 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government
|
|
|
Subject: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: dianavan Date: 24 Sep 05 - 12:13 PM Cheney's position as vice-president of the U.S. is a conflict of interest! Not only does Halliburton and Cheney benefit from no-bid contracts in New Orleans and Iraq, it is also allowed to supply weapons and services to terrorist sponsored states including Iran. When will the citizens of the U.S. rise up against this tyranny? It is in Cheney's interest to create war, destroy nations and get paid to reconstruct those same nations. What could be more obvious? Its been two years now since this has been common knowledge. This is not a conspiracy theory, it is fact. When will the people of the U.S. demand a change? Where are the politicians with integrity? Democrats and Republicans alike have sanctioned this abuse of power. Its time for a new political party but with the voting rigged, how does an honest politician have a chance? Any answers? From Halliburton Watch: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/09/26/politics/main575356.shtml |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Ebbie Date: 24 Sep 05 - 12:28 PM That is really old information, dianavan. Could you link to something more recent? I know you used to be 'American' and, as they say, there is no one more strident and strict and self righteous than a recent convert, but my bristles rise in response to some of your implications. Just what do you expect Americans to do? You are aware of our political system so you know that for any actual change we have to wait for the next election. If you are speaking instead to the uncommitted or to the BushShits, the Mudcat is not the ideal vehicle. By and large you are railing at the choir. Perhaps you'd like to take out newspaper ads in the US and help wake up the people who still maintain their allegiance to Bush and Cheney and their cohorts? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Ron Davies Date: 24 Sep 05 - 12:32 PM "not a conspiracy theory"--if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck...... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Sorcha Date: 24 Sep 05 - 05:05 PM Well, doh..... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Donuel Date: 24 Sep 05 - 05:11 PM Poster I made for Halliburton investment sales... http://www.angelfire.com/md2/customviolins/halliburt.jpg Hey their stock has doubled. and so have US casualties. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Don Firth Date: 24 Sep 05 - 06:39 PM As my drinking uncle used to tell me, "It's true that you can't make an omelet without breaking eggs, but if you break a lot of eggs, it doesn't always result in an omelet." Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 24 Sep 05 - 07:55 PM Not all attempts at an omette are edible either... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 24 Sep 05 - 08:03 PM or even omLettes, either... I wonder what an omette is... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Bobert Date: 24 Sep 05 - 08:31 PM Well, yeah, d, they kinda do... See, they are perfectly content sharin' the governemnt with other corporation so long as it doesn't cost them any real money... As to the question of when the American people will have had enough? This is way more difficult to answer because on the following: 1. The elections in the US are totally corrupt... Not only can't they run an election that is fair but even if they did, some 85 % of all districts have been so gernmandered that it wouldn't matter... 2. The corpoartions own the media and so that Jeffersonian idea that democracy depends on an infgormed electorate goes right out the window... 3. The "Soutern Strategy" is so successfull that it nowe works in the midwest as well... Whereever you have ignorant people all you have to do is throw out a few "Do you want beaucrats in yer pockets" 'er "Do you want liberals killin' yer babies" and enough of these ingorant folks will show to the polls to get yet another Corporate owned Rebub. elected... and 4. The American people are, deep down inside, very afarid... They are bombarded with stuff that is intended to make them so... Look at the news... Half of it is about stuff that keeps folks afraid... This is the best climate for the corporations to beat down the working class... The corporate CEO's ain't afraid but they well understand that if they keep the wiorking class afraid that the working class will work for less money, will not ask for national health care, etc. etc... and lastly... 5. The American people are in debt up to their necks. Rather than the rich using the all that dough to build factories and infastruncture to insure American jobs they threw it all into investments which ended up financing the houses that Americans are buying??? Yeah, this has kept the economy (falsely) looking good on paper but there is an end in sight and when lots of these folks find that the jobs they have are ditrectly or indirectly being financed by the loose credit in the housing industry... discover, ahhh, that folks ain't buyin' homes bno more... When this happens this economy will come down like a house of cards and expose the tax cuts fir waht they were... Just another redistribution of even more waelth (thru interest paid by the workin' class for these homes) upwards and away from a working class that may never ever get to retire... So, how will it change??? I'm not too sure... I reckon it will change the way that every empire that has ever existed changed... It will implode from the greed of it's moneyed class and its leaders... BObert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: dianavan Date: 24 Sep 05 - 09:43 PM Like I said, ebbie, "Its been two years now since this has been common knowledge." I never claimed it was recent news. I also mentioned that, "Democrats and Republicans alike have sanctioned this abuse of power," so I don't know how an election will solve the problem especially when the voting is rigged. Although I am extremely frustrated by the lack of action on the part of the U.S. citizenry, my hope is that the U.S. will not implode, as Bobert has said but I fear that he may be correct. Ron - When I re-read my post, I must agree that it is in fact a conspiracy. However it is not theory, it is all out there in black and white. It is fact. Whats holding up the conflict of interest investigation? Why hasn't Halliburton been indicted for fraudulently billing the U.S. govt. for goods and services in Iraq? Why are the poor of India and the Phillipines doing the dirty work in Iraq for mere pennies? Why do Americans sit by and idly watch the corruption and greed of their administration and their cronies? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Bee-dubya-ell Date: 24 Sep 05 - 09:51 PM This opinion piece is pretty informative. Bear in mind that it was written five years ago - before the 2000 election and well before the invasion of Iraq. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: dianavan Date: 24 Sep 05 - 10:18 PM ..and nothing has changed for the better. How do they get away with it? What a frustrating situation. So much for thoughts of a peaceful revolution! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Bobert Date: 24 Sep 05 - 10:23 PM Why do you think JFK got the bump??? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: katlaughing Date: 24 Sep 05 - 11:06 PM Why do Americans sit by and idly watch the corruption and greed of their administration and their cronies? Watched any news coverage of the March on Washington, today, dianavan? Here are the first few paragraphs: War Protest Generates Strong Turnout By Ryan G. Murphy, Emma Vaughn and David Pierson, Times Staff Writer Capping a summer of rising discontent with the war in Iraq, tens of thousands of protesters marched through cities across the nation Saturday to demand the immediate withdrawal of U.S. forces. Crowds shrugged off chilly rains and breakdowns in public transportation to greet Cindy Sheehan and her traveling anti-war vigil in Washington, D.C. In Los Angeles, actors and politicians led a snaking procession of protesters through downtown. And in San Diego, war veterans were among the thousands who gathered at a peaceful rally at a park. Many of the marchers said the events represented a growing momentum of discontent with the war and the Bush administration -- leading to the rise of Sheehan's movement. As you can see, there are more actions planned: The daylong march and rally was the first of three days of events here that is expected to culminate Monday with protesters flooding Congressional offices to demand an immediate and complete troop withdrawal, a position that few representatives on either side of the aisle have embraced. And, there would have been more there: Thousands of additional protesters were stranded in New York and other East Coast cities when 13 Amtrak commuter trains either were delayed or canceled because of an early morning electrical outage. As if we needed more reasons to get these bastards out, Halliburton and Cheney's other cohorts have received the first NO-BID-contracts for the Gulf Coast: ...Halliburton, Vice-President Cheney's former firm and major beneficiary in Iraq, has been tapped to clean up the Navy bases along the Gulf coast (at a cost of $29.8 million). Shaw earned a $100 million from the Corps of Engineers to rebuild homes (Bechtel, another major player, has been called in to build homes). These are all no-bid contracts. I am proud of each and every one of the Americans who got out there, today, and protested this administration's stupidity. kat |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Bobert Date: 24 Sep 05 - 11:13 PM Yeah, kat, and look at what it got them.... A hundred Bushite brownshirts got as much media time on FoxNews tonight as did the 10,000 plus aint-war folks??? Somethin' serously wrong with the way the corpoprate owned media reports the news.... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Donuel Date: 24 Sep 05 - 11:16 PM I just viewed the latest Halliburton commercial that features 3 employees who exclaim how proud they are of Halliburton. Without them The Army would still have their own KP duty. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: dianavan Date: 25 Sep 05 - 02:43 AM I did read about the protests, Kat. The best slogans (I thought) were 'Make Levees, Not War' and ' Proud of my soldier, ashamed of the war'. I also heard that the anti-war movement was starting a million dollar ad campaign on t.v. All up and down the coast, friends have been calling to tell me how angry U.S. citizens are. Katrina seems to have been the 'straw that broke the camels back'. Some Homeland Security! I hope that the movement has begun and will not die down until Bush and Blair wake up. I'm not holding my breath, however. It seems to me that the corruption has gone on for so long that it has become an acceptable part of government. They may bring the troops home from Iraq but there will be another war and another after that. Thats how these assholes make their living. Cheney wants to control the worldwide distribution of energy. He does this for power and for the riches it brings him. If leaders do not co-operate, he finds an excuse to make war. It has nothing to do with what is 'morally' right. We seem to live in world without ethics. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 25 Sep 05 - 05:14 AM Isn't there some way of declaring 'no-bid' contracts corrupt and unconstitutional? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: kendall Date: 25 Sep 05 - 08:04 AM What can we do? How about vote against every incumbent? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 25 Sep 05 - 08:23 AM ... for every non-major party candidate. Elect enough of them and they will be the majority. Unfortunately both side of the Party Machines cooperated to convince everybody not to vote for people like Perot, etc. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Bee-dubya-ell Date: 25 Sep 05 - 09:27 AM Isn't there some way of declaring 'no-bid' contracts corrupt and unconstitutional? On the federal level, no. Most states provide some sort of referendum process so that voters can directly instigate the lawmaking process. No legislator is ever going to vote to hurt a major campaign contributor, but the referendum process gives us a way of circumventing special interests. Some of the referendums passed by California voters would have had no chance of passage if presented as bills in the state legislature. There's really no national referendum process. We can complain to our elected representatives, but who are they going to listen to? A handful of voters or the guys who paid for their election campaigns? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 25 Sep 05 - 07:48 PM Which is why the system IS corrupt. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Peace Date: 25 Sep 05 - 10:28 PM Hey, my friend has a business. He wants more cash. I give him/her the job. What's to talk about? You think I give a rat's ass about taking care of taxpayers' money? This is GOVERNMENT. Get a grip. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Peace Date: 25 Sep 05 - 10:29 PM That is NOT corrupton. THAT is business. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Peace Date: 25 Sep 05 - 10:32 PM Read all about it! Nothin' corrupt in there, right? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Peace Date: 25 Sep 05 - 11:11 PM "Halliburton owns the U.S. government" I don't think so; however, it may hold the mortgage on the USA. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 26 Sep 05 - 04:51 AM Surely the point about no bid contracts is that they give the contractor free reign to set his own prices, a licence to print money. In a commercial context, this would be vigorously opposed as detrimental to the interests of shareholders. Where government is concerned, the shareholders are taxpayers, who are getting less bang for their bucks. At best this is immoral, at worst, malfeasance, and those responsible should find themselves looking for a new job, as they undoubtedly would in said commercial context. When one of the decision makers has financial links with the contractor, corruption is a generous description of the process. $200,000 in deferred pay, plus in all probability a guaranteed senior position with the contractor when his political career ends makes Cheney a bigger crook than our own late unlamented Robert Maxwell, and, by association Bush is tarred with the same brush. Bush/Cheney are selling the American people short to line their own bank accounts, and I find it hard to believe that there is no provision in US law to deal with them as other criminals are dealt with. Don T. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 26 Sep 05 - 07:01 AM QUOTE "Halliburton owns the U.S. government" I don't think so; however, it may hold the mortgage on the USA. UNQUOTE China owns 46% of it. Seen any changes in US policy towards China recently? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Bunnahabhain Date: 26 Sep 05 - 08:45 AM Wouldn't there also be howls of protest if there had been a lengthy bidding process before any contract for the rebuilding of the Gulf coast were signed? I'm not saying they're a good idea, just that it's a bad situation, so there may be no good answers. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: GUEST,rarelamb Date: 26 Sep 05 - 11:17 AM Let's go through a simple exercise: Hali stock goes up. Does Cheney make money? No. Hali stock goes down. Does Cheney make money? No. Hali has record profits. Does Cheney make money? No. Hali goes bankrupt. Does Cheney make money? No. He has deferred compensation that is insured. Note Deferred. In case some of our slower people do not understand, deferred means that he has already earned this income. It is insured. His income will not change no matter what happens to Hali. Now if he can not benefit in any form, how is there a conflict? Apparently it's not just things that are disproved weeks ago but instead years ago. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Peace Date: 26 Sep 05 - 01:48 PM Gee. I wonder if Cheney will have a wonderful high-paying job waiting for him when he is unemployed after the 2008 election? I wonder who will hire him? I wonder. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: GUEST,rarelamb Date: 26 Sep 05 - 02:03 PM LOL, Guilty for have a conflict of interest only provable 3 years in the future, if he takes a job with Haliburton. Sometimes, I think you guys don't even try anymore. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Peace Date: 26 Sep 05 - 02:09 PM Sometimes I think you never did. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: dianavan Date: 26 Sep 05 - 09:41 PM rarelamb - Read the link in the first post. "...unexercised stock options and deferred salary "are among those benefits described by the Office of Government Ethics as 'retained ties' or 'linkages' to one's former employer. Lautenberg said the report makes clear that Cheney does still have financial ties to Halliburton." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: GUEST,rarelamb Date: 27 Sep 05 - 12:11 PM He does have financial links but he does not have a conflict of interests. Reread my post. It doesn't matter what happens to Hali, Cheney's financial position does NOT change. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Peace Date: 27 Sep 05 - 01:16 PM I have a bridge you might be interested in purchasing, rarelamb. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: GUEST Date: 27 Sep 05 - 03:06 PM We have been wondering who the fool was that bought that bridge to begin with. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: katlaughing Date: 27 Sep 05 - 03:09 PM Hard to believe any one could be so naive these days. The way I understand it, "deferred" means Cheney is guaranteed that amount, at least, when he is no longer in office. And, of course, he will have a high paying position with Haliburton or one of the other taxpayer-rapers whenever he wants it, after getting out of office. Mr. Cheney takes care of his own very well. (It's hard for me to believe the same high school which my brother and sister graduated from, also produced such a despicable person as Cheney.) kat |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Don Firth Date: 27 Sep 05 - 03:59 PM Rarelamb, read a dictionary sometime. Here, let me help you: From the Merriam-Webster on-line dictionary:What this means, rarelamb, is that Vice President Cheney does not get the profit right now, but he does get it when he is no longer Vice President. It is held in trust for him until he resumes his status as a private citizen, and if the profit increases during the time he is Vice President, he also receives the increase. This is clearly a conflict of interest. There is no way anybody can whitewash this. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: GUEST,rarelamb Date: 28 Sep 05 - 10:37 AM Do some research " In Cheney's case, he signed a Halliburton form in December of 1998 choosing to have 50% of his salary for the next year, and 90% of any bonus money for that year, spread out over five years Legally, Halliburton can't increase or reduce the amount of the deferred compensation no matter what Cheney does as vice president. So Cheney's deferred payments from Halliburton wouldn't increase no matter how much money the company makes, or how many government contracts it receives." He gets paid no matter what happens. He is getting paid NOW. Please note the last sentence. I'de rather be naive and right than savvy and wrong. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: pdq Date: 28 Sep 05 - 11:54 AM Dear Don Firth, If you were in charge of provisioning a national administration with leaders, where would you look? The obvious choices are bureaucrats, lawyers, academics, professional politicians and business people. Since academics are from the "those who can, do - those who can't teach" arena, I would suggest that a few business executives, who are trained as leaders, would be an important part of the Firth Administration. Some lawyers are needed and bureaucrats are inevitable, but it is professional politicians who have never held private sector jobs in their lives, who are destroying our government. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: katlaughing Date: 28 Sep 05 - 01:18 PM Other research (My emphasis)When confronted with the proof of his ongoing financial ties with Halliburton, Cheney responded by claiming his deferred salary and stock options are not actually a "financial interest" as defined by federal ethics standards and therefore not a conflict of interest. This prompted the Congressional Research Service to issue a report which confirmed Cheney's ongoing financial interest in Halliburton "is considered among the 'ties' retained in or 'linkages to former employers' that may 'represent a continuing financial interest' in those employers which makes them potential conflicts of interest." Or, put more plainly: CBS/AP) A report by the Congressional Research Service undermines Vice President Dick Cheney's denial of a continuing relationship with Halliburton Co., the energy company he once led, Sen. Frank Lautenberg said Thursday. The report says a public official's unexercised stock options and deferred salary fall within the definition of "retained ties" to his former company. As of two years ago, pre-Katrina no-bid contracts, THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF TAXPAYER DOLLARS PAID TO HALLIBURTON TO $2.25 BILLION – OF WHICH $1.25 BILLION IS FROM THE NO-BID, EXCLUSIVE CONTRACT. From: Click here More current news includes: In May, despite concerns by the Army's own auditors about billing practices, the firm received a $72.2 million performance bonuses for its work in Iraq. The bonus was the largest ever received by the firm. Halliburton has billed the government more than $10.5 billion to date under a contract to provide aid for the military in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere. There are more reports of abuses which are costing the taxpayers so much at click here Looks as though this book would be a good place to do some research, too: click here. kat |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: GUEST,rarelamb Date: 28 Sep 05 - 01:45 PM Are you kidding? This is a joke right? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: dianavan Date: 29 Sep 05 - 02:38 AM Yeah, rarelamb, The jokes on you if you don't understand 'conflict of interest' but somehow I think you really do understand. Its just that ethics mean nothing to you. One more time for your reading pleasure... "CBS/AP) A report by the Congressional Research Service undermines Vice President Dick Cheney's denial of a continuing relationship with Halliburton Co., the energy company he once led, Sen. Frank Lautenberg said Thursday. The report says a public official's unexercised stock options and deferred salary fall within the definition of "retained ties" to his former company" Or maybe you are saying that although he 'retains ties' those ties do not constitute a conflict of interest. In that case look at the number of no-bid contracts Halliburton has received since Cheney was in office. Look at the increase in share price. Not only that, he's manipulating the price of energy in North America by creating highs and lows so that his buddies can clean up on the market. He's a slimball, rarelamb, but I guess it takes one to know one. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Teribus Date: 29 Sep 05 - 04:12 AM When all this kicked off just in March 2003, and was discussed previously the no-bid contract thing was explained. Halliburton won a competitive bid contract to win a "Frame Agreement" Contract to provide support services to the US Government in 1998. It was under the terms of that contract that the initial contracts in Iraq were placed. The practice is quite common, logical and perfectly legal. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: dianavan Date: 29 Sep 05 - 04:20 AM What about subsequent contracts? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Teribus Date: 29 Sep 05 - 05:32 AM Frame agreement contracts are awarded for a set period of time and may have extensions. For example the company I work for is a frame agreement contractor for a number of companies, the term of the contract is 5 years, with yearly options to extent for periods of 12 months up to a maximum of five years after wich the frame agreement contract is put out for competitive tender. Now if awarded work under the frame agreement, the contract for that work may containt the customers right to extend the work through Company Option. So the situation could arise where the frame agreement contract may have expired but the contractor performing the work is still engaged under options applicable to a specific job. This is cost efficient and logical as it beneficial to both parties. It permits rapid response should emergency intervention be required, it reduces our clients costs and provides us with the long term stability to invest in new equipment and carry out necessary research and development. Halliburton won a frame agreement contract via a competitive tender process in 1998, if similar to what is described above, then all work within the scope of that frame agreement could automatically be awarded to Halliburton up until 2008. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: GUEST,rarelamb Date: 29 Sep 05 - 10:09 AM Lol, feel free to actually read my link. There is no conflict of interest as Cheney does not benefit one iota whether Hali does well or not. No amount wishing or halucinating will change that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 29 Sep 05 - 11:22 AM It has been stated that Cheney holds share options in Haliburton, in addition to his deferred salary. If the price of their shares rises, as seems certain, pray tell me, how will he not benefit? Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: GUEST,rarelamb Date: 29 Sep 05 - 11:26 AM PUHLEEEEEEZE read the link. (I think this may be one of the reasons people post the whole wad instead of using links) Those options are in a trust. All procedes goto charities. He does NOT benefit! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Peace Date: 29 Sep 05 - 02:43 PM "Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: GUEST Date: 27 Sep 05 - 03:06 PM We have been wondering who the fool was that bought that bridge to begin with." He'll be the first. You don't think I OWN it do you? Twit! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: katlaughing Date: 29 Sep 05 - 02:51 PM Did read YOUR research link, did you read anyone else's? In reference to Cheney: The (Congressional Research Service) report says a public official's unexercised stock options and deferred salary fall within the definition of "retained ties" to his former company. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: pdq Date: 29 Sep 05 - 03:05 PM ...from the link GUEST rarelamb posted: Stock Options - VP Dick Chaney "That still would leave the possibility that Cheney could profit from his Halliburton stock options if the company's stock rises in value. However, Cheney and his wife Lynne have assigned any future profits from their stock options in Halliburton and several other companies to charity. And we're not just taking the Cheney's word for this -- we asked for a copy of the legal agreement they signed, which we post here publicly for the first time. The "Gift Trust Agreement" the Cheney's signed two days before he took office turns over power of attorney to a trust administrator to sell the options at some future time and to give the after-tax profits to three charities. The agreement specifies that 40% will go to the University of Wyoming (Cheney's home state), 40% will go to George Washington University's medical faculty to be used for tax-exempt charitable purposes, and 20% will go to Capital Partners for Education , a charity that provides financial aid for low-income students in Washington, DC to attend private and religious schools. The agreement states that it is "irrevocable and may not be terminated, waived or amended," so the Cheney's can't take back their options later." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: katlaughing Date: 29 Sep 05 - 03:48 PM From someone who says it better than I (my emphasis), an excerpt: Published on Tuesday, September 23, 2003 by the Daytona Beach News-Journal Cheney's War Stock Editorial In 2001, Halliburton paid Cheney a salary of $205,298. In 2002, the company paid him $162,392. He is to receive similar payments this year and for the next two years. Those are "deferred salary" payments -- not retirement benefits or payments from escrow accounts, but, as Lautenberg points out, "an ongoing corporate obligation that is paid from company funds." If Halliburton were to go under, the payments would stop. That, of course, is not about to happen. The stock market has tanked in the last three years. The economy continues to lurk between recession and Herbert Hoover's shadow. But Halliburton's stock value in less than a year (going back to last October) has grown 75 percent. Hint: Halliburton is the Pentagon's top contractor in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. And Cheney, a proponent, if not a fan, of both wars, holds 433,333 Halliburton stock options. I have no financial interest in Halliburton of any kind. If Cheney's deferred salary and stock options don't constitute a financial interest of any kind, then the vice president's conception of reality is as questionable as his ethics. The fact that he has pledged not to profit from stock sales by giving profits to a charity doesn't diminish the extent of his ties. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Don Firth Date: 29 Sep 05 - 04:05 PM Thank you, kat. Case closed! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: GUEST,Arkie Date: 29 Sep 05 - 05:33 PM Could Mr. Cheney receive his share when he leaves office? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: katlaughing Date: 29 Sep 05 - 06:12 PM Yer welcome, Don. Arkie, I'm looking for info on that. In the meantime, Cheney needn't worry about it...he's already received so much. this article from 2000 spells out a lot. Some excerpts: Halliburton Corporation, the world's largest oilfield services company, confirmed August 16 that Republican vice presidential nominee Richard Cheney will receive a "golden handshake" worth up to $20 million upon his retirement as chief executive officer of the firm. Although Cheney did not fulfill the terms of his contract as CEO, which requires that he serve until age 62, another three years, in order to collect full benefits, Halliburton's Board of Directors has decided to waive all penalties and give him the maximum severance and pension package, the bulk of which is in the form of stock options. and (my emphasis): Even without the pension and severance payments Cheney would leave Halliburton a wealthy man. He already owns stock worth more than $25 million, although he has never personally invested a penny in the company. Just last May he cashed in stock options that netted him a profit of $3 million, after he had already taken on the job of helping Bush select a vice-presidential candidate. He also made $1.3 million in salary in 1998 and again in 1999, and similar amounts in salary as well as bonuses of between $1 and $2 million in 1996 and 1997. The waiver means that Cheney will not forfeit options to buy 400,000 ordinary shares of Halliburton stock at a favorable price. The Board also decided to lift the restrictions on another 140,000 shares of restricted stock, allowing Cheney to convert these into regular shares... According to a Halliburton officer, the options cannot be transferred or donated to charity except after Cheney's death, by his heirs. Cheney was named CEO of Halliburton in August 1995, despite his lack of previous experience in the oil industry, because company officials expected that his overseas and Washington contacts would prove advantageous. This judgment proved accurate, especially in the Middle East, where the oil sheiks remember Cheney as US secretary of defense during the Persian Gulf War. And we are to believe he will NOT receive any profits?! He's been a "good boy"... Halliburton will not forget. Besides a ready job with them, they will find a way to profit him, now, or later, no matter. This is gross conflict of interest, imo. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: katlaughing Date: 29 Sep 05 - 06:37 PM Here's one of the best and most telling background articles I have ever read on Cheney, from Rolling Stone. There are some very interesting comments by former colleagues of his near the end of the article. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Don Firth Date: 29 Sep 05 - 07:39 PM Y'know, pdq, I've been thinking about what you said above. ". . . the Firth Administration. . . ." That has a nice ring to it. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Peace Date: 29 Sep 05 - 07:44 PM It would provide the people of the USA with an honest government--and one with a brain. Go fer it, Don. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: dianavan Date: 29 Sep 05 - 08:17 PM Excellent link, Kat. Unempathetic is just a nice way of saying he's an asshole. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: katlaughing Date: 29 Sep 05 - 08:36 PM Would that be the Firth of Fourth Administration, Don? (Couldn't resist!:-) Thanks, dianavan! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: GUEST Date: 29 Sep 05 - 08:41 PM Hmmnnn, lots of assholes here, eh? A shrewd businessman always creates a lot of jealousy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: GUEST Date: 29 Sep 05 - 08:42 PM My dog wouldnt be jealous of you GUEST |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Teribus Date: 29 Sep 05 - 08:58 PM Actually I agree with GUEST 29 Sep 05 - 08:42 PM What we are seeing in this thread is good old socialist left wing envy. Where the denigration of one of the most successful CEOs of a world ranked corporation gifts his stock options completely to charity is howled down by the liberal looney left for what reason? You, of the looney left have two choices (please answer honestly - if you are capable of that): a) You don't like George W Bush as your President even although he was democractically elected as such. b) You just plain and simple despise success |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: GUEST Date: 29 Sep 05 - 09:17 PM It is b) as they are incapable of acheiving success. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Peace Date: 29 Sep 05 - 10:26 PM I could use some of that for the petunias, Guest. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: dianavan Date: 29 Sep 05 - 10:46 PM "...even although" Cheney is one of the CEOs of a world ranked corporation he still has ties to Halliburton. Who ranks these corporations, anyway? Certainly wasn't the taxpaying public. So, he's a businessman (without a drop of compassion) running the U.S.A. Like I said, Halliburton owns the U.S. government. Halliburton RUNS the U.S. government might be a more appropriate title. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Teribus Date: 29 Sep 05 - 11:20 PM Dianavan: Dick Cheney WAS a CEO of a world ranked corporation, not IS. I believe that his ties have been fully explained. Now what exactly is your objection to the trust, set up to ensure that any monies made go to charity - so far no government watchdog has pulled the current Vice-President up for any wrongdoing and I am fairly certain that they are watching for it. The corporations are ranked for market share, profitability and overall performance by financial institutions all over the world. They invest, rather large sums, in the likes of Halliburton and other corporations, the money they invest is what pays peoples pensions, so in general, indirectly, it is the tax paying public. Since when has any Vice-President run the USA with the elected incumbent still alive and in office - Oddly enough Dianavan I cannot think of one. And if you are given to left wing generalisations I suppose you can come up with some sort of evidence that all businessmen have not a drop of compassion (maybe Bill Gates qualifies in your book - ask those around the world who are currently receiving help from the man - they might put you right). Neither Halliburton, or any other corporation owns the US Government, your current administration was elected by the American people, rather decisively, if memory serves me correctly. The fact that that result did not fall in with your desires is neither here nor there - learn to live with it for what it is, don't attribute it to anything other than it is - the free will of the American people. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: dianavan Date: 30 Sep 05 - 12:42 AM Since I am Canadian, my current administration (hopefully) was not elected by the American people. What country are you from? Statements like, "...in general, indirectly, it is the tax paying public..." are pretty general and indirect. Do you think the people are stupid? Are you a Fascist? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: GUEST,H Date: 30 Sep 05 - 09:37 AM Dianavan, after reading your posts over the past few weeks, I am thankful you are not a citizen of the US. We have enough narrowminded and shortsighted people here now. You constantly attack the poster rather than attempting to contradict the contents. You are not the only one doing this, I must admit it is an easy route to take when one doesn't have supportive thoughts/facts to employ. Please, stay up there. I guess you are basically an okay person but your approach to logic is something we do not require more of here. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: GUEST Date: 30 Sep 05 - 10:18 AM This is so insignificant as to not to be worth the typing time. However, if given careful consideration as to the thought processes and the denial capability of some Libs. On 27 Sep 05 @ 01:16 Peace said and I quote, "I have a bridge you might be interested in purchasing, rarelamb". To me, this indicates ownership by Peace. No where is anything being implied that she was in the position of a sales agent. Later, I simply posted that "many of us had wondered who bought the thing to begin with." Later, , on 29 Sep @ 2:43 PM., Peace said "He will be the first. You don't think I own it do you? Twit!" Well, Gee whiz, Peace, you said you did "I have a bridge......." I wonder how we should interpret your other posts. Please advise. As I said, it is insignificant by itself but in the grand scheme of things....................? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: TIA Date: 30 Sep 05 - 11:01 AM So the stock profits go to charity. Just asking - is there any tax deduction related to these charitable contributions? Them tax lawyers is tricksie. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: GUEST,rarelamb Date: 30 Sep 05 - 11:02 AM Ha! Inconceivable :) Well i've tried. I think we are at an impass. For my part, I have : 1 Proven that no matter what happens to Hali, Cheney will neither lose money nor make money. 2 Without consideration there is no conflict of interest. No one has proven 1 wrong. For the oppositon has: 1. Been unable to prove that Cheney benefits when Hali makes money 2. puts forward the arguement that when Cheney leaves office, he will then get his benefits by getting a plum job with Hali. Therefore any legislation that helps oil companies today will be proof of a conflict of interest if he works for them in the future. Let me first say that, 'Minority Report' was only a movie. It is absurd in the least to be crucifying a guy for what you think he might do in the future. Second, by your standard every single congressman, senator, president and vice-president would have to recuse themselves from every piece of legislation that deals with any potential field they may enter after elected office. Conspiracies are a poor substitute for logic and empiricism. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: katlaughing Date: 30 Sep 05 - 01:15 PM Without consideration there is no conflict of interest. Be sure to notify the Congressional Research Service, eh? Guest...reduced to name-calling? That sure proves something. Teribus: our current administration was elected by the American people, rather decisively, if memory serves me correctly. 51% to 48% is hardly what I would call "decisive." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: GUEST Date: 30 Sep 05 - 01:51 PM Katlaughing, this is the guest who did the last post as Guest. I assume that you are refering to me with regard to name calling? Please, go back and read the 10:18 AM post today. Can you ascertain the quotation marks? Thanks for your assistance in proving my point. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: katlaughing Date: 30 Sep 05 - 03:09 PM For the record, I was referring to guests who posted at 29 Sep 05 - 08:41 PM and 29 Sep 05 - 09:17 PM. I meant to include some of what Teribus posted, too. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: GUEST,rarelamb Date: 30 Sep 05 - 03:52 PM I question whether or not you have read my link. In the future, I will be posting the articles as opposed to providing links as it appears people do not read them. ""Financial Interest" Democrats have taken issue with Cheney's statement to Tim Russert on NBC's Meet the Press Sept. 14, 2003, when he said he had no "financial interest" in Halliburton: Cheney (Sept. 14, 2003): I've severed all my ties with the company, gotten rid of all my financial interests. I have no financial interest in Halliburton of any kind and haven't had now for over three years. And as vice president, I have absolutely no influence of, involvement of, knowledge of in any way, shape or form of contracts led by the Corps of Engineers or anybody else in the federal government. Shortly after that, Democratic Sen. Frank Lautenberg released a legal analysis he'd requested from the Congressional Research Service. Without naming Cheney, the memo concluded a federal official in his position -- with deferred compensation covered by insurance, and stock options whose after-tax profits had been assigned to charity -- would still retain an "interest" that must be reported on an official's annual disclosure forms. And in fact, Cheney does report his options and deferred salary each year. But the memo reached no firm conclusion as to whether such options or salary constitute an "interest" that would pose a legal conflict. It said "it is not clear" whether assigning option profits to charity would theoretically remove a potential conflict, adding, "no specific published rulings were found on the subject." And it said that insuring deferred compensation "might" remove it as a problem under conflict of interest laws. Actually, the plain language of the Office of Government Ethics regulations on this matter seems clear enough. The regulations state: "The term financial interest means the potential for gain or loss to the employee . . . as a result of governmental action on the particular matter." So by removing the "potential for gain or loss" Cheney has solid grounds to argue that he has removed any "financial interest" that would pose a conflict under federal regulations." In case you missed it: "Actually, the plain language of the Office of Government Ethics regulations on this matter seems clear enough. The regulations state: "The term financial interest means the potential for gain or loss to the employee . . . as a result of governmental action on the particular matter."" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: GUEST,TIA Date: 30 Sep 05 - 03:55 PM tax implications....? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: GUEST,rarelamb Date: 30 Sep 05 - 03:58 PM I would assume he gets the tax deduction the year he set up the irrevocable trust. As a Gift Trust instead of a CRUT charitable remainder unit trust, I think it was simply a strait gift. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: GUEST Date: 30 Sep 05 - 04:14 PM Nice try Katlaughing, but no cigar. The first, 8:14 was me quoting your friend Dianavan and the second was simply picking a choice offered by Teribus, no name calling there UNLESS "if the shoe fits". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: katlaughing Date: 30 Sep 05 - 04:37 PM Is that really you? Believe what you will rarelamb...impasse/splitting hairs it is. Seems obvious to many, many people. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Barry Finn Date: 30 Sep 05 - 04:48 PM To gain power & influence is legal & it is equal in value to money. Only difference between gaining money while being in a confit of interest is that leagly that can bring about, at worst, jail time (hah,hah)& digrace & for power influence no legal consequences & in the eyes of some, not digraceful. Barry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Barry Finn Date: 30 Sep 05 - 04:50 PM By the way, I forgot to ask. Did Halliburton get any no bid contracts ot re build any parts of the Gulf Coast? Barry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Bobert Date: 30 Sep 05 - 08:30 PM Hey, I haven't had time to keep up with my pudder-stufff to much but, in case someone hadn'tr mentioned it, I'd just like to say: HEY, TERIBUS!!! Been a long time since Bush had you assigned to Mudville... Liie what gives??? Bush thinkin' that the Mudville folkie revolutionaries is plannin' to overthrow some small town in Oklahoma??? Hey, we can't even get folks to *tune* so I wouldn't worry none much about us... But glad to see you got reassigned... Jus' wish I had more time to mess with ya.... Danged... Oh, Halliburton???? So, ahhhh, like why is it that they have become the *poster corporation* fir what appears to be very corrupt about yer guy's adminstration??? Seems we keep hearing thesame old story: "Well, Ralpf, no one else can do it!!!" Hey, T-Bird, it's a friggin' taeriler... My couzin Rufus prolly knows more 'bout trailers than everyone at Halliburton combined.... Bugt welcome back, pal.... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: katlaughing Date: 30 Sep 05 - 10:34 PM Yes, Barry, they did and Congress is looking into it: Click Here. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Peace Date: 30 Sep 05 - 10:43 PM Nice to see that maybe Congress has grown a pair. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Bobert Date: 30 Sep 05 - 10:50 PM So now Halliburton is the triler experts of the world... Hmmmm??? My cousin Rufus knows more about trailers tha the top 100 employees at Halliburton... But, like Teribus used to argue back inb the old days, Halliburton is the only company capible of buuying 10,000 trailers... Nah, I think Rufus could out buy the top ten Halliburton tariler buyers.... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Peace Date: 30 Sep 05 - 10:57 PM News articles here. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: katlaughing Date: 03 Nov 06 - 12:10 AM Congress Tells Auditor in Iraq to Close Office By JAMES GLANZ Published: November 3, 2006 Investigations led by a Republican lawyer named Stuart W. Bowen Jr. in Iraq have sent American occupation officials to jail on bribery and conspiracy charges, exposed disastrously poor construction work by well-connected companies like Halliburton and Parsons, and discovered that the military did not properly track hundreds of thousands of weapons it shipped to Iraqi security forces. And tucked away in a huge military authorization bill that President Bush signed two weeks ago is what some of Mr. Bowen's supporters believe is his reward for repeatedly embarrassing the administration: a pink slip. The order comes in the form of an obscure provision that terminates his federal oversight agency, the Office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, on Oct. 1, 2007. The clause was inserted by the Republican side of the House Armed Services Committee over the objections of Democratic counterparts during a closed-door conference, and it has generated surprise and some outrage among lawmakers who say they had no idea it was in the final legislation. Mr. Bowen's office, which began operation in January 2004 to examine reconstruction money spent in Iraq, was always envisioned as a temporary organization, permitted to continue its work only as long as Congress saw fit. Some advocates for the office, in fact, have regarded its lack of a permanent bureaucracy as the key to its aggressiveness and independence. But as the implications of the provision in the new bill have become clear, opposition has been building on both sides of the political aisle. One point of contention is exactly when the office would have naturally run its course without a hard end date. rest of article may be read HERE. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Bobert Date: 03 Nov 06 - 07:49 AM Thanks for refreshing this thread, Kat... Bush has reassigned T-Bird to Mudcat in the hopes that T can get everyone to see the light and vote Repub Tueasday... ...but I've been waitin' along time for T to explain just what special skills iot takes to purchase trailers... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Donuel Date: 03 Nov 06 - 01:40 PM whats a few billion among friends? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Teribus Date: 04 Nov 06 - 12:57 AM Bobert - 30 Sep 05 - 10:50 PM "...Teribus used to argue back inb the old days, Halliburton is the only company capible of buuying 10,000 trailers..." Bobert - 03 Nov 06 - 07:49 AM "I've been waitin' along time for T to explain just what special skills iot takes to purchase trailers..." I don't believe that I have EVER mentioned Halliburton in association with buying trailers. Bobert on the other hand seems to think that I have, no doubt he can supply examples. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Bobert Date: 04 Nov 06 - 09:05 AM Okay, T-zer, what is it then that you would like to ***proclaim*** that Hallinurton is the only company in the world can do and thusly should be awarded no-bid contracts??? Puttin' out oil fire??? Building clinics??? Repairing electical facilities??? Fixing bridges??? Cooking??? If I am not mistaken you were a strong defender of the no-bid contracts in the period after the invasion, weren't you??? If not, then pardon me... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Teribus Date: 05 Nov 06 - 02:28 AM 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. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Bobert Date: 05 Nov 06 - 09:49 AM Danged, T, I must have been asleep at the wheel... I had forgotten that it was Clinton, and not Bush, who decided to invade Iraq and occupy it in 1998... Not!!! Come on T-zer... Do you rerally expect anyone to believe your story here??? I mean, do you really expect that a contract for "Services Package A" awarded to Halliburton in 1998 was all encompassing for "Services Package B" that would be required to meet the needs of a war and an occupation??? If so then one would have to assume that in 1998 someone in military procurments would have had to not only know that George Bush would be elected some 2 years later but decide to invade and occupy Iraq a couple years after that... That, my friend, is a major stretch of imagination... Plus, given the fact that a sitting Vice President was still recieving compensation from his former company, Halliburton, at the time when Halliburton was contracted makes this entire affair smellier than a box of of fishheads... So, inspite of the Teribus world view, there will come a time when these no-bid contracts that were awarded to Halliburton will get a peek and if the Dems should prevail this Tuesday it could be sooner than later depending on just which of the Bush administartion scandals the Dems elect to bring out from under Bush's carpet... But before you say "There you go again, Bobert, with yer factless predictions" keep in mind that over the past 5 years my predictions on Iraq have been purdy much on the $$$... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Donuel Date: 05 Nov 06 - 08:21 PM Not to worry. Last week a secret bill (called an earmark) was sneaked into a larger bill that permanently fired the accounting officer whose job was to oversee the money going to Halliburton and other corporations in which the military outsources much of their "good work" No more oversight/accounting = No more problems with scandalous theft. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Bobert Date: 05 Nov 06 - 09:12 PM Exactly, Donuel... This is the way it is done while it still can be done... This kinda reminds me of Enron when they went weeks ordering folks to shread documents... This is why Bush ahs classified more document in 6 years then were classified in in total from George Washington to the end of Clinton's administration... These crook are runnin' scared as well they should be and they are going to use the next 2 years to sandbag, classify and obstruct to kepp the American peopl;e from finding out just what a bunch a crooks they really are but the American people have allready figured it out... Yeah, evn the ones who are in denial deep down inside know it... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Slag Date: 05 Nov 06 - 09:17 PM hmmmm. Maybe that's why the economy is doing so well. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Teribus Date: 06 Nov 06 - 05:52 AM 100 up! Bobert - 05 Nov 06 - 09:49 AM "Come on T-zer... Do you rerally expect anyone to believe your story here??? I mean, do you really expect that a contract for "Services Package A" awarded to Halliburton in 1998 was all encompassing for "Services Package B" that would be required to meet the needs of a war and an occupation??? If so then one would have to assume that in 1998 someone in military procurments would have had to not only know that George Bush would be elected some 2 years later but decide to invade and occupy Iraq a couple years after that... That, my friend, is a major stretch of imagination..." You obviously know little about contracts and contracting at the level required. The Frame Agreement Contract won competitively by Halliburton in 1998 was for the Pentagon in support of US Armed Forces on a world-wide basis, i.e. it covered anything that was required/could be required so your "Services Package A" and "Services Package B" arguement does not wash. The Frame Agreement Contract lasts for a fixed period and covers all eventualities for services, where these cannot be defined or quantified specific rates are set according to circumstance. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Old Guy Date: 06 Nov 06 - 07:16 AM Who invented LOGCAPs? Exerpted from http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/reg19n3b.html : Five months after the 1994 election, President Clinton launched an ambitious project to deliver on his campaign promise to “radically change the way government operatesâ€"to shift from top down bureaucracy to entrepreneurial government.â€쳌 Vice President Gore, who was given the task of “creating a government that works better and costs less,â€쳌 quickly assembled a team of career government executives and outside management consultants and embarked on the National Performance Review (NPR). By September 1993 they delivered the blueprint that was to serve as the Clinton administration's reform agenda (REGO I). The reinvention, which was meant to evolve over time, was itself reinvented in the wake of the Republican victory in the 1994 congressional elections. Chastened by the electorate, President Clinton proclaimed that he had received the voters' message “loud and clearâ€쳌 and proceeded to launch Phase II of reinvention (REGO II). The contrast between the two reform agendas could not be more striking and the change in course, including the reshaping of the coalition to promote REGO II, is a testament to the adaptability of the Clinton administration. More |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Bobert Date: 06 Nov 06 - 08:53 AM No, T, I know more than I want to know about contracts and, more specificly, procuements... I worked for my brother's firm during and after the Kuwait war negotiating contracts for all kinds of tenders that the Kuwaitis put out for "bid"... And I we won our fair share... These tenders are *very* specific... It takes a real leap of imagination that Halliburton would be contratced to perform "Service Package B" in '98 or '99 for reconstrction services for a war that wasn't even on the radar screen... If that is your position, it is about as weak as the ones you were makin' during Bush's mad-dash-to-Iraq(mire)... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: John on the Sunset Coast Date: 06 Nov 06 - 10:38 PM Gosh, if Halliburton owns the US, I should buy their stock so I can own the US too. Now when I own the US.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Teribus Date: 07 Nov 06 - 04:56 AM Bobert, you are trying to compare oranges to apples, you are comparing a contract for specific services for a specific time frame to a Frame Agreement Contract covering a multitude of services over a period of years. They are not the same thing at all. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Bobert Date: 07 Nov 06 - 01:37 PM That's my point, T-bird... Like you have just said, "They are not the same thing at all." Given that we both agree on this much then why do you think that a contract with Halliburton signed in '98 or '99 for "A, B & C" jsutified givin' Halliburton a no-bid contract to perform "D, E & F" in Iraq some 4 years after the "A, B & C" contract had gone into effect??? There's somethin' lackin' here in your logic, ol pal... Seems no matter how you argue your psoition it doesn't work... Kinda a square peg and round hole thing for ya no matter how many times ya play it out... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Peace Date: 07 Nov 06 - 01:45 PM They are corrupt bastards. Period. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Bobert Date: 07 Nov 06 - 07:55 PM Don't try to confuse T-Bird with more facts, brucie... He's allready well over his head and the poor boy is now arguing with himself... But ya' kinda have to give him credit... He has no fear of takin' up arguing losin' causes... That's shows courage 'er.... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Old Guy Date: 07 Nov 06 - 08:27 PM "Vice President Al Gore's National Performance Review mentioned Halliburton's performance in its Report on Reinventing the Department of Defense, issued in September 1996. In a section titled "Outsourcing of Logistics Allows Combat Troops to Stick to Basics," Gore's reinventing-government team favorably mentioned LOGCAP, the cost-plus-award system, and Brown & Root, which the report said provided "basic life support services-food, water, sanitation, shelter, and laundry; and the full realm of logistics services- transportation, electrical, hazardous materials collection and disposal, fuel delivery, airfield and seaport operations, and road maintenance." Exerpted from http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_13_55/ai_104538161/pg_3 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Bobert Date: 07 Nov 06 - 08:41 PM Ancient history, Oldster... How about emailin' ol' Al and see what he says today... Heck, my hair was still dark in '96... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Old Guy Date: 07 Nov 06 - 09:26 PM Bobert plays the old "one standard for you and no standard for me" Ancient History Card. Check around a little Bobert and tell us who reinvented government and started outsourcing things to Halliburton. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Old Guy Date: 07 Nov 06 - 09:28 PM Dick Cheney Ties ...In recent years the company has become the center of several controversies involving the 2003 Iraq War and the company's ties to U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney. Cheney retired from the company during the 2000 U.S. presidential election campaign with a severance package worth $34 million. As of 2004, he had received $398,548 in deferred compensation from Halliburton while Vice President.[4] Cheney also retains unexercised stock options at Halliburton, which have been valued at nearly $8 million. Concerns have been raised regarding the possible conflict of interest resulting from Cheney's deferred compensation and stock options from Halliburton. However, before entering office in 2001, Cheney bought an insurance policy that guaranteed a fixed amount of deferred payments from Halliburton each year for five years so that the payments would not depend on the company's fortunes. He is legally bound by an agreement he signed which turns over power of attorney to a trust administrator to sell the options at some future time and to give the after-tax profits to three charities. The agreement specifies that 40% will go to the University of Wyoming (in Cheney's home state), 40% will go to George Washington University's medical faculty to be used for tax-exempt charitable purposes, and 20% will go to Capital Partners for Education. The agreement states that it is "irrevocable and may not be terminated, waived or amended," preventing Cheney from taking back the options at a later date.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Teribus Date: 08 Nov 06 - 02:34 AM Eh, Bobert Frame Agreement Contracts are set to cover works, services and support that may be required during the period of that contract. So a contract with a duration of five years signed in 1998 would cover any work required in 2003. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Peace Date: 08 Nov 06 - 06:14 AM Depends when in 1998 the contract was signed. 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Peace Date: 08 Nov 06 - 06:24 AM Guess not on second look. That's probably why I can't figure out how old I am. Halliburton may own some of the US government, but if todays voting is anything to go by, they don't yet own the American people. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Bobert Date: 08 Nov 06 - 10:06 AM Yeah, T-Bird, what brucies says... Hope you unloaded yer Halliburton stocks before the election... And, for the record, your argument lacks logic... No one, other than you, would believe that a contract awarded in 1998 would be used to justify a massive rebuilding of a country ivaded and occupied almost 5 years later... Call any contract lawyer and ask them... No, dangit, not yer wingnut brother-in-law who graduated in the bottom 1/4th of his correspondance law school... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Old Guy Date: 08 Nov 06 - 09:51 PM I have benn looking all over the net trying to find out who owns Halliburton and I can't fine anything except Mike Moore owns Halliburton stock. Does anybody know who owns Halliburton? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Teribus Date: 08 Nov 06 - 10:01 PM Bobert as far as I am aware Halliburton has never been awarded a contract to rebuild any country, invaded, or otherwise. Frame Agreement Contract covered engineering support and services required for by the US Military, it also included immediate repair of oilfield infrastructure damaged by military action or by deliberate sabotage by the enemy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Don Firth Date: 08 Nov 06 - 10:06 PM Then, Teribus, you haven't been paying attention to the news. Or you've been listening only to Fox News and people like Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Old Guy Date: 08 Nov 06 - 10:28 PM Bobert: Have you studied up on the history of LOGCAPs yet? ...Halliburton discovered the benefits of government patronage when its support for U.S. President Lyndon Johnson resulted in several contracts, such as constructing military bases during the Vietnam War. In 1991, after the Persian Gulf War, then-Defense Secretary Cheney commissioned Brown & Root to conduct a study on the benefits of military outsourcing, paying the company an additional $5 million to update the report months later. In 1992, Brown & Root was awarded the U.S. Army's first Logistics Civil Augmentation Program contract, an omnibus contract that allows the Army to call on KBR for support in all of its field operations, including combat, peacekeeping and humanitarian assistance. LOGCAP is a "cost plus award fee" contract, meaning that KBR is paid a fee above the cost of the service ranging from two percent to five percent, depending on performance. When the Army needs a service performed, it issues a "task order," a sort of minicontract that outlines the tasks the contractor needs to perform. When the United States joined NATO forces in the Balkans in 1995, KBR was deployed to the Balkans. KBR lost a second five-year LOGCAP contract—awarded to DynCorp in 1997— after the General Accounting Office reported in February 1997 that KBR had overrun its estimated costs in the Balkans by 32 percent (some of which was attributed to an increase in the Army's demands). Despite these findings, KBR was awarded a new contract for Balkan logistical support that ran through May 1999. In September 2000, the GAO released another report claiming the Army had not reined in contractor costs, placing the total cost of the Balkan contract at $2.2 billion... Excerpted from http://www.publicintegrity.org/wow/bio.aspx?act=pro&ddlC=31 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Peace Date: 09 Nov 06 - 01:22 AM Old Guy: You asked above who owns Halliburton. Here ya go. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Old Guy Date: 09 Nov 06 - 11:09 PM So only 5% of Halliburton is directly owned, 82% is owned by stock and mututal funds so that leaves 13% owned by inddividuals. Those funds must be the major owner of the government. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Peace Date: 10 Nov 06 - 02:18 AM Of course, blocks of stocks and mutual funds can be owned by individuals who wish to remain 'anonymous'. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: GUEST Date: 12 Nov 06 - 02:05 PM Someone recently told me that Lydon Bains Johnson, owns Hallibuton, bought in the 60". Now Lady Bird and daughter Lynda benefit. Does anyone know? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Teribus Date: 13 Nov 06 - 03:16 AM Always thought that it was the other way round, Lady Bird's family were major shareholders and LBJ married into it. But so far all research indicates that US Government does not appear to be among things owned by Halliburton, and that the major part of Halliburton's stock is owned by investment companies, insurance companies and pension funds. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: dianavan Date: 13 Nov 06 - 05:49 PM "the major part of Halliburton's stock is owned by investment companies, insurance companies and pension funds." And here are the names of the people who control those stocks: http://www.halliburton.com/about/board_of_dir.jsp |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Bobert Date: 13 Nov 06 - 06:32 PM Just for fun, I checked out the Halliburton web site that d has provided and there is a place where you can insert a name or product and search it and, hmmmmmmm??? Seems that this site hasn't ever heard of Dick Cheney??? Like what's this all about??? But then I noticed the small print and found that the site has been revised by Diebold, Inc.... Nevermind... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Peace Date: 13 Nov 06 - 06:37 PM http://www.halliburtonwatch.org/ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Peace Date: 13 Nov 06 - 06:40 PM Halliburton doesn't OWN the US government, but it certainly seems they are the tail that wags the dog. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Bobert Date: 13 Nov 06 - 07:56 PM Well, given that the Cheney administration that has gotten the US into Iraqmire is the same Cheney, irregarless of the sanitizing of the current website, who once ran Helliburton and collected money annually from Hellibrton at the time that Helliburton was being awarded no-bid contracts I would have to say that it's twiddle-dee, twiddle dum on the ownership end of the deal... Of course, the mighty Teribus will argue that the US government, under Bill Clinton mind you, entered into some kind of open ended contract with Helliburton in '98 that forsaw Cheney's invasion orders of Iraqmire and therefore the contracts were perfectly above board??? Hmmmmmmmmm??? I think the better drugs ain't comin' States way these days... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Old Guy Date: 13 Nov 06 - 10:27 PM Bobert's drug induced humming bird trance ignores this fact: Halliburton discovered the benefits of government patronage when its support for U.S. President Lyndon Johnson resulted in several contracts, such as constructing military bases during the Vietnam War. In 1991 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Little Hawk Date: 14 Nov 06 - 02:31 AM They may own the US Government, but they don't own my dachshund yet! He has an agenda all his own... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Little Hawk Date: 14 Nov 06 - 02:52 AM Dickering around about who is worse, the Democrats or the Republicans, and which one of them has toadied up to Haliburton and when and how is largely a waste of time. They both serve the same corporate masters. They adopt differing outward styles primarily to delude the voting public into thinking it still has a real choice and a real democracy. It's a clever technique, mind you. It works every time. Americans are used to it, and they think it's the only way. When people in the USA can only can see 2 viable, electable choices to vote for...Tweedledee and Tweedledum...they will vote accordingly for one or the other and the farce will go on for another term of office. Look at the pathetic choices you are offered, generally speaking, for you chief executive. The faces in power will change whenever enough damage has been done to the public's interests to alienate a majority of Americans against the false face that's presently in power...in which case they will turn to the other false face for the next 4 to 8 years. "And may the farce be with you." ;-) This is how you can have what is technically still a "democracy" in terms of the public mechanisms and laws put in place, but is actually an undemocratic oligarchy of powerful financial interests that are completely beyond the control of the public, and not reachable through the election process. Money bought out your democracy long ago and replaced it with an outer facade. Very clever indeed. The same has happened in many other places too, by the way, not just in the USA. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Teribus Date: 14 Nov 06 - 03:23 AM Bobert's post of 13 Nov 06 - 07:56 PM, wonders about a "sanitized" web site that shows that current US Vice-President Dick Cheney has nothing to do with the Halliburton Organisation. Well Bobert, that would not come as any shock to any rational human being as the current date is 14th November 2006 and Dick Cheney cut all ties with Halliburton to run for Office in some time in 1999. "Of course, the mighty Teribus will argue that the US government, under Bill Clinton mind you, entered into some kind of open ended contract with Helliburton in '98 that forsaw Cheney's invasion orders of Iraqmire and therefore the contracts were perfectly above board???" No arguement Bobert, no arguement at all. The fact that Halliburton were awarded a competitively bid five year Frame Agreement Contract in 1998 during the Clinton Administrations second term in office is undeniable (Year 1 of the contract ran from 1998 to 1999; Year 2 from 1999 to 2000; Year 3 from 2000 to 2001; Year 4 from 2001 to 2002 and Year 5 from 2002 to 2003), it is a simple matter of record, no arguement at all. The contract scope of work in broad terms was to provide engineering, logistical and support services to the US military on a world-wide basis - No foresight required Bobert, if during that period Bobert, any branch of the US military required any such services, anywhere in the world, it would fall upon Halliburton to provide those services. Oh, and yes Bobert the contracts were perfectly above board. On a separate subject Bobert quotes deaths in Iraq as being 650,000. This figure of 650,000 comes from an article in the British Medical Journal, "The Lancet", the numbers arrived at come from batch sampling and extrapolation and the survey has been totally discredited, it suits Bobert's purposes so he believes it to be true. Bobert believing it to be true does not however make it true. IraqBodyCount, so far the most comprehensive and accurate, but by no means infallable, gives a high figure total of 55,000. The Iraqi Government comes up with potential but unconfirmed estimates of between 100,000 and 150,000. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Peace Date: 14 Nov 06 - 10:18 AM "IraqBodyCount, so far the most comprehensive and accurate, but by no means infallable, gives a high figure total of 55,000. The Iraqi Government comes up with potential but unconfirmed estimates of between 100,000 and 150,000." Acceptable numbers to you are they? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Little Hawk Date: 14 Nov 06 - 11:40 AM Of course they're acceptable to him, Peace. He finds them convenient because it gives him ammunition with which to shoot at Bobert's last post. ;-) Such are the petty victories sought by people engaging in arguments. Iraqis, of course, find neither set of death count numbers particularly convenient, given the fact that they are the people directly affected. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Old Guy Date: 14 Nov 06 - 01:46 PM Bobert: "He is legally bound by an agreement he signed which turns over power of attorney to a trust administrator to sell the options at some future time and to give the after-tax profits to three charities. The agreement specifies that 40% will go to the University of Wyoming (in Cheney's home state), 40% will go to George Washington University's medical faculty to be used for tax-exempt charitable purposes, and 20% will go to Capital Partners for Education. The agreement states that it is "irrevocable and may not be terminated, waived or amended," preventing Cheney from taking back the options at a later date" Please explain to us how is Cheney getting his kickback money from Halliburton? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Little Hawk Date: 14 Nov 06 - 02:31 PM When you know the right people, it's never that big a problem, Old Guy. A favor here gets a favor there. One hand washes the other. You know how it is in any big organization. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Old Guy Date: 14 Nov 06 - 06:34 PM So what favors is Cheney getting from the University of Wyoming, George Washington University and the Capital Partners for Education? Let's have some details here instead of a broad assumption. I can see where he might get free medical care from GWU but he is getting it free now and he's got the geetis to pay it out of pocket anyway. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Bobert Date: 14 Nov 06 - 08:08 PM Has Dick Cheney recieved money from Helliburton as a sitting Vice President??? Yes ______ No _______ I rest my case... No I don't... T, you are so full of it that I'd bet your eyes a brown... I've been around contracts and if yyou are standing by your assertion that Helliburton's 1998 contract for services "A,B & C" also would cover services "D, E & F" for recontsruction of an occupied country that the US had invaded then you are on some serious mind aletering drugs that have render your mind incapable of comprehending nothin', absolutely nuthin', that has to do with the real world... Imean, thi8s is the weakest argument that you have ever made and absolutely rediculous... No, well beyond absolutely rediculous... Wahat a crock of bull on your part!!! No, make that a hundred crocks of bull... No, make it a million crocks... Are you for real, pal... Hey, look, you ain't playin' with folks here who haven't done anything in their lives but sing folk music... I've been in the trenches with contracts and you are full of bull... You wouod be laughed out of any real life contract negotiation session... Sorry, but you are dead wrong here.... *****Dead wrong****... Get into the real world... No, it may not be a lot of fun but it is the real world... I play in it every day... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Teribus Date: 16 Nov 06 - 03:33 AM A question for you Bobert relating to something that you came out with in your post of 14 Nov 06 - 08:08 PM: "T, you are so full of it that I'd bet your eyes a brown (Actually they are blue Bobert)... I've been around contracts and if yyou are standing by your assertion that Helliburton's 1998 contract for services "A,B & C" also would cover services "D, E & F" for recontsruction of an occupied country that the US had invaded then you are on some serious mind aletering drugs that have render your mind incapable of comprehending nothin', absolutely nuthin', that has to do with the real world" Please provide details of any contract that Halliburton has been awarded for reconstruction in Iraq. As far as I know they provide engineering, logistics and support services for the US Forces and they were tasked with remedial repairs to oilfield infrastructure damaged during the invasion and in the restoration of Iraq's oil production capability - No reconstruction of an occupied country as such Bobert. Regarding the reconstruction of Iraq (Bobert's services D, E & F) funded through USAID these currently involve some 150 US companies and the work is worth around $48.7 billion for work in both Iraq and Afghanistan. For those outside the US, it is a condition of anyone accepting USAID that the money pledged MUST be spent inside the US and that US companies must be contracted to undertake the work - Halliburton isn't one of them Bobert. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: dianavan Date: 16 Nov 06 - 04:08 AM Another word for remedial repairs and restoration of an oil pipeline might be said to be reconstruction of that pipeline. Lets not split hairs. If there had been no invasion, there would have been no need to repair the pipeline. It wasn't broken. The Iraqi invasion has been very profitable for Halliburton and their associates. http://www.halliburtonwatch.org/home.html |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Bobert Date: 16 Nov 06 - 12:36 PM What d said, t... And as fir yer eyes being blue??? Must have been some blue food coloring in the bull's feed... I mean, lets get real here... You are no more right on this one as you were with yer positions during the mad-dash-to-Iraqmire and we all know how they turned out... But, as per the pre=invasions discussions we had, don't believe me but I'm sniffin' a Congressional investigation into Helliburton in the comin' year an' all this stuff is gonna come out and when it does... ... like Iraqmire, you'll sneek outta here in the dead of night and resurface in a couple of years with a revised story... In the words of the late, great Jackie Gleason, "Yer a pip there, T-Bird..." Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Halliburton owns the U.S. government From: Old Guy Date: 16 Nov 06 - 10:47 PM Bobert: "Get into the real world... No, it may not be a lot of fun but it is the real world... I play in it every day..." I work in the real world every day. Yes, Cheney received a deferred, fixed amount of money that was owed to him before he came into office. Has that amount of money increased or decreased due to Iraq? If so show me where. Concerns have been raised regarding the possible conflict of interest resulting from Cheney's deferred compensation and stock options from Halliburton. However, before entering office in 2001, Cheney bought an insurance policy that guaranteed a fixed amount of deferred payments from Halliburton each year for five years so that the payments would not depend on the company's fortunes. He is legally bound by an agreement he signed which turns over power of attorney to a trust administrator to sell the options at some future time and to give the after-tax profits to three charities. The agreement specifies that 40% will go to the University of Wyoming (in Cheney's home state), 40% will go to George Washington University's medical faculty to be used for tax-exempt charitable purposes, and 20% will go to Capital Partners for Education. The agreement states that it is "irrevocable and may not be terminated, waived or amended," preventing Cheney from taking back the options at a later date.... |
