36 votes

unCOOL: WTO Infringes National Sovereignty. US Country of Origin food labeling overruled by Geneva-based bureaucrats!

The World Trade Organization overrules US laws requiring country-of-origin food labeling. These so-called free trade agreements seem to mostly about undermining national/local/individual sovereignty in favor of supranational bureaucracies and international corporations:


Note that the Obama administration is continuing to push the TPP (Trans Pacific Partnership) agreement which will bring more of the same...


(just one of several good DP threads about TPP)

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.


Glad I eat organic food, hope the organic food in Mexico is still good for me.

I for one

wants to know where the freakin food/produce/meat/ is coming from screw the WTO! F'k them! Get us out of that freakin UN agreement now!

It's time! Rand Paul 2016!

"Truth, Justice, and the American Way!"

this only confirms

what I say for years that freedom in general and free market are mutually exclusive with the so called "free trade".
You don't want others impose tariffs on your goods? OK, give us your sovereignity, money and freedom to be bribed by all the multinational corporations and then do what we want, or... We make tariffs on your goods.
Why the USA just doesn´t send the WTO official answer like: You want us repeal the law which 93% of our consumers want? OK, bye, don't expect us to pay you a penny. And if you want tarrifs to our goods export anyway, OK, expect our tariffs on the import. Can you win? Obviously not, we are the biggest importer in the world and this would only bring jobs back to us, so you'll see more goods with Made in USA label around the world.
But unfortunately even more obviously nobody can expect anything like that from the international corporate puppets like Obama.

But by God

Everything, including food, that comes from China MUST bear the stamp of Made In China...

I could rant a million words on this topic.

no law...

"Congress shall make no law …abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press" aside, I'm one of the 93% who is curious to know where their food is from. Food coming from Chile or China would both suggest different attitudes and practices regarding what goes on or into food.

Since this abridges the right to print words on a package it is an abridgment of the freedom of speech. Since the First Amendment forbids Congress making such laws, this part of the GTO Treaty is unconstitutional.


John Locke:

On Dissolution of Government: http://www.americanpatriotparty.cc Direct: http://www.pacificwestcom.com/oregonpatriotparty/Locke_Civil...

#217. Fourthly, the delivery also of the people into the subjection of a "FOREIGN POWER", either by the "PRINCE OR BY THE LEGISLATIVE", is certainly a change of the legislative, and so a "DISSOLUTION of GOVERNMENT". For the end why people entered into society being to be preserved one entire, free, independent society TO BE GOVERNED its >>>OWN LAWS, this is lost >>>WHENEVER they are "GIVEN UP" INTO THE "POWER OF ANOTHER".

#202: "...For exceeding the BOUNDS of AUTHORITY is NO more a right in a great than a petty officer, NO more justifiable in a king than a constable. But so much the WORSE in him as that he has more trust put in him, is supposed, from the advantage of education and counsellors, to have better knowledge and LESS REASON to do it, having already a greater share than the rest of his brethren. "

#222: "... whenever the "LEGISLATORS" endeavour to take away and destroy the property of the people, or to reduce them to slavery under >>>arbitrary power, they put themselves into a STATE OF WAR with the people, who are thereupon absolved from ANY farther obedience, and are left to the common refuge which God hath provided for all men against force and violence.

Whensoever, therefore, the "LEGISLATIVE" shall transgress this fundamental rule of society,

and either by >>>AMBITION, FEAR, FOLLY, or CORRUPTION, endeavour to grasp themselves,

>>>OR PUT INTO THE HANDS OF >>>"ANY OTHER", an absolute power over the lives, liberties, and estates of the people, by this ">>>>>>BREACH OF TRUST they FORFEIT" the power the people had put into their hands for quite contrary ends, and it devolves to the people, who have a right to resume their original liberty, and by the establishment of a new legislative (such as they shall think fit), provide for their own safety and security, (APP Note: See this in the Declaration of Independence) which is the end for which they are in society."

(APP Note: See this in Samuel Adams Statement within the Rights of the Colonists, 1772: "If men through FEAR, FRAUD or MISTAKE, should in terms renounce and give up any essential natural right, the eternal law of reason and the great end of society, would absolutely vacate such renunciation; the right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it is not in the power of Man to alienate this gift, and VOLUNTARILY become a slave.")

#218. Why, in such a constitution as this, the DISSOLUTION of the government in these cases is to be imputed to the prince is evident, because he, having the force, treasure, and offices of the State to employ, and often persuading himself or being flattered by others, that, as supreme magistrate, he is incapable of control; he alone is in a condition to make great advances towards such changes under ">>>>>>>PRETENCE of lawful AUTHORITY", and has it in his hands to terrify or suppress opposers as factious, seditious, and enemies to the government; whereas no other part of the legislative, or people, is capable by themselves to attempt any alteration of the legislative without open and visible rebellion, apt enough to be taken notice of, which, when it prevails, produces effects very little different from foreign conquest. Besides, the prince, in such a form of government, having the power of dissolving the other parts of the legislative, and thereby rendering them private persons, they can never, in opposition to him, or without his concurrence, alter the legislative by a law, his consent being necessary to give any of their decrees that sanction. But yet so far as the other parts of the legislative any way contribute to any attempt upon the government, and do either promote, or not, what lies in them, hinder such designs, they are guilty, and partake in this, which is certainly the ">>>>GREATEST CRIME" men can be guilty of one towards another."

#220. In these, and the like cases, when the government is dissolved, the people are at LIBERTY to provide for themselves by erecting a new legislative differing from the other by the change of persons, or form, or both, as they shall find it most for their safety and good. ..."


#237. "What, then, can there no case happen wherein the people may of right, and by their own authority, help themselves, take arms, and set upon their king (APP: OR LEGISLATIVE), imperiously domineering over them? None at all whilst he remains a king. 'Honour the king,' and 'he that resists the power, resists the ordinance of God,' are Divine oracles that will never permit it. The people, therefore, can never come by a power over him >>>UNLESS he does something that makes him >>>CEASE TO BE KING; for then he divests himself of his crown and dignity, and RETURNS to the state of a "private man", and the people become free and superior; the power which they had in the interregnum, before they crowned him king, devolving to them again. But there are but few miscarriages which bring the matter to this state. After considering it well on all sides, I can find but two.

Two cases there are, I say, whereby a king, ipso facto, becomes "NO KING" (APP: AND NO LEGISLATIVE), and loses ALL power and regal authority over his people, which are also taken notice of by Winzerus.

The first is, if he endeavour to "overturn the government" -- that is, if he have a purpose and design to RUIN the kingdom and commonwealth, as it is recorded of Nero that he resolved to cut off the senate and people of Rome, lay the city waste with fire and sword, and then remove to some other place; and of Caligula, that he openly declared that he would be no longer a head to the people or senate, and that he had it in his thoughts to cut off the worthiest men of both ranks, and then retire to Alexandria; and he wished that the people had but one neck that he might dispatch them all at a blow.

Such designs as these, when any king harbours in his thoughts, and "SERIOUSLY PROMOTES", he IMMEDIATELY GIVES UP all care and thought of the commonwealth, and, CONSEQUENTLY, "FORFEITS" the power of governing his subjects, as a master does the dominion over his slaves whom he hath ABANDONED.

238. "The OTHER case is, when a king makes himself the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>"DEPENDENT OF ANOTHER", and subjects his kingdom, which his ancestors left him, and the people put free into his hands, "TO THE DOMINION" "OF ANOTHER".

For however, perhaps, it may not be his intention to prejudice the people, yet because he has hereby LOST THE PRINCIPAL part of regal dignity -- viz., to be next and immediately under God, supreme in his kingdom;

and also because he (APP: OR THE LEGISLATIVE) BETRAYED OR FORCED his people, whose LIBERTY he ought to have carefully PRESERVED, into the POWER and DOMINION of a "FOREIGN NATION".

By this, as it were, alienation of his kingdom, he himself "LOOSES the power" he had in it before,

>>> without transferring any the LEAST RIGHT to those on whom he would have bestowed it; and so by this ACT sets the people free, and leaves them at their own disposal. One example of this is to be found in the Scotch annals."

(APP Note: Relate this to a national government who places its people into the hands of a world government (or organization), or under the control of foreign treaties - then Review the APP news letter on the Constitutional Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788 http://www.pacificwestcom.com/americanpatriotpartynewsletter & Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions http://www.pacificwestcom.com/candidates in regard to NULLIFICATION by each states OWN AUTHORITY, what must occur, and what are the protections of the states, with regard to when a national government becomes disingenuous to its "ORIGINAL COMPACT".)

#239. In these cases Barclay, the great champion of absolute monarchy, is forced to allow that a king may be resisted, and ceases to be a king. That is in short -- not to multiply cases -- in whatsoever he has NO AUTHORITY, there he is NO KING (i.e. NO LEGISLATIVE, NO PRESIDENT), and may be resisted:

for wheresoever the authority CEASES, the king ceases too, and becomes like other men who have no authority. And these two cases that he instances differ little from those above mentioned, to be destructive to governments, only that he has omitted the principle from which his doctrine flows, and that is the breach of trust in not preserving the form of government agreed on, and in not intending the end of government itself, which is the public good and preservation of property. When a king has dethroned himself, and put himself in a STATE OF WAR with his people, what shall hinder them from PROSECUTING him who is NO king, as they would ANY OTHER MAN, who has put himself into a STATE OF WAR with them, ..."

American Patriot Party.CC

Part of our 4 Historical Document Suggested Reading.

Only 20 pages in all, and all actual documents by the Founders.

As always with the APP it's FREE! So Read it and Get Educated!

RichardTaylorAPP - Chair - American Patriot Party.CC

John Locke #201, 202, 212 to 232; Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions 1798; Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788; Rights of the Colonists 1772.

they'll just tax you

and say oh well......

It's time! Rand Paul 2016!

"Truth, Justice, and the American Way!"

agreed! But when in your

agreed! But when in your lifetime has the constitution mattered? Certainly not in mine.

if anyone really cared

they'd boycott.

reedr3v's picture

I do. But they haven't noticed or cared.

It will take many thousands, probably millions of alert, awake consumers.

External sanctions for a war of attrition

This is exactly what is going on with this. We have been sanctioned by our own gov't and corporations for decades. Now it is finally starting to come from the 'outside', though we all know they are in the game together. It will be a very slippery slope from here on in, I believe.

Change is coming whether you can believe it or not.

Obama is pushing

for one global government before he hands over the reins to Romney. He has done so much to further the NWO with all the WARS designed to bring every nation under US-NATO control.

Now the final coup is to remove sovereignty from every nation and allow some super government to call the shots globally.

Of course in the background are the international foreign billionaires club of Central Bankers controlling the money, and therefore the world, as Rothschild always envisioned and planned.

Obama should not be allowed to push through this trade agreement. Nor should Canada or Mexico.

Yep - and next step is to disarm the citizens

Hence the meeting this month with the UN. All about registration, which is to identify who has the guns, so they can then confiscate them. this is exactly what they did in the EU.

RP R3VOLution

"before he hands over the reins to Romney"

While I want neither one anywhere near leadership, I am not so sure Romney isn't all for it and I am even less sure he will beat Obama. The rest of your post sounds right on course for either Romney the NeoCon or Obama the Marxist so does it really matter what Obama does now if Romney is just going to take up the same actions?

God help us all

Romney would be worse but I think Obama is being pushed out by the Bilderberg. They have their man in Romney.

But our man Dr. Ron Paul may still take the prize!

ECB at the centre of a “effective single supervisor

The World Central Banking agenda is coming together according to plan too. The European zone just fell under their financial reins under the ECB.
Won't be long before they push all the banks under the IMF domain. They feel they have us in Checkmate...question is will the world wake up in time?

"Under the deal, Spanish banks will be recapitalised directly by allowing a €100 billion EU bailout to transferred off Spain’s balance sheet after the European Central Bank takes over as the single currency’s banking supervisor at the end of the year.

The decision, taken by a meeting of eurozone leaders in the early hours of Friday morning, will be based on a move to put the ECB at the centre of a “effective single supervisory mechanism” for banks after an EU summit in December.

“We affirm that it is imperative to break the vicious circle between banks and sovereigns,” said a summit statement."

RP R3VOLution

Agree. And this is what they have been trying to do

from the very beginning long ago; Rothschild, control the money control the world. Obama was a key player in their plan, and so is Romney, who will continue to facilitate the NWO.

But somehow I do not think they are going to succeed, because of Ron Paul and all of us who are awake and many more starting to see the big picture. Germany is rebelling and so are people in Britain. The NWO do not have the military on their side. The military will stand with the people.

Romney is defintely in bed with them

Barclay's CEO Robert Diamond, who is involved with Libor-gate scandal, was in the middle of planning a fundraiser for Romney - Hello!

Not to mention all the GoldmanSachs money donated to Romney.

(Wonder if Jamie Diamond is related?)

RP R3VOLution

This is very important.

Thanks for posting.

Lord Acton, Lord Chief Justice of England, 1875 - "The issue which has swept down the centuries and which will have to be fought sooner or later is the People v. The Banks."