On 12/9/05, Dan Minette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Gary Denton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >Your list is of recent contracts after things went to Hell in a > >handbasket. My later post I actually stopped pulling news accounts of > >contracts in 2003 except for a very recent post of the type of > >contracts being given. There is a clear difference between what was > happening in the > >first year and before and what is happening now. Between their plans for > >strategic control of oil financed by Iraqi oil and the current $100 > >billion toilet. > > > Well, my first source said: > > "BAGHDAD: Iraq's oil ministry has awarded the country's first post-war > oilfield development contracts to Turkish and Canadian firms, an oil > official said on Thursday."
That was the first post-Saddam era *upstream deals* Trying to slip one over? > So what contracts were awarded before the first contract? There may have > been a consulting contracts before this, but this is a multiply sourced > very specific reference to a tracable contract that have specific companies > listed as participating in the contracts. > > I see nothing so concrete from your quotes. It's all about secret plans to > start a war to do something that never started to happen. Further, the > people in question would be starting a war to decrease their own companies > net worth and income. I summarized over 20 bids from newspaper articles in 2003 here - Point to where this is all secret plans to start a war to do something that never started to happen and say again there is nothing concrete? "Halliburton and its KBR subsidiary received Iraqi oil field contracts without competitive bidding... Bechtel Group won the contract to rebuild Iraq without open competitive bidding.... A contract to improve Iraq's public health system was awarded to a research and consulting firm, Abt Associates Inc, from Massachusetts....Halliburton's KBR, closely linked to Vice President Dick Cheney, was given exclusive contracts in Iraq, including renovating presidential palace to be used by the US. The company was also given the Logistics Civil Augmentation Program that will "set up, cater to and care for the Iraq-based officials and it has no cost ceiling." ... A Washington report lays out the groundwork for potential contractors and outlines the steps that will launch Iraq as a test case for exporting neoliberal economic models to the Middle East....Members of the Iraqi Governing Council expressed grave concern over the $1.2 billion cost of police training in Iraq and the list of sub-contractors approved by Bechtel... According to Christian Aid, the Coalition Provisional Authority has accounted for only one fifth of Iraq reconstruction funds.... On the first day of the [Iraq Development] Fund's existence, May 22, 2003, US President George Bush issued an Executive Order that seems to formalize "crony capitalism" in Iraq by substantially protecting US oil corporations.... The Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) has been unable to account for billions of dollars transferred by the UN to the Development Fund for Iraq. Furthermore, the CPA has stymied the work of the International Advisory Monitoring Board (IAMB) created to provide transparency... The law firm headed by former US Secretary of State James Baker will "restructure" Iraq's debts. Greg Palast points out that the US-influenced Iraqi Governing Council made the appointment, thereby preventing the US Congress from demanding accountability... .Funds for the reconstruction and development of Iraq will pay for 26 contracts in the electricity, oil and water sectors, but the Pentagon will not permit French, Russian and German firms to take part.... and I'll stop with a partial listing just through 2003." http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/contractindex.htm I also provided a source with links to all the articles. You, on the other hand, are trying to slip new development deals as the "first deals" instead of only the first of that type of deal. I also answered previously your argument that people pushing this was were pushing this war against their own economic interests. You seem to be losing things, should I wait till you catch up on your reading? > <snip> > >> Finally, I think there is an unwritten assumption underlying this > analysis. > >> It is that Hussein never has and was very unlikely to ever pose a > >> significant future risk to the United States. No reasonable person > could > >> even think so. > > > >> Is my reading of that assumption valid? > > >I think that is a fair assumption. > > So, his invasion of Kuwait was just a local matter, and didn't pose any > risk at all to the US or the world at large? Show me where Saddam was prepared to invade Kuwait again. Show me where Saddam had any military offensive capability? And not back 15 years ago but after he had suffered the worst military defeat in modern times and then was embargoed for a decade. You can't really believe this stuff your spouting, can you? -- Gary Denton http://www.apollocon.org June 23-25, 2006 "My socks match, they're the same thickness." Easter Lemming Liberal News Digest - http://elemming2.blogspot.com _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
