IGX

http://www.stopfasttracknow.org/

Obama et al are attempting to railroad this through the system right now.

Corporations over government.
Corporations over citizens.

Pretty shady shit.

All the bible belt whinging about WORSTPRESIDENTEVER.....this motherfuckers...is the real deal.

Reasonable minds can differ on health care, ME policy etc...this is a straight up corporate take over (and before anyone gets all lathered about the other party...GB 1, GB2, Reagan, and Nixon all would have signed it just as quickly)

Apparently a lot of people in the UK(and EU) feel the same way about the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership(TTIP).

This is just the logical playing out of the post-WW2 globalist agenda.

And it's all because of YKW.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2ZTIi-0Mrk[/youtube]

BD makes a most important point. We are all so busy shouting support for our own 'team' (as if they give a fuck about us) that we fail to see the fact that ALL of the 'teams' represent the banks, multi-nationals and the tyrants behind them, before they will ever stand for you.

They somehow manage to get us arguing over shit like gay marriage and any other non-issue rather than focus on the theft of the globe and our freedoms, right out from under our feet.

Race, sex, age, religion, suburb you live in, baseball team, whatever the fuck, it doesn't really matter. The differences are more a result of global and local circumstance than the actual human beings behind the labels. We need to remove all prejudice from our mind except for one very important distinction... There is we the people, and there are the exulted thieves. That is the 'them', that you need to direct your disdain and distrust toward. That is the them you need to protect your family from.

Take an hour away from your football, porn and x-factor, please watch this...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHpVA_fO2zk[/youtube]

Blaidd Drwg wrote:All the bible belt whinging about WORSTPRESIDENTEVER.....this motherfuckers...is the real deal.

Reasonable minds can differ on health care, ME policy etc...this is a straight up corporate take over (and before anyone gets all lathered about the other party...GB 1, GB2, Reagan, and Nixon all would have signed it just as quickly)

Yes, entirely.

Blaidd Drwg wrote:All the bible belt whinging about WORSTPRESIDENTEVER.....this motherfuckers...is the real deal.

Reasonable minds can differ on health care, ME policy etc...this is a straight up corporate take over (and before anyone gets all lathered about the other party...GB 1, GB2, Reagan, and Nixon all would have signed it just as quickly)

?? From what I've seen, it's just another regional free trade pact between a few developed nations and a few developing ones. I'd personally prefer to see kids toys coming from a country less likely to use lead paint on them than China.

Blaidd Drwg wrote:All the bible belt whinging about WORSTPRESIDENTEVER.....this motherfuckers...is the real deal.

Reasonable minds can differ on health care, ME policy etc...this is a straight up corporate take over (and before anyone gets all lathered about the other party...GB 1, GB2, Reagan, and Nixon all would have signed it just as quickly)

Yup. When Bill Clinton signed NAFTA, every living ex president except Reagan was there to shake his hand. Reagan would have been there if not for Alzheimer's.

Turdacious wrote:

Blaidd Drwg wrote:All the bible belt whinging about WORSTPRESIDENTEVER.....this motherfuckers...is the real deal.

Reasonable minds can differ on health care, ME policy etc...this is a straight up corporate take over (and before anyone gets all lathered about the other party...GB 1, GB2, Reagan, and Nixon all would have signed it just as quickly)

?? From what I've seen, it's just another regional free trade pact between a few developed nations and a few developing ones. I'd personally prefer to see kids toys coming from a country less likely to use lead paint on them than China.

Dig deeper....and then try to read it. You can't. Neither can congress.

Turdacious wrote:

Blaidd Drwg wrote:All the bible belt whinging about WORSTPRESIDENTEVER.....this motherfuckers...is the real deal.

Reasonable minds can differ on health care, ME policy etc...this is a straight up corporate take over (and before anyone gets all lathered about the other party...GB 1, GB2, Reagan, and Nixon all would have signed it just as quickly)

?? From what I've seen, it's just another regional free trade pact between a few developed nations and a few developing ones. I'd personally prefer to see kids toys coming from a country less likely to use lead paint on them than China.

Very few of the minds who line up to oppose trade deals are reasonable.

Pinky wrote:

Turdacious wrote:

Blaidd Drwg wrote:All the bible belt whinging about WORSTPRESIDENTEVER.....this motherfuckers...is the real deal.

Reasonable minds can differ on health care, ME policy etc...this is a straight up corporate take over (and before anyone gets all lathered about the other party...GB 1, GB2, Reagan, and Nixon all would have signed it just as quickly)

?? From what I've seen, it's just another regional free trade pact between a few developed nations and a few developing ones. I'd personally prefer to see kids toys coming from a country less likely to use lead paint on them than China.

Very few of the minds who line up to oppose trade deals are reasonable.

If it's worth having, it's worth a vigorous public debate. The negatives of more super secret shit outweighs whatever benefits might be in the deal.

This is the consummate reasonable man.

http://www.dancarlin.com/product/common ... f-control/

Oh I am sure that there are very good reasons for the super secret shit.

It is probably our fault that they can't tell us what is actually in the law.

People only hide shit from me for my best interest.

Here's another (yeah I know it's E. Warren...read the argument first)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/ ... story.html

ISDS would allow foreign companies to challenge U.S. laws — and potentially to pick up huge payouts from taxpayers — without ever stepping foot in a U.S. court. Here’s how it would work. Imagine that the United States bans a toxic chemical that is often added to gasoline because of its health and environmental consequences. If a foreign company that makes the toxic chemical opposes the law, it would normally have to challenge it in a U.S. court. But with ISDS, the company could skip the U.S. courts and go before an international panel of arbitrators. If the company won, the ruling couldn’t be challenged in U.S. courts, and the arbitration panel could require American taxpayers to cough up millions — and even billions — of dollars in damages.

This isn’t a partisan issue. Conservatives who believe in U.S. sovereignty should be outraged that ISDS would shift power from American courts, whose authority is derived from our Constitution, to unaccountable international tribunals. Libertarians should be offended that ISDS effectively would offer a free taxpayer subsidy to countries with weak legal systems. And progressives should oppose ISDS because it would allow big multinationals to weaken labor and environmental rules.

I can't be trusted to comprehend these things properly.

Blaidd Drwg wrote:Here's another (yeah I know it's E. Warren...read the argument first)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/ ... story.html

So there is one senator who has read it?

I have no idea how many senators have bothered to track down the material leaked form wikileaks. Elizabeth Warren at least has.

As per usual, the people voting on it have probably not read much of the parts that aren't secret let alone the bits that are.

Blaidd Drwg wrote:I have no idea how many senators have bothered to track down the material leaked form wikileaks. Elizabeth Warren at least has.

As per usual, the people voting on it have probably not read much of the parts that aren't secret let alone the bits that are.

You live in the land of WTO protests. Maybe some secrecy is understandable.

Turdacious wrote:

Blaidd Drwg wrote:I have no idea how many senators have bothered to track down the material leaked form wikileaks. Elizabeth Warren at least has.

As per usual, the people voting on it have probably not read much of the parts that aren't secret let alone the bits that are.

You live in the land of WTO protests. Maybe some secrecy is understandable.

You live in ground zero for most of this country's problems...but I know you're not prone to such facile arguments....I mean who among this esteemed body would dismiss a national policy disaster solely on snark?

uhh..wait.

nevermind.

Blaidd Drwg wrote:

Turdacious wrote:

Blaidd Drwg wrote:I have no idea how many senators have bothered to track down the material leaked form wikileaks. Elizabeth Warren at least has.

As per usual, the people voting on it have probably not read much of the parts that aren't secret let alone the bits that are.

You live in the land of WTO protests. Maybe some secrecy is understandable.

You live in ground zero for most of this country's problems...but I know you're not prone to such facile arguments....I mean who among this esteemed body would dismiss a national policy disaster solely on snark?

uhh..wait.

nevermind.

First of all, I live in ground zero for nearly all of this country's problems. Treaties should be negotiated away from the public eye but ratified in it. Warren is a lousy messenger though-- she goes from one extreme that rising wages for low wage workers doesn't hurt employment, to this. Her argument may have merit, but I don't believe her.

You're better than that.

Divorce your reflexive predjudice against her ( I share that ) and look at the subject matter.

Turdacious wrote:

Blaidd Drwg wrote:Here's another (yeah I know it's E. Warren...read the argument first)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/ ... story.html

So there is one senator who has read it?

She is an Apache Code Talker.

Blaidd Drwg wrote:You're better than that.

Divorce your reflexive predjudice against her ( I share that ) and look at the subject matter.

The subject matter is a free trade treaty. That's all we really know.

I know that previous free trade treaties have cost jobs and destroyed industries in the USA. What would be different about this one?