Interesting comments below. I presume the "why we slipped" remark is a bit tongue in cheek, but it conforms accurately to objective fact. The same political leaders who tout the EU's recent enhancements to green laws, worker protection, etc. markedly fail to point out that such laws are strictly lame-duck measures given, as Duncan points out, the ultimate primacy of the WTO. And Pat Buchanan is not the only one who can put 2 and 2 together re/ the fate of US sovereignty, but it's revealing of the "openness" of the US media that such sentiments are only given airtime when mouthed by the likes of a Buchanan or Perot. Is it really the US who "won two big ones" over Canada and Europe? Or was it corporatism that "won two big ones" against democratic sovereignty in general? Are Europeans the only dumb ones? Only the US Constitution itself has legal primacy over treaties (unless they're with Native Americans or Third-World countries), and one wonders what will happen when the WTO starts passing unconstitutional measures... a Free-Trade Amendment? Perhaps someone should challenge GATT on constitutional grounds before it's too late - as an unconstitutional yielding of sovereignty to non-US bodies. If something has to go "out the window", I'd rather it wasn't democracy. My apologies to Duncan if he intended his message as sardonic irony. rkm @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ [forwarded to •••@••.••• by James Love] Date: Thu, 10 Jul 1997 From: Duncan Frissell <•••@••.•••> To: Declan McCullagh <•••@••.•••>, •••@••.••• Subject: Re: Data protection laws spark U.S. and E.U. tussle, from FT -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >A recently adopted EU directive on data protection makes it illegal after >October 1998 for EU businesses to "export" personal data for commercial >purposes to countries which lack comparable privacy laws. >Such a ban could prevent the sale of customer information, or even >exchanges of marketing databases between subsidiaries of international >companies. >The clause has already been cited by financial services groups as a >potential barrier to trade. That's why we slipped GATT and the WTO past those dumb Europeans. Their Privacy Protection regime goes out the window as soon as the WTO has a case before it. Notice the U.S. won two big ones recently. Canada can't block U.S. magazines on cultural protection grounds (goodby European TV) and Europe has to let U.S. hormone-tainted beef in. And Pat Buchanan worried that *our* sovereignty would be hurt by GATT. Open systems can't be hurt by openness. Poor Europe. "Mauke", as we say in Hawaiian. DCF @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ ~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~--~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~ Posted by Richard K. Moore - •••@••.••• - PO Box 26 Wexford, Ireland Cyberlib: ftp://ftp.iol.ie/users/rkmoore/cyberlib | (USA Citizen) * Non-commercial republication encouraged - Please include this sig * ~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~--~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~
Share: