You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #26: That's my read on it, too. The Bushwhacks corrupted everything they touched including the DEA. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 11:33 AM
Response to Reply #3
26. That's my read on it, too. The Bushwhacks corrupted everything they touched including the DEA.
The DEA and the U.S. ambassador got thrown out of Bolivia (by Evo Morales--an action that the entire continent stood behind) because the DEA and the U.S. ambassador were colluding with white separatist rioters and murderers who intended to split Bolivia in two and gain power over Bolivia's main gas resources in the eastern provinces. This was one of the final acts of the Bush Junta--trying to overthrow Bolivia's democracy--while they were arranging their final looting of the U.S. government and instigating a worldwide depression (Sept 2008).

The U.S. (Bushwhack) ambassador Philip Goldberg was funding/organizing the white separatists right out of the U.S. embassy in Bolivia. But what somewhat surprised me during those events was that Morales also threw out the DEA for the same reason. It got me to thinking about what the U.S. "war on drugs" in Bushwhack hands would be used for.

Here are my suspicions:

1) They used it----that is, they used billions and billions of our tax dollars in U.S. "war on drugs" funds--most especially in Colombia, for consolidating the trillion+ dollar cocaine revenue stream into fewer hands and directing those huge illicit profits to certain beneficiaries (U.S. banksters, the Bush Cartel, the CIA, etc.);

2) They used it to decapitate the trade union movement in Colombia, and to drive five MILLION peasant farmers from their lands, with state terror, as a favor to their pals at Drummond Coal, Chiquita, Monsanto, Exxon Mobil et al, to prepare Colombia for U.S. "free trade for the rich"; and

3) These were the Bushwhack "war on drugs" purposes throughout Latin America, notably in Venezuela (the Chavez government also threw the U.S. ambassador and the DEA out of the country), Ecuador (ditto), Honduras (rightwing coup d'etat designed by the Bushwhacks, sprung on Obama six months into his administration before he could get control of policy in Latin America), and Mexico where the Bush Junta helped rig the 2005 election (the Leftist lost by a hairsbreadth, 0.05%, in what is widely believed to have been a stolen election) and then (under rightwinger Calderon) proceeded to inflict this bloody war on Mexico, NOT to stop the drug trade but to PROFIT from it (--get rid of the smaller, more independent operations; control the consolidated trade; and turn Mexico into Colombia--a bloodsoaked rightwing dictatorship in which violation of civil and human rights is routine, labor leaders and other advocates of the poor have no power and many voters are fooled into supporting militaristic "law and order" policies for relief from the violence (which never comes) and in hope that the criminal trade will be stopped (which it never is).

Where I think the Obama administration stands on all this--Bush Junta "war on drugs" crimes (especially in Colombia)--is that they are under obligation to cover it up. Just as they immunized Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and gang on the Iraq War, torture and other mind-boggling crimes, they have had to ( or feel that they have had to) cover up U.S. (Bushwhack) complicity in the crimes of mafia boss Alvaro Uribe, 'president' of Colombia during the Bush Junta, which may have included U.S. military and/or U.S. military 'contractor' participation in massacres and "turkey shoots" and very likely included direct U.S. embassy participation in Uribe's vast, illegal, domestic spying operation (--Uribe was spying on judges, prosecutors and opposition politicians, and on trade unionists and other advocates of the poor, and has been accused of using the spying operation to draw up "hit lists" of trade union leaders and others for the Colombian military and its closely tied righrtwing paramilitary death squads to assassinate).

Finally, as to the Corporate Press--which I have been closely monitoring in regard to U.S. activity in Latin America--I thought at first that your comment ("limited hangout") referred to the New York Slimes. I realize now that what you were saying is that the DEA is involved in a "limited hangout" probably ahead of disclosures (that we will not likely hear much about in the Corporate Press) of "bad apple" agents/commanders in the DEA or other "war on drugs" agencies. But my condemnation extends to the New York Slimes as well, and to ALL of the Corporate Press and Media. THEY have allowed themselves to become the conduits of "limited hangouts," coverups and corporate/government propaganda across the board. Think, for a moment, about the New York Slimes withholding their story about Bush Junta domestic spying for an entire year, to help ensure that Bush/Cheney would be re-(s)elected in 2004--not to mention their promulgation of goddamned lies about "weapons of mass destruction" in Iraq. They were/are doing the same number on Latin America--lies, coverups, propaganda.

There is evidence for all of the above (Bush Junta crimes in Colombia; Obama coverup). I am not basing my stated suspicions on nothing. But what infuriates me even more is that, I realize by now, the Corporate Press and Media will NEVER investigate this, EXCEPT as a "limited hangout." They will help cover it up; they will NEVER seek or tell the truth. Maybe their bank accounts are getting padded with cocaine profits as well--I don't know. But there are several reasons why the Obama administration would cover all this up and why the Corporate Press and Media would act as a government propaganda arm about it (as they have done on other matters). These include the fact that U.S. "war on drugs" instigated violence serves the purposes of U.S. "free trade for the rich" and provides a backup war profiteer boondoggle (on top of outright wars).

One other thing: I think that the "secret government" (the Bush Cartel and associates) is totally out of control and cannot be "gotten." We are in other words in the vulture clutches of a transglobal mafia that has committed, and is committing, terrible crimes throughout the world and is answerable to no one. Just as in Colombia, our government was directly run by this extremely powerful mafia for eight years and subsequent governments (Obama in the U.S., Santos in Colombia), however they come about, CANNOT (or think they cannot) go after the mafia dons, and they thus become collusive in the crimes. (U.S. "free trade for the rich" also benefits from these crimes--for instance, clearing the peasants off the land in Colombia--so supporters of U.S. "free trade for the rich"--such as Obama and Santos--are also inclined to look the other way. But I think mostly that their hands are tied. They don't have the power to hold the Bush Junta or their operatives to account. Obama would not be president for long, if he tried to. And the same is probably true of Santos*.)

------

*(Colombian prosecutors are trying to hold Uribe to account--but have been undermined by U.S./Obama (including Panetta/CIA) actions. Here, nobody--and I mean NOBODY--is even trying to investigate the Bush Junta. Got to give credit to Colombian prosecutors but I think that, while Santos may be allied with them, as to cleaning up Colombia's government and nailing Uribe and others, Santos has to tread carefully. The U.S. has arranged things so that Uribe is not only still at large, but also has ambitions and a plan to regain power in Colombia. He has split the rightwing party into pro-Uribe (mafia) and pro-Santos (cleaner government) factions. His candidates didn't do well in the recent elections but that doesn't mean that he can't regain power. He can. He has an extensive network of death squads and other operatives in Colombia and is closely allied with Bush Sr and Bush Jr and their worldwide criminal operation. If Diebold/ES&S decides to oust Obama next year and bring in Bush junta II, Uribe is waiting in the wings to be re-installed in Colombia. The main advantage that Santos has is that he has allied with the continent-wide movement toward independence in South America. For instance, his very first action in office was to make peace with Venezuela. The Leftists, who control regional policy now, are moving swiftly toward cooperation on peace and social justice, "south-south" and multilateral trade and protection of the sovereignty of Latin American countries. In fact, their new Latin America-wide organization--CELAC (which has been called the anti-OAS)--is meeting in Caracas this week, with every Latin American country in attendance and the U.S. and Canada excluded. Santos sees the "handwriting on the wall." He surely is a U.S. "free trade for the rich" operative but he ALSO sees the advantage for Colombia of friendly relations and trade with the countries leading this movement (Venezuela, Brazil, Ecuador, Argentina, Bolivia, Uruguay, Paraguay, Nicaragua and others) and that gives him some protection (--against Uribe, who was at war with it and even tried to start a hot war between the U.S./Colombia and Ecuador/Venezuela, in early 2008, and was still trying to instigate a war with Venezuela in his last weeks in power ).)

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC