DTB?
- Thread starter kosar
- Start date
oooh! I am so offended. I already answered your question to which the answer is patently obvious. Besides which I am not obligated to do your research for you. It would be wasted on the likes of you in any case.
But for you ferdinand: (from Mother Jones)
In 1992, the Pentagon, then under Cheney's direction, paid Texas-based Brown & Root Services $3.9 million to produce a classified report detailing how private companies -- like itself -- could help provide logistics for American troops in potential war zones around the world. BRS specializes in such work; from 1962 to 1972, for instance, the company worked in the former South Vietnam building roads, landing strips, harbors, and military bases. Later in 1992, the Pentagon gave the company an additional $5 million to update its report. That same year, BRS won a massive, five-year logistics contract from the US Army Corps of Engineers to work alongside American GIs in places like Zaire, Haiti, Somalia, Kosovo, the Balkans, and Saudi Arabia.
After Bill Clinton's election cost Cheney his government job, he wound up in 1995 as CEO of Halliburton Company, the Dallas-based oil services giant -- which just happens to own Brown & Root Services. Since then, Cheney has collected more than $10 million in salary and stock payments from the company. In addition, he is currently the company's largest individual shareholder, holding stock and options worth another $40 million. Those holdings have undoubtedly been made more valuable by the ever-more lucrative contracts BRS continues to score with the Pentagon.
Between 1992 and 1999, the Pentagon paid BRS more than $1.2 billion for its work in trouble spots around the globe. In May of 1999, the US Army Corps of Engineers re-enlisted the company's help in the Balkans, giving it a new five-year contract worth $731 million.
To critics, this all adds up to classic revolving-door politics: Cheney's work for Halliburton, they say, has allowed him to improperly profit off of actions he took and contacts he made while in government.
"Over the years, we've tried to slow the revolving door to make sure decision makers don't benefit from decisions they make while they are in office," said Tom Smith, the Texas state director of Public Citizen, a non-profit consumer group. "You have to question whose interests Cheney is looking after, and whether privatization has really benefited the Department of Defense, or the defense contractors like Brown & Root."
Although the US military has long relied on contractors for various services, the issue for some observers is the possibility that Cheney used his contacts within government to enrich himself. "We are talking about nepotism of the highest order and profiteering at the expense of the US taxpayers," says Pratap Chatterjee, a radio journalist who has followed Halliburton for several years.
Chatterjee points out that BRS gets a one percent profit guarantee on their logistics contracts and that in Somalia, the company was given another eight percentage points for meeting various incentive clauses in their contract. "Compare that with average corporate profit percentages, which are about three percent," he said.
Moreover, while there are advantages to using private companies to do soldiers' work, BRS has run into significant criticism for the way it has carried out some of its military missions.
The company has drawn praise for allowing more American soldiers to carry M-16's instead of spatulas. "It doesn't take a soldier to do what Brown & Root does for the Army," explains Jan Finegan, a spokesperson for the Army Materiel Command, who points out that the active-duty force of the US military has declined by about 25 percent over the past decade. Hiring a private contractor to take out the garbage, do the laundry and take care of the dining halls "frees soldiers up to do what they are trained to do," she said.
BRS also saves money by hiring local workers whenever possible. But that doesn't always turn out happily. In 1994, at the end of its engagement in Somalia, where American troops had attempted to quell endemic civil strife, BRS dismissed the Somali workers it had hired. The disenchanted workers then staged a protest at the United Nations compound in Mogadishu, until they were scattered by UN troops armed with batons and tear gas. Three people were reportedly injured in the melee.
In 1996, in Hungary, where BRS had set up shop to support American troops stationed in the former Yugoslavia, the company ran into more controversy. Shortly after American forces moved in, Hungarian officials ruled that BRS was subject to the country's value-added tax, and that company employees were subject to Hungarian income tax, just like any other private corporation. The Pentagon, however, insisted that the company was part of the American military and therefore exempt from the tax. Ultimately, BRS did pay the Hungarian government $18 million in taxes -- for which it was reimbursed by the US government. The company was also accused of sexual harassment by several female workers who claimed that BRS employees had fondled and propositioned them.
Nonetheless, BRS, which has 20,000 employees worldwide, continues to pull in major government deals. The company recently won a $100 million contract from the US State Department to upgrade security at its embassies. It also holds a long-term contract with the British military to operate the Devonport Royal Naval Dockyard, the UK's sole refitting and refueling location for nuclear powered submarines.
Nine years ago, Dick Cheney was overseeing the military's performance in the Gulf War. Since then, he has made millions running a business that provides services to that same military. That business, incidentally, has contributed a quarter-million dollars to the Republican cause so far this election cycle. And now, Cheney and Bush are the odds-on favorites to take the White House.
Is this politics as usual? Or is it business as usual? In Cheney's case, it's difficult to tell the difference.
In 1992, the Pentagon, then under Cheney's direction, paid Texas-based Brown & Root Services $3.9 million to produce a classified report detailing how private companies -- like itself -- could help provide logistics for American troops in potential war zones around the world. BRS specializes in such work; from 1962 to 1972, for instance, the company worked in the former South Vietnam building roads, landing strips, harbors, and military bases. Later in 1992, the Pentagon gave the company an additional $5 million to update its report. That same year, BRS won a massive, five-year logistics contract from the US Army Corps of Engineers to work alongside American GIs in places like Zaire, Haiti, Somalia, Kosovo, the Balkans, and Saudi Arabia.
After Bill Clinton's election cost Cheney his government job, he wound up in 1995 as CEO of Halliburton Company, the Dallas-based oil services giant -- which just happens to own Brown & Root Services. Since then, Cheney has collected more than $10 million in salary and stock payments from the company. In addition, he is currently the company's largest individual shareholder, holding stock and options worth another $40 million. Those holdings have undoubtedly been made more valuable by the ever-more lucrative contracts BRS continues to score with the Pentagon.
Between 1992 and 1999, the Pentagon paid BRS more than $1.2 billion for its work in trouble spots around the globe. In May of 1999, the US Army Corps of Engineers re-enlisted the company's help in the Balkans, giving it a new five-year contract worth $731 million.
To critics, this all adds up to classic revolving-door politics: Cheney's work for Halliburton, they say, has allowed him to improperly profit off of actions he took and contacts he made while in government.
"Over the years, we've tried to slow the revolving door to make sure decision makers don't benefit from decisions they make while they are in office," said Tom Smith, the Texas state director of Public Citizen, a non-profit consumer group. "You have to question whose interests Cheney is looking after, and whether privatization has really benefited the Department of Defense, or the defense contractors like Brown & Root."
Although the US military has long relied on contractors for various services, the issue for some observers is the possibility that Cheney used his contacts within government to enrich himself. "We are talking about nepotism of the highest order and profiteering at the expense of the US taxpayers," says Pratap Chatterjee, a radio journalist who has followed Halliburton for several years.
Chatterjee points out that BRS gets a one percent profit guarantee on their logistics contracts and that in Somalia, the company was given another eight percentage points for meeting various incentive clauses in their contract. "Compare that with average corporate profit percentages, which are about three percent," he said.
Moreover, while there are advantages to using private companies to do soldiers' work, BRS has run into significant criticism for the way it has carried out some of its military missions.
The company has drawn praise for allowing more American soldiers to carry M-16's instead of spatulas. "It doesn't take a soldier to do what Brown & Root does for the Army," explains Jan Finegan, a spokesperson for the Army Materiel Command, who points out that the active-duty force of the US military has declined by about 25 percent over the past decade. Hiring a private contractor to take out the garbage, do the laundry and take care of the dining halls "frees soldiers up to do what they are trained to do," she said.
BRS also saves money by hiring local workers whenever possible. But that doesn't always turn out happily. In 1994, at the end of its engagement in Somalia, where American troops had attempted to quell endemic civil strife, BRS dismissed the Somali workers it had hired. The disenchanted workers then staged a protest at the United Nations compound in Mogadishu, until they were scattered by UN troops armed with batons and tear gas. Three people were reportedly injured in the melee.
In 1996, in Hungary, where BRS had set up shop to support American troops stationed in the former Yugoslavia, the company ran into more controversy. Shortly after American forces moved in, Hungarian officials ruled that BRS was subject to the country's value-added tax, and that company employees were subject to Hungarian income tax, just like any other private corporation. The Pentagon, however, insisted that the company was part of the American military and therefore exempt from the tax. Ultimately, BRS did pay the Hungarian government $18 million in taxes -- for which it was reimbursed by the US government. The company was also accused of sexual harassment by several female workers who claimed that BRS employees had fondled and propositioned them.
Nonetheless, BRS, which has 20,000 employees worldwide, continues to pull in major government deals. The company recently won a $100 million contract from the US State Department to upgrade security at its embassies. It also holds a long-term contract with the British military to operate the Devonport Royal Naval Dockyard, the UK's sole refitting and refueling location for nuclear powered submarines.
Nine years ago, Dick Cheney was overseeing the military's performance in the Gulf War. Since then, he has made millions running a business that provides services to that same military. That business, incidentally, has contributed a quarter-million dollars to the Republican cause so far this election cycle. And now, Cheney and Bush are the odds-on favorites to take the White House.
Is this politics as usual? Or is it business as usual? In Cheney's case, it's difficult to tell the difference.
And regarding Cheney's continuing ties to Haliburton; i.e., conflict of interest.
http://money.cnn.com/2003/09/25/news/companies/cheney/index.htm
http://money.cnn.com/2003/09/25/news/companies/cheney/index.htm
And more on who Dicky is REALLY looking out for:
http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/03/08/17_halliburton.html
http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/03/08/17_halliburton.html
You continue to do everything except answer the question. Just answer, in your own words, what proof you have that:
1. The main reason we went in to Iraq was for oil.
2. Give an example of what oil we have taken; or, if no oil has yet been appropriated, when will we do so?
Two simple questions that you can answer in your own words without having links to specious sites that do not answer the question at hand.
1. The main reason we went in to Iraq was for oil.
2. Give an example of what oil we have taken; or, if no oil has yet been appropriated, when will we do so?
Two simple questions that you can answer in your own words without having links to specious sites that do not answer the question at hand.
I have ALREADY clarified myself several times but YOU persist in nit-picking my statements while cleverly avoiding the facts of the issue which even a modicum of intelligence or awareness, not to mention lack of complete naivete, which are public knowledge. If you wish to debate semantics find a lawyer.
Incidentally, tell us your theory for this war's motivation and prove it yourself. Your specious evidence will boil down to only what the White House has claimed is their motivation and frankly their credibility has just about been completely discredited.
Unlike you, I don't claim to know the motivation of our government other than what they tell us. Unlike you, I don't believe everything I read that disagrees with my own thoughts. Nor do I believe everything I read even if it supports my opinion. And we are both just voicing opinions, aren't we? The difference is you present your opinion as fact.
So, we see you resort once again to the woeful debater's tactic of asking me a question rather than addressing my question. And charging me with finding evidence to support my position when I haven't stated an opinion and without doing what you were originally asked - answer the question.
Here is all I ask of you - simple, brief, to the point. Please do this in your own words and don't use a variety of copied and pasted words of others. I just want to hear what the Ocelot has to say in his own words. It has taken 16 posts to get this far.
I will repeat my first challenge and that was to explain what you mean by your comment. Note that my original request asked you not to go off point and ramble about the Bush administration.
Let's put this to bed once and for all. You can do it and I will give you the last word if you just respond. No double talk, no drifting to another topic, etc. In fact, let's make it easy and I will substitute "opinion" for "evidence." Ready? Here goes:
Ocelot - Let us just boil it down to one issue. Don't rant and rave about Bush, Iraq, Saudi Arabia,Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, et al. Just answer ONE point that you yourself have posed:
"It's starting to look more and more like the rationale is boiling down to the greed of oil, which is really sick."
Ocelot
(In YOUR OPINION) how has the US has appropriated any oil in Iraq? And if not, how and when is this going to happen?
So, we see you resort once again to the woeful debater's tactic of asking me a question rather than addressing my question. And charging me with finding evidence to support my position when I haven't stated an opinion and without doing what you were originally asked - answer the question.
Here is all I ask of you - simple, brief, to the point. Please do this in your own words and don't use a variety of copied and pasted words of others. I just want to hear what the Ocelot has to say in his own words. It has taken 16 posts to get this far.
I will repeat my first challenge and that was to explain what you mean by your comment. Note that my original request asked you not to go off point and ramble about the Bush administration.
Let's put this to bed once and for all. You can do it and I will give you the last word if you just respond. No double talk, no drifting to another topic, etc. In fact, let's make it easy and I will substitute "opinion" for "evidence." Ready? Here goes:
Ocelot - Let us just boil it down to one issue. Don't rant and rave about Bush, Iraq, Saudi Arabia,Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, et al. Just answer ONE point that you yourself have posed:
"It's starting to look more and more like the rationale is boiling down to the greed of oil, which is really sick."
Ocelot
(In YOUR OPINION) how has the US has appropriated any oil in Iraq? And if not, how and when is this going to happen?
Look dude. I do NOT believe we are appropriating oil and never said so. Frankly, I don't CARE if we DO take oil. I will RANT and RAVE about any damned thing I want by the way. If you don't like it TOO FUKIN BAD.
I do believe Pres Cheney trumped up WMD evidence and 9/11 links to justify taking out Hussein for reasons of MONEY - OIL RELATED NO-BID SWEETHEART DEALS - OKAY? Is that clear enough for you? THAT IS MY OPINION BACKED BY THE EVIDENCE WHICH I HAVE ALREADY POSTED BUT WHICH YOU DID NOT READ A WORD OF WHICH IS YOUR CHOICE.
IS THAT GOOD ENOUGH FOR YOU, DIPSHIT.
(That should get me banned huh?)
I do believe Pres Cheney trumped up WMD evidence and 9/11 links to justify taking out Hussein for reasons of MONEY - OIL RELATED NO-BID SWEETHEART DEALS - OKAY? Is that clear enough for you? THAT IS MY OPINION BACKED BY THE EVIDENCE WHICH I HAVE ALREADY POSTED BUT WHICH YOU DID NOT READ A WORD OF WHICH IS YOUR CHOICE.
IS THAT GOOD ENOUGH FOR YOU, DIPSHIT.
(That should get me banned huh?)
Last edited:
And by the way 6-5 here is a post from only a week ago:
http://www.madjacksports.com/forum/showthread.php?t=196290
http://www.madjacksports.com/forum/showthread.php?t=196290
Ferdville just wants to hear what Ocelot has to say in his own words. (yeah, that's real believable). Anyway, I am honored. And now Ocelot has spoken.
Ocelot you look like an idiot and you shouldnt call people dipshits anyways you ASShole :mj07: :mj07: Your answers are stupid and evading the question, then you feel like you are the idiot and you call him a dipshit. Good one asswhipe
I have posted 4 sources in this thread and not a single statement in any of them has even been addressed by the peanut gallery (as usual). Ferdville took the 1st shot at me accusing me of ranting and raving. If you can't take a bitch-slapping then don't ask for it with your wiseass remarks.
Ocelot - What I enjoy most about you is the fact that I can get your goat so easily. It must be frustrating when you don't have the answers. The same thing happens to little kids all the time.
The other thing is , I think a look at this thread just shows how frustrated you get before you answer me. Go back and look at this thread. You make a comment and I respond with ONE reply. Then you fire off about 3 in a row, that is your usual. The reason is obvious. You are so discombobulated that you speak your mind, or more likely post a link. Then you think of something else so you write a second reply ( or you do another Google search until you find something that remotely addresses your point). Then you get in another frenzy and forget to say something else that wanders in to your gray matter and you post a third response. It is very comical and entertaining for me to see that. It is nice to get a laugh. I wish I could see your face . It probably gets as red as Rudolf's nose. I would love to measure your blood pressure because I am sure you are ready to burst like Old Faithful.
Keep up the good work. Embarrassing the liberals isn't easy, but you are doing it well.
Glad that your accuracy rate continues as usual. Remember, I believe it was you that said "all scientists agree there is global warming" or similarly inane and totally fallacious claim. Manson comes on and gives you a link to another article where it states that 83% of scientists DO NOT agree there is global warming. And we know how much faith you have in links because you are the King at letting other people do your talking for you. Of course, in your case, that makes a lot of sense.
Now, before you answer this one with your typical 3 responses, take a deep breath and count to 10. That will possibly prevent your blood vessels bursting like Mt. St. Helens. Actually, instead of just thinking off the top of your block head, here is a tip. Write everything down that you want to put in 3 responses. Then,combine them into one reply. Even better, write it out and wait a couple of hours, then read it again to see if it makes sense. Oops, nevermind - don't try that or you will forever be stuck. And keep in mind that you are providing more laughter and enjoyment for me and the MJ crowd than Billy Barty and midget wrestling. And that is one subject for which I imagine you have more than a passing knowledge. Keep it up Ocelot - everybody needs a laugh.
The other thing is , I think a look at this thread just shows how frustrated you get before you answer me. Go back and look at this thread. You make a comment and I respond with ONE reply. Then you fire off about 3 in a row, that is your usual. The reason is obvious. You are so discombobulated that you speak your mind, or more likely post a link. Then you think of something else so you write a second reply ( or you do another Google search until you find something that remotely addresses your point). Then you get in another frenzy and forget to say something else that wanders in to your gray matter and you post a third response. It is very comical and entertaining for me to see that. It is nice to get a laugh. I wish I could see your face . It probably gets as red as Rudolf's nose. I would love to measure your blood pressure because I am sure you are ready to burst like Old Faithful.
Keep up the good work. Embarrassing the liberals isn't easy, but you are doing it well.
Glad that your accuracy rate continues as usual. Remember, I believe it was you that said "all scientists agree there is global warming" or similarly inane and totally fallacious claim. Manson comes on and gives you a link to another article where it states that 83% of scientists DO NOT agree there is global warming. And we know how much faith you have in links because you are the King at letting other people do your talking for you. Of course, in your case, that makes a lot of sense.
Now, before you answer this one with your typical 3 responses, take a deep breath and count to 10. That will possibly prevent your blood vessels bursting like Mt. St. Helens. Actually, instead of just thinking off the top of your block head, here is a tip. Write everything down that you want to put in 3 responses. Then,combine them into one reply. Even better, write it out and wait a couple of hours, then read it again to see if it makes sense. Oops, nevermind - don't try that or you will forever be stuck. And keep in mind that you are providing more laughter and enjoyment for me and the MJ crowd than Billy Barty and midget wrestling. And that is one subject for which I imagine you have more than a passing knowledge. Keep it up Ocelot - everybody needs a laugh.
