It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Secret Trans Pacific Partenership

page: 1

log in


posted on Nov, 16 2013 @ 07:07 PM
This is something that is not solely a US issue.

This treaty has 29 chapters, but only 5 of them have to do with trade. Most Americans don't realize this, but this treaty will fundamentally change our laws regarding Internet freedom, health care, the trading of derivatives, copyright issues, food safety, environmental standards, civil liberties and so much more. It will also merge the United States far more deeply into the emerging one world economic system. Initially, twelve nations will be a party to this treaty including the United States, Mexico, Canada, Japan, Australia, Brunei, Chile, Malaysia, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam. It is hoped that additional nations such as the Philippines, Thailand and Colombia will join the treaty later on.

There are some very good reasons why Obama does not want the American people to know anything about what is in this treaty. This agreement will impose very strict Internet copyright rules on the American people, it will ban all "Buy American" laws, it will give Wall Street banks much more freedom to trade risky derivatives and it will force even more domestic manufacturing offshore.

The secrecy surrounding these treaty negotiations have really been unprecedented. The following is an excerpt from a recent article by Kurt Nimmo...

“Since the beginning of the TPP negotiations, the process of drafting and negotiating the treaty’s chapters has been shrouded in an unprecedented level of secrecy,” Wikileaks notes in a statement on the release of the TPP draft. “Access to drafts of the TPP chapters is shielded from the general public. Members of the US Congress are only able to view selected portions of treaty-related documents in highly restrictive conditions and under strict supervision. It has been previously revealed that only three individuals in each TPP nation have access to the full text of the agreement, while 600 ’trade advisers’ – lobbyists guarding the interests of large US corporations such as Chevron, Halliburton, Monsanto and Walmart – are granted privileged access to crucial sections of the treaty text.”


A leaked draft of the Trans-Pacific Partnership deal looks to have worrying intentions.
Australians could pay more for drugs and medicines, movies, computer games and software, and be placed under surveillance as part of a US-led crackdown on internet piracy, according to details of secret trade negotiations exposed by WikiLeaks

Read more: ml#ixzz2krKwmm

you will find the link to wikileaks in the above article. Below is the 96 page pdf link


I came across this story this morning, hope it hasn't been posted before mods.

I haven't read the whole draft yet it's 96 pages long. What are your thoughts on this Ats'ers, why all the secrecy? what don't they want us to know....
edit on 16-11-2013 by keenasbro because: link to wikileaks didn't work

edit on 16-11-2013 by keenasbro because: add link

posted on Nov, 16 2013 @ 07:13 PM
The world being sold out further from under our feet to corporations. What is up with 'secret negotiations' that will affect the public. How come our employees get away with pulling $#!t like this? Politics is probably the only place where when your employee does a bad job and lies to you, you can't fire him for 4 years and by the end of that term you know more about who is winning on American Idol than you do about law making.

posted on Nov, 16 2013 @ 07:52 PM
edit on 16-11-2013 by Blowback because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 16 2013 @ 08:12 PM
reply to post by keenasbro

The link to the Sydney Herald is not working, at least not here in the US. Are there any more credible newsworthy sources with the same information?

posted on Nov, 16 2013 @ 08:25 PM
reply to post by MountainEnigma

Try these links ml

The TPP is another step in the direction of total market deregulation in the interests of international big business and is another threat to Australia’s national sovereignty. What is at stake is democratic society’s ability to regulate a market economy in the broad public interest. The TPP would constitute a further shift of power towards corporate rule without the normal means of democratic accountability, such as elections, advocacy and public protest.
edit on 16-11-2013 by keenasbro because: add links

posted on Nov, 16 2013 @ 08:30 PM
reply to post by keenasbro

Brilliant post. Thank you for the sources.

posted on Nov, 16 2013 @ 08:49 PM
Let me guess, they "need to pass it so we can see what's in it?"

Shifty lil bastards.

posted on Nov, 16 2013 @ 09:02 PM
There is a lot going on and we as usual are kept in the dark, so the dark lords can realise their sinister dreams.
I could add links all day, there is a lot of opposition to TPP, It seems tptb want to keep the agreement details under wraps until the eleventh hour.

“It’s quite radical, the level of secrecy surrounding the Trans-Pacific Partnership,” said Matthew Rimmer, an associate professor at the Australian National University. “The [agreement] is kind of a stealth bomber – it flies under the radar and no one gets to see what’s in it until the big reveal, in which there’s very little scope for discussion about that content.”

If they become aware – that's the key. One of TPP's most abhorrent elements has been the secrecy under which it's been negotiated. The Obama administration's fondness for secret laws, policies and methods has a lot to do with a basic reality: the public would say no to much of which is done in our names and with our money if we knew what was going on. As Senator Elizabeth Warren pointed out, in a letter to the White House:

I have heard the argument that transparency would undermine the administration's policy to complete the trade agreement because public opposition would be significant. If transparency would lead to widespread public opposition to a trade agreement, then that trade agreement should not be the policy of the United States. I believe in transparency and democracy and I think the US Trade Representative should too.


posted on Nov, 16 2013 @ 09:23 PM
I want so bad to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the government is after us, but not this!

This is to much! I mean the more I read the scarier it gets.

Time to start prepping again, and maybe I should invest in guns.

posted on Nov, 16 2013 @ 09:42 PM
I used to work for a pacific trade partnership super PAC, I wonder if the two are connected somehow?

posted on Nov, 16 2013 @ 10:20 PM
reply to post by terriblyvexed

I'm with you, the more I read the scarier it get's

Found this link, this chapter covers Investment.

There are other articles on TPP here

posted on Nov, 16 2013 @ 11:10 PM


Just about anything Obama says *MUST* be seriously considered to be 180 degree diversions.

The more he emphasizes any particular point, the more we need to assume the opposite as the true intentions.

Even what would seem to be a slight tangent must be thought through as an opposite tangent (90 degrees "up" must mean 90 degrees "down")

Listen to Obama in the above video and think about his delivery methods and pay attention to the empiricals.

this article has some hard truths....

.... The “one world” economic agenda that Barack Obama has been pushing is absolutely killing the U.S. economy. As you will see later in this article, we are losing jobs and businesses at an astounding pace. And each new “free trade” agreement makes things even worse. .....

Their goal is to conclude talks by the end of this year. To be clear, this is not about helping business and industry in this country. As with everything this administration has done it is about “leveling the playing field,” and not only here in the US, but globally.

It is about global redistribution of wealth, which does not mean bringing other countries up to our standards. It means bringing our standards down, all in the name of equality.

the highlighted part could apply to any advanced industrialized signator

Trans-Pacific Partnership, Agenda 21 & Redistribution of Wealth via EO & Cap & Trade

posted on Nov, 17 2013 @ 12:57 AM


Absolutly wonderful source, thank you.

posted on Nov, 17 2013 @ 01:08 AM
It is all part of the drift towards globalism.

Globalism has no benefits whatsoever for the average person in the developed nations, as it puts them in increasing competition with third-world slave labor. Nor does it have much advantage for developing nations and third-world nations, except for a tiny proportion of the elite in these countries who will get rich while the billions of poverty-stricken people in these countries will notice little if any improvement: Their numbers are so vast that any prosperity accruing to them will be swallowed up.

Two metaphors:

1) The titanic is sinking and the lifeboats are deployed, but there are not enough lifeboats and most people are drowning. If the lifeboats go back to the swarm of drowning people and try to save them, they will only be swamped with desperate people who will pull them down, and everybody will die. If the lifeboats stay awya from the swarm, however, at least the people in the lifeboats will live. In this metaphor, the lifeboats are the developed nations. Globalism means dragging down the developed nations in a way that won't really help the world's poorest, either.

2) Imagine an inflatable kiddie pool in the desert full of water shared by a few people. Then one of them gets greedy and punctures a hole in the side of the kiddie pool, grabbing some of the outflow with a personal bucket but letting the rest of the water bleed out into the desert. Of course the desert will remain dry; the water will be lost in the enormity of the sandy wasteland. In this metaphor, the kiddie pool is the developed nation. The greedy guy with a pail is the elite, and the other people in the pool who are left high and dry are the middle classes of the developed nations.

TL,DR summary: Globalism destroys the prosperity of the developed world while doing nothing substantial to raise the living standards of the poorer nations. The only ones who benefit are the traitorous elites who sell out their own people.

posted on Nov, 17 2013 @ 03:27 AM
reply to post by keenasbro

I just sent a letter to my state rep, after making sure i had a good grasp of what's been released, but I'd be highly surprised to hear back.

But the NDAA, NSA, DOD, FEMA , NOAA, DOA it all makes sense now.

If this happens there will be civil unrest, and martial law is already prepared.

Congress better not buckle on this, if you can't read it in 90 days vote NO!!

posted on Nov, 17 2013 @ 10:40 PM
For those of us who enjoy watching a video to shed some light on the topic, TPP discussion coming from Professors, Research fellows, Uni Lectuers, etc: please follow the link provided.

The Title is. What does the TPP mean for Australia. The country specified is irrelevant if it is to be a binding agreement between the 12 Countries mentioned.

I need to add that there are 6 presenters, so you are looking at over an hour of veiwing.

The event took place on October 15 / 2013

About the event:

The Swinburne Institute for Social Research and the Faculty of Information and Communication Technologies is proud to present a public discussion of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and broader trade related issues on topics ranging from (but not limited to):

Digital rights
Cultural goods and services
Intellectual property
Biotech and GMO's
Health (and PBS)
International dispute settlement
Export/import markets, including impacts on food production
Foreign investment.
It is anticipated that panel members will each provide a short presentation summarising issues of interest before opening discussion up with the broader audience.

This event will be filmed and released under a Creative Commons licence and will be hosted on the Swinburne Commons.

The Panels

Panel 1: Trade in Cultural and Digital Goods and Services

Jock Given -
Swinburne University Professor of Media and Communications at the Swinburne Institute.
Angela Daly
Swinburne University Research Fellow in Media and Communications law, Board Member of Electronic Frontiers Australia
William Davis
Swinburne University
Matthew Mitchell
Swinburne University Lecturer IT/eCommerce
Panel 2: Health, Environment and Community

Nick Rose
National Coordinator Australian Food Sovereignty Alliance
Deborah Gleeson
School of Public Health and Human Biosciences,
La Trobe University
Bob Phelps
Gene Ethics
Frances Murrell

edit on 17-11-2013 by keenasbro because: add time of videos

posted on Nov, 17 2013 @ 10:57 PM
reply to post by terriblyvexed

Good for you.

You may want to take the time to view the video linked in post above.

I also found this snippet interesting, well comical at least.

Lori Wallach, a trade policy expert with Public Citizen, believes the focus on non-trade issues should raise eyebrows about how seriously the TPP is interested in promoting free trade whatsoever. She points out that, after all, the U.S. already has free trade agreements with six of the countries in the negotiations, and excepting Japan, “the 4 TPP countries without existing U.S. trade pacts have [a] combined economy the size of Pennsylvania.”

edit on 18-11-2013 by keenasbro because: to add

posted on Nov, 17 2013 @ 11:07 PM
reply to post by six67seven

Well you nailed it, according to the discussion panel (link) I have posted, that is exactly what they talk about.

This is a must watch discussion.

new topics

top topics


log in