The power behind TTIP

A site like OoL would be remiss if it did not address TTIP but no one’s writing much about it either because either it’s bleedin’ obvious to all or else we don’t really understand it fully.

We know Nige and crew had a protest in the European Parliament, we know America’s in this in a big way, we know it’s been mooted for some time.  There’s a brand of conservatism which even Old Labour people embrace which involves protection of one’s own workers, support of one’s own people and support of small and medium business.

There will always be multinationals if there are capital based economies and from at least before the Anti-Trust Laws of the late 1800s in America, the issue of the monopolist squeezing out local trade and price-fixing has been a major issue.  Within capitalism, it’s called crony capitalism.

It makes it hard for true conservatives to argue free trade because so much is not free trade in the least, except for the rigged markets.

Before going further, the first premise of this post is that even though we, as a people, do not seem to be able to combine to force governments  to do our will or our will has become so fragmented and ineffective under influence from people paid to do this, then at least we can educate people about things and every little blogger around the supposed free world can help do this.

The starting point, the first blockage, is that you and I might have radically different views of who runs things.  The left call it “the capitalists”, the right think it’s big governments and malignant bureaucracies.  The factor which is consistently ignored in all the discussion is what I’ve termed Them for a long time and though it’s a hydra, the source is the same crooked money in trillions, were it to have an artificial figure placed on it.

This factor, Them, is what runs governments. In America, there’ve been occasions it’s been painfully obvious.  Everyone knows of a JPM who were Peabody in the 1800s and there is evidence that they not only made a killing on various crashes and then booms but that they influenced when those actually occurred.

That lifts it into a whole new malevolent ballgame. We could start with the Panic of 1857, on which I previously wrote:

“It’s as though they know nothing about the hand in glove politics of the finance [here too] or the way this has always been the case. e.g.the Panic of 1857, caused by the collapse of the grain market and by the sudden collapse of Ohio Life and Trust, for a loss of five million dollars, in response to which the BofE lent Peabody $1m [an enormous sum for those days] but declined to support other firms.

Or the 1907 panic, when JP Morgan rescued banks and trust companies, averted a shutdown of the New York Stock Exchange, and engineered a financial bailout of New York City. Same players, same result – deeper capture of the financial infrastructure, completed in 1913 with the privately owned Fed.

This isn’t good economics – it’s monopoly of a malevolent type which not only doesn’t give a toss whether the free enterprise system survives or not but which can realize profits under any system people are currently under the yolk of.”

The banks are certainly part of it and most understand that these are greedy, rapacious superfirms our money bails out on the say-so of its bought minions, i.e. governments.  But it’s much bigger than that.

You can point to Henry VIII or Hitler and say that they were not under control.  Yes they were.  They were controlled by the money just as any venture anywhere has been. In the late middle ages in Europe, it was the Venetians, which became the Templars and they had agents in all countries influencing policy, e.g. Sarpi.  This not only determined when wars would be but even which scientific theories were smiled upon and which weren’t, e.g. Newton [backed by the Venetians] and Kepler, who wasn’t.  Have you ever explored Newton’s private life? It’s a huge field with so many examples.

A more recent example is the SPPNA in America. March 23rd, 2005, Bush, Martin [Canada] and Fox [Mexico] met in seclusion and adopted a recommendation of the CFR to set up an NAAC [North America Advisory Council] which was going to control, for all three nations, most of life in the region, not unlike the plan of the EU [Club of Rome]. I wrote this at the time:

From the site:

“The SPP does not attempt to modify our sovereignty or currency or change the American system of government designed by our Founding Fathers […] The SPP is a White House-driven initiative. ”

It only regulates these areas:

  1. defense
  2. the judiciary
  3. education
  4. social security

… and simply:

  1. opens the borders and creates access and egress via the state constructed NAFTA Superhighways
  2. creates a free economic zone within NA shores

… run by the North American Advisory Council [CFR appointees – p53]

The old defence of “conspiracy theory” was trotted out when mainly WND called them on it but once everyone else jumped on it, calling it the NAU, it was headed for the scrapheap in that form.

And still people did not see from where this was being generated.  Who exactly is formulating and promoting these schemes.  Bush?  Over here – Blair?  How about Chatham House being the centre of the “thinkery”, along with Bilderberg etc. on the continent?

And start to explore these and you’ll find Tavistock, which goes back, in One Direction, to Rhodes and Milner, the Round Table groups and forward to Common Purpose, Mulgan, Demos, which combines nicely with Total Information Awareness and the Internet of All Things.

And what is the Chatham House rules about discussions?  Now why would that be?

The theory is a constant assault of newly generated schemes which arise, have their life, then disband or are abandoned.  The EU does this.  It forms committees to recommend, people you and I have never heard of or have heard of all too much, they recommend to the Commission, who adopt it and so they would, as they formed the committee, it then becomes a directive or recommendation, goes to Strasbourg, then to governments where it is automatically adopted, as the Blairs, Browns and Camerons owe their positions to these people.

And where do you or I get a look in?  Nigel?  We don’t. End of.

The average commuter this morning, this Friday – is he or she going to have the SPPNA or TTIP foremost on his/her mind?  The average mother? Most bloggers?

Nigel writes, at Breitbart:

Whilst TTIP may masquerade as being about free trade, actually it’s not. It’s about harmonisation, standardisation and a market place in which the giant corporates can dominate. 

As a former trader, the argument that making everything the same creates greater business opportunities is anathema. Differences in price, regulation and standards lead to a much greater volume of business and trade being conducted which inevitably leads to a more competitive, profitable market place.

Whether or not the NHS is directly under threat or can be excluded from TTIP during what will be interminable negotiations remains to be seen. But the fact that a disputes mechanism will be set up that has a higher authority than our own supposedly sovereign Parliament and Courts is not only undeniable, but in my view wholly undesirable.

And the public themselves, in large numbers, have begun to twig that’s something’s afoot.

We’ve got to this point of the post and still not given the official explanation of TTIP, the expurgated and well-spun version:

The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) is a proposed free trade agreement between the European Union and theUnited States. Proponents say the agreement would result in multilateral economic growth,[1]while critics say it would increase corporate power and make it more difficult for governments to regulate markets for public benefit.[2][3] The American government considers the TTIP a companion agreement to the Trans-Pacific Partnership.[4] After a proposed draft was leaked in March 2014,[5] the European Commissionlaunched a public consultation on a limited set of clauses and in January 2015 published parts of an overview.[6]

An agreement is not expected to be finalized before 2016.[7]

The bottom line, for old anti-Them warriors is that it is more of the same regulation, bureacucratic tying up and power more formally put into the hands of the Money which already controls things but not as efficiently as they’d like.

And of course there is the “bundling” factor – what also gets swept in alongside it at critical times when we’re looking elsewhere, e.g. Christmas, Bank Holiday etc. It’s essentially the harmonizing of the American crooks – CFR, TLC and so on, with the EU crooks.

The aim? As it always was – price fixing and the squeezing out of competition with spin-offs such as any national attempt at sovereignty or self-sufficiency is strangled. In the early 1900s, Free Trade v Protection was the second major issue after Capital v Labour.

Those two issues are still alive and kicking, this time as the TTIP. If it emanates from Them, it is bad, it cannot be for the benefit of the general populace, it does not shore up national economies in the least, it is to be opposed.

[H/T Wiggia]