POLITICS: FBI Investigating Halliburton Contracts, page 1

posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 04:37 PM

link

The FBI has begun investigating whether the Pentagon improperly awarded no-bid contracts to Halliburton Co., seeking an interview with a top Army contracting officer and collecting documents from several government offices. This news comes one week before the election.

story.news.yahoo.com
FBI agents this week sought permission to interview Bunnatine Greenhouse, the Army Corps of Engineers' chief contracting officer who went public last weekend with allegations that her agency unfairly awarded a Halliburton subsidiary no-bid contracts worth billions of dollars in Iraq, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press.

Asked about the documents, Greenhouse's lawyers said Thursday their client will cooperate but that she wants whistleblower protection from Pentagon retaliation.

"I think it (the FBI interview request) underscores the seriousness of the misconduct, and it also demonstrates how courageous Ms. Greenhouse was for stepping forward," said Stephen Kohn, one of her attorneys.

"The initiation of an FBI investigation into criminal misconduct will help restore public confidence," Kohn said. "The Army must aggressively protect Ms. Greenhouse from the retaliation she will encounter as a result of blowing the whistle on this misconduct."

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

It is intresting, as most news like this, is coming with days left to election. This topic has come up numerous times on ATS. I am wondering if anything can, and wll be done by the Bush Administration to block any more information from coming out before the election. Asking for 'whistle blower' protection, to me, seems like she may have some serious dirt.

[edit on 28-10-2004 by TrickmastertricK]

James the Lesser

posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 04:39 PM

link

About time. Wonder how Bush will try to block this, like he did the 9/11 commission.

MaskedAvatar

posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 04:48 PM

link

Not the first investigation.

The administration's internal review found that nothing improper had occurred. Surprise, surprise.

This review has nothing to do with the fact that Halliburton's subidiary has been gouging US taxpayers on the price of petrol going into Iraq. Or the price of a hammer, or other rorts.

Who really sicced the dogs onto the Pentagon?

veritas93

posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 04:56 PM

link

Seems to me that Bush and his ilk aren't necessarily concerned with trying to cover any of this up. His decision was open and blatant. Personally, I feel that this no-bid contract is at very least criminal. However, it's hard to recall the last time that we had a president that didn't deserve some prison sentence or another lol. I'm thinking that Carter might have been the last, but that's only because he was fairly inept as a president. Just goes to show the truly screwed up nature of our system. I couldn't be more pleased if both Bushes, Clinton and Reagan (if it were still possible) were to do a bit (or a lot) of time in the slammer.

soficrow

posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 11:09 AM

link

Originally posted by veritas93
Seems to me that Bush and his ilk aren't necessarily concerned with trying to cover any of this up. His decision was open and blatant. Personally, I feel that this no-bid contract is at very least criminal. ...I couldn't be more pleased if both Bushes, Clinton and Reagan (if it were still possible) were to do a bit (or a lot) of time in the slammer.

...FYI - The FBI is now considering the investigation a criminal matter.

And I agree that some hard time would do these fellas a lot of good. ...Okay, not sure I agree about Clinton. Exactly why do you lump him with this bunch?

?

Bleys

posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 11:26 AM

link

Originally posted by soficrow

And I agree that some hard time would do these fellas a lot of good. ...Okay, not sure I agree about Clinton. Exactly why do you lump him with this bunch?

?

He mentioned Clinton because he also awarded Halliburton no-bid contracts. The Halliburton controversy has been on-going for more than a decade, it's just being given serious media attention in the last four years.

veritas93

posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 11:45 AM

link

Bleys is right. Also, each of these presidents has been responsible for allowing the sale of vital technology (like duel use tech that probably gave China MERVs). I'd think that these guys were probably only willing to allow these "business transactions" after being loaded down with the universal lubricant. Clinton is not free of corruption only because he's a Democrat lol. Most presidents are little more than self serving slime balls IMHO.

soficrow

posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 11:55 AM

link

Thanks. Hear you and agree - just lacking details.

.

veritas93

posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 12:16 PM

link

Originally posted by soficrow
Thanks. Hear you and agree - just lacking details.

.

Understood. you're not the first person to get onto me for lack of details lol. I'll try to work on that. I think that in particular, Clinton allowed Motorola (anyone correct me if I'm wrong) to sell duel use tech to China that could also be considered a key component to MERV warhead technology. There were trade restricitons (for obvious reasons) that didn't and still don't seem to have any meaning to those in high enough positions. He's not the only one responsible for behavior like this by any means.