Continuing from Part 8 on the topic of country of origin labeling:

Transparency?

In this case, I’m going to go outside the scope of the TPP, but I think this would definitely relate to issues that affect Canada when it is dealing with its trade agreement with Europe (CETA).

Here is a member of the European parliament, Glenis Willmott, running straight into the policy of the globalist controllers despite the clear votes of the European parliament in her view. She runs into their spin and propaganda at every turn. Does it really cost so much to label the country of origin? Don’t consumers have a right to know? Etc. It’s clear what their agenda is worldwide after listening to this. They’re obviously following another playbook other than the commonsense views of ordinary people.

Country of origin labelling for meat in the EU

GlenisWillmottMEP | 4 December 2014

Glenis calls for country of origin labelling for meat, to provide European consumers with more information about the meat they buy.

Although she mentions that there are obviously products already that label food voluntarily, I wonder, based on my analysis, whether it will be feasible legally and technically for any business to do so under the global trade regime we’re talking about. In other words, this takes on a form of censorship or deliberate secrecy, the opposite of transparency. Myself, I don’t trust legislation as a method to empower us, because it can bring in all sorts of bad rules (intended or not), but sometimes empowerment can be the intention of those who support such legislation. The legislation may seem to limit freedoms for some, but what is the reality? A law might be an attempt to balance our relative powerlessness against the powerful who have already established their own global regime of how they want to do things.

---

Vote in the United States that Repealed their Legislation

House Votes to Remove Country-of-Origin Labels on Meat Sold in U.S.
By Tennille Tracy, The Wall Street Journal | 10 June 2015

. . . follows a series of rulings by the World Trade Organization finding the labeling discriminates against animals imported from Canada and Mexico . . .

The story spins it as “seeks to prevent a long battle,” but I suspect they didn’t have a choice from their point of view if they wanted to stay in NAFTA. Isn’t the power held by WTO rulings under NAFTA (and their financial penalties) absolute?

---

Sen. Stabenow Calls for Voluntary Country-of-Origin Labels on Meat
Wall Street Journal | 25 June 2015

. . . Following their win at the WTO, both Canada and Mexico are now threatening retaliatory measures totaling more than a combined $3 billion.

Senator Pat Roberts is quoted basically saying that even Stabenow’s proposal might not pacify Canada and Mexico.

But is there more going on in the background than governments posturing about retaliatory measures?

---

Along with all sorts of spin, the following article gives more details about the U.S. situation:

Labeling meat by country of origin on the way out
The TandD.com | 25 May 2015

. . . The WTO ruled May 18 that the U.S. labels put Canadian and Mexican livestock at a disadvantage, rejecting a U.S. appeal after a similar WTO decision last year.

The Obama administration had already revised the labels once to try to comply with previous WTO rulings. . . .

The powerful just steer the ship the way they want it to go, making it seem like there’s never any choice about the direction. Oh, a few oarsmen try their best supposedly but it just can’t be done!

Continued Part 10