and my next question would be why? Kevin Graeme writes:
> There is an RFP process. It's just currently geared to exclude some > companies, particularly non-US companies. > > -Kevin > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Dana Tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Monday, March 31, 2003 8:57 AM > > To: CF-Community > > Subject: Re: Halliburton out of the running > > > > > > If they are the best then I agree with this. I dunno why there couldn't > > still be an rfp though... but if that is the case the question > > then becomes > > why all the secrecy about the payments to Cheney. Assuming they are > > innocent for a moment, the extreme secrecy of tnis administration works > > against this country's (and its own) best interestes. > > > > Dana > > > > > > Jerry Johnson writes: > > > > > In response to Tim's saying that a subsidiary of Haliburton is > > the best at that kind of work, and he has seen them in the field, > > I withdraw my qualified objections. > > > > > > If they are the best (and I take Tim's word for it) then, > > regardless of appearances and the cost, they should be doing the work. > > > > > > Mea culpa. > > > Jerry Johnson > > > > > > >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 03/31/03 09:28AM >>> > > > Well, no. If you mean me, I never talked about the rebuilding. > > > > > > I was specifically talking about the money awarded for support > > in the field. > > > > > > There are already civilians on the ground running the ports, > > controlling the captured oil fields, running water pipes from > > Kuwait, and putting out the oil head fires. They ain't there for free. > > > > > > The money was awarded using existing open ended never ending > > (no top dollar amount) support contracts. > > > > > > No bid. Really no controls. > > > > > > Not that there is _necessarily_ anything wrong with that, but > > as someone here said last week, I don't like even the appearance > > of impropriety in my elected (and appointed) officials. > > > > > > Jerry Johnson > > > > > > >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 03/29/03 11:05AM >>> > > > But it proves that there was a bid process, which some on this list > > > disputed. And any sub-contracts would be awarded by the > > contract winner, > > > not the government. > > > > > > My point here is that many people jump to conclusions without > > getting all > > > the facts first. > > > > > > At 03:55 PM 3/29/2003 +0000, you wrote: > > > >"Halliburton, which declined to comment, could still be awarded a > > > >sub-contractor role.....Halliburton has won one Iraq-related job. The > > > >company's Kellogg Brown & Root unit this week was awarded a > > contract by the > > > >U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to put out oil fires and make emergency > > > >repairs to Iraq's oil infrastructure. Halliburton wouldn't > > speculate about > > > >the deal's monetary value. " > > > > > > > >Still I suppose it's good they are nto going to get the whole > > enchilada... > > > > > > > > > > > >Nick McClure writes: > > > > > > > > > > http://money.cnn.com/2003/03/28/news/companies/Halliburton/index.htm > > > > > > > > Halliburton is out of the running for the main contract to rebuild > Iraq. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=5 This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
