BS: Saddams Fortune

Subject: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: kendall
Date: 22 Nov 03 - 07:52 PM

I wrote to Tom Allen, my rep. to congress, and a man of great integrity, not to mention a friend, and asked him what happened to the truckloads of American money that the Army hauled out of Saddam's palaces.
He said,Dear Ken, some of it was used to rebuild the infrastructure, but most of it went to American companies that may or may not be involved in rebuilding Iraq. What companies? Halliburton and Bechtel! What a surprise!
His letter was quite detailed, and he signed it "Tom" and with his own hand wrote, "We need regime change here"!
I can post it here if anyone wants to see the whole letter.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: Ebbie
Date: 22 Nov 03 - 08:26 PM

Please do post it.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: kendall
Date: 22 Nov 03 - 09:51 PM

I'll try.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: Sorcha
Date: 22 Nov 03 - 09:56 PM

Yes, please post. The whole thing just sucks....and I am sick about it....Cheney et al. get rich while our children die....for no good reason.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: kendall
Date: 22 Nov 03 - 10:03 PM

I have the letter with Congressman Allen's letter head, but I can't figure out how to post it the way it appears. My scanner runs all the letters together in a jumbled up mess.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: Rapparee
Date: 22 Nov 03 - 10:20 PM

Try scanning it as a picture (jpeg) instead of a document.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: GUEST,Frankham
Date: 23 Nov 03 - 12:25 PM

Again, it was Poppy Bush that set Saddam up. Saddam did his worst dirty work with Poppy's blessing. The reason they thought they knew about WMD's is because the Senior Bushes and Reagan gave them to Saddam as a buffer to Iran. Short term historical memory abounds.

Frank Hamilton

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: Amos
Date: 23 Nov 03 - 12:52 PM

Kendall:

Let me know if you need a hand -- I can scan it (or a really clean xerox of it) for you and send you the file electronically for you to post if needed, and return the hardcopy by mail.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: kendall
Date: 23 Nov 03 - 07:34 PM

I may have to Amos, but tell me, how do I scan it as a picture?

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: Rapparee
Date: 23 Nov 03 - 07:37 PM

Kendall, what sort of scanner do you have? And what sort of software to go with it?

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: kendall
Date: 23 Nov 03 - 08:01 PM

It's an HP scanjet.3300C

It scans photos exactly, but it makes a puddin' of text.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: kendall
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 03:22 PM

Just got a new confuser, so I'll try to post that letter from my congressman, Tom Allen.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: kendall
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 03:29 PM

Couldn't figure out how to do it, so e mailed it to Pene azul

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: Amos
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 03:59 PM

The picture needs to go through a different process called Optical Character Recognition before it can be handled as text. It is totally different in terms of coding. A black and white picture is a bunch of dots, and each dot is on or off. So the code is just a huge stream of on-on-off-off-on-off type binary digits. Text is generated from ASCII code, with each character or number being represente din the file by an 8-bit number like "01000111" for example. So a text file is a series of 8-bit numbers and for each number the computer generates a character on the screen rather than interpreting the file one dot at a time.

So someone has to OCR the file to turn the bit-mapped picture of characters into the ASCII-coded text version.

Most modern scanners come equipped with OCR software, or did the last time I looked.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: kendall
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 04:48 PM

And in English that would be?

Jeff is my man for this sort of thing. Thanks for trying AMOS.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 05:24 PM

If it was just a matter of sharing the words, typing it out might be simplest. But the point of photocopying or scanning a letter is to demonstrate that it hasn't been edited after receipt. OCR doesn't ensure that any more than typing it out does.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: kendall
Date: 22 Dec 03 - 09:17 PM

For some reason, Jeff hasn't posted the letter. I now have a new confuser, so I'll try to post it here.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: kendall
Date: 22 Dec 03 - 09:46 PM

Congressman Allen's letter is in my documents file, anyone know how to post it to the forum?

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: DougR
Date: 22 Dec 03 - 10:32 PM

Geeze, Kendall, I think we all know what it must say. "Bush is a dolt! We must rid ourselves of Bush! We must elect ___________, a Democrat, as our next president!" It doesn't take much imagination does it? You are going through too many frustrating operations just to show us something the Congressman's staff member wrote that may or may not have been seen by the Congressman.

Sigh.

DougR

P. S. Merry Christmas, Kendall!

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: GUEST,Nerd
Date: 23 Dec 03 - 12:58 AM

If you had read Kendall's original post, DougR, you would know that his congressman is also a friend of his, and almost certainly did not fob off a staffer letter on him. In any case, why not wait to see what the letter does say? I'm willing to bet it looks nothing like the ridiculous mockery you wrote to try to belittle other people's opinions.

By the way, I notice that the person who wrote the letter that in your own words "doesn't take much imagination" was...you! What refreshing honesty!

P.S. Merry Christmas DougR!

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: Amos
Date: 23 Dec 03 - 01:05 AM

Kendall:

The simple thing is to open the document, select all, and copy it to the Clipboard. Then go to your browser and start a new thread and paste the contents into the text box.

If this hangs up, you can try going back and copying again while the New Thread box is already open, and try again.

I am assuming it is either a plain text document or in some word-processor format such as Word.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: kendall
Date: 23 Dec 03 - 04:19 AM

I have a new computer and just can't seem to get used to XP. Nothing is the same as win 98 and it's driving me nuts!.
I opened the document, hit "select" but there it stopped, no "clipboard".

Doug has thrown down the gauntlet and one way or another, this is going to get posted here!
For your information, Doug, Tom Allen is a Rhodes Scholar and a gentleman. I asked him what happened to Saddam's billions and he told me. Being a big business worshipper, you won't like the answer.

If nothing else works Amos, give me your e mail address and I'll send it to you.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: kendall
Date: 23 Dec 03 - 07:15 PM

Amos, I took the liberty of looking up your e mail address and sending you a copy of Tom's letter. Doug, how do you like your crow?

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: Amos
Date: 23 Dec 03 - 08:41 PM

Kendall:

See PM -- check the addy to make sure it is right, as I haven't rec'd yr email yet! When I do I will post the contents if I can do so.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: kendall
Date: 24 Dec 03 - 08:11 AM

I've sent this twice. Maybe the Bushites are draining your mailbox! LOL

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: Bobert
Date: 24 Dec 03 - 08:55 AM

Kendall,

When you get this stuff sorted out, please start another thread with the letter so it doesn't get lost. This is important stuff. And if Clinton had done the same with Milosovoch's dough, you know,passed it out to his campaign donors then Doug would be calling for his resignation.

I can't understand why some folks feel it's okay to lie, steal and cheat as long as it is done by a Republican..

BTW, Dougie, I've heard that if ya brine the crow over night in it ain't half bad but I would personally know since I'm always right.

Aww, jus' messin' with ya. pal. I mean after all, it is crow, dangit...

But a Merry Christmas and, hey, get nude with yer new wife unner the Christmas tree and be sure to take lots o' piccures to put in next years Christmas cards... Oughtta be a hoot, don't ya think?...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: Amos
Date: 25 Dec 03 - 10:43 AM

I have received the JPEG image f the letter, and I can vouch for the fact that (a) it appears to be a genuine letter sent to Kendall Morse from Senator Allen and (b) it has two personalized hand-written modifications in the sender's hand. One is the strike out of "Mister Morse" and the hand-written replacement "Ken" in the salutation. The other is a post-script which states "We need regime change here!". As we do not have OCR software, my wife went to the trouble to type the letter out and it's text is as follows:

---

Congress of the United States
House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20513-1901

Thomas H. Allen
1st District of Maine
1717 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
[phone]

234 Chicago Street
Portland, ME 04101
[phone]

http://tomallen.house.gov

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE
Subcommittees:
Energy and Air Quality
Environment and Hazardous Materials
Democratic At-Large Whip
House Oceans Caucus
        Co-Chair
Affordable Medicines Task Force
        Co-Chair


November 10, 2003

Mr. Kendall Morse
40 Ardsley Avenue
South Portland, Maine 04106

Dear Mr. Morse [handwritten, "Ken"]:

        Thank you for contacting me about accounting for money seized
from Saddam Hussein's palaces. I appreciate hearing from you.

        Since the ouster of Saddam Hussein, the U.S.-led interim
government in Iraq (the Coalition Provisional Authority, or CPA) has
assumed control of about $5 billion in Iraqi oil revenues, foreign
assets, and cash stockpiles. The CPA has publicly accounted for only
about $1 billion of these funds.

        The U.S. Military has spent a porition of the funds on
thousands of small-scale reconstruction projects that have improved
the lives of Iraquis. Such speedy and visible results have probably
saved both U.S. and Iraqi lives by showing that the U.S. is there to
help the Iraqi people.

        On the other hand, the disbursement of the majority of these
funds raises serious questions about transparency and accountability.
About $3 billion has gone almost exclusively to American companies
that may or may not subcontract with Iraqi companies. I am deeply
concerned that some of these U.S. companies, such as Bechtel and
subsidiaries of Halliburton, have previous or current ties to senior
officials in the Bush Administration. These connections present
serious conflicts of interest, paralleling the Administration's
massive tax cuts that benefit the wealthy and well-connected.
Further, the trend of awarding contracts without a competitive
bidding process is disturbing, and runs counter to the kind of
democratic government and free market economy that we are trying to
build in Iraq. During consideration of the supplemental spending bill
for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, I voted for an amendment to
require competitive bidding on Iraqi oil infrastructure projects. I
also voted for an amendment to require executive agencies tooinform
Congress of "no-bid" contracts before they are offered, which was
retained in the final version of the bill.

        Please be assured that I will keep your thoughts in mind, and
continue to monitor the situation. If related legislation comes
before the House energy and Commerce Committee, I will continue to
work for transparency and accountability in government contracting.

        Again, thank you for your message. I hope you will continue
to contact me on issues important to you.

Sincerely,


Tom Allen
Member of Congress [then handwritten: We need regime change HERE!]

---

Regards,

A

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: Amos
Date: 25 Dec 03 - 10:57 AM

I have posted the original JPEG graphic of the letter to the web where it can be viewed by clicking on this link.

Regards,

A

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: kendall
Date: 25 Dec 03 - 11:03 AM

Ya done good Amos. Now, may we hear from the big business worshippers?

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: kendall
Date: 25 Dec 03 - 11:14 AM

Oh, Dougie...care to respond?

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: Bobert
Date: 25 Dec 03 - 12:27 PM

Oh, Kendall,you bad, bad boy... Going an' hurtin' my poor ol' buddy's punkin' head... And on Christams! Danged!

I'm sorry Dougie. I tried to stop him but youknow how Kendall can get when he's got the goods! They are gonna get delivered.

But, hark, just stay low and yer but, T-Bird, will come along with one of his masterfull, "War-n-Peace" length threads which will actually contain nothing but should be, as per usual, entertaining.

Aww, jus' messin' wid ya', T-zer. I'm sure there will be some little over looked nugget, like misused puncture-ation. But $3B is a lot of dough to go unaccounted for, wouldn't ya' say?

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: kendall
Date: 25 Dec 03 - 04:36 PM

refresh until Doug hollers "UNCLE"

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: Ebbie
Date: 25 Dec 03 - 05:28 PM

Yeah- DougR will say Uncle quickly enough- but it'll be Uncle George, not Uncle Sam. Funny how patriotism has become George's property. You don't suppose that it's George Washington Bush, do you? A god-given inheritance, for sure.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: kendall
Date: 25 Dec 03 - 11:33 PM

come on Doug!

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: kendall
Date: 27 Dec 03 - 02:26 PM

We're waiting Doug.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: Amos
Date: 27 Dec 03 - 04:15 PM

Have you sent him a PM?

A

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: GUEST,Frank
Date: 27 Dec 03 - 04:28 PM

I read recently that the capture of Saddam may have taken place much earlier in the year. Evidence? There were dates on the palm trees in the background. June-July are date growing months.

Is it possible that the news was delayed in time for the election?

Frank

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: Ebbie
Date: 27 Dec 03 - 05:53 PM

What/Which election?

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: kendall
Date: 27 Dec 03 - 07:25 PM

I did send Doug a pm. He is busy, but he will check in later. (Probably looking for a good crow recipe. LOL

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: Hrothgar
Date: 28 Dec 03 - 04:56 AM

Let's hope he doesn't get Mad Crow Disease (Corvine Spongiform Encephalopathy) from eating it

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: kendall
Date: 28 Dec 03 - 08:27 AM

Don't hold your breath, I've never heard a republican admit being wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: kendall
Date: 29 Dec 03 - 04:15 AM

still waiting, Doug.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: kendall
Date: 29 Dec 03 - 08:12 AM

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: Bill D
Date: 29 Dec 03 - 11:44 AM

mebbe Doug should write HIS congressman for a comparison of views.
I suspect there would be a few differences. *grin*

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: DougR
Date: 29 Dec 03 - 02:46 PM

Okie dokie. I have read the letter. It appears to me to be nothing more than a re-hash of criticisms you hear Democrats raving about the Bush administration every day! The money went to American companies to help build the infrastructure of Iraq. So what's wrong with that? Would you rather it have gone to French, Russian, or German complanies to do the same work? American taxpayers, for the most part, are financing the war in Iraq. Why shouldn't the work go to American companies? Even the Congressman admits much of the money has been spent on things that benefit the Iraqi people directly.

I think you folks are reading far too much in this letter. The Congressman reflects your views so you think it's a great letter filled with new news. Don't you read newspapers? I don't think the Congressman revealed on thing in the letter that hadn't been widely reported in the press, radio and TV (Even CNN and MSNBC!)

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: TIA
Date: 29 Dec 03 - 03:29 PM

"...The money went to American companies to help build the infrastructure of Iraq..."

How much money, to which companies, and for what projects?
It's the lack of accounting that is the scandal.
Oh, wait. We must just shut up and trust the President.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: Greg F.
Date: 29 Dec 03 - 06:27 PM

The man still thinks this is a football game, and that the only individuals opposed to the BuShite lies and corruption are "Democrats".

Sad.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: kendall
Date: 29 Dec 03 - 07:28 PM

Tom didn't attack the president, Doug.

Now, the three billion that went to Halliburton, plus the 87 billion from we taxpayers, plus the untold billions that those unopposed companies stand to drag in tells me that being a Bush contributor is a good deal.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: DougR
Date: 30 Dec 03 - 03:23 PM

Perhaps you should send him a contribution for his campaign, Kendall! :>)

Greg F.: see the thread on who is the most admired man in America. :>)

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: Greg F.
Date: 30 Dec 03 - 04:22 PM

Yon thread and the poll cited are a great deal more telling of the mental acuity of that admiring fraction (29%) of the U.S. population than they are of the character or qualifications of the corrupt and dishonest sack of shit that temporarily occupies the Oval Office.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: kendall
Date: 30 Dec 03 - 10:18 PM

Mussolini was all but worshipped...for a while.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: Bobert
Date: 30 Dec 03 - 10:24 PM

In any facist state, consolidation of power is papamount... Hmmmm? The White House? Check The legislature? Check. The Judiciary? Check.

Hmmmmm? Mussolini might not be too far off the mark, Kendall.

Problem is: most folks who support this consolidation of power don't have a clue where it can lead and by the time they figure it out, it will be way too late...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 30 Dec 03 - 10:25 PM

Q: Why wasn't anyone surprised that Saddam Hussein was found in a spider hole?


A: Because he's an Iraqnid!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: Amos
Date: 30 Dec 03 - 10:50 PM

Robin:

Groooooooooooooooannnnnn 8 times.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: Ebbie
Date: 30 Dec 03 - 10:55 PM

Greg F: "...the BuShite lies and corruption ". Doug R, you didn't address the charge. Are you truly thrilled at the supposed popularity of Bush no matter what the truth is of this administration??

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: GUEST,Clint Keller
Date: 31 Dec 03 - 12:56 AM

There's nothing wrong with the work going to American companies, Doug.

What's wrong is "...that some of these U.S. companies, such as Bechtel and subsidiaries of Halliburton, have previous or current ties to senior officials in the Bush Administration. These connections present serious conflicts of interest... Further, the trend of awarding contracts without a competitive bidding process is disturbing, and runs counter to the kind of democratic government and free market economy that we are trying to build in Iraq."

It ain't whatcha do, it's the way atcha do it.

As a capitalist, would you want an agent of your company to award contracts to his old friends without competitive bids?

clint

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: kendall
Date: 31 Dec 03 - 09:35 AM

Iraqnid...thats funny!

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: Teribus
Date: 05 Jan 04 - 06:55 AM

Hi Amos,

Thanks for posting the text of Tom Allen's letter, which on reading put the thing in perspective. All in all a bit of an anti-climax, as Doug has pointed out it was totally predictable in content and far from being detailed as kendall contended in his opening post.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: kendall
Date: 05 Jan 04 - 08:43 AM

One sees what one sees, even if it is in plain English.
Teribus, why don't you write to your republican congressman and ask the same question?

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: Teribus
Date: 05 Jan 04 - 10:55 AM

In plain english kendall you asked Tom Allen about money seized from Saddam's palaces by coalition forces.

In plain english Tom Allen expanded the sum the CPA has assumed control of by including Iraqi oil revenues and foreign assests. The former could not have been held in Saddam's palaces and the latter, depending on where they are held may only be frozen, not spent. But for arguements sake let us assume that they are available to the CPA.

In plain english Tom Allen states that the CPA has publicly accounted for $1 billion out of a total of $5 billion. The US military have spent a portion of the funds (portion undisclosed) and $3 billion has gone to "American companies" for reconstruction work that may or may not subcontract work to Iraqi companies. The "may or may not" indicates that he is referring to work that is ongoing and figures can therefore not be available for "public accounting".

Tom Allen's plain english then degenerates to waffle regarding questions about transparency and accountability. His concerns regarding previous/current ties to Bechtel and Halliburton of senior members of the Bush Administration, are based on what exactly. Regarding current ties and conflicts of interest - Do State Governors, representatives of both houses of congress and members of the Presidents Administration not have to declare their interests? Previous ties? Does Mr. Allen seriously support the stand that ones previous employment precludes a person from other jobs? If he does then I may well ask him what jobs he feels he should be precluded from pursuing because of past employment and political interests.

How the current administrations tax cuts come into the equation is somewhat bemusing. Tax cuts generally benefit all and it is a method of "kick-starting" ailing economies that has been used successfully in a number of countries.

Is there a "trend" of awarding "no-bid" contracts? The Halliburton Frame Agreement Contract was awarded as a result of competitive bidding, and it was under the terms and conditions of that Frame Agreement Contract that they were assigned work in Iraq. By the way, the same companies he refers to held similar Frame Agreement Contracts under the previous administration.

Not having a Republican Congressman, or woman for that matter, precludes me from writing to them to ask the same question. However, as stated above I may well write to Mr. Tom Allen.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: kendall
Date: 05 Jan 04 - 07:59 PM

I asked a question, he answered it, period. Spin it any way you wish.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 06 Jan 04 - 04:48 AM

kendall - "His letter was quite detailed"

Hell as like it was - spin that any way you like.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: kendall
Date: 06 Jan 04 - 07:59 AM

Most Mudcatters can read.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: DougR
Date: 06 Jan 04 - 07:13 PM

Ebbie: I didn't address Greg F's comments because I don't think it would accomplish anything. He thinks Bush is a liar; I don't. End of story.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: Greg F.
Date: 07 Jan 04 - 08:01 AM

And therein lies the difference. That Dubya and his handlers have been proven time and time again to be liars doesn't signify- to some. "None so blind.." etc.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: kendall
Date: 07 Jan 04 - 09:34 AM

selective deafness?

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 07 Jan 04 - 10:08 AM

Selective?

Whatever, kendall that is entirely subjective.

Your intial post foretold of how Mr Tom Allen provided you with a letter going into this in detail - that was your take on it, your subjective opinion, based on the fact that you read it as the music playing your tune.

Having read the letter, expecting (I don't know why) some additional information, I share the same opinion as that of DougR, i.e. "I don't think the Congressman revealed one thing in the letter that hadn't been widely reported in the press, radio and TV (Even CNN and MSNBC!)"

Detailed it was not - for contractural details relating to the assignment of contracts - you would be better advised to go through the Waxman/US Army/GAO correspondence. Quite comprehensive and detailed - you might not like some of those details as they definitely do not play your tune.

One thing is fairly plain though - if these are the "issues" that the Democrats are going to take the current administration on with - the Democrats are going to lose.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: kendall
Date: 07 Jan 04 - 04:09 PM

Senator Waxman had one word for the Pebtagon/Halliburton "report" INCOMPREHENSIBLE

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 08 Jan 04 - 02:28 AM

Kendall,

Waxman asked the Pentagon a number of questions and they answered them.

Waxman then asked the GAO the same questions and they answered them.

Waxman, then says that those answers are incomprehensible! Can't the man read? They were couched in pretty clear and detailed terms, apparently Mr. Waxman is not a Mudcatter.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: kendall
Date: 08 Jan 04 - 06:50 AM

Did you read their answers? are they available to the public?

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 08 Jan 04 - 12:29 PM

Hell yes kendall, I've read the correspondence, there's loads of it. Google input Waxman Iraq Contracts and you should get to it.

Yesterday BBC ran a couple of good articles detailing what contracts had been awarded in Iraq and what companies had got the work and the value of that work. Hell of a lot more than just Bechtell and Halliburton - but drawing attention to those doesn't help the Democrats cause does it.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: DougR
Date: 08 Jan 04 - 04:35 PM

Waxman is a left-wing nut (IMO of course)

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: kendall
Date: 08 Jan 04 - 07:54 PM

I read all of the Waxman reports and saw nothing there that makes me change my mind. I did not see or hear the BBC thing you mentioned.

Did you hear the report from the Carnagie Institute? no WMD's never were still, aint any.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 09 Jan 04 - 01:57 AM

Hi kendall,

On the Waxman/Army/GAO correspondence I thought that both answered Waxman's questions fully

Haven't read the Carnegie Endowment Report yet, but the content as reported does not surprise me. The decisions taken by your President were still correct.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: kendall
Date: 09 Jan 04 - 12:16 PM

Sure, he couldn't catch the real culprit, so he pulled a "Pearl Harbor" on a country that wasn't in any way a threat to the USA. He knew it would be a cakewalk because there were no WMDs, and the rest of the Arab world had no use for Saddam.
Moussolini did the same thing in Ethiopia, "To restore the glory of Rome"
The man is a liar and a phoney. The destruction of the towers was the best thing (politically) that could have happed to him. Up until then, he was an election fraud and a thief. After, a liar and a phoney. Now, convince me otherwise. (With facts, not opinions)

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 10 Jan 04 - 01:59 AM

"Up until then (911), he was an election fraud and a thief. After, a liar and a phoney. Now, convince me otherwise. (With facts, not opinions)"

It would be a pointless exercise kendall as the charges you lay are based on your opinions and having taken that position there is nothing that would convince you otherwise.

One thing that has never ceased to amaze me and others this side of the pond is the insistance of the voting population of the United States of America that their politicians must be as pure as the driven snow - it must be a great comfort knowing that you are all so perfect.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddams Fortune
From: kendall
Date: 10 Jan 04 - 06:02 AM

..all so perfect... cheap shot. I'm finished with this thread, you want the last word? take it. adios