PhillyKev 0 #1 July 19, 2004 Bush: U.S. Looking Into Whether Iran Involved in 9/11 Halliburton Gets Subpoena Over Iran Ties Cheney was CEO of Halliburton while they were doing $40 million a year in business in Iran. While technically not illegal, even though it was illegal for any US companies to do business there, Halliburton set up a subsidiary in the Cayman's so that they could get around that. Is no one else concerned that the VP has so little concern for the security of our nation that he willingly circumvents rules about doing business with Rogue nations? Doesn't matter if it was before he was VP or technically legal. It shows that profits were more important to him than our nation's security. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tunaplanet 0 #2 July 19, 2004 QuoteIt shows that profits were more important to him than our nation's security. Where exactly does it show that? Proof? Statement he made? Or is this another extreme liberal conspiracy and obscure opinion? Forty-two Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #3 July 19, 2004 Let me clarify my post for those who can't see black and white. US says Iran is rogue nation. They harbor terrorists and seek WMD. Therefore, it is illegal for US companies to do business with them. A company sets up an offshore subsidiary for the sole purpose of doing business with that nation. What do you think about that company and it's corporate officer's dedication to the security and well being of our nation? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #4 July 19, 2004 Actually, I was wrong. The right wingers favorite news source, newsmax straightened me out. The sole purpose of the Cayman based company wasn't to sell to Iran. It was also to do business with Libya and IRAQ. http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/6/24/80648.shtml As far as what Cheney feels about not trading with rogue nations, "Cheney has long criticized of unilateral U.S. sanctions, which he says penalize American companies. He has pushed for a review of policy toward Iraq, Iran and Libya." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tunaplanet 0 #5 July 19, 2004 QuoteWhat do you think about that company and it's corporate officer's dedication to the security and well being of our nation? I don't know them personally, haven't seen any specific profiles on them nor interviewed them myself. I tend to see things clearly before jumping on an uneducated rant. Forty-two Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #6 July 20, 2004 QuoteGive up blurting out your distorted political views and stick to singing QuoteI don't know them personally, haven't seen any specific profiles on them nor interviewed them myself. I tend to see things clearly before jumping on an uneducated rant. Bwaahhahhaaaa from the same poster on two different threads. So I take it you personally interviewed Ronstadt and read all about her political views in specific profiles.... You are killing me..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tunaplanet 0 #7 July 20, 2004 Nothing is contradicting. Read and comprehend better. Forty-two Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Darius11 12 #8 July 20, 2004 I have no clue how many times I have said the only thing this and most governments care about is making money. They don’t care about our sons and daughters getting killed as long as they make money. I don’t know how any one could deny how corrupt this administration is. I am not saying the democrats are great. Trust me I know the first infantile post will most likely be Clinton was a liar. Who cares if Clinton was a liar I could give too fucks about him. Right now the problem is this administration how do we fix this problem and make sure it does not happen again?I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #9 July 20, 2004 You're wrong. He's right. No need for discusion. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanuckInUSA 0 #10 July 20, 2004 QuoteI don’t know how any one could deny how corrupt this administration is. Who cares if Clinton was a liar. Right now the problem is this administration how do we fix this problem and make sure it does not happen again? I'm with you on this one. My biggest problem with GWB is that he is the most dangerous, arrogant and reckless president I've seen since I've been of voting age. And before people start labeling me as this or that, I have never ever voted for a Liberal government in my life. As a western Canadian, I am extremely frustrated with the liberal control Ontario and Quebec has had with Canadian politics these last 15 years (part of the reason why I left Canada almost 7 years ago). And if I was an American, you can pretty much guess that I would be a Republican. But GWB has gone too far. He is pushing the world into uncharted territory and could very well go down in the history books as the guy who started it. And for what? WMD? What WMD? To control the Oil? I'm not so sure of this. No it looks like he's started it so that him and his pals can first destroy nations and the people in those nations and to then make much-o $$$ rebuilding these nations (and who cares if the nations are in termoil and not rebuildable, just as long as the people who funded GWB get richer in the process, it's all good ... for them). The man is dangerous, ignorant and arrogant and must be stopped (at least in my mind). But America is a democracy and if enough Americans are happy with GWB, then so be it. At least Americans have the option of choosing who they want to lead themselves into ... Just my two cents ... Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Remster 30 #11 July 20, 2004 QuoteI am extremely frustrated with the iberal control Ontario and Quebec has had with Canadian politics these last 15 years HEY! Dont drag us into this. Quebec hasnt been voting Liberal for 4 elections nowRemster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EricTheRed 0 #12 July 20, 2004 QuoteBush: U.S. Looking Into Whether Iran Involved in 9/11 Halliburton Gets Subpoena Over Iran Ties Cheney was CEO of Halliburton while they were doing $40 million a year in business in Iran. While technically not illegal, even though it was illegal for any US companies to do business there, Halliburton set up a subsidiary in the Cayman's so that they could get around that. Is no one else concerned that the VP has so little concern for the security of our nation that he willingly circumvents rules about doing business with Rogue nations? Doesn't matter if it was before he was VP or technically legal. It shows that profits were more important to him than our nation's security. Maybe not technically legal... QuoteHalliburton, the oilfield services company formerly headed by US vice-president Dick Cheney, has disclosed that a Treasury department probe into its business dealings with Iran had been elevated to a criminal investigation. source http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1087373852500illegible usually Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #13 July 20, 2004 Yeah, it would technically be legal if Halliburton US had zero control, influence, or even knowledge of their dealings with sanctioned nations. I suspect that's not the case since that's about the only reason they had to open a subsidiary in the Cayman's. But, even if it were technically legal, that's bad enough in my book that they were deliberately circumventing sanctions that were imposed for national security. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
