Rivals Say Halliburton Dominates Iraq Oil Work

Society Pakistan & World Affairs
1

Rivals Say Halliburton Dominates Iraq Oil Work
Fri Aug 8, 8:57 AM ET Add Top Stories - The New York Times to My Yahoo!

By NEELA BANERJEE The New York Times

The Bechtel Group, one of the world’s biggest engineering and construction companies, has dropped out of the running for a contract to rebuild the Iraqi oil industry, as other competitors have begun to conclude that the bidding process favors the one company already working in Iraq (news - web sites), Halliburton.

After the United States Army Corps of Engineers quietly selected Halliburton in the spring to perform early repairs of the Iraqi oil business in the aftermath of the war, other companies and members of Congress protested that the work should have been awarded through competitive bidding.

Halliburton’s role in the rebuilding has been under political scrutiny because the company was formerly headed by Vice President Dick Cheney (news - web sites). But the Bush administration and the Corps of Engineers, which is overseeing the Iraqi oil reconstruction effort, have repeatedly said that Halliburton has no inside track.

Preliminary plans for a new contract, which industry executives had thought might total $1 billion, were announced late in June by the Corps of Engineers. The bidding was meant, in part, to introduce competition and a sense of fairness into the lucrative Iraqi reconstruction market, an executive with a major engineering concern said. Like many industry executives, he would speak only on condition of anonymity because his company does not want to jeopardize its chances for future government contracts.

But in the last month, the corps, which is overseeing the reconstruction efforts, has specified a timetable for the work that effectively means that the value of any contract companies other than Halliburton could win would be worth only about $176 million, according to Corps of Engineers documents and executives in the engineering and construction business.

Earlier this week, Bechtel cited the timetable as its reason for dropping out of the bidding. The company now plans to deal directly with the Iraqi oil ministry for future reconstruction work, a spokesman, Howard N. Menaker, said.

Although the oil ministry and the Army Corps of Engineers nominally cooperate, industry analysts say the Americans have the upper hand.

Officials of the Corps of Engineers did not return numerous phone calls yesterday seeking comment on the contract. But last month, in response to questions from other companies about Halliburton’s role, the corps said on its Web site that all potential bidders had received the same information to “eliminate any competitive advantage” Halliburton might have from its involvement in the Iraqi reconstruction work so far.

A spokeswoman for Halliburton, Wendy Hall, would not discuss whether its engineering unit, Kellogg Brown & Root, would bid, saying only that “we will evaluate the opportunity.”

After indicating in June that it planned to solicit bids, the Corps of Engineers held a conference of prospective bidders in Dallas on July 14. Records of the meeting show that it was attended by some of the most experienced engineering and construction companies in the world including, besides Halliburton and Bechtel, Fluor, the Parsons Group, Schlumberger and Foster Wheeler.

Among those companies, only Fluor and Parsons have indicated so far that they plan to make bids by the Aug. 14 deadline. A winner will be announced by Oct. 15, according to the Corps of Engineers.

At the meeting and in the initial request for proposals, the Corps of Engineers put forth what the industry calls “an indefinite quantity, indefinite delivery” contract. Industry executives said they were told there could in fact be two principal contracts, one for the oil industry in northern Iraq and the other for the south. The value of each contract could range from $500,000 to $500 million over several years, according to the Corps of Engineers, which cited the continued instability in Iraq as a reason for keeping the terms so vague.

A transcript of the July meeting shows that bidders were concerned even then that Halliburton would have a competitive advantage over other companies because it was already working with the Corps of Engineers in Iraq and helping to assess the repairs needed at oil production sites and pipelines after the war and years of an economic embargo.

The corps denied that such a conflict of interest existed, according to the transcript.

Over the last three weeks, however, the Corps of Engineers has provided additional information to bidders indicating that by the July meeting, it and Halliburton already had a fairly clear understanding of the scope and financial value of the work to be done and the timetable for completing it.

The newly released information indicates that a week before the Dallas meeting, the Corps of Engineers and Halliburton participated in a large workshop in Baghdad that also included representatives of the Iraqi oil ministry and the ruling Coalition Provisional Authority to draw up a detailed plan for rebuilding much of the Iraqi oil industry by the end of March 2004.

A week ago, the Corps of Engineers Web site carried an amendment to the contract proposal, saying that 220 projects, mostly at installations above the ground, must be completed for Iraq’s oil production to reach prewar levels. The projects are divided into three phases, with a total estimated cost of $1.14 billion.

But the corps notes in the plan that the first two phases, which together would require about $967 million in investments, would have to be completed by Dec. 31.

Halliburton’s competitors worry that if the winner of the new contracts is not announced until Oct. 15, that company could not even begin the work before year’s end. The only company that could do the work based on that timetable is Halliburton, its competitors say.

Only the third and final phase, worth about $176 million and requiring the work to be completed by March 31, could realistically be performed by a Halliburton competitor, its rivals say.

"The feeling at our company was `Yes, Halliburton is the incumbent, but we had an opportunity there,’ " a representative of another engineering concern said. “But if we had believed that from the beginning we had no chance of winning this, we wouldn’t have bid.”

Responding to pointed questions about the timetable by potential bidders, the Corps of Engineers’ Web site said the proposed schedule was “not intended to change anything” about the bidding process.

For its part, the Kellogg Brown & Root unit of Halliburton will do whatever work the corps gives it, Ms. Hall, the spokeswoman, said.

“It is not known at this time how or if the future award of another Corps of Engineers contract will affect current K.B.R. operations or the terms and conditions of its contract,” she said.

The first wave of Halliburton employees arrived in Iraq in March, to oversee the extinguishing of several oil well fires near Basra. Since then, its responsibilities, under the direction of the Corps of Engineers, have expanded from its initial job of making emergency repairs.
**
Working in Iraq has helped turn around Halliburton’s financial performance, its second-quarter results showed. The company made a profit of $26 million, in contrast to a loss of $498 million in the period a year earlier. The company stated that 9 percent, or $324 million, of its second-quarter revenue of $3.6 billion came from its work in Iraq.
**

911 surely came as a blessing for halliburton :~)

2

Yers, and Halliburtons $26M profit for the quarter certainly makes up for the trillions of value lost in the stock market following 9-11, and the $4B per month being shelled out by the US Gov't in Iraq. That makes a lot of sense.

3

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Stu: *
Yers, and Halliburtons $26M profit for the quarter certainly makes up for the trillions of value lost in the stock market following 9-11, and the $4B per month being shelled out by the US Gov't in Iraq. That makes a lot of sense.
[/QUOTE]

^
no one forced USA to go into iraq :~)

you see, to gain you have to lose. they decided to lose a few trillions but look at the bigger picture, they have the 2nd largest oil reserves at their disposal now. how much that will bring in? gazillions? :~)

4

"they decided to lose a few trillions"

so who's "they" this time, the zionist jews, the right-wing christian conservatives, or the shadowy military-industrial complex leaders who control Bush's hawks? Or are you saying that "they" are all united against muslims to get the almighty oil. Please enlighten us w/more of your wishful thinking paranoia. LoL

5

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Stu: *
"they decided to lose a few trillions"

so who's "they" this time, the zionist jews, the right-wing christian conservatives, or the shadowy military-industrial complex leaders who control Bush's hawks? Or are you saying that "they" are all united against muslims to get the almighty oil. Please enlighten us w/more of your wishful thinking paranoia. LoL
[/QUOTE]

Stu sounds like he is loosing the argument. Now we have to explain to him who "they" is.....lol

6

The perspectives from a female Iraqi (well, half Iraqi, half Scottish), as she’s describing a conference in Amman titled, “Doing business in Iraq”.

Meeting Mr Bechtel, Betool Khedairi, 2 September 2003, The Guardian

Why do you refuse to talk politics? You’re an Iraqi woman, a writer and you live in the free world. Why have you not mentioned Saddam or Bush even once in your work?" This is a question I’m repeatedly asked by interviewers.

My late father, an Iraqi businessman, made me promise that I would never discuss or get involved in politics. In our part of the world, a promise made to a father is a spiritual tie, even more so after he dies. I tried my best not to break this father-daughter bond but, growing up in Baghdad, it wasn’t always easy.

I can now appreciate his insight. My promise to him bought me time and, thanks to his advice, I have survived to tell some tales. But I had to start sometime, and so it was with political intent that I pinned a badge on my blouse and attended a conference at the Hayat hotel here in Amman, Jordan, called Doing Business With Iraq. As a lay person, I gathered this conference was an attempt to “do business” in a triangular form: the US, Jordan, Iraq and back again. The ballroom was packed with more than 1,000 people as the panel of foreign experts explained the mechanics of every businessman’s fantasy: rebuilding a country.

Bechtel, Halliburton, the Jordanian minister of industry and trade, McKinsey & Company, the deputy chairman of the Iraqi Industries Federation, the WHO and many others had gathered. A plastic folder containing details of speakers, participants and briefs about the countries represented lay in every lap. The man from Bechtel started off by saying that the time for heroics was over. Now was the time for reconstruction. They used terms like “institutional strengthening”, “getting the government in shape” and “self-sufficiency”.

They underlined the need for internationally recognised standards of quality. They insisted on the importance of bridges. At the heart of their plans for a new Iraq was the dictum that ports lead to rails and rails lead to roads.

The Jordanians were worried about their pre-produced goods for Baghdad, piled up in warehouses thanks to existing contracts. How were they to free their funds from the banks with the country at a standstill? The panel assured them that they would take their concerns to the administration team in Baghdad to find solutions. They would also discuss these issues with the Central Bank of Jordan.

A heated question from the Jordanians regarded what was going to happen to their frozen letters of credit. How were they going to work with Iraq when there was no electricity or water and very tired human beings in such an insecure situation? Answer: “The timing is unclear. The key word of free economy is free. These answers have to come from the Iraqi government. We are in the process of de-Ba’athification, and that will take time.”

In spite of the difficulties, it seemed that the panel’s aim was to educate Iraqis on how to work with Americans. Terms like “affectionate”, “with love” and “interest in the Iraqi people” were used alongside pie charts on how to save the economy and pictures of Iraqis working on construction sites.

During the discussions mobile phones were not turned off. An Iraqi tune, High Over the Palm Trees, was ringing out next to me, followed by a snatch of Tchaikovsky from an Indian investor’s bag, then calls to prayer from an Islamic mobile. People were talking constantly during the gathering and the microphones kept switching themselves off, so at one stage the participants had to share one mic that kept shifting from hand to hand.

Mr Hikma Pharmaceuticals gave a balanced, short speech, saying that he thought nothing would be stable before next January, and that working with Iraq meant working with the Iraqi people and respecting their needs. I looked around me. I couldn’t recognise many Iraqi faces. Many of the profiles were of men with bumpy noses and tummies sticking out. They looked like sets of Hitchcocks. Mr deputy chairman of the Iraqi Industries Federation welcomed any help Iraq could get, from anybody who could help.

Mr Jordanian ambassador to the United States summed up his view via the conference screen: “Jordan has always been the lungs that have allowed the Iraqis to breathe”.

After hours of watching westerners floating around in light linen suits and easterners fiddling with their worry beads, the finale went something like this: “Privatisation of the public sector and diversification in the private sector.” Eventually.

I miss my father. He was right. There are so many hidden truths that we, people outside politics, will never know about. He believed in building countries, not destroying them. Today I see another view taking shape: deconstruct countries in order to reconstruct them.

At six in the evening, a friend caught up with me in the corridor and asked: “So, if you’re not here for business and you’re not from the media, why did you pay the exorbitant subscription fee and waste a whole day?”

I answered: “Actually, I came here to gather information. I want to write a comedy.”

[Betool Khedairi, born of an Iraqi father and a Scottish mother, lived in Iraq until she was 24. Now 37, she lives in Amman. She is the author of a novel, A Sky So Close]

7

An Iraqi blogger:

The Promise and the Threat](Baghdad Burning)

The Myth: Iraqis, prior to occupation, lived in little beige tents set up on the sides of little dirt roads all over Baghdad. The men and boys would ride to school on their camels, donkeys and goats. These schools were larger versions of the home units and for every 100 students, there was one turban-wearing teacher who taught the boys rudimentary math (to count the flock) and reading. Girls and women sat at home, in black burkas, making bread and taking care of 10-12 children.

The Truth: Iraqis lived in houses with running water and electricity. Thousands of them own computers. Millions own VCRs and VCDs. Iraq has sophisticated bridges, recreational centers, clubs, restaurants, shops, universities, schools, etc. Iraqis love fast cars (especially German cars) and the Tigris is full of little motor boats that are used for everything from fishing to water-skiing.

I guess what I’m trying to say is that most people choose to ignore the little prefix ‘re’ in the words ‘rebuild’ and ‘reconstruct’. For your information, ‘re’ is of Latin origin and generally means ‘again’ or ‘anew’.

In other words- there was something there in the first place. We have hundreds of bridges. We have one of the most sophisticated network of highways in the region: you can get from Busrah, in the south, to Mosul, in the north, without once having to travel upon those little, dusty, dirt roads they show you on Fox News. We had a communications system so advanced, it took the Coalition of the Willing 3 rounds of bombing, on 3 separate nights, to damage the Ma’moun Communications Tower and silence our telephones.

Yesterday, I read how it was going to take up to $90 billion to rebuild Iraq. Bremer was shooting out numbers about how much it was going to cost to replace buildings and bridges and electricity, etc.

Listen to this little anecdote. One of my cousins works in a prominent engineering company in Baghdad- we’ll call the company H. This company is well-known for designing and building bridges all over Iraq. My cousin, a structural engineer, is a bridge freak. He spends hours talking about pillars and trusses and steel structures to anyone who’ll listen.

As May was drawing to a close, his manager told him that someone from the CPA wanted the company to estimate the building costs of replacing the New Diyala Bridge on the South East end of Baghdad. He got his team together, they went out and assessed the damage, decided it wasn’t too extensive, but it would be costly. They did the necessary tests and analyses (mumblings about soil composition and water depth, expansion joints and girders) and came up with a number they tentatively put forward- $300,000. This included new plans and designs, raw materials (quite cheap in Iraq), labor, contractors, travel expenses, etc.

Let’s pretend my cousin is a dolt. Let’s pretend he hasn’t been working with bridges for over 17 years. Let’s pretend he didn’t work on replacing at least 20 of the 133 bridges damaged during the first Gulf War. Let’s pretend he’s wrong and the cost of rebuilding this bridge is four times the number they estimated- let’s pretend it will actually cost $1,200,000. Let’s just use our imagination.

A week later, the New Diyala Bridge contract was given to an American company. This particular company estimated the cost of rebuilding the bridge would be around- brace yourselves- $50,000,000 !!

Something you should know about Iraq: we have over 130,000 engineers. More than half of these engineers are structural engineers and architects. Thousands of them were trained outside of Iraq in Germany, Japan, America, Britain and other countries. Thousands of others worked with some of the foreign companies that built various bridges, buildings and highways in Iraq. The majority of them are more than proficient- some of them are brilliant.

Iraqi engineers had to rebuild Iraq after the first Gulf War in 1991 when the ‘Coalition of the Willing’ was composed of over 30 countries actively participating in bombing Baghdad beyond recognition. They had to cope with rebuilding bridges and buildings that were originally built by foreign companies, they had to get around a lack of raw materials that we used to import from abroad, they had to work around a vicious blockade designed to damage whatever infrastructure was left after the war… they truly had to rebuild Iraq. And everything had to be made sturdy, because, well, we were always under the threat of war.

Over a hundred of the 133 bridges were rebuilt, hundreds of buildings and factories were replaced, communications towers were rebuilt, new bridges were added, electrical power grids were replaced… things were functioning. Everything wasn’t perfect- but we were working on it.

And Iraqis aren’t easy to please. Buildings cannot just be made functionary. They have to have artistic touches- a carved pillar, an intricately designed dome, something unique… not necessarily classy or subtle, but different. You can see it all over Baghdad- fashionable homes with plate glass windows, next to classic old ‘Baghdadi’ buildings, gaudy restaurants standing next to classy little cafes… mosques with domes so colorful and detailed they look like glamorous Faberge eggs… all done by Iraqis.

My favorite reconstruction project was the Mu’alaq Bridge over the Tigris. It is a suspended bridge that was designed and built by a British company. In 1991 it was bombed and everyone just about gave up on ever being able to cross it again. By 1994, it was up again, exactly as it was- without British companies, with Iraqi expertise. One of the art schools decided that although it wasn’t the most sophisticated bridge in the world, it was going to be the most glamorous. On the day it was opened to the public, it was covered with hundreds of painted flowers in the most outrageous colors- all over the pillars, the bridge itself, the walkways along the sides of the bridge. People came from all over Baghdad just to stand upon it and look down into the Tigris.

So instead of bringing in thousands of foreign companies that are going to want billions of dollars, why aren’t the Iraqi engineers, electricians and laborers being taken advantage of? Thousands of people who have no work would love to be able to rebuild Iraq… no one is being given a chance.

The reconstruction of Iraq is held above our heads like a promise and a threat. People roll their eyes at reconstruction because they know (Iraqis are wily) that these dubious reconstruction projects are going to plunge the country into a national debt only comparable to that of America. A few already rich contractors are going to get richer, Iraqi workers are going to be given a pittance and the unemployed Iraqi public can stand on the sidelines and look at the glamorous buildings being built by foreign companies.

I always say this war is about oil. It is. But it is also about huge corporations that are going to make billions off of reconstructing what was damaged during this war. Can you say Haliburton? (Which, by the way, got the very first contracts to replace the damaged oil infrastructure and put out ‘oil fires’ way back in April).

Well, of course it’s going to take uncountable billions to rebuild Iraq, Mr. Bremer, if the contracts are all given to foreign companies! Or perhaps the numbers are this frightening because Ahmad Al-Chalabi is the one doing the books- he is the math expert, after all.

8

^ That’s an interesting piece, Spoon, thanks.

Bush pals hired to rewrite Iraqi law, Ben Wootliff
31 August 2003, The Observer

An American law firm with ties to the Bush administration has been hired to help set up a legal system in Iraq. The firm, Squire, Sanders & Dempsey, has been drafted in by USAID to advise on privatising former government-held industries, structuring government economic and regulatory agencies, and developing a tax structure.

The legal deal is part of a larger package worth up to $79.6 million taken on by Bearingpoint, formerly called KPMG consultants, to advise on the restructuring of Iraq. The deal is expected to lead to several million dollars of work for Squire, Sanders, effectively as sub-contractor.

It was also announced on Friday that the administration in Iraq has appointed a JP Morgan-led consortium that includes France’s Credit Lyonnais to set up and manage a trade bank for Iraq.

The Coalition Authority in Baghdad created the bank to allow Iraqi ministries and oil concerns to begin making big-ticket purchases abroad.

The purchases are likely to start at an average of about $100m a month but the bank’s overall business could balloon to $500m a month as Iraq’s oil industry gets back on its feet.

The number of contracts awarded to companies with close connections to the Bush administration is increased by the Squire, Sanders’ deal. The firm donated $41,350 to George W Bush’s election campaign in 2000, and earlier this year a Sanders partner, Ronald James, was made personnel chief of the new Department of Homeland Security.

James used to work for Donald Rumsfeld, now Defence Secretary, when Rumsfeld was a member of Congress, and during the Nixon administration he shared a White House office with Dick Cheney, now Vice President.

Recipients of contracts in Iraq already include Kellogg Brown & Root, a subsidiary of Halliburton which was run by Cheney and is a major Republican Party donor.

The company has been given more than $1 billion dollars worth of contracts to reconstruct postwar Iraq and help repair its oilfields. The decision to award these contracts to Halliburton became even more controversial after it emerged that they were given without competition.

9

Hmm.. I knew about the JP Morgan one, that's small beans.. but that law deal?? Damn, they're bold.

10

Halliburton forms .0015 of US economy and only 9% of Halliburton revenue came from Iraq. That is a big loot. no wonder US economy is turning around. These evil westerns have once again been able to loot the wealth of East. Bravo.

Working in Iraq has helped turn around Halliburton's financial performance, its second-quarter results showed. The company made a profit of $26 million, in contrast to a loss of $498 million in the period a year earlier. The company stated that 9 percent, or $324 million, of its second-quarter revenue of $3.6 billion came from its work in Iraq. <<<

$498+$26 = $524 millions. Looks like Halliburton has been able make a profit of $524 millions on a revenue of $324 million from Iraq. That is great performance by any standards.

I totally agree that all companies should be given equal opportunity to bid to do the work best and cheapest but either way it does not ammount to gazzillions of dollars that American companies are accused to make from Iraq.

11

**

Or arrogant, depending upon how one perceives it :clown:

Does anyone else get the sense that the whole country is sort of being auctioned off in chunks. Whichever countries had large ‘Gulf War’ reparations owing them from Iraq, queued up ages ago to get their finger in the pie (foremost being Iraq’s bloodsucking Arab neighbours of course). Countries from the ‘coalition of the willing’ will be the first to be rewarded by their companies gaining a stake in ‘reconstructing’ all the bridges, grids, & infrastructures. Iraq has sort of become a farce - we wrecked it and now we’re ‘auctioning’ bits & pieces of it to our own corporations while giving ourselves self-congratulatory pats on the back for helping to ‘rebuild’ what we destroyed, at the expense of who knows how many innocent civilians.

12

I would hope those countries who helped with the overthrowing of Saddams' regime would be rewarded the most contracts.

13

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by underthedome: *
I would hope those countries who helped with the overthrowing of Saddams' regime would be rewarded the most contracts.
[/QUOTE]
Yup.. those Mongols and Ukranians have a far more advanced industrial sector than, say, France and Germany.

14

I dinn know halliburton's competitors were also being considered as conspiracy theorists :)

The company is getting an advantage, possibly de to its ties with Cheney (btw is he still in hiding, tell him no one remembers Enron anymore) but that is speculation, although enough going on to make halliburton's competitors feel uncomfortable.

15

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by spoon: *
Yup.. those Mongols and Ukranians have a far more advanced industrial sector than, say, France and Germany.
[/QUOTE]

dont forget the 100 polish soldiers..

16

[thumb=D]bensargent030830.JPG[/thumb]

17

^ haha... so true:D

18

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ChannMahi: *

$498+$26 = $524 millions. Looks like Halliburton has been able make a profit of $524 millions on a revenue of $324 million from Iraq. That is great performance by any standards.

[/QUOTE]

That's 26MM out of 324MM. Why are you adding up last year's loss and this year's profit but denominating it by this year revenue?

19

^ very simple. The accusation is that Halliburton was making a loss of $498 million last year in the same quarter but this year because of the lucarative contracts in Iraq it made a proft of $24 millions..meaning the balance sheet went positive $24 million from a negative $498...all because of a business of $324 millions in Iraq.

Here is my skeptical mind. I certainly hate that big fat ass dick Chenney and friends and I know he has been deepily involved with management of oil companies in USA with considerable stock options and ownership interests. The above news piece shows these companies got combined contracts of over $1 billion so for...out of which Dick Chenney's stake is probably very small...let us say $5 or $20 million dollars. What bugs me is that if it is true these guys thrust young men and women of their country into a war only for few million dollars...t...not a big sum of money by American standards. It is hard to believe that is the case. If that is the case then God bless America.

20

ChannMahi, it isnt hard to believe it is a FACT, even Bush himself has now admitted that american GI’s are dying for the sake of US corporations. :disgust:

Bush Drops the Mask, They Died for Halliburton](http://www.counterpunch.org/vest12112003.html) 11 Dec 03

By DAVID VEST

The mask came off this week. George “No More Beating Around The” Bush came right out and admitted it, on camera no less. American soldiers have died in Iraq, and are still dying, said the Commander-in-Chief, so that Halliburton, Bechtel and other corporate contributors to his campaign can make money. When it came down to money, Bush dropped all pretense. He blatantly didn’t care whether he looked like a villain or a weeping clown.“It makes sense,” said the Selected One, for “countries that have risked lives” to “have the benefit” from the contracts to rebuild Iraq.

Countries that did not support Bush’s plan for an unprovoked, shoot-first preemptive strike on Iraq, including countries that merely asked him to hold off for 30 days before invading unilaterally, need not apply. **“Friendly coalition folks risked their lives, and therefore the contracting is going to reflect that, and that’s what the US taxpayers expect,” Bush said.

(No, Mr. President. What US taxpayers expect is a legitimately elected government, a president with some integrity and intelligence, a congress with some courage, clean air to breath and water to drink, a functioning economy, a foreign policy that doesn’t make us cringe when we think about it …)**

The naked admission of the war’s profit motive is but the most recent example of a new trend in Washington: officials coming right out and admitting the obvious. Recently Pentagon advisor Richard Perle, for example, confessed openly that the entire invasion of Iraq was probably illegal. Apparently no one in DC sees any need to fear repercussions. This is an administration that no longer cares what anyone thinks about what it thinks. The more it gets away with, the more it wants. If Bush had the slightest apprehension that he might not get his way, he would speak in a different tone with us.

Nevertheless, judging by the initial response to this latest policy pronouncement (it has been met with immediate and overwhelming international condemnation), the plan needs a little tweaking. With the following minor changes, we could perhaps cut the president a little slack and get behind him on this. … Full Article