It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

POLITICS: Halliburton Wins Again

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 11:44 PM
link   
Halliburton subsidiary KBR was just awarded a U.S. Navy "Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Multiple Award Construction Contract (MACC)." Halliburton, once headed by US Vice-President Dick Cheney, is being investigated for alleged accounting frauds worth millions of dollars. On February 3, the Army said it will not withhold payments to Halliburton, despite the alleged fraud. Halliburton more than doubled its defense contracts from $3.9 billion in 2003 to $8 billion in 2004, to become the sixth largest defense contractor to the USA. According to the Center for Public Integrity, Halliburton didn't break into the top 100 defense contractors until the United States invaded Iraq in 2003.

 



i-newswire.com
The Southern Division Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFACENGCOM) announced today that KBR is one of four contractors awarded a U.S. Navy Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Multiple Award Construction Contract (MACC) to repair northwest Florida Navy facilities damaged by Hurricane Ivan. KBR was also selected as the contractor for the initial task order on this project. KBR is the engineering and construction subsidiary of Halliburton (NYSE:HAL).

KBR is a global engineering, construction, technology and services company. ...Halliburton, founded in 1919, is one of the world's largest providers of products and services to the petroleum and energy industries.



"Halliburton, once headed by US Vice-President Dick Cheney and heavily involved in projects in Iraq, is being investigated in "America for alleged accounting frauds involving millions of dollars."
Halliburton in London


"In a departure from normal policy, the Army said yesterday it will not withhold future payments to Halliburton... The decision comes months after Army auditors recommended withholding 15 percent of payments, about $60 million a month, from Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg, Brown & Root Inc., the largest government contractor in Iraq.

The government has set aside $9.3 billion to pay KBR for troop support in the Middle East...

"Once again, the Bush Administration is putting Halliburton's interests above those of the taxpayers," Waxman said in a written statement. "Halliburton is busting the Army's budget, yet Administration officials continue to ignore rampant overcharging and the recommendations of their own auditors." "

Army Waives Rule Despite Audit Reports


"The Halliburton Co. edged United Technologies to become the sixth largest defense contractor in 2004, according to the Defense Department. ...Halliburton moved from No. 7 to No. 6 in 2004, more than doubling its defense contracts from $3.9 billion in 2003 to $8 billion in 2004. It only broke into the top 100 defense contractors when the United States invaded Iraq in 2003, according to analysis by the Center for Public Integrity."

Halliburton doubles its defense contracts




Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


The Halliburton-Cheney connection is legendary, and subject to much criticism. The missing and unaccounted for funds remain a scandal.

But Halliburton is benefitting yet again from US taxpayers' hard earned money.



Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
BUSINESS: Over $10 Billion In Iraq Contracts for Halliburton
Does Halliburton get favored treatment?

[edit on 6-2-2005 by soficrow]




posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 11:50 PM
link   
I've been saying this repeatedly. Iraq was not for oil. Americans aren't stealing from Iraq. A bunch of rich old farts from PNAC are stealing from America!
This was is a raid on the US treasury, plain and simple. They are taking tax dollars that would have built roads or repaid the money stolen from our Social Security fund, and they're giving it to Halliburton instead. I can't even imagine what the PNAC crew needs with tens of billions of dollars though. I'm afraid to wonder.
The really really fringe paranoid freakish conspiracy theorist voice in my head is saying that they're diverting government funds to build a second non-national government, including military forces. I can't prove that of course. I'm just being paranoid.



posted on Feb, 7 2005 @ 02:43 AM
link   
The thread is about American government waste. This is another soficrow attempt to wake up America- it won't work.

Halliburton should have become a major embarrassment but has not. Not only is it more of the same it appears that Halliburton has become emboldened. Countless Halliburton rip-off stories have floated for years yet the company grabs more and more with no apparent ill effects. Even Nixon wasn't this arrogant.

    Vagabond, did you leave out some kind of lead statement to your post?
    PNAC? Start a thread on it and the moves toward Americas money-
    If you can tie it into the Halliburton 'robbery' then great. I don't think you can successfully.


*edit
I think you are missing some other players in your PNAC argument


[edit on 7-2-2005 by JoeDoaks]



posted on Feb, 7 2005 @ 05:04 AM
link   
Ohh the fear of Halliburton....BS

Some backround on Halliburton,
www.halliburton.com..." target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow">http...://www.halliburton.com/news/archive/2004/article_101004.jsp

Hallibruton has been supporting the millitary for over 60 years....


We began providing support to the U.S. military during World War II -- building warships -- and continued that support in the Korean and Vietnam wars, when we built port facilities and airports. We helped provide humanitarian assistance in famine-stricken Somalia and logistical support in the Balkans. We also provide military support in Uzbekistan, Georgia, Afghanistan, Djibouti, Kuwait, Jordan and Turkey.


Lets look deeper shall we?
www.halliburton.com...
from the horses mouth.


Senator John Kerry has suggested, though never explicitly stated, that the Bush administration has an improper relationship with Halliburton, the company where Dick Cheney was chief executive from 1995 until he left in 2000 to run for vice president.
Hmm notice the word SUGGESTED, instead of other more concrete allegations of this, gee I wonder why? Perhaps because he couldnt actually substantiate most of this?


Mr. Cheney's critics concede that there is no concrete evidence that he has pulled any strings on Halliburton's behalf.
Hmm, sounds like an admission that they cant substantiate their claims.


On the question of Mr. Cheney's income from Halliburton, officials of the Bush-Cheney campaign said that before entering office in 2001, Mr. 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. The officials also said he had promised to donate to charity any after-tax profits he made from exercising his stock options. These steps are not unusual for corporate executives who enter government.
Not unusual for corp execs that enter government eh? THEN WHATS THE BEEF HERE? Im certain we could dig up similar linkages between democrats too...big whoop.


To avoid conflict of interest, the service (gao) said, any official with a continuing interest in a company should include the relationship in public financial disclosure statements, a step Mr. Cheney has taken.
Nuff said, he disclosed...again big whoop, like the rich players dont know and do business with other rich players....how many players of this caliber do you think tha avg country has around in government or the private sector anyway?


Who gets contracts....
at the time the war was starting
www.opensecrets.org...



Even before the war in Iraq began March 20, the Bush administration was considering plans to help rebuild the country after fighting ceased. According to news reports in early March, the U.S. Agency for International Development secretly asked six U.S. companies to submit bids for a $900 million government contract to repair and reconstruct water systems, roads, bridges, schools and hospitals in Iraq.
Hmm that would be 6 different companies here, not one.
Now indeed, the president DID restrict the bidding to only companies in countries that aided the war effort, which is the right thing to do as the other countries werent willing to put their lives on the line to deserve a chance at the profits potential of rebuilding. Too bad France.
This site also lists contracts awarded so far at that time, which company, how much they donate to whom (Rep/Dem), and what the contract was for....a reminder, this is just the start of the war effort and the contracts at that point....many more have come down the pipe since then. I wont take up space posting what my link will allow you to read yourself, but notice that out of 9 contracts listed at that point 5 went to Rep sponsors and 4 went to Dem sponsors (where the companies support went)
But oh yeah...ONLY EVIL BUSH BUDDIES GET CONTRACTS RIGHT?

On the NO BID ISSUE


there are frequent references to our "no-bid" contract to support the U.S. soldiers in Iraq. The fact is that after a fully competitive and open bid process we were awarded a contract in 2001, well before the war in Iraq, to provide logistical support for U.S. soldiers wherever they might be deployed.
As shown above there have been and are others bidding and getting contracts. BUT ITS OK TO PUT THE ANTI-BUSH BLINDERS ON!!

Hmm imagine that, COMPETITIVE OPEN BID CONTRACTS....

ok but what about the no-bids,


KBR did receive, at the outbreak of the war, a sole-source contract issued under urgent conditions to quickly restore the flow of Iraqi oil. But what you will not often read is that the independent General Accounting Office has since reviewed the contract and reported that it was "properly awarded ... to the only contractor [the Defense Department] had determined was in a position to provide the services within the required time frame given classified prewar planning requirements." And you will almost never read that profit margins on these contracts are extremely low and that the oil contract was replaced early this year by one that was competitively bid.
So the GAO determined after an investigation that the contract was properly awarded to the company that capasity to deliver what was being called for.
Did you also read the part where they were competitivly out bid (replaced) for the contract later on?

MORE you ask about the no bid contract?



In March 2003, Kellogg Brown & Root, Halliburton's construction and engineering subsidiary, received from the Pentagon what is called a sole-source contract, meaning it was awarded without bidding, to restore and operate Iraqi oil wells. The contract, which was classified when it was awarded just before the invasion of Iraq, could be worth as much as $7 billion.
Hmm a CLASSIFIED contract...now why would they do that?



Halliburton contracts awarded in the last six months have been won in competitive bidding. But the administration has said it would have been impractical to have open bidding on the oil wells contract since Halliburton already had an established position in Iraq and since making the contract public before the invasion would have compromised this country's war plans.
Hmm so Halliburton was alleady in position to deliver service in Iraq...thats quite a jump on the competition which would require time and effort just to catch up.
ALSO
Revealing these plans would have COMPROMISED the invasion if revealde BEFORE the conflict...NO DUH!!!! Watching the companies that do business with the GOV or the MILLITARY can reveal alot about what they could be up to.

Ohh but they are bad for doing this...are they?


The nonpartisan investigative Government Accountability Office, formerly the General Accounting Office, agreed with the administration's assessment. It reported in June that the Halliburton subsidiary had been the only company ''in a position to provide the services within the required time.'' David M. Walker, who as comptroller general is chief of the G.A.O., told a House committee that the no-bid contract was justified ''given the war in Iraq and the urgent need for reconstruction efforts.''
Again they seemed to be the only company with the capasity to deliver....yet you bash them for being a world leader AMERICAN company that leads in its field?
BOO HOO.



posted on Feb, 7 2005 @ 05:38 AM
link   
Also, it will probably completely destroy the big ol' "evil NWO company" bullcrap that keeps flying, BUT Halliburton is getting rid of KBR...and this contract goes with KBR.

So when they finally cut that wart off Halliburton's arse...you're going to have to go in and do a replace all and put KBR in for Halliburton everywhere.



posted on Feb, 7 2005 @ 06:00 AM
link   
CazMedia and Valhall, way to go.


We need some more common sense in these topics. CazMedia, you got my Way Above vote man.



posted on Feb, 7 2005 @ 06:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by JoeDoaks
Halliburton should have become a major embarrassment but has not. Not only is it more of the same it appears that Halliburton has become emboldened. Countless Halliburton rip-off stories have floated for years yet the company grabs more and more with no apparent ill effects. Even Nixon wasn't this arrogant.


I'd say you're spot on there considering the disconnected tirade immediately following your post.


And on and on we go.

Even the most measured and pointed critical view of a hand in fist corporate/government embarrasment (as offered by Soficrow) is now guaranteed the wrath of a public groundswell in reversed criticism and dismissal of all sins via the "shotgun defense."

Unless I'm missing some nuanced point, I can easily see how everything both soficrow and cazmedia said could indeed be true about the situation.

First of all, it's not like soficrow said Halliburton was the devil at all. But neither do they walk on water as implied in the conditioned defense to which we've grown accustomed.


But if there is any bit of warrant to the scandal or increased scrutiny (which I'd hope all open minds would agree there is), dismissing it entirely only serves, empowers and emboldens the most corrupt elements of an otherwise well intentioned contractor and government.

I mean why do we even have Army auditors otherwise? They say something's off. Some people complain, and behold the people scream FREE BARABBAS! :shk:

I applaud you Soficrow for having the guts to even ask the critical questions in this topsy turvey backlash world we currently find ourselves.



posted on Feb, 7 2005 @ 06:52 AM
link   
No one has dismissed the audit. I think anytime there is any discrepancy it needs to be rectified.

But RANT - are you double jointed? How do you get yourself in the position to twist the current review of EXISTING BILLING RECORDS with the intent to see if there were overcharges to be some connection to missing funds in Iraq?


soficrow said: The missing and unaccounted for funds remain a scandal.


THAT'S B.S.! So, in this case, I'm not crying 'FREE BARRABAS', I'm yelling "WHERE THE HELL'S THE CONNECTION! CRAP FOR THAT MATTER, WHERE'S THE LOGIC!"

No one in authority, other than the typical ATS NWO crowd, has ever implied that Halliburton was taking monies under the table. The current review of billing records is to see if there were overcharges for services and products. That's on the bill! That's not missing! They had to write a check made payable to EVIL NWO CORPORATION.

Typical twisted crap.



posted on Feb, 7 2005 @ 07:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall
No one has dismissed the audit. I think anytime there is any discrepancy it needs to be rectified.

But RANT - are you double jointed? How do you get yourself in the position to twist the current review of EXISTING BILLING RECORDS with the intent to see if there were overcharges to be some connection to missing funds in Iraq?


soficrow said: The missing and unaccounted for funds remain a scandal.


THAT'S B.S.!


Like I said "unless I'm missing some nuanced point..."

So the criticism of the original post is linking the investigation of potential Halliburton overcharges to lost US funds?

See I didn't get that. But it's much clearer now. Thank you.

Let's revise as follows:

Any corruption by Halliburton or ineptitude of the government are independent of each other, not linked.

Now I see what all the fuss was about.



posted on Feb, 7 2005 @ 08:21 AM
link   
Haliburton

HAL - 2001 - rotating treadmill,

rotating bar - Fear and Loathing movie, playing the Strauss waltz, from 2001.

rotating bar - that James Bond movie.

Burton, Richard.

What's New Pussycat?, line from - "are you Richard Burton?", "no, I'm Peter O' Toole" -

cut to,

Casino Royale. ( giant list of stuff tooo numerous to mention here about that film........ )

Next - Dr. Strangelove,

why?

the roles Peter Sellers plays.

Peter's real name, Richard Henry.


what is HAL? kinda like Junior, an AI.

Tom Jones sang What's New Pussycat,

Tom Jones is the last film JFK saw,

so what else is new?



posted on Feb, 7 2005 @ 08:41 AM
link   
Occurs Haliburton is a winner alone with all the other companies link to the Carlyle group.

They all winners in the Bush administration, and yes oil is an issue, after all let wait for the privatization of Iraq.



posted on Feb, 7 2005 @ 09:27 AM
link   
In an effort to deny ignorance, i will make one comment...

construction bids are supposed to be JUST THAT... BIDS
and then the government is supposed to take the best one... or be able to totally justify the choice of another company that didn't win the bid, (didn't meet all the req's).

this doesn't appear to have been done, on this or any other contract that haliburton and a few other favored friends of the administration...

when a state official chooses a non winning bidder for a state contract, he is run out of office in scandal...

why do we accept a deviation from proper process when it comes to the US government? shouldn't these contracts be even more important to audit, and monitor for corruption?

every president owes certain people when he is elected, and so he pays them back with lots of fringe benefits and contracts after election...

The scandal used to be: the use of insider knowledge on these bids, to encourage the "freind" to be the best bid, so he would win the contract.

illegal, true, but at least the people got a good deal on the contract.

someone in the "cover my A$$" department ain't doing his job.... or do they just not think anyone cares?

i think it is more a elite power issue than an oil one... oil is just one measure of power....



posted on Feb, 7 2005 @ 09:42 AM
link   
Perhaps the investigation of fraud has something to do with this? Halliburton Set Up for Corruption

It's amazing how this news is swept under the rug, and to think this was made public a long time before the investigation was under way. Where's the outcry?



posted on Feb, 7 2005 @ 09:42 AM
link   
I tell you what the reason for contracts bids it to allowed smallest companies to have the chance also.

Here in our local base contractors has taking over, they sold this privatization as a good think for the community, and more employment.

Now, the smallest companies home base got bump out by big defense department companies, like Titan now under Lockheed, Era also under Lockheed, General Dynamics and so the all the major ones.

They are providing jobs all right but after a cleaned up of the local employees and now they are hiring only ex-military personnel and some of them are brought from other areas.

What happened to local jobs? well finally a small cleaning company home base won a one and only contract in the base.......for maintenance, fantastic.

The people of the town has fought to keep the base open and now local companies had not chance against the big boys favored by the Administration.



[edit on 7-2-2005 by marg6043]



posted on Feb, 7 2005 @ 10:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Vagabond
I've been saying this repeatedly. Iraq was not for oil. Americans aren't stealing from Iraq. A bunch of rich old farts from PNAC are stealing from America!
This was is a raid on the US treasury, plain and simple. They are taking tax dollars that would have built roads or repaid the money stolen from our Social Security fund, and they're giving it to Halliburton instead. I can't even imagine what the PNAC crew needs with tens of billions of dollars though. I'm afraid to wonder.
The really really fringe paranoid freakish conspiracy theorist voice in my head is saying that they're diverting government funds to build a second non-national government, including military forces. I can't prove that of course. I'm just being paranoid.


Vagabond, you are absolutely right about them stealing from the taxpayers. As far as your second point goes, let me redirect your thinking. They steal from this obscene pool of money that we, all taxpaying Americans, break our backs to provide. What they use that money for is to keep the shadow government installed in power. This shadow govenment then facilitates the stealing of money by these companies. It's a vicious cycle that is never going to end. This shadow government has been in power in this country for a long time now. John F. Kennedy was not one of them and was therefore eliminated. Alot of the money they steal is used for political capital. Money is the only power in this world.

Peace



posted on Feb, 7 2005 @ 10:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jamuhn
It's amazing how this news is swept under the rug, and to think this was made public a long time before the investigation was under way. Where's the outcry?


Oh there's outcry alright.

Let my people gooooooooooooooooooooo!


If unfair persecution is another $8 billion last year, nail me to the cross now!

Don't you know you can't even look sideways at Halliburton now Jahmun? It's not PC (politically conservative).



posted on Feb, 7 2005 @ 10:08 AM
link   
ANother thing is, so what, do you know how many people they employ???? Do you want the bids going overseas to China and the cheap labor they can provide. Get ready, because it could happen. THe Chinese could become the "new Irish" building pipleines jsut as America railroads were built.

If you check, I bet you have a family member or a friend employed by them or a subsidary. And as far as the arguement that contractors move in and take over , someone got rich in the deal so what is the difference. Blame the CEO of the old company, not Lockheed. I feel sorry for the workers, I do, but this will occur in ANY job market. Downsize, rebuild and then hire more at lower wages. This is life, not a conspiracy.



posted on Feb, 7 2005 @ 10:17 AM
link   
Does any body has a clue how this people works.

Contracts goes in one lump sum (our tax payer money), worker worth, let's said 100 thousand dollars a year company budget presented to the government.

Company hired worker in local area and base on cost of living, small town military base, cost of living about 30 thousand a year, company offer 40 to worker, worker happy, take offer, company pocket for the big CEO, 60 thousand.

Yes that is how it goes, How do I know? I know. Its no questions not monitoring no nothing tax payer money is given away as lump sums for projects but not body monitors the big boys.



posted on Feb, 7 2005 @ 10:21 AM
link   
the only way the american public will ever care about haliburton is if paris hilton does an internship there......most americans assume politicians give out sweetheart deals, and it sjust how its done.....too bad really



posted on Feb, 7 2005 @ 10:24 AM
link   
Who cares, people are employed. You can have outsourcing (no job, China has a billion workers ready for labor) or you can take your salary. As long as I have a job, and I can support my family, I could care less what the CEO of my company makes.


You cannot have it both ways, and soon, if we are not careful, we won;t even have a choice.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join