Who's more unpatriotic?

[Simple_Min]

An OP/ED from our friends over at Ny Times. Those damn lying unpatriotic liberals

"Since at least the 1980's, federal laws have prohibited U.S. companies from doing business in one or more of these countries. Yet Halliburton appears to have sought to circumvent these restrictions..."

Dancing With the Devil
By BOB HERBERT

Let's see. Who's less patriotic, the Dixie Chicks or Dick Cheney's long-term meal ticket, the Halliburton Company?

The Dixie Chicks were excoriated for simply exercising their constitutional right to speak out. With an ugly backlash and plans for a boycott growing, the group issued a humiliating public apology for "disrespectful" anti-Bush remarks made by its lead singer, Natalie Maines.

The Chicks learned how dangerous it can be to criticize the chief of a grand imperial power.

Halliburton, on the other hand, can do no wrong. Yes, it has a history of ripping off the government. And, yes, it's made zillions doing business in countries that sponsor terrorism, including members of the "axis of evil" that is so despised by the president.

But the wrath of the White House has not come thundering down on Halliburton for consorting with the enemy. And there's been very little public criticism. This is not some hapless singing group we're talking about. Halliburton is a court favorite. So instead of being punished for its misdeeds, it's been handed a huge share of the riches to be reaped from the reconstruction of Iraq and U.S. control of Iraqi oil.

A Democratic congressman, Henry Waxman of California, has raised pointed questions about the propriety of rewarding Halliburton with lucrative contracts as part of the U.S. war on terror when the company has gone out of its way to do business in three nations that the U.S. has accused of supporting terror: Iraq, Iran and Libya.

In an April 30 letter to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Mr. Waxman wrote:

"Since at least the 1980's, federal laws have prohibited U.S. companies from doing business in one or more of these countries. Yet Halliburton appears to have sought to circumvent these restrictions by setting up subsidiaries in foreign countries and territories such as the Cayman Islands. These actions started as early as 1984; they appear to have continued during the period between 1995 and 2000, when Vice President Cheney headed the company; and they are apparently ongoing even today."

According to Mr. Waxman, a subsidiary called Halliburton Products and Services opened an office in Tehran, Iran, in February 2000, has done work on offshore drilling projects and has asserted, "We are committed to position ourselves in a market that offers huge growth potential."

Shareholder complaints since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, particularly from the pension funds of the New York City Police and Fire Departments, have prompted Halliburton officials to agree to reevaluate their operations in Iran.

The federal government has been well aware of Halliburton's shenanigans. In his letter to Secretary Rumsfeld, Mr. Waxman noted that "Halliburton was fined $3.8 million in 1995 for re-exporting U.S. goods through a foreign subsidiary to Libya in violation of U.S. sanctions."

The fine was not enough to stop the company from dancing with the devil. It still has dealings in Libya.

Now, with the U.S. takeover of Iraq, Halliburton has hit the jackpot. It has only recently been made clear that an "emergency" no-bid contract given in March to the Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg Brown & Root covers far more than the limited task of fighting oil well fires. The company has been given control of the Iraqi oil operations, including oil distribution.

"It's remarkable there's been so little attention paid to the Halliburton contracts," said Mr. Waxman. In addition to doing business in countries that have sponsored terrorism, the congressman said, Halliburton has been accused of overcharging the U.S. government for work it did in the 1990's. And last year the company agreed to pay a $2 million settlement to ward off possible criminal charges for price gouging.

"Their reward for that terrible record," said the congressman, "was a secret no-bid contract, potentially worth billions, to run Iraq's oil operations."

Halliburton and its subsidiaries are virtuosos at gaming the system. It's a slithery enterprise with its rapacious tentacles in everybody's pockets. It benefits from doing business with the enemy, from its relationship with the U.S. military when the U.S. is at war with the enemy, and from contracts to help rebuild the defeated enemy.

Meanwhile, the flag-waving yahoos are hyperventilating over nonissues like the Dixie Chicks.

[riderace]

amen brother, too bad most people are working their asses off just to survive and don't have the time to research the truth.

[Dilbert1234567]

this whole administration is bull shit, they are screwing over america to suit there own agendas.

[Krutch9]

The middle class is becoming rare species.

[The_Dude]

halliburton still has ties to the govt, and dick is salvaging their asses still.

[Simple_Min]

In order to keep the "threat" which is the middle class, appeased, our government likes to throw in our eyes insignificant amounts of money to keep us from rising up. Ofcourse we buy it and it shows in the next general election.

Remember the politics and the theme of Rome from Gladiator.

[Frowning Budah]

At least Haliburton is trying to be sneaky. Did you see that World Com. The same World Com that ripped investors off for billions of dollars has been given a contract worth millions to build a wireless network in Iraq. Even thought they have never built that kind of system before and there are hundreds of UN-indicted companies with experience that were not given the chance. Nothing like throwing it into your face.

[Charlatan]

I think Haliburton's record speaks for itself. They are a multinational corporation that has managed to successfully work the system...

The real culprit here is the rank hypocracy in the US government...

[Simple_Min]

Originally posted by Charlatan
I think Haliburton's record speaks for itself. They are a multinational corporation that has managed to successfully work the system...

The real culprit here is the rank hypocracy in the US government...

Heh, what's worse a president who screws a intern or a president who screws an entire nation?

[Charlatan]

That's a good question Simple_Min...

Interestingly I haven't seen any replies to this thread from our esteemed friends on the right wing of the TFP.

[~springrain]

Originally posted by riderace
amen brother, too bad most people are working their asses off just to survive and don't have the time to research the truth.

well said... i couldn't agree more

thanks for posting...

[Kadath]

Maybe we should learn the lesson and just push for a split politics board. We can all agree, and they can all agree, and no one will learn anything. Spring forth, burly protectors of the right, and save your leader's reputation!

[Lebell]

I prefer to let History make a judgement on this one, the same as Clinton.

[Kadath]

Clinton got judged in the moment as well. We could at least pay this administration the same courtesy.

[Lebell]

Not by me.

[smooth]

And the silence deafens....

...in retrospect it appears that had this war been about oil interests and occupation we would really be in trouble.

[archer2371]

Originally posted by Kadath
Maybe we should learn the lesson and just push for a split politics board. We can all agree, and they can all agree, and no one will learn anything. Spring forth, burly protectors of the right, and save your leader's reputation!

If you insist.....
Well, I guess I can't really defend the fact that Haliburton has or hasn't done some very corrupt things in the business world (because they have), and I hate it when a corporation does something like this, because I believe in the old saying of "There are no business ethics, just ethics." Which basically says that if you're going to run a business, do it truthfully, take care of your customers, and your employees. Kadath, I completely agree with you, through debate, we each learn something, and by agreeing and collecting together in groups, we atrophy as a society and as a people. However, it must be noted that Haliburton could have been stopped cold before the Bush Administration has been in place, (i.e. Clinton, Bush, and Reagan) and this corporation must be stopped or reformed, I'm thoroughly surprised that after getting ripped off so many times that the U.S. Government and the U.S. Military has allowed that corporation to remain standing. So it's not completely Bush's fault, nor is it completely Cheney's fault, it's the repeated fault of a government that has tended to look the other way whenever something like that happens. If the people find that Bush, Cheney, or any of the government has done something illegal, put 'em on trial, impeach them, whatever, if they have as much proof as they did with Nixon to say that Bush was using his power to advance his agenda and no one else's by all means I say he should step down, be impeached, whatever. I, one of the most conservative people on this TF project, some of you have seen my posts, agree with the most of you here, if someone does something illegal, they must be punished, and not let off, it has to apply to everybody or the decencies of society are all for naught. I'm for big business, but I am for honest big business, I'm pro-life, but by all means, if the birth is the result of rape or will endager the mother's life, it's reasonable to allow the woman to choose to have an abortion, I don't agree with the Dixie Chicks, but that's their opinion, and then there's mine, mine isn't on a public stage, theirs is, and most of their fanbase are conservative country listeners, they should have realized that there were going to be reprecussions to a comment such as that. I am open minded, put some facts infront of me that refute my position, and I will most likely change my viewpoint or concede a few things. I guess I didn't "defend" Dubya like you thought I would, but hey, I will say that I like the guy, I will say that I respect him, and I will say that I will exercise my right to vote for him in 2004, but hey, that's my opinion and I agree with him on a lot of issues and topics, if there were another candidate that came out that I believed in more, or I thought had a better stance on the issues, then I'd vote for him instead. I thoroughly believed that Alan Keyes was the best guy for the Republican Presidential Candidacy back in 2000. However, by election, Bush got the call and I supported him and I will continue to support him.

[james t kirk]

Business and patriotism have always seemed to be two different things, not only in the US, but all over the G-7.

How often have we heard, "it's business"

World com are slime balls, so is Enron, so is global crossings, so it 360 networks.

They all bilked investors for billions and nothing happens to these guys.

How it is that they aren't all in jail boggles my mind.

A guy with a gun robs a bank and gets 10 grand, then when he gets caught gets 20 years.

I guy with a brief case steels a billion or two and nothing happens. How fucked up is that.

The article concerning haliburton is just another case where it seems that business trumps integrity. It's not a right wing or left wing thing per se, but it is another example of the bush administration's pure out and out hypocrisy.

[rth9821]

Shareholder complaints since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, particularly from the pension funds of the New York City Police and Fire Departments, have prompted Halliburton officials to agree to reevaluate their operations in Iran.

I wonder if any of those shareholders belong in the "flag-waving yahoos" club that loathes the politics of the Dixie Chicks. I doubt Herbert bothered to ask the yahoos about the shady Halliburton past for fear of being confronted with a diverse and thoughtful population.

That one quote undermines Herbert’s thesis: people are paying attention and taking the necessary steps to punish unprincipled corporate decisions.

Naturally, there's more noise from the Dixie Chicks issue. Its political value is negligible compared to its entertainment value. It's been dramatized by the entertainment industry itself and even though the Dixie Chicks were cast as the villain they'll probably come out ahead.

[Kows]

How can we expect anyone (democrat or republican) to speak out against this company when they all receive money from big corporate? It's all a sham. When the lower classes begin to realize that they are being screwed over, there will be a revolution. You can either at that point embrace change or hang unto the artificial constructs of opression in this society (i.e. corporations).

[Lebell]

Originally posted by james t kirk
Business and patriotism have always seemed to be two different things, not only in the US, but all over the G-7.

I would argue that you can make this statement about any country in the world, be it a third world country where corrupt officials take payoffs to "facilitate" business transactions, or an oil rich country where government officials funnel off money into personal swiss bank accounts, or the officials at big first world corporations such as Enron.