Another day, another criminal probe into Halliburton dealings with shady regimes.

July 20, 2004 7:06 PM

Another day, another criminal probe into Halliburton dealings with shady regimes.This is for activities going back to the 1995-2000 period, when the current Vice-President was CEO of the petroleum exploration leviathan. It's also been well documented that Halliburton did business with Iraq during that same time period. This begs the question, how many "forbidden countries" were Halliburton doing business with during Mr. Cheney's stewardship? Note: it's somewhat related, though not quite the same, as this previous thread.
posted by clevershark (15 comments total)

I PAID FOR THIS MICROPHONE
posted by crunchburger at 7:31 PM on July 20, 2004

Wait for it.....






GYOBFW.
NewsFilter.
AgendaFilter.
HalliburtonFilter.
CheneyFilter.
BushBashingFilter.

Fucking endless parade of pathetic non-news stories to "show us something we've never seen before." I mean really, the entire article was about issuing a subpoena. That's it. The rest of the text has been discussed here, ad nauseam, will little resolution. Can we try to keep this front page useful?
posted by BlueTrain at 7:38 PM on July 20, 2004

Halliburton's boss from hell
posted by homunculus at 8:10 PM on July 20, 2004

Hailey Burton
posted by quonsar at 8:14 PM on July 20, 2004

there's always this: Auditors working for the International Advisory and Monitoring Board (IAMB), a UN-sanctioned panel charged with overseeing the management of Iraqi’s oil revenues, have repeatedly asked the US for internal audit information related to a "no-compete" Halliburton contract worth $1.4 billion. But the Bush administration has refused all such requests. An official with the IAMB says the US has also refused to turn over a list of other companies awarded no-compete contracts by the Coalition authority in Iraq.
posted by amberglow at 8:23 PM on July 20, 2004

quonsar, do you think little Hailey is embarrased or ashamed by the commonality of her name with the corp's? otoh, baby model, ewwwwww.
posted by billsaysthis at 8:26 PM on July 20, 2004

Press the play button to listen to Kenny G while you visit tells us all we need to know about little Hailey.
posted by quonsar at 8:31 PM on July 20, 2004

Poor Hailey has male pattern baldness. So young, too.
posted by dhoyt at 8:44 PM on July 20, 2004

Halliburton did business with Iraq

Honestly, every time I read that, it has the impact of the first time. It's really quite something, don't you think?
posted by sudama at 8:46 PM on July 20, 2004

and there's always this, too ... Moore told of how security was pulled from military fuel convoys and diverted to protect Halliburton trucks and drivers, leaving the soldiers with no military police and little more than their own rifles to protect them from attack.
Moore recalled the anxiety of regularly hauling 7,500 gallons of fuel for two days between Tikrit and Baghdad with little in the way of protection or weaponry. "As a soldier, we put ourselves in someone else's hands and put our lives on the line for our country," she said. "But they seemed to care more for the civilian drivers."
Halliburton drivers, Erlandson noted, make $100,000 a year while Army drivers such as Moore make $2,500 a month. "It's outrageous to all of us," he said. ...
posted by amberglow at 9:05 PM on July 20, 2004

How does Hailey maintain the website? I mean she can't even read and... Right?

Oh Haliburton. Ok wait a sec.

*clears throat, musters outrage*

These crimes must not go unpunished! We demand justice! Aren't there a hundred or so seperate investigations going on? These guys are running out of laws to violate.
posted by euphorb at 9:30 PM on July 20, 2004

Fucking endless parade...

Sorry that crimes which members (okay, just one) of this Administration may be involved in are revealed on such a regular basis that they sound like a broken record.
posted by clevershark at 10:28 PM on July 20, 2004

What “begs the question” in fact means is “to assume the truth of an argument or proposition to be proved, without arguing it”

sorry
posted by Outlawyr at 6:05 AM on July 21, 2004

Hey, this is good:

For example, when National Security Adviser Condoleeza Rice asserted that we had to invade Iraq, because we didn't want the smoking-gun proof of their weapons of mass destruction to be a mushroom cloud over one of our cities, she was claiming as the premise of her argument the idea that the Iraqis had or were on the verge of having nuclear weapons. But whether or not they had such weapons was precisely what needed to be proved in order to justify the invasion, so it could not be itself used as proof of the need to invade to preempt their use of such weapons.
posted by Outlawyr at 6:11 AM on July 21, 2004

Where's everyone's favorite 'bot?
posted by trondant at 8:09 AM on July 21, 2004