Tonight is the dreaded Evidence mid-term upon which I’ve previously commented and which has slowed my ability to do significant research for the kind of detailed articles I like to write here.
That doesn’t explain one significant failure pointed out to me this morning by James G. Brown in his comment on my January 2004 article about U.S. companies benefiting from the war in Iraq.
Mr. Brown points out that I’m an idiot because “[T]here’s only one company in the U.S. that can do what Halibrton [sic] can do.” Just one. The others are “French or Germany [sic] corporation[s].”
Silly me. We liberal Jews are so ignorant that we can’t even spell the names of other companies, let alone recognize that they can’t do what Halliburton can do.
Oh, wait. I forgot. This is the United States. That means there are likely other companies that compete with Halliburton and can do the same thing Halliburton does.
That must explain this quote:
The Bechtel Group, one of the world’s biggest engineering and construction companies, has dropped out of the running for a contract to rebuild the Iraqi oil industry, as other competitors have begun to conclude that the bidding process favors the one company already working in Iraq, Halliburton. — Neela Banerjee, Rivals say Halliburton Dominates Iraq Work (August 8, 2003) Truthout
And that doesn’t even count the other competitors listed on the Yahoo! Finance site.
Oy! “Bechtel” is a “Germany [sic]” name! They must be Germans! Not.
Riley P. Bechtel, Chairman and CEO of Bechtel, was born in the United States and graduated from Stanford University in California before joining an American law firm (in San Francisco, I believe). Bechtel itself was founded by Warren A. Bechtel, who started out grading railroad beds with mule-drawn wagons in 1898 in Oklahoma. Bechtel has been involved in such non-German projects as San Francisco’s Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) system and the Hoover Dam Project. Unlike Halliburton, they can’t handle foreign engineering projects, though — unless you count the work they did on Hong Kong’s new airport and associated infrastructure. Oh, and the work they did in Iraq before realizing Halliburton was the favored son.
As Mr. Brown noted, some of these companies traded on American stock exchanges are not totally owned by Americans. That, as he explains, should make it clear to us why we award them contracts off the coast of Texas, but not in foreign places like Iraq.
So ignore the fact that the company Vice-President Dick Cheney once headed got no-bid Iraqi contracts worth billions. It’s not corruption. They’re Americans! And only some of their competitors are Americans!
More importantly, Mr. Brown seems to be ticked off because I wrote about corruption within the United States government whereas he was concerned that there are questions about whether Kofi Annan has a son who might have been involved in receiving illicit payments under the “Oil for Food” scandal. As with “Halibrton,” Mr. Brown cannot spell the name “Kofi Annan,” but he is already convinced Mr. Annan was involved in corruption that makes Halliburton “look like chump change.”
Nothing like that has ever happened in the United States! No politicians, or their sons, have ever been involved in similar scandals.
Well, unless you count the Savings & Loan scandal that cost some Americans their entire life savings and retirement plans and in which several members of the Bush family had key parts.
But perhaps we liberal Jews are just pissed off because the numerous scandals involving every generation of the Bush family reach all the way back to when the United States government ordered the seizure of Bush property because the company Prescott Bush was running was engaged in supporting Adolf Hitler.
And perhaps the only reason he left off the word “stinking” that most people use when they say “liberal Jew” was out of recognition that the blog article on which he was commenting was written in January of 2004 — long before any allegations I ignored against Kofi Annan’s family were made.
As of December 2004, these are still only recent allegations and no one yet knows what happened. That’s why the U.S. senate wants to see United Nations records relating to the “Oil for Food” program.
Funny how Mr. Brown doesn’t mention anything about the U.S. companies — ChevronTexaco and ExxonMobil — that are also under investigation in two separate grand jury proceedings to determine their role in the scandal. Funny how he doesn’t comment upon the fact that we have, as yet, nothing more than allegations about any U.N. involvement.
And we can’t use, as support for the U.N., the belief of many folk that the allegations are manufactured by the Bush Administration to get even with the U.N. for its stand on the illegality of the U.S. invasion of Iraq. After all, they must be lying. They oppose the Bush Administration. I mean, only al-Jazeera types would argue that “there has yet to be found a single person with his hand in the U.N. cookie jar.” And the fact that Halliburton’s Swiss bank accounts were recently frozen while they’re investigated in an alleged bribery scandal should not lead us to think anything I ever wrote about them was justified.
So, clearly, I’m simply prejudiced because in January 2004 I was writing about Halliburton’s no-bid contracts and the scandal surrounding them instead of writing about Kofi Annan.
Of course, my blog article that stirred up Mr. Brown was written long after the verified and validated information regarding the Bush family’s involvement with Nazi Germany, Saudi Arabia (whence virtually all the World Trade Center terrorists came) and, of course, the business of selling weapons (is this perhaps why there are wars whenever we put Bushes in office?). As of today — I just checked to make sure — Fox “news” has two stories about Kofi Annan on their main page; CBS has none, ABC none, MSNBC none, CNN none. But a Google search this morning on “bush family nazi involvement” returns 97,700 documents. A similar Google search on the term “halliburton scandal” returns 120,000 documents.
Dang! Why doesn’t this friggin’ liberal Jew have any January 2004 blog articles about Kofi Annan’s scandal, which makes “Halibrton [sic] … look like chump change”?
I’m sorry that I don’t write the things on my blog that make people like Mr. Brown happy. I’m sorry that I think corruption occurring in my own country’s government which threatens the existence of my own country gets more “press” on my blog than these other important corruptions in which American companies like ChevronTexaco and ExxonMobil are involved. I’m sorry I document my sources via hyperlinks so that people can see that the things I do write about are not made up. I’m sorry I didn’t do the research to prove that Halliburton’s competitors cannot do what Halliburton can do. I admit I assumed that because they are competitors of Halliburton, they could.
But maybe Mr. Brown was not referring to what they could do in Iraq. Maybe he was referring to the fact that none of Halliburton’s competitors can get no-bid contracts from the Bush Administration.
Hmmm…I never considered that as a defense to the charges! (I wonder if that’s because I’m a “liberal Jew”?) Brilliant!
Oh, and speaking of the long-forgotten Halliburton no-bid contracts, check out Malnurtured Snay’s blog article this morning about the soldier who asked Rumsfield why they don’t get armored vehicles to fight against the Iraqis — and the Bush Administration’s threat that unless Halliburton got another no-bid contract, the soldiers would get no additional armor.
Snay wants to know why this soldier doesn’t support the troops in Iraq. After all, he did question the Administration’s handling of the war.
Me? I’m busy researching to see if “Wilson” is a jewish surname.