>What exactly was this?
>
>the one Haliburton no-bid thing
The proper protocol to win military contracts is to submit a competitive
bid detailing what you will do and for how much. Halliburton secured the
contract without a competitive bid. People go to jail for violating army
procurement rules. I have read several articles in the WSJ where experts
have stated that their opinion is that while certain protocols may have
been broken there doesn't look like a back-room deal was brokered and in
fact that need was an over-ruling factor in moving forward without the
competitive bids. Furthermore, the unit of Halliburton that has been
accused of overcharging is KBR - which is a subsidiary of Halliburton - and
operates essentially like a separate company. I just wouldn't make sense
for a guy like Cheney to make it this obvious.
That said, one can't but help wonder why is this administration and in
particular this project been marred with so many scandals and
suspicions? Can they all be overblown conspiracy theories?
*Has any of this actually been resolved yet? Has any independent agency
either cleared or denounced the legality of the Halliburton contract?
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
