Bush will veto attempts to stop Dubai based company run our ports

[Geoff_M]

Why can't these jobs go to Americans and American held and based companies?

For starters, if you'll listen to industry experts they'll tell you that by and large American firms got out of the port operation business a couple of decades ago. Though there aren't any major US players left in the business now, there is a large US-based company that does have experience in this business sector: Halliburton. You wouldn't mind if Bush gave them a big slice of the port pie, would you?

Lord knows we need some jobs to stay here in the US, and maybe it's just me, but I think one place to start would be with industries that are vital to our national security.

You're overlooking the fact that the jobs are here now and will stay here. There aren't plans to fly in day laborers from the UAE or Mexico to work the ports. There's no reason to believe that 95+% of the workers at any given port will not continue to be good ol' 'Mericans.

 

[sodaseller]

With respect to the "secret" nature of the "deal", Paul at Wizbang makes this rather obvious comment about the assertion:Further more, the negotiations that routinely take place between the Government and companies concerning the approvals of such transactions are "secret" because they envolved sensitive internal non-public information and trade secrets. This is just like when the FTC does a Robinson-Pattman (sp?) monopoly determination when two US companies want to merger. The results and certain details may be made public, but most the information discussed remains private.

Hart Scott Rodino premerger analysis, not RP, which is price discrimination. Those are confidential, but are a bit different analytically than what is being discussed here. In that case, government is determining is proposed mereger between private parties will result in excess market concentration, and whether any partial divestitures are necessary to permit the merger to consummate.

In this case, government is one of the parties to the contract. In those cases, negotiations are not usually confidential

 

[sodaseller]

On another point, the claim that documents that are trade secrets are never produced pursant to a court order is erroneous. Happens every day, subject to court ordered confidentiality orders. You woudl never be able to litigate business torts (noncompetes, antitrust, tortious interference) otherwise. That's a red herring justification of the permission to keep records out of subpoena power

 

[Geoff_M]

Hart Scott Rodino premerger analysis, not RP, which is price discrimination.

You're right... I can never keep those two straight.

I don't believe they are throwing around the term "trade secret" as a legal determination. I suspect a more appropriate term would have been "non-disclosure agreement" or "confidentiality agreement". The exact terms of the deal between P&O and DWP are confidential. I don't see any conspiracy in the US government respecting that confidentiality. Nor is it fair to characterize the negotiations between the US and DPW as a "secret deal". The AP writer is engauging in hyperbole.

 

[sodaseller]

I'm talking about the provision that permits offshore record keeping, beyond the reach of courts. As I understood it, the argument was that that was no big deal because those are trade secrets that are not disclosed anyway. Presuming I understood the argument correctly, that makes no sense to me, and I find the unavailability of records to be highly problematic.

As for the 'confidential" negotiations, my very cursory reading on the issue seemed to reveal that there was statutory requirement of openness. Could be wrong. I haven't read much on it, which is why I have refrained from opining to date except on discrete issues.

Bottom line is that while I will admit I should have more facts, we have a likely partisan divide on the issue. I distinctly do not trust the judgment of this Administration. I don't for a minute imagine that they would ever favor anyone they thought presented a threat, but I don't trust their ability to distinguish the difference. Their errors in judgment to date on such matters have been horrendous, pace Chalabi.

I am now reading Sen. Graham's book which in nutshell contends that longstanding relationships with the Saudis caused the Administration to see what they wanted to see and not to appreciate how deeply the radicals were intertwined in the power structure, even though the individuals we were dealing with directly may have been sincere. I also cannot forget Ret. General Zinni's decision to refuel in Yemen which led to the attack on the Cole. He too was seduced by local American friendly leaders and has admitted, albeit in the softest voice possible, that he failed to realize how interwoven the radicals were in every aspect of governance. Though anyone can be mistaken, I especially do not trust this group given their groupthink mentality on such issues

 

[eclectics]

I also cannot forget Ret. General Zinni's decision to refuel in Yemen which led to the attack on the Cole. He too was seduced by local American friendly leaders and has admitted, albeit in the softest voice possible, that he failed to realize how interwoven the radicals were in every aspect of governance. Though anyone can be mistaken, I especially do not trust this group given their groupthink mentality on such issues

This is exactly what bothers me about this deal.

 

[DawnCt1]

Why can't these jobs go to Americans and American held and based companies? Lord knows we need some jobs to stay here in the US, and maybe it's just me, but I think one place to start would be with industries that are vital to our national security.

The JOBS ARE in the United States because the ports are in the United States. The dock workers are in the US as is the security, etc. The only change is who writes the paycheck. How would you feel if Halliburton got the deal? There aren't a lot of companies who do this kind of management.

 

[Sylvester McBean]

I saw what I saw?? Come on you don't live in Fla...... you live in area 51. You were abducted weren't you? Had a love child with the aliens too...

yes, I live in Area 51. I was abducted and had a love child with the aliens. the Men in Black then took me back in time to view the Kennedy assasination and the planting of explosives in the World Trade Center towers to bring them down by the US government. it was a great trip. unfortunately, now I'm paying child support to some alien chick 11,000 light years away and the commute on the weekends to see the baby is killing me.

 

[Charade]

Here's the thing - I don't think that the United States should have ANY other country (Saudies , Iranians or British for that matter) with ANY role in our ports, our rail lines, our pipelines, our side of the borders, our Airports, or our waterways. None.

.

Oxygen!! I need oxygen!! I agree.

 

[richiebaseball]

Snopes and the 9/11 commision as evidence? and you think I glean my views fom mass e-mails?

Personally I think your view is through Michael Moore colored glasses. Know what I mean?

 

[LakeAriel]

Personally I think your view is through Michael Moore colored glasses. Know what I mean?

You might want to try on those glasses, maybe you'll be able to see! Pay particular attention to the Bush's close connection with the Saudis' (15 hijackers)

 

[sodaseller]

Kevin Drum makes a good point, quoting Greider:


http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2006_02/008287.php

....William Greider writes that George Bush has used war and terror as a partisan cudgel for the past five years, and the culture of fear he's nurtured so cynically has been the cornerstone of his political success:

So why is the fearmonger-in-chief being so casual about this Dubai business? Because at some level of consciousness even George Bush knows the inflated fears are bogus. So do a lot of the politicians merrily throwing spears at him. He taught them how to play this game, invented the tactics and reorganized political competition as a demagogic dance of hysterical absurdities, endless opportunities to waste public money. Very few dare to challenge the mindset.

....It would be nice to imagine this ridiculous episode will prompt reconsideration, cool down exploitative jingoism and provoke a more rational discussion of the multiplying absurdities. I doubt it. At least it will be satisfying to see Bush toasted irrationally, since he lit the match.

On a related note, it makes me feel almost nostalgic to watch the toxic stew of cherry picking, half truths, and outright misrepresentations currently being used to demonize the UAE as a virtual arm of al-Qaeda. You know what it reminds me of? The way Bush & Co. tried to sell Saddam Hussein as Osama's best buddy in the Middle East. It's poetic watching the Bushies squirm when they're on the receiving end of this stuff.

 

[Sylvester McBean]

Personally I think your view is through Michael Moore colored glasses. Know what I mean?

I personally think michael moore is a repugnant, sensationalist pig. but I also don't march with blind faith with the bush administration. the address he gave on the night of September 11th moved me to remember why I campaigned for him. every decision he's made since them has led me to believe he's a soft-headed, brazen tool.

 

[disneymom3]

Well, hey at least this issue has served to unite many dems and repubs......Cant' say much more for it. I will stand up and say that I voted for Bush--yeah, twice--and while I don't regret the decision based on other choices at the time, I sure wish there was some reason to impeach him now and be done with him. The man is making it painful to be conservative these days and is coming across even to supporters (some of us, that is) as a complete idiot.

It is truly painful and just keeps getting worse.