Eagle

Home

News
Behind the Headlines
Two-Cents Worth
Video of the Week
News Blurbs

Short Takes

Plain Talk

The Ryter Report

DONATIONS

Articles
Testimony
Bible Questions

Internet Articles (2015)
Internet Articles (2014)
Internet Articles (2013)
Internet Articles (2012)

Internet Articles (2011)
Internet Articles (2010)
Internet Articles (2009)
Internet Articles (2008)
Internet Articles (2007)
Internet Articles (2006)
Internet Articles (2005)
Internet Articles (2004)

Internet Articles (2003)
Internet Articles (2002)
Internet Articles (2001)

From The Mailbag

Books
Order Books

Cyrus
Rednecker

Search

About
Comments

Links

 

Startlogic Windows Hosting

Adobe  Design Premium¨ CS5

20 years

The leak Obama did not want to happen: a secretive
trade agreement that exempts foreign companies in
the US from the domestic laws that govern corporate
activity of US companies in America, was exposed.
This new treaty by Executive Order will
breach
sovereignty and give government absolute
control of website content on the Internet.

The American people have learned that classified information about US participation in a partially successful joint US-Israeli computer virus attack on Iran's cyber-system that controls its nuclear weapons program was deliberately leaked to the liberal media. In addition, the world now knows how the Defense Department selects targets for counterterrorism assassination. It's a safe bet that both leaks were specifically authorized by the Obama White House. Why?

The short answer? To make Barack Obama—the most inept, indecisive leader (on important issues)—appear to be a decisive leader. When it comes to green issues where Obama is spending taxpayer dollars and not private investor dollars to finance the "sky-is-falling schemes" of the ecowackos, Obama is a decisive guy. But that's not really surprising since he is using our money—and the money of our as yet unborn great, great grandchildren—to finance the environmental pipedreams of key leftist donors who aren't about to squander their own wealth on projects and products that logic says can't work.

Obama, of course, flatly denied the allegations that his Administration leaked information that flatters him in a June 11, 2012 press conference, saying, "The notion that my White House would purposely release classified national security information is offensive."

With members of Congress on both sides of the aisle demanding a special prosecutor to investigate the military leaks, Obama is trying to plug a real leak that poses a threat to his reelection. The real leak hasn't been reported by any mainstream electronic or print news sources. The leak was created by a member of Congress. It concerns a secret Obama trade agreement.

The leak, in the form of a trade document, was sent to the consumer advocacy group, Public Citizen.org, blowing the whistle on secret Obama's trade policies. This trade deal, negotiated by the Obama White House in strict secrecy, is the devastatingly controversial Trans-Pacific Partnership [TPP]. The NAFTA of Asia plan will have worldwide consequences. The source of the leak? House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa [R-CA] who also placed the document on his own House website to show the American people what Obama was up to. But, when the mainstream media fails to pay attention to the trade deal, neither does the general public.

The Trans-Pacific Partnership will not only destroy the sovereignty of all the signatory nations in a world increasingly manipulated by George Soros, it will also wipe out every semblance of Internet privacy by giving the US government absolute control of the onramps of the information superhighway—by edict, not by law. Access to creating an Internet news portal will likely require an FCC license if Obama's trade agreement becomes reality. FCC regulators will control Internet access more tightly than they currently control the other electronic media—radio and TV—to prevent fifth columnists (i.e., rightwing journalists) from...well...writing stories like this one without an FCC permit (their federal driver's license to cruise the information superhighway).

King Barack is attempting to accomplish all of this with a royal decree he has no authority to make. In Executive Order 13563, Obama declares his action is based on "...the authority vested in me...by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America." The president—even a real one—lacks the Constitutional authority to manufacture his own laws simply because Congress is moving too slowly for him, or not moving at all. Nor does he possess the "kingly" authority to ratify a treaty—something only the US Senate can do since, constitutionally, that's a prerogative enjoyed only by State governments.

Under the trade agreement currently advocated by Obama, domestic companies in the United States will continue to be subject to all domestic laws. Regulations that are currently in force at the time of the agreement, including environmental regulations and regulations concerning labor unions, and laws dealing with economic and banking issues, will continue to impact domestic companies. Foreign transnational companies operating within the United States (which in many cases will still be American companies that have renounced their US roots) will be exempt from those laws.

In the event US regulatory agencies challenge them, the foreign companies have the right to appeal any US regulatory ruling or infraction of US law to an international tribunal which will have the power to overrule any American trade law. If the United States government does not adhere to the tribunal's judgment, the tribunal (or the UN's World Trade Organization) can impose trade sanctions on the United States for failing to abide by its rulings.

In the 94-page platform of the Democratic National Committee on Aug. 9, 2008, "Renewing America's Promise," Obama pledged to invest whatever resources were needed to reignite American competitiveness by investing in job creation in America's manufacturing communities to create new job opportunities here by rebuilding the manufacturing infrastructure in what the DNC called "a connected America." This program, the DNC said, would lead to job creation only if the Obama Administration supported small business growth and entrepreneurship—which Obama pledged to do. He apparently forgot that pledge about 12:01:01 p.m. on Jan. 20, 2009, because he was already working on the framework of the Trans-Pacific Partnership before the dust settled on his inaugural address.

Small Business America was not invited to the party—just like the GOP was not invited to share in the legislative process at the federal level from Jan. 4, 2007 to Jan. 6, 2011. Since not a single GOP vote was needed to enact any piece of legislation Obama wanted passed, it seemed pointless to the Democrats to listen to the GOP prattle as they bellyached on the record about the Obama agenda. GOP Congressman were forced to voice their objections to the Obama-Pelosi-Reid social progressive agenda in the Congressional Record while speaking to a completely empty House chamber—many times after the votes enacting the legislation had already been cast. However, when the trial balloon for TPP was floated, there was no support for it on either side of the aisle. On this one issue, Republicans and Democrats alike were united.

When Public Citizen broke the story, unlike the military leaks that made Obama look like a leader, Obama looked like a man committing treason. I think surrendering sovereignty to a foreign entity qualifies as treason. I think erasing the Bill of Rights also qualifies as treason since Obama swore to uphold and defend the rule of law and the Constitution of the United States. Earlier, his Justice Department told the US Supreme Court that the Obama Administration would not defend the Defense of Marriage Act, a legally enacted law in the US Code—something Obama swore to do under oath.

Democrats and Republicans alike were upset to learn about Obama's secret trade agreement. Lori Wallach, Director of Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch issued a statement saying that "...[t]he outrageous stuff in this leaked text may well be why US trade officials have been so extremely secretive about..." (since Obama signed Executive Order 13563 on Jan. 18, 2011). The United States, during the Obama Administration, has devolved from a nation of laws to a nation of powerful men making laws in secret that benefit only them.

If Congress does not repudiate Executive Order 13563, it will shackle the United States to a worldwide regulatory system and cede a huge chunk of US environmental and economic sovereignty to the United Nations that will benefit only the the princes of industry and the barons of banking in the global community—and penalize every man, woman and child in the United States.

EO 13563 is laced with so much toxic language about protecting economic growth, competitiveness and job creation that is designed to make sure no one pays attention to the "whereas" and "therefores" that spells economic disaster for the United States—and for those small business industries we have left. Our former friends, allies and neighbors who jealously resented the powerful America that pulled them up by their bootstraps put them back on their feet at the ends of both World War I and War World II are now stripping clean to the bone the corpse of the late, great United States.

The Obama reforms and regulatory realignments detailed in Executive Order 13563 that will help make Obama's NAFTA of Asia, the Trans-Pacific Partnership work, is Obama's absurd assumption that he is somehow constitutionally empowered to usurp the Congress when they don't give him what he wants. Executive Order 13563 arrogantly begins with "...By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States..." Perhaps the Manchurian Candidate in the White House should take a few minutes and read the Constitution. Contrary to what he says, the President (if we actually had one) is not "vested with the authority" he claims in EO 13563. He has absolutely no legislative authority, nor does anyone else in the Executive Branch—including the unelected bureaucracy that creates the regulations in the laws Congress writes. None. Nada. Zilch. Zip.

The leaked Trans-Pacific document that both embarrassed and enraged Obama addresses wide-ranging regulations that will transform international investments, financial reform and environmentalism—but not for the better from the perspective of Americanism. Many of the policies outlined in the proposed trade pact don't stand a prayer of making it through Congress, let alone be ratified as a treaty by the Senate or, enacted as a law, as were both NAFTA and CAFTA. Any talk about weakening key consumer protections found in current US law have long been rejected by consumer advocates, financial reform advocates and even the labor unions whose support is critical to the election of Democrats. Yet, Obama's free trade negotiations with eight Pacific rim countries contain provisions that will turn the unions against any politician that votes for it. I can't imagine they will give Obama a pass.

In a DNC campaign pledge in 2008, Obama said, "We will not negotiate bilateral trade agreements that stop the government from protecting the environment, food safety, or the health of its citizens; give greater rights to foreign investors than to US investors; require the privatization of our vital public services, or prevent developing country governments from adopting humanitarian licensing policies to improve access to lifesaving medications." Almost every one of those promises are broken in the leaked documents.

When queried by the media, the US Trade Representative [USTR] downplayed concerns, adding that it does not comment on "leaked documents." "Nothing in our Trans-Pacific Program could impair our government's ability to pursue legitimate, nondiscriminatory public relations programs, including measures to protect public health, public safety and the environment." (Most USTR comments include concerns about public health specifically because of the abysmal track record of the lack of safety in Chinese medicines imported into the United States.) If you remember, in Jan., 2008, reports of 350 cases of adverse allergic reactions from contaminated Heparin™ in the United States reached the FDA. Nineteen of the initially affected people died. On Feb. 12, 2008 as both the death count and the number of "allergic reactions" increased, the FDA released an advisory to physicians and hospitals to stop using Baxter International's Multiple Dose Heparin™ and to use Heparin™ from other suppliers. Baxter recalled their Heparin™. By April, over 1,000 people had the symptoms. The death toll reached 81 people.

Although laws have been enacted in the United States that theoretically protect Americans from drugs imported from other countries, under Obama's Trans-Pacific Partnership (NAFTA of Asia), the right of foreign companies to use international arbitrators to argue disputes reinforces the adage of "buyer beware." The fact that the USTR argued that "...this administration is committed to to ensuring strong...public health safety laws..." means nothing when American retailer or wholesale buyers unknowingly buy inferior Chinese products from foreign distributors. In many cases, the American companies purchase "sample orders" for testing to make sure the products meet US standards only to find when their bulk orders are placed, inferior material or construction is substituted. What can be done about it? Virtually nothing based on trade laws according to Lori Wallach of Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch.

"Beginning with NAFTA," Wallach said, "the agreements [was a] delivery mechanisms of an agenda. So the good trade was used to wrap around...non-normal agreements." Wallach, in the video, is holding the 900 page NAFTA agreement which was, she said, nothing more than a restraint on food and drug safety and a ban on "buy America" procurement. Two pages of the documents, she observed flipping through the document, dealt with trade. The rest of it, she said "...was basically a trojan horse maneuver where the good name of trade was used to implement stuff that, literally, Congress has rejected and the public has said is unacceptable.. Then, you brand it as a trade agreement, and march it right through."

Which is why key Senate Democrats joined the bipartisan trade revolt against Obama. Among them was Sen. Ron Wyden [D-OR], Chairman of the Subcommittee on International Trade who was denied access by the Office of US Trade Representative to any of the documents in the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement. Ultimately, Wyden gained "eyes only" access to the papers, but his staff could not—including those with key insight on trade policy. Asked about Obama's bureaucrats blocking his access to information for which his committee has oversight, Wyden's spokeswoman, Jennifer Hoelzer said, "That's better than nothing. I would point out how insulting it is for them to argue that members of Congress are to personally go over to USTR to view trade documents. An advisor at Haliburton or the MPAA is given a password that allows him or her to go on the USTR website and view the TPP agreement anytime he or she wants." But not Congress. The USTR or the White House appeared to be afraid that Congress would download the documents and the embarrassing facets of those "trade agreements" might end up in the public domain—like now.

Working with Wyden is Sen. Sherrod Brown [D-OH] a longtime opponent of NAFTA-style trade deals who was determined to open up TPP by exposing the "trojan horse maneuver" of the White House at the 7th Annual Netroots Nation Conference in Providence, RI on June 7-10. The Netroot Nation Conference is an annual gathering of social progressive political activists. It was originally organized by Daily Kos with the first conference held in Las Vegas in 2006. In 2007 it was renamed YearlyKos. You might say that Netroot Nation is the far left socialist alternative to the Conservative Political Action Committee Conference, which is held in late February-early March each year in the Washington, DC metro area.

Brown expressed concerns at Netroot Nation about the recent Obama trade deal where companies will be given the right to ignore existing health and safety standards inside other countries by virtue of the trade agreement. What does mean to us? Other countries, by virtue of the agreement, also have the right to ignore the health and safety standards in the United States when they sell to us.

Like I said, we now live in a "buyer beware" world. The transnational industrialists who fill the campaign war chests of Presidents, Senators and Congressmen, and who have been frustrated with US health and safety laws, have now found a way around them with the help of the Obama Administration's trade agreement. Brown told his audience at Netroot Nation that in the past, members of Congress have been concerned largely about pharmaceutical patents, but those concerns are spreading. Brown noted that TPP will drive up up the cost of prescription drugs throughout Asia. Ultimately, everything, everywhere, will become more expensive because of TPP, thanks to the transnational industrialists and barons of banking who have shifted the balance of political power in the world from governments to them. Bribing politicians with political contributions is now paying handsome dividends.

Also included in TPP is a legislative provision that failed to clear the 112th Congress in 2012. The House version of the bill to protect intellectual property rights from Internet piracy was called Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity—or PIPA for short. The Senate version, which was stopped by Wyden, was called SOPA or the Stop Online Piracy Act. Since the legislation was never enacted nor signed into law, the transnational industrialists lobbied for its inclusion in TPP.

The problem with the Trans-Pacific Partnership is that it overrides the laws of every nation on Earth specifically to benefit corporations. Congress did not vote on it because it was negotiated in secret—hidden even from those members of Congress who oversee the drafting of treaties.

When Issa published the entire intellectual property chapter of the Transpacific Partnership agreement as it was drafted by the USTR, Carol Gutherie of the USTR told the Huffington Post that "...putting the text of a partially negotiated agreement online could weaken the hand of US negotiators as they work strategically to get the best possible deal for American workers and businesses." In reality, the best deal for the American workers and American businesses is no deal.

In contrast, Congressman Issa said, "While the Obama Administration speaks publicly about protecting an open Internet, and delivering open government, they continue pushing secretive agreements like ACTA..." (the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement) "...and TPP that exclude the public and could undermine individual privacy rights [that] stifle innovation." Buried in TPP is the USTR's efforts to legally outlaw the terminology "Buy American." It has become clear that the core objective of the Obama Administration is to completely gut the American economy because when the United States signs a trade agreement, it must immediately conform all of our federal and State laws to agree with the terms of the agreement it just signed. Doing so makes future reforms to benefit the "Buy American" advocacy increasingly difficult since the United States cannot, according to international trade law, amend or rescind the trade pact to benefit what American businesses are left in the market place. What we should have learned from NAFTA in 1994 is that international trade pacts have dramatic and far-reaching consequences on domestic policy that far exceed economic trade. The most important policy impact of NAFTA on the American people was the secret provision that erased the borders between the United States and Canada and the United States and Mexico. That is what stopped President George W. Bush from constructing a wall between the US and Mexico. That's why all of the rhetoric of expelling illegal aliens from the United States is just that—rhetoric. By the way, thank Bill Clinton for that one. That's not a George W. Bush sin.

 

 

 

 

Just Say No
Copyright 2009 Jon Christian Ryter.
All rights reserved
.