CAFTA: The Bad News

Today the U.S. Senate Finance Committee endorsed CAFTA, sending it to the full Senate for a vote, which could still take place this same week.

Not surprisingly, the general public in the U.S.--mindless hedonists that most of them are fast becoming--remains oblivious to what CAFTA is, and what its implications are for U.S. self-determination (read: liberty).

But what they don't know (and don't want to know) can and will hurt them and their children and grandchildren...

Consider:

** CAFTA is only the beginning. The Senate Republican Policy Committee policy paper admits that CAFTA's purpose is "integrating more closely with 34 hemispheric neighbors-thus furthering the Free Trade Agreement of the Americas (FTAA)." Have they bothered to ask how many Americans actually want to be "integrated" with the poverty, corruption, and Communism of our hemispheric neighbors? (Hint: NO!)

** CAFTA will put the U.S. under another anti-American international tribunal. CAFTA includes hundreds of pages of grants of vague authority to foreign tribunals. The World Trade Organization has already ruled against the U.S. in 24 costly cases and even had the nerve to outlaw Utah's gambling ban. A NAFTA tribunal opened our highways to Mexican trucks even though they don't comply with U.S. laws. CAFTA will only guarantee more of the same.

** CAFTA would prohibit states from giving any preference to contractors in their state. Any Central American country could file a complaint.

** Under CAFTA, state legislatures would relinquish their right to regulate utilities, land use, and taxpayer-funded contracts. It forces us to use the "least trade restrictive" regulation and change our laws so they are "no more burdensome than necessary." Activist judges can make that language cover anything they want.

** The pro-CAFTA folks aren't really for true free trade. They are for global managed trade ... because that is what CAFTA (like NAFTA) really is. Think about it: Why does it take over 1,000 pages to define "free trade"?

** CAFTA fits hand-in-glove with the world-government agenda to make the U.S. just another client state. How?

Consider: CAFTA article 10.16.3 places the United States under the jurisdiction of international tribunals supervised by the United Nations.

Consider: CAFTA article 10.5.2(a) states that these international tribunals must use "customary international law" as established by the "principle legal systems of the world" when deciding cases.

Welcome to the United Nations' world court system!

Will enough Senators have the presence of mind and/or constitutional awareness to do the sensible thing and oppose CAFTA?

Will sufficient numbers of alert and informed citizens compel their Senators to do the sensible thing and oppose CAFTA?

Time will tell.

Michael Jackson Hysteria

It was at once astonishing and discouraging to observe how so many self-styled American "Christians" reacted to the "not guilty" verdict in pop star Michael Jackson's trial in early 2005.

Apparently accused of multiple counts of child molestation, Jackson was acquited by the jury of all counts. When the news reached the place where I was on June 13th, there were shreiks of incredulous derision for the jurors. These self-appointed "Christian" erstaz jurors--some 1,000 miles away from (and only superficially familiar with) the actual court proceedings--apparently "knew" Mr. Jackson was guilty, contrary to the jury's findings.

My quiet suggestion that none of us had heard all the testimony or saw all the evidence presented throughout the trial was met with the pregnant silence and sideways glances indicative of a rained-on bigotfest. The very idea that their prejudiced disparaging might be driven more by the folly of prejudiced ignorance than reason and truth was something they simply refused to even consider.

I'm no Michael Jackson fan, mind you. I've been aware of the guy, but never bought a single recording of his music. In my opinion, he's a bit weird for any number of reasons. But neither my--nor anyone else's--subjective estimation renders him ipso facto guilty of child-molesting.

Justice in the U.S. strives to remain based on the presumption of innocence, not the presumption of guilt. The scenario described above illustrates a disturbing popular trend in the opposite direction.

Likewise, the biblical Christian principles of giving the benefit of the doubt (I Corinthians 13:7), loving one's neighbor as one loves one's self (Matthew 19:19), and treating others the way we would like to be treated (Luke 6:31), suggest that consciencous Christians would refrain from fanning the flames of fact-free feeding frenzies on overpopularized figures. But no (apparently).

I don't intend to ever grow tired of saying it: Truth Matters. And their failure to develop and apply objective critical analysis skills renders the bigoted hostility of many Americans--"Christians" included--no less credible than the arbitrary (and ultimately very deadly) verdicts of the Inquistion.

Whenever the truth takes a backseat to uninformed personal opinion--even if it is "popular" or even "majority" opinion--authentic liberty and justice are at risk of being on different bus altogether.