OT - THIS thread is a political one. read only if you want to

[Flasch186]

Looks like Cheney's office DID coordinate the Halliburton contract in Iraq...

Bishop.....isn't this just getting shadier every day....


4 days ago it was that the enw medicare package saved seniors an avg. of 25% on prescription drugs BUT that those same companies have raised their prices ~23% since Bush came inot office, so the real payers are the tax payers and the elderly pay the same amount but the Companies make the difference....


Im so disgusted....everyday i find out more that has been hidden or misled....

what do you think?


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A Pentagon (news - web sites) e-mail said Vice President Dick Cheney (news - web sites)'s office "coordinated" a multibillion-dollar Iraq (news - web sites) reconstruction contract awarded to his former employer Halliburton, Time magazine reported on Sunday.

The e-mail, sent by an Army Corps of Engineers official on March 5, 2003, said Douglas Feith, a senior Pentagon official, provided arrangements for the RIO contract, or Restore Iraqi Oil, between Halliburton and the U.S. government, Time said.

The e-mail said Feith, who reports to Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, approved arrangements for the contract "contingent on informing WH (White House) tomorrow. We anticipate no issues since action has been coordinated w VP's (vice president's) office."

A spokesman for Cheney said his office had no role in the contract process.

"Vice President Cheney and his office have had no involvement whatsoever in government contracting matters since he left private business to run for vice president," said Kevin Kellems, a spokesman for Cheney.

An administration official familiar with the e-mail, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the memo merely mentions the fact that the White House had been given a standard courtesy call notifying that a contract decision that had already been made and was being publicly announced soon.

Cheney was Halliburton's CEO from 1995 until he joined President Bush (news - web sites)'s presidential ticket in 2000.

The Texas oil services firm has been accused by some Democrats of war profiteering after winning billions of dollars in contracts from the U.S. military in Iraq.

The company has strongly denied it obtained favorable treatment.

(I think that this is by definition)

A spokesperson for Halliburton was not immediately available for comment.

Time said the Pentagon e-mail was located among documents provided by Judicial Watch, a watchdog group.




THEN..............


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Vice President Dick Cheney's office denied Sunday that he was involved in a coordinated effort to secure a multibillion dollar Iraq oil deal for Halliburton, his former employer.

A reference to such an arrangement was made in an internal Pentagon e-mail from an Army Corps of Engineers official to another Pentagon employee, Time magazine reports in its June 7 edition, which is due on newsstands Monday.

The existence of the e-mail was confirmed to CNN by a senior administration official familiar with it.

The e-mail -- dated March 5, 2003 -- says Douglas Feith, undersecretary of defense for policy, approved the arrangement to award the contract to the oil-services company, the administration official said.

According to an e-mail excerpt in Time, the contract was "contingent on informing WH [White House] tomorrow. We anticipate no issues since action has been coordinated w[ith] VP's office."

The Corps of Engineers gave Halliburton the contract three days later without seeking other bids, Time reports.

Time says it found the e-mail "among documents provided by Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog group."

The senior official told CNN the e-mail was a typical "heads-up" memo from one government agency to another that "a decision has been made, we're about to announce this contract, and as a courtesy we are alerting the White House of a public announcement. This is a standard practice."

The "coordinated action" referred to, the senior administration official said, was "that of publicly announcing the contract decision that has already been made."

The heads-up would have been given because of Cheney's previous involvement in the company as chief executive officer, and the anticipated controversy over the noncompetitive bid, the official said.

"The vice president and his office have played no role whatsoever in government contracting since he left private business to campaign for vice president" in 1999, Cheney spokesman Kevin Kellems said Sunday.

Time reports the e-mail also says Feith got the "authority to execute RIO," or Restore Iraqi Oil, from his supervisor, Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz.

The contract was one of several Halliburton and its subsidiaries were awarded by the government over the past year.

Cheney was chairman and chief executive officer of the Texas-based Halliburton Co., one of the world's largest service providers to the oil and gas industry, from 1995 to 2000, when he resigned to run for vice president.

Cheney still receives about $150,000 a year in deferred payments for work he performed as chairman. He also holds more than 433,000 stock options, according to a report last fall by the Congressional Research Office requested by Sen. Frank Lautenberg, a New Jersey Democrat. (Full story)

Cheney has insisted in the past that the deferred compensation was set up two years before he became a vice presidential candidate in 2000 and that he assigned all his stock options to a charitable trust just before being sworn in.

[Dutch]

Happy Memorial Day...

[chinaski]

The simple fact that Halliburton was awarded these contracts under no bid circumstances makes me sick. _Even_ if Cheney was never the CEO of Halliburton, it would still piss me off. It plainly shows they dont care about being 'fiscally responsible' in any way.

[Dutch]

Outside of Halliburton's inability to fend off the conspiracy theory presented by the media, they have done an amazing job in Iraq, just like we knew they would.

[BishopMVP]

I'm going to play some basketball in a second, so I don't have time for a long response or finding more facts. Off the top of my head, I never said anything about Halliburton in any thread with you and don't really see how this would relate to the prisoner abuse. From what I've seen of Halliburton overall in the Iraq war, while possibly getting favorable treatment in originally getting a contract, they've done the job well and not overcharged the government (we remember the furor about how they did, where it turned out it was a subcontractor and Halliburton, not the gov't, paid the extra costs.) One of the main problems I've read about lately is that we have been slow in handing out reconstruction contracts because we've been going through the contracting process carefully and slowly. So either we give it out to the normal companies (like Halliburton) and are accused of favoring companies or the money goes out slower than you want it to. In the end, I have no soft spot for Halliburton or Cheney (while I like Rumsfeld and Bush, I've always felt Cheney was creepy and I'd like to see him replaced, maybe by Rice) but until the Democrats/anti-Bush groups can find some evidence to back up their claims of war profiteering (a very serious charge) other than just the favorable treatment, I'm gonna treat it as politically-driven partisan attacks on a company that is helping us a lot in Iraq right now.

[Flasch186]

i wasnt connecting the dots to the prisoner abuse....theyre seperate and equally bad events.


Impossible to prove the war-profiteering unless omewhere an email is leaked that says, "Man, we can make a lot of money of this here war." Its all speculation, and in many things it is speculation.. SHOOT in a civil courtroom you only need 51% of the evidence to prove guilt and if some people need 100% proof then theyll always have their head sin the sand...and feel good about it.

Be safe playing ball, I rolled my ankle last yr. WORST injury ever had....terrible. Wear high tops!!!

[Glengoyne]

The simple fact that Halliburton was awarded these contracts under no bid circumstances makes me sick. _Even_ if Cheney was never the CEO of Halliburton, it would still piss me off. It plainly shows they dont care about being 'fiscally responsible' in any way.
Another simple fact...Get ready for this. Hold onto your socks.



Halliburton gets that contract if a Democrat is in office. Check more than your facts, they can be right and still not tell the whole story.

Halliburton is THE biggest logistics and support provider to our millitary and government. They have been for a number of years. They get the contract no matter who is in office. So yes they were awarded the contract without going through a bidding process.


Oh and on the prescription drug thing....What discount are the seniors eligibile for now? 25% right? So they pay 25% less than the drugs would cost them without the medicare discount..right? So they are saving 25% right? How is that not a benefit to them? How is it the administration's fault the drug companies raised their prices? Sure I would have liked a medicare deal where the government negotiated rates with drug companies, but don't claim for a second this isn't a good deal for those on medicare.

If your are gonna bring a political debate to the floor, at least bring your "A Game". This is weak "blood for oil" bullshit.

[Blackadar]

From CNN today:

Democrats want Cheney-Halliburton probe
Republicans dismiss questions about contract
Tuesday, June 1, 2004 Posted: 6:13 PM EDT (2213 GMT)


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A Democratic senator Tuesday called for a congressional investigation into whether Vice President Dick Cheney had a role in awarding a no-bid contract in Iraq to his old company, the oil-services giant Halliburton.

"It's a legitimate question," said Sen. Patrick Leahy, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee. "It raises the real question, can the American people trust their government to do the right thing? We have very real rules here."

Cheney's office has said repeatedly that the vice president has no role in government contracting and has severed all financial ties with the Texas-based Halliburton.

Cheney was chief executive officer of Halliburton from 1995 to 2000, when he became George Bush's running mate.

Time magazine raised the issue again this week, citing a March 5, 2003, e-mail from an Army Corps of Engineers official to another Pentagon employee.

The e-mail -- first obtained by the conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch under the Freedom of Information Act -- stated that Pentagon official Douglas Feith, the undersecretary of defense for policy, approved the arrangement to award a non-competitive contract to Halliburton.

It reported the contract was "contingent on informing WH [White House] tomorrow. We anticipate no issues since action has been coordinated w(ith) VP's office."

John White, a Pentagon appointee in the Clinton and Carter administrations, said the e-mail suggests an "unprecedented" level of involvement by senior Pentagon officials in the awarding of contracts.

"I've never seen of anything like this -- never heard of anything like this," White told reporters in a conference call with Leahy. "I think the vice president's office has a lot of questions to answer, as does the Pentagon."

But a senior administration official told CNN the e-mail is a typical "heads-up" memo from one government agency to another that "a decision has been made," and disputed suggestions that the e-mail was evidence of Cheney's involvement in the matter.

With both houses of Congress controlled by President Bush's fellow Republicans, the prospect of any Cheney-Halliburton hearings appears unlikely.

"For me, not having seen any of the accusations or read Time magazine today, it would be premature for me to say we need hearings on it," Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tennessee, said Tuesday.

Leahy, D-Vermont, faulted Republicans for not wanting to examine the issue.

"This is the same Congress that during the Clinton administration would have five new investigations started by midday Monday, and just add to them all week long," Leahy said. "Now they won't hold hearings, no matter what it is -- if you have cost overruns or anything else -- they just refuse to hold hearings, but of course they should."

Halliburton's involvement in the Iraq reconstruction effort has been controversial since it won a multi-billion no-bid contract in 2003. The U.S. Defense Department is investigating whether Halliburton overcharged for the fuel delivered to Iraqi civilians, and its Kellogg, Brown and Root subsidiary agreed to refund $27 million for potential overbillings at five dining halls in Iraq and Kuwait.

"This is a politicizing of Halliburton, which is a shame," said Mary Matalin, a former Cheney aide now working as a senior Bush-Cheney campaign adviser.

"Halliburton itself has lost close to three dozen workers over there in Iraq," Matalin told NBC's Today show. "I mean, just let it go."

CNN's Robert Yoon contributed to this report.
-------------------------------------------------

Does anyone else think the last couple of paragraphs are just plain disgusting? Whether Halliburton and Cheney did anything wrong can be debated. Should there be an investigation? Yes, if only to prove it one way or another.

But to use the fact that they've lost employees as a reason NOT to investigate is just sickening. "Hey, people have died, so let's not do anything". Absurd and disgusting - I'd be really upset if I were a loved one of one of the folks who died and read this - to use the loss of my loved one as a political chip.

[Dutch]

Democrats want Cheney-Halliburton probe

No! Really?

:)

[WussGawd]

Outside of Halliburton's inability to fend off the conspiracy theory presented by the media, they have done an amazing job in Iraq, just like we knew they would.

I want some of what you're smoking, Dutch. It's got to be wonderfully mind-altering.

We know that Halliburton has:

*Overcharged for meals, and charged for meals not delivered.
*Charged for truck convoys that never ran.
*Overcharged the Army/Marines for gasoline purchased in Kuwait.
*Used its political connections (shadow control) with Cheney to become the principal supplier in Iraq in a no-bid contract.

For those who continue to deny that this latest connection shows that Cheney is a crook, I'd suggest you're either in deep denial, or lying to cover for somebody. Which is it?

[Franklinnoble]

Another simple fact...Get ready for this. Hold onto your socks.



Halliburton gets that contract if a Democrat is in office. Check more than your facts, they can be right and still not tell the whole story.

Halliburton is THE biggest logistics and support provider to our millitary and government. They have been for a number of years. They get the contract no matter who is in office. So yes they were awarded the contract without going through a bidding process.


Oh and on the prescription drug thing....What discount are the seniors eligibile for now? 25% right? So they pay 25% less than the drugs would cost them without the medicare discount..right? So they are saving 25% right? How is that not a benefit to them? How is it the administration's fault the drug companies raised their prices? Sure I would have liked a medicare deal where the government negotiated rates with drug companies, but don't claim for a second this isn't a good deal for those on medicare.

If your are gonna bring a political debate to the floor, at least bring your "A Game". This is weak "blood for oil" bullshit.
Agreed. Can we stop beating the Halliburton-Iraq horse already?

[BishopMVP]

i wasnt connecting the dots to the prisoner abuse....theyre seperate and equally bad events.I wasn't sure what you meant by "this is getting shadier." I just assumed Iraq as a whole, and the prisoner abuse is the biggest story right now.Impossible to prove the war-profiteering unless somewhere an email is leaked that says, "Man, we can make a lot of money off this here war." Its all speculation, and in many things it is speculation..War Profiteering could be shown if you had prrof Halliburton was profiting excessively off the Iraq war (or Afghanistan/any other contracts they have). With all the attention Democrats/anti-War groups have been focusing on Halliburton, I feel confident gross misconduct would/will come out.Be safe playing ball, I rolled my ankle last yr. WORST injury ever had....terrible. Wear high tops!!!High tops are for pussies ;) jk I rolled my ankle badly during lacrosse last year and it took about a month to be able to cut right and even then the pain didn't stop until about 2-3 weeks after the season ended. Ankle injuries suck.Does anyone else think the last couple of paragraphs are just plain disgusting? Whether Halliburton and Cheney did anything wrong can be debated. Should there be an investigation? Yes, if only to prove it one way or another.

But to use the fact that they've lost employees as a reason NOT to investigate is just sickening. "Hey, people have died, so let's not do anything". Absurd and disgusting - I'd be really upset if I were a loved one of one of the folks who died and read this - to use the loss of my loved one as a political chip.Does anyone else think they took one quote out of context to portray Halliburton in a poor light?We know that Halliburton has:

*Overcharged for meals, and charged for meals not delivered.
*Charged for truck convoys that never ran.
*Overcharged the Army/Marines for gasoline purchased in Kuwait.
*Used its political connections (shadow control) with Cheney to become the principal supplier in Iraq in a no-bid contract.We do? I thought when the evidence came out, it was the Army/Pentagon refusing to pay the (relatively small) overcharging, which was by a subcontractor, and that in the end Halliburton was forced to pay the cost overruns. I'm sure you could find a similar scenario for almost every major government contractor, and if it wasn't Halliburton no one would have blinked an eye.

EDIT - Also Flasch, I didn't want to bump the other thread, but it appears now Alan Dershowitz is making many of the same points I did on the Geneva Convention. IMO, he goes too far and advocates the use of torture in certain extreme situations, but he certainly isn't a right-wing pawn. hxxp://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bal-op.geneva28may28,0,3485167.story?coll=bal-oped-headlines

[Flasch186]

what scares me about some of these posts is the people asking questions get called, or inferred, that theyre doing something wrong....without debate we would have nothing.


The halliburton stuff, shouldve been open bid....Shoot for PR sake wouldve been smart. There are companies that had since come out saying that they couldve done a better job for equal or less money (couldve been salesmanship) but they shouldve been given a shot to present their proposal. Now it looks like Cheney had something to do with getting "his friends" a huge contract. NOT blood for oil, but doing favors for friends = not good = shady. Its too easy to write off these arguments as simply blood for oil cuz it makes that side of the discussion look thin...there is more to it then that.

Even if a memeo does come out inferring War profiteering, im afraid the same people wouldnt believe it...its that "im only going to believe what fits my argument" crap.

[Glengoyne]

what scares me about some of these posts is the people asking questions get called, or inferred, that theyre doing something wrong....without debate we would have nothing.


The halliburton stuff, shouldve been open bid....Shoot for PR sake wouldve been smart. There are companies that had since come out saying that they couldve done a better job for equal or less money (couldve been salesmanship) but they shouldve been given a shot to present their proposal. Now it looks like Cheney had something to do with getting "his friends" a huge contract. NOT blood for oil, but doing favors for friends = not good = shady. Its too easy to write off these arguments as simply blood for oil cuz it makes that side of the discussion look thin...there is more to it then that.

Even if a memeo does come out inferring War profiteering, im afraid the same people wouldnt believe it...its that "im only going to believe what fits my argument" crap.
Again the deal with Halliburton would have happened even if Gore was President, and still w/o a bid. It was NOT an out of ordinary event. I do agree that yes if time allowed, an open bid would have been great at least to avoid the partisan finger pointing that the no-bid contract has. Someone decided that time wasn' t available. With regard to the "memo" at hand... do we really think someone who is Vice President of the United States, a position that requires one to divest their holdings or place them in a blind trust would consider directing a government agency hire their old company? I mean anyone in that position with any sense at all would avoid even the hint of involvement in that process. Now I'm no fan of Cheney, but I don't think he is an idiot either. So yeah I totally buy the "spin" the administration applied to the memo. To believe otherwise is to think Cheney got involved with governmental impropriety to a level that would require his resignation if not his prosecution, and there is no way he risks that with so little to gain.

[Desnudo]

Ultimately I could really care less what the circumstances of this contract were. It's not important. What will make the history books is what happens when the US hands power back to the Iraqis. That's what will be discussed in the coming years. The rest of this crap is election year posturing, regardless of what party is in office.

[Flasch186]

i think Cheney would do it because I think that they dont think about the Lawful ramificiations and such...I think that they think that they are covered in teflon. I believe that he would do it, because he knows he can get away with it.

[Dutch]

Ultimately I could really care less what the circumstances of this contract were. It's not important. What will make the history books is what happens when the US hands power back to the Iraqis. That's what will be discussed in the coming years. The rest of this crap is election year posturing, regardless of what party is in office.

Agreed, ultimately, the motivation of all Americans is to see us make the world safer for America. I think, regardless of hurt feelings, in the long run, we have a strong chance to change the way the Middle East views democracy and the USA.

It can still fail. We can still look like evil baffoons, but I hope opposite is true and we succeed in our ultimate mission to bring the Middle East the freedom that will root itself as our own did and allow them to snuff out their own hate mongers in the future.