RKMBs Forums .::Important::. Politics and Current Events "It's not about oil or Iraq..."

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dave the Wonder Boy:
Whomod, I see you filibustered around the real issues for three posts.

Pretty much everything you posted can be dismissed simply as liberal spin of the truth.

---

quote:

---

Halliburton's Activities in Nations that Sponsor Terrorism

In press accounts and SEC filings, Halliburton and its
subsidiaries have been linked to three nations known for their
support of terrorism: Iran, Iraq, and Libya. Since at least the
1980s, federal laws have prohibited U.S. companies from doing
business in one or more of these countries. Yet Halliburton
appears to have sought to circumvent these restrictions by
setting up subsidiaries in foreign countries and territories such
as the Cayman Islands. These actions started as early as 1984;
they appear to have continued during the period between 1995 and
2000, when Vice President Cheney headed the company; and they are
apparently ongoing even today.

In 1990, following Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, President
George H.W. Bush imposed economic sanctions, including a complete
trade embargo, on Iraq. The sanctions ban the export of goods,
technology, and services to Iraq. Criminal penalties for
violating the Iraqi sanctions range up to 12 years in jail and
$1,000,000 in fines.[9]

Despite these sanctions, the Washington Post has reported
that Halliburton performed work in Iraq while Vice President
Cheney was leading the company. Halliburton had stakes in two
companies that signed contracts to sell over $73 million in oil
production equipment and spare parts to Iraq while Mr. Cheney was
CEO. The companies were subsidiaries of a joint venture between
Dresser industries - which Halliburton acquired in 1998 - and
Ingersoll-Rand, another large equipment maker. From 1997 through
mid-2000, the subsidiaries sold water and sewage treatment pumps,
spare parts for oil facilities, and pipeline equipment to Iraq.[10]

The Vice President initially tried to deny this involvement
in Iran. In July 2002, he stated on national television: "I had a
firm policy that we wouldn't do anything in Iraq, even - even
arrangements that were supposedly legal.... [W]e've not done any
business in Iraq since the sanctions [were] imposed, and I had a
standing policy that I wouldn't do that."[11] A month later,
confronted with an admission by a Halliburton spokesman that the
company indeed did business with Iraq, Vice President Cheney
admitted that "[w]hen we took over Dresser, we inherited two
joint ventures with Ingersoll-Rand that were selling some parts
into Iraq," but he said he did not know of this at the time. Mr.
Cheney also said that "[s]hortly after we took control of
Dresser, we divested ourselves of those two companies."[12]

Both of these statements, however, have been contradicted by
other evidence. Two former senior executives of the Halliburton
subsidiaries say they knew of no policy against doing business
with Iraq.[13] One of the executives also said that he was certain
that Mr. Cheney would have known about the business with Iraq.[14]
Furthermore, Halliburton did not divest itself of the
subsidiaries "shortly" after Halliburton took control of Dresser.
Instead, the firms traded with Iraq for more than a year under
Mr. Cheney, signing almost $30 million in contracts.[15]

9 U.S. Department of the Treasury, Office of Foreign Assets
Control, Iraq: What You Need to Know about the U.S. Embargo (Mar.
12, 2003).

10 Firm 's Iraq Deals Greater than Cheney Has Said, Washington
Post (June 23, 2001).

11 This Week, ABC News (July 30, 2000).

12 This Week, ABC News (Aug. 27, 2000).

13 Firm 's Iraq Deals Greater than Cheney Has Said, supra note
10.

14 Id.

15 Id.


http://lists.envirolink.org/pipermail/corporations/2003-May/000033.html

---

quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave the Wonder Boy
And mass populations of liberal schmucks protesting in cities across the world (half-informed, who are probably motivated more by undigested liberal propaganda and emotion than a real understanding of the truth, and what's really being attempted for the greater good of the entire middle east in Iraq).
These protests, however large, are still a fraction of the population of the countries where they occurred.

---

As opposed to 70% of the informed American public solidly behind Bush for most of the year because they assumed, based on unbiased reports and conservative half-truths & statements, that Iraq had something to do with 9/11.

Nice to see you can dismiss the masses (the other 30%, the so called "liberal schmucks befuddled by liberal propaganda :lol: ) who prophetically said it was b.s.) just as easily as Bush can.

I thought I'd also get back to your "it's us or them" comments sometime. Because to me that sounds like a recipe for wholsale Crusade style genocide. We're up against a violent fanatical offshoot of Islam and their leaders who are encouraging them to attack the west (most of who preach, teach, and reside in SAUDI ARABIA) not against the whole of the Middle East, lest they destroy us first, like you and Ann Coulter seem to think we are.

quote:

---

Ann Coulter & Peter Fenn, Crossfire:
CNN, November 23, 2001

FENN: Let me ask you one very simple question. You have written, and I quote, “We should
invade their countries, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity.”
COULTER: Yeah, that was a good one.
FENN: Now, I just have one very simple question. Who is “they”?
COULTER: The sentence before that sentence says who they are. And that is the terrorists, the people
cheering and dancing in the street.
FIEGER: Convert them to Christianity?
COULTER: The ones we happen to be killing right now. Thank God for the Green Berets.
FIEGER: What’s the difference between you and bin Laden?

*******************************************

“This is no time to be precious about locating the exact individuals directly involved in this particular
terrorist attack. … We don’t need long investigations of the forensic evidence to determine with
scientific accuracy the person or persons who ordered this specific attack. … We should invade their
countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren’t punctilious about locating and
punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That’s
war. And this is war.”

“We oughta be discussing whether they should be tortured.”

“That’s the whole point here, to kill them. And we will kill them. … Our objective is to kill him and we
kill him. … So we need to kill them and we are killing them. … kill all these other fanatics who are
running over there. … These are precisely the people we want to kill.”

“Even fanatical Muslim terrorists don’t hate America like liberals do.”

“When contemplating college liberals, you really regret once again that John Walker is not getting the
death penalty. We need to execute people like John Walker in order to physically intimidate liberals, by
making them realize that they can be killed too. Otherwise they will turn into outright traitors.”

“According to initial buoyant reports in early February, enraged travelers rose up in a savage attack on
the secretary of transportation. Hope was dashed when later reports indicated that the irritated travelers
were actually rival warlords, the airport was the Kabul Airport, and Norman Mineta was still with us.”

“We have a national debate about whether Clinton ‘did it,’ even though all sentient people know he did
… otherwise there would only be debates about whether to impeach or assassinate.”

---