The Secret Deal For Our Ports

Two stories have emerged recently. One is that Bush didn't know about the deal to turn over operations of American ports to the United Arab Emirates. The other is that Bush's administration had worked out a secret agreement with the UAE to clear the way for the deal. So which is it?

It's entirely possible that the two are not mutually exclusive. Members of the Bush administration could have cut a secret deal with a foreign government for control of our ports without the President ever knowing. But if that's true, doesn't it prove that Bush is completely out to lunch when it comes to actually leading this country? Here's an overview of the Bush administration's secret conditions (or lack thereof) for approving this deal, from the AP.

Under a secretive agreement with the Bush administration, a company in the United Arab Emirates promised to cooperate with U.S. investigations as a condition of its takeover of operations at six major American ports, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press.

The U.S. government chose not to impose other, routine restrictions.

In approving the $6.8 billion purchase, the administration chose not to require state-owned Dubai Ports World to keep copies of its business records on U.S. soil, where they would be subject to orders by American courts. It also did not require the company to designate an American citizen to accommodate requests by the government.

Essentially, these conditions weren't so much about protecting Americans from potential wrongdoing by a foreign power, but rather protecting a foreign power from accountability to Americans. It's incredible. And I'm left wondering who in the administration was involved in setting the parameters of this agreement. For example, what level of involvement did Treasury Secretary John Snow or Maritime Secretary David Sanborn, both of whom have a special interest in seeing the deal approved, have in hammering out the details?

The Republican ideal of Bush as vigilant protector is laughable. Their man behind the curtain is napping on the job.

Tags: corruption, National Security, Republicans (all tags)

Comments

6 Comments

Re: The Secret Deal For Our Ports

If Bush did not appoint Snow and Sanborn, who did?  And if he did appoint them, it wasn't so they could walk Barney and Beezley, it was to grease the skids for this deal.  

by via 2006-02-23 04:54AM | login to reply | 0 recs
killing an arab

Arabs aren't the enemy - the nutball terrorists are.   The ships are made in a big shipyard in Japan. Then they are flagged out of some tax shelter like UAE or Hong Kong. And their cargo is oil bound for the US through the port of Dubai.

Al Qaeda is mostly Saudi. Not  UAE. That said, I still don't like the deal. There's something about it all that doesn't add up.

by turnerbroadcasting 2006-02-23 06:45AM | login to reply | 0 recs
DP World deal is precurser deal

It is a UAE condition for ratifying The Middle East Free Trade Agreement (MEFTA). Not only did they know the terms they re-wrote them to accomindate the UAE. It is the billions a stake with the MEFTA that are driving the Administration's actions.

by citizen80203 2006-02-23 07:26AM | login to reply | 0 recs
Re: DP World deal is precurser deal

Yup. It shouldn't be a surprise that the traditional media don't seem to be able to follow the story well enough to see the MEFTA connection.

I'm still surprised.

Sigh.

by kb 2006-02-23 10:09AM | login to reply | 0 recs
Re: The Secret Deal For Our Ports

Hey, W: isn't it amazing what you can learn when you read newspapers and watch the news! If you are shocked this this issue, George, you should try reading some of our blogs over here on the left - they'll make your hair stand up! You'll be stunned to learn what those morons in your administration have been doing while you are playing your Nintendo.

by clueless 2006-02-23 08:35AM | login to reply | 0 recs
Re: The Secret Deal For Our Ports

One point about the Ports is if the bushies are so convinced that government can't/shouldn't run business's and we are committed to privatization ( or so we are told) Why is it OK for foriegn governments to run business's?

Is the Dubai Gov. that much more efficient then any level that we have here?

If the idiots were to be consistent they would ban any government owned business from any US contract for anything. If we are going to have a government run public services here in the US I want it to be our government.

by rational 2006-02-23 11:02AM | login to reply | 0 recs

Login

 

Sign-in-with-twitter-lighter

Advertise Blogads