Freedom fries is a political euphemism for French fries in the United States. The term came to prominence in 2003 when the then Republican Chairman of the Committee on House Administration, Bob Ney, renamed the menu item in three Congressional cafeterias in response to France’s opposition to the proposed invasion of Iraq.
Although originally supported with several restaurants changing their menus as well, the term fell out of use due to declining support for the Iraq War.
Following Ney’s resignation as Chairman, it was quietly reverted.
Beating The War Drums For Iran: How AIPAC Is Splitting America
Nowhere are the dangers of partisan disunity more apparent than in the United States’ handling of foreign policy, especially when it comes to Iran and the forces working to maintain it the latest boogeyman of U.S.
A dispute over American foreign policy in the Middle East is prompting an unprecedented schism between the executive and legislative branches.
Nowhere has this split been made more apparent than in the open letter sent by 47 Republican senators to the leadership of Iran on March 9. One faction of the U.S. government wants to maintain a policy of destructive regime change and isolation of Iran and its allies, while the other is considering a more moderate approach that starts with a nuclear deal and ends in potential peace between longstanding rivals.
According to its author, Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas, the letter was meant to educate Iran’s leaders about the nature of the American constitutional system so that Iran does not believe an agreement made by it and the P5+1 nations (the United States, China, Russia, France and the United Kingdom, plus Germany) will be binding.
Yet the letter was actually intended to destroy those negotiations, an outcome which fits squarely into the policies of Israel’s Likud Party government, which won Tuesday’s elections. Headed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the Likud Party has influence over the actions of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), a pro-Israel lobby group.
Indeed, Open Secrets reported that Cotton received hundreds of thousands of dollars from pro-Israel donors, including over $900,000 from the Emergency Committee for Israel, during his election campaign.
According to MJ Rosenberg, Cotton’s letter was likely written by AIPAC.
While the anti-Iran coalition may seem like it’s backed by every Senate Republican, it is not. Seven of the Senate’s current 54 Republicans refused to sign Cotton’s letter, revealing a more level-headed approach to an issue that is being promoted among partisan lines.
Those seven senators deserve to be named for not following the herd and goading the U.S. into another war in the Middle East. They are Lamar Alexander (Tenn.), Dan Coats (Ind.), Thad Cochran (Miss.), Susan Collins (Maine), Robert Corker (Tenn.), Jeff Flake (Ariz.), and Lisa Murkowski (Alaska). Col. Lawrence B. Wilkerson(Ret.), Secretary of State Colin Powell’s chief of staff from 2002 to 2005, described them as “The Magnificent Seven” in a recent Huffington Post article.
“Many of the 47 who did sign the letter followed the herd instinct to hurt the president and now wish they had not,” Wilkerson wrote. “I commend, however, most strongly the seven. They refused to join the herd no matter the thundering of its hooves.”
IMHO … again they are showing disrespect and total disregard to POTUS
WASHINGTON — The fractious debate over a possible nuclear deal with Iran escalated on Monday, March 9, as 47 Republican senators warned Iran about making an agreement with President Obama, and the White House accused them of undercutting foreign policy.
In a rare direct congressional intervention into diplomatic negotiations, the Republicans signed an open letter addressed to “leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran” declaring that any agreement without legislative approval could be reversed by the next president “with the stroke of a pen.”
The letter appeared aimed at unraveling a framework agreement even as negotiators grew close to reaching it. Mr. Obama, working with leaders of five other world powers, argues that the pact would be the best way to keep Iran from obtaining a nuclear bomb. But critics from both parties say that such a deal would be a dangerous charade that would leave Iran with the opportunity to eventually build weapons that could be used against Israel or other foes.
While the possible agreement has drawn bipartisan criticism, the letter, signed only by Republicans, underscored the increasingly party-line flavor of the clash.
Just last week, the Republican House speaker, John A. Boehner, gave Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel the platform of a joint meeting of Congress to denounce the developing deal, and Senate Republicans briefly tried to advance legislation aimed at forcing Mr. Obama to submit it to Congress, alienating Democratic allies.
NOT EVERYTHING SEEMS KOSHER … IN OTHER WORDS, IT SMELLS FISHY
WE NEED TO EDUCATE OURSELVES, STAY INFORMED AND BE ACTIVE
The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is a proposed regional regulatory and investment treaty. As of 2014, twelve countries throughout the Asia-Pacific region have participated in negotiations on the TPP: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the United States, and Vietnam.
The proposed agreement began in 2005 as the Trans-Pacific Strategic Partnership Agreement (TPSEP or P4). Participating countries set the goal of wrapping up negotiations in 2012, but contentious issues such as agriculture, intellectual property, and services and investments have caused negotiations to continue into the present, with the last round meeting in Ottawa from 3–12 July 2014. Implementation of the TPP is one of the primary goals of the trade agenda of the Obama administration in the United States of America.
On 12 November 2011, the nine Trans-Pacific Partnership countries announced that the TPP intended to “enhance trade and investment among the TPP partner countries, to promote innovation, economic growth and development, and to support the creation and retention of jobs.” Some global health professionals, internet freedom activists, environmentalists, organized labor, advocacy groups, and elected officials have criticized and protested the negotiations, in large part because of the proceedings’ secrecy, the agreement’s expansive scope, and controversial clauses in drafts leaked to the public.
On 16 October 2014, WikiLeaks released a second updated version of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Intellectual Property Rights Chapter.
~~History~~
The TPSEP was previously known as the Pacific Three Closer Economic Partnership (P3-CEP), its negotiations launched on the sidelines of the 2002 APEC Leaders’ Meeting in Los Cabos, Mexico, by Prime Ministers Helen Clark of New Zealand, Goh Chok Tong of Singapore and Chilean President Ricardo Lagos. Brunei first took part as a full negotiating party in the fifth round of talks in April 2005, after which the trade bloc became known as the Pacific-4 (P4). Although all original and negotiating parties are members of theAsia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), the TPSEP and TPP are not APEC initiatives. However, the TPP is considered to be a pathfinder for the proposed Free Trade Area of the Asia Pacific (FTAAP), an APEC initiative.
The original agreement was concluded by Brunei, Chile, New Zealand and Singapore on 3 June 2005, and entered into force on 28 May 2006 for New Zealand and Singapore, 12 July 2006 for Brunei, and 8 November 2006 for Chile.
It is a comprehensive agreement, affecting trade in goods, rules of origin, trade remedies, sanitary and phyto-sanitary measures, technical barriers to trade, trade in services, intellectual property, government procurement and competition policy. Among other things, it called for reduction by 90 percent of all tariffs between member countries by 1 January 2006, and reduction of all trade tariffs to zero by the year 2015.
On the last day of the 2010 APEC summit, leaders of the nine negotiating countries endorsed the proposal advanced by US President Barack Obama that set a target for settlement of negotiations by the next APEC summit in November 2011.
However, negotiations have continued through 2012, 2013 and 2014.
President Obama nominated Robert Holleyman as deputy US trade representative. If confirmed by the US Senate, Holleyman will help lead the effort to pass the controversial Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal.
Notably, Holleyman is a former lobbyist who led efforts to pass the Stop Online Piracy Act legislation, better known as SOPA, when he was leader of the Business Software Alliance. The SOPA debate (along with its sister legislation, PROTECT-IP, in the Senate) brought a spotlight on industry efforts to undermine Internet freedom through what many considered to be draconian intellectual property policy.
Critics have pointed out, the leaked TPP documents relating to TPP negotiations reveal that the United States is seeking to resurrect portions of the SOPA bill through the TPP, namely, holding Internet Service Providers liable for hosting copyright infringement and extending the copyright life of certain corporate-owned copyrights. As Washington Post blogger Henry Farrell noted, the proposed TPP provisions suggest the deal will advance intellectual property rules that “could not be achieved through an open democratic process.”
During the SOPA debate, Holleyman was chief executive of the Business Software Alliance, a trade group for software companies including IBM. Holleyman commended then – Judiciary Chairman Lamar Smith for his work in sponsoring SOPA and for pushing for its passage. In 2012, as the bill worked its way through Congress, the BSA spent over $1.6 million on lobbying. After widespread outrage against the bill, which eventually failed, BSA withdrew official support and sought similar policy changes through other legislation.
~~What is The TPP?~~
Anonymous
~~Published on Nov 11, 2013~~
The Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (or TPP for short) is being negotiated in secret between more than 12 countries around the Pacific region. Find out why it poses a huge threat to your digital freedoms.
~~TPP: The Dirtiest Trade Deal You’ve Never Heard Of~~
The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) could cost us our internet freedom, labor rights, access to affordable medicine, the safety of our food, and protections that keep our water and air clean.
It Is What It Is 