> > > For instance, NAFTA, GATT, and so forth, are based on
> > > international and US law.
> >
> > Organizations protected by international treaties are relatively
> > safe.
>
> Yes, but are the agreements that they serve safe?
You may be right that US is not a safe contry even for NAFTA nor GATT.
As I said, IANA definitely NOT and ISOC may not either.
> Not according to the Food
> and drug
> administration here in the US, for instance (Refrence to NAFTA). Also not some
> international banks such as Barrings for instance (Refrence to recent fraud
> problems
> not covered within the GATT agreement).
I don't know any US-locally-famous affair w.r.t some regional
trade association nor bank.
However, if you are saying that US local law interfered their activity,
it does not surprise me.
> Hence
> it is our contention that protection under both US law and International law
> is indeed an added protection that should be considered viable an based on a
> good
> trust model.
You have just argued against yourself with your own examples
which should be convincing to yourself.
Masataka Ohta