On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 18:20:08 +0100, Noel wrote:

On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 23:27:58 GMT, Telamon
wrote:

Just because it "looks" like there is a connection does not mean it
exists.

The old maxim that if it looks like a duck and walks like a duck then
it probably is a duck is still true.


So "probably" is not in your dictionary?

On 29 Aug 2004 23:54:07 GMT, "-=jd=-"
wrote:

Even if Kerry was in office instead of Bush, the gig would still have
quite likely been awarded to Halliburton/KBR simply because they've been
there, done that and can hit the ground running on *all* of the tasks
required.

But there's likely be a damned likely be higher level of
meaningful oversight.

m II wrote:
clifto wrote:
It's not possible at all. Halliburton is not the VP's corporation. Cheney
wasn't working for Halliburton at the time in question.

Good grief...

===========================================
http://www.costanzo.org/Rex/Commenta...ton_circle.htm

http://tinyurl.com/4gutl

Thanks for making my point for me. I know you were just trying to
change the subject, i.e. now that I've pointed out that Cheney was
not part of Halliburton during the war you want to point at other
stuff Cheney MIGHT have done when he was part of Halliburton. But
in so doing, you've proven my point.

Nice bunch of ultraliberal propaganda sites you chose, too.

--
John Kerry walks into a bar. The bartender says, "Why the long face?"

On 31 Aug 2004 00:41:23 GMT, "-=jd=-"
wrote:


And who would the some unknown firm be, if not Halliburton/KBR?

Based on the recent contracts worth millions to Boeing
(despite the fact they're supposd to be blacklisted for prior shady
practices), Halliburton/KBR will likely continue get the contracts, as
sole possible suppliers. But, without their currently highly placed
friends in the administration, there would be less inclination to let
them slide on accountability. Right now, they know they can do what
they want, with their buddies running interference for them. The worst
they get now for overcharges is "pay up", with no penalties.

In article ,
"-=jd=-" wrote:

On Tue 31 Aug 2004 11:32:30p, wrote in message
:

On 31 Aug 2004 00:41:23 GMT, "-=jd=-"
wrote:


And who would the some unknown firm be, if not Halliburton/KBR?

Based on the recent contracts worth millions to Boeing
(despite the fact they're supposd to be blacklisted for prior shady
practices), Halliburton/KBR will likely continue get the contracts, as
sole possible suppliers. But, without their currently highly placed
friends in the administration, there would be less inclination to let
them slide on accountability. Right now, they know they can do what
they want, with their buddies running interference for them. The worst
they get now for overcharges is "pay up", with no penalties.



For the task requirements to be met, I don't think Boeing is set up for
it. I'm not saying they couldn't be, but I doubt they could hit the ground
running to meet all the requirements and execute the tasks.

Again, you may not like them, and I don't think it matters if anyone does
or not - Halliburton/KBR are about the only realistic candidates. Think of
it like Microsoft, but without any flavor of Unix available as a
competitor.

Don't you just love it when someone hijacks the thread. What the hell
does this have to do with the radio Netherlands news magazine?

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Telamon schrieb:

Don't you just love it when someone hijacks the thread. What the hell
does this have to do with the radio Netherlands news magazine?


Realize: you're NEVER the owner[tm] of any thread you may have
initialized....

In article ,
Volker Tonn wrote:

Telamon schrieb:

Don't you just love it when someone hijacks the thread. What the hell
does this have to do with the radio Netherlands news magazine?


Realize: you're NEVER the owner[tm] of any thread you may have
initialized....

Never said it belonged to me.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California