Trans-Pacific Partnership Trade Deal Endorsed by Major Tech Group (siliconbeat.com)

An anonymous reader shares a report on SiliconBeat: An industry group representing major tech firms including Google, Facebook, Yahoo, Amazon, Twitter, Uber and eBay has endorsed the controversial Trans-Pacific Partnership trade pact plan "The TPP recognizes the Internet as an essential American export," Internet Association CEO Michael Beckerman said in a statement. "Historically, pro-Internet policies have been absent from trade agreements, which is why the TPP is an important step forward for the Internet sector that accounts for 6 percent of the GDP and nearly 3 million American jobs. "It will be critical that the TPP is implemented in a way that supports the Internet economy." While President Barack Obama backs the trade deal, it has met with strong opposition from critics including Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who attacked secrecy around the pact's drafting and has said the deal could weaken U.S. regulations that are good for Americans but might threaten foreign companies' profits.Brier Dudley, Seattle Times Columnist, tweeted, "TPP "taken a 180" since TPA, when there was confidence of passage, Rep @davereichert says. Issues incl. biologic protections, tobacco lobby."

Comments

US presidential campaign and TPP

[blind biker]

I am a socialist and a European. I was very surprised to hear that Trump was/is against the TPP. When I heard that, I started following him a bit. I also started paying attention to the campaign. In the end, while I have always been a lefty, I realized I can't stand Hillary, whereas I find some points in Trump which I agree with. Hillary looks like someone who'd sell her own mother for money and power, and would throw anyone under the bus.

Strictly from the POV of TPP, if either Trump or Bernie become presidents, the deal will be dead in the water.

Re:US presidential campaign and TPP

[Grishnakh]

Yep, that's one big reason I'm planning to vote for Trump if it comes down to him versus Hillary. She's the most obviously corrupt Presidential candidate I've ever seen in my lifetime. I'd rather vote for Bernie, but the DNC has been railroading him from the beginning. If we have to have a Hitler-esque buffoon as President to avoid the disaster that is the TPP, then so be it. And BTW, I live in a swing state, so my vote actually counts. The Democrats have brought this on themselves.

Re:US presidential campaign and TPP

[Tailhook]

Trump has consistently opposed not only TPP but threatened existing trade deals as well, to the point that China has published "warnings" to the US about Trump. Cruz held the typical Republican position on "trade" until recently, and has since even cast votes against the "fast track" rubber stamp authority Congress wanted to give Obama, but it still looks like an election year position. Kasich is your typical US Chamber of Commerce Republican; endless cheap labor and frictionless imports forever. Hillary is bought and paid for by the TPP lobby; she's a Walmart exec for Christ sake. Bernie has a clue; he's been fighting against all this trade crap since forever, opposing Most Favored Nation status for China, NAFTA (both circa Clinton I), etc. I don't see Bernie expound on this nearly enough however. If he'd shout it from the rooftops like Trump does he'd be doing far better in the primaries.

Trump's belligerancy is quite mainstream.

[jbn-o]

I encourage people to listen to what he says, and not just the indignant responses to his campaign rhetoric because it's interesting to hear an 'emperor wears no clothes' candidate as Trump occasionally is. Some of the things Trump says are plain lies, racist, and vulgar—reasons to reject supporting his campaign. But sometimes he tells the truth and gets booed for it (like when he pointed out the Iraq war was based on lies) or describes long-extant US mainstream foreign policy in clear language yet gets unfair flack for it from those who consider themselves a part of the US left (like the call-in to Fox News advocating a war crime). The real horror of his candidacy isn't Trump per se it's that so much of what he says is a plainly-worded description of what's going on and what has been going on for years before Trump's campaign began.

Consider Trump's call-in to which John Oliver provided a remarkably one-sided indignant reaction: On his 2016-02-28 show, John Oliver played a clip of Trump's call-in to Fox News saying "...the other thing with the terrorists, you have to take out their families. When you get these terrorists, you have to take out their families. They care about their lives, don't kid yourself. They say they don't care about their lives, you have to take out their families." and Oliver replied "That is the front runner for the Republican nomination advocating a war crime." which is a true but incomplete and certainly nowhere near as damning as Oliver wants it to be.

Oliver never told his viewers that is also extant US foreign policy wherein President Obama hand-picks whom to assassinate with drones every Tuesday (the so-called "Terror Tuesday" meetings) and that these attacks have extrajudicially killed innocent family members of alleged (never arrested, charged, or tried) so-called "terrorists". Some killed on-purpose (like 16-year-old U.S. citizen Abdulrahman, son of U.S. citizen Anwar al Awlaki who was killed in a separate attack 2 weeks prior), some killed without the U.S. knowing who they are killing as the CIA apparently does with some regularity. This is what Noam Chomsky recently rightly described as "massive global terrorism": drone attacks firing missiles that destroy whatever the missile hits as well as a large area around the target, resulting in indiscriminate extrajudicial murder of innocent passers-by. When Robert Gibbs, former White House press secretary and senior adviser to Obama's reelection campaign commented on Abdulrahman's murder shortly after it happened Gibbs said "I would suggest that you should have a far more responsible father if they are truly concerned about the well being of their children." a line on a par with Trump-level tact and recognition of responsibility.

Or when former NSA and CIA director, General Michael Hayden told Bill Maher "the American armed forces would refuse to act [on Trump's orders on torture and extrajudicial killings]" and Trump says "They won't refuse. They're not going to refuse me, believe me." Trump is right—they won't refuse. The proof has been staring the world in the face for years as Glenn Greenwald pointed out on Democracy Now! on 2016-03-29:

The idea that the U.S. military, in mass, refuses to follow orders if they constitute illegal conduct or war crimes is negated by the entire history of this country, including very recently. You do have isolated members of the armed forces who periodically refuse on grounds of conscience or legal and moral duty. They denounce certain tactics. They resign from the military. They