Hospitals & Asylums
Legal Consequences of Off-Season Flu Delivery HA-14-5-09
By Tony J. Sanders
1.The Swine Flu A(H1N1) pandemic of 2009 has brought to light the importance of controlling etiologic agents. Thanks to the virulence of the Spanish Flu A(H1N1) 1918-1919, that killed 20-50 million mostly young people, scientists have made the name of the influenza viruses public knowledge. This knowledge of the name of the virus helps immensely to advocate for the control of the offending pathogen. Within days of saving the pork industry by blaming the A(H1N1) pathogen, the deadliest virus seems to have been removed from circulation, but more thorough inspections, review and guidance are needed to completely defeat the pandemic. It is presumed that the term swine flu is in fact a reference to the strange guilty plea of the ICJ in the Avena and Other Mexican Nationals v. USA under the Hague Conventions. The unresolved free trade disputes between Mexico and the United States have been arbitrated, and the decision is in favor of appreciation of the peso in the best economic interest of the USA to devaluate. The legal research herein sets the stage for treaty reform to prohibit all disease pathogens internationally. It was previously brought to our attention in Health Inspector v. Meridian Bioscience HA-15-4-05 that an international shipment of potentially lethal Shanghai A(H2N2) flu virus had been accidentally shipped to thousands of medical labs in 18 countries, but it had been detected and all test kits were destroyed, before they could do any damage. As a consequence of the resurgence of pandemic A(H1N1) laboratory security will be heightened on all influenza virus research during this pandemic and for at least two flu seasons under Enhanced control of dangerous biological agents and toxins 42USC(6a)§262a.
2. Pandemic influenza is a global threat from which no country is immune and the actions required are a shared responsibility of the whole international community. In response to the SARS pandemic WHO devised a five point strategic action plan. (1) Reduce human exposure to the virus by reducing opportunities for human infection. (2) Strengthen the early warning system to ensure that affected countries, WHO, and the international community have all data and clinical specimens needed for an accurate risk assessment. (3) Intensify rapid containment operations to prevent the virus from further increasing its transmissibility among humans or delay its international spread. (4) Build capacity to cope with a pandemic to ensure that all countries have formulated and tested pandemic response plans and that WHO is fully able to perform its leadership role during a pandemic. (5) Coordinate global scientific research and development to ensure that pandemic vaccines and antiviral drugs are rapidly and widely available shortly after the start of a pandemic and that scientific understanding of the virus evolves quickly, mostly in regards to the adoption of the WHO Working Paper on Patent Issues related to Influenza Viruses and their Genes.
3. Human influenza is a highly transmissible respiratory illness that’s caused by the influenza viruses. Influenza is a viral infection that attacks the respiratory system, including the nose, throat, bronchial tubes and lungs. Influenza, commonly called the flu, is not the same as the stomach viruses that cause diarrhea and vomiting. Initially, the flu may seem like a common cold with a runny nose, sneezing and sore throat. But colds usually develop slowly, whereas the flu tends to come on suddenly. And although a cold can be a nuisance, the flu feels much worse. Symptoms of the flu come on suddenly and are worse than those of the common cold and do not include stomach ailments indicative of gastro-enteritis. Flu symptoms may include, (1) Body or muscle aches, (2) Chills, (3) Cough, (4) Fever over 101° F, 38°C, (5) Headaches, and (5) Sore throat and (6) Pneumonia, the cause of death. In the U.S., an estimated 25–50 million cases of the flu are reported annually - leading to 150,000 hospitalizations and 0-30,000–40,000 deaths yearly. If these figures were to be estimated incorporating the rest of the world, there would be an average of approximately 1 billion cases of flu, around 3–5 million cases of severe illness, and 300,000–500,000 deaths yearly. Over 90% of those deaths are in persons over the age of 64 years old. On average there are over 200,000 hospitalizations per year, again a wide range according to the severity of the season. About 50% of those hospitalizations are among those ages 64 and older. The highest rates of infection are in children. In fact attack rates are often over 30% in some communities, resulting in school shut downs and parents missing work due to having to stay home with their kids.
4. The 2008-2009 flu season was considered mild in the Northern Hemisphere. Up to April 8, 2009, the CDC had reported the deaths of 43 children from seasonal flu, compared to 68 in the previous flu season. The improvement was attributed in part to an improved Northern Hemisphere winter of 2008/2009 seasonal flu vaccine, for which a rare decision had been made to update all three strains (H1, H3, and B) concurrently, which ultimately yielded a exceptionally good match to the strains of H1N1 and H3N2 which eventually circulated. Less severe strains of influenza and a good vaccine match for the strains that were circulating combined to create a milder season this year than last. If we look at mortality and the rate of hospitalizations, it seems like this year is less severe compared to last year and more similar to the years prior to last year. Flu vaccines are often 70 percent to 90 percent effective. Last flu season, the vaccine was only about 20 percent effective against the H3N2 strain and less than 2 percent effective against the B strains, according to the CDC. The H1N1 strain is a distant descendant of the Spanish flu, but we have all built up a lot of immunity to it over the years. This flu pandemic is different in that it seems to affect mostly younger people, who would normally be in good health, much like the Spanish Flu A(H1N1) 1918-1919. Of the cases, 62% are in persons younger than 18 years. The Mexican fatalities are mainly young adults of 25 to 45. As the result of a permanently enhanced control of Influenza viruses we would like to see this “swine flu” pandemic swiftly and permanently brought to a conclusion and the rates of in season flu significantly reduced or eliminated as the result of heightened control of the etiologic agents and penalties for unlicensed or malevolent possession or delivery of the toxic substances. The fact that people infected with Influenza themselves become toxic does not in any way reduce the liability of scientists playing the real life version of Pandemic 2 by Monkey Games
5. WHO surveillance began picking up report of Influenza Like Illness (ILI) on March 18, 2009. As of April 24, 2009 when WHO began tracking the pandemic there were 854 cases of pneumonia in the capitol city and 54 had died. On April 29, 2009 WHO raised the pandemic alert level from 4 to 5. For the time being WHO is keeping the pandemic alert at level 5. An increase to level 6 will occur if community level transmission is to occur in a continent other than North America. WHO advises no restriction of regular travel or closure of borders. It is considered prudent for people who are ill to delay international travel and for people developing symptoms following international travel to seek medical attention, in line with guidance from national authorities. Travelers returning from Mexico are frequently infected. As of 12 May 2009 06:00 GMT, 30 countries have officially reported 5251 cases of influenza A(H1N1) infection to the World Health Organization (WHO). Mexico, the epicenter of the pandemic, has reported 2059 laboratory confirmed human cases of infection, including 56 deaths. The United States has reported 2600 laboratory confirmed human cases, including three deaths. Canada has reported 330 laboratory confirmed human cases, including one death. Costa Rica has reported eight laboratory confirmed human cases, including one death. More countries are reporting cases of swine influenza A-H1N1, as the outbreak centered in Mexico continues to spread. Hong Kong officials took aggressive measures to combat the flu, by placing 300 people in quarantine at the hotel where an infected man from Mexico was discovered. The following countries have reported laboratory confirmed cases with no deaths - Argentina (1), Australia (1), Austria (1), Brazil (8), China (2, comprising 1 in China, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, and 1 in mainland China), Colombia (3), Denmark (1), El Salvador (4), France (13), Germany (12), Guatemala (1), Ireland (1), Israel (7), Italy (9), Japan (4), Netherlands (3), New Zealand (7), Norway (2), Panama (16), Poland (1), Portugal (1), Republic of Korea (3), Spain (95), Sweden (2), Switzerland (1) and the United Kingdom (55).
6. WHO has sent 2.4 million anti-viral treatments to 72 developing countries to prepare for a possible pandemic. On May 3, CDC is scheduled to complete deployment of 25 percent of the supplies in the Strategic National Stockpile (SNS), 50 million courses, to all states in the continental United States. These supplies and medicines will help states and U.S. territories respond to the outbreak. In addition, the Federal Government and manufacturers have begun the process of developing a vaccine against the novel H1N1 flu virus. Mexico's health minister, Jose Angel Cordova, says the country's H1N1 flu epidemic appeared to have peaked in Mexico between April 23 and April 28, and that severe cases are declining. The World Health Organization could decide to call for international production of an influenza A H1N1 swine flu vaccine. However, before a vaccine is administered, there are a series of studies that need to be taken. These are under the direction of the National Institutes of Health and approved by the Food and Drug Administration. They need to do studies to determine how much of the antigen needs to be in the vaccine to stimulate protection. They will also need to see -- do you get sufficient immunity from one dose, do you need more than one dose. With each vaccine it's different, with different age groups it's different. It's really early to say how many vaccines someone is going to need until those studies are done. Hopefully, we will be able to find a vaccine that works with one dose. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration said it had approved a new manufacturing facility to be used to produce influenza vaccines. The facility is approved for seasonal flu vaccine production and could be used to produce vaccine against the new H1N1 swine flu strain. The facility, located in the United States, is owned and operated by Sanofi Pasteur, and will greatly increase the company's production capability, the FDA said in a news release.
7. The toll on the economy is however severe. It is estimated that Mexico could lose up to $4 billion dollars in tourism income after foreign visitors cancelled trips to popular beach resorts and colonial towns due to the flu scare according to Tourism Minister Rodolfo Elizondo. Tourism is one of Mexico's main dollar generators, along with oil exports and remittances sent from Mexicans living abroad. In 2008, some 23 million visitors from abroad spent $13 billion in Mexico. The World Bank estimates that a severe pandemic could cost over 3 percent of the global economy's gross national product, between one and two trillion dollars in the worst-case scenario. Mexico expects a slightly bigger than originally forecast fiscal deficit this year as it factors in government spending to help the economy bounce back from a flu outbreak that paralyzed key industries for nearly a week. The deficit was expected to be about 1.8 percent (of gross domestic product) but it is going to be slightly higher, between 1.9 percent and 2.0 percent according to Finance Minister Agustin Carstens. The flu crisis may knock 0.3 to 0.5 percentage points off Mexico's gross domestic product. On May 7, 2009 the United Nation's Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the World Health Organization (WHO), the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) and the World Trade Organization stated, “In the ongoing spread of influenza A(H1N1), concerns about the possibility of this virus being found in pigs and the safety of pork and pork products have been raised. Influenza viruses are not known to be transmissible to people through eating processed pork or other food products derived from pigs. Heat treatments commonly used in cooking meat (e.g. 70°C/160°F core temperature) will readily inactivate any viruses potentially present in raw meat products. Pork and pork products, handled in accordance with good hygienic practices recommended by the WHO , Codex Alimentarius Commission and the OIE, will not be a source of infection. Authorities and consumers should ensure that meat from sick pigs or pigs found dead are not processed or used for human consumption under any circumstances”
8. The sick pigs, who coined the termed swine for unfair victory, made an appearance in the dispute between Mexico and the United States, a dispute which is ongoing and to complex for the Court that couldn’t even perform the task in front of it. Fifty-one Mexican nationals fell within the scope of the review and reconsideration mandated in the Avena Judgment. At present only 50 are on the list, after the execution of José Medellín Rojas by the State of Texas on 5 August 2008 without review and reconsideration of his conviction and sentence. The dispute regarding American State Responsibility was settled in the US Supreme Court case of Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon 548 US __(2006) the United States has none, whereupon the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals wrote: we hold that “Avena is not binding federal law”. In the Judgment of 19 January 2009 the ICJ found that the matters claimed by the United Mexican States to be in issue between the Parties, are not matters which have been decided by the Court and thus cannot give rise to the interpretation requested by the United Mexican States. The Court also finds that the United States of America has breached the obligation incumbent upon it under the Order indicating provisional measures of 16 July 2008, in the case of Mr. José Ernesto Medellín Rojas. Reaffirms the continuing binding character of the obligations of the United States of America under paragraph 153 (9) of the Avena Judgment and takes note of the undertakings given by the United States of America in these proceedings, but turns a blind eye to the crime that has been committed declining, in these circumstances, the request of the United Mexican States for the Court to order the United States of America to provide guarantees of non-repetition. And to add insult to injury it rejects all further submissions of the United Mexican States.
9. In the Summary it was ominously decided that, “until the Court has rendered its judgment on the Request for interpretation, it shall remain seised of the matters”. This language is offensive to the Convention on the Prohibition of Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriologic (Biologic) and Toxin Weapons and Their Destruction (BTWC) of 1972 entered into force on 26 March 1975. What matters? The alma mater, A(H1N1), the lethal injections used in executions, the etiologic agents for atherosclerosis, cancer and HIV/AIDS, is no disease prohibited to the prosecutors under the gospel of the Hague Convention? Under the current regime of international justice poetry is of such little merit that the Judges have allowed two prosecutors to infiltrate the holy ground of the Plague in contempt of reparations, kill prisoners in contempt of economic development, assassinate the Director-General of the World Health Organizations in pursuit of impunity and seize the High Commission on Human Rights twice. The failure of the Hague Convention to prohibit the toxic substances that cause the vast majority of “disease” and death in civilians, including retired military officers and physicians, can no longer be overlooked. The international treaty regime controlling the manufacture, possession and use of biological and chemical weapons, agents and toxins is therefore reviewed. Numerous flaws have been found in the necessary human protection against laboratory produced disease vectors and recommendations are made for the reform of the scientific inspection and control regime.
First, the Geneva Conventions and the Hague Conventions need to be re-connected in order for the International Committee for the Red Cross (ICRC) and affiliates to avail of both the advances in the behavioral science achieved by the Geneva Convention and the prohibition of weapons of mass destruction achieved by the Hague Conventions. The ICRC has been remiss in this regard and Protocol (III) Additional to the Geneva Conventions relating the Adoption of a New Distinctive Emblem of 8 December 2005 is unnecessary and unjustified without reference to the Geneva Protocol (to the Hague Conventions) for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare 17 June 1925 in Art. 6 pertaining to Prevention and Repression of Misuse. Since 22 May 2006 when Director-General Lee Jong-wook was killed by a brain aneurism the medical establishment has been increasing tyrannical, unruly, fraudulent, toxic and rebellious. As of 2009 the AMA Code of Medical Ethics has been offline. It seems the medical establishment has aligned themselves with the Geneva Conventions against the Hague Conventions taking a considerable toll on the civilians advocating their moral conscious. The Geneva Protocol of 1925 is the lynchpin between the Hague Conventions and Geneva Conventions and it is imperative that the 20th century laws of war be consolidated so that society can move on to 21st century health theology.
Third, the Headquarters of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons is located in the Hague, Netherlands. The fundamental obligations of States Parties to the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) of 1997 are set out in its very first article. Each State Party undertakes never under any circumstances: (a) To develop, produce, otherwise acquire, stockpile or retain chemical weapons, or transfer, directly or indirectly, chemical weapons to anyone; (b) To use chemical weapons; (c) To engage in any military preparations to use chemical weapons; (d) To assist, encourage or induce, in any way, anyone to engage in any activity prohibited to a State Party under this Convention. (Article 1, paragraph 1). Each State Party undertakes to destroy all chemical weapons and all chemical weapons production facilities that it owns or possesses or that are located in any place under its jurisdiction and control, as well as to destroy all chemical weapons that it abandoned on the territory of another State Party. As it is written the Convention is fatally flawed at Art. II(2) in the definition of Toxic Chemical - any chemical which through its chemical action on life processes can cause death, temporary incapacitation or permanent harm to humans or animals. To be completely effective the word “disease” needs to be included in the definition so that Toxic Chemical means - any chemical which through its chemical action on life processes can cause disease, death, temporary incapacitation or permanent harm to humans or animals. Furthermore in the Guidelines for “Schedules” of Chemicals is offensive in that it incites the routine employment of torturous poisons and addiction and might be better as “Levels”. The OPCW recognizes these shortcomings and is striving to include biotechnology and vaccine research in their forthcoming negotiations.
Fourth, the United States is so disempowering that it would be remiss to omit mention of the prohibition in the United States. The current dogma is that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS; half high school) cannot receive their degree of Public Health Department (PHD) until they have amended the schedules of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) of 1971 to include pathologic agents of disease. This would be done in cooperation with the Schedules maintained by the United States Chemical Weapons Convention website that is the responsibility of the US Department of Commerce, Bureau of Industry and Security, Treaty Compliance Division and would result in a change of the name of the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) to Drug Evaluation Agency and transfer of such agency to the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). Having successfully rewritten the CSA the Department would have fulfilled the requirement for the degree of PHD. The proposed revision is Schedules I that cause instantaneous death or II cause deadly torturous disease such as ischemic heart disease, stroke, malignant melanoma (cancer), diabetes, HIV/AIDS etc. or III cause painful and/or debilitating medical conditions such as migraines, sciatica, arthritis, paralysis etc. or IV drugs such as chemotherapy whose benefits continue to outweigh the extremely dangerous side effects in the opinion of medical science and highly addictive illicit drugs such as heroin, cocaine meth-amphetamine and LSD or V all other prescription drugs that would not be listed, only regulated as usual or VI drugs approved for dispensation over the counter and natural medicine, that would not be listed only regulated as usual, and alcohol, tobacco, coca leaf, raw opium and marijuana.
10. We cannot allow the underlying disputes between Mexico and the United States of America to simmer on and therefore seek to arbitrate the free trade, migration and currency disputes in the conclusion of this treaties so that until the scientists and doctors have tired of their game of making peace and retired the State of Mexico and the USA can settle their civil and political disputes umpired by Canada so North American can prosper. Since Mexican President Felipe Calderon declared a war on drug traffickers in December 2006 the Los Angeles Times estimates that 7,337 people have been killed in drug cartel related violence. More than 45,000 federal troops and 5,000 federal police have been deployed to 18 states where trafficking groups are fighting local authorities and battling for access to US markets. Guns purchased in the US are flowing south while cartel-linked crime has spread north. Mexico's military-led offensive has roiled the country's drug underworld, leading to gunfights between soldiers and hit men as well as brutal feuding between rival trafficking groups including a large number of kidnappings and executions in several Mexican states, and shocking forms of violence including beheadings. More than 6,000 people died in drug-related violence in 2008 alone. In very violent cities, such as Ciudad Juárez and Tijuana, local governments have appointed high ranking military officers to head the police forces. The Calderón administration has stated that the use of the army is temporary, but has yet to present even a provisional plan for withdrawal of the troops.
11. The Mexican government needs to be more self-disciplined in their response to the Mexican drug war. The method prescribed by Human Rights Watch is for the President to rewrite the Military Code of Justice whereas the Code of Military Justice—particularly article 57 that violates article 13 of the Mexican Constitution, which clearly states that any violation by the military involving a civilian should be tried in civilian courts. Corruption and intelligence networks will need to be declassified and re-addressed confidentially through the trial of human rights abuses, heightened privacy protection for noncombatant civilians and heightened defense of national security clearance against US investigators. The swine flu pandemic has made it painfully clear that the United States of America needs to be very careful not to interfere with the territorial integrity and domestic security of the United States of Mexico. Sending 1,000s of foreign agents to fight corruption is like throwing gasoline on a fire. Failing to discipline his own judiciary and military, the Obama administration clearly needs to learn how to win his international wars using the principle of non-use of force. In the case of the Mexican drug war and swine flu Mexico has the more difficult task of trying and punishing soldiers and cartel combatants to prevent and punish human rights abuses and save lives while continuing to compensate victims. The United States for their part must desist in sending agents and establish protocol to respect the sovereign equality of the United States of Mexico and their armed forces.
regards to returning US - Mexican relations to normal, free trade, free migration
and commercial regulation are surely the most effective way to peace and
prosperity for both nations on more equal footing on the currency
exchange. The United States has however
been extremely unfair in the way it upholds its international treaty
obligations. Action needs to be taken to
end the immediate trade dispute regarding the banning of Mexican trucks from US
highways and agricultural tariff countermeasures by Mexico this March 2009 that
is surely the trigger for the off season flu delivery. The US was required under NAFTA to grant
Mexican trucks full access to its highways by January 2000, but domestic
opposition led US legislators to delay opening until a pilot program allowing
some trucks was instituted in 2007. In March 2009, after 45,000 Mexican trucks
used US highways, the US ended that program.
The Mexican Economy Secretary called the move “Wrong, protectionist and
a clear violation of NAFTA”. The 1994
agreement allows Mexico to introduce retaliatory tariffs equal to the amount
lost by the truck ban. In good times, an economy may be
able to weather these kinds of things.
But now it’s devastating”, said Rep. Dave Camp of Michigan whose
district is home to cherry farmers, manufacturers and chemical producers such
as Dow Chemical Co., that will be affected.
The tariffs apply to 36 agricultural and 53 industrial products,
including onions, strawberries, shampoo, toothpaste, pet food, books, pencils
and dishwashers. The only item facing a 45-percent tax is fresh grapes. Some 55
other products will be taxed at 20 percent, and the remaining 33 items at 10 to
15 percent. NAFTA normally exempts
agricultural products from such duties.
Mexican officials appear to have targeted products from states
represented by lawmakers who are influential in Congress or have some kind of
voice on trade issues. Mexico is Texas'
No. 1 trading partner — and the second biggest buyer of U.S. exports.
13. In 2006 during a slew of unpopular immigration legislation it was released that there were an estimated 12 million undocumented aliens living in the United States of America, swiftly bringing the US population estimates up to 300 million from 296 million. The total level of net immigration (legal and other, combined) under the intermediate projection is assumed to be 1,075,000 persons in 2006, and 900,000 persons in 2026 and for each year afterward. In 2005 DHS apprehended an estimated 1,241,089 foreign nationals. Ninety-two percent were natives of Mexico. Over 155,000 non-Mexican individuals were apprehended trying to enter the United States along the Southwest border in fiscal year 2005. The number of illegal entrants into the United States through the Southwest border is estimated to exceed one million people a year. There were 58,727 investigations initiated and 46,656 closed for immigration related activities including crime, compliance enforcement, work site enforcement, identity and benefit fraud, alien smuggling, and counter terrorism. ICE detained approximately 235,247 foreign nationals for a minimum of 24 hours. There were 202,842 foreign nationals formally removed from the United States. The leading countries of origin of formal removals were Mexico (73 percent), Guatemala (4.1 percent) and Honduras (4.0 percent). More than 1,035,000 other foreign nationals accepted an offer of voluntary departure. Under Art. 1 Section 9 Clause 1 of the US Constitution Congress has authority regarding, “the migration or importation of such persons as any of the states now existing shall think proper to admit”. The debate regarding migration is divided along the lines of border security and the legalization of undocumented aliens. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist has sought to exclude the program for temporary workers. The Judicial Committee, on the other hand, proposed an initiative to legalize as many as 11 million undocumented workers. It is important to note that US embassies charge an estimated $2,000 for visas that they approve only 53% of the time. Citizenship also requires that a person live in the US for 6 years and pass an exam. In the program for temporary workers the undocumented aliens receive a visa for three years that they can renew one time, for a total of six years whereby they would be eligible for citizenship. Legislation has so far been unsuccessful. To curb illegal immigration the best thing to do would be to reduce the price of a work visa to less than $500 for equality with Canada, besides devaluating the dollar against the peso.
14. Underlying this illiteracy and strife is the North American Free Trade Agreement. NAFTA entered into force on January 1, 2004 greatly devalued the peso. In the early 1990s the Mexican economy seemed healthy except for the current account deficit of over $20 billion 8 percent of gross national product (GNP) in 1992 and 7 percent in 1993, indicating a need to devaluate the currency, but NAFTA was a stunning opportunity to achieve a favorable balance of trade without devaluating so it was not attempted. However, NAFTA did not go smoothly. At first there were domestic problems. In January of 2004, an armed rebellion of Zapatistas began protesting the NAFTA deal for seven months. Second, the ruling party’s presidential candidate, Luis Donaldo Colosio, was assassinated on March 23. His death set off a financial panic that depleted foreign reserves from nearly $30 billion to $12.5 billion when President Zedillo took office on December 1, 1994. On December 20, 1994, the Mexican government devalued the peso. The financial crisis that followed cut the peso’s value in half, sent inflation soaring, and set off a severe recession in Mexico. To make matters worse foreign investors decided to engage in what is known as a speculative attack and rather than waiting for the central bank’s reserves to run out through a gradual process of current account deficits, speculators who realized that a devaluation was inevitable attacked the currency through massive capital outflows, totaling $5 billion, to force a devaluation. The Mexican crisis was that nearly $10 billion worth of tesobonos was slated to mature in the first quarter of 1995, and another $19 billion was due before the end of the year. As the result of the speculative attack tesobono sales were at a low and it did not seem likely that Mexico could sell enough tesebonos, even at high interest rates to cover the cost of paying those tesobonos that would mature that year. On January 2 an $18 billion line of credit for Mexico was committed, half by the U.S. government and half by other major governments and a few large private banks. While the crisis deepened, on January 12 the Clinton administration proposed a larger package, $40 billion in loan guarantees. As the result of internal and external stressors brought about by Neo-liberalism and its domestic opponents Mexico did not get to enjoy the account balancing benefits of NAFTA until after they were humiliatingly forced to devaluate the peso. By 2003 however Mexico enjoyed an international trade surplus of $39.8 billion with the USA.
15. With the record $1.75 trillion budget deficit and $600 billion international trade balance and a over 6% decline in GDP the US is running an account deficit of 20% of the GDP. Whereas 2/3 of GDP growth is estimated to be the result of exports the United States needs to promote the export economy. A number of studies have estimated the amount of devaluation that the US dollar should undergo for the USA to achieve a favorable balance of trade from 3-30%. The United States’ chronic current account deficit will inevitably reverse, and the reversal could be quite sudden. A currency that is overvalued, or a balance of payments deficit that is so large as to be unsustainable, can give rise to rapid exchange rate movements. One example is the current account deficit of the United States in recent years. There was no exchange rate manipulation; nonetheless, by most measures the currency was and is overvalued. Possibly the overvaluation could be offset—though not fully, so long as other countries maintained their dollar pegs—through fiscal policy, thereby reducing the underlying threat to stability of the global exchange rate system (Fischer 2008). The current financial crisis however serves to reinforce the basic assumption, that has guided US trade policy since December 2006, when the balance of trade began improving, the USA needs to prioritize its export products and to do so must devaluate its currency. The current account balance is unsustainable. In 2004 the United States ran a current account deficit of $650 billion, nearly 6 percent of its GDP. The Bureau of Economics Analysis reports the U.S. current account deficit in 2006 was $857 billion, 6.1 percent of GDP. This number is not only very large absolutely, it is also large relative to U.S. GDP. The implications of eliminating current account imbalances for relative wages, relative GDPs, real wages, and real absorption impose severe constraints upon the relative influence of the US GDP. How much relative GDPs need to change depends on flexibility of two forms: factor mobility and adjustment in sourcing of imports, with more flexibility requiring less change. At the extreme, U.S. GDP falls by 30 percent relative to the world’s. Much relative GDPs need to change depends on flexibility of two forms, factor mobility between manufacturing and non-manufacturing, and the ability of trade to adjust at the extensive margin. With perfect mobility and an active extensive margin, the GDP of the United States (running the largest deficit must fall about 8 percent.
16. The United States is the clearly the tyrant of the North American Free Trade Agreement and Mexico the victim of what must be racial discrimination. We shall allow Canada to judge. As the result of the current financial crisis however the tables have turned. The United States must allow Mexican trucks to use US highways if the US wishes for Mexico to desist in their countermeasures, as the economy demands. The United States must heighten their export vigilance for conventional, biological and chemical weapons being shipped to Mexico and amongst customs agents around the world who might be mobilized to stigmatize Mexico. The United States must apologize for so cruelly devaluating the peso at the inception of NAFTA by appreciating the peso, now that the US dollar is in need of devaluation. Devaluation clearly works to restore a favorable balance of trade and to promote economic growth. Devaluation worked in China, devaluation worked in Mexico. Devaluation is however humiliating and degrading especially when it is forced upon a nation by foreign investors. So far, China and Europe, have not been willing to enforce countermeasures against the United States, probably for fear of retaliation such as the A(H1N1) epidemic. To achieve economic recovery the United States is going to need to overcome their ego and devaluate the dollar. Only by devaluating the dollar against the peso will the US succeed in deterring economic immigrants from Mexico. . It is estimated that to compensate for the cost of their bailout the US must devaluate the dollar by 7% multilaterally, however because of the special relationship with Mexico, and need to apologize to Mexico for their disputes regarding mobility, the US dollar should devaluate by 14-21% against the Mexican peso, or maybe 7% per year until economic equality is achieved.
17. The Draft Articles on the Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts of 2001 with Comments emphasize that the expression “State responsibility”, was to be understood as meaning only “responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts”. It is important for States to be responsible for the cessation and reparation of internationally wrongful acts in order to adhere to the viable political ideologies of free market liberalism and social conservatism so that States limit their infringement upon the private sector to the redress of grievances under internationally recognized human rights law. The well-governed State must be responsible for satisfying the obligations created by violations of internationally recognized human rights. The United States of America, in particular, has been negligent of their responsibilities to cease hostilities and reparate, to the point of insurrection, in the Avena case, in negotiation of free trade with Mexico, in the bombing of civilians in Afghanistan and Pakistan and truly in nearly every case of tortuous misconduct brought before it by bereaved individuals or States. The intention is to artificially instil a moral conscious in State officials who would have otherwise been selected for their office on the basis of the wanton abandon with which they commit themselves to State Rights. State Rights are not however considered requisite to good governance, States enjoy sovereign equality, but for every right there is a responsibility, and a State who imposes responsibilities on the civilian population is tyrannical, by degree. For States to function efficiently it is proper to partner State Responsibility with Human Rights. The State then redresses the grievances of individual citizens, whose cost is reasonable by comparison to indiscriminate social programs, often paying for themselves by fining unethical behaviour and practices amongst government contractors, and allows the market economy to flourish free of unnecessary regulation and influence of powerful corporate interests, while protecting the rights of individual citizens, like ourselves.
18. Cessation of conduct in breach of an international obligation is the first requirement in eliminating the consequences of wrongful conduct. With reparation, it is one of the two general consequences of an internationally wrongful act. Cessation is often the main focus of the controversy produced by conduct in breach of an international obligation. It is frequently demanded not only by States but also by the organs of international organizations such as the General Assembly and Security Council in the face of serious breaches of international law. By contrast, reparation, important though it is in many cases, may not be the central issue in a dispute between States as to questions of responsibility. Where claims were made in respect of wrongful death, damages were generally based on an evaluation of the losses of the surviving heirs or successors, calculated in accordance with the well-known formula of Umpire Parker in the “Lusitania” case: Estimate the amounts (a) which the decedent, had he not been killed, would probably have contributed to the claimant, add thereto (b) the pecuniary value to such claimant of the deceased’s personal services in claimant’s care, education, or supervision, and also add (c) reasonable compensation for such mental suffering or shock, if any, caused by the violent severing of family ties. The sum of these estimates reduced to its present cash value, will generally represent the loss sustained by claimant. In cases of deprivation of liberty, arbitrators sometimes awarded a set amount for each day spent in detention. Awards were often increased when abusive conditions of confinement accompanied the wrongful arrest and imprisonment, resulting in particularly serious physical or psychological injury.
Sanders, Tony J. Legal Consequences of Off-Season Flu Delivery. Hospitals & Asylums. HA-14-5-09 60pgs.