You, for trying to characterise it as an honest mistake picked up in a routine audit, rather than something that’s been widely criticised in public for months.
And Coldfire, KBR doesn’t actually need to have a stake in the subcontractor for this to be a rip-off.
It’s a cost-plus contract, so KBR gets a percentage on top of every dollar they spend. If they pay twice the going rate for fuel, they make twice as much profit.
The DOD renewed KBR’s contract in mid-November, even though by then, everyone knew it was a complete rip-off.
I don’t really see how that’s my fault. What makes you certain it’s not an honest mistake?
**
Is that what the contract says, or are you speculating? Cost plus doesn’t usually or necessarily mean all costs plus a flat percentage, it can be a fee, and in percentage arrangements, non value added commodities like oil would typically be excluded. Without knowing what the contract actually says, you’re speculating.
Weasel Tactic #29: No matter how early into a story you happen to be, assume the most evil, underhanded explanation is the correct one. Minimize and denigrate more benign explanations. Attack, attack, attack.
Really, minty, this is beneath you. As a lawyer, you should be the first one in line to say we don’t have enough facts to rush to judgment.
Whatever. What makes you so sure it indicates price gouging on the part of Halliburton?
Not in the least. Regardless of the business or the industry, these things tend to be discussed in terms of their profit margin. That’s the standard. Your article from Al-jazeera says that the oil costs are pass-through. This article that I have found, contradicts that and suggests that they are indeed cost-plus. Which is it?
[quote]
Um, because KBR was obviously charging more than other suppliers? **
Let’s not go around in circles. Being familiar with the facts of the situation, you know that they are passing on the costs of their subcontractor, and you know that that behavior is normal and appropriate. You also know that David Lesar has stated KBR did not have a choice in it’s subcontractor so they were not able to shop the price.
So who are you accusing here (besides me?) Who has perpetrated a fraud?
Is the comparison between Kuwaiti and Turkey deliveries apples to apples or is their a difference in the products and circumstances? In short, is this an actual case of price-gouging?
If the subcontractor was price-gouging, was Hallburton an active participant in the fraud, merely complicit, or simply a third party who’s hands were tired?
Yes, very funny to mock any semblance of justice in the world. Nuremberg trials, what a joke. Every war crime tribunal, what a joke. Maritime laws, what a joke. International treaties (Bush throws those away like used toilet tissue) what a joke. UN, what a joke. The Geneva Convention, what a joke.
When he mocks international law, the president puts every U.S. citizen abroad in danger and mocks the very principles that the United States is supposed to stand for.
Well, now we do know that a cursory audit of the Haliburton contract has turned up $128 million in real and potential overcharges. That represents about 2.5% of the $5 billion spent thus far, which is a bit much to pass off as simple corporate sloppiness. I’d hope that Halliburton normally runs a tight enough ship to calculate its expense and profit margins more accurately than that. Obviously, a more extensive audit is required at this point, to see where else they may have screwed up the numbers.
Lets not forget that these are solidly American corporations! Their patriotism and integrity is clearly shown by their choices in campaign contributions, wherein they supported the true-blue American party, and not the Perfidious Liars[sup]TM[/sup] party! All of that money is going straight into the pockets of American corporate interests, and not to some cheese-eating surrender monkeys! And eventually it will find its way into American campaign contributions.
Real Americans, mind you! Not Monsieur Dean, nosirree!
Can you spell “entreprenuership”? Niether can I, but thats what it is! We should be applauding this vigorous display of good old-fashioned “get it while the gettin’s good” business acumen!
I don’t see how you include “potential overcharges” in an asessment of money already spent. The food thing was a proposal, not an invoice. This one is a mistake that was made and caught while still in the proposal stage, and before services were rendered or billed. I find it difficult to work up much of a lather about straightforward errors caught in the proposal stage, nor coun’t them as an error against billed services.
That cuts it in half to about 1.5% The other half is the oil, which the subcontractor may be entirely to blame for leaving Halliburton totally innocent. Or, the subcontractor may have a valid reason. Or it could be a mistake. Or it could be a massive attempt to defraud the government.
Only a total fucking idiot like Minty Green would assign blame without knowing the facts.
Me too. Screwups like the food services debacle, even if caught in the proposal stage as this one was, don’t do the company any good credibility wise.
Actually, I would hope that the contract would be audited at least 3 times. First in the proposal stage, second by Halliburton, and thridly by the Government. I would hope, and beleive that such things are standard operating procedure, even when nothing seems wrong.
Both Minty and Dewey are Lawyers. Both of them should know from experience that it’s the rare large contract that doesn’t have a few errors and disputes to be reconciled by the time all is said and done. It’s a part of the process.
Oops. I accidentally charged you twice my hourly rate over a period of six months, even after it was brought to my attention two months ago. Sorry, innocent mistake.
I say that something worse than a total fucking idiot would go to war by ignoring/cooking the facts.
Politically speaking, not keeping an eagle eye on conflict of interest situations, is idiotic too.
Implicit in all this, was also the view in the administration that Afghanistan and Iraq are two separated issues and Iraq had very little to do with the war on terror.
Germans and Canadians saw that it was right to attack Al-Qaeda, they and other nations did conclude Iraq was not part of this effort or there was need for more evidence.
The idiocy is in not admitting a mistake was made * (on that and in the WMD). Bush could have acknowledged that mistake, in a quiet way, by just giving what was really mostly a symbolic bone to the Europeans. Instead, we have naked pandering to the right in America. Unfortunately, the plan did not work, the Halliburton thing popped up, and combined with the twister made recently with Canada, (the Germany snub is equally bad) has made the administration look at his worst. This is not leadership, this is improvisation at best.
If anything, I see only a plausible good excuse to allow the companies of your cronies, to fleece the American taxpayer.
Surprisingly, many on the right have such a thick skull that they assume that to correct that mistake, we on the left are saying that we should return Iraq to Saddam, admitting to a mistake doesn’t require that, it is only necessary to stop reminding your allies that you still think the big lie was the truth.
Scylla, the dishonesty of the administration was already demonstrated in a very related field. And, to be dishonest one needs to lie, minty green has accusations, but in light of the evidence so far, valid ones IMO.
Looks like that last post of minty’s went right over the Usual Weasel’s head.
Dewey, we certainly need an investigation of this, at least as diligent and with as much White House cooperation as the 9/11 committee’s. With any luck, they’ll get to the bottom of this, in little over a year, wouldn’t ya say? Or, we could just look at what we have, assess it in light of an established behavior pattern, and presto, there’s circumstantial evidence that even is admissible in the courtroom that you think this board should be modeled after. Get a friggin’ grip on reality and reconsider your devotion to this administration, like a responsible citizen would, willya?