Halliburton Moving to Dubai

Posted on March 1st, 2007 in Politics by EngineerBoy

So, Halliburton has announced that they are moving their corporate headquarters from Houston, TX, USA to Dubai, UAE. Their stated reasoning is that, well, that’s where the action is and it makes sense for their CEO to be there.

Also note that Halliburton is spinning off their KBR subsidiary – and take special note that KBR is Halliburton’s engineering and military contracting arm, the arm that has done the bulk of contract work for the US government in Iraq.

So, here are three pieces of information that just seem to point to one inescapably unethical conclusion:

The CEO and Headquarters for Halliburton will relocate to Dubai.
Halliburton is spinning off KBR, which did most of the contracting work in Iraq for the US, and which is coming under increasing scrutiny by the ascendant Democratic party for no-bid contracts, shoddy work, price gouging, etc.
The outgoing Republican administration is losing their ability to protect the company that Dick Cheney ran just six short years ago – in fact, he went directly from being head of Halliburton to being the Vice President.

And now for some conjecture:

I’ll bet that extraditing someone from the UAE to the US can be made difficult, particularly if you are an executive with a multi-billion dollar multi-national corporation who recently moved your headquarters (and revenue base) to the UAE.
Halliburton is stating that they intend to retain their incorporation in the US and that only the CEO’s office and HQ are moving. I would not be surprised to hear an announcement down the line that Halliburton intends to move its incorporation to Dubai, as well. That’s strictly conjecture, but it sure seems like the next shoe to drop.
I’ll bet that Halliburton is going to do their damndest to get moved before the current lame-duck presidency ends and the new administration, almost assuredly Democrat, takes power and starts getting to look at the Iraq debacle from the inside. 
I’ll bet that there will be far-reaching, ongoing investigations and prosecutions related to the Iraq war, particularly directed against Halliburton for things as potentially drastic as war-profiteering, and perhaps even against members of the current administration for the ease with which business was simply handed to Halliburton/KBR, seemingly with no thought to competitive bid, fair pricing, or even ability to deliver. 
I’ll bet that divesting itself of the unit that did most of the contracting work in Iraq will serve to make it incrementally more difficult to involve Halliburton executives in the investigations/prosecutions (“What, you mean that company over there? They have nothing to do with us!”). 
I wonder if the UAE has any records-retention laws, and if they do, if they enforce them, and if they do, if Halliburton will care. I can see the situation arising where it will be awfully difficult for investigators to subpoena records from Halliburton, when said records either no longer exist, only exist in the UAE, or can’t really be located because they got misplaced during the spinoff of KBR – you

Global Warming – Is It A Natural Cycle?

Posted on March 1st, 2007 in Commentary by EngineerBoy

First, I want to start this article by saying that I don't identify myself as a Conservative or a Liberal. If forced to tag myself, I'd say I was a Realist. I agree with the right, the middle, and the left based on the particular issue at hand and my opinions of that particular issue – no dogmatism for me. In my political, corporate, ethical, and personal lives I've come to two realizations (well, more than two, but realizations that include these two):Sometimes people who don't have your best interests at heart still manage to get some things right.Sometimes people who have your best interests at heart still manage to get some things wrong.One other caveat here is that the only absolute knowledge that I have attained is that I know nothing. Everything else has a degree of uncertainty, so I don't claim to be an infallible voice pontificating from an ivory tower. I'm just a boy in the world, trying to make sense out of things.Case in point: Global Warming. This has become a huge, hot-button topic for every candidate of every party, has introduced us to the concept of carbon-neutrality, and has put humanity itself on trial as the slayers of Mother Earth. Now, I will admit without hesitation that humans do bad things to nature – pollution, strip mining, deforestation, overfishing, oil spills, refuse, snowmobiles, The Amazing Race, greased-up Channel swimmers, blue-ice-airplane-restroom-meteorites, dams, invasive species, cruel husbandry, over-watering, under-preserving, species endangerment, and golf courses, just to name a few.All of this drastically changes the ecosystem of the Earth. There is a philosophical question here, which is, should we consider that any impact by man on nature is negative and should be curtailed? I think stated in that way most of us would agree that no, it's a given that man can and should have some impact on nature. But, how does one define nature? Is it all non-human life on earth? Are humans not natural? Is there a fundamental difference between a dam built by a beaver and a dam built by humans, other than scale? And who draws the lines between acceptable and unacceptable? The NRA? OPEC? GreenPeace? PETA? So many differing opinions – they can't all be right…and they can't all be wrong, either.Before you think that the cause and effect of global warming is a known fact, check out this article on WikiPedia:Scientists Opposing the Mainstream Scientific Assessment of Global WarmingCheck out the list of scientists in that article – climatologists, geologists, geophysicists, and meteorologists from places like MIT, Harvard, USC, and Duke. They all agree on one thing, which is that we don't yet know that human CO2 production is causing global warming, nor do we know that the warming of the global temperature is necessarily a bad or unnatural thing. These are not radical people from questionable institutions