Nexus - 1501 - New Times Magazine-pages

Page Content (OCR)

major conflict to the US Constitution. The broad definition of an Bush's special "fast track" trade negotiating powers expired at the "animal enterprise" may encompass most US businesses: "any end of June 2007. In a last-minute proposal, the US insisted that enterprise that uses or sells animals or animal products". The phrase _all trade agreements include a special "Peace Clause" that would "loss of any real or personal property" is elastic enough to include make its use of illegal farm subsidies immune from prosecution loss of projected profit. Protections against "interference" extend to _ by the countries affected. Between 1994 and 2003, such a Peace any "person or entity having a connection to, relationship with, or Clause denied developing nations any legal recourse in the face of transactions with an animal enterprise". the "dumping" of cheap foreign products that had devastated their A letter from the American Civil Liberties Union to Congress, agricultural communities. dated March 6, 2006, explains their opposition to AETA based on Oxfam notes that proposals included in the new Peace Clause the concern that First Amendment activities such as would actually allow the US to increase its farm support from demonstrations, leafleting, undercover investigations and boycotts under $20 billion to almost $23 billion. The EU proposal would may be punishable as acts of terror under the overly vague and allow an increase in farm subsidies from $23 billion to $33 billion. open-ended law. Poor countries, with no surplus to supplement their farmers’ Author Will Potter argues that the harsher amendments that income shortfalls, would have nothing to respond with—no global AETA brings to its predecessor, AEPA, are hardly necessary, as support, no economic power and no legal appeals. AEPA was successfully used to disproportionately prosecute the (Sources: Oxfam International, "US Seeks 'Get-Out Clause’ for SHAC 7 animal rights activists organised to expose the illegal and Illegal Farm Payments", June 29, 2006, http://www oxfam.org/ inhumane operations of Huntingdon Life Sciences—for "animal en/news/pressreleases2006/pr060629_wto_geneva; Paul Blustein, enterprise terrorism". "Trade Talks Fail After Stalemate Over Farm Issues", Washington David Hoch and Odette Wilkens of Equal Justice Alliance ask: Post, July 25, 2006) "How did this bill [AETA] pass the House?" It was placed by the House Judiciary 22. North Invades Mexico Committee on the suspension calendar, under Author Mike Davis points out that few which process bills that are non-controversial people—at least outside Mexico—have can be passed by voice vote. The vote on the bothered to notice that while all the nannies, bill was then held hours earlier than cooks, maids and gardeners have been scheduled, with what appears to have been only six (out of 435) congresspersons heading north to tend the luxury lifestyles of irate Republicans, the Gringo masses have .First Amendment present pve vored for the bill, and pens activities such as been rushing su (0 ey glorious budget ucinich voted against it, noting: "My . retirements and affordable second homes in concern about this bill is that it does nothing demonstrations, Mexico. e address the real issue of animal Protection leafleting, undercover Mee number of Non Ameneans ving in ut, instead, targets those advocating animal . . . exico has soared from : to one rights." investigations and million (one-quarter of all US expatriates) in (Sources: Will Potter, "US House Passes boycotts may be the past decade. The land rush is sending up Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act With A property values to the detriment of Little Discussion or Dissent", Green is punishable as acts locals, whose children are the New Red, November 14, 2006, http://www.greenisthenewred. com/blog/2006/11/13/aeta-passes- house-recap/; David Hoch and Odette Wilkens, "The AETA is Invidiously Detrimental to the Animal Rights Movement (and Unconstitutional as Well)", Vermont Journal of Environmental Law, March 9, 2007, http://www. vjel.org/editorials/2007S/ Hoch. Wilkens.Editorial. htm) consequently driven into slums or forced to emigrate north, only to face increasing "invasion" charges. The Gringo footprint is largest (and brings the most significant geopolitical consequences) in Baja California. One of the irresistible attractions of Baja is that it has preserved a primordial wildness that has disappeared elsewhere in the West. Local residents, including a very eloquent indigenous environmental movement, cherish this incomparable landscape, as they do the survival of an of terror under the overly vague and open-ended law. 21. US Seeks WTO Immunity for Illegal Farm Payments egalitarian ethos in the peninsula's small towns and fishing villages. On July 24, 2006, after nearly five years of global trade However, thanks to the silent invasion of the baby-boomers from the negotiations, talks at the meetings of the World Trade north, much of the natural history and frontier culture of Baja could Organization collapsed—perhaps permanently, say some be swept away in the next generation. economic analysts. In January 2007, trade ministers from the (Source: Mike Davis, "Border Invaders: The Perfect Swarm United States, the European Union, Brazil, India, Japan and Heads South", TomDispatch.com, September 19, 2006, Australia said they remained hopelessly stalemated, mostly on the http://www.tomdispatch.com/index.mhtml?pid=122537) o om da Bush's special "fast track" trade negotiating powers expired at the end of June 2007. In a last-minute proposal, the US insisted that all trade agreements include a special "Peace Clause" that would make its use of illegal farm subsidies immune from prosecution by the countries affected. Between 1994 and 2003, such a Peace Clause denied developing nations any legal recourse in the face of the "dumping" of cheap foreign products that had devastated their agricultural communities. Oxfam notes that proposals included in the new Peace Clause would actually allow the US to increase its farm support from under $20 billion to almost $23 billion. The EU proposal would allow an increase in farm subsidies from $23 billion to $33 billion. Poor countries, with no surplus to supplement their farmers’ income shortfalls, would have nothing to respond with—no global support, no economic power and no legal appeals. (Sources: Oxfam International, "US Seeks 'Get-Out Clause' for Illegal Farm Payments", June 29, 2006, http://www oxfam.org/ en/news/pressreleases2006/pr060629_wto_geneva; Paul Blustein, "Trade Talks Fail After Stalemate Over Farm Issues", Washington Post, July 25, 2006) leafleting, undercover investigations and boycotts may be punishable as acts of terror under the are overly vague and open-ended law. . SE 21. US Seeks WTO Immunity for Illegal Farm Payments On July 24, 2006, after nearly five years of global trade negotiations, talks at the meetings of the World Trade Organization collapsed—perhaps permanently, say some economic analysts. In January 2007, trade ministers from the United States, the European Union, Brazil, India, Japan and Australia said they remained hopelessly stalemated, mostly on the contentious issue of farm trade. What went uncovered in mainstream news sources was any analysis of the content of the negotiations: what exactly the coun- tries involved were offering, and what they expected in return. Of utmost importance to the Bush administration was that the US receive immunity from lawsuits by poor countries before 23. Feinstein's Conflict of Interest in Iraq Dianne Feinstein—the ninth wealthiest member of US Congress—has been beset by monumental ethical conflicts of interest. As a member of the Military Construction Appropriations Subcommittee (MILCON) from 2001 to the end 18 = NEXUS ...First Amendment activities such as demonstrations, www.nexusmagazine.com DECEMBER 2007 — JANUARY 2008