Post reply

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.

Note: this post will not display until it's been approved by a moderator.

Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:

Attach:
Help (Clear Attachment)
(more attachments)
Allowed file types: doc, gif, jpg, jpeg, mpg, pdf, png, txt, zip, rar, csv, xls, xlsx, docx, xlsm, psd, cpp
Restrictions: 4 per post, maximum total size 192KB, maximum individual size 128KB
Note that any files attached will not be displayed until approved by a moderator.
Verification:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview


Topic Summary

Posted by: Giuliano Taverna
« on: June 05, 2009, 10:15:52 pm »

To that extent I agree with you.

It should be investigated.
Posted by: Alia
« on: June 05, 2009, 09:06:23 pm »

Then I attack whoever was responsible for holding a no-bid contract, that is the antithesis of a fair market.
Posted by: Giuliano Taverna
« on: May 28, 2009, 09:55:19 am »

Ok now you are just being foolish. Cheney isn't innocent to me because he is a republican, he is innocent because there is no evidence he is guilty. By your own admission so you should just confess you have no logical reason to attack Cheney.
Posted by: Alia
« on: May 27, 2009, 10:19:38 pm »

I don't care who was involved, it's still wrong.

Although I'll eat my cap if he wasn't involved. Call it a conspiracy theory if you want, but all politicians have been doing the same thing for a while now. Don't think that Republicans aren't corrupt just because they aren't Democrats.
Posted by: Giuliano Taverna
« on: May 27, 2009, 11:54:42 am »

And do you have proof Cheney was involved in them? If not its a conspiracy theory.
Posted by: Alia
« on: May 27, 2009, 12:47:25 am »

A no-bid contract is a favour.
Posted by: Giuliano Taverna
« on: May 25, 2009, 10:14:01 am »

If he didn't then your entire point is moot. It seems your entire position on Cheney is built on a baseless smear.

Its beyond illogical to admit you have no evidence to suggest Cheney had anything to do with Halliburton then continue to suggest he is guilty of giving them favors.
Posted by: Alia
« on: May 25, 2009, 01:07:39 am »

What if he didn't? Even then... It's still favouritism to hold a no-bid contract rather than have open competition.
Posted by: Giuliano Taverna
« on: May 24, 2009, 08:51:23 am »

That's a totally circumstantial claim, do you have even a shred of evidence that Cheney had anything to do with the decision to grant Halliburton those contracts?

Sounds to me like a conspiracy theory.
Posted by: Alia
« on: May 24, 2009, 01:42:36 am »

It's enough that they held a no-bid contract (there's no excuse for that) and gave the job to Cheney's old company. Obviously there was something going on.

I thought you believed in the free market.
Posted by: Giuliano Taverna
« on: May 24, 2009, 12:21:35 am »

care to offer substance to that claim?
Posted by: Alia
« on: May 23, 2009, 11:11:57 pm »

You know very well that "no stake in" means no such thing. Politicians and businessmen trade a billion dirty ways to transfer money.
Posted by: Giuliano Taverna
« on: May 22, 2009, 08:13:03 am »

So the fact that Cheney had no stake in  Halliburton whatsoever isn't convincing to you?

http://www.factcheck.org/kerry_ad_falsely_accuses_cheney_on_halliburton.html

Since my dad is the general projects manager of the Chelsea department of public works, I would suggest the same process by which contractors are chosen for our construction projects. Public bidding.
Posted by: Alia
« on: May 21, 2009, 11:15:05 pm »

They hate Cheney because of Halliburton. And don't tell me it's all faked, they did hold a no-bid contract, they did sell coke-a-colas to soldiers at the taxpayers' expense for $45, they did not clean the uniforms they were supposed to clean nor ensure unsoiled water, and that does just happen to be Cheney's old company. But let's assume for the moment that I'm a moonbat, and none of that happened, and let's have a thought experiment. What regulations are in place to prevent unfair favouritism of that sort? What would be the punishment, and who would punish?

But no, you're not crazy, you're just a salad-bar politician.
Posted by: Nin
« on: May 21, 2009, 10:01:07 pm »

No, you're just honest to your opinions.