Greenpeace Leaks Big Part Of Secret TTIP Documents (bbc.com) 136
An anonymous reader writes: The environmental group Greenpeace has obtained 248 pages of classified documents from the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) trade talks. The group warns EU standards on the environment and public health risk being undermined by compromises with the US, specifically that US corporations may erode Europe's consumer protections. The TTIP would "harmonize regulations across a huge range of business sectors, providing a boost to exporters on both sides of the Atlantic," writes the BBC. After the Greenpeace leak was published, EU Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmstroem said in her blog, "I am simply not in the business of lowering standards." Meanwhile, Greenpeace EU director Jorgo Riss said, "These leaked documents confirm what we have been saying for a long time: TTIP would put corporations at the center of policy-making, to the detriment of environment and public health." You can be the judge for yourself. The leaked documents are available for download here.
Since the TPP and TTIP are often mentioned togethr (Score:4, Insightful)
The EFF has a great write up on how the TPP (the trans pacific partnership, another one of these shitpile laws) will affect anyone even remotely interested in technology [eff.org]. It's a great link to send around to anyone who's thinking "I'm not in manufacturing, why should I care?"
It's bad, folks. And even worse because in summer 2015, before the election, before both the GOP (!) and Dem candidate came out against the TPP, Obama fought and beat back his own party [thehill.com] to get fast track authority [theguardian.com] for approval, meaning now it's way easier for it to get approved, with no ability to strip out the bad parts or filibuster against it.
Re: (Score:3)
Global Elitists conspiring behind closed curtains. And Obama is one of them. GOP and DNC are both equally in bed on this one. There is NO functional difference on anything that really matters. The only thing that keeps people divided are bathrooms and sexuality. I guess that's enough of a circus to keep the people distracted while both parties are conspiring against us.
Re: (Score:2)
TPP is shit. TTIP is shit.
It is funny to see Americans complain about the shit in these agreements, when the worst shit was put there by their own government.
These trade agreements could be a force for good in the world, raising environmental standards and labor rights, while spreading prosperity. But instead, America uses them to push the worst aspects of our capitalist system onto other countries, like draconian IP laws and disregard for consumer privacy.
Re:Since the TPP and TTIP are often mentioned toge (Score:4, Insightful)
-I'm just sayin'
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Why is it funny? Is it funny when your government is corrupt and works against you?
Re: (Score:2)
I know PLENTY of people, both Liberal and Conservative that don't like these trade agreements. Part of the charm of both Bernie and Trump is that they are not from the Political Cabal that is set up in DC that keeps pushing this shit though.
And I doubt you are against capitalism, I think you're really against Corpratism. And Being Libertarian, I am against the creation of the state (corporations) controlling its creator via political bribes, threats and influence. IMHO the rise of PACs, Union Contribution,
Re: (Score:2)
Do you think our government or main stream media- CNN FOX MSNBC NBC CBS ABC or any of the newspapers including the NYTimes of WSJ have said peep about the TTP? Most Americans don't even know what it is and would be outraged if they understood it. This is Congress and the WH and the government operating as nothing less than a criminal gang. This is the 1%er doing what the 1%ers do- smashing democracy, destroying the 99%s living standards for their personal private benefit.
All these trade agreements have do n
Re: (Score:2)
Do you think our government or main stream media- CNN FOX MSNBC NBC CBS ABC or any of the newspapers including the NYTimes of WSJ have said peep about the TTP?
Apparently, they have said so little that you confused the names of two of them :)
Re: (Score:3)
TTIP would put corporations at the center of policy-making, to the detriment of environment and public health."
Yes. The trade partnership agreement will see corporations at the center of policy making... not like what we have now.
Re: (Score:2)
This just makes it official rather than implied.
Re: Since the TPP and TTIP are often mentioned tog (Score:1)
Official in what sense? These people have no actual authority. Any decisions stemming from them have equal weight: no moral authority, only the threat of physical violence.
Re: Since the TPP and TTIP are often mentioned to (Score:1)
Also, do we even have a need for the concept behind the word 'official' in today's world?
Re: Since the TPP and TTIP are often mentioned tog (Score:1)
Official on what sense? These people have no actual authority. Any decisions stemming from them have equal weight: no moral authority, only the threat of physical violence.
Re: (Score:2)
At least now corporations have to bribe politicians in each country separately. With this agreement they just have to bribe some judges.
Re: (Score:2)
We are easily distracted.
TTIP would put corporations at the center of policy-making, to the detriment of environment and public health."
Yes. The trade partnership agreement will see corporations at the center of policy making... not like what we have now.
It just gives them a seat at the table rather than having to bother with all that expensive lobbying and bribery, which are of course, barriers to trade.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. The trade partnership agreement will see corporations at the center of policy making... not like what we have now.
So, you're saying that there is some sort of trade federation, backed by a shadowy figure trying to control everything.... ..... I have a bad feeling about this .....
Re: (Score:2)
Obama recently visited the UK, and urged us to remain in the EU, citing international agreements such as the TTIP and pointing out that if we left we'd no longer be a part of them.
Best reason to leave the EU, ever!
Re: (Score:2)
Obama recently visited the UK, and urged us to remain in the EU, citing international agreements such as the TTIP and pointing out that if we left we'd no longer be a part of them.
Best reason to leave the EU, ever!
Yeah but can you imagine scameron and his tory mates with no oversight? We'd be worse off than the victorians!
tyranny (Score:1, Flamebait)
Imagine if vitamin D were only available at 1000 iu, more like 20 years ago, and everyone in your family needs 10,000 iu per day to be normal to stay alive. 2-5 cents per day in one system, perhaps $2-5 per day in the other, or your shorter, miserable life.
Re: (Score:2)
A tryanny of the few upon the many.
Re: (Score:2)
Well (Score:2)
Environmental damage is fungible (Score:5, Informative)
Greater effort toward universal compliance should be the objective.
Re:Environmental damage is fungible (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You seem to know nothing about EU rules on pollution and emissions. We require products made in China to meet all our standards for hazardous materials, and companies that outsource manufacturing to China have the pollution generated there counted towards their domestic liability. Stuff that is made by Chinese companies and imported is subject to tariffs if it creates excessive pollution in China.
Re: (Score:1)
It would be great if that were true. Unfortunately, most of it is not. Products imported from China are indeed required to meet European safety and environmental standards. However, pollution produced in China while making the product, its components and raw materials are not accounted for in any way.
Cecilia Malmström (Score:3, Insightful)
is in the business of pushing the TTIP through. At any price. There's a lot of talk about how it would increase exports in both directions, but when the single directed economic force that the U.S is meets the EU's myriad of smaller economic forces pushing in their own direction, then the outcome will only favor the U.S and its corporations.
The inevitable and intended outcome of the TTIP is a single US-EU economy dictated by U.S corporations, wholly favoring the U.S. The EU is in control of its own economies today, but the TTIP would change that. The EU MUST reject the TTIP to remain in control of its own economies.
Re: (Score:2)
Your tone is that of an expert (well I guess it's Slashdot) but you put "EU" in scarequotes as if you disagree with that acronym on some level. Harms your credibility. A lot.
But then, you did seem to suggest that the UK is the only reason the germans and the french aren't killing each other, which is really fucking stupid.
Why is no one asking the obvious question (Score:5, Insightful)
Serious question: Why is any part of a multi national trade deal classified information ? Why is this even a thing? No one has mentioned one single sound reason at any level of discourse why any of this is classified. I do not live under a rock but maybe I should.
Re:Why is no one asking the obvious question (Score:5, Insightful)
What is even more sad is we have to find out not from law enforcement or our gov officials doing the right thing. We are finding out thru leaks.
If you are hiding something like this behind 'classified' criteria then you probably are doing something you shouldnt be.
Terror turn about is fair play (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
If you want a serious answer I can give you one. If you want the real answer, wait 200 years or so.
A serious answer is multi-anything deals require compromise. In most compromises, most people aren't thrilled, but can be persuaded that its a good trade to get what they want. If you are only fed the bad and not the good by your (faction/country/religion) leader, what do you think will be the mob reaction will be? Supposedly if you keep it secret til all the issues are worked out, you get a wholly useful
Re:Why is no one asking the obvious question (Score:5, Insightful)
> Why is any part of a multi national trade deal classified information ?
The answer to that is classified. :-)
You mean you don't trust a government where the FBI director wants expanded law enforcement access to encrypted data [pcworld.com] but yet still has the gall to make laws in secret?
What are you? A commie for pointing out the government officials are hypocrites? :-)
--
First Contact is coming ~2022. Are you ready for a larger perspective?
Re: (Score:2)
...but yet still has the gall to make laws in secret?
On a side note: the whole idea of secret laws [wikipedia.org] is a bit scary. Not only do they enable governments to abuse their powers, it seems that the entire concept is specifically designed to allow just that. "We find you threatening, and we don't need no stinking reasons. Go directly to Jail. Do not pass Go. Do not collect $200."
What am I missing here? Where is Cold Fjord when I need him to enlighten me?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because otherwise, people who don't understand how something as complex as a multinational trade agreement is negotiated and written, let alone actual international trade, will start screaming about nothing.
Your "nothing" certainly means something to at least one party in the negotiations, or it wouldn't be a part of them. It might be "nothing" they decide to sacrifice on behalf of unknowing third parties, which the third party would see as a problem had they known about it.
I certainly am not competent enough to understand multinational trade agreements, nor do I have to be. I'm very good at designing and querying databases, but for understanding multinational trade agreements I would rather rely on a pletora
Re: (Score:2)
The negotiators are appointed by the elected representatives of the people. Ratification is decided by elected representatives of the people, with input from their constituents. There's no point in getting worked up over any particular draft prov
Re: (Score:2)
My sibling post [slashdot.org]
After posting the previous post I've seen some of your other contributions to this discussion. Don't bother replying to mine, you won't get a response from me, as I already regret the wasted energy of replying to you in the first place.
Thank you.
Re: (Score:2)
Not saying there isn't a problem... (Score:3, Informative)
...but Greenpeace has been repeatedly shown to be a horrible organization of eco-terrorists who often don't understand the science behind the things they protest. It got so bad even some of the founders left and renounced all ties to the organization. Patrick Moore in particular left them when they decided it was a good idea to try to push a universal ban of chlorine in drinking water. Moore is also known to have done a complete 180 on nuclear power issues once he educated himself on the matter. He has spoken at length about how the organization has very little in the way of scientific direction.
So, there very well may be a problem here - but I'd be entirely sceptical of anything Greenpeace has to say about it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Not saying there isn't a problem... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Exactly my thoughts, too: "Holy shit, Greenpeace did something useful!"
We don't have to listen to anything they say about it, because we can read it ourselves. So, even if they say stupid shit, I thank them anyway.
Re: (Score:1)
No Mod Points (AC from the Commander Taco days), but I agree. Greenpeace rarely does anything useful - usually they do stuff like destroy the Nazca lines, use the Willamette River as a toilet while hanging from the bridge - but for once, Greenpeace did something right. But I still consider most of them to be terrorists.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not willing to concede that there's no catch in this...
Re: (Score:1)
>That was a Republican lie in order to make Greenpeace look violent when they've never done anything violent
Speaking of lies, ramming ships is a violent act that Greenpeace commits:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjlCGR_ggbw
Active trespassing against others while your co-terrorists are being thrown off a ship is a violent act that Greenpeace commits:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_G_9hsxxuA
Spray painting animals is violent. Here's Greenpeace being violent towards animals:
http://www.greenpeace.org/inte
Re:Not saying there isn't a problem... (Score:4, Insightful)
Focusing on the messenger and ignoring the message doesn't make it any less valid.
i.e.
Why the fucks was TPP signed in secret in the first place??
Re: (Score:3)
You're right. We should take everything a group of people who are known to use violence, lies, and junk science to achieve their ends at face value. Excuse me if I prefer to get this sort of information from people who are more reputable.
Re: (Score:1)
We should take everything a group of people who are known to use violence, lies, and junk science to achieve their ends at face value.
I agree. Trust the government.
Re: (Score:3)
We should take everything a group of people who are known to use violence, lies, and junk science to achieve their ends at face value.
The person you're replying to didn't say that. I realise you know that, but I wanna point it out.
FWIW, Greenpeace are dickheads. I haven't looked at the leak, but I strongly suspect the leak is legitimate.
You, on the other hand, wanna chuck everything because you don't like Greenpeace, and you're willing to use lame strawman arguments to that effect. Shame.
Re: (Score:2)
You're misreading what I'm saying. I want verification from someone who is: 1) not greenpeace, and 2) reputable, which greenpeace isn't.
Re: (Score:2)
What's with the small box? Based on one damn thing after another, our entire species has been shown to be disreputable. Excuse me if I prefer to get this sort of information from a species with a better track record.
Reputation is a fractal all the way down. Who can be trusted based on reputation? Well, how long is a beach?
Re: (Score:2)
Completely on-point and useful comment (Score:3)
...but Greenpeace has been repeatedly shown to be a horrible organization of eco-terrorists who often don't understand the science behind the things they protest.
That's a very important distinction to make, it's completely on-point and relevant to the current discussion.
We simply *cannot* judge the validity of the TTIP documents without taking their provenance and history of Greenpeace into account!
Amiright?
Re:Not saying there isn't a problem... (Score:4, Insightful)
Greenpeace is a group of eco-terrorists? Even by America's stretch of 'terrorism', that much seems a stretch. I'm all about the attirbution though, so if they've commited acts of terror and somehow slipping through the bungling fingers of the FBI, I'd be glad for the clarification.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
When I see violence and Greenpeace in one sentence, it's always used against them...
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Using the violence and the threat of violence against the corporation is the standard greenpeace tactic.
FTFY. I know corporation are people in the US, but still...
By the way, never forget the sinking of the Rainbow Warrior [wikipedia.org] by the French authority. So tell me again, who are the terrorists?
Re: (Score:1)
Are you talking about that fraude named Patrick Moore?
Re: (Score:3)
It's also worth noting that Greenpeace isn't a monolithic organization. Greenpeace USA is different from Greenpeace Canada and Greenpeace International, etc. GP USA, for example, has a rather poor reputation as a rubber stamp for corporate interests.
Re: (Score:2)
Unsurprisingly, Greenpeace has a statement [greenpeace.org]about him.
"Since then he has gone from defender of the planet to a paid representative of corporate polluters."
It's quite cool that he's actually a real life former good guy turned aspiring supervillain :)
(I know, he's probably a jerk. But that's a requirement for being a supervillain, so who can blame him)
Re: (Score:2)
The only possible interpretation (Score:2, Funny)
My God, the US is going to implement all of the consumer standards and protections of the EU market and significantly tighten its environmental and job market regulations! It's going to be Heaven/Hell for the American Democrat/Republican!
china is not part of this and there environment (Score:2)
china is not part of this and there environment is not even up to the level of this.
One thing seems to be true (Score:5, Interesting)
In the US, questionable items, like GMO, fracking, meds, hormons of various kinds etc. are allowed until proven harmful by scientific methods. In EU, questionable items are generally not allowed unless proven harmless by scientific methods (probably not quite true looking at the radioactive waste disposal issue - surely harmful to some extent - has not been resolved there).
So, who is the test animal?
Can be gotten from there: https://www.ttip-leaks.org/ [ttip-leaks.org]
Seems to be only a small part - couple of 100 pages of several thousand, as the whole secrete pile apparently is.
Why is it secret? Because it is dirty!
Re: (Score:2)
There's no point in getting people worked up over an early draft that's going to change. It also keeps outside parties from manipulating the process, excluded parties from starting wars, and profiteers from engaging in insider trading.
Oh, and the so-called "Precautionary Principle" is utter nonsense rooted in a logical absurdity - proving non-existence.
"This causes harm" is
Re: (Score:2)
It also keeps outside parties from manipulating the process, excluded parties from starting wars, and profiteers from engaging in insider trading.
Wow, you are just great! Who do you think the "insiders" with the TIPP were and which interests they were pursuing?
Sure the folks running after the democratic principle "by the people, for the people" and representing the interest of the majority of simple folks.
The secrecy about this thing and the procedures implemented with it was and still is nauseating - nevertheless, your statements about this topic is very entertaining, causing amusement.
Oh, and the so-called "Precautionary Principle" is utter nonsense rooted in a logical absurdity - proving non-existence.
Another hogwash here, well known toxins and tests for it harm
Re: (Score:2)
And yes, you're right that well known toxins, etc., can be tested for. Which is why they are tested for. The issue isn't known risks, it's unknown and unpredictable effects that aren't (and won't/can't be) revealed during tests.
Back to the matter at hand, the negotiators are appointed by the elected representatives of the people. The pro
Re: (Score:2)
That's actually pretty good.
Basic problem (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Translation, please (Score:3, Insightful)
FTA:
The TTIP would "harmonize regulations across a huge range of business sectors, providing a boost to exporters on both sides of the Atlantic"...
Translation:
The TTIP would "gut governmental control and oversight in as many business sectors as we can get away with, putting even more power in the hands of corporations and further screwing over average citizens on both sides of the Atlantic..."
It's amazing how much longer that sentence becomes when you look past the Orwellian euphemisms to what's really being said.
Waha (Score:2)
Why the hell does this need to be "leaked" (Score:1)
this document should be open to the public in the first place.
Re: (Score:2)
It's like the old saying, "Never judge a book by the first draft".
Or (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
US regulations may move towards Europe's.
Haha, good one.
Re: (Score:2)
And it's not like the current administration is pro-corporate, anti-regulation. It's not a matter of what regulations the negotiators can get weakened so much as how much stronger they can be made and still pass the Senate.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Could be anything (Score:4, Insightful)
And there are people like yourself that see conspiracies everywhere. Sorry to tell you that the information leaked is probably accurate and most likely doesn't tell the entire story of how awful TTIP will be for the average consumer.
Re:Could be anything (Score:5, Insightful)
There actually is a conspiracy, corporations vs. humans.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Doesn't need to be a conspiracy ,greed will suffice
Was there a conspiracy making the tobacco industry to lie for decades,and expending millions in political lobbying, propaganda, and misinformation?
what about the oil companies with the leaded fuel?
I would say yes, and yes. Both are conspiracies. I would also add the conspiracy among extraction companies to sow FUD about AGW.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because greenpeace's lies and conspiracy theories have been the leading cause of global war,ign since the 1960's
The leading cause? That's some next-level shit right there. Bravo!
Re:Could be anything (Score:4, Insightful)
Your argument is nuts. But lets assume it is not. The easiest way to defeat the claims made by Greenpeace would be to release the present state of results.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It wouldn't be beyond the real of possibility if someone made up at least some data, put it into some other pages of information and then leaked it to a group that's desperate for attention and donations.
I'd be more worried about why the negotiations are in secret and why they don't want anyone who basically isn't actively involved or stands to profit from it to even see the thing than some charity trying to grab attention. The one trying to avoid attention is usually more worthy of it than he who seeks.
Re: (Score:2)
Lemme see, the same jerks who scared everybody away from nuclear power ,and thereby killed us with global warming want to tell us more bull crap
Bullshit claim aside this attitude is the problem. Who gives a shit if we poison and destroy the world and by extension ourselves as long as we can make shit cheaper to make and more expensive to sell? Who gives a shit about the plebs who live in the shadow of our unregulated facilities that can do whatever the fuck they like? Going back to your bullshit example, nuclear power is perfectly fine if done properly, but doing it properly is expensive and threatens the bottom line if they have to worry about not
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So, your stance is that because a reactor took longer to build and cost more, all nuclear power is terrible?
Why was this UK reactor delayed? Was it maybe because of Fukushima, and lawsuits related to that against them? Why has it taken longer to build than estimated when they started? Did things change during construction that made the delays happen?
I see no indication of why the reactor was delayed, but you offer no evidence that is had anything to do with poorly run anything, and instead just act like
Re: (Score:3)