by Barbara Keeler

It would seem that everything has a bottom, but you could not prove it by observing the tactics of corporate predators and their puppet politicians. They can always find a way to sink to ever lower ground. Now corporate jackals are lining up to pick a bones of a nation devastated and terrified, pushing dark agenda past distracted watchdogs.

Passing a bill giving "Fast Track" treaty negociating authority to Bush has been added to list a "patriotic duties" set before Congress. Accoding to Russell Mokhiber and Robert Weissman, in the "The Wartime Opportunists," U.S. Trade Representative Robert Zoellick proclaimed that granting fast-track trade negotiating authority to the president was the best way to respond to the September 11 tragedy.

Under Fast track, which cleared the Ways and Means Committee on Oct 10, Congress may not amend trade agreements negotiated by the executive branch. It must vote yes or no. FTAA would make it convenient for multinational corporate giants to relocate operations abroad, leaving behind nuisances such as minimum wage, worker safety laws, environmental restrictions, and the like.

It gets worse. In a proposed Congressional handout to big biotech agribusiness, the bill contains language that would protect corporate producers and pushers of biotech foods and seeds at the expense of countries that want to protect their citizens' right to choose. The bill directs us treaty negotiators to oppose requirements such as labeling of genetically engineered foods and other "unjustified" technical barriers to trade.

Specifically, Section II of the bill, Trade Negotiating Objectives, under b) Principal Trade Negotiating Objectives, number 9) Reciprocal Trade in Agriculture, part viii, (II) directs the treaty negotiator to see that international treaties negotiated exclude ""unjustified trade restrictions or commercial requirements, such as labeling, that affect new technology, including biotechnology." In other words, parties to trade treaties with the United States would be prohibited from requiring labels on genetically modified (GM) foods.

Another listed objective is "To insure that labor, environmental, health, or safety policies and practices of the parties to traded agreements with the United States do not arbitrarily or unjustifiably discriminate against United States exports or serve as disguises barriers to trade."

This is the type of language that would be used against a country that cited environmental reasons for excluding from its borders GM ingredients or products that pose health or environmental concerns, or refusing to allow bioengineered crops to be grown on its soil.

Other sections in the proposed bill "require that proposed regulations be based on sound science, cost-benefit analysis, risk assessment, or other objective evidence;"

Sound good, right? Except that it paraphrases the rationale the United States used to strong-arm the European Union when it refused hormone treated beef. The World Trade Organization sided with the United States. Biotechnology is not specifically mentioned this language could be used as an argument against any country that wants to make its own laws regarding biotech organisms or foods sold within its borders.

The public cannot afford to be numbed or distracted but must guard against attempts to exploit the September 11 tragedy with proposals that have nothing to do with national security, but serve only narrow corporate interests. Quick action, using the contacts below, can avert this cynical grab for corporate control at the expense of the world's people.