In recent reports Halliburton officials have admitted to Pentagon auditors that employees of the no-bid contract holder to Iraq's reconstruction, accepted kickbacks of up to $6 million from a Kuwaiti firm. Also as David Kay the American placed in charge of finding the chemical and biological weapons and weapons related programs in Iraq left. He concluded contrary to many assertions and insinuations of the Bush administration, that Iraq had no stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons and "got rid of them" after the end of the '91 Gulf War. With these two revelations staring the Bush administration in the face, would it be fair to say that the case given for war has been severely damaged, and that the Bush administrations motives for this invasion were entrenched in favors and finances?

http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/energy/2004-01-23-halliburton-kickbacks_x.htm
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/24/politics/24WEAP.html?hp
http://newsports.us

Halliburton is worse than Enron.

Btw, Lies was a great book. ;)

again with the halliburton? and as far as the "reasons" for going to war, good luck finding anyone who wants to let Saddam out of jail and reinstall him. Because unless thats the ultimate goal of all this trying to prove we had no reason to go there and kick this guy out, then even if WMD are never found, it will matter little. it will matter to those who opposed the war from the beginning becasue someone named Bush with an (R) nest to his name started it, as the WMD is their sole thread to any credibility left, after that their arguments really take a dump, like oil, and halliburton and all that crap.