To: IAHF List
Subject: Codex - America's Vitamin Laws "Can't Be Overturned by WTO"?? See What WTO Did to Our Steel Tariffs
Date: 13 Jul 2003 01:32:13 -0000
IAHF List: See the article below my comments about how the WTO just ruled against our steel tarriffs and how they're going to impose a $2.2 Billion dollar fine against the USA, ruling in favor of the EU.
Today I had an email from a list member who attempted to wake up a health food store owner in San Diego, but she was laughed at and told (regarding Codex) "That could never happen here!!" (meaning our vitamin law could "never be overturned as illegal" by the WTO and forcibly changed under threat of enormous trade sanctions against vast sectors of our economy.
That health food store owner is typically ignorant re the implications of our having joined the WTO. See this article below about how the WTO just ruled against our steel tarriffs, ruling them "illegal" under international law.
I see the whole set up, and I can tell you straight out that FDA has set us up already to lose in a future WTO trade dispute on the vitamin issue. Congress has let them get away with this, so the fix is in, and the only way we can protect ourselves now is via the ANH lawsuit to overturn the EU FSD and to monkeywrench the cartel's plans THAT way. See my article at http://www.iahf.com/anh_lawsuit.html also see the information at http://iahf.com/index2.html scroll down to the end of Burton's letter, click on page 2, see the hypertext link to my info after that.... When you're done reading, you'll GET IT....... then I need you to donate to http://www.alliance-natural-health.org via your credit card and get more people to.
The woman who contacted me wanted me to generate a simple one page flyer for the health food stores. I told her we were working on NNFA in an effort to wake them up and we might succeed yet. I told her it would be better if the flyer went direct from NNFA to their stores because they usually ignore anything like this unless it comes from their own trade association, which is showing signs of waking up due to Verkerk and Hinde's visit. In the mean time, show the health food stores this info:
See this: WTO Rules U.S. Steel Duties Are Illegal
By Naomi Koppel Associated Press Writer
Published: Jul 11, 2003
GENEVA (AP) - The World Trade Organization ruled against heavy duties on steel imports imposed by the Bush administration, saying Friday that they violate global trade rules.
The European Union and seven other countries that had opposed the tariffs demanded Washington immediately lift the duties, which were supposed to protect the U.S. steel industry from cheap imports.
The EU said it was ready to impose $2.2 billion in retaliatory duties on U.S. imports, ranging from footwear to fruit and vegetables.
"This is not just a partial victory, this is a full victory. We have been given satisfaction on all accounts," said EU spokeswoman Arancha Gonzalez.
In Washington, the Bush administration said that it would appeal the WTO decision and the higher tariffs would remain in effect during the appeal process.
Bush introduced the "safeguard" duties of up to 30 percent on steel products in March 2002. During his presidential campaign, Bush had vowed to protect the domestic steel industry, a pledge seen as key to his victory in important steel-producing states.
But the tariffs raised sharp criticism abroad: European nations said the duties hurt their industries, and many saw the step as part of a pattern of unilateral acts by the Bush administration. In the United States, some carmakers complained that the tariffs increased steel prices.
Friday's ruling confirmed an interim WTO ruling in March.
The Bush administration had argued the tariffs met WTO provisions allowing temporary duties for up to three years to protect a domestic industry from a flood of cheap imports and give it time to restructure.
But the WTO panel, headed by Stefan Johannesson of Iceland, ruled that Washington failed to prove its measures were necessary because of "unseen developments" in the world steel market.
The United States said the unforeseen developments were created by the combination of the Russian and Asian financial crises, the strong U.S. dollar and the strong U.S. economy. But the panel said Washington did not show how these events led to a sudden increase in imports - the primary requirement before safeguard duties can be imposed.
It also said the United States had acted illegally by exempting imports from certain countries from the duties. Canada and Mexico - Washington's partners in the North American Trade Agreement - were excluded, as were Israel and Jordan.
After Friday's ruling, the Bush administration insisted the tariffs were legal. "Safeguard measures are allowed under WTO rules. Many countries have used them. We believe the safeguard measures comply with our international obligations," said Richard Mills, a spokesman for U.S. Trade Representative Robert Zoellick.
The U.S. appeal would likely delay any European move to impose retaliatory tariffs.
Gonzalez said Friday that the EU was ready to impose its retaliatory duties unless the United States removes the duties within five days of the WTO's adopting the report.
The other countries that appealed the U.S. action were Japan, South Korea, China, Switzerland, Norway, New Zealand and Brazil. It was the first time China or Switzerland had taken a complaint to the WTO.
International Advocates for Health Freedom
POB 10632 Blacksburg VA 24062 USA