democracy?

obvious and blatant corruption and big brothering were things i assumed that the u.s. government was above, so i find it annoying and shady that halliburton (please read: cheney) is making a killing off of this war. but recently it has only gotten worse since these natural disasters (read: recent hurricane epidemics) hit our north american shores causing mass damage and suffering and loss. in tragedy is where you begin to see the north american community become active in its grief and compassion, coming to the aid of those in need and devastated (plus as christians we are called to bear one another's burdens).
the rebuilding process began immediately with just the help that was being sent, given and done. i heard an influx of ideas from friends and relatives about what to do with these destroyed cities and towns (my dad's suggestion being far and above the best). the problem with disasters is that there are people who see them as a chance to get rich, to take advantage of the suffering of someone else. obviously cities like new orleans need to be re-built, but lo and behold, who gets the contract to build new orleans? halliburton.
see i grew up in guatemala. at the beginning of my time there we were ruled by a lovely dictator who enjoyed killing students and teachers who protested against him. he enjoyed having the army set the spanish embassy on fire because some indigenous people were demanding land and had fled there for shelter and amnesty. lastly he enjoyed combing the countryside killing revolutionaries and mayan indians, whoever they happened to come across. so this resulted in several coups until we ultimately had "democratic" elections.
democracy in guatemala is a fragile thing, manily because if elected you will probably serve only one term, so the challenge of your term becomes how much money you can pilfer from the country during your time there. it is kinder, gentler, dictatorship. these presidents enjoy changing the constitution, firing their cabinet, stealing from the national treasury, but especially giving government jobs to their friends.
when i returned back to guatemala in the winter of '98 the country seemed to be investing in infrastructure, and i was really excited about these advancements, thinking, "what a great way to generate capital in the country". well, the story goes that the president is a memeber of the board of directors of this construction company in mexico, so they won the construction contract. this is a great thing for guatemala becuase all the government money spent on the expensive part of the construction of the roads (read: supplies, machinary, engineers) was being sent out of the country and the cheap part (read: labor, which is ridiculously cheap there) would trickle around the country. obviously election time came and this president's party did not repeat. but the next president (who happened to have shot and killed two people in mexico) gives the road construction contract to his gardner. HIS GARDNER!!! talk about a set up for him just to make cash. so as you can see, this sort of thing is what most of global "democracy" looks like.
why do i write about all of this?
well, halliburton getting the war contracts might look shady to some. i had a friend mention that they probably were the only company that could do it. so i'll concede that point, but i haven't put it out of my mind. but then the new orleans contract? i'm starting to get a little uneasy. things start to look a little similar. then i'm reading the l.a. crimes the other day for my daily laker dose when i look over at "the most e-mailed stories" and come across this story.
i don't know about you, but teachers and students had better start watching their backs.