Bobert's post of 04 Nov 06 - 09:05 AM, is probably about as near as I will get to an acknowledgement from him that I have never mentioned anything about Halliburton and the purchase of trailers.

But rather than just admit his error, Ol' Bob tries to spin it. It does serve to illustrate that Bobert will "invent" facts, and attribute totally false statements to discredit those he is attempting to argue with.

On some of the red-herrings he threw up in the Bobert post referred to, I would direct "Good Ol' Selective Bobert's" attention to the years 1997 and 1998 (Minimum two years before your favourite bete-noir entered office). Invitations to Tender, on a competitive basis were sent out for a US Government (Pentagon) Frame Agreement Contract covering engineering and support engineering work and services with regard to the US Forces world-wide. The period of the Frame Agreement Contract was five years. Frame Agreement Contracts are very common and tend to be a very efficient way of getting jobs done. Halliburton won that competitive contract.

OK Bobert do the maths - five year frame agreement contract awarded on a competitive basis to Halliburton in 1998, Coalition troops enter Iraq in March 2003, against the threat by Sadam that he would do as he did before and set the oilfields ablaze, who is your contractor with regard to repair of oilfield infrastructure. 1998 + 5 = 2003, Frame Agreement Contract awarded on a competitive basis still in place, therefore contractor is Halliburton. Quite simple Bobert.