| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 07/19/2002 11:14:21 PM PDT by Admin Moderator, reason:
Flame war. |
Posted on 07/10/2002 11:04:03 AM PDT by SierraWasp
12:57PM Halliburton responds to Judicial Watch lawsuit (HAL) by Michael Baron Halliburton (HAL) is off 30 cents, or 2.1 percent, to $13.82, in midday action. The company is out with a press release responding to a lawsuit filed by Judicial Watch, a Washington, D.C.-based legal watchdog group. The suit alleges fraudulent accounting practices at Halliburton took place during the period when current vice president Dick Cheney served as its chairman and CEO. Halliburton called the claims in the suit, "untrue, unsupported, and unfounded." The company continued: "We are working diligently with the SEC to resolve its questions regarding the company's accounting procedures. Halliburton has always followed and will continue to follow guidelines established by the SEC and GAAP, General Accepted Accounting Principles."
You have absolutely no factual basis for this statement. This is the kind of slander I am talking about. Not only are you accusing Judicial Watch of bribery, you are also attacking the integrity of Ann Coulter, insinuating that she would be willing to take bribes from Judicial Watch, which would never occur.
Your utter hatred for this organization seems to cloud your ability to distinguish fact from fantasy.
Perhaps the Judicial Watch staff is possessed.
Fred you are not making sense. Who mentioned the IRS?
And your utter ignorance of JW and many other topics on FR is amazing. Why anyone even spends time trying to save you is beyond me. You have NO idea WHO you are talking to, WHAT folks KNOW or DO for employment, or their CONTACTS.
When you are told to FLEE JW, it is GOOD advice.
We can hear you all the way over at the Hobbit Hole on the cheesehole forum.
Then you should depart this thread too, and not waste your valuable time.
A crook is a crook, be it Bill Clinton or George Bush or Dick Cheney. I have been a Republican all my life, but I was the very FIRST person to say Richard Nixon should have been impeached.
See, I'm not a coward and I'm not afraid to say what I think.
How do you know if I have or haven't been committed before?
Oh please don't tee up softballs like that. Geeze.
I'm calling you a liar without integrity, because I know you'd defend him to the bitter end.
Of course, that is just my opinion.
How do you like the taste of your own medicine?
And I still answered the question, unlike others on this thread.
It takes integrity to not slander someone's name before all the evidence has come out in court.
Halliburton called the claims in [Klayman’s] suit, "untrue, unsupported, and unfounded." Of course, they haven’t come to court.
I just HAVE to ask you this one last thing: in light of the things that Klayman has been saying these last few days, are you admitting that Larry Klayman has no integrity?
Larry Klayman and the staff of Judicial Watch have always possessed the virtue of integrity in my eyes.
So Howlin says:
Well, since you agree with Larry's remarks and think they're virtuous, those of us who KNOW better can judge you as lacking integrity.
And Fred Mertz lashes out at Howlin with:
You need to mount your broom and fly away for a bit. I'm using my self control not to tell you what I really think of your assinine statement.
Actually, I believe you should hit the abuse button on yourself again.
I think everyone can judge just who is being assinine[sic].
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.