Saturday, July 24, 2004

Buried at the end of this story about

the allegations against Halliburton are these admissions from the USA Today writers:

Despite all the criticism, Halliburton was a logical choice for Iraq. It is the military's main logistics supplier around the world, working side by side with U.S. troops in the Balkans, Somalia, Rwanda, the Middle East and Central Asia. It also is among global leaders in oil field services. The company insists it did not call in any favors from Cheney to win business in Iraq.

Last week, Defense officials and others involved in the contracting process told the House Committee on Government Reform they had no contact with Cheney or his office about the contracts. Cheney and his aides played no role in the contract awards, they said.
...
Several Wall Street analysts predict the company will outperform others in the oil field services sector.
...
Halliburton isn't the only contractor in Iraq getting scrutiny. Fluor, Perini and Washington Group International are among others facing "substantial subcontracting pricing issues," Pentagon comptroller Dov Zakheim told a House hearing last week. "Halliburton's performance in Iraq has not been perfect, but it has not been terrible," Zakheim said.

But it's almost libelous to leave you with the impression that the article was negative on the whole. The format is 'allegation followed by defense' throughout. The jury's not in yet. I predict the verdict will be an aquittal, but it won't silence the howlers.

No comments: