[Face Ache]

Cheney's old firm's $3bn Iraq bonanza





The value of contracts awarded to Halliburton - formerly run by US Vice-President Dick Cheney - in Iraq has skyrocketed to $US2 billion ($A3.01 billion), prompting new calls from lawmakers to investigate the propriety of the deals.

Halliburton began work in Iraq with a $US37.5 million ($A56.5 million) no-bid contract in February to put out oil fires. That deal, expanded to include pumping oil, is now worth about $US948 million ($A1.43 billion), according to Halliburton figures provided to the New York Daily News.

But the oil contract alone, awarded by the Army Corps of Engineers to Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg, Brown & Root, is potentially worth up to $US7 billion ($A10.55 billion), the military said.

"It stinks - that the (oil) contracting was done behind closed doors that circumvents traditional bidding procedures just stinks to high heaven," said Representative Steve Israel, a member of the US House (of Representatives) Armed Services Committee.

Israel is sponsoring legislation that would make it difficult for private military contractors such as the Houston-based Halliburton to win contracts without public scrutiny. The Democrat's Hillary Clinton is backing a similar measure in the Senate.

Halliburton's contracts came under renewed fire this week after it was learned that Cheney, who has insisted he has no financial interest in his former company, has received hundreds of thousands of dollars from Halliburton since taking office.

Representative Henry Waxman has requested a General Accounting Office investigation into Halliburton's contracts, a spokeswoman confirmed.

Besides the oil deal, a second set of Halliburton contracts -- awarded by the Army's Field Support Command -- is worth about $US1.2 billion ($A1.8 billion), said Army spokesman Dan Carlson.

Those projects include building, supplying and staffing mess halls, latrines, POW camps, supply lines -- and even supporting Polish forces in Iraq. Bidding on those contracts was open, with three companies making offers before Halliburton won, Carlson said.

Halliburton has similar military contracts throughout the Persian Gulf region, as well as several other hot spots.

Asked about the investigations, Halliburton spokeswoman Wendy Hall said: "We are proud of our many employees who are currently working in the Middle East in support of the US military. These men and women are working hard in the midst of a difficult situation, and are doing a great job."

War is great for business. These guys must be hoping it never ends.

[Lerkfish]

Originally posted by Face Ache:
War is great for business. These guys must be hoping it never ends.

where did you quote this from?
I may want to quote it myself later, it would help to know the source.

[kvm_mkdb]

Originally posted by Lerkfish:
where did you quote this from?
I may want to quote it myself later, it would help to know the source.

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/...625189001.html

[Uday's Carcass]

$2 billion is small change compared to what Iraq is going to be raking in once their oil industry is fully functional.

besides, the Great Satan pretty much has to give the contracts to US or UK companies--it's not like they're going to the French. hah.

[Joshua]

The "hundreds of thousands of dollars" he has received from Halliburton since taking office are deferred salary payments, and they don't reflect any current interest in Halliburton's finances. He's going to get the salary payments regardless of what contracts the company wins or loses. Link.

[boots]

Didn't Lerk and TF question this when it the contract was awarded? I seem to recall them making a point about how much the contract would swell in the future...


And we all called them paranoid conspiracy theorists....

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by Uday's Carcass:
$2 billion is small change compared to what Iraq is going to be raking in once their oil industry is fully functional.

besides, the Great Satan pretty much has to give the contracts to US or UK companies--it's not like they're going to the French. hah.

[finboy]

Originally posted by boots:
Didn't Lerk and TF question this when it the contract was awarded? I seem to recall them making a point about how much the contract would swell in the future...


And we all called them paranoid conspiracy theorists....

They may have asked this question, but it doesn't mean they're NOT paranoid conspiracy theorists. I mean that in a GOOD way.

[moki]

Alas, it seems like much ado about nothing (apologies to Mr. Shakespeare)

from the Forbes article:

Cathie Martin, a Cheney spokeswoman, confirmed that the vice president has been receiving the deferred compensation payments from Halliburton, but she disputed that his statements on "Meet the Press" had been misleading.

Cheney had already earned the salary that was now being paid, Martin said, adding that once he became a nominee for vice president, he purchased an insurance policy to guarantee that the deferred salary would be paid to him whether or not Halliburton survived as a company.

"So he has no financial interest in the company," she said.

[snip]

The financial disclosure forms also said that Cheney continued to hold 433,333 unexercised Halliburton stock options, with exercise prices below the company's current stock market price.

Cheney's spokeswoman said he had placed these options in a charitable trust, and no longer had control over them.

On "Meet the Press," Cheney also said he had no involvement in the awarding of U.S. government contracts to Halliburton.

"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," he said

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by finboy:
They may have asked this question, but it doesn't mean they're NOT paranoid conspiracy theorists. I mean that in a GOOD way.

Hm.

I read that as admittance that they may have been right.

It's okay, you can say that here.



-s*

[boots]

Originally posted by moki:
Alas, it seems like much ado about nothing (apologies to Mr. Shakespeare)

from the Forbes article:

Certainly the compensation issue falls under this, but the bigger issue of giving contracts without open bidding...contracts that swell well beyond the disclosed work description/compensation...is still an issue...and certainly the bigger of the two anyway. Corporate nepotism sucks, yes, but having the price/scope bloat like in this case is worse (IMO)

[moki]

Originally posted by boots:
Certainly the compensation issue falls under this, but the bigger issue of giving contracts without open bidding...contracts that swell well beyond the disclosed work description/compensation...is still an issue...and certainly the bigger of the two anyway. Corporate nepotism sucks, yes, but having the price/scope bloat like in this case is worse (IMO)

Well, (this is an honest question, I don't know the answer) how many other US companies (obviously German/French/etc. won't be considered) have the capabilities to do what needs to be done in Iraq?

I'm betting that possible nepotism aside, Halliburton is one of the few companies that can handle everything that needs to be done.

You can always find the appearance of bias if you're looking for it, but that doesn't mean it exists.

[Developer]

Originally posted by moki:
Well, (this is an honest question, I don't know the answer) how many other US companies (obviously German/French/etc. won't be considered) have the capabilities to do what needs to be done in Iraq?

How many other companies were asked to make an offer?

[boots]

Originally posted by Developer:
How many other companies were asked to make an offer?

That, and what were the original terms of the contract....why did it just expand rather than have other jobs submitted to bidding. It may be that everything was kosher, but the lack of transparency certainly does nothing to allay the appearance of impropriety. I think that's at the heart...people want to know what the heck happened.

[BlackGriffen]

Originally posted by moki:
Well, (this is an honest question, I don't know the answer) how many other US companies (obviously German/French/etc. won't be considered) have the capabilities to do what needs to be done in Iraq?

What about companies from our faithful allies: Great Britain, Australia, and possibly Japan? What about, dare I ask, going straight to local contractors in Iraq and saving a metric buttload?

France, Germany, Russia, and China do not the whole rest of the world make.

BlackGriffen

[Uday's Carcass]

Originally posted by BlackGriffen:
What about companies from our faithful allies: Great Britain, Australia, and possibly Japan?

It'll get there. This is only the first wave.

What about, dare I ask, going straight to local contractors in Iraq and saving a metric buttload?

Keep in mind that the US government may want to install surveillance equipment in the phone network, in the cell phone infrastructure (when it's built by US companies), and the like. Once things are up and running, Iraqis will be manning those systems, sites, and equipment.

[version]

Rumsfeld, Bush, Cheney, etc, etc. have planned all this for years. Strip a country of its dignity, then wealth, and take over its resources; then charge the fcukers forever, for destroying the country, and rebuilding it. Killing is their business, and business is good.

Isn't it ironic that Iraq has to pay Bush and his cronies for destroying their country? If it wasn't so cruel, it'd be hilarious.

[Uday's Carcass]

Originally posted by version:
Isn't it ironic that Iraq has to pay Bush and his cronies for destroying their country? If it wasn't so cruel, it'd be hilarious.

You ignore the ways that Saddam destroyed Iraq for decades--not in terms of infrastructure, but through theft, rape, torture, murder, and several devastating wars he brought against the Iraqi people (Gulf War One--the Liberation of Kuwait, and the war with Iran). Saddam is the real enemy here. Now Iraqis have a chance at freedom and democracy. You are such a Tool of Propaganda. But I guess you're not getting your Baath Bugler anymore. heheh.

[BlackGriffen]

Originally posted by Uday's Carcass:
Keep in mind that the US government may want to install surveillance equipment in the phone network, in the cell phone infrastructure (when it's built by US companies), and the like. Once things are up and running, Iraqis will be manning those systems, sites, and equipment.

And you're Ok with this?

That's also a rather limited view. I'm also talking about rebuilding road, bridges, and buildings. Not to mention operating the oil industry.

There is no potential spy benefit in those things, is there?

BlackGriffen