Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 80

Thread: KBR to Get No-Bid Army Work as U.S. Alleges Kickbacks

  1. #61
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: KBR to Get No-Bid Army Work as U.S. Alleges Kickbacks

    never forget that our heroes are sacrificing and dying in the mountains on the moon while operating under preposterous ROE's, rules of engagement, which disallow gi gustavo from firing at the enemy if abdullah is NOT currently pointing a weapon at him

    CNSNews.com - U.S. Forces in Afghanistan Under New Orders to Hold Fire

    today, we learn of the pentagon's new promotion: hold your fire and earn a MEDAL!

    Hold fire, earn a medal - Navy News, news from Iraq - Navy Times

  2. #62
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:22 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,315
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: KBR to Get No-Bid Army Work as U.S. Alleges Kickbacks

    I think this thread is a pretty good indicator that while nobid contracts may be necessary and overall a good thing, more oversight of the process, to at least get rid of any appearance of impropriety would be a good thing.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  3. #63
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,301

    Re: KBR to Get No-Bid Army Work as U.S. Alleges Kickbacks

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    If that is accurate, I withdraw my objection to nobid contracts.
    The govt term for "no bid contract" is a "sole source contract". There FAR has justification requirements for this type of contract.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  4. #64
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,971

    Re: KBR to Get No-Bid Army Work as U.S. Alleges Kickbacks

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    Where was the outrage from the Bushneviks when Bush was doing it? Was it OK then, but not OK now? Of course not. It was WRONG then, just as it is WRONG now. But only now do you hear the outrage from the Bushnevik supporters. I wonder why? Could it be that the reason is because the president now in office has a "D" after his name, and not an "R", in which case, it would be perfectly OK?
    In all honesty I'm not seeing any outrage from "Bushneviks" over the awarding of the no bid contract. Even the poster you quoted was not complaining honestly that Obama shouldn't have given out no bid contracts becuase no bid contracts are bad.

    They are showing outrage because Obama and those on the left for years now have been bitching about no bid contracts and halliburton, only to then turn around when they're in office and give a no bid contract to essentially halliburton. They "outrage" is over the hypocrisy of it all. They couldn't have expressed similar outrage at Bush over the no-bid/halliburton thing because the situation was not in any way the same, nor was the reason people were "outraged" the same.

    Think you're a bit off base on that one dana.

  5. #65
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,971

    Re: KBR to Get No-Bid Army Work as U.S. Alleges Kickbacks

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    If I remember correctly, the objections against Haliburton were not because it got a no-bid contract. It was because of the obvious cronyism involved in the fact that it got the contract.
    However the only "proof" of it being due to cronyism was that Cheney was at one point connected to Halliburton. That was it. Halliburton had one no bid contracts before, PRIOR to Cheney. Halliburton has won No Bid contracts since, AFTER Cheney (we're talking about it in this thread). For it to literally be about cronyism one would have to believe that the only, or primary, reason that Halliburton was awarded the No Bid contracts was because of Cheney which to do so one would have to ignore the fact that they had gotten, and continue to get, no-bid contracts.

    Is it likely that cronyism played into it? Quite possibly. But there's no definitive truth, and even if it did there's an equally strong argument to be made that Halliburton was simply the best choice for the job regardless of Cheney's former position.

    Also, while cronyism was part of the outrage its absolutely wrong to suggest the outrage "was not about no-bid contracts" at all. There was certainly a fair amount of that. Even looking at old news archieves:

    "Justice pondering Halliburton probe Company criticized for no-bid contract issued before Iraq war"

    Article: Halliburton Allegations Are Sent to Justice Dept.; No-Bid Contracts In Iraq Are at Issue

    Halliburton's no-bid contracts in Iraq should outrage public

    Numerous stories, if not focusing on the fact it was no-bid, continually would reference it and add it in to give the insight of mispropriety and unfairness that no one else was let into the process. To argue that it the complaints were ONLY about the "no-bid" nature of it would be foolish and wrong. However to argue that the complaints were not about the No-Bid nature of it at all just isn't correct.

  6. #66
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Past the edge of the universe, through the singularity, and out the other side.
    Last Seen
    09-01-10 @ 05:23 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,324

    Re: KBR to Get No-Bid Army Work as U.S. Alleges Kickbacks

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    I call BS on that argument. Baker Hughes, Bechtel, Technip, and Schlumberger are all able to do that kind of work on that kind of scale, and there are quite a few smaller companies that could have done parts of it.
    Once again which of those companies had affiliates like KBR capable of handling reconstruction? Halliburton is much much more than an oil services company. And yes I suppose you could have had dolled out hundreds of of small contracts to independent companies, one for water purification, one for oil services, one for telecommunications, one for food distribution etc, but what then? Who was going to coordinate the massive logistics of all of those independent companies? The military? They were busy fighting the war. Another faction within the U.S. government bureaucracy? Hello FEMA. You needed a single under one roof conglomerate to handle the massive logistics involved in a warzone like that.

    The contract with Halliburton was done due to cronyism.
    So you're saying that people make multi-billion dollar decisions out of some sense of loyalty even though they have no financial stake in the company? Has Cheney gone back to working for Halliburton? Is Cheney doing some sort of consulting work for Halliburton? Cronyism implies doing a political favor for a company with an expectation of getting something in return later from the private sector, what exactly is Cheney expecting in return? To my knowledge the man has completely retired from the private sector.

    And if that were the case then why did Halliburton get no-bid contracts both before and after Cheney?
    Last edited by Agent Ferris; 05-14-10 at 10:32 AM.

  7. #67
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,971

    Re: KBR to Get No-Bid Army Work as U.S. Alleges Kickbacks

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    The contract with Halliburton was done due to cronyism.
    So is EVERY time Halliburton, or ANY company, is given a no-bid contract cronyism?

    Is it cronyism when they're being given one now? Was it cronyism when they won no-bid contracts prior to the Bush Administration?

    And if its not now, and its not then, why is it that it HAS to be cronyism when it was during the Bush Administration.

    Simply because Cheney was part of Halliburton at one time does not prove it was cronyism in any way. The case would be far stronger if they were never used prior to it, and never used after it, but that's NOT the case.

    There were legitimate reasons under the rules for No-Bid contracts and their uses to award it to Halliburton. Did Cronyism play into it? Quite possibly. But its pure and utter speculation and relatively weak ones at that given history and the present.

  8. #68
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:27 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,402

    Re: KBR to Get No-Bid Army Work as U.S. Alleges Kickbacks

    Quote Originally Posted by BWG View Post
    Just because you weren't lead to the water doesn't mean it wasn't there.

    A couple of posts between me and Sir Loin. I was replying to someone making the same erroneous claim, as you, that Haliburton was the only one that could do the job.




    This was in a thread that you actually participated in less than an hour after Sir Loin's post.

    And as a side note, if you want to look further back through that thread, I said I didn't really care if Haliburton got a no-bid contract. My only argument was that they weren't the only ones that could handle the job.
    And, IMO, you would be mistaken. Schlumberger nor Baker Hughes had the resources to take on the Iraq job. But, that's not the only point I made earlier in this thread. I also talked about how another reason for Halliburton getting the Iraq job, is that no one else wanted it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  9. #69
    Guru
    BWG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    South Coast
    Last Seen
    12-04-17 @ 11:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,203

    Re: KBR to Get No-Bid Army Work as U.S. Alleges Kickbacks

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris
    And Halliburton relocated their headquarters to Dubai but are still a U.S. Company.
    Haliburton was incorporated in the U.S. Schlumberger was incorporated in Curaçao of the Netherlands Antilles, not France.

    BTW, doesn't it make you chest swell with patriotic pride that Haliburton took all that American taxpayer money to Dubai?

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris
    Tell me what other company had subsidiary's which handled food service, construction, water purification etc? Anyways did you expect the military to perform the logistics of coordinating all of those operations while they were fighting the war? You needed an under one roof company to do it.
    Tell me, which of these is a Haliburton/KBR subsidiary?

    Tamimi Global
    ESS
    Eagle Global Logistics
    Event Source
    Prime Projects International (PPI)

    The correct answer is none of the above. They are just a few companies, domestic and foreign, sub-contracted by Haliburton/KBR to provide various services under the contract Haliburton received from the government. Any of the companies that have previously been mentioned could have done the same thing. Haliburton wasn't in the food service business, they weren't in the fuel transportation business. They had expertise in a lot of the work under the contract, , as did a a few others. A lot of the work under the contract they had little or no expertise in, so they sub-contracted, just like any of the other companies would be able to do.
    Quote Originally Posted by American
    The govt term for "no bid contract" is a "sole source contract". There FAR has justification requirements for this type of contract.
    If one company is the only source for that type of work why do Parsons, Fluor, Washington Group International, Shaw Group/Shaw Engineering and Infrastructure, Bechtel, Perini, et.al. have billion dollar contracts in Iraq and Afghanistan

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin
    Is it likely that cronyism played into it? Quite possibly.
    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin
    Did Cronyism play into it? Quite possibly.
    Even in your mind the possibility lurks, however so slight. Therefore in the mind of a 'leftie' that crack would tend to be ever so widened, so that the next natural step - from either side - would be the finger pointing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris
    So you're saying that people make multi-billion dollar decisions out of some sense of loyalty even though they have no financial stake in the company? Has Cheney gone back to working for Halliburton? Is Cheney doing some sort of consulting work for Halliburton? Cronyism implies doing a political favor for a company with an expectation of getting something in return later from the private sector, what exactly is Cheney expecting in return? To my knowledge the man has completely retired from the private sector.
    Money doesn't necessarily have to change hands in return for a 'favor'.
    “We just simply don’t know how to govern” - Rep. Steve Womack (R-AR) a member of the House Budget Committee

  10. #70
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,039

    Re: KBR to Get No-Bid Army Work as U.S. Alleges Kickbacks

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    However the only "proof" of it being due to cronyism was that Cheney was at one point connected to Halliburton. That was it. Halliburton had one no bid contracts before, PRIOR to Cheney. Halliburton has won No Bid contracts since, AFTER Cheney (we're talking about it in this thread). For it to literally be about cronyism one would have to believe that the only, or primary, reason that Halliburton was awarded the No Bid contracts was because of Cheney which to do so one would have to ignore the fact that they had gotten, and continue to get, no-bid contracts.

    Is it likely that cronyism played into it? Quite possibly. But there's no definitive truth, and even if it did there's an equally strong argument to be made that Halliburton was simply the best choice for the job regardless of Cheney's former position.

    Also, while cronyism was part of the outrage its absolutely wrong to suggest the outrage "was not about no-bid contracts" at all. There was certainly a fair amount of that. Even looking at old news archieves:
    Cheney wasn't tied to Halliburton. He was the CEO of the damned thing. It's like saying 'Bill Gates has a stake in Microsoft'. While correct, it is an understatement of what he actually did and was within the company. If you're going to rant about 'intellectual dishonesty' try avoiding it yourself.

    This lie that any other company other that Halliburton couldn't have gotten the job is quite simply a lie which has been proven over and over again.

    "Justice pondering Halliburton probe Company criticized for no-bid contract issued before Iraq war"

    Article: Halliburton Allegations Are Sent to Justice Dept.; No-Bid Contracts In Iraq Are at Issue

    Halliburton's no-bid contracts in Iraq should outrage public

    Numerous stories, if not focusing on the fact it was no-bid, continually would reference it and add it in to give the insight of mispropriety and unfairness that no one else was let into the process. To argue that it the complaints were ONLY about the "no-bid" nature of it would be foolish and wrong. However to argue that the complaints were not about the No-Bid nature of it at all just isn't correct.
    If anything this simply reaffirms the claim. Cheney was CEO of Halliburton BEFORE the Iraq war and before that he had been the Defense Secretary. The connection between the two span at the very least 18 years.

    * Following the end of Operation Desert Storm in February 1991, the Pentagon, led by then Defense Secretary Dick Cheney, paid Halliburton subsidiary Brown & Root Services over $8.5 million to study the use of private military forces with American soldiers in combat zones.[20]
    * Thomas H. Cruikshank, who served as chairman and CEO from 1989 until 1995, was replaced by Dick Cheney.[21]
    * In the aftermath of Operation Desert Storm, Halliburton crews helped bring 725 burning oil wells under control in Kuwait.[22]
    * In the early 1990s Halliburton was found to be in violation of federal trade barriers in Iraq and Libya, having sold these countries dual-use oil drilling equipment and, through its former subsidiary, Halliburton Logging Services, sending six pulse neutron generators to Libya. After having pleaded guilty, the company was fined $1.2 million, with another $2.61 million in penalties.[23]
    * In the Balkans conflict in the 1990s, Kellogg Brown-Root (KBR) supported U.S. peacekeeping forces in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia and Hungary with food, laundry, transportation and other lifecycle management services.[citation needed]
    * In 1998 Halliburton merged with Dresser Industries, which included Kellogg. Prescott Bush was a director of Dresser Industries, which is now part of Halliburton. Former United States president George H. W. Bush worked for Dresser Industries in several positions from 1948–1951, before he founded Zapata Corporation.[citation needed]
    Anybody who claims cronyism did not play a part in this is simply refusing to see the truth. Cheney hands contracts to Halliburton. Less than 4 years later he becomes CEO of the company. Less than 8 years later Halliburton what is probably the largest contract in its history by and administration who is crawling with people attached to it? Who the **** are you kidding?
    Last edited by Hatuey; 05-14-10 at 11:51 AM.
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •