It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Sanders to Clinton: The Time to Come Clean on TPP, Fast Track is 'Right Now'
page: 2share:
a reply to: Isurrender73
trea·son
ˈtrēzən/
noun
noun: treason; noun: high treason; plural noun: high treasons
the crime of betraying one's country, especially by attempting to kill the sovereign or overthrow the government.
U.S Federal Law
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.
By definition it could be called treason, however by US Law it doesn't fit. It does seem to be a coup d'état though.
This gets right to the core of it.
trea·son
ˈtrēzən/
noun
noun: treason; noun: high treason; plural noun: high treasons
the crime of betraying one's country, especially by attempting to kill the sovereign or overthrow the government.
U.S Federal Law
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.
By definition it could be called treason, however by US Law it doesn't fit. It does seem to be a coup d'état though.
This gets right to the core of it.
a reply to: mOjOm
Treason is the highest crime in the USA, so it's a good thing the standards are so high. I do get the feeling though that if the founding fathers were to see America in it's current form of politics, the defining of treason probably would be altered, just saying.
Treason is the highest crime in the USA, so it's a good thing the standards are so high. I do get the feeling though that if the founding fathers were to see America in it's current form of politics, the defining of treason probably would be altered, just saying.
originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: Isurrender73
trea·son
ˈtrēzən/
noun
noun: treason; noun: high treason; plural noun: high treasons
the crime of betraying one's country, especially by attempting to kill the sovereign or overthrow the government.
U.S Federal Law
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.
I guess you have to ask yourself. Are men who circumvent the US constitution and allow mega corporations aiding our enemies?
If the men who keep secrets are deemed enemies to the sovereignty of the USA I think we have a strong case.
Their is a war going on against our constitution and our sovereignty, and currently the people are loosing.
We are the government, we define the law. If the majority of us citizens believe it's treason then it os treason.
We even have the right to change any and every law, whenever we want. That is what makes this country great. Or should I say what used to make our country great?
I understand your point, I just can't believe they get away with all the BS.
edit on 12-6-2015 by Isurrender73 because: (no reason given)
a reply to: Vector99
If the founders saw the country the way it is now they would simply shoot every member in the Government and probably most of it's alphabet agencies too. Maybe a good part of the populous too since they warned us about this very thing happening from the start and we have proven to be complete failures in every way and even some ways the probably never thought possible.
If the founders saw the country the way it is now they would simply shoot every member in the Government and probably most of it's alphabet agencies too. Maybe a good part of the populous too since they warned us about this very thing happening from the start and we have proven to be complete failures in every way and even some ways the probably never thought possible.
a reply to: FyreByrd
Every single solitary member of congress, Bernie included, is guilty of perpetuating an environment where laws can be written under the veil of secrecy that affect the American public, where the details of the law can remain secret years after voting on it.
This is not a partisan issue.
This is not a republican, democrat issue.
Lip-service is being paid to this thing. It's all a game. Jail time if you dare speak of a law concerning trade?
Since when?
Did I wake up one day on a planet where laws are discussed, voted on, written in secret?
Especially in the "most transparent administration" in American history?
I most certainly am not trolling. I am outraged and not fooled for a moment by any politician (regardless of affiliation) who does not stand with the people they represent.
This is insulting. This is criminal. This is disgusting.
And apparently not a single politician is brave enough to be open and honest with the American people.
Every single solitary member of congress, Bernie included, is guilty of perpetuating an environment where laws can be written under the veil of secrecy that affect the American public, where the details of the law can remain secret years after voting on it.
This is not a partisan issue.
This is not a republican, democrat issue.
Lip-service is being paid to this thing. It's all a game. Jail time if you dare speak of a law concerning trade?
Since when?
Did I wake up one day on a planet where laws are discussed, voted on, written in secret?
Especially in the "most transparent administration" in American history?
I most certainly am not trolling. I am outraged and not fooled for a moment by any politician (regardless of affiliation) who does not stand with the people they represent.
This is insulting. This is criminal. This is disgusting.
And apparently not a single politician is brave enough to be open and honest with the American people.
a reply to: beezzer
I've been wondering that same thing. How exactly is it against the law to see or discuss this??? What law??? Where did this law come from??? How long has it been active??? Who voted for it??? How the F*ck is such a Law which is obviously only made to allow illegal law making possible even exist in the first place???
I've been wondering that same thing. How exactly is it against the law to see or discuss this??? What law??? Where did this law come from??? How long has it been active??? Who voted for it??? How the F*ck is such a Law which is obviously only made to allow illegal law making possible even exist in the first place???
a reply to: mOjOm
How can it even be discussed?
The only thing that can be openly stated, is either you are "for it" or you are "against it".
WTF?
How can you judge a politicians stance, if you can't even read the damned thing?
Bernie calling out Hillary?
How would Hillary know about it in the first place, if it's such a damned secret?
How can it even be discussed?
The only thing that can be openly stated, is either you are "for it" or you are "against it".
WTF?
How can you judge a politicians stance, if you can't even read the damned thing?
Bernie calling out Hillary?
How would Hillary know about it in the first place, if it's such a damned secret?
a reply to: beezzer
Exactly. Why would you vote for anything you can't read openly or discuss?? It makes no sense. What if written in there was something that said if passed you have to "face rape" every member who voted for it and that they must sell their wives and children in to slavery???
Sure, that would be unlikely, although somewhat appropriate at this point, but seriously, there could be anything in there. Literally anything at all like we are now in debt to "so-n-so" for 100 trillion dollars with interest and these people are not only going to vote on secret legislation but fast track it.
Worse yet, it's not totally secret even. Hell, some of it has been released and we know at least that part is completely criminal so nobody has an excuse even. They know at least what we know and that alone is enough to say "NO" and "F-U!!"
It's just ridiculous. I swear somewhere, someone is sitting in some comfy chair laughing their ass off right now saying to themselves I cannot believe how dumb these people are. You'd have to be "full retard" to even consider such a thing as believable. Any normal person in their right mind when being handed this to vote on would just laugh and throw it in the trash like a bad joke.
Exactly. Why would you vote for anything you can't read openly or discuss?? It makes no sense. What if written in there was something that said if passed you have to "face rape" every member who voted for it and that they must sell their wives and children in to slavery???
Sure, that would be unlikely, although somewhat appropriate at this point, but seriously, there could be anything in there. Literally anything at all like we are now in debt to "so-n-so" for 100 trillion dollars with interest and these people are not only going to vote on secret legislation but fast track it.
Worse yet, it's not totally secret even. Hell, some of it has been released and we know at least that part is completely criminal so nobody has an excuse even. They know at least what we know and that alone is enough to say "NO" and "F-U!!"
It's just ridiculous. I swear somewhere, someone is sitting in some comfy chair laughing their ass off right now saying to themselves I cannot believe how dumb these people are. You'd have to be "full retard" to even consider such a thing as believable. Any normal person in their right mind when being handed this to vote on would just laugh and throw it in the trash like a bad joke.
a reply to: mOjOm
In keeping with the thread, Hillary should have no knowledge of the bill because she is not an active member of congress. So Bernie calling her out on it is a non sequitur.
As for the bill itself, I can only surmise that it contains such draconian elements that will alter the US in such a fashion that after 4 years, knowledge of the contents of the bill will become quite apparent, but by then, it'll be too late to do anything about it.
In keeping with the thread, Hillary should have no knowledge of the bill because she is not an active member of congress. So Bernie calling her out on it is a non sequitur.
As for the bill itself, I can only surmise that it contains such draconian elements that will alter the US in such a fashion that after 4 years, knowledge of the contents of the bill will become quite apparent, but by then, it'll be too late to do anything about it.
originally posted by: seeker1963
a reply to: FyreByrd
Why don't Bernie tell us what's in it then?
Same with all the rest who have read it but say they are forbidden to talk about it! That would be a shoo in for anyone who is running to say FU to Obama and tell us serfs what the bill actually will do to destroy our economy!
Waiting.....................
They can't. If they speak out they will go to jail and everything they own will be confiscated leaving their families with nothing.
Most likely any media outlet that facilitated the release of that information would also be taken out of business if they didn't cut the feed as soon as that information started coming out.
Last, anything they say can easily be dismissed. As part of the process you can read the bill in a secluded room (if you get to be in the know) but you cannot take any notes or photographs of it, and you have a guard watching over you the whole time. You can write notes but they are confiscated and burned before you leave the room.
The best anyone could ever do is a summary and no one wants to put themselves at risk over a summary. Especially when they hope to actually repeal it once the full text is known.
Also, keep in mind that it's national security, with the way the laws are written now if you were taken for this you would most likely be going to a black site, where you would get off easy if you got the same treatment Manning got (stripped naked in a cell, forced to take medication, and left in solitary confinement with no legal access for years).
If I were a Senator I would try and do it. Take a pad of paper and a spy pen set to record (or maybe a suit button recorder). Write the notes and talk to myself as I do it. Burn the notes as I leave. Retype the notes from my speech later on in privacy. Then release it to wikileaks anonymously (with some proof of credentials). I fully understand why most wouldn't take that risk though.
edit on 12-6-2015 by Aazadan because: (no reason given)
The contents of the TPP were leaked:
https://__._/tpp/
But the politicians can argue it will benefit the country because the corporations and Wall Street will make more money even if the average person is reduced to living on food stamps.
https://__._/tpp/
But the politicians can argue it will benefit the country because the corporations and Wall Street will make more money even if the average person is reduced to living on food stamps.
a reply to: FyreByrd
While I applaud Bernie for his stance, (both in voting against fast-track authority and in calling on Hillary to make her position public sooner rather than later) IMO the only trade deal that would protect both American jobs and the environment should be pretty simple and straightforward.
First, it should include some basic principles to insure that differences in economies and standards of living aren't pitted against one another in a mad race to the bottom.
A good place to start would be to mandate that the only items to be traded "tax-free" are natural resources and food with the added caveat that neither can be sold below the market rate for that product, (if one exist) of the nation importing the product.
That way, those producing food and/or natural resources in the host country don't get undermined and/or find their livelihoods eliminated by foreign competition.
Secondly and probably most importantly, ALL manufactured products should be made within the economic confines of the nation they're to be sold in.
A much simpler way to put it is, "If you want to sell it here, build it here." Or, "If you want to sell it there, build it there."
If Toyota wants to sell cars here, I have no problem with them building a factory to manufacture them here with our workers in our economy and if Cadillac wants to sell cars in Japan, they can build a factory there. How simple is that?
There is no other way for any nation to protect and maintain their jobs and their own standard of living.
Finally, we should not trade any goods with any nation that does not employ environmental protection and/or human rights standards at least as stringent as our own.
Anyway, F&S for the OP and and big F&S to Bernie Sanders as well.
While I applaud Bernie for his stance, (both in voting against fast-track authority and in calling on Hillary to make her position public sooner rather than later) IMO the only trade deal that would protect both American jobs and the environment should be pretty simple and straightforward.
First, it should include some basic principles to insure that differences in economies and standards of living aren't pitted against one another in a mad race to the bottom.
A good place to start would be to mandate that the only items to be traded "tax-free" are natural resources and food with the added caveat that neither can be sold below the market rate for that product, (if one exist) of the nation importing the product.
That way, those producing food and/or natural resources in the host country don't get undermined and/or find their livelihoods eliminated by foreign competition.
Secondly and probably most importantly, ALL manufactured products should be made within the economic confines of the nation they're to be sold in.
A much simpler way to put it is, "If you want to sell it here, build it here." Or, "If you want to sell it there, build it there."
If Toyota wants to sell cars here, I have no problem with them building a factory to manufacture them here with our workers in our economy and if Cadillac wants to sell cars in Japan, they can build a factory there. How simple is that?
There is no other way for any nation to protect and maintain their jobs and their own standard of living.
Finally, we should not trade any goods with any nation that does not employ environmental protection and/or human rights standards at least as stringent as our own.
Anyway, F&S for the OP and and big F&S to Bernie Sanders as well.
Senators and Congressmen can discuss among themselves I think.
Hillary might not be included in that right now, but may have been when she was "in service".
Any new information she receives now could be considered obtained illegally?
It would ironic if she publicly states she has new knowledge of the TPP.
Sanders might be egging her into a trap !!!
Hillary might not be included in that right now, but may have been when she was "in service".
Any new information she receives now could be considered obtained illegally?
It would ironic if she publicly states she has new knowledge of the TPP.
Sanders might be egging her into a trap !!!
Flatfish...... you have just penned what most Americans think, say and devise. I could add nothing as I think bare minimum is best. Bravo, you hit
it on the head.
originally posted by: Flatfish
a reply to: FyreByrd
While I applaud Bernie for his stance, (both in voting against fast-track authority and in calling on Hillary to make her position public sooner rather than later) IMO the only trade deal that would protect both American jobs and the environment should be pretty simple and straightforward.
First, it should include some basic principles to insure that differences in economies and standards of living aren't pitted against one another in a mad race to the bottom.
A good place to start would be to mandate that the only items to be traded "tax-free" are natural resources and food with the added caveat that neither can be sold below the market rate for that product, (if one exist) of the nation importing the product.
That way, those producing food and/or natural resources in the host country don't get undermined and/or find their livelihoods eliminated by foreign competition.
Secondly and probably most importantly, ALL manufactured products should be made within the economic confines of the nation they're to be sold in.
A much simpler way to put it is, "If you want to sell it here, build it here." Or, "If you want to sell it there, build it there."
If Toyota wants to sell cars here, I have no problem with them building a factory to manufacture them here with our workers in our economy and if Cadillac wants to sell cars in Japan, they can build a factory there. How simple is that?
There is no other way for any nation to protect and maintain their jobs and their own standard of living.
Finally, we should not trade any goods with any nation that does not employ environmental protection and/or human rights standards at least as stringent as our own.
Anyway, F&S for the OP and and big F&S to Bernie Sanders as well.
I wish I could start threads. Would start on on the TPP. I think it is, in part, obviously, a chess piece in the "shift to Asia". There is a new "cold
war" going on between the USA and Russia/China/Iran.
China has been talking about a shift in their economy to a consumer based economy, much like America. China is also planning a new "silk road" and development bank which would compete with World Bank/IMF.
The new Silk Road is a massive development project which would change the face of trade/development on the Eurasian continent, down into Africa. This directly threatens US hegemony. China is also seeking to make their currency a reserve currency.
The TPP is a US led corporate injection into Asia dictating the rules of "trade" and undermining various governments sovereignty in favor of western corporations. It's an economic chess match in order to maintain US hegemony. The wars in the Middle East have had mixed results. Some success, some failure. Perhaps more failure than success.
Even the world bank executive who is now president of Afghanistan is talking with China about development. The USA is panicking. All US foreign policy is economic in nature. In the sense that resources must remain divided in the Middle East (Balkanized). There's a reason the Ottoman Empire was broken up. Oil companies wanted to pin various smaller nations against each other so that negotiating would be easily beneficial to the west. The west also seeks to keep the regions resources out of Russia/ChinaIran's hands. While flowing cheaply sold in US dollars.
Any smaller nation with either resources or a large disciplined labor force that sides with Russia/China/Iran is being targeted by the USA. Russia's periphery or surrounding nations are being pushed into the EU or NATO. Gaddaffi was killed as part of this new Cold War. They went after Assad as part of this new Cold War. Saddam the same. They have labeled Venezuela a threat to US national security as part of this new Cold War. Venezuela has oil and it has also marginalized World Bank/IMF. This explains the USA's coup attempts, it explains Obama's recent sanctions on Venezuela.
Basically, the TPP is part of the new economic Cold War being waged. Which has proxy wars under way and possibly out in the open confrontation between the US and China/Russia/Iran soon.
China has been talking about a shift in their economy to a consumer based economy, much like America. China is also planning a new "silk road" and development bank which would compete with World Bank/IMF.
The new Silk Road is a massive development project which would change the face of trade/development on the Eurasian continent, down into Africa. This directly threatens US hegemony. China is also seeking to make their currency a reserve currency.
The TPP is a US led corporate injection into Asia dictating the rules of "trade" and undermining various governments sovereignty in favor of western corporations. It's an economic chess match in order to maintain US hegemony. The wars in the Middle East have had mixed results. Some success, some failure. Perhaps more failure than success.
Even the world bank executive who is now president of Afghanistan is talking with China about development. The USA is panicking. All US foreign policy is economic in nature. In the sense that resources must remain divided in the Middle East (Balkanized). There's a reason the Ottoman Empire was broken up. Oil companies wanted to pin various smaller nations against each other so that negotiating would be easily beneficial to the west. The west also seeks to keep the regions resources out of Russia/ChinaIran's hands. While flowing cheaply sold in US dollars.
Any smaller nation with either resources or a large disciplined labor force that sides with Russia/China/Iran is being targeted by the USA. Russia's periphery or surrounding nations are being pushed into the EU or NATO. Gaddaffi was killed as part of this new Cold War. They went after Assad as part of this new Cold War. Saddam the same. They have labeled Venezuela a threat to US national security as part of this new Cold War. Venezuela has oil and it has also marginalized World Bank/IMF. This explains the USA's coup attempts, it explains Obama's recent sanctions on Venezuela.
Basically, the TPP is part of the new economic Cold War being waged. Which has proxy wars under way and possibly out in the open confrontation between the US and China/Russia/Iran soon.
originally posted by: Vector99
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
originally posted by: seeker1963
a reply to: FyreByrd
Why don't Bernie tell us what's in it then?
Because he would be arrested and charged with some very serious crimes.
Which is what is the saddest thing ever. Secrecy contracts can be legally binding to prison time. There is no secret you tell that should send you to prison when it comes to business, if it's a secret, someone somewhere knows it and will benefit most likely.
True but business has always been like that. That's the whole point in "trade secrets".
a reply to: JeanPaul
I think you're right about everything you just said!!! That's what I was assuming was going on as well, which I understand why they're doing it too.
The problem is that the way they are going about trying to hold on to economic power leaves everyone other than TransNational Corps a big fat loser.
These people are willing to sell out every man, woman and child alive to try and keep economic superiority. I can sympathize with that because it also effects me and others here directly if it's gone. But all they've done with that superiority since they obtained it is screw everyone over both us and them.
So it seems we are kinda screwed either way with this one. We hitched our cart to the wrong horse I guess.
I think you're right about everything you just said!!! That's what I was assuming was going on as well, which I understand why they're doing it too.
The problem is that the way they are going about trying to hold on to economic power leaves everyone other than TransNational Corps a big fat loser.
These people are willing to sell out every man, woman and child alive to try and keep economic superiority. I can sympathize with that because it also effects me and others here directly if it's gone. But all they've done with that superiority since they obtained it is screw everyone over both us and them.
So it seems we are kinda screwed either way with this one. We hitched our cart to the wrong horse I guess.
originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: JeanPaul
I think you're right about everything you just said!!! That's what I was assuming was going on as well, which I understand why they're doing it too.
The problem is that the way they are going about trying to hold on to economic power leaves everyone other than TransNational Corps a big fat loser.
These people are willing to sell out every man, woman and child alive to try and keep economic superiority. I can sympathize with that because it also effects me and others here directly if it's gone. But all they've done with that superiority since they obtained it is screw everyone over both us and them.
So it seems we are kinda screwed either way with this one. We hitched our cart to the wrong horse I guess.
Funny when even democrats latch onto "trickle down" economics. What's good for the top of the pyramid is good for the base. Too bad this doesn't mesh with reality as more and more capital becomes concentrated at the top. We've been sold lies and our "partisan" political system in the USA isn't so partisan on economic/foreign policy issues.
The divide is more so centered on social issues. Social conservatism (led by the religious) against social liberalism. It's quite a distraction.
new topics
-
DOJ Special Counsel Robert HUR Says JOE BIDEN Can Be ARRESTED After Jan 20th 2025.
Above Politics: 10 hours ago
top topics
-
More Proof of Lawfare
US Political Madness: 17 hours ago, 20 flags -
DOJ Special Counsel Robert HUR Says JOE BIDEN Can Be ARRESTED After Jan 20th 2025.
Above Politics: 10 hours ago, 8 flags
active topics
-
Results of the use of the Oreshnik missile system in Dnepropetrovsk
World War Three • 231 • : andy06shake -
Ok this is some BS now WTH
Rant • 23 • : doctordark -
I thought Trump was the existential threat?
World War Three • 55 • : andy06shake -
Anyone like the Scorpions?
Music • 16 • : andy06shake -
Well, here we go red lines crossed Biden gives the go ahead to use long range missiles
World War Three • 368 • : andy06shake -
The Acronym Game .. Pt.4
General Chit Chat • 987 • : JJproductions -
DOJ Special Counsel Robert HUR Says JOE BIDEN Can Be ARRESTED After Jan 20th 2025.
Above Politics • 10 • : angelchemuel -
Petition Calling for General Election at 564,016 and rising Fast
Political Issues • 89 • : angelchemuel -
-@TH3WH17ERABB17- -Q- ---TIME TO SHOW THE WORLD--- -Part- --44--
Dissecting Disinformation • 3379 • : brewtiger123 -
Mood Music Part VI
Music • 3715 • : Hellmutt