-star General on the company's board helps."
Brooks founded the company with his own money and talent. After he sold his stock, new management took over. The 4 star was hired last May. The point made to the other poster was regarding her omplied envy of Brooks' success and that he must have done it through connections or family pedigree. Of course you're going to hire former military officers for your company if you're in the defense business. Why would that be unusual or nefarious?
This whole story is nothing more than a veiled attack on Cheney and Halliburton. It is a sorry attempt to show corruption.
Obviously private companies have a right to make a profit.
If the president of this company spends lavishly on his daughter from his own wealth, that his business and not any matter for the public or the government.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.