Okay, first of all, that site you list is a partisan one. Within the pseudo-objective summary they list of Halliburton and its connections to Washington leaders, the linked report editorializes quite a bit, and it's clear they begin with an assumption of guilt by Haliburton and its executives, without demonstrating facts to back it up. They IMPLY quite a bit, but don't come out and say that there is a direct connection, or give evidence of a connection.

And they also --rather unprofessionally-- slip in quite a few digs and snide remarks.

Some examples:

quote:


Links with government

It is Halliburton's unashamed ties to the US Administration and key think-tanks such as Project for a New American Century that has guaranteed it a smooth flow of large contracts. Current US vice president, Dick Cheney, was Hallibuton's Chief Executive until 2000. He joined the company in 1995 after it was awarded the job of studying and then implementing the privatisation of routine army functions under the then secretary of defence... Dick Cheney. Unsurprisingly, Cheney is still being paid by Halliburton. When he left in 2000, he opted not to have his leaving payment in a lump sum, but instead to have it paid to him over five years, possibly for tax reasons. The obligatory disclosure statement filled by all top government officials says only that these yearly payments are in a range between $100,000 and $1 million. Nor is it clear how they are calculated.62
Several of the current directors of Halliburton have previously worked for the US government. For example, in October 2001, Ray L. Hunt was appointed by President George Bush to the President's Foreign Intelligence Board, whilst Lawrence S. Eagleburger has held a variety of positions.

"Unashamed ties". Gee, how objective and impartial.

All that can be said about Cheney is that he worked for in several high level government positions, and also worked for Halliburton, and had a five-year severance payout that is not disclosed publicly.
It is implied that Cheney (and others, later in the piece) rigged the contracts and received kickbacks. But this IMPLIED corruption is never proven.

The fact that Cheney and these men worked in several high-level policy groups and intellectual think-tanks simply proves that they are bright individuals who are very competent in world affairs and their chosen field.
Is it so unthinkable that Halliburton was one of several contractors, and was found to be the most competent contractor among them to do the job? Perhaps instead people should be chosen who have NO experience, and no knowledge of international business.

quote:
National Petroleum Council (NPC)

Halliburton's CEO David J. Lesar is currently a member of the NPC, whilst director Ray L. Hunt has served as chairman. Although the NPC is not allowed to lobby or act as a trade group, it operates in an advisory role to the US Energy Department.
The council's 1999 natural gas report concluded that regulation was becoming a barrier to meeting rising demand. Partially overseen by then chief executive of Halliburton, Dick Cheney, the report became a frequently cited source book for policy debate in the days leading up to House passage of new energy legislation which opened up some of the US's last unspoiled mountains, canyons and badlands.
Again, implied corruption, without proof. Perhaps as competent businessmen and world leaders, these executives simply convinced Cheney that that their policy was sound and logical and good for the country. And convinced, Cheney passed on the recommendations they suggested in their report.

Clearly, the last sentence of the above quote smacks of partisanship and whining environmentalism, and editorializes quite a bit.

I guess every member of the House who passed the bill is corrupt as well.

quote:
USA ENGAGE

Similarly, Cheney has opposed sanctions against almost all the countries that Halliburton does business in, including Iran, Libya and Azerbaijan. The one exception is Iraq, at least that is what he would have us believe (see Corporate Crimes). Now that Dick Cheney is back in government, his position on sanctions is likely to become more influential. Secretary of State Colin Powell has already echoed the sentiment of Cheney and USA*Engage, saying he wanted to reduce the use of sanctions as a foreign policy tool. This would leave Cheney’s ex-colleagues back at Halliburton freer than ever to pursue profits where environmental and human rights norms are disregarded.
This quote implies that all Cheney's decisions against sanctions are motivated out of greed, to fill Halliburton's coffers with lucrative contracts.
It also implies that Powell as well is corrupt. (If there is one person in Bush's administration I trust above all others to do what is right and best for the country, it's Powell, and I find this groundless accusation deeply annoying)

Perhaps their decision to not use sanctions is based on the fact that (far from underhanded motives of corporate greed) sanctions over the last 15 years against various countries HAS NEVER WORKED !

But like the rest of this piece, it editorializes toward trashing Cheney and anyone close to him, with a very narrow reading, toward a pre-dominant conclusion. And presents these wild conjectures as if they were facts.

They are not.