Paul H., you’re right about Coca-cola. It seems to me that it’s better tasting in Canada, and, last time I tried, even better tasting in Europe (particularly in the Netherlands).

So I got the idea that the sugar-sweetened Coca-cola of my youth (1950’s-60’s) was indeed better tasting. Don’t know offhand when they first went to corn syrup instead.

Here in San Antonio it’s possible to get Mexican bottled soft drinks, to include Coke, in the convenience stores/ supermarkets — I gather it’s sort of a “gray market”, not against the law but in technical violation of various bottlers’ agreements.

But private enterprise shipping cases from across the border is evidently not significant enough to get anybody excited; there was an interesting article about this subject in the WSJ sometime fairly recently.

Anyway–you can get a 12 ounce bottle of Mexican bottled Coca Cola in the supermarket here for 99 cents. The classic Coke bottle shape, real glass, seems like it’s the exact same as the old returnable bottle but you throw it away just like the plastic.

So I tried one. Couldn’t tell any difference from a US bottled corn syrup Coke. So much for my memory, though I suppose it’s possible the problem could be aging of the taste buds.

I also remember the legal mugging that some Texas cattlemen, led by billionaire Paul Engler, owner of Cactus Feeders, Inc. (meat industry) tried to inflict upon Oprah Winfrey but their suit had no merit drive-by lawsuit. Considering all that and more than can not be condensed here, the meat industry in the US can go to hell until they are well-done.
Certain parties that do not want an American influence in the marketplace, here in Korea (North Korea and South Korean nationalistic morons), wish to use this to sabotage any FTA agreement. Though the FTA is important to Korea, the US will hurt any chance it has of passing it if they allow special interests to push a meat agenda.

But if you’re referring to the health risk, then the issue is the (real but remote) possibility that the bone fragments could be from the spinal cord, where the BSE lurks.

Protection (of sugar) = higher prices
Higher prices = increased use of alternatives (corn syrup)

U.S. protection of sugar growers is also the result of anti-Castro policy.

That hardly makes it a cut and dry case however. Recently the WTO ruled in favor of the US. It was, and to some degree, still is a pretty contentious issue with no real cut and dry winner, loser, good guy or bad guy. Canada ‘won’ most of the decisions but not all - clearly showing that they were operating in a gray area. The Canadian government, by offering 1.2billion in “aid” (in an election year of course) did not really help their own argument that it was not a subsidized industry.

CBC

(apologize in advance if I messed up the links)

The World Trade Organization has ruled the U.S. did comply with international law when it imposed duties on Canadian softwood.

This here is also a pretty good summary.

When all the (saw)dust settled, the countries were able to come to a 7 year agreement.

The key difference here is that Canada/US went through legal channels to have pricing dispute solved - with mixed results. The bottom line is that the countries were able to come to an understanding and make an agreement. The potential (excuse the use) salting of the shipped meat in order to reject the shipments on unagreed upon conditions to “protect” the local markets goes way beyond that.

If the allegations are proven to be true…watch for some real fireworks in the near future. If not, it is just a whiny response to a childish interpretation of the agreement.