| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| susquesus |
Posted - December 11 2003 : 01:45:17 AM
I'm not too clear on the whole Haliburton thing. I guess they had a subsidiary in the Cayman Islands that did business with the Hussein regime, seems odd. At any rate, it sounds like they are a capable and proficient company that can handle the rebuilding projects. Are they being overpaid? Not enough competition for the contracts? Does Cheney still profit from Haliburtons success? Does he own their stock, collect a pension, sit on the board? What's the hubbub? |
| 15 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Kurt |
Posted - January 27 2004 : 07:48:45 AM
There STILL is NO EVIDENCE that Halliburton overcharged for fuel! They did throw two employees of Kellog Brown & Root to the wolves and handed over $6.3 million kickbacks but those pinko liberals have been going after KB&R since LBJ and STILL can't prevent them from getting new contracts!
President Bush during the Wright Brothers commemeration speech took time to say the New York Times has been naysayers for over 50 years. Too bad the only paper to report it was the New York Times so I can't report it. |
| SgtMunro |
Posted - January 17 2004 : 01:22:52 AM
I don't know about racism, by its true definition, being a problem in France (or here for that matter). But, prejudical thinking is a part of any culture, and it is brought about by a fear of the unknown (the strongest of mankinds fears). Most of us grow up and temper the prejudices ingrained in our upbringing, some do not. Either way, I am sure that there is a problem with prejudical thinking from all parties, and that it can be only overcome one person at a time...
Your Most Humble Servant,
|
| susquesus |
Posted - January 16 2004 : 11:26:15 PM
A friend recently told me that he had heard racism is a huge problem in France. Has anyone heard what the racial climate in France actually is like? It's a factor in US life, more so or less so in France? |
| susquesus |
Posted - January 16 2004 : 11:21:48 PM
Speaking of the Frenchers, I just moved into a neighborhood lovingly referred to as "Frogtown" for the French settlers that built it. |
| SgtMunro |
Posted - January 16 2004 : 11:01:05 PM
quote:
Heard today that Haliburton is now on trial in France- apparently they lost track of about 150 million dollars somewhere.
France huh? Yeah, they ought to get a "fair" hearing there. I guess the easy way out would be for Haliburton's leadership to convert to Islam, and proclaim the French charges as racist propaganda. The indeginous muslim population will then fall out and protest in the streets, and the French government will then back off...
How's that for a legal defense strategy?
Your Most Humble Servant,
|
| susquesus |
Posted - January 15 2004 : 8:40:53 PM
Heard today that Haliburton is now on trial in France- apparently they lost track of about 150 million dollars somewhere. |
| SgtMunro |
Posted - January 12 2004 : 10:28:12 AM
From what I understand, Haliburton has been cleared of any improper conduct. Interesting to note that it's vindication was mentioned only as a passing blurb in the media, and that it was no longer mentioned as the "Vice President's former company".
"There is no media bias, there is no media bias, there is no media bias..."
If it is repeated enough, do you think it will make it so?
Your Most Humble Servant,
|
| susquesus |
Posted - December 16 2003 : 01:16:16 AM
I'm sure it's horribly expensive to transport fuel through Iraq. I've heard they've had a difficult time finding drivers willing to do the job. I just figured that if the DoD is asking the questions it must be serious. I'm also happy that my tax money is closely accounted for. I look forward to the results of the investigation. |
| SgtMunro |
Posted - December 15 2003 : 8:02:56 PM
And if that is truly the case, then so be it. But, I think a complete investigation is in order, before jumping to conclusions. It would not be the first time that a 'hold-over' from the last administration had an axe to grind...
Your Most Humble Servant,
|
| Kurt |
Posted - December 15 2003 : 7:40:23 PM
As a followup in the NYTimes last Friday:
WASHINGTON, Dec. 12 - President Bush said today that the Halliburton Company would have to pay back any money it might have have overcharged the government for work it is doing in Iraq.
``If there's an overcharge, like we think there is, we expect that money to be repaid,'' Mr. Bush said this afternoon as he and his chief spokesman sought to distance the White House from a continuing controversy over Iraq-related work being done by Halliburton, which was once headed by Vice President Dick Cheney.
Alluding to a Pentagon audit that has found that Halliburton may indeed have overcharged the government by some $61 million for fuel deliveries, the president said: ``I appreciate the Pentagon looking after the taxpayers' money. They felt like there was an overcharge issue.''
|
| SgtMunro |
Posted - December 15 2003 : 7:20:34 PM
As to the New York Times story, and its figures, I kinda wonder how they arrived at $2.64/U.S. Gallon? I would like to know what Army Corps (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers?) Document that they quote. My numbers come from Rep. Waxman's (D-California) report, his complaint being that the local cost is $.70/U.S. Gallon (Kuwait), and why the cost is so much "higher" (I guess he hasn't bought Regular Unleaded in his home district in awhile).
Either way, if the DOD is looking into the complaints, we shall find out soon enough.
Your Most Humble Servant,
|
| Kurt |
Posted - December 15 2003 : 6:11:57 PM
Well, when we were angry with Iran for kidnaping our embasy, a lot of business was done with Saddam.
As to the fuel flap, on Dec. 10, the NYTimes ran a story:
"But a breakdown of fuel costs, contained in Army Corps documents recently provided to Democratic Congressional investigators and shared with The New York Times, shows that Halliburton is charging $2.64 for a gallon of fuel it imports from Kuwait and $1.24 per gallon for fuel from Turkey."
As long as they brought in 3 gallons fron Turkey for each 1 gallon fron Kuwait, what's the problem? |
| SgtMunro |
Posted - December 15 2003 : 5:40:10 PM
Well, considering that Haliburton contracted to transport refined gasoline into Iraq at $1.59/U.S. Gallon, which allows for a 2% to 7% profit, let's compare that to what gasoline is going for in California, hmmmm. The price of $1.59/ U.S. Gallon is pretty resonable for refined petroleum product, transported through several hundred miles of badly neglected/destroyed infrastructure and stored in newly constructed facillities. Now, I know that there are some pretty rough neighborhoods in L.A., but what they pay for fuel raises question of 'profiteering'. Except that the profiteering takes the form of federal, state & local taxes levied on each gallon, not to mention the added shipping expense due to California loosing 90% of her refinment capability (Thank you Enviro-Nazis!!!).
Just some food for thought, Susquesus...
Your Most Humble Servant,
|
| susquesus |
Posted - December 14 2003 : 3:22:31 PM
This week the President and the DoD both questioned how much Haliburton was charging to move fuel into Iraq. Haliburton claims they were overcharged by the Kuwaiti's, whaddya think? 61 million dollars, that's a large difference of opinion. |
| SgtMunro |
Posted - December 11 2003 : 2:39:19 PM
quote:
I'm not too clear on the whole Haliburton thing. I guess they had a subsidiary in the Cayman Islands that did business with the Hussein regime, seems odd.
You are right, they did do business with the Hussein regime and they did not violate the U.N. Sanctions.
quote:
At any rate, it sounds like they are a capable and proficient company that can handle the rebuilding projects.
Yes they are, and as I have stated in another post, they are one of only two companies in the world capable of handling all aspects of the rebuilding of Iraq's oil industry. The only other company being Martel (a French company).
quote:
Are they being overpaid? Not enough competition for the contracts?
I do not believe that they are being overpaid, for the specialty services they are providing (you want the best, you are gonna pay for it). As to the question on contract competition, they were awarded a 'no-bid' contract from the U.S. Military which is perfectly legal under a little known law passed during the Clinton Administration which allows emergency contracts to be given out without going through the usual 'sealed bid' process. The contract to Haliburton was awarded during the opening phases of the war, all subsequent contracts have been awarded under the 'sealed bid' process.
quote:
Does Cheney still profit from Haliburtons success? Does he own their stock, collect a pension, sit on the board? What's the hubbub?
The answers to these questions are a matter of public record, but I'll go over them anyways. The Vice President sold all of his stock, right after being nominated during the 2000 Campaign, this was done to avoid a conflict of intrest. No, he does not sit on their board of directors. To my knowledge, he does not collect one dime from the company. Does his friends/peers still on the board profit? Yep, you betcha', but nothing illegal there.
As to the hubbub, well if their was something don't you think that all of those 'mainstream' media types would be 'licking their chops'. Since there is no story, not even a made up one (ala Brent Glass), that should tell you that the VP is very much beyond reproach in his dealings with this company. Look at how the Enron story, and investigation (during the Democrats temporary control of the Senate in 2000) went away, once all of the fingers starting pointing at the previous administration...
Your Most Humble Servant,
|
|
![The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!]](images/wwwboard.gif "The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!]")
