Forbes asks if huge ammo buys should become “national conversation”
Paul Joseph Watson
March 11, 2013
Just days after announcing a 5-year, $4.5 million contract with Heckler & Koch, the Department of Homeland Security has released details of an identical agreement with weapons manufacturer Sig Sauer, as Forbes publishes an article calling for a “national conversation” about the DHS arms build-up that has been dismissed by the media as a conspiracy theory.
Sig Sauer. Image: YouTube
A solicitation for a no bid contract posted on the Federal Business Opportunities  website contains details of a DHS agreement with Sig Sauer to provide weapons parts under the remit of a $900,000 dollar a year contract set to run for five years.
The PDF document  accompanying the solicitation is virtually identical to an agreement announced last week  for Heckler & Koch to provide firearms replacement parts for the exact same fee and time period.
Despite our article drawing attention to the fact that the supposedly “redacted” figure of $4.5 million on the original agreement with Heckler & Koch was in fact visible, the same error appears in the Sig Sauer agreement, suggesting that only the name has been changed.
Although controversy surrounding the DHS’ purchase of some 2 billion rounds of ammunition  has dominated concerns about the federal government’s apparent arms build up, the DHS also purchased 7,000 fully automatic assault rifles  last September.
Despite the fact that some mainstream media outlets and leftist websites have tried to downplay concerns about the arms build up as paranoid conspiracy theories, the influential Forbes Magazine today features an article  by Ralph Benko asking if the issue should become a “national conversation.”
“At the height of the Iraq War the Army was expending less than 6 million rounds a month. 1.6 billion rounds, therefore, would be enough to sustain a hot war for 20+ years. In America,” states the article.
“Why, indeed, should the federal government not be deploying armored personnel carriers and stockpiling enough ammo for a 20-year war in the homeland? Because it’s wrong in every way,” writes Benko.
Not according to the likes of Media Matters, Huffington Post, the Atlantic Wire and others, all of which claimed the issue was “debunked”  merely because a DHS spokesperson told the Associated Press that the ammo buys were made in bulk to “save money” on training bullets. As Benko points out, the federal agency has bought enough bullets to last for a century of target practice.
In reality, most of the bullets purchased by the agency are hollow point rounds, which are more expensive than standard training bullets and therefore unsuitable for target practice. Last week, former Marine Richard Mason told reporters with WHPTV News  in Pennsylvania, “We never trained with hollow points, we didn’t even see hollow points my entire four and a half years in the Marine Corps.”
Those outlets reporting that the issue had been explained also failed to clarify how a single quotation from a representative of the very government agency being scrutinized could possibly mean that the matter had been adequately investigated and “debunked.”