Eat, Pray, Starve: What Tim Kaine Didn’t Learn During His Time in Honduras

RELIGION
HONDURAS
TIM KAINE

The vice-presidential nominee supports policies that hurt the country that was the “turning point” in his life.

By Greg GrandinTwitter

TODAY 11:18 AM

Democratic vice presidential candidate Tim Kaine (AP Photo / Lauren Victoria Burke)


Early in Hillary Clinton’s primary contest against Bernie Sanders, Berta Cáceres, an indigenous environmental leader in Honduras, was murdered by a coup regime that Clinton, as Secretary of State, helped consolidate in power. Apart for one quick statement denying any wrongdoing—“simply nonsense,” a spokesman said of the charges that Clinton was in anyway responsible for Cáceres’s killing—the Clinton campaign largely ignored the issue. As far as I know, the only journalist who asked Clinton directly about Honduras was Juan González, during Clinton’s interview with the editorial board of the New York Daily News. Clinton provided a wordy and vague answer. She admitted that the situation was bad, that activists were being slaughtered, but insisted that at the time she “managed a very difficult situation, without bloodshed, without a civil war, that led to a new election. And I think that was better for the Honduran people.” For the most part, criticism of Clinton on Honduras largely stayed on the margins of the primary process, even as the killing in Honduras continued and evidenced mounted that Washington was once again was funding old-school death squads (see the invaluable investigation by Annie Bird).


Now, having beat back that part of the Democratic rank-and-file that cares about dead feminist activists in small third-world countries, the Clinton campaign has gone full Sun Tzi, turning its Honduran weak point into a strength, or, à la Karl Rove, its vulnerability into a virtue.

In picking Virginia Senator Tim Kaine as her running mate, the campaign has front-and-centered Honduras— as a victim of Clinton’s realpolitik neoliberalism but as a sacred space of healing poverty.

Kaine, a Catholic, spent nine months in Honduras, from 1980 to 1981, in the Jesuit mission in El Progreso, very close to the company towns and plantations of the storied multinational banana company, United Fruit.

The sojourn, Kaine says, changed his life. Honduras “was really the turning point in my life. I was at Harvard Law School and didn’t know what I wanted to do with my life. And I took a year off and worked with Jesuit missionaries in Honduras,” Kaine told CNN’s Candy Crowley. “Every day I think of the lessons I learned from my friends there,” Kaine said elsewhere. The experience, he says, set him on his life’s journey to fight for social justice. Honduras “made him who he is,”said Kaine’s mother, Kathleen.

Majority Oppose Chapter 11 of NAFTA

Majority Oppose Chapter 11 of NAFTA

By Dana Gabriel http://www.borderfirereport.net/dana-gabriel/majority-oppose-chapter-11-of-nafta.html

A recent binational poll commissioned by the Council of Canadians, found that the majority of Americans and Canadians oppose provisions found in Chapter 11 of NAFTA. The poll found that 70% believe that energy corporations should not be allowed to sue governments for changes to policy that protect the environment and promote the public interest. Over half of the complaints filed under Chapter 11 of the agreement, have challenged environmental policies. Past polls have indicated that the majority also reject the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) and deeper integration into a North American Union. Continental integration is being achieved on many different levels and this includes through environmental commitments.

Chapter 11 of NAFTA grants foreign investors the right to sue member nations, if they feel that their profits have been restricted. Corporations have used this new power to challenge and even overturn labour, health and environmental laws. This new poll demonstrates that there is a desire for significant changes to be made to NAFTA. President Barack Obama has promised to renegotiate labour and environmental provisions under the agreement. Chapter 11 severely undermines our sovereignty. In many cases it is not being used to defend trade, but rather to challenge and override domestic laws.

When an investor files a suit under Chapter 11 of NAFTA, it does not mean that they will win. Increasingly, it is being used to intimidate and threaten governments who in many instances wish to avoid arbitration. In August of 2008, Dow Agrosciences served a notice of intent under Chapter 11. This was due to the province of Quebec’s decision to ban the sale, as well as certain uses of lawn pesticides containing the company’s active ingredient 2,4-D. Many support the ban and this includes medical and environmental officials. The province of Ontario is also working on a similar measure. Perhaps feeling that their case might be weak, Dow has not proceeded any further. They also might be waiting for several long standing cases to be settled that could set new precedents. Many feel that more stringent standards should be imposed by provincial health regulators. Chapter 11 undermines the decision making process of democratically elected governments. Through the SPP, pesticide regulations are being harmonized and as a result, Canada has lowered its standards.

North American integration is being accomplished through trinational environmental commitments. In June of 2008, the Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC) was established to assist in coordinating environmental policies and it is closely tied to NAFTA. It is also being used to implement elements of the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation. The CEC is working in conjunction with the governments of Mexico, the U.S., and Canada, setting up a continental strategy to identify environmental concerns. This could be used to further bind the three countries together, using the environment as the pretext. It is also another example of putting more power in the hands of unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats and organizations. Unfortunately, many solutions being offered to combat environmental issues are in the form of more taxes and more governmental control over our lives.

Canada does not have a national carbon cap-and-trade system in place, but some provinces have begun working on a shared market. There is a push to create a North American integrated carbon market. Recently, the European Union proposed a global system for trading carbon credits. They are urging developed nations to sign on, in an effort to curb greenhouse gas emissions. Such a global tax would definitely generate billions of dollars, but it would also be a financial burden for many. My fear is that any global solution could very well be at the expense of our freedoms and sovereignty.

NAFTA best serves corporate interests and does not represent true free trade. You know something is drastically wrong when Chapter 11 of the agreement essentially grants corporations more rights than national citizens. It might be popular to blame trade deals for all our economic woes, but they are only one part of our failed economic system. Congressman Ron Paul, who also ran as a Republican presidential candidate, explained it like this. “Free trade is not complicated, yet NAFTA and CAFTA are comprised of thousands of pages of complicated legal jargon. All free trade really needs is two words: Low tariffs. Free Trade does not require coordination with another government to benefit citizens here.” Could it really be that simple? Forget about renegotiating NAFTA. The time has come to scrap the trade accord in its entirety!

Free Trade: Passing The Baton to Obama

By Dana Gabriel

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Free-Trade-Passing-The-Ba-by-Dana-Gabriel-090122-767.html

When it comes to further advancing free trade initiatives, it really makes no difference which party controls, congress or the presidency. Democratic President Bill Clinton signed the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and Republican President George W. Bush did likewise with the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA). Any U.S. trade deal that has been negotiated and signed since NAFTA is based on that failed model. President Barack Obama voted against CAFTA when he was a senator and has come out against the U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement (FTA). He has promised to renegotiate NAFTA which could be used to jump-start the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) and plans for a North American Union. It could also serve to further spread the NAFTA model to the hemisphere.

Out of the ashes of the failed Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) came CAFTA. It expanded NAFTA’s free trade zone to El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Guatemala, Costa Rica and the Dominican Republic. Bush signed the agreement into law on August 2, 2005, after it had passed the House of Representatives under very questionable circumstances. It was hailed as a milestone for trade initiatives in the Americas and as an opportunity to create new jobs and open new markets for American products. CAFTA, like other free trade agreements, has failed to deliver on the promise of prosperity and has served to further benefit multinational corporations. It has been a rough ride and on January 1, 2009, Costa Rica became the last member country to enter into the agreement. This was not before they had to make some changes, including privatization of certain parts of their economy. Free Trade deals such as NAFTA and CAFTA, have been used to lock member countries into a framework that further favors investor rights and protections.

Much like NAFTA, CAFTA also granted corporations and foreign investors a new set of rights and privileges whereby they can sue member nations, if they feel their profits have been restricted. In December of 2008, Pacific Rim Mining Corp. threatened to sue the government of El Salvador under CAFTA, and filed a notice of intent. The company claims that despite compliance with current laws in place, they have been denied permits to begin mining silver and gold. Pacific Rim says that they have invested some $75 million and could be seeking up to $200 million in monetary damages and potential lost profits. Some scientists, along with citizen and environmental groups, have warned that the project poses a serious threat to local water supplies. This comes in the midst of governmental debates in El Salvador, pertaining to new mining laws. If the dispute is not resolved by March 9, 2009, Pacific Rim will be able to begin arbitration hearings. CAFTA includes a dispute-resolution mechanism similar to NAFTA’s chapter 11. Trade deals have been used to smuggle through a new set of transnational corporate rights. As a result, foreign investors and corporations have been given the power to challenge and even overturn labour, health, and environmental laws.

Obama has promised to renegotiate NAFTA in order to strengthen labour and environmental provisions. There are many who want him to do the same with CAFTA. In an article he wrote entitled ‘Why I Oppose CAFTA’ he stated, “Globalization is not someone’s political agenda. It is a technological revolution that is fundamentally changing the world’s economy, producing winners and losers along the way. The question is not whether we can stop it, but how we respond to it.” Does this mean we should just accept and embrace it? Try and tell that to the millions around the world who live in poverty and are resisting globalization. Ron Paul, who ran as a Republican presidential candidate, advocated real change which sparked an organic grassroots movement. He commented, “CAFTA was driven by politics and nothing more. Multinational corporations and political globalists share the same goals, namely the centralization of political power in international bodies and the diminution of national sovereignty.” In hopes of maybe trying to resurrect a revised version of the FTAA, Bush launched the ‘Pathways to Prosperity in the Americas’ initiative in September of 2008. It is modeled after the SPP and the U.S.-EU Transatlantic Economic Council. NAFTA and the SPP are precursors to a North American Union. Combined with CAFTA and other bilateral and regional deals, it could facilitate a larger multilateral agreement. What does an Obama presidency mean for the pending U.S.-Colombia FTA?

Even before taking the oath of office, there was already pressure for Obama to use his influence to get the U.S.-Colombia FTA passed. Recently, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced that Obama will continue to support Plan Colombia, but she said it did require some adjustments. Plan Colombia is part of the disastrous war on drugs. It was launched by the Clinton administration and has failed to reduce the flow of illegal drugs into the U.S. and has led to more violence and corruption in Colombia. With Obama further committing to this initiative, I believe that it holds well for the U.S.-Colombia FTA. He could get assurances from the Colombian government to better uphold human rights, and curb violence being perpetrated against labour leaders. After a few concessions are made to the agreement, Obama could give it his stamp of approval. The Democrats could then claim victory for the Colombian people and labour movements around the world. This would demonstrate Obama’s willingness to honor labour and human rights standards. With the current global economic crisis, many believe that the U.S. ratifying this trade agreement, would send a positive message to the rest of the world. It is a direct result of our monetary policies, government managed free trade agreements, and globalization, that we find ourselves in such economic dire straits.

Obama does have a clear advantage of preceding one of the most unpopular presidents in American history. In many ways, Bush is meant to take the fall and have everything blamed on him. His failures will be used as a steppingstone for the new administration. The global elite have passed the baton to Obama and he will carry on with open borders, amnesty, free trade, a North American Union agenda and the push towards world governance. He will be able to accomplish things that Bush and past presidents initiated, but were unable to complete. Many have been trapped in the whole fake left-right paradigm, designed to divide and conquer and neutralize any true opposition. With Obama, the propaganda masters have done a magnificent job mass marketing and packaging him for the masses. His popularity and cult-like worship seems to even transcend party lines. Unfortunately, just like Bush, he has no intentions of upholding the constitution or protecting American sovereignty. Expectations have been set high and Obama will be able to get by on charisma and rhetoric for only so long. We need to judge our leaders not by their words or promises, but by their actions.

RAPING AMERICAN SOVEREINGTY AND A NORTH AMERICAN UNION

Raping American Sovereignty and a North American Union

by Dana Gabriel http://newworldordermustbestopped.com/DanasBlog.html

It is becoming harder to chronicle the treasonous, dirty, despicable acts perpetrated by our government. Our sovereignty should not be given away, nor should it be for sale to the highest bidder as it is something to protect and it further defines us as a nation. The enemies of sovereignty are many and some include the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP), the World Trade Organization (WTO), the North American Free Trade Agreement, (NAFTA), and the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA). Our government is in collusion with powerful private corporate interests, and they are working together to create a North American Union. Every nation has the right and duty to protect its citizens, and it ceases to exist as a sovereign independent country if it fails to defend and control its own national borders. Multinational corporations view borders as barriers to increased profits and envision a world without them. Much of America's key infrastructure has been sold or is being leased to foreign corporations. We are surrendering our sovereignty, and the corporate takeover of America is almost complete. Some will have us believe that doing away with our sovereignty will bring big rewards and will benefit all. Tell that to the middle class and working poor. The result of globalization has meant that we have exchanged self-sufficiency, independence, and sovereignty for dependency.


The WTO serves as a middleman, forcing nations to change its laws and brings unwanted meddling in domestic affairs. It severely undermines national sovereignty and allows for the domination of trade policies by multinational corporations. The WTO has given free reign and granted entrenched rights to the world's largest banks and corporations. It has the power to impose sanctions and lacks any real democratic accountability with hearings and disputes conducted by secret tribunals. It also has the power to overturn sovereign nation's laws in areas of tax, labor, environment, and consumer safety. The U.S. was forced to change tax laws relating to Foreign Sales Corporations, and the WTO rules that each year the U.S. must issue at least 65,000 H-1B work visas or be fined for not allowing enough foreign labor to enter the country. With more frequency, multinational corporations are turning to the WTO in an effort to change U.S. laws including zoning laws which could be changed by international courts. Former Republican House speaker Newt Gingrich said of the WTO, “We need to be honest about the fact that we are transferring from the United States, at a practical level significant authority to a new organization.” Our own laws should never be changed or overridden by a body of unelected bureaucrats. The WTO has lead to the loss of more sovereignty and democracy which has limited our decision making.


NAFTA has lead to the loss of millions of American jobs, it has created trade deficits with both Canada and Mexico and has accelerated the destruction of the middle class. NAFTA severely undermines our sovereignty and control. Under Chapter 11, new rights and privileges were granted to foreign investors operating in Canada, the U.S., and Mexico. It has lead to state, provincial and municipal governments being challenged by corporations using their new rights to undermine environmental and judicial decisions. Foreign corporate investors can sue NAFTA countries for cash compensation in secret tribunals if they feel their rights have been violated. Foreign investors have been granted more rights than U.S. corporations and American citizens. CAFTA is equally as devastating, and is essentially an outsourcing agreement that will lead to the loss of more jobs and it will gut all buy American laws which give preference to local companies. Under CAFTA, multinational corporations will have the power to challenge environmental and public interests laws. It could also undermine immigration laws, giving international tribunals the power to rule over Congress. CAFTA seeks to wipe out American laws, and along with NAFTA is being used to breakdown national independence and sovereignty. It was former secretary of state Henry Kissinger who called NAFTA a step towards a New World Order. Many who view NAFTA as a success want to use it as the model for the proposed Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), which would encompass the whole hemisphere.


The North American Union is being created incrementally, using evolution by stealth, and is being done at the expense of our sovereignty. It is being created by unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats, and SPP working groups who are writing policy initiatives. One of the leading experts on the NAU Jerome Corsi said, “The SPP is creating new trilateral memoranda of understanding and mutual agreements which should be submitted to the Senate for two-thirds votes as international treaties.” He went on to say, “They are sharing their laws and regulations so we can harmonize and integrate our laws into a North American structure, not a USA structure.” Bureaucrats are able to move about almost completely undetected and with little or no scrutiny. There is a real lack of transparency which makes this whole process undemocratic. The SPP was never debated or passed by the Senate, and the American people deserve to be consulted when they are losing their sovereignty and their Constitution is being trampled upon. Those who claim that the SPP is simply about open dialogue and cooperation are being anything but honest. We're talking about political and economic integration including a single North American currency, which would mean the end of our financial sovereignty, the merging of our laws, environmental, health and safety standards, a new court and tax system, and a new NAU constitution. Under the SPP, the U.S. and Canadian military are further merging their command structures. Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul said, “Any movement toward a North American Union diminishes the ability of average Americans to influence the laws under which they must live.” Inside a NAU there is no room for American sovereignty, and how can harmonizing regulations with Mexico and Canada not undermine our independence? Bureaucrats and corporate interests are shaping our future with seemingly no oversight, and as we shed more sovereignty, we will lose the ability to govern ourselves.


More and more of America's critical infrastructure, including highways, are being sold, leased, or manged by private foreign companies which constitutes a surrendering of our sovereignty. The Spanish company Cintra is financing and building the Trans-Texas-Corridor (TTC) and will lease and operate it as a toll road. Cintra-Macquaire consortium already has leases for the Indiana and Chicago Skyway toll roads. The TTC is to be the first leg of a NAFTA Superhighway and will be a borderless open transportation system that is the necessary infrastructure needed for a North American Union. Many of the trucks and freight trains filled with Chinese containers unloaded in Mexican ports will have Kansas City as a destination. To handle the increased flow of Chinese cheap goods, Kansas City will have an inland port, and part of the facility will include a Mexican customs office. It is to be staffed by Mexican government custom officials as Mexico wants the right to inspect their own trucks. More disturbing is that it is to be considered sovereign Mexican territory. Imagine a little piece of Mexico in the heartland of the United States. The Financial Services SPP working group has also outlined plans to improve Mexico's infrastructure using Canadian and American tax dollars. This will further facilitate the flow of cheap goods from China and benefit multinational corporations. All across America, already paid for roads and freeways are being converted into toll roads. Charging tolls for roads that have already been paid for is criminal, and furthermore the selling and leasing of key infrastructure to foreign interests threatens our sovereignty and security.


We are witnessing the destruction of a sovereign independent America as well as the transfer of power from our elected government to unelected, accountable bureaucrats. In many cases we are already powerless and bound by international treaties, which in some cases take precedence over our own laws. Any move towards a North American Union represents a betrayal of the American people, the Constitution, self-government, freedom, independence, sovereignty, our culture, and our values. Ron Paul said of the North American Union, “The real issue is national sovereignty. Once again, decisions that affect millions of Americans are not being made by those Americans themselves, or even by their elected representatives in Congress. Instead, a handful of elites use their government connections to bypass national legislatures and ignore our Constitution.” The attack on our democracy continues, and the raping of American sovereignty has left it a shadow of its former self. We are losing our ability to control our own destiny.