Halliburton?Originally posted by clocker@15 January 2004 - 10:37
How insensitive must one be to not realize that awarding Halliburton huge contracts without competitive bidding was, at the very least, going to look/smell fishy?
They were in the mideast at Clinton's behest (and under Cheney's watch) for years; I don't recall it causing a problem then, do you?
There was an explanation offered by the Bush administration, though it wasn't touted at the time, because it was not seen as the issue it seems to be at the moment.
The reason Halliburton's services were retained was their prior presence in the mideast and the perception of "expertise" in the region; they were "in place".
As the administration needed an organization that could "hit the ground running", so to speak, it was decided to forego a drawn-out bid process in the name of expedience.
Perhaps it would be fruitful for you to explore the Clinton/Cheney connection; I'm sure a conspiracy exists.
Bookmarks