Feeds

back to article NetApp and Halliburton: going further, faster, together

What do the data storage firm NetApp and the internationally —er— recognized war profiteer Halliburton have in common? Oh ho ho! Last month, Network Appliance officially nick-ed its name to NetApp. It also snagged a new corporate logo and slogan in a marketing push to be more easily recognized as a brand. Turns out there's four …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

This post has been deleted by a moderator

Nice bashing of Halliburton. Too bad it's the wrong company.

Halliburton did (almost) all of their work in Iraq through their KBR subsidiary. In April 2007, KBR separated from Halliburton and became an independent company. When they left they took the vast majority (probably all) of the government/military work with them. So, technically, Halliburton is no longer in the business of "war profiteering".

A simple fact check would have show this, but I guess it's just so much more fun to bash on the "evil war machine" than to check facts.

0
0

No Bids

They just took the shortcut, since just about no other company would even try to bid for these contracts. Halliburton is just about the only gigantic international oilfield services company thats willing to go into a war zone, so they would have had the only bid. I do feel kinda sorry for their employees, who would probably be faced with a "go to Iraq or find a new job" type decision...

0
0
E

OK...

But which one is Vice President Cheney paid by?

0
0
Paris Hilton

An eloquent riposte

"Go fuck yourself." -Dick Cheney on his ties to Halliburton

I think that completely explains and puts to rest any questions as to Halliburton or KBR's alledged profiteering, and any possible involvement Cheney had with them. I, for one, am completely satisfied with that simple, straightforward explanation.

Paris, for obvious reasons.

0
0
Pirate

RE: Nice bashing of Halliburton

Naw, nice maneuvering.

It's the oldest ploy in the book - have a "subsidiary" take in huge contracts/subprime mortgages/risky investments, have the parent company spin off the sub, and then setup "corporate synergies" so that the sub pays the parent company for the services, and the sub takes the fall when the eventual legality of the actual work is questioned/investigated/brings enconomy crashing down.

The sub falls into disrepute with the shareholders holding pretty printed toilet paper and the "key" executives and board members sip champagne on their yacht in the Med, setting up the next scam/scheme/gov contract to keep paying for it all.

And, if you happen to run the largest "free" country in the world to tweak regulations, all the better for your pocketbook and friends, eh?

0
0
This topic is closed for new posts.